HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-12/17/1996-RegularDecember 17,1996
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
Council -Manager Form of Government
Regular Meeting - 6:30 p.m.
A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday, December 17,
1996, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll Call was
answered by the following Councilmembers: Apt, Azari, Janett, Kneeland, McCluskey, Smith and
Wanner.
Staff Members Present: Fischbach, Roy, Krajicek.
Citizen Participation
Tim Johnson, expressed the need to consider a 100 year flood plain plan along the River.
Jodee Lawrie, campaign representative for Twice the Ice, encouraged Council to include
enhancement to the EPIC Center in the Capital Improvement Program for the April ballot. She
spoke of the need for an additional sheet of ice and the number of people who are turned away.
Citizen Participation Follow-up
Councilmember Apt reported that there is a Poudre River sub -area plan which is part of the City Plan
process and requested information regarding how the 100 year flood plain map figures into those
plans.
Agenda Review
City Manager John Fischbach stated that Item 35, Direct staff to prepare a resolution selecting
projects to be included in the Building Community Choices Capital Improvement Program, has been
withdrawn from the agenda and would not be presented. He clarified Option C for Item #29, Items
Relating to the Provision for the Review and Processing of Land Use Applicants and Establishing
a Temporary Delay in the Acceptance of Certain Land Use Applicants Through March 31, 1997
(Options A & B), was included in Council's "Read Before the Meeting" folder.
Al Bacilli, 520 Galaxy Court, requested Item #20, Items Relating to the Fort Collins Good
Samaritan Village Annexation and Zoning, be withdrawn from the Consent Calendar.
181
December 17, 1996
***CONSENT CALENDAR***
This Calendar is intended to allow the City Council to spend its time and energy on the important
items on a lengthy agenda. Staff recommends approval of the Consent Calendar. Anyone may
request an item on this calendar to be "pulled" off the Consent Calendar and considered separately.
Agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar by the Public will be considered separately under
Agenda Item 926, Public Pulled Consent Items.
7. Consideration and approval of the regular meeting minutes of July 2 and July 16, 1996, and
the adjourned meeting minutes of July 9 and July 23, 1996.
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 145, 1996, Vacating a Portion of the Drainage Easement
on Chism Property.
The City received a dedication of a 65 feet wide x 280 feet long drainage easement from
Chism Homes, Inc. along the south property line of the Chism Property located on the east
side of South Shields Street. The drainage easement was dedicated for a proposed channel
identified in the McClelland's & Mail Creek Master Drainage Plan. This Ordinance was
unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 3, 1996.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 146, 1996, Amending Ordinance No. 24, 1996, Regarding
the Landmark Rehabilitation Grant Program.
This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 3, 1996,
amends Ordinance No. 24, 1996, removing one of the criteria of the program that states that
those property owners who have received grants in prior years will be of lower priority for
funding. By removing this requirement, larger and phased projects will not be discouraged
from applying year after year.
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 147, 1996, Amending Chapter 26, Article IX. Section 26-
632 of the City Code Regarding the Deferral of Fees for Affordable Housing
This Ordinance was unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 3, 1996, and
deletes the requirement of having affordable housing developers provide the City with a
letter of credit or certificate of deposit, until after the project has been completed.
11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 148, 1996. Appropriating $55.000 from the Use Tax
Carryover Reserve to Purchase a Surety Bond for the 1993 Sales and Use Tax Revenue
Refunding Bonds.
182
December 17, 1996
Ordinance No. 148, 1996, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on December
3, 1996 appropriates $55,000 in the Use Tax Carryover in order to purchase the surety in
1996.
12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 149, 1996, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the
Benefits Fund to Cover Medical Insurance Claims.
Due to extraordinary claims costs in the City's medical insurance plans, $1,000,000 is being
requested from the City's medical insurance reserve account. Medical insurance reserve
accounts are established for this purpose and are fully funded based on recommendations
from the City's Benefits Consultant. This ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on
First Reading on December 3, 1996, appropriates $1,000,000 from the Benefits Fund prior
year reserves to be used to cover medical insurance claims in excess of what was budgeted
for 1996.
13. Second Reading of Ordinance No 150 1996 Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
General Fund for the Fort Collins Police Services Substance Abuse Prevention Pro, -,ram.
Ordinance No. 150, 1996, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on December
3, 1996, appropriates the $27,000 in grant funds for expenditure in the Police Services
Substance Abuse Prevention Program.
14. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 151, 1996, Amending Chapter 2. Division III of the City
Code Pertainine to the Procedure for Hearing Appeals to the City Council
This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on December 3, 1996,
amends the appeals provision of the City Code so as to require that any written information
to be submitted to the Council by parties -in -interest for the Council's consideration at the
appeal hearing be submitted no later than 12:00 noon on the Wednesday preceding the appeal
hearing. The purpose of this revision is to give the Council adequate time to review the
submittals.
15. Second Reading of Ordinance No 152, 1996, Amending Section 2-581 of the Code of the
City of Fort Collins and Setting the Compensation of the City Attorney,
City Council met in Executive Session to conduct the performance appraisal of City Attorney
Steve Roy. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on December
3, 1996, establishes the 1997 salary of the City Attorney.
16. Second Readinjof Ordinance No. 153 1996 Amending Section 2-596 of the Code of the
City of Fort Collins and Setting the Compensation of the City Manager,
183
December 17. 1996
City Council met in Executive Session to conduct the performance appraisal of City Manager
John Fischbach. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading on
December 3, 1996, establishes the salary and compensation provided the City Manager.
17. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 154, 1996, Amending Section 2-606 of the Code of the
City f Fort Collins and Setting the Compensation of the Municipal Judge.
City Council met in Executive Session to conduct the performance appraisal of Municipal
Judge Kathleen M. Lane. This Ordinance, which was unanimously adopted on First Reading
on December 3, 1996, establishes the 1997 salary of the Municipal Judge.
18. First Reading of Ordinance No. 156, 1996, Authorizing the Granting of a Non -Exclusive
Storm Drainage Easement on Legacy/Salyer Open Space to Charles L. Meserlian and
Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Conservation Trust Fund - Acquisition and
Development.
The development of "Levon's Warehouse and Office Building" will require stormwater
flows to cross the Legacy/Salyer Open Space. The easement is along the easterly 150 feet
of the site, which will allow storm drainage sheet flows to follow historical patterns across
the Legacy/Salyer Open Space. A topographic survey indicates there is a natural, subtle
depression across the Open Space that would discharge eventually to the Poudre River, about
1200 feet south. Allowing historical drainage patterns across the Legacy/Salyer Open Space
has been approved by Natural Resources, Stormwater, and CLRS staff. Staff believes that
sheet flow across the Legacy/Salyer Open Space is more desirable than construction of an
open channel.
19. First Reading of Ordinance No. 157, 1996 Approving the Terms of the Lease Agreement for
151 South College Avenue, Suite H.
In order to have this leased space become tax exempt, it is necessary to have Council approve
the terms of the lease by Ordinance. Transportation is consolidating its functions in the
downtown area, and as a result, a lease agreement has been negotiated for Transportation
Demand Management (Smartrips) to move into a 2,000 square foot facility at 151 S. College,
Suite H. The gross rental for this facility is $1,500 per month, including taxes, utilities and
insurance. This amount will be reduced once the leased space is removed from the tax rolls.
The amount will be determined by the Larimer County Assessor's Office. The City's other
responsibilities as Tenant will be for routine janitorial, maintenance, and insurance.
184
December 17, 1996
20. Items Relating to the Fort Collins Good Samaritan Village Annexation and Zoning,
A. Resolution 96-149 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the
Fort Collins Good Samaritan Village Annexation.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 158, 1996, Annexing Property Known as the Fort
Collins Good Samaritan Village Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 159, 1996, Amending the Zoning District Map
Contained in Chapter 29 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for
Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Fort Collins Good Samaritan Village
Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
This is a request to annex and zone 15.210 acres (includes public right-of-way), and zone it
R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential with a PUD condition. The existing, 4-story, Fort
Collins Good Samaritan Village building is located on the property which is currently zoned
R-2, Residential in the County. This is a 100% voluntary annexation to the City. The
annexation of this area is consistent with the policies and agreements between County and
the City contained in the INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR THE FORT
COLLINS URBAN GROWTH AREA.
APPLICANT: The Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society
c/o Ken Merritt
Landmark Engineering
3521 West Eisenhower Blvd.
Loveland, CO 80537
OWNER: The Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society
4800 W. 57th
Sioux Falls, SO 57117
21. First Reading of Ordinance No. 160. 1996, Amending Chapter 14, Article III by the Addition
of a New Subsection 14-48.5 Regarding Administrative Approval of Changes That Are Not
Detrimental to Designated Landmarks.
The Landmark Preservation Commission is recommending that the Landmark Code be
amended to allow for administrative approval of certain kinds of minor building alterations
including color selection, awning recovering and changes that would not affect the historic,
architectural or cultural character of a property (including such changes to rehabilitation
plans previously approved by the Landmark Preservation Commission).
185
December 17, 1996
22. Resolution 96-150 Committing the City to Act as Reviewing Entity for the State Income Tax
Credit Program for Qualifying Historic Rehabilitation Projects for 1997.
Staff and the Landmark Preservation Commission recommend adoption of a Resolution
committing the City to act as a reviewing entity for the State Income Tax Credit Program for
qualifying historic rehabilitation projects under Colorado House Bill 90-1033 (CRS 39-22-
514) and that the City waive the $250 initial Application Fee to encourage designation of
local landmarks and preservation of historically significant resources.
23. Resolution 96-140 of the City Council of Fort Collins Adopting the Guidelines for Initiating
and Developing Council Ordinances and Resolutions.
The guidelines are intended to provide a clearer and more explicit signal to the City Manager
and staff concerning starting the actual work on a resolution or ordinance. However,
background work or preliminary information on a particular policy issue or question may be
requested by any member of Council at any time -- typically, a request for preliminary
background information is made at a regular council meeting or at a Study Session as part
of "Other Business" by an individual Councilmember and the request is for a "two page
memorandum." The "livo page memorandum" is prepared by staff and sent to the full
Council when completed. This preliminary work may or may not result in Council directing
staff to proceed and initiate work on a particular ordinance or resolution.
24. Resolution 96-151 Making Appointments to Various Boards and Commissions.
A vacancy currently exists on the Commission on Status of Women due to the resignation
of Jennie Haarsager. Applications were solicited and Councilmembers Azari and Janett
interviewed the applicants. The interview team is recommending that Rebecca Fosha be
appointed with a term to begin immediately and to expire June 30, 2000.
A vacancy currently exists on the Housing Authority due to the resignation of Brian Kane.
Applications were solicited and interviews were conducted. Councilmembers Azari and
Janett are recommending Sharon Winfree fill the vacancy with a term to begin immediately
and to expire June 30, 1998.
Vacancies currently exist on the Human Relations Commission due to the resignations of
Betty Sutton and Daniel Cordova. Applications were solicited and Councilmembers Azari
and Janett interviewed applicants and are recommending that Joe Jaramillo and Joe Stem be
appointed to the Human Relations Commission with terms to begin immediately and to
expire June 30, 1999.
186
December 17, 1996
25. Routine Deeds and Easements.
A. Deed of Easement from Miramont Associates, Limited Liability Company, for the
purpose of a slope and utility easement for the widening of Lemay Avenue from
Boardwalk to Fossil Creek. Monetary consideration: $0.
B. Deed of Easement from Miramont Associates, Limited Liability Company, for the
purpose of a temporary construction easement for the widening of Lemay Avenue
from Boardwalk to Fossil Creek. Monetary consideration: $0.
C. Deed of Easement from Oak Farm, Inc., for the purpose of a 15 foot slope and utility
easement for the widening of Lemay Avenue from Boardwalk to Fossil Creek.
Monetary consideration: $0.
D. Deed of Easement from St. Elizabeth's Ann Seton Catholic Archdiocese of Denver
for the purpose of a slope and utility easement for the widening of Lemay Avenue
from Boardwalk to Fossil Creek. Monetary consideration: $0.
Items on Second Reading were read by title by City Clerk Wanda Krajicek.
8. Second Reading of Ordinance No 145, 1996 Vacating- a Portion of the Drainage Easement
on Chism Property.
9. Second Reading of Ordinance No 146 1996 Amending Ordinance No 24 1996 Retarding
the Landmark Rehabilitation Grant Pro rgram.
10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 147, 1996, Amending Chanter 26, Article IX. Section 26-
632 of the City Code Regarding the Deferral of Fees for Affordable Housing.
11. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 148, 1996, Appropriating $55.000 from the Use Tax
Carryover Reserve to Purchase a Surety Bond for the 1993 Sales and Use Tax Revenue
Refunding Bonds.
12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 149, 1996, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the
Benefits Fund to Cover Medical Insurance Claims.
13. Second Reading of Ordinance No 150 1996 Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the
General Fund for the Fort Collins Police Services Substance Abuse Prevention Program
14. Second Reading of Ordinance No 151. 1996 Amending Chapter 2 Division III of the City
Code Pertaining to the Procedure for Hearing Appeals to the City Council
IF%
December 17. 1996
15. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 152, 1996, Amending Section 2-581 of the Code of the
City of Fort Collins and Setting the Compensation of the City Attorney.
16. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 153, 1996, Amending Section 2-596 of the Code of the
City of Fort Collins and Setting the Compensation of the City Manager.
17. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 154, 1996, Amending Section 2-606 of the Code of the
City of Fort Collins and Setting the Compensation of the Municipal Judge.
Items on First Reading were read by title by City Clerk Wanda Krajicek.
18. First Reading of Ordinance No. 156, 1996, Authorizing the Granting of a Non -Exclusive
Storm Drainage Easement on Legacy/Salyer Open Space to Charles L. Meserlian and
Appropriating Unanticipated Revenue in the Conservation Trust Fund - Acquisition and
Development.
19. First Reading of Ordinance No. 157, 1996 Approving the Terms of the Lease Agreement for
151 South College Avenue, Suite H.
20. Items Relating to the Fort Collins Good Samaritan Village Annexation and Zoning,
A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 158, 1996, Annexing Property Known as the Fort
Collins Good Samaritan Village Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 159, 1996, Amending the Zoning District Map
Contained in Chapter 29 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for
Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Fort Collins Good Samaritan Village
Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
21. First Reading of Ordinance No. 160, 1996, Amending Chapter 14, Article III by the Addition
of a New Subsection 14-48.5 Regarding Administrative Approval of Changes That Are Not
Detrimental to Designated Landmarks.
29. Items Relating to the Provision for the Review and Processing of Land Use Applicants and
Establishing a Temporary Delay in the Acceptance of Certain Land Use Applicants Through
March 31. 1997 (Options A & B),
Qption "A": First Reading of Ordinance No. 161, 1996, of The Council of The City of Fort
Collins Providing For The Review and Processing of Pending Land Use Applications and
Establishing a Temporary Delay in The Acceptance of Certain Land Use Applications
Through March 31, 1997.
188
December 17, 1996
Option "B": First Reading of Ordinance No. 161, 1996, of The Council of The City of Fort
Collins Providing For The Review and Processing of Pending Land Use Applications and
Establishing a Temporary Delay in The Acceptance of Certain Land Use Applications
Through March 31, 1997.
30. Items Pertaining to the REA Annexation and Zoning,
A. Option A: First Reading of Ordinance No. 162, 1996, Annexing Property Known as
the REA Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
Option B: First Reading of Ordinance No. 162, 1996, Annexing Property Known as
the REA Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado (with direction to delete
paragraph 4 of the Annexation Agreement).
B. Option A: First Reading of Ordinance No. 163, 1996, Amending the Zoning District
Map Contained in Chapter 29 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying
for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the REA Annexation to the City of Fort
Collins, Colorado, Into the HB-Highway Zoning District, with a PUD Condition.
Option B: First Reading of Ordinance No. 163, 1996, Amending the Zoning District
Map Contained in Chapter 29 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying
for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the REA Annexation to the City of Fort
Collins, Colorado, Into the CL-Limited Commercial Zoning District.
31. Items Relating to Citizen Initiated Ordinance Relating to the Establishment of a Permanent
Citizens Review Board to Review Citizen Complaints of Police Misconduct.
A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 155, 1996, Amending Section 2 of the Fort Collins
City Code to Establish a Citizens Review Board and to Provide for its Powers, Duties
and Responsibilities; OR
B. Resolution 96-152 Referring a Citizen Initiated Ordinance Relating to the Registered
Electors of the City at the April 8, 1997, Regular Municipal Election.
