HomeMy WebLinkAboutSTONEBRIDGE GARDEN APARTMENTS FINAL PUD - 82 93A - CORRESPONDENCE - CITY STAFF (3)Stonebridge Apartments
at Courtney Park
Harmony Road at Wheaton Drive
Ft. Collins, Colorado
Square Foot Development
c/o Loftus Developments
4700 Walnut
Boulder, CO 80301
FINAL LAND USE DESIGN INFORMATION
Project Size: 168 Units
March 4, 1994
Unit Mix:
Quantity
1 BR
700 s.f.
76
2BR (standard)
910 s.f.
62
2BR (double master)
1,080 s.f.
14
3BR
1,100 s.f.
16
Unit Breakdown Units
3BR 2BR
2BR
1 BR
8 Buildings
DBL
STD
A 23
2 1
12
8
B 17
2 1
6
8
C 17
2 1
6
8
D 23
2 1
12
8
E 27
2 4
7
14
F 27
2 4
7
14
G 17
2 1
6
8
H 17
2 1
6
8
168
16 14
-62
76
Parking Information:
Parking Required:
279 autos
3BR - 2 autos/unit
16 units
32 autos
2BR - 1.75 autos/unit
76 units
133 autos
1 BR - 1.5 autos/unit
76 units
114 autos
Total Automobile Parking Spaces Provided: 300 autos
Mix: 86 garages, 214 surface
Guest Parking 16 autos
Clubhouse Parking 5 autos
Handicap Parking 11 autos
Bicycle Parking (13 locations) 78 total
stone.014
>ti Nr.r.e e..ur e..er a.w
r w. .. ..wm...1m
IPr/ eMy M Y'w .[dp P
si.r NrPaaw.wl IMwer
Or
IUIw10 MO lOYi10
WC tlIRI1CITIM
µpw0 q W nwvq N Ser.w
bMNMGry elfwlCyn., CYSN,
N�MyN��le
.N.. Y P.... I
N lip Me
1Tlp l Cl11TY1Gllg1
m..wmrr M..w_anN I
wnrM1 w m� tis N
w111N
n», alas
+�n•.e.. wPr �
�Lr
1
i
� I
o�
L �
� 1
I
I
�i
"I
�I
FINAL
TECHNIC
The Planning and Zoning Board understood the City's stated concerns at the
public hearing and made the decision that the current location was the most
favorable one, given the neighbor's desires, the specifics of the proposed
apartment complex and the traffic generated by the development. Any future
commercial (or residential for that matter) project built on the vacant
commercial site to the east of Stonebridge will need to locate their entrance
driveway where we have concluded in order to allow building construction at
both the northwest and southwest corners of that property. The master P.U.D.
always envisioned the traffic circulation system of the subdivision including that
traffic generated by the neighborhood center.
It seems very unfortunate that the traffic engineer seems to believe we need
to revisit this same issue and then debate it again before the same group that
has already made their finding based upon the same information. They sided
with the neighborhood's desire and approved the plat where the developer
proposed the vehicle entrance. It would seem to me that it would be better
handled to first meet prior to the hearing with the City Manager and/or City
Attorney to review this matter ahead of a second duplicate debate before the
Board. Moreover, I question if it is even proper for city staff to reopen such a
discussion when the finding has been concluded with nothing having been
changed since the first hearing. I cannot imagine why the Board would want
to re-evaluate the same information yet again.
Let's meet to review this and any other outstanding problem later this week.
ctfully\SWpnitted ,
Janes $. Junge, 1�krgitect
cc: Linda Ripley
Jim Loftus
oIt037
JUNGE / AEICH / ASSOCIATES
ARCHITECTURE 6 PLANNING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
March 7, 1994
Steve Olt
City of Ft. Collins
281 N. College
P.O. Box 580
Ft. Collins, CO 80522
RE: STONEBRIDGE FINAL P.U.D. ISSUES
The only major remaining problem is that of Rick Endsdorph's continuing
concern of the entrance driveway location onto Wheaton Drive from our
project. This is the identical concern raised at the preliminary P.U.D. site plan
review during the Planning and Zoning Board Hearing. The Board made a
specific finding as to its location where now indicated after considerable
discussion and their conclusion was based with full knowledge of the
transportation departments opinion. In the meantime, Junge/Reich/Associates
has met with Steve Meyer of Sullivan -Hayes, the neighborhood shopping center
developer, who is proposing the King Soopers Center to coordinate alignment
of the two driveways. The technical site plan now establishes that alignment
of the Stonebridge entrance to be directly across the street from the proposed
neighborhood center driveway, and in conformance with the final fire
department and city engineering requirements.
It is important to understand the entrance drive to Stonebridge is exactly where
the neighborhood has directed it to be located. It could have been placed to
align at the intersection of Monte Carlo; however, the surrounding neighbors
do not want that, as they believe moving the drive to the north will encourage
additional traffic into their area. The background of this issue is clear to me
that the single family homeowners do not want any significantly greater traffic
volume to occur towards their houses. By locating the Stonebridge entrance
where it is now shown, most of the vehicles entering our complex will not
conflict with Monte Carlo and only those needing to exit to eastbound Harmony
will ever enter their neighborhood.
We held an initial neighborhood meeting to establish their concerns. The
original master P.U.D. had indicated two driveway entrances to this property.
After a great deal of discussion, it was perfectly clear they desired only one
entry and that it be located where now shown. This was confirmed at the
Planning Board Public Hearing on January 24, 1994 and again at our second
neighborhood meeting on January 26, 1994.
ott.037
4141 ARAPAHOE AVENUE, SUITE 100 303 444.2987
BOULDER, COLORADO 80303 FAX 303 444 • S08S