HomeMy WebLinkAboutHAMPSHIRE SQUARE II PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - 31 92 - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTES0
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD
MEETING MINUTES
June 22, 1992
Gerry Horak, Council Liaison
Tom Peterson, Staff Support Liaison
The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board was called to order at 6:37 p.m. in the Council
Chambers of City Hall West, 300 LaPorte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado. Board members present
included: Chairman Bernie Strom, Jim Klataske, Jan Cottier, Joe Carroll, Laurie O'Dell and Rene
Clements -Cooney. Member Walker was absent.
Staff members present included Planning Director Tom Peterson, Deputy City Attorney Paul Eckman,
Sherry Albertson -Clark, Kirsten Whetstone, Steve Olt, Kerrie Ashbeck, Ted Shepard, Joe Frank and
Georgiana Taylor.
Identification of citizen participants is from verbal statements and not necessarily correct since none
signed in.
rat"C11.7imL
Tom Peterson reviewed the Consent and Discussion Agenda. The Consent Agenda included: Item 1 -
Minutes of the May 18, 1992 Meeting; Item 2 - Little Caesars PUD - Preliminary, #28-92; Item 3 -
Potts PUD - Final, N6-92A; Item 4 - Best Buy PUD - Preliminary, #29-92; Item 5 -Hampshire
Square II - Preliminary Subdivision, #31-92; Item 6 - Silverberg PUD - Overall Development Plant,
#12-92; Item 7 - Prospect/Overland PUD - Final, M5-84D; Item 8 - Resolution PZ92-8 Vacation of
Utility Easement (Continued until July 27, 1992); Item 9 - Resolution PZ92-9 Vacation of
Temporary Easements for Access, Drainage and Utilities; Item 10 - Dakota Heights Subdivision -
County Referral, #32-92; Item 11- Woody Creek Subdivision - County Referral, #33-92; Discussion
Agenda - Item 12 - Amendment to the Sign Code for Neighborhood Commercial Areas; Item 13 -
Southside Service Center - Amended Overall Development Plan, N52-82D; Item 14 - Southside
Service Center PUD, Phase III - Site Plan Advisory Review, N52-82E; The following items continued
until June 27, 1992 - Item 15 - Oak/Cottonwood Farm - Amended Overall Development Plan, #54-
87F; Item 16 - Oak/Cottonwood Farm, Upper Meadows at Miramont - Preliminary PUD, N54-87G;
Item 17 - Stoneridge PUD - Overall Development Plan, #21-92B; Item 18 - Stoneridge PUD, 1st
Filing - Preliminary PUD, N21-92C; Item 19 - Dakota Ridge PUD, 1st Filing - Preliminary PUD,
#60-91D.
Item 2, was pulled for discussion by the applicant.
Item 4, was pulled for discussion by Member Carroll.
Item 5, was pulled for discussion by Member Carroll.
Item 6, was pulled by a member of the public.
Member Klataske stated he had a conflict with item 7.
Member Carroll moved for approval of items 1, 3, 8, 9, 10, and 11. Member Clements -Cooney
seconded the motion. Motion passed 6-0.
C
P do Z Board Meeting Minutes
June 22, 1992
Page 9
Member Clements -Cooney stated there was another concern about a fire hydrant which might have to be
removed located in the driveway which was going to be extended to the south to connect with the existing
Phar-Mor Center.
Mr. Olt replied that he did not know how that was going to be resolved, but did not consider that an issue
of significance that would be accommodated. It falls within the confines of the driveway as proposed as
it continues to the south. It was a minor item.
There was no public input.
Member Carroll moved for approval of Item 4, Best Buy P.U.D. with one condition, that the
retention of existing landscaping on the north boundary of the property be more specifically
addressed at final with In mind to retain as much of the existing foliage or landscaping as possible.
Member Klataske seconded the motion.
The motion passed 6-0.
