HomeMy WebLinkAboutINDIAN HILLS VILLAGE PRELIMINARY PUD - 81 93 - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSJ
Indian Hills Village
Page 2
Due to being adjacent to Spring Creek, there will not be onsite storm
water detention provided. It is proposed to collect the runoff from Basins
"A119 "B" and "DI' in the two proposed curb inlets at the north end of the
entrance road, and in the proposed area inlet south of the Stuart Street walk.
The storm water would then be carried under Stuart Street in a proposed 24-
inch diameter storm drain .to Spring Creek.
Basins "C11 and "E11 will drain to the existing curb.inl.et at the southwest
corner of Stuart Street and Stover Street and drain northerly to Spring Creek
in the existing outlet pipe.
Erosion control will be provided on the site because most of the existing
ground cover will be disturbed when the utilities, street cutting and overlot
grading is done. A silt fence will be'provided along the south side of Stuart
Street to mitigate rainfall -caused erosion. Since the site slopes northerly,
the silt fence and straw bales and then gravel filters at the proposed curb
and area inlets will protect Stuart Street and Spring Creek. The dense tree
areas along the east and west property lines will reduce the wind -caused
erosion.
The runoff calculations and drainage and grading plan are enclosed as
a part of this report. If you have any questions regarding this preliminary
report, please call.
Sincerely,
6a,r 02a�
Richard A. Rutherford,. P. E. & L. S.
President
jrr
enclosures
• •
STEWART&ASSOCIATES
Consulting Engineers and Surveyors
DeCealJer 6, 1993
Mr. Glen Schlueter
Storm Water Utility
City of Fort Collins
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, Colorado 80522
Dear Glen:
The following is the preliminary storm drainage report for Indian Hills
Village which is a proposed single—family detached Planned Unit Development
on the south side of East Stuart Street between Stover Street and Busch Court.
The site is the north part of Indian Hills West P.U.D., which was approved
in 1979. The site is situate in the Southeast I of the Northwest I of Section
24, Township 7 North, Range 69 West of the 6th P.M., City of Fort Collins,
County of Larimer, State of Colorado. The site contains 6.2151 net acres and
is bounded by East Stuart Street on the north, by Indian Hills Subdivision,
Second Filing, on the east, by the south part of Indian Hills West P.U.D. that
was developed on the south, and by Parkside Subdivision on the west.
The site is in the Spring Creek Drainage Basin and is directly across
East Stuart Street from the reach of Spring Creek that was improved in 1992
and 1993 along with the new Stuart Street bridge over Spring Creek. The site
slopes from south to north at approximately 1.7% grade.
The historic use of the site was as an outdoor movie theatre which was
closed approximately fifteen years ago. It has a fairly dense row of trees
along both the East and West property lines along with some scattred trees
near Stuart Street. The ground cover is native grass and weeds. There has
been some grading on the site, including some fill, since the move theatre
was dismantled.
The rear yards of the Indian Hills Subdivision, Second Filing, drain from
offsite onto the property and then northerly to Stuart Street in the landscaped
strip along the P.U.D.'s east property line. Likewise, the rear yards of the
Parkside Subdivision drain onto the P.U.D. from the west. The south part of
Indian Hills West, containing 5.76 acres, that was developed also produces
offsite flows that drain to Spring Creek across the P.U.D. The runoff from
the developed Indian Hills West property will be routed to Spring Creek in
the landscaping strip along the west line of the P.U.D.
James H. Stewart
and Associates, Inc.
103 S. Meldrum Street
P.O. Box 429
Ft. Collins, CO 80522
303/482-9331
Fax 303/482-9382
PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT
FOR
INDIAN HILLS VILLAGE
PREPARED
FOR
LAGUNITAS COMPANY
DECEMBER 6, 1993
STEWART & ASSOCIATES, INC.
103 SOUTH MELDRUM STREET
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80521
303/482-9331
0
models, will lend itself well to solar access. The houses will be
designed with solar.access in mind.
25. Will the garages be attached? We don't want a row of
unattached garage buildings along our back .property line.
Yes, the garages will be attached to the houses and will be
incorporated into the design of the house.
26. Will basements really be possible given the water level in the
area?
We believe that basements will be possible for some houses. Our
engineers will be looking into this in greater detail.
27. Is funding in place.for this project or will it get partially
built and then remain vacant if something goes wrong?
Funding is not an issue. We, the company that owns the land, are
doing the design, planning, and development.
28. Air pollution is a concern here. The area is in a basin with
Spring Creek. Any more cars will cause the pollution to
increase. This could be a real problem for the people who
live here now. With almost 100 garages that is a lot of
additional cars driving in and out every day. Also fire-
places will contribute to the pollution.
We have hired a traffic engineer to evaluate the potential traffic
impacts on Stuart Street. We don't intend to have wood fireplaces,
they will be gas, as required,by.the City. We will have Natural
Resources look into the air quality issue.
0
We intend to present a plan to the Indian Hills HOA detailing our
landscape ideas for this area. We also welcome the idea of
coordinating this effort, as we believe both parties will benefit.
19. You need to make sure the landscaped area between the existing
houses and the driveways is a good buffer. I would like to
see trees, shrubs, grass, etc.
We will be looking at those areas in detail at the time of final
submittal, but we agree, these need to be adequate buffers.
,20. What is the timing of construction?
We would like to begin in the Spring with site development which
should take 2 to 3 months to complete. The houses will probably
take 2 years to build out.
21. Will people be parking in the 16' drive lanes? We don't want
that.
One of the reasons the lanes are narrower is to discourage parking
there. There will be guest parking in front of the houses and two
car garages for each house. There should not be parking in the
drive lanes.
22. Will garbage be collected from the rear of the houses?
Probably not, the public street will be in front. The drive lanes
will be private.
23. The density seems very high, we don't see how you can put all
of those houses on only 6 acres.
The density is actually less than the previously approved townhouse
plan, or the Indian Townhouses that were built. The houses are not
large, the street is scaled down to a pedestrian scale, the front
yards are scaled down, porches are emphasized, and the side yard
setbacks are reduced. We are trying to accomplish a village,
concept of housing where there is a neighborhood feeling, where it
is safe and pleasant to walk along the tree lined streets, and
where the scale of the streets matches the scale of the houses.
The concept is not really new, it is the way neighborhoods were
developed 50 years ago. We believe that this will be an attractive
neighborhood and it an attractive alternative to typical townhouse
developments. (We are not including the Indian Hills Townhouses in
that description because we believe that is a well designed
project).
24. What about solar orientation? Will you be able to get solar
access if the houses are so close together?
We will do everything we can to meet the requirements of the City's
Solar Orientation Ordinance. The way the houses will be
constructed, the design and combinations of ranch and two story
We will consider the existing homes when we design the lighting.
When we have more information about lighting it will be made
available to you.
13. What about streets, will they be public or private and who
will maintain them?
We are working with the City Engineering Department and Poudre Fire
Authority to work out a reasonable alternative to the standard 36'
wide city street. We would very much preferpublic streets and
believe that a 28' paved street, with a 20' drive and 8' parking
area on alternating sides, is more in scale with what we are trying
to accomplish with this design.
14. How far is the driveway edge from your property line at the
southwest corner?
It is 131. Nine feet of landscaping for the existing trees, then
4' of gravel or non -hard surface to give the trees and root systems
some protection, and then a 16 asphalt drive way. The back of the
garage will be 3-4' from the drive way.
15. What will you do with the existing emergency access at the
southeast corner of the property?
It is no longer needed by the Fire Authority, it will be
landscaped. There will not be any vehicular access between the
existing townhouses and this proposal as was shown on the previous
townhouses plan.
16. There are some serious drainage issues on the site and in the
area, especially for the people on the east side of Busch
Court., The current situation is not adequate at all. Where
will the water from the townhouses go when this property is
developed? Right now it just flows over this property and
sometimes onto our lots. Will it be piped? We hope you can
solve the drainage problems in the area with this plan.
All of the drainage issues will have to be resolved. We will have
our engineers look into the situation you have described. All
drainage from this site will be piped directly to Spring Creek.
17. Could you explain how you plan to deal with the stormwater on
the site and through the development, especially out of the
existing drainage pond?
We can generally show you on the plans how the drainage is intended
to go, but we are still in the preliminary stages of engineering
design so we can't be that specific. The water in the existing
drainage pond will have to be dealt with on our plans.
18. We would like to see some coordination between you and the
townhouses HOA on the landscaping between the two
developments.
k,
entrance feature.
5. Could we get copies of the plans that you intend to submit.
Yes, we will send plans to anyone who is interested.
6. What will the height of the buildings be?
Approximately 30' at the highest. The steep pitched roofs give the
houses a taller profile.
7. Will you level the site or regrade it?
We will not change it much from what you see.
8. How many houses will there be on the 6 acres?
Approximately 48.
9. Will the landscaping be maintained by a homeowner's
association?
Yes, everything outside of the individual building envelopes will
be maintained by a homeowner's -association, including the
streetscape landscaping.
10. What do you intend to do with the existing trees along the
east and west property boundaries? Who will maintain them?
We intend to preserve them. We will work with the City Forester to
determine which trees are worth preserving, because some of them
are dead or dying, and we plan to work out a 5 or 10 year
replacement program. The developer will do the initial pruning and
maintenance and the HOA will take over after time.
11. Bull doze them all now. They are mostly weeds and are not
that great.
We agree that many of them are not that attractive and for those we
would work out a program to replace them with other more attractive
trees. But the existing trees do have value now as they provide a
pretty dense buffer and screen between the existing houses and this
site, especially in the spring, summer, and fall.
12. What about street lighting? We. don't want really bright
lights, but something like our development which is more
subdued. I would be interested in knowing more about the City
residential lighting scheme, as far as luminaries of light.
Also, please consider second story windows of existing housing
when you design the lighting.
We will be working with Light and Power to work out a street
lighting scheme that will be subdued and adequate but not overdone.
We also don't want to light up the place, but want it to be safe.
Neighborhood Information Meeting Summary
Indian Hills Village PUD
The following are comments, concerns, and questions expressed at a
neighborhood information meeting held on December 2, 1993. The
proposed project, known as Indian Hills Village PUD is for
approximately 48 single family and duplex lots on approximately 6
acres. The proposal is for a "cottage" type community, with rear
accessed garages, front porches, steep pitched roofs, and a scaled
down, pedestrian oriented street scape.
Note: All responses are by the applicant, unless otherwise noted.
1. What is the projected price range and size of the houses.
Approximately 35-40% of the units will be ranch style with the
remainder being 2 story houses. There will be a mix between single
family and the attached duplex type houses. They will range in
size from 1,000 sq. ft. to about 2,000 and some will have
basements. Our projected construction costs are approximately $100
per square foot.' We estimate the houses will be in the $,160,000 to
$210,000 price range.
2. Will you be taking down the overhead power lines behind our
houses? We would like to see them placed underground.
We will consult with Light and Power about coordinating the
undergrounding of those lines with installation of the underground
lines for this project.
3. Where will the teenagers and children play, there are no green
belts or parks? Even with one child per unit there could be
48 kids with no place to play, and even worse, there could be
48 dogs with no yards.
The development will likely not appeal to families with children as
the yards are small. We anticipate that the development will
appeal to empty nesters, retired people, young professionals, etc.
The sort of person would doesn't want a large yard to maintain, yet
wants to own an individual house. We also anticipate interest from
people moving out of larger houses looking for a high quality
smaller house. There are also two City parks within a half mile,
with Spring Park just down the street and 'Edora Park a short
distance down the bike trail.
4. If you end up not using the front area along Stuart Street for
detention what will you do with it?
It will be incorporated into green area, front yards, and an
a
Furthermore, we request a variance for public right-of-way Local Access
streets for right-of-way width reduction from thirty-five feet standard
to thirty-four feet and for sidewalk one side.
Yours truly,
Richard A. Rutherford
P.E. and L.S.
dk
M
C. East and west boundary lines have dense existing tree and
landscape buffers which must be maintained and which require strip of
project common space along both such boundaries in order to respect and
maintain such buffers and tree root systems.
2. Furthermore, central to our concept of this cottage community is that
it be pedestrian -friendly, and that the public roadway, parking, sidewalk,
and related landscaping be designed to help accomplish this. We have
proposed meandering 20' travel lanes (asphalt) with parking offsets
(concrete) alternatively on each side of street interspersed with 5'
landscape right-of-way islands throughout project and sidewalk one side.
This results in an aesthetic and pedestrian -friendly right-of-way.
3. Units
have 35'
and 40' frontages and
only minimal front yards.
Minimum
permissible
roadway, parking and
sidewalk as well as
landscaping
are essential to keep the streetscape and space between
houses on
each side
of street in appropriate
scale with residences and
yards, and
to prevent
the impervious surfaces
(asphalt and concrete) from
being the dominant aesthetic feature of these
streetscapes.
4. The City of Fort Collins' Goals and Objectives articulate the goal to
"Reduce street widths in residential developments where appropriate"
(Page 17). We believe this project is an excellent example of the
situation where such reduction of width is appropriate.
5. Not only is this right-of-way design aesthetic and in appropriate scale
with the proposed housing, but it is inherently safe because its design
encourages and mandates a slow vehicle speed in project which is
consistent with vehicle safety, pedestrian safety, and the nature of the
neighborhood.
Accordingly, we hereby request a variance for public right-of-way Local
streets for right-of-way width reduction from forty feet standard to
thirty-nine feet and for . sidewalk one side.
STEWART&ASSOCIATES
Consulting Engineers and Surveyors
December 6, 1993
City of Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board
c/o Kirsten Whetstone, Project Planner
City of Fort Collins Planning Department
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado 80524
RE: Indian Hills Village Right -of -Way Width and Sidewalk Variance
Request
Dear Planning and Zoning Board Members:
The proposed innovative Indian Hills Village PUD will only fit on the site
if a variance is granted with regard to right-of-way width and sidewalk.
A problem is caused by preexisting site parameters specifically:
A. Water and sewer mains have been previously installed on site
dictating a configuration of four north -south rows of housing, two rows in
an island in the center of parcel and two rows respectively along the east
and west boundaries of property.
B. This is an in -fill site sandwiched between two north -south
streets, Busch Court and Stover Street and with access only from Stuart
Street at the north.
James H. Stewart
and Associates, Inc.
103 S. Meldrum Street
P.O. Box 429
Ft. Collins, CO 80522
303/482-9331
Fax 303/482-9382
a
so
C. Enough landscape offsets to allow the scale of the street to read
as a downsized Local Street appropriate for the scale of the project, not-
withstanding the fact that this street has two full-sized travel lanes and
very adequate and convenient guest parking.
D. Sufficient yard landscaping and landscape offsets (5' wide in
right-of-way) so that the community has a pleasant, warm, attractive
feel about it and is aesthetically attractive rather than looking like a
wide bowling alley and a sea of asphalt with small homes bordering each
side, close to each other and totally out of scale with the right of way.
Please call me for any additional information you may require or with any
questions. We look forward to your favorable action on our request. Thank
you.
Sincerely,
Jon h
Enclosures
dk
President
a
units and are accessed by private drives. To accompish this goal on this
site requires minimizing street widths,
3. Furthermore, we want this cottage community to be pedestrian -
friendly, and we have designed the public roadway, parking, sidewalk, and
related landscaping to help accomplish this. We have proposed meandering
20' travel lanes (asphalt) with parking offsets (concrete) alternatively on
each side of street interspersed with 5' landscape right-of-way islands
throughout project. This, together with attractive cottage frontages and
garages out of sight at rear, results in an aesthetic and pedestrian -
friendly right-of-way.
4. This project has small houses with small yards located on small lots.
Minimum permissible roadway, parking and sidewalk as well as
landscaping are essential to keep the streetscape in appropriate scale
with residences and yards, and to prevent the impervious surfaces
(asphalt and concrete) from being the dominant aesthetic feature of these
streetscapes.
5. The City of Fort Collins' Goals and Objectives articulate the goal to
"Reduce street widths in residential developments where appropriate"
(Page 17). We believe this project is an excellent example of the
situation where such reduction of width is appropriate.
6. Not only is this right-of-way design aesthetic and in appropriate scale
with the proposed housing, but it is inherently safe because its design
encourages a slow vehicle speed in project which is consistent with
vehicle safety, pedestrian safety, and the nature of the neighborhood.
7. The goals which can be achieved by this project if necessary street
variance is granted include:
A. Providing adequate guest parking at the front of every house
(resident parking is in two car garage located at rear of each house and
accessed by driveway lanes).
B. Obvious and self -enforcing nature of parking without the use of
striping and signs (City request) in order to reasonably insure that parking
never occurs in or partially encroaches upon asphalt travel lanes, assuring
that they will always be clear for fire and rescue vehicles
a
N
LAGUNITAS COMPANY
3307 S. College Ave. Suite 200, Fort Collins, CO 80525
303 226 5000 • FAX 226 5125
January 7, 1994
City of Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board
c/o Kirsten Whetstone, Project Planner
City of Fort Collins Planning Department
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado 80524
RE: Indian Hills Village Residential Street Variance Request
Dear Planning and Zoning Board Members:
We respectfully request a variance in the residential street standard, as
described below and in the two accompanying engineers letters, so that it
will be possible to develop the innovative Indian Hills community which
we are proposing.
1. A problem is caused by preexisting site parameters specifically:
A. Water and sewer mains have been previously installed on site
dictating a configuration of four north -south rows of housing, two rows in
an island in the center of parcel and one row each respectively along the
east and west boundaries of property.
B. This is an in -fill site sandwiched between two north -south
streets, Busch Court and Stover Street and with access only from Stuart
Street at the north.
C. East and west boundary lines have dense existing tree and
landscape buffers which must be maintained and which require strip of
project common space along both such boundaries in order to respect and
maintain such buffers and tree root systems.
2. Central to our cottage community concept is the fact that two -car
garages instead of domintating the streetscape are located at the rear of
01Y07I1994 14:10 4672AW KRAGER & ASS�S PAGE 02
Mr. Jonathan J. Prouty
Lagunitas Company
January 7, 1994
Page 2
separation of the parking areas from the travel lanes, i do not
believe these variances will cause any public health, safety, or
welfare problems if it were approved.
sincerely,
Kathleen L. Kr er, P.E.
Krager and Associates, Inc.
January 7, 1994
Mr. Jonathan J. Prouty
Lagunitas Company
3307 South College Avenue, Suite 200
Fort Collins, Colorado 80525
re: street variance Request
file: 2.4347var
Dear Jon:
Per your request, I have reviewed your application for a varianr!t<
to the city of Fort Collins residential street standards. I
understand that you are requesting two variances of the local
street width of 36 feet to 34 feet with parking on both sides and
29 feet with parking on one side within your Indian Hills
Subdivision. This reduction in street width would be
accomplished by reducing the on -street parking width from eight
feet to seven feet.
The use of a 34-foot flow line to flow line cross section is an
accepted engineering practice. Within the Denver metro area the
Cities of Westminster, Thornton, Arvada, and Lakewood all have
34-foot flow line to flow line Local street Standards. The
Institute of Transportation Engineers, in their Transportation
4nd Traffic Kngineering Handbook also recommends a 7-foot depth
for on -street parking.
The proposed design of paving the travel lanes in asphalt and the
parking areas in concrete will provide a strong visual aid to
drivers to help assure that parked vehicles do not encroach on
the travel lanes. The landscaped endcaps to the parking areas
will also help define the difference between the parking area au(l'
travel lanes.
The variance to provide a 29-foot flow line to flow line cross
section will accommodate a seven -foot parking area on only one
side of the street. Adequate parking for each residence has been
provided in this subdivision, and thus the additional parking
spaces are not needed. The City of Lakewood allows a 28-foot
flow line to flow line street when adequate parking has been
provided.
since these
design in
4090 Estes Street
street cross sections are considered a standard
many communities and your design emphasizes the
Wheat Ridge. Colorado 80033 (3031425-0805 FAX (303) 467-2354
of
Mr. Mike Herzig
January 6, 1994
Page 2
The access to the garages were called private drives on the preliminary
submittal. In fact, if they are designated as alleys by the City, they do
not need a variance.
If you have any questions regarding the variance requests, please call.
Sincerely,
Richard A. Rutherford, P.E. & L.S.
President
rar/jm
a
M
STEWART&ASSOCIATES
Consulting Engineers and Surveyors
January 6, 1994
Mr. Mike Herzig
City of Fort Collins
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
Dear Mike,
This is a request for two variances for residential streets in the proposed
Indian Hills Village located at the intersection of East Stuart Street and
Stover Street.
The variances are as follows:
1. A variance of the right—of—way width of a Local Street from 54 feet
to 43 feet, and the flow line to flow line width from 36 feet to 34 feet, Table
1, Page T-1. The reduction would be in the parking width from 8 feet to 7
feet and the driving lanes would remain 10 feet wide. The utility easements
on either side of the street would be widened from 9 feet to 14 112 feet.
The 7 foot wide parking area will be delineated by being concrete, with 20
foot wide driving lanes being asphalt. The standard cannot be met with the
garages in the rear of the lot which is desirable in order to not have the
street scape be all garage doors. There should not be problems in handling
the traffic since the driving lanes remain 10 feet wide.
2. A variance of the Local Access Street right—of—way from 54 feet to
34 feet and the flow line to flow line width from 36 feet to 29 feet, Table
1, Page T-1. The street would have parking only on one side of the street.
The A.D.T. for each street where this section is proposed is 600. The standard
cannot be met with the garages in the rear of the lot due to added land needed
for width of the garage access drive. The street would have parking on one
side only, and no parking signs will be provided by the developer. The lots
on the Local Access Streets are within 150 feet of the residential street
and therefore do not cause a problem for fire fighting.
James H. Stewart
and Associates. Inc.
103 S. Meldrum Street
P.O. Box 429
Ft. Collins, CO 80522
303/482-9331
Fax 303/482-9382
Accordingly, we respectively request a variance to solar ordinance
permitting 14% (7 lots) non-compliance and finding that 51% (25 lots)
compliance is satisfactory.
The basis for this variance request is Section 29-627 (a), Subsections (1)
and / or (2) which authorize Planning and Zoning Board to grant variances
in the event that exceptional conditions peculiar to the site result in
hardship caused to subdivider if solar ordinance is strictly applied
(Subsection 1) and in the event that exceptional conditions or difficulties
exist with regard to solar orientation which will cause hardship to
subdivider if solar ordinance is strictly applied, (Subsection 2).
Sincerely,
JondlW U. Prouty
Pre ident
dk
LAGUNITAS COMPANY
3307 S. College Ave. Suite 200, Fort Collins, CO 80525
303 226 5000 • FAX 226 5125
December 6, 1993
City of Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board
c/o Kirsten Whetstone, Project Planner
City of Fort Collins Planning Department
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado 80524
RE: Indian Hills Village / Solar Orientation Variance Request
Dear Planning and Zoning Board Members:
Our Indian Hills Village project is limited by certain preexisting
constraints that affect our ability to comply with the solar orientation
ordinance.
1. Water and sewer mains have been previously installed on site
dictating a configuration of four north -south rows of housing, two rows in
an island in the center of parcel and two rows respectively along the east
and west boundaries or property.
2. This is an in -fill site sandwiched between two north -south
streets, Busch Court and Stover Street and with access only from Stuart
Street at the north.
3. Accordingly, most houses are laid out with an east -west
orientation, making it difficult for such houses to comply with the solar
ordinance, except where adjacent to open space or right-of-ways, and as
shown in our site plan, only 25 of our 49 lots (51%) comply with the solar
ordinance.
4. East and west boundary lines have dense existing tree and landscape
buffers which must be maintained and which require strip of project
common space along both such boundaries in order to respect and maintain
such buffers and tree root systems.
This is an example of what we do not want Indian Hills Village's ROW and streetscape to look like.
If,
Big
Seattle Cottage Project - a sea of asphalt and concrete totally out of scale with small houses on small
lots with short front yards.
PHASING SCHEDULE
Commencement of construction is expected in April 1994.
Development construction is expected to be complete by August 1, 1994.
Individual housing units construction will occur over a two year period consistent with
market demand.
homeowners.
C. It is intended that future ownership of all PUD units be by resident
homeowners.
3. Estimate of number of employees
Not applicable.
4. Description of rationale behind assumptions and choices
Our central assumption is that a significant portion of the housing market will
value the quality, aesthetics, livability and convenience of the type of residential
unit and neighborhood we are proposing as an alternative to townhouse and
patio home communities with similar densities.
Furthermore, we believe that the benefits of a well landscaped, attractive,
pedestrian -friendly neighborhood with streets and sidewalks in appropriate
scale to the housing justifies the flexibility in standards interpretations which is
required.
5. Completed point charts
Enclosed .
Variance request letters for solar orientation and right-of-way width
and sidewalk are also enclosed.
6. Conflicts between land use
There are no conflicts of land uses. The residential development proposed is
consistent and compatible with residential uses to the east, to the south and to
the west.
Substantial existing landscape buffers exist on the east and west boundary.
These will be supplemented and enhanced.
Open space and landscaping buffers site from townhouses to the south.
Additional landscaping will be installed both on our site and on the neighboring
Indian Hills West open space as is negotiated with their Homeowner's
Association.
7. Energy conservation worksheet
Not applicable.
STATEMENT OF PLANNING OBJECTIVES
1. City Land Use Policies achieved by proposed plan
A. Maximum utilization of land within city.
B. Promotes alternative transportation modes.
C. Promotes use of mass transit (adjacent bus stop).
D. Residential development close to employment, recreation, shopping
facilities, park and daycare.
E. Availability of existing utilities at site.
F. Contiguous to existing development within city limits
G. Landscaping of open spaces with native vegetation along with attractively
developed green spaces.
H. Conservation of resources and promotion of energy efficiency in
development process by making use of existing installed water and sewer
mains on site for maximum public and private cost -benefit advantage.
I. Provide a mix of diverse housing options within the context of three proposed
basic models to meet the differing needs and budgets of consumers.
J. Aesthetic pedestrian -friendly neighborhood.
K. Access to two adjacent and nearby parks.
L. Access to adjacent bike path.
M. Open space along project east and west boundaries, proposed joint open
space usage with Indian Hills West at south, pocket parks and attractive
entry landscaping and features.
2. Ownership of Public and Private open space and intention with regard to future
ownership of PUD
A. Public open space will be owned and maintained by Homeowner's
Association.
B. Private open space will be owned and maintained by individual
L
7. Assumption / Rationale
Our central assumption is that the significant portion of the housing
market will value the quality, aesthetics, livability, and convenience of
the type of residential unit and neighborhood we are proposing as an
alternative to townhouse and patio home communities with similar
densities.
8. Phasing
Development of property will occur in on one phase scheduled for spring
1994. Residential units will be constructed on a schedule based on quality
of construction and market demand. We estimate build out at -two years or
less.
We look forward to working with the City of Fort Collins and to your
favorable consideration of this project. Please contact me with any
questions you may have.
Sincerely,
Jonat Prouty
PresiVnt
dk
0
Also, units
have 35'
and 40' frontages and
only minimal front yards.
Minimum
permissible
roadway, parking and sidewalk as well as
landscaping
are essential to keep the streetscape
and space between
houses on
each side
of street in appropriate
scale with residences and
yards, and
to prevent
the impervious surfaces
(asphalt and concrete) from
being the
dominant aesthetic feature of these
streetscapes.
6. Achievement of Planning Purposes
We feel that our proposed plan for Indian Hills Village achieves many of
the purposes of Fort Collins Land Development Guidance System Goals and
Objectives. and Land Use Policies, including but not limited to the
following:,
a. Meeting community needs, superior design, creativity,
compatibility with adjacent land use and healthy community growth
pattern (in -fill).
b. Higher residential uses near: core area, parks, existing water and
sewer service, major employment centers, public transportation, -
alternative modes of transportation (bike path), and existing high density
areas.
c. Encourage and promote location and development of residential
units in areas which can conveniently and economically provide public and
private facilities and services needed by residents.
d. Diversity of housing types allowing mixture of income levels in
neighborhood.
e. Reduction of street width in new residential developments
where appropriate.
f. Neighborhood identity, proximity to parks, private and common
open space, limitation of extraneous traffic.
g. In harmony with nature coupled with superior landscape and
aesthetic design.
h. Construct a pedestrian -friendly neighborhood and promote bicycle
and bus alternative transportation.
The east property line landscape buffer is located not just on site, but
also on adjacent ten foot City owned alley - easement. We believe that
our development provides the City with two opportunities with regard to
this alley - easement:
a. City may wish to underground overhead power lines in the next
few months while access across our site is possible.
b. City may wish to enter a landscape maintenance agreement with
us whereby our Homeowner's Association takes on the obligation for
maintaining landscaping in this ten foot strip (possibly vacating this ten
foot strip to us as common private open space, or not).
New and supplemental trees and landscaping shall be provided along south
boundary both on our property and on Indian Hills West townhouses
property as is mutually beneficial, as is negotiated with their
Homeowners Association. Furthermore, we have offered to participate in
the construction of landscaping, picnic facilities, gazebo, and / or active
recreational facilities on the Indian Hills West approximate half acre of
raw land located at the northwest corner of Indian Hills West and adjacent
to our site at the south.
A private pocket park may be installed adjacent to the perpendicular
parking at the northeast corner of interior housing.
Trees and landscaping as well as appropriate signage will be installed as
part of our private open space and project entry at north of site adjacent
to Stuart Street. We want this entry to make an impressive statement of
community and neighborhood identity, in harmony with landscaping and
natural environment.
5. Pedestrian -Friendly Neighborhood
Furthermore, central to our concept of this cottage community is that it
be pedestrian -friendly, and that the public roadway, parking, sidewalk,
and related landscaping be designed to help accomplish this. We have
proposed meandering 20' travel lanes (asphalt) with parking offsets
(concrete) alternatively on each side of street interspersed with 5'
landscape right-of-way islands throughout project and sidewalk one side.
This results in an aesthetic and pedestrian -friendly right-of-way.
u
cottage designs with front porches and generous landscaping in front yard
and ROW island.
Private side yards permit views from house into side yard and enhance the
openness of the house with this indoor - outdoor relationship.
Highly efficient and aesthetic interior layout and design are incorporated
into three major house plans: a) ranch plan, b) two story with main floor
master, and c) two story with bedrooms up.
Garage access is by private drives which are softened by their proximity
to the adjacent open space and landscaping, as well as overhanging tree
canopies from adjacent private yards and other landscaping.
Housing will be a mix of detached and duplex units. Duplexes are
necessary in order to locate side yards adjacent to ROW at the end of each
row of houses rather than having a zero lot line with house right up
against ROW. In such cases, it is planned that a ranch unit be coupled with
a two story unit so that attached units read as single family detached
units with separate identity notwithstanding their common duplex wall.
Our goal is to provide three basic model concepts, each of which can be
tailored with floor plan and features to meet individual consumer's needs,
design tastes and budget. Our goal, furthermore, is to provide for the
diverse housing needs of empty nesters, singles and couples, single
parents, and small families, whose needs include low maintenance, small
yards and the convenience of central location proximate to shopping,
schools, parks, bike paths and employment.
4. Landscaping
Fourteen Chinese Elm one to three feet in diameter are located toward the
north end of the site. The City Forester recommends saving four or five of
these, including one which provides a buffer between project and existing
residence at northeast of site and also including a majestic three foot in
diameter tree with exceptional size, limb structure and aesthetics.
Existing dense east and west property line buffers will be pruned and
thinned consistent with safety and health, and an annual program of
supplemental and replacement tree planting will be initiated.
around to achieve maximum public and private cost - benefit advantage
and to utilize maximum energy and resource efficiency in the
development process.
Site (zoned R-P) drops
fourteen substantial trees
to the south buffering it
and has dense existing
lines buffering it from si
Street (zoned R-L).
ten
feet in elevation from south to
north, has
towards
north of site,
has private
open space
from
Indian Hills West
Townhouses
(zoned R-P)
rees
and shrubs along
east and west boundary
igle
family housing on
Busch Court
and Stover
Site is located on bus route; less than two blocks from Spring Creek bike
path and two parks; less than a mile from two schools and three shopping
centers; and about a mile from Poudre Valley Hospital, Woodward
Governor, CSU and Teledyne Waterpik.
The site sewer and water constraints require that the lots be oriented
primarily east -west, resulting in 51% solar ordinance compliance and
necessitating the variance for the 14% not in compliance.
Furthermore, such constraints require that all utilities be located in
easement at front of lot and that street widths for Local and Local Access
public ROW's each be reduced from standard by one foot. (We feel this is a
proper implementation of the Land Use Goal to "Reduce street widths in
new residential development where appropriate" (page 17). This results
in a public Local street with two ten foot asphalt travel lanes, seven foot
concrete parking one side, five foot landscaped ROW island other side, and
sidewalk one side, and a Local Access street with two ten foot asphalt
travel lanes, seven foot alternatively parking / landscaping one side, and
sidewalk one side (34' ROW).
3). Cottage Conceit
We are proposing an innovative cottage home concept with attractive
streetscape, small side yard, and attached rear two -car garage which
enables us to create a very aesthetic and functional residential
community while still achieving eight units per acre density. We believe
this is a superior alternative to monolithic blocks of townhouses or patio
homes with two -car garage as their predominant streetscape feature.
Indian Hills Village will have an attractive streetscape with traditional
u
LAGUNITAS COMPANY
3307 S. College Ave. Suite 200, Fort Collins, CO 80525
303 226 5000 • FAX 226 5125
December 6, 1993
City of Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board
c/o Kirsten Whetstone, Project Planner
City of Fort Collins Planning Department
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado 80524
RE: Indian Hills Village Preliminary PUD Submittal / Statement of
Planning Objectives / Phasing Schedule
Dear Planning and Zoning Board Members:
The purpose of this letter is to introduce Lagunitas Company and to
describe in summary the proposed Indian Hills Village housing
development in the context of City of Fort Collins planning, goals,
objectives and policies.
1. Developer
Lagunitas Company is the lead partner in a joint venture between
Lagunitas Company and Wonderland Hill Development Company. Both
companies have been involved in commercial and residential development
and construction in Boulder County for more than twenty years.
Wonderland is known for its award -winning passive solar and innovative
residential PUD and home design. Attached please find our complete
preliminary PUD submittals.
2. Site
6.25 acre site is located at the south of Stuart Street between Busch
Court and Stover Street. It was part of the previous Indian Hills West
townhouse PUD which was developed in 1979 and is located adjacent to
the south. At that time, rough site grading was done and water and sewer
mains were installed on our property, however, it was not otherwise
developed or built out. This condition of existing installed water and
sewer creates a challenging site constraint which should be designed
Nortnea5t Correr C' tre ciege
SEI/4 of the NW 1/4 0 f 2 4 -7- 64
(Found ;* 4 rebar 0.5- below asphalt) YYY -------
GChAL4111,11,11AIL
Basis of Bearing SO�O-03a .16' 7 - - - NI -0 0 SOO-O`Ic" W 40.00
io, .......
WE to 5 0-0, 07, 36 W m s69-52,Wc--
WOO-07,3u-t 0,.,0�00"E 5 00' 2500
SOO a SW
RACT "A" 60.00 5--w— T, 11 .11 * . . I I —
2 4 46.�* 5 iZF4. D 0 24.00� q W 700
c
G G
lizu r, F 320 sr.
3, . — — 3, IGAO 3 r
55.0 15•
00
S-01) 4C
.41 c;
I V z c
�5n '�F j Jim 0 0 --
9 16� S F
91
z I z z .0 -01
%
Gal, ..66rj 5 F� m � O m) 10. ,, i;9
Z
No U
TO 3 F z• 'b•Xf �4-
z ICW� F. 0
IF
x, 25? &F
Z
Go' 1 24.00• P
10� a
C)0.7000/
NW07'34SE I
m-m*5eE
c I �; - . . n �5.
'0 o-�- I .
dl� :3 q 112
WE 0000'
SO
h84-,,-
VQT 7., 41
X K�07 so E4 r
71(�IUO N , , 24.14
Ncf-,
2.-- WAY
9
LLJ 3co Or'sorw 15 461 4PY
sw IC4
moo- 7, 2400' 2400'
v Z*R 2400
MOO 24.�O
W i:� , 1 .5 U42
40
W(a � it .
I . - x I . ✓ -8 G -8
� Id
ry 0 .00
z 4.
NCO-07*3eE'--
0 24.00' 24.00' 24.0d
0
�14
8785 (@26 (a C2�-
SO(rof x —W
F.
a 8 ftc-O'. Z4.
Pn 00- 07 3C
0 2400 80
-7 24.00 Qe
SM- 07'a —W--
E.,." •3 (ro?,30,w "All SOO-(
/� / . . -&WO, 2410 1 60 S F TRAC
Idu TRACT 9'. 60.0,,
L
C44 0
�0)
10,5131 ACRES) fis.,),i 1: L -1 fD 0 W
so -a, 3 W U-711 I!t4q S F.
-4 0
24*0
so� cc dAll-
0 G G
74.38'
U73 L— 790, -w:7
74
0
It- 2 44r,
F
-9
24 00�
NFO. 0-7 x
8 44 too- -A
240" am 2,.M. 24.W I 24.X '0 14;5V
ry 306-00� SW�7 SO-W &92 Dt-
So ooccco�
i5� 4.1 t - Scc
Oc'M E
Aj �O
M... CHOCTAW j 9 I'M 449 V. so.
0 _.Sav
W00-07'30"E N84 i
384 00-E. 4
z 70.0-
n
101, S
41, G
I Lem F, 45
TO 0'
4S4-M'CG I (D
N 0 07,�,,E I air
v s 4 Q—S I Jill WO O,W
4 7WU 70.OG'
G, 0 ..
. c C SM,
560 F
J. J.
ic4J F
30 07
0
N T "A"
0
S F /71\
ACT
80 S. F. 700
ry
TRACT �,1956 ACRES 01 '50, .5
SM,
l3ta S F. I i640 S F
0 0ry .GOO
7 X. Wry 45M E 5,1
0.
�5-- -010, so�-07
�s 10 NGC-07�30�E 7O.M.
30'
102 3 0'
G
G
67
D
rc
mod
2 4.,cj
Z&OO,
Indian Hills village PUD:
Planner: Kirsten Whetstone
Additional Stormwater review comments that need to be addressed
by final:
These additional comments were provided by Terri Fead -
Stormwater Utility - Capital Projects Manager:
When installing the stormwater pipe that daylights into
Spring Creek any disruptions to adjacent boulders, weep holes, or
grouting must be repaired. Grouted rock must be used around this
pipe where it daylights at Spring Creek to provide some channel
protection in low flow situations. The Stormwater Utility has
the specifications for the rock used along Spring Creek, these
will be supplied to the consultant nad/or the developer. Any
replacement rock used in this area and the grout used around the
rock must meet Stuart/Stover Street project specifications.
Please check whether this stormwater pipe is on city
property after it crosses under Stuart Street. Make sure the
access ramp from Stuart Street to the bottom of the channel is
not blocked by this pipe. Please be aware that there is an
irrigation pipline along Stuart Street in this area. Look for
the meter pit to verify location.
Any landscaping or plantings that are disturbed with this
pipeline installation will have to be replaced. The replacements
will need to be approved by the city forester before being
installed. Please address the maintenance of these replacement
plantings until they are established.
Please address any erosion problems that might occur due to
the installation of the pipeline in the area between Stuart
Street and Spring Creek.
Si • ' ° Date:
Ak
Ah
DENSITY CHART
Maximum
Earned
Criterion
Credit
If All Dwelling Units Are Within:
Credit
a
20%
2000 feet of on existingorapproved neighborhood shopping center.
-
___
b
10%
650feet ofonexisting tronsitStop.
10%
C
10%
4000feet ofonexisting oropprovearegional Shopping center.
10%
d
20%
3500 feet of an existing Or reserved neighborhood pork community pork or community facility.
20%
We
10%
1000 feet of a school, meeting all the requirements of the compulsory educatlon laws of the Slate of Colorado.
10%
QIf
20%
3000 feet of o major employment center.
C0
g
5%
1.000 feet of a child care center.
55%
h
20%
T1arm'Fort Collins
__
I
20%
The central Business District.
