HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 09/02/2003 - SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 120, 2003, AMENDIN AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ITEM NUMBER: 35
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL DATE: September 2, 2003lip FROM
Ken Waido
SUBJECT :
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 120, 2003, Amending the City's Land Use Code to Implement
the I-25 Subarea Plan, Which is an Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The planning area of the I-25 Subarea Plan includes only lands located within the Fort Collins
Growth Management Area (GMA) boundary. The planning area includes approximately 5,561
acres (8.7 square miles) of land of which approximately 2,128 acres (3.3 square miles), or 38%
410 of the 8.7 square miles of the planning area, is currently annexed into the City. The vision,
goals, principles and policies contained within the I-25 Subarea Plan apply only to the 8.7 square
mile planning area. In addition, the 1-25 Subarea Plan describes a variety of implementation
actions that should be taken if the Subarea Plan is to be successful.
Based on concerns expressed by some property-owners staff has amended Ordinance No. 120,
2003, to have most distance measurements be made from the center-line of I-25 instead of the
edge of the I-25 right-of-way. For example, instead of stating a distance of one hundred twenty
(120) feet the ordinance contains a distance of two hundred forty-five (245) feet (120 feet plus
125 feet [one-half of the I-25 250' right-of-way]). Another example is to change some distances
from one thousand three hundred twenty (1,320) feet to one thousand four hundred forty-five
(1,445) feet (1,320 + 125).
Attached to this agenda item summary is a map depicting the planning area of the 1-25 Subarea
Plan.
Ordinance No. 120, 2003, was adopted 4-2 (Councilmembers Hamrick and Roy opposed, Mayor
Pro Tern Bertschy absent), on August 19, 2003.
i l✓�"4 k " �N'Ty
.
d r. /
.. 12500.
40
r a�
-14
y
. tr '
�¢ 41-25 Subarea Plan
Major Streets
M }s
. ORDINANCE NO. 120, 2003
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING THE CITY'S LAND USE CODE TO IMPLEMENT
THE I-25 SUBAREA PLAN, WHICH IS AN ELEMENT OF THE
CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
WHEREAS, by Resolution 2003-095, of the Council of the City of Fort Collins, the
Council adopted the I-25 Subarea Plan as an element of the Comprehensive Plan of the City; and
WHEREAS, in order to implement the I-25 Subarea Plan the Council has determined that
the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins ("Land Use Code") should be amended by the
addition of a new Division 3.9 for the purpose of establishing "Development Standards for the I-
25 Corridor" and that the Land Use Code should further be amended as it pertains to the urban
estate, commercial, employment and industrial zone districts to make cross-references in the
regulations for such districts to the I-25 corridor regulations and should be amended by adding a
definition in the Land Use Code to define the tern 1-25 Activity Center"; and
WHEREAS, the Council has determined that the foregoing amendments to the City's
Land Use Code are in the best interest of the protection of the health, safety and welfare of the
City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FORT COLLINS that the Land Use Code of the City is hereby amended as follows:
Section 1. That Section 3.1.1 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as
follows:
3.1.1 Applicability
All development applications and building permit applications shall comply with
the applicable standards contained in Divisions 3.1 through 3.9 inclusive, except
that single-family dwellings and accessory buildings and structures and accessory
uses that are permitted subject only to basic development review as allowed in
Article 4 need to comply only with the standards contained in Article 4 for the
zone district in which such uses are located and the standards contained in
Division 3.4.7 and Division 3.8. In addition to the foregoing, this Land Use Code
shall also apply to the use of land following development to the extent that the
provisions of this Land Use Code can be reasonably and logically interpreted as
having such ongoing application.
Section 2. That the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of anew
Division 3.9 which reads in its entirety as follows:
DIVISION 3.9 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE I-25 CORRIDOR
Sections:
3.9.1 Development Standards for the I-25 Corridor
3.9.1 Development Standards for the I-25 Corridor
(A) Applicability. These standards apply to applications for
development within
Mteistate Highway 25 (1-253 which tight-of-way includes the
frontage r. the boundary of the I-25 Subarea Plan.
(B) Purpose. The purpose of this section is to provide standards to
implement the model standards outlined in the "Development
Standards for the I-25 Corridor" and the "Fort Collins I-25
Corridor Sub Area Plan," in addition to the standards contained
elsewhere in this Land Use Code.
(C) Location of Single Family Residential Lots From I-25.
(1) Development of new single family residential lots within
one thousand three hundred twenty (1,320) feet (one-
quarter [1/4] mile of the centerline of Interstate Highway
25 (I-25) right-of-ov ay shall be prohibited.
(2) In the Urban Estate zone district, development that creates
new single-family residential lots located between one-
quarter (1/4) and one-half (1/2) mile from the centerline of
I-25 right-of way shall utilize the clustering technique (as
provided for in Section 4.1(E)(2) of this Land Use Code for
the Urban Estate District) in order to concentrate densities
away from the—I-25—right-of ovaq, maximize views, and
preserve landscape features or open space.
(D) Commercial Building Placement Standards.
(1) The placement of a commercial building on a lot, tract or
parcel of land adjoining the I-25 right-of-way where the
building is located closer than one hunched hventy
ff26)two hundred forty five (245) feet from the centerline
• of I-25 right-of-way shall be restricted so that no more than
fifty (50) percent of the total frontage of the lot, tract or
parcel of land is occupied by the building.
(2) The placement of a commercial building on a lot, tract or
parcel of land adjoining the I-25 right-of-way where the
building is located a minimum of
(im'9)two hundred forty five (245) feet from the centerline
of I-25—right-of-tray, shall be restricted so that no more
than sixty (60) percent of the total frontage of the lot, tract
or parcel of land is occupied by the building.
(E) Landscaping Standards.
(1) Parking Lot Perimeter Landscaping. At least seventy five
(75) percent of the perimeter of all parking areas shall be
screened from nearby streets, public rights-of-way, public
open space, and nearby uses by at least one of the
following methods:
(a) A berm at least three (3) feet high with a maximum
slope of 3:1 in combination with evergreen and
• deciduous trees and shrubs;
(b) A hedge at least three (3) feet high, consisting of a
double row of shrubs readily capable of growing to
form a hedge, planted three (3) feet on center in a
triangular pattern;
(c) A decorative fence or wall between three (3) and
four (4) feet in height in combination with
landscaping including, without limitation, evergreen
and deciduous trees and shrubs.
(2) Site Perimeter Landscaping Adjacent to the I-25 Right-of-
Way.
(a) Buffers adjacent to I-25. Developments with a site
perimeter which is adjoining the I-25 right-of-way
shall provide a landscaped buffer of at least eighty
(80) feet between the building or parking lot edge
and the I-25 right-of-way. The buffer shall consist
of informal clusters of deciduous and evergreen
trees and shrubs planted in an offset pattern and
•
shall consist of one (1) tree and ten (10) shrubs per
twenty-five (25) lineal feet of frontage.
(b) Berms. Berms greater than three (3) feet in height
shall not be permitted adjoining the I-25 right-of-
way if they block long-range views of mountains
and open lands for motorists on I-25 (not including
motorists on frontage roads or ramps).
(F) Commercial Building Design Standards.
(1) Roof Form.
(a) Roofs on principal structures with a building
footprint of less than ten thousand (10,000) square
feet shall:
1. be pitched with a minimum slope of at least
5:12,
2. incorporate the 5:12 pitch by use a modified
Mansard roof, covering a sufficient area of
the roof so as to create the appearance that
the Mansard roof covers the entire structure,
and
3. incorporate at least one of the following
elements into the design for each fifty (50)
lineal feet of roof:
a. Projecting gables/dormers,
b. Hips,
c. Horizontal or vertical breaks,
d. three (3) or more roof planes.
(b) Roofs on structures with a footprint of greater than
ten thousand (10,000) square feet shall have at least
two (2) of the following features:
1. Parapet walls featuring three-dimensional
cornice treatment that at no point exceeds
one-third (1/3) of the height of the
supporting wall.
• 2. Overhanging eaves, extending at least three
(3) feet beyond the supporting walls.
3. Sloping roofs not exceeding the average
height of the supporting walls, with an
average slope greater than or equal to one
(1) foot of vertical rise for every one (1) foot
of horizontal run.
4. Three (3) or more roof slope planes.
(2) Building Form/Facade Treatment.
(a) Buildings that face public streets, adjoining
developments, or connecting pedestrian frontage
shall be articulated, fenestrated and proportioned to
human scale along at least sixty (60) percent of the
fagade using features such as windows, entrances,
arcades, arbors, or awnings.
(b) Building facades facing a primary access street
shall have clearly defined, highly visible customer
entrances that feature at least two (2) of the
following:
1. Canopies or porticos,
2. Overhangs,
3. Recesses or projections of at least three (3)
percent of wall length,
4. Arcades,
5. Distinctive roof forms,
6. Arches,
7. Outdoor patios,
8. Display windows,
9. Planters or wing walls that incorporate
landscaped areas and/or places for sitting.
(3) Materials and Colors.
(a) One or more of the following building materials
shall be incorporated into the design of a structure
and used to provide visual interest at the sidewalk
level for pedestrians:
•
1. Stucco,
2. Brick,
3. Stone, or
4. Tinted, textured masonry block.
(b) Smooth faced gray concrete block and tilt-up
concrete panels are prohibited.
(c) Metal is prohibited as a primary exterior surface
material. It may be used as trim material covering
no more than ten (10) percent of the fagade or as a
roof material.
(d) Fagade colors shall only be earth tone colors with a
low reflectance.
(e) High-intensity primary colors are prohibited on any
roof area visible from a public or private right-of-
way or public open space.
(G) Block Pattern for Activity Centers.
(1) To the maximum extent feasible, larger sites containing multiple
buildings and uses shall be composed of a series of urban-scale
blocks of development defined and formed by streets or drives that
provide links to nearby streets along the perimeter of the site.
(2) Block sizes shall not exceed ten (10) acres for commercial
development.
(3) In addition to a network streets and drives, blocks shall be
connected by a system of parallel tree-lined sidewalks that adjoin
the streets and drives combined with off-street connecting
walkways so that there is a fully integrated and continuous
pedestrian network.
(4) To the maximum extent feasible, remote or independent pad sites,
separated by their own parking lots and service drives, shall be
minimized. Such buildings shall be directly connected to the
pedestrian sidewalk network.
. (H) Service Areas, Outdoor Storage and Mechanical Equipment.
(1) Location. Loading docks, outdoor storage yards, and all other
service areas shall be located to the sides and/or rear of a building,
except when a site abuts I-25, in which event said areas shall be
located to the sides of the building that do not face I-25.
(2) Screening.
(a) All outdoor storage yards, loading docks, service areas, and
mechanical equipment or vents larger than eight (8) inches
in diameter shall be concealed by screens at least as high as
the equipment they hide, of a color and material matching
or compatible with the dominant colors and materials found
on the facades of the principal building. Chain link, with
or without slats, shall not be used to satisfy this
requirement.
(b) Equipment that would remain visible despite screening, due
to differences in topography (i.e., a site that is at a lower
grade than surrounding roadways) shall be completely
enclosed except for vents needed for air flow, in which
event such vents shall occupy no more than twenty-five
(25) percent of the enclosure facade.
(1) Fencing and Walls.
(1) Materials. Walls and fences shall be constructed of high-quality
materials, such as, tinted, textured blocks; brick; stone; treated
wood; or ornamental metal and shall complement the design of an
overall development and its surroundings. The use of chain link
fencing or exposed cinder block walls shall be prohibited.
(2) Location. Fences and walls shall be set back at least six (6) feet
from the back edge of an adjoining public sidewalk, and such
setback area shall be landscaped with turf, shrubs, and/or trees,
using a variety of species to provide seasonal color and plant
variety.
(3) Maximum Length. The maximum length of continuous, unbroken,
and uninterrupted fence or wall plane shall be forty (40) feet.
Breaks shall be provided through the use of columns, landscaping
pockets, transparent sections, and/or a change to different
materials.
(J) Wireless Telecommunication.
(1) Location. Wireless telecommunication facilities shall not be
permitted within
one thousand four
hundred forty five (1,445) feet of the centerline of I-25.
(2) Height. Wireless telecommunication facilities shall not exceed the
maximum height allowed for a structure as specified in the Land
Use Standards of the underlying zone district.
(K) Height.
(1) Outside the I-25 activity centers, non-residential building heights
shall not exceed twenty (20) feet within one hundmd (100) feet of
the 1-25 wo hundred twenty five (225) feet of the
centerline of I-25.
(2) Outside the I-25 activity centers, non-residential and residential
building heights shall not exceed forty (40) feet between oee
of waytwo hundred twenty six (226) feet and seven hundred
twenty five (725) feet of the centerline of I-25.
(3) Where existing site topography (whether natural or man-made)
blocks views of the mountains or open lands from I-25, these
height restrictions shall not apply.
(L) Minimum Residential Density in Activity Centers.
(1) Minimum residential density in activity centers shall be twelve
(12) dwelling units per gross acre.
Section 3. That Section 4.1of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition
of a new subparagraph (F) which reads in its entirety as follows:
(F) Development Standards for the I-25 Corridor. Development located
within one thousand three hundred twenty (1,320) feet (one-quarter [1/41
mile) of either side of the centerline of I-25
f entage marls) shall be subject to the requirements of Section 3.9.
Section 4. That Section 4.17(B)(3)(b) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by
the addition of a new subparagraph 14 which reads in its entirety as follows:
14. I-25 activity centers.
Section 5. That Section 4.17 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the
addition of a new subparagraph (F) which reads in its entirety as follows:
(F) Development Standards for the 1-25 Corridor. Development located
within one thousand three hundred twenty (1,320) feet (one-quarter [1/4] mile) of
either side of the centerline of I-25 shall
be subject to the requirements of Section 3.9.
Section 6. That Section 4.22(D)(3) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read
as follows:
(3) Locational Standards along 1-25. Along I-25, any secondary uses
shall be located at least
(i,329)one thousand four hundred forty five (1,445) feet (one-
gawte, [3f41 mile)from the centerline of Cither Side Of thC I-25
Such secondary uses shall
be located so that they have direct access from a collector or local
street.
Section 7. That Section 4.22 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the
addition of a new subparagraph (F) which reads in its entirety as follows:
(F) Development Standards for the 1-25 Corridor. Development located
within one thousand three hundred twenty (1,320) feet (one-quarter [1/4]
mile) of either—sick—of—the centerline of I-25 tight-of-may (inciading
frontagcreads) shall be subject to the requirements of Section 3.9.
Section 8. That Section 4.23(D) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the
addition of a new subparagraph (2) which reads in its entirety as follows:
(2) Locational Standards along 1-25. Along I-25, any use listed under
4.23(B)(3)(c) shall be located at least one thotisand HUM handfe
twenty (1,320) feet (one-clawtet [f/41 mile) of eithm one
thousand four hundred forty five (1,445) feet from the'centerline of
I-25 . Such uses shall be
located so that they have direct access from a collector or local
street.
Section 9. That Section 4.23 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the
addition of a new subparagraph (F) which reads in its entirety as follows:
(F) Development Standards for the I-25 Corridor. Development located
within one thousand three hundred twenty (1,320) feet (one-quarter [1/41
mile) of eithe, side of tit the centerline of I-25 '
frentagcmads)shall be subject to the requirements of Section 3.9.
Section 10. That Section 5.1.2 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the
addition of a new definition "1-25 activity center' which reads in its entirety as follows:
1-25 activity center (located as described in the I-25 Subarea Plan) shall mean an area of
concentrated development containing more than one (1) principal land use type and generally
served by high frequency transit. Such land uses may include office, retail, residential, or
service uses such as hotels, motels and personal and business services. In an I-25 activity center,
the different types of land uses are in close proximity, planned as a unified complementary
whole, and functionally integrated to the use of vehicular and pedestrian access and parking
areas.
Introduced and considered favorably on first reading and ordered published this 19th day
of August, A.D. 2003, and to be presented for final passage on the 2nd day of September, A.D.
2003.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading this 2nd day of September, A.D. 2003.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ITEM NUMBER: 37A-B
DATE: August 19, 2003
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL FROM:
Ken Waido
SUBJECT :
Items Relating to the Adoption of the I-25 Subarea Plan as an Element of City Plan, the City's
Comprehensive Plan.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of the I-25 Subarea lain as an element of the City's Comprehensive
Plan and implementing Land Use Code' amendments. On Jane 19, 2003, the Planning and
Zoning Board voted 5-2 to recommend adoption of the I-25 Subarea Plan and implementing
Land Use Code amendments.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
A. Resolution 2003-095 Adopting the "I-25 Subarea Plan" as an Element of the
Comprehensive Plan of the.City(City=Plan)B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 120, _,003 mend the City's Land Use Code to
Implement the I-25 Subarea-Pl h W, chfs_ an Element of the City's Comprehensive
Plan.
The I-25 Subarea Plan encompasses 10.8 square miles, roughly one-mile on either side of the I-
25 right-of-way for a distance of 10 miles, extending from County Road 52 on the north to
Carpenter Road (County Road 32) on the south. Approximately 8.7 square miles of the planning
area is located in the Fort Collins Growth Management Area (GMA) boundary. The Subarea
Plan includes an inventory of existing conditions; overview of corridor issues; and, vision, goals,
principles and policies and plans for land use, trans ortation, community appearance and design,
economic sustainability, hous ng' , �osful
, at 1 eas and open lands, and growth
management. In addition, th lan de f im mentation actions that should be
taken if the Subarea Plan is be s cA Ties of p posed amendments to the City's
Land Use Code are also being recomma option in conjunction with the Subarea Plan.
The planning process included extensive opportunities for comment by the public, property
owners, City and County boards and commissions, and City and County elected officials.
ACKGROUND:
In March 1997, the City Council adopted City Plan, as the new Comprehensive Plan. The City
of Fort Collins Structure Plan, a map showing the distribution of future land uses and
transportation systems, was also adopted as a component of City Plan. The City Plan documents
identified the need to do additional planning for the I-25 corridor by designating the area an 1-
25 Special Study Corridor". In addition, the City Plan Principles and Policies document
contained the following:
DATE: August ITEM NUMBER:
PRINCIPLE LU-4: More specific subarea planning efforts will follow adoption of these
City Plan Principles and Policies which tailor City Plan's city-wide perspective to
individual neighborhoods, districts, corridors, and edges.
Policy LU-4.5 Priority Subareas. The following areas have been identified as priority for future
subarea planning:
• I-25 Corridor(emphasis added)
• Mountain Vista
• East Mulberry
• Fossil Creek Reservoir Area +, -r
The Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Plan was adopteby the City Council on March 17, 1998, the
Mountain Vista Subarea Plan was.adbpt4e1&on!Mar( h 16, 1999;and the East Mulberry Corridor
Plan was adopted on September 17, 2002. These plans, along with the Harmony Corridor Plan
(rev. 2003), established policies and land uses for areas west of I-25, thus, the 1-25 Subarea
Plan's focus was mostly directed to areas east of the interstate highway.
Two I-25 Corridor Plans
At the time of development of the Fort Collins I-25 Subarea Plan there was also a multi-
jurisdictional planning effort to develop the Northern Colorado Regional Communities I-25
Corridor Plan. The planning ndane he�eg na( ndx uba a planning efforts overlapped.
