Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCUNNINGHAM CORNER PUD MARCH 1983 - Filed GC-GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE - 2003-07-31STATEMENT OF PLANNING OBJECTIVES FOR THE CUNNINGHAM CORNER MASTER PLAN The amendment to the Master Plan of Cunningham Corner, like the currently approved plan, is comprised of a variety of housing types with a central shared recreation amenity, complimented by a convenience commercial site and an office park employing approximately 350 persons. This plan is in compliance with the following criteria of the Fort Collins Land Use Policies Plan: • Close proximity to employm?nt, recreation and shopping facilities. • Greater than three units to the acre. • Does provide for a mix of housing densities. • As a higher density residential use, is located near a regional shopping center and neighborhood park facilities and has access to public transportation. The purpose of amending the Master Plan is to omit the connection of Windmill Drive to Woodwest subdivision, thereby addressing two major con- cerns. First, the residents of Woodwest have raised strong objections to the street connection. Second, Tract A planned for townhomes, and Tract H, an open space and detention area, could then be integrated into a unified site plan and not function as two parcels separated by a drive. The elimi- nation of the proposed connector street will not adversely affect traffic flow or compromise emergency services to Woodwest subdivision. Location and densities of residential parcels will remain similar to the current Master Plan. The proposed housing types are combined with the existing neighborhoods to form a logical progression of densities from single family to townhomes to medium density condominiums adjacent to the office and commercial center at the intersection of Shields and Horsetooth. The Master Plan will accommodate 230 units and 87,000 square feet of office and commercial building. Chestnut Village is under -construction and is therefore not included within the proposed Master Plan. The various uses are connected by landscaped buffers providing pedestrian access without crossing streets or parking lots. Units are oriented towards landscaped areas to optimize privacy to balconies and patios. Emphasis on streetscapes along the arterial streets and drives within this development will be reinforced by creative site design and landscape treat- ment. ZVFK architects/planners. eleven old town square, sulte 200, fort collins, co. 80524 use. telephone 303 493-4105 EX T Y� .T'+- C� 1 J � SETOOTH I LOCATIONS Phone 303-221-6581 A.tAho ry- 238 Walnut Fort Collins, Colo. 80524 DATE: April 3, 1985 RECEIVED TO: Joe Frank, Planning APR 4.1985 FROM: Larry Donner, Fire Marshal . RE: Windmill Drive DEPARTM ENI I have reviewed the request to amend the Cunningham Corner Master Plan. The Poudre Fire Authority does not support amending the Master Plan to omit the connection of Windmill Drive to Gunnison Drive. Response time is critical to the Poudre Fire Authority in the event of either a fire or a medical emergency. An explanation of this importance follows. The ability of a fire department to terminate a fire before flashover (full room involvement) occurs is extremely important in minimizing casualties and loss from fire. Field observations and controlled scientific tests have indicated the time to flashover ranges from six to ten minutes. The time sequence from ignition to fire extinguishment is divided into three segments. I. Detecting the fire: After a fire has started, it must be detected. In Fort Collins residential neighborhoods, the most common method of detection is someone reacting to a smoke alarm or seeing a fire. Except in buildings equipped with detectors which report directly to an alarm company or in buildings equipped with extinguishing systems the fire department has little control over this time. 2. Notification of the Fire Authority: The primary mode of emergency notification in Fort Collins is the "911" emergency phone number. In order for a person to report a fire they must a) recognize the need, and b) know how to call for help. Some people call "0" for the telephone operator. This results in a delay because information operators must determine which city and state are involved to notify the proper agency. Again, the fire department has very little control over the time involved in reporting a call. 3. Response to the fire: After the fire is detected and the alarm sounded, the fire equipment must be dispatched, PROTECTING LIVES & PROPERTY travel to the scene, and set up for fire control operations. This portion of the sequence can be controlled to some extent by the fire department. a) After the communications center is notified of a fire, the closest fire equipment