Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
AIRPARK VILLAGE - ANNEXATION & ZONING - 16-05 - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT
• An example diagram of a 130,000 sq. ft, 4-story, mixed -use building along a 600 foot block, at 1.0 FAR, with the following uses included in the building: 1) 50% commercial/employment (30,000 sq. ft. medical, 110,000 sq. ft. office, 30,000 sq. ft retail) 2) 40% residential (108 units on 2"d through 4`h floors), 3) 10% industrial (30,900 sq. ft.) Questions and Answers Q: How long are the "superb locks." A: Approximately 600 to 660 feet. Comment/Suggestion: Those blocks seem quite long, perhaps one or two more cul-de- sacs can be inserted along the parkway to make the block lengths around 500 feet long. Suggestion: In the portion of Airpark Drive that runs parallel to the runway, there was mention of new buildings fronting onto Airpark Drive. Perhaps careful consideration should be given to these uses fronting onto Airpark Drive to ensure that the new buildings will be compatible with the existing uses across the street. This would be a good place for workshops, warehouses or business service shops. Suggestion: Extending to the northwest of the portion of Airpark Drive that runs parallel to the runway, it may be an appropriate separation between the existing business uses and the back of the new development to locate a commercial alley along Q: It sounds like the development will be putting new water and sewer improvements in as part of the development. Will the existing property owners be able to tap into the new utility lines? A: Yes. Schedule • We're going to skip a month this time, and have our final meeting in February 2005. The topic will be on development policies and potential options for an improvement district. 3) The northwest end. Re -designate the northwest end of the Airpark Village property to a land use designation that allows commercial/employment together with limited residential (mixed -use residential and multifamily residential) uses; • Three cross sections through the site were illustrated as follows: 1) The southeast end. Four-story employment type buildings would be pulled up to face and open directly onto the street along both sides of the Parkway. Parking lots and landscaped areas would be in the rear portions of the lots, providing a buffer between the 4-story buildings and the adjacent existing developments to the northeast and southwest. 2) The central portion. Two Story mixed -use buildings would be pulled up to face and open directly onto the street along both sides of the parkway. A parking lot and landscaping would buffer the development from the adjacent property to the northeast. The portion of Airpark Drive that currently pins parallel to the runway is an existing street that would be improved to standards, and a two-story building would face and open directly onto it. 3) The northwest end. Four-story mixed -use buildings would be pulled up to face and open directly onto both sides of the parkway. A parking lot and landscaping would buffer the development from the adjacent property to the southwest. No residential units would have direct view to the southwest, to reduce any potential conflicts in uses between residential and the existing industrial uses. Along the north end, residential buildings could face and open directly to the north, facing the channel. • Floor Area Ratio's 1) A diagram was shown of 1.0 FAR with 4 scenarios: (1) a one story building on the entire site, (2) a two story building on half the site, (3) a three story building on a third of the site, or (4) a four story building on a quarter of the site. The point was made that the same FAR can have various numbers of stories, depending on the size of the footprint of the building. 2) 3 diagrams were shown superimposed onto a 600 foot long block: (1) a "suburban" building mass at 0.5 FAR; (2) an "urban" building mass at 1.0 FAR; and (3) a "core" building mass at 1.5 FAR. The polls indicate the preference is an "urban" intensity of 1.0 FAR. Airpark Village Public Meeting 5 Conducted 12/15/2004 at the Ramada Inn Introductions • Local Facilitators, Mikal Torgerson and Troy Jones (of M. Torgerson Architects, 223 North College Ave. Fort Collins) • Developer, Lloyd Goff • Engineer, Richard Husmann Previous Topics • September— The Dry Creek Channel will be located on the northeast side of the site, assuming the City's channel improvement project moves forward as planned. • October — The street network will be configured with a Parkway (a 4-lane boulevard with parallel parking) down the middle of the development. This will create another east -west connection between Timberline and Lemay. • November — Land Use configuration a "main street" configuration will be used with a mixture of land uses having: 50% commercial/employment (includes retail, offices, medical, research & development parks, business services); 40% residential (includes condos in upper stories of mixed use buildings, senior housing, apartment buildings, town -homes); 10% industrial uses (including light manufacturing, workshops, warehousing, etc.) This Month's Main Discussion — Land Uses • Photograph of site from above with street network superimposed: 1) Shows the super blocks approximately 660 feet in length; 2) Shows the channel alignment; 3) Shows the context of the development. • Proposed land use changes to the East Mulberry Corridor Plan: 1) The southeast end. Keep the employment designation as shown on the EMCP at the southeast end of the Airpark Village property. 2) The central portion. Re -designate the center portion of the Airpark Village property to a land use designation that allows mixed -use buildings including office, retail, medical, professional services, mixed -use residential (only north of the parkway). Comment: Noise is part of the existing business park. Bright lighting too. We don't want new residential to be located in such a way that would restrict our ability to operate our industrial uses as we always have. Response: We can put deed restriction. Perhaps residential would only be appropriate north of the parkway. Q: How many dwelling units would be likely? A: In a mixture of types ranging from townhomes to apartments to lofts, there may be up to 1000 units. It would be at least 50% or more as ownership dwelling units. Keep in mind, these units would be balanced by supporting employment uses. Q: Are we going to be filling in any of the site, bringing up the ground elevation? If so, will there be any additional impact of flooding on the existing businesses? A: There will probably be a 3 foot berm next to the new flood channel that will fan into the rest of the site. The new flood channel will solve the Dry Creek flooding problem. The City will require that Airpark village drain into the new channel, not into the existing neighborhood. Schedule • Next Month is "Density/Intensity of Development." • The next meeting is in the evening of December 15`h. The regular monthly meeting at 6pm, and a public open house at 7 pm. • January's topic will be "Development Policies and Open Space," • February's topic will be "Improvement District." Business Survey We're trying to get an accurate assessment of all the business that are operating in the vicinity. We'd like to get an understanding of all the airport related business that would be affected by the closure of the airport. If we get an exact assessment, we could potentially help negotiate a package deal for the