HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 02/19/2013 - SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 014, 2013, AMENDINDATE: February 19, 2013
STAFF: Tim Buchanan
Lindsay Ex
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 7
SUBJECT
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 014, 2013, Amending the Land Use Code Regarding Trees and Correcting a Cross-
Referencing Error.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on February 5, 2013, amends the Land Use Code to mitigate
for additional tree species, amend the tree mitigation radius, mitigate for cotton-bearing cottonwood trees and seed-
bearing boxelder trees, and correct a cross-referencing error in the Land Use Code.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
During First Reading, Council directed staff to amend the proposed changes to achieve the following:
• Instead of only using the Ecological Characterization Study (ECS) for assessing whether Russian olive and
Siberian elms should be mitigated for, use the following approach:
N On urban sites, Russian olive and Siberian elm would be mitigated using the 1-6 tree replaced method as
is used on all other species, but exempt smaller diameter Russian olive and Siberian elm, those of
apparent wild or volunteer origin (such as those that have sprouted along fence lines and foundations) and
Russian olive and Siberian elm determined to be in poor condition.
N On natural sites (in Natural Habitat Buffer Zones), Russian olive and Siberian elm would be mitigated as
determined in the ECS.
N In addition, staff would clarify that a full range of factors, such as shade, aesthetics, canopy, and cooling
values are used in the determination of tree mitigation requirements.
Staff reviewed these changes with the Planning and Zoning Board during a Special Hearing on February 7, 2013. The
Planning and Zoning Board voted 7-0 to recommend approval of this revised direction.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary - February 5, 2013
(w/o attachments)
2. Planning and Zoning Board minutes, February 7, 2013
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
ATTACHMENT 1
DATE: February 5, 2013
STAFF: Tim Buchanan
Lindsay Ex
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 17
SUBJECT
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 014, 2013, Amending the Land Use Code Regarding Trees and Correcting a Cross-
Referencing Error.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In the summer of 2012, staff was asked to consider a change to the Land Use Code acknowledging the ecological
value of non-native trees, specifically Russian olive and Siberian elms. As staff evaluated these potential Land Use
Code changes, other suggestions for improvements to the Land Use Code arose, including amending the tree
mitigation radius, requiring mitigation of native cotton-bearing cottonwood trees and female box elder trees, and
correcting minor clerical errors in the Land Use Code.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
There are four components to the proposed Land Use Code changes:
1. Non-Native Trees
In July 2012, City Council requested that staff evaluate whether or not the current regulations surrounding non-native
trees, specifically Siberian elm and Russian olives, adequately addressed the ecological value these trees can provide.
Currently, Siberian elm and Russian olives are classified as nuisance species, are exempt from the tree mitigation
requirement, and are prohibited from being planted in the City. In addition, if located within a Natural Habitat Buffer
Zone, staff has often required the removal of Russian olive trees to prevent their proliferation in proximity to natural
habitats and features. At some sites, staff has encouraged selective or partial removal of Siberian Elms based on site
specific objectives.
Staff believes these tree species can provide ecological value (see Attachment 5 for more details). Based on feedback
from the City’s Park and Recreation Board, Natural Resources Advisory Board and the Planning and Zoning Board,
staff is proposing to update the Land Use Code to acknowledge and require mitigation for the value these species
provide. Non-native tree mitigation is proposed to be analyzed through a project’s Ecological Characterization Study,
and if the trees are found to provide ecological value to the site, mitigation will be required.
2. Tree Mitigation Radius
In addition, staff is proposing to change the requirement that mitigation trees must be planted within a quarter-mile
radius of the project site. The quarter-mile radius requirement has proven to be a challenge to meet, especially with
infill development. Increasing the types of trees that will be required to be mitigated for could exacerbate this existing
challenge. The quarter-mile radius was originally included to place off-site mitigation trees close to the project and
not to overly favor planting trees on City land. If they cannot be placed on site, most developments have preferred
placing mitigation trees on City land due to the ease of coordination and have been constrained in placing mitigation
trees on any other property within the quarter-mile radius.
