Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRIDGEVIEW CLASSICAL SCHOOL, REVISED PHASE IV ADDITION - SITE PLAN ADVISORY REVIEW - 16-01B - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTS40. Question: (Resident) What is the basis for the 810 maximum enrollment? Response: (Applicant) The charter for the school allows 810 students at this site. The charter would allow up to 1360 if the school was housed elsewhere. 41. Question: (Resident) Is the expansion really to add more students? Response: (Applicant) The enrollment will increase with or without the expansion. The expansion is intended to better serve our existing students. 42. Question: (Resident) How many students did the school have in 2004, when the fourth addition was originally reviewed? Response: (Applicant) 540 students. 43. Question: (Resident) If this school splits into elementary and junior/senior high, and the high school stays on this site, that is potentially 720 students who could drive their cars. Has the school thought about this issue? Response: (Applicant) A decision to split the school has not been made and we will address those issues if/when the need arises. 44. Question: (Resident) Does the school have an open campus? Response: (Applicant) No. 44. Question: (Resident) Several students and faculty go off campus (in our neighborhood) to smoke. How can the kids leave? Response: (Applicant) This was before the fences and school alarms. Very few of the students now smoke, and they are not allowed to leave campus to do so. Faculty must check out to leave campus, and we are unable to prohibit them from going wherever they want to have a cigarette. 10 34. Comment: (Resident) Because of the school many neighboring properties have seen an increase in trash/litter in their yards. The school needs to make the students aware of this issue and help find a solution. 35. Question: (Resident) It seems to me that there is some law regarding school grounds and the safety issue of conducting other business on those school grounds. Does this law apply? Response: (Planner) I am unaware of such laws. The City Attorney may be able to provide more insight. Follow-up Response: (Planner) Without a specific statutory cite, the City remains unaware of such regulations. This question may be better addressed by the Poudre School District. 36. Question: (Resident) How does Children's World feel about the addition? Response: (Applicant) Children's World was contacted and has not expressed any concern over the project. 37. Question: (Resident) How big is the proposed addition and what is the lot size? Response: (Applicant) The proposed floor area is 9,366 square feet for the addition (58,777 sq. ft. total) and the lot size is 176,331 sq. ft. (4.048 acres). 38. Question: (Resident) How many cars are in the lot on an average day? Response: (Applicant) We don't have an exact count, but the lot is almost never full to capacity. 39. Comment: (Resident) Because of the traffic issues, many of the residents request that the school submit a new, thorough traffic study for the City and Planning and Zoning Board to review. prohibiting left turns onto Stuart. Has this been discussed? Response: (Applicant) Yes we have discussed that issue, but it would just push the problem east, where it could interfere with the Riff enburg School and the neighborhood even more. 28. Question: (Resident) If the large garage is removed, will the 6 foot privacy fence remain? If a chain link fence is also installed, could it be west of the privacy fence? Response: (Applicant) The privacy fence will remain and any chain link fencing will be in addition to what is already on site. 29. Comment: (Resident) In the past, the school has had problems with weeds and maintenance of the fence. This school needs proper maintenance so that it is not a neighborhood nuisance. 30. Comment: (Resident) As a longtime member of the neighborhood, it should be noted that Riff enburg has never caused any problems. On the contrary, the newer Ridgeview school is a constant neighborhood nuisance. 31. Comment: (Resident) City traffic engineers also need to look at the pedestrian traffic. The pedestrian traffic really adds to the traffic problem, because of the shared parking agreement, people are always walking across the street. The crosswalk timers do not seem to belong enough for people to cross the streets. 32. Comment: (Resident) I live across Lemay from the school and cannot get out of my driveway some days because of the school traffic. This is a major nuisance and safety concern that the traffic engineers need to address. 33. Comment: (Resident) I would like the traffic engineers to explore some striping options on the roads to provide a right turn lane. 21. Question: (Resident) With the second addition, the school promised the neighbors that the modular buildings would be removed. One is still there. With this addition, will the modular building be removed for sure? Response: (Applicant) Yes. 22. Comment: (Resident) I would like the applicant to be held accountable, in writing, for the promise to permanently remove the modular building. This meeting's notes should serve as documentation for this promise. 