HOUSES THAT WOULD BE PREVENTED BY THIS ORDINANCE

ADDRESS 707 W. MOUNTAIN

Lot size -9247 sf

House size - 2853 sf
Garage Detached - 216 sf

ALLOWED WITH .27 FAR - 2496 sf

ALLOWED WITH (Option B Revised) 2911 sf – 216 garage = 2695 sf

This house is over the allowed .27 floor area by - 357 sf

This house is over the allowed (Option B Revised) floor area by -158 sf

Actual FAR = .33

____________________________________________________________________________

ADDRESS 430 W. MOUNTAIN

Lot size - 6440 sf

House size - 2862 sf

Garage detached - 462 sf

ALLOWED WITH .27 FAR - 1738 sf

ALLOWED WITH (Option B Revised) 2210 sf – 462 garage = 1748 sf

This house is over the allowed .27 floor area by - 1124 sf

This house is over the allowed (Option B Revised) floor area by - 1114 sf

Actual FAR = .52

__________________________________________

ADDRESS 602 W. MOUNTAIN

Lot size - 6825 sf

House size - 2251 sf

Garage attached - 468 sf

ALLOWED WITH .27 FAR 1842 sf – 468 garage = 1374 sf

ALLOWED WITH (Option B Revised) 2306 sf – 468 garage = 1838 sf

This house is over the allowed .27 floor area by - 877 sf

This house is over the allowed (Option B Revised) floor area by - 413 sf

Actual FAR = .40

__________________________________________

ADDRESS 628 W. MOUNTAIN

Lot size - 5507 sf

House size - 2610 sf

Garage attached - 432 sf

ALLOWED WITH .27 FAR 1487 sf – 432 garage = 1055 sf

ALLOWED WITH (Option B Revised) 1977 sf – 432 garage = 1545 sf

This house is over the allowed .27 floor area by - 1555 sf

This house is over the allowed (Option B Revised) floor area by - 1065 sf

Actual FAR = .55

__________________________________________

ADDRESS 103 North Sherwood

Lot size - 6900 sf

House size - 2472 sf

Garage - N/A

ALLOWED WITH .27 FAR - 1862 sf

ALLOWED WITH (Option B Revised) - 2325 sf

This house is over the allowed .27 floor area by - 610sf

This house is over the allowed (Option B Revised) floor area by - 147sf

Actual FAR = .36

__________________________________________

ADDRESS 301 South Sherwood

Lot size - 4750 sf

House size - 2188 sf

Garage detached - 251 sf

ALLOWED WITH .27 FAR - 1282 sf

ALLOWED WITH (Option B Revised) 1787 sf – 251 garage = 1536 sf

This house is over the allowed .27 floor area by - 906 sf

This house is over the allowed (Option B Revised) floor area by - 652 sf

Actual FAR = .51

__________________________________________

ADDRESS 1001 Akin Ave

Lot size - 6799 sf

House size - 2067 sf

Attached garage - 484 sf

ALLOWED WITH .27 FAR 1835 sf – 484 garage = 1351 sf

ALLOWED WITH (Option B Revised) 2300 sf – 484 garage = 1815 sf

This house is over the allowed .27 floor area by - 716 sf

This house is over the allowed (Option B Revised) floor area by - 251 sf

Actual FAR = .37

_________________________________________

ADDRESS 821 Wet mountain Ave

Lot size - 7104 sf

House size - 2498 sf

Garage detached - 400 sf

ALLOWED WITH .27 FAR - 1918 sf

ALLOWED WITH (Option B Revised) 2376 sf – 400 garage = 1976 sf

This house is over the allowed .27 floor area by - 580 sf

This house is over the allowed (Option B Revised) floor area by - 522 sf

Actual FAR = .41

_________________________________________

ADDRESS 606 West mountain Ave

Lot size - 8056 sf

House size - 3116 sf

Garage detached - 528 sf

ALLOWED WITH .27 FAR - 2175 sf

ALLOWED WITH (Option B Revised) 2614 sf – 528 garage = 2086 sf

This house is over the allowed .27 floor area by - 941 sf

This house is over the allowed (Option B Revised) floor area by - 1030 sf

Actual FAR = .45

___________________________________________

ADDRESS 110 North Sherwood

Lot size - 2700 sf

House size - 1908 sf

Garage - N/A

ALLOWED WITH .27 FAR - 729 sf

ALLOWED WITH (Option B Revised) - 1215 sf

This house is over the allowed .27 floor area by - 1179 sf

This house is over the allowed (Option B Revised) floor area by - 693 sf

Actual FAR = .7

__________________________________________

-

COME TO THE P&Z MEETING TONIGHT - JAN 20, 2011

AT CITY HALL -6:00PM

CASE STUDY #1

Even though this is the type of house that everybody seems to love, the new code would prevent this house from being created. The house was moved in 1900 to a small lot that was divided from a larger corner lot. According to the Larimer County records this lot is only 2700f and the house is 1900sf. While the lot is small the house is situated nicely on the property creating a couple of small intimate gardens. At 1900sf the house is actually large enough for a family and has been a great asset to our neighborhood for many years.

Under the regulations of the new ordinance this lot would only be allowed 729sf. (2700 x 0.27FAR) Why would we as a community want to prevent this house from being built? Why would we want to prevent this homeowner from living within walking distance of work, restaurants, banks, the Post Office, etc?

Forward thinking communities are working on ways to promote this type of redevelopment - Diverse, denser, walkable, close to transit. Why is our community trying to stop it?

The average house built in America is 2400sf. This lot would only be allowed 30% of average. Most families are probably not going to live in a 700sf house.

These code changes will likely prevent more good development like this house than they will prevent the projects that people have complained about. Think about it. This house could not be built. Why would we not want this house in our neighborhood?

CALL CITY COUNCIL THESE CHANGES ARE EXTREME AND NOT VERY WELL THOUGHT OUT. This house is currently a 0.70 FAR , more than twice the proposed new Floor Area Ratio, but what a great house in a great neighborhood!

How the ordinance changes the allowed sizes of houses

COME AND VOICE YOUR OPINION.

It is important:

January 20, 6:00 PM, the Planning and Zoning Board will review Ordinance No. 003, 2011 and provide a recommendation to City Council.

On February 1, City Council will vote (2nd reading) on Ordinance No. 003, 2011

FLOOR AREA RATIO (FAR)

The City Council is in the process of voting in an ordinance that changes the allowable size of house or addition that can be built in the Fort Collins East and West side neighborhoods. They have already voted yes for this in the first reading even though most of the Council admitted that they did not fully understand it. The ordinance will change both the definition of “Floor Area Ratio” and the actual numerical ratio for both the N-C-M and N-C-L zones.

The definition of “FLOOR AREA” and “ FLOOR AREA RATIO” FROM THE Fort Collins Land Use Code:

CLICK FOR ENLARGED VIEW

What the Code presently allows in N-C-L Zone

CLICK FOR ENLARGED VIEW

This is equal to a FAR of 0.4 or 40% for the N-C-L Zone

What the Code presently allows in N-C-M Zone
CLICK FOR ENLARGED VIEW

This is equal to a FAR of 0.5 or 50% for the N-C-M Zone

THE NEW FORT COLLINS ORDINANCE

REDUCES THE “FAR” FOR BOTH ZONES TO ----- 0.27 or 27%.

This is a 32.5% reduction for the N-C-L zone and a 46% reduction for the N-C-M zone. These are extreme reductions and set Fort Collins' FAR below any we could find.

WHAT “FAR” DO OTHER CITIES USE

We found “FAR” numbers for several cities that are known as great places to live. They appear on some of the same “LISTS’ that Fort Collins is on.

Austin Texas 0.4 or 2300sf (whatever is larger)

Eugene Oregon 0.5

Cupertino California 0.45

Lake Oswego Oregon Sliding - 0.3 @15,000sf lot to 0.5 @6,000sf lot

Madison Wisconsin 0.5

WHAT THIS MEANS TO YOU

The table below demonstrates how this really affects your property.

CLICK FOR ENLARGED VIEW

• Under the existing regulations, if you have a 7000sf lot in the N-C-M zone you can build up to a 3,500sf home. Under the new ordinance you will only be allowed a 1890sf home. A 46% reduction. Less than the average house built in America. The average size of new homes built in the US is about 2400sf.

• Under the new ordinance any lot smaller than 9000sf (MORE THAN 70% OF THE LOTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS) would NOT be allowed to build an average size house. Shouldn’t we all be allowed at least an average American Dream!

The table below demonstrates how few lots will be allowed an average size house.

CLICK FOR ENLARGED VIEW

Landmark Preservation Commission gains control through BACK-DOOR

COME AND VOICE YOUR OPINION.

It is important:

On January 20, the Planning and Zoning Board will review Ordinance No. 003, 2011 and provide a recommendation to City Council.

On February 1, City Council will vote (2nd reading) on Ordinance No. 003, 2011

City Council and the Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) are taking a back-door approach to gain design control of new development in the Eastside and Westside neighborhoods.

• In a neighborhood that is designated Historic the Landmark Preservation Commission would have the right to review new and renovation projects within that neighborhood. It is very difficult to create a Historic District since you need a majority of the property owners to agree on it. Instead of creating a Historic District, City Council is using new ordinances to take control of design and aesthetic decisions about your home.
• We had a year long study prepared by the planning staff with multiple public meetings and online surveys. People generally rejected the concept of required design guidelines or an “aesthetic code’. It’s too subjective they said.
• At the last minute Staff and City Council revised the proposed code changes and Council voted for an ordinance that had not even been presented to the public. They set the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and eave heights so low that most projects will have to apply for a variance. Then they threw in the following amendment “Require that an applicant receive a recommendation from a sub-committee of the Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) prior to requesting a variance for certain development standards.

With this new ordinance the Landmark Preservation Commission will have the right to review most projects in the neighborhood since most projects will require a variance. The LPC will not be required to use the National Park Service Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties since thee projects are not registered historic places. The review will be totally subjective, they can just say “the porch is wrong”, “the windows are too contemporary”, etc. In other words, there are no written rules, guidelines or codes for this review!

From the Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) webpage:

“Their primary functions are the local landmark designation of historic buildings and the review and approval of plans for exterior changes to these structures”

The LPC should not be an “Architectural Review Committee” for the Eastside and Westside Neighborhoods. This will be a costly and time consuming mistake.

Drastic House Size Restrictions in NCM, NCL zoning districts - Ordinance 003, 2011

Background about Ordinance NO. 002, 2011 and NO. 003, 2011 - Adopted by Fort Collins' city council on January 4, 2011 - 1st reading

Ordinance NO 003, 2011 - Full Text:

1. Lowers the FAR limits in the NCL and NCM zones for single family detached homes to .27. 
2. Basements and detached garages would not count toward the FAR limit calculation.
3. Land Use Code Revisions
1. Address the "volume loophole" by counting upper building space as a second floor, regardless of whether the floor is built, where the volume exceeds the typical volume associated with a one-story house.
2. Change the point of measurement for side wall height to be at the property line rather than at the base of the side wall at finished grade.
4. LPC (Landmark Preservation Commission) pre-approval required when zoning variance is requested
1. In order to help ensure the any variance of the new standards adopted by Ordinance NO 003, 2001, does not result in new construction or additions that incompatible with existing structures in the City's residential neighborhoods, the Ordinance also amends Section 2.10.2(H) of the Land Use Code, pertaining to variances, to require that any application for a variance of these new standards be accompanied by a written recommendation from a committee of the Landmark Preservation Commission, as authorized under Section 2-278(b)(5) of the City Code. 

Background:

1. January, 2010 - Design Standards Study commissioned by the City Council to examine concerns and issues about recent scrape-offs and pop-ups. Extensive material is available about this study, input and conclusions.
2. December 9, 2010 - Planning and Zoning Board Hearing - unanimously rejecting the then proposed House size changes. (Average+ Approach was examined in details, Changes to FAR and LPC control were not ever brought up and discussed!)
3. January 4, 2011 - New Text using FAR and LPC control over zoning variances were created in less than 3 weeks. City Council  approved the NEW text of the Ordinance at 1st reading.

Next Steps/Upcoming Meetings

• January 10 – Citizen Advisory Committee Meeting
• January 20 – Planning and Zoning Board Hearing
• February 1 – City Council Meeting (Second Reading) 

Please Reference City of Fort Collins Material:

East West Side Study

Summary of Public Comments