Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRIGDEN FARM, 14TH FILING - FDP - 56-98AS - CORRESPONDENCE - ADMINISTRATIVE INTERPRETATIONDetermination of Sufficiency pursuant to Section 1.4.3 of the LUC September 21, 2011 Page 2 the Final Development Plan is a reconfiguration of the approved site plan with architectural revisions for a permitted use. We see no basis in code for a requirement that the building configuration and/or architecture accommodate specific individual uses. We formally request that you inform us in writing if you disagree with this interpretation". I am unclear as to what interpretation you are requesting as you are citing an existing approved FDP and a proposed amendment, which has not been reviewed. I am requesting that you provide the following information to provide clarity so I may understand your request: 1. Are you requesting an interpretation for the existing FDP? 2. Are you requesting an interpretation for some future FDP? 3. Are you asking to use portions of the existing FDP for a future FDP without addressing the full LUC? 4. Please cite the code provision for which you are requesting an interpretation. Following receipt of the additional information, requested clarity and code citations for in accordance with Section 1.4.1 of the LUC my authority is to make interpretations of the text of the LUC and the boundaries of zone districts on the Zoning Map, I will review the resubmission of request for interpretation in accordance with Section 1.4 of the LUC. Sincerely, Steven J. Dush, AICP Director — Community Development and Neighborhood Services -2- Planning, Development & Transportation Services City`y 0f Fort Community Development & Neighborhood Services College Avenue Collinsrth P.O.P. P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 970.416.2740 970.224.6134-fax tcgov.com September 21, 2011 Troy W. Jones Chief Planner MTA Planning and Architecture 608 South Mason Street Fort Collins, CO 80524 Dear Mr. Jones: In response to your formal "Request for Interpretation" dated September 8, 2011 and in accordance with Section 1.4 of the Fort Collins Land Use Code (LUC), I would like to provide the following Determination of Sufficiency pursuant to Section 1.4.3 of the LUC. With respect to Interpretation Request #1, additional information is necessary as the request is not clear or specific and therefore not ready for review. Your formal request is as follows: "In discussions held on September 6, 2011, you stated that planning staff could not support the proposed major amendment because it would not be consistent with the approved ODP. It is our assertion validating consistency with the ODP was part of the Final Development Plan approval, with the final Development Plan now superseding the ODP. We formally request that you inform us in writing why the ODP is being cited as a cause for denial once an approved Final Development Plan is in place." This request is not clear as I do not know if you are referencing a future development plan and or the existing development plan as the request seems to ask why staff is denying an approved Final Development Plan. I am requesting that you provide the following information to provide clarity so I may understand your request: 1. Please clarify what Final Development Plan you are referring to as being denied. 2. Please cite the code sections for which you are requesting an interpretation With respect to Interpretation Request #2, additional information is necessary as the request is not clear or specific and therefore not ready for review. Your formal request is as follows: "A copy of the Final Development Plan, Rigden Farm, Fourteenth Filing is attached as Exhibit C. Please notice Item 12 of the General Notes. This note specifies a use, among others, " '..Multi -Family Dwelling Units and any other future uses for the N-C Zoning District". Further, there are no restrictions listed that would disallow any of the uses from the east side of Illinois Drive. It is our interpretation of this Note to mean that the developer has the right to construct multifamily dwelling units on any, or all, of the property. The proposed amendment to