CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION

Transcription

1 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ITS REGULAR MEETING ON THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2012 AT CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 107 NORTH NEVADA AVENUE COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO CHAIR SUTHERS CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER AT 8:30 A.M. THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 1:15 P.M. PRESENT: Ham Henninger Magill Markewich Phillips Shonkwiler Suthers ABSENT: Gonzalez Walkowski ALSO IN ATTENDANCE: Mr. Kyle Campbell, Interim Director of Planning Mr. Marc Smith, Municipal Attorney Mr. Rick O Connor, Interim Land Use Review Lead MINUTES Motion by Commissioner Markewich, seconded by Commissioner Shonkwiler, to approve the August 16, 2012 minutes. The motion carried 5-0 (Commissioner Phillips abstained, Commissioner Ham excused, and Commissioners Gonzalez and Walkowski absent). COMMUNICATIONS Commissioner Suthers announced Commissioner Ham is running late due to a work obligation. Kyle Campbell announced he would leave the hearing room during Items 4.A-4.C to avoid a possible conflict of interest.

2 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM PROJECT DESCRIPTION PAGE NO. Request by Colorado Springs Utilities for consideration of the following development applications: ITEM NO.: A.1 CPC MP A9MJ12 ITEM NO.: A.2 CPC ZC PARCEL NO: PLANNER: Larry Larsen 1. A major amendment to the approved Banning Lewis Ranch Master Plan to remove the Research & Development (R&D) and Retail (R) land use designations and replace with the Public Utility Water(P-W) land use designation. This would allow the applicant to proceed with other City applications to secure approval of the Southern Delivery System (SDS) Water Treatment Plant facility. 2. A change of zoning district classification from PIP-2/AO (Planned Industrial Park with Airport Overlay) and PBC/AO (Planned Business Center with Airport Overlay) to PF/AO (Public Facility with Airport Overlay). The subject property consists of 124 acres and is located immediately east of Marksheffel Road between Highway 24 and Highway

3 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION ITEM PROJECT DESCRIPTION PAGE NO. ITEM NO.: B.1 CPC MP A1MN12 ITEM NO.: B.2 CPC ZC ITEM NO.: B.3 CPC DP PARCEL NO.: PLANNER: Larry Larsen Request by LDC, Inc. on behalf of Templeton Gap Storage, LLC for consideration of the following development applications: 1. An amendment to the Dublin North Master Plan to remove the residential designation upon the eastern portion of this area and re-designate it for office / warehouse use. 2. A zone change from A/AO (Agricultural with Airport Overlay) to the C-6/AO (General Business with Airport Overlay) zone district for the T-Gap Storage project. This application and project would allow for the future development of an office warehouse, RV storage and self-storage units. 3. A development plan for the T-Gap Storage project. The project will be developed in phases: first RV storage, second office/warehouse units and last self-storage units. The property is located approximately 1,500 feet north and east of the Tutt Boulevard and Templeton Gap Road traffic circle, east of Templeton Gap Road and it consists of 7.0 acres. 7 ITEM NO.: C.1 CPC ZC ITEM NO.: C.2 CPC DP PARCEL NO.: PLANNER: Erin McCauley Request by Jon Romero of YOW Architects on behalf of DJs Properties II for consideration of the following development applications: 1. A change of zone from R-5 (Multi-Family Residential) to C- 5/cr (Intermediate Business with Conditions of Record). 2. A development plan for 1865 Dublin Boulevard. The property consists of 1.27 acres, is currently zoned R5 (Multi- Family Residential), and is located at 1865 Dublin Boulevard. 9-3-

4 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION UNFINISHED BUSINESS CALENDAR ITEM PROJECT DESCRIPTION PAGE NO. ITEM NO.: 4.A CPC MP A3MN12 ITEM NO.: 4.B CPC ZC ITEM NO.: 4.C CPC CP PARCEL NO.: , PLANNER: Meggan Herington (Postponed from the August 16, 2012 meeting) Request by NES, Inc. on behalf of Pulpit Rock Investments, LLC for consideration of the following development applications: 1. A minor amendment to the Flying Horse Master Plan. This amendment would change the land use designation of 3.43 acres of Parcel No. 12 from Residential, units per acre, to Office. 2. Rezoning 3.43 acres from PUD (Planned Unit Development) to OC (Office Complex). 3. The Flying Horse Parcel No. 12 Office Concept Plan consisting of 40,000 square feet of office building with associated parking. The property consists of 3.43 acres and is located on the north side of Flying Horse Club Drive at the northwest corner of Highway 83. NEW BUSINESS CALENDAR 15 ITEM PROJECT DESCRIPTION PAGE NO. ITEM NO.: 5.A AR CP A2MJ12 ITEM NO.: 5.B CPC CU ITEM NO.: 5.C CPC FP PARCEL NO.: PLANNER: Meggan Herington Request by Nass Design Associates on behalf of Nor wood Development Group for consideration of the following development applications: 1. A major amendment to the concept plan to change auto sales and commercial land uses to multi-family residential for 260 multi-family residential units. 2. A development plan for 260 multi-family residential units on acres. The project will be a combination of one, two, and three-bedroom units in three-story apartments with garages. 3. A final plat for one lot to be used for 260 multi-family residential units. The property is zoned C-6/AO/cr (General Business with an Airport Overlay and conditions of record), contains acres, and is located southwest of Woodmen Road and Powers Boulevard

5 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION ITEM PROJECT DESCRIPTION PAGE NO. Request by Pinnacle Land Surveying Company Inc. on behalf of Barbara and Fred Johnny Garcia for consideration of the following development applications: ITEM NO.: 6.A CPC ZC ITEM NO.: 6.B CPC CP PARCEL NO.: PLANNER: Steve Tuck 1. A zone change from R (Estate, Single Family) and PBC/CR (Planned Business Center with Conditions of Record) to R- 5/CR (Multi-Family Residential with Conditions of Record) and PBC/CR for B&J Garcia Subdivision Filing No. 2. The westerly portion of the property is presently zoned R and is proposed for R-5/CR zoning. The easterly portion of the site is currently zoned R and PBC/CR and is proposed for PBC/CR zoning. 2. The B&J Garcia Subdivision Filing No. 2 concept plan. The concept plan shows a three story, 17,500 square-foot assisted living facility for the proposed R-5 zoned, westerly portion of the site and office and commercial uses on the proposed PBC zoned, easterly portion of the site. The property is located south of San Miguel Street between Circle Drive on the east and Yuma Street on the west, is addressed as 1216 N. Circle Drive and consists of 3.68 acres

