The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES Estes Park Planning Commission 1991-11-19BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Park Planning Commission November 19, 1991 Commission: Attending: Also Attending: Absent: Chairman Sager, Commissioners Wendell Amos, Mark Brown, Harriet Burgess, Alma Hix, Lariry Wexler and Richard Wood Chairman Sager, Commissioners Amos, Brown, Burgess, A. Hix, Wexler and Wood Trustee/Liaison Garrett, Community Development Director Stamey, Public Works Director Linnane, streets/Parks Superintendent Speedlin, Deputy Clerk Heifner None Chairman Sager called the meeting to order at 1:30 P.M. 1. MINUTES. Minutes of the October 15, 1991 Planning commission were approved as submitted. development plans. neVille2JU amendment to nerelopment Plan 91^SVvfeLn. cl^ ffnr-A nlll/applxcaa Chairman Sager opened a rblic •^e-JSUe^h^/igent fo? building .°f Therruns w§d constructe^of^hain^lin^^d screened with a six f ^ the main level kennel area amendment is necessary ^ , f at least two years and is SI?fgr^Siacehda?ybrsnmPa??2°Lendnfraartea in the lower level. There being no further testimony. Chairman Sager declared the public hearing closed. nrevious Planning Commission Director ®tamey noted ^ Pnment specifically Item 8. of ?nlaininrcorisslon minutes which states: 8. Noise - ^PP^^^notice^hand peraanently Premedy immediately upon ^ot'lce' , -^-n^osed in the future riSiSorbfya?iowSesSfnPoirreacoL an issue. It was moved and seaonHei (Kood-Hix^)^! tho^v^Mendment to approved!nL proposL^i staff, aid it passed unanimously. ifillap/^^PPlicaI^ Chairman Sager opened a PUbUc hesaringai Amendment to the Development PI landra Gilf illan/Applicant. 2, Henningson Addition, Job rSf representing the Paul Kochevar/Estes Park aTne?dment to the developmentApplicant, stated the proposed amen<taentcess __ the plan consists of a mod1:L,f 1>f(ft^hanaed from two lanes to one crossing Fall e^. WP;1Tfr0poSed Sue to the excessive cost of lane. This amendment is proposea uu BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Park Planning Commission - November 19, 1991 - Page 2 a two lane bridge compared to one lane. Chairman Sager declared the public hearing closed. Director Stamey stated the proposed amendment is not in conflict witn the original special review approval and the access request is consistent with a number of accommodation sites along Fall River. The Public Works Department is in concurrence with the request, providing the 24 ft. wide approach has a stacking capacity of three car lengths. It was moved (Wexler-Burgess) the Amendment to Development Plan for Special Review 91-2, Lot 2, Henningson Addition be approved, and it passed unanimously. 3. finSDIVISIGNS 3.A.Peaceful Pines Subdivision of Lot 3, Dannels Z & Bonnie Dekker/Appli^i^ lots. This subdivision al P icant has requested an Pinewood Lane cul-de sac. oarradius of 40 ft., compared exception to J^ggcause of concerns, i.e. snow removalto the standard 45 ft. Because or recoinmended that a standard C<^,a^ul-de-sac be -oving^^tte hasealso the^cul-de-sac^design needs to have a 2% cross slope. Robert L. Dekker/Appli^aLa;ieCOv^sendesignSd ^T?bJtSidard at the end of Pinewood Lane;,wt;Lndlrd 45 foot radius would radius of 40 feet because a pine. It require the removal oife:fTi^0tJ:aC40. radius and only fill.near is believed that by very good chance of survival.this large tree. It will have chaYi^an Sager declared the Hearing no furt?ie^#ldteSco^iskioner Brown questioned whether Dublic hearing closed. Comm nossibility of extending the Applicant had con®;L<i®re1 ._n^. i ? property for a potential Pinev/ood Lane through t e pp ^^d properties, should they loop connection to the d Applicant's engineer stated bir°waesdare1Xpli=anS'sf i.S:ent tP0 .niniBi.e, not na.amaze traffic in this area. 4. all items noted in staff's Director Stamey st^eo^ leaving only the question of recommendations have be®<a' cui-de-iac. It was moved and size end slope of the proposed oul de s^^^^ peaceful Pines ^SvisiofmooriotBr;3,a Dor?