Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTRAILHEAD ANNEXATION & ZONING - 43-02 - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTES (3)Planning and Zoning Board Minutes April 15, 2004 Page 12 Member Gavaldon moved to recommend approval of the Trailhead annexation and zoning, #43-02 with initial zoning to E, Employment zoning district and deny the request to amend the Mountain Vista Subarea Plan. Member Craig seconded the motion. Member Carpenter would not be supporting the motion. As she said the last time this came before them, LMN is a reasonable and good use of this land. She did not have a problem with the Employment because tonight they just took 156 acres out of Employment into Public Open Lands on the consent agenda. She thinks that this citizen has been in the mist of this for a long time and she did not see any reason not to make this LMN. She would not be supporting the motion for employment. Chairperson Torgerson would also not support the motion. He concurred with Member Carpenter and also felt that it was worth noting that this is one of the few opportunities for affordable housing that we have seen for some time. The motion was approved 5-2 with Members Carpenter and Torgerson voting in the negative Project: Atrium Suites, 502 West laurel Street Request for Modification of Standard. Project Description: Request for a Modification of Standard for a pending PDP known as Atrium Suites at 502 West Laurel Street. The standard at issue is Section 4.8(D)(1) which pertains to density and minimum lot area. The applicant is requesting that the proposed building square footage exceed the lot size by 2,041 square feet. The site is located at the northwest corner of West Laurel Street and Sherwood Street. The site presently contains a large residential structure that was formerly a sorority and now houses two programs of the Larimer County Corrections Department. The site is 19,221 square feet in size and zoned NCB, Neighborhood Conservation Buffer. Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence: Don Brookshire, 3207 Kittery Court, Fort Collins representing the applicant gave a presentation to the Board. He stated since the Board received their packets, the Planning and Zoning Board Minutes April 15, 2004 Page 11 the representations that have been made regarding acreages for stormwater. They are in detailed discussions with the city Stormwater Department right now over how to design a stormwater system for this drainage. It is a very complicated issue. He is not a stormwater engineer, but he has learned more about it that he cares to know. He would say that there is a lot of water coming down this drainage and that water has to be dealt with. The acreage figures that are being thrown around, he did not think that anyone knows whether those acreage figures are accurate and where they are actually going to have to put detention ponds in order to fix this problem. Anheuser Busch's comment on this would be that the cart is being put before the horse. We really need to figure out where we are going to put all this water and where it is going to go. He did not think that anyone knows the answer to those acreage figures right now. He did not think that anyone know that answer whether the water crosses the railroad to the east side or stays on the west side of the railroad. All those things are still in discussion and until those are worked out, he did not think they could make assumptions about detention ponds and where stormwater is going to be placed on any of this property. Other than that, Anheuser Busch really does not have any objections to zoning requests by this applicant. They were concerned that the Board make decisions based on incomplete information about how much stormwater detention will be needed both on Anheuser Busch's property up in the county and also other properties in the vicinity. PUBLIC INPUT CLOSED Chairperson Torgerson asked if it would be appropriate to look at the Transition District for a property like this so an applicant could proceed as a city project, but request a zoning further down the road when the subarea plan might be finished. Planner Barkeen replied that the Transition zone could be an option on this property, it is considered a holding zone until such time. as in this case, an area plan is completed and then rezoned appropriately. He thought the concern the Board was hearing from the applicant was that that was just as useless as the Employment or any zoning at all. Director Gloss responded also that since this application was already initiated and was going towards first reading of the ordinance at Council, we accepted a development plan and they paid their fees for the city to start their reviews of the PDP, so that action is already started. The city will accept an application after the annexation has gone through an initiating resolution. If an applicant would like to spend the money with no assurances that an annexation would occur and an annexation does not occur, obviously we don't take action and they will have spent those fees with nothing to show for it. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes April 15, 2004 Page 10 uses. That has occurred; not only has the applicant offered to sell this property to the city at half of its appraised value, but he will also dig the detention pond for the city. That makes a double savings for the city if this could be allowed to move forward. It is also a benefit to her client because he will be taking that dirt and moving it down to the southern part of the Trailhead project in areas where he needs the fill. Irregardless if it is a benefit to her client, it is also a benefit to the city. It is just one of those situations where it is a "win win" for both and she thinks that the Board should consider that in their decision tonight. Ms. Ripley showed a detailed drawing showing the area of the detention pond that would be created in order to resolve some of the flooding further to the north. In summary, conditions have changed since this property was initially designated to be zoned Employment. More recently, more progress has been made in moving the Mountain Vista Plan forward and alleviating some of the stormwater concerns. They would happy to be patient and wait until all the remaining issues in the Mountain Vista Plan were completed, but months and months go by and there is no indication that it is going to be rapped up in three months or more. In the meantime there are some real community benefits that she believes the city could gain by allowing the Trailhead portion to move forward. • First the city would gain a project that would provide housing for families at the affordable end of the market. • The Trailhead development would benefit that the local economy immediately versus needing a very long time for an employment use that may never materialize. It is just not an attractive location now and no one knows how long it would take before it might be. • Greenfield Drive would be extended north providing additional access for Employment zoned properties further north. • The city gains an opportunity to get a trail easement. • The city would acquire a regional detention facility at a substantial savings and move forward with resolving the Anheuser Busch stormwater issues. For all of those reasons, they were asking the Board once again tonight to consider recommending to the City Council that this portion of the Trailhead development be zoned LMN rather than E. PUBLIC INPUT Colin Deal, with the law firm of Fadry (?) and Benson in Denver spoke to the Board on behalf of Anheuser Busch. Mr. Deal stated that they received notice this morning that this was going to be on the agenda again today and he really did not know what was going to be proposed until he just listened to it. He stated that their concern was with Planning and Zoning Board Minutes April 15, 2004 Page 9 talking about was whether they could move forward with that or whether they need to wait until the Mountain Vista Plan is completed. Originally, their reasoning for wanting to change the zoning was because there were changed conditions in the area. There is no interchange being planned at East Vine Drive any longer, there is no Vine Drive truck route and there are no railroads for opportunities at the Trailhead location. All three of these were strong reasons why this would have been an ideal Employment zoned property, but those conditions no longer exist. Now it is just a property that has that designation, but perhaps would not if it were being done today. They thought they had a strong case to move forward with suggesting rezoning. Staff has been wonderful in working through all the issues with them. There is a whole litany of reasons why LMN makes sense at this location: • It is an attractive location because it is adjacent to Waterglen. • It is an opportunity to build entry level affordable housing. Habitat for Humanity has built several homes in Waterglen. There are no more for them to build. They are very anxious for the Trailhead property to move forward so they can build homes in a new project. • Waterglen would become less isolated as a community. • The property to the south of Trailhead is designated LMN already. • If the property were rezoned to LMN, it would put housing close to employment opportunities as well as shopping opportunities. • The housing in this location would support the employment potential that will exist further north. • Open space and raw water are there for irrigation of this development, as well as the green space associated with it. • Greenfield Drive would be extended north and it is another opportunity to help that area further north to become more accessible so that employment uses will become attractive for employers that want to move to Fort Collins. • It is an opportunity to establish a below grade crossing for the bike trail. That opportunity may come again, but it is right here on the table now with this Trailhead development if they can just move forward. • In the end, this is what everyone agreed, that LMN makes a lot of sense in this location. The changed circumstance since they were here last really had to do with the fact that staff has continued to be gracious enough to work with them to try and move this forward. They are still not able to have all the issues resolved with Anheuser Busch, but one of the big issues has to do with storm drainage. The Storm Drainage Department worked with her client and with her clients efforts and help, did some investigations in order to determine whether or not utilizing the area to the north as stormwater detention could help relieve flooding further north, land that is more accessible for employment Planning and Zoning Board Minutes April 15, 2004 Page 8 working with our Stormwater Department is to purchase the majority of the northern piece of the Trailhead property and convert that to a regional storm drainage detention pond. The theory behind that is that we now use 40 to 50 acres of the north property for detention. It would then free up 'Y' number of acres of land to be designated as employment on the Anheuser Busch property for future employment uses. Through the property purchase negotiations, there has been some drainage plans to determine what would this affect and how will this work. It is estimated that about 30 acres of detention would be located on the northern property and about 60 acres would still be located on the Anheuser Busch property. We are only looking at a net gain of about 30 acres of future Employment land within Anheuser Busch. Given that, staff is still recommending that the Trailhead property be annexed into the Employment zone district rather than the LMN zone district as proposed by the applicant. The reason behind that is that we are still at a net loss of Employment land not only within Mountain Vista, but also within the city as a whole. With this proposal, we are about a 60 acre net loss, whereas before we were at a 90 acre net loss. We are making up some ground, but we are still not quite there yet. Again, staffs proposal is that we continue to work through the amended Mountain Vista Plan, continue to work with Anheuser Busch to transfer the Employment designation on the Trailhead site up further north within the land owned by Anheuser Busch, more compatible with Anheuser Busch and has better access to 1-25, via the Mountain Vista interchange. Member Lingle asked about the approval of this on February 19, 2004, would the Board have to rescind that? Planner Barkeen replied that technically, this is a brand new application. They have refilled their annexation petition, map and paid the applicable fee for that. The action the Board took previously is still out there, but hopefully this will override or supercede that previous action. Linda Ripley, VF Ripley Associates was here tonight representing Vista Ventures, the applicant on the Trailhead property. She appreciated the opportunity to bring the item before the Board again to once again clarify information because it is such a complex issue, specifically what has changed since the last time they were here. In the way of background, she wanted to reiterate that her client and herself started working on this project two and a half years ago. She knows that the Planning and Zoning Board is concerned about time, but they have been very patient in two and a half years to get the zoning, all the while having a lot of support from the staff, because eventually, they would like to see this property zoned LMN as well. What they were Planning and Zoning Board Minutes April 15, 2004 Page 7 Chairperson Torgerson seconded the motion. The motion was approved 5-2 with Members Craig and Carpenter voting in the negative. Project: Trailhead — Annexation and Zoning, #43-02 Project Description: Request for annexation and initial zoning of 88.79 acres located on the north side of Vine Drive, west of 1-25. The requested zone district is LMN, Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Board recommend that City Council approve the Trailhead Annexation and Zoning #43-02 with initial zoning to the Employment (E) Zone District and deny the requested Mountain Vista Subarea and Structure Plan Amendments. Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence: Bob Barkeen, City Planner gave the staff presentation. He stated that this item has been before the Board on February 19, 2004 and at that time the Board recommended approval of the annexation with initial zoning of E, Employment zoning district, which was contrary to the request by the applicant which was for Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood. Since then the applicant has been meeting with city staff to resolve the primary issue associated with the LMN zone district on this parcel which is the net loss of Employment land within not just Mountain Vista, but the city as a whole. A solution has been proposed by the applicant. The applicant owns a piece of ground immediately north of the Trailhead Annexation and it is between 40 and 50 acres depending on how much right-of-way you take out of it. Immediately north of that is land that is owned by Anheuser Busch. Right now on this property, which through the staff initiated Mountain Vista Amendment Plan, staff is proposing that the Anheuser Busch property north of Trailhead be zoned E, Employment. Staff feels that it is appropriate for that land use designation given the access to 1-25 and also the desires of Anheuser Busch to not have any non-residential uses within their property immediately adjacent to their brewery operations. Right now, this property is encumbered by flooding that occurs on the property during a significant event. During a 100-year storm event, it is estimated that about 90 acres of this land is inundated with floodwater. What the applicant is proposing, and has been Council Liaison: Karen Weitkunat Chairperson: Mikal Torgerson Vice Chair: Judy Meyer Staff Liaison: Cameron Gloss Phone: (W) 416-7435 Phone: (W) 490-2172 Chairperson Torgerson called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. Roll Call: Carpenter, Schmidt, Craig, Meyer, Gavaldon, Lingle and Torgerson. Staff Present: Gloss, Eckman, Shepard, Olt, Barkeen, Stringer, Smith and Deines. Director of Current Planning Cameron Gloss reviewed the Consent and Discussion Agendas: Consent Agenda: 1. Minutes of the December 19, 2002, February 19, (Continued) and March 18, 2004 Planning and Zoning Board Hearings. 2. #13-82CROakridge Business Park, 36th Filing, Holiday Inn Express — Project Development Plan. 3. #4-04 Resource Recovery Farm Rezoning. Discussion Agenda: 4. #43-02 Trailhead — Annexation and Zoning. 5. #7-04 Atrium Suites, 502 W. Laurel Street — Modification of Standards. 6. Recommendation to City Council — Floodplain Regulations. Member Lingle pulled Item 2, Oakridge Business Park for discussion. Member Gavaldon moved for approval of the consent agenda for Item 1, less the February 19, 2004 minutes and Item 3. Member Craig seconded the motion. The motion was approved 7-0. Project: Oakridge Business Park 36th Filing, Holiday Inn Express, Project Development Plan, #13-82CR Project Description: Request for a four-story 89-unit hotel on 2.167 acres. The total square footage of the building will be 51,808. The property is located at the southeast