Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTHE RETREAT AT FORT COLLINS (FORMERLY REDWOOD STREET MULTI-FAMILY) - PDP - PDP180002 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE REQUESTland planning  landscape architecture  urban design  entitlement Thinking outside of the box for over two decades. 419 Canyon Ave. Suite 200  Fort Collins, CO 80521  tel. 970.224.5828  fax 970.224.1662 www.ripleydesigninc.com June 6, 2018 Request for Alternative Compliance Landmark Properties, Inc. (“Landmark”) is the developer of the proposed Retreat PDP (the “Project”) located on a triangular piece of property east of Redwood Street and mostly north of Suniga Road as it is planned to extend east through the Project. Bordering the Project on its west side is the existing Redwood Meadows neighborhood and Redwood Street. Between the Project and Conifer Street on the north is a 45-50 foot wide City-owned drainage way and a single row of single-family housing facing Conifer Street. The Lake Canal borders the Project on its eastern edge with medium density multi-family housing (“Northfield”) proposed for the property on the other side of the canal. The Project will have limited frontage along Suniga Road and Redwood Street. Thinking outside of the box for over two decades. 419 Canyon Ave. Suite 200  Fort Collins, CO 80521  tel. 970.224.5828  fax 970.224.1662 www.ripleydesigninc.com Land Use Code Requirements The Project is subject to the following: 3.6.3 - Street Pattern and Connectivity Standards (A) Purpose . This Section is intended to ensure that the local street system is well designed with regard to safety, efficiency and convenience for automobile, bicycle, pedestrian and transit modes of travel. For the purposes of this Division, "local street system" shall mean the interconnected system of collector and local streets providing access to development from an arterial street. (B) General Standard . The local street system of any proposed development shall be designed to be safe, efficient, convenient and attractive, considering use by all modes of transportation that will use the system, (including, without limitation, cars, trucks, buses, bicycles, pedestrians and emergency vehicles). The local street system shall provide multiple direct connections to and between local destinations such as parks, schools and shopping. Local streets must provide for both intra- and inter- neighborhood connections to knit developments together, rather than forming barriers between them. The street configuration within each parcel must contribute to the street system of the neighborhood. (F) Utilization and Provision of Sub-Arterial Street Connections to and From Adjacent Developments and Developable Parcels. All development plans shall incorporate and continue all sub-arterial streets stubbed to the boundary of the development plan by previously approved development plans or existing development. All development plans shall provide for future public street connections to adjacent developable parcels by providing a local street connection spaced at intervals not to exceed six hundred sixty (660) feet along each development plan boundary that abuts potentially developable or redevelopable land. The Project is proposed to include direct public street connections to Suniga Road (major arterial) and Redwood Street (minor collector). In addition, compliance with the first requirement of LUC 3.6.3(F) to “continue all sub-arterial streets stubbed to the boundary of the development plan” would require that two existing streets in the Redwood Meadows neighborhood, Lupine Drive and Mullein Drive, both of which have been stubbed to the boundary of the Project, be continued into the Project. Compliance with the second requirement of LUC 3.6.3(F) to “provide for future public street connections to adjacent developable parcels” would require the construction of at least two streets over the Lake Canal to the future Northfield neighborhood. Thinking outside of the box for over two decades. 419 Canyon Ave. Suite 200  Fort Collins, CO 80521  tel. 970.224.5828  fax 970.224.1662 www.ripleydesigninc.com The required connections are shown on the following version of the Project development plan. Alternative Compliance The Street Pattern and Connectivity Standards of LUC 3.6.3(F) are eligible for alternative compliance pursuant to LUC 3.6.3(H): (H)Alternative Compliance. Upon request by an applicant, the decision maker may approve an alternative development plan that may be substituted in whole or in part for a plan meeting the standards of this Section. (1) Procedure . Alternative compliance development plans shall be prepared and submitted in accordance with submittal requirements for plans as set forth in this Section. The plan and design shall clearly identify and discuss the alternatives proposed and the ways in which the plan will better accomplish the purpose of this Section than would a plan which complies with the standards of this Section. (2) Review Criteria. To approve an alternative plan, the decision maker must first find that the proposed alternative plan accomplishes the purposes of this Division equally well or better than would a plan and design which complies with the standards of this Division, and that any reduction in access and circulation for vehicles maintains facilities for bicycle, pedestrian and transit, to the maximum extent In reviewing the proposed alternative plan, the decision maker shall take into account whether the alternative design minimizes the impacts on natural areas and features, fosters nonvehicular access, provides for distribution of the development's traffic without exceeding level of service standards, enhances neighborhood continuity and connectivity and provides direct, sub-arterial street access to any parks, schools, neighborhood centers, commercial uses, employment uses and Neighborhood Commercial Districts within or adjacent to the development from existing or future adjacent development within the same section mile. Thinking outside of the box for over two decades. 419 Canyon Ave. Suite 200  Fort Collins, CO 80521  tel. 970.224.5828  fax 970.224.1662 www.ripleydesigninc.com The Request Landmark proposes an alternative plan for the Project that would, in addition to the connections to Redwood Street and Suniga Road, provide the following connections in place of the connections shown on the prior graphic: (i) a private street connection with sidewalks to Conifer Street (major collector); (ii) pedestrian, bicycle and emergency access between the Project and Redwood Meadows at Lupine Drive and Mullein Drive; and (iii) pedestrian and bicycle bridge over the Lake Canal connecting the Project and the proposed Northfield neighborhood. The connectivity issues of a LUC compliant plan are interrelated, however, it is helpful to discuss the Redwood Meadows and Lake Canal connections separately in regard to justification for an alternative plan. Justifications Connection to Redwood Meadows Lupine Drive and Mullein Drive were platted in 1983 as part of Redwood Village PUD Phase I, now referred to as Redwood Meadows. The drives were originally intended to connect to future phases of Redwood Village PUD to the east and south, however, those future phases were never constructed and the property remains undeveloped. Landmark Properties is under contract to purchase the property with the intention of developing a student-oriented, multi- family project. Landmark has held two neighborhood meetings and has also met with the Redwood Meadows HOA to discuss the future Project and the potential impacts to the neighborhood. In an effort to create a more compatible relationship between Redwood Meadows and the Project, Landmark has incorporated the following into its plans: (i) a wider than required buffer between the Redwood Meadows and the Project, (ii) two-story buildings adjacent to the neighborhood, instead of the taller 3-story buildings, and (iii) significant buffer yard plantings and new back yard fences for adjoining property owners. These features have been well received by the existing residents, however, the possibility of street connections through the neighborhood remains a concern for the Redwood Meadows residents. Early in the development review process, Landmark asked the City staff to consider not requiring vehicular connections to and through the Redwood Meadows neighborhood. The proposal was to provide access for pedestrians, bicycles and emergency vehicles only. The informal request was met with strong opposition from City staff. Since that informal request was made, Landmark’s traffic consultant completed a traffic impact analysis in order to quantify the impact to the Redwood Meadows neighborhood. If the Retreat project provides vehicular street connections to Lupine and Mullein the vehicle trips per day (VTD) increase substantially on Lupine. Lupine goes from 250 VTD to 1015 VTD. Mullein was not counted and would have minimal change in traffic. Lupine would still meet City standards related to capacity for local connector streets, however, the traffic impact is not ideal and we believe unnecessary in this particular location. With encouragement from the Redwood Meadows neighborhood, Landmark decided to pursue acquiring easements and/or additional property to the north in order to be able to provide a connection to Conifer Street. Based on the positive responses from the City’s Utility Thinking outside of the box for over two decades. 419 Canyon Ave. Suite 200  Fort Collins, CO 80521  tel. 970.224.5828  fax 970.224.1662 www.ripleydesigninc.com Department and the property owner to the north, the Project now proposes, in addition to the direct connections to a minor collector (Redwood Street) and to a major arterial (Suniga Road), a connection to a major collector (Conifer Street) so that residents of the Project can travel in any direction safely and conveniently without cutting through the adjacent residential neighborhood. The purpose of the City’s connectivity standard is to ensure that the local street system is well designed with regard to safety, efficiency and convenience for automobile, bicycle, pedestrian and transit modes of travel. With the proposed direct street connections and additional access for pedestrians, bicycles and emergency vehicles at Lupine Drive and Mullein Drive, we believe vehicular access through Redwood Meadows is both unnecessary and undesirable. Connections Across the Lake Canal With direct street connections to Conifer Street, Redwood Street and Suniga Road, it is also unnecessary and undesirable to cross the Lake Canal with two vehicular crossings in addition to Suniga Road which will cross the canal near the south boundary of the Project. The proposed Northfield project has direct access to Lemay Avenue and two access points along Suniga Road. Northfield representatives have asked that the connections between the Project and Northfield not be made, so that traffic does not cut through Northfield to get to arterial streets. Landmark proposes to eliminate the required street crossings and replace them with a bridge for pedestrians and bikes. With the direct street access connections that both the Project and Northfield propose, along with the pedestrian/bike bridge, additional street crossings of the canal would not be necessary to ensure that the local street system is well designed with regard to safety, efficiency and convenience for automobile, bicycle, pedestrian and transit modes of travel. The proposed local street system would provide multiple direct connections to and between local destinations and activity centers. We believe the purpose of the standard is met without the additional crossings and that there are additional benefits to not creating the street crossings. Those benefits include:  The City’s Police Department, Neighborhood Enforcement Team (NET) has told us that they are seeing and being alerted by citizens seeing trash and other debris, camping issues, bodily waste, needles and other drug paraphernalia at bridges and canal crossings. With fewer crossings the opportunity for these problems to occur are reduced.  The City’s Parks and Recreation Department proposes a regional trail along the canal. With fewer crossings the trail would be safer and more enjoyable.  The management of the Lake Canal would prefer to not have street crossings that are unnecessary. Crossings increase maintenance costs and attract transients.  The canal and adjacent natural habitat buffer zones can be maintained as a wildlife corridor with limited interruptions. Review Criteria The proposed alternative plan accomplishes the purposes of the Street Pattern and Connectivity Standards (safety, efficiency and convenience) equally well or better than would a plan which complies with the standards, and the reduction in access and circulation for vehicles maintains facilities for bicycle, pedestrian and transit to the maximum extent feasible. Thinking outside of the box for over two decades. 419 Canyon Ave. Suite 200  Fort Collins, CO 80521  tel. 970.224.5828  fax 970.224.1662 www.ripleydesigninc.com  The alternative plan proposes direct connections to a minor collector (Redwood Street), a major collector (Conifer Street) and a major arterial (Suniga Road).  Residents of the Project and neighborhoods in the vicinity can travel in all directions safely and conveniently on streets with higher classifications without adding traffic to local streets in adjacent residential neighborhoods.  Redwood Meadows would be protected from “cut-through” vehicular traffic.  Northfield would be protected from “cut-through” vehicular traffic.  Pedestrian and bike circulation between the neighborhoods would be encouraged with sidewalk connections and accessible trails within the Project, and with the bike and pedestrian connections to Redwood Meadows and Northfield that are provided in lieu of street connections.  Emergency access to and through Redwood Meadows is maintained with the alternative plan.  Transit service will be enhanced. A new bus stop will be located on Redwood Street just south of Redwood Meadows, and the Project will operate a shuttle bus to/from Colorado State University for its resident population.  The new regional trail to be constructed parallel to the Lake Canal within the Project will be safer, more convenient and more scenic for users without street crossings over the Lake Canal interrupting the trail system.  Since wider street crossings of the canal would be attractive locations for transient camps, the regional trail users and the neighborhood residents would be safer without the full crossings.  The Lake Canal would be easier to maintain at a lower cost without street crossings that collect trash.  The alternative plan distributes the Project's traffic without exceeding level of service standards.  The wildlife corridor along the Lake Canal and the adjacent natural habitat buffer zones would not be compromised by vehicular street crossings.  The alternative plan minimizes the impacts on natural areas and features.  The alternative plan enhances neighborhood continuity and connectivity for pedestrians and bikes while providing direct street access to nearby activity centers.  A plan that met the standard would encourage motorists to cut through residential neighborhoods unnecessarily to reach activity center destinations including King Soopers, Lyric Cinema, New Belgium Brewery, Old Town and many others. In addition, several City Plan Principles and Policies support multi-family housing at this location and the transportation network proposed for the Project. Thinking outside of the box for over two decades. 419 Canyon Ave. Suite 200  Fort Collins, CO 80521  tel. 970.224.5828  fax 970.224.1662 www.ripleydesigninc.com The following City Plan policies support the location of medium density multi-family housing at this location where residents can walk, ride bikes and/or use transit to access a variety of activity centers including: Old Town and North College Avenue (Jax, the Lyric Cinema and KingSoopers mega store).  Policy T 1.1 – Physical Organization The physical organization of the City will be supported by a framework of transportation alternatives that balances access, mobility, safety, and emergency responses throughout the city, while working towards reducing the rate of growth of vehicle miles of travel and dependence on the private automobile.  Policy T 3.1 – Pedestrian Mobility Promote a mix of land uses and activities that will maximize the potential for pedestrian mobility throughout the community and minimize the distance traveled.  Policy T 3.2 – Bicycle Facilities Encourage bicycling for transportation through an urban development pattern that places major activity centers and neighborhood destinations within a comfortable bicycling distance.  Policy T 8.2 – Design for Active Living Promote neighborhood and community design that encourages physical activity by establishing easy access to parks and trails, providing interesting routes that feature art and other visually interesting elements, and locating neighborhoods close to activity centers and services so that physically active modes of transportation are a desirable and convenient choice. In regard to discouraging “cut-through” traffic, City Plan includes the following policies:  Policy T4.3-Interconnected Neighborhood Streets Neighborhood Streets will be interconnected, but designed to protect the neighborhood from excessive cut-through traffic.  Policy T 13.2 – Neighborhood Traffic Provide a complete street network that minimizes through traffic on collector and local streets in neighborhoods. Conclusion In conclusion, the proposed alternative plan avoids the vehicular connections that would negatively affect adjacent neighborhoods, but embraces safe and convenient pedestrian and bike connections that allow access and encourage alternative modes of transportation. The alternative plan functions well for vehicles and increases safety for pedestrians and bicyclists. Emergency access is provided where it is needed and transit opportunities will be enhanced with the Project. Finally, the streets and intersections in the vicinity of the Project will function well within City level of service requirements without the street connections.