Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFALCON RIDGE PUD - PRELIMINARY ..... JUNE 6, 1994 P & Z BOARD HEARING - 2-94F - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTES• Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 31 Member Strom asked what specifically would be the point? Member Klataske replied that there be some, within the 3500 feet to the park. If that involves a ditch crossing off -site, then that would have to be provided. Member Strom preferred to vote on that as an amendment and have some discussion on it. Member Walker seconded the motion as stated. Member Strom commented that he was not exactly sure where they would be on that. The only reason he was reticent to take it on as a friendly amendment is he was not sure about the precedent, since he did not remember them having done that before. He asked the staff for some feedback on that. Member Klataske stated if giving them points for being within the 3500 foot of the school, that it should be within 3500 foot walking distance. In other words, they shouldn't be given the points for it. • Mr. Olt replied the way it's been dealt with, was that the distances have been defined as the crow flies. That's how they have been done on any development. So this would be a unique situation in this case. Granted, there were concerns about the safety of the movement of the children down Country Club Road, but in terms of the direct, almost the direct, access to Tavelli school, in this case, is down Country Club Road, and then it is just around the corner on Lemay Avenue, so there aren't ditches to cross, there aren't these things. Be it as the crow flies or as the street flies, he thought it was within that distance. Member Klataske asked how about the same thin as far as the park, you know, where they're given points for being within proximity to the park? y Mr. Olt replied the park's a different situation. The location of the park, granted, it's a little more difficult to get to the park via streets. And that would increase the distance. But again, the way we have interpreted the points charts in the Land Development Guidance System, it's a straight-line distance from the closest point of the development to the closest point of that criteria, whatever it may be; in this case, the park. Member Cottier thought that points out an area that they need to look at, because the distance makes no difference if it's not • accessible. The motion passed 4-1 With Member Elatasko voting in the negative. Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 30 Member Klataske asked about solar orientation and the request for 60 single family lots. After calculation of the number of lots to come up with the percentage of 55 percent, they were only talking 32 of the 58 lots. It's off by the one earlier. What was the difference there? Mr. Olt replied that the difference was the ordinance specifies that -- it related to lots of 15,000 square feet or less. Granted, a lot in excess of 15,000 square feet maybe could qualify as, but it did not meet the definition of the ordinance. Therefore, there were two lots --unless something is changed, that are in excess of 15,000 square feet. Therefore, they do not have to comply with the ordinance. Therefore, they were looking at 32 of the 58 that are subject to the ordinance that are in compliance. Member Klataske asked if either of the two lots that are in excess of 15,000 square feet complied. Mr. Olt replied that the theory is that when the ordinance was adopted in excess of 15,000 square feet, they cannot comply because you've got enough space on that lot to be able to orient the house any way you want. Member Klataske asked if there would be streetlights? Mr. Olt replied that there would be. Member Cottier asked about construction traffic. Mr. Lawler replied they had not discussed that, but that could be easily be routed separately as an access off of Country Club. That was not a problem with them. Member Strom moved for approval of Falcon Ridge POD - Preliminary, recognizing the findings of fact in the staff report, with the authorization for the solar orientation variance, and with one condition that staff and developers explore this question of an additional access point onto Country Club Road in some more detail before we get to the final. A second condition that we at least get some sketch plan elevations, since the neighborhood has requested that prior to the final. Member Klataske seconded the motion adding a third condition about finding out about access to school, whatever off -site improvements might be required to get the kids from this subdivision out, going down on Country Club Road or onto Lemay, if it's going to require a ditch crossing or what; so they're getting points with this right now for being in proximity to the school, and yet the distance is as a bird flies, and these kids are going to have to swim a ditch or something. Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 29 may exist there, if they can work that out in terms of some of those requirements. Mr. Sherman also added that going across the drainage field, the 1.46 acre there that's shown in yellow, there's something on the order of a 16-foot elevation change there from their property down to the bottom of that and back up to Highway 1. He thought that it was impractical to try to put a street up there. There would be a 30-degree angle at Highway 1 intersection and that would make it tough to get out onto the road. Mr Sherman also responded that as far as the stub out on Golden Eagle Drive, which is the center east -west street, he thought that it's always more something the City would like us to do to allow for future development if that parcel to the west of them ever desires to develop. Member Klataske asked about accessing Country Club Road from what is not a cul-de-sac and perhaps working with the neighbors along Ford Lane, converting that to a cul-de-sac to relieve their concerns about traffic along there. . Mr. Olt replied there had been ongoing discussion since worksession. He knew that the applicants have talked with Tom Vosberg with the Transportation Department. He asked Mr. Vosberg to respond to that question. Member Klataske asked if there was a concern about having two points of access to Country Club that close together? Mr. Vosberg replied no. That would be acceptable. Mr. Olt added that regarding cul-de-sacking Ford Lane, he assumed when they said cul-de-sacking, they meant cul-de-sacking the northern end of it where it intersects County Club Road now. Member Klataske replied that was correct. Mr. Vosberg stated from a traffic feasibility point of view, it would work okay. The numbers supported one point of access not. He did not know what was involved in the process of vacating the right-of-way and closing off a street in terms of just --part of it's County, but it could be explored. Member Klataske thought it would alleviate the traffic coming along Ford Lane for this subdivision, making the subdivision possible for the traffic going onto Country Club Road, as opposed to putting it • down on Ford Lane. Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 28 Mr. Olt replied that he was unable to answer that question tonight; but would research that and have an answer. Mr. Vosberg added that within the safe routes to school program, some safe routes to school do utilize areas where there are no sidewalks. Member Cottier asked if they had considered extending the northern east -west street out to Highway 1 as your access rather than going out to Ford Lane or up to Country Club? Mr. Lawler replied that they did not discuss that in great length. They did check, and it was from the guidelines they were given on distance from that intersection, they would not have been able to do it. Because of the land point sticking up at Spaulding, they would have to be fairly north with a east -west route. It was our opinion that would not be something that would be acceptable in the traffic design. Member Cottier asked why was the stub on the middle east -west shown? Mr. Lawler replied for interconnection with future sites. Member Cottier asked if that would have the same problem? Mr. Lawler replied he did not think the intent was ever to go clear across to Highway 1. He thought that's to allow further development, some other attachment. Interneighborhood connection is all the intent was. Member Cottier asked what their position was on connecting to Country Club through their eastern cul-de-sac rather than having the two access points onto Ford Lane? Mr. Lawler replied that their conceptual review, initially, when they first designed this development, was to have an access to Country Club; and we were advised at that time by Transportation they'd rather us not do that, so they altered their plan to this plan. They never have been against that, and they could take this cul-de-sac onto Country Club if that was the Board's desire. Mr. Sherman added that if they were to do that, they are right at the minimum density requirement right not, basically, a number of things in the course of laying out this project and getting to the point that they were at now. They would be in the position of losing a lot both in terms of their density count, and that also a solar lot. Losing that lot was not without financial cost to them. It was something that they were willing to do in order to try and be cooperative with the neighbors and to relieve some problems that 0 Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 27 material. We have not sat down and drawn the designs yet. They will be professionally done and tasteful and a benefit to the neighborhood. Member Strom asked for the citizen's question about the sidewalk issue in this area. Mr. Olt said internally within Falcon Ridge PUD, they are proposing sidewalks throughout, on both sides of the streets, sidewalks along Country Club Road and sidewalks along at least the west side of Ford Lane. So typically, this would have to meet the standard City criteria for streets and sidewalks. Member Strom asked other than within the development itself, is there any pedestrian facilitation from this area to the school or park site? Mr. Olt said there is not to date, and that dialogue hasn't taken place. No, once you leave the area of Falcon Ridge development, there is no sidewalk. /^1 Member Strom asked if the City typically looks at off -site improvements to sidewalks. To his recollection, do we? Mr. Olt deferred the question to Mike Herzig. Mr. Herzig stated that the City Code does not address that. The only off -site requirements that can be placed on a developer have to do with off -site street improvements. However, it being a PUD, there have been off -site sidewalks built by developers. Under that type of framework, you can do that. The only thing he wanted to add is that as part of the sidewalk improvements internal to the site, they'd also be improving the sidewalks on frontage of Country Club Road all the way to Highway 1. That doesn't take care of the direction to the schools. Member Strom said speaking of schools, would you address the standard response as it concerns Tavelli Elementary capacity. He was looking at the staff report, and it reports the capacity is there now. Mr. Olt was asked to address the question. Mr. Olt replied that was correct. The capacity did appear to be there. The numbers in terms of children generated from any development of this nature, based on elementary, junior high, and high school, is given to us by the school district. Member Cottier asked if the school district have a policy that . defines that to walk in, there must be sidewalks, and is the school district aware that these kids are within the walking distance and there are no sidewalks? Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 26 Mr. Eckman had one other comment to make on the annexation, ownership and so on. The Annexation Statutes of the State call for a person having the right to challenge an annexation within 60 days after the effective date of the annexation. This challenge is to be brought in the district -- in this case, Larimer County. The 60 days has not yet run regarding the time, Statute of Limitation regarding the challenging of the annexation; however, the Statute also says that "any party bringing such action shall first have filed a motion of reconsideration within ten (10) days of the effective date of the ordinance, finalizing the challenged annexation, which motion shall state with particularity the grounds upon which the judicial review is sought." Mr. Eckman stated that no motion for reconsideration has been filed, with my knowledge,d within ten (10) days of the effective date of the annexation ordinance. It is his opinion that it is too late to challenge the annexation. Mr. Basil Hamdan, Civil Engineer, of the Storm Water Utility Department, said he would address questions concerning drainage. Mr. Hamdan showed on a slide the area to be releasing near the Powers property. One of the questions asked of them was to ascertain how the drainage will work on Terry Lake Road and how they will mitigate any release there. Another question concerned the other detention pond with a low area and staff wants to make sure that whatever is going on in the area does not exceed street capacity. These two issues have been raised and asked of them, but have not received re -submittal on those. At this point, we can only hope that they will meet them, and they are usually addressed with the final submittal requirements. Vice -Chair Cottier asked of the applicant about a homeowners association and what about elevations for the proposed homes. Is there any idea what the houses would look like? Mr. Olt responded by saying that elevations have not been typically reviewed for single-family residential development, be it the north or south side of Fort Collins. We do not typically ask for building elevations for single-family residential, but it is something that can certainly be considered. Mr. Lawler said that there will be a homeowners association. The papers are not drawn up since it is in such an early stage at this point for that. As far as the elevations for the houses, this is just a preliminary, and we don't want to get too far into things before we find out what kind of problems may arise. There have been preliminary discussions with Tom Bolt, an architect from Boulder. It is the applicant's intention to retain his services to design five or six designs specifically for this site. New designs will include masonry on the exteriors and upgraded roofing 0 • Planning & Zoning June 6, 1994 Page 25 is not sufficient land is sought to problem. Board Minutes for that, then it leaves open the question what be annexed, and I think that would present a Mr. Olt answered that with respect to the legal descriptions that were submitted with the petitions for annexation, he was made aware by Mr. Powers that there were some discrepancies. Mr. Olt had the city's Land Surveyor run a closure check on those legal descriptions and he indicated that they did close, but unfortunately, Mr. Olt did not have the annexation files with him; however, he could produce that. He gave closure checks on the annexations. Realize that annexations are developed from legal descriptions, they are not field surveyed. After he is finished, he would like Mr. Rutherford to tell us where the legal descriptions came from. Those were supplied and certified by the applicant's attorney. The City Survey says that the legal descriptions did, in fact, close. Mr. Dick Rutherford, engineer and surveyor on this project, said there has also been title insurance, through American Heritage Title Insurance Company, and has issued policy on this. It has been checked and rechecked, so he didn't think that there is a l possibility of a problem in the title. It is very remote. They have issued a policy from the Ford Estate, through the developers, where the descriptions came from and the insurance company has insured the descriptions. Vice -Chair Cottier asked if it pertained to the triangular piece? Mr. Rutherford said yes, there is actually two parcels, a deed to the triangular parcel, and that is the way the Ford Estate had gotten it to 1960 something. Hark and Heritage Title didn't have any problem with it. Vice -Chair Cottier said none -the -less there seems to be issues about drainage, where the detention pond should be located and does it adequately handle the drainage from this site. Mr. Rutherford said there has been a preliminary drainage report done on this. It is broken into two basins, the north two-thirds of the property drains to the triangular area. He didn't know if the Board members were acquainted with the area specifically but it is very low, quite a bit lower than the highway. It will work very nicely for a detention pond. In fact, for the historic flows, it will be let out at the historic rate and continue down Highway 1. The other detention pond is in the southwest corner of the property, and it will discharge at a historic rate onto Spaulding Lane, which also goes west to the Larimer-weld Canal. 0 Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 24 vice -Chair Cottier asked if it would be the financial responsibility of the homeowners on Ford Lane? Mr. Herzig said it would be the full responsibility of the developer, because of their impact on the existing street, to reconstruct the street and put a concrete border on the street to take care of the requirement that there is a gutter on a City - standard street. Vice -Chair Cottier asked about the inadequate infra -structure existing there, water, water pressure, sewer? Can you address those? Mr. Herzig said no he could not, it would have to be done by Elco if they are providing the water, they would have to respond to that question. Mr. Edward Lawler, the applicant, said he would not speak for Elco but what they have told them they can supply the area well. By looping, the pressure should be improved quite possibly. The sanitation, Cherry Hills Sanitation (name of company muted) also feels that the lines that have been there are quite capable of holding the subdivision. They had designed their lines bigger for more development in this area, compared to farther east where a lot of development is going. So they are actually in favor of using the infrastructure they already have in place. Vice -Chair Cottier directed a question to Mr. Paul Eckman, Deputy City Attorney, brought out by a citizen stating that a legal description was inaccurate for the annexation and also the triangular piece shown in the northwest corner was not owned by the developer, therefore, could it be used as a detention pond for this development. Are there any problems with us considering this project proposed with those legal questions? Deputy City Attorney Eckman said when the annexation petition was submitted, the certification of the developer's attorney said all of the owners of the property described in the annexation had signed the annexation petition. The City does not do its own title search, it relies upon the attorney to certify that for the City. We are relying on that and will continue to rely on it unless we have some more definitive information that would indicate to the contrary. Regarding the legal description not closing, he thought he would have to refer to Mike Herzig or one of the engineers who have examined the legal description. The City Attorney's Office doesn't plot them out to examine if they close or not. Generally, as far as the Law is concerned, if the legal description is sufficient to give reasonable notice of the land that is proposed to be annexed, I think we wouldn't have to worry about it. If it • Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 23 Member Strom asked if the projection is day for this development onto Country projection for traffic via Spaulding? for roughly 350 trips per Club Road? What is the Mr. Vosburg answered yes to the first question. The traffic study focuses on peak hours only. He did his own estimations backing up the ADT for Fort Lane, but has not done the same for Spaulding, but said roughly their distribution between the two points is pretty much an even split 60-40, roughly the same kind of volume. Spaulding Lane roughly carries 500 ADT. Their traffic study estimated that in the year 2015, it would carry approximately 750 ADT. The actual long-range projections for Spaulding Lane is low, closer to 1,500 ADT. While there is a difference in numbers, that is within the ball park in a residential street in Fort Collins, although it is starting to get busier than we see in many areas. Vice -Chair Cottier asked, regarding Ford Lane, the upkeep and maintenance questions with the idea of it being half City and half County? Mr. Mike Herzig, Planning Engineer, addressed the question stating that he had talked with Rex Burns, the County Engineer, about the situation with Ford Lane. It is now a County road. The developer would be required to improve it with curb