23. Comment: (Resident) The addition and the building's architecture seem fine and not very major issues with this project. The primary concerns we have are the number of students and the traffic dilemmas. We really would like a solution that helps mitigate the congestion and the growing numbers on the site. 24. Comment: (Resident) The building before the addition has a maximum capacity of 810. Rather than continually trying to expand, the school should find a new school/site to have room to grow. 25. Comment: (Resident) Lately the students at the school have been heard saying that they know the neighborhood hates them (and their school). Is this the type of relationship that your school wants to foster? Can it learn to be a better neighbor? 26. Question: (Resident) The neighborhood has raised a lot of concerns about safety and the levels of traffic that the school generates. This is now an issue that City is well aware of. If an accident did occur, what is the City's liability if such concerns are ignored? Follow-up Response: (Planner) The City is not liable as long as the streets are properly maintained. 27. Question: (Resident) One solution to the traffic concerns may be Response: (Applicant) The shared parking agreement began when the building was a church and had different peak hours from the nearby business park. We entered a lawsuit with the office park when a resolution could not be reached. The addition will not be on this parking easement, nor will it affect the total number of parking spaces. Parking at the school continues to operate on a first -come first -serve basis, and the lot is rarely filled to capacity. 17. Comment: (Resident) In the future, more and more of the high school students will have cars. Parking and traffic problems are going to increase. 18. Question: (Resident) If the school can currently fit 810 students and that is the maximum number you are allowed by your charter, why build an addition at all? It seems very unnecessary. Response: (Applicant) The school can fit that many students, but the design is inadequate. The music is so noisy it disrupts the other classrooms, and other classes are forced to meet in the halls. The new addition will provide a soundproof music area, karate space and additional classrooms for the current population. 19. Comment: (Resident) It is hard to trust the school and its motives. Why don't you just remodel what you already have rather than expand? 20. Question: (Resident) What are the long term plans for the school, in 5 and 10 years? Response: (Applicant) With this addition, the site will be completely maxed out and the building will not be able to grow more. We may curb enrollment if we are too crowded, or we may divide the school into an elementary and a junior/senior high. We do not have a site or definite plans to do so at this time. 11 12 13. 14. 15. 16. Question: (Resident) How many of the current high school students drive to school? Response: (Applicant) Very few of them drive to school, but exact numbers are unknown. We promote carpooling and will limit the number of students who can drive to school if the issue becomes problematic in the future. Comment: (Resident) Safety is a primary concern of mine. There are students at this school that drive inappropriately and way too fast. As enrollment grows, this problem will only get worse as long as the high school students are allowed to drive themselves. Question: (Resident) Does the school share parking with Children's World? Response: (Applicant) Yes, some of the spaces on the south end of the parking lot have signs designating them as Children's World parking. They only have about 4 employees at one time in their building and do not need much parking. Question: (Resident) What is the exit rate for students at the school? Response: (Applicant) We tend to replace the students we lose. For example, this year (2005-2006) we have lost 40 students and gained 38. Question: (Resident) Can we be informed about the parking lawsuit taking place? Response: (Meeting Facilitator) The shared parking agreement has resulted in a lawsuit and is being settled in court. The applicant and the business park may brief the neighbors as to the status of the lawsuit, but this will not be a matter on which the Planning and Zoning Board or the School Board will determine the final outcome. 5 additional students? Response: (Applicant) The traffic counts were taken on current numbers, but were adjusted to include the additional students. 10. Comment: (Resident) This school is generally unwanted in this neighborhood. We feel that it brings many negative qualities to this neighborhood and that it has not earned our trust. Because of the traffic this school generates, we feel extremely trapped in our neighborhood unless we want to make right turns only. This school creates a traffic nightmare for area residents. 11. Comment: (Resident) The traffic improvements that have been made are generally good, especially the left turn signal. However, the left turns onto Stuart are problematic because they create circulation problems to the Stuart Professional Park and out onto Lemay. The City needs to evaluate and resolve the traffic problems in this area as a whole, not on a per -site basis. 