Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHARMONY RIDGE PUD, PHASE ONE - PRELIMINARY ..... SECOND P & Z BOARD HEARING - 49-95A - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTESI Planning and Zoning Board Minutes September 23, 1996 Page 30 OTHER BUSINESS Member Byrne asked staff to provide an executive summary of what the existing conditions look like and what the forecasted conditions for Harmony Road and the intersection of Harmony and Shields are sent to City Council. He would like it to include the arterial streets that are in dire need of expansion. Chairperson Bell stated that she would like to add that the Board spends an incredible amount of time on traffic issues and concerns. She would like to see the Board address some of these things at the worksession and have some meaningful discussions with staff as to what the Board sees as continual problems. There was no other business. The meeting was adjourned at 1:15 a.m. 0 w Planning and Zoning Board Minutes September 23, 1996 Page 29 Member Weitkunat moved for approval of the Harmony Ridge PUD with the 5 stated conditions in the staff report. Member Byrne asked that something in writing be sent to City Council about the issues talked about on Harmony and the traffic situation. Chairperson Bell asked again about the streetlighting. Assistant City Attorney Duval replied that the Director of Engineering approves the streetlighting and the Board does not have control over the streetlighting. Chairperson Bell asked why the Board cannot request as a condition that the developer look into it and consider it as a variance. Mr. Duval replied that they could make it a condition as long as they don't require the developer to obtain a variance as a condition of approval. The Board could word the condition to read that the developer contact the Director of Engineering to request or consider a variance to the streetlighting. Mr. Vansant reported that they would be willing to look into a variance for the streetlighting. Member Colton asked that a condition be placed on the approval that a new traffic study be submitted that includes the impact of Registry Ridge, the impact of the expansion of the Front Range College and shows possible improvements and timeline for the Harmony and Shields intersection and the level of service given nothing is done for 5 and 10 years. Member Weitkunat accepted the condition. Member Gavaldon seconded the motion. Member Colton commented that he would also like to have the developer look at the setbacks of the lots next to The Ridge, but would not make it a condition. Chairperson Bell stated that her concern is the interior road system and how it relates to both phases and she is dissatisfied with what the Board has seen and what the big picture is supposed to look like. The motion was approved 4-1 with Chairperson Bell voting in the negative. • Planning and Zoning Board Minutes September 23, 1996 Page 28 Planner Olt explained that a transition is being provided. A minimum 20 foot setback is being provided and as Mr. Vansant has stated, they are working with The Ridge Homeowners Association to provide additional berming and landscaping in the open space within The Ridge as additional visual and sound buffer. No they are not providing any open space. Chairperson Bell asked Mr. Bridenbach of The Ridge what he was looking for as far as buffering. Mr. Bridenbach replied he was looking for more separation. Member Gavaldon stated that he is having a hard time supporting this project because the traffic is still a compelling issue that he feels that has not been thoroughly addressed to the satisfaction of the citizens who live out there and to future developments. His other concern is marketing these units to elderly populations and if that does not work out, it will also add more traffic. Member Weitkunat made her comments on traffic and stated that she feels that alternative transportation in this area should be promoted. She felt that it was a well planned idea for the number of houses that will be placed in the development. She felt the development was favorable to her. Member Byrne commented on the traffic issues in the City and the length of time it takes to get road improvements. He also commented that services are needed in the area for people to walk to and not have to get into their cars and drive. Member Colton felt that a 20 foot buffer was not sufficient on the eastern properties. He would like to see it increased to at least 30 feet. He also commented on giving variances for solar orientation and would like to see more mitigation for giving those variances. He also felt that he may not have heard enough on the traffic impacts and have a recent enough traffic study, and felt that the traffic issue has not been addressed adequately. Member Weitkunat moved for approval of the solar variance on the Harmony Ridge PUD. Member Byrne seconded the motion. The motion was approved 4-1, with Chairperson Bell voting in the negative. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes September 23, 1996 Page 27 Member Colton asked about off -site street improvements and what would this developer have to pay for. Ms. Ashbeck replied that any development adjacent to an unimproved street, whether it be a local, collector or arterial, is obligated to widen that street to it's width as designated on the Master Street Plan. In this case Harmony is an arterial and they are obligated to improve it along their frontage. Ms. Ashbeck explained the options for the developer as to paying for off -site improvements. Ms. Ashbeck also explained again the situation with the new and old Harmony Roads. Ms. Ashbeck stated that if the developer would choose to incorporate old Harmony Road as a local street within the development he would have to bring that road up to local street standards if it were to remain as a public street. Right now that determination has not been made. Ms. Ashbeck also explained street oversizing fees, impact fees, and when those fees are applied to widening and improving roads. Chairperson Bell asked about street lights for the development. Ms. Ashbeck stated that street light variances are determined by the Director of Engineering and that this project had not submitted a variance to their street lighting at this time. This project at this time is projected to be street lighted per the City's Street Standards. Mr. Vansant also replied that they would be putting down directional lighting fixtures in the area, and if that was not available they would be seeking a variance to the lighting criteria. Chairperson Bell asked if the people who live directly in the area access the open space. Planner Olt replied that staff would like to see two points of public trail access to the proposed city trail. As pointed out previously, there is a proposed pedestrian access only trail into The Ridge. Mr. Shoemaker added that they are planning two railheads, one at Shields and Fossil Creek Drive on the east of the Cathy Fromme prairie. The other would be at Taft Hill Road and old Harmony. Chairperson Bell asked what, if any, is the buffer that this project is providing as transition with The Ridge. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes September 23, 1996 Page 26 Mr. Bridenback stated that the traffic situation is intolerable now, so it was immaterial whether this would add any measurable impact. He stated that the situation got intolerable by letting developments like this one go in without any overall plan to fix the arterials. He felt that traffic was still a real issue for this development. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION CLOSED Chairperson Bell asked if the applicant would like a rebuttal to citizen participation. Mr. Vansant stated that they have agreed to meetings with the Homeowners Group from The Ridge to do put in streetlights and to keep them at a minimum amount that would satisfy city standards. He stated that they have increased the setbacks against their property lines that nothing can be built in, and they have agreed to build to put a berm on their green area and plant trees on it. They have tried to mitigate the impact that their house will have. They have also tried to make sure that their houses will not be built on the crest of the hill as to help with the views. Member Weitkunat asked if there were western and southern slopes next to The Ridge. Mr. Vansant explained the topography of the area. Member Byrne asked how arterial streets like Harmony are improved. Mr. Bracke explained that generally the arterials are improved with development. There are street oversizing fees that help pay for some of the improvements. There are no magic numbers, when the problems become severe, the City goes in and does the project as a capital improvement or through the street oversizing fund. Member Byrne asked if he could predict any timing for improvements for Harmony and Shields. Mr. Bracke stated he had no way of predicting that. Member Byrne asked about the level of service at the intersection of Shields and Harmony and asked Mr. Bracke when he felt that intersection would go over the unacceptable level. Mr. Bracke stated that with continued development in the area, maybe 6 or 7 years. Mr. Bracke explained to the Board the level of service policies of the City. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes September 23, 1996 Page 25 Planner Olt stated that in All Development Criteria A1.1 in the LDGS it is specific to single and two-family home lots of less than 15,000 s.f. in size. The language is right out of the Solar Orientation Ordinance. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION Meryle Busch, lives in Woodridge Subdivision commented on the project. He stated he did not have any problems with the project the applicant was proposing. His concerns on the project have to do with traffic. Mr. Busch spoke of the traffic generated from the newly constructed Woodlands Apartments, the Front Range Community College addition, and his concern with weekend traffic when the new Harmony Road is opened that will be going to Horsetooth Reservoir. He spoke about the closing of the existing Harmony Road and bringing it up to public street standards if it is to be used as an access for this development. He felt that closing the old Harmony Road would improve the intersection at Taft and Harmony, but what happens to it after that is still undefined and he is concerned about that. Bill Nussbaum, lives in Woodridge and his house borders where Phase II will go in. He is there as a representative of the Woodridge development. He stated that safety is the biggest concern. He mentioned the intersection of Harmony and Taft Hill and that the opening of the new Harmony Road might be the solution to the problem. He mentioned the growth at Trilby and Taft and that there should be a better access route to the south and felt that Seneca would be a great option for that process. He spoke about the prairie dog towns and the wildlife in the area and that they need to be protected. He spoke about the schools being full and was also concerned with the prices of the homes being affordable to the elderly. Mr. Nussbaum was concerned with the wind tunnel in the area and felt that the proposed housing would have trouble with snow drifts and felt that would be a concern for the elderly residents it is being marketed to. Dale Bridenback, spoke earlier at the ODP. He stated that he still has concerns with the traffic. He spoke of his concern regarding the transition between the single family homes in this development and the ones in The Ridge development. He stated that the homes in The Ridge are approximately 2/3 acre with greenbelt behind them, which makes them about 1 acre in size. He was concerned with the size of the proposed lots and did not feel they were compatible with the ones in The Ridge. He would like to see lower density along the side that is adjacent to The Ridge. He wanted to make sure that there is an adequate transition and also was concerned with the view that they would have now in The Ridge. Mr. Bridenback spoke of his concerns with street lighting and mentioned that there is no street lights in The Ridge. He also spoke of no greenbelts or buffering between this development and The Ridge and felt that this development should also provide a greenbelt at the rear of their lots. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes September 23, 1996 Page 24 natural area types of issues that sometimes are very thorny. There have been several issues addressed. One being storm drainage and storm detention and the owners would need to retain easements from the land that they currently own to allow the stormwater detention. There are several significant drainages that come down this property and the project was designed to recognize the steep terrain and the drainages. Mr. Shoemaker stated that there is a condition in the staff report that is significant and should remain that speaks to a requirement for a sedimentation pond so that the water that comes off the development site is allowed to settle and the velocities slowed before it goes into the natural drainage and on down to the Burns Tributary. That design will be designed and configured between preliminary and final. He felt that a design could be accomplished that would minimize the impact to the natural area. Mr. Shoemaker spoke about the characteristics of the site. This is at a level of detail that is typically beyond a preliminary and usually is addressed at final. He felt that additional work and visual analysis should be done at this stage to satisfy staff what this project would look like in the future. He stated that the City contracted with EDAW to visual simulation work on this project. He stated that included constructing a topographic model in a computer base of the overall site, establishing several view points of where you would look to this site. Mr. Shoemaker and Planner Olt showed slides and explained the visual simulations. Chairperson Bell asked about the height of the buildings. Planner Olt replied that they would be similar to the homes already existing to the east. They will be two story townhomes that are dropping down the ridge and relate to the topography and the ridge lines. The building mass will not be any more that what is already there to the north and to the east. They will be a maximum of 30 feet in height. Chairperson Bell asked for the applicant's presentation: Joe Vansant, applicant on the project gave the applicant's presentation. He gave a brief history of the project. Mr. Vansant spoke on traffic, solar orientation, cross - sections, height limitations, street layout and street widths, attached versus detached sidewalks, walkways, topography of the site, and bike trails and connections. Member Colton wanted to follow up on the solar -orientation issue of only applying to single family homes. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes September 23, 1996 Page 23 Member Byrne asked for an explanation for the Solar Variance requested. Planner Olt replied that the solar orientation ordinance is based on the alignment of the lot and that is based on the street alignment. It has to be within 30 degrees of true east/west in terms of the front or the rear of the lot. Obviously, because of the narrowness of this area, the street has to assume a north/south alignment, which makes the fronts and backs of the lots facing either east or west. They should be facing either north or south within that 30 degrees. It is based on the topography of the area, the significant drainageway. It is very difficult to move streets up and down the drainageway. What is being done is a street is being brought down into the property, which is making it very difficult to align those lots within the 30 degrees of the true east/west. Member Byrne asked if there were other configurations that were looked at? Planner Olt replied no. He also reminded the Board that the single family is the only housing type that is subject to the solar orientation ordinance. Member Byrne stated that he sees more projects that don't meet the solar ordinance that do. He felt that was a problem because we seem unable to achieve it consistently all over town. Member Gavaldon asked if these streets would be public or private. Kerrie Ashbeck, Engineering Department stated that the developers proposal is to have all public streets. She stated that the reason there is a condition on the staff report is to allow the developer, if he would choose to, to come back at final and incorporate the new street standards. He is not obligated to due to the timing of his submittal in relation to when those standards went into effect. Member Byrne asked if the sidewalks were detached. Ms. Ashbeck replied that right now they are proposing the old standard with a 28 foot wide street, which is roll-over, or attached curb, gutter and sidewalks. Tom Shoemaker, Director of Natural Resources added to the staff presentation. He stated that in the staff report and in worksession, there were several questions that were related to Natural Resource issues. He highlighted the Overall Development Plan and that it was intended to try to maximize the very valuable natural area that would be added to the Cathy Fromme Prairie. He stated that in working jointly in the acquisition in the development planning process, have attempted to satisfy up -front, a lot of the Planning and Zoning Board Minutes September 23, 1996 Page 22 requirements and meets the requirements as set forth