Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutKECHTER ANNEXATION NO. 3 - ANX120005 - P&Z PACKET - MINUTES/NOTESPlanning & Zoning Board July 19, 2012 Page 4 is an appropriate way to handle annexation. She doesn't think statutes had this level of creativity in mind. She thinks the City should be really transparent on how they do some of these things. Chair Smith asked Deputy City Attorney Daggett to comment. She said the concept of the entire street means from curb to curb rather than end to end in the language that was read. She also wanted to mention that although she hasn't been actively involved in the discussion about the legal basis for the annexation petition that was filed, it is her understanding that there's been fairly extensive discussion of that. She said City Council will be making formal findings in connection with compliance in the action that Council takes so if, in fact, the Board does not feel comfortable making a recommendation specifically on the issue of eligibility, you might consider making recommendations on other aspects of the proposal. Input None Member Campana made a motion to recommend to, City Council to approve the Kechter Annexation and Zoning No 1, #ANX110003; No.2, #ANX110004; and No. 3, ANX110005. Member Kirkpatrick seconded the motion. The motion passed 5:1 with Schmidt dissenting. Project: Regency Lakeview Addition of Permitted Use for Multi -Family Dwellings at Christ Center Community Church and Project Development Plan, # PDP120013 Project Description: This is a request This is a request to add Multi -Family Dwellings, as specifically described on the Regency Lakeview Project Development Plan; as a permitted use in the Low Density Residential (R-L) zone district and Project Development Plan on the 11 acres located on the east side of the Christ Center Community Church. The project would consist of 175 dwelling units divided among eight buildings plus a clubhouse. There would be a mix of one, two and three -bedroom units. There would be 292 parking spaces divided among attached garages, detached garages and surface parking, and 283 bike spaces. Amenities would include a clubhouse, pool and walkways. The existing stormwater detention pond at the south end of the parcel would be enlarged and improved as a two -acre pocket park. There would be no new access drives from either Lemay Avenue or Drake Road. As required, the request for an Addition of Permitted Use is being submitted in conjunction with the Regency Lakeview Project Development Plan. The site is generally located at the southeast corner of Lemay Avenue and Drake Road and is presently a component of the 25- acre Christ Center Community Church campus. Recommendation: Approval Planning & Zoning Board July 19, 2012 Page 3 creates an opportunity to intersperse affordable housing throughout the city. Holland provided a context of the area and the Fossil Creek Area Framework Plan: • variety of lot sizes • city and county subdivisions • existing county residences He said staff recommends approval of the annexation and requested zoning of L-M-N, Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood. Further, 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. Public Input None Board Discussion Member Schmidt asked if the whole area (developments under county review) is also in the receiving area or is it just this one particular parcel. Holland said Kechter Crossing is also in the receiving area. Schmidt asked if the county is developing at a higher density than Urban Estate. Holland said on a plan that he's seen, there are 75 lots with a density of 3 units per acre and the average square footage of the lots was 9,521 square feet. Member Schmidt asked if East County Road 36 is still by its name a county road. Holland said it is not a city owned road. Schmidt said this is a very creative annexation —the very first triangle (annexation) is a road. If we don't own the road, how can annex a parcel we don't own to get the 1/6 contiguity for the next parcels. Holland said essentially there are two requirements for annexations. You must have the 1/6 contiguity and you must 50% or more of ownership interest of the area to be annexed however, the 1/6 continuity requirement excludes public roads, ways or alleys. He said the City of Fort Collins - represents more than 50% of the ownership interest exclusive of the public roads, streets, and alleyways as defined in state statute. Member Schmidt said she presumes the first annexation is solely roadway. Holland said correct. If the county owns the road, are they requesting we annex that piece? She doesn't understand how you have the starting 1/6 contiguity when it's not anyone's property —it's solely a piece of the road. Holland referred to Schmidt's use of the word creative. He said if it's creative, than it is used more often than not. He said when you consider the complex nature of how cities are organized, state statutes gives a lot of leeway in their very specific case law that permit a city to annex property. If they didn't have that ability, it would be very difficult for these sorts of things to get done. Holland provided information on annexation case law including: • The shape and size of the parcel ultimately annexed, whether in a flagpole annexation or otherwise, is not relevant to its eligibility for annexation. Board of County Commissioners v. City and County of Denver and Board of County Commissioners of County of Arapahoe v. City of Greenwood Village. • If annexing a portion of a street or alley, must annex the entire street or alley. C.R.S. 31-12- 105(1) (f). Member Schmidt asked why then weren't we annexing the whole street ... it seems arbitrary where it's stopped. She said she just wants to make the point that she's gone along when it's a private party (even when they want to divide their parcel(s) in a creative manner). She said we don't usually start with just a road. She said if the City has a very good reason why this has to be annexed at this particular point in time in this creative fashion that may be one thing; but she hasn't seen it come forth. She doesn't want to take up the Board's/everyone's time but she won't be able to support it because she doesn't think this Planning & Zoning Board July 19, 2012 Page 2 Andy Smith asked if there were any audience or Board members who wanted to pull items from the Consent Agenda. Member Schmidt asked that Item 3, Kechter Annexation and Zoning No 1, ANX110003; No.2, #ANX110004; and No. 3, ANX110005 be pulled from the Consent Agenda. Consent Agenda: 1. Minutes from the June 21, 2012 Planning and Zoning Board Hearing. 2. Forney Annexation and Initial Zoning, #ANX120002 Member Schmidt made a motion to approve the consent agenda consisting of the minutes from the June 21, 2012 hearing, and the Forney Annexation and Initial Zoning. Member Campana seconded the motion. The motion was approved 6:0. Discussion Agenda: 3. KechterAnnezation and Zoning No 1, #ANX110003; No.2, #ANX110004; and No. 3, ANX110005 4. Regency Lakeview Addition of Permitted Use for Multi -Family Dwellings at Christ Center Community Church and Project Development Plan, # PDP120013 Project: Kechter Annexation and Zoning No 1, #ANX110003; No.2, #ANX110004; and No. 3, ANX110005 Project Description: As the Owner and Applicant, the City of Fort Collins has submitted a written petition requesting the annexation of three sequential annexations, known collectively as the Kechter Annexation. The Kechter Annexation is located approximately 900 feet east of the intersection of South Timberline Road and Kechter Road. The requested zoning for -this annexation is the Low Density - Mixed -Use Neighborhood District (L-M-N), which is in compliance with the City of Fort Collins Structure Plan and the Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Plan. Recommendation: Approval Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence An email from Erin Richmond in opposition was received and distributed to the Board in their Read before Packet. City Planner Jason Holland said this is a 100% voluntary annexation for a property located within the Growth Management Area. The project satisfies the requirement that no less than one -sixth of the perimeter boundary be contiguous to the existing City boundary. The L-M-N zoning is consistent with the City's Structure Plan Map. The City has submitted a written petition requesting the, annexation of three sequential annexation areas, known collectively as Kechter Annexation. The series of annexation areas are: Kechter Annexation No. 1: 0.130 acres Kechter Annexation No. 2: 0.505 acres Kechter Annexation No. 3: 18.644 acres Total for Kechter Annexations 1, 2 and 3: 19.279 acres Holland said no development is proposed and the proposal does not create an enclave. He said the majority of the area being annexed is at 2313 Kechter Road; one of five sites in the City of Fort Collins Land Bank program. This is a City -owned property purchased in 2006 as a part of the Land Bank Program. He said the purpose of the Land Bank Program is a long term affordable housing tool. It also Chair Andy Smith called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. Roll Call: Campana, Carpenter, Hatfield, Kirkpatrick, Schmidt, and Smith r Excused Absence Stockover Staff Present: Kadrich, Daggett, Holland, Shepard, Stanford, Virata, and Sanchez - Sprague Agenda Review CDNS Director Laurie Kadrich reviewed the agenda Citizen participation: Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Current, said he'd like to report Type I hearing problems to the Board in the context of their advisory function to City Council. The Type 1 Hearing was for the Aspen Heights Project Development Plan (PDP) — a student housing development planned for North College. There were two significant administrative failures. The first, the hearing off cer/decision maker was not duly authorized as required by the Land Use Code. Sutherland said he cannot get a memo from either the City Attorney's Office or the Planning Department that would place the officer in that position and responsible for being the decision maker for that hearing. Second, the same recording system used tonight was used that evening but there was a failure in recording the proceedings. He can understand failure of equipment but he can't understand why notification of the failure of the equipment and the lack of a verbatim transcript was not made known to him, the other appellants or the applicants of that project for well over a month. He said a number of ideas have come forward from the public on how we can make the appeal process better for everybody. He's bringing to their attention evidence of 'pretty significant failure' of that process. He said we need improvements on how we do these things —the failures need to be addressed. He implores the Board to impanel a working group to bring forth ideas to improve processes so we don't see controversy after controversy. Member Schmidt asked staff to put this general topic on a work session agenda. Weren't there some changes in the way recordings were going to be handled? Director Kadrich said she believes she briefed the Board at the last work session but more work has been completed. Mr. Sutherland is correct, we did not have a recording of that hearing and we did make some internal changes. She is currently in the process of working with the City Attorney's office staff on a response regarding the appointment of our hearing officer. That should be forthcoming to Mr. Sutherland and Ms. Kadrich will make sure the Board also gets a copy.