HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Planning Commission 1986-02-18BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
/ Planning Commission
February 18,1986
Commission:Chairman A1 Sager, Members Duane Blair,
Mark Brown, Mike Dickinson, George Hix,
Steve Komito, Richard Wood
Attending;All
Also Attending;Town Administrator Hill, Town Attorney
White, Town Engineer Widmer, Town Planner
Stamey, Secretary O'Connor
Absent;None
1. Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting held January 21,
1986 were submitted and approved.
2. SUBDIVISIONS;
2.a. Arapaho Meadows P.U.D.f Phase I - Concept Plan;
Planner Stamey identified the location the subdivision which
is located West and North of Highway 7, East of Marys Lake.
Size of the site is 47.43 acres, number of lots is 33 - the
smallest of which is .53 acres, the largest is 1.14 acres,
common open space is 14.5 acres, the Town will supply the
water service. Upper Thompson Sanitation District will
supply the sewer service, existing zoning is E-1 Estate
(30.67 acres) and E-2 Estate (16.76 acres). Those speaking
in favor of the P.U.D.; Sam A. Luce, property owner. Dr.
Luce stated the proposed P.U.D. creates 33 single-family
residential lots. Road construction will utilize existing
materials with the customary cut and fill to facilitate
uniformity of the slope of the land. All roads will be
paved. Dr. Luce anticipates no changes in the landscape or
scenic views. The use of the open space will be coordinated
with the Estes Valley Recreation and Park District for the
possible development of a golf course. The entire area will
be sold as individual lots with construction to be accom
plished by the owners under the guidelines of the covenants;
owners will also be subjected to building approval by an
Architectural Committee to ensure a pleasing and well
coordinated development. Open space will be open to public
use and access will be obtained by public roads. The
development is scheduled for completion within three (3)
years following approval by the Town. No building permits
will be issued prior to connection of the sewer and water
systems. Dr. Luce requested one revision to the plat which
was submitted with the application: roads in the subdivi
sion were named using historical data concerning indian
tribes who resided in the area; upon further research. Dr.
Luce requested "Sioux Road" be amended to read "Pawnee
Road." Planner Stamey presented the staff report indicating
three (3) maps were submitted. The "colored" map indicated
common open space, building envelope, open space water and
drainage, open space buffer and public street right-of-way.
Correspondence was received from the following:
Water Department...........................................02/12/86
Light and Power Department.....................02/03/86
Upper Thompson Sanitation District..02/12/86
State Highway Department.........................02/11/86
National Park Service................................02/07/86
State Geological Survey............................02/12/86
Planner Stamey advised he, along with Town Engineer Widmer
and the State Highway Department held a meeting to discuss a
possible second public access to State Highway 7. A meeting
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Planning Commission - February 18, 1986 - Page two
with the National Park Service was also held to clarify
locations of open space in relation to elk habitat. Town
Attorney White advised he had concerns regarding the un
availability of water at this time and, that at the time of
final platting, documentation is required regarding mainte
nance and ownership of the open space. In rebuttal. Dr.
Luce informed the Commission that if the open space is not
developed as a golf course within three (3) years, the open
space will be incorporated under the management of a proper
ty owners organization. Also clarified was the 30-foot
buffer area along the east side of Lot 5, Block B, not Lot
1. Those expressing concerns: Ralph Read, Carriage Hills,
who had the following comments: the developer was crowding
too many lots on too small a piece of property; a more
suitable location for the access road would be in the
northeast section of the property; and tree plantings. Mr.
Al Velthoen had the following comments: the wet meadow
should remain undeveloped open space - the roadway would cut
the meadow in half; more consideration should be given as to
the placement of the lots to retain the natural beauty; and
availability of water service. Town Attorney White stated
the Planning Commission's role in reviewing the concept plan
was to ensure that if problems are evident, that they are
corrected prior to final plat approval. If substantial
deviations from the concept plan occur, the developer would
be required to resubmit the plan to the Planning Commission.
The Commission does not have the ability to regulate size of
lots; however, the subdivision must conform to setback and
zoning requirements prior to approval. Following dis
cussion, Member Wood moved Arapaho Meadows P.U.D.Phase I
Concept Plan be approved subject to the following con
ditions :
1. A note be placed on the final plat and included in
the covenants stating: No building permits shall
be issued within Arapaho Meadows until a con
nection is made to the Town's water service.
2. A note be placed on the final plat and included in
the covenants that addresses efforts to reduce
off-site visibility of development on Lots 1
through 3, Block A, and Lots 1 through 5, Block B.
This note should include criteria such as building
siting and placement, cut and minimal
disruption of natural vegetation, building colors
and materials, re-vegetation and landscaping.
Detail is to be shown as part of the development
plan submittal prior to construction on these
sites. (Ideally, more detailed development
guidelines should be prepared for the entire
subdivision).
