HomeMy WebLinkAboutBDR FOUR PLEX AT 621 S MELDRUM ST - FDP130002 - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORTPROJECT: BDR Four Unit Multi -Family
621 South Meldrum Street
Project Development Plan #120030
APPLICANT: Cathy Mathis
The Birdsall Group
444 Mountain Avenue
Berthoud, CO 80513
OWNER: Big Deal Real Estate, LLC
Jeff Eggleston
2519 Ridge Creek Road
Fort Collins, CO 80528
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This is a request to demolish an existing 626 square foot single family home located at
621 South Meldrum Street, and construct a multi -family building containing four units.
The existing residence, which was built in 1910, has been functioning as a college
student rental. The site is approximately 0.22 acres or 9,513 square feet, and is
bisected by the Arthur Ditch. The ditch is an underground concrete water canal
approximately 13 feet wide in a 33 feet wide easement. The property abuts a 20 foot
alley to the west.
The proposed multi -family building is two stories in height with approximately 4,900 total
square feet and will contain three-bedroom/two bathroom dwelling units. Gross overall
density of the project is 18.2 dwelling units per acre. The project will provide four off-
street parking spaces to be accessed from the alley. The property will be re -platted to
include new easements. The site is in the (N-C-B) Neighborhood Conservation, Buffer
zone district, and falls within the TOD (Transportation Overlay Development) zone. One
Modification of Standard accompanies this request.
v
BDR Four Unit Multi -Family, P.D.P. i Report February 4 2012
• The 2' reduction is proposed along the parking drive isle, and not directly
adjacent to the parking spaces, where the impact of a reduced setback would be
greater;
• The setback as modified permits a parking area that would otherwise be
infeasible while providing consistency with the LUC in terms of lot width, primary
building setbacks, and with enhanced architecture that provides appropriate
massing, scale, detail and articulation and;
• The parking setback as modified permits a development plan that accommodates
off-street parking that would otherwise be infeasible. While parking spaces are
not required of this project, the off-street spaces provided help reduce on -street
parking demand, therefore providing a benefit to nearby neighbors without any
significant adverse impacts.
D. Section 3.5.1 — Building and Project Compatibility
(1) Architectural Character; (2) Building Size, Height, Bulk, Mass, Scale
This standard requires that new projects be compatible with the established
architectural character and context of the general area.
The project provides architecture that sets an enhanced standard, providing appropriate
size, bulk, massing, scale, detail and articulation in the following ways:
• The overall appearance of the dwelling is traditional, which fits the established
character of the surrounding residences.
• The Primary Elements of the proposed architecture — the overall outline of the
home, the use of gables and hip roof elements, and the use of second -story
elements that are integrated into the roof line — are designed with the appropriate
size, bulk, and massing that achieve a transition and compatible fit with existing
homes in on the block.
• Secondary Elements such as bay windows, porch elements, eave brackets and
roof dormers are provided that are appropriate in size, scale and proportion so
that these elements do not overpower the overall building form, while providing
visual interest and articulated massing on all sides of the dwelling.
• Enhanced architectural detailing is provided through the use of building
projections and recesses that provide a high level of building articulation and are
appropriately scaled, stepping down at interior lot lines to provide transition with
adjacent lots.
• The mix of materials used is predominately stucco and lap siding, and the
balance of the two materials is satisfactory with neither material applied as an
overly dominant feature. Windows are large and well-proportioned with a wide
framed casing that enhances the traditional feel of the dwelling.
10
BDR Four Unit Multi -Family, P.D. P. —.dff Report February 4. 2012
4. Neighborhood Meeting:
A neighborhood meeting was not required, and the applicant felt that a meeting was not
necessary, given the predominantly rental character of the neighborhood and the close
proximity of the project to Colorado State University, in which a development of this type
and intensity is generally to be expected.
5. Findings of Fact / Conclusion:
In reviewing and evaluating this Project Development Plan, Staff makes the following
findings of fact and conclusions:
A. The BDR Four Unit Multi -Family Project Development Plan (P.D.P) complies with
Division 2.2 — Common Development Review Procedures.
B. The P.D.P. complies with the applicable Article Three General Development
Standards.
C. The P.D.P complies with the applicable standards of Article Four — Neighborhood
Conservation Buffer N-C-B zone district.
D. The Modification of Standard meets the applicable requirements of Section
2.8.2(H) and the granting of the Modification would not be detrimental to the
public good.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the BDR Four Unit Multi -Family Project Development
Plan, #120030 and Modification of Standard.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Site Plan
2. Landscape Plan
3. Utility Plan
4. Plat
5. Statement of Planning Objectives
6. Applicant's Modification of Standard Request
7. Letter from adjacent property owner
8. Engineering Certification letter
11
BDR Four Unit Multi -Family. P.D.P. -._J Report February 4 2012
The modification request addresses Section 3.2.2(J) of the Land Use Code, which
requires that any vehicular use area containing six or more parking spaces or 1,800 or
more square feet shall be set back from the side lot line a minimum average of five feet.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of the Project Development Plan and Modification of Standard.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Project Development Plan complies with the process located in Division 2.2 —
Common Development Review Procedures, the relevant standards of the Article 4
Neighborhood Conservation, Buffer zone district and General Development Standards
of the Land Use Code, pending the approval of the Modification of Standard. The
Modification of Standard request was found to be justified by the criteria in Section
2.8.2(H) of the Land Use Code.
COMMENTS:
1. Background:
The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
N: N-C-B;
Existing Single -Family Residential, rental
S: N-C-B;
Existing Single -Family Residential, rental
E: N-C-B;
Church of Jesus Christ, L.D.S.
W: N-C-B;
Existing Two -Family Residential, rental
The project site is part of the Original Fort Collins Town Site Annexation, January 1st,
1873.
2. Compliance with Applicable Article 4. Neighborhood Conservation, Buffer
District N-C-B Standards:
The BDR multi -family project complies with all applicable Article 4 Standards; relevant
standards are listed specifically as follows:
A. Section 4.9(B)(2)(a)(3) - Permitted Uses
Multi -family dwellings, up to four units, located in a street -fronting principal building, are
a permitted use in the N-C-B zone, subject to Administrative Review and Public
Hearing.
E
BDR Four Unit Multi -Family, P.D. P. _ .ff Report February4. 2012
B. Section 4.9(D)(1) — Density
The project is in compliance with this section which requires that the minimum lot area
be equivalent to the total floor area of the building, but not less than 5,000 square feet.
For the purposes of calculating density for this project, "total floor area" means the total
gross floor area of the building as measured along the outside wall, including each
finished or unfinished floor level. (Open balconies and basements shall not be counted
as floor area for purposes of calculating density).
The total floor area proposed is 4,948 gross square feet on a total lot size of 9,513
square feet, which meets the minimum lot area and density requirement.
C. Section 4.9(D)(5) — Floor Area Ratio (FAR):
This section requires that lots are subject to a maximum FAR of thirty-three hundredths
(0.33) on the rear 50% of the lot. The project's proposed lot configuration is in
compliance with this requirement. The building footprint is located almost entirely within
the front 50% of the lot. Due to the fact that the building projects into the rear 50% of
the lot by only a few feet, an exact FAR percentage was not required and not provided
as part of the Site Plan land use table information.
D. Section 4.9(D)(6)(a-e) — Dimensional Standards:
The project is in compliance with the applicable minimum dimensional standards of this
section, which has the following requirements for multi -family buildings:
• Minimum lot width: This standard requires that each multi -family dwelling
have a minimum lot width of 50 feet. The proposed lot has a width of
approximately 50 feet.
• Minimum setbacks: The project complies with the standard setbacks and
acknowledges the minimum standards: 15 feet front, 5 feet interior side, 5
feet rear at existing alley.
• Maximum building height: The proposed structure does not exceed the
maximum building height requirement of 3 stories for the N-C-B zone
district, and proposes a maximum building height of 2 stories which
provides greater land use transition and compatibility with adjacent and
nearby one-story residences.
E. Section 4.9(E)(1-7) —Applicable Development Standards:
• Building Design, 4.9(E)(1): The project is in compliance with all
applicable building design standards of this section, which require that
exterior walls be constructed at right angles to the lot, that the second floor
not overhang the lower front or side of the building, that the front porch
K
BDR Four Unit Multi -Family P.D.P. - _J Report February 4 2012
proposed is limited to one story, and that the roof pitch be between 2:12
and 12:12. The front building fagade features building entrances with a
one-story architectural porch feature that is compatible in quality and
scaled appropriately in comparison with nearby residences.
• Building Height, 4.9(E)(2)(a)(1): The proposed structure does not exceed
the maximum building height requirements.
• Eave Height, 4.9(E)(2)(b)(1): The new dwelling is not proposed to be
constructed on the rear portion of the lot and is located at the front of the
lot, where eave heights in excess of 13 feet in height are permitted.
• Landscape/Hardscape Material, 4.9(E)(4): This standard requires that
not more than 40% of the front yard be covered with inorganic material,
and the project is in compliance with this standard.
• Access, 4.9(E)(6): Parking is accessed from the alley as required and is
not located between the building and the street.
3. Compliance with Article Three — General Development Standards:
The BDR multi -family project complies with all applicable General Development
Standards; relevant standards are described as follows:
A. Section 3.2.1 — Landscaping and Tree Protection
• The project is in compliance with this section. The plans provide for new trees,
with certain caliper sizes that exceed the minimum requirements, in order to
provide adequate replacement for existing trees that are proposed to be
removed. The project's proposed tree replacement and mitigation was reviewed
and recommended for approval by the City Forester;
• The project provides the required quantity and diversity of trees and landscape
plantings. Building foundation and parking lot landscaping is enhanced; shrub
and ground cover planting beds are provided in excess of the minimum coverage
requirements with predominately low -water -use plant selections. Overall water
use of 9.7 gallons per square foot is significantly less than the required maximum
of 15 gallons per square foot;
• The parking lot perimeter and interior has been planted and screened with a
combination of trees, shrubs and privacy fence that provide a significant screen
and appropriate transition between the project and adjacent residences;
4
BDR Four Unit Multi -Family, P.D. P. .eff Report February 4, 2012
B. Section 3.2.2 — Access, Circulation and Parking
• Due to the fact that the project is in the Transit -Oriented Development (TOD)
Overlay Zone, there is no minimum parking requirement for multi -family
dwellings. Five off-street parking spaces are provided, and the parking access
and location at the rear of the property is designed in conformance with the TOD
standards. The provision for the no minimum parking requirement in the TOD
zone is referenced in LUC section 3.2.2(K)(1)(a)(1).
• Bicycle facilities are designed in accordance with the minimum requirements,
with 7 covered and 5 uncovered spaces provided for a total of 12 spaces.
C. Section 3.2.2(J) —Parking Setbacks
• The applicant is requesting a modification of standard to the parking setback
along a lot line, and the following is an analysis of this modification request:
Request for Modification — Section 3.2.2(J), which requires that parking be set
back from a lot line a minimum width of 5 feet at any point.
a. The Standard At Issue:
Section 3.2.2(J) of the Land Use Code states that:
"(J) Setbacks. Any vehicular use area containing six (6) or more parking spaces or one
thousand eight hundred (1,800) or more square feet shall be set back from the street
right-of-way and the side and rear yard lot line (except a lot line between buildings or
uses with collective parking) consistent with the provisions of this Section, according to
the following table"..
Minimum average of
entire landscaped setback
Minimum width of setback
area
at any point
(feet)
(feet)
Along an arterial street
15
5
Along a nonarterial street
10
5
Along a lot line
5
5
.b. Description of the Modification:
The applicant proposes a Modification of Standard to Section 3.2.2(J) to permit a
parking setback of 3 feet along the southern boundary of the parking area.
4�
BDR Four Unit Multi -Family P.D.P. 1 Report February 4 2012
C. Description of Applicant's Justification:
"The property has several physical constraints. It is a narrow, 50' wide lot and the
existing Arthur Ditch runs diagonally through the site, thus causing the parking area to
be pushed towards the alley. In addition, requirements for stormwater detention and
water quality on the back portion of the site requires an extended detention area. This
area is already tight at 6' wide, thus requiring the need for retaining walls in order to
achieve the needed depth for the pond. Other challenges include
achieving/accommodating the required 24' wide drive and parking stall depth. Given the
above, we respectfully request that the Big Deal Four Plex project be allowed to have
setback of 3 feet instead of 5 feet along the south property line"
"We feel that 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 for the following reasons:"
➢ "The proposed plan provides landscape and a solid privacy fence along the south
property line, thus providing additional screening of the vehicle use area."
➢ The parking lot is only 1,974 square feet. The area where we are requesting
relief is only 50 feet long, which is relatively small compared to other parking
lots."
➢ "The width of the landscape area in the proposed alternative plan is short by 2
feet."
➢ "We feel that the proposed alternative plan ensures sensitivity to the surrounding
neighborhood by building an attractive, desirable product in an infill site with a
price point that the market desires and that the community can be proud of.
Although not strictly a criteria for justification, the construction of the project
would be a benefit to the neighborhood."
d. Staff Evaluation and Analysis:
Land Use Code Modification Criteria:
"The decision maker may grant a modification of standards only if it finds that the
granting of the modification would not be detrimental to the public good, and that:
(1) the plan as submitted will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the
modification is requested equally well or better than would a plan which complies with
the standard for which a modification is requested; or
41
BDR Four Unit Multi -Family P.D.P., ..,H Report February 4. 2012
(2) the granting of a modification from the strict application of any standard would,
without impairing the intent and purpose of this Land Use Code, substantially alleviate
an existing, defined and described problem of city-wide concern or would result in a
substantial benefit to the city by reason of the fact that the proposed project would
substantially address an important community need specifically and expressly defined
and described in the city's Comprehensive Plan or in an adopted policy, ordinance or
resolution of the City Council, and the strict application of such a standard would render
the project practically infeasible; or
(3) by reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional
situations, unique to such property, including, but not limited to, physical conditions such
as exceptional narrowness, shallowness or topography, or physical conditions which
hinder the owner's ability to install a solar energy system, the strict application of the
standard sought to be modified would result in unusual and exceptional practical
difficulties, or exceptional or undue hardship upon the owner of such property, provided
that such difficulties or hardship are not caused by the act or omission of the applicant;
or
(4) the plan as submitted will not diverge from the standards of the Land Use Code that
are authorized by this Division to be modified except in a nominal, inconsequential way
when considered from the perspective of the entire development plan, and will continue
to advance the purposes of the Land Use Code as contained in Section 1.2.2.
Any finding made under subparagraph (1), (2), (3) or (4) above shall be supported by
specific findings showing how the plan, as submitted, meets the requirements and
criteria of said subparagraph (1), (2), (3) or (4)."
Modification Criteria, Supporting Findings:
This request of approval for this modification complies with the standards per Review
Criteria 2.8.2(H)(1) through (4) in the following ways:
Criteria (1): the plan as submitted will promote the general purpose of the
standard for which the modification is requested equally well or better than would
a plan which complies with the standard for which a modification is requested.
Supporting Findings:
• The intent of the required 5' vehicle use area setback is to provide sufficient
space for visual screening and to enhance the appearance of the vehicle use
area. The 3' of landscape area, in combination with the privacy fence, provides
a softened landscape edge interior to the parking area while mitigating the
visual impact to the property to the south. Additionally, the 2' reduction is
proposed along the parking drive isle, and not directly adjacent to the parking
spaces, where the impact of a reduced setback would be greater.
BDR Four Unit Multi -Family P.D.P. r Reoort February 4 2012
Criteria (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
Supporting Findings:
• The parking setback as modified permits a development plan that
accommodates off-street parking that would otherwise be infeasible. While
parking spaces are not required of this project, the off-street spaces provided
help reduce on -street parking demand, therefore providing a benefit to nearby
neighbors.
• The overall project provides a design that is consistent with the quality of the
neighborhood and consistent with the following policies:
• Policy LIV 6.2 — Seek Compatibility with Neighborhoods. Encourage design
that complements and extends the positive qualities of surrounding
development and adjacent buildings in terms of general intensity and use,
street pattern, and any identifiable style, proportions, shapes, relationship to
the street, pattern of buildings and yards, and patterns created by doors,
windows, projections and recesses. Compatibility with these existing elements
does not mean uniformity.
• Policy LIV 7.4 — Maximize Land for Residential Development. Permit
residential development in most neighborhoods and districts in order to
maximize the potential land available for development of housing and thereby
positively influence housing affordability.
Criteria(4): The plan as submitted will not diverge from the standards of the Land
Use Code that are authorized by this Division to be modified except in a nominal,
inconsequential way when considered from the perspective of the entire
development plan, and will continue to advance the purposes of the Land Use
Code as contained in Section 1.2.2.
Supporting Findings:
• The modification is minor when considered from the perspective of the entire
development plan, which provides consistency with the LUC in terms of lot
M
v'
BDR Four Unit Multi -Family P.D.P. _e11 Report February 4.2012
width, primary building setbacks, and with enhanced architecture that provides
appropriate massing, scale, detail and articulation. The resulting project
enhances the established character of the neighborhood with an intensity of
use that is consistent with the purpose statement of the N-C-B zone district,
which is "intended for areas that are a transition between residential
neighborhoods and more intensive commercial -use areas or high traffic
zones."
• The overall project provides high quality, high performing architecture that is
sensitive to the character of the surrounding neighborhood, and as such is
consistent with the policies of the Land Use Code described in Section 1.2.2
as follows:
(J) Improving the design, quality and character of new development.
(M) Ensuring that development proposals are sensitive to the character of
existing neighborhoods.
e. Staff Recommendation and Findings of Fact:
Staff recommends approval of the Modification. In evaluating the request, and in
fulfillment of the requirements of Section 2.8.2(H)(1) Staff makes the following findings
of fact:
(1.) The granting of the Modification would not be detrimental to the public good;
(2.) The plan as submitted will promote the general purpose of the standard for which
the Modification is requested equally well or better than would a plan which
complies with the standard for which the Modification is requested;
(3.) The granting of the modification 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 described in the city's Comprehensive
Plan, and the strict application of such a standard would render the project
practically infeasible and;
(4.) The plan as submitted will not diverge from the standards of the Land Use Code
except in a nominal, inconsequential way when considered from the perspective
of the entire development plan.
This is because:
• The 3' of landscape area in combination with the privacy fence provides a
softened landscape edge interior to the area, while mitigating the visual impact to
the property to the south;
0