HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Planning Commission 1995-09-19BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Planning Commission
September 19, 1995
Commission:
Attending:
Also Attending:
Absent:
Chairman Sager, Commissioners Mark Brown,
Harriet Burgess, John Gilfillan, Alma Hix,
Edward Pohl and David Thomas
Chairman Sager, Commissioners
Gilfillan, Pohl, and Thomas
Burgess,
Trustee/Liaison Dekker, Community Development
Director Stamey, Senior Planner Joseph, Town
Attorney White, Clerk O'Connor
Commissioners Brown and A. Hix
Chairman Sager called the meeting to order at 9:30 A.M.
1. MINUTES.
Minutes of the August 15, 1995 meeting were approved as
presented.
Chairman Sager reviewed the Rules of Conduct for the benefit of all
those in the audience.
2. Mountain Park Subdivision (Storer Ranch Addition), SE ^ OF
Section 19, T5N, R72W of the 6th P.M., Town of Estes Park.
Outlets A & B - Combined Zoning Hearing. Attorney White
reported that the Commission will be reviewing three zoning
proposals for this site:
Plan "A" - Proposed by the Developer, rezones proposed
Outlets A and B from Commercial Outlying to R-M Multi
family Residential).
Plan "B" - Proposed by Lone Pine Residents, would rezone
the northern 1/2 to E-Estate.
Plan "C" - Informal plan proposed by staff (following
their meeting with Larimer County representatives).
Following presentation of all three plans, comments will be
heard from the audience.
Plan "A". Applicant's Representative Bill Van Horn commented
that the site has been zoned C-0 since it was annexed, and
that the C-0 zone allows intense use—retail and commercial.
The Applicants (Wille and Wehr) were aware of the existing
character of the neighborhood to the east and attempted to
respond to and design a transition for permitted uses. The
Applicant has agreed to restrictive covenants to ensure a
favorable transition from commercial to estate, i.e. no metal
buildings, decorative fencing, architectural review, and
landscaping—all to be compatible with current and future
neighbors. Mr. Van Horn urged the Commission to recognize the
significant contribution being provided by the Applicants as
their proposal was prepared with sound land planning.
Plan "B". Jim Toresdahl, 1720 High Pine Dr., referred to the
definition of Vested Property Right as contained in Title 17,
including the Comprehensive Plan (both current and proposed),
and read aloud portion of the "Purpose" also contained in
Title 17, and questioned whether the following items were
adequately addressed: high density (less likely to enhance
the general welfare), property values, intrusion in E-Estate
zoning, proposed eight condominiums/acre where there is
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Planning Commission - September 19, 1995 - Page 2
currently one house on slightly less than one acre, elk
migration (high density eliminates the elk corridor as well as
pasture), over-crowding, existence of low-income housing in
the area, there is no open space being proposed,
transportation facilities, fire hazard, and earthquake fault
relative to multi-story buildings. In summary, the Applicants
have failed to respond to the desires of the community.
Ron Harvey, 1830 N. Ridge Ln., stated that prior to annexation
the 35 acres, the first 600' was zoned commercial,
primarily for accommodations; behind the commercial
designation, the property was zoned E-Estate in Larimer
County. Storer Ranch Addition was annexed in 1984 with C-2
zoning, then changed to C-0. The area proposed for E-Estate
is 17 acres. The proponents desire the northern 17 acres be
returned to estate, with the remaining 18 acres along Highway
34 being zoned C-0. The 35-acre site was zoned commercial
with the business park proposal. When this proposal failed,
residents were unaware they had a right to return previous
zoning to this property.
Plan "C". Community Development Director Stamey reported that
in a meeting with Larimer County representatives, staff
prepared a bubble plan for 160 acres that includes open space
with pockets of residential development, cluster development,
continuous access and internal loop connection. C-0 is
proposed at the southeast corner (11 acres) with use as exists
today, and transition to R-M at the western half (14.5 acres).
A transitional zone of 4.5 acres zoned R-S, adjacent to the
Lone Pine E-Estate zoning, would be designated for single
family development. Larimer County supports Plan "C";
however, consensus has not been achieved with the Developers
and Lone Pine neighborhood.
Audience comments were heard from: Ralph Nicholas, 1660 N.
Ridge Ln., read an excerpt from the Draft Comprehensive Plan
and commented on the quality of life and the decline of such,
open space/Land Trust support, wildlife habitat, the shared
vision of Town government and citizens, against "piecemeal"
development, and urged approval of Plan "B"). Ed
McKinney/EVIA, EVIA could not arrive at a consensus due to
many unknowns, it is important to consider the existing
character of use in the region, neighborhood desires and how
they will be impacted, the greater community wishes relative
to the Talmey-Drake survey, the needs of the biotic community,
long-range needs of the community, wishes of the developers,
possibility of the Commission to proceed on the CO portion of
the property, and Mr. McKinney urged citizens to get involved
with the Town Budget relative to a desire to divert funds to
open space. Linda Tucker, 741 Lone Pine Dr., requested and
received confirmation on the size of the lots in Plan C, how
open space is being provided, and whether entry level homes
were being proposed. With the Developers' proposal of 160
condominiums, there could be an extra 400 people in the area.
Concern was expressed on property values, open space, the
neighbors are willing to work with the Developers, however,
the Developers have not responded to their letters and
covenants. Joann Hanna, 1050 E. Lane, the people most
directly affected by the proposal should buy the property and
give it to the Land Trust. Vivian Moyers, 1751 Raven Ave. her
residence is across the street from an existing large
condominium complex which does not have a manager in authority
to hear complaints such as the accumulation of junk cars,
appliances, and furniture. Ms. Moyers is opposed to the plan
based on the above, and increased traffic. Lee Ann Wehr,
offered her voice for commercial merchants and the
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Planning Commission - September 19, 1995 - Page 3
contributions made to the community; her business will be
impacted by the CDOT Highway 7 widening project which will put
Park Supply out of business. The Developer's intend it to
provide a service to the community, help retain business in
Estes Park, and the Developers are not adverse to compromise.
Merwyn Joens, 1041 Otis Ln., commented on the over-population
of Aspen and expressed concern with expected growth with this
project. Mr. Joens urged the Commission and Town Board to
limit growth for the continued quality of life. Dick Barlow,
351 Moraine, requested and received confirmation that Plan "C"
would delete the 6001 strip of commercial zoning on the land
in the County, and noted that potential buyers of property
should take a pro-active stance prior to investing in
property. Thelma Shoemaker, when she purchased her property
in the 70's, the property in question was zoned E-Estate. If
the condominiums are constructed, they will block her view,
she objected to the zoning change in 1984 and presumed the
zoning would revert back to estate zoning when the proposed
business park failed. Ms. Shoemaker also expressed concern
with fire protection and street connections. Linda Tucker,
reiterated that the neighbors were advised by the Developers
that the Plan was non-negotiable, commented on drainage
concerns. Ms. Tucker read excerpts from a recent Peter Boyles
news article and appealed to the Commission for their
assistance in responsible development of this property. Carol
Harvey, 1830 N. Ridge Ln., questioned whether the portion of
the site designated commercial was the last remaining
commercial property. Lone Pine is the entrance to Town, why is
commercial being allowed such as auto repair shops and the
ark. Tedd Shanks, 1760 Lone Pine Dr., the majority of
homeowners in Lone Pine purchased their property prior to
proposed development of the 35 acres. Ron Harvey, residents
are in agreement with the CO zoning portion for the southeast
corner if it can be maintained, the restrictive covenants are
agreeable, the primary issue is uncontrolled growth, the
Town's eastern entrance now has an ark, with approval of the
Developers' proposal, a wall of condominiums will be added.
In addition, the open space equates to 15% or less while the
Stanley Historic District was required to provide 30%, and
residents are willing to work with the Developers.
In rebuttal, Mr. Van Horn stated that the Developers have
significantly changed their proposal to accommodate
neighborhood concerns, and the Applicants have requested down
zoning from commercial to R-M Residential to ensure auto
repair shops and questionable architectural buildings cannot
occur. In reviewing the site with John Pedas/Larimer County,
it was determined that an error exists in the County zoning
map, and in 1981, the official County zoning map indicated
that the County commercial zone reached the rear of the
property—the centerline of Section 19. There is no basis to
expect estate zoning as requested in Plan "B".
