Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDAKOTA PINES PUD PRELIMINARY AND FINAL - 60 91F - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSITEM NO. 6 MEETING DATE 4/26/93 STAFF Ted Shepard 6gi City of Fort Collins PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD STAFF REPORT PROJECT: Dakota Pines, Preliminary and Final P.U.D., #60-91F APPLICANT: Desyn Homes c/o Cityscape Urban Design 3555 Stanford Road, Suite 105 Fort Collins, CO 80525 OWNER: C.D.L. Partnership c/o Chuck Betters, The Group, Inc. 375 East Horsetooth Road Fort Collins, CO 80525 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for Preliminary and Final P.U.D. for 27 patio homes and 12 townhomes on 5.58 acres. The site is located at the northwest corner of East Horsetooth Road and Red Mountain Drive. The site is zoned R-P, Planned Residential. RECOMMENDATION: Approval EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Dakota Pines P.U.D. conforms with Pine Cone Overall Development Plan. The P.U.D. satisfies the All Development Criteria and is supported by the performance on the Residential Uses Point Chart of the L.D.G.S. A variance from the requirements of the Solar Orientation Ordinance is recommended based on the pre -determined development pattern and the configuration of the parcel. The eight foot wide detached sidewalk complies with the bicycle/pedestrian path network established with Pine Cone O.D.P., and New Fort Collins High School. The project is feasible from a traffic engineering standpoint. COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 (303) 221-6750 PLANNING DEPARTMENT L J a�y7p@P(A� urban design, inc. Policy 79. Low density residential uses should locate in areas: a. Which have easy access to existing or planned neighborhood shopping centers; b. Which have easy access to major employment centers; C. Within walking distance to an existing or planned elementary school; and d. Within walking distance to an existing or planned neighborhood park... Policy 80. Higher density residential uses should locate: b. Within close proximity to community or neighborhood park facilities; C. Where water and sewer facilities can be adequately provided; and d. Within easy access to major employment centers. Construction at Dakota Pines is expected to begin in the summer of 1993, and may continue through 1995. DAKOTA PINES LAND USE BREAKDOWN March 1, 1993 Area Gross 243,255 sq. ft. 5.58 acres Net 169,919 sq. ft. 3.90 acres Dwelling Units Patio Homes 27 Townhomes 12 Total Units 39 Solar Oriented Lots 9 33.33 % ' (of Patio Homes) Density Gross 6.99 du/ac Net 10.00 du/ac Coverage Buildings 53,000 sq. ft. 21.79 % • (Garages & carports included in building coverage) Street R.O.W. 73,336 sq. ft. 30.15 % Parking & Drives 30,000 sq. ft. 12.33 % Open Space: Common 8,064 sq. ft. 3.32 % Private 78,855 sq. ft. 32.42 % Total Open Space 86,919 sq. ft. 35.74 % Floor Area Residential 65,000 sq. ft. Parking Provided Garage/Carport 78 spaces 2.00 / unit Other 14 spaces Total Vehicles 92 spaces 2.36 / unit 'Note: Garages and / or driveways will accommodate Handicapped, Motorcycle, and Bike parking Max. Building Height 36 ft. Patio Home Setbacks (unless otherwise noted) Front 12 ft. 16' at garage doors - Side 0 ft. 10' min. between buildings Corner Side 12 ft. 16' at garage doors Rear 10 ft. DAKOTA PINES PUD ALL DEVELOPMENT: NUMBERED CRITERIA CHART ALL CRITERIA APPLICABLE CRITERIA ONLY CRITERION Is the erllerion oWlcoble7 WIII the crllerlon . be satisfied? If no, please explain ,e�,�`�;` Yes No NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATABILITY 1. Social CompatabilltY xX . . 2. Neighborhood Character x3" 3. Land Use Conflicts Y ss 4. Adverse Traffic Impact X X PLANS AND POLICIES 5. Comprehensive Plan . X ?r X PUBLIC FACILITIES & SAFETY 6. Street Capacity X ;:.#t ,:. :• s °2 X 7. Utility Capacity X 8. Design Standards 9. Emergency Access 10. Security Lighting X X 11. Water Hazards }{ x RESOURCE PROTECTION Q. Soils & Slope Hazard X r: #>; ; :'. X . 