HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning And Zoning Board - Minutes - 10/09/1978I
11
+R7
Planning and Zoning Board
Minutes
October 9, 1978
Board Present: Phyllis Wells, Bob Burnham, Gary Ross, Gary Spahr, Robert Evans,
Charles Unfug
Staff Present: Charles Mabry, Paul Deibel, John Dewhirst, Robert Steiner
Legal Staff: Don Deagle
The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m.
Phillis Wells: Explained the purpose and functions of the Planning and Zoning
Board. Emphasized the importance of citizen input.
1. Approval of September 11, 1978 minutes.
Gary Ross: Moved to approve the minutes.
Bob Burnham: Seconded the motion.
Vote: Motion carried unanimously.
Phyllis Wells: Expressed the sincere appreciation of the Board for former
Chairman Bob Burnham's endurance and forebearance and masterful
handling of long and arduous meetings in the past.
Bob Burnham: Thanked Phyllis Wells and the Board.
Charles Mabry: Pointed out to the Board that items 144-78, 149-78 150-78 had
either been requested for continuance or withdrawal.
2. #142-78 Fox Meadows First Annexation.
Description: Proposal to annex 81 acres on the southeast comer
of E. Horsetooth and Timberline Road. Requested zoning is T-
Transitional and R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential.
Applicant: Fox Meadows Partnership, c/o Bill Tiley, P.O. Box 471
Fort Collins, Colorado, 80522.
Paul Deibel: Gave the following analysis and recommendation:
The subject parcel is presently an active farm as is the immediate
vicinity except for the NW corner of this intersection where the
Platte River Power Authority office complex is located.
P & Z Board Minutes
Page 2/October 9, 1978
The application requests rezoning of the annexation area of 20+
acres along Timberline Road to T (Transition District) with the
remainder to R-L-P (Low Density Planned Residential District.)
Annexation
l.a. Water and sewer lines are available; however, repay agree-
ments will be due.
b. The Police, Fire and Public Works Departments are all concerned
about their ability to provide acceptable levels of service
within the financial constraints of their operating budgets
to newly annexed property. This concern is of a general
nature related to all annexations not just this one in par-
ticular. The significance of this concern increases every
year.
c. This request for annexation and R-L-P and T zoning is con-
sistant with present City goals, objectives and practices.
Zoning
2.a. The "T" (Transitional District) is appropriate along Timber-
line Road since uncertain classification in the future.
Timberline Road may become a truck route.
b. The R-L-P (Low Density Planned Residential District) is com-
patible with the other recent actions inthis area. It will
permit site -plan review, treatment along Horsetooth Road,
and variety of housing types.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the Planning and Zoning Board recommend to
the City Council approval of both the annexation and the rezoing.
Bill Tiley: (Representing the Applicants)
Had no objections to staff comments.
Gary Ross: Thought this was a logical "fill-in" type of annexation. Moved to
recommend approval of the annexation. Added he thought T zoning on
the western portion was most appropriate given the ambigious status
of Timberline Road and adjacent types of development.
Gary Spahr: Second the motion.
Vote: Motion carried unanimously.
ZONING
Bill Tiley: Said the applicants requested single-family zoning and the Tran-
sition district. Noted the proximity of the site to some major
employment areas-Hewlitt Packard and NCR.
Gary Ross: Said the owners of the land to the south should be made aware that
a pattern for R-L-P development was being established for their
land as well.
Bill Tiley: Said they were aware of it and that the same designer was working
on both properties.
P & Z Board Minutes
Page 3/October 9, 1978
Bob Burnham: Asked if there was a development time table.
Bill Tiley: Said construction would begin in 1979.
Phyllis Wells: Asked if a road pattern would be worked out with the staff.
Bill Tiley: Said yes - noted the whole square mile involved only four land-
owners.
Robert Evens: Moved to recommend approval of the requested zoning.
Gary Ross: Second the motion.
Vote: Motion carried unanimously.
3. #143-78 Fort Collins National Bank Annexation.
Description: Proposal to annex 5.3 acres south of East Horsetooth
Road, north of Larimer County Canal #2, and immediately west of the
Landings P.U.D. Requested zoning is B-P, Planned Business District.
Applicant: Fort Collins National Bank, c/o Les Kaplan, 528 S. Howes,
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
Paul Deibel: Presentedthe following analysis and recommendation:
1. Annexation
a. The property is surrounded by land which is either in the
development stage and in the City or where development is
imminent.
b. All City utilities and services are available.
c. The annexation is consistent with present policies and
practices of the City.
d. The Fort Collins National Bank owns the land to the north
and the subject parcel. They wish to develop the parcel
under one unified concept.
2. Rezoning to B-P (Planned Business District)
a. Zoning would provide buffer between commercial to the west
and the developing residential areas to the east.
b. Applicant willing to exclude all retail functions from this
site. The only permitted uses would be bank and or offices.
Such limitation of land uses of this site would further
buffer the residential area to the east.
3. The Planning Department's position is that the annexation and
rezoning of the subject is appropriate at this time. However,
an overall development plan and especially a street and traffic
plan must be developed prior to City processing a subdivision
plat and a site plan.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the Planning and Zoning Board recommend to
the City Council approval of the annexation and rezoning based
on the above statements subject to the following conditions:
P h Z Board Minutes
Page 4/October 9, 1978
1. A Master development plan including a street and circu-
lation pattern be developed for the entire area south of
Horsetooth Road, east of South College Avenue and west of
the Landings Drive.
2. No retail uses be permitted.
Bob Burnham: Asked if a street plan was devised for the area immediately to the
west.
Paul Deibel: Said no - explained this to be the reason for Condition #1.
Les Kaplan: (Representing the Applicant)
Said it was an "in-fil" type annexation and almost qualified for
involuntary annexation.
Gary Ross: Thought it unfortunate a larger piece of land couldn't be annexed.
