Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Estes Valley Planning Commission 2018-08-21RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission August 21, 2018 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall 1 Commission: Chair Bob Leavitt, Vice-Chair Sharry White, Commissioners Betty Hull, Russ Schneider, Robert Foster, Frank Theis, Steve Murphree Attending: Chair Leavitt, Commissioners Schneider, White, Foster, Murphree and Theis Also Attending: Director Randy Hunt, Town Attorney Greg White, Senior Planner Jeff Woeber, Planner Robin Becker, Town Board Liaison Ron Norris, County Staff Liaison Michael Whitley, Recording Secretary Karin Swanlund Absent: Commissioner Hull Chair Leavitt called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. There were approximately 70 people in attendance. 1. OPEN MEETING Planning Commission/Staff Introductions 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA It was moved and seconded (White/Schneider) to approve the agenda as presented and the motion passed 6-0. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of July 17, 2018 Planning Commission meeting minutes. It was moved and seconded (Schneider/Foster) to approve the consent agenda as presented and the motion passed 6-0. 4. BLACK CANYON WEDDING DEVELOPMENT PLAN Planner Becker reported that this item was continued to the next Planning Commission meeting to be held October 16, 2018 and that a public meeting with neighborhood and community members was to be held August 23 at the Black Canyon Office. Public Comment: Anna Claassen, town citizen, questioned when the public meeting was planned and noted that neighbors have not been notified Jay Blackwood, town citizen, stated that a glitch in GPS brings people to the Black Canyon neighborhood rather than the Black Canyon Inn, and this project would cause more issues with people coming to the wrong address. He would like GPS to be fixed. It was moved and seconded (Foster/Theis) to continue the Development Plan to the October 16, 2018 meeting and the motion passed 6-0. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission August 21, 2018 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall 2 5. RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN LOCATED AT 1041 SOUTH SAINT VRAIN AVE, KNOW AS WIND RIVER APARTMENTS. Planner Woeber stated that this application was reviewed by the EVPC at their June 19, 2018 meeting. Due to questions that were raised by the EVPC, and with concurrence of the applicant, the application was continued to the July 17, 2018 EVPC meeting. With revisions not being available in time for that meeting, it was continued to the August 21, 2018 EVPC meeting. The applicant, in their revised submittal materials, has detailed all requested revisions, and has outlined specifically what has been revised. The subject property is 5.77 acres in size and is undeveloped. Currently the site is two separate lots. A lot consolidation application has been submitted to combine Lots 1 and 2 of Wapiti Minor Subdivision into one lot. The development consists of four multi-family structures, three 24-unit buildings and one 22-unit building resulting in 78 units with two bedrooms and 16 units with one bedroom. Legal notices were published in the Estes Park Trail Gazette and adjacent property owners were notified. There is significant opposition to this project. Staff recommended approval of the Wind River Apartments Development Plan and approval of the associated waiver request to reduce the radius of a section of an internal drive. Staff and Commission Questions: Director Hunt recused himself from discussion due to owning property and living across the street from the Development Project. Woeber stated that the housing cost limits has been revised in the restricted covenant agreements. Applicant Discussion: Paul Pewterbaugh stated that the reason for the delay was to be sure to address all the concerns, feedback and input from both the Planning Commission and the public. All members of the team were present at the meeting to answer all questions that may arise. He then summarized the components of the application. Eric Blackhurst, President of Estes Park Housing Authority, presented an abbreviated presentation on the housing needs situation. The first housing study was done in 1989- 1990, community wide, and three studies have been done since, 1999, 2008 and 2016, all with similar results. Joe Coop, Van Horn Engineering, displayed the sidewalk proposal along Lexington Lane, and the west side of highway 7. A Pedestrian Study showed that a lighted pedestrian crossing beacon didn’t warrant a CDOT permit. He also discussed the drainage issues and plans that would vastly improve the current system. The traffic study determined that there were 45 trips per hour, thus not triggering a left turn lane onto Highway 7. Mail cluster boxes will not be on Lexington Lane. Steve Lane, Basis Architecture, reviewed the lot density which was calculated on being one lot at 5.77 acres without a dedicated private street. Lot size does not affect the density of the day care or number of units. The height and density bonus was approved RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission August 21, 2018 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall 3 to allow RM zoned properties to solve the housing needs. The 15% open space/recreational space is met. The height code will be met, with the 3 story buildings being dug into the west side of the lot. Parking has 182 spaces for units and 16 guest spaces which is more than most neighboring communities. The EVDC specifies that this development should have 204 parking spaces. Taking out 4 units would allow us to meet the requirement, but nothing would change with regard to the site plan and traffic. Our proposal includes a request to allow 182 spaces rather than the 204 per the EVDC. Public Comment: Comments are summarized, full comments can be found on the Town of Estes website at www.estes.gov/meetingvideos for 12 months from the date of meeting The following town citizens spoke in opposition with concerns related to: pedestrian and traffic safety, drainage, flooding, work force housing density, parking, garbage generated, and Vacation Home impacts: Marcia Weaver, Kristen Hill, Liz Lord, Karen Nicholson, Adam Bensma, Brookie Gallagher, Nancy Fuller, Martha Rouch, Katie Sykes Town citizens speaking in favor stating the following reasons: the need for work force housing, property rights, many business owners and workers in favor, take advantage of developers willing to invest their money, and 352 people on the affordable housing waitlist: James Poppitz, Kent Smith, Jon Nicholas, Greg Rosener, Charley Dickey, Naomi Hawf Commissioner/Applicant Discussion: Paul Pewterbaugh emphasized that he understands the concerns of the neighbors, but this property has been zoned RM for years. Businesses using apartments for employees would be held to the same requirements as private renters. Covenants have an occupancy limit of two people per bedroom, plus one. Housing Authority will oversee the leases, as hired by the Town of Estes Park. One year leases are desired, six month leases are the minimum. The hope is to attract families that work and help run the town. Deed restrictions are 50 years, and run with the land. Joe Coop addressed the drainage questions clarifying how the drainage plan will help the neighborhoods to the east. Commissioner Comments: Comments are summarized, full comments can be found on the Town of Estes website at www.estes.gov/meetingvideos for 12 months from the date of meeting. • Workforce housing is needed but so is the need to be careful with unintended consequences • Abuse of the intended use of the density bonus. Two lots were combined but all the housing was placed on one lot, producing a density much greater than 16 units per acre, which was envisioned when the code amendment was adopted. • Maximum density does not have to be granted. The EVDC says up to a maximum of 200% depending on site-specific conditions. This is supported by the EVDC section 11.2.B "site-specific conditions may prevent maximum bonus density levels from being achieved due to the character of the land or surrounding uses." RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission August 21, 2018 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall 4 • Inadequate facilities for parking within the development. Proposed parking is less than the EVDC requirement. • Traffic and parking on Lexington Lane. This road is narrow and it will be difficult to handle the traffic load. The Town does not even want to install "No Parking" signs, according to the developer. • Serious concerns for pedestrian and bicycle safety on Lexington Lane and at the Highway 7 crossing. • There are no conditions put on the project to mitigate parking and safety issues. • Lack of compromise on either side in the two months that have passed since the last public hearing. • Workforce housing needs to be addressed in sensible and reasonable way, respecting the rights and interests of all parties involved. It was moved and seconded (Foster/Schneider) to deny the Development Plan application without findings and the motion passed 4-2 with Theis and Murphree voting against. A ten minute recess was called at 4:20 6. APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL REVIEW TO ALLOW A “DAY CARE CENTER” IN A MULTI FAMILY-RM RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT Summary: in addition to the Development Plan, the applicant has included a proposal for a day care facility on the apartment site, to serve the residents but which is also intended to have the capacity or openings for children from outside the development. The daycare is proposed within an existing structure on the property, which would be remodeled and expanded, with a portion also used as a leasing office. Legal notices were published in the Estes Park Trail Gazette and adjacent property owners were notified. Staff recommends the Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval of the Special Review Use for the Wind River Day Care Center to the Town Board of Trustees with the following condition: The approved use shall be consistent with the plans and information as submitted by the applicant for the Special Review Use. Applicant Pewterbaugh elected to continue with the Special Review of the Day Care Center stating that the Development Plan would attract a lot of young families, with a projected 60% use from the apartments. Steve Lane reviewed the plans for the day care facility and leasing office. It was moved and seconded (Schneider/White) to approve the application for a Special Review Use the item and the motion passed 6-0. 7. EVDC TEXT AMENDMENT RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission August 21, 2018 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall 5 To add “Sightseeing/Tour Vehicle Facility” as an S2 Special Review use in the A, Accommodations, the CD, Downtown Commercial and the CO, Outlying Commercial Zoning Districts, and also add a definition of the same. Staff recommended a review of the amendment for compliance with the EVDC §3.3.D Code Amendments, Standards for Review and forward a recommendation to the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees and the Larimer County Commissioners for a final decision to approve. Staff/Commission Questions: It was explained that most users of Sightseeing/bus tours are staying in A zoning, thus the reason for putting buses in Accommodation Zoning, in addition to Commercial Zoning. The Special Review would allow rulings based on the specifics of individual applications. Public Comment: Bob Berman, 1442 Raven Circle, expressed concerns about putting a bus barn on one of the major entrances to the town while the other companies have found less obtrusive areas. This company is not new and had a different place to park at one time. Once approval is given to one company, it will open up the door for all other Special Reviews in A zoning, which are all over town. Commissioner Discussion: comments are summarized S2 review would be on a case by case basis with conditions allowed to be added. Don’t see the need to add the A zoning or change the code. This particular property has had problems with all businesses that have operated out of the location. The code has prohibitions for fueling and repairs in regard to the word “facility”. It was moved and seconded (Murphree/Leavitt) to recommend that the Estes Park Board of Trustees and the Board of Larimer County Commissioners approve the text amendment to the EVDC as presented by staff, with findings recommended by staff. The motion was approved 4-2 with Foster and Schneider voting against. 8. ESTES PARK TROLLEYS S-2 SPECIAL REVIEW The applicant requested approval of an S2 Special Review for the use, “Sightseeing/Tour Vehicle Facility” in the A, Accommodations Zoning District. Summary: this special review was contingent upon approval of the related Code Amendment. Staff found that this use has been established at this location for approximately one year, and impacts have been minimal. Staff recommends that Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval of the Special Review Use for a Sightseeing/Tour Vehicle Facility in an A, Accommodations Zoning District with the following conditions: 1. The approved use shall generally be consistent with the materials submitted by the applicant, and shall specifically include the applicants proposed use of the facility only as a sales office and point of dispatch for tours, and the limitation on the number of vehicles in the fleet. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission August 21, 2018 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall 6 2. Within 30 days of Special Review approval, applicant shall submit a Landscaping Plan to the Community Development Department, providing an effective screening with trees and shrubs from adjacent roads. The Landscaping Plan shall be reviewed and approve by staff, and the landscaping shall be established by the applicant within 60 days after staffs approval of the Landscaping Plan. Landscaping shall be inspected and approved by staff. Staff/Commission Questions: Director Hunt proposed, since the applicant was not present, two alternatives: continue the item to the next meeting or deny the application without prejudice. It was moved and seconded (Foster/White) to continue the Special Review Use for a Sightseeing/Tour Vehicle Facility to September 18, 2018. The motion passed 6-0. 9. UPPER THOMPSON SANITATION DISCTRICT LOCATION AND EXTENT REVIEW Planner Woeber detailed the review of a location and extent for a partial rebuild of the sanitation districts existing office/shop facility in a CO, Outlying Commercial Zoning District. The proposal involves rebuilding an approximately 3000 square foot building, including the office and one of the seven garage bays, all proposed within the existing footprint. Legal notices were published in the Estes Park Trail Gazette and adjacent property owners were notified. Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the Location and Extent Review Application as submitted by the applicant. Applicant Discussion: Jess Reetz, Cornerstone Engineering, stated that the project is much needed as the facility is old and outdated. It was moved and seconded (Theis/Foster) to approve the Upper Thompson Sanitation District’s application for a Location and Extent Review, with staff findings. The motion passed 6-0. 10. PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE: EVDC §3.2 STANDARD DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURE B. NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMUNITY MEETING, §3.2 F SUMMARY TABLE STANDARD DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS BY APPLICATION TYPE, CHAPTER 13 DEFINITIONS, AND APPENDIX B SUBMITTAL REQUREMENTS. Planner Becker discussed the proposed Text Amendment that would allow property owners to become informed and involved in the Estes Valley Development Review Process in regard to projects in their neighborhood. Staff/Commission Discussion: An application will be deemed incomplete if meeting is not held. If a meeting was attempted, but did not happen, a letter would need to be submitted stating why. This would apply to anything that requires a public meeting, including Annexation and RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission August 21, 2018 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall 7 Rezoning. Use classification would only be a recommendation and not required, since use classifications may not be applicable to a specific location. Public Comment: Naomi Hawf, Estes Park Housing Authority, questioned how and what type of notice would be sent. Hunt and Becker answered that a 10 day notice prior to meeting, an ad in the newspaper and a mailing using the same address list as the Community Development office would be required. It was moved and seconded (White/Foster) to recommend that the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees and the Board of Larimer County Commissioners approve the text amendment to the Estes Valley Development Code, according to findings of fact and as recommended by staff. The motion passed 5-0. (Commissioner Murphree left meeting early) 11. REPORTS Due to the length of the meeting, there were no reports given. There being no further business, Chair Leavitt adjourned the meeting at 5:35 p.m. _________________________________ Bob Leavitt, Chair __________________________________ Karin Swanlund, Recording Secretary