CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD …€¦ · · 2012-06-19city of colorado springs planning commission record-of-decision . the city planning commission held

CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION

THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ITS REGULAR MEETING ON THURSDAY, JULY 17, 2008 AT

PIKES PEAK REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT CENTER 2880 INTERNATIONAL CIRCLE

COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO 80910

CHAIRMAN HANSEN CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER AT 8:30 A.M. THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 5:30 P.M.

PRESENT: Butcher None

ABSENT:

Butlak Cleveland Gonzalez Hansen Hartsell Magill Stroh Suthers

Mr. William Healy, Planning and Community Development Director ALSO IN ATTENDANCE

Mr. Marc Smith, City Staff Attorney

Mr. Healy announced the following correspondence was received after printing of the agenda: COMMUNICATIONS

• Item 4 – letter from adjacent property owner regarding access concerns. • Item 8 – letter adjacent property owners in opposition • Item 11 – revised technical modifications distributed by staff, page 206 of the agenda

Moved by Commissioner Suthers, seconded by Commissioner Cleveland to approve the June 5, 2008 minutes. Motion carried 8-0 (Commissioner Butcher excused).

MINUTES

NOTE: To view any Exhibits and/or Figures referenced in this document, please contact the City Planning Commission Secretary at 719-385-5356.

July 17, 2008 Page 2


CONSENT

ITEM/PLANNER PROJECT DESCRIPTION PAGE NO. ITEM NO.: A.1 CPC MP 01-00147-A2MJ08 ITEM NO.: A.2 CPC ZC 08-00004 ITEM NO.: A.3 CPC CP 01-00148-A4MJ08 TAX ID NO.: 5307000095 PLANNER: Larry Larsen

A request by N.E.S. Inc. on behalf of Chocamo LLP for approval of the following development applications:

1. A major amendment to the master plan for Greenbriar/Powerwood consisting of 15.72 acres.

2. A change of zone classification from M-1/PBC/AO-CAD/CR (Light Industrial and Planned Business Center with Airport Overlay – Commercial Airport District and Conditions of Record) to PBC/AO-CAD consisting of 15.72 acres.

3. A major amendment to an approved concept plan for Greenbriar/Powerwood Concept Plan consisting of 15.72 acres in a proposed PBC/AO-CAD (Planned Business Center with Airport Overlay – Commercial Airport District) zone.

The subject property is located west of Templeton Gap, immediately east of the closed Templeton Gap landfill.

7

ITEM NO.: B CPC ZC 08-00097 TAX ID NO.: 7413401032 PLANNER: Tim Scanlon

A request by the City of Colorado Springs Historic Preservation Board on behalf of Chadbourn Spanish Gospel Mission for approval of a change of zone classification from M-2 (Heavy Industrial) to M-2/HP (Heavy Industrial with Historic Preservation Overlay) consisting of 0.26 acre located southwest of Conejos Street and Cimino Drive, addressed as 402 Conejos Street.

9

ITEM NO.: C CPC CU 08-00098 TAX ID NO.: 7324402013 PLANNER: Heather Rose

A request by Lisa Peterson on behalf of Coronado Real Estate Invest LLC for approval of a conditional use to allow a Business Park in the PIP-2 (Planned Industrial Park) zone district for Direct Buy consisting of 1.55 acres located at 680 West Garden of the Gods Road. This file was originally submitted as File No. AR MDP 08-00241, which was withdrawn and re-submitted as a conditional use after review.

10



ITEM/PLANNER PROJECT DESCRIPTION PAGE NO. ITEM NO: D CPC CU 07-00362 TAX ID NO.: 6409217010 PLANNER: Lonna Thelen

A request by Yergensen, Obering, & Whittaker on behalf of Bishop and Diocese of Colorado for approval of a conditional use to allow a charter school (Grades K-6) use in a R1-6 (Single-Family Residential) zoned property consisting of 1.38 acres located at 1107 N. Union Boulevard and 1802 East San Rafael Street.

11

ITEM NO: E CPC ZC 08-00090 TAX ID NO.: 7413401025 PLANNER: Ryan Tefertiller

A request by the City of Colorado Springs for approval of a change of zone classification from PF/cr/SS (Public Facility with Conditions of Record and Streamside Overlay) to C-5/SS (Intermediate Business with the Streamside Overlay) consisting of 3.14 acres located at 30 Cimino Drive.

12

ITEM NO: F CPC CU 08-00045 TAX ID NO.: 6414101066 PLANNER: Mike Schultz

A request by WestWorks Engineering on behalf of Pierce Properties LLC for approval of a conditional use to allow Business Park use in a PIP-2/AO-CAD/APZ2 (Planned Industrial Park with Airport Overlay - Commercial Airport District and Airport Protection Zone). The subject property consists of 1.09 acres and is located at 4615 Town Center Drive.

13

ITEM NO: G.1 CPC NV 08-00048 ITEM NO: G.2 CPC CU 08-00046 ITEM NO: G.3 CPC FP 08-00047 TAX ID NO.: 7327101004 PLANNER: James Mayerl

A request by Rockwell Consulting Inc. on behalf of Garden of the Gods - Contadora LLC for approval of the following development applications:

1. A non-use variance for parking and building setback from a residential zone.

2. A conditional use to allow a Health Club use in a PIP-1 (Planned Industrial Park) zone consisting of 6.872 acres.

3. Final subdivision plat approval of Shops at Arrowswest Filing No. 2 consisting of 5 lots in a PIP-1 (Planned Industrial Park) zone consisting of 9.471 acres.

The subject property is located at 4195, 4145, 4125, 4165 and 4185 Arrowswest Drive.

14

ITEM NO: H CPC DP 94-00031-A6MJ08 TAX ID NO.: 7324401026 PLANNER: James Mayerl

A request by The Larson Group, Inc. on behalf of Quartz/Driscoll Partnership LLP for approval of a major amendment to an approved Development Plan for Micro Metals with administrative relief requested for lot coverage. The subject property consists of 9.40 acres, is zoned PIP-1/cr (Planned Industrial Park with conditions of record) and located at 515 Elkton Drive.

16



ITEM NO: I CPC CU 08-00094 TAX ID NO.: 7413409004 PLANNER: Sharon Robinson

A conditional use to allow a two-sided, 98 square feet for each face, billboard at above-ground level in a C-6 (General Business) zoned property consisting of 5.63 acres located at 610 Abbot Lane.

17

NEW BUSINESS

ITEM/PLANNER PROJECT DESCRIPTION PAGE NO. ITEM NO.: 4.a CPC MP 03-00031-A1MN07 ITEM NO.: 4.b CPC PUZ 07-00344 ITEM NO.: 4.c CPC PUP 07-00345 TAX ID NO.: 5306000103, 5306300001 PLANNER: Larry Larsen

A request by Matrix Design Group, Inc. on behalf of Woodmen Land Development LLC and Woodmen Land Asset LLC for approval of the following development applications:

a. A major amendment to an approved master plan for The Ridge at Woodmen consisting of 90.52 acres

b. A change of zone classification from A/AO-CAD (Agricultural with Airport Overlay – Commercial Airport District) to PUD (Planned Unit Development; Mixed Use: Commercial & Multi-Family Residential; 60 feet max. bldg. ht.; 12 – 24.99 du/ac with Airport Overlay - Commercial Airport District) consisting of 90.52 acres located northwest of Black Forest Road and E. Woodmen Road.

c. A PUD Concept Plan for Woodmen Towne Center Concept Plan consisting of 90.52 acres in a proposed PUD/AO-CAD zoned property located northwest of Black Forest Road and E. Woodmen Road.

18

ITEM NO: 5 AR NV 08-00192(AP) TAX ID NO.: 6418210014 PLANNER: Sue Matz

An appeal by Law Offices of Buxman Kwitek & Ohlsen Professional Corporation on behalf of Rod Beers Inc. of an administrative decision regarding a non-use variance request to allow 60-foot spacing requirement from residential property where 200 feet is required. The variance was requested to allow a tavern. The 0.09-acre, C-6/HR (General Business with Highrise Area Overlay) zoned property is located at 12 East Kiowa Street.

23



ITEM/PLANNER PROJECT DESCRIPTION PAGE NO. ITEM NO: 6.a CPC ZC 08-00069 ITEM NO: 6.b CPC CU 08-00070 TAX ID NO.: 5330201002 PLANNER: Lonna Thelen

A request by Art C. Klein Construction, Inc. on behalf of Tutt Commercial Center LLC for approval of the following development applications:

a. A change of zone classification from C-5/cr/AO-CAD (Intermediate Business with conditions of record and Airport Overlay - Commercial Airport District) to C-5/cr/AO-CAD (Intermediate Business with conditions of record and Airport Overlay - Commercial Airport District).

b. A conditional use to allow an Auto Dealership with retail sales, car wash, and service repair in a proposed C-5/cr/AO-CAD.

The subject property consists of 4.3 acres and is located at 4081 to 4143 Tutt Boulevard.

