The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutWEST PLUM STREET PUD - PRELIMINARY/FINAL - 10-96A - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSRE(. VEp APR U 8 1996 mfo2or2 the houses closest to Plum will have their back yards facing Plum Street while all our front yards face Plum Street. Effectively, we will be viewing their back yard activities (where the most intimate domestic events take place) from our front windows. While we understand that the developer intends to create a small autonomous community in the PUD, the design effectively creates a visual and symbolic barrier to the larger neighborhood. This PUD should not be a separate community but exist as part of the larger community. The best solution is to extend the existing grid system of streets so that the PUD houses are oriented the same as those that surround it. If this cannot be done, we suggest that along with decreasing housing density, the developer reorient the houses on Plum Street so that their back yards face the back yards of the houses on Timber Lane and Rocky Road. The architectural design of the houses within the PUD should also be compatible with houses in the surrounding neighborhood. There are very few two-story houses in this neighborhood. It consists mostly of one and one -and -one -half -story split level houses from the 1960s and 1970s. Thus, the overall neighborhood profile is relatively low and horizontal. This quality should be retained. We suggest that two-story houses be replaced with one -and -a -half story houses and that the developer avoid the vertical, neo-Victorian style so popular in some new developments. This would also retain some of the view and the light to existing houses. We commend the developer for some features of the PUD that will enhance the neighborhood. For instance, the landscaping within the PUD and especially the trees within a parking strip facing Plum improve the overall streetscape. Plum Street has alot of pedestrian traffic (especially dog walkers) and the parking strip will provide some barrier from traffic. The current, narrow sidewalks that directly abut the street are far too narrow and dangerously close to traffic, which will become worse with the new development. Front porches and recessed garages are architectural features that give the feeling of community, unlike some small houses that place the garage directly in front on the street. Thank you for soliciting our comments. As you are both well aware, such infill developments as the West Plum PUD in previously empty pastures are an emotional issue. We understand that we cannot stop change despite our longing for the open space to remain. But we also firmly believe that what is built within our existing neighborhood must be compatible, visually and socially, with its surroundings. We urge you as city planners and developers to seriously consider our concerns. We look forward to talking to you at future meetings. Sincerely, Janet Ore Mark Fiege 2524 W. Plum Ft. Collins, CO 80521 March 31, 1996 Mitchell Haas, City Planner Community Planning & Environmental City of Fort Collins 281 N. College Ave. P.O. Box 580 Ft. Collins, CO 80522-0580 Dear Mr. Haas and Mr. Viita; RFc�lv. 40 APR 0 8 1gg� Services Thank you for soliciting community comment on the proposed PUD on W. Plum Street. We live directly north across Plum from the site and so are very interested in what will be built. Judging from the presentation on January 25, 1996, we have two main areas of concern we hope the developer will remedy: the density of housing and the development's overall compatibility with its surrounding neighborhood. Our biggest concern is the high density of housing proposed for the site and the problems that such density will bring with it. Because the current proposal packs in 16 houses on only three acres with lot sizes between 50 X 90' and 50 X 125', we think the development is too densely occupied. Density of housing should replicate the surrounding neighborhood which has lot sizes considerably larger (ours is almost 100' X 100'). To preserve the neighborhood's character, this infill development should not exceed the density of the overall neighborhood. We feel very strongly that the PUD's plan should be modified to reduce its density. Such high density will bring with it the attendant problem of greatly increased traffic and subsequent deterioration of air and noise quality. The PUD will generate substantially increased traffic on what is currently a very quiet street. We would like the developer and the city to take all measures possible to diminish the amount of traffic and preserve air quality. We have a few suggestions. Require all residents in the PUD to hire a single garbage hauler. Now at least four different garbage companies have garbage trucks and recycling trucks rumbling down our street. This is way too many to enter such a small development. For maximum traffic efficiency, ideally the PUD should extend the street grid rather than utilize a cul-de-sac. Knowing this won't happen, we suggest clear pedestrian access to Elizabeth Street. This could diminish needless car trips and encourage riding public transportation. The PUD homeowners' association should restrict off-street parking within the PUD and on Plum Street, allowing cars parked only in driveways. This would encourage fewer personal cars and prevent a street full of parked cars. Such parking restrictions are especially important for Plum Street which is our front yard but PUD houses' back yard. We are also concerned with the general incompatibility of this small infill development with the larger neighborhood. Most of houses in this area face a grid system of streets. Though we have some small cul-de-sac streets, they have only six or so houses. In the proposed PUD, all sixteen houses will face inward on the cul-de-sac. In fact, fencing, lighting? What type of design is proposed for the houses (single-story/two- story/bi-level/garages)? What amount of parking is provided? How will drainage be addressed? How much grading/fill will be done to this site and how will that impact adjacent properties? PROPERTY VALUES- Any new development in an area should not diminish property values for existing development. The average value/price of homes in this area should not decrease because of the proposed development. If anything, the average should increase because of the new development. Much of this is dependent on the style/size/quality/cost of the new homes that would be developed. There has been some mention that the developer wants to keep some measure of "affordability" for the lots/houses. Again, these efforts tie back into the profit margin, density and what makes a project economically viable. The developer should show that this development will not negatively impact property values in the area. PARKING- There should be adequate off-street parking available for each unit to account for the normal number of cars expected for such a development. Since some of the houses in this area have become rentals and are generally occupied by several college students, the number of vehicles in the area has increased. Having many cars parked on the street, combined with the curves at Plum and Timber Lane, often makes it difficult to see traffic coming or pedestrians crossing the street. The developer and City staff should anticipate this issue and ensure that adequate off-street parking is provided for any development on this property. If not, this could have an impact safety in the area, especially on the nearby residential streets. COVENANTS- Does the developer have plans for covenants? If the lots are proposed to be smaller than the surrounding lot sizes in this area, will there be any considerations given to limiting the number of pets or placement of storage buildings? Will covenants address parking restrictions, lighting, landscaping? Will they consider requiring owner - occupancy to mitigate impacts of college student rental properties? UTILITIES- Existing utilities to the east of this site are above -ground. We have been told (during one of our power outages several years ago) that the City planned to underground these lines. Will development of this site bring this about? We would imagine that utilities within the new development would be underground, but what about those lines that the new service would come off of? Is this something that the City will take action on? When does the City project to have this done by? l' ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC- Residents of the new lots would very likely access Plum to Timber Lane to Elizabeth Street. Even though this is a residential area and children are present, many drivers do not heed the speed limit. There are some curves/corners present that have a potential for problems even with existing traffic. Neighborhood children (and college students!) often play frisbee/football/catch in the streets. Though this is not the most appropriate place for those activities, perhaps there should be some consideration to providing signage that indicates this is a residential area, children are at play, etc. P.3°F3 I DENSITY/COMPATIBILITY- From our perspective, development of this property is expected. If done at the same density of adjacent neighborhoods and if the developer provides all needed improvements, this should not be a problem. However, it appears from the description of the potential development that the density of this project would be quite a bit higher than the surrounding neighborhoods. Since a project site plan has not yet been submitted, these comments are somewhat general in nature, though they do convey our concern regarding compatibility. Using the map provided with the notice for this meeting, the number of existing lots in an area roughly equivalent to the project site is 10. This does not factor in what appears to be an obvious need for some sort of street within this project which would decrease the amount of developable land, resulting in an even higher density. It is our very strong opinion that this development should be at the same density of the surrounding neighborhoods. These neighborhoods are well -established and have been in place for almost 30 years. New development should blend in with the existing character of the area. There has been some indication that the developer may be considering zero lot line setbacks. Presumably this is to enable the developer to maximize the number of units on this property, and thus increase his/her profit. The side setback requirements in the RL - Low Density Residential Zoning District currently require 5' from the property line. It appears that most existing houses have about a 6-8' side setback, resulting in a combined area of 12 - 16' between structures. How would a zero lot line setback development compare to the existing development in the area? Again, with no site plan to compare with existing development, this may be difficult to answer precisely. Our impression is that it would look and feel out of character in our neighborhood. If there are development costs/improvements required in order to develop residences on this 3 acre piece, then the developer needs to consider those costs vs. profits expected. If development costs are too high for a project that is at the same density as the adjacent neighborhoods, then perhaps development of that project is not a wise business move. If the developer feels compelled to squeeze in more units to make a profit, that should be some indication that augh a development at that location is not wise. It certainly won't be compatible with the surrounding, well -established neighborhoods and would create a greater impact on the existing infrastructure. Compatibility with the existing neighborhood should not be sacrificed just so that a developer can increase profit or make a project economically viable. Creating a development that is inconsistent with the neighborhood would be sacrificing the current residents and property owners to the developer's profit margin. We hope that the developer, City staff, and the Planning and Zoning Board and City Council members are responsive to the neighborhood concerns about the density of this development. LOT LAYOUT/DESIGN OF THE DEVELOPMENT -This property is somewhat lower than property to the south. How is project designed? What is the density? What does the developer envision for lot layout, roads/sidewalks, house locations, landscaping, p•20F3 0 From: Bill and Carol Evans, 933 Timber Lane, Ft Collins, CO 80521 To: West Plum PUD Developer and City Planning Staff COMMENTS REGARDING WEST PLUM PUD: We appreciate the opportunity to share ideas and concerns with the developer and the City Planning staff regarding a potential residential development in our area. There are many valuable insights, observations and experiences from living here that current residents can provide that should be used by the developer in designing the project and by staff in its review and evaluation of the project. We hope that, even if this development does not proceed, City staff will still consider and remember our comments and those of others at the neighborhood meeting, and take action where necessary. Some of these issues are existing ones that should be addressed regardless of any new development. Some of these issues are things that are very likely to worsen with increased density unless significant improvements are made. We recognize the rights that property owners have in attempting to develop their land. We expect the same recognition from developers and City staff in that any new development should not negatively impact the surrounding area. Again, we do appreciate this chance early in the process to share our ideas, comments and concerns.. It is our hope that the developer and staff sincerely consider this input in designing this residential project and will provide answers to the questions raised here. CK1AMOLDIN9 WATER PRESSURE- Lack of adequate water pressure is an existing concern for many residents in this neighborhood. As we understand the situation, this area is served by water mains in Mulberry Street which then feed smaller mains to our area. Properties south of Elizabeth Street are served by a different water main system. We are at the dead end of these lines coming off of Mulberry Street and are uphill from the project site. What will the developer and City do to guarantee that the water pressure situation will not worsen as a result of 16 more residences/lawn sprinklers etc. creating an additional demand for water? This is a case where the existing infrastructure is barely adequate for the existing demand. This is one of the issues that really needs to be addressed whether or not this development happens. We have had meetings about other development proposals in our area and this is always a concern. It would be helpful if the City Water Department could come out and take pressure readings for the existing residences so that there is at least a baseline of data to evaluate this situation. f,1OP3 Planning and Environmental vices Current Planning City of Fort Collins January 12, 1996 10(a). 1 C % (e) .. 0 /o T'i 4 ��1+•s�l . r i- s / d . ,�o �s -- a- •+.a r e Dear Resident: V. a d)'a HIV.1-1 P^0 /-"'o -1 r••e• • • 7" +v.o J44_+ On Thursday, January 25,1996 from 7:00 to 9:00 p.m. at Westminster Presbyterian Church*, 1709 West �' s Elizabeth Street, the City of Fort Collins Planning Department will conduct a neighborhood information meeting to discuss a proposal for a development in your neighborhood. The potential developer is proposing a residential project (tentatively named West Plum P.U.D.) that may contain approximately•16 lots on 3 acres. The development would consist of single-family detached homes. The property is located between West Plum Street (to the north), Rocky Road (to the west), and Timber Lane (to the east). The area is surrounded by existing single family homes to the north, east, and west; to the south, there is an existing home on an abutting lot of approximately two acres. N o�e : `� e.4 i e ..� s LAa i c �,# o •�` a , No formal development review request has been made to the City at this time and no decisions will result from this meeting. The potential developer will give a presentation of their plans in order to get ideas, concerns, and general feedback from the local residents. A representative of the City Planning Department will be present to respond to questions about City policies and regulations and to take minutes of the meeting. A list of affected property owners for this public information meeting is derived from official records of the Lanmer County Assessor. Because of the lag time between home occupancy and record keeping, or because of rental situations, a few affected property owners may have been missed. Please feel free to notify your neighbor of this pending meeting so that all neighbors may have the opportunity to attend. If you are unable to attend this meeting, written comments are welcome. regarding this matter, placase call our office at 221-5750. MH/gid *The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6750 for assistance.. 281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 FAX (970) 221-6378 TDD (970) 224-6002 J.: N r- U J1j),'j -A I I(j 1Yj Receive jWrit"Ca xo(if-,c-,fnr! _44---- Yes Yesl So dd—s- Z:p A P-i A 4 h I N) 'A zSz� .� �la' � ! �n�Z �S'�t I u I �( I luI 7Z7 Ob -KAW C-21 xL C i9A IAJ-,�j IBC( I L�OtM4?-t� �.002 Lm L\)LbII ;W! �014V If .07 �� X i i A. That has nothing to do with mitigating project........ 53. Was Pear Street not planned to go all the way, continuing through? --was pond omitted w. a lot of street drainage A. If put 10 lots or as few as 5 lots-- still use onsite water detention-- rare not have to do storm water detention -open space of tremendous value 54. If you want to make somebody happy, leave it as it is. I would buy it tomorrow if I had the money. I'd like it to be open. When do we say NO to building more houses?! r • 43. YES WE WANT A SECOND MEETING!!!!!!!!!!!!! M 44. I am Peter Tippin with Remax..... I'll be doing the marketing -OWNER OCCUPIED ONLY -reasonably priced homes 45. ' How about 5 years later? A. Today new home prod. made for rental but not this.......... 46. Does the land survey show property lines? Also, which ditch? A. Won't show up until ........................ 47. At the next meeting, could we have Roger Buffington from water and waste water attend? Then we could get some more specific answers. A. Sure.... 48. Is there on site detention? A. Temporary detention with discharge directly into the street -15,000 cubic -store on this property * * * something about the 100 year flood*** 49. It seems like the city is always changing the rules --when develop another-- looks different -- density /utilities TED... storm water regulations are the toughest they've ever been. When it comes to utilities the rules are stricter.......... and fees are up. The rules are the same as in 1981.(land planning) 50. If this is zoned for low density....... understand that zoning -will be required for on site detention? A. Yes absolutely. 51. Why? A. -->once look at several lots on property -no offsite property/ cannot dump onto ground quicker --whether or not it's 2 lots or 5 lots per acre. 52. Pay storm drainage fee now? I pay $100 per month for 1.5 acres. IT MITCH... May --planning and zoning/2 to 6 months for util. agreements -at best- fall(start building) 34. We come to this meeting and leave with general purpose. -what if nobody likes the project? -what is to say generally people don't like it but it's his land to do with as he pleases -all come out to be 2 story houses 35. Does it make a difference if we get upset or not? TED... This is your chance to tell them what you don't like about the project. 36. What if it falls on deaf ears? TED...-height restrictions, density, set backs -keep picking away at it ....... may be listing- may be not. 37. (KM)Part of my responsibility is to get this approved. We're here to find out what the likes and dislikes are. I value the comments I've heard here today. 38. It's difficult to see how this fits into the whole neighborhood. <people could see how fit in> ... hard to tell. Need to see adjacent lots. 39. Those people around there think someday it will be developed. -dealing with diff. plan-- houses... A. Your comments on how it will fit in are good ---along east property line-- 5 lots -density compare 2 1/2 - 3 to 5 on Plum -lot frontages compatible 40. We have several properties. We rent to college students and there are lots of vehicles on the street. Can you restrict it to owner occupancy? How much parking is there in the development? Have you considered this as part of the covenants? A. We can consider it ----- need to check 41. You're talking 2 car garage/ 20 feet wide on drive/ leave room for 1 car. A. Covenants can provide some control. r TED... Our regulations-- can park on the street for 48 hours... then it is an abandoned vehicle... will have to pay fine$$$ 42. Every house provides 2 off street parking..... P 5� • MITCH... No road access... probably would have said in conceptual if plan to widen. 25. Utilities............ -us on Timber Lane ... loop water line <on Plum St. -tied to each othef9> water pressure - Will it reduce our water pressure? A. The development would have to extend and fully loop the water lines back. 26. Do these questions come up in the preliminary and final review? A. Oh, yes. 27. Does the power come down Timber Lane/ Plum Street?/?/? We have power surges quite often and the City says it's not there. J 28. Electrical-- along east side of the property-- the utilities are above ground. When will they be put underground? The City says it will happen. A. I have seen some plans... -South side of Elizabeth/ it's not the intent of this'project to take them down -City is to put all underground 29. I spoke with an electrical engineer at the city... -criteria for burying power lines -when they repave they do it 30. So in this development, their utilities will be underground and ours not? A. Yes, we have to conform to the "rules". 31. If this does go through... if you buy a piece of property do you have to build a house on it? A. If the price is good enough .... no.(ha ha ha) -buy land with choice of homes to be built 32. Is there a way to eliminate the 2 story houses? A. no answer 33. What is the time frame for this development? A. 9 week process/ submit plan within 60 to 90 days -when we get approval, it'll then be another 9 to 10 weeks -the whole thing lasts about 6 months 16. When the development was proposed <north on Pear St.> we talked about density. My concern is, does this fit in there? 17. His feelings mirror mine and my husbands. We did expect this area to be developed.' 18. Why does this have to be a P.U.D. anyway? A. -->are doing narrower streets -6000 square foot minimum lot size -common open space area .... all beneficial to do PUD 19. Why here? It's because of density right? A. -add compatibility -1 story, single family, lot size is compat. -There are homes that close. 20. I understand you have to do a cul-de-sac. Is there any way to provide pedestrian access to Elizabeth? Otherwise you would have to go clear around. A. -bring all out to Plum, Rocky Road -we've talked of pedestrian access/ we are in the process of purchasing the land. -issue that Doug brought up... current land owner would have to be willing to provide this access. 21. Elizabeth has been widened to accommodate... road important and development is important to what touches/ should be ..... How will this be addressed? A. In conceptual review access to Elizabeth was discussed. No more curb cuts are desired. We're dealing with a portion of the site, the northern portion. 22. Is there any approval needed to split the property? 5 A. 16 lots? M? M !?>......... k` 23. Would that be part of the subdivision? A. Yes is would. 24. SUBJ. to widening Elizabeth? A. I can't really answer that. TED... We have to be careful of supreme court decision -case could be made/we'll have to think about it PAI(46 3/} 0 f A. There will be some buffering along the front. We may put in a tree lawn, a 4 to 5 feet walkway, and then a 3 to 4 foot shrub line ... <masonry wall> 8. Who is responsible for the upkeep of this development? A. The area will be commonly owned. <detention pond/front green... ground> ...will be part of the homeowners' association. The front yards will be taken care of by the individual lot owners. 9. If I live on Timber Lane or Rocky Road, how close will this be to us? If it's a 2 story, what happens to our view? A. They are fairly deep back yards, so about 50 to 70 feet apart. A#2. The outer lots could be 1 story ---I story development. (There's less square footage in a ranch.) 10. When I moved to Rocky Road, I was told that no one would ever build in that area because of the high water tables. A. Water table drops after land is developed----- land no longer irrigated. 11. You are aware that the south ditch is in use? A. Perhaps it is. 12. You are going to have seepage..... A. There will be a water wall to prevent seepage... measures would be taken to mitigate 13. Are you anticipating these houses to have basements? A. Option for basements... - will depend on level of water table - ability for sewer elevation/ basement could be garden level 14. Then the houses we see here are no longer 1 story but 1 1/2? A. That's a possibility. , 15. <situation with basement and water table> The density is very high, unlike the surrounding homes. They're just small homes on small lots. It's not fitting to the neighborhood. I also don't understand how 16 homes fit there ..... consistency... PACE 26 PROJECT: DATE: APPLICANT: CONSULTANT: Plum Street P.U.D January 25, 1996 Doug Viita Ken Merritt STAFF: ' Mitch Haas, Planner ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ • 16 detached single-family homes in small cul-de-sac development • 1200 to 1400 square foot homes • $120,000 to $130,000 , 1. What is the average lot size? These look pretty small. A. The lots vary.... 50 foot frontage... 120 feet deep... 110 to 90 feet along back/rear 2. How does that compare to the existing neighborhood? A. There will be about 5 units per acre. They are smaller but not substantially smaller. We have pushed the houses to the side of the lots, creating more "yard space." 3. Does the density calculation exclude the street area? A. The calculation includes the totral area of the site ... density in the city includes the whole area. 4. I feel like this will look quite crowded compared to what's around it. 16 homes on 3 acres is ridiculous! ... I don't get developing the 3 acres, that's silly. 5. How many feet are there between the main road and this area? A. About 10 feet ... 15 feet front to back... 20 to 22 feet to back wall -- smaller homes. 6. Does that mean, back to Plum Street is 20 to 22 feet? A. About 50 feet off the current edge of the walk way. 7. One thing about the houses on Plum is that they all face Plum Street. These all face inward. �RRGG 14 TicniETING Did you receive Correct .�'� 1 f �} "' Ji1�T1i7.� Yi� i PlY Zip written notification Address? CODE of this meeting? NAME (Print) STREET ADDRESS YES NO YES NO oi� Ir 73o'f bfaevo5c,, -T(z LYN -1 F)EA-V-- 8es2i X \\Gv - Cs� c 1 5 46. Thank you for your cooperation with the neighborhood. 47. It looks like you really took our comments and concerns into consideration. 48. What is the time line on this PUD? Mitch... June 24 is the scheduled date for this to go before the P8Z Board for Preliminary approval, then it would have to go through Final review which is also a 9 week process. - up to 2 months or so for - probably couldn't start building any sooner than winter/October, 1996. Meeting broke-up/adjourned at this point. 39. Will there be sidewalks along the south side of Plum? A. The existing one will stay. -and connections will be made into and throughout the development 40. What size will the sidewalks be? A. ... same ... 4 feet 41. Most of Pear is all electric. Will these homes have gas? A. Yes... <How much to switch my house? ... > 42. On the original preliminary drawing, one thing I liked was that it didn't have a garage right on the street. Will the ones that face Plum still have recessed garages? A. The city likes that ... and that's been the direction they've been pushing us in. We have no objection to recessing the garage doors and pulling the front doors and porches up to the front of the house. 43. What will be the average square footage of the houses? A. About 1200 square feet, and not garden level 44. Will the architecture be the same as was shown in the last meeting? A. We now have different size lots, so the architecture will have to be adjusted... still working on it 45. Is the developer's main thrust to earn lots of money?.... -are lots for sale, without homes? A. It is not my intention to sell the lots without a contract to build the home, but of course, "everything has its price." 30. The problem for me is the high density here ... and there. A. The proposed project before us is not high density. This is low. 31. Are the lot sizes the same in the new development? It looks like it's scaled down. A. The average size of these lots is significantly larger than they were at the 1st meeting. 32. Is the open space required by the city? A. Yes... as detention. 33. What will you do with it? A. Detain stormwater/runoff so that it can be released at acceptable levels. 34. This plan is a great improvement over before. Congratulations! 35. Will you still have the same landscaping along Plum? A. No. That will be left up to the individual home owner. -there will be a privacy fence along the west and south boundaries. 36. Is there any way to address the traffic? We can't have pedestrian access. Is there anything we can do? Mitch... traffic calming could be considered, speed bumps, cul-de-sacs, etc. But with just 13 lots, a traffic study is not required, and improvements are normally required as called for by the traffic studies. Without the study, no off site improvements would be required. 37. (Dev.)We can be sure that traffic is kept to a minimum by overall design. 38. 1 live on the northeast corner of Plum .... we get runoff in the winter --runs down the street and we get 3 to 4 feet of frozen ice covering the sidewalk and part of the street. When that runs down in the winter, you'll have a massive thaw. Mitch... the stormwater detention should manage the release rates. A. The run off from the site will not increase the rate. 23. It's not definite? A. Well, there are many private haulers, but we can consider writing that into the covenants. 24. Who decides on a pedestrian access from PUD/Elizabeth? (because buses pick-up on Eliz.) A. That would be through private property, and that property owner would have to be willing to provide an access easement across his/her property. If that property should ever want to develop, the City would require such a connection. 25. (To Mr. Mitzelfeld, the owner of the land to the south) You're not willing to sell or to provide this access easement? A. No, absolutely not. 26. Has there been any determination to power to this property? If it goes through, could they fix the power to my property? A. Service is available, beyond that (for more info.) you'll have to call Light and Power. 27. 1 know the average density figures about 4 homes per acre? ... Yes?... -has anyone gathered information for our neighborhood -are we talking more than our fair share? ... (of density?) Mitch... It's probably not too radically different from any other new neighborhoods. 28. This is different. This is not a new neighborhood. -also not a through street A. The city goal is mixed density. -It may not make people thrilled..... 29. It's good density and good planning that make a good neighborhood. That's our goal. 14. They're not garden level? A. No, any and all basements will be fully underground. So, a one story unit will actually be one story, not one and a half. The same for two story units. 15. 1 think it's better to have 1 '/ stories than 2. 16. Density-- there are a few areas where they are packed in --- in our neighborhood -they look out of place -lots of complaints 17. Will they still use a "zero lot line" configuration? A. No, we did away with that. Each home will sit more or less in the center of its lot. 18.. What is the size of the lots on the west side? A. This one is approximately 56' x 103' deep ... or close to 6000 s.f. on average. 19. Will all of the homes be done by the same builder? A. Yes — I am the developer and builder, too. 20. Will the homes on lots 11-13 face West Plum? A. Yes, these four units will face West Plum and take access off W. Plum, too. 21. Will there still be a home owners' association? A. Yes, all have the same water detention; this common area makes the HOA necessary. 22. Could they all have a common garbage hauler? -would cut down on some traffic Mitch... It's up to the home owners association, but we (the City) strongly and consistently recommend consolidation of trash hauling service. 6. On Minatta project....... (Siena PUD) - will their's effect the pressure zone? A. No. They are in the Foothills zone. - Boundaries may some time be adjusted, but that is not scheduled at this point. 7. We were told it wouldn't effect our water and it has. 8. 1 appreciate the assurance, but the pressure is affected. What if the water pressure is affected, then what do we do? A. - complain to the Water and Wastewater Department; eventually, the pressure zone boundaries could be adjusted to include your neighborhood in the Foothills Pressure Zone. 9. Would there a way to remedy it? A. It can be adjusted. It can be done. -additional water mains would have to be built, probably as a capital project. 10. Where does the money come from? (to fund) A. City expense - Developer's pay water acquisition and plant investment fees at the time of building permit issuance. $$$ goes to a special fund for "fix up' - capital improvements. 11. What is the size of the water main? A. ... 6" water and 8" sanitary. 12. 1 just wanted to know how far it ran. A. Mitch the lines run through/in the streets. 13. Are the houses basically ranch style except the 2 story options? A. Yes, plus these are very deep lots, making for a good amount of room between these units and your homes. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING MINUTES PROJECT: West Plum Street PUD DATE: May 6,1996 APPLICANT: Doug Viita CONSULTANT: Dennis Messner STAFF: Mitch Haas, Planner ---------------------------- 1. Why the dramatic change in plans? Why isn't Pear going straight through? A. The city doesn't want any more street access/curb cuts onto Elizabeth. 2. Was better access the reason for the changes? 3. Does the water line that would be tapped into run in Plum St.? A. Yes... 4. Will our water pressure be negatively affected? A. ROGER BUFFINGTON: Pressure zones boundaries for the Foothills Pressure Zone are to the west of this site. This is in the main pressure zone. I cannot make any guarantees, but your pressure really should not be noticeably affected. It should remain at no less than 24 psi. 5. 18 PSI for me is a good day... A. ROGER: That sounds low... - 24 PSI- summer - if at 18 PSI ... I'd investigate - summer- 35 PSI/hopefully above - in the mid 80's-pressure zone established (started as pump stations -then storage tanks) - 50 PSI difference on each side of the boundary George R. Mitzelfeld 2620 W. Elizabeth Ft. Collins, CO 80521 (303) 224-5610 me vwy a, iaaV Project No: PIA-195-96 Mr. Mitchell Haas Current Planning 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522-0580 Re: West Plum Street- P.U.D., Preliminary/Final (#10-96A) Dear Mr. Haas, On behalf of our client, the applicant for the proposed West Plum Street - P.U.D., we are requesting a variance to the Solar Orientation requirement of the Land Development Guidance System. All Development Criterion A-1.1 requires a minimum of sixty five percent (65%) of the lots meet the definition of a solar oriented lot. Three (3) lots within the proposed development meet the definition of a solar oriented lot. Therefore, only twenty three percent (23%) of the lots meets the solar orientation requirement. The site being considered for development has several physical constraints that preclude designing the development to optimize the solar orientation. The constraints are: 1. The site abuts existing development having a North - South orientation. 2. The long axis of the site is the North - South direction. 3. The City has required that Pear Street be extended from the North through the site to the South. 4. The primary circulation through the site is in the North - South direction rather than the East - West direction that is necessary to meet the solar definition. We feel that the request for variance is justified on the following grounds; 1. That by reason of exceptional conditions or difficulties with regard to solar orientation or access, undue hardship would be caused to the subdivider by the strict application of all provisions of Section A-1.1 2. The plan submitted is equal to or better than such plan incorporating the provisions fcr ,.hich the variance is requested. We sincerely appreciate your consideration of this request. If you should have any questions or desire additional information, please feel free to contact this office Respectfully Submitted, MESSNE glneering Associates Dennis R. Messner, P.E. cc: Viita Building Company Civil and Environmental Engineering Consultants 150 E. 29th Street, Suite 225 Loveland, Colorado 80538 Telephone: (970) 663-2221 RECEIVED J U L 2 2 1996 July 10, 1996 Ron Williams 913 Timber Ln. Ft. Collins, CO 80521 (970)493-0793 Mitchell Haas City Planner City of Fort Collins Dear Mitch: I talked with you over the phone some time ago regarding the West Plum Stree P.U.D. I am not opposed to the development of the vacant land adjacent to my property. I am concerned, however, with the possibility of a tall, two-story residence being built such that my view and privacy are interfered with. We have lived in our home for 27 years and would hate to have our privacy invaded. I believe that the development, if done properly, will enhance the value of my home and that of the neighborhood. Weed and pest control would certainly be helped. Please make my feelings made known with the development of this land so we can happily live in the neighborhood our children were raised in. Sincerely, Ron Williams SCHOOL PROJECTIONS Proposal: # 10-96A West Plum Street PUD - Preliminary Description: 13 single family residential units Density: 4.3 du/ac (gross) General Population: 13 (single family units) x 3.2*(persons/units) = 42 School Age Population: Elementary: 13 (units) x .120 (pupils/unit) = 2 Junior High: 13 (units) x .055 (pupils/unit) = 1 Senior High: 13 (units) x .050 (pupils/unit) = 1 TOTAL = 4 *Figures assume a mix of 2- and 3-bedroom single family residential. rFarnad Criterion Credit If it can be demonstrsood that the project will reduce noes removable energy usage either through the application of alternative energy 1 system or through committcd energy conservation measures beyond those normally required by City Code, a 5% bonus may be earned for every 5% reduction in energy use. '> Calculate a 1%bonus for every 50 acres included in the project m Calculate the percentage of the total acres in the project that are devoted to recreational use. Enter'fi of that percentage as a borma 11 If the applicant commits to preserving permanent off -site open space that meets the City's minnnum m requirements, calculate the O percentage of this open space acreage to the total development acreage and enter this percentage as a bonus. ifpwt of the total development budget is to be sped on neighborhood public transit facilities which are not required by City Code, P enter a 2% bonus for every $100 per dwelling unit invested 'SB". if part ofthe total development budga is to be spent on neighborhood facilities and services which are not otherwise required by City q Code, enter a 1% bonus for every 5100 per dwelling unit invested 0 Ifthe projed eodamv dwtllung w u set aside for individuals earning g0%or leas of the median income of City residents, as adjusted for family size, and paying less then 30% of their gross income for horsing, including utilities ("Affordable levelling Units"), 1, calculate the percentage of Affordable Dwelling Units to the total number of dwelling units in the project and enter that percentage as a boas, up to a naximnm of 15% (Ifthe projed is proposed to be constructed in multiple phases, the Affordable Dwelling Units must he constructed as a part ofthe plane for which approval is sought) In order to insure that the Affordable Dwelling Units remain �T affordable for a period of not less than 25 years, the developer shall record such protective covenants as may be required by the City under Sec. 29-526(JX4). If a commitment is being made to develop a specified percentage of the total number of dwelling units for Type "A" and Type "B" handicapped housing as defined by the City of Fort Collins, calculate the bonus as follows: TTT 3 Type "A" .5 x Type "A" Units Total Units In no case shall the combined bonus be greater than 300/6 Type "B" 1.0 x Tvoe "B" Units Total Units If the site or adjacent property contains a historic building or place, a bows may be earned for the following: t 3% For preventing or mitigating outside influences adverse to its preservation (eg. environmental, land use, aesthetic, economic and social factornr 3% Far assuring that new slnnc uu m will be m keeping with the ctaractc of the building or plane, while avoiding total units; 3% For proposing adaptive use of the building or place that will lead to its continuance, preservation and hmprovemem in an appropriate manner Ifa portion or all ofthe required parking in the multiple family project is provided underground, within the building, or in an elevated perking structure as an accessory use to the primary structure, a bonus may be earned as follows: u 9% For providing 75% or more of the parking in a struchve; 6% For providing 50 - 74 A of the panting in a structure; 3% For providing 25 - 49°/a of the parking in a structure. Ifa cemmrtnvt is being made to povide approved automatic fire extinguishing systems for the dwelling units, eater a bonus of 10°h V If the applicart commits to providing adequate, safe and convenient pedestrian and bicycle connections between the project and any W of the destination points described below, calculate the bonus as follows: [� 5% For connecting to the nearest existing City sidewalk and bicycle path/lane•, 5% For connecting to any existing public school, lark and transit stop within the distances as defined in this Density Chart; 5% For connecting to an existing City bicycle trail which is adjacent to or traverses the project TOTAL <OZ Maximum Earned iterion Credit Credit 2000 feet of an existmg neighborhood service center, or a neighborhood service center to be constructed as a part 20"h a afthe project (if the project is proposed to be constructed in multiple phases, such neighborhood servica center *7 must be constructed as a part of the phase for which approval is soughQ b 650 fed of an existing transit stop (applicable only to projects having a density of at least six [6] dwelling units 20% per acre on a grm+ acreage basis) 4000 fed of an exexisting community/regional shopping cents, a m� a eornity/regional shopping artier to be 10% C constructed as a part of the project. (If the project is proposed to be constructed in multiple phases, such community/regional shopping caua must be constructed as a part of the phase for which approval is sought) 3500 fed ofan existing neighborhood or eomonrty park or a community facility (EXCEPT GOLF COURSES}. 20% 20 or 914-P_�91----------------- ---------- ------ d 3500 fed of a publicly owned, but not developed, neighborhood or community park, or community facility 10% (EXCEPT GOLF COURSES) or 3500 feet of a publicly owned golf course, whether developed or not 100/0 2500 fed of an existing school, meeting all requirements of the State of Colorado compulsory education laws 1046 e r 3000 fed of as existing major employment centa, or a major employment center to be constructed as a pat of 20% 1 the project (Ifthe project is proposed to be corstructed in multiple phases, such major employment nests must be constructed as a pat of the phase for which approval is sought) No building, office or business park, or shopping center which his served as the basis for the claiming of credit under any other "base" criteria of this Density Chart can also be used as the basis for claiming credit under this criterion. .. 1000 feet of an existing child care center, a a child care aNer to be constructed as a pat of the project (If the 5% a b project is proposed to be constructed in multiple phases, such child care center must be constructed as a part of the phase for which approval is sought) $ "North Fort couins" 20% IThe Central Business District 20% A project whose boundary is contiguous to existing urban development. Credit may be earned as follows: 30% 0% For projects whose property boundary has 0 - l0a/o contiguity; 10 - 15% For projects whose property boundary has 10 - 20a/o contiguity; 15 - 20% For projects whose property boundary his 20 - 30%con iguit)r 0 20 - 25% For projects whose property boundary has 30 - 40% contiguity; 25 - 30% For projects whose property boundary has 40 - 50% contiguity. Ifthe project contains dwelling units set aside for individuals earning 80%or less of the median income of City 15% residents, as adjusted for family size, and paying less than 30% of their gross income for housing, including k "' im ("Affwdabk Dn+el'O"bits'I ralcrdde the percentage of Affordable Dwelling units to the total numbs ofdwelling units in the project and enter that percentage, up to a maximum of 15% (If the project is proposed to be constructed an multiple phases, the Affordable Dwelling Units mud be constructed as a put of the phase for wbkh approval is sought_) In order to insure that the Affordable Dwelling Units remain affordable for a period efnot less thin 25 years, the deveiopa shs0 record such protective covenants as maybe required by the City undo Sec. 29-526(JX4} 51 eos fbirrr.-r (SUR-TO-ML) -- WEsr t'L_t m C N I/z l(o- 7- CTIVITY: �sidential Uses EFMTION: residential uses. Uses would include single family attached dwellings, townhomes, duplexes, bile homes, and multiple family dwellings; group homes; boarding and rooming houses; :ernity and sorority houses; nursing homes; public and private schools; public and non-profit Lsi-public recreational uses as 'a principal use; uses providing meeting places and places for ilic assembly with incidental office space; and child care centers. The following applicable criteria must be answered "yes" and implemented within the development plan. Yes No N/A 1. DOES THE PROJECT EARN THE MINIMUM PERCENTAGE POINTS AS CALCULATED ON THE FOLLOWING "DENSITY CHART IT'FOR THE PROPOSED DENSITY OF THE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT? The required earned credit for a residential project shall be based on the following: fi�0 percentage points = 6 or fewer dwelling units per acre 60 - 70 percentage points = 6-7 dwelling units per acre 70 - 80 percentage points = 7-8 dwelling units per acre 80 - 90 percentage points = 8-9 dwelling units per acre 90 -100 percentage points = 9-10 dwelling units per acre 100 or more percentage points = 10 or more dwelling units per acre 2. DOES THE PROJECT EARN AT LEAST 40 Yes No N/A PERCENTAGE POINTS AS CALCULATED ON THE FOLLOWING "DENSITY CHART H" FROM BASE POINTS? Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments. The City of Fort Collins, Colorado. Revised as per Ordinance No. 2, 1996. -10-94A: WEST NO'Mee ' ND) FkSMIMaq+FINAL Activity A: ALL DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA ALL CFITE A I ^ APFL!CABLE CIR1TE=1A CNLY C=ITE=1CN A1. CCMMUNiT!-''•!VIDE CRITEFIA. i.1 Sci2r CnEri-a-icn L C .r"'Crerar�•` Plan l.- e I . , Icn 1. Wiiclii:e Dec csi: i. p �.I( �U2iICV :`e =-;erien Will the c.. tericri acclicacfe9 be satistiecl I y a o� Yes INo If no, please explain - �G=--_ , A.I n Ve - Eike Pi2-cr7cr•t 2rC pr:-r:tp-. r= L .. .��'(;^irc `cl,-... �:'C Vln`Nc I I ✓1 L V I 2.iL ac. Q I✓I✓I L. 2.14 Sic-s I I ! I _2.15 Site 'ci Unc L✓I fI I , 2. IC Ncis-e and V;crar;cn i✓ 11/1 I 2.17 Gear cr Hea I I I ✓I 2.18 'r,a__rccus I'V1E;Erials I I I 3. ENGINEERING CRITERIA 3.1 Utiiir/ CECECaV ✓I 3.2 Ceslan Standar.:s 3.3 Werer Ha-arCis a.4 Gecicglc HaZ_rcS I I_/I Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments i ne City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised �5 1994JUS _ - 61 - I Engineering Associates 1. 2. 3. 3. 4. R 6. 7. WEST PLUM STREET - P. U.D. PROPOSED LAND USE DATA Zoning: Existing Zoning: RL - Low Density Residential Proposed Zoning: RP - Planned Residential Property Description: Refer to attached description. Density: Lots = 13 Gross Site Area = 3.05 ± acres Net Site Area = 2.55 ± acres 4.3 D.U./Acre - Gross Density 5.1 D.UJAcre - Net Density Minimum Lot Area = 5,768 sq. ft. ± Maximum Lot Area = 12,711 sq. ft. ± Average Lot Area = 6,994 sq. ft. ± Proposed Utility Service: Proposed Water Service: City of Fort Collins Proposed Sewage Service: City of Fort Collins Proposed Electric Service: City of Fort Collins Proposed Solid Waste Disposal: Private Hauler Proposed Telephone Service: U S WEST Communications Proposed Natural Gas Service: Public Service Company Proposed Cable Television Service: Columbine Cablevision Easements: Streets and easements shall be provided as the principal location for access and utilities. A fifteen (15) foot wide utility and drainage easement to be dedicated along all front lot lines adjacent to street right-of-way. A ten (10) foot wide utility and drainage easement to be dedicated along all rear lot lines. Setbacks: Setbacks are to be established as: From Front property line - Twenty (20) foot, minimum From Rear property line - Twenty (20) foot, minimum From Side property line - 0 foot, minimum with a minimum of ten (10) feet between structures Parking: A minimum of two (2) off-street parking spaces are to be provided per house. Parking spaces located within driveways and garages are included. Addressing: Lot addresses to be determined by the City of Fort Collins Building Department. 8. Open -Space Maintenance: All private open -space on individual lots is to be maintained by the property owner. All private open -space designated by separate tract reference is to be owned and maintained by the developments Home Owners Association. Civil and Environmental Engineering Consultants 150 E. 29th Street, Suite 225 Loveland, Colorado 80538 Telephone: (970) 663-2221 WEST PLUM STREET - P. U. D. City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado Plannine Obi_e_ ttiiv The housing structures within this development are to be single-family detached homes.The proposed homes are intended to provide affordable housing for the low to moderate income family. The proposed houses are to provide a basic structure with a kitchen, living area, three bedrooms and two bathrooms. The homes are to have 1,200 to 1,500 square feet of finished living area. Single level, "Ranch," and "two - story" homes are to be constructed. Each home is to have an unfinished basement and an attached two car garage as a part of the basic construction. The site plan has been designed to position each house along a side lot line in order to provide the lots open space in one more usable area. Lots have been arranged and houses positioned to provide view lines within the development and for the existing neighboring homes. The homes are to have an architectural style that is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The anticipated style is used throughout the development in order to maintain the quality of the project. The proposed development is within easy walking or bicycling distance of nearby schools, parks and shopping. The developments sidewalks are to be integral with the curb and gutter in order to provide a more usable front yard space. In addition to parallel parking that will be available along the streets, there will be off-street parking spaces developed in the cul de sac. Access to employment centers and neighborhood shopping centers is readily available by way of the adjacent collector street, West Elizabeth Street. The proposed development site is not considered to be a natural area with upland or wetland potential. The site is not located within an officially designated floodplain. Tract "A" of the "West Plum Street - P.U.D." is to remain an undeveloped parcel. The development of this parcel is to be considered separately at a future date. The existing home on Tract "A" is to remain as the residence for Mr. Mitzelfeld, the site's owner. Pear Street is to be extended to the limits of Tract "A" in order to provide access for future development on Tract "A." The proposed open space/detention area tract is to be owned and maintained by the development's Home Owners Association. The private open space on each single-family residential lot, such as, yards, gardens, patios, etc., is be owned and maintained by each individual lot owner. If necessary, a maintenance easement will be provided on adjacent lots in order to allow access to provide maintenance along any `zero lot' side of a structure. Civil and Environmental Engineering Consultants 150 E. 29th Street, Suite 225 Loveland, Colorado 80538 Telephone: (970) 663-2221 M wme w Nruasw �nnmrn e-,. n. r n w.e i m frw.vermp o m. eM m r mn,ee`�.I. Raper e. car u w W cM er Epn cmn.. 1,N rtA,,,wN Alw zwwN WeNN awwnA. AVT.rea p m. rmm+bq xw±g mwe n m. cM er ren cemn. np aii ' Zee nq�d anp111K111LF n alTller0. Ibl : Naepn.nW N PMmr. N .auwJa W � uN P.rnh nN. TNtl egelMie+ ee. ccmrinTNN n 5lelvxsa y.:np,n � �i1 M IRn eM rvhM a Sertu.`�N�Ir+nw.eeme .r!Wrt ' Ml samFYlxc. xc. = N^Bw.®Ne p... lM awl..1 pen re. f-.. J �ewww mp Lj w r Ignm�ln.+. e�i.ff..ironnwa Yan + rti new �+.. Na T \ aA p W .whqu Mvn Meem. M. 1n,. T RfNil- 1N700'00 S a5'M'00 E 21.21 M.55 15.00 15.00 S M'33'00 W 21.21 23.55 15.00 15.00 W005i 5 ]PM'00 E 50.00 5238 2B.B) W.00 P3B5z S 05'1a25 E B.a1 B.a2 a.22 50.00 SP21 m S 35'1a'25' E a2.Sa a3.9a M.50 MOO IC2 12000'S0 s W2500 E ".60 10a.72 am 50.0E STJB'W s aT35a0 E M91 "M 15.10 MOO K ID S IPM'20 W M.tl T.M aB." W-00 OPSB 1 N BPOB 52 E a2.01 1202 1.01 B19.a1 O M' N Ba'3r22 E 57.M 5).Rn 2B.Ba B19AI OTQ'0a N BF]0'32 E moo 5a.IN1 27.31 e19.a1 03'MSB N WOU'02w E a5.27 a5.27 22.Ba B1B.41 PLAT OF- WEST PLUM STREET A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT A TRACT OF LAND IN THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 69 WEST s.puwl le,nN ;f OF THE 61h P.M.. CITY OF FORT COLLINS. COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO s PM'f; ' E s Ovvland Subdivls{prl 295AT N BP !r w j Emt upe NEU 71L17' S OPM'00' E 15-7-62 mp8'S9'00' we't lolum 5tr-®t h w/T..P.O.R Fww Srµ Awoar Rw519.{5' _ w/ Cm uT L-99.55' 99.5 N. 59'35'00 "E 9r N 58'OS'30' E L12 N 59'35'00E - 175.00 1_ s ww'30' w _ CB C10 __ f0.00- �IN�°� °1O�° IC SC R.W ].IW B' galrlpge s UNIIOr =72 8' °� °�rlmt 1 u li eNn Ctlp �LSe12V4 MY 0 e13 8 13 g a °yya R = ..le : rr0ct B snml a wwnm ana 1B3.0].CU' p l ^ xr q,ft I Tlse) NtintpineE Oy the Npmromers S BP35'00' W b. w"� 6 W' i neeoc teNt Tmct 8 �s ne.eny w B])� p e ueGcp.. a EI A, a and 2 IP dpl 4 Wllly p menl in ils entirctY. $ 5)M w A F•R {eo.w 5Bw 0' - 8 10100' a m.ii N !P]B'011' E - 1)1.00' 1W 1'n If P * 4 5P]5'W w jai A 10 S N iz BB32 an14 57M IIR.R 103.o0' w :+ g l � A gl w� ra5•a0aw 57M p{I G R G ".R 10].00' r r35.00' w 57M p.N. w ��0444 Q ~ s ers0 B e2u p.R 11-ta3.l 10 t�12.05'r _ W� -1w oN,wN,Oe s MIRY EmwnWa L2 n�Illl� c 5' : sAm pxl Opwx uumMaMM 77.00' m"' _ ionitlw era we er W I.., a.�wne.a wM, le ww"i iwtl e.lns ml m. e. n.n ane ']5'OO' E I • uw « . x.. Mn Mn w e nn eew es w.I I"' Ie. * e mn01w.wnr w 1DOG e0.R r 8 W x.npwl IM Imo..' PES'00' n Nw�UeWm1 � WM .weeJ`5.� 1 oe �ry Seul. 0` Eae1e`o a ell nn.lo.; seuln q Ife.l ff- E f, .P3 NThml 1.x90.M BPJS'Jff rff N BP35'00' E y - b+ pep , w Wand 1 1 .l 'I. x5�1 ^s. ea' M1et core x fwl. ]�x.19 Ixl a IM su Mn.l ewm er le m m n ^M uMl of e..w.d `Wim"wn-I. B to 1 .1 ld ff Msf5 .nc. e ! .o1l 1. m m .ala a.�ne smmpyl u�� in as T oe� w..l laeop� r. I mU[ a�ert ar e[elnrme. 11821 ap.R . w ovxs».Iplw, Ilwm nJe'pv' Low roan Iwt le m. Sou1M..l cw , !I . M M4 M 5,ifism ewarMp le IM pM w � In 182.20' Ilw.ne.w o.ne tlM M Suhl'naa SeuM Wx5'W [ael.e U5 luln re..ln..IwX.f"I ...r fn.. te... pw.a nae .. Mrlr .pM-w-.or N BP]5'00' E _ �I.rP 1 "'f" Bnuam sebanrvo+ wa >��oo' a is..5� rm I Io on M .w,.ne pM If Mygel an M LM.M en N.owtlw H aY Win., nwhe Itixe amy ;M mrlenrwmure.ry el .ae laeae. 5uwiwrw. eon 9'0l'.' 7 11014 p,R N.6) I.el m cemm W am penpne supplNsf Wise I1.1 .M.wM rv.n peunawr d a pwl..a swalnwn Nen wlrrJe'm- cmi ers i°5 �s 1n MO6'l11' fe.1. If ry enegleW e�a6ffI `590'pweM 'o uw Mr .een Mn fIfffIMIf to*Soum8..3 x I. , 1 an., of 5B'OC esos'w' [eat. _- 1 qr..i 1.1l"1. Inc core oa I of sve cum Sr 9a 1W. I.— rlen p eplspp- emc Trpcl A axxe. .r. (run.. pr.wn.n] Nate: WMn Tract A erov,o^ P.r Street ,.11 Se aA.ndW M proMae p01k elrwt accae. for Troet A 20.00'j 'ry 11177 r oow W - JB1:w N 5P]5'00' W F- 0wPµ .xn t Il.e Been aenN.a eeraa ewnw sb2 ¢ram, mw. If Im. mmfer a ,WpIGMw w rssexxrs M yaw.9 �b.e ceuW W.p11 amc m ItS, IKu. S'rFECIa- PU.D MRV IlUene�'npnb o^ar.cen'er�..n 0 ae+.nak.l�p'1�1 b1. eli me 111 T.. ueaw a.elcol. a+e f-I Ie III r nam eawrlw."1' e:: .roe: ��wn i�� eMw.•nam is N I: If "If yycMea: e31 �mn �� r w M.rrwb eaAaad 'ew.e ml .w • tea p al nMo, . ep.n w w�p'�`Ilw lmw enT��Inae Ynecmbee um I ' wu•.m�nem w .e.e..bM1w,� raln.w a, neM.pnane .wn In. n _ aw m no .me N gP a yA � /'a Sens sort If, carom !_ wM 0w Ist2na cpmrc a VmNS 1` tM lorwene er e/'e`rnwx E ISie wl:wrweMm`ww wy 9enlm $plNl Mlle a NOMw�t OuOrtn semmN wN .row row. I... ul. _ ear a .5. I»e j M.BP 18-7-0 w PiI. 11B.b'r �trttn 9en[n Cerra m 1B-7-A. P.M. !sue R2eFbsE� 1 E4 oR E.�6daTie�IS gre _ _ was .rz. ... As . wm...d .d .r.r ...rw. MI pl0nt aunwi MDR: candi .eh cuafters MN .tm m. Ipr Np. t Grolier mplxbl numry el-. farm m mwt r... shim..pwIfifti ALI own areas am at ae -..a amass a terewe wen, Seqa +hell w r plead at 50e raatad WMdt9rd..: M we.tem Y.9wvt9rvar. dM ]aS Bi arena. ilk m4pmum dpplwaion rote for M e.N mIr had I. 12 awards M m./a 1NIa ie a 'DSylvnd' 1. mixture Land ne :swish system d proposals. .1 Mi and flower dads alai oft, matches to an a.eraq. ]' depth eith paw Win,, Rn MNd grouping. blame :n wawa .1. Nat be ethanol Own rod by P era by 1/0' draft a -I .dam. -1 w i .im I e tee el som /ocx mwcn .. 1. w a m:mmum at dean. oVP six 16) all Mtn franc . dampnM wad w 1- la ]-I,z' w.lwa r:er agprwae o fertility DIaMe with ]I gram Apsym m Slew Fawew 20-10-5 rooters. Plate feelers :n dadX011 mix Did Dmi Ala Iem. Its Wam.1n of mavan and bath w,In om pan should ....ton pwr ana me pan. -tarot. woo x n- Its [q.yei when must w abta:a. Iwm tM City rambler Were any . a ...be by nvlmor on me IaM.caw ae, ae pan., purrs ar hp.w,l nn me Wart r,sM-rl-rq. r The Owner or nw awmwe npmwnta:w to auanty cmi all plant material prior to fwrhilmuon. lc NI Cxielmg teas stall be pruned m the City rah-f-i'm.ium wu. prepare.'. L.T:ng I— to be .v.... w now. ash pro -went gwbli vran MNare Ire. aimed am rat to de .mash, 1My amuw w gelected to alp meta p .d ... I.w, nervy equipment should no, m allowed to camera the wit ell- the mat rote of existing trade. 13. band cutting surmle Turks .mirerr possible. Siw.aes and among IeWe Mould be wawa sunai.nq a where .rim .ruing. la Boot pas from d.cara em enMlld M derw mb:dw. Sm ddn dual cuts NwW w Tubes, defend beam the rootil bPn o chwrcr 10 ay but pq weer tm o- International, 15. NI kae.c.Wns map dw manes or wcumd ... an :now.. lets o1 trei ..a wa...t ar wnort.c. bend to, 125% al Im Mwabw at the mm.aw es Tomcataxed on this plan pap to the lssuonca Cif a CMdicab of b."my 16 uinn chamber; :n epwws and plant Iowlene may be mow a,elrlg c mm on aue to aw eolWuona. 17 .1 area thew. I.... am dart they, to . maawd w am:v:dual its shall be inpeY., anigvW and maintained by the ..Mars! worn 10 the 'lotion system anal ce reviewed and approved by the Chile Water and wasw.oar, Ex ting Curt, Gutter and Sidewalk West Plum H iz _ — , ,a•ac, ni SH-Sui-Oc— Ma c c _ LL 3 GL o _Tr per pe d iNV t t red. I\v H Open - ;, Space .0° 15G•oc Non -Irrigated Dryland Cis 50% Crested Wheatgrass --=J 30% Western Wheatgrms _ _ --- - - _ 20% Ellue Groma y__GC is _j' / l T t Note. pro Gut r d 4idewalk Curb, Allbe other lawns and plant Gutter 8 Sidewalk beds to be installed, irri- gated gated maintained by Proposed 6' High Solid Wood Fence individual property owner. I 10 Department me I. ustrubdure .1 . fluxes, Permit "TER CONSUMKION SUMMARY .. ,. • .. ... .. ... y^^^^ 7m""ienm'�=f:nl��'Se4 i fr 7"iM is nallmorefor Imm all water.. ....it r�arr-^1r�sor..r�lRewhad �II �G9� el 1�[1r.• • No women afteds will be .. . adds attv ^1�w�rx :w�l .�1(Lz"1�=■tCz red, �1 I^lull 6 I�d�Pm'� _ .. • •. - •...• f'il"•nwT^fir+^'Sf]^S<��R1>r I.,al.'r'w^TTrm'I T'7.I,e1�laYf'tll'ly:'�R4I1�Ii6L1� �. F•Si1fIIFi wase I.�e'•�h-�r."^red.y:.a.�o�rx�yvr.��.-.�ra��•�rml� 22 sh ..,.I oft. Lawns." I l.n.bulloom shush ba . by .1m, earn n. wax .. U�aM Sh"i ensure am are mityllatim plan Is CoOrdefindual with Me plans done by other memblaft. .. that the vropi grading. storm drainage of other comitruclion does not -mi will wor wasecoss. Ingratiation and marrano— of andweass, .'.-.his an the pit, Stop w Corti mc.r+.t _ z 31a1 Refer lv Kay lot S.1mi At .r Came. N. ICrain;mgwddmw s.pw ryswet sgnot na:cmaa. aPaQ accpwnp Ir am•. Tyhtnliy IrepCUe tM Number of 'mes s to 1! lassaN - ldoE 0 is c 0 G 7 S4Q v Ir.da L ?wt- _ W l i 3 J L LT. JYLIi:.:tl4 iCA.r 85.L�I;iL ]Mob at, wmftin p.?-1g5-gE SrtEE' 3f _ T a�� \71-L`lT.l TT� M A P PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: uN nwA ,V 19.mtr •4 tends t xenn. R.niP w ww o,,P;,. 6» w e�r-a'�a�eNtl �. tee, ,. .,. e..e� .. e�e,wo e..�.aw ,I. Ntl. ter. , se ,•..�. W .el. .... Rla M m W. oDnr tl �....� .,..m.e w .. x� �. ..An ✓ e•9a Nm.�...1..� wmN n oFsra ti�. Wn ..n.n.� � _N. I..m -S s " �+' T T RS eF M EMY O" 1995. +NE �E^S GNEO RARIES ARE THE SOLE OWNERS OF RF^.aRO OF IE REML v OSOR19EO'I ME ABOIE SRE PIN It CONStRUEO IN C.RS. ._":SENS TO T..E OEVOORVENT OF SAO nR ER As SNOW. .- _ ., seO NV%. _ .:� 'IS'RUMEW WAS N NNOWLEDGEJ BEFORE LE TN5 _ OAr On . 1996 o RES: _ =N0 OtFCAL SUPL PLANNING AND ZONING CERTIFICATE -: I -re P:µNM L Ap ZONING 60 Or of :11 Or rORT ___ ::: i+_O ON +.,IS _ MT OF _ •9_6. WEST PLUM STREET A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT A TRACT OF LAND IN THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION 16. TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6fh P.M., CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO 1 West E'IIZAbRh{1 rJ1'l'66i LAND USE BREAKDOWN AREA, MW xarxJa n n 5se r aeJes avGmmi 1ss.rp n n JOS . ,[. Ol1nJfM,N.= .,, Ob n .,. DWELLING LINOS YttGIL-riq� 9ETAENE9 I1aNE5. _ torn uW+s -�J n SOIAM ORIENTEO LOTS J unN, x2x OENSOT W ..J a u xR 51 COVERAGE SINER N-aMl it.lal K. M1. 1911 T VNOIN6 A dIM149 ,a.LVO n. N qfN R WDafARaMt 0 q n 0 I fAY.Y, UM F. N e.! t grYN lyf fiS,Sxp 4 n. 4.S i, _ t9NL ORM 4'.¢ 6\Ja1 n. M1 "OR AR RIERNI x,.aov n. n. MINIMUM PAINUNG PRWIMD G.MC[/fY.VNr S! rp.w a«-slm, �S y�a� — _ .nNa.is -- swo.. 69 5p.w.NM wrt. uN.9.. ma/. en..m. w awneem nn,�.N .�ww-Fx m.e e..n ew9 W%IMUM BUILDING HEIGHT Jc n SETBACNS (UNLESS O ERW SE NOTED) 'Nan +s W ro n INn.nn w aew i1"'...e a a.,.a <Nr we..e w!9.. Na J n. �eeca +1 caNNEn Wa NCw za n. GCNI:RAI NOTFS wI�N mw„ tw w F...nnn...ol oI«r ene em..wen.. =�nsee.. „nR. nna .em, .vIN-a nm,n.n J ye^. enwo [ompv .0 M'N 1, CWreunnv a .nrNn�er�mn �. Pa,.a m .gal." ='.' - ,» 1.m..... n.n .wan . 1W., .n..w „,n,�,.. Te. a m.e...a,., ,e .00�n.""","". 6NNsaw .r . NMNe� r.M .,.��w.n ,...m. w....N� .+. rnr r.tlw.n,. �0 uM.cAFry en .minwei �W. n ,e s in.1YM an TwM m ,I.. n �LN„nen.n, n bra, e.em. ow, n enP'ntl`nw, v Ink yn n,n w prNitlW�rmia owr au menlmwe. M w�enee. tlennn on mn ebn Mxn..e n, • Aenn.etl tIN�+ o...Nv+m 1^0.o I e..eew ,w ee,tlw+. l n 4 DnelaPn to BYllai,,qq Ga P0. Bo. a 5 Fen Collins. Colora6a 00522 TaMP .i (970)A62-A5.9 NEn9In m ,M50 C 29n� SNmn9. Su M3J9 Lo.Nona. Gaama9 M38 'WL Two,mo a (VO) 6B]-2221 Survgor Inannill La,a su"win0 IMI N. CIM..d M. IuwbM. Caaoee M37 tm TN,.PenR (9M) 669-0515 a® . _ aD. cRWmMF mE.'..x::� r z � Q a c o In �a O aWS U �i�o 9g.0 Z Boo' q at ,� OjjQ M� �W� W 6 6 E-' rt. IbY )l.199e Nl: A6 D� NO 96A1 - nel..l W PU-195-96 aEET 1 Of I No Text 0 Engineering Associates Mr. Mitchell Haas Current Planning 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Port Collins, Colorado 80522-0580 Re: West Plum Street - P.U.D., Preliminary/Final (#10-96A) Dear Mr. Haas, July 9, 1996 Project No: PLA-195-96 On behalf of our client, the applicant for the proposed West Plum Street - P.U.D., we are requesting a variance to the Solar Orientation requirement of the Land Development Guidance System. All Development Criterion A-1.1 requires a minimum of sixty five percent (65%) of the lots meet the definition of a solar oriented lot. Three (3) lots within the proposed development meet the i i i r n90i1 c�.l._ 1..�.. �.. the definition of a solar oriented lot. Therefore, only twenty three percent (23%)'). o" Une lots r eets the solar orientation requirement. The site being considered for development has several physical constraints that preclude designing the development to optimize the solar orientation. The constraints are: 1. The site abuts existing development having a North - South orientation. 2. The long axis of the site is the North.- South direction. 3. The City has required that Pear Street be extended from the North through the site to the South. 4. The primary circulation through the site is in the North - South direction rather than the East - West direction that is necessary to meet the solar definition. We feel that the request for variance is justified on the following grounds; 1. That by reason of exceptional conditions or difficulties with regard to solar orientation or access, undue hardship would be caused to the subdivider by the strict application of all provisions of Section A-1.1 2. The plan submitted is equal to or better than such plan incorporating the provisions for which the variance is requested. We sincerely appreciate your consideration of this request. If you should have any questions or desire additional information, please feel free to contact this office Respectfully Submitted, MESSNEI ngineering Associates � Dennis R.. Messner, P.E. cc: Viita Building Company Civil and Environmental Engineering Consultants. 150 E. 291h Street, Suite 225 Loveland, Colorado 80538 Telephone. (970) 663-2221 West Plum Street PUD - Preliminary and Final, #10-96A July 22, 1996 P & Z Meeting Page 7 If the staff and the developer disagree over the provisions to be included in the development agreement, the developer may present such dispute to the Board for resolution. The Board may table any such decision, until both the staff and the developer have had reasonable time to present sufficient information to the Board to enable it to make its decision. (If the Board elects to table the decision, it shall also, as necessary, extend the term of this condition until the date such decision is made.) If this condition is not met within the time established herein (or as extended, as applicable), then the final approval of this planned unit development shall become null and void and of no effect. The date of final approval for this planned unit development shall be deemed to be the date that the condition is met, for purposes of determining the vesting of rights. For purposes of calculating the running of time for the filing of an appeal pursuant to Chapter 2, Article II, Division 3, of the City Code, the "final decision" of the Board shall be deemed to have been made at the time of this conditional approval; however, in the event that a dispute is presented to the Board for resolution regarding provisions to be included in the development agreement, the running of time for the filing of an appeal of such "final decision" shall be counted from the date of the Board's decision resolving such dispute. West Plum Street PUD - Preliminary and Final, #10-96A July 22, 1996 P & Z Meeting Page 6 6. Findings of Fact/Conclusions: A. The West Plum Street Preliminary and Final P.U.D. satisfies all of the applicable All Development Criteria of the LDGS, with the exception of the solar orientation requirement (A-1.1). B. A variance from the solar orientation requirement is justified under the Variance Procedures outlined in Section K of the LDGS; C. The request is supported by its performance on the Residential Uses Point Chart of the L.D.G.S. by achieving a score of 62. Of the 62 total points, 57 come from base criteria and 5 from bonus criteria; D. The proposed land use, site design and layout, and architecture are considered to be compatible with the surrounding area; and, E. The project is feasible from a traffic engineering perspective and promotes City transportation policies. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of 1) a variance from the solar orientation requirement (All Development Criterion A-1.1) of the LDGS, and 2) the West Plum Street Preliminary and Final P.U.D., #10-96A, subject to the following condition: 1. The Planning and Zoning Board approves this planned unit development final plan upon the condition that the development agreement, final utility plans, and final P.U.D. plans for the planned unit development be negotiated between the developer and City staff and executed by the developer prior to the second monthly meeting (September 23, 1996) of the Planning and Zoning Board following the meeting at which this planned unit development final plan was conditionally approved; or, if not so executed, that the developer or the City staff, at said subsequent monthly meeting, apply to the Board for an extension of time. The Board shall not grant any such extension of time unless it shall first find that there exists with respect to said planned unit development final plan certain specific unique and extraordinary circumstances which require the granting of the extension in order to prevent exceptional and unique hardship upon the owner or developer of such property and provided that such extension can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good. West Plum Street PUD - Preliminary and Final, #10-96A July 22, 1996 P & Z Meeting Page 5 Internal circulation will be accommodated by extending Pear Street from the north side of West Plum Street into the PUD, terminating in a cul-de-sac. The street will be a minimum of thirty-six (36') feet wide from flowline to flowline. Since views of the mountains from the existing residences to the east, as well as from the proposed dwellings, are a significant concern, the closest structure to the abutting property lines on the east will be over sixty feet from said property lines. Every other proposed unit would be more than a hundred (100') from the nearest easterly neighbor's property. Thus, views of the foothills should remain virtually unobstructed. The P.U.D. will continue the existing, formally spaced row of street trees along the West Plum Street frontage. In addition, sidewalk connections would be made from this development to the sidewalks along West Plum Street. The site is designed with sensitivity to the topography, mountain views, and visibility from adjacent lots/homes. 5. Transportation: The West Plum Street Preliminary and Final PUD is an infill project. Land uses in the area are primarily residential. The project is located near a bus route and major shopping and business centers. It is close to two active parks in Rogers Park (to the north) and Overland Park (to the south), and it is near schooling. Surrounding local and collector streets would provide easy access to the arterial system which includes West Elizabeth Street, West Mulberry Street, South Taft Hill Road and Overland Trail. Most local streets intersecting these arterials have stop sign control. The nearest signalized intersection is at West Elizabeth and Taft Hill Road. A traffic impact study was not required with this project because only thirteen units are proposed, thus it can be expected that the West Plum Street PUD will generate approximately 130 vehicle trip ends on a typical weekday at full build out. This will not have a significant impact on existing transportation systems. As mentioned, pedestrian circulation is provided by connecting sidewalks from within the development to West Plum Street. Pedestrian access to West Elizabeth Street was pursued; however, the abutting property owner was unwilling to grant the necessary easement (see attached letter). The proposed project has been designed such that if and when the adjacent property to the south develops, pedestrian access to West Elizabeth Street will be easily accommodated. In total, the West Plum Street Preliminary and Final P.U.D., is feasible from a transportation standpoint. West Plum Street PUD - Preliminary and Final, #10-96A July 22, 1996 P & Z Meeting Page 4 3. Neighborhood Compatibility Two neighborhood meetings were held; the first was on January 25, 1996 and the second was on May 6, 1996 (see attached minutes). Concerns raised at the first neighborhood meeting centered on lot sizes and density, general layout and lot orientation, view preservation, drainage, water pressure, and buffering between the existing, adjacent residences and the proposed dwellings. Between the first and second neighborhood meetings the applicant revised the plans significantly. The lots adjacent to the existing homes were adjusted to be substantially deeper than previously represented and the three lots along West Plum Street were changed to be oriented toward Plum Street. Also, the number of proposed units dropped from 16 to 13. These changes as well as some other minor adjustments seemed to satisfactorily address the neighborhood's concerns with regard to lot sizes, density, layout, orientation, view preservation, and buffering. The neighbors also expresses satisfaction with the assurance that drainage concerns would be handled in a manner acceptable to the City's Stormwater Utility. Concerns with regard to water pressure were still apparent, but Roger Buffington of the City's Water and Wastewater Department assured the attendees of the meeting that if this project were to have any affects on water pressure, they would be so minimal as to be virtually imperceptible. At the end of the second meeting, some of those in attendance thanked the developer for taking their concerns to heart and for cooperating with the neighborhood. (See attached neighborhood meeting minutes; May 6, 1996). The proposed density, the site layout, the single family lots, and the architecture are compatible with the surrounding area, which includes additional single family homes and other planned residential developments. 4. Design: The project is configured as a single family subdivision composed of thirteen (13) lots on 3.05 acres. All units will have attached two -car garages and an option for full basements (which would be completely underground, not "garden level"). Many of the units will have front porches, and on most of the units the garages will be recessed/setback further from the street than the front porch/entryway. This, along with the planting of regularly spaced street trees, will help to mitigate the potential for garages to dominate the streetscape. Exterior roof lines will be a combination of hip and gable styles pitched at no less than 6:12, and roofing materials will be fiberglass shingles. The highest point on any structure will be no more than 24' and 6" above grade. Exterior building materials will be of horizontal lap siding (buyers will have an option to choose vinyl siding if they desire). West Plum Street PUD - Preliminary and Final, #10-96A July 22, 1996 P & Z Meeting Page 3 practically be oriented for solar access have been arranged to do so (3 out of 13, or 23%). Consequently, the applicant has requested a variance from the solar orientation requirement of the LDGS (All Development Criterion A-1.1), and staff feels that it would be appropriate to support this request. The long axis of the site configuration is oriented in a north/south direction, and City standards called for the site's access to be aligned with and extend Pear Street from the north to the south. All abutting, existing lots are oriented in a north -south direction, and the proposed West Plum Street PUD continues this orientation. It is, therefore, not desirable or even possible to orient internal circulation in the east/west direction that is required to provide the solar access orientation called for in this criterion of the LDGS. Given the above described situation, staff feels that granting the requested variance would not be detrimental to the public good, nor would it impair the intents and purposes of the LDGS; furthermore, the requested variance is justified on either/both of the two following grounds, as stipulated in Section K of the LDGS: 1) That by reason of exceptional conditions or difficulties with regard to solar orientation or access, undue hardship would be caused to a subdivider by the strict application of any provisions of this section [provision A-1.1]; or, 2) That the plan submitted is equal to or better than such plan incorporating the provision for which a variance is requested. • Residential Uses Point Chart On the Residential Uses Point Chart (Point Chart H), this Preliminary and Final P.U.D. achieves a score of 62. Of the 62 total points, 57 come from base criteria and 5 from bonus criteria. Points are earned for proximity to an neighborhood service center (Cedarwood Plaza), proximity to an existing neighborhood/community park (Rogers Park), and for contiguity to existing urban development. In addition, bonus points were awarded for connection to the nearest existing City sidewalk and bicycle path/lane. The required minimum score on the Residential Uses Point Chart is sixty (60) points, at least forty (40) of which must come from base points. Therefore, the West Plum Street Preliminary and Final P.U.D. exceeds the minimum score required by the Residential Uses Point Chart of the L.D.G.S. West Plum Street PUD - Preliminary and Final, #10-96A July 22, 1996 P & Z Meeting Page 2 COMMENTS: 1. Background: The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: N: RL; Single Family Residential (existing) S: RL; Vacant (approved Siena PUD, single-family residential) E: RL; Single Family Residential (existing) W: RL; Single Family Residential (existing) The proposal site was annexed into the City of Fort Collins as part of the Overland Trail Annexation on October 15, 1970 (Ordinance Number 60, 1970). The total annexation included an area of 243 acres; the proposed West Plum Street Preliminary and Final PUD sits on 3.05 acres of the annexed area. 2. Land Use: This is a request for Preliminary and Final P.U.D. approval for 13 single family lots on 3.05 acres located between West Plum Street, Rocky Road, Timber Lane, and West Elizabeth Street. The gross density is 4.26 dwelling units per acre; this is considered low density. All Development Criteria All Development Criteria A-1.12 of the L.D.G.S. calls for an average residential density of at least three (3) dwelling units per acre. Therefore, the West Plum Street Preliminary and Final P.U.D. complies with the density requirements of the L.D.G.S. It is staffs feeling that all applicable All Development Criteria of the LDGS are being satisfied, with the exception of the solar orientation requirement (A-1.1). The applicant has requested a variance from this requirement, and staff feels that it would be appropriate to support this request. See the following subsection (Solar Orientation) for further explanation. • Solar Orientation All Development Criteria A-1.1 calls for a minimum of 65% of the lots to meet the definition of a solar oriented lot; this would mean that at least 9 of the 13 proposed lots would have to meet the definition of a solar oriented lot, As many lots as could ITEM NO. 2 MEETING DATE 7/22/96 STAFF _Mitch Haas City of Fort Collins PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD STAFF REPORT PROJECT: West Plum Street Preliminary and Final P.U.D., #10-96A APPLICANT: Viita Building Company 127 North Mack Street P.O. Box 885 Fort Collins, CO 80522 OWNER: George R. Mitzelfeld and Mary E. Bartlett 2606 West Elizabeth Street Fort Collins, CO 80521 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request for Preliminary and Final P.U.D. approval for 13 single family lots on 3.05 acres located between West Plum Street (to the north), Rocky Road (to the west), Timber Lane (to the east), and West Elizabeth Street (to the south). The PUD request is for the northern 3.05 acres of a site that totals 5.58 acres; the remaining 2.55 acres to the south is entitled as "Tract 'A' (Future Development): Not Part of This PUD." Both the developing parcel and the remaining portion are zoned RL, Low Density Residential. RECOMMENDATION: Approval with a condition. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This request for Preliminary and Final PUD approval: ► Satisfies all of the applicable All Development Criteria of the LDGS, with the exception of the solar orientation requirement (A-1.1); ► Staff is recommending approval of the requested variance from the solar orientation requirement of the LDGS, as the request meets the requirements of the Variance Procedures outlined in Section K of the LDGS; ► The request is supported by its performance on the Residential Uses Point Chart of the L.D.G.S.; ► The land use, site design and architecture are found to be compatible with the surrounding area; and, ► The project is feasible from a traffic engineering standpoint and promotes City transportation policies. COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 (303) 221-6750 PLANNING DEPARTMENT