Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSCENIC VIEWS PUD - FINAL - 3-96A - CORRESPONDENCE - (6)(2) Requiring that a Site Plan Note prohibit gates across any access drive is justified on the grounds of the following All Development Criteria: A-2.1, A-2.2, A-2.4, and A-2.5: A-2.1: This criteria requires PUD's to provide for a vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation network that can be incorporated into the neighborhood and community. Gates do not provide for integration or incorporation into a neighborhood, rather they provide for segregation, separation, and isolation. A-2.2: This criteria requires that site plan elements (such as fences and parking facilities) be oriented in a way that is consistent with the established neighborhood character. Security gates are not found in the neighborhood. In fact, there are no existing security gates for a residential subdivision in the entire City of Fort Collins. The introduction of a security gate would be an intrusion into the established neighborhood character which would be inconsistent with established neighborhood aesthetics. Thus, in an effort to be proactive and ensure the continued satisfaction of A-2.2, a site plan note prohibiting such gates is being required. A-2.4: The introduction of a security gate would place a limitation on the modes of transportation that would use the system. A gate would place a limitation on car, truck, bus, and emergency access, and would not be safe, efficient, convenient or attractive. Again, in an effort to be proactive and ensure the continued satisfaction of A-2.4, a site plan note prohibiting such gates is being required. A-2.5: This criteria asks that the PUD provide adequate access for emergency vehicles and for those persons rendering fire protection and emergency services. Again, in an effort to be proactive and ensure the continued satisfaction of A-2.5, a site plan note prohibiting such gates is being required. Even with a note stating that gates will be prohibited, it will still be necessary to provide for access easements for all modes that may potentially use the street system. 1✓19. Please provide some labels on the elevations. For example, which materials options will be available on which parts of the structures? If you should have any questions regarding these comments or if I could be of further assistance to you in any way, please do not hesitate to contact me at 221-6641. Sincerely, Mitchell Haas Project Planner 8. Please add at least one more evergreen tree behind (on the south side) each of the two garages located at the southeast corner of the site (east of Building 6). These trees should sit between the garages and the sidewalk, but behind the utility easement line. ✓ 9. Please add more shrubs and ornamentals along West Elizabeth Street, between the buildings and the sidewalks, for the five buildings have the potential to be very close to the street and tight setbacks generally require heavy landscaping. /10. On the south side of the garages between Buildings 20-24, the landscaped island would probably be a practical, convenient location for a mailbox cluster. The mailboxes should go in the middle of this island, being flanked on both sides by Autumn Purple Ashes (2-FA). ✓ 11. Please label the tree shown on the east side of Building 12. J 12. Please provide clusters of taller trees along the north property line to provide adequate buffering for the existing single family residence. ✓ 13. Please define "special paving." 14. The sidewalks along West Elizabeth Street and Overland Trail should directly abut the property/R.O.W. lines; they are currently shown to be two -to -three feet from this line. Please adjust this alignment accordingly. CI 5 Please make the path from West Elizabeth Street up to the detention pond/open space six (6) feet wide and specify this width on the plans. ✓ 16. Please show all stepping stones on site plan (see label to south of Building 2; it's pointing to nothing). 17. / Please add stepping stone or full walkways in the following locations: ✓ ► To the northeast of Building 6, please provide a path from the currently shown walkway to the northeast corner of the garage and along the western edge of the landscape island. This would form an "L" around the Shademaster Honeylocust (GT). ► To the north of Building 10, please provide a connection from the shown walkway to the garage area; this would run between the garage Patmore Ash (FP). J Between Buildings 16 and 19, please connect the middle, east/west walkway all the / way through. This would meander around the Deborah Norway Maple (AP). ✓ 18. The Planning Department is requiring either (1) provision of "Public Access Easements" on all proposed private drives, or (2) a note on the site plan prohibiting gates across any access drives. The following justifications are noted: ► (1) Provision of Public Access Easements: by not providing such easements on private drives the developer and the City would be creating the potential for a "limitation" on the "modes of transportation that will use the system." Providing the potential for such a limitation is a failure to meet the requirements of All Development Criteria A-2.4. d- July 19, 1996 Mr. Eldon Ward Cityscape Urban Design, Inc. 3555 Stanford Road, Suite 105 Fort Collins, CO 80525 Dear Eldon, Staff has reviewed your revised submittal for the Scenic Views P.U.D., Final (#3-96A) and offers the following comments: 1. The stormwater detention pond needs to be built with the first (1st) phase of development. In addition, all proposed phasing must be shown on utility plans, as well as on site and landscape plans. / 2. The numbering scheme of the phasing plan will cause confusion. The phasing plan currently shows thirteen (13) stages of development broken into five (5) phases. Please use whole, round numbers (i.e., 1, 2, 3 ... without A, B, C, etc.), or provide explanatory notes delineating the time frame/schedule of construction anticipated for each phase. Also, please show the phasing lines on the actual site and landscape plans, so as to ensure that nothing sits on a line. ✓3. Please provide further clarification of Site Plan Note #20. If a phasing plan is provided, construction will have to occur in the approved order; otherwise, an administrative change will be required. ,/ 4. Across the street from Buildings 16 and 18, there is a label which reads "4-TC." The planting of these four trees is shown to occur in two different phases; thus, the labeling of these trees should be indicated as 3-TC on Sheet 4 of 5, and 1-TC on sheet 3 of 5. This way, the labeling will be coordinated with the phasing plan and confusion over what gets planted when should be eliminated. J 5. We liked the parking layout to the north of Buildings 15 and 16 better the way it was before the last revisions (6/28/96). Please consider going back to the previously proposed layout. On the latest landscape plan, the trees for this previous parking layout are still shown, but the islands that they would sit on are no longer there. Please, either place these trees someplace else or replace the islands. ✓6. Please place a tree between the dumpster and the stepping stones to the north of Buildings 1 and 2. ✓7. At the corner to the northeast of Building 1, please add a second Glenleven Linden (TC), as was shown on the original Final submittal