Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning And Zoning Board - Minutes - 02/04/19990 El Council Liaison: Scott Mason I Staff Liaison: Bob Blanchard Chairperson: Glen Colton Phone: (H) 225-2760 (W) 679-3201 Vice Chair: Sally Craig Phone: (H) 484-9417 The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Chairperson Colton Roll Call: Weitkunat, Gavaldon, Craig, Colton. Members Davidson, Meyer and Carpenter were absent. Staff Present: Blanchard, Eckman, Deines, Wamhoff, McCallum, Schlueter, Shepard and Olt. Agenda Review: Director of Current Planning Blanchard reviewed the Consent and Discussion Agenda's: 1. Minutes of the November 19, 1998 Planning and Zoning Board Hearing. 2. Resolution PZ99-3 Easement Vacation 3. #46-98 Howell Building - Project Development Plan. 4. #57-98 Wykoff - Larimer First Annexation & Zoning. 5. #57-98A Wykoff - Larimer Second Annexation & Zoning. 6. Recommendation to City Council Regarding the Larimer County Regional Road and Park Capital Expansion Fees. 7. #66-93G Windtrail Park P.U.D., Amended Preliminary and Final. Director Blanchard pulled items 4 and 5 for discussion. Item 7 was moved to the Consent Agenda. Member Gavaldon moved to approve Consent items 1, 2, 3, and 7. Member Weitkunat seconded the motion. The motion was approved 4-0. Project: Wykoff - Larimer Annexation and Zoning First, #57-98 Wykoff - Larimer Annexation and Zoning Second, #57-98A Project Description: First: Request for the voluntary annexation of 6.69 acres of land located north of County Road 38E, west of Taft Hill Planning and Zoning Board Minutes February 4, 1999 Page 2 Road. The site is currently zoned FA1, Farming in Larimer County. The requested zoning is LMN, Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood. This zoning requires an amendment of the City Structure Plan from Rural Open Lands and River Corridor to Low Density Mixed Use Residential. . Second: Request for voluntary annexation of 14.47 acres of land located north of County Road 38E, west of Taft Hill Road. The site is currently zoned FA-1 Farming in Larimer County. The requested zoning requires an amendment of the City Structure Plan from Rural Open Lands and River Corridor and Urban Estates to Low Density Mixed Use Residential. Staff Recommendation: Recommend approval of the annexation. Recommend denial of the Structure Plan amendment; and, Recommend approval of the RF, Foothills Residential zoning. Hearing Testimony Written Comments and Other Evidence Bob Blanchard, Director of Current Planning gave the staff presentation and recommendation on both items. Director Blanchard showed slides of the property and surrounding areas; and, stated that the applicant has requested a Structure Plan amendment and subsequent zoning of LMN, Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood. Brett Larimer, 1600 West Horsetooth Road and co -applicant of the request gave the applicant's presentation. Mr. Larimer stated that he agrees that the property does meet the contiguity requirements, but did not agree with the staffs recommendation for zoning of the property. Mr. Larimer indicated that he is requesting a zoning of LMN, Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood. He felt that if it is left with a staff recommendation of RF, Foothills Residential, would only give the property a density of 5 lots sprawled on about 20 acres, given the boundaries and restrictions of the natural areas. He stated that about 50% of the 20 acres is a developable parcel, which fits more into the clustering context than the sprawl context for this particular parcel. Mr. Larimer stated that they were not going to be unavailable to discuss with Natural Areas about selling the northern section of Spring Creek, since they have offered them an incentive to do so for a natural separation for the public open lands there. He stated that they are not opposed to that, but at this time there is no incentive to do that. Staff has limited them and gave them the ultimatum of saying that if they choose not to sell the property north of Spring Creek, then the property will be zoned RF. RF will never get enough density, only 6 homes will be offered if the land is to be developed under • Planning and Zoning Board Minutes February 4, 1999 Page 3 the RF zoning district, and that makes it totally unfeasible. With current impact fees and the water/sewer cost to extend the mains and get the infrastructure done, it is unfeasible to consider residential development on this parcel. Mr. Larimer entered into the record a picture of the property. The picture indicated that Olander Elementary School was just north of the property. Mr. Larimer stated that the property was within ''Y2 mile of Olander Elementary and that the property provided contiguity and connectivity to the school from this property and other properties in the area. This was a parcel that was close to a major recreational area, Horsetooth Reservoir, and he felt the area was defined as a neighborhood center and argued that only 6 lucky families would get to live here. Mr. Larimer