12. Question: (Resident) What is the purpose of the RL, Low Density Residential District? How is this school compatible with the rest of the neighborhood? Response: (Planner) The RL district is "intended for predominately single- family residential areas located throughout the city which were existing at the time of adoption of this Land Use Code." While the purpose is primarily for singe -family housing, other uses are permitted in the zone district as well. Schools are permitted uses in the district, subject to Planning and Zoning Board approval. The -school also boarders a more intense district, the MMN, Medium Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood District, where the office park and higher density residential uses are permitted. The Land Use Standards of the RL zoning district specify what density and dimensional standards are appropriate and compatible for this district. 4 currently are. 7. Comment: (Resident) I would prefer to see the basketball courts moved closer to the school, rather than where the garage is now. This would help reduce the noise the neighbors complain about, reduce pedestrian/auto conflict in the parking lot (better traffic circulation), and help the school keep track of the students better since they would be closer to the building. B. Question: (Resident) Since this building is getting so large, do the "big - box standards" apply? Response: (Applicant) The addition does include several changes in plane, windows and variation in materials to break up the massing. Response: (Planner) The new addition will be reviewed pursuant to the building standards in Land Use Code Division 3.5.3 for institutional buildings. Specifically, Section 3.5.3(D) states that "no wall that faces a street or connecting walkway shall have a blank, uninterrupted length exceeding thirty feet without including at least two of the following: change. in plane, change in texture or masonry pattern, windows, treillage with vines, or an equivalent element that subdivides the wall into human scale proportions." The standards for Large Retail Establishments do not apply to this proposal because it is not a retail establishment, therefore we will only be able to review based on general compatibility with the institutional standards. 9. Question: (Resident) How many students are currently enrolled? How many students are anticipated with the addition? Response: (Applicant) The school currently has 649 students. Next year we anticipate 720 students, with or without the addition. Our charter allows us 810 students maximum with or without the new addition. 9. Question: (Resident) Does the traffic study take into account the 3 ...........................QUESTIONS, CONCERNS, COMMENTS, RESPONSES........................... 1. Question: (Resident) Will the storm drainage be affected with this addition? Response: (Applicant) The existing detention pond will remain and a small portion may be moved to make space for the addition. Total impervious area will actually decrease with the replacement of the asphalt near the modular building with grass. Z. Question: (Resident) How will trees affected by the addition be mitigated? Response: (Applicant) The one tree that needs to be removed will be replaced with three new trees elsewhere on the site. 3. Question: (Resident) Will the new trees be located on the corner of Stuart and Lemay or on a different part of the site? Will the affect the detention ponds? Response: (Applicant) The locations of the new trees have not yet been determined. They will not be placed in locations which interfere with the storm drainage. 4. Comment: (Resident) I would like to request that the new trees be relocated to the southeast edge of the site as a buffer for the neighbors. I would especially like to see the use of evergreen trees for year-round screening purposes. 5. Comment: (Resident) I would officially like to make a request that the applicants prepare an updated traffic study, even if the City traffic engineer does not require such an item. b. Question: (Resident) How will the noise from the playgrounds be mitigated? Response: (Applicant) The six foot privacy fences will remain as they K Comm(_.ity Planning and Environmenta; ,ervices Current Planning City of Fort Collins PROJECT DATE: APPLICANT: CITY PLANNER: NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING Ridgeview Classical School Phase IV Addition February 27, 2006 Domenic Carpine, Assistant Principal, Ridgeview Classical School Larry Trampe, Principal Architect, Architectural Resource Group Shelby Sommer PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicants are proposing a 9,366 square foot addition to the existing Ridgeview Classical School located at 1800 South Lemay Avenue. The property falls within the RL - Low Density Residential Zoning District, in which public and private schools for elementary, intermediate and high school education are permitted uses. This request for review from Ridgeview Classical School will be submitted as a Site Plan Advisory Review, pursuant to Colorado State Statute 22-32-124, which allows the Planning and Zoning Board to review and comment on the proposal. If the Planning and Zoning Board members are not satisfied with the applicant's response to their comments, they may request a hearing before the Board of Education for the Poudre School District. The proposed two-story addition is on the northwest corner of the site, near the intersection of Stuart and Lemay. The addition will make room for additional classrooms and will relocate the music and karate rooms. The modular building on the site will be removed and the asphalt underneath replaced with grass. The large garage near the southeast edge of the property will be removed and a basketball court will be erected on the remaining concrete pad. Parking and traffic circulation will remain as -is with this addition. 