Planning Commission Minutes 2021 05 13

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes May 13, 2021 Page 6 of 10 Public notice was met through publication in the Daily Camera on April 25, 2021, and via required postings on April 28, 2021. Zuccaro gave the background, reminding the Commission that they had denied a previous request and the applicant had purchased the property since that review. He noted that the proposal was in line with the Comprehensive Plan. He described the Planned Community Zone District (PCZD) requirements and the role of the General Development Plan. Over the course of his presentation, he described the different land uses on the development, the public land dedication proposal, the height and density restrictions, the support of the Open Space and Parks advisory boards, the parking requirements, multimodal efforts, buffering and screening from US 36, road and trail connections, traffic and mobility, drainage and utilities, and the twenty-year projection for the fiscal analysis of the impact on the City. He provided staff analysis of the proposal and recommended approval with the following conditions: 1. Revise Development Program Note 2 to Clarify Building Height Proposals are Subject to PCZD Agreement Language on Clustering 2. Label the two pedestrian underpasses proposed under Campus Drive 3. Provide the letter of intent from the 1078 S. 88th Street property owner for the right of way needed for the Campus Drive road expansion 4. Revise the plans and studies to address all outstanding items included in the April 20, 2021 Public Works review letter Rice asked for a comparison of the proposed building heights to the existing GDP. Zuccaro replied that the ConocoPhillips PUD included a larger percentage and more of the building area contemplated as anticipated as either four or five stories, which was almost 2 million square feet of the 2.5 proposed, for buildings between 65' and 95' feet high. This current proposal included a maximum of 35% above three stories, or about a million square feet. In the current proposal the highest building was 90 feet. Rice asked for the tallest building at the Monarch school. Zuccaro replied that he did not know and offered to look into it. Rice asked for an FAR comparison. Zuccaro replied that ConocoPhillips had 2.5 million square feet versus 3.1 million proposed, with an FAR of .2 versus .24 proposed. Rice asked for confirmation that they were looking at the minimum parking requirements as the maximum requirements in this case and that the parking structure was not included in the FAR calculations. Zuccaro confirmed and added that the structures would help decrease the overall asphalt. Rice addressed the clustering amendment, which tried to maximize the private and public open lands. Zuccaro confirmed and described clustering as a way to reduce the overall footprint and also to strategically place buildings so that the new open space contributes to the viewshed or is contiguous with other open space.