Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTHORLAND ANNEXATION & ZONING NO. 1 - 32-07 - CITY COUNCIL PACKET - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT (5)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 a project development plan are submitted. That can happen independently on each lot. Deputy City Attorney Eckman added that if someone would try to as: as a subdivision it would be possible to coordinate. But, failing that develop their property. It may be piecemeal. If it is piecemeal, if wo development uses such as the Thorland's proposal., Member Lingle recommended approval of Thorland,'Anni based on the Findings found on the Staff Report=Pege;3. motion. Motion passed 7:0. Member Lingle recommended approval of Thorland Anni based on the Findings found on the Staeport Page 3. motion. Motion passed 7:0. Other Business: Meeting adjourn edat:7,0.0 p.m Cameron Gloss, Director those lots and develop it rson has a right to use/ Ilikely be low density type and Zoning ar Rollins se and Zoning No 2-433-07 ar Rollins seconded the to 1'errtilimits 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 develop,;. 1-1hat would occur. He's talked to a number of the property owners as there seems to be a lot°of interest in that area. The Thorlands, however, are the only ones who have petitioned for annexation._ Chair Schmidt asked if any of the parcels are currently for sale Olt respondeJyes. When he was out there a couple of weeks ago to take photos for tonight's presentation, he noticedtwo for -sale signs for parcels east of the Thorland's. Member Rollins asked Olt to speak to planning for dralh4e or utilities whether it's an individual property owner or a developer for the whole approximately .O 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 he.oivns home currently on the parcel. For the Board'gilnfor the Blehm Subdivision as well as one property ovine information on what they'd like-XA. do. Before pttCk, with City staff and has an,. fnderst0iding of the requ utilities and they have in.a-conceri%zin that regard issues related to the Ne+9 MMercer Dilth that affect s maintain the status quo A that The property will J.".- the neighbors that while theirs is., nbiot$C plap,; fo neighborhood property with hiSiwife. His in-laws live in the )y,he's spoken" to all the property owners in `fie°ii�fttkj;and a few to the west. He's shared g the Arldperty, he met in conceptual review ants that relate to right-of-way, drainage and itionally there are water rights and drainage l,,parcels in the Blehm Subdivision. They will 3 horse property and he wanted to reassure area, their plans are "a good thing" for the Chair Schmidt commented hat as an area urbanizes or an individual property owner wants to add anothergouse (subdivide) the- County thinks it's more appropriate for the City to act on the request— satisfvinq standards that exist'ivithin City limits. Paul Miller asked3fithere were'bfans for the second home. Chair Schmidt said tonight the question before the board Wwhether the' property should be annexed. Any questions related to plans would be more appropriate at theatime._tf'ey come in with a project development plan. Paul Miller asked if wheall 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 proposal. The owners expressed intent is to subdivide and build an ac That action is not yet initiated. When they come in with a developmg easement or future right-of-way. Staff would want to see a circulad be the starting point for redevelopment. ='- Member Rollins asked if the annexations were approved, with one request. Olt replied yes —they would have 50%,4, Chair Schmidt wondered what would happen if and do not want to grant right-of-way for a road. they are required by LUC Section 3.6 to provide Member Wetzler asked how the street alit area are annexed and built out. Olt re, Road/County Road 36. - A road would be n this road would not be a collector street redevelopment plans for the properties, it is Public Input Pete Miller, 2309 Sweetw it would be for the City to understands there are plg know what is, beng,ptann piecemeal fashion Carl Edwards lives in Ste one piece b,fa,fairiy large With a masfer;plan, we'd sewers. If there'S not a rr End of Public Input , lives lot to sits —it is not a design single-family residence. isal, it would require an The right-of-way would the County w; hexed and wa be able to do that !tie annexed to subdivide, would be determined when the seven lots in this e lot depths e'r !,over, ,1300 feet from Kechter io_more than 660 frofffithat starting point. Olt said aftli�b the Street tiYl ster Plan. Until we see the in where thelogical alignment would be. of the pror interested annexation. He wondered what advantage rning exactly what would be occurring —he ice but he's not seen them. He'd like to He's worried what would happen in a Creek Suijtlavision. He'd like to understand why the City would allow ,fo, be annexed. Why not one master plan versus one parcel at a time? ;aibetter sense of planning for drainage, easements/roads, utilities, and r`pian, can we get one? Staff member Olt said. to 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 I ntergovem mental 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 Subdivisiorrn Larimer County. The other portion of Lot 1 of the Blehm Subdivision;is `:adjacent to the south of the property. The Stetson Creek residential dQvelopmofit;is adjacent to the north of the property. The property is undeveloped and is in thefA1 - Farming District in Larimer County. The requested zoning for,this annexatfon;is. UE - Urban Estate. Recommendation: Approval subject to two conditions --one condition relating to preserving the integrity of underground utilities ar3d;at the time of submittal for P Q P., the architectural elevations for the west elevation shall demonstrate compliance with Section 3.5.1(G) — Building Height;Review and Section 3.5:1(H) — Land Use Transition. ,14 Project: Thorland Annexation an61106tfing No. 2 - #33-0 - Project Description: This is a request to req uestep -2 of Lot 1 of of the B )perty is p Land is in Jj1zo'n6,548, peres located on the north side of 10 feet eastof South Timberline Road. It is the Blehm Subdivision in Larimer County. The other i Subdivision is adjacent to the north of the lly developed (with one single-family residence FA1 - Farming District in Larimer County. The 6tion is UE - Urban Estate. approval of the annexation and recommends that the i the UE - Urban Estate Zoning District. commending that this property be included in the Residential od Sign District. A map amendment would not be necessary should A and Zoning Board recommend that this property be. placed on the Neighborhood Sign District Map. 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 Thorand, 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 DISTRICT (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 Redevelopmeuttlnfill. 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 I 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 he 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-1.2 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 inf ill 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. Le. 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. Collins/Loveland water district, Excel, and Poudre Valley REA. Sewer is provided by septic and will ATTACHMENT 5 [Thorland Annexation No. 1] 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-IA 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 street 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 HSG-2A 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 1 of the Brehm 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 1 /7 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-6.1 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 4 [Thorland Annexation No. 1 J 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. February 19, 2008 -3- Item No.16 A-C property on the Residential Neighborhood Sign District Map because the property is shown to already be outside of Areas Not In The Sign District. Findings 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 Urban Growth Area. 2. The area meets the eligibility requirements included in State law to qualify for a voluntary annexation to the City of Fort Collins. On January 15, 2008, the City Council adopted Resolution 2008-001 that accepted the annexation petition and determined that the petition was in compliance with State Iaw. 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 requested UE — Urban Estate Zoning District is in conformance with the policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the annexation and requested zoning of UE - Urban Estate. Staff is recommending that this property be included in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. A map amendment will not be necessary to place this property on the Residential Neighborhood Sign District Map. PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Board, at its regular monthly meeting of January 17, 2008, voted 7 - 0 to recommend approval of the annexation. The Board voted 7 - 0 to recommend that the property be placed in the UE - Urban Estate Zoning District. The Planning and Zoning Board voted 7 - 0 to recommend that this property be included in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity map. 2. Proposed zoning. 3. Structure Plan 4. Statement of Principles and Policies and Consistency 5. Statement of Necessity and Desirability of Annexation 6. Minutes from the January 17, 2008 Planning and Zoning Board meeting (draft). February 19, 2008 -2- Item No. 16 A-C Staff is recommending that this propertybe included in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. A map amendment will not be necessary to place this property on the Residential Neighborhood Sign District Map because the property is shown to already be outside of the Areas Not In The Sign District. APPLICANT: Miles and Jennifer Thorland 4918 Bluestem Court Fort Collins, CO 80525 OWNER: Same As Applicant BACKGROUND The applicants and property owners, Miles and 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 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 FA - Farming District in Larimer County. The requested zoning for this annexation is UE - Urban Estate. The surrounding properties are currently zoned RL - Low Density Residential in the City to the north and FA 1 - Farming in Larimer County to the west, east, and south. This is a 100% voluntary annexation. The property is located within the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area. 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 will agree to consider annexation of property in the UGA 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 South Harmony Annexation (February, 1986) to the north. The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: N: RL in the City of Fort Collins; existing single-family residential E: FA in Larimer County; existing single-family residential S: FA in Larimer County; existing single-family residential W: FA 1 in Larimer County; existing single-family residential The requested zoning for this annexation is the UE - Urban Estate Zoning District. There are numerous uses permitted in this District, subject to either administrative review or review by the Planning and Zoning Board. The City's adopted Structure Plan, a part of the Comprehensive Plan, suggests that Urban Estate Neighborhood is appropriate in this location. Staff is recommending that this property be included in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District, which was established for the purpose of regulating signs for non-residential uses in certain geographical areas of the City that may be particularly affected by such signs because of their predominantly residential use and character. A map amendment will not be necessary to place this ITEM NUMBER: 16 A-C AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY I DATE: February 19, 2008 FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Steve Olt SUBJECT Items pertaining to the Thorland No. 1 Annexation and Zoning. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution and the Ordinances on First Reading. The Planning and Zoning Board voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the annexation; and, the Board voted 7-0 to recommend that the property be placed in the UE - Urban Estate Zoning District. The Planning and Zoning Board voted 7 - 0 to recommend that this property be included in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Resolution 2008-013 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the Thorland No. 1 Annexation. B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 016, 2008, Annexing Property Known as the Thorland No. 1 Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 017, 2008, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Thorland No. 1 Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. 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 FA - Farming District in Larimer County. The requested zoning for this annexation is UE - Urban Estate. 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, the Larimer County and City of Fort Collins Intergovernmental Agreements, the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code, and the Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Plan. There are no issues or known controversies associated with this annexation.