Based on discussions with the Planning and Zoning Board during its October 2012 Work Session, a tiered approach
is being proposed that requires mitigation to first take place within one-half mile of the project site, then one mile from
the project site if there are not suitable sites within the one-half mile. If a suitable site cannot be found within one mile
from the project site, then the closest, suitable site within the City’s boundaries will be selected.
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
February 5, 2013 -2- ITEM 17
3. Mitigation for Native Cotton-bearing Cottonwood and Female Box Elder Trees
The Land Use Code currently exempts native cotton-bearing cottonwood and female box elder trees from the tree
mitigation requirements in the Land Use Code, unless these trees are within a Natural Habitat Buffer Zone, or an area
of land set aside for resource protection. These trees are classified as nuisance trees in City Code and are not
allowed to be planted within the City. However, these species do contribute to the urban tree canopy, regardless of
their position in the landscape. Therefore, based on a recommendation from the Natural Resources Advisory Board,
staff is proposing to amend the Land Use Code and requiring mitigation for these tree species as well.
4. Minor Clerical Changes
Two sections of the Land Use Code incorrectly reference Section 3.4.1 of the Land Use Code, Natural Habitats and
Features. The proposed Ordinance corrects those references.
FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS
A Land Use Code that is systemically updated is able to respond to changing trends and conditions. This continuous
improvement provides for an adaptable regulatory environment, yet remains predictable for all users and decision-
makers. While there may be no direct financial and economic impacts in the typical fiscal sense, a dynamic Land Use
Code creates a valid and credible legal framework that serves a vibrant local economy.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The City has an internal sustainability goal to achieve a 30% canopy density in suitable areas of City Parks and a
minimum of 70% native vegetation on its Natural Areas. While these Land Use Code changes will largely apply to
private land development, the mitigation of non-native trees with native trees will contribute to the City’s internal goals
by reducing the spread of non-native tree seeds into Natural Areas. The increase in native species that will occur as
the result of non-native tree mitigation will support City Plan Policy ENV 1.1 (Protect and Enhance Natural Features),
Policy ENV 2.5 (Provide Land Conservation and Stewardship), and Policy 24.4 (Restore and Enhance the Poudre
River Corridor). In addition, the mitigation of native cotton-bearing cottonwood and female box elders will increase
the City’s overall tree canopy.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
On January 17, 2013, the Planning and Zoning Board considered the proposed revisions to the Land Use Code. During
the January 17, 2013 hearing, the Board unanimously voted to recommend approval of this item as part of its Consent
Calendar.
Since the inclusion of mitigation requirements for non-native trees that are prohibited and considered a nuisance is
a departure from the current direction of the Land Use Code, staff met with two City Boards, in addition to the Planning
and Zoning Board, to assess what direction is the most appropriate.
On December 5, 2012, staff met with the Parks and Recreation Board on this topic and the Board voted 8-0 to support
both the amended tree mitigation radius and to require that Ecological Characterization Studies assess any non-native
trees present on a site and, if found to have ecological value, to either preserve or mitigate for this value.
Staff met with the Natural Resources Advisory Board on December 19, 2012 to review these changes. The Board
voted 8-0 to support amending the tree mitigation radius and to require that Ecological Characterization Studies assess
any non-native trees present on a site and, if found to have ecological value, to either preserve or mitigate for this
COPY
COPY
COPY
COPY
February 5, 2013 -3- ITEM 17
value. One member of the Board abstained from voting, as he was concerned that the existing mitigation radius
standard should remain.
In addition to supporting the Land Use Code changes discussed, the Natural Resources Advisory Board also
unanimously voted to recommend requiring mitigation for native, cotton bearing cottonwoods and female box elder
trees.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Item 929 Problem Statement and proposed Code language for the non-native trees, tree mitigation radii, and
mitigation for cotton-bearing cottonwood and female box elder trees elements.
