Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning And Zoning Board - Minutes - 05/02/1983Board Present Staff Present Legal Representative PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MINUTES MAY 13 1983 May 2, 1983 CL Tim Dow, Gary Ross, Dennis Georg, Dave CG,rlfillla RKEd Stoner, Don Crews, Ingrid Simpson, Randy Larsen Ken Waido, Curt Smith, Cathy Chianese, Bonnie Tripoli, Sherry Albertson -Clark, Linda Hopkins John Huisjen fleeting was called ''.e order at 7:00 p.m. Roll was taken. AGENDA REVIEW 1. Annual Review of the Intergovernmental Agreement of the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area Description: Staff has conducted a comprehensive review of all elements of the Intergovernmental Agree- ment and is recommending several changes. The Board needs to conduct a public hearing and forward a recom- mendation to the City Council. 2• Historic Old To::n Cc;acepi Description: Request for approval of the Historic Old Town project in concept. Located along the 100 block of Linden Street. DISCUSSION AGENDA 1• Annual Review of the Intergovernmental Agreement of the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area Ken Waido: Gave staff report explaining proposed changes and recommending adoption of the changes. Gilfillan: Asked that persons discussing this itec:i identify which of the four areas referred to in the staff report their input relates to. Jerry Nix: 2105 South Shields. Complemented city staff, council, Planning and Zoning Board, on their efforts on this document. Complained County policies in regard to the Intergovernmental Agreement are often not followed, however. Believes the "no growth" sentiment in County is definitely delaying growth and sometimes reflected in unfair policy statements. Corridor Study -draft and Corridor Plans Implementation into the Intergovernmental Agreement set forth a mile corridor area between Cities of Loveland and Fort Collins pointing out there were potential control problems. These problems need to be addressed possibly through evaluation by a study group. May 2, 1983 P&Z Page 2 Gil fiIIan: Recapped above points, appreciated concern and recom- mended continued input. Kate Brandies: President, League of Women Voters. Stated the League stands behind Urban Growth Area philosophy but was concerned the northern boundary change being in the best interest of the County as a whole, and not simply a particular group. Also, believed encouraging growth was meant to mean within the City limits. Finally, objected to the boundary extension because of the industrialization of valuable agricultural lands. The second concern regarded the proposed waiver from sewer and road requirements. Felt this might increase health hazards. Only rare cases of exceptional hardship or the very small developer should be exempt. Requested the interest of the public as a whole be served by any changes. Gerald Dusbabek: Southeast of Fort Collins, owns property bordered on two sides by the UGA but not in UGA. Gave proposed changes much thought and asks the Planning and Zoning Board adopt the document. Alan Apt: 2301 Sheffield Drive. Indicated initially this plan was to help growth move from the center of the City outward in an orderly fashion. Commended City and County on this having happened; however, finds the recommended changes very disturbing. It appears Anheuser-Busch is the primary justification for this northern growth and there haven't been any reasons beyond this. Asked when City and citizens would view Anheuser-Busch location from their standpoint. This should not be after -the -fact. Feels the phasing criteria should not be changed. Also, the addition of street and water waivers are unreasonable and unjus- tifiable and should be turned down. Tom McKenna: 3500 Rolling Green. Indicated poor notification regarding this extension of the Urban Growth Boundary to accommodate Anheuser-Busch. Opposed to this because of conversion of agricultural land. This land was originally left out of the UGA for this reason and should not be changed to industrial now. There are still too many unanswered questions of Anheuser-Busch. His letters remain unanswered and this heightens concern over future plans. Approximately three years ago Planning was indicating the future land -use plan would have criteria in it to slow down, even halt, growth. By August 14, 1980, May 2, 1983 P&Z • • Page 3 quality of life criteria should have been established; however, they do not exist today. Feels, until this criteria is established, no additional development should be permited. Also, extension of this would show land speculators City policies can be changed. We have no obligation to insure the property owners gets the maximum profit. People in Country Club and Terry Shores have rights not to have a smokestack in their backyard, and we have rights not to have our quality of life deteriorated by a major development of this sort. Art March: 636 Cheyenne Drive. Addressed waiver of phasing criteria. In -fill development in UGA was to be pro- moted while inappropriate new islands of development were to be discouraged. This is