Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 06/19/2001 - SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 107, 2001, MAKING AGENDA IT ITEM NUMBER: 1 EM SUMMARY DATE: June 19,20,i FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL FROM: Ted Shep&:` SUBJECT: Second Reading of Ordinance No. 107, 2001, Making Various Amendments to the City of Foci BBB Collins Land Use Code. ry RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Staff has identified a variety of proposed changes, additions and clarifications in the spring biannual update of the Land Use Code. On May 17, 2001, the Planning and Zoning Board voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the proposed changes to City Council. Ordinance No. 107, 2001 was unanimously adopted on First Reading on June 5,2001. i AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ITEM NUMBER: 19 FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL DATE: June 5, 2001FROM: Ted She and SUBJECT : First Reading of Ordinance No. 107, 2001, Making Various Amendments to the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Staff has identified a variety of proposed changes, additions and clarifications in the spring biannual update of the Land Use Code. On May 17, 2001,the Planning and Zoning Board voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the proposed changes to City Council. ACKGROUND: The Land Use Code was first adopted in March of 1997. Subsequent revisions have been recommended on a biannual basis to make changes, additions, deletions and clarifications that have been identified in the preceding six months. The proposed changes are offered in order to resolve implementation issues and to continuously improve both the overall quality and "user- friendliness" of the Code. Following is a brief update of one issue and a synopsis of two substantive issues. Attachments include a summary of all the issues as well as the draft Ordinance itself. UPDATE: Due to the need for further analysis, staff has continued until fall the proposed change that would have increased the turning radii for the emergency fire access drives from 20 feet inside and 40 feet outside to 25 feet inside and 50 feet outside. There are two issues. First, there is a concern that the proposed larger radii do not allow for a smooth transition along the curb line for some of the streets recently approved in the Latimer County Urban Area Street Standards. Second, there is a concern that additional input is needed from the development community which would be required to construct the larger cul-de-sacs which would go from 80 feet to 100 feet in diameter. Staff is keenly aware of the needs of Poudre Fire Authority and will continue to work on this issue over the next several months. DATE: June 5, 2001 2 ITEM NUMBER: 19 SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES: 1. Revise the Size Limitation on Places of Worship or Assembly in L-M-N Zone In the L-M-N district, Places of Worship or Assembly would be allowed to be exempt from the building footprint size cap of 20,000 square feet just like Schools. The proposed change would allow such uses to achieve a building footprint size of up to 25,000 square feet as a Type One (administrative) permitted use. Any such use over 25,000 square foot building footprint would be a Type Two (Planning and Zoning Board)permitted use. Problem statement: Presently, in the L-M-N district, all Non-Residential and Mixed-Use Buildings cannot exceed a building footprint size of 20,000 square feet with the exception of Schools. Places of Worship or Assembly have consistently been included along with Schools as a component of neighborhoods but are capped in size. New Places of Worship or Assembly, like Schools, are often larger than 20,000 square feet with no apparent detriment to the quality of the neighborhood. In addition, a field survey revealed that many existing neighborhoods include churches over 20,000 square feet. Proposed Solution: Places of Worship or Assembly, like Schools, would become exempt from this size cap but would be allowed up to a building footprint size of only 25,000 square feet as a Type One _ (administrative) permitted use. Any such land use with a building footprint over 25,000 square feet would be a Type Two (Planning and Zoning Board) permitted use. Compatibility issues,are addressed in other areas of the Land Use Code. P & Z Board: The Board recommended the maximum size for a Type One permitted use be capped at a building footprint size of 20,000 square feet. Council Growth Management Committee: The Committee recommended the maximum building footprint size for a Type One permitted use be capped at 25,000 square feet. If over 25,000 square feet, then such use would be a Type Two permitted use. 2. Amend the Definition of Parks. Recreation and Open Lands The present definition of Parks, Recreation and Open Lands refers to publicly-owned facilities only and excludes private facilities. DATE: June 5, 2001 3 ITEM NUMBER: 19 Problem Statement: The Land Use Code allows Parks, Recreation, and Open Lands in all zones. But under the present definition, only publicly-owned Parks, Recreation and Open Lands are permitted even though private/non-profit parks and recreation facilities are an identical land use. Private facilities were permitted under Zoning Code in place from 1965 to 1997. The omission of private facilities into the Land Use Code was an oversight. This means organizations like the Fort Collins Soccer Club, Fort Collins Little League Baseball Club, Fort Collins Church Athletic Association and the like are not allowed to construct their own facilities even though their function is exactly the same as a public facility. All operational characteristics would continue to be governed by existing Land Use Code standards. Proposed Solution: Add the clause "whether such facilities are owned or operated by the city or by another not-for- profit organization" to the definition. P & Z Board: The Board voted 4-3 to retain this proposed Land Use Code revision and directed staff to research potential impacts on the U-E (Urban Estate), R-F (Foothills Residential) and river zones (C-C-R and R-D-R). Council Growth Management Committee: The Committee agreed that, in terms of a land use per se, there is no distinction between public and private facilities. The primary differences are found in operational characteristics (parking, lights, noise and hours of operation) which are governed by other General Development Standards as found in Article 3 of the Land Use Code. The concern over operational characteristics has been duly noted by staff. The impact on the foothills and river zones will be analyzed. Input from private parties and the City's Parks and Recreation Department will be sought. Any appropriate changes will be considered in the Fall.