2. Item 923 Summary Report stating the clerical changes needed in the Land Use Code to correctly reference
certain sections of the Land Use Code.
3. Parks and Recreation Board minutes, December 5, 2012
4. Natural Resources Advisory Board minutes, December 19, 2012
5. Planning and Zoning Board minutes, January 17, 2013
6. Memo re: City Code and Land Use Code and Non-native Trees, August 20, 2012
Planning & Zoning Board
February 7, 2013
Page 2
Consent Agenda:
1. Land Use Code (LUC) Amendments Related to Ecological Value of Non-Native Trees, Tree
Mitigation Radius, and Clerical Changes
Member Campana made a motion to approve the consent agenda which consists of Land Use
Code Amendments Related to Ecological Value of Non-Native Trees, Tree Mitigation, and Clerical
Changes. Member Hatfield seconded the motion. The motion was approved 7:0.
Discussion Agenda:
2. Foothills Mall Redevelopment, PDP #1200036
3. Eastside/Westside Character Study
_______
Project: Foothills Mall Redevelopment Project Development Plan # 1200036
Project Description: This is a request for a mixed-use redevelopment of the existing Foothills Fashion
Mall. As proposed, the project contains a commercial/retail component, a
commercial parking structure and 800 multi-family dwelling units on 76.3 acres.
The site is zoned C-G, General Commercial and is located within the Transit-
Oriented Development Overlay District (TOD).
Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence
City Planner Courtney Levingston Beth Sowder said the project proposes to deconstruct portions of the
existing Foothills Fashion Mall and renovate the original structure, for a 388,084 square foot, one-level,
enclosed shopping mall. In addition, various free standing buildings including the Commons at Foothills
Mall buildings, the Shops at Foothills Mall buildings, The Plaza at Foothills Mall, The Corner Bakery,
Christy Sports and the Youth Activity Center building would all be deconstructed.
Eight new retail buildings are proposed along South College Avenue, ranging from 9,300 square feet to
31,715 square feet in size. Internal to the site, five new retail buildings are proposed to be located
northwest of the existing enclosed mall. These five buildings range from 7,636 square feet to 12,000
square feet in size. To the southwest of the existing mall, four new restaurants are proposed ranging in
size from 8,088 square feet to 14,000 square feet as well as a new, two story 24,000 square foot
Foothills Activity Center to replace the Youth Activity Center.
A new 86,754 square foot entertainment and theater building is proposed, located southeast of the new
restaurants. The large east green area and smaller west green plazas anchor the pedestrian network.
The commercial component provides a total of 3,581 parking spaces via a six level, 84,663 square foot
parking structure and surface parking spaces.
The project proposes 800 multi-family residential units distributed among five buildings that will include a
mix of studio, one, two and three bedroom units. The unit mix would be divided in the following manner:
59 studio units; 395 one-bedroom; 319 two-bedroom and 27 three-bedroom, for a total of 1,173
bedrooms. For the residential component, 1,422 parking spaces are proposed via three separate
subterranean structures (858 spaces), an above ground structure on lot 6 (472 spaces) and 92 open
surface parking stalls located on lot 3.
ATTACHMENT 2
1
ORDINANCE NO. 014, 2013
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING THE LAND USE CODE REGARDING TREES AND
CORRECTING A CROSS-REFERENCING ERROR
WHEREAS, Siberian elm and Russian olive trees are classified as nuisance species and
are exempt from tree mitigation requirements under the Land Use Code, and are also prohibited
from being planted within the City; and
WHEREAS, Siberian elm and Russian olive trees sometimes provide ecological,
aesthetic, shade, canopy and cooling values for other species and habitat; and
WHEREAS, on those occasions when the nuisance species of Siberian elm and Russian
olive trees provide desirable ecological value for habitat, the City Council believes that such
species should be mitigated if not preserved under the Land Use Code; and
WHEREAS, the native tree species known as female box elder and cotton-bearing
cottonwood contribute to the City’s tree canopy and habitat goals; and
WHERAS, because these trees provide ecological and urban canopy values, the City
Council believes that these trees should be mitigated in accordance with existing standards; and
WHEREAS, compliance with the tree mitigation radii as contained in the Land Use Code
has been difficult to achieve and the City Council believes that the tree mitigation radii should be
adjusted accordingly; and
WHEREAS, there are two occasions within the Land Use Code where the cross-
references pertaining to buffer zones are incorrect and should be corrected; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that these proposed amendments to the
Land Use Code are in the best interests of the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FORT COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That Section 3.2.1(F) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as
follows:
3.2.1 Landscaping and Tree Protection
. . .