almost an impossi- bility. The policy is too stringent. Waivers are only granted if you contribute to a road fee and upgrade the adjoining part of the arterial street. While a fee is reasonable, to approve the adjoining off -site street is unreasonable. No land use legislation is cast in concrete and needs to be changed as circumstances change and this was the intent of this original legislation. The City has been trying to grow to the north unsuccessfully in the past because of major impediments (river, raiload tracks, land). "Yank" Banowetz: 12 Forest Hills Lane, County. Here because proposal may affect County landowners. Agrees that notifica- tion was poor, feels that changing policy as well as extending border confuses the issues. Developers in the past have given up, for financial reasons, developing land in the north. Fort Collins' policies indicate industrial use should be confined to indus- trial parks and near transportation facilities. The fact this is "prime agricultural land" is not a concern to him, but because a particular developer wants to develop an 1100-hundred acre industrial park 800 yards from existing quality residential areas. Ingress and egress is a problem to the north yet the City proposes to take in an industrial park. There is no transportation network out there, and when Anheu- ser-Busch comes, because it will be in the City, the City will build roads. Stated this proves when a developer with muscle wants policies changed, we'll change them. While he realizes these boundaries must be changed from time to time, the tail should not wag the dog. Changing boundary now is unwise. Separate changes in the plan from changes in the boundary and act on them separately. May 2, 1983 P&Z Page 4 Jim Hess: 704 Highland Place Road. Reminded Planning and Zoning Board there was a lot of citizen input regarding the economic well-being of the community. Feels the people want Anheuser-Busch to move to Fort Collins and the Board is doing a good job. Preserving prime farm land not really an issue, growing beer and people is maybe a better thing to do with the land and the water here. Max Hoffman: One issue, addressed in this review, provides a way of treating a piece of ground that might be interpreted differently by several governing bodies. In the City, a developer must improve an arterial street to City standards; in Loveland its treated differently; and in the County you're told you have to provide arterial streets to the City limits. The City has now provided a vehicle to get before the Board and present each individual item and make a determination --this is a milestone and very well done. Anheuser-Busch has done everything in the world to make everything for our City as well done as possible. Alan Apt: To make more specific statements, the phasing concept of the Land Use Plan has teeth in it --the phasing criteria. If these aren't retained, the Urban Growth Boundary might as well be extended to Cheyenne, through Loveland to Longmont, to Estes Park and Sterling. This criteria represents the public interest and should not be changed. Someone has to pay and it's usually the public. There is plenty of land in the northeast that can be immediatly developed according to the current criteria and the waiver process doesn't need to be expanded to include street and water. Curt Smith: Noted proposal tonight is submitted to the Board from the staff. It was clearly brought about by an Anheuser-Busch interest but is not from a corporation or an individual. Staff review done whether Anheuser- -Busch were to come or not. It does not authorize approval for any development upon any piece of property. Georg: Regarding the Intergovernmental Agreement, questioned City not approving development having impact on County roads. Waido: Indicated development proposal requiring more than 36 feet, staff would recommend denial of project until a means of improving that particular facilities traffic could be handled, for example, by County establishing a special improvement district. Georg: Indicated that answered one of his questions, but still wondered how to measure an identifiable impact. May 2, 1983 P&Z • Page 5 • Smith: Stated City required off -site street if you did not have access to an improved street. An identifiable impact would be any number of traffic affecting a street would require upgrading of the street; i.e., City Transfort building and Southridge Greens Golf Course project. Unless a street is already improved to a level that can handle the traffic, a minimum 36-foot standard, it will be improved or some variance adopted. Dow: Questioned storm drainage fees. How can City tax residents outside City limit? Waido: Stated taxation would be done by the County. Fee is only capital improvements fee, no operation or maintenance fees. But there could be fees collected in the City which eventually will be used outside City limits and beneficial to entire basin. Ross: Asked about seemingly double -type burden for a devel- oper regarding street improvement and additionally payment into a fund to improve streets for others. Is this equitable? Smith: Indicated in City if you develop a piece of land you develop all the adjacent streets as a minimum and pay an arterial oversizing street fee, which is very similar. Ross: Questioned misunderstanding that the fee for the streets was applicable only to commercial and indus- trial- type uses and not residential. Smith: Stated City fee is applicable to any land use and any development, including City development. Gilfillan: Noted many individuals seemed to feel this was at the request of Anheuser-Busch. Stated the area recom- mended to the boundary change is not specifically for this as other property owners are being referred to in this particular issue. Stated when Woodward Governor came many people were disturbed, but looking at it today it's a very excellant company. Today's policies are more restrictive than when Woodward -Governor came to town. Smith: Responded to Mr. Apt's comments on phasing criteria noting that criteria are not being changed but a mech- anism for a variance is being added to those criteria. This variance requires approval by the County Commissioners and the City Council based on public input. Also insures a mechanism for variance in hardship cases. May 2, 1983 P&Z Page 6 Simpson: Asked who makes decision of hardship for a developer. Smith: Referred to paragraph Cl, a-h, showing submittal re- quirements, which indicate the governing body would make the ultimate decision. Waido: Indicated sewer waiver process, criteria 2B, requires notification to property owner and future purchasers. Simpson: Asked if an owner could be removed from the Urban Growth Boundary if it was a hardship for individual, for example on Hwy 287 there's an individual who would like to develop. Under the current system there is no sewer for miles and it is economically unfeasible; would he be able to request a waiver? Waido: Yes. Urban Growth Area boundary changes can be used to include or exclude property. Smith: Urban Growth Area is a zoning district but must go through joint review and joint approval. Stoner: Suggested Anheuser-Busch submit a proposal indicating amount of waiving necessary for them to develop the site they are intending to develop. Smith: Indicated Anheuser-Busch would be coming into the City and would not operate under this criteria. Also, the City is not waiving its off -site street improvement requirement for Anheuser-Busch. If Busch develops, they will have perimeter streets, a minimum of 40 feet in width, and access to an Interstate. This deals with the 150-acre brewery street site. There have been no commitments to street improvement requirements that will be done or made on the other 1100-acre site if any other development comes about. That will all be looked at individually. Stoner: Questioned if "teeth" were being eliminated. Waido: Believed only one development in Urban Growth Area had been approved. One industrial use had been looked at which was actually outside the UGA, but it was eventually denied. Stoner: Commented on growth outward, to the south, in the Urban Growth Area. Waido: Commented on urban sprawl and leap -frog development. For example, there is no residential development close to Hewlett-Packard now, nor was there any five years ago when they first came in. Residential development Cannot expend same monies as industrial. Anticipates May 2, 1983 P&Z Page 7 the same to hold true in this case with residential development locating in areas pressently served by infrastructure. Smith: Added correction that Anheuser-Busch indicated 35 coal cars per week, 5-6 per day. But no determination has yet been made that they will use coal. Georg: Questioned 18-month limitation on waiver. Waido: Statuatory limitations seem to be good. Felt 18 months was a reasonable amount of time. Gilfillan: Asked if any complaints had been voiced. Waido: Hadn't heard any. Simpson: Asked if extensions would be granted. Waido: Saw no reason 6-month extensions couldn't be granted for good reason. Smith: Indicated real reason for limitation was to enforce new criteria that might have been adopted. If the criteria hasn't changed, and the development is still viable, there is no reason the conditions couldn't be extended also. Dow: Questioned whether phasing criteria was to discourage in -fill in the Urban Growth Area. Felt improvement requirements was to encourage in -fill and discourage sprawl. By lessening restrictions we will be defeat- ing our policy of encouraging in -fill. Felt consider- ation or waiver procedure appropriate in some instan- ces but didn't want to give up too much in an attempt to solve some infrequent problems. Waido: Concurred. Waiver process is to allow peculiar circum- stances to come before the board. Dow: Asked what developers options were. Waido: Indicated agreements would be between developer and landowner. Ross: Asked if developer could demonstrate intended growth is it inappropriate to force developer to make huge road expense. Smith: If developer had a waiver approved, he would still be required to build adjacent streets, with costs May 2, 1983 P&Z Page 8 Ross: Asked if improvements are developed and further