Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOAK/COTTONWOOD FARM PUD - AMENDED MASTER PLAN - 54-87A - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTES • PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING MINUTES April 24, 1989 The meeting began at approximately 6:33 p.m. in Council Chambers. Members present included, Laurie O'Dell, Frank Groznik, Sandy Kern, Jim Klataskc. Lloyd Walker, Jan Shepard, and Rex Burns. Staff was represented by Tom Peterson, Ted Shepard, Sherry Albertson-Clark, Paul _ Eckman, and Kayla Ballard. Mr. Peterson reviewed the Consent Agenda which consisted of: (1) Minutes of the March 27 and April 3 meetings; (2) #78-80D, Replat of Tract "A" Golden Meadows, 5th Filing - Preliminary and Final Subdivision; (3) #146-79L Burger King at Raintree PUD - Final; (4) #13-82AQ, Oak Ridge Village PUD, 8th Filing -Final; (5) #53-84G Warren Farms 3rd Filing - Final Subdivision was continued to May 22 meeting; (6) #46-85A, Resolution PZ89-2 - Vacation of a Portion of a Utility Easement on Lot 1, of the Plat of Opera House Block Building, PUD. The Discussion Agenda consisted of Items (7) #54-87A, Oak-Cottonwood Farm PUD - Amended Master Plan; (8) #54-87B, Harmony Market PUD - Preliminary; (9) #54-87C. Harmony Market PUD, Filing I - Final (PACE). Staff asked that Item #2 be pulled for disci.on. Member Groznik moved to approve Items 1,3,4, and 6. Member Kern seconded the motion. Motion passed 7 - 0. REPLAT OF TRACT A GOLDEN MEADOWS - #78-80D Ted Shepard. project planner, gave a brief summary of the project. He stated that although staff recommended approval, staff wished to have stated for the record the land :: ,e to the south of the property. Member Kern stated that a neighborhood shopping center located to the south was in the master plan and the Board needed to be sensitive to residential areas. K. Bill Tiley stated he was a partner in the ownership of the land since 1977. He stated they had downzoned the multi-family to single family. They would notify perspective customers of the proposed center. Member Walker asked if multifamily would be more appropriate. Mr. Tiley stated that there will be adequate landscaped buffers provided. Member Kern moved to approve the replat with a condition that a sign be erected which noted the land uses of the property to the south. Member Klataske seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-1. Member Walker voted no. The Board adjourned to review the letters received that day in regard to the PACE application. • • The Board resumed the meeting after a fifteen minute recess. OAK-COTTONWOOD FARM PUD - AMENDED MASTER PLAN - #54-87A HARMONY MARKET PUD - PRELIMINARY - #54-87B HARMONY MARKET PUD - FIRST FILING (PACE), FINAL - #54-87C Ted Shepard gave a brief summary of the projects. Tony Fiest, the developer, gave a presentation. He described the area around the site and its current land uses. He reviewed the site plan and the changes suggested by staff which have been implemented. He outlined the traffic flows within the site, parking areas which are to be landscaped and increased, noting that PACE had 650 stalls while similar shopping centers had less. He pointed out the removal of the pads indicated on the original master plan and stated that they would be reviewed as leased. He added that the pads are restricted except PACE. In the area of landscaping and buffering, he noted that the 60 trees would be increased in size, with the service area being screened. He stated the lighting would be reduced, pursuant to suggestions by the neighborhood, to 15 feet. This would require more lighting poles. He gave a summary of the PACE Company and its financial impact on the community. Next, he graphically showed the present traffic patterns and those anticipated by the buildout of the site. He noted the extension of Boardwalk and Oakridge Drives, as well as the signal at Boardwalk and Harmony. He stated that since Harmony was a state highway, it would be capable of handling the increased traffic volumes. He gave a brief overview of the existing air quality and based on air quality surveys, stated that PACE would contribute about a 4% increase. He stated that the number would be higher if the site suggested near I-25 was used. He stated that based on noise studies, there would be no noticeable increase in noise. He gave a brief description of the detention area and spoke about neighborhood compatibility. Chairperson O'Dell asked if the statistics included any development or if they were based on PACE being built. Mr. Armando Ballofet, an air quality consultant, stated the projection for 1990 included no development, while the number for 2010 included some development of a less intensive nature. Member Walker asked if the 332,550 square feet included the pad sites. Mr. Fiest stated that 40,000 square feet was attributed to the pad sites. He said that the pad sites were limited to available parking. Mr. Shepard gave the staff recommendation which was approval. He stated that all three proposals met or exceeded the point chart. Member Walker stated that Parcel "G" was zoned R-L and asked if a PUD could come through the process. -2- • • Mr. Shepard replied it was not a matter of zoning, as the master plan designated the uses in that area. Member Walker asked if the use changed and was required to come through the PUD process, how Palmer Drive would be handled. Mr. Shepard stated that on the master plan, a portion of Palmer Drive would be vacated, leaving no access between fairway Estates and the G.T. property (Parcel "G"). Member Groznik asked if there was a discussion between the county and city in regard to the street vacation. Mr. Shepard stated