HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/17/2019 - Planning And Zoning Board - Agenda - Regular MeetingPlanning and Zoning Board Page 1 October 17, 2019
Jeff Hansen, Chair City Council Chambers
Jeffrey Schneider, Vice Chair City Hall West
Michelle Haefele 300 Laporte Avenue
Michael Hobbs Fort Collins, Colorado
Per Hogestad
David Katz Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 & Channel 881
William Whitley on the Comcast cable system
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities
and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-
6001) for assistance.
Regular Hearing
October 17, 2019
6:00 PM
• ROLL CALL
• AGENDA REVIEW
• CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
Individuals may comment on items not specifically scheduled on the hearing agenda, as follows:
• Those who wish to speak are asked to sign in at the podium.
• The presiding officer will determine and announce the length of time allowed for each speaker.
• Each speaker should state their name and address and keep their comments to the allotted time.
• Any written materials should be provided to the Secretary for record-keeping purposes.
• A timer will beep once and the time light will turn to yellow to indicate that 30 seconds of speaking time
remain and will beep again and turn red when a speaker’s time to speak has ended.
• CONSENT AGENDA
The Consent Agenda is intended to allow the Planning and Zoning Board to quickly resolve items that are
non-controversial. Staff recommends approval of the Consent Agenda. Anyone may request that an item
on this agenda be “pulled” for consideration within the Discussion Agenda, which will provide a full
presentation of the item being considered. Items remaining on the Consent Agenda will be approved by the
Planning and Zoning Board with one vote.
The Consent Agenda generally consists of Board Minutes for approval, items with no perceived
controversy, and routine administrative actions.
Planning and Zoning Board
Hearing Agenda
Packet Pg. 1
Planning and Zoning Board Page 2 October 17, 2019
1. Draft Minutes for the P&Z September Hearing
The purpose of this item is to approve the draft minutes of the September 19, 2019, Planning and
Zoning Board hearing.
• DISCUSSION AGENDA
2. Garcia House Adult Residential Treatment Facility, PDP190009
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
This is a request for a Project Development Plan to build a two-story
long-term care facility on a .6-acre site at the corner of Patton Street
and East Elizabeth Street. The request includes a modification of
standard to reduce parking lot drive aisle width from 24 feet to 22 feet.
APPLICANT: Russell + Mills Studios
506 S College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80524
OWNER: SummitStone Health Partners
4856 Innovation Drive
Fort Collins, CO 80525
STAFF ASSIGNED: Clark Mapes, City Planner
• OTHER BUSINESS
• ADJOURNMENT
Packet Pg. 2
Date:
Start Time: 6:00 p.m. Stop Time: 8:27 p.m.
Roll Call Haefele Hobbs Hogestad Katz Schneider Whitley Hansen Vote
x x x x x x x 7 present
1- Consent: September 19, 2019 Mintues Haefele Katz Hobbs Whitley Schneider Hogestad Hansen
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 7:0
2 - Garcia House Adult Residential Treatment
Facility, PDP190009 Katz Hobbs Whitley Schneider Hogestad Haefele Hansen
Y Y Y Y N Y Y 6:1
2 - Modificiation of Standard to Section 3.2.2(l)
Parking Stall Dimensions Hobbs Whitley Schneider Hogestad Haefele Katz Hansen
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 7:0
4 - Whitley Schneider Hogestad Haefele Katz Hobbs Hansen
5 - Schneider Hogestad Haefele Katz Hobbs Whitley Hansen
6 - Hogestad Haefele Katz Hobbs Whitley Schneider Hansen
7 - Haefele Katz Hobbs Whitley Schneider Hogestad Hansen
Roll Call & Voting Record
Planning & Zoning Board
10/17/2019
Planning & Zoning Board Hearing
Date: October 17, 2019
Document Log
Any written comments or documents received after the agenda packet was published are listed here.
Unless otherwise stated, these documents are included in the online “Supplemental Documents” for this meeting.
CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Draft Minutes for the P&Z September 19, 2019 Hearing
DISCUSSION AGENDA:
2. Garcia House Adult Residential Treatment Facility, PDP190009
• UCitizen emails/letters:U
o (None)
• Superseded Site Plan Set from Postponed September Hearing
GENERAL CITIZEN EMAILS/LETTERS:
•
EXHIBITS RECEIVED DURING HEARING:
Item # Exhibit # Description:
Agenda Item 1
Item 1, Page 1
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 17, 2019
Planning and Zoning Board
STAFF
Shar Gerber, Customer and Administrative Manager
SUBJECT
MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 19, 2019 P&Z HEARING
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is the consideration and approval of the draft minutes of the September 19, 2019
Planning & Zoning Board hearing.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft September 19, 2019 P&Z Minutes
Packet Pg. 3
DRAFT
Jeff Hansen, Chair City Council Chambers
Jeffrey Schneider, Vice Chair City Hall West
Michelle Haefele 300 Laporte Avenue
Michael Hobbs Fort Collins, Colorado
Per Hogestad
David Katz Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 &
William Whitley Channel 881 on Comcast
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities
and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-
6001) for assistance.
Regular Hearing
September 19, 2019
Chair Hansen called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
Roll Call: Hansen, Hobbs, Hogestad, Katz, Schneider, Whitley
Absent: None
Staff Present: Everette, Yatabe, Tatman-Burruss, Holland, Yoder, Betley, Wilkinson and Manno
Chair Hansen provided background on the board’s role and what the audience could expect as to the order of
business. He described the following procedures:
• While the City staff provides comprehensive information about each project under consideration, citizen
input is valued and appreciated.
• The Board is here to listen to citizen comments. Each citizen may address the Board once for each item.
• Decisions on development projects are based on judgment of compliance or non-compliance with city Land
Use Code.
• Should a citizen wish to address the Board on items other than what is on the agenda, time will be allowed
for that as well.
• This is a legal hearing, and the Chair will moderate for the usual civility and fairness to ensure that
everyone who wishes to speak can be heard.
Agenda Review
Development Review Manager Everette reviewed the items on the Consent and Discussion agendas, stating that
all items will be heard as originally advertised.
Public Input on Items Not on the Hearing Agenda:
Planning and Zoning
Board Minutes
ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 4
DRAFT
Planning & Zoning Board
September 19, 2019
Page 2 of 8
Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant Blvd., spoke to the postponed revisions to the City code dealing with the
appeals procedure before Council. He would like to make sure that the problems are addressed at the beginning of
the processes so that individuals understand completely. Please consider if the problem statement is accurately
defined before anyone moved forward.
Karen Lynn, 5100 Northern Lights Dr., hopes and expects that the Board is interested in what citizens have to say
about development issues as she does not get the impression that the Board respects the position and input of its
citizens.
Planning Manager Everett responded to Mr. Sutherland’s concerns regarding the appeals code changes. This is
an upcoming item to this Board within the next couple of months. Chair Hansen commented that the Board has
made some recommendations.
Consent Agenda:
1. Draft Minutes from August 15, 2019 P&Z Hearing
Public Input on Consent Agenda:
None noted
Chair Hansen did a final review of the items that are on consent and reiterated that those items will not have a
separate presentation unless pulled from the consent agenda.
Member Hobbs made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the Consent agenda which
consists of the single item of the August 15, 2019 Planning and Zoning Board hearing minutes. Member
Hogestad seconded the motion. Vote: 6:0.
Discussion Agenda:
2. The Overlook – Modification of Standard
Project Description: This is a proposed stand-alone Modification of Standard to the Land Use Code. The
Modification requests the removal of the project’s previously approved 8,100 square feet of commercial
space to allow a 100% multi-family residential use on the site. Projects with residential-only buildings are
considered “secondary uses” in the Employment District and are limited to 25% of the total Employment-
zoned land in the surrounding area.
Recommendation: Approval
Secretary Gerber reported that the following citizen emails/letters were received
• Citizen emails/letters:
o Letter from Cole Kramer, adjacent property owner, who is against a modification to the land use code as
the current designation is appropriate for this property.
o Letter from Janet Axelrod who would like the whole zone to be “multi-resident”.
• Memo to the Planning and Zoning Board members addressing questions from the work session
Board Disclosures:
Vice Chair Schneider disclosed that his office is in the notification area and that he does not feel he needs to
recuse himself from this item.
Chair Hansen recused himself from this item stating that the architectural firm he works for is the designer of the
project.
ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 5
DRAFT
Planning & Zoning Board
September 19, 2019
Page 3 of 8
Staff and Applicant Presentations
Planner Holland gave a brief verbal/visual overview of this project.
Russell Lee, Ripley Design and Butch Stockover, Owner and developer, provided a verbal/visual presentation to
the Board.
Public Input (3 minutes per person)
None noted.
Staff Response
None noted.
Board Questions / Deliberation
Member Hobbs questioned if this was the last parcel to be developed within the employment zone and if it was the
opinion of Planner Holland that there are other parcels within this zone that are likely to be redeveloped soon.
Planner Holland confirmed the parcel development and that he did not want to speculate too much one way or the
other in terms of redevelopment.
Member Hogestad questioned the applicant regarding the 8100 sq. ft. of commercial space of which part would be
turned into proposed workspace. How many residents of the development would end up using this space? Mr.
Stockover could not answer this question but gave the intent and a thought that it might be 10-20% on a regular
basis. If they live there, they can use the space. Member Hogestad wanted an idea of what the space would look
like. Mr. Stockover referred to a slide showing preliminary plans of the conference center. Member Hogestad
concern is that people from outside the housing development would need parking spaces. Mr. Stockover
commented that they are not bringing people in, they are keeping people at home; less traffic with a high walkability
score.
Member Hobbs commented that it is difficult to fill the remaining employment zones when maturity takes place.
Vice Chair Schneider clarified that there would not be residential going into the business parks. Member Hobbs
point stands that we are not leaving someone else without the same type of latitude that is being asked of currently.
Attorney Yatabe gave direction on Member Whitley’s motion.
Member Whitley made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board adopt the findings stated in the staff
report regarding the modification of the Overlook Modification of Standard MOD190001, the approval of this
modification of standard is based on the agenda materials, the information and materials presented during
the work session, this hearing and the Board discussion of this item. Member Hobbs seconded. Vice Chair
Schneider appreciates the applicants team coming down. Vote: 5:0.
4. Hughes Stadium Annexation Property Rezoning
Project Description: This is a request to rezone 164.56 acres located on the west side of Overland Trail and north
of CR32 (parcel # 9720100913) with one condition and to place the property into the Residential Sign District. City
Council initiated the rezoning on July 16 and directed City staff to prepare a rezoning application and make a
recommendation regarding the appropriate zoning. The site is currently zoned Transition (T) and staff recommends
placement into the Residential Foothills (RF) and Low-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) zone districts.
Recommendation: Approval
Secretary Gerber reported that the following citizen emails/letters were received:
o Letter of opposition from Janice Vail to preserve the open space and quiet sanctuary on the west side of
town.
ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 6
DRAFT
Planning & Zoning Board
September 19, 2019
Page 4 of 8
o Letter from Barbara Solow requesting additional stop lights be added to accommodate the growing traffic.
o Letter of opposition from Joe Rowan asking the City and CSU work together to act in the best interest of all
Coloradoans.
o Letter of opposition from Brian Shipley, stating the land should be left as open space and voicing concerns
regarding current and future traffic.
o Letter from Ethan Gannett, who would prefer open space to housing, but if it must be developed, would
prefer the land be used for multiple purposes including low income, mixed residential, open space and
business with proper traffic infrastructure.
o Letter of opposition from Mary Grant, member of PATHS, voicing multiple concerns including the actions
and motivation of the City, CSU, and Planner Gloss. Also concerns over the traffic, the impacts to the
ground and Horsetooth Reservoir, the effect on the school system and air quality, with a list of concerns
they would like the City to address.
o Letter of opposition from Tamra Meurer, member of PATHS, stating the resident’s goals are not being
included in the options. Questioning the motivations of CSU, the City government and the board members.
o Letter of opposition from Gloria Katers voicing frustration that the college is given priority over residents,
she would like this area to remain open space.
o Letter from Becca LaPole with multiple questions for staff including the use of preserved open space, the
zoning options and what they mean, how this plan aligns with the City’s Core Values, and the importance of
dark skies and open space.
o Letter of opposition from Tony Arduino with concerns over the high-density development that is promoted
by our city council, saying the public’s opinions are not being heard. He believes the city should devise a
unique zoning designation for this property.
o Letter of opposition from Victoria Jordan who wants to preserve the uniqueness of Fort Collins and not
have it feel like the rest of the front range metro area.
o Letter of support from William Jacobi, President of Fox Creek HOA.
o Letter from Cyndy Luzinski who would like to see a planned community such as a dementia friendly village
to support our aging population.
o Letter of support from Larry Buckendorf, who believes Fort Collins already has an abundance of open
space and needs affordable housing.
o Letter from Alan Strope asking for this process to be slowed down and include more citizen input.
o Letter from Sean Dougherty who would like to see at least R-L zoning, but preferably L-M-N zoning and
encourages out of the box ideas for residential areas.
o Multiple letters from Dr. Peter Mullarkey concerned with preserving the trails behind the Hughes site, and
the safety of cyclists and pedestrians at Overland Trail and Drake. He does support the proposed disc golf
course and traditional golf course. He also has questions regarding the low-density development zone and
the intent to generate open space.
o Letter from Cheryl Fox requesting that as much open space be retained as possible and that housing
development be kept to a minimum.
o Letter of opposition from Del and Jeannie Benson stating the best use of this site is for open space.
o Letter of opposition from Lindsay Morgan stating the Hughes property deserves more thought and inclusion
of multi-use opportunities.
o Letter of opposition from William J. Rowley, who does not think the rezoning is in the long-term interests of
the citizens of our community.
o Letter of support from Jim and Tricia Medlock stating the proposed development will fit in with the
development already in place.
o Letter from Eileen Scholl who supports making this area zoned for Residential Foothills and Low Density
Mixed-Use.
o Letter from Lisa Baugh presenting her idea of The Social and Environmental Innovation Center of Ft.
Collins.
ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 7
DRAFT
Planning & Zoning Board
September 19, 2019
Page 5 of 8
o Called attention to 3 key points: City Staff has done a great job attempting to balance multiple community
goals, the structure plan and many of the zoning scenarios evaluated to not seem to recognize the existing
physical condition of the sit, key City goals could better be achieved with more flexibility in zoning.
o A zoning map was turned in by Alan Braslan
• Letter from Brendan Willits, Planning Manager with Poudre School District, providing specific numbers
regarding the original design capacity, modified capacity, and the utilization of current schools in the area.
• Comments from the Our City Website:
o Inquiry regarding the traffic counter regarding the student population.
o Concerns regarding the view of the mountains and traffic congestion.
o Request to keep this land as close to its current state as possible.
o Request to keep this as open space, citing emergency services availability, safety for evacuation, less
erosion of trails, keeping nature close, and preserving multiple plants and animals in the area.
o Comments regarding the importance of dark skies, lack of streetlights and lack of asphalt and concrete on
the west side of the City.
o Comment asking for a new trend of neighbors who can benefit each other.
Member Hogestad disclosed that he has worked for and is retired from CSU, he does not feel there is a conflict.
Staff and Applicant Presentations
Planner Gloss gave a brief verbal/visual overview of this project.
Public Input (3 minutes per person)
Anna Goldetsky, resident and member of Council District 5, she raised concerns with zoning, community safety,
traffic, noise and light pollution and historical precedence. The site and air quality reports are outdated and no
basis for factual conclusions or directional indicators. Please do not move forward at this time.
Melodie Nicholas, 2700 Garrett Dr., because of our topography, smog is kept in and affects the air quality of the
area. The site is closed off, not close to the Max and other amenities. She is concerned with traffic, lack of access
points and safety.
Alan Braslan, 816 W. Mountain Ave., submitted a zoning map and offered his views on encroachment, with a
suggestion that geography needs to be considered and how directionally, roads should run.
Patricia Babbitt, 309 Scott Ave., concerned with development and read a letter from her sister, former student at
CSU.
Melissa Rosas, 3520 Pratolina Ct., feels that this space should be kept as open space like City Park. She would
like to know how many place types were put down for the Hughes area during the City Plan presentation and if they
were in favor of or against development of the area. She recommends this area be kept as a T-Transition zone for
the time being.
Renee Walkup, 3514 Pratolina Ct, wants to know why we are considering the status quo at the Hughes site. She
feels we can do better. Would like a unique zoning designation for the space, an intentional, innovative, revenue
producing suggestion. Stuffing 700 homes in this space is not a good idea.
Tamra Meuer, 1137 Wyndham Hill Rd., spoke of a vision for any housing development that has been proposed.
What if this space was used as a village for those needing elder care or special care? Be innovative and creative
with the space.
Lias Baughn, 1705 Heatheridge Rd, she would like the space to be largely natural and open, also transforming the
world. She would like to see a coworking facility nestled into the natural uniqueness of the area, the Social and
Environmental Innovation Center of Fort Collins.
ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 8
DRAFT
Planning & Zoning Board
September 19, 2019
Page 6 of 8
Ted Walkup, 3514 Pratolina Ct., he would like to see the rezoning reflect the core values of our City Plan.
Rex Miller, 3833 Spruce Dr., he feels this is a total charade and means nothing as CSU is not obligated to abide by
any zoning that is put on the property. Please represent the citizens.
Mary Grant, 3427 W. Elizabeth, she is concerned about the fate of the Hughes property. She is asking that the
zoning be placed on hold, that a collaborative process be used to determine zoning, there is a need for alternatives
to traditional housing, we need innovative ideas, we need to modify the annexation document with CSU, we need to
complete the studies that the community has asked for.
Kent Pedersen, 9193 S. Jamaica St., Lennar Homes, commented on their agreement with CSU to build out the
property.
Staff Response
Planner Gloss responded to the air quality comment. There is no requirement to conduct an air quality study for
rezoning and development planning. The best available data was used as it was specific to the foothills. With
respect to staff preparation of material, planning staff was directed by Council to craft zoning options to present to
the public. Toward comments made regarding traffic, a transportation impact analysis would have to be completed
for any development plan that would be submitted.
Traffic Engineer Wilkinson clarified that this is a rezoning and not an application. They can only look at the overall
area until a proposal comes in and specifics are known. Chair Hansen enquired about roughly how many daily trips
might be seen, and who pays for improvements. Mrs. Wilkinson responded roughly 600 vehicle trips per day. The
traffic impact study will identify what required improvements are and then depending on the impact to the
developer, the developer must meet the standards and they must pay for the improvements in a manner that is
proportional to their impact.
Planner Gloss responded to safety concerns. PFA is convinced that they can provide emergency access for the
entirety of the property as well as fight wildland fires based on the conditions and access that they have through the
natural area today, and also additional access they would hope to achieve if and when a development plan comes
forward.
Planner Gloss responded to Mr. Walkup and his comments regarding infrastructure. With respect to transportation,
those costs would be borne by the developer. There is water, stormwater and sewer capacity on the site to
accommodate the two zone districts that are being suggested.
Planner Gloss responded to Mr. Miller and his points raised regarding the authority of the CSU Board of Governors.
Planner Gloss does not feel qualified to answer the question. Attorney Yatabe responded that it is a possibility that
CSU could seek to develop on their own, their current model is to sell the property to a private developer. Vice
Chair Schneider questioned if there was ever a conversation with CSU or an IGA that says CSU would adhere to
whatever zoning ultimately was placed on the property. Attorney Yatabe did not know if there was ever a
conversation, but that there is no IGA regarding this. Member Hobbs wanted to know if it was clear legally that if
this deal did not go through with Lennar, and the property was sold by CSU to another private entity/developer that
the zoning will stay in force. Attorney Yatabe believed that was clear in the sense that if it is sold to a non-public
entity, that entity is subject to a land use code. There are certain exceptions under State law to which the City must
adhere about public institutions like CSU. The City would adhere to that with the School District.
Planner Gloss responded to the proposal to split the property. Staff’s proposal does align with the RF zone district
boundaries. The speaker did have a point that you could change that line slightly, more at a diagonal.
Planner Gloss responded to alternative uses. Some of the uses would be permitted within the LMN zone district
and others would not. Some would be permitted under another process, like an addition of permitted use or a PUD.
Mark Sears, Sr. Manager of Natural Areas, responded to questions pertaining to thoughts from Natural Areas. This
was not a site that Natural Areas wanted to pursue. It is expensive to buy, and funds could be better spent in other
parts of the community. There are other large areas established in the area. Member Whitley asked if it could
ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 9
DRAFT
Planning & Zoning Board
September 19, 2019
Page 7 of 8
have been considered for open space if we chose to spend the money. Mr. Sears responded yes. Member
Whitley added that this was not included in the options for the property and could have been. Mr. Sears responded
that this is not a recommendation.
Board Questions / Deliberation
Member Katz wanted to know how the City received its findings stating that there are no significant impacts to
water, air quality and stormwater. Planner Gloss explained that there is an internal staff review group.
Member Hobbs wanted further explanation on what the boundaries of the City’s legal capabilities are in terms of
zoning a piece of private property as public open lands. Attorney Yatabe responded that if the land use code
provisions related to zoning and or rezoning are the applicable standards both to your decision and to the decision
made by City Council, those are the adopted standards and essentially in relation to the comprehensive plan, that it
is consistent with that. This is a quasi-judicial hearing meaning there is a discrete piece of property to which there
are certain standards that apply to it in terms of the zoning. Member Hobbs feels there needs to be more
clarification, still. Chair Hanses stated that if legal counsel is sought, the Board would have to go into executive
session, and he feels the Board is not at that point. Member Hobbs agreed.
Vice Chair Schneider wanted some background to the 50/50 split with the zoning. Why not match the East.
Planner Gloss responded it is where the boundary is captured the best. Some options were considered and what is
being presented is the best option.
Member Katz wanted Planner Gloss to build on what City Council gave to staff on zoning recommendations and
why there was not one that was homogenous UE or any other zone. Planner Gloss responded they were asked to
provide some options and a staff recommendation. There was no specific and direct statement of intent to use one
district over another. Staff’s starting point was to go back over City Plan.
Member Hogestad wondered why is does not seem like a 50/50 split, LMN is greater than the other zone district.
Planner Gloss commented that the LMN has a lesser intensity than the MNN. Member Hogestad clarified that he is
speaking of the land size. The LMN holds a larger portion. He is concerned with the intense use of the LMN
zoning as it will affect traffic, dark sky, etc. Member Hansen requested clarification from Member Hogestad.
Planner Gloss reiterated reasoning on the boundaries.
Chair Hansen questioned the naturals area to the West, is there a requirement for a buffer? Planner Gloss
explained that there is a qualitative buffer. A study would be completed to look at habitat, and an ecological
characterization study would be completed. Characteristics would be looked at and then require a buffer along the
West edge of the property as it abuts the natural area.
Member Hogestad wanted to know if a park like area is required, do they end up as private open spaces? Planner
Gloss responded yes, except for the area that is clustered in the RF district where the requirement is for publicly
designated space.
