Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990 JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL - SITE PLAN ADVISORY REVIEW - 20-87A - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTESi 0 46 r . • • PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MINUTES June 27, 1988 The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board was called to order at 6:32 p.m. in Council Chambers of New City Hall, 300 LaPorte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado. Board members who had attended the worksession on June 24, 1988, included Dave Edwards, Sandy Kern, Laurie O'Dell, Don Crews, Jim Klataske, and Alternate Bernie Strom. Board members present at the meeting included Dave Edwards, Sandy Kern, Don Crews, Jim Klataske and Alternate Bernie Strom. Staff members present included Joe Frank, Ken Waido, Sherry Albertson -Clark, Mike Herzig, Rick Ensdorff, Gail Ault, and Paul Eckman. Acting Chairman Dave Edwards noted that The Westside Neighborhood Plan would be heard on July 11 at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Member Crews gave a farewell speech. He indicated that many good projects had been approved in his seven years on the Board. He also noted the many changes that have come to Fort Collins during the 35 years he has lived here, amenities which were due to change - growth. He added that an individual has responsibility to do something for the community and asked people to get involved because it was satisfying. (See Attachment 1). Chairman Edwards asked for a legal determination of a quorum. Paul Eckman responded that four members present at the meeting constituted a quorum, and the number voting determined the itcm's disposition; i.e., there were five members present constituting a quorum. If 2 members abstained from an item it would take only 2 of the 3 remaining members to approve or deny the item. Assistant Planning Director Joe Frank reviewed the Consent and Discussion Agenda. The Consent Agenda included: Item 1, April 25, 1989 and May 23, 1988, minutes; Item 2, 20-82D HARBOR WALK ESTATES, PHASE III, PUD -Preliminary and Final; Item 3, 53-85R CENTRE FOR ADVANCED TECHNOL- OGY PUD, 9th FILING (Centre Village, Phase One) - Final; Item 4, 78-81F, CIMARRON PLAZA PUD (New Giant Video) - Preliminary and Final; Item 5, 13-82AF, OAK RIDGE PUD - Amended Master Plan; Item 6, 13-82AG, OAK RIDGE VILLAGE, 6th Filing, PUD - Preliminary & Final; Item 7, 96-81L, RESIDENCES AT HORSETOOTH COMMONS PUD - Final; Item 8, 19-85C, CACHE LA POUDRE INDUSTRIAL PARK PUD - Preliminary & Final; Item 9, 11-82A, HOUSING AUTHORITY Non -Conforming Use Expansion; Item 10, Planning and Zoning Minutes - June 27, 1988 Page 2 50-88, RIGDEN FARM ANNEXATION. The Discussion Agenda included ITEM 11, 69-84F, FORT RAM VILLAGE PUD, 2nd Filing - Final; ITEM 14, 20-87A, 1990 JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL; Item 15, 58-86B, RICHARD'S LAKE PUD, PAR- CEL A - Preliminary & Final; and Item 16, 40-88, STERLING SPECIAL REVIEW - County Referral. Item 56-88, WESTSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN -Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan was to be continued to a special July 11, 1988, meeting. Item 12, 46-88, PARK SOUTH PUD - Master Plan, and Item 13, 46-88A, PARK SOUTH PUD, Parcel A -Preliminary, as well as Item 17, 7-88A, MIDLAND GREENS PUD - Master Plan Country Referral, were conti- nued to the July 25, 1988, meeting. The Board removed Items 1, 2, 3, 10 and Ken Parker asked that Item 6 be heard. Members Kern and Crews stated they would abstain from item 10, Chairman Edwards from item 2, because of perceived conflicts of interest. Member Kern moved to approve Items 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 of the Consent Agenda, Member Crews seconded and motion carried 5-0. Member Crews moved to approve Item 2, Member Strom seconded. Motion carried 4-0. Member Strom moved to approve item 10, Member Klataske seconded, motion carried 3-0. Member Klataskc indicated the May 23, 1988, meeting minutes contained an error on Page 1, three lines from the bottom and should be changed to read the easterly 10 feet, not 100 feet. _ Member Crews moved to approve Item 1, Member Strom seconded, motion carried 5-0. Ken Parker, 5213 Honeylocust, asked what the word "unit" in the description referred to. Sherry Albertson -Clark, City Planner, responded that a lot or unit referred to one single family dwelling. She explained the site layout, stating the lots varied in size from approximately 9000 square feet and larger and McMurray was the eastern boundary. Member Kern interjected the lots ranged in size from 7,800 to 15,600 square feet. Member Strom moved to approve Item 6, Member Crews seconded, motion carried 4-0. CENTRE FOR ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY, 9th Filing - 53-85R Member Crews stated he would be abstaining from the vote on this item as would Member Kern because of a perceived conflicts. Sherry Albertson -Clark gave staff description recommending approval with the condition the sidewalk north of the site be constructed as part of this development. Frank Vaught, representing Colorado State Research Foundation, the applicant, indicated he was informed this afternoon of the sidewalk problem. He was surprised that the extension was a requirement of this proposal since it was a part of the Sundering Townhomes project. He didn't feel the applicant should be responsible to build this four foot sidewalk. • PIanning and Zoning Minutes - June 27, 1988 Page 5 signs which indicate the change from two to one lanes. He would check to insure they were properly located. A signal was not warranted now but the Traffic Department will continue to monitor the site. Member Kern moved to approve the project. Member Crews seconded. Member Crews stated that he had voted for approval of the preliminary and found this project, with the decrease in units, an improvement. Member Kern noted similar feelings. He felt the City experiment with four bedroom apartments may be a nice compact way to be near the University. He was bothered that policing methods were ineffective and hoped a better method could be found but the design package was improved. Member Strom reiter- ated the above comments and was concerned with the effect of traffic on Plum. He felt the City needed to monitor this closely. Member Klataske stated the overall concept from the original was improved. Member Crews asked if it was necessary to vote on the four unrelated persons aspect and Mr. Eckman responded it was part of the application for final. Member Kern amended his motion to include Board approval of four unrelated persons per unit since the Board was satisfied the applicant has provided what was necessary to satisfy the LDGS. Member Crews concurred. Motion carried 5-0. • Chairman Edwards noted "experiment" had a negative connotation and hoped it could be expressed as innovative. He also hoped this concept would not be concentrated in the West Elizabeth area or that developers would not be required to have protective covenants in all cases. 