noted the density of the surrounding neighborhoods being higher and stated that there should be 40 units clustered on this property. Mr. Larimer closed by saying that the annexation would help the city, but it has to be made feasible for the other parties involved. He asked the Board to consider his request to zone the property LMN. • Public Input None. Member Craig asked about utilities and what was available out there. Mr. Larimer replied there was water in 38E and sewer at Highlands West. The city has the sewer in Highlands West and Fort Collins Loveland Water District down 38E. Chairperson Colton asked about Mr. Larimers claim that only 5 units could be built on this property. Director Blanchard replied that he did not agree. He stated that if the entire parcel is zoned Residential Foothills, there are two options. You can develop the entire parcel at 1 home per 2.29 acres, 100,000 s.f., which would give you about 6 units. The other option, is to develop as a residential cluster plan at a density of 1 home per net acre. For discussion purposes, a 3 acre buffer on each side of Spring Creek is subtracted and would leave a net acreage at 1 home per acre, so the property would net around 17 homes. Director Blanchard cautioned the Board that until a decision on the natural areas that . are mapped is made, we really can't talk in terms of actual numbers and be confident about it. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes February 4, 1999 Page 4 Mr. Larimer responded that until a development proposal is filed, the actual net as opposed to gross acreage of this parcel cannot be physically determined. By his interpretation of the current Land Use Code for the natural area buffer zone, approximately 10 to 11 acres of this property would be in the buffer zone, leaving only a net acreage of 10 acres. If the cluster option is looked at, you have to have 50% of your land open anyway, so the net residential development acreage is already reduced to 10 acres. In addition, the staff report recommended that they don't build on the north side of Spring Creek because they want it for public open lands, which would limit him further to just 6 acres, or 6 net acres at 1 unit per net acre, that would be 6 units clustered on 6 acres on a 20 acre parcel. That does not make residential development feasible. Mr. Larimer felt that if the city wants annexation, they should be competitive with what the County would allow on the property — in allowing at least the density that the FA-1 would allow, which was 2 units per acre or 40 units on that parcel overall. The new City Plan does not allow for that under the RF or the UE, so the only alternative he has is to apply for the LMN residential district. Director Blanchard clarified that we do not know if the property on the north would be purchased so it should not enter into the discussion tonight. Secondly, if the property is developed as an RF Cluster Plan, then the applicant would be required to dedicate the property. Director Blanchard stated that he an Mr. Larimer disagree in how the code is interpreted for this situation. Member Weitkunat asked if Director Blanchard felt the two parcels to the east were compatible with this property. Director Blanchard replied he did. Member Gavaldon agreed with staffs recommendation. Member Gavaldon moved to recommend approval of Wykoff - Larimer, First Annexation, #57-98. Member Craig seconded the motion. The motion was approved 4-0. Member Gavaldon moved to recommend denial of the requested amendment to the Structure Plan Map for the Wykoff - Larimer Annexation, #57-98. Member Craig seconded the motion. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes February 4, 1999 Page 5 Member Craig commented that she supports the motion. Everyone knows she is for the "green". In reading everything that staff has provided, they are trying very hard to give this piece of property monetary value, but keeping the green and the transition as was wanted by everyone who put the Structure Map together. Chairperson Colton also would support the motion for denial of the change to the Structure Plan. He believed that this was a real important part of the city Structure Plan to recognize some areas with larger urban estates as well as open space. The motion was approved 4-0. Member Gavaldon moved to recommend approval of the RF, Residential Foothills zoning for Wykoff - Larimer First, #57-98. Member Weitkunat seconded the motion. Member Weitkunat felt that RF was the appropriate zoning based on its location and proximity to the foothills and its access to rural open lands and stream corridors in that area. She felt it was extremely appropriate for where it is located and it does meets the Isintent and purposes of the city structure map. She felt that clustering can occur and accomplish the purposes. She felt that in the long run Mr. Larimer would end up with the units that he needs. The motion was approved 4-0. Member Gavaldon moved to recommend approval of the Wykoff - Larimer Annexation, #57-98A. Member Weitkunat seconded the motion. The motion was approved 4-0. Member Gavaldon moved to recommend denial of the requested Structure Plan Map amendment for the Wykoff - Larimer Annexation, #57-98A. The motion was approved 4-0. Member Gavaldon moved to recommend approval of the RF, Residential Foothills zoning for the Wykoff - Larimer Annexation, #57-98A. The motion was approved 4-0. 