HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Estes Valley Planning Commission 2009-08-18RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Planning Commission
August 18, 2009, 6:00 p.m.
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Commission:
Attending:
Also Attending:
Absent:
Chair Doug Klink; Commissioners Alan Fraundorf, John Tucker, Betty
Hull, Steve Lane, Ron Norris, and Rex Poggenpohl
Chair Doug Klink, Commissioners Alan Fraundorf, John Tucker, Betty
Hull, Steve Lane, Ron Norris, and Rex Poggenpohl
Director Joseph, Town Attorney White, Planner Shirk, Planner Chilcott,
Town Board Liaison Homeier, and Recording Secretary Thompson
None.
The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological
sequence.
Chair Klink called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
1. PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
2. CONSENT AGENDA
Approval of minutes from July 21,2009 Planning Commission meeting.
Approval of correction of The Neighborhood creation date, 1975 should be 2005. (June,
2009 minutes)
It was moved and seconded (Fraundorf/Lane) that the consent agenda be accepted,
and the motion passed unanimously.
3. YMCA OF THE ROCKIES - SIGNAGE MASTER PLAN Metes & Bounds parcel
located at 2515 Tunnel Road
Owner: YMCA of the Rockies
Applicant: DaVinci Sign Systems, Inc.
Request: Master Plan for Signage (addendum to YMCA of the Rockies Master
Plan) and appeals to Sections 10.2.B and 10.5.L of the Larimer County Land
Use Code
Planner Shirk reviewed the staff report. He stated the Larimer County Board of County
Commissioners approved the YMCA of the Rockies Master Plan in March, 2007. This
master plan is intended to outline the development of the YMCA campus.
The current request for a Signage Master Plan refers to Section 10.2.B of the Larimer
County Land Use Codes (LCLUC), which states “signs may not be placed on or over
public roads or rights-of-way, or in road or access easements, except for utility warning
signs.” The existing YMCA entrance sign is located within public right-of-way, which is
over 100 feet wide, and the owner desires to replace this sign with a new one at the
same location. This location maximizes visibility and will avoid constrictions associated
with the bridge and pond. Larimer County Engineering and Planning are both
supportive of this request. Concerns were site visibility and verification that the nearest
edge of the entrance sign is at least 40 feet from centerline of Tunnel Road.
Planner Shirk stated that during the Master Plan review process, some residents
thought the lighting on the existing entry sign was excessive. Because of that concern,
a condition of approval was placed on the Master Plan of 2007 stating “the overall
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 2
August 18, 2009
lighting plan mentioned on page 35 should be developed within the first year of
approval. Entry lighting should be addressed first.” The applicant proposes to use
internal illumination in order to minimize “light spillage.”
Section 10.5 states, in part, that “signs may not exceed four square feet per face or ten
feet in height.” The applicant is requesting an appeal to this section to allow fewer
large signs rather than more small signs. Larimer County Planning supports this
request. This appeal would not preclude the need for a building permit. These
wayfinding signs are intended to have reflective lettering and not be illuminated.
Section 10.18 of the LCLUC requires “a sign plan shall be prepared for all permanent
signs in nonresidential districts that require a sign permit under this section.” The
applicant has submitted this signage master plan to satisfy this requirement, and as
support for the waiver of future sign permits.
The YMCA of the Rockies Master Plan includes the following signage concepts: 1) A
planned system of signs of the themed image with a consistent style, color and
material, coordinating with other site materials; 2) Wayfinding Signage for both
vehicles and pedestrians, consisting of directional road-side and pedestrian-area
signs, informational kiosks with site maps, and facility name signage; 3) Regulatory
Signage for vehicles that is coordinated with the site sign system; 4) Informational
Signage coordinated throughout the site; 5) Interpretive Signage to educate the visitor
on the site’s historic and natural resources and environmental conservation; and 6)
Major wayfinding signs visible from streets and illuminated for night use.
Planner Shirk stated it is staff’s opinion the signage plan and appeals are consistent
with the policies, goals and objectives of the Estes Valley Plan and YMCA of the
Rockies Master Plan. This request has been submitted to all applicable reviewing
agency staff for consideration and comment. No significant issues or concerns were
expressed. This is a recommendation to the Larimer County Board of County
Commissioners, scheduled to be on the agenda in September.
Public Comment:
Chuck Jordan, Engineer with RLH, stated new signage is important for YMCA guests
due to recent improvements and alterations of the existing roadways. This signage
plan will allow the YMCA to continue to implement their Master Plan. Mr. Jordan noted
the new entrance sign is longer than the existing sign; however, the added length will
be placed towards the bridge and pond rather than extend closer to the road.
Commissioner Hull is supportive of the proposed illumination level of the entrance
sign. Commissioner Poggenpohl commented this master plan is a good improvement;
however, he believes it could be more comprehensive.
