HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/10/2018 - Planning And Zoning Board - Agenda - Work Session* Work session times are approximate and are subject to change without notice.
Jeffrey Schneider, Chair Conference Room A
Jeff Hansen, Vice Chair 281 N. College Avenue
Jennifer Carpenter Fort Collins, Colorado
Michael Hobbs 80524
Christine Pardee
Ruth Rollins
William Whitley
Planning and Zoning Hearing will be held on Thursday, August 16, 2018, in City Hall Chambers.
Regular Work Session
August 10, 2018
281 N. College Avenue – Conference Room A
Noon - 4:00 pm
TOPICS: PROJECTED TIMES:
Consent:
1. June 21, 2018, P&Z Hearing Draft Minutes
2. July 13, 2018 P&Z Special Hearing Draft Minutes
3. July 19, 2018, P&Z Hearing Draft Minutes
12:00 – 12:10 pm
Discussion:
4. Century Wireless Telecommunications Facility, PDP170017
(Frickey)
5. Country Club Reserve (Mapes)
12:10 – 1:00 pm
Policy and Legislation:
• Harmony Corridor Plan Amendment (H25) Follow-up (Mapes)
• Downtown and Transition Code Updates (Gloss/Wray)
1:00 – 1:40 pm
Board Topics:
• Urban Renewal Plan (URP) Update (Rowe)
• City Plan Update (Mounce/Overton)
• BFO Process Update (Everette)
• Deadlines for Public Comment (Everette)
• Board Retreat Discussion (Everette)
• Training & Professional Development (Everette)
1:40 – 3:35 pm
Planning and Zoning Board
Work Session Agenda
Packet Pg. 1
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 2, 2018
TO: Members of the Planning and Zoning Board
FROM: Clark Mapes, City Planner
TH: Cameron Gloss, Long Range Planning Manager
Rebecca Everette, Development Review Manager
RE: Proposed Harmony Corridor Plan Amendment – Gateway Area
No Action Requested:
This item is for worksession discussion on August 16.
Staff is seeking followup feedback from the Board about the proposal to amend the Harmony
Corridor Plan which was introduced at the July 13 worksession.
The initial proposed amendment is available at:
https://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/pdf/neighborhood-
mtgs/harmony_gateway_plan_amendment.pdf
It contains extensive information about trends in employment-based land use.
In response to Board discussion in July, staff has discussed and the Board’s main concerns,
questions, and suggestions for alternative approaches with the applicants.
At the worksession, staff proposes to share the applicants’ desire to proceed with the plan
amendment as proposed, and to discuss the findings that are ultimately needed in the City’s
evaluation of the proposal.
Applicants’ Desire to Proceed:
• The applicant team wants to proceed with this plan amendment process, and not lump it into
the larger City Plan process.
HARMONY CORRIDOR PLAN MEMO
Harmony Memo Pg. 1 of 2
Packet Pg. 2
• The team has not been attracted to the PUD approach vs the plan amendment approach. The
the lack of a clear vesting benefit mainly caused the loss of interest. Also, they find that the
plan amendment approach makes sense because it is needed to replace outdated information
and set a land use strategy as the plan calls for. They find that it makes sense to do this in the
same way as was done with the lifestyle center amendment was done.
• The team suggests that this approach makes sense for the City because it allows more say in
what happens on the property, resulting in a tailored strategy beyond what the Land Use Code
currently allows; beyond what the plan currently says; and beyond what a PUD master plan
would allow.
Findings Needed:
The required findings are simple and require significant case-by-case interpretation:
1. Is the Harmony Corridor Plan in need of the proposed amendment?
2. Will the amendment promote the public welfare and be consistent with the City’s vision and
goals?
To make these findings, staff sees these policy questions:
• North half: is the shift in land use mix appropriate – i.e., with retail and residential use
allowed up to 75% and the employment use requirement reduced to 25%?
• South half: is the change from Rural Lands zoning to a new urban mixed-use zoning
designation appropriate?
