HomeMy WebLinkAboutKECHTER TOWNHOMES - PDP200010 - - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT Development Review Staff Report
Planning Services Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 p. 970-416-4311 f. 970.224.6134 www.fcgov.com
Administrative Hearing: February 4, 2021
Kechter Townhomes
Summary of Request
This is a proposed Project Development Plan (PDP), #PDP200010.
The plan would develop a 5-acre City of Fort Collins Land Bank
property with 54 affordable for-sale townhome units in 11 buildings
comprising 4-, 5-, and 6-plexes.
Location Map – All LMN Zoning
Next Steps
If approved, the applicant will be eligible to submit a Final
Development Plan to finalize engineering and other details and
record all plan documents; the applicant could then apply for
construction and building permits.
Site Location
3620 Kechter Rd., just east of Lady Moon Dr.
Sign #560, Parcel #8604000924.
Zoning
Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood (LMN)
Property Owner
City of Fort Collins
222 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins, CO 80204
Applicant/Representative
Ryan Kelly, TWG, LLC
Carrie McCool, McCool Development Solutions
383 Tennyson St., Denver, CO 80212
Staff
Clark Mapes, City Planner
Contents
1. Project Introduction .................................... 2
2. Comprehensive Plan ................................. 3
3. Public Outreach ......................................... 4
4. Land Use Code Article 2 ............................ 4
5. Land Use Code Article 3 ............................ 9
6. Land Use Code Article 4 .......................... 16
7. Findings of Fact/Conclusion .................... 17
8. Recommendation ..................................... 18
9. Attachments ............................................. 18
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of two Modifications
of Standards and the Project Development Plan
including alternative compliance for two
standards, with two conditions of approval.
Site Lady Moon Dr.
Administrative Hearing
PDP 200010 | Kechter Townhomes
Thursday, February 4, 2021 | Page 2 of 18
Back to Top
1. Project Introduction
A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Notable aspects of the PDP include:
• 54 affordable, for-sale townhomes in 11 buildings comprising 4-, 5-, and 6-plexes.
• Large mature cottonwood trees on the site are retained.
• Buildings are placed along new streets, one of which has full movement access onto Kechter Road on the
south, and another which connects to Quasar Way and is stubbed to the property line on the north.
• A walkway connects to Eclipse Lane, which is stubbed to the property line on the east, in lieu of a full street
connection.
• The plan includes an Alternative Compliance request for the lack of a vehicular connection to Eclipse Lane.
• The plan includes Alternative Compliance for the lack of tree plantings around the east and north perimeter,
where a buffer yard tract on abutting property contains trees that provide the functional equivalent of standard
tree planting requirements.
• The plan includes a Modification of a standard to allow two of the same building design to be placed next to
each other along the east edge of the site.
• A condition of approval is recommended regarding an ongoing survey of bald eagle usage of the large
cottonwood trees.
• A condition of approval is recommended regarding ongoing discussions with nearby homeowners and the
Observatory Village HOA about planting a few trees on abutting HOA property.
• The City of Fort Collins Land Bank Program is the owner of the property. The Land Bank proposes to sell the
site to a partnership among a nonprofit Community Land Trust, Elevations CLT; the Colorado Department of
Housing; affordable housing developer TWG Development; and Housing Catalyst, the City of Fort Collins’
Housing Authority.
B. DEVELOPMENT STATUS/BACKGROUND
1. Annexation and Planning
The property is in the Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Plan area, which was b rought into an expanded City
Growth Management Area in 1997 as part of a sweeping overhaul of the City’s comprehensive plan known as
City Plan. That GMA expansion and the adopted plans represented agreement between Larimer County and
the City for land use and development to be managed by the City going forward.
In 1999, the Willow Brook Annexations #1 and #2, wrapped around the subject property on the north and east
sides. In 2000, the Willow Brook Overall Development Plan was approved for that land, followed in 2001 by
the Willow Brook Project Development Plan. Willow Brook is now developed and is known as Observatory
Village.
Willow Brook plans designed the street and block network with Quasar Way and Eclipse Lane connections
stubbed to the subject property on its north and east sides for future connection, consistent with goals and
development requirements intended to knit developments together into interconnected neighborhoods with
mixes of different housing types (single-family homes, townhomes, etc.)
The subject property was purchased by the City’s Land Bank Program in 2002 and annexed in 2003 as
Willow Brook Annexation #3. In 2017, the program determined that the time was right to issue a Request for
Proposals for development of affordable housing in home ownership form.
Administrative Hearing
PDP 200010 | Kechter Townhomes
Thursday, February 4, 2021 | Page 3 of 18
Back to Top
2. Surrounding Zoning and Land Use
North South East West
Zoning Low Density Mixed-Use
Neighborhood (L-M-N)
Low Density Mixed-Use
Neighborhood (L-M-N)
Low Density Mixed-Use
Neighborhood (L-M-N)
Low Density Mixed-Use
Neighborhood (L-M-N)
Land
Use
Observatory Village Single
family subdivision
Radiant Park, Zach
Elementary School, and
single family
subdivisions across
Kechter Road
Observatory Village
Single family
subdivision
City park space and
Fossil Ridge Elementary
School
C. OVERVIEW OF MAIN CONSIDERATIONS
The plan has gone through multiple iterations to explore the following issues:
• First and foremost, the process resulted in saving all of the large cottonwood trees, which were all shown to
be removed in the initial plan as submitted.
• The trees were a driving factor in subsequent alternatives for street layout and stormwater facilities, with
implications for the number of units. During review of the project, the total number of units decreased from
60, to 56, to 54 as proposed today.
• In addition to the time spent on plan iterations to retain the trees, the applicants and staff learned early in the
process that bald eagles had been using the trees. This led to a several-month process to understand the
implications of local, state, and federal protections and to formulate the approach to an Ecological
Characterization Study (ECS). The ECS is still ongoing at the time of this writing to accurately understand
usage of the large trees by eagles and recommend any potential mitigation measures depending on results.
• Street access on Kechter Road was another fundamental issue that was resolved through the plan iterations.
The initial submittal had no connection; the proposed plan now includes a full movement street connection.
• The Kechter access was key to staff support for not connecting a street to Eclipse Lane, which is stubbed to
the site on the east as would typically be required.
2. Comprehensive Plan
A. CITY PLAN (2019) AND RELATED POLICY GUIDANCE
The City’s comprehensive plan (2019 City Plan) was developed with the participation of thousands of community
members and embodies the vision and values of the community for the future.
Affordable housing is a pervasive theme throughout the plan, mentioned in the Vision and Values for Livability,
Community, Sustainability; in a number of Principles and Policies; and in the City Structure Plan Mixed
Neighborhoods description. All of these address needs for attainable and affordable housing options for residents
at all income levels to be able to live and work in Fort Collins. Integrating and distributing affordable housing as
part of neighborhoods and the community, rather than creating larger concentrations of affordable units in isolated
areas, is a longstanding aspect. Compatible design is another key aspect.
Fort Collins City Plan is easily found online, and pertinent policy guidance is found on pp. 17, 20, 25, 27, 28-29,
36, 42-43, 98, and 114.
City Plan’s general overall direction is reinforced by related plans and programs including the Affordable Housing
Strategic Plan, the City’s Affordable Housing Program, and City Council Strategic Plans. Affordable, for-sale
single-family homes (townhomes in this case) are an extraordinarily difficult need to meet in new housing
development. This proposal provides 100% affordable, for-sale townhomes.
Administrative Hearing
PDP 200010 | Kechter Townhomes
Thursday, February 4, 2021 | Page 4 of 18
Back to Top
The 2015-2019 Affordable Housing Plan (AHSP) is being updated at the time of this writing, with the new plan in
draft form. It expands the plan to address all housing but still retains the focus set in the AHSP for homes that
house low income residents. The new plan specifically calls out a need for housing options other than single
family detached houses, such as townhomes. It incorporates the objectives of the AHSP, which built upon
guidance from an earlier 2010 edition. Key objectives are:
• Incentivize the production of affordable housing
• Support opportunities to obtain and sustain affordable homeownership
• Refine development incentives and expand funding sources and partnerships
The Land Bank Program is one of the City’s affordable housing incentives. In 2017, a City Council Priority
directed staff to sell one of the Land Bank parcels for permanently affordable home ownership development. The
City issued two requests for proposals before choosing the development team for this project. This project
partners with Elevation Community Land Trust, who will purchase the finished units and resell them to qualified
low income buyers. The land trust will retain the land by lease and will be a long term steward to assure
permanent affordability. The Colorado Division of Housing among others also brings funding to the partnership. A
complex package of funding sources is needed as subsidy to provide permanent affordability.
Finally, Fort Collins residents have identified housing affordability as one of the top two concerns in the last 5
years of citywide Community Surveys.
3. Public Outreach
A. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING
A neighborhood meeting was held on July 27, 2020 with approximately 90 people in attendance and 16 emails
related to the meeting. Main topics were concerns about existing traffic speeding and danger to children; existing
traffic volumes related to Zach Elementary school; the value of existing mature cottonwoods on the property fo r
bald eagles, hawks, and owls; and general concerns about affordable townhomes impacting people in the
adjacent Observatory Village (the adjacent single-family detached housing development).
4. Land Use Code Article 2
A. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROCEDURAL OVERVIEW
1. Conceptual Review – CDR200004
A conceptual review meeting was held on June 5, 2020.
2. Neighborhood Meeting
Pursuant to LUC Section 2.2.2 – Step 2: Neighborhood Meetings, a neighborhood meeting was not required
for this project which requires an Administrative Hearing as a ‘Type 1’ project. However, the applicant team
recognized the need, and an online neighborhood meeting was held on July 27, 2020. 270 letters were mailed
to owners within the notice area.
3. First Submittal - PDP200010
The PDP was submitted on July 24, 2020.
4. Notice (Posted, Written and Published)
Posted Notice: May 19, 2020, Sign #560.
Written Hearing Notice: January 21, 2021, 270 addresses mailed.
Published Hearing Notice: Scheduled for January 28, 2021.
Administrative Hearing
PDP 200010 | Kechter Townhomes
Thursday, February 4, 2021 | Page 5 of 18
Back to Top
B. DIVISION 2.8 – MODIFICATION OF STANDARDS
The Land Use Code is adopted with the recognition that there will be instances where circumstances in a given
development plan may warrant a design solution that does not comply with all standards as written.
Accordingly, code standards include the provision for ‘Modification of Standards’ under certain criteria.
In this case, the plan requires two modifications, one for two buildings with the same building design located next
to each other, and the other for the number of parking spaces.
The modification criteria in Land Use Code Division 2.8.2(H) provide for evaluation of modification requests, as
follows.
Land Use Code Modification Criteria:
“The decision maker may grant a modification of standards only if it finds that the granting of the
modification would not be detrimental to the public good, and that:
(1) the plan as submitted will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the modification is
requested equally well or better than would a plan which complies with the standard for which a
modification is requested; or
(2) the granting of a modification from the strict application of any standard would, without impairing the
intent and purpose of this Land Use Code, substantially alleviate an ex isting, defined and described
problem of city-wide concern or would result in a substantial benefit to the city by reason of the fact that the
proposed project would substantially address an important community need specifically and expressly
defined and described in the city's Comprehensive Plan or in an adopted policy, ordinance or resolution of
the City Council, and the strict application of such a standard would render the project practically infeasible;
or
(3) by reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional situations, unique to
such property, including, but not limited to, physical conditions such as exception al narrowness,
shallowness or topography, or physical conditions which hinder the owner's ability to install a solar energy
system, the strict application of the standard sought to be modified would result in unusual and exceptional
practical difficulties, or exceptional or undue hardship upon the owner of such property, provided that such
difficulties or hardship are not caused by the act or omission of the applicant; or
(4) the plan as submitted will not diverge from the standards of the Land Use Code tha t are authorized by
this Division to be modified except in a nominal, inconsequential way when considered fro m the
perspective of the entire development plan, and will continue to advance the purposes of the Land Use
Code as contained in Section 1.2.2.
Any finding made under subparagraph (1), (2), (3) or (4) above shall be supported by specific findings
showing how the plan, as submitted, meets the requirements and criteria of said subparagraph (1), (2), (3)
or (4).
1. Modification of a building variation standard – Section 3.8.30(F) requiring no two of
the same building plan to be placed next to each other
Overview
This standard calls for “no two similar buildings next to each other”. Th is modification request is to allow two
buildings with the same design to be placed next to each other in one location along the east side of Street B,
at the east edge of the plan. The color scheme is reversed on these two buildings.
Administrative Hearing
PDP 200010 | Kechter Townhomes
Thursday, February 4, 2021 | Page 6 of 18
Back to Top
Summary of applicant justification:
The applicant’s modification request is attached. The request is based on lack of detriment to the public good,
and on subparagraphs (2) and (4) above -- “defined community need” for affordable housing, and “nominal
and inconsequential” when considered from the perspective of the whole plan.
The applicants note that the plan results from a series of iterations that explored issues with staff and
community members. The iterations focused on three interrelated issues that were more fundamental than
the issue of the side-by-side 5-plexes: 1) preservation of large, mature cottonwood trees that staff and
neighbors felt were crucial to retain as a highly notable feature of the property; 2) street connections to
Kechter, Quasar, and Eclipse; and 3) the viable number of units in the plan needed to cover costs while
keeping the units affordable.
The placement of the two 5-plexes was a secondary consideration driven by those bigger issues. The
applicants acknowledge how important it is to avoid a monotonous , impersonal visual and pedestrian
environment. They contend that the building design and color schemes provide pedestrian-friendly visual
interest that adequately offsets the lack of additional variation that would result from eliminating a unit to
replace a 5-plex with a 4-plex. For these reasons, the request contends that this is a nominal and
inconsequential aspect of the whole plan that does not create a detriment to the public good.
Staff Findings:
Staff finds that the granting of the modification would not be detrimental to the public good and that the plan
satisfies criteria in subparagraphs (2) and (4) under Section 2.8.2(H) governing modification requests.
Detriment to the public good. Staff finds that modulated building massing, architectural detailing, and color
variation provide adequate pedestrian and visual interest, given that this is a lone instance of the same
building plan side by side. The residential character and variation throughout the development offset the
effect of the two buildings such that their placement is not detrimental to the public g ood.
Criterion (2), “defined community need”. Staff’s finding reflects clear needs for various types of affordable
housing, which are described in the City’s comprehensive plan (City Plan), Affordable Housing Strategic Plan,
City Council Strategic Plans, and the City’s Affordable Housing Program, and other public forums. Affordable,
for-sale single-family homes (townhomes in this case) are a particularly difficult need to meet in new housing
development, and the plan provides 100% affordable townhomes for sale.
Staff is convinced that maintaining 54 units is crucial to the development program and reflects a necessary
balancing of tradeoffs, including the placement of the two 5-plexes.
Criterion (4), “nominal and inconsequential” when considered from the perspective of the entire
development plan. 10 of the 11 buildings in the plan comply with the standard, and the entire development
plan reflects a balance of tradeoffs as explained above. Given this perspective of the entire plan, staff finds
that building design and color schemes provide pedestrian-friendly visual interest that adequately offsets the
lack of additional variation that would result from switching one of the 5-plexes to a 4-plex to strictly comply
with the standard, thus making the issue nominal and inconsequential under the criterion.
Administrative Hearing
PDP 200010 | Kechter Townhomes
Thursday, February 4, 2021 | Page 7 of 18
Back to Top
2. Modification of a standard for a minimum required number of parking spaces –
subsection 3.2.2(K)(1)(a)
Overview
Subsection 3.2.2.(K)(1)(a) requires a total number of parking spaces for the attached dwelling units as shown
below. Relatedly, subsection 3.2.2.(K)(1)(b) allows parking on internal streets in attached and multi-family
housing developments to be counted to meet the requirement. 107 parking spaces are required, and the plan
provides 99 spaces.
Number of Bedrooms/
Dwelling Unit
Kechter
Townhomes
Units
Parking spaces per
dwelling unit-required
Total
required
Provided
Off-
Street
Provided
On
Streets
Two 5 1.75 9 54 45
Three 49 2.0 98
Total spaces required 107
Total spaces provided 99
Late in the review process, the applicant team realized that 8 of the street parking spaces in the last plan
iteration were not viable upon more detailed measurement of clearances from stop signs and sidewalk ramps,
and recognized that some short street segments where continuous parking on both sides would restrict
passage of vehicles would not be allowed. The result is that the parking count is short of minimum
requirements by 8 spaces.
The applicant team and staff scrutinized every possibility for additional spaces on the plan, or, for reducing
the number of dwelling units to lower the requirement and possibly open up space for a few angled or head-in
parking spaces, which would be the only way to increase the number provided. This latter approach would
require a variance to local street design standards, which would likely not beworkable from an operational
standpoint.
The applicant team determined that eliminating a unit(s) and the time delay required for another design
iteration are not feasible. The only way to continue toward a hearing is to request a Modification of the
standard. The request is attached.
Summary of applicant justification:
The applicant’s modification request is attached. The request is based on lack of detriment to the public good,
and on subparagraph (2) above -- “defined community need” for affordable housing.
Criterion (2), “defined community need”. The extensive design and review process to retain the large
trees had implications for the street layout and reduced the number of units in the plan from the original 60, to
56, to 54 in the proposed plan.
The proposed plan is at a point where the only solution would be to eliminate more of the dwelling units . With
the saving of the existing trees and the street parking clearance requirement s, there is not sufficient room on
the property to provide 107 code-required parking spaces.
The request articulates why, without the proposed modification, the project is financially and logistically
infeasible.
The request articulates the need for the affordable housing as defined in City policy documents and
discussions. Also, it notes that in 2019 the City’s Internal Housing Task Force presented recommendations to
the City Council which included, among others, decreasing development costs by (i) increasing
opportunities for density bonuses; (ii) relaxing parking standards; and (iii) relaxing certain design
standards. Staff’s follow up memorandum outlining the City Council’s direction noted general support for the
ideas about flexible development standards that also protect quality of life, safety, and neighborhood
character.
Administrative Hearing
PDP 200010 | Kechter Townhomes
Thursday, February 4, 2021 | Page 8 of 18
Back to Top
The request notes that this modification directly relates to those City Council discussions.
The request notes that the standard does not count parking in driveways toward the requirement when the
driveways are in front of garages. However, in reality those driveways will be used as parking for residents
and visitors, and those spaces provide a ‘cushion’ of 44 spaces more than the requirement.
The request contends that to deny the introduction of 54 affordable for sale units because of the delinquency
of 8 parking spaces per code, which are offset by the ability to park in the driveways, would be contrary to the
community’s planning for affordable housing.
Detriment to the public good. The request contends that for the reasons above, there is no detriment to the
public good.
Staff Findings:
Staff finds that the granting of the modification would not be detrimental to the public good and that the plan
satisfies criteria in subparagraphs (2) and (4) under Section 2.8.2(H) governing modification requests.
Detriment to the public good. Staff finds that the effect of any parking shortage would be largely managed
by the residents of the homes and would be contained primarily within the development. To the extent that
there could be any spillover parking onto City streets beyond the development’s boundaries, that is part of the
purposes and function of the City’s street network. Although not a determining factor, staff notes that adjacent
portions of streets closest to the site include stretches with no facing buildings.
Criterion (2), “defined community need”. Staff’s finding reflects needs for various types of housing that is
affordable to residents with various incomes, which are described in multiple documents and other public
forums as noted in other parts of this report.
As evaluated under Criteria 2.8.2(H)(2), staff finds that the project would alleviate the well-defined and
described need for affordable housing; and the modification reflects a necessary balancing of tradeoffs,
and is necessary to enable the project to proceed.
Administrative Hearing
PDP 200010 | Kechter Townhomes
Thursday, February 4, 2021 | Page 9 of 18
Back to Top
5. Land Use Code Article 3
A. DIVISION 3.2 - SITE PLANNING AND DESIGN STANDARDS
Applicable Code
Standard
Summary of Code Requirement and Analysis Staff
Findings
3.2.1 –
Landscaping
and Tree
Protection
The standards of this Section require a development plan to demonstrate a whole
approach to landscaping that enhances the appearance and function of the
neighborhood, buildings, and pedestrian environment. This includes incorporation of
valuable existing trees to the extent reasonably feasible, and that was the greatest issue
in the evolution of the whole plan for this proposal.
A grove of mature cottonwoods in the southeast corner of the site along Kechter Road,
and an even larger cottonwood in the northwest corner, were shown to be removed in
the original plan submittal. Subsequent iterations resulted in retaining all of these trees
as a driving factor in the plan as proposed. Neighbors and the local newspaper pointed
out common observations of bald eagles, hawks, and owls using these trees.
The plan provides:
Street trees as required.
Irrigated turf where appropriate, and mulched planting beds around building foundations.
Appropriate seed mixes in and around the stormwater detention ponds and rain
gardens.
Tree plantings around buildings: Alternative Compliance
The plan does not provide tree plantings around buildings as required in subsection
3.2.1(D) which requires that all developments establish trees in landscape areas within
50 feet of buildings. The rear yards around the perimeter of the plan are 8 feet per the
minimum required setback, and the east perimeter behind buildings has a storm drain
pipe that prevents trees in the narrow space. That pipe system extends partway around
the north perimeter as well, with the same effect.
Section 3.2.1 allows for Alternative Compliance as described in subsection (N). The
applicant team submitted a request under that subsection, attached. The premise is
that abutting property to the east and north is a buffer yard owned by the adjoining HOA
which contains trees adequate to meet the requirements, thus accomplishing the
purposes of the standard. The buffer yard varies from 30 to 40 feet in depth.
The applicant team is also pursuing conversations with owners of the four closest
houses with backs or sides that will face the back sides of proposed buildings across the
buffer yard. The applicants are willing to plant additional trees in the buffer yard if
desired and agreed by the owners and the HOA.
Complies via
Alternative
Compliance
for Tree
Stocking;
and one
potential
condition to
confirm at
the hearing.
Administrative Hearing
PDP 200010 | Kechter Townhomes
Thursday, February 4, 2021 | Page 10 of 18
Back to Top
Staff recommends a condition of approval that up to six additional trees be planted in
the abutting buffer yard if consistent with a desire and agreement by the HOA.
Condition of approval:
Staff recommends the following condition of approval to in order to find that the
project meets LUC 3.4.1(E) standards:
Complete the eagle roosting survey (March 2021) prior to FDP approval and if a winter
night roost and/or communal roost is determined to exist, then implement the tempo ral
buffering and three other mitigation measures explained in the Bald Eagle Roost
Mitigation Measures document dated January 28, 2021.
Note that the code provision for Alternative Compliance is very similar to the provisions
for Modifications of Standards, and in this case the applicants could request either.
They have chosen to request the former, but the request articulates how the plan meets
the defined community need for affordable housing, which is a criterion for approval of
the latter. Affordability of the townhomes is a factor in the limited space for tree
plantings around the buildings.
3.2.1(F) – Tree
Mitigation
This Section requires that developments retain significant existing trees to the extent
reasonably feasible. The plan retains the few existing trees on the site.
Complies
3.2.2 – Access,
Circulation and
Parking –
General
Standard
This Section requires that development projects accommodate the movement of
vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians safely and conveniently, both within the development
and to and from surrounding areas.
The street and sidewalk network provides for most of the needs of the development. In
addition the plan provides:
A walkway connection to the east in lieu of a street connection to Eclipse Lane which is
stubbed to the east edge of the plan.
A walkway connection to park space on the west.
Complies,
with a
modification
for number
of parking
spaces
3.2.2(K)(1)(a)
and (b) –
Required
Number of Off-
Street Parking
Spaces
This subsection requires a minimum number of parking spaces for attached dwellings.
A Modification of Standard is requested as explained previously in this report.
Modification
Requested
3.2.4 – Site
Lighting
The only lighting will be provided by porch light fixtures attached to the building using
fully shielded, down-directional, color temperature 3,000 Kelvin or less fixtures as
required; along with any standard street lighting.
Complies
Administrative Hearing
PDP 200010 | Kechter Townhomes
Thursday, February 4, 2021 | Page 11 of 18
Back to Top
B. DIVISION 3.4 – NATURAL RESOURCES STANDARDS
The purpose of this Section is to ensure that when property is developed consistent with its zoning designation,
the way in which the proposed physical elements of the development plan are designed and arranged on the site
will protect the natural habitats and features both on the site and in the vicinity of the site.
Applicable
Code
Standard
Summary of Code Requirement and Analysis Staff
Findings
3.4.1 –
Natural
Habitats
This Section applies if any portion of the development site contains natural habitats or
features that have significant ecological value, including those that are discovered during
site evaluation and reconnaissance associated with the development review process. The
Section lists the types of natural habitats and features considered to have significant
ecological value.
When a development site contains any of the listed types of habitats or features, then the
developer must provide an Ecological Characterization Study (ECS) prepared by a
professional qualified in the areas of ecology, wildlife biology or other relevant discipline.
In this case, the property has a grove of large cottonwood trees in the southeast corner
along Kechter Rd., and a single large cottonwood tree in the northwest corner. These trees
are to be retained in the plan. Early in the review process, neighbors and others shared
observations and photos of bald eagles using the trees, particularly the one in the northwest
corner which overlooks a pond on abutting Parks property on the west. The Coloradoan
newspaper had run a story on the eagles in February 2019. Neighbors also noted hawks
and owls using the trees.
One of the listed types of habitats and features is “raptor habitat features, including nest
sites, communal roost sites and key concentration areas”, and the information about eagles
prompted a special ECS process to assess eagle use of the trees as habitat.
An ECS describes any wildlife use of the area, the times or seasons that the area is used by
those species and the "value" (meaning feeding, watering, cover, nesting, roosting,
perching) that the area provides for such wildlife species. An ECS then recommends any
protections to be incorporated into a plan.
In this case, a several-month exploration of local, state and federal protections for bald
eagle was undertaken, and a specially tailored ECS process was formulated. This involved
discussions with the Colorado Division of Parks and Wildlife, the US Fish and Wildlife
Service, the applicant team, and the professional firm hired to conduct the ECS.
A draft ECS was submitted in December 2020, and a survey of eagle roosting is still
ongoing through March 21. At least one tree on site is utilized by bald eagles to some
degree. The ongoing survey is conducted twice monthly to determine which trees are being
used and whether or not they are being used in a way that would classify as a winter night
roost or communal roost.
Significance of roosts. LUC Section 3.4.1(E) requires buffer zones surrounding natural
habitats and features to protect the ecological character from the impacts of the ongoing
activity associated with the development. Standards for these buffers include performance
standards both numerical distance setbacks from specified natural features.
Numerical buffer distances in the Land Use Code range from 1/8 to ¼ to ½ mile depending
on the specific type of roost usage.
Staff does not recall these bald eagle buffers ever having been applied to a development
plan. The different types of roosts are not defined, and the City would typically rely on
Colorado Parks and Wildlife guidance on such matters. CPW has been consulted frequently
during the review of this project.
No spatial buffer zone. The ongoing survey will determine if bald eagle use of the trees on
site qualifies as a ‘winter night roost’ or ‘communal roost’. However, discussions with CPW
have resulted in a finding that no spatial buffer will be applied regardless of the survey
findings. To date, these roosts have not been observed.
Condition of
Approval
Administrative Hearing
PDP 200010 | Kechter Townhomes
Thursday, February 4, 2021 | Page 12 of 18
Back to Top
Part of the reasoning is that the eagles have demonstrated a tolerance to non-construction
activities such as those already existing in the immediate vicinity.
CPW is familiar with the area surrounding the site and notes that it likely qualifies as a
‘Highly Developed Area’ under their guidelines and as such they would typically recommend
a ¼ mile buffer.
A ¼ mile buffer would cover the entire site as well as surrounding neighborhoods, part of
Twin Silo Park, and most of Zach Elementary School. Within all of the listed spatial buffer
distances, numerous types of disturbance (noise, vehicular and pedestrian traffic, lighting,
etc.) currently exist that the eagles have already acclimated to.
Another determining factor is that there are numerous bald eagle resources along the
Poudre River Corridor and Fossil Creek Reservoir less than a mile away, including current
CPW-recognized roost sites, communal roosts, winter concentration areas, nests, and
winter and summer forage areas.
Temporal buffering. Instead of a spatial buffer, if usage is found to qualify as a roost, a
temporal buffer per CPW’s recommendations is recommended as a condition of approval.
Outdoor construction activity during roosting season (Nov. 15 to Mar. 15) would only be
permitted from 10:00 to 2:00 pm.
With bald eagles observed utilizing the trees on site exhibiting a level of tolerance of existing
disturbance and abundant resources nearby, it is likely that construction activities, with an
elevated level of noise, activity, and disturbance right on site, is what would warrant
mitigation.
Additional mitigation. Furthermore, if usage is found to qualify as a roost, then three
additional mitigation measures have been agreed upon by applicants and staff in the
extensive review process as part of recommending approval.
These are explained in a Raptor Roost Mitigation Measures document, attached. They are:
• Designation of the northwestern cottonwood tree’s ‘Critical Root Zone’ as a ‘Natural
Habitat Buffer Zone’ (defined terms) which would add protection for that tree, which
shows signs of decline due to aging.
• Shadow planting of young cottonwoods near the northwestern cottonwood tree .
• Selective pruning of the northwest tree as appropriate to extend its life.
Condition of approval:
Staff recommends the following condition of approval to in order to find that the
project meets LUC 3.4.1(E) standards:
1. Complete the eagle roosting survey (March 2021) prior to FDP approval and if a winter
night roost and/or communal roost is determined to exist, then implement the temporal
buffering and three other mitigation measures explained in the Bald Eagle Roost
Mitigation Measures document dated January 28, 2021.
Administrative Hearing
PDP 200010 | Kechter Townhomes
Thursday, February 4, 2021 | Page 13 of 18
Back to Top
C. DIVISION 3.5 - BUILDING STANDARDS
Applicable
Code
Standard
Summary of Code Requirement and Analysis Staff
Findings
3.5.2(D)
Building
Placement in
Relation to
Streets
This standard requires buildings to be placed along streets such that walkways lead to
entrances without crossing any vehicular use area. The dwellings are simply placed
directly fronting onto street sidewalks, which is ideal.
Complies
3.5.2(F)
Garage Doors
This standard is to prevent residential streetscapes from being dominated by protruding
garage doors, and to allow the active, visually interesting features of homes to dominate
the streetscape. Garage doors must be recessed from the face of the home or a porch,
and must not comprise more than 50% of the frontage of a dwelling. The garages are
recessed from both porches and the front walls of the homes, and the doors comprise
40% of the building frontage.
Complies
D. DIVISION 3.6 - TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
This Section is intended to ensure that the transportation system is in conformance with adopted transportation
plans and policies established by the City.
Applicable
Code
Standard
Summary of Code Requirement and Analysis Staff
Findings
3.6.2 – Streets,
Streetscapes,
Alleys and
Easements
This Section requires transportation network improvements for public health, safety and
welfare, with requirements in accordance with the Larimer County Urban Area Street
Standards, and requires necessary easements for utilities and access.
The plan provides new internal streets in conformance with standards, including
Alternative Compliance regarding connecting a new street to existing Eclipse Lane
which is stubbed to the property line.
The plan also includes restriping of Kechter Road abutting the property on the south,
related to new street access to and from Kechter.
Complies
3.6.3(F) and
(H) – Street
Pattern and
Connectivity
Subsections 3.6.3(F) requires development plans to connect and extend streets that are
stubbed to the boundary of the plan by previous development, while subsection 3.6.3(H)
allows for Alternative Compliance not extend and connect a street stub in a given
instance.
Quasar Way is stubbed to the north side of the development plan, and Eclipse Lane
likewise on the east.
Through a series of iterations in the review process, the plan has ended up providing:
• Extension and connection to Quasar Way on the north;
• Walkway-only connection to the Eclipse Lane sidewalk on the east;
• Full street access to and from Kechter Road on the south.
A request for Alternative Compliance is attached for the walkway-only connection to
Eclipse, in lieu of a standard street connection.
Alternative Compliance Review Criteria
To approve an alternative plan, the decision maker must find that the alternative plan
accomplishes the purposes of Division 3.6, Transportation and Circulation, equally well
or better than would a plan which complies with the pertinent standards, and that any
Complies,
with
Alternative
Compliance
for Eclipse
Lane
Connectivity
Administrative Hearing
PDP 200010 | Kechter Townhomes
Thursday, February 4, 2021 | Page 14 of 18
Back to Top
reduction in access and circulation for vehicles maintains facilities for bicycle,
pedestrian and transit, to the maximum extent feasible.
In reviewing the proposed alternative plan, the decision maker must take in to account
whether the alternative design minimizes impacts on natural 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 with in the same section mile.
Applicants Request
The applicants provided a request for Alternative Compliance, attached. It explains that
the proposed alternative plan provides affordable housing that furthers the goals of
adopted City plans; meets Level of Service requirements; minimizes impacts on natural
features; provides for strong bike and pedestrian connections while addressing
neighborhood connectivity objections; and makes it feasible to deliver 54 rare for -sale
affordable housing units while providing high-quality design.
Staff Findings
The alternative plan without the Eclipse street connection is a result of:
• Incorporating space to retain large existing cottonwood trees into the project,
to minimize impacts on natural features; and
• Introducing new street access to and from Kechter Road, which serves the
main function that Eclipse would have provided.
The plan fosters nonvehicular access with a conveniently located walkway connection
to Eclipse, in lieu of a street. The overall plan provides a convenient system of streets
and sidewalks, and a walkway to park and school space on the west.
The applicant team and staff explored iterations of all alternatives with and without
connections to Quasar, Eclipse, and partial or full access on Kechter.
The vehicular connection provided at Quasar is important as a vehicular street
connection to and from the north without significant circuitous routes, while a vehicular
connection at Eclipse was found less important once agreement was reached on full
access to Kechter, because the main vehicular function of Eclipse would have been to
access Kechter via Jupiter Drive on the east.
The plan balances tradeoffs with important trees, the number of dwelling units needed
for financial viability of the plan, and implications of access on Kechter.
3.6.4 –
Transportation
Level of
Service
Requirements
This Section contains requirements for the transportation needs of proposed
development to be safely accommodated by the existing transportation system, or that
appropriate mitigation of impacts will be provided by the development in order to meet
adopted Level of Service (LOS) standards. A Transportation Impact Study (TIS) was
required under this Section to evaluate the traffic generation and distribution added by
the development.
The most significant change to the existing transportation system is a new full
movement access on Kechter Road, which requires restriping for an eastbound left turn
lane. In order to accommodate the new turn lane, parking along the south side of
Kechter will need to be removed, which is consistent with arterial roadway standards.
Staff finds that the plan complies with Level of Service (LOS) requirements for vehicular
traffic, pedestrians and bikes.
Complies
Administrative Hearing
PDP 200010 | Kechter Townhomes
Thursday, February 4, 2021 | Page 15 of 18
Back to Top
3.6.6 –
Emergency
Access
This Section requires adequate access for emergency vehicles and persons rendering
fire protection and emergency services.
Poudre Fire Authority staff participated in plan review and finds that the straightforward
arrangement of dwellings along streets provides the needed access.
Complies
E. DIVISION 3.8.30 – DESIGN STANDARDS FOR SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED DWELLINGS
This Section is intended to promote variety in building form and product, visual interest, acces s to parks,
pedestrian-oriented streets and compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods.
Applicable
Code
Standard
Summary of Code Requirement and Analysis Staff
Findings
3.8.30(C) –
Access to a
Park, Central
Feature or
Gathering
Place
This standard requires useable outdoor space within the development or within ¼ mile
of at least 90% of the dwelling units. The location complies with Radiant Park across
Kechter Road, Twin Silo Park and Fossil Ridge High School across Lady Moon Drive,
and also abuts park space along the west.
Complies
3.8.30(D) –
Block
Requirements
This subsection requires a framework of blocks with a maximum block size of 7 acres.
The plan provides blocks defined by new streets within the 5-acre property.
Complies
3.8.30(F)(1) Buffer yards shall be provided along the property line of abutting existing single - and
two-family dwellings. Where single family houses abut the plan on the north and west, a
buffer yard exists as part Willow Brook plans (Tracts W and Z, labeled as ‘Bufferyard’).
This space varies from 30-40 feet in its narrowest portions.
Complies
via existing
abutting
buffer yard
3.8.30(F)(2) –
Design
Standards for
Multi-Family
Dwellings
This subsection requires building variation in townhome and apartment developments
with more than three buildings. In this case, with 11 buildings, at least three distinctly
different building designs are required, with no similar buildings placed next to each
other.
Staff finds that the plan meets the standards with one exception , for which a
modification of a standard is requested as discussed previously in this report. The
modification is to allow two buildings with the same design to be placed next to each
other along the east side of Street B, at the east edge of the plan. Th e color scheme
is reversed on these two buildings.
Different building designs must vary significantly in footprint size and shape, unique
entrance features and architectural elevations , roof forms, massing proportions and
other characteristics, within a coordinated overall theme. Such variation must not
consist solely of different combinations of the same building features.
• The plan provides four main building plans: 4 -plexes, 4-plexes with
accessible units, 5-plexes, and 6-plexes. Each of these building plans
comes with two different color schemes.
• Building designs incorporate differing arrangements of two-story and single-
story massing modulation, pitched roof forms, porch roofs at entrances,
window patterns, and lap and board-and-batten siding. The single-car garages
are recessed and comprise less than 50% of building frontage.
Complies
with a
requested
Modification
of a
standard
Administrative Hearing
PDP 200010 | Kechter Townhomes
Thursday, February 4, 2021 | Page 16 of 18
Back to Top
6. Land Use Code Article 4
A. DIVISION 4.5 – LOW DENSITY MIXED-USE NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT (LMN)
The LMN zone district was created in 1997 as part of a sweeping update of the City’s comprehensive plan that
resulted in the original City Plan document and the Land Use Code.
Applicable
Code
Standard
Summary of Code Requirement and Analysis Staff
Findings
4.5(A) -
Purpose
This Section states:
“Purpose. The Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District is intended to be a
setting for a predominance of low density housing combined with complementary and
supporting land uses that serve a neighborhood and are developed and operated in
harmony with the residential characteristics of a neighborhood. The main purpose of
the District is to meet a wide range of needs of everyday living in neighborhoods that
include a variety of housing choices, that invite walking to gathering places, services
and conveniences, and that are fully integrated into the larger community by the
pattern of streets, blocks, and other linkages. A neighborhood center provides a focal
point, and attractive walking and biking paths invite residents to enjoy the center as
well as the small neighborhood parks. Any new development in this District shall be
arranged to form part of an individual neighborhood.”
The project adds a housing choice and is designed with characteristics that are in
harmony with the neighborhood.
Complies
4.5(B) -
Permitted
Uses
The proposed Single Family Attached residential use is permitted. Complies
4.5(D)(1) –
Residential
Density
Density standards limit development plans to a maximum of 12 dwelling units per acre
for affordable housing. The plan proposes 10.4 units per acre.
Complies
4.5(D)(3) –
Residential
Density
LMN zone district standards include requirements for access to ‘Neighborhood
Centers’ for development plans over 4o acres.
N.A.
4.5(E)(1) –
Street System
Block Size
LMN zone district standards include a standard that requires the local street system to
limit block size to 12 acres maximum. A similar standard for attached and multi-family
residential development, in Section 3.8.30, limits block size as noted previously in this
report. The plan provides blocks defined by new streets within the 5-acre property.
Complies
4.5(E)(2) –
Street System
Block Size
This standard requires a mid-block pedestrian connection along any block face longer
than 700 feet. The entire property is 624 feet in its longest dimension.
N.A.
Administrative Hearing
PDP 200010 | Kechter Townhomes
Thursday, February 4, 2021 | Page 17 of 18
Back to Top
Findings of Fact/Conclusion
In evaluating the request for the Kechter Townhomes PDP#200010, staff makes the following findings of fact and
conclusions:
The Project Development Plan complies with the applicable procedural and administrative requirements of Article 2 of the
Land Use Code.
The Project Development Plan complies with pertinent standards located in Article 3 – General Development Standards
with two modifications of standards.
Staff supports the request for Modification of Standards to subsection 3.2.2(K)(1)(a) – Required Number of Parking
Spaces to allow 99 parking spaces instead of the 107 that the standard requires.
The modification would not be detrimental to the public good and the request satisfies criterion (2) in subsection 2.8.2(H)
because the parking as designed is a critical component the plan that en ables the development of affordable housing in
the form of homes for sale, which is a clearly defined and described problem of community -wide concern; and any
impacts from the lower number are mitigated by the opportunity for parking in driveways in front of garages (44 spaces)
which are not included as part of the 99 parking spaces provided.
Staff supports the request for Modification of Standards to Section 3.8.30(F)(2),Variation Among Buildings, to allow two
buildings with the same plan to be located next to each other in one location.
The modification would not be detrimental to the public good and the request satisfies criteria (2) and (4) in subsection
2.8.2(H). The modification is not detrimental to the public good because modulated building massing , architectural
detailing, and color variation provide adequate pedestrian and visual interest, given that this is a lone instance of the sam e
building plan side by side. The residential character and variation throughout the plan offset the effect of the two buildings
such that their placement is not detrimental to the public good.
The modification satisfies criterion (2), “defined community need”, because the plan provides affordable housing in the
form of homes for sale, which is a clearly need of community-wide concern, and the building program is critical for project
viability, reflecting a necessary balancing of competing demands for space in the plan, with the placement of the two 5-
plexes being part of the balance.
The modification satisfies Criterion (4), “nominal and inconsequential” when considered from the perspective of the entire
development plan because 10 of the 11 buildings in the plan comply with the standard, and the entire development plan
reflects a balance of tradeoffs as noted above; and given this perspective of the entire plan, the modulated building design
and color schemes provide pedestrian-friendly visual interest that offsets the lack of additional variation that would result
from switching one of the 5-plexes to a 4-plex to strictly comply with the standard.
The Project Development Plan complies with pertinent standards located in Division 4.5 Low Density Mixed -Use
Neighborhood in Article 4 – Districts.
Administrative Hearing
PDP 200010 | Kechter Townhomes
Thursday, February 4, 2021 | Page 18 of 18
Back to Top
7. Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Hearing Officer approve the two Modifications of Standards to Land Use Code
Sections and subsections 3.2.2(K)(1)(a) and 3.8.30(F); and approve Kechter Townhomes PDP#200010,
including Alternative Compliance for subsections 3.2.1 (D) and 3.4.1(E) based on the Findings of Fact and
supporting explanations found in the staff report, with two conditions to be satisfied if found necessary,
pending ongoing work and conversations:
• Complete current discussions with abutting homeowners and their HOA and if desired and agreed by
those parties, then the applicant shall plant up to six additional trees in the abutting bufferyard, with
adjustment of the HOA irrigation system to irrigate the new trees, in collab oration with the owners and
HOA.
• Complete the eagle roosting survey (March 2021) and if a winter night roost and/or communal roost is
determined to exist, then implement the temporal buffering and three other mitigation measures
explained in the Bald Eagle Roost Mitigation Measures document dated January 28, 2021.
8. Attachments
1. Applicants Narrative
2. Request for Modification of a Standard – Number of Parking Spaces
3. Request for Modification of a Standard – Building Variation in One Instance
4. Request for Alternative Compliance – Tree Planting in Rear Perimeter Areas
5. Request for Alternative Compliance – Street Connectivity at Eclipse Lane
6. Site and Landscape Plans
7. Whole Layout Diagram
8. Architecture
9. Utility Plans
10. Plat
11. Neighborhood Meeting Notes
12. Ecological Characterization Study
13. Raptor Survey and Mitigation Measures
14. Traffic Impact Study
4383 Tennyson Street, #1D Denver, Colorado 80212 Phone: 720.465.4320 www.mccooldevelopment.com
July 22, 2020
City of Fort Collins – Community Development & Neighborhood Services
Attn: Ms. Tenae Beane, Development Review Coordinator
280 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80524
Re: Kechter Townhomes; Project Development Plan and Subdivision Plat
Applications
3620 Kechter Road, Fort Collins, Colorado 80528
Dear Ms. Beane,
On behalf of the owner, City of Fort Collins, we are pleased to submit the attached Project
Development Plan and Subdivision Plat for the project known as Kechter Townhomes,
generally located at the northwest corner of Kechter Road and Jupiter Drive just east of
Twin Silo Park. The following project information provides additional details to assist City
staff in the review of this Project Development Plan and Subdivision Plat applications.
Project Title: Kechter Townhomes Project Development Plan and Subdivision Plat
Past Meeting Dates:
● Preapplication meeting was held on June 5, 2019
● Neighborhood Meeting is scheduled for July 27, 2020
General Information: This is a request for a Project Development Plan and Subdivision
Plat to develop a ~5 acre City of Fort Collins Land Bank parcel to construct 100%
permanently affordable, for-sale homes consisting of 60 townhomes with a mix of (6) two
and (54) three-bedroom units generally located at the northwest corner of Kechter Road
and Jupiter Drive just east of Twin Silo Park. Primary access is provided off of Kechter
Road with additional neighborhood connectivity provided to Quasar Way and Eclipse Lane.
A total of 119 parking spaces are proposed that include 60 garage spaces, 55 on street and
4 off street spaces. A linear green space provides additional off-street circulation for
pedestrians and north-south connectivity through the development. The property is zoned
Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood (LMN) and is subject to Administrative (Type 1)
review. The associated subdivision plat includes 60 lots with .57 acres of open space and
~1.599 acres of right-of-way dedication.
Existing and Proposed Owners/Funding Structure: Elevation Community Land Trust
(Elevation CLT or ECLT) secured a grant from the Colorado Department of Housing to
Page 2 of 4
assist with the acquisition of subject property. Indiana-based affordable housing
developer, TWG Development, LLC (TWG), is the developer and has formed a limited
partnership (Kechter Homes LP) with Housing Catalyst, the City of Fort Collins’ Housing
Authority, to allow the project to benefit from tax exemptions and property tax abatement
through the construction period to time of sale to ECLT. TWG’s related entity TWG
Construction, LLC, will serve as the General Contractor.
TWG and ECLT will enter into a purchase and sale agreement through which ECLT will
acquire the subdivided parcels and finished townhomes at an agreed-upon price point.
ECLT will then sell the improvements to qualified households earning less than 80% area
median income (AMI), with prices set around 70% AMI to ensure long term affordability
and to serve a broader range of incomes. The difference between the acquisition sales price
and the homeowner sales price will be subsidized with additional philanthropic capital
from ELCT. ECLT will maintain ownership of underlying land and will ensure affordability
and owner-occupancy using a 99-year renewable land lease. ECLT will also establish a
homeowners association that they will monitor.
Transportation Improvements: A Traffic Impact Study was finalized on July 8, 2020.
Based on the analysis contained in the study, the proposed Kechter townhomes project
demonstrates compliance with the standards in the Larimer County Urban Area Street
Standards for traffic at the time of development. It is recommended that the proposed site
access to Kechter Road be constructed as a full-movement access without an eastbound
left-turn lane. Neighborhood connections are provided to the already planned and stubbed
out roadway connections to Eclipse Lane and Quasar Way.
Neighborhood Meeting Overview: A neighborhood meeting is scheduled for July 27,
2020. We look forward to the opportunity to share our development proposal with the
surrounding neighborhood. A second neighborhood meeting will also be held in August or
September 2020.
Site Design: The site’s design includes an internal street system with sidewalks and tree
lawns on each site. Buildings are set back to provide additional front lawn space. The
center of the neighborhood is anchored with a number of townhomes, a walking path that
provides the neighborhood with a north-south pedestrian connection, and a linear park
that connects the homes in the east-west direction and provides a visual connection to the
adjacent open space to the west.
Transition Techniques: The adjacent land uses include single-family residential (east and
north), school (west), and park (south). The site has been designed to further the City’s
affordable housing goals by integrating and distributing affordable housing as part of
individual neighborhoods and the larger community. More specifically, the site and
building design complement and enhance the positive qualities of existing adjacent
neighborhoods by continuing on-street parking, detached sidewalks, tree lawns, individual
front yards, and front-accessed garages. Lastly, the design aligns with the anticipated
evolution, built form, mix of housing types, and mobility described in Mixed Neighborhood.
Page 3 of 4
The narrative below describes proposed transitioning techniques along all property
boundaries.
Panting Beds are provided along the north, east and west perimeters softening the
buildings. Open space and storm water facilities provide a buffer from Kechter road to the
south.
Architectural Design: Community architecture consists of four different building types
with a number or exterior color options that mimic the architecture of the adjacent
neighborhoods with pitched asphalt roofs, two-story and single-story massing, walk-up
front porches, vinyl windows, residential window proportions, cement board siding and
trim, and earth-toned colors. The combination of two- and three-bedroom townhomes
creates buildings with varied massing and roof lines to provide visual interest and
variation between the building types. Garage doors are recessed from the fronts of the
dwellings and comprise no more than 50% of building frontage.
Utilities:
Water – Water will be provided to the project by the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District
via existing water mains located adjacent to the project site. No upgrades to the existing
system are anticipated.
Sewer – Sewer will be provided by the South Fort Collins Sanitation District via existing
sewer mains adjacent to the project site. No upgrades or off-site improvements to the
existing system are anticipated.
Stormwater – Stormwater will be conveyed via a system of swales and storm drains to
stormwater treatment and detention facilities located at the southern end of the site. All
City of Fort Collins Stormwater requirements will be met by the project, including Low
Impact Development (LID) treatment.
Development Phasing Schedule: At this time, the entire Kechter Townhome project is
anticipated to be developed in a single phase.
Initial Submittal Comment Response Letter: Attached.
Signed Letters of Intent from Impacted off-site property owners(s): The TWG Team in
conjunction with the City of Fort Collins is working with the Observatory Village
Homeowners Association to vacate the existing 30’ access easement that currently
encumbers the western edge of the subject property. This matter will be resolved prior to
scheduling the hearing.
Lighting: With such little lighting proposed, Staff granted a waiver from the Photometric
Plan submittal requirement. All proposed lighting is depicted within the Plan Set (See Sheet
A1.5) and will meet City of Fort Collins requirements.
Page 4 of 4
Ecological Characterization Memo: Since this site is not within the 500 feet of defined
natural habitats and features, the ECS was waived. On July 15, 2020, the City shared a
comment from a community member on a potential Bald Eagle foraging site immediately
adjacent to the Kechter parcel. Given this information, the City required a ECS memo that
focuses on the trees serving as a potential foraging site for American Eagles. The TWG
Team has engaged Cedar Creek Associates, Inc., to prepare the ECS memo. In light of how
the information was received, Kelly Smith granted approval to make this formal submittal
prior to the ECS memo. The ECS memo will be submitted to the City upon completion.
We are thrilled with the opportunity to bring this project to the City of Fort Collins and look
forward to working with you and the City through the development review process. Please
feel free to reach out to me at 303.378.4540 or carrie@mccooldevelopment.com with any
questions or comments.
Sincerely,
McCOOL DEVELOPMENT SOLUTIONS
Carrie McCool,
Principal
Enclosures:
MINIMAL RISK. PAINLESS PROCESS. BEAUTIFUL SPACES.
o: 970.224.5828 | w: ripleydesigninc.com
RIPLEY DESIGN, INC. | 419 Canyon Avenue, Suite 200 | Fort Collins, CO 80521
January 26, 2021
Kechter Townhomes PDP
Modification Requests
General Development Standard / Request for
Modification
4. LUC 3.2.2 Access, Circulation and Parking
(K) Parking Lots – Required Number of Off-Street Spaces for Type of Use.
(1) Residential and Institutional Parking Requirements. Residential and institutional
uses shall provide a minimum number of parking spaces as defined by the standards
below. (a) Attached Dwellings: For each two-family and multi-family dwelling there
shall be parking spaces provided as indicated by the following table:
Number of Bedrooms/Dwelling Unit Parking spaces per dwelling unit
One or less 1.5
Two 1.75
Request: VOA proposes to provide 99 parkign spaces (54 off-street parking
spaces and 45 on street parking spaces) for 54 dwel ling units, instead of the 107
spaces required by this standard (see table below).
Number of
Bedrooms/
Dwelling Unit
Kechter
Townhomes
Parking spaces per
dwelling unit
Parking spaces per
dwelling unit-required
Two 5 1.75 9
Three 49 2.0 98
Total spaces required 107
Total spaces provided 99
MINIMAL RISK. PAINLESS PROCESS. BEAUTIFUL SPACES.
o: 970.224.5828 | w: ripleydesigninc.com
RIPLEY DESIGN, INC. | 419 Canyon Avenue, Suite 200 | Fort Collins, CO 80521
Justification for Approval of General Development
Standard Modification
Kechter Town Homes asserts that the modification to the parking standard meets the
modification approval criteria [LUC 2.8.2(H)(2)] Alleviate Defined Problem / Address
Community Need and that the granting of the modification would not be detrimental to
the public good
Alleviate Defined Problem / Address Community Need
LUC 2.8.2(H)(2) the granting of a modification from the strict application of any standard would,
without impairing the intent and purpose of this Land Use Code, substantially alleviate an existing,
defined and described problem of city-wide concern or would result in a substantial benefit to the
city by reason of the fact that the proposed project would substantially address an important
community need specifically and expressly defined a nd described in the city's Comprehensive Plan
or in an adopted policy, ordinance or resolution of the City Council, and the strict application of
such a standard would render the project practically infeasible; or
By providing 54 affordable for sale units, The Kechter Townhome development does
substantially alleviate an existing defined and described problem of City wide concern.
