HomeMy WebLinkAboutHARVEST PARK SUBDIVISION, 5TH FILING - REPLAT OF BLOCKS 3 & 4 - 25-98H - DECISION - FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISIONHarvest Park Subdivision, 5ftl Filing PDP
Administrative Hearing
Findings, Conclusions, and Decision
October 1, 2003
Page 6 of 6
SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS
A. The Harvest Park Subdivision, 5t" Filing, Project Development Plan, is subject to
administrative review and the requirements of the Land Use Code (LUC).
B. The Harvest Park Subdivision, 5t" Filing, Project Development Plan, satisfies the
development standards of the LMN zoning district.
C. The Harvest Park Subdivision, 5t" Filing, Project Development Plan, complies
with all applicable General Development Standards contained in Article 3 of the
Land Use Code.
DECISION
The Harvest Park, 5th Filing Project Development Plan, #25-98H, is hereby approved
by the Hearing Officer without condition.
Dated this 15th day of October 2003, per authority granted by Sections
1.4.9(E) and 2.1 of the Land Use Code.
e� "T-
ameron Gloss /
Current Planning erector
Harvest Park Subdivision, 50 riling PDP
Administrative Hearing
Findings, Conclusions, and Decision
October 1, 2003
Page 5 of 6
2. Compliance with Article 4 and the LMN Zoning District Standards:
The Project Development Plan complies with all applicable requirements of
Article 4 and the LMN Zoning District. The Staff Report summarizes the PDP's
compliance with these specific standards and no specific evidence was
presented to contradict the statements and conclusion of the staff report
concerning compliance with Article 4 or the LMN District Standards.
Appeals were made to the Hearing Officer to consider the general impacts upon
the quality of life that might arise due to the increase in residential density as a
result of the Project. The neighborhood testimony indicates a perception that
property values are enhanced through less dense development and that there
will be an increase in the percentage of units that will be rented. The Hearing
Officer both sympathizes with the neighboring residential owners, but finds that
the proposed use is lawfully permitted within the zoning district.
The Hearing Officer finds that the density of 4.55 units per gross is within the
maximum permitted density of 8 units per acres. While a lesser residential
density may be desired by neighboring property owners, there is no basis in the
City's Land Use Code upon which the Hearing Officer could require a reduction
in the Project's density.
Testimony was offered at the Hearing by a neighboring property owner that the
Project represents a rezoning of the property, therefore, making the Project
subject to the City's rezoning criteria. The property owner further stated that it
would be unlawful for the City to approve a rezoning without a finding that the
review criteria are met. While the Hearing Officer understands the expressed
concerns of the neighborhood relative to this issue, the Hearing Officer finds that
the Project does not include a request to amend the City's zoning map, therefore,
it is not subject to the requirements of Section 2.9.4(H) of the Land Use Code.
2. Compliance with Article 3 of the Land Use Code — General Development
Standards
The Project Development Plan complies with all applicable requirements of
Article 3 including the plat standards of Section 3.3.1. No evidence was
presented to contradict the statements and conclusion of the staff report
concerning compliance or to otherwise refute the compliance with Article 3.
Harvest Park Subdivision, 5`° riling PDP
Administrative Hearing
Findings, Conclusions, and Decision
October 1, 2003
Page 4 of 6
Harvest Park Subdivision. These impacts included increased traffic, parking,
decrease in open space, increase in paved areas, change in architectural
character, negative impact to common areas and facilities, decrease in property
values, and potential increase in the number of rental units.
A primary issue repeatedly raised by many opponents involved was the
perception that the Owner had misrepresented the type of residential
development proposed for the subject property, at such time that other residential
units were sold within the Harvest Park Subdivision. In response to this issue, the
Owner's representative testified that the Owner is willing to enter into a formal
agreement with the neighborhood that no replatting or other changes to the
Harvest Park Subdivision will result in a future increase in the number of
townhouses (attached residential units) beyond that previously approved. The
Hearing Officer acknowledges area resident's concerns and would encourage
the Owner to enter into such agreement with the neighborhood, but has no
authority to require that this agreement be included as a condition of approval nor
for the City to be a party involved in such agreement.
Adverse traffic conditions within the neighborhood was an issue raised by some
opponents of the Development. Concerns were based primarily on the perceived
additional volume of traffic passing through neighboring streets as a result of the
Project. Based on evidence presented on the issue of traffic volumes affecting
neighboring streets, the Hearing Officer is convinced that vehicular conflicts will
not increase in any significant manner by the traffic generated by the Project.
Traffic projections provided are based on nationally -recognized data and
methodology adopted by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The
Hearing Officer acknowledges and appreciates that residents have provided
careful thought in the framing of their concerns; however, the weight of evidence
presented by the Applicant and corroborated by the City staff, supports a finding
of compliance with the Transportation Level of Service Requirements.
Although the Hearing Officer finds that some of the compatibility and design
concerns raised by opponents of the PDP were insightful and might improve
acceptance of the PDP by the neighboring landowners, the PDP must be judged
under the existing applicable regulations of the City of Fort Collins Land Use
Code. Many of the compatibility issues that were raised, i.e.-the perceived
reduction in the amount of open space, impact to common area facilities, and
perceived increase in the percentage of rental units, clearly falls outside the
applicable review criteria. The regulations provide sufficient specificity to
determine that the Applicant and Owner have designed the PDP in conformance
with the applicable regulations and there is no authority for the Hearing Officer to
mandate that the Applicant or Owner exceed the minimum requirements of the
Land Use Code in designing the development.
Harvest Park Subdivision, 5`° riling PDP
Administrative Hearing
Findings, Conclusions, and Decision
October 1, 2003
Page 3 of 6
Kevin and Marie Killian, 5251 Cornerstone Dr.
Laurie Everhart, 5108 Corbett Dr.
Catherine Lee, 5132 Corbett Dr.
Craig Miller, 2891Spring Harvest Ln.
Written Comments:
None
FACTS AND FINDINGS
This property was annexed into the City as part of the Ruff Annexation in September
1999.
The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
N: RL; existing Harmony Park, existing Traut Elementary School, existing single-
family attached residential north of the school.
NW: RL; existing Preston Junior High School, existing Wild Wood Farm single family
neighborhood,
S: LMN; Rock Creek Drive, undeveloped portions of the Harvest Park PDP
development, Sage Creek development (under construction),
W: LMN; undeveloped portions of the Harvest Park PDP development,
RL; existing Stetson Creek and Timber Creek single-family residential
neighborhoods.
E: LMN; existing and under construction portions of the Harvest Park development.
1. Compatibility with Surrounding Uses:
The evidence established that the owner of the subject property was originally
entitled by the Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood (LMN) Zoning District. This
zoning has been in place since the property was annexed in 1999 and when the
original Overall Development Plan (ODP) and Project Development Plan (PDP)
phases of the ODP were approved. The LMN zoning district permits a wide
range of residential uses, including single-family detached dwellings, two-family
dwellings, single-family attached (a.k.a. townhouses) dwellings, multi -family
dwellings (limited to eight or less units per building), small group homes and
mixed -use dwelling units.
Testimony was offered at the hearing by neighboring residential land owners
regarding the anticipated or feared impacts of the proposed replatting, which
would result in construction of townhouses, upon the existing residences of the
Harvest Park Subdivision, 5rd Filing PDP
Administrative Hearing
Findings, Conclusions, and Decision
October 1, 2003
Page 2 of 6
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: Evidence presented to the Hearing Officer established
no controversy or facts to refute that the hearing was
properly posted, legal notices mailed and notice
published.
The Hearing Officer, presiding pursuant to the Fort Collins Land Use Code, opened the
hearing at approximately 6:00 p.m, on October 1, 2003 in the City Council Chambers at
300 LaPorte Ave., Fort Collins, Colorado.
HEARING TESTIMONY, WRITTEN COMMENTS AND OTHER EVIDENCE:
The Hearing Officer accepted during the hearing the following evidence: (1) Planning
Department Staff Report; (2) application, plans, maps and other supporting documents
submitted by the applicant and the applicant's representatives to the City of Fort Collins;
and (3) a tape recording of testimony provided during the hearing. The LUC, the City's
Comprehensive Plan (City Plan), and the formally promulgated policies of the City are
all considered part of the evidence considered by the Hearing Officer.
The following is a list of those who attended the meeting:
From the City:
Troy Jones, City Planner
Marc Virata, Development Review Engineer
From the Applicant:
Terence Hoaglund, Vignette Studios
Robert Reid, Writer Corporation
From the Public:
Susan Emrani, 2932 Cornerstone Ln.
Jeff Kingerus, 2950 Cornerstone Ln.
Catherine Lane, 1532 Corbett Dr.
Linda Halvorson, 5120 Corbett Dr.
Susan J. Booges, 5262 Cornerstone Dr.
Julia Wallich, 5145 Corbett Dr.
Jim Laycock, 5939 Corbett Dr.
Staci Langford, 5114 Corbett Dr.
City of Fort Collins
Commi. .y Planning and Environmental _rvices
Current Planning
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER
TYPE I ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING DATE
PROJECT NAME:
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
HEARING OFFICER:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
October 1, 2003
Harvest Park Subdivision, 5th Filing,
PDP
#25-98H
Vignette Studios
144 North Mason Street, Suite 2
Fort Collins, CO 80524
The Writer Corporation
6061 South Willow Drive, Suite 232
Englewood, CO 80111
Cameron Gloss
Current Planning Director
The Applicant has submitted a Project Development Plan (referred to herein as the
"Project" or the "PDP") proposing a replat of Blocks 3 & 4 of the approved Harvest Park
P.D.P. from 36 single family detached house lots to 40 single-family attached lots
(townhouses). The project site is bounded by Harvest Park Lane on the north, Old Mill
Road on the west, Mill Stone Way on the east, and Rock Creek Drive on the south.
SUMMARY OF HEARING OFFICER DECISION: Approval
ZONING DISTRICT: LMN- Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval
281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020