Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSTONEBRIDGE GARDEN APARTMENTS FINAL PUD - 82 93A - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTESPlanning sod Zoninx Board Minutes March 28 1994 Pane 21 called to the dispatch center, the address automatically goes up on the screen of the computer. That will be investigated further but the reason for the system is for the understanding that they may be flustered, out of control, etc. It can be identified correctly and be given to the emergency team. Mr. Junge said that they would work on all these issues but was looking for approval before these were all worked out. The concerns with the name and sidewalk will be addressed. Member Walker commented that it is a hypothetical traffic engineering situation. Wheaton Drive is fairly short and connects easily to Lemay. It appears to be other opportunities to go to other signalized intersections. He believed the access to Monte Carlo will change the character there. There are critical compatibility issues that need resolution. The school, proposed retail center and multi -family complex make up the complex and need to be considered as a compatibility issue. He believed it important to maintain the character of Monte Carlo as a local street. The transportation standard has to be weighed against the compatibility standard. He believed that not all options for traffic engineering arc not being closed by keeping the access in place. There other ways to solve the geometry problems that are being presented. Member Walker moved to approve the Stonebridge Garden Apartments PUD Final. Member Strom seconded the motion. Chair Clements asked if an amendment to the motion was needed for the sidewalk bike lane issue needs that to be resolved. Member Walker agreed with Member Strom's comments regarding the sidewalk and bikeway and didn't see it as an issue. Mr. Olt said the plan indicates the desire to build the sidewalk and didn't think it needed to be a condition for approval because it is part of the plan. Member Cottier said she would support the motion and commented that she was sorry to focus so much on the traffic issue and haven't said too much what a nice project this is. She was glad the neighborhood liked the project. It is a good trade off that Monte Carlo traffic will not be increased with the access connection. She disagreed that All Development Criteria would not be met with the access point where it is proposed. Member Klataske said the name change would be more clear for emergency calls to people driving through Fort Collins and thought it worthwhile to justify a name change to eliminate the confusion. Mr. Eckman addressed the sidewalk issue. If it is to be constructed on a public right-of-way and this developer is in agreement to install it and it is part of the plan, he was not at all convinced that it would take Courtney Park's consent to put it in. If it were installed, it would be Courtney Park's obligation to remove the snow seasonally. Motion passed 6-0. Planning gad Zoning Board Minutes March 28. 1994 Page 20 Jack O'Neill - 1307 Brittany Ct. - He lives in Golden Meadows and supports the project. He walks along Wheaton at Lemay every and wondered why the intersection hasn't been considered for a light? He had concern for the children and their safety. Sheri Chandler - 4470 S. Lemay #806 - Had concerns about the bikeway proposed to be paid on the property she manages at Courtney Park Apartments. She questioned who would be maintaining this bikeway? Les Kaplan - 1060 Sailor's Reef - He believed it was a well designed project. His concern was about the name "Stonebridge" and the implications that could confuse it with "Stoneridge" that already exists nearby in Fort Collins. Consider emergency situations and the delay it could cause if not identified properly. This is an opportunity for the Board to prevent an unnecessary form of confusion. He submitted a letter from the Poudre Valley Fire Authority that supported his position. A name change would eliminate confusion with respect to safety. CITIZEN INPUT CLOSED. Chair Clements asked the question regarding the traffic light at Wheaton and Lemay? Mr. Olt said it needs further study and is not considered at this time. Chair Clements asked about the sidewalks and bike lane that would affect Courtney Park. Mr. Olt said Stonebridge has offered to build the sidewalk and bike lane as under the Harmony Corridor Plan from the west portion of the development to Lemay. It is an amenity that should be done and the developer is offering to pay for it. He was uncertain what information was given to Ms. Chandler. Mr. Jim Loftus - 2350 Willowcreek Drive - Boulder - He met with Sheri today and she asked if they did not chose to do the maintenance of these sidewalks even if we put it in. Mr. Mike Herzig said this was new information. It is a standard requirement that developments along large corridors need to put these improvements in. If a project is a PUD, the maintenance is left with the developer, snow removal, etc. He would need to research Courtney Park development approval for installation of the sidewalk within public right of way_ Mr. Eckman said in regard to the sidewalk, the Code provides that any sidewalk within the City must be maintained by the owner of the real property adjacent to the sidewalk. The same is with snow removal, it is the owner's obligation to keep it clear of snow, but not necessarily the liability rests with the property owner because there is case law to the contrary. Member Strom said if the staff sees we need a public sidewalk there and this developer is willing to pay for it, the City should take this opportunity. Maintenance would then be under the Code. Chair Clements said the "name" issue is a legitimate