The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSTONERIDGE PUD, THIRD FILING PRELIMINARY - 21 92F - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSITEM NO. 5 MEETING DATE 1-94-94 STAFF Ted Shepard PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD - ., - STAFF REPORT PROJECT: Stone Ridge P.U.D., Third Filing, Preliminary, #21-92F APPLICANT: Kaplan Companies c/o Vaught -Frye Architects 1113 Stoney Hill Drive Fort Collins, CO 80525 OWNER: Kaplan Companies 1060 Sailor's Reef Fort Collins, CO 80525 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for Preliminary P.U.D. for 58 single family lots on 22.3 acres. The P.U.D. also includes an .8 acre active recreational area. The site is located north of Horsetooth Road approximately one-half mile east of Timberline Road. The zoning is R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential. RECOMMENDATION: Approval EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The request for Preliminary P.U.D. for the Third Filing is in conformance with the approved Overall Development Plan. The P.U.D. satisfies the All Development Criteria and is supported by the variable criteria of the Residential Point Chart of the L.D.G.S. A variance from the absolute requirement that density be a minimum of three dwelling units per acre, on a gross acreage basis, is recommended. The P.U.D. complies with the Solar Orientation Ordinance. A variance to allow six cul-de-sacs to be built at a width of 28 feet, from curb to curb, is recommended. The project has been reviewed by the Transportation Department and found acceptable. COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 (303) 221-6750 PLANNING DEPARTMENT RNE CONE P.U.D. LOW OENSf RESIDENTIAL ZONED RP _____________________ ------ _------- _______________ mw�a� ` `\ ° I I I i �� \ \ 17 ° 29 30 / `\. 12 II a II \ 14* 18It t it _J 321 10 19 II 90 34 /\ 20 ` ``>y i FUTURE PHASE EXISTING PHASE 2 21 It 3 40 41 /If` _ � � `\ 5 Iit 22 2 1 I 1 ir___ ,✓j 39 1, I a II I ` 'J *'t 25 _ 7 24 / / 28 25 ^� 21 29° i VAUGHT EM r 1 0 26 24 \�\ j 23 i 28e 27 22 20 \ V y t_ 23 T6'L-3d . O;', PR6DYMRY • 9 STONE RIDGE P.U.D. 24 THIRD FILING EXISTI „ 12 PHASE , -` THIRD FILING a ASE 1 a; I PHASE 2 25 • FORT COLLINS COLORADO 10 13 t6 17 18 r 'T 15 I I 27 26 L_ J 9 4 I_01 e =� - yj STONE RIDGE P.U.D. THIRD FILING PHASE 1 FORT COLLINS COLORADO PINE CONE P.U.D. LOW DENSNT RESIOENRK ZONED RP ________________________________ ____________ 29 /� 13 n' 16 / 14 18 EPA WOW 15 32 II 10). — mac.:/ i' P 19 34 QEXISTIN + ('� FUTURE 7 ,ir ,i,.�;,- 20 y PHASE PHASE 21 40 if I, ( 5 11 /; 22 , 26 \ g 2 I it U -42 8 U — 24 28 \, 30 26 \ 27 24 23 28 22 20 \ 23 za IST 2 AS E 1 25 10 � n)3 THIRDFILING PHASE 1 V7I 19 � 1 p A A v v v STONE RIDGE P.U.D. THIRD FILING PHASE 2 FORT COLLINS COLORADO - 1 i SCHOOL PROJECTIONS PROPOSAL: STONERIDGE PUD, 3rd Filing - Preliminary DESCRIPTION: 58 single family units on 22.3 acres DENSITY: 2.6 du/acre General Population 58 (units) x 3.5 (persons/unit) = 203 School Age Population Elementary - 58 (units) x .450 Junior High - 58 (units) x .210 (pupils/unit) = 26.1 (pupils/unit) = 12.18 Senior High - 58 (units) x .185 (pupils/unit) = 10.73 Design Affected Schools Capacily Enrollment Shepardson Elementary 546 467 0 Boltz Junior High 900 1015 Fort Collins Senior High 1300 1418 i STONE RIDGE FILING THREE Statement of Planning objectives (December 6, 1993) Filing Three of Stone Ridge Village lies directly east of Filings One and Two and continues the orderly progression of project phasing from west to