6 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM: A.1, A.2 STAFF: Larry Larsen FILE NO.: CPC MP A9MJ12, CPC ZC PROJECT: Southern Delivery System Water Treatment Plant DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Motion by Commissioner Magill, seconded by Commissioner Shonkwiler, to approve Item A.1- File No. CPC MP A9MJ12, the amendment to the Banning Lewis Ranch Master Plan based upon the finding that the plan complies with the master plan review criteria in City Code Section , subject to compliance with the following condition: Condition of Approval: This amendment will be subject to the preparation of a revised Banning Lewis Ranch Land Use Table, after the subsequent master plan amendment for the associated Southern Delivery System Bradley Substation project application, which is pending. Motion carried 6-0 (Commissioner Ham excused, and Commissioners Gonzalez and Walkowski absent). Motion by Commissioner Magill, seconded by Commissioner Shonkwiler, to approve Item A.2- File No. CPC ZC , the proposed zone change to PF (Public Facility), based upon the finding that the change complies with the zone change criteria found in City Code Section B. Motion carried 6-0 (Commissioner Ham excused, and Commissioners Gonzalez and Walkowski absent). September 20, 2012 DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR -6-

7 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM: STAFF: B.1-B.3 Larry Larsen FILE NO.: CPC MP A1MN12, CPC ZC , CPC DP PROJECT: T-Gap Storage DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Motion by Commissioner Magill, seconded by Commissioner Shonkwiler, to approve Item B.1- File No. CPC MP A1MN12, the amendment to the Dublin North Master Plan based upon the finding that the plan complies with the master plan review criteria in City Code Section , subject to compliance with the following technical and informational modifications: Technical Modifications: 1. Re-insert Sheets 5 and 6 into the completed Master Plan set; and 2. Provide City Utilities approval of Sheet 6, the Master Facilities Plan, and address all issues to their satisfaction. Motion carried 6-0 (Commissioner Ham excused, and Commissioners Gonzalez and Walkowski absent). Motion by Commissioner Magill, seconded by Commissioner Shonkwiler, to approve Item B.2- File No. CPC ZC , the proposed zone change to C-6/AO (General Commercial with Airport Overlay), based upon the finding that the change complies with the zone change criteria found in City Code Section B. Motion carried 6-0 (Commissioner Ham excused, and Commissioners Gonzalez and Walkowski absent). -7-

8 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION Motion by Commissioner Magill, seconded by Commissioner Shonkwiler, to approve Item B.3- File No. CPC DP , the T-Gap Storage Development Plan based upon the finding that the plan complies with the development plan review criteria in City Code Section E, subject to compliance with the following technical and informational plan modifications: Technical Modifications: 1. Show on Sheets 2, 3, 4 and 5, the western side 6-foot chain fence with opaque covering, so as to be consistent with the other three sides and to provide the required screening from Templeton Gap Road. 2. Provide City Utilities approval of Sheet 7, the Preliminary Utility and Facility Plan, and address all issues to their satisfaction. Motion carried 6-0 (Commissioner Ham excused, and Commissioners Gonzalez and Walkowski absent). September 20, 2012 DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR -8-

9 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM: C.1, C.2 STAFF: Erin McCauley FILE NO.: CPC ZC , CPC DP PROJECT: 1865 Dublin Boulevard Items C.1 and C.2 were pulled by the audience. STAFF PRESENTATION Ms. Erin McCauley, City Planner II, briefly reviewed the applications. Commissioner Markewich inquired of the maximum height allowed if the building were torn down and rebuilt. Ms. McCauley replied the building could be a maximum height of 45 feet. APPLICANT PRESENTATION 1. Mr. Aaron Horn stated the former child care service vacated the property about 18 months ago, and the owner has attempted to rent the property since then. The owner is requesting the C-5 (Intermediate Business) zoning for a prospective tenant. Commissioner Ham now in attendance. Commissioner Magill inquired if he had any conversations with the neighbor. Mr. Horn replied no. The prospective tenant has discussed the intended use with the neighbors and there have not been many concerns. 2. Mr. Larry Whitaker, YOW Architects, stated the building was specifically built for a day care service. The proposed pet service use is compatible with the site, surrounding commercial uses, and the fire station to the south. CITIZENS IN FAVOR None -9-

10 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION CITIZENS IN OPPOSITION 1. Mr. Chad Burfitt, adjacent property owner, was concerned that there are multiple dogs on the site already despite the zone change having not been approved. He was concerned with loud barking and other animal noises that already occur. He preferred future uses limited to family-friendly activities, and distributed a copy of a neighborhood petition (Exhibit A). Commissioner Magill inquired what Mr. Burfitt would like restricted from the allowed uses. Mr. Burfitt stated anything that would potentially cause noise such as the animal care or constant outdoor uses. Commissioner Suthers clarified the list of uses he would like to prohibit. Mr. Burfitt would not object to a small animal clinic if the use were contained indoors. He also requested tattoo parlors be restricted from the site. Commissioner Phillips inquired about the animal clinic further west on Dublin Boulevard. Mr. Burfitt stated he believed there are no residences that abut the dog kennel/daycare use, and noise from I-25 may drown out some of the animal noise. 2. Mr. Ray Wrobel, adjacent property owner, was concerned with possible after-hours noise and runoff from animal feces because the site slopes down toward the residential homes to the east. Mr. Wrobel referenced the nearby Dublin House restaurant/bar that is open until 2am and is a nuisance to the neighbors because of loud, late-night motorcycle engines and vehicle accidents of drunken patrons. He would not object to the proposal if the use was contained indoors and traffic was mitigated to reduce the negative impacts to the neighborhood. APPLICANT REBUTTAL 1. Mr. Whitaker stated pet services is a daytime use. The pets are contained within the building and the exterior is used only for a short period of time to relieve the dogs according to State health regulations. 2. Mr. Brandon Matheny, potential tenant, explained his business provides daily professional grooming and animal daycare from 8am-5pm with no overnight care. The use is limited to outside access as regulated by the Department of Agriculture, such as the exterior of the site is used only for short periods to relieve the animals and the concrete is bleached and cleaned every day. Commissioner Magill inquired of their current business location. Mr. Matheny stated he has not occupied a business space since September 8, His former location was near the Vickers and Academy intersection. Commissioner Ham requested he address the neighbor s concern of noise. Mr. Matheny stated the dogs are only outside for a short period and then brought back into the building. 3. Ms. Kim Matheny stated the dogs were at the building during the transition period from their former location, and those dogs all went home that day. -10-

11 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION STAFF REQUESTED TO SPEAK Ms. McCauley clarified the definition of pet services when located within a building, which exclude uses for livestock and large animals. Should the applicant go beyond that definition, they would need to amend the development plan and mitigate any issues. Commissioner Suthers was concerned with overnight boarding and if it would be allowed should another business move into the building. Ms. McCauley stated yes, that would be allowed. DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Moved by Commissioner Magill, seconded by Commissioner Henninger, to approve Item C.1- File No. CPC ZC , the request for a change of zone from R-5 to C-5/cr based on the finding that the request complies with the approval criteria found in City Code Section B, and is subject to the following conditions of record: Conditions of Record: Uses shall be limited to those defined as Permitted or Conditional within the OC (Office Complex) zone district, as well as the following permitted C5 Permitted uses: a. Business Office Support Services; b. Consumer Repair Services; c. Pet Services; d. Mixed Commercial-Residential; e. Personal Improvement Services; f. Commercial Center; and g. Small Animal Clinic. The following uses shall be Conditional in addition to those noted as Conditional in the OC zone district: a. Teen Club/Young Adult Club; b. Club (Membership, Social and Recreational); c. Liquor Sales; and d. Recreational Services - Indoor Entertainment, and - Indoor Sports and Recreation. The following use shall be prohibited: a. Medical Marijuana Facility. Commissioner Magill desired to place further conditions on the development plan rather than the zone change to restrict outside boarding, overnight boarding and limiting business hours from 7am-6pm. Commissioner Shonkwiler felt it reasonable to extend the list of allowable uses. His concern is there are potential uses other than today s proposal. -11-

12 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION Motion carried 5-2 (Commissioners Markewich and Shonkwiler opposed with Commissioners Gonzalez and Walkowski absent). Moved by Commissioner Magill, seconded by Commissioner Ham, to approve Item C.2-File No. CPC DP , the development plan for 1865 Dublin Boulevard based on the finding that the request complies with the approval criteria found in City Code Section E, subject to the following restrictions: 1. No animal boarding for outdoor use. 2. Business hours for pets from 7am-6pm. 3. A pet waste mitigation plan shall be provided. Mr. Campbell requested those restrictions be attached as bullet points under Pet Services as listed in the zone district conditions of record. Commissioner Ham asked Commissioner Magill to amend the motion to include a pet waste mitigation plan (included in list above). Commissioner Magill agreed. Motion carried 5-2 (Commissioners Shonkwiler and Markewich opposed with Commissioners Gonzalez and Walkowski absent). September 20, 2012 DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR -12-

13 -13-

14 -14-

15 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION UNFINISHED BUSINESS CALENDAR ITEM: STAFF: 4.A-4.C Meggan Herington FILE NO.: CPC MP A3MN12, CPC ZC , CPC CP PROJECT: Flying Horse Parcel Number 12 STAFF PRESENTATION Ms. Meggan Herington, City Planner II, reviewed the applications with PowerPoint slides (Exhibit A). Commissioner Shonkwiler inquired of the area west of the gated emergency access. Ms. Herington stated it is zoned PUD (Planned Unit Development) for single-family residential, but there are no lots built there yet. Commissioner Shonkwiler inquired of a nearby lot that was recently rezoned. Ms. Herington replied that lot was originally planned for 175,000 square feet of office and was rezoned to allow a religious institution. Commissioner Henninger inquired how many acres are currently zoned for residential. Ms. Herington displayed the master plan and deferred to the applicant. Commissioner Magill estimated it to be 50 acres. APPLICANT PRESENTATION Mr. John Maynard, NES Inc., reviewed the applications with PowerPoint slides (Exhibit B). The existing residences are approximately 600 feet away from the proposed office use. Commissioner Markewich inquired if the presentation slides show the building located further to the east as compared with the plan shown in the agenda. Mr. Maynard stated the plans should be the same. The building envelope was moved as far east as possible while in compliance with the utility easements and the 75-foot setback from Highway 83 as designated within the master plan. Commissioner Shonkwiler requested Mr. Maynard comment on the design of the proposed office use, if a future traffic signal will be installed at Highway 83 and Flying Horse Club Drive, and if the full service access could be moved further west to relieve potential congestion at the traffic signal. Mr. Maynard stated the traffic report suggested moving the access 50 feet to the west, which is shown on the plan. He would investigate whether the access could be moved farther to the west while avoiding the water line. The annexation agreement requires the Flying Horse development to participate in both signals planned at the Highway 83/Northgate -15-

16 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION Boulevard as well as the Highway83/Flying Horse Club Drive intersections. The Flying Horse community also requires design standards for its non-residential parcels. He has not seen those design requirements, but that will be presented during the development plan review stage. CITIZENS IN FAVOR None CITIZENS IN OPPOSITION 1. Mr. David Phillips, Siena neighborhood homeowner, stated the community stands united in their opposition. The Comprehensive Plan and City Code Section requires compatibility, and he felt that was not met. He referenced City Code Section regarding protecting residences from traffic and noise. His neighborhood is not quiet. He requested denial of the applications. He submitted a petition opposing the applications (Exhibit C). Commissioner Magill inquired why his neighborhood is not quiet. Mr. Phillips stated there is traffic from the clubhouse and other neighborhood traffic. Commissioner Magill inquired if he s familiar with buffering. Mr. Phillips felt buffering could be accomplished if more residential were built. Commissioner Markewich referenced the revised full-movement traffic intersection that would deter traffic from his neighborhood and if that satisfied his concerns. Mr. Phillips stated that is a better solution versus the traffic from the roundabout in his neighborhood. Commissioner Ham inquired of the compatibility issues the neighbors are concerned with. Mr. Philips stated it is an overwhelmingly residential area where office is not compatible. APPLICANT REBUTTAL Mr. Maynard stated the Flying Horse Master Plan was never planned as solely a residential area, it was always intended to have non-residential land uses especially fronting Highway 83 to block noise. The infrastructure was designed for more traffic than built. DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Commissioner Markewich stated that office use is more appropriate at this busy intersection, rather than residential. This use will serve as a benefit to the neighbors due to the buffering effect of the office building and parking lot, especially after the area is fully developed and traffic increases along Highway 83. Moved by Commissioner Shonkwiler, seconded by Commissioner Magill, to approve Item 4.A- File No. CPC MP A3MN12 the amendment to the Flying Horse Master Plan. Motion carried unanimously (Commissioners Gonzalez and Walkowski absent). Moved by Commissioner Shonkwiler, seconded by Commissioner Magill, to approve Item 4.B- File No. CPC ZC , the zone change of 3.4 acres from PUD (Planned Unit Development) to OC (Office Complex), based upon the findings that the change of zoning -16-

17 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION request complies with the three (3) criteria for granting of zone changes as set forth in City Code. Commissioner Magill felt that a litmus test for the impact a use has for existing and potential neighbors is that it won t negatively impact noise, aesthetics, and value. If he could pick a zone and use that was complimentary, it would be this type of office use. Commissioner Suthers felt the neighbors should all be proud of their area, but she found it difficult to believe that an office use would not be not compatible with residential uses. Traffic along Highway 83 will only get worse, and this use will help buffer that noise. She asked the audience to rethink their opposition because, at the end of the day, they will be glad they have this buffer between Highway 83 and their homes. Motion carried unanimously (Commissioners Gonzalez and Walkowski absent). Moved by Commissioner Shonkwiler, seconded by Commissioner Magill, to approve Item 4.C- File No. CPC CP , the Flying Horse Parcel 12 Concept Plan based upon the findings that the concept plan complies with the review criteria for granting of concept plans as set forth in City Code Section with the following minor modifications: Technical Modifications: 1. Add file number CPC CP to the bottom right corner of all plan pages. 2. Remove or revise the emergency access notes per Fire Department comments. Motion carried unanimously (Commissioners Gonzalez and Walkowski absent). September 20, 2012 DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR -17-

18 Exhibit: A Items: 4.A-4.C CPC Meeting: September 20, 2012 File No(s). CPC MP A3MN12 CPC ZC CPC CP Flying Horse Parcel #12 City Planning Commission September 20, 2012 Meggan Herington Flying Horse Parcel #12 Vicinity Map Minor Master Plan Amendment Zone Change (3.4 acres) Concept Plan (Office building) -18-

19 Exhibit: A Items: 4.A-4.C CPC Meeting: September 20, 2012 Flying Horse Parcel #12 Master Plan Amendment Site Details Flying Horse Parcel #12 Concept Plan 3.4 acre office complex 40,000 sf office site Parking at 5 spaces per 1000 sf Standard OC criteria apply 45 foot height max Landscape setbacks Building setbacks -19-

20 Exhibit: A Items: 4.A-4.C CPC Meeting: September 20, 2012 Flying Horse Parcel #12 Concept Plan Flying Horse Parcel #12 Stakeholder Process/Issues Notification to 56 property p owners on 3 occasions Neighborhood meetings April 4 th - 12 neighbors in attendance - no issues August 29 th - 16 neighbors in attendance - numerous concerns Staff received 2 letters of opposition -20-

21 Exhibit: A Items: 4.A-4.C CPC Meeting: September 20, 2012 Concerns: Flying Horse Parcel #12 Stakeholder Process/Issues Heights of future buildings Design of future buildings Site design Screening/buffering Landscaping Lighting Parking/layout Overall change of use impact on property values Increased traffic/access Flying Horse #12 Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the applications as presented The applications do comply with the City Code review criteria -21-

22 Exhibit: A Items: 4.A-4.C CPC Meeting: September 20, 2012 Flying Horse #12 Questions? -22-

23 Exhibit: B Items: 4.A 4.C CPC Meeting: September 20, 2012 Flying Horse Parcel #12 Office Planning Commission September 20, 2012 Introduction / Outline Process to Date What we learned from Postponment Master Plan History Applications Description Summary -23-

24 Exhibit: B Items: 4.A 4.C CPC Meeting: September 20, 2012 Process to Date Office use on this parcel originally proposed 2 3 years ago at NH meeting. NH meeting April 2012 June applications August CPC postponed to allow applicant to hold additional NH meeting. August 29 NH meeting attended by 15, 4 of whom do not live in area. What we learned from Postponement Vision ii of Flying li Horse of some purchasers is not consistent with vision portrayed in Master Plan and Comp. Plan. Intent to hold periodic development updates for residents. -24-

25 Exhibit: B Items: 4.A 4.C CPC Meeting: September 20, MP (Original) i Master Plan History Office at FHCD and Hwy 83; 4000 DU; highest intensity in MP along FHCD; Infrastructure based on this plan. -25-

26 Exhibit: B Items: 4.A 4.C CPC Meeting: September 20, Amendment Office along FHCD concentrated at Powers Village land use south of FHCD included non residential 3000 DU -26-

27 Exhibit: B Items: 4.A 4.C CPC Meeting: September 20, Amendment #9 Reduced d ddensity by changing Village to more standard residential DU Entitled 177,000 SQ. FT. of office, including 800 parking spaces. -27-

28 Exhibit: B Items: 4.A 4.C CPC Meeting: September 20, Amendment #10 Office parcel changed to Religious Institution -28-

29 Exhibit: B Items: 4.A 4.C CPC Meeting: September 20, Amendment #12 Add office parcel back to Highway 83/FHCD corner, limited it to 40, SQ.FT. (Current Proposal) -29-

