Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 06/03/2014 - FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 086, 2014, MAKING VAgenda Item 13 Item # 13 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY June 3, 2014 City Council STAFF Ted Shepard, Chief Planner SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 086, 2014, Making Various Amendments to the Land Use Code. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to adopt a variety of changes, additions and clarifications to the Land Use Code that have been identified since the last update in July 2013. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The Land Use Code was first adopted in March 1997. Subsequent revisions have been recommended on a regular basis to make changes, additions, deletions and clarifications that have been identified since the last update. The proposed changes are offered in order to resolve implementation issues and to continuously improve both the overall quality and “user-friendliness” of the Code. The proposed revisions (except for some late changes to Sections 2.13.1, 2.13.2 and 2.13.10 which will be considered by the Board prior to City Council’s Second Reading of Ordinance No. 086, 2014) were considered by the Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Board at its May 8, 2014 regular meeting. All of the proposed revisions included in the Ordinance except as mentioned above have received unanimous approval from the P&Z Board. While there are a high number of revisions compared to previous years, there are three new additions to the Land Use Code that are highlighted for Council’s benefit. A new Site Plan Advisory Review process is being added to address development projects associated with other governmental agencies rather than relying on state statutes. (Ordinance Section 2, Item Number 975.) A comprehensive approach to allowing and regulating three distinct sizes of Solar Gardens is being added in response to the City’s new Solar Power Purchase Program. (33 Ordinance Sections, Item Number 967.) In the River Downtown Redevelopment (R-D-R) zone, the new development standards have been significantly revised and improved in order to codify the findings R-D-R Design Standards and Guidelines project that is reaching its conclusion. (Ordinance Section 64, Item Number 987.) During the Board’s deliberation, the following topic was discussed individually: Addition of Permitted Use: Ordinance Section 1. Item number 976 Agenda Item 13 Item # 13 Page 2 This revision adds a purpose statement and two applicability statements to provide clarification about the process. Also, where an applicant is requesting adding a use within or adjacent to an existing residential neighborhood, two, not one, neighborhood meetings would be required at specific time points in the process. Three members of the public addressed the Board and provided letters to supplement their testimony. While these speakers supported the proposed code revisions in draft Ordinance, they went on to ask the Board to also consider eliminating the Addition of Permitted Use process in nine zone districts on the basis that these districts feature residential land uses and, as such, are not appropriate locations for requests for an Addition of Permitted Use. These speakers represented that the A.P.U. process offers a degree of land use flexibility that may be more suited for non-residential zones but contained the risk of unpredictability for residential zones. The Board discussed this issue and decided that the changes suggested by the public input went beyond the scope of the 2014 annual update to the Land Use Code. The Board indicated that in the fall of 2013, a P&Z sub-committee, along with interested citizens, explored a wide range of issues associated with the Addition of Permitted Use process and determined that the minor changes as contained in the draft Ordinance were reasonable. Further, the Board indicated that, in general, the A.P.U. process is working and effectively balances land use flexibility with predictability on a case-by-case basis. The Board considered the public input and, after deliberation, decided to not offer any changes to the draft Ordinance as it relates to the Addition of Permitted Use process but added that the topic bears further discussion at an upcoming work session. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS Code revision number 982 provides for greater opportunities for Unlimited Indoor Recreation Establishments (greater than 5,000 square feet) and Limited Indoor Recreation Establishments (under 5,000 square feet) by allowing these uses to now go into the H-C, Harmony Corridor zone, but only as secondary uses. Unlimited Indoor Recreation uses include large-scale gymnasium-type facilities such as for tennis, basketball, swimming, indoor soccer and the like. Limited Indoor Recreation uses include yoga studios, exercise clubs, dance studios, martial arts schools, and arts or crafts studios. This change allows the Land Use Code to respond to changing trends and conditions by providing for a wider distribution of facilities that promote recreation, health and wellness across the entire City. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Code revision number 967 enacts a comprehensive approach to allowing solar installations of three varying sizes on a city-wide basis in 24 zone districts. The City of Fort Collins recently adopted the Solar Power Purchase Program (SP3), which will buy about 5 megawatts (MW) of new, locally-installed solar capacity to help meet the community’s renewable energy commitments under the Colorado Renewable Energy Standard. With new opportunities for residents and businesses to take advantage of the SP3 and other solar program elements, as well as growing interest in solar energy sources in general, there will now be three new land uses, along with new rules and provisions, for small, medium and large-scale solar energy systems. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION All of the proposed changes (except those changes to Sections 2.13.1, 2.13.2 and 2.13.10 which will be considered by the Board prior to second reading) have been discussed and refined in conjunction with the Planning and Zoning Board at various work sessions between February and May of this year. On May 8, 2014, at the regular meeting of the P&Z Board, the Board considered the proposed revisions and voted unanimously to recommend to City Council approval of all the changes. In addition, the revisions to the R-D-R, River Downtown Redevelopment Zone District were specifically discussed with other boards and commissions because these changes codify the findings of a separate design project. Referred to as the Fort Collins R-D-R River Downtown Redevelopment Zone District Design Standards and Guidelines, the project resulted in significant revisions to the development standards within this Agenda Item 13 Item # 13 Page 3 district. Both the proposed standards and guidelines were presented to the following: Landmark Preservation Commission Downtown Development Authority Parking Advisory Board Economic Advisory Commission Natural Resources Advisory Board The design standards are codified in the Ordinance. The supplemental Design Guidelines, however, which contain images and suggestions, are being brought forward for Council consideration as a separate Resolution (Attachment 2 in Agenda Item 17, Resolution 2014-046 Adopting the Fort Collins River Downtown Redevelopment Zone Design Guidelines). PUBLIC OUTREACH The proposed revisions to the Addition of Permitted Use were derived from discussions among the Planning and Zoning Board ad-hoc sub-committee and interested citizens. ATTACHMENTS 1. List of Issues (PDF) 2. Summary Report - All Issues (PDF) 3. Cross Reference Report - Issues with Ordinance Section Numbers (PDF) 4. City Council Work Session Summary, April 8, 2014 (PDF) 5. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes, May 8, 2014 (PDF) 6. Ordinance No. 086, 2014 (PDF) Land Use Code Issues Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Issue ID# Issue Name 904 Amend 4.17(B)(3) - R-D-R Zone - to allow parking lots and parking structures as principal uses and to allow such parking lots to be partially improved but only on an interim basis of three years with an extension provision. 914 Amend 4.9(D)(6)(b) - N-C-B Front Yard Setback - to clarify that the 60-foot minimum front yard setback must apply to not just the front yard but also the side yard (south of University Avenue) and clarify that it applies to Shields Street only. 940 Clarify 4.7(F)(7) (N-C-L), 4.8(F)(7) (N-C-M), and 4.9(F)(7) (N-C-B) - so that the prohibition on subdividing a lot from front to back does not apply to corner lots. 945 Clarify 3.2.3(E) - Shading - 3.5.1(G) - Building Height Review - to add T.O.D. as exempt from the Shading standard and coordinate how buildings in the Downtown, Community Commercial and T.O.D. must still address both Shading and Building Height Review. 954 Add to 4.9(B)(3) - N-C-B Permitted Use List - Type 2 - Single Family Attached Dwellings - as this housing type is well-suited for this zone district. 955 Amend 5.1.2 - Definition of Parking Structure - so that it includes all manner of structured parking (i.e. under- structure, one level, podium), not just a parking structure consisting of more than one level as presently written. 956 Amend 3.10.5(F) - Development Standards for T.O.D. Overlay - Articulation - to add that multi-story buildings must also feature a distinct base, middle and top and include north of Prospect Road. 958 Amend 2.2.10(A)(1)(e) and 2.2.10(A)(2)(e) - Minor Amendments - to clarify that criterion (e) also includes P.D.P.'s rather than just site specific development plans for consistency with the entire Minor Amendment process and standards. 959 Amend 2.3.2(H)(3) - O.D.P. standards - to clarify that the requirement to comply with the Transportation Level of Service per 3.6.4 requires the submittal of a T.I.S. at the master level only, not the full, intermediate or memo level per LCUASS. 960 Amend 3.5.2(C ) - Residential Building Standards - and 3.8.30(F)(2) - Multi-family Standards - to enhance variation in building design for both single family attached (townhomes) buildings and multi-family buildings. 961 Amend 3.2.1(E)(5) - Parking Lot Interior Landscaping - to revise the parking lot figure that shows 6% landscaping. 962 Amend 4.6(E) - M-M-N Building Height - to replace the allowance of adding a fourth story if located within a prescribed distance from an intersection. 963 Amend 3.10.4[C] - Off-street Parking in T.O.D. - to allow flexibility to the standard that requires parking to be located only behind, above or below street facing buildings with no parking along a street. 964 Amend 2.2.10(A)(3) - Referral of Minor Amendment - so that a referred Minor Amendment can be referred to the Hearing Officer if the original plan was a Type One. 965 Amend 4.16(B)(2) - Downtown Zone Permitted Uses - to allow existing single familly detached dwellings as a permitted use. 966 Amend 3.8.25(B) - Abandonment Period/Reconstruction of Permitted Uses- to change the requirement for the start of reconstruction following a calamity from 6 to 12 months. 967 Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 1 of 3 Issue ID# Issue Name 968 Amend 2.2.11(A) regarding notice of transfer in equitable interest of the ownership of land that is subject to a pending application. 969 Amend 3.6.2(O) - Easements - so that a public access easement needs to be stubbed to the property line just like a street connection. 970 Amend 2.7.3[C]- Building Permit Review Procedures, 2.2.3(D)(3) - Development Review Fees and 2.13.3(E) - Application for Vested Rights and Takings Determinations - to clarify waiving fees for the Fort Collins Housing Authority/other qualifying agencies. 971 Amend 2.2.4 - Step 4 Determination of Sufficiency - and in succeeding references from 2.3.2 through 2.15.2 (11 occurrences) so that Determination of Sufficiency is replaced by Review of Applications for internal consistency. 972 Amend 3.10.4(D)(1) - T.O.D. Parking Structure Design - so that where parking structures face streets, the list of allowable uses may contain other non-residential uses besides retail. 973 Clarify 4.5(E)(2)(e)2 - LMN Development Standards - so that the reference back to 3.5.3[C] - Build-to Line - Exceptions - is required in order to set the building back greater than 15 feet. 974 Amend 4.5(E)(2)(e) - LMN Development Standards - Building Massing - to remove a duplicate reference to a building maximum of 20,000 square feet. 975 Amend the pertinent sections of Article Two to introduce the Site Plan Advisory Review process as a component of the Land Use Code so as to not solely rely on State Statutes. Add a definition. 976 Amend 1.3.4(A) - Addition of Permitted Use - to add a Purpose Statement and two Applicability Statements that further clarifies the process. 977 Amend 1.3.4[C] - Addition of Permitted Use - Planning and Zoning Board Authority and Limitation - to require a second neighborhood information meeting if the subject site is in or adjacent to an existing residential neighborhood. 978 Add to 5.1.2 - Definitions and Article Four - Zone Districts - to create a new land use - Music Studio - by providing a new definition and assigning to nine zone districts as a Type One use. 979 Amend 3.8.4(A) - Child Care Regulations - to align the size of the required outdoor play area with the expected number of children at any one time and to match the State, which is the licensing authority, and define Drop in Child Care Center. 980 Amend 4.16(G) - Downtown Zone - to add a map for the Old Town Historic Landmark District standards and guidelines and a cross-reference to Chapter 14 of the City Code. 981 Amend 2.2.6(A)(E) - Notice - so if written notice, once mailed, is not actually received and if a sign, once posted, is rendered unreadable, then such condition does not affect the validity of any hearing, meeting, or determination by the decision maker. 982 Amend 4.26(B)(3)[c] - Harmony Corridor Permitted Use List - and 4.26(D)(2) - Harmony Corridor Secondary Uses - to add Unlimited and Limited Indoor Recreational Use and Facility as Type Two and as secondary uses in the H-C zone. 983 Amend 2.10.2(F) - Zoning Board of Appeals - to change the 7 day notice requirement to 14 days to be consistent with the requirement for other hearing types. 984 Amend 2.9.4 - Text and Map Review Procedures - to clarify that City Council can overturn a rezoning protest by a simple majority, not by a two-thirds majority. 985 Remove the Transitional Land Use Regulations from the Code as they are now obsolete. 986 Amend 2.2.11(D)(3) - Vested Rights - to clarify the standard for internal consistency. Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 2 of 3 Issue ID# Issue Name 987 Amend 4.17(D)(E) - R-D-R Development Standards - to implement new design standards which are intended to maintain the character of the area and assist applicants in preparation of development plans and add a cross reference to supplemental guidelines. Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 3 of 3 Annotated Issue List Land Use Code Maintenance Process 999900004444 Amend 4.17(B)(3) - R-D-R Zone - to allow parking lots and parking structures as principal uses and to allow such parking lots to be partially improved but only on an interim basis of three years with an extension provision. This item addresses two problems/issues. First, Parking Lots and Parking Structures are not currently allowed as principal uses in the R-D-R zone. These are uses that can be a key part of mixed, pedestrian-oriented places, and staff believes they are important uses to allow in the R-D-R zone. These uses are allowed in D, Downtown zone across Jefferson Street. The importance and suitability of these uses are demonstrated by the public lots and garages which support multiple properties in the Downtown core area. Staff is not certain why these uses are not permitted. Regardless of any original reasons, it is now apparent to staff that they are beneficial, if not crucial, uses that need to be added to the Permitted Uses list. Second, an issue has been brought up regarding the evolution of redevelopment in the area. Per the name of the zoning district, the area is envisioned to shift from its past focus on industrial operations, to more intensive redevelopment of housing, businesses and workplaces. This transition is expected to occur over the long term on a parcel-by-parcel basis. Providing parking for these uses can be a challenge for some of the small parcels in the area. At the same time, there may be former vehicle use or outdoor storage areas becoming underutilized on other parcels. For the long term, more on-street parking is planned for Willow Street, and the need for a parking structure or shared parking lot has been under discussion for years. However, no definite action has been identified for a structure or lot. In the meantime, larger parcels that may be presently under-utilized would be prime candidates to provide needed parking on an interim basis. An off-site parking lot as a principal use would benefit the smaller parcels in the short term until a long term solution is realized. Otherwise, some development could be delayed until the ultimate parking solution is constructed, or it could occur without the benefit of such parking. 1. Allow Parking lots and Parking structures as a principal uses in the R-D-R, subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Board. These uses are currently allowed in eight zone districts, including all three sub-districts of the Downtown zone. 2. Allow Parking lots as a principal use that that provide shared parking with other properties use on an interim basis, without full improvements under applicable standards (e.g., paving, lighting, landscaping). The level of public improvement would be determined by Engineering in the review process. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 63 4.17(B)(3) Adds parking lots/structures in R-D-R as Type Two. Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 1 of 21 63 999911114444 Amend 4.9(D)(6)(b) - N-C-B Front Yard Setback - to clarify that the 60-foot minimum front yard setback must apply to not just the front yard but also the side yard (south of University Avenue) and clarify that it applies to Shields Street only. The West Central Neighborhoods Plan was adopted in 1999 and calls for the residential character along Shields Street to be preserved. Four distinct areas for preservation were identified; one being the west side of Shields Street between University Avenue and Prospect Road. As a result, the 60-foot minimum front yard was added to the development standards in the N-C-B zone. But, the standard fails to clarify that the large front yard setback applies only to lots abutting Shields Street. Clearly, lots that do not abut Shields Street are not intended to feature a 60-foot setback and are eligible to be subject to 15-foot front yard setback for the house and 20-feet for the garage. Clarify that the standard applies to lots abutting Shields Street only. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 53 4.9(D)(6)(b) Clarifies applicability of the setback standard along Shields. 999944440000 Clarify 4.7(F)(7) (N-C-L), 4.8(F)(7) (N-C-M), and 4.9(F)(7) (N-C-B) - so that the prohibition on subdividing a lot from front to back does not apply to corner lots. The code was changed in 2004 to prohibit subdividing an existing lot from front to back in the NCL, NCM or NCB zones. This change was one of several adopted changes intended to limit the impact of rear lot development in the old town zones. Other changes to accomplish this purpose were to limit the footprint size of rear lot buildings and to establish a maximum floor area ratio for building coverage in the rear half of a lot. The current standard was adopted to prevent carriage houses from being subdivided off from the primary house with the result that there would be two separate owners. As a result, carriage houses that don’t front on a street are to be subordinate to the primary house and under the control and ownership of the primary house owner, rather than being on a separate lot along the alley under the potential ownership of an absentee landlord. The standard wasn’t intended to preclude the further subdividing of a corner lot in such a manner that the two resulting lots would both have lot frontage on a street. A new lot and house that fronts on a public street is not a carriage house. Also, the established character of many blocks in the east side and west side neighborhoods include corner lots that have been subdivided previously, with a new house having been constructed on what was once the rear portion of the corner lot. Changing the 2004 code provision would allow corner lots to continue to be redeveloped in a manner consistent with the established pattern of the neighborhoods. The proposed solution is to change the standard so that it accurately reflects that the original intent of the regulation was to apply the lot split prohibition only to interior block lots where carriage houses could not front on a street. All of the other regulations pertaining to setbacks and lot/floor area ratios should and would still apply on a corner lot, but the lot split prohibition per se should not apply to corner lot situations where a house is designed to front on a street. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 2 of 21 49 4.7(F)(7) Clarifies the intent of the standard. 51 4.8(F)(7) Clarifies the intent of the standard. 54 4.9(E)(7) Clarifies the intent of the standard. 999944445555 Clarify 3.2.3(E) - Shading - 3.5.1(G) - Building Height Review - to add T.O.D. as exempt from the Shading standard and coordinate how buildings in the Downtown, Community Commercial and T.O.D. must still address both Shading and Building Height Review. Section 3.2.3(E) Shading, has a 25-foot hypothetical wall requirement with an exemption for the D, Downtown and C-C, Community Commercial zones. The D and C-C zones permit taller buildings, with an understanding that shading across property boundaries is an acceptable tradeoff in the more compact and intensive urban pattern envisioned in the two zones. There is a question whether the D and C-C zones should also be exempted from Special Height Review standards in Section 3.5.1(G) as well because both Sections rely on shadow analysis and contain standards for shading by new development. While the two Sections on light and shading overlap to a degree, there is a meaningful difference. Staff finds no particular problem with continuing to apply the Special Height Review Section 3.5.1(G) to all zoning districts city-wide. However, in considering the question, a few other potential edits emerged to improve the two Sections. First, in 3.2.3(E) Shading, exempt the Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay Zone in addition to the D and C-C zones which are currently exempted. Staff believes this would be appropriate because the TOD Overlay Zone contains incentives for additional building height that could be contrary to the 25-foot hypothetical wall standard. The TOD area is envisioned to allow similar intensity of development to the D and CC zones. Second, staff found a number of potential revisions and clarifications that would improve the usefulness of Section 3.5.1(G) Special Height Review. •3.5.1(G)(1)(a)(1) Views: this subsection requires that a building “shall not substantially alter the opportunity for, and quality of, desirable views from public places, streets, and parks.” The standard suggests techniques including making buildings smaller or increasing setbacks. Staff does not find this standard to be useful in any way, and it has the potential to be problematic in terms of making the required findings. Staff proposes to delete this subsection. If Fort Collins ever wants to protect “desirable views”, the effective way to do it is to identify those, map the view cones, and write standards for how to protect views including elevations above sea level for the tops of buildings. •3.5.1(G)(1)(a)(2) Light and Shadow and (3) Privacy: Staff has identified potential edits for clarification. Exempt the TOD Overlay Zone from Section 3.2.3 Shading, the same as the D and CC zones are exempted by current language. Delete subsection 3.5.1(G)(1)(a)(1) Views. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 3 of 21 Edit subsections 3.5.1(G)(1)(a)(2) Light and Shadow and (3) Privacy. Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 29 3.2.3(E)(1) Adds T.O.D. as being exempt from the shading standard. 30 3.5.1(G)(1) Updates the building height review standards. 999955554444 Add to 4.9(B)(3) - N-C-B Permitted Use List - Type 2 - Single Family Attached Dwellings - as this housing type is well-suited for this zone district. The N-C-B zone district was established pre City Plan in 1991 and, from the beginning, allowed Multi-Family Dwellings as a permitted use. And, at that time, Single Family Attached Dwellings was not yet a defined term in the Zoning Code. Then, with the adoption of the Land Use Code in 1997, the term Single Family Attached was added as a permissible housing type in the new City Plan zone districts. This housing type was initially envisioned to be more associated in the newly developing areas rather than infill redevelopment in the East and West Side Neighborhoods. The real estate term for this housing is “townhome” where each unit is on its own fee simple lot but, at the same time, may be attached in an unspecified number such as four-plex or six-plex and aligned horizontally next to each other. There are a multitude of Multi-Family Dwellings (apartments and condominiums) in the N- C-B. This housing type allows units to be stacked vertically resulting in typical multi- family arrangements and densities that are seen today. Single Family Attached Dwellings, however, by being on their own individual lots, cannot be stacked resulting in less density. Where Multi-Family Dwellings are allowed, it stands to reason that by virtue of having less density, Single Family Attached Dwellings should also be allowed. Add Single Family Attached Dwellings as a Type Two permitted use in the N-C-B. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 52 4.9(B)(3) Adds Single Family Attached to N-C-B. 999955555555 Amend 5.1.2 - Definition of Parking Structure - so that it includes all manner of structured parking (i.e. under-structure, one level, podium), not just a parking structure consisting of more than one level as presently written. In recent months, multiple development applications, that are located in the TOD Overlay Zone, have been submitted with a design that includes: •Ground floor structured parking; •Along the pedestrian level; •Street facing; and, •With multi-family dwellings or other uses sharing the structure and primarily in the upper floors. According to the definition in Section 5.1.2, this model of structured parking is not considered a “parking structure” because the structure is not principally used to park motor vehicles, instead it is considered accessory to the other uses in the structure. Therefore, the development design that provides street faced parking along the pedestrian Problem Statement Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 4 of 21 level that shares the structure with other uses is not subject to the standards in Section 3.10.4(D). The background information and purpose statements associated with the Design Standards for the TOD Overlay Zone suggest that this is a phrasing oversight and that any structured parking along that is street facing along the pedestrian level should be subject to the standards in Section 3.10.4(D). Amend Section 5.1.2 Definitions so that “Structured parking” shall mean any motor vehicle parking contained within a structure that shares another use. Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 90 5.1.2 Amends the definition. 999955556666 Amend 3.10.5(F) - Development Standards for T.O.D. Overlay - Articulation - to add that multi-story buildings must also feature a distinct base, middle and top and include north of Prospect Road. Utilizing a strong base, middle and top in architecture for taller buildings are well accepted design principals. Section 3.5.3 requires this for commercial and mixed-use buildings, and section 3.10 requires it for buildings that are permitted additional height allowance per 3.10.5(F)(1)(a-c). But, it is not required for all buildings, specifically multifamily, in the T.O.D. Overlay Zone. The T.O.D. Overlay Zone promotes an urban density that will benefit by requiring these design principles for all taller structures. Amend 3.10.5(F) so that subsections (2) and (3) apply to all buildings greater than two stories in height and not only to buildings utilizing the height increase clause in subsection (1) (a-c). Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 39 3.10.5(F) Enhances architectural standards for multi-family buildings in T.O.D. 999955558888 Amend 2.2.10(A)(1)(e) and 2.2.10(A)(2)(e) - Minor Amendments - to clarify that criterion (e) also includes P.D.P.'s rather than just site specific development plans for consistency with the entire Minor Amendment process and standards. The Code allows for minor amendments to both Project Development Plans and site specific development plans, provided that the proposed minor amendment meets the criteria outlined in the Code. Currently, criterion (e) states that a minor amendment is allowed only if the minor amendment does not result in new buildings, additions or site improvements outside of the boundaries of the approved site specific development plan. But, the criterion presently makes no reference to Project Development Plans. Clarify criterion (e), in two instances, so that it is consistent with the Minor Amendment process that allows amendments to be made to P.D.P.’s as well as site specific development plans. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 5 of 21 Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 6 2.2.10(A)(1)(e) Clarifies Minor Amendment criteria for internal consistency. 7 2.2.10(A)(2)(e) Clarifies Minor Amendment criteria for internal consistency. 999955559999 Amend 2.3.2(H)(3) - O.D.P. standards - to clarify that the requirement to comply with the Transportation Level of Service per 3.6.4 requires the submittal of a T.I.S. at the master level only, not the full, intermediate or memo level per LCUASS. This section is a standard for an Overall Development Plan and, by cross reference, requires compliance with Section 3.6.4(C) which states: Transportation Impact Study. In order to identify those facilities that are necessary in order to comply with these standards, development plans may be required to include the submittal of a Transportation Impact Study, to be approved by the Traffic Engineer, consistent with the Transportation Impact Study guidelines as established in Chapter 4 of the Larimer County Urban Area Streets Standards. Per the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards, there are four levels of a Transportation Impact Study. These are Master, Full, Intermediate and Memorandum. The problem is that the Section 2.3.2(H)(3), which is an O.D.P. standard, does not specify which level of T.I.S. is required. In practice, the Master Level is the appropriate level. This is because at the O.D.P. level, the best estimation of trip generation rates cannot yet be determined. At the P.D.P. stage, however, the amount of commercial square footage or number of dwelling units can be determined and the Full, Intermediate or Memorandum Level T.I.S. is required. The level of the T.I.S. turns out to make a difference in assessing compliance with LCUASS. At the Master level, variances are not considered because the data is in the aggregate. At the other three levels, however, variances must be considered if there is a lack of compliance. The proposed solution is to clarify the standard that the Master level T.I.S. is required. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 12 2.3.2(H)(3) Clarifies level of transportation study for O.D.P.'s. 999966660000 Amend 3.5.2(C ) - Residential Building Standards - and 3.8.30(F)(2) - Multi-family Standards - to enhance variation in building design for both single family attached (townhomes) buildings and multi-family buildings. Current standards do not address variation in building design for single-family attached buildings (townhomes). For multi-family buildings, the standards could be enhanced to address architectural design to enrich the variety among repeated buildings. Additionally, the current standards allow up to two similar building designs to be placed next to one another, with building design variation satisfied within the boundaries of the entire development site. This overall building variation is not noticeable from certain vantage points, such as where two buildings are similar and placed next to one another along a street front. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 6 of 21 1.Repeat the Variation Among Repeated Buildings language in 3.5.2(C) –Residential Building Standards so that these standards also apply to single-family attached buildings. 2.Add language to reinforce building and dwelling unit façade variation in 3.8.30(F)(2) - Design Standards for Multi-Family Dwellings Variation Among Repeated Buildings. 3.Add a provision that no two similar buildings shall be placed next to each other along a street, street-like private drive or major walkway spine for both single family attached and multi-family. Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 31 3.5.2[C] Enhances variation among single family attached buildings. 35 3.8.30(F)(2) Enhances variation among multi-family buildings. 999966661111 Amend 3.2.1(E)(5) - Parking Lot Interior Landscaping - to revise the parking lot figure that shows 6% landscaping. The current Figure 1 does not reflect aspects of a realistic or desirable parking lot layout. It shows an odd configuration that would create problems with a number of related code standards. Replace the figure to illustrate a more realistic, desirable, and complete parking lot layout. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 28 3.2.1(E)(5)[c] Improves the diagram. 999966662222 Amend 4.6(E) - M-M-N Building Height - to replace the allowance of adding a fourth story if located within a prescribed distance from an intersection. Section 3.8.30 was adopted on Sept 18, 2012 per Ordinance No. 092, 2012. This section established the Land Use and Development Standards for multi-family housing. These standards were placed in Article Three in order to be applied city-wide. Prior to adoption, the standards were found only in the Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood zone district which, at that time, allowed for an exception to the maximum height of three stories to add an additional fourth story but only if the upper portions of the building were within a prescribed distance to certain sized intersections. By allowing buildings to be built closer to public right-of-way, the fourth story provided incentive in creating a walkable, urban community, When these standards were originally adopted in 1997, they were tailored specifically to the height allowances in the M-M-N district. Now that these standards have been shifted into Article Three, a conflict exists with M-M-N standards in Article Four which caps building height at three stories. In order to restore the fourth story option to the M-M-N zone, the standard should be re- The proposed solution is to retain the fourth story option as is exists in Article Three but re-introduce the option specifically in M-M-N so there is no conflict. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 7 of 21 Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 47 4.6(E) Replaces the fourth story height allowance. 999966663333 Amend 3.10.4[C] - Off-street Parking in T.O.D. - to allow flexibility to the standard that requires parking to be located only behind, above or below street facing buildings with no parking along a street. Presently, the standard is an all-or-none proposition in that there cannot be, in any case, any parking along a street edge. In fact, there may be instances where the fundamental objectives of creating a walkable urban environment may still be achieved with a small amount of street edge featuring a parking lot. Also, the reference to parking being located “above” a building should be replaced by “within” a building. The solution is to add a measure of flexibility to the standard. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 37 3.10.4[C] Provides flexibility for parking lots in T.O.D. 999966664444 Amend 2.2.10(A)(3) - Referral of Minor Amendment - so that a referred Minor Amendment can be referred to the Hearing Officer if the original plan was a Type One. The Code allows for the Director to refer a minor amendment to the Planning and Zoning Board only, regardless of what type of review it originally was subject to; thus potentially elevating a minor amendment from the original administrative review process to review by the Planning and Zoning Board. Allow for minor amendments to be referred to an administrative hearing officer if the approved plan was originally subject only to administrative review. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 8 2.2.10(A)(3) Allows Minor Amendment referrals to Hearing Officer if originally a Type One review. 999966665555 Amend 4.16(B)(2) - Downtown Zone Permitted Uses - to allow existing single familly detached dwellings as a permitted use. Detached single-family dwellings are the only type of residential use that is currently not allowed in any of the three sub-districts of the Downtown zone. A downtown area is typically not a place where we would encourage new detached single-family housing units. However, our downtown area does contain some existing detached houses and some buildings that were originally constructed as detached houses which have subsequently been converted to commercial uses such as restaurants, offices or retail stores. Some of these converted houses are designated landmarks, such as the Montezuma Fuller House on West Magnolia Street, which had been converted to an office many years ago. With the current prohibition on detached single-family houses, the converted houses are Problem Statement Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 8 of 21 not allowed to convert back to their original use. The Montezuma Fuller House was recently listed for sale, and every potential buyer that contacted the City was interested only in converting it back to a house. Most felt that it was not suitable for commercial use. Amend the permitted use list to allow existing buildings and resources to convert back to their original use as a detached single-family dwelling. Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 58 4.16(B)(2) Allows houses in the Downtown to revert to single family detached dwelling. 999966666666 Amend 3.8.25(B) - Abandonment Period/Reconstruction of Permitted Uses- to change the requirement for the start of reconstruction following a calamity from 6 to 12 months. Section 3.8.25(B) pertains to the reconstruction period applicable to buildings that were originally constructed as a use-by-right and which have been damaged by fire, accidental cause or natural catastrophe. Specifically, the code allows such a building to be reconstructed to its pre-damaged condition only if the work is started within 6 months of the date of the damage. The pre-damaged condition of these older use-by-right properties is generally one where the property doesn’t comply with current standards for site design, landscaping, etc. The code stipulates that if the reconstruction work is not started within the 6 month time frame, then the entire property must be brought into compliance with the current standards of Articles 3 and 4 of the LUC. Several buildings suffered damage due to a significant, heavy snow storm a couple of years ago. Staff has observed that insurance claims are now taking longer to resolve then in past years, and this has created a hardship with respect to the ability of a building owner to begin reconstruction within 6 months. Section 3.8.25(A) already allows for a 12 month abandonment period for these use-by- right buildings, meaning that such a building can remain vacant for up to 12 months before requiring site upgrades prior to re-occupancy. Staff believes that the reconstruction time frame for damaged buildings should be consistent with the time frame for abandoned buildings. Amending (B) will achieve consistency and will allow for a longer period of time in which to resolve insurance claims and other issues associated with rebuilding after damage or construction. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 34 3.8.25(B) Increases the timeframe to rebuild. 999966667777 Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. Present Land Use Code standards encourage the use of both active and passive solar energy systems for heating air and water in homes and businesses, as long as natural topography, soil or other subsurface conditions or other natural conditions peculiar to the site are preserved. Adopted LUC solar standards focus primarily on three areas: 1) the orientation of newly subdivided lots to take advantage of winter solar gain; 2) solar access protection based on Problem Statement Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 9 of 21 the degree of shadow cast by a hypothetical 25 foot-tall solar wall for properties within all zone districts except Downtown and the Community Commercial districts; and 3) recently adopted building height and placement standards within the Eastside and Westside neighborhoods that protect south facing wall and roof area. The Code is silent with respect to the installation of specific “solar energy systems” at all scales and the land use and aesthetic implications for siting such systems. Add a new Supplemental Regulation that creates three levels of solar systems and add new regulations that address their design and impacts. Add the three systems to the Article Four zone districts and assign the Basic Development Review, Type One and Type Two processes accordingly. Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 36 3.8.32 Adds a new Supplemental Regulation for Solar Farms. 40 4.1(B)(3)[c] Adds small and medium solar systems to R-U-L as Type Two. 41 4.2(B)(3)(d) Adds small and medium solar systems to U-E as Type Two. 42 4.3(B)(3) Adds small and medium soloar systems to R-F as Type Two. 43 4.4(B)(3) Adds small and medium solar systems to R-L as Type Two. 44 4.5(B)(3)(d) Adds small and medium solar systems L-M-N as Type Two. 46 4.6(B)(3) Adds small and medium solar systems to M-M-N as Type Two. 48 4.7(B)(3) Adds small and medium solar systems to N-C-L as Type Two. 50 4.8(B)(3) Adds small and medium solar systems to N-C-M as Type Two. 52 4.9(B)(3) Adds small and medium solar systems in N-C-B as Type Two. 55 4.10(B)(3) Adds small and medium solar systems in H-M-N as Type Two. 56 4.13(B)(3) Adds small and medium solar systems in P-O-L as Type Two. 57 4.14(B)(3)[c] Adds small and medium solar systems in R-C as Type Two. 60 4.16(B)(2)(D) Adds small and medium soloar systems in D as Type One. 62 4.17(B)(2) Adds small and medium solar systems in R-D-R as Type One. 67 4.18(B)(2)(d) Adds small and medium solar systems in C-C as Type One 69 4.19(B)(2)(d) Adds small and medium solar systems in C-C-N as Type One. 71 4.20(B)(2)(d) Adds small and medium solar systems in C-C-R as Type One. 73 4.21(B)(2)(D) Adds small and medium solar systems in C-G as Type One. 75 4.22(B)(2)(d) Adds small and medium solar systems in C-S as Type 76 4.23(B)(2)(d) Adds small and medium solar systems in N-C as Type One. 77 4.24(B)(2)(D) Adds small and medium solar systems in C-L as Type One. 78 4.26(B)(2)(d) Adds small and medium solar systems in H-C as Type One. Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 10 of 21 81 4.27(B)(1) Adds small and medium solar systems in E as B.D.R. 83 4.27(B)(2)(d) Adds large scale solar systems in E as Type One. 85 4.28(B)(1)(f) Adds small and medium solar systems in I as B.D.R. 87 4.28(B)(2)(d) Adds large scale solar systems in I as Type One. 91 5.1.2 Adds a definition for Building-Mounted Solar Energy System. 92 5.1.2 Adds a definition for Ground-Mounted Solar Energy System. 93 5.1.2 Adds a definition for Solar Energy System. 94 5.1.2 Adds a definition for Solar Energy System - Large-Scale. 95 5.1.2 Adds a definition for Solar Energy System - Medium-Scale. 96 5.1.2 Adds a definition for Solar Energy System - Small-Scale 999966668888 Amend 2.2.11(A) regarding notice of transfer in equitable interest of the ownership of land that is subject to a pending application. Section 2.2.11(A) pertains to the lapse of application submittals, essentially allowing a period of 180 days following receipt of City comments to submit a revised application and also allowing for the granting of a couple of extensions. This Section is silent on the question of whether an application expires upon transfer of ownership of the property. The purpose of this amendment is to clarify that pending applications (which have not manifested into any kind of an approved plan) expire upon transfer of ownership of the property (or any portion of the property) unless a new owner provides evidence acceptable to the Director of the prior owner/applicant’s intention to transfer the application to the successor in interest. Add a requirement that notice be provided to the Director if an application changes in ownership. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 9 2.2.11(A) Requires notice of ownership transfer for pending applications. 999966669999 Amend 3.6.2(O) - Easements - so that a public access easement needs to be stubbed to the property line just like a street connection. There may be instances where a public access connection is needed, but where a public access easement is suitable in lieu of right-of-way. Existing code language does not state this in as clearly as the proposed language to ensure the extension of any easements stubbed to property lines. The intent is the same as for extension of streets stubbed to property boundaries required in other Code Sections. Add a standard requiring continuation of easements intended to be extended from previous developments. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 32 3.6.2(O) Requires public access easements to be stubbed to property line. Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 11 of 21 999977770000 Amend 2.7.3[C]- Building Permit Review Procedures, 2.2.3(D)(3) - Development Review Fees and 2.13.3(E) - Application for Vested Rights and Takings Determinations - to clarify waiving fees for the Fort Collins Housing Authority/other qualifying agencies. Ordinance No. 37, 2013, contains certain amendments to the Land Use Code which resulted in some ambiguity as to the proper interpretation of the Land Use Code. In order to clarify, Section 2.7.3(C) should be amended to delete any reference to submittal and hearing date schedule, which is not a part of the Land Use Code language in Step 3, and in its place, include development review fees as being fully applicable. Furthermore, Section 2.2.3(D)(3) should be amended by changing, in the second line, the word “chapter” to “section”. Finally, Section 2.13.3(E) should, in the second line thereof, be changed so that the word “chapter” is changed to “section”. Clarify three sections in order to delete improper references, add a reference to development review fees and to revise language for consistency. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 3 2.2.3(D)(3) Deletes Chapter and adds Section for internal consistency. 16 2.7.3[C] Clarifies that development review fees are applicable. 24 2.13.3(E) Deletes Chapter and adds Section for internal consistency. 999977771111 Amend 2.2.4 - Step 4 Determination of Sufficiency - and in succeeding references from 2.3.2 through 2.15.2 (11 occurrences) so that Determination of Sufficiency is replaced by Review of Applications for internal consistency. Step 4 of the common development review procedures has, at some point, undergone a name change so that it is no longer “determination of sufficiency” but is “review of applications”. This change was not made in the remainder of the Land Use Code under the sections pertaining to overall development plan, project development plan, final plan, stockpiling permits, building permits, etc. The 12-step process should be changed throughout the Land Use Code so that the words “determination of sufficiency” are changed to “review of applications.” This change is needed in order to ensure that Step 4 is fully applicable since the “determination of sufficiency” paragraph is only a part of the requirements of Step 4 as it has been amended by Ordinance 149, 2012. Change Step Four to Review of Applications and in 11 occurrences thereafter in Article Two. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 11 2.3.2(D) Replaces language for consistency. 13 2.4.2(D) Replaces language for consistency. 14 2.5.2(D) Replaces language for consistency. 15 2.6.3(D) Replaces language for consistency. 17 2.7.3(D) Replaces language for consistency. 18 2.8.2(D) Replaces language for consistency. 20 2.9.4(D) Replaces language for consistency. Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 12 of 21 21 2.10.2(D) Replaces language for consistency. 23 2.11.2(D) Replaces language for consistency. 25 2.15.1[C](4) Replaces language for consistency. 26 2.15.2(B)(4) Replaces language for consistency. 999977772222 Amend 3.10.4(D)(1) - T.O.D. Parking Structure Design - so that where parking structures face streets, the list of allowable uses may contain other non-residential uses besides retail. This standard requires that where parking structures in the Transit-Oriented Development Overlay Zone face streets, the structure must contain uses besides parked vehicles in order to activate the street and promote a pedestrian scale. As currently stated, the standard requires that one of the street-facing uses must be retail and that other uses are allowed as well. Staff has found that a retailer may not choose to locate in such a location in all instances and that a degree of flexibility to allow other non-residential uses would be as equally effective. By not mandating retail, but allowing other non-residential uses to locate within a structure along a street, the objective of creating active streets at the pedestrian scale can still be accomplished. The proposed solution is to encourage, but not mandate, retail within the structure along the street and, at the same time, allow other non-residential uses as well. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 38 3.10.4(D)(1) Adds flexibility for allowable uses at ground level within a parking structure. 999977773333 Clarify 4.5(E)(2)(e)2 - LMN Development Standards - so that the reference back to 3.5.3[C] - Build-to Line - Exceptions - is required in order to set the building back greater than 15 feet. Within Article Four, in the L-M-N zone, there are a series of development standards for non-residential and mixed-use buildings. In this section, there are two regulations that address how far back a building can be from the street. The first references the build-to- line standard in Article Three which requires a building to be placed within a certain distance of the right-of-way, but also allows exceptions to accommodate buildings being further back, but only with certain landscape improvements. This standard allows buildings to be further back than the build-to line but only by providing compensatory enhancements. This standard is sufficient. The second standard, however, merely requires a minimum building setback with no reference to the build-to line requirement in Article Three. This means that any building could simply exceed the required minimum and would not have to provide the enhancements required by exceeding the build-to line. The L-M-N zone district is intended for low density housing with other supporting and complementary uses with attractive walking and biking paths. The build-to-line standards, with their exceptions, ensure visual interest and attractiveness along the adjoining walking and bike paths. The required minimum setback, however, does not guarantee an enhanced area along the adjoining walking and bike paths. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 13 of 21 Allow the reference to the build-to-line standard in Article Three, with its exceptions and compensatory design, to prevail and delete minimum required setback standard. Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 45 4.5(E)(2)(e)2. Deletes a duplicate standard. 999977774444 Amend 4.5(E)(2)(e) - LMN Development Standards - Building Massing - to remove a duplicate reference to a building maximum of 20,000 square feet. Within the L-M-N district development standards for no-residential and mixed-use buildings, there are two occurrences of the exact same requirement of a nonresidential building section 4.5(E)(2)(b) and 4.5(E)(2)(e). In an application review there would not be a time when one section would be applied and not the other. The repeating standard creates unnecessary redundancies in the development review process. Delete the second time the requirement is found in the section. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 45 4.5(E)(2)(e) Deletes a duplicate standard. 999977775555 Amend the pertinent sections of Article Two to introduce the Site Plan Advisory Review process as a component of the Land Use Code so as to not solely rely on State Statutes. Add a definition. The Land Use Code does not describe the purpose, review process, and standards applied to public buildings and/or facilities being constructed pursuant to C.R.S. 31-23-209 and 22-32-124. Create 2.1.3(e) describing the Site Plan Advisory Review process and Division 2.16 that clarify how general terms, e.g. - “location, character and extent”, will be applied to site development plans for public buildings and facilities referred to the Planning and Zoning Board. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 2 2.1.3 Adds Site Plan Advisory Review as a type of development application. 27 2.16 Adds procedures and standards for Site Plan Advisory Review. 999977776666 Amend 1.3.4(A) - Addition of Permitted Use - to add a Purpose Statement and two Applicability Statements that further clarifies the process. In 2013, a sub-committee of the Planning and Zoning Board met with interested citizens regarding the Addition of Permitted Use process. One of the outcomes is that there is presently a lack of a Purpose Statement that generally describes the overall intention of the process. A Purpose Statement would be helpful especially for citizens that are asked to participate in the process evaluating a request for an Addition of Permitted Use. Problem Statement Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 14 of 21 The solution is to add a Purpose Statement and two applicability statements that further clarify the two types of Additions of Permitted Use. Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 1 1.3.4 Adds Purpose and Applicability Statements for the Addition of Permitted Use process. 999977777777 Amend 1.3.4[C] - Addition of Permitted Use - Planning and Zoning Board Authority and Limitation - to require a second neighborhood information meeting if the subject site is in or adjacent to an existing residential neighborhood. In 2013, a sub-committee of the Planning and Zoning Board met with interested citizens regarding the Addition of Permitted Use process. One of the outcomes is that there is a heightened concern when a land use not otherwise permitted in a residential zone is proposed in within a residential area. Residential neighborhoods are considered to be stable and not typically subject to rezonings or changes of use. The Addition of Permitted Use process, however, allows for new uses to be introduced into residential areas. Also, since most all zone districts include a mix of uses and are not exclusively residential, the concept of what constitutes residential areas requires a broader perspective than merely a list of zone districts. Consequently, the process of evaluating an Addition of Permitted in existing residential areas could be improved by promoting a higher level of dialogue and collaboration among the neighborhood, applicant and staff. The proposed solution is to require a minimum of two neighborhood meetings for projects seeking an Addition of Permitted Use in or near residential areas. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 1 1.3.4[C] Requires two neighborhood meetings for A.P.U.'s in residential neighborhoods. 999977778888 Add to 5.1.2 - Definitions and Article Four - Zone Districts - to create a new land use - Music Studio - by providing a new definition and assigning to nine zone districts as a Type One use. The C-C zone district contains a permitted use of “artisan and photography studio and gallery”. The definition of this use does not contain any reference to musical artists and accordingly, does not specifically provide for any type of studio space for musicians so they could rehearse, collaborate, record or write music. A new definition of “music studio” should be added to Article 5, and that “music studio” should be a listed permitted use in the commercial zones of the City, and perhaps other zones as well. The proposed solution is to create a new use and add to the various commercial, employment and industrial zones. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 59 4.16(B)(2)[C] Adds Music Studio in D as Type One. 62 4.17(B)(2] Adds Music Studio in R-D-R as Type One. 66 4.18(B)(2)[c] Adds Music Studio in C-C as Type One. Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 15 of 21 68 4.19(B)(2)[c] Adds Music Studio in C-C-N as Type One. 70 4.20(B)(2)[c] Adds Music Studio in C-C-R as Type One. 72 4.21(B)(2)[C} Adds Music Studio in C-G as Type One. 74 4.22(B)(2)[c] Adds Music Studio on C-S as Type One. 82 4.27(B)(2)[c] Adds Music Studio in E as Type One. 84 4.27(D)(2) Adds Music Studio as a secondary use in E. 86 4.28(B)(2)[c] Adds Music Studio in I as Type One. 89 5.1.2 Adds a definition for Music Studio. 999977779999 Amend 3.8.4(A) - Child Care Regulations - to align the size of the required outdoor play area with the expected number of children at any one time and to match the State, which is the licensing authority, and define Drop in Child Care Center. Section 3.8.4(A) was last updated on July 1st, 2008 per Ordinance No.59, 2000. This section regulates the size of outdoor play area required for a Child Care Center. Although the Land Use Code has some regulations for a Child Care Center, the license of such facility is issued by the State. The State requirements for the size of the outdoor play area are lower than the Land Use Code standard. The following tables illustrate what is required by the State regulations and by the City’s Land Use Code for a hypothetical Child Care Center that has the capacity of 100 children. Calculation For Required Square Footage Per State Regulation The minimum square footage for outdoor Play Area for 20 Children1,500 Sq. Ft. For more than 20 Children there needs to be 75 square feet of outdoor play area each Child using the area at one time100x75=7,500 Square Feet (This number would be the full capacity outside at one time) At no time can the play area be less than 1,500 Square Feet or 75 square feet per 33% of the Center's Capacity whichever is greater.100x.33=33 Children Total square footage required75x33=2,475 Sq. Ft. Calculation of Required Square Footage Per Land Use Code The minimum square footage for outdoor Play Area for 15 children or fewer.2,500 Sq. Ft. Child Care Center100 Children 50% of the Capacity of Center 100/2=50 Children An additional 75 sq. ft. to the initial 2,500 sq. ft. For every child above 15 children at half the Capacity50-15=35 Children 35x75=2,625 Sq. ft. Total square footage required2,500+2,625=5,125 Sq. Ft. Problem Statement Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 16 of 21 The Land Use Code requirements are to ensure a sufficient outdoor play area is provided. The state regulations are set to achieve the same goal. There is not a clear reason why these two standards are set to result in substantially different square footage requirements. The difference between the two standards results in confusion and additional steps during a development review process. In addition it has been granted that the required outdoor area may be met by a park within close proximity and which is available for use by the Child Care Center. Also the Land Use Code does not provide a definition for Drop-in Child Care Centers. Since this facility is also regulated by State licensing city staff has depended on the State’s definition. Require an applicant to provide the number of children that will play outdoors at any one time and set the minimum square footage requirements based on this number. Also incorporate the park allowance into the standard. Also provide a definition for Drop-in Child Care Centers that aligns with the State’s definition. Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 33 3.8.4(A) Amends the outdoor play area for child care centers. 88 5.1.2 Adds a definition for Drop-in Child Care. 999988880000 Amend 4.16(G) - Downtown Zone - to add a map for the Old Town Historic Landmark District standards and guidelines and a cross-reference to Chapter 14 of the City Code. Historic Preservation Staff has prepared a document of design standards that will address re-development and new development within the Old Town Fort Collins Historic District. This comprehensive document covers a wide range of issues and, due to the complexities of complying with State and Federal regulations; the new standards are significantly more thorough and detailed than the present Code. As a result, staff proposes that the entire document be codified as a supplement to the Land Use Code and that a reference to this supplement will be inserted into both the Downtown and River Downtown Redevelopment (R-D-R) zone districts development standards. In addition, Chapter 14 of the City Code addresses issues related to designation of local historic landmarks and also refers to the United States Secretary of the Interior Standards with regard to historic preservation. The proposed revision would also reference Chapter 14 and the Federal standards as well. The proposed solution is to add a cross-reference and map to the Downtown zone to refer to the new Standards and Guidelines document as well as Chapter 14 of the City Code and the Federal standards. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 17 of 21 61 4.16(G) Adds a cross reference to a supplemental Design Standard document and map. 999988881111 Amend 2.2.6(A)(E) - Notice - so if written notice, once mailed, is not actually received and if a sign, once posted, is rendered unreadable, then such condition does not affect the validity of any hearing, meeting, or determination by the decision maker. Section 2.2.6(A) requires that written notice be mailed to owners of record of all real property within a specified area to advertise a public hearing. The standard also states that failure to mail such notice shall not affect the validity of any hearing, meeting or determination by the decision maker. The failure-to-mail provision is inherently too broad seems to simply forgive an administrative error. Instead, the requirement to mail should be mandatory. Now, if a letter once mailed is not received by the recipient, then such a failure should not cause a public hearing to be invalid. Section 2.2.6(B) requires that a sign (or signs) be posted on any property subject to a public development review process within 14 days following submittal of a development application. Staff has observed that, upon occasion, posted signs do not always remain upright in a readable position over the course of the posting. This is due to a wide variety of factors such as inclement weather, theft, vandalism or other unforeseen tampering. The Code is silent as to validity of providing proper notice of a public hearing or determination by the decision maker if a posted sign fails to remain readable. The proposed revision would allow that if a posted sign, once posted, fails to remain readable, then such condition should not cause a public hearing to be invalid. Delete the failure-to-mail clause and then add two new provisions that allow a public hearing to remain valid if a letter, once mailed is not received and a sign, once posted, does not remain readable. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 4 2.2.6(A) Deletes the failure to mail clause. 5 2.2.6(E) Adds validity provisions for mailed notice, once mailed and signs, once posted. 999988882222 Amend 4.26(B)(3)[c] - Harmony Corridor Permitted Use List - and 4.26(D)(2) - Harmony Corridor Secondary Uses - to add Unlimited and Limited Indoor Recreational Use and Facility as Type Two and as secondary uses in the H-C zone. The Limited indoor recreation use is defined in the Land Use Code by the following: shall mean facilities established primarily for such activities as exercise or athletic facilities; and amusement or recreational services, such as billiard or pool parlors, pinball/video arcades, dance studios, martial art schools, arts or crafts studios; or exercise clubs, but not including bowling alleys or establishments which have large-scale gymnasium-type facilities for such activities as tennis, basketball or competitive swimming. This definition is intended to restrict the type of recreational use allowed to those small-scale facilities containing no more than five thousand (5,000) square feet that would be compatible with typical buildings and uses in the zone district in which this use is allowed. Problem Statement Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 18 of 21 Unlimited indoor recreation use is defined in the Land Use Code by the following: shall mean establishments primarily engaged in operations and activities contained within large-scale gymnasium-type facilities such as for tennis, basketball, swimming, indoor soccer, indoor hockey or bowling. These uses have been clearly defined and have been required to be processed through an Addition of Permitted Use in the Harmony Corridor District. Upon these Addition of Permitted Uses applications they have been found to be in context with the district, as they provide support to primary employment. The most recent Addition of Permitted Use for recreational establishment in the Harmony Corridor district was the Rockery Mountain Archery located at 4518 Innovation Drive. In addition Health and membership clubs are already permitted as a secondary use in the Harmony Corridor District. Health club is defined by the following: shall mean an establishment that is open only to members and guests and that provides facilities for at least three (3) of the following: aerobic exercises, running and jogging, exercise equipment, game courts and swimming facilities, and that also includes amenities such as spas, saunas, showers and lockers. It is has been observed that both the Limited and Unlimited recreation establishments have similar impacts as a Health club. The main differences being that Health clubs require at least three distinct activities verses only one activity required by recreation establishments and the need for a membership by the Health club. Add both the Limited indoor recreation establishment and Unlimited indoor recreation establishment as permitted use in the Harmony Corridor district and classify them as a secondary use. Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 79 4.26(B)(3)[c] Adds Unlimited and Limited Indoor Recreation in H-C as Type Two. 80 4.26(D)(2) Adds Unlimited and Limited Indoor Recreation in H-C as secondary use. 999988883333 Amend 2.10.2(F) - Zoning Board of Appeals - to change the 7 day notice requirement to 14 days to be consistent with the requirement for other hearing types. The public notice requirement for Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) variance hearings is a minimum of 7 days, whereas the requirement for other quasi-judicial boards is 14 days. Neighbors of recent ZBA variance requests have commented that a 7 day notification doesn’t allow adequate time to review and research the details of the request and prepare comments for the meeting. This also has resulted in letters being submitted to the ZBA at the time of the hearing, rather than in advance of the hearing, leaving little opportunity for board members to review and consider the information. In order to provide additional time for neighborhood residents to review and research pending variance applications and to prepare comments in advance of a ZBA meeting, staff proposes that the notice requirement for ZBA hearings should be increased from seven to 14 days to be consistent with the requirement that applies to other public hearing processes. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 22 2.10.2(F) Increases notice for Z.B.A. from 7 to 14 days. Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 19 of 21 999988884444 Amend 2.9.4 - Text and Map Review Procedures - to clarify that City Council can overturn a rezoning protest by a simple majority, not by a two-thirds majority. Article II, Section 11 of the City Charter provides that the City Council may approve any action except the passage of emergency ordinances and the approval of executive sessions by majority vote of those present and voting. With regard to zoning changes, the Colorado Revised Statutes provide at Section 31-23-305 that if a protest is filed with the City Clerk in a timely manner, objecting to the zoning change, the City Council must overcome the protest by a two-thirds majority of all of its members. The statutory provision contained in C.R.S. 31-23-305 is in direct conflict with Article II, Section 11 of the City Charter. Matters pertaining to zoning are uniquely local in nature such that the City, under its home rule authority as authorized pursuant to Article XX of the Colorado Constitution has the power to supersede the application of the two-thirds vote requirement contained in Section 31-23-305, C.R.S. Staff recommends that it is in the best interests of the City that Section 2.9.4 of the Land Use Code be amended to expressly provide that the City Council can overturn of rezoning protest by simple majority vote of the City Council. Change the provision from two-thirds majority to simple majority. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 19 2.9.4 Changes requirement from two-thirds majority to simple majority. 999988885555 Remove the Transitional Land Use Regulations from the Code as they are now obsolete. The Transitional Land Use Regulations were enacted in August of 1997 five months after the adoption of the Land Use Code and were intended to govern the transition from the Land Development Guidance System and Zoning Code to the new Land Use Code. Now, 17 years later, it is well past the time that these regulations are needed. In order to not have obsolete regulations clutter up the Code, staff recommends this section be deleted in its entirety. Remove the Transitional Land Use Regulations from the Code. (Note, a citation is not needed to repeal these regulations.) Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 97 None Repeals the outdated Transitional Land Use Regulations. 999988886666 Amend 2.2.11(D)(3) - Vested Rights - to clarify the standard for internal consistency. Section 2.2.11(D)(3) outlines the requirements in obtaining a Vested Right. Early in the standard it spells out that the vested right is established when engineering improvements (water, sewer, streets, curb, gutter, street lights, fire hydrants and storm drainage) are completed to code within three years of the approval of the development plan. But later in the same paragraph, it states failure to undertake and complete the development with the term of the vested property right shall cause a forfeiture of the vested property right and Problem Statement Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 20 of 21 shall require resubmission of all materials and re-approval of the same to be processed as required by this Code. The word “development” is inconsistent with the rest of the paragraph that states “engineering improvements”. Further it has been the practice and interpretation that the word “development” in this section has meant the “engineering improvements”. Delete development and replace with engineering improvements for consistency. Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 10 2.2.11(D)(3) Clarifies the language for internal consistency. 999988887777 Amend 4.17(D)(E) - R-D-R Development Standards - to implement new design standards which are intended to maintain the character of the area and assist applicants in preparation of development plans and add a cross reference to supplemental guidelines. The City has engaged in a review process to evaluate and analyze the existing development and design standards in the River Downtown Redevelopment (R-D-R) zone district. The result of this effort is the formation of a new set of standards and guidelines that are intended to further address both re-development and existing development within this district. In order to codify these standards, they are being added to the R-D-R zone in conjunction with the annual 2014 Land Use Code update. In addition, there is a new supplemental document that provides detailed and illustrative explanations, along with numerous images, to assist applicants in preparation of a development plan. Add new standards and clarify existing standards to the R-D-R, and add a cross-reference to the supplemental document. Problem Statement Proposed Solution Overview Related Code Revisions Ord. Section Code Cite Revision Effect 64 4.17(D) Updates R-D-R development standards. 65 4.17(E) Adds a cross-reference to supplemental Design Guidelines document. Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 21 of 21 Land Use Code Revisions Annotated Ordinance Index Ord. Section # Code Cite Revision Effect Issue 1.3.4 Adds Purpose and Applicability Statements for the Addition of Permitted Use process. Amend 1.3.4(A) - Addition of Permitted Use - to add a Purpose Statement and two Applicability Statements that further clarifies the process. 1 976 1.3.4[C] Requires two neighborhood meetings for A.P.U.'s in residential neighborhoods. Amend 1.3.4[C] - Addition of Permitted Use - Planning and Zoning Board Authority and Limitation - to require a second neighborhood information meeting if the subject site is in or adjacent to an existing residential neighborhood. 1 977 2.1.3 Adds Site Plan Advisory Review as a type of development application. Amend the pertinent sections of Article Two to introduce the Site Plan Advisory Review process as a component of the Land Use Code so as to not solely rely on State Statutes. Add a definition. 2 975 2.2.3(D)(3) Deletes Chapter and adds Section for internal consistency. Amend 2.7.3[C]- Building Permit Review Procedures, 2.2.3(D)(3) - Development Review Fees and 2.13.3(E) - Application for Vested Rights and Takings Determinations - to clarify waiving fees for the Fort Collins Housing Authority/other qualifying agencies. 3 970 2.2.6(A) Deletes the failure to mail clause. Amend 2.2.6(A)(E) - Notice - so if written notice, once mailed, is not actually received and if a sign, once posted, is rendered unreadable, then such condition does not affect the validity of any hearing, meeting, or determination by the decision maker. 4 981 2.2.6(E) Adds validity provisions for mailed notice, once mailed and signs, once posted. Amend 2.2.6(A)(E) - Notice - so if written notice, once mailed, is not actually received and if a sign, once posted, is rendered unreadable, then such condition does not affect the validity of any hearing, meeting, or determination by the decision maker. 5 981 2.2.10(A)(1)(e) Clarifies Minor Amendment criteria for internal consistency. Amend 2.2.10(A)(1)(e) and 2.2.10(A)(2)(e) - Minor Amendments - to clarify that criterion (e) also includes P.D.P.'s rather than just site specific development plans for consistency with the entire Minor Amendment process and standards. 6 958 Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 1 of 12 Ord. Section # Code Cite Revision Effect Issue 2.2.10(A)(2)(e) Clarifies Minor Amendment criteria for internal consistency. Amend 2.2.10(A)(1)(e) and 2.2.10(A)(2)(e) - Minor Amendments - to clarify that criterion (e) also includes P.D.P.'s rather than just site specific development plans for consistency with the entire Minor Amendment process and standards. 7 958 2.2.10(A)(3) Allows Minor Amendment referrals to Hearing Officer if originally a Type One review. Amend 2.2.10(A)(3) - Referral of Minor Amendment - so that a referred Minor Amendment can be referred to the Hearing Officer if the original plan was a Type One. 8 964 2.2.11(A) Requires notice of ownership transfer for pending applications. Amend 2.2.11(A) regarding notice of transfer in equitable interest of the ownership of land that is subject to a pending application. 9 968 2.2.11(D)(3) Clarifies the language for internal consistency. Amend 2.2.11(D)(3) - Vested Rights - to clarify the standard for internal consistency. 10 986 2.3.2(D) Replaces language for consistency. Amend 2.2.4 - Step 4 Determination of Sufficiency - and in succeeding references from 2.3.2 through 2.15.2 (11 occurrences) so that Determination of Sufficiency is replaced by Review of Applications for internal consistency. 11 971 2.3.2(H)(3) Clarifies level of transportation study for O.D.P.'s. Amend 2.3.2(H)(3) - O.D.P. standards - to clarify that the requirement to comply with the Transportation Level of Service per 3.6.4 requires the submittal of a T.I.S. at the master level only, not the full, intermediate or memo level per LCUASS. 12 959 2.4.2(D) Replaces language for consistency. Amend 2.2.4 - Step 4 Determination of Sufficiency - and in succeeding references from 2.3.2 through 2.15.2 (11 occurrences) so that Determination of Sufficiency is replaced by Review of Applications for internal consistency. 13 971 2.5.2(D) Replaces language for consistency. Amend 2.2.4 - Step 4 Determination of Sufficiency - and in succeeding references from 2.3.2 through 2.15.2 (11 occurrences) so that Determination of Sufficiency is replaced by Review of Applications for internal consistency. 14 971 2.6.3(D) Replaces language for consistency. Amend 2.2.4 - Step 4 Determination of Sufficiency - and in succeeding references from 2.3.2 through 2.15.2 (11 occurrences) so that Determination of Sufficiency is replaced by Review of Applications for internal consistency. 15 971 Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 2 of 12 Ord. Section # Code Cite Revision Effect Issue 2.7.3[C] Clarifies that development review fees are applicable. Amend 2.7.3[C]- Building Permit Review Procedures, 2.2.3(D)(3) - Development Review Fees and 2.13.3(E) - Application for Vested Rights and Takings Determinations - to clarify waiving fees for the Fort Collins Housing Authority/other qualifying agencies. 16 970 2.7.3(D) Replaces language for consistency. Amend 2.2.4 - Step 4 Determination of Sufficiency - and in succeeding references from 2.3.2 through 2.15.2 (11 occurrences) so that Determination of Sufficiency is replaced by Review of Applications for internal consistency. 17 971 2.8.2(D) Replaces language for consistency. Amend 2.2.4 - Step 4 Determination of Sufficiency - and in succeeding references from 2.3.2 through 2.15.2 (11 occurrences) so that Determination of Sufficiency is replaced by Review of Applications for internal consistency. 18 971 2.9.4 Changes requirement from two-thirds majority to simple majority. Amend 2.9.4 - Text and Map Review Procedures - to clarify that City Council can overturn a rezoning protest by a simple majority, not by a two-thirds majority. 19 984 2.9.4(D) Replaces language for consistency. Amend 2.2.4 - Step 4 Determination of Sufficiency - and in succeeding references from 2.3.2 through 2.15.2 (11 occurrences) so that Determination of Sufficiency is replaced by Review of Applications for internal consistency. 20 971 2.10.2(D) Replaces language for consistency. Amend 2.2.4 - Step 4 Determination of Sufficiency - and in succeeding references from 2.3.2 through 2.15.2 (11 occurrences) so that Determination of Sufficiency is replaced by Review of Applications for internal consistency. 21 971 2.10.2(F) Increases notice for Z.B.A. from 7 to 14 days. Amend 2.10.2(F) - Zoning Board of Appeals - to change the 7 day notice requirement to 14 days to be consistent with the requirement for other hearing types. 22 983 2.11.2(D) Replaces language for consistency. Amend 2.2.4 - Step 4 Determination of Sufficiency - and in succeeding references from 2.3.2 through 2.15.2 (11 occurrences) so that Determination of Sufficiency is replaced by Review of Applications for internal consistency. 23 971 Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 3 of 12 Ord. Section # Code Cite Revision Effect Issue 2.13.3(E) Deletes Chapter and adds Section for internal consistency. Amend 2.7.3[C]- Building Permit Review Procedures, 2.2.3(D)(3) - Development Review Fees and 2.13.3(E) - Application for Vested Rights and Takings Determinations - to clarify waiving fees for the Fort Collins Housing Authority/other qualifying agencies. 24 970 2.15.1[C](4) Replaces language for consistency. Amend 2.2.4 - Step 4 Determination of Sufficiency - and in succeeding references from 2.3.2 through 2.15.2 (11 occurrences) so that Determination of Sufficiency is replaced by Review of Applications for internal consistency. 25 971 2.15.2(B)(4) Replaces language for consistency. Amend 2.2.4 - Step 4 Determination of Sufficiency - and in succeeding references from 2.3.2 through 2.15.2 (11 occurrences) so that Determination of Sufficiency is replaced by Review of Applications for internal consistency. 26 971 2.16 Adds procedures and standards for Site Plan Advisory Review. Amend the pertinent sections of Article Two to introduce the Site Plan Advisory Review process as a component of the Land Use Code so as to not solely rely on State Statutes. Add a definition. 27 975 3.2.1(E)(5)[c] Improves the diagram. Amend 3.2.1(E)(5) - Parking Lot Interior Landscaping - to revise the parking lot figure that shows 6% landscaping. 28 961 3.2.3(E)(1) Adds T.O.D. as being exempt from the shading standard. Clarify 3.2.3(E) - Shading - 3.5.1(G) - Building Height Review - to add T.O.D. as exempt from the Shading standard and coordinate how buildings in the Downtown, Community Commercial and T.O.D. must still address both Shading and Building Height Review. 29 945 3.5.1(G)(1) Updates the building height review standards. Clarify 3.2.3(E) - Shading - 3.5.1(G) - Building Height Review - to add T.O.D. as exempt from the Shading standard and coordinate how buildings in the Downtown, Community Commercial and T.O.D. must still address both Shading and Building Height Review. 30 945 3.5.2[C] Enhances variation among single family attached buildings. Amend 3.5.2(C ) - Residential Building Standards - and 3.8.30(F)(2) - Multi-family Standards - to enhance variation in building design for both single family attached (townhomes) buildings and multi-family buildings. 31 960 3.6.2(O) Requires public access easements to be stubbed to property line. Amend 3.6.2(O) - Easements - so that a public access easement needs to be stubbed to the property line just like a street connection. 32 969 Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 4 of 12 Ord. Section # Code Cite Revision Effect Issue 3.8.4(A) Amends the outdoor play area for child care centers. Amend 3.8.4(A) - Child Care Regulations - to align the size of the required outdoor play area with the expected number of children at any one time and to match the State, which is the licensing authority, and define Drop in Child Care Center. 33 979 3.8.25(B) Increases the timeframe to rebuild. Amend 3.8.25(B) - Abandonment Period/Reconstruction of Permitted Uses- to change the requirement for the start of reconstruction following a calamity from 6 to 12 months. 34 966 3.8.30(F)(2) Enhances variation among multi-family buildings. Amend 3.5.2(C ) - Residential Building Standards - and 3.8.30(F)(2) - Multi-family Standards - to enhance variation in building design for both single family attached (townhomes) buildings and multi-family buildings. 35 960 3.8.32 Adds a new Supplemental Regulation for Solar Farms. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 36 967 3.10.4[C] Provides flexibility for parking lots in T.O.D. Amend 3.10.4[C] - Off-street Parking in T.O.D. - to allow flexibility to the standard that requires parking to be located only behind, above or below street facing buildings with no parking along a street. 37 963 3.10.4(D)(1) Adds flexibility for allowable uses at ground level within a parking structure. Amend 3.10.4(D)(1) - T.O.D. Parking Structure Design - so that where parking structures face streets, the list of allowable uses may contain other non- residential uses besides retail. 38 972 3.10.5(F) Enhances architectural standards for multi-family buildings in T.O.D. Amend 3.10.5(F) - Development Standards for T.O.D. Overlay - Articulation - to add that multi-story buildings must also feature a distinct base, middle and top and include north of Prospect Road. 39 956 4.1(B)(3)[c] Adds small and medium solar systems to R-U-L as Type Two. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 40 967 4.2(B)(3)(d) Adds small and medium solar systems to U-E as Type Two. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 41 967 Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 5 of 12 Ord. Section # Code Cite Revision Effect Issue 4.3(B)(3) Adds small and medium soloar systems to R-F as Type Two. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 42 967 4.4(B)(3) Adds small and medium solar systems to R-L as Type Two. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 43 967 4.5(B)(3)(d) Adds small and medium solar systems L-M-N as Type Two. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 44 967 4.5(E)(2)(e) Deletes a duplicate standard. Amend 4.5(E)(2)(e) - LMN Development Standards - Building Massing - to remove a duplicate reference to a building maximum of 20,000 square feet. 45 974 4.5(E)(2)(e)2. Deletes a duplicate standard. Clarify 4.5(E)(2)(e)2 - LMN Development Standards - so that the reference back to 3.5.3[C] - Build-to Line - Exceptions - is required in order to set the building back greater than 15 feet. 45 973 4.6(B)(3) Adds small and medium solar systems to M-M-N as Type Two. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 46 967 4.6(E) Replaces the fourth story height allowance. Amend 4.6(E) - M-M-N Building Height - to replace the allowance of adding a fourth story if located within a prescribed distance from an intersection. 47 962 4.7(B)(3) Adds small and medium solar systems to N-C-L as Type Two. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 48 967 4.7(F)(7) Clarifies the intent of the standard. Clarify 4.7(F)(7) (N-C-L), 4.8(F)(7) (N-C-M), and 4.9(F)(7) (N-C-B) - so that the prohibition on subdividing a lot from front to back does not apply to corner lots. 49 940 4.8(B)(3) Adds small and medium solar systems to N-C-M as Type Two. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 50 967 Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 6 of 12 Ord. Section # Code Cite Revision Effect Issue 4.8(F)(7) Clarifies the intent of the standard. Clarify 4.7(F)(7) (N-C-L), 4.8(F)(7) (N-C-M), and 4.9(F)(7) (N-C-B) - so that the prohibition on subdividing a lot from front to back does not apply to corner lots. 51 940 4.9(B)(3) Adds small and medium solar systems in N-C-B as Type Two. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 52 967 4.9(B)(3) Adds Single Family Attached to N-C-B. Add to 4.9(B)(3) - N-C-B Permitted Use List - Type 2 - Single Family Attached Dwellings - as this housing type is well-suited for this zone district. 52 954 4.9(D)(6)(b) Clarifies applicability of the setback standard along Shields. Amend 4.9(D)(6)(b) - N-C-B Front Yard Setback - to clarify that the 60-foot minimum front yard setback must apply to not just the front yard but also the side yard (south of University Avenue) and clarify that it applies to Shields Street only. 53 914 4.9(E)(7) Clarifies the intent of the standard. Clarify 4.7(F)(7) (N-C-L), 4.8(F)(7) (N-C-M), and 4.9(F)(7) (N-C-B) - so that the prohibition on subdividing a lot from front to back does not apply to corner lots. 54 940 4.10(B)(3) Adds small and medium solar systems in H-M-N as Type Two. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 55 967 4.13(B)(3) Adds small and medium solar systems in P-O-L as Type Two. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 56 967 4.14(B)(3)[c] Adds small and medium solar systems in R-C as Type Two. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 57 967 4.16(B)(2) Allows houses in the Downtown to revert to single family detached dwelling. Amend 4.16(B)(2) - Downtown Zone Permitted Uses - to allow existing single familly detached dwellings as a permitted use. 58 965 4.16(B)(2)[C] Adds Music Studio in D as Type One. Add to 5.1.2 - Definitions and Article Four - Zone Districts - to create a new land use - Music Studio - by providing a new definition and assigning to nine zone Ord. Section # Code Cite Revision Effect Issue 4.16(B)(2)(D) Adds small and medium soloar systems in D as Type One. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 60 967 4.16(G) Adds a cross reference to a supplemental Design Standard document and map. Amend 4.16(G) - Downtown Zone - to add a map for the Old Town Historic Landmark District standards and guidelines and a cross-reference to Chapter 14 of the City Code. 61 980 4.17(B)(2) Adds small and medium solar systems in R-D-R as Type One. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 62 967 4.17(B)(2] Adds Music Studio in R-D-R as Type One. Add to 5.1.2 - Definitions and Article Four - Zone Districts - to create a new land use - Music Studio - by providing a new definition and assigning to nine zone districts as a Type One use. 62 978 Amend 4.17(B)(3) - R-D-R Zone - to allow parking lots and parking structures as principal uses and to allow such parking lots to be partially improved but only on an interim basis of three years with an extension provision. 63 904 4.17(B)(3) Adds parking lots/structures in R-D-R as Type Two. Amend 4.17(B)(3) - R-D-R Zone - to allow parking lots and parking structures as principal uses and to allow such parking lots to be partially improved but only on an interim basis of three years with an extension provision. 63 904 4.17(D) Updates R-D-R development standards. Amend 4.17(D)(E) - R-D-R Development Standards - to implement new design standards which are intended to maintain the character of the area and assist applicants in preparation of development plans and add a cross reference to supplemental guidelines. 64 987 4.17(E) Adds a cross-reference to supplemental Design Guidelines document. Amend 4.17(D)(E) - R-D-R Development Standards - to implement new design standards which are intended to maintain the character of the area and assist applicants in preparation of development plans and add a cross reference to supplemental guidelines. 65 987 4.18(B)(2)[c] Adds Music Studio in C-C as Type One. Add to 5.1.2 - Definitions and Article Four - Zone Districts - to create a new land use - Music Studio - by providing a new definition and assigning to nine zone districts as a Type One use. 66 978 Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 8 of 12 Ord. Section # Code Cite Revision Effect Issue 4.18(B)(2)(d) Adds small and medium solar systems in C-C as Type One Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 67 967 4.19(B)(2)[c] Adds Music Studio in C-C-N as Type One. Add to 5.1.2 - Definitions and Article Four - Zone Districts - to create a new land use - Music Studio - by providing a new definition and assigning to nine zone districts as a Type One use. 68 978 4.19(B)(2)(d) Adds small and medium solar systems in C-C-N as Type One. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 69 967 4.20(B)(2)[c] Adds Music Studio in C-C-R as Type One. Add to 5.1.2 - Definitions and Article Four - Zone Districts - to create a new land use - Music Studio - by providing a new definition and assigning to nine zone districts as a Type One use. 70 978 4.20(B)(2)(d) Adds small and medium solar systems in C-C-R as Type One. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 71 967 4.21(B)(2)[C} Adds Music Studio in C-G as Type One. Add to 5.1.2 - Definitions and Article Four - Zone Districts - to create a new land use - Music Studio - by providing a new definition and assigning to nine zone districts as a Type One use. 72 978 4.21(B)(2)(D) Adds small and medium solar systems in C-G as Type One. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 73 967 4.22(B)(2)[c] Adds Music Studio on C-S as Type One. Add to 5.1.2 - Definitions and Article Four - Zone Districts - to create a new land use - Music Studio - by providing a new definition and assigning to nine zone districts as a Type One use. 74 978 4.22(B)(2)(d) Adds small and medium solar systems in C-S as Type One. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 75 967 Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 9 of 12 Ord. Section # Code Cite Revision Effect Issue 4.23(B)(2)(d) Adds small and medium solar systems in N-C as Type One. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 76 967 4.24(B)(2)(D) Adds small and medium solar systems in C-L as Type One. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 77 967 4.26(B)(2)(d) Adds small and medium solar systems in H-C as Type One. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 78 967 4.26(B)(3)[c] Adds Unlimited and Limited Indoor Recreation in H-C as Type Two. Amend 4.26(B)(3)[c] - Harmony Corridor Permitted Use List - and 4.26(D)(2) - Harmony Corridor Secondary Uses - to add Unlimited and Limited Indoor Recreational Use and Facility as Type Two and as secondary uses in the H-C zone. 79 982 4.26(D)(2) Adds Unlimited and Limited Indoor Recreation in H-C as secondary use. Amend 4.26(B)(3)[c] - Harmony Corridor Permitted Use List - and 4.26(D)(2) - Harmony Corridor Secondary Uses - to add Unlimited and Limited Indoor Recreational Use and Facility as Type Two and as secondary uses in the H-C zone. 80 982 4.27(B)(1) Adds small and medium solar systems in E as B.D.R. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 81 967 4.27(B)(2)[c] Adds Music Studio in E as Type One. Add to 5.1.2 - Definitions and Article Four - Zone Districts - to create a new land use - Music Studio - by providing a new definition and assigning to nine zone districts as a Type One use. 82 978 4.27(B)(2)(d) Adds large scale solar systems in E as Type One. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 83 967 4.27(D)(2) Adds Music Studio as a secondary use in E. Add to 5.1.2 - Definitions and Article Four - Zone Districts - to create a new land use - Music Studio - by providing a new definition and assigning to nine zone districts as a Type One use. 84 978 Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 10 of 12 Ord. Section # Code Cite Revision Effect Issue 4.28(B)(1)(f) Adds small and medium solar systems in I as B.D.R. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 85 967 4.28(B)(2)[c] Adds Music Studio in I as Type One. Add to 5.1.2 - Definitions and Article Four - Zone Districts - to create a new land use - Music Studio - by providing a new definition and assigning to nine zone districts as a Type One use. 86 978 4.28(B)(2)(d) Adds large scale solar systems in I as Type One. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 87 967 5.1.2 Adds a definition for Drop-in Child Care. Amend 3.8.4(A) - Child Care Regulations - to align the size of the required outdoor play area with the expected number of children at any one time and to match the State, which is the licensing authority, and define Drop in Child Care Center. 88 979 5.1.2 Adds a definition for Music Studio. Add to 5.1.2 - Definitions and Article Four - Zone Districts - to create a new land use - Music Studio - by providing a new definition and assigning to nine zone districts as a Type One use. 89 978 5.1.2 Amends the definition. Amend 5.1.2 - Definition of Parking Structure - so that it includes all manner of structured parking (i.e. under- structure, one level, podium), not just a parking structure consisting of more than one level as presently written. 90 955 5.1.2 Adds a definition for Building-Mounted Solar Energy System. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 91 967 5.1.2 Adds a definition for Ground-Mounted Solar Energy System. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 92 967 5.1.2 Adds a definition for Solar Energy System. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 93 967 Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 11 of 12 Ord. Section # Code Cite Revision Effect Issue 5.1.2 Adds a definition for Solar Energy System - Large-Scale. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 94 967 5.1.2 Adds a definition for Solar Energy System - Medium- Scale. Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 95 967 5.1.2 Adds a definition for Solar Energy System - Small-Scale Amend 3.8 - Supplemental Regulations - to add three levels of Solar Farms (small, medium and large-scale) as new uses, assign to various zone districts and establish regulations governing such development. 96 967 None Repeals the outdated Transitional Land Use Regulations. Remove the Transitional Land Use Regulations from the Code as they are now obsolete. 97 985 Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 12 of 12 ATTACHMENT 4 May 8, 2014, Draft Minutes Planning and Zoning Board Project: 2014 Annual Revisions, Clarifications & Additions to the Land Use Code Project Description: This is a request for a recommendation to City Council regarding the annual updates to the Land Use Code. There are proposed revisions, clarifications and additions to the Code that address a variety of subject areas that have arisen since the last annual update in 2013. Recommendation: Approval Secretary Cosmas listed several citizen letters that had been received since the last work session: Mike Knowles and Michelle Haefele with concerns about the proposed amendments regarding the Addition of Permitted Use (APU), Gina Janett with recommendations about the proposed changes, and Paul Patterson with concerns about the protection of neighborhoods as a result of the proposed changes. She also reported that Chief Planner Shepard had provided a memo update to the Board members with changes to Ordinance Section 33, item #979, and Ordinance Section 64, item #987. Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence Staff Presentation Chief Planner Shepard gave an overview of the annual changes to the Land Use Code, including the memo he updated and the recent changes since the work session. Member Hart noted that the Board had already reviewed each proposal extensively at previous work sessions. Public Input Mike Knowles, 623 Monte Vista Avenue, spoke about the granting of APU’s and how it changes the character of the neighbor and how he feels the APU in residential zones should be eliminated to protect homes, which are homeowner investments. Paul Patterson, 2936 Eindborough Drive, requested that the Board reconsider Section 1 (the APU section of the Land Use Code) and remove the use of APU in residential neighborhoods. He stated that the APU is too vaguely defined and thinks it could be interpreted in too many ways. Michelle Haefele, 603 Monte Vista Avenue, spoke about the APU not protecting neighborhoods from incompatible, high-intensity uses. She acknowledged that the original intent of the APU was to accommodate unforeseen uses, like breweries. She is asking that certain zone districts be protected from the APU, listing each zoning codes separately. Board Questions and Staff Response Member Hart asked for clarification of the citizen’s stated concerns. Chief Planner Shepard explained that the citizens appear to be asking for consideration of global items, which would require more public outreach but are not directly related to the proposed code changes. Director Kadrich stated that these citizen comments were made previously through the Citizen Task Force. This Planning and Zoning Board sub-committee and interested citizens discussed all aspects related to the APU process last Fall. This task force considered these and other suggestions. However, the Planning and Zoning Board directed Staff not to remove the APU process from nine zone districts as requested. Instead, the Board directed Staff to make only the revisions that are contained in the 2014 Land Use Code Update Ordinance. She also agreed that this type of change is outside the scope for the proposed LUC updates and would require a much more extensive review and community outreach. Member Schneider asked if the citizens would clarify their concerns with respect to existing homes. Michelle Haefele responded that the purpose of the zone called Neighborhood Conservation Buffer (NCB) is to prevent the creep of incompatible uses, such as commercial zones, into single-family neighborhoods. She is concerned that, if a zone is not listed in NCB, a new APU could allow for more intense uses. Vice Chair Kirkpatrick asked if there would be any concentrated efforts coming up to explore some of these citizen recommendations in addition to what the P&Z Board would be recommending. Chief Planner Shepard stated that staff has only received direction to make the proposals heard at this hearing. Chair Carpenter suggested that these citizen comments should be discussed at another work session to ensure proper consideration. This discussion will be scheduled for the June work session. Chair Carpenter asked the Board to focus on the revisions currently being proposed. Member Hart stated that he was surprised that these letters are being received now, and he suggested that further work should be done with the citizens in the specific zones in question. Member Schneider asked for more discussion about definition of facility and expansion during the SPAR process, including the changing character of buildings/facilities and the 25% rule. Planning Manager Gloss responded that, with respect to the 25% addition and the change in character, staff had proposed that language specifically to have both qualitative and quantitative measurements, which is how the draft ordinance was crafted, but he offered to consider wording changes or other options. Member Schneider stated that he wants to comply with the Secretary of Interior’s guidelines, but he has concerns with respect to historical buildings. Director Kadrich added that the SPAR review is separate and distinct from any sort of historic preservation process, so this may not be a good example of this code review. She understands that this is the reason the staff has implemented the two-part test. The staff had borrowed some of the language from the school district agreement as a model, because it was based on their Master Plan, and those types of expansions fit the Master Plan and don’t require a SPAR review. The Board can also direct staff to review the language of this code. Deputy City Planner Eckman clarified the criteria for a SPAR review, which is a statutory process for public buildings where the Board is entitled to look at location, character and extent only, and the governing body that funds the public building can overrule a disapproval by the P&Z Board with a 2/3 vote. He acknowledges the vagueness of the location, character and extent criteria, which can be subject to interpretation. Member Schneider asked again about the 25% rule; he is concerned that, without a Board process, a builder may not have to provide neighborhood connectivity because the project is being built in phases and this might be overlooked due to other project considerations and loopholes. Planning Manager Gloss responded that support facilities might be better defined in order to make a clear determination of the definition of what the facility includes. Director Kadrich stated that the City is currently moving away from the term “SPAR” to clearly define a review process in terms of location, character and extent. Member Hansen asked about the articulation of taller buildings (more than 2 stories high) and how much flexibility is available to satisfy this requirement. Chief Planner Shepard stated that staff has interpreted that these standard mostly apply to larger buildings, and they have interpreted the code based on the pedestrian scale. They are trying to avoid looming buildings that create “dead” space, so he believes there is flexibility. Board Deliberation Member Hart made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board recommend to City Council approval of the annual updates to the Land Use Code as presented, including the two changes included in Senior Planner Shepard’s May 7, 2014, memo dealing with section 3.84 and 4.17D. Member Hobbs seconded the motion. Member Schneider stated that he appreciates the citizen participation in the LUC change process. Member Hansen and Vice Chair Kirkpatrick agreed and thanked the staff and citizens for their input. Vote: 7:0 1 ORDINANCE NO. 086, 2014 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKING VARIOUS AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS LAND USE CODE WHEREAS, on March 18, 1997, by its adoption of Ordinance No. 051, 1997, the City Council enacted the Fort Collins Land Use Code (the "Land Use Code"); and WHEREAS, at the time of the adoption of the Land Use Code, it was the understanding of staff and the City Council that the Land Use Code would most likely be subject to future amendments, not only for the purpose of clarification and correction of errors, but also for the purpose of ensuring that the Land Use Code remains a dynamic document capable of responding to issues identified by staff, other land use professionals and citizens of the City; and WHEREAS, City staff and the Planning and Zoning Board have reviewed the Land Use Code and identified and explored various issues related to the Land Use Code and have made recommendations to the Council regarding such issues; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the recommended Land Use Code amendments are in the best interests of the City and its citizens. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That Section 1.3.4 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 1.3.4 Addition of Permitted Uses (A) Purpose Statement. The purpose of the Addition of Permitted Use process is to allow for the approval of a particular land use to be located on a specific parcel within a zone district that otherwise would not permit such a use. Under this process, an applicant may submit a plan that does not conform to the zoning, with the understanding that such plan will be subject to a heightened level of review, with close attention being paid to compatibility and impact mitigation. This process is intended to allow for consideration of unforeseen uses and unique circumstances on specific parcels with evaluation based on the context of the surrounding area. The process allows for consideration of emerging issues, site attributes or changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject property. For residential neighborhoods, land use flexibility shall be balanced with the existing residential character. Projects are expected to continue to meet the objectives of any applicable sub-area plan and City Plan. The process encourages dialogue and collaboration among applicants, affected property owners, neighbors and City Staff. 2 (B) Applicability. This Section is applicable only under the following circumstances: (1) Where the proposed use is not listed as a permitted use in any zone district, does not fall within any existing use classification, and is proposed as being appropriate to be added to the permitted uses in the zone district. If approved under this Section, such use shall be considered for inclusion into the zone district pursuant to Division 2.9; or (2) Where the proposed use is listed as a permitted use in one or more zone district(s) and is proposed based solely on unique circumstances and attributes of the site and development plan. (AC) Required Findings. In conjunction with an application for approval of an over- all development plan, a project development plan, a final plan or any amend- ment of the foregoing, and upon the petition of the applicant or on the Director's own initiative, the Director (or the Planning and Zoning Board as specifically authorized and limited in subsection (B) below) may add to the uses specified in a particular zone district any other similar use which conforms to all of the following conditions: . . . (5) Such use, if located within or adjacent to an existing residential neighborhood, shall be subject to two (2) neighborhood meetings, unless the Director determines from information derived from the conceptual review process that the development proposal would not have any significant neighborhood impacts. The first neighborhood meeting must take place prior to the submittal of an application. The second neighborhood meeting must take place after the submittal of an application and after the application has completed the first round of staff review. (56) Such use is not a medical marijuana dispensary or a medical marijuana cultivation facility. (BD) Planning and Zoning Board Authority and Limitation. In conjunction with an application for approval of an overall development plan, a project development plan, a final plan or any amendment of the foregoing, the Planning and Zoning Board may add a proposed use if the Board specifically finds that such use would not be detrimental to the public good and would be in compliance with the requirements and criteria contained in Section 3.5.1, provided that such 3 addition of a proposed use by the Planning and Zoning Board must be specific to the proposed site and shall not be considered for a text amendment under subsection (C) below and provided further that such use is not specifically listed as a "Prohibited Use" in the zone district in which the proposed site is located. (CE) Codification of New Use. When any use has been added by the Director to the list of permitted uses in any zone district in accordance with subsection (AC) above, such use shall be promptly considered for an amendment to the text of this Code under Division 2.9. If the text amendment is approved, such use shall be deemed to be permanently listed in the appropriate permitted use list of the appropriate zone district and shall be added to the published text of this Code at the first convenient opportunity, by ordinance of City Council pursuant to Division 2.9. If the text amendment is not approved, such use shall not be deemed permanently listed in the zone district, except that such use shall continue to be deemed a permitted use in such zone district for only the development proposal for which it was originally approved under subsection (AC) above. (DF) Conditions. When any use has been added to the list of permitted uses in any zone district in accordance with this Section, the Director (or the Planning and Zoning Board, if applicable) may impose such conditions and requirements on such use as are necessary or desirable to accomplish the purposes and intent of this Code, to ensure consistency with City Plan and its adopted components and associated sub-area plans, to prevent or minimize adverse effects and impacts Section 2. That Section 2.1.3 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new subparagraph (e) which reads in its entirety as follows: 2.1.3 Types of Development Applications (E) Site Plan Advisory Review (1) Purpose and Effect. The Site Plan Advisory Review process requires the submittal and approval of a site development plan that describes the location, character and extent of improvements to parcels owned or operated by public entities. In addition, with respect to public and charter schools, the review also has as its purpose, as far as is feasible, that the proposed school facility conforms to the City’s Comprehensive Plan. (2) Applicability. A Site Plan Advisory Review shall be applied to any public building or structure. For a public or charter school, the Planning and Zoning Board shall review a complete Site Plan Advisory Review application 4 within thirty (30) days (or such later time as may be agreed to in writing by the applicant) of receipt of such application under CRS 22-32-124. For Site Plan Advisory Review applications under CRS 31-23-209, such applications shall be reviewed and approved or disapproved by the Planning and Zoning Board within sixty (60) days following receipt of a complete application. Enlargements or expansions of public buildings, structures, schools and charter schools are exempt from the Site Plan Advisory review process if: (a) The change results in a size increase of less than twenty five (25) percent of the existing building, structure or facility being enlarged whether it be a principal or accessory use; and (b) The enlargement or expansion does not change the character of the building or facility. Application for a Site Plan Advisory Review is subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Board under the requirements contained in Division 2.16 of this Land Use Code. Section 3. That Section 2.2.3(D)(3) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (3) Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City Council may, by ordinance, waive the imposition of any fee imposed by the provisions of this ChapterSection for a housing project wholly or partially owned by a housing authority formed pursuant to the provisions of Section 29-4-101, et seq., C.R.S., if the City Council, in its sole discretion, determines that: . . . Section 4. That Section 2.2.6(A) of Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.2.6 Step 6: Notice (A) Mailed Notice. The Director shall mail written notice to the owners of record of all real property within eight hundred (800) feet (exclusive of public rights- of-way, public facilities, parks or public open space) of the property lines of the parcel of land for which the development is planned. Owners of record shall be ascertained according to the records of the Larimer County Assessor's Office, unless more current information is made available in writing to the Director prior to the mailing of the notices. If the development project is of a type described in the Supplemental Notice Requirements of subsection 2.2.6(D), then the area of 5 notification shall conform to the expanded notice requirements of that Section. In addition, the Director may further expand the notification area. Formally designated representatives of bona fide neighborhood groups and organizations and homeowners' associations within the area of notification shall also receive written notice. Such written notices shall be mailed at least fourteen (14) days prior to the public hearing/meeting date. The Director shall provide the appli- cant with a map delineating the required area of notification, which area may be extended by the Director to the nearest streets or other distinctive physical fea- tures which would create a practical and rational boundary for the area of noti- fication. The applicant shall pay postage and handling costs as established in the development review schedule. Failure to mail such notice shall not affect the validity of any hearing, meeting or determination by the decision maker. . . . Section 5. That Section 2.2.6 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new subsection (E) which reads in its entirety as follows: (E) The following shall not affect the validity of any hearing, meeting, or determination by the decision maker: (1) The fact that written notice was not mailed as required under the provision of this Section. (2) The fact that written notice, mailed as required under the provision of this section, was not actually received by one or more of the intended recipients. (3) The fact that signage, posted in compliance with the provision of this section was subsequently damaged, stolen or removed either by natural causes or by persons other than the person responsible for posting such signage or his or her agents. Section 6. That Section 2.2.10(A)(1)(e) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (e) the minor amendment does not result in new buildings, building additions or site improvements, such as parking lots and landscap- ing, that are proposed to be located outside the boundaries of the approved Project Development Plan or approved site specific development plan; or . . . 6 Section 7. That Section 2.2.10(A)(2)(e) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (e) the minor amendment does not result in new buildings, building additions or site improvements, such as parking lots and landscap- ing, that are proposed to be located outside the boundaries of the approved Project Development Plan or approved site specific development plan. Section 8. That Section 2.2.10(A)(3) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (3) Referral. In either (1) or (2) above, the Director may refer the amend- ment to the Administrative Hearing Officer or Planning and Zoning Board. The referral of minor amendments to development plans approved under the laws of the City for the development of land prior to the adoption of this Code shall be processed as required for the land use or uses proposed for the amendment as set forth in Article 4 (i.e. Type 1 review or Type 2 review) for the zone district in which the land is located. The referral of minor amendments to project development plans or final plans approved under this Code shall be reviewed and processed in the same manner as required for the original development plan for which the amendment is sought, and, if so referred, the decision of the Hearing Officer or Planning and Zoning Board shall constitute a final decision, subject only to appeal as provided for development plans under Division 2.3, 2.4 or 2.5, as applicable, for the minor amendment. Section 9. That Section 2.2.11(A) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (A) Application Submittals. An application submitted to the City for the review and approval of a development plan must be diligently pursued and processed by the applicant. Accordingly, the applicant, within one hundred eighty (180) days of receipt of written comments and notice to respond from the City on any submittal (or subsequent revision to a submittal) of an application for approval of a development plan, shall file such additional or revised submittal documents as are necessary to address such comments from the City. If the additional submittal information or revised submittal is not filed within said period of time, the development application shall automatically lapse and become null and void. The Director may grant one (1) extension of the foregoing one- hundred-eighty-day requirement, which extension may not exceed one hundred twenty (120) days in length, and one (1) additional extension which may not exceed sixty (60) days in length. This subsection (A) shall apply to applica- tions which are, or have been, filed pursuant to this Code and to applications 7 which are, or have been, filed pursuant to the laws of the City for the develop- ment of land prior to the adoption of this Code. On transfer of ownership of any real property that is the subject of a pending application, whether in whole or in part, such transfer shall bar a new owner or transferee from taking further action on such application unless, prior to taking any action, the new owner provides evidence satisfactory to the Director that the transferor of such property intended that all rights of the owner under the pending application be assigned to the transferee. Section 10. That Section 2.2.11(D)(3) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (3) Term of Vested Right. Within a maximum of three (3) years following the approval of a final plan or other site specific development plan, the applicant must undertake, install and complete all engineering improve- ments (water, sewer, streets, curb, gutter, street lights, fire hydrants and storm drainage) in accordance with city codes, rules and regulations. The period of time shall constitute the "term of the vested property right." The foregoing term of the vested property right shall not exceed three (3) years unless: (a) an extension is granted pursuant to paragraph (4) of this subsection, or (b) the City and the developer enter into a development agreement which vests the property right for a period exceeding three (3) years. Such agreement may be entered into by the City only if the subject development constitutes a "large base industry" as defined in Article 5, or if the Director determines that it will likely take more than three (3) years to complete all engineering improvements for the development, and only if warranted in light of all relevant circumstances, including, but not limited to, the size and phasing of the development, economic cycles and market conditions. Any such development agreement shall be adopted as a legislative act subject to referendum. Failure to undertake and complete the developmentsuch engineering improvements within the term of the vested property right shall cause a forfeiture of the vested property right and shall require resubmission of all materials and reapproval of the same to be processed as required by this Code. All dedications as contained on the final plat shall remain valid unless vacated in accordance with law. Section 11. That Section 2.3.2(D) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (D) Step 4 (Determination of SufficiencyReview of Applications): Applicable. Section 12. That Section 2.3.2(H)(3) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 8 (3) The overall development plan shall conform to the Master Street Plan requirements and the street pattern/connectivity standards both within and adjacent to the boundaries of the plan as required pursuant to Sections 3.6.1 and 3.6.3(A) through (F). The overall development plan shall identify appropriate transportation improvements to be constructed and shall demonstrate how the development, when fully constructed, will conform to the Transportation Level of Service Requirements as contained in Section 3.6.4 by submittal of a Master Level Transportation Impact Study. Section 13. That Section 2.4.2(D) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (D) Step 4 (Determination of SufficiencyReview of Applications): Applicable. Section 14. That Section 2.5.2(D) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (D) Step 4 (Determination of SufficiencyReview of Applications): Applicable. Section 15. That Section 2.6.3(D) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (D) Step 4 (Determination of SufficiencyReview of Applications): Applicable except that the term “City Engineer” shall be substituted for the term “Director.” Section 16. That Section 2.7.3(C) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: . . . Step 3(D) (Submittal and Hearing Date Schedule): Not applicable. Step 3(ED) (Development Review Fees): Step 3(E)(1) shall apply. Step 3(E)(2) and (3) shall not applyApplicable. Section 17. That Section 2.7.3(D) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (D) Step 4 (Determination of SufficiencyReview of Applications): Not applicable. Section 18. That Section 2.8.2(D) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (D) Step 4 (Determination of SufficiencyReview of Applications): Applicable. 9 Section 19. That Section 2.9.4 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.9.4 Text and Map Amendment Review Procedures An amendment to the text of this Code or an amendment to the Zoning Map may be approved by the City Council by ordinance after receiving a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Board. Any such proposed amendment shall be processed through a public hearing before the Planning and Zoning Board, which hearing shall be held either prior to City Council consideration of the proposed amendment or between first and second readings of the ordinance approving the amendment which will provide a recommendation to the City Council. (See Steps 1 though 12 below). The City Clerk shall cause the hearing by the City Council to be placed on the agenda for a future City Council meeting; and the public hearing before the City Council shall be held after at least fifteen (15) days' notice of the time, date and place of such hearing and the subject matter of the hearing and the nature of the proposed zoning change has been given by publication in a newspaper of general circulation within the City. On a proposal for a text amendment, the Planning and Zoning Board shall hold a hearing, which hearing shall be held either prior to City Council consideration of the proposed amendment or between first and second readings of the ordinance approving the amendment. Notice shall be given as required for ordinances pursuant to the City Charter. The City Council shall then approve, approve with conditions or deny the amendment based on its consideration of the Staff Report, the Planning and Zoning Board recommendation and findings and the evidence from the public hear- ings, and based on the amendment's compliance with the standards and conditions established in this Section. In the event that a protest is filed under the provisions of Section 31-23-305, C.R.S., any protested zoning change shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of a simple majority of the Councilmembers present and voting as provided in Article II, Section 11 of the City Charter. (See Steps 8 and 9 below). . . . Section 20. That Section 2.9.4(D) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (D) Step 4 (Determination of SufficiencyReview of Applications): Applicable. Section 21. That Section 2.10.2(D) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (D) Step 4 (Determination of SufficiencyReview of Applications): Applicable. 10 Section 22. That Section 2.10.2(F) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (F) Step 6 (Notice): Subsection 2.2.6(A) only applies, except that "800 feet" shall be changed to "150 feet," and for single-family houses in the NCL and NCM zone districts, eight hundred (800) feet shall be changed to five hundred (500) feet for variance requests for: (1) Construction that results in a two-story house where a one-story house previously existed and where there is at least one (1) lot abutting the side of the subject lot and the house on such abutting lot is one (1) story; or (2) Construction of a new house that is greater than two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet; or (3) Construction of an addition that results in a total square footage of more than three thousand (3,000) square feet; and "14 days" shall be changed to "7 days," everywhere they occur in subsection 2.2.6(A). Subsections 2.2.6(B)—(D) shall not apply. Section 23. That Section 2.11.2(D) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (D) Step 4 (Determination of SufficiencyReview of Applications): Applicable. Section 24. That Section 2.13.1 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.13.1 Purpose The purpose of this Division is to provide a procedure for relief, where appropriate, to persons who claim that the adoptionapplication of this Code has interfered with their vested rights to develop, or who claim that their property has been taken by reason of the application of this Code. The provisions and procedures of this Division shall be followed to conclusion prior to seeking relief from the courts based upon any claim of vested rights, or any alleged denial of economically beneficial use of land, any alleged lack of reasonable nexus of a condition imposed by the City to potential impacts of development, any lack of rough proportionality of a condition imposed by the City to potential impacts of development, any deprivation of due process which causes a taking, or any other taking of real property. 11 Section 25. That Section 2.13.2 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.13.2 Administrative Process/Hearing Officer There is hereby established the following Vested Rights Determination and Takings Determination Procedures for the purpose of identifying certain parcels of real property in the City that should be made exempt, or partially exempt, from the application of any portion of this Code. An owner or developer of real property in the City who claims such an exemption on the basis of development rights that have vested under the criteria contained in Section 2.13.10 that certain development rights have vested with regard to such property, prior to the effective date of this Code may seek a Vested Rights Determination in accordance with the procedures described in this Division. Furthermore, an owner or developer of real property in the City who claims that such property has been taken without just compensation or who claims a deprivation of due process may seek a Takings Determination in accordance with the procedures described in this Division. With regard to a Takings Determination, the owner or developer may assert any legally recognized takings claim, including, but not limited to, a claim that he or she has been deprived of "all economically beneficial use" of his or her property, that a condition imposed by the City does not have a "reasonable nexus" to the potential impacts of his or her development, that such a condition is not "roughly proportional" to the potential impacts of his or her development, or that actions taken by the City under this Code have resulted in a deprivation of due process. Such persons will be provided an opportunity for a public hearing, the right to present and rebut evidence, a formal record and an impartial Hearing Officer in accordance with the following procedures. Such Hearing Officer shall be selected and appointed by the City Manager and shall be an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Colorado with experience in land use matters. Subject to the procedures hereinafter provided, the Hearing Officer shall issue formal findings of fact, conclusions of law and a Vested Rights Determination and/or Takings Determination, depending on the nature of the claim asserted by the applicant. The claims shall be reviewed according to the following procedure: . . . Section 26. That Section 2.13.3(E) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (E) Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City Council may, by ordinance, waive the imposition of any fee imposed by the provisions of this ChapterSection for a housing project wholly or partially owned by a housing authority formed pursuant to the provisions of Section 29-4-101, et seq., C.R.S., if the City Council, in its sole discretion, determines that: 12 . . . Section 27. That Section 2.13.10(A) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.13.10 Criteria for Vested Rights (A) This section is intended to strictly adhere to and implement existing case law and statutory law controlling in the State of Colorado as they relate to the doctrine of vested rights and equitable estoppel as applied to a home rule municipality exercising its authority and powers in land use planning, zoning, the provisions of adequate public facilities concurrent with development (APF), subdivision, site development, land development regulations, and related matters addressed in this Land Use Code. It is the express intent of the city to require application of the provisions of this Division 2.13 to as much development and property in the city as is legally possible without violating the legally vested rights of an owner developer under case law or statutory law. The criteria herein provided shall be considered in rendering a Vested Rights Determination hereunder. It is intended that each case be decided on a case-by-case factual analysis. An applicant shall be entitled to a positive Vested Rights Determination only if such applicant demonstrates, by clear and convincing evidence, entitlement to complete his or her development without regard to the otherwise applicable provisions of this Land Use Code by reason of: (A) the provisions of Title 24, Article 68, C.R.S.; (B) Section 2.2.11(D) (Lapse) of this Land Use Code; or (C) the existence of all three (3) of the following requirements: . . . Section 28. That Section 2.15.1(C)(4) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (4) Step 4 (Determination of SufficiencyReview of Applications): Applicable. Section 29. That Section 2.15.2(B)(4) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (4) Step 4 (Determination of SufficiencyReview of Applications): Applicable. Section 30. That Article 2 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new Division 2.16 which reads in its entirety as follows: 13 Division 2.16 Site Plan Advisory Review 2.16.1 Purpose and Applicability The purpose and applicability of a Site Plan Advisory Review is contained in Section 2.1.3(E). 2.16.2 Site Plan Advisory Review Procedures A Site Plan Advisory Review shall be processed according to, in compliance with and subject to the provisions contained in Division 2.1 and Steps 1 through 12 of the Common Development Review Procedures (Sections 2.2.1 through 2.2.12, inclusive) as follows: (A) Step 1 (Conceptual Review): Applicable. (B) Step 2 (Neighborhood Meeting): Applicable. (C) Step 3 (Development Application Submittal): All items or documents required for Site Plan Advisory Review as described in the development application submittal master list shall be submitted. The Director may waive or modify the foregoing submittal requirements if, given the facts and circumstances of the specific application, a particular requirement would either be irrelevant, immaterial, redundant or otherwise unnecessary for the full and complete review of the application. Prior to acquisition of land or contracting for the purchase of a facility, a public school or charter school shall advise the Planning and Zoning Board in writing. The Planning and Zoning Board shall have ten (10) days in which to request submittal of a site development plan. Prior to constructing or authorizing any other public building or structure, a site development plan identifying the location, character and extent shall be submitted to the Planning and Zoning Board. (D) Step 4 (Determination of Sufficiency): Applicable. (E) Step 5 (Staff Report): Applicable. (F) Step 6 (Notice): Applicable. (G) Step 7(A) (Decision Maker): Not applicable, and in substitution thereof, the Planning and Zoning Board shall consider a Site Plan Advisory Review and approve or disapprove the application in a public hearing held within sixty 14 (60) days after receipt of the application under CRS 31-23-209. In the case of a public or charter school application under CRS 22-32-124, the Planning and Zoning Board shall provide review comments at a public hearing held within thirty (30) days (or such later time as may be agreed to in writing by the applicant) after receipt of the application. Step 7(B)-(G) (Conduct of Public Hearing, Order of Proceedings at Public Hearing, Decision and Findings, Notification to Applicant, Record of Proceedings, Recording of Decisions and Plats): Applicable. (H) Step 8 (Standards): Not applicable, and in substitution thereof, an application for a Site Plan Advisory Review shall comply with the following criteria: (1) The site location for the proposed use shall be consistent with the land use designation described by the City Structure Plan Map, which is an element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. (2) The site development plan shall conform to architectural, landscape and other design standards and guidelines adopted by the applicant’s governing body. Absent adopted design standards and guidelines, the design character of the site development plan shall be consistent with the stated purpose of the respective land use designation as set forth in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. (3) The site development plan shall identify the level of functional and visual impacts to public rights-of-way, facilities, and abutting private land caused by the development, including, but not limited to, streets, sidewalks, utilities, lighting, screening and noise, and shall mitigate such impacts to the extent reasonably feasible. (I) Step 9 (Conditions of Approval): Not applicable. (J) Step 10 (Amendments): Not applicable. (K) Step 11 (Lapse): Not Applicable. (L) Step 12 (Appeals): Not applicable, and in substitution thereof, a disapproved Site Plan Advisory Review made under CRS 31-23-209 may be overruled by the governing board of the public entity by a vote of not less than two-thirds (2/3) of its entire membership. Further, with respect to a review made under CRS 22-32-124, the Planning and Zoning Board may request a hearing before the applicable board of education. 15 Section 31. That Figure 1 in Section 3.2.1(E)(5)(c) of the Land Use Code is hereby deleted and replaced with the new Figure 1 as follows:: Figure 1 Interior Landscaping for Vehicular Use Areas 16 Figure 1 Interior Landscaping for Vehicular Use Areas Section 32. That Section 3.2.3(E)(1) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (E) Shading. (1) The physical elements of the development plan shall be, to the maximum extent feasible, located and designed so as not to cast a shadow onto 17 structures on adjacent property greater than the shadow which would be cast by a twenty-five-foot hypothetical wall located along the property lines of the project between the hours of 9:00 am and 3:00 pm, MST, on December 21. This provision shall not apply to structures within the fol- lowing high-density zone districts: Downtown, Community Commercial, and Transit-Oriented Overlay District. . . . Section 33. That Section 3.5.1(G)(1) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (G) Building Height Review. (1) Special Height Review/Modifications. Purpose. The purpose of this Section is to establish a special process to review buildings or structures that exceed forty (40) feet in height. Its intent is to encourage creativity and diversity of architecture and site design within a context of harmonious neighborhood planning and coherent environmental design, to protect access to sunlight, to preserve desirable views and to define and reinforce downtown and designated activity centers. All buildings or structures in excess of forty (40) feet in height shall be subject to special review pursuant to this subsection (G). (a) Review Standards. If any building or structure is proposed to be greater than forty (40) feet in height above grade, the building or structure must meet the following special review criteria: 1. Views. A building or structure shall not substantially alter the opportunity for, and quality of, desirable views from public places, streets and parks within the community. Desirable views are views by the community of the foothills, mountains and/or significant local landmarks (i.e., Long's Peak, Horsetooth Mountain). Techniques to preserve views may include, but are not limited to, reducing building or structure mass, changing the orientation of buildings and increasing open space setbacks. 21. Light and Shadow. Buildings or structures greater than forty (40) feet in height shall be designed so as not to have a substantial adverse impact on the distribution of natural and artificial light on adjacent public and private property. Adverse impacts include, but are not limited to, casting shadows on adjacent property sufficient to preclude the functional use of 18 solar energy technology, creating glare such as reflecting sunlight or artificial lighting at night, contributing to the accumulation of snow and ice during the winter on adjacent property, and shading of windows or gardens for more than three (3) months of the year. Techniques to reduce the shadow impacts of a building may include, but are not limited to, repo- sitioning of a structure on the lot, increasing the setbacks, reducing building or structure mass or redesigning a building or structure's shape. 32. Privacy. Development plans with Bbuildings or structures greater than forty (40) feet in height shall be designed to avoid infringing on the privacy of adjacent public and private property, particularly adjacent residential areas and public parks. Techniques to improve the level of privacy in a neighborhood may include, but not be limited to,address privacy impacts on adjacent property by providing landscaping, fencing, and open space, window size, window height and window placement, orientation of balconies, and changing building or structure orientationorientation of buildings away from adjacent residential development, or other effective techniques. 43. Neighborhood Scale. Buildings or structures greater than forty (40) feet in height shall be compatible with the scale of the neighborhoods in which they are situated in terms of relative height, height to mass, length to mass, and building or structure scale to human scale. (b) Submittal Requirements. All development plans proposing building or structure heights in excess of forty (40) feet shall, at a minimum, include the following information: 1. a shadow analysis that indicates on the project development site plan the location of all shadows cast by the building or structure (with associated dates of the year); 2. a visual analysis that: a. identifies the extent to which existing views may be blocked; b. depicts in graphic form views before and after the project, utilizing photographs of the area and neutral drawings derived from at least two (2) points from which the 19 proposal will be commonly viewed, one (1) of which should be a vista towards the foothills; and c. indicates these points of observation on an inset map or plan of the area; and 32. a summary of the key conclusions of the shadow and visual analysis, and steps to be taken to comply with the review standards set forth above. . . . Section 34. That Section 3.5.2(C) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 3.5.2 Residential Building Standards . . . (C) Housing Model Variety and Variation Among Buildings. (1) Single-family detached, single-family attached in groups of two (2), and two (2) family dwellings shall comply with the following requirements: (1a) Any development of one hundred (100) or more single-family detached, single-family attached in groups of two (2), or two- family detached dwelling units shall have at least four (4) different types of housing models. Any development ofcontaining fewer than one hundred (100) single-family or two-family dwelling units shall have at least three (3) different types of housing models. The applicant shall include in the application for approval of the project development plan documentation showing how the development will comply with the foregoing requirement. (2b) Each housing model shall have at least three (3) characteristics which clearly and obviously distinguish it from the other housing models, including differentwhich characteristics may include, without limitation, differences in floor plans, exterior materials, roof lines, garage placement, placement of the footprint on the lot, and/or building face. (3c) The requirements provided in subparagraphs (1) and (2) above shall not apply to developments containing ten (10) or fewer dwelling units. 20 (4d) The enforcement procedure for this standard shall be in accordance with Section 3.8.15. (2) Single-family attached buildings containing more than two (2) dwelling units shall comply with the following requirements: (a) For any development containing at least three (3) and not more than five (5) buildings (excluding clubhouses/ leasing offices), there shall be at least two (2) distinctly different building designs. For any such development containing more than five (5) buildings (excluding clubhouses/leasing offices), there shall be at least three (3) distinctly different building designs. For all developments, there shall be no similar buildings placed next to each other along a street or street-like private drive. Building designs shall be considered similar unless they vary significantly in footprint size and shape. (b) Building designs shall be further distinguished by including unique architectural elevations and unique entrance features, within a coordinated overall theme of roof forms, massing proportions and other characteristics. Such variation among buildings shall not consist solely of different combinations of the same building features. Section 35. That Section 3.6.2(O) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (O) Easements. Easements shall be controlled by the following requirements: . . . (3) Development plans shall incorporate and continue any public access easements so as to connect them to any such easements that exist on abutting properties. (34) The subdivider shall be responsible for adequate provisions to eliminate or control flood hazards associated with the subdivision in accordance with Chapter 10 of the City Code. Agreements concerning stormwater drainage between private parties shall be subject to city review and approval. Section 36. That Section 3.8.4(A) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 21 3.8.4 Child Care Center Regulations. (A) A minimum of two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet of outdoor play area shall be provided for fifteen (15) children or fewer, with seventy-five (75) additional square feet being required for each additional child, except that the size of the total play area need only accommodate at least fifty (50) percent of the capacity of the center, and that suchThe outdoor play area shall not be required for drop-in child care centers. For the purposes of this subsection, the capacity of the center is calculated based upon indoor floor space reserved for school purposes of forty (40) square feet per child. Any such play area on the site of the child care center within or abutting any residential district shall be enclosed by a decorative solid wood fence, masonry wall or chain link fence with vegetation screening, densely planted. The height of such fence shall be a minimum of six (6) feet and shall comply with Section 3.8.11. Where access to preschool nurseries is provided by other than local streets, an off- street vehicular bay or driveway shall be provided for the purpose of loading and unloading children. Section 37. That Section 3.8.25(B) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: . . . (B) A building or structure containing a permitted use which has been damaged by fire or other accidental cause or natural catastrophe may be reconstructed to its previous condition provided that such work is started within six (6)twelve (12) months of the date of the occurrence of such damage. In the event such work is started later than six (6)twelve (12) months from the date of the occurrence, then the building or structure may be reconstructed, provided that, to the extent reasonably feasible, such reconstruction complies with the applicable standards of Article 3 and Article 4 of this Code. Section 38. That Section 3.8.30(F)(2) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (F) Design Standards for Multi-Family Dwellings. . . . Minimum Outdoor Play Area for a Child Care Center 15 children or less 1,200 square feet more than 15 children 75 square feet per child for 33% of the child capacity of the center 22 (2) Variation Among Repeated Buildings. For any development con- taining at least three (3) and not more than five (5) buildings (excluding clubhouses/leasing offices), there shall be at least two (2) distinctly different building designs. For any such development containing more than five (5) buildings (excluding clubhouses/leasing offices), there shall be at least three (3) distinctly different building designs. For all developments, there shall be no more than two (2) similar buildings placed next to each other along a street, street-like private drive or major walkway spine. Buildings designs shall be considered similar unless they vary significantly in footprint size and shape, architectural elevations and entrance features, within a coordinated overall theme of roof forms, massing proportions and other characteristics. Building designs shall be further distinguished by including unique architectural elevations and unique entrance features within a coordinated overall theme of roof forms, massing proportions and other characteristics. To meet this standard, sSuch variation among buildings shall not consist solely of different combinations of the same building features. . . . Section 39. That Division 3.8 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new Section 3.8.32 which reads in its entirety as follows: 3.8.32 Solar Energy Systems (A) Applicability. These standards shall apply to all solar energy systems. (B) Purpose. The purposes of these solar energy system supplementary regulations are to promote reduced dependence on non-renewable energy sources, to design solar energy systems in a manner that minimizes impacts on adjacent properties, and to promote systems that are visually compatible with the character of the areas in which they are located and that are not detrimental to public health, safety, and welfare. (C) General Design Standards: (1) To the maximum extent feasible, ancillary solar equipment shall be located inside the building or screened from public view. (2) The applicant shall demonstrate that the height, location, setback, or base elevation of a solar energy system minimizes potential glare and visual impacts of the system on adjacent properties. 23 (3) Support structures for ground-mounted solar facilities shall, to the extent reasonably feasible, use materials, colors, and textures that complement the site context. (4) All solar energy system appurtenances including, but not limited to, plumbing, water tanks and support equipment, shall be of a color that is complementary to the site location, and shall be screened to the extent reasonably feasible without compromising the effectiveness of the solar collectors. Solar panels/collectors are exempt from the screening requirements of this Section and Section 3.5.1(I)(6). (5) To the maximum extent feasible, solar energy systems shall complement the visual characteristics of the site and the adjacent area. (6) Building-mounted solar energy systems are exempt from the height requirements of this Land Use Code, except that they must comply with the height limitations of this Section 3.8.32 including the following: Table xxx: Height limitations on roof- and building-mounted solar energy systems for principal and accessory buildings, as measured above the roof line. Non-residential and residential buildings (excluding single-family or duplex dwellings) < 2:12 pitch 8 feet, as measured on a vertical axis to the roof below to which it is installed (see Figure x below) 2:12 to 6:12 pitch 4 feet, as measured on a vertical axis to the roofline below to which it is installed. > 6:12 pitch 2 feet, as measured on a vertical axis to the roofline below to which it is installed. Single-family and duplex dwellings (principal and accessory buildings) No taller than one foot, as measured on a vertical axis to the roof below to which it is installed unless roof pitch is 2:12 or less, in such case two feet is permitted. No portion of a solar energy system shall project above the maximum projection line depicted within Figures xxx and xxxx below. All buildings Building-mounted solar energy systems shall not extend horizontally beyond any roof overhang Building - mounted solar energy systems 24 Solar panels installed on the sides of buildings as awnings or attached to buildings as shade elements are permitted so long as the provisions of this and other applicable requirements are met. Figure xxx: Maximum height for roof-mounted systems (Principal buildings [excluding single-family or duplex dwellings]) Figure xxxx: Maximum height for roof-mounted systems (single family and duplexes) (D) Standards for Small, Medium and Large-scale Solar Energy Systems. Solar energy systems shall conform to the applicable size-based regulations as set out in this subsection (D): (1) Small-Scale Solar Energy Systems. 25 (a) Maximum Lot Size. One-half (0.5) acre. (b) Maximum Height. All ground-mounted small-scale solar energy systems shall comply with the accessory building height limits within the zone district, except for light poles with integrated solar panels which are subject to the standards of Section 3.2.4. (c) Setbacks. Ground-mounted, small-scale solar energy systems shall be not located within the front, side or rear building setbacks, or the front yard area. If necessary for the system’s effectiveness, ground-mounted solar energy collectors may be located within the minimum setbacks for the zone district, provided that the solar energy collector is located no less than fifteen (15) feet from rights-of-way and five feet from all other property lines. (d) Parking. No minimum parking requirements shall apply. Parking spaces located beneath covered parking solar energy systems are exempt from maximum parking limits. (2) Medium-Scale Solar Energy Systems. (a) Lot Size. Between one-half (0.5) acre to five (5) acres. (b) Maximum Height. All ground-mounted medium-scale solar energy systems shall comply with the accessory building height limits within the zone district, except for light poles with integrated solar panels which are subject to the standards of Section 3.2.4. (c) Setbacks. Ground-mounted, medium-scale solar energy systems shall not be located within the front, side or rear building setbacks, or the front yard area. (d) Fencing/Access. Ground-mounted medium-scale solar energy systems shall be enclosed with a perimeter fence with a minimum height of five (5) feet and a maximum height of seven (7) feet. Knox boxes and keys shall be provided at locked entrances for emergency personnel access. Warning signage shall be placed at the entrance and perimeter of the facility. 26 (e) Visual Appearance. Buildings and accessory structures shall, to the extent reasonably feasible, use materials, colors, and textures that blend the facility into the existing environment. 1. Landscaping. Landscaping and/or screening materials shall be provided to assist in screening the facility from public rights-of-way and neighboring residences. 2. Lighting. Lighting shall be limited to the minimum necessary for security and shall incorporate shielded full cut-off light fixtures. 3. Electrical Interconnections. All electrical interconnection and distribution lines within the project boundary shall be underground, except for power lines that extend beyond the project site or are within a substation. (3) Large-Scale Solar Energy Systems (a) Lot Size. Greater than five (5) acres. (b) Maximum Height. All ground-mounted large-scale solar energy systems shall comply with the accessory building height limits within the zone district, except for light poles integrating solar panels which are subject to the standards of Section 3.2.4. (c) Setbacks. Large-scale solar energy systems shall be set back from all property lines a minimum of thirty (30) feet, and shall be located at least one hundred feet from all residentially zoned land. Additional setbacks may be required to mitigate visual and functional impacts. (d) Fencing/Access. Ground-mounted large-scale solar energy systems shall be enclosed with a perimeter fence with a minimum height of five (5) feet and a maximum height of seven (7) feet. Knox boxes and keys shall be provided at locked entrances for emergency personnel access. Warning signage shall be placed at the entrance and perimeter of the facility. 27 (e) Visual Appearance. Buildings and accessory structures shall, to the extent reasonably feasible, use materials, colors, and textures that blend the facility into the existing environment. 1. Landscaping. Landscaping and/or screening materials shall be provided to assist in screening the facility from public rights-of-way and neighboring residences. 2. Lighting. Lighting shall be limited to the minimum extent necessary for security and shall incorporate shielded full cut-off light fixtures. 3. Electrical Interconnections. All electrical interconnection and distribution lines within the project boundary shall be underground, except for power lines that extend beyond the project site or are within a substation. (E) Maintenance. Any solar energy system that has not been in working condition for a period of one (1) year shall be subject to Section 115 (Unsafe Structures and Equipment) of the International Building Code, which may require the panels and associated equipment to be removed, or the unsafe condition otherwise mitigated if it is determined to be unsafe. If so determined by the Building Official, the panels and associated equipment shall be promptly removed from the property to a place of safe and legal disposal, after which the site and/or building, as applicable, must be returned to its preexisting condition. (F) Use Restrictions in Established Residential Areas. Notwithstanding the use review criteria contained in the various zone districts set out in Article 4 (Type 1/Type 2 review), if either a small-scale solar energy system or a medium-scale solar energy system is located on an existing platted lot and within an established residential neighborhood, then such system must be processed as a permitted use subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Board. (G) Allocation of Energy. Energy derived from solar collectors may be allocated to the lot where the system is located or may be distributed to other locations. Section 40. That Section 3.10.4(C) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 28 (C) Off-street Parking. Off-street parking shall be located only behind, above, or within or below street-facing buildings to the maximum extent feasible. No parking will be allowed between the street and the front or side of a building. Section 41. That Section 3.10.4(D)(1) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (D) Parking Structure Design. To the extent reasonably feasible, all parking struc- tures shall meet the following design criteria: (1) Where parking structures face streets, retail andor other non-residential uses shall be required along at least fifty (50) percent of the ground level frontage to minimize interruptions in pedestrian interest and activity. The decision maker may grant an exception to this standard for all or part of the ground level frontage on streets with low pedestrian interest or activity. . . . Section 42. That Section 3.10.5(F) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (F) Building Height. All buildings shall have a minimum height of twenty (20) feet, measured to the dominant roof line of a flat-roofed building, or the mean height between the eave and ridge on a sloped-roof building. In the case of a complex roof with different, co-dominant portions, the measurement shall apply to the highest portion. . . . (2) Buildings allowed under subparagraphs (F)(1)(a), (b) or (c) of this Section shall have a base portion consisting of one (1) or two (2) stories. The base portion shall be clearly defined by a prominent, projecting cornice or roof, fenestration, different material and different color from the remainder of the building. If the base portion is two (2) stories, the ground floor shall be further differentiated by fenestration and other detailing. (3) Buildings allowed under subparagraphs (F)(1)(a), (b) or (c) of this Sectiongreater than two (2) stories in height shall also be designed so that upper portions of the building are stepped back from the base. The adequacy of upper floor step-backs shall be determined by the extent to which they advance the following objectives: . . . 29 Section 43. That Section 4.1(B)(3)(c) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new paragraph 2 which reads in its entirety as follows: 2. Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy systems. Section 44. That Section 4.2(B)(3)(d) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new paragraph 3 which reads in its entirety as follows: 3. Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy systems. Section 45. That Section 4.3(B)(3) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (3) The following uses are permitted in the R-F District, subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Board: . . . (c) Industrial Uses: 1. Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy systems. (cd) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses: 1. Wireless telecommunications equipment. Section 46. That Section 4.4(B)(3) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (3) The following uses are permitted in the R-L District, subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Board: . . . (d) Industrial Uses: 1. Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy systems. (de) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses: 1. Wireless telecommunication equipment. Section 47. That Section 4.5(B)(3)(d) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new paragraph 3 which reads in its entirety as follows: 30 3. Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy systems. Section 48. That Section 4.5(E)(2)(e) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (e) Building Massing. No building permitted by this Section shall have a single undifferentiated mass with a footprint over ten thousand (10,000) square feet. No building footprint shall exceed a total of twenty thousand (20,000) square feet.1. For any building with a footprint in excess of ten thousand (10,000) square feet, walls that are greater than seventy-five (75) feet in length shall incorporate recesses or projections created by wall plane returns of at least thirty (30) feet; any such building shall be differentiated into multiple sections of mass in order to achieve proportions that are compatible in scale with adjacent residential neighborhoods. 2. Minimum front yard setback of all buildings shall be fifteen (15) feet in order to provide a landscaped front yard consistent with the residential character of the L-M-N zone district. Section 49. That Section 4.6(B)(3) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (3) The following uses are permitted in the M-M-N District, subject to Planning and Zoning Board review: . . . (d) Industrial Uses: 1. Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy systems. (de) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses: 1. Wireless telecommunication equipment. Section 50. That Division 4.6 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new Section 4.6(E) which reads in its entirety as follows: (E) Buildings. 31 (1) Notwithstanding the M-M-N district maximum building height, the portion of a building located within a radius of seventy-five (75) feet of the apex at the corner of the two (2) property lines at the intersection of two (2) arterial streets may contain an additional story if the resulting building height conforms to the maximum allowable height in the district. (2) Notwithstanding the M-M-N district maximum building height, the portion of a building within a radius of fifty (50) feet of the apex at the corner of the two (2) property lines at any street intersection (except an arterial/arterial intersection) may contain an additional story if the resulting building height conforms to the maximum allowable height in the district. Section 51. That Section 4.7(B)(3) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (3) The following uses are permitted within the N-C-L District, subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Board: . . . (c) Industrial Uses: 1. Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy systems. (cd) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses: 1. Wireless telecommunications equipment. Section 52. That Section 4.7(F)(7) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (7) Subdividing of Existing Lots. No existing lot may be further subdivided in such manner as to create a new lot in the rear portion of the existing lot. This regulation shall not apply to corner lots. Section 53. That Section 4.8(B)(3) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (3) The following uses are permitted in the N-C-M District, subject to Planning and Zoning Board review: . . . 32 (d) Industrial Uses: 1. Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy systems. (de) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses: 1. Wireless telecommunication equipment. Section 54. That Section 4.8(F)(7) of the Land Use code is hereby amended to read as follows: (7) Subdividing of Existing Lots. No existing lot may be further subdivided in such manner as to create a new lot in the rear portion of the existing lot. This regulation shall not apply to corner lots. Section 55. That Section 4.9(B)(3) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (3) The following uses are permitted, subject to Planning and Zoning Board review: (a) Residential Uses: 1. Fraternity and sorority houses, provided that such fraternity or sorority house is located within a street- fronting principal building. 2. Single-family attached dwellings. 23. Multi-family dwellings containing more than four (4) dwelling units per building at a density of more than twenty-four (24) dwelling units per net acre, provided that such multi-family dwelling is located within a street-fronting principal building. 34. Mixed-use dwellings which are combined with any other use subject to Planning and Zoning Board review. (b) Institutional/Civic/Public Uses: 1. Public and private schools for preschool, elementary, intermediate, high school, college, university and vocational and technical education. (c) Commercial/Retail Uses: 33 1. Medical and dental clinics, professional offices and personal and business service shops which propose structural additions or exterior alterations to the existing building, or the uses are to be constructed on a lot or parcel which contained a structure at the time of adoption on October 25, 1991, provided that such use is located within a street-fronting principal building. 2. Funeral homes, provided that such funeral home is located within a street-fronting principal building. (d) Industrial Uses: 1. Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy systems. (de) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses: 1. Wireless telecommunication equipment. Section 56. That Section 4.9(D)(6)(b) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (6) Dimensional Standards. . . . (b) Minimum front yard setback shall be fifteen (15) feet. Setbacks from garage doors to the backs of public walks shall not be less than twenty (20) feet, except that the minimum front and side yard setbacks for lands located within the West Central Neighborhood Plan Subarea and south of University Avenue and abutting Shields Street, shall be sixty (60) feet, and the minimum setbacks from garage doors to the backs of public walks shall not be less than sixty-five (65) feet. . . . Section 57. That Section 4.9(E)(7) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (7) Subdividing of Existing Lots. No existing lot may be further subdivided in such manner as to create a new lot in the rear portion of the existing lot. This regulation shall not apply to corner lots. 34 Section 58. That Section 4.10(B)(3) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (3) The following uses are permitted in the H-M-N District, subject to Planning and Zoning Board review: . . . (d) Industrial Uses: 1. Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy systems. (de) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses: 1. Wireless telecommunications equipment. Section 59. That Section 4.13 (B)(3) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new subparagraph (b) which reads in its entirety as follows: (b) Industrial Uses. 1. Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy systems. Section 60. That Section 4.14(B)(3)(c) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new paragraph 2 which reads in its entirety as follows: 2. Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy systems. Section 61. That the table contained in Section 4.16(B)(2) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (2) The following uses are permitted in the subdistricts of the Downtown District, subject to Basic Development Review (BDR), administrative (Type 1) Review or Planning and Zoning Board (Type 2) Review as specifically identified on the chart below: Land Use Old City Center Canyon Avenue Civic Center A. RESIDENTIAL Single-family detached dwellings which were subsequently converted to a different use and are proposed to be returned to their original use. BDR BDR BDR . . . 35 Section 62. That the table contained in Section 4.16(B)(2)(C) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Land Use Old City Center Canyon Avenue Civic Center C. COMMERCIAL … … … … Music studios Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 . . . Section 63. That the table contained in Section 4.16(B)(2)(D) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Land Use Old City Center Canyon Avenue Civic Center D. INDUSTRIAL Workshops and small custom industry Not Permitted Type 1 Type 1 Research laboratories Not Permitted Type 1 Type 1 Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy systems Type 1 Type 1 Type 1 . . . Section 64. That Section 4.16 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new Section (G) which reads in its entirety as follows: (G) Old Town Fort Collins Historic District. Buildings located within the locally designated Old Town Fort Collins Historic District shall also comply with the Old Town Historic Landmark District Design Standards, Chapter 14 of the City Code, and the U.S. Secretary of Interior Standards for Treatment of Historic Buildings. See map. Figure XX Old Town Fort Collins Historic District 36 Section 65. That Section 4.17(B)(2) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (2) The following uses are permitted in the R-D-R District, subject to administrative review: . . . (c) Commercial/Retail Uses: . . . 37 14. Music studios. (d) Industrial Uses: 1. Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy standards. (de) Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses: 1. Wireless telecommunication equipment. 2. Satellite dish antennas greater than thirty-nine (39) inches in diameter. Section 66. That Section 4.17(B)(3)(c) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new paragraph 8 which reads in its entirety as follows: 8. Parking lots and parking structures (as a principal use). Section 67. That Section 4.17(D) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (D) Development Standards. (1) Transition between the River and Development. (a) River landscape buffer. In substitution for the provisions contained in subsection 3.4.1(E) (Establishment of Buffer Zones) requiring the establishment of "natural area buffer zones," the applicant shall establish, preserve or improve a continuous landscape buffer along the River as an integral part of a transition between development and the River. To the maximum extent feasible, the landscape buffer shall consist predominantly of native tree and shrub cover. (See Figure 20.) The landscape buffer shall be designed to prevent bank erosion and to stabilize the River bank in a manner adequate to withstand the hydraulic force of a 100-year flood event. The bank stabilization shall comply with the following criteria: Figure 20 Landscape Buffer 38 39 1. Any bank stabilization improvements shall consist of native plants and stone to the extent reasonably feasible. If any structural materials such as concrete are required, such materials shall be designed to emphasize characteristics of the native landscape such as color, texture, patterns and proportions, in order to minimize contrast with the River landscape. 2. The predominant visual elements in any bank stabilization improvements shall be native vegetation and stone, notwithstanding the use of any integrated structural elements. Blank walls shall not be used to retain the slope of the River bank. (b) Outdoor spaces. On sites that have River frontage between Linden Street and Lincoln Avenue, buildings or clusters of buildings shall be located and designed to form outdoor spaces (such as balconies, arcades, terraces, decks or courtyards) on the River side of the buildings and/or between buildings, as integral parts of a transition between development and the River. A continuous connecting walkway (or walkway system) linking such spaces shall be developed, including coordinated linkages between separate development projects. (2) Streets Connections and Walkways. (a) Streets. Redevelopment shall maintain the existing block grid system of streets and alleys. To the extent reasonably feasible, the system shall be augmented with additional connections, includingsuch as new streets, alleys, walkway spines, mid-block passages, courtyards, and plazas in order to promote a fine-grained pedestrian circulation network that supplements public sidewalks in substitution of streets and/or alleys. (b) Driveways. To the extent reasonably feasible, driveways and curb cuts must be minimized in order to avoid disruption to the sidewalk network, by using shared driveways between properties. The width of driveways and turning radii must be minimized except where truck access is required. (bc) Linden Streetscape. Redevelopment activity along the Linden Street frontage shall be designed to provide for the extension of the streetscape improvements found between Walnut Street and Jefferson Street, including on-street parking defined by landscaped curb extensions, wide sidewalks with trees in cutouts and tree grates, and pedestrian light fixtures. Specific design details are 40 subject to approval by the City Engineer in accordance with the design criteria for streets. (cd) Jefferson Streetscape. Redevelopment activity along the Jefferson Street frontage shall provide formal streetscape improvements including street trees in sidewalk cutouts with tree grates and planters to screen parking. Planters to screen parking shall be designed and constructed to appear as integral extensions of the building design. Materials used shall not be inferior to those used in the construction of the principal building. (de) Interim Improvements. If, at the time of review of a development application, design and engineering criteria for permanent street edge improvements have not been established, then the applicant may construct interim street edge improvements if such improvements are approved by the City Engineer based upon the following criteria: 1. To the maximum extent feasible, the interim improvements will not conflict with any permanent improvements reasonably anticipated to be installed in the future, and 2. The construction of the interim improvements would not be substantially detrimental to the public good. (3) Buildings. (a) Landmarks Exception. Changes or additions to structures or properties designated (or determined by the Landmark Preservation Commission to be eligible for designation) as landmarks in accordance with Chapter 14 of the City Code shall be permitted to emulate the shapes, sizes, proportions, heights, patterns and materials of the landmark (or eligible) structure(s) rather than being required to conform to the standards for buildings contained in this subsection (3). (ba) Industrial Buildings. Except as otherwise provided in this subsection (3), all new nonresidential buildings, including industrial buildings, shall comply with the standards for Mixed-use and Commercial Buildings contained in Section 3.5.3. (cb) Programming, Massing and Placement. 1. Height/Mass. Multiple story buildings of up to five (5) stories are permitted; however, massing shall beprovided that massing is terraced back from the River and from streets as follows:so that (1) multiple story buildings or parts of buildings shall stepare stepped down to one (1) 41 story abutting the River landscape frontage; and are stepped down (2) buildings or parts of buildings shall step down to three (3) stories or less abutting any street frontage. Such terraced massing shall be a significant and integral aspect of the building design. Where new buildings are placed next to existing shorter buildings that are expected to remain, the new buildings must be stepped down in such a manner as to minimize their impact on the shorter buildings. 2. Parking lots. Buildings shall be sited so that any new parking lots and vehicle use areas are located in either: (1) interior block locations between buildings that face the street and buildings that face the River, or (2) side yards. 3. Street frontage. Proposed parking lots and/or vehicular use areas located within fifty (50) feet of any street right-of- way shall not exceed fifty (50) percent of the street frontage of the parcel upon which the parking lot or vehicular use area is proposed. 4. Frequent view/access. No building wall abutting the landscape corridor along the River shall exceed one hundred twenty-five (125) feet on the axis along the River. 5. Outdoor spaces and amenities. To the extent reasonably feasible, all development shall provide on-site outdoor space such as courtyard, plaza, patio or other pedestrian- oriented outdoor space. To the extent reasonably feasible, outdoor spaces shall be visible from the street and shall be visually or physically connected with any outdoor spaces on adjacent properties. (dc) Character and Image. New buildings shall be designed to demonstrate compatibility with the historical agricultural/industrial characteristics of the District in order to promote visual cohesiveness and emphasize positive historical attributes. Such characteristics include simple rectilinear building shapes, simple rooflines, juxtaposed building masses that directly express interior volumes/functions, visible structural components and joinery, details formed by brickwork, sandstone sills, lintels, headers and foundations, and details formed by joinery of structural materials. 1. Articulation. Exterior building walls shall be subdivided and proportioned to human scale, using offsets, projections, overhangs and recesses, in order to add architectural 42 interest and variety and avoid the effect of a single, massive wall with no relation to human size. 21. Outdoor spaces. Buildings and extensions of buildings shall be designed to form architectural outdoor spaces such as balconies, arcades, terraces, decks or courtyards, and to integrate development with the landscape to the extent reasonably feasible. 32. Windows. Windows shall be individually defined with detail elements such as frames, sills and lintels, and placed so as to visually establish and define the building stories and establish human scale and proportion. Windows shall be placed in a symmetrical pattern relative to the wall and massing. Glass curtain walls and spandrel-glass strip windows shall not be used as the predominant style of fenestration for buildings in this District. This requirement shall not serve to restrict the use of atrium, lobby or greenhouse-type accent features used as embellishments to the principal building. 43. RooflinesRoof forms. A minimum pitch of 8:12 shall be used for gable and hip roofs to the maximum extent feasible. Where hipped roofs are used alone, the minimum pitch shall be 6:12. Flat, shed, and gable roof forms corresponding to massing and interior volumes/functions shall be the dominant roof forms. Flat-roofed masonry buildings shall feature three-dimensional cornice treatment integral with masonry on all walls facing streets, the river or connecting walkways, unless they are stepped and terraced back to form a usable roof terrace area(s). Additional decorative shaped cornices in wood (or other material indistinguishable from wood) shall be permitted in addition to the top masonry cornice treatment. Sloped metal roofs are allowed. Barrel roofs may be used as an accent feature but must be subordinate to the dominant roof. Specialized or unusual roof forms, including mansards and A-frames, are prohibited. A single continuous horizontal roofline shall not be used on one- story buildings except as part of a design style that emulates nearby landmarks (or structures eligible for landmark designation). (e5.) Materials. Building materials shall contribute to visual continuity within the District. Textured materials with native and historic characteristics such as brick, stone, and wood, architectural cast stone and synthetic stone in 43 historically compatible sandstone patterns only, architectural metals, and materials with similar char- acteristics and proportions shall be used in a repeating pattern as integral parts of the exterior building fabric, to the maximum extent feasible. Masonry units must wrap around the corners of walls so as to not appear as an applied surface treatment. Other exterior materials, if any, shall be used as integral parts of the overall building fabric, in repeating modules, proportioned both horizontally and vertically to relate to human scale, and with enough depth at joints between architectural elements to cast shadows, in order to better ensure that the character and image of new buildings are visually related to the Downtown and River context. Lapped aluminum siding, vinyl siding, smooth- face concrete masonry units, synthetic stucco coatings, and imitation brick are prohibited. 6. Primary entrance. The primary entrance must be clearly identified and must be oriented to a major street, pedestrian way, place, courtyard, and/or other key public space. The primary entrance must feature a sheltering element such as a canopy or be defined by a recess or a simple surround. 7. Accent features. Accent features, where used, must complement and not dominate the overall composition and design of the building and may include secondary entrances, loading docks, garage bays, balconies, canopies, cupolas, vertical elevator/stair shafts and other similar features. 8. Awnings and canopies. Awnings and canopies must complement the character of the building and must be subordinate to the façade. Colors must be solid or two (2) color stripes for simplicity. (4) Site Design. (a) River Landscape. The natural qualities of the River landscape shall be maintained and enhanced, using plants and landscape materials native to the River corridor in the design of site and landscape improvements. (b) Walls, Fences and Planters. Walls, fences and planters shall be designed to match or be consistent with the quality of materials, the style and colors of nearby buildings. Brick, stone or other masonry may be required for walls or fence columns. 44 (c) Street Edge. A well-defined street edge must be established and shall be compatible with the streetscape in the public realm. Components may include any of the following: planted areas, decorative paving, public art, street furnishing with ornamental lighting and iron and metal work that reflect on the agricultural/industrial heritage of the district. (d) Corner Lots. For sites located at public street corners, parking lots and vehicular use areas shall not abut more than one street frontage. (e) Parking. Where parking lots are highly visible from streets or pedestrian-oriented outdoor spaces, a visual buffer must be provided. Such buffering may consist of any of the following singularly or in combination: a low solid screen wall, a semi- opaque screen or a living green wall consisting of plant material sufficient to provide a minimum of 75% opacity year-round or other screening device that is sensitive to pedestrian activity. (f) Interim Parking. Interim parking lots as a principal use may be approved with a gravel surface and without lighting and landscape improvements, and shall be restricted to a period of use not to exceed three (3) years. Extensions for two (2) successive periods of one (1) year each may be granted by the Planning and Zoning Board upon a finding that the use is compatible with the context of the area and is a beneficial use which supports the purpose of the R-D-R zone. (g) Service Areas and Outside Storage Areas. Service areas and outside storage areas that are not used for trash and recycling containers, dumpsters and mechanical equipment, must, to the maximum extent feasible, be located to the side or rear of the building and be screened from public view. Notwithstanding the foregoing, where industrial processes and outdoor mechanical activities are functionally integral to the principal use, such areas must, to the extent reasonably feasible, be located to the side or rear of the building and not impact pedestrian areas. Partial screening must be provided with design and materials consistent with the building and/or the agricultural/industrial character of the area. 45 Section 68. That Section 4.17 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new Section (E) which reads in its entirety as follows: (E) Design Guidelines. See also the Fort Collins R-D-R, River Downtown Redevelopment Zone District Design Guidelines, which are intended to assist applicants in the preparation of development plans within the zone district. Section 69. That Section 4.18(B)(2)(c) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new paragraph 27 which reads in its entirety as follows: 27. Music studios. Section 70. That Section 4.18(B)(2)(d) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new paragraph 3 which reads in its entirety as follows: 3. Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy systems. Section 71. That Section 4.19(B)(2)(c) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new paragraph 26 which reads in its entirety as follows: 26. Music studios. Section 72. That Section 4.19(B)(2)(d) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new paragraph 4 which reads in its entirety as follows: 4. Small-scale and medium scale solar energy systems. Section 73. That Section 4.20(B)(2)(c) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new paragraph 19 which reads in its entirety as follows: 19. Music studios. Section 74. That Section 4.20(B)(2)(d) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new paragraph 2 which reads in its entirety as follows: 2. Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy systems. Section 75. That the table contained in Section 4.21(B)(2)(C) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Land Use I-25/SH 392 (CAC) General Commercial District (C-G) C. COMMERCIAL/RETAIL (Cont'd) . . . . . . . . . Music studios Not permitted Type 1 . . . 46 Section 76. That the table contained in Section 4.21(B)(2)(D) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Land Use I-25/SH 392 (CAC) General Commercial District (C-G) D. INDUSTRIAL USES . . . . . . . . . Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy systems Type 1 Type 1 . . . Section 77. That Section 4.22(B)(2)(c) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new paragraph 43 which reads in its entirety as follows: 43. Music studios. Section 78. That Section 4.22(B)(2)(d) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new paragraph 6 which reads in its entirety as follows: 6. Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy systems. Section 79. That Section 4.23(B)(2)(d) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new paragraph 2 which reads in its entirety as follows: 2. Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy systems. Section 80. That the table contained in Section 4.24(B)(2)(D) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Land Use Riverside Area All Other Areas D. INDUSTRIAL . . . . . . . . . Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy systems Type 1 Type 1 . . . Section 81. That Section 4.26(B)(2)(d) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new paragraph 4 which reads in its entirety as follows: 4. Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy systems. Section 82. That Section 4.26(B)(3)(c) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of two new subparagraphs 13 and 14 which read in their entirety as follows: 13. Limited indoor recreation establishments. 14. Unlimited indoor recreation use and facility. 47 Section 83. That Section 4.26(D)(2) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of two new subparagraphs (p) and (q) which read in their entirety as follows: (p) Limited indoor recreation establishments. (q) Unlimited indoor recreation use and facility. Section 84. That Section 4.27(B)(1) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new subsection (f) which reads in its entirety as follows: (f) Industrial Uses: 1. Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy systems. Section 85. That Section 4.27(B)(2)(c) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new paragraph 14 which reads in its entirety as follows: 14. Music studios. Section 86. That Section 4.27(B)(2)(d) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new paragraph 7 which reads in its entirety as follows: 7. Large-scale solar energy systems. Section 87. That Section 4.27(D)(2) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new subparagraph (y) which reads in its entirety as follows: (y) Music studios. Section 88. That Section 4.28(B)(1)(f) of the Land Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new paragraph 3 which reads in its entirety as follows: 3. Small-scale and medium-scale solar energy systems. Section 89. That Section 4.28(B)(2)(c) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new paragraph 24 which reads in its entirety as follows: 24. Music studios. Section 90. That Section 4.28(B)(2)(d) of the Land Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new paragraph 11 which reads in its entirety as follows: 11. Large-scale solar energy systems. Section 91. That Section 5.1.2 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new definition “Drop-in child care center” which reads in its entirety as follows: 48 Drop-in child care center shall mean a center that provides occasional care for forty (40) or fewer children between the ages of twelve (12) months and thirteen (13) years for periods of time not to exceed six (6) hours in any twenty-four (24) hour period or fifteen (15) hours in any seven (7) day period. Section 92. That Section 5.1.2 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new definition “Music studio” which reads in its entirety as follows: Music studio shall mean a fully enclosed soundproof studio for the recording, producing, writing or rehearsing of music. Section 93. That the definition “Parking structure” contained in Section 5.1.2 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Parking structure shall mean a building or structure consisting of more than one (1) level and principally used to park motor vehiclesany building containing motor vehicle parking that is a principal use with or without any additional uses. Section 94. That Section 5.1.2 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new definition “Building-mounted solar energy system” which reads in its entirety as follows: Building-mounted solar energy system shall mean a solar energy system mounted on a building. Section 95. That Section 5.1.2 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new definition “Ground-mounted solar energy system” which reads in its entirety as follows: Ground-mounted solar energy system shall mean a solar energy system with a supporting framework that is placed on, or anchored in, the ground and that is structurally independent from any building. Carports, garages, breezeways, covered walkways or similar non-climatized accessory structures that incorporate building-mounted solar energy systems shall not be classified as ground-mounted solar energy systems and shall instead be subject to height and setback regulations governing accessory structures. Section 96. That the definition of “Solar energy system” contained in Section 5.1.2 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Solar energy system shall mean a system of solar collectors orand other deviceequipment or structural design feature of a structure that relies upon sunshine as an energy source and is capable of collecting, distributing and storing (if appropriate to the technology) the sun's radiant energy for a beneficial use. A solar energy system includes, but is not limited to, ground-mounted and building-mounted photovoltaic, solar thermal or solar hot water panels, and light pole and electric charging station-mounted solar panels. Solar energy systems may be considered accessory uses to other uses on a lot, or principal uses, if located on vacant lots. 49 Section 97. That Section 5.1.2 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new definition “Solar energy system, large-scale” which reads in its entirety as follows: Solar energy system, large-scale shall mean a solar energy system covering more than five (5) acres. Section 98. That Section 5.1.2 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new definition “Solar energy system, medium-scale” which reads in its entirety as follows: Solar energy system, medium-scale shall mean a solar energy system covering between one half (0.5) acre and five (5) acres. Section 99. That Section 5.1.2 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new definition “Solar energy system, small-scale” which reads in its entirety as follows: Solar energy system, small-scale shall mean a solar energy system covering less than one-half (0.5) acre. Section 100. That the “Transitional Land Use Regulations” dated August 1997 are hereby repealed and removed from this Land Use Code. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 3rd day of June, A.D. 2014, and to be presented for final passage on the 1st day of July, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on this 1st day of July, A.D. 2014. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk districts as a Type One use. 59 978 Tuesday, May 20, 2014 Page 7 of 12