HomeMy WebLinkAbout300 SMITH STREET - MODIFICATION OF STANDARD - 39-03 - REPORTS - CITIZEN COMMUNICATION1. Staff should not make its recommendations to the Board based on points
unrelated to the applicants' request. It is Bachman Enterprises making
this request, not city staff. Staff should, however, advise the Board about
their thoughts on the applicants reasoning for requesting the modification
based on existing codes, the East Side Neighborhood Plan, City Plan, and
other standards and guidelines that may be applicable.
2. Bachmann Enterprises purchased this parcel with full access to the
existing conditions placed on this parcel, specifically the East Side
Neighborhood Plan and rezoning to the NCM zone district under the new
City Plan. I would expect that any developer be required to demonstrate
that certain hardships or constrains be demonstrated BEFORE any
variance to existing codes, policies, guidelines, or standards are modified.
I see no compelling reason that Bachmann Enterprises could not fully
develop this property WITHOUT the proposed modification.
3. Other homeowners in our East Side Neighborhood that have the same
condition (additional frontage area) have been able to successfully
redevelop their properties. What is the overriding NEED for Bachmann
Enterprises to go forward with their development plans without this
variance? Bachmann Enterprises is proposing to demolish the existing
single family home and begin anew with an empty lot. What constraints
are in their way?
In summary, I urge the Board to deny this modification request. I see no
constraints or hardships that are imposed by the existing conditions, codes,
plans, standards or guidelines that limit Bachmann Enterprises' ability to fully
develop this property. There is no overwhelming need to deviate from existing
city or neighborhood plans.
If the Board should see the benefit of staffs' reasoning, then existing codes,
standards, and guidelines should be amended for our entire neighborhood.
"Piece -meal" alteration of standards, plans, and guidelines in the East Side
Neighborhood does not serve those of us who have worked diligently to preserve
our existing condition.
look forward to the continuing dialog surrounding development of this parcel.
Thank you for consideration of my opinion.
Sincerely,
Glen Hildreth
315 Smith Street
Fort Collins, CO 80524-2941
Phone: 970-224-2021
Email: ghfcco@frii.com
December 3, 2003
TO: The Planning and Zoning Board, City of Fort Collins
RE: 300 Smith Street, Modification of Standards, File #39-03
I am the owner of 315 Smith Street, a direct neighbor of the Bachmann property.
have lived in my house since purchasing it in 1994, and have been active in
many of the efforts to preserve and develop the Old Town district of our city.
I am submitting this letter to the Board in opposition to the above mentioned
modification. If I had been able to attend the meeting of December 41h, I would
have made my appeal in person. I hope that the Board will consider the points I
make within this letter as it makes its decision.
Bachmann Enterprises is requesting this setback modification (per their letter
dated November 12, 2003), based on three justifications:
1. "provide a more ample private yard on the south side of the property"
2. "provide additional shield from Riverside traffic'' and
3. "push the garages facing Olive Street further back so that they are less
visible from the street"
I do not agree with their contention that the proposed site plan with modification
is equal to or better than development of this site within the existing standard.
On each of the points above:
1. Additional space for private yards on the south side of the property could
easily be obtained by reducing the building envelopes of each of the
three proposed units.
2. 1 do not understand this point exactly, but moving the proposed buildings
closer to Olive (and consequently closer to Riverside) would hardly add
"additional shield" from traffic on Riverside.
3. Getting additional setback on the north side of this lot does not stop the
applicant from moving the garages to the south. This can be
accomplished without this modification.
The applicant has requested this modification based on the above three points. I
would urge the Board to limit their deliberation to deny or grant this modification
based on the applicants request.
After speaking with Troy Jones on this issue, I understand that city staff is
making the recommendation to grant this modification. The staffs' reasoning
being that there is additional frontage along Olive Street than along other streets
in this area; therefore granting this variance is acceptable. I would disagree with
this recommendation based on the following points: