Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutProject Narratives - 10/01/2025 Carolynne C. White Attorney at Law 303.223.1197 direct cwhite@bhfs.com www.bhfs.com Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP 303.223.1100 main 675 Fifteenth Street, Suite 2900 Denver, Colorado 80202 October 1, 2025 City of Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Commission 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins 80524 RE: Proposed Strauss Lakes Annexation and Overall Development Plan Dear Planning and Zoning Commission: We represent and are land use counsel to Cottonwood Land and Farms, LLC (“Cottonwood”) with respect to the following applications: • An application for the annexation (the “Annexation”) of approximately 147.5 acres at the northeast corner of Horsetooth Road and Ziegler Road (the “County Property”) and zoning of the Property to Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (“LMN”) and Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (“MMN”) (the “Zoning”), and • An application for the Strauss Lakes overall development plan (the “ODP”) on approximately 160.49 acres, composed of approximately 12.99 acres at the northeast corner of Horsetooth Road and Ziegler Road (the “Annexed Property”) and the County Property (collectively, the “Property”). The purpose of this letter is to provide the Planning and Zoning Commission (the “Commission”) with additional information that may aid the Commission in reviewing the applications for the Annexation and ODP. I. BACKGROUND A. Cottonwood’s long-standing relationship with the City and Fort Collins community Cottonwood, the owner of the Property and the applicant for the Annexation, Zoning, and ODP, has had a long and collaborative relationship with the City of Fort Collins (the “City”) as well as a deep history of investment in the Fort Collins community. For example, prior to the City establishing its Natural Areas Department, Cottonwood donated more than 200 acres north of Prospect Avenue to the Southeast Poudre Greenbelt Association for the preservation of open lands. Notably, the City now owns and manages this property, which is known as the Riverbend Ponds Natural Area. Cottonwood also gifted approximately 200 acres of land south of Prospect Avenue to the City, now known as the Running Deer October 1, 2025 Page 2 Natural Area. Additionally, Cottonwood donated 15 acres of land to the City in 1993 or 1994, ground which is the current home of the Hageman Earth Cycle business operation. Finally, in 2014, Cottonwood bargain sold approximately 59 acres to the City’s Parks Department for the East Community Park. As part of that project, Cottonwood donated clean fill and top soil that had a market value of approximately $1.86 million. B. The Strauss Lakes Property The Property was purchased by Cottonwood in 1977. In 1978, a concrete batch plant was constructed and a total of 515 acres were approved for sand and gravel mining by Larimer County and the State of Colorado. Larimer County approved 100 acres of industrial zoning for the northwest portion of the property, stretching both north and south of the railroad tracks. The County Property is located in unincorporated Larimer County and is zoned industrial and rural residential. The Annexed Property has been annexed to the City and is currently zoned LMN. C. Proposed Development Cottonwood intends to seek approval of (i) the annexation to the City of the County Property and the zoning of the County Property as LMN and MMN as described further in the application for the Annexation and (ii) an ODP for the entire Property. Ultimately, Cottonwood intends to develop the Property with a mix of townhomes, carriage homes, single family homes, paired homes, and multifamily homes (the “Project”). As part of the Project, Cottonwood also proposes to develop a mix of commercial uses north of William Neal Parkway. This area may include business uses and neighborhood serving commercial uses, including but not limited to retail, restaurant, daycare, and neighborhood support service uses. Please note that Cottonwood submitted a preliminary design review application for a project for the Property in 2020 (the “Prior Project”), and a preliminary design review meeting with the City was held on May 6, 2020 for the Prior Project. Subsequently, the application for the Prior Project was withdrawn. In 2021, Cottonwood submitted a request for a proposal review of a proposed development on the Property, and a proposal review was held before the Planning Commission on January 20, 2022. An application was never submitted in connection with the 2022 proposal review. On December 21, 2023, a proposal review for a planned unit development overlay (the “PUD Overlay”) for the Property was held before the Planning and Zoning Commission (the “Commission”). On May 8, 2024, a preliminary design review meeting was held with City staff, and on May 13, 2024, a neighborhood meeting was held for the Project. Feedback from the proposal review, preliminary design review, and neighborhood meeting have been incorporated into the applications. October 1, 2025 Page 3 A submittal of the application for the Annexation and PUD Overlay for the Property were made on November 21, 2024, and City comments were provided on January 28, 2025. At that time, the Annexation and PUD Overlay included, in addition to the Property, an approximately 22.65-acre parcel located to the north of the Property (the “Northern Parcel”). However, at this time the Northern Parcel is no longer included in the application for either the Annexation or the ODP. After several discussions with the City, and in response to feedback from City staff, the application for a PUD Overlay has been converted into the application for the ODP that is the subject of this letter. II. ANALYSIS – ANNEXATION OF COUNTY PROPERTY The Fort Collins Land Development Code effective as of May 17, 2024 (the “Code”) and the Colorado Municipal Annexation Act of 1965 (the “Act”) establish the processes and requirements for annexations. The City’s process is set forth in Section 6.10 of the Code, and the criteria for eligibility of a property for annexation are set forth in Section 31-12-104, C.R.S. What follows is an explanation of how the Annexation application complies with such criteria. A. Landowner Consent Except in limited circumstances, an annexation may only be approved with the consent of the landowners of the property subject to the annexation, which can be demonstrated through a public election or through submittal of an annexation petition that is “signed by persons comprising more than fifty percent of the landowners in the area and owning more than fifty percent of the area, excluding public streets, and alleys and any land owned by the annexing municipality.” Colo. Const. Art. II, Section 30; C.R.S. § 31-12-104(1). Here, Cottonwood, the property owner, has signed the petition for annexation attached to the application for Annexation. Therefore, this requirement is met. B. One-Sixth Contiguity Further, the subject property must meet a minimum contiguity requirement. More specifically, the City must find that “not less than one-sixth of the perimeter of the area proposed to be annexed is contiguous with the annexing municipality.” C.R.S. § 31-12-104(1)(a). The County Property far exceeds the one-sixth contiguity requirement in the Act. The County Property is contiguous with the City along its southern and western borders. Therefore, the County Property satisfies the one-sixth contiguity requirement in the Act. C. Community of Interest The City must also find that “a community of interest exists between the area proposed to be annexed and the annexing municipality; that said area is urban or will be urbanized in the near future; and that said area is integrated with or is capable of being integrated with the annexing municipality.” C.R.S. § 31-12-104(1)(b). The fact that the subject property has satisfied the one-sixth contiguity requirement October 1, 2025 Page 4 described above “shall be a basis for a finding of compliance with these requirements,” unless certain facts are demonstrated at a hearing that prove at least two of the following three factors: (a) that the adult residents of the subject property will not use the services provided in the annexing municipality or work in the annexing municipality, (b) that the landowners intend to dedicate the subject property exclusively to agricultural use for at least the next five years, and (c) that it would not be physically practicable to extend municipal services to the subject property. Id. In other words, if the subject property is sufficiently contiguous with the annexing municipality, it is assumed that they share a community of interest unless it can be proven that they are in fact incompatible. Here, because the County Property satisfies the one-sixth contiguity requirement, it can be concluded that the County Property satisfies the above-mentioned requirements