that the county would process a vacation between Lots 65 and 66 of the 3rd filing. The city would be included in the county's review process as a referral agency. The City did not have an objection to the proposal. The Chairperson instructed the Board that the economic gains attributed to the project would not be information reviewed by the Board for either approval or denial. Public Input Gordon Kruse, Member of the Fairway Estates H.O.A., stated that an informal vote at a neighborhood meeting showed that a vote to defeat the motion for support of the project passed. This was due to concerns of incompatibility, increased traffic, air and noise pollution. Carol Stertz, resident, stated that the regional nature was too incompatible and believed the site to be a bad location and suggested a more outlying parcel. Winslow Caughey, resident, asked for a one month delay, as he believed there needed to be a second opinion on the Air Quality Study. He thought that the particulates in the air, not just CO, should be studied. He believed that the City should be responsible for that study and that the City needed to balance growth with air quality. Chuck Panella, resident, supported the project. He stated that Harmony Road was not residential and that he had faith in the planning process. He believed that the project was in the best interest of the City as it would keep retail dollars in the City and would offer more retail selection. Ken Bolen, resident, believed the project to be a good planned one and supported the project. Michael Stertz, resident, suggested that the project be moved to Prospect/I-25 area on G.T. Lands' Interstate Master Plan area. He urged the Board to vote no on the project. Zach Kaplan, resident, was not opposed to the project, but objected to the City's enthusiasm with enuorsing the site, especially after the second PACE site was denied. He had concerns about the acceptance of the Noise Analysis. He no . .i that PACE trucks would run at all hours. He asked how the City was -3- • • addressing the Clean Air Act and what are Fairway Estates' assurances on Parcels G and H. He believed that the Air Quality Study was too hasty. Edith Kruse, resident, asked that the project not be rushed. She had concerns in regard to the noise, especially the semi-trucks. David Luttrop, resident, stated that zoning should protect, not promote growth. He noted that the buffering at this site should be similar to the buffering at the Denver PACE sites, which had miles of buffer, instead of the feet of buffer at this site. Mike Holtz, Oakridgc Village, stated that an informal survey taken showed that all but 2 surveyed were mildly or violently opposed to the site. He believed that the changes were too cosmetic for such a massive project. He would prefer a neighborhood community shopping center, as so much regional draw would be negative. He believed the planning process did not notify the neighborhood on time, that the process was too compressed and that the more time was needed to address concerns. He stated that the runoff would go into Oakridge and cause mosquito and health problems and wished it to be relocated. Craig Coogan, Landings/Sandy Cove, believed that the PACE project was not included in the L.D.G.S. and that the 1987 master plan created a "compatible expectation" and that the burden of proof was to prove that compatibility. He stated that the project was too large. Harold Swope, Fairway Estates, took issue of the master plan amendment in 1987 and thought it was zoning. He stated that City deceived the residents by saying a Neighborhood Shopping Center not a Regional Shopping Center of 100,000 square feet was proposed. He did not believe the massive scale of this project was incompatible, as it would also serve Nebraska and draw traffic into the neighborhoods. He stated that the Air and Pollution studies were invalid. He believed the City needed to collect data, not the applicant. Scott Mason, resident, believed amending the master plan to be suspicious and noted that the project would draw customers from three states. Wesley Nelson, resident, asked that a deed restriction be a condition of approval. Jayne Hennen, resident, believed the City to be progressive, and supported the project. She believed the public input process had worked, that Mr. Fiest was accessible and sincere to the residents. She stated that the closing of vehicular access via Palmer Drive was positive and would encourage less traffic. Mike Winchell, Oakridge resident, favored growth but questioned the use of that project at that site. He noted that children's access would be limited to Werner Elementary via Harmony Road. He believed that property values would decline and that the 10% of unfiltered run-off would be dangerous. A groundwater study should be required. He would prefer that the site be relocated east of Timberline to protect the local residents. Jim Avery, resident, asked that if PACE was a Regional/Community Shopping Center, what would Cub Foods and the other tenants be termed. He did not believed that the Phase One landscaping was adequate for a stand alone type -4- • • building. He opposed the amended master plan/warehouse concept as it was not compatible. Matt Delich, Traffic Engineer, stated that a 420,000 square foot retail store would generate 21,000 trips per day and that a 332,550 square foot retail store would generate 16,000 trips per day. He noted that the number of trucks would be proportional based on truck ratios for both uses. Ralph Waldo, a Golden Meadows resident, stated that quality growth was the path to the future and that good citizen participation would enhance property values. He believed that the project was well designed, as well as convenient, and an appropriate use for that site. Peter O'Neill, a Landings resident, had concerns regarding traffic on Boardwalk and felt it could be kept a collector by improving the Harmony/College intersection and progressive signalization. He believed that Whaler's Way would be a short cut and wished a left turn lane for northbound Lemay Avenue into Whaler's Way be constructed. He noted the necessity for quality architectural guidelines, noting there was no "theme" shown on the P.U.D. He would like to see more detail to ensure a quality site. Ward Luthi, Citizen Planners, complimented the applicant and their presentation. He stated that PACE by itself was not the issue. He believed the project should be delayed. He stated that at the first neighborhood meeting, it was said that the master plan would not need to be amended. At the second meeting it was stated that the master plan would be amended and at the third, the City did not attend. He thought the Land Use Policies Plan was too vague, allowing piecemeal development to occur. He stated that the credibility of the process was in question. Larry Gordy, resident, President of the Golden Meadows H.O.A., and speaking as its representative, believed that Mr. Fiest had made himself available and that the process had yielded a quality development. He stated that the Golden Meadows HOA supported the project. Bill McCaffery, resident, noted that this site would eventually develop and he supported the project, as he believed it to be of good quality. Jean Tinnermeier, resident, stated that the increased traffic would cause air pollution, which would in turn affect health and quality of life. Kevin Simmons, resident, supported Mr. Fiest. He believed that the project was good and was surprised at the upgrades and reduction of scale done by the applicant. He believed the project to be an asset to Fort Collins. Mrs. Jean Sanderson, resident, asked that the Board not get caught up in details and believed that the project would cause harm. She voiced concerns about creation of a "discount alley." Larry Batterton, resident, believed that too much development had ruined College Avenue and that this project was too close to College Avenue, and would cause further problems. He preferred that the project be located on Highway 14, so customers would spill over into the downtown area. He believed that the traffic increase would be a problem. -5- • • Patrice Janiga, resident, believed the project was inappropriate and that by not having the pad sites was deceptive. Dick Rule, resident, stated that he lived on Lemay Avenue across the street from the project. He has resided there for 8 years and has seen all the new development. He supported the process and project. Mary Bolen, resident, supported the project. Member Groznik asked what could and could not be built on the present master plan. Mr. Shepard stated Parcel 1B was designated as Business Service Area on the currently approved master plan. Member Groznik asked if a 100,000 square foot retail use could be built there. Mr. Shepard stated that before the first neighborhood meeting, it could be done as a stand-alone building, but now, however, there was a preliminary PUD for a 50 acre development, which indicated a community regional shopping center and required a master plan amendment. Member Groznik asked about the air quality study's validity, whether it received the time necessary for a valid study, and whether a third party would do a better job gathering the data. Mr. Armando Balloffet said the study was done in three weeks. He said they did not base the noise projections on measurements. He stated the measurements were done to verify the computer model, one which was used by the Federal Highway Administration to forecast noise levels near major arterials. He believed the results may be a little high due to the lack of shielding of noise by structures, as the model was based on open areas. He stated the air pollution study was based on traffic on Harmony Road and surrounding streets in a 1/4 mile radius. He stated the study was done by measuring the current and projected emission rates. These rates were gathered by the Colorado Department of Health and discussed with the City's Natural Resources Dept. before running the modeling. He stated that the carbon monoxide concentration was the only standard which Fort Collins could not meet. He agreed that there were other gases and particulates in the air, but the carbon monoxide was the only standard which needed the meet the Clean Air Act. Member Groznik asked if lessening the number of trips was a way to lower these levels. Mr. Balloffet replied yes. Member Kern asked about the effect of the building in regards to shielding noise off of Harmony Road. Mr. Balloffet believed the buildings would shield the noise to the south of the development. He stated that any structure would reduce noise levels by 5 decibels. -6- • • Member Kern asked how will noise reduction would be addressed at the rear loading area. Mr. Balloffet stated that the 12' shield wall would significantly reduce vehicles and trash compactor noise levels. Member Kern asked if a diffuser or absorbers have any effect in the truck loading area. Mr. Balloffet stated that there had been a lot of work in wall design and slats but traffic noise was not specific, so it was difficult to use anything except thick walls. Member Groznik asked if the number of truck trips was taken into account when doing the studies. Mr. Balloffet replied yes. Member Burns asked if there was any effective way to gauge the ability of the site to handle stops and starts of vehicles. Matt Delich answered that the best measure was the level of service standards. He stated that all the intersections in the area would operate at an acceptable level of service standard. Member Burns asked if use of these levels of service standards would lessen emissions. Mr. Delich replied yes. He further stated that when the vehicles move more efficiently, they emit less emissions. Member Walker asked why staff believed that this was an appropriate way to treat this project by having the amended master plan, preliminary and final all in one meeting. Mr. Shepard stated the planning process allows for a preliminary and final to be reviewed at one time. This was an appropriate request. He stated the developers were asked to submit all plan and impact studies in a timely manner and that all revision deadlines be met. The developer submitted complete materials and met all deadlines. Member Walker asked how each specific tenant building would be reviewed. Mr. Shepard stated each would require conceptual review, a neighborhood meeting, submittal and Planning and Zoning Board review. He said that all plans would be based on the site's theme and compatibility. Member Walker asked that the deed restriction on 1-G and the note on the master plan be clarified. Eldon Ward stated they placed more refined notes on the master plan. He stated the deed restriction would be outside the City's process. Member Shepard asked if the notes applied to 1-H as well as 1-G. 7- • • Mr. Ward stated yes. He said 1-G would be treated as though zoned RL and 1-H would be treated as though zoned RLM. He said they also gave up the right to come back later and amend the master plan but reserve the right to seek things such as a day care center and residential scale office buildings on 1-H. Member Shepard asked if 1-G would include the elimination of Palmer Drive as a vehicular access point. Mr. Ward stated that on the master plan, there was an understanding that it would not. He noted that Oak/Cottonwood Farm Inc., had no ability to vacate Palmer Drive as it was in Fairway Estates. Member Shepard asked if the design guidelines applied to the remaining preliminary or for the pads. Mr. Shepard replied pads. Member Kern asked what the anticipated size of this market and what percent of business would come from Fort Collins. Patrick Schmidt, PACE, Inc., stated the area anticipated would be a 30 mile radius and did not include Nebraska. He believed that 75% to 80% would be local customers. Member Groznik asked if he had figures regarding the number of Ft. Collins residents would currently had a membership. Mr. Schmidt believed that there would be several hundred thousand dollars worth of business. Mr. Fiest added that the figure would be $5 million annually from Fort Collins. This figure has been calculated by market studies and is referred to as retail "leakage." Member Kern asked if the applicant would object to a condition whereby a loading truck would be required to turn off it's engine, if longer than five minutes. Mr. Fiest stated there would be no objection. Member Klataske asked if shutting off and starting an engine would cause more pollution. Mr. Fiest did not know but assumed that by running for a period of time would cause more emissions. Member Groznik noted that there was a sign at Toddy's stating that the area was a quiet zone and to turn off truck engines. Member Kern asked how the applicants could restrict traffic on Boardwalk Drive and asked if 4' berms would eliminate the impact of head lights. -8- i • Mr. Shepard stated that signalization and traffic progression would emphasize Harmony Rd., rather that Boardwalk Dr. He stated that the berm height could be a condition. Chairperson O'Dell asked about the configuration of the Harmony/Boardwalk intersection. Mr. Delich stated that northbound Boardwalk would have a left turn lane, a thru lane and a right turn lane. He said southbound Boardwalk would have a left turn lane and a thru/right turn combined. He anticipated that Boardwalk would remain a 2 lane street with the potential for a center turn lane. Member Kern was concerned about the phased landscaping, if not fully developed. He asked what guarantees the applicants could give. Mr. Shepard stated that the final PUD was evaluated as if it were a stand alone with Phase 2 taking 2-3 years to develop. He noted the numerous street trees and berms along the perimeter of the site. Member Groznik asked if there was a neighborhood park and bike path planned and now the circulation would happen. Mr. Shepard stated that no neighborhood park was planned south of Harmony yet but one was master planned in the Oak Cottonwood Master Plan. Mr. Ward stated a planned bike path .!long the railroad ROW was incorporated into the Oakridge Master Plan and connections have been provided in this master plan. Member Groznik moved to approve the Oak Cottonwood Amended Master Plan. Member Shepard seconded the motion. The motion passed 7-0. Member Kern moved to approve the Harmony Market Preliminary PUD with the following conditions: 1. Berms be approximately 4' along Harmony Road to shield traffic light. 2. Signs for truck loading zones stating that engines are to be turned off. 3. Continuity in design for all development in the project. Member Groznik seconded the motion. The motion passed 7-0. Member Kern moved to approve Harmony Market Filing One - PACE with the three conditions approved in the preliminary motion. Member Groznik seconded the motion. The motion passed 7-0. Other Business: Tom Peterson noted that the continued meeting would be held in the Lincoln Center Mini-Theatre, on Wednesday April 26th at 6:30 p.m. The meeting adjourned at 11:30 p.m. -9-