It was moved and seconded (Hull/Tucker) to recommend approval of the Signage
Master Plan and Appeals to Larimer County Land Use Code sections 10.2.B and
10.5.L for the YMCA of the Rockies to the Board of County Commissioners with
the findings and conditions recommended by staff, and the motion passed
unanimously.
CONDITIONS:
1. No sign permits shall be required for regulatory signage, informational signage, or
interpretive signage, though plans shall be submitted to Estes Park Community
Development to ensure consistency with the approved master plan and compliance
with sight visibility requirements set forth in Appendix D.IV of the Estes Valley
Development Code.
2. Approval of this plan does not affect any requirements for building permits.
3. All signage shall be of a themed image with a consistent style, color and material,
coordinating with other site materials.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
August 18, 2009
4. Surveyor shall verify nearest edge of entry sign is at least 40-feet from centerline of
“Tunnel Road”.
5. Compliance with memo from Larimer County Engineering dated July 21,2009.
4. LOCATION AND EXTENT/SPECIAL REVIEW 09-01 - STANLEY PARK GRANDSTAND
Metes & Bounds parcel located at 1209 Manford Avenue
Owner: Town of Estes Park
Applicant: Thorp Associates
Request: Redevelop a 1.053 acre area of the Stanley Park Fairgrounds, which
contains the grandstand, and to replace the grandstand.
Planner Chilcott reviewed the staff report. She stated it is the intent of the Estes Park
Urban Renewal Authority and the Town of Estes Park to make a series of
improvements at the existing Stanley Park Fairgrounds, the first of which will be to
replace the 62-year-old Granny May Grandstand with a new facility. The footprint of
the grandstand will be 15,500 square feet with additional restroom, concession, and
ticket booth space under the grandstand of 2,715 square feet. The Stanley Park site is
approximately 42 acres in size, the parcel on which the grandstand is located is
approximately 7.55 acres in size, and the grandstand redevelopment area is just over
an acre in size.
Planner Chilcott stated the new grandstand will front onto the existing arena similar to
the current grandstand. It will provide a safer, more functional and more attractive
grandstand, as well as increase the seating capacity from 2,100 seats to 2,700 seats.
Restrooms and concession areas would also be improved.
Planner Chilcott explained this project is one component of a larger revitalization plan
for Stanley Park Fairgrounds. In 2003, the Board of Trustees adopted the Stanley Park
Revitalization Plan prepared by the Town Board Goal Team #5; in 2005, the Stanley
Park Master Concept Plan was reviewed by Planning Commission and approved by
Town Board; also in 2005, Van Horn Engineering and Surveying completed a Storm
Drainage Master Plan, and Cornerstone Engineering and Surveying began work on
drainage improvements. In 2009, construction plans for a transit hub/paved parking
area on the property was prepared by David Evans and Associates, and the Town is in
the process of securing funding for these improvements. In July, 2009, Kenney
Associates was awarded an architect and engineering service contract for a Multi-
Purpose Event Center and Indoor Arena at the Fairgrounds. Most recently, Thorp and
Associates has prepared Architectural Design Guidelines for Stanley Park to help
guide the new construction and renovation. Parking will be located between the Senior
Center paved parking and the existing paved parking. A proposed multi-purpose event
center will most likely be placed northwest of the grandstand, where the current barns
are located.
Planner Chilcott stated the Stanley Park Fairground is classified as a Major
Entertainment Event use in the CO-Commercial Outlying zoning district and requires
review of a special review application by the Planning Commission with approval by
the Town Board. She submitted this request to reviewing agency staff and adjacent
property owners for consideration and comment. Several agencies commented and
their requests for compliance are included in the conditions for approval. No public
comment was received.
Planner Chilcott stated staff reviewed this application for compliance with the
standards for review in Estes Valley Development Code Section 3.8.D and the special
review standards. This plan complies with minimum required building/structure
setbacks, impervious coverage, and floor area ratio limits. On August 4, 2009, the
applicant was granted a height variance by the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment to
allow the ventilating cupolas on the grandstand to exceed the maximum allowable
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 4
August 18, 2009
height by four feet four inches. Planner Chilcott noted the main roof of the building
complies with the maximum allowable height.
Concerning public trails and private open areas, Planner Chilcott noted the
redevelopment of the grandstand courtyard will improve the pedestrian feel by
removing the asphalt paving and replacing it with colored concrete. Newly constructed
parking lots will also improve the pedestrian connections between parking areas and
the grandstand. No recommendations were made for additional sidewalk construction
at this time.
Planner Chilcott reviewed the requirements for the quantity of trees and shrubs for the
project. The Master Plan calls for a significant amount of landscaping along the
frontage. Staff suggests evaluating the landscaping for the entire Stanley Park, which
would allow for more flexibility in locating required trees and shrubs. For example, staff
would be supportive of installing fewer trees and shrubs in the grandstand courtyard
and planting more elsewhere on the fairgrounds property.
Commissioner Poggenpohl believes the landscaping plan is very important, and thinks
these improvements should have a high priority. He would like the Tree Board to
provide recommendations to the Public Works department.
Planner Chilcott stated the new exterior lighting plan complies with the Estes Valley
Development Code (EVDC). The existing floodlights on the ridgeline of the current
grandstand will be removed and reinstalled on the roof of the new grandstand.
However, they will be located further down the roof, closer to the arena, and will shine
at a lower angle than they currently shine. This will be a slight improvement over the
current situation.
Planner Chilcott stated staff recommended preparing a parking study to evaluate the
full range of uses at the fairgrounds, the potential for shared parkirig between each of
the uses, and the possibility of using off-site parking combined with public transit A
parking study could ensure that parking needs are adequately addressed. The
planned transit hub parking, which includes defined parking spaces, w'11 l:).e a
significant improvement over the current parking situation. This transit hub is a
separately funded phase of the Stanley Park redevelopment, and staff is working to
secure funding for this project from a variety of sources. Thorp Associates has
provided conceptual plans for the intervening 78-space parking lot between the
grandstands and the transit hub parking area in order to begin determining how the
connection between the two areas will work. This connection is important for
compliance with accessible parking regulations as well as drainage PurPoses-
the parking areas are constructed, there will be approximately 346 paved and striped
parking spaces at the fairgrounds. Additional parking may also be cons^ucted during
later phases of redevelopment. Staff recommends evaluating accessible parking for
the grandstand and transit hub as a whole, rather than as independent projects, in
order to gain a better analysis and design. Because lots with defined parking spaces
have higher capacities than those with unmarked spaces. Staff rec°mme"d®
a complete parking study of the entire property. The end r®su't routes
comprehensive plan for overall parking issues, and ensure all the access'ble routes
work. Planner Chilcott stated part of the existing lot does not meet current standards,
and any parking spaces will be an improvement.
Planner Chilcott stated adequate public facility improvements are required jo be
installed concurrent with the impacts of the development. The sani ation district
commented that sewer service lines will need to be studied and properly sized. The
waTeTdepartmLt comments pertained to water-line sizes, which wi re^e revjsio^
to the development plan. The drainage plan is very critical due to the 0cat,°o of he
property in comparison to the lake and the number of animals that will be us'ag the
site The Storm Drainage Master Plan completed by Van Horn Engineering and
Surveying in 2005 envisions most of the water from the grandstand area will dram east
towards Community Drive, eventually entering the existing detention pond near the
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 5
August 18, 2009
Gun Club. There is the possibility of a temporary retention pond on the Stanley Park
property to collect runoff before entering the swale carrying it to the lake area. Staff
believes a drainage plan and report for this phase of redevelopment could evaluate the
conformity with the 2005 Drainage Master Plan and determine if any additional
improvements are needed, or if any state permits and plans need to be obtained or
updated to bring the grandstand drainage system up to current standards.
Staff determined no additional fire hydrants will be required; however, revisions to the
ISO calculations may be required because access to one of the hydrants used in the
calculations is blocked by existing and proposed Stanley Park improvements. Design
details are being discussed by the affected agencies. Planner Chilcott pointed out that
two wet standpipes will be required and should be shown on the development plan.
Colorado Department of Transportation has notified Planner Chilcott they will require a
traffic impact analysis to evaluate needed improvements, if any. This analysis could be
updated as additional redevelopment occurs and could also evaluate options to
improve safety and the impact of increased usage of the Fourth Street access to the
fairgrounds. Just looking at the Grandstand portion of the development may not have
as much impact on traffic as would other projects forthcoming.
Several Planning Commissioners commented about the need for timely completion of
traffic and parking analyses and were concerned about the improvements as they
relate to future redevelopment. Several Commissioners expressed concern about
waiting until issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the grandstand to complete
these studies. There were also concerns about the drainage. Director Joseph
explained the topography of the area, and noted that future projects will affect
drainage. He stated our obligation is to retain the flows from the developed site. He
also said the engineering company is very mindful and focused on water quality and
intent on complying with water quality regulations. This topic is still being discussed
and actively tracked to ensure compliance. The drainage plan will be incrementally
expanded to meet the requirements of each proposed project in Stanley Park.
Commissioner Norris would like a reason on the record for the drainage not going
through the primary detention pond.
Public Comment:
There were no comments from the public.
Commissioner Norris requests adding a condition of approval to refer the landscaping
recommendations from the Tree Board to the Public Works Department.
Commissioner Poggenpohi suggested acceierating the parking and traffic studies due
to the implications on the overall development plan, timing, and cost.
It was moved and seconded (Poggenpohl/Hull) to recommend approval of
Location and Extent/Special Review 09-01 - Staniey Park Grandstand, with the
findings and conditions recommended by staff and modified below, and with the
recommendation that the parking and traffic studies be expedited because of
their implications on the overail development plan, timing, and project costs.
The motion passed unanimousiy.
CONDITIONS:
1. Compliance with the comments in the Estes Park Public Works and Utiiities
Departments memo dated Juiy 24, 2009. This includes revising the development
plan to satisfy the Water Department comments including the comment about
water-line sizes.
2. Compliance with the comments in the Estes Park Fire Department emaiis dated
July 17, 2009 and August 5, 2009. Revised ISO calculations shall be submitted for
review and approval, if required by the Fire Department, and any required
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
August 18, 2009
6
revisions, such as the installation of a wet standpipe, shall be reflected on the
development plan.
3. Compliance with the comments in the Colorado Department of Transportation
email dated August 4, 2009.
4. Sewer service lines will need to be studied to be properly sized.
5. The application shall comply with standards for review in Estes Valley
Development Code Section 3.8.D Standards for Review \s required.
6. Landscaping shall be installed along Manford Avenue as required by the Estes
Valley Development Code.
7. A parking study shall be prepared in accordance with EVDC 7.11.E Parking
Studies tor review and approval and the required amount of parking provided.
8. Accessible parking spaces and accessible routes from those spaces shall be
reviewed with the Building Department and any needed revisions shall be reflected
on the plans.
9. A drainage plan and report for this phase of redevelopment shall be prepared and
required improvements for this phase of redevelopment shall be installed.
10. A traffic impact analysis shall be submitted for review and approval and any
required improvements installed.
11. The redevelopment shall be designed to accommodate a screened and animal-
proof dumpster(s) located to comply with EVDC Section 7.13. The dumpster
location shall be shown on the development plan for review and approval.
12. A Town Board signature block shall be provided rather than a Planning
Commission signature block.
13. The Tree Board shall be engaged in the preparation of final landscape plans for
this project.
5. REPORTS
The Community Development Department has had no pre-application meetings since
the last Planning Commission meeting.
Town Board approved the following projects that were previously reviewed by Planning
Commission: The Neighborhood Preliminary Subdivision Plat, The Meadow Preliminary
Condominium Map, Stone Bridge Estates Preliminary Condominium Map, and
Wonderview Village Supplemental Condominium Map #2
The Board of County Commissioners approved the Binns Amended Plat.
Staff made the changes to the Wildlife Habitat and Assessment code that were
recommended by Planning Commission, and the revisions will be reviewed by Town
Board on August 25, 2009. One of the revisions was to the buffer section, to say that all
development shall provide a setback from any identified important wildlife habitat to the
maximum extent feasible. Planner Chilcott stated the entire Estes Valley is mapped
wildlife habitat. The way the current draft is currently written, these review standards
apply to all development applications whether or not a conservation plan was triggered.
Staff was concerned it would be very unpredictable for developers and difficult for staff
to determine how every development had provided a setback from all important wildlife
habitat to the maximum extent feasible when a conservation plan had not originally
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission
August 18, 2009
been triggered. Language was revised to state all development subject to a wildlife
conservation plan would be reguired to provide a setback in accordance with the
recommendations in the study. Staff wanted to be assured this language was the intent
of the Planning Commission. The Commission agreed on the revision.
Director Joseph reported on the most recent public forum on small-scale residential
wind turbines. He stated this meeting tried to focus discussion on the tougher
regulatory issues, and feels it was a useful discussion and people are beginning to form
opinions. This information will be used to get some type of code language written
during the 120-day moratorium. Commissioner Norris thought the forum was productive
and people brought up a lot of points which he believes will benefit the writing process.
Director Joseph stated a comment was made about whether or not to allow wind
turbines at all, and that person felt staff may be jumping to conclusions by wanting to
write code to regulate them if it was decided to ban them altogether. There vyere
comments both for and against wind turbines, and a large group is still non-committal.
Director Joseph hopes the discussion will help people have an informed deasion. He
stated the moratorium was placed because people were upset we had already 'ssued
several permits prior to any regulations being in place. People are accepting of the
moratorium and its purpose. Commissioner Hull believes the visual impact seerried to
be a real priority to the public. Commissioner Norris believes the Town Board wil make
this a high priority and hopes they will draft a problem statement soon Director Joseph
stated^ staff has done a lot of research on this topic, and soon will have a websde
oaae dedicated to this topic. However, he does not want us to be content with t e
cunent presentation, and would like to continue to add information to the page in order
to allow people to be informed and make well-grounded decisions.
There being no further jrlOink adjourned the meeting^ 7:10 p.m.