1 281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020 MD= lrtHE4Yi t2EYA1;Rr • 4:u �r . r.r 1 L- Ll L'I LIN . s�stes? aela�rta+ .jJJ'1 � riGF11EG6': ELSYArtCR! i E A S T S T U A R T S T R E E T rrw MPIQ =• /r •YrYY1�a W r�ir�Y W� � � a [ • •rr•rrrrrrrr— � [ •rryrrr rt�ryy♦����yY�Y•—yryr�r�— • __ r ♦ •♦ •i•Y Y�`r�Yyr�1 rr. W � �rYr ♦Y♦ir�M�rr Z� ♦� /�fr�l�r(fr����+•�♦l��rrSw g W �rrrrri..irri♦�♦—♦rrrr w.rr � O rY �• `��I y Y ` Y• w•Y—rr•�rf• �rr�ia♦�f��A:G:�7:r�z..i. � J �K y r.rw• Y�rr rYrr Y��r•i y/ S W �iI • o [ P L A N T LI ST (n ♦ r fa r ♦a s p� � �t • •a — -EE: la -fY F `� V/ O � M Lluwjr MET �. I OWL -- N OLKA►$s r I t _ pMy I•.n. sMRua PIAMW OETAE. Comm PL%WM WTAL tdTLn �u rrT aiT�+rbcnhLL nlrSaFc! �. rc tXTRTLT F4A.11 I.YRf h lRY'1f£ W Vl}i,IJ1iM6 Da(1N P(J Bax }le,i6 KTRT Rtll,i4 [YLGRLGO 184,}1 I'tLL6 iM0'4N-e4 lac.6 vu1Gn4 R'.19Rw4}KN i rn1 Ttl4r l}leTT' napll soar ti+, n0. a aoawa een:c. j cssr stra�o erm ,.,,,._ ,��+r r \} aaae y �q rTp•eery oeftrCflm a++un }T} rtw rb ra yea+ ERA � �/ V Y` �. �5�. r-�AF6'afyi"NCTCA��cw ro lu+rc�cwamw�w�� WAVI, :97�4iiiiER1C �1? I . r _ \�-rr rr•raTv... Lpii'o. // a.. w», i �� R?tmn"M M AM\ �•.. ..�. R s, a-r r>E oTlx.-}c}o oc rurooc. }x t.l cm' a• war aw..LPW&i w9 �a�i•A%iavfte'r•�is w«clenR.un - = ' �y \Y .:• r ! tf.ls x --- � �nm tY v� a.wu6040CLiams tee -r". r �• �y\\ +D,' .{\�\,�j...1 \ Ski n2+pM3"1 4tlKn AeYwax Ncr. R.IM-ATVJu 'K'-06rNi i1lNI1?M.t 49�0 dc11Y6' wl42R 8 {%a--•--F_iii R+>l* iiWTWI +ICa Nfvz S '. j'; �•_ 41ExVif012 17 M tat @}• w !r ft' CA wo _w �.�\. er J� DS F{6 f•JIKHl 5L�}-• I(O , D 4 r d I ' <Xt%iirG� r SITE PL,!N fr�1 Nan! `1 ♦ V Ell � Qm- 0.M No Text Ridgeview Classical School, Revised Phase IV Addition, Site Plan Advisory Review - #16-01 B, Planning and Zoning Board Meeting April 20, 2006 Page 6 4. Neighborhood Response A neighborhood meeting was held on February 27, 2006 at the Ridgeview School. There were approximately 20 people in attendance at this meeting. A summary of the key issues is included below, and a more detailed summary of all concerns is attached. • Significant concern over traffic problems at the intersection of Stuart and Lemay. • Concerns over the parking agreement between the school and the Stuart Professional Park. • Concern over the school's capacity and ability to enroll more students with the addition. • Concern over neighborhood compatibility, noise and the school's motives. The City has received one letter from an affected property owner, which is also attached. CONCLUSIONS After reviewing the Ridgeview Classical School, Revised Phase IV Addition, Site Plan Advisory Review - #16-01 B, staff offers the following conclusions: 1. The location of the proposed Ridgeview Classical School Revised Phase IV Addition is appropriate. 2. The character of the proposed Ridgeview Classical School Revised Phase IV Addition is compatible with its surroundings and the existing building. 3. The extent of the proposed Ridgeview Classical School Revised Phase IV Addition is appropriate because off-street parking demands are satisfied without relying on the shared parking agreement and the traffic flow in and, around the site operates acceptably. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the Ridgeview Classical School, Revised Phase IV Addition, Site Plan Advisory Review - #16-01 B. Ridgeview Classical School, Revised Phase IV Addition, Site Plan Advisory Review - #16-01 B, Planning and Zoning Board Meeting April 20, 2006 Page 5 A new sidewalk is proposed to connect the existing Stuart Street sidewalk to both the new addition and the existing sidewalk adjacent to the building entrance. A twelve foot black chain link fence is proposed along the northern edge of the playground at Stuart Street. Typically, City standards do not allow fences more than four feet high in front yard areas; however, the applicant has proposed the twelve foot high fence for safety reasons (to prevent balls from being kicked and thrown from the playground into the street). The proposed fence will be adorned with Engleman Ivy. C. Extent A shared parking agreement has been in place between this property and the Stuart Professional Park since 1984. This is a private agreement which was negotiated when this property was a church facility. The parking agreement continued with the conversion of the site to a school facility. When the Ridgeview School submitted a Site Plan Advisory Review for a similar addition in 2004, the parking agreement came into question because that proposed addition would sit within the parking easement area. The Planning and Zoning Board and the Poudre School District ultimately decided