Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout203 W MULBERRY PUD AMENDED FINAL - 41 90A - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTES1 0 0 PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING MINUTES December 17, 1990 The regular 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: Chairman Jim Klataske, Bernie Strom, Jan Cottier, Laurie O'Dell, Lloyd Walker, Joe Carroll, and Margaret Gorman. Staff members present included Tom Peterson, Ted Shepard, Paul Eckman, Sherry Albertson - Clark, Steve Olt, Kirstcn Whetstone, Mike Herzig, Ken Waido, and Georgiana Taylor. Board Members present at the December 14, 1990 workscssion included: Chairman Jim Klataske, Bernie Strom, Laurie O'Dell, Joe Carroll, Jan Cotticr, Margaret Gorman and Lloyd Walker. Identification of citizen participants is from verbal statements and not necessarily correct since none signed in. AGENDA REVIEW Planning Director Tom Peterson reviewed the Consent and Discussion Agenda. The Consent Agenda included: Item 1 - Minutes of the November 19, 1990 meeting; Item 2 - Prospect Park East ( Vipont) - Rezoning, #44-84E; Item 3 - Campus West Texaco - Non Conforming Use, #47- 90; Item 4 - South Glen P.U.D., 3rd Filing, Amended, Two -Year Extension, #110-79G; Item 5 - PZ 90-17 Vacation of Easements, #49-90. Member Walker asked if the facia was going to be all the way around the building at the Campus West Texaco. Was it in the plan and did they have to condition the approval on that also. Mr. Olt replied that the facade would continue along the south and the north sides of the buildings and tie into the existing portion and just continue to the back corners of the south and north sides. He did not believe they were intending to carry the facade along the back or the west side of the proposed building. Mr. Peterson stated that they needed to pull the item for further discussion. Member Walker pulled item 3, Campus West Texaco for conditions of approval. Member Strom moved to approve consent items 1, 2, 4, 5. Member O'Dell seconded the motion. Motion was approved 7-0. CAMPUS WEST TEXACO - 047-90 Member Walker moved to approve item 3 with the conditions that the facia trim be extended the full length of the north and south elevations as shown in the latest sketch and also the easement conditions as stated in the memo submitted to the Board. Member Strom seconded the motion. Motion was approved 7-0. RICHMOND ASSOCIATES OFFICE - R-H ZONE REQUEST. #46 9 Ted Shepard gave the staff report recommending approval. Don Richmond, Richmond Associates, stated he had lived in the property for 2-1/2 years. He stated because of the West Side Rezoning he had to go through an R-H zone request. He stated he had done some improvements on the property and those were discussed in the plan. He stated most of his neighbors supported the business use in the neighborhood. He had unanimous support with the type of use he was asking for approval on. He stated the plan addresses the issues that needed to be addressed and would welcome any questions. Susan Hooley, 1223 S. Sherwood Street asked for clarification of what an R-H Zone was and if rezoning would affect just that piece of property on the block or if it would apply to any other property on the block. Mr. Shepard replied this property was not being rezoned. The underlying zoning would remain R-H, there were no properties on the block or in the R-H zone that were changing their zoning. This was a request for a non-residential use in the R-H zone by special review. That special review was a site plan review that was brought to the Planning and Zoning Board through the public hearing process so the impacts of that special use could be reviewed in a public format. It is merely a review procedure that gets public attention and was not a rezoning. Dan George, 425 West Mountain, stated that he was aware of Mr. Richmonds's planned use and some of that would involve an improved alley that borders on their two properties. The alley had been in use since about 1943 and from what he understands, Mr. Richmond will improve it, which he was in favor of since it has been an access for all the property owners since 1943. It has been in good use and maintained well and to have an improvement to allow vehicle access would be welcomed. He was willing to work with Mr. Richmond as far as upkeep. Member Walker moved for approval of Richmond and Associates R-H Zone Request. Member Cottier seconded the motion. Member O'Dell noted for the record that even though this did not conform to what had been set out in the West Side Neighborhood Plan, the staff had done a good job and the applicant had done a good job in keeping this as a residential looking unit even though it was going to be a business and she believed that the plan wants to keep this looking like a residential unit and she thought that had been accomplished at this point. Motion was approved 7-0. 203 West Mulberry PUD - Amended Final 041-90E Sherry Albertson Clark gave the staff report recommending approval subject to a condition regarding some additional landscaping on the site plan. Mr. Jerry King, stated that they had recently received approval on the front portion of their property and they had done the same things to the rear part of the property with respect to landscaping and irrigation. They had a hedge that was dying and they had revived it and planted all the way around so you can see into the property, but the hedge was headlight height to automobiles so you cannot see what is on the property except for the hoods and roofs of the cars. He stated what they were worried about on the front of the property was when they n r planted there they had to remove alot of dirt. It was 21 year old asphalt and they put sterilization there for the asphalt. They had the soil tested and the sterilant was still very powerful in the soil and their landscape person who did all the plantings said that he would not guarantee what would grow there because of that. Member O'Dell stated Mr. King mentioned there was some landscaping along the west side of the property going around the south side a certain distance and then he mentioned that there was not an asphalt area, but an area that had pole peelings. Are there any plantings in that area. Mr. King replied that it was just covered with pole peelings and they did not plant anything there because the landscape person did not feel that it would last. They were planning on planting there but the area was all sterilized before asphalt was laid. Chairman Klataske asked what it would take to dig it out and replace it. How much soil were they talking about and approximate cost. Ms. Clark replied according to the City Forester's Office, they believe this chemical was applied as a pre -emergent to prevent weeds from developing in there prior to the actual asphalt installation. They have a list of plant materials which will grow and was provided by the manufacturer that will grow in those areas and was an extensive list with plant materials common to this area. According to the Foresters' Office, if a hole was dug to plant a tree, one would have to dig down about two feet and remove all the contaminated soil and replace it with new soil and their philosophy and their belief was that any landscape materials planted in such a fashion should survive. Member Carroll asked if the staff recommendation was an island at the entrance and the northeast corner of the site. Ms. Clark replied that their feeling was that the area of focus in terms of landscaping for the site was to provide materials that would be visible from the public right-of-way. Materials placed in those areas would be very difficult to be viewed from anyone beyond the site. Therefore they were recommending installation of an island. It would take a minimum of one parking space to create an island large enough to plant one deciduous or ornamental tree and several shrubbery. Member Strom asked how was it that fairly extensive improvements to this site were made before it came before them for review. Mr. King replied that they called the City and talked to Peter Barnes and asked if they had to have a permit to asphalt. He talked to two people in Peter's office and they both said they did not need any permit to do any asphalting and so they asphalted. A couple of weeks after the asphalting, Peter Barnes called him up and said he was not supposed to asphalt so he told him the two people's names he talked to and Pete replied that they must have some mis communications in his office and Mr. King did this on what they told them. Mr. King replied that he also was told by the people that did the sterilization that you could cut a hole and take soil out and put new soil in and it would be fine and when it rains alot and alot of water goes in there they would get leeching from under the soil and you would always have that problem and that was why they would not guarantee any plants that were planted there. Member Strom asked if the plant list was from the manufacturer of the sterilant. Ms. Clark replied that was her understanding, it was faxed to us from a landscape contractor in Loveland who was also involved in working on this site. Member Strom asked what it contained. Ms. Clark replied that most types of deciduous and ornamental and shrubbery materials that we use in Ft. Collins were on the list. It was quite extensive, it was not by any means restricted by the application of that material. Chairman Klataske stated he did not see any lighting plans on this and did she have anv knowledge of any on -site lighting for this area. Ms. Clark replied they had raised this question to the applicant and his response was he would be utilizing and relying on existing lighting on the south side of the building. Member Strom stated that additional landscaping would be beneficial to this site not only at the entrance but also at the southeast corner of the site where it would soften the transition between this commercial use and what was still residential to the south. Member Strom moved to approve this project subject to landscaping provided at both the southeast and northeast corners of this site subject to detail approval by the staff. Member O'Dell seconded the motion and added that she believed that because lighting was going to be used from the existing building and probably shining directly across those cars, she thought it would help the residents to the south to have some landscaping in there to cut down on some of the lighting. Member Cottier stated she would support the motion and it was an appropriate use for that location and was happy to see some use being made of that site which had been abandoned for a number of years. She thought it was unfortunate that there's been some confusion in the way this had happened, but the landscaping wassomething they could do to improve the appearance. We have to go by the opinion, the technical opinion given by City staff, with respect to the viability of the landscaping and thought that it would only enhance the site and perhaps help business too. Mr. King stated that the property that they were referring to, the southwest part of the property, there are no homes there. There were businesses adjacent to their property. Member O'Dell asked if the building south of them was a home. Mr. King replied that the home on the southwest corner was a rental home and was shielded by a garage. The others were some sort of gun club and the other was an oriental, kung fu studio and was not a residence. Member O'Dell replied that the landscaping was still needed to achieve the kind of look that was needed in the area. Mr. King replied that there was a 6 foot fence back there and their lights, which were existing on the building, were there prior to them purchasing it and did not go to the properties but were facing down lighting the drive way closest to the building. Member O'Dell asked Mr. King if he thought there might be a security problem with the cars parked on the lot when it would be fairly dark. 11 i • i Mr. King replied that they were not concerned about a security problem. Motion was approved 7-0. BURNS RANCH AT OUAIL RIDGE - RF SUBDIVISION AND RF CLUSTER PLAN REVIEW PRELIMINARY. #23-908. Note: This item was on the agenda for discussion purposes only. Kirstcn Whetstone stated that there are several issues still to be resolved. They were presenting this item for public hearing and information and discussion only. This property was not yet in the City and they were asking the Board not to take action on this proposal at this time. This proposal was for two separate plans, one was for an RF Cluster Plan of 32 single family lots on 34.55 acres and the other part was an RF Subdivision Plan for 4 large single family lots on 10.5 acres, for a total of 36 single family lots on 45.05 acres. The remaining area is to be dedicated to the City for public open space to be kept in a natural state. The issues that were still not resolved were the annexation. There was a second reading scheduled for January 15th that was tabled. Water service to the property, was still being discussed and that should be resolved prior to the preliminary hearing. They also have some issues concerning some off -site easements and the final grading, drainage utility plans as well as the location of a significant population of a rare foothills plant. Eldon Ward, Cityscape Urban Design gave a presentation on the process and design of the project into the RF zone. He stated they wanted a feel from the Board if they had any concerns they were not aware of before they wrapped up the annexation process. Chairman Klataske asked what the maximum elevation was on the homes. Mr. Ward replied the maximum elevation was 5,250 as per the zoning requirement. Member Cottier asked with respect to the open space that surrounded the single lots on the west side, was there any intended trail that would go close to those lots or was it just going to be open. Mr. Ward replied that it was anticipated it would be open space. Member O'Dell asked if a barn or an out building would be allowed. Mr. Ward replied that there would be no building outside of the building envelope. Chairman Klataske asked how runoff was being handled on these lots. Mr. Ward replied it was being directed into the street and into a natural drainage way through the site and then into Quail Hollow and into the rest of the drainage for that section. SINGLE ROOM OCCUPANCY HOUSING POLICY Ken Waido stated this was an item that they were requesting the Board to make a recommendation to City Council.