Ralph Nicholas commented on the importance of wildlife as
witnessed by the recent special wildlife section in the Trail
Gazette. In addition, 72.2% of all residential property in
Vao1 is not Prilnary residence. With the Talmey Drake survey,
90% of the people desire open space. Linda Tucker reiterated
that the residents are not as concerned with the first 600'
(commercial) and that at their meeting with the Developers, a
plan had not been submitted for the structures, thus the
residents had no guarantee of what was to occur. Edwina
Lindgren, 1776 Olympian Ln. expressed concern with two-story
structures and the amount of asphalt. Jim Toresdahl requested
consistent land uses.
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Planning Commission - September 19, 1995 -• Page 4
Director Stamey acknowledged correspondence received from Jim
Welch/Storer Ranch Co-owner supporting Plan "A", opposing Plan
"B", requesting the Commission conditionally approve Plan "A",
subject to the property being sold to the developers. In
addition, staff acknowledged the following in the packet:
neighborhood suggestions for the covenants, reduced map of
Mountain Park Subdivision, Plan "B" Petition, and letters in
support of Plan "B" from Karen Zipser, Jane Hinson, Mr. and
Mrs. Ron Harvey, and Ron Harvey, Mr. and Mrs. Harvey Tucker
(2), Mr. and Mrs. John Zollman, and Ralph Nicholas. A report
written by Carol Prince (Lone Pine resident) presented to the
Town Board August 22, 1995 was also acknowledged.
Chairman Sager presented copies of Planning Commission minutes
dated November 20, 1984 where the annexation and concept plan
of the Storer Ranch Addition was favorably recommended, with
23 conditions, to the Town Board and minutes of Town Board
December 4, 1984 approving the annexation and development
which was to occur as a P.U.D. Attorney White clarified that
the P.U.D. regulations have been deleted from the Code and
that in 1986, the entire Town was rezoned and the 35 acres was
zoned C-0 Commercial; the previous 23 conditions have been
deleted as well. Director Stamey reported that the current
Draft of the Comprehensive Plan has not been adopted—the Plan
is for future land use only at this time. Attorney White
confirmed that as Plan "C" was not a "formal" plan, it could
not be approved without benefit of an advertised public
hearing, and that Plans "A" or "B" must be acted upon
separately. Staff also clarified that the Town has not
received the technical details on the Developers' proposal
requested by the Commission in August.
It was moved and seconded (Pohl/Burgess) Flan "A" for the
Storer Ranch Addition be continued until the October 17, 1995
Planning Commission meeting, and in no event shall the
decision on Plan ,,A" be made later than the November 21, 1995
Planning Commission meeting, and it passed unanimously.
It was moved and seconded (Pohl/Burgess) Plan "B" also be
continued until the October 17, 1995 Planning Commission
meeting, and in no event shall the decision on Plan "B" be
made later than the November 21, 1995 Planning Commission
meeting, and it passed unanimously.
With consensus by, and direction of the Planning Commission,
staff, in the interim, is to work with the Developers and Lone
Pine Neighborhood to refine Plan "C" and attempt to reach a
compromise.
Mr. Van Horn stated he anticipates being prepared by the
October 17 meeting. Ron Harvey commented that if the
residents are involved in the decision-making process, they
will assist in meeting the October deadline.
Chairman Sager declared a 10-minute recess at 11:30 A.M.
Chairman Sager reconvened the meeting at 11:40 A.M.
3. SUBDIVISIONS.
3.A. Preliminary Plat of Mountain Park Subdivision (Storer
Ranch), Richard Wille and Jim Wehr/Applicant. This item was
previously continued under Item #2 above.
3.B. Amended Plat of Lot 1, Stanley Meadows Addition, Town of
Estes Park/Applicant. It was moved and seconded
(Burgess/Thomas) the Amended Plat be continued to October 17,
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Planning Commission - September 19# 1995 - Page 5
1995, and it passed unanimously.
3.C« Amended Plat of Lots 7, 8, 25, and a Portion of Lot 24.
Block 10, Town of Estes Park (Lewiston Condominiums), Rex
Miller/Applicant. It was moved and seconded (Thomas/Pohl) the
Amended Plat be continued to October 17, 1995, and it passed
unanimously.
3.D. Amended Plat of the Manske Subdivision# Brook & Avalon
Drive, Glen S Margaret Manske/Applicants. The intent of this
submittal is to divide the property known as Manske Addition.
The property consists of one lot of 1.55 acres and the
proposed lot split will create two conforming lots of 0.90
acres (39,249 sq. ft.), and 0.65 acres (28,348 sq. ft.). Both
lots will be served with public utilities. There will be a
detention pond in the southeast corner of Lot 1, and the storm
water management report has been prepared. This proposed
subdivision qualifies as a minor subdivision under Section
16.12.070 and may be considered as a final plat.
Applicant's Representative Van Horn reviewed the staff report,
noting the owner's concurrence. Jeannette Villers, adjacent
resident, questioned what the maximum density would be on each
lot. Staff responded that one duplex on each lot would be
allowed. There being no further discussion, it was moved and
seconded (Pohl/Thomas) the Amended Plat of the Manske Addition
be favorably recommended to the Town Board, subject to the
following conditions, and it passed unanimously;
1. Indicate adjacent lot information on the plat.
2. Provide proof of inclusion, or application for inclusion,
in the NCWCD prior to Town Board review.
3. As Lots 1 and 2 share a common driveway, a maintenance
agreement must be added to the plat.
4. Indicate angle point information for 15' utility
easement.
5. Detention pond detail be approved by Public Works prior
to the first building permit. Detention pond to be
constructed with first building permit - this note to be
added on plat.
Representative Van Horn reported that he does not anticipate
NCWCD to respond by the September 26 Town Board meeting, thus
this plat will be placed on the Board's October 10 Agenda.
3.E. Amended Plat of Lots 20 & 21, Grand Estates Subdivision,
James Watson/Applicant. Bill Van Horn, Applicant's
Representative, stated that the intent of this amended plat is
to adjust the interior lot line of Lots 2 0 and 21, Grand
Estates Subdivision to place all improvements (house, garage
and storage building) on one lot. The existing residence is
on Lot 20, and the garage and barn are on Lot 21. Staff
believes it is possible to configure the proposed lots to
provide two conforming lots (the garage and residence would be
located on one lot and the storage building on the other lot) .
The Applicant contends that Board of Adjustment consideration
is unnecessary as the owner is not changing the existing non
conformance, just reversing it. Director Stamey noted that he
will confirm whether Board of Adjustment consideration is
required. There were no comments from the audience. It was
moved and seconded (Burgess/Gilfillan) the Amended Plat of
Lots 20 and 21, Grand Estates Subdivision be favorably
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Planning Commission - September 19, 1995 - Page 6
recommended to the Board of Trustees subject to all existing
service lines be shown and placed in easements, as
appropriate, and a 10' utility easement be provided along the
perimeter of each lot, and it passed unanimously. Mr. Van
Horn confirmed that, if needed, the owner will apply for a
variance.
3.F. Amended Plat of Lot 2, Murphy Subdivision, 753 & 755
Prospect Ave., Habitat for Humanitv/Applicant. Mindy Klowden,
Habitat Representative, reported that the proposal will create
two single-family lots to accommodate one duplex for
affordable housing. Director Stamey reviewed the staff report
which includes a Special Review Request to grant an exception
to Section 17.20.020, B., 6., e., to reduce the minimum lot
area of 18,000 sq. ft. to 13,491 sq. ft. An access easement
is shown on Lot 2B for the benefit of Lot 2A. This plat
qualifies as a minor subdivision and, as such, may be
considered as a final plat. The Code provides that each lot
or dwelling unit assured for at least ten years to be sold at
a price of not more than 300% of the Larimer County median
family income; an exception to the minimum lot area may be
granted down to two-thirds of the area normally required. The
deed restrictions proposed for the property should be reviewed
by the Town Attorney for Code conformance prior to Town Board
consideration. Ms. Klowden confirmed that separate water
services will be installed, however, said lines were not yet
completed. There were no comments from the audience. It was
moved and seconded (Thomas/Gilfillan) the Amended Plat of Lot
2, Murphy Subdivision be favorably recommended to the Board of
Trustees, incorporating the following, and it passed
unanimously:
1. Add access maintenance agreement to the plat.
2. Two weeks (minimum) prior to Town Board review, the
Applicant is to provide a copy of the deed restrictions
regarding sales price of the units, for review by the
Town Attorney.