Moved to recommend approval of the annexation.
Bob Burnham: Second the motion.
Vote: Motion carried unanimously.
ZONING
Les Kaplan: Summarized rationale for the requested zoing (complete document
attached):
1. Zone would act as a buffer;
2. It functions within the content of the vicinity;
3. Orients to the north;
4. Commits to a P.U.D.;
5. Compliments the mall;
6. Avoids routing commercial traffic through residential areas;
7. The use fits size of the property.
Bob Burnham: Asked if staff saw any conflict with the commercial development in
the Landings.
Paul Deibel: Said no. Thought the present proposal had city-wide orientation.
Charles Unfug: Thought it was a severe burden to restrict development on the site
until a road masterplan was developed. Noted BP allowed site plan
reveiw. Thought it appropriate to recommend approval sans conditions.
Gary Ross: Suggested a time limit for the development of a street masterplan
and if it was not completed, development could continue regardless.
Les Kaplan: Said the applicant was aware of the masterplan. Suggested tying
development to the configuration of the extension of Plaza Drive.
Added he would like to have a 25%, retail allotment granted.
Paul Deibel: Suggested it was preferable not to approach the street pattern in
a piecemeal fashion. Thought it would be optimal to prohibit all
retail but didn't consider the problem to be critical.
P & Z Board Minutes
Page 5/October 9, 1978
Bob Burnham: Thought the Board would be remiss in its duties if it did not see
a street circulation pattern.
Paul Deibel: Pointed out that most of the area to the south was still in the
County which was another constraint.
Charles Unfug: Argued this particular development involved only one street and
that the major concern was for the wider area to the south.
Bob Burnham: Moved to recommend approval of the BP zone with the stipulation
that no retail use be permitted. Added the directive to the
Planning staff for development of a street masterplan but that
development on this particular site not be contingent on that plan.
Robert Evans: Second the motion.
Gary Ross: Thought some retail use was acceptable and saw it as a means of possibly
limiting large quantities of future land changing to commercial.
Charles Unfug: Agreed with Gary Ross, but saw difficulty with enforecment of a 25%
requlation.
Vote: Robert Evans - yes
Gary Ross - no, favored some retail.
Bob Burnham - yes
Gary Spahr - yes
Charles Unfug - yes
Phyllis Wells - yes
Motion carried, 5 - 1
4. #144-78 Eagle 1 P.U.D.: Preliminary Plan.
Description: Proposal for a 2.0 acre three lot commercial P.U.D.
zoned H-B, Highway Business, at the northeast corner of S. College
Avenue and Del Clair Road.
Applicant: Curt Henningson & Jeff Burrows, c/o Les Kaplan, 528
S. Howes, Fort Collins, Colorado 80521.
The item was continued to the November meeting (letter attached).
5. #145-78 Prospect - Timberline P.U.D.: Preliminary Plan.
Description: Proposal for a commercial P.U.D. zoned H-B, Highway
Business, at the northeast corner of E. Prospect Street and Timber-
line Road.
Applicant: Foster Lumber Company, c/o Les Kaplan, 528 S. Howes,
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521.
Paul Deibel: Presented staff analysis and recommendations:
1. Zoning. It might be argued that the proposed use is not permitted
in the H-B, Highway Business zone inasmuch as "Builders supply -
yards and lumberyards" are not specifically listed as a permitted
use until the C-Commercial zone. However, the staff does feel
that the proposed use would be an appropriate one at this lo-
cation. Moreover given the retail sales characteristics of this
P & Z Board Minutes
Page 6/October 9, 1978
specific proposal, we feel that it would qualify as a per-
mitted use in the H-B zone which allows "other business uses
which have environmental influences similar to its" listed
uses. Uses such as warehousing and automobile or mobile
home sales are permitted in H-B if part of a P.U.D. (The above
does not necessarily mean that any lumberyard proposal would
be permitted in H-B.)
2. Access. Driveway entrance on E. Prospect should be located
400 feet east of the arterial intersection. Also, turning
radius of drive should be designed for anticipated truck traffic.
3. Peripheral treatment. Landscaped areas along E. Prospect should
be increased to establish a significant boulevard treatment at
this "entrance" to the City. The staff would suggest a dimension
of 30' to 40' from the curb for this landscaped area (which
would also include standard sidewalk).
4. Spring Creek. The area of the Spring Creek Flood Easement
adjacent to this site on the west side of the creek should
be included on the subdivision plat as well as the site and
landscape plans. This means that the engineering and land-
scape treatment of this area should be addressed at this time.
Plat should provide for the recreational trail easement along
Spring Creek.
5. Security. This site will receive relatively infrequent police
patrol surveilance and stringent on -site security measures
(lighting, alarm, etc.) should be taken.
6. Building perspectives should be submitted prior to approval of
preliminary plan.
Recommendation
Approval subject to above comments.
Phyllis Wells: Asked about plans for the railroad crossing on Prospect.
Paul Deibel: Said it would not be affected by this plan, but envisioned a signal
in the future.
Les Kaplan: (Representing the Applicants)
Explained the site's location vis-a-vis the railroad tracks and
other lumber yards. Said the applicant had no objections to
providing treatment along Spring Creek.
Gary Ross: Asked if it was advisable to have only one access point.
Paul Deibel: Said the Fire Department had studied the proposal carefully and
determined one access paint to be adequate. Said the police were
also in favor of just one access.
Gary Ross: Said the City would have to deal with the bridges across Spring
Creek since they could curtail development.
P & Z Board Minutes
Page 7/October 9, 1978
Don Deagle: Suggested the Board explain they had considered whether this par-
ticular use fit with the criteria of the H-B zone.
Phyllis Wells: Said yes and that the Board concurred that it fit. Said this P.U.D.
met with the condition of "similar environmental impact."
Charles Unfug: Moved to recommend approval subject to staff comments.
Phyllis Wells: Said the motion included the zoning question and the Board's finding
that the plan met the requirements.
Bob Burnham: Seconded the motion.
Vote: Motion carried unanimously.
Phyllis Wells: Recommended to City Council that an investigation be carried out
on the railroad crossing.
6. #146-78
Replat Stonehenge 6th P.U.D.: Preliminary Plan.
Description: Proposal for a 1/2 acre commercial site within the
Stonehenge 6th P.U.D. located on the east side of South Lemay
Avenue, 1/4 mile south of Stuart Street. Zoning is R-L-P, Low
Density Planned Residential.
Applicant: The Landings, Ltd., Osprey Homes, c/o ZVFK Architechs,
218 W. Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado 80521.
Paul Deibel: Gave the following analysis and recommendations.
On the one hand, this proposal may be seen as taking a good ad-
vantage of the P.U.D. ordinance commercial allotment to provide a
small scale commercial center for neighborhood oriented (not nec-
sarily just project oriented) retail and office uses at a very
convenient location to a significant number of dewlling units.
The residential architectural and landscape treatment would provide
for visual compatibility with the adjacent residential uses, and
would in fact complement the neighborhood by providing an attractive
focal point for the immediate vicinity.
On the other hand the proposal may be seen as taking undue advan-
tage of the P.U.D. ordinance to circumvent the need for a rezoning
to provide a small spot for commercial uses which orient toward
the arterial street rather than the adjacent neighborhoods and
which create the potential for traffic, noise, litter, etc. which
would be intrusive on adjacent residential neighborhoods regard-
less of architectural and landscape treatment.
While the staff strongly supports the provision of neighborhood
convenience commercial uses within residential areas, we never-
theless question the "need" for additional retail commercial
development in this vicinity given the existing commercial de-
velopment at Lemay and Drake. We also tend to question the vi-
ablity of retail commercial development at this small a scale
in a neighborhood of this low a density. Finally, we are not sure
of the desirability of a pattern of many small commercial sites
at scattered locations along arterial streets.
P 6 Z Board Minutes
Page 8/October 9, 1978
Recommendation
On balance the staff feels that retail uses are not justified at
this location, We do feel however, that professional office uses
could be a feasible and compatible use, as long as the buildings
are clearly residential in scale and exterior treatment (as is
proposed).
Thus our recommendation is for approval subject to the following
conditions:
1. Uses be limited to professional office uses as defined
by the zoning ordinance.
2. Neither building exceed 3,500 sq. ft. in floor area.
3. Elevations or renderings of buildings be submitted
prior to preliminary approval.
4. Parking be provided at a ratio of 1 space/150 sq. ft.
of floor area.
5. Other
a. Center island in Druid should be shortened to provide
for left turn movements and to increase sight distance;
b. Difference in storm runoff between approved residential
and proposed commercial development should be retained
on site (in parking areas.)
Reid Rosenthal: (Applicant)
Had no objections to staff comments other than parking.
Said this proposal would supply a more interesting entry to the
subdivison than four single-family homes.
Said four single family homes would never match the landscaping
of this proposal.
Said no retail uses would be allowed.
Said additional parking would hurt the appearance but said he
could supply four more spaces.
Ron Sammons (1925 Lemay): Submitted a petition opposing any change in the P.U.D.
Said he had been told it would be only single family
Said Stonehenge should be an extension of Indian Hills.
Said there were plenty of other areas for business uses.
Said this proposal might force a traffic light at the
intersection. Said there was no guarantee it wouldn't
be retail.
Don Deagle: Said non -retail restrictions could be handled via covenants.
Louis Robinson (1012 Commanche): Opposed to the plan.
Rebecca Sammons: Asked why more professional offices were needed since an abundance
already existed.
Lester Redder (1917 Lemay): Opposed.
R. Rosenthal: Said Stonehenge residents favored the proposal. Said the plan
would enhance the area. Said this site was a convenience to the
neighborhood.
P & Z Board Minutes
Page 9/October 9, 1978
Dr. Ken Howie (Potential future occupant of the site): Estimated about 20
patients per day, maximum.
Gary Ross: Asked about the second building.
Dr. Howie: Didn't know.
Charles Unfug: Said he appreciated the public's concern but said traffic on
Lemay stood to increase dramatically regardless of this proposal.
Saw the impact of this proposal as negligable.
Gary Ross: Projected about 64 trips a day in and out of the site. Saw this
as substantially more traffic than four houses would generate.
Conjectured that Lemay might end up being rezoned along its
fringes like S. College. Felt this proposal could encourage
such an occurance.
Bob Burnham: Noted the proposal was consistant with the P.U.D. ordinance.
Gary Ross: Said it was permitted but that this plan was an amendment to an
existing P.U.D. and thought it would be incorrect to modify it.
Bob Burnham: Moved to recommend approval subject to staff comments.
Charles Unfug: Seconded the motion,
Vote:
Robert Evans - yes
Gary Ross - no, reasons stated above.
Bob Burnham - yes
Gary Spahr - no
Charles Unfug - yes
Phyllis Wells - no, agreed with Gary Ross
Motion failed to carry.
Phyllis Wells:
Said the plan would appear before City Council November 7.
Don Deagle:
Noted the Board was making no recommendation
7. #147-78
The Wharf at the Landings P.U.D.: Revised Preliminary Plan.
Description: Proposal for 32 townhouse units on 3.2 acres zoned
R-P, Planned Residential, located at the southwest corner of
E. Horsetooth Road and Landings Drive.
Applicant: Landings, Ltd., Osprey Homes, C/o ZVFK Architects,
218 W. Mountain, Fort Collins, Colorado, 80521.
Paul Deibel:
Gave the following staff analysis and recommendation:
1. Private Drive
a. Design to meet City Engineering specifications.
b. Maintenance of drive to be provided for in P.U.D. Main-
tenance Guarantee.
c. Driveway type entrances off of Landings Drive.
