HomeMy WebLinkAboutMAIL CREEK CROSSING - SECOND ANNEXATION & ZONING (ENCLAVE) - ANX160007 - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTESPlanning & Zoning Board
February 16, 2017
Page 12
possibility of obtaining an exception (i.e. grandfather clause). He is also concerned that he will have to
pay a penalty to REA Electric, which he opposes because he doesn't support the annexation.
Staff Response
Planning Director Gloss responded to the citizen questions by saying current land uses are
"grandfathered" and can continue in perpetuity, so long as they are not expanded. Regarding the REA
jurisdiction, there is a transfer of electric utility to the City of Fort Collins, but there is a 5-year transitional
period with fees. He added that there is a growth management area boundary, and he anticipates that
these areas will be annexed when they become eligible.
Board Questions and Staff Response
Member Hobbs asked whether the non -conforming use to be grandfathered to these properties will
survive changes in ownership or different purchasers; Planning Director Gloss confirmed that this is true
as long as that same use is continued. In addition, any change of use could be addressed within
established processes (such as the APU process). Chair Schneider asked if there will be something in
writing acknowledging that there will be existing legal, nonconforming uses; Planning Director Gloss
confirmed that this will occur. Chair Schneider also asked whether similar annexations in the past have
resulted in cost concessions to REA; Planning Director Gloss confirmed that this happened in the past.
There was more discussion regarding the REA fees and rates.
Board Deliberation
Member Hobbs made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board recommend to City Council
approval of the Mail Creek Crossing Second Annexation and Zoning, based upon the findings of
fact contained in the staff report that is included in the agenda materials for this hearing and the
board discussion on this item. Member Hansen seconded. Vote: 5:0.
Assistant City Attorney Yatabe noted that these two annexations will be heard by City Council at their
February 21, 2017, hearing.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:02pm.
meron Gloss, Planni Director
Je der, Chair
Planning & Zoning Board
February 16, 2017
Page 11
Public Input (3 minutes per person)
Daryl Nelson, 2221 Spruce Creek Drive, would like to better understand what the rezoning means in
terms of impact to his neighboring property.
Staff Response
Planning Director Gloss responded to the citizen's question by saying this area will be zoned for low -
density housing, allowing for a variety of housing types. There are no proposed projects in cue for this
area at this time.
Board Questions and Staff Response
Member Whitley asked what the zoning is in the areas that abut the area in question. Planning Director
Gloss responded that there are predominantly low -density, mixed -use neighborhood designations, along
with higher -density housing and a small commercial designation. Therefore, the rezoning will align with
neighboring areas.
Board Deliberation
Member Hobbs made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board recommend to City Council
approval of the Lehman -Timberline Annexation and Zoning ANX160006, based upon the findings
of fact contained in the staff report that is included in the agenda materials for this hearing and
the board discussion on this item. Member Hansen seconded. Vote: 5:0.
Project: Mail Creek Crossing Second Annexation and Zoning
Project Description: This is a City -initiated request to annex and zone 43.698-acre 11-parcel enclave into
the City of Fort Collins. The parcels became an enclave with the annexation of the Mail Creek Crossing
Annexation on January 17, 2014. As of January 17, 2017, the City became authorized to annex the enclave
in accordance with State Statute 31-12-106. The enclaved parcels abut the east side of South Timberline
Road and are bisected by Kechter Road.
Recommendation: Approval
Staff Presentation
Planning Director Gloss provided an overview of this proposal, highlighting the past annexations that
created this enclave. He stated that the proposed zoning is consistent with the Structure Plan and the
Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Plan, saying that the Urban Estate (UE) zoning for single-family housing will
have low -density impacts.
Public Input (3 minutes per person)
Jeff Reynolds, 5332 Timberline, has some concerns about the proposed Urban Estate zoning and how
that will affect his property.
Alan Eklund, 5318 S. Timberline, opposes the annexation, saying this annexation will create a financial
burden for his family, because he will lose some of the rights to the land use as a homeowner. He feels
that rezoning to UE may preclude many of the activities he currently enjoys; he also inquired into the
Planning 8 Zoning Board
February 16, 2017
Page 10
Vice Chair Hansen encouraged the community to stay engaged during Plan implementation.
