Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Estes Valley Planning Commission 2014-03-18RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission March 18, 2014 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Commission: Attending: Also Attending: Chair Betty Hull, Commissioners Doug Klink, Charley Dickey, Kathy Bowers, Nancy Hills, Steve Murphree, Wendye Sykes Chair Hull, Commissioners Klink, Dickey, Bowers, Hills, Murphree, and Sykes Director Chilcott, Senior Planner Shirk, Town Board Liaison Elrod, Larimer County Liaison Michael Whitley, and Recording Secretary Thompson Absent:None The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological sequence. Chair Hull called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. There were approximately 15 people in attendance. Chair Hull explained the purpose of the Estes Valley Planning Commission and stated public comment is invaluable. Each Commissioner was introduced. Chair Hull explained the process for accepting public comment at today's meeting. 1. PUBLIC COMMENT None CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of minutes, February 18, 2014 Planning Commission meeting. It was moved and seconded (Klink/Sykes) to approve the consent agenda as presented and the motion passed unanimously. ESTES PARK TRANSIT FACILTY AND PARKING STRUCTURE - Development Plan 2013-07; Lot 1, Visitor Center Subdivision Planner Shirk stated the application being reviewed was a public structure, which required a Location and Extent review in addition to the Development Plan. The Planning Commission would be the decision-making body; however, if the Planning Commission disapproves the project, the applicant may appeal to the Town Board. Planner Shirk stated the review would be for compliance with the Estes Valley Development Code. Planner Shirk reviewed the staff report. This is a request to replace an existing surface parking lot with a three-level 217 space structured parking facility. The proposed structure would be located east of the existing Visitor Center, utilizing the existing access from Big Thompson Avenue (Hwy 34). The project would account for a redesigned transit stop, and has been designed to accommodate transit busses. Planner Shirk stated the overall site of disturbance would be slightly more than two acres. There is an existing sewer main located under the site, which would be relocated and a new sewer easement rededicated. The current design of the proposed structure would require variances from three regulations in the EVDC: 1) Height variance for the light fixtures on the third level; 2) height variance for the stairwell; and 3) setback variance for the front of the structure. Planner Shirk stated the CD-Commercial Downtown zone district has a maximum front setback of sixteen (16) feet. Due to the location of the driveway access, additional space between the street and the building is desired to create the best fit on the property. Planner Shirk stated the applicant has also requested a minor modification to reduce the length of the parking spaces as well as the driving path through the structure. The Board of Adjustment will review the variance application at the May 6, 2014 meeting. The Planning Commission has the authority to approve the minor modification request. Planner Shirk stated the site is located within the Downtown planning area. In accordance with the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan, the proposed use and design is consistent with the uses and issues outlined in this plan. A component of the Comprehensive Plan was transportation planning to help reduce downtown traffic congestion. To this end, the Town, RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 2 March 18, 2014 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Larimer County, State of Colorado, and Rocky Mountain National Park partnered in the creation and adoption of the Estes Valley Transportation Alternative Study in 2002-2003. This study identified the Visitor Center for structure parking. The proposed parking structure would fulfill this component of the Transportation Alternatives report. Planner Shirk stated the proposed structure would have a stone veneer for the lower level, and concrete for the upper levels, as recommended in the Comprehensive Plan. Planner Shirk stated the application was routed to affected agencies and adjacent property owners. Issues with the Parks Department and Estes Park Sanitation District (EPSD) were addressed and resolved. The road along the east side of the proposed structure would be wide enough for Parks and Sanitation trucks to pass through. Nearby property owners have expressed concern about the lighting. Planner Shirk stated the plans call for LED lighting, which turn on instantly and will be on timers for dimming during non-operating hours. Motion detectors will be placed for lights to come on as needed, using multiple lighting zones to allow maximum flexibility in hours and intensity of illumination. The proposed structure would be designed to dissuade criminal activity before it occurs, using "Crime Prevention through Environmental Design" (CPTED) principals. These include but are not limited to: planning deciduous trees in pedestrian areas instead of conifers; using motion-censored lighting; and creating an open building design and stair tower. The final landscaping design would require approval by the Parks Department, who would maintain the landscaping. The stormwater management plan would also incorporate the landscaping plan in its design to best utilize runoff. Planner Shirk stated signage will play an important part to alert the public that busses and recreational vehicles would not be allowed in the structure. Depending on the timing of the completion of the project, landscaping may need to wait until the next growing season to be installed. Staff Findings 1. The development plan, if revised per recommended conditions, will comply with applicable standards set forth in the EVDC, as outlined in the staff report and Development Code Analysis dated March 7, 2014. This finding excludes requested modifications and waivers. 2. The development plan is consistent with transportation goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. 3. Community-wide policies in the Comprehensive Plan include "the natural colors of wood and stone are most desirable for building exteriors." The proposed structure would have a stone veneer for the lower level, and concrete for the upper levels. 4. The requested minor modifications to parking stall dimensions relieve practical difficulties in developing the site. 5. Nearby property owners have expressed concern about lighting, and requested the lighting be minimized. 6. The parking structure and site include CPTED principals to help reduce potential criminal activity, including vehicular break-ins, assault, and vandalism. 7. Landscaping shall either be installed or guaranteed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 8. The Planning Commission is the Decision-Making Body for the Development Plan and Location & Extent Review. Staff and Commission Discussion Planner Shirk explained the proposed height of the stair tower is approximately 32 feet, and the top of the light fixtures would be approximately 47.5 feet. The maximum height allowed in the EVDC is thirty (30) feet. After discussion with the lighting designer, it was determined the proper lighting would be best achieved by using fewer higher poles rather than more shorter poles that would comply with the height limit. The lights would come on by using a tiered system. Commissioner Dickey acknowledged Public Works Director Zurn for facilitating the forum for public input. He stated the proposed facility would also be the transit facility for the local shuttles and would also have a visual impact. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 3 March 18, 2014 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Public Comment Bob Stanley/Walker Parking Consultants is the designer of the facility. He thanked all the Town departments that have contributed to this effort. Extensive input makes for an exciting project. He stated the stair tower would be very open, affording great views and security. He wanted this to complement the surrounding landscape rather than compete with it. He stated there are some interesting elements with this project that have the potential to win some awards in the parking structure industry. He noted the artwork renditions are still in the draft stage. Caroline Campion/Town resident commented this project was needed for the community. She appreciated the meeting early on to discuss the proposed lighting. In the winter, she suggested closing off the third level, so the lights would not disturb the dark sky. She was concerned about the lighting of the structure. Paul Fishman/Town resident wondered about the traffic impact on Hwy 34 and how ingress and egress would be affected. He questioned whether this project affect the FLAP grant project planned for the downtown area. Gary Matthews/Town resident stated the Safeway fueling station lights are very bright and an eyesore for him. He thought the impact of the top lighting would be lessened if the driving surface was darker in color. He stated lower light levels would be greatly appreciated. Public comment closed. Staff and Commission Discussion Director Zurn stated lighting was an issue and the dark sky would always be in the forefront. Operationally, there would be a lot of flexibility. He stated the higher poles actually have less light spill over. Sconces on walls and a lower level of lighting was considered; however, it is important for the Town to build a very safe structure that the public will feel safe using. Lighting can be dimmed if it is determined they are too bright. He stated they would be using the same software currently used at the fairgrounds, which have a dimming technique that can be altered remotely by each light. Director Zurn stated the structure has been designed with compatibility for future growth. At this time, the Traffic Impact Analysis showed no traffic light was warranted at the entrance to the structure. He stated he would welcome personal discussions with local merchants to discuss transportation in general in the downtown area. The transportation vision included reconfiguration of downtown and a transit component. It was determined there was no one solution to the problem, and this structure was one of the components. Transit and centralized parking was another outcome of the vision study. He thanked the Commissioners that participated in the design charrette. Mr. Stanley stated the concrete surface met the applicant's goal for minor reflectivity. Grey is a good surface for adequate reflectivity, as well as a good material for durability, slip resistance, and texture. Conditions of Approval 1. Variance approval for building setback and height. 2. The existing EPSD easement shall be vacated and rededicated before EPSD acceptance of relocated sewer main. 3. Grading plan shall incorporate the center landscape island into the stormwater management plan to the extent practical. 4. The landscaping plan shall be amended to include landscaping outlined in the staff report, include grass seed mix, and shall be subject to final review and approval of the Parks Department. 5. Compliance with the following affected agency comments: a. Community Development dated March 7, 2014. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission March 18, 2014 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall b. Water Department dated February 21, 2014. c. Estes Valley Fire Protection District dated February 21, 2014 d. Estes Park Sanitation District dated February 20,2014. It was moved and seconded (Bowers/Murphree) to recommend approval of the Estes Park Transit Facility & Parking Structure, Development Plan 2013-07 and Location & Extent Review with the findings and conditions recommended by staff and the motion passed unanimously. 4. ESTES VALLEY COMPRENEHSIVE PLAN MODERNIZATION Director Chilcott stated the modernization of the Comprehensive Plan has resumed after being stalled because of the flood. She would appreciate feedback from the Commissioners. The modernization of the Plan will be on the agenda for a Joint Work Session for the Larimer County Commissioners, Town Trustees, and Planning Commissioners to give all three boards the opportunity to comment and determine if this document is on track as directed. Meeting details will be finalized soon. Director Chilcott stated the Land Use chapter is a very important part of the plan. The vast majority of the Estes Valley residential land is zoned RE-l-Rural Estate (10-acre minimum lot size) covering 37% or about 7,000 acres. A-Accommodations takes up the majority of non- residential land covering 10% or about 2,000 acres. The CD-Commercial Downtown zone is a small sixty-six (66) acres, but is more intensely developed and the core of the local economy. The goal of the modernization was to update the plan with accurate information in a more user-friendly format. The 2008 Statistical Update of the plan included a build-out analysis completed by Felsburg, Holtz, and Ullevig. Staff has contacted that group and requested they provide the information in a format compatible with our GIS system. The goal is to obtain a working model allowing staff to check the accuracy of the information. The reformatted information could also be fed into a build-out analysis being created by the North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization. Director Chilcott explained the current model does not have an accurate comparison of parcels, units, etc. and staff is hopeful the updated model will provide those. Planner Shirk added Commissioner Hills has been providing editing feedback, which has been extremely helpful to staff. Director Chilcott provided an overview of the Community-Wide Policies section. Staff assured the Commission they are only updating facts and figures, and have not made any changes to the actual policies. She stated there was one word in the policy statement that was changed. "Create" was replaced with "Maintain" because the original Comprehensive Plan was created prior to the adoption of the Estes Valley Development Code. She assured the Commission that staff takes any changes very seriously, and Commissioners and the public are encouraged to speak with staff if they believe any changes are too significant for the goal of modernization. One other change being proposed is for "Area Plans" to be named "Neighborhood Plans". This would allow additional neighborhoods to be added in the future, or broken down into smaller areas. Additional improvements include: updated maps and charts using today's computer technology; photos highlighting goals and purposes of the areas; photos showing the characteristics of the specific neighborhoods; and each neighborhood being described using the same topics, map styles, statistics, etc. In the Downtown area, references to Estes Park Urban Renewal Authority (EPURA) and other outdated organizations were removed. Updates on the Action plan will be made where applicable. The directive and action to modernize the Comprehensive Plan will definitely reduce the amount of time and money needed to move forward with a complete update if the Town Board provides that direction. When asked by Commissioner Dickey, Director Chilcott stated discussion about updating the entire Comprehensive Plan occurred for about three years before direction was given to staff to proceed with the modernization. Currently, funding for flood recovery has higher priority over funding for an updated Comprehensive Plan. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission 5 March 18, 2014 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall 5. REPORTS Director Chilcott reported the Community Development Department has interviewed candidates for a full-time Code Compliance Officer. Currently, Planner Kleisler's position is half-time Planner and half-time Code Compliance Officer. He will shift to become a full-time Planner. Director Chilcott reported the Community Development Department requested and will be receiving an employee to assist with clerical work for both Planning and Building Safety. This person will be coming to us through the Larimer County Workforce Center, at no charge to the Town, and will work in our department for several months. Director Chilcott reported the Joint Work Session with Planning Commission, Town Board, and County Commission will be the afternoon of Wednesday, April 9th. Staff recommends meeting on a quarterly basis, with dates set well in advance. If there are no items for discussion, meetings could be cancelled. Staff hopes regular meetings will help build good working relationships between the Boards. She stated the newly-elected Town Trustees will be encouraged to attend. Planner Shirk reported O'Reilly Auto Parts will be moving forward with their Development Plan. They will also need to apply for a setback variance, since the approval of the earlier variance has expired. The application will be before the Planning Commission in April and the Board of Adjustment in May. Planner Shirk reported staff is working on an amendment to the EVDC concerning micro­ breweries, -wineries, and -distilleries. Other possible amendments concerning attainable housing and assemblies will be on the Joint Work Session agenda. Planner Shirk reported Mary's Meadow Condominiums has submitted an application for a supplemental condominium map. There is a minor issue with an easement. Director Chilcott reported Community Development Department and the Town applied for grants to fund a master plan for Fall River extending from the National Park boundary through the downtown corridor. We received $144,000 in grants. Six firms submitted proposals, and a team of community members, staff, and river experts chose Walsh Environmental to design the Fall River Master Plan. The Walsh team has plans to heavily involve the public and affected agencies in the design process. A Volunteer Advisory Board will be created to assist with making decisions. Commissioner Dickey has volunteered to represent the Planning Commission on that Board. Planner Shirk reported a downtown business owner has plans to put a small mural on a downtown building. Staff was able to work with her and, using the existing Sign Code, accomplish the goal without having to go through the Creative Sign Design Review Board. He stated this was an indicator that the current code is working. There being no further business, Chair Hull adjourned the meeting at 2:48 p.m. Karen Thompson, Reeefaing Secretary