The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSUNRISE RIDGE, SECOND FILING - MAJOR AMENDMENT - MJA180002 - DECISION - HEARING OFFICER DECISION� � CITY OF FORT COLLINS TYPE 1 ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING FINDINGS AND DECISION HEARING DATE: PROJECT NAME: CASE NUMBER: May 30, 2018 Sunrise Ridge, Second Filing, Major Amendment MJA 180002 APPLICANT: David Houts Houts Development and Construction 5102 Daylight Court Fort Collins, CO 80528 OWNERS: Houts Development and Construction LLC 3721 Precision Drive, #314 Fort Collins, CO 80528 Sunrise Ridge LLC c/o Lee R. and Debra S. Reep 5102 Daylight Court Fort Collins, CO 80528 Lee R. and Debra S. Reep, Kelly D. Smith 5102 Daylight Court Fort Collins, CO 80528 David E. and Joanne P. Taggart 4038 Stoney Creek Drive Fort Collins, CO 80525 HEARING OFFICER: Kendra L. Carberry PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request to amend the Sunrise Ridge, Second Filing, Final Plan, to change the housing type on 7 lots from single-family detached dwellings to duplexes. The change would increase in the number of units from 7 to 14, resulting in a density increase from 1.4 to 2.7 dwelling units per gross acre. The Major Amendment ("MJA") includes 3 Requests for Modification of Standard: (1) to raise the density from the allowable maximum of 2.00 to 2.77 dwelling units per gross acre; to reduce the side yard setback on all interior lot lines; and to reduce the rear yard setback on Lots 2 and 3. The site contains 5.04 acres and is bordered by the Willow Brook Subdivision (Observatory Village) to the west, Sunrise Ridge First Filing to the north, and Old Oak Estates to the south. SUMMARY OF DECISION Approved ZONE D[STRICT: Urban Estate (U-E) 6,8i20/8 O: C'SERS'FORT COLLLh'S LAA'U L'S'EISL'h'R/SE R/DGE',DECI.SIO,M1'-060818.DOC'.1' � � HEARING: The Hearing Officer opened the hearing at approximately 5:30 p.m. on May 30, 2018, in the Community Room at 281 North College Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado. EVIDENCE: During the hearing, the Hearing Officer accepted the following evidence: (1) the Planning Department Staff Report; (2) the application, plans, maps and other supporting documents submitted by the applicant; (3) a summary of verbal comments received by the City prior to the hearing from Jeffrey Squires, April Hutchinson, Hope Shurigar and Tyler Shurigar, as set forth in the memorandum from Ted Shepard dated May 30, 2018; and (4) a copy of the public notice. The Land Use Code and the formally promulgated policies of the City are all considered part of the record considered by the Hearing Officer. TESTIMONY: The following persons testified at the hearing: From the City: Ted Shepard From the Applicant: David Houts From the Public: Julie Olson, Seth Pickett, Craig Skinner I�Vl�7h[ti: 1. Evidence presented to the Hearing Officer established the fact that the hearing was properly posted, legal notices mailed and notice published. 2. The First Modification of Standard (Section 4.2(D)(1)(a), Urban Estate Maximum Allowable Density) meets the applicable requirements of Section 2.8.2(H) of the Code: a. The MJA will promote the general purpose of the Standard for which the Modification is requested equally well as a plan that complies with the Standard, because the density in the MJA is consistent with the density of the Sunrise Ridge First Filing, and the duplexes proposed in the MJA are designed to retain the established character of the neighborhood. b. The proposed increase in density from 2.00 to 2.76 dwelling units per gross acre is not detrimental to the public good and does not diverge from the standards of the Land Use Code except in a nominal, inconsequential way, because the duplexes will be appropriately spaced andlandscaped. 3. The Second Modification of Standard (Section 42(D)(2)(d), Urban Estate Required Minimum Side Yard Setbacks — Portions of All Interior Side Lot Lines) meets the applicable requirements of Section 2.8.2(H) of the Code: a. The MJA as submitted will promote the general purpose of the Standard for which the Modification is requested equally well as a plan that complies with the Standard, because the existing approved plan for the development is silent as to side-yard setbacks, and the layout of the lots in pie shapes makes larger setbacks impractical. 2 e; Bi2n�a Q: IUSERSIFORT COLLINS LAND USEISCINRISE RIDGEIDECISlON-060818.DOCX • � b. The reduction in setbacks is not detrimental to the public good and does not diverge from the standards of the Land Use Code except in a nominal, inconsequential way, because the lot sizes remain large and the building envelopes are appropriately spaced. 4. The Third Modification of Standard (Section 4.2(D)(2)(c), Urban Estate Required Minimum Rear Yard Setback — Lot 2 and 3) meets the applicable requirements of Section 2.8.2(H) of the Code: a. The proposed reduction in the rear yard setback on Lots 2 and 3 is not detrimental to the public good and does not diverge from the standards of the Land Use Code except in a nominal, inconsequential way, because the change is only 5', and the lot size is large enough to accommodate this Modification without detrimental visual impacts. In addition, the location of the building envelopes minimizes any negative impacts of such reduction. ANALYSIS Prior to and during the hearing, the public raised several concerns, including the proximity of the duplexes to existing sewer facilities and existing residences, on-street parking availability, traffic and street lighting. The Hearing Officer finds that, during the hearing, the Applicant clarified the location of the boundary lines of the MJA, established easements, the proposed buildings and existing sewer facilities. Apparently, there was some confusion about those locations, as well as the distance between the residences proposed by the MJA and existing residences. Once the easements and no- build areas were clarified, the public's concerns appeared to be sufficiently addressed. Regarding the on-street parking issue, the Applicant testified that there would be sufficient off-street parking in the 2-car garages and 2-car driveways for each of the residential units. In the case of parties or events requiring additional parking, the cul-de-sacs could accommodate additional vehicles. In addition, the testimony revealed that on-street parking is allowed on roadways adjacent to the development, if necessary. Finally, regarding the street lighting concern, the Hearing Officer finds that street lighting would be permitted even under the current, previously-approved plan, and the MJA does not appear to increase the amount of street lighting required. DECISION Based on the foregoing findings and analysis, the Hearing Officer hereby enters the following rulings: Each of the 3 Modifications of Standard is approved as submitted. DATED this 8`h day of June, 2018. �ia�.� ,�.'��:�� Kendra L. Carberry, Hearing Officer 3 6 8 ?n�8 U��('.SE2S FORT COI L/.�'S L4,ND L'SEIS(!A'RISE R/DGEIDECISIO.N-060R18 DOC.k' N �n�._ ...--p I ,_ -�-� �unrise Ridge Secand Filing Major Amendment 1 inch = 600 feet I �a __ Le Fever Dr � �� ' � �� _... � ._. . . J - % _ _ _ � � . :��, � I � � I _ ,. � . i J _ O ... . _._......,.., h � � � �i � N .. .. _ .. .. N . .,.. ( � � Precision Dr �. _�... ., . � V � � � i�1��i �� ..��i � � _�:�m` � �� __ �� _ _� �" � � � �... � i � � � � � �� .,� �;. �� I_�� l� �-�� r � � _,Steelhead St l - � " ` ` � .. _..... _ .I I I . , I� I j �� , Q _ .. �� I I I I I. �"� �� l_ . l.I ,�� — � ' ��illi�ll_i111�1! I � � � -" ��;�� _ � � � � , < « i'� � � . _) � � � � �•�- mv Rock Creek .....,. .. , Dr _ \ Vo a er Ln _. <.. . _. ��_��I�� G. � � �. _� ., _ _.. ::.�, y g � _; , � .. , - . , , � , , ._ -` , �, . , J �. ` � G /, .. . . � '::'. J I I....I I I Ii I C ... '� ' .. .._ ' . . ., ._. ... .:: ...._ ( ~ . : ' ' j .. ... � ...� ... J ......` I � � �'�Y.. � ' ��\��ir,` �� / , � i -. _: . o . _ �_ �- i � , � � : _ o � __ , o e .I i _. . . � � � - � � o � . -. 1ro �-_ � I I i� �.i � I IJ� I! I. _�I l�� ,.__� !� �. � � i Galileo Dr �, \ ` � � � � _... _ � , , -(. � II I f I 1 II I I I I � _: II � , � i I� \�� I �I �I��IIIIIIIII I � � II� �� g g I Observatory Dr � l " Observatory Dr 'I � Fo�sil �Rid e Hi h School' ii � � � �� ( � �_� o � _.. � ' �• �; �;�ii�ii��ii�_�� I�I I I I I I !�I --. � Cassiopeia Ln 2. _i I I , II,, � I.I I, I �� , l.l f� � l \\ I � I � �_ � � � o `<�: � � � � � �_.l � I -'; � ' . : ' _I Big DiPPer 0� \ `, ', .� ', �,\ �, I 1 I_...I.! I -._.. B�9 Dipper Dr -- \ � I � - --- 1 J]_.. -- ��I � �I �� .�,��; ��t ,. I I I� II I '� `� � ��ppeC . ` S �.. l. l I.. I.....I _I...J I l. l_. I '�l��e, \ ,� ��\� I_�. , /../l J. 1 abe,. � , ' � � � �. _ � � ` � ` � '� � �� , _ � _._. .. � � , , I_ � � � �� - -� � ` ,, �, I � � i � � �' � dr y � .� � � �� . � � r .�, , , I^1 ._ � o ,,� .� I� � � .; �_I i I��._.�� I�� '(� ,J �',, � j_ o -,---=� �� L � Full Moon Dr � � � � �\ � ,, ,,� C7 _ � � � o � � �.. .� � � � � . �. � � �. _ � I � � .. ' _ _ j ''1 .+ . , �� __. . - , - � , �0$8� R�� e �� I I I I i I i J-1 I 1. � I� � '� �` � � , , , � . g High SChD01 � a Eclipse Ln p , �I � � ` �! �I _�� _ � �f� � �I(I� �� ,� � �'� -� _: _.. � 1 ' I. �� - I I J- I( � _ ( `4 �. .:, 1 . � •-� �n.� _ � Cosmos Ln � --� , , _ ., ��. I I I t e - I __.__(I( I� ,III �II��...��_� -_______ ``�,11 . . � \`4:; I --- - Kechter Rd - =< - _ _ __..._._...�.. _ � _ _ E County Road 36 , .�._..._.__ ._..�__._._.._,.. ;_I � �I �Igcr � j I_I [ I I II �I w��dE! ��,,I �� __ _ ,, , . . �.,:, � I ee� � �'o� � � � � � I � � I Y_ ��_ ' IIIII_II ,;i � � o� ,; , , � I. , ,� „ � Radiant Park � Zach Efementary � � � � � � � �I � � � ' � �� I � � II _ „ , 1 1 � � �Oak Sha � � I I I ,, _,I � p � rn I I. I I o I I', aow Way o' I , _ I_I..I , � i l ` � � ,*, , _ . _ . , ��- .,�.�� 1 i�� , ` I11III�I, � � 1 Co��,�� . , ,� �� Muskra� C�reekDr � '.�.""s'_�. � � �� •. : , ' .� _ �.. � �_.. ... ___ 1 ) ' I a I 1 , '��' ' � i 1.. I � �'/ � i � 0�� I ._....1, . �. 0._I r` `�\`\ �� •" \ i ,� _ _ Q Ii. i�'1 \II�I :1 9 � . . _.. .. _. . ` , . �� i r I� �c � 1 `/ 4\. ,./..`.� I. � I ' � I ? .;� � � l l � y. .. a�., � d i _ _ _^w � _ �! ' �.'-, � �a�� ' - I I J . ... � , � .. r..r � ; �� . =' �� . .,._.. . _ __.—_ i � �.. ..... . . _ .." _ _ I . � � � r , � � '' � i � � i � � � � � I i _ _ —�-�, �_ -_ ! � — � �-- � � � - --- � �„ . �� :; ,�;. ``\' � ' f , -- . � .. . __ � _ .. �.� , _ _ �:it caf � Y . F ..� ort o �ns ,,�- � MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: � Planning, Development and Transportation Services Planning Services 281 North College Ave P.O. Box 580 Fori Collins, CO 8�-,F,'�� i�,P;� 970.221.6750 970.224.6134 - far. tcpov c:omicurrentplannrn�� Kendra Carberry, City of Fort Collins Administrative Hearing Officer Ted Shepard, Chief Planner � May 30, 2018 Sunrise Ridge 2�d Filing — Major Amendment — Phone Call Log For the consideration of Sunrise Ridge 2�d Filing, Major Amendment, the City of Fort Collins Planning Department has received three phone calls since the mailing of the notification letter. These two calls are summarized as: On May Wednesday, May 23, 2018, Staff received a phone call from Mr. Jeffrey Squires who resides in Morningside Village, which is located north of Sunrise Ridge 1St Filing. He expressed concerns about adding traffic onto Strauss Cabin Road, especially given that the new apartment complex, H- 23, was recently approved and is under construction. Staff responded that the addition of seven dwelling units did not require a Transportation Impact Study or Memorandum and does not trigger any additional public improvements 2. On Thursday, May 24, Staff received a call from Mrs. April Hutchison who resides in Old Oak Estates which is located directly south of Sunrise Ridge 2"d Filing. Mrs. Hutchison expressed concern about the distance between her house, Lot 2, Old Oak Estates, 4012 Big Dipper Drive, and the Lot 4 of Sunrise Ridge 2"d Filing. She also expressed concern about the potential value of the future dwellings relative to her house value. Staff replied that there is a 3�-foot sewer easement on the north side her lot and a 37-foot wide easement (divided between a 20-foot sewer easement and a 17-foot drainage easement) thus creating a 67-foot separation where no buildings can be placed. Staff also clarified that potential home values is not a criterion by which a land development proposal can be reviewed. 3. On Wednesday, May 30, 2018, Staff received two .�ione calls one each from Mrs. Hope Shurigar and from Mr. Tyler Shurigar who reside in Old Oak Estates located directly south of Sunrise Ridge 2"d Filing on 4030 Big Dipper Drive. Ms. Shurigar expressed concems about the available amount of parking and that parking may spill out onto public streets. She also expressed concem about the growing amount of traffic on Strauss Cabin Road and that the recently approved H-23 apartment complex will add traffic on the roads within the immediate vicinity. Mr. Shurigar expressed his opposition to the request to increase the density. Staff replied that each dwelling will have a two-car garage and a two-car driveway. Further, the amount of traffic on Strauss Cabin Road is expected to increase due to the H-23 apartment complex. Consequently, the developer is responsible for widening a segment of Strauss Cabin Road and financially participating in two other public improvements: the signalization of Harmony Road and Strauss Cabin Road and improvements to the Strauss Cabin / Kechter Road intersection in the form of a separate right tum lane. Regarding the request for increased density, this request will be forwarded to the Hearing Officer for consideration. Sunrise Rid�e 2nd Filin� Major Amendment—MJA180002 May 30, 2018 — Conference Room A-D Si�n-In Sheet PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY (NOTE: We will mail a copy of the hearing decision report to those that print legible names and addresses.) Name Address Phone Number E-mail Address r' � � . � l y �A� y.�a � �/ � �a,��`Up�n �f� P��,, � (,t 1 / �l � r, 3�oi � �� n� � 2. ��`' \ � 6 �' I > > � ��,� .,< �7DLZZ 72Z � � @,�►��ql ��(pytr, �' 3 � �a^: C�n � �1<j � < �o � �as � Gr �� h � � � -� �Z- 3 Z� �, 3. � Y � �� < < <�� .�-�. � - -- _ _- --- 4. -___ _ _---- - ��vu ,� n � , �� q,.-j-/a; -- C� o/`L! Q ' ., e 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. � o� �� Page 1 of 3