A project whose bourWaryis contiguous to existing urban development. Credit may be earned as follows:
0%—For projects whose Property boundary has 0 to 10%contiguity.
31%
10 to 15%— For projects whose Property boundary has 10 to 20% contiguity..
boundary has 20 to 30%contiguity
f
.15 to 20%— For projects whose property
20 to 25%— For projects whose property boundary has 30 to 40%contiguity
For boundory has 40 to 50%contguity
30 %
25 to 30%— projects who$ property
If It can be demonstrated that the projectwill reduce non-renewoble energy useoge either through the application of alternative energy
k
systems or through committed energy conservation measures beyond mat nomnolty required by City Code. a5% bonus may be earned
for every 5%reduction in energy use.
Calculate a 1% bonus for every 50 acres included in the project.
m
Calculate the percentage at the total acres in the project that are devoted to recreatronal use, enter 92 of that percentage as a bonus.
It me applicant commits to Prewmng penmonentottsi to open space that meets the CitVs minimum requirements. calculate the Percentage
n
of this open space acreage to the total development acreage. enter this percentage as a bonus
--
II pan of the total development budget is to be spent on neighborhood public eonsit Iocilities which are not Othervnse required by City Code.
O
enter 2% bonus for every 5100 per dwelling unit invested.
If part of the total development budget is to be spent on neighborhood facilities and services wnich are not otherwise required by City Code.
P
enter al%bonus for every 5100 Per dwelling unit invested.
__
If a commitment is being made to develop a specified percentage of the total number of dwelling units far low income families enter Mat
4
percentage as a bonus up to a maximum of 30%.
___
If a commitment is being made to develop 0 specified Percentage of the total number of dwelling units for Type Wand Type'B' handicapped
Z
housing as defined by me City of Fort Collins calculate the bonus as follows:
O
r
TYPe'A'— .5 times Typen its
/�/1
co
Type'B'-1.0 times Type'B'units
oto�T ,' Its
In no case shall the combined bonus begieoef than 30%.
___
If the site oradjocent propertyconfainsarl historic building or place. a bonus may be earned for the following:
3% — For prevenfing or mifigating outside influences (e.g. environmental. land use. aesthefic, economic and social factors) adverse to its
S
preservation:
3% — For assuring that new structureswill be in keeping with the character Of the building or place. while avoiding total units
3% — Far Proposing adaptive use of the building or place that will leodto its confinuance. preservation and improvement in on
OPPropriatemonner.
Ito portion or all of the required parking In the multiple family project Is provided underground.within the building. or kt an elevated parking
structure as an aCCessory use to the primary structure, a bonus may be earned as follows:
t
9% — For providing 75% or moreol the parking in a structure.
6% — For providing 50-74% of the Dorking in a structure:
3% — For providing 25-49% of the parking in a structure.
— — —
u
if a commitment is being made to provide approved automatic fire extinguishing systems for the dwelling units, enter a bonus of 10%.
___
TOTAL 85%
1119TIM
ACTIVITY: Residential Uses
DEFINITION
H
All residential uses. Uses would include single family attached dwellings,
townhomes, duplexes, mobile homes, and multiple family dwellings; group
homes; boarding and rooming houses; fraternity and sorority houses; nursing
homes; public and private schools; public and non-profit quasi -public rec-
reational uses as a principal use ;_uses.prpyiding meeting places and pl-ace-5
for public assembly with incidental office space; and child care centers.
CRITERIA Each of the following applicable criteria must be
answered "yes" and implemented within the develop-
ment.plan.
Yes No
1. On a gross acreage basis, is the
average residential density in the
project at least three (3) dwelling
units per acre (calculated for
residential portion of the site only)? 0 ❑
2. DOES THE PROJECT EARN THE MINIMUM
PERCENTAGE POINTS AS CALCULATED ON
THE FOLLOWING "DENSITY CHART" FOR
THE PROPOSED DENSITY OF THE RESI-
DENTIAL PROJECT? THE REQUIRED EARNED
CREDIT FOR A RESIDENTIAL PROJECT ® ❑
SHALL BE BASED ON THE FOLLOWING:
30-40 PERCENTAGE POINTS = 3-4 DWELLING UNITS/ACRE;
40-50 PERCENTAGE POINTS = 4-5 DWELLING UNITS/ACRE;
50-60 PERCENTAGE POINTS = 5-6 DWELLING UNITS/ACRE;
60-70 PERCENTAGE POINTS = 6-7 DWELLING UNITS/ACRE;
70-80 PERCENTAGE- POINTS = 1-8 DWELLING UNITS/ACRE;
80-90 PERCENTAGE POINTS = 8-9 DWELLING UNI S ;
90-100 PERCENTAGE POINTS = 9-10 DWELLING UNITS/ACRE;
100 OR MORE PERCENTAGE POINTS = 10 OR MORE DWELLING UNITS/ACRE.
ALL DEVELOPMENT; NUMBERED CRITERIA CHART
ALL CRITERIA
APPLICABLE CRITERIA ONLY
CRITERION
1$ In0 Cn10nOn C001,C00107
Fm m0 COiOn
00 wvwea'
if no, please explain
a: `� ' �+
Yes No
NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATABILITY
1. Social Comparability
X
X.
2. Neighborhood Character
X
X
3. Land Use Conflicts
X
X
4. Adverse Traffic Impact
PLANS AND POLICIES
5. Comprehensive, Plan X X
PUBLIC FACILITIES & SAFETY
6. Street Capacity
X
X
7. Utility Capacity
}{
8. Design Standards
X
Variance Pending for solar
9. Emergency Access
x
X
widt
W. Security Lighting
x
X
11. Water Hazards
X
RESOURCE PROTECTION
Q. Soils & Slope Hazard
X
X
Q. Significant Vegetation
X
X
14. Wildlife Habitat
X
X
15. Historical Landmark
16. Mineral Deposit
x
17. Eco•Sensitive Areas
18. Agricultural Lands
ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS
19. Air Quality
X
X
20. Water Quality
X
X
21. Noise
X
X
22. Glare & Heat
x
23. Vibrations
X
X
24. Exterior Lighting
X
X
25. Sewoges & Wastes
I X1
I X
SITE DESIGN
26. Community Organization
X
X
27. Site Organization
X
X
28. Natural Features
29. Energy Conservation
30. Shadows
31. Solar Access
X
X
32. Privacy
X
X
33. Open Space Arrangement
34. Building Height
35. Vehicular Movement
36. Vehicular Design
X
X
37. Parking
38. Active'Recreotionol Areas
39. Private Outdoor Areas
40. Pedestrian Convenience
41. Pedestrian Conflicts
42. landscaping/Open Areas
43. Landscaping/Buildings
44. Landscaping/Screening
x
45. Public Access
4:1
46. Signs
AD C1
Activity A: ALL DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA
ALL CRITERIA
s the cmww
a C)r icabk?
CRITE=!ON
d $
APPLICABLE CRITERIA ONLY
Wi0 M e emenan
be swade(V
Yes No If no, please explain
Al. COMMUNITY -WIDE CRITERIA
1.1 Solar Orientation I .
1.2 Ccmcrenensive Plan I I
ARiANCE i2EQuFSTr�►,
1.3 Wildlife Habitat I 1IV
1.4 Mineral Deposit
1.5 Escicaically Sensitive Areas I reserved
1.6, Lands or Acricultural Imoortance I reserved
1.7 Enercv Conservation'
X
I
,
1.8 Air Qualitv I X1
I
1.9 1/Vlater Qu21i kv ly I
I
1
10 CE`,Ne'CQ and WaSteS I I I
I
I
4 2. NE:GH60RH00D COMPATIBILITY CRITERIA
II
2.1 Veni=iar. Pedestrian. Bike Transcanatien I XI
I
2.2 Suilcina P!aca rent and Orientation I I .
I
I XI
2.3 Naturai Features ix I
I
I XI
I
2.4 Venicular Circulation and Parking i x
2S Emergency Access I I
2.6 Pscestnan Circulation I I
i
I
2.7 Arc^itecure ( II
Ix
I I
2.8 Euiicino Heicnt and Views I I
I
I
2.9 Shading
Ix I I
IX
2.10 Solar Access
Ix I
2.11 Historic Resources
I I IX1
I
I
2.12 Setbacks
IX I
2.13 Lancscace
I
I
i naj
2.14 Sicns
I
'
I Site Lighting
I I
X
2.16 Noise and Vibration I
I
x
1
2.17 Glare or Heat I
I
2.18 Hazardous Materials
A 3. ENGINEERING CRITERIA
3.1 Utility Capacity 141 1
1
X I
I
"? Desicn Standards I I
I
I
rhGnCE e IPS"cG�
J Water Hazards I I
I
I
:.: Geciccic Hazards
I I
I
I
I
SS
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
OF THE PROPERTY
A portion of the INDIAN HILLS WEST P.U.D., City of Fort
Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado, which
begins at a point on the East line of said Indian Hills
West P.U.D. which bears S 00007'30" W 104.79 feet from
the Northeast corner of the Southeast 1/4 of the
Northwest 1/4 of Section 24, Township 7 North, Range 69
West of the Sixth P.M., and runs thence S'00007130" W
487.59 feet; thence S 84000' W 127.23 feet; thence
N 73009'19" W 6.79 feet; thence N 8.9052130" W
353.58 feet to a point on the West line of Indian Hills
West P.U.D.; thence along said West line, N 00007130" E
572.37 feet to the South line of East Stuart Street;
thence N 89056' E 385.06 feet; thence S 00007'30" W
74.45.feet; thence S 89052130" E 101.54 feet to the
Point of Beginning.
N
SCHOOL PROJECTIONS
PROPOSAL: INDIAN HILLS VILLAGE PUD - Preliminary
DESCRIPTION: 49 single family units on 6.25 acres
DENSITY: 7.84 du/acre
General Population
49 (units) x 3.5 (persons/unit) = 171.5
School Age Population
Elementary - 49 (units) x .450 (pupils/unit) = 22.05
Junior High - 49 (units) x .210 (pupils/unit) = 10.29
Senior High - 49 (units) x .185 (pupils/unit) = 9.065
Design
Affected Schools Capacity Enrollment
Laurel Elementary 568 532
Lesher Junior High 725 640
Fort Collins Senior High 1300 1418
EWER
FED 93
152
DENSITY INNOVATIONS IN THE ROCKIES
,,?
PLAN B PLAN a ..
Margarita. and Portalon in Tustin Ranch.
This partnership (called Newport Court -
Homes) will likely be managing general
partner for the development and sale of
CourtHume communities as well.
The Town Court Collection in Ran-
cho Santa Margarita illustrates RGC's un-
orthodox development strategy. At
build -out, the collection will include 129
townhouses and 307 CourtHomes. But
rather than build separate model complex-
es for each product, as Orange County
builders typically do, RGC was able to ne-
gotiate with the developer to group all
models near the Town Court Collection
entrance. "We're starting with just enough
land for the entry and the models," Murar
says. "We'll buy additional parcels for each
new neighborhood as we need them."
Phased mapping and site improve-
ments are another way of reducing front-
end capital needs. Murar says. Municipal
and county officials have agreed to allow
permits and fees ro be paid throughout
the project cycle rather than up front. And
RGC negotiated with its architects, engi-
PLAN f:
DENVER: 10 TO THE ACRE
Downing, Thorpe & James is developing a 10-per-acre detached program
for a builder in Denver, where typical affordable single-family densities
are in the 6-per-acre range. The land plan mixes wide -shallow and long -
narrow lots in groups of four to six along short street segments. Two -
car garages are to the rear, accessed by alleys. "Moving the garages to
the back gives the concept its biggest marketing boost," says the firm's
director of community design, Steve James. "It produces a friendly
street scene that reduces little -used front yard space, yet leaves enough
front yard for landscaping and strong entries." The 1,000- to-1,400-
square-foot cottages include a mix of one- and two-story plans.
neers, and other team members to defer a
percentage of payment until close of es-
crow. The next step is to work out a sin-
gle -source supply relationship with
subcontractors and suppliers in exchange
for accelerated construction schedules.
But how much does all this stream-
lining actually save? For a 164-unit project,
more than $11 million in peak capital, Mu-
rar estimates (see charts on previous
page). "That translates to a significant re-
turn on investment for our equity
providers, even with the smaller mar-
gins —and lower prices for the consumer."
COURTING OTHER MARKETS
Not surprisingly, word of RGC's record -
breaking densities is getting around.
"We've gotten some calls from landowners
in Dallas and Seattle. They have parcels
zoned for multifamily, and want to know
more about our CourtHomes," Murar
says. The concept would work best, he
says, in areas where monthly rents are in
the �800-to-$1,000 range. -Someone pav-
ing those rents could afford to buy a
CourtHume. especially now that the FHA
limits can provide financing,"
He's not too worried about other
builders ripping off RGC's Courrilomr
scheme. "Most peoplr wrould go crazy tr•.
ing to figure out the puzzle," he chuckle,.
"We've spent four vears and countless
hours putting the pieces together. 1Cs
much easier for us to do it than for some-
one else to reinvent the wheel." :Nonethe-
less. RGC has copyrighted both the
CourtHome name and the designs. And
the company is exploring ways to bring
CourtHomes to builders in other markets.
"We might send a team from our own staff
out to consult with another builder, for a
fee plus a percentage of sales." Murar
says. RGC would come in once the land
was in place, tailoring the "client's" busi-
ness plan, supplying the necessary draw-
ings, and preparing a complete package
for presentation to lenders.
But for now, the top priority is bring-
ing Orange County',, densest -ever. mu<t
affordable detached houses to nlai_ket—
and selling them. 0
Architecture
OIV THE BOAREP
American Heritage Cottage 2000...
An American Favorite Revisited
Visit most cities in MiddleAmerica
and you're likely to find one or more
still -charming neighborhoods of 60
or 70-year-old cottages. An impor-
tant aspect of the charm is the ab-
sence of garages from the street
scene.
In the "good old days," garages
were placed at the back of lots and
reached via side driveways or alleys.
The long drives consumed sizeable
chunks of the lots, and alleys were
frequently maze -like —but the street
scenes were generally much stronger than in small -lot neighborhoods today where garages are typically
dominant. Today's neighborhoods generally offer more usable yard area and privacy, as well as much improved
floor plans.
Planners and designers at Downing, Thorpe & James, Inc. have evolved a new approach to small -lot develop-
ment that gives back the charming streetscape, yet overcomes the shortcomings of the older approach.
TheAmerican Heritage Cottage 2000 idea
combines the best of both front -loading
downin
th o rp e
j ames
Neighborhood Cluster
StreetScene Character
and rear -loading strategies into a unified
neighborhood planning concept. It utilizes
the alley, but does not allow it to dominate
the land plan. It incorporates front-load-
ingoff public streets, butin a new "shared -
drive" approach that expands lot sizes and
enhances privacy between homes. It pre-
serves backyard space, indeed, expands it
with more usable side yards.
The new cottage product concept offers
more similarity to the benefits of "Z-Lot"
products of the 1980's than to its historic
counterpart. Although the steep pitched
roofs, high gables, dormers and front
porches offer an authentic cottage look
from the street, interior spaces and floor
plans are opened -up and more functional
arrangement of tiny rooms. The design
also allows views through the house to the
"private side" of the lot, significantly ex-
panding the feel of the interior space and
the indoor -outdoor relationship.
22 HomeBuilder • March 1991
•
•
Am I
of I
It
REAR ACC"$
m
'MI H 14A
L BA
i A
r
BA- 'R A,
LFT-
ALLEI
Upper level
pper level
85 81-
Vi wide let, typ. condition 40 wide lot, typ. condition
PLAN H PLAN A
main level 6m; s.1. 978 s.f.
t.1111 1371 J
IODLJ/AC PUBLIC STREET
1000-1400S.F UNITS
aa
07
40 wide corner lot
PLAN C
main level 775 g.f.
total 1318 .f.
(kn% ning
ttuwlw
P1111cs
0 0
INDIAN HILLS VILLAGF
I LAN H
'LAN 4
'LAN C
04W t7;'- -
*MISF A
MA
r
or
tl
A-
K11
- mf
�
UN,
v:
'16W
JAN-24-94 MON 16:54
P.91
Western Investors 303 2259762 p-gy
���. - _ 1•..l�.�LN.�lA�1.1...1 11
ENT
Post -It brand fax transmittal memo 7im v. t ...e .
January 24, 1994
t it
pt
e e r
Fax p
Fax
Dear City Planning and Zonings
At the January 19, 1994 Indian Hills West; 'townhouse
Association Board of Directors maotiag John Prowdy
presented a landscaping plan that had name trees
located on Indian -Hills Went Townhouse Association
boundary area. The Board felt comfortable with this
and approved the plan.
However, there are two issues that I want to mention
and set aside from the approval of the landscaping
plan. The first issue is a gazaba which was sug-
gested in the west area of Indian Hills want Town-
house Association property. This, would he shared by
resider►Es of Indian Hill* West Townhouse Association
and Indian Rills Villag4. Indian Hillis West Town-
house Asaoalation does not give approval for the
gaaebe at this time. The second issue is an engi-
neering question about the developers ability to put
the edge of the street on the property line with no
Set back,
This needs to be shared with the city for its vali-
dity as a separate issue.
sincerely.
Dennis W. N,aks
Association Manager
n
Views down Local Streets shall focus
on ornamentals to enhance drive experience
`7_r� LEGEND
sitting1si I. ential
.es wl.t L Existing Shade Trees �
t
Etl•Iln
h` D.... ... •mm E.J r..r aqu..� Conceptual Street Tree Plantings
�.pm•le er 1, n. •Mur I
(shade tree) i
Drivewayy Lane Planting
(small sltatla tree) w
ntr Feature - - r i� � -
sI cent pavement Ornamental Accent Trees
accent I t j r _
ornamental plantings Ex IOeg
Grounticover
CAI �I �n .n e...•..ouch le. Y.InY�xn•. or.n
t •. Elmi�".'b w. - — 1 cammani.w.e•Nnv. i.ilueiiq ilur in u. .acne x o w.
Driveway Lane planting shall consist of
small shade trees to soften rear architecture
See Preliminary Site Plan for information
on existing trees to the north end of site.
Ornamental trees with Street Tree
backdrop shall occur along
Local Streets where open space r
joins on both sides.
Front and side yards
may have low picket fences
Existing
Jj' TRH. J
u
Supplemental planting to the south will help
transition to existing townhouse project
Hula...
PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN
,••ED4
0
Vicinity Map
is Certiflcation'of ACCeotan
Planning and Zoning Approval
. SmMad Pgk,q In Corsage Witnessesst
p apsuwnitl
.�. •m..2 ,..- •.`..`r . Gms4 Paim,q(in a%.) sages
....•r ......._ ._ ... ..... (.aA SPgawnit)
Hara lnP Pending 1 space
—us m mr.Timm Fartl,q Ise spgas
6Sold. Parking In alleges
yepynyr e]a AC 072SO(a1.) 100%
Brow 9n Sol Till DW C
(-I NMc Rim.. - 1.1E AC( 10,11O LL) 1S0Y
-HBx«.ry lmas .TT Act i0,E00e1.1 illY
.(-)upon Bpn••(os1 .TE AS I v.erssl.) 12.5 %
w Da•alo (Lo1.1••• sA AC Bu.s0Bat) sv.o %
x.,e.
net. moarvora•• r••u,N,land .a.re, gala ..' aa...n .mm. rl» e.o.w.)
•• F,snl «r0 ap•«. <auW N eM alir.01nts —1-yMk seas Mn.reNnelu« n "nothe0
.. Girsisl Me,
. EWTNO TOW nose Ara, aM flab M nm Ma W 1o15hf re
Oa 0.WmiaJ steel .1 AWebeNa n Dania .
.TYr. BUIWmEmnlOa lor. Typ. sS sTi lK Lo1 •I,sss a.l. '
. TFp, MD001 BYMIM Emela AM tubsit1a•S1A3.la yY
;w J.
(s« Rita. BIOgEn••lepellol sle•
Tyo SIdo, Envelope/Lot Size Diagram
� I W
I, wl
v d u WI SIDE YAR.
p TYp.
• I of
FRONT YARD
0
as Street
Ezisting
T.H.
Unit Statistics
• 9«ree MMl: , - s
•xe.. aea. xepN; tas
. Room TFp. FmlNlnl 1.000-1250..1.: ProN•« It., eJ.11ni le..-1.a00e1.
Unit Tabulation
• Cluster Singes Fandv (Detach. Units): v UM,.
• Clem'&".a F.MIT(Dupe..e): rzuwe(s ouP.ne•)
Total leg Unlb Rs. oalaC)
Solar Orientation Ordinance
- 2va Lan (51%) gees scW o,me.,a (ano gW, - Lot. are designer. nT- O
- A 1A. b Mbq eponal he 1.40e IYn4Ylybq Lease
Ise%•ra%e ass(I malso g.
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
PROPOSED LAND USE: Cluster Single Family(P.U.D.) 1: �•-0•
EXISTING ZONING - RP .......
. r.......
Garfield
St,
> Garfield St, >
o
m
Edwards
St, r
to
C� Q
Doc
r
o
�
w
cr
c
E_2
Pit kin 3
E
St.Cn
E
W fdword 3
St, -t
Bucke
a St
0 5
; Sucke e S N
E. i
St o c
E. La ke n
St,
O
E. , �o 4� to o` s\,e PI.
N o v C9 c v
c
r
i pect.
r
N
_ St.
E.
Prospect
Ra
w E.
Pro
40
U O
c in
o
W
i
N
oN
i�
�dN
«Dine
L
W
C7
Porker
St
a
a
Lon
a
v
J
AI ert
Oven
`� vV•
Alpert, •, .\�v+ L w . c dovv5
�
n
a �� G
t
�•
E
Stuart
3
o
LA
St e.ct. CO N
n on
.. Meadows
N Lone
n
Q p
E,
Ison
'S' rtn r br'�'
�•
> Ch kee t �Corrxnonc
ey O
L
c
O
enne c C
Indion
sumta
m ,�
w ., m Cheyenne V ; a o E 3
`� Dr. >
Ct.
Arthur•.
Dr
�, tcp —.
,... A
o .: L > 0 LA a.
w G N N Tr it ait
tone -
art. ..D a�� Dgrimouth
(r b outhT c v Cir.
o
p
NiOgo
Rutgers Awe.. IV
�.. _.__
Gu e — . —� hippev a r t
3 v e Ln.
ouo .� c
J)
o
��'� o o
ti; p
a J a Columbia
u ; u m o 3
j
'
Q u)
_olumbia
Yale v Corn II Ave
Yu /e Wa?, o --
R
Combr►d -� d
Porl
.-
V.O t
`
cn
eat
w>. r `A
o
a n derbi a,
ITEM: I N D IAN H I LLS VI LLAG E
PUD = Preliminary
NUMBER: 81=93
North
I
Indian Hills Village PUD- Preliminary, #81-93
January 24, 1994 P & Z Meeting
Page 10
Therefore, based on these findings, staff recommends approval of
Indian Hills Village PUD, Preliminary #81-93, with a variance to
the requirements of the Solar Orientation Ordinance and a variance
to the Street Standards regarding ROW and street width, with the
following conditions:
1. That a replacement schedule for existing landscaping be
submitted and approved by the City's Natural Resources
Department and the City Forester.
2. That an agreement with the Indian Hills Townhouses HOA,
regarding off -site landscaping be submitted and approved by
the Planning Department, or that the landscaped buffer along
the south boundary be provided on the Indian Hills Village PUD
property.
3. That the on -street parking width issue of 71 versus 81 be
resolved prior to submittal of final plans.
Indian Hills Village PUD- Preliminary, #81-93
January 24, 1994 P & Z Meeting
Page 9
Based on the findings that the request satisfies the criteria found
in Design Criteria and Standards for Streets, staff recommends
approval of the request to allow a 28 foot wide street, with
parking alternating from one side to another and a minimum drive
aisle width of 201.
In addition, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow a 71,
as opposed to an 81, parallel parking space width (see attached
variance request). This would in a sense vary the street width in
some places to 271. At this time staff does not have enough
information to make a recommendation to the Board on this request.
The applicant has indicated that this is a crucial element of the
design, given constraints on the east west dimensions and utility
locations and requirements. The additional width would have to
come from the landscaped buffer on the east and west property
lines, as all other areas are at a bare minimum. Staff would like
to have a better understanding of this request prior to making a
recommendation and is therefore recommending a condition that the
on -street parking width issue of 71 versus 89 be resolved prior to
submittal of final plans.
7. Stormwater
A preliminary drainage report and drainage and grading plans were
submitted and have been approved at this stage by the City
Stormwater Utility. All flows from this development will be
conveyed and released into Spring Creek. There will be no on -site
detention. There are issues concerning existing drainage problems,
grading, existing vegetation on the west property line, and flood
plain issues which will be resolved prior to final approval.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff finds that Indian Hills Village PUD, Preliminary:
1) Is in conformance with and satisfies the criteria of the All
Development Criteria of the LDGS, provided that a variance to
the Solar Orientation Criteria is granted and that a variance
to the public ROW and street width for the local street is
granted.
2) Sufficiently mitigates potential land use conflicts and
represents a compatible land use with the surrounding area.
3) Meets the absolute criteria of the Residential Uses Point
Chart of the LDGS as the overall density is greater than 3
DU/acre and the proposed density of 7.84 DU/acre is supported
by a score of 85% on the Residential Density Chart.
Indian Hills Village PUD- Preliminary, #81-93
January 24, 1994 P & Z Meeting
Page 8
Staff has reviewed the applicant's variance request and has made
the following findings:
a. The main street is a loop street.
b. The street has less than 750 ADT.
C. There is no direct access to an arterial.
d. For the most part the lots do not face each other,
although a few of the homes served by the loop street do.
Due to the nature of the design, with garages in the rear
and guest parking in clearly delineated areas in front of
the houses, the parking is self enforcing and the 20'
drive aisle width, necessary for emergency services
access, will remain clear.
e. It is not recommended that one side of the street be
signed "no parking". Instead, the parking will alternate
from side to side in delineated parking bays, separated
by landscaped islands. The Fire Authority wants guest
parking to be self enforceable and to be provided near
the vicinity of each front yard.
Given the target market, (retired people, empty nesters,
and young professional people or couples with no or few
children), observed parking patterns at neighboring
townhouses provides a probable example of the extent of
on -street parking that would be required. Very little
guest parking was observed at the Indian Hills Townhouses
to the south on several occasions. Each unit there has
a garage and guest spaces are interspersed throughout the
development.
Staff finds that Indian Hills Village PUD will be of
similar character, but there will be a two car garage for
each unit, plus an additional 41 guest parking spaces
available throughout, and parking will be more
successfully provided on alternating sides of the street
than if it is restricted to one side of the street.
Staff finds that the variance request is appropriate for the scale
and character of the Indian Hills Village PUD. The request has
been reviewed by the Poudre Fire Authority and was found to be
acceptable. The low volume of daily trips combined with a
sufficient amount of guest parking spaces allow the 28' street to
function safely in accordance with the standard criteria for the
City of Fort Collins.
c
Indian Hills Village PUD- Preliminary, #81-93
January 24, 1994 P & Z Meeting
Page 7
Staff finds that due to the innovative sensitive design and well
landscaped buffer areas, the proposed land use is compatible with
the surrounding land uses. Neighborhood compatibility issues have
been addressed.
6. Transportation
Access to the site is from a single entrance on Stuart Street. A
traffic impact analysis was submitted with this development
proposal. To accommodate the new access to Stuart Street it is
necessary to re -stripe Stuart Street to include left turn lanes for
east bound traffic. This can be accommodated with the existing
cross-section. With re -striping, the surrounding street system
can safely accommodate the proposal. Access for the entire
development is on Stuart Street, a collector street, and therefore
the development does not significantly impact surrounding local
streets.
The main loop street is proposed to be dedicated as public right-
of-way (ROW). The applicants have requested a variance to the City
Street Standards (see attached) to allow a 28' street on a 43' ROW
for the main loop street and a 28' street on a minimum of a 34' ROW
for the local access street stubs. There have been several utility
coordination meetings to resolve utility conflicts and to locate
and size sufficient utility and sidewalk easements. The City
Engineering Staff does not have concerns with the proposed ROW
widths, provided all utility requirements can be met.
According to the City of Fort Collins Design Criteria and Standards
for Streets:
1128 foot wide public streets may be used in the City of Fort
Collins provided they are used in a Planned Unit Development
and meet the following criteria:
a. Be a loop street or cul-de-sac which connects with only
one public street.
b. Have less than 750 ADT (average daily trips).
C. Are not accessed from an arterial street.
d. Are not used in a single family area where single family
homes face each other across the street.
e. One side shall be signed "no parking".
Indian Hills Village PUD- Preliminary, #81-93
January 24, 1994 P & Z Meeting
Page 6
houses and garages. Houses range in size from 1,000 sf to
1800 sf.
b. The proposed density of 7.8 DU/ac is supported by the Land Use
Policies Plan and criteria of the LDGS. The proposal includes
landscape buffers, both existing and proposed, which mitigate
perceived land use conflicts for surrounding land uses. This
is an infill site and the proposal for higher density
residential development at this location addresses City goals
for infill development, diversity of housing types, and
convenient location to shopping, employment, schools, and
recreation.
C. The City Light and Power Utility has a residential street
lighting standard which will be used for City Streets in this
development.
d. A drainage report and drainage and grading plans are being
reviewed by the City Stormwater Utility. The proposal is
required to meet all City requirements for stormwater,
including detention and off -site flows. The current drainage
problems in the area will be resolved to the extent possible
when the drainage system for this proposal is constructed.
e. The existing dense tree plantings along the east and west
property lines will remain to buffer and screen this use from
the existing single family houses on Stover Street and Busch
Court. Thirty foot setbacks from the rear garages to the
rear property line of adjacent single family lots provide
additional buffering. The dense stand of trees along Stuart
Street will remain to provide a landscape buffer for the
existing house. The applicant proposes additional landscaping
on the adjacent Indian Hills Townhouses common open space to
provide a better landscaped buffer between the two
developments. All setbacks to existing dwelling units meet or
exceed standard, use -by -right setbacks as stated in the Zoning
Code.
f. A traffic impact analysis was submitted with this development
proposal. The surrounding street system can safely
accommodate the proposal. Access for the entire development
is on Stuart Street, a collector street, and therefore the
development does not significantly impact surrounding local
streets.
g. The proposal meets Air Quality Goals in that it provides
infill and higher density development located near the Core
Area which in turn helps reduce automobile dependency, urban
sprawl, and air pollution.
Indian Hills Village PUD- Preliminary, #81-93
January 24, 1994 P & Z Meeting
Page 5
delineated by concrete paving, in contrast to the asphalt drive
aisles. On -street guest parking is broken up with landscaped
islands of shrubbery and street trees to reduce the amount of hard
surface.
All landscaping, outside of the individual building envelope, is
maintained by a homeowner's association.
A combination of single family and duplexes are proposed. A
combination of two story and ranch style houses are proposed. All
houses have an attached rear access garage, front porches, pitched
roofs, and a combination of brick and wood siding in a variety of
colors. The maximum building height is 351. The houses range in
size from 1,000 sq. ft. to 1,800 sq. ft. Where possible, some
houses will have full basements.
Existing dense landscaping along the east and west property lines
provides a buffer between the proposed houses and the backyards of
existing single family houses on Stover Street and Busch Court.
This landscaping will be maintained and augmented over the years,
according to an annual program of supplemental and replacement tree
plantings and pruning. The applicant is also proposing additional
landscaping on the Indian Hills Townhouses property to the south to
increase the buffer between the proposed single family houses and
existing townhouses.
Staff is recommending, as a condition of preliminary approval, that
a replacement schedule for existing landscaping be submitted and
approved by the City's Natural Resources Department and the City
Forester. Staff is also recommending, as a condition of
preliminary approval, that an agreement with the Indian Hills
Townhouses HOA, regarding off -site landscaping and maintenance
responsibilities be submitted and approved by the Planning
Department, or that the landscape buffer along the south boundary
be provided on the Indian Hills Village PUD property.
5. Neighborhood Compatibilit
A neighborhood meeting was held on December 2, 1993. Minutes to
this meeting are attached. The primary concerns were physical
characteristics of the houses, density, street lighting, drainage,
landscaped buffers and setbacks, traffic and air pollution.
a. The houses are proposed to be a combination of 1 and 2 story
units with attached rear two -car garages and front porches.
The advantage to rear garages is that it removes the garage
and auto element from the pedestrian oriented front yards.
Housing is proposed as a mix of detached single family and
attached duplex units to get away from a monolithic row of
Indian Hills Village PUD- Preliminary, #81-93
January 24, 1994 P & Z Meeting
Page 4
11(1) That by reason of exceptional topographical, soil, or
other subsurface conditions or other conditions peculiar to
the site, hardship would be caused to a subdivider by the
strict application of any provision of this Article."
11(2) That by reason of exceptional conditions or difficulties
with regard to solar orientation or access, hardship would be
caused to a subdivider by the strict application of any
provisions of this Article."
11(3) The applicant demonstrates that the plan as submitted is
equal to or better than such plan incorporating the provision
for which a variance is requested".
Staff finds that the variance request is justified. Under
requirement (1), the infill nature and pre -determined development
pattern, small size of this site, existing adjacent streets and
development, existing utilities and trees, and point of access
qualify as conditions peculiar to the site which causes a hardship
to plat additional solar oriented lots. Staff finds that the
variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the public
good and without substantially impairing the purposes of the LDGS.
In addition, under requirement (3), Staff finds that the plan
contains features that render it equal to or better than a plan
that could have met the 65% solar orientation. These features
include the pedestrian scale front yard areas, rear access garages,
existing landscaping on the perimeter, and in general, the
innovative "cottage" concept of the plan.
4. Design
The proposal is for 37 single family and 12 duplex lots with rear
accessed garages. The average lot size is 3,032 sq. ft. with an
average front yard setback of 151. The proposed side yards vary
from zero lot line to 51.
All lots front on either the main local public loop street or from
a dedicated local access street stub, with the exception of Lots
34-37 which front on Stuart Street but have vehicular access from
a private drive in the rear. Garage access for all units is from
a system of private driveways.
The proposal is an innovative "cottage" or "village" concept, where
the public portion of the development, ie. the front street right-
of-way and utilities are reduced to a more pedestrian scale,
garages are in the rear, and the streetscape is an attractive
combination of front yard landscaping, a detached pedestrian walk
with a landscaped parkway, and street trees. Guest parking is well
Indian Hills Village PUD- Preliminary, #81-93
January 24, 1994 P & Z Meeting
Page 3
and for contiguity to existing urban development.
The proposed plans achieve many of the goals and purposes of the
Land Use Policies Plan. The proposal is an infill development and
staff believes that the proposed project meets the goals of 1)
encouraging residential development which is conveniently located
near the core area, parks, employment centers, public
transportation, bike trails, and other higher density residential
uses, 2) providing a diversity of housing types in the community,
3) development of infill property with existing utilities and
services, and 4) encouraging alternative modes of transportation.
In addition, the design is innovative and achieves compatibility
with the existing, surrounding land uses through enhanced
landscaped setbacks and building and street design and orientation.
3. Solar Orientation
The Solar Orientation ordinance requires that 65% of the lots
within a single family PUD or subdivision be oriented to within 30
degrees of a true east -west line. The Preliminary Plan indicates
that 25 out of a total 49 lots, or 51%, are considered to be solar
oriented. An additional 7 lots would need to be solar oriented in
order to meet the 65% compliance requirement.
The applicant has submitted a variance request for relief from the
strict requirement of 65% orientation compliance. The request is
attached. In summary, the applicant states the following:
A hardship is caused by preexisting site parameters, specifically,
a) Water and sewer mains are existing and dictate a configuration
of four north -south rows of housing (two on the inside "island" and
one each along the east and west boundaries of the property),
b) This is a small infill site located between two north -south
streets, namely Busch Court and Stover Street,
c) Access is restricted to one location off of Stuart Street and
essentially a loop street through the development is dictated,
d) There are existing landscaped buffers with dense plantings of
trees, requiring additional unpaved open space to be dedicated to
protect the root systems and maintain the buffer.
According to the Solar Orientation Ordinance:
"When permitted, the Planning and Zoning Board may authorize
variances under this Article upon its findings that the following
requirements in (1), (2), or (3) have been satisfied:"
Indian Hills Village PUD- Preliminary, #81-93
January 24, 1994 P & Z Meeting
Page 2
COMMENTS:
1. Background
The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
N: RM; existing duplexes
S: RP; existing townhouse (Indian Hills West PUD)
E: RL; existing single family residences (Indian Hills)
W: RL; existing single family residences (Parkside)
The site was previously the location of the Sunset Drive -In. In
May of 1979, the property was rezoned in the LaConte-East Stuart
Street Rezoning, from R-L, Low Density Residential, to conditional
R-P, Planned Residential Zoning. The conditions of this rezoning
stipulated that the non -conforming status of the drive-in would be
abandoned, upon rezoning, with the operation of the drive-in
ceasing within 15 months.
The Indian Hills West PUD was approved in June of 1979 for 110
townhouses on the entire 12.5 acre site, at a density of 8.8 DU/ac.
The drive-in was removed and the southern half of the site was
developed, containing 50 townhouses. The remaining 60 approved
units were to be constructed on the northern 6.25 acres, now known
as Indian Hills Village PUD.
At the time of approval of Indian Hills West PUD, "significant
activity" on the site was required in order to retain the validity
of the PUD approval. Since nearly half of the site was developed
under the approved PUD and utilities were installed throughout the
12.5 acre site, the PUD was considered to be still valid.
In July of 1992 the Planning and Zoning Board approved a proposal
to abandon the undeveloped portion of Indian Hills West PUD in
order for a private school to develop the site as a "use -by -right"
under the RP zoning. The school has since abandoned plans for
developing the site, therefore, there are no existing approved
plans for this 6.25 acre site.
2. Land Use
The request for 37 single family units and 12 duplex units, for a
total of 49 units on 6.25 acres represents a density of 7.84
dwelling units per acre (DU/ac). This proposed density is
supported by a score of 85% on the Residential Density Point Chart
of the LDGS. Points were earned for proximity to transit (on
Stuart Street), regional shopping (College Avenue), neighborhood
park (Spring Park), schools (Spring Creek Country Day School and
Rivendell School), a day care center (Mountain Center on Stuart),
ITEM NO. R_L±72-
MEETING DATE 1-24-94
STAFF
Kirsten Whetstone —
-
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD
-- -
STAFF REPORT
PROJECT: Indian Hills Village PUD, Preliminary, #81-93
APPLICANT: Jonathan J. Prouty, President
Lagunitas Company
3307 S. College Ave, Suite 200
Fort Collins, CO 80525
OWNER: Pearl Street 19th Ltd.
3307 South College Avenue, Suite 200
Fort Collins, CO 80525
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This is a request for a preliminary PUD for 37 single family and 12
duplex lots on 6.25 acres. The project is located on the south
side of Stuart Street, between Busch Court and Stover Street. The
zoning is RP, Planned Residential.
RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The request for a total of 49 single family and duplex lots on 6.25
acres is comparable in terms of density and housing type to the
previously approved Indian Hills West PUD on this site. The
proposed use is compatible with and adequately screened and
buffered from the surrounding houses and townhouses. The proposal
complies with applicable All Development Criteria of the LDGS.
The proposed density of 7.84 DU/acre is supported by a score of 85%
on the Residential Density Chart of the LDGS.
Staff is recommending a variance to the Solar Orientation Ordinance
as only 51% of the lots meet the requirements, due to physical
constraints of an infill site and existing utilities and trees. In
addition, a variance to the City Street Standards, to allow a
narrower ROW for a 28' local public street is being recommended by
staff. The project is feasible from a traffic engineering
standpoint. The "village concept", of single family infill lots
with rear access garages and pedestrian scale front yards and
streets, is innovative and meets City policies and locational
criteria for higher density residential uses. Conditions regarding
landscaping and parking width are being recommended.
COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 (303) 221-6750
PLANNING DEPARTMENT