HomeMy WebLinkAboutSTATE HIGHWAY 14, EAST FRONTAGE ROAD - ANNEXATION & ZONING (RESUBMITTAL) - 20-00 - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTESPlanning and Zoning Board Minutes
December 19, 2002
Page 5
The motion was approved 7-0.
Vice -Chairperson Torgerson moved for approval of the requested zoning of
LMN, Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood for the State Highway 14, East
Frontage Road Annexation and Zoning.
Member Meyer seconded the motion.
The motion was approved 5-2 with Members Colton and Craig voting in the
negative.
Project: Modification of Standards, In -Situ, Inc., 105
East Lincoln Avenue
Project Description: Request for a modification of two standards,
Secion 3.4.1(E)(2) Buffer Zone Performance
Standards and Section 4.16 (D)(3)(a)(3) and
Buildings — Frequent Views/Access. The
proposed structure encroaches into the Poudre
River buffer zone more than the allowable
20%.
Staff Recommendation: Approval
Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence:
THIS PROJECT WAS APPEALED. A VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT /S
AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
December 19, 2002
Page 4
edge, and that we don't want a lot of housing on the east side of 1-25, we don't want
mixed -use activity centers over there, because that is not the option that Council has
been given direction on. He thought that the draft plan that Council has is going a
long way in the direction, but he thought there was a possibility that if Council had
more discussion, that Council would say that this should be Urban Estate and not
LMN. He felt that the 1-25 Sub Area Plan needs another round of review, and he is
not hanging his hat on that document. He is looking at the surrounding properties
and seeing that this could potentially be a much higher density and it would be
density on the east side of 1-25, where he had heard Council at a worksession or
two say that they really don't want that mixed -use higher density east of 1-25. That is
why he would not be supporting this, because he does not think that there will be
any parks, little neighborhood commercial centers, it would be driving into town and
he feels it is an inappropriate place to put high density.
Member Craig concurred with Member Colton and would not be supporting the
change of the Structure Map to LMN. When she remembers when the Board
reviewed the 1-25 Sub Area Plan in January of 2002, it specifically showed this piece
of property as Urban Estate. Then in July, the draft showed it as LMN. She did not
feel, as a Board, that they discussed any of these changes, and she does not know
how these changes came about. She does have a draft that does shows this
property as Urban Estate at one time, and she does agree that it should be part of
the feathering that goes into the existing development that is out there under Larimer
County as well as some of the development that is less dense than Urban Estate,
which is adjacent to and just south of this property, along with the Industrial. We
have put Urban Estate as a buffer to some of the County development. She feels
that Urban Estate is more appropriate.
Vice -Chairperson Torgerson moved for approval of the Structure Plan Map
Amendment for the State Highway 14, East Frontage Road Annexation and
Zoning.
Member Carpenter seconded the motion.
The motion was approved 5-2 with Members Colton and Craig voting in the
negative.
Member Bernth moved for approval of the annexation of the State Highway 14,
East Frontage Road Annexation and Zoning based on the findings of fact and
conclusions on page 7 of the staff report, specifically items A and B and that
an Open Space Agreement needs to be in place by the February 18, 2003 City
Council Hearing.
Member Meyer seconded the motion.
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
December 19, 2002
Page 3
property for open lands is 100% consistent with the public interest vision of both
the 1-25 Regional Plan and 1-25 Sub -Area Plan. Mr. Kaplan also noted that the
LMN zone district is the zone district with the lowest density that still allows for
affordable housing opportunities.
Public Input
Steve Pfister, 531 Del Clair, has been very involved with the 1-25 Corridor for the
past three years. He felt that the proposed LMN zoning was very consistent with the
meetings and hearings that he attended during the three year time period. He has
also been involved with the Sunflower project, just immediately north of this
property, for the past four years as it has gone through the County approval process.
There is just a little under 200 units, which is about 5 units per acre. The Clydesdale
project is 225 units, which is also high density. Just north of Highway 14, there is
the Cloverleaf Mobile Home Park, which has about 400 units and is very high
density. There is already existing high densities in four different projects north of this
property. The intersection of 1-25 and Prospect has been identified as an activity
center that would provide the housing areas with shopping and services. To provide
affordable housing, we need higher density and this project would have a mix of
housing with an affordable housing component.
