HomeMy WebLinkAboutHARVEST PARK - PDP - 25-98A - DECISION - FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISIONFILE No. 255 01/17 '00 16:30 ID:COOPER INVESTMENTS 303 290 8260 PAGE 16
The application meets the criteria for alternative compliance requests for
Sections 3.2.3(B) Solar -Oriented Residential Lots and Division 3.6.3 Street
Pattern and Connectivity.
Declsion
Based upon the findings and conclusions, the Applicant's request for Project
Development Plan approval for Harvest Park case number 25-98A is approved
with the following conditions.
1. The applicant shall comply with the proposed alternative compliance
Sections 3.2.3(B) Solar -Oriented Residential Lots and 3.6.3 Street Pattern and
Connectivity.
2. The applicant shall comply with all notes and conditions set forth on the
applicant's submittal sheets 1 through 23 dated 4120/1999 and revised
10/5/1999 and 12/21/1999 Vignette Studios.
3. The applicant shall submit all building elevations and other materials
necessary to enable the planning staff to review this project for compliance with
Division 3.5 Building Standards. In the event the planning staff and applicant
can not agree upon the project's compliance with this division they shall refer
this matter to the Hearing Officer, who shall retain jurisdiction, for
determination. The applicant shall not commence construction of the dwellings
until full and final review of the project for compliance with Division 3.5 is
complete.
Dated this „/�ay of January, 2000 per authority granted by Section 1.4.9
(E) and 2.1 of the Land Use Code. / G��
I l
Steven Klausing, Hearing`Officer
15
FILE No. 255 01/17 '00 16:30 IMOOPER INVESTMENTS 303 290 8260
PAGE 15
related to increased traffic from this site to and through adjacent developments.
There was also concern over the issue of pedestrian safety in the vicinity of the
neighboring schools. These are legitimate concerns however, the Cities master
traffic plan has identified streets within the area and the traffic levels which are
anticipated and for which road construction has been planned. Development
of existing agricultural land into a residential development will lead to an
increase in traffic from this site and said traffic will use roads which lead to and
through adjacent developed areas. However, the density of this development
is barely within the minimum required and the Applicant must construct all
public improvements, including the dedication of rights of way necessitated by
this development. Finally, the Hearing Officer finds that the LUC does not
allow the decision maker to impose conditions upon the approval of a project
development plan to mitigate the impact of traffic from a development on off
site roads such as Harmony, unless such a condition has been previously
approved by the City such as traffic impact fees. The combination these
factors and the fact that the City has planned for and approved the designation
of streets which will accommodate the anticipated traffic leads the Hearing
Officer to conclude that the plan meets the standards of this Section.
Division 3.6.6 Emergengy Access
This Division requires that emergency vehicles can gain access to, and
maneuver within, the project so that emergency personnel can provide fire
protection and emergency services without delays. The plan meets this
requirement.
FINDINGS OF FACT/CONCLUSIONS
After reviewing the staff report, the Harvest Park Project Development Plan
submittal and considering all the evidence at the public hearing, the Hearing
Officer makes the following findings of fact and conclusions:
The Project Development Plan is located in the LMN District. The proposed
land uses of single-family attached and detached dwellings and two-family
dwellings and a neighborhood center are permitted in the LMN zone district
subject to administrative review. The Project Development Plan complies
with all applicable district standards of Section 4.4 of the Land Use Code,
the LMN Low Density, Mixed -use Neighborhood zone district.
The Project Development Plan complies with
Development Standards contained in Article
the approved alternative compliance as noted
14
all applicable General
3 of the Land Use Code with
herein.
FILE No. 255 01/17 '00 16:29 ID:COOPER INVESTMENTS 303 290 8260 PAGE 14
that the plan complies with these requirements and accomplishes the goals of
the plan.
Division 3.6.3 Street Pattern and Connectivity Standards
This Division requires that street connections to surrounding communities be
provided at intervals not to exceed 600 feet, unless rendered not feasible due
to unusual topographic features, existing development or a natural area or
feature. The purpose of this standard is to ensure that the local street system
is well designed with regard to safety and efficiency and convenience for
automobiles, bicycles, pedestrian and transit modes of travel. The Applicant
has requested alternative compliance with this standard.
The Hearing Officer finds that the evidence is that street connectivity is limited
by several of the factors above. The evidence is that street connectivity is
restricted to the south due to McClelland Channel drainage system. This
channel is an important drainage way that the Natural Resources Department
is attempting to reclaim. It has also been identified as an important drainage
by the Storm Water Department. The standard would require four crossings. It
is the opinion and the testimony of the staff from these departments that this
many crossings would be detrimental to their goals. The Applicant has
proposed two crossings instead of the four plus two additional pedestrian
crossings. The property to the south will be accessed by two vehicular and two
additional pedestrian crossings.
The Hearing Officer may grant alternative compliance if it is found that the
proposed plan accomplishes the purposes of the Section equally or better than
a plan which complies with the Section. As stated above in the Section on
solar access and the Applicant's alternative compliance request it is necessary
to evaluate several important policy goals of the city. In this case adequate
access has been provided and the plan protects important natural resources
and features. An existing topographical feature is present and existing
development to the south has been designed to be consistent with the
Applicant's plan. The Hearing Officer finds that this is a well conceived
alternative that accomplishes the intent of the standard and promotes other
important city goals, the alternative compliance is approved.
Division 3 6 A Transportation Level of Service Requirements
A Transportation Impact Study (TIS) was conducted. The staff report indicates
that the TIS, which has been reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineer and
Transportation Planning Department, meets the required Level of Service
Standards for all modes of transportation to and from the Site. -It is noted by the
Hearing Officer that most of the concerns voiced by the public at the hearing
13
FILE No. 255 01/17 '00 16:29 ID:COOPER INVESTMENTS 303 290 8260 PAGE 13
The purpose of this Article is to ensure that the physical and operational
characteristics of proposed buildings and uses are compatible when
considered within the context of the surrounding area. Architectural character
requires that new development in or adjacent to existing developed areas shall
be compatible with the established architectural character of such areas by
using a design that is complimentary.
Architectural character, building size, height, bulk, mass and scale, building
orientation, privacy considerations and building materials are all standards set
forth in General Development Standards Division 3.5 Building Standards, 3.5.1
Building and Project Compatibility. Therefore, the project must be evaluated
against these standards, compliance with which is required pursuant to Division
2.4.2(H). The applicant has submitted artists renderings of the elevations and
architectural elements of the proposed houses. These are not however,
architectural elevations. The renderings suggest proposed units of a high
degree of architectural detail, creativity and imagination and provided the
materials are compatible with the surrounding area these houses would comply
with the standards. The renderings include three different architectural styles
and include features such as rear accessed garages, all these features
contribute to meeting the standard. At the hearing the applicant testified that
they intend to build the homes as indicated on the renderings. Accordingly, the
Hearing Officer's decision will be conditional upon compliance with the
standard and construction of the homes as indicated by the Applicant. As a
condition of approval of this Project Development Plan the Applicant shall
submit to the Planning Department full architectural elevations including
materials descriptions. If these are substantially similar to the illustrations
submitted at the hearing the houses will meet the standard. If however, they
differ substantially and the Applicant and city staff can not agree then the
Hearing Officer shall retain jurisdiction to determine compliance with the
standards.
vision 3.5.2 Residential Building Standard
Since the applicant has not submitted elevations or other materials to enable
the Hearing Officer to evaluate these factors the Hearing Officer's decision will
be conditional upon compliance with these standards.
Division 3 8 1 Maste( Street Plan
The City has identified the location and ultimate functional classification of
necessary arterial and collector streets on the "City of Fort Collins Master
Street Plan". All developments must provide for and accommodate the streets
and transportation facilities identified in this plan. The Hearing Officer finds
12
FILE No. 255 01/17 '00 16:28 ID:COOPER INVESTMENTS 303 290 8260 PAGE 12
standards provided in this Section relate to the time of year and hours when
access to sunshine is preferred and in the procedure to evaluate shading.
Based upon a reading of the entire Section the absence of detailed standards
leads the Hearing Officer to conclude that the specific elements of the plan
required to comply with the standard are flexible and that there may be a
combination of elements for the staff and the applicant to determine provided
the few specifics in the Section are applied.
The Hearing Officer finds that the elements of the development plan including
buildings, circulation, open space and landscaping are designed to the
maximum extent possible while still in compliance with other Article 3 and
Article 4 building and development standards. The Hearing Officer also finds .
that the physical elements of the plan including the trees have been designed
so as not to cast shadows. The Hearing Officer concludes that availability of
alternative compliance means that the LUC does not contemplate that the sole
measure of compliance with the standard is the number of lots in compliance.
To conclude otherwise would render the entire alternative compliance provision
meaningless. Therefore, the Hearing Officer finds that the plan complies with
the standard to the maximum extent possible and that it accomplishes the
purposes of the Section equally or better than a plan which meets the
standards of the Section and therefore the alternative compliance it approved.
Division 3.2.4 Site Lighting.
The exact locations of street lights is determined by the Light and Power
Department after the plat is recorded. The on -site lighting levels will satisfy the
lighting limits of the LUC.
Division 3.4.1 Natural Habitata and Features
This site is bordered by a drainage channel that has deteriorated overtime.
The applicant has proposed significant improvements in cooperation with the
City and other property owners. The testimony is that the development will
provide a significant positive contribution to the restoration of a badly
deteriorated natural area and may contribute to the establishment of an
improved natural habitat. The standard is met.
Division 3.4.1(Q Pstablishment of Buffer Zones
The plan indicates that the applicant has provided a 50' buffer adjacent to the
channef which is sufficient.
Division 3 5 1 Building and Project Compatibility
FILE No, 255 01/17 '00 16:28 ID:000PER INVESTMENTS 303 290 8260 PAGE 11
standards of this Section. In reviewing the proposed alternative plan, the
decision maker shall take into account whether the alternative design
enhances neighborhood continuity and connectivity, fosters non vehicular
access, and preserves existing natural or topographical conditions on the site.
The staff testified that it supports the Applicant's alternative plan because the
opportunity offered by the applicant for active solar use will accomplish and
satisfy the section equally well as a plan that meets the standard. The staff
also testified that they and the applicant have thoroughly reviewed the plan to
identify opportunities and changes which would enable the plan to meet the
standard and that the Applicant has cooperated with the staff requests for
modifications to the plan to maximize the extent to which the plan meets the
standard
In evaluating the proposed plan it is necessary to consider and weigh several
policy goals which the City has adopted in the LUC. It appears that the
applicant is short by approximately 8 lots in meeting the solar access standard.
The testimony was that the applicant has responded to all requests to amend
the plan by the staff and other governmental agencies including the fire
department. Several other important policy considerations mitigate in favor of
the proposed layout including; the layout of the streets, the orientation of the
homes to arterial streets, whether a home on a corner should face one street or
the other, connectivity, orientation towards open space. In evaluating a request
for alternative compliance the Hearing Officer first notes that alternative
compliance with other LUC provisions such as site Lighting, LUC 3.2.4, and
Parking Lot Ratio, LUC 3.2.3(K)(2) is available. Conversely alternative
compliance is not provided for in many other standards, in particular
engineering standards. Therefore, the Hearing Officer when evaluating a
request for alternative compliance must consider whether a plan which meets
standards which are largely inflexible and intended for the health and safety of
the citizens and for which alternative compliance is not generally available is
preferable over a plan which is marginally not in compliance with a standard
which the city recognizes to appropriately contemplate some flexibility and for
which alternative compliance is provided.
Reviewing Division 3.2.3 the Hearing Officer finds that there are 3 specific
standards. Division 3.2.3 (B) requires that 65% of the lots conform to the
definition of a "solar oriented Lot". A solar oriented lot is defined in the LUC.
Section 3.2.3 (C) establishes that the elements of the development plan are to
be located and designed to the maximum extent possible to protect access to
sunshine for solar oriented systems or solar oriented rooftop surfaces. Both
passive and active solar systems are clearly contemplated within this Section.
Finally, Division 3.3.3 (D) establishes standards for shading and the impact of
trees. Shading by deciduous trees is noted to be beneficial. The only specific
10
FILE No. 255 01/17 '00 16:27 IMOOPER INVESTMENTS 303 290 8260 PAGE 10
vision 3.2.2(C) (4) Bicvcle Fac
Testimony was received and the plan indicates that adequate bicycle racks will
be provided at the neighborhood center as well as the smaller neighborhood
parks.
The on -site pedestrian system provides directness, continuity and safety. Of
particular note is the enhancement to pedestrian crossings and the traffic
circles to ensure the recognition of the pedestrian way and provide refuges for
pedestrians.
Division 3.2.2(C)(8) Djfect On -site Access to Pedestrian and BiW
Destinations
Direct connections to the neighborhood center, and the small neighborhood
parks are provided by the pedestriantbicycle network.
Division 3.2.2 () Parking
This Division requires adequate parking which is dependent upon the number
of bedrooms_ The standard requires up to 2 parking spaces for up to 3
bedrooms. The Hearing Officer notes that the plan indicates that 984 parking
spaces are provided which is 2.1 spaces per unit; therefore the standard is
met.
Division 3.2.3 Solar Access, Orientation, Shadin
The applicant is requesting Alternative Compliance for Section 32.3(B) of the
Land Use Code which states, "at least 65% of the lots less than 15,000 s.f. in
area in single and two family residential developments must conform to the
definition of a "solar -oriented lot" in order to preserve the potential for solar
energy usage." The staff has determined that 391 of the proposed units are
subject to the solar orientation ordinance and therefore 254 lots must meet the
standard. The staff has indicated that after review of the applicant's plan 246 of
the lots meet the ordinance, which is 8 short or 62.9% of the lots subject to the
ordinance.
Section 3.2.3 (E), Alternative Compliance, states that upon the request of the
applicant, the decision maker may approve an alternative sit layout that may be
substituted in whole or in part for a plan meting the standard if the decision
maker finds that the proposed alternative plan accomplishes the purposes of
this Section equally well or better than would a plan which complies with the
FILE No. 255 01/17 '00 16:27 ID:COOPER INVESTMENTS 303 290 8260 PAGE 9
of the Section. The Hearing Officer has reviewed the plan and finds that the
plan meets these standards.
Division 3.2.1 (2) Street Trees
The applicant has submitted a landscapingplan pursuant to Section
3.2.1(13)(2)(a) of the Land Use Code. This Code section provides "wherever
the sidewalk is separated from the street by a parkway, canopy shade trees
shall be planted at thirty-foot to forty -foot spacing (intervals) in the center of all
such parkway areas." The proposal provides trees spaced at 30 foot and 40
foot intervals I an 8 foot wide parkway between the curb and sidewalk along
Corbett Drive, Rock Creek Drive and County Road 9, collector and arterial
streets and 30' to 40 ' on center in 6' wide parkways along the internal local
and connector streets.
Division 3.2.1 U (3) Minimum Soecies Divers
No more that 15% of the landscaping consists of a single species. The
applicant has submitted a comprehensive plan that meets the standard.
Division 32.2 Access. Circulation and Parking
The purpose of this Division is to ensure that the parking and circulation
aspects of the development are well designed with regard to safety, efficiency
and convenience for vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians and transit both within the
development and to and from surrounding areas. The plan includes an internal
network of sidewalks along arterial, collector and local streets. The applicant
has identified primary pedestrian crossings by the use of different paving and
striping. In addition the use of traffic circles and enhanced pedestrian refuges
contributes to the finding that the Applicant has met this standard.
Division 3.2.2 (Cl Safetv C
Testimony was received at the hearing and the plan indicates that the parking
and circulation system will accommodate the movement of vehicles, bicycles,
pedestrians and transit safely and conveniently throughout the site and to and
from surrounding areas. As stated above the Applicant has included additional
enhancements that will contribute to meeting this standard.
Division 3 2.2(C) (2) Curb Cuts and Ramos
Adequate curb cuts and ramps have been provided at convenient, safe
locations.
FILE No. 255 01/17 100 16:26 ID:COOPER INVESTMENTS 303 290 8260 PAGE 8
The plan and drawings submitted by the applicant indicate that the streets
being proposed meet the block structure and block size requirements.
Article 3 of the Land Use Code — General Development Standards
The application must comply with all applicable Article 3 General Development
Standards. The staff has reviewed the applicant's submittal and has indicated
in the staff report that the Project Development Plan meets all Article 3
Development Standards with the exceptions noted which follow. Evidence was
presented at the hearing and was included within the applicant's submittal
materials which the hearing officer finds applicable to the following specific
standards and which meet these standards. In addition, the applicant is
requesting alternative compliance for two standards which are addressed
separately.
Modification of Standards-Pla
Prior to addressing the Applicant's submittal regarding the Article 3 compliance
and the requests for. alternative compliance the Hearing Officer takes note that
the Applicant requested and received approval for modification of Article 3
standards from the Planning and Zoning Board. These modifications were:
LUC Section 3.5.2 (D)(2) setbacks from arterial streets and reduced front yard
setbacks; Section 3.6.2 (L)(1)(a) private drives and when allowed; Section
3.6.2 (L)(1)(c) private drives additional access; 3.6.2 (L)(2)(c) private drives and
design requirements. These modifications were approved by the Planning and
Zoning Board on October 7, 1999.
Division 3.2.1 Landscaping and Tree Protection
The intent of this Division is to require the preparation of landscape and tree
protection plans that ensure significant canopy shading, contribute to the visual
quality and continuity within and between the development and other
developments, provide screening and mitigate conflict between activity areas
and site elements, enhance outdoor spaces, reduce erosion and storm water
runoff and mitigate air pollution. The applicant must submit a landscaping plan
that: (1) reinforces and extends any existing patterns of outdoor spaces and
vegetation where practicable, (2) supports functional purposes such as spatial
definition, visual screening, creation of privacy, management of microclimate or
drainage, (3) enhances the appearance of the development and neighborhood,
(4) protects significant trees, natural systems and habitat, (5) enhances the
pedestrian environment, (6) identifies all landscape areas, (7) identifies all
landscape elements within the areas, and (8) meets or exceeds the standards
FILE No. 255 01/17 '00 16:26 ID:COOPER INVESTMENTS 303 290 8260 PAGE 7
more), (2) small lot single-family detached dwellings (lots containing less than
6000 s.f.) and (3) two-family dwellings. The proposed lot sizes include a very
wide range from 13,098 to 1,560 square feet. The applicant has proposed one
and two story units, attached and detached units. The plan includes garages
entered form both the front, and rear of the lots. The Hearing Officer also finds
that this proposal does not contain any one housing type that constitutes more
than 90% of the total, in fact the proposed unit allocation is well distributed over
the various housing types. The Hearing Officer finds that the project
demonstrates creativity, variety, and the standard is very well met.
Division 4.4 (3) Neighborhood Centers
A neighborhood center satisfying the location, design, access, and outdoor
spaces requirements is proposed as part of this Project Development Plan.
The proposed neighborhood center will include a recreation center, pool, day
care and community center. The standard is satisfied by including the
neighborhood center in the plan. As a design factor the plan indicates that
100% of the dwellings in this Project Development Plan are located within the
specified distance (3,950') from the neighborhood center.
Division 4.4 (7) Small Neighborhood Parks
Several small neighborhood parks are included in the plan. These parks are
well located to provide good access to the various neighborhoods within the
overall project. The parks are well designed and will foster the creation of
distinct neighborhoods within the development. The outdoor spaces
component of the neighborhood center also satisfies this requirement and at
least 90% of the dwellings in a development are within 1/3 mile of a
neighborhood park, that is at least 1 acre in size.
Division 4.4(E) Streets and Blocks
An interconnected network of streets is provided in the LMN portion of this
Project Development Plan in a manner that results in blocks of developed land
bounded by connecting streets no greater than 12 acres in size, thereby
satisfying the applicable streets and blocks standards.
Division 4.4 (E) (2) Nonresidential and Mixed -Else
The neighborhood center is the only nonresidential land use in the Project
Development Plan. The plan for the center meets the maximum size, height,
roof form, building massing, orientation, and other restrictions for nonresidential
buildings within the LMN zone.
6
FILE No. 255 01/17 '00 16:25 ID:COOPER INVESTMENTS 303 290 8260 PAGE 6
Compliance With Article Two Administration
Division 2.2.2 Neighborhood Meeting
As previously stated herein a neighborhood meeting is not required for
the approval of this Project Development Plan by Type 1 Administrative
Review. However, the Hearing Officer notes that a neighborhood meeting was
held in conjunction with the Sage Creek development. The City mailed
notification letters to affected property owners and interested parties and
according to the staff report 34 neighbors and interested parties attended.
According to the staff report issues of concern included traffic, lot size, density,
the neo-traditional concept and alley safety. The Hearing Officer notes that
these issues were also raised by the public at the public hearing.
Comer pliance With Division 4 Development standards
Divisio
The overall minimum average density for the LMN portion of the overall
Harvest Park site must be at least 5 dwelling units per net acre of residential
land and may not exceed eight dwelling units per acre. The Project
Development Plan provides a density of 5.06 dwelling units per net acre of
residential land. The Hearing Officer finds that this is within the minimum and
maximum required density for this district. While some lots might be seen as
small there is a large variety in lot sizes and unit sizes and this variety is
preferred to a monotonous size which does not offer the opportunity for variety
that this plan does. The public testimony included concerns regarding
increased traffic which often is related to the issue of density. The Hearing
Officer finds however, that the proposed density is barely over the minimum
required and therefore well within the legally permitted density for this site and
therefore permitted.
on 4.4 (D) (2) Mix of Ho
Because the development is more than 45 acres this Project Development
Plan is required to provide a minimum of three housing types. In addition the
Code requires a variety of lot sizes and dimensions in order to avoid a
monotonous streetscape, larger lots are encouraged on corners and smaller
lots adjacent to common open spaces. Standard single family lots over 6,000
square feet, small lot single family lots of less than 6,000 square feet for
detached homes, two family units, and attached family units may be used to
satisfy this requirement. The applicant has proposed three housing types: (1)
standard lot single-family detached dwellings (lots containing 6000 s.f. or
5
FILE No. 255 01/17 '00 16:25 ID:COOPER INVESTMENTS 303 290 8260 PAGE 5
The Hearing Officer finds that this is a request for approval of a Project
Development Plan, that review as an Administrative Type 1 review is
appropriate and that the zoning for the site is Low Density Mixed Use
Neighborhood, LMN. The Hearing Officer finds that the applicant has
submitted a request for: single family detached dwellings, two-family (duplex)
dwellings, and single family attached dwellings and a neighborhood center
within the LMN zoning district. The Hearing Officer finds that these are
permitted uses in the LMN zoning district in the Land Use Code Section 4.4(B)
subject to administrative review.
The Hearing Officer finds that the submittal complies with the permitted uses
within the LMN District, that the request complies with the District Standards
contained in Section 4.4 (LMN — Low Density Mixed -use Neighborhood zone
district) and Article 3 of the Land Use Code (General Development Standards)
upon conditional acceptance of the Applicant's request for alternative
compliance and subject to the conditions that follow.
Land Uses
Division 4.4 Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood
The project is located in the LMN District. The Land Use Code describes the
LMN district as intended to be a setting for low density housing combined with
complimentary and supporting land uses that serve the neighborhood and are,
developed and operated in harmony with the residential characteristics of the
neighborhood. A variety of housing choices is intended that invite walking to
gathering places, services and conveniences. A community center provides a
focal point and attractive walking places and biking paths invite citizens to
enjoy the center as well as small parks. New developments in this district are to
be arranged to form part of an individual neighborhood. The neighborhood
center is intended to form the core of the neighborhood the size of which is
typically 80 to 160 acres.
The proposed uses of single-family attached and detached dwellings and
two-family dwellings are permitted in the LMN zone district subject to
administrative review. The applicant has included a neighborhood center as a
focal point of the plan. The land use plan of the site has been designed to
create distinct neighborhoods, all accessible to the neighborhood center but
most also served by a small neighborhood park with a focal center. The
Hearing Officer finds that the land use is permitted and includes the required
elements for this district and is of the preferred size.
4
FILE No. 255 01/17 '00 16:25 ID:COOPER INVESTMENTS 303 290 8260 PAGE 4
Mark Jackson
Transportation Planning
For the Aoolicant:
Terence Hoaglund
Vignette Studios
719 Pear Street.
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
Darwin Horan
The Writer Corporation
6061 South Willow Suite 232
Englewood, Colorado 80111
Testimony was received from several citizens during the public comment
portion of the hearing. These citizens signed a sign in sheet and entered their
names into the record.
Background
The Applicant's submittal materials and the staff report are a part of the record
and are incorporated herein by reference. The Hearing Officer takes official
notice of the drawings and visual aids, including slides, used during the hearing
and the Fort Collins Comprehensive Plan and street master plan.
The evidence is that the surrounding zoning and land uses are:
N: RL; Existing residential, schools, (Wildwood, Preston Junior High,
Traut Elementary), park land.
S: LMN; Sage Creek, Project Development Plan #25-98 B,
proposed.
E FA-1; Larimer County, existing agricultural.
W: RL; Existing residential (Stetson Creek, Timber Creek).
The site was annexed as part of the Ruff Annexation, September 15,
1998.
3
FILE No. 255 01/17 '00 16:24 ID:COOPER INVESTMENTS 303 290 8260
PAGE 3
Harmony Road, and east of Timberline Road. The
property is zoned Low Density Mixed -Use
Neighborhood District (LMN).
Hearing Officer Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
Zoning District: Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood
Notice of Public Hearing and
Neighborhood Meeting: The planning staff representative testified
that the property was properly posted, legal
notice mailed and published. There is no
requirement for a neighborhood meeting
however one was held and the minutes from
the meeting were presented at the hearing.
The Hearing Officer, presiding pursuant to The Fort Collins Land Use Code,
opened the hearing at 6:30 p.m. on January 5, 2000 in the conference room of
the City of Fort Collins Planning Department located at 281 North College Ave.
Fort Collins, CO. The Hearing Officer admitted the staff report and the
Applicant's submittals, which included a traffic study, into the record.
Hearing Testimony Written Comments and Other Evidence
The following individuals testified at the hearing
From the City of Fort Collins:
Ron Fuchs
City Planner
Babil Hampden
Utilities Department
Janet Meisel Bums
Parks Department
Marc Virata
Engineering Department
Kim Kreimeyer
Environmental Planner
2
FILE No. 255 01/17 '00 16:24 ID:COOPER INVESTMENTS 303 290 8260
PAGE 2
C
ITY OF FORT COLLINS
ADMINIkRATIVE HEARING OFFICER
TYPE I ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION
Hearing Officer:
Project Name
Case Number:
Steven Klausing, Hearing
Officer Administrative, Type 1
Harvest Park
#25-98A
Owners: The Writer Corporation
6061 South willow Drive, Suite 232
Englewood Colorado 80111
Applicant: Terrance Hoaglund, ASIA
Vignette Studies
719 Pear Street
Fort Collins, CO 80521
Project Manager Dino DiTullio
Everitt Companies
3030 south College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80525
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This is a request for approval of a Project
Development Plan pursuant to an Administrative
Hearing Type 1. The site is 106. 63 acres which the
Applicant proposes to develop into 470 residential
units. These units break down to 317 single family
detached residences, 74 duplexes and 79 attached
single family residences on lots ranging in size from
13,098 square feet to 1,560 square feet. The
Harvest Park Development Plan includes a
community neighborhood center and several small
neighborhood parks. This site is west of County
Road 9, north of County Road 36, south of East