Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-092-10/02/1979-ADOPTING A BUILDING HEIGHT REVIEW CRITERIA 7 1 RESOLUTION 79-92 OF THE COUNCIL OF THL CITY OF FORT COLLINS ADOPTING A BUILDING HEIUHT REVIEW CRITERIA WHEREAS, heretofore Section 118-82 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins has been amended to preclude buildings of a height greater than forty feet —(40' ) unless they ,are located in a Unit Development Plan as defined, processed, and approved according to Section 118-83 of the Zoninq Ordinance, and WHEREAS, it is necessary end appropriate that a review criteria be established for Planned Unit Development review concerning the development of buildings over forty feet (40' ) in height and to guide the review of proposals for such buildings under the P U D Ordinance NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FJRT COLLINS that the building height review criteria, a true copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A", be, and they hereby are, approved and adopted Passed and adopted at a regular ireeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins neld this 2nd day of 0,,eSober 1 rl ST C Clerk PROPOSED CITY of FORT COLLINS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT BUILDING HEIGHT REVIEW CRITERIA A Put pose and Objectives Sec 118-82(c) of the City of Fort Collins Zoning Ordinance (as proposed to be amended) precludes buildings of a height greater than forty feet (40' ) unless they are located in a unit development plan as defined, processed and approved according to Sec 118-83 of the Zoning Ordinance (i e the P U D Ordinance) The purpose of these criteria is to establish a framework for the discretionary review of building heights in excess of forty feet in a P U D proposal The intent is to encourage creativity and diversity of architectural and site design within a con- text of harmonious neighborhood planning and coherent environmental design The primary objectives of the City of Fort Collins in regulating building heights ate the follo�iing 1 to preserve the character and stability of existing residential neighborhoods by precluding the development of buildings which by their height are intrusive to the established character of the neighborhood Some of the external costs imposed by intru- sive height include visual incompatibility due to differences in building scale, loss of views, loss of sunlight on adjacent pro- perty, and loss of privacy in adjacent yards, 2 to define and reinforce the downtown area as the high intensity focal point in the community wlhile preserving the historic character of the "old torn" area, 3 to allow for maximum utilization of other areas zoned for high density residential , commercial and industrial use, but witnout substantially altering the urban form of the city through building heights which conflict wit'i the general scale of development in the district or community as a whole, 4 to generally protect access to air and sunlight for active and passive utilization of solar energy, 5 to provide conscious direction to the development of the urban form of the city through placement of nigh rise buildings This direction would generally allow high rise development in the downtown area as per Objective 2, discn,rrage hign rise development in or adjacent to low and medium density neighborhoods as per Objective 1 , and expect no more than mid-rise de�Plopment elsewh-te as oer Objective 3, 6 to allow fur %aviation of cnese general eypectaLi ons wneie justified through the discretionary reviewr of planned unit development proposals Page 2 re Proposed City of Fort Collins P U D Building Height Review Criteria B Information to be Submitted Section 118-83, E, (2) , (b) , [141 of the Zoning Ordinance requires a P U D preliminary plan suomittal to include "any additional informa- tion as required by the review authority necessary to evaluate the character and impacts , both fiscal and environmental , of the proposed planned unit development" P U D proposal which ential building heights in excess of forty feet (40' ) should include the following 1 a snadow analysis which indicates on the preliminary site plan the location of all shadows cast by the building (with associated dates of the year) , 2 a visual analysis which identifies existing views to be blocked, from where, of what, and to whom, and wnich depicts in graphic form views before and after the project utilizing photographs of the area or neutral drawings derived from them with proposed buildings drawn in Deoictions should be made from at least two points from which the proposal will be commonly viewed, one of which should be a vista towards the foothills These points of observation should be indi- cated on an inset mao or plan of the area (see Exhibit One for example) , 3 the P U D statement of planning objectives should evaluate the shadow and visual analysis , and specifically address the review criteria below C Review Criteria 1 Height Districts The purpose of the height districts as indicated on the attached map is to establish a general policy of benchmark expectations concerning building heights in the community as a whole The height district boundaries are based on the objectives listed above The districts are, however, intended as guidelines rather than absolute limitations Given the specific characteristics of a site and proposal , the City Council might approve a building of whatever height above the benchmark which it felt was justified by the other criteria By the same toEen, the Council might limit building height to less than the benchmark expectation where it deemed this to be necessary The policy for benchmarE criteria concerning building heights in P U D ' s for each height district are as follows Height District 1 - 40 feet Height District 2 - 55 feet Height Oistr ict 3 - io spec f r, ll n See Exhibit Two for a map indicating the location of these height districts (as currently proposed) Page 3 re Proposed City of Fort Collins P U D Building Height Review Criteria 2 Views A building of greater than benchmark height should not substantially alter the opportunity and quality of desireable views within the community 1 Particular enphasis will be given to pre- serving views of the foothills from city parks and public spaces Adverse effects may derive from buildings above benchmark height which block widely perceived vices of the mountains , or which compete for attention with significant landira0 s or features of the skyline (e g Long' s Peak, Horsetooth HOUntain, Fort Collins High School cupola, church steeples , mature treeline silhouette in historic residential neighborhoods, etc ) Beneficial effects may derive from screening existing objectionable vistas and creation of new viers , particularly from public spaces Viers may be preserved (and other criteria listed below nay be enhanced) by increasing building height while reducing building mass , changing the orientation of long high buildings , and increasing open space View Impact Evaluation Guide A+ The project provides significant additional views from public spaces A The project does not alter the opportunity and quality Of public views B The project impinges on widely perceived views but planned mitigative action can reduce this effect C The project impinges on widely perceived views , and no mitigative action is possible or is planned D The project substantially blocks significant views 3 Light and Shadow A building of greater than benchmark height should not have a substantial neaative effect on the distribution of natural and artificial light on adjacent public and private property Nega- tive effects include casting shado,rs on adjacent property sufficient to precludes functional use of solar energy, or creating intense glare (sunlight reflection or nightime lighting) Beneficial effects in- clude the provision of desireable shade with landscaping or arcades and artificial lighting which improves the nightscaoe (e g along downtown streets) Light and Shadow Evaluation Guide A+ The project improves the distribution of light and sradow on adjacent property A The project does not affect the distribution of lignt and shadow on adiri(-ent property 1 The eroectatron is that buildings of benchmark height Mould neet this and the following criteria Page 4 re Proposed City of Fort Collins P U D Building Height Review Criteria B The project Impinges upon the potential for adjacent property to utilize solar energy, but mitigative action can reduce this effect C The project impinges upon the potential for adjacent property to utilize solar energy, and no mitigative action is possible or is planned D The project casts shadows which preclude the functional use of solar energy on adjacent property 4 Privacy_ A building of greater than benchmark height should be designed so as not to intrude on the privacy of adjacent residential uses Negative impacts occur Mien windows and balconies directly overlool adjacent residential outdoor living spaces , (backyards, patios , balconies) Positive effects are provided by landscaping, fencing and building orientation which add to the level of privacy in a neighborhood Privacy Impact Evaluation Guide A+ The project improves the level of privacy in a neighborhood A The project does not affect the existing level of privacy in a neighborhood B The project impinges to some extent upon the privacy of adjacent property, but planned alterations can mitigate this effect C The project impinges upon the privacy of adjacent property, and no attempt to mitigate this effect is possible or as planned D The oroject entails windows and balconies which directly overlook immediately neighboring outdoor living spaces 5 Scale A building of greater than benchmark height should be com- patible with the scale of its neighborhood Adverse effects derive from buildings which depart from established coherent patterns in an area with respect riot only to height, but to mass, type of land use, the intensity of use (coverage, density, open space configuration) , setbacks and distance between buildings , exterior treatment and materials , oroportions of ooenings (doors and windows) , facade variety, exterior artificial lighting, etc Beneficial effects derive from buildings which help to visually and functionally inte- nt ate a site with its eurr oundr, o natural end built emnr onmert Such building pr oblde Jai 1ecy am di _t S ! =y 0` dc� gn t0 in Bred in a manner which is sympathetic to or reinforces established coherent neighborhood patterns Page 5 re Proposed City of Fort Collins P U D Building Height Review Criteria Scale Impact Evaluation Guide A+ The project' s scale and detail will add variety of deisan to the area while reinforcing coherent neigh- borhood patterns A The project's scale and design detail are sympathetic to coherent neighborhood patterns B The project' s design conflicts with or is overly repetitious of some established neighborhood patterns , but these effects can be reduced C The projects design conflicts frith or is overly repetitious of some established neighborhood patterns and no mitigative action is possible or is planned D The project' s scale is incompatible with its surroundings EAlblt Ors \ / n I ► 1 Parbal Visual AhalVslS V A ` h �,c�aatLioVl ,4 �/ VIEW f ovn (st.- ,iX� oil K18P/ 1 , te r' �,z r' f r J n � 1 /-Ater i a I -n a El o o September 10, 1979 Nanning & Zoning Boa, u Meeting 18 #120-79 Ordinance Amendment and Review Criteria to Implement Building Height Regulations Deibel Stated he would answer questions on the proposed amendment Wells Asked how the impact of the hospital would be evaluated Delbel Peplied that the "evaluation guides" were designed to make it easier for decision makers to come to a consensus in evaluating each of the criteria The drawing of the hospital is only an illustration of a portion of a visual analysis In answering the specific question of the impact of the hospital , it probably would rate an A on all criteria except view impact Viewed as in the drawing, it would probably rate a C, but it would most often be viewed from Lemay in whicn case it would rate an A Wells Read a comment from Paul Eckman stating he would like to encourage greater density within the core area Deibel Stated that was wnat the amendment should do and that it was designed to trigger a special review Wells Asked how the Spring Creel proposal would rate Smith Stated it should not be discussed as a law suit is pending Wells Asked when Council would review the amendment Smith Replied the first week in October, and that Council would have two hearings on it Les Kaplan Stated that energy efficiency should be considered when evaluating building height Wells Stated that energy efficiency should be considered in all developments Van Driel Motion to recommend approval of the proposed amendment with the sugges- tion that Council seek expert advice regarding energy efficiency Evans Second Deibel Stated that energy was not inulueed only because staff <<3s trying to address height exclusively and energy should apply to all development, not just high-rise buildings 'rlorl is in process on energy criteria for all da✓elDpr"^nt Van Driel Withdrew the condition concerning energy from the motion Vote Motion carried, 5 - 0 Wells Adjourned meeting