Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout617 WOOD ST. (MORIE AT CAPITOL HILL) - PDP - 22-06 - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTESPlanning & Zoning Board November 16, 2006 Page 8 Member Schmidt made a caution to the staff regarding the future issues that may arise with alleys and notes that it could become a very dangerous situation if more and more people begin putting garages in the alley. Staff member Olt said that if that were the case, the project that pushed the threshold would be responsible for paying for the paving of the alley. There is also the potential for repays to be set up. He notes that the decision to pave an alley is on a case by case basis, and by no means says that this will occur in every situation. Member Schmidt was concerned that if neighbors started using the alley, and one decides to build a garage and tips the threshold, he would be responsible for it. Staff memberr Olt responded that he thinks it would be illogical to build garages and provide access back there. Member Fries said that if the properties on the west side built garages, it might be an improvement because the fences are clearly built too close. McKee added that it is actually a little bit less than 20 feet, and that they dedicated another 8 feet off of that alley for the new development. Member Fries wanted to state that none of the public comments really addressed the modification issues. He also noted that the word "character" was used several times. He thinks that the development has demonstrated character by the effort to maintain existing landscape. Chair Lingle said that he has been on the fence about this. He believes that this is what this zoning district can become in the next 20 to 30 years, but that it is a jolt right now. He thinks that this neighborhood has a lot of untapped potential and he is in favor of the development project. Staff member Olt added that two blocks down Elm Street on the north side of the road, a developer built two large, two-story homes. At the time they were unsure about it, but there have not been any adverse comments and now the homes are occupied and acceptable to the neighborhood. Chair Lingle noted that he thought it was commendable that the emphasis is internal to the courtyard, rather than having the four families out to the perimeter. Lingle stated that he is concerned about the alley. He thinks that it could become a problem in the future, especially if additional properties begin to use it as access. Pro It: i2006. 06 Biannual Revisions, Clarifications, and Addit' s to the Land ode Project Descriptio a request for the Recommendati o City Council regarding nnual update to the Land U ode. There are proposed ns, clarifications, and ions to the Code that address a variety e eas that h arisen since the last update in the Spring of Staff Recommendation: Approval Hearing Testimony, VILTen Comments and other Evidence: Staffmember She noted the biannual Land Use Codes changes are to b onsidered by the Board in this Wings review. He brought to the Board's a memo distributed ea ' in the evening referring t here we will be broadening the color range allowed in the electronic rea oard sign. Planning & Zoning Board November 16, 2006 Page 7 Member Schmidt commented that it would be better to leave the carports as garages and hopes that the developer will do what he can to make the homes compatible. Chair Lingle agreed, saying that since it is about 4% of the total area that is allowed, it is an inconsequential deviation. Member Schmidt made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the modification request to section 4.7 D 1 of the Land Use Code, based on the fact that granting the modification would not be detrimental to the public good and that the plan submitted is equally well or better, meets the standard, and will not diverge from the standard in more than a nominal and inconsequential way. Member Fries seconded the motion. Motion passed 6: 0. Member Schmidt made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the request for modification to the standard section 4.7(F)(1)(C) of the Land Use Code, based on the facts and the findings that granting the modification would not be detrimental to the public good and that the plan submitted is equally well or better, meets the standard, and will not diverge from the standard in more than a nominal and inconsequential way. Member Meyers seconded the motion. Motion passed 6: 0. Member Schmidt made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board recommend approval for modification in section 4.7(F)(1)(G) of the Land Use Code, based on the facts and findings that granting the modification would not be detrimental to the public good and that the plan submitted would promote general purpose of the standard, equally well or better than a plan which complies and that the reason of exceptional physical conditions are extraordinary exceptional standards unique to the property warrant that. Member Fries seconded the motion. Motion passed 6: 0. Member Schmidt moved that the Planning and Zoning Board recommend the approval of the project development plan #22-06 for Morie at Capital Hill. Member Rollins seconded the motion. Motion passed 6: 0. Member Schmidt commented that she thinks this is a good plan for the site, but that the developer should do whatever possible to buffer the scale of the project. Member Meyer likes the project as well. McKee thanked the City and the Board for all of the work that they do. Planning & Zoning Board November 16, 2006 Page 6 that it appeared that some of the fences might be encroaching into the alley right of way making it appear a lot narrower. Chair Lingle asked McKee to explain the architectural character of the homes. McKee said that they had two objectives. One, they wanted to provide a contemporary style that speaks to the freshness of the area. Secondly, he wanted to create a residential feel that resembles some of the newer projects on West Mountain and near Lab Elementary School. The buildings will be a mixture of contemporary stucco designs and hardi board. He noted that the homes will look residential from Wood Street, but along the center path you will have a fantastic view of the courtyard. Member Schmidt commented that she was concerned that the two sides of the buildings will look massive and lose the residential feel when they are covered in stucco. McKee responded with two comments. For one, the square footage of the buildings is not very large. Secondly, one entire side will be lined with trees and a 6 foot fence. The north side has two large trees in the back that cover up that space. He also mentions that the space is very open, due to the fact that they have maintained the 33% FAR and the fence that has been pushed back 8 feet from the alley. Member Schmidt asked if the height of his building would resemble that of the neighbor to the south. McKee said that he thinks it will. Member Schmidt asked if the trees shown in the picture were on his property line. McKee said that they are on top of the property line and that the fence shown encroaches three feet on their property. It will be torn down and replaced. Chair Lingle asked if the color in the rendering is accurate. McKee said that the actual color will be sandy colored and sagebrush. They will paint the colors on a few samples of the building to see how it looks, and then make adjustments if necessary. Chair Lingle asked if this was an FCP step for approving the color. Staff member Olt said that they will get into more detail later and record it in the final plans. Chair Lingle had some further questions about the strong color. McKee said that the pale sage green will be on the south side and will absorb more of the sunlight making the building more energy efficient. The lighter color, a sandy ochre, will be on the south building. Member Stockover made a side note regarding making decisions on development proposals. He said that he always tries to weigh the needs of the neighbors and the property owner. He notes that in this case there is not a lot of opposition in the neighborhood, and feels that once the project is done they will be happy. Stockover thinks that with the green space, the project will be in compliance. He supports it as is and thinks that accepting it will be better than open car ports. McKee responded by saying that the structure of the building is supposed to have a layered effect resembling a village. Even with the parking lot across the street, he feels that the area has the potential to be very nice, connecting to the parks and Poudre River. Member Schmidt asked McKee to describe the second floor since they did not receive a sketch. He said that the deck will come off the master bedroom and cover only a portion of the garage area. There will be double door exits with a wall of windows. Member Schmidt asked for verification of the size of the decks. McKee stated that the front ones are a tiny bit larger than the back ones. Member Schmidt was concerned about the one on the north being so close to the neighboring property. McKee said that 3 of the decks face inward. The other faces the drive space and they will be building a fence line along that area. Planning & Zoning Board November 16, 2006 Page 5 Public Participation Ben Stein lives directly west of the proposed development project and across the alley on Park Street. He states that the alley is too narrow to promote access for vehicles. He stressed the importance of the privacy that the alley provides. Stein admires the built green goals but does not think that the building has any architectural ties to the rest of the neighborhood. Stein also wanted to know if there is any guarantee that this property would not be rented or leased in the future. He said that there are enough rentals in the city as it is. Stein further stated that, although he wasn't sure of the numbers, this property would riot significantly increase the value of the surrounding neighborhood. Lastly, Stein asked a question to clarify the city codes relating to the height of the roof line and the space between units. Riley Phipps lives at 612 Park Street, directly west of the proposed development. He believes that the home will negatively impact the neighborhood. The proposed project will be the only two-family home in a neighborhood of single family homes and will not contribute to the theme of the area. It will set a precedent for future construction and continue to erode the character of the neighborhood. He also feels that the home is too big for the property. Lastly, Phipps agrees with Stein that the proposal to access the property through the alley is unnecessary and the property should be accessed through Wood Street. Brian D'Agostino has been working with McKee on the proposed development project. He stated that he was very impressed with McKee's concern for keeping the neighborhood feel of the area and designing an environmentally conscious project. To do this, he resigned some of his initial options for a denser building and more of a "lease space." D'Agastino stated that the sale price for the homes is substantial and that it is not practical to use it as a rental property. End of Citizen Participation Chair Lingle asked Staff member Olt to return to the pictures of the alley. He said that his experience tells him that most of the alleys in Old Town are paved almost the full 20 feet width of the alley right of way. He asked if an engineer had evaluated the alley. Randy Maizeland said that he took the project to the Transportation Coordination meeting and that it was decided that there were two units on two lots and that this was not different than a single unit with a carriage house as far as trip generation and traffic. Therefore, they did not feel that they had to pave the alley to the full standard. Chair Lingle wanted to know if the width of whatever is there is up to the standard. Maizeland stated that it is not a standard width. Member Schmidt asked if two cars can pass each other in the alley. Maizeland responded that there is 20 feet of right of way, but looking at the picture, it does not look like two cars could pass each other easily. Chair Lingle followed up by asking if Maizeland was comfortable leaving the width the way it is and supporting the project. Maizeland said that it could be completely unimproved with no pavement. Member Schmidt asked if in the future, other residents want to build garages backing into the alley, when improvements would be made and if the entire alley would change. Maizeland responded that improvements would be triggered if there was a proposal for development on a high density lot. If everyone came as an individual and just put one carriage house or garage with their access on the alley, improvements would not be triggered. Member Stockover stated that the fences looked like they were encroaching and that from the site plan. It looked like the property line was in about 8 feet from the right of way. Maizeland responded Planning & Zoning Board November 16, 2006 Page 4 property side there would be an 8 foot setback to yield the garage spaces, which would open up the space to the west of the property. They will probably gravel the area. Member Schmidt presumed that the fire department approved the access plan. McKee agreed. Any fencing will have unlocking gate doors to allow access from the sides. However, the fire department noted that they would be fighting a fire from the Wood Street side. Member Schmidt asked if there would eventually be any fence at the back of the property. McKee said no, but that there would be a small amount of fencing for privacy. The current fencing would be removed to open up the space. Member Schmidt asked about the wells along the sides of the building that were referred to on the plans. McKee said that they are the window wells to the basement. Member Schmidt asked how tall the building is compared to the other two -stories next door and on the corner. McKee wasn't sure of the heights of the other buildings. He said that his building would be about 20 feet, in addition to the pitch of the roof. He noted that the land slopes substantially and wasn't sure how that would affect the appearance. Member Schmidt asked if the grading would stay the same or if they will try to make it flat from the street. McKee stated that the grading is planned to direct water to a natural holding area and to a detention area for water that will create the natural feature. There will also be drainage installed to ensure that water flows correctly. McKee said that the height will be similar to what is to the south of them. Member Schmidt wanted to verify that there is only 5 feet from the deck of unit B to the property line and if McKee knew how far away the house is on the other side. McKee showed where the distance was 5 feet from the building and the property line. He also noted where the distance increases as you go up to the second floor. McKee noted that it is difficult to tell because of the towering trees that have not been pruned. Member Schmidt asked if they are going to be four individually owned townhomes. McKee stated that they will be individually owned and that an HOA will be implemented to manage and maintain the property. Chair Lingle asked if the solution being proposed for compliance with the Density and Intensity of Development is McKee's suggestion and if taking 100 square feet from each unit was considered and denied. McKee said that halfway through the project, they realized that they miscalculated the FAR ratio. Because of that, they already reconfigured the base and pushed a lot of the first level spaces to the second level. Later on, they realized that they were over on the FAR ratio once again. He did not think that they could reduce the space any further because it would lose its functionality for the users. Chair Lingle asked Staff member Olt if the City's control over the site amenities remains the same even though it is a HOA situation. He asked this due to his concern that, over time, the HOA may determine that the water features and other extensive site features are too much for them to deal with, but that they would still be bound by the PDP and FCP. Staff member Olt replied that they would be bound by this approved and recorded development plan. Any changes to the amenities would require a minor amendment request. Chair Lingle said that these amenities were being proposed as mitigation to the intensity of development of the site and wants them to remain in place. McKee noted that his purpose was to engineer functioning detention spaces that are also dedicated to the City. Planning & Zoning Board November 16, 2006 Page 3 footage. By eliminating those two garages, the living unit square footage would be reduced by approximately 400 square feet. 2. Modification 2 is to Section 4(F) (1) (C) of the Land Use Code. This section states that accessory buildings and attached garages should have a front yard setback that is at least 10 feet greater than the front setback of the principal building that is located on the front portion of the lot. This plan has two buildings facing Wood Street. One unit of the two units facing Wood Street does not meet the setback requirement. Staff Olt stated the reason for the modification request was to preserve the three large, deciduous shade trees on the property. To preserve one of the trees, the front porch had to be moved back a foot, creating a nine foot instead of ten foot setback. After evaluation, staff felt that by saving the trees, an equal to or better than situation has been created as required by Section 2.8.2(H). 3. Modification request 3 is to Section 4.7(F) (1) (g) of the Land Use Code and deals with roof form. This section states that the minimum pitch of any roof of the building shall be 212 and the maximum pitch of the building shall be 1212 except that new detached accessory buildings and additions to existing dwelling units may be constructed with a pitch that match any roof of the existing dwelling unit. Additionally, the roof pitch of a dormer or turret or semi -architectural feature may not exceed 2412. This is the crux of the section that we have to deal with for this modification. The covered porch may be flat whenever the roof of said porch is also considered to be floor of a second story deck. In this case, the covered porches over these two units facing Wood Street are flat, but they do not create an outdoor space or a second -level deck. Staff has evaluated this against the overall architectural character of the building and determined that the architectural character created on the site is equal to or better than an architectural plan that would comply with this standard in the Land Use Code. Staff member Olt stated that he received a call from a homeowner at 621 Wood Street. She feels that the project is too big for the lot in the neighborhood, there is poor access into the property from both Wood Street and the alley, and that the alley is narrow and it is difficult for many cars to pass through the alley. The homeowner is concerned because of the future ability to market and become rental property in the future. Chair Lingle asked if the front porch would need to be covered in order for the garage setback from the face of the primary dwelling to be in compliance. Staff member Olt responded that if the garage were not covered or part of the building, then the garages would have to be set back even further from the living unit. It can be either the living unit or a covered porch. Applicant Craig McKee, managing partner of McKee Brothers, LLC presented. He stated it was previously determined there is no historical value to the house being razed. The project will promote green building. While the proposed project creates a denser usage of the space, the appearance from Wood Street will be residential. He stated the project is beneficial to Fort Collins because it will enhance redevelopment in Old Town, increase neighborhood property value, and increase the City tax base. Applicant requested the Planning and Zoning Board approve the first modification request to build the two -car garages to retain property value and provide adequate enclosed storage for the new property owners. Member Schmidt asked McKee if he was planning any improvements to the alley. He responded saying that they were not planning to pave the alley because of the sizeable cost. He said that on his Planning & Zoning Board November 16, 2006 Page 2 Project: Morie at Capitol Hill (617 Wood Street), Project Development Plan - #22-06 Project Description: This is a request to demolish the existing single-family house at 617 Wood Street and construct two new residential buildings, each containing two, 2 or 3-bedroom dwelling units on a platted property that is 17,115 square feet in size. These two family dwelling units will be in 2-story buildings (25' in height) on the north and south halves of the property. These principal buildings will front on Wood Street, with the dwelling units accessed from Wood Street and an existing alley along the west side of the property. Each dwelling unit will have an attached 2-car garage facing either Wood Street or the alley. The property is located on the West side of Wood Street between West Vine Drive and Elm Street. The property is in the NCM — Neighborhood Conservation, Medium Density Zoning District. Staff Recommendation: Project Approval; Denial of Modification to Section 4.7(D)(1) Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence: Staff member Olt provided contextual site information. The Morie at Capitol Hill (617 Wood Street) Project Development Plan is a request to construct two new residential buildings, each containing two, two or three bedroom dwelling units. This is a platted property 17,115 square feet in size, and the existing single-family home at that address would be demolished. The surrounding neighborhood is predominantly single-family. Two of the dwelling units would access directly from Wood Street and two units would access from the alley on the west side of the property. There are multi -family residences to the west and south. The City of Fort Collins Service Center is directly to the east. Associated with this development are three modifications of the standards. Staff member Olt feels that they have been met. Modification 1 is to Section 4.7(D) (1) of the Land Use Code. This section deals with Density Intensity Development and states that minimum lot areas shall be the equivalent of two times the total floor area of the building, but not less than the following: It must be a minimum of 5,000 square feet per minimum for a two-family dwelling and 6,000 square feet for all other uses. Open balconies and basements shall not be counted as floor area. In this particular case, there is a total property area of 17,115 square feet. As proposed, the four dwelling units and attached garages would be 8,967 square feet. That is approximately 409 square feet more than half the size of the property. The applicant has requested a modification to allow the additional 409 square feet. Staff has evaluated the modification request and determined that it is not supported by Section 2.8.2(H) of the Land Use Code. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the modification request. Also built into the applicant's request is the ability to convert one-half of each of these two car garages into a car port. That would provide one enclosed garage and one carport. As defined by the Land Use Code, a carport is not considered part of the total building square Council Liaison: Karen Weitkunat Staff Liaison: Cameron Gloss Chairperson: Dave Lingle Phone: (W) 223-1820 Vice Chair: Briqitte Schmidt Phone: (W) 491-2579 Chairperson Lingle called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m. Roll Call: Meyer, Fries, Schmidt, Stockover, Rollins, Lingle. (Andy Smith absent) Staff Present: Gloss, Eckman, Olt, Shepard, Barnes, Maizeland, and Deines Director of Current Planning, Cameron Gloss, reviewed the Consent and Discussion Agendas: Citizen participation: None. Consent Agenda: 1. Minutes of the April 20, 2006 Planning and Zoning Board Hearing 2. Resolution PZ06-13 — Easement Vacation 3. Resolution PZ06-14 — Access Easement Dedication 4. Resolution PZ06-15 — Drainage Easement Dedication 5. Resolution PZ06-16 — Sight Distance Easement Dedication 6. Resolution PZ06-17 — Easement Dedication Discussion Items: 7. #22-06 — Morie at Capitol Hill (617 Wood Street)— Project Development Plan 8. Recommendation to City Council for Fall 2006 Biannual Revisions, Clarifications and Additions to the Land Use Code. Member Schmidt moved for the approval of the Consent Agenda consisting of the Minutes for April 20, 2006 and Resolutions PZ06-13, PZ06-14, PZ06-15, PZ06-17, and PZ06-17. Member Fries seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0.