MESA COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION February 28, 2008 PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES

Transcription

1 MESA COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION February 28, 2008 PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES Vice Chairman Bonella called to order a scheduled hearing of the Mesa County Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. Vice Chairman Bonella led the Pledge of Allegiance. The hearing was held in the Public Hearing Room, Mesa County Administration Building, 544 Rood Avenue, Grand Junction, Colorado. In attendance, representing the Mesa County Planning Commission, were: Mark Bonella, Christi Flynn, Terri Binder, Michael Gardner, Thomas Kenyon and Gregory Robson In attendance, representing the Mesa County Department of Planning and Economic Development, were: Kurt Larsen, Michael Warren and Keith Fife. Chy Arnett was present to record the minutes. There were 22 citizens present throughout the hearing. APPROVAL OF MINUTES AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA ANNOUNCEMENTS CONTINUED ITEMS WITHDRAWN ITEMS RESOLUTIONS CONSENT ITEMS

2 HEARING ITEM TXT1 WHITEWATER MIXED USE DISTRICTS & DESIGN STANDARDS TEXT AMENDMENT Petitioner: Mesa County Department of Planning and Economic Development Staff: Michael Warren, AICP, Request: Approval of amendments to the Land Development Code to implement portions of the Whitewater Community Plan by creating design criteria and a mixed use zoning district. Staff Recommendation: Approval Staff s Presentation: Michael Warren, of Mesa County Long Range Planning Division entered into the record TXT1 Whitewater Mixed Use Districts and Design Standards Text Amendments, The Mesa County Land Development Code 2000 as amended, the master plan with specific reference to the Whitewater Community Plan of 2006, the project report and the Powerpoint exhibit labeled Exhibit A. Mr. Warren presented the Powerpoint presentation, and noted that this is a text amendment for the Land Development Code with one request but he broke it into two parts. Part One: The amendment to chapter 4 which is the use matrix and other applicable sections in 5 and 6 of the code. Part Two: Is to adopt the mix use commercial district design standards as appendix D of the code. Mr. Warren stated that Whitewater has experienced significant change over the last twenty five years and Mesa County has addressed changes over time beginning in 1979 with the original Whitewater Land Use Regulations. In 1996 the area was addressed with policies and guidelines in the Countywide Land Use Plan. The Whitewater, rural community, was designated in In 1999 the Whitewater Kannah Creek Area Plan was adopted by the planning commission. In 2005 the area was updated again in the Countywide Land Use Plan, for the rural areas, and in 2006 the Whitewater Rural Community Plan was adopted. All the plans reflect the change in population increases, demands for more infrastructure and services, demands for more intensive land uses, and availability of services. Mesa County has tried to be consistent with policies to meet the needs over time. Right now in the downtown area of Whitewater there is a mix of existing land uses. The 2006 plan was the implementation point, to come back and create a mixed use zone district as well as to create design guidelines that could be implemented for that mixed use zone. Since June of 2007 the project has been in process, with Steering Committee meetings, a Design Charrette, Open Houses, mailings, and Planning Commission Workshops. The key points, that it s a general mix of uses rather then mandatory or specific set of mixes in a development lot. Mr. Warren stated that it s a good balance to achieve a mixed use over time, its implemented as either a mixed use residential or a mixed use commercial. The residential components, of the mixed use, can be a maximum of 12 dwelling units per acre. The district in the residential category is between 60% and 75% of the use, like wise in the commercial areas. The mixed use commercial area is along Hwy 50 and the other mixed use areas are just east of Hwy 50 and Reeder Mesa and a little bit in 2

3 the downtown area. There is about 80 acres of mixed used residential and 15 acres of the mixed use commercial. The straight commercial area is about 20 acres. There is a business park designation of 85 acres, a commercial industrial designation of about 115 acres, with some existing industrial that was there before the plan was updated of around 35 to 40 acres. The design guidelines, standards apply to the entire area, with one exception that of single family residential being exempt. This will be a significant change because of the area evolving into an urban area which will require urban standards. These designs guidelines and standards apply to the mixed use multi family residential area, the commercial and the industrial and each of those have the same content, applicability, site design, vehicle and pedestrian circulation, parking landscaping, and screening. Definitions of these guidelines and standards have been put in so that it is very clear to everyone who uses the documents, such as a developer, planner or planning commission, of what the specific requirements are. Mr. Warren feels it s flexible in the building and architectural styles. The plan recognizes the environmental constraints that are in Whitewater, and promotes community comfort, along with vehicle, pedestrian, circulation, connections, public transit, sidewalks, linkages to community locations and activities, and tries to create sense of comfort and connection, to whatever services as they become more and more available. This network will expand and become a very friendly place for people to be. The parking standards and guidelines are looking for an aesthetic element to it, in both the landscaping, and layout of the sites with parking in the rear or on the sides with screening and paving material that will help with runoff. Landscaping, (with the strong guidance from Curtis Swift, Tri-River Extension) will be done in low water use plants with lots of mulch amenities and a selection of plants that will do well in Whitewater environment. In both structural and planting type screening for the accessory uses that go with commercial zones, they are looking for some creativity, and there is some flexibility in the standards that will work for this community without putting too much burden. Mr. Warren stated that as development progresses we are hoping to create some linier paths for walking and to establish those with walls and berms and fencing, some parameters have been put into place to make that a value to the community. Mr. Warren referred to the amendment for the compliance with the Land Development Codes. He feels that the amendment promotes predictability and consistency, it provides for appropriate opportunities for participation, as well as extensive participation, throughout the development of the standards, guidelines and the zone district as well as the code itself. There are no conflicts with this zone district with the participation process. It is fair by giving due consideration and protecting private property rights and it certainly respects that. It is not within the joint planning area, so criteria (5), is not applicable. He asked that the MCPC approve the amendment and recommend it to the BoCC. Questions: Commissioner Kenyon asked why the discussion by the steering committee to protect the trails and trail systems including the Old Spanish Trail to town was not included in this discussion and wanted to know if it was still part of the plan. Mr. Warren stated that it is not in the zone code but that the plan is included the 2006 Whitewater Community Plan which includes trail, parks and open spaces and it 3

4 specifically calls out the continued protection of the Old Spanish Trail as part of the planning for Whitewater. Comment: Commissioner Kenyon then wanted to clarify to the public that in the steering committees discussions there was a lot of discussion of the lack of irrigation water and that the design really needed to reflect the minimum availability of irrigation water and that the County is unresolved yet as to how the waste water will be treated in that area but that it will be treated by either pumping from one place to another or building of some sort of plant, so that this plan takes into consideration that their will be waste water treatment available. Mr. Warren stated that was a correct statement. Comment by Kurt Larsen stating that the County has entered into negotiations with both Clifton and Persigo for extension of that sewer. Public Comments: Patrick Green, of Landesign Consulting Engineers, of 326 Main Street. Grand Junction, Co. spoke representing the owners of El Rancho Dos Rios subdivision. They are in the mixed use commercial area. Mr. Green stated that the owners of the property are a contractor business and they are intending to develop their property and move their business to that property using the mixed use idea of both having the site for their business and also develop some residential along with that. The owners of the property would like the MCPC, and planners to consider modifying the proposed uses in the Future Land Use Classification, Table 1, Mixed Use District Permitted Uses, Commercial section, Category, Retail Sales and Services. The 6 th item under the Specific Use Type column is noted as Contractors and trade shops, indoor operations and storage. Under the Commercial Mixed Use Zoning, this use is acceptable with a Conditional Use permit. The 7 th item under the Specific Use Type column is noted as Contractors and trade shops, indoor operations and outdoor storage (including heavy vehicles). The only difference between the two uses, 6 and 7 is the outside storage. Mr. Green stated that his client is requesting Specific Use Type, Item 7 to also be listed as permitted with a Conditional Use C, under the Mixed Use Commercial zoning. Question: Commissioner Binder asked for clarification of the location of the property being discussed. Mr. Green provided the clarification that it was near where the old race track use to be and that there was already some screening available. Edward Gardner of 935 Lakeside Court spoke. Mr. Gardner was on the Steering committee. He stated that he is representing The Kannah Creek Extension Ditch #2. He referred to a comment that was made, that there is little to no irrigation water available in the area. Mr. Gardner clarified that Ditch #2 is the only ditch that serves the Whitewater area and in that ditch they carry eleven inches of water for the town of Whitewater which is only 24 lots. Mr. Gardner requested that in all new subdivisions and new considerations that they are contacted to comment on the request. Comment: by Kurt Larsen Director of Planning stated that in fact that is part of our indexing process that notification is provided to the irrigation companies. 4

5 Question: Commissioner Bonella asked Mr. Warren if he saw any problem with what Landesign is requesting. Mr. Warren stated that Mr. Green did come in with his client to talk about this several weeks before the hearing to discuss the possibilities with the County Staff, and the County directed him to write the letter to bring it to the MCPC s attention. At that time the pluses and minus were discussed in general. The County staff did inform Mr. Green that they do NOT support that request. The County Staff believes it goes against the goals that they are trying to achieve in that area. Largely Mr. Warren feels the reason for the Staff not supporting this was is that it is not consistent with the mixed use with residential and commercial type of uses. Mr. Warren pointed out on the streetscape that what they are trying to achieve is a sense of intensively active area in the core area (Downtown) and the set backs are close to the street and a sense of urban character and even when mixed in with some commercial, as it is now it would be screened and INDOORS and not something that would be readily visible and the request is not consistent with the type of direction that the County staff is trying to head. Question: Commissioner Bonella, asked for clarification that his understanding is that the County is trying to do more of a retail sales type of thing along with possibly some retail on the main floor and residential on top floor. Mr. Warren stated that, yes, that is the ultimate goal of the County staff, and so the outdoor storage would not be compatible with that, even if it was screened, the traffic caused by outdoor storage area such as heavy equipment coming and going or large vehicles, that would not be compatible with the County staff goal. Because of this Mr. Warren stated that the County staff cannot support the request. Comment: Kurt Larsen stated that the outdoor storage is not generally compatible with what is trying to be created in a mixed use zone. Mr. Warren stated they are looking for more retail and residential. Some uses are allowed which includes contractors but it does require that any storage be indoor and treated as a conditional use. This is a recognition that this is different and those kinds of uses if you re going have them belong in the industrial zones of the community. Comment: Commissioner Bonella added that in a bigger picture throughout the planning process when the actual Land Use Plan of 2006 was developed Whitewater was identified as The Key Entry Way into our community. That was something that Whitewater had strong feelings for and they want to be that first impression community. Question: Commissioner Kenyon asked Mr. Warren if contractors would want to store equipment if it would have to be indoors. Mr. Warren stated that with the criteria as it is now that was a correct statement. Commissioner Kenyon then asked if there are any exceptions. Mr. Warren stated that he didn t feel that the County would be so regulatory as to not allow any outdoor parking especially if it was after hours. Comment: Kurt Larsen noted that also with the Conditional Use process it would have to go thru a hearing process to be allowed even indoors. There may locations that this might be appropriate but at that time you would find out what would be allowed outside he felt that it should not be equipment or materials. Question: Commissioner Bonella asked how many acres are in the mixed use area. Mr. Warren stated the break down of the areas again for Mr. Bonella. 5

