Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Planning Commission 1984-01-17BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission January 17, 1984 Commission: Attending: Also Attending: Chairman A1 Sager, Members Duane Blair, George J. Hix, Margaret Houston, Steve Komito, Richard A. Wood and John Carmack All Town Administrator Hill, Attorney White, Public Works Director Widmer, Planner Cole, Secretary Jensen Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting held December 20, 1983 were approved. ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Member George Hix nominated A1 Sager as Chairman of the Planning Commission, Member John Carmack seconded the motion. Member George Hix moved the nominations be closed and the Secretary cast a unanimous ballot. Member Richard Wood seconded the motion and it passed unanimously with Member A1 Sager abstaining from the vote. Member Duane Blair nominated Margaret Houston for Vice-Chairman and Member George Hix seconded the motion. Member Duane Blair then moved the nominations be closed and the Secre­ tary cast a unanimous ballot. Member George Hix seconded the motion and it passed unanimously, with Member Margaret Houston abstaining from the vote. Member Margaret Houston nominated Ann Jensen as Secretary. Member George Hix seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. SRR No. 41 - BOWLING CENTER - REQUEST FOR AN EXCEPTION: In a letter dated January 3, 1984, Mr. John Ownby wrote to request the removal of the buildings on the Bowling Alley Site Plan be stricken from the site plan. Mr. John Ownby, Jr. ex­ plained that until the owner had plans for the property, he did not wish to remove the existing structures. The site plan was intended as a "partial site plan" for the bowling alley only. Public Works Director Widmer stated that the site plan shows both pieces of property and one completion date for the project. Member Richard Wood stated that the public hearing on Special Review Request No. 41 was conducted based on the site plan submitted, and he had a problem with modifying the plan without public input. Chairman Sager stated that without another Special Review Request and public hearing, the Planning Commission would be in error by modifying the plan. Member Duane Blair moved the Planning Commission recommend denial of this request to the Town Board. Member John Carmack seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. C-1 COMMERCIAL ZONE - LOT SIZE AMENDMENT - PUBLIC HEARING: Chairman Al Sager opened a public hearing on a proposed amendment to the C-1 Commercial Zone which would incorporate the minimum lot size requirements as in the C-2 Restricted Commercial Zone. Public Works Director Widmer read the proposed ordinance amending the Code. Those speaking in favor of the amendment, none. Those speaking in opposition to the amendment, none. Mr. Bill Van Horn asked for a point of clarification regarding the possibility of the ordinance affecting a Commercial Subdivision. Director Widmer stated that this amendment will not affect Commercial Subdivisions. Chairman Sager declared the hearing closed. BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - January 17, 1984 - Page 2 Member Richard Wood moved this ordinance amendment be favorably recommended to the Town Board. Member George Hix seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. FALL RIVER ESTATES, THIRD ADDITION - PRELIMINARY PLAT; Mr. Tom Brown, representing the owners, presented Fall River Estates, Third Addition preliminary plat (Section 15, T5N, R73W of the 6th P.M.). The following correspondence was received: National Park Service ..................................................01/06/84 Estes Park Fire Department .......................................01/05/84 Department of Highways..................................................01/06/84 Public Works Director....................................................01/06/84 Water Superintendent ....................................................01/09/84 Light and Power Director ........................................01/09/84 Town Attorney ...................................................................01/10/84 Town Planner .....................................................................01/11/84 Mr. Brown indicated that the comments in the Planner's letter would be taken care of during the Site Development process. In response to the Town Attorney's letter, Mr. Brown stated that he would indicate "private road easement" on the site plan. The wording would be approved by the Town Attorney. In response to the Water Superintendent's letter, Mr. Brown stated the water lines are shown on the plat and the fire protection had been taken into consideration by the Fire Department. Mr. Brov/n did not respond to item 1 in the Public Works Director's letter regarding a 2 inch overlay of 1,425 feet of county road (a town road if annexed) , at an approximate cost of $14,000. Mr. Brown did indicate that item 3 regarding the replatting of Lot 2 to conform to the Municipal Code would be met by subjecting Lot 2 to the Site Development Process. Mr. Maurice Worley, Chairman of the Methodist Church Board of Directors, stated that the Methodist Church owns Lot 1, Block 5 of the Fall River Estates, Third Addition, and requested the Town approve the annexation. Mr. Worley requested the Town consider overlaying Fish Hatchery Road because the road will be used by the church when their building is constructed. A lengthy discussion followed. Member Margaret Houston moved the preliminary plat be accepted with the following conditions: the Town Attorney provide the wording for the road easement and lot 2 be replatted to conform to the requirements of the Code. After a brief discussion. Member Houston withdrew her motion. Member Duane Blair moved the Fall River Estates, Third Addition preliminary plat be accepted with the following conditions: 1. Show road easement as a "private road easement" allowing the Town Attorney to word the dedication to be placed on the plat. 2. Development on lot 2 be subject to the Site Development Process. 3. The cost to overlay Fish Hatchery Road be borne by the developer. Member Richard Wood seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. PROSPECT MOUNTAIN SUBDIVISION, A P.U.D. THIRD FILING - SITE PLAN Mr. Bill Van Horn, representing the owners, presented the final site plan on Prospect Mountain Subdivision, a P.U.D. Third Filing. Mr. Van Horn explained that by developing the property in stages, the owner was able to more fully utilize the property which produces a good finished product. The following correspon­ dence was received: BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - January 17, 1984 - Page 3 Light and Power Director ......................................12/28/83 Estes Park Fire Department ......................................01/04/84 Public Works Director ..................................................01/06/84 Water Superintendent ...................................................01/09/84 Upper Thompson Sanitation District ......................01/09/84 Town Attorney ...................................................................01/10/84 Town Planner .....................................................................01/11/84 A lengthy discussion followed on whether the private drive indicated on the site plan was in fact a private drive or private street. Attorney Greg White stated that it was his opinion that this was a private street and Section 17.60.090 (8) provides that "there shall be no private streets located within a planned unit development". Mr. Van Horn stated that this was a "gray" area and he felt it should be a private drive maintained by the developer rather than a publicly maintained street. Planner Cole stated that she would like to see how the rest of Outlot A v/ill be developed. Mr. Van Horn stated that this could be done. A discussion also ensued on the 30 foot setback on the westerly boundary of the envelopes required in Section 17.60.090 (a) of the Code and filed by the applicant in the original statement of intent. Mr. Van Horn asked the Planning Commission to table Prospect Mountain Subdivision, P.U.D. Third Filing and Site Plan until next month in order to allow him an opportunity to work with the Town Staff regarding the street situation and the 30 foot setbacks on the westerly boundary of the envelopes. Mr. Van Horn indicated that he would provide a site plan for the remainder of Outlot A. Member Richard Wood moved Prospect Mountain Subdivision, a P.U.D. Third Filing be tabled until the February Planning Commission meeting. Member Margaret Houston seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. MANUAL OUTLINE AND CONSULTANT QUALIFICATION STATEMENTS DISCUSSED; The Planning Commission agreed to discuss the Manual Outline at a work session scheduled for Tuesday, February 7, 1984 at 12:00 noon. The Planning Commission would also like to interview the two consultants on the revision of the Zoning Ordinance at that time. Planner Cole will make arrangements for the interviews and send notices to the Planning Commission members. COUNTY REFERRALS: Thunder Mountain Park, a P.U.D. Master Plan. The property is located three miles from National Park Village South on County Road 69B, also known as Tunnel Road (North 1/2 of Section 9, T4N, R73W of the 6th P.M. , Larimer County) . Mr. Paul Kochevar, representing Thunder Mountain Associates (developers of the property), explained that the development would include 41 lots in an E-Estate Zone and that each lot be approximately 2.2 acres, with 51.6 acres of open space for a total of 92.3 acres. The following correspondence was received: Neil Rosener (In support of the development) 01/09/84 To County from National Park Service ............11/22/83 To County from Bureau of Reclamation ................12/02/83 Town Planner (With Attachments) ...........................12/12/83 Mr. Roe Johnson, representing the John Timothy Stone Association, expressed concern about the overall density of the development and the traffic problems which might be created on the County Road. Mr. Wayne Newsom spoke in favor of the development. Chairman A1 Sager asked about secondary access to the property. Mr. Kochevar explained that the owners of the property had an agreement with the YMCA Camp and Bureau of Reclamation to provide access across the Bureau of Reclamation property to the Tunnel Road. A discussion followed on the water situation. Mr. Dwight Dannen, General Partner in Thunder Mountain Associates, explained BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - January 17, 1984 - Page 4 the water system stating that water would be provided through the tunnel, and when that was shut down, they would turn Wind River into the syphon. Chairman A1 Sager asked the Planning Commission members to give their opinions on the project; Al Sager - He recognizes the developers have made an effort to alleviate the problems that were expressed when the development came to the Planning Commission in September, 1983. He feels this is a proper development for this area. Margaret Houston - She is not concerned about the road situation and feels the development is close enough to Town to be adequately taken care of by the Fire Depart­ ment, Sheriff's office, and school system. Richard Wood - He would like to see the road upgraded, but does not see this as a reason to jeopardize the development. George Hix - He likes the project and feels the devel­ opers have tried to meet the concerns of the people. Duane Blair - He is for the project. Steve Komito - He is concerned about the secondary access road and it feels it might be wise to include another secondary access as part of the proposal. John Carmack - Expressed concern about the secondary access road. Big View Acres - Mr. Bill Van Horn, representing the owners, presented the Subdivision Sketch Plan for Big View Acres (Section 17 and 20, T5N, R72W) . The property contains 114 acres with 29 proposed lots and is located on the west side of Dry Gulch Road approximately one-half mile from Town limits. Mr. Van Horn explained that this is a rural development, and as such would have well water and septic systems. A lengthy discussion fol­ lowed on the utilities. The following correspondence was received; Public Works Director ................................................12/22/83 Estes Park Fire Department ......................................12/09/83 Public Works Director Widmer stated that this development would not meet Town standards. Mr. Russell Legg, Larimer County Planner, stated that the County Health Department had some concerns on soils tested in the area. He also stated that Larimer County is currently doing a study on the North End and he would like the Town and County Staffs to review the entire north end when the data has been compiled. Chairman Sager stated that the County is making an effort to identify the situation in the entire north end and he is in favor of staying with the Town staff recommendation, which states the subdivision should be constructed in accordance with all Town standards. Mr. Ned Bramwell, President of the North End Property Owners Association, expressed the Association's concern that this^ remain a low—density area. The Planning Commission agreed with Chairman Sager that the subdivision should be constructed to Town stan­ dards . The discussion of "Proposed Procedures For County Referrals" was postponed. 'own ClerkAnn E. Jensen