Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTWIN SPRUCE FARM PUD PRELIMINARY AND FINAL - 22 90 - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSITEM NO. 5 MEETING DATE 6-25-90 STAFF Sherry Albertson -Clark City of Fort Collins PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD STAFF REPORT PROJECT: Twin Spruce Farm PUD, Preliminary and Final-#22-90 APPLICANT: United Bank of Fort Collins 401 S. College Fort Collins, CO 80524 OWNER: same PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A request for preliminary and final approval for 2,880 square feet of office space for a computer software development company and retention of an exist- ing single family home as a residence, on 2.2 acres, located at 2115 W. Mulberry. The site is zoned M-L, Low Density Mobile Home. RECOMMENDATION: Approval. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to use a converted garage for office space for a computer software development company and to retain the existing single family home as a residence. The only exterior changes proposed for the site are the addition of two parking spaces and provision for an emergency equipment turn around. The proposed project achieves 58% on the Business Services Point Chart. The minimum required on the point chart is 50%. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 300 LaPorte Ave. P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 (303) 221-6750 PLANNING DEPARTMENT NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING SUMMARY On Wednesday, May 30, 1990 at 7:00 P.M. at Apostolic Life Tabernacle, a ❑eighborhood meeting was held on the proposed Twin Spruce Farm PUD. In attendance at this meeting were Rick and Julie Burcham, applicants; Tim Dow, attorney for the applicants; Leann Reeves, United Bank (property owner of the subject property); Russ McCann and Rick Koentopp, realtors representing the subject property; Frank Bruno, Economic Development Coordinator; and Steve Olt and Sherry Albertson -Clark of the Planning Department. Five area prop- erty owners attended the meeting. The meeting began with an introduction by Sherry Albertson -Clark to the purpose of the meeting. Russ McCann discussed the proposed project. After this presentation, questions and comments were addressed. The following summarizes the questions asked by area property owners and responses given by the applicants, as well as comments made by the property owners. uestion: What would happen to the existing residence? Any multi -family units? Response: It would be retained as the owner's (applicant's) single family home. Question: What about the number of employees? Does this include the owners? Response: Yes. The plan indicates a maximum of 10 employees and we anticipate 9 at this time. Question : Why is the fire truck access needed? Response: Mulberry Street is an arterial street and the fire trucks cannot be parked on a busy street to fight fires. Either a turn around must be provided on the site for fire equipment, or the structures must be sprinkled. uestion: Would there be any children or animals at the property? Concerned about noise. Response: Only two cats. May consider several sheep in the future. (Staff responded that fr rm animals are not permitted in this zoning district). uestion: What is the size of the parcel? Response: About 2.2 acres. Comment: City should approve this proposal, would be welcomed in the neigh- borhood. The meeting adjourned at 8:05 P.M. s PROJECT: ,A1,k),5yu-_- 1�;,m TyD' TYPE OF MEETING: �Lt!lp DATE: J�O-JD NAME ADDR/ESS WRITTEN NOTIFICATION YES/NO 0WNER RENTS' F�J � NVVGJ, R-E I eAAJ AAAA--k L2 w ),,3 CD ✓'u ✓I v R,cv_ r 3� s Sa • • June 18, 1990 INFORMATION SYSTEMS City of Fort Collins Planning Department Attn: Sherry Albertson -Clark P. O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 Dear Sherry, Hawkeye Information Systems develops and markets computer software for IBM computers. We do all of our marketing thru the telephone and distribute the software via UPS. We have no retail or walk-in trade. Hawkeye has 7 employees, not counting my wife and myself. Each employee stays on the property during the length of the day, with a trip out for lunch, and an occasional errand. We do not anticipate any excessive growth, but would like to be allowed up to 10 employees. Sincerely, � LL Richard A. Burcham Hawkelre HAWKEYE INFORMATION SYSTEMS • P.O. Box 2167, Ft. Collins, Colorado 80522 • 303-498-9000 THE GROUP INC. REAL70RS May 10, 1990 To the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board I would like to point out several items of benefit regarding the potential purchase of the property at 2115 west Mulberry, Fort Collins, by Richard and Julie Burcham (Hawkeye Information Systems). The Burchams are relocating their computer business from Los Angeles, California to Fort Collins based on several items: 1) Seeing Fort Collins as a desirable area for their personal employees to raise families without the threat of the big city influences, cost of housing, goods and services and to be able to take advantage of the Colorado life-style. 2) The selection of the city was over Boulder and Longmont and in particular the subject property was based on an in -home business atmosphere that will be very low key with 8-10 employees including Mr. and Mrs. Burcham. 3) The subject property is zoned ML, but has been used as a business location for the past years with a multitude of users and employees. Apparently there has not been a problem with the contiguous properties or adjoining residences during that period of time. 4) The Burchams would like to maintain an image of in -home business, do not require signage or retail space, and have employees who have staggered work hours due to the time zones across the United States and several foreign countries. Delivery trucks consist of 2-3 Federal Express or United Parcel Trucks daily. All security fencing, existing landscaping, etc. would be maintained on the premises as presently shown. 5) From an economic standpoint, in addition to the initial impact of the purchase of this property, 5-6 key employees will be purchasing residences and vehicles. 401 West Mulberry Street • Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 . Telephone 303/221-0700 375 East Horsetooth Road 0 Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 0 Telephone 303/223-0700 THE GROUP INC. REALTORS Page 2 6) Projected sales for the company in 1990 will be $2,000,000 and $3,000,000 in 1991. Annual base incomes paid to the employees will range in the $400,000 to $500,000 area. We ask your consideration for the P.U.D. approval to allow this business to operate on these premises as we believe it is very conducive to the surrounding area and neighborhood. Rick Koentopp Broker Associate on behalf of Rick and Julie Burcham 401 West Mulberry Street • Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 ' Telephone 303l221-0700 375 East Horsetooth Road • Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 • Telephone 303/223-0700 13 Q • Twin Spruce Farm PUD, Preliminary and Final - #22-90 P & Z Meeting - June 25, 1990 Page 2 COMMENTS 1. Backeround: The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: N: R-L; existing church (Apostolic Life Tabernacle) S: M-L; existing mobile home park (Skyline Mobile Home Park PUD) E: B-L; existing service station W: R-L; existing single family home This site is known as the Twin Spruce Farm Subdivision, which was approved in 1980 as a one -lot subdivision. The site consists of a single family residence, a garage, green house, studio and several small out buildings. The existing home has previously been used for residential purposes, with office uses occurring in the finished garage. The past office uses have been illegal home occupations, since more than one non-resident employee worked at the site. The garage has previously been converted to an office occupancy and contains numerous telephone lines. 2. Land Use: The proposed office use was evaluated under the criteria of the Business Services Point Chart. Using this Point Chart, the project achieves 58%. Points were awarded for being located on a transit route; being outside the South College Avenue corridor; being on at least two acres and for contiguity. A minimum of 50% is required on this point chart. Therefore, the proposed land use is supported by the criteria of the Business Services Point Chart. The proposed office use is for a computer software development company (Hawkeye Information Systems), which would employ a maximum of 10 employees, including the two principals of the company. The company develops and sells computer software packages. The single family home would be retained as the residence of the principals. 3. Design: There is an existing single family home on the site, as well as a garage, greenhouse, studio and several small outbuildings. The proposed office use would be located in the garage structure, occupying 2,880 square feet. A maximum of ten employees, including the principals of Hawkeye Information Systems, are proposed. The remainder of the site will remain in its present configuration (orchard and pasture). The entire perimeter of the site is fenced with 6' solid wood fencing and there is a security gate at the site's entrance. The gate is typically open during business hours. Key access at the security gate is being provided for the Poudre Fire Authority. 0 Twin Spruce Farm PUD, Preliminary and Final - #22-90 P & Z Meeting - June 25, 1990 Page 3 The site contains a significant number of mature trees, all of which will be retained. There are two site changes proposed with this request. Two addi- tional parking spaces are planned and a turn around needed for emergency equipment is proposed east of the driveway. The turn around is planned to be constructed of grass crete, which would be adequate to hold fire equipment. One tree would be transplanted as a result of the construction of this turn around and two existing lights along the driveway would be relocated. There are nine parking spaces on the site, including three spaces in the garage. Two additional spaces are proposed, for a total of 11 parking spaces. This is adequate for providing the required two spaces for the residence, as well as meeting employee and/or visitor demand. The paved area between the resi- dence and garage provides adequate space for any delivery trucks, such as United Parcel Service. 4. Neighborhood Compatibility: A neighborhood meeting was held on this proposal. Five area property owner/residents attended this meeting. No issues or concerns relative to this proposal were raised by the neighborhood. There do not appear to be any impacts on the surrounding property as a result of this proposal. RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the Twin Spruce Farm PUD, Preliminary and Final exceeds the minimum required points on the Business Services Point Chart and the proposed PUD is in conformance with the All Development Criteria of the Land Development Guidance System. Therefore, staff recommends approval of Twin Spruce Farm PUD, Preliminary and Final, #22-90. �I ,IMP 0ras� r. 'mC �, -» FOA • 0 L NULON ' IN(" IANIW A+rr.. _. Jw iRvv • e✓.u. wWu .s rww ewnr Ij �'� ae!MwN.o j, � liI /♦v .. tW4 RL 0 i4 .Na ^'k C i - S • . �• ba. yw.� .. Rx � NRNf Ir:ARI. "�n,.e -iT rw 14 • — ecnv v wrti�' ��yy •}nit e.va A/�rN f NONs{ VICINITY MAY eeaL{'. I•" Imo' r- DATA ..q © gjNBR s. NA Y Y.rrM 601 6, GONigf ANY{. PO{( LO WIMb, LO. BOeu�. {YKi. 30WNq PI - LW O.",tY MOB NOMf s M4L4f KIMpfR op LOFS i I b•YB{♦i ^ L04 AMA : 'b•41N AL.! +\ }r B%Nf Ilb{ i11Yit{ (AMLY p{iO{NL{ i ry0I0[.ep N6i '. iIYNL YL11LY 2-N4 S.'IM c( i 4Mi Y � LcwWfR bO1T..p S+1vILB e,BfO iP ♦ i"tom l � PARKINq LPAG{6'h {. - 45IAG{s \ r• %' .tl nIi.yuy11 of � toTAL . I I cM4s L°Mni �*1Mb I �� �i j NI:IMUM .o! {rytLOYf{�'. to P{oIL{ I,b(g5: I. pµ 1R{fs 1 bNRusa c.NOWN Af{ {rNeflNq . b'MMb b•M r V L. ALL UDLN%b iO blBL ARf ►M{Jkq. ` OMNAgf; NO °61R{{{ 616NAgf ° y1W BB YAT sr.� ILIBM6 - ..m TYE TMi. A ENYI. O(f�Ge' 61tlN WIW Df Ubio NHt 10 MO L.YICR KOR. {Lfo Ie'KN wNni A MW 'NO .fI4 ILANE' ir44 «114 B4zAttALNfv 10 6A10 0N gA1f Al ills ♦ �•�. ♦ _ fHrlgiMN NfN A(<wo UNf. t gWin. rjl-•.. r.. a,o. r wn.. oy RA& 9RDAKDOWN I.H. A� BIIIJINne fy�ie i{ BF 1 tmMre u�~ "al bw•'•'«M�AIr NW .�1 O[M mw4 MBInR.ON.Ns 4e11 4601 N IB% e % �� rx bvr. wL.�L.•r�1.LL. Mw. n.�4.I (/ INRq{NQ' AG(�H �' 4b0 N 9X NOBIL{ Roma fA{IC �jOAL{. I`-20 tp4t NL OP{N aTAL1{VBMK.sr Mors JNNB b, 11N10 n.w. Ar r goon �I. �� 91,O o b0 T. ®.14% � I�.r •• � ••1•.•i. M 1 �i�i R �• li R. � R w�Ms �•b•j�A��W.�.x/YY x i ixw«. t✓� . IM .4♦. Ib 1�♦Y. liw•ri� i i� i •LL�.us s. /w�����{� 7839 .I ALL DEVELOPMENT: NUMBERED CRITERIA CHART ALL CRITERIA APPLICABLE CRITERIA ONLY CRITERION Is the criterion applicable? Will the criterion be satistled? If no, please explain ��`�F.�`�°,, Yes No NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATABILITY 1. Social Compatability 2. Neighborhood Character Nil I 3. Land Use Conflicts 4. Adverse Traffic Impact PLANS AND POLICIES 5. Comprehensive Plan PUBLIC FACILITIES & SAFETY 6. Street Capacity 7. Utility Capacity 8. Design Standards 9. Emergency Access 10. Security Lighting 11. Water Hazards RESOURCE PROTECTION 12. Soils & Slope Hazard 13. Significant Vegetation 44. Wildlife Habitat 15. Historical Landmark 16, Mineral Deposit 17. Eco-Sensitive Areas 18. Agricultural Lands ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS 19. Air Quality 20. Water Quality 21. Noise - - ,are & Heat 23. Vibrations 24. Exterior Lighting 25. Sewages & Wastes SITE DESIGN 26. Community Organization 27. Site Organization 28. Natural Features 29. Ener-,,, Conservation 30. Shadows 31. Solar Access 32. Privac. 33. Open Space Arrangement 34. Building Height 35. Vehicular Movement 36. Vehicular Design 37. Parking 38. Active Recreational Areas 39 Privaf= Outdoor Areas 40. Pedestrian Convenience 41. Pedestrian Conflicts 42. Landscaping/Open Areas 43. Landscaping/Buildings 44. Landscaping/Screening 45. Public Access 46. Signs ACTIVITY: Business Service Uses DEFINITION E Those activities which are predominantly retail, office, and service uses which would not qualify as or be a part of a neighborhood or commu- nity/regional shopping center. Uses include: retail shops; offices; per- sonal service shops; financial institutions; hotels/motels; medical clin- ics; health clubs; membership clubs; standard and fast-food restaurants; hospitals; mortuaries; indoor theatres; retail laundry and dry cleaning outlets; limited indoor recreation uses; small animal veterinary clinics; printing and newspaper offices; and, other uses which are of the same gen- eral character. CRITERIA' Each of the following applicable criteria must be answered "yes" and implemented within the develop- ment plan. Yes No 1. Does the project gain its primary vehicular access from a street other ❑ ❑ than South College Avenue? 2. DOES THE PROJECT EARN AT LEAST 50% OF THE MAXIMUM POINTS AS CALCULATED ❑ ON "POINT CHART E" FOR THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA? a. Is the activity contiguous to an existing transit route (not appli- cable for uses of less than 25,000 square feet GLA or with less than 25 employees) or located in the Central Business District? b. Is the project located outside of the "South College Avenue Corri- dor?" c. Is the project contiguous to and functionally a part of a neighbor- hood or community/regional shopping center, an office or industrial park, located in the Central Business District or in the case of a single user, employ or will employ a total of more than 100 full- time employees during a single 8-hour shift? d. Is the project on at least two acres of land or located in the Cen- tral Business District? continued f; I continued I; e. Does the project contain two or more significant uses (such as retail, office, residential, hotel/motel, and recreation)? f. Is there direct vehicular and pedestrian access between on -site parking areas and adjacent existing or future off -site parking areas which contain more than ten (10) spaces? g. Does the activity reduce non-renewable energy usage, through the application of alternative energy systems, use of existing build- ings, and through committed energy conservation measures beyond that normally required by City Code? h. Is the project located with at least 1/6th of its property boundary contiguous to existing urban development? i. If the site contains a building or place in which a historic event occurred, which has special public value because of notable archi- tecture, or is of cultural significance, does the project fulfill the following criteria. i. Prevent creation of influences adverse to its preservation; ii. Assure that new structures and uses will be in keeping with the character of the building or place. Imitation of period styles should be avoided; and iii. Propose adaptive use of the building or place that will lead to its continuance, conservation and improvement in an appropriate manner while respecting the integrity of the neighborhood. -23- 0 • BUSINESS SERVICE USES POINT CHART E For All Critera Applicable Criteria Only Criterion Is The Cterion Applicable Yes No II Ill IV Circle The Correct Score Yes WW No Multiplier Points Earned 1x11 Maximum Applicable Points a, Transit route X 2 0 2 b, S. College corridor X X 2 0 4 8 c, Part of center X X 2 0 3 6 d, Two acres or more X X 2 0 3 6 e, Mixed -use X X 2 C 3 6 f, Joint parking - 1 2 0 3 g, Energy conservation X 1 2 0 4 8 h, Contiguity X I X 2101 5 10 i, Historic preservation 1 2 0 2 j, 1 2 0 k, 1 2 0 l 120 VW — Very Well Done Totals '71 VI Percentage Earned of Maximum Applicable Points V/VI =V1I - VII —24—