40 Planning and Zoning Board Minutes February 4, 1999 Page 6 Project: Recommendation to City Council Regarding the Larimer County Regional Road and Park Capital Expansion Fees. Project Description: Larimer County has asked that the City of Fort Collins adopt a parallel set of fees for development which occurs within the City. Two fees would be added to the City's current fees. They would include a Regional Road Capital Expansion Fee and a Regional Park Fee in Lieu of Land Dedication. Marc Engemoen, Public Works Director for Larimer County gave the presentation for this item. Public Input None. Board Questions and Commen Member Gavaldon asked about needing more road improvements on County Road 17 when there was just work done on it recently. Mr. Engemoen replied that several years ago there was a project to put bike lanes on that road. That project was funded by the North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization. Those were funds specifically earmarked for bicycle improvements that added the 8 foot bike shoulders to that particular roadway. The improvements that would be necessary in the future, for a road that is already carrying approximately 10,000 or 11,000 vehicles per day, would be adding two more vehicle lanes as well as continuing to have the 8 foot bicycle lanes. Member Gavaldon asked about County Roads 32, 38 and 402 going east. He questioned the roads being only 5 to 7 miles long before you are in Weld County and was Weld County going to partner in keeping the roads consistent with our upgrades to 4 lanes. Mr. Engemoen replied that the 2015 traffic models indicate that those roads will be carrying 15,000 cars per day. The capacity of a two-lane road is significantly less than that. If we really want to have a level of service that is safe, we will have to widen those roads to 4 lanes. He hoped that in the next "x" number of years, we will be able to work closely with Weld County to encourage them to look at how they can creatively find a 0 7 Planning and Zoning Board Minutes February 4, 1999 Page 7 solution to fund their half of the problem. He felt that it would be doing a disservice to the residents of Larimer County if we did not at least improve what was in our jurisdiction. Member Gavaldon asked about other surrounding communities using our roads and asked if the argument was that they also come into our cities and pay city taxes therefore they are covered from additional monies for future roads. Mr. Engemoen replied that they are not capturing all the people who are using the roads. He does not know of a system that could do that. They have taken a big leap in trying to identify a system that would treat Larimer County as a region. He would like to get to a point where we are thinking regionally including Longmont and Greeley. He was hoping to take this initial step and begin to think of transportation regionally within the County and build on that to think regionally with other communities as well. Member Gavaldon asked about property taxes, and in addition, we are now being asked to pay a fee on top of property taxes. The fee then adds to the price of the home because the builders will pass the cost along to the consumer. He felt that was a "double dipping" approach. Mr. Engemoen replied that they were not "double dipping". He stated that there were two sides to transportation needs. One is capital improvements, which we are talking about with the regional fee. The other is maintenance. Virtually every dollar that Larimer County collects currently goes towards operations and maintenance. The County does not have funds for capital improvements. A very small amount of the tax money they collect is set aside to deal with urgent safety problems. As new homes come on board, all the new traffic just beats up the roads that much quicker and the operations and maintenance costs continue to grow. The funds that will continue to be collected in the future from new development through taxes will still go toward operations and maintenance. The fee they are suggesting that Larimer County residents pay is the capital improvement portion of the picture. There is about $200,000,000 in capital improvement needs out there. The longer they delay implementing these fees, the larger that problem is going to become and the more expensive it is going to be. Mr. Engemoen explained that the County is doing the same thing that the City is doing. The County has existing needs, deficiencies that have accumulated over the past several decades. There are also new needs that are associated with new development. They are proposing the same thing that the City of Fort Collins is doing. The City is using impact