[ Home ] [ Up ]

Notes on the County's Pre-Application Conference

MEMORANDUM
April 24, 2001

TO:  File: PRE-01-129 Baptist Road Wal-Mart

FROM:  Carl F. Schueler, Assistant Director

RE:  Summary of April 23, 2001, Pre-Application Meeting

This memo augments and supplements the attached tracking system report.

1) Contact Persons in County

Contact Persons -Wal-Mart

2) Application Process

Process will be combined rezoning to PBC (Planned Business Center) District and Preliminary Plan, possibly for four lots. This will be followed by a final Plat and then Administrative Plot Plan(s). Carl Schueler stressed that the rezoning was a discretionary decision on the part of the Board of County Commissioners.

3) Timing Issues

Coordination related to the various transportation corridor and engineering studies was identified as a primary concern. Andre Brackin suggested the Baptist Corridor consultant (who should be under contract in early June) might need three to four month to address key issues. However, it is very unlikely the main intersection (Struthers/ Baptist) will move. The Colorado Department of Transportation Interchange R.F.P. process is underway and should dovetail with the Baptist Road Rural Transportation Authority Corridor Study.

Once a Preliminary Plan application is complete staff suggested a minimum of 60 days would be required prior to a Planning Commission hearing. This hearing date is set 21 days prior, at which time all key issues would need to be either resolved or clearly identified as hearing items. Following the Planning Commission there will need to be a minimum 30-day advertising period for the rezoning. For the Final Plat the process repeats itself. However, in this case there is no certain need for 6- days of review processing and no need to legally advertise. Following approval of a Final Plat, the Administrative Plot Plan procedure should be a matter of a few weeks. Review time for the building permit is not in the control of the Planning Department. All of the above schedules need to be coordinated with the Major Thoroughfare Task Force to which this item will need to be taken back.

4) Road Issues

Carl Schueler and others brought up the issues of Baptist Road and Struthers Road. He provided copies of the February 25. 2000, Major Thoroughfare Task Force minutes and noted that the issue of access to the church lots and adjacent lots to the east had not been fully resolved at that time. D.O.T. has reservations about a 50-foot wide publicly maintained access way with the configuration as shown. CLC Will provide an updated traffic study with all reasonable alternatives presented. Carl Schueier stated that staffs have a strong position to the effect that a full nortlV south connection of Struthers Road needs to be guaranteed in conjunction with this project. There was discussion over the physical logistics, timing and effected property owners (Struthers Ranch, Millers and Forest Lakes). The important consideration to staff is that a connection be ultimately guaranteed.

With respect to overall phasing, three general classes of improvements were identified:

1. Property-specific improvements directly identified and addressed through the planning process;
2. Other improvements (adjacent or off-site) that need to be in place concurrent with opening of the store;
3. Additional ultimate improvements necessary to support the regional network at local buildout, including long-term financial commitments to these.

There was general consensus that a development agreement should be fashioned to address these considerations.

5) Drainage and Other Utilities Including Water

Paul Danley noted the property is not within a specifically studied basin such that the drainage plan would need to address flows through on-site detention.

Ron Simpson commented that the Triview District has some drainage and road standards beyond those of the County. Carl Schueler observed that compliance with these would be between the applicant and the District.

Carl Schueler stated that the subdivision would either have to meet the County’s 300-year water requirement or obtain a waiver for this. John Spillane will coordinate with Cole Emmons, Assistant County Attorney, on this.

6) Coordination with Monument

Carl Schueler noted a need to coordinate with Monument at an early juncture in the process at least to become fully cognizant of their input and concerns. The County will arrange this meeting. Mr. Wilson asked that his clients have a little more time to make some decisions in anticipation of the meeting. At a minimum this meeting (or a reasonable attempt at such) will be a prerequisite prior to any submittal. Carl Schueler further noted that Monument had recently indicated an interest in annexing this segment of Baptist Road. This issue is being followed up.

7) Neighborhood Meeting

Staff encourages a neighborhood meeting to include any interested residents of Chaparral Hills. This meeting would be arranged by the applicant with staff in attendance. The idea is to discuss issues and options with concerned area residents. This might or might not result in mutually agreed upon approaches. Applicant should address key issues raised by area residents.

8) Design/ Visibility issues

Staff pointed out that design and visibility issues will be a major concern and should be addressed generally at the zoning) Preliminary Plan stag.. This relates primarily to the County Master Plan and not to the Land Development Code. The Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners should have a good sense of what the facility will look like through the use of vertical elevations and examples of similar existing centers.

Tracking System Report

Pre-Application Meeting-El Paso County, Colorado

Planning File Number: PRE-01-129

Documents required for this Project Type (Submittal Requirements):

Application Fee. $0.00

Materials Provided:

Copy of agenda for meeting; Copy of new draft fee list with note that these are not final; copy of minutes of 2/26/00 MTTF minutes; copy of Condition attached to Struthers Ranch Sketch plan approval; copy of all emails and letters received thus far; etc.

Comprehensive Planning issues Notes/Comments:

Discussed Importance of Tri-Lakes Plan; Provided excerpt from I-25 Overlay; they purchased copy of this plan

Issues affecting this project:
Access
Soils and Geology
Water Supply
Drainage
Special Districts
Trails

Current Planning issues Notes/Comments:

They purchased a copy of the LDC

DOT issues Notes/Comments:

Discussed both access and drainage in some detail; much discussion of timing of various traffic studies and improvements.

Notes/Comments:

Full discussion documented in a follow-up memo.

DISCLAIMER: The information included in this form is intended for general documentation and guidance only, and is not warranted as to completeness or accuracy. Any stated agreements do not have the effect of a contractual obligation on any party. If questions, call the point of contact, Carl Schueler, at El Paso County Planning Department (719)520-6300.

[ Home ] [ Up ]