HomeMy WebLinkAboutNOEL ANNEXATION & ZONING - 58-87, A - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORTITEM NO. 12
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING OF awember 2i-0 j988
STAFF REPORT
PROJECT: Noel Annexation and Zoning - #58-87, A
APPLICANT: Gefroh-Hattman Inc. OWNER: Wallace Noel
135 West Swallow Rd. 253 Grey Rock Rd.
Fort Collins, CO Laporte, CO
PROJECT PLANNER: Ken Waido
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request to annex and zone approximately 287.5
acres located west of Overland Trail and north of West Prospect Road
(extended). The requested zoning is in two parts: 1) 187.5 acres of R-F,
Foothills Residential for the western portion of the property; and 2) 100 acres
of R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential for the eastern portion of the
property; and is further conditioned by specific density and design conditions
contained in an Annexation Agreement.
RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the annexation and R-F and R-L-P zoning
requests.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This is a request to annex and zone approximately
287.5525 acres located west of Overland Trail and north of West Prospect Road
(extended). Approximately 4.6123 acres of the annexation is owned by the City
of Fort Collins and is the location of a water storage tank. The requested
zoning is in two parts: 1) 187.5420 acres of R-F, Foothills Residential for the
western portion of the property; and 2) 100.0105 acres of R-L-P, Low Density
Planned Residential for the eastern portion of the property; and is further
conditioned by specific density and design conditions contained in an Annexa-
tion Agreement. The property is presently undeveloped. This is a voluntary
annexation which, as indicated, also contains a proposed Annexation Agreement
outlining several total dwelling unit and land development restrictions and a
commitment to dedicate approximately 126 acres to the City for open space
purposes.
OFFICE OF DEVELOPMENT 300 LaPorte Ave. • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 • (303) 221-6750
SERVICES, PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Noel Annexation and Zoning #58-87,A
P & Z Meeting - November 21, 1988
Page 2
Background:
The applicant, Gefroh-Hattman Inc., on behalf of the owner, Wallace Noel, has
submitted a written petition requesting annexation of approximately 287.5525
acres located west of Overland Trail and north of West Prospect Road
(extended). Approximately 4.6123 acres of the annexation is owned by the City
of Fort Collins and is the location of a water storage tank. The requested
zoning is in two parts: 1) 187.5420 acres of R-F, Foothills Residential for the
western portion of the property; and 2) 100.0105 acres of R-L-P, Low Density
Planned Residential for the eastern portion of the property. The property is
presently undeveloped. This is a voluntary annexation which also contains a
proposed Annexation Agreement outlining several total dwelling unit and land
development restrictions and a commitment to dedicate approximately 120 acres
to the City for open space purposes.
The owner's reasons for requesting this annexation and Annexation Agreement
are outlined in the attached September 29, 1988, letter from the applicant. A
copy of the proposed Annexation Agreement is also 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 Overland Trail Annexation to the east and the Sec-
ond and Third Foothills Annexations to the south.
Zonings:
The Noel Annexation was first submitted to the City for formal review in
September 1987. The annexation application at that time requested the follow-
ing zonings: 1) 267.702 acres of R-L-P, Low density Planned Residential; and 2)
19.8505 acres of B-P, Planned Business. Staff immediately began discussions
with the applicant concerning the requested zonings because, in staff's
interpretation, the requests did not meet the foothills policies. After several
months of discussion, the applicant requested an informal meeting with the
Planning and Zoning Board to discuss the Noel Annexation and potential alter-
native zoning requests.
A special work session of the Board was held on March 9, 1988, to discuss the
Noel Annexation. Staff presented a history of the development of the foothills
policies and the applicant made a presentation justifying the annexation's
zoning requests. After discussing the issue of the zonings, the Board indicated
that it felt the foothills policies would not support the R-L-P and B-P zoning
requests, as presented.
Noel Annexation and Zoning #58-87,A
P & Z Meeting - November 21, 1988
Page 3
The requested zoning for this, annexation now is in two parts: 1) 187.5420 acres
of R-F, Foothills Residential for the western portion of the property; and 2)
100.0105 acres of R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential for the eastern
portion of the property. The R-F District designation is for low density
residential areas located near the foothills. The R-L-P District designation is
for areas planned as a unit to provide variation in use, density and building
placement. The owner would like to develop the property with predominantly
detached single-family residential units. However, due to adjacent multi -family
developments along the property' southeastern boundary, the owner would like
the option to develop patio homes in no more than duplex configurations per
structure as a buffer to the proposed single-family areas.
The primary criteria for evaluating a zoning request is its compliance with the
officially adopted elements of the City's Comprehensive Plan. If the elements
of the Comprehensive Plan lack specific guidance, zoning requests can be
justified through several general welfare considerations such as: availability of
adequate transportation, educational, - utilities, and other facilities to
accommodate the uses permitted in the zone; the need in the vicinity and/or
community as a whole for additional land of the zone; changing conditions in
the surrounding area; and the evaluation of impacts of the zone upon the
immediate neighborhood or area. Another alternative available is to modify or
change the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. If policies are successfully
changed, the zoning request can then be favorably considered.
The requested zoning districts of this annexation again raise the issue of land
uses near the foothills. Specifically, the request asks the City for a determina-
tion as to where the boundary of the foothills policies lies. Staff believes that
properties west of Overland Trail should be reviewed on a case -by -case basis
for conformity with foothills policies. This case -by -case evaluation is similar
to the case -by -case evaluation the City provides within the LAND DEVELOP-
MENT GUIDANCE SYSTEM development review process. The case -by -case
evaluation must take into account existing adjacent uses and unique property
attributes which may indicate land use and design options available for the
development of the property while still adhering to the foothills area's goals,
objectives, and policies. In some cases for properties located west of overland
Trail, special annexation agreements and/or design conditions will be necessary
to protect public aesthetic and open space interests.
For example, in the Overland Hills Annexation (Case #29-86, A) the applicant
requested annexation of 83.54 acres, located west of Taft Hill Road and south
of Horsetooth Road (extended), to be zoned 19.37 acres in the R-L-P district
and 57.58 acres in the R-F district. The annexation was in an area for a
possible relocation of Overland Trail, i.e., the potential relocation split the
property. In recommending approval of the zoning requests staff stated, "Staff
supports the applicant's request for these zoning designations feeling that
Overland Trail can make a clear break between urban development to the east
and lower density residential development to the west." The Overland Hills
Noel Annexation and Zoning #58-87,A
P & Z Meeting - November 21, 1988
Page 4
Annexation and requested zonings were approved by the City Council in Octo-
ber 1987. This is an example of such a property specific case -by -case evalua-
tion.
The Noel Annexation request is, thus, another property specific case -by -case
evaluation. Staff believes, based on the property owner's willingness to place
land use, density, and development design conditions on the property, as
indicated in the summary of the annexation agreement below, that the foothills
goals, objectives, and policies will be achieved.
The owner is sensitive to the City's policy of preserving the foothills in their
natural environmental setting. The owner has proposed, in his September 29,
1988 letter, to donate approximately 120 acres located above the 5200 foot
elevation line to the City for open space purposes. Although the owner insists
on making this offer it is strictly forbidden under law that zoning decisions be
made based upon some offer that would constitute a trade-off for the zoning.
Such a decision would constitute contract zoning, or the purchase of zoning.
Since the City cannot lawfully contract for zoning, any considerations regard-
ing zoning must be based on sound principles of the City's Comprehensive Plan
and not based, in any way whatsoever, upon any dedication of land to the
City. Further, there must be no requirement of a donation imposed upon the
developer.
The major issue is then,
The owner has proposed
development conditions
Agreement). In summary
ment are:
what is the appropriate
an Annexation Agreement
he is willing to accept
the conditions contained
land use for the property.
outlining the density and
(see attached Annexation
in the Annexation Agree-
1. Approval of the requested zoning districts.
2. No commercial or other non-residential development.
3. Only detached single-family residential units and some patio homes
located near existing adjacent multi -family development to the south.
4. Maximum total of 587 residential units. This number is not guaranteed
but is dependent upon City development approvals.
5. All development proposals will be subject to site plan reviews.
6. No development above the 5200 foot contour line.
7. The maximum height of any structure will be thirty (30) feet.
The property under consideration for annexation has some unique aspects which
may require broader interpretation of the foothills policies in relationship to
the requested zonings. Adjacent to the property are several developments of
"urban" character. Multi -family residential development is located to the south
Noel Annexation and Zoning #58-87,A
P & Z Meeting - November 21, 1988
Page 5
and the Colorado State University Equine Center and Foothills Campus is
located to the north. These developments suggest a "line" other than Overland
Trail might be appropriate to delineate the area of applicability of the
foothills policies.
Findinp,s
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 December 6, 1988, the City Council will consider 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 second reading of the
Ordinances annexing and zoning the property will be considered by the City
Council on January 17, 1989.
4. The requested zonings are the major consideration. The R-F zone request is
in conformance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The R-L-P zoning
request asks the City to determine the appropriate "line" as to where the
foothills policies begin to apply. The density and development related
conditions of the Annexation Agreement we believe protect the goals,
objectives, and policies the City's Comprehensive Plan for the foothills area.
5. Staff believes that properties west of Overland Trail should be reviewed on
a case -by -case basis for conformity with foothills policies. This case -by -case
evaluation must also take into account existing adjacent uses and unique
property attributes which may indicate land use and design options available
for the development of the property while still adhering to the foothills
area's goals, objectives, and policies. In some cases, special annexation
agreements and/or design conditions will be necessary to protect public
aesthetic and open space interests.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of the annexation and R-F and R-L-P zoning request and annexation
agreement.
Egater (,an" lI
!i 11001:41--on
R