Councilmember McCluskey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Smith, to adopt and
approve all items not removed from the Consent Agenda. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari,
Kneeland, Janett, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
If:�
December 17. 1996
Items Relating to the Fort Collins Good
Samaritan Village Annexation and Zoning, Adopted.
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
"Executive Summary
A. Resolution 96-149 Setting Forth Findings oj'Fact and Determinations Regarding the Fort
Collins Good Samaritan Village Annexation.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 158, 1996, Annexing Property Known as the Fort Collins
Good Samaritan Village Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 159, 1996, Amending the Zoning District Map Contained
in Chapter 29 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes
the Property Included in the Fort Collins Good Samaritan Village Annexation to the City of
Fort Collins, Colorado.
This is a request to annex and zone 15.210 acres (includes public right-of-way), and zone it R-L-P,
Low Density Planned Residential with a PUD condition. The existing, 4-story, Fort Collins Good
Samaritan Village building is located on the property which is currently zoned R-2, Residential in
the County. This is a 100% voluntary annexation to the City. The annexation of this area is
consistent with the policies and agreements between County and the City contained in the
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR THE FORT COLLINS URBAN GROWTH
AREA. Please refer to the attached memo from Mike Herzig, Development Engineering Manager
to Mike Ludwig, City Planner for further information regarding the annexation of adjacent right-of-
way (Constellation Drive).
APPLICANT: The Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society
clo Ken Merritt
Landmark Engineering
3521 West Eisenhower Blvd.
Loveland, CO 80537
OWNER: The Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society
4800 W. 57th
Sioux Falls, SD 57117
BACKGROUND:
The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
ILP
December 17, 1996
N: FA (County); existing single-family residential (Skyview Acres and Skyview South
Subdivisions).
S: r-1 p (City); existing single-family residential (Ridgewood Hills PUD).
W. FA (County); existing single-family residential (Fossil Crest Subdivision),
E: FA (County); existing single-family residential (Skyview Acres South Subdivision).
The applicant, Mr. Ken Merritt, Landmark Engineering, on behalf of The Evangelical Lutheran
Good Samaritan Society, has submitted a written petition requesting annexation and zoning for a
parcel known as the Fort Collins Good Samaritan Village Annexation and Zoning. Any existing
commercial signs on the property will have to conform to the City's Sign Code at the conclusion of
a five year amortization period.
The property is located at the northwest corner of West Trilby Road and Constellation Drive and
is therefore located within the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area. According to the policies and
agreements between the City of Fort Collins and Lorimer County contained in the
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR THE FORT COLLINS URBAN GROWTH
AREA, the City will consider the annexation ofproperty in the UGA when the property is eligible
for annexation according to State law. The property satisfies the required one -sixth (116) contiguity
to existing City limits as its southern boundary (690) is common with the north line of the Timan
First Annexation.
Over the next 10 to 20 years, the Fort Collins Good Samaritan Society proposes to build
approximately 40 assisted care duplex residential units; 5 0-60 assisted care apartment units; critical
care nursing facilities; a physical therapy center; and associated support facilities on the property.
Accordingly, the requested zoning for this annexation is R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential
with a PUD condition.
Section 29-146 of the City Code states:
"The R-L-P Low Density Planned Residential District is for areas planned as a unit to
provide variation in use, density and building placement. "
The requested P. U.D. condition would require any development proposal for this property to be
reviewed against the criteria of the LAND DEVELOPMENT GUIDANCE SYSTEM (LDGS).
The requested R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential Zoning with a P.U.D. condition is in
conformance with a number ofpolicies contained in the City's Comprehensive Plan. Some examples
offrom the City's Comprehensive Plan are as follows:
From the Goals and Objectives document:
Encourage new residential construction within and adjacent to areas where adequate
facilities and services exist.
191
December 17, 1996
Urban development in the urban service area should be consistent -with the provision of
utilities, schools, parks, and other public services and preferably contiguous to existing
development.
Encourage urban density residential development to occur within the City, phased urban
density residential development in the urban service area, and rural development beyond the
urban service area.
The above themes are repeated in the following policies from the Land Use Policies Plan:
#3a The City shall promote maximum utilization of land within the City.
#12 Urban density residential development usually at three or more units to the acre
should be encouraged in the urban growth area.
#20 Land use, site planning, and urban design criteria shall be developed to promote
pleasant, functional and understandable inter -relationships through and between
land uses.
(Note: Any development proposal will be reviewed against the All -Development
Criteria of the LDGS to ensure this policy is satisfied.)
422 Preferential consideration shall be given to urban development proposals which are
contiguous to existing development within the city limits or consistent with the
phasing plan for the City's urban growth area.
(Note: Ridgewood Hills is directly south of this property)
426 Availability ofexisting services shall be used as a criteria in determining the location
of higher intensity areas in the City.
(Note: Adequate and existing utility services are present on and adjacent to the site.)
#75 Residential areas should provide for a mix of housing densities.
(Note: See above reference to Section 29-146 of the City Code for the definition of
the R-L-P zoning district. In addition, the P. U.D. process will allow the potential for
a range of residential densities.)
478 Residential development should be directed into areas which reinforce the phasing
plan in the urban growth area.
192
December 17, 1996
(Note: The Intergovernmental Agreement requires property in the UGA which is
eligible to be annexed and proposed to be developed to petition the City for
Annexation)
#82 Higher density residential uses should locate in planned unit developments or in
close proximity to existing higher density areas.
Staff believes that the requested R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential with a PUD condition
zoning is in conformance with the policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Please refer to the attached memo from Mike Herzig, Development Engineering Manager to Mike
Ludwig, City Planner for further information regarding the annexation of adjacent right-of-way
(Constellation Drive).
FINDINGS:
1. The annexation of this area is consistent with the policies and agreements between Larimer
County and the City of Fort Collins contained in the INTERGOVERNMENTAL
AGREEMENT FOR THE FORT COLLINS URBAN GROWTH AREA.
2. The area meets all criteria required by State law to quay for a voluntary annexation to the
City of Fort Collins.
3. On November 5, 1996, the City Council approved a Resolution which accepted the
annexation petition and determined that the petition is in compliance with State law.
d. On November 25, 1996, the Planning and Zoning Board voted unanimously to recommend
approval of the annexation and zoning request.
5. The requested R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential zoning is in conformance with the
policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
6. It is further recommended that the zoning carry a condition that the property will develop
as a Planned Unit Development (P. U D.) in accordance with the LAND DEVELOPMENT
GUIDANCE SYSTEM.
The Sign District Map adopted pursuant to Section 29-593.1 of the Code of the City of Fort
Collins should be changed and amended to show that the subject property is included in the
Residential Neighborhood Sign District.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the annexation of the property and requested zoning.
193
December 17, 1996
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning and Zoning Board, at its regular monthly meeting on November 25, 1996, voted 7-0
to recommend approval of the annexation of the property and requested zoning. "
City Planner Mike Ludwig gave the staff presentation on this item.
Councilmember McCloskey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Apt, to adopt Resolution
96-149.
Al Baccili, 520 Galaxy Court, stated he did not oppose the annexation but requested the City be
responsible for upkeep and maintenance of Constellation Drive and spoke of increased traffic that
would occur in the area.
Ludwig spoke of the City's annexation policies and stated rights -of -way adjacent to the property
have been included in the annexation. He clarified the City does not typically annex rights -of -way
that are not adjacent or part of the annexation. He stated the City would not be obligated to replace
the road if replacement was needed.
Councilmember Smith made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Apt, to adopt Ordinance No.
158, 1996 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Kneeland, Janett, McCluskey,
Smith and Wanner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Kneeland made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Apt, to adopt Ordinance No.
159, 1996 on First Reading. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Kneeland, Janett, McCluskey,
Smith and Wanner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Staff Reports
City Attorney Steve Roy congratulated John Duval on his recent award for "Outstanding Assistant
City Attorney".
Assistant City Attorney John Duval thanked Council for its recognition.
Councilmember Reports
Councilmember Apt reported the Growth Management Committee met and discussed transition
options for implementation of City Plan and stated this compromise was arrived at after receiving
feedback from homebuilders, developers and others.
194
December 17. 1996
Councilmember Smith stated the MPO met and discussed ways to reduce single vehicle occupant
use. He reported on a meeting scheduled to discuss the Harmony Road/I-25 interchange. He spoke
of a long range planning effort for I-25 corridor improvements and how federal, state, and local
funds would be used to make it a more effective transportation corridor.
Mayor Azari asked if anyone on Council was interested in serving on the National League of Cities
Policy Committee or Steering Committee and spoke of a NLC meeting she recently attended. She
reported the U.S. Conference of Mayors held a task force meeting and discussed welfare reform and
stated she would like to meet with human service providers as a result of that meeting.
Items Relating to the Provision for
the Review and Processing of Land Use Applicants and
Establishing a Temporay Delay in the Acceptance of Certain
Land Use Applicants Through March 31, 1997 (Options A & B),
Option C Adopted as Amended on First Reading,
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
"Executive Summary
Option "A ": First Reading of Ordinance No. 161, 1996, of The Council of The City of Fort Collins
Providing For The Review and Processing of Pending Land Use Applications and Establishing a
Temporary Delay in The Acceptance of Certain Land Use Applications Through March 31, 1997.
Option"B": First Reading of Ordinance No. 161,1996, of The Council of The City ofFort Collins
Providing For The Review and Processing of Pending Land Use Applications and Establishing a
Temporary Delay in The Acceptance of Certain Land Use Applications Through March 31, 1997.
BACKGROUND:
Two options are beingpresented for Council's consideration with regard to the transition from the
City's existing land use regulations into the new land use code. Both options would establish a
temporary delay in the acceptance of new land use applications through March 31, 1997. Both
options would also provide that existing preliminary PUD's and preliminary subdivision plats would
remain in effect for one year from the effective date of the ordinance or their original expiration
date, whichever is sooner. Option "A " would require all final PUD plans and subdivision plats that
are filed after the effective date of the new land use code to conform to all provisions of the new land
use code except those pertaining to land use layout and densities. Option "B " would permit all such
plans to be processed under the existing provisions of the Code.
At its December 2, 1996 meeting, the Growth Management Committee discussed the problems
inherent in the transition from one set of land use regulatory codes to another. City Plan proposes
a complete rewrite of the City's development regulations, not merely amendments to existing codes.
Staff is now at the point in the process where the policy language is adopted, and the bulk of the
195
December 17, 1996
implementing regulations have been drafted or discussed with Council. Two city-wide open houses
on the new regulations are complete, and adoption of these new regulations is in sight, scheduled
for the two regular meetings in March 1997.
The Planning and Zoning Board discussed the transition period at its work session on December
6, 1996. The Board will take it up at its December 13 work session and consider a formal
recommendation on December 16. Staff will report the Planning and Zoning Board action to
Council at the meeting on December 17.
Any time a community makes a transition from one system to another, it creates a number of
problems that must be dealt with. Staff is beginning to receive many questions f•om those involved
in the development review process about how the transition to the new system will be handled. How
long will we continue to receive applications under the LDGS? What is the effect of adopted
elements of City Plan on current applications? How long will approvals received in the coming
months be vested, if at all?
In addition to the predictable frictions in transition from one system to another, the CPES staff have
identified other problems that should also be considered.
We received an unusual number of applications under the LDGS at the November filing
deadline —sixteen. The previous three months had seen about five applications per month.
The previous year we averaged about eleven per month. If this rate continues during the
four remaining application deadlines (December through March), staff members will not
have adequate time to devote to the implementation work plan to meet the March deadlines
for City Plan. In addition, new preliminary submittals received during this time frame
almost certainly be caught in the transition between the two systems.
We are concerned that significant land parcels key to the success of City Plan goals may
come under development proposals that are at odds with the direction set by the new
Structure Plan, Principles and Policies and Proposed Zoning.
We need to establish a firm time frame for "sunsetting" the LDGS procedures. No matter
how we transition from one system to another, the Planning and Zoning Board and staff will
be required to operate for some period of time under two systems. Projects will be processed
under one or the other depending upon when applications were received, the length of time
prior approval steps are vested, and other similar considerations. It makes sense to
minimize the length of time that the two systems are required to operate side by side.
Councilmembers have asked about the volume of applications currently in the system that will be
affected by any decision during this transition period. Currently there are approximately 36 PUDs
in the "pipeline ". These include those which have preliminary approvals, but not finals (19); those
which have been granted final approvals on part of the development (7); and preliminary
applications not yet heard by the P&Z Board (10).
196
December 17. 1996
Staff has also been asked for the number of approved, platted, vacant, single-family lots that are
available for new building permits. Our best information is drawn from the inventory done for the
Structure Plan earlier this year. At that time there were approximately 2,650 lots available for
which no building permit had been issued.
To address this transition period, and the problems it presents both for applicants and the City
organization, the City Plan consultants and staff considered a variety of options. Staff recommends
Council act to clarify the mechanics of the transition period.
It is important to note that there are both individual and community interests involved in how we
make the transition. It is impossible to know how many private property owners may be preparing
applications, taking out loans on property, or other normal actions associated with land
development and management. It is certain that some of these plans or actions will be frustrated
by the change -over to a new system, no nutter what course the City adopts. On the other hand, the
broader community goals contained in the City Plan documents should be implemented in as timely
a manner as possible, with minimal carryover of conflicting development proposals.
Thus, the challenge presented in devising a mechanism for transitioning into the proposed new
regulatouy system has been to avoid undue delay or administrative disruption, while still respecting
the interests of affected property owners.
OPTIONA:
Two optional ordinances have been prepared for Council's consideration. Option "A", the
proposal initially recommended by staff and the Growth Management Committee, contains the
following provisions:
Existing approved and pending ODPs would be of no f urther effect as of January 17,
1997, except to the extent that such ODPs are necessary to review preliminary PUD
applications filed prior to January 17, 1997, the anticipated effective date of the
Ordinance.
2. Preliminary PUDs and preliminary subdivision plats that were filed prior to the
effective date of the ordinance and approved by the City before or after the effective
date would remain in effect for one (1) year from that date or the original expiration
date of the preliminary PUD or preliminary subdivision, whichever is sooner.
However, the following conditions would apply:
a. Any portions of the preliminary PUD or preliminary subdivision plat not
covered by the filing of a final PUD or final subdivision plat before the end
of the foregoing period of time ivould expire;
b. If the final PUD or subdivision plat application is filed after the effective date
of the new land use code, the final PUD or subdivision plat would not only
197
December 17, 1996
have to conform to the preliminary PUD or subdivision plat, but it would
also have to conform to all of the applicable new criteria in the land use code
(except those criteria pertaining to land use layout and densities with respect
to PUDs); and
C. If a property owner or developer claims a common law right to have the
original effective period of the preliminary PUD or subdivision plat remain
in force, or a right to have the final plan or plat reviewed solely tender the
existing code provisions (rather than under the new land use code), that
person would be able to utilize a vested rights determination process and
seek a determination as to whether such right had, in fact, vested.
3. Final PUDs and other site specific development plans that receive approval prior to
or after the effective date of the new land use code would remain in effect for three
(3) years, subject to the provisions of Section 29-514 of the City Code, pertaining to
vested property rights.
4. As of the effective date of the ordinance, the only land use applications that would
be accepted by the City for filing, review and processing would be: (a) applications
for final PUD plans and final subdivision plats for which preliminary PUD plans or
preliminary subdivision plats have been approved by the City, and (b) applications
for building permits submitted pursuant to any approved "site specific development
plan " as defined in Section 29-512 of the Code. As of that date, and until April 1,
1997, the City would not accept for filing, review or processing any other new land
use applications, including, without limitation, applications for ODPs, preliminary
PUD plans, preliminary subdivision plats, special site plan reviews, or building
permits other than those issued pursuant to a site specific development plan.
Completed applications for ODPs, preliminary PUDs, preliminary subdivision plats,
special site plan reviews and building permits other than those issued pursuant to a
site -specific development plan filed before the effective date of the ordinance would
be reviewed under the applicable provisions of the existing Code. If a final PUD or
subdivision plat application is then filed after the effective date of the new land use
code, the final PUD or subdivision plat would not only have to conform to the
approved preliminary PUD or subdivision plat but it would also have to conform to
all of the applicable new criteria in the land use code except, with respect to PUDs,
those provisions pertaining to land use layout and densities.
