Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 04/27/2004 - SPRING 2004 LAND USE CODE AMENDMENTS - NATURAL FEA DATE: April 27, 2004 STUDY SESSION ITEM STAFF: John Stokes FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Spring 2004 Land Use Code Amendments—Natural Feature Buffers. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED The purpose of this study session is to introduce Council to a number of proposed changes to the City's Natural Habitat and Features protection standards (Section 3.4.1 of the Land Use Code) intended to address various issues that have arisen through the application of the existing Code provisions. Staff seeks direction from Council regarding the proposed conceptual approach to addressing each of these issues outlined below. Section 3.4.1 of the Code, adopted seven years ago, is intended to help integrate conservation of natural habitats and features (such as wetlands and raptors nests) into the City's urban fabric as development occurs. Natural Resources and Current Planning staff believe that various changes can be made to the Code that will better balance development and conservation outcomes. These Code changes will make it easier to process development applications,resolve some of the inherent values conflict associated with conservation and development and,in some cases,strengthen conservation results. Although there are a number of proposed revisions, the most important and substantive relate to three major themes: 1. Changes to the way development applications are reviewed and processed. 2. Changes to raptor buffer standards. 3. Changes to wetland standards. Although the three major areas of changes are regarded as a package, only items 1 and 2 will be potentially ready for Council action in June. Item 3, pertaining to wetlands, will be broadly reviewed during the study session,however,specific changes will be developed and brought forward in the fall. ATTACHMENTS Memorandum: Land Use Code Amendments —Natural Feature Buffers. Spring 2004 Land Use Code Changes Community Planning and Environmental Services Natural Resources Department ity of Fort Collins Memorandum To: City Coun�cil l From: Doug Mom, Ted dard, John Stes, Tom Vosl g Date: April 19, 2004 Re: Land Use Code Amendments—Natural Feature Buffers. Spring 2004 Land Use Code Changes Background: With the adoption of the Land Use Code in 1997, Council adopted Section 3.4.1 relating to Natural Habitat and Feature protection. This section of the Code was designed to provide clear natural feature protection standards and to help clarify the development review process with respect to the conservation of natural features such as wetlands, riparian areas, and raptor nesting sites. Formerly, under the Land Development Guidance System, there was limited guidance as to how natural features were to be protected. • Thus, it was difficult to address natural features during the development review process on a consistent and predictable basis. In 1999, Section 3.4.1 of the Land Use Code was significantly revised to include a buffer standards table for various features (see below). Currently, the Code discourages any activity that encroaches more than 20%into the buffer standard (also referred to as "buffer zone"). The Code also contains performance standards that applicants must meet if they propose to encroach on the buffer zone. The performance standards are designed to ensure that qualitative measures are taken to ensure the protection of the natural feature. For example, tree plantings, wetlands restoration, non-native plant control, or re- grading a site to its natural contour could be required to help meet performance standards. BUFFER ZONE STANDARDS FOR FORT COLLINS NATURAL HABITATS AND FEATURES',2 NATURAL HABITAT OR FEATURE BUFFER ZONE STANDARD'' solated Areas rogation ditches that serve as wildlife 50 feet corridors • solated patches of native grassland or 50 feet i_h College "Venue - ;O.Box 580 - 7r:(t Collins,CO 80522-0580 • (970)221-6600 • FAX(970)224-6177 shrubland Isolated patches of native upland or 50 feet riparian forest oodlots/farmstead windbreaks 25 feet Naturalized irrigation ponds 50 feet Naturalized storm drainage 50 feet channels/detention ponds Lakes or reservoirs 100 feet Wetlands< 1/3 acre in size 50 feet Wetlands> 1/3 acre in size, without 100 feet significant use by waterfowl and/or shorebirds Wetlands> 1/3 acre in size with 300 feet significant use by waterfowl and/or shorebirds. Stream Corridors oxelder Creek 100 feet Cache la Poudre River(west UGA 300 feet boundary to College Avenue) ache la Poudre River in downtown 200 feet (College to Lincoln Avenue)Z Cache la Poudre River (Lincoln Avenue 300 feet o east UGA boundary) Cooper Slough 300 feet ry Creek 106 feet ossil Creek and Tributaries 100 feet Spring Creek 100 feet • Special Habitat Features/Resources of Special Concern Bald eagle communal feeding sites 660 feet Bald eagle communal roost sites 1,320 feet Bald eagle nest sites 2,640 feet Red-tailed and Swainson's hawk nest 1,320 feet sites Winter raptor concentration areas 300 feet Great blue heron colonial nest sites 825 feet igratory waterfowl concentration areas 300 feet IN esting waterfowl concentration areas 300 feet • Special Habitat Features/Resources of Special Concern Migratory shorebird concentration areas 300 feet Nesting shorebird concentration areas 300 feet IM igratory songbird concentration areas 300 feet ocations of Preble's meadow jumping 300 feet ouse ocations of rare butterfly species r e analysis Locations of rare, threatened or site analysis endangered plant species ocations of geological or site analysis aleontological sites of special interest • In general, staff believes that Section 3.4.1 of the Code and the buffer and performance standards have worked well. There are some areas of the Code,however,that staff believes can be improved. The three major areas for improvement include: 1) Changes to the way development applications are reviewed and processed. 2) Changes to raptor buffer standards. 3) Changes to wetland standards. Application Review Process, Issues: Section 3.4.1 is unusual in that there is an"automatic"call-up provision to the Planning and Zoning Board(P&Z) whenever an applicant goes below the 20% encroachment threshold and even if the applicant is meeting the objectives of the performance standards. This is mandatory even if the project is eligible for Type I review. Thus, if an applicant goes below the 20% threshold,he must bring a full Project Development Plan (PDP) to P&Z. There are no other call-up provisions in the Land Use Code similar to the call-up requirement of Section 3.4.1. Typically the applicant can seek a stand-alone modification of a standard prior to full submission of the PDP. This process was designed to allow for a determination of the modification request without investing in the required level of engineering design prior to receiving guidance on whether or not the modification would be acceptable. Unfortunately,because of the 80/20 ratio and the automatic call-up, the manner in which 3.4.1 applications currently are processed defaults to a purely quantitative approach as opposed to a more integrated qualitative approach. For example, staff could allow for a reduction in the buffer standard that exceeds 20% if the performance standards also were being met and thus provide a conservation result that would be better than if a strict application of the buffer standard were applied. Application Review Process,Proposed Changes: To ameliorate the call-up problem, and to lead to better outcomes, it is proposed that the 80/20 ratio be eliminated and that staff be allowed to reduce or enlarge the buffer standards and to apply the performance standards without having to go to P&Z immediately. This would allow a PDP that triggers review under Section 3.4.1 to proceed to public hearing in the same manner as all other PDP's. Regardless of this proposed change, all projects would continue to go through a public hearing, either with a hearings officer or to P&Z and all Type II applications would continue to be reviewed by P&Z. Raptor Buffer Standards/Issues: Raptors are birds of prey that typically require large areas to successfully forage and breed. At 1,320 feet, the buffer standard for raptors encompasses a half-mile diameter and 126 acres of land. Because of its size, the standard intimidates landowners, may • cause surreptitious removal of nesting trees, and is difficult to enforce. Staff believes that a revised standard, in addition to providing mitigation options and criteria, will lead to better balance in development and conservation outcomes. Recently, staff asked EDAW to review the scientific literature related to raptors and flushing distances. Flushing distance is the distance at which a raptor sitting on a nest becomes disturbed by an approaching human and then leaves the nest(usually to return after the disturbance has subsided). The literature indicates that flushing distances are in excess of 1,500.' All of the studies that were reviewed were conducted in rural or wiidland areas. As far as we have been able to determine, very little research has been performed on raptors nesting in urban environments. Fort Collins currently has about 26 nesting raptors within the Growth Management Area and 10 nesting raptors within the City limits. Four of the nests within the City limits occur in urbanized areas, the other six occur in areas that may be subject to future development activities. Many of the nests are supported by substantial amounts of raptor habitat acquired through the City's Natural Areas program. Raptor Standards/Pronosed Changes: • The proposed new buffer standard is 900' (a circle with a radius of 900' equals approximately 58 acres). • • An applicant would be allowed to encroach on the 900' by one-half the distance, or 450.' The potential area of land that could be affected by this encroachment is 43 acres. MITIGATION ZONE NEST SITE �-�NO DISTURBANCE! NO BUILD ZONE i Obviously the proposed buffer standard is less than the 1,500' noted as a flushing distance in the scientific literature. Nevertheless, after staff consultation with the • Colorado Division of Wildlife raptor specialist and a local raptor biologist, the 900' and 450' buffers were identified as potentially adequate distances for those hawks that are able to adapt to urban environments. In fact, such hawks already nest within City limits. RMtor mitigation: • It is proposed that applicants encroaching within the zone that occurs from 900' to 450' be required to provide mitigation. At this point, staff is considering two types of mitigation. The first entails land acquisition that meets certain criteria, such as proximity to open space or suitability as raptor habitat. The second form of mitigation would be a payment-in-lieu of land acquisition. Staff has not yet determined what a suitable land acquisition ratio would be, nor has staff determined how a payment-in-lieu fee would be structured. Both mitigation lands and funds would enhance the efforts of the Natural Areas program to conserve suitable raptor habitat. Exceptions: Staff is proposing that certain zone districts be exempted from requirement to conserve raptor nests. These could include Commercial or Community Commercial zones which are already intensely developed, or zoned for intense levels of development. An applicant with a nest in one of these districts could essentially encroach on the entire conservation buffer,but would be required to leave the nest tree and to mitigate for the full extent of the encroachment. Wetlands Standards and Issues: Changes are not being proposed to wetland standards this spring. Staff does propose, • however, to bring forward specific changes to the wetland standards in fall, 2004. In anticipation of those changes, a brief outline of the issues and possible conservation strategies are included here. Section 3.4.1 of the Code currently provides setbacks from wetlands. While these setbacks work well in many situations, they fail to discriminate between lower and higher quality wetlands and they do not provide any guidance on possible mitigation strategies. Staff has observed situations wherein a low quality wetland is conserved with a great deal of effort and cost, when it might make more sense to provide a mitigation alternative that actually leads to a better conservation outcome. To achieve this approach, it will be necessary to: • Create a wetland typing system • Create a wetland ranking system • Create appropriate mitigation guidelines for low-quality wetlands Wetland typing, ranking, and mitigation systems are used by a number of other communities throughout the country. Staff will be examining those other systems and creating a template that is appropriate to Fort Collins for Council's consideration this fall. In sum, it is staff s belief that better conservation outcomes will be achievable with a • more sophisticated approach to wetlands conservation.