and gutter on both sides of the street with sidewalks at least on the west side. Maintenance of it is something the County would like to discuss with the City. There is an annual meeting between the City and the County where they divide up areas like this and determine the most logical organization to maintain the road. Because the City would be maintaining all the streets in this new development, it would be logical that the City would take over the maintenance of Ford Lane in accordance with full improvement to City standards. Vice -Chair Cottier said "...full improvements on the east side of the street?" Mr. Herzig said they would have to reconstruct the whole street, and the City requires that the curb and gutter be installed on the other side. That would still depend upon a design and working with the residents along the frontage to determine how the elevation should work and whether that causes problems for those properties. That is yet to be done within the final design phases of this project. Vice -Chair Cottier asked that for the City to take over full responsibility for that street, it would have to be improved on the east side? 0 Mr. Herzig said the whole street has to be improved. Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 22 per day. The effect of adding an additional access point or moving the proposed access point wouldn't have any affect whatsoever on the total volume on Country Club Road because it is the same amount of trips being generated by the development just being disbursed to Country Club Road in a different way. If, for instance, an additional access point was provided within this development at the point suggested by one of the gentlemen who testified, the affect would be that it would be spread out over two access points onto Country Club Road. From a general practice point of view, the aim is to take advantage of existing access and limit access onto a road in order to improve the flow on that road. Providing multiple points of access on Country Club Road may impede the flow of traffic than if the access was concentrated at one point. The flip side of that is providing multiple points of access disburses the traffic more within the area that is generating the traffic. Member Strom asked if his view of Country Club Road is to serve as a collector street? Mr. Vosburg said that is correct. Member Strom stated that we have a lot of concern if there are multiple accesses to arterial but not to collectors. Mr. Vosburg Said that is correct. Member Strom also asked about the Highway 1 intersection improvements. To your knowledge, are they planning to change the alignment or location of the intersection, or are they simply upgrading it and how does that interplay with Spaulding Lane connection? Mr. Vosburg said there is significant realignment of the intersection, and it is difficult to explain verbally. He chose a graphic that was well suited. He explained the funded project "in the works". Terry Lake Road will come down and be realigned to come directly across the bottom of Terry Lake and intersect Highway 287. He pointed out where the new intersection would be constructed with double left -turn lanes and other improvements. This small ditch crossing, which is a bridge now in between Spaulding Lane intersection and N. College, would be removed. Spaulding Lane would follow the old Terry Lake Road alignment up to the new intersection of the realignment of Terry Lake Road at another point. This would separate the intersection of Spaulding Lane and Terry Lake Road and Highway 287. There will be considerable offset, where now there is very little offset in that area. The angles of intersection will also be improved. 0 0 Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 21 information he got out of the traffic study. Again, that is correct, it is roughly the total average daily trips that this development will generate and put on Ford Lane. He said he would like to put it into context. The 350- 400 trips is well within the capacity of residential streets in Fort Collins. The Transportation Department doesn't consider residential streets busy until the count is over 750 and closer to 1,000 average daily trips. Two weeks ago, we heard from residents of an area called Imperial Estates, which is a county subdivision where residents were concerned about maintaining a rural life style. The streets within Imperial Estates carry approximately 400 daily trips now, so the future volumes on Ford Lane would be in that ball park, or slightly lower. (3) The safe stopping distance between Ford Lane and potential access point that a gentleman pointed out was discussed. He stated that in his conversations with a State Highway Engineer that 200 feet is the required safe stopping distance. He is correct. An additional access n point could be provided in that general area, and he indicated on the site plan that it would be feasible and safe from a Transportation point of view. The volumes forecast don't require that there be an access from a different point or multiple accesses, but it would be a safe, feasible access point. Another point of concern was raised regarding existing backup on Terry Lake Road and Highway 287 and that intersection in the mornings at the red light. The State will be improving that intersection. The applicant touched on it briefly in his presentation. They will be reconstructing that whole area and putting in double left turn lanes along with right turn lanes, so the operation of the intersection should be improved significantly with the project. It was his understanding that project is supposed to be under construction within a year, although he did not have all the details. Member Strom asked Mr. Vosburg about the possibility of an additional access point within the development and what do he see as projections for longer term traffic on Country Club Road. Would this be a problem? Mr. Vosburg wasn't sure that he understood correctly. What is the long-range project volume of Country Club Road? was the second question related to adding an access point? Country Club Road now • carries approximately 2,000 vehicles per day. The traffic study forecasts long range in the year 2015 that will be 3,500 vehicles Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 20 concerns me because of the impact of having two different agencies on either side. Mr. Mussard urged the Board to review the numbers and to look at the situation first hand, drive around on Country Club, on Spaulding, on Ford Lane, park there for about an hour and see if you think 100 vehicles will use Ford Lane on any day right now. This number is excessive and he has no idea where it came from. It is not in the report. Please look at the drainage and the basin, please review the traffic situation and do some arithmetic. It doesn't match up. Again, he reiterated that piece -meal development will self -perpetuate itself right on to the Wyoming line. Ms. Dauda Brooks - 2116 Ford Lane - She wanted to go on the record without repeating her neighbors that she has the same concerns. She said there should be a "holistic" view of development, planning, as is being done in the Harmony Corridor Project, and should be done on a small plot as well. She thought the density was too high. CITIZEN INPUT CLOSED. Chair Cottier said she would restate the questions raised by the citizens. The first question is concerning the traffic issues, specifically the accuracy of the traffic study and the implications for the proposed access onto Ford Lane onto Country Club Road. Tom Vosburg of the Transportation Department was asked to respond. Mr. Tom Vosburg, City Transportation Department, Transportation Planner. He addressed questions raised by the citizens: (1) The estimate of existing traffic on Ford Lane was too high at 100, and it was pointed out that the assumptions used in the traffic study were applied. It should be more like 50 trips per day. Mr. Vosburg said the gentleman was right, the report is wrong. The current traffic on Ford Lane is about 50 trips a day. He didn't believe that significantly changed the conclusions of the traffic study, although the additional trips estimated to be generated by the new development are appropriately calculated and if anything, that error results in overstating the total amount of traffic that will be carried on Ford Lane and Country Club Road, but just a very small amount. (2) The total amount of new trips generated by Falcon Ridge was discussed. He believed the gentleman used his own estimate of approximately 350 daily trips based on the 1J Planning 6 Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 19 employment center, regional shopping area, they are not direct distances. You have to go through the "mousetrap" of north Fort Collins. Mr. Mussard said the storm drainage problem had been brought up several times, in previous meetings, and has not been satisfactorily answered. It has been said that all of this would be taken care of. The Power's family has given some specific problems with the drainage. He pointed out an area on the map and located a basin stating there is no drainage at this time. He also said there is a ridge that surrounds an area where water stands after a good rain or if irrigation ditches are not shut off after a time. His question was if the developers were planning to drain the entire surrounding area or just the subdivision. He said drainage has not been addressed. Mr. Mussard said there has not been any presentation to the neighborhood as to specifics of what is the quality of construction. There have been numbers given with no specific information. He referenced the shades of color discussed earlier in the meeting, red or maroon. The neighbors do not know what kind • of external surface will be on the houses and yet there is an expectation that this is a wonderful plan for this community. If specific colors are addressed in south Fort Collins, it would be polite for the neighbors to see what kind of buildings we are going to have directly across the road from where we live, for simple courtesy. Mr. Mussard said it has been relayed by the City that services have to go through the County, who have been told in the past that this is not a problem. Where are agreements between the two agencies that anyone else on Ford Lane is injured and 911 is called, how clear is it to the dispatcher when we on the County side as opposed to the City side. He knows that the ambulance service serves the county and the fire department serves the county. Who comes to check the break-in? Who is the first police officer to arrive? Is it City or County? He stated there will be some confusion when the center line of the road is considered. How do I know which side I am on? Mr. Mussard was concerned about the upgrade on only one side at this time and we have not been given an adequate answer as to how this impacts our side of Ford Lane. will we be required, now or in the future, to put in curb, gutter and sidewalks? What is going to be put in on the City side as far as curb, gutter and sidewalk? Right now, it the rain's real good, his water runs into his lawn. I think that is great, I am saving water and I am not using water. I am conscious of that and I am careful of it. If I have to put in curb and gutter, I have a whole new picture, a small item, but it Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 18 density being too high and found it difficult to understand how the project would be a buffer between larger properties and larger properties. The printed information that he had seen is somewhat misleading in regard to the wonderful site this is for this type of development, such as a park within 3,000 feet, only if you swim the Eaton Ditch or allow your kids to do so. Major employers were supposed to be within 3,000 feet, again only if you swim the Eaton Ditch or take Lemay or College Avenue. He was confused by the process as they were not allowed to discuss density at the annexation hearing and now er are basically being told that we are fortunate that they haven't passed 5 units per acre minimum and that we are lucky that we are only getting 3 units per acre. He did not understand at what point the density gets to be discussed. In regard to lot size, he said, if you look at the lots they are in the 7,000 - 7,500 square foot category. The developer's claim to fame is 10,000 square foot average. I can develop 6 lots, 5 at 2,000 and 1 at 100,00D and collect 18,300 square foot average. The figures can be somewhat misleading. One other number that was confusing was that the solar variance is based on 32 of 58 lots to come up with a percentage. According to the staff report earlier, he didn't understand the difference between 58 and 60. Carl Spaulding - owner of the property bordering on the west side. he had big problems with where the road tends to dump on his property. He showed the location of his home facing south. The access on Spaulding lane notes that there are problems on its access to Highway 1. There can't be Valley View, Spaulding Lane, trailer people to go up and out (he was pointing to the map). He said he was not contacted and asked planning staff to communicate with him. Don Mussard - 2124 Ford Lane - he said it was across the road and part of the access to the proposed development. The proposal by the developers is strong on defending objections raised in the past, but nothing was proposed but simply defended questions that had been raised. The point that this very nicely fits and buffers between urban and rural and suburban developments that have been there for many years. He contended that "piece -meal" development, one small area at a time, is self-perpetuating in that one is the buffer for the next one and the next one, etc. He was not sold on this idea. He requested the area map. The number of feet to a neighborhood playground is there to here. There is no street to connect the neighborhood easily or the alternative is a congested street or Country Club Road to Lemay, none of