Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSILVER OAKS COMMERCIAL PUD - PRELIMINARY - 14-88J - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTES� ar4 • Motion carried 5-0. Member Strom -moved to recommend the Sherman -Lawler SeconCAnnexatlon an -Zoning with the condition that it be placed in the neighborhood sign district. Member Fontane seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. Member Strom moved to recommend the Sherman -Lawler Third Annexation and Zoning with the condition that it be placed in the neighborhood sign district. Member Fontane seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. Chair Clements mentioned that the following items for discussion will be postponed to March 7, 1994: Item 22 Waterglen PUD - Preliminary, Item 23 Waterglen - PUD Preliminary and Item 26 Proposed Amendments to the Appeals Provision of the City Code. Horsetooth West PUD - Amended Overall Development Plan. #14-88I. Mr. 5 that he would like the Board to consider d Item 20 Silver Oaks PUD, Paired Ho. using"�r_ePflflinary, #14-88J together with the Horsetooth West PUD, #14-88K, since they are related under the overall development plan. The Board will accept each item, however, separately. Mr. Shepard then read the staff report. Ric Hattman - Gefroh-Hattman - The overall master plan was presented with a slide presentation describing the properties and location in detail. A day care facility was relocated closer to a different intersection to keep the morning and afternoon traffic dispersed and to reduce the length of trip time to the area. The multiple family area will be directly adjacent to the school site, with 3-units to the acre for the entire parcel. The Commercial area of Taft Hill and Horsetooth with office buildings, day care center, convenience center and car wash. With generous setbacks from arterials, screened parking by buildings, and canopy functions. Features included outdoor areas near office buildings, all buildings are single -story in height, wood siding on all structures. He showed slides of a near by gas/market station and did not consider it a shopping center pointing out that it was not of their quality their project would have. He stated that points should not be withheld for the project's location. CITIZEN INPUT. Glenn Church - Dalton Street in the Springfield Housing Subdivision - How are the units going to be owned? How will these units be occupied, rentals? Mr. Hattman said it is the intention of the developers to sell the duplexes in a condominium fashion, each half to one person. It is looked at a owner -occupied situation; as in the City, there may be rentals from time to time, but it is not intended to be a rental or a project maintained by the developer to rent. Member Cottier asked Mr. Shepard with respect to the commercial area, why wouldn't it be 0 • Mr. Shepard said the primary reason is that Bronson is not sufficiently separated from the intersection of Horsetooth and Taft. That distance is needed for southbound left turn stacking. To -introduce a curbcut in the -area would probably add some unnecessary corrgestion-to the area. Bronson Street can serve that function, placing the curbcut there the flow is freed on the arterial. Member Klataske mentioned that this project did not receive points for being an office park in a commercial area. Where does the definition for office park come from? Is there any basis for the number of buildings that would constitute an office park? Mr. Shepard said it is a definition out of the LDGS, definition section. He thought the units were calculated to promote these centers for locating in as large of a concentration of offices as possible so customers would be users on site without a lot of driving. The original calculating formula was done in 1981 and he had no background knowledge of how those numbers were arrived at in formulating them. Member Klataske also asked about the convenience center canopy lighting issue been settled? Is the developer aware of what will be permitted as far as downlighting? Mr. Shepard said there is a note on the PUD as far as the under canopy lighting being flush with the under canopy light not protruding. That the under canopy surface itself be painted in an off-white or beige or tan. With those two considerations will be a lessening of the off -site illumination that is seen in some centers. Member Klataske asked why it is preferable to have a day care center located in a commercial setting versus the location closer to the elementary school? Mr. Shepard said the day care acts as a buffer for the retail office buildings, accessible not only to residents within Silver Oaks but to anyone who is using Taft or Horsetooth, outside the square mile section. Chair Clements said the staff report states the condition concerning the operating hours of the car wash. Is it only the car wash or would it include the convenience store? Mr. Shepard said it pertains only to the car wash. Mr. Eckman said there should be three separate motions and on Item 19, he called the Board's attention to the variance to the requirement of 65% on point chart J, a variance. On page 5 there are staff findings to recommend that a one -day automatic car wash be considered allowable and of similar character, a finding as part of a motion. Member Cottier asked about finding No. 4? Mr. Shepard said the justification of the variance satisfies the neighborhood land use policies for a shopping center and that by making the finding on the variance, it satisfies the locational provision. Member Klataske moved for approval of Horsetooth Overall Development, Second Amendment. Member Strom seconded the motion. Chair Clements reminded the Board that it has a condition regarding the operation of the car wash and a variance to Point Chart J and the findings would need to be stated that the car -wash of -similar or- like use. - - -- - -- -- Member Klataske made a motion as stated by Chair Clements. Member Fontane seconded the motion. Member Cottier asked if we could clarify that the car was is not a self -serve one. Mr. Shepard said this was an important issue and for clarification purposes should be made part of the preliminary PUD, requiring the active participation of the store clerk and not a 24 hour self -serve. Mr. Eckman asked for clarification if the motion contained a finding that the one -day automatic car wash was like or similar character, includes the variance and condition in the staff report. Member Klataske said that is correct. Member Strom agreed. Motion passed 5-0. Member Cottier moved for approval of Silver Oaks Paired Housing Preliminary. Member Fontane seconded the motion. Motion passed 5-0. Item 21 - Boston Chicken PUD - Preliminary. #79-93. Ms. Whetstone read the staff report. She presented to the Board several letters that had arrived today concerning the access issue, and revised conditions of the staff report. Mr. Ed Zdenek - ZTI Group - Made comments regarding the positive aspects that it is an inf ill development. He went to great length in describing the layout and design with corresponding drawings, siting sidewalk and open green space, buffering parking with berming, and ingress and egress accesses to the property. There was lengthy discussion among Board members, staff, Rick Ensdorff of Transportation and the developer concerning specifically the ingress and egress points accessing the development. There are potential accesses to neighboring properties (medical office park and a church site) and future planning for these accesses seemed appropriate. Also there was the issue of a stop on the southern border, more planning for parking layout and additional landscaping. Traffic flows from one business to the next were examined as were placement of access traffic and flow design circulation. There are 49 spaces, above City standards, for parking. There will be areas for seating inside the restaurant as well as a drive -through.