HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 11/06/2007 - SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 126, 2007, AMENDIN ITEM NUMBER: 20
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY DATE: November 6, 2007
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Ken Waldo
SUBJECT
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 126,2007,Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins
by Changing the Zoning Classifications for That Certain Property Known as the Southwest Corner
of East Prospect Road and I-25 Rezoning.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance was adopted on First Reading on October 16, 2007 by a vote of 5-0 (Troxell
withdrawn, Ohlson absent) and rezones 143 acres located at the southwest corner of East Prospect
Road and Interstate 25. A 25-acre parcel of land zoned C,Commercial, and a 118-acre parcel of the
former Resource Recovery Farm zoned POL,Public Open Lands is now rezoned to E,Employment
District.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Copy of First Reading Agenda Item Summary- October 16, 2007.
ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM NUMBER: 23
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY DATE: October 16, 2007
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Ken Waido
d
SUBJECT
Items Relating to the Prospect Road/I-25 Interchange Rezonings.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinances on First Reading and the Resolution.
The Planning and Zoning Board voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the plan amendments and the
requested rezonings.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. Resolution 2007-097 end' e tyr1a Stru ure Plan Map Pertaining to the
Southwest Corner of Prosp ct Roa d I-
B. Resolution 2007-098 Amending the City Structure Plan Map Pertaining to the Northeast
Corner of Prospect Road and I-25.
C. Resolution 2007-099 Amending the I-25 Subarea Plan.
D. First Reading of Ordinance No. 126, 2007, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort
Collins by Changing the Zoning Classifications for That Certain Property Known as the
Southwest Corner of East Prospect Road and 1-25 Rezoning.
E. First Reading of Ordinance No. 127, 2007, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort
Collins by Changing the Zoning Classifications for that Certain Property Known as the
Northeast Corner of East e�gect an YniThis is a request to amend the 5 Suba Pla e tructure Plan map, and rezone
143 acres located at the southw e t ped Interstate 25 and rezone 105
acres located at the northeast corner of East Prospect Road and Interstate 25.
The current Structure Plan designations for the 143 acres in the southwest are Commercial Corridor
District, for a 25 acre parcel, and Open Lands, Parks and Stream Corridors, for a 118 acre parcel.
The current I-25 Subarea Plan designations are Commercial Corridor District and Proposed Open
Space,with corresponding zoning district designations of 25 acres of C,Commercial and 118 acres
October 16, 2007 -2- Item No. 23
of POL, Public Open Lands. The City proposes a Structure Plan amendment and amendments to
the I-25 Subarea Plan to change the area into the Employment District designation with a
corresponding rezoning to the E, Employment District.
The current Structure Plan d gnatio r 86Pan
5Ythbar
the northeast is the Industrial
District and the current I-25 S area P des' is also Industrial District. The
current Structure Plan designatio 19 o 0s Estate District and the current
I-25 Subarea Plan designation for the area is also Urban Estate. The applicant proposes a Structure
Plan amendment and amendments to the I-25 Subarea Plan to change the area into additional
Commercial Corridor and Employment District designations with corresponding rezonings to the
C, Commercial District and the E, Employment District.
APPLICANT FOR REZONING OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER:
City of Fort Collins
Department of Natural Resources
City Planning and Community Development Department
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
OWNER OF PROPERTY I LU E IN T T CORNER REZONING:
City of Fort Collins
c/o Darin A. Atteberry, City Manager
300 LaPorte Avenue, City Hall West
Fort Collins, CO 80521
APPLICANT FOR REZONING OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER:
Land Acquisition and Management, LLC
7200 South Alton Way Suite B 150
Centennial, CO 80012
OWNER OF PROPERTY INCLUDED IN THE NORTHEAST CORNER REZONING:
Same
BACKGROUND
Staff is recommending changes -2 ea ran t City Plan, Structure Plan map and
the rezoning of 143 acres into the E,Employment District in the southwest and in the northeast,the
rezoning of 86 acres into 66 acres of C,Commercial District and 20 acres of E,Employment District;
and the rezoning of 19 acres from UE, Urban Estate District to the E, Employment District. The
northeast corner rezonings would result in at total of 96 acres of C, Commercial zoned area (66
rezoned acres added to 30 acres of existing C zoning) and 39 acres of E, Employment zoning. The
E,Employment zoned areas would provide a buffer between the 96 acres of Commercial zoning and
residential areas to the north and east.
October 16, 2007 -3- Item No. 23
The review of land uses and zoning around the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange is based on:
1. City Council direction to staff indicating the Council's general preference for a higher level
of"commercial" use fCof
s fo Yh
covery Farm property located
in the southwest quadr ospe R d/ nge. Staff has concluded that
rezoning 25 acres of t fro om 118 acres from POL, Public
Open Lands to E,Empfor al 3 a , mployment)would encourage
new businesses and expansion of local businesses while preserving the area as an attractive
community gateway, and would be in the best interests of the City.
2. Simultaneously, the City received a rezoning request from the owners of property in the
northeast quadrant of the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange requesting a change in zoning of
86 acres of I, Industrial and 19 acres of UE, Urban Estate.
Staff decided to review the land uses around the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange as a result of the
rezoning requests from the City and the private property owners to determine what would be the best
land use pattern for the area around the interchange for the City as a whole, independent of the
specific rezoning requests. The amendments to the plans are related to the rezoning requests but are
independent actions. If the amendments to the plans are approved,the rezoning requests are simply
implementation actions to the V
eThe fundamental policy issued ssed i t onin quest for the southwest corner is:
should City Plan be amendedin c ge to cover area currently preserved as open
space to an area that will permit the development of employment land uses in the SW quadrant of
the Prospect Road/1-25 interchange?
The fundamental policy issue to be addressed in the rezoning request for the northeast corner is:
should City Plan be amended and zoning changed to allow for the development of a
regional/community scale shopping center in the northeast quadrant of the Prospect Road/I-25
interchange? A regional/community shopping center in the northeast quadrant will help contribute
tax revenues necessary to fund Prospect Road/1-25 interchange improvements and related
infrastructure. Given the cost to improve infrastructure,development from all four quadrants around
the interchange will need to contribute funding to improve the interchange.