^ste%asaitw\otnh the conS??ion?aend0 it passed unaninously. construct a standard ^le-de-nao with 45 «edrluts0aJ^i^^ thePcul-de-sachinAthe1proposedPlocation or relocate,. chairman Sager opened a hsainruSn^Addition Plat and Special Review 't Gerald Palmer/Appl leant 'rorek1ne>f'avir1oafPatS| ^prW and ft.Applicant is proposing to subdivide thrs 1. BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Park Planning Commission - November 19, 1991 - Page 3 site into fifteen lots for single-family development. Two open space outlets (Outlets A and B) are proposed. Outlet B preserves open space and wetlands along Fish Creek. Director Stamey explained the development and pointed out that by preserving the wetlands and the area along Fish Creek, the Applicant can request a transfer of the number of lots that could have been built at this location, to other portions of the site. Robert Lawrence, President of Greater Fish Creek Association, referred to his November 16, 1991 letter to the Planning commission, wherein Mr. Lawrence expressed hxs objection to the proposed development, in that it i;f;Lolates. tJ?e character of the neighborhood, and the associated investment values. Seymour Graham/Estes Park developer also spoke in opposition to the proposed development on the basis of similar logic. Jim Malone/an adjacent property owner, stat.e.do long as Planning Commission regulations are satisfied by developer he has no objection to the development. Steve ™Stto the Hearing no further testimony,public hearing closed. Director Stameytat^ed all c°allowlng had been met and placed on t oorenrided fWexler-Hix) the further discussion, it was mo^® .a^0 So> saint Vrain Addition Final Plat & Special Reviey' . . eant be favorably recommended following conditions: inclusion of staff recommendations #1-«H contained in its report; under Special Review, sPD1ea^nal”9lBpor“ncSeibecaS“ determined the outlets are . Ji wildlife migration of value for animal »>^jtats, also recognizing “e" re^ng sere lot line development, Staff determination allowing for °0J^Jnaia°n (cimmon certain6 I'o^ a"9 f permissible development alternative. 4. COUNTY REFERRALS 4.2^a Park Ent^aTice Estates. 4-Vi 1 e reouest for rezoning to the Larimer County submitted tb . advisory review and Estes park Planning 13 iotsY in the Park comment. The fiT.om m_Tourist to E-Estate. Town Entrance Estates Subdivision this subdivision. The staff has met with resHldec;ntaS srnfqle-family subdivision and senWdaa Telfe/of VuVporf 1. 2. 3. BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Park Planning Commission - November 19, 1991 - Page 4 Larimer County, thanking them for the opportunity to review and respond, and it passed unanimously. 4.B. Morris Rezoning, Tyrone & Lois Morris/Apolicant. Larimer County submitted this request for rezoning to the Estes Park Planning Commission for advisory review and comment. Staff explained this matter involves the rezoning of approximately six (6) acres from E-Estate to A-Accommodations. Jess Batchelder/EVIA commented the EVIA will unanimously oppose this rezoning request. Commissioner A. Hix thanked the Larimer County Planning Commission for eliciting the Estes Park Planning Commission's input, but declined comment, and Commissioner Wexler concurred. Chairman Sager stated that Larimer County's rules and regulations allow for site specific requests of an assigned zone, contrary to Estes Park's zoning regulations. Within several Town zones, a multitude of use rights is allowed. Staff and Commissioners questioned how site specific rezoning is administered over the long-term. Commissioner Brown noted that to allow this area to develop zoned A-Accommodations may, in fact, be somewhat in the interests of the individuals. Commission consensus was to direct staff to respond to Larimer County stating the aforementioned comments. 5.ADJOURNMENT There being no further business. Chairman Sager adjourned the meeting at 4:00 P.M. to a Discussion/Study Session. 6. DISCUSSION/STUDY SESSION 6.A. Preliminary Concept Plan, Our Lady of the Mountains Catholic Church, Burt Wadman/Applicant. In a study session, the Planning Commission and staff met with representatives of Our Lady of the Mountains Catholic Church, and interested neighbors. Burt Wadman, Paul Kochevar, Kerry Prochaska, and Father Gabel explained the church's long range plans (20-40 years). A schematic concept plan was provided. The next immediate priority is development of additional parking. Director Stamey will summarize this study session in a memorandum that will be distributed to the Planning Commission, church representatives and neighbors in attendance. The study session adjourned at 5:00 P.M. Donna Heifner, Deput^^Town Clerk