HomeMy WebLinkAboutINTERSTATE LANDS FIRST ANNEXATION - 34-88 - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSITE4 Ni) 20
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING OF jani,a.-_ 2_3 ]g89
STAFF REPORT
PROJECT: Interstate Lands First Annexation - #34-88
APPLICANT: G.T. Land Colorado, Inc. OWNER: Overlook Farm Inc.
c/o Cityscape Urban Design 3555 Stanford Road
21 Old Town Square, Suite 242 Suite 100
Fort Collins, CO 80524 Ft. Collins, CO 80525
PROJECT PLANNER:; Linda Ripley
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request to annex approximately 20.5 acres
located west of I-25 and north of Prospect Road. The property is presently
undeveloped.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the annexation.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This is a request to annex approximately 20.5 acres
located west of I-25 and north of Prospect Road. The property is presently
undeveloped. This is a voluntary annexation. There is an annexation agreement
which defines the developer's and the City's responsibilities regarding storm
drainage improvements, street improvements, access and utility services
affecting the future development of this property. The proposed agreement is
attached.
OFFICE OF DEVELOPMENT 300 LaPorte Ave. • P 0. Box 580 • Fort Collins. Colorado 80522 __'
SERVICES, PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Interstate Lands First'Annexation - #34-88
January 23, 1989 P&Z Meeting
Page 2
COMMENTS
1. Background:
The owner, Overlook Farm Inc., has submitted a written petition requesting
annexation of approximately 192.4 acres located west of I-25 and north of
Prospect Road. Due to contiguity problems, the area to be annexed has been
divided into two separate annexations, Interstate Lands First Annexation,
consisting of 20.5 acres, and Interstate Lands Second Annexation, consisting
of 171.9 acres. This is a voluntary annexation. The property is presently
undeveloped. There is an annexation agreement which defines the
developer's and the City's responsibilities regarding storm drainage
improvements, street improvements, access and utility services affecting the
future development of this property. The proposed agreement is attached.
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 annex
property in the UGA when the property is eligible for annexation according
to State law. The property gains the required 1/6 contiguity to existing city
limits from a common boundary with the Sludge Farm Annexation to the
south.
2. Neighborhood Concerns:
A neighborhood meeting was held March 29, 1988 to hear concerns
regarding the annexation and zoning of this property as well as to receive
comments on the proposed master plan. The meeting was well attended by
county residents who voiced their concerns about annexation. The primary
objections were to City expansion in general, the possibility of their
property becoming an enclave in the future, and the urban land uses
proposed being a threat to their rural lifestyle. Interstate Lands First
Annexation does not create an enclave.
3. Findings:
a) 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.
b) The area meets all criteria included in State law to qualify for
annexation to the City of Fort Collins.
Interstate Lands FirsLlAnnexation - #34-88
January 23, 1989 P&Z Meeting
Page 3
c) On February 7, 1989, the City Council will hear 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. Public hearing and first reading of the
Ordinances annexing and zoning the property will be considered by the
City Council on March 21, 1989.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of Interstate Lands First Annexation - #34-88.
No Text
Planning e, Zoning Board Meeting
January 2�-', 1989 continued to January �-10, 1989
Item 22 and 2L1 Interstate Lands Tract A & B zoning request
Madam Chairman and Members of the Board:
Our concerns in regard to the zoning of Interstate Lands
Tract A °< B are as follows:
1. Water Table
The water table in our area is only eight feet down in most
places. As owners of Estate lots who depend on shallow
wells to irrigate our lands, intensive development in this
area concerns us. We are concerned that our wells will be
contaminated by surface pollutants from roofs & parking lots
or worse, that the water table will drop below our wells
when the land is sealed over by development.
2. Access
The roads in Boxelder Estates were designed and built as
light duty rural residential roads. That is a 2" thick 217
wide strip of asphalt built over 20 years ago. We, as an
Association are responsible for the maintenance of these
roads. We do not want or deserve to bear the cost of
damage caused innitially by contruction vehicles and later
by increased daily traffic using Boxelder as an access.
Also, up to this time all of the roads in Boxeleder Estates
are dead end roads. We have practically no traffic. We are
fortunate in that we do not have to worry about our pets or
our children being run over by through traffic. It is quiet
in our neighborhood.
7. Transition
As I have mentioned before Boxelder Estates consists of
estate lots up to three acres. The proposed zoning, planned
residential. allow for densities far greater than that which
exists now. I understand that your point system penalizes
delvelopers for density development of less than 31 units per
acre. We feel it is inappropriate to penalize the
residents of Boxelder Estates by allowing zoning conducive
to high density development.
Solution:
1. In order to minimize the impact on existing homes
adjoining Interstate Lands Tract A & E we propose the
following:
First in order to provide for a proper transition from
existing estate lots to highway business and a regional
shopping mall the area designated planned residential should
be doubled in size.
Second, due to a pending lawsuit between Boxelder Estates
and L_._7_ G� �•Ga /o2.o�a� /.v=------ filed in
r G�;�� c�� ..,.r or 4Afthe f i r st one hundred
and twenty five feet to the east of Boxelder Estates, an
area of approximately 5 acres, should be zoned transitional.