HomeMy WebLinkAboutTHORLAND ANNEXATION & ZONING NO. 2 - 33-07 - CITY COUNCIL PACKET -Planning & Zoning Board
January 17, 2008
Page 7
Carl Edwards said he'd like to applaud Mr. Thorland for asking that the property be annexed and for
having such a great plan. His concern remains if each one of these parcels are annexed separately
will each parcel have utilities and easements and retaining ponds or is there some way to create a
master plan so you don't have each property having to have that?
Olt responded from the standpoint of utility easements it's not different from what you'd find in a
subdivision such as Stetson Creek. Each property has specific utility easements for water, sewer,
electricity, etc. Detention (managed storm water run-off) would be required in some circumstances —
that would be defined (if required and where) when a subdivision plat and aproject development plan
are submitted. That can happen independently on each lot.
Deputy City Attorney Eckman added that if someone would try to assemble those lots and develop it
as a subdivision it would be possible to coordinate. But, failing that`each person has a right to use/
develop their property. It may be piecemeal. If it is piecemeal, it.would most-tikely be low density type
development uses such as the Thorland's proposal.
Member Lingle recommended approval of Thorland Annexation and Zoning
based on the Findings found on the Staff Report Page 3. Member Rollins sE
motion. Motion passed 7:0.
Member Lingle recommended approval of Thorland Annexation and Zoning No 2-433-07
based on the Findings found on the Staf ,-,p port Page 3. Member Rollins seconded the
motion. Motion passed 7:0. - _ _ .
Other Business:
Member Lingle noticed when looking at informatio'"r
he noted the bylaws state that elections should tak
elections have been in January. He asked if at sor
Gloss said he'd like to put by-law review on a work
Meeting adjourned°,*..00 p.m
to torlimits for the Chair and Vice -Chair,
in September. To his recollection,
we need to amend our by-laws. Director
iagenda.
Brigitte Schmidt, Chair
Planning & Zoning Board
January 17, 2008
Page 6
Chair Schmidt asked Olt to describe the standards for Urban Estate. Olt explained that UE is one of
the three lowest density zones. It requires that residential property in that zone be on one-half acre
parcels or no more than two per acre. Cluster development is also allowed in that zone and must
maintain the same density requirements. In this case with six acres there could be a maximum of 12
units with a corresponding requirement that 50% of the parcel be in open space.
Olt said speaking to the question of advantage to the City this is not an action the City initiated.
Rather because the owner wants to subdivide and build, they have elected to petition for annexation.
There is no master plan for the approximately 8 or 9 parcels/60 acres north of Kechter. It is not
normally the type of situation where we would direct the type of development: -that would occur. He's
talked to a number of the property owners as there seems to be a Jol"of interest in that area. The
Thorlands, however, are the only ones who have petitioned for annox6tion.
Chair Schmidt asked if any of the parcels are currently for sale. `Olt respond0qyes. When he was out
there a couple of weeks ago to take photos for tonight's presentation, he noUded :two for -sale signs for
parcels east of the Thorland's.
Member Rollins asked Olt to speak to planning for drainage or utilities whetherit's an individual
property owner or a developer for the whole approximately 60 acre parcel. Would we not hold them
both to the same standards? Olt responded yes they would be held to the same standards. Utility
plans and a drainage report are some of the items that are reviewed at the time a project development
plan subdivision proposal is submitted.
Miles Thorland, 4918 Bluestem Court, said h4o"W"'1'j-
home currently on the parcel. For the Board's=infor
the Blehm Subdivision as well as one property dWne
information on what they'd like to do. Before pick
with City staff and has an understanding of the re*
utilities and they have no concerns in that regard.``:
issues related to the New Mercer Ditch that affect s
maintain the status quo with that. The property will
the neighbors that while there is no master plan fo
neighborhood;: ;
;,_property with his wife. His in-laws live in the
fidhh he's spoken to all the property owners in
fhtrth.,and a few to the west. He's shared
ng the property, he met in conceptual review
nents that relate to right-of-way, drainage and
ditionally there are water rights and drainage
!n:.parcels in the Blehm Subdivision. They will
'a horse property and he wanted to reassure
e area, their plans are "a good thing" for the
Chair Schmidt commented that as an area urbanizes or an individual property owner wants to add
another douse (subdivide) fhe County thinks it's more appropriate for the City to act on the request —
satisfying 41andards that existl-10hin City limits.
Paul Miller asked f there were plans for the second home. Chair Schmidt said tonight the question
before the board is whether th4property should be annexed. Any questions related to plans would be
more appropriate at'ti'eUme;aFiey come in with a project development plan.
Paul Miller asked if whei "all the properties in the Blehm Subdivision are annexed will they all come in
as Urban Estate or will that change over time. Olt responded that the subdivision as identified on the
City's Structure Plan is shown as Urban Estate; so yes, all will come in as Urban Estate. If another
zoning district was requested, it would need to be evaluated by staff, reviewed by the Planning &
Zoning Board, with the ultimate decision being made by City Council. Deputy City Attorney Eckman
said that's not to say that it couldn't change to another zone given the proximity of more densely
developed subdivisions such as Sage Creek and Stetson Creek. Olt added that if that were the
situation there is a public notification/outreach process.
Planning & Zoning Board
January 17, 2008
Page 5
County. The other portion of Lot 1 of the Blehm Subdivision is adjacent to the south of the property.
The Stetson Creek residential development is adjacent to the north of the property.
Miles & Jennifer Thorland have submitted a second written petition requesting annexation of 5.18
acres located on the north side of Kechter Road approximately 800 feet east of South Timberline
Road. It is the southerly portion of Lot 1 of the Blehm Subdivision in Larimer County. The other portion
of Lot 1 of the Blehm Subdivision is adjacent to the north of the property.
The requests are nothing more than bringing the parcels into the City limits —it is not a design
proposal. The owners expressed intent is to subdivide and build an additional single-family residence.
That action is not yet initiated. When they come in with a development proposal, it would require an
easement or future right-of-way. Staff would want to see a circulation road. The right-of-way would
be the starting point for redevelopment.
Member Rollins asked if the annexations were approved, A,_'Old the lot to the east be able to do that
with one request. Olt replied yes —they would have 50%;.Gt1'ntigujty.
Chair Schmidt wondered what would happen if theb"-: l;;currently`Ip the County want to be annexed
and do not want to grant right-of-way for a road. Olt re t ti;Z,4,. ihexed and wanting to subdivide,
they are required by LUC Section 3.6 to provide connectiv'it eta 66n properties.
Member Wetzler asked how the street alignment would be de%jined when the seven lots in this
area are annexed and built out. Olt replied the lot depths 60over,.1300 feet from Kechter
Road/County Road 36. A road would be needed no more than 660 `'•'fat starting point. Olt said
this road would not be a collector street or a part of the Street 09ster Plan. Until we see the
redevelopment plans for the properties, it is unknown where the logical alignment would be.
Public Input
Pete Miller, 2309 Sweetwater, lives north of the proposed annexation. He wondered what advantage
it would be for the City to annex. He'd be interested in learning exactly what would be occurring —he
understands there are plans to build a single family residence but he's not seen them. He'd like to
know what is,:belrrgjylarined for the entire seven parcels. He's worried what would happen in a
piecemeal:fashion.
Carl Edwards lives in Stetson Creek Subdivision. He'd like to understand why the City would allow
one pieceof a fairly large area;to be annexed. Why not one master plan versus one parcel at a time?
With a master;Plan, we'd have.abetter sense of planning for drainage, easements/roads, utilities, and
sewers. If theeO. tot a masterptan, can we get one?
End of Public
Staff member Olt said.:,10 the best of his knowledge all the parcels are individually owned. The
property is located well within the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area (UGA.) According to policies and
agreements between the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County contained in the Intergovernmental
Agreement for the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area, the City agrees to consider annexation of property
in the UGA when the property is eligible for annexation according to State law. This not a forced
annexation or enclave situation. It is a voluntary petition to annex. The property owner's intent is to
subdivide and build a second single-family residence. When the property is annexed it would come in
with an Urban Estates (UE) zoning designation.
ATTACHMENT 6
Planning & Zoning Board
January 17, 2008
Page 4
The following two projects were considered together
Project: Thorland Annexation and Zoning No. 1 - #32-07
Project Description: This is a request to annex and zone 1.66 acres located on the north side of
Kechter Road approximately 800 feet east of South Timberline Road. It is the
northerly portion of Lot 1 of the Blehm Subdivision in Larimer County. The other
portion of Lot 1 of the Blehm Subdivision is adjacent to the south of the
property. The Stetson Creek residential development is adjacent to the north of
the property. The property is undeveloped and is in the FA1 - Farming District in
Larimer County. The requested zoningfor;,this annexation is UE - Urban Estate.
Recommendation: Approval subject to two conditions --one condition relating to preserving the
integrity of underground utilities=:4qd_ at the tirrae of submittal for P.D.P., the
architectural elevations for the west*vatioij"shall demonstrate. compliance
with Section 3.5.1(G) — Building Heidi ' ew acid Section 3.5.1(H) — Land
Use Transition.
Project: Thorland Annexation and Zoning No. 2 - #33�' Tp`
Project Description: This is a request to annex and zone 5.18acres located on the north side of
Kecht r :Road approximately 800 feet east of South Timberline Road. It is the
, soutFifierty`06mon of Lot 1 of the Blehm Subdivision in Larimer County. The other
portion of Lot ;1 of the Blehm Subdivision is adjacent to the north of the
property. Th4: roperty is partially developed (with one single-family residence
and`bWbuildmtjS).and is in the FA1 - Farming District in Larimer County. The
requested.zonir►yJ i$;annexation is UE - Urban Estate.
Recommendation: Staff recoifFftds approval of the annexation and recommends that the
property be pfped; in the UE - Urban Estate Zoning District.
Staff is recom"inding that this property be included in the Residential
Neighborhood Sign District. A map amendment would not be necessary should
the Planning and Zoning Board recommend that this property be placed on the
Residential Neighborhood Sign District Map.
Hearino Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence
Planner Steve Olt reported this property (in the case of Annexation # 1) gains the required 1/6
contiguity to existing City limits from a common boundary with the South Harmony Annexation
(February, 1986) to the north. Once approved, the second annexation request gains the required 1/6
contiguity to existing City limits from a common boundary with Annexation # 1.
The applicants and property owners, Miles & Jennifer Thorland, have submitted a written petition
requesting annexation of 1.66 acres located on the north side of Kechter Road approximately 800 feet
east of South Timberline Road. It is the northerly portion of Lot 1 of the Blehm Subdivision in Larimer
immediate neighbors in the Blehm Subdivision both verbally and in writing of our
plans to annex and subsequently build a second home on the property.
Land Use Code DIVISION 4.2 URBAN ESTATE DLSTRICT (U-E)
This property has been zoned U-E
Response: This property is in full compliance with the land use codes as specified
in section 4.2 of the Fort Collins Land Use code
remain on septic since a main sewer line does not exist within 400 feet. There is
no need for storm sewer since less than 35% of the property is impermeable.
There are no streets on the existing property. Any subsequent residential
development will require the installation of an in -home sprinkler system to
comply with fire code.
c. Development that occurs within the Growth Management Area will have at
least one -sixth of its boundary area contiguous with existing urban
development, except as may be otherwise provided by the legislation of the
City Council.
Response: The property will be annexed in two simultaneous annexations so as to
meet the above requirement.
PRINCIPLE GM-8: The City will promote compatible infill and
redevelopment in areas within the Growth Management Area
boundary.
Policy GM-8.1 Targeted Redevelopment/Infill. Redevelopment and infill
development will be encouraged in targeted locations. The purpose of these areas is to
channel growth where it will be beneficial and can best improve access to jobs, housing
and services with fewer and shorter auto trips. These targeted areas are parts of the city
where general agreement exists that development or redevelopment is beneficial. A
major goal is to increase economic activity in the area to benefit existing residents and
businesses and, where necessary, provide the stimulus to redevelop.
These areas should be defined from City Plan, Subarea Plans, Zoning and locational
criteria such as:
a. Underutilized land
Response: The 6.68 acre property currently has 1 single family home. The intent
is to add a second single family home after the property is subdivided (which will
take place after the annexation).
PRINCIPLE AN-1: New neighborhoods will be integral parts of the
broader community structure.
Response: The annexation of this property will not create a new neighborhood. The
property will still belong to the Blehm Subdivision
Policy EXN-1Z Collaboration with Surrounding Residents. The City will continue
to ensure that neighbors will be advised of any changes and be requested to comment.
Stated preferences of neighbors will be considered in determining acceptable intensity
and character of infill and redevelopment.
Response: We are providing APO labels to the city that identify the surrounding
neighbors per the requirements for annexation_ In addition, we have notified our
Response: The property does not fall within a designated natural area and does
not contain wetlands.
PRINCIPLE GM-3: The City will consider the annexation of new territory into the City
limits when the annexation of such property conforms to the vision, goals, and policies of
City Plan.
Policy GM-3.1 Annexation Policies. The City Council will weigh the following
factors when considering the annexation of new land into the incorporated limits:
a. Statutory requirements. The property must meet all statutory requirements
for annexation according to the laws of the State of Colorado.
Response: this property meets the statutory requirements for annexation.
b. Property to be annexed must be located within the Growth
Management Area The property must be located within the Growth Management Area
boundary, or the boundary must be amended using the process described in GM .1.2
before the City considers the proposed annexation.
Response: The land is located within the boundaries of the Fossil Creek
Reservoir Area Plan.
GM-3.1.e. Infrastructure standards. Developed land, or areas seeking voluntary
annexation, must have their infrastructure improved (e.g., streets, utilities
and storm drainage systems) to City standards, or must have a mechanism
(e.g., a special improvement district, capital improvements program, etc.) in
place to upgrade such services and facilities to City standards before the City
will assume full responsibility for future maintenance.
Response: Money will either be put into escrow or payment will be made to the
city for the required improvements on Kechter road Additional infrastructure
changes for water utilities will not be required as the property is already served by
either the city or the county for these services.
PRINCIPLE GM-5: The provision of adequate public facilities and the phasing of
infrastructure improvements will be important considerations in the timing and location
of development.
Policy GM-5.1 Phasing of Development. The provision of public facilities and
services will be utilized to direct development in desired directions, according to the
following considerations:
a Development will only be permitted where it can be adequately served by critical
public facilities and services such as water, sewer, police, transportation, schools,
fire, stormwater management, and parks, in accordance with adopted levels of
service for public facilities and services.
Response: The property is currently served by the Ft. CollinsUveland water
district, Excel, and Poudre Valley REA. Sewer is provided by septic and will
ATTACHMENT 5
[Thorland Annexation No. 21
Statement of Principles and Policies and Consistency
For the Thorland request for annexation into the city of Fort Collins of Lot 1 of the
Blehm Subdivision.
Policy T-1A Adequate Facilities. The City will ensure the provision of adequate
facilities for the movement of goods and people while maintaining the integrity of
existing streets and minimizing travel -related impacts within residential neighborhoods.
As growth occurs, appropriate transportation investments should be made to support
increased demands for travel.
Response: We will provide money for the improvements on Kechter road as
required or alternatively we will put money into escrow for those same
improvements.
PRINCIPLE CAD-1: Each addition to the sheet system will be designed. with
consideration to the visual character and the experience of the citizens who will use the
street system and the adjacent property. Together, the layout of the street network and the
streets themselves will contribute to the character, form and scale of the City.
Response: Improvements made to Kechter road adhere to the required standards
set forth for Kechter road by the city of Fort Collins.
Policy HSG2.4 Preservation of Neighborhoods. The City will attempt to retain
existing affordable housing stock through conservation efforts of older residential
neighborhoods.
Response: The original house on this property, Lot t of the Blehm subdivision,
will remain.
Policy ENV4.2 Water Supply Policy. The raw water requirements for new
development should be set such that, with other water acquisitions and water
conservation measures, the total water supply available is adequate to meet or exceed a
1 in 50-year drought.
Response: The property comes with in of 1.2 shares (— 5 acre feet) of the New
Mercer ditch which will be used to supplement city water for irrigation purposes.
Policy ENV-6A Protection and Enhancement. The City's regulatory powers will be
used to preserve, protect, and enhance the resources and values of natural areas by
directing development away from sensitive natural features — such as
wetlands, riparian areas and wildlife habitat. When it is not possible to direct
development away from natural areas, these areas will be protected in the developed
landscape.
ATTACHMENT A
[Thorland Annexation No. 21
Statement Regarding Necessity and Desirability of Annexation
The proposed property for annexation, Lot 1 of the Blehm Subdivision, currently borders
the city of Fort Collins on its northern boundary. The property also falls within the. Fossil
Creek Reservoir Area Plan growth management area:
Therefore, it is both the intent of the City of Fort Collins as well as Larimer County that
this property ultimately be annexed into the city of Fort Collins.