concern. Mr. Phillips reported that there is a E911 system in Fort Collins which, when an emergency is Planning and Zoning Board Minutes March 28, 19" Page 19 the design. It was suggested very late that it should be relocated, the City's process is flawed in that conclusion. There will no driveway accesses to Monte Carlo from the commercial site to the east, so it will be located on Wheaton. His point was that 275 feet, he believed to be about a block, is too short a distance for left turn move, not because of our driveway but the commercial site. The traffic from the site is being kept from Monte Carlo for a positive reason. He made a statement of traffic peak times being different for the commercial use to his proposed development. He disagreed with Mr. Ensdorf's recommendation, with the neighborhood also in disagreement. He has gone through the process with good faith and worked diligently with staff only to have this issue unresolved. He did not want further delay. Matt Delich, traffic engineer - 3413 Banyon Avenue - Loveland - He did the traffic study for the development and made several comments. He discussed the issues surrounding the left turns and access points to Wheaton. He showed a solution with omission of bike lanes and a double left lane turn, referencing the double left turn lane at Harmony and College, 430 feet long combined --a major arterial. So he had did not have a problem with the distance from the access to Harmony. His proposal will handle anticipated volumes for this area. Mr. Strom asked if there was a need for left turn lanes at Monte Carlo? Mr. Delich said it should be striped as he showed in his rendering of Wheaton, with three lanes, two travel lanes, with bike lanes. He mentioned green time on Harmony Road (the time which vehicles can pass). With a single left turn lane there needs to be more green time, and with double you turn it in half and reduce it significantly, allowing additional green time for the through movement. Chair Clements asked about signalization at Harmony and Wheaton? Mr. Olt said that was not correct. There is talk about it and is being looked into. It is not part of the Harmony Corridor Plan to be signalized. One of the conditions, submitted by Transportation for the preliminary, was to have an area wide study of transportation but it did not occur because it was not accepted by the board as a condition. Chair Clements pointed out the study was really for the commercial site and not for the Stonebridge development. ITIZEN INPUT. Tim Dolan - Golden Meadows Homeowners Association - Enclave Homeowners Association - People like to complain but there is something you can do to make a difference. He fully supported the project. His major concerns were as follows. Connecting Monte Carlo to the access of Stonebridge would create too much traffic. The group favored a light at Wheaton to divide the through traffic. He was told at a neighborhood meeting for King Soopers that there would be a light there. They are frustrated with not including the commercial site as part of the impact in the neighborhood to make decisions where it should be addressed as a whole and not piecemeal. As an association, participating in the process with the developer, arriving at agreement, but now the City states they do not approve of access location. There is frustration with the process. There is willingness to work with developers but there needs to be decisions made. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes March 28, 1994 Page 18 Mr. Vosberg did not have the statistic need but the issue for alignment to Monte Carlo would be adequate. A basic design criteria states that it is desirable to line up access points for a traffic circulation design perspective. Mr. Phillips said that Rick Ensdorf has been involved with this project in regard to all the transportation issues but was not present at the meeting because there was an emergency in the family. As the entrance to Stonebridge moves further from Harmony to Monte Carlo, it very soon reaches a point where it is not a matter what the minimum distance but a matter of how close it is to Monte Carlo to align the intersection. The lefthand turn lanes are for both access onto Harmony and ingress into Stonebridge on Wheaton. He apologized for not having the answer specifically. Chair Clements was disappointed and frustrated over inadequate representation from Transportation. It is critical for the credibility of decision makers to have adequate information to base decisions upon. Mr. Phillips stated that conversations with Rick Ensdorf and Steve Olt before the work session Friday was adamant that the Transportation Departments position was the access should with Monte Carlo. He desired to work with the developers as a group and was very strong on the position he stated. Member Fontane asked if there is data supporting the need for signalization of Harmony? Mr. Phillips said Mr. Ensdorf stated it need further traffic analysis and the recommendation be done on a broader basis for the area by the developer and are in the process to accomplish that. The main focus is getting approval of the left turn lanes from the Department of Transportation. Member Cottier said if the access to this project is moved to coincide with Monte Carlo, where would the access to the parcel to the east be moved? Mr. Olt stated that is being considered independently. Member Cottier asked if those access should align, or have no alignment and what is the logic to that? Mr. Phillips said that doesn't require a lefthand motion onto Wheaton, so there may be the possibility of an access without it aligning with an intersection because you don't have as much distance, perhaps. Mr. Jim Junge, the planner for the development - 9630 E. Powers Place in