HomeMy WebLinkAboutFRONT RANGE SECOND REZONING - 20-06 - CORRESPONDENCE - (14)Steve Olt,- Re: Lithia Rezoning - Please C e In! Page 2
Site was formerly zoned C, so the relationship of C to homes on north side of Skyway has a precedent. In
fact a Hugh M Woods was approved here.
In the previous rezoning, staff found merit both in the C zoning existing at the time, and the NC/MMN/C
combination which was proposed (either was acceptable).
STRUCTURE PLAN CRITERIA
To recommend amendment of the Structure Plan, staff and the Planning and Zoning Board have to find
that: 1) the existing Structure Plan is in need of change; and 2) the proposed changes would promote the
public welfare and be consistent with the vision, goals, principles, and policies of City Plan. These are the
applicable criteria, contained in Appendix C of City Plan.
REZONING CRITERIA
To recommend approval of the Rezoning, staff and the Planning and Zoning Board would have to find that
the rezoning is:
(a) consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; and/or
(b) warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject
property"
The above criteria are found in subsection 2.9.4[H][2] of the Land Use Code outlines mandatory
requirements for quasi-judicial rezonings. In addition, the following subsection 2.9.4[H][3] lists additional
factors that may be considered along with the mandatory requirements for this type of quasi-judicial
rezoning, as follows:
"In determining whether to recommend approval of any such proposed amendment, the Planning and
Zoning Board and City Council may consider the following additional factors:
(a) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is compatible with existing and
proposed uses surrounding the subject land, and is the appropriate zone district for the land;
(b) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse
impacts on the natural environment, including but not limited to, water, air, noise, stormwater
management, wildlife, vegetation, wetlands and the natural environment'; and
(c) whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly
development pattern."
We have a meeting with the applicants Monday fyi (Steve and 1).
Steve Olt - Re: Lithia Rezoning - Please C e In! Page 1
From: Clark Mapes
To: Joe Frank; Ken Waido; Steve Olt
Date: 08/10/2006 10:56:13 AM
Subject: Re: Lithia Rezoning - Please Chime In!
thanks Ken. That does help. Everyone, notice that Ken concluded with the same question I started with!
>>> Ken Waido 8/10/2006 9:26:05 AM >>>
I guess recently (last 2 years or so) we have heard from developers that the City lacks both MMN and C
zoned properties. Since the multi -family housing market is down and the interest in economic
development, especially retail sales tax generators) is up, there would probably be support for enlarging
the C zone at this site.
I still question why (other than property -owner boundaries) the existing C zoned area can not be used. I
also think that a car dealership has some unique impacts on surrounding residential areas (both SF and
MF). Lights, noise, etc., more so that even a Woods store would have had.
Personal comment: here is another example where the LDGS would have provided an opportunity to
review the proposed change of use without dealing with "zoning."
Can we find the necessary City Plan policies to justify the Structure Plan amendment and rezoning?
>>> Clark Mapes 8/9/2006 5:06:32 PM >>>
Long message here, but it may save a meeting! Please read this and reply - I need the help.
I finally had a conversation w/Jeff Timan. He's been wondering what to do with the property; and whether
a zoning change would be good.
Loks like the supermarket deal has passed. But he noted if he rezones to C, then in two years a
supermarket could come back into the picture... then he'd be back again ... but he would consider reverting
to C along with Lithia, if there was some economy in doing them together. If we wanted to encourage that,
and if it could logistically be put on the table along with the Lithia request, he MIGHT do it.
So nothing definite to add. He asked me what our vision is, and he asked me whether he could piggyback
onto the Lithia request at this time. (Again, he didn't say he wants to rezone, he just asked whether they
could piggyback, and what the schedule would be.) Steve, think about the logistics of this. I suppose the
deadline for fall rezonings is passed, huh? The logistics don't look good, do they?
So back to the Lithia request, I think we need to get clear on our comments based on the request as
submitted.
I don't see strong reasons to oppose it, but do you see reasons to SUPPORT it? How much should we
consider the car dealership aspect of it?
It removes 9 acres of MMN , leaving 13. That's enough for a typical apartment complex. Not likely to be
much of a Mixed Use Neighborhood leading to a Town Center, as shown in the materials for the current 3-
part zoning arrangement.
If the MMN were to develop in the future, you could say that its access would be through a car lot, but how
much consideration should we give to the fact that its a car dealer requesting the C zoning, vs simply
evaluating the merits of C zoning? Even under the current zoning, development would likely have a
somewhat mixed commercial character along the street leading in from Skyway. Not as intensive as
coming through a car dealership, but also not a quiet residential street.
MMN already abuts C for about the same distance, so no additional interface is created between C and
MMN.