The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPEAK VIEW - MAJOR AMENDMENT & REPLAT - 26-00C - DECISION - FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISIONMEMORANDUM TO: Hearing Officer for Peak View Estates Second Major Amendment FROM: Ted Shepard, Chief Planner DATE: June 11, 2004 RE: Public Input from Lori Pivonka On Friday, June 11, 2004, at 4:15 p.m., Lori Pivonka, 3020 Virginia Dale Drive, contacted the Current Planning Department to express opposition to the Peak View Estates Second Major Amendment. This project will be considered by the Hearing Officer on Thursday, June 17, 2004, at 4:30 p.m. at 281 North College Avenue. Ms. Pivonka lives nearby and is unable to attend the public hearing. She is opposed to increasing the density on the project. This is the second amendment that results in increasing the number of dwelling units. Her input on this proposal is that the increase in density should not be allowed. I �z 1409/� ,/ Z�-S%,9-I-E-s SSE c-a-Iv A /74 TO t, /9-,`7 4rlV O /47 EN fi6AI Ujo° fh�e,E _ l' h.E`f' PcArrvEx / eel- Peak View Estates PDP Secono Major Amendment Administrative Hearing Findings, Conclusions, and Decision June 18, 2004 Page 5 .qtrAP.tS The staff report outlines the Project's conformance with Section 3.6.2 concerning streets, streetscapes, alleys and easements. All streets are dedicated to the public; the remaining public ways are private drives serving garage access. Transportation Level of Service Requirements Section 3.6 of the LUC imposes standards for all modes of transportation. The Staff Report indicates that the Project is in compliance with Section 3.6 of the LUC. A Transportation Impact Study was prepared in conjunction with the P.D.P. West Elizabeth Street is classified as a minor arterial street. Andrews Peak Drive and Pleasant Valley Road are classified as local streets, with on -street bike lanes. Three intersections were analyzed, Elizabeth and Overland Trail; Elizabeth and Taft Hill Road; and Elizabeth and Andrews Peak Drive. The net increase of two dwelling units does not change the Level of Service for these intersections. SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS A. The Peak View Estates Project Development Plan Second Major Amendment is subject to administrative review and the requirements of the Land Use Code (LUC). B. The Peak View Estates Project Development Plan Second Major Amendment complies with all applicable district standards of Section 4.4 of the Land Use Code, (LMN) Low Density Residential Mixed Use zone district. C. The Peak View Estates Project Development Plan Second Major Amendment complies with all applicable General Development Standards contained in Article 3 of the Land Use Code. DECISION The Peak View Estates Project Development Plan Second Major Amendment #2600C is hereby approved by the Hearing Officer without condition. Dated this 18th day of June 2004, per authority granted by Sections 1.4.9(E) and 2.1 of the Land Use Code. ameron Glos Current Planning Director Peak View Estates PDP Second Major Amendment Administrative Hearing Findings, Conclusions, and Decision June 18, 2004 Page 4 The Hearing Officer finds that the proposal is consistent with the use standards specified in Article 4. While the previously approved PDP plan and subsequent amendment, that included fewer attached residential units, may be desired by some neighboring property owners, there is no basis in Article 4 of the City's LUC upon which the Hearing Officer could prohibit additional dwelling units within three of the proposed buildings. 3. Compliance with Article 3 of the Land Use Code — General Development Standards The project development plan complies with all applicable sections of Article 3 of the LUC as explained below. Landscaping and Tree Protection. The staff report outlines the Project's compliance with Section 3.2.1 concerning landscaping and tree protection and there was no evidence introduced at the hearing to contradict the Staff Report. Street trees on 40-foot centers will continue to be provided along Andrews Peak Drive Access, Circulation and Parking. The staff report outlines the Project's compliance with Section 3.2.2 concerning access, circulation and parking. The Applicant and City staff testified at the hearing that the street connection, Pleasant Valley Road, would continue to connect to both abutting neighborhoods to the east and west as approved under the original PDP. Also, the Project provides residential off-street parking spaces exceeding the number required under the LUC. Guest parking is also available on the two internal public streets. Natural Habitat/Features Buffer Zones. The staff report indicates that the Major Amendment does not impact the 50 —foot wide buffer along the north bank, and 20-foot wide buffer along the south bank, of the Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal. Relationship of Dwellings to the Street and Parking. This requirement is met, in that the proposed three-plex units directly face Andrews Peak Drive, and the five- plex is significantly closer than the maximum allowable distance. Residential Building Setbacks. The staff report indicates the building setbacks exceed the minimum 20 feet frontyard setback required, including the setback for Lot 1, Tract H, which shifts the building ten feet to the north off the private drive to the south. Garage Door Design Standards. Since the two new multi -family units have garages facing private drives, not public streets, this standard is satisfied. Peak View Estates PDP Secoi u Major Amendment Administrative Hearing Findings, Conclusions, and Decision June 18, 2004 Page 3 From the Public: None Written Comments: Memorandum from Ted Shepard summarizing telephone message from Lori Pivonka, 3020 Virginia Dale Drive. FACTS AND FINDINGS 1. Site Context/Background Information The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: N: L-M-N; Existing residential S: R-L; Existing Overland Park E: R-L; Existing residential (Sienna P.U.D.) W: L-M-N; Existing residential (Lory Ann Estates) The property was annexed as part of a larger parcel in 1970. Peak View Estates P.D.P. was approved in December of 2001 by the Planning and Zoning Board and included three modifications. 2. Compliance with Article 4 and the LMN — Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood Zoning District Standards: The Project Development Plan complies with all applicable requirements of Article 4 and the LMN zone district. The Staff Report summarizes the PDP's compliance with these standards and no specific evidence was presented to contradict or otherwise refute the compliance with Article 4 or the LMN District Standards. In particular, the proposed multi -family residential uses, with eight or fewer units per building, are permitted within the LMN zone district subject to an administrative review. According to the staff report, the Project is also in conformance with Section 4.4(D)(1)(b) standards relating to maximum residential density, and Section 4.4(E)(3) that sets a maximum residential building height While there was no direct testimony or evidence presented at the public hearing to contradict the Project's compliance with these standards, information from Lori Pivonka, a neighboring property owner to the northeast, identified opposition over an increase in residential density beyond that approved under the original and first amendment to the PDP application. Peak View Estates PDP Secona Major Amendment Administrative Hearing Findings, Conclusions, and Decision June 18, 2004 Page 2 Lot 1, Tract H, located east of Andrews Peak Drive, would shift the building envelope ten feet to the north to facilitate maneuvering for the garages to the south. This project is located on the south side of West Elizabeth Street, between Sienna and Lory Ann Estates. The Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal runs through the southern portion of the property. SUMMARY OF HEARING OFFICER DECISION: Approval ZONING DISTRICT: L-M-N, Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: Evidence presented to the Hearing Officer established no controversy or facts to refute that the hearing was properly posted, legal notices mailed and notice published. PUBLIC HEARING The Hearing Officer, presiding pursuant to the Fort Collins Land Use Code, opened the hearing at approximately 4:30 p.m. on June 17, 2004 in Conference Room A at 281 N. College Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado. HEARING TESTIMONY, WRITTEN COMMENTS AND OTHER EVIDENCE: The Hearing Officer accepted during the hearing the following evidence: (1) Planning Department Staff Report; (2) application, plans, maps and other supporting documents submitted by the applicant and the applicant's representatives to the City of Fort Collins; (3) public testimony provided during the hearing; and (4) a petition signed by 24 area residents opposing the request. The LUC, the City's Comprehensive Plan (City Plan), and the formally promulgated policies of the City are all considered part of the evidence considered by the Hearing Officer. The following is a list of those who attended the meeting: From the City: Ted Shepard, Chief Planner From the Applicant: Don Leffler, Design Development Consultants Commi y Planning and Environmental„ :vices Current Planning City of Fort Collins CITY OF FORT COLLINS ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER TYPE I ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING DATE: June 17, 2004 PROJECT NAME: CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: HEARING OFFICER: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Peak View Estates Project Development Plan, Second Major Amendment #26-OOC Mrs. Vicki Wagner/BLS Development c/o Design Development Consultants 2627 Redwing Dr. #350 Fort Collins, CO 80525 Mrs. Vicki Wagner/BLS Development 2402 Cedarwood Drive Fort Collins, CO. 80526 Cameron Gloss Current Planning Director The Applicant has submitted a Major Amendment to add two dwelling units to the previously amended plan Project Development Plan, approved in December 2001. This would result in an increase in the number of dwelling units from 63 to 65. Specifically, the requested changes would result in: • Lot 2, Tract H, located east of Andrews Peak Drive, would change from a two- plex to a three-plex. • Lot 12, Tract J, located east of Andrews Peak Drive, would change from a two- plex to a three-plex. • Lot 2, Tract G, located west of Andrews Peak Drive, would change from a two- plex to a three-plex. • Lot 11, Tract J, located east of Andrews Peak Drive, would be reduced from a four-plex to a three-plex. 281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020