HomeMy WebLinkAboutSPRING CREEK VILLAGE - MODIFICATION OF STANDARD - 26-99 - CORRESPONDENCE - LUC REQUIREMENTS• Policy MMN-3.2 Surrounding Neighborhoods. "The Neighborhood Commercial Center
should be integrated into the surrounding Medium Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood,
contributing to the neighborhood's positive identity and image. Residents should be able to
get to the Center without the need to use an arterial street."
• Policy MMN-3.4 Block Pattern. "The pattern of streets and blocks in the surrounding
neighborhood will be strongly encouraged to carry directly into and through a
Neighborhood Commercial Center as a simple and sure way to achieve the urban design
character described in MDN-3.3 and integrate the center with the surrounding
neighborhood."
• Policy EXN1.1 Changes to Existing Residential Developments. "...changes may result from
specific initiatives intended to improve the quality of existing neighborhoods, such as
improving mobility and access to everyday activities and services, and the introduction
of neighborhood centers, parks, and small civic facilities."
• Policy EXN-1.3 Relationship to the Vicinity and the Broader Community. "In determining
the acceptability of changes to parcels of land adjacent to existing residential developments,
the adjacent residents' preferences will be balanced with community -wide interests.
Project Comments for
Spring Creek Village Modification of Standard
From: Troy Jones, Current Planning
Project Planner: Steve Olt
1) The applicant is requesting a modification to gain permission to not make a street connection
to an adjacent property. The proposed development in zoned NC —Neighborhood
Commercial zoning district. Granting the modification request would take away the
ability for the adjacent neighborhood to have a street connection going into the NC
zone. Street connections between neighborhoods are important, but when the proposed site is
in the NC zone, they are even more important. Other city departments have indicated that
they could support not having this connection to eliminate the potential for cut -through
traffic. It seems apparent that City Plan and the LUC both specify this type of connection as
very important, and I would suggest more important than eliminating the possibility of cut -
through traffic.
2) Other Problems:
• By not having the required street system, the development does not provide multiple
direct connections to and between local destinations.
• The development plan with no street connection system is not as easily accessible for fire
protection services to the population it is intended to serve.
3) The following sections of the LUC specifically require the connection to be made:
• Section 3.6.3(A) "Local streets must provide for both intra- and inter -neighborhood
connections to knit developments together, rather than forming barriers between them."
• Section 3.6.3(E) "All development plans shall contribute to developing a local street system
that will allow access to and from the proposed development within the same section mile as
the proposed development, from at least three (3) arterial streets upon development of
remaining parcels within the section mile, unless rendered infeasible by unusual topographic
features, existing development or a natural area or feature."
• Section 3.6.3(F) "All development plans shall incorporate and continue all sub -arterial streets
stubbed to the boundary of the development plan by previously approved development plans
or existing development."
• The "purpose" of the Street Pattern and Connectivity section of the LUC is 3.6.3(A) states,
"This Section is intended to ensure that the local street system is well designed with regard to
safety, efficiency and convenience for automobile, bicycle, pedestrian and transit modes of
travel. For the purposes of this Division, "local street system" shall mean the interconnected
system of collector and local streets providing access to development from an arterial street."
• Section 4.19 Neighborhood Commercial District, (E) Development Standards, (1) Site
Planning, (a) Overall Plan states, "The applicant shall demonstrate that the development plan
contributes to a cohesive, continous, visually related and functionally linked pattern
within existing or approved development plans within the contiguous Neighborhood
Commercial District area in terms of street and sidewalk layout, building siting and
character and site design."
4) City Principals and Policies (from City Plan) do not support granting this modification
request.
teve 0 t - Spnng Cree Vi1agePage
From: Troy Jones
To: Basil Harridan, . Bob Blanchard, Clark Mapes, Dave ...
Date: 9/22/99 11:49AM
Subject: Spring Creek Village
After staff review today, I got to thinking more about the modification request to eliminate the requirement
for a street connection at Spring Creek Village. I don't know if it came up, but does everyone realize the
proposed development is zoned NC? This would be eliminating the only possible street connection from
the NC zone to the surrounding neighborhood. In looking at the LUC and City Plan, there seems to be a
substantial number of places where this type of connection is specifically intended and required. If I
understand the reasons correctly, staffs was leaning toward supporting the modification requiest to
eliminate the possibility of cut -through traffic. Please see the attached file that lists all of the City Plan and
LUC citations that ask for such a connection. I proposed that we (staff) reconsider support of granting this
modification request. Please forward any responce to this topic to all original recipiants of this e-mail
message.
Troy Jones, City Planner
Current Planning Department
City of Fort Collins
(970)221-6206