The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLAURIE SUBDIVISION PUD, 1ST FILING - AMENDED PRELIMINARY & FINAL - 44-89F - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSITEM NO. 21 MEETING DATE 3/ 2 3/ 9 2 STAFF Sherry Albertson—Cla City of Fort Collins PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD STAFF REPORT PROJECT: Laurie Subdivision PUD 1st Filing, Amended Preliminary and Final - #44-89F APPLICANT: Dr. William M. Musslewhite c/o Jack Johnson Company 1910 Prospector Ave., Suite 200 Park City, UT 84060 OWNER: Same PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for two single family lots on 1.4 acres, located on the west side of Shields Street, approximately 1/2 mile south of Harmony Road, zoned R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential. RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The applicant proposes two single family homes on this site. Lot 9 was previously the site of the approved South Shields Veterinary Clinic. The applicant has requested a variance to the minimum required density of 3 DU/acre. Staff supports the requested density variance. The proposed density is supported by the Density Chart. The applicable All Development Criteria have been addressed by this proposal. Conditions regarding executing the plat and the Development Agreement are recommended. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 300 LaPorte Ave. P.O. Boa 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 (303) 221-6750 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Laurie Subdivision PUD First Filing, Amended Preliminary and Final - #44-89F March 23, 1992 P & Z Meeting Page 2 COMMENTS 1. Background• The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: N: RLP; vacant S: RLP; existing single family residence E: RLP; existing single family residences (Clarendon Hills) W: RLP; vacant (Laurie Subdivision PUD, 2nd Filing) existing single family residences (The Ridge) This site is part of the area annexed in 1989 as The Ridge Annexation and was zoned RLP, Low Density Planned Residential. There is no PUD condition attached to the zoning of this area; therefore, single family homes are considered a "use -by -right" in this zoning designation. The applicant pursued a planned unit development for the non-residential use (veterinary clinic) that was originally proposed on Lot 9. Due to the unique characteristics of the site, a PUD has also been proposed for the residential areas of the site. The South Shields Veterinary Clinic PUD was approved in May of 1990 for a veterinary clinic on what is now shown as Lot 9 and the existing residential use on Lot 10 was to be retained. Although the final PUD plan for the veterinary clinic was approved, the final documents were never filed or recorded. The site is also a portion of the South Shields Veterinary PUD Master Plan (Overall Development Plan), which was approved by the Board in November of 1989. This plan consisted of a veterinary clinic, nine single family lots on the western portion of the site and the existing residence. 2. Land Use• Approval of the proposed amended preliminary and final plan constitutes an amendment to the South Shields Veterinary Clinic Master Plan (Overall Development Plan) which included the veterinary clinic on Lot 9. Staff believes that the deletion of the veterinary clinic in lieu of a single family lot is appropriate. Laurie Subdivision PUD First Filing, Amended Preliminary and Final - #44-89F March 23, 1992 P & Z Meeting Page 3 The proposed land use consists of two single family lots on 1.4 acres. The proposed Amended Preliminary and Final Plan was evaluated under the Residential Density Chart. The proposed density of 1 DU/1.16 acre is supported by the 40o achieved on the Density Chart. Points were awarded for proximity to a neighborhood park (new SW park site), proximity to a major employer (Front Range Community College) and energy conservation (achieving an energy rating on the Energy Score System that exceeds the minimum required score by 10 points). The proposed density does not meet the minimum required density of 3 DU/acre and the applicant has requested a variance to this requirement. Staff believes that this site serves as a logical transition between Shields Street and the lower densities of The Ridge PUD to the west. Furthermore, given the unique characteristics of this site, development at a density lower than the required 3 DU/acre is logical, to further minimize impacts on the site. Therefore, staff is recommending approval of the requested density variance. The proposed single family lots are compatible with surrounding land uses, which consist primarily of large, single family lots ranging in size from .5 acre to 1.2 acres. The gross density (including open space areas) of The Ridge PUD is 1.6 DU/acre, with net density at 1.1 DU/acre (excluding open space areas). 3. Design• The proposed lots are 23,005 and 26,288 square feet in size. Lots in excess of 15,000 square feet are excluded from the requirements of the Solar Orientation Ordinance; however, both of these lots are solar oriented. Both lots have a minimum setback of 60' from the eastern edge of the property, so homes on these lots will have adequate space for buffering from Shields Street. There is an existing irrigation channel traversing the 2nd Filing of this development. This channel provides irrigation water to the Applewood Estates development. At the present time, the open channel is proposed to be re-routed and piped through the lst and 2nd Filings in a 20' easement. The pipe will daylight into the existing open channel at the south edge of the site and continue through the properties to the south, until it crosses Shields Street farther south. A future re -alignment of the pipe is planned for with a 20' easement along the south edge of Lot 10, to provide for a future route for the existing channel on this site. Laurie Subdivision PUD First Filing, Amended Preliminary and Final - #44-89F March 23, 1992 P & Z Meeting Page 4 The Applewood Irrigation Association is an owner/proprietor of this development because the Association has a prescriptive easement for the existing irrigation channel. The remaining details regarding the irrigation pipeline route have not been finalized, so the Association has not signed the final plat. Therefore, staff is recommending the following condition: The Planning and Zoning Board approves this planned unit development final plan upon the condition that the plat for the planned unit development be executed by the developer and all other owners and proprietors (as defined by Colorado Statute) prior to the next monthly meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board; or, if not so executed, that the developer, at said next monthly meting, apply to the Board for an extension of time. If this condition is not met within the time established herein (or as extended, if 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. As of this time, the development agreement has not been signed. Therefore, staff is recommending the following condition, which essentially requires that the agreement be signed within 30 days from the date of Board approval: The Planning and Zoning Board approves this planned unit development final plan upon the condition that the development agreement for the planned unit development be negotiated between the developer and City staff and executed by the developer prior to the next monthly meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board; or, if not so executed, that the developer, at said next monthly meeting, apply to the Board for an extension of time. 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 if such presentation is made at the next succeeding monthly meeting of the Board. 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 this condition is not met within the time established herein (or as extended, if 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. Laurie Subdivision PUD First Filing, Amended Preliminary and Final - #44-89F March 23, 1992 P & Z Meeting Page 5 4. Neiahborhood Compatibilit Neighborhood meetings have been held on this project during the early planning stages, in January and June of 1990. Since that time, staff has remained in contact with area residents and representatives of The Ridge Homeowner's Association. Staff believes that this proposal, to delete the approved veterinary clinic in lieu of two single family lots, is compatible with the surrounding land uses, which consist primarily of large, single family lots. 5. Transportation: The proposed lots (along with the eight lots proposed in Laurie Subdivision, 2nd Filing) will access the site via a local street (Wooded Creek Court) from Shields Street and is feasible from a traffic engineering standpoint. RECOMMENDATION Staff finds that the Laurie Subdivision PUD, lst Filing, Amended Preliminary and Final addresses the applicable All Development Criteria of the LDGS and that the requested density variance is justified. The proposed density is supported on the Density Chart. Therefore, staff recommends approval of Laurie Subdivision PUD, 1st Filing, Amended Preliminary and Final, #44-89F with the following conditions: 1. The Planning and Zoning Board approves this planned unit development final plan upon the condition that the plat for the planned unit development be executed by the developer and all other owners and proprietors (as defined by Colorado Statute) prior to the next monthly meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board; or, if not so executed, that the developer, at said next monthly meting, apply to the Board for an extension of time. If this condition is not met within the time established herein (or as extended, if 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. 9 Laurie Subdivision PUD First Filing, Amended Preliminary and Final - #44-89F March 23, 1992 P & Z Meeting Page 6 2. The Planning and Zoning Board approves this planned unit development final plan upon the condition that the development agreement for the planned unit development be negotiated between the developer and City staff and executed by the developer prior to the next monthly meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board; or, if not so executed, that the developer, at said next monthly meeting, apply to the Board for an extension of time. 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 if such presentation is made at the next succeeding monthly meeting of the Board. 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 this condition is not met within the time established herein (or as extended, if 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. olVAmM►`■U910 E yn e 1 b, 'it Vw:, . lac N Rw f.EY• — q Planning and Zoning Board Review Requirements Certification SUR+- r.'r1e�FL"'A4Ylawr°s-fray '.� ZdFb FWas �p'RIC •Ipaaagev vtr,+V va ro•,pBaean, aya Fm2•re, i».NHLC �FA RiN.pl'Y .�..a`eT. faumgmlw eya rr. 2 RirJM ERf—H oV-1, aEVH>:iMfa+FW M(z RE.".1,CR II. Sd8—W T. THe oP / su?HL- fF.rrr rn-`' 14PG.fla's ar aarf yrrcF lFle ousir+vcfla+ pr±dx�s w;w a1. pryarRsx 3 y1�,�/W�yp��PWY.0 �RartsePjr� F41Y I�j Ct `�$D(''Itt FU'NNL E4 IFIo J`�'der 1C' r•R jIIF ARwAel pWLM fn INo rtW'1rp" Owner Certification z ,m saY u.t a.1u.r1 •mpe ex � L 4 e Y r ern, �wr 2M Fig First9 & 1A L t Filing Statement of Planning Objectives F. eoorrmaa x I, xrnq a..raw I,r oareq sl.u. anarerea,a 1- i�`m. ,laa:. Doer .r�naa wFr.11r , . °a' an �^tl . r:ay M 4rrtorpor.eeE rna •U'r'YEEr.lstm w .mta I,na uae cn,� s rlll ee tried n tM auldlri<fm Wreeants. Refer to Rs:fa :' m.,«nea For e�lierm ,Dec o ,.s a r. �rzww'�ws:e .-el I -1 v 9 Q \ \ _ r8 10 saq. Fa.r,v a.am«e c Iq Nlxth� �(• Scale: 1'=0' �y�✓r 1st 2nd Votes: Tabulations Frig Fig Lie Stb. pip mir`m� i,a�iws• a''P.er m a ,o Parcel Size. Goss va K e.s r First Fna ia�•,i• w Parcel Sae,., Net ,4 a s.,.: Sub PUD Fe,.,.q a .. eRm...i w W.•,.r If Total Snge Family Lots x e Second Fig Final i. o".en= yr,a.. ar --Y. ResKlential Density oA, Uik/dbe adv uasrdye et .o ,.r. �n•��iri•e.c'---tte Inn " �;,w.e dire aw.a ,,, Driveway Coverage Site Plan Public Street nAa Stt ROW A. ssx• wrnaaa«e or enr Rrlr.r<eroe ,m Iseaaa stu �I.ern ,aa«r,Rm rree ue crl.,m na curer or u,o Open Space Wa ss'rso zrc,• 30 Sept 1991 I,ma,n,er, .sa«ieiion. e x or yov caeca vze aoan 3 LI � 0 Planting Specifications coo _ pL<ea•nt, a af.11:ua ° a t at«iaiiaanat`P ,�: nG <p�ellNEa� brn r° CYe° eM till[ Sn ea �'o + • ma.,�.a `....,.�< _-�m,ma.s r w. t eAewlrweaa�l�y t�eW�y uovtl. �•va�'. a wlnlwu e[ ID° Ppl •a Ntc�•n t0 lbe"<t ll•bl• pnospn<rn•aarill a t - - s m o f slopes oro(bµe pl�tep a . 1 M _ -' uapnq cneniul •r .e nem in"tn BE or Container WTree Container Shrub - Slope Container Shrub - Dryland ° , �°" °� . •°'^� nra ^ •°f<n ^°NM eppll•a _ M.I�rW r.. ..�,.a....e .� lb/ern vltt 4ci1[i•r aaavG [o tin• •lorry .i: Notes i Y/ c .evo Jlxa•rtl ?.Enna: finor ,r-rarro✓ /br ,,. ..: "��, ° � � °v�"•:•''w Y<w A..�aA .w A y •. u<u w %ee�.ii4 Mb d✓,. ..r. E:...v �a f 7 An•..r w N 6r /xv •. w. maws. a accr u e.ra,.r i�<. w .rr. � iz:re ra�q,ra�l�rpw/Inaecez rw toe rartwt+s� .a p � wvlro ae u,.ey r m...p .a...<.r. R/LTML'WMA.%^"'a iNP W#tl►R lM7 MYl. Nafd� a' .t taeT awb tH1 al+4p aF K1►i M TMutc. i4�sib<� amp. r. H re.v. a,�v.<a,a.e .b ....re., Paw. rc+. wfi 24e P+a1a ra'p♦e it m .,,..+ .cur ra.v. me..nrwa /1lJrtaMlJ� KbwW atl'�-�ETP1w+gp�aG M4 pGtl�i �a Pz'f+ Iva 23,Y 5 2 e P.4en Tc 1He IWYeKtr tt' P PUP.JFIb RxwYT. orf-SiIC M5RLiw+ of viTr STMF NAz':a{ 1T-E rniSiwcTei+ m �. v *cur. 9. I� rwu. c6 BCGU�. MgIK tRe+r.o �PD� N p �'Ngg�q�}yylup zpy E M ME at vaW, M'i�ai py�i�, fi+ P R �' 7 ti°P,'>EliT Co4vliYlavo (}mULiX �EWleEEMT� Y°GS vEr'i �•N-'-'� ^�h1Tyi-Ta ze �7 6 tMIV•eWif •F Eiq•NMtm POPUVIe TII N2'cw. qv� Ya`INr'�`wr,iM,-n .:� 6 t.lhit.£�6M`folfvHWuXJ I�A1uh KJ,WNPTr uv�s lb I.2K'!.•`RI. ssw.'M 16 /Q*J �i'r6TR�rV�1/�Fy-a:+ cAPTP�UeaT7lm:'+�n.. .r INPr}l�NFP F-t. 2.:IN. jrG. ,f �a6a, :�--tf tale/• t�fnfvY.eC �sa•e: rfrt - I jW.... NL: ,e em,tlaL Rt�e: 2t Legend Existing Vegetation s o O Q U I L U LL O U) .mo ^Z) Z, a s a�� Laurie Sw. FM Amended Frst Fig Filet Laurie Sub. PLX) Second Frog Final Landscape `Plan ��991 L� LAURIE SUBDIVISION SITUATE IN THE EAST HALF OF SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 6 NORTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6tN PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, CITY Oi FORT COLLINS. COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO, At N uiurei u.wa. Nrz�i z U 1 ` i1 \ \ •rmra.a rwnx 1W226 ft 1 1� L42 — • $ w�l 1\OPEN SPAC — — — Y SU , 6c 1 ^/WRAIHAGR\ \\ \ � 3o..` I I� ✓ \ ••s \ \� \ i 2 et. W .: .. r-------- \ II 6 5k� l— — — — �J8t200' 1UTAIfewz �I� /( J Zlv MD uwn a r,awr. Ia II I - I L — — — — — ------ logy r'A ..�.::.:., ;li • R „:t E 10I t NORTH GRAPHIC SCALE �`wn•w ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, YOU MUST COMMENCE SURVEYORS CERTIFICATE DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING CITY PLANNING JACK JOHNSON 1, DOYLE E. PERGANOE. DO HEREBY CERTIFY MAT I AM A REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR AND THAT I HOLD APPROVED. AS TO FORM. BY THE APPROVED BY ME PLANNING 8 20NING BOARD ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS CERTIFICATE NO. 132M AS PRESCRIBED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STALE OF COLORADO. I FURTHER CERTIFY DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING, CITY OF OF FORT GOWNS. COLORADOPIL ON THIS COMPANY SURVEY "THIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST MAT A SURVEY HAS BEEN MADE OF ME LAND SHOWN ON THIS PLAT AND DESCRIBED HEREON. ME FORT COLLINS, STATE OF COLORADO DAY OF A.D., 19 . T. DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT. MAY ANY I FURTHER CERTIFY THAT TO ME BEST OF MY KNOM.EDGE, THIS PLAT IS A CORRECT REPRESENTATION OF SURVEYED AND HAS BEEN PREPARED IN CONFORMITY WM ME MINIMUM STANDARDS AND REDUIREMENTS ON ON MI5 —DAY OFIS ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE MAN TEN YEARS FROM ME LAND OF ME LAW. 19_ 13006 ~FAx efo DATE OF ME CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. - -ao55 foI-ew� 516-9S9-SSSf PAY S1B-S 5551 D0YLE E. PERGANDE DATE: IN •f !{e A..•ry ,r L.AP &-d • • 07e pup- 4-411nIr ALL DEVELOPMENT: NUMBERED CRITERIA CHART ALL CRITERIA APPLICABLE CRITERIA ONLY CRITERION Is the criterion ocoOCCole? WIII the criterion ce so0shecl - If no, please explain ;F Yes No NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATABILITY 1. SCCid1 COmpatablliry 2. Neighborhood Character 3. Land Use Conflicts 4. Adverse Traffic Imoact PLANS AND POLICIES 5. Comprehensive Plan PUBLIC FACILITIES & SAFETY 6. Street Capacity 7. Utility Capacity 8. Design Standards 9. Emergency Access 10. Security Lighting 11. water Hazards RESOURCE PROTECTION 12. Soils & Slope Hazard 13. Significant Vegetation 14. Wildlife Habitat I �[ 15. Historical Lanamdrx k 16. Mineral Deposit 17. Eco-Sensitive Areas 18. Agricultural Lands ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS 19. Air Quality i( 20. Water Quality 21. Noise 22. Glare & Heat 23. Vibrations 24. Exterior Lighting 25. Sewages & Wastes SITE DESIGN 26. community Organization 27. Site Organization 28. Natural Features I Y I y 29. Energy Conservation I 30. Shadows 31, Solar Access 32. Privdcv 33. Ocen Space Arrangement 34. Buiiding Heignt I II 35. Vehicular Movement 36. Vehicular Design I y I 37. Parxing 38. Active Recreational Areas 39 Private Outdoor Areas I x 40 Peae< rian Convenience I y 41 Peciesrnan Conflicts 42. LanascalcingiOloen Areas 43. Lanascaoing/Bulldings I 44 Lanascaping;Screening I I 45. Public Access 46. Signs -�t.Zavd cws (Nla js Xr . solar' nrtrwf , X -12- / A I iVI`I oiej VWI L.001, W"r IT ODENSITY CHART Maximum Earned Criterion Credit If All Dwelling Units Are Within: Credit a 200,10 2000 feet of an existing or approved rpgnoorh000 snooping center b 10 Jo p50feet ofOnexisting tionsns:x C 10 10 4000 feet or an existing or aoorovea re?onal snooping center d 200,0 3500 feet of an existing or reserved re%q:oorh000 park communry odrx or community facility. 05M� ♦V % o �•r We 10 /0 1000 feet at a school. meeting cs me rec urements or me compulsory eaucanon laws or me State of Colorado. Qf 200% 3000 feet at a major emotovrnent cerw moo" vV , ? f� o W g 5% 1000 feet of O Child cafe center. h 20 o TJorth• Fon Collins I 20% The Central Business Distinct. A project whose boundary is conngucLSto existing urban development. Crecirt mov be earned as follows: 0%— For projects wnose Orooer'v bounoary has 0 to 10% conhgurty: 10 to 15% — For projects wnese oroce-N Dounaory has 10 to 20 q conngulty, j 30% 15to20%—Fortprojects whose Drooeryboundary has 20to30%contiguity, 20 to 25%— For protects -nose uooery boundary has 30 to 40% contiguity. 25 to 30% — For projects wr= Drooer, Doundary has 40 t0 50`.e conngui y. If it con De eemorurratea mat me orolect will reduce non-renewcole energy useoge either mrougn the aDpnCOrIOn of anematve energy k systems or mrougn commi neat energy conservanon rnrsues oevona mat normary reauirea my CM Code. a 5% bonus may oe earned for every 51% reduction In energy use. Ccicujate a 1% bonus for every 50 acres included n the ororect. m Calculore me percentage of me total acres in the omeC .: at are devoted to recreational use. enter 112 of mat percentage as a bonus if me aooitcent commirs to oreserwng oefmanenr o'tsae open space mar meets me Ciiys minimum rec uremenm colculore me oercentage n of This open space acreage to me total oeveloor+em acreage. enter mis percentage as a bonus r pan or the total development budget is to oe spent On nergnoornooa Duoic vonsrt facilities wnich are not otherwise reauirea by City Code. 0 enter 2% bonus tot every S100 per welling unit nvesee If oan of the total development bueoet Is to be spent on neignbornooa toc ithes and services which are not otherwise required by City Code. P enter a 1% bonus for every 5100 per welling urvf rwvsea coit a commrrmeni Is being made to aevetOD a sDecnec oecentage at the total number of weiiing unrt tar low income families. enter mot percentage as a oonus up to a maximum of 3M coQ If a comrnmrent is being mace to Oeve oo a soecr ed Oercentoge of the total number of owailing units for Type -A• and Type -Y hanaicooDea Z housing as detinea by the City of Fort Collins co>cacte me Bonus as follows O 0 r Type •A-- Shines To'A"units OtaTl units t j r Type B" —1.0 times Type •B" unit ora�rts In no cose snail the combined bonus be greater than 3Z — It the we or eoicicent aroperry contarls an historic loin or place, a bonus may be eOme(3 for the following 3% — Fororevenrngormnlganngoumcelnftomes:eg.environmentallanduse.Desthetr—economicandsocialfactors)adversetoits S preservation: 3% — For assunng that new stiuctureswnll be in xeeor>C v rh the character of the wilding or place. while avoiding total units 3% — For proocmng oaeanve use at me Dtuc i or axoce mat will lead tom connnuance. preservation and improvemenhn an cooroona'e manner. It a portion or oil otme reourea oarxing in the rtxtnore Tmy project is provided underground within the building or in an elevated Dcnang sttucnue as on accessory use r0 the Dnmary sTru=Se. Z bonus mOy be earned as tollows t 9% — For providing 75% or more of me panahg n o =.X=e: 0% — For proviamg50-74%at" Darwngncz=Lre 3% — For providing 25-49% of me Dancing in a srloara u It a commttment is berng mace to orovide aeortvec a-ornanc fire extinguishing systems for the wewng units enrer a bonus of 10%. TOTAL qa -30-