east. Located on 22.3 acres of the 92 acre Overall Development Plan, Filing Three includes approximately 800 feet of additional Horsetooth Road frontage and extends to the north boundary of the development. The third filing is completely consistent with the Stone Ridge Amended Overall Development Plan (#21-92E), approved unanimously by the Planning and Zoning Board on April 16, 1993. The design includes "urban -size," single-family lots with an average lot size of 10,000 sq. ft. Consistent with the project design theme already developed in'Filings One and Two, these lots border.a curvilinear greenbelt which meanders through the development, thereby unifying the neighborhood and, secondarily, providing a storm drainage function. The third filing also contains the Stone Ridge Recreation Area, featuring an extensively landscaped neighborhood swimming pool. Consistent with the ODP are the 2.6 d.u./ac., the single-family land use, the location of the Recreation Area, and the locations of streets. It.should be noted that this density is inclusive of the land area designated for the Recreation Area, which area was shown separately on the ODP. Were the .80 acres for the Recreation Area subtracted from Filing Three gross area, the density would be 2.7 d.u./ac. Furthermore, were the .82 acre Horsetooth Road right-of-way subtracted from the gross area, the density would be 2.8 d.u./ac. for Filing Three. The ODP has committed a portion of Filing Four to approximately 5.6 d.u./ac. directly at the northwest corner of Horsetooth Road and C.R. 9. Such moderate density development is most plausible from a land use standpoint and would establish the overall density of Stone Ridge at over 3 d.u./ac. A highly visible sign has been posted at this corner indicating that this portion of Stone Ridge is reserved for "multi-family/patio-home" development. Filing Three is by design an extension of Filings One and Two. The landscape.treatment along,Horsetooth Road continues the identical, broadly -landscaped, birmed, greenbelted, and brick - pier -fenced arterial street landscaping of Filing One. Greenbelts in Filing Three are linked to those in Filings One and Two for circulation, storm drainage and aesthetic considerations. The intimate cul-du-sac lot configuration is repeated in a manner which gives each lot a unique identity. Also, the bike/pedestrian -2- trail running east -west along the south border of the Dakota Ridge development to the north is connected to Stone Ridge (a second connection) by a bike/pedestrian trail at the end of Cherrystone Court of Filing Three. The short cul-du-sac streets in Filing Three are proposed as 28 feet in width, similar to 2.8 feet -wide Rosestone Court in Filing Two as approved by the Planning and Zoning Board. All three streets are shown at the standard 36 feet street width. A street width variance request has been prepared for the applicant by traffic engineer Matt Delich and has been submitted to the Planning Department. Filing Three is shown as a two phase development, with Phase One consisting of that area south of Fieldstone Drive, and Phase Two being the area north of Fieldstone Drive. Development is intended to commence in the Spring of 1994 and, depending upon market conditions, could continue through the Fall of 1995. Please address Planning Department questions and comments regarding Filing Three of Stone Ridge to Les Kaplan at 226-6819. S-riftE lev GEC Activity A: ALL CRITERIA ALL DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA CRITERION Al. COMMUNITY -WIDE CRITERIA 1.1 