which have berms nor sidewalks. We are told that someday they will be provided for us. It doesn't help the kids that have to cross other people's property in order to get to school. They are close enough so they can't ride the bus, they can't get to the park, it is misleading to say it is 3,500 feet. He said the same thing applies with the major • Planning & zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 17 Mr. Powers presented some documents to enter into evidence at this hearing. He would like to claim that he was representing the neighborhood. Vice -Chair Cottier said that the 30-minute time limit is for organized neighborhood presentations. Mr. Powers said he believed he provided sufficient copies to the Planning and Zoning Board and the staff of a resolution and series of quit -claim deeds. This is recorded at the County and what it represents is the first two quit -claim deeds on pages 2 and 3. Quit -Claim the property I pointed out previously between and enter a common ownership between the County and the Larimer-Weld Irrigation Company. They in turn hold the property in common. Mr. Powers said the other two quit -claim deeds which begin on page 4 and 5, quit -claim that land to the Ford family and Powers' family. He brought to the Board's attention on page 4, the bold letters on the first quit -claim deed on page 4, it says that the property that he has pointed out to the Board, is for the use and occupancy for agricultural and farming purposes. This does not • appear to be to us an agricultural or farming purpose. It is definitely an urban purpose to put a detention pond there. Legally, the detention pond belongs on the developer's property, not on the County's and irrigation company's property, if that is the case. The result of this is that it reduces the developers acreage without that by 1.46 acres, the density goes to 3.29 units per acre for the 18.24 acres that remain in the development without the area I outlined as the triangular area. Besides the concerns regarding ownership, there is also concern about the drainage and who will maintain it. We see that there will be a homeowner's association developed; we would like to have further established with sufficient capital to maintain. We also would expect to be able to expect and improve any drainage improvements on the triangular area as well, sine we do have an interest in this area. We don't doubt that the drainage can go through that area, but at historic rates, and we do want to have the assurance that we have the ability to inspect and approve the drainage improvements which will flow over an ownership interest that we hold. We also expect that the developer will improve the drainage along Highway 1, Terry Lake Road to its ultimate point of discharge at the Larimer-Weld Canal. That would mean improvement along the highway -barrow ditch. That concluded his comments. Clifford Hart - 609 Cordial Road - He agreed with what other neighbors had said and that he lives on the north side of Country Club Road, where the lots are considerably larger and most are acreages, as are some of the properties to the south. he addressed Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 16 schools. If you look at the way it is presently, none of the connecting streets have sidewalks, curbs or gutters. He showed that the only way to get to the parks would be to go down Country Club and then south on Lemay to the park, which is across an irrigation ditch. He offered an idea of a centrally located park for the proposed development, or playground, or reduce the density to 30, stating the existing plan shows some lots to 6,000 square feet. His concern was for the children. Ed Powers - represents a family that owns property to the west of the development - The Spaulding property is between the development and his client's property. he showed the location on the map. The property has been owned by the family for generations, 70 years, and have lived there. At the time of annexation, there were several things requested and he did not see them happening in this development plan. He said he appreciated the staff providing the necessary information regarding the development. Mr. Powers said (1) when the information plat was reviewed, there was some information from old family records that not all of the owners had participated in the election of this annexation. He said he would bring it up later. (2) When the legal description was reviewed, they found it to be inaccurate, the legal description did not close and that several of the courses did not match up. In particular, the first course which produces contiguity with the City at this point that ran more northwesterly and away from the City limit line. This was brought to the Planning Staff s attention, they were notified prior to consideration by the Council for this annexation. Unfortunately, nothing has been done regarding those legal descriptions. Further problems have occurred as we have reviewed the legal descriptions and how it related to our property and how things interacted in the area. Mr. Powers stated when he came before the Board during the annexation process, he asked that this be a quality development, of an urban time and that is not seen in the development plans proposed. We don't see the urban standard being achieved. Perhaps we don't understand the preliminary plat process. It does not show everything. It just shows partial sidewalks only at the entry of the subdivision, and there are no street lights to provide illumination and security to the residents. As far as the ownership that he alluded to that not all of the owners participated in the election of the annexation. It had come to our attention that the proposed detention pond area, which is along Highway 1 and immediately west of the proposed subdivision, near Terry Lake Road and across Terry Lake itself, is not owned by the developer. Planning S Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 15 Mr. Carney brought out a point on highway access. he had spoken to George Rowe who is the Regional Design Engineer at the State of Colorado Department of Engineering for the Highway 1 project. According to Mr. Rowe, the realignment of Highway 1 is still in the preliminary stages, it is not a "done deal". It is proposed to go to bid sometime in the next year. There is no inclusion for pedestrian access to the North College Business Corridor as yet in the preliminary access plan. If there is an increase in people, they need to safely access the North College Corridor, otherwise, the Country Club Road will be utilized, which is already an unsafe situation. Mr. Carney said he would like to see this development access Country Club Road directly. According to Mr. Rowe, the Department of Transportation, a 30 mph design speed requires a 200-foot stopping site distance. If they have the same block density as in Rimrock, oriented north -south, there is 230 feet between the street (60-foot street), that would provide the subdivision to directly access Country Club Road. He pointed to the location on the map and stated that stopping site distance to the east is significantly less, provides 500 feet to Highway 1 and provides over 200 feet • site stopping distance in both directions. He did not know why the developer couldn't take an access to Highway 1 or Spaulding Lane that would allow Soo feet, and 400 feet is required for 50 mph design speed. Ms. Genion Hammond - 505 County Club Road - She stated that she has been a resident of Rimrock over 20 years and chose to live in the County because of the animals and the beauty it offers. She realizes there will be change and as she understands that Ford Lane is half owned by the County and half owned by the City in length, two entities caring for the road or not. She challenged the Board as to the maintenance and upkeep of the road and she asked about the environmental impacts. She mentioned at Highway 1 you may wait through three light exchanges before a person could get across because of the traffic concentration. Mr. Ray Archer - 423 Spaulding Lane - His home is located at the southeast corner of the proposed development. his family selected the area because of its openness and its proximity to the city. He questioned the density of the proposed development compared to surrounding areas, where most live on acreages. He believed 60 units was too dense for the area. his major concern is for the children. He reported that the developer projected 51 children for the 60 homes site (27 elementary, 13 junior high and 11 high school students). After reviewing the homes in the $11o,000 to $140,000 range, 3-bedroom with unfinished basement, he concluded that it was • more like a family dwelling, meaning 1 1/2 to 2 children per dwelling, meaning 90-120 children. He commented that the developers said there was good access to the park and to the Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 14 Mr. Manning concluded by asking that, with these discrepancies noted, he requested the City put a hold on this development until a new unbiased study is prepared and submitted for review. he said he would appreciate an opportunity to respond if there were questions of the City Traffic Department about the numbers he reported. Sharon Housely - 2105 Sunstone Drive - She read from a prepared statement. On Wednesday, December 15, 1993, the Sandcreek Associates presented a proposal for the Falcon Ridge Subdivision at a Neighborhood Informational meeting. At that meeting, the developers wrote down many, many questions and told the group they would find out the answers to those questions and have a second informational meeting. Two major concerns she addressed were: 1. Would ELCO Water District be able to provide enough water for the 60 proposed homes without affecting water pressure of existing residences? 2. Can Tavelli Elementary, whose enrollment is already 625 students, handle the enrollment from these additional homes. Ms. Houseley said she would like to go on record that the neighborhood had not received any answers to their questions and would still like to have a response by the developers. Mr. Tim Carney - 2101 Sandstone Drive - Rimrock Subdivision - He has written a letter to the Board regarding his thoughts about Falcon Ridge. He stated it is the toughest development to get clear answers on because of the nature of the inter -governmental agreement, the access to the highway and the improvements to the roads. He has been referred to the City, County and the State and no one is really answering his questions. He said he could use the same slide to disprove the buffer area the developers showed a transition. He could take the same slide and take the opposite approach. he further stated if the area is known there is a geologic terrace, there are irrigation ditches, there are lakes. It is a world away and the density of the surrounding area, including Rimrock, including everything else around, it is no where near the proposed density of this development. His main concern about his, as stated in his letter are. 1. The density is too high. 2. The proposed access is inadequate and unfair to the existing residents. 3. There is a significant lack of infrastructure to support growth in this corridor and 4. Public safety would be negatively impacted, children going to school, roller bladers, etc. • Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 13 Ridge Development as they impact families on Ford Lane. His concern was the traffic that moves east and north out of the subdivision onto Country Club Road. A direct access from the Falcon Ridge to Country Club Road is desired by the current residents there; and talking to the developers, he believed that was their original plan as well. The advantages would be to maintain the integrity and independence of the Rimrock Subdivision, would also reduce safety and environmental hazards to the established neighborhood residents, and would be a cost savings to the developer not to have to upgrade the County Road to City standards. Another point of issue is with the traffic impact study prepared by Eugene Capola for Sandcreek Associates. Some of the critical statistical data is incorrect. Some of the assumptions and estimates pertaining to traffic direction and growth are questionable at best. These errors would invalidate any conclusions made form that report. Mr. Manning said that Ford Lane was estimated at 100 vehicles per day, on page 3, and would like to have the resource named --where those kinds of estimates come from. The report also states that it is under stop sign control and it is not, nor are there 100 • vehicles using that street each day. In fact, using the report's own trip generation of 9.5 trips per home per day times the five existing homes on Ford Lane would equal 47.5 trips per day, not the 100 trips stated in their report. There is much less traffic. he lives at the end of Ford Lane and, besides the traffic he generates from his house, only a few cars may come his way by mistake. he calculated only 28.85 vehicles per day. By the reports of higher use of traffic on Ford Lane, the data indicates a much lower impact on the development, when in reality, it would have a tremendous impact, in fact, an additional 300-350 trips per day. Using a high estimate of 50 vehicles per day, currently on Ford Lane, would mean a 500 percent increase in traffic on Ford Lane alone. He could not live with that, nor could his family. Mr. Manning took another exception to the traffic report. It was estimated another 10 percent increase in traffic on Country Club Road and Spaulding Lane between now and 1997. He wanted the source of the findings as well. The Falcon Ridge development alone will add nearly 300 vehicle trips per day on each of the roads, based on their data that 583 trips will be generated from the 60 homes on that proposed development and half of those trips would be going on each of those roads daily, according to their report. The increase on Spaulding Lane, which they designate now at 500 vehicles per day, would go up to almost 800 vehicle trips per day, or a 60 percent increase. On Country Club Road, the current estimate is 2,000 per day and another 200 would bring it up to a 15 percent • increase. These increases are without adding any other new development sin the area over the next few years. Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 12 The Coalition has submitted a petition to City Council to h ave an interim look at the existing inter -governmental agreement, which is overdue for review. This project, Falcon Ridge, is a critical example of a study that needs to be done before major developments are allowed to occur. The documents that will be sent to City Council were given to the Planning and Zoning Board and it has already been given to the County. The project needs to be downsized similar to the Pheasant Ridge Subdivision which is already annexed. Rather than using the issue that these will be compatible with the existing Rimrock Subdivision; this does not allow, in its present form, a transition area and does not appear to be in the spirit of the original governmental agreement as it was drafted between the City and the County. It is time to address this "leap -frog" development concept. Just because the Land Development Guidance System (LDGS) promotes this type of density, it should not mean it is always adaptable to all areas, especially this area north of the major city development, which is all appearing in the south. The Northeast has already developed some unique characteristics. Some of the areas are 30 plus years old. Even though the densities appear adequate at a first glance, a closer look will show that this project will actually cause a major impact on the existing area, especially in view of the already overloaded access on Terry Lake Road, Country Club Road and Lemay. We need to slow down and examine, just as we are doing with the Harmony Corridor, what really is in the best interest of the established neighborhoods, rather than apply the same criteria as is used in the much dense uses further south. This area is unique, having been developed for so long. There are large tracts of land that have opened up in the south for development. That is not available in the north, there are pockets as was shown on the map. It is one of the more critical areas to be carefully studied. Just because there may be, down the road, a promise of a by-pass or a change in the traffic flow, it is totally going to depend on how much money is available from the State. If any of you have worked on the express way or by-pass projects, historically, a piece of it is done and money runs out. If the project is passed in its existing form, this project is just going to be a nightmare for the people that live there and also for those people who have purchased their homes. Mr. Jerry Manning - resident of the Rimrock Subdivision - he is a member of the Northeast Neighborhood Coalition. He addressed the traffic and safety issues as they relate to the planned Falcon • Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 11 r 1 L J 0 Member Strom moved to reaffirm the Boardes position made two weeks ago. Member Winfree seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-1. with Fontane voting in the negative. Item 5 Falcon ,Midge FIIp - Preliminary, 12-94F Member Sharon Winfree had a conflict of interest and was not present during the hearing. Mr. Steve Olt, Project Planner, read the staff report with the requested variance to solar orientation ordinance. Staff recommends approval. Mr. Peter Sherman and Mr. Ed Lawler of Sandcreek Associates, presented aerial slides of the area to show why it is compatible with the surrounding area and why it provides a good transition from College Avenue to Highway 1 into the County and larger acreage areas. There are a half dozen houses on Ford Lane and one lot is vacant. Rimrock is a 10-acre parcel with a density of 3.1 acres, which is almost exactly the same density they are proposing for the development directly across the street. He showed a slide from the south where Ford Lane was located. The mobile home park, Valley View Avenue have a similar density to their development. another slide showed Spaulding Lane, Highway 1 and College Avenue. There has been some concern about a traffic bottleneck at Spaulding Lane and Highway 1. There is a stop light at Highway I and Highway 287. There is a rather short neck between the Highway 1 and Spaulding Lane. It is the applicant's understanding that there is a project slated to re-route Highway 1 farther around the west down 287. The neck that is connecting Highway 287 and Spaulding will be abandoned and Spaulding Lane will go up Highway 1 and intersect the new section of Highway 1 which should relieve a great deal of the traffic congestion that results at that intersection at this time. There is a fairly sizable mobile home park on the west of Highway 287, transitioning from a higher density mobile home, standard 3 plus units to the acre, then out into the country. We feel we have a compatible project and that it provides a good transition. We will be glad to entertain any questions. CITIZEN INPUT, Ingrid Simpson - resides in the Northeast area of Fort Collins - She represented the Northeast Neighborhood Coalition. This area is within the larger area that is in the process of being studied. PLANNING i ZONING BOARD MEETING MINUTES June 6, 1994 Gerry Horak, Council Liaison Ron Phillips, Staff support Liaison The June 6, 1994, 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 Vice -Chair Jan Cottier, Members Jennifer Fontane, James Klataske, and Bernie Strom, Lloyd Walker and Sharon Winfree. Chair Rene' Clements was absent. Staff members present included Interim Planning Director Ron Phillips, Deputy City Attorney Paul Eckman, Joe Frank, Basil Hamdan, Mike Herzig, Steve Olt, Ted Shepard, Tom Vosburg, Kirsten Whetstone, and Carolyn Worden. AGENDA REVIEW Mr. Ron Phillips, Interim Planning Director read the agenda review items. Consent Agenda: Item 1. 5 Senses Daycare PUD - Preliminary and Final, #23-94, Item 2. Resolution PZ94-7 Easement Vacation. Discussion Agenda: Item 3. Harmony Market PUD, 6th Filing, Red Robin - Final, #54-87T, Item 4. Amendment to the Harmony Corridor Plan and Land Development Guidance System, #29- 90A, Item 5. Falcon Ridge PUD - Preliminary, #2-94F; Item 6. Indian Hills Village PUD - Final, #81-93A and Item 7. Fossil Creek Estates PUD - Final (continued at the request of the applicant). CONSENT AGENDA Item 1. 5 Senses Daycare PUD - Preliminary and Final, #23-94 and Item 2. Resolution PZ94-Easement Vacation. Member Klataske made the motion to accept Items 1 and 2 of the Consent Agenda. Member Winfree seconded the motion. Motion passed 6-0. Item 3. Harmony Market PUD, 6th Filing, Red Robin - Final. Mr. Ted Shepard, Project Planner, read the staff report and recommendations. The conditions of approval have been satisfied and staff recommends approval of the PUD. There were slides presented.