HomeMy WebLinkAboutUNION PLACE/REVIVE - COMBINED MJA/FDP - FDP140032 - DECISION - FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISIONCITY OF FORT COLLINS
TYPE 1 ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING
FINDINGS AND DECISION
HEARING DATE: February 2, 2015
PROJECT NAME: Union Place / Revive Major Amendment
CASE NUMBER: FDP#140032
APPLICANT: Susan McFaddin
Seven Generations
210 West Magnolia Street, #360
Fort Collins, CO 80521
OWNER: Revive Properties, LLC
P.O. Box 720
Ogallala, NE 69153
HEARING OFFICER: Marcus A. McAskin
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a Major Amendment to the Union Place
development plan located south and west of the intersection of West Willox Lane and North College
Avenue (the “Application”). The Applicant proposes to change portions of the plan (Block 2, Block
4 and Lot 1, Block 5) from 37 multi-family dwellings to 37 single-family attached dwellings
(commonly referred to as townhomes). This change requires adding individual lot lines between
the shared walls of the units. The architectural design of these dwellings is also being amended as
well as minor adjustments to the landscape plan. The property is zoned C-S, Service Commercial
District. The proposed Application is permitted in the zone district, subject to a Type One review.
The Application also includes a request for a Modification of Standard to reduce the front building
setbacks in Block 4 from 15 feet (15’) to nine feet (9’). Specifically, the Applicant seeks to modify
Section 3.5.2(E)(2) of the Land Use Code which establishes a 15 foot (15’) setback for all residential
and detached structures from any public street, other than an arterial. The request to modify the
setback standard set forth in Section 3.5.2(E)(2) of the Land Use Code applies to Block 4 only.
BACKGROUND AND LAND USE HISTORY:
• The property was annexed into the City of Fort Collins with the North College Annexation
in December 1959. It remained un-platted and unimproved until 2009.
• The Union Place development plans were approved in 2009, consisting of 8 single-family
homes, 30 triplex units, 37 condominiums and 14 mixed-use units. The maximum approved
building height is 40 feet, with all buildings approved as 2 or 3 stories. Approximately 2
acres of the site is designated as a regional detention pond.
1
• After the 2009 plan approval, the infrastructure for the site was constructed.
• A minor amendment to the 2009 plan was approved by the City in 2014.
• The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
Direction Zone District Existing Land Uses
North
Service Commercial (C-S);
Single-Family Detached Dwellings
Low Density Mixed-Use
Neighborhood (L-M-N)
South Service Commercial (C-S)
North College Mobile Plaza –
Manufactured Home Community
East Service Commercial (C-S)
McDonald’s Fast Food Restaurant; North
College Car Wash and Mini-Storage
West
Larimer County Zoning Category
“Open” (O)
Brunswig Subdivision – Located in
Larimer County outside of the City limits;
Low Density Mixed-Use
Neighborhood (L-M-N)
North College Mobile Plaza –
Manufactured Home Community
SUMMARY OF DECISION: Approved.
ZONE DISTRICT: Service Commercial District (C-S)
HEARING: The Hearing Officer opened the hearing at approximately 5:00 p.m. on Monday,
February 2, 2015, in Conference Rooms A-D, 281 North College Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado.
EVIDENCE: Prior to or at the hearing, the Hearing Officer accepted the following documents as
part of the record of this proceeding: (1) Planning Department Staff Report for Union Place / Revive
Major Amendment, FDP#140032; (2) Statement of Planning Objectives submitted by the Applicant
dated December 17, 2014; (3) Modification of Standards Request dated December 4, 2014; (4)
Applicant’s Site Plan including Landscaping Plan; (5) the Union Place Subdivision, First Replat
(replat of Block 2, Block 4, and Lot 1, Block 5, Union Place Subdivision) (6) Building Elevations;
(7) Notice of Public Hearing Letter dated January 16, 2015; (8) Affidavit of Publication of the Fort
Collins Coloradoan dated January 21, 2015 evidencing publication of the Notice of Hearing on
January 21, 2015; (9) the 2009 approved Site Plan for Union Place; (10) the 2014 approved Minor
Amendment for Union Place; and (11) the PowerPoint presentation prepared by applicant for the
2
February 2, 2015 hearing (titled Revive Fort Collins: Renewable, Sustainable and Healthy) which
includes site & vicinity photographs. In addition, the City’s Comprehensive Plan, Code, and the
formally promulgated polices of the City are all considered part of the record considered by the
Hearing Officer.