30 -30- Exhibit: B Items: 4.A 4.C CPC Meeting: September 20, 2012

31 Exhibit: B Items: 4.A 4.C CPC Meeting: September 20, 2012 Applications/Concept Plan Details MP Amendment, Zone Change to OC, Concept Plan Concept p Plan places upper limit on intensity of development Impact to road system significantly less than land use that was used to base design of infrastructure, which is in place now Wall separates residential land use from proposed office Access to officesite completely separate from residential access Change to office removes impact of connection to Calistoga to north, thereby eliminating any traffic impacts from Calistoga to access Club and Powers -31-

32 Exhibit: B Items: 4.A 4.C CPC Meeting: September 20, 2012 Summary Road and infrastructure serving proposed office use designed and constructed to serve much higher intensity of use FH Master Plan has balance of land uses, including employment good planning Intersection of an Expressway and a minor Arterial is the appropriate location for non residential land use Site specific design createsappropriate appropriate buffer to residential, and separates access Land use mix in Master Plan, which includes nonresidential uses, is necessary for future viability of Metropolitan District serving Flying Horse residents -32-

33 -33-

34 -34-

35 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION NEW BUSINESS CALENDAR ITEM: 5.A 5.C STAFF: Meggan Herington FILE NOS.: AR CP A2MJ12, CPC CU , CPC FP PROJECT: Woodmen Ridge Apartments STAFF PRESENTATION Ms. Meggan Herington, City Planner II, reviewed the applications with PowerPoint slides (Exhibit A). APPLICANT PRESENTATION 1. Mr. Steve Sharkey, Nor wood Development, introduced the design team. Commissioner Markewich inquired of the areas the concept plan is amending and stated, that the agenda packet references 'Planning Area C or area east of Targa Drive' and states that the maximum building height is 130 feet except for 'Buliding 12', but later references the C-6 zone maximum height of 50 feet. 2. Mr. Jim Nass, Nass Design Associates, displayed a poster board that identified the phased planning areas and that that the site in question is only the South section of Area C. All apartment buildings in the multi-family area are now referenced as Buildings 12.A-12.M and are restricted to a 50-foot height. Mr. Nass displayed a poster board focused on the multi-family use. He explained that the North portion of Area C (east of Targa) will retain the 130-foot maximum building height with the long-range plan being the development of a hotel on that parcel. Concerns were how to mitigate Powers Boulevard and adjacent neighbors. The plan locates only one building along Powers Boulevard. There is 100-foot distance from the traffic lanes to the edge of the right-of-way with a 55-foot open space corridor for a future City trail and another 28 feet of private street with additional 10 feet of landscaping and retaining wall. Powers Boulevard is 260 feet from the closest apartment building. Travel lanes of Powers Boulevard are even with the apartment rooftops. Next, he addressed building 10 (most southern and adjacent the single-family residential area). He displayed a cross-section from the closest home along Grand Prairie to the closest multi-family building. All residences along Grand Prairie Drive are separated by a 20-foot berm along Bridle Pass Drive, and those residential lots slope down from the top of that berm. An 80-foot right-of-way along Bridle Pass Drive separates those single-family homes along with a 20-foot landscaping buffer and 40-foot building setback on the proposed site. The distance from the closest single-family home to the multi-family building is -35-

36 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION 190 feet. Next, Mr. Nass addressed lighting and stated the nearby auto dealership is allowed 35-foot poles with high wattage and full cut-off fixtures. The multi-family development lights are restricted to a 20-foot pole height and wattage is less than half of the neighboring commercial development. Commissioner Markewich inquired of the construction timing of New Car Drive to access the signal along Woodmen Road. Mr. Nass replied New Car Drive will be constructed to the roundabout after the commercial sites are built. At this time it is not necessary to connect just for the multi-family development. He also mentioned the traffic study estimated a 35% reduction in traffic for the proposed multi-family use versus the previously intended commercial uses. Commissioner Shonkwiler inquired of the Targa Drive extension. Mr. Nass replied Targa Drive will be constructed with the multi-family development. Commissioner Markewich was concerned that the right-in/right-out intersection along Woodmen Road was too close to Powers Boulevard. Mr. Sharkey stated that Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) created that intersection. Most residents will likely access the traffic signal at Duryea Drive and Woodmen Road. He deferred to City Traffic Engineering. Ms. Kathleen Krager, City Traffic Engineering, stated the City has an intergovernmental agreement with CDOT regarding access at Powers Boulevard. That agreement allows CDOT to control access to City streets within feet of the Powers Boulevard right-of-way. CDOT determines if access is appropriate. Right-in/right-out intersections typically have the lowest accident rates. If this right-in/right-out were to develop an accident history, both the City and CDOT could restrict access. Commissioner Henninger inquired if Woodmen Road s right-hand road curbing (southern curb) could be corrected soon because he s personally almost lost a right tire because the transition is not very apparent. Ms. Krager stated that part of Woodmen Road is listed on a phase improvements list for the entire Woodmen corridor, but it is second-to-last on the list. She will take his recommendation to City Engineering for spot improvement. Commissioner Henninger felt this site is too tucked into the neighborhood for access issues from Powers Boulevard. Ms. Krager did not feel many will use Bridle Pass to access the site because of the good access from Powers and Woodmen. Commissioner Henninger felt access to the site from the southern route along Powers Boulevard is challenging. Ms. Krager suggested Powers to Woodmen to Duryea. Commissioner Markewich inquired of the uncompleted section of Dublin Boulevard between Powers Boulevard and Bridal Pass Drive. Ms. Krager stated the Pikes Peak Rural Transportation Authority (PPRTA) extension list will be up to voters to widen Bridle Pass Drive. A future traffic signal is planned for the Bridle Pass Drive/Dublin Boulevard intersection. Commissioner Magill inquired of any further impacts to the school district and referenced page 92 of the agenda. Mr. Sharkey has not received any information from the school district and anticipated the impacts to School District 11 is less than a single-family residential use. -36-

37 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION CITIZENS IN FAVOR None CITIZENS IN OPPOSITION Mr. Steve Bacon, homeowner along Duryea Drive, stated the developer marketed the proposed site for commercial/retail uses when he purchased his home. He felt commercial/retail uses would increase the neighborhood value. He was concerned with current traffic at high speeds along Bridle Pass Drive and suggested a deceleration lane. He was concerned with the short distance of the first entrance along Targa Drive from Woodmen Road into the commercial/retail site. Wagon Trails homeowners pay a fee to maintain the neighborhood walking trails and questioned how Nor wood would maintain the trails with more residents using them. APPLICANT REBUTTAL Mr. Sharkey addressed Commissioner Magill s previous comments regarding impacts to the school district and stated the three-bedroom units produce more children versus smaller units. There are only 21 three-bedroom units in the complex. Next, he addressed Mr. Bacon s comments of traffic backing up and blocking the road to other parts of the retail development. He referenced Nor wood s extensive history of creating viable commercial sites that do not intentionally create traffic jams. The neighborhood trails are a part of the Nor wood Special Maintenance District created in 1981, whereby the City Council is the board of directors and the maintenance contractor is the City Parks Department. The commercial/retail areas, the apartment complex, and the singlefamily residences will all be obligated to pay fees toward maintenance of the trails. STAFF REQUESTED TO SPEAK Commissioner Suthers inquired of traffic volume and if a double left-turn lane off Duryea Drive is viable. Ms. Krager replied that most traffic at that signalized intersection is retail traffic. The proposed multi-family use s heavy outbound traffic is expected during the morning; whereas the commercial (Wal-Mart) site s heavy traffic volumes typically occur during the afternoon/evening. The traffic study did not require a double-left turn. Commissioner Ham referenced Mr. Bacon s request for a deceleration lane along Bridle Pass Drive. Ms. Krager stated City guidelines do not recommend deceleration lanes on collector streets. Thus, she has not recommended one. Commissioner Magill felt that the struggle is that design could mitigate speeds to some degree but that could become mandatory. Ms. Krager stated Colorado Springs Police Department can spend little time on speeding tickets, and she preferred to review street design to encourage proper speeds intended for the street rather than a road that accommodates higher speeds. -37-

38 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Moved by Commissioner Markewich, seconded by Commissioner Phillips, to approve Item No. 5.A-File No. AR CP A2MJ12, the concept plan for Woodmen Ridge Apartments, based upon the finding that the concept plan complies with the concept plan review criteria in City Code Section D. Commissioner Magill felt the natural transition from single-family residential to commercial is a multi-family development. The design criteria reduces the traffic. The impacts to surrounding schools is probably less than a single-family residential project. This use and design is a compliment rather than a detriment to the area. He supported the development. Commissioner Henninger felt that the traffic design is a bit cumbersome. He found the placement of the apartment complex is oddly placed next to a commercial district. He referenced a multi-family development in the Cordera neighborhood that is set farther back from Powers Boulevard. He felt this multi-family development would be a better transition and better fit were is set farther from Powers Boulevard. He was not a strong supporter of the applications. Commissioner Markewich felt this use was a good transition especially near the sport facility and the busy intersection at Woodmen and Powers. Motion carried 6-1 (Commissioner Henninger opposed and Commissioners Gonzalez and Walkowski absent). Moved by Commissioner Markewich, seconded by Commissioner Phillips, to approve Item 5.B File No. CPC CU , the Conditional Use for Woodmen Ridge Apartments, based upon the finding that the conditional use complies with the conditional use and development plan review criteria in City Code Sections and Motion carried 6-1 (Commissioner Henninger opposed and Commissioners Gonzalez and Walkowski absent). Moved by Commissioner Markewich, seconded by Commissioner Phillips, to approve Item 5.C File No. CPC FP , the final plat to for Woodmen Ridge Apartments Filing No. 1, based upon the finding that the plat complies with the subdivision plat review criteria in City Code Sections and Motion carried 6-1 (Commissioner Henninger opposed and Commissioners Gonzalez and Walkowski absent). September 20, 2012 DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR -38-

39 Exhibit: A Items: 5.A-5.C CPC Meeting: September 20, 2012 File No(s). AR CP A2MJ12 CPC CU CPC FP WOODMEN RIDGE APARTMENTS City Planning Commission September 20, 2012 Meggan Herington Woodmen Ridge Apartments Vicinity Map SITE acres Property is zoned C-6 Multi-family is a conditional use -39-

40 Exhibit: A Items: 5.A-5.C CPC Meeting: September 20, 2012 Woodmen Ridge Apartments Concept Plan Powers Autopark II Concept Plan Currently approved for auto sales Woodmen Ridge Apartments Conditional Use Development Plan 260 apartment units 18.2 dwelling units per acre 13 buildings 3 stories each/38 feet in height Clubhouse/recreation center and pool on-site Access via Woodmen Ridge View to the north Full site landscaping (screening/buffering) g) to City Code standards -40-

41 Exhibit: A Items: 5.A-5.C CPC Meeting: September 20, 2012 Woodmen Ridge Apartments Conditional Use Development Plan Woodmen Ridge Apartments Stakeholder Process/Issues Neighborhood meeting on July 11, neighbors attended Staff received 6 s of opposition Concerns: Increased traffic/access Site design Lighting, fencing, landscape, building height Change of use from commercial to multi-family Crime Burden on schools Decreased property values -41-

42 Exhibit: A Items: 5.A-5.C CPC Meeting: September 20, 2012 Woodmen Ridge Apartments Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the applications as presented The applications do comply with the City Code review criteria Woodmen Ridge Apartments Questions? SITE -42-

43 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION NEW BUSINESS CALENDAR ITEM: 6.A, 6.B STAFF: Steve Tuck FILE NOS.: CPC ZC , CPC CP PROJECT: B&J Garcia Subdivision No. 2 STAFF PRESENTATION Mr. Steve Tuck, City Senior Planner, reviewed the applications with PowerPoint slides (Exhibit A). Mr. Tuck requested adding technical modification 14 that requires the applicant to show the stormwater quality areas as displayed on the approved drainage report. APPLICANT PRESENTATION 1. Mr. Fred Johnny Garcia, property owner, intends to construct an assisted living facility on the site (R-5 portion of the site). Mr. Garcia appreciated Mr. Tuck s hard work and coordination on the project. Commissioner Shonkwiler inquired if Mr. Garcia reviewed alternative uses for the site. Mr. Garcia was open to options allowed within the PBC zone district. Commissioner Shonkwiler felt more creative solutions could be included. Commissioner Ham inquired if Mr. Garcia met with the neighborhood to address their issues. Mr. Garcia replied yes, a neighborhood meeting was held, and he met with a few neighbors on a separate occasion at his office. He felt most of the issues were addressed, but height and use are the outstanding issues. 2. Mr. John Towner, Pinnacle Land Surveying Company, stated the proposal complies with the Comprehensive Plan s 2020 Land Use Map. The building height is being negotiated with the City Planning and Development Department for the assisted-living facility portion of the site. A three-story height is being requested, and he felt the 30-foot height restriction recommended by staff would negatively affect the product the applicant desires to build. He suggested an elevation height restriction instead because Yuma Street falls from south to north. It is important to have a drive-under garage to alleviate any overflow neighborhood parking issues. Commissioner Markewich inquired if the applicant requested the 30-foot height restriction. Mr. Towner replied the original PBC-zoned site originally had the condition of record for a 30-feet height. City staff is requesting a 30-foot building height on the R-5 zoned portion, but the applicant is requesting a 36-foot height. -43-

44 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION Commissioner Magill asked if the 36 feet could be accommodated during the development plan stage taking into consideration the subterranean parking area. Mr. Tuck replied yes, three stories at a 30-feet height could be accommodated from the back side of the site (back side would appear to be three stories, and the west side would appear to be a two-story building). Setting a height limit is appropriate at this hearing. Staff is requesting a 30-foot height for compatibility with the single-family residences. Mr. Garcia requested 36 feet on the R-5 zoned property. Commissioner Shonkwiler felt there would be difficulties constructing a three-story building within a 30-feet height restriction. He felt there are other reasonable ways to construct the product without negatively affecting the neighbors. Mr. Towner displayed a plan and proposed dropping the underground garage at 98 feet with living areas at 10 feet per story. From the pedestrian view at Yuma Street the height would appear to be 14 feet and the San Miguel Street view would appear to be 26 feet. The applicant proposes to keep the older trees to provide a visual buffer as well. Commissioner Suthers clarified that the applicant agrees with the 30-foot building height condition of record for the PBC/cr rezoning. Mr. Towner stated that is correct. CITIZENS IN FAVOR None CITIZENS IN OPPOSITION 1. Mr. Charles Barber, neighboring property owner, stated the southerly portion of the PBCzoned lot needs the same limitations or conditions of the northerly portion of the lot. He opposed the R-5 rezoning and commercial development. He felt the sanitary sewer and stormwater drainage could not accommodate the proposed population density of an assisted-living facility. Commissioner Magill clarified that the plans may enforce compliance with stormwater quality needs to accommodate the capacity of the proposed use. Mr. Barber was in opposition of the property possibly being developed at the expense of the taxpayers. He felt the applicant should move the electric transformer that stands four feet high and is located where a proposed driveway is shown, and stormwater mitigation needs to be addressed during this review phase. 2. Mr. Robert Sommers, representing a nearby property owner who is his mother, stated that anticipated drainage due to the increased amount of asphalt and roof tops needs to be addressed. He requested architectural renderings of the buildings. The applicant s roofline elevation change request is late in the game. The neighborhood is already densely populated, and he was concerned that the site would change from a senior facility to a multi-family use with higher density and increased traffic. The site should adhere to the original conditions of record to better complement the existing single-family homes. He requested the applicant create a Memorandum of Understanding to the Mid-Palmer Park homeowners association so all expectations are clearly addressed. -44-

45 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION 3. Mr. John Colecchi, adjacent property owner, supported the assisted-living facility and stated a 36-feet height is agreeable off San Miguel but would be too high off Yuma Street. He opposed the rezoning that could potentially allow an apartment complex in the future. He referenced the current drug traffic at a neighboring apartment complex. A multi-family use could exacerbate the limited visual line of sight and speeds along San Miguel and Yuma. He was also concerned with stormwater drainage citing the recent rain and hail storm in the neighborhood. 4. Ms. Elaine Sommers, nearby property owner, was also concerned with drainage and traffic congestion. She supported a 30-foot height limitation. 5. Ms. Jean Wickham, nearby property owner, stated the driveway into the proposed assisted facility is directly across the street from her home. She was concerned the tall building would block daylight into her home along with exacerbating the current neighborhood plumbing issues. She suggested a traffic study due to a population increase on the site. She requested a four-way stop be installed (currently at two-way stop). APPLICANT REBUTTAL 1. Mr. Towner stated a drainage report, traffic report, water pressure report, and wastewater flow report were provided to the City. All neighbors will have further opportunity to express their concerns during the development plan review stage. 2. Mr. Garcia clarified that no fast food restaurant or car wash uses are proposed for the site. STAFF REQUESTED TO SPEAK Commissioner Suthers inquired if medical marijuana would be allowed in the original conditions of record. Mr. Tuck stated yes, since that use was not allowed in the city at that time, it could be considered an allowable use if it s not specifically restricted. Commissioner Suthers couldn t imagine the neighborhood would desire that use in the area. Commissioner Shonkwiler stated this plan represents a good resolution of issues and supported the project. He would prefer the 36-foot building height for the assisted facility portion of the site. Moved by Commissioner Magill, seconded by Commissioner Shonkwiler, to approve Item No. 6.A-File No. CPC ZC , the zone change from R and PBC/CR to PBC/CR for 1.81 acres, and from R to R-5/CR for 1.87 acres, based on the finding the request complies with the review criteria in City Code Section B, and subject to the following conditions: -45-