is dispatched. In Fort Collins, this is done by radio. The average dispatch time from receipt of the alarm until the fire equipment leaves the f-'re station is 60 to 90 seconds. b) The fire equipment must travel from the fire station to the fire scene. Factors that influence this time are street layout, weather conditions, and traffic. c) After the fire equipment arrives on scene, it must 5e 5csitioned according to need, water must tie supplied any; t firefighters must prepare to enter the building. This cerioei varies from two to four minutes for a single family dwelling. Add i1,ional units respond Irom separate locations to supplement the first -in crew consisting of two or three fire fighters. Given what is involved in the total sequence any time saved in any portion of the sequence assists us in controlling the incident. A sinilar sequence is involved in medical emergencies. Set-up time is much less 30 to 60 seconds, but time can be even more critical with a medical. If a person has stopped breathing, brain damage begins to take place within four to six minutes. In the event of a medical emergency, seconds can make the difference between a vichle patient, a severely handicapped victim, or a death. Any means of reducing response times to medical emergencies are helpful. The elimination of Windmill Drive as an entryway into the Southeast corner of Woodwest: maintains an unacceptable level of exposure in the neighborhood. The very same people concerned about the Windmill extension now may he placed in jeopardy as a result of its omission. Given the present street layout for this portion of Woodwest, our apparatus must make a series of turns which slows our response time greatly. The Windmill extension will reduce travel distances and the number of turns involved in responding to the neighborhood. The design as proposed on the original Master Plan will save us from 1.5 to 2 minutes in response time. If you have any questions, please call. LD/mmf cc: John Mulligan Curt Smith Sam Mutch b. The existing pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalk, etc. in Windmill Drive will need to be removed and replaced with an acceptable ground treatment, the cost of which should be borne by the developers of Cunningham Corners. c. The cost of any removal or relocation of existing utilities, including shutting off at the main, should be borne by the developers. New utility easements will need to be dedicated for the remaining utilities. d. A sidewalk should be provided between Gunnison Drive and Richmond Drive. The developers should be required to install this sidewalk and dedicate the required public access easements. e. The applicants should be required to fulfill the above requirements as part of the approval of any future phases of the project. 3. Overall, the residents appeared to be satisfied with the quality of development which has already occurred on the site. SUMMARY OF NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING On Monday, March 4, 1985 at Rocky Mountain High School, the staff of the Community Development Department held a public information meeting on Tract A of the Cunningham Corners Master Plan, generally located east of Shields Street and dire--tly south of the existing single family homes in the Woodwest Subdivision. ,:Ioe Frank, Senior City Planner, facilitated the meeting and represented City staff. Frank. Vaught, Tom Sibbald, Tom Glund, Larry Stanton, and Suzanne Bassinyer represented the applicants. Approximately 12 neighborhood residents (representing 10 households) attended the meeting. While the subject of the meeting was the 80 unit townhome portion (Area "A") of the overall Master Plan, several of the statements made by the residents at that meeting are relevant to the discussion of the subject amendment to the Master Plan. The issues that arose during the discussion at the meeting that are relevant to the Master Plan are as follows: 1. Neighborhood residents attending the meeting did not want Windmill Drive to he extended. The residents were concerned about the unwanted additional traffic in :heir neighborhood. They did not feel there was a need for more ways out of their subdivision. Staff Response: The applicants are seeking approval to amend the existing Master Plan to delete the requirement of extending Windmill Drive between Gunnison Drive and Richmond Drive. The staff, however, feels that Windmill Drive should be extended based upon the following reasons: a. That the requirement for the extension of Windmill Drive is consistent with past City policy and plans for Cunningham Corners. b. That the extension of Windmill Drive would provide a more convenient access to Horsetooth Road for existing homes in and around Gunnison Drive and would have the added benefit of reducing the number of trips on other residential streets in the neighborhood. c. That the extension of Windmill Drive will improve the Police emergency response time and patrol capabilities for the neighborhood. d. That the extension of Windmill Drive will improve the response time to the neighborhood by fire and other emergency apparatus. 2. What will happen to Windmill Stub if it is not extended? Staff Response: In the event that Windmill Drive is not extended, the staff recommends the following: a. Windmill Drive will need to be vacated and the adjoining single family property owners will need to accept the ROW. The applicants should be required to provide all the necessary documentation for the vacation. Planning and Zoning Matter Page 7 #4-83D 2. That the extension of Windmill Drive would provide a more convenient access to Horsetooth Road for existing homes in and around Gunnison Drive and would have the added benefit of reducing the number of trips on other residential streets in the neighborhood. 3. That the extension of Windmill Drive will improve the Police emergency response time and patrol capabilties for the neighborhood. 4. That the extension of Windmill Drive will improve the response time to the neighborhood by fire and other emergency apparatus. If in the event, the Planning and Zoning Board decides to approve the proposed changes to the Master Plan, the staff would recommend that applicants be responsible for the removal of the existing stub of Windmill Drive, installation of a new sidewalk between Gunnison Drive and Richmond Drive, and other requirements as detailed in this report. ReCEAVED Joe Frank. April S, 1985 Uf f ice of Planning and Development APR 0 �g�5 City of Fort Collins 300 LaPorte Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80522 D��RyNi Dear Joe: We are writing to express our views on the proposed changes to the PUG master plan for Five Daks Village at Cunningham Corner. Our comments specifically address the pr000sed elimination of the Windmill Drive extension and the storm runoff detention facility. Based upon careful consideration of many factors concerning the extension of Windmill Drive, we have concluded that it would be best for the street extension to be constructed for the following reasons: 1. The street extension will improve the efficiency.of traffic flow within our neighborhood. 1A1e feel that any increase in traffic (from Cunningham Corner) will be offset by a decrease in cross traffic in our neighborhood currently caused by the inefficient access. , 1. Police and fire protection services will benefit from the improved access. 3. A portion of Windmill Drive is already in place. If the, street extension were abandoned, this "stub" would fall into disrepair unless the city would continue to maintain it. At best, the stub would become an eyesore (as it already is); at worst, the residents of our neighborhood might be assessed to finance its removal. 4. When the developer of Cunningham Corner received approval for the current high density master plan, they promised (as part of that plan) to provide a large well -maintained area of open space. Most of this open space has already been constructed; although it is not yet well -maintained. We feel that the new proposal eliminates much of this open space. The developer has already won approval for high density housing at Cunningham Corner. It is not reasonable that they should now seek approval for the elimination of open space. S. Colony Drive currently carries too much traffic and is in disrepair. The Windmill extension should reduce some traffic flow on Colony. We realize that this is a very sensitive issue in our neighborhood, and that many residents are against implementing the street extension. We share some apprehension about increased noise and traffic flow nearer to our home. Nevertheless, we: feel that the benefits of the street extension far outweigh the problems it might cause. To help allay !some of the current residents' concerns, we feel that it is prolir^r• Lo r,r,E. for, same iissurancer, from the city. f ir;t, in exchange for requiring that the Windmill extension be installed, we is4:. that the oily guarantee that a street never be opened in the right-of-way which connects Gunnison Drive and Shields Street. Second, if the city should approve the request to eliminate the extension of Windmill Drive, we ask that the city also require a detailed plan for the proper disposition of the already installed portion of this street, and that this plan will not place a financial burden upon the current residents of the neighborhood. The second item, over which we wish to express our concern, is the lack of any sort of drain for the storm runoff detention area. This will create obvious problems; such as, a muddy pit that will not support the supposedly required vegetation, a mosquito habitat and a general inability to use the open space as it is intended. We feel that the cost of draining the detention facility should be borne by the developer of the property, and we are not willing to wait for several years to have the problem corrected by the city at taxpayers' expense. One possible approach toward a compromise would be to proceed with the instollation of a drain, and then partially restrict its flow capacity until the necessary downstream improvements are completed. Joe, thanks in advance for your thoughtful consideration of the issues raised in th+:, letter'. If you wi:,h for us to Further• clajui fy our- po!ii l:.ion on these mat ter b , feel tree to call' ('2'23 •(db4 ). Sincerely, Q (� Eric and Pam Fellers 3?84 Gunnison Drive Fort Gollin5,•(:0 80526 'lL. �LL�sto, OL) �` Co-r✓J/, CCU 0O 0000-IS 21, GL Ir t cLt-cC-fs� �6� L�, r't LC-- 7k L t IILL Ct.c� 3 3 c l ,4-A L XL4 L.IJ-0L-; IC z. 3 Z �) G-unhis�'l L""f� CITY OF FORT COLLINS UCPAHIMf Nr Of THAN'Y4 )WAf;()r4 mcmno Animim TO: Joe Frank, Senior City Planner Q� FROM: Rick Fnsdorff, Traffic Engineer DATE: April 12, 1995 RE: Windmill Prive Extension The Traf--ic Engineering Division has analyzed the area in and around the proposed Windmill Drive extension to Gunnison Drive. The purpose of this analysis is to dotermi,1W the imrsact on traffic circulation resulting from the proposed connection of Windmill Drive. It has been the Department of Transportation's position that the extension of Windmill Drive to Gunnison from the Cunningham Corners PUD would be beneficial to the existing homes in and around Gunnison Drive. This benefit would be derived from a more convenient access to Horse--ooth Road. The current situation for vehicular access into this area necessitates the use of local streets such as Colony, Blue Mesa, and Worthington, for access to this residential area. The Traffic Engineering Division has taken traffic counts (see attached map) in this area to determine the extent of traffic currently using these streets. The following list is the result of this volume caunt. I TRANSPORTATION r' E�o� 5 U Fail (:o'�': i Coioraco 80522 • ;3i-3}2�'. fib Windmill Drive Extension April 12, 1985 Page 2 1. Colony Drive north of Horsetooth Road 362 vehicles southbound, 319 vehicles northbound 2. Tradition Drive north of Horsetooth Road 90 vehicles northbound, 105 vehicles southbound 3. glue Mesa Avenue hetween Gunnison and Colony Northbound <38 ve�:�cles, southbound 415 vehicles 4. Wort.hin(iron Avc)nue between blue Mesa and )wallow southbound 43/ vehicles, northbound 349 The above traffic volumes are all twenty-four hour totals per direction. These traffic volume numbers do not indicate excessively high traffic volumes on these local streets. In analyzing the possible impact area of the Windmill Drive extension, it was determined that there are approximately 50 - 55 single family home lots that are identified as being in the impact area (see attached map) for this roadway extension. It is the opinin of the Traffic Engineering Division that residents of this impact area would be more than likely to use Windmill Drive if the extension was in place to Gunnison for access to Horsetooth Road. Given the fact that the City is currently finishing arterial roadway improvements on Horsetooth Road, it is felt that: Horsetooth Road will become an important facility for access back to College Avenue. It is felt that with the extension of Windmill Drive, the approximate 50 - 55 single family homes in the impact area would relocate their trips to Windmill Drive to Horsetooth Road instead of theer current situation of using Blue Mesa and Colony Drive. The overall impact on Colony Drive would be an approximate 15 - 20% reduction in traff`�c on Colony Drive. Windmill Drive Extension April 12, 1985 Page 3 Since there are no collector type streets in this area, that is streets that have been designed to funnel traffic out of residential areas to arterials, the local streets are handling that type of traffic in this area, such as Colony and Worthington and Placer. With the inclusion of Windmill Drive as a fourth alternate, it would be a more reasonable distribution ,of a residential type traffic from this area, and therefore the burden placed now on Colony and/or Placer could be relieved and more fairly distributed throughout the area. In conclusion, the analysis done on this area indicates that the Windmill Drive extension would be of a positive benefit from a traffic circulation standpoint for those residents who fall in the impact area. Also there would be a positive benefit for those residents living on Blue Mesa and Colony in the more reasonable re -distribution of access in and around this area. R L E : s q