regarding the existence of a community of interest between the County Property, on one hand, and the City, on the other hand. Additionally, as demonstrated by the ODP, the Property is not intended to be dedicated to agricultural uses, and is intended to provide residences and services for adults who will use the services of and work in the City. As the Property is adjacent to existing development in the City, it is physically practicable to extend municipal services to the Property. Also, the Property is located within the growth management area indicated on the City’s Structure Plan. Therefore, a community of interest exists between the County Property and the City. III. ANALYSIS – ZONING OF COUNTY PROPERTY – STATEMENT OF CONSISTENCY In connection with an application for Annexation, the City requires a statement of consistency of the requested Zoning—in this case LMN and MMN—with the City’s Structure Plan. The City’s Structure Plan designates the Property as “Mixed Neighborhood,” which is characterized by the types of uses permitted in LMN and MMN, including single-family detached homes, duplexes, townhomes, small scale multifamily buildings, small-scale retail, restaurants/cafes, and similar uses. According to the Structure Plan, new neighborhoods in the “Mixed Neighborhood” place type should “provide opportunities for a variety of attached and detached housing options and amenities in a compact neighborhood setting” and should “include a mix of housing options (lot size, type, price range, etc.)” LMN and MMN zoning are compatible with this purpose because they emphasize housing variety and resident-serving amenities. According to the Code, LMN is intended to be “a setting for a variety of housing” and to encourage “complementary commercial and institutional land uses and amenities,” and MMN is intended for “a diverse range of higher intensity housing and complementary services and amenities.” Overall, LMN and MMN zoning are overwhelmingly consistent with the Structure Plan. IV. ANALYSIS – ODP The Code requires that the criteria set forth in Section 6.5.2.(I) of the Code must be met for approval of an ODP. As described in detail throughout this section, all of these criteria are met. October 1, 2025 Page 5 A. Criterion 1: The overall development plan shall be consistent with the permitted uses and zone district standards contained in Articles 2 and 4 for all zone districts contained within the boundaries of the overall development plan. The plan shall also be consistent with any development standards (Articles 3 and 5) that can be applied at the level of detail required for an overall development plan submittal. Only one (1) application for an overall development plan for any specific parcel or portion thereof may be pending for approval at any given time. Such application shall also be subject to the provisions for delay set out in Section 6.3.11. The ODP is consistent with the permitted uses and zone district requirements in the LMN and MMN zone districts, as well as with the development standards in Articles 3 and 5 of the Code. Article 2 -Zone Districts Article 2 of the Code sets forth district-specific development standards, including for LMN and MMN zone districts. As demonstrated by the ODP, and particularly the land-use statistics table, the ODP is consistent with the requirements in Article 2 applicable to LMN and MMN, except as modified by the modifications of standards (the “Modifications”) included in the ODP. Schedule 1 attached hereto describes in detail all of the requested Modifications and how those requested Modifications meet the applicable criteria for approval set forth in Section 6.8.2 of the Code. Article 4 – Use Standards With respect to the use requirements in Article 4 of the Code, the ODP is consistent with the permitted uses in LMN and MMN. The Project is designed to be a dynamic mixed-use development with a variety of beneficial uses allowed in the LMN and MMN zone districts, including housing, business and commercial utilizations, and open space and recreational opportunities. With respect to housing, the ODP contemplates a variety of housing options at a variety of market rate, attainable, and affordable price points, including single unit dwellings, single unit attached dwellings, and multi-unit dwellings, all of which are permitted within the LMN and MMN zone districts. In addition to the housing options outlined above, the mixed-use development proposed in the ODP would support a diverse array of business and commercial utilizations that are intentionally developed to complement the surrounding housing options. These may include a variety of neighborhood center uses, including but not limited to restaurants, personal and business service shops, retail stores, and childcare centers. Articles 3 and 5 – Development Standards October 1, 2025 Page 6 The ODP also complies with all applicable zone district development standards in Articles 3 and 5 of the Code, except as modified by the Modifications. Article 3 of the Code addresses the building standards applicable to residential building types. The ODP is consistent with all of these building standards and facilitates the compliance of future project development plans (each, a “PDP”) with these building standards (as modified by the Modifications). Article 5 of the Code describes general development and site design standards that apply throughout the City. The following analysis describes the ways in which the ODP is consistent with all applicable standards in Article 5, all as modified by the Modifications: • Division 5.2 Affordable Housing. The ODP contemplates the development of affordable housing and facilitates its integration into the Project in future PDPs in ways that shall comply with the requirements of Division 5.2. • Division 5.3 Residential Development. o The ODP is consistent with all of the requirements for residential development, including the required mix of housing, building orientation, block requirements, building setbacks, lot width and size, and garage design. o Additionally, the ODP contemplates development of a neighborhood center, as required by Section 5.3.3 of the Code north of William Neal Parkway. o The ODP also contemplates the development of small neighborhood parks throughout the Project, consistent with Section 5.3.4 of the Code. • Division 5.4 Development Infrastructure. o The ODP is consistent with and facilitates construction of the Project, including all development infrastructure, in compliance with Division 5.4. o Additionally, the ODP is in compliance with the Master Street Plan, as required by Section 5.4.5(D) of the Code and will facilitate future development that is consistent with the requirements for streets, streetscapes, alleys and easements described in Section 5.4.6 of the Code; the street pattern and connectivity standards in Section 5.4.7 of the Code; the emergency access standards in Section 5.4.8 of the Code; and the bus stop design standards in Section 5.4.9 of the Code. o Section 5.4.10 of the Code requires the submittal of a transportation impact study, which has been submitted in connection with the ODP. • Division 5.5 Environmental Requirements. o This division of the Code includes requirements related to noise and vibration, hazardous materials, glare or heat, solar access, orientation and shading, and parks and trails. Most of these requirements are not applicable at the ODP stage. October 1, 2025 Page 7 o Section 5.5.5 of the Code requires all development plans shall provide for, accommodate, or otherwise connect to the parks and trails identified in the City’s ReCreate Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Final locations for parks and trails will be determined at the PDP stage, but the ODP has designated a number of conceptual park and trail locations, consistent with the ReCreate Parks and Recreation Master Plan. • Division 5.6 Environmental Site Suitability. Most of the requirements of this division of the Code will become applicable at the PDP stage rather than the ODP stage. However, in connection with the ODP, an Ecological Characterization Study (“ECS”) has been provided, as required by Section 5.6.1 of the Code. The ECS assesses the ecological features of the site and has informed the rough estimates of natural area buffer zones in the ODP and shall inform such zones in future PDPs. • Division 5.7 Compact Urban Growth Standards. The purpose of this division of the Code is to require that no development may be approved unless it is located within the City limits and meets the City’s standards for degree of contiguity, availability of adequate public facilities, and access. As described in Section II (Annexation) above, the Property has contiguity with existing urban development and access to adequate public facilities. • Division 5.8 Historic. This division of the Code is inapplicable, as there are no historic resources on the Property. • Division 5.9 through 5.16. These divisions of the Code set forth a number of requirements related to landscaping and tree protection, trash and recycling enclosures, exterior site lighting, yards and setbacks, building standards, and signs that will be applicable at future stages of development when site details and engineering details are available. However, the ODP is consistent with and facilitates development of the Project in conformance with the applicable requirements. • Division 5.17 Water Adequacy Determinations. In connection with the Project, Cottonwood will coordinate with the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District and the South Fort Collins Sanitation District to determine water and sewer capacity for the Project. Therefore, the ODP is consistent with all applicable zone district and use standards in Articles 2 and 4 of the Code and with all development standards in Articles 3 and 5 of the Code, and this criterion is met. B. Criterion 2: The overall development plan shall be consistent with the required density range of residential uses (including lot sizes and housing types) with regard to any land which is part of the overall development plan and which is included in the following districts of Article 2: October 1, 2025 Page 8 o The Rural Land District (RUL). o The Urban Estate District (UE). o The Residential Foothills District (RF). o The Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (LMN). o The Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (MMN). o The High Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (HMN). o The Manufactured Housing District (MH). o The Community Commercial - North College District (CCN). o The Harmony Corridor District (HC). o The Employment District (E). The Property is located within the LMN and MMN districts, and is consistent with the required density range of residential uses. According to Section 2.2.1 of the Code, in the LMN zone district, the maximum density for residential units is 1 unit per 3,630 square feet of site area and the minimum density for residential units is 1 unit per 10,000 square feet of site area. According to Section 2.2.2 of the Code, in the MMN zone district, there is no maximum density for residential units, and the minimum density for residential units is 1 unit per 5,000 square feet of site area. As demonstrated by the Land-Use Statistics table in the ODP, the ODP proposes unit ranges consistent with these Code requirements and facilitates development consistent with the standards for lot sizes and housing types in the LMN and MMN zone districts, as applicable, as such standards are modified by the Modifications. Therefore, this criterion is met. C. Criterion 3: The overall development plan shall conform to the Master Street Plan requirements and the street pattern/connectivity standards both within and adjacent to the boundaries of the plan as required pursuant to Sections 5.4.5 and 5.4.7(A) through (F). The overall development plan shall identify appropriate transportation improvements to be constructed and shall demonstrate how the development, when fully constructed, will conform to the Transportation Level of Service Requirements as contained in Section 5.4.10 by submittal of a Comprehensive Level Transportation Impact Study. A Comprehensive Level Transportation Impact Study (the “Traffic Study”) has been submitted in connection with the ODP. The Traffic Study identifies the appropriate transportation improvements to be constructed and analyzes and demonstrates how the Project will conform to the Transportation Level of Service Requirements in the Code. In accordance with the recommendations of the Traffic Study, the intersection of William Neal Parkway and Ziegler Road will be signalized. October 1, 2025 Page 9 As demonstrated by the ODP and the Traffic Study, the ODP will conform to the City of Fort Collins Master Street Plan, dated February 15, 2011, as amended (the “Master Street Plan”). D. Criterion 4: The overall development plan shall provide for the location of transportation connections to adjoining properties in such manner as to ensure connectivity into and through the overall development plan site from neighboring properties for vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle movement, as required pursuant to Section 5.4.7(F) and Section 5.9.1(C)(6). Roadway access to the Project will be via several public street connections from both Ziegler and Horsetooth Roads. It is the intent to align street access with both Percheron Road and William Neal Parkway. As noted above, the intersection of William Neal Parkway and Ziegler Road will be signalized. Internal roadway networks will be provided to connect the various neighborhoods. Pedestrian connectivity will be provided throughout the Project, with on-street sidewalks and a series of bike/pedestrian pathways to the future East Community Park and the City’s trail system. The Project will be a walkable community with multiple connections to the surrounding open spaces, community park, and trails. Therefore, this criterion is met. E. Criterion 5: The overall development plan shall show the general location and approximate size of all natural areas, habitats and features within its boundaries and shall indicate the applicant's proposed rough estimate of the natural area buffer zones as required pursuant to Section 5.6.1(E). The ODP shows the general location of all natural areas, habitats, features, and natural area buffer zones. Natural features include the existing irrigation ditches that surround the site. As a result of the East Community Park and development, the Boxelder Ditch Company may require the Boxelder Ditch be put in a u-shaped concrete channel with a metal grate. In addition, the FCRID runs along and through the site, generally on the west side of the Property. Appropriate setbacks and mitigation will be provided to protect the FCRID corridor. The FCRID and Boxelder ditches will be incorporated into the development, with the natural habitat buffer to be usable as a green space and an open space amenity for the community. There are also significant natural features to the north and east of the Project including a large reservoir, the Cache la Poudre River, and the future East Community Park. The Project will work with the City to coordinate efforts in trail connections and road connections to enhance the area and provide appropriate access to these great amenities. Therefore, this criterion is met. F. Criterion 6: The overall development plan shall be consistent with the appropriate Drainage Basin Master Plan. October 1, 2025 Page 10 The site drains towards the southeast and utilizes the existing Boxelder Ditch corridor towards the Foothills Drainage Channel to convey flows to the Cache La Poudre River east of the Project. Because the Foothills Drainage Channel was designed with additional capacity for future development, the Project plans to discharge with limited detention as dictated based on final land use intensity, channel capacity analysis, and storm peak timing analysis. Multiple stormwater control facilities will be incorporated into the overall landscape plan to control flows throughout the site, with a final pond in the southeast corner anticipated to provide final flow control prior to discharging to the Foothills Drainage Channel. Additionally, the southwest corner parcel to the west of the FCRID will drain to a detention and water quality pond to be located in the north corner of said parcel. A drainage report has been provided in connection with the ODP. Per the 1989 Agreement between the City and Cottonwood, Cottonwood has the right to utilize all excess capacity in the Foothills Drainage Channel. Offsite flows from upstream properties are directed towards the FCRID and routed through the site in the FCRID, with diversion into the Foothills Drainage Channel at the radial control gate north of Horsetooth Road. Historic drainage patterns are not anticipated to be modified as part of the proposed development. In accordance with City of Fort Collins requirements, the Project will incorporate Low Impact Design (“LID”) measures throughout the development in order to reduce runoff rates and provide water quality treatments. As the Project will impact more than one acre, full compliance with Colorado Department of Health and Environment and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System requirements will be provided. LID and water quality treatment measures shall be provided throughout, with each phase being required to provide the appropriate treatment. A wide variety of methods are anticipated to be utilized across the development to achieve the required goals. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the Drainage Basin Master Plan, and this criterion is met. G. Criterion 7: Any standards relating to housing density and mix of uses will be applied over the entire overall development plan, not on each individual project development plan review. Standards related to housing density and mix of uses are applicable throughout the entire ODP, as adjusted to accommodate the standards of the underlying zone districts. All future PDPs for the Project shall comply with the housing density and mix of use standards set forth in the ODP. Therefore, this criterion is met. October 1, 2025 Page 11 V. CONCLUSION As demonstrated throughout this letter, the proposed Annexation and ODP meet all the criteria in the Code for approval. We respectfully request that you recommend approval of the Annexation, Zoning, and ODP. Sincerely, Carolynne C. White Enclosures October 1, 2025 Page 12 Schedule 1 Modifications of Standards [See attached] 28171849.13 34340204.11 1 STRAUSS LAKES MODIFICATION OF STANDARDS 9/30/2025 The Applicant requests nine modifications of standards in Articles 2, 3, and 5 of the Code. Pursuant to Sections 6.8.1 and 6.8.2 of the Code, in connection with the approval of an ODP the Planning and Zoning Commission may grant a modification of any of the following: • the zone district standards in Article 2 of the Code, excluding Section 2.6.3 PUD Overlay, • the building standards in Article 3 of the Code, • the use standards in Article 4 of the Code, not including any use listed in the use table, and • the general development and site design standards of Article 5. Any such modification may be granted upon a finding that “the granting of the modification would not be detrimental to the public good” and at least one of the following: “(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 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.” Each of the requests by the Applicant for modifications of standards meets the criteria as follows. 34340204.11 2 ARTICLE 2 ZONE DISTRICTS Modification #1 Section 2.2 Mixed-Use Section 2.2.1 LMN Development Standards – Entrances and Orientation - Non-Residential & Mixed Use Code Language: Entrance faces street, opens directly onto adjoining local street. Requested Modification: For non-residential & mixed-use buildings, entrances shall be required to face streets and open directly onto adjoining streets where feasible. If an entrance is unable to face and open directly onto an adjoining street, then a network of sidewalks and connecting walkways through the parking areas connecting the entrance to the street shall suffice, provided that techniques to enhance pedestrian safety and enhance the pedestrian experience are implemented, which such techniques may include but are not limited to bulb-outs, raised crosswalks, patterned concrete, and textured surfaces. The connecting walkway may cross a driveway. Modification Criteria: The request for approval of this modification fulfills the criteria in Sections 6.8.2(H)(1) and (3) of the Code in the following ways. Justification: • The modification would not be a detriment to the public good. This modification would not be a detriment to the public good and in fact would enhance the public good because it facilitates more flexible design and desirable development. The standard as written would require non-residential and mixed-use buildings to face William Neal Parkway with parking to the rear (lake-side), when patios facing the lake would be most desirable and most consistent with new urbanist principles. The standard as written would also require less desirable pedestrian connections along the street instead of along the lake. The modification therefore brings the advantages of being visually more interesting, safer, and quieter than fronting onto a public street. The patrons of any commercial establishments and the residents of any dwelling units will not need to walk any farther to access neighborhood amenities or to leave the neighborhood on foot than they would if the buildings were oriented to a public street. Therefore, this criterion is met. • Criterion 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: The purpose of the standard is to ensure that a street sidewalk or walkway directly connects a main entrance of a building to the street sidewalk without requiring pedestrians to walk across parking lots or driveways. However, this is not always possible or necessary to ensure pedestrian safety. This modification meets the general purpose of the standard equally well or better by requiring techniques to enhance pedestrian safety such as bulb-outs and raised crosswalks, which help enhance pedestrian visibility, reduce vehicle speeds, and fit within the context of the mixed-use neighborhood, as well as new urbanist techniques such as patterned concrete and textured surface to enhance the pedestrian experience. 34340204.11 3 This modification is also supported by the following principles and policies of City Plan: o “Support walking as a safe, easy and convenient travel option for all ages and abilities by building a connected network of sidewalks, paths and trails.” (Principle T 7) o “Safe Pedestrian Facilities: Develop safe and secure pedestrian settings by developing and maintaining an appropriately lit pedestrian network, enforcing snow removal on sidewalks adjacent to residential properties and mitigating the impacts of vehicles. Connections will be clearly visible and accessible, incorporating markings, signage, lighting and paving materials.” (Policy T 7.2) o “Pedestrian Connections: Provide an attractive, safe environment for pedestrians, bicyclists and drivers on neighborhood streets with well-designed streetscapes, including detached sidewalks, parkways and well-defined crosswalks.” (Policy T 7.4) As an illustrative example of a parking lot crossing at an urban shopping center that incorporates techniques to enhance pedestrian safety and meets the purpose of the standard equally well or better, please see the below graphic: Well-defined crosswalk across a private drive. Therefore, this criterion is met. • Criterion 3: by reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional situations, unique to such property, including, but not limited to, 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, 34340204.11 4 provided that such difficulties or hardship are not caused by the act or omission of the applicant: Additionally, physical conditions and extraordinary and exceptional situations unique to the property would result in unusual and exceptional practical difficulties not caused by the Applicant. The placement of William Neal Parkway creates a narrow site between William Neal Parkway and the lake to the north, which makes it difficult to follow the standard as written in a way that facilitates desirable building configuration. As noted above, the placement of William Neal Parkway would create the practical difficulties of less desirable dwelling unit and commercial building configurations and less desirable pedestrian connections. By contrast, the modification reflects creative project design that overall provides more pedestrian connectivity than other traditional neighborhoods. Therefore, this criterion is met. Modification #2 Section 2.2 Mixed Use Section 2.2.1 LMN Development Standards – Building Placement & Building Envelope – Building Height Code Language: Building Height – Residential - Up to 3 Units – 2.5 Stories max. Requested Modification: The maximum building height of any residential building shall be 3 stories. Modification Criteria: The request for approval for this modification meets the criteria set forth in Sections 6.8.2(H)(1) and (4) of the Code in the following ways: Justification: • The modification would not be a detriment to the public good. This modification would not be detrimental to the public good. It advances the public good by supporting a greater variety of housing types and sizes near infrastructure and daily amenities, which supports walkability, reduces vehicle miles traveled, and lowers long‑term public service costs. The modification also advances affordability and housing choice by enabling small, low- rise formats that broaden the range of attainable homes without changing the character of the neighborhood. Therefore, this criterion is met. • Criterion 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: The original 2.5‑story limit was intended to keep homes in scale with their surroundings and protect light, air, and privacy. This modification achieves the same goal while better supporting the City Plan vision of creating greater housing diversity and housing choice. This approach encourages compact, walkable neighborhoods with a mix of housing types, which are key principles of new urbanism. This modification also furthers the following goals of City Plan, which call for more housing choices, efficient land use, and connected, livable communities: 34340204.11 5 o “New Neighborhoods: Encourage creativity in the design and construction of new neighborhoods that: Provides a unifying and interconnected framework of streets, sidewalks, walkway spines and other public spaces; Expands housing options, including higher-density and mixed-use buildings; Offers opportunities to age in place; Improves access to services and amenities; and Incorporates unique site conditions.” (Policy LIV 4.1) o “Create more opportunities for a range of housing choices.” (Principle LIV 5) o “Housing Options: To enhance community health and livability, encourage a variety of housing types and densities, including mixed-use developments that are well served by public transportation and close to employment centers, shopping, services and amenities.” (Policy LIV 5.1) Therefore, this criterion is met. • Criterion 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. This modification represents a modest dimensional adjustment. The difference between 2.5 stories and 3 stories is minor in both visual and functional terms for low-rise residential buildings. The overall building form remains consistent with the intended scale of the district, and the change does not alter the permitted use or any development standards such as setbacks, lot coverage, or parking. When viewed in the context of the entire development plan, the effect of this change is minimal. It does not create measurable new impacts on traffic, utilities, or public services, nor does it compromise neighborhood character. The modification continues to advance the purposes of the Land Use Code in Section 1.2.2 by promoting a wide variety of housing opportunities and compact, walkable neighborhoods. Please see the below illustrative graphic, demonstrating how the resulting dwelling units will continue to maintain consistency with the density and form of the neighborhood: Proposed: 3-story building height maximum for all residential buildings. 34340204.11 6 Therefore, this criterion is met. Modification #3 Section 2.2 Mixed-Use Section 2.2.2 MMN Development Standards – Entrances and Orientation - Non- Residential & Mixed Use Code Language: Entrance faces street, opens directly onto adjoining local street. Requested Modification: For non-residential & mixed-use buildings, entrances shall be required to face streets and open directly onto adjoining streets where feasible. If an entrance is unable to face and open directly onto an adjoining street, then a network of sidewalks and connecting walkways through the parking areas connecting the entrance to the street shall suffice, provided that techniques to enhance pedestrian safety and enhance the pedestrian experience are implemented, which such techniques may include but are not limited to bulb-outs, raised crosswalks, patterned concrete, and textured surfaces. The connecting walkway may cross a driveway. Modification Criteria: The request for approval of this modification fulfills the criterion in Section 6.8.2(H)(1) of the Code in the following ways. Justification: • The modification would not be a detriment to the public good. This modification would not be a detriment to the public good and in fact would enhance the public good because it facilitates more flexible design and desirable development. The standard as written would require non-residential and mixed-use buildings, such as certain clubhouses, to face the street with parking to the rear, when more flexible development would be more desirable and most consistent with new urbanist principles. The standard as written could also require less desirable pedestrian connections along the street. The modification therefore brings the advantages of being visually more interesting, safer, and quieter than fronting onto a public street. The patrons of any commercial establishments and the residents of any dwelling units will not need to walk any farther to access neighborhood amenities or to leave the neighborhood on foot than they would if the buildings were oriented to a public street. Therefore, this criterion is met. • Criterion 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: The purpose of the standard is to ensure that a street sidewalk or walkway directly connects a main entrance of a building to the street sidewalk without requiring pedestrians to walk across parking lots or driveways. However, this is not always possible or necessary to ensure pedestrian safety. This modification meets the general purpose of the standard equally well or better by requiring techniques to enhance pedestrian safety such as bulb-outs and raised crosswalks, which help enhance pedestrian visibility, reduce vehicle speeds, and fit within the context of the 34340204.11 7 mixed-use neighborhood, as well as new urbanist techniques such as patterned concrete and textured surfaces to enhance the pedestrian experience. This modification is also supported by the following principles and policies of City Plan: o “Support walking as a safe, easy and convenient travel option for all ages and abilities by building a connected network of sidewalks, paths and trails.” (Principle T 7) o “Safe Pedestrian Facilities: Develop safe and secure pedestrian settings by developing and maintaining an appropriately lit pedestrian network, enforcing snow removal on sidewalks adjacent to residential properties and mitigating the impacts of vehicles. Connections will be clearly visible and accessible, incorporating markings, signage, lighting and paving materials.” (Policy T 7.2) o “Pedestrian Connections: Provide an attractive, safe environment for pedestrians, bicyclists and drivers on neighborhood streets with well-designed streetscapes, including detached sidewalks, parkways and well-defined crosswalks.” (Policy T 7.4) As an illustrative example of a parking lot crossing serving non-residential uses that incorporates techniques to enhance pedestrian safety and meets the purpose of the standard equally well or better, please see the below graphic: Example of a well-defined crosswalk across a private drive. Therefore, this criterion is met. 34340204.11 8 ARTICLE 3 BUILDING TYPES Modification #4 Section 3.1.4 Rowhouse Section 3.1.4 Lot Standards Code Language: Rowhouse lot area shall be 1,400 sq. ft. minimum. Requested Modification: A minimum lot area of 1,000 sq. ft. shall be required for any rowhouse. Modification Criteria: The request for approval of this modification fulfills the relevant criteria set forth in Sections 6.8.2(H)(1) and (4) of the Code in the following ways: Justification: • The modification would not be a detriment to the public good. The proposed modification would not be a detriment to the public good. Rather, it would enhance the public good by facilitating development more consistent with the City Plan, including the following policies and goals: o “Opportunity to provide alternatives to the more typical single-family detached homes or apartments available in Fort Collins, such as duplexes, townhomes and ADUs.” (Benefits of “Mixed Neighborhoods”) o “Create more opportunities for a range of housing choices.” (Principle LIV 5) o “Housing Options: To enhance community health and livability, encourage a variety of housing types and densities, including mixed-use developments that are well served by public transportation and close to employment centers, shopping, services and amenities.” (Policy LIV 5.1) The City Plan clearly envisions development in mixed neighborhoods like the Project that is more dense and provides a greater variety of housing types. The proposed modification is consistent with these goals and policies because it facilitates smaller, denser lots and a greater diversity of product types. Therefore, this criterion is met. • Criterion 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: The general purpose of this standard is to promote good design and livability. The modified standard promotes this general purpose as well as or better than the original standard because it helps the ODP achieve the principles of new urbanism. While a lot size minimum of 1,400 square feet is intended to increase livability by allowing for private outdoor space, the ODP facilitates livability equally as well, if not better, through shared open spaces, including all of the walkable parks described in the cover letter for the application. Therefore, this criterion is met. 34340204.11 9 • Criterion 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. The modification deviates from the original standard in a nominal, inconsequential way when considered from the perspective of the entire ODP, and when the needs of future residents are considered. This is true because the modification will not result in a significant difference to the type of housing product that can be constructed. The attached nature of the product means that the look and feel of dwelling units constructed on lots less than 1,400 square feet but more than 1,000 square feet will be similar to the look and feel of dwelling units constructed on lots of 1,400 square feet. Residents will have a comparable living experience while gaining the benefit of common open space that provides opportunities for socializing and recreation. Please see the below illustrative graphic of a typical lot, demonstrating how the resulting dwelling units will be configured