HomeMy WebLinkAboutRAVEN VIEW - PDP - 12-05 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCILIt should be noted that even at the lowest pedestrian level of service, defined as: "Other Areas" the
same table would appear as:
city
Appeal
Expected
LOS
City Staff
LOS for "Other' Areas
LOS
Estimate
Assessment
-&redness
C
E
Fail
Continuity
C
C
Unknown
Street Crossings
C
D
Unknown
Visual Interest S Amenity
C
D
Unknown
Security
C
C
Unknown
Notes: Score of =Best E'-Worst
Info from City of Fort Collins PWwtnan Level of Service 1996
To borrow from the LOS documents:
Waiver Granted 12/30/05
"The following (noted above) defines the minimum acceptable standards by Pedestrian
Facilities Plan Area. It should be noted that numerous locations within a city will not achieve
the minimum LOS. Because of limited funding, improvements should be prioritized toward
activity areas, routes to school, parks, and transit To cap the current problem, new
developments, both public and private, as well as major street improvements and
redevelopment should adhere to the pedestrian LOS standards. "
Though it is accurate that the administrative officer may grant a waiver of these LOS requirements, in
the instance of the proposed Raven View development, the waiver of these LOS requirements will
result in a dangerous situation for future residents of the development. We believe it is important for
the City Council to review our concerns in an objective forum.
Regards,
Lois and Robert Gore
521 Crestmore PI
482-6448
Adjoining Landowner
Eric Stenner
917 W Magnolia St
416-6370 c.,-r
Adjoining Landowner
Charles Fletcher
2025 W Mulberry St
Ph: AA•z- 80%
Adjoining Landowner
Amended to name Lois and Robert Gore, at contacts as listed above, as the lead appellants and
authorized to receive City notices on behalf of all appellants.
January 20, 2006
Wanda Krajicek
City Clerk, City of Fort Collins
Re: Amended Request for Appeal of Administrative Decision on Raven View PDP mbdif cation of
Standard #12-05/12-05A Dated December 30, 2005
Dear Wanda,
This letter will serve as notice that undersigned request an appeal of the ruling of the administrative
officer per the above project on the grounds that in granting a waiver of the Transportation Level of
Service (LOS) requirement for pedestrian movements of Section 2.8.2(H)(3) the administrative officer
and duly appointed city staffers significantly erred in interpreting city code.
Specifically, in allowing waiver of the LOS, the city staff agrees that in developing the property it is
not necessary for the developers to provide an acceptable bicycle and pedestrian commute to school,
and other neighborhood activities. The city staff would appear to concur with the developers that
forcing all the residents of the development, and most specifically the school -age children, to walk
parallel to the arterial street of Taft Hill Road is a safe and acceptable risk to promote the development
of this property.
The undersigned differ with the view of the city and the developers that children walking to school
along a narrow arterial street is an acceptable risk. The section of Taft Hill Road which is in question
is an area where evasive maneuvers by motorists is significantly restricted due to the narrow design of
the roadway and high volume of traffic. In addition, the section of Taft Hill Road where school
children will be forced to walk every day offers only a four foot width of sidewalk which directly abuts
the traffic lanes of Taft Hill Road, compromising the safety of the children on fair weather days, and
further eroding that margin of safety in inclement weather or darkness.
Though unknown, the undersigned also contend that the city staff may not have considered the
proposed route to school as a "School Walking Area" as defined in the LOS documentation and in not
choosing an accurate designation of the area, inadvertently lowered the necessary LOS. Below is
pasted a chart of the City Required LOS for these areas, as well as the Appellant's estimate of LOS
post -development as well as the known city staff LOS estimate from the review meeting.
city
Appeal
LOS for School Walking
Expected
LOS
city Staff
Area
LOS
Estimate
Assessment
Directness
B
E
Fail
Continuity
B
C
Unknown
Street Crossings
B
D
Unknown
Visual Interest & Amenity
C
D
Unknown
Security
B
C
Unknown
Notes: Score of W=best 'E'=Worst
Into from City of Fort Collins Pedestrian Level of Service 1996
<-Waiter Granted 12/30/05