• What aspects of potential future development should a Plan amendment include? E.g.:
o mix of land uses–requirements and limits for residential, big box retail?
o major trail link–Poudre to Fossil Creek
o river valley habitat and ‘gateway’ landscaping
o walkable framework of streets and blocks
o Strauss Cabin Road comfort for people walking & crossing & biking
o Harmony Road – comfort for people likewise
o buildings – height, character
o other?
Staff will look forward to presenting and discussing the issues and questions at the
worksession.
Contact:
Clark Mapes, City Planner
970.221.6225
cmapes@fcgov.com
HARMONY CORRIDOR PLAN MEMO
Harmony Memo Pg. 2 of 2
Packet Pg. 3
1
Gretchen Schiager
To: P&Z Board
Cc: Clark Mapes
Subject: P&Z: Communication re the Harmony Corridor Work Session Item
All,
Please see below. I will add this to the work session’s Supplemental Documents
Gretchen Schiager
Administrative Assistant
Community Development & Neighborhood Services
970.224.6098
From: Ruthie Rollins <ruthie.rollins@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, August 06, 2018 8:36 AM
To: Clark Mapes <CMAPES@fcgov.com>
Cc: Gretchen Schiager <gschiager@fcgov.com>
Subject: HR&A ‐ NOMA Smarter Cities
Clark:
For Friday's work session could you please look into each of the reports that were attached to Harmony Corridor
Amendment request. For example who is NOMA Smarter Cities? Most of the attachments don't have dates. Also most
have disclaimers about the information contained within them. The HR&A report thanks the contributions of CBRE and then
we have a report or marketing materials from CBRE.
Do we have good information from the current update to City Plan that would address some of the real estate information
we were given?
Thanks and Gretchen could you pass this along to the rest of the board.
‐‐
Ruth Rollins
970 213‐2393
Have a wonderful day :)
HARMONY CORRIDOR PLAN
BOARD COMMUNICATION
Packet Pg. 4
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
8/8/2018 1
BACKGROUND
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 5
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
8/8/2018 2
• Lafarge (A Gravel Mining Company) mined the sand and gravel that created the pits on H25
prior to 2006. None of the water or wetland areas on the site are naturally occurring – they
were all man made features resulting from years of sand and gravel mining.
• In order to account for the exposed ground water created by mining the Pits – Lafarge
sought to put a substitute water supply plan in place to cover the evaporative loss
established during the mining operation. There have not been water rights or an
augmentation plan sought or approved for this property provide for the continued legal
exposure of ground water at this location.
• Stoner and Company bought the property in 2006 with the intent to develop the property
and fill in the mining pits (or a substantial portion thereof).
• Stoner and Company filed for bankruptcy in early 2012 and eventually lost the property via
foreclosure in October of 2012 to its lender.
• The property was then owned by Firstier Bank for a period of years prior to the current
owner’s purchase of the property.
• The State of Colorado Division of Water Resources has issued two Show Cause Orders
requiring that the Pits be filled (included for review).
• At this time the current owner has a short term Substitute Water Supply Plan approved to
cover evaporative loss obligations. This is not a long term solution to the exposed ground
water. The State of Colorado Division of Water Resource continues to insist that these pits
be filled and the exposed ground water be eliminated as a permanent solution.
• The current owner is leasing the water rights necessary to accommodate the short-term
Substitute Water Supply Plan.
• The current owner plans to conform with the State’s requirement that the pits be filled in as
development plans are finalized.
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 6
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
PIT 1
8/8/2018 3
PIT 2
PIT 3
PIT 4
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 7
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
8/8/2018 4
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 8
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
8/8/2018 5
• The southern portion of the property largely consists of an additional gravel mining
pit that was established by the prior gravel mining company. This reservoir is not a
naturally occurring feature and the conditions on the property are man-made.
• The southern ½ of the property was initially annexed into the City of Fort Collins in
2009.
• The initial zoning for the property was “T” for Transitional
• This southern portion of the property was requested to be rezoned to “RUL” several
years ago for property tax purposes and was always intended to be reassessed for
zoning as the current owner began to review development plans for the property.
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 9
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
8/8/2018 6
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 10
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
Current Zoning
8/8/2018 7
The current ownership believes that the
inclusion of this southern portion of the
property into the Harmony Gateway District
will provide:
a. Continuity to create a cohesive
development for the site
b. Integration of additional
primary/employment based land
into the Harmony Corridor area
c. Application of consistent
development standards and
guidelines within the Gateway
Activity Center
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 11
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
Existing Structure Plan Proposed Change
Replace Rural Land
designation with
Harmony Gateway
District designation
8/8/2018 8
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 12
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
8/8/2018 9
HARMONY
COORIDOR
PLAN
AMENDMENT
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 13
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
8/8/2018 10
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 14
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
8/8/2018 11
THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT ADDS NEEDED DEFINITION TO THE GOALS AND
PURPOSE OF THE HARMONY ROAD GATEWAY AREA AND THE ASSOCIATED
ALLOWED USES
• Harmony Corridor Gateway area is designated as a “Special Urban Design
Opportunity”
• Existing HC Plan does not provide any specific guidance as to the characteristics of
this area that differentiate it from the rest of the Harmony Corridor. This has been
identified as a “gap” or unfinished element of the HC Plan.
• The proposed Amendment would revise Map 10 of the HC Plan to designate this
Special Urban Design Opportunity area and other portions of HM LLC’s Property as
Harmony Corridor Gateway Activity Center, and would add guidelines within the HC
Plan to help direct future development
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 15
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
8/8/2018 12
THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT CREATES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR UNIFIED
DEVELOPMENT OF A HIGHLY VISIBLE PIECE OF PROPERTY LOCATED ALONG I-25
• The Amendment proposes to change the designation of the southern portion of the
Property from Rural Lands Edge to Harmony Gateway District.
• This change would allow for unified development of this highly visible piece of
property in a manner that is consistent with the goals set out in the HC Plan for
development of this area as a major regional business center.
• City Plan needs the proposed Amendment to allow for uniform and innovative
development of this highly visible Property, which is also under unified ownership
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 16
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
8/8/2018 13
THE ELEMENTS OF THE CITY PLAN RELATED TO THE I-25 AND HARMONY ROAD
GATEWAY AREA ARE IN NEED OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IN ORDER TO
ACHIEVE THE STATED GOALS OF CREATING A MAJOR BUSINESS CENTER IN
NORTHERN COLORADO
• The HC Plan was adopted over a decade ago. While the Harmony Corridor remains
fundamentally attractive for new development, the reality is that suburban
commercial parks are increasingly obsolete.
• In the place of suburban commercial parks, employees and employers are looking for
integrated mixed use developments that offer opportunities to work, live, innovate
and play within one site, which is desirable because it can reduce the time and
expense spent on commuting and transportation.
• In addition, these areas create a “sense of place” that is in high demand, and this
preference by employers and employees continues to strengthen.
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 17
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
8/8/2018 14
GROWING TREND
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 18
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
8/8/2018 15
GROWING TREND
“Mixed-use neighborhoods are in high demand
and growing because employees want to live and work in
places with a “sense of place” and convenient access to
amenities.”
“… the expansiveness, serenity, and security of
the 1980’s suburban office campus once made
that environment appealing… Now, however,
walkability and activated environments are at
the top of many tenants’ lists of must-haves.“
“Suburban office parks are no longer
attracting all of the newer and more
innovative companies.“
“Millennials are forging the comforts
of larger detached homes…and are
instead opting to live close to work,
transit and amenities.“
“Mixed-use neighborhoods are in high
demand and growing because
employees want to live and work in
places with a “ sense of place” and
convenient access to amenities.“
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 19
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
8/8/2018 16
STATEMENT ADDRESSING CITY PLAN AMENDMENT CRITERIA
• The proposed Amendment adds needed definition to the goals and purpose of the
Harmony Road Gateway area and the associated allowed uses.
• The proposed Amendment creates the opportunity for unified development of a
highly visible piece of property located along I-25.
• The elements of the City Plan related to the I-25 and Harmony Road Gateway area are
in need of the proposed Amendment in order to achieve the stated goals of creating a
major business center in Northern Colorado.
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 20
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
8/8/2018 17
CONCEPT
PLANS
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 21
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
8/8/2018 18
• The current ownership has worked extensively on land uses and concept plans for the
property for the last 2 years.
• These concepts are shared with staff and the P & Z board to provide an illustration of
the densities and mix of uses that can be developed according to this proposed
Gateway Area Amendment.
• The goal is to create a live, work, play environment that integrates a synergistic and
dynamic mix of uses for the Gateway Area.
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 22
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
8/8/2018 19
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 23
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
8/8/2018 20
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 24
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
8/8/2018 21
RESPONSES TO P & Z QUESTIONS FROM JULY 13 WORK SESSION
• Why is this being proposed by a developer? Can they do that?
Response: Yes. Anyone can request a plan amendment.
• Why is staff spending time on a developer’s request? This is a plan for the
community, not just one developer.
Response: We received a request, and we have to process it.
• Would staff be doing this if the developer didn’t propose it?
Response: Yes, maybe, at some point. There is a need to clarify the vision and set a
strategy for land use as the plan says. But not sure what would trigger an initiative.
That’s mainly what this proposal does. We think the main reason for the applicant’s
proposal was to move it forward – to get the process started.
• Who’s writing this – staff or the developer?
Response: Staff will write it. Of course we will collaborate with the owner’s team.
We planned to process this in the identical way that the Lifestyle Center (Front
Range Village) and the Riverwalk (H25 site) were processed. Those were initiatives
by owners, but staff drafted amendments to the plan and standards and guidelines.
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 25
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
8/8/2018 22
RESPONSES TO P & Z QUESTIONS FROM JULY 13 WORK SESSION
• How is the south half a part of the gateway? - I don’t see that connection.
Response: that’s one of the questions. It could be part of the gateway area, like the
natural area on the north side, whether or not it gets the new urban mixed-use
designation that is proposed.
Owner Response: The Southern half was meant for inclusion in prior planning
efforts by Stoner & Co when the property was initially annexed into the City of Fort
Collins in 2009. The initial zoning for the property was “T” for Transitional
This southern portion of the property was requested to be rezoned to “RUL” several
years ago for property tax purposes and was always intended to be reassessed for
zoning as the current owner began to review development plans for the property.
The current ownership believes that the inclusion of this southern portion of the
property into the Harmony Gateway District designation will provide:
a. continuity to create a cohesive development for the site
b. Integration of additional primary/employment based land into the Harmony
Corridor area
c. Application of consistent development standards and guidelines with the
Gateway area of the Harmony Corridor
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 26
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
8/8/2018 23
RESPONSES TO P & Z QUESTIONS FROM JULY 13 WORK SESSION
• Would like to evaluate this with an actual development plan. [Staff note: There was
a misunderstanding about the Lifestyle Center and Riverwalk initiatives being done
in conjunction with development plans.]
Response: A PUD would be similar, almost equivalent to doing this plan amendment
would do. And, it would be based on a development plan. Staff has mentioned this
option to the applicant and they are open to the idea.]
Owner Response: Planning efforts to date have been concept level master plans.
We have included several of the early concepts and alternative concept plans to
show the implementation of the mix of land uses with the Gateway Area. These
provide an illustrative representation of the type of mixed use community that
would be possible under a wider range of land use options.
• What’s the outreach process? This is a huge change for the whole community. This
should be more like a full subarea plan process. It needs a bigger public process.
Maybe get the people from the original plan involved.
Response: We were viewing this the same as the previous amendments for the
Lifestyle Center and the Riverwalk. The Riverwalk was never brought to hearings
for adoption but had multiple worksessions including Council and was nearly ready
to bring forward when it fizzled out.
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 27
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
8/8/2018 24
RESPONSES TO P & Z QUESTIONS FROM JULY 13 WORK SESSION
• Don’t care about how the Lifestyle Center was done – this is much bigger. Same for
the Riverwalk – that was never approved.
• Very uncomfortable with this. Its completely opposite of what plan calls for. A lot of
work went into the plan. This is based on picking one little line from the plan calling
for more work. Sounds like staff is advocating this on behalf of the developer. Don’t
think we should just toss out the policies in the plan for the natural landscape
gateway.
Response: Staff would draft a new chapter 5 in the plan and would incorporate the
existing policies as needed. The existing guidance in the plan would form the
foundation of additional policy language. Staff would build off the existing vision,
rather than significantly altering the vision.
• Want to know more about the employment use. How important is it to keep the 75-
25. Is switching to 25-75 the right mix? How can we know? Maybe it should be
50/50?
Response: City Plan is looking at this.
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 28
H-25 CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
8/8/2018 25
RESPONSES TO P & Z QUESTIONS FROM JULY 13 WORK SESSION
• The PUD option looks like a better way to go.
Owner Response: Owner has considered a PUD as an alternative to the current the
proposal, and in fact drafted a detailed response regarding the PUD language that
would have established the PUD as a viable tool for this property. The PUD
ordinance as adopted makes it infeasible for a project of this magnitude.
H25 OWNER PRESENTATION
Packet Pg. 29
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 1, 2018
TO: Planning and Zoning Board
THRU: Rebecca Everette, Development Review Manager
FROM: Patrick Rowe, Redevelopment Program Coordinator
RE: Fort Collins Urban Renewal Fundamentals
Potential New Plan Area – Drake and College
The City is evaluating a new potential urban renewal plan area in the vicinity of Drake Road and College
Avenue with the purpose of facilitating reinvestment and redevelopment outcomes in the area that
are consistent with community goals and objectives as specified by community planning documents.
One of the critical steps in the formation process is Planning and Zoning Board’s review of the
proposed urban renewal plan (URP) document. The review is planned to occur at the board’s
September meetings. Staff has prepared a presentation on urban renewal fundamentals for the
board’s August 10th
Work Session to provide general background on urban renewal and the Fort Collins
Urban Renewal Authority, and to set context for the board’s September review of the URP.
A copy of the presentation is enclosed.
URP MEMO
URP Memo Pg. 1 of 1
Packet Pg. 30
8/10/2018
URA - Work Session
Patrick Rowe, Economic Health Office
URA Fundamentals Work Session
Planning & Zoning Role
2
Review for conformity with
general plan for development.
URP STAFF PRESENTATION
URP PPT Pg. 1 of 7
Packet Pg. 31
Urban Renewal Plan - Purpose
3
Revitalization of urban areas and the removal of
economic impediments
deteriorated • obsolete • lacking re-
investment • missing / inadequate public
infrastructure • unsanitary • unsafe • faulty
street layout • contaminated
“Blight” Remediation and Prevention
Fort Collins URA
4
Increase from new development activity
URP STAFF PRESENTATION
URP PPT Pg. 2 of 7
Packet Pg. 32
5
Example Projects
6
URP STAFF PRESENTATION
URP PPT Pg. 3 of 7
Packet Pg. 33
Example Projects
7
8
Objectives
URP STAFF PRESENTATION
URP PPT Pg. 4 of 7
Packet Pg. 34
Objectives
9
Increase from new development activity
Incentivize high efficiency buildings and projects
Support a spectrum of housing affordability
options
Encourage development that improves
community vitality and sense of place
Retain, expand, or attract businesses
Plan Areas – Process Outline
Evaluate
• Step 1 – Identify Focus Area
• Step 2 – Existing Conditions Study
Develop
• Step 3 – Define Objectives
• Step 4 – Understand Redevelopment Potential
• Step 5 – Document Public Improvements
Adopt
• Step 6 – Solicit P&Z Input and Present to Entities
• Step 7 – Run Impact Model and Reach Agreement on Mitigation
• Step 8 – Adopt the Plan
10
URP STAFF PRESENTATION
URP PPT Pg. 5 of 7
Packet Pg. 35
New Plan – Guiding Principles
• Strategic and
Focused
• Community Benefits
Oriented
• Build on Planning
Documents
• Identify Win-Win
Solutions
11
12
Proposed Study / Plan Area
MAX King
Soopers
Spradley Barr
URP STAFF PRESENTATION
URP PPT Pg. 6 of 7
Packet Pg. 36
Next Steps
13
TODAY P&Z - Work Session: URA Fundamentals
September 14, 2018 P&Z - Work Session on Proposed URP
September 20, 2018 P&Z - Regular Meeting on Proposed URP
URP STAFF PRESENTATION
URP PPT Pg. 7 of 7
Packet Pg. 37