relocation of interested business owners to sites at the Fort Collins Loveland Airport. M • We would like to determine if the neighboring business owners would prefer it if many local developers ultimately build out the site, or if one national developer building it all would be preferred. Questions and Answers Q: What has the City's reaction been to all this? How involved have they been? A: Their initial reaction is that if we want to amend the East Mulberry Corridor Plan, we need to really involve the neighbors in the effort and thoroughly explore the pros and cons of any change we propose. We've been meeting with City Staff fairly regularly as we continue to find the appropriate solutions. Q: So if the front of the buildings faces the new parkway, what happens on the back half of the properties? A: The backs of the buildings face the open space and parking areas at the rear of the parcels. The backs of the buildings face the existing industrial area. Q: What motivates the City as far as development patterns go? A: Revenue, jobs housing balance, quality planning. Q: It seems that a main street would be too long if it went the whole length of the parkway (1.25 miles), could we take pieces of all 3 land use choices (main street, campus, and village). Maybe all 3, but how's the poll helpful in that scenario? A: Certainly the pattern can encorporate elements of each. The three choices help determine the appropriate ratio of mix of the different uses. Q: Do we have an open space requirement? A: It depends on the zone. In either case, we'll have a linear park along the channel. We'll have open space as one of the topics in February. Q: Will there be a buffer to protect from vandalism? I don't want people coming across my property. A: That's what we need to learn from you all. Do you want interactivity between the existing industrial area and the new Airpark Village, or do you want a barrier. We could do a fence or a path, it's up to you all. Comment: We (neighboring property owners) don't want to annex into the City. 3 1) The MAIN STREET layout is a vertical (one use above another in the same building) and horizontal mix of uses (different uses next to each other) with residential dominating employment/commercial and retail. This "Main Street" example would involve 10 to 30 local developers in competition with one another. It would use a Grid Pattern with multi -story buildings. This land use would be dominated by employment/commercial (50%) but have significant residential (40%) and marginal industrial uses (10%). It could also accommodate civic and entertainment uses. 2) CAMPUS The Campus layout is a horizontal mix of uses by a main sponsor or developer who builds everything for the owners & users. This layout uses a spot pattern of large structures with a unifying internal framework of connecting walkways and landscaped outdoor spaces. This campus example would involve minimal local development participation. Residential and employment/commercial uses would be comprise 50% each with no industrial uses. 3) VILLAGE These usually develop around a common theme with such examples as seaports, lumber mills and resorts. Villages are more of an organic pattern like a tree with a common trunk or even an old town plaza. Over time the branch areas are built by several developers but fewer than the main street option. Villages typically have a blend of all uses: residential 45%, employment/commercial 35% and industrial 20%. • Land Use Poll to Date: Main Street = 23 Votes; Campus = 11 Votes; Village = 12 Votes; No Residential = 8 Votes. • As we start to dive into Land Uses in more detail, an example that may help folks visualize the size of Airpark Village is that the parkway will be 25 city blocks on either side of the parkway, which is similar to the length of the 161h Street Mall in Denver from Broadway to Union Station. • As tentatively layed out, there will be parcels of developable property bounded by the parkway on one side, side streets on 2 sides, and a common property line with neighborhood on the fourth side. The average size of these developable parcels will be about 3 city blocks • The general conclusions of the Market Study for the site indicate: There's a high demand for residential uses, particularly for senior housing; there's a moderate demand for retail, enough to serve new housing and jobs nearby; there's a relatively low demand for industrial; it would be appropriate to reserve part of the site for a "Campus" style employer. 2 Airpark Village Public Meeting 4 Conducted 11/17/2004 at the Ramada Inn Introductions • Local Facilitators, Mikal Torgerson and Troy Jones (of M. Torgerson Architects, 223 North College Ave. Fort Collins) Website • Developer, Lloyd Goff • Engineer, Richard Husmann • As always, the website is www.aiEparkvilla e� com. As we collect more information, and as we progress through the process, the website is updated continuously. Latest Updates on Issues Alreadv Discussed • After further detailed discussions with the City regarding the flood channel, the City Stormwater Department is proceeding with plans to locate the flood channel northeast. The City doesn't want to have to wait until the airport closes before it make the stromwater channel improvements, and the northeast alignment is the only alignment that would allow that. This Month's Main Discussion — Land Uses • The approved East Mulberry Corridor Plan designates the southeast 1/3 of Airpark Village as Employment, and the northwest 1/3 of Airpark Village as Industrial. As we take a closer look at the context, we notice that residential already exists directly to the west and east of the northern 1/3 of the Airpark Village site. Introducing residential as a land use into the mix on this northern 1/3, we feel, would be more appropriate than Industrial. • Examples were shown of the following: 1) Residential buildings (ranging from single-family to townhomes, to multistory luxury lofts); 2) Vertical mixed -use buildings (with commercial ground floors and either residential or office above); 3) Commercial/Employment buildings (ranging from retail to office to multi -story mixed use with retail and employment mixed vertically). • The Poll this month is intended to determine what the appropriate mix of land uses should be for the development of Airpark Village. The choices of the poll were as follows: Introduction of Land Use Topic The next poll will be on land uses. We will ask the participants to choose what the appropriate combinations of land uses should be. We will also explore whether or not it makes sense to introduce residential into the mix. We will be looking at national market trends, and conducting a local market analysis to help determine what uses are viable in Airpark Village. We anticipate that industrial uses won't be a major component of the project. As we think through the land uses, it is important to keep in mind that Airpark Village is the same size as the 161h Street Mall in Denver, including the blocks flanking it on either side. The appropriate mix and diversity of land uses along this linear development is the thing we need to determine. Proposed East Mulberry Corridor Plan (EMCP) Amendments As a result of this series of neighborhood participation meetings, we are discovering that the conclusions of the EMCP were rather general in nature. Once we've dived into the specific issues one by one in greater detail, it has become apparent that we need to treat the EMCP as a living document that adapts to changed conditions and that is subject to refinement. We propose to take our proposed changes of the EMCP to the City and County for approval hearings in March and April. After the EMCP has been amended, we will proceed, as required by the intergovernmental agreement between the City and the County, with annexation of the development site. Questions and Answers Q: Will there be a traffic signal at International and Mexico? A: Most likely. Q: Could there be a new street introduced parallel to and just west of Lemay running from Buckingham to Lincoln, in order to allow the main flow of traffic between Airpark Village and Downtown to utilize Lincoln? A: Quite possibly. Q: Is the City still exploring both the underpass and the flyover option of the realigned Vine Drive crossing of the railroad tracks? Isn't an underpass impossible given the flooding issues in the area? A: The City is still exploring both options. The flyover is the most likely option. It is, however, and unfunded project, so the timing of implementation is uncertain. Q: The meeting was then directed to discussing each of the connections between the Airpark Village and the surrounding neighborhood. Each connection was discussed individually as follows: Southeast Connection to Airway Avenue • No Objections. • No issues raised by neighbors. Extension of Aimark Drive across Aimark Village to Connect to International • No Objections. • One concern raised was that currently there are a lot of accidents at Airpark Drive and Lincoln Ave. This should be addressed. • Another concern was that this may make access into and out of the businesses northeast of the airpark more difficult because the additional traffic on International. Connection to Dry Creek Mobile Home Park • No Objections. • One concern raised was that a bridge should probably be avoided crossing the natural area just west of the mobile home park. The feasibility of this connection should be analyzed in more detail. Connection to the West (Buckingham Alignment vs. Lincoln Alignment) • No one objected to connecting to the Buckingham Alignment. • 4 people objected to the Lincoln Alignment. • One concern raised was that there's already too much traffic on Lincoln. • The participants were asked their preference regarding the traffic on Lincoln. 5 participants responded that they'd prefer that the traffic on Lincoln be reduced from it's current levels, and 2 participants responded that they'd prefer the traffic on Lincoln to stay the same or increase. Connection to Vine Drive to the North • One neighbor suggested that Airpark Village provide a connection across the railroad tracks and connect to Vine Drive. It was discussed that this would be unlikely given the Public Utility Commission's policy to not grant any new at -grade crossings of railroad tracks. Connection to Timberline to the East • No one objected to the connection to Timberline as shown. • One option would be to create a new intersection either in line with or south of Donella Court where the main new spine road would connect to Timberline. Lincoln would merge into the spine road west of it's intersection with Timberline. Airpark Village Public Meeting 3 Conducted 10/13/2004 at the Ramada Inn Introductions • Local Facilitators, Mikal Torgerson and Troy Jones (of M. Torgerson Architects, 223 North College Ave. Fort Collins) • Developer, Lloyd Goff • Engineer, Richard Husmann Web Site Discussion • www.ai[parkvillage.com • As we collect more information, and as we progress through the process, the website is updated continuously. • The website is our library for the project. It includes a very thorough description of all the issues we have discovered and analyzed to date. Polls on the Issues • Each neighboring property owner gets to vote on the monthly issue. Anonymous votes cannot be counted. Only voters who let us know who they are will have their vote counted. We keep specific logs of who voted for each choice on every issue. Property owners can change their vote as time goes on. • Each month we need neighboring property owners to vote on the issue of the month. The first two month's issues open to a vote were: 1) flood channel alignment; and 2) roads and access. The next issue open to a vote is land uses. • The status of the flood channel poll at the time of the meeting was: 36 in favor of the western alignment, and 21 in favor of the eastern alignment. • The status of the roads and access poll at the time on the meeting was: 23 in favor of the parkway configuration, 6 in favor of the loop configuration. • The website will be opening the polls for the land use choices within a couple weeks. This Month's Main Discussion — Connections To Surrounding Neighborhoods The East Mulberry Corridor Plan (EMCP), adopted in 2002 by the City and the County, identified a street network of connections between the airport redevelopment and the surrounding area. One of the main factors to consider is that the EMCP envisions a new arterial street connecting Timberline to Lemay going through the airpark development. The EMCP identified this new arterial as being and extension of International Boulevard on the east, and eventually tying into the Lemay/Lincoln intersection on the west. Also the EMCP envisions the intersection of Timberline/Lincoln to be reconfigured further to the north from its current location. Comment: A property owner commented that he appreciates this type of public involvement, and thinks we are going about this process in the right way. Land Use Market (Next Meeting's Topic) • We'll bring in a market expert to speak about which land uses are likely do develop sooner than other land uses. Questions regarding the upcoming Land Use Market topic Q: How big a factor are land uses in determining the appropriate street alignment? A: We think the street network can serve a variety of land uses, however participants can always change their vote on the on-line polling for the street alternatives after the land uses are established. Q: What will the new flood channel design look like aesthetically? A: It will have a flat bottom with cattails, and sloped walls. It will be owned with common ownership and maintained by the property owner's association. We will be discussing options for the structure of an owner `s association as well as options for creating an improvement district at our February meeting. Q: Will the new channel take the nearby properties out of the FEMA floodplain? A: It is anticipated that the new channel, together with the City/County improvements scheduled for the upstream areas of the Dry Creek, will take most of the impacted properties out of the floodplain. Final FEMA mapping once the projects are in place will determine the new FEMA floodplain. Road Network — 2 options (This Meeting's Tooic • Alternative A is in accordance with the East Mulberry Corridor Plan (more of a loop road concept), • Alternative B will be more of a spine road eventually connecting Timberline to Lincoln through the airpark. Connecting to Lemay may have some difficulties. • The audience was asked to vote on their preferred street alignment between now and next month's meeting (October 13`h) Questions regarding Road Aliwmnent Q: Do the 2 alternatives assume the ditch is on the east or the west? A: As of the time of the meeting, the votes from the polling is 14 in favor of the east alignment (airport side), and 6 in favor of the west (other side of the runway from the airport). Based on the results, the preliminary design