Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNOEL ANNEXATION & ZONING - 58-87, A - CORRESPONDENCE - APPLICANT COMMUNICATION (2)September 29, 1988 Mr. Ken Waido Planning & Development City of Fort Collins Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 RE: NOEL ANNEXATION FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Dear Mr. Waido: This letter will serve as our ation regarding the 287± acre Trail in Fort Collins. GEFROH HATTMAN INC. ARCHITECTS/PLANNERS CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 135 West Swallow Road Fort Collins, CO 80525 (303) 223-7335 reintroduction of the Petition for Annex - Noel property located west of Overland If you recall, the original petition was submitted on September 1, 1987. Since that time the petition has been on hold pending discussions with City Staff. On March 9, 1988, we had an informal work session with the. Planning and Zoning Board outlining the request for annexation. In an effort to move the.project forward on a positive note, Mr. Wallace Noel has met with numerous Planning Staff members, Linda Hopkins, Mike Davis, and Steve Burkett, City Manager,.outlining a proposal to the City for annexation and land donation. At our most recent meetings, Linda Hopkins, Mike Davis and Steve Burkett voiced their approval and support for our new proposal, and that they would recommend that Staff support our annexation/donation concept. Simply, the proposal is as Follows: The entire property comprised of approximately 287 acres lies west of Overland Trail and is with.i-n the area depicted as the Foothills' zone and the Urban Growth Area. This zone as adopted allows a maximum of one unit/acre on a clustered basis or 27 acre lots without clustering on the entire property including above 5200 elevation. It is the intention of the owner, Mr. Noel, to request annexation based on an agreement between the City and Mr. Noel whereby Mr. Noel would deed over to the City some approximately 126± acres to be zoned RF in exchange for allowing a portion of the remaining property, approximatley 100± acres to develop under the foremat of the Land Development Guidance System with the underlying zoning of RLP. The petition and enclosed diagram define the area to be zoned RF, RLP, and that which is to be donated. We propose that the lower 100 acres be zoned RLP and the remaining 187± acres zoned RF. The uppermost area of this RF zoned property, approximately 126 acres, would be donated to the City and 0 Mr. Ken Waido September 29, 1988 Page 2 its allowable densities transferred down to the remaining 61 acres zoned RF. There are numerous reasons for support of this exchange: 1. First and foremost, the City has defined the property to be donated as significant open space and of prime importance to the City's open space policies. In fact, the property is defined as a parcel that the City should seek to purchase. It is obvious that a donation would save the City and its taxpayers countless dollars -- monies which would be available for other open space acquisitions. 2. The surrounding existing land uses indicate that this parcel lies be- tween extremely concentrated existing uses. To the South lies 16 unit/acre multi -family uses, to the West lies existing urban uses ranging from four units/acre to 12 units/acre, and to the North lies the existing Colorado State University Equine Center, a major commer- cial facility. 3. Reasonable urban densities (RLP) are appropriate and necessary to off- set development costs, namely streets and utilities required to meet urban standards. The costs of serving properties .with gas, telephone, sewer and water can only be offset with appropriate densities. Econ- omic viability while not a primary concern of the City is the major factor in any development. The opportunity to offer a product com- petitively with other developments serves to ensure that the City will receive its payback through permits and fees for providing basic ser- vices. 4. In its Master Traffic Plan, the City has defined Overland Trail as a major arterial. With urban -type development occuring only on the east side of Overland Trail, it.is hard to believe that adequate revenues from street oversizing fees could -be collected to cover the cost of street improvements . Lack of.development on its west side would put an undue burden for street improvements for those properties lying to the East as well as City taxpayers who ultimately will make up, the difference. City streets should not be mandated as the separation between urban and rural developments. Rather land use densities should gradually decrease as you move away from City streets. 5. It should be noted that the College, Colorado State University, retains ownership of much of the surrounding property. The City has little, if any,control over how CSU develops its property. The City may initiate control and tie the.hands of private development as it may feel appro- priate, but they could not control development should this property come under the ownership of Colorado State University. Nor is the College required to help pay for City streets -or services. This is evidenced by the Equine Center which did not receive any City approvals or improve- ments to Overland Trail. Mr. Ken Waido September 29, 1988 Page 3 6. Both the City of Fort Collins and the Fort.Collins/Loveland Water District have scarred the property with the construction of unsightly water towers above the 5200 elevation. I dare say that the development of housing at those elevations would have proven to be more visually pleasing than the towers that exist. ;.It should be noted, however, that we support the idea of preserving the upper portion of this property as open space and are willing to do so with this proposal. 7. If the City is truly concerned about visually controlling the Foothills, it should support urban lot -development at a 4 unit/acre density rather than allowing the potential for 2_ acre lots to develop. One only needs to look around the City at existing large acreage developments to see the visual blight caused by so-called "horse ranchette" sites. The erosion from overgrazing, unsightly barns, rundown fencing and weed growth be- cause the homeowner cannot effectively control watering or grass on large lots are obvious. Just imagine the visual mess with ranchettes littering the Foothills. To summarize, we offer the City the opportunity to receive permanent open space without a burden to taxpayers and also an opportunity for the City to receive efficient paybacks through fee and permits by allowing reason- able urban densities. It is our intention and desire to be heard at the October meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board to bring this matter forward as soon as possible. Respectfully, G! FROH HATTMAN ANC �Atn 4 Jame sf A. Gefroh Pres dent enc. cc: Steve Burkett Mike Davis Tim Hasler Linda Hopkins Wallace Noel