fees to address the piece that has to do with new development. The City has chosen to use the fee approach to fund the future Planning and Zoning Board Minutes February 4, 1999 Page 8 deficiencies. The City is using a sales tax to fund the existing deficiencies, the Future Choices Program is the current program. The County will also be looking at other methods of funding to address existing deficiencies. Cam McNair, City Engineering Department added that this is a growth paying its own way issue. City Staff was consulted on this by Mr. Engemoen and his consultant and the City had a chance to review the proposal and the City is very much in support of it. He stated that the Transportation Board endorsed the proposal. He stated that a side benefit of this would be that there might be less incentive for builders to look outside of the city limits to try and avoid some of the fees because now the fees in the County would be similar to those in the city limits, at least for the fees that support transportation. Mr Engemoen gave a presentation on the Regional Park Fee. He explained that the fee is not the same as the transportation capital expansion fee, it is a fee in lieu of land dedication for parks. This fee would only be charged to residential units, not commercial, business or industrial permits. Chairperson Colton asked if the fee would be raised accordingly if the price of land increases. Mr. Engemoen replied it would. It is built into the Ordinances a periodic review of the fees. Mr. Engemoen stated that the Regional Park Fee is actually is for new residents to "buy" into our existing level of service. They will also pay the quarter cent sales tax that enhances or furthers our level of service. Member Weitkunat asked to have 'level of service" defined in this instance. Mr. Engemoen replied that in this context it means the total number of acres divided by the total number of units. There are currently 13,000 acres and 86,000 residential units, so the level of service is 0.158 acres per residential unit. Member Gavaldon asked if they had met with the Affordable Housing Board and if so, what were their findings. Russ Legg, Director of Planning for Larimer County replied that the Board recommended denial of the fees and they also were going to write a letter to the City Council for their consideration on March 2 indicating that it was very difficult for them to consider "any" fee from the County when the County as an institution does not seem to Planning and Zoning Board Minutes February 4, 1999 Page 9 take affordable housing as serious as the Board would like for them to. The recommendation included both fees. Member Gavaldon asked if the County or the City were looking at exemptions or considerations for affordable housing. Mr. Mc Nair replied that if these fees are put into place, then whatever rules we use in Fort Collins to deal with affordable housing would apply to these fees just like any other fees. Mr. Legg replied that the affordable housing question is very difficult for County. He stated that they have reduced impact fees for affordable housing developments in the past, but it is done on a case by case basis. The Commissioners have directed both Planning and the staff that works on affordable housing to: • identify what is true affordable housing and; • what is worthy of consideration using that definition as an affordable housing land use project. ofThe Commissioners are a long way from deciding the policy that is associated with that. Member Gavaldon asked about the total fees for a building permit. Mr. Legg replied that in 1995, the City of Fort Collins had almost $8,000 worth of development fees. That was raised in 1998 to almost $10,400 which is about a 36% increase by the City of Fort Collins from 1995 to 1998. Member Gavaldon asked where that put us in 1999 with these fees. Mr. Legg replied that it would be an additional $865 to the total. Member Gavaldon felt that was a very large increase of over 36%. Member Craig commented that Mr. Engemoen gave an excellent presentation. Member Craig recommended that the Board forward a recommendation to implement both the Regional Road Capital Expansion Fee as well as the Regional Park Fee. Chairperson Colton seconded the motion. Member Gavaldon complimented staff on their presentation. Member Gavaldon stated Planning and Zoning Board Minutes February 4, 1999 Page 10 that he could see some merit in the transportation fee, but would not support the fee based on values. He also would not support the park fee because he believes in the user system and if the users want it, they have to pay for it. He is also sensitive to affordable housing needs and felt the fees were becoming unreasonable. He does believe in fees and felt Fort Collins does have a good structure in place. He felt there should be more work on this because he felt that the fees have crossed the line to unreasonable for growth to pay its own way. Member Weitkunat would not be supporting the fee for parks. She felt the quarter percent sales tax took care of