Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Planning Commission 1987-09-15BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission September 15, 1987 Commission; Attending; Also Attending; Absent: Chairman Al Sager, Commissioners David Barker, Duane Blair, Mark Brown, George Hix, Steve Komito, Richard Wood Chairman Sager, Commissioners Barker, Blair, Brown, Hix, Komito Town Administrator Hill, Town Attorney White, Town Planner Stamey, Town Engi­ neer Widmer, Clerk O'Connor Commissioner Wood, Secretary Jones 1. Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting held August 18, 1987 were submitted and approved. 2. SUBDIVISIONS; 2 .a.Woodlands Addition - Final Plat. Dave Tiemeyer, Engineer/Rocky Mountain Consultants,representing the devel­ oper Gerald Palmer, submitted the aforementioned final plat. Mr. Tiemeyer stated most concerns raised in the Staff Report had been resolved. Pursuant to, and in keeping with the character of the land, Mr. Tiemeyer requested the Planning Commission grant an exception in (1) requiring a 100' tangent and allow a radius of 363' for two curves; and (2) requiring a design standard of 45' in lieu of the proposed 30' for vertical curve lengths. Mr. Tiemeyer acknowledged all revisions must be received by the Town no later than Septem­ ber 23rd to be placed on the Town Board agenda September 29, 1987. Concerning access. Planner Stamey reported the Colorado Department of Highways submitted a letter dated August 26, 1987. Pursuant to the State Highway Access Code, direct access to State Highway 7 through "Outlot A" would not be permitted. Axminster Lane provides a reasonable alternative for direct access to Highway 7 via street connections to the north and south of this subdivision. Planner Stamey stated that an Improvement Guarantee would need to be filed with the Town prior to final plat approval. Receipt of correspondence from the Town Engineer, Town Attorney, Light and Power Department and Colorado Department of Highways was acknowl­ edged . There were no persons speaking in "favor" of or in "oppo­ sition" to the final plat. Following discussion. Commission­ er Brown moved Woodlands Subdivision be approved contingent upon the following conditions; 1. Improvement Guarantee filed with the Town prior to approval of the final plat by the Town Board. 2. All property pins set prior to Town Board approval. 3. Add the following items to the plat; • a note identifying utility easements. • the area of "Outlot A" (0.532 Ac.) • a note stating that "Outlot A" is a non-building site. BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - September 15, 1987 - Page two change the wording of Board of Trustees approval from "ordinance" to "resolution." the single-family note to read: "All lots in the Woodlands Subdivision shall be used only for one single-family residence per lot." a note Court. limiting driveway access to Woodland 4. The following should be incorporated for Roadways, Utilities and Drainage Plans: • an exception be granted for the reverse curve tangent in Woodland Court and the vertical curve lengths on Woodland Court. • the grades on Axminster Lane be raised as much as possible over the minimum 0.4%. • existing and proposed landscaping be shown in the cul-de-sacs and islands. • indicate the details of the detention pond outlet, drainage swale and transition to Woodland Court. • concrete cross-pan to be 6" thick with welded wire fabric. • detention pond be designed to manage both the two-year and 100-year storms. • submit maps of Drainage Basins A, B and C. 5. Three (3) street lights be installed as identified by the Light and Power Department. Commissioner Hix seconded the motion and it passed unanimous­ ly. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: 3.a. Zoning Ordinance Amendments. Chairman Sager declared a public hearing to consider zoning ordinance amendments to the C-D Parking Requirement, Application Fees, RV Park Standards, C-0 Containment, and Multi-Family Density Calculation. C-D Parking Requirement - Planner Stamey reported the current parking requirement was adopted in February, 1985 and to date, the Town has not collected any fees ($2,000/space). EPURA initiated discussions with the Board of Trustees requesting removal of the parking fee in the C-D District. Following such discussions, the Town Board requested the Planning Commission review the requirement for various alternatives. Planner Stamey identified three (3) possible options: retain the current provisions, modify the fee-in-lieu of provision, or exempt the C-D District from the parking requirements. Those speaking in "favor" of repealing the requirement were: Seymour Graham. In summary, Mr. Graham stated such a regulation was restricting further development that could occur in the downtown area. EPURA has committed itself to create parking and they will help satisfy the need for additional parking. The trolley is also an asset; when the system has been fully established, they too will help BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - September 15, 1987 - Page three in alleviating parking congestion. Mr. Graham urged the Planning Commission to repeal the parking ordinance. Greg Rosener. Mr. Rosener stated the regulation has definitely stopped development and the downtown "core” must be retained as a "viable" area. Mr. Rosener ques­ tioned if the regulation met the goals and objectives associated with its adoption three years ago, and urged repeal of the parking requirement. Peter Marsh. With the exception of one (1) day this summer, parking for employees was always available near the Old Church Shop Building. The parking regulation was not in effect