Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWATERFIELD PUD - PRELIMINARY - 7-95B - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTESPlanning and Zoning Board Minutes May 19, 1997 Page 10 Staff commented that the zoning code defined "family" as no more than three unrelated individuals. Supreme court ruling has questioned the validity of the definition. MOVED BY GAVALDON, SECONDED BY CHAPMAN: FOR APPROVAL OF WATERFIELD PUD PRELIMINARY #7-95B WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT MORE WETLAND NEGOTIATION/DISCUSSION TAKE PLACE WITH DEVELOPER AND CITY. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. COMMENTS: Member Gavaldon complimented applicant on 3-D visual effects on renderings of units and would like to encourage more of this media. Complimented the developer on taking time to be proactive with good foresight. Member Chapman commented on the good natural area plan and its development. Member Weitkunat commented on the type of density and its need in the area. Member Davidson commented on the development layout and the compliment of the wetlands to the affordable housing. Member Colton commented on the way the improvements will be established and the excellent mixed use concepts and the well -designed development. ESKIN PUD - FINAL, #48-95A STAFF PRESENTATION Request for final PUD approval for preliminary PUD that was approved by P&Z a year ago. Located at the southwest corner of East Drake Rd. and Harvard St. Existing home occupation. Eskins live on second floor with chiropractic office on first floor. Preliminary PUD would allow the Eskins to move out of the second story while maintaining chiropractic office on first floor. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes May 19, 1997 Page 9 BOARD COMMENTS Member Davidson thought decibel readings would be appropriate at the switching yard. Member Colton talked about putting a condition on the wetlands. Staff felt comfortable with the applicant's responsibility to the wetlands and thought further conditions would not be necessary. MOVED BY GAVALDON, SECONDED BY WEITKUNAT: FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE TO CRITERIA 2 FOR POINT CHART J. REASON FOR VARIANCE IS TO ALLOW FOR THE POINTS THAT HAVE NOT MET THE MINIMUM. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. COMMENTS: Member Colton felt it did meet the conditions for the variance. Member Chapman expressed the lack of contiguity and how this is a unique situation. MOVED BY GAVALDON, SECONDED BY CHAPMAN FOR APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE OF ALTERNATE DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA FOR A 1.1 SOLAR ORIENTATION FOR WATERFIELD PUD AS IS EQUAL TO OR BETTER THAN. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. COMMENTS: Member Chapman felt the applicant did a good job in outlining the solar variance. MOVED BY CHAPMAN, SECONDED BY WEITKUNAT: TO AUTHORIZE THE INCREASE FROM THREE TO FOUR UNRELATED PERSONS WHO MAY RESIDE IN THE 18 4-BEDROOM UNITS. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Member Chapman asked what the city's intent was regarding the restriction after it was passed. i Planning and Zoning Board Minutes May 19, 1997 Page 8 Engineers who agreed on the 11.5 acres. The wetlands will be the responsibility of the homeowners. Has developed 14 mitigation factors to be convenient provisions enforceable through the Homeowner's provisions. BOARD QUESTIONS Member Davidson asked about the homeowner's economic feasibility of protecting the wetlands. Liley thought the mechanism would be the homeowners versus the affordable housing. Member Davidson expressed concern over wildlife corridors and migration. Staff said the focus was on the waterfowl. There will be tree and shrub plantings and screening resources. The deer have not been taken into consideration. The Board was reminded that there is a park site to the south. Member Davidson asked about the land owned by Pat Music and how her house could be buffered. Liley advised they will look into some type of combination landscape/fence treatment. Member Gavaldon asked a question about a wetland study. Member Davidson asked to do some research on when the wetland study was done and the information included. Erik Burt from Wetland Consultants, Incorporated said a wetlands delineation was completed which established the 11.5 acres. Member Chapman asked a question of Mr. Burt regarding the Wildlife Impact Statement and if there could be a bigger buffer in the wetland area. It was agreed by Burt that a bigger buffer would be beneficial. Member Colton asked if staff could research the wildlife activity regarding the deer. Staff said the nearest corridor mapped was Dry Creek Corridor that would have deer activity. STAFF COMMENTS Mike Ludwig talked about residential development. Eric Bracke answered the questions about the switching yard and the proximity to the residential area. Times are four minutes a switch about six times a day. Traffic impact is not great. Planner Ludwig said switching is separated from development by an arterial street. i Planning and Zoning Board Minutes May 19, 1997 Page 7 BOARD QUESTIONS Member Weitkunat wanted some clarifications on the school, park and delineation of streets and traffic circulation patterns. Member Chapman asked about development of Conifer and County Rd. 11 to the north. Member Davidson asked about the wetlands. A handout was given to the Board. He asked about lots 63 and 64 and the 100-foot variance. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION Joe Solomon expressed concerns about the wetlands area. He wanted to know the exact acreage of the wetlands because there have been several different estimates. He questioned the source of water needs. He believed the wetlands tie in with the Larimer Well Canal in terms of wildlife being supported. He would like to seethe Army Corps of Engineers consulted. He wanted to know how the dedication of the wetlands to the city will be maintained. Don Holman was concerned with the area on the southern part of the project which is across the street from the railroad switchyard which might cause problems with the housing proposed in the area. STAFF RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS Rob Wilkinson, said there was a hydrologic study done. Water appeared to come from Larimer Weld but may be an underground ground water flow as well. Applicant has agreed to assure that wetland is not cut off from a source and will provide water either through a subdrain system or from another source. The Corps of Engineers was not asked for input because there was no direct impact to the wetlands. The size of the wetland appears to be correct. Stormwater is planned to be released into wetland area after it's treated. Natural Resources might be interested in acquiring the wetland area. Ms. Liley pointed out that the wetlands had been surveyed and sent to Corps of Planning and Zoning Board Minutes May 19, 1997 Page 6 units, provides additional open space, recreation areas, parking areas and public facilities to adequately service the occupants of the development neighborhood. Consistent with City's transportation policies. Staff recommends 1) Approval of a variance to criteria 2, Point Chart J. 2) Approval of a variance to all development criteria A 1.1 solar orientation. 3) Approval of request for 18 four -bedroom full -type dwelling units as part of Bull Run Apartments' portion. 4) Approval of the Preliminary PUD request. Four additional pieces of information are: May 13, 1997 - Letter from Bernard and Denelva Taylor May 13, 1997 - Letter from Lucia Liley to Rob Wilkinson concerning the potential for additional wetland buffering and/or acquisition by the city. May 19, 1997 - Letter from Patricia Music, owner of Plumber School. Memorandum from staff to Board providing architectural analysis referenced in Section 4-C of staff memo. APPLICANT PRESENTATION Lucia Liley spoke on behalf of the applicant. She spoke on the zoning ordinance, the time period for being reviewed, the base points the site must have. She gave information on the affordable housing aspect of the site, public financing and how amenities and services will be made available to the project. There will be significant transportation and infrastructure improvements. She addressed concerns regarding wetlands buffering. Frank Vaught with VF Ripley Associates presented information on the developments around the site. Showed site slides, talked about the traffic flows, commented on the service retail available to the neighborhood and talked about the affordable horsing available for mix -use dwellings. Slides were shown. He commented on the wetland enhancement which affords 30 percent open space to the development. He spoke on the size of island. Talked about financial implications caused by the new infrastructure. Mr. Vaught submitted a commitment letter and escrow agreement and resolution of School Board accepting the school deed. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes May 19, 1997 Page 5 Member Chapman commented that all 8 codes have been met. Doesn't feel parking is a problem. 11 Member Gavaldon commented on the efforts and flexibility of the applicant and the good job in seeking neighborhood input. WATERFIELD PUD - PRELIMINARY, #7-95B STAFF PRESENTATION Proposed on approximately 140 acres located on the NW corner of E. Vine Dr. and County Rd. 9E or Summit View Rd. Surrounding development includes Adrial Hills Development, Lindenmeier Lake, Collins Air Mobile Home Park, proposed Dry Creek mobile home park and airport industrial park. Adjacent to farm land and to the railroad switching yard on S. Side of Vine Dr. The City Council adopted Ordinance 52-1996 which rezoned property. Southern 60 acres of property was zoned limited industrial with a PUD condition.. Northern 80 acres rezoned to low density planned residential with PUD condition. Council placed an additional condition which required the property to be developed in a net density of 6 dwelling units per net developable acres. The applicant is requesting approval of 483 dwelling units, 187 single-family lots, 120 senior cottage units and 176 apartments known as Bull Run, a 5,000 square foot Convenience Store, 10,000 square foot retail office building and 6,000 sq. ft. day care center. A 10 acre school site is included for platting purposes only and has been dedicated to the School District and accepted. Title for the park site has been placed in escrow pending approval. Overall average density is 3.95 dwelling units per acre. The net acreage is 6.06. Request was submitted on February 27, 1997. It has been processed according to the Land Development Guidance System. It earned 67 percent of the maximum applicable points on the Residential Uses Point Chart exceeding minimum required 60 points for a density of 3.9 dwelling units per acre. It is in compliance with Ordinance 52-1996 which rezoned the property. It earned 52 percent of the maximum applicable points on the neighborhood Convenience Shopping Center Point Chart. The Land Development Guidance System failed to exceed the minimum required 65 percent; however, can be granted a variance. It meets all development criteria with the exception of A 1.1 which is solar orientation. Staff recommends granting a variance to A1.1. Staff recommends that this project is compatible to surrounding neighborhood. It preserves 25 acres of wetlands, provides 36 percent of total dwelling units as affordable