Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPOUDRE VALLEY BUSINESS PARK REZONING COUNTY REFERRAL 2.26.90 P AND Z BOARD - 56 89, A - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORTTTEM NO. 8 MEETING DATE 2/26/90 STAFF Sherry Albertson -Clark PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD STAFF REPORT PROJECT: Poudre Valley Business Park, Rezoning - County Referral #56-89A APPLICANT: Poudre Valley REA P. 0. Box 1727 Fort Collins, CO 80522 OWNER: Charles and Lydia Frye 34896 Weld Co. Rd. #19 Windsor, CO 80550 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A request for rezoning from FA-1 Farming to C-Commercial on 43 acres, located 1/2 mile cast of I-25, on the south side of State Highway 392 (Windsor Road). RECOMMENDATION: Denial. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This request is to rezone 43 acres from FA-1 Farming to C-Commercial, for the new headquarters for Poudre Valley REA. This proposal is inconsistent with the Larimer Countv Land Use Plan, which has designated this area for Rural Non -Farm land uses. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 300 LaPorte Ave. P.O. Boa 580 Fort Collins. CO 80522-0580 (303) 221-6750 PLANNING DEPARTMENT • Poudre Valley Business Park PUD, Rezoning - County Referral #56-89A February 26, 1990 P & Z Meeting Page 2 COMMENTS 1. Backeround: The surrounding zoning and land use is as follows: N: E-1; existing large lot single family residences (Ptarmigan Subdivision) S: FA-1; undeveloped E: FA-1; undeveloped W: FA-1; undeveloped The Planning and Zoning Board reviewed a similar request for this site at the December 18, 1989 Board meeting. The previous request included a Master Plan and rezoning to I -Industrial Zoning. Several separate lots were proposed for creation on the Master Plan, with no specific use or users identified. The Planning and Zoning Board voted 7-0 to recommend denial of this earlier proposal on the basis that it was inconsistent with the Larimer County Land Use Plan. The Larimer County Planning Commission also recommended denial, with primary concerns focusing on the separate lots. The applicant has revised the rezoning request to respond to concerns regarding these individual lots. 2. Land Use: This proposal is to rezone the site to Commercial Zoning for the new headquarters for Poudre Valley REA. The REA facility would occupy 18.7 acres of the entire site. The northeast corner of the site is a wetlands. The site is located outside the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area, in the area designated for Rural Non -Farm land uses in the Larimer County Land Use Plan. The Rural Non -Farm area is intended for low density residential development and open -space type uses. Such areas are typically located to provide a transition between urban and rural areas in Larimer County. Development in the Rural Non -Farm area is intended to be single family residential, at a density of 1-2.5 acres per dwelling unit. The only non-residential uses anticipated in these areas are schools, parks, open space and neighborhood commercial areas associated with residential development. At the present time, commercial zoning exists at the intersection of I-25 and Windsor Road; however, the area east of the intersection is still zoned for rural/agricultural and low density single family uses. The Larimer County Land Use Plan, as amended by the Intergovernmental Agreement, specifies that "commercial development, other than that related to agri-business, will be limited to that allowable by the zoning as of the date of adoption of the plan and at interchanges of I-25". While this site provides many locational attributes for the applicant, the proposal to rezone this site to Commercial Zoning and develop the site in non-residential land uses is inconsistent with the Larimer County Land Use Plan. RECOMMENDATION: This proposal is inconsistent with the Larimer County Land Use Plan. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the Poudre Valley Business Park, Rezoning, #56-89A. 0 Member Kern also shared Member Strom's views and felt rezoning more desirable. Member Burns moved to approve this project including the granting of the variance. Member O'Dell seconded the motion. The motion to approve this item passed 7-0. CALIFORNIA PLAZA PUD - Preliminary & Final - #52-89 Ted Shepard gave a description of the property and indicated the final drainage plans were approved with the condition all stormwater documents be reviewed by Stormwater Utilities in their final form. David Herrera, Executive Director of the Fort Collins Housing Authority, the applicant, explained the easement problems and the need to approve this project prior to the end of the year. Mr. Shepard gave the staff report and added the project was subject to the following condition: All storm drainage plans shall be completed by the applicant, and reviewed and approved by the City's Stormwater Utility prior to the City of Fort Collins executing and recording the PUD documents. Mr. H. N. Brandenhoff, 1709 Remington, owner of the property to the north of the driveway, asked for clarification on the s-shaped access and whether he could have access to his backyard from the proposed parking area. Mr. Herrera indicated two properties to the south had been donated four months ago by Stormwater Utilities. The non -approved easements were terminated and the flag lot easement on the north created. Regarding the use of the property to access Mr. Brandenhoff's land, Mr. Herrera replied it would be up to the new owner but the Authority could put forth the recommendation that an access be granted. Mr. Shepard indicated the PUD could possibly be amended administratively, or the suggestion could go through the Planning and Zoning Board. Member Klataske understood the need to expedite this project. Member Walker approved of project with staff condition. Member Klataske moved to approved the project with the condition that staff stated. Member Walker seconded the motion. The motion to approve with condition was approved 7-0. POUDRE VALLEY BUSINESS PARK - Master Plan and Rezoning - 56-89 Sherry Albertson -Clark gave a staff description of the proposal. John Donnelly, civil engineer with CDS Corporation represented the applicant, Poudre Valley REA. He stated this was not a currently recommended use but Poudre Valley REA picked the location because of the amenities. Ptarmigen Subdivision to the north has reviewed the plan. The out lots to the south could be sold to other similar users; i.e., electronic assembly. Poudre Valley REA proposed covenants for use, architecture, industrial processes, etc. • Ron Carey, General Manager, Poudre Valley Rural Electric Association, showed a map of the service territory and indicated the excellent access provided by the site. Adjoining property owners all support the project although it doesn't meet current County land use designation. Ms. Albertson -Clark indicated the rezoning from farming to the industrial zone was inconsistent with the County plan and staff is recommending denial. The applicant had done a good job addressing architecture and internal land concepts but covenants are difficult to enforce by local government. Member Walker noted there appeared to be no hardship necessitating this move. Member Burns stated due to a perceived conflict he would refrain from voting on this item. Chairman Kern explained his vote against the proposal stating that while REA was a marvelous neighbor this zoning change would be permanent and remain even if REA left. Member Carroll felt the South College facility was excellent but was troubled by the industrial use on the out lots and the fact there was no specific plan for the entire area. The motion to recommend denial to the County Commissioners was made by Member Carroll. Member O'Dell seconded. The motion carried 6-0. SHAMROCK MANOR PUD - Preliminary - 53-89 Sherry Albertson -Clark gave a staff description of the proposal & property. Ric Hattman, architect for project, stated two distinctly different housing types, related to one another, would be provided. Phase one would be assisted living for 17 residents in one building of the scale of a single family home. Phase two would be 26 units of independent living. It was an in -fill project and the transportation impact with this project was less than with previously approved projects. Member Walker questioned what guarantee there was that seniors only would be reside here. Mr. Hattman noted this fact was indicated on the PUD. Ms. Albertson -Clark noted it could be easily controlled in the board and care facility. She added the Board could put a specific condition on the individual dwelling units. Mr. Eckman, asked the Board to consider the age group they wished to target. John Vetterling, 2701 Stover, Unit 5, stated the Scotch Highlands Board was against the project. The October 25 neighborhood meeting showed a proposed fence dividing the driveway between the existing project and this proposal. Also the rules and regulations of the Board indicated no construction could occur without Board approval and no business activities were allowed on the property. He noted the residents had sent a letter of concerns. Additional concerns of his were the density as well as the devaluation of his property. Mary Jean Mahan, 2701 Stover, Unit 10, was concerned that plans for the property have changed and with the devaluation that would occur. ITEM POUDRE VALLEY BUSINESS PARK County Referral NUMBER 56-89