Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMANHATTAN TOWNHOMES, SECOND FILING - PDP/FDP - FDP150021 - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTS (17)July 27, 2015 City of Fort Collins Current Planning Department 281 North College Ave. Fort Collins, CO 80524 Re: Manhattan Townhomes Please accept this request for a Modification of Standards to Section 3.5.2(E)(2) and Section 3.5.2 (D)(1) of the Land Use Code. Background The proposed Manhattan Townhomes project is located in the Manhattan Townhomes Second Filing Subdivision. The 2.208-acre site is bounded by Manhattan Avenue to the west and City- owned land to the east and south. The intent of this PDP and combined Final Plan application is to replat the existing approved plan and convert the use to a for-sale single family attached townhome project. There are 7 buildings proposed, with a total of 36 units. There are 5 2- bedroom units and 31 3-bedroom units. Overall density 16.3 dwelling units per acre. Modification to Section 3.5.2(E)(2) Code Language: Section 3.5.2(E )(2) Residential Building Setbacks, Lot Width and Size statess the following: (2) Setback from Nonarterial 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. Requested Modification: The Manhattan Townhomes project is requesting to have the minimum setback be less than fifteen (15) feet from the public street right-of-way. Modification Criteria The request of approval for this modification complies with the standards per Review Criteria 2.8.2 (H)(1) and (2) in the following ways: 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. 2 Further, We feel that the granting of the modification would not be detrimental to the public good. Justification We feel that 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 for the following reasons: • The modification is minor, when considered from the perspective of the entire development plan, which provides consistency with the Land Use Code in terms of enhanced architecture, building articulation and quality materials. • Each building fronting Manhattan Avenue has a covered front porch with clearly-defined building entries, and differing building materials and colors. This aids in further enhancing the pedestrian experience. • The proposed alternative plan continues to improve the design, quality and character of new development by exceeding the building standards set forth in Section 3.5. The use of high quality residential building materials, building articulation, projections and recesses, along with pitched roof elements ensures sensitivity to and compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. • In addition, the project is designed to reflect the characteristics of the existing established residential neighborhood. The buildings have entrances orienting to the street and sidewalks, private outdoor space, and individual identities. The garages are rear-loaded and visibility from the public streets will be minimized. • The visual impacts of the building will be greatly reduced by the use of extensive, enchanced landscaping along the street frontage, utilizing a combination of shrubs, grasses and trees that will provide adequate screening and visual interest. • The construction of the proposed plan will greatly improve a vacant parcel with partially- constructed infrastructure. Although not strictly a criteria for justification, the consruction of the project would be a benefit to the neighborhood. • We feel that the proposed alternative plan ensures sensitivity to the surrounding neighborhood by building an attractive, desirable product in an infill site with a price point that the market desires and that the community can be proud of. Modification to Section 3.5.2(D)(1)(b) Code Language: Section 3.5.2(D)(1) Relationship of Dwellings to Streets and Parking statess the following: (1) Orientation to a Connecting Walkway. Every front facade with a primary entrance to a dwelling unit shall face the adjacent street to the extent reasonably feasible. Every front facade with a primary entrance to a dwelling unit shall face a connecting walkway with no 3 primary entrance more than two hundred (200) feet from a street sidewalk. The following exceptions to this standard are permitted: (a) Up to two (2) single-family detached dwellings on an individual lot that has frontage on either a public or private street. (b) A primary entrance may be up to three hundred fifty (350) feet from a street sidewalk if the primary entrance faces and opens directly onto a connecting walkway that qualifies as a major walkway spine. (c) If a multi-family building has more than one (1) front facade, and if one (1) of the front facades faces and opens directly onto a street sidewalk, the primary entrances located on the other front facade(s) need not face a street sidewalk or connecting walkway. Requested Modification: The Manhattan Townhomes project is requesting to allow Buildings F and G to have their primary entrance be greater than 200 feet from a street sidewalk. Modification Criteria The request of approval for this modification complies with the standards per Review Criteria 2.8.2 (H)(1) and (2) in the following ways: 2. 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. Further, We feel that the granting of the modification would not be detrimental to the public good. Justification We feel that 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 for the following reasons: • Although the primary entrances to Buildings F and G are greater than 200 feet from the public street, there are numerous paths throughout the project that connect to the street. Each front door has a sidewalk connetion to a walkway spine that opens diresctly to the sidewalk on Manhattan Avenue. • This project will be contstructing the 8’ wide bicycle and pedestrian trail connection from Manhattan Avenue to the Mason Street Corridor. This important connection allows for direct access from the neighborhood to the MAX transit stop, shopping, retail, employment and other commercial areas to the east of this site. This fulfills LUC 3.2.2 (C)(6). • The modification is minor, when considered from the perspective of the entire development plan, which provides consistency with the Land Use Code in terms of enhanced architecture, building articulation and quality materials. • The proposed alternative plan continues to improve the design, quality and character of new development by exceeding the building standards set forth in Section 3.5. The use of 4 high quality residential building materials, building articulation, projections and recesses, along with pitched roof elements ensures sensitivity to and compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. • The construction of the proposed plan will greatly improve a vacant parcel with partially- constructed infrastructure. Although not strictly a criteria for justification, the consruction of the project would be a benefit to the neighborhood. • We feel that the proposed alternative plan ensures sensitivity to the surrounding neighborhood by building an attractive, desirable product in an infill site with a price point that the market desires and that the community can be proud of.