in All Development Criterion A-1.9 in the LDGS. The runoff generated by the development shall be routed through water quality (treatment) sedimentation ponds prior to being released into the potential natural area acquisition property. Such ponds shall be designed in accordance with Volume 3 of the UDFC District's Drainage Criteria Manual" or other industry "Best Management Practices" standard and shall comply with the City of Fort Collins design criteria and standards. Any downstream dischartge from these ponds into the potential natural area shall be designed to minimize potential channel instability and shall take into account the bicycle trail crossings of the drainage channels. The stabilizing measures could include both structural and non-structural (vegetative and bio-technical) measures. All of these measures shall be reviewed and approved by the Natural Resources Division, from a technical and aesthetic standpoint, and by the Stormwater Utility, for conformance with drainage design criteria, prior to Planning and Zoning Board approval of the final PUD. 3. At the time of final PUD submittal the developer must provide a request for a variance to the City's Street Design Standards to allow some of the internal local streets to be narrower than the minimum 36' width. The requrest must be approved by the Director of Engineering prior to recording the PUD plans. 4. At the time of final PUD submittal the developer must provide designs for the intersection of "old" Harmony Road with the Harmony Ridge PUD entry and the intersection of "old" Harmony Road with "new" Harmony Road. The designs must meet All Development Criterion A-3.2 of the LDGS and the criteria in the City's Street Design Standards prior to recording the PUD plans. 5. the layout and density of this development may have to change based on evaluation of a street width variance request, the configuration and design of the street intersections both on -site and off -site at "old" and "new" Harmony Roads (All Development Criterion A-3.2), and the information regarding views, building mass, transition zones, and site layout (All Development Criteria A-2.3 and A-2.7). The ultimate layout and density for the Harmony Ridge Pud, Phase One will be determined at the time of final PUD review and approval. r ,r Planning and Zoning Board Minutes September 23, 1996 Page 21 Planner Olt replied that the Overall Development Plan breaks down the land uses on the various portions of the property. This plan shows the whole 186 acres, clearly defines two phases of development and what exactly would occur there, and 140 acres of proposed open space. Chairperson Bell asked if the only roadway that would be going through Phase II would be Seneca. Planner Olt replied that what it is showing is an access off of what is presently the old Harmony Road alignment. An access into that phase and that would constitute on a typical ODP, where a collector alignment would be. Member Weitkunat moved for approval of the Harmony Ridge Overall Development Plan. Member Gavaldon seconded the motion. Member Colton stated that in general, he felt that this meets most of the Land Use Policies. There are some definite traffic issues and he felt that the land use was appropriate. The motion was approved 5-0. HARMONY RIDGE, PHASE I. PRELIMINARY. #49-95A Steve Olt, City Planner gave the staff report recommending approval with the following conditions: 1. Letters of intent for necessary off -site drainage easements, to allow the stormwater from Harmony Ridge PUD to pass across the natural area (including the Cathy Fromme Prairie) into the Burns Tributary, must be provided at the time of submittal of the final PUD documents. The actual easement agreements must be provided to the City by the plan revision due date for final PUD review. The easement agreements must be accepted by the Stormwater Utility prior to Planning and Zoning Board approval of the final PUD. 2. At time of submittal of final PUD documents the developer must provide design for the stormwater conveyance channels and structures from the Harmony Ridge Pud to the Burns Tributary to the south. Upon review it will be determined if the design adequately addresses the Stormwater Utility's PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MINUTES Regular Meeting September 23, 1996 6:30 p.m. Council Liaison: Gina Janett I Staff Liaison: Bob Blanchard Chairperson: Gwen Bell Phone: 221-3415 (H) Vice Chairperson: Glen Colton Phone: 679-3201 (W) 225-2760 (H) The meeting was called to order at 6:40 p.m. Roll Call: Byrne, Gavaldon, Weitkunat, Colton, Bell. Member Davidson was absent. Staff Present: Olt, Jones, Shepard, Ashbeck, Bracke, Blanchard, Duval and Macklin. Agenda Review: Current Planning Director Blanchard reviewed the consent and discussion agendas. The consent agenda items are as follows: 1. Minutes of the April 8, April 22, and May 20, 1996 Planning and Zoning Board Hearings. (April 22, and May 20 Continued) 2. #21-89G Troutman Office Park PUD - Preliminary & Final 3. #13-82BS Oakridge Business Park, 23rd Filing, Invision Marketing PUD - Preliminary & Final 4. #16-96A Ramada Limited Suites PUD, Phase 1 - Final 5. #3-96A Scenic Views PUD - Final 6. Modifications of Conditions of Final Approval 7. Recommendation to City Council Regarding the Request to Remove Land from the Urban Growth Area. Discussion Agenda: 8. #31-95C Hearthfire PUD - Preliminary 9. #20-96 Sinclair Redevelopment PUD - Preliminary and Final 10. #49-95 Harmony Ridge PUD - Preliminary & Final 11. #49-95A Harmony Ridge PUD, Phase One - Preliminary These items are Continued until the October 7, 1996 P & Z Hearing: 12. Recommendation to City Council for the Approval of the Principles and Policies Document as part of City Plan. 13. #6-96 Harmony Towne Center PUD - Preliminary 14. #33-94B Harmony Safeway Marketplace PUD - Final