The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutREDTAIL - MAJOR AMENDMENT - 26-01B - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSI NY 1 (,)2.W FIATS MAW, .� a ua.w E I i � '11- (.)2 eR TMH ' r LOT 3 I li 1 i � S y ww nx.y ow.e.r Tm.l' =='I I I, I ✓' `/ 1 "'666 �� map 11 too ',fp j tore \I� L-rii a �. 13 I2 , \W We II i l Q URI I, Ioumrs II I i (10)243R FLATS LOT 8 rT CTA p 1( 1 1 Ira 11 E�,,,.d FOSSIL CREEK UM OFFICE 1 1 1 1 eECm1C ` I - 1 I I ; (a)2 OR FIATS 1 •• �•� `TO P — 1 - 14-B I II � , FOSSIL CREEK I II ; � (10)2�RaAT9 1 18 I � I OFFIC I li I I i i LOT I I ease q. RLOT 6 1 I I 1 t V M2-B l FLATS1 �. �I.a ro. I I; ; (10(:-ea FLATS i PITRf EL I�f TO. I it i ? It GIMERONaWIVE °� - --------- wa I I' 11 m ws"s (iolJ- Mrs '1 mr 10T1 \I�` �m�E'� Ire TRACT `\`\ 11 1 I 11 essr q. R ; d `` , eum r },I2`M FLIT! .u.a1 TM I II L 2 I II i 1 e es2o.Ln. o ILA (91�91 FIATS IT RACT(� War, Olw.•e.a 11 � \ I �i eTas 2 LOT 1 I MA S.Sie q. R eurms up RIrs L I I TRACTA\ 1 J a,aarq a. Eaitllq I ; ; (,LreR 2-OR-ER 's n"Ai ti 1 a2 .�... Poew I I , (a)Z-0R TH iN . / VMv a OM-Y. Ett , I I I I; R...ww+ TRACT F,p \ I ----- ---- ---- ------ II I _--- ---------- ---- - - - - ------ I 1 s ICI Y CITY OF FORT LARF EArnROv�nAlos REOTAII RATURARALAREJI IF I / hrrmxnrr. � oa mber2ls�.gem lox VFRIpbY II rtrgm..emm.� .ra® 9 w 2 DemmOer 21�1 w ..e 7 OeartOsr 21v.. »...� � LL QU 0 LL Tr �� ICY Yr fYm�Y W.ueml. I FnaiY.n� • � .' Mer I�uC 1 t�Ve�n�V Rw. 1 Very importantly, however, the orientation of the buildings in a north/south alignment assures that the sidewalk and streets at the east of buildings, as well as the bicycle/pedestrian trail at the west of buildings, will both get a substantial amount of southern sunlighf to help ameliorate snow and ice conditions. 7. Because the buildings all have a ground level parking and occupancy beginning at the second level, then the bikers and pedestrians on the trails have more privacy than if they were directly opposite ground level office windows, and vise versa. 8. The project is in scale with the neighborhood because we have created the neighborhood. That is the whole purpose of the Redtail Office Campus, to create a neighborhood that has only four office buildings along its west edge in conjunction with a large amount of open space and ponds to the east. The buildings, in conjunction with such open space creates a neighborhood that is appropriate in its relationship between these elements. 9. A shadow analysis is enclosed. Also see the discussion of shadows, sun and related matters above. 10. Because the specific elements, to which we would compare our project to, don't exist because they have not been constructed (10 condominium buildings and 2 carriage houses), it is not possible to do a conventional visual analysis. It is, however, possible to compare our proposed 4 office buildings with the presently approved 10 condominium buildings and 2 carriage houses, with respect to the extent to which views are enhanced or blocked. The results are unequivocal. From 11 points of view, all such views are enhanced by the change from residential to office buildings. And in comparison from the same 11 points of view, all such views would be blocked if the currently approved condominium project is constructed. Other visual considerations are described in a number of places above. In addition, it is worth noting that a) approximately half the parked cars will now be out of sight, parked under buildings, b) the view of the parking lots from the east will be buffered by heavy landscape screening and c) the four office buildings are characterized by simple elegance in design and earth tones. Thank you for your consideration of the foregoing. Respe ully, i on Prouty F:\Documents\Redtai1\Major Amendment\Height.Review,061907.doc Page 3 6/20/2007 2:19 PM 4. Care has been taken to assure that these four office buildings and the entire project reflect a coherent environmental design. The buildings are located along the western edge of the property, blocking both the ugly views of the elevated railroad tracks and the train noise, which pedestrians drivers and people enjoying the private open space would otherwise see. Furthermore, the location of the buildings along the west edge allows for the open space, ponds and wetlands to all be contiguous. This aspect of environmental design is substantial, especially when you consider that the project has 79 percent open space. Views towards the project from the east driving in look over heavily -screened parking at the top of the hill toward four buildings with large windows of blue sky between them (as opposed to the present -approved project, which would, if built, have a view of ten condominium buildings and two carriage houses, presenting a virtual wall of buildings along the entire west edge of the project). Lastly, the buildings have been designed with rough finished block, earth tones and horizontal lines, all of which contribute to their environmental compatibility with their surroundings. 