Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIRAMONT VILLAGE PUD - FINAL - 54-87AJ - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSITEM NO. 4 MEETING D�TE 5/20/96 ST.�FF Mi tch Haas City of Fort Collins PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD STAFF REPORT PROJECT: Miramont Village Final P.U.D., #54-87AJ APPLICANT: James Company % Mr. Eldon Ward Cityscape Urban Design 3555 Stanford Road, Suite 105 Fort Collins, CO 80525 OWNER: Oak Farm, Inc. 3555 Stanford Road, Suite 100 Fort Collins, CO 80525 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request for Final P.U.D. for 52 single family lots on 10.79 acres located at the northwest corner of South Lemay Avenue and Southridge Greens Boulevard. The parcel is zoned rp, Planned Residential. RECOMMENDATION: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Approval with a condition. The Final P.U.D. is in substantial compliance with both the approved O.D.P. and the approved Preliminary P.U.D. The Final continues to satisfy the All Development Criteria and the Residential Uses Point Chart of the L.D.G.S. The P.U.D. is found to be sensitive to and maintains the character of the surrounding area. The project is feasible from a traffic engineering standpoint and promotes transportation policies. � COMMUNII'Y PLANNING AND ENVIIiONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO R0522-Q580 (303) 221-6750 I'LAtiNItiG D��,PnPti"i h1i�.tiT � Miramont Village PUD - Final, #54-87AJ May 20, 1996 Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Page 2 COMMENTS: 1. Background: The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: • N: rp; Single Family (Ramparts at Miramont P.U.D.) S: rlp; Vacant (Huntington Hills O.D.P., Parcel A, "Multi-Family") E: rlp; St. Elizabeth Seton Church and Single Family (Southridge Greens) W: rp; Vacant (Oak-Cottonwood Farm O.D.P. Parcel K"Low/Medium Density Residential") The original Oak-Cottonwood Farm Overall Development Plan (271 acres) was approved in 1987. Numerous filings have been approved and the O.D.P. is developing in a mixed- use fashion as originally envisioned. Approved P.U.D.'s include a church (Evangelical Covenant), a private school (Heritage Christian), congregate care (Collinwood), community/regional shopping center (Harmony Market), office (Bank One), health club (Miramont Tennis and Fitness Center), single family (Miramont, Miramont Valley and the Ramparts at Miramont), patio homes (The Courtyard and Cottages at Miramont), condos (Hamlet at Miramont), and apartments (Oak Hill Apartments). The Miramont Village Preliminary P.U.D. was approved on the consent agenda by the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board on March 4, 1996. 2. Land Use: The Oak-Cottonwood Farm O.D.P. designates this area as Parcel A"Multi-Family; Alternative Use: Low Density Residential." Thus, Parcel A of the approved O.D.P. has been earmarked for residential densities ranging from low to high (high densities are typically associated with multi-family developments). This project proposes single family development at 4.82 dwelling units per acre, which is considered low-to-medium density residentiaf. This Preliminary P.U.D., therefore, complies with the Overall Development Plan. In addition, this Final P.U.D. is in substantial compliance with the approved Preliminary P.U.D. for this site. In addition, All Development