Other Business
Planning Director Gloss provided direction on some concerns that were raised as a result of the
Landmark Apartments appeal:
There was insufficient time allotted to the public that wished to speak on that item (only 2 minutes
each were allowed by the Chair at that time); and
Information was not entered into the public record just before the hearing, which did not allow the
public to have access to the same material afforded to the Board for consideration.
Chair Schneider asked what the time frame is for updating the website for new information received prior
to a hearing. Secretary Cosmas responded that the online materials are updated within 24 hours of
being received; however, if information is received on the day of the hearing, the Board members will
receive an email with the updates, but they will not be posted online. Secretary Cosmas offered to post
online updates in a separate section to highlight those items received since the work session. Member
Hobbs requested Staff to add this item to the next work session in order to review guidelines for
continuation and for public information review within the terms of due process. Planning Director Gloss
offered to work with our legal counsel to find a way to be fair to the public and to Staff.
Board took a 5-minute recess at 8:27pm to consider re -opening the hearing.
Member Hobbs made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board reopen the February 16, 2017,
hearing in order to reconsider two projects at the request of several citizens: Lehman -Timberline
Annexation and Zoning and the Mail Creek Crossing Second Annexation and Zoning; Member
Whitley seconded. Vote: 5:0.
Project: Lehman -Timberline Annexation and Zoning
Protect Description: This is a City -initiated request to annex and zone 5.684-acre parcel (#8608253901) at
5830 South Timberline Road into the City of Fort Collins. The parcel became an enclave with the annexation
of the Mail Creek Crossing Annexation on January 17, 2014. As of January 17, 2017, the City became
authorized to annex the enclave in accordance with State Statute 31-12-106. This parcel is located between
Mail Creek Ditch and Bacon Elementary School.
Recommendation: Approval
Staff Presentation
Planning Director Gloss provided a brief overview of this proposal for the audience, giving the specific
location, size and eligibility under State statute. He showed some maps and discussed the zoning
designation.
Planning & Zoning Board
February 16, 2017
Page 9
Design Guidelines include a new section on neighborhood character, looking at architectural styles and
historical preservation, guidance and new building and site design guidance.
Public Input (3 minutes per person)
Gina Janett, 730 W. Oak Street, has some concerns about the rezoning proposals, specifically citing two
Old Town locations: the flat surface parking lot at Meldrum and Olive and the triangular section bound by
Olive, Sherwood, and Magnolia; she feels that the buffers for both of these areas should be reviewed.
She is also concerned that the Plan is misleading regarding the requirement for diverse housing sizes
and styles, saying that this would allow many small homes to be torn down and replaced by larger
homes. She also suggested stronger design standards, not just voluntary guidelines.
Applicant and Staff Response
Member Rollins requested more explanation on the two areas questioned by the citizen. Planner
Mounce showed a map of the areas in question, saying that these areas are not being considered for
rezoning. Planner Wray added that there are no specific recommendations being made at this time;
rather, additional community engagement will provide better information going forward. Member Rollins
has a concern that, although the proposed map is still conceptual, it could quickly become a reality.
Planner Wray stated that part of the goal was to provide a stronger buffer between Downtown and Old
Town neighborhoods. Since the zoning changes are part of the whole transition, Staff decided to
combine the zoning changes and possible land use changes into one package. Member Hobbs asked
for more clarification of the rezoning processes overall. Senior Planner Wray responded that outreach
would continue: he plans to hold a series of meetings to continue the discussion, continue meeting with
boards and commissions, and finally bring forward potential recommendations to the P&Z Board and to
the City Council.
Planning Director Gloss added that Staff has budgeted for a study in 2017 to review the transition areas
in the Old Town and Downtown Neighborhoods. The purpose of this study will be to determine the
appropriate design standards for these transition areas. A college intern has been hired for the purpose
of capturing data on the built transition areas; then a consultant will be hired to review and revise
appropriate transition codes that address multi -family housing and other non-residential uses. In
addition, a second budgeted assignment will allow Staff to review code changes for these interface and
transitional areas.
Board Deliberation
Member Hobbs was complimentary of the overall plan, saying it appears to be very comprehensive. Vice
Chair Hansen considers this as a study of the community, saying it reflects thoughtful concerns going
forward. Member Whitley agreed, saying he is looking forward to more investigation and citizen input in
the future. Chair Schneider also agrees that this plan was well -developed and collaborative.
Member Hansen made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board recommend that City Council
adopt the Old Town Neighborhoods Plan, based upon the findings of fact contained in the staff
report that is included in the agenda materials for this hearing and the board discussion on this
item. Member Hobbs seconded. Vote: 5:0.
Member Hobbs made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board recommend to City Council
adoption of the Old Town Neighborhoods Design Guidelines, based upon the findings of fact
contained in the staff report that is included in the agenda materials for this hearing and the
board discussion on this item. Member Whitley seconded. Vote: 5:0.
Planning & Zoning Board
February 16, 2017
Page 8
Project: Old Town Neighborhoods Plan
Proiect Description: The Old Town Neighborhoods Plan (Plan) is an element of City Plan and
represents a combined update of the 1986 Eastside Neighborhood Plan and the 1989 Westside
Neighborhood Plan. The Old Town Neighborhoods generally encompass the predominantly residential
neighborhoods to the west and southeast of Downtown. The Plan strives to address new and ongoing
neighborhood issues and opportunities, organized by four key topic areas: Neighborhood Character and
Compatibility, Land Use and Transitions, Circulation and Mobility, and Sustainability. The Plan provides a
renewed vision and policy guidance for the two neighborhoods, and incorporates details on programs,
strategies, and actions to support and implement the neighborhood vision.
Project: Old Town Neighborhoods Design Guidelines
Proiect Description: The Old Town Neighborhoods Design Guidelines provide updated non -mandatory
guidance for compatible rehabilitation and new construction projects in the Eastside and Westside
neighborhoods, which are together known as the Old Town Neighborhoods. Staff has worked collaboratively
with a consultant team to develop the Design Guidelines over the last two years. Outreach for the Design
Guidelines was integrated with the concurrent Old Town Neighborhoods Plan effort, and has included
engagement with neighborhood residents, stakeholder groups, Boards and Commissions, and City
leadership. The Planning and Zoning Board is asked to make a recommendation to City Council on whether
the Design Guidelines should be formally adopted.
Recommendation: Approval of both
Staff Presentation
Planner Wray gave an overview of this recommendation to City Council for both the Old Town
Neighborhoods Plan and Old Town Neighborhoods Design Guidelines, which are being combined in one
presentation. He noted that the Old Town Neighborhoods Plan represents a combined update of the
original East Side/West Side Neighborhood Plans that were approved in the early 1980s addressing new
and emerging issues for neighborhood vision, policies, and implementation. He discussed the zoning of
these neighborhoods, the extensive public outreach performed, and the effort to make this a
collaborative effort with the community. He listed the various approaches to accomplishing this: public
meetings, a neighborhood stakeholder group, online questionnaires, board and commission updates,
multiple updates just with the P&Z Board, and 2 City Council work sessions. He highlighted the fact that
most of the neighborhoods involved are already "built out", providing limited opportunity for consideration
for change in infill and redevelopment potential. The Plan is consistent with City Plan policy for
preserving the character and context of the established neighborhoods, preserving the historic resources
within the area, enhancing compatibility, and providing opportunity and options for enhanced bike and
pedestrian mobility within the internal neighborhoods. He listed the key policy direction provided by the
Plan: neighborhood character and compatibility, historic preservation, land use and transition areas, and
improved neighborhood safety, local street improvements, and enhanced crossing treatments. The plan
recommends a series of immediate, short-term and long-term implementation actions, which would
warrant additional public outreach. Therefore, just the voluntary guidelines are being brought forward at
the present time concurrent with Plan adoption.
The Old Town Neighborhoods Design Guidelines recommendation represents an update to the original
1996 Design Guidelines and the 2013 implementation strategy recommendation from the Character
Study (along with direction from City Council in 2013) and is intended to be voluntary and advisory, not
regulatory. They are applicable to the existing neighborhood conservation low density and neighborhood
conservation medium density zoning areas within both neighborhoods. The key components of the
Planning & Zoning Board
February 16, 2017
Page 7
Applicant and Staff Response
Jon Sweet, Professional Engineer, discussed the noise impacts of the lift stations, saying the only time a
backup generator would be needed would be during a power loss. In case of an emergency, he stated
that there will be approximately 60 hours of backup within the gravity piping system uphill of the lift
station. Nicole Hahn, with City Traffic Operations, addressed the bike access question, saying the signal
is slated to go in ahead of occupancy for this intersection, so "at -grade" crossing would be available at
Harmony Road. There are long-term trail connections slated, although not funded yet. The possibility of
a roundabout will be considered at a future date.
