Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
COUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 02/28/2006 - NORTHWEST SUBAREA PLAN
DATE: February 28, 2006 WORK SESSION ITEM STAFF: Timothy Wilder FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Northwest Subarea Plan GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. Are there any other key choices or alternatives for land use, open space and recreation, trails and transportation/services (see Key Choices section below) that Council would like the planning team to consider? 2. Is there any other information Council needs as the project moves forward? BACKGROUND The development of the Northwest Subarea Plan started in early 2005 as one of the priority subareas for future planning identified in the City Plan. The Northwest Subarea has been within the City's Growth Management Area since 1980 and is bordered by Laporte to the north, CSU Foothills Campus to the west, and urban neighborhoods of the city to the south and east. Unlike these surrounding areas, the Northwest Subarea has not been the subject of a focused planning effort. Today, development of lands within the Northwest Subarea is guided by the land use designations of the City Structure Plan. It primarily designates the area for Urban Estate and Low-Density Mixed Use Neighborhood designations as well as Poudre River/Poudre River Corridor and Open Lands, Parks, Stream Corridors. The intent of the Northwest Subarea Plan is to provide a finer level of detail and guidance for how future development of the area should occur. It will also address other concerns including compatibility between new and existing neighborhoods, transportation, trails and open space, commercial uses and home occupations, and public services. The project is being jointly managed by City and County staff, with a consultant team led by Clarion Associates providing support. To date, four large public meetings have been held on the Plan. Two subarea-wide meetings in September were attended by over 200 residents and owners. Two intensive working meetings were held in December and February, each of which were attended by over 40 people. Hundreds of comments were received through these meetings and also through emails, phone calls, and mailings. In addition to the large meetings, staff has held several one-on-one meetings with residents, landowners, and the Northwest Fort Collins Neighborhood Forum, an organized group of residents in the area. February 28, 2006 Page 2 Key Plan Choices The attached Bulletin describes potential goals for open space and recreation, land use, trails, and transportation/services that the public is being asked to consider. It also contains a series of land use alternatives tailored to specific geographic regions of the study area. The alternatives have a basis in the City Structure Plan designations and current County zoning, modified somewhat with input gained from the neighborhood meetings and discussions with City and County staff. The most significant alternatives and potential goals are listed below: 1. Land Use (pages 4 — 7 of Bulletin) — No significant changes to existing neighborhoods. Options for developable land are listed below: • Options for areas west of Overland Trail are Rural Residential (1 unit per 2.29 acres) or Urban Estate (2 units per acre), both types clustered and non-clustered. This area is a priority for open space protection. Considerations: The low density, Rural Residential option with clustering would help protect the open quality of this area and conform more closely to the County zoning designation, while the higher density Urban Estate designation conforms to the current City Structure Plan. • Options for areas near County neighborhoods and near the Poudre River are clustered and non-clustered Urban Estate (2 units per acre). The River area is a priority for open space protection. Considerations: Urban Estate is consistent with the current City Structure Plan and County zoning designations. The Urban Estate option with clustering would help to protect important natural resources through higher densities on less land, while without clustering housing on larger lots could be spread over a broader area. • Options for areas near the CSU Foothills Campus at LaPorte/Overland are clustered and non-clustered Urban Estate (2 units per acre) and a Neighborhood Center. Considerations: In addition to the considerations for the area described above for Urban Estate residential, a neighborhood center option could provide more convenient shopping opportunities for residents. However, many residents have opposed this idea and it is unclear whether the market would support a center in this location. • Options for areas closer to city limits are Low Density Residential (overall maximum of 8 units per acre) with and without Neighborhood Center, and Live/Work areas along LaPorte Avenue. Considerations: The Low Density Residential land use conforms to the City Structure Plan. The Neighborhood Center is already allowed in the Low Density Mixed Use Residential designation; however, the Plan could allow vacant and February 28, 2006 Page 3 developed property at LaPorte and Taft to evolve into a center that provides neighborhood services. The market feasibility of this idea has not yet been explored. In addition, an option for this area is to transition commercial areas along LaPorte Avenue into Live/Work uses. These uses could best be described as low intensity studios, small commercial uses, expanded home occupations, and mixed residential/commercial uses. 2. Open Space and Recreation (pages 3-4, 9) — Protect high priority lands for natural areas, wildlife, views and recreation and retain a system of open space throughout the area (through public purchases, conservation easements, clustered developments, private efforts, etc). Encourage a developer-provided new park north of Vine Drive. 3. Trails (pages 8 — 9) — Provide a series of community and neighborhood trails throughout the area. Several of the most significant trails connecting to the Poudre Trail or to public open space could be provided by the city (cost borne by City), while most of the neighborhood connector trails would need to be provided through new development or neighborhood initiated efforts (cost borne by development or homeowners/residents). 4. Transportation/Other Services (page 10) — Provide flexibility in code/standards so that the design, placement, etc. of local neighborhood transportation connections are sensitive to existing neighborhoods. One new north-south connector may be needed between LaPorte Avenue and West Vine Drive. 5. Restoration of Soldier Creek (page 12)— One of the "big" ideas of this Plan suggests that Soldier Creek, which historically flowed from an area near Mulberry/Overland in a northeasterly direction to the Poudre River, be restored. The West Vine Basin Stormwater Master Plan already shows proposed improvements near the historic channel. This enhanced vision of Soldier Creek would combine stormwater improvements with natural habitat restoration and a trail system to provide an integrated stream system, similar to Spring Creek. This idea received a very favorable response from attendees at the February 16 workshop. Other Plan Elements Neighborhood residents have expressed a strong desire to retaining the existing character and qualities of the Northwest Subarea. A character preference survey completed at the December workshop showed an emphasis on more rural or suburban characteristics (large lot, informal landscaping, etc.) versus urban characteristics (see Attachment 4, last three pages). Ratings of residential images favored smaller homes on larger lots. Ratings of non-residential images showed a preference for small scale businesses. Ratings of landscape/environment images favored open fencing (versus closed fencing), streets without curb and gutter, dirt trails (versus gravel or paved), and informal landscaping. In order to reflect these preferences, the planning team is preparing a set of Design Guidelines that would apply to new development. The Design Guidelines will be prepared to fit the appropriate context. For instance, "rural' type characteristics are more appropriate for areas that have a very low residential density. Staff anticipates the draft Guidelines will be prepared in time for the next workshop, to be held in several months. February 28, 2006 Page 4 Next Steps The project team will be preparing a draft framework plan and an outline of possible strategies to implement the Plan's goals and framework plan. This work will be presented for review by the community at the final community intensive workshop. The workshop is anticipated to take place April, 2006. P ATTACHMENTS 1. Northwest Subarea Plan Study Area 2. Schedule 3. September 15th and 27th Public Workshops 4. December 7, 2005 Public Workshop Summary 5. Northwest Subarea Plan Bulletin(Volume 2) 1 'IM in ®[ An h I# �" C y qq C � 1 i ATTACHMENT 2 • - ----T - - - v� ( c m ■ j -__ ....... ....... -�.- ��-.-. --.-.-- ..-..--{ C14 cd ■�+'] O N I t� ' v E I, O p I Z �i ► p I d i w I � N p p e ■ L - i r CI N N � _O O 3m h O O v E N 7 > 1 3 ro O c m -o °. 00 0 1 N O ° o N d o c Q O. d G N U Wm u V t O c ° Orn .!uo cc N crn o m ' '° _ c c 0 E - o V m p Q E £ o VO CO 0- i aV V Z V V Q ~maui �O' Y ATTACHMENT 3 UP���. September 1 St" and 27th Public Workshops Summary Overview The City of Fort Collins and Larimer County hosted two workshops in September,on the 1511,and 27t, to discuss issues in specific areas of northwest Fort Collins and portions of Larimer County that are covered by the Northwest Subarea Plan. These were the first public meetings for the project, which will continue through 2006. The issues raised at these meetings will help set the stage for choices to address topics such as land use, trails, transportation,utilities and others. The next public events are targeted for November 2005,but no specific dates have been set yet. Notification Prior to Meetings Before the meeting, the project team mailed out 2,400 letters to all households and properties in the area containing information about the two meetings, the "Summer'05—Project Bulletin," which also contained a mail-back comment form. • The planning team met with the Coloradoan to discuss the project. The Coloradoan posted an Opinion piece on September 131h,2005 with the title, "Public must drive areas plans for northwest" which included information about the upcoming meetings. • The Coloradoan also printed an article following the first meeting,on Friday, September 1.6111, entitled, "Residents speak up to preserve rural life." Meeting Attendance The sign-in sheets and "dot map" show that people from all parts of the study area attended the meetings: 85 people signed in for the September 151h meeting at CSU. • 125 people signed in for the September 271h meeting at Lincoln.Junior High. Meeting Agenda and Format Both meetings followed a similar format, as follows: 1. Sign-in and Open House. The first half hour of the meeting allowed time for participants to place a dot on the study area map to indicate where they live and work, review posted materials,and talk with staff. 2. Discussion. Staff responded to key questions raised by the community and then provided a brief overview of the planning process and continued opportunities for public involvement. 3. Small Group Working Session. The large group broke into smaller groups organized by area (e.g., North and South of Vine Drive)and discussed issues and choices. 4. Ideas and Preferences. Individual participants posted dots on ideas boards. 1 Handouts and Materials Available • Copies of the display posters(in limited quantities). • Copies of Coloradoan newspaper articles • Comment forms • Listening Log through September 151"(for first meeting). These materials are also available on the website: www.fcgov.com/advancel2lanninz Comment Forms and Listening Log Comment forms were completed and turned in by a limited number of people. These comments are summarized in the"Listening Log,' which also contains the 60+Bulletin comment forms received via mail, fax, or email (see Listening Log). Questions Raised by Participants During the discussion period of the meeting, participants raised the following questions, that staff answered (see attached Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)sheet for answers to many of the questions): • Who is Clarion and why are they involved in the creation of this plan? • What clout or interest does Clarion have in the plan? Are they developer-driven? • How will this plan impact current and future zoning in the area? • To what degree will residents be involved, and will that involvement truly help shape the process or is this just lip service? • What prompted the city and county to make this plan? • Was this plan initiated because there is a developer planning a project in the area? • Is this process merely seeking to provide a"rubber stamp' to a plan that has already been developed for the area? Is there a preconceived outcome? • What will happen if development is proposed before the plan is complete and adopted? • Will this plan impact or change current development proposals? • How was the boundary for the area determined? • Will CSU be involved in this planning process? • How many planned unit development(PUD)proposals have been submitted to the county for this area? ■ Is this plan going to lead to forced annexations like we are seeing with the southwest enclave? • What is the timeline of this plan? • Will the special review process override the recommendations made in the plan? • How does this plan relate to the comprehensive plans of the city and county? • What constraints to development has staff considered for the area? • Is water supply a constraint to development? • What types of trails would be proposed and where would they go? • How would grandfathering relate to this plan (in both city and county)? • Is this plan being driven by a desire for more sales tax? • Is this plan attempting to develop the area in a manner similar to south Fort Collins? • What is the overall process and timeline for the development of this plan? 2 • • Is this going to be a document that holds "feet to the fire'-how much will it impact decision made for the area? Who gets the final decision on this plan and what are the opportunities for public input? To what degree are suggestions for the area going to be restricted by codes and regulations? Can we really make our suggestions happen? If the City and County approve a plan for a trail that crosses my property without my consent, what happens? Is this the same for roads? What is the process of informed consent in the County? General Comments The Small Group Workshop comments and the Ideas Preference Summary sheets (attached) highlight the following directions for and concerns about the plan: Common Ideas: Trails. Many residents would like improved trail connections,but property owners and residents do not necessarily want new trails adjacent to or through their properties. Many residents want improved(safe)equestrian,bicycle, and pedestrian access on Taft Hill, Shields, Vine, LaPorte, and Overland Trail. • Open Space/Agricultural Lands. Most residents would like to keep as much land for agriculture and open space as possible. Small groups discussed using creative approaches such as neighborhoods collectively purchasing lands, clustering development,supporting small • "community-supported agriculture"CSAs, or allowing greater flexibility for"rural economic uses"on agricultural properties, such as roadside stands. • Streets. Residents have mixed opinions about street improvements: o Some residents think streets should be widened or intersection improvements made to help with traffic versus o Most people like the "rural"feel of streets with narrow cross-sections,no sidewalks,no street lights, and no curb and gutter. o Most existing residents agree: No through streets. Street Lighting. Residents generally agree—no more street lighting. • Limited or No Commercial Development. Residents are generally very opposed to any large commercial shopping in the area,but some residents could support some small neighborhood- scale retail(but generally not gas stations or"mini marts"). • Low Density. Residents would like to make sure that new developments are built at low densities and are compatible with current subdivisions. Patio homes and townhomes may be acceptable if accompanied by lots of open space,trails, and greenspace. • No "Cookie Cutter Development." Many agree this area is unique and should not become like other parts of Fort Collins with larger subdivisions with uniform styles of housing. • Protecting Environmental Quality. The Poudre River is an important resource. • Other Amenities. Public horseback riding area, trails and other recreation amenities are important to many residents. Fewer Utilities above Ground. Electric wires should be underground. • 3 Common Concerns: • Annexation. Existing residents generally are very opposed and concerned that the city will annex properties. However, the issue is complex as it relates to developed subdivisions versus vacant properties and needs better explanation about when the city could annex properties(i.e., when a developer voluntarily chooses to annex property that is adjacent to city limits). (Note: The FAQ sheet and the annexation issues board provide more information about this subject). • Eminent Domain. Some residents are concerned that the city or county have aims to condemn property. (Note: The FAQ sheet provides more information about this topic). • Government Regulation and Involvement. Some participants would prefer less government involvement in the area and are concerned that the plan may result in greater restrictions on ability to have animals, freedom to use land and property,and other individual rights. 4 • September 15 — Small Group Comments Group # 1 : (facilitators - Amy and David) Comments about Issues: • Keep the Waal character of the neighborhood,including animals. • Keep the area low-density. • Retain areas of agriculture/conserve agricultural lands. • Keep out light pollution so that we can still see the stars at night. • Become a "sustainable"neighborhood. • Help residents strategize innovative ways for neighbors to pursue their goals as individuals (e.g.,innovative ways to keep open space and agricultural lands without relying on government). • Get utility improvements made, such as burying power lines. Have less uncertainty about future uses and development of land in our neighborhood (i.e.,including possible future use of Poudre School District property). Other Ideas and suggestions: • Maintain continued strong community involvement throughout the process. • Look into conservation easements or organizing neighbors to purchase agricultural lands for a neighborhood- based community supported agriculture. • Involve the Sunset Water District more. Consider developing new street standards for the area with more Waal street components. • Group # 2: (facilitator - Porter) Comments about Issues: • Maintain the existing character of the area. • Retain the pattern of small acreages and modest homes. • Create better trail connections for pedestrians,including Irish Elementary kids,between neighborhoods,and to Horsetooth trail. • Help reduce conflicts between residential areas and business, commercial,and industrial uses. • Address code violations. • Retain the Waal atmosphere,including our ability to keep animals. • Plan for additional parks and open space—perhaps between Havel Ave and N. Hillcrest Dr,and Havel and Teal Drive. • Keep out major/minor shopping areas. • Keep street and other lighting low so that we still have our views of the night sky. Other Ideas and Suggestions: • No additional lane/widening of Vine Drive but improve bike lanes. • Need to address reduced bus service as a transportation issue. • Infrastructure planning should address the capacity issue of Sunset Water District given their smaller pipes. • The small pipes should be seen as an advantage because they can help limit growth. • 5 Group # 3 (facilitator - Russ) Comments about Issues: • Plan transportation to have fewer problems with traffic on major streets like Vine Drive. Other Ideas and Suggestions: • Meet with the Board of Directors of the Sunset Water District to discuss water issues. • Do not want to be annexed into the city. Group # 4: North of Vine (facilitator - Lesli) Comments about Issues: • Plan road improvement projects. • Retain open space and views. • Accommodate patterns of animals. • Keep our character and not become the south end of town. • Develop the quality of life in out area. • Address transportation safety issues e.g.north of Stonecrest. • Have an opportunity to give our input for how our area should look 20 years from now. Other Ideas and Suggestions: • Use clustering to retain open space. • Small scale commercial development is OK. • Let's think global. • Look into ways that HOAs could buy up some land. Group # 5: (facilitator - Timothy) Comments about Issues: • Keep the feel of freedom and individuality we enjoy now. • Keep the scale of developments down. • Keep important open lands. • Plan for more trail connections to connect the area-including to the Poudre Rives trail and gravel mine path. • Create a thoughtful pattern of development that allows for equestrian trails and wildlife corridors. • Help guide new development. • Influence development decision-making for our area. Other Ideas and Suggestions: • Process needs to help create a bridge so that there is not animosity between newcomers and long term residents. • No cookie-cutter development • Do not want new development to affect how we use our land. 6 September 27— Small Group Comments Group # 1: North of Vine (facilitators - Russ and Amy) Comments about Issues: • Work on preserving open space corridors between neighborhoods for residents and wildlife. • Create more/better bike path connections,including to the Poudre Trail. • Plan for parks and trails. • Keep the current rural feel of streets,including minimal street lighting. • Encourage power lines to be buried as projects are pursued. • Keep traffic down within neighborhoods by not planning through streets. • Plan for how to keep the density of development low. • Address traffic and safety concerns on major arterials in the area such as Overland Trail,Vine and Taft. • Plan for ways to incorporate the gravel mines into an open space and recreation area in the long-term. Maintain the coral character of the area by shaping the kind of development that comes in. • Encourage a developer fee system that would place the costs of infrastructure and parks on developers. Improve access to the Poudre River and Trail. • Keep the rural residential character of the area—plan to limit commercial and business activity. • Plan to retain existing agriculture and large animal business activities (e.g. stables) to remain as part of the land use mix. Safeguard agricultural-based business. Ideas and suggestions: • • No annexation—do not want additional city regulations. Group # 2: (facilitator - Porter) Comments about Issues: • Retain open space and agricultural areas. • Address problems of increased traffic on streets that are now turning into arterials such as Sunset and Hollywood. • Keep the number of streets that are widened to a minimum—widening impacts tree-lined streets,increases traffic. • Keep the rural feel of the streets—no curb and gutter. Preserve the rural farm character. If development occurs—should either be low density on large lots or higher density clustered and surrounded by open space. • Retain views of the mountains through development patterns and height restrictions. Provide parks for children in new developments. • Encourage that subdivisions be allowed to have horses. • Limit the amount of commercial activity in the area-are close enough to needed goods and services. • Revise zoning to eliminate inconsistencies or places where incompatible uses exist. • Retain existing businesses. Other Ideas and Suggestions: • Incorporate multiple uses in stormwater plans. • Expand the requirement for notifying landowners when a zoning variance has been requested. • • Dense housing raises a crime concern. • Provide info on re-zoning process,grandfather rules, stormwater improvement plans and timelines, and right to farm law. 7 Group # 3: Vine Drive south to LaPorte Ave. (facilitators - Naomi and David) Comments about Issues: • Retain the low density rural character. • Increase and improve trails,wildlife corridors,and paths for bikes,pedestrians and horses. • Help deal with unwanted wildlife,including bears. • Address security concerns from CDC (terrorism concern). • Be more involved with street planning. • Encourage utility lines to be buried. Group # 4: South of Vine Drive (facilitator - Lesli) Comments about Issues: ■ Plan for better bike access and walking trails. • Keep rural character. • Plan street improvements including shoulders and sidewalks. • Plan for development patterns that"fit"our area and are not city-type developments with higher densities and street lights. • Find a balance between safety and traffic for bikes and cars on main arteries (Taft,Vine,LaPorte, Overland) • Retain open space (south of Adrien,north of LaPorte, south of Vine,west of Taft.) • Retain a primarily residential land use mix—do not encourage new commercial development(on this group, 12 people agreed on NO commercial development;3 agreed that small commercial at neighborhood scale might be okay). • Reduce traffic patterns and do not add opportunities for cut-through traffic where there are currently none. • Keep the agricultural feel of having horses and animals allowed on properties. • Plan for a horse trail connection from Poudre Trail to Foothills or the community arena. Other Ideas and Suggestions: • Involve CSU and their plans in this process. • Provide more information on"informed consent." • Make CSU plan and stormwater improvement plans available on the web. Group # 5: City (facilitator - Timothy) Comments about Issues: • Keep the uniqueness—avoid having a visually monotonous area. Other Ideas and Suggestions: • A divided community is detrimental—don't want to be forced to do something. • Take a historical approach. • The area currently lacks the developer mentality. • The level of services is fine. 8 i Ideas Preference Summary "RED DOT/GREEN DOT" (September 15 Meeting) Annexation Agree Disagree Annexation into the city: I have mixed feelings about this. The County has done a poor job of enforcement,improvement, planning or controlling development in the area, and I would 1 8 welcome help. However, I'd hate to lose the"rural-urban" nature of the area or to see the area become"mini-California" like Forth Collins around Horsetooth. Limited future development. I am NOT interested in 1 annexation. 44 I see no advantage to we property owners in being annexed. 19 Onlyadded complications for all of us can ensue. Transportation and Trails Slowing traffic in neighborhood from PHS students. Traffic 10 control on Laporte and Mulberry before and after school. Improved (SAFE!) equestrian,bicycle, and pedestrian access on • Taft Hill, Shields, and Overland Trail from the south to the 25 Poudre River Trails stem. Better public transit. 11 3 No access through collector streets. Improved bike access on 8 Vine Drive. More enforcement of speeds and speed limits on Taft Hill Road- very unsafe! Land Use and Growth Balance between growth and maintaining open space should be of paramount importance. 21 I moved here because I liked the way it was...5 years later,I still like it as is. 18 2 More patio homes or town homes. Single family homes with areas of open space included with bike trials and old fashioned 5 19 streets. Patio Homes/townhomes are OK if there are accompanied by lots of open s ace, trails, and green space. 3 Public Services and Utilities • Hooking houses on septic to sewers stem. 9 1 Fewer above-ground electric/cable TV/telephone wires would make this a better place to live. 18 9 Sewer not a priority,but would be nice. Bike/walk lanes on Taft Hill,Vine and Laporte—kids walk and 9 bike to school we like access to the river trails stem. Try to coordinate with Sterling Ln and canal and school district to put a walking bridge over the canal at the end of the street to 1 access Lincoln JHS-kids cut through and across the canal. Parks, Open Space, and Natural Habitats Agree Disagree I would like the plan to keep s much open space as possible. I would like the NW part of town and the Poudre River to remain 28 a recreational area for runners,bikers and horseback riders. Continued open space acquisition with access, trail 21 1 development A NW side pool. More natural areas. A kayak course on 2/5/5 12/0/1 Poudre. Parks are not a priority. Open space and connections to open space and parks are priorities. Equestrian activities should 6 always be kept in mind. No more high density developments a la Poudre Overlook. 12 Cows not condos! Allows access to CSU property along foothills(LaPorte Avenue to Centennial Drive). 5 1 Cluster any development, developments/developers should be as mindful as possible of the open and quiet. Smaller individual lots. History and Character I don't want to see cookie cutter house type development. 24 1 Keeping a rural feel rather than suburban. 31 How can we prevent the NW part of Fort Collins from becoming like the south part of town? We like the rural 26 1 atmosphere. Keep Wal-Mart out of here! Vacant lots within the city limits should be encouraged to be developed as commercial property to promote economic 2 9 growth in turn cause roads to be maintained. 10 i Ideas Preference Summary "RED DOT/GREEN DOT" (September 27 Meeting) Annexation Agree Disagree Annexation into the city: I have mixed feelings about this. The County has done a poor job of enforcement,improvement, planning or controlling development in the area, and I would welcome help. However, I'd hate to lose the"rural-urban" 25 nature of the area or to see the area become"mini-California" like Forth Collins around Horsetooth. Limited future development. I am NOT interested in 23 2 annexation. I see no advantage to we property owners in being annexed. 7 Only added complications for all of us can ensue. I want annexation. 49 Fort Collins has nothing to offer through annexation,only 7 $ increased expense. Why pay higher taxes for services we don't want? We have a 6 3 • good relationshipwith the county. Transportation and Trails Slowing traffic in neighborhood from PHS students. Traffic 4 control on Laporte and Mulberry before and after school. Improved(SAFE!) equestrian,bicycle, and pedestrian access on Taft Hill, Shields, and Overland Trail from the south to the 19 1 Poudre River Trails stem. Better public transit. 6 Eliminate semi-truck traffic on Taft Hill Road and prohibit 9 3 Jake"brakes in residential areas. Make streets have wider shoulders and bike lanes throughout. 1 3 I like the rural feel of the streets in this area,I don t want to 26 have bi urban streets. Need better enforcement of speed limits. 4 Address traffic and safety on LaPorte and Vine—including sidewalks. 5 Sidewalks on Taft Hill and Vine St. 12 Improve entrance to High School from LaPorte Ave. 2 1 • Leave us alone! 4 tt Land Use and Growth Balance between growth and maintaining open space should be 15 1 of paramount importance. I moved here because I liked the way it was...5 years later,I still 15 1 like it as is. More patio homes or town homes. Single family homes with areas of open space included with bike trials and old fashioned 3 9 streets. I would like to see a major shopping area with a national chain 57 store, especially supermarkets. Leave it alone—no stores or new houses—stop growth! 25 2 There should be protection and encouragement for community 11 supported agriculture. Address the patchwork pattern of development. 2 1 Why not do something different in this area than the rest of Fort 20 Collins. The area is a fantastic agricultural resource. Public Services and Utilities Hooking houses on septic to sewers stem. 3 3 Fewer above-ground electric/cable TV/telephone wires would 18 make this a better place to live. We need more street lighting. 1 47 There should be incentives or grants to retrofit structures to make them more energy efficient. I like having Larimer County Sheriff service. 5 5 Comcast cable access...US cable stinks. DSL? 10 1 Parks, Open Space, and Natural Habitats Agree Disagree I would like the plan to keep as much open space as possible. I would like the NW part of town and the Poudre River to remain 37 a recreational area for runners,bikers and horseback riders. Continued open space acquisition with access, trail 15 1 development A NW side pool. 4 24 A kayak course on Poudre. 2 15 Open space, trails, and more community space. 16 i2 • I would like to see more hiking trails in our area. g 1 Public horseback riding area where access would not require a 24 horse trailer. We have a lot of wildlife—deer,hawks,foxes, a black bear, and, 14 on rare occasions, the sounds from a"bigcat" at night. Protecting the Poudre River and waterways from 20 environmental degradation(pesticides,fertilizer, etc.) I don't want the west side of Overland North of Vine to look like "the Ponds". 5 Have natural areas around housing clusters so there is pedestrian access on natural trails (unpaved) to walk around 1 the area. History and Character I don't want to see cookie cutter house type development. 19 Keeping a rural feel rather than suburban. 17 How can we prevent the NW part of Fort Collins from becoming like the south part of town? We like the rural 23 atmosphere. Keep Wal-Mart out of here! I like this area for its diverse population, open space, and rural 19 feel. 1 enjoy the agricultural feel. Lack of busy 4-lane streets. Lots of 21 green fields and houses with bigyards. I want to still be able to see the night sky. 20 • 13 �e-area ATTACHMENT 4 • Aa n December 7, 2005 Public Workshop Summary Overview The City of Fort Collins and Larimer County hosted a workshop to discuss of the character of northwest Fort Collins and portions of Larimer County that are covered by the Northwest Subarea Plan. This was the second public event for the project, which will continue through summer 2006. Notification Prior to Meetings Before the meeting, the project team emailed information to the mailing list of households and properties in the area containing information about the meeting. • The city and county mailed.postcards. The city and county issued a news release on 11/25/05 about the meeting. • Other? Meeting Attendance 52 people signed in for the meeting. Meeting Agenda and Format • The meeting format was as follows: 1. Presentation—Project Status and Background Information. The planning team provided a brief PowerPoint overview of issues in the area,surrounding influences, what we heard during the September meetings (see attached PowerPoint slides). 2. Character Preference. The planning team presented images of existing development, housing types,non-residential types and landscaping and environment for individuals to rate. This exercise was followed by a small group discussion about the different images. 3. Mapping Exercise. The smaller groups discussed issues and choices. 4. Wrap-up and Next Steps. Handouts and Materials Available Copies of the character preference posters • Copies of the mapping exercise "Roles and Responsibilities"handout. • Character preference rating sheets. These materials are also available on the website: www.fegov.com/advancel2lanning Listening Log Comments received to date are summarized in the "Listening Log"on the project website. • t Character Preference Survey and Discussion Group t (Facilitator: Doug) Housing What fits? • Semi-custom homes. • Multi-family residential developments that are smaller in scale, varied in style and color, and clustered to allow for open space. • Larger lots with larger setbacks, rural-style fencing, and a sense of openness between structures. • Agricultural or farm-style buildings. • Older homes (add character). • Diversity of housing(e.g.big and small)mixed together in one area. • Mixed-use of farming or agricultural—based businesses and single-family residences. • Small house on larger lot. What does not fit? • Uniform architecture and homes placed very close together with no open space or setbacks. • Homogenous"mass produced"feel. • High densities with a lot of pavement. • Residential and commercial mixed-use. • "McMansion"homes. Develo ment Patterns Pattern Advantages Rural Subdivision • Larger parcels support agricultural uses (keeping animals). Clustered Development • Allows higher density development(eg photos# 10&12)that would not work without the cluster providing open space. • Provides open space and trail opportunities. • Helps conserve areas for agriculture. • Helps maintain wildlife corridors. Non-Residential What fits? • Heavily landscaped set backs. • Parking in the rear/no big parking lot frontage. • Safe access for pedestrians and children. • Agricultural uses or an agricultural feel(3,6,9 &11). • For small scale commercial, prefer 12 to 7. • Small-scale clustered commercial (three to four shops, similar to #4 but without the urban streetscape). 2 . What does not fit? Large cookie-cutter site plans. Lots of pavement/large parking areas. What hinds of business activity would be appropriate? • Fruit stands. • Small, local grocery. • Post office. • Utilitarian shops. Landscape/Environment What streets fit? • Need to have selective local streets so Taft Hill does not become huge. • Sidewalks that are separate from narrow streets. • Best option is to have trails instead of sidewalks to keep roadside ditches/culverts (help water quality). What trails fit? • Unimproved trails (e.g. 9 &10). • Multi-use trails for pedestrians and horses that provide connections to other trails. • Trails to schools. What fencing and landscaping fit? • • Open fencing with a rural style. • Native non-manicured landscaping(more of#12&15, less of#8, 13&14). What parks and open space are most appropriate? A and B (open space) are great,neutral on C(playground). It would be fine is kept to a very small scale. Group 2 (Facilitator: Ginny) Housing What fits? • Individual design of home and landscaping. • Open views and open space. • Lower densities. • Multi-family is fine if clustered to allow for open space. What does not fit? • High-density tract homes. • Small yardsihouses too close together. • Garage-dominated houses. Develo ment Patterns Pattern Advantages Rural Su bdivision • Individual control of lar er lot. • Clustered Development • Easy access too ens ace. 3 Non-Residential What fits? • Structure that blends landscape with the open character of the area. • Prefer natural materials,including fencing. • Shorter building heights. What does not fit? • Flat,high storefronts/facades. • Buildings with large setbacks from street that have large up-front parking lots. Landscape/Environment What streets fit? Some of group prefer#7 for an arterial,with the shoulder right next to the paving. What trails fit? • Mixed opinion between trails in that do not want the trails to be placed too close to homes. • Mixed opinion on whether trails should have hard surface. Group 3 (Facilitator: Sue) Housing What fits? • Human scale development next to open space. • Architectural connectivity. • Traditional,older style home with a low profile. • Homes that are environmentally-friendly, e.g. solar homes. • Homes diverse in their appearance and price range. • Small,secondary living units. • Some multi-family is appropriate. What does not fit? • Repetitive style and positioning (e.g. all in a row) • Homes with protruding garages. • Huge condo complexes. • Tall buildings that obscure views. Develo ment Patterns Rural Subdivision • Individual yards. Clustered Development • Large spaces for everyone. • More accessible open space. • Less traffic impact. • More open views. Non-Residential What fits? • Low profile buildings that do not block views. 4 i • Homegrown businesses and roadside stands. • Agriculturally"flavored"businesses. • Businesses that are centered around the neighborhood. What does not fit? Big-scale commercial development or anything that blocks views. • Franchises or chain stores. • Trucking or garbage companies. What kinds of business activity would be appropriate? • Locally-owned businesses. • Pub. • Locally-owned coffee shop. • Beaver's type grocery or market. • Veterinarians. • Small churches. • Daycare. • Bagel shop/bakery. • Agricultural support businesses (non-chemical). Landscape/Environment What streets fit? • Streets that are bike and pedestrian friendly with shoulders. • Narrow, curvy streets. No big, straight streets(get used for drag racing). What trails fit? All kinds, do not need edging or high-maintenance surfaces. What fencing and landscaping fit? • No high, white synthetic fences. • Open fencing with natural colors/materials. What parks and open space are most appropriate? Should have a mix of parks-small neighborhood parks,natural areas, open spaces with mountain views (especially west of Overland Trail). Group 4 (Facilitator: Russ) Housing What fits? • Low density. • Low profile. • Single family. • Ranch style. • Older homes with additions. What does not fit? • • High density=higher traffic. • Matchbox look. • New England style. 5 • Condominium townhome styles. • 3 story or more. Develo meat Patterns Rural Subdivision • More use of space. More individual space. Acceptable. Clustered Development • More open space. Less overall visual impact of houses. Acceptable if open s ace perpetual. Non-Residential What fits? • Agricultural uses very appropriate(3, 6,9, 11). • Are open,maintain rural feel. • They don't attract high traffic use. • They don t have lights at night to disturb neighbors. • C.S.A. (Community Supported Agriculture). • No mega churches. What does not fit? • Lights at night are too bright. • Obtrusive larger buildings. • No large parking lots with lights. • Big box stores. • No strip malls. • No #2, 7,4. What kinds of business activity would be appropriate? • Small family operated,home business,horse boarding (small scale). • No dog kennels. • No a lot of traffic—low volume. No lights on all the time. Landscape/Environment What streets fit? • Prefer#5—most common, #6—arterial. • Sidewalks should not be attached to streets if installed on main arterials. • Underground utilities would be preferred. • Prefer sidewalks only on arterials. What Types of Fencing and Landscaping are appropriate? • No high barrier fences like #3. Prefer less use of plastic fencing. What trails fit? • Prefer "character' elements,not#13. Any of 9-12 are okay,depending on location for 12. Parks/Open Space • A&Bare great—their existence is important access for some would be great. 6 - No large manicured parks. No parks with night lighting. Small parks okay,especially off trails. Group 5 (Facilitator: Clark) Housing What fits? - Large lots but not large houses. Cluster housing with space,such as B. - Actual Farm houses including modest or simple ones—not really shown in the examples. What does not fit? Not too many of#1—a few okay. "McMansions" #9 or 16 doesn't fit in area. We don't want coolde cutter! Derelo ment Patterns Rural Subdivision • One person likes this pattern—for privacy. Clustered Development • Income diversity and open space are important to many of us. Non-Residential What fits? - We like JAX Farm and LaPorte Hardware store. Overland foods. - #6 fits—we all like. #11 fits—its local—setback is good. Need: landscaping, lighting,setbacks, sign codes—very important! - Businesses where the product comes from the property, and local ownership fit the area. What does not fit? Big box—no. We don't want more traffic and more businesses. What hinds of business activity would be appropriate? 1 person would like to have some neighborhood commercial added into the area. No one else would -there's enough commercial within a few miles and more would not fit this area. Landscape/Environment What streets fit? Don't create another South Hollywood because it is gravel and non-maintained as a result of poor planning. What Types of Fencing and Landscaping are appropriate? • We don't like white plastic fencing. No solid fencing. If curbs and gutters are needed for flooding—okay. Otherwise not necessary. What trails fit? • We like trails but some of use don't want them in our backyards. Not too close to houses. Need to be buffered. We like#9 and#10 best. Informal okay. 7 Parks/Open Space • We all like A&B. All but one really likes the idea of a playground. All agree that a playground could fit if part of informal open space like in the examples. • Informal open space is great. Group 6 (Facilitator: Porter) Housing What fits? • Older style housing with no sidewalks. • Single story homes (to retain views). • Single-family, low-density homes with lots of open space. What does not fit? • Homes too tall or too close together. • Homogenous architecture and landscaping. Develo ment Patterns Pattern Advantages Rural Subdivision • Individual yards creating feeling of s ace. Clustered Development • Big blocks of open s ace. Non-Residential What fits? • Like the agricultural feel of#3, 6,9&11. ■ Churches (small). What does not fit? • Businesses that would create traffic. What kinds of business activity would be appropriate? • Convenience. • Small community center. Landscape/Environment What streets fit? • Streets with a rural feel e.g. #5. • Shoulders for bicycle riders. • Separated sidewalks for safety. What trails fit? • Trails with natural surfaces,e.g. unimproved multi-use trails. What fencing and landscaping fit? • Fencing with natural materials. • Lots of mature trees. What parks and open space are most appropriate? • Open space areas like A and B. • Playgrounds where there is not access to school playgrounds. 8 Group 7 (Facilitator: Craig) Housing What fits? • More modest homes on large lots. • Natural style of landscaping, not manicured. • Multi-family if designed with a natural look. • If smaller lots, smaller homes. What does not fit? • Large homes on small lots. • High densities of homes too close together. Develo meat Patterns Rural Subdivision • Individual yards. Clustered Development . Large spaces for everyone. • More accessible open space. • Less traffic impact. • More open views. Ron-Residential What fits? • Businesses that have a shorter profile. • Anything agricultural. • Stand alone businesses eg. Nurseries. What does not fit? • Mini-mart complexes. What hinds of business activity would be appropriate? • Schools. Landscape/Environment What streets fit? • Streets should be pedestrian friendly but more rural (f5). What trails fit? • A range of trails could work. Best if not located adjacent to roads. What fencing and landscaping fit? • Open fencing made with natural materials is preferable. • More natural landscaping, including xeriscaping. What parks and open space are most appropriate? • A&B are good options. • C would work better with a more natural looking set of equipment. 9 Group 8 (Facilitator: Timothy) Housing What fits? • Modest homes(not mansions). • Varied architectural types within one neighborhood. • Ranch-type homes. • Lower density homes with lots of open space. • In some cases, the"fit" depends on where you are in the area. • Horse and animal properties. What does not fit? • Mansions. • Larger homes on smaller lots. Develo ment Patterns Pattern Advantages Rural Subdivision • Consistent with existing neighborhoods. --t Clustered Development • More economical. • Open space available for common use. Non-Residential What fits? • Depends on location. What does not fit? • Anything too modem or sophisticated. • Large commercial. • ATM's or gas stations (have enough). What hinds of business activity would be appropriate? • Community Supported Agriculture(CSA). • Garden supply market. Landscape/Environment What streets fit? • Room for all types depending on where needed. • No street lights. • Narrow streets with detached sidewalks. What trails fit? • Trails along the River, concrete or gravel. • Secondary trails should be less formal and connect existing neighborhoods. What fencing and landscaping fit? • Open style fencing. What parks and open space are most appropriate? • Open space areas like A and B. • C could fit depending on location. 10 Group 9 (Facilitator: Lesli) Housing What fits? • More rural style homes with lots of open space. What does not fit? Homes too close together. Homes that are homogenous, "cookie-cutter'. Develo meet Patterns Rural Subdivision Large private lots. Clustered Development • Provides open s ace. Hon-Residential What fits? • Independent businesses with rural qualities. What does not fit? • Larger scale commercial. • Chain stores. • Stores with lots of lighting/glare. What kinds of business activity would be appropriate? • Small neighborhood store. • Small market e.g. Beavers grocery. Landscape/Environment What streets fit? • Prefer trails to sidewalks. What trails fit? • Trails that connect to Poudre Trail. • Trails that connect to schools. What fencing and landscaping fit? Open, natural fencing. What parks and open space are most appropriate? • Open space areas like A and B—preserve wildlife corridors. • Make sure spaces are well maintained. • Neighborhood parks, but not with sports fields. tt Small Groff Comments — Mapping Exercise Directions: Groups had 40 minutes to prepare comments on a mapping exercise. Participants discussed choices for land use, transportation,trails, and other issues. They used markers and stickers to indicate these choices,using the legend on the map as a guide. Group 'I (Facilitator: Doug) • No written comments on this map but lots of colors for land use. Agriculture is the preferred use but some town and nual residential okay in south and east part of subarea. • Large parcels east of Lee Lake are(a)Agriculture as first choice,or (b) clustered residential as second choice. Group 2 (Facilitator: Ginny) • Underground cables! • Rural residential indicated as okay on many of the properties with some indicated for multi-higher density, clustered rural. • LaPorte and N. Overland Trail location could be a mixed-use retail, non-residential project. Group 3 (Facilitator: Sue) • This map indicates views to the west on the CSU campus and on the city's open space parcel. It also indicates a number of potential trails along ditches and along soldier creek extension. It shows some commercial development near Poudre High School. • Notes indicate: neighborhood business center with low profile buildings with diversity. • Nothing to block views (protect). • Works well with existing environment • Okay with mixed uses,but only locally-owned businesses. • Low profile buildings. • Pedestrian-friendly planning. Group 4 (Facilitator: Russ) • Map shows parks,natural areas,and open space west of Overland Trail and indicates views. • Agriculture indicated as preferred use on other parcels in middle,with rural residential (2 acre lots) indicated as second choice. • One property is designated for clustered nual residential development. • Services: Police and Sheriff are fine as is. Sidewalks,only LaPorte and Vine (also better bike lanes). • Code enforcement is fine. • Other: no commercial. High Speed Internet. Group 5 (Facilitator: Clark) • Map shows a lot of parks,natural areas,and open space,especially west of Overland Trail. • Some rural residential to west. • Low density residential along lake fronts change to higher density like Water Valley (gravel mine area). • Need road from Taft to Overland. Underground utilities. Some of us (not all)would like small businesses. Group 6 (Facilitator: Porter) • Stormwater and wastewater need upgrading. • Fire department—increase if development occurs (at training center?) • Code enforcement—some like it as is; some would like it to be better. Consistency important, not overzealous. • Trails: through developed areas. Some—not at the expense of taxpayers;some—no trail at all. Some,yes, -- trails with no conditions. 12 • First choice is for all land to remain agriculture. Second choice is for open space. If development occurs, 3 • participants suggested clustered rural residential. Group 7 (Facilitator: Craig) • Many properties shown as agriculture or open space. No residential development indicated on the map. This map indicates trail locations. • Other comments: Minimum housing on acreage. If conceivable,no more than one per acre residential on the remaining open areas. • Keep in agricultural,but if necessary go to rural residential (less than 2 per acre) or clustered rural residential (some disagreement about this approach). • Hope for regional park. • Can subarea plan be effective soon enough to save the current areas? Group 8 (Facilitator: Timothy) • Trails assume property owners are willing. • Parks,trails connected to local developments • Historical school,clustered residential, and small commercial. • Mixed use and open development. • Additional comments from some members of the group: Seems like having a trail like#10 sends mixed messages. This trail is a recreation trail and not conducive for kids going to school or ADA accessibility. Do not make N. Taft Hill a major arterial between LaPorte and Vine. Group 9 (Facilitator: lesli) • Maps incomplete because the group ran out of time. • Keep the land near the gravel mine and in the floodplain as open space. • Parcel southeast of Lee Lake—group's preference would be for(a) continued agriculture, (b) open space or park, (c) cluster with open space,or(d) large lot with trails. • Trails should connect neighborhoods to schools,neighborhoods,other trails,and parks. • Ask for policy to control zoning changes for a longer period of time after a property changes hands. 13 e ( m ;CC YaY y'pp f� p IP ro C. _ t . p • r r r = owl] d , ? a r" r oil '�: r" r" 9 Y L Ilia, I �! _ y r r s F C F Ih � .•, � ; �Y I ar. r" r e 1 yf il t .7� ! 1 i 1 7 L!. .. � �? � ~ $ IP : i | � ! � � IP P . . � \ IL ■ : . . . IP . . § \! s � t 9: �• ! ! CL \ | | \ < i� u t 1 a {. i i i N ++C6 �t MIS d. X m v .3�h c Vllp .� sieu+�S s��eil Suldusspuel 6upuaj ATTACHMENT 5 She Z Planbarea ! 00 The Northwest Subarea planning team has been hard at This Bulletin contains a comment form. Please fill it out work studying the many ideas raised at our last meeting in and return it or bring it to the February 16 meeting. December 2005. This booklet is designed to update you on the progress to date on the land use and design recommendations for the plan and,most importantly, to get your comments. This booklet is also set up to serve as a workbook to be used during the meeting being held February 16, 2006. Please plan to attend that upcoming meeting! In this Issue About the Northwest Subarea Plan Page 1 The Planning Process Page 2 Key Directions for the Plan Page 2 Open Space and Recreation Choices Page 3 Potential Land Use Choices Page 4 Trails Choices Page 8 ' ' ut the Northwest Subarea Transportation, Services, and Utilities-1 arge 10 Design Recommendations Page 11 The Northwest Subarea Plan is a joint planning effort of • A Vision for Soldier Creek Restoration_ Page 12 Latimer County and the City of Fort Collins. The intent is to create a more detailed plan for this area's future. Since 1980,all the land in the Northwest Subarea has been within Fort Collins' Growth Management Area(GMA). Visit the project website at: Because the land is within the city's GMA it is considered www.fcgov.com/advanceplanning part of the city's planning area and so the county's comprehensive plan does not address land uses within the The following information is available for you to view: area. Lands in the Subarea are included in City Plan,which provides general guidance for future land uses in the area. • Answers to Frequently Asked Questions; Including this area in Crty Plan does not mean all the • A summary of existing conditions in the Subarea; properties are within city limits or will ever be within city • Maps of the area; limits. . A summary of key issues for the plan to address;and a Summaries of comments received at prior public The Northwest Subarea Plan will offer a finer level of workshops and meetings. detail and guidance for how future development of the area should occur. The subarea plan will also address: Or contact us directly! • How new development can be compatible with existing Russell Legg,Chief of Planning neighborhoods and how to protect the neighborhood Latimer County (970) 498-7683 (phone) character; PO Box 1190 (970)498-7711 (fax) • Improving travel -whether by bicycle,on foot,or by Fort Collins,CO 80522 Rlepg(alarimer.orh car; • New trails and open space; Timothy Wilder,City Planner • Where businesses may be appropriate;and • Which neighborhoods need improved services or City of Fort Collins (970) 221-6756 (phone) utilities, such as water or sewer. PO Box 580 (970) 224-6111 (fax) Fort Collins,CO 80522-058 TwilderCaUcgov.com The Planning Process The planning process for the Northwest Subarea Plan has enjoyed a high level of public involvement since mid-2005. Residents,property owners,businesses, and other interested parties have participated in several ways: • Interviews and discussions with the planning team. • Returning comment forms from the Summer 2005 Bulletin mailed to all property j owners (66 comment forms received). • Attending the first"kick-off"meetings held in September, 2005,designed to share background information on the plan and hear feedback and ideas from the community for what the plan should accomplish (over 200 participants). Mark your calend r!400 • Reading information posted on the website: www.fcgov.com/advanceplanning, Please attend the next and sending email and suggestions to the planning team. community • Attending the December,2005 workshop (over 50 participants). Attendees gave workshop valuable ideas about: • ,ruary 16, 2006 1) A Character Preference Survey--designed to express preferences of housing, at Lincoln Junior High, non-residential buildings, streets,trails,parks, fencing, and landscaping types. 2) Mapping Exercise to identify potential trails,land uses,open space,views, and other important features of the area. Thank you for participating! What is in a name? The planning team generated the following What should the community call this"subarea"? Is dttections or broad goals for the Northwest Subarea "Northwest Subarea" an appropriately descriptive name, based on community input. or should the community define a name that better reflects the identity of the area? What are the areas' 1. Retain connected open spaces. common attributes or sense of place? The Northwest 2. As new growth and development occurs,it Fort Collins Forum has suggested: should fit the diverse mix of building designs ? and natural setting characteristics of the area. "Naturally Northwest Fort Collins Diverse 3. As new growth occurs,it should safeguard Neighborhoods that Value Heritage,Wildlife,Vistas, natural features and habitat areas. Parks, and Trails." T 4. Preserve "assets" such as historic structures, prominent foothills views, and small farms. Do you agree? What names/themes might you suggest? 5. Work to develop a connected system of trails and access to a diverse array of recreational opportunities. Other News in the Neighborhood 6. Maintain a local roadway system that is in Northwest Fort Collins Forum, agroup of keeping with the character of the Northwest concerned residents,prepared recommendations for Subarea. the Northwest Subarea in a report entitled, 'Experience Country Close Up Northwest Fort Which themes do you think best represent Collins"Qanuary 2006). The Northwest Fort the Northwest Subarea: Collins Forum recommends that many of the ❑ Horses and equestrians agricultural or vacant lands in the area be ❑ County neighborhoods conserved as open space or natural areas, or ❑ Views continued for agriculture. It also supports ❑ Historical farms and home sites additional trails,parks, equestrian facilities, 0 wildlife conservation, and that the plan define a ❑ Access to nature and natural areas 'iense of place"forthe area. For more ElDiverse neighborhoods and residents information about the NW Forum, e-mail.• 0 Other nwfortcollins@yahoogroups.com addressKey Choices for the Plan The following pages open space and recreation,land use, trails,utilities,and transportation. Open Space and Recreation Choices � Open Space Draft Goals • Conserve high priority lands in the area for natural areas,wildlife,views, and recreation. (Note: the "choices"map on page 9 identifies some high priority areas,including lands near the Foothills and the Poudre River). • Retain a system of connected open space throughout the area using a variety of means,including acquisition,easements,willing donors, or set asides as part of development projects. • Balance property owner rights with the community's desire for Open Space: Consider This conservation. As of 2005, the City of Fort Collins o ns iderat i o n s Natural Areas Program has conserved over 33,000 acres of land. To be Residents have expressed strong interest in conserving many of the remaining considered for this program,properties undeveloped or agricultural properties as open space to maintain the area's vistas should appear in the city's Land and open"country"qualities. Open space can also help achieve a separation Conservation and,Stewardship Master between Fort Collins and LaPorte to the north,provide space for wildlife, conserve " Plan, designated as potential natural views and the historic heritage of the area, and reduce the costs for infrastructure area or community separator. For to serve development. On the other hand,the subarea is within the City of Fort properties not designated on the plan, the Collins Growth Management Area,one of the areas within Latimer County where city generally evaluates the property using some growth and development is expected to occur over time because services and the following criteria: •utilities are available. Most lands are zoned for residential development and property owners likely have certain expectations of how they can develop their • It should have natural resource property. While conservation of some vacant lands may be an option,the city and values(such as wetlands, wildlife county cannot mandate open space conservation and the cost of acquiring land habitat, or other intrinsic values). makes it prohibitive for the city and county to conserve all vacant lands in the area. • It should be part of a connected system of open space. Mechanisms to Conserve Open Space • It should have community-wide Several conservation options are available,including: public benefit(e.g., is accessible through views or public right of • The city can purchase land as public open space (at a cost of approximately way, and is not only of benefit to a $5,000 to $15,000 per acre,depending on whether water rights are attached, selectgroup of neighbors). plus the cost of maintaining it over the long term). The county does not typically acquire open space lands within a Growth Management Area. For the city to buy land,the proposed property would need to be a city-wide priority FPO— and meet city criteria. agre::th the • The city can work with landowners to establish conservation easements to ' uproperties that are conserve land as private open space (at a lesser cost to the city;landowner maintains the property and city monitor the land). designated as future • The city can accept donations from willing landowners (with city or landowner potential open space on maintaining the land over the long-term;landowner assumes the cost of the "Trails, Recreation, and donating the land or conservation easement). Open • Residents or land trusts can approach landowners to negotiate conservation on page 9? How do you think the community easements. The planning team has prepared a"Guide to Land Preservation tect Initiatives" that is available on the project website to assist residents with local should acquire or prol initiatives, L open space in the • The city and county can mandate clustered development patterns so that if Northwest Subarea? properties do develop some portion of the land is set aside as private open space. 4 Parks and Recreation Draft Goals • Encourage a developer-provided new park north of Vine Drive. • Support private initiatives to build equestrian facilities. o you support showing a future Park Considerations park north of Vine The Northwest Subarea has limited options for developing new parks. Most of the Drive?north of Vine, Subarea is within the unincorporated county,and the county does not typically develop or would you be willing manage neighborhood parks. Areas within city limits and south of Vine Drive and east of to pay a fee to help Taft Hill are within the service areas of City Park and Huidekooper Park. Lee Martinez Park serves residents east of Shields Drive. Mechanisms to Acquire Land and Build Parks Options to develop and build a new private park north of Vine Drive include: • Residents can organize and negotiate with a developer to build a private park as part of a new development. • City and county can determine if county residents in this area are willing to tax themselves to purchase land, and build and maintain a private park. • If any new residential developments generate city parkland fees they will be used for improvements at Huidekooper Park or City Park. Future Land Use Considerations Some future development is likely to occur in the Northwest Subarea. Most of the area is currently zoned and planned for very low or low density residential development(on City's Structure Plan map and existing city/county zoning). While residents have indicated interest in keeping vacant and agricultural properties "open,"it likely is not be possible to conserve all lands. Draft Goals for Future The city and county cannot prevent landowners from exercising certain Land Use development rights,and public agencies are not willing to buy all land for open space. The Subarea Plan is an opportunity to identify and refine acceptable • Any new development will development patterns that might occur on properties if conservation is not generally be low intensity practicable. residential development,with lowest intensity near foothills. This section discusses the range of choices for the area that are realistic and • Allow only small-scale balance resident and property owners'interests. The choices consider existing commercial development;no zoning,land use plans,and other factors (such as open space priorities). The large retail, choices mostly convey different development patterns. For instance,a Rural • Limit building footprint sizes Residential development would allow homes on larger lots throughout a for other non-residential property,whereas a Rural Residential Cluster might mean that residential structures (e.g.,recreation development will occur on 20%of the property where the remaining 80%is facilities, churches,etc.) left as open space. While clusters result in a more compact development • Allow new small businesses if pattern on the developed portion, they are the best way to ensure that areas of they fit the character of the open space remain on properties that are developed in the future. Generally, area. the choices on the following pages show lower intensity of uses toward the • Continue to allow existing foothills,and more urban uses near or within city limits; this is consistent with legal small businesses. current city and county zoning for the area. 5 Potential 'lrypes of Development Distinct Parts of the Northwest Subarea The Northwest Subarea has five distinct areas where • Rural Residential different development choices are possible. They are: Housing at a maximum density ` of 1 du/2.29 acres, with lot sizes 1. West of Overland Trail/Foothills generally averaging 2.29 acres and 2. County Neighborhoods little or no common open space. 3. CSU Foothills Campus Gateway 4. Urban Neighborhoods 5. River/Bluff Rural Residential Clusterr Housing at a density of 1 du/2.29 acre gross density,with 80%of 7. 1, land conserved as open space and building lots with an average size Z of 0.3 acres (lot sizes similar to 4 '— Dean Acres). -- ., 3 Urban Estate Residential Housing at a density of 2 du/acre O _ ®' '• gross density, similar to Poudre Overlook. Little common open space. This area is zoned FA-1 which allows farming or 2.29 acre minimum lots for residential development. It is designated for Urban Estate on the Structure Plan,which Urban Estate Residential Cluster allows up to 2 units per acre (du/ac). • 4 Housing with 2 du/acre gross density,with 50% of land The private properties in this area are currently pasture conserved as open space and land and horse stables. In addition,the city recently residential building lots no purchased a 150+ acre open space parcel just west of the smaller than 0.2 acres. Poudre Overlook subdivision. Meeting participants have noted this area is important for wildlife,views,and other natural qualities,including wetlands. Low Density Neighborhood t ; Housing up to 8 du/acre of Area 2: County Neighborhoods residential development but with Most of this area is currently zoned FA which allows no minimum lot size. Could also densities of 2 du/ac. (i.e.,approximately 500 new include neighborhood services. residential units). Some smaller properties are zoned for industrial or commercial uses. The city's Structure Plan designates all lands in this area for Urban Estate Live/Work and Limited development,which also allows 2 du/ac. Potentially Commercial developable lands north Vine Drive are being farmed or Could allow offices,live-work, or are currently vacant. other small scale non-residential uses mixed with residential, 4D Residents and meeting participants are interested in including expanded home continuing farming in this area and note the land's value occupations. for wildlife,and historic farmhouses. They are also interested in a park or open space on vacant properties. Neighborhood Center Area 3: CSU Foothills Campus Gateway Could allow retail services no This area is planned for Urban Estate,but it is one area larger than 5 acres (e.g., small where residents and other participants seem to generally garden center, small retail, support some non-residential development near the intersection of Laporte and N. Overland Trail. Potential Types of Development, Cont. Area 4: Urban Neighborhoods Land Use Choices for Each Area Much of this area is developed as urban density The maps on the right-hand page correspond with the neighborhoods (i.e.,with density greater than 1 u/ac) and is either within the city limits or adjacent to city limits land use choices listed for each area below. For instance, where vacant lands may annex over time. Vacant lands in Area 1, "A- Rural Open Lands"corresponds with that the area are primarily zoned for low density land use on map A. Please consider which combination neighborhoods,up to 8 u/ac. with attached units. Several of land use choices would be best for the Northwest large vacant or agricultural parcels are located here. These Subarea. vacant properties are important for stormwater Area t West of Overland Trail management and wildlife grazing, but are also close to urban facilities and services,including parks, schools,and Note: Land in this area it a priority far open space city water and sewer. conservation. In the event that the city can not acquire the land for natural areas, or if open space is otherwise not feasible, choices for residential development include: This area is zoned FA and is planned as Urban Estate residential,allowing 2 u/ac. Lands along the river and A Rural Residential Cluster with 80% open space bottom of the bluff are currently being mined,and little B Rural Residential land will be available for development when mining is C Urban Estate Residential Cluster with 50%open complete. Much of the land is within the 100 year space floodplain of the Poudre River which precludes residential development.This is important land for future Area 2: County Neighborhoods trails,water storage,and natural areas restoration. Clustered development... D Urban Estate Cluster with 50%open space Rural Residential (L!/P Urban Estate Residential Cluster example on 75 homesasti 80%open 33 clustered h Area 3: CSU Foothills Campus Gateway homer an I - _ - °B' = J A Urban Estate Residential Cluster r i B Urban Estate Residential C Urban Estate Residential with Neighborhood Center. Area 4: Urban Neighborhoods Versus non-clustered A Low Density Neighborhood B Low Density Neighborhood with a small development... neighborhood center on Laporte Avenue Rural Residential © example on 75 acres Live/work areas (e.g., expanded home with 33 homer. occupations, studios, and other uses) v � Area 5: Bluffs/River Note: Land in this area is a priority far open space conservation. Other choices include.- Urban Estate Residential Cluster B/C Urban Estate Residential Alternative Land Use Choices _ . Vit Larger color i :._ maps are on the project website. Fort Collins RR AxOnOUS ... QUYIN Uiii� UL �__ - • ILMN 1 7 @� r e a. PK =� �- _. � a 1! LEGEND ME Agricultural/Open Space �`� '` RR W1 Rural Residential -- -' ` : I UE Urban Estate Residential _ LMN Low Density Residential -<k_ IR -v Uxl ' .I,t NC M hleighborhoodCommercial Yt LW VZO.. live/Work 1 ! -- RR-C = RR Cluster•, r- UE-C = UE Cluster Goals • Provide multi-purpose trail connections from neighborhoods and schools to Foothills and Poudre River Trail. • Establish future trail locations with property owner willingness and public acquisition,or as part of future developments. Trail Benefits • Provide local neighborhood connectors that (a) are safe routes for travel between schools,parks,natural areas, Fort Collins and county residents wide#use the re#on's and homes, and(b) connect to other major destinations trails for recreation and transportation purposes Trails within the community,including CSU and Downtown. provide safe routes for travel off-streets forpedestnans, • Provide local recreation trails that are the proper size bicycles, and equestnans to travel between destinations and and design for different areas. have many health, and other community benefits. • Limit impacts on neighboring properties through Generally trails increase the value of nearby properties proper design and screening. because residents view them as an amenity. Trails Considerations Many residents are interested in providing additional trails in the area to (a) connect to existing major recreation destinations, including the Poudre Trail and the Foothills Trail, (b) provide places for equestrians,and(c) provide a safe network for pedestrians and bicycles to travel to and from destinations such as schools, shopping,and home. Some residents ate concerned about potential impacts on neighboring properties and want to ensure that the city and county do not condemn property to acquire trails. The county does build and maintain trails as part of regional Trail Financial Costs recreation facilities and could possibly have a role in providing Multi purpose trails cost between$300-350,000 per mile connections to the Foothills Trail. CSU has expressed some to acquire land and build That cost increases to$700,00 willingness to support a trail connection along Laporte Avenue, ? untb an underpass. Gravel paths cost$75,000 per mile. but has concerns about security of campus facilities. The city's It costs$12,000 peryearper mile to maintain a multi- trails focus is on multi-purpose trails that are part of a community- purpose trail. wide system. Potential smaller local connections (shown on the map on page 9)will be a function of the transportation network and would be provided either through developments or local initiatives. Mechanisms to Establish/Maintain Public Trails Several options for public trails are available,including: • Focus on the major community multi-purpose trail connections for city acquisition,construction, and maintenance (i.e., to connect to the Poudre River Trail and the Foothills Trail). • City and/or county requires local neighborhood connections (for bicycles and pedestrians) as part of future developments. • Residents can work directly with landowners to negotiate easements for local recreation trails (e.g, footpaths) and apply for grants. • Clustered developments can establish local recreation trails on open space portions of properties. Typically,these would be private trails for the use of residents,but neighbors could negotiate with developers to provide connections and access. 