The regional plan studied the 32-mile it erstate7o dor from' ounty Road 52 on the north to an
in
area south of the Town of Beik o�ud w' le t e su area planatudied the ten-mile long corridor
from County Road 52 to Carpenter Road (County Road 32). The regional plan focused on
design, transportation, and open lands and natural areas. The objective of the subarea planning
effort was to focus on these same issues and more as the regional plan but in a more focused
manner than the regional plan. The Northern Colorado Regional Communities I-25 Corridor
Plan was adopted by the Fort Collins' City Council on November 20, 2001.
I-25 Subarea Plan
The development of the I-25 §ybar P e n ted
TOc 6'""IT-as a commitment to complete
City Plan for the areas adjac t to the 25 co us, y Plan's basic philosophies and
policies are inherently inclid in t I-2 Plan Eventually, the land use and
transportation policies of the I�25baze Pand Amendments to the City of Fort
Collins Structure Plan, and the Master Street Plan. Implementation techniques will include
amended zoning districts, annexation and zoning, and new development design standards.
The planning process developed two sets of three land use alternatives and a draft land use plan
(a.k.a. "preferred alternative'). All were subjected to numerous reviews by the general public,
property owners, City and County advisory boards and commissions, and City and County
elected officials. In September 2001, two draft land use plan options were developed, one that
included a GMA boundary expansion and one that restricts development east of I-25 to
properties already inside the City's GMA boundary. The two options formed the basis for
discussing and eventually providing the direction on whether the I-25 Subarea Plan should be
completed with, or without, an expansion of the existing GMA boundary east of I-25 as well as
other major land use policy issues. The most critical issues were as follows:
DATE: ITEM NUMBER:
• Should the plan be developed to include an expansion of the City's GMA boundary, or
10 should the plan be developed for only areas within the existing GMA boundary?
• Should large tracts of land be preserved for the potential location of industry and
businesses in prime locations for such uses (most are currently zoned for such purposes),
or should some, or all, of these areas be planned for different uses and rezoned?
• Should residential neighborhoods of differing types be provided in close proximity to
future employment and shopping areas to allow people the opportunity to live, work and
shop in their own neighborhood?
Listed below are the key points conclusions, and p lic es off th 25 Subarea Plan:
y
t -r �s
• Due to the recent adoption-of the Mountain'-Vista Subarea Plan (1999), the Fossil Creek
Reservoir Area Plan (1998), and the East Mulberry Corridor Plan (2002), along with the
Harmony Corridor Plan (rev. 2003), the I-25 Subarea Plan mainly deals with the area
located east of I-25 from around the Prospect Road interchange on the south, to County
Road 52 on the north, and County Road 5 on the east. The Northern Colorado Regional
Communities I-25 Corridor Plan (2001) provided the framework for the Subarea Plan.
• No change to the City's Growth Management Area (GMA) boundary is proposed as a
result of the Plan.
• Two mixed-use activity cente �ar:e)entified for the planning area, one at the I-
25/Mulberry interchange and,the theyt e I-25/Pros�ect interchange.
• Future employment and industrial adjacent to I-25 will develop in campus-like settings in
between the Activity Centers. This will be achieved through zoning, the use of design
standards, including setback requirements and maximum building frontage allowances,
minimizing building heights, and the proper management of floodplain areas.
• The Corridor contains approximately 416 acres of commercial, 390 acres of employment
and 698 acres of industrial lands.
• Boxelder Creek is [o prese d as r rrid" The City's Resource Recovery
Farm is to be preserve publr open n . Appro ately 1,184 acres in the corridor
will be open lands (inclu rive str corridor , and, city-owned open lands and
natural areas).
• Secondary uses (retail and highway oriented commercial uses) typically permitted in
industrial and employment districts will be required to be set back at least 1/4 mile form
I-25 in order to avoid the development of a "commercial strip" appearance along the
interstate frontage.
• Low-density, detached single-family residential development shall be prohibited within
one-quarter (1/4) mile of I-25 through various means, including zoning patterns and land
use restrictions. Development that creates new detached single-family lots in urban estate
areas located between one-quarter (1/4) and one-half (1/2) mile from the I-25 right-of-
way shall utilize a clustering technique to concentrate densities away from the I-25 right-
DATE: ITEM NUMBER:
of-way, and to maximize views, preserve landscape features or open space, and provide a
buffer to any adjacent industrial uses.
• Low-density, mixed-use neighborhoods are to be concentrated within one-half(1/2) mile
on either side of Mulberry Street east of I-25 (with the exception of the 80 acres located
southwest of the Mulberry Street/County Road 5 intersection which are to be urban estate
areas). The low-density, mixed-use neighborhoods could have densities as high as eight
(8) dwelling units per acre, with affordable housing projects obtaining a density up to
twelve (12) dwelling units per acre.
• The balance of the areas plannorresidentialusesare to-be urban estate developments
with a maximum density of Al)two. dwellin units pefa5re.
• In total, the residential areas•within.the'planning area-will generate approximately 2,512
new dwelling units on 1,743 acres, for a total population of approximately 6,154.
• The study area is planned to eventually be served with multi-modal transportation
options, including mass transit, bicycle and pedestrian connections. A supplemental
street system is planned allowing movement within the corridor, thus, diminishing the
need to utilize the interstate highway for shorter length trips. The employment and
industrial districts adjacent to I-25 will be designed in such a manner that they eventually
obtain their access from the supplemental treet system, thus, minimizing the need to use
the frontage roads adjacent to -25.
• The proposed changes to the has er Stre lan haveen analyzed by staff, and along
with the eventual extension of transit and improvements to bike and pedestrian facilities
in the area have been found adequate and appropriate to handle the multi-modal
transportation needs of existing and future land use development in the I-25 Corridor.
Any infrastructure improvements shown outside of the City's Growth Management Area
boundary are not the financial responsibility of the City of Fort Collins and reflect
recommendations from other adopted regional plans. Similarly, improvements deemed
necessary to Interstate 25 interchanges at SH-392/Carpenter Road, Prospect Road, and
Mulberry Street, are the financial responsibility of the Colorado Department of
Transportation and any
�dev'erdip "n m res ttn'im'�cts.
• Most of the undeveloped land in Ct 's Grow Management Area is expected to
annex to the City prior two develo nt a uired he Fort Collins-Larimer County
intergovernmental agreement. Thus, when development does occur, such development
will be subject to all of the provisions of the City's Land Use Code, payment of the
City's development impact fees, etc.
Planning Process
The development of the I-25 Subarea Plan began in October 1999, as a commitment to complete
City Plan for the areas adjacent to the I-25 corridor. Also, as indicated above, various drafts of
the Plan were subjected to numerous reviews by the general public, City and County advisory
boards and commissions, and City and County elected officials.
DATE: ugu ITEM NUMBER:
The planning process included meetings with the City's Planning and Zoning Board, Natural
Resources Advisory Board, Transportation Board, Affordable Housing Board, and Air Quality
Advisory Board. Key meetings included a public forum and two public hearings before the
Planning and Zoning Board as well as two City Council study sessions and a regular Council
meeting where Council provided specific direction on policies issues, including preservation of a
portion of the Resource Recovery Farm as open lands, no change to the City's (GMA) Growth
Management Area boundary, and restricting residential densities to less than urban densities for
areas east of I-25 (see attached copy of Resolution 2001-135).
Meetings were also held with the Larimer County Planning Commission and Agricultural
Advisory Board, as well as the Board of ount,�y GBommissiorners7Organized community groups
involved in the process included Cttizen Platne the Chamber of Commerce's Legislative
Review Committee, the East Mulberry Subarea laCtizens Steering Committee, as well as the
I-25 Subarea Plan Citizens Task,ForceNGeueral public open-houses were also conducted to
provide information to the public and the project maintained a web site where the public could
access information and drafts of the plan. The Plan was also given extensive coverage by the
local media.