Jim Mokler, 4424 East Mulberry stated that he is the developer of the Interchange
Business Park, which is immediately north of this site. He is also lives across the
street from this project on Mulberry. It is his understanding that City Plan, with the
LMN zoning encourages having employment centers next to the LMN zoning. What
they are building at Interchange Business Park is in fact an employment center,
which creates many jobs in the area. They would be happy to have additional
housing in the area that would afford people to be able to walk or ride their bike to
go to work. As part of their development plan, they dedicated a trail easement that
wraps around the east and south part of their property and immediately adjoins this
site that is being talked about tonight. He believes that the LMN zoning is consistent
with what City Plan says and he is in full support of the annexation with LMN zoning.
Public Input Closed
Member Colton agreed that we should annex this property, but he has concerns
about having it LMN as opposed to Urban Estate. He thinks that this property could
become a much higher density that the other three neighborhoods next to it. He
thought this could become anywhere from 5 to 10 units per acre. He did not think
that this is in keeping with the surrounding neighborhoods in the area. On the 1-25
Sub Area Plan, which the Board has not seen in almost a year, the Board has not
heard what Council's comments are. All he knows is that they have asked for a soft
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
December 19, 2002
Page 2
Member Carpenter moved for approval of Consent Item #2. Member Bernth
seconded the motion. The motion was approved 6-0, with Vice -Chairperson
Torgerson abstaining from the vote.
Project: State Highway 14 — East Frontage Road
Annexation and Zoning
Project Description: Request to annex and zone a 47.15 acre
parcel. The site is located on the east side of
the 1-25 East Frontage Road approximately
one -quarter mile south of State Highway 14
(East Mulberry Street). The recommended
zoning is LMN, Low Density Mixed Use
Neighborhood.
Staff Recommendation: Approval
Hearing Testimonv, Written Comments and Other Evidence:
Chief Planner Ted Shepard gave the staff presentation, recommending approval.
He stated that the property is 47 acres located on the east side of 1-25, south of
Mulberry Street. The recommended zoning is LMN, which is the indication from
the final draft of the 1-25 Sub -Area Plan which will be fully adopted in the spring.
Member Craig asked why City Council had continued the initiating resolution of
this item from its last agenda.
Planner Shepard replied that it was pulled from the City Council agenda because
the smoking ordinance was also on the agenda and this item was on consent as
all initiating resolutions are. One council member had a question about
annexation policy in general and staff was unable to find out the nature of the
question because he wanted to reserve it for public discussion. A pulled consent
item is not heard until last on the agenda and with the smoking ordinance, it
would not have been heard until 1:00 or 2:00 in the morning. Planner Shepard
recommended that it be moved to January 7th where it would be scheduled for
discussion.
Les Kaplan, Imago Enterprises, gave the applicant's presentation. He stated that
the Structure Plan calls for E — Employment and POL — Public Open Lands
zoning for the site. Mr. Kaplan stated that the proposed LMN zoning for the
property and the voluntary setting aside of the FEMA Floodplain area and more
Council Liaison: Karen Weitkunat
Chairperson: Jerry Gavaldon
Vice Chair: Mikal Torgerson
Staff Liaison: Cameron Gloss
Phone: (H) 484-2034
Phone: (W) 416-7431
Chairperson Gavaldon called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m.
Roll Call: Meyer, Colton, Carpenter, Torgerson, Craig, Bernth, and
Gavaldon.
Staff Present: Gloss, Eckman, Shepard, Barkeen, Stringer, Moore,
Schlueter, and Deines.
Director of Current Planning Cameron Gloss reviewed the Consent and
Discussion Agendas:
Consent Agenda:
1. Minutes of the September 19, October 17 (CONTINUED), and
November 4 (CONTINUED), 2002 Planning and Zoning Board
Hearings.
Recommendations to City Council:
2. #36-02 First Free Will Baptist Church, Annexation and Zoning.
3. #20-00 State Highway 14, East Frontage Road Annexation and Zoning.
4. #50-02 CSU South Dormitory Rezoning.
Discussion Agenda:
The Planning and Zoning Board are the final authority on the following
items:
5. #46-02 Modification of Standards — In -Situ, Inc., 105 East Lincoln
Avenue.
6. #20-02A Modification of Standard — Garth Commercial Plaza.
7. #42-02 Major Amendment and Modification of Standard — 419 West
Mountain Avenue.
Vice -Chairperson Torgerson declared a conflict on Item #2, First Free Will
Baptist Church, Annexation and Zoning.
Member Craig asked to pull Item #3, State Highway 14, East Frontage Road
Annexation and Zoning, to discussion.
Vice -Chairperson Torgerson moved for approval of Consent Item #1, less
the October 17 and November 4, 2002 minutes, and Consent Item #4.
Member Colton seconded the motion. The motion was approved 7-0.