that this project would not be reviewed until the parking agreement issue was resolved. This proposed revised addition does not impact the existing parking easement or agreement, and the matter is currently being resolved between the two parties outside of this City process (though legal action). Staff finds it acceptable for the Ridgeview Classical School to proceed with the Site Plan Advisory Review process for the proposed revised addition at this time. The school currently provides 151 total parking spaces on -site, which complies with the Land Use Code Standard that allows a maximum of 232 spaces (four spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area). Drainage on the site will improve with this addition because the school is replacing some of the existing asphalt with landscaping. The existing detention pond will be impacted slightly by the new addition, so the pond will be relocated to the northwest side of the addition and enlarged for additional capacity. The City did not require a Transportation Impact Study for this proposal. A copy of the traffic study from the 2004 application is attached for reference. The City has observed traffic conditions at and near this site on many occasions, and has determined that the existing traffic conditions are comparable to other schools in this district. Ridgeview Classical School, Revised Phase IV Addition, Site Plan Advisory Review - #16-01 B, Planning and Zoning Board Meeting April 20, 2006 Page 4 area and modular trailer northeast of the existing building will be removed and replaced with grass for a new play area. Two existing garages at the south edge of the property will also be removed and replaced with landscaping. The two-story 9,366 square foot addition will provide new orchestra, band and music practice rooms and karate facilities for existing and future students. The location of this proposed addition has changed since the 2004 review of a similar proposal, primarily due to issues over the parking agreement and neighborhood compatibility. The former proposal located the addition on the southeast portion of the building. This new addition is proposed for the northwest corner of the building. B. Character The existing building includes a total of 49,411 square feet of floor area. The new addition will provide an additional 9,366 square feet for a total of 58,777 square feet. Total site area is 4.048 acres (17.6,331 square feet). In the RL, Low Density Residential Zoning District, minimum lot area is three times the total floor area of the building. With this proposed addition, the lot area is exactly three times the total floor area. The proposed addition is two stories in height, with a basement for storage, and in this zoning district, maximum building height is three stories. The overall building mass of the proposed and existing building is not out of character with the existing neighborhood, which includes a variety of uses, including office, multi- and single-family residential, commercial, child care and an elementary school. The proposed addition has been designed to match the existing building's architecture. The addition will be primarily brick with some EFIS finish to match previous building additions. Vertical slit windows are intended to match the original building design. A bell tower on the north side of the addition will serve as the building's focal point. The existing EFIS finish will be painted a darker brown color to reduce the contrast between it and the brick. The addition's base will be stone or masonry and the top treatment will be a brick soldier course cap. The addition will require removal of one existing mature ash tree. The City Forester has approved the removal of this tree, and will require three new replacement trees to be planted elsewhere on the site. The applicant has located the three new Ponderosa Pine trees along the southern edge of the property per a request at the neighborhood meeting. Foundation plantings are proposed along the northwest and western facades. Ridgeview Classical School, Revised Phase IV Addition, Site Plan Advisory Review - #16-01 B, Planning and Zoning Board Meeting April 20, 2006 Page 3 request the charter school to submit a site development plan for the proposed facility, but must issue such request, if any, within ten days after receiving the written advisement. If requested by the relevant planning commission or governing body, the charter school, acting on behalf of its sponsoring school board, shall submit such a site development plan. The relevant planning commission or governing body may review and comment on such plan to the governing body of the charter school, but must do so, if at all, within thirty days after receiving such plan. The relevant planning commission or governing body, if not satisfied with the response to such comments, may request a hearing before the board of education regarding such plan. Such hearing shall be held, if at all, within thirty days after the request of the relevant planning commission or governing body. The charter school then may proceed with its site development plan unless prohibited from doing so by school board resolution. " In addition, the City of Fort Collins processes all Site Plan