HomeMy WebLinkAboutREDTAIL RESIDENTIAL - PDP - 26-01 - CORRESPONDENCE - CITY STAFFthe walkway requires the pedestrian to walk around the building (see
definition of connecting walkway in Article 5), this walkway does not
qualify as a `connecting walkway."
• Building B in the northwest corner of the site has no connecting walkway
connecting the building to a street sidewalk. Connecting walkways by
definition cannot require a pedestrian to cross a vehicle area.
• The two unnamed buildings along the new proposed Fossil Creek Boulevard
both satisfy this standard in that each of the buildings have one "front fagade"
facing and opening directly onto a street sidewalk.
• Buildings A,B,C, D, E, and F along College Ave. and the new Fossil Creek
Boulevard all satisfy the standard.
7) The street sidewalk must be provided around the cul-de-sacs. As shown, half of the
sidewalks around the cul-de-sacs are not provided.
8) The garage standards in section 3.5.2(E) of the LUC require that "street -facing
garage doors must be recessed behind either the front fagade of the ground floor
living area portion of the dwelling or a covered porch," except for "attached and
multifamily dwellings which also face a second street or major walkway spine." The
Cameron Bluff buildings A, B, C, D, E, and F satisfy this standard because they all
have secondary frontage along a major walkway spine. The Cameron Bluff buildings
G and H, and the two unnamed buildings on Fossil Creek Parkway do not satisfy this
standard in that they have street facing garage doors which are not recessed behind
the ground floor living area portion of the dwelling or a covered porch, and they do
not face a second street or major walkway spine in addition to their street frontage.
This is a huge problem. Staff is not likely to support a modification request for this
standard.
9) Be aware that CDOT will require a median in College Avenue and a median on
Cameron Drive in the vicinity of the frontage road.
CC: Susan Joy
Ron Gonzales
Cam McNair
Clark Mapes
Doug Moore
Kathleen Reavis
Gary Diede
3
3) Additionally, in order for the structures at the end of Cameron Drive to be located
further than 660 feet from a single point of access, a modification will need to be
granted by the Planning and Zoning Board to section 3.6.6(D)(4)(f)(2) where it states,
"no dead-end length for an emergency fire access road shall exceed 660 feet."
Even if the concessions are made in comment #2 above, buildings C, E, F, G, and H
are still beyond 660 feet from the single point of access. It would be up to you to
attempt a modification to this standard. Until a formal modification request is
submitted, including a specific justification in accordance with the modification
procedures in 2.8.2(H) of the LUC, staff cannot determine whether we could
recommend support of the to request to the P&Z Board. However, if Engineering
and PFA are supportive of such a modification, it's likely that staff could recommend
approval.
4) Also, the street connectivity required in the South College Access Management Plan
is still not connecting Fossil Blvd with Cameron with a public street or a public access
easement connection. The South College Access Management Plan is intended to
specify the community -wide needs with regard to safety, efficiency and convenience
for automobile, bicycle, pedestrian and transit modes of travel within this specific
geographical area. The general street pattern and connectivity standard in LUC
3.6.3(B) is not satisfied because this stated connection is not provided. You mioht
be able to get staff support for a modification request in this instance if the requested
emergency access connections from comment #2 above are provided and provided
you can provided an adequate written justification in accordance with the
modification procedures in 2.8.2(H) of the LUC.
5) The access to Building B (northwest corner of site) exceeds 150' dead end length,
and there is no emergency turn -around as required in LUC 3.6.6(D)(4)(f)(1).
6) 3.5.2(C) Relationship of Dwellings to Streets and Parking (1) Orientation to a
Connecting Walkway requires that every "front fagade with a primary entrance to a
dwelling unit" must face either (1) a connecting walkway within 200 feet of a street
sidewalk or (2) a major walkway spine within 350 feet of a street sidewalk ....
except that when a building has more than one "front faqade with a primary entrance
to a dwelling unit', and one of those front facades faces and opens directly onto a
street sidewalk, then the other "front facades" need not face a connecting walkway.
This standard applies to this Redtail PDP revision dated 2/20/02 as follows:
• Buildings A, B, and D on the Cameron Drive bluff satisfy this standard
because all three buildings have one front fagade that faces and opens
directly onto a street sidewalk,
• Buildings C, E, F, G, and H on the Cameron Drive bluff do not satisfy the
standard as follows:
- Buildings C, E, and F have one qualifying "front fagade" facing a
"major walkway spine," however, the standard requires that every
"front fagade" face a connecting walkway. The standard is only half
satisfied on these buildings. The other "front fagade" needs to face
and open directly onto a street sidewalk or connecting walkway
without requiring the pedestrian to cross vehicular areas.
- Buildings G and H both have two "front facades," neither of which face
and open directly onto a street sidewalk, connecting walkway or major
walkway spine. There is a walkway that connects the street sidewalk
to one of the "front facades" of these two buildings, however because
Comn ity Planning and Environmenta ervices
Current Planning
Citv of Fort Collins
To: Jon Prouty
From: Troy Jones
Dave Stringer
Date: March 12, 2002
Re: Informal comments regarding Redtail PDP layout issues
1) These comments are only a reaction to a site plan drawing informally submitted to
Troy Jones on February 20, 2002 (hereafter referred to as the 2/20 site plan), and
are intended to offer feedback on general site layout issues only. By providing
these comments to you, it shall not be construed that this is a complete list of all
outstanding detailed comments. If this set of comments is silent on an issue, don't
assume the issue has been resolved. A formal re -submittal will need to happen in
order to general a detailed set of all remaining comments.
2) As shown on the 2/20 site plan, the cul-de-sac of Cameron Drive exceeds 660 feet in
length from a single point of access (the College/Cameron intersection). In
accordance with LUC 3.6.2(B), both PFA and the City Engineer need to agree if a
variance is to be granted. The PFA and Engineering positions on the issue are as
follows:
• PFA - Initial discussions with Ron Gonzales of PFA indicate that first and
foremost, they would like to back up Engineering in their position regarding
this standard. If Engineering doesn't want to support the request, but if
Engineering is inclined to support the variance, PFA could support it provided
that the proposed Cameron Drive buildings are fire sprinklered.
• Engineering - Dave Stringer discussed the issue with his supervisors and
they could support the variance under two conditions:
- The first condition - emergency access connections with
emergency access easements need to be made in the following
three key locations; (1) the frontage road to the new segment of
Fossil Creek Parkway (emergency only); (2) the new segment of
Fossil Creek Parkway to the end of Coronado Court; and (3)
Coronado Court to Cameron Drive through the existing parking lot.
If and only if all three emergency access connections are made,
then the dead-end length can be measured from the intersection
of the emergency access drive with Cameron, which would then
only slightly exceed 660 feet.
- The second condition — the Redtail PDP construct an eathern
bench next to the railroad track on the western edge of the
detention pond upon which the future Mason Street trail can rest.
28l North Col Ie`e ACCnL1C • P(). Box 580 • Fort Col Iim, CO 80522-Ib80 • (070) "l-o _5U • FA.A H70) 41fl-2020