for the 2 alternative street designs assume the ditch is on the east alignment (airport side). Q: How big a factor are land uses in determining the appropriate street alignment? A: We think the street network can serve a variety of land uses, however participants can always change their vote on the on-line polling for the street alternatives after the land uses are established. Q: It seems that perhaps there should be street access into the adjacent neighborhoods. A: We'll get into this in the next meeting. Airpark Village Public Meeting 2 Conducted 9/15/2004 at the Ramada Inn Introductions • Local Facilitators, Mikal Torgerson and Troy Jones (of M. Torgerson Architects, 223 North College Ave. Fort Collins) • Developer, Lloyd Goff • Engineer, Richard Husmann Purpose of This Series of Meetings • We're establishing the development concept and design by involving nearby property owners in the decision making process. • This is our way to involve affected neighbors as we prepare our eventual development submittal for the project, to eventually go through the public hearing process for development approval. • The more you tell us during this process, the more input you end up having in the outcome of the project. Web Site Intro • Homepage, • Various pages, • Polling (14 to 6), Flood Channel (Refresher of Last Meeting's Topic) • While airport is in operation, the FAA requires channel to be at least 250 feet off runway, • Preferred Alternative (temporary and permanent channel) Questions regarding Flood Channel Q: Is the western alignment of the channel shown to be on some the adjacent neighbors property? How will that edge along the airport edge and the neighbors property be A: The diagram is general. Once the alignment is further refined, the channel will roughly follow the boundary of the airport. The plan is to keep the road along the edge of the airport intact. There are two options for how that edge would work. Q: Once the temporary channel is constructed, will the flood channel and creekbed still exist? A: Yes, it must be maintained. The City Structure Plan is a map that sets forth a basic framework to show how Fort Collins should grow and evolve over the next 20 years. This plan illustrates a future city made up of four basic kinds of places: • Neighborhoods • Districts • Corridors • Edges The key principles of the City Structure Plan include a compact development pattern, an interconnected transit system, new activity centers, a system of interconnected open lands, a growth management area boundary, and multiple means of travel — including driving, walking, bicycling, and transit. Together, these principles reinforce the desired future described in the Community Vision and Goals element of City Plan, and establish a blueprint for future growth. Structure Plan May 4, 2004 H,044/ 10 L144, 14 Cozy 514-� PL44ov MA The Structure Plan is a map that sets forth a basic framework, showing how Fort Collins should grow and evolve over the next 20 years. It is intended to serve as a blueprint towards the desired future described in the Community Vision & Goals element of City Plan. As such, the map is only intended to serve as a general guide for future land use decisions. It not a zoning map. Many of the boundaries on the map are generalized for illustrative purposes, and in actuality may vary somewhat when applied "on the ground" as a result of natural and man-made features or as a result of varying conditions or circumstances. Structure Plan May 4, 2004 OAF] Minor Amendment Procedures Minor Amendments will be considered by the City Council, after recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Board, City staff, and any boards and commissions that may have a legitimate interest in the proposed amendment, provided that such board or commission is duly authorized pursuant to Chapter 2 of the City Code to function in such advisory capacity. Notice of such Council action will be given as required for resolutions pursuant to the City Charter. The City Council will then approve, approve with conditions, or deny the amendment based on its consideration of the recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Board, City staff, boards and commissions, and evidence from the public hearings. Approval of the amendments will be by resolution. Citizen requests for a Plan Amendment will be considered by the City Council no more frequently than twice per calendar year unless directed- by City Council upon receipt of a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Board, as stated in Policy GM-11.4 Decision -making. Plan amendment requests based on proposed development projects that involve rezonings may also be processed concurrently with rezoning applications. Plan amendments initiated by City Council, City staff, boards and commissions, and annexations and initial zoning, may be processed at any time (Policy GM- 11.1). Requests will be submitted to the City's Advance Planning Department at least 60 days prior to the hearing date for the Planning and Zoning Board. The 60-day submittal requirement is necessary in order to permit adequate public notice to be given and to allow adequate time to complete the background work for considering a plan amendment. A plan amendment will be approved if the City Council makes specific findings that: The existing City Plan and/or any related element thereof is in need of the proposed amendment; and The proposed plan amendment will promote the public welfare and will be consistent with the vision, goals, principles and policies of City Plan and the elements thereof. If adopted by the City Council, City Plan will be revised to include the changes resulting from the amendment. A letter of notification -will be forwarded to the appropriate boards and commissions when the revision(s) have been finalized. C Process and Procedures for Revisions East Mulberry Corridor Plan I districts, that, by changing the designation, the above Principles and Policies continue to be promoted. Industrial uses permitted in each zone are as follows: Employment Zone Industrial Zone Permitted Industrial Uses: Permitted Industrial Uses: • Light industrial uses, Light industrial uses, • Research laboratories, Heavy industrial uses, • Warehouses, Recycling facilities, • Composting facilities, Research laboratories, • Warehouse and distribution facility, Warehouses, • Dry-cleaning plants. Composting facilities, • Workshops and custom small Warehouse and distribution facility, industries Dry-cleaning plants, • Workshops and custom small industries, • Recreational vehicle, boat and truck storage, • Outdoor storage facility, • Resource extraction, processes and sales establishments, • Junk Yards, • Airports and airstrips, • Transport terminals (truck terminals, public works yards, container storage), • Farm implement and heavy equipment sales. these public meetings can be found on the project's website at http://www.gMarkvillage.com. 2. The proposed amendments to the EMCP plan will promote the public welfare. a. The public welfare is served by providing jobs and housing in balance with one another, especially when provided in close proximity to one anther in the same neighborhood. A balance of jobs and housing within a development provides housing opportunities for new workers generated by the new jobs. When these are provided within the same neighborhood, the opportunity for workers to live in close proximity to their place of employment is enhanced. 