It address the critical need for affordable owner occupied housing in the community.
The need for affordable housing is defined in City Plan and the Affordable Housing
Strategic Plan. The 2015 adopted Affordable Housing Strategic Plan sets the goal to
have 6% of Fort Collins housing stock be comprised of affordable housing (defined as
housing for residents earning 80% AMI or less), increasing to 10% beyond 2020.
Currently, the City is hundreds of units short of meeting this goal. The opportunity to
provide affordable housing for 54 households is a significant step towards addressing
this important community need and provides a substa ntial benefit to these individuals
and the community as a whole.
The City Plan Principles and Policies listed below make it clear that the City desires to
encourage a variety of housing types and densities, as well as, make affordable housing
available for residents.
Policy LIV 5.5 Integrate and Distribute Affordable Housing
Integrate the distribution of affordable housing as part of individual neighborhoods and the larger
community rather than creating larger concentrations of affordable units in isolated areas
Policy LIV 6.4 Permanent Supply of Affordable Housing
Create an inventory of affordable housing consistent with the Affordable Housing Strategic Plan.
MINIMAL RISK. PAINLESS PROCESS. BEAUTIFUL SPACES.
o: 970.224.5828 | w: ripleydesigninc.com
RIPLEY DESIGN, INC. | 419 Canyon Avenue, Suite 200 | Fort Collins, CO 80521
Policy LIV 7.2 – Develop an Adequate Supply of Housing
Encourage public and private for- profit and non-profit sectors to take actions to develop and
maintain an adequate supply of single- and multiple-family housing, including mobile homes and
manufactured housing.
Policy LIV 7.4 – Maximize Land for Residential Development
Permit residential development in most neighborhoods and districts in order to maximize the
potential land available for development of housing and thereby positively influence housing
affordability.
Principle LIV 8: The City will encourage the creation and expansion of affordable
housing opportunities and preservation of the existing affordable housing supply.
Policy LIV 8.3 – Offer Incentives
Support and encourage the private development of affordable housing by offering incentives,
such as special assistance to offset the costs of the City’s impact fees and development
requirements, air rights, energy saving features, and reducing local government barriers to the
construction of and the rehabilitation of affordable housing units.
Policy LIV 8.5 – Integrate and Distribute Affordable Housing
Encourage the integration and distribution of affordable housing as part of individual
neighborhoods and the larger community rather than creating larger concentrations of affordable
units in isolated areas.
In 2019 the City’s Internal Housing Task Force presented recommendations to the City
Council. These recommendations included, among others, decreasing development
costs by (i) increasing opportunities for density bonus’s; (ii) relaxing parking
standards; and (iii) relaxing certain design standards. Staff’s follow up
memorandum outlining the City Council’s direction noted the Council’s support for the
idea of flexible development standards that also protect quality of life, safety, and
neighborhood character. Please note that the modification being sought by Kechter
Townhomes directly relate to the recommendations supported by City Council.
When approaching the programming for Kechter Townhomes, the team wanted to
maximize the density and efficiency of the project. It is not feasible to achieve the
necessary number of units while providing enough parking spaces to satisfy the parking
standards.
The proposed modification and development plan best meets the goals of the project –
to deliver the greatest amount of affordable housing that is feasible, while embracing
high quality design that recognizes and is sensitive to the surrounding community.
MINIMAL RISK. PAINLESS PROCESS. BEAUTIFUL SPACES.
o: 970.224.5828 | w: ripleydesigninc.com
RIPLEY DESIGN, INC. | 419 Canyon Avenue, Suite 200 | Fort Collins, CO 80521
The need to increase the amount of affordable housi ng in Fort Collins is widely
recognized and fully documented in the Social Sustainability Gaps Analysis, the
Housing Affordability Policy Study, the Affordable Housing Strategic Plan, the Social
Sustainability Strategic Plan and the Fort Collins City Plan/Plan Fort Collins.
The modifications to the parking standards are necessary and will allow the
development of much needed affordable housing. Without the proposed modification
the project is completely financially infeasible. With the saving of the existing trees
and on street parking setback requirements from ram ps and stop signs, there is not
sufficient room on the property to provide 107 code defined parking spaces.
The Land Use Code does not allow parking in driveways to count towards required
parking if that drive way is in front of a garage. However, in reality those driveways
will be utilized as parking for residents and visit ors alike. If you were to add in the
driveway parking the development would be able to show a surplus of 44 spaces.
In conclusion, delinquency of a few parking spaces as defined by the Land Use
Code is contrary to the community need for affordable housing. As stated above,
the Housing Affordability Policy Study, the Affordable Housing Strategic Plan, the
Social Sustainability Strategic Plan and City Plan all place affordable housing as
one of the greatest needs in Fort Collins. It would seem a dis-service to the City
and its citizen’s to deny the introduction of 54 affordable for sale units for the sake
of a small number of parking spaces that are offset by the ability to park in the
driveways.
January 26, 2021
Modification Request
Kechter Townhomes – Project Development Plan, PDP200010
3.8.30 Multi-Family and Single-Family Attached Dwelling Development Standards - Building
Variation
F(2) Variation Among Buildings. Alternative compliance approval is requested to allow two 5-plexes to
be similar to each other along the project site's east edge.
Reason for Request
The request is based on lack of detriment to the public good, and “defined community need” for affordable
housing, and “nominal and inconsequential” when considered from the perspective of the whole plan.
The current plan with two 5-plexes on the east side is a result of a series of plan iterations in the exploration
of issues with staff and community members. The iterations focused on three interrelated issues that were
more fundamental than the issue of the side-by-side 5-plexes: 1) street connections to Kechter, Quasar,
and Eclipse; and 2) preservation of large, mature cottonwood trees that staff and neighbors felt were crucial
to retain as a highly notable feature of the property, and 3) the viable number of units in the plan needed to
cover costs while keeping the units affordable.
The placement of the two 5-plexes was a secondary consideration in the final iteration as proposed. While
the project team realizes the importance of avoiding a monotonous impersonal visual and pedestrian
environment, the proposed building design and color schemes provide pedestrian-friendly visual interest
that adequately offsets the lack of additional variation that would result from eliminating a unit. Lastly, the
requested relief is a nominal and inconsequential aspect of the whole plan that does not create a detriment
to the public good.
4383 Tennyson Street, #1D • Denver, Colorado 80212 • Phone: 720.465.4320
www.mccooldevelopment.com
MINIMAL RISK. PAINLESS PROCESS. BEAUTIFUL SPACES.
o: 970.224.5828 | w: ripleydesigninc.com
January 13, 2020
Alternative Compliance Request
Kechter Townhomes – Project Development Plan
3.2.1(D) Tree Planting Standards
D. Tree Planting Standards. All developments shall establish groves and belts of trees along all city
streets, in and around parking lots, and in all landscape areas that are located within fifty (50) feet of
any building or structure in order to establish at least a partial urban tree canopy. The groves and belts
may also be combined or interspersed with other landscape areas in remaining portions of the
development to accommodate views and functions such as active recreation and storm drainage.
Reason for Request
In order for drainage to move south through the site to the detention pond along Kechter Road.
A storm line needs to be placed between the proposed dwelling units and the eastern property
line. The City of Fort Collin’s utility separation standards prevents tree planting along the
eastern property within the development. However, there are eleven (11) mature trees within
the Willow Brook Subdivision that are within the 50’ required by the code. The code requires
ten (10) along the east property line. These trees along with three new canopy trees proposed,
are exceeding the performance and purpose standards required for Kechter Townhomes as set
forth in section 3.2.1(D).
Code section 3.2.1(N) allows for alternative compliance
LUC 3.2.1 (N) Alternative Compliance . Upon request by an applicant, the decision maker
may approve an alternative landscape and tree protection plan that may be substituted in
whole or in part for a landscape plan meeting the standards of this Section.
(1) Procedure. Alternative landscape plans shall be prepared and submitted in accordance
with submittal requirements for landscape plans. Each such plan shall clearly identify and
discuss the modifications and alternatives proposed and the ways in which the plan will
better accomplish the purposes 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 Section equally well or
better than would a plan which complies with the standards of this Section.
MINIMAL RISK. PAINLESS PROCESS. BEAUTIFUL SPACES.
o: 970.224.5828 | w: ripleydesigninc.com
In reviewing the proposed alternative plan for purposes of determining whether it
accomplishes the purposes of this Section as required above, the decision maker shall take into
account whether the alternative preserves and incorporates existing vegetation in excess of
minimum standards, protects natural areas and features, maximizes tree canopy cover,
enhances neighborhood continuity and connectivity, fosters nonvehicular access or
demonstrates innovative design and use of plant materials and other landscape elements.
The existing and proposed trees on the property to the east of the development exceed the
requirements highlighted above and maximizes existing tree canopy per the highlighted
requirements above. There is 400 lineal feet of building frontage along west property. At 40’
spacing, that would require 10 trees. By utilizing the existing trees and the proposed trees, we
are exceeding that requirement by 4 trees. All of these trees are less than 50’ from the
proposed buildings and provide all of the benefits promoted by the highlighted section above.
Additional development benefit.
Although not part of the alternative compliance criteria, as an affordable housing project the
development does substantially alleviate an existing defined and described problem of City wide
concern. This is a justification allowed within the modifications of standards.
The proposed project is an affordable housing community that will result in a substantial benefit
to the City. It is designed to address the critical need for affordable owner occupied housing in
the community. The need for affordable housing is defined in City Plan and the Affordable
Housing Strategic Plan. The 2015 adopted Affordable Housing Strategic Plan sets the goal to
have 6% of Fort Collins housing stock be comprised of affordable housing (defined as housing
for residents earning 80% AMI or less), increasing to 10% beyond 2020. Currently, the City is
hundreds of units short of meeting this goal. The opportunity to provide affordable housing for
54 households is a significant step towards addressing this important community need and
provides a substantial benefit to these individuals and the community as a whole.
When approaching the programming for Kechter Townhomes, the team wanted to maximize the
density and efficiency of the project. It is not feasible to achieve the necessary number of units
while providing enough utility separation to accomplish 3.2.1(D) without utilizing the off site
trees.
The proposed alternative compliance and development plan best meets the goals of the project
– to deliver the greatest amount of affordable housing that is feasible, while embracing high
quality design that recognizes and is sensitive to the surrounding community.
4383 Tennyson Street, #1D • Denver, Colorado 80212 • Phone: 720.465.4320
www.mccooldevelopment.com
January 18, 2021
Alternative Compliance Request
Kechter Townhomes – Project Development Plan, PDP200010
3.6.3 (F) Street Connections To and From Adjacent Developments and Developable Parcels
F. Utilization and Provision of Sub -Arterial Street Connection s to and From Adjacent
Developments and Developable Parcel s. All development plans shall inco rporate 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 pote ntially developable or
redevelopable land.
Reason for Request
The original Project Development Plan included vehicular connections to both Quasar Way and Eclipse
Lane. Through the public outreach process, we heard the neighbors were not in favor of vehicular
connections at Quasar and Eclipse. Observatory Village provided written comments that included concerns
regarding traffic through the neighborhood. The TWG Team has developed an alternative compliance
development plan that eliminates the Eclipse Lane connection for vehicles but provides a bike and
pedestrian connection that will better accomplish the purpose of the Street Pattern and Connectivity
Standards while addressing neighborhood objections to street connectivity.
Alternative Compliance Review Criteria
The TWG Team explored numerous iterations of design alternatives to address neighborhood concerns
that included eliminating both Quasar and Eclipse connections. We appreciate working with the Planning
Department to present a revised development plan that maintains the Quasar Way connection and
eliminates Eclipse for vehicles. This reduction in Eclipse vehicular access and circulation maintains facilities
for bicycle and pedestrian access to the maximum extent feasible. The narrative below outlines how the
proposed alternative development plan meets the relevant Alternative Compliance Review Criteria.
• Minimizes the impacts on natural areas and features. The alternative development plan incorporates
the existing cottonwood trees in excess of minimum standards, protects natural features, maximizes
tree canopy cover, and enhances neighborhood continuity and connectivity.
• Fosters nonvehicular access. Although the Eclipse vehicular connection has been eliminated, the
design includes a bike and pedestrian access to the neighborhood to the east and south. It also
includes the provision of a walkway that would be aligned through a parcel dedicated for public access,
open space, utility, drainage, and landscape maintenance that is owned by the Willow Brook
Homeowners Association. We appreciate the City’s efforts in starting a dialogue with the HOA to allow
construction of the walkway as currently depicted with the possibility of planting additional trees.
Page 2 of 2
• Traffic distribution, Level of Service Requirements, Neighborhood Continuity and Connectivity. The
proposed roadway connection from the project site to the adjacent neighborhood to the north is
provided via Quasar Way. This roadway connection was already planned and st ubbed out to tie into
for future connectivity. The connection at Quasar is provided as it is critical for the optimal vehicular
function with the new street connection to Kechter while the most important function of Eclipse is
providing access to Kechter via Jupiter Drive. It is also more helpful than the one to Eclipse in order to
access Lady Moon Drive without significant circuitous routes.
When reviewing the project’s site generated traffic, location, and travel time/travel length, the proposed
Quasar connection will carry a small amount of traffic due to the location and the project’s low trip
generation. Based upon the site layout and roadway layout, it will be quicker for a large majority of the
vehicles within the project site to use the Kechter Road/Site Access intersection directly than traveling
through the adjacent neighborhood. The proposed alternative development plan complies with Levels
of Service (LOS) requirement for traffic, the City of Fort Collins Transportation Plan, and the Larimer
County Urban Area Street Standards.
• Land Use Efficiency. Kechter Townhomes will be an affordable housing community that furthers the
goals and objectives of the City Plan and the Affordable Housing Strategic Plan. The alternative
development plan demonstrates compliance with the Level of Service requirements, minimizes impacts
on natural features, and provides for strong bike and pedestrian connections while addressing
neighborhood connectivity objections to deliver 54 affordable housing units that are feasible while
embracing high-quality design.
DRAWING NUMBER:
ISSUED
PROJECT No.:
DRAWN BY:
REVIEWED BY:
SEAL:
PREPARED BY:
No. DESCRIPTION DATE
REVISIONS
No. DESCRIPTION DATE
ORIGINAL SIZE 24X36
E N T IT L E M E N T
D R A W IN G S
N O T F O R
C O N S T R U C T IO N
419 Canyon Ave. Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80521phone 970.224.5828 | fax 970.225.6657 | www.ripleydesigninc.com
KECHTER TWG, LLLP.
Ryan Kelly
p. 317.559.7009
e. rkelly@twgdev.com
ENGINEER
ARCHITECT
NORTHERN ENGINEERING
Andy Reese
301 N. Howes St. Suite 100
Fort Collins, CO 80521
p. 970.221.4158
STUDIO ARCHITECTURE
Aldo Sebben
1350 Pine Street, Suite 6
Boulder, CO 80302
p. 303.250.9525
OWNER
COVER SHEET
PDP SUBMITTAL
KECHTER
TOWNHOMES
12/23/2020PDP SUBMITTAL #22
07/22/2020PDP SUBMITTAL1
FORT COLLINS, CO
RL
AG
R20-029
L1.0
NORTH
UNIT TYPE SUMMARY
DWELLING UNITS (DU)TOTAL BEDROOMS PARKING
RATIO REQUIRED PARKING
SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED (2-BED)5 10 1.75/DU 9
SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED (3-BED)49 147 2.0/DU 98
TOTAL 54 157 107
PROJECT PARKING
PROVIDED REQUIRED
OFF STREET PARKING 0
ON STREET PARKING 54
SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED GARAGE PARKING 54
TOTAL 108 107
LOT SUMMARY
# OF LOTS TOTAL LOT AREA
% OF GROSS PDP
AREA
SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED 54 110304 54.12
GROSS DENSITY
AREA 217800 (5 ACRE)
TOTAL DWELLING UNITS 54
DENSITY 10.8 DU/AC
EXISTING ZONING L-M-N
GROSS AREA
TOTAL
AREA (SF)
TOTAL AREA
(ACRES)
% OF GROSS
PDP AREA
BUILDING COVERAGE 49231 1.13 22.60
DRIVES AND PARKING 13963 0.32 6.41
OPEN SPACE AND LANDSCAPE 62568 1.44 28.73
DETENTION 10699 0.25 4.91
HARDSCAPE 1010 0.02 0.46
PUBLIC STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY 66355 1.52 30.47
KECHTER STREET
RIGHT-OF-WAY 13974 0.32 6.42
TOTAL GROSS COVERAGE 217800 SF 5.00 AC 100.00
DENSITY
AREA COVERAGE
BUILDING HEIGHT
BUILDINGS MAXIMUM HEIGHT STORIES
SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED-BUILDINGS TYPE 1 D,B MAIN BLDG: 32'-5" 2
SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED-BUILDINGS TYPE 2 H,I MAIN BLDG: 32'-5" 2
SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED-BUILDINGS TYPE 3 A,C,F,G MAIN BLDG: 29'-4" 2
SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED-BUILDINGS TYPE 4 E,J,K MAIN BLDG: 29'-4" 2
LAND USE CHART
KECHTER TOWNHOMES
Project Development Plan
Director Signature
PLANNING CERTIFICATE
APPROVED BY THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND
NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
ON THIS ________ DAY OF ________, 20__.
OWNER (SIGNED)Date
THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL.
NOTARY PUBLIC ADDRESS
THIS DAY OF
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES:
AS .
(PRINT NAME)
20 .A.D., BY
THE UNDERSIGNED DOES/DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I/WE ARE THE LAWFUL OWNERS OF THE REAL
PROPERTY DESCRIBED ON THIS SITE PLAN AND DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I/WE ACCEPT THE
CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS SET FORTH ON SAID SITE PLAN.
OWNER'S CERTIFICATION
GENERAL NOTES
1. THE PROJECT SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FINAL PLANS. AMENDMENTS TO THE
PLANS MUST BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY PRIOR TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ANY
CHANGES TO THE PLANS.
2. REFER TO FINAL UTILITY PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS AND CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION FOR STORM
DRAINAGE STRUCTURES, UTILITY MAINS AND SERVICES, PROPOSED TOPOGRAPHY, STREET
IMPROVEMENTS.
3. REFER TO THE SUBDIVISION PLAT AND UTILITY PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS, AREAS AND DIMENSIONS
OF ALL EASEMENTS, LOTS, TRACTS, STREETS, WALKS AND OTHER SURVEY INFORMATION.
4. ALL CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE WITHIN THIS DEVELOPMENT PLAN WILL BE
COMPLETED IN ONE PHASE. EACH SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED AND DETACHED HOME, AND THE
LANDSCAPE ASSOCIATED WITH EACH LOT, SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN PHASES ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS.
5. A MODIFICATION TO THE 30' SINGLE FAMILY SET BACK FROM AN ARTERIAL (SEE SECTION 3.5.2(E)(1)) HAS
6. ALL SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES SHALL MEET OR EXCEED THE GARAGE DOOR STANDARDS AS
OUTLINED IN 3.5.2(E) OF THE LAND USE CODE.
7. A MINIMUM OF TWO HOUSING MODELS SHALL BE REQUIRED. THESE HOUSING MODELS SHALL MEET OR
EXCEED THE STANDARDS AS OUTLINED IN 3.5.2(C) OF THE LAND USE CODE.
8. ALL EXTERIOR LIGHTING PROVIDED SHALL COMPLY WITH THE FOOT-CANDLE REQUIREMENTS IN SECTION
3.2.4 OF THE LAND USE CODE AND SHALL USE A CONCEALED, FULLY SHIELDED LIGHT SOURCE WITH
SHARP CUT-OFF CAPABILITY SO AS TO MINIMIZE UP-LIGHT, SPILL LIGHT, GLARE AND UNNECESSARY
DIFFUSION.
9. SIGNAGE AND ADDRESSING ARE NOT PERMITTED WITH THIS PLANNING DOCUMENT AND MUST BE
APPROVED BY SEPARATE CITY PERMIT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. SIGNS MUST COMPLY WITH CITY SIGN
CODE UNLESS A SPECIFIC VARIANCE IS GRANTED BY THE CITY.
10. THE PROPERTY OWNER FOR EACH RESIDENTIAL LOT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
AND SNOW REMOVAL INSIDE THEIR PROPERTY BOUNDARY. ALL OTHER LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AND
SNOW REMOVAL SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF A HOME OWNER'S ASSOCIATION.
11. FIRE HYDRANTS MUST MEET OR EXCEED POUDRE FIRE AUTHORITY STANDARDS UNLESS AN APPROVED
VARIANCE IS PROVIDED BY THE POUDRE FIRE AUTHORITY. ALL BUILDINGS MUST PROVIDE AN APPROVED
FIRE EXTINGUISHING SYSTEM.
12. ALL SIDEWALKS AND RAMPS WITHIN THE PUBLIC ROW MUST CONFORM TO CITY STANDARDS.
ACCESSABLE RAMPS MUST BE PROVIDED AT ALL STREET AND DRIVE INTERSECTIONS AND AT ALL
DESIGNATED ACCESSABLE PARKING SPACES. ACCESSABLE PARKING SPACES MUST SLOPE NO MORE
THAN 1:48 IN ANY DIRECTION. ALL ACCESSIBLE ROUTES MUST SLOPE NO MORE THAN 1:20 IN DIRECTION
OF TRAVEL AND WITH NO MORE THAN 1:48 CROSS SLOPE.
13. PRIVATE CONDITIONS, COVENANTS, AND RESTRICTIONS (CC&R'S), OR ANY OTHER PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE
COVENANT IMPOSED ON LANDOWNERS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT, MAY NOT BE CREATED OR
ENFORCED HAVING THE EFFECT OF PROHIBITING OR LIMITING THE INSTALLATION OF XERISCAPE
LANDSCAPING, SOLAR/PHOTO-VOLTAIC COLLECTORS (IF MOUNTED FLUSH UPON ANY ESTABLISHED
ROOF LINE), CLOTHES LINES (IF LOCATED IN BACK YARDS), ODOR-CONTROLLED COMPOST BINS, OR
WHICH HAVE THE EFFECT OF REQUIRING THAT A PORTION OF ANY INDIVIDUAL LOT BE PLANTED IN TURF
GRASS.
14. ANY DAMAGED CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALK EXISTING PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, AS WELL AS
STREETS, SIDEWALKS, CURBS AND GUTTERS, DESTROYED, DAMAGED OR REMOVED DUE TO
CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT, SHALL BE REPLACED OR RESTORED TO CITY OF FORT COLLINS
STANDARDS AT THE DEVELOPER'S EXPENSE PRIOR TO THE ACCEPTANCE OF COMPLETED
IMPROVEMENTS AND/OR PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE FIRST CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
15. FIRE LANE MARKING: A FIRE LANE MARKING PLAN MUST BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE FIRE
OFFICIAL PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. WHERE REQUIRED BY THE FIRE
CODE OFFICIAL, APPROVED SIGNS OR OTHER APPROVED NOTICES THAT INCLUDE THE WORDS NO
PARKING FIRE LANE SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS TO IDENTIFY SUCH
ROADS OR PROHIBIT THE OBSTRUCTION THEREOF. THE MEANS BY WHICH FIRE LANES ARE DESIGNATED
SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A CLEAN AND LEGIBLE CONDITION AT ALL TIMES AD BE REPLACED OR
REPAIRED WHEN NECESSARY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE VISIBILITY.
16. PREMISE IDENTIFICATION: AN ADDRESSING PLAN IS REQUIRED TO BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE
CITY AND POUDRE FIRE AUTHORITY PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
UNLESS THE PRIVATE DRIVE IS NAMED, MONUMENT SIGNAGE MAY BE REQUIRED TO ALLOW
WAY-FINDING. ALL BUILDINGS SHALL HAVE ADDRESS NUMBERS, BUILDING NUMBERS OR APPROVED
BUILDING IDENTIFICATION PLACED IN A POSITION THAT IS PLAINLY LEGIBLE, VISIBLE FROM THE STREET
OR ROAD FRONTING THE PROPERTY, AND POSTED WITH A MINIMUM OF SIX-INCH NUMERALS ON A
CONTRASTING BACKGROUND. WHERE ACCESS IS BY MEANS OF A PRIVATE ROAD AND THE BUILDING
CANNOT BE VIEWED FROM THE PUBLIC WAY, A MONUMENT, POLE OR OTHER SIGN OR MEANS SHALL BE
USED TO IDENTIFY THE STRUCTURE.
SITE
SCALE: 1" = 1200'
VICINITY MAP
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
GROSS / NET (GROSS AREA AND
NET AREA ARE THE SAME)
SHEET TITLE SHEET #
COVER SHEET L1.0
SITE PLAN L2.0
SITE PLAN L2.1
LANDSCAPE PLAN L3.0
LANDSCAPE PLAN L3.1
LANDSCAPE NOTES L3.2
TREE MITIGATION PLAN L4.0
FLOOR PLANS A1.1
ELEVATIONS A1.2
COLOR ELEVATIONS A1.3
3D VIEWS A1.4
TYPICAL DETAILS A1.5
FLOOR PLANS A2.1
ELEVATIONS A2.2
COLOR ELEVATIONS A2.3
3D VIEWS A2.4
FLOOR PLANS A3.1
ELEVATIONS A3.2
COLOR ELEVATIONS A3.3
COLOR ELEVATIONS A3.3A
3D VIEWS A3.4
3D VIEWS A3.4A
FLOOR PLANS A4.1
ELEVATIONS A4.2
COLOR ELEVATIONS A4.3
COLOR ELEVATIONS A4.3A
3D VIEWS A4.4
3D VIEWS A4.4A
SHEET INDEX
A TRACT OF LAND SITUATE IN THE SE 14 OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 6 NORTH,
RANGE 68 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO,
WHICH CONSIDERING THE EAST LINE OF SAID SE 14 AS BEARING S 03 DEGREES
37'29" E AND WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE THERETO, IS
MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE S14 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 4 AND RUN THENCE N 03
DEGREES 20W, 624.68 FEET;
THENCE EAST 349.25 FEET;
THENCE S 03 DEGREES 30' E 624.68 FEET;
THENCE WEST 349.25 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING
HY DGAS
CONTROLIRR
CONTROLIRR
CONTROLIRR
CONTROLIRR
A RV
H2O
HY DCONTROLIRR
CONTROLIRR
CONTROLIRR
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXWXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXG G G G G G G G
GGW53'-0"
ROW
30'-0"
ROAD
4'-6" ATTACHED
WALK
7'-0"
PKWY
7'-0"
PKWY
4'-6"
WALK
53'-0"
ROW 9'-0"
UTILITY ESMT
9'-0"
UTILITY ESMT
30'-0"
ROAD
4'-6"
WALK
4'-6"
WALK
9'-0"
UTILITY ESMT 9'-0"
UTILITY ESMT
30'-0"
ROAD
53'-0"
ROW
4'-0"
WALK
9'-0"
UTILITY ESMT
4'-6"
WALK
7'-0"
PKWY
ADA RAMP, TYP.
BENCH
9'-0"
UTILTIY ESMT
4'-6" WALK
7'-0" PKWY
30'-0"
ROAD
53'-0"
ROW
7'-0" PKWY
4'-6" WALK
9'-0"
UTILITY ESMT
4'-0"
WALK
HYDRANT, TYP.
HYDRANT
PROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINE
7'-0"
PKWY 7'-0"
PKWY
8'-0"
12'-0"
18'-2"
19'-3"
19'-3"
6'-0"
DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
ESMT
8'-0"
7'-0"
PEDESTRIAN
ESMT
5'-0"
PEDESTRIAN
ESMT
14'-0"
DRAINAGE AND
UTILITY ESMT
6'-0"
DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
ESMT
8'-0"
6'-0"
DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
ESMT
8'-0"
6'-0"
DRAINAGE AND UTILITY ESMT
8'-0"
6'-0"
DRAINAGE AND UTILITY ESMT
10'-4"
6'-0"
DRAINAGE AND UTILITY ESMT
ECLIPSE LANEQUASAR WAYBUILDING BBUILDING CBUILDING JBUILDING KBUILDING IBUILDING HBUILDING D
BUILDING E
BUILDING FBUILDING HBUILDING GSTREET A
STREET BSTREET DSTREET BLOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 5
TRACT D
LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 3 LOT 4
LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 3 LOT 4 LOT 5 LOT 6
TRACT A
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 5
LOT 6 LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 5
LOT 6
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
BLOCK 8
BLOCK 1
BLOCK 2BLOCK 3BLOCK 11BLOCK 10BLOCK 12BLOCK 9BLOCK 7BLOCK 6PARCEL W
WILLOW BROOK
PARCEL R
WILLOW BROOK
UNPLATTED
PARCEL NO.
8604000904 PARCEL WWILLOW BROOKPARCEL XWILLOW BROOKLOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 5
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
8'-0"
14'-2"16'-1"
TRANSFORMER, TYP.
12'-0"
TRANSFORMER, TYP.
BENCH
4'-6" ATTACHED WALK
EXISTING TREE
DRIP LINE
ON STREET PARKING SPACE FOR INFORMATION ONLY.
NO TO BE STRIPED.
24'-3"
20'-5"
RAMP LOCATION IS CONCEPTUAL
AND WILL BE COORDINATED WITH
FORESTRY TO SAVE THE EXISTING
TREE.
18'-11"
4'-6" WALK
WS WS
WS WWWWWWSS SS SS SS SS
SS SS
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSWSW SW SW SWS WSW SWSW
S
WS WS WS WS WS
SS SS
WS
SS SS
SS SS
WS WS
WS WS
SS SS
SS SS
WS
WS WS
SS SS
WS
SS SS
SSSS
WSWS
WS
SSSS
SSSS
SSSS
SSSS
WSWS
WS
SSSS
SSSS
SSSS
WS
SSSS
WS
WS
WS
W
S SSSSSSSSWSWSWS WS WS
WS WSSS
SSSSSS SS
SS SS
WS
WS WS
SS SS
WS WS
WS
SS SS
WS
SS SS
WS
SSSS
SSSS
SS SS
SS SS
WS
W S WS
WS
WSWS
WSWS
WSWS
SS SS
SS SS
WS WS
WS
SS SS
WS
SSSSSS SSSSWSWSWSWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWSSSSSSSSSS
SSGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGEEEEEEEEEEEESSSS
SSSS
SSSS
SSSS
SSSS
SSSS
SSSS
SSSSSSSSSSWSWSWSWSWSWSWSWS
W SWS
WS
E
EEEEEEEEEEEEEE
E EEEEEEE E
E E EEEEEE E
EEEEEWW
SSSS
WW
WSWS
GG
xx
= SANITARY SEWER SERVICE UTILITY
=WATER UTILITY
=WATER UTILITY SERVICE
=STORM DRAIN UTILITY
= GAS UTILITY
= PROPERTY BOUNDARY
= DRAINAGE OR UTILITY EASEMENT
= LOT LINE
=EXISTING FENCE
=EXISTING TREE
= PICKET FENCE
DRAWING NUMBER:
ISSUED
PROJECT No.:
DRAWN BY:
REVIEWED BY:
SEAL:
PREPARED BY:
No. DESCRIPTION DATE
REVISIONS
No. DESCRIPTION DATE
ORIGINAL SIZE 24X36
E N T IT L E M E N T
D R A W IN G S
N O T F O R
C O N S T R U C T IO N
KECHTER TWG, LLLP.
Ryan Kelly
p. 317.559.7009
e. rkelly@twgdev.com
ENGINEER
ARCHITECT
NORTHERN ENGINEERING
Andy Reese
301 N. Howes St. Suite 100
Fort Collins, CO 80521
p. 970.221.4158
STUDIO ARCHITECTURE
Aldo Sebben
1350 Pine Street, Suite 6
Boulder, CO 80302
p. 303.250.9525
OWNER
419 Canyon Ave. Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80521phone 970.224.5828 | fax 970.225.6657 | www.ripleydesigninc.com
SITE PLAN
PDP SUBMITTAL
KECHTER
TOWNHOMES
12/23/2020PDP SUBMITTAL #22
07/22/2020PDP SUBMITTAL1
FORT COLLINS, CO
RL
AG
R20-029
L2.0
NORTH
0 10 20 40
SCALE: 1"=20'-0"
LEGEND
MATCH LINE SEE SHEET L2.0
MATCH LINE SEE SHEET L2.1
S FES
D
S
D
T
CTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVEEEEEEEEEEE E EXXX
X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
E E E E E
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
C
T
V
CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV
CTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXSTSTST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST STSTSTST
SSSSSS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS
SS SS
SSSSSS8'-0"
30'-0"
ROAD
53'-0"
ROW
9'-0"
UTILITY ESMT
4'-6" WALK
7'-0" PKWY
7'-0"
PKWY
4'-6" WALK
9'-0"
UTILITY ESMT
TRANSFORMER, TYP.
TRANSFORMER, TYP.
8'-0"
8'-0"
PROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINE
HYDRANT, TYP.
ADA RAMP, TYP.
BENCH
6'-0"
DRAINAGE AND
UTILITY ESMT
6'-0"
DRAINAGE AND UTILITY ESMT
15'-0" EXISTING ESMT
KECHTER ROAD ROW
DETENTION POND
(TRACT B)
RAIN GARDEN A
(TRACT C)BUILDING ABUILDING IBUILDING HKECHTER ROAD
STREET C
STREET DSTREET BLOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 4
LOT 5
LOT 1
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 4
LOT 3 BLOCK 11BLOCK 12BLOCK 5PARCEL NO. 8609128901
UNPLATTED
PARCEL NO.
8604000904 PARCEL XWILLOW BROOKRAIN GARDEN B
LOT 4
LOT 5
BUILDING GBLOCK 318'-2"
14'-0" DRAINAGE AND
UTILITY ESMT12'-0"10'-5"
8'-0"
49'-1"
12'-0"4'-6" ATTACHED
WALK
EXISTING TREE DRIP LINE
30'-0" ROAD53'-0" ROW
4'-6" WALK
4'-6" WALK
7'-0" PKWY
7'-0" PKWY
ON STREET PARKING SPACE FOR
INFORMATION ONLY. NOT TO BE
STRIPED
18'-11"SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SSSSSSSSWWWS
SS SS
SS SS
WS WS
SS SS
SS SS
WS
SS SS
SS SS
SSSS
SSSS
WSWS
WS
WSWS
SS SS
WS
SS SS
SS SS
WS
WS WSWW
WWW W W W W W W
WWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWGGGGGG
G G G G G G
G
G G
G
G GGGGGWS
WS WS
SS SS
WS WS
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSS
WW
WSWS
GG
xx
= SANITARY SEWER SERVICE UTILITY
=WATER UTILITY
=WATER UTILITY SERVICE
=STORM DRAIN UTILITY
= GAS UTILITY
= PROPERTY BOUNDARY
= DRAINAGE OR UTILITY EASEMENT
= LOT LINE
=EXISTING FENCE
=EXISTING TREE
= PICKET FENCE
DRAWING NUMBER:
ISSUED
PROJECT No.:
DRAWN BY:
REVIEWED BY:
SEAL:
PREPARED BY:
No. DESCRIPTION DATE
REVISIONS
No. DESCRIPTION DATE
ORIGINAL SIZE 24X36
E N T IT L E M E N T
D R A W IN G S
N O T F O R
C O N S T R U C T IO N
KECHTER TWG, LLLP.
Ryan Kelly
p. 317.559.7009
e. rkelly@twgdev.com
ENGINEER
ARCHITECT
NORTHERN ENGINEERING
Andy Reese
301 N. Howes St. Suite 100
Fort Collins, CO 80521
p. 970.221.4158
STUDIO ARCHITECTURE
Aldo Sebben
1350 Pine Street, Suite 6
Boulder, CO 80302
p. 303.250.9525
OWNER
419 Canyon Ave. Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80521phone 970.224.5828 | fax 970.225.6657 | www.ripleydesigninc.com
SITE PLAN
PDP SUBMITTAL
KECHTER
TOWNHOMES
12/23/2020PDP SUBMITTAL #22
07/22/2020PDP SUBMITTAL1
FORT COLLINS, CO
RL
AG
R20-029
L2.1
NORTH
0 10 20 40
SCALE: 1"=20'-0"
LEGEND
MATCH LINE SEE SHEET L2.0
MATCH LINE SEE SHEET L2.1
GAS
CONTROLIRR
CONTROLIRR
CONTROLIRR
CONTROLIRR
CONTROLIRR
CONTROLIRR
CONTROLIRR
W
G G G G G G G G
GGW1 - UA
TCG - 2
2 - AG2
2 - AG
1 - TCG
AO - 1
CSP - 2
QMU - 2
QMU - 1
3 - CSP
UA - 2
AG - 2
TCG - 1
2 - MB
2 - SG
2 - SG
2 - MSR
2 - MSR
JW - 3
PE2 - 3
JW - 3
GP - 1
JW - 3
PE2 - 3
GP - 2
1 - COO
2 - TCG
AG2 - 1
3 - GDS
MC - 2
COO - 2
QMU - 1
3 - AC2
GP - 1
GP - 3
PI - 3
MC - 1
2 - MB
PE2 - 3
3 - CP2
TCG - 1
GP - 1
WS WS
WS WWWWWWSS SS SS SS SS
SS SS
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSWSW SW S
W SWS WSW SWSW
S
WS WS WS WS WS
SS SS
WS
SS SS
SS SS
WS WS
WS WS
SS SS
SS SS
WS
WS WS
SS SS
WS
SS SS
SSSS
WSWS
WS
SSSS
SSSS
SSSS
SSSS
WSWS
WS
SSSS
SSSS
SSSS
WS
SSSS
WS
WS
WS
W
S SSSSSSSSWSWSWS WS WS
WS WSSS
SSSSSS SS
SS SS
WS
WS WS
SS SS
WS WS
WS
SS SS
WS
SS SS
WS
SSSS
SSSS
SS SS
SS SS
WS
W S WS
WS
WSWS
WSWS
WSWS
SS SS
SS SS
WS WS
WS
SS SS
WS
SSSSSS SSSSWSWSWSWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWSSS S
SSSSSSS SGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGEEEEEEEEEEEESSSS
SSSS
SSSS
SSSS
SSSS
SSSS
SSSS
SSSSSSSSSSWSWSWSWSWSWSWSWS
W SWS
WS
E
EEEEEEEEEEEEEE
E EEEEEEE E
E E EEEEEE E
EEEEEWW
1
L3.1
ECLIPSE LANEQUASAR WAYBUILDING BBUILDING CBUILDING JBUILDING KBUILDING IBUILDING HBUILDING D
BUILDING E
BUILDING FBUILDING HBUILDING GSTREET A
STREET BSTREET DSTREET BLOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 5
TRACT D
LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 3 LOT 4
LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 3 LOT 4 LOT 5 LOT 6
TRACT A
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 5
LOT 6 LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 5
LOT 6
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
BLOCK 8
BLOCK 1
BLOCK 2BLOCK 3BLOCK 11BLOCK 10BLOCK 12BLOCK 9BLOCK 7BLOCK 6PARCEL W
WILLOW BROOK
PARCEL R
WILLOW BROOK
UNPLATTED
PARCEL NO.
8604000904 PARCEL WWILLOW BROOKPARCEL XWILLOW BROOKLOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 5
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
DRIP LINE
RAMP LOCATION IS CONCEPTUAL
AND WILL BE COORDINATED WITH
FORESTRY TO SAVE THE EXISTING TREE.
30'-6"38'-0"29'-2"
23'-8"36'-9"32'-6"
21'-4"
36'-10"
24'-11"
30'-0"
30'-10"
24'-4"
32'-5"
28'-10"
31'-8"
18'-5"
EXISTING TREES WITHIN 50' OF BUILDING
WILL BE USED FOR TREE
STOCKING.
FENCING DETAILS
02 LANDSCAPE MATERIAL
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION QTY DETAIL
WOOD MULCH (MEDIUM HYDROZONE) 10,015 SF
IRRIGATED TURF (HIGH HYDROZONE) 28,064 SF
ROCK MULCH (MEDIUM HYDROZONE) 10,285 SF
NATIVE SEED MIX (LOW HYDROZONE) 24,833 SF
DETENTION POND SEED MIX 5,861 SF
EXISTING TURF 3,468 SF
RAIN GARDEN (VERY LOW) 1,672 SF
REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE
TREES QTY COMMON NAME CONT CAL
AC2 3 COLUMNAR NORWAY MAPLE B & B 1"
AO 7 OHIO BUCKEYE B & B 1"
CSP 8 WESTERN CATALPA B & B 1"
COO 6 WESTERN HACKBERRY B & B 1"
CP2 9 PRAIRIE SENTINEL COMMON HACKBERRY B & B 1"
GP 12 PRINCETON SENTRY MAIDENHAIR TREE B & B 1"
GDS 6 SEEDLESS COFFEE TREE `ESPRESSO` B & B 1"
PA2 3 LANCELEAF POPLAR B & B 1"
QB 3 BUCKLEY OAK B & B 1"
QMU 8 CHINKAPIN OAK B & B 1"
TCG 7 GREENSPIRE LINDEN B & B 1"
UA 5 ACCOLADE ELM B & B 1"
EVERGREEN TREES QTY COMMON NAME CONT CAL
JW 15 WOODWARD COLUMNAR JUNIPER B & B 6` HT
PI 3 FASTIGIATE SPRUCE B & B 6` HT
PE2 9 ERECT SCOTCH PINE B & B 6` HT
MITIGATION TREES QTY COMMON NAME CONT CAL
AG4 2 BIGTOOTH MAPLE B & B 2"
AG3 3 AUTUMN BRILLIANCE APPLE SERVICEBERRY B & B 2"
ORNAMENTAL TREES QTY COMMON NAME CONT CAL
AG2 7 BIGTOOTH MAPLE B & B 1"
AG 6 `AUTUMN BRILLIANCE` SERVICEBERRY B & B 1"
CC 1 EASTERN REDBUD B & B 1"
MSR 4 STAR MAGNOLIA B & B 1"
MC 4 CORALBURST CRABAPPLE B & B 1"
MB 4 RED BARRON CRAB APPLE B & B 1"
PAA 2 AUTUMN BLAZE PEAR B & B 1"
SG 6 PRESIDENT GREVY LILAC B & B 1"
SSSS
WW
WSWS
GG
xx
M
= SANITARY SEWER SERVICE UTILITY
=WATER UTILITY
=WATER UTILITY SERVICE
=STORM DRAIN UTILITY
= GAS UTILITY
= PROPERTY BOUNDARY
= DRAINAGE OR UTILITY EASEMENT
= LOT LINE
=EXISTING FENCE
=EXISTING TREE
=MITIGATION TREE
=PICKET FENCE
DRAWING NUMBER:
ISSUED
PROJECT No.:
DRAWN BY:
REVIEWED BY:
SEAL:
PREPARED BY:
No. DESCRIPTION DATE
REVISIONS
No. DESCRIPTION DATE
ORIGINAL SIZE 24X36
E N T IT L E M E N T
D R A W IN G S
N O T F O R
C O N S T R U C T IO N
419 Canyon Ave. Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80521phone 970.224.5828 | fax 970.225.6657 | www.ripleydesigninc.com
KECHTER TWG, LLLP.
Ryan Kelly
p. 317.559.7009
e. rkelly@twgdev.com
ENGINEER
ARCHITECT
NORTHERN ENGINEERING
Andy Reese
301 N. Howes St. Suite 100
Fort Collins, CO 80521
p. 970.221.4158
STUDIO ARCHITECTURE
Aldo Sebben
1350 Pine Street, Suite 6
Boulder, CO 80302
p. 303.250.9525
OWNER
LANDSCAPE PLAN
PDP SUBMITTAL
KECHTER
TOWNHOMES
12/23/2020PDP SUBMITTAL #22
07/22/2020PDP SUBMITTAL1
FORT COLLINS, CO
RL
AG
R20-029
L3.0
NORTH
0 10 20 40
SCALE: 1"=20'-0"
A PERMIT MUST BE OBTAINED FROM THE CITY FORESTER BEFORE ANY TREES OR SHRUBS AS
NOTED ON THIS PLAN ARE PLANTED, PRUNED OR REMOVED IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. THIS
INCLUDES ZONES BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND CURB, MEDIANS AND OTHER CITY PROPERTY.
THIS PERMIT SHALL APPROVE THE LOCATION AND SPECIES TO BE PLANTED. FAILURE TO OBTAIN
THIS PERMIT IS A VIOLATION OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS CODE SUBJECT TO CITATION
(SECTION 27-31) AND MAY ALSO RESULT IN REPLACING OR RELOCATING TREES AND A HOLD ON
CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.MATCHLINE SEE SHEET L3.1
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET L3.0
LEGEND
NOTE: ALL MULCH BEDS WILL HAVE PLANT MATERIALS IN THEM.
INDIVIDUAL PLANTS WILL BE PLACED AND LABELED AT FINAL
PLANS.
EXISTING TREES WITHIN 50' OF BUILDING
WILL BE USED FOR TREE
STOCKING.
PLANT SCHEDULE
NOTE: TREES IDENTIFIED AS MITIGATION TREES SHALL BE
PROVIDED AT THE INCREASE SIZE PER DIVISION 3.2.1 (F)(1) OF
THE FORT COLLINS LAND USE CODE.
S FES
D
S
D
T
CTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVEEEEEEEEEEE E E
E E E E E
C
T
V
CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV
CTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVSTST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST STSTSTST
SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS
SS SS
SSSSSS2 - QMU
QMU - 1
AG4 - 2
1 - PAA
1 - PAA
GP - 2
JW - 3
AG - 2
CP2 - 3
JW - 3
AG3 - 3
CC - 1QMU - 1
UA - 2
2 - SG QB - 1
3 - COO
4 - AG2
3 - GDS
AO - 3
2 - QB
2 - CSP
2 - AO
1 - AO
3 - CP2
1 - MC
GP - 1
3 - GP
PA2 - 3
M
M
M
M
MSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SSSSSSSSWWWS
SS SS
SS SS
WS WS
SS SS
SS SS
WS
SS SS
SS SS
SSSS
SSSS
WSWS
WS
WSWS
SS SS
WS
SS SS
SS SS
WS
WS WSWW
WWW W W W W W W
WWWW
WWWWWWWWWWGGGGGG
G G G G G G
G
G G
G
G GGGGGWS
WS WS
SS SS
WS WS
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDETENTION POND
(TRACT B)
RAIN GARDEN A
(TRACT C)BUILDING ABUILDING IBUILDING HKECHTER ROAD
STREET C
STREET DSTREET BLOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 4
LOT 5
LOT 1
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 4
LOT 3 BLOCK 11BLOCK 12BLOCK 5UNPLATTED
PARCEL NO.
8604000904 PARCEL XWILLOW BROOKRAIN GARDEN B
LOT 4
LOT 5
BUILDING GBLOCK 3DRIP LINE
18'-5"
02 LANDSCAPE MATERIAL
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION QTY DETAIL
WOOD MULCH (MEDIUM HYDROZONE) 10,015 SF
IRRIGATED TURF (HIGH HYDROZONE) 28,064 SF
ROCK MULCH (MEDIUM HYDROZONE) 10,285 SF
NATIVE SEED MIX (LOW HYDROZONE) 24,833 SF
DETENTION POND SEED MIX 5,861 SF
EXISTING TURF 3,468 SF
RAIN GARDEN (VERY LOW) 1,672 SF
REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE
TREES QTY COMMON NAME CONT CAL
AC2 3 COLUMNAR NORWAY MAPLE B & B 1"
AO 7 OHIO BUCKEYE B & B 1"
CSP 8 WESTERN CATALPA B & B 1"
COO 6 WESTERN HACKBERRY B & B 1"
CP2 9 PRAIRIE SENTINEL COMMON HACKBERRY B & B 1"
GP 12 PRINCETON SENTRY MAIDENHAIR TREE B & B 1"
GDS 6 SEEDLESS COFFEE TREE `ESPRESSO` B & B 1"
PA2 3 LANCELEAF POPLAR B & B 1"
QB 3 BUCKLEY OAK B & B 1"
QMU 8 CHINKAPIN OAK B & B 1"
TCG 7 GREENSPIRE LINDEN B & B 1"
UA 5 ACCOLADE ELM B & B 1"
EVERGREEN TREES QTY COMMON NAME CONT CAL
JW 15 WOODWARD COLUMNAR JUNIPER B & B 6` HT
PI 3 FASTIGIATE SPRUCE B & B 6` HT
PE2 9 ERECT SCOTCH PINE B & B 6` HT
MITIGATION TREES QTY COMMON NAME CONT CAL
AG4 2 BIGTOOTH MAPLE B & B 2"
AG3 3 AUTUMN BRILLIANCE APPLE SERVICEBERRY B & B 2"
ORNAMENTAL TREES QTY COMMON NAME CONT CAL
AG2 7 BIGTOOTH MAPLE B & B 1"
AG 6 `AUTUMN BRILLIANCE` SERVICEBERRY B & B 1"
CC 1 EASTERN REDBUD B & B 1"
MSR 4 STAR MAGNOLIA B & B 1"
MC 4 CORALBURST CRABAPPLE B & B 1"
MB 4 RED BARRON CRAB APPLE B & B 1"
PAA 2 AUTUMN BLAZE PEAR B & B 1"
SG 6 PRESIDENT GREVY LILAC B & B 1"
SSSS
WW
WSWS
GG
xx
M
= SANITARY SEWER SERVICE UTILITY
=WATER UTILITY
=WATER UTILITY SERVICE
=STORM DRAIN UTILITY
= GAS UTILITY
= PROPERTY BOUNDARY
= DRAINAGE OR UTILITY EASEMENT
= LOT LINE
=EXISTING FENCE
=EXISTING TREE
=MITIGATION TREE
=PICKET FENCE
DRAWING NUMBER:
ISSUED
PROJECT No.:
DRAWN BY:
REVIEWED BY:
SEAL:
PREPARED BY:
No. DESCRIPTION DATE
REVISIONS
No. DESCRIPTION DATE
ORIGINAL SIZE 24X36
E N T IT L E M E N T
D R A W IN G S
N O T F O R
C O N S T R U C T IO N
419 Canyon Ave. Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80521phone 970.224.5828 | fax 970.225.6657 | www.ripleydesigninc.com
KECHTER TWG, LLLP.
Ryan Kelly
p. 317.559.7009
e. rkelly@twgdev.com
ENGINEER
ARCHITECT
NORTHERN ENGINEERING
Andy Reese
301 N. Howes St. Suite 100
Fort Collins, CO 80521
p. 970.221.4158
STUDIO ARCHITECTURE
Aldo Sebben
1350 Pine Street, Suite 6
Boulder, CO 80302
p. 303.250.9525
OWNER
LANDSCAPE PLAN
PDP SUBMITTAL
KECHTER
TOWNHOMES
12/23/2020PDP SUBMITTAL #22
07/22/2020PDP SUBMITTAL1
FORT COLLINS, CO
RL
AG
R20-029
L3.1
NORTH
0 10 20 40
SCALE: 1"=20'-0"
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET L3.1
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET L3.0
LEGEND
PLANT SCHEDULE
NOTE: TREES IDENTIFIED AS MITIGATION TREES SHALL BE
PROVIDED AT THE INCREASE SIZE PER DIVISION 3.2.1 (F)(1) OF
THE FORT COLLINS LAND USE CODE.
NOTE: ALL MULCH BEDS WILL HAVE PLANT MATERIALS IN THEM.
INDIVIDUAL PLANTS WILL BE PLACED AND LABELED AT FINAL
PLANS.
A PERMIT MUST BE OBTAINED FROM THE CITY FORESTER BEFORE ANY TREES OR SHRUBS AS
NOTED ON THIS PLAN ARE PLANTED, PRUNED OR REMOVED IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. THIS
INCLUDES ZONES BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND CURB, MEDIANS AND OTHER CITY PROPERTY.
THIS PERMIT SHALL APPROVE THE LOCATION AND SPECIES TO BE PLANTED. FAILURE TO OBTAIN
THIS PERMIT IS A VIOLATION OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS CODE SUBJECT TO CITATION
(SECTION 27-31) AND MAY ALSO RESULT IN REPLACING OR RELOCATING TREES AND A HOLD ON
CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
FENCING DETAILS
3/4" = 1'-0"
4" X 4" CEDAR POST, PAINTED WHITE1
1" X 4" CEDAR PICKET, PAINTED WHITE2
6" X 6" CEDAR POST, PAINTED WHITE. LOCATED AT END OF FENCE RUNS.3
2" X 4" CEDAR RAIL, PAINTED WHITE4
1
1
3
4
44 4
36" TYPICAL 36" START/END SECTION 36" GATE
ELEVATION
PLAN
ELEVATION
PLAN
ELEVATION
PLAN
2'-11"
2"
6"
2'
4"
2"
2"
4"3"
4
2"
4"
1'-10"
8' O.C.3'-4"
6" X 6" WOOD FLAT FANCY POST CAP BY HOME DEPOT MODEL #189301, PAINTED WHITE5
5
2'-8"
1"
1"
1"1"1"1"
OP-KET-011
TREES CODE QTY BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT CAL
AC2 3 ACER PLATANOIDES `COLUMNARE` / COLUMNAR NORWAY MAPLE B & B 1"
AO 7 AESCULUS GLABRA / OHIO BUCKEYE B & B 1"
CSP 8 CATALPA SPECIOSA / WESTERN CATALPA B & B 1"
COO 6 CELTIS OCCIDENTALIS / WESTERN HACKBERRY B & B 1"
CP2 9 CELTIS OCCIDENTALIS PRARIE SENTINEL / PRAIRIE SENTINEL COMMON HACKBERRY B & B 1"
GP 12 GINKGO BILOBA `PRINCETON SENTRY` / PRINCETON SENTRY MAIDENHAIR TREE B & B 1"
GDS 6 GYMNOCLADUS DIOICUS `ESPRESSO` / SEEDLESS COFFEE TREE `ESPRESSO` B & B 1"
PA2 3 POPULUS X ACUMINATA / LANCELEAF POPLAR B & B 1"
QB 3 QUERCUS BUCKLEYI / BUCKLEY OAK B & B 1"
QMU 8 QUERCUS MUEHLENBERGII / CHINKAPIN OAK B & B 1"
TCG 7 TILIA CORDATA `GREENSPIRE` / GREENSPIRE LINDEN B & B 1"
UA 5 ULMUS X `ACCOLADE` / ACCOLADE ELM B & B 1"
EVERGREEN TREES CODE QTY BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT CAL
JW 15 JUNIPERUS SCOPULORUM `WOODWARD` / WOODWARD COLUMNAR JUNIPER B & B 6` HT
PI 3 PICEA PUNGENS `ISELI FASTIGIATE` / FASTIGIATE SPRUCE B & B 6` HT
PE2 9 PINUS SYLVESTRIS `FASTIGIATA` / ERECT SCOTCH PINE B & B 6` HT
MITIGATION TREES CODE QTY BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT CAL
AG4 2 ACER GRANDIDENTATUM / BIGTOOTH MAPLE B & B 2"
AG3 3 AMELANCHIER X GRANDIFLORA `AUTUMN BRILLIANCE` / AUTUMN BRILLIANCE APPLE SERVICEBERRY B & B 2"
ORNAMENTAL TREES CODE QTY BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT CAL
AG2 7 ACER GRANDIDENTATUM / BIGTOOTH MAPLE B & B 1"
AG 6 AMELANCHIER X GRANDIFLORA `AUTUMN BRILLIANCE` / `AUTUMN BRILLIANCE` SERVICEBERRY B & B 1"
CC 1 CERCIS CANADENSIS / EASTERN REDBUD B & B 1"
MSR 4 MAGNOLIA STELLATA `ROYAL STAR` / STAR MAGNOLIA B & B 1"
MC 4 MALUS X `COARALBURST` / CORALBURST CRABAPPLE B & B 1"
MB 4 MALUS X `RED BARRON` / RED BARRON CRAB APPLE B & B 1"
PAA 2 PYRUS CALLERYANA `AUTUMN BLAZE` / AUTUMN BLAZE PEAR B & B 1"
SG 6 SYRINGA VULGARIS `PRESIDENT GREVY` / PRESIDENT GREVY LILAC B & B 1"
HYDROZONE AREA (SF)WATER NEEDED
(GALLONS/SF)
ANNUAL WATER USE
(GALLONS)
HIGH 28064.00 18 505,152.00
MODERATE 20300.00 10 203,000.00
LOW 24833.00 3 74499.00
VERY LOW 1672 0 0.00
TOTAL 74,869 10.4536 782,651
ANNUAL WATER USE NOT TO EXCEED 15 GAL./SF. AVERAGE OVER THE SITE
WATER USE TABLE
DRAWING NUMBER:
ISSUED
PROJECT No.:
DRAWN BY:
REVIEWED BY:
SEAL:
PREPARED BY:
No. DESCRIPTION DATE
REVISIONS
No. DESCRIPTION DATE
ORIGINAL SIZE 24X36
E N T IT L E M E N T
D R A W IN G S
N O T F O R
C O N S T R U C T IO N
419 Canyon Ave. Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80521phone 970.224.5828 | fax 970.225.6657 | www.ripleydesigninc.com
KECHTER TWG, LLLP.
Ryan Kelly
p. 317.559.7009
e. rkelly@twgdev.com
ENGINEER
ARCHITECT
NORTHERN ENGINEERING
Andy Reese
301 N. Howes St. Suite 100
Fort Collins, CO 80521
p. 970.221.4158
STUDIO ARCHITECTURE
Aldo Sebben
1350 Pine Street, Suite 6
Boulder, CO 80302
p. 303.250.9525
OWNER
LANDSCAPE NOTES
PDP SUBMITTAL
KECHTER
TOWNHOMES
12/23/2020PDP SUBMITTAL #22
07/22/2020PDP SUBMITTAL1
FORT COLLINS, CO
RL
AG
R20-029
L3.2
NORTH
0 10 20 40
SCALE: 1"=20'-0"
REQUIRED LANDSCAPE
LINEAR FEET PROVIDED
TREES
REQUIRED
TREES DIFFERENCE
FRONTAGE OF STREETS A, B, C, D 2330 59
-CANOPY STREET TREES PROVIDED AT 30'-40' O.C 41
-ORNAMENTAL STREET TREES
PROVIDED AT 20'-40' O.C.18
TOTAL PROVIDED 59 0
KECHTER ROAD 290 8 0
-CANOPY STREET TREES PROVIDED AT 30'-40' O.C 8
TOTAL PROVIDED 8 0
MITIGATION TREES 5 5 0
OVERALL TOTAL 72 72 0
REQUIRED LANDSCAPE
1.PLANT QUALITY: ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE A-GRADE OR NO. 1 GRADE - FREE OF ANY DEFECTS, OF
NORMAL HEALTH, HEIGHT, LEAF DENSITY AND SPREAD APPROPRIATE TO THE SPECIES AS DEFINED BY
THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN (AAN) STANDARDS. ALL TREES SHALL BE BALL AND
BURLAP OR EQUIVALENT. UPRIGHT JUNIPERS MAY BE IN CONTAINER. PLANTS MAY BE DOWNSIZED TO
THE FOLLOWING SIZES.
-CANOPY TREES (AS STREET TREE) = 1.25" CAL. -CANOPY TREES = 1.0" CAL.
-ORNAMENTAL TREES = 1.0" CAL. -EVERGREEN TREES = 4.0' HT. -SHRUBS = 1 GALLON CONT.
2.IRRIGATION: ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS WITHIN THE SITE INCLUDING TURF, SEED, SHRUB BEDS AND TREE
AREAS SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM. THE IRRIGATION PLAN MUST BE
REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS WATER UTILITIES DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO THE
ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT. ALL TURF AND SEED AREAS SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH AN
AUTOMATIC POP-UP IRRIGATION SYSTEM. ALL SHRUB BEDS AND TREES SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH AN
AUTOMATIC DRIP (TRICKLE) IRRIGATION SYSTEM, OR WITH AN ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE APPROVED BY
THE CITY WITH THE IRRIGATION PLANS. THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE ADJUSTED TO MEET THE
WATER REQUIREMENTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL PLANT MATERIAL.
3.TOPSOIL: TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT FEASIBLE, TOPSOIL THAT IS REMOVED DURING CONSTRUCTION
ACTIVITY SHALL BE CONSERVED FOR LATER USE ON AREAS REQUIRING REVEGETATION AND
LANDSCAPING.
4.SOIL AMENDMENTS: SOIL AMENDMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED AND DOCUMENTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH
CITY CODE SECTION 12-132. THE SOIL IN ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS, INCLUDING PARKWAYS AND MEDIANS,
SHALL BE THOUGHLY LOOSENED TO A DEPTH OF NOT LESS THAN EIGHT(8) INCHES AND SOIL
AMENDMENT SHALL BE THOROUGHLY INCORPORATED INTO THE SOIL OF ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS TO A
DEPTH OF AT LEAST SIX(6) INCHES BY TILLING, DISCING OR OTHER SUITABLE METHOD, AT A RATE OF AT
LEAST THREE (3) CUBIC YARDS OF SOIL AMENDMENT PER ONE THOUSAND (1,000) SQUARE FEET OF
LANDSCAPE AREA. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, A WRITTEN
CERTIFICATION MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY THAT ALL PLANTED AREAS, OR AREAS TO BE PLANTED,
HAVE BEEN THOROUGHLY LOOSENED AND THE SOIL AMENDED, CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS
SET FORTH IN SECTION 12-132.
5.INSTALLATION AND GUARANTEE: ALL LANDSCAPING SHALL BE INSTALLED ACCORDING TO SOUND
HORTICULTURAL PRACTICES IN A MANNER DESIGNED TO ENCOURAGE QUICK ESTABLISHMENT AND
HEALTHY GROWTH. ALL LANDSCAPING FOR EACH PHASE MUST BE EITHER INSTALLED OR THE
INSTALLATION MUST BE SECURED WITH AN IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT, PERFORMANCE BOND, OR
ESCROW ACCOUNT FOR 125% OF THE VALUATION OF THE MATERIALS AND LABOR PRIOR TO ISSUANCE
OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR ANY BUILDING IN SUCH PHASE.
6.MAINTENANCE: TREES AND VEGETATION, IRRIGATION SYSTEMS, FENCES, WALLS AND OTHER LANDSCAPE
ELEMENTS WITH THE FINAL PLANS SHALL BE CONSIDERED AS ELEMENTS OF THE PROJECT IN THE SAME
MANNER AS PARKING, BUILDING MATERIALS AND OTHER SITE DETAILS. THE APPLICANT, LANDOWNER OR
SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST SHALL BE JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REGULAR
MAINTENANCE OF ALL LANDSCAPING ELEMENTS IN GOOD CONDITION. ALL LANDSCAPING SHALL BE
MAINTAINED FREE FROM DISEASE, PESTS, WEEDS AND LITTER, AND ALL LANDSCAPE STRUCTURES SUCH
AS FENCES AND WALLS SHALL BE REPAIRED AND REPLACED PERIODICALLY TO MAINTAIN A
STRUCTURALLY SOUND CONDITION.
7.REPLACEMENT: ANY LANDSCAPE ELEMENT THAT DIES, OR IS OTHERWISE REMOVED, SHALL BE
PROMPTLY REPLACED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THESE PLANS.
8. THE FOLLOWING SEPARATIONS SHALL BE PROVIDED BETWEEN TREES/SHRUBS AND UTILITIES:
40 FEET BETWEEN CANOPY TREES AND STREET LIGHTS
15 FEET BETWEEN ORNAMENTAL TREES AND STREETLIGHTS
10 FEET BETWEEN TREES AND PUBLIC WATER, SANITARY AND STORM SEWER MAIN LINES
6 FEET BETWEEN TREES AND PUBLIC WATER, SANITARY AND STORM SEWER SERVICE LINES.
4 FEET BETWEEN SHRUBS AND PUBLIC WATER AND SANITARY AND STORM SEWER LINES
4 FEET BETWEEN TREES AND GAS LINES
9. ALL STREET TREES SHALL BE PLACED A MINIMUM EIGHT (8) FEET AWAY FROM THE EDGES OF DRIVEWAYS
AND ALLEYS PER LUC 3.2.1(D)(2)(a).
10. PLACEMENT OF ALL LANDSCAPING SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SIGHT DISTANCE CRITERIA AS
SPECIFIED BY THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS. NO STRUCTURES OR LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS GREATER THAN
24" SHALL BE ALLOWED WITHIN THE SIGHT DISTANCE TRIANGLE OR EASEMENTS WITH THE EXCEPTION
OF DECIDUOUS TREES PROVIDED THAT THE LOWEST BRANCH IS AT LEAST 6' FROM GRADE. ANY FENCES
WITHIN THE SIGHT DISTANCE TRIANGLE OR EASEMENT MUST BE NOT MORE THAN 30" IN HEIGHT AND OF
AN OPEN DESIGN.
11. COMMON OPEN SPACE AREAS AND LANDSCAPING WITHIN RIGHT OF WAYS, STREET MEDIANS, AND
TRAFFIC CIRCLES ADJACENT TO COMMON OPEN SPACE AREAS ARE REQUIRED TO BE MAINTAINED BY A
PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION. THE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SNOW
REMOVAL ON ALL ADJACENT STREET AND PRIVATE DRIVE SIDEWALKS AND SIDEWALKS IN COMMON OPEN
SPACE AREAS.
12. THE FINAL LANDSCAPE PLAN SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH ALL OTHER FINAL PLAN ELEMENTS SO THAT
THE PROPOSED GRADING, STORM DRAINAGE, AND OTHER DEVELOPMENT IMPROVEMENTS DO NOT
CONFLICT WITH NOR PRECLUDE INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS ON THIS
PLAN.
13. LANDSCAPING WITHIN RESIDENTIAL LOTS ARE REQUIRED TO BE MAINTAINED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER
OF THE RESIDENTIAL LOT, AND THE PROPERTY OWNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SNOW REMOVAL ON THE
RESIDENTIAL LOT.
14. THE DEVELOPER SHALL ENSURE THAT THE FINAL LANDSCAPE PLAN IS COORDINATED WITH ALL OTHER
FINAL PLAN ELEMENTS SO THAT THE PROPOSED GRADING, STORM DRAINAGE, AND OTHER
DEVELOPMENT IMPROVEMENTS DO NOT CONFLICT WITH NOR PRECLUDE INSTALLATION AND
MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS ON THIS PLAN.
15. MINOR CHANGES IN SPECIES AND PLANT LOCATIONS MAY BE MADE DURING CONSTRUCTION -- AS
REQUIRED BY SITE CONDITIONS OR PLANT AVAILABILITY. OVERALL QUANTITY, QUALITY, AND DESIGN
CONCEPT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE APPROVED PLANS. IN THE EVENT OF CONFLICT WITH THE
QUANTITIES INCLUDED IN THE PLANT LIST, SPECIES AND QUANTITIES ILLUSTRATED SHALL BE PROVIDED.
ALL CHANGES OF PLANT SPECIES AND LOCATION MUST HAVE WRITTEN APPROVAL BY THE CITY PRIOR
TO INSTALLATION.
16. ALL PLANTING BEDS SHALL BE MULCHED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF THREE INCHES.
17. IRRIGATED TURF SHALL BE TEXAS BLUEGRASS/KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS HYBRID REVEILLE OR APPROVED
EQUAL.
18. EDGING BETWEEN GRASS AND SHRUB BEDS SHALL BE 18" X 4" ROLLED TOP STEEL SET LEVEL WITH TOP
OF SOD OR APPROVED EQUAL.
19. ATTACHED SINGLE FAMILY AND COMMON OPEN SPACE DETAILED LANDSCAPE PLANS WILL BE PROVIDED
AT FINAL PLAN LEVEL.
GENERAL LANDSCAPE NOTES
TREE PROTECTION NOTES
TREE DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT
(INCHES)
AUGER DISTANCE FROM FACE OF
TREE (FEET)
0-2 1
3-4 2
5-9 5
10-14 10
15-19 12
OVER 19 15
1. ALL EXISTING TREES WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND WITHIN ANY NATURAL
AREA BUFFER ZONES SHALL REMAIN AND BE PROTECTED UNLESS NOTED ON THESE PLANS
FOR REMOVAL.
2. WITHIN THE DRIP LINE OF ANY PROTECTED EXISTING TREE, THERE SHALL BE NO CUT OR FILL
OVER A FOUR-INCH DEPTH UNLESS A QUALIFIED ARBORIST OR FORESTER HAS EVALUATED
AND APPROVED THE DISTURBANCE.
3. ALL PROTECTED EXISTING TREES SHALL BE PRUNED TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORESTRY STANDARDS. TREE PRUNING AND REMOVAL SHALL BE PERFORMED BY A
BUSINESS THAT HOLDS A CURRENT CITY OF FORT COLLINS ARBORIST LICENSE WHERE
REQUIRED BY CODE.
4. PRIOR TO AND DURING CONSTRUCTION, BARRIERS SHALL BE ERECTED AROUND ALL
PROTECTED EXISTING TREES WITH SUCH BARRIERS TO BE OF ORANGE FENCING A MINIMUM
OF FOUR (4) FEET IN HEIGHT, SECURED WITH METAL T-POSTS, NO CLOSER THAN SIX (6) FEET
SHALL BE NO STORAGE OR MOVEMENT OF EQUIPMENT, MATERIAL, DEBRIS OR FILL WITHIN
THE FENCED TREE PROTECTION ZONE.
5. DURING THE CONSTRUCTION STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT, THE APPLICANT SHALL PREVENT
THE CLEANING OF EQUIPMENT OR MATERIAL OR THE STORAGE AND DISPOSAL OF WASTE
MATERIAL SUCH AS PAINTS, OILS, SOLVENTS, ASPHALT, CONCRETE, MOTOR OIL OR ANY
OTHER MATERIAL HARMFUL TO THE LIFE OF A TREE WITHIN THE DRIP LINE OF ANY
PROTECTED TREE OR GROUP OF TREES.
6. NO DAMAGING ATTACHMENT, WIRES, SIGNS OR PERMITS MAY BE FASTENED TO ANY
PROTECTED TREE.
7. LARGE PROPERTY AREAS CONTAINING PROTECTED TREES AND SEPARATED FROM
CONSTRUCTION OR LAND CLEARING AREAS, ROAD RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND UTILITY EASEMENTS
MAY BE "RIBBONED OFF," RATHER THAN ERECTING PROTECTIVE FENCING AROUND EACH
TREE AS REQUIRED IN SUBSECTION (G)(3) ABOVE. THIS MAY BE ACCOMPLISHED BY PLACING
METAL T-POST STAKES A MAXIMUM OF FIFTY (50) FEET APART AND TYING RIBBON OR ROPE
FROM STAKE-TO-STAKE ALONG THE OUTSIDE PERIMETERS OF SUCH AREAS BEING CLEARED.
8. THE INSTALLATION OF UTILITIES, IRRIGATION LINES OR ANY UNDERGROUND FIXTURE
REQUIRING EXCAVATION DEEPER THAN SIX (6) INCHES SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED BY BORING
UNDER THE ROOT SYSTEM OF PROTECTED EXISTING TREES AT A MINIMUM DEPTH OF
TWENTY-FOUR (24) INCHES. THE AUGER DISTANCE IS ESTABLISHED FROM THE FACE OF THE
TREE (OUTER BARK) AND IS SCALED FROM TREE DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT AS
DESCRIBED IN THE CHART BELOW:
9. ALL TREE REMOVAL SHOWN SHALL BE COMPLETED OUTSIDE OF THE SONGBIRD NESTING
SEASON (FEB 1 - JULY 31) OR CONDUCT A SURVEY OF TREES ENSURING NO ACTIVE NESTS IN
THE AREA.
PLANT SCHEDULE
A PERMIT MUST BE OBTAINED FROM THE CITY FORESTER BEFORE ANY TREES OR SHRUBS AS
NOTED ON THIS PLAN ARE PLANTED, PRUNED OR REMOVED IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. THIS
INCLUDES ZONES BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND CURB, MEDIANS AND OTHER CITY PROPERTY.
THIS PERMIT SHALL APPROVE THE LOCATION AND SPECIES TO BE PLANTED. FAILURE TO OBTAIN
THIS PERMIT IS A VIOLATION OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS CODE SUBJECT TO CITATION
(SECTION 27-31) AND MAY ALSO RESULT IN REPLACING OR RELOCATING TREES AND A HOLD ON
CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
1. A PERMIT MUST BE OBTAINED FROM THE CITY FORESTER BEFORE ANY TREES OR SHRUBS AS
NOTED ON THIS PLAN ARE PLANTED, PRUNED OR REMOVED IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY.
THIS INCLUDES ZONES BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND CURB, MEDIANS AND OTHER CITY
PROPERTY. THIS PERMIT SHALL APPROVE THE LOCATION AND SPECIES TO BE PLANTED.
FAILURE TO OBTAIN THIS PERMIT MAY RESULT IN REPLACING OR RELOCATING TREES AND A
HOLD ON CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
2. CONTACT THE CITY FORESTER TO INSPECT ALL STREET TREE PLANTINGS AT THE
COMPLETION OF EACH PHASE OF THE DEVELOPMENT. ALL MUST BE INSTALLED AS SHOWN
ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. APPROVAL OF STREET TREE PLANTING IS REQUIRED BEFORE
FINAL APPROVAL OF EACH PHASE.
3. STREET LANDSCAPING, INCLUDING STREET TREES, SHALL BE SELECTED IN ACCORDANCE
WITH ALL CITY CODES AND POLICIES. ALL TREE PRUNING AND REMOVAL WORKS SHALL BE
PERFORMED BY A CITY OF FORT COLLINS LICENSED ARBORS WHERE REQUIRED BY
CODE.STREET TREES SHALL BE SUPPLIED AND PLANTED BY THE DEVELOPER USING A
QUALIFIED LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR.
4. THE DEVELOPER SHALL REPLACE DEAD OR DYING STREET TREES AFTER PLANTING UNTIL
FINAL MAINTENANCE INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE BY THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORESTRY DIVISION. ALL STREET TREES IN THE PROJECT MUST BE ESTABLISHED, WITH AN
APPROVED SPECIES AND OF ACCEPTABLE CONDITION PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE.
5. SUBJECT TO WRITTEN APPROVAL BY THE CITY -- STREET TREE LOCATIONS MAY BE
ADJUSTED TO ACCOMMODATE DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS, UTILITY SEPARATIONS BETWEEN
TREES, STREET SIGNS AND STREET LIGHTS. STREET TREES TO BE CENTERED IN THE MIDDLE
OF THE LOT TO THE EXTENT FEASIBLE. QUANTITIES SHOWN ON PLAN MUST BE INSTALLED
UNLESS A REDUCTION IS APPROVED BY THE CITY TO MEET SEPARATION STANDARDS.
STREET TREE NOTES
SPECIES DIVERSITY
TREE SPECIES DIVERSITY
# OF TREES % OF TOTAL
CANOPY TREES 77 53.85
ACER PLATANOIDES 'COLUMNARE' 3 2.10
AESCULUS GLABRA 7 4.90
CATALPA SPECIOSA 8 5.59
CELTIS OCCIDENTALIS 6 4.20
CELTIS OCCIDENTALIS PRARIE SENTINEL 9 6.29
GINKGO BILOBA 'PRINCETON SENTRY' 12 8.39
GYMNOCLADUS DIOICUS 'ESPRESSO' 6 4.20
POPULUS X ACUMINATA 3 2.10
QUERCUS BUCKLEYI 3 2.10
QUERCUS MUEHLENBERGII 8 5.59
TILIA CORDATA 'GREENSPIRE'7 4.90
ULMUS X 'ACCOLADE' 5 3.50
EVERGREEN TREES 27 18.88
JUNIPERUS SCOPULORUM 'WOODWARD' 15 10.49
PICEA PUNGES 'ISELI FASTIGIATE' 3 2.10
PINUS SYLVESTRIS 'FASTIGIATA' 9 6.29
ORNAMENTAL TREES 39 27.27
ACER GRANDIDENTATUM 7 4.90
AMELANCHIER X GRANDIFLORA 'AUTUMN BRILLIANCE' 6 4.20
CERCIS CANADENSIS 1 0.70
MAGNOLIA STELLATA 'ROYAL STAR' 4 2.80
MALUS X 'CORALBURST' 4 2.80
MALUS X 'RED BARRON' 4 2.80
PYRUS CALLERYANA 'AUTUMN BLAZE' 2 1.40
SYRINGA VULGARIS 'PRESIDENT GREVY' 6 4.20
MITIGATION TREES
ACER GRANDIDENTATUM 2 1.40
AMELANCHIER X GRANDIFLORA 'AUTUMN BRILLIANCE' 3 2.10
TOTAL 143 100.00
P
R
E
V
AILIN
G W
IN
DNOTES:
SET S0 THAT TOP OF ROOT 1-2"
HIGHER THAN FINISHED GRADE
MARK NORTH SIDE OF TREE IN
NURSERY AND ROTATE TREE TO
FACE NORTH AT THE SITE
WHENEVER POSSIBLE
2 STRAND 12 GAUGE GAL. WIRE
(TWIST TO TIGHTEN) &
GROMMETED NYLON STRAPS
THREE (3) TWO INCH LODGE POLE STAKES
DRIVEN (MIN. 24") FIRMLY INTO UNDISTURBED
SOIL OUTSIDE OF PLANTING HOLE BEFORE
BACKFILLING STAKE ABOVE FIRST BRANCHES
OR AS NECESSARY FOR FIRM SUPPORT
REMOVE ALL WIRE, TWINE BURLAP, MESH
AND CONTAINERS FROM ENTIRE ROOT
BALL AND TRUNK
PLAN VIEW - THREE STAKES
3 X BALL DIA.
TREE PLANTING DETAIL - WOOD POSTS
SCALE: NTS
SCARIFY SIDES OF HOLE LEAVING
1:1 SLOPE
ROUND TOPPED SOIL BERM 4"
HIGH X 8" WIDE ABOVE ROOT
BALL SURFACE SHALL BE
CONSTRUCTED AROUND THE
ROOT BALL. BERM SHALL BEGIN
AT ROOT BALL PERIPHERY. (OMIT
IN TURF AREAS)
BACKFILL WITH BLEND OF EXISTING SOIL
AND A MAXIMUM 20% (BY VOL.) ORGANIC
MATERIAL PLACE FIRMLY BUT DON'T TAMP
OR COMPACT AROUND ROOT BALL. WATER
WATER THOROUGHLY TO SETTLE AND
REMOVE AIR POCKETS. PRIOR TO
MULCHING, LIGHTLY TAMP SOIL AROUND
THE ROOT BALL IN 6" LIFTS TO BRACE
TREE. DO NOT OVER COMPACT. WHEN THE
PLANTING HOLE HAS BEEN BACKFILLED,
POUR WATER AROUND THE ROOT BALL TO
SETTLE THE SOIL.
4" DEEP MULCH RING PLACED A MINIMUM
OF 6' IN DIAMETER. 1" MULCH OVER ROOT
BALL. DO NOT PLACE MULCH IN CONTACT
WITH TREE TRUNK
BOTTOM OF ROOT BALL RESTS ON
EXISTING OR RECOMPACTED SOIL
L-PL2-PLA-021
SEED MIXES
DRYLAND NATIVE SEED
SPECIES PREFERRED
VARIETIES
SEEDED RATE
LBS./ACRE
(DRILLED)
LEYMUS CINEREUS / GREAT BASIN WILDRYE MANGAR 3
NASSELLA VIRIDULA / GREEN NEEDLE GRASS LODROM 2
ACHNATHERUM HYMENOIDES / INDIAN
RICEGRASS PALOMA, NEZPAR 1
ELYMUS TRACHYCAULUS / SLENDER
WHEATGRASS PRIMAR, REVENUE 2
ELYMUS LANCEOLATUS / THICKSPIKE
WHEATGRASS CRITANA 3
PASCOPYRUM SMITHII WESTERN
WHEATGRASS ARRIBA, BARTON 4
15
WATER QUALITY NATIVE SEED
SPECIES PREFERRED
VARIETIES
SEEDED RATE
LBS./ACRE
(DRILLED)
LEYMUS CINEREUS / GREAT BASIN WILDRYE MANGAR 3
NASSELLA VIRIDULA / GREEN NEEDLE GRASS LODROM 2
ACHNATHERUM HYMENOIDES / INDIAN
RICEGRASS PALOMA, NEZPAR 1
ELYMUS TRACHYCAULUS / SLENDER
WHEATGRASS PRIMAR, REVENUE 2
ELYMUS LANCEOLATUS / THICKSPIKE
WHEATGRASS CRITANA 3
PASCOPYRUM SMITHII WESTERN
WHEATGRASS ARRIBA, BARTON 4
SCHIZACHYRIUM SCOPARIUM / LITTLE
BLUESTEM BLAZE 3
18
HY DGAS
CO NTROL
IRR
CO NTROL
IRR
CO NTROL
IRR
S
VAULTELEC
ELECARV
H2O
A RV
H2O
W FE SD
S
SHYDCO NTROL
IRR
CO NTROL
IRR
CO NTROL
IRR
DWSO
E
VAULTELEC
T
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXW W
TTCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVTTTT T T EEEEEEEE XX X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXE E E
X X X X X X X X X X X X X XC
T
V
CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV
CTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVX X X X X X X X X X X X X
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXSTST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST STSTSS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS
SS
SSSS1
2
4
3
5
7 8
6 9 10
EXISTING GARAGE
EXISTING HOUSE
EXISTING SHEDS
11
PROPERTY LINE
EXISTING FENCE
EXISTING PAVILLION
12
DETENTION POND
(TRACT B)
RAIN GARDEN A
(TRACT C)
ECLIPSE LANEQUASAR WAYBUILDING ABUILDING BBUILDING CBUILDING JBUILDING KBUILDING IBUILDING HBUILDING D
BUILDING E
BUILDING FBUILDING IBUILDING HBUILDING GKECHTER ROAD
STREET A
STREET BSTREET DSTREET C
STREET DSTREET BLOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 4
LOT 5
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 5
TRACT D
LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 3 LOT 4
LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 3 LOT 4 LOT 5 LOT 6
TRACT A
LOT 1
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 5
LOT 6 LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 5
LOT 6
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 3
LOT 4
BLOCK 8 BLOCK 1
BLOCK 2BLOCK 3BLOCK 11BLOCK 12BLOCK 11BLOCK 10BLOCK 12BLOCK 9BLOCK 7BLOCK 6BLOCK 5WILLOW BROOK
PARCEL R
WILLOW BROOK
UNPLATTED
PARCEL NO.
8604000904
UNPLATTED
PARCEL NO.
8604000904 PARCEL WWILLOW BROOKPARCEL XWILLOW BROOKPARCEL XWILLOW BROOKRAIN GARDEN B
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 5
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 5
BUILDING GBLOCK 3TREE MITIGATION LEGEND
EXISTING TREES
TO SAVE IN PLACE
EXISTING TREES
TO BE REMOVED
# TYPE DBH CONDITION MITIGATION VALUE NOTES REMOVAL
1 COTTONWOOD 90" FAIR - 6 NO
2 PONDEROSA PINE (2) 14"FAIR + 2.5 YES- R.O.W CONSTRUCTION
3 COTTONWOOD 42" FAIR 3.5 NO
4 COTTONWOOD 38" FAIR 3.5 NO
5 COTTONWOOD 35" FAIR 3.5 NO
6 COTTONWOOD 62" FAIR - 6 NO
7 COTTONWOOD 31" FAIR - 3 NO
8 COTTONWOOD 70"FAIR -6 NO
9 COTTONWOOD 48"FAIR, FAIR -5 NO
10 COTTONWOOD 54" FAIR - 5 NO
11 BLUE SPRUCE 13" FAIR 2 YES- NEW GRADING
12 ASH 9" FAIR 1.5 NO
TOTAL 46
TYPE COUNT REQUIRED MITIGATION TREES
TREES PRESERVED 10
TREES TO BE REMOVED 2 5
TOTAL 12 5
LOCATION COUNT
MITIGATION TREES PROPOSED TO BE PLANTED ON-SITE 5
MITIGATION TREES PROPOSED TO BE PLANTED OFF-SITE 0
PAYMENT IN LIEU (ASSUMES $450 PER TREE)0
TOTAL 3
MITIGATION TREES PROVIDED REQUIRED
CANOPY TREE 0
ORNAMENTAL TREE 5
TOTAL 5 5
TREE MITIGATION SUMMARY
DRAWING NUMBER:
419 Canyon Ave. Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80521phone 970.224.5828 | fax 970.225.6657 | www.ripleydesigninc.com
land planning landscape architecture
urban design entitlement
ISSUED
PROJECT No.:
DRAWN BY:
REVIEWED BY:
SEAL:
PREPARED BY:
No. DESCRIPTION DATE
REVISIONS
No. DESCRIPTION DATE
ORIGINAL SIZE 24X36
E N T IT L E M E N T
D R A W IN G S
N O T F O R
C O N S T R U C T IO N
TREE MITIGATION
PLAN
TREE MITIGATION
PLAN
KECHTER
TOWNHOMES
12/23/2020PDP SUBMITTAL #22
07/22/2020PDP SUBMITTAL1
FORT COLLINS, CO
RL
AG
R20-029
0 15 30 60
SCALE: 1"=30'-0"NORTH
RESTRICTIONS ON TREE REMOVAL AND CONSTRUCTION APPLY."
L4.0
COPYRIGHTPLOT DATE:C
PROJECT No:
Sheet Issue & Revision Log
No DateDescription
DRAWN BY:
REVIEWED BY:
DRAWING NUMBER:
SEAL:
E N T IT L E M E N T D R A W IN G S N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T IO N
ORIGINAL SIZE 24X36
No
REVISIONS
FORT COLLINS, CO
PREPARED BY:
FORT COLLINS, CO
KECHTER TWG, LLP.
Ryan Kelly
p. 317.559.7009
e. rkelly@twgdev.com
ARCHITECT
STUDIO ARCHITECTURE
Aldo Sebben
3575 Ringsby Ct. Suite 300C
Denver, CO 80216
p. 303.250.9525
ENGINEER
NORTHERN ENGINEERING
Andy Reese
301 N. Howes St. Suite 100
Fort Collins, CO 80521
p. 970.221.4158
It is the client's responsibility prior to or during construction to notify the
architect in writing of any perceived errors or omissions in the plans and
specifications of which a contractor thoroughly knowledgeable with the
building codes and methods of construction should reasonably be aware.
Written instructions addressing such perceived errors or omissions shall be
received from the architect prior to the client or client's subcontractors
proceeding with the work. The client shall be responsible for any defects in
construction if these procedures are not followed.
419 Canyon Ave. Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80521
phone 970.224.5828 fax 970.225.6657 www.ripleydesigninc.com
DateDescription
7/20/2020 1:53:43 PMKECHTER
TOWNHOMES
Project # 19_014_00
PDP SUBMITTAL
WS
CR
1 PDP SUBMITTAL 07/22/2020RAINGARDENA
RAINGARDEN44556665544VAULTGASCONTROLIRRCONTROLIRRCONTROLIRRCONTROLIRRSVAULTELECELECF
ESDCONTROLIRRCONTROLIRRCONTROLIRRDEVAULTELECTCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVEEEEEECTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVGGGGSTST
STSTSTSTSTS
TSS B
E
G
H
JKECHTER ROADQUASAR WAY
ECLIPSE LANENOT TO
SCALE
A BUILDING LETTER
(COLOR CODED PER BUILDING TYPE)
ACCESSIBLE UNIT (6 TOTAL)
(REQUIRED PER C.R.S., TITLE 9, ARTICLE 5)
TWO-BEDROOM UNIT (5 TOTAL)
(THE REMAINDER ARE THREE-BEDROOMS)
FOR INFORMATION
ONLY
SITE DIAGRAM
D
K
A
F
C
I
2 PDP SUBMITTAL #2 12/23/2020