HomeMy WebLinkAboutLEMAY AVENUE ESTATES - MODIFICATION OF STANDARD - 37-04A - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORTModification — Lemay Avenue Estates - PDP — Filing #37-04A
April 25, 2005 Administrative Public Hearing
Page 8
5. FINDINGS OF FACT/CONCLUSION:
A. The requested Modification of the Standard in Subsection 4.1(D)(1)(b) of the Land Use
Code for the Lemay Avenue Estates, PDP is subject to an Administrative (Type 1)
review.
B. Granting the requested modification would not be detrimental to the public good.
C. The Modification of Standards Exhibit plan as submitted will advance or protect the
public interests and purposes of the standard for which the modification is requested
equally as well as a plan which complies with the standard for which a modification is
requested, as set forth in Section 2.8.2(H)(1) of the LUC.
The alternative plan proposes that 8 of the 55 lots (15%) in the Lemay Avenue
Estates development be less than the required 1/2 acre (21,780 square feet)
minimum lot size in the UE District. The lots (12 through 18 & 20) would range in
size from 0.41 acre (17,671 square feet) to 0.48 acre (20,724 square feet). They are
located on the east side of the development along the Stanton Creek drainageway.
The diminished lots sizes would enable the development to satisfy the 100' buffer
area requirement along Stanton Creek, a tributary of Fossil Creek, without imposing
a conservation easement on the lots. Therefore, any fencing could be along the rear
property lines. Visually, with or without fencing on the buffer setback line, the lots
would appear the same as lots satisfying the minimum lot size.
D. This request is only for a modification of the specific standard in Subsection
4.1(D)(1)(b) of the LUC. The applicant has already submitted a PDP proposal for
review by the City. The PDP is being reviewed, and a determination will be made,
separate from this request for a modification of standard. However, it will be heard at
the same administrative public hearing on April 25, 2005.
6. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the Modification of Standard in Subsection 4.1(D)(1)(b) of
the Land Use Code (including the Modification of Standards Exhibit) for the Lemay Avenue
Estates, Project Development Plan - #37-04A.
Modification — Lemay Avenue Estates - PDP — Filing #37-04A
April 25, 2005 Administrative Public Hearing
Page 7
4. STAFF'S ANALYSIS OF MODIFICATION REQUEST
Subsection 4.1(D)(1)(b) of the LUC sets forth the requirement that lot sizes shall be one-
half (1/2) acre (21,780 square feet) or larger for dwellings that are not clustered in
accordance with the standards set forth in Division 4.1.
In reviewing the proposed alternative plan for purposes of determining whether it
accomplishes the purposes of this section as required, Staff has determined that:
' Granting the requested modification would not be detrimental to the public
good and would not impair the intent and purposes of the LUC.
" The alternative plan as submitted (Modification of Standards Exhibit) will promote
the general purpose of the standard for which the modification is requested equally
as well as a plan which complies with the standard for which a modification is
requested, as set forth in Section 2.8.2(H)(1) of the LUC.
The Proposed Natural Resource Buffer Easement plan shows all 55 lots in
the Lemay Avenue Estates development as meeting the minimum lot size of
1/2 acre (21,780 square feet) in the UE District. However, the proposed
"natural resources buffer easement line" on this plan encroaches into Lots 12
through 18, Lot 20, and Lot 21. If this plan were to be approved then a
conservation easement would be needed on these 9 lots. Any fencing on the
rear portions of these lots would have to comply with Section 3.4.1(E)(1)(i) of
the LUC.
The alternative Modification of Standards Exhibit plan proposes that 8 of the
55 lots (15%) in the Lemay Avenue Estates development be less than the
required 1/2 acre (21,780 square feet) minimum lot size in the UE District.
The lots (12 through 18 & 20) would range in size from 0.41 acre (17,671
square feet) to 0.48 acre (20,724 square feet). They are located on the east
side of the development along the Stanton Creek drainageway. The
diminished lots sizes would enable the development to satisfy the 100' buffer
area requirement along Stanton Creek, a tributary of Fossil Creek, without
imposing a conservation easement on the lots. Therefore, any fencing could
be along the rear property lines. Visually, with or without fencing on the buffer
setback line, the lots would appear the same as lots satisfying the minimum
lot size.
The alternative plan represents the better and more equitable solution to the buffer
area setback along Stanton Creek. Also, there are 16 lots of the 106 lots (15%) in
the Greenstone development just to the east of Stanton Creek and this proposed
development that are less than 1/2 acre in size. They range in size from 17,268 to
21,745 square feet. Greenstone is also in the UE District.
Modification — Lemay Avenue Estates - PDP — Filing #37-04A
April 25, 2005 Administrative Public Hearing
Page 6
storm drainage, fire and emergency services, police, electricity, open
space, recreation, and public parks;
• This proposed alternative plan continues to avoid the inappropriate
development of lands and provides for adequate drainage and reduction
of flood damage;
• This proposed.alternative plan continues to encourage patterns of land use
which decrease trip length of automobile travel and encourage trip
consolidation by transitioning an in-between density between the Stanton
Creek neighborhood to the north (more dense) of the site, and the
Greenstone neighborhood to the east (less dense);
• This proposed alternative plan continues to increase public access to
sidewalks, trails, bicycle routes and other alternative modes of
transportation by stubbing a trail connection to eventually connect to the
City's regional trail system;
• This proposed alternative plan continues to minimize the adverse
environmental impacts of development through the provision of the
natural features buffer along Stanton Creek;
• This proposed alternative plan continues to improve the design, quality
and character of new development by adhering to the building standards
in section 3.5;
• This proposed alternative plan continues to foster a more rational pattern
of relationship among residential, business and industrial uses for the
mutual benefit of all by adhering to the permitted uses in the zone district;
• This proposed alternative plan continues to encourage the development of
vacant properties within established areas;
• This proposed alternative plan continues to ensure that development
proposals are sensitive to the character of existing neighborhoods by
developing like uses next to like uses;
• This proposed alternative plan continues to ensure that development
proposals are sensitive to natural areas and features by providing the
natural features buffer along Stanton Creek.
We look forward for the opportunity to explain our request in person and/or answer any questions
you may have about the request.
Modification — Lemay Avenue Estates - PDP — Filing #37-04A
April 25, 2005 Administrative Public Hearing
Page 5
This proposed alternative plan does not detract in any way from satisfying this purpose. The
development allows a transition from the Stanton Creek neighborhood to the north and the
Greenstone neighborhood to the east. Greenstone is also zoned Urban Estate. Between
Greenstone PUD First through Third Filings there are 15 lots (out of a total of 106) that are
under a half acre, ranging in size from 16,399 square feet to 21,745 square feet. Clearly the
proposed modification to reduce the minimum lot size on 8 of our lots does not affect the
plan's ability to continue to satisfy the purpose and intent of the Land Use Code.
Suggested Findings.
a) The granting of the modification would not be detrimental to the public good
because there's no physical difference on how the lots would be fenced (or how
the lots would visually appear) between the proposed alternative plan and a plan
that meets the code. The only difference is on paper.
b) The plan as submitted will not diverge from the standards of the Land Use Code
except in a nominal, inconsequential way when considered from the perspective
of the entire development plan, because, again, there's no physical difference on
how the lots would be fenced (or how the lots would visually appear) between
the proposed alternative plan and a plan that meets the code. The only difference
is on paper.
c) The granting of the modification will not affect the plan's ability to improve and
protect the public health, safety and welfare (as contained in Section 1.2.2)
because:
• This proposed alternative plan continues to be consistent with the Land
Use Code, City Plan and its adopted components, including but, not
limited to the Structure Plan, Principles and Policies and associated sub-
area plans;
• This proposed alternative plan continues to encourage innovations in land
development by allowing a creative way to obtain the requested natural
feature buffer;
• This proposed alternative plan continues to foster the safe, efficient and
economic use of the land, the city's transportation infrastructure, and
other public facilities and services by allowing the existence of the natural
feature buffer to happen without affecting the number of lots allowed in
the development;
• This proposed alternative plan continues to facilitate and ensure the
provision of adequate public facilities and services such as transportation
(streets, bicycle routes, sidewalks and mass transit), water, wastewater,
Modification — Lemay Avenue Estates - PDP — Filing #37-04A
April 25, 2005 Administrative Public Hearing
Page 4
works from the City's perspective. The preference of the development team is to keep
the same number of lots while allowing the buffer to be located in a separate open
space tract, rather than having natural buffer easements on each lot. The development
team therefore requests a modification of standards to allow those lots abutting the
creek to be smaller than the required minimum '/z acre lot sizes.
This modification is requested in accordance with the review procedures set forth in
Section 2.8.1(H) of the Land Use Code as follows:
Modification to Section 4.1(D)(1)(b)
Code Language. Section 4.1(D)(1)(b) of the Land Use Code states the following: "(b) Lot
sizes shall be one-half ('/2) acre or larger for dwellings that are not clustered in accordance
with the standards set forth in this Division."
Requested Modification. We request the following minimum lot sizes to be reduced from a
minimum % acre (21,780 square feet) to the following sizes:
Lot Number
Proposed Square
Footage
Lot 12
18,823 s.f.
Lot 13
18,357 s.f.
Lot 14
19,183 s.f.
Lot 15
17,671 s.f.
Lot 16
17,792 s.f.
Lot 17
20,541 s.f.
Lot 18
20,724 s.f.
Lot 20
19,690 s.f.
Our Logic. The difference between the proposed alternative plan and a plan that meets the
code is very subtle. Upon development of the affected lots, in either scenario, the area
within the natural features buffer will be fenced off from the yard areas of the lots. The only
difference is whether this natural features buffer is all one tract, or if portions of it are made
up of easements across the back of several lots. We feel that the difference is
inconsequential.
As described in the purpose statement in 4.1 of the LUC, the Urban Estate zone district "is
intended to be a setting for a predominance of low -density and large -lot housing. The main
purposes of this District are to acknowledge the presence of the many existing subdivisions
which have developed in these uses that function as parts of the community and to provide
additional locations for similar development, typically in transitional locations between
more intense urban development and rural or open lands."
Modification — Lemay Avenue Estates - PDP — Filing #37-04A
April 25, 2005 Administrative Public Hearing
Page 3
(2) the granting of a modification from the strict application of any standard
would, without impairing the intent and purpose of this Land Use Code,
substantially alleviate an existing, defined and described problem of city-wide
concern or would result in a substantial benefit to the city by reason of the
fact that the proposed project would substantially address an important
community need specifically and expressly defined and described in the
City's Comprehensive Plan or in an adopted policy, ordinance or resolution of
the City Council, and the strict application of such a standard would render
the project practically infeasible; or
(3) by reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and
exceptional situations, unique to such property, including, but not limited to,
physical conditions such as exceptional narrowness, shallowness or
topography, or physical conditions which hinder the owner's ability to install a
solar energy system, the strict application of the standard sought to be
modified would result in unusual and exceptional practical difficulties, or
exceptional or undue hardship upon the owner of such property, provided
that such difficulties or hardship are not caused by the act or omission of the
applicant, or
(4) the plan as submitted will not diverge from the standards of the Land Use
Code that are authorized by this Division to be modified except in a nominal,
inconsequential way when considered from the perspective of the entire
development plan, and will continue to advance the purposes of the Land
Use Code as contained in Section 1.2.2."
The applicant has proposed that the modification of the standard would not be detrimental
to the public good and that it meets the requirements of Section 2.8.2(H)(4) of the LUC.
3. APPLICANT'S REQUEST (in Times New Roman font)
Please accept this request for a Modification of Standards to Section 4.1(13)(1)(b) of the Land Use
Code.
Background
The Lemay Avenue Estates PDP is a proposed single family housing development in
the Urban Estate zone district. The development abuts Stanton Creek, which is a
tributary of Fossil Creek, and therefore requires a 100 foot natural features buffer
along the creek. The core issue of this modification revolves around whether it would
be more desirable to have this natural features buffer in a tract outside lots, or whether
it would be more desirable to designate a small portion of the lots (that abut the creek)
as a natural features buffer easement. It is our understanding, after talking to Doug
Moore of Natural Resources and Steve Olt of Current Planning, that either scenario
Modification — Lemay Avenue Estates - PDP — Filing #37-04A
April 25, 2005 Administrative Public Hearing
Page 2
City, which will be discussed in front of the Administrative Hearing Officer at the same
public hearing meeting on April 25, 2005.
COMMENTS
1. BACKGROUND
The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
N: LMN in the City of Fort Collins;
E: UE in the City of Fort Collins;
S: UE in the City of Fort Collins;
W: LMN in the City of Fort Collins;
existing residential (Stanton Creek)
existing residential (Greenstone)
existing large acreage residential
existing residential (Provincetowne)
The property was annexed as part of the Graese Acres Annexation in August, 1984.
The property has not previously been subdivided or planned.
2. MODIFICATION REQUEST — PERTINENT CODE SECTIONS
This request is for a modification of a standard in the following section of the LUC:
Section 4.1(D) - Land Use Standards, Subsection 4.1(D)(1)(b), regarding minimum lot
sizes, states:
"Lot sizes shall be one-half (1/2) acre or larger for dwellings that are not clustered in
accordance with the standards set forth in this Division."
The Applicant has submitted a PDP request for the Lemay Avenue Estates. It contains 55
lots for single-family detached dwellings. To minimize encroachment of lots into the
required buffer area for Stanton Creek, the Applicant has submitted a request for a
Modification of Standard to Section 4.1(D)(1)(b), including a Modification of Standards
Exhibit, that would allow 8 lots to be slightly smaller than 1/2 acre (21,780 square feet).
They would range in size from 0.41 acre (17,671 square feet) to 0.48 acre (20,724 square
feet).
As specified in Section 2.8.2 Modification Review Procedures, (H) (Standards), the
Planning and Zoning Board may grant a modification of standards only if it finds that the
granting of the modification would not be detrimental to the public good, and that:
(1) the plan as submitted will promote the general purpose of the standard for
which the modification is requested equally well or better than would a plan
which complies with the standard for which a modification is requested, or
_ ITEM NO.
MEETING DATE 25 ACj
STAFF_ e�,'JT'..U1E: O L ':r
ism
Citv of Fort Collins HEARING OFFICER
STAFF REPORT
PROJECT: Lemay Avenue Estates, PDP - Modification of Standard - #37-04A
APPLICANT: Everitt Companies
c/o Stan Everitt
3030 South College Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado 80525
OWNER: Lemay Avenue Estates LLC
c/o Stan Everitt
3030 South College Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado 80525
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This is a request for a modification of the standard set forth in Section 4.1(D) - Land Use
Standards of the Land Use Code (LUC), more specifically Subsection 4.1(D)(1)(b)
regarding minimum lot sizes. There is a Project Development Plan (PDP) request for 55
single-family residential lots on 48.5 acres. The property is located on the east side of
South Lemay Avenue just south of the existing Stanton Creek development. Primary
access to the development site is to be from South Lemay Avenue, with a second point of
access via Stanton Creek Drive to the north (in the Stanton Creek development). The
property is zoned UE, Urban Estate District in the City of Fort Collins.
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Applicant has submitted an application with a request for a modification of the
standard as set forth in Section 4.1(D) - Land Use Standards, Subsection 4.1(D)(1)(b) of
the LUC regarding minimum lot sizes. This subsection sets forth the requirement that:
• Lot sizes shall be one-half (1/2) acre or larger for dwellings that are not clustered
in accordance with the standards set forth in this Division.
This application for a modification of the standard requests that the Administrative Hearing
Officer determine if the modification request meets the intent of the LUC. This request is
only for a modification of the specific standard in Subsection 4.1(D)(1)(b) of the LUC. The
Applicant has also submitted a PDP proposal for an Administrative (Type 1) Review by the
COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO80522-0580 (970) 221-6750
PLANNING DEPARTMENT