3. As part of the final plat and development plan,
landscaping treatment be shown for the 30-foot
buffer area along the east side of Lot 5, Block B,
and along its northeasterly extension, south of
Arapaho Road. As a guide, one tree per 30 lineal
feet should be installed, preferably in natural
appearing groupings.
4. A note be placed on the final plat that addresses
setback requirements for building envelopes, as
more fully outlined in Section V - Concerns and
Issues.
5. The southerly lot lines of Lots 3 and^ 4, Block B,
be modified by reducing their extension into the
meadow area.
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Planning Commission - February 18, 1986 - Page three
That a note be placed on the final plat and
incorporated in the covenants which restricts the
location, height and type of fencing in the
subdivision. Generally, fences should be no
higher than 40", should not be barb wire and
should be of uniform-type construction.
The Annexation Agreement between Luce and the Town
be amended to allow for a portion of Phase I
development to occur north of the "development
line" without providing the northerly access.
Provision of a deceleration lane for Highway 7 at
its intersection with Arapaho Road, in accordance
with standards set by the Colorado Department of
Highways.
Incorporation of the following engineering con
cerns in final plat submittal:
a.Street Grades: The engineering design draw
ings submitted with the final plat must
indicate compliance with the design standards
included in the Subdivision Regulations. Of
special concern are:
• Minimum grade no less than 0.4%; Maximum
grade no greater than 10%; these grades are
minimums and maximums, not average grades.
• Grades approaching intersections: no
greater than 4% within 100-feet of the
intersection; 3% maximum at the inter
section.
• 100-foot tangents are required between
reverse curves.
• Intersections should be designed at right
angles where possible; this may mean
redesign of the southern Ute/Arapaho
intersection by moving Arapaho to the east
with a larger radius curve or a combination
of a move and curve to allow more room for
Ute to intersect at right angles.
• Vertical curves must be designed between
all grade breaks.
Drainage: A drainage study complying with the
Larimer County Stormwater Management Manual
must be submitted with the final plat. This
study must be prepared by a professional
engineer registered in Colorado, and must
analyze historic vs. developed runoff for the
100-year storm. In order to not increase the
flows on downstream property above the histor
ic rate, detention will be required.
Culverts at the following locations must be
designed to pass the 100-year flows: 60' west
of State Highway 7 on Arapaho; 320' west of
State Highway 7 on Arapaho; on Arapaho between
Lots 2 and 3, Block A; on Arapaho between lots
2 and 3, Block B; and on Ute below the dam.
The remainder of the culverts may be designed
to pass the 10-year storm, with overflows to
handle the 100-year event.
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Planning Commission - February 18, 1986 - Page four
Drainage easements must be platted on the
final plat for all drainage channels crossing
lots or open spaces.
c. Street Curbs: Asphalt curbs shall be in
stalled on both sides of Ute along Lots 7, 8
and 9, Block A and along Lots 6 through 10,
Block C. This curb shall be a Colorado
Department of Highways Type 6 Curb, installed
in accordance with the Colorado State Highway
Department specifications.
d. Street Design: Street design will be based
upon a "soils report" prepared by a registered
professional engineer for the portion of
Arapaho from State Highway 7 to the north line
of Lot 3, Block A and for the portion of Ute
below the existing dam. Street right-of-way
should have a 25-foot radius at all inter
sections .
10.
11.
12,
Incorporation of Upper Thompson Sanitation Dis
trict requirements in final plat and development,
which includes: extension standards, plsn and
profile, easements, size of collection system,
ownership and maintenance of lines, and developer
responsibilities.
Upon submittal of the final plat, documentation is
required regarding open space management.
Include in the drainage study details on the
stability of the earthen dam on the site.
Member Brown seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
The public hearing to consider Arapaho Meadows will take
place at the next Town Board meeting scheduled for Tuesday,
February 25, 1986.
3. GENERAL BUSINESS:
3.a. Review and discussion of proposed Planning Co^issi^
Bv-Laws: The Commission reviewed a draft copy of By Laws.
The By-Laws contained: Organization and Officers including
Responsibilities, Duties and Powers; Meetings g
Public Meetings, Regular Meetings, Continued Meetings,
Special Meetings, Study Session.s/Work,sh°ps' A5®?faprocedure^
Meetings, Motions, Voting; Review and
and Adoption. The Commission expressed a desire to aiviae
the preliminary copy into two segments which would
By-Laws (organization of the Commission) and the Rules of
Procedure. No further action was
allow Town Attorney White an opportunity to rev
By-Laws.
4. REPORTS:
4.a. Town Planner Stamey reported a P"5litCo WS^cu?I the
tentatively been set for March 13, 1986 to discuss tne
Residential Zoning Revisions. Mr. Ph1.1 Her^. ^1^3^eaP|eTown
to conduct the workshop. A meeting with Ph1.3;.TOWn
officials will be scheduled for either the 13th or 14th.
4 b. Member Hix and Town Planner Stamey attended a workshop
with the Larimer County Comprehensive Plan Review Committee.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned.
Vickie’O'Connor, Secretary