43 C V . , ® W r L Pfr x ! `` p � W �k o. x I CU W • ; I ro a ^ ,� e y v r..� , � eersxexelcnae:eemmrxxvnninmGmS+r,�re ` fi 000 '.. O ! � c j Transportation, Services, and Utilities Services and Utilities What are needs for improved services or utilities in the subarea? To date, the city and Transportation Goals county have not heard many concerns from • Allow flexibility, consistent with code/ participants,but the following issues are on the table: standards, to provide local neighborhood connections(bike and pedestrian) as • Some residents and businesses have noted a alternatives to locally connected streets. need for improved water lines (to improve • Continue to allow flexibility to modify street pressure and quality). standards for lower density developments to • Some neighborhoods may need to connect fit the character of the area. law to sewer systems in the future because of failing septic systems. Considerations • Residents and others have noted an interest The "Transportation Choices"map reflects the City's Master Street in working with Xcel Energy to bury electric Plan (MSP) and indicates arterial and collector streets with proposed lines in the county. City electric lines within improvements over time. The choices map considers one new city limits are buried. local/collector street connection in the city between Laporte and • A Stormwater Master Plan should be done Vine Drive (north of City Park) to better connect the street system at for the North Basin (north of Vine Drive). half-mile spacings. Local street connections to existing subdivisions are not shown on the "choices"map,but may occur in the future as needed. Street connections may be avoided in some cases if alternative local pedestrian and bicycle connections are provided in new neighborhoods (i.e., typically an 8-foot concrete path). Local developments are required to make improvements on internal and adjacent streets. p Street cla.rrification.rWX ""^ ��:. .... of the MSP do not reflect current K conditions of strem.. .a:. , Some arterials and collectors may need r to be widened or improved over time. FOOTMO h59 CAMM w , , Ji xJ. ytti� � l ,,�yyry� i.l� �`.. • , � Wiest T TRANSPORTATION CHOICES SSubarea o w Mw •.«m.�«. ... „. ,M..•„ an g � o '.�m �hevl.lael —camawn _ /� �hrntll=txl r n �� R.vs,Hwn.NgOes �Favy lYlAvpee6! —(mbl=Iw) Design r r The planning team is preparing a set of Design Guidelines for the plan that will apply to new development. While •guidelines are recommendations rather than requirements,they are language that can serve as the foundation for formal standards that would add teeth to current code requirements. The design recommendations being created as part of this process will help inform both the developers who propose new developments,and the city and county staff who review those proposals,as to how new development should occur to best suit the character of the area. These guidelines will address both residential and non-residential developments as well as various landscape elements such as lighting, fencing, signs,and landscaping. The goal of these guidelines is to help preserve the area's character as future development projects take place. PREFERRED Residential Desired Neighborhood Character: • Variety of housing designs,colors, and lots sizes. • Larger setbacks and areas of open space. W • Modest homes in line with the scale and character of existing residences. • Diverse range of housing types and prices. • Rural style homes and lots with plenty of natural/informal landscaping. • Interspersed agriculturally-based uses or businesses,including horse NOT THIS! properties. What will the Design Guidelines Include? Design recommendations for new residential developments will protect the character of the area through encouraging design for: larger setbacks,more variety, smaller street-facing garages,more open space in clustered • developments,and shorter building heights to preserve views,taking into consideration current code requirements. Non-Residential ..;.Sidential Character: • Agricultural or farm based businesses which offer open areas,have few permanent structures,and generate little traffic. • Small-scale retail activities that"fit"the neighborhood. • Buildings designed with a modest,rustic appeal. • Minimal pavement/parking areas,particularly at the front of buildings. NOT THIS! What will the Design Guidelines Include? Design recommendations for new non-residential developments will protect the character of the area in designs for: business signs and lighting,building footprints, and building designs (e.g.using natural materials for a more rural feel). I t& Landscape THIS! Desired Landscape Character: NOT THIS! • Ranch-style fencing that is more open. • Natural,informal style of landscaping. What will the Design Guidelines Include? Design recommendations for landscape elements will encourage design for: open fencing made of natural materials and informal landscaping treatments. t VisionrSoldier Restoration Draft Goal • Restore Soldier Creek to a connected drainage with trails and open space using a variety of means including acquisition with willing sellers,easements,willing donors, or set asides as part of development projects. What is Planned? The land south of Vine Drive (i.e.,The West Vine Basin) drains into the Poudre River along the former Soldier Creek. Once a natural stream similar to Spring Creek,Soldier Creek is now a 0410. w "^ combination of ditches and pipes through the area. Developments over time have also narrowed the creek flow area, and nearby properties are prone to flooding. A number of properties in the part of the Subarea are in the 100-year s - floodplain of Soldier Creek. To solve the flooding problems in the West Vine Basin,the city/county Stormwater Master Plan has identified drainage improvements to drain to the Poudre River. The West Vine Basin master plan,as currently proposed,consists of a series of channels,pipes,and detention ponds (see Water Features and Soldier Creek could look like this: Basic channel (no trail or habitat) (e.g.,Drake and Shields"BEFORE improvements") Floodplains map on the project website). While these improvements achieve the basic objective of making the area safer from flooding,they will not protect and restore habitat or provide trails. What are Opportunities? The"Soldier Creek"project could be a opportunity to create a connected drainage,trails,and open space system. This would accomplish flood safety,trail,and open space objectives and also , protect and restore habitat—the Soldier Creek Restoration Vision Ways to Achieve the Vision? Achieving the restoration vision would require joint city/county efforts and coordination between departments including Parks, Natural Resources,and Stormwater. If the community,and city OR,and county support the vision, a varietyof funding sources channel Soldier Creek could look like this: Restored natural drainage g channel (e.g.,Drake and Shields`AFTER"improvements) could be available to achieve the project,including federal grants, fees,and developer land dedications,and willing sellers. It is not too late to define this "Solider Creek Restoration Vision." 0 Thank you for your interest. Please fill out the comment form in this booklet and plan to attend the t February 16, 2006 meeting with - Soldi 't ek Loca your ideas! Thank you for your input! SThis comment form will be useful for exercises at the February 16, 2006 meeting. Please IN our your answerr and return to the address listed belong or bringyour form to the meetiq. PAGE 2: Do you agree with the Draft "Key Directions" for the Plan? What would you change or add? PAGE 2: Is it important to develop a name for the Subarea? What do you recommend as a name ? PAGE 3: Do you support the recommendations for open space (see the map on page 9)? Comments: PAGE 4: Do you support the recommendations for parks (see the map on page 9)? Comments: PAGE 4: Do you agree with the draft future land use goals? Comments: PAGE 5-7: Which future development choices do you support,as identified on the maps on page 7: (Circle) AREA 1 MAP A. Rural Residential Cluster MAP B. Rural Residential MAP C. Urban Estate Cluster AREA 2 MAP A. Urban Estate Cluster MAPS B/C. Urban Estate Residential AREA 3 MAP A. Urban Estate Cluster MAP B. Urban Estate Residential MAP C. Urban Estate w/Center AREA 4 MAP A. Low Density Neighborhood MAP B. Low Density with Small Center MAP C. Live/work areas AREA 5 MAP A. Urban Estate Cluster MAPS B/C. Urban Estate Residential Comments: Comments, page 2 PAGE 8: Do you support the recommendations for trails (see the map on page 9)? (Draw trails on the map). Comments• PAGE 10: Do you support the recommendations for transportation, services, and utilities? Comments: PAGE II: Do you support the draft design recommendations? Comments: PAGE 12:1 D support the "Vision for Solider Creek"? Comments: i I GENIF CONNERS: I-V--= Return your completed comments to: e s w w e n w w w • ew w w w e w r w � w• • r w w w . . . . . . . e w w w e . w . w w e . e e w . w w . w e w er Postage required Advance Planning City of Fort Collins PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 Attn: Northwest Subarea Plan