Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Planning Commission 1989-09-19BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission September 19, 1989 Commission: Attending: Also Attending: Absent: Chairman Al Sager, Commissioners David Barker, Mark Brown, Harriet Burgess, Polly Garrett, George Hix, Richard Wood Chairman Sager, Commissioners Brown, Burgess, Garrett, Hix, Wood Town Planner Stamey, White, Secretary Jones Commissioner Barker Town Attorney Chairman Sager called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting held August 15, 1989 were submitted and approved. 2. PETITIONS 2. a. Petition for Rezoning Lot 26, Twin View Subdivision At last month’s meeting a public hearing was scheduled to consider this application. Planner Stamey acknowledged receipt of a letter from applicant (Michael L. McDonald) dated August 28, 1989 requesting his application be withdrawn. A letter was sent by staff to residents of the Fish Creek area advising of this withdrawal. Commissioner Garrett moved to accept the request to withdraw the petition and cancel the scheduled public hearing. Commissioner Brown seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. 3. SPECIAL REVIEW 3. a. Special Review 89-3, Stanley Condominiums Concept Plan (continued from August 15, 1989). Chairman Sager declared the public hearing open. Member Hix advised the Commission of a possible conflict of interest and, therefore, would abstain from discussion or voting on this request. Mr. Frank Gray, representing the owners^ of the property, stated that, since the last Planning Commission meeting they had been working with staff to resolve some of the questions raised at that meeting. Applicant has decided to approach the plan from a concept level at this time. A slide presentation was shown by Mr. Burt Wadman, architect for this development, illustrating in_ more detail the proposed road system, alignment of buildings, and proposed colors of buildings. He advised that a meeting had been held with the Stanley Hills Homeowner's Association regarding negotiating a new right-of-way so as to have two- way access to the development, but the general conclusion was that approval would not be granted by the association. He stated that, as a short term alternative, a one-lane entry is proposed which would connect with adjoining property to the west. BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - September 19, 1989 - Page 2 Mr. Paul Kochevar of Estes Park Surveyors, addressed comments in the staff report advising that_ the proposed private street system is needed to control vehicular traffic in the development. He further advised that the street from the existing right-of-way off Steamer Drive to the west will be a private street easement that will have the capability of reverting to a public street. He stated they will continue working with the Stanley Hills Homeowner's Association to secure necessary agreements needed for access and drainage. Public comment was heard from the following: Dr. Robert T. Smith - Stated that he was the previous owner of this property and at the present time court action is underway regarding ownership. He suggested that any decision in this matter be delayed until the court matter is settled. Hearing no further public comment. Chairman Sager declared the public hearing closed. Planner Stamey advised the Commission that staff has not formally reviewed any proposal for one-way access at the southeast portion of the site, or any drainage revisions in the area. Staff's position has been that two 2-way access points are needed for this development. He further stated that if a one-way access is developed and a cul-de-sac proposed without connecting the northern end, the access will not work well. Further discussion followed regarding site planning alternatives, height of structures,_ stabling and use of horses on the property, and acceleration/deceleration lanes at the Highway 34/Steamer Drive intersection. Mr. Kochevar advised that the owner has offered to construct improvements on Steamer Drive at the intersection of this development's access street. Correspondence was acknowledged from the following: Town Attorney White................August 28, 1989 Division of Highways..............August 1, 1989 Division of Wildlife..............August 23, 1989 Planner Stamey also advised of a telephone call to Mr. Lane Ittelson of the Colorado Historical Society. Mr. Ittelson confirmed the meeting and discussions held with applicants and stated the society's primary concerns relate to building size and color. Commissioner Brown moved for favorable recommendation of Special Review 89-3 to the Town Board with conditions as follows: 1. The private street system meet public street standards, including paved width, provisions for future right-of way, setbacks, and improvement guarantee. 2. Provisions be made for public street dedication across the northern portion of the site, to the west property. 3. Two 2-way access points from Steamer Drive be provided and the use of the existing deeded access points is recommended. BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - September 19, 1989 - Page 3 4. 5. 6. 8. 9. 10. 11 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. All necessary agreements from Stanley Hills Property Owner's Association be secured for access and drainage, if required. That Phase II of the development consider site planning alternatives for road location. Negotiate the required highway improvements with the Highway Department and town staff, and submit those determinations with the development plan. The interior street be extended to connect with Steamer Drive at the north with the first phase, and the cul- de-sac be eliminated. Electrical service be designed and easements provided. Utilities be placed underground. Water service provided in accordance with town's standards. A drainage study prepared to Larimer County Storm Water Management Manual standards be submitted. Storm water facilities need to be sized to handle both phases of the development. Landscape buffer areas be designated. Incorporate the comments of the Colorado Dept, of Wildlife with development criteria and covenants. Concept of horse use on the site is approved subject to meeting applicable town codes. Provide information to the Colorado Historical Society. Consideration be given to the comments by the Historical Society in regard to splitting the mass of buildings 5 through 11, and 12 through 21. Re-titling drawing to "Concept Plan." if necessary, are theImprovements to Steamer Drive, developer's responsibility. Provide elevation drawings that illustrate the architectural features that may exceed 30' in height. All the above should be addressed and incorporated prior to submission of the development plan. In addition, a final subdivision plat will need to be submitted with the development plan. Member Garrett seconded the motion and it passed unanimously with Commissioner Hix abstaining. For clarification, the Planning Commission indicated that the proposed alignment of the street in Phase II is acceptable. The applicant also has the flexibility to look at other alternatives. BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - September 19, 1989 - Page 4 DEVELOPMENT PLAN 4.a. Development Plan 89-2, Lot 3, Pine River Subdivision, Guy & Annie Meulener Chairman Sager opened the public hearing to consider the above request. Mr. Paul Kochevar, representing applicants, stated a two-phase development on a site approximately one- half acre in size at the corner of Pine River and Riverside Drives, is proposed. Phase I will consist of a car repair building, 2,600 sq. ft. in size. Phase II will consist of ten storage units, with a total floor area of 2,360 sq. ft. Commissioner Brown questioned the proposed lighting and was advised that a note had been placed on the plat addressing that issue. The lighting proposed will be placed underneath the slanted eaves of the building, shining down on the site. There being no comments from the audience in favor of or in opposition to this request. Chairman Sager declared the public hearing closed. Planner Stamey reviewed the staff report noting that access to this development would be from the interior streets and not onto Riverside Drive. He further noted that zoning was C-0 Outlying Commercial and the proposed use of the site is a permitted use in that zoning. Correspondence was acknowledged from the following adjacent landowners, all residents of Peak's Condominiums, expressing concerns regarding the development: Fred & Barbara Bertie..................Sept. 17, 1989 Villiers R. Gerd............................Sept. 19, 1989 Planner Stamey advised the Commission that under Development Plan review, the primary interest is related to the specifics of the site itself and not necessarily to building materials and appearance. After further discussion regarding outside storage, and being advised by Mr. Kochevar that none was planned. Commissioner Garrett moved that Development Plan 89-2 be approved with the following conditions: 1. Prior to construction of Phase II, parking demand and utilization for Phase I be reviewed, and if necessary, additional on-site parking be provided. 2. Arterial street planting area be identified, and a note placed on the plat identifying installation with Phase I construction. 3. Drainage be addressed as follows: a. V-notch weir be designed with different formula. b. Top of V-notch weir be set at 7656.5, if possible. c. Drainage way north of and adjacent to the building remain undisturbed. _ , d. Disturbance of site vegetation be minimal. 4. Sizes and location of water and sanitary sewer service and mains be identified. 