Advisory Review proposals under Section 31-23-209, Colorado Revised Statutes, which states: "When the commission (Planning and Zoning Board) has adopted the master plan of the municipality or of one or more major sections or districts thereof, no street, square, park or other public way, ground or open space, public building or structure, or publicly or privately owned public utility shall be constructed or authorized in the municipality or in such planned section and district until the location, character, and extent thereof has been submitted for approval by the commission." This proposal will be evaluated per these two statutes on the basis of the proposal's location, character and extent. The Planning and Zoning Board may review and comment on the proposal, and if the Planning and Zoning Board is not satisfied with the applicant's response to those comments, a hearing may be requested before the Poudre School District Board of Education. 3. Location, Character and Extent A. Location The Ridgeview Classical School is located at the southeast corner of Lemay Avenue and Stuart Street. The site was previously used for a church, and then leased as a charter school in 2001. Public schools are permitted within the RL, Low Density Residential District, subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Board. The proposed building addition is located on the northwest portion of the site in an area that is currently landscaped area. The existing asphalt Ridgeview Classical School, Revised Phase IV Addition, Site Plan Advisory Review - #16-01 B, Planning and Zoning Board Meeting April 20, 2006 Page 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This request for review from Ridgeview Classical School is submitted to the Planning and Zoning Board as a Site Plan Advisory Review pursuant to State Statute Section 22- 32-124, which permits the City to review and comment on the proposal with respect to its location, character and extent. COMMENTS: 1. Background The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: N: MMN (Medium Density Mixed -Use District) — Office condos E:. RL (Low Density Residential District) — Single-family attached and detached dwellings, Riffenburgh Elementary School S: RL (Low Density Residential District) — Daycare facility, single-family attached and detached dwellings, office buildings W: RL (Low Density Residential District) —Single-family detached dwellings This property has been used for the Ridgeview Classical School since August 2001. In May 2004, the Planning and Zoning Board considered a similar addition to the Ridgeview Classical School building. The Planning and Zoning Board disapproved the application and requested a hearing before the Board of Education, primarily due to concerns about a parking agreement with the neighboring business park, and the intensiveness of the school on the site. The School Board agreed to hold this hearing, but soon after decided, with the City's permission, to place the request on hold until the parking issue between the Ridgeview Classical School and the Stuart Professional Park was resolved. At this time, both parties have entered into a lawsuit concerning the parking agreement, which will be resolved in the legal system, not with this Site Plan Advisory Review process. It has been determined that this revised proposal for an addition may now proceed under the Site Plan Advisory Review process. 2. Process The City of Fort Collins has agreed with Ridgeview Classical School to process this application under Section 22-32-124, Colorado Revised Statutes, which states: "Prior to contracting for a facility, a charter school shall advise in writing the planning commission, or governing body if no planning commission exists, which has jurisdiction over the territory in which the site is proposed to be located. The relevant planning commission or governing body may ITEM NO. 10 MEETING DATE4/20/06 STAFF Shelby Summer Citv of Fort Collins PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD STAFF REPORT PROJECT: Ridgeview Classical School Revised Phase IV Addition, Site Plan Advisory Review - #16-01 B APPLICANT: Larry Trampe Architectural Resource Group, P.C. 1828 Wallenberg Drive Fort Collins, CO 80526 OWNER: RCS Building Corporation C/O Premier Title and Escrow, Inc. 5310 Ward Road, Suite G07 Arvada, CO 80002 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Ridgeview Classical School requests a Site Plan Advisory Review to construct a two- story building addition to the existing Ridgeview Classical School facility located at 1800 South Lemay Avenue. The proposed 9,366 square foot addition will provide facilities for existing and future students. The band, music and orchestra practice rooms and karate room are to be relocated into this addition to be more isolated for sound purposes. Site improvements include removal of asphalt and a modular building, installation of a new playground and grass area, and foundation plantings along the perimeter of the new addition. The property is zoned RL —Low Density Residential District. RECOMMENDATION: Approval COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. PO. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 (970) 221-6750 PLANNING DEPARTMENT