Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Planning Commission 1986-05-20BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS /Planning Coinniission May 20, 1986 Commission; Attending: Also Attending: Absent: Chairman A1 Sager, Commissioners David Barker, Duane Blair, Mark Brown, Mike Dickinson, George Hix, Steve Komito Chairman Sager, Commissioners Barker, Blair, Brown, Dickinson, Komito Town Attorney White, Town Administrator Hill, Town Planner Stamey, Town Engineer Widmer, Secretary O'Connor Commissioner Hix Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting held April 15, 1986 were submitted and approved. SPECIAL REVIEW: 2. a. Special Review Request #86-2 - Rocky Mountain Park Tour Company: Mr. Chris Pedersen, President, Rocky Mountain Park Tours, Inc., submitted a Special Review Application seeking approval to operate tours on an hourly schedule through Estes Park and adjacent areas utilizing a dou­ ble-decker English bus. Primary streets utilized include: Elkhorn Avenue, Big Horn Drive, Virginia Drive, Park Lane, MacGregor Avenue, U. S. Highway 34, including the By-Pass, Moraine Avenue, Marys Lake Road, Peak View Drive and Highway 7. Drop-off/Pick-up points include: • Parking Lot #1 - East of the Municipal Building (Temporary). • Area south of the Municipal Building, when Transit Center is constructed. • Tregent Park Loading Zone. • Motels/Hotels along the proposed routes, including The Stanley Hotel, Inn at Estes Park and the Holiday Inn. • Former bus station site, 231 Moraine Avenue (Tempo­ rary) . Headquarters for the operation is proposed at the "Rock Inn", which is located outside Town Limits. There were no comments in "favor" of or in "opposition" to the special review request. Commissioner Brown moved Special Review Request #86-2 - Rocky Mountain Park Tour Company be favorably recommended to the Board of Trustees. Commissioner Barker seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. SUBDIVISIONS: 3. a. Ricciardi Subdivision: The site is located at the southwest corner of MacGregor Avenue and U. S. Highway 34 By-Pass. Two lots are proposed with Lot 1 containing 4,822 square feet and Lot 2 containing 11,213 square feet. Existing Zoning is R-2 Multiple Family. The Planning Commission approved this proposed subdivision on March 19, 1985. However, the plat was never submitted to the Board of Trustees for final approval and is being re-submitted. There were no persons present representing the applicant. Those speaking in "favor" of the subdivision, none; those BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - May 20, 1986 - Page two speaking in "opposition", none, the staff report. Planner Stamey presented Commissioner Brown stated that there are special circum­ stances or conditions affecting the property; that the exception is necessary for the preservation and the enjoy­ ment of a substantial property right of the petitioner; that the granting of the exception will not be materially detri­ mental to the public welfare or injurious to the other property in the neighborhood in which the property of the petitioner is situated or in conflict with the purposes and objectives of Title 16; and moved Ricciardi Subdivision be favorably recommended to the Board of Trustees contingent upon the following conditions; 1. Provision of separate sanitary sewer service lines to the residential buildings located on Lots 1 and 2 prior to the closing of sale of either parcel or subject to a written agreement between the property owner and the Estes Park Sanitation District regard­ ing the provision of separate sewer service. 2. Dedication of a 10' wide utility easement for the existing natural gas line. Location of such ease­ ment to be determined in conjunction with the Public Service Company. Commissioner Dickinson seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. 4. DEVELOPMENT PLANS; 4. a. Development Plan #86-1 - Overlook Condominiums (Revised); Mr. Greg LaRock/Architect, representing the owners, presented the revised development plan of Overlook Condominiums. The development plan was tabled by the Planning Commission April 15, 1986. Previous major concerns expressed by the Commission have been addressed and the plan is now in conformance. Mr. LaRock stated staff recommenda­ tions have been accepted; the property owner will also comply with comments submitted by referral agencies. Planner Stamey summarized the staff report. There were no persons speaking in "favor" of or in "opposition" to the development plan. Commissioner Dickinson moved Development Plan #86-1 Overlook Condominiums (Revised) be approved subject to the following conditions; 1. Obtain signatures of owners/lienholders on the Development Plan. 2. Right-of-way dedication executed by separate docu­ ment containing language with regard to relocation of parking upon opening of the right-of-way. Covenants also need to address this issue. 3. Include a note stating that the Condominium Asso­ ciation shall relocate said parking and drainage within ninety (90) days of notification by the Town that relocation is required. 4. Include a note stating that the east property line is to be landscaped in accordance with the Municipal Code. BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Coininission - May 20, 1986 - Page three 5. Include a note on Sheet 3 of the plat stating that landscaping shall be in accordance with Town regu­ lations . 6. Relocate the 6" water line 5' to the west and provide water taps as specified by the Water Depart­ ment. 7. Provide manholes as specified by the Estes Park Sanitation District. 8. The amended covenants shall provide for maintenance of the roads and relocation of the parking and drainage area by the Town in the event of failure of the owners or the condominium association to do same. Commissioners Brown seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. 4.b. Development Plan #86-2 - Estes Park United Methodist Church: Mr. Paul Kochevar, representing the owners, submit­ ted the aforementioned development plan. The proposed site is located on Lot 1, Third Addition, Fall River Estates. Construction of a church of approximately 11,680 square feet is being proposed. Initial development contains 33 parking spaces. Provision has been made for 47 additional parking spaces, which, under the proposal, would be paved within one (1) year of receiving a "Certificate of Occupancy." Planner Stamey summarized the staff report. Building elevations shown on Sheet A-3 of the plat indicate an average building height of 37.6'. Building height is limited to 30' unless a greater height is authorized by Special Review. The proposed parking area located on the south side of Fish Hatchery Road (Lots 3 and 4) is subject to a 49-year lease agreement. The Planning Commission expressed concern regarding the time-limit of the agreement. There were no comments in "favor" of or in "opposition" to the development plan. Commissioner Brown moved Development Plan #86-2 - Estes Park United Methodist Church be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicants seek approval of the proposed building height through the Special Review process, or modify the building to meet the 30' height limitation. 2. ' Indicate on the Development Plan: a.Existing trees in the area of the entrance to the church. driveway b.Radii of curves. c.Remove grading lines from the State right-of-way. Highway d.Required landscape areas. e.Split-rail fence. f.Dimension of building and building setback from the north and south property lines. g-Dimension of parking spaces at the corner of the site. northwest h.Re-vegetation of graded areas beyond and asphalt coverage. building BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - May 20, 1986 - Page four i. That landscaping on the south side of Fish Hatchery Road will occur with parking lot development. j. Landscape area between parking and the north side of Fish Hatchery Road. 3. An appropriate landscape proposal be developed to visually soften the building from U. S. Highway 34. Note; If the applicants seek a building height of more than 30', this landscape plan should be a part of the Special Review submittal. Otherwise, the landscaping proposal should be submitted at the time of application for a building permit. 4. Modify parking as follows; a. Eliminate six-space bay adjacent to Fall River, which would result in a net reduction of three spaces. b. Locate additional parking (approximately seven spaces) on the south side of the church drive, extending east of the three-space bay. c. Consider changing the eight-space bay at the northwest corner to "compact cars only", which would result in a total of nine spaces. 5. Upon expiration of the current lease, an option be included to renew the lease agreement for another 49 years. Commissioner Barker seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. 4.C. Development Plan #86-3 - Cleave Street Parking Lot; Mr. Art Anderson/Executive Director/Estes Park Urban Renewal Authority, submitted Development Plan #86-3. The project will involve site preparation (clearance and grading) and construction of a new parking lot at the northwest corner of Cleave Street and Big Horn Drive. Ten parking spaces currently exist. The development will create a total of 41 parking spaces. A significant amount of landscaping is proposed, primarily in the form of a "pocket park" along Cleave Street. A rendering of the proposed landscape plan was also presented. Demolition of the residence and commer­ cial structure are currently underway. The parking lot could be operational by July 1st. Planner Stamey summarized the staff report. No comments were received from the audience. Commissioner Dickinson moved Development Plan #86-3 - Cleave Street Parking Lot be approved contingent upon the following conditions; 1. A note be placed on the Development Plan stating that at such time as the curb line is moved to the north, all parking will comply with the 8' setback. 2. The existing water line service be utilized or disconnected in accordance with Water Department specifications. 3. The sewer line be capped in accordance with the Estes Park Sanitation District specifications. BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - May 20, 1986 - Page five 4. One (1) extra McGraw-Edison wall-lighting fixture be provided as replacement stock for the Light and Power Department. 5. The curb and gutter detail shown on Sheet 3 could have an 18" pan section in lieu of the 24" shown. 6. The two entrance gutters should be a minimum of 6' wide (preferably 8') in lieu of 4' as shown. 7. Details of the landscaping and sprinkler system should be provided to the Town for approval prior to construction. 8. One of the odd-shaped areas could be designated for motorcycle parking by construction of a concrete pad. 9. Several PVC sleeves should be provided to contain sprinkler lines and control wires parallel to the 3/4" galvanized water line. 10. The steel plate drainage channel should be "diamond tread" plate, fastened to an angle shelf. This channel should be detailed on the plan. Commissioner Brown seconded the motion and it passed unani­ mously . COUNTRY REFERRALS; 5. a. Winterwood Estates, Preliminary Plat; The proposed subdivision is located south of Estes Park on Highway 7. The site contains 105 acres and is zoned E-Estate (Larimer County) . 22 lots are being proposed. The site was not designated for development in the Estes Park Comprehensive Plan due to a combination of three factors: slopes exceed­ ing 30%, elevation above the Town's "blue line", and severe wildfire hazards. There were no persons present represent­ ing the applicant, Mr. Ted Johnson. Planner Stamey sum­ marized the staff report, and concerns pertaining to: Water Service: The western half of the site is not within the boundaries of the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. Property must be included within this District to enable Crystal Water Company to provide water service. Crystal Water Company has not committed to serve this site. There are several questions regard­ ing the ability of Crystal Water Company to serve the site, including: site elevation, filtration capacity, pumping capacity, and pending litigation. The Town's Water Master Plan did not include this site for water service due to the property being located outside the Conservancy District boundary, and its elevation. Access: Roads appear to exceed 10% grade. The existing travelled ways are too narrow to meet standards. Site observation would indicate that access into several lots could result in excessively steep driveways. Following discussion. Commissioner Brown moved the Planning Commission recommend denial of the Winterwood Estates Preliminary Plat to the Larimer County Planning Commission due to the following concerns: 1. Water service. 2. Severe wildfire hazard. BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - May 20, 1986 - Page six 3. Access. 4. Slopes exceeding 30%. 5. Adequacy of the site for development. Commissioner Blair seconded the motion and it passed unani­ mously. 6. REPORTS; The Urban Growth Area Agreement has been delayed due to Larimer County reviewing their Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission stated the agreement is in the best interest of citizens in the Estes Park area, and stressed the urgency in Larimer County to proceed as rapidly as possible. As requested by the Planning Commission April 15th, Building Inspector Jones contacted various communities concerning regulations pertaining to strings of light bulbs. Staff will proceed in gathering additional information for pre- sention to the Commission. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned. Vickie O'Connor, Secretary