3. The proposed amendments to the EMCP plan will be consistent with the vision, goals, principles and policies of City Plan and the EMCP. a. Principle EMC.LU-1 Future residential neighborhoods will be integrated with existing residential subdivisions, and be within close proximity to shopping, recreation and employment destinations. b. Principle EMC.LU-2 The East Mulberry Corridor study area will support quality employment districts for a variety of primary workplaces and supporting uses. c. Policy EMC.LU-3.1 Employment districts will include the development of planned office and business parks that promote quality design and construction of buildings, outdoor spaces, transportation facilities and streetscapes. They should encompass the development of workplaces consistent with the availability of public facilities and services and should continue the vitality and quality of life in adjacent residential neighborhoods. d. Policy EMC.LU-3.2 The Employment District's primary uses will include offices and institutions, light industrial uses and research and development activities. e. Principle EMC.LU-4. The East Mulberry Corridor study area supports the retention of existing industrial and agricultural business uses and their future expansion. f. Policy EMC.LU-4.1. Existing and future industrial uses will be supported and focused along I-25 frontage and around the Fort Collins Downtown Airport area. We are proposing changing the land use designation on the "Overlay Framework Plan" within the EMCP from Industrial to Employment. There's enough of an overlap between the industrial type uses allowed in both Employment and Industrial zoning Statement of Principles and Policies & Consistency with the City Structure Plan for the Airpark Village Annexation Summary of Request As part of the Airpark Village Annexation, we request to change the land use designation of the property being annexed from Industrial District to Employment District. The applicable land use designation has been established in the East Mulberry Corridor Plan's "Framework Overlay Plan," which is translated into the City Structure Plan. This request is to amend the land use designation on both the East Mulberry Plan's "Framework Overlay Plan," and the City Structure Plan. Criteria to Amend the Framework Overlay Plan and the City Structure Plan (Appendix C of City Plan) A plan amendment will be approved if the City Council makes specific findings that: • The existing City Plan and/or any related element thereof is in need of the proposed amendment; and • The proposed plan amendment will promote the public welfare and will be consistent with the vision, goals, principles and policies of City Plan and the elements thereof. Justification to Amend the Framework Overlay Plan and the City Structure Plan 1. The EMCP is in need of being amended for the following reasons: a. From July 2004 through February 2005, the developer conducted a series of neighborhood meetings which involved the neighboring property owners in deciding appropriate uses, intensities, street configurations, and massing & scale of buildings for the redevelopment. Through this process, the development team, together with input from the neighboring property owners, did a much more comprehensive analysis of future development scenarios of the airport site (and adjacent properties) than was done as part of the EMCP process. Summaries of . _ n• -. j -.. :; 4. .. '..c S yl ,t del � v.. SCHLUE, EF; IEY' 4 POSS • I n \ i& 1.4 i� 1\ G = AT`fACHMENT ,sell R .r+ �RNr=Y CERT 1FiCATIGIN r iji an attorney {tG2FTS2Ct to (3tdCt►C Iii th State Of GoJGrddo, hsrebycectity'that, as.ofthg datF .;,:!sss the area reFenred to as the =} r cafe, tha signets r t Fort-COWns are the of this Anrtexabon Pefzkortrf Anrtexatzon,to the G,fy ownem of Teat Bri Pr Y '; Te area posed fait annexatibh. thaf said owners' oonsMute mote than 50% a FuRf}e![more, . ' tea laridQtivners in the. area pm said rra is desfaabed on A arthment "�' GI A►inexation Peb -z -" land ,ri Said ace's: exc{t_t4iva rsf arjd own rr►ote tttarrnSQ° of the gtra�arc �n� ,I :,';� �. ._ 41 bateE . ttam R NCi _ t0 s' i, is r 1. , u , TOTPL. 'f= . ATTACHMENT"B" STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss- COUNTY OF LARIMER ) The undersigned, being first duly sworn upon his oath states: That he was the circulator of the attached Petition for Armexation and that each signature tlmeen is the signature of the person whose name it purports to be. !� ?II �l lu:�l 1 A' Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of 2005 , by 1,1.oYco n o WITNESS my hand and official seal. Id Zoo Com6ssidn Expiration ATTACHMENT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ANEXATION A tract of land situate in Sections 7 and 8, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the Sixth P.M., County of Larimer, State of Colorado, which, considering the North line of the West 1/2 of said Section 8 as bearing S89°28'51 "E and with all bearings contained herein relative thereto, is contained within the boundary lines which begin at a point which bears S 1698'59"W 4367.77 feet from the North 1/4 Corner of said Section 8, and run thence S009 TO "W 687.33 feet to the Northeast Comer of Lot 3 of the Replat of Lot 1, Fort Collins Community Airpark Subdivision; thence along the Northerly line of said Lot 3, N59°04'20"W 269.73 feet; thence S38°07'20"W 228.23 feet to a point on the Northerly right-of-way line of Airway Avenue; thence S40048'26"W 100.00 feet to a point on the Southerly right-of-way line of Airway Avenue; thence along said Southerly right-of-way line, along the arc of a 100.00 foot radius curve to the left a distance of 4.77 feet, the long chord of which bears N50°32'47"W 4.77 feet, and again N51 °54'51 "W 1002.79 feet; thence N38°46'56"E 337.18 feet to the Northeast Corner of Lot 29, Fort Collins Community Airpark Subdivision; thence along the Northerly line of said Fort Collins Community Airpark Subdivision, N51 °47'27"W 921.48 feet to a point on the Easterly right-of-way line of Airpark Drive; thence along said Easterly right-of-way line, along the arc of a 100.00 foot radius curve to the right a distance of 17.45 feet, the long chord of which bears S33°12'32"W 17.43 feet; thence N51 °47'33"W 100.00 feet to a point on the Southerly right-of-way line of Airpark Drive; thence along said Southerly right-of-way line, along the arc of a 20.00 foot radius curve to the left a distance of 31.36 feet, the long chord of which bears N0605849"W 28.26 feet, and again N52001'54"W 862.28 feet, and again along the arc of a 134.02 foot radius curve to the right a distance of 77.75 feet, the long chord of which bears N35'13'30"W 76.66 feet, and again along the arc of a 214.40 foot radius curve to the left a distance of 125.62 feet, the long chord of which bears N35024'16"W 123.84 feet; thence along the Northerly line of the Second Replat of the Fort Collins Industrial Park, N52020'51 "W 1462.19 feet to the Northwest Corner of Lot 106A of the 3rd Replat of Fort Collins Industrial Park; thence along the West line of said Lot 106A, S00023'41 "E 30.80 feet; thence along the Northerly line of Lot 12 of the Replat of Lots 11 through 17, Fort Collins Business Center 1st Filing, N52003'36"W 480.54 feet; thence along the Northerly line of Fort Collins Business Center 2nd Filing, N52008'56"W 599.99 feet; thence N37043'58"E 107.72 feet; thence N52004'42"W 913.48 feet; thence N88°32'50"E 1505.93 feet to the Northeast Corner of Tract S, Dry Creek Minor Subdivision; thence along the Westerly line of said Tract S, S0098'06"E 171.84 feet, and again N88014'57"E 422.85 feet, and again S55025'36"E 400.19 feet, and again S00°00'36"W 510.00 feet; thence along the Southerly line of said Dry Creek Minor Subdivision, S55019'53"E 1778.89 feet to the Southeast Comer of said Dry Creek Minor Subdivision; thence along the East line of said Dry Creek Minor Subdivision, N00106'35"E 121.43 feet to a point on the Northerly right-of-way line of International Boulevard; thence along said Northerly right-of-way line, S55°19'53"E 945.07 feet, and again S89°29'21 "E 802.17 feet; thence S00'05'3I "W 1299.48 feet to the point of beginning, containing 147.8331 acres, more or less, and being subject to all easements and rights -of -way which are existing or are of record or as shown on this plat. KINCAID PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A tract of land situate in Section 7, and in the West'/2 of Section 8, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the Sixth P.M., County of Larimer, State of Colorado, which, considering the North line of the said West %2 of Section 8 as bearing S89°28'51"E and with all bearings contained herein relative thereto, is contained within the boundary lines which begin at a point which bears S16°38'59"W 4367.77 feet, and again N51 °50' 1 TV 1963.88 feet from the North''/4 corner of said Section 8, and run thence N55°19'35"W 1260.04 feet, thence N70°30'39W 14.97 feet; thence N71°07'07"W 354.20 feet; thence N53044'03"W 297.64 feet; thence N35025'40"E 491.85 feet; thence S55°19'54"E 2495.80 feet; thence N89028'44"W 712.48 feet to the point of beginning, containing 21.2917 acres, more or less, and being subject to all easements and rights -of -way which are existing or are of record or as shown on this plat. (Check box if applicable). The Petitioners reserve the right to withdraw this petition and their signatures therefrom at any time prior to the commencement of the roll call of the City Council for the vote upon the second reading of the annexation ordinance. Individual Petitioners signing this Petition represent that they own the portion(s) of the area described on Attachment W as more particularly described below: A tract of land situate in the County of Larimer, State of Colorado, to -wit: INSTRUCTIONS: INSERT HERE the legal description of individual parcels, or if only ownership, type "See Legal Description on Attachment A'." �ee mfifig(.btv�nRv� �'ot ' �Ki�Cal d p�P i ININ WITNEHEROF, II/w� executed this Petition for Annexation this day of 2 Signature Petitioner's/Owner's Signature Address Address City State ZiTl city State Zip AIRPARK PROPERTY PARCELI 21 acres LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A tract of land situate in Section 7 and the West '/z of Section 8, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the 6t' P.M., County of Larimer, State of Colorado, which considering the North line of the said West % of Section 8 as bearing S89'28'51"E with all bearings contained herein relative thereto, is contained within the boundary lines which begin at a point which bears S16°38159"W 4367.77 feet from the North'/4 corner of said Section 8 and run thence N51°50' 17"W 1963.88 feet; thence S89°29'03"E 1546.13 feet; thence S00005'31"W 1199.54 feet to the point of beginning, containing 21.2878 acres more or legs. PARCELS 2 THROUGH 7 80 acres LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A tract of land situate in Section 7 and the West '/z of Section 8, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the 6"' P.M., County of Larimer, State of Colorado, which considering the North line of the said West ''/z of Section 8 as bearing S89°28'51"E with all bearings contained herein relative thereto, is contained within the boundary lines which begin at a point which bears S 16°38'S9"W 4367.77 feet from the North % corner of said Section 8 and run thence S0097'01"W 687.33 feet; thence N59004'02"W 269.73 feet; thence S38007'20"W 228.76 feet, thence N47°23'45"W 9.55 feet; thence N51054'51"W 1001.57 feet; thence N38°46'56"E 237.17 feet; thence N51°47'27"W 921.52 feet; thence along the arc of a 100.00 foot radius curve to the left a distance of 139.63 feet, the long chord of which bears NI 1°47'27"W 128.56 feet; thence N52'01'54"W 882.40 feet; thence along the arc of a 54.02 foot radius curve to the right a distance of 31.34 feet, the long chord of which bears N35°13'30"W 30.90 feet; thence along the arc of a 294.40 foot radius curve to the left a distance of 131.87 feet, the long chord of which bears N31 °26' 17"W 130.77 feet; thence S27°41'00"W 85.85 feet; thence along the arc of a 214.40 foot radius curve to the left a distance of 56.27 feet, the long chord of which bears N44043'05"W 56.10 feet; thence N52°20'51"W 1462.19 feet; thence S11°29'S0"E 37.15 feet; thence N52°03'36"W 489.66 feet; thence N52108'56"W 599.99 feet; thence N37043'58"E 107.72 feet; thence N52004'42"W 913.48 feet; thence N88°32'50"E 1505.93 feet; thence S00°18'06"E 970.25 feet; thence S54055' 12"E 756.19 feet; thence S53045'02"E 297.64 feet; thence S71007'07"E 354.20 feet; thence S70030'38"E 14.97 feet; thence S55019'34"E 1260.04 feet; thence S51°50'17"E 1963.88 feet to the point of beginning, containing 79.8304 acres more or less. (Check box if applicable). The Petitioners reserve the right to YAOx r'aw this petition and their signatures therefrom at any time prior to the commencement of the roll call of the City Council for the vote upon the second reading of the annexation ordinance. Individual Petitioners signing this Petition represent that they own the portion(s) of the area described on Attachment "A" as more particularly described belawr A tract of land situate in the County of Larimer, State of Colorado, to -wit: INSTRUCTIONS: INSERT HERE the legal description of individual parcels, or U only ownership, type "See Legal Description on Aftachrnent `A k4ac al �'L AirpapV Prr ITNESS WHEROF, Uwe have executed this Petition for Annexation this Zs day of c�r�� �`v ,�i.Pr✓C�2k ass©e, Znc. syl .Ir iy, P, d, Wrier's Signature Petitioneft0orner's '_ A— boo /- lcaja y Ave a ck � Address Address 25 � IC-I-C- A�,S--24- City State Zip City State Zip PETITION FOR ANNEXATION THE UNDERSIGNED (hereinafter referred to as the "Petitioners") hereby petition the Council of the City of Fort Collins, Colorado for the annexation of an are, to be referred to as the K,CP0Vrr-_ vin Annexation to the City of Fort Collins. Said area, co sisting of approximately ork hu (i `iS ) acres, is more particularly described on Attachment "A,° attached hereto. The Petitioners allege: 1. That it is desirable and necessary that such area be annexed to the City of Fort Collins. 2. That the requirements of Sections 31-12-104 and 31-12-108, C.R.S., exist or have been met. 3. That not less than one -sixth (1/6) of the perimeter of the area proposed to be annexed is contiguous with the boundaries of the City of Fort Collins. That a community of interest exists between the area proposed to be annexed and the City of Fort Collins. 5. That the area to be annexed is urban or will be urbanized in the near future. 6. That the area proposed to be annexed is integrated with or capable of being integrated with the City of Fort Collins. That the Petitioners herein comprise more that fifty percent (50%) of the landowners in the area and own more than fifty percent (50%) of the area to be annexed, excluding public streets, alleys and lands owned by the City of Fort Collins. 