HomeMy WebLinkAboutRIGDEN FARM, 5TH FILING, TRACT I, SETTLERS GREEN - PDP - MODIFICATIONS OF STANDARDS - 56-98J - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTS (3)Modification of Standards for Settler's Green P.D.P. at Rigden Farm, File # 56-98J
March 15, 2001 P&Z Meeting
Page 2
COMMENTS
1. BACKGROUND
The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
N: LMN — Des Moines Drive, Parkside East at Rigden Farm P.D.P. (under review),
Canby Way, a portion of Rigden Farm filing 1,
T — Drake Road, Cargil Research Farm, historic barn, farm land,
NW: LMN - LaGrange Multifamily, Housing at Rigden Farm P.D.P. (under final
compliance review), Parkside West at Rigden Farm P.D.P. (under review),
MMN & NC — Undeveloped phases of the Rigden Farm Development,
E: LMN, approved filing 1 of Rigden Farm (under construction), Rigden Farm filing 6
P.D.P. (under review),
S: LMN — Custer Drive, a neighborhood center (under construction) including
relocated Johnson Farm structures, undeveloped phases of the Rigden Farm
Development,
RL — existing Dakota Ridge and Stone Ridge Residential Developments,
W: LMN — Rigden Parkway, LaGrange Multifamily Housing at Rigden Farm P.D.P.
(under final compliance review)
MMN & NC — undeveloped phases of the Rigden Farm Development.
The property is east of Rigden Parkway, north of Custer Drive, south of Des Moines
Drive, and was annexed into the City as part of the Timberline Annexation in November
of 1997.
The applicant currently has a Project Development Plan under review for the entire site,
called Settler's Green at Rigden Farm; Current Planning File 56-98J. The uses
proposed in the P.D.P. are permitted in the-LMN — Low Density Mixed -Use
Neighborhood District and the proposed density is consistent with the Overall
Development Plan. A recommendation will be forwarded to the Hearing Officer as a
Project Development Plan, at the appropriate time for final review as outlined in the
Land Use Code Section 2.4.2 Project Development Plan Review Procedures.
2. THE MODIFICATION PROCESS
(A) Section 2.8.2(H) of the LUC specifies that in order to approve a modification the
Planning and Zoning Board must find that:
(1) the granting of the modification is not detrimental to the public good,
(2) the plan as submitted will:
�l
modification advances or protects the purpose of this standard. If a homeowner decides to
locate their garage on the property line it would cause the garage to be offset from their house
enhancing their view from the rear of their house and allowing more light in, and giving the
feeling of a larger yard area. Depending on the lay out of their home it could add to their
privacy utilizing the garage as a screen. Due to the small size of the detached garages and
optional carriage units we do not feel that air circulation would be encumbered by whether or
not they are located on the property line or F from the property line.
Thank you for your consideration of this modification request.
Sly
Robert T. Hand
Project Manager
Settler's Green, Registered LLLP
i
we are requesting this modification to allow families on these lots to have a bit more
yard space between their house and the detached garage. This advances the public's
interest by protecting small children in providing them a protected play yard area. This
will also apply to the multifamily units by giving them enough space between their units
and the proposed detached garages to have either a small yard or enclosed courtyard.
2. Granting of the this modification request will advance the public interest in that it would
discourage people from parallel parking in front our their garages. An eight foot
setback would encourage the space between the garage and the alley right-of-way to
be used as a parking space. A six foot setback would discourage this practice, thus
keeping the alley more open and easier to maneuver.
3. We feel that this plan advances the public's interest significantly by addressing the
following specific community needs outlined in the city's Comprehensive Plan:
PRINCIPLE AN-5: All new residential buildings should be designed to
emphasize the visually interesting features of the building, as seen
from the public street and sidewalk. The visual impact of garage
doors, driveways, and other off-street parking will be minimized and
mitigated.
Policy AN-5.1 Garages and Driveways. To foster visual interest along a
neighborhood street, the street frontage devoted to protruding garage doors and
driveway curb crossings will be limited. Generally, garages should be recessed, or if
feasible, tucked into side or rear yards, using variety and creativity to avoid a
streetscape dominated by the repetition of garage doors. Locating garages further from
the street can allow narrower driveway frontage at the curb, leaving more room for an
attractive streetscape. It is recognized that there may be ways a residential property
can be custom -designed to mitigate the view of a protruding garage opening. The
intent of these policies is not to limit such custom -designed solutions when an
individual homeowner has a need or preference for protruding garage openings.
Policy AN-5.2 Alleys and Shared Driveways. Alleys and various forms of shared
driveways are encouraged in order to improve the visual interest of neighborhood
streets by reducing driveway curb cuts and street -facing garage doors. Such alleys and
driveways can also serve as locations for ancillary buildings, utilities, service functions,
and interior -block parking access.
Policy AN-5.3 Street Vistas. If possible, the view down a street should be designed to
terminate in a visually interesting feature, and not terminate directly in a garage door.
ADVANCES OR PROTECTS THE PURPOSES OF THE STANDARD
We have met with city staff and it was determined that the purpose of this standard was to stay
out of the 8' utility easement required by the engineering standards. Telephone and cable are
the only utilities that will be using this easement and have concurred that a 5' easement will be
adequate for their needs. We have requested a variance from engineering to reduce the utility
easement from 8' to 5' and expect approval shortly. Our request to reduce the rear setback
from 8' to 6' will not encroach upon the 5' utility easement that is being proposed.
According to city staff the purpose of the 5' side yard setback is to ensure that the lots have
adequate light, air circulation, and privacy between adjacent properties. Our request for this
February 14, 2001
Troy Jones
Planner
City of Fort Collins
281 North College
Fort Collins. CO 80524
Dear Mr. Jones:
In addition to our Settler's Green PDP submittal, we are requesting modification to the following
standard for Lots 1-27, Settler's Green P.D.P. (See attached site plan).
3.5.2(D)(3) Side and Rear Yard Setbacks. The minimum side yard setback for all
residential buildings and for all detached accessory buildings that are incidental to the
residential building shall be five (5) feet from the property line. If a zero -lot line
development plan is proposed, a single six-foot minimum side yard is required. Rear
yard setbacks in residential areas shall be a minimum of fifteen (15) feet from the rear
property line, except for garages and storage sheds not exceeding eight (8) feet in
height, where the minimum setback shall be zero (0) feet, and for alley -accessed
garages and dwellings for which the minimum setback shall be eight (8) feet.
We feel that our proposed plan reducing the required rear set -back from 8' to 6' and side yard
set back from 5' to 0' on alley accessed garages and dwellings will advance or protect the public
interests and purposes of the standard for which the modification is requested equally well or
better than would a plan which complies with the standard. This modification is requested for
the following reasons:
NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC GOOD
1. Reducing the rear yard setback from 8' to 6' and the side yard set back from 5' to 0'
would not have a detrimental impact on vehicle or pedestrian visibility. In fact, it would
have a positive benefit. A 6' rear setback would discourage residents from parallel
parking in the alley along their garage door and a 0' side setback would allow more
space on the lot to place parking spaces perpendicular to and off the alley.
2. Granting this modification request increases the feasibility and viability of this project.
People seeking this type of home and neighborhood also expect to obtain a minimal
amount of private yard space. By being forced to adhere to the current setback
standards while also trying to provide an alternative to "garage dominated" designs
would force us to provide nominal or no private yard space. We are concerned that the
lack of yard space would negatively impact the feasibility of the project.
ADVANCES OR PROTECTS THE PUBLIC INTERESTS
This project is alley loaded and designed to have detached garages at the rear of the
property. Because alleys and detached garages consume more of the available land,
No Text
Modification of Standards for Settler's Green P.D.P. at Rigden Farm, File # 56-98J
March 15, 2001 P&Z Meeting
Page 6
6. RECOMMENDATION:
A. Staff recommends approval of the modification request #1 to section 3.5.2(D)(3) of
the Land Use Code.
B. Staff recommends approval of the modification request #2 to section 3.5.2 (D)(3)
subject to the condition that property owner of a lot who proposes to locate an
accessory building along a property line with a zero setback may only do so if a
maintenance access easement has been dedicated on the adjacent property.