during reconstruction of said building; the investment could have been increased by 12%. Expansion of Friar's Restaurant to include outdoor seating has not taken place due to the $2,000 fee/space. Mr. Marsh requested the Commission review the relative costs the regulation places on development projects in the "core" area. Peggy Cayton. Ms. Cayton read from a prepared statement and formally requested consideration be given to parking meters. Revenues generated from parking fees could be used not only to provide additional parking as needed but could provide additional Town support for programs such as the Library, Hospital, Recreation District and Stanley Park. The statement included a formula establishing fees of 10<:/i-hour, 10<:/hour and 25<:/hour, "space hours" and projected revenues that could be generated. Gerald Swank. Mr. Swank offered a history of events which resulted in the increase of Sales Tax to 4% in 1982. The Estes Park Political Action Committee (EPPAC) was formed to support the increase; EPPAC desired the increase to be "earmarked" for improvements of the Town, such as parking and a convention center. No time limits were attached to the increase. In Mr. Swank's opinion, funds have already been provided for the purpose of providing additional parking. With regard to the parking regulation, progress has been halted. In considering a 400 square foot expansion, parking fees for 32 seats would result in an additional investment of $24,000. Actual ownership of any property would not be realized with such an investment; therefore, lending institutions would have difficulty in financing the expenditure. Zero Coupon Bonds would not meet the requirement, not would the investment be refunded. A dis-service was also being created by not enforcing the parking limits. Mr. Swank urged the Commission to remove the parking fee and allow free enterprise. Ross Brown. Mr. Brown advised he had not been in favor of the parking requirement from its inception. In nearby municipalities, the developer would not be required to provide parking several blocks away from his place of business. Mr. Brown requested the parking requirement be repealed. Rowland Retrum. Mr. Retrum stated the requirement contained inequities. The Town already had an agency in place to serve such a purpose - EPURA. If the parking plan needs revision however; it should be considered in the public review process. Those speaking in "opposition" to deleting the require­ ment: BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - September 15, 1987 - Page four Bill Van Horn. Parking is a burden and those creating demand should share in the burden. Demand is associated with use, with the primary beneficiary being the business owner. The $2,000 per space fee does not pay for the total cost of parking. The "market" also plays a part in inflated prices. Amendment of the provision could include spreading payment of the parking fee over several years, perhaps at zero interest or attaching a lien to the property if the fee is not paid. Mr. Van Horn agreed with Ms. Cayton; however, parking meters will not provide all the necessary revenue. Mr. Van Horn stated it might not be equitable to exempt the C-D District while requiring C-0 developers to provide parking. Maynard Brown. Mr. Brown stated that in the C-0 Dis­ trict, the property owner must pay for and provide his own parking. It is an asset to be located in the C-D District. Mr. Brown urged the Commission not to rescind the Ordinance. Comments from members of the Planning Commission are sum­ marized below; Chairman Sager. Urged the Commission to give careful consideration on their action taken today which would have an affect on the future. Commissioner Brown.Consideration must include the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission is charged with establishing a legal means to ensure development pays its fair share/burden. Attention should be focused on the C-0 District to stimulate development. Review of an alternative such as adding gross floor area or cover­ ing new land, the fee would apply; the change in use would be excluded. Commissioner Hix. Concern was expressed regarding the number of vacant buildings in the C-D District. Commis­ sioner Hix recommended the parking ordinance for the C-D District be repealed. Commissioner Barker,Expressed a concern regarding redevelopment. If development does in fact impact the parking, the developer should bear the burden. Commis­ sioner Barker is opposed to completely repealing the fee. Commissioner Komito. Urged the Commission to retain the parking requirement at this time. Commissioner Blair. Prudent developers must realize when the market is capable of supporting develop­ ment/redevelopment. Timing is of the essence. Chairman Sager acknowledged receipt of a letter dated May 26, 1987 submitted by Town Attorney White and a letter dated May 5, 1987 submitted by EPURA. There being no further testimo­ ny, Chairman Sager closed this portion of the public hearing. Additional discussion followed with Commissioner Brown moving the Planning Commission recommend to the Board of Trustees that the current Ordinance be modified to exempt changes in use within existing footprint of a building and existing gross floor area from parking provisions; however, for any addition to gross floor area or construction occurring outside the building footprint, within the C-D District, the applicant will be responsible for the parking provisions. Commissioner Barker seconded the motion and it passed by the following votes: Those voting "Yes" Commissioners Barker, BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - September 15, 1987 - Page five Brown, Hix and Sager, and Komito. Those voting "No” Commissioners Blair Application fees. Planner Stamey reported that the Code and Sanitation Committee recommended various fee adjustments August 7, 1986. The following Code Sections were overlooked in the Ordinance: 17.29.090 Floodplain Development Permit ($50.00 plus addition of the following sentence: "Applicants for a Floodplain Development Permit shall be assessed a fee of $50.00 to cover all charges of advertising and processing.) 