(F) Tree Protection and Replacement. Existing significant trees within the LOD and
within natural area buffer zones shall be preserved to the extent reasonably feasible
and may help satisfy the landscaping requirements of this Section as set forth
above. Such trees shall be considered "protected" trees within the meaning of this
2
Section, subject to the exceptions contained in subsection (2) below. Streets,
buildings and lot layouts shall be designed to minimize the disturbance to
significant existing trees. All required landscape plans shall accurately identify the
locations, species, size and condition of all significant trees, each labeled showing
the applicant’s intent to either remove, transplant or protect.
Where it is not feasible to protect and retain significant existing tree(s) or to
transplant them to another on-site location, the applicant shall replace such tree(s)
according to the following schedule and requirements. Replacement trees shall be
used to satisfy the tree planting standards of this Section. Replacement trees shall
be planted either on the development site or in the closest available and suitable
planting site. The closest available and suitable planting site shall be selected
within one-half (1/2) mile (2640 feet) of the development site, subject to the
following exceptions. If suitable planting sites for all of the mitigation trees are not
available within one-half (1/2) mile (2640 feet) of the development, then the
planting site shall be selected within one (1) mile (5280 feet) of the development
site. If suitable planting sites are not available for all of the mitigation trees within
one (1) mile (5280 feet) of the development site, then the City Forester shall
determine the most suitable planting location within the City’s boundaries as close
to the development site as feasible.
(1) A significant tree that is removed shall be replaced with not less than one (1)
or more than six (6) replacement trees sufficient to mitigate the loss of value
of the removed significant tree. Notwithstanding the foregoing, significant
Siberian elm and Russian olive trees located in a natural habitat buffer found
to contain ecological value, as provided in Section 3.4.1(D)(1) of this Land
Use Code, that would have been exempt from mitigation under subsection
(2)(c) below shall be mitigated in accordance with Section 3.4.1(E)(2)(b) of
this Land Use Code. The applicant shall select either the City Forester or a
qualified landscape appraiser to determine such loss based upon an appraisal
including but not limited to shade, canopy, aesthetic, environmental and
ecological value of the tree to be removed and by using the species and
location criteria in the most recent published methods establishedappraisal
guide by the Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers. Replacement trees
shall meet the following minimum size requirements:
(a) Canopy Shade Trees: 3.0" caliper balled and burlap or equivalent.
(b) Ornamental Trees: 2.5" caliper balled and burlap or equivalent.
(c) Evergreen Trees: 8' height balled and burlap or equivalent.
(2) Trees that meet one (1) or more of the following removal criteria shall be
exempt from the requirements of this subsection:
(a) dead, dying or naturally fallen trees, or trees found to be a threat to
public health, safety or welfare;
3
(b) trees that are determined by the city to substantially obstruct clear
visibility at driveways and intersections;
(c) tree species that constitute a nuisance to the public such as Siberian elm
and Russian olive unless the trees are identified as containing
ecological value as provided in Section 3.4.1(D)(1) of this Land Use
Code.Siberian elm less than eleven (11) inches DBH and Russian olive
less than eight (8) inches DBH.
(d) Russian olive and Siberian elm of wild or volunteer origin, such as
those that have sprouted from seed along fence lines, near structures or
in other unsuitable locations.
(e) Russian olive and Siberian elm determined by the City Forester to be in
poor condition.
(3) All existing street trees that are located on city rights-of-way abutting the
development shall be accurately identified by species, size, location and
condition on required landscape plans, and shall be preserved and protected
in accordance with the standards of subsection (G).
Section 2. That Section 3.2.1(M) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as
follows:
(M) Revegetation. When the development causes any disturbance within any natural
area buffer zone, revegetation shall occur as required in paragraph 3.4.1(E)(2)
(Development Activities within the Buffer Zone) and subsection 3.2.1(F) (Tree
Protection and Replacement).
Section 3. That Section 3.4.1(D)(1) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read
as follows:
3.4.1 Natural Habitats and Features
. . .
(D) Ecological Characterization and Natural Habitat or Feature Boundary
Definition. The boundary of any natural habitat or feature shown on the Natural
Habitats and Features Inventory Map is only approximate. The actual boundary of
any area to be shown on a project development shall be proposed by the applicant
and established by the Director through site evaluations and reconnaissance, and
shall be based on the ecological characterization of the natural habitat or feature in
conjunction with the map.
(1) Ecological Characterization Study. If the development site contains, or is
within five hundred (500) feet of, a natural habitat or feature, or if it is
determined by the Director, upon information or from inspection, that the site
likely includes areas with wildlife, plant life and/or other natural
4
characteristics in need of protection, then the developer shall provide to the
City an ecological characterization report prepared by a professional qualified
in the areas of ecology, wildlife biology or other relevant discipline. At least
ten (10) working days prior to the submittal of a project development plan
application for all or any portion of a property, a comprehensive ecological
characterization study of the entire property must be prepared by a qualified
consultant and submitted to the City for review. The Director may waive any
or all of the following elements of this requirement if the City already
possesses adequate information required by this subsection to establish the
buffer zone(s), as set forth in subsection (E) below, and the limits of
development ("LOD"), as set forth in subsection (N) below. The ecological
characterization study shall describe, without limitation, the following:
(a) the wildlife use of the area showing the species of wildlife using the
area, the times or seasons that the area is used by those species and the
"value" (meaning feeding, watering, cover, nesting, roosting, perching)
that the area provides for such wildlife species;
(b) the boundary of wetlands in the area and a description of the ecological
functions and characteristics provided by those wetlands;
(c) any prominent views from or across the site;
(d) the pattern, species and location of any significant native trees and
other native site vegetation;
(e) the pattern, species and location of any significant non-native trees,
including Siberian elm and Russian olive trees as described as defined
in Section 3.2.1(F)(21)(c) of the Land Use Code, and non-native site
vegetation that contribute to the site’s ecological, valueshade, canopy,
aesthetic and cooling value;
(f) the top of bank, shoreline and high water mark of any perennial stream
or body of water on the site;
(g) areas inhabited by or frequently utilized by Sensitive and Specially
Valued Species;
(h) special habitat features;
(i) wildlife movement corridors;
(j) the general ecological functions provided by the site and its features;
(k) any issues regarding the timing of development-related activities
stemming from the ecological character of the area; and
5
(l) any measures needed to mitigate the projected adverse impacts of the
development project on natural habitats and features.
Section 4. That Section 4.17(D)(1)(a) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to
read as follows:
(D) Development Standards.
(1) Transition between the River and Development.
(a) River landscape buffer. In substitution for the provisions contained in
subsection 3.4.1(E) (Establishment of Buffer Zones) requiring the
establishment of "natural area buffer zones," the applicant shall
establish, preserve or improve a continuous landscape buffer along the
River as an integral part of a transition between development and the
River. To the maximum extent feasible, the landscape buffer shall
consist predominantly of native tree and shrub cover. (See Figure 20.)
The landscape buffer shall be designed to prevent bank erosion and to
stabilize the River bank in a manner adequate to withstand the
hydraulic force of a 100-year flood event. The bank stabilization shall
comply with the following criteria:
. . .
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 5th day of
February, A.D. 2013, and to be presented for final passage on the 19th day of February, A.D.
2013.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
6
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 19th day of February, A.D. 2013.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk