Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Estes Valley Planning Commission 2001-10-16BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Planning Commission October 16, 2001,1:30 p.m. Board Room (Room 130), Estes Park Municipal Building Commission: Attending: Chair Joyce Kitchen, Commissioners Wendell Amos, DeeDee Hampton, Ed McKinney, Cherie Pettyjohn, Edward Pohl, and Dominick Taddonio Chair Kitchen, Commissioners Amos, Hampton, McKinney, Pettyjohn, Pohl, and Taddonio Also Attending: Town Board Liaison Habecker, Town Attorney White, Director Joseph, Planner Shirk, Planner Chilcott and Recording Secretary Wheatley Absent:None Chair Kitchen calied the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. 1. CONSENT AGENDA a. Estes Valley Planning Commission Minutes dated September 17 & 18 2001 b- preliminary condo map. THE WOODLANDS CONDOMINIUMS AnniiAnnt. The Woodlands on Fall River, Inc. It was moved and seconded (Pohl/Pettyjohn) that the Consent Agenda be accepted and It passed unanimously. 2. PUBLIC COMMENT Bill Van Horn, speaking for other members of the North End Property Owners, advised it is their opinion that the development plan for the church should be reviewed by the Plannino Commission prior to approval of the zoning of the Good Samaritan Addition. Town Attorney White advised that this issue will be brought before the Town Board on Tuesday, October 23,2001, and should be included in the annexation agreement should the Town Board choose to do that. 'lonyuiu Director Joseph advised that the waiver of the church development plan prior to review does not waive the requirement of a development plan for the church site at a later date should the project proceed. ?toneJgaLte Drive> asked for clarification on the review process and Town Attorney White advised that the Planning Commission would be reviewing the Preliminary w^.ih'kL0676 0pr!IlntTlan t«day with the contin9ency that the Annexation and Rezoning would be approved by Town Board on October 23, 2001. y Director Joseph advised that the affordable housing development plan submittal has been Departrnentd 'S available t0 the public in the offices of the Community Development Town Board Member Habecker advised that the issue of rezoning has not yet been approved and advised the public that they could present their issues at the Town Board meeting. 3- ^ELIMINARY PLAT, GOOD SAMARITAN FIRST AND SECOND ADDITION. Annlirant- Tho Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society. Town Attorney advised again that the rezoning and annexation would be heard at the Town Board and not reviewed today by the Planning Commission. BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission - October 16,2001 Page 2 Randy Davis, representative of the Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society, was present and gave a brief history on why this parcel was chosen. In most cases, either land or buildings have been donated to Good Samaritan to develop their other facilities. This was not the case in Estes Park. This parcel allowed for the sale of the eight lots to the north to help subsidize the development. Other parcels were either too costly or too small. The partnering with the Housing Authority and the Lutheran Church has been beneficial to all parties. Kerry Prochaska, engineer and representative for Good Samaritan, reviewed the proposal for the Preliminary Plat which was originally submitted August 24, 2001. The portion of Stonegate Drive connecting Dry Gulch to Ptarmigan Trail will be paved and upgraded to public street standards. The road layout and acreage layouts were reviewed. Mr. Prochaska answered questions from the Planning Commissioners. There are building envelopes and deed restrictions on the eight single family lots so they cannot be further subdivided. Mr. Davis advised that he has a list of approximately 150 people who have shown interest in the project. Approximately 90 are from the Estes Park area. Final charges for rents and purchasing costs cannot be determined at this time; however, he reviewed their Loveland facility fees as a baseline comparison. Director doseph with assistance from Planner Shirk reviewed the staff report. This is an subdivision application will subdivide a 62-acre parcel into three open space lots two multi- family development lots, one senior assisted living lot, eight single-family residential lots, and dedicate street rights-of-way and various pedestrian and utility easements. This subdivision propos^'s in conjunction with annexation, rezoning, and development plan review requests mr the Good Sarnaritan” senior assisted living proposal. Staff recommends the Ptarmigan I ran - Dry Gulch Road intersection be redesigned to comply with the Code which stipulates g^rade at intersections should be 3% or less. Approval of this proposal includes Planning Comm'ss'on approva! of a minor modification to Appendix D (ll)(G) to allow horizontal turn radn of less than the 200 feet required for a collector street. This proposal meets applicable nIfhiiiafrdS|^et f0 nh !!I C!l?pter 7 of the EVDC’ and sPecifical|y those regarding adequate public facilities. Public Works Staff has approved the submitted drainage report and the general geometry of the water line and roadway. The final roadway construction plan should ensure a s'te d'stance of 450 feet at both Dry Gulch intersections. The Developer should contact Honda Corporation to discuss the water line contract fee. In response to questions from the Commissioners, Mr. Prochaska advised that there would a,?