46 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION The Conditions of Record for the PBC/CR zone are: 1. The following uses are prohibited: auto service, automotive wash, bar, sexually oriented business, medical marijuana, and liquor stores. 2. All activities shall be conducted entirely within a building. 3. There shall be no outside storage of any material or products. 4. The maximum building height shall be 30 feet. The Condition of Record for the R-5/CR zone is: The maximum building height shall be 36 feet. Commissioner Magill stated traffic, parking, landscaping and other issues will be addressed during the development plan review stage. The concept plan is to expand the commercial site facing Circle Drive and rezoning the potential R-5 lot. He felt the R-5 zoning is a great transition zone versus an entire commercial parcel. Commissioner Markewich felt the assisted-living facility will reduce potential traffic compared with a multi-family use. He felt that all the potential uses may enhance the neighborhood. Motion carried 6-1 (Commissioner Ham opposed with Commissioners Gonzalez and Walkowski absent). Moved by Commissioner Magill, seconded by Commissioner Henninger, to approve Item No. 6.B-File No. CPC CP , the concept plan for the B&J Garcia Subdivision No. 2 based on the finding the plan complies with the review criteria in City Code Section D, subject to compliance with the following technical and/or informational modifications to the concept plan: Technical and/or Informational Modifications to the Concept Plan: 1. Show the required parking requirement for the assisted living as 75 beds (not units) with a parking ratio of 1 parking space/5 beds (similar to a nursing home). If the proposed use is for elderly (60 years or above) then the requirement of 0.6 space/dwelling unit is correct, but the proposed use must be revised from assisted living to elderly. 2. For Lot 1, B&J Garcia Subdivision No. 1 note the existing zoning as PBC/CR per Ordinance No Note the proposed zoning as PBC/CR. Delete One (1) Multi-Family Residential Lot from this table. Revise the parking requirement for the building designated as business park to 1 space/500 square feet. Delete the office requirement of 1/400 and the warehouse requirement of 1/1000 for this building. The required number of parking spaces for the 5,440 square-foot business park building will be 11 spaces. 3. For proposed Lot 2, B&J Subdivision No. 2 note the proposed zoning as PBC/CR. 4. Note the proposed Conditions of Record for the PBC/CR parcels as: 1) The following uses are prohibited: auto service, automotive wash, bar, and sexually-oriented business. 2) All activities shall be conducted entirely within a building. 3) There shall be no outside storage of any material or products. 4) The maximum building height shall be 30 feet. 5. Note the Condition of Record for the R-5/CR parcel as: 1) The maximum building height shall be 36 feet. 6. Delete the boundary line between the existing and proposed PBC/CR zones. If the rezoning request is approved then one PBC/CR district will be created. This line may be shown as a -46-

47 CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD-OF-DECISION lot line but not a boundary line. The boundary lines are to be located at the perimeter of the property owned by Barbara and Johnny Garcia, including the 30-foot area to be dedicated for the San Miguel Street right-of-way. 7. Show the side setback along the east line of the R-5 area as five (5) feet instead of 20 feet (this setback was shown correctly on the previous plan but modified with this revision). 8. Show the 25-foot landscape and building setback extending across the entire frontage of Circle Drive (a portion is not shown). 9. Delete from the proposed R-5 area riprap. Note the removal of the chain link fence from the R-5 area along Yuma Street and San Miguel Street. 10. Note the existing electric vault located in the westerly driveway on San Miguel Street shall be relocated at the owners expense. 11. Show the six (6)-foot detached sidewalk extending along Circle Drive (portion not shown). Show the five (5)-foot detached sidewalk along San Miguel Street (portion not shown). Show and identify the five (5)-foot detached sidewalk along Yuma Street (portion not shown). Show the existing sidewalk on the southwest corner of Yuma Street and San Miguel Street and align the proposed sidewalk on the southeast corner of Yuma Street and San Miguel Street with the existing sidewalk across the street to the west. 12. As required by Traffic Engineering add the sight triangles for each driveway that is adjacent to a public street (refer to the Engineering Criteria Manual, Traffic Criteria Manual Section III Sight Distance Requirements). Ensure the grading, landscape, fence/wall, and future signage meets the sight distance standards. The 25-foot x 25-foot sight triangle is no longer used. 13. As required by Colorado Springs Utilities include the preliminary utility plan notes. 14. Show on concept plan the areas set aside for stormwater quality as shown on submitted drainage plan. Motion carried 6-1 (Commissioner Ham opposed and Commissioners Gonzalez and Walkowski absent). September 20, 2012 DATE OF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR -47-

48 Exhibit : A Items: 6.A, 6.B CPC Meeting: September 20, 2012 B&J Garcia Subdivision No. 2 Zone Change File No. CPC ZC Concept Plan File No. CPC CP B&J Garcia Subdivision No. 2 Rezone 3.69 acres from PBC/CR (0.82 acre) and R (2.87 acres) to PBC/CR (1.81 acres) and R-5/CR (1.87 acres) Concept plan shows 21,000 square feet of office and business park on the PBC/CR site and 52,000 square feet for an assisted living facility on the R-5/CR site 2-48-

49 Exhibit : A Items: 6.A, 6.B CPC Meeting: September 20, 2012 Aerial View 3 B&J Garcia Subdivision No. 2 Concept Plan 4-49-

50 Exhibit : A Items: 6.A, 6.B CPC Meeting: September 20, 2012 Intersection of Circle Drive & San Miguel Street, looking south 5 San Miguel Street in foreground, looking southwest 6-50-

51 Exhibit : A Items: 6.A, 6.B CPC Meeting: September 20, 2012 San Miguel Street, looking west with site on left 7 Northwest corner of site, looking east, intersection of San Miguel Street & Yuma Street 8-51-

52 Exhibit : A Items: 6.A, 6.B CPC Meeting: September 20, 2012 Intersection of Yuma Street & San Miguel Street, looking southeast 9 Southwest corner of site, looking northeast

53 Exhibit : A Items: 6.A, 6.B CPC Meeting: September 20, 2012 B&J Garcia Subdivision No. 2 Approve the zone change to: R-5/CR with the building height limited to 30 feet and PBC/CR with the following uses not permitted: auto service, automotive wash, bar, & sexually oriented business, all activities shall occur inside, no outside storage, and building height limited to 30 feet Approve the concept plan subject to revisions to the plan; add to list: show stormwater quality facilities as required by approved drainage report