Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFOSSIL CREEK DESIGN CENTER PUD - 94-88A - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTESPLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING FEBRUARY 27, 1989 MINUTES The meeting began in Council Chambers at 6:32 p.m. Members present included, Laurie O'Dell, Frank Groznik, Sandy Kern, Dave Edwards, Jim Klataske, Lloyd Walker and Rex Burns. Staff was represented by Tom Peterson, Joe Frank, Sherry Albertson Clark, Ken Waido, Glenn Schleuter, Mike Herzig, Paul Eckman, and Kayla Ballard. Ms. Clark reviewed the Consent Agenda which consisted of: (1) Minutes of the January 23 and January 30, 1989 meetings, (2) #95-81H, Seven Lakes PUD, Phase II - Preliminary and Final, (3) #13-82AO, Oakridge Business Park, 12th Filing - Preliminary; (4) #53-84G Warren Farms, 3rd Filing - Preliminary Subdivision; (5) #53-85W Centre for Advanced Technology 13th Filing -Final; (6) #107-88 Revisions to the Subdivision Regulations - Minor Subdivisions; (7) #5-89, A New Notc Partnership First Annexation and Zoning; (8) #6-89, A New Note Partnership Second Annexation and Zoning; (9) 07-89, A Koldeway Annexation and Zoning; (10) #9-89, A Nelson Annexation and Zoning; (11) #3-89, A Fort Collins Industrial and Technical Park Venture First Annexation and Zoning; (12) #4-89, A Fort Collins Industrial and Technical Park Venture Second Annexation and Zoning; (13) #10-89, A Skyvicw Ltd. Annexation and Zoning. Mr. Peterson reviewed the Discussion Agenda which consisted of: (14) #1-888 Gateway at Harmony Road PUD - Preliminary; (15) #52-80I Valley Forge PUD - Amended Final; (16) #94-88A Fossil Creek Design Center PUD - Final; and (17) #1-89, A Ridge Annexation and Zoning. He noted that Item #5 would be continued to the March 27 meeting. He asked that Items #11 and #12 be moved to the Discussion Agenda. Member Edwards perceived a conflict on Items #2 and #3. Member Kern asked that the minutes be corrected. as he did not state he thought the project should be a neighborhood convenience center. Member Groznik moved to approve Items #1, #4, #6, #10 and #13. Member Kern seconded the motion. The motion to approve passed 7-0. Member Klataske moved to approve Items #2 and #3. Member Walker seconded the motion. The motion to approve passed 6-0, Member Edwards did not participate. Member O'Dell stated that the Board would discuss Items #7, #8, and #9 at the March 6 meeting. Mr. Herzig stated medians were standards in arterials and were paid for by street oversizing fees. He said that since there were no medians now, the developer would be reimbursed. Motion to approve with conditions passed 7-0. VALLEY FORGE PUD Ted Shepard, project planner, gave a brief description of project. Mark Kirsting, Young Electric Sign Co., stated the reasons for the signage request. He said the additional lighting would add safety and creation of a more friendly atmosphere for the children. He noted the lights in the awning would not be on after the end of the business day, approximately 6:30 p.m. or 7:30 p.m. Ray Gray, also with Young Electric Sign Co., representing Children's World, stated the lighting would be diffused and focused on the walkway. He said the sign would be illuminated from 6 a.m. to 7 a.m. and then from dusk to 7 p.m., being off during the day. He said the sign sets out from the building 24", and would not interfere with the architectural design of the building. Mr. Shepard presented the staff report in which staff was recommending denial as it was an intrusion into the Brown Farm residential area. Member Walker asked if the issue was illumination. Mr. Shepard replied that the old sign was unlit and that the issue was illumination. Mike Moog, resident, believed signage was similar to something found on College Avenue. He did not think it was compatible, as several yards face the center and would be affected by the light. Marie Munn, resident, agreed the sign should be denied and noted that there was a high intensity light there now. Pat Marsh, resident, asked that the project be denied. Member Walker moved to deny the project due to the illumination. Member Groznik seconded the motion. Motion passed 7-0. FOSSIL CREEK DESIGN CENTER Sherry Albertson Clark, project planner, gave a brief description of the project. She stated that staff recommended continuation to the March 27 Board meeting and the applicants requested continuance to the March 6 meeting. -10- Ken Goff, representing the owner, asked if it was appropriate to do the whole presentation at this time. Chairperson O'Dell believed it was appropriate to discuss the potential for continuance and dates. She noted that the continued items would be heard on March 6 and the next regular meeting would be on March 27. Mr. Goff stated he would like to be heard on the 6th. He stated that the Board had reviewed the preliminary plan. It was