3. Separate water service lines and taps be provided for
each unit.
4. Locate the lot on the vicinity map.
3.G. Amended Plat of Lots 3 S 4. DeVille Subdivision, 1110
Woodstock Dr., James Barleen/Applicant. This amended plat
proposes to combine two existing lots into one lot. Kerry
Prochaska, Applicant's Representative, reported that the
amended plat is being proposed along with a development plan
which converts the existing dinner theater use to a
combination gas station/convenience store/ video store. Items
contained in the staff recommendation have been completed.
Director Stamey requested the dedication of additional right-
of-way note #1 be modified to: "Woodstock Drive right-of-way
dedicated to the Town of Estes Park with this plat." In
addition, the dedication statement is to dedication of streets
to be added to the plat. Mr. Prochaska confirmed that the
sanitation lines are within an existing easement. There being
no comments from the audience, it was moved and seconded
(Thomas/Burgess) the Amended Plat of Lots 3 & 4, DeVille
Subdivision be favorably recommended to the Board of Trustees,
subject to the following conditions, and it passed
unanimously:
1. Dedicate the additional Woodstock Drive right-of-way with
this plat.
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Planning Commission - September 19, 1995 - Page 7
2. The 10' easements be identified as utility and drainage
easements.
3. Add drainage maintenance note to plat.
4. Drainage ditch to be hydro-seeded in early Spring of
1996.
5. Show Stanley Avenue right-of-way and street.
6. Show lots on vicinity map.
7. Modify dedication statement to reflect dedication of
street right-of-way.
DEVELOPMENT PLANS.
4.A. Development Plan #95-9, Lots 3 & 4, DeVille Subdivision,
1110 Woodstock Dr., James Barleen/Applicant. This development
plan proposes a change of use for an existing building, from
dinner theater to gas station/convenience store/video store.
The existing building will be renovated, adding 100 sq. ft. to
the structure. A gasoline pump island with canopy will also
be added. A second access off Woodstock is proposed to be
added, with parking and site circulation revised to
accommodate the new pump island. Approximately 11,500 sq. ft.
of existing asphalt pavement will be removed to create
planting beds along Highway 7 and Woodstock Drive, to be
planted to Town standards. The height and general
architectural style of the building will remain unchanged;
however, a new store front and public entrance will be located
on the North side of the building to serve the video store.
Applicant's Representative Prochaska reported that changes
have been made to the plat subsequent to staff comments.
Mr. Prochaska reported that the Applicant is dealing with CDOT
concerning the Highway 7 widening project and drainage
improvements. The sidewalk clearance width has been increased
from 5' to 7'; discussion has not yet occurred with CDOT on
the existing hike/bike path along Hwy. 7; the intersection has
been re-designed and RMC will review changes with Public Works
Director Linnane to ensure the configuration is sufficient to
meet the needs of said intersection.
Commissioner comments included; confirmation of where the
sewer line on the south side of Woodstock was located; whether
the corner requirements at the western access off Woodstock
Dr. meet Town standards relative to stacking of vehicles (a
total of eight vehicles are being proposed - Director Linnane
noted that should a problem arise, the Applicant would be
requested to change configuration and add a one-way arrow);
confirmation that parking stops would be installed and
indicated on the plat; confirmation that the existing 30'
western access is non-conforming and that it will be
eliminated; and that lighting be contained on-site.
There were no comments from the audience. It was moved and
seconded (Pohl/Gilfillan) Development Plan #95-9 be approved
subject to the following conditions, and it passed
unanimously:
1. Provide for a 20 ft. edge radius for the driveways.
2. Coordinate the drainage improvements with CDOT and Public
Works.
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Planning Commission - September 19, 1995 - Page 8
3. Provide irrigation for landscaping.
4. Substitute trees for shrubs on a mutually agreed upon
formula with staff (proposed 4% shrubs = 1 tree).
5. Provide for a minimum sidewalk clearance width of 5 ft.
(e.g. widen sidewalk to 7 feet) , and provide a curb ramp.
6. Show typical parking dimensions.
7. In coordination with COOT and Public Works, determine
feasibility of placing pedestrian/bike path on the
western edge of this site.
8. Show new alignment of Woodstock with horizontal curve
radius. Show Stanley Avenue right-of-way and street.
9. Lighting to be confined on-site.
4. B. Development Plan 93-12, Lot 1, Booth Resubdivision, John
& Sandra Gilf illan/Applicant. Commissioner Gilfillan declared
a conflict of interest and vacated the room. Paul Kochevar,
Applicant's Representative, reviewed staff comments indicating
a second phase of eight units for a total 14 rental units plus
one manager's units are being proposed. The first phase
consisting of six units and an office/manager's unit has been
constructed. The basic layout of the site would remain the
same with the duplex unit footprints longer and more narrow.
Most of the mature trees are being retained.
The total project conforms with the minimum lot area
requirement of 103,500 sq. ft. The site area, when adjusted
for floodplain, equals 109,482 sq. ft. Parking will be
installed for the second phase (7-10 additional spaces plus
two for the manager) during construction. Unit numbers will
be indicated on the parking spaces and as Units 1 and 3 are
handicapped-accessible, handicapped spaces will be available,
and parking bumpers will be installed. Additional parking for
the third phase will occur in 1996. A note regarding phased
parking will be added to the plat. Discussion with the Estes
Park Sanitation District will occur within the next few weeks
and issues will be resolved prior to any additional building
permits being issued.
As there were no comments from the audience, it was moved and
seconded (Burgess/Thomas) Development Plan #93-12 for
Riverwood Phase II, Lot 1 Booth Resubdivision be approved
contingent upon the following, and it passed by the following
votes: Those voting "Yes" Commissioners Burgess, Pohl, Sager
and Thomas. Those voting "No" none. Those "Abstaining"
Commissioner Gilfillan.
1. Identify two handicapped accessible units.
2. Identify typical building and walkway dimensions.
3. Clarify parking note.
ANNEXATIONS.
5. A. Miqnerv Addition, Highway 7, West of Carriage Hills, 6th
Filing, Herb & Sherry Miqnerv/Applicant. Chairman Sager
opened the public hearing. Representative Kochevar noted that
the proposed 4-acre parcel is zoned E-Estate in the County.
There is a residence located on Lot 1, and a well on Lot 2.
Bluebird Lane is private and it cannot be utilized for access
as originally planned. Thus, a vicinity map was presented
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Planning Commission - September 19, 1995 - Page 9
that provided an alternative access for Lot 2. Seven existing
homes access their residences via an access easement, and the
Applicant is proposing extending the easement for Lot 2. The
Applicant agrees with staff comments, and is requesting E-
Estate zoning.
Mr. Kochevar confirmed that adjacent property owner Mr.
Okamoto is willing to provide an easement; however access has
not yet been obtained from Mr. Meyer. Director Linnane
reported that staff has not had an opportunity to verify the
slope and width of the proposed access (driveway).
Audience comments were heard from the following adjacent
property owners: Corky Sorensen, who expressed her opposition
to any access as, by agreement, they must maintain the road,
traffic has increased due to the Applicant's business and
adjacent rental property. Eberhard Meyer, who stated Bluebird
Lane is private and he intends it to remain so. In 1974 he
provided an easement for Mr. Okamoto for access. If Mr.
Okamoto has provided an additional easement and the document
has been recorded, the document must be voided. Teddy Haines,
who expressed concern with water relative to existing wells.
The well on proposed Lot 2 is inactive, if it is activated,
the well could negatively impact all other wells. The
existing wells are "minimum yield" providing from 8-10 gallons
of water per hour. Jon VerSchurr, who reported he had his
well fractured to provide additional water. The well has
since reverted to producing a minimum yield. Mr. VerSchurr
also commented on a previous plat that addressed the private
driveway. Staff responded that the Commission had no
authority to request the Okamoto easement to Mignery be
voided. Ann Leonard stated she had no objection to the
annexation, however, she was concerned with the well situation
and additional traffic. Robert Haines requested clarification
on annexation and Town water and sewer facilities.
Mr. Kochevar stated that the Applicant advised him to withdraw
the Annexation Petition should neighborhood concerns be
expressed. There being no further testimony. Chairman Sager
declared the public hearing closed. Acting upon the
Applicant's request, it was moved and seconded
(Burgess/Thomas) the Annexation Petition for Mignery Addition
be withdrawn, and it passed unanimously.
5.B. Fish Creek Addition, (formerly Waterburv Addition), Joan
Waterburv/Applicant. Chairman Sager opened the public
hearing. Paul Kochevar, Applicant's Representative presented
a map with additional detail indicating Lot 1 on the west side
of Fish Creek, and Lot 2 on the east side. This is a proposed
subdivision combined with an annexation request. The site
consists of two existing unimproved parcels under the same
ownership zoned as E-Estate in the County. The Applicant is
requesting R-S zoning and subdivision into three lots of just
under one acre each. Additional land is being dedicated as
public right-of-way along Fish Creek Road.
The proposed subdivision qualifies as a minor subdivision
under 16.12.070, and as such may be considered as a final
plat. The proposed annexation meets all applicable criteria,
and the requested R-S zoning is consistent with the character
of the surrounding neighborhood, particularly considering the
size of the proposed lots.
A 15' public access easement along Fish Creek Road will be
provided, and an agreement from adjacent resident Mr. Campbell
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Planning Commission - September 19, 1995 - Page 10
for access off Country Club Drive has been obtained.
As there were no comments from the audience, Chairman Sager
declared the public hearing closed. It was moved and seconded
(Thomas/Burgess) the Fish Creek Addition be favorably
recommended to the Town Board, contingent upon the following,
and it passed unanimously.
1. Rectify legal description and annexation map.
2. Show former property line.
3. Revise wetlands note.
4. Each lot to be served by public water and sewer.
5. Prior to approval of the final plat by the Board of
Trustees, the developer finalize the water line
reimbursement provision with Gerald Palmer.
6. Provide a copy of the access easement from Mr. Campbell.
7. A note be added to the plat regarding the maintenance
agreement for the access easement for Lots 2 and 3.
8. Add a note to the plat that only single-family lots will
be allowed.
Commissioner Burgess noted the Applicant's effort in improving the
plan with this submittal.
It was move and seconded (Pohl/Burgess) the Pish Creek
Addition be zoned R-S Residential, and it passed unanimously.
6. COUNTY REFERRAL.
6. A. Marvs Lake Estates. Rudolf & Hilde Frank/Applicant.
Senior Planner Joseph reported on his discussion with Larimer
County Zoning Administrator Jerry White concerning zoning for
this site. Upon research, Mr. White has determined that the
property is currently zoned E-Estate which raises a question
as to the appropriateness of a bed and breakfast
accommodation. Applicant's Representative Kerry Prochaska was
unaware of the E—Estate zoning. Real Estate Agent Judy
Nystrom advised that the purchasers were assured by Larimer
County that the property was zoned A-Accommodations, and
requested the Commission consider the proposal regardless of
zoning issues. Staff commented that the Town's bed and
breakfast regulations differ from those of the County, and
that due to the discrepancy in the zoning designation, it is
inappropriate to consider this proposal at this time.
Director Stamey will so advise Larimer County of the
Commission's discussion on this proposal.
REPORTS.
7.A. Commercial Zoning# Phil Switzer. In a letter dated
August 13, 1995, Phil Switzer requested properties bounded by
Highway 7 on the east and Stanley Ave. on the west be rezoned
to provide more equitable setbacks that would allow for the
existing setbacks of existing buildings. During the mid-
eighties, when the majority of these properties were rezoned
to C-O, most properties were already built upon and thus, they
did not conform to the new zoning setbacks. Staff reported
the request does have merit and that it will be considered
during the Phase III of the new Comprehensive Plan.
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Planning Commission - September 19, 1995 - Page ll
Staff noted the Comprehensive Plan Work Session scheduled
Thursday, September 21 at 1:30 for the Planning Commission.
Chairman Sager reported that the Planning Commission will
resume their winter meeting schedule with their October 17
meeting (work session at 12:00 noon, with the public meeting
held at 1:30 P.M.).
There being no further business. Chairman Sager adjourned the
meeting at 1:30 A.M.
Vickie O'Connor, CMC/AAE, Town Clerk