OPTION B:
Option "B, " which was developed after further staffdiscussion with the Planning and Zoning Board
and Growth Management Committee, would differ from Option "A" in that all final PUD plans and
subdivision plats that are filed prior to expiration date of the preliminary PUD plans and
.subdivision plats would be reviewed and processed by City staff and/or the Planning and Zoning
Board under the existing provisions of the City Code. In order to guard against the filing of
198
December 17. 1996
placeholder" applications that are not actually ready for review, a provision has been added to
Option "B" to ensure that completed applications for• PUD plans and subdivision plats are not
subject to amendment by the applicant without concurrence of the Community Planning and
Environmental Services Director and are reviewed by staff andlor the Planning and Zoning Board
as soon as the Director determines that they are ready for such review.
VARIATIONS:
In addition to these two options, the Growth Management Committee, the Planning and Zoning
Board, and staff reviewed two variations, either or both of which could be applied to either of the
options.
First, both'options call for a one-year effective period for new preliminary approvals, during which
a final PUD application must be filed to be considered (Section 2). This period could be shortened
to six months. This would have the advantage of shortening the period when the P&Z Board must
operate under two land use codes simultaneously. It would also discourage developers from
submitting preliminary applications that could not reasonably be immediately pursued to final
application.
Second, both options call for a suspension in the acceptance of new applications for preliminary
approvals between the effective date of the ordinance and the effective date of the new land use code
(Section S). Under either option, this delay in the acceptance ofpreliminaries could be omitted from
the ordinance, leaving all other sections dealing with the other aspects of the transition period
(expiration ofpreliminaries, finals, and site specific development plans) This would likely increase
the number ofprojects in transition, but would allow applications now beingprepared additional
time to be submitted.
Under either option, a development proposal that is "caught in the transition " could be withdrawn
and resubmitted under the new standards, after their effective date. There could be advantages for
doing so, as the draft regulations are currently constituted. Many of the land uses in the new
regulations will be approved administratively, with greater reliance on clear standards written into
the code."
Councilmember Apt made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Wanner, to adopt Ordinance No.
161, 1996, Option C on First Reading.
Director of Community Planning and Environmental Services Greg Byrne gave the staff report on
this item and stated Option C was drafted by the Growth Management Committee. He spoke of the
difficulty in making a transition from one set of regulations to another and reported new Land Use
Code is scheduled for adoption in March of 1997. He spoke of existing ODPs which have received
approval by the Planning and Zoning Board. He stated Option C addresses how new applications,
preliminary applications, site review and PUDs are received for processing, and if received after
January 17, 1997, six months would be the time -frame allowed to submit final application. He
responded to Council questions and stated preliminary approval often means a significant financial
199
December 17, 1996
and time investment has been made. He commented final approvals can take up to three years,
according to state law and the City Code. He stated it is not uncommon for a large development plan
to be presented in preliminary phases.
City Attorney Steve Roy reported the Homebuilders Association has requested a variance of the
vested rights determination process and reviewed the definition of vested rights, noting fees could
be refunded to the applicants. He stated it may be possible for the project to proceed under the
existing rules and added the determination would be made by the hearing officer on a case -by -case
basis. He and clarified that the decision could be appealed to Council.
Councilmember Wanner offered an amendment directing staff between First and Second Reading
of the Ordinance, to add language stating that an exemption or extension be made for affordable
housing projects. Councilmember Apt as maker of the motion, accepted the amendment as a friendly
amendment to his previous motion.
City Attorney Steve Roy read Option C into the record.
Rene Clements, 606 Pronty Court and representing the Chamber of Commerce Local Legislative
Affairs Committee, spoke of LLAC's concerns regarding the timing of presenting this Ordinance
(ie., holidays) and believed City Plan should be in place before transitioning occurs.
Lucia Liley, 110 E. Oak, spoke of the need to transition between plans and the difficulty in achieving
that goal. She suggested between First and Second Reading Council review what constitutes a
complete application and how vested rights apply to approved ODPs and preliminaries which have
phasing.
Frank Vaught, Vaught -Frye Architects, expressed concerns regarding timing and the necessity of
a transition.
Dan Jensen, Jensen Homes, expressed concerns regarding the amount of money he has invested in
infrastructure on a development currently in progress.
Eldon Ward, Cityscape Urban Design and member of CPAC, spoke of concerns regarding the
uncertainty of the upcoming rules and urged Council to use caution in proceeding with the Plan.
Bridgitte Schmidt, 932 Ivemess Street, representing the northeast neighborhood coalition, spoke of
development submittals what have taken a long time for the developer and residents to agree on. She
urged Council review existing ODPs before terminating them.
Susan Nabors, 905 E. Swallow #8 and member of the Affordable Housing Board, stated the
Affordable Housing Board would like to review the City Plan before the Ordinance is adopted and
spoke of its effect on affordable housing.
200
December 17, 1996
Dave Osborn, 217 W. Olive, urged Council to grant existing ODPs exemptions due to vested rights
interests.
Director of the Fort Collins Housing Authority Rochelle Stephens urged Council to exempt
affordable housing projects nearing the development stage.
Stan Whittacker, LGT Real Estate Advisors, spoke of upcoming projects that would be subject to
three year vesting on the preliminary approval and spoke of the amount of money invested in
infrastructure. He urged Council recognize infrastructure investments.
Mark Goldberg, real estate developer, expressed timing concerns under existing rules and requested
consideration be given to commercial development.
Tom Horn, 1601 Quail Hollow Drive and Planning Consultant, opposed implementation of phasing
until City Plan is adopted stating there are still too many unanswered questions.
Bruce Lockhart, 2500 E. Harmony Road, stated he did not support adoption of City Plan and spoke
of the impact a moratorium would have on renters.
Jim Harmon, PrideMark Development, urged Council to not "sunset" ODPs and expressed concerns
regarding fairness and equity.
Don Parsons, 432 Link Lane, stated the transition period was not long enough.
Carl Glaser, architect, did not believe a transition period was necessary. He suggested projects
which began under the old process remain there.
Lou Stitzel, 512 E. Laurel and representing TRAC Housing, spoke of the need to expedite projects
currently underway.
Kim Maevers, Northern Colorado Homebuilder's Association, stated there were many issues to be
resolved ie., vesting rights, cost impacts, and unanswered questions regarding City Plan.
Mark Palcowitz, developer, opposed adoption of Option C and expressed concerns regarding
approved ODPs. He urged Council review the issue before Second Reading and consider
grandfathering existing rights.
Jim Sell, Jim Sell Designs, did not believe there was a need for a transition period. He spoke of the
difficulty in making adjustments after ODP approval, stating those ODPs should remain under the
existing LDGS.
Chris Ricard, a Fort Collins resident, spoke in support of City Plan and complimented staff for its
hard work on the Plan.
201
December ]7, 1996
City Attorney Steve Roy stated parties affected by adoption of the Ordinance would be eligible to
apply for a hearing with the Hearing Officer.
Councilmember Apt asked that before Second Reading, staff look at providing some form of
certainty for those with vested rights interests and develop criteria that would be used for vested
rights.
Byrne spoke of the need for a transitioning period for existing ODPs, stating they are planning
documents which do not have the same level of private investment.
City Attorney Steve Roy suggested Council consider applying the moratorium to only entirely new
preliminary applications which are not pursuant to an approved ODP.
Councilmember McCloskey stated he believed the vested rights process leaves people with too much
uncertainty and supported a clearer definition of the process. He stressed the need to help the
community through the process.
Councilmember Kneeland opposed the motion and spoke of its effect on affordable housing in the
City. She objected to concerns that people would be rushing to submit plans for approval and
believed there were too many unanswered questions to adopt the Ordinance.
Mayor Azari thanked staff and the Growth Management Committee for simplifying the information
given to Council and supported the Committee's recommendation.
Councilmember Apt supported adopting the ordinance and spoke of the need to move ahead. He
stated it wouldn't be fair to citizens or staff to not make a definite decision regarding transitioning.
He thanked staff, the Growth Management Committee and Homebuilder's Association for their input
and work.
The vote on Councilmember Apt's motion to adopt Ordinance No. 161, Option C as amended on
First Reading was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Janett, Smith and Wanner. Nays:
Councilmembers Azari, Kneeland and McCluskey.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Items Pertaining to the REA
Annexation and Zoning. Adopted on First Reading
The following is staff's memorandum on this item.