27

ITEM NO: 7 CPC NV 08-00084 TAX ID NO.: 6408329007 PLANNER: Erin McCauley

A request by Leona & Jack Slocum for approval of a non-use variance to the following section of the City Code:

• Section 7.3.105.A.1.d - Side Yard Setback: To allow 1-foot side yard setback where 5 feet is required.

This variance is requested to allow an existing carport to remain. The 0.13-acre, R1-6 (Single-Family Residential) zoned property is located at 525 North Cedar Street.

31

ITEM NO: 8 CPC UV 08-00067 TAX ID NO.: 6406409001 PLANNER: Steve Tuck

A request by Debra Stirling & Melanie Marsden on behalf of Sam Rubinson for approval of a use variance to allow veterinary service, medical offices or general offices in a R1-6 (Single-Family Residential) zoned property. The subject property consists of 0.11 acre and is located at 1730 North Corona Street.

33

ITEM NO: 9 CPC MP 84-00361-A1MN07 TAX ID NO.: 0 PLANNER: Rick O’Connor

A request by NES, Inc., City of Colorado Springs Parks and Recreation Department and City of Colorado Springs Fire Department on behalf of Classic Homes for approval of a minor amendment to the Stetson Ridge Master Plan consisting of 40 acres located northeast of Peterson Road and Dublin Boulevard. The changes include the inclusion of a fire station, change to single-family residential for a portion of a previously identified community park and the reduction in residential density.

36



ITEM/PLANNER PROJECT DESCRIPTION PAGE NO.

ITEM NO: 10 AR MP 83-00423-A7MN07 TAX ID NO.: 5318200023 PLANNER: Rick O’Connor

A request by NES, Inc. and City of Colorado Springs Fire Department on behalf of RDS for approval of a minor adjustment to a Master Plan for Stetson Hills Phase 2 (Ridgeview) for the following actions:

1. The elimination of a prior fire station site (Tutt and Article); 2. Adjustment to commercial along Powers Blvd., west of Tutt

Boulevard and south of Dublin Boulevard, and The reduction of residential density in the southwest corner of Dublin Boulevard and Peterson Road.

38

ITEM NO: 11 CPC CU 08-00095 TAX ID NO.: 533040118, 5330401109 PLANNER: Jim Gagliardi

A request by LDC, Inc. on behalf of Village Seven Baptist Church DBA Springs Ranch Baptist Church for approval of a conditional use to allow a District 49 charter school in a PBC/AO-CAD (Planned Business Center with Airport Overlay – Commercial Airport District) zone. The proposed school use would be co-located in the previously approved Spring Ranch Baptist Church building. Temporary modular buildings are also proposed on the site to house the school until the completion of the principal building. The property is located southwest of Peterson Road and N. Carefree Circle at 3850 Pony Tracks Drive.

39

ITEM NO: 12 CPC ZC 08-00086 TAX ID NO.: 6331203002 PLANNER: Mike Schultz

A request by Kathy Stenberg on behalf of The Estate of Florence C. Schultz for approval of a change of zone classification from R-5 (Multi-Family Residential) to M-1 (Light Industrial) consisting of 0.62 acres. The subject property is located at 120 Cascade Court.

41



CONSENT CALENDAR MEETING: JULY 17, 2008 ITEM : A.1-A.3 STAFF: LARRY LARSEN FILE NO(S): CPC MP 01-00147-A2MJ08, CPC ZC 08-00004, CPC CP 01-00148-A4MJ08 PROJECT : TUTT BOULEVARD BUSINESS CENTER DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Moved by Commissioner Hartsell, seconded by Commissioner Butlak to approve Item A.1, CPC MP 01-00147-A2MJ08, the amendment to the Greenbriar / Powerwood Master Plan based upon the finding that the Master Plan Amendment complies with the master plan review criteria in City Code Section 7.5.408 subject to compliance with the following conditions and the technical and/or informational plan modifications:

Condition of Approval on the Master Plan Amendment: Provide City Engineering / Traffic approval of the public street designation for Stoneleigh Drive.

Technical and Informational Modification to the Master Plan Amendment: Correctly show all the adjacent land uses.

Motion carried 8-0 (Commissioner Butcher excused). Moved by Commissioner Hartsell, seconded by Commissioner Butlak to approve Item A.2, CPC ZC 08-00004, the zone change from M1/AO-CAD/CR to PBC/AO-CAD based upon the finding that the Change of Zoning request complies with the three (3) criteria for granting of zone changes as set forth in City Code Section 7.5.603. The motion carried 8-0 (Commissioner Butcher excused).



Moved by Commissioner Hartsell, seconded by Commissioner Butlak to approve Item A.3, CPC CP 01-00148-A4MJ08, the Greenbriar / Powerwood Concept Plan Amendment based upon the finding that the Concept Plan Amendment complies with the concept plan review criteria in City Code Section 7.5.501, subject to compliance with the following conditions and the technical and/or informational plan modifications:

Conditions of Approval on the Concept Plan Amendment: 1. Provide the City’s Emergency Coordinator’s approval of the street names and designations

shown on the concept plan. 2. Provide City Engineering / Traffic approval of the public street designation for Stoneleigh

Drive. Technical and Informational Modification to the Concept Plan Amendment: Correctly show all the adjacent land uses.

The motion passed 8-0 (Commissioner Butcher excused). __July 17, 2008_____ _____________________________ DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR



CONSENT CALENDAR MEETING: JULY 17, 2008 ITEM : B STAFF: TIM SCANLON FILE NO(S): CPC ZC 08-00097 PROJECT : CHADBOURN SPANISH GOSPEL MISSION DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Moved by Commissioner Hartsell, seconded by Commissioner Butlak to approve Item B, CPC ZC 08-00097, the zone change from M-2 to M-2/HP, based upon the findings that the Change of Zoning request complies with the three criteria for granting of zone changes as set forth in City Code Section 7.5.603.B and Section 7.3.505 (B), and approve the use of the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation by the Historic Preservation Board as the standards to be used in evaluating applications for permits from the Pikes Peak Regional Building Department. The motion carried 8-0 (Commissioner Butcher excused). __July 17, 2008_____ _____________________________ DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR

July 17, 2008 Page 10


CONSENT CALENDAR MEETING: JULY 17, 2008 ITEM : C STAFF: HEATHER ROSE FILE NO(S): CPC CU 08-00098 PROJECT : DIRECT BUY DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Moved by Commissioner Hartsell, seconded by Commissioner Butlak to approve Item C, CPC CU 08-00098, the conditional use for a business park based upon the finding that the conditional use complies with the review criteria in City Code Section 7.5.704, subject to compliance with the following technical and/or informational plan modifications:

Technical and Informational Modifications to the Master Plan Amendment: 1. Place City File Number CPC CU 08-00098 in the lower right hand corner of each/all plan

pages. 2. Please make the following changes to the site data table:

a. Please finish the curb line on the right hand side of the entry lane. (Please look at the right hand side of the main entry way off of W. Garden of the Gods. The curb appears to stop in an unusually place. Please clarify or add the curb line.)

3. Resolve any remaining landscape architect review comments. 4. Resolve any remaining fire review comments. 5. Resolve any remaining traffic review comments. 6. Resolve any remaining utilities review comments.

The motion carried 8-0 (Commissioner Butcher excused). __July 17, 2008_____ _____________________________ DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR

July 17, 2008 Page 11


CONSENT CALENDAR MEETING: JULY 17, 2008 ITEM : D STAFF: LONNA THELEN FILE NO(S): CPC CU 07-00362 PROJECT : CESAR CHAVEZ ACADEMY CENTRAL DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Moved by Commissioner Hartsell, seconded by Commissioner Butlak to approve Item D, CPC CU 07-00362, the Conditional Use Development Plan for Cesar Chavez Academy Central based upon the finding that the request complies with the three review criteria in City Code Section 7.5.704. The motion passed 8-0 (Commissioner Butcher excused). __July 17, 2008_____ _____________________________ DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR

July 17, 2008 Page 12


CONSENT CALENDAR

MEETING: JULY 17, 2008 ITEM : E STAFF: RYAN TEFERTILLER FILE NO(S): CPC ZC 08-00090 PROJECT : 30 CIMINO DRIVE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Moved by Commissioner Hartsell, seconded by Commissioner Butlak to approve Item E, CPC ZC 08-00090, the proposed change of zone, based upon the finding that the request complies with the required zone change criteria in City Code Section 7.5.603(B). The motion passed 8-0 (Commissioner Butcher excused). __July 17, 2008_____ _____________________________ DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR

July 17, 2008 Page 13


CONSENT CALENDAR MEETING: JULY 17, 2008 ITEM : F STAFF: MIKE SCHULTZ FILE NO(S): CPC CU 08-00045 PROJECT : LOT 2, REMAD SUBDIVISION BUSINESS PARK DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Moved by Commissioner Hartsell, seconded by Commissioner Butlak to approve Item F, CPC CU 08-00045, the Conditional Use of a Business Park in a PIP-2 zone, based upon the findings that the conditional use request complies with the three (3) criteria for granting a conditional use as set forth in City Code Section 7.5.704; subject to compliance with the following technical and informational plan modifications:

Technical and Informational Modifications to the Development Plan/Conditional Use: 1. Show the locations of all overhead doors on the site plan of the front development plan page. 2. Ensure the type of landscape cover is provided along the top(s) of the retaining walls,

coordinate with the City Landscape Architect. 3. Coordinate with City Engineering/SERT to ensure the new grading and erosion control plan is

acceptable. 4. The Parkway (6’ depth) should be planted to meet the 75% vegetative cover (Code & Policy

7.4.317 Ground Plane and Turf). Please add the triangle symbol to your legend or change the median symbol shown to coordinate with the legend.

5. Substitute the setback tree species or genus type with a taller tree which will have a canopy to work better adjacent to the sidewalk and with pedestrian use.

6. Trees on Lot 1 cannot count toward Lot 2 requirements. Update the chart to reflect only Lot 2 proposed plant material to meet requirements. The third parking lot tree should be identified. Internal plant requirements can be satisfied with shrub substitutions if needed up to 100% per code and policy.

7. The existing site soil conditions should be identified per Preliminary Landscape Plan Check List 2a on the plan.

8. Show the proposed gas and electric meter locations on the utility sheet and on the building elevations.

9. Coordinate with CSU on existing retaining walls and encroachment into the side yard utility easement.

10. Label the existing and proposed mains with size and material types and indicate whether they are private or public.

11. Coordinate with CSU to resolve how the electric line along the east side will be relocated so as not to interfere with the proposed building footprint.

12. Show the existing gas and electric lines on the landscape plan. The motion passed 8-0 (Commissioner Butcher excused). __July 17, 2008_____ _____________________________ DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR

July 17, 2008 Page 14


CONSENT CALENDAR

MEETING: JULY 17, 2008 ITEM : G.1-G.3 STAFF: JAMES MAYERL FILE NO(S): CPC NV 08-00048, CPC CU 08-00046, CPC FP 08-00047 PROJECT : SHOPS AT ARROWSWEST HEALTH CLUB Pulled off Consent by Commissioner Cleveland and discussed after approval of remainder of Consent calendar. STAFF PRESENTATION Commissioner Cleveland disclosed his involvement with the Trails and Open Space Coalition, but stated he has no financial gain from this development. Mr. Mike Schultz, City Planner II, appeared on behalf of James Mayerl. Commissioner Butcher now present. Commissioner Cleveland inquired if it would be best to construct the 12-foot wide trail now instead of after development (located near 30th Street and Garden of the Gods Road). Ms. Sarah Keith, Parks and Recreational Services Department representative, stated she would coordinate to try to get that accomplished. Commissioner Cleveland inquired when that trail be constructed. Mr. Kent Rockwell, Rockwell Consulting, preferred to postpone the trail construction until development of the adjacent lots. This development is removed from that trail. He felt that Parks Dept. could develop the trail earlier if desired. DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Moved by Commissioner Hartsell, seconded by Commissioner Cleveland to approve Item G.1, CPC NV 08-00048, the Shops at Arrowswest Non-Use Variances based upon the findings that the Non-Use Variance meets the review criteria for non-use variances as set forth on Section 7.5.802 of the City Zoning Code. The motion passed 8-0 (Commissioner Butcher abstained). Moved by Commissioner Hartsell, seconded by Commissioner Cleveland to approve Item G.2, CPC CU 08-00046, the Conditional Use and accompanying development plan for the Shops at Arrowswest based upon the findings that the Conditional Use meets the review findings for conditional uses as set forth in Section 7.5.704 and 7.5.502(C) of the City Zoning Code. This recommendation for approval is subject to compliance with the Design and Technical and Informational Modifications listed below:

July 17, 2008 Page 15


Technical and Informational Modifications to the Development Plan: 1. Update the sheet index to reflect Final Landscape Plan. 2. The PIP-1 zone requires a 50 foot front yard setback. Show that on the plan. 3. Show that existing lot 9 to the north is zoned PBC. 4. Note the reception number of the multi-use trail easement along 30th Street on the plan and plat.

The motion carried 8-0 (Commissioner Butcher abstained). Moved by Commissioner Hartsell, seconded by Commissioner Cleveland to approve Item G.3, CPC FP 08-00047, the Shops at Arrowswest Subdivision Plat based upon the finding that the subdivision plat complies with the purpose and intent of the Subdivision Regulations as set forth in Section 7.7.102 of the Subdivision Code. The motion carried 8-0 (Commissioner Butcher abstained). __July 17, 2008_____ _____________________________ DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR

July 17, 2008 Page 16


CONSENT CALENDAR MEETING: JULY 17, 2008 ITEM : H STAFF: JAMES MAYERL FILE NO(S): CPC DP 94-31-A6MJ08 PROJECT : MICRO METALS DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Moved by Commissioner Hartsell, seconded by Commissioner Butlak to approve Item H, CPC DP 94-31-A6MJ08, the amendment to the Micro Metals Development Plan based upon the finding that the development plan complies with the review criteria in City Code Section 7.5.502(C) subject to compliance of the following technical and/or informational plan modifications:

Technical and Informational Modifications to the Master Plan Amendment: 1. Complete the file number (CPC DP 94-31-A6MJ08) in the lower right hand corner of the plan. 2. Note on the plan that the curb east of the new expansion will be marked as a fire lane as

required by the Fire Department. 3. Provide an updated utility plan that addresses the concerns of Springs Utilities.


July 17, 2008 Page 17


CONSENT CALENDAR

MEETING: JULY 17, 2008 ITEM : I STAFF: SHARON ROBINSON FILE NO(S): CPC CU 08-00094 PROJECT : 98 SQUARE-FOOT BILLBOARD DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Moved by Commissioner Hartsell, seconded by Commissioner Butlak to approve Item I, CPC CU 08-00094, the conditional use as it meets all the billboard requirements as set forth in Section 7.4.406 (i) of the Zoning Code, and is subject to the following conditions:

1. Lamar Outdoor Advertising will need to apply for a sign permit from the City for the billboard. 2. The original I-25 billboard credits should be attached to the sign application. 3. The Record of Decision and stamped plans from the City Planning Commission hearing should

be attached to the sign application 4. An updated copy of the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Roadside Advertising

permit should be attached to the sign application. 5. Billboard #25 must be removed prior to applying for a billboard permit.


July 17, 2008 Page 18


NEW BUSINESS CALENDAR MEETING: JULY 17, 2008 ITEM : 4.a-4.c STAFF: LARRY LARSEN FILE NO(S): CPC MP 03-00031-A1MJ07, CPC PUZ 07-00344, CPC PUP 07-00345 PROJECT : WOODMEN TOWNE CENTER STAFF PRESENTATION Exhibit A, a letter of concern regarding access to an adjacent property, was distributed to the Planning Commission prior to the meeting. Mr. Larry Larsen, City Senior Planner, presented PowerPoint slides (Exhibit B). Commissioner Gonzalez inquired if the offset between Foxtrot Drive and the private drive to the north would present a concern? Mr. Larsen replied that a condition of approval requires those two streets line up, but requests that condition be removed due to significant topography to the north and grading proposed for this site. With the transition of residential to commercial uses, cut-through traffic may be discouraged if the streets are offset. This will be discussed at the development plan stage. Commissioner Cleveland inquired if the proposed water tanks would be screened from new development? Mr. Larsen stated a landscape buffer would be constructed with a neutral paint color on the tanks. Commissioner Gonzalez inquired of appropriate capacity on Woodmen Road for this development and future developments. Mr. Larsen stated a “white paper” is being created by City staff to address the Woodmen Road expansion and its future capacity needs. Due to Federal funds available for environmental assessments of portions along Woodmen Road, any adjustment to the roadway may affect Federal funding. This proposed development is pushing that traffic capacity. This development should not bear the cost and burden of future Woodmen expansions. Commissioner Hartsell inquired if this design could accommodate a future interchange? Mr. Larsen stated yes, with minimal impact to the proposed building design and siting of buildings. Commissioner Gonzalez inquired who would bear the cost of redesigning Woodmen Road and Tutt Boulevard? Mr. Larsen replied he did not know. There are several metro districts in the area, but some of the service plans do not address those issues. Commissioner Hartsell expressed her concerns about the City’s proposed Park N’ Ride site. She felt the City should mimic the developer’s landscaping design into the Park N’ Ride site rather than mimic the City’s current lack of landscaping at existing Park N’ Ride sites. Mr. Larsen requested the Planning Commission strike significant modification 1 on page 122 of the agenda.

July 17, 2008 Page 19


APPLICANT PRESENTATION

1. Mr. Timothy Ridner, Cedarwood Development, introduced the item and appeared for questions.

2. Mr. Ray Perez, Matrix Design Group, presented a PowerPoint slides (Exhibit C) and expressed appreciation for Mr. Larsen’s coordination and hard work.