development isn't going to take place until City is in there, isn't it dangerous to widen the street halfway. Smith: Stated in City limits there would be an agreement with the developer for phasing. The County doesn't set up improvement districts similar to the City's. Given the County's operation it's difficult to say. There needs to be some commitment as to how the street will be improved in the future. Waido: Responded to citizen comments for clarification. The City's policy plan indicates City should rezone industrial properties immediately to the north and adjacent to the central business district for intro- duction of new residential support to the downtown. Indicated the intent of the paragraph indicating Anheuser-Busch needed 160 acres to locate, was the opportunity for a large-scale, quality industrial park does not exist in the present vicinity of the 155-acre parcel. Therefore, we are looking at an area beyond that particular location. Regarding the notification of the meeting, the Coloradoan ran an issue of the newspaper dedicated to riva e Property Week with a large section dealing with the Urban Growth Area Amend ments. Under the Land Development Guidance System, land uses are not inherently incompatible. Any land use can be made compatible through appropriate design and other mechanisms. Concerning the coal -firing of the Anheuser-Busch plant, staff is presently involved with EQUATAC (Environmental Quality Technical Advisory Committee) addressing the air quality impact of Anheuser-Busch. Regarding the establishment of mea- sureable criteria being adopted within one year, measurable criteria for quality of life have been established for a period of time. Indicated the Quality of Life Committee was meeting May X with the City Council in a worksession. Stated Anheuser-Busch would receive staff support only if it was determined to be a positive benefit overall for the community. Gilfillan: Felt review should be under the four separate divi- sions. Opened up to Board for further discussion and recommendations. Georg: Indicated any formal motion made was only a recom- mendation to City Council. Moved to recommend adop- tion of the Intergovernmental Agreement as specified in the staff report. May 2, 1983 P&Z • Page 9 Ross: Vote: Stoner: Crews: Second. Motion to recommend approval carried 7-0. Moved to recommend approval of the Urban Growth Boun- dary Change as indicated by staff. Second. Vote: Motion to recommend approval carried 6-1 (Simpson voting no because of concern that Anheuser-Busch was a major factor, and the changes should rather stand on their own merit.) Dow: Moved to recommend approval of the Larimer County Land Use Plan as amended. Ross: Second. Vote: Motion to recommend approval carried 7-0. Stoner: Commented the waiver process was a major portion of the discussion, and he believes common sense should rule over the written word and moved to recommend approval of the changes to the supplementary regula- tions. Gilfillan: Second. Georg: Indicated he was concerned with management of in -fill growth versus sequential growth. Didn't feel these regulations would improve those currently on the book. Also, the measurement of impact is arbitrary and the waiver process as presented does not lessen this fact. Believed there were other alternatives. Note: A discussion on Special Improvement Districts took place, Ross and Dow expressing some of the same concerns. Vote: Motion to recommend approval carried 5-2 with Simpson and George voting no. Waido: Indicated the item would go to City Council May 17 and to Larimer County in a joint meeting between Planning Commission and County Commissioners after both cities have completed their processes. May 2, 1983 P&Z Page 10 2. Historic Old Town Concept Smith: Gave staff report recommending approval. Gilfillan: Asked why this was coming forth as a "concept". Smith: Old Town does not fall under P.U.D. requirements because of the way it is zoned. Simpson: Asked if parking situation was addressed. Smith: Indicated DDA would provide 300 spaces of parking. Circulation changes would probably open Walnut Street back up. Gilfillan: Questioned if this was reversing procedure back to what existed two years ago. Bill Kingsbury: Director of Downtown Development Authority. Indicated Board is being asked to make recommendation on whether the project is in agreement with all the documents mentioned in staff report. It is in keeping with the comprehensive plan of Historic Old Town approved about 1$ years ago. Georg: Recommended approval to council the Historic Old Town concept which is consistent with submitted findings. Dow: Second Smith: Stated findings: Project consistent with adopted goals and objectives of the City of Fort Collins. Proposal conforms to the adopted Land Use Policies Plan. The proposal is consistent with Historic Old Town Area Plan which is adopted element of City's Comprehensive Plan. The Old Town Project is in agree- ment with the Downtown Development Authority Plan of - Development. Vote: Motion carried 7-0. Motion to adjourn seconded and passed. Meeting ad- journed at 10:15 p.m.