HomeMy WebLinkAboutTHE RETREAT AT FORT COLLINS (FORMERLY REDWOOD STREET MULTI-FAMILY) - PDP - PDP180002 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 3 - ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE REQUEST (3)land 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
Revised July 25, 2018
Request for Alternative Compliance
Landmark Properties, Inc. (“Landmark”) is the developer of the proposed Retreat at Fort
Collins (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 row of multi-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 the proposed Suniga Road extension 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.
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
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
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.
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: (i) a public street
connection with sidewalks to Conifer Street (major collector); and (ii) pedestrian, bicycle and
emergency access between the Project and Redwood Meadows at Lupine Drive and Mullein
Drive.
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 605 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.
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
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
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.
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.
• 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 the adjacent Redwood Meadows single-family neighborhood.
• Redwood Meadows would be protected from “cut-through” vehicular traffic.
• Pedestrian and bike circulation between the Project and the Redwood Meadows
neighborhood would be encouraged with pedestrian and bike connections as well as
accessible trails 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 alternative plan enhances neighborhood continuity and connectivity for
pedestrians and bikes while providing direct street access for cars to nearby activity
centers.
• A plan that met the standard would encourage motorists to cut through a single-family
residential neighborhood unnecessarily to reach activity center destinations including
King Soopers, Lyric Cinema, New Belgium Brewery, Old Town and many others.
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
In addition, several City Plan Principles and Policies support multi-family housing at this
location and the transportation network proposed for the Project.
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 the adjacent Redwood Meadows neighborhood, 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
connection to Redwood Meadows.