111,413 I 19:451Y 1: i I► 1
Member Carroll stated the reason that he asked this be pulled was the treatment of the border between
the fence and the street which was shown on the plans to be rock and sidewalk. This was questioned at
our work session basically under criteria two, if this was really compatible with and sensitive to the
immediate environment. He thought that the question they had in mind was if this was a proper treatment
for that streetscape, keeping in mind what was present to the west and east of it. Perhaps you've had a
chance to look since then and could address that with us.
Steve Olt, Project Planner replied he had. Hampshire Road goes to the north and the project then would
be serviced off of Hampshire Road. There was an existing detached sidewalk all along the street frontage
on West Drake. There was about a five foot wide parkway that existed from curb to sidewalk, then a
five foot sidewalk, then approximately seven feet from the existing sidewalk to what would be the back
lot lines of the proposed lots. Along that lot line would be a six foot high wood fence with brick pillars
approximately every 100 feet. What the applicant had proposed in the parkway was street trees in the
form of shade and deciduous trees. What we had to work with here, however, was not only street lights,
and there was a minimum separation requirement by the City that there be a forty foot separation between
street trees and the light posts, that were existing in this area as well as a high voltage transmission line
all the way along the frontage. It actually night be adjacent to the fence as you see it here. That was
controlled by Platte River Power Authority and they had a requirement that trees did not really grow any
taller than about 30 feet to avoid the sag in their lines along this frontage. They also had a thirty foot
separation between their poles and he thought there were, only two poles in this area, Therefore, the
selection of the trees addressed the concern of both the City Light and Power standpoint as well as the
P & Z Board Meeting Minutes
June 22, 1992
Page 10
Platte River Power Authority's standpoint. As a ground cover or mulch, if you will, what the applicant
was proposing was a cobblestone as a ground cover being relatively maintenance free.
To address Mr. Carroll's concern about what happened to the east and to the west, there was the Drake
Crossing neighborhood shopping center to the east of Hampshire Road and that did in fact have a
relatively broad set back which incorporated berms. It was a manicured turf grass with some trees in this
area. As you move into the existing neighborhoods to the west of this, he thought it, was Brown Farm,
you pretty much had the same cross section as you see here. From curb to sidewalk there was about a
five foot set back then the wall itself, then seven to eight feet to the existing fences. There was a variety
of solid wood fences along that street frontage. Some incorporated brick columns, some did not. There
were absolutely no trees in that area. He was out there today to look at this and it was not being
maintained at all. It was weedy was what it was. To the south and directly across from Brown Farm
at Quail Hollow there was a five foot parkway between the curb and gutter and the sidewalk, then the
walk itself, then the fence. There was no separation similar to what you would have here. There was
no separation between the sidewalk and the lot lines. There was a shadow box wood fence along here.
There were trees in the parkway along Quail Hollow. Some of that area was being maintained, cut, some
of it was not. Some of that was weedy as well.
Chairman Strom asked would they be getting more specificity on the varieties of trees with the final?
Mr. Olt replied, they did not have to be specific at the preliminary level.
Member Strom stated he understood that was correct.
Member Clements -Cooney stated that at the neighborhood meeting there was a comment about having
open fences for access to existing ditch and trail to the west. Would there be access to this trail?
Mr. Olt replied, yes at the west end of the cul-de-sac as you see on the plan there was a 20 foot wide
utility and trail easement that was being platted to access that trail easement along the Pleasant Valley and
Lake Canal.
Chairman Strom asked if the fence extended along the west side of the property.
Mr. Olt replied that had not been determined yet. Those were property lines, specific lot lines and had
not yet addressed what fencing would occur along the west property line adjacent to the ditch.
Richard Storck, Storck Development mentioned they had developed a number of projects and also noticod
other developers and they also get concerned about what streetscaping looks like and the lack of
maintenance. Obviously, they did not only think it was important for the City to have an attractive
setting, but also for their purposes of marketing and long term relationship with the City and future
projects. One thing that they found in subdivisions of this size if not larger, was those areas a lot of
times did not get maintained and in fact become garbage collection, raw dirt and as you could see here
weeds and so forth. In a project we are doing in Louisville currently and a number of other projects down
there, what they have gone to is a mixture of cobble size, in other words from one inch to four inch.
P & Z Board Meeting Minutes
June 22, 1992
Page 11
So, what that does do is create a texture getting away from the blandness of just straight concrete. It was
a low maintenance type of an issue as well as they were also looking at savings in water. He guessed
that was what they would like to propose and with the trees there, felt like that would create the texture
that they were looking for and prevent the unsightly situation.
Chairman Strom asked if he would consider the possibility of some shrub islands or something in there
to break up the hard surface.
Mr. Storck replied to a certain amount. He was not sure how extensive he was suggesting, but would
be willing to work with Staff. They had already added the brick columns. Brown Farm had a mixture
of some brick columns, majority not brick columns. All he would ask was that they did not have to excel
what other developments have had.
Chairman Strom had a concern that they recognize the problem of maintenance and that if it was not well
maintained it did go to seed and look pretty bad. The cobbles tend to make it hard surface from fence
line to fence line and it would seem that something on the ground level, shrubs or something on that
order in a few islands would break that up a little bit and soften the texture.
Mr. Storck replied he and Mr. Olt had an opportunity to speak earlier and he guessed what he would
propose was perhaps where they saw the lighter green trees and putting some planting beds there perhaps
using some type of xeriscape material so that they did not have to have the watering and maintenance and
that type of thing.
Chairman Strom asked if they would be watering the trees?
Mr. Storck replied they would take care of those for a period of two years. After such time they should
be established and should maintain themselves.
Chairman Strom asked if the same kind of thing could be done with shrubs? Can you get shrubs
established and not have to worry too much about watering over the long term?
Mr. Olt replied yes, two to three years should accommodate, especially if the materials were selected
again from a xeriscape pallet or something like that. There was a lot of things with it that could be done.
Establishment would be necessary so that they would be able to sustain on their own after that period of
time.
Member Carroll replied that was his concern. He certainly would not want to require high maintenance
items to be planted out there that were going to die, be it blue grass or high maintenance shrubs. He
thought the concern that they noticed in the work session was that the sidewalk was a straight as the crow
flies sidewalk and with stones on both sides of it and the fence it gives the illusion of just wall to wall
concrete. The trees were going to help and he did not have anything in mind, but he thought perhaps
something very xeriscape type items that wouldn't be terribly expensive, yucca plants or what have you
that would break up that line along there. He understood that with the brick columns and the street trees
P & Z Board Meeting Minutes
June 22, 1992
Page 12
it would look better than other areas and maybe it would prompt those people to do something. That was
something they could look at with the final.
Member O'Dell asked if they were talking about replacing the trees with shrubs in the section between
the street and the sidewalk, or the six foot seven foot wide strip next to the fence? She was not sure what
was being suggested.
Mr_ Storck replied he would like to propose keeping the trees as we show them currently and then cobble
stone next to the planting beds in these areas to break up that with xeriscape.
Chairman Strom asked if he meant at the base of those trees.
Mr. Storck replied yes. That would come out from the distance of the fence itself to the sidewalk and
so that would make a definite substantial break.
Member O'Dell asked if they would carry it from the fence to the sidewalk.
There was no public input.
Member Carroll moved approval of item number S, Hampshire Square II, Preliminary Subdivision
with one condition, that some additional landscaping be shown at final on the streetscape. Member
Cottier Seconded the motion.
Chairman Strom asked if he was thinking along the same lines in terms of landscaping.
Member Carroll replied he did not want to get too specific, but some landscaping in between the trees
as the applicant proposed between the sidewalk and the fence, of low maintenance that would become
established in two years, xeriscape that would break up the canyon effect of the streetscape and the wall.
The motion was approved 6-0.
SILVERBERG PLD - OVERALL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Mr. Roger Anderson stated his concern was actually he did not know anything that was going in there.
It had nothing on the list here, but that's why he was here, to find out. Once he found out, he may
object to it.
Sherry Albertson -Clark gave the staff report recommending approval.
Chairman Strom asked for a brief synopsis of what the ODP meant and what additional stages they would
be going through before anything happens in terms of actual development on this site.