The rezoning requests need to be viewed independently from the City's Adequate Public Facilities
(APF) requirements: All development plans for parcels impacting the Prospect Road/I-25
interchange must include a Tran ''o tP
Ynedimprovements,
e TIA will determine whether
traffic generated by the develo ent will esult vice(LOS)at the interchange
and the physical improvement at will ed t igate the impacts. In order to
begin construction, developmen rrtust a b or have funding
appropriated that will cover improvement costs.
In summary, the specific plan amendments for the southwest request involves changing 25 acres of
commercial and 118 acres of open space designated land to create 143 acres of employment land in
the southwest quadrant of the interchange. The specific plan amendments for the northeast quadrant
of the interchange involve changing 86 acres of industrial to 66 acres of commercial and 20 acres
of employment and changing 19 acres of urban estate to employment.
October 16, 2007 -4- Item No. 23
THE SOUTHWEST SITE
The properties proposed for rezoning are currently an undeveloped 25 acre parcel of land zoned C,
Commercial,and a 118 acre par e v Farm zoned POL,Public Open
Lands.
The adjoining existing zoning d us e a flows:
N: C, Commercial and E, Employment, mainly undeveloped
E: C, Commercial, and County Commercial and FA I, Farming zoning, partially developed
retail and office uses, and agricultural uses
S: POL, Public Open Lands, and RC, River Corridor, public open space and the Boxelder
Sanitation District's wastewater treatment facility
W: POL, Public Open Lands, the Running Deer Natural Area, Colorado Welcome Center and
I-25 rest area
The property was annexed into the City of Fort Collins as part of the 325 acre Sludge Farm
Annexation in June of 1988 and zoned RC, River Corridor District. In 1997,the 25 acre parcel was
placed into the C, Commercial District and the 118 acre parcel was placed into the E,Employment
District as a result of the City Pl c mpr ensive rezonin of the entire city. The sizes of the
commercial and employment s w e sed al ev opment Plan(ODP) for the area
prepared by the Planning Dep ent f the U it' p t.
The Utilities Department operated a sludge application process on the property until transferring that
operation to other sites in northern Larimer County. The Natural Resources Department purchased
144 acres from the Utilities Department to be preserved as open space (the Running Deer Natural
Area),and in 2003,purchased an additional 151 acres as open space. In May 2004,the City Council,
following the policies and implementation actions contained in the I-25 Subarea Plan,rezoned the
151 acre parcel from E, Employment into the POL, Public Open Lands District. The 118 acres
requested for rezoning is a portion of the 151 acre tract.
THE NORTHEAST SITE
The adjoining existing zoning and land uses are as follows:
N: C, Commercial and LMN, Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood, undeveloped
E: County FA-1, FarminCE
Oel
d subdivision, and UE, Urban
Estate, undeveloped 1 P School District
S: C, Commercial, and C ially de loped retail and office uses
W: C, Commercial and E, , devel
The property was annexed into the City of Fort Collins as part of the 235 acre Galatia Annexation
in 1990 and zoned HB, Highway Business, IP, Planned Industrial, and RLP, Low Density Planned
Residential Districts. All of the zoning districts had a Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning
condition attached which required development proposals to be reviewed against the criteria of the
Land Development Guidance System (LDGS)which was the City's PUD ordinance at the time.
October 16, 2007 -5- Item No. 23
In 1997, the Galatia Annexation were rezoned as part of the City Plan comprehensive community
rezoning. The 30 acres of HB, Highway Business was rezoned C, Commercial; the 86 acres of IP,
Planned Industrial was rezoned I, Industrial; and the 119 acres of RLP, Low Density Planned
Residential was rezoned UE,farce
toere r o d a r of RL istricts were eliminated from
the Land Use Code in 1997. adoption of the I-25 Subarea
Plan in 2003.
Approximately 100 acres of the 119 acres zoned UE are currently owned by the Poudre School
District. The property is undeveloped, but will likely be used for athletic fields and school bus
storage.
CITYPLAN AND THE I--25 SUBAREA PLAN
In 1997,the City adopted City Plan as the City's the new Comprehensive Plan. The Structure Plan
map showed Commercial Corridor land use designations in all four quadrants immediately adjacent
to the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange; Employment District designations for other areas in the
northeast, southwest, and southeast quadrants; Low Density Mixed-Use Residential designation in
the northwest quadrant; and Rural/Open Lands and Stream Corridors designation for other areas in
all four quadrants. The Structure Plan map also identified the need for additional planning in the
dub
ecial Stud Corridor." In addition City Plan's
I-25 corridor and designated the ar at ty
chapter on Principles and Po ' s co ao w g:
PRINCIPLE LU-4: s ia anning e rts will follow the adoption
of these City Plan Principles and Policies which tailor City Plan's citywide
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
Concurrent with the development of the I-25 Subarea Plan, was a multi-jurisdictional cooperative
planning effort to develop the Northern Colorado Regional Communities 1-25 Corridor Plan. The
planning boundaries of the two efforts overlapped. The regional plan studied the I-25 corridor from
County Road 52 on the north to an area south of the Town of Berthoud, while the subarea plan
studied the area from County Road 52 to County Road 32 (Carpenter Road). The most significant
difference between the two plan t e it d uses in more detail than the
regional plan. The regional an wa ased n x. ng use plans of the participating
jurisdictions. The regional pl focus n de o ng a set design standards, a transportation
element,and open lands/natural polic . h thern orado Regional Communities I-25
Corridor Plan was adopted by the City in November 2001.
In 2003, the City adopted the I-25 Subarea Plan as an element of City Plan. The key points,
conclusions, and policies of the 1-25 Subarea Plan are summarized as follows:
October 16, 2007 -6- Item No. 23
1. 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.
2. No change in the City's o
3. Two activity centers w iden i d,on t e lb treet interchange and the
other at the Prospect oad ' ch The NE uadrant of the Mulberry
interchange was planned epot to ' nofa nal/community shopping
center. The NE quadrant of the Prospect interchange was designated as a mix use
activity center with commercial, industrial, and residential uses.
4. Employment and industrial districts adjacent to 1-25 are to be designed in a manner
as to maintain a perception of openness through the corridor.
5. Secondary uses(retail and highway-oriented commercial uses)typically permitted in
employment/industrial districts will be required to be set back at least 1/4 mile from
I-25 to avoid a commercial strip appearance along 1-25.
6. Detached single-family residential development is prohibited within 1/4 mile ofI-25.
7. Low density, mixed use neighborhoods are to be concentrated within 1/2 mile of
Mulberry Street.
8. The balance of areas planned for residential development are to be urban estate
developments.
9. The City's Resource Reco F s to be reserved as o en space.
10. The subarea is planne o e n ally s ti-modal transportation
options. A supplemen streets tem 1 ate ement within the subarea,
thus, diminishing the n to util I- fo hort trig
11. Most undeveloped land within the subarea is expected to annex prior to development.
LAND USE CODE
The regulations covering rezonings in the City of Fort Collins are contained in Division 2.9 of the
Land Use Code. Section 2.9.4 (H) (2) indicates the following:
Mandatory Requirements for Quasi-Judicial Rezonings. Any amendment to the
Zoning Map involving the zoning or rezoning of six hundred forty(640)acres of land
or less(a quasi-judicial rezoning)shall be recommended for approval by the Planning
and Zoning Board or approved by the City Council only if the proposed amendment
is:
(a) consiste he o P ; and/or
(b) warrant by ge c ditions ithin the neighborhood
sunoundi din g t ubject erty.
Section 2.9.4 (H) (3) of the Land Use Code indicates the following:
Additional Considerations for Quasi-Judicial Rezonings. In determining whether to
recommend approval of any such proposed amendment, the Planning and Zoning
Board and City Council may consider the following additional factors:
October 16, 2007 -7- Item No. 23
(a) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is compatible with
existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land, and is the
appropriate zone district for the land;
(b) whether and the to t dment would result in
significantly ad rse i is on e 1 e ' nment, including,but not
limited to, wat air, n sto er mana ment, wildlife, vegetation,
wetlands and na nch g o envir nt;
(c) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a
logical and orderly development pattern.
SOUTHWEST CORNER APPLICANTS REQUEST AND JUSTIFICATION:
In 2003, the Natural Resources Department Natural Areas Program completed purchase of the
Resource Recovery Farm (RRF) as a scenic and open lands buffer. At the time of purchase, the
eastern portion of the RRF was not described as an area of interest to the Natural Areas Program in
the Natural Areas Policy Plan , nor the various community separator plans adopted by the City.
Because the eastern portion was not shown in these plans, and because it has low natural resource
values, Natural Areas Program staff embarked on a planning process to help guide the property's
ultimate management and disposition status.
In August 2005,the Natural RCeo
cct sh d e Ycat
s for the RRF property with the
Council and requested policy e C ieneralpreference fora hierlevel of"commercial"use fort B d Coupective,the Natural Resources
Department staff concluded that rezoning a substantial portion of the property(118 acres)from POL,
Public Open Lands to E, Employment would be in the best interests of the City.
In addition,staff s perspective is that the 25 acre parcel zoned C,Commercial,immediately adjacent
to the interchange and owned by the City should be combined with the 118 acre parcel to create a
143 acre parcel for employment type uses.
Employment zoning would allow the property to be used for economic development purposes. At
the same time,however,the adopted 1-25 Subarea Plan-as well as other constraints on the property,
would allow the property to be developed in a manner that preserves an aesthetically pleasing
viewshed from I-25 as well as protects adjoining areas with high natural values (namely Boxelder
Creek and the Running Deer Natural Area). The rezoning request excludes Boxelder Creek,it will
remain zoned POL.
Regulations contained in thekth
Use ode a li b to -25 corridor, and more generally
throughout the community, ten$ to h e ployme industrial districts designed in a
manner to maintain openness the se k requi ents,maximum building frontage
allowances,restricting building heights,and proper management of floodplains. Minimum building
setback requirements are 205 feet from the centerline of I-25. Maximum building frontage
allowance is 50% at the 80 foot minimum setback from the property line, which can be expanded
to 60%at an increased setback of 120 feet. Building heights are restricted to 40 feet within 600 feet
from the property line adjoining 1-25.
October 16, 2007 -8- Item No. 23
NORTHEAST CORNER APPLICANTS REQUEST AND JUSTIFICATION
The following has been submitted by the applicant as a justification for the rezoning requests:
• The Prospect / I-25 iC
as c s c in 9 6. Since its construction, traffic
volumes have increas tly t interch a structure has deteriorated.
• A recent North I-25 Eta ct ement )team its
of the interchange
indicates that portions of the interchange are CURRENTLY experiencing a failing Level of
Service(LOS) quality F (failure).
• Furthermore, the EIS team projects increases of roughly 4 times the current traffic volume
for the interchange in the next 20 years.
• North 1-25 EIS projections call for a 200 foot widening of interstate right-of-way(ROW)to
accommodate an additional lane of traffic in each direction and improvements to the on/off
ramps and safety lanes. As a result, any reconstruction of the Prospect interchange must
accommodate a wider footprint. The current interchange ROW will not accommodate this
widening.
• Cost estimates/projections for the interchange and Prospect Road improvements are
substantial:
0 The projectioCeof
int chan a itself is $25 000,000.00 (excluding ROW
acquisition cos
Boxelder Creeg f Pros c d we f interchange is $3,000,000.
0 Prospect Roada erc o Count oad 5 is$1,700,000 to$2,300,000
(excluding design,entitlements,utilities,structures,relocation ofTimnath inlet canal,
and CR5/Prospect intersection).
0 Prospect Road west of interchange to Summit View is $1,000,000 to 1,300,000
(similar exclusions).
0 The total, thus, ranges from $30,700,000 to $31,600,000, at a minimum.
• Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), the Federal Highway Administration
(FHwA) and the City have little funds to aid in the construction of this interchange and
related street improvements.
• A new interchange is needed to meet the Adequate Public Facilities(APF) requirement for
the new CSU R&D center in the southwest quadrant as well as for the property owner's
anticipated project or other developments on the interchange corners. A new interchange
will serve as a "Gateway to CSU", as envisioned by the University. If the City wishes to
have this interchange co d )' e P
it willlikely need to be funded
by a public/private fin ing ve lThe I-25 Subarea Plan d the evel ment Plan(ODP) on the property
were developed prior to currer co ojections and proposed land use
changes on the City-owned property becoming available. Clearly such magnitude of
interchange constructions costs and such land use changes could not have been anticipated.