17.36.010 C. Certification of Occupancy ($5.00) 17.36.010 E. Changes and Amendments ($50.00) Add Section 17.36.050 Effective Date. Development plan, concept plan, special review applications, variances, subdi­ vision or annexation plats shall be effective following Town Board, Planning Commission or Board of Adjustment approval, only upon certification by the Town Finance Officer that all costs pursuant to any provision of this Code relating to any such plat or plan have been paid in full. Plans, plats or variances shall be deemed null and void if said fees have not been paid within sixty (60) days of mailing of final billing by the Town. No building permit shall be issued until certification by the Town Finance Officer has been issued. Commissioner Hix moved the application fees be approved. Commissioner Blair seconded the motion and it passed unani­ mously. Chairman Sager declared this portion of the public hearing closed. Chairman Sager announced a 5-minute recess. Chairman Sager reconvened the meeting. RV Park Standards. In various discussions with property owners adjacent to RV Parks, Planner Stamey determined a clarification was needed in Code Section 17.32.040 A. Maximum Density to read as follows: "The maximum number of RVs allowed on the property, whether occupied, unoccupied or stored, shall not exceed the maximum number of permitted RV sites. The following Section should be added: 17.32.080 Applications A. "Application Requirements. All applications for construction, establishment, expansion or alteration of mobile home parks or RV parks within the Town shall contain the following information and conform to the following requirements: 1. 2. 3. 4. Name and address of the applicant. Designation of all persons having in the mobile home or RV park and a of said interest. an interest description Location and legal description of the mobile home or RV park. A mylar and twenty-one (21) prints of a Devel­ opment Plan conforming to Section 17.36.040. BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - September 15, 1987 - Page six B. Application Fee. All persons filing applications as provided in this Section shall be charged a fee of $50.00. Those speaking in "favor” of the amendments Lew Wallace. Mr. Wallace expressed concern in RVs being stored 75 feet from his property line. Those speaking in "oppo­ sition" none. Chairman Sager declared this portion of the public hearing closed. Following discussion, Commissioner Brown moved the RV Park Standards be favorably recommended to the Board of Trustees. Commissioner Hix seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. C-0 Containment. Planner Stamey stated the following addition was needed for clarification purposes: 17.16.060 Special C-0 District Requirements A. No principal use shall be allowed outside of a building, except those permitted uses approved through Special Review. B. All outdoor material and storage areas shall be separated from street and property lines by a planting area at least five (5') feet wide, containing dense planting, and optionally, a sight-impervious fence or wall. There were no persons speaking in "favor" of or in "opposition" to the addition. Chairman Sager declared this portion of the public hearing closed. As additional information is required. Commissioner Brown moved Section 17.16.060 Paragraph "A" be tabled. Commissioner Barker seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Commissioner Brown moved the Planning Commission fa­ vorably recommend Section 17.16.060 Paragraph "B" to the Board of Trustees. Commissioner Barker seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Multi-Family Density Calculation. As additional re­ search and discussion with Zoning Consultant Phil Herr is required. Planner Stamey requested this item be tabled. Tom Brown concurred with the request. Chairman Sager declared said public hearing closed. Commissioner Hix moved the Multi-Family Density Calculation be tabled. Commissioner Komito seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. 4 . SET PUBLIC HEARING: Commissioner Barker moved the following public hearings be scheduled to consider a rezoning request from R-S Residential to E-Estate, Devon Hills Subdivision: Planning Commission, October 20, 1987, 1:30 P.M. Town Board, November 3, 1987, 7:30 P.M. Commissioner Hix seconded the motion and it passed unanimous­ ly. BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - September 15, 1987 - Page seven 5. REPORTS; 5.a. Planner Stamey reported Mark Roskam, General Manag­ er/Holiday Inn requested discussion pertaining to the "flag" section of the Sign Code be tabled to October. 5.b. Executive Director Anderson/EPURA provided background information for the Confluence Park/Plaza Project. Contract negotiations are near completion. Construction will begin two (2) weeks following execution of the contract. Construction should be completed by June 15, 1988. Due to budget constraints, construction will not take place on the East side of the Big Thompson riverbank. 5.C. The Commission reviewed the proposed Budget for 1988. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned. 0 (Q ^/rJ Vickie O'Connor, Town Clerk