2. Parking
a. Some overflow parking should be provided in Phase I.
P & Z Board Minutes
Page 10/October 9, 1978
b. Parallel parking spaces should be 23' long.
c. Elimination of some of the parallel parking along north
and east into parking bay placed throughout the site.
This will improve internal aesthetics and reduce point
of potential conflict.
C. Increase the depth of parking aprons in front of garages
to allow the parking of auto out of the private roadways.
3. Detention
a. On -site runoff detention will be necessary. Engineering
Department will not allow runoff to empty into the lake
across Landings Drive. The lowest area of this site is
the SW corner of Landings Drive and Horsetooth Road
occupied by 3 d.u.'s.
4. Improvements
a. Fifteen foot (15') easement for existing electric line at
east end.
b. Sidewalks along Landings Drive.
C. Extend water line on Horsetooth Road.
d. Improve full length of Horsetooth Road with 1st Filing.
e. Access roads and fire hydrants to be in service before
construction begins.
5. The Planning staff is also concerned about the impact of
Horsetooth Road upon the 3 northern d.u.'s. These d.u.'s
will be only 40' from a future major arterial roadway. It
is suggested that these 3 d.u.'s be eliminated.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the Planning and Zoning Board recommend
approval of this request to the City Council subject to the elimi-
nation of the 3 d.u.'s at the southwest corner of Horsetooth Road
and Landings Drive and subject to concerns outlined previously.
R. Rosenthal: (Applicant)
Had no problems with staff comments.
Charles Unfug: Asked if staff comments were for the whole project or just the first
phase.
Paul Deibel: Said the whole project.
Charles Unfug: Moved to recommend approval subject to staff comments.
Gary Spahr: Seconded the motion.
Vote: Motion carried unanimously.
P & Z Board Minutes
Page ll/October 9, 1978
8. #148-78 Scotch Pines Village Shops P.U.D.: Preliminary Plan.
Description: Proposal for a 10.7 acre commercial P.U.D., zoned
B-P, Planned Business, at the southwest corner of East Drake and
South Lemay.
Applicant: E. E. Mitchell & Company, c/o Bill Brenner, Robb and
Brenner, Inc., Suite 1080, Savings Building, Fort Collins, Colorado
80521
Paul Deibel: Gave staff comments and recommendation:
In general, the staff feels that the architectural and landscape
design of this proposal will make it a visually attractive
development.
Specific staff comments are as follows:
1. Access. This proposal will generate a significant amount of
traffic. The impact of this traffic will be lessened somewhat
by the following revisions:
a. Channellize and sign service driveway onto Lemay for
right turn only (entrance off Edinburgh);
b. Provide striping in Lemay for left turns into the main
entrance on Lemay.
2. Landscaping. Trees in central walkway should be located 3 1/2
feet from curb and protected from parked car overhang.
Tree planters in parking lot should have concrete rather than
R. R. tie curbs. Also landscape plan should indicate land-
scaping at rear of site referred to in planning objectives as
providing visual and acoustical separation.
3. Parking. City standard for 600 one-way parking aisles requires
a total width (stall -drive -stall) of 60' whereas the plan
only provides 55'.
4. Building code. Provisions should be made on final plan for
compliance with building sepration as required by the build-
ing code.
5. Utilities (to be addressed with final utility plan.
a. Drainage should be directed to the Edinburgh -Drake catch
basin rather than the Drake-Lemay catch basin (or outflow
to be restricted to 4 c.f.s. thus increasing required
detention volume);
b. Utilities should be located to eliminate any pavement cuts
on Drake or Lemay (any lines off these streets should be
bored rather than open cut.)
C. Sidewalk along Edinburgh should be 4' wide.
Staff Recommendations
Approval subject to above comments.
Bill Brenner: (Representing the Applicant)
Had no problems with the staff comments.
Phyllis Wells: Asked about treatment on the south boundary.
P & Z Board Minutes
Page 12/October 9, 1978
Bill Brenner: Said it would be landscaped with a fence and grade change
Phyliis Wells: Asked if there was pedestrian access through the area.
Bill Brenner: Said no.
Roger Smith (Strachan Drive): Mildly opposed. Concerned about the increase of
truck traffic on Strachan.
Bill Brenner: Said with the exit only restriction at the east end, the only
way in was via the Edinburgh curb cut.
Gary Spahr: Asked if berming had been reduced along Lemay.
Bill Brenner: Said it had to allow for a sidewalk. Said it could be built up
some.
Bob Everitt (Parkwood Lake): Asked about signage.
Bill Brenner: Explained. Said it would be low-key and tasteful.
Roger Smith: Said he'd heard no constructive response to his concern. Suggested
making Edinburgh one way southbound.
Paul Deibel: Said this could create problems since Edinburgh channeled alot of
traffic from Strachan to Drake added that a traffic study could be
requested of the applicant to determine the volume of truck traffic.
Robert Evans:
Moved to recommend approval subject to staff comments and that City
Council concern itself with a means of minimizing truck traffic
through residential areas.
Bob Burnham:
Seconded the motion.
Charles Unfug:
Asked what the practicality of the motion was.
Paul Deibel:
Said an indication of truck traffic generated would be obtained
from the applicant.
Bob Burnham:
Said the staff would see the traffic analysis and felt it was not
the responsibility of the Board to design the sets.
Vote:
Motion carried unanimously.
Charles Unfug:
Said his yes vote was based on the traffic problem being studied
prior to City Council.
(Items 149-78
and 150-78 were withdrawn)
11. #151-78
M & N Towing - Sunset Street Rezoning. (County Referral)
Description: Proposal to rezone Lot Two in Block Two of the
Rostek First Addition from FA -Farming to C-Commercial, located
on the west side of N. Sunset Street, north of LaPorte Avenue.
Applicant: M & N Towing, 215 N. Sunset, Fort Collins, Colorado
80521.
P & Z Board Minutes
Page 13/October 9, 1978
Paul Deibel: Gave staff analysis and recommendations:
1. This request, if granted, would permit commercial land use
intrusion into an area which is basically residential in
nature.
2. The commercial land uses would be incompatible with the res-
idential area with the potential for degrading the residential
environment.
3. The request constitutes a "spot zoning" request which is basic-
ally an undesirable in land use planning.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the Planning and Zoning Board recommend
denial based on the following findings.
1. This request constitutes a spot zone.
2. This request would permit commercial land uses to intrude
into a residential area.
3. This request has the potential to degrade the basic
residential environment of this area.
Charles Unfug: Moved to recommend denial.
Robert Evans: Seconded the motion.
Voet: Motion carried unanimously.
12. #152-78 Poudre Plains Subdivision, Preliminary Plat. (County Referral)
Description: Proposal for a 22 unit subdivison zoned R-2, on
5.6 acres, located on the south side of N. Vine Drive, east of
Irish School and west of the New Mercer Canal.
Applicant: Robert Streeter & Robert Aronson, 832 Gregory Road,
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521.
Paul Deibel: Gave staff comments and recommendations:
Secondary Access
A 30' emergency access road is being proposed. However, a permanent
connection to Impala Drive is needed. The area between this develop-
ment and Impala Drive is not platted. The cul-de-sac proposed at
the end of Poudre Court should be temporary until such time the
link to Impala Drive is built. At the same time the emergency
access road can also be abandoned.
Conditions
It is recommended that the Planning and Zoning Board recommend
approval of this request subject to the following conditions:
1. That the cul-de-sac at the end of Poudre Court be a temp-
orary cul-de-sac until a link to Impala Drive is developed.
2. That a temporary cul-de-sac be installed at the end of N.
Brairwood Rd. until this road is developed into the property
to the south.
P & Z Board Minutes
Page 14/October 9, 1978
3. That all improvements be built to City standards.
Gary Ross: Asked if the temporary cul-de-sacs would have full curbs.
Paul Deibel:
Said
they
would have
full turning radii but
no curbs.
Robert Evans:
Asked
if
the county
was supportive of City
standard improvements.
Paul Deibel: Said yes.
Bob Burnham: Said there might be street name confusions with "Poudre." Asked
what the status of the Urban Service Area was.
Charles Unfug: Said it was still in negotiation. Said each service district had
related but different problems.
Bob Burnham: Asked why recommendations from the Urban Service Steering Committee
were no longer being heard.
Charles Mabry: Said it was being held in abeyance until completion of the Urban
Service Study.
Gary Ross: Moved to recommend approval subject to staff comments and that the
name be checked.
Charles Unfug: Seconded the motion.
Vote: Motion carried unanimously.
13. #153-78 Replat Lots 14, 15, Block 4, Cotton Willow Estaes Third.
(County Referral)
Description: Proposal to divide two lots into three on 1.8 acres,
zoned M located west of LaPorte, south of U.S. 287 on McConnell
Drive.
Applicant: Lee McConnell, 4102 Greenridge Drive, LaPorte, Colorado.
Paul Deibel: Said this was a very technical replat involving a very minor change.
and recommended approval.
Charles Unfug: Said the effect was to break up the density and would be advantageous
to the whole development. Moved to recommend approval.
Gary Spahr: Seconded the motion.
Vote: Robert Evans - yes
Gary Ross - yes
Bob Burnham - yes
Gary Spahr - yes
Charles Unfug - yes
Phyllis Wells - Abstained. Felt she was not well enough versed on
the item to make a knowledgable vote.
Phyllis Wells: Scheduled an October 26, 1978, 7 p.m. meeting to discuss Policy
Alternatives to the Land Use Plan.
Meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
LesterCo Su�ta�t •
M. Kaplan
September 13, 1978
Mr. Chuck Mabry
Director, Planning and Development
City of Fort Collins
City Hall
Fort Collins, Colorado 80524
RE: Planning Objectives for Fort Collins National Bank
Annexation
Dear Chuck:
I have been asked by the Fort Collins National Bank to re-
present their proposal to annex and zone certain property to the
City of Fort Collins. The statement of planning objectives con-
tained herein is intended to accompany the Fort Collins National
Bank Annexation request, dated September 15, 1978.
troduction
This proposed 4.7 acre annexation would fill in the incor-
porated city area between the south edge of the existing seven (7)
acre B-P, Planned Business, area on the south side of Horsetooth
Road and the Larimer County Canal No. 2. The petitioner of this
annexation, the Fort Collins National Bank, would like to cooperate
with the other property owners within this overall 11.7 acre area
in planning the entire site as a non -retail office park. The Bank
intends to be principal user of this proposed office park.
The Fort Collins National Bank intends to ultimately relocate
its bank facility from its present location on South College Avenue,
directly across from the Foothills Fashion Mall. While this site
has been extremely well -received by the community since its opening
in 1976, several factors have prompted the Bank to consider a
second location.
First, the rapid south and southeastern growth of the city
since 1976 has opened up new banking trade areas which have not
met with accessible banking facilities. Secondly, due to the
success of the existing Fort Collins National Bank facility,
combined with the existing and anticipated rapid population growth
of the city, the Bank has accelerated and expanded its future
facility space projections. Finally, the Bank is interested in
528 S.Howes Fort Collins. Colorado 80524 (303) 482-3322
Mr. Chuck Mabry
September 13, 1978
Page Two
locating its ultimate facility within a high -quality office park
setting, located off of South College Avenue and approximate to
the emerging residential communities in the south. Principally
for these reasons, the Bank has begun steps towards site acquisi-
tion for its new facilities.
Site Location Objectives
The Bank has been extremely particular in deciding upon a new
location. Among the site location criteria which were considered
to be essential to the Bank are the following:
1) Proximity to the rapidly emerging and anticipated
residential neighborhoods in the southern portions of
Fort Collins. The Bank does not want its new location
to be strictly highway -oriented. Rather, it hopes to
promote a neighborhood banking concept while still pro-
viding good accessibility from South College Avenue and
the commercial areas immediately to the north.
2) Adjacency to the Foothills Mall areas, without actually
being included within the Mall and without being
associated with an extensive retail area. The Bank
wishes to maintain an identity independent from the retail
activities of the Mall, however, provide convenient
banking facilities to Mall customers.
3) Large enough site to combine the Bank's space require-
ments with those of other non -retail commercial users.
The Bank plans to be the principal user on a site that
includes complementary and similarly high -quality
office space users. This mini -office park would have
primary orientation to residential areas, with approxi-
mately 300 feet of frontage on Horsetooth Road.
Planning Objectives
Once annexed to the City and zoned B-P, Planned Business,
the subject property would be combined with the existing B-P area
to the north and planned as a non -retail unit development. Subject
to annexation and B-P zoning, the other property owners are willing
to cooperate in the site planning for this overall 11.7 acre area.
Within this overall area, several acres to the south are undevelop-
able and additional acres to the west will likely be taken by
street right-of-way.
Mr. Chuck Mabry
September 13, 1978
Page Three
The Bank hopes to construct its new main building in the next
three (3) years. Immediately, -however, the Bank plans to place
a permanent drive-thru facility on the north end of the site.
This will contain a 600 to 800 square foot structure and four (4)
to six (6) drive-thru windows.
All of the owners of this overall site have agreed to pursue
the office park concept with a strict limitation on retail
activities. As the principal user of this site, the Bank would
insist on attractive site design, compatibility with surrounding
areas, and complementary architectual design.
Hopefully, this brief statement of planning objectives helps
to explain the intentions of the Fort Collins National Bank and
other property owners for this overall site, in light of the
subject annexation and zoning requests.
Sincerely yours,
Lester M. Kaplan
LMK/rs
FORT COLLINS NATIONAL BANK ANNEXATION
Justifications for the Annexation
and Planned Business Zoning Requests
The Annexation
The subject property is clearly within the direction of
Fort Collins urban expansion and as such, according to annexa-
tion policies of the City, should be incorporated into the City.
For the most part, the property is surrounded by land which is
either in the process of developing or where development is
imminent. All City utilities and services are available to the
site. The inclusion of this property into the City is both
consistent with the adopted Larimer County Land Use Plan and
with the stated land use policies of the City. In that this
property is serviceable by Fort Collins utilities and not presently
within nor anticipated for inclusion within the South Fort Collins
Sanitation District, its annexation to the City should not be a
concern of the Urban Service Area Program.
State and local legal requirements for one -.sixth contiguity
to the incorporated limits of the City are satisfied through
existing adjacency with both the Planned Business area to the
north and also Landings Drive of the Landings P.U.D. to the east.
An additional reason for annexation is that property lines
for the existing Planned Business area to the north run north -
south through the subject property. The petitioner, the Fort
Collins National Bank, presently owns a portion of the Planned
Business area and wishes to annex the unincorporated portion of
its property which extends to Larimer County Canal No. 2. This
annexation is a prelude to planning a small office park, which
would include the Bank as the principal user. The property
owners to the east own the east portion of this existing Planned
Business property and also the entire east portion of the subject,
unincorporated property. This owner, Horsetooth Properties, a
general partnership, has agreed to a unified P.U.D. development
approach to this entire 11.7 acre parcel, subject to annexation
and to the extention of the existing B-P zoning district to the
annexable property. Upon annexation, the canal would constitute
a logical zoning district line to the entire B-P site.
The Zoning
In that the City has neither completed its comprehensive
land use plan nor has prepared a specific area plan for the
vicinity including the subject 4.7 acre property, the suitability
of the requested B-P zoning will be discussed in terms of relevant
land use policies and objectives to which the City has heretofore
subscribed. These policies and objectives will be stated and
followed by a statement on the consistency of the zoning request
with such land use designation criteria.
Criteria I.
The spot zoning of specific parcels of
land to accommodate a specific use or
users should be avoided.
RESPONSE: The petitioner is attempting to justify the appro-
priateness of the B-P zone in general, not the appropriateness
of a bank -office complex. The full range of retail uses allowed
in the B-P zone are not of interest to the petitioner. Should the
City determine that predominantly retail uses would not promote
the public interest or a desirable development pattern, then the
petitioner is willing to limit retail uses to only 25% of the gross
-2-
leasable floor area. These conditions would apply as well to the
existing B-P area for which there are presently no development
conditions.
Criteria II.
Zoning should serve to provide a buffer
between .more intense Highway Business
uses and residential areas.
RESPONSE: The B-P zone is commonly used as a buffer between
more intense commercial uses in residential areas. A case in
point is the City downzoning from Highway Business to Planned
Business of the two acre property proposed for a skateboard park
on the basis that B-P zoning would be more compatible with the
neighboring residential areas. The B-P zoning district east of
the Foothills Fashion Mall provides a buffer between the Mall and
residential areas and, therefore, is analogous to the area of
the request. As a buffer area, the subject property lies between
Highway Business zoning to the west and to the north and the
residential development to the east.
Criteria III.
Zoning should promote a desirable pattern
of land uses and should functionally
relate to surrounding areas.
RESPONSE: The overall 11.7 acre development would provide close
in office conveniences to adjoining residential neighborhoods in
addition to serving as an effective transition between the Foothills
Mall areas and these neighborhoods. Once the site is developed,
it will also serve as an employment center close in to residential
areas. It is important to note that the rectangular shape of
the property denotes residential rather than Horsetooth Road
orientation. The overall site has approximately 1500 feet of
frontage on Landings Drive and only 300 feet of frontage on
Horsetooth Road.
-3-
Criteria IV.
Employment centers and commercial develop-
ment should orient north, so as not to
promote further uncontrolled southern
growth.
RESPONSE: As an office park and employment area, the eventual
project will provide a north orientation to development south
of Horsetooth Road.
Criteria V.
Coordinated approaches to site planning
for adjoining land parcels having
different ownership should be encouraged.
RESPONSE: The petitioner is in the awkward position of owning a
rectangular shaped piece of property, the north portion of which
is zoned Planned Business in the City and the south portion of
which is zoned in the County. In order to develop the entire
property under City auspices, the owner is seeking annexation.
The requested B-P zoning district would be an extension of the
existing B-P zoned area. The property owner to the east has
agreed to cooperate in the unified development of the entire
parcel, if the annexation and Planned Business zoning is approved
by the City.
Criteria VI.
The use of rights -of -way or natural
features as zoning district lines should
be encouraged.
RESPONSE: The requested Planned Business zoning would result in
the canal serving as a zoning district line to the south and
Landings Drive as platted serving as the zoning district line to
the east.
-4-
Criteria VII.
To the extent possible, unnecessary
zoning should be avoided.
RESPONSE: If the Planned Business zoning is approved, the
petitioner is willing to prepare a site plan proposing that at
least 75% of the site be used for high quality, non -retail
commercial uses. At least 90% of the Highway Business zoned
Foothills Mall area is retail and, subject to the B-P zoning,
will serve as an attractive office park compliment to the
Foothills Mall areas.
Criteria VIII.
Land uses that require people to drive
through residential area streets to
and from commercial areas should be
avoided.
RESPONSE: The.proposed Planned Business area would have excellent
access on its eastern edge from Landings Drive, a collector
street, and very likely on its western edge from the service
road proposed to connect Horsetooth Road and Harmony Road and
to provide interior access to Highway Business uses facing
South College Avenue.
Criteria IX.
Land use approaches that provide the
potential for site plan review, thereby
assuring greater compatability with
surrounding areas, should be encouraged.
RESPONSE: The proposed Planned Business zone would promote site
plan review and would provide the City an opportunity to impose
conditions on uses, if deemed appropriate.
-5-
Criteria X.
The size of a particular parcel should
encourage its most suitable use.
RESPONSE: In 1976 the City annexed and zoned to Highway Business
seven (7) acres of the Brune Property, so that it could be
added to an existing seven (7) acre Highway Business parcel
having frontage on South College Avenue and Horsetooth Road.
The resulting project is the Foothills Square P.U.D. In zoning
this annexed property Highway Business, the City determined
that a more appropriate use of the existing seven (7) acres
would result, if the site were enlarged that is, and more opportunity
for good design would exist through a larger site. The Fort Collins
National Bank feels that the same arguments apply to the subject
property.
Summary
The requested B-P, Planned Business, zoning district for the
Fort Collins National Bank Annexation would extend the existing
Planned Business area to the canal, a logical zoning district line.
Through the approval of this annexation and zoning, the Bank
would then be able to cooperate with property owners to the east
in the joint planning of an overall 11.7 acre area. As much as
three (3) acres of the total area may not be developable due to
the flood plain to the south and potential right-of-way dedications
to the west. The proposed office park would orient to Landings
Drive and provide an excellent buffer between Highway Business to
the west and north and residential development to the east. The
Bank, as the petitioner and intended principal user of the site,
is willing to limit uses to essentially non -retail commercial.
The resulting office park would not promote College Avenue traffic
am
but rather would be both an additional service to vehicles
traveling to and from the Foothills Fashion Mall areas and also
a convenient neighborhood facility approximate to residential
areas.
ti
LESTER M. KAPLAN
Planning Consultant
528 South Howes
Fort Collins, Colorado 80524
-7-
IU 4 INJtIV I tWL
ident ,
303/226-4747 -.
300 SPINNAKER LN
yr
' 4 4t i��ry?;i j �l
i
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
80525
�3 't
September 26, 1978
;Ma
City of Fort Collins "II",`y� x;
'
Planning Department
300 West Laporte Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
a ,
Gentlemen:
I was recently made aware of the annexation petition and the
requested BP zoning for Fort Collins National Bank on the land
site directly west of the Landings PUD. In discussions with the
petitioners and their: representative, Les Kaplan, several agree-
ments`concerning architectural control;in the development of
,
the site have been tentatively reached.
My main concern obviously is that the intentions,of the
development regarding architectural style and landscaping be
in harmony with my surrounding residential development. The
possibility of a residential buffer has also been discussed with
the applicants.'
It is my feelings that the applicants are acting in good,
faith and that we will at some point in the future reach a firm ;
agreement on architectural controls and residential buffers. In
addition, I feel the proposed occupants of the property„ namely +
Fort Collins National Bank, and subsidiary offices, would be
beneficial to the Landings. 'It might in fact create a very
pleasant "live where you work" type of atmosphere between the
projects.
LAN�ENGS
City of Fort Collins
September 26, 1978
Page Two
In summation, the Landings has no problems with either the annexation
proposed or the requested BP zoning by the applicants, and, in fact, supports
the proposal;
comer (1 (�J
Reid L. Rosenthal
RLR/ j rh
•
Fort Collins National Bank
P. O. Box 2366
Fort Collins. Colorado 80522
303/226-2265
September 15, 1978
Mr. John Arnold, City Manager
City of Fort Collins
City Hall
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
Dear Mr. Arnold;
MOUNTAIN
The Fort Collins National Bank has begun plans to ultimately relocate
its present bank facility from South College Avenue to a carefully
selected location on Horsetooth Road; approximately across from the new
Foothills Square P.U.D.
While the bank has been pleased with its present location, several factors
have prompted the selection of another site for the bank's permanent
location. First, the bank wishes to be closer to the rapidly emerging
residential areas south of Horsetooth Road. Secondly, the. bank is con-
cerned about the traffic situation on South College Avenue and would like
to provide an accessible, high exposure facility that does not require
traveling on College Avenue. Finally, the bank wishes to share a site
with other quality, office commercial users as part of a small office park.
We plan, of course, to keep our present site at 3131 South College Avenue
as a detached facility, but not as our main location.
The bank has selected the B-P, Planned Business, site, located roughly
1,000 feet east of South College Avenue on the south side of Horsetooth
Road. In order to properly implement its plans, the bank is petitioning
the City for the annexation and B-P zoning of the four acre unincorporated
area immediately south of this site and extending to Larimer County Canal
No. 2. The necessary annexation petition has been submitted to the Planning
Office for the October 9, 1978 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board.
The bank does not own the east portion of the overall proposed development
site, including the east portion of the annexation. However, should the
City favorably consider the annexation and extension of the B-P zoning dis-
trict, then the neighboring owners have indicated to the bank their willing-
ness to cooperate in a unified P.U.D. development approach
properties.
Mr. John Arnold, City Manager
September 15, 1978
Page Two
Should this site prove feasible for the bank's ultimate plans, it will
construct a four to six window drive-thru facility and an approximately
600 to 800 square foot structure as soon as possible after plans are
approved by the City. The main bank building, projected at 60,000 square
feet including leasable office space, should be completed within three
to five years.
Both as a courtesy to you and because of the importance of this annex-
ation to the bank's future plans, I am herein advising you of this
petition. Should you have any questions concerning this petition or the
bank's future plans, I look forward to discussing them with you.
Sincerely yours,
Gary:CasseTl
President�
GC:lm
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
September 25, 1978'
Mr. Gary Cassell, President
Fort Collins National Bank
Post Office Box 2366
Fort Collins, Colorado 80522
Dear Gary:
I have received your letter about your new proposed banking facility.
It sounds exciting. 'I'm pleased you informed me about your plans.
A copy of your letter has been forwarded to our Planning and Develop-
ment Department so they also may be apprised Of your long-range plans.
Please feel free to contact me if I can be of further help.
Sincer y,
Jo E Arnold
Cit Hager
jas
"cc: Chuck Mabry, Planning and Development Director, w/enc.
RECEIVED
SEP 2 81979
Pla�;��ir�
Department
1'/3- 78
P4z s...d. C'
QDLORADO - WYOMING INVESTMENTS AND RESOURCE'S, LTD.
314 WEST MOUNTAIN • FORT COLLINS. COLORADO 80531
PHONE: (303) 494.5660
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS
PETER G.GUNDERSON
NATURAL RESOURCES PROPERTIES
THk:ODORE R. DAVIS
September 29, 1978
Mr. Chuck Mabry
Director Planning and
Development Department
City of Fort Collins
300 LaPorte Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 30521
Dear Chuck,
We are the managing partners of Horsetooth Properties, a general
partnership, which owns approximately the east half of the property
included in the Fort Collins National Bank Annexation. As such,
we have represented the partnership in discussions with the Bank
concerning its plans for an office park complex at this location.
Please know that Horsetooth Properties is a supporter of this
annexation for several reasons. First, the annexation and B-P
zoning seems like a logical extension of a zoning district to Larimer
Canal No. 2. Secondly, subject to this annexation and zoning,
Forsetooth Properties has agreed to jointly prepare a site plan for
the overall area, including the existing B-P property, to assure the
unified development of this approximately 10 acre area. Finally,
Horsetooth Properties would agree to limit the uses to essentially
non -retail. The partnership and the Bank share the opinion that
the location would provide attractive, residentially -compatible
uses and help to mitigate College Avenue traffic problems.
Very truly yours,
Peter G. Gunderson I
/t
IVE1a
'otfi -o z ors
r 1 a 1-. l yp�•i'1�
Departrme-ht
Mitchell & co.
October 9, 1978
Mr. Charles Mabry
City of Fort Collins
300 LaPorte Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80521
Dear Mr. Mabry:
Mitchell S Co. is the owner of approximately 10 acres of ground lying immediately
west of the proposed Fort Collins National Bank Annexation. This letter is to
register our support for the annexation and the requested BP zoning.
cc: Mr. Les Kaplan
1100 SAVINGS BUILDING
• P.O. BOX 1208 FORT COLLINS. COLORADO 80522 0 484-3777
LesterC�s itant
M. Kaplan
October 9, 1978
Mr. Chuck Maybry
Director
Department of Planning
and Development
300 West LaPorte Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
Dear Chuck:
Pursuant to our meetin last week to is ss
staff suggestions concerning the Eagle One P.U.D. Pre-
liminary Plan, submitted for the Ober Planni and
Zoning Board meeting, on behalf of the loners I am
herein requesting that Board consideration of this item
be "continued" (tabled) until the November meeting.
Very ruly yours,
Lester M. Kaplan
LMK:ro
OF
PIann T.ig
DePa:t:r.tni
528 S, Howes Fort Collins. Colorado 80524 (303) 482 3322 ----
N
•
2
ib.
(j�%.e�/ � .�..c-.�-c��..� •,,¢tea-c�Y�.�.-2` e�� _ v.�ty.p_�
� cu��n- c-e-��vc-zti��Gc s�c-/ .�t..�G� �.c.--C�,.,�• i��%up- d�-,�- =
y
/7 C�s
/5i7
/C//7_
1 go 8
/9/�
/Irel
1) C T 10 1978
Q"L I e -�k &D plal,rIllig
`tMent
tL xx_ , tLL
12e,,,t�7t; I.-tt, pu-p
aflb� tr
�d w
yu�
h �*r
M -
�'v