43. Significant Vegetation X 14. Wildlife Habitat X 15. Historical Landmark 16. Mineral Deposit X 17. Eco•Sensltive Areas 18. Agricultural lands ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS 19. Air Quality X �. ;. - rx. r. • ; �;�:,: X X 20. Water QualityX 21. Noise X 22. Glare & Hoof 23. Vibrations X x 24. Exterior Lighting 9 9 X X 25. Sewa es & Wastes SITE DESIGN 26. Community Organization X. X 27. Site Organization x - >m J x "3 y" ' < 28. Natural Features . 29. Energy Conservation X X 30. Shadows X+w ' X 31. Solar Access 32. Privacy;: 33.Open Space Arrangement X X 34. Building HeightF. 35. Vehicular Movement X 36. Vehicular Design 37. Parking X X 38. Active Recreational Areas 39. Private Outdoor Areas " . !� a '"':''e :sow 40• Pedestrian Convenience Xk x 41. Pedestrian Conflicts 42. Landscaping/Open Areas . Landscaping/Buildings Landscaping/Screening X X X X L44. . Public Access X X . Signs X X -12- DAKOTA PINES PUD DENSITY CHART Maximum Earned Criterion Credit I(AIIDwellinpUnitsAre Within- Credit a 20% 20Meelofane•M1hrgOronno.-MMcsKixro«slwn ^gConl1 20 b 10% eSO leafol on enstng"anus put e 10% 4000feel of on ew"V oo«o,od leg ona snapo,a Camel - d 20% 35wfeet of an austnlpolletervoanegntxxtlo3o porkcomrK^ry aal4« corlvnunN ocv4y 20 We 10% 10001ea10foxtiod.rneemgwmereorlemmn Of" coma son ooucoeon ra.sof me store dca«oms 10 Q} 20% 3000teetotomotoremoroyn+emcenbcr 20 W 9 5% 100oteelotacmdcalacenler. h 20% 'Noan*F«ICaorn 20% 1hriCeritolkorieuUstrcl. AgoieGl whole BOuntlOrylsConMpdaNlo a iWVu rmfnaevebfxnens. Creo4 maybe earned at News ' 0%— For projech Morse wopertyboVaory hot0 to 10% :onfquity. j 0 30% 10101S%—F m0loCh Whose«apemy bounden, riot 101020%Conlgr4ly,• 15 to 20%— For «pectswhoso dooentvba,,nd ryras23 fo30%conlpuhy 201025%— For prolectswhose peaeMboun con, a; 30 to4p%ConfgWly. 30 251030%— Far projectswnos Property bo nOon, has 40105g% conligury k e 4con, be mrMinskdod"NO Ise molocl vAG Iockgo Mnl•lellewad0 energy usoogo eanel trvoulpn" oppKohon of aeernol" energy fysl4,ns«frvaugh taru"MOO em'WcanSONOlgn Mature' beyara eel min"ly lequeod by City COOO, 05% bonus nay be earned br over, 5%1 educb on in enegy use Colcubte o f%bonus l« avbly SO bcsesnck4w n oro «goct m CMulofelnefcicentogo of" rotor ouesin me arWecl ltal we Bowled to recrealidar use. enter tR of trial percentope as 0 bonus n If rue aDatiCanl CoMvP; to pew" pelnanenl mule open space that treats One CiW%mnimsrn teCoremenri,colcuolo ere percentage Of ine opensrxxe acreage to ee total de iamienlocreage. order lWs percentage as a bona O o portal the Iota dewbarrient budget is to be spent on neighborhood publlC transit ooi4tleswnich we nol onwrwiw rogWradby City Code. enter 2% bonus l« every SWO pot Owe" unit nveslod p naartof mo lddoeveaprrlent budget is to be spent onneipfsa«hopd IOCooes and services which de riototnenvrse requited by City Code. tar $100 enteral% bonus every tsar owetwg rn4rweslecl (� n e d cormMtrnenf is being Moss, op to specifem dpercentoge of me total number ofowelfiguniti lot low me w"cofami4es. Onto, Riot as borlus.up a 3M Y perconlage a a=xtrrwnd Z If 000sfvnttmenl It beha mode 10mlvOldp0 speC14e0 DO'Contoge of the totalnuna9f of dwell4lg units for Type' A' and Type o'Iarocopped dousing w defined by"CsryotFort COMM coKUato the bonus ca fohow OF Iype'K— Shmet 71yts coe'0'-1.014nes ..F Ivnn'e-urvts oIT d unit In no case shoo me cornbine l bomis be greater can 30%, 9 me silo a adjacent property COnldroanNslark txi10419 «place.a bonus may be earned lot the tdbvMg 3% — For doven141g or miigoting aublde Influomos.(o.g.orMr«vnontol l«auw.ceslhelk• econamiaand social oCt«s)adverse rolls S areserwtr«u 3% — F«gssurugtridnewsrnxMesw@beinYeednOwilhlhacndoClerdlriebuOdiNO DIOCe.wtuteawl r9n01ddurtis 3% — Fdfxpos %90"iveweofinebui o 41ug«poee eel woileodbibdonfirruwlce.aewrwranondimpnovenrentinon appopate name,. 0 o gentian «god me rOqusbedpontrlg Infne mWlide fOrNN(xdOClit provaed unrlet«ou nCLvAINnme bWa41g«n molewteciporting stfY kxewanacCOt Yar 10thepYn«ysWCMe.oboretnwyboearnedwt000wc } 9% — F«pfovrdng7S%«moredOarmWWnoskmkxe; e% -• Fvclovo4g S0.74%dmeporkNnostnchoo. ]% — Fd fxgvainp 2S4V".ofoopo6ngnoflsmK,rc. U deeM1'1eknMuttsbsnrg rrotlabtxovrae OoarOvea outortatk l4e onrlguisNnp tystelrn l«ma aweo41p rx1iKontmo bonwof 10%, .TOTAL l oo March 1, 1993 City of Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board c/o Steve Olt Community Planning & Environmental Services P. 0. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 Dear Board Members; urban design, inc. 3555 stanford road, suite 105 fort collins, colorado 80525 (303) 226-4074 FAX (303) 226-4196 This letter represents a request for a variance to Ordinance No. 142, 1991, the Solar Orientation Ordinance for the proposed Dakota Pines PUD. The reasons this variance is needed include: 1. By reason of conditions peculiar to the site, hardship would be caused to the subdivider by the strict application of the Ordinance. The site specific conditions that dictate the orientation of a large number of the proposed lots are: The north -south alignment of Red Mountain Drive. The size and configuration of the parcel, which can only be efficiently planned for the desired density and housing type with predominantly east -west lots. 2. The plan submitted is equal to or better than a plan for the subject property incorporating a higher number of solar oriented lots. Although most of the lots have an east -west orientation, the patio homes are designed to have most of the living spaces and window area on the side away from the "zero lot line" - typically the south side. Rooftop solar access is not inhibited. And - except for a period from mid December through early January - the windows on south walls of the patio homes on east -west lots are not anticipated to be shaded during the 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. time period. Preliminary reviews indicate that the proposed homes at Dakota Pines will rate very highly in the "Energy Score" program. Thank you for your consideration of this request. We will be looking forward to your favorable review. Sincerely, Eldon Ward, President Cityscape Urban Design, Inc. cc: Chris Ray, Desyn Homes Paul Versteeg, Desyn Homes Dakota Pines PUD - Preliminary and Final, .#60-91F April 26, 1993 P & Z Meeting Page 2 COMMENTS 1. Background• The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: N: R-P; Vacant (Future Fort Collins High School athletic fields) S: R-L-P; Single Family (Fox Meadows Subdivision) E: R-P; Single Family (Dakota Ridge First Filing) W: R-P; Vacant (Future Fort Collins High School parking lot) Dakota Pines P.U.D. is part of a larger parcel of land that was annexed into the City as the Timberline Second Annexation in 1979. It was originally zoned R-P with a P.U.D. condition. This P.U.D. condition was lifted by a rezoning request in.1981. The site was included in the Greenfield Village Master Plan which was"in effect from 1981 to 1992. Dakota Pines is part of Pine Cone Overall Development Plan, approved in April of 1992. Three projects have been approved in the Pine Cone O.D.P.: New Fort Collins High School - Site Plan Advisory Review Dakota Ridge First Filing - Final P.U.D. Pine Cone Apartments - Final P.U.D. 2. Land Use• The area defined by Dakota Pines P.U.D. is designated as Parcel F of the Pine Cone Overall Development Plan. This parcel is identified as "Low Density Residential - Alternative Use: Multi - Family" on the O.D.P. The request for both patio homes and townhomes represents a combination of both of these O.D.P. classifications. Dakota Pines P.U.D., therefore, complies with the Pine Cone Overall Development Plan. The proposed density of 6.99 dwelling units per acre was evaluated by the performance on the Residential Uses Point Chart of the L.D.G.S. The P.U.D. earns 100% thereby supporting the proposed density. Points were awarded for having contiguity with existing urban development and for proximity to the following public services: Neighborhood shopping center (Pine Cone O.D.P.) Neighborhood park (Pine Cone O.D.P) New Fort Collins High School Major Employment Center (Timberline Business Park, P.R.P.A.) Dakota Pines PUD - Preliminary and Final, #60-91F April 26, 1993 P & Z Meeting Page 3 Dakota Pines P.U.D, therefore, is supported by the performance on the Residential Uses Point Chart of the L.D.G.S. 3. Neighborhood Compatibility: Dakota Pines is a small scale, mixed residential project. It is bounded on the north and west by the New Fort Collins High School campus. There are existing single family homes on the south (Fox Meadows Subdivision) separated by Horsetooth Road, classified as an arterial street. There is an existing single family P.U.D. (Dakota Ridge, First Filing) under construction on the east, separated by Red Mountain Drive (local street). Because of the residential character of the project, and the separations afforded by the campus and streets, the project is considered to be compatible with surrounding development.' 4. Design: The primary design feature of Dakota Pines is that most of the garage structures are "side -mounted" along the two streets versus fronting on the streets. The result is a streetscape that has a more attractive and hospitable character than a series of garage doors lining the street 20 feet back of the sidewalk. For example, of the 10 units fronting on Red Mountain• Drive, only two have garages that front the street. In addition, 19 out of 27•patio home units share a driveway which minimizes the curb cuts along the street and sidewalk. There are detached sidewalks along Horsetooth Road and Red Mountain Drive. The resulting parkways are planted with a formal row of deciduous shade trees. The detached walk and street trees on Red Mountain Drive match the design across the street in Dakota Ridge P.U.D., First Filing. Pike Circle features an attached sidewalk but is lined with formal rows of street trees, directly opposite each other, to create a similar effect as on Red Mountain Drive. The Horsetooth streetscape consists of perimeter fencing to screen the parking lot for the townhomes. This fencing is punctuated with brick columns and consists of two distinct heights for variety. A pedestrian opening connects the townhome area with the arterial sidewalk. 5. Solar Orientation: The Solar Orientation Ordinance requires that 65% of the lots within a single family P.U.D. be oriented to within 30 degrees of a true east -west line, or provide 50 feet of unobstructed solar J Dakota Pines PUD - Preliminary and Final, #60-91F April 26, 1993 P & Z Meeting Page 4 access along any southerly side property line. For the patio home area of Dakota Pines, only 9 out of 27 lots (33%) comply with the solar orientation requirement. The 12 townhome lots are exempt. The applicant has requested a variance from the strict requirement that 65% of the lots be oriented to satisfy the ordinance. This request is attached and is summarized as follows: Due to the parcelization of the Pine Cone O.D.P, the configuration of the site results in a rough north -south rectangle. This shape was created by the size of the high school campus (68 acres), the size of the neighborhood shopping center (11 acres), and the need to provide a north -south street (Red Mountain Drive) to serve the southerly portion of Pine Cone O.D.P. Given the pre -determined shape, the applicant submits that the parcel can only be efficiently planned for the desired density and housing type by platting lots in an east -west layout. The Planning and Zoning Board is empowered to grant variances to the provisions of the L.D.G.S. under the following circumstance: "The strict application of any provision would result in peculiar and exceptional practical difficulties to, or exceptional and undue hardship upon, the owner of such property, provided that the variance may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without substantially impairing the purpose of this section." Staff finds that the variance request is justified under this criterion. Since the perimeter boundaries (high school campus) and existing streets (Red Mountain Drive) represent a pre -determined development pattern, it would be an exceptional and practical difficulty to make the necessary modifications in order to meet the solar orientation standard. Further, Staff finds that the variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good or without impairing the purpose of the L.D.G.S. Staff, therefore, recommends the variance be granted. 6. Transportation: In 1992, the Pine Cone Site Access Study was submitted in conjunction with the Pine Cone Overall Development Plan. This study assumed that Parcel F would develop into 22 single family homes with a daily trip generation of 220. Dakota Pines P.U.D. contains 39 units which generate 390 daily trips. Despite this increase in trip generation, the development does not create any additional impacts on Red Mountain Drive (local street) or the Horsetooth Road/Red Mountain Drive intersection. Dakota Pines PUD - Preliminary and Final, #60-91F April 26, 1993 P & Z Meeting Page 5 The sidewalk along Red Mountain Drive is eight feet wide and detached from the curb by a seven foot wide parkway. This sidewalk is intended to act as an offstreet bicycle/pedestrian path to promote non -vehicular access to the high school campus and the neighborhood park. This sidewalk conforms to the design of the overall path network approved for the New Fort Collins High School and the Pine Cone Overall Development Plan. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the variance from the requirement that 65% of the single family lots comply with the orientation specifications of the Solar Orientation ordinance. Staff finds that the variance is justified due to the pre -determined development pattern resulting in a north -south shaped parcel. Strict application of the Solar Orientation ordinance would result in peculiar and exceptional practical difficulties and undue hardship upon the subdivider. Finally, Staff finds the variance may be granted without detriment to the public. good and without impairing the purpose of the Solar Orientation Ordinance. Staff finds that the request for Dakota Pines Preliminary and Final P.U.D. satisfies the All Development Criteria and is supported by the performance on the Residential Uses Point Chart of the L.D.G.S. Staff, therefore, recommends approval of Dakota Pines, Preliminary and Final P.U.D., #60-91F, subject to the following condition: 1. The Planning and Zoning Board approves this planned unit development final plan upon the condition that the development agreement, final utility plans, and final P.U.D., plans for the planned unit development be negotiated between the developer and City staff and executed by the developer prior to the second monthly meeting (June 28, 1993) of the Planning and Zoning Board following the meeting at which this planned unit development final plan was conditionally approved; or, if not so executed, that the developer, at said subsequent monthly meeting, apply to the Board for an extension of time. The Board shall not grant any such extension of time unless it shall first find that there exists with respect to said planned unit development final plan certain specific unique and extraordinary circumstances which require the granting of the extension in order to prevent exceptional and unique hardship upon the owner or developer of such property and provided that such extension can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good. If the staff and the developer disagree over the provisions to be included in the development agreement, the developer may Dakota Pines PUD - Preliminary and Final, #60-91F April 26, 1993 P & Z Meeting Page 6 present such dispute to the Board for resolution if such presentation is made at the next succeeding or second succeeding monthly meeting of the Board. The Board may table any such decision, until both the staff and the developer have had reasonable time to present sufficient information to the Board to enable it to make its decision. (If the Board elects to table the decision, it shall also extend the term of this condition until the date such decision is made). If this condition is not met within the time established herein (or as extended, as applicable), then the final approval of this planned unit development shall become null and void and of no effect. The date of final approval for this planned unit development shall be deemed to be the date that the condition is met, for purposes of determining the vesting of rights. For purposes of calculating the running of time for the filing of an appeal pursuant to Chapter 2, Article II, Division 3, of the City Code, the "final decisions, of the Board shall be deemed to have been made At the time of this conditional approval; however, in the event that a dispute is presented to the Board for resolution regarding provisions to be included in the development agreement, the running of time for the filing of an appeal of such "final decision" shall be counted from the date of the Boards decision resolving such dispute. ITEM: DAKOTA PINES PUD North Preliminary & Final NUMBER: 60=91 F L Q�2@@P@ urban design, inc. DAKOTA PINES PUD Preliminary and Final Plan Statement of Planning Objectives March 1, 1993 The proposed Dakota Pines PUD is consistent with the Pinecone ODP, and represents the next step in creating a neighborhood that may achieve a significant number of the City of Fort Collins' adopted Goals and Objectives, Land Use Policies, elements of the Fort Collins Area Transportation Plan, and preliminary findings of the Neighborhood Compatibility study. Dakota Pines represents an opportunity to provide a greater mix of housing types in this area than has been achieved in recent years. The proposed combination of patio homes and townhomes makes an excellent transition between the traditional single family lots in Dakota Ridge 1 st Filing, and the high school property to the west. Key design concepts employed to better define neighborhood character include a continuation of the formal street tree program initiated with Dakota Ridge, and a concentrated effort to reduce the visual impact of garage doors on the streetscape. Townhomes near the corner of Red Mountain Drive and Horsetooth "front" on Red Mountain, with garages in the rear. Where practical, garages for patio homes are placed behind the house, or turned with side walls facing the street. Consistent with the Pinecone ODP, the Dakota Pines PUD Plans were prepared with a number of other planning goals and concepts in mind; giving special attention to elements affecting neighborhood compatibility. These concepts include: Create a successful mixed use development. Work within the framework of a viable master planned community with the potential to share amenities, storm drainage improvements, and/or other common elements, as established with the ODP. Plan for a land use mix with complementary uses within easy walking distance of each other. Allow flexibility for the development of a range of housing types with the ability to respond to changing market demands. II. While recognizing traditional traffic management needs, create a circulation system that - where practical - makes bike and pedestrian access between uses convenient. Include design characteristics - such as entry streets tailored to serve differing land uses - which lend clarity and identity to residential neighborhoods. cu�ywp@ urban design, inc. Provide neighborhood street systems that promote neighborhood integrity, by restricting extraneous motorized traffic from low density residential areas. Design a collector street system that can gather traffic from a neighborhood and carry it to an arterial street; yet divert "through" traffic away from local traffic. Plan a viable, integrated bike and pedestrian system for the Pinecone community, including safe, direct pedestrian and bike access from residential to shopping areas and the high school. III. Provide land use transitions and creative relationships between uses. Protect defined neighborhood areas from the intrusion of activities which may have negative impacts upon residents; particularly traffic generated by more intensive uses. Plan an integrated system of open spaces using the major recreational area formed by the proposed city park and the high school athletic fields as a major neighborhood focal point and land use buffer. Plan transitional uses between the commercial and low density residential areas, while avoiding conflicts - particularly in terms of traffic circulation - with other development areas. The Dakota Pines PUD is also consistent with applicable Land Use Policies, including: Policy 3. The City shall promote: a. Maximum utilization of land within the city; d. The location of residential development which is close to employment, recreation, and shopping facilities. Policy 12. Urban density residential development usually at three or more units to the acre should be encouraged in the urban growth area. Policy 74. Transitional land uses or areas (linear greenbelts or other urban design elements) should be provided between residential neighborhoods and commercial areas in order to enhance the concept of a mixture of land uses. Policy 75. Residential areas should provide a mix of housing densities.