^>'tectural controls. He also noted that when engineering the road curves, the portion of Ptarmigan Trail with the tighter curves was assumed to be a local f Innlirctthertthan a C0 le?0r street- Director Joseph reviewed the different requirements for a local street as opposed to a collector street. Public Comment: wnniH^ho'dilf3 StI°He9fte DriVJe’ commented regarding the elk corridors and asked what would be done with the topsoil during the construction phase. Al Sager, 911 S. St. Vrain, asked why the wider curve could not be continued which would .ra^°ve ihe aee(? forIthe two except'ons. Director Joseph advised that the curves do meet ThQ t-aH?ard f0r loca. ,streets- Collector streets are designed with a minimum radii required. The tighter cuives will reduce the speed that can be used. Director Linnane advised that the speed limit will be initially set at 30 mph and that the radii of the two curves are acceptable to the Public Works Department. H Bill Van Horn commented that maybe there was a need to change the standards for collector sireeis. Mr. Prochaska advised that there would be no fencing allowed except to protect landscaping BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission - October 16,2001 Page 3 to allow free movement of the elk. The reason for emphasizing the wetlands was to provide protection for elk and other wildlife. There will be a phased approach to construction so that the entire area wouid not be stripped of topsoil at one time. The topsoil will be re-seeded and revegetated with a maintenance program to remove noxious weeds. The stockpiled topsoil will be covered to minimize the wind effect. Mike Kellum, 1170 Meadow Lane, questioned the driveway maintenance agreement. The public hearing was ciosed. It was moved and seconded (Amos/McKinney) to recommend approval to the Town Board of Trustees of the Preliminary Piat of the Good Samaritan First and Second Addition with the foiiowing conditions, and it passed unanimously. 1. Addition of the following note: “Lots 5 and 7 shall not receive access from Ptarmigan Trai|.” 2. Redesign the Ptarmigan Traii - Dry Gulch Road intersection to comply with Appendix D (1)(F) 2. 3. Finai roadway construction plan shall ensure a site distance of 450 feet at both Dry Gulch intersections. 4. Any re-routing of existing electric line shali require an easement. 5. Acceptance of an improvement guarantee. 6. The foiiowing wiidlife mitigation techniques shali be inciuded in the recorded covenants: a. Unless stored in bear-proof containers, trash shali not be left out overnight and residents are not to feed wildlife. b. Residents are hereby notified hunting is aliowed within the unincorporated portion of Larimer County. 7. Shared maintenance agreement for the driveway serving Lots 5,6 & 7 shall be provided with the Finai Piat. 8. This approval is contingent upon acceptance of the rezoning and annexation by the Town Board. DEVELOPMENT PLAN 01-14. GOOD SAMARITAN VILLAGE. Applicant: The Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society. Kerry Prochaska, engineer, and Steve Lane, architect, were present to answer questions. Planner Shirk reviewed the staff report. This is a proposal to develop a 104-unit senior living campus, consisting of duplex, congregate, and assisted care living facilities with an internal pedestrian network and associated landscaping. This proposal meets applicable density, floor area ratio, lot coverage, and setback requirements for the “RM” district as weli as meeting applicable standards set forth in Chapter 7 of the EVDC, with the exception of landscaping and loading standards. Section 7.5.C.2 specifies that alternatives to the minimum quantities set forth in the landscaping requirements may be authorized by the Planning Commission provided the proposed landscaping is equivalent to that specified by the code in providing visual appeal, screening, shading and restoration of disturbed areas. It is Staff’s opinion the submitted landscaping plan meets the objectives of the landscaping plan with five minor modifications outiined in the conditions of approval. Based on a submitted parking study. Staff has applied modified loading calculations to aliow for a single loading space for the congregate and assisted living faciiity buildings. This proposal meets standards for adequate public facilities outlined in the EVDC. The proposed congregate living facility wili require a height variance. Pianner Shirk answered questions from the Commission. Mr. McKinney requested that a walkway be added between Units 406 and 407. Kerry Prochaska advised that the trail system was designed for ADA accessibility and that this was omitted due to the steep slope. Commissioner McKinney still requested it for a “destination” walk with steps and handrails. Commissioner Hampton suggested that a path be postponed for one year to determine use. It was agreed to wait and aliow occupants to determine the need for this walkway. BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission - October 16, 2001 Page 4 Commissioner Pettyjohn questioned whether the landscaping requirement was too restrictive. Mr. Prochaska advised that based on the code requirements, the cost would be $748,000 for landscaping, which included the drip irrigation, fencing and maintenance. Planning Commission reviewed the site-specific landscaping needs. Steve Lane, architect, answered questions from the Commission. The duplexes would be built with high quality stone veneer. The breezeway between the congregate and assisted living buildings would be an enclosed breezeway. There will be architectural guidelines for the duplexes which will pass any architectural review requirements. Chair Kitchen called for a 5-minute recess. Public Comment: Betty Hull, 1723 Stonegate Drive, and Barney Treadway, 2100 McGraw Ranch Road, asked the Commission not to reduce the landscaping requirements. Bill Van Horn asked for a copy of the annexation agreement (which would be available in the next couple of days). Per Master Plan, the character of openness is to be preserved in the North End. Al Sager questioned the standard for number of private residences on a private driveway. Multi-family projects have not fit with this single family subdivision standard. Commissioner Taddonio asked for clarification regarding the condition of approval for the variance to allow for the 43-foot height. It was moved and seconded (Amos/Hampton) to approve Development Plan 01-14, Good Samaritan Village with the following conditions, and It passed. Those voting yes: McKinney, Hampton, Pohl, Amos, and Pettyjohn. No: Kitchen and Taddonio. 1. Approval of the Annexation Agreement. 2. Approval of the proposed Good Samaritan Subdivision and Annexation. 3. Approval of the requested rezoning from “RE-1” to “RM”. 4. Approval of a variance to allow for the 43-foot maximum height of the congregate building. 5. Compliance with Public Works Director Linnane’s comments dated October 1, 2001, regarding final construction plans. 6. Submittal of a Revised Development Plan incorporating the following; a. Revisions to signature blocks, “Greg Amble, include titld' and replace ‘Town of Estes Park Community Development, Robert B. Joseph” with “Joyce Kitchen, Chair” b. Addition of the following notes; (1) “All intersections with Ptarmigan Trail shall have stop signs installed to M.U.T.C.D. standards. c. Revised site pian including; (1) Addition of bicycle racks. (2) Redesign of “700” unit driveway so as not to overlap with the sidewalk. (3) Redesign of the parking aisles to be widened to 22 feet for one-way traffic, with M.U.T.C.D. standard signs to be provided. (4) Consolidate drives for units 501 and 502. d. Revised Landscaping Plan, to be reviewed and approved by Community Development Staff, incorporating the following: (1) Additional landscaping shall be located along Dry Gulch Road, and should include Narrowleaf Cottonwood and conifers. (2) Note 9 on the landscape plan shall be amended to read “All trees to be staked or guyed and fenced to protect from wildlife damage.” (3) Note 10 on the landscape plan shall be amended to read, “All landscaped areas shall be automatic drip irrigated and all plant materials maintained in a healthful condition.” (4) The following note shall be placed on the landscape plan: “Department of Wildlife BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission - October 16, 2001 Page 5 shall not be responsible for damage by wildlife.” (5) The following note shall be placed on the landscape plan: “All plant material shall meet the American Association of Nurserymen specifications for Number 1 grade, and shall comply with the quality standards of the Colorado Nursery Act, Title 35, Article 26, C.R.S., as amended.” 5. PRELIMINARY PLAT. SOLITUDE SUBDIVISION. Applicant: Frederic and Susan Carlson. Town Attorney White advised this property was annexed to the Town at the last Town Board meeting. Paul Kochevar, representing the applicant, reviewed the proposal. The name for the street is still under review. The water line which serves the Parrot property (not a service line) will be rerouted to go between Lot 4 and Lot 5. The storm water berm to prevent water from coming off Fish Creek Road will be in the 15-foot hike/bike easement. Public Comment: Joe Arnold, owner of the property immediately to the south, had concerns about elk habitat, night sky lighting (light pollution), and slope. The two existing little cabins are non- conforming and should be removed. Public hearing was closed. It was moved and seconded (McKinney/Amos) to recommend approval to the Town Board of Trustees of the Preliminary Plat of the Solitude Subdivision with the following conditions, and it passed unanimously. 1. The preliminary Plat title shall state that the Solitude Subdivision is a resubdivision of Lot 1, Carlson Addition. 2. The preliminaiy plat shall include a legend that describes ail symbols shown on the plat, including the lighting, fire hydrant, and transformer, and junction box symbols. 3. The final plat shall contain a note indicating that those non-conforming cabins that are to remain are not made conforming by approval of the final plat. 4. The current access for the house that crosses Lot 1, Block 2 shall be formally abandoned so that the access does not encumber Lot 1, Block 2 following approval of the final subdivision plat. 5. A fifteen (15) foot hike/bike trail easement shall be provided along Fish Creek Road. 6. The preliminary plat shall show the sidewalk location and the street utility plan shall be revised to show a six-foot sidewalk. 7. The preliminary plat shall show where, within utility easements, the existing overhead power lines will be relocated and buried or a note shall be added to the preliminary plat stating that existing overhead power lines shall be relocated and buried underground within the utility easements. 8. A note shall be included on the final construction drawings stating that street light fixtures will be purchased from the Town of Estes Park Light and Power Department and shall be paid for at the applicant’s expense. 9. The existing waterline serving the Parrot property shall be relocated into utility easements shown on this Plat. 10. Existing development on site shall be connected to Town water. 11. The timing of connecting the existing development to Town water shall be addressed in the subdivision improvement agreement. 12. The property shall be included in the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. 13. The Protective Covenants Section 2. (J) provisions for single-family dwellings with private offices shall be removed. 14. The Protective Covenants shall restrict the use of each unit to accommodations use and shall use the same definition of accommodations use as the Estes Valley Development Code Section 13.3.6. 15. A copy of the recorded Protective Covenants shall be submitted to the Town within thirty (30) days of Final Plat approval. 16. Approval of the street name by the Fire Chief. BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission - October 16, 2001 Page 6 PRELIMINARY PLAT. STAUFFER ADDITION. Applicant: John H. and Stanley H. Stauffer. Kerry Prochaska was present representing the applicant. Planner Shirk gave a brief review of the staff report. This application is for a minor subdivision to divide one lot into two lots. The parcel is currently developed with a single-famiiy dwelling unit with associated outbuildings. Riverside Drive bisects the lot. This plat would dedicate 55 feet of right-of-way for Riverside Drive and create two separate lots. The site contains a mapped wildfire hazard and 30% slopes in the southeast portion of the lot, a mapped geologic hazard in the northwest portion of the lot, several mature ponderosa pine trees, and approximately 300 feet of Big Thompson river frontage. The applicant proposes to annex the property to the Town upon recording of the subdivision plat. Based on the existing trail and the potential for accommodation and/or multi-family residential development on proposed Lot 1, and specific Code provisions. Staff recommends dedication of a trail easement along the existing trail. The applicant has requested the trail dedication be delayed until a development plan is submitted. It is their position the dedication of a trail easement may hinder the sale of the property, which could be marketed as a single-family lot. The site contains mature trees and important riparian wildiife habitat that should be protected with limits of disturbance. The extreme southeastern portion of the subdivision contains a mapped wildfire hazard. Staff suggests a LOD that sets aside the river setback, fioodplain, steep slopes, and wooded area. No significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff relative to Code compliance or the provision of public services. Kerry Prochaska of Cornerstone Engineering was present representing the applicants. The applicant does not want to dedicate a trail easement that would encourage trespass from adjacent properties. The requirement of two easements, one along the roadway and one along the river, and the construction of a sidewalk is not a reasonable requirement. A reservation for a pedestrian right-of-way would be preferable to an easement at this time. Director Joseph commented that the trail construction could be postponed until the property is deveioped. Reservations should not generally be used in place of easements which are shown on the plat; however, since the future development on this property is in question, a reservation wouid be allowable in this instance. The need for a sidewalk is evident, but the burden of construction couid be postponed to when the property is developed. Public Comment: John Spooner, 527 Hondius Circle, owns the property along the south. There is a sidewalk already to the west and sidewalks are needed along the roadway. Timberlane’s cabins are right down by the river and would be a poor connection for a river walkway. Suggested Lot 2 be rezoned as E-1, consistent with the surrounding lots south of Riverside Drive. Connie Phipps, 585 Wonderview Avenue, is the realtor working with the applicant. Existing trail along the river has been created primariiy by guests at Timberlane. A street location for the trail/sidewalk would be preferable. The lower lot will likely be developed. It was moved and seconded (Amos/Hampton) to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat of the Stauffer Minor Subdivision to the Board of County Commissioners with the foiiowing conditions and the motion passed. Those voting yes: McKinney, Hampton, Pohl, Amos and Taddonio. Those voting no: Kitchen and Pettyjohn. Submittal of a Revised Plat incorporating the following: 1. Reservation of a 10-foot wide pedestrian easement within the 50-foot river setback subject to dedication upon adjacent trail development connecting to the east or west; and the dedication of a 10-foot pedestrian easement along the north side of Riverside Drive subject to that being built at the time of development of Lot 1. 2. Delineation of a limits-of-disturbance that incorporates mature trees, steep slope areas, river setback, and floodplain. 3. Rename the plat to “Stauffer Subdivision.” BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission - October 16,2001 Page 7 4. 5. The plat shall have appropriate dedication statement and signature blocks added. The dedication statement shall be subject to review and approval by the Town Attorney. A note shall be added to the plat: “Limits of disturbance shall apply unless as modified by a site specific development. 7. REPORTS Currently under Staff Review; Development Plan for Colorado Mountain School and Development Plan for Oliver’s Cottages. Mrs. Chavez, neighbor to Oliver’s Cottages, expressed concern regarding her sewer service being cutoff due to the redevelopment of Oliver’s Cottage, as well as the excess cars at the neighboring property. Town Attorney White assured her the sewer service would not be cut off. Director Joseph advised that the Code Enforcement Official would check into the excess vehicle problem to ascertain if any codes were being violated. There being no further business, Chair Kitchen adjourned the meeting at 5:52 p.m.