approved contingent upon drainage issues being addressed. They met with the neighborhood. He noted the Board had additional concerns regarding building height. He said that there was an additional neighborhood meeting. Several residents had concerns regarding the height of the building and entrance detail and the phasing of the project. He noted that they have made several modifications, primarily to Iower the building. They have also reduced the height in the entrance detail and screened the loading area in Phase 1. He said that the screen would be temporary, as Phase Two would screen the area permanently. He said a problem arose in regard to an eastern access point on an approved plat for property south of this site. In their preliminary plan, they showed the road being brought diagonally across their property. It adjoined Snead Drive at that point. Staff had concerns about the connection of Snead Drive and Fossil Creek Drive and safety factors in regard to this connection. He said another concern was the catch basin which would contain their drainage water in a culvert that was designed as a linear catch basin. In reviewing this, it was decided that it needed to be redesigned to function better. He noted that the Development Agreement needed to be signed as does an agreement with the neighbor to the south to create easements required to do construction of the drainage area and connection to Snead Drive. He believed the items could be resolved in a matter of days, hence the request to be heard on March 6. Chairperson O'Dell asked if the catch basin originally needed to be redesigned. Mr. Goff replied yes. He said they designed an inlet to contain water from their property and Snead Drive. He said it then would be contained in a concrete culvert and carried under Fossil Creek Parkway when it was built. He said the concrete catch basin at the south property line, as originally designed, would not be adequate, necessitating redesign. He said the Board was given plans with Snead Drive as proposed, but because they had no chance to develop this. The neighborhood was not aware of this, they did not wish to include it as part of their proposal. It was taken off and added to another set of documents with the request that they be approved without the road were submitted. He said they would then go back to the neighborhood and come to an agreement as to where the road would be. Chairperson O'Dell asked if that portion would be an amendment to the final. Mr. Peterson stated yes, it would be an amendment. Mr. Goff stated it was a landscaped 12' area that was about 2' in the middle. He noted on the site plan where it would be located. -11- Member Walker asked how the drainage from the roofs and pavement would be handled. Mr. Goff stated the drainage would be to the back of the building and contained in curb and gutter in Snead Drive to the outlet and to catch basin. He said an additional catch basin would be designed to catch overflow. The drainage from the parking lot would go to the detention area, contained in the concrete structure, then to the swale and continue north to Fossil Creek Parkway. Member Groznik asked if one week was enough time to get the information required to the staff for review and on to the Board. Mr. Peterson believed the concerns were with storm drainage and thought the plans could be submitted and reviewed in time for the Board. He said the Board would have the staff recommendation by Friday. Michael Griffith, the attorney for Fossil Creek H.O.A., stated that they had lined up speakers for tonight's meeting and that they would have conflicts on the following Monday. Lynn Block, resident, stated the Planning Department told her at 3 p.m., that this item was still on the agenda. Chairperson O'Dell stated the Board had received a letter dated the 27th, but there was no indication of the time it was received. Member Groznik did not wish to come to the meeting and find the applicant was not prepared or the plans had not been reviewed, nor would he want the neighborhood group to bring up issues which were not brought up at the neighborhood meeting. He would favor a continuance to the next regular meeting. Chairperson O'Dell was concerned about the way Snead Drive was depicted and wanted the question of Snead Drive resolved. She would also like to see this project at the next regular meeting. Member Burns asked if there are casements and right-of-way agreements that needed to be drawn up. Mr. Goff replied yes. Member Burns believed that there were a large number of things to work out. At the December meeting the applicant had not resolved these things and now, two months later, they were still unresolved. He believed that the project should be continued until March 27. Member Groznik moved to continue this project to the March 27 meeting. Member Walker seconded the motion. Motion passed 7-0. -12-