Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 04/01/2008 - ITEMS RELATING TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF EAST PRO ITEM NUMBER: 18 A-C AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY DATE: April 1, 2008 FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Ken Waldo SUBJECT Items Relating to the Northeast Corner of East Prospect Road and I-25 Rezoning. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Ordinance on First Reading and the Resolutions. The Planning and Zoning Board voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the plan amendments and the requested rezonings. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Resolution 2008-028 Amending the City Plan Structure Plan Map Pertaining to the Northeast Corner of the Prospect Road and 1-25 Interchange. B. Resolution 2008-029 Amending the I-25 Subarea Plan. C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 032, 2008, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins by Changing the Zoning Classifications for that Certain Property Known as the Northeast Corner of East Prospect Road and 1-25 Rezoning. This is a request to amend the 1-25 Subarea Plan and the City Plan Structure Plan map,and rezone 105 acres located at the northeast corner of 1-25 and East Prospect Road. The current Structure Plan map and 1-25 Subarea Plan designation for 86 of the 105 acres is the Employment District;the designation for remaining 19 of the 105 acres is the Urban Estate District. The applicant proposes amendments to the Structure Plan map and 1-25 Subarea Plan to change existing Employment into Commercial Corridor and change Urban Estate into Employment along with corresponding rezonings to the C, Commercial District and the E, Employment District. As indicated, the applicant is proposing amendments to existing City plans because the requested rezonings are not consistent with the Structure Plan map and 1-25 Subarea Plan. In order for Council to approve the rezonings, amendments to the existing plans will be necessary. APPLICANT AND OWNER: Land Acquisition and Management, LLC 7200 S. Alton Way Suite B 150 Centennial, CO 800012 April 1, 2008 -2- Item No. 18 A-C BACKGROUND In June 2007,the City received two rezoning requests for properties adjacent to the Prospect Road/1- 25 interchange. Neither request was consistent with the existing land use designations for the properties as depicted on the Structure Plan map or the maps and policies of the I-25 Subarea Plan. The rezoning request at the Southwest corner of the interchange for 143 acres of Employment District was not consistent with City plans which showed the area as a Commercial Corridor District (25 acres) and open space (118 acres). The rezoning request at the Northeast corner of the interchange for 66 additional acres of Commercial Corridor and 39 acres of Employment was not consistent with City plans which showed the area for a larger 86 acre parcel of Employment, 30 acres of Commercial Corridor, and 20 acres of Urban Estate District. Rather than decide immediately to recommend denial of the rezoning requests to the Planning and Zoning Board and the City Council based on inconsistency with adopted City plans, staff took the opportunity to do a detailed review for land uses around the interchange. The review was intended to determine the pattern for land uses around the interchange as a benefit to the City as a whole, independent of the specific rezoning requests. Staff recognized that the rezoning requests could elevate the importance of the interchange in the City's economic development efforts. In total, the requests could net an additional 96 acres of Employment District to provide locations for primary jobs in the community and could net an additional 55 acres of Commercial Corridor District for retail development. The resulting Commercial Corridor parcel size in the Northeast corner would be large enough for the development of major regional retail uses. In their simplest forms, the rezoning requests represent a shifting of land uses already expected in City plans to develop adjacent to the interchange. For example, instead of 25 acres of Commercial Corridor developing at the Southwest corner, the results of the rezonings could be that those acres would be shifted to the Northeast corner. And, instead of 86 acres of Employment developing in the Northeast, the results of the rezoning could be that most of those acres would be shifted to the Southwest corner. After reviewing the rezoning requests in detail, staff determined that the requests represented a better land use pattern for area around the I-25/Prospect interchange than the land uses in existing City plans. Since neither rezoning request was consistent with adopted City plans, staff decided to recommend approval of the changes to the 1-25 Subarea Plan and the Structure Plan map in order to help justify the rezonings to the Planning and Zoning Board and City Council. In October 2007, the City Council agreed to amend the 1-25 Subarea Plan and the Structure Plan map and approved the rezoning requests for the Southwest corner of the Prospect/1-25 interchange. The rezonings specifically changed 25 acres of C,Commercial District and 118 acres of POL,Public Open Lands District to 143 acres of E, Employment District. Staff is recommending changes to the 1-25 Subarea Plan and the Structure Plan map and approval of the rezoning of 86 acres of 1, Industrial District into 66 acres of C, Commercial District and 20 acres of E,Employment District;and the rezoning of 19 acres from UE,Urban Estate District to the E, Employment District. The Northeast corner rezonings would result in at total of 96 acres of C, Commercial zoned area(66 rezoned acres added to 30 acres of existing C zoning) and 39 acres of E, Employment zoning. The E, Employment zoned areas would provide a buffer between the 96 April 1, 2008 -3- Item No. 18 A-C acres of Commercial zoning and residential areas to the north and east. The table below summarizes the land use data. Comparison of Existing Zoning and Proposed Zoning for the Northeast Corner of the Prospect/I-25 Interchange Existing Zoning Acres Proposed Zoning Acres Commercial 30 Commercial 96 Industrial 86 Industrial 0 Employment 0 Employment 39 Urban Estate 19 Urban Estate 0 Total 135 Total 135 The next table indicates the available supply of buildable lands within the GMA boundary for each of the affected zoning districts, the existing supply and the supply if the Northeast rezoning were to be approved. Buildable Lands Inventory Existing Acres and Available Acres if the Northeast Rezoning Were Approved Zoning District Existing Acres After Rezoning Commercial 422 488 Industrial 724 638 Employment 853 892 Urban Estate 2,254 2 235 The review of land uses and zoning around the Prospect Road/I-25 interchanged is based on: 1. City Council direction to staff indicating the Council's general preference for a higher level of"commercial" use for portions of the former Resource Recovery Farm property located in the Southwest quadrant of the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange. Staff concluded that rezoning a portion of the property, 25 acres from C, Commercial and 118 acres from POL, Public Open Lands to E, Employment (for a total of 143 acres of E, Employment) would encourage new businesses and expansion of local businesses while preserving the area as an attractive community gateway, and would be in the best interests of the City. a. Short history: The Utilities Department operated a sludge application process on the property until transferring that operation to other sites in northern Latimer County. The Natural Resources Department purchased 144 acres from the Utilities Department to be preserved as open space, the Running Deer Natural Area, and in 2003, purchased an additional 151 acres as open space. In May 2004, the City Council, following the policies and implementation actions contained in the I-25 Subarea Plan,rezoned the 151 acre parcel from E,Employment into the POL,Public Open Lands District. At the time of purchase,the eastern portion of the RRF was not described as an area of interest to the Natural Areas Program in the Natural Areas Policy Plan, nor the various community separator plans adopted by the City. Because the eastern portion was not shown in these plans, and because it has low natural resource values,Natural Areas Program staff embarked on a planning process April 1, 2008 -4- Item No. 18 A-C to help guide the property's ultimate management and disposition status. In August of 2005,the Natural Resources staff shared a series of options for the RRF property with the City Council and requested policy direction. The City Council indicated its general preference for a higher level of"commercial" use for the property. Based on Council's perspective,the Natural Resources Department concluded that rezoning a substantial portion of the property(118 acres)from POL,Public Open Lands to E, Employment would be in the best interests of the City. Employment zoning would allow the property to be used for economic development purposes. The adopted I-25 Subarea Plan-as well as other constraints on the property,would allow the property to be developed in a manner that preserves an aesthetically pleasing viewshed from I-25 as well as protect adjoining areas with high natural values (namely Box Elder Creek and the Running Deer Natural Area). The rezoning request excluded Boxelder Creek, as it will remain zoned POL. 2. Simultaneously, the City received a rezoning request from the owners of property in the Northeast quadrant of the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange requesting a change in zoning of 86 acres of I, Industrial and 19 acres of UE, Urban Estate. The table below combines land use data for both the Southwest and Northeast rezoning requests. The table indicates the amount of acres in each land use category prior to the rezoning requests and the amount of acres in each land use category if both rezoning requests were to be approved. Comparison of Existing Zoning and Proposed Zoning for the Southwest and Northeast Corners of the Prospect/I-25 Interchange Existing Zoning Acres Proposed Zoning Acres Commercial 55 Commercial 96 Industrial 86 Industrial 0 Employment 0 Employment 182 Urban Estate 19 Urban Estate 0 Public Open Lands 118 Public Open Lands 0 Total 278 Total 278 The next table indicates the available supply of buildable lands within the GMA boundary for each of the affected zoning districts when considering the areas in both the Southwest and Northeast comers of the Prospect/I-25 interchange, i.e., the existing supply and the supply if the Northeast rezoning were to be approved. Buildable Lands Inventory After Approval of the Southwest and Northeast Rezonings Zoning District Existing Acres I After Rezoning Commercial 447 488 Industrial 724 638 Employment 710 892 Urban Estate 2.254 2,235 April 1, 2008 -5- Item No. 18 A-C The City Council will ultimately need to decide if City plans should be amended for the proposed land use patterns. The amendments to the plans are related to the rezoning requests but are separate, independent actions. If the amendments to the plans are approved,the rezoning requests are simply implementation actions to the plan amendments. Said another way, the rezonings are designed to realign the City land use regulations with the preferred land use patterns as shown on the respective plans. The fundamental policy issue to be addressed in the rezoning request for the Northeast comer is: Should City plans be amended and zoning changed to allow for the development of a community/regional retail center in the Northeast quadrant of the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange? The rezoning requests represent a significant land use and economic development policy issue to add the Prospect/I-25 interchange to the limited inventory of sites within the GMA boundary suitable for the development of community/regional retail uses. Such sites are necessary for the City to maintain a leading role as an important economic center for Northern Colorado. Land Use Planning Fundamental land use issues to be addressed in the rezoning request for the Northeast corner are: • Recognition that I-25 is no longer an eastern urban edge of the community as previously contained in City Plan visions. 0 More specifically,the area on the Structure Plan map east of the Fort Collins GMA showing Rural Land Use to make a clear distinction between urban uses inside the Fort Collins GMA and rural uses outside the GMA is no longer valid. Initially, the land uses east of I-25 depicted a transition from high intensity urban uses (commercial and employment) adjacent to I-25, to urban estate residential (maximum of 2 units/acre) inside the GMA, to rural residential uses (1 unit/2.29 acres) outside the GMA. 0 The land uses adopted in the recent Land Use Plan amendment to the Timnath Comprehensive Plan have changed the vision for the area east of the Fort Collins GMA from Waal residential to higher density residential uses and urban types of employment and commercial land uses. • The land uses planned within the Timnath GMA create the need for Fort Collins to reconsider the land uses on the Structure Plan map. • The land uses planned within the Timnath GMA will have impacts(largely unknown at this time)on the City of Fort Collins' land uses,economy,infrastructure,and public services and facilities. o The City's plans need to be reconsidered to address the new regional context of what is happening beyond the City's Growth Management Area (GMA) boundary, and regionally, along the I25 corridor. April 1, 2008 -6- Item No. 18 A-C • The Prospect/1-25 interchange was previously identified in the 1-25 Subarea Plan as an "activity center." • The rezoning includes changing 19 acres from Urban Estate to E,Employment;and 20 acres of I, Industrial to E, Employment, for a total of 39 acres of E, Employment. The current Urban Estate zoning is not feasible from a marketing/quality of life standpoint;it is unlikely anyone will choose to build an estate home so near the interstate and adjacent to commercial uses. The employment rezoning of this area makes sense; provides a better buffer to the existing estate subdivision; and adds to the inventory of employment land. Based on comments from a neighborhood meeting conducted in September 2007, the existing residents preferred the employment zoning. • Part of the reason for enlarging the C zoning in the Northeast is to devote about 20 acres of land to the proper management of the Boxelder Creek floodplain. Portions of the property currently zoned C, Commercial will be "lost" to floodplain and/or storm drainage management areas. Hence,the proposed zoning,enlarging the commercial zoned property, is partially in response to this. • The loss of commercial zoning, about 25 acres in the Southwest corner of the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange needs to be compensated for by increasing the amount of commercial zoning in the Northeast corner. o The amount of commercial zoning should maximize the capability of providing sufficient ground to locate a community/regional retail center at the Northeast corner. • The Prospect interchange represents a key community gateway, combining a balance of economic development and open space preservation. It is logical that the interchange maximize the ability for the development of a mix of commercial and employment uses. • Rezoning Question: Should City plans be amended and zoning changed to allow for the development of a community/regional retail center in the Northeast quadrant of the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange? 0 The plan amendments and rezonings will help strengthen the interchange for an expanded role in the City's economic development strategies. Economic Development Fundamental economic development issues to be addressed in the rezoning request for the Northeast comer are: • Recognition that sales tax revenues are vital to the City's economic (budget)health and the provision of municipal services and facilities. • Fort Collins' position as a regional retail trade center is weakening; regional shopping patterns are shifting as new centers become operational; because of its central location and April 1, 2008 -7- Item No. 18 A-C ease of access, the I-25 corridor is quickly becoming the primary regional retail corridor in Northern Colorado. • Community/regional retail centers are key contributors to City sales tax revenue. 0 The competition for retail sales tax dollars is significantly different now than in previous years. In order for the City to remain competitive in the Northern Colorado market,undeveloped community/regional retail sites need to be provided in desirable locations. 0 The Downtown, the Foothills Mall, Harmony Road, and South College Avenue are typically the areas cited as the most important retail shopping locations in the City. However,these locations cannot accommodate larger format regional retail centers, because they are largely built out. With such a limited supply of sites suitable for the development of community/regional retail uses, Interstate interchanges need to be considered as locations for regional retail trade. • A recent Economic Planning Systems (EPS) study commissioned by the City to evaluate future retail capacity in the vicinity of Fort Collins, determined that over the next ten years an increase of approximately 1.5 million feet of regional retail space is anticipated. If the City wishes to capture any of this increased retail space (and its related sales tax)the City needs to allow regional retail sites to locate along Fort Collins' interchanges. Transportation • The Colorado Department of Transportation(CDOT),the Federal Highway Administration (FHwA) and the City have little/no funds to aid in the reconstruction of the Prospect/I-25 interchange, a key transportation entryway, and related street improvements. o It was previously not anticipated that the responsibility for improving the Prospect/1- 25 interchange would fall on local governments and/or adjacent property owners using public/private partnerships. The reality is that for the past ten years or more, interstate interchanges throughout Colorado have been built/improved through a combination of private and local funding sources. 0 A regional/community retail center the Northeast quadrant could help contribute tax revenues necessary to fund Prospect Road/1-25 interchange improvements and related infrastructure. Given the cost to improve infrastructure, development from all four quadrants around the interchange will need to contribute funding to improve the interchange. The rezoning requests need to be viewed independently from the City's Adequate Public Facilities (APF) requirements. Development plans for parcels in the Northeast quadrant must include a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA). The TIA will determine whether traffic generated by the development will result in reduced level of service (LOS) on City streets (not the interchange)and the physical improvements that will need to be constructed to mitigate the impacts. In order to begin construction, developments must either build the needed improvements, or have funding appropriated that will cover improvement costs. April 1, 2008 -8- Item No. 18 A-C The Site: The adjoining existing zoning and land uses are as follows: N: C, Commercial and LMN, Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood, undeveloped E: County FA-1, Farming, Kitchell Estates, large lot residential subdivision, and UE, Urban Estate, undeveloped 100 acre parcel owned by the Poudre School District S: C, Commercial, and County Commercial, partially developed retail and office uses W: C, Commercial and E, Employment, mainly undeveloped The property was annexed into the City of Fort Collins as part of the 235 acre Galatia Annexation in 1990 and zoned HB, Highway Business, IP, Planned Industrial, and RLP, Low Density Planned Residential Districts. All of the zoning districts had a Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning condition attached which required development proposals to be reviewed against the criteria of the Land Development Guidance System (LDGS) which was the City's PUD ordinance at the time. In 1997, the 235 acres of the Galatia Annexation were rezoned as part of the City Plan comprehensive community rezoning. The 30 acres of HB, Highway Business was rezoned C, Commercial; the 86 acres of IP, Planned Industrial was rezoned I, Industrial; and the 119 acres of RLP, Low Density Planned Residential was rezoned UE, Urban Estate. The HB, IP, and RLP Districts were eliminated from the Land Use Code in 1997. No parcels were rezoned as a result of adoption of the I-25 Subarea Plan in 2003. Approximately 100 acres of the 119 acres zoned UE are currently owned by the Poudre School District. The property is undeveloped, but will likely be used for athletic fields and school bus storage. City Plan and the I-25 Subarea Plan In 1997,the City adopted City Plan as City's the new Comprehensive Plan. The Structure Plan map showed Commercial Corridor land use designations in all four quadrants immediately adjacent to the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange; Employment District designations for other areas in the Northeast, Southwest, and Southeast quadrants; Low Density Mixed-Use Residential designation in the Northwest quadrant;and Rural/Open Lands and Stream Corridors designation for other areas in all four quadrants. The Structure Plan map also identified the need for additional planning in the I-25 corridor and designated the area as the"I-25 Special Study Corridor." In addition, City Plan's chapter on Principles and Policies contained the following: PRINCIPLE LU-4: More specific subarea planning efforts will follow the adoption of these City Plan Principles and Policies which tailor City Plan's citywide perspective to individual neighborhoods, districts, corridors, and edges. April 1, 2008 -9- Item No. 18 A-C Policy LU-4.5 Priority Subareas. The following areas have been identified as priority for future subarea planning: I-25 Corridor Concurrent with the development of the 1-25 Subarea Plan, was a multi jurisdictional cooperative planning effort to develop the Northern Colorado Regional Communities 1-25 Corridor Plan. The planning boundaries of the two efforts overlapped. The regional plan studied the I-25 corridor from County Road 52 on the north to an area south of the Town of Berthoud, while the subarea plan studied the area from County Road 52 to Carpenter Road(Colorado State Highway 392). The most significant difference between the two plans is that the subarea plan dealt with land uses in more detail than the regional plan. The regional plan was based on existing land use plans of the participating jurisdictions. The regional plan focused on developing a set of design standards, a transportation element, and open lands/natural areas policies. The Northern Colorado Regional Communities 1-25 Corridor Plan was adopted by the City in November 2001. In 2003, the City adopted the 1-25 Subarea Plan as an element of City Plan. The key points, conclusions, and policies of the 1-25 Subarea Plan are summarized as follows: • The 1-25 Subarea Plan mainly deals with the area located east of I-25 from around the Prospect Road interchange on the south to County Road 52 on the north, and County Road 5 on the east. • No change in the City's GMA boundary was proposed. • Two activity centers were identified, one at the Mulberry Street interchange and the other at the Prospect Road interchange. The Northeast quadrant of the Mulberry interchange was planned for the potential location of a regional/community shopping center. The Northeast quadrant of the Prospect interchange was designated as a mix use activity center with commercial, industrial, and residential uses. • Employment and industrial districts adjacent to I-25 are to be designed in a manner as to maintain a perception of openness through the corridor. • Secondary uses (retail and highway-oriented commercial uses) typically permitted in employment/industrial districts will be required to be set back at least %4 mile from I-25 to avoid a commercial strip appearance along I-25. • Detached single-family residential development is prohibited within 1/4 mile of I-25. • Low density, mixed use neighborhoods are to be concentrated within 1/2 mile of Mulberry Street. • The balance of areas planned for residential development is to be urban estate development. • The City's Resource Recovery Farm is to be preserved as open space. April 1, 2008 -10- Item No. 18 A-C • The subarea is planned to eventually be served with multi-modal transportation options. A supplemental street system will facilitate movement within the subarea, thus, diminishing the need to utilize I-25 for short trips. • Most undeveloped land within the subarea is expected to annex prior to development. Land Use Code The regulations covering rezonings in the City of Fort Collins are contained in Division 2.9 of the Land Use Code. Section 2.9.4 (H) (2) indicates the following: Mandatory Requirements for Quasi-Judicial Rezonings. Any amendment to the Zoning Map involving the zoning or rezoning of six hundred forty (640) acres of land or less (a quasi-judicial rezoning) shall be recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board or approved by the City Council only if the proposed amendment is: (a) consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan; and/or (b) warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject property. Section 2.9.4 (H) (3) of the Land Use Code indicates the following: Additional Considerations for Quasi-Judicial Rezonings. In determining whether to recommend approval of any such proposed amendment, the Planning and Zoning Board and City Council may consider the following additional factors: (a) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land, and is the appropriate zone district for the land; (b) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment, including,but not limited to, water, air, noise, stormwater management, wildlife, vegetation, wetlands and natural functioning of the environment; (c) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern. NORTHEAST CORNER APPLICANT'S REQUEST AND JUSTIFICATION: The following has been submitted by the applicant as a justification for the rezoning requests: • The Prospect / I-25 interchange was constructed in 1966. Since its construction, traffic volumes have increased significantly and the interchange structure has deteriorated. • A recent North I-25 Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)team analysis of the interchange indicates that portions of the interchange are CURRENTLY experiencing a failing Level of Service (LOS) quality F (failure). • Furthermore, the EIS team projects increases of roughly 4 times the current traffic volume for the interchange in the next 20 years. April 1, 2008 -11- Item No. 18 A-C • North I-25 EIS projections call for a 200 foot widening of interstate Right-of-Way(ROW) to accommodate an additional lane of traffic in each direction and improvements to the on/off ramps and safety lanes. As a result, any reconstruction of the Prospect interchange must accommodate a wider footprint. The current inte rchange ROW will not ac commodate this widening. • Cost estimates/projections for the interchange and Prospect Road improvements are substantial: 0 The projection for the interchange itself is $25,000,000.00 (excluding ROW acquisition costs). 0 Boxelder Creek crossing of Prospect Road. west of interchange is $3,000,000. o Prospect Road east of the interchange to County Road 5 is$1,700,000 to$2,300,000 (excluding design, entitlements, utilities, structures, relocation of Timnath inlet canal, and CR5/Prospect intersection). o Prospect Road west of interchange to Summit View is $1,000,000 to 1,300,000 (similar exclusions). o The total,thus, ranges from $30,700,000 to $31,600,000, at a minimum. • Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), the Federal Highway Administration (FHwA) and the City have little funds to aid in the construction of this interchange and related street improvements. • A new interchange is needed to meet the Adequate Public Facilities (APF)requirement for the new CSU R&D center in the Southwest quadrant as well as for the property owner's anticipated project or other developments on the interchange corners.A new interchange will serve as a"Gateway to CSU",as envisioned by the University.If the City wishes to have this interchange constructed anytime in the near future, it will likely need to be funded by a public/private financing vehicle. • The I-25 Subarea Plan and the current Overall Development Plan (ODP) on the property were developed prior to the current interchange cost projections and proposed land use changes on the City-owned property becoming available. Clearly such magnitude of interchange constructions costs and such land use changes could not have been anticipated. • Gene Andrist, a financial planner involved with the financing of many interchanges and other major projects throughout the state, has developed a number of funding scenarios for public/private financing of the interchange.Increased levels of retail space at the interchange corners appears to be the key to provide increased revenue sources to the City to pay for interchange and related improvements. • A recent Economic Planning Systems (EPS) study commissioned by the City to evaluate future retail capacity in the vicinity of Fort Collins, determined that over the next few years an increase of approximately 1.5 million feet of retail space is anticipated. The City is in a very competitive market with the Towns of Timnath,Windsor and Wellington for this retail space. If the City wishes to capture any of this increased retail space (and its related sales tax)the City needs to move quickly and aggressively. The property owners (the Whites) have been very involved in a series of planning related studies/projects for the interchange,the surrounding area,and along the I-25 corridor. Listed below is a summary of their involvement: April 1, 2008 -12- Item No. 18 A-C BOXELDER CREEK REGIONAL STORMWATER ALLIANCE • Served from the inception of the Boxelder Alliance until present as the representative for a group of private property owners. • Was one of 5 groups (Landowners, City, Wellington, Larimer County, Colorado Water Conservation Board) who EQUALLY funded the stormwater masterplan. • Served as 1 of 5 voting members on the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) which provided overall direction to the Alliance's efforts. The TAC: o Prepared the Scope of Work for the engineering consultant, 0 Selected the engineering consultant, o Provided ongoing direction to/coordination with the selected consultant o Reviewed/commented on work products, o Held monthly public meetings to discuss progress, 0 Participated in weekly/biweekly meetings to complete tasks for the Alliance, 0 Reviewed/commented on final Regional Master Plan, o Participated in Alliance presentations to Alliance members and town councils. • Served as 1 of 5 voting members on the Financial Advisory Committee (FAC). 0 FAC was formed to ensure financial feasibility to the engineering options. o Independently funded legal consultant to the FAC. 0 The FAC: ■ Completed funding analyses of the Master Plan alternatives, ■ Researched project financing options, ■ Completed damages & consequences assessments, ■ Developed Funding/Implementation Strategy for final Master Plan, ■ Coordinated with TAC in developing a recommended alternative. • Prepared list of property owners in vicinity of I-25/Prospect(400 names)for public notices. • Advised local property owners group of Alliance financing issues. • Coordinated with Alliance members including: Larimer County, Town of Wellington, the City, Town of Timnath, Town of Windsor, North Poudre Irrigation Company, Boxelder Sanitation Distirict, New Cache la Poudre Irrigation Company, Colorado Water Conservation Board, Colorado Department of Transportation and others. NORTH I-25 EIS • Attended North I-25 EIS Technical Advisory Committee meetings (usually was the only member of the public in attendance). • Participated in all local (Group 7) meetings. • Organized group of landowners in the neighborhood of I-25/Prospect and advised them of interchange issues. • Met regularly with City Transportation staff as well as CDOT and Felsburg Holt Ullevig., consultants on the North I-25 EIS project. • With City Transportation staff and other property owners,influenced the proposed alignment and details of the Prospect/I-25 interchange to the advantage of City. April 1, 2008 -13- Item No. 18 A-C • Facilitated meetings between North I-25 EIS and Boxelder Creek Stormwater Alliance to resolve mutual issues. • Researched and resolved historic preservation issue with North I-25 EIS team. PROSPECT ROAD IMPROVEMENTS • Organized group of local property owners concerning issues pertaining to future Prospect Road improvements. • Coordinated regularly with City Transportation and Engineering staff. • Facilitated series of public/private meetings with the City, Timnath Engineer, and local property owners to address future improvements to Prospect before they became problems. These issues included: 0 Boxelder Creek crossing of Prospect west of I-25, 0 Greeley Water Extension& Transmission Project(GWET) crossing of Prospect, 0 Boxelder Sanitation District sewer crossing of Prospect at McLaughlin Lane, 0 Relocation of Timnath Inlet canal to allow future widening of Prospect, 0 Prospect/County Road 5 intersection issues, o Boxelder Creek stormwater overflow canal crossing of Prospect(the Grand Canal). 0 With Town of Timnath,Don Bachman,Cache la Poudre Irrigation Company,Poudre Valley School District and a local developer, developed cross section profile of future Prospect ROW which is in use today. GREELEY WATER EXTENSION & TRANSMISSION PROJECT (GWET) Background: Greeley's GWET project is a 60-inch diameter waterline delivering water from their pre-treatment plant northwest of Fort Collins to Greeley. In its nominal configuration, the bottom of the pipeline is to be placed on top of approximately 2 feet of gravel and covered with at least 60 inches of soil making the total depth of their pipeline excavation and backfill approximately 12 feet. The sheer size of this project makes it important to anticipate related issues in advance of the project's construction. The 2007 segment of this project included a crossing of Prospect Road at McLaughlin Lane,a crossing of I-25 at a location north of Prospect and completion to a point in the vicinity of the Fort Collins Airpark. The I-25 crossing is particularly complicated since three irrigation company canal crossings, the Boxelder Creek crossing, a Boxelder Sanitation District sewer line crossing as well as various other utility crossings are located in close proximity to one another. • The White's facilitated several public/private meetings with representatives from Greeley, Timnath,Boxelder Alliance,City Transportation/Engineering and Stormwater Departments, the Poudre Valley School District,Boxelder Sanitation District, CDOT,a group of affected landowners, and others to discuss details of the project. • Arranged to have GWET representatives attend several Boxelder Alliance TAC meetings to coordinate the particularly tight and complex I-25 crossing as well as other mutual issues. • Facilitated meetings with the Timnath Engineer and Timnath GMA developers to discuss project alignment to minimize impacts to properties in vicinity of Timnath. • Worked closely with Poudre Valley School District personnel regarding crossing of the GWET project across the District's and White's properties. • The 2007 segment of the GWET pipeline is nearing completion. April 1, 2008 -14- Item No. 18 A-C Amendments to the Structure Plan map and the 1-25 Subarea Plan The Structure Plan map, a component of City Plan, the City's Comprehensive Plan, sets forth a basic pattern of development, showing how Fort Collins should grow and evolve over the next 20 years. The 1-25 Subarea Plan is an element of City Plan and provides greater detail and policies for the I-25 corridor. For the Northeast corner,the maps in these existing plans currently designate 30 acres as commercial, 86 acres as employment, and 19 acres as urban estate (not including the 100 acres owned by the Poudre School District) in the Northeast quadrant of the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange. To recommend approval of the rezoning proposal, the City Council has to find that: 1)the existing Structure Plan is in need of change; and 2)the proposed changes would promote the public welfare and be consistent with the vision, goals, principles, and policies of City Plan. The applicable criteria are contained in Appendix C of City Plan. Review Criteria for Structure Plan Minor Amendments: Appendix C of City Plan outlines mandatory requirements for public notice, review process and evaluation criteria for minor amendments to City Plan, including Structure Plan map amendments. The Plan text states: "A plan amendment will be approved if the City Council makes specific findings that: The existing City Plan and/or related element thereof is in need of the proposed amendment;and the proposed plan amendment will promote the public welfare and will be consistent with the vision, goals,principles and policies of City Plan and the elements thereof." To support the requested rezoning, amendments to existing plans will be necessary. Attachment 1 contains the statements,policies,and maps which need to be amended within the 1-25 Subarea Plan. Attachment 2 is a summary of the recommended change to the City Plan Structure Plan map. Analysis Based on Rezoning Review Criteria How the rezoning requests address the requirements in the City's Land Use Code are summarized below: (a) consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; As indicated earlier,staff decided to review the land uses around the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange as a result of the rezoning requests from the City, for the Southwest quadrant, and the private property owner, for the Northeast quadrant, to determine what would be the best land use pattern for the area around the interchange for the City as a whole, independent of the specific rezoning requests. The amendments to the plans are related to the rezoning requests but are independent actions. Also as indicated earlier,the requested rezonings are not consistent with the current Structure Plan map or the 1-25 Subarea Plan for the Northeast quadrant. First, current City plans designate the Northeast quadrant more as an Employment District (86 acres) versus a Commercial District (30 acres). The rezonings would essentially switch to focus to more of a Commercial District(96 acres) April 1, 2008 As- Item No. 18 A-C than an Employment District(39 acres). And,second,the I-25 Subarea Plan identified the northeast quadrant of the Mulberry and I-25 interchange, not the Prospect interchange, as the potential location of a regional/community shopping center. Before being approved by the Council, the proposed rezoning in the Southwest quadrant was also not consistent with the existing Structure Plan map or the I-25 Subarea Plan. City plans designated the Southwest quadrant more as a Commercial District(25 acres)and open space (118 acres). The Southwest rezonings switched the focus to an Employment District (143 acres). In order for Council to approve the Northeast rezonings, amendments to the existing plans will be necessary,just as Council approved plan amendments in order to approve the Southwest rezoning. If the amendments to City plans are approved, the Northeast rezoning requests are simply implementation actions to the plan amendments. Staff is recommending the plans be amended to allow additional commercial and employment land uses to develop in the Northeast quadrant of the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange. It is becoming more apparent that I-25 is not a logical urban edge to the community. The importance of the I-25 corridor to the economic development of Northern Colorado can be viewed all along the corridor. The towns of Timnath, Windsor,and Wellington are changing the character of areas east of 1-25 from the rural, low density residential areas envisioned in both the initial City Plan of 1997, and the 2004 update,to urban types of uses. In staff s opinion,the City's plans need to be changed to address the new regional context of what is happening beyond the City's Growth Management Area(GMA) boundary. In CityPlan one of the stated community goals i y g s s. • Fort Collins will maintain its role as a regional economic center. As part of working toward that end, the City Council has created and adopted an Economic Action Plan. Its purpose is to describe specific activities to enhance the local economy. Over the years, a healthy economy in Fort Collins has been achieved by focusing on preserving and enhancing the natural environment, preserving and maintaining programs and services that contribute to a high quality of life, continuing to build on the success of the Downtown area,and maximizing the value of Colorado State University in our community. The Economic Action Plan contains an Economic Vision and Economic Values statements as follows: Economic Vision: A healthy economy reflecting the values of our community in a changing world. The Plan also lists several Economic Values, including the following: • Municipal services contribute to making Fort Collins a great and visionary city and depend on a healthy economy that fuels a reliable revenue stream. The item above is the link between high quality municipal services and a reliable income stream. Since the majority of the City's tax revenues come from sales tax, this is the key point of the Economic Action Plan that relates to community/regional retail development in the I-25 Corridor. The plan talks about being proactive regarding economic issues. The City has been proactive in April 1, 2008 -16- Item No. 18 A-C working with the developers and adjoining communities on issues of transportation and new regionally oriented retail development. Staff routinely analyzes monthly tax collections to better understand where the community is losing local retail opportunities and factors that information into the City's overall retail strategy. The plan also talks about identifying key infrastructure gaps that may stall development. This relates to groups like the Boxelder Alliance which is working on solving floodplain issues, and on needed improvements to the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange. Lastly,the plan talks about keeping the buildable lands inventory up-to-date to be constantly aware of land area needs for all types of land uses and to be able to identify where community/regional commercial activities are best directed. In summary, staff believes that the City Council's Economic Action Plan provides a comprehensive framework for addressing job creation objectives balanced with pursuing the rebuilding of the City's sales tax base. The work that has been done in evaluating the economic impact of the Mason Corridor project, analysis of the plan amendment request at Prospect Road and I-25 all consistent with the Economic Action Plan. (b) warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject property. There are several changed conditions that help justify the plan amendments and rezoning request. When the 1-25 Subarea Plan was adopted in 2003,it was assumed that the necessary improvements to the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange would be funded by the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) and/or the Federal Highway Administration(FHWA) since it was part of the federal/state highway system. It was not anticipated that the responsibility for improving the interchange would fall on local governments and/or adjacent property owners using public/private partnerships. The competition for retail sales tax dollars is also significantly different now in 2007 than it was in 2003. In order for the City to remain competitive in the Northern Colorado market, undeveloped retail commercial sites in desirable locations need to be provided. The City is lacking in areas to attract new community/regional/community retail establishments. Interstate interchanges are the type of desirable sites for such regional serving retail uses. Land use plans by other jurisdictions,particularly the Town of Timnath, are changing the character of areas east of I-25 from the rural,low density residential,areas shown on the City's plans,to more intense urban uses. In June 2007, the Timnath Town Board approved an amendment to Timnath's Land Use Plan which extended Timnath's Growth Management Area (GMA) boundary north of Timnath to County Road 52(the northern boundary of the Anheuser-Busch Brewery). The Timnath Land Use Plan also intensified the residential densities and land uses in the area to include commercial and employment uses. This is a significant change of conditions that affects areas within the Fort Collins GMA boundary. 1-25 is no longer a line from which land uses begin to decrease in intensity from employment and commercial uses adjacent to the highway, to urban residential,to urban estate residential,to rural uses. The land uses in areas east of I-25 are beginning to mirror the urban types of land uses west of I-25. Even the 100 acres of UE zoned property owned by the Poudre School District slated for use as athletic fields and school bus storage are not low intensity, rural types of land uses. April 1, 2008 -17- Item No. 18 A-C In addition to the above, Section 2.9.4[H][3]provides factors that maybe considered along with the mandatory requirements for quasi-judicial rezonings. Staff has prepared a response to each of the additional factors, demonstrating how the optional criteria could also be met: (a) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land, and is the appropriate zone districtfor the land; The C, Commercial District and the E, Employment District are the appropriate zones for the Northeast corner. The E, Employment District will provide for a land use transition from the C, Commercial District areas to the surrounding residential properties to the north and east. The E, Employment District is more restrictive than the previous I, Industrial District for the property to the north.Areas to the south and west are designated for a mix of commercial and employment uses. Regulations contained in the Land Use Code are intended to have employment districts along the I-25 corridor designed in a manner to maintain openness through the use of: setback requirements, maximum building frontage allowances, restricting building heights, and proper management of floodplains. (b) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water, air, noise, stormwater management, wildlife, vegetation, wetlands and natural functioning of the environment; Staff's perspective is that development in the C, Commercial District and the E, Employment District at the Northeast corner would have no significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. Again,development applications will be subject to the City's development standards relative to natural habitat,energy conservation,stormwater and landscape design. Part of the reason for enlarging the C, Commercial zoning in the Northeast quadrant was to devote land to the proper management of the Boxelder Creek floodplain. (c) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern. The Prospect Road/I-25 interchange represents an opportunity to create a key community gateway, combining a balance of economic development and open space preservation. It is logical that such an important interchange maximize the ability to have land available for the development of a mix of commercial and employment types of uses. The City's development standards will require adequate public utilities and infrastructure to be in place to assure an orderly development pattern. FINDINGS OF FACT/CONCLUSIONS After reviewing the East Prospect Road and I-25 rezonings and amendments to the 1-25 Subarea Plan and the City Plan Structure Plan map, staff makes the following findings of fact and conclusions as explained in detail above: I. The request for amendments to the 1-25 Subarea Plan and the Structure Plan map would be consistent with the City Plan's overall vision, goals, principles, and policies. April 1, 2008 -18- Item No. 18 A-C 2. The rezoning requests are consistent with City Plan,the City's Comprehensive Plan, based on the Structure Plan map amendment and amendments to the I-25 Subarea Plan. 3. The proposed C, Commercial District and E, Employment District are appropriate for the Northeast corner and are consistent with the types of land uses previously planned for the interchange area. 4. The proposed rezonings will not result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. 5. The proposed rezonings will result in a logical and orderly pattern of development. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the amendments to the I-25 Subarea Plan and the City Plan Structure Plan map and the rezoning of 86 acres of I,Industrial to 66 acres of C, Commercial and 20 acres of E, Employment and the rezoning of 19 acres from UE, Urban Estate to E, Employment. to create a 39 acre E zoned buffer between the C,Commercial zoned area(a total of 96 acres)and residential areas to the north and east. Staff is also recommending that a zoning condition be placed on the requested rezoning. The purpose of the zoning condition is for the City to be able to "control" development of the entire property via an overall development plan (ODP) if smaller parcels are sold off to other owners before development plans are submitted to the City. In other words,the City can require a property under single ownership that will develop in phases to submit an ODP for the total development of the property, but the City cannot require other parcels/owners to also be involved under a single ODP. Again,the zoning condition will give the City the ability to control development of the total 105 acres via an ODP. Section 3 of the rezoning ordinance contains the following: "That,under the authority provided in Section 2.9.4(I)and Section 2.2.9 of the Land Use Code,the rezoning as described in Section I (legal description of the property) is conditioned upon the requirement that all of the lands described in Section 1 shall be developed under a single overall development plan, in order to insure that the rezoning will result in a a logical and orderly development pattern." PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Board, at its regular monthly meeting on September 20, 2007,voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the plan amendments and the requested rezonings. April 1, 2008 -19- Item No. 18 A-C ATTACHMENTS 1. Recommended Changes to the I-25 Subarea Plan. 2. Recommended Changes to the City Structure Plan map. 3. Minutes from the September 20, 2007, Planning and Zoning Board meeting. 4. Northeast Corner Rezoning map. 5. Summary of Work Session of February 12, 2008. 6. Power Point presentation. • • ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT Recommended Changes to the I-25 Subarea Plan. Existing Amendments Justification Statements, Policies, Maps Deletions Additions for the Change Page vi The undeveloped land in the NE quadrant of the I-25 and Executive Summary: Mulberry Street interchange initially planned for the Two activity centers are Two activity centers are potential location of a identified for the subarea, identified fer in the subarea community/regional retail one at the I-25/Mulberry for the potential location of center is approximately 50 Street interchange and the regional/community acres in size. Adding 66 other at the I-25/Prospect shopping centers, one at the acres of commercial zoned Road interchange. The I-25/Mulberry Street land to the existing 30 acres northeast quadrant of the I- interchange and the other at at the NE quadrant of the 25/Mulberry Street the I-25/Prospect Road Prospect Road and I-25 interchange is also planned interchange. The northeast interchange would make a for the potential location of quadrant of the 1 96 acre parcel large enough a regional/community 25,AfuIlerfy Street for a regional or community shopping center. shopping center. However, all 96 acres are not totally developable due to 20 acres shopping e . of site constraints, including the Boxelder Creek floodplain. Therefore, the total developable size of the commercial area would be 76 acres, or about the size of the Foothills Mall property. The need for additional undeveloped commercial land in the City is critical for the community to provide alternative locations for retail development in Northern Colorado. Interstate interchanges are a logical location for regionally serving retail development. 1 Existing Amendments Justification Statements, Policies, Maps Deletiens Additions for the Change Page 21 With the rezoning of 25 acres of commercial zoning 5.2 Land Use Plan to employment zoning in Objectives the SW quadrant of the Prospect Road/I-25 Designation of Activity Designation of Activity interchange and the relative Centers. This plan Centers. This plan lack of commercial zoning designates activity centers designates activity centers in the community as a along I-25 at the Prospect along I-25 at the Prospect whole, it is important to Road and Mulberry Street Road and Mulberry Street maintain a significant interchanges. These centers interchanges. These centers amount of commercial are intended to evolve into are intended to evolve into zoning at the Prospect/I-25 concentrated areas of concentrated areas of interchange. Basically, mixed-use development mixed-use development transferring 25 acres of with high visibility, with high visibility, Commercial zoning from increased levels of activity, increased levels of activity, the SW quadrant to the 30 and more integrated and more integrated acres of Commercial zoning appearances. In addition, appearances. In Wien, in the NE quadrant is a the northeast quadrant of the neAheast quadfant 9 start. However, due to the I-25/Mulberry the 1 :ry development constraints in interchange is planned as a the NE quadrant, such as potential location for a and also the potential land needed to regional/community locations for-a accommodate the Boxelder shopping center. regional/community floodway, etc., which shopping centers. requires about 20 acres, additional land is necessary to be designated for commercial development above the simple addition of 25 acres from the SW quadrant. A total of 96 acres of commercial zoning is requested and should be sufficiently large enough for a regional/community shopping center. 2 Existing Amendments Justification Statements, Policies, Maps Deletiom Additions for the Change Page 26 The map amendments will graphically depict the Fort Collins I-25 Subarea wording changes being Plan—Land Use Plan made in the I-25 Subarea Plan. Existing map. The map will be amended to delete 86 acres of Industrial designated land and 19 acres of Urban Estate land in the NE quadrant and to show about 66 acres of additional Commercial land and 20 acres of Employment land in the NE quadrant of the Prospect/I-25 interchange. Also, the Activity Centers boundary around the Commercial Corridor designated land in the NE quadrant will be expanded to cover all 96 acres of commercial designated land. Page 26 The map amendments will also graphically depict the Fort Collins I-25 Subarea proposed zoning changes to Plan—Zoning Plan show 96 total acres of the C, Commercial District and Existing map. The map will be amended 39 acres of the E, to delete 86 acres of I, Employment District in the Industrial zoning and 19 NE. acres of Urban Estate zoning to show about 66 additional acres of C, Commercial zoning and 20 acres of E, Employment zoning the NE quadrant of the Prospect/I-25 interchange adjacent to the highway. 3 • • ATTACHMENT ATTACHMENT 2 Recommended Changes to the City Structure Plan map. Justification Existing Map Amendment for the Change Existing map (see attached The map will also be The map amendments will map). amended to delete 86 acres graphically depict the map's of Industrial District land consistency to the and 19 acres of Urban amendments being made in Estate land to show about the 1-25 Subarea Plan. 96 acres of Commercial Corridor land and 39 acres of Employment District land located in the NE quadrant of the ProspecUI- 25 interchange adjacent to the highway. 4 ATTACHMENT 3 Planning &Zoning Board September 20, 2007 Page 4 Meeting to continue oast 11 p.m. Member Wetzier made a motion to continue the meeting until all time-sensitive agenda Items were completed. Member Schmidt seconded the motion. Motion was approved 7-0. The following two projects were considered together Project: Southwest Corner of East Prospect and 1.25 Rezoning and Plan Amendments, #4-04A Project Description: SW—This is a request to amend the 1-25 Subarea Plan and the City Plan Structure Plan map, and rezone property located at the southwest corner of East Prospect Road and Interstate 25. The plan amendments and the rezoning will change commercial and open space lands to an employment district designation. Recommendation: Approval of the amendments to the 1-25 Subarea Plan and the City Plan Structure Plan map and the rezoning of 25.17 acres of Commercial (C) and 118.17 acres of Public Open Lands(POL)to Employment(E). Project: Northeast Corner of East Prospect Road and 1-25 Rezoning and Plan Amendments,#16-07 Project Description: This is a request to amend the 1-25 Subarea Plan and the City Plan Structure Plan map, and rezone property located at the northeast corner of East Prospect Road and Interstate 25. The plan amendments and the rezoning will change Industrial and urban estate space lands to commercial and employment district designations. Recommendation: Approval of the amendments to the I-25 Subarea Plan and the City Plan Structure Plan map and the rezoning of 86 acres of I, Industrial to 66 acres of C, Commercial and 20 E, Employment and approval of rezoning 19 acres from UE, Urban Estate to E, Employment to create a 39 acre E zoned buffer between the C, Commercial zoned area (a total of 96 acres)and residential areas to the north and east. Planning & Zoning Board September 20, 2007 Page 5 Hearina Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence Chief Planner Ken Waido reported staff is recommending changes to the 1-25 Subarea Plan and the City Plan, Structure Plan map and the rezoning of 143.34 acres located in the southwest corner of East Prospect Road & Interstate 25 into the E, Employment District. In the northeast corner, staff is recommending approval of the amendments to the 1-25 Subarea Plan and the City Plan Structure Plan map and the rezoning of 86 acres of 1, Industrial to 66 acres of C, Commercial and 20 E, Employment and approval of rezoning 19 acres from UE, Urban Estate to E, Employment to create a 39 acre E zoned buffer between the C, Commercial zoned area (a total of 96 acres)and residential areas to the north and east. The review of land uses and zoning around the Prospect Road/1-25 interchanged is based on: 1. City Council direction indicating the Council's general preference for a higher level of "commercial" use for portions of the former Resource Recovery Farm property located in the SW quadrant of the Prospect Road/1-25 interchange. Staff has concluded that rezoning a substantial portion of the property, 25 acres from C, Commercial and 118 acres from POL, Public Open Lands to E, Employment(for a total of 143 acres of E, Employment)would encourage new businesses and expansion of local businesses while preserving the area as an attractive community gateway and would be in the best interests of the City. 2. Simultaneously, the City received a rezoning request from the owners of property in the NE quadrant of the Prospect Road/1-25 interchange requesting a change in zoning of 86 acres of I, Industrial. Staff decided to review the land uses around the interchange as a result of the rezoning requests from the City and the private property owner to determine what would be the best land use pattern for the area around the interchange for the City as a whole, independent of the specific rezoning requests. The amendments to the plans are related to the rezoning requests but are independent actions. If the amendments to the plans are approved, the rezoning requests are simply implementation actions to the plan amendments. The fundamental policy issue to be addressed in the southwest rezoning request is should City plans be amended and zonings changed to covert an area currently preserved as open space to an area that will permit the development of employment land uses in the SW quadrant of the Prospect Road/1- 25 interchange? The fundamental policy issue to be addressed in this northeast rezoning request is should City plans be amended and zoning changed to allow for the development of a regional/community scale shopping center in the NE quadrant of the Prospect Road/1-25 interchange? A regional/community shopping center in the NE quadrant will help contribute tax revenues necessary to fund Prospect Road/1-25 interchange improvements and related Infrastructure. Given the high infrastructure cost to development from all four quadrants around the interchange, this property will need to contribute funding to improve the interchange. The rezoning needs to be viewed independently from the City's Adequate Public Facilities (APF) requirements: All development plans for parcels impacting the Prospect interchange must include a Transportation Impact Analysis(TIA). The TIA will determine whether traffic generated by the development will result in reduced level of service (LOS)at the interchange and the physical improvements that will need to be constructed to mitigate the impacts. In order to begin construction, Planning &Zoning Board September 20, 2007 Page 6 all development must either build the improvement or have funding appropriated that will cover improvement costs. The regulations covering rezonings in the City of Fort Collins are contained in Division 2.9 of the Land Use Code. Section 2.9.4 (H)(2)indicates the following: Mandatory Requirements for Quasi-Judicial Rezonings. Any amendment to the Zoning Map involving the zoning or rezoning of six hundred forty(640)acres of land or less (a quasi- judicial rezoning)shall be recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board or approved by the City Council only if the proposed amendment is: (a) consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan; and/or (b) warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject property. Section 2.9.4(H) (3) of the Land Use Code indicates the following: Additional Considerations for Quasi-Judicial Rezonings. In determining whether to recommend approval of any such proposed amendment, the Planning and Zoning Board and City Council may consider the following additional factors: (a) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land, and is the appropriate zone district for the land; (b) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water, air, noise, stormwater management, wildlife, vegetation, wetlands and natural functioning of the environment; (c) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern. Interstate 25 Subarea Plan Concurrent with the development of the 1-25 Subarea Plan, was a multi jurisdictional cooperative planning effort to develop the Northern Colorado Regional Communities 1-25 Corridor Plan. The planning boundaries of the two efforts overlapped. The regional plan studied the 1-25 corridor from County Road 52 on the north to an area south of the Town of Berthod, while the subarea plan studied the area from County Road 52 to County Road 32 (Carpenter Road). The most significant difference between the two plans is that the subarea plan (adopted in November 2001)dealt with land uses in more detail than the regional plan. The regional plan was based on existing land use plans of the participating jurisdictions. The regional plan focused on developing a set of design standards, a transportation element, and open lands/natural areas policies. In 2003, the City adopted the /-25 Subarea Plan as an element of City Plan. The key points, conclusions, and policies of the I-25 Subarea Plan are summarized as follows: • The 1-25 Subarea Plan mainly deals with the area located east of 1-25 from around the Prospect Road interchange on the south to County Road 52 on the north, and County Road 5 on the east. • No change in the City's GMA boundary was proposed. • Two activity centers were identified: one at the Mulberry Street interchange and the other at the Prospect Road interchange. The NE quadrant of the Mulberry interchange Planning & Zoning Board September 20, 2007 Page 7 was planned for the potential location of a regional/community shopping center. The NE quadrant of the Prospect interchange was designated as a mix use activity center with commercial, industrial, and residential uses. • Employment and industrial districts adjacent to 1-25 are to be designed in a manner as to maintain a perception of openness through the corridor. • Secondary uses (retail and highway-oriented commercial uses)typically permitted in employmentrindustrial districts will be required to be set back at least''% mile from 1-25 to avoid a commercial strip appearance along 1-25. • Detached single-family residential development is prohibited within % mile of 1-25. • Low density, mixed-use neighborhoods are to be concentrated within '/2 mile of Mulberry Street. • The balance of areas planned for residential development were to be urban estate developments. • The City's Resource Recovery Farm is to be preserved as open space. • The subarea eventually would be served with multi-modal transportation options. A supplemental street system will facilitate movement within the subarea, thus, diminishing the need to utilize 1-25 for short trips. • Most undeveloped land within the subarea is expected to annex prior to development. Regulations contained in the Land Use Code both applicable to the 1-25 corridor and more generally throughout the community are intended to have employmentlindustrial districts designed in a manner to maintain openness through the use of, setback requirements, maximum building frontage allowances, restricting building heights, and proper management of floodplains. Minimum building setback requirements are 205 feet from the centerline of 1-25. Maximum building frontage allowance is 50% at the 80 foot minimum setback from the property line, which can be expanded to 60% at an increased setback of 120 feet. Building heights are restricted to 40 feet within 600 feet from the property line adjoining 1-25. The Prospect interchange represents a key community gateway, combining a balance of economic development and open space preservation. It is logical the interchange maximize the ability for the development of a mix of commercial and employment uses. Changes in the surrounding neighborhood warrant consideration. Land use plans by other jurisdictions are changing the character of areas east of 1-25 from the rural, low-density residential, areas to more intense urban uses. Interchanges are desirable sites for regional serving retail uses. Competition for sales tax dollars is different in 2007. The City's development standards will require adequate public utilities and infrastructure to be in place to assure an orderly development pattern. Prospect interchange will not be funded by CDOT or FHWA. Local revenue sources must be found for interchange improvements. Staff is recommending changes to the I-25 Subarea Plan and the City Plan, Structure Plan map and the following rezoning: • 143.34 acres located in the southwest comer of East Prospect Road & Interstate 25 into the E, Employment District. • In the northeast of 86 acres of I, Industrial to 66 acres of C, Commercial and 20 E, Employment and approval of rezoning 19 acres from UE, Urban Estate to E, Employment to create a 39 acre E zoned buffer between the C, Commercial zoned area (a total of 96 acres) and residential areas to the north and east. Chair Lingle asked Natural Resources Director John Stokes to outline the natural resource value of that land. Member Schmidt also asked if there would be enough buffering of the Boxelder Creek. Planning &Zoning Board September 20, 2007 Page 8 Stokes provided the following background information. The Natural Resources Department's Natural Areas Program completed purchase of the Resource Recovery Farm (RRF)as a scenic and open lands buffer in 2003. At the time of purchase, the eastern portion of the RRF was not described as an area of interest to the Natural Areas Program in the Natural Areas Policy Plan, nor the various community separator plans adopted by the City. Because the eastern portion was not shown in these plans, and because it has low natural resource values, Natural Areas Program staff embarked on a planning process to help guide the property's ultimate management and disposition status. In August of 2005, the Natural Resources staff shared a series of options for the RRF property with the City Council and requested policy direction. The City Council indicated its general preference for a higher level of"commercial" use for the property. Based on Council's perspective, the Natural Resources Department staff concludes that rezoning a substantial portion of the property(118 acres) from POL, Public Open Lands to E, Employment would be in the best interests of the City They are retaining a buffer around Boxelder Creek. The rezoning would allow the property to be used for economic development purposes. At the same time, it would allow the property to be developed in a manner that preserves aesthetically pleasing views from 1-25 as well as protects adjoining areas with high natural values (namely Box Elder Creek and the Running Deer Natural Area). The rezoning excludes Boxelder Creek, it will remain zoned POL. Wendi Birchler of Norris Design, representing the property owners (Rick& Dave White) reported they have been very involved is a series of planning related studies/projects for the interchange, the surrounding area, and along the 1-25 corridor. Listed below is a summary of their involvement: • Boxelder Creek Regional Storm water Alliance. They've served from the inception of the Boxelder Alliance until present as the representative for a group of private property owners including landowners, the City, Town of Wellington, Larimer County, and the Colorado Water Conservation Board, who equally funded the storm water master plan. • The Whites attended North 1-25 Environmental Impact Study Technical Advisory Committee meetings. They've organized group of landowners in the neighborhood of 1-25/Prospect and advised them of interchange issues. They met regularly with City Transportation staff as well as CDOT and consultants on the North 1-25 EIS project. With City Transportation staff and other property owners, they've influenced the proposed alignment and details of the Prospect/1-25 interchange to the advantage of the City. They facilitated meetings between North 1-25 EIS and Boxelder Creek Storm water Alliance to resolve mutual issues. They researched and resolved historic preservation issues with the North 1-25 EIS team. • Prospect Road Improvements. The Smiths organized a group of local property owners concerned about issues pertaining to future Prospect Road improvements. They coordinated regularly with City Transportation and Engineering staff. They facilitated series of public/private meetings with the City, Town of Timnath Engineer, and local property owners to address future improvements to Prospect before they became problems. These issues included : Boxelder Creek crossing of Prospect west of 1-25, Greeley Water Extension & Transmission Project(GWET)crossing of Prospect, Boxelder Sanitation District sewer crossing of Prospect at McLaughlin Lane, Relocation of the Timnath Inlet canal to allow future widening of Prospect, Prospect/County Road 5 intersection issues, Boxelder Creek stormwater overflow canal crossing of Prospect(the Grand Canal). With the Town of Timnath, Planning & Zoning Board September 20, 2007 Page 9 former City Engineer Don Bachman, Cache la Poudre Irrigation Company, Poudre Valley School District and a local developer, they developed a cross section profile of future Prospect ROW which is in use today. Greeley Water Extension &Transmission Project(GWET) GWET is a 60"diameter waterline delivering water from their pre-treatment plant NW of Fort Collins to Greeley. In its nominal configuration, the bottom of the pipeline is to be placed on top of approximately 2 feet of gravel and covered with at least 60"of soil making the total depth of their pipeline excavation and backfill approximately 12 feet. The 2007 segment of this project included a crossing of Prospect Road at McLaughlin Lane, a crossing of 1-25 at a location north of Prospect and completion to a point in the vicinity of the Fort Collins Airpark. The 1-25 crossing is particularly complicated since three irrigation company canal crossings, the Boxelder Creek crossing, a Boxelder Sanitation District sewer line crossing as well as various other utility crossings are located in close proximity to one another. The White's facilitated several public/private meetings with representatives from Greeley, Timnath, Boxelder Alliance, City Transportation/Engineering and Stormwater Departments, the Poudre Valley School District, Boxelder Sanitation District, CDOT, a group of affected landowners, and others to discuss details of the project. They worked closely with Poudre Valley School District personnel regarding crossing of the GWET project across the District's and White's properties. Public Input None Member Schmidt noted on the SW side employment zoning is proposed rather than commercial because of the buffering needed for the Boxelder Ditch. On the other side of the interchange it appears there would be more commercial. Stafnnember Waldo replied yes, with the loss of commercial on the west side, they looked to the east for increased commercial zoning. That came after working with stakeholders who agreed that commercial with employment buffering would be preferred. Member Schmidt asked it this would not continue to be an activity center? Waldo responded we would also amend our activity center boundary to coincide with the outside periphery of the commercial zone. There would need to be a commercial mass to produce the revenue needed to improve the infrastructure(including funding for the interchange.) Member Schmidt said she is in support of the changes,the main reason being the changes driven by the Town of Timnath. With the increase in the intensity of use, it would be an appropriate thing to provide services in the interchange area—conned the whole region with good land use patterns. Southwest Comer of East Prosoect Road and 1-25 Member Schmidt made a motion to approve changes to the 1-25 Subarea Plan based on the matrix found on pages 8-12 of the staff report. Member Campana seconded the motion. Motion was approved 7-0. Member Schmidt made a motion to approve changes to the Structure Plan Map on the southwest corner of East Prospect and 1-25. Member Campana seconded the motion. Motion was approved 7-0. Planning &Zoning Board September 20, 2007 Page 10 Member Schmidt made a motion to approve rezoning of 25.17 acres of Commercial (C) and 118.17 acres of Public Open Lands(POL)to Employment(E) on the southwest corner of East Prospect and 1-25,#04-04A. Member Smith seconded the motion. Motion was approved 7-0. Member Schmidt asked if staff was comfortable with the reduction of i-Industrial land inventory. Staffmember Waido responded yes. Northeast Corner of East Prospect Road and 1-25 Member Schmidt made a motion to approve changes to the 1-25 Subarea Plan based on the matrix found on pages 13-16 of the staff report. Member Smith seconded the motion. Motion was approved 7-0. Member Schmidt made a motion to approve changes to the Structure Plan Map on the northeast corner of East Prospect and 1.25. Member Rollins seconded the motion. Motion was approved 7-0. Member Schmidt wanted to thank the applicant for taking the time to meet with the neighbors to consider their concerns and for working with affected interests on the water issues and creek mitigation. Member Schmidt made a motion to approve rezoning of the northeast corner of East Prospect and 1-25 as listed on page 19 of the staff report. Member Wetzler seconded the motion. Motion was approved 7-0. Other Business: None. Meeting adjourned at 12:00 a.m. of A0AA4"04& Ca ron Gloss, Director 5svid Lingle, Chair I © • • ATTACHMENT 5 City Planning and Community Development ' P.O. Box 580 281 N.College Ave. City of Mort Collins Fort Collins,co 80524 970-221.6376 970-224-6111 Fax fcgov.com MEMORANDUM DATE: February 15, 2008 TO: Mayor and City Councilmembers TH: Darin Atteberry, City Manager Diane Jones, Deputy City Manager / Jeff Scheick, Executive Director, Planning Development and Transportation Joe Frank, Director, City Planning and Community Development FM: Ken Waido, Chief Planner I RE: February 12, 2008, Work Session Summary— I-25 Corridor ATTENDANCE The Mayor and all Council members were in attendance. Staff members presenting included Darin Atteberry, City Manager; Mike Freeman, Chief Financial Officer; Joe Frank, Director, City Planning and Community Development; Ken Waido, Chief Planner; and Mark Jackson, Interim Transportation Director. Josh Birks, Economic and Planning Systems, and Bob Garcia, Colorado Department of Transportation also addressed the Council. SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION The work session covered the I-25 Corridor, including: the current City Plan vision and policies related to the development of community/regional retail centers; environmental influences; the review of three pending applications in the 1-25 Corridor; changes and trends in the retail market and regional conditions; the need for, and financing of, 1-25 interchange transportation improvements; and direction from the Council granting permission for the further processing of the pending applications. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Council requested that staff prepare additional information to respond to the following questions as the pending applications are brought forward: where renewal is a way of life • Do any of the pending applications conflict with existing City Plan policies, and if they do, how do they differ? • What changes in the amounts of undeveloped land within the various use categories are affected by the rezoning requests? • How would the rezonings change the retail square footage absorption capacities of vacant properties within the GMA? • Is there a"preference study" that indicates where people would like to shop, or indicates why they shop at certain locations? • What are the impact on vehicle miles traveled (VMTs) of the rezonings? • Can a summary of commuting patterns into and from the city for employment and shopping purposes be produced? • Can the economic impacts be calculated of that portion of the trips through the interchanges that are for doing business and shopping in Fort Collins? NEXT STEPS Staff obtained Council approval for the further processing the three pending applications as follows: March 4, 2008, Regular Council Meeting • SH-392 Interchange Improvement Plan • NE I-25/Prospect Road—City Plan amendments and rezoning request. March 25, 2008, Council Work Session • Harmony Interchange—City Plan amendments, development standards, and annexation/initial zoning request. April 1 , 2008 City Council Meeting NE Prospect/ 1 =25 Interchange Rezonings 1 Prospect Interchange Rezonings - Q �eLs ON x LDEx gx w IN. q euc.F.x ar C camm w I ed — 3 f .�, .mowecr xo ll #4.04A SW Comer of " 016-07 NE Comer of N 1.25 & Prospect Road Rezoning A 1-25 & Prospect Road Rezoning A wlX FMPw mW WIMO1 Stan P.oyoxad zoning . �.NON IN* 1 SW Corner Rezoning Approved by the City Council 10/ 16/2007 .WELCERNL W , YORLOEROIi N l • W n 1g YV6f� &ICNVE S! r r�6 SRE 11L1M1O1{NW � M]Nf NW i or 1 S � r c�r r 90 #4.04A SW Corner of 9 N #4.04A SW Comer of N 1-25 & Prospect Road Rezoning A 1.25 & Prospect Road Rezoning A ! ..i V1]�Alt I/NaJbv9 M1w�r1VR NE Corner Rezoning Existing and Proposed�l Zoning 'JUL 61 UN ¢ OULSI OR yy / IA 4MMq[LOOP SSS I 1 SITE I N #16,07 NE Comer of N 016-07 NE Comer of N 1.25 & Prospect Road Rezoning A 1-25 & Prospect Road Rezoning A minoor wvnm 51.n v.000..e:oR1Ru ...a�cor 2 NE Corner Rezoning From : 86 acres of I , Industrial To : 66 acres of C , Commercial and 20 acres of E , Employment From : 19 acres of UE , Urban Estate To : 19 acres of E , Employment Result : 96 acres of C , Commercial and 39 acres of E , Employment 5 Fundamental Policy Issue • NE Corner Rezoning - Should City plans be amended and zoning changed to allow for the development of a community/regional retail center and employment land uses ? 6 3 Land Use Code Mandatory Requirements for Quasi =Judicial ( < 640 acres ) Rezonings - ( a ) consistent with City Plan, the City' s Comprehensive Plan ; and / or - ( b) warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject property. 2004 Structure Plan ® CITY OF FORT COLT MS STRUCTURE PLA ' . • The City Plan = Structure Plan map and the policies of City Plan form the basis for judging Al rezoning requests . t n L iL 1 f- I.V 4 1 =25 Subarea Plan Fort Collins 1-25 Subarea Plan • The 1 =25 Subarea Plan Structure Palo is an element of City Plan and contains more specific land use policies and provides development decision making guidance for the areas along the I -25 �-- corridor. 1 A 1 =25 Subarea Plan Major Policies • No change to the GMA boundary . • Two activity centers : Mulberry and Prospect interchanges . NE quadrant of Mulberry planned for the potential location of a regional /community shopping center. • Employment districts adjacent to I -25 to be designed to maintain a perception of openness through the corridor. • The Resource Recovery Farm to be preserved as open space . 10 5 Prospect Road / 1 =25 Interchange • The 1 =25 Subarea Plan shows the interchange as a commercial ( red ) activity center ( dotted _ = 1 line ) with employment ( purple ) and industrial - - ( pink) areas , urban residential ( bright yellow) and rural residential ( light yellow) with natural areas and stream corridors ( green ) . Mandatory Requirements for Quasi -Judicial Rezonings . • ( a ) consistent with City p , Plan , the City ' s Comprehensive Plan ; lei • To support the requested rezonings , amendments to existing plans are necessary . • Neither the SW nor the NE rezoning requests are consistent with exiting adopted plans . 12 6 Recommendation for NE Corner Change the Land Use Plans and Zoning Designations as Requested \` QUIP YI - Q WutII S f , wmmnoon nE u 3 #1647 NE Coma of N M1647 NE Corner of `"�` 1-25 & Prospect Road Rezoning A 1-25 & Prospect Road Rezoning N 13 1ri7001 ewr.mr YIL y sun Prvpo sd&nmq Prospect/ I -25 Activity Center • The Prospect/ 1 =25 interchange was previously identified in the I -25 Subarea Plan as an " activity center. " • The rezoning request increases the size of the community/ regional retail parcel within the activity center (from 30 to 96 acres ) and adds to its importance in the community ' s economic development strategies . 14 7 Prospect Interchange Rezonings • Mandatory Requirements for Quasi =Judicial Rezonings . — ( b ) warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject property . 15 ( b ) warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject property . • Competition for sales tax dollars is different in 2008 than it was earlier in the decade . • Interstate interchanges are desirable sites for regional serving retail uses . • There are limited opportunities within the GMA for new regional serving retail uses . 16 8 Limited Opportunities • Mountain Vista - 72 acres MTN A • NE Mulberry/1 -25 E - 47 acres • NE Prospect/1 =25 - 96 acres (with rezoning) • SW Carpenter/1 =25awl - 109 acres • Foothills Mall/Square - 130 acres ( redevelopment) 17 Limited Opportunities With such a limited supply of sites suitable for the development of regional serving retail uses , interstate interchanges need to be raised in importance in order for the City to maintain a leading role as an important economic center for Northern Colorado . 18 9 ( b) warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject property . • Land use plans by other jurisdictions are changing the character of areas east of I -25 from the rural , low density residential areas , as envisioned in City plans , to more intense urban uses . 19 2004 City Structure Plan o The Structure Plan map east of the Fort Collins GMA shows Rural Land Use ( brown) to make a clear distinction between urban uses inside the GMA and rural it uses outside the GMA o Land uses east of 1 -25 depicted a transition from high intensity urban uses (commercial and 4_ employment) adjacent to 1 -25 , to urban estate residential (maximum of 2 units/acre) inside the GMA, to rural residential , uses ( 1 unit/2 .29 acres) outside 4�_ the GMA. llrrr� 10 Timnath Land Use Plan Comparison Showing Significant Change of Character for Areas East of the GMA I lour slumiluW lr lb• '- 1 WIUNk Y� ri InwrNRwyNf�WNAL. 2007 Timnath Land Use Plan • In 2007 Timnath w..• . L •, - - - amended its Land use L Plan changing the B character of areas east of the GMA : U _ M SE LAND USE P PLAN — added urban commercial and employment uses • - - =-='= — increased residential densities — extended urban uses north to County Road 52 " — eliminated the Fort Collins/Timnath community separator 11 Structure Plan / Timnath Plan • ® Fort Collins/Timnath Compilation map Land Use showing Structure Plan land uses within the GMA and Timnath y Land Use Plan uses M' n i ISIa ,p outside the GMA. - • East of GMA shows employment ( purple ) , commercial ( red ) and - non -rural residential - densities ( gold ) . Implications of Other Plans • Recognition that I -25 is no longer an eastern urban edge of the community as previously contained in the City Plan vision . • City plans need to be reconsidered to address the new regional context of what is happening beyond the City ' s GMA boundary , and regionally along the 1 =25 corridor. 24 12 ( b ) warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject property . • Prospect interchange will not likely be funded by CDOT or FHWA . • Local revenue sources must be found for interchange improvements . 25 Additional Considerations for Quasi =Judicial Rezonings . • ( a ) whether the proposed amendment is compatible with uses surrounding the subject land , and is the appropriate zone district for the land ; • ( b ) whether the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment , • ( c ) whether the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern . 26 13 (a) whether the proposed amendment is compatible with uses surrounding the subject land , and is the appropriate zone district for the land ; • Areas to the N , S , and W are designated for a mix of commercial and employment uses . • The E District will provide a transition from the C District to the residential properties to the N and E . 27 ( a) whether the proposed amendment is compatible with uses surrounding the subject land , and is the appropriate zone district for the land ; • Regulations in the LUC are intended to have employment districts along the 1 =25 corridor designed to maintain openness through . . Increased setback requirements , . maximum building frontage allowances , . restricting building heights , and . proper management of floodplains . 28 14 ( b) whether the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment ; • Development in the C and E Districts would have no adverse impacts on the natural environment . • Development applications will be subject to the City ' s development standards relative to : . natural habitat , . energy conservation , . stormwater, and . landscape design . 29 ( b) whether the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment ; • Part of the reason for enlarging the C zoning in the NE was to devote land (about 20 acres ) to the proper management of the Boxelder Creek floodplain . 30 15 ( c ) whether the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern . • The Prospect interchange represents a key community gateway , combining a balance of economic development and open space preservation . • It is logical that the interchange maximize the ability for the development of a mix of commercial and employment uses . 31 ( c) whether the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern . • The City ' s development standards will require adequate public utilities and infrastructure to be in place to assure an orderly development pattern . 32 16 Comparison of Existing Zoning and Proposed Zoning Existing Proposed Zoning Acres Acres Commercial 30 96 Industrial 86 0 Employment 0 39 Urban Estate 19 0 Total 135 135 Buildable Lands Inventory Existing Vacant Acres gone Vacant Acres Rezoning ( + & -) 1 724 - 86 ( NE ) 638 Total 34 17 Buildable Lands Inventory Existing Vacant Acres Zone Vacant Acres Rezoning ( + & -) + 143 ( SW) E 710 + 39 ( NE ) 892 Total 35 Buildable Lands Inventory Existing Vacant Acres Zone Vacant Acres Rezoning ( + & -) .25 (SW) C 447 + 66 ( NE ) 488 Total 36 18 Buildable Lands Inventory Existing Vacant Acres Zone Vacant Acres Rezoning ( + & -) UE 25254 - 19 ( NE ) 2 , 235 Total 37 Staff and P &Z Board Recommend Approval uuuT oR B v OR wr.u�oon i SITE I N #16,07 NE Comer of N 016-07 NE Comer of N 1.25 & Prospect Road Rezoning A 1-25 & Prospect Road Rezoning A minooi unvnm slm v.000R.e:oRRu ...R—rar 19 RESOLUTION 2008-028 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING THE CITY'S STRUCTURE PLAN MAP PERTAINING TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF PROSPECT ROAD AND I-25 WHEREAS, the City has received an application to rezone certain property located at the northeast corner of East Prospect Road and Interstate Highway 25, hereafter referred to as the "Northeast Corner of East Prospect and I-25 Rezoning"; and WHEREAS, the rezoning application requests that the subject property be rezoned as follows: Parcel A would be rezoned from the Industrial("I")Zone District to the Commercial("C") Zone District; Parcel B would be rezoned from the Urban Estate ("UE") Zone District to the Employment ("E") Zone District; and Parcel C would be rezoned from the Industrial ("I") Zone District to the Employment(`E") Zone District; and WHEREAS, the Council finds that, while the proposed Northeast Corner of East Prospect and I-25 Rezoning does not comply with the present land use designation shown on the City's Structure Plan Map for that location, it complies with the Principles and Policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan, as well as the Key Principles of the City's Structure Plan; and WHEREAS,accordingly,the Council has determined that the proposed Northeast Corner of East Prospect and I-25 Rezoning is in the best interests of the citizens of the City; and WHEREAS, the Council has further determined that the City's Structure Plan Map should be amended as shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto, so that the proposed rezoning will comport with the City's Comprehensive Plan in its entirety, including the City's Structure Plan Map. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, as follows: Section 1. That the City Council finds that the existing City Plan Structure Plan Map is in need of the amendment requested by the applicant for the Northeast Corner of East Prospect and I-25 Rezoning. Section 2. That the City Council finds that the proposed amendment will promote the public welfare and will be consistent with the vision,goals,principles and policies of City Plan and the elements thereof. Section 3. That the City Plan Structure Plan Map is hereby amended so as to appear as shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held this 1 st day of April, A. D. 2008. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Cit Fort Collins STRUCTURE PLAN 'v'�'• Wellin ton /---- -- - - - - - - - - 'I - - - - - - - C-R•58 --- �- — Windsor 87 aesenar lY Fort Collins - --- � - - —�— Wellington 5 . - Separator x 1 Lake D4wglas eke Bellvu La Porte _ - -, e Tern CR 54G - --- \Li:iiiiiiiiiiii C-R.53 Long Pond r --Country-Club-. > 1 ti Willox 1 _ - denmu�ei _ Lake Mountain-Vista Foothills -"T" �-"'go VSine-. Campus t LIJ�[ Ill '� �`�� t \ �� Expansion Area .l � Mulbeiry— —SH-14 J Lory wf + `� - State CSU Park Prospect Li CSUtadiu U E lr r1� U-Drake- -� - - ~ � -_� r / rmnath , Fort C Ilins - Reain vo � .III Tim ath Horsetooth Saps ator Mountain Horsetooth Park 1 1 int 0I nath _.._._.- -Harmony--- H, Harmony I r n M 117 r q U _ 1 O Fort ollins Ti nath - co Windsor 'fJ, Separator Wildflowe ° Trilby - - -� 10 Tea ' .., ice_ kk it, iat5" ` t I - � .._-_..__.._..__.__.. Caroenter , � SH 392 - I. I Fort Collins - 87 Loveland Separator Windsor _ CRr38 Lov1and D 0.5 1 Boundaries Districts 0 ITTIiiiiii Miles ,,�ppeepp Fort Collins GMA Downtown District dF Industrial District Edaes Corridors 1�2J � Community Separator N Enhanced Travel Corridor (Transit) r�rJ Potential GMA Expansion Community Commercial District Neighborhoods '"444�YYYi � Foothills � Poudre River Corridor .JF�I Other City GMA If Commercial Corridor District Urban Estate `4Y � Rural Lands Poudre River 461aPlanning Area dF Neighborhood Commercial Center Low Density Mixed-Use If Open Lands, Parks, Stream Corridors Adjacent Planning Areas 4F Campus District Medium Density Adopted Mixed-Use April 1, 2008 ^/ City Limits dF Employment District RESOLUTION 2008-029 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING THE I-25 SUBAREA PLAN PERTAINING TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF PROSPECT ROAD AND I-25 WHEREAS, the City has received an application to rezone certain property located at the northeast comer of East Prospect Road and Interstate Highway 25 (hereafter referred to as the "Northeast Corner of East Prospect and I-25 rezoning"); and WHEREAS, this rezoning application would result in zoning changes to the lands located therein which necessitate not only the amendment of the City's Structure Plan Map but also the amendment of the I-25 Subarea Plan; and WHEREAS,Council has,this same date,adopted Resolution 2008-028 amending the City's Structure Plan Map,so that the proposed rezoning would now comply with the land uses as set forth on said Map; and WHEREAS, the Council has also determined that the proposed rezoning is in the best interests of the citizens of the City and that the I-25 Subarea Plan should be amended to correspond with the amendment to the City's Structure Plan Map so that,with respect to the northeast quadrant of Prospect Road and I-25,the Commercial and Employment Districts will be consistent with both the Structure Plan Map and the I-25 Subarea Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council finds that the I-25 Subarea Plan is in need of the amendment requested by the applicant for the Northeast Corner of East Prospect and I-25 rezoning. Section 2. That the City Council finds that the proposed amendments to the I-25 Subarea Plan will promote the public welfare and will be consistent with the vision, goals, principles and policies of City Plan and the elements thereof. Section 3. That the I-25 Subarea Plan is hereby amended as shown on Exhibit"A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 1 st day of April, A.D. 2008. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk EXHIBIT "A" Existing Amendments Justification Statements, Policies, Maps Deletiens Additions for the Change Page vi The undeveloped land in the NE quadrant of the I-25 and Executive Summary: Mulberry Street interchange initially planned for the Two activity centers are Two activity centers are potential location of a identified for the subarea, identified fer in the subarea regional/community one at the I-25/Mulberry for the potential location of shopping center is Street interchange and the regional/community approximately 50 acres in other at the I-25/Prospect shopping centers, one at the size. Adding 66 acres of Road interchange. The I-25/Mulberry Street commercial zoned land to northeast quadrant of the I- interchange and the other at the existing 30 acres at the 25/Mulberry Street the I-25/Prospect Road NE quadrant of the Prospect interchange is also planned interchange. The xeAheast Road and I-25 interchange for the potential location of quadrant would make a 96 acre a re ional/communi ty 'c n,e. " ,nzy 94f e t parcel large enough for a shopping center. regional or community shopping center. However, all 96 acres are not totally shopping eeateF. developable due to 20 acres of site constraints, including the Boxelder Creek floodplain. Therefore,the total developable size of the commercial area would be 76 acres, or about the size of the Foothills Mall property. The need for additional undeveloped commercial land in the City is critical for the community to provide alternative locations for retail development in Northern Colorado. Interstate interchanges are a logical location for regionally serving retail development. t EXHIBIT "A" Existing Amendments Justification Statements, Policies, Maps Deletion Additions for the Change Page 21 With the rezoning of 25 acres of commercial zoning 5.2 Land Use Plan to employment zoning in Objectives the SW quadrant of the Prospect Road/1-25 Designation of Activity Designation of Activity interchange and the relative Centers. This plan Centers. This plan lack of commercial zoning designates activity centers designates activity centers in the community as a along I-25 at the Prospect along I-25 at the Prospect whole, it is important to Road and Mulberry Street Road and Mulberry Street maintain a significant interchanges. These centers interchanges. These centers amount of commercial are intended to evolve into are intended to evolve into zoning at the Prospect/I-25 concentrated areas of concentrated areas of interchange. Basically, mixed-use development mixed-use development transferring 25 acres of with high visibility, with high visibility, Commercial zoning from increased levels of activity, increased levels of activity, the SW quadrant to the 30 and more integrated and more integrated acres of Commercial zoning appearances. In addition, appearances in the NE quadrant is a the northeast quadrant of start. However, due to the I-25/Mulberry the r '� development constraints in interchange is planned as a the NE quadrant, such as potential location for a and also the potential land needed to regional/community locations for-a accommodate the Boxelder shopping center. regional/community floodway, etc., which shopping centers. requires about 20 acres, additional land is necessary to be designated for commercial development above the simple addition of 25 acres from the SW quadrant. A total of 96 acres of commercial zoning is requested and should be sufficiently large enough for a regional/community shopping center. 2 EXHIBIT "A" Existing Amendments Justification Statements, Policies, Maps Deletion Additions for the Change Page 26 The map amendments will graphically depict the Fort Collins I-25 Subarea wording changes being Plan—Land Use Plan made in the I-25 Subarea Plan. Existing map. The map will be amended to delete 86 acres of Industrial designated land and 19 acres of Urban Estate land in the NE quadrant and to show about 66 acres of additional Commercial land and 20 acres of Employment land in the NE quadrant of the Prospect/I-25 interchange. Also, the Activity Centers boundary around the Commercial Corridor designated land in the NE quadrant will be expanded to cover all 96 acres of commercial designated land. Page 26 The map amendments will also graphically depict the Fort Collins I-25 Subarea proposed zoning changes to Plan—Zoning Plan show 96 total acres of the C, Commercial District and Existing map. The map will be amended 39 acres of the E, to delete 86 acres of I, Employment District in the Industrial zoning and 19 NE. acres of Urban Estate zoning to show about 66 additional acres of C, Commercial zoning and 20 acres of E, Employment zoning the NE quadrant of the Prospect/I-25 interchange adjacent to the highway. 3 ORDINANCE NO. 032, 2008 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FOR THAT CERTAIN PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF EAST PROSPECT ROAD AND I-25 REZONING WHEREAS, Division 1.3 of the Fort Collins Land Use Code (the "Land Use Code") establishes the Zoning Map and Zone Districts of the City; and WHEREAS, Division 2.9 of the Land Use Code establishes procedures and criteria for reviewing the rezoning of land; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the foregoing, the Council has considered the rezoning of the property which is the subject of this ordinance,and has determined that said property should be rezoned as hereafter provided; and WHEREAS,the Council has further determined that the proposed rezoning is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and/or is warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject property; and WHEREAS, the Council has further determined that, upon consideration of the criteria established in Section 2.9.4(11)(3)(c), the rezoning hereafter described should include a condition that all lands rezoned under this ordinance be developed under a single overall development plan, in order to ensure a logical and orderly development pattern; and WHEREAS,to the extent applicable, the Council has also analyzed the proposed rezoning against the considerations set forth in Section 2.9.4(H)(3) of the Land Use Code. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the Zoning Map adopted by Division 1.3 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by changing the zoning classification of Parcel A from Industrial ("I" ) Zone District, to Commercial ("C") Zone District, Parcel B from Urban Estates ("UE") Zone District, to ("E") Employment Zone District, and Parcel C from Industrial ("I") Zone District to Employment("E") Zone District for the following described property in the City known as the Northeast Corner of East Prospect Road and I-25 Rezoning: Parcel "A" A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 68 WEST, 6TH P.M., COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE BASED UPON THE FOLLOWING:THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER(SEI/4)OF SECTION 15 ASSUMING TO BEAR NORTH 89056'23"WEST WITH ALL OTHER BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE THERETO. THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 15 IS A FOUND REBAR WITH A 2.5" ALUMINUM CAP STAMPED "LS5028". THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER IS A FOUND REBAR WITH A 2.5" ALUMINUM CAP STAMPED "LS 28295". THE FOLLOWING DESCRIPTION CONTAINS AREAS THAT ARE OWNED BY GROUPS OTHER THAN LAAM., SPECIFICALLY THE PROSPECT ROW AND THE INLET CANAL ROW. COMMENCING AT THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 15; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 15 NORTH 89056'38" WEST 635.26 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE NORTH 89056'38" WEST, 466.90 FEET; THENCE LEAV ING SAID SOUTHERLY LINE NORTH 07°00'10"EAST, 191.80 FEET; THENCE NORTH 03030'59" EAST, 120.05 FEET; THENCE NORTH 13012'43" EAST, 84.97 FEET; THENCE NORTH 04034'l8" EAST, 117.51 FEET; THENCE NORTH 30023'25" EAST, 95.23 FEET; THENCE NORTH 03035'32" WEST, 112.92 FEET; THENCE NORTH 39054'34" WEST, 66.61 FEET; THENCE NORTH 76016'30" WEST, 150.63 FEET; THENCE NORTH 84056'30" WEST, 552.56 FEET; THENCE NORTH 67049'30" WEST, 101.38 FEET; THENCE NORTH 54049'03" WEST, 895.34 FEET; THENCE NORTH 14023-52" WEST, 78.64 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00014'26" EAST, 1151.18 FEET; THENCENORTH 09°23'57"WEST,59.72 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 15; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE SOUTH 89035'57" EAST, 858.54 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00003'22" WEST, 800.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89035'57" EAST, 1100.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00003'22" WEST, 1867.60 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL CONTAINS 2840637 SQ. FT. (65.212 ACRES) MORE OR LESS. Parcel `B" ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE BASED UPON THE FOLLOWING:THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER(SEI/4)OF -2- SECTION 15 ASSUMING TO BEAR NORTH 89056'23" WEST WITH ALL OTHER BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE THERETO. THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 15 IS A FOUND REBAR WITH A 2.5" ALUMINUM CAP STAMPED"LS5028". THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER IS A FOUND REBAR WITH A 2.5" ALUMINUM CAP STAMPED "LS 28295". COMMENCING AT THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 15; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 15 NORTH 89056'38" WEST 635.26 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00003'22" EAST, 1334.24 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 00003'22" EAST, 1333.36 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89035'57" EAST, 639.66 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00008'25" WEST, 1331.29 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89047'03" WEST, 637.70 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL CONTAINS 850922 SQ. FT. (19.534 ACRES) MORE OR LESS. Parcel "C" A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 68 WEST, 6TH P.M., COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE BASED UPON THE FOLLOWING:THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER(SE1/4)OF SECTION 15 ASSUMING TO BEAR NORTH 89056'23" WEST WITH ALL OTHER BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE THERETO. THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 15 IS A FOUND REBAR WITH A 2.5" ALUMINUM CAP STAMPED"LS5028". THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER IS A FOUND REBAR WITH A 2.5" ALUMINUM CAP STAMPED "LS 28295". COMMENCING AT THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 15; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 15 NORTH 89056'38" WEST 635.26 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00003'22" EAST, 1867.60 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 89035-57" WEST, 1100.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00003'22" EAST, 800.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89035'57" EAST, 1100.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00003'22" WEST, 800.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL CONTAINS 879984 SQ. FT. (20.202 ACRES) MORE OR LESS. Section 2. That the Sign District Map adopted pursuant to Section 3.8.7(E)of the Land -3- Use Code be, and the same hereby is, changed and amended by showing that the above-described property is not included in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. Section 3. That,under the authority provided in Section 2.9.4(I)and Section 2.2.9 of the Land Use Code,the rezoning as described in Section 1 is conditioned upon the requirement that all of the lands described in Section 1 shall be developed under a single overall development plan, in order to insure that the rezoning will result in a logical and orderly development pattern. Section 4. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to amend said Zoning Map in accordance with this Ordinance. Introduced,considered favorably on first reading,and ordered published this 1st day of April, A.D. 2008, and to be presented for final passage on the 15th day of April, A.D. 2008. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 15th day of April, A.D. 2008. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk -4-