HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Planning Commission 1989-02-21BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Planning Commission
February 21, 1989
Commission:
Attending:
Also Attending:
Absent:
Chairman Al Sager, Commissioners David
Barker, Duane Blair, Mark Brown, Polly
Garrett, George Hix, Richard Wood
Chairman Sager, Commissioners Barker,
Brown, Garrett, Hix, Wood
Town Planner Stamey, Town Administrator
Klaphake, Secretary Jones
Commissioner Blair, Town Attorney White
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting held January
17, 1989 were submitted and approved.
2. SUBDIVISIONS
2a. Amended Plat of Lots 4 and 5, Block 5, Town of Estes
Park - Applicant: Estes Park Urban Renewal Authority
Commissioner Hix announced that he had a possible conflict
of interest and would abstain from discussion and voting on
this request.
Mr. Art Anderson, Executive Director, Urban Renewal
Authority advised the commission that EPURA is proposing to
acquire a portion of Lot 4 from Mr. & Mrs. Herbert L.
Bartlett for additional Riverside Plaza space. EPURA
currently has a landscape easement on this portion of Lot 4.
Planner Stamey noted that the proposed amended plat will
have no adverse impact on the character of the neighborhood
or existing services.
Commissioner Wood stated that the granting of the exception
will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or
injurious to 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 to
favorably recommend this amended plat to the Town Board.
Commissioner Garrett seconded the motion and it passed
unanimously with Commissioner Hix abstaining.
3. DEVELOPMENT PLANS
3.a.____Amendment to Dev. Plan #87-1, Request to Modify
Building Location - Applicant: Richard S. Hanniqan
Mr. Hannigan advised the Commission that the amended
development plan proposes to modify the building
configuration and location of units 7, 8, and 9 from what
was previously approved. He noted that because of the
sloping ground, relocating the units would give better
drainage control, more open space, and be more aesthetically
pleasing. He also informed the Commission that unit #9 has
been designated for handicapped use (as per State
requirements).
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Planning Commission - February 21, 1989 - Page 2
Planner Stamey commented that all items noted in the staff
report had been addressed and the plan does comply with
standards for development plan review.
Commissioner Brown moved for approval of the amendment to
Development Plan #87-1 with a notation on the plat that one
unit be designated handicapped accessible. Commissioner Hix
seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
3.b. Dev. Plan #88-4, Request to Waive Lienholder Signature
Applicant; Ron Harvey
This development plan was approved by the Planning
Commission in December, 1988. Mr. Harvey advised the
Commission that the lienholder (Investors Residential
Mortgage in Lubbock, Texas) has declined to sign the plan
because of condominiumizing. He submitted correspondence
from the lienholder signifying their reluctance to sign;
therefore he is requesting this requirement be waived.
Planner Stamey advised that the lienholder signature is
required on development plans according to the town's zoning
regulations, and the purpose is to notify any party who
might have an interest in that property of any changes,
obligations or commitments and it also declares that the
property will be developed in accordance with the plan and
with the town's zoning regulations.
Commissioner Barker inquired as to whether or not the
regulations require a lienholder approve what is going to be
developed, or rather is it just for notification purposes.
Planner Stamey affirmed that the regulation is that each
development plan be signed by any owners and lienholders.
The regulation doesn't address whether or not the signing of
the plan is giving their approval.
Commissioner Brown expressed concern that the Planning
Commission may not be empowered to waive a requirement that
is in the code and questioned the town's liability position
if the lienholder does not sign.
It was suggested by Commissioner Barker that legal
clarification be obtained from the Town Attorney and moved
for this request to be appealed to the Town Board at their
next regularly scheduled meeting. Commissioner Brown
seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous.
4.COUNTY REFERRAL
4.a.____Coleman Special Review, Request for Approval of
Miniature Golf Course (Ride-A-Kart Area) - Applicant;
Coleman Enterprises
Commissioner Hix announced that he had a possible conflict
of interest and would abstain from discussion and voting on
this request.
Planner Stamey advised that because of the close proximity
of this project to Estes Park town limits, Larimer County
has referred the proposal to the Estes Park Planning
Commission for review and comment.
Mr. Gary Coleman addressed the Commission stating that the
proposal is to develop a 36-hole miniature golf course on
the Ride-A-Kart property with 18 holes being completed by
Spring and the remaining 18 holes developed in the Fall.
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Planning Commission - February 21, 1989 - Page 3
The project will be developed by CAST of Wisconsin, who also
developed Water World and the Denver Zoo. The proposed
location is west of Mall Road, immediately north of the Big
Thompson River. He noted that the request has been through
flood review and also drainage and electrical installations
have been addressed. Hours of operation would be 9:30 a.m.
to 10:00 p.m., the same as Ride-A-Kart.
After further discussion regarding parking and paving of the
parking area and entrances. Commissioner Brown moved to
favorably recommend this request to the Larimer County
Planning Commission with consideration being given to the following items:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Lighting - shielded to reduce off-site glare.
Parking demand be examined.
Paying of parking area be required by June, 1990.
Utility easement be negotiated with the Estes Park Light and Power Dept.
Commissioner Barker seconded the motion and the vote unanimous.was
REPORTS
5.a. Capital Improvement Program
s^arized the Capital Improvement Program
iown ref?rred the Planning Commission by the
cut" li^t?nfTf ofreVieW+-• a^d cornment* He identified a "first
anS ? °f.potential projects under the General Fund
13th at 2^00eoPm1S?o d: \ttndy session was sot for March xjtn ar ^.uu p.m. to review the CIP.
5.b. Vail Report
elect?oniSSkfJ!2tn °f lhe field trip to Vail to examine the electronic kiosk system, greeter program, banners cluster mail boxes and city entry signs. manners, cluster
p!1^^6 being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 3:00
nes /I Secretary