Chair Hansen spoke of a proposed condition. He had a thought that a PUD might be ideal and wanted to know if
this might be an option. Planner Gloss commented that staff does not have recent experience with requiring a
PUD. He has not seen that a condition placed to force a PUD would be placed on a zone. Attorney Yatabe did not
have a good answer, he has not seen this condition.
Vice Chair Schneider cautioned to the Board how much they can focus on, the Board it not looking at a project, but
rather a piece of ground. A PUD would be great but focus on the Board’s role this evening.
Member Hobbs proposed the Board to recommend to City Council a zoning of RF for the entire parcel. This would
start the negotiations with the developer on how to cluster and use the site relative to issues like the retention pond
and less density as they get closer to the foothills. This gives the leverage to have a creative conversation and
process. Chair Hansen is concerned that amenities may not be allowed in the RF zone. Vice Chair Schneider
feels that the LMN should be smaller, and a neighborhood center or services must be in this part of town. All RF
will not work. Member Whitley agreed with Member Hobbs, that the RF is the best compromise given the options.
ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 10
DRAFT
Planning & Zoning Board
September 19, 2019
Page 8 of 8
Member Katz also agreed and would consider a UE. Vice Chair Schneider commented that you will not get the mix
of uses, affordability and obtainability, only single-family detached homes.
Attorney Yatabe wanted to make a correction. At least 50% of the total land area needs to be set aside and could
be set aside as private open space.
Member Hobbs hopes that if the Board suggested that if this becomes all RF, and if City Council went in that
direction as well, that it would go a long way toward spurring a PUD. Member Whitley feels this is a strong idea.
Vice Chair Schneider does not understand how if a developer does a PUD if the property is zoned all RF. Attorney
Yatabe clarified that if granted you have your underlying zoning. This is an overlay of regulations that goes on top
of the zoning. Montova allowed for customized uses, densities, modifications etc. The underlying zone may
control, but the overlay allows the latitude to create a customized zoning. This is a different process than what we
are looking at this evening.
Chair Hansen would like to know how much land percentage wise the Board would like to dedicate to the zone
districts. Planning Manager Everette added that if there are questions about specific areas or measurements, she
does have the map up and can make calculations.
Attorney Yatabe advised as far as zoning because it makes a good negotiating point, this is not what the Board is
looking at. The Board, under the Land Use Code, is looking at the standards set before you.
Member Hobbs made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board recommend to City Council to not
approve the Hughes Stadium Annexation Property REZ190001 as stated in the staff report, but rather
recommend clustered development within the RF, Residential Foothills, zoning designation, for the entire
parcel and be included in the residential sign district. This recommendation is based up the agenda
materials, the information and materials presented during the work session, this hearing and the Board
discussion on this item and the public input tonight. Member Whitley seconded. Vice Chair Schneider
cannot support this recommendation. Chair Hansen agrees with Vice Chair Schneider and will not be supporting
this recommendation. Member Whitley feels there is plenty of different zoning in Fort Collins. Vote: 4:2.
Other Business
Planning Manager Everette welcomed Member Katz to his first hearing
Adjournment
Chair Hansen moved to adjourn the P&Z Board hearing. The meeting was adjourned at 9:39 pm.
Minutes respectfully submitted by Shar Gerber.
Minutes approved by a vote of the Board on: ____________.
Rebecca Everette, Development Review Manager Jeff Hansen, Chair
ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 11
Development Review Staff Report Agenda Item 2
Planning Services Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 p. 970-416-4311 f. 970.224.6134 www.fcgov.com
Planning and Zoning Board Hearing: October 17, 2019
Garcia House Adult Residential Treatment Facility, PDP190009
Summary of Request
This is a request for a Project Development Plan to build a two-story
long-term care facility on a .6-acre site at the corner of Patton Street
and East Elizabeth Street. The request includes a modification of
standard to reduce parking lot drive aisle width from 24 feet to 22
feet.
Zoning Map
Next Steps
If approved by the Planning and Zoning Board, the applicant will be
eligible to proceed to filing of final plans and then to a building
permit.
Site Location
Southeast corner of E. Elizabeth and Patton
Streets.
Zoning
Employment District (E)
Property Owner
SummitStone Health Partners
4856 Innovation Drive
Fort Collins, CO 80525
Applicant/Representative
Russell + Mills Studios
506 S College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80524
p. (970) 484-8855 e.rmills@email.com
Staff
Clark Mapes, City Planner
p. (970) 221-6225 e. cmapes@fcgov.com
Contents
1. Project Introduction .................................... 2
2. Public Outreach ......................................... 3
3. Compatibility with Comprehensive Plan .... 3
4. Article 2 – Applicable Standards ................ 4
5. Article 3 - Applicable Standards ................. 5
6. Article 4 – Applicable Standards: ............. 11
7. Modification of Standards ........................ 12
8. Findings of Fact/Conclusion .................... 13
9. Recommendation ..................................... 13
10. Attachments ............................................. 13
Staff Recommendation
Approval of the modification request and
approval of the PDP.
Packet Pg. 12
P&Z Agenda Item 2
PDP190009 | Garcia House
Thursday, October 17, 2019 | Page 2 of 13
Back to Top
1. Project Introduction
PROJECT DESCRIPTION & STAFF REVIEW OVERVIEW
This is a request for a Project Development Plan (PDP) to build a long-term care facility at the corner of Patton
Street, McHugh Street, and East Elizabeth Street (parcel # 8718312002). The proposed building has 16 beds and
employs 12-14 staff members. The number of staff on site at any given time will vary, with a maximum of 8 staff
members on site for major shifts. The facility will be staffed 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Fourteen on-site parking
spaces are proposed. Access is from McHugh Street on the north. The property is within the Employment (E) zone
district and requires Planning and Zoning Board (Type 2) Review.
The site is fully served by the existing street network. The proposed development rebuilds the street edges to
current standards with new curb, gutter, and detached sidewalk along with new driveway access.
The one salient design issue has been compatibility with the nursing home building on adjoining property that has
been identified as a historic resource.
The most complex site planning issues have involved fitting all utilities into the plan with adequate clearances and
separations. A notable feature is an underground installation for stormwater detention located below the parking lot.
The utility issues have been adequately resolved for hearing, with any further technical or construction details to be
incorporated into Final Plans.
The PDP includes a modification of a standard for the drive aisle width in the parking lot, to reduce the width from
24 feet to 22 feet.
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
1. Current Conditions
The 0.6-acre site is roughly triangular in shape due the angled orientation of McHugh Street on the north,
which parallels Riverside Drive one short block further to the north. The site has remained undeveloped while
development has occurred on all sides.
2. Surrounding Zoning and Land Use
North South East West
Zoning Low density mixed use
neighborhood (LMN), and
Employment (E)
Employment (E) Low Density Residential Employment (E)
Land
Use
Rehabilitation and
counseling facility, and
medical office
Rehabilitation and
nursing home
Parking lot access to
rehabilitation and
nursing home; and
apartments
Medical offices
3. Site History
The site has become surrounded by healthcare-related development since initial annexation as part of the
1959 Larimer County Hospital Annexation, and the 1967 East Elizabeth Subdivision of which it is a part.
Packet Pg. 13
P&Z Agenda Item 2
PDP190009 | Garcia House
Thursday, October 17, 2019 | Page 3 of 13
Back to Top
2. Public Outreach
NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING
A neighborhood meeting was held on June 10, 2019 at Life Church; no residents attended.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
No other public comment has been received. Any communication received between the public notice period and
hearing will be provided to the Board for the hearing.
3. Compatibility with Comprehensive Plan
CITY PLAN
City Plan, the City’s comprehensive plan document, includes the following general direction pertinent to the
proposed development plan:
Principle LIV 8: Develop an equitable, comprehensive, coordinated and efficient system of health and human
services that is accessible to all residents in need of assistance.
POLICY LIV 8.2 HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICE PROVIDERS
Rely upon Larimer County to provide community health and human services in partnership with local service
providers. Focus on improving communication, education, accessibility and collaboration in order to enhance overall
physical and mental health, safety and wellness of the community.
POLICY LIV 8.3 PARTNER ORGANIZATIONS
Partner, fund and collaborate with local service providers to ensure adequate levels of assistance for human-
services needs, including affordable childcare; homelessness services; mental illness and substance use disorders;
food access; workforce development; and education.
Packet Pg. 14
P&Z Agenda Item 2
PDP190009 | Garcia House
Thursday, October 17, 2019 | Page 4 of 13
Back to Top
4. Land Use Code Article 2 Procedural Requirements
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROCEDURAL OVERVIEW
1. Conceptual Review
A conceptual review meeting was held on April 19, 2019.
2. Neighborhood Meeting
A neighborhood meeting was held at the Life Church on June 10, 2019 and satisfies the applicable
requirement of Section 2.4.2 – Project Development Plan Review Procedures.
3. Submittal (July 3, 2019)
The project was submitted on July 3, 2019 and deemed complete on July 5, 2019. The project was
subsequently routed to all reviewing departments.
2 rounds of review – one revision of the plans – followed the initial submittal. Also, additional followup design
work was needed on the building design for historic resource compatibility.
4. Notice (Posted, Written and Published)
Posted notice: June 10, 2019, Sign # 498
Written notice: September 4, 2019, 116 letters sent.
Hearing notification area (blue shading)
Packet Pg. 15
P&Z Agenda Item 2
PDP190009 | Garcia House
Thursday, October 17, 2019 | Page 5 of 13
Back to Top
5. Land Use Code Article 3 - Applicable Standards
DIVISION 3.2 - SITE PLANNING AND DESIGN
Applicable
Code
Standard
Summary of Code Requirement and Analysis Staff
Findings
Landscaping
and tree
protection
standards
Section 3.2.1
This Section requires a fully developed landscape plan that addresses
relationships of landscaping to sidewalks, parking and walkways, the building,
abutting properties, and users of the site in a manner appropriate to the
neighborhood context.
The plan provides the following main components:
• A new street parkway with turfgrass and street trees.
• Mulched planting beds around the building.
• Parking lot landscaping, including perimeter screening.
• A landscaped courtyard.
• All landscaping is coordinated with utilities throughout the entire site.
Complies
Access,
circulation
and parking
standards
Section 3.2.2
This Section requires convenient, efficient parking and circulation that adds to
the attractiveness of the development.
• The plan provides sidewalks, curb cuts for the parking lot access, sidewalk
ramps, on-site walkways, and a clearly delineated parking lot layout in
compliance with standards.
• The plan includes a request for a Modification to reduce the standard drive
aisle width from 24 feet to 22 feet. The Modification is discussed in section
7 of this report. Other salient points in staff’s evaluation under Section
3.2.2 follow.
Modification
requested
to a
subsection
Bicycle
parking:
subsection
3.2.2(c)(4) -
This subsection requires 4 bike parking spaces minimum for the use and size
of the building.
• 4 spaces are provided, with 1 space within the building entry vestibule, and
3 spaces in a rack along the main walkway to the building entrance.
Standard Requirement for reference:
1/5,000 sq. ft., 4 minimum..
20% enclosed; 80% on fixed racks outside.
Complies
Parking -
number of
off-street
P&Z Agenda Item 2
PDP190009 | Garcia House
Thursday, October 17, 2019 | Page 6 of 13
Back to Top
Site Lighting
Section 3.2.4
This Section requires all lighting to be down-directional with sharp cutoff
fixtures to ensure that the functional and security needs of a project are met in
a way that does not adversely affect adjacent properties.
• Lighting fixtures in the plan are down-directional sharp cutoff fixtures and
light is contained within the site.
Complies
Trash and
Recycling
Section 3.2.5
This Section requires trash and recycling enclosures to be adequate,
convenient, and accessible as appropriate for the proposed use.
• A trash and recycling enclosure is located along the parking drive aisle
with easy access to sidewalks and the parking lot. The design is
complementary to the overall plan with matching brick masonry and metal
doors.
Complies
DIVISION 3.3 - ENGINEERING
Applicable
Code
Standard
Summary of Code Requirement and Analysis Staff
Findings
Plats and
Easements
Section
3.3.1
This section requires dedication of rights-of-way for public streets and easements
for drainage and utilities as needed to serve the development.
• The PDP includes a plat with all necessary dedications and also includes
an off-site easement for a sewer connection to the east.
Complies
Packet Pg. 17
P&Z Agenda Item 2
PDP190009 | Garcia House
Thursday, October 17, 2019 | Page 7 of 13
Back to Top
DIVISION 3.4 – HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
Applicable
Code
Standard
Summary of Code Requirement and Analysis Staff
Findings
Historic and
Cultural
Resources –
Section 3.4.7
This Section requires development to be compatible with historic resources.
Section 3.4.7(B) requires analysis of an “area of adjacency,” which consists of
identified historic resources within 200 feet of the development site. When there
is a historic resource on or abutting the development site, it becomes the primary
point of comparison for creating design compatibility with the new construction.
Based on these requirements, the area of adjacency for the Garcia House
consists of one abutting property that meets the standards for a historic resource:
1020 Patton. This property is a 1968, one-story rehab/nursing center that is faced
primarily with stone and has a large, gable-roof entrance canopy supported by
prominent stone pillars. The building’s low-slung horizontality provides an
opportunity to relate horizontal elements on the new construction to the abutting
structure.
The applicable requirements for New Construction Near Historic Resources are
listed in subsection 3.4.7(E) Table 1, as follows:
Massing and Building Articulation
New construction shall be similar in width or, if larger, be articulated into massing
reflective of the mass and scale of historic resources on the development site,
abutting, or across a side alley.
• The building is articulated with massing broken up to reduce the
appearance of width and is dimensionally compatible in width with 1020
Patton.
Building Materials
Lower story facades must be constructed of authentic, durable, high quality
materials (brick, stone, glass, terra cotta, stucco (non EVIS), precast concrete,
wood, cast iron, architectural metal) installed to industry standards.
• The proposed materials, comprising fiber cement lap siding, board and
batten vertical siding, and brick, are durable, high quality materials.
The proposed building design shall reference one or more of the predominate
materials on abutting historic resources, by using at least two of the following to
select the primary materials for the lower story facades:
1) type; 2) scale; 3) color; 4) three-dimensionality; 5) pattern.
• Brick masonry is used in a horizontal pattern along the lower story façade,
particularly on the western module of the modulated building, which is
strongly horizontal in orientation to relate to the form of the 1020 Patton
building. This masonry material relates to the primary stone material on the
historic resource in type and color.
Façade Details
Building design must use at least one of the following: 1) similar window pattern;
2) similar window proportion of height to width; 3) similar solid-to-void pattern as
found on abutting historic resources on the abutting.
Complies
Packet Pg. 18
P&Z Agenda Item 2
PDP190009 | Garcia House
Thursday, October 17, 2019 | Page 8 of 13
Back to Top
• The proposed building has similar window patterns as found on the abutting
historic resource, most particularly along Patton Street where the buildings
may be viewed together. The design also features a strong solid-to-void
pattern creating recesses and shadows that relate to prominent
overhanging eaves and the entry portico on the abutting building.
The building design must use select horizontal or vertical reference lines or
elements (such as rooflines, cornices, and belt courses) to relate the new
construction to the abutting historic resource.
• The western portion of the building along Patton Street is a module that
features a low horizontal band of brick masonry and horizontal rooflines and
eaves on both the first and second stories, which relate the building to the
horizontality of the historic resource.
• The building entry is highlighted with a deep gabled roof overhang
supported by masonry columns similar to the entry feature which is the
primary feature on the abutting resource.
Visibility of Historic Features
New construction shall not cover or obscure character-defining architectural
elements, such as windows or primary design features of historic resources on
the development site, abutting, or across a side alley.
• The position and design of the new construction on the site, combined with
the relatively large separation between the buildings, does not impact the
visibility of the abutting historic building.
Packet Pg. 19
P&Z Agenda Item 2
PDP190009 | Garcia House
Thursday, October 17, 2019 | Page 9 of 13
Back to Top
DIVISION 3.5 – BUILDING
Applicable
Code
Standard
Summary of Code Requirement and Analysis Staff
Findings
Building and
Project
Compatibility
Section 3.5.1
This Section requires the physical and operational characteristics of proposed
buildings and uses to be compatible when considered within the context of
the surrounding area.
• The context of the surrounding area comprises various health-related uses
including rehabilitation and counseling uses. The site is the last remaining
undeveloped parcel in its original subdivision which has developed with
various synergistic uses around Poudre Valley Hospital.
• The proposed use has similar characteristics to uses in the existing
context, and the design of the proposed development sets a similar or
enhanced standard of quality for the streetscape, and pedestrian interest
and comfort in building and site design.
Complies
Building
Placement
and Design
Section 3.5.3
This Section promotes the design of an urban environment that is built to
human scale.
Subsections require buildings to be placed in direct relation to street
sidewalks with no intervening parking lots or drives; building design with
variation in massing related to entrances and organization of integral
structure, spaces, and activities in the building; building façade articulation;
and clearly defined entrances.
• The plan places the building along the streets and provides direct
walkways to the entrance without crossing any vehicular use areas.
• The main entry is covered with a projecting roof element that creates a
sheltered and definable entry and front porch to add definition and
articulation.
• Architectural design is based on modern interpretation of a variety of
roof forms existing in the surrounding medical-related buildings in the
area. Those include various pitched roofs in symmetrical and
asymmetrical gables and clerestories and shed roofs, and flat roofs.
Proposed materials comprise fiber cement lap siding and board and
batten vertical siding placed to accentuate horizontal and vertical wall
elements. Brick projections and accents are placed in contemporary
forms to create a modern juxtaposition to the more traditional-style
siding materials. The western portion of the building along Patton
Street is designed to relate to the potentially historic nursing home
building facing Patton on the abutting property to the south.
Complies
Packet Pg. 20
P&Z Agenda Item 2
PDP190009 | Garcia House
Thursday, October 17, 2019 | Page 10 of 13
Back to Top
DIVISION 3.6 - TRANSPORTATION & CIRCULATION
Applicable
Code Standard
Summary of Code Requirement and Analysis Staff
Findings
Streets,
Streetscapes,
and
Easements
Section 3.6.2
This Section contains requirements for street system design including
conformance with the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS)
for street design including streetscapes. It also requires easements for utilities,
access, drainage or other public purposes as required by the City Engineer.
• The plan removes and replaces outdated curb, gutter and sidewalk with
new streetscape in conformance with current street standards.
• The plan includes needed easements for utilities and drainage.
Complies
Transportation
Level of
Service
Section 3.6.4
This Section requires a Transportation Impact Study (TIS) unless the proposed
development is deemed to have a nominal impact pursuant to LCUASS Chapter
4, in which case a TIS may be waived by the Traffic Engineer and a memo on
traffic impacts may be provided in lieu of a TIS.
• A TIS was waived and a memo provided. Fifty-three (53) Average Daily
Trips (ADT) are anticipated and are found to be negligible, with no changes
to streets required other than the streetscape improvements noted above.
Complies
Emergency
Access
Section 3.6.6
This Section is to ensure that emergency vehicles can gain access to and
maneuver within the project so that emergency personnel can provide fire
protection and emergency services without delays.
• The streets and parking lot drive provide adequate emergency access in
conformance with Poudre Fire Authority requirements.
Complies
Packet Pg. 21
P&Z Agenda Item 2
PDP190009 | Garcia House
Thursday, October 17, 2019 | Page 11 of 13
Back to Top
6. Land Use Code Article 4 – Applicable Standards:
SUMMARY
Article 4 of the Land Use Code contains standards for the various zoning districts throughout the City. The subject
property is zoned Employment (E), Division 4.27 of the Land Use Code. The only pertinent standard in this case is the
Permitted Use list in the E zone.
DIVISION 4.27 – EMPLOYMENT DISTRICT (E)
Applicable
Code Standard
Summary of Code Requirement and Analysis Staff
Findings
Permitted
Uses
Subsection
4.27(B)(3)(b)
‘Long-term care facilities’ are listed as a Permitted Use. Staff finds that the
proposed land use is a long-term care facility by virtue of being an
intermediate health care or assisted living facility under the definition of long-
term care facility in Article 5.
• The proposed facility is to provide inpatient services to clients with
substance abuse disorders and other mental health issues, who will be
housed up to 90 days. The clients are not free to come and go as they
please, and the facility will be staffed 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.
For reference: excerpt from definition of Long-term care facility:
…3. Intermediate health care or assisted living facility shall mean a health-
related institution planned, organized, operated and maintained to provide
facilities and services which are supportive, restorative or preventive in
nature, with related social care, to individuals who because of a physical or
mental condition, or both, require care in an institutional environment but
who do not have an illness, injury or disability for which regular medical care
and twenty-four (24) hour per day nursing services are required.
Complies
Packet Pg. 22
P&Z Agenda Item 2
PDP190009 | Garcia House
Thursday, October 17, 2019 | Page 12 of 13
Back to Top
7. Modification of a Standard
SUMMARY:
The applicant requests a modification to subsection 3.2.2(L) to reduce the parking lot drive aisle width from 24
feet to 22 feet.
STANDARDS FOR REVIEW OF MODIFICATIONS
Standards for review of modifications, subsection 2.8.2(H) are provided here for reference:
“The decision maker may grant a modification of standards only if it finds that the granting of the modification
would not be detrimental to the public good, and that:
(1) the plan as submitted will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the modification is
requested equally well or better than would a plan which complies with the standard for which a modification
is requested; or
(2) the granting of a modification from the strict application of any standard would, without impairing the intent
and purpose of this Land Use Code, substantially alleviate an existing, defined and described problem of city-
wide concern or would result in a substantial benefit to the city by reason of the fact that the proposed project
would substantially address an important community need specifically and expressly defined and described in
the city's Comprehensive Plan or in an adopted policy, ordinance or resolution of the City Council, and the
strict application of such a standard would render the project practically infeasible; or
(3) by reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional situations, unique to
such property, including, but not limited to, physical conditions such as exceptional narrowness, shallowness
or topography, or physical conditions which hinder the owner's ability to install a solar energy system, the
strict application of the standard sought to be modified would result in unusual and exceptional practical
difficulties, or exceptional or undue hardship upon the owner of such property, provided that such difficulties
or hardship are not caused by the act or omission of the applicant; or
(4) the plan as submitted will not diverge from the standards of the Land Use Code that are authorized by this
Division to be modified except in a nominal, inconsequential way when considered from the perspective of the
entire development plan and will continue to advance the purposes of the Land Use Code as contained in
Section 1.2.2.
Any finding made under subparagraph (1), (2), (3) or (4) above shall be supported by specific findings
showing how the plan, as submitted, meets the requirements and criteria of said subparagraph (1), (2), (3) or
(4).”
SUMMARY OF APPLICANT’S JUSTIFICATION
The applicant’s modification request is attached. The request is based upon subparagraph (4) above --
“nominal and inconsequential”.
SECTION 3.2.2(L) Parking Stall Dimensions requires two-way parking lot drive aisles for standard vehicles to
be 24 feet wide.
The applicant’s justification for a 2-foot reduction is that reducing the drive aisle by 2 feet is nominal and
inconsequential when considered from the perspective of the entire development plan because the parking lot
has only 14 spaces and the site will have only 52-65 average daily trips (ADT) on weekdays. The request
asserts that the plan will continue to advance the purposes of the Land Use Code as contained in Section
1.2.2.
Packet Pg. 23
P&Z Agenda Item 2
PDP190009 | Garcia House
Thursday, October 17, 2019 | Page 13 of 13
Back to Top
STAFF FINDING:
Staff finds that the Modification would not be detrimental to the public good and is justified under
subparagraph (4) because:
• The 24’ standard width typically accommodates double-loaded drive aisles, which have more movement
conflicts; whereas the drive aisle in the parking lot of the proposed development is single-loaded.
• The standard typically accommodates uses with high levels of activity by the general public, whereas this
facility is expected to have little activity by the general public. Overall average daily trips are projected to
be 53, ranging from 40 to 65. Any inconvenience from the slight reduction in drive aisle width would be
borne by those directly involved with the private activity at the facility, thus limiting any detriment to the
public good.
• The slight reduction in drive aisle width in this limited location would not affect the overall purposes of the
Land Use Code outlined in Section 1.2.2.
8. Findings of Fact/Conclusion
In evaluating the request for the Garcia House Adult Residential Treatment Facility Project Development Plan,
PDP190009, staff makes the following findings of fact:
1. The PDP complies with process requirements located in Division 2.2 – Common Development Review Procedures for
Development Applications of Article 2 – Administration.
2. The PDP complies with relevant standards located in Article 3 – General Development Standards, with one
modification to a standard for parking lot drive aisle width.
3. The modification of a standard to subsection 3.2.2(L), Parking Stall Dimensions, would not be detrimental to the public
good and meets the applicable requirements of subsection 2.8.2(H)(4) because the single-loading of the drive aisle,
the low level of activity, and the limited public usage all serve to offset any inconvenience caused by the 2-foot
reduction in drive aisle width.
4. The PDP complies with the one relevant standard located in Division 4.27, E Employment District in Article 4 –
Districts which lists the proposed use as a Permitted Use.
9. Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Board make a motion to approve the modification of a standard to Land
Use Code subsection 3.2.2(L), and approve Garcia House Adult Residential Treatment Center PDP#190009 based on
the Findings of Fact and supporting explanations found in the staff report.
10. Attachments
1. Applicants Narrative & Color Plan Rendering
2. Planning Set (site, landscape, and architectural plans)
3. Staff Memo on Compliance with code Section 3.4.7
4. Modification Request
5. Civil Plan Set
6. Plat
Packet Pg. 24
NTS
CIRCLE C-ADULT
RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT
SERVICES
Project Location
CIRCLE C-ADULT RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT SERVICES
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 25
Project Narrative
CIRCLE C-ADULT RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT SERVICES
PROJECT GOAL:
The overall design intent and goal of Circle C-Adult Residential Treatment Services is to build a quality long term care facility
that will provide inpatient services to clients with substance abuse disorders who will be housed up to 90 days. The facility will
have 16 beds and provide employment to 12-14 individuals. The clients are not free to come and go as they please which means
that the facility will be staffed 24 hours a day and 365 days a year.
BACKGROUND:
Currently the site is a undeveloped lot (parcel # 8718312002) that has attached sidewalks and a small paved area on the
southeast corner of the site that serves as a parking area and access to the site south of the this lot. A road barrier is in place at
the property line of this parking area.
1. PROJECT TITLE:
Circle C-Adult Residential Treatment Services
Conceptual Review: submitted as Elizabeth and Patton St Care Facility
2. MEETING DATES:
Conceptual Review Meeting: April 19, 2019
Neighborhood Meeting: June 10, 2019
3. GENERAL INFORMATION:
Project Location: South of East Elizabeth Street, east of Patton Street, west of McHugh Street, North of Rehabilitation and
Nursing Center of the Rockies
Size: 25,619 sf / 0.59 ac
Existing zoning: Employment (E)
Proposed zoning: Employment (E)
Number of off street parking spaces provided: 14, (minimum 10 required)
Number of building stories proposed: Two
Maximum building height: 35’
LUC Modifications proposed:
Section 3.2.2 - Access, Circulation And Parking
Land Use Code:
(L) parking stall dimensions. Table a (1) standard spaces . Parking spaces for standard vehicles shall conform with the
standard car dimensions shown on table a, (row f) two-way drive aisle width = 24 feet
Modification:
Two-way drive aisle width = 22 feet, 2 foot reduction requested.
4. PROPOSED OWNERS:
The property is currently under contract with a July 12, 2019 closing date set.
Summitstone Health Partners
Applicant:
Russell + Mills Studios
Contact: Shelley LaMastra
506 S College Ave, Unit A
Fort Collins, CO 80524
970-484-8855
5. EXISTING OWNERS:
Aynex Limited Contact: Nicky Galbraith and Mike Keller
4321 Whippeny Drive
Fort Collins, CO 80526
970-389-8289
nickyinthefort@gmail.com
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 26
Project Narrative
CIRCLE C-ADULT RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT SERVICES
6. TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS:
The TIS requirement has been waived. An estimated Traffic flow memo has been provided with the submittal to document
anticipated traffic volumes for the site. Improvements to public ROW curb to meet LCUASS with detached sidewalks and tree
lawn are proposed with the project.
7. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING
A neighborhood meeting was held on June 10, 2019 at the Life Church building. No public participants came to the meeting.
8. SITE DESIGN
The Circle C-Adult Residential Treatment Services is located on a unique property near the hospital. The lot is triangular in shape
and has thee sides that front public ROW. The site design seeks to front the building on each of the public ROWs.
The parking lot will be located on the southern most property boundary that is least visible from the street ROWs. There are
several large existing trees along the property boundary that will help screen the lot. An additional 5’ wide planting area has been
provided for screening.
Vehicular traffic is primarily coming from Lemay Ave (arterial) and down East Elizabeth Street (collector). On site surface parking
is provided. Poudre Fire Authority will be able to utilize the street frontages to stage. Ambulances and trash trucks will be able
to pull into the parking lot. A exit only drive has been provided to Patton Street for Ambulances and trash trucks to eliminate the
need to back out of the lot. The exit will be signed as an exit only from Patton and will also have signage on the interior of the lot
that it is only an exit for ambulances and trash.
Pedestrian traffic will come from the detached sidewalks along these roads that feed into the site. A pedestrian connection will
be provided to the main entrance from both Patton and McHugh street. An accessible route has been provided from the McHugh
ROW sidewalk.
Landscaping will use a variety of low water and native species. The proposed tree lawns will contain City recommended species.
Due to existing utilities within the new tree lawn and spacing requirements from stop signs street trees will not be possible along
Patton.
9. DISTURBANCES
No existing wetlands, natural habitat areas are being disturbed with this project.
10. TRANSITION TECHNIQUES
The project seeks to transition to both the surrounding neighborhood by its architectural character as well as parking lot the is
located off of the main street frontages.
11. ARCHITECTURE
The Circle C-Adult Residential Treatment Services is a proposed two-story, approximately 12,600 S.F., substance use disorder
treatment facility for men and women over the age of 18. The facility includes a supervisor office, therapist offices, nurses’ offices,
exercise room, kitchen and dining room as well as group gathering rooms and other smaller support spaces. The upper floor is
sleeping rooms 4 men’s and 4 women’s designed for two occupants each and separated by a living room and nurse station. There
is a courtyard enclosed by three sides of the building and a fence. The main entry is covered with a projecting roof element that
creates a sheltered and definable entry and front porch to add definition and articulation to the building’s entry. The building has
street frontage on three sides. Each side has distinctive characteristics while creating a cohesive overall design.
The architectural design is based on a modern interpretation of neighboring vernacular with use of shed and flat roof forms. The
proposed materials consist of cement fiber lap siding and board and batten vertical siding placed on the facades to accentuate
the horizontal and vertical wall elements. The brick projections and accents are placed in contemporary forms to create a modern
juxtaposition to the classic siding. The shed roofs slope with the low side on the street face in order to lower the scale of the
building.
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 27
Project Narrative
CIRCLE C-ADULT RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT SERVICES
0 10 20 40’
12. PHASING SCHEDULE
No phasing is proposed with this development.
UTILITIES
The sanitary sewer service is anticipated to connect to an existing City of Fort Collins 24-inch main that is located in the Academy
Park Apartments parking lot, immediately east of the proposed site. The project anticipates a grease interceptor that will be
located within the proposed parking lot. The 1.5-inch water service and fire line will connect to an existing City of Fort Collins
6-inch main in McHugh Street. The site has a 4-inch water service stub that will not be used and will be abandoned at the main.
Communication, electric, and natural gas utility services will be provided along E Elizabeth Street and McHugh Street.
LIGHTING
All lighting will meet City of Fort Collins requirements. A photometric plan has been submitted.
STORMWATER:
This site is located within the Spring Creek drainage basin and is included as part of the Spring Creek Master Drainage Plan.
Stormwater from this site as well as a portion of the parcel south of the site currently flows across the site undetained into the
curb and gutter located on Patton and McHugh Streets. Provisions will be made to capture the off-site flow from the parcel south
of the site and convey it to the curb and gutter on Mc Hugh Street. The site has been designed to meet the provisions of the
Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, adopted December 2018. Stormwater from the majority of the site will be captured,
treated, and released at the Historic 2-yr rate as required. Stormwater from the building will be conveyed via roof drains to the
underground detention pond. Stormwater from the courtyard, walks, and parking area will be captured in grated inlets in various
locations and conveyed to the same underground detention pond. The underground detention pond will be constructed under
the proposed parking lot south of the building and is proposed to be a StormTech chamber system. The StormTech system will
outlet into a structure equipped with an orifice plate to control the release rate prior to it being conveyed to the curb and gutter
on McHugh Street.
SITE PLAN:
McHugh
Elizabeth
Patton
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 28
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 29
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 30
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 31
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 32
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 33
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 34
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 35
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 36
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 37
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 38
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 39
Z/<s E ZͲ
d, ZD>>zZK< E>hD͘
^dKZ &ZKEdt/d,
/E^h>d '>/E'Ͳ
D Ed&/ ZKZE
dd E^//E'Ͳ W/Ed͕
^W,>d^,/E'> ^Ͳ
WZ Ͳ&/E/^, D d>
KtE^WKhdͲ
WZ Ͳ&/E/^, D d>KyͲ
^dz> 'hdd ZͲ
,KZ/KEd> D Ed
&/ Z>W^//E'Ͳ W/Ed
tKK&^/Ͳ W/Ed͕
WZ Ͳ&/E/^, D d>KyͲ
^dz> 'hdd ZͲ
,͘D͘KKZE&ZD Ͳ
W/EdͲ
WZ ^dKEZ d WͲ
Z/<s E Z EdEͲ
E͘>hD͘Z ^^
EhD Z>^Ͳ Z<'Zz
ϮϵΖͲϰΗ
ϮΗ
ϭϮΗ
Z/<s E ZͲ
d, ZD>>zZK< E>hD͘
^dKZ &ZKEdt/d,
/E^h>d '>/E'Ͳ Z<
'Zz&/E/^,
D Ed&/ ZKZE
dd E^//E'Ͳ W/Ed͕
^W,>d^,/E'> ^Ͳ
WZ Ͳ&/E/^, D d>
KtE^WKhdͲ
WZ Ͳ&/E/^, D d>Ky
^dz> 'hdd ZͲ
,KZ/KEd> D Ed
&/ Z>W^//E'Ͳ W/Ed
tKK&^/Ͳ W/Ed͕
WZ Ͳ&/E/^, D d>KyͲ
^dz> 'hdd ZͲ
,͘D͘KKZE&ZD Ͳ
W/EdͲ
D Ed&/ ZKZE
dd E^//E'Ͳ W/Ed͕
E͘>hD͘Z ^^
EhD Z>^Ͳ Z<'Zz
E͘>hD͘Z ^^
EhD Z>^Ͳ Z<'Zz
ϮϵΖͲϰΗ
&Z ^,/Z>Khs Z
'ZW,/^>
ϭΖͲϬΗ
ϮΖͲϬΗ
ϭϬΖͲϬΗ
ϰΖͲϬΗ
ϬϭͲ &/Z^d&>KKZW>E
ϭϬϬΖͲ ϬΗ
ϭϭͬϮΗ^YhZ dh
ϰΖͲϭΗ
ϮΗ
ϭϮΗ
ϯΗ
ϭϮΗ
Z/<s E ZͲ
d, ZD>>zZK< E>hD͘
^dKZ &ZKEdt/d,
/E^h>d '>/E'Ͳ
D Ed&/ ZKZE
dd E^//E'Ͳ W/Ed͕
^W,>d^,/E'> ^Ͳ
WZ Ͳ&/E/^, D d>
KtE^WKhdͲ
WZ Ͳ&/E/^, D d>KyͲ
^dz> 'hdd ZͲ
tKK& E ddKWK&,>&Ͳ, /',dZ/<t>>Ͳ ϰyϰ Z
WK^d^t/d,D/yK& ZϮyϮEϮyϰ^>d^Ͳ ^d/E&/E/^,
tKK'd dKDd,tKK& E Ͳ ^d/E&/E/^,
>>D ,E/> Yh/WD EddK
^Z E KZW/Ed W Z/dzKZ/EE ^
ϮΗ
ϭϮΗ
ϮϵΖͲϰΗ
WWZKy/Dd <EKyKy
>Kd/KE
Z/<s E ZͲ
d, ZD>>zZK< E>hD͘
^dKZ &ZKEdt/d,
/E^h>d '>/E'Ͳ
D Ed&/ ZKZE
dd E^//E'Ͳ W/Ed͕
^W,>d^,/E'> ^Ͳ
WZ Ͳ&/E/^, D d>
KtE^WKhdͲ
WZ Ͳ&/E/^, D d>KyͲ
^dz> 'hdd ZͲ
,KZ/KEd> D Ed
&/ Z>W^//E'Ͳ W/Ed
tKK&^/Ͳ W/Ed͕
WZ Ͳ&/E/^, D d>KyͲ
^dz> 'hdd ZͲ
E͘>hD͘Z ^^
EhD Z>^Ͳ Z<'Zz
ϮϵΖͲϳΗ
WWZKy/Dd >Kd/KE
K&&
'ZW,/^>
ϭΖͲϬΗ
ϮΖͲϬΗ
ϭϬΖͲϬΗ
ϰΖͲϬΗ
ͻ >> yWK^ > dZ/>͕W>hD/E'ED ,E/> Yh/WD Ed
ED d Z^dK ^Z E KZKd, Zt/^ W/Ed dKDd,
: Edh/>/E'Dd Z/>͘
ͻ >>Dd Z/>^^,KtE/E > sd/KE^Z KE Wdh>/EEdhZ
EZ ^h: ddKWWZKs>z>K>h/>/E'hd,KZ/d/ ^͕
KtE Z^͕EZ,/d d͘
ͻ Z & ZdK/s/>W>E^&KZ'Z/E'EdKWK'ZW,//E&KZDd/KE͘
ͻ Z & ZdK>E^W W>E^&KZW>Ed/E'/E&KZDd/KE͘
Z/<s E ZͲ
d, ZD>>zZK< E>hD͘
^dKZ &ZKEdt/d,
/E^h>d '>/E'Ͳ
D Ed&/ ZKZE
dd E^//E'Ͳ W/Ed͕
^W,>d^,/E'> ^Ͳ
WZ Ͳ&/E/^, D d>
KtE^WKhdͲ
tKK&^/Ͳ W/Ed͕
WZ Ͳ&/E/^, D d>KyͲ
^dz> 'hdd ZͲ
Z/<s E ZͲ
d, ZD>>zZK< E>hD͘
^dKZ &ZKEdt/d,
/E^h>d '>/E'Ͳ
D Ed&/ ZKZE
dd E^//E'Ͳ W/Ed͕
^W,>d^,/E'> ^Ͳ
WZ Ͳ&/E/^, D d>
KtE^WKhdͲ
WZ Ͳ&/E/^, D d>KyͲ
^dz> 'hdd ZͲ
,KZ/KEd> D Ed
&/ Z>W^//E'Ͳ W/Ed
tKKdZ/DͲ W/Ed͕
WZ Ͳ&/E/^, D d>KyͲ
^dz> 'hdd ZͲ
,͘D͘KKZE&ZD Ͳ
W/EdͲ
WZ ^dKEZ d WͲ
>>ZKK&dKWD ,E/> Yh/WD EddK ^Z E tKK&^/Ͳ W/Ed͕
ϮΗ
ϭϮΗ
ϮΗ
ϭϮΗ
E͘>hD͘Z ^^
EhD Z>^Ͳ Z<'Zz
ϮϵΖͲϰΗ
'ZW,/^>
ϭΖͲϬΗ
ϮΖͲϬΗ
ϭϬΖͲϬΗ
ϰΖͲϬΗ
ͻ >> yWK^ > dZ/>͕W>hD/E'ED ,E/> Yh/WD Ed
ED d Z^dK ^Z E KZKd, Zt/^ W/Ed dKDd,
: Edh/>/E'Dd Z/>͘
ͻ >>Dd Z/>^^,KtE/E > sd/KE^Z KE Wdh>/EEdhZ
EZ ^h: ddKWWZKs>z>K>h/>/E'hd,KZ/d/ ^͕
KtE Z^͕EZ,/d d͘
ͻ Z & ZdK/s/>W>E^&KZ'Z/E'EdKWK'ZW,//E&KZDd/KE͘
ͻ Z & ZdK>E^W W>E^&KZW>Ed/E'/E&KZDd/KE͘
WW^hD/dd>' E Z>EKd ^
Ϭ ϭͬϮ
Η
ϭΗ ϮΗ
ϱ ϰ ϯ Ϯ ϭ
ϮΗ
ϭϮΗ
Z/<s E ZͲ
d, ZD>>zZK< E>hD͘
^dKZ &ZKEdt/d,
/E^h>d '>/E'Ͳ
D Ed&/ ZKZE
dd E^//E'Ͳ W/Ed͕
,KZ/KEd> D Ed
&/ Z>W^//E'Ͳ W/Ed
tKK&^/Ͳ W/Ed͕
D Ed&/ ZdZ/DͲ W/Ed͕
WZ Ͳ&/E/^, D d>
KtE^WKhdͲ
WZ Ͳ&/E/^, D d>KyͲ
^dz> 'hdd ZͲ
ϮϵΖͲϰΗ
Z/<s E ZͲ
d, ZD>>zZK< E>hD͘
^dKZ &ZKEdt/d,
/E^h>d '>/E'Ͳ
D Ed&/ ZKZE
dd E^//E'Ͳ W/Ed͕
WZ Ͳ&/E/^, D d>
KtE^WKhdͲ
WZ Ͳ&/E/^, D d>KyͲ
^dz> 'hdd ZͲ
,KZ/KEd> D Ed
&/ Z>W^//E'Ͳ W/Ed
tKK&^/Ͳ W/Ed͕
WZ Ͳ&/E/^, D d>KyͲ
^dz> 'hdd ZͲ
>>ZKK&dKWD ,E/>
Yh/WD EddK ^Z E KZ
W/Ed W Z/dzKZ/EE ^
Z/<s E ZͲ
D Ed&/ ZdZ/DͲ W/Ed͕
ϮϵΖͲϳΗ
ϳ͘ϯ
Ϯ
Z/<s E ZͲ
d, ZD>>zZK< E>hD͘
^dKZ &ZKEdt/d,
/E^h>d '>/E'Ͳ
D Ed&/ ZKZE
dd E^//E'Ͳ W/Ed͕
,KZ/KEd> D Ed
&/ Z>W^//E'Ͳ W/Ed
tKK&^/Ͳ W/Ed͕
D Ed&/ ZdZ/DͲ W/Ed͕
>>ZKK&dKWD ,E/>
Yh/WD EddK ^Z E KZ
W/Ed W Z/dzKZ/EE ^
Ϭ ϭͬϮ
Η
ϭΗ ϮΗ
ϱ ϰ ϯ Ϯ ϭ
Ϭ ϭͬϮ
Η
ϭΗ ϮΗ
ϱ ϰ ϯ Ϯ ϭ
WZK: d
d
ZtE
ϳϭϮt,> Z^tz^h/d ͕ͲϭϬϬ
&KZdK>>/E^͕KϴϬϱϮϱ
;ϵϳϬͿϮϮϯͲϭϴϮϬ
ǁǁǁ͘ĂůŵϮƐ͘ĐŽŵ
WZ/Ed &/> ED ͗
ΞĂůŵϮƐϮϬϭϵ
EKd&KZKE^dZhd/KE
ϵͬϭϵͬϮϬϭϵϱ͗Ϯϭ͗ϬϮWD ϬϬϬϬͲWƌŽũĞĐƚͲ^͘ƌǀƚ
h/>/E'W Z^W d/s ^
ϭϵϮϳ
/^
ϬϵͬϬϱͬϮϬϭϵ
ϱ
/Z> WZK'ZDz^hDD/d^dKE
&KZdK>>/E^͕K
'Z/,Kh^ ͗
ϱ ^> ͗
ϭ ϯŝƌĚƐĞLJĞsŝĞǁ>ŽŽŬŝŶŐ^t
ϱ ^> ͗
ϯ ϯŝƌĚƐĞLJĞsŝĞǁ>ŽŽŬŝŶŐEt
EK /^^h d
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 44
ϱ ϰ ϯ Ϯ ϭ
WZK: d
d
ZtE
ϳϭϮt,> Z^tz^h/d ͕ͲϭϬϬ
&KZdK>>/E^͕KϴϬϱϮϱ
;ϵϳϬͿϮϮϯͲϭϴϮϬ
ǁǁǁ͘ĂůŵϮƐ͘ĐŽŵ
WZ/Ed &/> ED ͗
ΞĂůŵϮƐϮϬϭϵ
EKd&KZKE^dZhd/KE
ϵͬϭϵͬϮϬϭϵϱ͗ϮϮ͗ϭϬWD ϬϬϬϬͲWƌŽũĞĐƚͲ^͘ƌǀƚ
h/>/E'W Z^W d/s ^
ϭϵϮϳ
ƵƚŚŽƌ
ϬϵͬϬϱͬϮϬϭϵ
ϲ
/Z> WZK'ZDz^hDD/d^dKE
&KZdK>>/E^͕K
'Z/,Kh^ ͗
EK /^^h d
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 45
Ϭ ϭͬϮ
Η
ϭΗ ϮΗ
ϱ ϰ ϯ Ϯ ϭ
WZK: d
d
ZtE
ϳϭϮt,> Z^tz^h/d ͕ͲϭϬϬ
&KZdK>>/E^͕KϴϬϱϮϱ
;ϵϳϬͿϮϮϯͲϭϴϮϬ
ǁǁǁ͘ĂůŵϮƐ͘ĐŽŵ
WZ/Ed &/> ED ͗
ΞĂůŵϮƐϮϬϭϵ
EKd&KZKE^dZhd/KE
ϵͬϭϵͬϮϬϭϵϱ͗Ϯϯ͗ϱϳWD ϬϬϬϬͲWƌŽũĞĐƚͲ^͘ƌǀƚ
KEd ydh> > sd/KE^
Es/ t^
ϭϵϮϳ
ƵƚŚŽƌ
ϬϵͬϬϱͬϮϬϭϵ
sϭϬ
/Z> WZK'ZDz^hDD/d^dKE
&KZdK>>/E^͕K
'Z/,Kh^ ͗
EK /^^h d
sϭϬ ^> ͗ ϭΗсϮϬΖͲϬΗ
ϯ KEd ydh> > sd/KEͲ t ^d
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 46
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 47
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 48
2204 HOFFMAN DRIVE
LOVELAND, COLORADO 80538
(970) 278-0029
COLORADO
CIVIL
GROUP, INC.
ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 49
2204 HOFFMAN DRIVE
LOVELAND, COLORADO 80538
(970) 278-0029
COLORADO
CIVIL
GROUP, INC.
ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 50
2204 HOFFMAN DRIVE
LOVELAND, COLORADO 80538
(970) 278-0029
COLORADO
CIVIL
GROUP, INC.
ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 51
2204 HOFFMAN DRIVE
LOVELAND, COLORADO 80538
(970) 278-0029
COLORADO
CIVIL
GROUP, INC.
ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 52
DATE DESCRIPTION
REVISIONS
OF
DATE:
2204 HOFFMAN DRIVE
LOVELAND, COLORADO 80538
(970) 278-0029
CCGCOLORADO
CIVIL
GROUP, INC.
ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS
SHEET:
SCALE:
JOB NO:
CHECKED:
DESIGNED:
FILE NAME:
CALL THE UTILITY NOTIFICATION CENTER OF COLORADO
3 DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG
811 OR 1-800-922-1987
www.UNCC.org
AUGUST 14, 2019
0060.0002.00
CEM
10
HAH/EJJ/CEM/GAP
0" 1" BAR IS ONE INCH ON ORIGINAL DRAWING
1" = 20'
1" = 20'
02040
scale feet
LEGEND
NOTES
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 53
2204 HOFFMAN DRIVE
LOVELAND, COLORADO 80538
(970) 278-0029
COLORADO
CIVIL
GROUP, INC.
ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 54
1" = 20'
1" = 20'
02040
scale feet
0060.0002.00_GRADING
LEGEND
NOTES
DATE DESCRIPTION
REVISIONS
OF
DATE:
2204 HOFFMAN DRIVE
LOVELAND, COLORADO 80538
(970) 278-0029
CCGCOLORADO
CIVIL
GROUP, INC.
ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS
SHEET:
SCALE:
JOB NO:
CHECKED:
DESIGNED:
FILE NAME:
CALL THE UTILITY NOTIFICATION CENTER OF COLORADO
3 DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG
811 OR 1-800-922-1987
www.UNCC.org
AUGUST 14, 2019
0060.0002.00
CEM
10
HAH/EJJ/CEM/GAP
0" 1" BAR IS ONE INCH ON ORIGINAL DRAWING
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 55
2204 HOFFMAN DRIVE
LOVELAND, COLORADO 80538
(970) 278-0029
COLORADO
CIVIL
GROUP, INC.
ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 56
2204 HOFFMAN DRIVE
LOVELAND, COLORADO 80538
(970) 278-0029
COLORADO
CIVIL
GROUP, INC.
ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 57
2204 HOFFMAN DRIVE
LOVELAND, COLORADO 80538
(970) 278-0029
COLORADO
CIVIL
GROUP, INC.
ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 58
2204 HOFFMAN DRIVE
LOVELAND, COLORADO 80538
(970) 278-0029
COLORADO
CIVIL
GROUP, INC.
ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 59
van
2'-0"
OVERHANG
9'-0"
UTILITY
EASEMENT
4'-6"
WALK
6'-6"
TREE
LAWN
ACCESS FOR ADJACENT LOT
PARKING LOT
TRASH ENCLOSURE
LS501
X
22'-0" 17'-0"
12'-0"
9'-0"
EAST FACING SIGN: AMBULANCE/TRASH EXIT ONLY
WEST FACING SIGN: EXIT ONLY
8'-0"
REHABILITATION AND NURSING
CENTER OF THE ROCKIES
24'-0"
6'-0"
8'-0" 8'-0"
10'-6"
5'-0"
12'-6"
11'-0"
12'-3
1
2
"
10'-8"
13'-8"
8'-9
1
2"
5'-0"
5'-0"
5'-0"
PA
PA PA
PA
PA PA
PA
PA PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
(3) BIKES
BIKE RACK
LS501
X
INTERIOR COURTYARD
REFER TO LS401 FOR
MORE INFORMATION
LOT 1
25,619 SQ. FT
0.588 ACRES
ROW DEDICATED
BY THIS PLAT
2,039 SQ. FT
0.047 ACRES
ROW DEDICATED
BY THIS PLAT
2,039 SQ. FT
0.047 ACRES
CIRCLE C-ADULT RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT SERVICES
Being a Replat of Lot 2, East Elizabeth Subdivision,
Situate in the Southwest Quarter of Section 18, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M.
City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado
STATEMENT OF OWNERSHIP AND SUBDIVISION:
Know all persons by these presents, that the undersigned, being owner(s) of the following described land:
Lot 2, East Elizabeth Subdivision, City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado
. . . (which above described tract contains 0.635 acres, more or less)
for themselves and their successors in interest (collectively,“Owner”) have caused the above described land to be
surveyed and subdivided into lots, tracts and streets as shown on this Plat to be known as CIRCLE C-ADULT
RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT SERVICES (the "Development"), subject to all easements and rights-of-way now of
record or existing or indicated on this Plat. The rights and obligations of the Plat shall run with the land.
________________________________________________
BY: AS:
NOTARIAL CERTIFICATE
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss
COUNTY OF WELD )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of ___________, 20___.
Witness my Hand and Official Seal.
My commission expires: ________________.
VICINITY MAP
SCALE: 1" = 1000'
BASIS OF BEARINGS AND LINEAL UNIT DEFINITION
Assuming the West line of the Southwest Quarter of Section 18, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M.,
monumented as shown on this plat, as bearing South 00°01'03" West, a distance of 2639.10 feet and with all other
bearings contained herein relative thereto.
The lineal dimensions as contained herein are based upon the " U.S. Survey Foot."
TITLE COMMITMENT NOTE
For all information regarding easements, rights-of-way and title of records, Majestic Surveying, LLC relied upon Title
Commitment Number 580-F0534837-383-JNB, dated July 27, 2016, as prepared by Fidelity National Title Insurance
Company to delineate the aforesaid information.
This survey does not constitute a title search by Majestic Surveying, LLC to determine ownership or easements of
record.
Feet
02040
MAJESTIC SURVEYING, LLC 1111 DIAMOND VALLEY DRIVE #104, WINDSOR, CO 80550
PROJECT NO: 2018143-A
DATE: 6-20-2019
DRAWN BY: SIP
PROJECT NAME: ELIZABETH PATTON
FILE NAME: 2018143-A
CLIENT: CCG
CHECKED BY: SIP SCALE: 1" = 20'
1
SHEET 1 OF 1
REVISIONS: DATE:
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE
I, Steven Parks, a Colorado Licensed Professional Land Surveyor, do hereby state that this Subdivision Plat was
prepared from an actual survey under my personal supervision, that the monumentation as indicated hereon were
found or set as shown, and that the forgoing Plat is an accurate representation thereof, all this to the best of my
knowledge, information and belief.
Steven Parks - On Behalf of Majestic Surveying, LLC
Colorado Licensed Professional Land Surveyor #38348
NOTICE
According to Colorado law you must commence any legal action based upon any defect in this survey within three
years after you first discover such defect. In no event may any action based upon any defect in this survey be
commenced more than ten years from the date of the certification shown hereon. (13-80-105 C.R.S. 2012)
CERTIFICATE OF DEDICATION:
LIENHOLDERS
By:_____________________________________ As:_____________________________________
Witness my hand and seal this ______ day of ___________, 20 ___.
NOTARIAL CERTIFICATE
STATE OF COLORADO)
ss
COUNTY OF LARIMER)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of ___________, 20___.
Witness my Hand and Official Seal.
My commission expires: ________________.
MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE:
The Owner hereby warrants and guarantees to the City, for a period of two (2) years from the date of completion and
first acceptance by the City of the improvements warranted hereunder, the full and complete maintenance and repair
of the improvements to be constructed in connection with the Development which is the subject of this Plat. This
warranty and guarantee is made in accordance with the City Land Use Code and/or the Transitional Land Use
Regulations, as applicable. This guarantee applies to the streets and all other appurtenant structures and amenities
lying within the rights-of-way, Easements and other public properties, including, without limitation, all curbing,
sidewalks, bike paths, drainage pipes, culverts, catch basins, drainage ditches and landscaping. Any maintenance
and/or repair required on utilities shall be coordinated with the owning utility company or department.
The Owner shall maintain said improvements in a manner that will assure compliance on a consistent basis with all
construction standards, safety requirements and environmental protection requirements of the City. The Owner shall
also correct and repair, or cause to be corrected and repaired, all damages to said improvements resulting from
development-related or building-related activities. In the event the Owner fails to correct any damages within thirty
(30) days after written notice thereof, then said damages may be corrected by the City and all costs and charges billed
to and paid by the Owner. The City shall also have any other remedies available to it as authorized by law. Any
damages which occurred prior to the end of said two (2) year period and which are unrepaired at the termination of
said period shall remain the responsibility of the Owner.
Notice of Other Documents:
All persons take notice that the Owner has executed certain documents pertaining to this Development which create
certain rights and obligations of the Development, the Owner and/or subsequent Owners of all or portions of the
Development site, many of which obligations constitute promises and covenants that, along with the obligations under
this Plat, run with the land. The said documents may also be amended from time to time and may include, without
limitation, the Development Agreement, Site And Landscape Covenants, Final Site Plan, Final Landscape Plan, and
Architectural Elevations, which documents are on file in the office of the clerk of the City and should be closely
examined by all persons interested in purchasing any portion of the Development site.
REPAIR GUARANTEE:
In consideration of the approval of this final Plat and other valuable consideration, the Owner does hereby agree to
hold the City harmless for a five (5) year period, commencing upon the date of completion and first acceptance by the
City of the improvements to be constructed in connection with the development which is the subject of this Plat, from
any and all claims, damages, or demands arising on account of the design and construction of public improvements of
the property shown herein; and the Owner furthermore commits to make necessary repairs to said public
improvements, to include, without limitation, the roads, streets, fills, embankments, ditches, cross pans, sub-drains,
culverts, walls and bridges within the right-of-way, Easements and other public properties, resulting from failures
caused by design and/or construction defects. This agreement to hold the City harmless includes defects in materials
and workmanship, as well as defects caused by or consisting of settling trenches, fills or excavations.
Further, the Owner warrants that he/she owns fee simple title to the property shown hereon and agrees that the City
shall not be liable to the Owner or his/her successors in interest during the warranty period, for any claim of damages
resulting from negligence in exercising engineering techniques and due caution in the construction of cross drains,
drives, structures or buildings, the changing of courses of streams and rivers, flooding from natural creeks and rivers,
and any other matter whatsoever on private property. Any and all monetary liability occurring under this paragraph
shall be the liability of the Owner. I further warrant that I have the right to convey said land according to this Plat.
ATTORNEY'S CERTIFICATION:
I hereby certify that this Subdivision Plat has been duly executed as required pursuant to Section 2.2.3(C)(3)(a)
through (e) inclusive of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins and that all persons signing this Subdivision
Plat on behalf of a corporation or other entity are duly authorized signatories under the laws of the State of Colorado.
This Certification is based upon the records of the Clerk and Recorder of Larimer County, Colorado as of the date of
execution of the Plat and other information discovered by me through reasonable inquiry and is limited as authorized
by Section 2.2.3(C)(3)(f) of the Land Use Code.
Attorney:
Address:
Registration No.:
NOTICE
ALL RESPONSIBILITIES AND COSTS OF OPERATION, MAINTENANCE AND RECONSTRUCTION OF THE PRIVATE
STREETS AND/OR DRIVES LOCATED ON THE PRIVATE PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS PLAT SHALL BE
BORNE BY THE OWNERS OF SAID PROPERTY, EITHER INDIVIDUALLY, OR COLLECTIVELY, THROUGH A PROPERTY
OWNERS' ASSOCIATION, IF APPLICABLE. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS SHALL HAVE NO OBLIGATION OF
OPERATION, MAINTENANCE OR RECONSTRUCTION OF SUCH PRIVATE STREETS AND/OR DRIVES NOR SHALL THE
CITY HAVE ANY OBLIGATION TO ACCEPT SUCH STREETS AND/OR DRIVES AS PUBLIC STREETS OR DRIVES.
APPROVED AS TO FORM, CITY ENGINEER
By the City Engineer, City of Fort Collins, Colorado this _____ day of _____________________, 20___.
________________________________
City Engineer
PLANNING APPROVAL
By the Director of Community Development and Neighborhood Services the City of Fort Collins, Colorado this
_____ day of
_____________________, 20___.
________________________________
City Engineer
NOTE
There shall be no private conditions, covenants or restrictions that prohibit or limit the installation of
resource conserving equipment or landscaping that are allowed by Sections 12-120 & 12-122 of the City
Code.
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 6
Packet Pg. 61
COURTYARD WALL REFER TO
ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS FOR
MORE INFORMATION
12'-8"
BENCH
LS501
X
5'-0"
20'-0"
9'-2"
WHEELSTOP, TYP.
LS501
X
ENCLOSED BIKE
PARKING (1)
10'-0"
DRAINAGE AND
UTILITY EASEMENT
5'-0"
5'-0"
PLAN FOR MORE INFORMATION)
(REFER TO GRADING
LANDSCAPE WALL
LS501
X
HANDRAIL DETAIL)
(REFER TO ARCH. FOR
STAIRS
LS501
X
5'-0"
HANDRAIL DETAIL)
(REFER TO ARCH. FOR
STAIRS
LS501
X
FRONT OF RAISED WALK TO HAVE
BRICK FACING TO MATCH BUILDING
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
EASEMENT
ROLLED TOP EDGER (6 HT. / 7 GAUGE MIN.)
6" CONCRETE
STD. GRAY, MEDIUM BROOM FINISH
4" CONCRETE
STD. GRAY, MEDIUM BROOM FINISH
CRUSHED LIMESTONE
PAVEMENT
TABLE AND CHAIRS
LOUNGE CHAIR AND SIDE TABLE
4'X4' GARDEN BOX
BOULDER SEATING
BIKE RACK
SIGN
LIGHT (REFER TO PHOTOMETRIC PLAN FOR
MORE INFORMATION)
PLANTING AREA
SITE LEGEND:
PA
10' 0 5' 10' 20' N O R T H
Sheet
Sheet Name
Checked By:
Drawn By:
Date:
CR
SL
07.03.2019
Circle C-Adult Residential
Treatment Services
PRELIMINARY
DEVELOPMENT
PLAN
LS101
SITE PLAN
24’-0”
22’-0”
LUC Modification Request
CIRCLE C-ADULT RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT SERVICES
SECTION 3.2.2 - ACCESS, CIRCULATION AND PARKING
Land use code:
(L) parking stall dimensions. Table a (1) standard spaces . Parking spaces for standard vehicles shall conform with the
standard car dimensions shown on table a, (row f) two-way drive aisle width = 24 feet
Modification:
Two-way drive aisle width = 22 feet, 2 foot reduction
Modification Requests Standards applied:
4) the plan as submitted will not diverge from the standards of the Land Use Code that are authorized by this Division to
be modified except in a nominal, inconsequential way when considered from the perspective of the entire development
plan, and will continue to advance the purposes of the Land Use Code as contained in Section 1.2.2.
Reducing the drive aisle by 2’-0” is nominal and inconsequential for the parking lot as the parking lot has only 14 spaces
and the site will have only 52-65 average daily trips (ADT).
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 5
Packet Pg. 60
WZK: d
d
ZtE
ϳϭϮt,> Z^tz^h/d ͕ͲϭϬϬ
&KZdK>>/E^͕KϴϬϱϮϱ
;ϵϳϬͿϮϮϯͲϭϴϮϬ
ǁǁǁ͘ĂůŵϮƐ͘ĐŽŵ
WZ/Ed &/> ED ͗
ΞĂůŵϮƐϮϬϭϵ
EKd&KZKE^dZhd/KE
ϵͬϭϵͬϮϬϭϵϱ͗ϮϬ͗ϬϭWD ϬϬϬϬͲWƌŽũĞĐƚͲ^͘ƌǀƚ
h/>/E' > sd/KE^
ϭϵϮϳ
ƵƚŚŽƌ
ϬϵͬϬϱͬϮϬϭϵ
ϰ
/Z> WZK'ZDz^hDD/d^dKE
&KZdK>>/E^͕K
'Z/,Kh^ ͗
EK /^^h d
ϰ ^> ͗ ϯͬϭϲΗсϭΖͲϬΗ
ϭ WWͲ KhZdzZͲ > sd/KEϭ
ϰ ^> ͗ ϯͬϭϲΗсϭΖͲϬΗ
ϯ WWͲ KhZdzZͲ > sd/KEϯ
ϰ ^> ͗ ϯͬϭϲΗсϭΖͲϬΗ
Ϯ WWͲ KhZdzZͲ > sd/KEϮ
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 43
WZK: d
d
ZtE
ϳϭϮt,> Z^tz^h/d ͕ͲϭϬϬ
&KZdK>>/E^͕KϴϬϱϮϱ
;ϵϳϬͿϮϮϯͲϭϴϮϬ
ǁǁǁ͘ĂůŵϮƐ͘ĐŽŵ
WZ/Ed &/> ED ͗
ΞĂůŵϮƐϮϬϭϵ
EKd&KZKE^dZhd/KE
ϵͬϭϵͬϮϬϭϵϱ͗ϭϵ͗ϯϭWD ϬϬϬϬͲWƌŽũĞĐƚͲ^͘ƌǀƚ
h/>/E' > sd/KE^
ϭϵϮϳ
ƵƚŚŽƌ
ϬϵͬϬϱͬϮϬϭϵ
ϯ
/Z> WZK'ZDz^hDD/d^dKE
&KZdK>>/E^͕K
'Z/,Kh^ ͗
EK /^^h d
ϯ ^> ͗ ϯͬϭϲΗсϭΖͲϬΗ
ϭ WWͲ ^Khd, ^d > sd/KE
ϯ ^> ͗ ϯͬϭϲΗсϭΖͲϬΗ
Ϯ WWͲ EKZd, ^d > sd/KE
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 42
WW^hD/dd>' E Z>EKd ^
Ϭ ϭͬϮ
Η
ϭΗ ϮΗ
ϱ ϰ ϯ Ϯ ϭ
WZK: d
d
ZtE
ϳϭϮt,> Z^tz^h/d ͕ͲϭϬϬ
&KZdK>>/E^͕KϴϬϱϮϱ
;ϵϳϬͿϮϮϯͲϭϴϮϬ
ǁǁǁ͘ĂůŵϮƐ͘ĐŽŵ
WZ/Ed &/> ED ͗
ΞĂůŵϮƐϮϬϭϵ
EKd&KZKE^dZhd/KE
ϵͬϭϵͬϮϬϭϵϱ͗ϭϴ͗ϰϭWD ϬϬϬϬͲWƌŽũĞĐƚͲ^͘ƌǀƚ
h/>/E' > sd/KE^
ϭϵϮϳ
ƵƚŚŽƌ
ϬϵͬϬϱͬϮϬϭϵ
Ϯ
/Z> WZK'ZDz^hDD/d^dKE
&KZdK>>/E^͕K
'Z/,Kh^ ͗
Ϯ ^> ͗ ϯͬϭϲΗсϭΖͲϬΗ
ϭ WWͲ ^Khd, > sd/KE
Ϯ ^> ͗ ϯͬϭϲΗсϭΖͲϬΗ
Ϯ WWͲ t ^d > sd/KE
EK /^^h d
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 41
^d >,EZ/>
KE>zd^d/Z^Ͳ
W/Ed͘
ϮΗdžϰΗdh ^d >
'hZZ/>
>h^d Z^E
dKWZ/>Ͳ W/Ed͘
ϭͬϮΗdžϮΗΘϭͬϮΗdžϰΗ
^d >W>d
'hZZ/>,KZ͘
W/< d^Ͳ W/Ed
ϭ
'ϭ͘ϲ
ͻ >> yWK^ > dZ/>͕W>hD/E'ED ,E/> Yh/WD Ed
ED d Z^dK ^Z E KZKd, Zt/^ W/Ed dKDd,
: Edh/>/E'Dd Z/>͘
ͻ >>Dd Z/>^^,KtE/E > sd/KE^Z KE Wdh>/EEdhZ
EZ ^h: ddKWWZKs>z>K>h/>/E'hd,KZ/d/ ^͕
KtE Z^͕EZ,/d d͘
ͻ Z & ZdK/s/>W>E^&KZ'Z/E'EdKWK'ZW,//E&KZDd/KE͘
ͻ Z & ZdK>E^W W>E^&KZW>Ed/E'/E&KZDd/KE͘
WW^hD/dd>' E Z>EKd ^
ϱ ϰ ϯ Ϯ ϭ
WZK: d
d
ZtE
ϳϭϮt,> Z^tz^h/d ͕ͲϭϬϬ
&KZdK>>/E^͕KϴϬϱϮϱ
;ϵϳϬͿϮϮϯͲϭϴϮϬ
ǁǁǁ͘ĂůŵϮƐ͘ĐŽŵ
WZ/Ed &/> ED ͗
ΞĂůŵϮƐϮϬϭϵ
EKd&KZKE^dZhd/KE
ϵͬϭϵͬϮϬϭϵϱ͗ϭϳ͗ϰϵWD ϬϬϬϬͲWƌŽũĞĐƚͲ^͘ƌǀƚ
h/>/E' > sd/KE^
ϭϵϮϳ
ƵƚŚŽƌ
ϬϵͬϬϱͬϮϬϭϵ
ϭ
/Z> WZK'ZDz^hDD/d^dKE
&KZdK>>/E^͕K
'Z/,Kh^ ͗
ϭ ^> ͗ ϯͬϭϲΗсϭΖͲϬΗ
ϭ WWͲ ^d > sd/KE
ϭ ^> ͗ ϯͬϭϲΗсϭΖͲϬΗ
Ϯ WWͲ EKZd, > sd/KE
EK /^^h d
ϭϯͬϰΗсϭΖͲϬΗ ^> ͗
ϯ yd Z/KZ,EZ/>ͬ'hZZ/> d/>
ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 40
spaces
subsection
3.2.2(k):
This subsection requires a minimum of 10 parking spaces based on number of
beds and number of employees.
• 14 are provided.
Standard Requirement for reference:
.33 per bed plus 1 per two employees on major shift.
16 beds x.33 = 5.28 plus 8 employees on major shifts / 2 = 4.
5.28 plus 4 = 10 total required.
Complies
Packet Pg. 16