Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNORTH COLLEGE MARKETPLACE - AMENDED ODP - 42-08 - CORRESPONDENCE - TRAFFIC STUDY (3)c> Page 2 of 2 >>> Kathleen Bracke 4/27/2009 9:47 AM >>> here is Matt's map that goes with the memo. >>> Mark Jackson 4/27/2009 9:42 AM >>> KB, Is there a map that is supposed to accompany Matt's memo? I can't follow his suggested alternative. Steve & Steve, what are your thoughts on matt's suggestion? MJ >>> Kathleen Bracke 4/27/2009 9:37 AM >>> Hi, Steve & Steve. Here is the memo that Matt Wempe prepared last week regarding the North College Marketplace development project. Transportation Planning's recommendation is to modify the Ped LOS and request that the developer escrow the funds in lieu of being required to build the pedestrian connection improvements due to the difficulties arising from the Ditch Company. Here is an excerpt from Matt's memo: "Based on these issues, Transportation Planning is recommending that a modification be granted for the pedestrian LOS standards. This is based on the inability of the developer to obtain the necessary easements to permit the construction of the bridge in a timely manner. As a condition of approval, the developer should be required to contribute the URA funds designated for pedestrian connections towards a future pedestrian capital project along North College Avenue. This condition would require agreement from the URA (to determine if the developer can contribute URA funds to a City capital project) and Engineering (to develop a cost estimate and proportion share for the development). Transportation Planning will coordinate this effort prior to the Planning & Zoning Board hearing. Jeff and Mark, please let me know if this approach is acceptable. I will then coordinate with Current Planning to inform the developer and address the modification in their staff report to the Planning & Zoning Board. "If you and Jeff and Mark are ok with Matt's recommendation, please let us know. Matt Wempe worked with Matt Baker from Engineering on this issue too so that we have a clear understanding and coordination about what is build -able by the developer and what is not at this time. Please let me know if you need any additional information on this. As I mentioned, Matt is out of the office until Thursday this week so let me know what I can do to help with this while he is out. Thanks, Kathleenx6140 file://CADocuments and Settings\solt\Local Settings\Temp\GW}OOOOI.HTM 5/5/2009 c= Page 1 of 2 Steve Olt - North College Marketplace memo re: Ped LOS From: Kathleen Bracke To: Jeff Scheick; Mark Jackson; Steve Dush; Steve Olt Date: 4/29/2009 6:48 PM Subject: North College Marketplace memo re: Ped LOS CC: Helen Migchelbrink; Matt Baker; Matthew Wempe thanks, Steve. Matt will be back tomorrow so he can help you with this, Kathleen >>> Steve Olt 4/29/2009 3:53:32 PM >>> As I begin the Staff Reports for the North College Marketplace, Amended ODP and the North College Marketplace, Second Filing (shopping center) - PDP I will need to refer to the appropriate section(s) of the Land Use Code (LUC) and address the pedestrian bridge issue through the modification of standard process. I am assuming that the actual section of the LUC we will be modifying is Section 3.6.4(B) Genera/ Standardthat states: 'All development plans shall adequatelyprovide vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle facilities necessary to maintain the adopted transportation Level of Service standards contained in Part 11 of the City of Fort Collins Multi -modal Transportation Level of Service Manual for the following modes of transportation: motor vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian. The Transit L OS standards contained in Part H of the Multi -modal Transportation Manual will not be applied for the purposes of this Section. " Matt W. and I will work together to provide the appropriate information and recommendations (presumably approval) in the Staff Reports to the Planning & Zoning Board. Based on the criteria set forth in Section 2.8.2(H) of the LUC, it would seem that we will be using Section 2.8.2(H)(3) to justify the modification request. This section deals with "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". Since the property owner/developer was willing to provide the pedestrian bridge crossing of the Larimer and Weld Canal but the ditch company ultimately decided to not allow such crossing, this section would seem to be appropriate. Granted the property owner/developer will still be responsible for entering into an agreement with the City that will pursue an alternative pedestrian crossing route along North College Avenue. Steve Olt, Project Planner >>> Kathleen Bracke 4/27/2009 1:14 PM >>> Thanks, Jeff. Appreciate your quick feedback on this. Matt & Matt - can you please coordinate on the best way to show the ped bridge to address Jeffs safety concerns? thanks, Appreciate everyone's help with this, Kathleen >>> Jeff Scheick 4/27/2009 12:39 PM >>> This looks like a pretty good solution. One thing that we may need to play with is the location of the ped bridge hooking up to College. It looks like it is at the start/end of a tight curve so there could be some safety concerns for peds crossing a limited visibility point. I appreciate the creative solution approach here. Thanks! Jeff file://CADocuments and Settings\solt\Local Settings\Temp\GW)00001.HTM 5/5/2009