"Executive Summary
Staff is recommending that this property be excluded from the Residential Neighborhood Sign
District. Properties along South College Avenue have been excluded from the District, since this
202
December 17, 1996
area is a community/regional shopping and business service uses corridor that is not planned to
provide neighborhood -oriented land uses. A map amendment would be necessary to place this
property on the Residential Neighborhood Sign District Map.
The Planning and Zoning Board, on November 25, 1996, voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the
annexation. The Board voted 6-1 to recommend zoning the property HB - Highway Business, with
a PUD condition. The Staff Report, with attachments, that went to the Board is attached to this
agenda item summary.
The Planning and Zoning Board voted 7-0 to recommend that Paragraph 4, a Disconnection Clause,
be struck from the Annexation Agreement that is attached to the Petition.
The Planning and Zoning Board voted 7-0 to recommend that this property be excluded from the
Residential Neighborhood Sign District.
A. Resolution 96-153 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the REA
Annexation.
B. Option A: First Reading of Ordinance No. 162, 1996, Annexing Property Known as the REA
Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado.
Opt ion B: First Reading of Ordinance No. 162, 1996, Annexing Property Known as the REA
Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado (with direction to delete paragraph 4 of the
Annexation Agreement).
C. Option A: First Reading of Ordinance No. 163, 1996, Amending the Zoning District Map Contained
in Chapter 29 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning
Purposes the Property Included in the REA Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Into
the IIB-Highway Zoning District, with a PUD Condition.
Option B: First Reading of Ordinance No. 163, 1996, Amending the Zoning District Map
Contained in Chapter 29 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning
Purposes the Property Included in the REA Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado,
Into the CL-Limited Commercial Zoning District.
This is a request to annex and zone 9.39 acres located on the west side of South College Avenue,
south of Harmony Road and the Arbor Plaza Shopping Center, and north of Fossil Creek Nursery.
The Burlington Northern Railroad is adjacent along the west property line. The requested zoning
is CL -Limited Commercial Zoning District with no PUD condition. The expressed purpose of this
request is to develop an automobile sales business for the Spradley-Barr dealership that currently
operates at the southwest corner of South College Avenue and Drake Road. The property is
developed, having been the headquarters for Poudre Valley REA for many years, and it is in the
Business and Commercial Zoning Districts in Larimer County. This is a 100% voluntary
annexation.
203
APPLICANT: Spradley-Barr
c% Cityscape Urban Design, Inc.
3555 Stanford Road, Suite 105
Fort Collins, CO. 80525
OWNER: Poudre Valley REA
7649 REA Parkway
Fort Collins, CO. 80528
BACKGROUND:
The applicant, Spradley-Barr, c% Cityscape Urban Design, Inc, on behalf of the property owners,
Poudre Valley REA, has submitted a written petition requesting annexation of 9.39 acres located
on the west side of South College Avenue, south of Harmony Road and the Arbor Plaza Shopping
Center, and north of Fossil Creek Nursery. The Burlington Northern Railroad is adjacent along the
west property line. This is a 100% voluntary annexation.
The property is currently developed, having been the headquarters for Poudre Valley REA for many
years, and is zoned B - Business (on the front 113, about 300' of lot depth) and C - Commercial (on
the back 213) in Larimer County. The County's Business Zone is for most retail, office, and service
uses. This zone does not allow automobile sales and is more restrictive than the Commercial Zone.
Automobile sales are a permitted use in the Commercial Zone. This is a more permissive zone for
more intense commercial activities.
The property is located within the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area. According to policies and
agreements between the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County contained in the Intergovernmental
Agreement for the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area. the City will agree to consider annexation of
property in the UGA when the property is eligible for annexation according to State Law. This
property complies with State regulations by meeting the requirement for 116 contiguity to existing
Citylimits. This occurs through common boundaries with the Arbor Commercial Annexation (May,
1981) to the north and the Fairway Estates Business Annexation (January, 1981) to the east.
This property was the subject of an annexation and zoning request in late 1993. That application
included a request for the HB - Highway Business Zoning District. Staff recommended HB with a
PUD condition. The Planning and Zoning Board recommended HB with a PUD condition. City
Council action was to approve annexation of the property at first reading and postpone
consideration of the zoning. The applicant withdrew the application for annexation and zoning after
this action was taken.
The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows
N.• HB; existing shopping center (Arbor Plaza PUD)
E: BL; existing various business and commercial uses
S: T-Tourist in Larimer County; existing business (Fossil Creek Nursery)
W.• FA -Farming in Larimer County
204
Issues and Analysis:
The zoning requested for this annexation by the petitioner is the CL - Limited Commercial Zoning
District. The expressed purpose of this request is to develop an automobile sales business for the
Spradlcy-Barr dealership that currently operates at the southwest corner of South College Avenue
and Drake Road. Automobile sales is a permitted "use -by -right" in this District. There are
numerous other uses permitted in the CL District.
As a permitted use in the CL Zoning District, an application must be made to the Director of
Planning which includes a Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations complying with
the Land Development Guidance System (LDGS). In reviewing the application, the Director holds
an administrative review hearing. Written notice ofsuch hearing is given to owners ofrecord ofall
real property within a minimum of 500' of the subject property. City Code permits the Planning
Director to refer the item to the Planning and Zoning Board if the Director determines that the
proposal raises issues that require further public hearing and discussion, or if any party -in -interest
requests such referral. Appeals of the Director's decision may be taken by any party -in -interest to
the Planning and Zoning Board.
As an alternative, a PUD may be submitted in the CL Zoning District. This would be reviewed by
the Planning and Zoning Board. However, the applicant is requesting the CL Zoning District with
no PUD condition attached. The options for recommending a zoning designation with the
annexation are:
Granting the zoning district as requested by the applicant (CL - Limited Commercial
with no PUD condition).
Granting the zoning district as recommended by staff (HB - Highway Business with
a PUD condition).
Granting any one of the other zoning districts that are available in the City of Fort
Collins Zoning Ordinance.
4. Attaching a PUD condition to the zoning district.
5. Requiring an annexation agreement between the applicant and the City.
6. Imposing zoning conditions.
The applicant has submitted a proposed Annexation Agreement with the Petition that includes, in
paragraph 4, a disconnection clause that states:
"In the event any ordinance becomes effective in the City within twenty years after the
effective date ofthe annexation ordinance, and such ordinance alters and limits any Owner's
right to use the Property as contemplated by this Agreement, then the City, upon written
request of Owner, will proceed to take all necessary action to immediately disconnect of the
Property from the City's boundaries, and the Property may not be annexed subsequently
except by voluntary petition by the Owner. "
205
If the Council initially approves CL zoning for this property, but within 20 years after such approval
the Council alters the zoning of the property in any way, the language of this paragraph would allow
the property owner to disconnect this property from the City, possibly creating a perpetual enclave
within the City limits. The Planning and Zoning Board considered this disconnection clause and
voted 7-0 to recommend to City Council that this paragraph be stricken from the proposed
Annexation Agreement. A copy of the Agreement is attached to the Petition and this agenda item
summary.
Staff believes that the CL - Limited Commercial Zoning District was adopted by City Council in
1991 to specifically address issues at that time related to the existing and proposed land uses in the
Riverside Avenue corridor. In fact, this is the only area in the City where CL zoning exists.
Properties surrounding the subject property on South College Avenue are in the hb - Highway
Business, BL - Limited Business, and BP - Planned Business Zoning Districts. Staff is
recommending that the property be placed in the HB - Highway Business Zoning District with a
PUD condition attached. It is staff's opinion that even though automobile sales is not expressly
permitted in the HB Zoning District, it meets the intent of the District by being an automobile -
oriented business. The PUD condition could allow automobile sales and provide for adequate staff
and public review of any development submittal. Regardless of the proposed land use, the HB
Zoning District with a PUD condition is most appropriate in this location based on adjacent zoning
to the north and the location along South College Avenue.
Staff is recommending that this property be excluded from the Residential Neighborhood Sign
District, which was established for the purpose ofregulatingsigns for non-residential uses in certain
geographical areas of the City which may be particularly affected by such signs because of their
predominantly residential use and character. Properties along South College Avenue have been
excluded from the District, since this area is a community/regional shopping and business service
uses corridor that is not planned to provide neighborhood -oriented land uses. A map amendment
would be necessary to place this property on the Residential Neighborhood Sign District Map.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the annexation and recommends that the property be placed in the
HB - Highway Business Zoning District with a PUD condition.
Stafffinds that the annexation request is appropriate for the following reasons:
1. The annexation of this area is consistent with the policies and agreements between Larimer
County and the City of Fort Collins contained in the Intergovernmental Agreement for the Fort
Collins Urban Growth Area.
2. The area meets the eligibility requirements included in State law to qualify for a voluntary
annexation to the City of Fort Collins.
3. On November S, 1996, the City Council considered and approved a resolution determining
that the proposed annexation process for this property by establishing the date, time, and
206
place ivhen a public hearing will be held regarding the readings of the Ordinances annexing
and zoning the area.
Staff is recommending that this property be excluded front the Residential Neighborhood Sign
District. Properties along South College Avenue have been excluded from the District, since this
area is a community/regional shopping and business service uses corridor that is not planned to
provide neighborhood -oriented land uses. A map amendment would be necessary to place this
property on the Residential Neighborhood Sign District Map.
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning and Zoning Board, at its regular monthly meeting of November 25, 1996, voted 7-0
to recommend approval of the annexation. The Board voted 6-1 to recommend approval to zone the
property HB - Highway Business, ivith a PUD condition. Regardless offuture development, it was
their opinion that development review should before the Planning and Zoning Board and be
evaluated against the requirements of the LDGS.
The Planning and Zoning Board voted 7-0 to recommend that paragraph 4, a disconnection clause,
be struck from the Annexation Agreement that is attached to the Petition.
The Planning and Zoning Board voted 7-0 to recommend that this property be excluded fr-oin the
Residential Neighborhood Sign District. "
City Planner Steve Olt gave the staff presentation on this item and described the location and size
of the proposed annexation. He stated the applicant requested the property be zoned C-L (Limited
Commercial) with no conditions. He clarified staff is recommending H-B (Highway Business) with
a PUD condition attached. He reported the applicant has attached an Annexation Agreement which
states the applicant may withdraw its petition if the zoning request is denied.
Councilmember McCluskey made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Janett, to adopt
Resolution 96-153. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Kneeland, Janett, McCluskey, Smith and
Wanner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Kneeland made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Janett, to adopt Ordinance
No. 162, 1996, Option B on First Reading.
Eldon Ward, Cityscape Urban Design and representing the petitioner, responded to Council
questions and clarified the applicant did reserve the right to withdraw the petition prior to Second
Reading.
The vote on Councilmember Kneeland's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Apt,
Kneeland, Janett, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
207
Olt explained acceptable uses under the C-L Zone.
Councilmember Wanner made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Apt, to adopt Ordinance No.
163, 1996 Option A, on First Reading.
Mr. Ward spoke of the changes in design standards for use -by -right stating the requirements are the
same for use -by -right as a PUD. He stated the C-L Zone is the closest to Larimer County's Zoning.
He spoke of how the development would meet City standards when the building is renovated i.e.,
architecture, drainage, lighting, noise, landscaping, etc. and clarified that the C-L Zoning would
create less of a traffic burden than the H-B Zone. He stated a PUD condition would create an
extreme downzoning from the condition presently held under Larimer County zoning and stated the
applicant would not proceed with the development. He reported Boardmembers of Fairway Estates
Homeowners Association supported the request and will discuss the zoning with residents at its
upcoming meeting. He responded to questions regarding the use accepted under Latimer County
zoning.
Olt clarified similar car dealerships on College Avenue are zoned H-B, stating they have all been
approved under the Planned Unit Development process through the LDGS. He stated H-B Zoning
with a PUD condition, staffs recommendation, states that any use could be proposed on any site
regardless of the existing nature of the site.
Director of Current Planning Bob Blanchard stated the C-L Zoning District was developed as part
of the eastside planning process and it currently exists only along Riverside Avenue. He stated it
was staffs intent that C-L Zoning only apply in the eastside neighborhood.
Larry Stroud, 300 S. Howes, stated the property will be developed as a use -by -right, and commented
the only issue is whether it will be developed in the City or the County.
Stroud spoke of the amount of money spent on the planning process and stated he did not want the
project to be threatened by not receiving a guaranteed use. He stated he believed the previous
annexation process was an abuse of the system and stated the applicant did not want to see that type
of abuses happen to this project.
Blanchard clarified staff supports the use of a car dealership for the site and believes it to be an
appropriate use, emphasizing the issue is appropriate review of the project whether it is a use by right
or not.
Councilmember Wanner spoke in support of the motion and believed staff and the Planning and
Zoning Board's recommendation was made after appropriate consideration.
Councilmember McCloskey opposed the motion and of the differences between City and County
reviews. He stated if the neighborhood is willing to work with the developer, he would support their
decision. He believed this was an appropriate use for the site.
Mayor Azari spoke of the need for consistency in the process.
NE
The vote on Councilmember Warmer's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Apt,
Janett and Wanner. Nays: Councilmember's Kneeland, McCluskey and Smith.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Items Relating to Citizen Initiated Ordinance Relating to
the Establishment of a Permanent Citizens Review Board to
Review Citizen Complaints of Police Misconduct, Resolution 96-152 Adopted.
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
"Executive Sttmmary
A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 155, 1996, Amending Section 2 of the Fort Collins City
Code to Establish a Citizens Review Board and to Provide for its Powers, Ditties and
Responsibilities; OR
B. Resolution 96-152 Referring a Citizen Initiated Ordinance Relating to the Registered
Electors of the City at the April 8, 1997, Regular Municipal Election.
On November 5, 1996, the City Clerk received a petition requesting that Council subunit a Citizen
Initiated Ordinance relating to the establishment of a permanent Citizens Review Board to review
citizen complaints of Police misconduct.
The petition was found to be insufficient on November 8, 1996, and petition representatives
withdrew the petition. The Charter provides that a petition may be withdrawn and amended within
fifteen (15) days from the filing of the Clerk's certificate of insufficiency. On November 25, 1996,
petition representatives submitted the amended petition.
On November 27, 1996, the City Clerk verified (Petition Certification attached) that the aniended
petition contained sufficient signatures for presentation of the petition to initiate an ordinance to
Council. The petition contains the signatures of at least 2,249 registered City electors, which is 10%
of the total number of ballots cast at the 1995 Regular City Election.
Article X of the City Charter requires that the Council either adopt the Citizen Initiated Ordinance
without change within 30 days of the date of the presentation of the City Clerk's certification of a
valid petition to the Council, or submit it to a vote at a regular municipal election.
Item A (Ordinance No. 155, 1996) is the Citizen initiated Ordinance in its entirety.
Item B (Resolution 96-152) would submit the Citizen Initiated Ordinance to the voters at the regular
municipal election scheduled for April 8, 1997. "
City Manager John Fischbach gave the staff presentation on this item and explained options
available. He stated it was staff s recommendation to adopt Option B.
209
City Attorney Steve Roy responded to earlier questions by Council stating he did not believe
Councilmembers would be restricted from expressing their views regarding the measure.
Councilmember Smith made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Wanner, to adopt Resolution
96-152.
Councilmember Janett stated the Health and Safety Committee has been reviewing items similarly
related to this issue. She spoke of the need for a cooperative system.
Councilmember Kneeland stated the Health and Safety Committee has been reviewing the
effectiveness of the Citizen Liaison Commission and of the handling of complaints by citizens. She
expressed opposition to the proposed Ordinance stating if it were adopted there would have to be
changes to the City's Charter.
Mayor Azari spoke in support of Option B and stated the current process is not visible and not used.
She commended the citizens who presented the initiative for their efforts.
The vote on Councilmember Smith's motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Azari, Apt,
Kneeland, Janett, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner. Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Items Relating to the Purchase
of Natural Areas, Adopted.
The following is staff s memorandum on this item.
"Financial Impact
These items authorize the acquisition of three properties, totalling approximately 249 acres of land,
for public natural area purposes. The total acquisition cost to the City of Fort Collins is S1,035,000.
Long-term maintenance costs are estimated at S8, 964 annually, based on an estimated cost of S36
per. acre per year. Funds for acquisition and long-term maintenance would come from proceeds of
the 114 cent Natural Areas Sales Tax. The land acquisition portion of the fund has a current balance
of $2.5 million.
Executive Summary
A. Resolution 96-154 of the Council of the City of Fort Collins Authorizing the Acquisition of
Approximately Ninety-eight Acres of Land for Natural Area Purposes.
B. Resolution 96-155 of the Council of the City of Fort Collins Authorizing the Purchase of
Approximately Thirty-one Acres of Land for Natural Area Purposes.
C. Resolution 96-156 of the Council of the City of Fort Collins Authorizing the Purchase of
Approximately One -hundred and Sixty Acres of Land for Natural Area Purposes.
210
These Resolutions authorize the acquisition of three properties for natural area purposes. The 98-
acre William and Associates property is located south of the Poudre River and is bisected by the
proposed alignment for the Timberline Extension. The 31-acre Nix property is located immediately
west of the William and Associates property. The 160-acre Franz property is located south of the
existing Cathy Fromme Prairie, east of the Lorimer County Landfill. All three properties have
significant natural values and would help meet the objectives of the Natural Areas Policy Plan and
several other adopted plans and policies.
BACKGROUND:
William and Associates Property. Stgffhas negotiated a purchase and sale agreement with William
and Associates Investment Co., for acquisition of 98.29 acres of land located south of the Poudre
River, north of Prospect Street. The property has an appraised value of Sl, 250, 000. Under the terms
of the agreement the City will purchase 31.45 acres of land (a 32% undivided interest in the entire
parcel) for $400,000. William and Associates will donate the remaining 66.84 acres (a 68%
undivided interest) to the City. The donation value is $850,000.
The property is currently vacant. It is zoned IG-general industrial and IP-industrial park.
Approximately 16 acres of the site are within the Cache la Poudre River floodway, and 49.5 acres
are within the floodplain, and 32.5 acres are entirely out of the floodplain. The site was recently
under contract by a major industrial/business park developer, however, those plans were withdrawn
and the City was allowed to negotiate with the property owner.
The Poudre River Trail follows the northern and eastern boundaries of the property. Adjacent land
to the north and east is primarily the City -owned Riverbend Ponds Natural Area. Land to the south
consists of the existing Seven Lakes Business Park and a gravel mine. The gravel mining is
completed and the land has been acquired by development interests. The property to the west is the
Nix Property which is also proposed for natural area acquisition.
The site will be bisected by the planned Timberline Road Extension. Costs of the road right-of-way,
estimated at S46,000 for 4.2 affected acres, will be paid by the Timberline Project. Stafffrom
Engineering, Natural Resources, and other departments are working closely together to ensure that
the design ofthe Timberline Road Extension is as compatible as possible with the current and future
natural values of the area.
The eastern portion of the property, approximately 40 acres, consists of a series of naturalized
gravel ponds. The mix of ponds, wetlands, and well -developed riparian woodland present here has
high aesthetic value and provides high quality habitat for a wide variety of wildlife species. This
portion of the site is considered a high priority acquisition within the natural areas program.
The northern portion of the property, approximately 58 acres, was used in the past cis a clumping
area for lime sludge that was a byproduct of sugar beet processing. As a result, the site is very
weedy and natural habitat conditions are degraded. Despite this, the site is used by a variety of
wildlife species and offers panoramic views of the mountains from the Poudre River Trail and the
future Timberline Road Extension. This portion of the site is considered a moderate priority
acquisition within the natural areas program.
211
The property is in the heart of the Poudre River Corridor, adjacent to a large existing natural area,
and will be highly visible from both the Poudre River Trail and the Timberline Road Extension.
These factors make it a highly desirable site for natural area restoration. Preliminary assessments
indicate the sugar beet waste can be revegetated, especially if topsoil or compost is added before
seeding. A plan for future restoration of the property will be developed during 1997.
Nix Property. Staff has also negotiated a purchase and sale agreement with Calvin C. Johnson and
Lois M. Johnson and Ten CO., a partnership, for the acquisition of property commonly referred to
as the Nix Farm. The property is located south of the Poudre River, at the east end of Hoffman Mill
Road. The property abuts the William and Associates property described above. The total purchase
price of 5515,000, includes $475,515 for 30.8 acres of land, and 540,485 for 13 shares of Arthur
Irrigation Company and 13 shares of Emigh Lateral Stock. The purchase price is the appraised
value of the land determined by Jerry Moore, MA. I.
The property is zoned IG-general industrial and is primarily outside of the floodplain of the Poudre
River. The property is a historic farm and has been used for agricultural purposes for many years.
The property includes two houses, a barn, and irrigated pasture. These are currently leased for
approximately 518, 000 per year. The existing leases will be retained for a minimum of one year
while a management plan is prepared for the property.
Adjacent land uses include: the Bignall Natural Area and other undeveloped floodplain of the
Poudre River to the north, gravel mining to the east, railroad right-of-way and commercial
development along Riverside Avenue to the south, and industrial development to the west. The
Poudre River Trail runs through the northern portion of the property.
The property is identified as a moderate priority acquisition site within the natural areas program.
The site includes portions of the riparian corridor of the Poudre River, small wetland areas, and
irrigated pasture that provides excellent buffer to the Poudre River corridor. The propertyhas a
pastoral feel and provides an aesthetically pleasing landscape to trail users. It is higher in elevation
than surrounding lands and offers good views of the Poudre River.
The historic value and future options for use of the existing structures on site will be evaluated as
a management plan for the property is prepared during 1997. Options include removal of the
structures, continued leasing for residential and agricultural purposes, and conversion to public
uses consistent with the purposes of the Natural Areas Plan, the Parks and Recreation Policy Plan,
or other community programs.
Franz Property. Larimer County has negotiated a purchase and sale agreement with Pauline Franz
for the acquisition of 160-acres of land located immediately south of the City -owned Cathy Fromme
Prairie and east of the Larimer County Landfill. The agreement has been structured as a series of
lease/purchase options in which the total property would be acquired in four, 40-acre parcels. A
40-acre parcel would be acquired in each of the years 1996, 1998, 2000, and 2002. The
lease/purchase option provides possession of the property at closing on the first 40-acre parcel. The
total compensation for the lease purchase options and the real property is $480, 000. The purchase
price is consistent with an appraisal commissioned by Larimer County.
212
As with other natural arealopen lands acquisitions in the region between Fort Collins and Loveland,
the Franz Property is proposed as a joint acquisition by Lorimer County and the City of Fort
Collins. Larimer County has proposed that the City pay 25% of the total price, or 5120, 000, for a
25% undivided interest in the property. This would be paid in S30,000 increments at two-year
intervals as described above. The remaining fumdingfor the acquisition will be provided by Larimer
County, with 50%from Larimer CountyNatural Resources, and 25%from the Lorimer County Open
Lands program. Larimer County Natural Resources' interest in the property is as undeveloped
buffer to the Larimer County Landfill.
The property is undeveloped land which has been used historically for dryland grazing. It is zoned
FA-1-Farming. Surrounding land uses include: the City -owned Cathy Fromme Prairie to the north,
small farms and large -lot residential uses to the east, vacant grazing land to the south, and the
Larimer County landfill to the north.
Public purposes of the acquisition include maintaining an undeveloped buffer to the landfill as well
as natural area and open space purposes. It includes rolling rangeland, interspersed with
intermittent drainages and small wetland sites. The site includes large areas of prairie dog colony
and is an integral part of the unique wintering raptor habitat complex encompassed by"the Cathy
Fromme Prairie. The site would be managed by the City of Fort Collins as an addition to the Cathy
Fromme Prairie.
Inspections. Several inspections will be completed prior to closing on the properties, including
physical inspections, boundary survey verification, and environmental liability audit. The purchase
and style agreements are contingent on obtaining satisfactory results from these inspections.
Policy Basis. Acquisition of these sites is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Natural
Areas Policy Plan, the Parks and Recreation Policy Plan, the City Structure Plan, and the City Plan
Principles and Policies. In addition, the Franz Farm is identiijied as a conservation area in the Plan
for the Region Between Fort Collins and Loveland.
Board and Commission Review. The Parks and Recreation Board and Natural Resources Advisory
Board reviewed and endorsed the proposed acquisitions on December d, 1996. "
Director of Natural Resources Tom Shoemaker gave a brief presentation on this item and reported
on the location of this property.
Councilmember Smith made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Wanner, to adopt Resolution
96-154. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Kneeland, Janett, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner.
Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
213
Councilmember Smith made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Wanner, to adopt Resolution
96-155. Yeas: Councilmembers Apt, Azari, Kneeland, Janett, McCluskey, Smith and Wanner.
Nays: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 11:05 p.m.
ayor
ATTEST:
214