HomeMy WebLinkAboutMARSEE PUD - PRELIMINARY & FINAL - 14-95 - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSPLKT SCYLE 1"[20' NORTH
..M pe,lµarY� }.Na esn.
t• e•rr i e.�alr r.«rra ri•r Lsrr. au...
w•sl ws«4tIN. M 1..I D. fM fMD Msaoo boors st
.e a el \s N N M\ a
a..ae ..... ew a fm IW. a.ry a •---. sw a
N..w.
uj
L•t r«« Nlf N !t.
W I 1
W cc
nr
N+ a �u4N«LL' r % v l
FAIRVI EW
--- —
I
CONSTITuT1or1 --...— ... .
—
a
I_ja
Z
$. 6R1.
•
SOUTHR lb
H
so
... _ _
=„ I
W
—
or
so
L-YNNWOOD
,„
i"
•„ t„ is ITTI 1I
LCSTYp1\nl
I
neNNLT AIL r,^
vicinity �al
\But] CT
-TTE PLAN
er,rnD,nr
Nn� tN.Morm
w.•mr. ue .vI:IL+�e..:n Np N N Nv w.
Wouy .. a 1., I. Wm
•NN or NJ.... I I
[N IrMors.rr[lltu[lr ...e4rINW ..l.e. x
Yr ssra .Ir ss•[r..N 'so ........ s
rYr N. .D.IN•.N..
y....« .r a .0 a« . «.• .r m ater r «a
ru u.. D.LMr.r•. Is'. _ ev .1 � u_
•.«s «[r .! rlsulN s .NtN MN
aN Np or nn n M Y , r. ,na.6 ... Y
[roar r , npu-rp,..l .uvp
.. , m. .......
1. .W� W... .pIDmILL ,DD1.10.
i' D"m.imr er� n.•�u.
t., .wN r
a. .N.OY. M" NINM , , M.r rl.l.-oso t-1
Moor.
s.r r\t 1.1 W.r rta.
a. IYtN .pDW .mYr pININ t`.1 N� 1'�
.'I.... rDN..,:
vamp ,vv mm m N
r.. a, .,
.ID WY m, n..YNtr ., . w-W .aa•M Mosssrt.t• N N • •lpl.-.wl, .NY«•• or Morris.
,s r.•M.., H1LY--EF • I,.N
MARSEE PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PUD
CONVERSION OF A SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENCE TO A DUPLEX RESI➢ENCE
1320 SOUTHRIDOE DRIVE
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
DENSITY CHART (continued
Criterion Ea
Crelit
S
If the site or adjacent property contains a historic building or place, a bonus may be earned for the following:
39a For preventing or mitigating outside influences adverse to its preservation (e.g. environmental, land
use, aesthetic, economic and social factors);
3% For assuring that new structures will be in keeping with the character of the building or place, while
avoiding total units;
0
H
3% For proposing adaptive use of the building or place that will lead to its continuance, preservation and
improvement in an appropriate manner.
Z
t
If a portion or all of the required parking in the multiple family project is provided underground within the
Obuilding,
or in an elevated parking structure as an accessory use to the primary structure. a bonus may be earned as
m
follows:
9'Yo For providing 75% or more of the parking in a structure;
6% For providing 50 - 74% of the parking in a strucntre;
O
3% For providing 25 - 49% of the parking in a strucatre-
V
If a commitment is being made to provide approved automatic fire extinguishing systems for the dwelling units, I
enter a bonus of 10%.
O
V If the applicant commits w-roviding adequate, safe and convenient pedestrian and bicvcle connections between the
project and any of the desw :aon points described below, calculate the bonus as follows:
5% For connectir._ a the nearest existing City sidewalk and bicycle patMane;
5-7o For connecting to any existing public school, park and transit stop within the distances as denned in this 0
Density Chart
5mo For connecting to an existing City bicycle trail which is adjacent to or traverses the project.
TOTAL
Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments
The City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised September 1994
- 79a -
DENSITY CHART
Maximum EarnedCriterion
Credit Credit
a
2000 feet of an existing neighborhood shopping center; or
----------
20%
4-
-------------------------------------
2000 feet of an approved but not constructed neighborhood shopping
----
--
center.
1090
b
650 feet of an existing transit stop (applicable only to projects having a density of at least six (6] dwelling
20%
units per acre on a gross acreage basis)
C
4000 feet of an existing or approved regional shopping center
10%
10
3500 feet— of— off an_ex_istin_g_neig_hb_or_ho_od_ o_r co_mmu_nity pa_rk_, or _
20Cyo
20
d
—
3500 feet of a publicly owned, but not developed, neighborhood or community park, or community
1090
W
iaciliry (except golf courses); or
Q
Cn
3500 feet of a publicly owned golf course, whether developed or nog — — — — — — — —
1090
6
m
e
2500
50 feet of an existing school, meeting all requirements of the Stale of Colorado compulsory education
10%
laws
to
f
3000 feet of a major employment center
20%
20
1000 feet of a child care center
590
h
"North" Fort Collins
20%
O
1
The Central Business District
20%
G
J
A project whose boundary is contiguous to existing urban development. Credit may be earned as follows:
30%
09a For projects whose property boundary has 0 - 10% contiguity;
10 - 15% For projects whose property boundary has 10 - 2090 contiguity;
15 - 20% For projects whose property boundary has 20 - 3096 contiguity;
20 - Z590 For projects whose property boundary has 30 - 409a contiguity;
25 30% For
30
- projects whose property boundary has 40 - 5090 contiguity.
k
If it can be demonstrated that the project will reduce non-renewable energy usage either through the appiicadon of
alternative energy systems or through committed energy conservation measures beyond those normally required by
City Code, a 5% bonus may be earned for every 5% reduction in energy use.
O
Calculate a 1 9a bonus for every 50 acres included in the project.
0
f17
Calculate the percentage of the total acres in the project that are devoted to recreational use. Enter 1/2 of that
percentage as a bonus.
0
f1
If the applicant commits to preserving permanent off -site open space that meets the City's minimum requirements,
calculate the percentage of this open space acreage to the total development acreage and enter this percentage as a
bonus.
0
C
U part of the total development budget is to be spent on neighborhood public transit facilities which are not
otherwise required by City Code, enter a 290 bonus for every $100 per dwelling unit invested.
P
If part of the total development budget is to be spent on neighborhood facilities and services which are not otherwise
t/9
required by City Code, enter a 19a bonus for every $100 per dwelling unit invested.
0
4
If a commitment is being made to develop a specified percentage of the total number of dwelling units for low
z
income families, enter that percentage as a bonus, up to a maximum of 30%.
O
QIf
f
a commitment is being made to develop a specified percentage of the total number of dwelling units for Type "A"
"B"
m
and Type handicapped housing as defined by the City of Fort Collins, calculate the bonus as follows:
Type "A" .5 x Tvne "4" Units
Total Units
In no case shall the combined bonus be greater than 30%
Type "B" 1.0 x TvRe "R" Unitq
Total Units
O
Continued
Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments
The City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised September 1994
-79-
Q.i I'C;MENT "B"
MARSF.E Pt V.D. , P/T=
ACTIVITY:
Residential Uses
DEFINITION:
H
All residential uses. Uses include single family attached dwelings, tnwithomes, duple es, mobile homes,
and multiple :amity dwellings: group homes: boarding and-ocming houses: frarerniry and sernrry
houses: nu. -sing hor..es: oublic and private schools; oublic and non-profit cuasi-oublic r� auonal uses
as a princ:oal use: uses providing meeting places and pieces for public assembly with incidental oFace
space: and child --,re ;.eaters.
CRITERIA:
i fie icllow rig Luc ^le c w on must be answer,.,. `ves" and
implemented vid^ a :e development nian.
I. DOES L=- ?�C =C E.�Zti^T—IiLYLti1LY1?
POL�iS '-S �C:.=A�HD ON _ FOLT OwZNC "DEtiSii"
C A1ZT 'F0_K -- ?ROPOSLD DENS= OF RSSiDF,:NTIAL
?ROJEC7 -ze r-=,::red earned c: hit for a residear-i roject shall be
based on une ?wowing:
60 60 - 0 ^e _ntaze'points
"0 80 ^--.__ntage points
80 - 90 ue-.-entage points
90-100 ^:age points
*100 oints
= 6 or fewer dwelling ,=its per ace
= 6 - i dwelling units per ace
= i - 8 dwelling units per ace
= 8 - 9 dwei ing:uaits per ace
= 9-10 dwelling units per ace
= 10 or more dwelling mils per acre
%-12 S-F. i r .199 ACZF
y S,560 S.F; /AARE
2 D.v.'s
.19Ci p� C
1O•� W*S /Acske-
4 WR1A AC.E tEQuesmb
Yes ;N'110
N/A
Lana Leveiopment uwaance �)vstem for Ylanned unit Developments
7 ae Ciry of Fort Collins, Colorado, Re-rsed August 1994
1W-z
Activity A: ALL DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA
ALL CRITERIA I APPLICABLE CRITERIA ONLY
Is the c.-rtencn Will the c^fteno
apclicablel be satisfied?�
CRITERION � � a 3I Yes No !f no, pie2se excfain
-1. COMMUNI T Y-WIDE CRITERIA.
1.2
Ccmcrehensive Plan
I 106#1
1.3
Wildlife Habitat
I Ito
1.4
Mineral Deocsit
I �r
1. ,
1.6
ECCICCIcaIIy Sensitive Areas
Lands of Acricultural Imoertance
I reserved
I reserved
1.7
Enercy CCnserlatien
1.8
Air Qualitv
I• 1✓
1.c-
We---, Quahty
I I I.i
1.12
Residential Density I
I✓
A 2.
NE!GNBORHOOD COMPA7211- TY CRfTE
2.1
Ve �icuiar. Feces rian, Bike Transccration
I✓
2.2
Euiidirc P!ac_=ri;ent and Orient aticr,
2 3
Natural Fea:--res
2.4
Vehicular Cir=lation and Parking
1✓
2.5
Emergency Access
2.5
Fecesirian Circulation
I�
2. 7
Arcnitec:ure
2.8
Building He:ent and Views
2.S
Shading
2.10
Sclar Access
2.11
Histcric Rescurcas
2.12
Setbacks
2.13
Landscace
2.14
Sicns
2.15
Site Lighting
2.16
Noise and Vibraticn
2.17
Glare cr Heat
2.18
Haz=rdous Materials
A 3.
ENGINEERING CRITERIA
3.1
Utility Capacity
3.2
Desian Standards
3.3
Water Hazards
3.4
Gecicgic Hazards
IA
Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments
T he City of Fart Collins, Colorado, Revised `ch 19944� ►
61
♦ WEST ELIZABETH STREET
RP
FT
LULU
z
LU
� a
z uj oc ! I
Q > > SPRINGFIELD DRIVE a
a s W
>
�F I m �ILUx
�I
O N !pl LL OI
L) y ?„
I z
I Z
i 1 J 1 I
I I I
i
j
i RL
I
r� WEST PROSPECT ROAD
Dv} J a SHIELDS STREET
cc
W
-�
��JJ O
C7
rp z
W
x
RLP RP
x
VICINITY MAP
05/08/95
#14-95 Marsee Residential Addition PUD
Preliminary &Final
51
L�
i
0101111•
L
1'
Marsee P.U.D., Preliminary and Final, #14-95
May 22, 1995 P & Z Meeting
Page 6
garage.
!r
Only the single -story, two -car garage would be visible to the
public. The applicant proposes 12" lap siding, asphalt shingles
and roof line height to match the existing 3-bedroom, single-family
residence. The applicant originally proposed a two story addition
but revised their submittal to a single story garage with a 1-
bedroom basement apartment. Staff had expressed concerns that the
two-story addition was not compatible with the single -story, ranch
style character of the immediate neighborhood.
5. Transportatione
The proposed two -car garage satisfies All Development Criteria A-
2.4 by providing the minimum required two off-street parking
spaces.
FINDINGS OF FACT/CONCLUSION:
In evaluating the request for the Marsee P.U.D., Preliminary and
Final, Conversion of a Single -Family Residence to a Duplex
Residence, #14-95, staff makes the following findings of fact:
1. It earns 90% of the maximum applicable points on the
Residential Uses point chart, 10% percent less than the 100%
minimum requirement of Criteria 1 to allow 10 or more dwelling
units per acre.
2. Granting a variance to Criteria 1 of the Residential Uses
point chart would be detrimental to the public good and would
impair the intent and purposes of the Land Development
Guidance System; and the plan as submitted is not equal to or
better than such plan incorporating the provision for which
the variance is requested.
3 it melts a l esf the applzcalale A13 Devlopment..ra tz of., tie
STKTWAAT PEQ SOARS t kkVJ= 04 PER CATI kXTbegW-e .
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of a variance to the Residential Uses Point
Chart of the LDGS and recommends denial of the Marsee P.U.D.,
Preliminary and Final, Conversion of a Single -Family Residence to
a Duplex Residence, #14-95.
Marsee P.U.D., Preliminary and Final, #14-95
May 22, 1995 P & Z Meeting
Page 5
Criterion" of the Residential Uses Point Chart are
opportunities for which P.U.D. proposals may demonstrate
their provision of additional public benefit or good. No
"Bonus Criterion" points were awarded. Therefore, it
appears that the proposed project provides substantial
private benefit but little public benefit. Staff is
concerned that approval of the requested variance and the
proposed project will set an undesirable precedent. If
the City wants to encourage the conversion of existing
single-family residential units to multi -family
residential uses, it should solicit extensive public
input and evaluate the potential to "upzone" low -density
residential areas surrounding the university.
(3)
The property has been zoned R-L, Low -Density Residential since
1965. Duplex residences are not a permitted use in this district,
therefore no "legal" duplexes exist in the surrounding
neighborhood. All Development Criteria A-2.4 "Vehicular
Circulation and Parking" is not satisfied by this development
submittal (see Transportation section).
In lieu of a formal neighborhood meeting, staff required the
applicant to distribute a letter (approved by staff as to its form
and content) to all households within 500' of the subject property
describing the proposed project. A majority of the neighbors who
have contacted staff are not in opposition to the addition of a
two -car garage, but do oppose the conversion of the single-family
residence .to a duplex residence. Attached are copies of all
letters which staff received and a listening log of telephoned
comments. Please note that several of the letters/comments
reference a second story apartment addition. The applicant revised
their submittal to eliminate the "visible" second story addition by
proposing a 1-bedroom basement apartment beneath the proposed
Marsee P.U.D., Preliminary and Final, #14-95
May 22, 1995 P & Z Meeting
Page 4
(2) The proposed project earns 90% of the maximum applicable
points on the Residential Uses point chart of the
L.D.G.S. All of the points claimed are from the "base
(locational) criterion". It is virtually impossible for
a single lot to obtain "bonus criterion" points, when it
appears that they are intended for projects of a much
larger scale. The applicant submits that obtaining ten
more points on the Residential Uses Point Chart would not
make the project any more viable and therefore the
project does not impair the intent and purposes of the
L.D.G.S.
(3) The proposed project is equal to such plan incorporating
the provision for which a variance is requested. It
promotes a "legal" higher density residential use near
the university which helps reduce the need for auto
dependency and the two car garage prctv:ces the rr{u�re'd
tiro o ...... paratc ;;spges3 will reduce the amount
of existing on -street parking. The additional 1-bedroom
apartment will not be visually obtrusive as it will be
provided in a basement beneath the proposed garage.
Staff recommends denial of the applicants request for a variance to
the Residential Uses Point Chart. Staff feels that a variance for
the proposed project is detrimental to the public good and impairs
the intent and purposes of the L.D.G.S. for the following reasons:
(1) The property has been zoned R-L, Low -Density Residential
since 1965. Duplex residences are not a permitted use in
this zoning district. Although staff supports the
reduction of auto dependency, there are no formally
adopted policies which state that higher density
residential uses should be provided near the university
at this time. The P.U.D. process is more suitably used
on larger, vacant or redeveloping properties rather than
additions to single-family residential lots. It is not
appropriate for a non -permitted use to "circumvent"
underlying zoning through the P.U.D. process without
providing additional public benefit beyond the minimum
requirements of the zoning district.
(2) The "public" most affected by the proposed project is the
immediate neighborhood. Although there may be a
significant number of occupancy code violations in this
neighborhood (this has not been verified), the Land
Development Guidance system is not the appropriate method
of enforcement. There is significant neighborhood
opposition to the proposed conversion of a single family
residence to a duplex residence and limited support (see
attached letters and listening log). The "Bonus
Marsee P.U.D., Preliminary and Final, #14-95
May 22, 1995 P & Z Meeting
Page 3
Section K. Variance Procedures, of the LDGS states:
"The Planning and Zoning Board is empowered to grant variances to
the provisions of this section (the LDGS). The decision of the
Planning and Zoning Board on any application for a variance shall
be set forth in writing in the minutes of the meeting of the Board.
Variance requests may be granted if the Board determines that the
granting of the variance would neither be detrimental to the public
good nor impair the intent and purposes of this section and if the
applicant demonstrates:
(1) That by reason of exceptional topographical, soil or
other subsurface conditions or other conditions peculiar
to the site, undue hardship would be caused to a
subdivider by the strict application of any provisions of
this section, or
(2) 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, or
(3) That the plan as submitted is equal to or better than
such plan incorporating the provision for which a
variance is requested, or
(4) The granting of a variance from the strict application of
any provision would result in a substantial benefit to
the City by reason of the fact that the proposed project
would help satisfy a defined community need (such as
affordable housing or historic preservation) or would
alleviate an existing problem (such as traffic congestion
or urban blight), and the strict application of such a
provision would render the project practically
unfeasible."
The applicant submits that granting the variance would neither be
detrimental to the public good nor impair the intent and purposes
of this section and meets Variance Criteria #3 for the following
reasons:
(1) There are more than three unrelated individuals living in
a majority of the "single-family" residences in this
neighborhood. The applicant's effort to obtain approval
for a "legal" duplex through the established City
procedures, which remains owner occupied versus absentee
owned; and the reduced need for automobile dependence by
concentrating higher densities close to the university,
protects and promotes the public good.
Marsee P.U.D., Preliminary and Final, #14-95
May 22, 1995 P & Z Meeting
Page 2
COMMENTS
1. Background:
The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
N: R-L; existing single-family residential
S: R-L; existing single-family residential
E: R-L; existing single-family residential
W: R-L; existing single-family residential
This property was annexed into the City as part of the Fairview 4th
Annexation on May 18th, 1961 and subdivided as part of the Fairview
4th Filing Subdivision on July 13, 1961. The property has been
zoned R-L, Low -Density Residential since 1965.
This is a request for Preliminary and Final P.U.D. approval for the
addition of a one-story, 672 square foot, two -car garage, and 1-
bedroom basement apartment to an existing 1,342 square foot, 3-
bedroom, single-family residence located at 1320 Southridge Drive.
The existing single-family residence would be converted to a duplex
residence.
Duplexes are not a permitted use in the R-L, Low -Density
Residential District. Therefore, this project has been submitted
as a Planned Unit Development. It has been evaluated against the
Residential Uses Point Chart, earning 90% of the maximum applicable
points. Points were awarded for the following: c) being located
within 4,000 feet of an existing or approved regional shopping
center (10 points); d) being located within 3,500 feet of an
existing neighborhood or community park (20 points); e) being
located within 2,500 feet of an existing school, meeting all
requirements of the State of Colorado compulsory education laws (10
points); f) being located within 3,000 feet of a major employment
center (20 points); and j) having 100% contiguity to existing urban
development (30 points). No bonus points were claimed. However,
two dwelling units on an 8,672 square foot lot is equivalent to
10.05 dwelling units per acre and requires a minimum of 100% of the
maximum applicable points. The applicant requests a variance to
the Residential Uses Point Chart.
Criteria 1 of the Residential Uses Point Chart of the LDGS requires
a minimum of 100 or more percentage points for a project which
proposes a density of 10 or more dwelling units per acre.
ITEM NO. 17
MEETING DATE 5/22195
iii
STAFF Mike Ludwig
City of Fort Collins PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD
STAFF REPORT
PROJECT: Marsee P.U.D., Preliminary and Final, Conversion of
a Single -Family Residence to a Duplex Residence,
#14-95.
APPLICANT: Wendell and Jeani Marsee y
1320 Southridge Drive
Fort Collins, CO 80521
OWNER: Wendell and Jeani Marsee
1320 Southridge Drive
Fort Collins, CO 80521
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This is a request for Preliminary and Final P.U.D. approval for the
addition of a one-story, 672 square foot, two -car garage, and 1-
bedroom basement apartment to an existing 1,342 square foot, 3-
bedroom, single-family residence located at 1320 Southridge Drive.
The existing single-family residence would be converted to a duplex
residence. The site is bounded by Southridge Drive and Fairview
Drive. The zoning is R-L, Low -Density Residential.
RECOMMENDATION: Denial of a variance request and denial of the
proposed Marsee P.U.D.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The R-L, Low -Density Residential District, does not allow duplex
residences as a permitted use. Therefore, the proposed
addition/conversion has been submitted as a P.U.D. The proposed
project earns 90% of the maximum applicable points on the
Residential Uses point chart of the L.D.G.S. However, two dwelling
units on an 8,672 square foot lot is equivalent to 10.05 dwelling
units per acre and requires a minimum of 100% of the maximum
applicable points. The applicant has requested a variance to the
Residential Point Chart. Staff recommends denial of the variance
request as the applicant has been unable to satisfy the variance
criteria of Section K of the L.D.G.S. Therefore, staff recommends
denial of the Marsee P.U.D for its failure to meet Criteria 1 of
the Residential Uses Point Chart.
IVO"
- ft% vbpQt� O'SLOSSI(A
Pit CAW AUTWNEY
COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 (303) 221-6750
PLANNING DEPARTMENT