Greenwood Village. He stated that it is not land use issues in question for the project. Have staff support on those issues. He had staff in attendance to answer questions of the Board. He gave a short presentation about the corridor plan and criteria. He maintained the position that the access would be in the best interest of the neighborhood to have it in the location submitted. At the neighborhood meeting (1) they did not want multiple vehicular access to our site, (2) they did not want it aligned with Monte Carlo at Wheaton Drive and (3) could we do anything to minimize the impact of apartment buildings visually as it encountered their neighborhood. The realignment to their specifications was the popular solution. He worked with staff around Planninr and Zoning Hoard Minutes March 28, 1994 Pare 17 Item 17. Stonebridee Garden Apartments PUD, #82-93A Mr. Steve Olt, project planner, read the staff report with recommendation regarding access on Wheaton Drive and signalization that would require approval of an amendment to the Harmony Road Access Plan. That would involve the City and the Colorado Department of Transportation. He read the recommendation stated in the staff report and gave supporting documents for denial of access at this time. Chair Clements asked for a point of clarification. The reason for the denial is because the access issue has not been resolved. Mr. Olt said yes. Mr. Strom requested more specific indication of exactly how the criteria are not met. Mr. Olt read the criterion from the LDGS concerning this issue, being All Development Criteria 2.1. The location of the access as proposed will not function in a safe operational manner should the time arise when the left turn lanes are required. Mr. Walker said there is 275 feet, to his understanding, from Harmony to the entrance. He would like an interpretation from the traffic engineer what specifically is the problem? Mr. Olt said he would like to introduce Tom Vosberg, from the Transportation Department of the City of Fort Collins. Mr. Vosberg introduced himself and stated he has not been directly involved with this specifically. If a signal is required at the intersection of Wheaton and Harmony Road as a result of development in the area, there will be the need for adequate storage for vehicles turning left. The 275 feet does not provide adequate distance to provide that storage if a single lefthand turn lane is utilized, which is the standard for this situation. The applicant's engineer will be discussing alternatives as to how that will be handled. It is the City Traffic Engineer's opinion that situation is to utilize the single lefthand turn lane which requires additional space for adequate storage of cars. Mr. Walker asked if a double lefthand turn lane provides adequate stacking within the 275 feet? Mr. Vosberg said he wasn't in a position to make a recommendation, but it would be adequate storage, operationally feasible in a very narrow prescribed sense. Staff has concerns about appropriate mix using a double turn lane and is it not standard practice that the City would require good design practice. Mr. Walker asked for the appropriate standard for this situation? Mr. Vosberg said there is a general impression is that there is development activity that is likely to occur in the area. It is likely that intersection is a candidate for signalization. Mr. Walker asked how much footage is needed to provide adequate left turn lane? PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING MINUTES March 28, 1994 Gerry Horak, Council Liaison Ron Phillips, Staff Support Liaison The March 28, 1994, meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board was called to order at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall West, 300 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado. Board members present included Vice -Chair Jan Cottier, James Klataske, Bernie Strom, and Lloyd Walker. Chair Clements and Member Winfrcc were absent. Staff members present included Interim Planning Director Ron Phillips, Deputy City Attorney Paul Eckman, Tom Vosberg, Mike Herzig, Steve Olt, Ted Shepard, Ken Waido, Kirsten Whetstone, and Carolyn Wordea AGENDA REVIEW Mr. Ron Phillips, Interim Planning Director read the agenda review items. CONSENT AGENDA: Item 1. Minutes for January 24 and 31 of the Planning and Zoning Board Meetings; Item 2.Oak Hill Apartments, PUD Preliminary #54-87L; Item 3. Marketplace PUD (Taco Bell) - Preliminary & Final, #32-89F; Item 4. Nokomis Subdivision - Preliminary, #8-94; Item 5. Fox - Hilâ–ºs, 2nd Filing - Foothills Site Plan Review, #36-93C; Item 6. Resolution PZ94-1 - Easement Vacation; Item 7. Resolution PZ94-2 - Easement Vacation; Item 8. Segul N-C-M Site Plan Review, #85-93; Item 9. Lemay Plaza P.U.D. - Extension Request, #57-87; Item 10. Modifications of conditions of Final Approval; Item 11. Miramont PUD, Phase 3 - Preliminary; Item 12. Recommendation to City Council for Proposed Reduction of Right -of - Way Width Street Standards. Item 19. Miramont PUD, Phase 3 - Preliminary. Member Fontane moved to accept consent agenda items as stated above. Member Klataske seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0. DISCUSSION AGENDA: Item 15, Overland Trail Annexation and Zoning. 09-94A. Chair Clements indicated that she and Member Klataske had a conflict of interest regarding this item and would not be present during the meeting, with Vice -Chair Cottier presiding. Mr. Ken Waido, Chief Planner, read the staff report and recommendations and requesting approval. Member Walkcr asked clarification of the zoning boundaries. Mr. Waido said the boundary would extend as an extension of the RF for the Maxwell Open Space area, through the property, locating the canal and to the cast would be RLP. 1