5. Adherence to no outside storage. Commissioner Wood seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - September 19, 1989 - Page 5 5.SUBDIVISIONS 5»a. Preliminary Plat, Caswell Siibdivision, Fall River Road & Castle Mountain Road Mr. Paul Kochevar, representing the six applicants involved with this project, stated that the property in question is located on Castle Mountain Road, just off Fall River Road. He stated that ten years ago the property was divided into five lots. Existing Lot 5 is approximately 10 acres. This preliminary plat subdivides existing Lot 5 into proposed Lots 5, 6, 7, and 8. He further noted that Castle Mountain Road is proposed to be dedicated with this subdivision, and the right-of-way width is being studied to accommodate the construction of a new town maintained road. Reference was made regarding rezoning of the property from R-M Multiple Family to E-Estate. Mr. Kochevar advised that part of the contract to purchase was assurance that the property would not be re-zoned. After further discussion regarding required right-of-way width. Commissioner Brown moved for approval of this Preliminary Plat with the following conditions to be incorporated into the final plat: 1. Provide water notes as follows: a. Town water service is available below elevation 7,850 for Lot 8. b. Town water service is available below 7,850 for Lots 1 and 2 if a 6" water main is extended to these lots, at the owner's expense, from the existing 12" main. c. Town water is not available for Lots 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6 • A utility easement for the existing 12" water main, with legal description, be provided. All existing utilities, with easements and legal descriptions, be shown. Add the proposed right-of-way and cul-de-sac configuration to Van Horn Engineering's roadway survey. The proposed right-of-way must be large enough to accommodate the existing roadway with a 20' wide asphalt street. Provide flow arrows and the initial and major storm runoff rates at all drainage crossings. Consider dedication of Castle Mountain Road. 40 wide right-of-way for Commissioner Garrett also suggested applicants pursue re­ zoning of this property as soon as practical. Commissioner Burgess seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. PLAN AMENDMENT Amendment to the Estes6.a. Review and Recommendation of Park Downtown Redevelopment Program Town Attorney White advised the Commission that this was a referral from the Town Board of Trustees and state statutes require that when a substantial modification is made to the BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - September 19, 1989 - Page 6 Downtown Redevelopment Plan (Urban Renewal Plan), Planning Commission review is required to determine whether or not the modification conforms to the general plan of the community. Planner Stamey summarized the amendment, indicating the proposed boundaries of the expansion to be Easterly along Highway 36, including the new intersection islands, along the east side of Highway 7 to the south side of Dunraven Street, west to the west side of Stanley Avenue right-of- way, north on Stanley to Highway 36 (a legal description and map of the area was provided). He further noted that the proposed redevelopment will include a public conference center and related site improvements, parking, landscaping, street improvements, and sidewalks. Planner Stamey submitted a memorandum (dated September 8, 1989) to the Planning Commission, and advised that he has reviewed the proposed amendment and finds it conforms to the Town of Estes Park's Comprehensive Plan dated May 17, 1977, amended by the Estes Park Planning Commission on July 18, 1978, and adopted by the Estes Park Planning Commission May 20, 1980, and by the Board of Trustees May 27, 1980. In the memorandum several sections of the Comprehensive Plan were identified which supported the proposed amendment. Public comment was heard from Mr. Bill Watson and Jerry Knutson, both business owners along Dunraven Street, expressing concern with restrictions that might be placed on their property by Urban Renewal. Town Attorney White responded to the issues raised. After further discussion. Commissioner Wood moved that the Planning Commission find the proposed amendment in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, in concurrence with the memorandum prepared by Steve Stamey dated September 8, 1989. Commissioner Brown seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. REPORTS 7.a. Planner Stamey advised the Commission of a referral for informational purposes received from Larimer County. This referral concerns a request from High Drive Property Owners Association requesting their area be closed to the discharge of firearms. After review, it was the consensus of the Planning Commission that this request is warranted and Commissioner Hix moved to recommend support for this request. Commissioner Garrett seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. Commissioner Garrett suggested staff write to Larimer County advising of same. 7.b. Planner Stamey updated the Commission on the budget process and advised that one of the items being reviewed is the first year of a two year program for a Comprehensive Plan update. There being no further business, 3:55 P.M. the meeting was adjourned at