Solar Orientation 1.2 Ccmprehensive Plan 1.3 Wildlife Habitat 1.4 Mineral Deposit 1.5 Ecologically Sensitive Areas 1.6 Lands cf Agricultural Importance 1.7 Enercy Conservation 1.8 Air Qualitv APPLICABLE CRITERIA ONLY i the craedw Wa applicable?beaatia8ed� e Yes No If no, please explain A 2. NEIGH80RHOOD COMPATIBILITY CRITERIA 2.1 2.2 2.4 Vehicular Circulation and 2.5 Emergency Access 2.6 Pedestrian Circulation 2.7 Architecture 2.9 Shading 2.10 Solar Access 2.11 Historic Resources 2.12 Setbacks 2.13 Landscape 2.14 Sians 2.15 Site Lighting 2.16 Noise and Vibration 2.17 Glare or Heat 2.18 Hazardous Materials A 3. ENGINEERING CRITERIA 3.1 Utility Capacity 3.2 Design Standards 3.3 Water Hazards 3.4 Geologic Hazards 54 q 3 - 3 a ALL DEVELOPMENT: NUMBERED CRITERIA CHART ALL CRITERIA APPLICABLE CRITERIA ONLY • CRITERION�� IS the criterion 000licoolel Will Ine cnterlon oe liali5Le0, If no, please explain ,OAF �.� �F ves No NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATABILITY 1. Social COmpOtability 2 Nelghoornood Character 3. Lona.Use Conflicts 4 Adverse Traffic Impact PLANS AND POLICIES 5.Comprehensive Plan AIA f-C REmuBST On1 DENSIi PUBLIC FACILITIES & SAFETY 6 Street Cocacity 7. Utility Capacity 8. Design Standards 9. Emergency Access 10, Security Lighting I/ 11. Water Hazards RESOURCE PROTECTION 12. Soils & Slooe Hazard 13. Significant Vegetation 14 Wildlife Habitat 15. Historical Landmark 16. Mineral Deposit 17. Eco-Sensitive Areas 18. Agricultural Lands ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS 19. Air Quality 20. Water Quality 21. Noise 22. Glare & Heat 23, Vibrations 24. Exterior Lighting 25. Sewages & Wastes SITE DESIGN 26. Community Organization 27. Site Organization 28. Natural Features 29. Energy Conservation 30.Shadows 31. Solar Access 32. Privacy 33. Open Space Arrangement 34. Building Height 35. Vehicular Movement 36. Vehicular Design 37. Parking 38. Active Recreational Areas 39. Private Outdoor Areas t/ 40. Pedestrian Convenience 41. Pedestrian Conflicts 42. Landscaping/Open Areas 43.. Landscaping/Buildings 44. Landscaping/Screening 45. Public Access 46. Signs ACTIVITY: fees ident id I Uses DEFINITION: H All residential uses. Uses would include single family attached dwellings, townhomes, duplexes, mobile homes, and multiple family dwellings; group homes; boarding and rooming houses; fraternity and sorority houses; nursing homes; public and private schools; public and non-profit quasi -public rec- reational uses as a principal use; uses providing meeting places and places for public assembly with incidental office space; and child care centers. CRITERIA ° Each of the following applicable criteria must be answered "yes" and implemented within the develop- ment plan: Yes No 1. On a gross acreage basis, is the average residential density in the project at least three (3) dwelling units per acre (calculated for residential portion of the site only)? ❑ SfE VAR,.9,cr t�Q UEST 2. DOES THE PROJECT EARN THE MINIMUM PERCENTAGE POINTS AS CALCULATED ON THE FOLLOWING "DENSITY CHART" FOR THE PROPOSED DENSITY OF THE RESI- DENTIAL PROJECT? THE REQUIRED EARNED / CREDIT FOR A RESIDENTIAL PROJECT r`J[fJj ❑ SHALL BE BASED ON THE FOLLOWING: 30-40 PERCENTAGE POINTS = 3-4 DWELLING UNITS/ACRE; 40-50 PERCENTAGE POINTS = 4-5 DWELLING UNITS/ACRE; 50-60 PERCENTAGE POINTS = 5-6 DWELLING UNITS/ACRE; 60-70 PERCENTAGE POINTS = 6-7 DWELLING UNITS/ACRE; 70-80 PERCENTAGE POINTS = 7-8 DWELLING UNITS/ACRE; 80-90 PERCENTAGE POINTS = 8-9 DWELLING UNITS/ACRE; 90-100 PERCENTAGE POINTS = 9-10 DWELLING UNITS/ACRE; 100 OR MORE PERCENTAGE POINTS = 10 OR MORE DWELLING UNITS/ACRE. Da_ T-roNf R-io6z 3.,/ DENSITY CHART Maximum corneal Criterion Credit ItAII Dwelling Unit Are Within- Credit a 20% 2000 reefof w evsnng or oawwea na gnb«n000 ca+ta b 109'o e50 reeror on e.anrq rtawrvop. C 10% .+000leetofwevongorcocr a regicn +000rgcenror. d 20% 3500 rear or w emnng or fefanep negipo nwmoork comrnunnf Mmw corr u Nf=,, a00 We 10% 1000 fear of 0=004. rteevq ca me rea uremenR of me ccm lsciN eauca gnq not me Lore ofcrwo. < t 20% 3000faer«amaloremaownenfcenfer. g 5% 1000 feet of a cniw core confer h 20% worm"Foa Cabot 1 20% rheCenrta&airevgistnrt. A «olaCf wawa barw«y a cannprof a ro e vmq urpon oe.ecorrvnr. G cart moy as eomsa as M4�.rc O% _ F« wwaaf wwa aropeMbourfpay rws fo+0%connguay. .. too 15%_Fa J 30% 1 aroacnw «ooerN Dounpavnm 10ro 20% cw gsny, 3 20 to 257%r.-� aoe�afw�ww aooww oovf m3300 to 40% one V 25 to 30%— Fa wolecawnof orco" bcu , na 40 m 50% conngufy. k tt RCan as Oerttonsrtaetl marmsoiolaCtwnll reaXerwn•rerowoa errrgvsmage arlrw nrouprf pry apwwononofarterrwt� gv wvfsof fma/gl COmmrrtea energycaaerwawnr*teaaxea ba�orw fffa ro lv'ea wfNGNCoae.06%wrurrar wearnea fa e�ery 5%reaucnon n ererpy wa. I • cow lcrfaa 1%D=Atcrs 50aamnaupean eao a0. M. Cacvrere ire percemape Of Ire Iola W"0ne Dr l Mot awwraa to mcrscfl l M.anrar V2 of Mat oemanroge as a oc x n tt me apoocafrrorrrnm to weswwq penff«fenrortve awn wove mar m me GNs merf>tm rearemena eca rfro cereenroge of ma open spore ocreoge ro irm 0 a a awrao ocreapa enter mR cercenfogeon a 0o O rcparofinerotor ae\ewanerlfMX*91eto wnergrcorrwbawrpwbrtarunRsenllpwnIcharan orraapaaovONCoda emr 2% bonn rot a en 5100 per O..Owwv ure mmrea. p If part of rtfe tola Oef'ewafNrrt Ouogef a to ra wool On nef�w«fwpp fapYllat and serwceswrtwat aanatamMvnae raauraa W C.N Caoa urlrt nwevea. antes 1%ocr for 5100 pera Iwvcn Q tta Canmrtmernaoeng rt+ooeboa•Tgaasosalcap«cenroged a+s bra rxyrwera OrMYng1/vR fa how ncanefamest snterrtwf 3091. oercenrrapa maoonutup roarr+®a.m ar Z OfReroa xr wa IXaMe wq nR aiwa'A"a wrwe not aaeapea rcow'g wa.rortaoc wba cccro cs oemaiov nouarq m oaten W fro CMor fort co"Cacaa4ars rte Donn m foeownc O1YD..A.— .5f , T,p r," M r�rr1 — Type H-1.O wM 17 in rwc snag" cpmbnaa oona be grm arrtw130X rcfrw via «oaourn proosrhmlxfrron nmac fxeorrga pars. a Donartfoi D• aanaa forma fpapwaq 3% — Fa crwwl aMwXp"waft nflyarx>/flac. amaanwlfy laq ua. aefrteee aearrartecaw food roaonl oa Mrft 5 prafanVebR 3% — F«asangtMfrwancrrwwN ban.saargran maavaebrdms auWlnq«pace. reregw6rq Iola wn 3X — Fa ama.gmmrnasa.am. Dulangapfpca mawaiemtomoornk,aFrrca aa+rwnmaw n+pro�nernnm mamsaafffavw. tta OOrlbn ad Ot Rfe rewraa papgn rtfa msFttpe fm.M a«ea 4 aO.+aeO unasraavfa. Nfrfln fM ar�rp a n an srwarea parorq lfnras4aaamac=sawvue ro IM prerf W fvuatsfa a Dbrku rtwy ae eamea r3 fbrltlwe t g%—Fapaag7S%afara al ma povgnasnc it e% — Forpra m 50.74%0ftMoavgn0bncva: . 3% — FaWc%.drg25-4M0fflw=R gnasmcnaa. u rcammmmanrabaeq Rwaab CrsTwa aaprveO WIafRCanp ors eaefplafrq ryifaffa fa ma a+alYglll�R anMaD«xad10X. .TOTAL y -30- Stoneridge P.U.D., Third Filing - Preliminary, #21-92F January 24, 1994 P & Z Meeting Page 2 COMMENTS: 1. Background• The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: N: R-P; Vacant (Single Family - Dakota Pines 2nd Filing) S: R-L-P; Vacant (Single Family - English Ranch Fourth Filing) E: R-L-P; Vacant (Single Family - Stone Ridge O.D.P.) W: R-L-P; Single Family (Stone Ridge 2nd Filing) Stone Ridge P.U.D. was originally part of the Webster Farm which was annexed and zoned into the City in July of 1992. The following actions have been passed thus far: Stone Ridge O.D.P.: July - 1992 Stone Ridge Filing One July - 1992 Stone Ridge Amended O.D.P. April - 1993 Stone Ridge Filing Two April - 1993 2. Land Use• A. overall Development Plan The area of the Third Filing is described by portions of Parcels A, C, and F on the amended O.D.P. (April 1993). Parcel A is designated as "Single Family" with an anticipated density of 2.5 dwelling units per acre. Parcel C is also designated as "Single Family" with an anticipated density of 2.7 dwelling units per acre. Parcel F is designated as "Recreation Complex". (The primary justification for these low densities on certain portions of the O.D.P. is that two other parcels carry more than 3.00 dwelling units per acre. Parcel is B is developing as "courtyard" homes at 3.7 dwelling units per acre and Parcel E is a future phase that anticipates patio homes or townhomes at 5.6 dwelling units per acre. The overall density for the O.D.P. is expected to equal or exceed 3.00 dwelling units per acre.) The proposed land uses of low density single family and active recreation, therefore, conform to the approved Overall Development Plan. B. Absolute Criteria The request for 58 single family lots on 22.30 acres represents a density of 2.6 dwelling units per acre. This proposed density does 00 in November 29, 1993 (File: 9394LT01) 0 0 a Mr. Mike Herzig '0 N Fort Collins Development Engineer $ P.O. Box 560 O 19 o Fort Collins, CO 8.0522-0580 Cl) Z Dear Mike: g Ui Stone Ridge Village is proposing to build 28 foot wide public streets on a number of cul-de-sac streets in the development. u, These cul-de-sacs are named Cherrystone Place, Cherrystone Z Court, Pearlstone Place, Plumstone Place, Peachstone Place, > and Limestone Court. According to the Fort Collins Design a Criteria and Standards for Streets, this street width will Z require a variance by the City of Fort Collins. r Z m The reasons for requesting/granting this variance are listed below: - The streets proposed to be 28 feet wide will have less than 750 ADT on them. These cul-de-sacs would generate the following daily traffic: Cherrystone Place and Cherrystone Court (17 d.u.) - 165 ADT; Pearlstone Court (6 d.u.) - 60 ADT; Plumstone Place (5 d.u.) - 50 ADT; Peachstone Place (7 d.u.) - 70 ADT; and Limestone Court (6 d.u.) - 60 ADT. The respective generated traffic volumes would be at the point where the cul-de-sacs intersect with either Blackstone Drive or Fieldstone Drive. These volumes are far below the threshold level in the "Fort Collins Standards." There is not likely to be any external traffic passing through these cul-de- sacs. Therefore, the aforementioned traffic volumes will co be a worst case level for each cul-de-sac. - The streets that are proposed to be 28 feet are all cul- W de -sacs. Z - The cul-de-sacs do not access an arterial street. W - This is primarily a large lot development. The density u.i is considered to be medium (2.1 to 6.0 dwelling units per 3 acre). Based upon criteria in "Recommended Guidelines • for Subdivision Streets, A Recommended Practice," o Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1984, the pavement C.j J a width should be 28-34 feet. The proposed 28 feet meets LU this recommended practice. a - Typical developments with large lot sizes provide more a than four off-street parking spaces per dwelling unit. A comparable development is the First Filing of Clarendon • Hills. Based upon observation at various times on a 3 number of days, the average number of vehicles parked on = LL a Hinsdale Drive in Clarendon Hills was 3 in a length of F- r°C- . 