1990 JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL-*20-87A George Galida of Poudre R-1 School District gave the staff description and indicated that the property was adjacent to a proposed City park. Joe Frank noted this was a Special Review as the School District was exempt from codes but State Statute gave the City review considerations. The 30 acre site contains an elementary school and the proposed junior high school. Planning concerns focused on traffic generated, both pedestrian and vehicular. Streets and sidewalks were not adequate and these comments needed to be passed on to the school district. Chairman Edwards asked what the Board options were of Mr. Eckman. He indicated the school board must submit the site plan for review. Planning and Zoning Board can require a public hearing of the school board. Since the P&Z Board was acting in an advisory roll they can either approve the proposal, request a hearing, or disapprove the proposal (in which instance it would take a 2/3 vote of school board to approve the proposal). 0 Planning and Zoning 1wiinutes - June 27, 1988 Page 6 Member Strom asked that the service area be described. Mr. Galida responded the Boundary Committee was responsible for establishing the boundaries and would probably do that sometime before school opens, usually within approxi- mately a 1 1/2 mile radius. Over 1 1/2 mile requires busing. The District has constructed a school pathway so that Imperial Estates has pedestrian access. Member Strom asked if there was pedestrian access from Taft Canyon and Mr. Galida indicated no. Member Strom noted the need to move quickly and decide who should provide street and sidewalk access. Member Crews also had serious concerns. Schools built in isolated areas lack roads and sidewalks. He wanted the message relayed to the Board regarding this concern. Mr. Galida responded the District, City and County all work under a diverse set of circumstances to get kids to schools. Chairman Edwards indicated that it was a worthy goal to combine elementary and junior high schools, someday the location will be the right place, but the safety aspect needs to be viewed. Therefore, P&Z has a rei'ponsibility to speak to the health, safety, and welfare of the City because it'.; hard to get parents concerned when the boundary can't be identified. He "elt the P&Z Board should take its strongest option and request that the school board review this proposal in front of the public. Mr. Galida interjected that there had been a special Neighborhood Meeting already as well as discussion through the PTO and at school board meetings which were open to the public. Member Kern asked if the public had knowledge of the P&Z Board':, concerns which resulted from this recent traffic study. He felt a meeting where just these concerns were addressed was necessary. Chairman Edwards read a letter from Lopez Elementary's principal indicating "we" must do our best to protect the children against themselves and requested watching for safety problems. Chairman Edwards asked for a motion. Member Kern noted we're looking for safe access for students and wondered how to get the school board's attention and wanted public discussion. Mr. Eckman stated the Board should request a public hearing without approving or disapproving the proposal. Member Strom indicated he felt this was an appropriate site, the plan works but his concern was with access and safety. He moved to recommend a public hearing. Member Kern seconded. Mr. Eckman stated regarding 31-23209 CRS the Board should find favorably on conditions of location and structure. Mr. Frank indicated he would recommend Planning and Zoning Minutes - June 27, 1988 Page 7 a public hearingto the school . M board ember Crews asked that the Planning and Zoning Board be kept informed and be notified when a public hearing date was set. RICHARD'S LAKE PUD, PARCEL A - Preliminary & Final - 58-86B Sherry Albertson -Clark gave staff description of project indicating it was on discussion agenda because of unresolved issue with the mineral rights of the owner. It was her understanding, however, that "as of today" they have reached substantial agreement. Staff recommended approval as all land use issues are addressed and recommends a variance regarding density. Roger Prenzlow, representing applicant, described this 2.3 acre portion of the 184 acres total project. He noted the spillway was at an elevation of 70.2. Art Vermillion, Park Oil and Gas representative, indicated his company and Mrs. Hoffman have come to a verbal agreement and he emphasized mineral owners' rights need to be considered in future applications. Member Crews moved to approve this phase of the project stating it was a good plan. Member Kern seconded. Motion carried 5-0. 0 STERLING SPECIAL REVIEW - County Referral - 40-88 Sherry Albertson -Clark gave the staff description of this gravel extraction proposal on a 58 acre site. Mike Refer, Sterling Sand and Gravel employee, asked the City Attorney what the County Referral process was. He was concerned as Sterling had no requests from the City for additional information regarding this project and, therefore, no input from the applicant. He was at the meeting, he thought, because of Item 8. Sherry Albertson -Clark noted it was in the area of joint planning concern and automatically referred to City for review. Staff had seen this item for the first time in March and worked with the County staff to obtain information, Mr. Frank added it was referred to the City because of potential impact and the Planning and Zoning Board would make a recommendation to the County. Mr. Refer asked what staff recommendation was. Sherry Albertson -Clark responded staff was recommending approval with two conditions: 1) That Taft Hill Road be monitored and if maintenance is neces- sary the applicant will be responsible. 2) That signage for truck traffic and speed be installed by the applicant. •