HomeMy WebLinkAboutREDTAIL RESIDENTIAL - PDP - 26-01 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - MODIFICATION REQUEST (10)A diversity of homes, and in the alternative, offices, including size, architecture and
price, will be offered in the Redtail project, including:
Redtail Townhomes are located on a small hill previously the home of Mill Brothers
Nursery. They have frontage on Fossil Boulevard with access to garages off private
drives at the rear of buildings. They overlook College Avenue to the east and have
mountain views to the west. A major purpose of these single family attached units is to
create a very attractive neighborhood of affordable housing for sale. The mini -park,
mail kiosk, tot lot area has benches and provides the opportunity for informal socializing.
Redtail Condominiums are located on the mesa at the west side of the property and
overlook three naturalized detention ponds. Most have mountain views. They are
adjacent to a centrally located linear park with a plaza area, a mail kiosk and a sitting
area for informal socializing.
Redtail Carriage Houses are located in both of the above sub -neighborhoods and are
configured as two-family residences and all have views of the mountains. These units
further serve affordable housing needs as their prices will start below $100,000.
Office Buildings, the alternative use, would be located on the mesa at the west side of
the property and overlook three naturalized detention ponds. Most have mountain
views. They are adjacent to a centrally located linear park with a plaza area, a mail
kiosk and a sitting area for informal socializing.
The project is an infill project between offices and retail to the east, warehouse -office to
the north, City -owned Redtail Grove Natural Area to the south, and the railroad to the
west with residential beyond that. The project has been designed with high sensitivity to
the three naturalized detention ponds and the existing office uses.
Connectivity is being provided between the proposed uses and existing offices to the
east, and also between project and existing warehouse uses to the north, by means of
Cameron Drive, Conejos Road, Fossil Boulevard, public sidewalks, and connectivity to
planned bike / ped paths along Fossil Creek and Mason Transportation Corridor trails.
II.
Modification Request #1 — Natural Features and Habitat Buffer
In reference to LUC 3.4.1:
LUC 3.4.1(C) refers to the use of buffer zones as one of the four methods enumerated
to minimize to the maximum extent feasible impacts and disturbances to natural
habitats and features, wetlands, ponds and trees. We have designed the Redtail
project to fully comply with the buffer requirement. The average linear distance of
2
y
5. Promoting excellence in design and construction of planned residential
neighborhoods, buildings, outdoor spaces, and streetscapes.
6. Incorporating innovative architecture and planning concepts including front and
back roof step-down design; central park -courtyards concept merging landscape,
hardscape, pedestrian, bicycle and vehicle uses; interesting building elevations;
and aesthetic building frontages.
7. Providing sense of community and quality of life, which are inherent in and flow
from the essential elements of the project: a) two small residential
neighborhoods, b) each comprised of residential buildings surrounding central
parks, plazas, and mailboxes, c) all creatively designed in a way which enhances
aesthetics, safety and quality of life, and d) the highest sensitivity to the unique
natural resource attributes of this site which in conjunction with landscape areas
comprise 79% of this special project.
We respectfully ask for your favorable consideration and approval of our requested
modifications. Thank you.
Sincerely,
V
routy''sident
JP/hlb
Enclosures
14
H. Major revegetation and enhancement of the buffer zone areas, creating
additional habitat, food source, herbaceous plant diversity, and woody
species.
In addition, we are providing the City with an essential link for its Mason
Transportation Corridor trail and its connectivity to the Fossil Creek trail, both of
which will be under construction soon. This has great public value both
regionally and citywide. Specifically, we are extending Conejos Road north
through the middle of the northernmost pond and providing connectivity to Fossil
Boulevard. This will then be used for a bicycle / pedestrian path connection.
Without this essential link, it would be virtually impossible to make this
connection because of the extremely steep railroad track embankment in the
railroad right-of-way which plummets precipitously into the pond, denying north -
south access along this short section of railroad right-of-way.
r
Although it would appear that consideration of the specific LUC provisions enumerated
above would be sufficient basis for the P&Z decision to approve the Redtail project, P&Z
may also wish to consider the three alternative LUC modification criteria enumerated in
LUC 2.8.2, any one of which may provide P&Z with the sole basis or supplemental
reasons for supporting the Redtail project. .
Or,
Promotes the general purpose of the standard equally well or better — We believe
that on review of the information presented above that it is conclusive that the
proposed Redtail development plan, having now evolved for three years and five_
submittals, achieves the purposes of and is compatible with, sensitive to, protects
and enhances natural habitat and features better than the alternative of rigid
enforcement of buffer for existing buffer from existing wetlands, 53% reduction in
number of residential units in project, the demise of the Redtail project, and then
development of the existing Cameron Park Second Filing platted lots as a matter
of right with no buffers whatsoever! See Exhibit D — Buffer Comparison and
Exhibit E Existing Cameron Park Second Filing Plat.
2. P&Z approval of modification would result, without impairing LUC purposes, in a
substantial benefit to the City as specifically expressed in the comprehensive
plan and strict application of the standard would render project practically
infeasible — The Redtail project does not impair LUC purposes but rather
promotes them as described above. The Redtail project achieves numerous
specific comprehensive plan goals and benefits including open space. and natural
habitat and features protection and enhancement, affordable housing, diversity in
housing models and costs, creative and quality planning, aesthetic design, and
sense of community.
7
desirable and safe. Furthermore we believe that the benefit to the public by not
causing further intrusion in the form of a connecting walkway in the open space
buffer at the west of these buildings is a substantial public benefit which justifies
the granting of this modification. In addition, we believe that the enhancement of
public safety by accessing Fossil Boulevard at a single point rather than multiple
points on a curve is a substantial benefit which also justifies the granting of this
modification.
Accordingly we respectfully request approval to allow us to provide this sidewalk
connection as proposed, for the reasons that:
1. The granting of the modification would not be detrimental to the public good — but
rather the public good will be enhanced, as has been described above;
2. We believe granting of this modification will result in substantial benefit to the City
in the form of not constructing a walkway through an open space buffer, which
walkway would be difficult to construct and unaesthetic because of the steep
grades involved;
3. And we believe that the exceptional physical conditions that are unique to this
property including unusual configuration, site constraints, and grade, support the
appropriateness of granting this modification.
IV.
Furthermore with regard to both of the foregoing modification requests, our plan
achieves LUC purposes and addresses community needs by:
1. Fulfilling a community need for affordable housing.
2. Providing housing immediately adjacent to offices and nearby to many other
workplaces.
3. Providing internal pedestrian connectivity by means of sidewalks, walkways, and
parks.
4. Providing pedestrian connectivity between the residential neighborhoods, and the
existing offices to the east by means of Cameron Drive, Frontage Road, private
drives and sidewalks. Furthermore, the project provides easements for
connectivity to the Fossil Creek and Mason Transportation Corridor trails. Also, it
provides connectivity via public transit and public streets to schools, parks,
library, retail, office and employers.
13
Ill.
Modification Request #2 — Sidewalk Connection from Building G and Building 2
In reference to LUC 3.5.2.(C):
Building G and Building 2 connect to the Fossil Boulevard sidewalk by means of a
walkway which proceeds from the southeast comer of Building G across a very low
traffic driveway and then north to the sidewalk. These buildings also have supplemental
connectivity to the Conejos Road sidewalk by means of the immediately adjacent
private courtyard — vehicle — pedestrian way which is aesthetically constructed with
colored patterned concrete. The reasons we have designed connectivity in this fashion
are:
1. The unique and difficult configuration of the entire Redtail property, and the
engineering and fire safety requirements which must be met for such project,
constrain this building site with Conejos Road to the north, private open space to
the west, Fossil Creek Office Park parking lot to the south, and Fossil Boulevard
to the east.
2. While it is possible to connect these two buildings with a connecting walkway
which runs along the west side of such buildings and proceeds north to the
Conejos Road sidewalk, this connecting walkway would intrude into the open
space buffer and because of its connection to the Conejos Road sidewalk would
perhaps invite additional people into this area.
3. The problem of this walkway is compounded by the relatively steep grade as you
proceed west from these buildings. As a result, if this connecting walkway was
installed it would require a substantial cut across the hillside which would have to
be mitigated with a retaining wall.
4. It is not possible to trade the buildings and parking locations. We have explored
this layout alternative and it does not work because of driveway length
requirements, garage door requirements and parking lot area drive width
requirements. In addition, this alternative is not safe, as it would require all
driveways accessing directly onto Fossil Boulevard right at a major bend in the
road. The alternative we have proposed of accessing these residential units and
their associated parking from a single point of access off Fossil Boulevard and
from a private drive not only meets the requirements mentioned but also is much
safer given the unique circumstances involved.
5. On balance, we believe that a modification of the connecting walkway standard
permitting the residents of Building G and Building 2 to walk from the courtyard
areas (colored patterned concrete) in front of their houses to a walkway which
proceeds across a private drive to the Fossil Boulevard sidewalk or to a walkway
which proceeds to the Conejos Road sidewalk would be reasonable and
12
lighting along the south side of the development as well as areas facing the wetland
buffer zone will be shielded to minimize off -site nighttime light intrusion. Street and
parking areas are designed to be interior to the project to minimize noise intrusion into
the Redtail Grove Natural Area and wetland buffer zones. Finally existing commercial
and/or residential developments on the south side of Cameron Drive and the east side
of College Avenue are closer to the red-tailed hawk nest than the proposed Redtail
project, indicating red-tailed hawk tolerance of these features. Therefore, the project is
in compliance with this performance standard.
(e) Revegetation of the buffer zone to native grasses, shrubs, and trees will not only
minimize degradation of the ecological character of the wetland but enhance adjacent
habitat and existing habitat diversity. Further, the project is designed so that roadway
and higher use areas are centralized in the project area, thereby buffering these higher
use from wildlife areas with the backs of buildings. Plantings of native shrubs and trees
will also provide visual screening between the buffer zone and building envelopes.
External landscape or security lighting fronting the buffer zone and wetlands will be
shielded to minimize nighttime light impacts on these areas. Diversion of surface runoff
from developed portions of the property into water quality detention basins prior to
release into the wetland drainage will minimize the risk of water quality degradation in
the wetlands, ponds, and unnamed drainage. Therefore, the project is in compliance
with this performance standard.
(f) Minor slope changes will be required for construction of wetland mitigation areas and
detention basins, but the general character of existing slopes within the buffer zone will
be maintained after regrading. Therefore, the project is in compliance with this
performance standard.
(g) As indicated, the buffer zone will be revegetated to native grassland with inclusions
of native shrub and tree plantings. Therefore, the project is in compliance with this
performance standard.
(h) A walking path and wildlife viewing area will be constructed within portions of the
buffer zone for passive recreation and wildlife and natural areas viewing. Since existing
office buildings and associated human use areas are currently located immediately
adjacent to the east side of the wetland drainage, I believe the Redtail walking trail and
viewing area to be compatible with the ecological character and wildlife use of the
wetland. Therefore, the project is in compliance with this performance standard.
3.4.1 (E) (2) — Development Activities Within the Buffer Zone
Portions of the buffer zone will be regraded to create a stormwater detention basins and
wetland mitigation areas. Buffer zone disturbances will be revegetated to native
vegetation. The stormwater detention basins, walking pathways, and mitigation are all
permitted developments within the buffer zone. Therefore, the project is in compliance
with the requirements of Section 3.4.1 (E) (2).
11
grass species such as smooth brome (Bromopsis inermis), crested wheatgrass
(Agropyron cristatum), and cheatgrass (Anisthantha tectorum). Habitat value and
wildlife use of non-native grassland habitat is limited because of low vegetation species
diversity, low forage value, and the relative lack of woody vegetation cover. The
proposed revegetation/mitigation plan would replace the non-native grassland
community in the buffer zone with native grasses and tree and shrub plantings. These
plantings will enhance habitat diversity by increasing vegetation cover and forage
values as well as vegetation structural diversity. Increased habitat diversity adjacent to
the existing wetlands and drainage will also serve to enhance the overall habitat value
of the wetland. Therefore, the project is in compliance with this performance standard.
(b) The potential for wildlife movement from the Redtail Grove Natural into the
unnamed drainage on the property will be maintained with project development. The
two planned road crossing across the drainage will have minimal effect on urban -
adapted wildlife use of the drainage since similar development features and buildings
already exist in close proximity to the east side of the drainage. In addition culverts
under Cameron Drive and Conejos Road will permit aquatic wildlife movement. The
existing unnamed drainage on the property has minimal value as a wildlife corridor to
other natural areas for a variety of reasons. First, although the drainage connects to the
Fossil Creek drainage south of the Redtail property, immediately east of this confluence
the Fossil Creek drainage corridor is interrupted by a major four -lane arterial, College
Avenue. The current culvert structure that passes Fossil Creek flow under College
Avenue does not permit any wildlife movement. The west end of the unnamed drainage
on the Redtail property is interrupted by the Colorado and Southern Railroad right-of-
way. Here again, the current culvert design precludes any wildlife movement under the
railroad embankment. Residential developments exist west of the railroad right-of-way
(c) A number of significant trees grow along the drainage and the pond perimeters.
Current project development plans will result in avoidance of disturbance to the most
significant stands of trees, but a few native trees will be lost due to project components
and the wetland mitigation areas. Trees determined to be significant by the City of Fort
Collins will be mitigated by plantings of replacement trees in the buffer zone as required
by the City. All remaining undisturbed wetlands and replacement wetland mitigation
areas will be protected with the establishment of the buffer zone. Therefore, the project
is in compliance with this performance standard.
(d) Applicable portions of this performance standard include the protection of nesting,
feeding, and wintering areas for waterfowl, wading birds, and shorebirds as well as
protection of any wetland greater than 0.25 acre in size. Revegetation of the buffer to
native grasses, shrubs, and trees will protect the existing wetlands and enhance habitat
and vegetation cover for waterbird use of the wetland drainage. Therefore, the project
is in compliance with this performance standard. With respect to the red-tailed hawk
nest south of the property, a 6 percent reduction in the 1,320-foot buffer would not have
any adverse effect on nesting use for the following reasons. The Redtail development
would be out of direct line -of -sight of the nest as illustrated in the September 16, 2002
letter from Jon Prouty to Michelle Pawar and Doug Moore (see attached letter). Outside
10
3.4.1 (E) (1) — Establishment of Buffer Zones
Natural habitats and features on or near the Redtail Project Area for which City of Fort
Collins buffer standards apply include the wetland drainage and trees on the property
and an existing red-tailed hawk nest south of the property.in the Redtail Grove Natural
Area.
City standards call for a 1,320-foot development setback from red-tailed hawk nests. As
currently proposed, the Redtail Project has a 1,240-foot buffer that would be a 6 percent
reduction in the required buffer. Establishment of an average buffer distance of at least
80 percent or more of the established buffer requirement is permitted as long as
compliance with the City's buffer zone performance standards is demonstrated.
Based on previous conversations with Natural Resources staff (Tom Shoemaker and
Doug Moore), it was agreed that a buffer requirement of 50 feet was applicable for
naturalized detention ponds and associated wetlands located on the Redtail
development site. Current project development design indicates that after the loss of
the indicated wetland areas at the south end of the property, an average buffer distance
of 56 feet would be maintained for remaining undisturbed wetland areas, although some
wetland buffer distances would be less than 50 feet. A minimum buffer of at least 50
feet would also be maintained for all created wetland mitigation areas except for the
open water mitigation area to be created in the northwest corner of the property.
Constraints associated with road design criteria permit no setback from the extension of
Conejos Road and the open water mitigation area to be created. Impacts associated
with reductions in the 50-foot buffer zone elsewhere will be mitigated by revegetation of
all areas of the buffer zone area into native grassland with inclusions of native shrub
and tree plantings. All open water and wetland impacts will be mitigated by one -for -one
replacement in the designated mitigation areas. A detailed revegetation and wetlands
mitigation plan, developed by Cedar Creek Associates, Inc., is included with the Redtail
development plan submittal to the City of Fort Collins.
Based on Section 3.4.1 (E) (1) reductions in the 50-foot wetland buffer zone can be
approved by the City provided the buffer zone performance standards are achieved. My
assessment regarding the Redtail project's compliance with the City's buffer zone
performance standards is as follows.
3.4.1 (E) (1) — Buffer Zone Standards
(a) The project will preserve the remaining non -impacted wetland areas, and regrading
disturbances in the buffer zone will be revegetated to wetland mitigation areas or native
grassland uplands with inclusions of native tree and shrub plantings. All open water
and wetland impacts will be mitigated by one -for -one replacement in the designated
mitigation areas. Native tree and shrub plantings will be employed to enhance wildlife
habitat as well as to provide visual screening of development features that intrude into
the buffer zone. Existing habitat in the buffer zone consists almost entirely of non-native
grassland except in the immediate vicinity of the pond edges where wetlands and a few
species of native trees are supported. Non-native grassland is dominated by introduced
Or,
3. Exceptional physical conditions unique to property would result in undue
hardship on owner — The Redtail project clearly has exceptional physical
conditions unique to the property including a) severe physical constraints with the
railroad to the west, City natural area to the south, ponds and offices to the east,
and pond and warehouses to the north, b) major topographical variations, c)
three ponds and associated natural habitat and features and d) only one platted
point of access.
Not to support this excellent project after three years and five submittals of arduous
evolution would be the death knell for this innovative plan.
We believe that the most powerful and creative tool in the LUC is "Good or Better
Than".
When the Decision Maker finds "Good or Better Than", it can loosen the prescriptive
requirements to allow something "Good or Better Than" to be achieved while at the
same time honoring and achieving the goals and purposes of the LUC.
Such is the opportunity you / we have with the Redtail project.
And should Redtail fail to go forward, the alternative of building out these existing
Cameron Park Second Filing lots as presently platted would not be "Good or Better
Than", would not in the public's best interest, and would be very unfortunate.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Although this project complies with the Land Use Code provisions 5.1.2 and 3.4.1(C) as
is explained above, for analysis and informational purposes, we will describe how this
project meets City of Fort Collins Buffer Zone Performance Standards (LUC 3.4.1(E)).
City of Fort Collins Buffer Zone Performance Standards (Section 3.4.1 (E) of the City of Fort
Collins Land Use Code)
The following is our evaluation for each applicable standard and requirement within this
section of the Land Use Code, as prepared by our wildlife biologist, Mike Phelan, of
Cedar Creek Associates.
4. Restore or replace resource value lost to community from development
disturbances to natural habitat and features — All buffer and open space areas
which are impacted by development grading, stormwater drainage improvements
and%otherwise are being restored, mitigated, replaced and enhanced as per our
open space restoration plan, our tree mitigation plan, our wetlands mitigation
plan, open water mitigation plan, and our open space — landscape plans,
including major wildlife habitat and food source enhancement.
Approximately 1/4"' of an acre (of this 11.8 acre project) is low -quality wetlands
with wetlands -type grass on a hillside, no wildlife habitat value, no open water, no
woody species, and no diversity of herbaceous plants. See Exhibit B, Low -
Quality Wetlands Being Displaced. These low -quality wetlands and also
approximately 1/10t' of an acre of high -quality wetlands are being displaced by
this project. They will be mitigated 100% by the establishment of new, high-,
quality wetlands immediately adjacent to the ponds. See Exhibit C1-4, Ponds
Photos and Areas of Mitigation.
We are restoring and / or mitigating all impacted wetlands, habitats, natural
features and buffer area as well as enhancing existing conditions in a way which
provides considerably more ecological value than that lost. These restoration
and mitigation efforts will include the following:
A. Addition of trees, shrubs and grasses in open space areas as per our
revegetation plan.
B. Addition of trees, shrubs and grasses as per our landscape plan.
C. Protection of important trees and elimination of nuisance trees as per our
tree inventory and mitigation plan.
D. Improvement of ponds quality and shorelines resulting in healthier ponds,
better fish environment and improved wildlife habitat and food source.
E. Creation and enhancement of high -quality wetlands immediately adjacent
to existing ponds which i) will perform erosion control and water quality
functions which the displaced wetlands performed, ii) will provide new
wildlife habitat, wildlife food source, open water, and diversity in
herbaceous plants, and iii) will be located substantially below (downhill
from) the edge of the development lots which will further buffer them from
same.
F. Addition of herbaceous plants and woody species to provide excellent
habitat and food source for wildlife.
G. Expansion of the northernmost pond.
wetlands mitigation plan, open space restoration plan, tree mitigation plan, and
numerous visits to the site by our staff, City staff, and expert consultants.
6. Dozens of changes have been made as we have evolved this project to being the
most feasible and prudent alternative possible within the meaning of these words
and to achieve the goal of a project compatible with and sensitive to natural
habitats and features and plants and animals.
7. In this regard it is certainly relevant that the project now, we believe in its final
and best alternative form, has 79% (7.26 acres) net private open space and
landscape area.
FOUR ALTERNATIVE METHODS
The second part of LUC 3.4.1(C) specifies four alternative methods for achieving the
general standard:
Direct development away from sensitive resources — We have configured our
project into two sub -neighborhoods, both buffered from natural features and
habitat to the maximum extent feasible: a) the townhome neighborhood is
located at the far northeast of the project, away from ponds and wetlands and up:
against College Avenue, and b) the condominium — carriage house neighborhood
is located at the far west of the project, right up against the railroad right-of-way
and buffered to the southeast and north from the ponds and wetlands.
0,
2. Minimize impacts and disturbance through the use of buffer zones — All
development is pulled back away from and buffered from natural habitat and
features to the maximum extent feasible. The buffer is in excess of that required
and puts the project in 111.2% compliance with the general buffer requirement.
Furthermore, the buffer area will be enhanced by the improvement of wetlands,
improvement of open water, improvement of trees, bushes and wildlife habitat;
buffer design to minimize intrusion, noise buffering, visual buffering, and
aesthetic building design and scale.
Or,
Or,
3. Enhance existing conditions — Existing conditions are being protected and
enhanced, including the three on -site ponds and the associated high -quality
wetlands, herbaceous plants, woody species, wildlife, birds and fish.
5
We believe that the Redtail project as it has evolved over the last three years in
response to our best ideas and the City's input complies with these General Standard
provisions:
1. Feasible means:
a. Capable of being done or carried out (e.g., a feasible plan)
b. Suitable
c. Reasonable and likely
d. Synonyms are:
i. Possible
ii. Practicable
iii. Viable (having a reasonable chance of succeeding)
iv. Workable
2. Prudent means:
a. Shrewd in the management of practical affairs
b. A synonym is: sensible*
3. We have worked arduously for three years and five submittals and have explored
all possible alternatives we could think of, and our advisors and City staff could
suggest.
4. We have made all possible efforts to comply with the requirement that the Redtail
project be compatible with and sensitive to natural habitat and features, including
buffer at 111.2% compliance, improvement of habitat, improvement of wetlands,
improvement of open water, improvement of trees, bushes, and wildlife habitat;
buffer design for minimum intrusion, noise buffering, visual buffering and
aesthetic building design and scale.
5. And in addition (LUC permits this as an alternative to paragraph 4 above), we
have minimized the potential negative impacts of development as reflected by
our detailed studies and plans for protection, restoration, enhancement and
mitigation relating to natural features and buffers, including ecological survey,
tree inventory, wetlands delineation, geological studies, hydrological studies,
Merriam -Webster Desk Dictionary, 01995
4
Redtail development lots from the ponds and related wetlands is 55.3', which is in
compliance with, and in fact, exceeds, the 50' required buffer standard. See Exhibit A —
Developed Lots Setback from Wetlands.
However, since our proposed buffer configuration involves the displacement of some
existing low -quality wetlands (wetlands -type grass on a hillside), staff has concluded
that this is a matter appropriate for P&Z consideration.
In this regard, the General Standard, LUC 3.4.1(C), provides that, "to the maximum
extent feasible the development plan shall be designed and arranged to be compatible
with and to protect natural habitats and features and the plants and animals that inhabit
them and integrate them within the developed landscape of the community."
Furthermore, this section specifies four alternative methods for doing this:
1. Directing development away from sensitive resources,
2. Minimizing impacts and disturbances through the use of buffer zones,
3. Enhancing existing conditions, or
4. Restoring or replacing the resource value lost to the community (either on -site or
off -site) when a development proposal will result in the disturbance of natural
habitats or features.
So we must first be clear about what the General Standard means, and then consider
which one or more of the four methods are relevant to Redtail.
GENERAL STANDARD INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION
The first part of the LUC Definition Section 5.1.2 says that "Maximum extent feasible
shall mean that no feasible and prudent alternative exists, and all possible efforts to
comply with the regulation or minimize potential harm or adverse impacts have been
undertaken."
So two conditions have to be met:
1. No feasible and prudent alternative to the proposed development plan exists, and
2. All possible efforts have been undertaken a) to comply with the regulation, or in
the alternative b) to minimize potential harm or adverse impacts.
3
LAGUNITAS REDTAIL, INC.
3944 JFK Parkway, Fort Collins, CO 80525
970-226-5000• Fax 970-226-5125
October 1, 2003
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of Fort Collins
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80525
RE: Redtail Project / Modification Requests
Dear Planning and Zoning Commission Members:
I.
Introduction
Redtail is a unique mixed use project consisting of four complementary residential
product types located in two neighborhoods adjacent to each other, which make good
use of this difficult infill parcel in a way that incorporates good planning, good
architecture, and respect for environmental considerations. In each neighborhood there
is a unifying contemporary -traditional architectural theme, attractive landscaping
transitioning to private open space, and a sense of cohesiveness and community.
Residential units include two types of multi -family units (condominiums), single family
attached (townhomes) and two-family units (carriage houses)._ In the alternative some
buildings may be built as offices with complementary architectural character.
The Redtail project had its genesis three years ago in our desire to achieve two
objectives: a) to build affordable housing for purchase, and b) to build a project that is
better than what we have a right to build on the existing platted lots (Cameron Park
Second Filing) which permit construction right to the property lines with no buffer from
natural features and habitat.
This project achieves these two objectives with a) pricing beginning under $100,000 and
b) 79% (7.26 acres) net private open space, ponds, wetlands and landscaped area.
1