6 Question: Commissioner Kenyon asked for a breakdown of the closeness proximity to the industrial and mixed use area and how far would someone have to go to have an outdoor storage. Mr. Warren explained that it was within a reasonable distance from the mixed use zone area. Comment: Commissioner Bonella remarked that with this whole future land use area we need to be careful as to what is approved for the long term goal to be able to follow the long term plan. Mr. Warren stated that one of the discussions with Mr. Green and his client that the first person who comes in with a conditional use permit may be the best to comply with it but over time things change and that is why the longer term impact is very important. Comment: Mr. Bonella remarked that personally he feels that he would NOT support the change right now. Mr. Bonella wants to see how things go over the next few years and see how the development goes. Motion: Commissioner Kenyon moved that regarding Item # TXT1 The Whitewater mixed used districts and design standards a Motion of support and that it be passed on to the BoCC with a favorable recommendation, subject to the approval of the amendments to the land development code and portions of the Whitewater community plan by creating design criteria and a mixed use zoning district. Second: by Commissioner Binder. Motion approved: TXT1 CLIFTON/FRUITVALE COMMUNITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION TEXT AMENDMENT Petitioner: Mesa County Department of Planning and Economic Development Staff: Keith B. Fife, AICP, , Keith.Fife@mesacounty.us Request: Approval of amendments to the Land Development Code to implement portions of the Clifton/Fruitvale Community Plan by creating design standards and a mixed use zoning district. Staff s Recommendation: Approval Staff s Presentation: Keith Fife, AICP, Long Range Planning Division Director entered into the record The Mesa County Master Plan, Mesa County Development Code, project file which includes the Project review and the Powerpoint Presentation which is Exhibit (A). The main purpose for the Land Development Code Amendment is to further implement the Clifton/Fruitvale Community Plan that was adopted by the Planning Commission back in The amendments are specifically directed at the Old Downtown Area. The County wants to promote the character of that area, they worked with the citizens and the consulting team of THK Associates to implement this portion of the plan. The amendments are to encourage development of a mix of uses in the area of Clifton. Mesa County is looking more to a redevelopment of an existing community. Some steps taken were a broad brush market analysis to see what sorts of development the community can handle, along with a three day design workshop with the community at the Clifton Community Hall where community members could come in any time of the day or evening to share their concerns and hopes. There were a total of three different 6

7 community forums held throughout the course of the project which includes a revised Future Land Use and Transportation Circulation Map. Presentation of the (draft) Mixed Use Zone District and standards have been discussed with the Planning Commission, and citizens along the way. Currently Mesa County does not have a Mixed Use Zone District in place but we may have very shortly in Whitewater and Clifton/Fruitvale area. This Amendment would create a tool that people can use to re-zone their property in the areas that the Future Land Use Map is designating as commercial mixed use. The district and design standards which is being called appendix ( C ) and will become part of the Land Development Code are very similar as what was just seen in the Whitewater discussion. This is a table of contents discussing the intent of the design standards, the boundary, how the projects would be reviewed. This will insure that the standards are being met and the guidelines are generally being adhered to. The entire intent is to make the Clifton/Fruitvale area more pedestrian friendly. There are special streetscapes and landscaping items that are recommended. It does recommend a maximum number of off-street parking spaces with new development which is something unique to the Counties zoning districts, right now we have minimums, and people tend to use more then the minimum in their design of parking. This is to keep it in a pedestrian scale and not overwhelm the landscape with parking. The guidelines do provide a lot of flexibility and guidance in architectural style. Mr. Fife stated that the proposal is to add the following to the Land Development Code: section MU-OTC Description of the MUOTC Zone District. MU-OTC to Table 5.1 Use Table. MU-OTC to Table 6.1 Density and Dimensional Standards, and Appendix C Old Town Clifton Mixed Use District and Design Standards. The staff s finding is that the proposed text amendment is consistent with the purpose statements in section 1.5 and is not in conflict with other sections of the code and staff recommends approval of the text amendment. Questions: Commissioner Binder stated that while looking back at the Whitewater Retail Sales and Service Matrix of what can be done in that area, she noticed that under Contractors and Trade Shops Indoor Operations and Storage it is a Conditional Use Permit under Mixed Use Commercial and then over on the Clifton/Fruitvale Retail Sales and Service it states that Contractors and Trade Shops Indoor Operations and Storage is allowed, Commissioner Binder wanted to know why it is allowed in Clifton but NOT in Whitewater. Mr. Fife stated that there is an already existing development that is in the Old Town Clifton area that includes contractor shops and they seem to be working. Any new development will have to meet the design standards and guidelines. Question: Commissioner Bonella wanted clarification of the matrix, it shows in the matrix under Wholesale sales it allows wholesale business with no highly flammable material liquids, conditional use permits for agricultural products, but All other wholesale uses are not allowed. Comment: Mr. Larsen noted there was no specific discussion except that in this whole area we are dealing with an existing developed area and there is a lot more variety of existing uses in the area, so its something that we 7