• Gene Andrist,a financial planner involved with the financing ofmany interchanges and other
major projects throughout the state, has developed a number of funding scenarios for
public/private financing of the interchange. Increased levels of retail space at the interchange
corners appears to be the key to provide increased revenue sources to the City to pay for
interchange and related improvements.
October 16, 2007 -9- Item No. 23
• A recent Economic Planning Systems (EPS) study commissioned by the City to evaluate
future retail capacity in the vicinity of Fort Collins,determined that over the next few years
an increase of approximately 1.5 million feet of retail space is anticipated. The City is in a
very competitive market op
in r and Wellington for this retail
space. If the City wis to capere retail space (and its related sales
tax) the City needs to ve qu' ely.
The property owners (the Whites) have been very involved is a series of planning related
studies/projects for the interchange,the surrounding area,and along the 1-25 corridor. Listed below
is a summary of their involvement:
BOXELDER CREEK REGIONAL STORMWATER ALLIANCE
• Served from the inception of the Boxelder Alliance until present as the representative for a
group of private property owners.
• Was one of 5 groups (Landowners, City, Wellington, Larimer County, Colorado Water
Conservation Board) who EQUALLY funded the stormwater masterplan.
• Served as 1 of 5 voting members on the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) which
provided overall direction to the Alliance's efforts. The TAC:
a Prepared the Scope of Work for the en ineering consultant,
Selected the en eeri nsu t,
0 Provided ongoi directi to/ r y
selected consultant
0 Reviewed/com to n or o cts,
o Held monthly public meetings to discuss progress,
o Participated in weekly/biweekly meetings to complete tasks for the Alliance,
o Reviewed/commented on final Regional Master Plan,
0 Participated in Alliance presentations to Alliance members and town councils.
• Served as 1 of 5 voting members on the Financial Advisory Committee (FAC).
o FAC was formed to ensure financial feasibility to the engineering options.
o Independently funded legal consultant to the FAC.
o The FAC:
■ Completed funding analyses of the Master Plan alternatives,
■ Researched project financing options,
■ Completed damages & consequences assessments,
■ Developed Funding/Implementation Strategy for final Master Plan,
■ Coordinated with TAC in developing a recommended alternative.
• Prepared list of property i ' 'tyP
YPe
400 names)for public notices.
• Advised local property ners up o Issues.
• Coordinated with Alli e me rs in unty, Town of Wellington, the
City, Town of Timnath, o so , rrigation Company, Boxelder
Sanitation Distirict,New Cache la Poudre Irrigation Company,Colorado Water Conservation
Board, Colorado Department of Transportation and others.
NORTH 1-25 EIS
• Attended North 1-25 EIS Technical Advisory Committee meetings (usually was the only
member of the public in attendance).
October 16, 2007 -10- Item No. 23
• Participated in all local (Group 7) meetings.
• Organized group of landowners in the neighborhood of I-25/Prospect and advised them of
interchange issues.
• Met regularly with City o to Yadage
T and Felsburg Holt Ullevig.,
consultants on the No I-25 I proje
• With City Transportati staff ther o youenced the proposed alignment
and details of the Prospe int g the of City.
• Facilitated meetings between North I-25 EIS and Boxelder Creek Stormwater Alliance to
resolve mutual issues.
• Researched and resolved historic preservation issue with North I-25 EIS team.
PROSPECT ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
• Organized group of local property owners concerning issues pertaining to future Prospect
Road improvements.
• Coordinated regularly with City Transportation and Engineering staff.
• Facilitated series of public/private meetings with the City, Timnath Engineer, and local
property owners to address future improvements to Prospect before they became problems.
These issues included:
0 Boxelder CreekConDis
g of ospect west of I-25
Greeley Water Tr m si P 'ec GWET) crossing of Prospect,
o Boxelder Sanit t se ng o ospect at McLaughlin Lane,
o Relocation of Tn c t llow fu widening of Prospect,
o Prospect/ County Road 5 intersection issues,
o Boxelder Creek stormwater overflow canal crossing of Prospect(the Grand Canal).
o With Town of Timnath,Don Bachman,Cache la Poudre Irrigation Company,Poudre
Valley School District and a local developer,developed cross section profile of future
Prospect ROW which is in use today.
GREELEY WATER EXTENSION AND TRANSMISSION PROJECT (GWET)
Greeley's GWET project is a 60-inch diameter waterline delivering water from their pre-treatment
plant northwest of Fort Collins to Greeley. In its nominal configuration,the bottom of the pipeline
is to be placed on top of approximately 2 feet of gravel and covered with at least 60 inches of soil
making the total depth of their pipeline excavation and backfill approximately 12 feet. The sheer
size of this project makes it important to anticipate related issues in advance of the project's
construction. The 2007 segmen pr ' cl YBodetr"Sanitation
Prospect Road at McLaughlin
Lane, a crossing of I-25 at a to tion no of P s t on to a point in the vicinity of
the Fort Collins Airpark. I-25 c sing iculicated since three irrigation
company canal crossings, the B er cro g, District sewer line
crossing as well as various other utility crossings are located in close proximity to one another.
• The Whites facilitated several public/private meetings with representatives from Greeley,
Timnath,Boxelder Alliance,City Transportation/Engineering and Stonmwater Departments,
the Poudre Valley School District,Boxelder Sanitation District, CDOT, a group of affected
landowners, and others to discuss details of the project.
• Arranged to have GWET representatives attend several Boxelder Alliance TAC meetings to
October 16, 2007 -11- Item No. 23
coordinate the particularly tight and complex I-25 crossing as well as other mutual issues.
• Facilitated meetings with the Timnath Engineer and Timnath GMA developers to discuss
project alignment to minimize impacts to properties in vicinity of Timnath.
• Worked closely with P a trirc
elregarding crossing of the
GWET project across Distn s and e' rThe 2007 segment of GW ipeli is earinn.
AMENDMENTS TO THE STRUCTURE PLAN MAP AND THE I-25 SUBAREA PLAN:
The Structure Plan map,a component of City Plan,the City's Comprehensive Plan,sets forth a basic
pattern of development, showing how Fort Collins should grow and evolve over the next 20 years.
The I-25 Subarea Plan is an element of City Plan and provides greater detail and policies for the I-25
corridor. For the southwest corner,the maps in these existing plans currently designate the 25 acre
parcel as commercial and the 118 acre parcel as open space. For the northeast corner, the maps in
these existing plans currently designate 30 acres as commercial, 86 acres as industrial,and 19 acres
as urban estate(not including the 100 acres owned by the Poudre School District) in the northeast
quadrant of the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange. To recommend approval of the City Plan and 1-25
Subarea Plan amendments, the City Council has to find that: (1) the existing Structure Plan is in
need of change; and(2)the proposed changes would promote the public welfare and be consistent
with the vision,goals,principlesn
licof Ci Plan. The applicable criteria are contained in
Appendix C of City Plan.
Review Criteria for Structurei r e ents: endix C of City Plan outlines
mandatory requirements for public notice, review process and evaluation criteria for minor
amendments to City Plan, including Structure Plan map amendments. The Plan text states:
"A plan amendment will be approved if the City Council makes specific findings
that: The existing City Plan and/or related element thereof is in need of the proposed
amendment;and The proposed plan amendment will promote the public welfare and
will be consistent with the vision,goals,principles and policies of City Plan and the
elements thereof."
To support the requested rezoning, amendments to existing plans will be necessary. Attachment 1
contains the statements,policies,and maps which need to be amended within the I-25 Subarea Plan.
Attachment 2 is a summary of the recommended changes to the City Plan Structure Plan map.
ANALYSIS BASED ON R ONI EV C T
How the rezoning requests addre a req en ' the C' Land Use Code are summarized
below:
(a) consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan;
Staff decided to review the land uses around the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange as a result of the
rezoning requests from the City, for the southwest quadrant, and the private property owner,for the
northeast quadrant, to determine what would be the best land use pattern for the area around the
October 16, 2007 -12- Item No. 23
interchange for the City as a whole,independent of the specific rezoning requests. The amendments
to the plans are related to the rezoning requests but are independent actions. If the amendments to
the plans are approved, the rezoning requests are simply implementation actions to the plan
amendments. Staff is recomme nktot
1 he commercial and open space
lands in the southwest quadran be cp1dusesp
n istrict designation. Basically,the
plan amendments revert the p erty l ed and zoned prior to the 1-25
Subarea Plan adoption. � y
Staff is recommending the plans be amended to allow additional commercial and employment land
uses to develop in the northeast quadrant of the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange. It is becoming more
apparent that I-25 is not a logical urban edge to the community. The importance of the I-25 corridor
to the economic development of Northern Colorado can be viewed all along the corridor. The towns
ofTimnath,Windsor, and Wellington are changing the character of areas east ofI-25 from the rural,
low density residential areas envisioned in both the initial City Plan of 1997, and the 2004 update,
to urban types of uses. In staff s opinion, the City's plans need to be changed to address the new
regional context of what is happening beyond the City's Growth Management Area (GMA)
boundary.
In City Plan, one of the stated community goals is:
Fort Collins will main its 1 a 0 1 o i enter.
The downtown, the Foothills 1 d ut of e Aven are typically the areas cited as the
most important retail shopping locations to help achieve this goal. Staff believes that interstate
interchanges need to be elevated to share a similar importance.
Principle ECON-2 states:
Economic Sustainability: The City will strive to develop an economy which will be
self-sustaining within the limits of its GMA.
Policy ECON-2.2 states:
Fort Collins will be a leader in developing an economy which continues to"develop"
within its GMA.
The southwest and northeast quCdmen
of40n
Pta
-2 ' erchange are within the City's
GMA boundary. The plan ams ll strengthen the interchange for an
expanded role in the City's ec gies.
Policy GM-4.2 states:
Capital Improvement Policy. The City will continue to operate under the following
Capital Improvement Policies:
e. The City will use a variety of different funding sources to fund capital
projects with an emphasis on the"Pay-as-you-go"philosophy.
October 16, 2007 -13- Item No. 23
One of the northeast applicant's stated justifications for the plan amendments and rezoning is to
provide a land use basis for the ability to generate sufficient tax revenues from the development of
parcels around the Prospect Road/I-25 interchanges to cover the costs of necessary infrastructure
improvements, including the inC
' e cc the ospect Road/I-25 interchange.
This would be consistent with on- p o h .
(b) warranted by changeon in neigh ood surrounding and including
the subject property.
When identified for open space preservation in the 1-25 Subarea Plan, the eastern portion of the
Resource Recovery Farm (RRF) was not described as an area of interest to the Natural Resources
Department's Natural Areas Program in theNatural Areas Policy Plan,nor the various community
separator plans adopted by the City. Because the RRF was not shown in these plans, and because
it has low natural resource values,Natural Areas Program staff embarked on a planning process to
help guide the property's ultimate management and disposition status. Staff has concluded that the
eastern portion is not needed for open space in order to achieve any of the City's natural area
preservation goals.
There are several changed conditions that help justify the plan amendments and rezoning request.
When the 1-25 Subarea Plan wCed in 003,it was assumed that the necessary improvements
to the Prospect Road/I-25 wo b the Colorado Department of
Transportation (CDOT) and/o 1 Hi mini tion (FHWA) since it was part of
the federal/state highway systa of ic' ted that a responsibility for improving the
interchange would fall on local governments and/or adjacent property owners using public/private
partnerships. The plan amendments and rezoning request will help address this changed condition
whereby local revenues will need to be created in order to finance interchange improvements.
The competition for retail sales tax dollars is also significantly different now in 2007 than it was in
2003. In order for the City to remain competitive in the Northern Colorado market, undeveloped
retail commercial sites in desirable locations need to be provided. The City is lacking in areas to
attract regional/community scale retail establishments. Interstate interchanges are the type of
desirable sites for such regional serving retail uses.
Land use plans by other jurisdictions,particularly the Town of Timnath, are changing the character
of areas east of I-25 from the rural, low density residential,areas shown on the City's plans,to more
intense urban uses. In June 2007, the Timnath Town Board approved an amendment to Timnath's
Land Use Plan which extendCnorthe
th' en ea (GMA) boundary north of
Timnath to County Road 52 ( boun f e A rewery). The Timnath Land Use
Plan also intensified the resid ies 1 d uses in a area to include commercial and
employment uses. This is a sigh co tions t fects areas within the Fort Collins
GMA boundary. I-25 is no longer a line from which land uses begin to decrease in intensity from
employment and commercial uses adjacent to the highway, to urban residential, to urban estate
residential,to rural uses. The land uses in areas east of I-25 are beginning to mirror the urban types
of land uses west of 1-25. Even the 100 acres of UE zoned property owned by the Poudre School
District slated for use as athletic fields and school bus storage are not low intensity, rural types of
land uses.
October 16, 2007 -14- Item No. 23
In addition to the above,Section 2.9.4[H][3]provides factors that maybe considered along with the
mandatory requirements for quasi-judicial rezonings. Staff has response a to each of the
prepared
additional factors, demonstrating how the optional criteria could also be met:
(a) whether and the extent whichoes en t is compatible with existing and
proposed uses surroun g the , d is the ropriatezone district for the land;
The E, Employment District is the appropriate zone for the southwest corner. Areas to the north,
northeast, and east are designated for a mix of commercial,industrial, and employment uses. Also,
the regulations contained in the Land Use Code are intended to have employment districts along the
I-25 corridor designed in a manner to maintain openness through the use of: setback requirements,
maximum building frontage allowances, restricting building heights, and proper management of
floodplains.
The C, Commercial District and the E, Employment District are the appropriate zones for the
northeast corner. The E, Employment District will provide for a land use transition from the C,
Commercial District areas to the surrounding residential properties to the north and east. The E,
Employment District is more restrictive than the previous I,Industrial District for the property to the
north. Areas to the south and west are designated for a mix of commercial and employment uses.
And again, the regulations conta' ed in t LanPUse Code aze intended to have employment
districts along the 1-25 corrid desi in o in n openness through the use of
setback requirements, maxim buildi fron gwand , restricting building heights, and
proper management of floodpl
(b) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly
adverse impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water, air, noise,
stormwater management, wildlife, vegetation, wetlands and natural functioning of the
environment;
Staff believes that development in the E, Employment District at the southwest corner would have
no significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. Any development application will be
subject to the City's development standards relative to natural habitat, energy conservation,
stormwater and landscape design.
Staff s perspective is that development in the C, Commercial District and the E, Employment
District at the northeast corner would have no significant adverse impacts on the natural
environment. Again, developm is i to City's development standards
relative to natural habitat,ener cone ion, dscape design. Part of the reason
for enlarging the C, Commer 1 zon• in quadran% was to devote land to the proper
management of the Boxelder Cr ood -
(c) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a logical and
orderly development pattern.
The Prospect Road/I-25 interchange represents an opportunity to create a key community gateway,
combining a balance of economic development and open space preservation. It is logical that such
October 16, 2007 -15- Item No. 23
an important interchange maximize the ability to have land available for the development of a mix
of commercial and employment types of uses. The City's development standards will require
adequate public utilities and infrastructure to be in place to assure an orderly development pattern.
FINDINGS OF FACT/CON USIO
After reviewing the East Prospe ad - 5 nings amendments to the 1-25 Subarea
Plan and the City Plan Structure Plan map, staff makes the following findings of fact and
conclusions as explained in detail above:
1. The request for amendments to the 1-25 Subarea Plan and the City Plan Structure Plan map
would be consistent with the City Plan's overall vision, goals, principles, and policies.
2. The rezoning requests are consistent with City Plan,the City's Comprehensive Plan,based
on the Structure Plan map amendment and amendments to the 1-25 Subarea Plan.
3. The proposed E, Employment District is appropriate for the parcels at the southwest comer
of Prospect Road and I-25.
4. The proposed C, Commercial District and E, Employment District are appropriate for the
northeast corner and will help provide tax revenues necessary to cover local funding
required to improve the Prospect Road/I-25 interchange as well as other infrastructure
improvements.
5. The proposed rezoninC(e)j fiyor !ly
verse impacts on the natural
environment.
6. The proposed rezoning andattern of development.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the amendments to the 1-25 Subarea Plan and the City Plan Structure
Plan map and the rezoning of 25 acres of C,Commercial and 118 acres of POL,Public Open Lands
to to 143 acres of E, Employment at the SW comer and for the NE comer, the rezoning of 86 acres
of I, Industrial to 66 acres of C, Commercial and 20 acres of E, Employment and the rezoning of 19
acres from UE, Urban Estate to E, Employment. to create a 39 acre E zoned buffer between the C,
Commercial zoned area(a total of 96 acres) and residential areas to the north and east.
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION
Zoning Board at its regular monthly meeting on September 20 2007 voted 7-0
The Planning and Zon g gu y g p ,
to recommend approval of the ezonings.
8µ
ATTACHMENTS
1. Recommended Changes to the I-25 Subarea Plan.
2. Recommended Changes to the City Plan Structure Plan map.
3. Draft minutes from the September 20, 2007 Planning and Zoning Board meeting.
4. Southwest Corner Rezoning map.
5. Northeast Corner Rezoning map.
ORDINANCE NO. 126, 2007
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE
CITY OF FORT COLLINS BY CHANGING THE ZONING
CLASSIFICATION FOR THAT CERTAIN PROPERTY KNOWN
AS THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF EAST PROSPECT ROAD AND I-25 REZONING
WHEREAS, Division 1.3 of the Fort Collins Land Use Code (the "Land Use Code")
establishes the Zoning Map and Zone Districts of the City; and
WHEREAS, Division 2.9 of the Land Use Code establishes procedures and criteria for
reviewing the rezoning of land; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the foregoing, the Council has considered the rezoning of
the property which is the subject of this ordinance, and has determined that said property should be
rezoned as hereafter provided; and
WHEREAS,the Council has further detenmined that the proposed rezoning is consistent with
the City's Comprehensive Plan and/or is warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood
surrounding and including the subject property; and
WHEREAS, to the extent applicable, the Council has also analyzed the proposed rezoning
against the considerations set forth in Section 2.9.4(H)(3) of the Land Use Code.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL. OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That the Zoning Map adopted by Division 1.3 of the Land Use Code is hereby
amended by changing the zoning classification of Parcel A from "POL", Public Open Lands Zone
District, to "E", Employment Zone District, and Parcel B from "C", Commercial Zone District, to
"E", Employment Zone District for the following described property in the City known as the
Southwest Comer of East Prospect Road and I-25 Rezoning:
Parcel "A"
A tract of land located in Sections 21 and 22, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of
the Sixth Principal Meridian,City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado, being
more particularly described as follows;
Considering the north line of the Northeast quarter of Section 21 as bearing North 88
degrees 21 minutes 25 seconds West between a Brass Cap monument, L.S. 14823,
at the northeast corner of the said Section 21 and a Aluminum Cap monument, L.S.
14823, at the north quarter corner of Section 21, based upon G.P.S. observation and
the City of Fort Collins coordinate base, and with all bearing contained herein
relative thereto;
Commencing at the Northeast Corner of the said Section 21; THENCE along the
north line of the said northeast quarter,North 88 degrees 21 minutes 25 seconds West
for a distance of 1241.97 feet; THENCE South 01 degrees 38 minutes 35 seconds
West for a distance of 30.00 feet to the northeast corner of the Easement and
Controlled Access Agreement described in Resolution 88-66 and recorded June 13,
1988 at Reception No. 88026808 records of the Clerk and Recorder of the said
Larimer County, and to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS
DESCRIPTION;THENCE along the easterly and northerly line of the said Easement
and Controlled Access Agreement,the following seven(7)courses and distances,(1)
South 44 degrees 22 minutes 29 seconds West for a distance of 136.14 feet;(2)along
a non-tangent curve to the left having a radius of 532.96 feet, a central angle of 14
degrees 20 minutes 52 seconds and an arc length of 133.46 feet, being subtended by
a chord of South 15 degrees 13 minutes 34 seconds East for a distance of 133.1 1 feet;
(3) South 22 degrees 24 minutes 00 seconds East for a distance of 1 10.41 feet; (4)
along a curve to the right having a radius of 612.96 feet,a central angle of 40 degrees
05 minutes 20 seconds and an arc length of 428.88 feet, being subtended by a chord
of South 02 degrees 21 minutes 20 seconds East for a distance of 420.18 feet; (5)
South 17 degrees 41 minutes 20 seconds West for a distance of404.31 feet,(6)South
36 degrees 10 minutes 43 seconds East for a distance of 117.93 feet; (7) North 89
degrees 57 minutes 13 seconds East for a distance of 1059.64 feet to the easterly line
of that certain tract of land described in a Warranty Deed recorded October 2, 1979
in Book 1992 at Page 0280 records of the said Clerk and Recorder;THENCE along
the said easterly line the following seven (7) courses and distances, (1) South 06
degrees 05 minutes 24 seconds East for a distance of 345.66 feet; (2) South 00
degrees I I minutes 08 seconds West for a distance of 53.90 feet; (3) along a non-
tangent curve to the left having a radius of It 583.00 feet, a central angle of 06
degrees 33 minutes 06 seconds and an arc length of 1324.49 feet, being subtended
by a chord of South 03 degrees 07 minutes 19 seconds East for a distance of 1323.77
feet; (4) non-tangent from the previous curve, South 06 degrees 05 minutes 36
seconds West for a distance of 417.50 feet; (5) along a non-tangent curve to the left
having a radius of 11680.00 feet,a central angle of 03 degrees 00 minutes 01 seconds
and an arc length of 611.62 feet, being subtended by a chord of South 09 degrees 52
minutes 54 seconds East for a distance of 611.55 feet; (6) South 25 degrees 25
minutes 54 seconds East for a distance of 425.50 feet; (7) South 12 degrees 38
minutes 54 seconds East for a distance of 968.97 feet to the south line of the tract
described in the said Book 1992 at Page 0280; THENCE along the said south line,
North 89 degrees 59 minutes 50 seconds West for a distance of 344.37 feet to the
southeast corner of the said Section 21; THENCE along the south line of the
southeast quarter of the said Section 21, North 88 degrees 44 minutes 39 seconds
West for a distance of 713.83 feet; THENCE leaving the said south line, North 29
degrees 50 minutes 26 seconds West for a distance of 653.27 feet; THENCE along
a curve to the right having a radius of 424.29 feet, a central angle of 27 degrees 35
minutes 32 seconds and an arc length of 204.33 feet, being subtended by a chord of
North 16 degrees 02 minutes 40 seconds West for a distance of 202.36 feet;
-2-
THENCE North 02 degrees 14 minutes 54 seconds West for a distance of 432.64
feet; THENCE North 00 degrees 39 minutes 47 seconds West for a distance of
512.69 feet; THENCE North 22 degrees 05 minutes 40 seconds West for a distance
of 121.69 feet; THENCE North 02 degrees 47 minutes 24 seconds West for a
distance of 129.58 feet;THENCE along a curve to the left having a radius of t 57.27
feet, a central angle of 42 degrees 50 minutes 08 seconds and an arc length of 117.58
feet, being subtended by a chord of North 24 degrees 12 minutes 28 seconds West
for a distance of 114.86 feet; THENCE North 45 degrees 37 minutes 32 seconds
West for a distance of 71.28 feet;THENCE along a curve to the right having a radius
of 330.34 feet, a central angle of 30 degrees 41 minutes 12 seconds and an arc length
of 176.93 feet, being subtended by a chord of North 30 degrees 16 minutes 56
seconds West for a distance of 174.82 feet; THENCE North 14 degrees 56 minutes
20 seconds West for a distance of 100.27 feet; THENCE along a curve to the left
having a radius of 289.75 feet, a central angle of 20 degrees 34 minutes 23 seconds
and an arc length of 104.04 feet, being subtended by a chord of North 25 degrees 13
minutes 31 seconds West for a distance of 103.48 feet; THENCE North 35 degrees
30 minutes 43 seconds West for a distance of 144.89 feet; THENCE along a curve
to the right having a radius of 364.63 feet, a central angle of 37 degrees 10 minutes
I I seconds and an are length of 236.55 feet, being subtended by a chord of North 16
degrees 55 minutes 37 seconds West for a distance of 232.42 feet; THENCE North
01 degrees 39 minutes 28 seconds East fora distance of 921.36 feet,THENCE along
a curve to the right having a radius of 707.08 feet, a central angle of 17 degrees 07
minutes 56 seconds and an arc length of 211.43 feet, being subtended by a chord of
North 10 degrees 13 minutes 26 seconds East for a distance of 210.64 feet to the
south line of Parcel No. 2 State of Colorado Project No. MC C 060-031 described at
Reception No.20050068449 records of the said Clerk and Recorder;THENCE along
the said south line, non-tangent from the previous curve, North 89 degrees 57
minutes I I seconds East for a distance of 6.45 feet to the southerly extension of the
westerly line of the said Easement and Controlled Access Agreement described in
Resolution 88-66, the southerly extension is also the easterly line of the said Parcel
No. 2;THENCE along the said southerly extension and along the westerly line of the
Easement and Controlled Access Agreement described in Resolution 88-66 the
following five(5)courses and distances,(1)North 17 degrees 41 minutes 20 seconds
East for a distance of 673.89 feet; (2) along a curve to the left having a radius of
532.96 feet, a central angle of 40 degrees 05 minutes 20 seconds and an arc length
of 372.90 feet, being subtended by a chord of North 02 degrees 2t minutes 20
seconds West for a distance of 365.34 feet; (3) North 22 degrees 24 minutes 00
seconds West for a distance of 110.41 feet; (4) along a curve to the right having a
radius of 612.96 feet, a central angle of 15 degrees 37 minutes 22 seconds and an are
length of 167.14 feet,being subtended by a chord of North 14 degrees 35 minutes 19
seconds West for a distance of 166.62 feet; (5) non-tangent from the previous curve,
North 45 degrees I 1 minutes 27 seconds West for a distance of 146.18 feet to the
north line of the said Easement and Controlled Access Agreement described in
Resolution 88-66; THENCE along the said north line, South 88 degrees 2 t minutes
25 seconds East for a distance of 280.00 feet to the point of beginning.
3
The above described tract contains 117.545 Acres more less.
Parcel `B"
A tract of land located in Section 21,Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the Sixth
Principal Meridian, City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado, being more
particularly described as follows;
Considering the north line of the Northeast quarter of Section 21 as bearing North 88
degrees 21 minutes 25 seconds West between a Brass Cap monument, L.S. 14823,
at the northeast corner of the said Section 21 and a Aluminum Cap monument, L.S.
14823, at the north quarter comer of Section 21,based upon G.P.S. observation and
the City of Fort Collins coordinate base, and with all bearing contained herein
relative thereto;
Commencing at the Northeast Corner of the said Section 2t; THENCE along the
north line ofthe said northeast quarter,North 88 degrees 21 minutes 25 seconds West
for a distance of 1241.97 feet; THENCE South 01 degrees 38 minutes 35 seconds
West for a distance of 30.00 feet to the northeast corner of the Easement and
Controlled Access Agreement described in Resolution 88-66 and recorded June 13,
1988 at Reception No. 88026808 records of the Clerk and Recorder of the said
Larimer County;
THENCE along the easterly line of the said Easement and Controlled Access
Agreement described in Resolution 88-66, South 44 degrees 22 minutes 29 seconds
West for a distance of 37.44 feet to the south line of that certain tract of land
described in a Quit Claim Deed recorded June 5, 2006 at Reception No.
20060041498 records of the said Clerk and Recorder, Parcel 10, and to the TRUE.
POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS DESCRIPTION;
THENCE along the south line of the said tract described at Reception No.
20060041498, South 88 degrees 21 minutes 25 seconds East for a distance of 340.24
feet (recorded as 339.85 feet) to the northerly line of that certain tract of land as
described in a Warranty Deed recorded October 2, 1979 in Book 1992 at Page 0280
records of the said Clerk and Recorder;
THENCE along the said northerly line and along the easterly line of the said tract
described in Book 1992 at Page 0280 the following five (5) courses and distances,
(1) South 61 degrees 41 minutes 15 seconds East for a distance of 41.53 feet; (2)
North 89 degrees 36 minutes 16 seconds East for a distance of 327.82 feet; (3) South
36 degrees 48 minutes 56 seconds East for a distance of 80.95 feet; (4) South 17
degrees 44 minutes 53 seconds East for a distance of 789.49 feet; (5) South 06
degrees 05 minutes 24 seconds East for a distance of 358.54 feet to the northerly line
of the said Easement and Controlled Access Agreement described in Resolution 88-
66; THENCE along the said northerly line and along the easterly line of the said
-4-
Easement and Controlled Access Agreement described in Resolution 88-66 the
following seven (7) courses and distances, (1) South 89 degrees 57 minutes 13
seconds West for a distance of 1059.64 feet; (2) North 36 degrees 10 minutes 43
seconds West for a distance of 117.93 feet; (3) North 17 degrees 41 minutes 20
seconds East for a distance of 404.31 feet; (4) along a curve to the left having a
radius of 612.96 feet,a central angle o f 40 degrees 05 minutes 20 seconds and an arc
length of 428.88 feet,being subtended by a chord of North 02 degrees 21 minutes 20
seconds West for a distance of 420.18 feet; (5) North 22 degrees 24 minutes 00
seconds West for a distance of 110.41 feet; (6) along a curve to the right having a
radius of 532.96 feet,a central angle of 14 degrees 20 minutes 52 seconds and an arc
length of 133.46 feet,being subtended by a chord of North 15 degrees 13 minutes 34
seconds West for a distance of 133.11 feet;(7)non-tangent from the previous curve,
North 44 degrees 22 minutes 29 seconds East for a distance of 98.70 feet to the point
of beginning.
The above described tract contains 24.932 acres more less.
Section 2. That the Sign District Map adopted pursuant to Section 3.8.7(E)of the Land
Use Code be, and the same hereby is, changed and amended by showing that the above-described
property is not included in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District.
Section 3. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to amend said Zoning
Map in accordance with this Ordinance.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 16th day of
October, A.D. 2007, and to be presented for final passage on the 6 day of November, A.D. 2007.
I
Mayor
ATTEST:
Ll Y(-�. -V� -".
City Clerk
-5-
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 6th day of November, A.D. 2007.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
r
-6-