5. The views driving into the project are described above. From a pedestrian or driver's perspective, there are presently no views to the west, including the mountains, because of the high railroad track embankment along the entire west boundary. When the streets, sidewalks and buildings are constructed, there will be views from them of private open space and ponds to the north, to the east and to the southeast. In addition, there are views to the south across the project's private open space and out over 38 acres of City -owned Redtail Natural Area. Views of the project's private open space from outside the project are greatly enhanced as a result of not constructing 10 large condominium buildings and two carriage houses (as per the present.approved project), but rather building only four office buildings. These views are increased from no views except a wall of buildings (currently approved project) to private open space views from about 40 percent of the bicycle/pedestrian trail at the west. And such views will be enjoyed from about 80 percent of the bicycle/pedestrian trail at the south. Views are increased from the east with landscaped parking and breaks of sky between buildings, as opposed to just a wall of condominiums. Views from the north are increased as a result of the elimination of the east row of condominiums, which previously blocked that portion of the view. 6. Two of the four buildings have shadows of an adjacent building to the south cast on them during part of the day, however, in an office environment, the working conditions are actually improved by having indirect sunlight rather than direct, southern sunlight. While solar collectors are not planned, the flat roofs of all four buildings are totally clear from shadow and available for same, should that ever prove to be desirable. P:\Documents\Redtail\Major Amendment\Height.Review.061907.doe Pave 2 6/20/2007 2:19 PM RECEIVED r 1zt� '� s CURRENT PLANNING To: Decision -maker From: Jon Prouty Lagunitas Redtail, Inc. Re: RedtaiURedtail Office Campus Building Height Review Date: June 20, 2007 Redtail Office Campus buildings will be 61 ft. in height, that is requiring a special height review. Our submittal is as follows: The Redtail Ponds Office Campus buildings are examples of creativity and diversity in architecture. The individual buildings have the aesthetics of dark earth tone rough block (providing relief and shadow) for the base of buildings and for the central element and complementing this a lighter graylbeige earth tone for the three stories above the base and flanking central element. The roofline is slightly asymmetrical and takes two steps down at one end, providing added diversity and interest in the design. In this respect. Buildings 1 and 2 will be reciprocal of each other, as will 3 and 4. This, coupled with the fact that 4 is not in the same row as 1 through 3, contributes to the diversity and difference between buildings, however, this notwithstanding, there is enough commonality of elements so that the four buildings are cohesive aesthetically. The building design is simple, elegant and reflects some of the elements which Frank Lloyd Wright used successfully in residential design. 2. Two aspects of building design contribute both to the creativity and diversity in architecture of the buildings, and also to fundamental functional aspects of the building. They are: A. The use of full under -building parking to create a base for the building, as well as convenient building access from a sheltered parking area. In addition, under - building parking results in about 50 percent of the parking being hidden from view. B. While a portion of the height in excess of 40 ft. is necessary for the aesthetics of the roof profile, the majority of this excess height is required to allow for a state- of-the-art subfloor plenum HVAC delivery system which, coupled with other energy -saving measures, will reduce energy costs for these buildings by about 50 percent. 3. The four Redtail Ponds Office Campus buildings are harmonious with the neighborhood because we are creating our own office campus neighborhood separate and buffered from other uses in all directions. % F1Documento � pa". msa ik,'��i�`lrg gR eb 80525 • (08f'2� 6-5000 • Fax (s�ioj 26-5125FM Metal Swing Texture Coated Concrete Precast Panels Suspended Met: Shading Devices Cast,n-Place Concrete SOUTH ELEVATION scale: %": VA. WEST ELEVATION V FRlplay rvrna..® �O6i� e. n ..il Fn�In..riW Fl.m. Beg V FRf�lay rvmlmo mx. pgla'reR lbl Masonry A�tlFITAS Storefront cam` Glees � 1 Meet SiEing TextureCosteo Concrete — Precast Panels Canoere 1 Open To Parking 0 100'-01, o J o Y FQ U EAST ELEVATION o scale:'," V-0" w O m s z Q J LU J 0 LL eIHVATIONH Tpie �r r tentl 1 ». 1'Ininn�y IMu�nenl. J C - C n ��utlCmm� V Mrler � t �Cnrine Ylur. PLANT NOTES TREE PROTECTION NOTES WATER USAGE TABLE SIGHT DISTANCE EASEMENT b TREE PLANTING — IRRIGATED AREAS .;x (p�CCNIFER TREE PLANTING — GUY WIRES u eic; m wu — SHRUB PLANTING _ �rpf ♦(r SCxF }p�v a WrJ I r�m�rrr, •n Ooea'm ^'t rn V FRipI®y al us. mmw.~ `lemlmao umrerar�w 1 req°rv® puson r � pq�r of 0 0 U i 0 0 0 0 LL 4-6 RY. — a®c ❑NCTA - �•� MLd GIb! , Q6�LOT 2 .. y � LOT / nor �"... ♦ _.� / J' TRACT R 1 I OYY•YIL•ll0 �Qy o�•YYmnYm�•rcc. }vxa �N®\I�•W GNE R..flEiJJ R � Rum �yy[A. au�.gsu �.. nm+unnm ® .uRYYv ® RAfN p w BfiiE P.]V 0Y Y.IW V.e PYu1pR Veeomeul, ee\ . m.Y.eUm Oeew,nel V FR_ May flwla�em fl�ol'N��eea M1*� N.i.R�NY �NIIM�m tc ppgM � MgWWN ywgg�N M1M�pL OURVBYOR of i iL or C 4 U 3'6 -arewT.m,Nesn».. Z s o 14� • a o �n TRACT D_. 0 �.� eurunurng F i a . p. a • F' FS IN — LOT •:F c II�1 l w — I� 0 • m EL v 5'� ...._ LOT9 T,ACTE ` r 1 1 \ _ +s�. •aw 4 w LOT B • 1 TRACT 9wrvnnu....auov� �.. _ wcvmwv'xe • II s LOT ] Po eox-- IT m�. a . LnE u. "ll \/FF2iplay fl>.194'le.f l•U H N 2-6 I Y I•eewx.� i'y •. � . ii \ LAND USE STATISTICS @ 11 i ^:.. i � ; \ �TRACTE • �r�®.�..�.m��.. s wz.�w.s .��.. _ I oLalw ww.r Mr17YY» ' I I 2 \ p flA14n Oal LEGEND GENERAL NOTES I•I•A5• R _ TRACT . i..wrss erwowneu "••mV •,••�•,••��R6ie61a•e•fe nu,lnrc. � I L�0T8 i ee Q I I I I I� I tA6]m�ynu.e E 1� wart G3i 1�II 0 I I' eRrnc NMIbl0.T^4Eerwv w.nv,rse .w .uON+i i�i•[ 0 Lul0 wi`( M II: ❑' __ r.mmran..m...rrnam WL erm..w 'yj i, +au Ij ,f—y _14LNe_ II I E ctwnwv. � � Og � �! � I I ; � •`` � � wwunmlwna ww.oa,ona.u.c� er_.. m.+n rrmm.nr r LOT 7 m I , I __ ___ ____ __ � _ _____� � '/' nm ea.rs.a....o......�".�o.�..'..,ss,"..u�`..>�o�m"" mnswr•• -�-- _ �,,,• % LAND USE STATISTICS OWNER'S CERTIFICATION ..w.... OFFICE BUILDING DETAILS i A' 6 seer •mn l � _ > PARKING TRACT0 LOT 1 o WU vesmw.wa._. .o w_ PLANNING LOTS •,,9 • DIRECTOR OF PLANNING o w0 z WT. 0 0 ON U TRACT e s 0 LOTLOT 4 n . LOT3 TRACT A ..a.... . _ i \ I ICI II • ee Wi c TRACT ID1. 1.. L.a v. rm.loe rood".m, 1-6 wl i I o w ------------- �i LL N - w w w 0 O A FO SSIL CREEK PK SITE S 30M LN N #26-01 B Redtail Major Amendment (Type II) 5/2/2007 1 inch : 300 feet Redtail Ponds Office Campus, Major Amendment, File # 26-01 B August 16, 2007 Planning and Zoning Board Hearing Page 10 2. The Project Development Plan complies with all applicable district standards of Section 4.21 of the Land Use Code, C - Commercial zone district. 3. The Project Development Plan complies with all applicable General Development Standards contained in Article 3 of the Land Use Code. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Redtail Ponds Office Campus, Major Amendment, File # 26-01 B. Redtail Ponds Office Campus, Major Amendment, File # 26-01 B August 16, 2007 Planning and Zoning Board Hearing Page 9 defined as a neighborhood, community, or regional shopping center, or an employment center with over 300 employees. These buildings will be located on the west side of the South College Avenue commercial corridor and will be an extension of the Cameron Office Park, George Sanders PUD, and Weburg PUD. Together they would make up an employment center with over 300 employees. Staff has determined that the additional 12' of building height over 40', and 8' over the previously approved 40' high residential buildings, will not create adverse impacts on the surrounding area and is in character with the overall intent of the South College Avenue commercial corridor. E. Division 3.6, Transportation and Circulation Master Street Plan [3.6.1] — South College is shown as a 6 lane arterial on the Master Street Plan. The South College Access Management Plan designates Cameron Drive and Fairway Lane as signalized intersections with College Avenue, and specifically calls out the need for an internal street network connecting Cameron Drive and Fairway Lane without the use of College Avenue. This PDP is consistent with the Master Street Plan, and provides the required internal street connections, therefore it satisfies this standard. 2. Streets, Streetscapes, Alleys and Easements [3.6.2] — This section of the code requires that connections of a private drive with a public street shall be made with a driveway cut using the detail titled, "New Driveway Approach" in accordance with City Engineering standards. The project complies with this standard. FINDINGS OF FACT/CONCLUSIONS After reviewing the Redtail, Major Amendment, File # 26-01 B, staff makes the following findings of fact and conclusions: 1. The proposed office use is permitted in the (C) Commercial Zoning District, subject to a Planning and Zoning Board review. Redtail Ponds Office Campus, Major Amendment, File # 26-01 B August 16, 2007 Planning and Zoning Board Hearing Page 8 1. Views. The 52' tall buildings in the Redtail Ponds Office Campus should not substantially alter the opportunity and quality of desirable views within the area any further that the residential buildings in the approved Redtail PDP, which would be 40' in height. In this instance, the footprints for the 4-story buildings are approximately 6,300 square feet in size (Buildings 1 - 3) and 5,332 square feet in size (Building 4) and the placement of the buildings on the site are such that the additional 8' will not dramatically hinder primary views to the foothills from the existing office uses to the east that are most affected. The buildings are oriented north - south, with Buildings 1 - 3 being spaced 30' apart and Building 4 being 120' south of Building 3. 2. Light and Shadow. The taller building will cast shadows on small portions of adjacent properties but the shadows will not preclude the functional use of solar energy and will not shade windows or gardens on the adjacent properties. The impact of contributing to the accumulation of snow and ice on adjacent properties during the winter months is minimal. 3. Privacy. The building is located where it will not have privacy impacts on office and residential uses in the area. Other buildings in the immediate surrounding area are offices, generally 2 stories in height. The closest office buildings are approximately 500' to the east. The closest residences are 800' to 1,000' to the west, on the other side of the railroad track embankment on the west side of the project. This embankment is approximately 10' to 15' higher than the ground elevation of this project. 4. Neighborhood Scale. A building greater than 40' in height should be located in either of two areas: in the downtown area or in an established or developing activity center. An activity center is Redtail Ponds Office Campus, Major Amendment, File # 26-01 B August 16, 2007 Planning and Zoning Board Hearing Page 7 enhances an interconnected street system within and between neighborhoods. Proper right-of-way has been dedicated for public streets, emergency access easements, and utility easements have been provided as needed to serve the area being platted. 2. Water Hazards [3.3.3] — The Stormwater Department has reviewed the application and has indicated that the application satisfies the requirements of this standard. C. Section 3.4.1 Natural Habitats and Features The approved Redtail PDP satisfied this section of the LUC and the Redtail Ponds Office Campus layout is consistent with that plan to the extent that the natural habitat and buffers are being equally protected. D. Division 3.5, Building Standards 1. Building and Project Compatibility [3.5.1] — The architectural character is compatible with the architectural character of other existing development in the area. The 4-story, 52' high buildings will be constructed of texture -coated concrete precast panels and cast -in -place panels, with horizontal windows and metal siding panels on each level. The fronts of each building will be a combination of masonry and storefront glass. There will be suspended metal slat shading devices (awnings) on the west sides of the buildings. Main entrances face connecting walkways and street sidewalks. 2. Building Height Review. Section 3.5.1(G) states that: All buildings or structures in excess of 40' in height shall be subject to special review pursuant to this subsection (G). The four buildings, as proposed, will be 52'-0" high to the top of the parapet and 61' high to the top of the towers over the main entries to the building. The applicant has submitted a shadow analysis based on Section 3.5.1(G) Building Height Review in the LUC. A copy of the shadow analysis is attached to this staff memo. Staff has evaluated the criteria for a special review of buildings in excess of 40' in height: Redtail Ponds Office Campus, Major Amendment, File # 26-01 B August 16, 2007 Planning and Zoning Board Hearing Page 6 vehicular access to and from the public streets. This standard is, therefore, satisfied. d. Parking Lots: Required Number of Spaces for Type of Use [3.2.2(K)(2)] - Non-residential Parking Maximums: This section of the Land Use Code limits an office use to a maximum of 3.0 spaces for each 1,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area (4.5 spaces if contained within parking garage, which approximately 63 spaces will be). There is proposed to be 70,468 square feet of office use; therefore, a maximum of 210 parking spaces can be provided in the parking areas that serve the office buildings. If there is a restaurant use in Building 4 then there would be 65,247 square feet of office space and 5,221 square feet of restaurant use. In this case, the maximum allowed on -site parking would be 245 spaces. A total of 181 on -site parking spaces are being proposed. This section of the LUC is being satisfied. e. Handicap Parking [3.2.2(K)(5)] — There are 7 handicap spaces provided in convenient locations. The standard is thereby satisfied. 3. Solar Access, Orientation, Shading [3.2.3] - The layout of the project does not cast unreasonable shadows within the site or on adjacent properties so as not to impair the access to sunshine for potential solar energy systems or for solar -oriented rooftop surfaces. This standard is therefore satisfied. 4. Site Lighting [3.2.4] - Down -directional, sharp cut-off pole mounted light fixtures are provided to illuminate parking lots, drive aisles, and walkway areas. As required, the lighting levels will not exceed 10 foot-candles on site, and the walkways will be illuminated at least 0.5 foot-candles. B. Division 3.3, Engineering Standards 1. Plat Standards [3.3.1] -As required, the general layout of the lots, roads, driveways, utilities, drainage facilities, and other services within the proposed development are designed in a way that Redtail Ponds Office Campus, Major Amendment, File # 26-01 B August 16, 2007 Planning and Zoning Board Hearing Page 5 a. Street Trees [3.2.1(D)(2)] -The applicant is satisfying the 30 to 40 foot spacing interval requirement; therefore, the Major Amendment satisfies this standard. b. Minimum Species Diversity [3.2.1(D)(3)] - The applicant proposes 76 trees on the Landscape Plan. The landscape plan proposes no more than 15% of a single species of trees; therefore, the Major Amendment satisfies this standard. c. Parking Lot Perimeter Landscaping [3.2.1(E)(4)] - As required, the on -site outdoor parking areas are screened adequately from the street and adjacent office uses with plant material of sufficient opacity to block the required amount of vehicle headlights. d. Parking Lot Interior Landscaping [3.2.1(E)(5)] -All proposed parking lots provide a minimum of 6% of their total area as landscaped areas. This standard is, therefore, satisfied. 2. Access, Circulation and Parking [3.2.2] a. Direct On -Site Access and Off -Site Access to Pedestrian and Bicycle Destinations [3.2.2(C)(6)&(7)] - Direct sidewalk connections are provided from the on -site dwellings to the adjacent street network which, in -turn, provides sidewalk and bicycle connectivity to the future Mason Transportation Corridor's bicycle/pedestrian trail. This standard is thereby satisfied. b. Transportation Impact Study [3.2.2(C)(8)] - The City's Traffic Engineer and the Transportation Planning Department have reviewed the applicants Transportation Impact Study and have found that it meets the required vehicular, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit Level of Service requirements. c. Access and Parking Lot Requirements [3.2.2(D)] - Pedestrian areas are clearly differentiated from vehicular areas. All off-street parking spaces have unobstructed Redtail Ponds Office Campus, Major Amendment, File # 26-01 B August 16, 2007 Planning and Zoning Board Hearing Page 4 development plans approved under this Land Use Code shall be reviewed and processed in the same manner as required for the original development plan for which amendment is sought. The Redtail PDP was a development proposal that was reviewed and approved as a Planning and Zoning Board (Type 2) Project Development Plan request. The applicant is requesting to eliminate 92 dwelling units (in 12 buildings) and construct 4 new office buildings, each 15,664 to 18,269 square feet in size, totaling 70,468 square feet of office uses. There will be changes to the building footprints and the height of the 4-story buildings will change from 40' to 52', with a tower element over the front entries being 61' high. The layout on the Site Plan will not change substantially because the new office buildings and surface parking areas will be in the same locations as the approved lots and pad sites and will use the same street network as previously approved. The approved Redtail PDP has a total of 160 off-street parking spaces, with a minimum of 160 spaces being required, for the 92 dwelling units to be eliminated. The requested Redtail Ponds Office Campus, Major Amendment has a total of 181 off-street parking spaces, with no minimum being required for the non-residential use. Maximum parking allowances do apply and the Major Amendment request proposes significantly fewer spaces than would be allowed based on the square footage of the office or office/restaurant space. Staff has determined that there are no adverse impacts associated with the proposed change of use from residential, with the loss of 92 dwelling units, to offices. 3. Division 4.21 of the Land Use Code, Commercial District (C) The proposed Major Amendment to office use is permitted in the (C) Commercial Zoning District, subject to a Planning and Zoning Board review. The Project Development Plan complies with all applicable district standards of Section 4.21 of the Land Use Code, C - Commercial zone district. 4. Article 3 of the Land Use Code - General Development Standards The Project Development Plan complies with all applicable General Development Standards as follows: A. Division 3.2, Site Planning and Design Standards 1. Landscaping and Tree Protection [3.2.1] Redtail Ponds Office Campus, Major Amendment, File # 26-01 B August 16, 2007 Planning and Zoning Board Hearing Page 3 building configurations would be virtually the same. At time of the PDP decision by the Planning and Zoning Board the applicant agreed to the residential option for this area. 2. Article 2 - Administration Section 2.2.10(A) Minor Amendments The Redtail Ponds Office Campus, Major Amendment request proposes to eliminate 92 of the previously approved 141 dwelling units in the Redtail, PDP. This would constitute a 65% decrease in the total number of units in the project, thereby exceeding the 1 % decrease allowed by this section of the LUC. Therefore, the request may not be considered as a Minor Amendment. It must go through the Major Amendment development review process. Section 2.2.10(A)(2) states that: Minor Amendments shall only consist of any change to any development plan or any site specific development plan which was originally subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Board (either as a Type 2 project or as a project reviewed by the Board under prior law) and was approved by the Board, provided that: (a) the minor amendment results in an increase or decrease by one (1) percent or less in the approved number of dwelling units. The Redtail PDP was a development proposal that was reviewed and approved as a Planning and Zoning Board (Type 2) Project Development Plan request and was evaluated against the criteria and standards set forth in the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code. Section 2.2.10(B)(1) Procedure/Criteria for Major Amendments Amendments to any approved development plan or site specific development plan that are not determined by the Director to be Minor Amendments under the criteria set forth in Section 2.2.10(A) shall be deemed Major Amendments. Major Amendments to approved development plans or site specific development plans approved under the laws of the City for the development of land prior to the adoption of this Land Use Code shall be processed as required for the land use or uses proposed for the amendment as set forth in Article 4 (i.e., Type 1 review or Type 2 review) for the zone district in which the land is located, and, to the maximum extent feasible, shall comply with the applicable standards contained in Articles 3 and 4. Major Amendments to development plans or site specific Redtail Ponds Office Campus, Major Amendment, File # 26-01 B August 16, 2007 Planning and Zoning Board Hearing Page 2 COMMENTS: Background The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: E: C; Existing Cameron Park office development. S: POL; Existing City -owned Redtail Grove Natural Area, W: FA1; Farming zone in Larimer County - existing BNSF Railroad tracks, existing rural residential properties. N: C; Approved residential (Redtail PDP) The property was part of 3 separate annexations: (1) Mill 1st Annexation in January 1987; (2) Mill 2"d Annexation in January 1987; and (3) Fossil Creek West 15t Annexation in November of 1988. The approved Redtail PDP site is roughly an L-shaped site, bisected by a naturalized drainage channel which flows from the west, through a culvert under the adjacent BNSF Railroad embankment, southeasterly through the site, and through the northern end of the Redtail Grove Natural Area that outfalls into Fossil Creek. The proposed Redtail Ponds Office Campus, Major Amendment, being the western portion of the Redtail PDP project, is located between the existing naturalized drainage channel and the railroad embankment. Cameron Drive currently exists to the east of the site, and is stubbed to the eastern property line. Fossil Boulevard currently exists to the north of the site, and is stubbed to the northern property line. The site has approximately 930 feet of frontage along the BNSF Railroad right-of-way. The Fossil Creek Trail is planned to be installed in the near future by the City in the Redtail Grove Natural Area just south of the site. The bicycle/pedestrian portion of the Mason Transportation Corridor connecting the South Transit Center with the Fossil Creek Trail will be located within the eastern edge of the railroad right-of-way, immediately adjacent to this site. Within the western hilltop area of site for the original Redtail PDP, the applicant proposed 6 eight -unit condominium buildings, 4 ten -unit condominium buildings, and 2 two -unit carriage house buildings. Together, the buildings within this western hilltop area of the site provided 92 dwelling units. The applicant requested that the PDP have the flexibility to substitute the use of the proposed buildings within this hilltop area be approved as either the 92 dwelling units or as up to 109,234 square feet of office. In either scenario, the proposed site layout and ITEM NO. 2 MEETING DATE 8/16/07 6a STAFF Steve Olt Citv of Fort Collins PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD STAFF REPORT PROJECT: Redtail Ponds Office Campus, Major Amendment - File #26- 01B APPLICANT/ OWNER: Jon Prouty Lagunitas Redtail, Inc. 3944 JFK Parkway, Suite 12E Fort Collins, CO 80525 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Redtail Ponds Office Campus, Major Amendment to the approved Redtail PDP requests the elimination of 92 dwelling units (88 multi -family, 4 two-family) in 12 buildings and replacement of them with 4 office buildings and associated parking (within the buildings and surface). Building 4 may contain a restaurant use. There would be 181 parking spaces on -site. The buildings will be up to 61' in height, with the majority of a building being 52' high, and contain between 15,664 and 18,269 square feet each on 4 floors. This proposed development is located north of the City's Redtail Grove Natural Area, west of the intersection of South College Avenue and Cameron Drive, south of Fairway Lane, and east of the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railroad tracks. The site is in the C - Commercial zone district. RECOMMENDATION: Approval EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The proposed Major Amendment for a change from residential to office use is permitted in the (C) Commercial Zoning District subject to a Planning and Zoning Board review, per Section 2.2.10(B)(1) the Land Use Code. The Project Development Plan complies with all applicable district standards of Section 4.21 of the Land Use Code, C - Commercial zone district. The Major Amendment complies with all applicable General Development Standards contained in Article 3 of the Land Use Code. COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. P.O. Box580 Fort Collins, CO80522-0580 (970)221-6750 PLANNING DEPARTMENT