Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 05/01/2012 - ITEMS RELATING TO THE WILD PLUM FARM NO. 1 ANNEXATDATE: May 1, 2012 STAFF: Courtney Levingston AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 11 SUBJECT Items Relating to the Wild Plum Farm No. 1 Annexation. A. Resolution 2012-028 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the Wild Plum Farm Annexation No. 1. B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 038, 2012, Annexing Property Known as the Wild Plum Farm Annexation No. 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This is a request to annex 0.64 acres located on the east side of North Taft Hill Road, approximately 1,750 feet north of West Vine Drive. The property is developed and is in the FA – Farming Zone District in Larimer County. The surrounding properties are currently zoned FA – Farming in the Larimer County to the north, west and south; and, Urban Estate in the City (Lincoln Middle School) to the east. The zoning ordinance will come forward on May 15, 2012. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The applicant, Shane L. Beckers, the property owner, has submitted a written petition requesting annexation of 0.64 acres located on the east side of North Taft Hill Road, approximately 1,750 feet north of West Vine Drive. The property is developed and is in the FA - Farming District in Larimer County. The requested zoning for this annexation is UE – Urban Estate. The surrounding properties are currently zoned FA – Farming in the Larimer County to the north, west and south; and, Urban Estate in the City (Lincoln Junior High School) to the east. The zoning ordinance will come forward on May 15, 2012 The property is located within the Fort Collins Growth Management Area. According to policies and agreements between the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County contained in the Intergovernmental Agreement for the Fort Collins Growth Management Area, the City will agree to consider annexation of property in the GMA when the property is eligible for annexation according to State law. This property gains the required 1/6 contiguity to existing City limits from a common boundary with the Lincoln Junior High School Second Annexation (October, 1998) to the east. Findings: 1. The annexation of this area is consistent with the policies and agreements between Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins contained in the Intergovernmental Agreement for the Fort Collins Growth Management Area. 2. The property meets the eligibility requirements included in State law to qualify for a voluntary annexation to the City of Fort Collins. 3. On March 20, 2012, the City Council approved Resolution 2012-017 that accepted the annexation petition and determined that the petition was in compliance with State law. The Resolution also initiated the annexation process for the property by establishing the date, time and place when a public hearing would be held regarding the readings of the Ordinances annexing and zoning the area. 4. The request is in conformance with the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code. This annexation request is in conformance with the State of Colorado Revised Statutes as they relate to annexations, the City of Fort Collins Comprehensive Plan, and the Larimer County and City of Fort Collins Intergovernmental Agreements. There are no issues or known controversies associated with this annexation. May 1, 2012 -2- ITEM 11 In February 2011, the Larimer County Board of County Commissioners held a Special Review meeting regarding the horse boarding facility located on the subject property. The County Board of Commissioners approved the boarding stable with conditions such as a 25 horse maximum, stable operational conditions and a requirement for the applicant/property owner to petition for annexation into the City. An ordinance proposing zoning with the conditions established by the County will come for Council consideration on May 15, 2012. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS No direct financial impacts result from the proposed annexation. The property is developed at the present time, containing a single-family residence and a commercial horse boarding facility. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution and the Ordinance on First Reading. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its April 19, 2012 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Board conducted a public hearing regarding the annexation and zoning request and voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the annexation. The Board voted 6-0 to recommend that the property be placed in the Urban Estate Zone District. The motion made note of the conditions that were put in place at the time the County Commissioners approved the Special Review. The minutes from the April 19, 2012 Planning and Zoning Board Hearing are attached. PUBLIC OUTREACH The public notification of the annexation and zoning request occurred two weeks prior to the item going before the Planning and Zoning Board at its scheduled public hearing on April 19, 2012. A letter of notification of the public hearing was mailed to all affected property owners within 800 feet of the property 14 days prior to the hearing. The Land Use Code does not require a neighborhood meeting for annexation and initial zoning and a meeting was not held for this annexation and zoning request. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Planning and Zoning Board minutes, April 19, 2012 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 2 Planning and Zoning Board April 19, 2012 DRAFT minutes ___________________________________________________________________ Project: Wild Plum Farm Annexation # 1, ANX110001 and Wild Plum Farm Annexation # 2, ANX110002 Project Description:Annexation #1 is a request to annex and zone 0.64 acres. Annexation # 2 is a request to annex and zone 3.82 acres. Both are located on the east side of North Taft Hill Road, approximately 1,750 feet north of West Vine Drive. The property is developed and is in the FA - Farming District in Larimer County. The surrounding properties are currently zoned FA – Farming in the Larimer County to the north, west and south; and, UE – Urban Estate in the City (Lincoln Junior High School) to the east. The requested zoning for this annexation is UE – Urban Estate. Recommendation: On both Annexations and Zoning, staff recommends approval of the annexation and recommends that the property be placed in the UE - Urban Estate Zoning District. Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence City Planner Courtney Levingston said the property is developed and has an existing single family residence and horse boarding facility. In February 2011 – Becker’s Stable had a special review before the Larimer County Board of County Commissioners. The County Board approved commercial boarding stable with conditions such as 25 horse maximum, stable operation conditions, and annexation into the city. The requested zoning for this annexation is UE – Urban Estate. The Urban Estate Zone District allows horse boarding facility. The Land Use Code does not limit the number of large animals boarded and if annexed, the City will uphold the maximum large animal condition placed on the property by the Board of County Commissioners. The City’s Neighborhood Services Code Compliance Division will enforce applicable municipal code provisions including:  Municipal Code Section 4-72 applies to personal use and does not apply to commercial operations like Wild Plum Farms. Horses may be kept for the use of occupants of a lot and their guests provided that at least 1/2 acre of pasture area is available for each horse or pony.  Municipal Code Section 4-116 states that in no event shall any person keep at his or her premises more pet animals than can be properly maintained in a healthy condition without presenting a health or safety hazard to the owners, keeper or others and without constituting a nuisance to the occupants of neighboring properties. Staff recommends approval of the annexation and recommends that the property be placed in the UE - Urban Estate Zoning District. Member Schmidt asked if the applicable Municipal Code provisions address the conditions placed on this property by the Larimer County Board of County Commissioners. She also wondered if all the provisions had been completed by June 1, 2011. Finally, she wondered if the city recognizes the Larimer County requirements or do they just become mute once annexed into the city? Levingston said a neighbor with concerns could call Neighborhood Services Code Compliance relative to violations in Code Sections 4-72 and 4-116. Levingston said that Code Section 4-72 applies primarily to personal use; not like this commercial horse boarding facility. She said Code Section 4-116 would apply. It states that in no event shall any person keep at his or her premises more pet animals than can be properly maintained in a healthy condition without presenting a health or safety hazard to the owners, keeper or others and without constituting a nuisance to the occupants of neighboring properties. Levingston said the city would also uphold the maximum number of 25 horses. Deputy City Attorney Daggett said there are a couple of other sections of the code that relate to care and treatment of animals in the city – Sections 4-70 and 4-71 address management of waste and treatment of animals. Vice Chair Campana asked if the county conditions would apply once they’re annexed into the city. Daggett said the limitations the County imposed on the use, would limit the use once it’s annexed. It may be that a recommendation, if there is one, would be helpful to clarify. If there is no condition placed on the zoning, the existing permitted use is up to 25 horses on the site. Campana said beyond the limit of 25 horses, there were 16 conditions shown in their January 10th minutes. Conditions had to do with manure, treatment, facilities for dealing with manure, lighting, etc. Do we need to police that? Has it already been done? Member Schmidt asked if the applicant wants to speak to the questions asked by Vice Chair Campana. Applicant’s Presentation Dr. Shane Becker said he does not have a formal presentation but he is available to answer questions. He said all the conditions set during the permit process he went through with Larimer County have been met. He completed them by the due date and they were signed off by the County before he submitted his application for annexation into the city. They’ve been operating under those conditions. He noted the site plan used earlier in the presentation is inaccurate—that’s not the plan that was approved by the County and it doesn’t show any of the conditions that were required. He said a final plan is probably available through the County. Campana asked if he was prepared to continue to operate under the conditions the county requested when annexed into the city. Becker said yes. Member Schmidt asked Dr. Becker to explain the Resource Stewardship Plan (RSP). Becker said his basic understanding is that he was not required to complete it. The RSP is designed to restrict people—to help them manage themselves. His permit/conditions applied in his situation. Member Carpenter said she was still a little confused by the conditions placed by the county. She understands from the applicant that he’s met all of those. She said in some cases they appear ongoing. She asked what the city has in place to enforce the ongoing issues. Deputy City Attorney Daggett said if you interpret the conditions on the current improved use as defining the legal use; theoretically continued compliance with those conditions could be considered a zoning enforcement matter. This is a legal non- conforming use to the extent it continues consistent with the legal restrictions on the use. Carpenter asked if they needed to recommend that these conditions follow. Daggett said no because they’re driven by the concept of the use as being legal when it comes in. You are not actually imposing new conditions although you could expressly recognize that you’re intending for those existing conditions to continue to be enforced. Public Input None Board Discussion Member Schmidt said she’d like it to be on the record that these conditions be recognized just so that if something does happen (the neighbors have a problem with arena dust, etc.); they can call for enforcement. She believes because of the proximity of the neighbors; the county approved with condition and she believes the city should recognize them. Member Kirkpatrick agreed. Member Schmidt moved the Planning and Zoning Board recommend approval of the Wild Plum Farm Annexation and Zoning No. 1, # ANX110001 making note of the conditions that were put in place at the time the County Commissioners approved the Special Review. Also, the zone should be UE – Urban Estate. Member Kirkpatrick seconded the motion. Motion was approved 6:0. Member Schmidt asked if she should just go forward with the motion for No. 2, #ANX110002. Daggett said you’d like to make the same motion with respect to No. 2. Schmidt asked if there needed to be public comment. Daggett asked if they intended the discussion to cover both items because it appeared to be the case. Schmidt and Campana said yes. The Chair confirmed that there were no requests for public input on No. 2. Member Schmidt said she’d like to make the same motion for Annexation & Zoning No. 2, # ANX110002 as for the No. 1. Member Kirkpatrick seconded the motion. Motion was approved 6:0. RESOLUTION 2012-028 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS SETTING FORTH FINDINGS OF FACT AND DETERMINATIONS REGARDING THE WILD PLUM FARM ANNEXATION NO. 1 WHEREAS, annexation proceedings were heretofore initiated by the City Council for property to be known as the Wild Plum Farm Annexation No. 1; and WHEREAS, following notice given as required by law, the City Council has held a hearing on said annexation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby finds that the petition for annexation complies with the Municipal Annexation Act, Section 31-12-101, et seq., Colorado Revised Statutes Section 2. That the City Council hereby finds that there is at least one-sixth (1/6) contiguity between the City and the property proposed to be annexed; that a community of interest exists between the property proposed to be annexed and the City; that said property is urban or will be urbanized in the near future; and that said property is integrated with or is capable of being integrated with the City. Section 3. That the City Council further determines that the applicable parts of said Act have been met, that an election is not required under said Act and that there are no other terms and conditions to be imposed upon said annexation. Section 4. That the City Council further finds that notice was duly given and a hearing was held regarding the annexation in accordance with said Act. Section 5. That the City Council concludes that the area proposed to be annexed in the Wild Plum Farm Annexation No. 1 is eligible for annexation to the City and should be so annexed. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 1st day of May A.D. 2012. Mayor ATTEST: Interim City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 038, 2012 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS ANNEXING PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE WILD PLUM FARM ANNEXATION NO. 1 TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO WHEREAS, Resolution 2012-017, finding substantial compliance and initiating annexation proceedings, has heretofore been adopted by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby finds and determines that it is in the best interests of the City to annex said area to the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the following described property, to wit: A tract of land being a portion of the tract of land described in the Warranty Deed recorded November 27, 1996 at Reception No. 96085333; being located in the S 1/2, N 1/2, S 1/2, NW 1/4, SW 1/4 of Section 3, Township 7 North, Range 69 West of the 6th P.M., which considering the West line of the SW 1/4 of said Section 3 as bearing due North with all bearings herein relative thereto is described as follows: Commencing at the Northwest corner of said S 1/2, N 1/2, S 1/2, NW 1/4, SW 1/4; thence along the West line of said SW 1/4 South, 90.60 feet; thence East, 146.75 feet; thence North 44 degrees 01 minutes East, 15.65 feet; thence East, 58.00 feet; thence North, 81.19 feet more or less to the North line of said S 1/2, N 1/2, S 1/2, NW 1/4, SW 1/4; thence North 89 degrees 30 minutes 32 seconds East, 768.80 feet to the Point of Beginning; thence North 89 degrees 30 minutes 32 seconds East, 329.00 feet to the NE corner of said S 1/2, N 1/2, S 1/2, NW 1/4, SW 1/4; thence South 00 degrees 00 minutes 39 seconds West, 164.70 feet to the Southeast corner of said S 1/2, N 1/2, S 1/2, NW 1/4, SW 1/4; thence South 89 degrees 30 minutes 12 seconds West, 10.00 feet; thence North 00 degrees 00 minutes 39 seconds East, 82.35 feet; thence South 89 degrees 30 minutes 32 seconds West, 319.00 feet; thence North 00 degrees 00 minutes 39 seconds East, 82.35 feet to the Point of Beginning. This annexation contains 0.641 acres. is hereby annexed to the City of Fort Collins and made a part of said City, to be known as the Wild Plum Farm Annexation No. 1, which annexation shall become effective upon completion of the conditions contained in Section 31-12-113, C.R.S., including, without limitation, submission of all required filings for recording with the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder. Section 2. That, in annexing said property to the City, the City does not assume any obligation respecting the construction of water mains, sewer lines, gas mains, electric service lines, streets or any other services or utilities in connection with the property hereby annexed except as may be provided by the ordinances of the City. Section 3. That the City hereby consents, pursuant to Section 37-45-136(3.6), C.R.S., to the inclusion of said property into the Municipal Subdistrict, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 1st day of May, A.D. 2012, and to be presented for final passage on the 15th day of May, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ Interim City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 15th day of May, A.D. 2012. _________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ Interim City Clerk