Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutREA ANNEXATION AND ZONING DECEMBER 7 1993 CITY COUNCIL HEARING - 64 93 A - REPORTS - FIRST READINGPlanning and Zoning Board Meeting Minutes October 25, 1993 Page 7 Mr. Eckman stated only with respect to non -conforming uses would you find the property owner being able to ignore the PUD condition. He said the zoning that was imposed upon the property, any property, in a case where you are faced with a PUD condition, the State law required all property be zoned. He stated that Staff was attempting to find a zoning designation that best suited the situation. He said the zoning didn't dictate any particular kind of use. He said it may, in some ancillary way, set an expectation. He said it could be zoned low -density residential, with a PUD condition, and then come up with the same kinds of uses that would exist with the HB zone. Mr. Waido stated that the change to the non -conforming use process required a public hearing and a decision by the Board. Mr. Peterson said that PUD requirements, when placed on zoning, gave a higher level of review and detail. He said in a use -by -right designation, there would be limited review that would not get full focus of public attention. He said what was being proposed was at a higher level of review. Member Fontane recommended approval of the REA Annexation and Zoning. Member Winfree seconded the motion. Member Cottier commented that the H-B zoning with the PUD condition says nothing about the green space that was there. She stated that the Board would be more apt to do something with the PUD condition than without. Whether it was designated H-B made no difference. Motion passed 7-0. PZ93-12 HISTORIC RESOURCES PRESERVATION PROGRAM Jennifer Carpenter, Landmark Preservation Commission, stated that the Commission had been working on this project for three years. She stated the LPC Commission was directed by the City Council to work on a plan to avoid crisis, and provide implementation and protection measures for our city's important and unique historic resources. She believed the commission has succeeded in that task. She said the draft represents the labors of many people, the LPC, City staff and many members of the community. She said the commission assembled a technical team which was made up of people with background in history, government, real estate, development, the University, and they all studied the plan and gave valuable 'input. She said there were numerous public meetings held. She said there were many great ideas and when able to, incorporated into the final draft. Again, she stated the plan is established to avoid crisis whenever possible, strive for a management plan to provide predictability, objectivity and realistic protection measures for our city's historic resources. She said she was available for questions. Planning and Zoning Board Meeting Minutes October 25, 1993 Page 6 the County would be more restrictive and, in some cases, the H-B, Highway Business, Zone would be more restrictive with the PUD condition. He pointed out that this proposal was in regard to annexation and zoning rather than specific proposals that may come forth. PUBLIC INPUT Calla Pott, 4675 Venture Lane, stated that annexation was inevitable and the main concern was that the Poudre Valley Electric Association has the opportunity to literally move forward with this business. She stated that part of this was that their property being annexed into the city. She raised the issue of growth vs. non -growth and stated that it should be managed growth. She emphasized the importance of the aesthetic appeal of new developments being considered. She stated that in light of Amendment 1, the proposal provided a sales tax base for the city, which would be fiscally responsible. She said if annexed, the Board was requested to have a sub -area plan as to what the site areas will look like and a positive vision for the designated south entrance into the city. She pointed out that currently there was a large green area at Poudre Valley Electric Association, hopefully this could stay intact through zoning other than H-B, Highway Business. PUBLIC INPUT CLOSED Chair Clements -Cooney stated her concern was not the annexation, but the designation of H-B, highway business, given the surrounding developments without the HB designation, other than Arbor Plaza which should not set the standard for the area. Member Strom added that the underlining zoning does not have much effect if a PUD condition is placed on it, and requested staff clarification. Mr. Waido replied that a Highway Business Zone with a PUD condition, a Limited Business Zone with a PUD condition, a planned business zone with a PUD condition and all would have the same essential effect on the property. He said any development proposal would be needed to be submitted to the City through the LDGS and that the point charts will guide decision - making of the City based on the use that is proposed, not the underlining zoning. Chair Clements -Cooney asked if the underlining zoning dictated the kind of proposals that will come before the P&Z Board. Mr. Waido replied no. Member Strom asked Mr. Eckman if there were any situations where the PUD condition would not rule. 0 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting Minutes October 25, 1993 Page 5 Mr. Eckman asked if the motion specified that there be no sheds on the first three lots. Member Strom clarified, as part of his motion, that there are to be no sheds on the back property line of the three lots adjacent to Dr. Kieft's property, that setbacks would be met whatever their size. Motion passed 7-0. REA ANNEXATION AND ZONING. #64-93A Chair Clements -Cooney stated that she had received phone calls regarding this item and wanted to pull it for discussion. Ken Waido, Chief Planner, gave the staff report with staff recommending approval. Chair Clements -Cooney asked if the request for the HB zone came from the City or the property owner. Mr. Waido replied that it came from the applicant. Chair Clements -Cooney asked what can be proposed under the HB designation. Mr. Waido stated the HB designation and the HB designation with a PUD condition were two different things. He stated the PUD condition would require any development proposal to be submitted as a PUD and essentially, through the guidance system, any land use could be proposed. He stated the proposal would then be, reviewed for overall development criteria, applicable to all applications, and then the point chart depending on land use proposed. He stated, in terms of annexation and zoning, the HB zone with a PUD condition did not predict what type of land use could go on there; the PUD condition would protect the City in that any development proposal would need to go through the guidance system. Chair Clements -Cooney asked if the property to the east of the site was annexed. to the city.. Mr. Waido replied that it was annexed and zoned B-L, Limited Business, with no PUD condition. He stated a number of retail and office uses were allowed by -right in that zone, in fact, most of those uses east of this site did occur through just the straight zoning. Eldon Ward, Cityscape Urban Design, stated that the highway business zone has been typically applied in this area on South College with few exceptions. He stated that the zoning in the county is C, Commercial, and B, Business, that allowed similar uses -by -right.. He stated that i ..��• Kr=A Annexation &Zoning 14P North NUMBER: 64=93, A l t L SSr � 4 a r wt 01. Rasse�d and adopted on final reading,Ohisn21st day of,;.December; i i� 4' Marti e + 7 � i • � i r d� '� �`i i � ' ��t ,}2 �Y 'iMayor ,1ua�HK� e6 fi k 4 cr`tyclerk Y i #.. a .. �. AA J ORDINANCE NO. 1619 1993 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP CONTAINED IN CHAPTER 29 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AND CLASSIFYING FOR ZONING PURPOSES THE PROPERTY INCLUDED IN THE REA ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the Zoning District Map adopted pursuant to Chapter 29 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins be, and the same hereby is, changed and amended by including the property known as the REA Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, in the H-B, Highway Business District: A tract of land situate in the Northeast Quarter of Section 2, Township 6 North, Range 69 West of the 6th P.M., Larimer County, Colorado, which considering the East line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 2 as bearing S 00°37'58" W and with all bearings contained herein relative thereto, is contained within the boundary lines which begin at the Northeast corner of said Section 2 and run thence S 00°37'58" W 995.83 feet, and again N 89°01'01" W 49.51 feet to the true point of beginning; thence S 00035'38" W 450.00 feet; thence N 89°01'02" W 909.52 feet; thence N 00°43'58" E 450.00 feet; thence S 89°01'01" E 908.43 feet to the point of beginning. Containing 9.3901 acres more or less. Section 2. That the Sign District Map adopted pursuant to Section 29-593.1 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins be, and the same hereby is, changed and amended by showing that the above -described property is not included in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. Section 3. That the zoning granted herein is expressly conditioned upon the entire above -described property being developed as a planned unit development in accordance with the Ordinances of the City. Section 4. That the Director of Engineering is hereby authorized and directed to amend said Zoning District Map in accordance with this Ordinance. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 7th day of December, A.D. 1993, and to be presented for final passage on the 21st day of December, A.D. 1993. Mayor r1aWt5 City Clerk Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 7ih day of December, A.D. 1993, and to be presented for final passage on the 21st day of December, A.D. 1993. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading this 21st day of December, A.D. 1993. Mayor . ATTEST: City Clerk ORDINANCE -NO. 160, 1993 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS ANNEXING PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE REA ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO WHEREAS, Resolution 93-190, finding substantial compliance and initiating annexation proceedings, has heretofore been adopted by the Council of the City of Fort Collins; and WHEREAS, the Council does hereby find and determine that it is in the best interests of the City to annex said area to the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the following described property, to wit: A tract of land situate in the Northeast Quarter of Section 2, Township 6 North, Range 69 West of the 6th P.M., Larimer County, Colorado, which considering the East line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 2 as bearing S 00°37'58" W and with all bearings contained herein relative thereto, is contained within the boundary lines which begin at the Northeast corner of said Section 2 and run. thence S 00°37'58" W 995.83 feet, and again N 89*011,01" W 49.51 feet to the true point of beginning; thence S 00035'38" W 450.00 feet; thence N 89°01'02" W 909.52 feet; thence N 00°43'58" E 450.00 feet; thence S 89°01'01" E 908.43 feet to the point of beginning. Containing 9.3901 acres more or less, be, and hereby is, annexed to the City of Fort Collins and made a part of said City; to be known as the REA Annexation. . Section 2. That, in annexing said property to the City, the City does not assume any obligation 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 hereby annexed except as may be provided by the ordinances of the City. Section 3. That the City hereby consents, pursuant to Section 37-45-136(3.6), C.R.S., to the inclusion of said property into the Municipal Subdistrict, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. RESOLUTION 93-190 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS SETTING FORTH FINDINGS OF FACT AND DETERMINATIONS REGARDING THE REA ANNEXATION WHEREAS, annexation proceedings were heretofore initiated by the.Council of the City of Fort Collins for property to be known as the REA Annexation; and WHEREAS, following Notice given as required by law, the Council has held a hearing on said annexation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS: Section 1: That the Council of the City of Fort Collins hereby finds that the petition for annexation complies with the Municipal Annexation Act. Section 2. That the Council hereby finds that there is at least one -sixth (1/6) contiguity between the City and the property proposed to be annexed; that a community of interest exists between the property proposed to be annexed and the City; that said property is urban. or will be urbanized in the near future; and that said property is integrated with or is capable of being integrated with the City. Section 3. That the Council further determines that the applicable parts of said Act have been met, that an election is not required under said Act and that there are no other terms and conditions to be imposed upon said annexation. Section 4. That the Council further finds that notice was duly given and a hearing was held regarding the annexation in accordance with said Act. Section 5. That the Council concludes that the area proposed to be annexed in the REA Annexation is eligible for annexation to the City and should be so annexed. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins held this 7th day of December, A.D. 1993. Mayor ATTEST: ty Clerk DATE: December 7, 1993 3 ITEM NUMBER: 35 A-C STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the annexation and requested zoning. Staff also recommends that a PUD condition be attached to the H-B Zone for the property which would require all redevelopment proposals for the property to be reviewed against the criteria of the LAND DEVELOPMENT GUIDANCE SYSTEM. PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Board, at its regular monthly meeting of October 25, 1993, voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the annexation and requested zoning. A copy of the Board's minutes is attached. DATE: December 7, 1993 property is zoned C-Commercial Any existing commercial signs o n The property is located within the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area. According to policies and agreements between the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County contained in the INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR THE FORT COLLINS URBAN GROWTH AREA, the City will consider the annexation of property in the UGA when the property is eligible for annexation according to State law. The property meets the State's eligibility criteria - 1/6 contiguity to existing city limits from a common boundaries with the Arbor Commercial Annexation to the north and the Fairway Estates Business Annexation to the east. (See Attached Map) Zoning Designations The surrounding zoning and existing land uses are as follows: N: H-B, Highway Business, Arbor Plaza Shopping Center E: B-L, limited Business, variety of retail, commercial and office uses S: T-Tourist (County), Fort Collins Nursery W: FA-1, Farming (County), large lot residential development The requested zoning for this annexation is the H-B, Highway Business District. The H-B District designation is for automobile oriented businesses. The property will probably eventually redevelop with a commercial use which has a regional/community focus. According to the City's LAND USE POLICIES PLAN, regional/community commercial uses should located near transportation facilities that offer the required access to the uses, in ares served by public transportation, and in areas served by existing water and sewer utilities. This site addresses these locational policies. A Preliminary PUD for a new/used car dealership has been submitted to the City for this property. The Planning and Zoning Board will review the proposal on December 13, 1993. Findings The annexation of this area is consistent with the policies and agreements between Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins contained in the INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR THE FORT COLLINS URBAN GROWTH AREA. 2. The area meets all criteria included in State law to qualify for a voluntary annexation to the City of Fort Collins. 3. On October 19, 1993, the City Council approved a resolution which accepts the annexation petition and determines that the petition is in compliance with State law. The resolution also initiates the annexation process for this property by establishing the date, time and place when a public hearing will be held regarding the readings of the Ordinances annexing and zoning the area. 4. The requested H-B Highway Business District is in conformance with the policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan. J- AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Items Relating to the REA Annexation and Zoning. RECOMMENDATION: ITEM NUMBER: 35 A-C DATE: December 7, 1993 STAFF: Ken Waido Staff recommends approval of the annexation and requested zoning. The Planning and Zoning Board voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the annexation and zoning request. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: A. Resolution 93-190 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the REA Annexation. B. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 160, 1993, Annexing Approximately 9.4 Acres, Known as the REA Annexation. C. Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 161, 1993, Zoning Approximately 9.4 Acres, Known as the REA Annexation, into the H-B, Highway Business, Zone with a PUD Condition. This is a request to annex and zone approximately 9.4 acres located west of College Avenue and south of Harmony Road, south of the Arbor Plaza Shopping Center (Wal-Mart). The requested zoning is the H-B, Highway Business District. The property is presently developed as the main office of the Poudre Valley Rural Electric Association. The property is currently zoned B-Business and C- Commercial in the County. This is a voluntary annexation. APPLICANT: Ronald J. Carey, General Manager Poudre Valley Rural Electric Association, Inc. 4809 S. College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80526 OWNER: Same BACKGROUND: Annexation Eligibility The applicant and owner, Ronald J. Carey, General Manager, Poudre Valley Rural Electric Association, has submitted a written petition requesting annexation of approximately 9.4 acres located west of College Avenue and south of Harmony Road, south of the Arbor Plaza Shopping Center (Wal-Mart). The requested zoning is the H-B, Highway Business District. The property is presently developed as the main office of the Poudre Valley Rural Electric Association. The eastern third of the property is currently zoned B-Business, while the western two-thirds of the