HomeMy WebLinkAboutHARVEST PARK - MAJOR AMENDMENT & REPLAT - 25-98G - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTS�v
nt
L4,.
4 City of Fort Collins
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING
Project: for oc,v�t % . HNrU°St R�lc
Meeting Location:: F
Date:
Attendees: Please sign this sheet. The information will be used to
�� update the project mailing list and confirm attendance at neighborhood
meetings. Contact the Planning Departmerit (221-6750) if you wish to
receive minutes of this meeting.
Did You Receive orrect
ritten NotilIcnion ddress.
Name Address Zip
Yes+ Y
-` No
Yes
No
/11CN01-AJ r—RC-AJCI� Z�3U IIHBCR 2aEK!/R. i^f U[LiNs BcS�Z
�S/g /phi N LO✓iw QdS2
pp%,eSJtinf�.,
Jt! �cn n A b- P+ 5 i g ,, r� �.ueQL G� :� G'oGl o �D 5zd
i/IV4
S-�P_vQ-I-_ Iv,;Y4r,h SoGI SaW4I11 ()rfLt, CVI1,,"Is• �052�
✓
. GeopicseW t AlG i-J 6Ut l 2 rS 4AWY"IC CT-. ee,
ten`
Ell
X
k
NEIGHBORHOOD LNFORAIATION MEETING
for
Project: t1wV,(h TA,/U—
Meetina Locatiom. la � nwS
Date: .- 36�• 36• Z�.
Attendees: Please sign this sheet. The information `vill be used to
update the project mailing list and confirm attendance at neighborhood
meetings. Contact the Planning Department (221-6750) if you wish to
receive minutes of this meeting.
Did You Receive �Correcc
Written Noti�icationll�lddrevs.
Name Address Zip
Yes+
No
Yes
No
L)C, SLe;w .Yl JI15 V1A c 5w�Gez►Z�k $osZSl
' 92
sn ou) /fie s a 6 r 80 S :�-8
IX
Ls��od,( c�Ci S o 3ro ,S,•-o ,_ 5 �� 5e
x
I K
Did
Dir.
x
n�
�vi3 Prw 5-L
I
X
17
1 5 /hlaar� �r gd
Tow4ts �4/8 p�t fVIQ C4 eot'ag
>C
k
�C 934fS Sm a,(�( d �r 8oS2
X
Comment (by neighbor): Can we meet with our council person?
Answer (by City staff): Yes. Contact the City Manager's Office to request. Also, the
first 30 minutes of every City Council meeting is devoted to public input on items not on
that evening's agenda. This may be a good chance to voice your concerns.
Comment (by neighbor): There will probably be at least 150 dwelling units from Harvest
using Timber Creek as their primary access.
Comment (by neighbor): A property owner named Tony on 2500 block of Rock Creek
was told it would never go through by Writer Homes.
Question (by neighbor): Can we notify a larger area of neighbors for the hearing on this?
Answer (by City staff): We can only require the applicant to notify 750' from the
project, which in this case is the one block being changed. If a group can distribute past
the required notification distance, more can be invided.
Comment (from neighbor): Noise pollution from traffic will affect home values.
Question (by neighbor): Regarding the new rules of 660 foot intervals of street
connections .... when you can't get them .... Why can't properties along Kechter have
street punch through east and west?
Answer (by City staff): It potentially could, but it would require acquisition of property
from a series of different property owners, and there is no money for such an endeavor.
We typically require that once a property develops, that the property being developed
provide all on site streets, but since the large lots along Kechter are not likely to develop,
there isn't really a mechanism to pay for such a street.
Question (by neighbor): Why didn't Writer put more connections? Why no connection
east on County Fair Lane?
Answer (by City staff): The southwest corner of Harvest Park has the McClelland
Channel running through it. This constraint makes it difficult to make connections. The
property southwest of Harvest Park and south of Stetson Creek is made up of large deep
lots fronting on Kechter Road. It would be infeasible to require off -site construction of
such a road. The lack of connections is more a result of the layout of Stetson Creek
(which was a result of a previous code) in that there were no street stubs provided to
connect to. Harvest Park was not required to mitigate the design of Stetson Creek's lack
of connectivity. It was considered an off -site issue during the review of Harvest Park.
Comment (by neighbor): Now that we all realize traffic problems — time to go back and
fix the problems.
Question (by neighbor): Can neighborhood buy the road?
Answer (by City staff): Not likely, but check with the Traffic Operations Department.
Comment (by neighbor): This is like Swallow Street right through our neighborhood.
Comment (by neighbor): The new high school will also add to east -west traffic on
Timber Creek. This will impact all neighborhoods in this area.
Question (by neighbor): Why is there only one connection between Harvest and the
neighborhoods to the west (Stetson Creek and Timber Creek)?
Answer (by applicant): Stanton Creek and Timber Creek were developed under the
previous code. They didn't have the requirement, as the new code does, to stub future
frequent street connection to adjacent developable properties. It was not required of these
developments to make multiple east -west connections between neighborhoods.
Comment (by City staff): A problem was identified with the old standard. This is why
the current code requires that a development provide stubs of future street connections
every 660 feet along the property lines abutting developable ground. Harvest Park PDP
didn't have the opportunity to connect to the west except where Rock Creek Drive was
stubbed to the common property line.
Question (by neighbor): In cases like this, where the connection requirements between
the old code and the new code create situations where all the traffic is directed to one
connection rather than distributed among several connections, there is a real problem.
Can we close -off Rock Creek Drive to solve the problem?
Answer (by City staff): Not likely. It would solve one problem at the expense of
creating other problems.
Question (by neighbor): What about the Rock Creek connection between the
neighborhoods as emergency traffic only? What would it take to close off connection of
Rock Creek?
Answer (by City staff): Not likely, but the Traffic Operations Department could
elaborate.
Comment (by applicant): If we close — it pushes traffic problems on north up Corbitt
More traffic = slower
Comment (by neighbor): Bus Routes: Kids run across this collector to bus. Doesn't trust
City Engineering- Why no light at Stetson Creek?
Answer (by City staff): There are specific traffic counts that must occur at an
intersection in order to warrant a traffic signal. If and when this intersection meets
warrants, a signal would be possible. The Traffic Operations Department is the point of
contact for this.
Comment (by neighbor): Traffic issues — The traffic calming in Harvest makes these new
units less likely to use Harvest Streets because it would be more convenient to go west
through Timber Creek.
Comment (by City staff): There are limited funds for the City to go into neighborhoods
and retro-fit traffic calming measures such as speed humps. Every neighborhood with
existing speeding problems is ranked by seriousness of the problem by our Traffic
Operations Department. There is only funds every year to make traffic calming
improvements to the 3 most serious ranked neighborhoods. The Stetson Creek Drive and
Timber Creek Drive traffic problems are not ranked near the top of the list of
neighborhoods with the most serious speeding problems, therefore it is unlikely that the
City would pay to install traffic calming anytime soon. If the Homeowners Associations
perhaps wanted to pool some funds together to pay to make traffic calming
improvements, there may be a way to get them in.
Question (by neighbor): What design features were taken into account for traffic calming
in the street design of Harvest Park?
Answer (from the applicant): The streets provide a somewhat circutious route through
the neighborhood, there are 4 round-abouts, intersections have curb bump -outs, and there
are several medians.
Question (by neighbor): Will there be a limit to the number of vehicles each townhouse
owner will be allowed to have?
Answer (from applicant): Don't believe so.
Question (by neighbor): Is it possible to require the developer to do something about
traffic as part of this review?
Answer (by City staff): Only to the extent that the additional I dwelling units would
generate. Single family detached housing statistically generates more trips per day than
townhomes, so even though there will be more dwelling units, the fact that the developer
will be substituting townhomes for single family detached, the proposed change is likely
to have similar traffic generation.
Question (by neighbor): Why are the multifamily units selling faster?
Answer (by applicant): It's due to the market. That price range has more buyers.
Comment (by neighbor): Also Harvest Park neighborhood has whole new style to it.
Comment (by applicant): Traffic/drainage are always major issue, we don't deny it.
Question (by neighbor): Doesn't alley loaded give up back yard?
Comment (by neighbor): Just because market for townhomes is strong now, please don't
make changes to a good plan because it sells quicker.
City of Fort Collins
Community Planning and Environmental Services
Current Planning
Neighborhood Meeting Notes
.Conducted April 30, 2002
for
Major Amendment to Harvest Park P.D.P.
Project Description: The request is to replat Block 2 of the approved Harvest Park P.D.P.
from 18 single family detached home lots to 29 single- family attached home lots
(townhomes). The location is bounded by Harvest Park Lane on the north, Country
Squire on the west, Old Mill Road on the east, and Rock Creek on the south.
Comments, Questions & Answers:
A resident from the Timber Creek Subdivision stood up and read a statement from a
neighborhood resident (Kent Allenbrand) who could not attend.
Comment (by neighbor): Harvest is not taking "just care" to be sensitive to the needs of
the neighborhoods to the west (Stetson Creek & Timber Creek).
Comment (by neighbor): This neighbor commented on several items as follows:
• There are not enough interconnected streets between Harvest and the
neighborhoods to the west, so all the east -west traffic will channel onto the
one connection provided.
• Each of the 11 additional housing units will have additional vehicular trips to
and from these lots. This will impact the existing neighborhoods negatively.
The two existing collectors (Timber Creek Drive & Stetson Creek Drive) will
have to take all the east -west traffic to and from Timberline.
• The two existing collectors (Timber Creek Drive & Stetson Creek Drive) are
designed too wide, therefore cars go too fast on them.
Comment (by neighbor): There is great concern about Rock Creek absorbing the traffic
between these two neighborhoods. The 2500 block of Rock Creek was not designed
sensitive to collector level traffic loads in that the setbacks of the houses are similar to the
way local streets typically configure houses, not collectors. There needs to be traffic
calming / traffic control on the 2500 block of Rock Creek to mitigate this problem.
Question (by neighbor): If the fact that this is an odd shape block is part of the reason
why single family detached lots won't work on this block, why doesn't Harvest Park just
put their rec. center there?
Answer: The rec. center location that is being provided is central to the neighborhood so
more people are in close proximity to it.
281 North College Avenue • PO. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020
No Text
Harvest Park Major Amendment and Replat, File #25-98G
January 27, 2003 Administrative Hearing
Page 7 -
C. The Harvest Park Major Amendment and Replat meets the plat
requirements located in Section 3.3.1 - Plat Standards located in the
General Development standards in Article 3 of the Land Use Code.
D. The approval of the Harvest Park Major Amendment and Replat would
continue to allow the Harvest Park PDP to satisfy the General
Development Standards of Article 3.
E. The approval of the Harvest Park Major Amendment and Replat would
continue to allow the Harvest Park PDP to satisfy the Zone District
Standards for the LMN - Low Density Mixed- Use Neighborhood Zone
District.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the Harvest Park Major Amendment and Replat,
File #25-98G.
Harvest Park Major Amendment and Replat, File #25-98G
January 27, 2003 Administrative Hearing
Page 6
2. Streets, Streetscapes, Alleys and Easements [3.6.2] — The
connections of the private drives with the public streets use the
applicable Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards as required.
The standard is therefore satisfied.
4. Article 4 — Districts (Division 4.4 of the Land Use Code, Low Density
Mixed -Use Neiahborhood Zone District)
The proposed uses of single-family attached dwellings are permitted in
the LMN zone district subject to Type 1 review.
A. The PDP meets the applicable Land Use Standards [4.4(D)] as follows:
Density [4.4(D)(1)] — The density is required to be no less than 5 dwelling
units per net acre of residential land, and no more 8 units per gross acre
of residential land. As a result of this major amendment, the revised unit
count of the entire Harvest Park PDP is now 481 dwelling units. The net
residential acreage of the PDP is 92.41 acres and the gross residential
acreage is 106.63 acres. The net density is now 5.2 dwelling units per net
acre of residential land, and the gross density is now 4.5 dwelling units per
gross acre of residential land. This standard is therefore satisfied.
B. The PDP meets the applicable Development Standards [4.4(E)] as
follows:
Streets and Blocks [4.4(E)(1)] — The blocks created as part of this major
amendment are smaller than 12 acres in size. This PDP therefore
satisfies this standard.
5. Findings of FacUConclusion:
A. The Harvest Park Major Amendment and Replat contains a use that is
permitted in the LMN — Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood Zoning
District subject to Type 1 review.
B. The Harvest Park Major Amendment and Replat meets the procedural
requirements located in Division 2.2.10(B) Major Amendments of the Land
Use Code.
Harvest Park Major Amendment and Replat, File #25-98G
January 27, 2003 Administrative Hearing
Page 5
1. Building and Project Compatibility [3.5.1 ] — The architectural character
isconsistent and compatible with the architectural character that has
been established in the neighborhood. The Harvest Park PDP's
elevations for 4-plex and 5-plex units will apply to the single-family
attached buildings created by this major amendment. Main entrances
face connecting walkways and street sidewalks.
2. Residential Building Standards [3.5.2]
a. Orientation to a Connecting Walkway [3.5.2(C)(1)] -
Every front fagade with a primary entrance to a dwelling
unit faces an adjacent street sidewalk.
b. Setback from Nonarterial Streets [3.5.2(D)(2)] —As
required, all buildings are set back a minimum of 15 feet
from the street.
c. Side and Rear Yard Setbacks [3.5.2(D)(3)] — As required
building locations do not exceed the minimum setbacks
requirements that specify a minimum side yard setback
of 5 feet for end -units in single-family attached buildings,
and minimum rear yard setback of 8 feet for alley
accessed garages and dwellings.
D. Division 3.6, Transportation and Circulation
1. Master Street Plan [3.6.1] — Rock Creek Drive is identified as a
Collector on the Master Street Plan, but is currently not yet built
adjacent to this major amendment site. There are two sections of
Rock Creek Drive that currently exist. The first is the portion of Rock
Creek Drive east of the major amendment site between Ziegler Road
and Corbitt Drive. The second is a half block segment within the
Stetson Creek neighborhood that stubs the street to the Harvest Park
PDP's western property boundary. The build out of the approved
Harvest Park PDP will eventually connect these two segments of Rock
Creek Drive. Initially, the portion of Rock Creek Drive that stubs to the
western edge of the Harvest Park PDP was established by the Rock
Creek Overall Development Plan (ODP), which was approved by the
Planning and Zoning Board in November of 1993. The Harvest Park
Project Development Plan (PDP) was approved in January 2000.
Harvest Park Major Amendment and Replat, File #25-98G
January 27, 2003 Administrative Hearing
Page 4
allow users of the street sidewalk network to access
Harmony Park to the north of the site and other
neighborhood sidewalks in all other directions.
c. Transportation Impact Study [3.2.2(C)(8)] —The city
Traffic Engineer has indicated that in accordance with
the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation
Handbook, 6th Edition, 1997, that there is no traffic
impact with the change in land use. In summary, the
difference in trip generation between the original
approval of 18 single-family detached dwelling units and
the amended application of 29 condominium/townhouse
dwelling units is summarized in the table below:
Land Use
24-hour
AM
AM
PM
PM
Volume
Peak
Peak
Peak
Pea
Hour
Hour
Hour
k
Enter
Exit
Enter
Hour
Exit
18 single-family
172
3
10
12
6
detached units
29 condo/
170
2
11
10
5
townhome units
B. Division 3.3, Engineering Standards
1. Plat Standards [3.3.1 ] — As required, the general layout of the lots,
roads, driveways, utilities, drainage facilities, and other services within
the proposed development are designed in a way that enhances an
interconnected street system within and between neighborhoods.
Proper right-of-way has been dedicated for public streets, and
drainage easements, and utility easements have been provided as
needed to serve the area being platted.
2. Water Hazards [3.3.3] — The Stormwater Department has reviewed the
application and has indicated that the application, satisfies the
requirements of this standard.
C. Division, Building Standards [3.5]
Harvest Park Major Amendment and Replat, File #25-98G
January 27, 2003 Administrative Hearing
Page 3
Procedural Requirements, Division 2.2 - Common Development Review
Procedures for Development Applications, Subsection 2.2.10(B) Major
Amendments, where it states that amendments to any approved PDP that are
not deemed to be minor amendments shall be deemed major amendments. As
specified in Subsection 2.2.10(A) Minor Amendments, a minor amendment
cannot increase or decrease the number of dwelling units by more than one
percent. This request increases the number of dwelling units by approximately
2.5%, and therefore, can only be processed as a major amendment. As required
in Subsection 2.2.10(B) Major Amendments, such major amendments shall be.
processed as required for the land use or uses proposed for the amendment as
set forth in Article 4 (i.e. Type 1 review or Type 2 review) for the zone district in
which the land is located, and to the maximum extent feasible, shall comply with
the applicable standards contained in Articles 3 and 4.
4
3. Article 3 - General Development Standards:
The Project Development Plan complies with all applicable General
Development Standards as follows:
A. Division 3.2, Site Planning and Design Standards
1. Landscaping and Tree Protection [3.2.1 ]
a. Street Trees [3.2.1(D)(2)] — As required, the proposed
major amendment provides street trees within the
landscaped parkway between the curb and the street
sidewalk at 30 to 40 foot spacing intervals.
2. Access, Circulation and Parking [3.2.2]
a. Direct On -Site Access to Pedestrian and Bicycle
Destinations [3.2.2(C)(6)] — The on -site pedestrian
destinations include the connecting walkway network,
and the street sidewalks. Direct sidewalk connections
are provided from the on -site dwellings to these
pedestrian destinations, thereby satisfying this standard.
b. Off -Site Access to Pedestrian and Bicycle Destinations
[3.2.2(C)(7)] — The applicant is providing curb ramps that
Harvest Park Major Amendment and Replat, File #25-98G
January 27, 2003 Administrative Hearing
Page 2
COMMENTS:
1. Background:
The zoning and land uses that surround the site are as follows:
N: RL; existing Harmony Park, existing Traut Elementary School, existing
single-family attached residential north of the school.
NW: RL; existing Preston Junior High School, existing Wild Wood Farm single
family neighborhood,
S: LMN; Rock Creek Drive, undeveloped portions of the Harvest Park PDP
development, Sage Creek development (under construction),
W: RL; existing Stetson Creek and Timber Creek single-family residential
neighborhoods.
E: LMN; existing and under construction portions of the Harvest Park
development.
The applicant requests a maior amendment to amend the Harvest Park Project
Development Plan (PDP). This includes amending the site plan, landscape plan,
elevations, and utility plans to reflect conversion of 18 single family detached
home lots to 29 single-family attached home lots. The total number of dwellings
for the PDP is thereby amended from 470 units to 481 units. The site and
landscape plans are thereby amended to reflect the change. The elevations are
changed to specify that 4-plex and 5-plex building elevations now apply to this
amended area. The utility plans have been amended to reflect changes to
utilities, street design, and drainage design.
The replat portion of this application creates a new plat, now called "Harvest
Park Subdivision, Fourth Filing", for the portion of the original "Harvest Park
Subdivision" originally specified as "block 2." The plat reconfigures lot lines,
creates a new street segment (called Fruited Plains Lane), and creates an
additional 11 lots within the original block 2 area. The new plat creates a block 1
and a block 2 of Harvest Park Subdivision, Fourth Filing.
The parcel was annexed in September 1998 as part of the Ruff Annexation.
2. Article 2 - Administration:
The request complies with the applicable requirements of the Land Use Code,
specifically the procedural requirements located in Division 2.1 - General
ITEM NO.
MEETING DATE
STAFF D o t°
Citv of Fort Collins HEARING OFFICER
STAFF REPORT
PROJECT: Harvest Park Major Amendment and Replat, File #25-98G
[Type I, Administrative Review]
APPLICANT: Terence Hoaglund
Vignette Studios
144 N. Mason Street, Suite 2
Fort Collins, CO 80524
OWNER: The Writer Corporation
6061 S. Willow Drive, Suite 232
Englewood, CO 80111
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This is a request to change block 2 of the approved Harvest Park P.D.P. from 18
single family detached home lots to 29 single-family attached home lots
(townhomes). The process required by the Land Use Code to make this change
requires a major amendment of the Harvest Park P.D.P. to amend the approved
density, and a replat of block 2 of the Harvest Park Plat to change the lot
configurations. The project site is bounded by Harvest Park Lane on the north,
Country Squire Way. on the west, Old Mill Road on the east, and Rock Creek
Drive on the south. The property is in the LMN — Low Density Mixed -Use
Neighborhood Zone District.
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Harvest Park Major Amendment and Replat contains a use that is permitted
in the LMN — Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood Zoning District subject to
Type 1 review. The proposal meets the plat requirements located in Section
3.3.1 - Plat Standards located in the General Development standards in Article 3
of the Land Use Code. The approval of the Harvest Park Major Amendment and
Replat would continue to allow the Harvest Park PDP to satisfy the General
Development Standards of Article 3 and to satisfy the Zone District Standards for
the LMN — Low Density Mixed- Use Neighborhood Zone District.
COMMJNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO80522-0580 (970) 221-6750
PLANNING DEPARTMENT