8. That the City of Fort Collins shall not be required to assume any obligations 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 proposed to be annexed except as may be provided by the ordinance of the City of Fort Collins. Further, as an express condition of annexation, Petitioners consent to the inclusion into the Municipal Subdistrict, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District (the "Subdistrict") pursuant to §37- 45-136(3.6) C.R.S., Petitioners acknowledge that, upon inclusion into the Subdistrict, Petitioners' property will be subject to the same mill levies and special assessments as are levied or will be levied on other similarly situated property in the Subdistrict at the time of inclusion of Petitioners' lands. Petitioners agree to waive any right to an election which may exist pursuant to Article X, §20 of the Colorado Constitution before the Subdistrict can impose such mill levies and special assessments as it has the authority to impose. Petitioners also agree to waive, upon inclusion, any right which may exist to a refund pursuant to Article X, §20 of the Colorado Constitution. WHEREFORE, said Petitioners request that the Council of the City of Fort Collins approve the annexation of the area described on Attachment "A." Furthermore, the Petitioners request that said area be placed in the E- E io• i Zone District pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins. Lake Canal LMN LMN LMN lRi IN HORSE PARK T _ RL 77NI, 11STA R T Fs ANF64DR L RO PAR L N M. MMN U � U CCR E T C U I � v SC ST cache a Poudre River RC a E R o oudr C L #16-05 Airpark Village Annexation and Zoning N 4/5/2005 1 inch: 1000 feet Airpark Village Annexation and Zoning and Structure Plan/Sub-Area Plan Amendment #16-05 May 19, 2005 P & Z Meeting Page 7 E. On February 15, 2005, City Council passed a Resolution which accepted the annexation petition and determined that the petition is in compliance with State law. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Annexation of the parcel into the City of Fort Collins. Further, Staff recommends approval of the Plan Amendment and placement into the Employment zone district. Finally, Staff recommends placement within the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. Airpark Village Annexation and Zoning and Structure Plan/Sub-Area Plan Amendment #16-05 May 19, 2005 P & Z Meeting Page 6 that the Plan is in need of the proposed amendment. Staff also finds that the proposed Plan Amendment will promote the public welfare and will be consistent with the vision, goals, principles and policies of City Plan and the elements thereof. Staff, therefore, recommends approval of the proposed Plan Amendment. 8. Neighborhood Information Meetings: Staff did not facilitate the neighborhood information meetings that occurred between July of 2004 and February of 2005. These meetings were set up and facilitated by the contract purchaser and his consulting team. Such meetings exceed that which would have been conducted by City Staff and are considered sufficient to act in lieu of City sponsored meetings. The summaries indicate that there is a general level of acceptance by those attending for the proposed Plan Amendment. As mentioned, summaries of these meetings are attached. 9. Findings of Fact/Conclusion: In evaluating the request for the Airpark Village Annexation and Zoning and Structure Plan/Sub-Area Plan Amendment, Staff makes the following findings of fact: A. The annexation of this parcel is consistent with the policies and agreements between Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins, as contained in the amended INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT —GROWTH MANAGEMENT AREA. B. The parcel meets all criteria included in State law to qualify for annexation by the City of Fort Collins. C. The requested zone district, Employment, is not in conformance with two elements of the City's Comprehensive Plan (City Plan). These elements are the Structure Plan Map and the East Mulberry Corridor Plan. D. The request for the Plan Amendment meets the criteria of Minor Amendment Procedures as outlined in Appendix C of City Plan. D. Since the applicant has partially justified the request for Employment zoning on the basis that such zoning would provide opportunities for a range of residential uses, Staff recommends the parcel be placed within the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. Airpark Village Annexation and Zoning and Structure Plan/Sub-Area Plan Amendment #16-05 May 19, 2005 P & Z Meeting Page 5 C. Since light industrial is allowed in both the E and I zones, the Plan Amendment does not come with the opportunity cost that the City is losing industrial ground out of the buildable lands inventory. Sufficient land area remains in the Growth Management Area for heavy industrial, the land use that would not be allowed in the Employment zone. D. With the Plan Amendment, vision, goals, principles and policies of City Plan and the East Mulberry Corridor Plan remain intact. 7. Staff Recommendation for Employment Zoning: Staff is recommending approval of the Plan Amendment. This recommendation is based on the following points: A. As mentioned, the East Mulberry Corridor Plan (EMCP) includes a Framework Plan Overlay Map that was intended to be implemented at such time as the existing Fort Collins Downtown Airport redevelops. This Overlay Map describes an extension of Employment land use designation on the southerly portion of the airport property, along with future street connections consistent with the Master Street Plan. The Plan Amendment would extend the Employment zone over the entire Airpark Village, not just the southern portion. This is a logical and rational land use pattern that will result in richer mix of land uses than under Industrial zoning. B. The Plan Amendment provides the opportunity to integrate residential land uses within an employment area. Unlike current development patterns, where there is strict separation of land uses, residential can be blended with non-residential land uses rather than being placed in isolated pockets. C. Staff agrees that the Plan Amendment represents a "down -zoning" but that the loss of industrial land is marginal. Recent heavy industrial site selections (Owens Illinois and two methanol plants) have bypassed urban areas for large undeveloped semi -rural parcels. According to the Land Use Code, the definition of light industrial is very broad and captures the most likely land uses that would be attracted to the East Mulberry Corridor. For a compare and contrast analysis, the definitions of light industrial and heavy industrial are provided as an attachment. Staff finds that with the level of interest and private sector planning analysis for Airpark Village that exceeds the attention paid to this parcel by the East Mulberry Corridor Plan, Airpark Village Annexation and Zoning and Structure Plan/Sub-Area Plan Amendment #16-05 May 19, 2005 P & Z Meeting Page 4 4. Amendment to the Structure Plan Map and East Mulberry Corridor Plan: Placing this parcel entirely into the Employment zone requires official action on the City's Structure Plan Map and the sub area plan that governs this specific geographic area. This map and sub area plan are components of City Plan. In order to simplify the Board's discussion, amending these two maps shall be referred to as the Plan Amendment. Please note that one cannot occur without the other so they cannot be separated and must be treated in tandem. 5. Plan Amendment Review Criteria: City Plan allows for amendments through a Minor Amendment process as outlined in Appendix C (see attached). The two review criteria are: A. The City Plan and/or any related element thereof is in need of the proposed amendment; and B. The proposed plan amendment will promote the public welfare and will be consistent with the vision, goals, principles and policies of City Plan and the elements thereof. 6. Summary of Applicants' Case for Employment Zoning: The applicants have provided an attachment titled "Statement of Principles and Policies and Consistency with the City Structure Plan." Briefly, the main points are summarized as follows: A. Between July of 2004 and February 2005, the applicants have conducted a planning analysis for this particular parcel that exceeded the detail of the East Mulberry Corridor Plan. This involved an evaluation of land use, street network design and determining the mass and scale of buildings. In addition, several neighborhood meetings were held with affected property owners. Summaries of these meetings are attached. B. Employment zoning allows for eight different types of residential land uses whereas the Industrial zone allows for only two types. The applicants' contend that providing a balance between jobs and housing is a key factor in developing this area. The Employment zone offers the opportunity to create such a balance whereas the Industrial zone does not. Airpark Village Annexation and Zoning and Structure Plan/Sub-Area Plan Amendment #16-05 May 19, 2005 P & Z Meeting Page 3 contiguity with the City limits. This exceeds the required minimum of 16.66% (one - sixth). The parcel, therefore, complies with the requirements of the INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT — GROWTH MANAGEMENT AREA and is eligible for annexation. One of the stated intents of the AGREEMENT is to have urban development occur within the City in order that the provision of urban level services by the County would be minimized. This is a 100% voluntary annexation. The parcel is not an enclave. On February 15, 2005, City Council passed a Resolution which accepted the annexation petition and established that the petition is in compliance with State statutes. 2. Compliance with State Law: As mentioned, the annexation has 25.53% of its perimeter boundary contiguous with existing City limits which exceeds the required one -sixth as mandated by State law. Further, the parcel is found to have a community of interest with the City and the parcel is expected to urbanize shortly. 3. Zoning: The proposed zoning for the Airpark Village Annexation is E, Employment. As stated in the Land Use Code: (A) Purpose. The Employment District is intended to provide locations for a variety of workplaces including light industrial uses, research and development activities, offices and institutions. This District also is intended to accommodate secondary uses that complement or support the primary workplace uses, such as hotels, restaurants, convenience shopping, child care and housing. Additionally, the Employment District is intended to encourage the development of planned office and business parks; to promote excellence in the design and construction of buildings, outdoor spaces, transportation facilities and streetscapes; to direct the development of workplaces consistent with the availability of public facilities and services; and to continue the vitality and quality of life in adjacent residential neighborhoods. In addition, Staff recommends the parcel be placed within the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. Airpark Village Annexation and Zoning and Structure Plan/Sub-Area Plan Amendment # 16-05 May 19, 2005 P & Z Meeting Page 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This is a 100% voluntary annexation for a property located within the Growth Management Area. The property satisfies the requirement that no less than one -sixth of the perimeter boundary be contiguous to the existing City boundary. The recommended zoning of Employment requires an amendment to both the City's Comprehensive Plan and Structure Plan Map. Staff recommends the parcel be placed within the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. The Initiating Resolution was considered by City Council on April 19, 2005 and approved. The item is scheduled for first reading by City Council on June 7, 2005. COMMENTS: Background: According to the policies and agreements between the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County, contained in the amended (November 21, 2000) INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS — GROWTH MANAGEMENT AREA (I.G.A.), the City will agree to consider for annexation property in the G.M.A. when such property is eligible for annexation according to State law. According to the I.G.A., as amended,: "It is the City's intent to annex properties within the GMA as expeditiously as possible consistent with the terms of this Agreement. Except as provided in Section 8(B), the City agrees to consider the annexation of any parcel or parcels of land located within the GMA which are eligible for voluntary annexation pursuant to the provisions of Title 31, Article 12 Colorado Revised Statutes." The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: N: I — Industrial (County); Burlington Northern Railroad tracks and switching yard S: I — Industrial (County); Existing Industrial Park (For Collins Community Airpark Subdivision) E: L-M-N; Existing Dry Creek Mobile Home Park E: I —Industrial (County); Existing Industrial Park (Industrial Business Park International P.U.D.) W: I — Industrial (County); Existing Industrial Park (Fort Collins Business Center, Fort Collins Industrial Park, Fort Collins Community Airpark Subdivision) The parcel gains the necessary one -sixth contiguity along portions of the east, north and west property lines. Of the total perimeter boundary, the parcel has 25.53% ITEM NO. 8 MEETING DATE 5/19/05 STAFF Tart Shepard_ City of Fort Collins PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD STAFF REPORT PROJECT: Airpark Village Annexation and Zoning and Structure Plan/Sub- Area Plan Amendment #16-05 APPLICANTS: Community Airpark Association, Inc. Mr. W. Doyer Kincaid c/o M.T.A. 223 North College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80524 OWNERS: Community Airpark Association, Inc. c/o Mr. Loren Maxey 2200 Airway Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80524 Mr. W. Doyer Kincaid 296 N. Burritt Avenue Buffalo, WY 82834 PROJECT -DESCRIPTION: Mr. Don Parsons 1631 Lakeshore Drive Fort Collins, CO 80525 This is a request to annex and zone a 147.83 acre parcel. The annexation includes three separately owned parcels, one of which is an existing privately owned airport. The site is located north of East Lincoln Avenue, south of East Vine Drive and west of Timberline Road. Contiguity with the existing municipal boundary is gained along portions of the west and east property lines. The east property line abuts the Dry Creek Subdivision. The requested zoning is Employment. This request requires an Amendment to the Structure Plan Map and the East Mulberry Corridor Plan. RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the annexation. Approval of the amendment to the Structure Plan Map and East Mulberry Corridor Plan. Approval of placement into the Employment zone district. COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. PO. Box580 Fort Collins, CO80522-0580 (970)221-6750 PLANNING DEPARTMENT