Criteria A-1.12 of the L.D.G.S. calls for an average residential density of at least three (3) dwelling units per acre. Therefore, the Miramont Village Preliminary P.U.D. complies with the density requirements of the L.D.G.S. On the Residential Uses Point Chart (Point Chart H), this Preliminary P.U.D. achieves a score of 76. Points are earned for proximity to a regional shopping center (Harmony � Miramont Village PUD - Final, #54-87AJ May 20, 1996 Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Page 3 i Market), a publicly owned golf course (Southridge Greens), an existing school (Werner Elementary), and a major employment center (Oakridge/Oakridge West Business Park). Points were also awarded for contiguity to existing urban development. In addition, bonus points were awarded for energy conservation, the provision of lands devoted to recreational use, and connection to existing City sidewalks. The required minimum score on the Residential Uses Point Chart is sixty (60) points. Therefore, the Miramont Village preliminary P.U.D. exceeds the minimum score required by the Residential Uses Point Chart of the L.D.G.S. 3. Neighborhood Compatibilitv: The proposed density and the single family lots are considered to be compatible with the surrounding area, which includes additional single family homes, a church, and other planned residential developments. 4. Desi n: The P.U.D. will continue the existing and approved landscaping and fencing treatment along the Lemay Avenue frontage as well as along the Southridge Greens Boulevard frontage. In addition, sidewalk connections would be made from this development to the sidewalks along both Lemay and Southridge Greens Boulevard. The site is designed with sensitivity to the topography, mountain views, visibility from adjacent neighborhoods, and the adjacent arterial roadway. 5. Solar Orientation: Of the 52 total lots, 42 are oriented to within 30 degrees of a true east-west line, or have a minimum of 50 feet of unobstructed access along the south lot line. This results in a compliance rate of 80.77%, which exceeds the required minimum of 65%. 6. Transportation: As mentioned, pedestrian circulation is provided by connecting sidewalks from within the development to Lemay Avenue and Southridge Greens Boulevard. Similarly, the Lemay Avenue sidewalk will be connected with the sidewalks along Southridge Greens Boulevard. Vehicles are accommodated by the proposed nefinrork of streets which include access to the north to Boardwalk Drive or to the south via Southridge Greens Boulevard. Both streets are classified as collectors and provide easy connections to the surrounding arterials. � Miramont Village PUD - Final, #54-87AJ May 20, 1996 Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Page 4 • The P.U.D. is consistent with the assumptions and conclusions made in the Oak- Cottonwood Farm Site Access Study (Delich, May, 1992). In fact, the generated traffic from the proposed use is actually less than that of the use approved with the O.D.P. (See attached Traffic Study: Delich, December 21, 1995.) The Miramont Village Final P.U.D., therefore, is feasible from a transportation standpoint. 7. Findings of FacUConclusions: A. The Final P.U.D. is in substantial conformance with the approved O.D.P., and it substantially complies with the approved Preliminary P.U.D. B. The Final P.U.D. satisfies the All Development Criteria of the L.D.G.S. C. The Final P.U.D. exceeds the minimum density requirements of the L.D.G.S., and exceeds the required minimum point total (60 points) on the Residential Uses Point Chart (Point Chart H: Density Chart) of the L.D.G.S. with a score of 76 points. D. The Final P.U.D. is compatible with the surrounding area. E. The Final P.U.D. is feasible from a transportation standpoint. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Miramont Village Final P.U.D., #54-87AJ subject to the following condition: The Planning and Zoning Board approves this planned unit development final plan upon the condition that the development agreement, final utility plans, and final P.U.D. plans for the planned unit development be negotiated between the developer and City staff and executed by the developer prior to the second monthly meeting (July 22, 1996) of the Planning and Zoning Board following the meeting at which this planned unit development final plan was conditionally approved; or, if not so executed, that the developer or the City staff, at said subsequent monthly meeting, apply to the Board for an extension of time. The Board shall not grant any such extension of time unless it shall first find that there exists with respect to said planned unit development final plan certain specific unique and extraordinary circumstances which require the granting of the extension in order to prevent exceptional and unique hardship upon the owner or developer of such s Miramont Village PUD - Final, #54-87AJ May 20, 1996 Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Page 5 • property and provided that such extension can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good. If the staff and the developer disagree over the provisions to be included in the development agreement, the developer may present such dispute to the Board for resolution. The Board may table any such decision, until both the staff and the developer have had reasonable time to present sufficient information to the Board to enable it to make its decision. (If the Board elects to table the decision, it shall also, as necessary, extend the term of this condition until the date such decision is made.) If this condition is not met within the time established herein (or as extended, as applicable), then the final approval of this planned unit development shall become null and void and of no effect. The date of final approval for this planned unit development shall be deemed to be the date that the condition is met, for purposes of determining the vesting of rights. For purposes of calculating the running of time for the filing of an appeal pursuant to Chapter 2, Article II, Division 3, of the City Code, the "final decision" of the Board shall be deemed to have been made at the time of this conditional approval; however, in the event that a dispute is presented to the Board for resolution regarding provisions to be included in the development agreement, the running of time for the filing of an appeal of such "final decision" shall be counted from the date of the Board's decision resolving such dispute. •l►����I1��!«-l�l�l� .. � � '� li\� 1) • , \ � '� �` �`�, � � A � \ �� I �\ \ � ��a � � �� � ���,� ;� � , � ��� � � ��� � � � � � �`� �\ ��� � � � � � �, � � �� � � 1 � � _ \ i � _�\ �� � PROPOSED MWAMONT VALLEV � �v \ �mm' y» � .`t5�'�Eut �rq� � — L _ � � � fl°x�ouet, ai,� - �t — — �--� � _ �, � the RA MTS AT I.ii MONT \ ` -�\ a. .p \ \ \ � � �, �C� � - ��<-���,�— __,� �" � �;- - � , _ _ , i � � a, — - � „ � � �' � '' , � �, ' _ _ ^� ;X'� ,y� as �� � �M � - ,y��, /\ as A � - -- 'Ao- u � � . - __ , ,y� � ,' Tf �`\ � -' Reiv eae�� � �- - _ - - - � � � � � yy e � \`/ — —/• —� T --_ \ � b Z/-- — I � «� / � � �` �� �I.u,. e�r+„P,_ � � I � j E! 80 �\ t1 I I � � I I 2� � �C {! v � '° � �' � �� � � � � II � � � , � � i i '° � � � �� � � --------- - i \, � _ --- _ � '. \\ , � �,� � ''�3 �_� �= � � � -- — � � � __ � � ��-- �•� � ��� ,� r �f �11�� -�I �� �I il I � a° ' °�, ����a,F=e,,� � , � e o e � u a �y � I � �' e,°� � � 1 � � � , �` "� ''Y!�` +� 1= �Yi �` � , \� �V � �� / \\ — — — — — _ — — I I� / \ \ \\ \ — � � � � � 2 �/� `/ _ nYY.HE�L„qL _ ' � � \� ,a — — � /� � \���� � � � � 1�—� � _ � j � � �� �� �, i > (y � � � � — —� �— —� i — i i ,n E �E.o�. , i = —i -- - � ' / / ��Y� � 6 ! 1 p I Y p I 11 I p I � ' ,� � �,� �'__ � � � � � � � � POSSIL CRE�EK PARK ....na� a�rre+e+* na. vax./,�/� \�� __ \ - _ - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ - _ - _ - _ GENERAL NOTES . , , � _ s u.���,. E u* �+.P� . oE*x.,eo wuK �. HUN7NOTON za+�.p SIGNATURE BLOCK I � � - - PROPERTY DESCRIPTION J .� ,� . � LEGEND � .��..�.m.,.., � � OAKRDOE E87ATE8 i �.4 8T. ELIZABETH SETON PAPoSH zo+m�.p ' _E _�.< < �,.,E w > < Y < W�xsBe Pa�.Epb tN Bo�u s DE LA�N�D�U�EBBREAKDOWN � u f6 � GOVEA�OE o. ePrE �� q^ rL+w ,....� P.�.n �,� � ��..� . � e�.�� e�w,Prava��rwrewM�eiaia>rs.�e PLGNNEW LANDSGAPE dRGHITEGT: � � Q � � VE OPEW 9U'LDE4� ����oi""'__� tMNV�LA0E8 ` v �' °° ��/'OG°G���ao(� 1V111llt�1Li11Vll�1V ll V 1111elle!'11VII1Pe �oLLJollUo FINAL SITE PLAN � � � � .�. — T —f 7 �—!--� _ ` — o x .r .e �. ro. 1 2 iVICINIT�Y MAP � 1 _ . �� �—���/ � � � rroxe� _ \ � �ACE \ ' _ . �',. � - � '_q � � i/ �I � �� the RAM ARTS AT MIR MONT �� \ ` � m a.� � � � � s° - �,� � '_ -��_� � � _ `_ � � . � � --a-� .� - � - , -, � �. � --- -- •�� - ss - �'�"�-�-'_�� � _ - ,. � s� // - _ ,� ,„ � � � , -_ '�.\'_ � - � � � w �_ � ' � q � , � ._�.. �:� � ; � � � _-- � ��� �- � ,_ , �� —� � „ „ — . , � �� �� , ,' sz i _ ��. �,`- �'� , � � ,. '�` �I � ; ,, - � � ` � � � � �� — �i —ir� —i—� � I� � a, ze zs s. '� ��� i � � i i � . . � � � � � ��� � � � � � � ` �° � � � �� , � _-__ ` ------ — „ � PROPOSEU . �� � � - �—� .. `�' � ,. - MiiAMONT YALLEV � � � (� f � � �r. _ . ZP�. . _ _. \� � � ` p . � � p /�� r l �r �I �� �I � , � -�r 28 � �� � � � � � I I I I - \ �\ \� - - _ b n b � M t9 � � zr ;� � � �` � � � , � _ � �� � � �� � � , � �` , " z , '�� � � � e � �, ` � _ � — — '� ' � � �� � � r'— �r-- , ,� —„ � / � \ �� d � ] I ! G I p � tl R �' 'z \ _ �� � � �' ` � � �= � � � � �� ' � � ; -g - _ __ - . . _ __ _. FOSSN. CREEK PARK / / � � / / � .. -� -. - _ - . �,�. , � , _ . — — PLANT NOTES HUNTNOTON HILLS � --� ^ � �T -- I( � � � .�. .� v— �ti— � .�, n.� w w, � � �= LEGEND � �_� e-.- -....a �...��.�..,.� �d� � m.+,..� a.�.�.•�,� ENTRY PLANTING DETAIL � ����P���� ��� J � I II OAKRIDOE EBiATE3 JI v ' ST. ELIZABETH SETON PARISH zw�.p � LANDSCAPE BREAKDOWN ¢`4 �`��;''" �.���, � e m��� �. ��.��g=�. ��.� P� _ . �„ ,..,>.��.,:��.-�ee:��.. _ „ � W LANDSCAPE BREAKDOWN � �ee �wuu e�n J ~� �e �aaep�`n .o,w ,.��.� ,�„ � �. PL6rAlER/ LGNGSGGPE dRG'ITEG-� '� .n ` aA o w. � GEVELOPEW BU'LD=R � W�,C V�1l�y ° eo°o � tM VILLAOES ��\�� �.� � �l Jor���ao� 1vw11c�1[111vll�1V ll V 1111e�t11�1II11`e 1ColL+ollLo FINAL LANDSCAPE PLAN � b � s...- .��,�. -_ . _; � _ —� _ — _ - � ,� � � �..� p „ p • � ' �: v„°'� , ��..� --- + �.-�.e ���..ai � \� s- S :o.[p,s ��' �� — I � ' ~ I � �� i�p GAOSS':CRESi J!, . • LDM� OEN 1 fl`Oa `.` iE5�0ENn���� ' � ���� � i �-� �\! � ' �.oe:" I �, . �. . ,a.w �e �` \ . .�r � nc.��+rin , ;�!� IL"� � , • � Jl�� � i f � � '' � V±��� `� i '<..'� I � � � �i� Lr 0. � :.r'o'�_� -a `I 1 1� .� �j � 1 j IP�NCEL � �,J i �>� % �! ��� : Lt�w ,� � .e wross xaet- � :� �aw wen:m �� ` . \RES:OENi14 �y / �� � ,f � �D , � /.� �.( � I � S.9 MI � 9 :Ow � .°� ��3� JENSIT .j I � x`, �' -��:.; - '(\. ; 9.SiGRaSS �CRESt ""•, �� \ LOM OENSIT'I qESIDENTI�� � \ +t rd tiw[I Cbef�ny �� ,..r � ... :so .. I LAND 115 BRFerpOWN I . __ .__ __ __ .. I' _ _ ,. ' ' = � � - I. �� . . -- +� �'-. i. � � � . � - � � • I�.. � ... ' � � + � �.. „ ,.,,..�, � � � � . � -- � � v�c�Nrtv Mao w'` � i � E�^� � �.�j, ::� � �..N i ..�:.'�i.-'-: ,� � .��y. ���1;�....�:�... wwats = � �r I . t �� m.0 r : ' .�,.�aa. , _����: - �E... � � � -'-`f- � ti . � _� � ... ..e.a. � :a.. .. � cGe� DEeCinlnnw � � T� __� � � ��.V____'___� . �� ��"� ,.�..���'_�—��� . f V1� �� ' .� �.� , �� aw '.._'�__.� ,�_.r.� �"' �' .. � '�' .� ! I"'�y�+„ .�._ ' �_..�__.- �.� ��_ '. �r� f.FNFpGy ryp7Ee �s • =� � ��' � �'� y.si a¢us —= �� �� i .r�- \ �_ � : = _�� ��u ����+ �. � ! "__ _'�_ -�..�._ _ ; P—_ - -_— __� I ea m•rta -- — _--��-_�'� - ,� � _� _ �- ==_= � .. _ �� .�� '� ML I -" :K�� � - SITE \ i0.3 GAO55 �CRESi� Q' 4LLLTI-iAY1lT ' ��aie��TM rt�w�nrt uY: ~ leo V wsn .�t�mr � ���-,��t�,���,,,,Q���y s ' - "'_ — _U G'�"" � u .i cnass .cRess `� ---- '..�._ �....�.�. .�., ... mro .. � -= - "�"°""F"'°`� OAK/COTTONWOOD FAR:K _. --- _ � __.. .1b[EIVDED O�ERALL DEVELOPl�CiT PL�N T_ .�..o ne r,n, roi¢r .n r�n — � sc.c r-aov ..�--��.+.'..��— — '�!�� oora 3"'u'.-�= � , �V � � I � KET � '�' __,� � I E�' ..�.�..� Q� a.T.l..� 0 200 WO — � � ���� � ��R � � _ 9Q� 4 � GI � �� O ��- • c • MIRAMONT VILLAGE FINAL PUD PROPERTY DESCRIPTION • A tract of land located in the Southeast Quarter of Section 1, Township 6 North, Range 69 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado, being more particularly described as follows: Considering the East line of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 1 as bearing South 00"04'26" West from an aluminum cap in a range box at the East Quarter corner of said Section 1 to an aluminum cap in a range box at the Southeast Quarter corner of said Section 1 and with all bearings contained herein relative thereto: Commencing at the Southeast corner of said Section 1; thence, along the South line of said Section 1, North 89 "06'23" West, 50.01 feet to a point on the West Right of Way of Lemay Avenue said point also the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence along said South line of said Section 1, North 89"06'23" West, 392.44feet to a point a curve concave to the Northeast having a central angle of 65 `46'32", a radius of 610.00 feet and the chord of which bears North 56' 13'07" West, 662.45 feet; thence departing said South line along the arc of said curve, 700.28 feet; thence, North 23" 19'51 " West, 358.22 feet; thence, North 66 `40'09" East, 89.18 feet; thence, South 42 ` 54' 13" East, 74.77 feet; thence, South 60 ` 34'05" East, 96.89 feet; thence, South 79"47'50" East, 315.22 feet; thence, South 72`23'49" East, 229.53 feet; thence, South 50' 35'58" East, 130.23 feet; thence, South 89 ` 56'40" East to a point on the West Right of Way of Lemay Avenue; thence, along Said West line, South 00`04'26" West, 428.18 feet to the Point of Beginning. The above described tract of land contains 10.788 acres and is subject to all easements and rights-of-way now on record or existing. \J MIRAMONT VILLAGE FINAL PUD LAND USE BREAKDOWN MARCH 18, 1996 � Area Gross 469,946 sq.ft. 10.79 acres Net 420,788 sq.ft. 9.66 acres Dwelling Units Patio Homes 52 units TOTAL UNITS 52 units Solar Oriented Lots a2 ur,�ts so.��°� Density Gross 4.82 du/ac Net 5.38 du/ac Coverage Buildings 98,800 sq.ft. 21.02°k Street R.O.W. 49,158 sq.ft. 10.46°k Parking & Drives 101,553 sq.ft. 21.61% Open Space: Recreational 13,247 sq.ft. 2.82°� Common 116,741 sq.ft. 24.84°k Private 90,447 sq.ft. 19.25% TOTAL OPEN SPACE 220,435 sq.ft. 46.91 % Floor Area Residential 148,200 sq.ft. Minimum Parking Provided Garage/Carport 104 spaces Other 88 spaces (8'x21' Long Term Parallel Parking) TOTAL VEHICLES 192 spaces 4 spaces/unit •note: Garages and/or driveways will accommodate handicap, motorcycle, and bicycle parking Maximum Building Height as ft. Single Family Setbacks Front 14 ft. from back of walk or curb 20 ft. at garage Side 0 ft. 10 ft. Between Buildings Corner Side 0 ft. Rear 0 ft. � J SCHOOL PROJECTIONS PROPOSAL: DESCRIPTION: DENSITY: 14IIRA1�iONT VII.LAG� PUD 52 patio homes on 10.79 acres 5.38 du/acre G�nersl PnDulation 52 (units) x 3..* (persons/uaits) = 160.40 Sci�ool �Q�e povulation E?e.�neatary - 52 (units) x ,a5p (pupiIs/uniu) _ =.; Junior �-:�gu - �2 (uniu) s .210 (puDilsiunirs) = 11 Seaior H'iga - 52 (units) x .185 (punus/units) = 10 TOTAI. = 44 *Figures assume a mix of _- and ; Sedroom singie family residentiaL � .� I ' � i • MIR,�IONT VILLAGE, FINAL PUD Activity A: ALL DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA ALL CRITERIA APPLICABLE CRITERIA ONLY Is the criterion Will the criterion �f no, please explain applicable? be satisfied? Not AP- Pre- pli- CRITERION ��m�- `B- �e�Y Final b�� Yes No A1. COMMUNITY-WIDE CRITERIA 1.1 Solar Orientation X X 1.2 Comprehensive Plan X X 1.3 Wildlife Habitat X 1.4 Mineral Deposit X 1.5 Ecologically Sensitive Areas reserved 1.6 Lands of Agricultural Importance reserved 1.7 Energy Conservation X X 1.8 Air Quality X X 1.9 Water Quality X X 1.10 Sewage and Wastes X X 1.1 1 Water Conservation X X 1.12 Residential Density X X A2. NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY CRITERIA 2.1 Vehicular, Pedestrian, Bike Transportation X X 2.2 Building Placement and Orientation X X 2.3 Natural Features X X 2.4 Vehicular Circulation and Parking X X 2.5 Emergency Access X X 2.6 Pedestrian Circulation X X 2.7 Architecture X X 2.8 Building Height and Views X 2.9 Shading X X 2.10 Solar Access X X 2.11 Historic Resources X 2.12 Setbacks X X 2.13 Landscape X X 2.14 Signs X 2.15 Site Lighting X X 2.16 Noise and Vibration X 2.17 Glare or Heat X 2.18 Hazardous Materials X A3. ENGINEERING CRITERIA 3.1 Utility Capacity X X 3.2 Design Standards X X 3.3 Water Hazards X 3.4 Geologic Hazards X Land Developme�t Guidance System for Planned Unit Development The City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised Aupust 1884 -61- • O 0 a � O O v � z a J W > O J w � Z W � a z Q r z a. m, �� Y � c.ii � U J �s.� C � w h-- H— ¢ � � � � 0 � � 0 r o. �o �o � 0 � c� z � w w z c� z W J > � z 0 �- a �- � 0 � n z a � � U � � a s � MEMORANDUM • To: Jim Postle, The James Company Eldon Ward, Cityscape Eric Hracke, Fort Collins Transportation Division Fort Collins Planning Department From: Matt Delich '�� Date: Subject December 21, 1995 The Miramont Village PUD traific study (File: 95113ME1) Miramont Village PUD is a continuing development wi�hin the Oak/Coctonwood Farm area in �ort Collins. This memorandsm compares t:�e general trip generation used in previous studies with the site specific uses proposed at this time. The Oak/Cottonwood Farm area is soizth af Harmcny Road, west of Lemay Avenue, and norlh of Fossil Cre�k. Its western edge is tne existing development located east of Col�ege Avenue (FQir�ay Estates and rossil Cr=ek Meadows). T:�e Oak/ Cottonwood Far� Amended Overall Development Plan (ODP) shows the area divided into Iettered parcels (A througn V). The ODP is shown in Figure 1. Figure 2 shows a site specific plan of the proposed Miramont Village PUD. The "Oak/Cottonwood Farm Site Acc�ss Study," i4ay 1?92 addresses the traffic impacts of ttie Oak/Cortonwood rarm Overall Development Plan. This site access study adcir=ssed the existing uses at that time, primarily in Farcel R, and development of the remainder of the Oak/Cottonwood Farm. Miramont Village PUD is located on Parcel A of the Overall Development Plan. The ODP showed 80 single family dwelling units on Parcel A. Miramont Village PUD is proposed as 52 dwelling units in a patio home configuration. Parcel A daily trip generation from the site access study was 765 average weekday vehicle trip ends as detached dwelling units. The peak hour trip 59 trip ends in the morning and B1 trip ends in The trig generation of the proposed Miramont calculated at 500 daily trip ends, 39 mvrning ends, and 52 afternovn peak ho�.u� trip ends. single family generation was the afternoon. Village PUD is peak hour trip Comparing the trip generation of the Parcel A uses indicates little difference bet:aeen the approved and proposed development. The generated traffic from the proposed use is actually less than the approved use. It is concluded that the proposed development is consistent with that used in the Oak/ Cottonwood Farm Site Access Study. 3 0 s � � 0 . . . / �' / � � \, . .� . �� ,C . ---� • . wueuor+r Ro�o ----� �� NO SCA� � , t � i t I �1 O `� T �) � ri � a ejv �� s -�, r-.a I �{ � u' u .i , . � • � .Tl'. � Figure 1 �AK / COTTONWOOD FARM ODP � � � � 0 • • �\� ' + � . � � �. `•� / i • �`� \ � ' �""`'�,-� /� ` _ 1 � � � '' � \,� � � � / /� � � � '� \ `��.`� �� / / \ � � � � � . / � \����` � - / —� •� � _�� � � -,'' � �`' • � �, ��� � � ,>, � ��� . , � .—�' � '� ��;, � \ .Y � � ` �,� . i� � �'�� � � � �'— /� � " . � i � �.' , -=��s� s�' • ' � �, \ . --;� � ,, , . 1"�.''1 �� `\ `��', �` / I \ ♦`�.� ; + ;--'� � ,.`'a;'� � 1 � � I� � y��� i�g��� �� � i � `� . 1 \ // �� . �c .' `> , `� ,� �� ., � —t— " -- --_ � _.— �— _ �. � � �; � � ,��.\ '� r�, — — ��►�'���� T; �i , � - _ '�� � •� � � � �.� '� � �-�� �-.. BLVD. � N NO SCALE �I.� � r-----�----�--- ,,,�; ; � �...� ';{fl ; ; � l� � � � -- ! ----i i � I - ------ II I � I - - Ijl� , , �;iI .e...... � I ;I , � 'i�il �� ; ,�.II il � w i���liZ ( ' f�j ;II I :�;� a u� I�I.Q �I��I�� ; w li � - �� � — � �� o— �I a �� I l � I . I _� 0 MIRAMONT ViLLAGE PUD SITE PLAN Fi9ure 2