HomeMy WebLinkAboutSPRINGBROOK PUD PRELIMINARY AND FINAL - 7 90,A - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSITEM NO. 12
MEETING DATE 5 7 20
STAFF Sherry Albertson —Clark
City of Fort Collins PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD
STAFF REPORT
PROJECT: Springbrook PUD, Preliminary and Final, #7-90,A
APPLICANT: Gary Mackey
913 Boltz Drive
Fort Collins, CO 80525
OWNER: C. M. Burchfield
1925 W. Drake Road
Fort Collins, CO 80526
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:.
This is a request for preliminary and final approval for 7 single family lots
and 7 duplex units (for a total of 21 dwelling units) on 6.2 acres. The site is
located on the south side of Drake Road, 600' east of Taft Hill Road and is
zoned r-p, Planned Residential.
RECOMMENDATION: Approval.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The applicant proposes 7 single family lots and 7 duplex units (for a total of
21 dwelling units) on 6.2 acres. The project scores 80% on the Residential
Density Chart. A minimum of 33% is required for the proposed density of 3.3
DU/acre. The preliminary plan was tabled March 26th by the Planning and
Zoning Board. Subsequently, the applicant has deleted three lots that were
impacted by the Spring Creek floodway and increased the depth of the duplex
lots along Drake Road.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 300 LaPorte Ave. P.O. Box 580 Fort Colfina, CO 80522-0580 (303) 221-6750
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STEWAU&ASSOCIATES
Consulting Engineers and Surveyors
January 5, 1990
Mrs. Sherry Albertson —Clark
Senior Planner
City of Fort Collins
P 0 Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
Dear Sherry:
06616 - 933
-.1 ''1 z10
The following are the planning objectives for Springbrook P.U.D.
Springbrook P.U.D. is located on the south side of West Drake Road 650
feet east of Taft Hill Road. It is zoned rp and is bounded on the east
by the Georgetown Townhouse Condominiums, on the south by the Spring
Creek Floodway and on the west by undeveloped land zoned bp.
The owner of the land, Mr. C.M. Burchfield, is going to sell the parcel
to Mr. Gary Mackey who will develop the single family subdivision. Mr.
Mackey will construct the single family homes.
The parcel is an "infill" project that has urban services including water,
sewer, gas, power, telephone and cable T.V. available adjacent to the
site. It has access to West Drake Road which is an arterial street that
has been improved by bits and pieces over the years. There is a proposed
capital project for 1994 to upgrade Drake Road.
There is an existing residence in the Northwest corner of the project
that faces and takes access from Drake Road. It is proposed to reverse
the garage on that lot in order to access the local street, Springbrook
Court, in the future.
One of the planning objectives was to create some open space along Spring
Creek to provide a continuation of the Spring Creek Bike Path: The open
space is mostly located in the Spring Creek Floodway. There is also
some open space provided along Drake Road to provide additional area
for a fence or wall and landscaping to mitigate traffic noise. A walkway
is provided for access to the Spring Creek open —area from the end of
the proposed cul de sac.
Because the site is zoned rp, it must have a gross density of three units
per acre. The developers would like to provide some two unit townhouses
on lots 1 thru 14 for retired or empty nesters. They feel there is a
market for this type of housing on the west side of Fort Collins. The
townhouses then increase the gross density to 3.8 per acre.
James H. Stewart
and Associates. Inc.
214 N. Howes Street
PO. Box 429
Ft. Collins. CO 80522
303/482-9331
aL�7/A!/,-f��nl�1i>
ALL DEVELOPMENT; NUMBERED CRITERIA CHART
ALL CRITERIA
APPLICABLE CRITERIA ONLY
-
CRITERION
Is the criterion appll_eable?_-
Will the chterlon
be 3011,1e0?
If no, please explain
Yes Yes No
NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATABILITY
1. Social Computability
--I
I
2. Neighborhood Character
3. Land Use Conflicts
4. Adverse Traffic I_mpac_i
PLANS AND POUCIES
5. Comprehensive PII-an_
PUBUC FACIUTIES & SAFETY'
6.-Sheet Cdpacity
T Utifi -N-Ca" act
P tY
-
8. Design Standards
--
9. Emergency Access
1(
40. Security Lighting
11. Water Hazards
RESOURCE PROTECTION
12. Soils & Slope Hazard _
13-. SignificantWgidtafion
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. Vibratio6s
-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.- P"rivacy
33. Open Space Arrangement
34. Builtling Height
-
35. Vehicular Movement
36. Vehicular Design
37. Parking. -
__ 38. Active Recreational Areas
39. Private Outdoor Areas
40. Pedestrian Convenience
41. Pedestrian Conflicts
42. Landscaping/open_Are_as_--_
43.. LandscapingBuildings
44. LandscapingliScreening
_
45. Publie Access
--
46. Signs
DENSITY CHART
Maximum
Criterion
Credit
If All Dwelling Units Are Within:
a
20%
2000 feet otan existing oropproved neighborhood shopping center. J
120
b
10%
65ofeet of an existing transit stop.
C
10% -
4000 feet of an existing or approved regional shopping center.
d
20%
3500feet ofanexisting orreservedneighbomoodpark community par korcommunityfocility.
We
vM<
10%
1000 feet of aschool, meeting allfhe requirements of the compulsoryedu crhon laws of me state of Colorado.
I
f
20%
3000 feel of a major employment center.
—
g
5%
1000 feet of a child core center.
h
20%
-Norm- Fort Collins.
20%
The Central Business District.
A project whose boundary Is contiguous to existing urban development. Credit may be earned os follows,
0 %— For projects whose Property boundary has 0 to 10% contiguity,
j
30%
10 to 15%—For projects whose Property boundary has 10 to 20% contiguity
16to 20%— For projects whose property boundary has 20 to 30% contiguity.
20to25%— For projectswnose property boundary has 30 to 40%contiguity
30
25 to 30%— For projects winos property boundary has 40 to 50%configuity:
Oft can be demonstrated that the project will reduce non-renewable energy useoge either mroupoh me application of altemofive energy
k
systems or through committed energy conservation measures beyond tKat normollyrequlred by CityCode,65% bonus may be earned
for every 5%reduction in energy use.
i
Calculateal% bonusforevery50ocresincluded in me project
rn
CatcUatethe percentageofinetotol acreslnthe projectthotoredevotedtorecreatlonal use.enterll2ofthafporciD6togeosobonus.
If the applicant commitsto preserving permanent offsite open spacethatmeetsthe Cil✓s minimum requirements. Calculate the percentage
n
ofthis open space acreage to metptal developmenf acreage, enterthis percentageaso bonus
ttpan of the total development budget is to be spent on neighborhood public transittroctiitleswhlch are nototherwlsefequired byClly Code.
O
enter 2%bonusfor every$100 per dwelling unit invested.
Ifpartolthetotaldev kgo ntbixfgetIstobe SpentonneighborhOOdfaUlitiesand SefviCeswhiCharenototneronserequiredby City Code.
P
enter al%bonus far every$100 per dwelling unit invested.
If a commitment a being made to develop a Specified percentage at the total number of dwelling units for low Incomefpmllies enterthot
(�
percentage as a bonus up to a maximum of 30%.
-
tta commitment is being mode todevelopa specified percentage of the total number of dwelling units forType'A' and TypeIr horidicappeci
housing as defined by the City of Fort Collins, calculate the bonus as follows:
OF
Type A _. Stith. Tt
coType'B'-1.0fifimes
o
Type B'units
o uni s
In no case shall the combined bonus be greater than 30%.
ttme site or adjacent property contains an historic building or place, a bonus may be earthed for the following:
3% — For preventingormltlgolingoutside Influences (e.g. environmental, land use, oesli economlcond social factors)adverse to Its
- 5
preservation;
3% — For assuring mat new structures will be in keeping with the Character otthe building orplace. while avoiding total units
3.. — For proposing adoptive use ofthe building or place that will lead to Bsoontinuance.preservation andirrWroyementin on
appropriate manner.
tta portion ar all otthe required parking in the multiplefamlty project Is provided underground, within the building, or In an elevated parking
structure as an accessary use to the onmary, structure, a bonus may be earned as follows'
t
9% — For providing75% Or more ofthe parking in a structure:
6% — Far providing 50-74% at "parking in 6 structure;
3% — For providing 25-49% of the parking in o structure.
U
If a commitment is being made to provide Opproved automatic fire extinguishing systemsfor the dwelling units, enter a bonus of 10%. _
TOTAL 8D
- 30-
NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING SUMMARY
On Tuesday, January 30, 1990 at 7:00 P.M. at the Foothills Unitarian Church, a
neighborhood meeting was held on the proposed Springbrook PUD. In
attendance at this meeting was Dick Rutherford, Project Engineer; Gary
Mackie, developer; and Sherry Albertson -Clark of the Planning Department.
Sixteen area property owners attended the meeting.
The meeting began with an introduction by Sherry Albertson -Clark to the
purpose of the meeting.. Dick Rutherford provided a presentation on the
proposed project. After this presentation, questions and comments were
addressed.
The following summarizes the questions asked by area property owners and
responses given by the applicants, as well as comments made by the property
owners.
Question : Why are the duplexes along Drake? Why not single family in this
area?
Response: The floodplain limits the site's development. City has minimum
urban density of 3 units per acre. Don't think duplexes are detrimental to the
area, with Georgetown. Units would be two -unit attached townhouses. Don't
know whether units would be owner -occupied or not.
Comment: Concerned about the duplex location, units becoming rentals.
Concerned about property values.
uestion: Would duplexes be single or two-story?
Response: Single -story. Units would be a minimum of 1,250 square feet each,
up to 1,500 square feet. Price range will be from 80's (per unit) to over
$100,000 (per unit).
Comment: Concerned that_ own home will look onto the backs of the duplex
lots.
uestion: What is the intent for the landscape buffer along Drake? How long
would it take trees to mature?
Response: A combination of street trees, evergreens, ornamentals and
shrubbery. City has minimum size requirements. May take 8-10 years for
plants to mature.
uestion: Would fencing be used?
Response: Not definite. May be fencing and may add more landscaping.
uestion: Why is the access street in the location shown?
Response: Either needs to line-up with Yorktown, or be off -set. Would like to
incorporate the existing private drive and even the Georgetown access, if
possible. Would be deleting existing access to Burchfield home.
0
•
uesti n: Where is the floodplain located on the site? Will filling the
floodplain occur?
Response: Indicated floodplain and floodway on the site plan. Will not be
filling. Building would take place outside floodplain. Must meet City's storm
drainage requirements, as do all developments.
uestion: Will there be fencing along the south property line?
Response: May be fencing of a lower height (ie. picket) to separate backs of
lots from open space on the site.
u stion: How would people from this site be kept off private property to the
south? Has cattle on property and there is an existing fence, but it does not
keep children out.
Response: Parks and Recreation Department Would need to evaluate the open
space area and location of trail through the area, then determine need for
fencing.
uestion: Will the trail be on the north or south side of the creek?
Response: Not sure at this time. Parks and Recreation Department will need
to evaluate.
ues i n: What about buffering to the west, since adjacent property is zoned
for commercial uses?
Response: Needs to be addressed by both developers.
Comment: Concerned about the grade of the proposed street intersection at
Drake.
Response; Would not be as steep as current driveway. Must meet City
standards.
uestion: What street improvements would be required on Drake Road?
Response: A 35' wide arterial standard, with curb, gutter and sidewalk:
Sherry Albertson -Clark provided a summary of the major issues and concerns
that were identified by area property owners. These are as follows:
1. Location/buffering of duplex units;
2. Storm drainage concerns;
3. Trail location/fencing concerns;
4. Access to the site; and
5. Buffering concerns.
The meeting adjourned at 8:30 P.M.
-2-
Springbrook PUD, Preliminary and Final - #7-90,A
P & Z Meeting - May 7, 1990
Page 2
COMMENTS
1. Background:
The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
N: R-L; existing single family residences (Lexington Green 4th)
S: R-P; undeveloped (existing large lot single family residence)
E: R-L-P; existing multi -family units (Georgetown PUD)
W: b-p; vacant
This site was annexed in 1983 as part of the Springbrook Annexation and was
zoned r-p, Planned Residential with a PUD condition. The property to the
west, which is zoned b-p, Planned Business, was also part of the Springbrook
Annexation. The current property owner's home is located on Lot 15 and
would be retained under the proposed development.
The Planning and Zoning Board reviewed
26, 1990 Board meeting and voted to table
concerns regarding lots being platted in
depth of duplex lots along Drake Road.
2. Land Use:
the preliminary plan at the March
this item. Board members expressed
the Spring Creek floodway and the
The proposed
land use consists of 7
single family lots and
7 duplex units, for
a total of 21
dwelling units. This
project achieves 80%
on the Residential
Density Point
Chart. Points were
awarded for proximity
to a neighborhood
shopping center,
transit, community
park and for contiguity. The proposed
density of 3.3
DU/acre is supported
by the Residential Point
Chart and exceeds
the minimum
density of 3.0 DU/acre
required in a PUD.
3. Design:
Since this item was tabled March 26, the applicant has made several changes to
the site plan. Lots 22-24 (lots that extended into the floodway of Spring
Creek) have been deleted and this area was incorporated into Tract B. Spring -
brook Court has also been shifted farther south, giving the duplex lots a
minimum depth of 125'.
The proposed plan consists of 7 single family detached homes and 7 attached,
duplex homes, for a total of 21 dwelling units. The single family lots range in
size from 5,944 square feet to 18,395 square feet. The duplex lots range in size
from 4,250 square feet to 5,526 square feet. All lots access from Springbrook
Court. The existing access to the home on Lot 15 would be closed when the
Drake Road improvements required of this applicant are made.
Existing vegetation on Lots 15 and 16, as well as three cottonwoods along
Drake Road, will be retained. A buffer along Drake Road (Tract A), consist-
ing of a combination of evergreen and deciduous trees and shrubs, provides
visual and noise screening for the backs of the duplex lots. Maintenance of
this area, as well as all other landscaping on the site and Tract B, would be
the responsibility of the Homeowners' Association.
0
Springbrook PUD, Preliminary and Final - #7-90,A
P & Z Meeting - May 7, 1990
Page 3
Tract B on the site plan is to be dedicated as an easement for floodplain, trail
and utility purposes. Although this area is north of Spring Creek, it can
provide a future link for the Spring Creek Trail. Tract B presently contains
grasses as the primary plant material. Since this area will remain as open
space and is identified as an area of "moderate sensitivity" on the City's
Wildlife Habitat/Wetlands maps, the applicant has provided riparian plant
materials, at staff request, to enhance Tract B. Plants used in this area have
characteristics that will not impede flood flows, since Tract B is in the
floodway of Spring Creek.
Fencing
is proposed along
the Drake Road frontage, the west
property line and
on Lots
1-21. The Drake
Road fencing consists of 6' wood
fencing, with a 2'
wide brick
pilaster placed
every 100'. Other fencing used on the site includes
6' wood
fencing along the west property line and 4' wood
fencing along the
backs of
Lots 17-21.
4. Neighborhood Comvatibility:
A neighborhood meeting was held on January 30, 1990 on this proposal. Ques-
tions raised related generally to location/buffering of the duplex units, storm
drainage, trail location/fencing and access to the site.
Buffering of the duplex units along Drake Road is being accomplished through
a combination of fencing and evergreen and deciduous trees and shrubs.
Tract
B is being dedicated as an
easement for utility, open
space and flood -
plain
purposes. An extension
of
the Spring Creek Trail may
cross this prop-
erty at some time in
the future.
At this time, there is no
fencing proposed
for Tract
B. If and
when a trail extension is constructed
on Tract B, the
Parks
and Recreation
Department
would work with surrounding property own-
ers to
address fencing
needs.
Access to the site is proposed at the existing location of a private drive. This
existing driveway would be incorporated into Springbrook Lane. There is also
an existing drive from the Georgetown PUD, located just east of Springbrook
Lane. The Georgetown drive from Drake Road will be closed and access to
Georgetown will be from Springbrook Lane.
5. Transportation:
Access to the site is from Drake Road, via Springbrook Lane. There is cur-
rently a private access easement (serving property to the south) in the proposed
location of Springbrook Lane. The applicant has obtained approval from the
property owner to the south to incorporate this access easement into the
proposed plan.
There is also an existing parking lot access for Georgetown PUD located just
east of the proposed Springbrook Lane. The existing access into Georgetown
will be closed and incorporated into Springbrook Lane by the applicant.
Otherwise, the two points of access on Drake Road would be essentially adja-
cent to each other, creating safety and access problems.
0 •
Springbrook PUD, Preliminary and Final - #7-90,A
P & Z Meeting - May 7, 1990
Page 4
6. Storm Drainage:
Development of this site is restricted by the floodplain and floodway of Spring
Creek. The Spring Creek Floodplain impacts Lots 3-7 and Lots 17-21. This
area is fairly large, since the site serves as a backwater for flood flows.
Construction of homes on lots in the floodplain requires elevation of the
finished floor 18" above the 100-year flood elevation.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff finds that Springbrook PUD, Preliminary meets the criteria of the All
Development Chart of the Land Development Guidance System and the pro-
posed density is supported on the Residential Density Chart. Therefore, staff
recommends approval of Springbrook PUD, Preliminary and Final, #7-90,A.
a
lm�
uMxt
bdNG�cAPE �{p DWp
(: I
��
AayRa✓,ULf
WNoiN
AsW
PPlW PIY{
WstR:Ax RK{
sP[ucE
[U£SULI OLIY{
o
J' W, Poa Waoa, evfoxsl9h[
C.
{NwI. IRia
�tF{{t 1rN
PVAKa go
-rYPIG4L *&IIDK OF
-.Jow't PLANTIN64
Jo GOAL
:.m.,PK.
ta°t
�$ w ILLwfuL tf°'t wYXn.J
DPvx /ILA1$a DatAa
w w'.rvY
A
. r pppu J9
I C «r W I rPaa w. Y w{ ally ,
OMNY.
I 3 p 3 I } 1 =7o wNW glYi Ar<{Ky. I� _ to Gtlxa RO
a c�L®ofLUcc(E'
�l_�L� G�_»
11 i H' 1♦' N' )1 IYI
` I
•� ens i eP[INGDFOdc GouRt xx ly ` � 1
MMNNI M
N I4 Nn a /� JTIUW vRLlxcsG
.-s A. '� it 'IkAL1 'D'
G. tro*}} d{.Iso eP WMI fo'atA{aa N+'s
Y A� C, {X Kt YI6.f1T1G4 U [{MYN
a s.<os Xer a>• lrs Rer>
sr eeala' �.Niwr�s.'
RI11 RP
Noise:
I. -ma {yl04l94 A4W. Fwm LAt 10 To
tRAK{ {oAp ulw K LLob{O.
'L. 1Y[Y N Ii{ WPL{Y LaTb, �M
°
OWA
GWN{IC WILL p{316N pUOLgCLb A9
° /Y
lOWNNpK{S. DUI WING YNV{lOP/�i
Vl
ARE elfaWN.
9. A 4' WMo ,a1[E LU[N DRlaa PIW W,
D
Q T
N 14o'.'l. WH, OR, CONStwull"
ALOWO I* RAU Lot LINE or Wtb
1"a 10.
-
+ A G' wa "" WIW. as < tKu~
T`
ALOIb jN{ W.lt I,IN{ 0 L.t.
B. tN{ W P*lAP{ AKA IN IRAct 'A' ANP
WON 1N{ p{AK{ RP. R.o W. ANV TIAL1 'ti
€�
WNL {A NAINTAI-W DY Im Nom*
-
OWNGFS
b. TYa 'AMp ft ARM IN 4RAO A AND
-
yLWHIN NO PRAM Ro. R.o.W. SHAW.
NAYS AN UMp &VOUWP I"WA13
1, TWe oPA f ,Pwt PAKKIN4 a 4&" PK
LQt WILL {{ P.11FAo PO{ 114 I IRCU
1.
6. EAW I•at OWN{R WILL D{ R{q, p*o to
PLAXI oW lr K mom 7 411y OF
nowt dowwN Ri AONNINP{p 1WGt.
<K My
£
L>-
v
ea4•R:.rur al
�
err +9.9L mdiv wvb
�
�
<os i'ww.. .V.ws p+vrra mom.
�^
U/6AYRwM 4 .I8J f<RMY/ ti""ot
V,
+�ni��va_w.wWrw°1C'�se.`°w
r� ww
Da.e.eves- ®nP M.aaar r�
�
�
asa-a>m
L
w
is
II
II II
u II
II � II
n II
--
---------------------
AEST O.P.I.E'E .PO,/O
o_
?xFt —PLL L-MA —LW 9. fx TI4P z u
a 1+
0
Z
O � 9
F4-S�1'W'9A 9K COU.T z _
-I'bw —OSS ., r n ••6•••� eP. rine uw'
fl L q-NL
Mlfl.-Q yKh Eris N T1U6 Atb/. TO
PbANi
MAl CK IAL6L 157
M.Y
O1Y
:ONHRx N4M8
MIANILpL NbM® I
18
�
�
Y
pY
M:
pW+[p Nf
xloxA
a.0 �j\\
W
y
V
06
D
9
L1 Ot100 31E �Pt l
1
GIbH
11x1.
3xKHIS :�+2L+'
,iw
SN
LL
'I
1
3YPKJ roxiYLoc
L TT f 8IF vil•06N
4:t0111! iNIpL>NiNOi
11LIp LOQObii
M{QSx1L4'6
\
�
�
�,
NL
0
Z
VO
1
M8Q41'p 5 K80Lt69 AbN
YON V'x8
p[<YINk9 PtNIGT EQL0�8ES
INUi NULI6
I
�
`V`
�
��
L
bNNrJ[(! GQIB
HALUG SNRN04.1'
-+.
�
BN
La
BJf•PA uJx P6F
JUNIPttub abDlNb 'pIGPPLO'
I:AMNR _
�
�
LV
�..�
'1
[tPTN b iO4nEpV
PY[fL6L¢M ..YTktbtBNFt
LOQNUO 6TMRNIP6lA b LRpJGOK.h
6up1YryYS fRQ1UNk1 'LOLCQIIA'
•
,. IN kttV Pbt b .b a. t !Y
i �
h
�
;•[•
.r�i[[iYi r[
— L. 10 LlJxibA[LY c[WUG vlt4lx�AxA
- hb
Ob
b
N�{t✓RN'A6P [OfTON4C00
MOGiN S..`l:.
I Ypuwb pu6'JN�[oLl
NNUG 4L1tlk
Eby
If.[ •nY[.
— E '+/9 OA4pibL NIWOYIS EINx
ONG " 00
u e4•$vm
vN oo'
A PLAT of SPIZINGBROOK P.U.D.
u/ u
`i1150f, IH 1N6 MOt1N W V{ OF 4W110N'b1,10WHANIP 'I HOUR, RAW 61 WVK OP TO &14 F..M., FOKT /dWH*, LOLOKADO q,.r
IYt@ NVi ON Y4 ING g i 1-e
4 "' 41Do' G O'14_po'
WIPMIENT OP OWNWRIP, h116PWWON AND W1716AIlPH
HHOW ALL mm BY 1H44G PCB¢e 1NAi -to VQVWb bNro All i ONJf AW I[oYPBVO of 1118
FO MlNA pB4a "Wv LANE, TV Nli' A 1B 1 N LAND h11mo IN 1NG Hor1 I/4 4 blN 'Vu vi.
1A+NaXIP 'I Nv[ry , fil 41 Ns� a T do PM afY a PoRi Low11w, 6MAry or LAtIMOR,
htAn a em.o[Avp NNY.N A NglHlHn 1W AWN WHIP o} 10 NM11HAW V4 N ~ hIXAi104 ' Ah
EBA[W6 g 89'41'�0' 0 ANp NMN AW b/ARId4h AONiAIWO Nb[BIN fIMiIN 'IKI[HO N6 LONiA1NW WIiINN
TNB DOILNPARV 4NK NINON peaty Afi A WIYi NINON 6MDs h B9'd'Om' 6 14' i$ MYH I¢A1 'ING NoNIWY01
�04. b� riH I pW f"A 1NNIL4 Alp
[VN 'MfNo 4 B9' $1' oo" B Al 4, Da PRW j TNBJt6 h 00 04 DO D
N D1'$I vo' i6 A4. oo fiM, BNci h no' 04 eo 6 90 po r6B7 'fI1BNAB
N D9• d1'oo' N Nvo fIH j iNBHAf N aP'ON'oo' 4J 444.4o rGBi 10 TNG POINT M d94IHN�NL1
egfiAWiNl4 i. lTb9 Av[B/s, Mo[s 0[ LBh4 kMA enwro iXp �iAMs to Ds hu[VAYAp AHD h DIYLpbP IUto
Lof iRAoth ANp 4R[BHh M oVIGN4 of TNh rLAT To ¢B KNOLlN Aa « III(amo PUV. AHD
,h gJBJBLi TO ASI. LAb6MBNih AN
(I(AXih-L4-LLY NON W [6LD[D LR 8%k+iING Lt INRGATBp OH
iM16 PLM AW Po NRRBDY DBMLAIB AW (qi-Y 1v INp Ta' PNWN: UH, InRWi[ NHBJTTIR i11L
sr[wth pN0 BASGMBXY4 Ah Ass LAID at Axp Ls514.A1Bp q1 illlh RAT PROYIpW HOHdy�L 'INM
Wttwto ryAIHibAi%1ND IiDs.arywih �1 A",
A1p0. �riMpHih DM Nof IttDb JIaN iN6 CITY A
N R1' b'oo' N
1 -
ATTOtHVYS &WI<IGAI
1Hw Vi To pBRNrY MI.
Ut d AY M
AO, 199v,. = W"IINOro AND
ITT C( o TK Al 14I0
Ai OBaG[Ib0 NK VC AND fil"I 4I16p 'INN 'iNY
oMHBK AV rfoP[IHo[4 M , iN- o1 II, pR0%NTY
✓+ oour4fU[n IN G-C h 19T4 dt$ III AM A4
b410NJ NW'RTI M OI nAro ptTB.
pR{ORNBY
[GwwlRAneN NA
yDKVPYOK6 6KnfItATP
s, ""A[P A fu1NB[ro v, A MY cm IB[BO
rRgB•wi I, C fkI ANp LAKV h IIWY[R IN 1H6
. AtE ? L XAM GO kiln GRCMf 14AT 1
RN Dr < KIN linfoK pop 19ULY ANP Go[RSNLY
11 R 1 xfa 1N0 RFb d A 6VWBY MAP" by IW
m WDK MY OIt.f hUVY[V1614N.
RIWp[D a RUi4Kfo[0
(A.Cla[o [Pg141R[Rp PL a Lh x[MLC
APPROVK A4 To ra m
�ofiBLau1u5 LOLo[Apa pION�TN4 WY pry
A,D 199o.
mNNNra or W41LVK1HS
APPKOVPV
BY i fLa91`10 ANo ig11J6T RtlI[D A Tib LITy w
foR} LOW14�i GPLOUA- off TNM. PAy M
d.P � 1990.
.a A¢Y
WITND'ih p R NAND/ AHr hAAL fll b PAY or A.I, M9o.
1141 B M o"101,11W NALTN[ ""W bIN"Y.Y
v MAXINP dMANFlN4 MRo{NY L"Nw NNCKLBy
4AAt C L Apw ys.
i f",&VW4 H4.([UMDNT 1y.9 pLHNONLpp46V Lf/O[b M TK' W Of ♦ V , 1,90
I,Y 60AfLt4 M bU[LNPli,V AND V. MAXING WRLIM" ANp BY 4AI B 41IN6Y M KWY ANP
PWo'INY Lot bcHLGY.
MY WYA[W. ooMMIaBIOJ ixgR[a,
4~ ft"
POPULATION PROJECTIONS
PROPOSAL: 7-90 SPRINGBROOK PUD
DESCRIPTION: 24 single family homes on 6.28 acres
DENSITY: 3.82 du/acre
General Population
24 (units) x 3.5 (persons/unit) = 84
School Age Population
Elementary - 24 (units) x .422 (pupils/u.nits)
Junior High 24 (units) x .148 (pupils/unit) _
Senior High - 24 (units) x .127 (pupils/unit) _
Affected Schools Design
Capacity
Bennett Elementary 546
Blevins Junior.High 900
Rocky Mountain High School 1250
10
4
3
Enrollment
535
908
1150