Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFOSSIL LAKE P.U.D. - PRELIMINARY - 33-01D1 - CORRESPONDENCE - CITY HALLRussell Legg Daniel Tasman July 28, 1997 Page 5 bicycle connections should be enhanced from that shown on the plans. At the minimum, pedestrian and bicycle connections should be made from cul-de-sacs through to streets. Some examples include a connection between lots 21 and 22 along Blue Heron Lane through to County Road 9 and connections off the cul-de-sacs located on Two Heron Court. If the neighborhood center does become a gathering, focal point as recommended, then the road system —including pedestrian and bicycle access and connections —should lead through and link the various neighborhoods to this center location. • All connections, including street, pedestrian and bicycle, to the outparcel should be indicated. Thank you for the opportunity to provide our comments regarding this proposal. If you have any questions regarding these comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Jo F. Fischbach City Manager xc: Mayor and City Council Members Greg Byrne, CPES Director Bob Blanchard, Current Planning Director Leanne Harter, City Planner, Current Planning Russell Legg Daniel Tasman July 28, 1997 Page 4 • Additional information is also needed on the landscaping and vegetation proposed for the buffer area as well as the design and grading of the proposed water quality protection areas. Comments related to Storm Drainage and Water/Wastewater: • Concerning the outfall for the McClelland Drainage, it is recommended that the applicant verify that the drainage will be preserved to the east as this is a major part of outfall system. Attached are relevant pages from the Master Drainage Plan for the McClelland Basin discussing the outfall and the existing irrigation pond. • This site drains towards the Reservoir, which results in two issues: Water Quality —If the water is to be discharged ultimately into the Reservoir, water quality practices are strongly encouraged before the water is released into the Reservoir. Stability of Shoreline —In order to increase the stability of the shoreline, plantings and shallow areas that serve to break waves are recommended. While this serves to increase shoreline stability, it may also result in limiting access to the Reservoir. Comments related to Engineering and Transportation concerns: • Appropriate ROW and improvements should be made for all roads along the frontage of this property. County Road 9 and County Road 36 are minor arterials and County Road 7 is considered a collector. • All plans should show any planned or existing access points on County Roads 9, 36 and 7. These should line up with, or be adequately separated from, access points on the other side of each roadway. • Please provide a traffic study so that the City can see the proposed impacts and evaluate the proposed off -site improvements. All off -site improvements should be articulated. Off -site road improvements should be done as necessary and as warranted by the traffic impact study, including bike, bus and pedestrian movements. • While not required, a multi -use trail to the north of the Reservoir should be considered. This sort of connection may provide access to the Reservoir as well as future connections to this neighborhood and other locations, including other neighborhoods and possible linkages with the Harmony Corridor. • We recommend that the layout be designed to more closely follow the intent of the Land Use Code, Street Standards or Master Street Plan for providing a grid system of roadways with enhanced interconnections as discussed before. The pedestrian systems as well as Russell Legg Daniel Tasman July 28, 1997 Page 3 • The clubhouse area should be enhanced so that it is more of a neighborhood center. City Plan describes neighborhood centers as "a year-round gathering place accessible to all residents." It is described as being no large than 7 acres and including some of the following: recreation facility, school, children's and adults' day care, place of assembly and worship, small civic facility, neighborhood -serving market, shops, small professional offices, clinics, and other small business. • The densities proposed with this development are not consistent with the City Structure Plan. The City Structure Plan recommends that low density residential neighborhoods have a minimum overall average density of 5 dwellings per acre. Three low density residential uses are identified in the Fossil Lake PUD—Suburban Single Family, Patio Homes, and Cottage Homes. The average density of these equals 3.9 dwelling units per acre which is less than that recommended on the City Structure Plan. Lower densities are being considered in the draft Fossil Creek Special Study Land Use Plan, however neither jurisdictions have formally adopted this document. Comments related to Natural Resources: • If there is to be development on the southern parcel, south of Duck Lake, an evaluation of impacts to both on -site and off -site wetlands and wildlife habitat areas should be conducted. Appropriate buffering and mitigation actions should be applied when the potential for impact to such is evident. • With regards to the northern parcel, located on the north side of Fossil Creek Reservoir, the primary concern is with the buffer zone distance proposed. Given that the desirability of a '/a mile buffer between development and the north shore of Fossil Creek Reservoir is recognized in several long term planning documents including the proposed Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Land Use Framework Plan and given that maximization of buffer width is desirable to protect current and future wildlife habitat values, and given that the applicant is proposing a buffer zone less than '/< mile in width, a wildlife impact study should be performed by a qualified consultant prior to finalizing the buffer width. The study should evaluate the impacts of the proposed development on the existing and future wildlife use of the habitats adjacent to the site and associated with Fossil Creek Reservoir. In particular, impacts to herons, bald eagles, and sensitive species of waterfowl and shorebirds utilizing the site and adjacent habitat areas should be evaluated, and adverse impacts to habitat areas should be avoided. If avoidance of impact is not possible, then mitigation plans should be developed to offset the projected wildlife/habitat impacts. Russell Legg Daniel Tasman July 28, 1997 Page 2 • The proposed development makes use of Bonus Density as allowed by Larimer County based upon open space, environmental sensitivity, and multi -modal circulation connections. The following comments are reflected on the enclosed plan and pertain to the layout of the site, including open space and circulation, as it relates to the calculation of Bonus Density for the proposal. . Circulation. Parts of the plan as submitted have disconnection and excessive distances in the street and circulation layout, with blocks of 1,000-2,000 feet between connections. For example, connections at Blue Heron Lake through to County Road 9 and Fossil Lake Commons through to the north would serve the site to a greater degree than what is indicated as well as additional suggested linkages shown on the plan. Open Space. Much of the common open space appears to be in leftover back yard and perimeter areas that may function more as private back yards than as common open space or environmental enhancement. This type of open space should not be cited as rationale for the use of bonus density. • The Reservoir is clearly a significant sensitive area. The ecological functions of its edge are under study by others with the objective of quantifying just what is needed for wildlife. Further review of this project should be delayed until the time the results of that study are available. Good urban design principles are in concert with conservation principles, suggesting more consolidated open space to leave more significant, larger and connected habitat areas for wildlife. • The plan has positive features that are responsive to community design purposes, notably the center and the mix of housing types. It appears that further refinement can reduce disconnection and land consumption, improve the multi -modal circulation system, and protect more of the high plains ecosystem that is indicative of the region. • The industrial site location is inappropriate in the proposed area. The Harmony Corridor Plan was developed to accommodate these types of businesses in areas that can be served by transit and other services. • Buyers that purchase lots next to lakes often assume ownership of the lake even though the lot lines may end quite a distance from the edge of the lake. lake. Please put notes on site plan to reflect that there may be future trail access in this area so that property owners do not get upset if 5-10 years down the road the City, County or another jurisdiction wishes to develop the shore line for trails to access the natural areas and Reservoir. • The Poudre Fire Authority may be concerned about the lengths of cul-de-sacs proposed. In addition, a fire station site may be within this project to serve this area. City Ma.-_ger City of Fort Collins July 28, 1997 Russell Legg Daniel Tasman Larimer County Planning Division P.O. Box 119b Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 Dear Russell and Dan: City staff has reviewed the Fossil Lake PUD and offers the following comments. Comments related to Planning, Site Layout and Design: • The Fossil Lake PUD proposal is based upon a system of Transfer of Development Rights that has yet to be formally adopted by Larimer County. Thus, the City has great concerns regarding the use of a mechanism that has not been fully developed nor tested. • Three areas demonstrate that the amount of developable land in the sending area is severely restricted, including the location of this property within the Airport Critical Zone, the topography of the sending area, and inconsistency with the Plan for the Region Between Fort Collins and Loveland. 1. The proposed sending area is located within the Airport Critical Zone. The Airport Critical Zone does not allow for residential use of any type, therefore, it is unclear how residential development rights may be transferred from an area wherein that type of development is not allowed. 2. Furthermore, the topography of the sending area as a part of a low-lying complex of ponds, wetlands, ditches, located in the broad, flat area that separates the Poudre and St. Wain watersheds severely limits the development potential. 3. The Plan for the Region Between Fort Collins and Loveland identifies the land use character of the sending area as "some limited commercial/mixed use development along 1-25 frontage road" (Subarea 18 of the Plan). As the land use character of the sending area never included residential uses (with the exception of rural residential development in areas not within the airport critical zone), it is questionable the transfer of residential development rights from this location could be allowed. This proposal is inconsistent with the Corridor Plan. 300 LaPorte Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6505 • FAX (970) 224-6107