Board Questions
Member Hobbs asked about requirements for mitigation or continuation of natural areas. Planner
Blochowiak responded that the code requirements cover both jurisdictional and non -jurisdictional
wetlands; therefore, all need to remain onsite. Member Hobbs also asked if those wetlands will be
maintained naturally or will need to be irrigated; Planner Blochowiak responded that those wetlands will
be maintained naturally due to site grading and the design of that area. Ms. Ripley added that
stormwater is being directed to that area, and she is confident that this will be enough to maintain proper
irrigation. Planner Blochowiak clarified that the lift station has not been approved and is still in the
development review process.
Board Deliberation
Member Whitley expressed his concern about the crosswalks and suggested a condition of approval for
having raised crosswalks. Member Rollins stated that she is not in favor of adding speed humps.
Martina Wilkinson, Traffic Operations, said that speed humps were not considered, since they would
require a consensus from neighbors. She added that speed control will be reviewed during future
phases. Planner Mapes stated the raised crosswalks are better suited to areas with raised sidewalks on
both ends; he will work with Traffic Operations on this. Ms. Ripley added that this will be a low traffic
zone, so she is willing to explore striping options during the final plan. Member Whitley offered to defer
to Traffic Operations at this time. Member Rollins will support this project, saying she doesn't feel the
modification is significant and is satisfied with the traffic patterns. Member Whitley complemented the
designers on the plan. Member Schneider also plans to support this project, saying a change of
conditional use is good.
Member Hobbs made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the modification to
the Harmony 23 PDP160031 (section 3.5.2(D)(1)), which allows dwellings to be placed other than
in relation to the parking drive at the west edge of the site, and based upon the findings of fact
contained in the staff report that is included in the agenda materials for this hearing and the
board discussion on this item. Member Whitley seconded. Vote: 4:0.
Member Hobbs made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the Harmony 23
PDP160031, based upon the findings of fact contained in the staff report that is included in the
agenda materials for this hearing and the board discussion on this item. Member Whitley
seconded. Vote:4:0.
Vice Chair Hansen rejoined the Board at 7:43pm.
Planning & Zoning Board
February 16, 2017
Page 6
Staff and Applicant Presentations
Planner Mapes gave a brief overview of this project, including a description of the property and the
reason for the modification request. Secretary Cosmas confirmed that no additional information had
been received since the work session.
Jacob Steel, with Terra Development Group, gave a short description of his company, noting the
experience of his company developing similar projects and the need for such projects in Fort Collins.
Linda Ripley introduced her team and then gave a presentation of the project, showing aerial maps, plat
maps, and the site plan. She also detailed the modification suggested in 2016 for a "naturalistic
landscape". She discussed the compatibility with the Land Use Code, detailing how the buildings will be
situated, the type of buildings proposed, and the natural areas being preserved. She detailed the access
proposed, including emergency access, parking spaces proposed, bicycle spaces proposed, a workshop
area, security provided, and utilities (trash and recycle). Landscape themes were selected to maintain
natural river theme, providing amenities exceeding the LUC requirements. She discussed the traffic and
signal plans, including a round -about control, and how they meet the level service requirements for
pedestrians.
Justin Larson, Architect with VFLA, discussed the architecture and the natural area development
proposed, noting how this project integrates both commercial and residential elements. He showed
slides of the building variations and architectural perspectives.
Ms. Ripley detailed the modification being requested to the standard that requires orientation to a
connecting walkway. She explained the rationale for the modification, showing safety features and
convenience.
Staff Analysis
Planner Mapes provided an analysis of this project, highlighting that Staff's findings on the connecting
walkway are based on the bluff, the river valley wall, and the ditch precluding any connectivity; he
continued by saying the design provides a reasonable pedestrian access to the units. Regarding the
street pattern, he doesn't feel there is anything lost with having units on the western edge. Member
Whitley asked if the crosswalks could be raised for speed control; Ms. Ripley responded that this could
be considered, provided it would work with drainage. Member Rollins asked some clarifying questions
regarding the garage units; Ms. Ripley clarified that those are 1-bedroom units. Member Hobbs asked if
those 1-bedroom apartments would have a dedicated garage below them; Mr. Steel responded that there
will be an interior garage access incorporated into this design. Ms. Ripley clarified how many bedrooms
are currently being offered above the garages.
Public Input (3 minutes per person)
Seth Pickett, 4036 Big Dipper, asked several questions:
• Will sewage be pumped uphill successfully?
• Is there a noise component for the pumping unit?
• Is there a backup plan in case these pumps fail?
• What sort of biking access will be available to SE residents across Harmony to access trails
available?
• How will traffic be mitigated?
Planning & Zoning Board
February 16, 2017
Page 5
included in the agenda materials for this hearing and the board discussion on this item. Member
Whitley seconded. Vote: 5:0.
Vice Chair Hansen recused himself at 6:48pm for the next 2 projects due to a conflict of interest.
Project: The Standard Apartments PDP160035
Proiect Description: This is a request for two five -story, multi -family apartment buildings, plus a parking
structure, consisting of a total of 239 dwelling units and 776 bedrooms. The project site includes re-
developing five parcels along the north side of West Prospect Road addressed as 820, 828, 832, 836
and 900 West Prospect Road for Building A. In addition, the existing Blue Ridge Apartments at 775
West Lake Street would also be redeveloped for Building B and the parking structure. Together the
assembled parcels contain 4.23 acres. There would be a mix of units ranging in size from one bedroom
to five bedrooms per unit and leasing would be by the bedroom. There would be 571 parking spaces all
of which would be contained within a five level parking garage. There would be .73 spaces per bedroom.
All existing buildings would be demolished. In Building B, along Lake Street, there would be 1,500
square feet of non-residential floor area. Access would be gained from West Lake Street. Access on
Prospect Road would be limited to emergency vehicles only. Amenities include a rooftop clubroom,
outdoor pool and terrace as well as an indoor rec and fitness room.
Recommendation: Approval
Staff and Applicant Presentations
Chief Planner Shepard gave a brief overview of this project, noting that there is a condition of approval
regarding the number of parking spaces required. Secretary Cosmas reported that the condition of
approval was just received prior to the hearing. Linda Ripley, representing the applicant, requested that
the project be continued to the March hearing, based on the condition of approval that was just received
from Staff.
Member Hobbs made a motion to continue The Standard Apartments PDP 160035 to the March
hearing. No public input was requested. Member Whitley seconded. Vote: 4:0. Assistant City
Attorney Yatabe noted that the materials that were previously struck from the record will be allowed back
into the record for the March hearing.
Project: Harmony 23 PDP160031
Project Description: This development plan proposes 366 apartment units on a 24.9-acre site at the
southwest corner of the Harmony Road/Strauss Cabin Road intersection. Buildings comprise ten 24-
and 36-plexes, two 4-plexes, and four 4- and 6-unit groupings stacked above garages. Units are a mix of
1-, 2-, and 3-bedrooms for a total of 570 bedrooms. The site is triangular in shape with steep topography
and the large Fossil Creek Reservoir Inlet Ditch forming the long western side of the triangle. The site
extends approximately 1/2 mile south from Harmony Road along Strauss Cabin Road. A Modification of a
standard is requested to the standard requirement that all residences be placed directly in relation to
street sidewalks, for 22 of the units along the western edge, on top of garages.
Recommendation: Approval
Planning & Zoning Board
February 16, 2017
Page 4
Member Hobbs asked how many bicycle spaces are required per the LUC; Planner Frickey confirmed
that the code would require 91 spaces, which is 1 space per bedroom. Member Rollins asked if the
porch could be increased in size; Mr. Wright responded that, due to the grading, the porch is as large as
possible at present.
Public Input (3 minutes per person)
Linda Vrooman, 912 Cheyenne Drive, is in favor of this project, saying that there is nothing comparable
to this project in Fort Collins, and she is looking forward to downsizing her current home while remaining
independent.
Board Questions
Member Hobbs asked whether the available bicycle areas in other similar projects are consumed by
electric mobility devices; Mr. Wright responded that generally there may be a maximum of 1-3 electric
mobility devices. Member Rollins asked rf the 1 parking space per unit is guaranteed; Mr. Wright
responded that this parking is guaranteed, although garage stalls will be selected based on a priority
number. Chair Schneider asked about using Minnesota as the demographic for Fort Collins bicycle
needs; Mr. Wright stated that there are many communities being used as models, even though Fort
Collins has one of the highest per capita bicycle ridership. Staff looked into the possibility of a Bike
Share program, but it wasn't pursued in conjunction with this project.
Board Deliberation
Vice Chair Hansen acknowledged that the modification for open space is common, and he is satisfied
that the parking modification is for a minimal amount; however, he is concerned with the modification for
bike parking, saying he feels that a backup plan would be useful in case the bicycle usage increases.
Mr. Wright stated that there is room for more surface and racks if needed. Member Rollins is in favor of
this project, saying she feels confident that the residents would be able to work together as a
cooperative. Member Whitley agreed, saying he would feel better if a firm backup plan for bicycle
spaces were in place. Mr. Wright stated that residents could decide how to handle this going forward.
Such changes could be funded through the resident reserve accounts. Member Whitley confirmed that
he will support this project.
Member Hansen made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve modification 1 to
the Village Senior Coop PDP (section 3.2.2(C)(4)(b)) regarding bike parking, based upon the
findings of fact contained in the staff report that is included in the agenda materials for this
hearing and the board discussion on this item. Member Whitley seconded. Vote: 5:0.
Member Hansen made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve modification 2 to
the Village Senior Coop PDP (section 3.2.2 (In(1xa)) regarding off-street parking, based upon the
findings of fact contained in the staff report that is included in the agenda materials for this
hearing and the board discussion on this item. Member Hobbs seconded. Vote: 5:0.
Member Hobbs made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve modification 3 to the
Village Senior Coop PDP (section 3.8.30(C)) regarding open space requirements, based upon the
findings of fact contained in the staff report that is included in the agenda materials for this
hearing and the board discussion on this item. Member Rollins seconded. Vote: 5:0.
Member Hobbs made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the Village Senior
Cooperative PDP 160036, based upon the findings of fact contained in the staff report that is
Planning & Zoning Board
February 16, 2017
Page 3
Discussion Agenda:
8. Village Senior Cooperative PDP
9. The Standard Apartments
10. Harmony 23 PDP
11. Whitman Outdoor Storage APU
12. Old Town Neighborhoods Plan — Recommendation to City Council
13. Old Town Design Guidelines — Recommendation to City Council
Project: Village Senior Cooperative PDP
Project Description for Rezoning: This is a request for a Project Development Plan for 52 multi -family
apartments located in one building. The multi -family units are targeted towards active seniors aged 55
and older. The proposed ownership model is a cooperative. Cooperative housing combines the financial
advantages of home ownership with the convenience of community living. Members of the cooperative
jointly own the property. To that end, a cooperative is a community of active adults who own a share- not
just a unit - in the entire community through a non- profit Cooperative Corporation. Each share is held
through an official Membership Certificate upon purchase. All of the units have 2- or 3-bedrooms. The
overall density of this proposal is 19.04 dwelling units per acre. The site is located on a 2.73-acre parcel
in the Medium Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood (MMN).
Recommendation: Approval
Staff and Applicant Presentations
Planner Frickey gave a brief overview of this project, noting there are 3 modifications being requested.
Secretary Cosmas reported that an email string between a citizen and Nicole Hahn, Traffic Operations,
was received after the work session regarding several traffic concerns. Chair Schneider also disclosed
for the record that he leases an office space in the mailing area for this project.
Shane Wright, with the Village Senior Cooperative, explained how his company specializes in senior
cooperatives all over the country, all in various stages of construction. He noted that three rounds of
review occur during project development, including significant neighborhood outreach. He explained
what a cooperative is and how it fills a need for seniors who are active but prefer less home
maintenance. He stated that the response in Fort Collins has been outstanding, and the location is
considered to be excellent. While the units will be cooperatively owned by each residence, his company
will continue to manage them in the future.
Staff Analysis
Planner Frickey provided some visual slides of the project plot, landscape plan, buffering, architectural
elevations, shadow analysis, and the modification requests. For modification 1, the applicant is
requesting reduction in required bicycle parking (proposing to provide 1 space per unit, rather than 1 per
bedroom). For modification 2, the applicant is requesting a reduction in the number of vehicular parking
spaces required (Staff found that parking at other similar developments has been underutilized,
indicating the recommended parking ratio may be too high). For modification 3, the applicant is seeking
a reduction to park, central feature or gathering space provided (must provide 10,000 feet, which was
actually written for larger sites, and the project complies with the alternate compliance option). This
modification is not uncommon and is slated to be reviewed in conjunction with the upcoming LUC
revisions.
Planning & Zoning Board
February 16, 2017
Page 2
• While the City staff provides comprehensive information about each project under consideration,
citizen input is valued and appreciated.
• The Board is here to listen to citizen comments. Each citizen may address the Board once for
each item.
• Decisions on development projects are based on judgment of compliance or non-compliance with
city Land Use Code.
• Should a citizen wish to address the Board on items other than what is on the agenda, time will
be allowed for that as well.
• This is a legal hearing, and the Chair will moderate for the usual civility and fairness to ensure
that everyone who wishes to speak can be heard.
Planning Director Gloss reviewed the items on the Consent and Discussion agendas, noting that all
advertised projects will be heard, with the exception of the Whitman Outdoor Storage APU, which was
requested to be continued to the March hearing. He also noted that the Village Senior Cooperative PDP,
which was originally on the consent agenda, was transferred to the discussion agenda by the P&Z Board
members at the work session.
Member Rollins posed a question to the Board regarding the large volume of information received on the
Harmony 23 PDP and The Standard Apartments after the work session; she feels that she has not had
adequate opportunity to review this information, and she suggested these projects be continued. Linda
Ripley, representing the Landmark properties, stated that the reason this large volume of material was
submitted was in the event of an appeal. She opted to strike the extra documents from the record, rather
than continue the item. As a result, the Board members agreed to go forward with this item. Assistant
City Attorney Yatabe clarified that the late materials received would be stricken from the record.
Member Hobbs made a motion to continue the Whitman Outdoor Storage APU to the March
hearing; Member Whitley seconded. Vote: 5:0.
Public Input on Items Not on the Hearing Agenda:
None noted.
Consent Agenda:
1. Draft Minutes from January 12, 2017, P&Z Hearing
2. Colorado Early Colleges SPAR
3. Beebe Christian School PDP
4. Talon Estates PDP 1-Year Extension
5. Lehman -Timberline Annexation and Initial Zoning
6. Mail Creek Crossing Second Annexation and Initial Zoning
7. Blue Ribbon Auto Body Paint Shop — Minor Amendment and Change of Use
Public Input on Consent Agenda:
None noted.
Member Hobbs made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the February 16,
2017, Consent agenda as presented; Member Hansen seconded the motion. Vote: 5:0.
Jeff Schneider, Chair
Jeff Hansen, Vice Chair
Jennifer Carpenter
Emily Heinz
Michael Hobbs
Ruth Rollins
William Whitley
City Council Chambers
City Hall West
300 Laporte Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado
Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 &
Channel 881 on Comcast
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will
make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221.6515 (TDD 224-6001) for assistance.
Regular Hearing
February 16, 2017
Member Schneider called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
Roll Call: Hansen, Hobbs, Rollins, Schneider, and Whitley
Absent: Carpenter and Heinz
Staff Present: Gloss, Yatabe, Shepard, Frickey, Langenberger, Blochowiak, Mapes, Wray, Kleer,
Overton, Mounce, Hahn, Wilkinson, Andrews, Ragasa, Virata, Iverson, and
Cosmas
Election of Officers
Member Hobbs made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board elect Member Schneider as
Chair for the 2017 term; Member Whitley seconded. Vote: 5:0.
Member Hobbs made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board elect Member Hansen as Vice
Chair for the 2017 term; Member Rollins seconded. Vote: 5:0.
Agenda Review
Chair Schneider provided background on the board's role and what the audience could expect as to the
order of business. He described the following procedures: