The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutBRIDGEFIELD P.U.D., PHASE I - FINAL ..... APRIL 24 & MAY 8, 1995 P & Z BOARD HEARINGS - 45-94A - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSSCHOOL PROJECTIONS PROPOSAL: BRIDGEFIELD PUD, Phases I & II DESCRIPTION: 62 housing units on 8.22 acres DENSITY: General Population 7.54 du/acre 284 (units) x 3.5 (persons/unit) = 994 School Age Population Elementary - 62 (units) x Junior High - 62 (units) x Senior High - 62 (units) x .450 (pupils/unit) = 27.9 .210 (pupils/unit) = 13.02 .185 . (pupils/unit) = 11.47 iTk/ �ry y/Y v.V v, I. - , r 11 FtiA: ALL DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA CRITERIA APPLICABLE CRITERIA ONLY CRITERION Is the criterion aepiicablV Will the criteria be satisfied? If no, please explain o � s a Yes No Al. COMMUNITY -WIDE CRITERIA 1.1 Solar Orientation I I I I I 1.2 Comorehensive Plan ✓I V/ 1.3 Wildlife Habitat I V1 j V/ 1.4 Mineral Deposit 1 1.5 Ecologically Sensitive Areas __reserved1 reserved I 6 Lands of Agricultural Imoorance 1.7 Enerov Conservation I ✓I ✓ 1.8 Air Quality I 1.9 Water Qualitv I ✓I 1.10 Sewace and Wastes 1 ✓I I 1 Water Conservation Ivl ✓ 1.12 Residential Density 2. NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY CRITERIAI 2.1 Vehicular. Pedestrian. Bike Tfansoortation I I I ✓ 2.2 Building Placement and Orientation I I I v 1 2.3 Natural Features I I ✓I I✓ I I 2.4 Vehicular Circulation and Parking t/I ✓ 2.5 Emergency Access _ 12.11 V/2.6 Pedestrian Circulation I✓ I I ✓ I 2.7 Architecture 2.8 Building Height and Views I I 2.9 Shading 2 10 Solar Access 1 v 1 ✓ I Historic Resources 1 2.12 Setbacks I I,/ 2.13 Landscape 1 1 2.14 Sicns 2.15 Site Lighting 2.16 Noise and Vibration I I t/ 2.17 Glare or Heat 2.18 Hazardous Materials A 3. ENGINEERING CRITERIA 3.1 Utility Capacity 3.2 Design Standards IVI I L/ 3.3 Water Hazards IV/ 3.4 Geologic Hazards - Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments The City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised ch 1994 -61- UPI S. BRYAN A'VP H o f ,. ,I L i. The Bridges F LEGEND IN MU /v AP YIM�.fI['xAl[ <Ii•.W[ SIII W/MIT Wwe Y.ew.w Y m i' [al M1YnO IIM.n trnwnl.lwh.m _ w Y�y�� Rw. [wml/.ra Pwrr rrw -I h'm e�Mw 1-1 /I'ml Sw.e•e .��lal. Ja..n.[. i.r'lll.[ • 1-t/t'eel 1 Na w ow n�Y. .vlrlr.lr w •..1Y9 4..w! Poli welil e v . .. PIO 11.. QI. Ywlw♦ Jwlr ] q 27 J 0.m�r[...wrw� M Ilwl P.r/w�n.wne6r � WI Y PLANT NOTES DECIDUOUS TREES ORNAMENTAL TREES EVERGREEN TREES manic mes � summ .sn Q nounw .sn O x.u.xr ,;w � women rnr ' ros� c� s O � srnwew.n Wane On exmrom rtns O s.e¢ sxow aee PCRCNNIALS rw[eer . wrues .xo ortu.en*u wsxe wex o.x O wil,R R..IG .�n O cw.wn snRues camas neclmevr ®O muax neee we O . a .n.v xmYaso vises O x[N10xr .Wn D e o ow npKiLOLUsi LECEND gSTREET UGMT 00 ELECTRIC VAULT YT ilRrfna'L BRIDGEFIELD P.U.D. .Nu FORT COLLINS COLORADO wmsceR nAn o � RWLEY ARBOOIATES omo�_ 19.f— .u.iPa -4 HaatheL�e Lake Cord, c"ll 1. As=l MV^l� �W 31 36 J, Cl < 0 116 @ II 7 x r i Z, 0 5,t Pond 0 T D;bc-�)" Faw�iew WAO West 30 Subd,vision U 31 PHASE 11 10 1 200 15 i Foothills Green 1st Filing C) 44, The Bridges P.U.D. IFI wiwi T 11—W. .-- A �AIONNG M ZC*Nal �AMAIWMVAJ. 0 LAM USE BREAKDOWN lAAP BRIDGERELD P.U.D. 0MIlUng MnFl A� 6L as FORT COLLINS OOLORADO L C> SCHOOL PROJECTIONS PROPOSAL: BRIDGEFIELD PUD, Phases I & II DESCRIPTION: 62 housing units on 8.22 acres DENSITY: General Population 7.54 du/acre 284 (units) x 3.5 (persons/unit) = 994 School Age Population Elementary - 62 (units) x Junior High - 62 (units) x Senior High - 62 (units) x .450 (pupils/unit) = 27.9 .210 (pupils/unit) = 13.02 .185 (pupils/unit) = 11.47 I Isi '..- moll s A WN� DRUM back 20 feet and leaving the street narrow at 20 feet. 3. Add parking spaces to Bridgefield Drive We are requiring that five parking bays be added to Bridgefield Drive to present a street that shows users where parking is allowed. The developer's design was just a 20 foot wide street with two parking bays over a three block length. To allow a street this narrow, additional bays must be provided in order to have a street where drivers have a clear picture of where it is acceptable to park and not park in the 20 foot wide drive isle. 4. The developer has proposed that Racoon circle be designated a Oneway street. it is our opinion that not enough traffic will use the street to justify a Oneway street. With too little traffic the Oneway will not be self enforcing. It will be too easy for users to violate the Oneway control. Also, it will be too inconvenient for some users to follow the Oneway restriction. The decision to use a Oneway or not should be left to the Transportation Department to determine. The Board may want to add conditions to support these items. Transport in Services Engineering Department City of Fort Collins MEMORANDUM DATE: April 20, 1995 TO: Steve Olt, City Planner FROM: Mike Herzig, Development Engineering Manager�� RE: Bridgefield P.U.D. The Engineering Department has reviewed the developer's additional variance requests and other unique features for this proposed development related to the proposed public streets. We believe the approved features, when designed and shown on the plans, will be okay for the City acceptance of certain streets as public streets for the City to maintain. The following is a summary of the requested variances and the conditions for their approval. 1. Request for three streets (Daemian Way, BrynnCourt and Marmot Way) to deadend in non-standard methods. The developer requested the use of a "hammer head" turn around at the end of the deadend streets instead of a standard cul-de-sac. Mike Pretz, the Fire Marshall, has stated that the Poudre Fire Authority will not fight fires in these deadend streets. Therefore, the standard cul-de-sac is not needed for their purposes. For public turn around purposes, we have agreed to allow the hammer head only because of the unique design of this development. This type of turn around was approved for Indian Hills P.U.D. as an experiment. This is extending that experiment. This approval in no way indicates we will approve this type of design again. We need to see results from these experimental approvals. 2. Several garage entrances were proposed to front on public streets with setbacks 3 feet from the back of curb. The proposed design was a problem for drivers backing a vehicle out of the garages, not having visibility backing into the public street. We agreed to a proposal to widen the 20 foot wide drive area to 27 feet along the areas of garage frontage and increasing the setback to 5 feet. I cannot say this is a good design, but we will try it. Our preference would have been to have the garages set 281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (303) 221-6605 Bridgefield P.U.D., Phase I - Final, *45-94A April 24, 1994 P & Z Meeting Page 6 If the staff and the developer disagree over the provisions to be included in the development agreement, the developer may present such dispute to the Board for resolution. The Board may table any such decision, until both the staff and the developer have had reasonable time to present sufficient information to the Board to enable it to make its decision. (If the Board elects to table the decision, it shall also, as necessary, extend the term of this condition until the date such decision is made.) If this condition is not met within the time established herein (or as extended, as applicable), then the final approval of this planned unit development shall become null and void and of no effect. The date of final approval for this planned unit development shall be deemed to be the date that the condition is met, for purposes of determining the vesting of rights. For purposes of calculating the running of time for the filing of an appeal pursuant to Chapter 2, Article II, Division 3, of the City Code, the "final decisions' of the Board shall be deemed to have been made at the time of this conditional approval; however, in the event that a dispute is presented to the Board for resolution regarding provisions to be included in the development agreement, the running of time for the filing of an appeal of such 11final decision" shall be counted from the date of the Board's decision resolving such dispute. 2. The design and resulting mitigation measures for storm drainage facilities, on both the Phase I and Phase II portions of Bridgefield P.U.D., shall be approved by the Stormwater Utility and the Natural Resources Division prior to approval of the utility plans. Also, the utility plans must be reviewed and approved (with signatures) by the New Mercer and Larimer County Canal No. 2 ditch companies prior to final utility plan approval by the City of Fort Collins. Bridgefield P.U.D., Phase I - Final, #45-94A April 24, 1994 P & Z Meeting Page 5 FINDINGS of FACT/CONCLUSIONS: In evaluating the request for the Bridgefield P.U.D., Final, staff makes the following findings of fact: * It is in conformance with the Bridgefield P.U.D., Preliminary. * It meets the applicable All Development Criteria in the L.D.G.S. * The eight conditions of preliminary approval have been met. * The lots in this development will gain their vehicular access from internal public and private local street via a single point of access from West Prospect Road. * The City Natural Resources Division is actively negotiating with the developer to purchase a portion of the property located south of the Larimer County Canal No. 2 and north of the existing pond in the Heatheridge Lake Condominiums for use as a natural area. If the natural areas purchase is completed, the project will remain in conformance with the City's rules and regulations. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Bridgefield P.U.D., Phase I - Final - #45-94A, with the following conditions: 1. The Planning and Zoning Board approves this planned unit development final plan upon the condition that the development agreement, final utility plans, and final P.U.D. plans for the planned unit development be negotiated between the developer and City staff and executed by the developer prior to the second monthly meeting (June 26, 1995) of the Planning and Zoning Board following the meeting at which this planned unit development final plan was conditionally approved; or, if not so executed, that the developer or the City staff, at said subsequent monthly meeting, apply to the Board for an extension of time. The Board shall not grant any such extension of time unless it shall first find that there exists with respect to said planned unit development final plan certain specific unique and extraordinary circumstances which require the granting of the extension in order to prevent exceptional and unique hardship upon the owner or developer of such property and provided that such extension can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good. Bridgefield P.U.D., Phase I - Final, #45-94A April 24, 1994 P & Z Meeting Page 4 affect the Phase I development plan and, therefore, the condition of preliminary approval relating to the no granting and no vesting of the layout and density is a mute point relative to Phase I. The Canal Importation Basin floodplain is contained in the area south of the Larimer County Canal No. 2, which would be Phase II of the Bridgefield P.U.D. if City acquisition were not to occur. The 63 lots in Phase I are not impacted by this floodplain; therefore, the condition of preliminary approval relating to delineation of the floodplain is not relevant to the Phase I approval. The Bridgefield P.U.D. utility plans have some storm drainage design features that could impact the potential natural area south of the Larimer County Canal No. 2 if it is acquired by the City. Staff is recommending a that condition be placed on the final approval requiring that the design and resulting mitigation measures for such a design be approved by the Stormwater Utility and the Natural Resources Division prior to approval of the utility plans. Also, the utility plans must be reviewed and approved by the New Mercer and Larimer County Canal No. 2 ditch companies prior to final utility plan approval by the City of Fort Collins. This condition will satisfy the condition of preliminary approval concerning a provision for legal agreements from the Larimer County Canal No. 2. 7. Resource Protection: The City Natural Resources Division is actively negotiating with the developer to purchase the portion of the property located south of the Larimer County Canal No. 2 and north of the existing pond in the Heatheridge Lake Condominiums, containing single family/duplex lots, for use as a natural area (shown as Phase II, not a part of the Phase I final P.U.D.). In the event that the City is successful in negotiating a purchase, then the lots and street/facility infrastructure would not occur. At that time the completed Bridgefield P.U.D. would consist of only the 63 lots on the remainder of the property between West Prospect Road and the Larimer County Canal No. 2 (Phase I). This revised project would still meet the requirements of the L.D.G.S. with a density of 7.66 dwelling units per acre. The first three Natural Resources Division conditions of preliminary approval (concerning stormwater management and water quality issues, a buffer zone between roads and an existing pond, off -site landscaping) are not relevant if the City acquires the portion of the property south of the Larimer County Canal No. 2 (Phase II of Bridgefield P.U.D.). The fourth condition (concerning a tree management program for the buffer zone) is being met with the preparation of a tree management program being created by the City Forester and the developer. Bridgefield P.U.D., April 24, 1994 P & Page 3 3. Design: Landscaping: Phase 2 - Final, #45-94A Z Meeting Deciduous canopy trees will be provided along the West Prospect Road frontage and a combination of canopy and ornamental trees will be along the internal local street frontages. There will also be canopy trees on the rear of the lots along the private driveways. Evergreen and deciduous ornamental trees will be included in the common open space areas for accent. Parking: The developer is providing 2 parking spaces per lot, totalling 126 spaces, for the proposed 63 dwelling units. There will be 62 guest parking spaces provided in parallel parking areas along the street frontages, in front of the homes. These parking areas will be alternated with landscape islands. The parking spaces are proposed to be 7' in width, which is less than the City standard of 8'. The Planning and Zoning Board granted a variance for the decreased parking width with the Bridgefield P.U.D., Preliminary. Solar orientation: A variance to the Solar Orientation ordinance was granted with the approval of the Bridgefield P.U.D., Preliminary. 5. Transportation: The lots in this development will gain their vehicular access from internal public and private local street via a single point of access from West Prospect Road, directly opposite of and aligned with South Bryan Avenue to the north. 6. Engineering: The Engineering Department's engineering -related comments and means of addressing the condition of preliminary approval concerning the elimination of the proposed street hammerheads (resulting in the possible deletion of two lots) are included in a letter from Mike Herzig of the Engineering Department to the Planning Department (attached to this staff report). 6. Storm Drainage: Stormwater detention requirements for this development will be provided on the lower portion of the property, south of the Larimer County Canal No. 2, that is currently in acquisition negotiations between the City and the developer. This detention pond will not Bridgefield P.U.D., Phase I - Final, #45-94A April 24, 1994 P & Z Meeting Page 2 COMMENTS: 1. Background• The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: N: RL; existing single family residential S: RP; undeveloped (Bridgefield P.U.D., Phase II) E: RP; existing multi -family residential (Heatheridge Lake Condominiums) W: rp; existing multi -family residential, natural area (The Bridges Condominiums) The Planning and Zoning Board approved the Bridgefield P.U.D., Preliminary on November 21, 1994 for 99 single family and duplex dwelling units on 16.93 acres. There were several conditions attached and they dealt with: Four Natural Resource conditions concerning stormwater management and water quality issues, a buffer zone between roads and an existing pond, off -site landscaping, and tree management program for the buffer zone. - Provision for legal agreements from the Larimer County Canal No. 2. - Preparation of a study to delineate the Spring Creek floodplain. - A redesign to eliminate the hammerheads on the streets, possibly deleting two lots. No granting and no vesting of the project's layout and density. 2. Land Use• This is a request for final P.U.D. approval for 63 single family and duplex dwelling units on 8.22 acres, for a gross residential density of 7.66 dwelling units per acre. There will be 37 single family detached dwelling units on 37 lots and 26 duplex dwelling units on 13 lots. This request is in conformance with the Bridgefield P.U.D., Preliminary and meets the applicable All Development Criteria of the L.D.G.S. r ITEM NO. 16 MEETING DATE 4/24/95 STAFF Steve Olt City of Fort Collins PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD STAFF REPORT PROJECT: Bridgefield P.U.D., Phase I - Final - #45-94A APPLICANT: Jonathan J. Prouty, President Lagunitas Company 3307 South College Avenue Fort Collins, CO. 80525 OWNER: Same As Applicant PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for final planned unit development (P.U.D.) approval for 63 single family and duplex dwelling units on 8.22 acres located on the south side of West Prospect Road between South Shields Street and South Taft Hill Road. The property is zoned RLP, Low Density Planned Residential. RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This request for final P.U.D. approval: * Is in conformance with the approved Bridgefield P.U.D. - Preliminary; * meets the applicable All Development Criteria in the Land Development Guidance System (L.D.G.S.); * has addressed the eight conditions of preliminary approval. COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 (303) 221-6750 PLANNING DEPARTMENT