in a way that continues to enhance livability and neighborhood character while also increasing housing variety in the City: 34340204.11 10 Therefore, this criterion is met. 34340204.11 11 Modification #5 Section 3.1.6 Detached House - Urban Section 3.1.6 Lot Standards Code Language: A minimum lot width of 40’ shall be required for any urban detached house. Requested Modification: A minimum lot width of 30’ shall be required for any urban detached house. Modification Criteria: The request for approval for this modification meets the criteria set forth in Section 6.8.2(H)(1) and (4) of the Code in the following ways: Justification: • The modification would not be a detriment to the public good. This modification would not be detrimental to the public good. On the contrary, it supports the public good by enabling a more diverse and inclusive housing mix. Narrower lot widths allow for a greater number of detached homes within the same area, which promotes key principles of new urbanism, including affordability, walkability, and efficient land use. The proposed 30-foot lot width still supports high-quality design and livability, and the resulting homes will maintain compatibility with surrounding development. The visual and functional differences between homes on 30-foot and 40-foot lots are minimal, especially when considered in the context of shared open spaces and pedestrian-oriented design. Importantly, Section 3.1.6 of the Code already contemplates modifications like this one, by acknowledging that lot standards for this housing type “may vary” from the dimension set forth in the Code when “part of a larger development and consistent with density requirements,” which is the case in this Project. Therefore, this criterion is met. • Criterion 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: The general purpose of the 40-foot minimum lot width standard is to ensure adequate space for detached homes that support livability, privacy, and neighborhood character. The proposed modification promotes these purposes equally well or better in the following ways: o Livability is preserved through thoughtful development planning, including shared open spaces and pedestrian pathways that enhance the residential experience. o Neighborhood character is maintained because the architectural style, setbacks, and massing of homes on 30-foot lots will be similar to those on 40-foot lots. o Affordability and housing choice are improved by allowing more compact lots, which can expand access to homeownership. Additionally, the modification aligns with the goals of the City Plan, including the following: 34340204.11 12 o “Opportunity to provide alternatives to the more typical single-family detached homes or apartments available in Fort Collins, such as duplexes, townhomes and ADUs.” (Benefits of “Mixed Neighborhoods”) o “Create more opportunities for a range of housing choices.” (Principle LIV 5) o “Encourage a variety of housing types and densities.” (Policy LIV 5.1) According to the Code, urban detached houses are already characterized as “distinct in that they are usually on smaller lots.” Therefore, this modification, which reduces lot widths by 25%, is consistent with the intended scale and character of this housing type and with its general purpose. Therefore, this criterion is met. • Criterion 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. The proposed reduction in minimum lot width from 40 feet to 30 feet represents a modest dimensional change that does not significantly alter the character, function, or livability of the development. When viewed in the context of the entire ODP, the following are true: o The overall density and form of the neighborhood remain consistent with the intent of the Code. o The visual impact of the narrower lots is minimal, especially given the use of consistent architectural design, setbacks, and landscaping. o The pedestrian experience and neighborhood connectivity are preserved or even enhanced through shared open spaces and walkable design. o The public realm (e.g., streetscape, sidewalks, and parks) is not negatively affected by the narrower lot widths. In short, the modification does not diverge from the Code in a way that would be significantly noticeable or impactful to the public or future residents. It continues to advance the purposes of the Code, including promoting compact, walkable, and diverse neighborhoods. Please see the below illustrative graphic of a typical lot, demonstrating how the resulting dwelling units will be configured in a way that continues to enhance livability and the pedestrian experience while maintaining consistency with the density and form of the neighborhood: 34340204.11 13 Therefore, this criterion is met. 34340204.11 14 Modification #6 Section 3.1.7 Detached House - Suburban Section 3.1.7 Lot Standards Code Language: A minimum lot width of 60’ shall be required for any suburban detached house. Requested Modification: A minimum lot width of 50’ shall be required for any suburban detached house. Modification Criteria: The request for approval for this modification meets the criteria set forth in Sections 6.8.2(H)(1) and (4) of the Code in the following ways: Justification: • The modification would not be a detriment to the public good. This modification would not be detrimental to the public good. It supports the public good by enabling a more diverse and inclusive housing mix within a suburban context. Specifically, the modification allows for the following: o Greater housing variety, including smaller detached homes that are more attainable for a broader range of residents. o More efficient land use, which supports sustainability and affordability. o Preservation of neighborhood character through thoughtful design, setbacks, and landscaping. The visual and functional differences between homes on 50-foot and 60-foot lots are modest when considered in the context of shared open spaces and consistent architectural standards. The modification enhances flexibility and furthers the goals of new urbanism without compromising livability or compatibility. Importantly, Section 3.1.7 of the Code already contemplates modifications like this one, by acknowledging that lot standards for this housing type “may vary” from the dimension set forth in the Code when “part of a larger development and consistent with density requirements,” which is the case in this Project. Therefore, this criterion is met. • Criterion 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: The general purpose of the 60-foot minimum lot width standard is to ensure adequate space for detached homes that support livability, privacy, and neighborhood character. The proposed modification promotes these purposes equally well or better in the following ways: o Livability is maintained through access to shared open spaces and pedestrian-friendly design. o Neighborhood character is preserved through consistent architectural massing, setbacks, and landscaping. 34340204.11 15 o Housing choice and affordability are improved by allowing smaller lots that support a broader range of home types and price points. The modification is also consistent with the goals of the City Plan, including the following: o “Opportunity to provide alternatives to the more typical single-family detached homes or apartments available in Fort Collins, such as duplexes, townhomes and ADUs.” (Benefit of “Mixed Neighborhoods”) o “New Neighborhoods: Encourage creativity in the design and construction of new neighborhoods that: Provides a unifying and interconnected framework of streets, sidewalks, walkway spines and other public spaces; Expands housing options, including higher-density and mixed-use buildings; Offers opportunities to age in place; Improves access to services and amenities; and Incorporates unique site conditions.” (Policy LIV 4.1) o “Create more opportunities for a range of housing choices.” (Principle LIV 5) o “Housing Options: To enhance community health and livability, encourage a variety of housing types and densities, including mixed-used developments that are well served by public transportation and close to employment centers, shopping, services and amenities.” (Policy LIV 5.1) According to Section 3.1.7 of the Code, suburban detached houses are characterized as “small to medium-sized” homes. This modification, which reduces the size of the lots by less than 20% to facilitate small homes, is consistent with the intended scale and character of this housing type and with its general purpose, and with the principles of new urbanism. Therefore, this criterion is met. • Criterion 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. The reduction from 60 feet to 50 feet represents a relatively modest dimensional change when considered in the context of the entire ODP due to the following: o The overall form and density of the neighborhood remain consistent with the Code’s intent. o The pedestrian experience and public realm are preserved through shared open spaces and walkable design. o The housing product remains compatible with surrounding development in terms of scale and appearance. This modification does not diverge from the Code in a way that would be significantly noticeable or impactful to the public or future residents. It continues to advance the purposes of the Code, including promoting compact, walkable, and diverse neighborhoods. Please see the below illustrative graphic of a typical lot, demonstrating how the resulting dwelling units will be configured in a way that continues to enhance livability and the pedestrian experience while maintaining consistency with the density and form of the neighborhood: 34340204.11 16 Therefore, this criterion is met. 34340204.11 17 ARTICLE 5 GENERAL DEVELOPMENT AND SITE DESIGN Modification #7 Section 5.3.2 Multi-Building and Mix of Housing 5.3.2(D)(1)(a)(b) and (c) Orientation to a Connecting Walkway Code Language: 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 primary entrance more than two hundred (200) feet from a street sidewalk and the address shall be posted to be visible from the intersection of the connecting walkway and public right of way. The following exceptions to this standard are permitted: (A) Up to one (1) dwelling 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 an apartment building or mixed-use 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. • Street-facing facades. Every building containing four (4) or more dwelling units shall have at least one (1) building entry or doorway facing any adjacent street that is smaller than a full arterial or has on-street parking. Requested Modification: The request is to allow primary entrances to a multi-unit dwelling to be located more than 200 feet from a street sidewalk and to not require every primary entrance of an multi-unit dwelling to face the adjacent street. For purposes of this standard, qualifying connecting walkways may cross driveways. Modification Criteria: The request for approval for this modification meets the criteria set forth in Sections 6.8.2(H)(1) and (4) of the Code in the following ways: Justification: • The modification would not be a detriment to the public good. The modification would not be a detriment to the public good. On the contrary, it supports the public good by enabling the development of multi-unit affordable housing in a manner that maintains strong pedestrian connectivity and high-quality urban design. The proposed modification avoids the need to construct an additional street solely to meet the standard, which would reduce site efficiency and flexibility without improving livability. Each multi-unit dwelling shall be connected to a comprehensive network of sidewalks and walkways that link directly to the street and other neighborhood amenities, and each front door shall have a sidewalk connection to a walkway spine that connects directly to the sidewalk of the private drives. Enhanced crosswalks and pedestrian pathways will be incorporated throughout the development to ensure safe and convenient access for all residents. 34340204.11 18 Therefore, this criterion is met. • Criterion 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: The general purpose of the standard is to ensure that building entrances are accessible, visible, and well-connected to the public realm. The proposed modification achieves this purpose through alternative means. Specifically, each primary entrance shall be connected to a walkway spine that links directly to the sidewalk of the private drives. Additionally, the site design shall include numerous pedestrian paths that provide direct and logical connections to the street network. Finally, the layout will support flexibility in site planning and encourage creative design solutions that align with new urbanist principles, without negatively affecting walkability and bikeability. The Project also exceeds the building standards in Section 3.5 of the Code by incorporating high- quality materials, architectural articulation, projections and recessing, and thoughtful massing, which contribute to a cohesive and attractive neighborhood character and ensure compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. The modification also directly supports the goals and policies of the City Plan, including: o “Create more opportunities for housing choices.” (Principle LIV 5) o “Housing Options: To enhance community health and livability, encourage a variety of housing types and densities, including mixed-use developments that are well served by public transportation and close to employment centers, shopping, services and amenities.” (Policy LIV 5.1) o “Supply of Attainable Housing: Encourage public and private sectors to maintain and develop a diverse range of housing options, including housing that is attainable (30% or less of monthly income) to residents earning the median income. Options could include ADUs, duplexes, townhomes, mobile homes, manufactured housing and other “missing middle” housing types.” (Policy LIV 5.2) o “Land for Residential Development: Use density requirements to maximize the use of land for residential development to positively influence housing supply and expand housing choice.” (Policy LIV 5.3) o “Integrate and Distribute Affordable Housing: Integrate the distribution of affordable housing as part of individual neighborhoods and the larger community.” (Policy LIV 5.5) o “Permanent Supply of Affordable Housing: Create and maintain an up-to-date inventory of affordable housing in the community. Pursue policy and regulatory changes that will encourage the rehabilitation and retention of affordable housing in perpetuity.” (Policy LIV 6.4). Please see the below illustrative graphic of an existing development in the City, demonstrating how the resulting configuration of walkways can enhance livability and the pedestrian experience while maintaining consistency with the density and form of the neighborhood: 34340204.11 19 Therefore, this criterion is met. • Criterion 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. Although the primary entrances exceed the 200-foot distance specified in the Code, the divergence is nominal when considered in the context of the entire development plan. The pedestrian experience is preserved and enhanced through a well-connected internal walkway system, enhanced crosswalks and pedestrian safety features, and clear address visibility and wayfinding. The modification does not compromise the functionality, safety, or accessibility of the development and continues to advance the purposes of the Land Use Code, including promoting inclusive, walkable, and livable neighborhoods. Therefore, this criterion is met. 34340204.11 20 Section 5.15.2 Mixed-Use, Institutional and Commercial Buildings Modification #8 5.15.2(C)(1) Relationship of Building to Streets, Walkways and Parking - Orientation to A Connecting Walkway Code Language: (1) Orientation to A Connecting Walkway At least one (1) main entrance of any commercial or mixed-use building shall face and open directly onto a connecting walkway with pedestrian frontage. Any building which has only vehicle bays and/or service doors for intermittent/infrequent nonpublic access to equipment, storage, or similar rooms (e.g., self-serve car washes and self-serve mini-storage warehouses) shall be exempt from this standard. Requested Modification: At least one (1) main entrance of any commercial or mixed-use building shall face and open directly onto a connecting walkway with pedestrian frontage where feasible. If no main entrance is able to face and open directly onto an adjoining street, then a network of sidewalks and connecting walkways through the parking areas connecting the main entrances to the street shall suffice, provided that techniques to enhance pedestrian safety and enhance the pedestrian experience are implemented, which such techniques may include but are not limited to bulb-outs, raised crosswalks, patterned concrete, and textured surfaces. A connecting walkway may cross a driveway. Modification Criteria: The request for approval for this modification meets the criteria set forth in Sections 6.8.2(H)(1) and (3) of the Code in the following ways: Justification: • The modification would not be a detriment to the public good. This modification would not be a detriment to the public good and in fact would enhance the public good because it facilitates more flexible design and desirable development. The standard as written would require mixed-use and commercial buildings to face William Neal Parkway with parking to the rear (lake-side), when patios facing the lake would be most desirable and most consistent with new urbanist principles. The standard as written would also require less desirable pedestrian connections along the street instead of along the lake. The modification therefore brings the advantages of being visually more interesting, safer, and quieter than fronting onto a public street. Therefore, this criterion is met. • Criterion 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: The purpose of the standard is to ensure that a street sidewalk or walkway directly connects a main entrance of a building to the street sidewalk without requiring pedestrians to walk across parking lots or driveways. However, this is not always possible or necessary to ensure pedestrian safety. This modification meets the general purpose of the standard equally well or better by requiring techniques to enhance pedestrian safety such as bulb-outs and raised crosswalks, 34340204.11 21 which help enhance pedestrian visibility, reduce vehicle speeds, and fit within the context of the mixed-use neighborhood, as well as new urbanist techniques such as patterned concrete and textured surface to enhance the pedestrian experience. This modification is also supported by the following principles and policies of City Plan: o “Support walking as a safe, easy and convenient travel option for all ages and abilities by building a connected network of sidewalks, paths and trails” (Principle T 7) o “Safe Pedestrian Facilities: Develop safe and secure pedestrian settings by developing and maintaining an appropriately lit pedestrian network, enforcing snow removal on sidewalks adjacent to residential properties and mitigating the impacts of vehicles. Connections will be clearly visible and accessible, incorporating markings, signage, lighting and paving materials.” (Policy T 7.2) o “Pedestrian Connections: Provide an attractive, safe environment for pedestrians, bicyclists and drivers on neighborhood streets with well-designed streetscapes, including detached sidewalks, parkways and well-defined crosswalks.” (Policy T 7.4) As an illustrative example of a parking lot crossing at an urban shopping center that meets the purpose of the standard equally well or better, please see the below graphic: Example of a well-defined crosswalk across a private drive. Therefore, this criterion is met. 34340204.11 22 • Criterion 3: by reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional situations, unique to such property, including, but not limited to, 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: Physical conditions and extraordinary and exceptional situations unique to the Property would result in unusual and exceptional practical difficulties not caused by the Applicant. The placement of William Neal Parkway creates a narrow site between William Neal Parkway and the lake to the north, which makes it difficult to follow the standard as written in a way that facilitates desirable building configuration. As noted above, the placement of William Neal Parkway would create the practical difficulties of less desirable building configuration and less desirable pedestrian connections. By contrast, the modification reflects creative project design that overall provides more pedestrian connectivity than other traditional neighborhoods. Therefore, this criterion is met. Modification #9 Section 5.15.2(C)(2) Orientation to Build-to Lines for Street front Buildings. *Please note that Section 5.15.(C)(2) refers to Article 7 Rules of Measurement Build-to Lines Code Language: Build-to line shall mean the line on which the front of the building or structure must be located or built and which is measured as a distance from a public right-of-way street. To establish "build-to" lines, buildings shall be located and designed to align or approximately align with any previously established building/sidewalk relationships that are consistent with this standard. Accordingly, at least thirty (30) percent of the total length of the building along the street shall be extended to the build-to line area. If a parcel, lot or tract has multiple streets, then the building shall be built to at least two (2) of them according to (A) through (C) below, i.e. to a street corner. If there is a choice of two (2) or more corners, then the building shall be built to the corner that is projected to have the most pedestrian activity associated with the building. (A) Buildings shall be located no more than fifteen (15) feet from the right-of-way of an adjoining street if the street is smaller than a full arterial or has on-street parking. (B) Buildings shall be located at least ten (10) and no more than twenty five (25) feet behind the street right-of-way of an adjoining street that is larger than a two-lane arterial that does not have on-street parking. (Code Section 7.1.2) Requested Modification: The proposed mixed-use and commercial buildings shall be permitted (a) to have a vehicle use area between the building face and the street, and (b) to be located more than 25 feet behind the street right-of-way. Modification Criteria: The request for approval for this modification meets the criteria set forth in Sections 6.8.2(H)(1) and (3) of the Code in the following ways: Justification: 34340204.11 23 • The modification would not be a detriment to the public good. This modification would not be a detriment to the public good and in fact would enhance the public good because it facilitates more flexible design and desirable development. The proposed design supports a high-quality pedestrian environment while allowing for a more functional and context- sensitive site layout. The intervening drive aisle between the building and William Neal Parkway is necessary for vehicular circulation and site access but is designed to prioritize pedestrian safety and experience. The drive aisle includes a wide raised crosswalk constructed of scored concrete, which slows vehicle speeds and emphasizes pedestrian priority. Additional enhancements, such as boulders, seating areas, upgraded landscaping, and an enhanced entry plaza, create a welcoming and active pedestrian zone between the building and the street. Therefore, this criterion is met. • Criterion 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: The general purpose of the build-to line standard is to ensure that buildings engage the street and contribute to a walkable, human-scaled environment. The proposed design achieves this purpose through the following: o A prominent building entrance oriented toward the street, even though it is set back beyond 25 feet. o A direct, enhanced pedestrian connection from the entrance to the public sidewalk, including a raised crosswalk across the drive aisle. o Streetscape elements and public-facing amenities that activate the space between the building and the street. These features ensure that the building maintains a strong relationship with the public realm. The modification is also supported by the following policies of City Plan: o “Public Amenities: Design streets and other public spaces with the comfort and enjoyment of pedestrians in mind. Incorporate features such as plazas, pocket parks, patios, children’s play areas, transit facilities, sidewalks, pathways, “street furniture” (such as benches and planters) and public art as part of development projects.” (Policy LIV 3.1) o “Context-Sensitive Development: Ensure that all development contributes to the positive character of the surrounding area. Building materials, architectural details, color range, building massing, and relationships to streets and sidewalks should be tailored to the surrounding area.” (Policy LIV 3.6) As an illustrative example of a parking lot crossing at an urban shopping center that meets the purpose of the standard equally well or better, please see the below graphic: 34340204.11 24 Example of a well-defined crosswalk across a private drive. Therefore, this criterion is met. • Criterion 3: by reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional situations, unique to such property, including, but not limited to, 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: The Project site is subject to exceptional physical conditions that create practical difficulties in complying with the build-to line standard. Specifically, the location of William Neal Parkway along the southern edge of the Neighborhood Commercial area creates a narrow site configuration that limits the ability to place buildings directly adjacent to the street while also accommodating necessary vehicular circulation and access. To maintain safe and functional site access, a drive aisle must be located between the building and the street. Strict application of the build-to line standard would prevent this configuration, resulting in a layout that is either infeasible or significantly less functional. These constraints are not the result of any action by the Applicant, but rather stem from the existing street network and the physical dimensions of the site. The proposed exception allows for a more practical and context-sensitive design while still achieving the intent of the standard through enhanced pedestrian connections, a raised crosswalk, and a well-designed entry plaza that maintains a strong relationship between the building and the public realm. Therefore, this criterion is met.