Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSWIFT ADDITION TO FOSSIL LAKE P.U.D. MODIFICATION OF STANDARDS - COUNTY REFERRAL - 33-01H - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - MODIFICATION REQUESTone-half (%) acre or larger. b. Dimensional standards. (1) Minimum lot width shall be one hundred (100) feet. (2) Minimum depth of the front yard shall be thirty (30) feet. (3) Minimum depth of the rear yard shall be twenty-five (25) feet. (4) Minimum side yard width shall be twenty (20) feet. Maximum building height shall be three (3) stories. 5. Development Standards. a. Street Connectivity and Design. The following standards shall apply to all development in the Estate Residential Area: (1) To the maximum extent feasible, streets shall be designed to F minimize the amount of site disturbance caused by roadways and associated grading required for their construction. (2) Development in this Area shall be exempt from the Street Pattern and Connectivity Standards. F. Mixed -Use Neighborhood Area Regulations. Development plans for property that is located in the area identified in the Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Plan as "Mixed -Use Neighborhood" shall conform to the following additional regulations: Purpose. The Mixed -Use Neighborhood Area is intended to be a setting for r a predominance of low density housing combined with complementary and supporting land uses that serve a neighborhood and are developed and operated in harmony with the residential characteristics of a neighborhood. The main purpose of the Area is to meet a wide range of needs of everyday living in neighborhoods that include a variety of housing choices, that invite walking to gathering places, services and conveniences, and that are fully integrated into the larger community. A neighborhood center provides a focal point, and attractive walking and biking paths invite residents to enjoy the center as well as the small neighborhood parks. Any new development in this area shall be arranged to form part of an individual neighborhood. I-4 (3) Cemeteries. (4) Public and private schools for elementary, intermediate, and high school education. (5) Places of worship or assembly. (6) Golf courses. C. Commercial/Retail Uses: (1) Child care centers. (2) Bed and breakfast establishments with no more than six (6) beds. (3) Plant nurseries and greenhouses. (4) Animal boarding (limited to farm/large animals). d. Industrial Uses: (1) Resource extraction, processes, and sales. e. Accessory/Miscellaneous Uses: (1) Farm animals. (2) Accessory uses. (3) Accessory buildings. 3. Prohibited Uses. All uses that are not expressly allowed in this Section shall be prohibited including "special review uses" which would otherwise have been allowed in the FA-1 Zone District. 4. Land Use Standards. a. Density/Intensity. All development shall meet the following requirements: (1) Net residential density shall range from one half (.5) to two (2) dwelling units per net acre. I-3 0 D. Minor Residential Developments. Proposals for Minor Residential Developments shall not be accepted or approved for lands located in the Fossil Creek Reservoir Area. E. Estate ResidentialArea Regulations. Development plans for property that is located in the area identified in the Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Plan as "Estate Residential' (( shall conform to the following additional regulations: Purpose. The Estate Residential Area is intended to be a setting for a predominance of low -density and large -lot housing. The main purpose of this area is 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. 2. Uses. Development plans may be submitted only for the following uses in the Estate Residential Area as shown on the Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Plan: a. Residential Uses: (1) Single-family detached dwellings. (2) State licensed group homes for no more than eight developmentally disable persons, provided such home is not located within seven hundred fifty (750) feet of another such home. (3) Owner occupied or non-profit group homes for the exclusive use of not more than eight persons sixty (60) years of age or older, provided such home is not located within seven hundred fifty (750) feet of another such home. (4) Two-family dwellings. (5) Single-family attached dwellings. b. Institutional/Civic/Public Uses: (1) Public facilities. (2) Parks, recreation and other open lands. I-2 F N �J N 0 1 I I I I I I Larimer County Land Use Code If a modification is approved it shall be controlling for the successively, timely filed, development applications for that particular develop- ment proposal only to the extent that is modified the standard pertaining to such plan. All modifications which apply to a develop- ment plan which has not been filed at the time of the granting of the modification shall be valid for a period of time not to exceed one year following the determination of the County Commissioners of the request for the proposed modification. November 22, 1999 4-43 Larimer County Land Use Code 2. The alternative plan, as submitted, will advance or protect the public interests and purposes of the standard for which modifi- cation is requested, equally well or better than a plan that complies with the standards for which modification is re- quested. In ascertaining the "public interests and purposes of the standards" the County Commissioners shall give great weight to: ,a. The recommendation of the municipality; b. The specific language of the standard, taken in the context of the regulation in which the standard is contained and in the context of the applicable provisions of the municipality's comprehensive plan; and c. The willingness and agreement of the municipality to annex the subject area. A modification shall be processed and reviewed concurrently with the development application to which it applies. A modification may be processed separately from such development application only if the County Planning Director in his/her sole discretion determines there is adequate information to allow the modification to be evalu- ated separately from the development application. Applicants seeking a modification shall file a written request with the County Planning Director. The County Planning Director shall refer the application to the Planning Director of the municipality. The municipality shall provide a recommendation to the County within 21 days of receipt of the request. The Larimer County Planning Commission or other recommending board, per the applicable intergovernmental agreement, and the County Commissioners shall hear the request in the public hearings set for the develop- ment application. If the County Planning Director has authorized the modification request to be processed separately from the development application, the applicable recommending board shall hear the request at the next available public hearing as determined by the Planning Director after receipt of the recommendation of the municipality, and the County Commissioners shall hear the re- quest at a public hearing no later than 21 days after receipt of the recommendation from the applicable recommending board. At the hearing, the County Commissioners shall consider relevant information presented by the applicant, the municipality and inter- ested members of the public. Based on the information, the County Commissioners may grant the modification or grant the modification with conditions in accordance with the criteria con- tained in this Section or deny the modification. 4-42 November 22, 1999 Larimer County Land ae Code 7. The County shall not accept any applications for Special Exceptions in any GMA District. 8. All division of land to create new lots in GMA Districts shall be submitted and processed as Planned Land Divisions (Subsec- tion 5.2), Minor Land Divisions (Subsection 5.4) or Rural Land Plans (Subsection 5.8). 9. Prior to final approval of an Rezoning, Special Review, Site Plan Review (Section 6), Planned Land Division, Minor Land Division or Rural Land Plan, the property owner shall provide a binding agreement for annexation. The agreement shall be in a form approved by the County and shall include a Power of Attorney authorizing the City or Town Clerk to execute and file annexation petitions and maps, and shall state that the property owner agrees to submit to the applicable municipality a petition for voluntary annexation at such time as the property becomes eligible for annexation according to state annexation laws. Such agreement shall be signed by the owner of the property, shall run with the land and shall be recorded in the Office of the Clerk and Recorder of Larimer County with a copy forwarded to the applicable municipality. 10. The County shall submit, to the applicable municipality for review and comment, all proposals for Rezoning, Special Review, Minor Land Division, Planned Land Division and Rural Land Plan within the applicable GMA District. The County shall afford the municipality 21 days from the date of transmittal of the referral to provide written comments. E. Modifications of Development Standards Required by Supplementary Regulations. Development standards in Supplementary Regulations to the GMA District may be modified if agreed upon in writing by the Developer, County Commissioners and the municipality. For proposed modifications not agreed to by the applicable municipality, the County Commissioners may grant such modifications only in exceptional circumstances and only if they find that granting the modification will not be detrimental to the public good and that: 1. By reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordi- nary and exceptional situations unique to such property, includ- ing but not limited to, physical conditions such as exceptional narrowness, shallowness or topography, the strict application of the standard sought to be modified would result in unusual and exceptional practical difficulties, or exceptional and undue hardship upon the owner of the affected property, provided such difficulties or hardship are not caused by the act or omission of the applicant; or November 22, 1999 4-41 Etwte � cam, Lot Number Amendment Type See Plan Sheet for Description) 1 2 3 4 21 yes 22 yes 23 yes 24 yes yes 25 yes yes 26 yes 27 yes yes 28 yes yes 29 yes yes 30 yes yes 31 yes yes 32 yes yes 33 yes 34 yes yes 35 yes yes 36 yes 37 yes 38 yes yes 39 yes 40 yes 41 yes yes 42 yes yes yes 43 yes yes yes 44 yes 45 yes 46 yes 47 yes 48 yes 49 yes 50 yes yes 51 yes yes 52 yes 53 yes 54 yes 55 yes 56 yes 57 yes 58 yes yes 3. A REDUCTION OF THE 100' MINIMUM LOT WIDTH EQUIVALENT TO AN 80' LOT WIDTH EQUIVALENT. DUE TO THE CREATIVE PLANNING OF THE SWIFT ADDITION PLAN THERE ARE SEVERAL CUL-DE-SAC LOTS THAT HAVE BEEN FORMED. MANY OF THESE CUL-DE-SAC LOT`_; ARE NARROWER THAN 100' AT THE STREET. TO MEET THE 100' LOT WIDTH EQUIVALENT THE BUILDING ENVELOPES ARE PUSHED INTO THE LOT SIGNIFICANTLY WHICH WOULD REQUIRE A LONG DRIVEWAY TO FALLOW ACCESS TO A GARAGE WITHIN THE BUILDING ENVELOPE. IT IS OUR POSITION THAT AN 80' LOT WIDTH EQUIVALENT WOULD STILL PROVIDE A SUBSTANTIAL FRONT SETBACK BUT WOULD ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF THESE LOTS WITHOUT THE EXTENSIVE DRIVEWAYS THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE REQUIRED. 4. A REVISION TO LOTS 27 AND 28. THESE LOTS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED WITH THE PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT TO MEET THE STANDARD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. IF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ARE ALLOWED WE PROPOSE THAT THESE TWO LOTS BE RECONFIGURED AS INDICATED ON THE PLAN. BOTH LOTS ARE 1/2 ACRE OR LARGER AS REQUIRED. Purpose of the proposed Amended P.U.D.: THE PURPOSE OF THIS PROPOSED AMENDED PUD IS TO ADDRESS SITE SPECIFIC CONCERNS REGARDING THE STANDARD SETBACKS FOR ESTATE LOTS AS DEFINED BY THE LARIMER COUNTY LAND USE CODE AND THE SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS TO THE LARIMER COUNTY LAND USE CODE. Standard Setbacks and Lot Width Requirement: THE STANDARD SETBACKS FOR ESTATE LOTS ARE: 30' FRONT 20' SIDE 25' REAR ADDITIONALLY THERE IS A 100' MINIMUM LOT WIDTH REQUIREMENT. FOR CUL-DE-SAC LOTS WHICH AT THE STREET ARE NOT 100' WIDE THE FRONT YARD SETBACK SHALL BE PLACED AT A POINT ON THE LOT WHERE THE WIDTH OF THE LOT IS EQUIVALENT TO A 100' WIDTH. Proposed Amendments: PLEASE SEE THE PLAN FOR A GRAPHICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS: THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS DO NOT AFFECT THE OVERALL ENGINEERING, PLANNING, OR LANDSCAPING -OF THE SWIFT ADDITION. IF THESE AMENDMENTS ARE APPROVED THE FINAL PLAT SUBMITTALS FOR THE SWIFT ADDITION WILL EE MODIFIED TO ACCOMMODATE THESE CHANGES. 1. THE SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT BETWEEN LOTS WOULD BE REDUCED FROM 20' TO 15'. THIS WOULD MAINTAIN A 30' CLEAR AREA BETWEEN BUILDING ENVELOPES. AS A PART OF THIS REQUEST WE WOULD PLACE A RESTRICTION ON THESE LOTS THAT WOULD NOT ALLOW PERIMETER FENCING. FENCING WOULD BE NOT BE ALLOWED TO EXTEND PAST THE SIDES OF THE HOUSE AND WOULD BE RESTRICTED TO THE BUILDING ENVELOPE AREA IN THE REAR OF THE HOUSE. BY NOT ALLOWING FENCING TO ENCROACH THIS SIDE SETBACK AREA WOULD BE KEPT OPEN TO ACHIEVE THE OPEN CHARACTER THAT IS DESIRED. IT IS OUR POSITION THAT THE INTENT OF THE 20' SIDE SETBACK WOULD BE MET WITH THE 15' SIDE SETBACK AND FENCING RESTRICTIONS. 2. THE SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENT FOR SIDES OF LOTS THAT ARE ADJACENT TO GREENBELTS WOULD BE REDUCED TO 7.5'. THE INTENT OF MAINTAINING AN OPEN CHARACTER BETWEEN ESTATE LOTS WITH LARGE SIDE SETBACKS WOULD BE PROVIDED BY THE GREENBELT. THESE GREENBELTS CREATE A MUCH LARGER SETBACK BETWEEN BUILDING ENVELOPES THAN WOULD NORMALLY BE ACHIEVED WITH THE 20' SIDE SETBACK. The Amended Preliminary Plat contains fewer overall lots (Original - 130 lots, Amended - 116 lots) and fewer estate lots (Original - 46 lots, Amended - 38 lots) than the original Preliminary Plat. The estate area in the Amended Plat incorporates significantly more open space than the original Preliminary Plat (Original - 1.4 Acres, Amended 4.3 Acres). This open space creates a buffer between the residential lots and the resource management area to the south which will be owned and managed by the Homeowner's Association. This buffer area will have screening plantings which will help buffer the sensitive wildlife habitat in the resource management area from the impacts of the residential area. We recognize that there have been significant changes made to the Swift Addition to Fossil Lake PUD from the original preliminary plat. It is our position that the changes made to the plan have greatly improved the plan, and that the new plan protects the public interests better than the original plan. It is our position that the requests before you to allow these proposed setbacks needs to be viewed in context of the entire plan. When viewed in contrast with the original plan it becomes clear that these setbacks, in conjunction with the quality planning of the overall project creates a plan that has more open space, is more aesthetically appealing, has better pedestrian connectivity, provides a better buffer between sensitive habitat and residential uses, and will advance and protect the public interests and intentions of the standard more greatly than the plan which complies with the standards. Please let me know if you have any questions, or if you need any additional information. Sincerely, 1;F Jim Bir Planner/Landscape Architect Original Swift Addition Preliminary Plat Amended Swift Addition Preliminary Plat It is our position that the proposed 7.5' side setback for lots adjacent to greenbelts will advance or protect the public interests and purposes of the standard equally well or better than a plan that complies with the 20' side setback standard. 3. A reduction of the 100' minimum lot width equivalent to an 80' lot width equivalent. Justification for request: Due to the creative planning of the Swift Addition plan there are several cul-de- sac lots that have been formed. Many of these cul-de-sac lots are narrower than 100' at the street. To meet the 100' lot width equivalent the building envelopes are pushed into the lots significantly which would require a long driveway to allow access to the garage, which would be located within the building envelope. Because of the need for a longer driveway, more of the front yard of these lots would be used as driveway. Additionally, this enlarged front setback would push the house further back on the lot, which would reduce the usable open space in the rear yard. The intent of the regulation is to create a more open feel, however the result is less open space and more paving. It is our position that the proposed 80' lot width equivalent for cul-de-sac lots will advance or protect the public interests and purposes of the standard equally well or better than a plan that complies with the 100' lot width equivalent. 4. A revision to Lots 27 and 28. Justification for request: These lots have been designed with the preliminary and final plat to meet the standard setback requirements. If the proposed setbacks are allowed we propose that these two lots be reconfigured as indicated on the plan. Please see the plan for the specific changes that are being requested. Also, please see the reduced plans of both the original Preliminary Plat as well as the Amended Preliminary Plat on the next page. 410 July 15, 2002 �R Troy Jones Fort Collins Current Planning Department 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80522 Re: Swift Addition to Fossil Lake PUD Justification for Modification of Estate Lot Setback Requirements Dear Troy: We are requesting a modification to the Estate Lot Setback Requirements for the Swift Addition to Fossil Lake PUD. The standard side yard setbacks for Estate Lots as described in the Supplemental Regulations to the Larimer County Land Use Code are: 30' Front Setback 20' Side Setback 25' Rear Setback Additionally there is a 100' minimum lot width requirement. For cul-de-sac lots, which at the street are not 100' wide the front yard setback shall be placed at a point on the lot where the width of the lot is equivalent to a 100' width. Our requests include the following amendments to the standards: 1. The Side Setback reauirement between lots would be reduced from 20' to 15' Justification for request: The 15' side setback would maintain a 30' clear area between building envelopes. As a part of this request we would place a restriction on these lots that would not allow perimeter fencing. Fencing would not be allowed to extend past the sides of the house and would be restricted to the building envelope area in the rear of the house. By not allowing fencing to encroach this side setback area would be kept open to achieve the open character that is desired. It is our position that the proposed 15' side setback in conjunction with the fencing restrictions will advance or protect the public interests and purposes of the standard equally well or better than a plan that complies with the 20' side setback standard. 2. The Side Setback requirement for sides of lots that are adjacent to greenbelts would be reduced to 7.5' Justification for request: The intent of maintaining an open character between estate lots with large setbacks would be provided by the greenbelt adjacent to these lots. These greenbelts create a much larger setback between building envelopes than would normally be achieved with the 20' side setback. Corporate Offices 3030 South College Avenue • Fort Collins • Colorado • 80525 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2125 • Fort Collins • Colorado • 80522 Telephone: (970)226-1500• FAX: (970) 223-4156 410 VW July 16, 2002 Troy Jones Fort Collins Current Planning Department 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80522 Re: TRANSMITTAL Dear Troy: Please see the attached letter requesting a modification to the Estate Lot Setback Requirements for the Swift Addition to Fossil Lake PUD. We are in the process of preparing the Adjacent Property Owners list. We will deliver that to you as soon as it is complete, which should be later today. If you have any questions or need any additional information please let me know. Thank you, Birdsa Planner/Landscape Architect Corporate Offices 3030 South College Avenue • Fort Collins • Colorado • 80525 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2125 • Fort Collins • Colorado • 80522 Telephone: (970) 226-1500 • FAX: (970) 223-4156