CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION"

Erika Bryan
5 years ago
Views:

1 Page 5 CONSENT CALENDAR MEETING: NOVEMBER 19, 2009 ITEM : STAFF: FILE NO(S): PROJECT : B.1-B.2 STEVE TUCK CPC ZC , AR CP A1MJ09 POWERS AUTOPARK II Items pulled from Consent by City staff. STAFF PRESENTATION Mr. Steve Tuck, Senior Planner, stated that he would not be completing a thorough presentation, but will simply be addressing the revisions to the conditions of approval. Mr. Tuck displayed an aerial of the proposed site and provided a brief background regarding the zoning and acreage of the property. He stated the High Rise Overlay zone would be removed from the property, but the C-6 Zone district (General Business) would be modified to include the ability to build high rise buildings up to 130 feet in height in the northeast portion of the site. He proposed a revised condition of record to address signage (Exhibit A). Commissioner Hartsell inquired of the location of Grand Prairie Heights, and inquired about the use of loud speakers and intercoms near the existing neighborhood? Mr. Tuck stated no loud speaker systems will be located near the residential neighborhood, and there are notes on the concept plan that require additional landscaping to buffer the neighborhood from noise and commercial views. Commissioner Butlak inquired of the maximum coverage allowed for auto dealers on the property? Could the entire site be occupied by auto dealers? If so, what will happen on the property regarding noise, views and streets? Mr. Tuck stated that there is the potential for this entire site to be occupied by auto dealers. The roads and accesses were taken into consideration should that occur. Commissioner Gonzalez inquired of the conditions of record to the west of the development? Mr. Tuck stated the proposed site s conditions of record are stricter than those of the western site. The western site has been developed above and beyond what the City required. APPLICANT PRESENTATION Mr. Fred Veitch, Nor wood Development Group, explained the purpose of the screening wall, additional landscaping and setbacks that would shield residential sites. He stated that there was additional consideration regarding lighting; all lights are full cut-off fixtures, and the lighting is less obtrusive than both the adjacent Wal-Mart and Penrose St. Francis Hospital. The project

2 Page 6 proposes dealerships as well as smaller businesses to occupy the site. He stated the signage has been reduced and the roundabout s turning radius has been expanded compared to that of Motor City. Mr. Veitch also stated that private covenants will be strictly enforced. Commissioner Butlak inquired of the specific banner rules. Mr. Veitch stated that prior to anything being put up on the property, such as banners and balloons, it will have to be reviewed and approved according to the strict covenants for the dealerships. Mr. Veitch submitted a copy of the developer s design guidelines (Exhibit B). CITIZENS IN FAVOR None. CITIZENS IN OPPOSITION 1. Mr. Bill Brooks, representing Penrose St. Francis Health Services, was concerned that the view from the hospital onto the auto dealership lighting during the evening time would deter from patient care and well being. Commissioner Hartsell inquired if there have been any additional issues raised? Mr. Brooks was not aware of any. Commissioner Suthers inquired had Mr. Brooks spoken to the applicant, Nor wood Development Group, prior to this meeting? Mr. Brooks replied no, he had not. Commissioner Hansen inquired if the current zoning district standards are more restrictive? Mr. Tuck stated the current and proposed zones are similar; however the C-6 (General Business) use allow for more intense uses. Mr. Tuck stated the C-6 zoning is an older zone that is less restrictive; however, the development plan must be reviewed prior to approval. The development plan review stage will provide an opportunity for public comment and public notice. Commissioner Hansen inquired of the High Rise Overlay? Mr. Tuck stated the site is currently zoned High Rise overlay, and there is the potential for higher buildings than allowed within the C- 6 zone. The proposed condition will limit the building height to 130 feet to only a portion of the site. 2. Mr. Gary Bradley served as a consultant for Penrose St. Francis. He stated that the hospital originally considered this site for their development, and is concerned that the proposed zoning will allow more intense uses from what is existing today. He stated he is also in opposition to the possibility of balloons and banners displayed on the property. He asked the following questions: Could the dealership turn off the lights at night? Is there going to be a billboard located on the property? Will the employees also be parking on the side streets? Commissioner Butcher inquired of the altering of a PBC zone with a big box building? And how is this significantly different from the Wal-Mart to the north? Mr. Bradley stated that the intensity of

3 Page 7 the storage use is the issue. He stated with a big box building there is a calming time during slow periods of business. That would not occur with a dealership. 3. Mr. Larry Barrett, representative of Scenic Colorado, opposed the proposed lighting, signage and possible negative impact to the surrounding neighborhood. He requested that lighting and signage be minimized. He also requested the views along both Powers Blvd. and Woodmen Rd be preserved. He requested the Commission take into account safety, signage and lighting prior to their decision. Commissioner Magill inquired of Mr. Barrett s impression of the existing auto park? Mr. Barrett felt the current auto park fits in with the surrounding neighborhoods very well. APPLICANT REBUTTAL Mr. Veitch stated he shares the concerns with lighting and signage. The lights are either turned down or off during the night. There is significantly less lighting during the night compared with the big box retail north of this site. The proposed site is allowed more square footage than what is currently proposed. Mr. Veitch displayed the proposed signage for the application. He would like to continue to work with the hospital to address their concerns. Commissioner Hartsell inquired of the amendment to the signs, and would they be similar to the existing auto park signage? Mr. Veitch stated that the proposed signs will look similar to the existing signs. Commissioner Hansen inquired of on-street parking along Bridle Pass Dr.? Mr. Veitch stated dealerships and their employees are not allowed to park on the street. The dealership pads must be able to compensate for not only the retail sale cars, but for employees as well. DECISION OF THE COMMISSION Motion by Commissioner Magill, seconded by Commissioner Butcher, to approve Item B.1, File No. CPC ZC , the zone change for acres to C-6/CR/AO (General Business with Conditions of Record with Airport Overlay) based upon the finding that the request complies with the review criteria in City Code Section (B) subject to the following conditions of record: Conditions of Record: 1. Maximum building heights in Planning Areas A and B or that area west of Targa Drive shall be 50 feet. 2. Maximum building heights in Planning Area C or that area east of Targa Drive shall be 130 feet, except Building 12 shall be 50 feet. 3. Thirty-foot landscape setback along Bridle Pass Drive. 4. Forty-foot building setback along Bridle Pass Drive. 5. Six-foot masonry wall placed along Bridle Pass Drive Four pylon signs as shown on the concept plan shall be allowed for the entire C-6 zone district. Low profile signs for individual buildings shall be prohibited, except one low profile sign shall be allowed for fuel prices for each establishment which provides fuel. The two

4 Page 8 pylon signs shall not exceed 200 square feet in sign area, 30 feet in height, with a minimum setback of 10 feet. The two minor pylon signs shall not exceed 150 square feet in sign area, 20 feet in height with a minimum setback of 10 feet. The pylon signs are for on premise signage within the C-6 district. No off premise advertising or billboards are permitted within the C-6 district. Wall signage shall be per the PBC zone requirements in Section F of the Zoning Code. Motion carried 8-0 (Commissioner Cleveland excused). Commissioner Stroh stated that it is clear that the applicant has come before the Commission having met or exceeded all standards. He stated that he was not pleased that despite public notice having gone out on multiple occasions, those in opposition did not communicate with the applicant prior to today s hearing. Commissioner Hartsell stated she is pleased with the applicant (Nor wood) and their consideration of the neighbors and commends them for imposing stricter covenants in place. Commissioner Gonzalez concurred with Commissioner Hartsell s comments. Commissioner Magill stated this is by far and away the most appealing auto park in existence. Commissioner Suthers agreed with Commissioner Magill s comments. Motion by Commissioner Magill, seconded by Commissioner Stroh, to approve Item B.2, File No. AR CP A1MJ09, the Powers Autopark II Concept Plan based on the finding the request complies with the review criteria in City Code Section (D), subject to compliance with following technical and/or informational plan modifications: Technical and/or Informational Modifications to the Concept Plan: 1. In note 3 indicate Entech Engineering, Inc. prepared the Geologic Hazard Study Exemption Request. 2. Revise Condition of Record 6 by indicating the two pylon signs shall not exceed 200 square feet in sign area, 30 feet in height, with a minimum setback of 10 feet, and the two minor pylon signs shall not exceed 150 square feet in sign area, 20 feet in height with a minimum setback of 10 feet. Note the pylon signs are for on premise signage within the C-6 district. Note no off-premise advertising or billboards are permitted within the C-6 district. Revise the third sentence in this Condition to state: Wall signage shall be per the PBC zone requirements in Section (F) of the Zoning Code. 3. In Note 6 revise C-6 to PBC. 4. As required by Colorado Springs Utilities revise the grading in the public utility easement in the southeast corner of the intersection of Targa Drive and Woodmen Road. This grading is in excess of that stipulated by the easement agreement. Motion carried 8-0 (Commissioner Cleveland excused).

5 Page 9 Commissioner Butcher stated that he was hesitant to vote to approve due to all of the restrictions placed on the signage at the Concept Plan stage. The applicant has gone above and beyond in restricting themselves, and commended the applicant for taking it upon themselves to do that. DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR

CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION

CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION January 20, 2011 Page 16 NEW BUSINESS CALENDAR MEETING: JANUARY 20, 2011 ITEM: 5 STAFF: FILE NO: PROJECT : BRETT VELTMAN CPC NV 10-00098(RF)