8 could find and maybe suitable but only if you do, as a Conditional Use, but only in this situation. Public comments: Cynthia Thomson of 3408 G Road, wanted to know what the negative would be if this amendment was not passed? Commissioner Bonella stated that there would not be much change at all in Clifton. Things would go on as they are right now. Discussion: Commissioner Kenyon remarked that the community has shown desires to improve in various ways and an additional need for sidewalks and opportunity for commercial development and he feels the county budget process has begun to look in the future as to how those improvements can be made in Clifton. Kurt Larsen commented on a very broad prospective that the community has been working on this for over two years including the revisions and refinements to the plan. Now this will create standards as identified as an important thing within the community. Mr. Larsen commented that the County has identified significant funding over the next few years in Clifton. The County is looking at substantial public involvement in contributions in the visual aspect of the community and the functional aspects of the community. Mr. Larsen and Commissioner Kenyon discussed the fact that over the last few years through community meetings and workshops, the County its consultants and the community developed the Standards and Guidelines. Bill Ramsey, of 109 Laura Avenue. Just moved to the area and has not had a chance to go to the community meetings and workshops. He stated that Laura Avenue does not go through and there are posts at the end of the street that enter into the Peach Tree shopping mall. He sees people using Laura Avenue on a regular basis for pedestrian access to Peach Tree. He feels that many of the people using that route need to get across the I-70 business loop for access to shopping now that Albertsons is closed. He would like the planners to consider putting some sort of pedestrian crossing over the road. Mr. Larsen commented that part of this whole plan is to provide better access for pedestrian traffic. Mr. Ramsey stated that he is just looking out for the existing people living in Clifton with this idea and he wants some protection for them. Question: Commissioner Bonella asked with all the updating being done in the new intersections are there plans for sidewalks and some sort of crosswalk area. Mr. Fife stated that he has not seen the specific design for the traffic light on I-70 business loop for Peach Tree, but he knows it is being studied by CDOT and he feels they are trying to accommodate pedestrian traffic with some sort of crosswalk. Also across from City-Market around Coronado Plaza and the new Transit Center CDOT is going to put a safer pedestrian crossing there. Mr. Fife would encourage Mr. Ramsey to take a look at the entire community plan there is very heavy emphasis on pedestrian connections and transportation. Mr. Fife also stated that CDOT is about to study Hwy 6 for access control in the future. Josh Boling of 3244 E ½ road spoke he is the senior pastor at the Extended Arms Church located downtown on 2 nd and F road. Mr. Boling was wondering about the 8

9 revising the downtown area and is excited for it. His building is in the historical area and he was wondering, (1) If they would have to provide additional parking to the building? (2) They want to add handicap features to the building and wanted to know if there are any restrictions on improvements? (3) He also wanted to know if there were restrictions for purchasing more land adjacent to the property? Mr. Bowling wanted to know if funds were available for the fact that this is a historical site? Mr. Fife stated that yes, the building was a historical building but there are no strings tied to that at this time. At this time there is not a County Historic Register but the Commissioners have been working with the Museum of Western Colorado to create such a program. If there was a Historical Register in place he feels that there may be some funds available but does not know, how much that would be. As far as restrictions for purchasing additional lands adjacent to the property there are no restrictions for purchases. The new amendments would allow a variety of uses in that area. Mr. Boling would like some sort of contact and wants to work hand in hand with the MCPC in the future. Mr. Larsen commented that even though we currently do not have anything in place right now, one of the upcoming steps in implementing this plan is to start looking more for community grants and see what other kinds of federal assistance might be available. Jim Linden of 3244 Front Street, wanted to know why the County is allowing stores like Albertsons to shut their doors. Why are we going in to this area and telling them how to live their lives and what they can or can not do? He feels that everyone is quite happy with the way things are now. He feels that the County is taking away from the standard of living in Clifton that he and his friends have come to enjoy. Mr. Bonella stated that its not something that the County has just decided this came from the public through intensive research, Workshops, Community forums, broad brush market analysis, and more. Mr. Bonella stated that the County has nothing to do with the grocery store deciding to close its doors. Mr. Bonella stated that by making these changes he hopes it will entice another large grocery store to want to move into the area. Mr. Fife stated that they are not changing the current zoning in this area that this amendment is only to allow re-zoning to take place. Commissioner Bonella stated that no one knows for sure what the outcome to the area will be but the County is trying to set guidelines and standards to try to improve the standard of living in Clifton/Fruitvale area. Allen Hassler of 3192 Bunting Avenue stated that he would like to thank the planning staff and any members of the Commission for the plan, however he feels that the plan calls for not enough parking for commercial zones and that the guidelines for landscaping parking lots will cause problems as far as safety because of lack of visibility. James Vezakis of 535 Kirby Drive spoke, he owns Clifton Liquors, and he feels that with his type of business, this amendment would be devastating to his business. Mr. Vezakis stated that the parking situation would be impossible for him to comply with because of the cost, and to move would be to expensive also. Commissioner Bonella asked when would Mr. Vezakis have to comply with the parking, and if Mr. Vezakis property is under CDOT jurisdiction? 9

10 Mr. Fife stated that Mr. Vezakis access is under CDOT jurisdiction. Mr. Bonella stated that it would be CDOT who would have to say what changes need to be made if any. Commissioner Kenyon stated that he appreciates the heads up about the concerns that it could be really hard on Mr. Vezakis business, this plan is to encourage not discourage change. Discussion ensued, different areas to place traffic lights and how it would help the community. Tammy Jones of 3867 River Rd. in Palisade, owns property in Clifton, she wants to know what is the time frame for CDOT to come on board and making their recommendations as far as F Rd. Commissioner Bonella stated that CDOT is working on it pretty hard but that he doesn t think that there is a time frame on this at this time. Mr. Fife stated that there is not any money budgeted to improve this stretch of F Rd. and if it s going to happen it s going to happen with local dollars. It is not in any of the Transportation Improvement Plans right now. Mr. Larsen stated that the access control plan hopefully will be done by fall. Public comment and discussion closed: Discussion: Commissioner Gardner thinks that it is a great plan and he hopes that it will help. Commissioner Bonella asked about parking, he wants there to be some consideration for the criteria for large businesses. Kurt Larsen stated that the comments on the parking can be individually looked at and changed on a one one basis. In large parking area most people park under the trees because of the heat. The issue about the numbers is if you drive by most shopping most parking lots only have 20 % parking used most times unless its Christmas time. Commissioner Bonella stated that by limiting parking you re limiting customers. Commissioner Robson stated that he is a design professional but that he agrees that the parking criteria is necessary to improve the flow of traffic and it adds to the improvement of the Clifton area which includes the parking lots. Commissioner Bonella wants it to be flexible in the design standards for parking lots. Commissioner Robson stated that that City of Grand Junction is stricter then what they are proposing for Clifton. Commissioner Bonella wanted to know who sets the standards for parking? Mr. Fife stated it comes from different engineering studies and standards. Mr. Larsen also stated that many of the standards are directly derived from studies done by Urban Land Institute which is a commercial based organization. Nationally they provide generally accepted standards providing the appropriate number of off-street parking that serve different types of uses. Commissioner Binder stated that her mother was hit twice in the first parking lot in the first mall ever built. Ms. Binder stated that the islands and landscaping are there to keep traffic flow moving and that it s for the betterment of the community. Kurt Larsen stated that shopping centers are generally designed for holiday parking and things have changed since then. And now these proposed standards say that the 10

11 calculations are set to the size of the store and then allow 10% on top of that to allow for the appropriate number of spaces needed. Commissioner Flynn stated that she wants to see the trees and the flowers and see the community cleaned up. Commissioner Robson stated that this is a guideline not written in stone. Commissioner Binder states that the traffic is going to make for a much better Clifton Commissioner Bonella stated that he was happy to see all the community participation and is looking forward to seeing what can come of it. MOTION: Commissioner Binder moved that on project TXT1CLIFTON/FRUITVALE Community Plan Implementation Text Amendment, be forwarded to the BoCC with a recommendation of approval. Seconded: by Commissioner Flynn. Motion Approved: 6-0 Comment: Kurt Larsen thanks to the community for their participation. Commissioner Bonella adjourned the hearing at 8.587p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Christi Flynn, Secretary 11