Commissioner Magill inquired why no detention ponds allowed in easements? Mr. Perez stated detention ponds would make easements too soggy to drive upon. Commissioner Magill did not understand Colorado Springs Utilities (CSU) rational for that. Commissioner Butlak inquired of drainage in Phase II (11.49-acre portion) with drainage through a series of underground pipes. Mr. Perez replied this design has not been engineered, but there is storage underground. Pipes will control stormwater and release at a historic rate discharge. Commissioner Butlak inquired who would be responsible for maintenance? Mr. Perez stated that a decision during preliminary discussions with the City, the City would maintain this as a detention pond. Commissioner Butlak was very concerned with that plan. Mr. Healy clarified that typically the maintenance of detention ponds would be the responsibility of the private land owner. Mr. Dave Lethbridge, City Engineering, stated CSU has not consistently precluded detention pond construction in easements. Underground detention storage is not new within the community, but typically the City is not responsible for the maintenance. City Engineering will continue dialogue with CSU whether to build an above ground detention pond or an underground detention pond would be assigned to the maintenance district. Final drainage reports must be approved prior to recording the plats. Commissioner Hartsell inquired if a representative from CSU could discuss this issue. (No representative was present). Commissioner Hartsell felt the detention pond could buffer parking areas. She hopes that City Engineering and CSU are more cooperative especially with maintenance costs. Commissioner Magill inquired of the ramifications of making a condition on the concept plan? Mr. Lethbridge stated it is already included as a condition of approval by City Engineering. Commissioner Magill was very concerned this item be addressed. Mr. Perez clarified this needs to be approved with development plan approval. Commissioner Cleveland inquired of the scope of the site in terms of parking. Mr. Perez stated this site would be compared as larger than the Citadel Mall parking lots. CITIZENS IN FAVOR

1. Mr. Don Holland, adjacent property owner north of the site, felt it is imperative to leave Fox Trot road open. He asked all neighbors to stand (approximately 15 persons in audience stood). They prefer this road not be closed. He stated there is a five-foot drop in topography from the proposed road to the existing fire hydrant.

Commissioner Hansen inquired if he is satisfied with the condition concerning the future road interface. Mr. Larsen clarified that Fox Trot is shown on paper only, and when the development plan is submitted the City will ensure that road is built with easements up to property north of the commercial site. Then the properties to the north could annex and continue the road construction of Fox Trot. CITIZENS IN OPPOSITION None.

July 17, 2008 Page 20


DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Moved by Commissioner Hartsell, seconded by Commissioner Stroh, to approve Item 4.a, CPC MP 03-00031-A1MJ07, the Amendment to the Ridge at Woodmen Master Plan based upon the finding that the Master Plan complies with the master plan review criteria in City Code Section 7.5.408 and is subject to the following conditions and technical and/or informational plan modifications:

Conditions of Approval on the Master Plan Amendment: 1. Provide the internal review and public hearing posting affidavits for City Planning files. 2. Provide City Utilities approval of the Wastewater Master Facilities Report. 3. Provide City Engineering approval of the Master Development Drainage Plan (MDDP) and all

of their drainage and stormwater issues have been adequately addressed. 4. Provide City Engineering / Traffic acceptance of the project’s modified Traffic Analysis. 5. Provide City Engineering / Traffic approval of the Woodmen Road right-in, right-out

intersection design and location. Technical and Informational Modifications to the Master Plan Amendment: 1. Remove the graphic notation “Existing County Zone: RR-3, Proposed City Zone: A” from

Master Plan drawing. 2. Show the internal Vollmer and Tutt connecting street as a “Commercial / Industrial Collector”. 3. Show the intersection of the Collector with Black Forest to align directly across from Vollmer

Road. 4. Move the Full Movement Intersection to align with the existing Fox Trot right-of-way to the

north. 5. Remove General Note #1; it is now not consistent with the MDDP. 6. Add the following new General Note: “The intersections’ designs and functions shown are

preliminary, final determination shall be made at the time of development plan review”. 7. Add the following new General Note: “The access to Powerwood No. 2 Master Plan project,

as shown, is in conformity with the approved Powerwood No. 2 Master Plan, as approved by the City.”

8. Reinstate General Note #7 from the approved Master Plan. The motion passed 9-0. Moved by Commissioner Hartsell, seconded by Commissioner Suthers, to approve Item 4.b, CPC PUZ 07-00344, the Zone Change from A/AO-CAD (Agricultural with Airport Overlay – Commercial Airport District) to PUD/AO-CAD (Planned Unit Development with Airport Overlay – Commercial Airport District) based upon the finding that the Change of Zoning request complies with the three (3) criteria for granting of zone changes as set forth in City Code Section 7.5.603 and the criteria for the establishment of a PUD zone as set forth in City Code Section 7.3.603. The motion passed 9-0.

July 17, 2008 Page 21


Moved by Commissioner Hartsell, seconded by Commissioner Magill, to approve Item 4.c, CPC PUP 07-00345, the Woodmen Towne Center PUD Concept Plan, based upon the finding that the PUD Concept Plan complies with the PUD concept plan review criteria in City Code Section 7.3.606 and is subject to the following conditions and significant design and technical plan modifications:

Conditions of Approval on the PUD Concept Plan: 1. Per approved Master Plan Note #3, provide City Transit acceptance of the location and their

accessibility to the Woodmen Road right-in right-out intersection to their potential park and ride site.

2. Provide City Utilities Water / Wastewater approval of the PUP Concept Plan, and the Preliminary Utility Service Plan and that all of their concerns have been adequately addressed.

3. Provide City Engineering / Traffic approval of the PUP Concept Plan, the project’s phasing plan and that all of their concerns have been adequately addressed.

Significant Modifications to the PUD Concept Plan: 1. Move the Full Movement Intersection to align with the existing Fox Trot right-of-way to the

north. 2. Modify the plan to show the City Engineering / Traffic approved design and location of the

Woodmen Road right-in, right-out intersection. 3. Modify the plan to show the developer’s, City Engineering / Traffic’s and City Transit’s

mutually approved alternative access location to/from the collector street to the potential park and ride site, in addition to the Woodmen Road right-in right-out intersection connection.

Technical and Informational Modifications to the PUD Concept Plan Amendment: 1. Per approved Master Plan General Note #5, show the proposed preliminary detail and the

extent of the proposed required transition and compatibility mitigation measures along the northern boundary to the residential single-family neighborhoods. Minimum measures should include enhanced landscaping, distance separation and opaque screening walls.

2. Remove the CSFD Fire Prevention General Notes, they should not be shown on this concept plan.

3. Under the Lot Data Table Lot 6, remove the Building Setback information and add the following: “Building Setbacks shall be determined at the time of Development Plan review” or add the acceptable front and rear yard setbacks.

4. Show a utility access road and easement along the northern boundary of Lot 5 for access to the City Water Tank parcel.

5. Add the following new General Note: “Street names shall be determined at the time of development plan and subdivision plat review and approval.”

6. Show the internal Vollmer and Tutt connecting street designated as a “Commercial / Industrial Collector.”

7. Modify the street cross sections to comply with City commercial / industrial collector standards with accommodations for bicyclists and add the following note below each cross section, “This cross section may be modified to prior development plan approval per City Code Section 7.3.612, subject to City Engineering / Traffic acceptance and approval.”

8. Add the following new General Note: “Per the Ridge at Woodmen Master Development Drainage Plan, stage release is required for all detention ponds.”

9. Show on the plan the Water Quality and Detention Ponds as shown on the Master Development Drainage Plan, as approved by City Engineering and City Utilities, if located within utility easements.

10. Modify the plan to incorporate any required City Engineering /Traffic modifications and changes as a result of their acceptance of the project’s traffic impact analysis.

July 17, 2008 Page 22


11. Add the following new General Note: “Additional right-of-way to connect the existing Fox Trot right-of-way shall be dedicated and provided at the time of development plan and subdivision plat review and approval or at such time as required by the City Public Works Director.”

12. Add the following new General Note: “The intersection’s design and function shown are preliminary, final determination shall be made at the time of development plan review and approval”.

13. Add the following new General Note: “The access to Powerwood No. 2 Master Plan project, as shown, is in conformity with the approved Powerwood No. 2 Master Plan, as approved by the City.”

14. Add a new City Engineering / Traffic approved General Note regarding the responsibility and timing for the installation of traffic signals at Tutt Boulevard and Woodmen Road intersection and the Black Forest Road and the collector street / Vollmer Road intersection.

15. Per approved Master Plan General Note #2, provide and show City Engineering / Traffic approved mitigation measures formulated to adequately address the failing levels of service for the left turn movements at the Woodmen and Tutt intersection.

16. Show the Woodmen Road, Black Forest Road and Tutt Boulevard roadway, intersections, interchanges, right-of-way and pavement widths and design per the City Engineering / Traffic approved street plan and profiles.

Commissioner Hartsell stated that emphasis on technical modification #9 should be closely reviewed by CSU regarding detention ponds within easements. Commissioner Butcher asked Mr. Lethbridge to convey to CSU the Planning Commission’s disappointment with their (CSU’s) lack of cooperation. Motion to approve Item 4.c passed 9-0. __July 17, 2008_____ _____________________________ DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR

July 17, 2008 Page 23


NEW BUSINESS CALENDAR MEETING: JULY 17, 2008 ITEM : 5 STAFF: SUE MATZ FILE NO(S): AR NV 08-00192(AP) PROJECT : PROPOSED LIQUOR ESTABLISHMENT AT 12 E. KIOWA STREET STAFF PRESENTATION Ms. Sue Matz, City Analyst, presented the appeal by means of PowerPoint slides (Exhibit A). Commissioner Hartsell inquired if liquor licensing requires a specific separation? Ms. Matz stated spacing between schools is required, but is measured differently. The applicant can apply for liquor license at the same time of City Planning zoning approval. Commissioner Butlak requested clarification of the spacing requirement. Ms. Matz replied a liquor establishment must be 200 feet away from a residential use, and it is measured from lot line to lot line (as the crow flies). This proposed use is only 60 feet from the Daniels Lofts building that face North Tejon Street. Ms. Matz clarified other taverns have existed prior to the construction of the residential uses within the same block, but a few of the tavern uses have expanded with approval of a variance application. APPLICANT PRESENTATION Mr. Doug Kwitek, attorney representing the applicants, stated his clients purchased the property in February 2008 with plans for an upscale tavern. The appeal is on two arguments: 1) the criteria for a non-use variance are met, and 2) the 200-foot rule should not preclude the applicant from developing the property as a bar. Mr. Kwitek quoted State Statute regarding free use of property; quoted from City Zoning Code § 7.3.105 and felt this property falls under a C-6 (General Business) use district for high traffic volume that generally does not depend upon the neighborhood for support; quoted § 7.3.202 and stated a conditional use permit is required for residential uses (Daniels Loft) within a commercial district, but a bar is a permitted use within the C-6 zone; the 200-foot spacing requirement would generally provide a buffer; the C-6 zone district does not offer a peaceful, quiet residential area, but downtown offers the “hustle and bustle” of this vibrant area; and a nearby tavern should be expected when purchasing a residential loft within the downtown area. Mr. Kwitek explained how he felt the three review criteria were met:

• The property is unique for the location; could not reasonably be used for other purposes, especially with a one-way drive access with limited visibility; is a noisy location, not close to civic buildings for professional offices.

• Financial/economic investment should be respected of the owner. • Applicant’s proposed use would not affect daily traffic flows; most business would be

generated during later afternoon into evening. Applicant proposes to improve the property.

July 17, 2008 Page 24


Commissioner Magill inquired if he measured the distance from the proposed tavern building to the residential building? Mr. Kwitek stated it was approximately 160 feet. CITIZENS IN FAVOR

1. Mr. Jon Severson, Colorado Springs Young Professionals Group, stated a survey conducted noted the lack of night entertainment within downtown Colorado Springs area. He did not believe this use would adversely affect noise and traffic within the downtown area.

STAFF REQUESTED TO SPEAK Mr. Thomas Harris, Lieutenant with the Colorado Springs Police Department, shared the department’s official comments with involvement of the applicant at their recently vacated property (aka Eden’s nightclub). He referenced criteria 2 – no adverse impact, and stated the CSPD responded to 358 calls for service at Eden’s relevant to two homicides. He mentioned specific assaults to a minor within the club, at which time Mr. Beers was continuing to go forth with his sponsorship of a “pimp, ho and thug night.” Changes were not made by the applicants, Mr. and Mrs. Beers. CSPD requested denial of the application. Commissioner Magill asked if CSPD is mainly objecting to the management. Mr. Harris clarified that CSPD is in objection to a historical pattern of activity at similar establishments owned by the applicant. Commissioner Butlak inquired of calls for service at similar establishments that mainly serve alcohol. Lieutenant Harris stated approximately 300 calls per year are made, but strictly food establishments are approximately five calls for service per year. APPLICANT PRESENTATION - Continued Commissioner Hartsell wanted further information of the interior design and activities planned for the tavern. Marie Beers stated the interior of the main level will contain one long bar with 3,000 square feet and a basement for office and storage space. The roof top patio will have a mezzanine to mimic the tavern near Coors Field in Denver. She felt a maximum of 150 patrons would be on site. Commissioner Hartsell inquired if the rooftop would have music. Ms. Beers stated the rooftop square footage would not lend itself to dancing, but a disc jockey (DJ) booth would be located inside on the main level. Approximately 70 patrons would be allowed on the rooftop. CITIZENS IN OPPOSITION

1. Ms. Wylene Carol, adjacent property owner representing Daniels Lofts, objected to the negative impact on her investment, quality of life and on the downtown. The hustle and bustle activity has degenerated from lively activity to increased crime, vandalism, disgusting behaviors originating south of their building. Many times she and other tenants of Daniels Lofts must clean up feces, urine and vomit from their building entrance due to nightclubs nearby. She quoted from the Downtown Action Plan that strives to ensure variety of housing choices, plan for new residential and loft housing in core, and make zoning regulations conform to objectives of this plan.

2. Mr. Terry Sullivan, Daniels Lofts property owner, rents his 1400 square foot loft with a private rooftop patio atop the parking garage, which is less than 40 feet from the Acme building (proposed site). Many of his tenants seek peaceful homes near the mountains, and he was concerned that the value of his investment would be diminished due to the close proximity and view of a rooftop bar.

3. Mr. George Hertner, physician at Memorial Hospital and property owner within the Daniels Lofts, stated his bedroom would overlook the proposed bar. Residential owners are expecting

July 17, 2008 Page 25


the City to enforce their Zoning Code and honor the 200-foot spacing requirement. He felt the applicant’s past action is disturbing.

4. Mr. Terrence Van Sant, property owner immediately east of the proposed site, strongly encouraged the Planning Commission to deny the appeal on the grounds of adverse impact to the adjacent owners. The evolution of Kiowa Street is important to downtown, especially since it is a main entrance from I-25. He felt there are many other types of uses for the vacant building.

Commissioner Butcher inquired of Mr. Van Sant’s opinion and experience of long-term effect of residential uses within a commercial zone. Mr. Van Sant stated that in order to be a vibrant downtown a full mixed-use area is needed. He felt a conditional use is a wonderful caveat for the Planning Commission to weigh pros and cons of downtown uses. Free market and enterprise will market the uses.

5. Mr. Les Gruen, representing the Downtown Partnership, requested the Planning Commission deny the appeal and uphold the staff’s decision. The 200-foot spacing requirement should be applied and enforced. He assured the Planning Commission that the Downtown Partnership would support a retail or restaurant use if it were compatible, but also felt residential is an essential component of downtown.

6. Mr. Chris Jenkins, Vice-Chair of Downtown Partnership and representative of Nor’wood

Development and Griffis-Blessing and Charter Holdings, opposed the application. Imagine Downtown, an amendment to the Downtown Plan, will be forthcoming to Planning Commission that will address modern uses and restrictions affected within the downtown area.

Commissioner Magill would like to maintain property rights, but asked if the Downtown Partnership is mainly focusing on land use. Mr. Jenkins replied yes, but he also referenced a past application where a neighborhood interjected their social influence that affected the Planning Commission’s decision. That also has to be taken into consideration. Commissioner Hartsell inquired if the 200-foot separation would apply to a restaurant bar? Ms. Matz stated restaurant uses require more than 50% of food sales and less than 35% bar area and would not require the 200-foot spacing. APPLICANT REBUTTAL Mrs. Beers felt some of the comments today were not appropriate for a land use hearing, but should be discussed at the Liquor Board hearing. She stated that most inquiries to lease the site were for a bar use. She felt the approved conditional use permits for residential uses have jammed up millions of dollars worth of real estate within the downtown area. She felt the downtown is going through growing pains and experiences negative connotation of business uses. She felt that changing the use to restaurant/food would be difficult to meet the food-to-liquor sales ratios. Commissioner Butlak inquired if she is a member of the Downtown Partnership or familiar with the Downtown Action Plan? Mrs. Beers replied she is not a member and is not familiar with the plan. She interpreted the 200-foot rule as applicable to homes along Tejon Street. She did not research the options available to the property prior to closing. Mr. Kwitek stated his clients were not aware of the 200-foot rule as it applies to a conditional use permit for residential uses. He felt the Code requirement does not mention conditional use permit for residentially used property.

July 17, 2008 Page 26


DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Moved by Commissioner Hartsell, seconded by Commissioner Butlak, to deny the appeal and uphold the administrative decision based upon the finding that proposed liquor establishment does not meet the review criteria in City Code § 7.5.802B and § 7.5.906.A. Commissioner Magill opposed the motion and felt the 200-foot separation requirement does not apply. He would approve if the site were proposed without the rooftop operation. Commissioner Butcher felt property rights should be upheld, and he reluctantly supported the application strictly from the land use criteria. Yet, if this item were to be heard by the Liquor Board, he would oppose the application due to his prior history of operating an office near the applicants who were not pleasant neighbors. Motion passed 6-3 (Commissioners Magill, Butcher and Gonzalez opposed). __July 17, 2008_____ _____________________________ DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR

July 17, 2008 Page 27


NEW BUSINESS CALENDAR MEETING: JULY 17, 2008 ITEM : 6a-6b STAFF: LONNA THELEN FILE NO(S): CPC ZC 08-00069, CPC CU 08-00070 PROJECT : PHIL LONG VALUCAR – 4081 TUTT BOULEVARD Commissioner Butcher excused. STAFF PRESENTATION Ms. Lonna Thelen, City Planner II, presented the application by means of a PowerPoint slides (Exhibit A). APPLICANT PRESENTATION Mr. Bruce Barr, representing Art C. Klein Construction, spoke more in depth regarding lighting and signage. Mr. Barr was in agreement to place a condition on the plan restricting signage on the east elevation. The blue painted metal “swoosh” element of the sign should not be considered within the total signage square foot calculation because it is not a vehicle brand; it is more of the recognizable dealership logo. Mr. Barr requested the condition addressing signage be removed from the plan and allow that review to be conducted by the Development Review Enterprise. Mr. Barr continued and stated the light fixtures specified on the plan are not flood lights or spot lights. The bulbs are 100 watt light fitted with a lens and filter for specific projected light. No light pollution would be experienced by adjacent properties. The lights would be timed and turn off at 10pm. Commissioner Gonzalez inquired if the lights were confined to the area of vehicle display near the west side of the building, and he inquired if a traffic study was necessary? Mr. Barr replied there is one uplight per vehicle. Mr. Barr also stated a traffic study was not required, but the applicant paid for a traffic study due to neighborhood comments. The study showed that the proposed use creates less traffic than if the site were developed as a traditional retail sales center. Commissioner Butlak inquired of fencing along eastern side of the site. Mr. Barr replied that a Parks Dept. trail is planned along the eastern boundary of the site. A six-foot fence is installed for security measures and is not permanent. Springs Ranch residents were concerned with graffiti on a permanent opaque fence; thus a chain-link fence is proposed. CITIZENS IN FAVOR

1. Mr. Don Frederick, resident of Island at Springs Ranch, was concerned with conditions placed upon the site to prevent future owners from operating the same as CarMax, specifically lighting and storage. He stated a neighbor solicited a questionnaire/petition supporting the project with specific concerns.

Commissioner Butlak inquired of the distance from the edge of this site to the residential neighborhood. Ms. Thelen stated it is approximately 1,300 feet from the site to the edge of the Island at Springs Ranch.

July 17, 2008 Page 28


CITIZENS IN OPPOSITION

1. Mr. William Sanderman, Island at Springs Ranch, opposes possible increased traffic due to additions of retail centers along Tutt Boulevard. He suggested delaying action on this request and require a review of the traffic study. He referenced the questionnaire, but did not submit for the record.

APPLICANT REBUTTAL None STAFF REQUESTED TO SPEAK Commissioner Cleveland inquired if staff is agreeable to the applicant’s proposed lighting system. Ms. Thelen stated the lights are noted on the plan, but the angles are not drawn. Thus, it is ultimately decided upon by Planning Commission. Commissioner Hartsell inquired of the logo signage. Ms. Thelen stated she spoke with the Sign Specialist of Development Review Enterprise, and the square footage calculation does include the “swoosh” logo portion of the design. Commissioner Magill was concerned that sign criteria is noted on the development plan, whereas historically this has not been on the development plan notes. Ms. Thelen replied signage is noted on the auto dealership’s plans to address the neighborhood’s concerns, along with addressing the pre-existing conditions for the site. Staff’s concern is height and square footage of the sign. DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Moved by Commissioner Magill, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, to approve Item 6a, CPC ZC 08-00069, the zone change from C-5/cr/AO-CAD (Intermediate Business with conditions of record and Airport Overlay – Commercial Airport District) to C-5/cr/AO-CAD (Intermediate Business with conditions of record and Airport Overlay – Commercial Airport District) based on the findings that the change of zoning request complies with the three (3) criteria for granting of zone changes as set forth in City Code Section 7.5.603(B), subject to the following conditions of record:

Conditions of Record: 1. The following uses shall not be permitted:

a. All residential uses b. Construction / contractor yard c. Sexually oriented businesses d. Crematory e. Bars, to include taverns, lounges, nightclubs, and other like uses, with

the exception of restaurants 2. The following minimum yard dimensions apply:

a. Front yard: twenty five feet (25’) b. Side yard: twenty five feet (25’) c. Rear yard: twenty five feet (25’) d. Setbacks are to be measured from the exterior property line of the zone

district. Setbacks from the interior lot lines are as per the development plan.

3. No portion of the building or signage shall be higher than 33 feet, 6 inches. 4. Signage requirements:

a. Freestanding signs shall be limited to the following:

July 17, 2008 Page 29


1. one sign at a maximum of 150 square feet and twenty-five (25) feet tall.

2. two signs at a maximum of 75 50 square feet and twelve (12) six (6) feet tall.

3. building signage on the west elevation of the building will be derived from 1.5 square feet of sign per 1 linear foot of building

4. building signage on the north and south elevation will be as shown on the development plan elevations.

b. no building signage will be allowed on the east elevation. 5. No outdoor repair or service of vehicles is allowed.

Motion passed 5-3 (Commissioners Hansen, Hartsell and Butlak opposed with Commissioner Butcher excused). Motion by Commissioner Magill, seconded by Commissioner Suthers to approve Item 6b, the Phil Long Valucar Development Plan based upon the finding that the development plan complies with the conditional use review criteria in City Code Section 7.5.704 subject to compliance with the following conditions and/or significant design, technical and/or informational plan modifications:

Significant Modifications to the Phil Long Valucar Development Plan: 1. Make the change in bold to the Current Conditions of record:

4. Signage requirements: a. Freestanding signs shall be limited to the following:

i. one sign at a maximum of 150 square feet and twenty-five (25) feet tall.

ii. two signs at a maximum of 75 50 square feet and twelve (12) six (6) feet tall.

iii. building signage on the west elevation of the building will be derived from 1.5 square feet of sign per 1 linear foot of building

iv. building signage on the north and south elevation will be as shown on the development plan elevations.

b. no building signage will be allowed on the east elevation. 2. Remove the ground mounted flood lights used to illuminate display areas. An additional

22 feet, 6 inch pole mounted light may be included in the display areas if needed. If additional pole mounted lighting is added, ensure the photometric plan foot candle value accounts for the addition and are noted as full cut-off. Provide additional details of ground mounted lighting for display areas.

Technical and Informational Modifications to the Phil Long Valucar Development Plan:

1. Note sheet 2 of 9 on sheet 2. 2. Changes to Sheet 1:

a. Show the sight triangles as 35 feet x 55 feet. Please also show the speed line of sight on this sheet.

b. Light diagram 1 on page one should show no sag of the lens in the drawing and should note full cut-off.

c. The arrows at the north entrance to the property and the arrows at the south entrance to the customer parking area are shown in reverse.

d. Provide a public improvement easement for the portion of the sidewalk outside the public improvement easement along Tutt Blvd.

July 17, 2008 Page 30


e. Remove the hatched shading under the drive area on the site development plan. f. Ensure all symbols in the legend match the symbols on the sheet and that all

symbols are included in the legend. ii. The parking symbology does not correspond between the legend and the

plan. iii. No wall pack symbol is in the legend.

g. A symbol for a small sign is at the southern entrance. Please note if the sign is to remain or be removed.

h. Show where the two customer parking spaces are to be located on the southeast side of the building.

i. Remove all bubbles that were used to show changes from the first plan. j. The parking required only takes into account the footprint square footage of

22,727 sq. ft. Revise the required parking counts to include the total square footage 24,624 sq. ft.

k. Under general notes, include the following note: iv. No vehicles will be off-loaded or loaded on Tutt Blvd. v. All materials, equipment, and trash will be stored inside the building.

3. Provide one sign for customer parking and one sign for employee parking next to the parking area next to the south property line.

4. Under the luminaire schedule call out the symbol with two open lamp shades as non-security lighting and note that it will be turned off by ten o’clock (10:00) P.M.

5. Provide a note on the photometric page that states all lighting will be full-cut off. 6. LANDSCAPE PLAN:

a. Call out tree planting heights of the trees planted along the east and northeast side of the property on the final landscape plan.

b. Change the Cal column of the plant schedule to “Planting Caliper or Height”. c. Please move the first and third tree south from the northern most entrance

adjacent to Tutt (as these will be in your speed line of sight triangle). d. Please adjust the speed line of sight on the landscape plan, as it is depicted

inaccurately. Please also show the stop signs on this sheet. e. Existing electric is not shown on the Landscape Plan and proposed trees must

be a minimum of six feet away from the existing electric lines. 7. Ensure Steve Smith, City Fire Department, provides approval of the fire hydrant

placement on the plan. Hydrants cannot be located behind proposed parking or other visual/physical obstructions.

Motion passed 5-3 (Commissioners Butlak, Hansen and Hartsell opposed and Commissioner Butcher excused). __July 17, 2008_____ _____________________________ DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR

July 17, 2008 Page 31


NEW BUSINESS CALENDAR

MEETING: JULY 17, 2008 ITEM : 7 STAFF: ERIN MCCAULEY FILE NO(S): CPC NV 08-00084 PROJECT : EXISTING CARPORT Commissioner Butcher returned. STAFF PRESENTATION Ms. Erin McCauley, Planner I, presented the application by PowerPoint slides (Exhibit A). Ms. McCauley explained that staff found that only one of the three criteria were met and recommended denial. APPLICANT PRESENTATION Commissioners Gonzalez and Suthers inquired if the garage was constructed with building permits. Ms. McCauley deferred to the applicant. Ms. Leona Slocum stated it was built on the northern side of the lot and moved to the south side before she purchased the property in 1968. Mr. Jack Slocum attempted to obtain a permit in 2007 when the carport was built. A private surveyor was too expensive to hire, thus he relied upon past surveys and plot lines for placement of the carport. Mr. Slocum provided letters in support (Exhibit B). CITIZENS IN FAVOR None CITIZENS IN OPPOSITION

1. Ms. Diane Sluss was mainly concerned that the applicant did not obtain a building permit, which would’ve triggered the need for a variance. If the carport is allowed to remain, then she would feel that the City Code is being broken down. She preferred the carport moved to the north side of the lot. She mentioned the poster was posted on the property with exception of approximately two days prior to the hearing, and she submitted photos (Exhibit C).

Commissioner Butlak inquired of the posting requirement. Ms. McCauley replied a posting may be required by the dept., but to allow the owner to replace a poster should it be blown down or removed by another. Commissioner Stroh inquired if there are specific dept. requirements or exceptions for these types of narrow alleyways when a wider alley is close? Ms. McCauley replied no, there are no exceptions. Commissioner Hansen inquired of alleyway speed limits. Mr. Dave Lethbridge replied it is 10 miles per hour.

July 17, 2008 Page 32


2. Mr. Lavar Winters, adjacent property owner, felt the garage and carport could be accommodated on the north side of the house prior to the landscaping installed in 2007. He mentioned he did not receive a postcard announcing today’s hearing. He was concerned the applicant would not remove the carport if the application were not approved.

Commissioner Gonzalez excused for remainder of the day. APPLICANT REBUTTAL Mr. Slocum felt today’s discussion is more of a neighborhood dispute rather than the carport. Commissioner Hartsell observed the same and suggested use of the neighborhood justice center to mediate and repair the neighborhood relationships. DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Moved by Commissioner Butcher, seconded by Commissioner Butlak, to approve Item 7, CPC NV 08-00084, allowing the existing carport to remain based upon the finding that the proposal meets all criteria for approval found in Section 7.5.802(B) of the Zoning Code. Commissioner Hartsell stated that the carport does not change the traffic flow into the garage. Motion passed 7-1 (Commissioner Stroh opposed and Commissioner Gonzalez excused). __July 17, 2008_____ _____________________________ DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR

July 17, 2008 Page 33


NEW BUSINESS CALENDAR MEETING: JULY 17, 2008 ITEM : 8 STAFF: STEVE TUCK FILE NO(S): CPC UV 08-00067 PROJECT : VETERINARY CLINIC, MEDICAL OFFICE OR GENERAL OFFICE AT 1730 NORTH

CORONA STREET Exhibit A (letter of opposition from neighborhood) was distributed to the Planning Commission prior to the meeting. STAFF PRESENTATION Ms. Lonna Thelen, speaking on behalf of Steve Tuck, presented the application by PowerPoint slides (Exhibit B). APPLICANT PRESENTATION 1. Dr. Sam Rubinson, property owner, obtained approval through the Planning Commission and City Council for the converted use of the building and remodeled it for his medical practice years prior. He closed his practice and vacated the office last year. He requested the Planning Commission grant the application for the veterinary clinic. 2. Dr. Melanie Marsden and Dr. Debra Stirling, applicants, do not service hoofed animals, only typical domestic animals. Dr. Marsden addressed item 2 under technical modifications and stated it is typical operation practice not to house animals overnight. Yet, they could not guarantee an emergency overnight stay would never occur. Commissioner Magill inquired if there have been complaints from their business at their current location. Drs. Marsden and Stirling stated no. Mr. Anderwald suggested amending the condition to state no non-medical overnight stays allowed for canines. Drs. Marsden and Stirling opposed the sign condition and requested a sign projecting out from the wall for better visibility. CITIZENS IN FAVOR None CITIZENS IN OPPOSITION

1. Ms. Paula Bayers, property owner at 1715 N. Corona Street and representative of immediate neighbor Sheilagh Coulter (1724 N. Corona), felt the veterinary clinic would negatively impact Ms. Coulter’s quality of life.

2. Mr. Russ Knight distributed a list of topics for opposition (Exhibit C) and felt the adjacent Bon

July 17, 2008 Page 34


Shopping Center is a more appropriate site for the veterinary clinic due to its established traffic patterns and parking lot.

3. Ms. Cheryl Heming, property owner of 1812 N. Corona, felt this veterinary clinic would increase traffic by 40%; would create increased activity and noise from clients, animals, and cars; the designated animal excrement area could cause a negative impact from odors carried by wind currents and heat during the summer; some homeowners depend upon on-street parking that could be monopolized by the clinic’s overflow parking.

4. Ms. Linda Knight, property owner of 1727 Corona, stated that the close proximity to the school could create a greater risk with animals and small children in an excited state; excrement left on the lawn or carried by the wind could cause communicable disease risk to adjacent owners’ pets; property owners are left uncertain of the future use of the site when the conditional use is allowing a few types of uses; the site is zoned R-1 6000 and have concerns relating to sense of place, odor, parking, health and safety, and zoning.

Commissioner Magill inquired of the impact of the previous medical office. Ms. Knight stated she only saw patients arrive approximately two days per week. Commissioner Butlak inquired where Steele School is located and designated walking routes. Ms. Knight pointed to the school two blocks west of the site, but there is not designated route for school children.

5. Mr. Rick Hoover, Rustic Hills Association, distributed a letter from Old North End Neighborhood president Dave Munger (Exhibit D).

6. Ms. Marjorie Smith, Central Colorado Springs Coalition, was concerned with two on-site parking spaces that back out into on-coming traffic. She mentioned that it does not take a veterinary clinic to change the dynamics of a quiet, tranquil neighborhood. The neighborhood could change drastically should new families with teenagers move in with additional vehicles and visitors to a home.

7. Mr. E.A. Bellringer, adjacent property owner, stated Dr. Rubinson had a low-impact, low-intensity business. He was concerned that parking could be exacerbated, barking from uninvited dogs near adjacent homes, and marking on adjacent properties.

8. Ms. Sandy Erskine, adjacent property owner immediately south of site, supports the veterinary clinic but would be opposed to a medical clinic allowed under this variance.

STAFF REQUESTED TO SPEAK Commissioner Butlak inquired of the parking requirements and future uses allowed under the requested variance. Ms. Thelen replied that one parking space per 200 square feet is required, and the existing spaces could be appropriately used. The medical office, veterinary clinic or office use would allow a future tenant to bypass an additional use variance application, which is not the case with the current use allowed for a medical office specific to Dr. Rubinson. Mr. Dave Lethbridge, City Engineering, addressed traffic issues. He stated that vehicles backing out into on-coming traffic has occurred for years without incident and City Engineering is not concerned with the re-aligned angled parking.

July 17, 2008 Page 35


DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Moved by Commissioner Hartsell, seconded by Commissioner Stroh, to approve Item 8, CPC UV 08-00067, the use variance for a veterinary clinic use only located at 1730 North Corona Street for Dr. Debra Stirling and Dr. Melanie Marsden based on the finding that the request complies with the review criteria in City Code Section 7.5.803(B) and is subject to compliance with the development plan modifications:

Technical and Informational Modifications to the Development Plan: 1. Note the eight, adjacent diagonal parking spaces within the rights-of-way shall be maintained

by the owner of 1730 North Corona Street and shall include striping and maintenance of the surface.

2. Note no non-medical overnight stays for canines dogs are permitted with the exception of an emergency.

3. Note the two trash containers shall be stored behind the 6-foot high fence. Note the location of a gate for the fence.

4. Revise the location of the sign to be attached to the wall(s) instead of extending from the corner of the building.

Motion passed 7-1 (Commissioner Butlak opposed and Commissioner Gonzalez excused). __July 17, 2008_____ _____________________________ DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR

July 17, 2008 Page 36


NEW BUSINESS CALENDAR MEETING: JULY 17, 2008 ITEM: 9 STAFF: RICK O’CONNOR FILE NO(S): CPC MP 84-00361-A1MN07 PROJECT: AMENDMENT TO THE STETSON RIDGE MASTER PLAN Commissioner Butlak excused for the remainder of the day. STAFF PRESENTATION Mr. Rick O’Connor, City Senior Planner, briefly presented the application. APPLICANT PRESENTATION John Maynard with N.E.S. spoke on behalf of the applicants and stated that this has been a year-long collaboration between the Fire Department, City Parks and two developers to help facilitate these changes and come to this resolution. CITIZENS IN FAVOR None CITIZENS IN OPPOSITION 1. Mr. Dale Bauer stated his property backs up to the future fire station and is concerned with

increased activity near his home, specifically increased noise and light pollution. He felt other locations within the master plan could be more appropriate for the fire station.

STAFF REQUESTED TO SPEAK Ms. Nina Rikoski, City Fire Dept., stated a sophisticated model is used to locate a fire station to handle 8-minute responses. This is the best location for a fire station and is optimum for the area. This station will serve the areas west of the site and some of the proposed Banning-Lewis Ranch development. Commissioner Hartsell inquired of issues that mitigate impacts of a fire station upon residential neighborhoods? Ms. Rikoski replied State Law requires when a truck is in emergency mode to alert the public (air horn blaring to prevent stopping at traffic intersections),yet personnel have discretion to stop, especially at night, rather than blowing the horn. Aiding with travel to an emergency is clearing the intersections by changing signals providing a clear route to the service call. The fire station is slated to complete construction in year 2010. CITIZENS IN OPPOSITION- Continued 1. Mr. Bauer was allowed to speak and asked why the fire station could not be placed on the west

side of the park instead of the east side? He also mentioned no one addressed the issue of when Dublin Boulevard will be constructed to Marksheffel Road. Mr. O’Connor explained the property on the west is owned by the City and conveyed to the city to satisfy park obligations as part of the development of Stetson Hills. The east part is not owned by

July 17, 2008 Page 37


the City and is still owned by private developers so there are no “strings attached” even though it is reflected as a park on the current master plan.

APPLICANT REBUTTAL Commissioner Hansen inquired when Dublin Boulevard is to be constructed. Mr. John Maynard, N.E.S., stated the responsibility to build Dublin Boulevard is market driven and will be constructed by the Stetson Ridge Metropolitan District as development along Dublin Boulevard occurs. Mr. Maynard had no additional comments for rebuttal. DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Moved by Commissioner Cleveland, seconded by Commissioner Suthers, to approve Item 9, CPC MP 84-00361-A1MN07, the minor amendment to the Stetson Ridge Master Plan, based upon the finding that the minor amendment complies with the master plan review criteria in City Code Section 7.5.408, subject to compliance with the following technical plan modifications:

1. Provide a minor amendment to the Master Development Drainage Plan for Stetson Ridge (prepared by Classic Consulting, July 2004) to address the drainage impacts of this change in land use.

2. Update the existing tabular Land Use Comparison Table to reflect the latest master revision (November 9, 2004).

3. Include the five-acre trail within the Land Use Table. Motion carried 7-0 (Commissioners Butlak and Gonzalez excused). __July 17, 2008_____ _____________________________ DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR

July 17, 2008 Page 38


NEW BUSINESS CALENDAR MEETING: JULY 17, 2008 ITEM: 10 STAFF: RICK O’CONNOR FILE NO(S): AR MP 83-00423-A7MN07 PROJECT: ADJUSTMENT TO THE STETSON HILLS MASTER PLAN-PHASE II (RIDGEVIEW) STAFF PRESENTATION Mr. Rick O’Connor, City Senior Planner, briefly reviewed the application as contained in the agenda. APPLICANT PRESENTATION Mr. John Maynard, N.E.S., appeared for questions. CITIZENS IN FAVOR None CITIZENS IN OPPOSITION None APPLICANT REBUTTAL None DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Moved by Commissioner Cleveland, seconded by Commissioner Magill, to approve Item 10, AR MP 83-00423-A7MN07, the adjustment to the Stetson Hills Master Plan—Phase II subject to the following technical modifications:

1. Update the land use table and plan to indicate a school use on the 7 acres remaining as 8-11.99 du/ac located in the southwest corner of Dublin and Peterson.

2. Within the master plan drawing, show the clouded area for just the areas undergoing change (fire station site and commercial area along Powers).

3. Provide an amendment to Master Development Drainage Plan which includes the drainage impacts of this change in land use.

Motion passed 7-0 (Commissioners Butlak and Gonzalez excused). __July 17, 2008_____ _____________________________ DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR

July 17, 2008 Page 39


NEW BUSINESS CALENDAR MEETING: JULY 17, 2008 ITEM: 11 STAFF: JIM GAGLIARDI FILE NO(S): CPC CU 08-00095 PROJECT: CHARTER SCHOOL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Commissioner Magill declared that he was responsible for the development of Springs Ranch and currently has no financial interest in this site. STAFF PRESENTATION As a result of recent meetings with City staff, Mr. Jim Gagliardi, distributed revised modifications to the development plan (Exhibit A). Mr. Gagliardi also presented the application with PowerPoint slides (Exhibit B). Commissioner Magill was concerned with modular buildings being required to move off site within 1 year and how has that issue been worked out with the applicant? Mr. Gagliardi replied that is a condition of approval and that the plan will be reviewed after one year. If the economic issues change necessitating the modular buildings remain, an enforcement officer would open a zoning violation case and proceed with tools available through the Zoning Code. APPLICANT PRESENTATION 1. Mr. Jon Romero, LDC, clarified the school was brought in to help the church’s financial situation with their construction schedule. Commissioner Suthers inquired about the amount of students that will occupy the modulars? Mr. Romero replied 25 students per modular building. Ms. Linda Stahnke, Rocky Mountain Classical Academy, stated the existing K-8 grades will be used as a model for this site. Carpool flow is estimated at 12 minutes and approximately 250 students will be on site. Rocky Mountain Classical Academy signed a notice of intent to lease the church with the agreement of the church to provide space. 2. Mr. Graham Prouty, pastor of Springs Ranch Baptist Church, will lease space from the owner of the trailers on Sunday mornings. Once the $2.5 million building is constructed for the 50 members then the church will vacate the modular buildings. CITIZENS IN FAVOR None CITIZENS IN OPPOSITION None STAFF REQUESTED TO SPEAK Commissioner Magill requested clarification of his traffic safety concern. Mr. Dave Lethbridge, City

July 17, 2008 Page 40


Engineering, stated that modifications for the pedestrian-vehicular safety are minimal enough that the conditional use could go in front of the Planning Commission for approval. DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Moved by Commissioner Cleveland, seconded by Commissioner Hartsell, to approve Item 11, CPC CU 08-00095, based upon the findings that the conditional use request complies with the three criteria for granting conditional uses as set forth in City Code Section 7.5.704, and is subject to the following technical modifications as modified by staff’s handout (Exhibit A):

Technical and Informational Modifications to the Conditional Use Development Plan: 1. The removal date of the modular buildings is one year from the stamped approval date on the

plans. 2. All platting and subdivision issues are to be addressed prior to the issuance of certificate of

occupancy.

Commissioner Butcher expressed his grave concern with the uncertainty of this project and the lack of financial assurances to help this site be successful. Commissioner Butcher lives in the area and would show no sympathy should the modular buildings be in violation after the one-year period. Motion passed 7-0 (Commissioners Butlak and Gonzalez excused). AUXILIARY COMMENTS Mr. Dick Anderwald wanted to clarify the time the City spent on the application due to recent severe criticism. Mr. Gagliardi clarified that a pre-application meeting was conducted and an expedited seven weeks was spent reviewing this plan by all City departments under the stakeholder process. Mr. Anderwald requested Mr. Romero explain if the City caused his firm any undue suffering due to the City’s review process. Mr. Romero stated that the applicant did not suffer at all from the City’s timely review. Mr. Romero appreciated the coordination with Mr. Gagliardi. Mr. Anderwald clarified that this application was processed from start to finish within seven weeks. Commissioner Butcher stated that timeframe further increases his concern regarding this project. __July 17, 2008_____ _____________________________ DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR

July 17, 2008 Page 41


NEW BUSINESS CALENDAR MEETING: JULY 17, 2008 ITEM: 12 STAFF: MICHAEL SCHULTZ FILE NO(S): CPC ZC 08-00086 PROJECT: 120 CASCADE CT – CHANGE OF ZONE STAFF PRESENTATION Mr. Michael Schultz, City Planner II, presented the application by PowerPoint slides (Exhibit A). APPLICANT PRESENTATION Ms. Kathy Stenberg, representing the estate, appeared for questions. CITIZENS IN FAVOR None CITIZENS IN OPPOSITION Mr. Robert Potter, 30 Cascade Court, stated the existing office/commercial buildings do not impact his property due to view of the buildings side or back view. He opposed a contractor’s storage yard and the potential noise and intensity of uses within the neighborhood. He preferred the site remained residentially zoned. He’s lived at the site since 1956, and his 101-year old mother lives in the home and sits in and enjoys the side yard during the day. Commissioner Hartsell stated this is another example of piece-meal zoning that occurs one lot at a time until the residential character of a neighborhood is destroyed. The Planning Department needs to comprehensively address and provide a way for neighborhoods to comment on these types of requests. It seems wrong to handle it in this fashion. DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Moved by Commissioner Suthers, seconded by Commissioner Stroh, to approve Item 12, CPC ZC 08-00086, the zone change request from R-5 (Multi-family Residential) to M-1 (Light Industrial) based upon the findings that the zone change request complies with the three (3) criteria for granting a change of zone as set forth in City Code Section 7.5.603 and is subject to the following conditions of record:

1. Outdoor storage restricted to the north 30 feet of the property. 2. Total building structure coverage not to exceed 40%. 3. Minimum ten-foot building side-yard setbacks.

Motion passed 5-1 (Commissioner Hartsell opposed with Commissioners Gonzalez, Cleveland and Butlak excused). __July 17, 2008_____ _____________________________ DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR

Documents

CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD …€¦ · · 2012-06-19city of colorado springs planning commission record-of-decision . the city planning commission held