A copy of the Planning Department Staff Report prepared for the above-referenced Application is
attached to this decision as ATTACHMENT A and is incorporated herein by reference.
TESTIMONY: The following persons testified at the hearing:
From the City: Jason Holland, PLA, City Planner
From the Owner: Susan McFaddin, Seven Generations (address on page 1)
Greg D. Fisher, Architect, 3115 Clyde Street, Fort Collins
From the Public: George C. Smith, 1717 Cedar Street, Fort Collins
Rob Phillips, 215 West Oak Street, #600, Fort Collins
FINDINGS
1. Evidence presented to the Hearing Officer established the fact that notice of the public
hearing was properly posted, mailed and published.
2. Based on testimony provided at the public hearing and a review of the materials in the record
of this case, the Hearing Officer concludes as follows:
A. the Application complies with the applicable procedural and administrative
requirements of Article 2 of the Land Use Code;
B. the Application complies with the applicable General Development Standards
contained in Article 3 of the Land Use Code; and
C. the Application complies with the applicable Service Commercial (C-S) District
standards contained in Article 4 of the Land Use Code, including Section 4.22(D) of
the Land Use Code which states that the maximum building height shall be three (3)
stories. The Application proposes both two (2) and three (3) story buildings, in
compliance with this standard.
3. The Application’s satisfaction of the applicable Article 2, 3 and 4 requirements of the Land
Use Code is sufficiently detailed in the Staff Report, a copy of which is attached as
ATTACHMENT A and is incorporated herein by reference.
4. Based on testimony provided at the public hearing and a review of the materials submitted
to the Hearing Officer is this case, the Hearing Officer also concludes that the Modification
of Standard (for Section 3.5.2(E)(2) of the Code, as requested by the Applicant) meets the
3
applicable requirements of Section 2.8.2(H) of the Code. Specifically, the Hearing Officer
finds as follows:
A. The Modification of Standard (the “Modification”) requested by the Applicant is to
Section 3.5.2(E)(2) of the Land Use Code (“Residential Building Setbacks from
Non-Arterial Streets”), which states as follows (underlined for emphasis):
3.5.2(E) (2) Setback from Non-arterial Streets. The minimum setback
of every residential building and of every detached accessory building
that is incidental to the residential building shall be fifteen (15) feet
from any public street right-of-way other than an arterial street right-
of-way, except for those buildings regulated by Section 3.8.30 of this
Code, which buildings must comply with the setback regulations set
forth in Section 3.8.30. Setbacks from garage doors to the nearest
portion of any public sidewalk that intersects with the driveway shall
be at least twenty (20) feet.
B. The Applicant requests the Modification to reduce the front building setbacks in
Block 4 from 15 feet (15’) to nine feet (9’)1
. The Modification applies to Block 4
only;
C. The Modification is not detrimental to the public good; and
D. The Modification satisfies Section 2.8.2(H)(4) of the Code – the Application as
submitted will not diverge from the standard set forth in Section 3.5.2(E)(2) except
in a nominal, inconsequential way when considered from the perspective of the entire
Application and will continue to advance the purposes of the Land Use Code as
contained in Section 1.2.2. Specifically, the Hearing Officer notes that the
Application represents an example of innovative infill development, the Application
involves townhome units that are DOE Challenge Home Energy certified and
therefore reduce energy consumption and demand, and that the Application
encourages the development of vacant properties within the North College Urban
Renewal Plan Area.
DATED this 6th
day of February, 2015.
___________________________________
Marcus A. McAskin
Hearing Officer
1 A diagram highlighting the requested Modification is set forth on page nine of
ATTACHMENT A.
4
ATTACHMENT A
Staff Report (attached)
5
ITEM NO _____________1__
MEETING DATE February 2, 2015
STAFF Holland
HEARING OFFICER
Planning Services 281 N College Ave – PO Box 580 – Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
fcgov.com/developmentreview/ 970.221.6750
STAFF REPORT
PROJECT: Union Place / Revive Major Amendment, FDP #140032
APPLICANT: Susan McFaddin
Seven Generations
210 West Magnolia Street, #360
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
OWNER: Revive Properties, LLC
P.O. Box 720
Ogallala, NE 69153
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This is a request for a Major Amendment to the Union Place development plan located
at the southwest corner of West Willox Lane and North Mason Street. The request
proposes to change portions of the plan (Block 2, Block 4 and Block 5) from 37 multi-
family dwellings to 37 single-family attached dwellings (commonly referred to as
townhomes). This change requires adding individual lot lines between the shared walls
of the units. The architectural design of these dwellings is also being amended as well
as minor adjustments to the landscape plan. The property is zoned C-S, Service
Commercial District. The proposed land use amendment is permitted in the zone
district, subject to a Type One review. One Modification of Standard is also proposed to
reduce the front building setbacks in Block 4 from 15 feet to 9 feet.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of the Union Place / Revive Major Amendment and Modification of Standard to
Section 3.5.2(E)(2) Setback from Non-arterial Streets.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Union Place / Revive Major Amendment (MJA) complies with the applicable
requirements of the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code (LUC), more specifically:
Union Place / Revive Major Amendment and Modification of Standard, FDP #140032
Administrative Hearing, February 2, 2015
Page 2
The MJA complies with process located in Division 2.2 – Common
Development Review Procedures for Development Applications of Article 2 –
Administration.
The MJA complies with relevant standards located in Division 4.22, Service
Commercial (C-S) of Article 4 – Districts.
The Modification of Standard to Section 3.5.2(E)(2) meets the applicable
requirements of Section 2.8.2(H), and the granting of this Modification would
not be detrimental to the public good.
The MJA complies with relevant standards located in Article 3 – General
Development Standards, provided that the Modification of Standard is
approved.
VICINITY MAP:
Union Place / Revive Major Amendment and Modification of Standard, FDP #140032
Administrative Hearing, February 2, 2015
Page 3
COMMENTS:
1. Background:
The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
Direction Zone District Existing Land Uses
North Service Commercial (C-S);
Low Density Mixed-Use
Neighborhood (L-M-N)
Single-Family Detached Dwellings
South Service Commercial (C-S) North College Mobile Plaza – Manufactured
Home Community
East Service Commercial (C-S) McDonald’s Fast Food Restaurant; North
College Car Wash and Mini-Storage
West Larimer County Zoning
Category “Open” (O)
Low Density Mixed-Use
Neighborhood (L-M-N)
Brunswig Subdivision – Located in Larimer
County outside of the City limits;
North College Mobile Plaza – Manufactured
Home Community
Land Use History:
The property was annexed into the City of Fort Collins with the North College
Annexation in December 1959. It remained un-platted and unimproved until
2009.
The Union Place development plans were approved in 2009, consisting of 8
single-family homes, 30 triplex units, 37 condominiums and 14 mixed-use
units. The maximum approved building height is 40 feet, with all buildings
approved as 2 or 3 stories. Approximately 2 acres of the site is designated as
a regional detention pond.
After the 2009 plan approval, the infrastructure for the site was constructed,
including all public improvements – which consist of roads, utilities and
drainage infrastructure.
Two Modifications of Standard and two Alternative Compliance requests are
approved with the existing Union Place development plans, as follows:
Union Place / Revive Major Amendment and Modification of Standard, FDP #140032
Administrative Hearing, February 2, 2015
Page 4
o Two Modifications of Standard approved:
1. Reduction of minimum parking lot stall dimensions for a standard
vehicle width from 8’ to 7’ (Section 3.2.2(L)), and
2. Reduction of minimum setback for residential buildings from
arterials street ROW from 30’ to 15’ (Section 3.5.2(D)(1)).
o Two Alternative Compliance Requests:
1. Landscape plan with no foundations plantings (for the mixed-use
buildings) (Section 3.2.1(E)(2)(d)),
2. Reduction of lot depth along an arterial street from 150’ to 80’
(Section 3.6.2(E)).
A Minor Amendment was approved in 2014 which changed the units located
in Block 1 from “Triplex” units to “Duplex” units.
2. Compliance with Applicable Service Commercial (C-S) District Standards:
The project remains in compliance with all applicable Service Commercial District
standards with the following relevant comments provided. Language in this staff
report that is taken directly from the Land Use Code (LUC) is shown in italics,
with certain relevant elements underlined for emphasis.
A. Section 4.26(B) – Permitted Uses
The proposed land uses remain consistent with the permitted uses in the Service
Commercial District.
The land uses approved with the current approved plans include:
Mixed-use Dwellings (This includes 9 dwellings and 17,000 square feet of
non-residential space located in three buildings along West Willox Lane).
Two-family dwellings
Single-family detached dwellings
Multi-family dwellings (37 total)
The amended plans that are proposed in conjunction with this staff report
include:
Changing all of the 37 multi-family dwellings located in Block 2, Block 4
and Block 5 to single-family attached dwellings.
Union Place / Revive Major Amendment and Modification of Standard, FDP #140032
Administrative Hearing, February 2, 2015
Page 5
All proposed and currently approved uses are Type One uses subject to
an administrative review with a Hearing Officer.
B. Density, Dimensional Standards, Development Standards, Land Use Standards
Section 4.22(D) of the Land Use Code (LUC).
Many of the zoning districts in the City of Fort Collins have specific zone district
standards related to Density, Dimensional Standards, Development Standards,
and Land Use Standards. However, the C-S District has no specific Density,
Dimensional Standards or Development Standards. The C-S District does have
one Land Use Standard, Section 4.22(D), which states that the maximum
building height shall be three (3) stories. The project proposes two and three
story buildings in compliance with this standard.
3. Compliance with Article 3 of the Land Use Code – General Development
Standards
The project remains in compliance with all applicable General Development
Standards with the following relevant comments provided:
A. Section – 3.2.1 Landscaping
Street trees are provided at approximately 40-foot intervals along portions of
streets, private drives and connecting walkways in accordance with the
standards of this section.
All open space tracts, parkways and parking islands remain adequately
landscaped in accordance with the minimum requirements, with deciduous
shrubs, evergreen shrubs and ornamental grasses provided with adequate
spacing.
B. Section 3.2.2 – Access, Circulation and Parking
Parking quantities for the amended single-family attached housing type are in
conformance with this section, which require that 3-bedroom dwelling units
provide at least two parking spaces per dwelling. This is the same parking ratio
that was required with the original approval when the housing was considered
multi-family.
Additionally, the amended project is not proposing changes to the street system,
and the majority of this infrastructure is constructed. This street system provides
86 additional parking spaces along the internal private drives. 28 of these “on-
street” spaces are required for the residential units that are part of the mixed-use
dwellings along West Willox Lane. The remaining 58 “on-street” parking spaces
Union Place / Revive Major Amendment and Modification of Standard, FDP #140032
Administrative Hearing, February 2, 2015
Page 6
are available for the commercial component of the mixed-use dwellings as well
as guest parking for the residential dwellings.
In conformance with the Purpose, General Standard and Development
Standards described in this section, staff finds that the parking and circulation
system provided with the project is adequately designed with regard to safety,
efficiency and convenience for vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians and transit.
C. Section 3.5.1 Building and Project Compatibility and 3.5.2 Residential
Building Standards
The amended plans propose a new building elevation design for the single-family
attached buildings. While there are no Residential Building Standards that
specifically address materials and building form, the single-family attached
building design provides variation in massing, juxtaposed materials and forms, as
well as varied patterns of recesses and projections that provide vertical and
horizontal interest, breaking down the overall scale of the buildings. Masonry
and entrance canopies are used to define and enhance individual unit entrances.
The use of materials and patterns is balanced, with colors and textures helping to
emphasize and articulate overall building forms.
In compliance with 3.5.2(B) Residential Building Standards – General Standard,
staff finds that the proposed single-family detached building design continues to
meet the standards of the section by providing adequate architectural articulation
and variation, with distinctive building entrances that are oriented towards the
public streets in accordance with the general standard.
In compliance with 3.5.2(D) Residential Building Standards – Relationship of
Dwellings to Streets and Parking, all of the single-family attached dwellings are
oriented towards a street and provide a connecting walkway to the street in
accordance with the standard.
D. Section 3.5.2(E)(2) – Residential Building Setbacks from Non-Arterial Streets
Project proposes a Modification of Standard to this section in conjunction with the
amended plans.
Land Use Code Standard proposed to be modified, underlined for
emphasis:
3.5.2(E) (2) Setback from Non-arterial Streets. The minimum setback of
every residential building and of every detached accessory building that is
incidental to the residential building shall be fifteen (15) feet from any
public street right-of-way other than an arterial street right-of-way, except
for those buildings regulated by Section 3.8.30 of this Code, which
Union Place / Revive Major Amendment and Modification of Standard, FDP #140032
Administrative Hearing, February 2, 2015
Page 7
buildings must comply with the setback regulations set forth in Section
3.8.30. Setbacks from garage doors to the nearest portion of any public
sidewalk that intersects with the driveway shall be at least twenty (20) feet.
Request for Modification. The applicant requests a modification to allow
a front building setback of nine (9) feet.
Land Use Code Modification Criteria:
“The decision maker may grant a modification of standards only if it finds
that the granting of the modification would not be detrimental to the public
good, and that:
(1) the plan as submitted will promote the general purpose of the standard
for which the modification is requested equally well or better than would a
plan which complies with the standard for which a modification is
requested; or
(2) the granting of a modification from the strict application of any standard
would, without impairing the intent and purpose of this Land Use Code,
substantially alleviate an existing, defined and described problem of city-
wide concern or would result in a substantial benefit to the city by reason
of the fact that the proposed project would substantially address an
important community need specifically and expressly defined and
described in the city's Comprehensive Plan or in an adopted policy,
ordinance or resolution of the City Council, and the strict application of
such a standard would render the project practically infeasible; or
(3) by reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and
exceptional situations, unique to such property, including, but not limited
to, physical conditions such as exceptional narrowness, shallowness or
topography, or physical conditions which hinder the owner's ability to
install a solar energy system, the strict application of the standard sought
to be modified would result in unusual and exceptional practical difficulties,
or exceptional or undue hardship upon the owner of such property,
provided that such difficulties or hardship are not caused by the act or
omission of the applicant; or
(4) the plan as submitted will not diverge from the standards of the Land
Use Code that are authorized by this Division to be modified except in a
nominal, inconsequential way when considered from the perspective of
the entire development plan, and will continue to advance the purposes of
the Land Use Code as contained in Section 1.2.2.
Union Place / Revive Major Amendment and Modification of Standard, FDP #140032
Administrative Hearing, February 2, 2015
Page 8
Any finding made under subparagraph (1), (2), (3) or (4) above shall be
supported by specific findings showing how the plan, as submitted, meets
the requirements and criteria of said subparagraph (1), (2), (3) or (4).
Applicant’s Justification:
Applicant’s justification narrative:
“Union Place is a unique green community of residential, mixed use and
commercial uses. Homes within the development will be built to U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) Zero Energy Ready Home standards. They
will be high performance, generating energy by geothermal and solar
panel systems and will be of a mix of traditional and progressive
architectural styles. Within Union Place there are three blocks of
townhomes.”
“The Modification of Standard request pertains to one block of such
townhomes. That being Block 4. The townhomes located on the other two
blocks do not encroach upon any setbacks. Furthermore, even on Block 4,
the primary structures do not encroach upon the setback. The requested
reduced setback is simply to accommodate low privacy walls which are
attached to the primary structure and provide privacy separation between
townhome units. This is represented in the following images.”
Union Place / Revive Major Amendment and Modification of Standard, FDP #140032
Administrative Hearing, February 2, 2015
Page 9
Summary of Applicant’s Justification:
The Applicant requests that the modification be approved and provides the
following justification for Criteria 1 and Criteria 4:
Criteria (1): the plan as submitted will promote the general purpose of the
standard for which the modification is requested equally well or better than
would a plan which complies with the standard for which a modification is
requested.
Applicant’s Justification for Criteria 1:
“This application proposes no setback modification for the primary
buildings. The reduced setbacks are simply for low privacy walls which are
attached to the primary buildings. The walls are approximately seven feet
(7’) tall and do not result in a lot pattern or streetscape that is detrimental
to the surrounding neighborhood.”
Criteria(4): The plan as submitted will not diverge from the standards of
the Land Use Code that are authorized by this Division to be modified
except in a nominal, inconsequential way when considered from the
perspective of the entire development plan, and will continue to advance
the purposes of the Land Use Code as contained in Section 1.2.2.
Applicant’s Justification for Criteria 4:
“The modification requests a six foot (6’) reduction in the non-arterial
street setback. Fifteen feet (15’) is the standard. As stated above, the
Union Place / Revive Major Amendment and Modification of Standard, FDP #140032
Administrative Hearing, February 2, 2015
Page 10
reduced setbacks are simply for low privacy walls which are attached to
the primary buildings. The walls are approximately seven feet (7‘) tall and
actually only encroach three feet (3’) into the prescribed setback. The
greater reduction of six feet (6’) was recommended by City staff to match
an existing nine foot (9’) utility easement. Since the primary buildings
themselves do not encroach into the typical setback and because the
privacy walls are relatively low (seven feet) and thus inconsequential, the
resulting setback will provide adequate visual separation and relief from
the street.”
“The modification is nominal when compared to the entire development
plan that provides high quality, high performing architecture that is
sensitive to the character of the surrounding neighborhood, and as such is
consistent with the policies of the Land Use Code described in Section
1.2.2 as follows:
(B) Encouraging innovations in land development and renewal.
(H) Reducing energy consumption and demand.
(J) Improving the design, quality and character of new development.
(L) Encouraging the development of vacant properties within established
areas.
(M) Ensuring that development proposals are sensitive to the character of
existing neighborhoods.
(O) Encouraging a wide variety of housing opportunities at various
densities that are well-served by public transportation for people of all
ages and abilities.”
Staff Finding
Staff finds that the request for a Modification of Standard to Section 3.5.2(E)(2)
is justified by the applicable standards in 2.8.2(H)(4). This is because:
A. The granting of the Modification would not be detrimental to the public good.
B. The project design satisfies Criteria 4 (2.8.2(H)(4): The plan as submitted will
not diverge from the standards of the Land Use Code that are authorized by
this Division to be modified except in a nominal, inconsequential way when
considered from the perspective of the entire development plan, and will
continue to advance the purposes of the Land Use Code as contained in
Section 1.2.2.
Staff finds that the Modification of Standard to allow a reduced front setback
is nominal and inconsequential because the setback reduction is limited to the
projecting privacy walls of the front building elevations. Overall, the front
portions of the primary building facades comply with the 15 foot front setback
Union Place / Revive Major Amendment and Modification of Standard, FDP #140032
Administrative Hearing, February 2, 2015
Page 11
standard, or exceed the standard by incorporating recessed elements within
the front facades. Additionally, the reduced setback is only requested for the
single-family detached buildings in Block 4, where these buildings face private
drives that are located within interior portions of the site. Because of the
location and limited scope of the modification, staff finds that the modification
is nominal and inconsequential and that the plan continues to advance the
purposes of the Land Use Code as contained in Section 1.2.2 including:
(L) Encouraging the development of vacant properties within established
areas and;
(O) Encouraging a wide variety of housing opportunities at various densities
that are well-served by public transportation for people of all ages and
abilities.
4. Neighborhood Meeting
A City neighborhood meeting was not required for this project and a meeting was not
held.
5. Findings of Fact/Conclusion
In evaluating the Union Place / Revive Major Amendment (MJA), staff makes the
following findings of fact:
A. The MJA complies with process located in Division 2.2 – Common
Development Review Procedures for Development Applications of Article 2 –
Administration.
B. The MJA complies with relevant standards located in Division 4.22, Service
Commercial (C-S) of Article 4 – Districts.
The Modification of Standard to Section 3.5.2(E)(2) meets the applicable
requirements of Section 2.8.2(H)(4), and the granting of this Modification is
nominal, inconsequential when considered from the perspective of the entire
development plan and would not be detrimental to the public good, because
the setback reduction is limited to the projecting privacy walls of the front
single-family building elevations in Block 4 and overall, the front portions of
the primary building facades comply with the 15 foot front setback standard,
or exceed the standard by incorporating recessed elements within the front
facades. Additionally, the reduced setback is only requested for the single-
family detached buildings in Block 4, where these buildings face private drives
that are located within interior portions of the site. Because of the location
Union Place / Revive Major Amendment and Modification of Standard, FDP #140032
Administrative Hearing, February 2, 2015
Page 12
internal to the site along private drives, and because the scope of the
modification is limited to the privacy walls, staff finds that the modification is
nominal and inconsequential, and that the plan continues to advance the
purposes of the Land Use Code as contained in Section 1.2.2 including: (L)
Encouraging the development of vacant properties within established areas
and; (O) Encouraging a wide variety of housing opportunities at various
densities that are well-served by public transportation for people of all ages
and abilities.
C. The P.D.P. complies with the relevant standards located in Article 3 – General
Development Standards, provided that the Modification of Standard is
approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of Union Place / Revive Major Amendment, FDP #140032
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Application Narrative
2. Applicant’s Modification of Standard Request
3. Site Plan
4. Landscape Plan
5. Building Elevations
6. Plat