Modification of Standards for Settler's Green P.D.P. at Rigden Farm, File # 56-98J
March 15, 2001 P&Z Meeting
Page 5
the adjacent lot at the time of platting: Staff is only recommending approval of this
modification request subject to the condition that any property owner of a lot who
proposes to locate a garage building along a property line with a zero setback may only
do so if a maintenance access easement has been dedicated on the adjacent property.
5. FINDINGS OF FACT/CONCLUSION:
A. The requested Modification of Standards for Settler's Green at Rigden Farm, file
#56-98J is subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Board.
B. Staff finds that the granting of modification request #1 would not be detrimental to
the public good because there are only two utilities located in the alley (phone and
cable TV), therefore there is no need for 8 feet of utility easement on either side of
the alley.
C. Staff finds that the granting of modification request #1 would advance the public
interests of the standard better than would a plan that satisfies the standard
because a narrower setback would help discourage residents from attempting to
parallel park in the alley along their -garage door, a practice which the city wishes to
discourage.
D. Staff finds that the plan as submitted, reflecting modification request #1, will protect
the purposes of the standard equally well as would a plan which complies with the
standard because the alley will function adequately for access, service and utilities
with either a 6 foot rear setback or an 8 foot rear setback.
E. Staff finds that the granting of modification request #2 would not be detrimental to
the public good because the granting of this request would allow the owner of each
property the ability to more efficiently use the back yard square footage, thereby
consolidating the usable area of the back yard to one side of the garage.
F. Staff finds that the granting of modification request #2 will protect the public
interests of the standard equally well as would a plan which satisfies the standard
because increasing the ability for: each lot to have usable yard space will allow each
lot to more likely have a protected and safe place for the residents to use.
G. Staff finds that the proposed plan reflecting modification request #2 will protect the
purpose of the standard equally well as would a plan that satisfies the standard
because having a garage along one of a lot's side property lines does not inhibit the
ability for adequate air circulation, light access, or physical access, so long as a
maintenance access easement is provided on the adjacent lot at the time of platting.
Modification of Standards for Settler's Green P.D.P. at Rigden Farm, File # 56-98J
March 15, 2001 P&Z Meeting
Page 4
and interior -block parking access." Staff finds that the plan as submitted reflecting
modification request #1 will protect the purposes of the standard equally well as
would a plan which complies with the standard because the alley will function
adequately for access, service and utilities with either a 6 foot rear setback or an 8 foot
rear setback.
(B) Modification Request #2 — Section 3.5.2 (D)(3) requires the proposed alley loaded
garages to have a minimum side yard setback of 5 feet.
The applicant requests the allowance to reduce the required 5 foot side yard setback to
a zero setback for alley loaded garages at Settler's Green.
Staff finds that the granting of modification request #2 would not be detrimental to the
public good because the granting of this request would allow each property the ability
to more efficiently use its back yard square footage, thereby consolidating the usable
area of the back yard to one side of the garage.
It is in the public's interest for single family lots to have at least a modest amount of
private yard or patio space so that the residents have the opportunity to create
protected play and leisure areas away from the general public. Such protected play or
leisure areas are particularly beneficial to residents who have young children or pets
that they wish to keep a watchful eye on. Staff finds that the granting of modification
request #2 will protect the public interests of the standard equally well as would a
plan which satisfies the standard because increasing the ability for each lot to have
usable yard space will allow each lot to more likely have a protected and safe place for
the residents to use.
There is no stated purpose in the Land Use Code for side yard setbacks. After much
discussion between the Current Planning Department and the Zoning Department, staff
has come up with a statement that we feel captures the purpose of side yard setbacks,
as follows: `The purpose of a side yard setback in single family detached lots is
generally to foster adequate air circulation between adjacent dwelling units, to allow a
property owner to have physical access to the entire building, and to allow each
dwelling unit adequate access to light." This is typically achieved by the creation of a
low density character to dwellings by detaching dwellings from one another. The
applicant proposes to give each lot owner the flexibility to locate the garage building
along one side of the lot with zero setback, but in no case does the applicant propose to
locate a garage building along both side property lines of a single lot. Staff finds that
the proposed plan reflecting modification request #2 will protect said purpose equally
well as would a plan that satisfied the standard because having a garage along one of a
lot's side property lines does not inhibit the ability for adequate air circulation, light
access, or physical access, so long as a maintenance access easement is provided on
Modification of Standards for Settler's Green P.D.P. at Rigden Farm, File # 56-98J
March 15, 2001 P&Z Meeting
Page 3
(a) advance or protect the public interests and purposes of the
standard equally well or better than would a plan that satisfies
the standard, or
(b) the proposed project would substantially address an important
community need specifically and expressly defined and
described in the city's Comprehensive Plan, adopted policy,
ordinance or resolution, or
(c) strict application of the standard sought to be modified would
result in unusual and exceptional practical difficulties or
exceptional hardship due to exceptional physical conditions
unique to such property.
3. APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The applicant has proposed that the modification requests meet the requirements of
LUC 2.8.2 Modification Review Procedures (H) Step 8 (Standards). Please see the
attached written justification by the applicant.
4. ANALYSIS OF MODIFICATION REQUEST
(A) Modification Request #1 — Section 3.5.2 (D)(3) requires that the minimum rear
yard setback for all alley loaded garages be at least 8 feet.
The applicant proposes to reduce the rear yard setbacks between the alley -garages and
the rear property line from 8 feet to 6 feet.
Staff finds that the granting of modification request #1 would not be detrimental to the
public good because there are only two utilities located in the alley (phone and cable
TV), therefore there is no need for 8 feet of utility easement on either side of the alley.
Both AT&T Cable and Quest have indicated that 5 feet of utility easement along the rear
property lines adjacent to the alley right-of-way is sufficient for their needs.
Staff finds that the granting of modification request #1 would advance the public
interests of the standard better than would a plan that satisfies the standard because a
narrower setback would help discourage residents from attempting to parallel park in
the alley along their garage door, a practice which the city wishes to discourage.
One of the general purposes of this standard is summarized in City Plan policy AN-5.2
Alleys and Shared Driveways, where it states, Alleys and various forms of shared
driveways are encouraged in order to improve the visual interest of neighborhood
streets by reducing driveway curb cuts and street -facing garage doors. Such alleys and
driveways can also serve as locations for ancillary buildings, utilities, service functions,
ITEM NO. 4
a_� , MEETING DATE 3 15 O1
STAFF Troy Jones
Citv of Fort Collins PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD
STAFF REPORT
PROJECT: Modification of Standards for Settler's Green at Rigden Farm
P.D.P., File #56-98J
OWNER/APPLICANT:
Robert Hand
Settler's Green LLLP
1901 Avery Court
Fort Collins, CO 80525
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for two modifications to section 3.5.2(D)(3)
of the Land Use Code for the Rigden Farm Settler's Green Project Development Plan
currently under review. The applicant proposes alley accessed garages for all lots in
the Settler's green Project Development Plan. This section of the LUC specifies side
yard setbacks of 5 feet and rear yard setbacks of 8 feet for such alley loaded garages.
The applicant would like a modification to the side yard setback to allow the flexibility to
locate garages (with or without optional home occupation or carriage house dwelling
unit within) with a zero setback from the side property line. The applicant would also
like a modification to reduce the required rear yard setback from 8 feet to 6 feet.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of both modification requests to
section 3.5.2(D)(3) of the Land Use Code.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This is a request for two separate and distinct modifications
to the following section of the Land Use Code:
3.5.2 Residential Building Standards (D) Residential Building Setbacks (3)
Side and Rear Yard Setbacks — "The minimum side yard setback for all
residential buildings and for all detached accessory buildings that are incidental
to the residential building shall be five (5) feet from the property line. If a zero -lot
line development plan is proposed, a single six-foot minimum side yard is
required. Rear yard setbacks in residential areas shall be a minimum of fifteen
(15) feet from the rear property line, except for garages and storage sheds not
exceeding eight (8) feet in height, where the minimum setback shall be zero (0)
feet, and for alley -accessed garages and dwellings for which the minimum
setback shall be eight (8) feet."
COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. PO. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 (970) 221-6750
PLANNING DEPARTMENT