that. If we are asking people to pay more to buy more land, she felt we already do that in the city and now they want people to also pay more for in the county and next it would be the state. Member Weitkunat felt she could not put that burden on another single family home to create more parkland. Member Weitkunat commented on the transportation capital expansion fee. She believed that the transportation has become regional and that the municipalities are responsible for much of the traffic that we find on these roads. What concerned her was the magnitude of the fee on all single, multi -family residences and commercial properties. She stated that if the northeast develops 10,000 units, there was $1,640,000 on roads that she was not sure the northeast will be traveling. She does not think that everyone should be accountable and she would not be supporting the motion. She thinks that the idea is right, but it needs to be more equitable. Chairperson Colton stated that he would be supporting the recommendation and the fees. He commented that in both the Plus System as well as City Plan, it talks about growth paying its fair share and to be fair to all involved. He felt this is doing growth smart, and if we don't do this then we won't have the roads, parks and open space; and then taxes will be raised on everyone, and that is unfair to those people who are already here. Chairperson Colton commented that he also supported the park fee. If we are to put this fee in place and the tax runs out in 5 years, the taxpayers have the choice to either renew it or not. If we are getting enough fees from the new growth, we might get a tax reduction for all of us who are already here. He felt we are obligated to do this for the people who already live here. We could reduce taxes in other areas if we have new growth pay for it. It comes from one place or the other or we suffer a level of service, and he was not willing to do that because it won't be a livable place here. Member Craig concurred with Chairperson Colton. She felt this was very needed. That Planning and Zoning Board Minutes February 4, 1999 Page 11 growth was coming here because of the amenities and if we don't continue to get the parks larger, people will complain. The recommendation failed 2-2 with Members Weitkunat and Gavaldon voting in the negative. There is no recommendation. There was no other business. The meeting was adjourned at 9:16 p.m. E 0 FEB 21999 1/29/99 Ted Shepherd Community Planning & Environmental Services PO Box 580 Fort Collins, Co. 80522 Dear Ted: On Thursday, January 28 Sister Mary Alice Murphy presented plans for the proposed Care Housing at W indtrail park to Hillpond residents at our Annual Homeowners Meeting. With the permission of the homeowners who were present at this meeting, 1 am writing to convey our general approval of the project as it was presented to us. It seems to us well planned, and we are assured that the CARE organization will provide careful and ongoing screening and supervision of residents. Please pass this letter along to the Planning & Zoning Board for their deliberations. Thank you. me ely, Ronald S. Hert Hill Pond Homeowners Assoc. Board 1913 H Waters Edge Fort Collins, Co. 80526 493-7770 or482-5650 a MEMORANDUM TO: City of Ft. Collins Planning & Zoning Board FROM: Russell N. Legg, Chief Planner Larimer County Planning Departmen RE: Regional Fees DATE: February 4, 1999 PLANNING DIVISION Planning Department P.O. Box 1190 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522-1190 (970) 498-7683 Fax (970) 498-7711 http://www.co.larimer.co.us/planning During the work session on the proposed fees, Mr. Gavaldon asked County staff to review the alternatives in the event all regional cities did not participate in the regional fee collection program. Each community the County works with will need to schedule their Review based on their internal fee review process and budget considerations. It is County staff s desire to have each community consider the issue as soon as possible. Each community should adopt or not adopt the regional fees based on their assessment of the merits of the program. Listed below are comparisons of residential building permits issued by the various cities and towns in Latimer County. Almost 90% of the residential building permits issued by the Towns and Cities in 1997 were issued by Ft. Collins and Loveland. 1997 Residential Permits Ft. Collins 57% Loveland 32% Estes Park 4.8% Berthoud 3.8% Wellington 2.2% Windsor 0 Timnath 0 These figures indicate that for the regional fee program to be considered fair and a success, then at a minimum Ft. Collins, Loveland, and Latimer County must participate in the program. County staff recommends regional participation in the fee should be reviewed and reported to adopting communities within 12 months. The fee administrators from the participating jurisdictions should jointly prepare the report and recommend any fee program modifications that may be appropriate. 0 RL/akc A ✓f., PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER