Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 03/16/1999 - SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 41, 1999, MAKING V AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ITEM NUMBER: 14 DATE: March 16, 1999 FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Tom Vosburg SUBJECT: Second Reading of Ordinance No.41, 1999,Making Various Amendments to the Fort Collins Land Use Code. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Ordinance No.41, 1999,was unanimously adopted on First Reading on March 2, 1999,and makes the following revisions to the Land Use Code: 1. Re-evaluation and refinement of the Natural Habitat Protection Standards; 2. Re-evaluation and refinement of the "Block Standards" and other development standards contained in the LMN, MMN,NC and CC zones. 3. Exemption of the Harmony Corridor and Fossil Creek Reservoir Plan areas from the contiguity requirement contained in the Compact Urban Growth Standards. 4. Clarification and refinement of the process and standards for Planning and Zoning Board review of requests for Modifications to Land Use Code Standards. One affected property owner offered detailed comments outlining concerns with the proposed changes at the March 2 meeting. Council directed staff to review and respond to the property owner's concerns. Staff met with the property owner, and explained how the proposed Code revisions relate to their property. The property owner now understands that the specific changes proposed with this Ordinance do not directly affect the developability of their property,but that other existing Code provisions do affect how the property maybe developed. Staff is continuing to work with the property owner regarding how to work through these issues. The property owner indicated that the proposed clarifications to the Modifications to Land Use Code Standards process will be very helpful and important to them in exploring options for their property. Changes Proposed for Second Reading Although not directly related to the developability of their own property, the property owners also expressed concerns that the proposed changes to the blocks standards would significantly decrease the commitment to supporting mixed use development in the MMN, NC and CC zones. Staff DATE: March 16, 1999 2 ITEM NUMBER: 14 reviewed these concerns, and agrees with the property owner that the changes as adopted on First Reading would significantly affect the ability of some small parcels to support mixed use development. To address this concern, staff has concluded that some additional provisions should be added on Second Reading of the Ordinance to the secondary use limitations staff is proposing for these zones. The existing Code imposes "block type" mix requirement on all projects greater than 10 acres. Parcels smaller than 10 acres are now free from additional land use mix controls beyond that already defined by the permitted uses in these zones. Staff is proposing to replace the "block type" mix requirement with a limit on secondary uses in order use a more administratively practical regulatory method to achieve approximately the same end result. However,the draft secondary uses limitations adopted on March 2 did not carry over the existing exemption for parcels smaller than 10 acres. Staff agrees that unless this exemption is carried over to the new secondary use limitation language, the proposed changes would indeed represent a significant reduction in the ability to do mixed use development on small parcels in these zones. That is not the intent of these proposed revisions. Although it may be appropriate to reconsider the size of parcels exempted from some form of land use mix control, changing the size threshold for such exemptions would constitute a significant change in the practical effect of the regulations, and could not be characterized a minor revision to the Code. As a result, staff has amended the Ordinance on Second Reading to include the existing exemption for parcels under 10 acres in the new limitations on secondary uses. These changes are in Sections 7, 9,and 12 of the Ordinance. Staff will re-evaluate size thresholds for secondary use limitations in these zones as part of the continuing work on the block standards now scheduled for Council consideration in November of this year. AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ITEM NUMBER: 30 A-B FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL DATE: March 2, 1999STAFF• Tom Vosburg SUBJECT: Items Relating to the Land Use Code. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of Pe Resolution and tlieArdinance on First Reading. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: A. Resolution 99-26 Amending Policy GM-5.1 of the "Principles and Policies' Element of the Comprehensive Plan of the City. B. First Reading of Ordina#ice No. 41, 199%,M*ing Various Amendments to the Fort Collins Land Use Code. „ t z,_.. These recommendations address four issues that were originally identified as part of the Fall 1998 Land Use Code maintenance process, but which were not included in the December ordinance in order to allow time to work on the issues. The issues addressed by these proposed revisions are: 1. Re-evaluation and refinement of the Natural Habitat Protection Standards; m ,. 2. Re-evaluation and refiTment of the "Blkc Standards" and other development standards contained in the LMN,`MMN,NC and QC zones. S 3. Exemption of the Harmony Corridor and Fossil Creek Reservoir Plan areas from the Contiguity requirement contained in the Compact Urban Growth Standards. 4. Clarification and refinement of the process and standards for Planning and Zoning Board review of requests for Modifications to Land Use Code standards. The exemption of the Harmony Corridor and Fossil Creek areas from the contiguity requirement (issue 3 above) requires Council adoption of a Resolution to amend the City Plan Principles and Policies. DATE: March 2, 1999 2 ITEM NUMBER: 30 A-B Each of the issues addressed by these proposed revisions is considered by staff to be a major revision as opposed to being a minor housekeeping issue. Staff will make a full presentation regarding each issue. Staff briefly reviewed these issues with the Council Growth Management Committee at its February 22 meeting. The Planning and Zoning Board held a public hearing on these issues on February 19, 1999, and recommended that Council adopt the proposed revisions, with the exemption of one element of the proposed changes to the 'Block Standards". The Planning and Zoning Board's recommendation is outlined in more detail below. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: ';, These recommendations address a number of issues that have recently emerged or have otherwise been identified by staff as being appropriate to consider outside the context of the semi-annual Land Use Code maintenance process. 1. Re-evaluate the Natural Habitat Protection Standards. The Council Growth Management Committee directed staff to re-evaluate the Natural Area and Features protection regulations contained in'the Land Use Code irnvsponse to concerns voiced by the Natural Resources Advisory,Board and the Plannin%and Zomng Board. Key issues of concern that have been identified include how the minimum buffer,,distances from natural areas are determined, as well as what kinds ofvegetatiofi is appropriate within the buffer zone. Staff is proposing the following revisions to respond to these concerns: a. Generally re-organize and clarify the existing standards to provide a clearer applicability sta?ement and to eliminate redundant language; b. Clarify the standards used to establish natural area buffers by utilizing a table of specific recommended minimum buffer distanc for different types of resources to be used in conjuncttor ith ex-Wfi ting performance criteria; W c. Give the Planning and, Zonin ,..Board_authority .over the buffer distance performance criteria in Type 2 review projects; d. Require Planning and Zoning Board review of projects impacting Sensitive and Specially Valued Species; e. Require native vegetation be used in restoring buffer areas when non-native vegetation is present; f. Strengthen existing design standards for projects in stream corridors by clarifying their applicability to above-ground utilities. DATE: March 2, 1999 3 ITEM NUMBER: 30 A-B This issue has been extensively reviewed with the Planning and Zoning Board, the Natural Resources Advisory Board, and the Parks and Recreation Board. Both the Natural Resources Advisory Board and the Parks and Recreation Board voted to recommend that Council adopt the Code revisions as proposed. Attachment 1 consists of a memo from Tom Shoemaker dated February 3 that provides background on this issue and outlines the key elements of the proposed revisions. 2. Re-evaluation and refinement of the 'Block Standards"and other development standards contained in the LMN, MMN NC and CC zones. Experience with recent projects indicates the need to continue to refine the various standards contained within the"Block Standards". Past refinements have addressed difficulties with applying the standards to in-fill development. Current concerns relate to the mix of land use and block types required by the standards. To address these issues, staff is proposing the following changes to the following zones: a. LMN Zone: Revise the neighborhood center requirement to require that 90 percent of all units be within 3/4 mile of a neighborhood center, instead of requiring a neighborhood center to be located in each quarter section. b. MMN Zone: Replace the civic bloclorequirement vWith a new requirement that 90 percent of all residentia limits be within 1/4 mile of a park, plaza or other civic amenity. c. MMN, NC and CC Zones: Replace the block type mix requirements with limitations on specific secondary uses. Delete minimum FAR requirements. Replace the minimum number of building stories with a minimum building height requirement. d. NC and CC Zones: Allow 10 acre size for blocks with supermarkets. Attachment 2 is a memo from Tom Vosburg dated February 3, 1999, that provides additional background information related to this issue -° The Planning and Zoning Board recommended that Council adopt each of the changes proposed by staff, except that the minimum two-story building height requirement be retained in the Code and not replaced by a minimum building height of 20 feet. While the Board agreed that it was inappropriate to mandate all buildings in the NC and CC zones be two stories,the Board requested that the existing requirements stay in effect until staff could proposed requirements that provide stronger incentives for two-story development in these areas. Staff continues to recommend to Council that the two-story requirement be eliminated and replaced with minimum building height requirement to provide an interim response to this issue until additional work on the development standards can be completed later this year. DATE: March 2, 1999 4 ITEM NUMBER: 30 A-B 3. Exemption of the Harmony Corridor and Fossil Creek Plan areas from the contiguity requirement contained in the Compact Urban Growth Standards. Certain properties within the Harmony Corridor Plan and the Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Plan have been identified that do not meet the Land Use Code (Article 3) 1/6 Development Contiguity requirement. Several landowners,and representatives within these two subareas,have brought this issue to staffs attention and have expressed concerns that failure to meet this standard will jeopardize their plans to pursue development in the foreseeable future. In addition,these owners question whether the application of this standard is appropriate to areas which have been determined through the subarea planning process to be ready for urban development. .n Staff proposes to amend the Code to exempt the Harmony6rri tqi and Fossil Creek Plan areas from the contiguity requirement. The,,r uirement would continue t ;apply in all other areas of the City. Staff also proposed to amend the City Plan Principles and Policies to make Policy GM-5.1 regarding contiguity consistent with this exemption. Attachment 3 is a memo from Pete Wray dated February 3, 1999, that provides additional background information related to this issue. The Planning and Zoning Board recommended Council adopt this proposed revision, with the reservation that the Pedestrianvt evel oflService standard be reevaluated to determine if it is appropriate to increase the distance within which offsite pedestrian improvements may be required. 4. Clarification and ref nement'of the process and standa`ds for Planning and Zoning Board review of requests for Modifications to the Standards of the Land Use Code. Staff has identified the need to clarify how requests for Planning and Zoning approval of Modifications to Standards may be processed and approved under Division 2.7 of the Code. Currently the Code allows such requests to be processed independently from Project Development Plan applications, but does not define how such a request would be processed. It is important to clarify howeto"-independently process,,Modification requests because the Modification process is key to;maintaining a degree of Mexibijity in application of the Land Use Code to better accommodate creative design alternatives. Attachment 4 is a memo from Tom Vosburg dated February 3, 1999, that provides additional background information related to this issue. Public Outreach A public open house presenting information on each of these issues was held on January 28, 1999. DATE: March 2, 1999 5 ITEM NUMBER: 30 A-13 Attachments Attachments 1-5 previously noted. Attachment 5 is an annotated issue list that provides a brief description of these other consent issues and cross references the related sections of the draft ordinance that implement the proposed revisions. Attachment 6 is an index to the draft ordinance that briefly lists the effect of each section of the ordinance and the issue that the section is related to. _x r, fi r ,: