HomeMy WebLinkAboutEAST MULBERRY CORRIDOR PLAN REZONE - 11-03 - CORRESPONDENCE - CITY COUNCILFebruary 11, 2003
Mr. James Webster
Page 2
request with staff, Planning and Zoning Board and City Council at study sessions. Staff did not
receive support for this change, but did support the Plan recommendation for an "E"
Employment land use designation.
On September 17 and 18, 2002, the City Council and the Larimer County Planning Commission
adopted the East Mulberry Corridor Plan, including an "E" Employment designation for your
property. Staff has scheduled a follow-up Plan implementation item to rezone this property from
"I" Industrial to "E" Employment with the Planning and Zoning Board on March 6 and City
Council on March 18, 2003. Both of these Hearings are open to the public and I encourage you
and Mr. Prouty to attend these hearings to voice your opinions.
While staff is moving forward with a recommendation to rezone the property to Employment
consistent with the adopted East Mulberry Corridor Plan and City Structure Plan, you can
propose to challenge this recommendation and request MMN Zoning during these Hearings.
I hope your questions have been sufficiently answered regarding future street impacts and
zoning. Please let me know if there is anything else that I can do to help you with this situation.
►s
cc: City Council Members
John F. Fischbach, City Manager
Greg Byrne, Director of Community Planning and Environmental Services
a
Mayor
City of Fort Collins
February 11, 2003
Mr. James Webster
HC 66, Box 408
Lusk, WY 82225
Dear Mr. Webster,
This letter is in response to a meeting held on December 20, 2002, with City staff, and to the
recent letter you forwarded to me on January 12, 2003, regarding your property on the corner of
Lincoln and Lemay. I appreciate your concerns and want to assist in answering your questions
concerning impacts of future streets, right-of-way coordination and a proposed change in zoning.
First, the new streets aligned across a portion of your property are described in the East Mulberry
Corridor Plan and amended Master Street Plan, both adopted by City Council on September 17,
2002. The three streets include a realigned Lemay Avenue, a proposed extension of International
Boulevard, and a proposed extension of Buckingham Street to Duff Drive. Pete Wray (City
Planner) forwarded your questions to Engineering staff to assist in providing a preliminary
assessment of the impacts these streets may have on your property in the future.
I understand that you have recently spoken on the phone to Cam McNair (City Engineer), and
that he has agreed to have our Engineering staff prepare some conceptual design options for
these three street segments that affect your property. You agreed to have some survey data
provided to Mr. McNair in order that his staff may use this information to prepare the conceptual
alignments. I understand that you also agreed that having this done by the end of February
would be acceptable to you. This work by our staff will not be a complete street design. You or
your developer are responsible for hiring an engineering firm to design the streets that are
adjacent to your property, along with the design of the development itself. But in the meantime,
we are glad to prepare some very preliminary conceptual drawings that more closely
approximate the way those three streets will need to be aligned, based on our City's street design
standards. When these conceptual layouts are complete, Mr. McNair will contact you to arrange
a meeting and a discussion on the impacts of the streets to your property.
Second, you have requested your property be zoned M-M-N (Medium Density Mixed -Use
Neighborhood) as you are working with John Prouty, a local developer interested in multi -family
residential development. Actually, Mr. Prouty brought this request to both City and County staff
in the spring of 2002 as part of the East Mulberry Corridor Plan process. Since the request to
change the City zoning from Industrial to MMN was'a City issue, Mr. Wray discussed this
300 LaPorte Avenue • PO. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6505 • FAX (970) 224-6107 • TDD (970) 224-6001
www.fcgov.com
A Timeline of Events affecting the Webster Property
1988 Give City additional Right of Way on Lincoln at no cost to city
1990 List property with F&M Land
2/92 Contract with Diamond Shamrock
2/92-6/94 Diamond Shamrock submits various plans and proposals City shows that they are
going to allow these plans with minor changes each time
1993 City requires Diamond Shamrock to pay for annex of property into the City
6/94-6/97 Diamond Shamrock with City input fine tunes for Final Approval
6197 Find buyer for house on property per City requirements to relocate causing loss of rents
due to meeting the City's desire to have the house saved in order that Diamond
Shamrock could go forward with planned development.
7/97 City denies Final Approval
2/98 Schrader proposal to City for a convenience store
7/98 Give City of Ft Collins Housing Authority Right of Way for storm drain w/ condition it
will meet requirements of property development
8/98 Schrader denied
10/01 John Prouty proposes multi purpose zoning with a housing project on back of property
City expresses this is what they want so Mr Prouty spends money to pursue this project.
12/01-11/02 John Prouty submits plans and attempts rezoning with the Webster's backing.
11/02 Rezoning denied due to City now has different ideas that do not agree with the
Webster's hopes for the property.
1988-2002 Webster's have repeatedly brought good projects to the City and each time they allow
the developer to spend large sums of money in an attempt to develop the property.
The City has caused the Webster's a great deal of hardship in making it once again
impossible to sell our property. We had hoped to be able to have this property sold by
now we have had it on the market for 12 years we aren't young people and this was to be
all of our retirement. The Webster's are a founding family in this City and it is sad that
we can not sell a piece of property in this amount of time totally due to the City's
politics! We sincerely felt that Mr. Prouty offered a good use of the property and a
means by which we could all see the property nicely developed. We also felt that if
anyone could work with the City it would've been Mr. Prouty.
January 12, 2003
Marty Tharp
601 Birky PI
Ft. Collins, CO 80526
Dear Ms. Tharp,
I am writing you in regards to the city's plan use for our property in respects to the "Mulberry Corridor".
First let me introduce myself I am James Webster my brother, sister and myself own the property at the
corner of Lincoln and Lemay. . As you are aware this property lies at the west end of the proposed
Mulberry Corridor. Recently we with John Prouty approached the planning department with a plan to
develop this property and had requested a M-M-N zoning on the property. Mr. Prouty presented to you
what we felt was a very practical and appealing plan to develop the property and had gone thru a great
deal of work and cost . However we were informed that this is not the City's idea for our property this is
not the first time we have had a developer spend sums of money and time to only be turned down again.
We felt that this was finally something that the City would like however since once again the ideas have
changed our ability to sell the property has been adversely affected by City politics. The City has
informed its that at this time to develop their projected plan they will need about 30% of our property for
roads. However the city doesn't wish to purchase this ground at this time however they will not allow us
to sell or develop it either. This makes us the City's banker for an unknown amount of time a large part
of our property is put in limbo unable to do anything with it. However we have a buyer who is willing to
work with the city and thus start the process of developing the remaining area. It seems unfair that not
only does the City tie our hands on the portion that they need for roads but also on the balance of the
property. The idea of zoning our property Employment makes it unmarketable at this time as we have
been informed by more then one source that there is an excess of office space in Ft. Collins. One only has
to drive around town and see all of the vacant office space so how long before our property then becomes
marketable ten or. twenty years? As you can see by the time line enclosed we have been doing our best to
work with the City and we have been quite some time attempting to sell.
We ask that when you do your zoning for the Mulberry Corridor you give us our M-M-N zoning as we
have requested. We believe that we have offered a means that is not unreasonable by which the property
can be developed. We would continue to work with the City as we have in the past they are going to need
our property for roads and we would like to believe that this can be resolved so that it benefits all parties.
Please consider our request we realize you have already reviewed this but we must believe that you can see
your way to realizing that this would benefit all.
ely
James Webster
Enc.,
be lower, in the range of $12,500 to $13,500 per lot. This would make your first year
assessment as low as $1583.
In order to finance these improvements, the City will issue special bonds. This is where
the requirements of the TABOR Amendment come into effect. The TABOR amendment
requires an election to authorize any additional taxes or debt taken on by the City of Fort
Collins. In order to meet these requirements of the TABOR Amendment, the City is
required to conduct a special election of all the registered voters of The Ridge to
specifically ask them to approve the additional debt proposed through the SID. The
ballot language is written using the standard language of the TABOR Amendment and
the amount of the debt. Indicated on the ballot is an amount to cover all contingencies.
The actual amount of the debt will be determined by the creation of the SID and not by
this election. Although it is important that the special ballot pass for the financing of the
SID, the election itself does not create the SID or obligate the property owners in any
way. The election is only necessary to authorize the City to take on the debt of the SID if
the property owners decide to proceed with the creation of the Special Improvement at a
later date.
If the election passes, I will continue to work with the Homeowners Association to
identify cost saving strategies, then ask The Ridge property owners if they wish to
proceed with the creation of the SID and proceed with construction.
In summary, you will receive a special election ballot around March 19`h which is solely
to satisfy the Tabor Amendment requirements. The election carries no obligation to the
homeowners to proceed with the improvements. Ballots must be received by the City on
or before April 3, 2001 to be counted.
I understand that this is a very complicated issue and I hope I have answered most of
your questions. Please feel free to call me at anytime if you need more information. My
work number is 224-6108, and if you would like to call after normal working hours, my
cell number is 222-0748.
Sincerely,
Matt Baker
Street Oversizing Program Coordinator
46 a
March 7, 2001
Dear Registered Elector in The Ridge Subdivision:
As you are aware, The Ridge Home Owners Association board has asked the City about
the possibility of forming a Special Improvement District (SID) to improve the streets in
your neighborhood. These improvements will bring the subdivision streets up to City
standards and allow the City to take over the future maintenance. In the upcoming City
election on April 3, you will be receiving a special mailed ballot to vote whether the City
is allowed to take on the additional debt of the SID, which is required by the TABOR
Amendment. The actual creation of the SID will come at a later date.
This special mail -in election is only to satisfy the requirements of Amendment 1,
commonly called the TABOR Amendment, which is a State Amendment to the
Constitution. The TABOR Amendment specifies that any additional debt taken on by the
City of Fort Collins must be approved by the electors. This election is only to give the
City permission to issue bond debt if the residents decide to proceed with the creation of
the SID. Ballots will be mailed on March 19t" and must be returned to the City Clerk's
Office, City of Fort Collins, by 7:00 pm on April P. A postmark does not count if the
ballot is not received by the Clerk's office by the 7:00 pm deadline.
The City has been working with your Homeowners Association Board to identify the
improvements needed to bring your streets up to City standard. The engineering design
includes a flat concrete edging (two feet wide), grinding up the existing pavement, and
new asphalt pavement. This design is the cheapest alternative to upgrading the streets in
your subdivision. After improvements are completed, the City will then take over
perpetual maintenance of the streets, relieving the homeowners of this financial burden.
Since the Homeowners Association in The Ridge subdivision have taken the initial steps
in the SID process, the City has completed the engineering design and cost estimates for
the improvements, which include a flat concrete ribbon curb and new asphalt paving.
The planned improvements do not include sidewalks or street lighting. Our estimated
total cost is $882,928.00. There would be some additional financing costs related to
issuing the SID bonds. The total estimated cost of the Special Improvement District to
upgrade your streets to City standards including the cost of the bonds is $1,015,366.00,
which is approximately $15,384.00 per lot. Typically assessments are levied on a yearly
basis and include equal principal payments, plus interest. For a fifteen year bond, your
cost for the first year would be $1,025 principal plus $923 interest for a total of $1984.00.
Each year after that, the interest amount would decline about $62 year until the final
payment would be $1025 principal plus $62 interest for a total of $1086.00. A full
estimated payment schedule is included with this letter. It is important that you realize
that these costs are only an estimate and are based on "worst case" construction. I
anticipate the project being completed 5% to 10% under budget, based on past experience
and current projects I have under construction at this time. Although I can say with some
assurance that your assessment will not exceed the estimated amount, I believe they will
a
11. The City Manager may establish administrative policies and procedures
for the Improvement District process and may recommend appropriate fees
to the City Council.
12. Proposed improvements should be of benefit to the City within a
reasonable time frame.
Base Recommendation Summary:
The LID process is the preferred method of improving annexed County streets to City
Standards. When property owners contract with a developer, payment is often required in
advance, imposing a financial burden on the homeowners. LIDS allow the property owners to
spread payments out over a number of years, making it a much more viable option for this type of
development. In addition, LIDS allow property owners to draw upon the expertise of the City
Staff, eliminating the need for outside engineering firms, which can add considerable expense to
the project.
As stated, LIDS follow the current SID process. The City originally created SIDs to
encourage development during slow economic times. The procedures set in place for SID
creation are suited to this type of development, yet tend to be a cumbersome method of
administrating roadway improvements in developed areas. Staff is recommending that some of
the procedural steps required for SIDs be relaxed for LIDS in fully built out areas.
"Special Improvement Districts Manual, Section III, General Procedures"
Initial Contact
2. Formal Application
1. First Resolution Packet (4 copies)
2. Second Resolution Packet (4 copies)
3. Creation Ordinance Packet (4 copies)
4. Approval Packet
5. Bond Ordinance Packet (4 copies)
b.)
Conclusion:
It is in the City's best interest to encourage developments to improve their own streets
and drainage systems after annexation with the use of an SID. The SID process is the preferred
method of improving streets in County subdivisions annexed into the city. Property owners have
theoption of hiring a private contractor themselves, but payment is often required in advance,
imposing a financial burden on homeowners. Using the SID process allows property owners to
spread payments out over a number of years, making it a much more viable tool for constructing
improvements in existing subdivisions. In addition, the SID process also allows property
oweners to draw upon the expertise of city staff, eliminating the need for outside consultants.
owners' expense. The SID criteria and policies adopted by council, and set forth in the "Special
Improvement Districts Manual, Section II., Policies", are as listed below.
All public improvements as described in Chapter 16 of the City Code shall
be eligible for inclusion in an Improvement District. However, the City
may exclude certain improvements when it deems such improvements are
not in the best interests of the City.
2. The City reserves the right to deny the creation of any District.
The proposed District should be consistent with the Maser Street Plan and
other planning documents of the City. The district should have an
approved Master Plan. An approved Preliminary Plan may be required if
local street or utility improvements are to be included within the District.
The City may also require a Storm Drainage Plan to be submitted.
4. The total cost of the District should not exceed the appraised value of the
improvements and the land to be included in the District.
The amount of encumbrances on the land in the District including the
assessments of the District should not exceed 90% of the value of the land
including the improvements without being acknowledged by subordinate
lien holders, or the posting of a surety from a recognized company for
100% of the principal and interest of the construction cost of the District.
6. The cost to be borne by the City in a District must be currently available or
minimized and/or deferred through credits or other mechanisms.
The City has the option to require property owners within the District to
manage construction of the improvements themselves or through
Professional Engineers where it is to the City's advantage to do so and the
proposed managers can demonstrate experience and competence.
8. The City has the option to require privately managed Districts to bid and
award contracts for construction of the public improvements when
provided for in the District's Master Agreement and performed in
conformance with the City Charter.
Construction activities of District improvements should not cause
extraordinary inconvenience to properties choosing not to be a party to the
District.
10. Should a default in the assessment payments of a District occur, the City
shall have the right to immediately proceed with all legal remedies
including a tax deed and sale of the affected land.
LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS FOR ANNEXED STREETS
Introduction:
As the City of Fort Collins develops, expansion into the urban growth areas becomes an
increasingly common occurrence. Many of these areas are County parcels that have been
annexed into the City after development has occurred. As County out parcels, the existing
infrastructure is often not built to current City standards. The City of Fort Collins' Policy GM-
2.1 "Annexation Policy" of the City Plan Principles and Policies, outlines the following standards
for upgrading County infrastructure which has been annexed into the City:
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 or other type project)
in place to upgrade such services and facilities to City standards before the City
will assume full responsibility for future maintenance.
.Several annexed developments are currently interested in bringing their street systems up
to City standards. The City s "Annexation Policy" recommends using Special Improvement
Districts (SIDS) as a vehicle to achieve these standards. SIDs have historically been a method
used by developers to construct a roadway infrastructure prior to construction of the
development. Due to the speculative nature of these districts, the City found them to be a
financial liability, and developed more stringent policies for the SID process. Unfortunately, this
process is cumbersome and tends to delay the construction of improvements in already developed
and improved areas. For this reason, we are suggesting that the City tailor its SID process for
improved developments and create a Local Improvement District (LID), in which standards for
improvements in developed areas would be relaxed.
LIDS function in much the same way as SIDs, but differ in that the area being serviced by
the LID is developed and improved property, and the City incurs little or no financial liability. It
is in the City's interest to encourage these areas to form LIDS and bring their streets up to City
standards at the property owners' expense. We are proposing that the City relax some aspects of
the SID process in order to make it more user friendly, and tailor it to fit the needs of developed
and improved communities.
Background:
It is City policy to provide only minor maintenance to annexed roadways that are not built
to City standards. County developments that are annexed into the City typically consist of rural
gravel roads with no curb and gutter, and a system of borrow ditches for drainage. As these
annexed areas continue to develop, population density goes up, and traffic levels increase, it
becomes increasingly important that the street system be brought up to City standards. Using the
LID format to achieve these standards works to both the City's and the property owners'
advantage. The property owner is able to use the City's technical resources, and to make
installment payments for the project, and the City is able to upgrade street systems at the property
City Council Study Session Summary of Comments
Page 4
Those two mentioned projects do list funding gaps. However they are identified as related
existing projects included in the Master Street Plan.
• Council expressed concerns about how the City will be able to provide future facilities and
services for this area and associated costs.
A more detailed annexation assessment will be needed if an enclave is established.
Council was satisfied with the proposed Funding Assessment.
Final Comments from Council:
• Members of Council are supportive of the East Mulberry Corridor Plan and gave staff
direction to move ahead in preparing the final Plan for adoption.
rl
City Council Study Session Summary of Comments
Page 3
The proposed memorial is located at the north east corner of Timberline Drive and Highway 14.
Staff has not received direction from Council or the Larimer County Planning Commission to
incorporate this item into the Plan.
Principles and Policies
Staff highlighted the primary issues addressed in the proposed principles and policies for the
study area. These statements represent a basis for determining implementation strategies.
Council was comfortable with the proposed principles and policies.
4. Implementation Action Plan
An updated Action Plan was distributed to Council along with a brief explanation of the
implementation strategies proposed.
• Council requested a brief summary explanation of how a Special Improvement District works
to fund bringing existing local streets up to our urban standards.
Attached is background information on Improvement Districts in the City. Also attached is a
description of a Special Improvement District for the Ridge Subdivision, created in 2001.
• Describe what the Map shows for the properties eligible for annexation?
This map illustrates what parcels are within City limits, which parcels are outside City limits, and
those parcels that touch existing municipal boundaries and are eligible for annexation.
• How soon will we see an enclave in this area?
Staff identified a few parcels that may be eligible soon east of I-25. Annexation agreements exist
for the adjoining properties mentioned.
Council stated they were satisfied with the proposed implementation action plan.
5. Project Funding Assessment
A preliminary assessment of estimated costs for public facilities and services was provided.
Is there a funding gap for the grade -separated intersections at Timberline RoadNine Drive,
and Lemay AveNine Drive?
City Council Study Session Summary of Comments
Page 2
Staff responded that the ballot language approved by voters previously (Ballot Initiative 200) will
restricts any consideration of an alternative truck route alignment other than the existing
designated route on Highway 14 within the city limits. In addition, if development expands within
the airport area, this would preclude a major arterial connection through this area.
If a new major arterial street and corresponding truck route was now proposed through the
existing airport property, then the East Mulberry Corridor Plan adoption schedule would need to
be delayed to assess this proposal.
• Can the proposed International Drive extension connect to Vine Drive near the north west
portion of the airport area?
Several existing constraints in the area preclude any consideration of connecting these two streets
including the railroad switching yards and the grade separated intersection at Lemay Ave and
Vine Drive.
Is the City interested in participating with any expansion of the existing airport?
This issue was discussed at the January 8, 2002 Council Study Session. Frank Bruno provided
background information on the Fort Collins/Loveland Airport and Council confirmed that the City
is not interested in acquiring or funding expansion of this facility as a second public airport. The
owners and private market will determine the ultimate fate of the Airpark.
• Does the Framework Plan reflect a loss of Industrial land use?
In looking at the existing Larimer County Zoning, yes the Plan reflects a change of industrial to
residential in some areas. However, a comparison between the City Structure Plan, which was
used a starting point for assessing the area in more detail, and the Framework Plan, both plans are
consistent, maintaining an expanded inventory of industrial and commercial land uses.
Staff received direction from Council that they were satisfied with the proposed Framework Plan,
and the issues addressed in the final Plan met their expectations.
2. Streetscape Design
A brief presentation by staff was provided outlining the key design concepts including new
Highway 14 cross section, plan views, and gateway concepts for the Timberline intersection, and
Greenfields intersection.
0 Where is the proposed aviation memorial located?
k
and Environmental Services
Advance Planning Department
City of Fort Collins
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 26, 2002
TO: Mayor Martinez and City Council Members
THRU: John Fischbach, City Manager :f
Greg Byrne, Director of CPES tr
Joe Frank, Director of Advance Pla ning
FROM: Peter C. Wray, City &nner
RE: East Mulberry Corridor Plan - Council Study Session Summary of Comments
This memorandum represents a summary of comments made by City Council Members at the July
23, 2002 Study Session regarding the East Mulberry Corridor Plan.
Staff provided an initial presentation in the project schedule and status of the Plan to date
including primary tasks completed and final implementation sections to be discussed during the
study session. In addition, staff handed out the latest Activities and Events Diary summarizing
meetings and events throughout the duration of the planning process. Council was satisfied with
the planning process and extent of public participation.
General direction sought and specific questions to be answered:
1. Framework Plan
Staff described the individual components of the plan including land use, street network and open
lands pattern. Key issues identified throughout the planning process were highlighted along with
how the plan recommendations responded to these issues. The following comments by members
of Council are listed:
• Would the proposed Framework Plan preclude a designated truck route alignment through the
existing Fort Collins Downtown Airpark?
281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6376
FAX (970) 224-6111 • TDD (970) 224-6002 • E-mail: aplanning@ci.fort-collins.co.us