Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBRICK STONE APARTMENTS ON HARMONY - PDP - PDP160019 - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTS (36)Neighborhood Meeting Notes Project: Harmony Multifamily - 201 E. Harmony Rd. Date: May 11, 2016 (Meeting #2) Applicant: Ben Massimo Planner: Pete Wray _____________________________________________________________________________________ City Process Overview: • Staff members present: Pete Wray, Planning Services; Rebecca Everette, Planning Services (environmental planner); Sarah Burnett, Neighborhood Services • Project is at an early stage. Applicant has completed conceptual review, now in third iteration of design concepts for this site. • Neighborhood meeting purpose is to share preliminary design. • No plans have been formally submitted yet. • After this meeting, applicant plans to prepare submittal package to City. • The project will be reviewed by staff for compliance with Land Use Code requirements. Following staff review, the proposal will be considered in a Type 2/Planning and Zoning board hearing because of the size of the multi-family project proposed. Applicant Presentation: • Applicant has made changes based on comments from the first neighborhood meeting. • The revised proposal includes two three-story buildings with terrace in between; each building will have courtyard facing to the south. • 114 units with 174 bedrooms. • 25.86 dwelling units per acre. • Most of the parking will be in an underground parking structure beneath the buildings; 199 parking spaces total are proposed. • Landscaped area on west side is planned for residents. • Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) allows one access point along this part of Harmony Rd. Access to this site will be shared with the existing residential building to the east. • Access to site will be right in, right out. • Building is longer, goes further east than the five-story building, mixed-use concept discussed at previous meeting. The applicant believes the building may block some of the traffic noise from Harmony Rd. Proposed Harmony Residential Project – Neighborhood Meeting #2 Notes Page 2 May 11, 2016 • Materials will include brick, stucco, and balconies for each unit. The lobby and clubhouse will be housed in a structure connecting the two buildings. • On the back (south) side, a patio is planned on second level of clubhouse. There are also patios in each courtyard. Question & Answer Session Q: What other projects have you done in Fort Collins? A: (Applicant) This is our first project in Fort Collins. Q: Will this bother our lake and flow of water to it? A: (Applicant) No, we cannot touch the lake. C: I feel our neighborhood is one of jewels of Fort Collins. Great area can bike/walk everywhere I need to go. Looks like a Chicago tenement and looks like the building on College that everyone laughs at. Q: Ownership: JAC, LLC. A: (Applicant) This developer will purchase the land from JAC, LLC. if the approval process goes through. Developer will develop and maintain property. Q: Is Les Kaplan involved with the project in any way? A: (Applicant) No. The applicant does not know if Les Kaplan may be part of JAC, LLC. (current owner of property. Q: I’m concerned about the number of units and that people will take dogs into neighborhood. Who will be there to manage this? What kind of authority will they have to take care of our neighborhood? Will you build wall all along property line to keep people out of pond? People do have the right to walk on streets, but park area is very limited. Pond used to be clear before Walmart and other development. A: (Applicant) We plan to have a fence on southeast side of property, with dense plantings. Our idea is to make it hard to get down to the natural area buffer. We plan to include evergreens that are not friendly to walk through. Q: Could there be fencing further west (between the buildings and the HOA-owned pond? A: (City) A fence would not be allowed by the City because the code requires a way for wildlife movement to continue. Q: I believe management cannot really control people. Real issue: access to property and right-in right-out access. Fire access at neighboring building is already problematic. This project will create problems to all neighbors because it will increase the numbers of people turning around. Other concern about Fairway Estates: the neighborhood has no lights and no sidewalks. All property except street itself is private. I’m concerned about the developer’s age target (younger adults), and believe this is not the best location for this type of facility. Why not better attention to traffic and density, and to traffic impacts? A: (City) The applicant will have to submit a traffic study. We know that Harmony Rd. has an access control plan, and that this parcel has to have shared access with property to the east. Staff will Proposed Harmony Residential Project – Neighborhood Meeting #2 Notes Page 3 May 11, 2016 look at traffic study in detail and will assess impacts on neighboring properties. The data could show that a deceleration lane or center lane may be required. Q: I’m concerned because of the other apartments. We were told there would be a live-in manager, but residents come to Fairway Estates streets in wheelchairs and are not safe. People have gotten stuck in wheelchairs in people’s driveways. It is an attractive neighborhood to others. People fish in the HOA’s private lake. People already run across Harmony without going to light; young people will be likely to cross without going to crosswalk. A: (City) Traffic operations are aware of the concerns, especially at Palmer Drive/College Ave intersection. The South College Access Management Plan shows future intersection improvements at this location. Possible changes include limiting the full-turn movement at intersection to a three-quarter turn movement operation. This equates to a right-in and right- out movement and left-in to Palmer since a center median strip may be installed in future. If there is enough impact, traffic operations can monitor/observe activity to determine if additional steps need to be taken. The City is aware Palmer area is problematic. Q: Could we get information on projects the applicant has developed in the past? A: (Applicant) Yes, we have information on the most recent project completed in the City of South Salt Lake, UT with a similar density of 27.5, but reflecting different design standards than what is required in Fort Collins. The link to this project is at: http://www.2550southmainapartments.com/features Q: Would you consider not allowing residents to dogs? A: No, we will allow dogs. C: This will be a difficult problem; people will have to walk dogs on private property/lawns in our neighborhood. A: Thanks for changing the project in response to first meeting. I am concerned about path along south side of building. Our HOA had a meeting with police last week regarding homeless trespassing. People are coming in the driveway to the existing building to the east of this property that will be used by new development. I’m concerned there will be more people moving south. I’m concerned that people will be attracted to Fairway Estates’ pond, and move southwest toward Max station. A: (Applicant) – We will work with Rebecca Everette (environmental planner) to determine what plantings could be appropriate. A: (City) – Homelessness is a problem in multiple areas in the City of Fort Collins at this point. Q: Would you consider a hipped roof to better blend with existing buildings nearby? A: (Applicant) – We chose the current roof style because it would visually appear less high. We could consider hipped roof, which actually costs less than the proposed roof style. Q: Would you consider having no balconies? A: (Applicant) It would be very difficult to market the units without balconies, but we could look at more solid fencing on the balconies. (Applicant) Paving on west and path is required by fire department. We did try to turn decks more inward so that they weren’t looking down at neighboring properties. Proposed Harmony Residential Project – Neighborhood Meeting #2 Notes Page 4 May 11, 2016 Q: Could they work with property owner to the east to discourage pedestrian traffic? A: (City) This would be dependent on what neighboring property owner wanted to do. Q: Everyone should be within 10 minute walk of nature. This is not within 10 minute walk of public green space. A: (City) Nature in the City approved last year. Currently evaluating where there might be gaps in access. Nature in City includes public and private spaces. A: (Applicant) – Fossil Creek trail will be extended. A: (City) Yes, the trail will be extended, but to a location further south of this site. Turf/open space on west that can be used for dog walking on site, and hopefully management could encourage residents to use that space. A: (Applicant) With the natural area buffer requirements, there is more open space than in other developments. C: I’m concerned about dogs defecating on private property in the neighborhood. Police encouraged residents to call about trespassers in our meeting last week. Q: I’m concerned that social areas on the south will have noise, sight, light from development. Can there be barriers for noise, sight, and light? A: (City) An effort is being made to restore some of plants/trees lost when the prior owner cleared the site. (Applicant) Images presented show plants with 5-10 years of growth. Q: Could a barrier at bridge where the road is closed be provided? 4x4 wooden posts get broken periodically and are replaced by HOA residents. The “No Outlet” sign is not very visible. Cars get to barrier, and then people turn around (or knock over the posts). When first established, fire department wanted access, but do not require the access any longer. I would like to know if bollards that can be removed with a key would be possible. Suggestion: tell renters that road is closed and cars cannot get through in information provided to renters when sign lease. A: (City) Poudre Fire Authority (PFA) and traffic could look at this. Even though it is an off-site impact, could be investigated to see if it could be done with this project. C: (Resident) I’d suggest looking at putting barriers earlier on each side. There are problems with people going around barriers. Q: Has anyone stood on bridge and looked up at site? The buildings will look big looking up at it. Hopes City will look at sound, light, and visual impacts. A: (Applicant) We believe there will be some sound-blocking of Harmony by building. C: (Resident) I would rather have road sounds. I’m concerned about safety/privacy of this community (Fairway Estates) that is a part of Fort Collins. We were welcoming to the residential building that is already here, but I think there are better locations for this project. Q: What are your estimates for total occupancy? A: (Applicant) 174 beds. It is hard to predict actual numbers. Q: Is the extra parking being provided for guests? A: (Applicant) 106 spaces required by the City (199 proposed). Proposed Harmony Residential Project – Neighborhood Meeting #2 Notes Page 5 May 11, 2016 Q: How many dogs will be allowed? A: (Applicant) We would not exclude someone who had a dog. We will charge for dogs. It is hard to predict an actual number. Some municipalities limit the number of dogs per household; perhaps Fort Collins does. Q: Does City have any thoughts regarding dogs? A: There is no limit on the number of dogs. Resident may contact the Humane Society of Larimer County with barking dog or other nuisance issues with animals. The City contracts with Humane Society for animal control services. Q: Can you tell residents not to walk in neighborhood? A: No, since the streets are public, we would not prohibit residents from walking in the neighborhood. C: I’m concerned about the safety of children playing in the pond and crossing Harmony. Q: Would it be possible to have no U-turn on eastbound Harmony at Home Depot/JFK and westbound Harmony at College/Harmony? A: (City) City traffic staff is aware of this issue and will evaluate. Pete will check with traffic operations to see if this has been specifically evaluated yet. C: Sometimes traffic on Harmony is backed up to Hogan; a long way around. Q: In terms of traffic study, is City concerned about this development? A: (Applicant) We have not submitted a traffic study to the City yet. We will need to redo the study with 114 units rather than the 164 earlier considered. We have only done scoping meeting with traffic operations to determine what the traffic study needs to address. A: (City) Generally, traffic does not seem to be concerned that the project will not meet the traffic requirements. Q: What if the whole building would be occupied by students with many people per bedroom? A: We will only rent to occupancy code. Leases are per unit, all people must sign. We would comply with the City’s occupancy ordinance (U+2). We are in the units frequently for service. We will market to anyone; applicants must pass background check and credit check. A: City – some developments have requested extra occupancy; this developer does not plan to request extra occupancy. Q: Would the City turn this project down / deny project? A: (Applicant) A decision is up to P&Z board. They have to look if the project meets the use, zoning, and other requirements? The Board can also put conditions on project. Staff checks for compliance with the requirements. Staff will provide a recommendation for the P&Z board. Board makes the final decision. Q: To whom are the P&Z board members accountable to? A: (Applicant) Range of experience on board. Board members are appointed by Council, reflecting a heightened role in City for approving development projects; make recommendations to City Council. The public can apply, and there is no district representation like Council. Proposed Harmony Residential Project – Neighborhood Meeting #2 Notes Page 6 May 11, 2016 Q: What is the height and length of the buildings? A: (Applicant) The buildings are 38 feet high, with a 50-60 foot gap between them. Combined, the two buildings would have about 100,000 square feet. Q: I’m concerned about the trash clean out (a metal skimmer that goes diagonally across Fossil Creek) that skims trash to keep is from going down into ponds. It was in good shape until previous owner reduced the size of the skimmer. A: (Applicant) We will look to City for guidance. Q: Whose responsibility to clean it out? A: (Another resident) There is an access way to clean it out. Utilities bought some of the land so that City staff can clean it out. Q: I am also concerned about sound and lighting. Can there be some additional buffering on east side where the parking is? Can there be additional blue spruce or other screening? A: (Applicant and City) We will look at this. Also, it is a code requirement that headlights be blocked. Q: I hope the Planning and Zoning Board also considers the impact of the project on surrounding neighborhood. A: (City) Yes, it is part of the discussion. There are Land Use Code standards for compatibility of projects with surrounding area. Q: Is their park public or just for your residents? A: (Applicant) It is a private park for use of our residents. Residents of apartment to east will not be allowed to use the park. Q: Can you describe your park? Can people go down to water? A: (Applicant) It will include lawn, trees, bushes. There will be no play set. It will be located in a flat area to west of building. Area to south does get steeper; it is hard to stop movement of people. C: I’m concerned about the safety of children along north edge of park (adjacent to Harmony). Q: Would you consider rocket junipers? A: There are lots of columnar conifers, with more each year. Q: Estimate for Planning and Zoning Board hearing date and for construction? A: (Applicant) P&Z hearing – August/September. Break ground in 2017. Q: What’s best way to participate? A: Provide feedback thought neighborhood meetings, writing to Pete (who will provide all written comments to Planning and Zoning Board), presenting comments at Planning and Zoning Board hearing. Residents cannot discuss development proposals with Councilmembers during review. Planning and Zoning Board decisions, though, may be appealed to City Council. Proposed Harmony Residential Project – Neighborhood Meeting #2 Notes Page 7 May 11, 2016 C: As a comparison, the office building at 2809 E. Harmony Rd. is 52,000 square feet. (It is the Preston building right behind The Group building.) Because site is higher than our residences, buildings will appear taller than 38 feet high. C: After the meeting, a resident asked about how the plan complies with the Harmony Corridor Plan? This property is shown in the Harmony Corridor Plan Land Use Map as “Secondary Uses without a Business Park” designation. This means multi-family residential use is permitted without a requirement for any more than 25% residential of a business park having 75% non- residential uses. Based on this land use designation from the Plan, this property is zoned Harmony Corridor, which permits multi-family residential as a use and Type II Review by the Planning and Zoning Board. This project will also need to comply with other zoning and general development standards of the Land Use Code.