Changes to the Draft I-25 Subarea Plan
Some minor wording changes have been made to the draft I-25 Subarea Plan from the version
presented to the Planning and Zoning Board last June. The changes are based on comments
from the Planning and Zoning Board, atur Re ie dvisory Board, and Transportation
Board. Deletions are shown as awhile ditions are shown as bold and
underlined.
Development Regulations
The Council is being asked to adopt certain amendments to the City's Land Use Code by adding
a new Division 3.9 Development Standards for the I-25 Corridor as well as some minor
amendments to provide cross reference provisions in the C, E and I zoning districts.
The Northern Colorado Regional Communities I-25 Corridor Plan produced a Development
Design Standards for the I-2 0 0 o e c tai recommended development
standards so there would be me con tency pm uality throughout the corridor.
It was anticipated that Comm ities w dad t variation f the document based upon their
existing regulations and communttprefe es. dccu contained a series of"Regional
Baseline Standards" often along with additional "Recommended Design Standards" for
additional control over development design.
City staff completed an exhaustive review of the Development Design Standards for the I-25
Corridor document and compared the regional baseline and recommended design standards to
provisions already included in the City's Land Use Code. In many cases, development
regulations in the Land Use Code already met, or exceeded, those recommended in the
Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor document. Where there were gaps, or
tighter standards recommended in the regional document, staff has prepared amendments to the
Land Use Code to be approved in conjunction with the adoption of the Subarea Plan.
ugus
DATE: ITEM NUMBER:
Key new development regulations for the I-25 Corridor are as follows:
• Secondary uses (retail and highway oriented commercial uses) typically permitted in the
industrial and employment zoning districts will be required to be set back at least 1/4
mile from I-25.
This provision expands an existing provision, Division 4.22 Employment District(E), (D)
Land Use Standards, (3) Locational Standards within the Mountain Vista Subarea, of the
Land Use Code and applies it to all Industrial Employment zoned properties within the I-
25 corridor.
• New, detached single familyUdidentil units are prohibited from locating within 1/4
mile of I-25.
• Minimum 80' landscaped setback requirement for buildings and parking lots from the I-
25 right-of-way.
Currently there are no minimum setback requirements for developments in the I,
Industrial, and E, Employment, Districts. This standard is recommended in the
Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor document and currently exists in the
Land Use Code for the Harmony Corridor District (H-Q.
• Building heights are redtn to 20 fee 1( story) o O dings located between 80 and
100 feet of the I-25 night-of waxy, and es cted t0 feet (two stories) for buildings
located more than 100 feew bubles,th 00� eet from t e I-25 right-of-way.
This standard is recommended in the Development Design Standards for the I-25
Corridor document. The proposed regulations represent a significant change in Land Use
Code building heights in the Industrial and Employment zoning districts that currently
allow structures to go to a maximum of 4 stories (up to 100').
• Maximum building frontage of 50% on parcels adjacent to I-25.
• No wireless telecomm CibafNopl to i P
- -o 5.
Transportation Impacts
The proposed changes to the Master Street Plan have been analyzed by staff and, along with the
eventual extension of transit and improvements to bike and pedestrian facilities in the area, have
been found to be adequate to handle the transportation needs of land use development in the I-25
corridor.
Planning and Zoning Board Recommendation
On June 19, 2003, the Planning and Zoning Board conducted a public hearing and voted 5-2 to
recommend to the Council that the I-25 Subarea Plan be adopted as an element of City Plan and
adoption of the proposed amendments to the Land Use Code. A copy of the Board's minutes are
attached.
DATE: ITEM NUMBER:
Comments/Recommendations from Other Boards
Attached are comments/recommendations from the Natural Resources Advisory Board, the
Affordable Housing Board, the Transportation Board, and the Air Quality Advisory Board.
7 7
Py
cop