Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Planning Commission 1990-12-18BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission December 18, 1990 Commission; Attending; Also Attending: Absent: Chairman A1 Sager, Commissioners Wendell Amos, Mark Brown, Harriet Burgess, Alma Hix, and Richard Wood All Community Development Director Stamey, Trustee/Liaison Garrett, Town Attorney White, Clerk O'Connor None Chairman Sager called the meeting to order at 1:32 P.M. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Minutes of the meeting held November 20, 1990 were approved as submitted. 2. DEVELOPMENT PLANS. 2.A. Development Plan #9 0-4, Tract 13,_Beaver Point,—Second Addition, Mark Whittlesev/Applicant - Continued from October 16. 1990. Paul Kochevar reported that the Applicant is proposing a seven-unit commercial accommodations development, plus a manager's quarters, in five (5) separate buildings on 2 acres. Mr. Kochevar advised that: (1) dates for phasing of the development have been provided, (2) a temporary drainage system will be provided until such time as the roadways are paved, and (3) a landscape schedule has been provided. Community Developer Director Stamey reviewed the staff report and phasing schedule, advising that the applicant has complied with staff comments contained in the staff report dated December 12, 1990. Mr. Kochevar confirmed one (1) tree will be removed and it will be replaced with a Ponderosa Pine. It was moved and seconded (Amos/Brown) Development Plan #90—4, Tract 13/ Beaver Point Addition, be approved, and it passed unanimously. 3. SPECIAL REVIEWS. 3.A. Special Review #90-7. Lot 44. Little Prospect Mountain Addition. Gerald Palmer/Applicant. In concurrence with the Applicant, it was moved and seconded (Brown/A. Hix) this item be continued to January 15, 1991. 3.B. Special Review #90-8. Lots 1 and 2, South Saint Vrain Addition. Trail Ridge, Ltd./Applicant. Chairman Sager opened a public hearing to consider^ the aforestated special review request. Peter Wood, architect representing the Applicant, stated that the proposal consists of a 32-unit apartment project, with five buildings on a 2- acre site. The two-story apartment buildings will be 28-30 high. Mr. Wood has reviewed the staff recommendations and is in basic agreement with them; the firm will redesign the blank north and south walls of the buildings to improve outwardly appearance, and re-orientate the buildings parallel to Highway 7. The Commission reviewed a rendering of the project and Mr. Wood confirmed that three (3) trees will be removed; however. BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - December 18, 1990 - Page 2 an effort is being made to save as many trees as possible. Mr. Wood was not able to clarify an issue pertaining to Federal law and age discrimination in housing. Those offering testimony; Mary Brauneis/Eagles Landing, who suggested laundry facilities be included in each unit in lieu of placing such facilities only in the recreation/office building. Those speaking in opposition; Chris Marshall, who expressed concern with the architectural and landscaping aspects of the project. There being no further testimony. Chairman Sager declared the public hearing closed. Community Development Director Stamey reviewed the staff report, and in particular those comments contained in the staff recommendation. As several issues were not complete, it was moved and seconded (Brown/Wood) Special Review #90-8 be continued to January 15, 1991, and the motion passed unanimously. The Commissioners commented ^ on appearance/architectural design vs. review regulations/criteria. 2.A. special Review #90-6. Lot 2. Stanley Knoll Subdivision^ United___Bank___of____Boulder____and____Stanley------Commercia_l Development/Applicant ~ Continued from November 20.,—19990. Chairman Sager read aloud public hearing procedures,^ and opened a public hearing to consider new information/testimony for Special Review 90-6. Community Development Director Stamey advised that (1) the Board of Adjustment had, during their meeting held December 14, 1990, accepted the number of parking spaces proposed; (2) the Traffic Study has not been received in its final form, and that the Study will be directly presented to the Board of Trustees f°r discussion/review; and (3) that a Special Election has been scheduled February 5, 1991 to consider rezoning of the aforestated property. Director Stamey then reviewed the staff report dated December 18, 1990. Bill Van Horn addressed the Commission, and stated that from the onset, the developers have been aware of the sensitivity of the site. Development was concentrated and open space was maintained to achieve a "village scale" project. The U. S. Highway 34/36 Intersection will be the primary view point; with the inclusion of gables, the roof design will enhance the view of the project. Mr. Van Horn addressed his interpretations on impervious coverage in a letter to tne Commission dated December 7, 1990. The Applicant als° suggested the Commission recognize the landscaping provided, and requested the overall benefits be weighed against any detriments. Mr. Van Horn also commented: the architecture will be an improvement of the site; the newly- received Housing Study identified that potential solutions for housing would occur with less "seasonal" businesses; the project will significantly increase the retail base without changing the character of the Town; with the exception of Stanley Village, the private sector has yet to provide any private parking lots or landscaping within EPURA s boundary. Commissioner A. Hix questioned the pitch of the roof; Mr. Van Horn stated that it is 4:12; however, he is examining a 3:i2 pitch. Commissioner Burgess questioned what new uses could be found if the factory outlet stores fail? Mr. Van Horn stated most failures have occurred in "warehouse" operations, ^ot factory outlet stores. The developers anticipate expending $150-200,000/year in advertising efforts in the area from Colorado Springs to Cheyenne—Estes Park will also be included in these promotion efforts. Studies have indicated that such stores serve as a most important activity in conjunction with conferences/conference centers. Chairman Sager questioned BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - December 18, 1990 - Page 3 whether semi-trucks would be utilized. Mr. Van Horn commented that "bob-tail" trucks would service the center through loading docks during normal working hours. Pertaining to the proposed 5'-wide landscape area between the property line and service drive, Mr. Van Horn stated that landscaping a 25'-wide area along the north property line was not necessary due to the wide right-of-way and cut bank. The right-of-way currently contains a significant number of trees, and the proposed accel/decel lanes should not prevent the trees from remaining in their present location. Those speaking in favor of the proposal: Greg Rosener who provided expertise on commercial development from a realtor's point of view. With regard to an EPURA subsidy, Mr. Rosener stated that was exactly what the Downtown Redevelopment Plan was established to do; all businesses have benefitted from construction of the Streetscape Project. Louis O'Riordan commented on the proposed "downzoning" Special Election and was advised such testimony was not relevant at this time. Those speaking in opposition: none. Whereupon Chairman Sager declared the public hearing closed. prtwniiaHioner comments. Commissioner Burgess reported that during an APA National Planning Conference, information was presented on "How Manchester, Veirmont Regained Control of its Destiny" which addressed how a tourist town faced problems relating to an influx of factory outlet stores. (This information was made a part of the record by reference thereto). Commissioner Amos made the following comments: _ Suitability of proposed location for this propect/nearby uses—supported or damaged: the project is nearly other commercial enterprises (below & east of the knoll), however, it would severely impact the Stanley Hotel property to th north. In his letter dated November 8, 199°» ,Co4?;frifd0 Historical Society President James Hartmann stated ® development of this size and scope will have an adverse effect on the Stanley Hotel Property, one of Colorado s most important historic sites. This National Register site is one of a relatively small number of sites that is considered by the Register to be of national significance. In Mr. Amos opinion, the visual damage to the Hotel Property far outweighs the benefits accrued by being adjacent to other commercial enterprises; (2) Uses of the site and nearby areas which would be displaced by or pre-emptied by this use: zoning for the knoll has been C-0 for at least 25 years - considering there has been no effort to rezone the property, one has to assume the community has accepted this zoning designation, the C-0 zoning should remain. Unless it becomes open space or other, it will be developed commercially. Mr. Amos personally desires the site to remain open space, however, the fact that it is now zoned C-0 provides that the site is subject to development. A project of this magnitude would have a severe impact on the existing commercial enterprises, probably displacing a number of local businesses. The project, ss i is proposed, does not conform to the principle of orderly growth in Estes Park and will lead to the demise of several viable businesses, leaving vacant business sites not only along Elkhorn, but in Stanley Village; (3) Adequacy of roads and utility facilities serving the location: excluding roads, the water, sewage and drainage facilities have been addressed by staff. Perhaps the Traffic Impact study and subsequent follow-up study did not fully address the impact on roads during the tourist season. Much more emphasis should be placed on the traffic problems presently existing and how this BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - December 18, 1990 - Page 4 project will exacerbate these problems. At times, Estes Park is almost in gridlock around the U._ S. Highway 34/36 Intersection, downtown streets, and the highways leading from the Park entrances. Mr. Amos does not believe the traffic problems will be solved by merely adding accel/decel lanes into the knoll property; (4) Environmental characteristics of the site and related areas, and consequences of the development as proposed for public safety^ and the natural environment: vehicular safety will deteriorate because of this proposed project. Resident deer and migrating elk (most visible in Estes Park) will of necessity move to other areas, probably increasing the frequency of animal-automobile collisions; (5) Building and site design and how well they avoid unnecessary damage to the natural environment through design adaptation to the particularities of the site, evidenced by minimization of cut and fill and vegetation removal: pursuant to drawings, few environmental features of the site have been programmed into the project; nearly all topside features have been removed or moved to fit a plan, in Architect Burt Wadman's November 12, 1990 letter, he stated "in the proposed development, the site's virtues are treated as obstacles to be overcome, with the result that the site itself has been sacrificed to the maximization of its economic opportunity." The project overwhelms the knoll site, the natural features have (for the most part) been removed to accommodate the plan, ensuing traffic problems have not been adequately addressed, the principles of ^ITstanlevnot been followed, and it has an adverse affect on tlJ.e Hotel Property. In closing. Commissioner Amos developer had every opportunity to design a village-type shopping area which would enhance Estes Park s s®a11 community image which existed for so many years; the deveioper should modify his project .to N use . th®advantage (its natural setting) using the existing trees, outcroppings, and views. commissioner Wood stated that the potentially on the Stanley Hotel Property becomes a mute point, with the previous designation of a conference center/municipal facilities on this site, more land use would have resulted, the proposed development is across a major artery from the hotel property although it is within the view corridor. Pertaining to displacement of local businesses due to factory nutlet stores this is an on-going process; to adopt a philosophy that new development will "rob an existing of its share of the pie", puts a limit on the size °f the pie -this type of philosophy is in error. There is a great deal r^rl commerce^ that can be had so that f everyone can participate, "business begets more business ; Wood expressed difficulty in accepting placing ^ °ap J-^ial upon the size of commerce that can occur. Any potential development will exacerbate existing problems; h°wever' are6 me chan isms in place which enable the Town to work with and/or alleviate those problems. It would be an error to cause this particular development to become ^ "last straw that is going to break the traffic proDiem s back." Displacing wildlife is. not °aeri)ostureshould be very carefully considered—to adopt a posture whereby the Town would claim every currently undeveloped Piece of property as an opportunity to purchase open space is a provincial approach that says "let;s limit ourselves to what we currently are"—that's not reality. commissioner A. Hix commented that "one man's vacant la^d ?-a not another man's open space." It is not Planning Commission to address the issue of competition BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - December 18/ 1990 - Page 5 existing businesses; Ms. Hix does not share traffic problem concerns expressed by Commissioner Amos—Highway 34 Bypass is under-utilized even during the summer tourist season. This property is not deer and elk habitat as stated; and the issue of adverse effect for the Stanley Hotel Property is not valid, the factory outlet stores will provide a convenient opportunity for their guests. Concerns were expressed pertaining to the impervious coverage issue and the landscape berm, suggesting a compromise between 5' and 25'. Commissioner Brown commented that he, too, based his consideration of this proposal on past special review requests and the Code. However, pertaining to nearby land uses and whether they would be supported or dzunaged: it appears that in the Comprehensive Plan it points out that the Town would like to maintain commercial development in the core area rather than urban sprawl; this site is part of the EPURA District; Damaging to the Stanley Hotel Property: perhaps and perhaps not; however, the Hotel is an asset to the co^unity, nation and public. If the public wishes to preserve the view to the hotel, it is incumbent upon the public to purchase that right. It is available under the process of eminent domain, anything without just compensation is a "noI?":]1is1:^^j55;dual The individual land owner should not pay for that individual right; Adequacy of the roads: should continue to have concern regarding traffic and that issue should be included in any recommendation to the Town Board as the Commission did ^ot have the opportunity to review the traffic ftudy. Environmental^characteristics of the site: 1t2eg1park” acres of open space/natural terrain surrounding Estes Park, however, it is important that some pockets of green spacebe preserved for aesthetic reasons, th1e/\pSh°hUeLld to III carefully chosen. The developer should be held to the standardYof paying for the land and providing the impervious coverage limit. The Board of Trustees do have the power to forgive that limit, however. Commissioner Brown does not believe that there are constraints that would preclude t developer from purchasing additional land open space, it would be a special favor otherwise, suitability of the site to commercial development: it hasbeen zoied coLercial for over 20 . si9nif that were actively supported by the public, contained m 3 buildings• perhaps this proposal was not considered as "ciiLerliil." overall impact/competition: Commissioner Brown exoressed difficulty in being "protectionistic due ^ ;:ftiTL\f1o1orpTtl7t°ofnfuen6detrrafhL, “the “nS?nrSith toe1dtve\o?^r^s0prohposaTas presented; however if oriU”niS- ?hetAeevertao11hei"|^^r^> Brown moved the Planning Commission reoo^end to the Tow Board that they give favorable consideration to the Of this project from the standpoint of the use of the sire development, and contingent upon the following: The impervious coverage be reduced, corresponding open space to be in<lorPorat®J the interior of the development and along the north property line, east of the entrance. 2 The landscape plan be revised to include a new plant schedule, shrub planting along the north property line, from the emergency exit west to the entryway, and that the fill slope alon9. property line be stabilized and re-vegetated with 1. PRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - December 18, 1990 - Page 6 native seed mix of grasses. 3. Installation of all utilities be extended to and through the site, and be placed underground. 4. Prior to Town Board review, submittal of all facade elevations for the north side of Building A, and the north and east sides of Building B. Service areas need to be adequately screened. 5. Water system and drainage improvements be constructed as described by the Public Works Department. 6. Indicate the following on the Development Plan: lot dimensions building dimensions building identification sidewalk trash receptacle location/screening development schedule actual building height Developer to conduct an archeological survey of private lands prior to commencing site work, to determine location of archaeological resource. All HVAC equipment to be screened from off-site view. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Provide bicycle parking area. Fire lanes to be designated and fire hydrants be provided for the Estes Park Volunteer Fire Department. Emergency access provisions to be identified and constructed. Reduce the height of the one-story buildings. inasmuch as finished architectural treatments for all^building elevations were not available at this time, v<->now?na should provide such for review by the Town Board. Following additional clarification. Commissioner Wood seconded the motion. Chairman Sager offered the following comments, referencing the Browne Bortz and Coddington (BBC) Study, d,ated. 1990: suitability of the proposed location/nearby land and whether theyJf would be supported by or damaged, . Stanley Village might be supported by the propect, depending on the ^tenants and the merchandise they are going to f f sale* merchants on Elkhorn Avenue might be supported fay oroiect depending upon the merchandise that is going to be for^ sale • the Stanley Hotel will be damaged by the development because of the complete change of the development De^iid^ asphalt parking lots, removal of the maiority of natural rock outcroppings, mature and immature existing trees, the resultant reflected automobile and bus windshields and P^inted bodies street lights and walkway lighting; Uses site aadnea^y areas be pre-emptied, etc.: pursuant to the BBC Study, Rage 2 "they will offer a mixture of upper and middle line clothing items yrnd accessories, hard goods, shoes, books and BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission -> December 18, 1990 - Page 7 kitchenware, and these things are all being currently sold in Town; Page 4 - some observers have predicted outlet facilities will experience such success that they will compete directly with traditional shopping centers, effectively eliminating the distinction between manufacturing and retailing. A recent national weakening in the performance of department stores could signal an acceleration of this trend; Page 9, there is no question the area has been significantly transformed due to the sheer numbers of outlet stores, other commercial enterprises, including additional outlet stores, are likely to become established following the initial outlet development; Adequacy of roads serving the location: only have one road serving this location, and the traffic study is not complete; Chairman Sager was hopeful said study will also be given careful consideration; Page 10, Outlet centers tend to further aggravate traffic congestion problems during peak tourism months—we know that is going to happen, how it is alleviated remains to be seen; Environmental characteristics of the site and related areas, and the consequences of the development as proposed for the natural environment: Chairman Sager referred to his efforts to recognize the results of the project in the removal and/or obliteration of the existing natural features (rock outcroppings and trees, all of which are Ponderosa Pine). On the Drawing, sheet 1 of 3, prepared by Bill Van Horn, the project retains less than 3/4's of the property as it exists. The loading docks orientated towards Wonderview are not acceptable. The 5' narrow landscape border along Wonderview is inadequate; Suitability of the specific proposed development relative to other potential uses allowed by right on the site, taking into consideration the location issues above: C-0 allows for retail by right, this project by its size, and the efforts of the developer to maximize the buildings, squeezes more than our Code allows with impervious coverage; the developer felt it necessary to obtain a parking variance which is an "overkill" of the perceived needs of our Town at this time; Building and site design and how well they: a. avoid visual (noise) or other intrusion into adjacent premises or depart from the established character of the vicinity: it will be quite prominent—that is by design—it cannot be hidden, the developer, by admission, is on purpose intruding into the skyline, into the line of sight from the Junction of 34/36, without concern to the visibility from the Stanley Hotel; b. Avoid unnecessary damage to the natural environment through design adaption to the particularities of the site, evidenced by minimization of cut and fill and vegetation removal: the staff report dated December 18, 1990 has suggested several alternates for consideration, these suggestions were made previously, only a few suggestions have been incorporated into the project; Size of the buildings: their placement, the extraordinary amount of cut and fill does not show much was possible with the goal of 101,000 sq. ft. of floor space, and the resultant requirement of the on-site parking; Social-economic, or community needs which are served by this proposal—economic: with the recognition of, among other facts, four (4) vacant units in the nearest retail development, Stanley Village, (upper level: Buckwheats, Wolf Chiropractor, Gun Shop, Canal Street), and the expressed availability of up to 60,000 sq. ft. of retail floor area in Stanley Village, is this new 101,000 sq. ft. really a compelling issue at this time? Conservatively speaking, does this meet a community need?; Consistency with the district's objective as stated on this title: read in full, excerpts from Section 17.04.010 and 17.12.030; Suitability of the specific proposed development relative to areas containing historic resources to minimize damage to those resources for future use: the visibility and nearness to the Stanley Hotel BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - December 18, 1990 - Page 8 (the major historical feature in our Town)-the damage is incalculable. Commissioner Burgess commented that this proposed development will be bringing a big influx of day visitors rather than our destination visitors which Estes Park has always tried to encourage. This type of tourist will not enhance hotel/motel business, and may possibly bring more people downtown, like the Saturday/Sunday traffic. The Bypass is an entryway to Rocky Mountain National Park, and the Town should not be "cluttering it"; should focus on major corridors and preserving and enhancing the natural resources that we have on these corridors. We are continually abusing the hillsides and open space; Stanley Village is the only commercial development on the Bypass, and Commissioner Burgess is not anxious for continued development along this route as long we do have one area around Town that is still beautiful. Commissioner Burgess prefers visitors park and view the existing wildlife in the Bypass area rather than seeing them entering the property to shop. In addition, traffic on the Bypass during the summer season does backup past the Stanley Hotel Property, and with increased traffic from an outlet facility, the Highway 34/36 Intersection could very soon become "malfunction junction." This proposal is too much growth, too quickly, it is not orderly growth, and the Town must decide whether it desires to maintain its mountain atmosphere and national park gateways, or if we (Town) should become a Town of outlet businesses that will change the entire profile of the Town to outlet city with day visitors. The proposal will not preserve the integrity, stability, or the beauty of our community. Commissioner Amos responded that this property had been zoned for 25 years as Commercial outlying and it will probably remain so; however. Commissioner Amos would prefer the property remain open space. In addition, this project overwhelms the 9% Acre-site. Commissioner Amos detailed view corridors in relation to statements made during the water slide located on Moraine Avenue; concern was expressed with where development would stop and how it could possibly relate to the downtown area disappearing. Mr. Amos stated he is not against factory outlet stores in this area; however, this project overwhelms the site and he would prefer the developer use the site to its best advantage, natural setting, using existing trees, outcroppings, and the views. Commissioner Brown also expressed concern with the size of the project, and by adhering to the impervious coverage limitation which is applied to all development, the Commission is requiring the developer to constrict the proposal to fit this standard. To require more, is inappropriate. The property is zoned commercial-outlying and it bears a great deal of resemblance already to our downtown area, not only in proximity, but Stanley Village looks a lot like our downtown area. In terms of development along the Bypass—few people recognize the commercial viability of hotels; several such hotels are located very near Rocky Mountain National Park. In terms of adding business to the community. Commissioner Brown studied factory outlet stores in the Branson, Missouri and Silverthorne/Dillon area, and found lodging sales have increased by over 12% in 1988; the remaining Summit County did not realize such an increase. Branson also noted a significant increase in retail sales in the community as a whole. As a consumer, it would be most beneficial to eliminate the second step between retail and wholesale—the price is generally better. In addition. Commissioner Brown clarified his motion pertaining to the expansion of BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - December 18, 1990 <- Page 9 landscaping from the emergency exit west to the entryway. It is a sensitive area, if the Board of Trustees can do something to increase the screening from the highway by use of landscaping that would be acceptable. The motion was defeated by the following votes: Those voting "Yes": Commissioners Brown, A. Hix, and Wood. Those voting "No"" Commissioners Amos, Burgess, and Sager. Votes cast resulted in a tie-vote. Town Attorney White commented that the aforestated was an affirmative motion, and with the tie vote, the motion failed. Therefore, a motion recommending denial of the project was in order. Commissioner Amos moved the special review project/factory outlet stores, as designed, not be favorably recommended to the Board of Trustees based upon the fact that (1) the project overwhelms the knoll site, (2) the natural features have been, for the most part, removed, to accommodate the plan (3) ensuing traffic problems have not been properly addressed, (4) the principle of orderly growth has not been followed, and (5) it has an^ adverse impact on the Stanley Hotel Property, a national registered site of historical significance. Trustee Burgess seconded the Commissioner Amos added: that if this proposal is denied by the Town, and, assuming that the Town Board feels the same as Commissioner Amos, that the project overwhelms .a^ea' ™ developer could come forward with a modified incorporating all the features that staff has pointed out, but scaled down to one that might be acceptable to thosa opposed to it at the present for those reasons (there are other reasons people are opposed tothis project) Sager confirmed with Mr. Van Horn thatMto,s°Jhis down is not negotiable. Commissioner Wood state.de/?1l®^. proposal does represent orderly development, and als° to the fact that the Commission has previously identified in the Estes Park Downtown Redevelopment Plen this very specific piece of property in the not to distant r»ast that the argument that it does great damage Stanlev Hotel is not a valid argument and, in general, we can ?ook S S^zonLg map as it goes along Wonderview Avenue and know very specifically where commercial zoning b®5ins a^d wSere it Lds. Chairman Sager affirmed that the past Proposed uses for the Knoll property could well have been a conference cln?er! municipal building; however, the parking requirements nf ? buildinas as opposed to 4, and the biggest building would SLe been ihfconfSLce center which might have been the same sK; of the center that is under construction, would have been to seat 500 people and that use only requires .commissioner Brown reaffirmed his findings for the “otion le^ Pd°?:iopLntrrqUh-envger,thdueretoCtih: Commission ■ s stat^cry ^Silngi0nh'e h:as6lL thif pr^^eft wfth" some pointiCofi0viewC01nitSSisneim^o:^t^^^^> ^^J^ep^r<wra d^ntoSn ^irioreeSrest°trpeWnofandevtlop” shLld be contiguous, the property is appropriately aoned^.^and Commi'r^lodnerbWoodnoonourredr.laTL vo\e was a= ! ^loll rSl .'.'hoe?;': Corrs“srLrn?ABUS?x:SandndWood9. The vote resulted in a tie—vote. Town Attorney White stated that this plan will probably be put bIfSre th^loard of Trustees for a deoision. A recommendation sho“l be made for those areas that teed to be reviewed-not a recommendation neither for or against the project, as BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Planning Commission - December 18, 1990 - Page 10 whole, but the Commission should present to the Trustees their areas of concern for the Town Board's consideration. Commissioner A. Hix recommended that certain requirements contained in Commissioner's Brown's failed motion be considered for review by the Trustees; Items #1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 1, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12. Further discussion was had concerning the impervious coverage. Town Attorney White clarified that it is apparent by the vote that the Planning Commission is not recommending that, if in fact, the aforestated items are corrected/amended, that the Commission would vote for recommendation of the project; the Commission is merely identifying items to be considered by the Board of Trustees in their review of the project—the Commission is not recommending approval/denial of the project. The motion failed for lack of a second. Chairman Sager moved staff prepare a written "position of concern" based upon the Commissioner's comments, for review by the Board of Trustees. Commissioner Brown seconded the motion, and it passed unanimously. 5.KENT DANNEN. Mr. Dannen briefed the Commission on his idea to promote Estes Park as the wildlife watching capital of Colorado. Director Stamey will distribute Mr. Dannen's information to the Commission and review said Commission's potential involvement in the project. There being no further business. Chairman Sager adjourned the meeting at 4:30 P.M. Vickie O'Connor, CMC, Town Clerk