1300 feet. This observation was conducted where there were dwelling units on both sides of the street. The Q number of parked, on -street vehicles would enable Hinsdale Drive to have been a 28 foot wide street with no traffic or parking problems. I recommend that these cul-de-sac streets in Stone Ridge Village be 28 feet wide (curb to curb). I would further recommend.that parking be allowed on both sides of the streets, if at least four off-street parking spaces are provided per dwelling unit. If you have any questions or desire additional information, do not hesitate to call me. Sincerely, , Matthew J. Delich, P.E. 04 lY — • � s ILI � ,• , 0 TAT y . ILIN x� xs f ,r � o •� __ "» � xe 'R C ON EA v fe • ,0 . � v x• VO • �• � m n � » aO v d • = p x • }. e � v v • i —HORSETOOTH ROAD —__—._—._—_--._—_--.--..—_--_--__—__—._—__—_- OVERALL LOT PLAN FORT COLLINS COLORADO O,]C] xINM x]M VF • 1]I4 ]ll O,IG x1N0,® YOi E Rli IJ >I,11N ni Stoneridge P.U.D., Third Filing - Preliminary, #21-92F January 24, 1994 P & Z Meeting Page 3 not satisfy the absolute criterion of the Residential Uses Point Chart of the L.D.G.S. which requires that the average residential density in a Filing be at least three dwelling units per acre on a gross acreage basis. The Planning and Zoning Board is empowered to grant variances to the L.D.G.S. if it can be demonstrated that the proposed P.U.D. is equal to or better than a plan that could have met the three dwelling unit per acre minimum. Staff recommends a variance to the absolute criterion. This recommendation is based upon the following findings: 1. The density for the Third Filing is consistent with the O.D.P. which was presented to the Planning and Zoning Board in April of 1993. The O.D.P. was approved based on the overall anticipated density of the 92 acre area supporting a density that is greater than three dwelling units per acre. It is Staff's finding that the Third Filing is consistent with the O.D.P. Staff, therefore, recommends a variance from the absolute criterion that the average residential density be at least three dwelling units per acre on a gross acreage basis. C. variable criteria The project was evaluated by the criteria of the Residential Uses Point Chart of the L.D.G.S. The project achieves a score of 64%. Points were awarded for proximity to an approved neighborhood shopping center (Pine Cone O.D.P.), City neighborhood park (Pine Cone O.D.P.), contiguity to existing development (Stone Ridge 2nd Filing and Dakota Ridge 2nd Filing), and for providing active recreational uses within the P.U.D. (greenbelt). Therefore, the proposed density of 2.6 dwelling units per acre is supported by the score of 64% on the Residential Uses Point Chart of the L.D.G.S. 3. Neighborhood Compatibility: As a single family residential P.U.D., Stone Ridge Phase Three is similar to the adjacent developments (Stone Ridge Filing Two and Dakota Ridge Filing Two.) Because the land use is residential, the project is considered compatible with the surrounding area. Stoneridge P.U.D., Third Filing - Preliminary, #21-92F January 24, 1994 P & Z Meeting Page 4 4. Design: A. Greenbelt Network Like Stone Ridge Filings One and Two, the primary design objective is to create a greenbelt network available to each lot. This greenbelt system will be dedicated as a non -build area and under the control of the homeowner's association. This internal greenbelt meanders and is shaped irregularly. Along Horsetooth Road, the greenbelt takes on the role of arterial streetscaping. B. Recreational Area The Third Filing includes Tract F of the O.D.P. which is an .8 acre parcel located along Kingsley Drive. The proposal includes a pool, wading pool, and pool building. These amenities are being provided at the discretion of the developer and are not a City requirement. C. Path to Dakota Ridge At the terminus of Cherrystone Court, an eight foot wide, concrete bicycle/pedestrian path will be constructed to connect with similar path being built along the south line of Dakota Ridge 2nd Filing. This path will allow east -west travel and help connect the two adjacent projects for bicyclists and pedestrians. D. Entry Feature The intersection of Horsetooth Road and Crestone Drive will be highlighted by landscaping, water feature and entry sign. This feature will be maintained by the homeowner's association. E. Fencing Side and rear yard perimeter fencing is restricted to those heights and types as specified on the P.U.D. This matches the fencing specifications already approved for Filings One and Two. In summary, the design of Stone Ridge carries forward the greenbelt network established in the previous filings. Other design features result in Stone Ridge being a residential project that is innovative in its attempt to establish a distinctive neighborhood character. 5. Solar Orientation: Of the 58 lots, 39, or 67% are oriented to within 30 degrees of a true east -west line, or have a side lot line facing south with a Stoneridge P.U.D., Third Filing - Preliminary, #21-92F January 24, 1994 P & Z Meeting Page 5 non -build area for a distance of no less than 50 feet. Therefore, the P.U.D. complies with the requirements of the Solar Orientation Ordinance. 6. Transportation: The Preliminary P.U.D. proposes that Cherrystone Place, Cherrystone Court, Pearlstone Place, Plumstone Place, Peachstone Place, and Limestone Court be constructed with 28 feet wide streets as measured from flowline to flowline. This request must be approved as a variance by the P & Z Board. The standard street width is 36 feet wide. By way of background, the application for Stone Ridge Filing Two included a similar request for Jewelstone Court, Jadestone Court, and Rosestone Court. This request was approved in April of 1993. Local streets may be considered for the 28 foot width provided they are used within a P.U.D. and meet the following criteria: a. Be a loop street or cul-de-sac which connects with only one public street. b. Have less than 750 ADT (average daily trips). C. Are not accessed from an arterial street. d. Are not used in a single family area where single family homes face each other across the street. e. One side shall be signed "No Parking" on standard City signs. Staff has reviewed the applicant's request and has made the following findings: a. All six streets are cul-de-sacs. b. All six streets each have less than 750 ADT. C. For all six streets, there is no access to an arterial. d. The homes served by these streets face across the street from each other. Each lot, however, has sufficient length and width to accommodate four offstreet parking spaces. According to Recommended Guidelines for Subdivision Streets, A Recommended Practice (Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1984), the pavement section for Stoneridge P.U.D., Third Filing - Preliminary, W21-92F January 24, 1994 P & Z Meeting Page 6 residential densities like Stone Ridge Third Filing (2.6 dwelling units per acre) should be 28 to 34 feet in width. The proposed 28 foot streets meet this recommended practice. e. It is not recommended that one side of the street be signed "No Parking". This finding is based on observations of a similar development (Clarendon Hills) with homes facing across the street from each other. Based on observations at various times on a number of days, the average number of vehicles parked on Hinsdale Drive in Clarendon Hills was three in a length of 1,300 feet. Staff finds that Stone Ridge Third Filing is of a similar character and that parking on both sides of the street should not be restricted. Staff finds that the variance request is appropriate for the scale and character of Stone Ridge Third Filing. The request has been reviewed by the Poudre Fire Authority and found acceptable. There will be a low volume of average daily trips. The lot widths average in the area of 80 feet which allows for at least three cars to be parked along the lot frontage. This minimizes the potential conflict of two cars parked directly across from each other. These six streets, therefore, will function safely in accordance with the standard criteria for the City of Fort Collins. Staff, therefore, recommends approval of the variance request to allow 28 foot wide streets for Cherrystone Place, Cherrystone Court, Pearlstone Place, Plumstone Place, Peachstone Place, and Limestone Court based on the finding that the request satisfies the criteria found in the City's Design Criteria and Standards for Streets. Also, the P.U.D. is found to be equal to or better than a P.U.D. that provides 36 foot wide streets. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Staff recommends a variance be granted from the absolute requirement of the Residential Uses Point Chart of the L.D.G.S. that the density, on a gross acreage basis, be a minimum of three dwelling units per acre. 2. Staff recommends a variance be granted to allow 28 feet wide streets, from curb to curb, on Cherrystone Place, Cherrystone Court, Pearlstone Place, Plumstone Place, Peachstone Place, and Limestone Court. Stoneridge P.U.D., Third Filing - Preliminary, #21-92F January 24, 1994 P & Z Meeting Page 7 In review of Stone Ridge P.U.D., Third Filing, Preliminary, Staff finds the following facts to be true: A. The request satisfies the All Development Criteria of the L.D.G.S. B. The request complies with the variable criteria of the Residential Uses Point Chart of the L.D.G.S. C. The P.U.D. is in conformance with the approved Overall Development Plan. D. The land use is compatible with the surrounding area. Therefore, Staff recommends approval of Stone Ridge P.U.D., Third Filing, Preliminary, #21-92F. 11ILIVI: SiUNt KIu(jt ruu qp 3rd Filing - Preliminary North NUMBER: 21-92F 34 7 + 20 :—XEXISTING 'SCERTMATION VICINITY MAP PHASE 2 4 IRD FiLI 21 ASE 2—- 3 40 41 5 22 ATTORNEV'S SIGNATURE 2 26 gs® 39 1Jy 42 23a 25 27 0 µ f . 1 -1 24 28 38 43 \ PLANNING APPROVAL AND ZONINGB0ARO ALAND USE BREAKDOWN I I _�\ \ 3023 »ecaa-a�cz�ac�-- I I \ 28 i 22 \\ —9 23 0 1 11 �� / 20 ' GENERAL NOTES W c kkkk 24 I nr,mtiwnu. 11 EXISTING /r " s' 3 a ...v. li t0 I 1 I it 11 a II '1 16 17 j j 780 Ell °+.........°.ro,.,� 15 27 26 • I` f III + \I' I r 14a I L - - 9 �LA6K9 T61-B— f NAUGHT i 11 11 I I 2 i i i+ I FUTURE Ri l i 1 1 + III 4 0 111 I 11 I PHASE 41 42 a .i 8 7 60 I+RELE�,wr I I I I I �� ERE 0.M! -_ = J \�) i STONE RIDGE P.U.D. � PHASE FILING L — — — J a ... _ t .. _ FORT COLLINS COLORADO ---HOR&ETOOTt I ROAD— — — — — — ME ENCLJSH R.WCH SUEDMSION ZONED R' LOW DENSITY PtANNEO RESIDEN114L J.5 O.V. / AL. Od��