Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFALCON RIDGE PUD - PRELIMINARY ..... 5/23/94 & 6/06/94 P & Z BOARD HEARINGS - 2-94F - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSdevelopment access Country Club directly. There is 750 feet between Highway 1 and Ford Lane. Surely there is enough room for a direct access street. - The density of the proposed development is too high. In order to buffer the density increase into the non city surrounding area, we propose a reduction in the number of lots per acre. The area near the proposed development features large lots and open space. Please consider the quality of life of the existing residents who honestly don't want to be in the City or live in a high density area. - A bike path, or sidewalk should be constructed along Country Club Road between Highway 1 and North Lemay Avenue before additional development proceeds. Country Club Road through the described stretch is dangerous for children and adult pedestriaris already. There is no shoulder o pedestrian pathway. I invite you to please come up here when the children are getting on school busses, and people are going to work on bikes and in cars. It is already a very hazardous situation. I have a young family and am very concerned. Highway 1 is worse, especially at the intersection of Spaulding Lane, 287 and the Highway. The City Planning office says some reconfiguration of Highway 1 is "planned" but can't say when or if it will really happen. When I ask you last week via telephone how children from the proposed Falcon Ridge PUD will get to downtown or Greenbriar Park, and you said "On Country Club Road". To be fair to the existing residents of the area, the City should require an upgrade of Country Club Road prior to additional development. There are not sixty homes which access it directly now. Falcon Ridge proposes that many new houses. - An alternative to upgrading Country Club Road would be for the City and developers of Falcon Ridge (and perhaps the County) to provide pedestrian trail access across Spaulding Lane towards Greenbriar Park. With the proposed redevelopment of the North College, such pedestrian access will be a good long term investment in the safety and quality of life of Northside residents. Thank you for your time. Please feel free to contact me regarding these or relates issues. Sincerely, Tim Carney (phone 48 4093) Tim Carney May 18, 1994 2101 Sandstone Drive Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 Steve Olt City of Fort Collins Planning Department PO Box 580 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 I am a resident of the Rim Rock Subdivision which is located just north of the Fort Collins city limits, due east of the proposed Falcon Ridge PUD. Falcon Ridge is located on land recently annexed into the City of Fort Collins at the corner of Country Club Road and Colorado State Highway 1. A Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board meeting is scheduled to hear review of the proposed development Monday, May 23. Unfortunately, due.to business commitments, I will be unable to attend the upcoming P&Z Board meeting on this development. As a resident of Rim Rock, and not a City resident, I along with other concerned county residents have been trying to reduce the impact of the proposed subdivision on our lives. We are not opposed to development, but feel we are being bulldogged by the City and want our voices heard. We need your input to balance what we perceive as unfair impacts on our lives. Some residents have been here for almost 25 years. I have reviewed the proposed development and ask you to use your influence with the City P&Z Board to recommend the following changes made to the PUD as currently presented: - This development should access Country Club Road directly. It is unfair to the non -city residents of Ford Lane and Rimrock subdivision to dump the traffic and associated noise, litter and hazards onto our street. Ford Lane has been a sleepy dead-end street with seven houses and a good quality of life for 25 years. There are many children with no where else to play, including a hearing impaired young man. According to the City of Fort Collins Traffic Department, it is feasible to access Country Club directly through Falcon Ridge and avoid the unfair impact on Rim Rock. However, the developer and your planning staff apparently PREFER not to. I suggest access through what is now planned as Fox Den Court or through reconfiguration of the Falcon Ridge Street plan. This will also save the developer the cost of upgrading Ford Lane which has no curb, gutter or sidewalks. Note that the developments furnished traffic study foresees no significant impact on Country Club Road from Falcon Ridge. While I find this so utterly ridiculous as to be pathetic, this very point supports our request that the between Highway 1 and Ford Lane. Surely there is enough room for a direct access street. - The density of the proposed development is too high. In order to buffer into the surrounding residents, we propose a reduction in the number of lots per acre. The area near the proposed development features large lots and open space. Please consider the quality of life of the existing residents who honestly don't want to be in the City or live in a high density area. - A bike path, or sidewalk should be constructed along Country Club Road between Highway 1 and North Lemay Avenue before additional development proceeds. Country Club Road through the described stretch is dangerous for children and adult pedestrians already. There is no shoulder or pedestrian pathway. I invite you to please come up here when the children are getting on school busses, and people are going to work on bikes and in cars. It is already a very hazardous situation. I have a young family and am very concerned. Highway 1 is worse, especially at the intersection of Spaulding Lane, 287 and the Highway. Steve Olt of the City Planning office says some reconfiguration of Highway 1 is "planned" but he doesn't know when or if it will really happen. I asked Steve Olt how children from the proposed Falcon Ridge PUD will get to downtown or Greenbriar Park, and he said "On Country Club Road". To be fair to the existing residents of the area, the City should require an upgrade of Country Club Road prior to additional development. There are not sixty homes which access it directly now. Falcon Ridge proposes that many new houses. - An alternative to upgrading Country Club Road would be for the City and developers of Falcon Ridge to provide pedestrian trail access across Spaulding Lane towards nbriar ,: C oPment o ♦.r BZ.'a. s'�arn. j'�i a....� ta.e prCt.:+3..-d iE'.de�el�..r.. � 2 North College, such pedestrian access will be a good long term investment in the safety and quality of life of Northside residents. Thank you for your time. Please feel free to contact me regarding these or relates issues. Sincerely, Tim Carney (ph a 482-4093) w Tim Carney 2101 Sandstone Fort Collins, Drive Colorado 80524 May 16, 1994 Rene Clements - Chairperson Jan Cottier Jenifer Fontane Jim Klataske Bernie Strom Lloyd Walker Sharon Winfree Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board c/o City of Fort Collins Planning Department PO Box 580 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 Members of the P&Z Board, I am a resident of the Rim Rock Subdivision which is located due east of the proposed Falcon Ridge PUD. Unfortunately, due to business commitments, I will be unable to attend the upcoming P&Z Board meeting on this development. Please give fair consideration to the following comments. I have reviewed the proposed development with City staff and would like to see the following changes made to the PUD as currently presented: - This development should access Country Club Road directly. It is unfair to the non -city residents of Ford Lane and Rimrock subdivision to dump the traffic and associated noise, litter and hazards onto our street. Ford Lane has been a sleepy dead-end street with seven houses and a good quality of life for 25 years. There are many children with no where else a.p1ay, :--1uing a '-earn, t, i1^parei } ou rg man. According to the Tom Vosburg, City of Fort Collins Traffic Department, it is feasible to access Country Club directly through Falcon Ridge and avoid the unfair impact on Rim Rock. However, the developer and staff PREFER not to. I suggest access through what is now planned as Fox Den Court or through reconfiguration of the Falcon Ridge Street plan. This will also save the developer the cost of upgrading Ford Lane which has no curb, gutter or sidewalks. Note that the development's furnished traffic study foresees no significant impact on Country Club Road from Falcon Ridge. While I find this so utterly ridiculous as to be pathetic, this very point supports our request that the development access Country Club directly. There is 750 feet May 17. 1994 Gretchen Carney 2101 Sandstone Drive Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 Rene Clements — Chairperson Jan Cottier Jenifer Fontane Jim Klataske Bernie Strom Lloyd Walker Sharon Winfree Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board c/o City of Fort Collins Planning Department' PO Box 580 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 Dear Members of the P&Z Board; As a resident of Rim Rock Subdivision I have some concerns regarding the proposed Falcon Ridge PUD. Although Rim Rock is only a few minutes from downtown it has afforded us a country,like neighborhood. I see the proposed Falcon Ridge development threatening this existence. Primarily because of the proposed density. I ' Falcon Ridge would be a lot more acceptable if: 1) The lot's were larger to: a'. maintain the "open country" feel of the Northside area b. not so heavily increase the traffic at the Highway 1/Country. Club Road intersection c. not so heavily impact the quality of life for resident's living on Ford Lane 2) The traffic wouldn't all empty onto Ford Lane, but access County Club Road directly via Fox Den Court 3) A bike lane and sidewalk were put on Country -Club Road since there will be increased traffic ' 4) Sidewalks were put on Ford Lane for safety Fort Collins is growing and development is inevitable, but it should be done.wisely and with some consideration of the existing residents. Sixty additional residence will impact this area. Please consider my concerns. Si cere� Gretchen Carney NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING You Written en Notification of this meeting? Correct. Address, Name Address Zip Yes No Yes No �'� iw�rnw� 5b�'C.ol�' Gu,b RBI �5a�. ,� ✓ 11!5,e�ti � ��q n. go JbL AAA L-4i. . NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING IA04M s � for Project: w rift, Meetina Location:li��l �l(� City of Fort Collins F Date: _. Attendees: Please sign this sheet. The information will be used to update the project mailing list and confirm attendance at neighborhood meetings. Contact the Planning Department (221-6750) if you wish to receive minutes of this meeting. Did You Receive Written Notification of this meeting? Correct ddress. Name Address Zip Yes/ No . Yes No / f P �V tL ✓" tx58o--r ;L i2-A �1 0l hah�� f l.lc�HS ✓ l 0.��P2` L� Cc�y�o��rtn v.' 8v S3.y 0-02 (At, r CoUlity (�O S e--. ✓h et ,2 2 S ! e ✓ , sao A6,b ✓ tpa,'-w 2- ` 42. comment: There is an overall feeling that the north side of Fort Collins would like to see a more open, lower density feel to the area. 43. Question: I'm interested in hearing about your short-term plans. Are you planning on submitting your development request in the near future? Answer: Yes, we are planning on submitting our development proposal on January 3, 1994. 44. Question: Where else have you developed? Answer: We are developing the Sandcreek Village at Willox Lane and Bramblebush Street. 45. Question: Will these homes be similar to the ones in Sandcreek Village? Answer: No, they will be slightly larger and more expensive. 46. Question: How tall will the homes be? Answer: They will be standard 2-story heights. 31. Question: Who is doing your traffic study? Answer: Gene Coppola from Denver, Colorado. 32. Question: Will the Ford Estate remain in the large lot configuration as shown on the concept plan? Answer: Yes, it will. 33. Comment: That will make the remainder of the development a relatively high density plan. 34. Question: Would you consider a larger lot proposal that may require a density variance to the City requirements? 35. Question: Do you find that it is possible to have a mixture of size and price homes? Answer: Within these small confines it will be difficult to. create that kind of diversity. 36. Comment: The direction that this proposal is establishing, being a higher density, feels to be contrary to how the neighborhood wants to see this area continue to development. 37. Question: How will access to the development occur during the construction? Ford Lane cannot take the weight of construction traffic. Answer: An answer to that question will be decided during the development review process. 38. Question: Who is restricting additional access from this development to Country Club Road? Answer: The City is indicating that they will limit access to Country Club Road. 39. Question: How long is construction and buildout of this development anticipated to take? Answer: That depends on the economic climate and the market. 40. Question: The lot sizes in Pheasant Ridge Estates are generally larger than these proposed lots, most being in the 20,000 square foot range. Why can't this development be more like Pheasant Ridge Estates? 41. Comment: People are living up here on the north side because we want a more open feeling. 23. Comment: I am concerned about the number of lots and density proposed with this development. I would prefer this development to look more like the recently approved Pheasant Ridge Estates. 24. Question: What can the City do to make provisions for bicycle/pedestrian connections to the schools and parks in the area? How do kids get out of this development and get to the facilities to be uses? Answer: The City Parks & Recreation Master Plan has identified general trail routes that will be provided, as possible. The Transportation Division is always attempting to provide necessary bicycle/pedestrian connections between neighborhoods and facilities. The City will secure trails, as necessary and possible, with new development. 25. Question: What is the vacancy rate of single family homes in Fort Collins? 26. Question: Have other annexations been done simply by annexing street right-of-way to create the required contiguity? Answer: Yes, annexation of street right-of-way for contiguity has been done on several occasions in the past. 27. Question: What kind of utilities will be required for this development? Answer: The standard water, sanitary sewer, electric, gas, television cable, and telephone will be provided by the City, utility companies, or districts. 28. Question: We presently have low water pressure now, with ELCO. How will this development improve the situation? Answer: That will be determined with the district's review of the development request. 29. Question: There is concern about the safety of the homes on Ford Lane, from a traffic standpoint. Do you need two street intersections on Ford Lane? Answer: We can look at the layout of this development to see if the street network can be changed. 30. Comment: Most of the traffic will go north on Ford Lane to Country Club Road because you cannot get out of Spaulding Lane onto Highway 1. 13. Comment: At this time the water that collects would not drain out of the low area. The existing culverts are too high. 14. Question: Will the sewer main that exists in the area be adequate to serve this development? Answer: It is an old clay pipe that will have to be replaced. 15. Question: What will this do to the property values around the development? Who will be most affected? 16. Question: What size and type of homes are, you planning to build? Answer: These will be 3-bedroom homes with basements, approximately 1,500 square feet (plus) in size. 17. Question: Will these be tract homes? Answer: There will be five models, or so, of homes for prospective buyers to choose from. is. Question: Will these homes look like the existing homes on Ford Lane? Answer: They will probably look a little more updated. 19. Comment: The lot sizes proposed, at 3 dwelling units per acre, are not consistent with properties in the surrounding area. 20. Comment: There is concern about the upgrading of Ford Lane and any improvements that may be required on the east side of the street, impacting the existing lots in Rimrock Subdivision. 21. Question: Has anybody looked at the impacts that this development will have on the school? Answer: The Poudre R-1 School District will be included in the review of the development proposal so that they can assess their needs and evaluate the existing and proposed school boundaries. 22. Question: Can the City deny this project based on the results of the traffic study or require the development to decrease the number of lots to diminish the traffic impacts? Y Answer: Policy, standards, and regulations give the City the ability to make those type of decisions. Answer: A traffic impact analysis must be done as part of the development review submittal to help determine the potential traffic impacts in the area with new development. 5. Question: Will there be covenants regulating the size of the lots? Answer: Yes, there will be covenants developed for this project. The cost of the homes will be $110,000 to $140,000. 6. Question: Who now owns this land? Answer: It is presently in an estate and under contract to Sandcreek Associates. 7. Question: Will there be an environmental study done for this development? Answer: The City's Natural Resource Department will evaluate the potential wetlands/wildlife value of this property as part of the development review process. 8. Question: You could propose a higher density development than you are showing now? Answer: Within the City a project with a higher density could be proposed. 9. Question: Why have you picked this particular parcel of land for development? We came north to avoid development. 10. Question: Will Ford Lane be widened with this development? Answer: It will have to be improved, to City standards if the land develops in the City. 11. Question: Will Ford Lane be continued south to Spaulding Lane? Answer: Currently, the plan is not to continue Ford Lane south with this development. 12. Question: We are very concerned with the drainage. We live at the bottom of the hill. How will the storm drainage (detention) area help me? Answer: The development will be made to drain to the detention area and be released at an acceptable rate. Citv of Fort Collins Commw. ., Planning and Environmental ices Planning Department Neighborhood Information Meeting Minutes for SANDCREER ASSOCIATES Date: December 15, 1993 Applicant: Ed Lawler/Pete Sherman Sandcreek Associates LLC P.O. Box 9684 Fort Collins, CO. 80525 City Planner: Steve Olt The potential applicants, Sandcreek Associates, have expressed an interest in developing a single family residential project on vacant land at the southeast corner of the intersection of Terry Lake Road (Colorado Highway 1) and Country Club Road. The purpose of this meeting was to introduce Mr. Lawler and Mr. Sherman, Sandcreek Associates, to the affected property owners and other potentially affected interests in attendance and enable them to ask questions about, express their concerns about, or express their support for the development proposal. The following questions, concerns, and responses were expressed at the meeting: 1. Question: You are going to put another road next to Ford Lane? Answer: We are going to increase traffic down Ford Lane by quite a bit. 2. Question: Ford Lane does not belong to the property owners to the east of the street? Answer: No, it is a County road. It is dedicated as a public street within the Rimrock Subdivision. 3. Question: In order for the land to be annexed into the City, is there no say by other property owners about the annexation? Answer: There will be a series of public hearings, three before the City Council and one before the Planning and Zoning Board, where anyone has an opportunity to express his or her position. 4. Question: Will all the traffic come in on Spaulding Lane? We cannot get out of Spaulding Lane now. 281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (303) 221-6750 May 11, 1994 Mr. Steve Olt City of Fort Collins 281 North College Ave. Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 Subject: Falcon Ridge Preliminary Review Response to staff comments dated April 22 1994 Dear Mr. Olt: Regarding item number 10a from the Planning Department, we would like to point out that the gross acreage being developed in this project is 19.17 acres and we have proposed 60 units which is 3.13 units per acre thus meeting the minimum of at least three dwelling units per acre. The existing farm house located on 2.32 acres is to remain separate and not a part of the development. If the City desires, we can describe Lot 61 by a Metes & Bounds description and remove it form the subdivision. Regarding item number 10e, we hereby request a variance to the Solar Orientation Ordinance for several reasons. We are significantly restrained in our ability to realign our total lots due to existing conditions and other city department requests. To maintain proper distance between street intersections, preserve mature trees, provide pedestrian/bike access, and accommodate a 6" regional gas line, we have proposed what we and many other city departments feel to be the best alternative. In addition, the subject property is aligned generally in a North/South direction, requiring at least one major North/South street with homes facing East and West. We respectfully request that our proposal be accepted as submitted and a variance granted. If you have any questions, please be sure to give me a call. SincerPie.,;, Ed LaNvIW Sandcreek Ass ciates, L.L.C. EL/aml DENSITY CHART Maximum Earned Criterion Credit Credit a 2000 feet of an existing or approved neighborhood shopping center 20% b 650 feet of an existing transit stop 10% C 4000 feet of an existing or approved regional shopping center m,6 Y 10% d 3500 feet of an existing or reserved neighborhood park, community park, 4 community facility t 20% 1000 feet of a school, meeting all requirements of the State of Colorado compulsory education laws 10% W f 3000 feet of a major employment center 20% O H Q9 1000 feet of a child care center 5% m h "North" Fort Collins 20% j The Central Business District 20% jA project whose boundary is contiguous to existing urban development. Credit may be earned as follows: 30% 0% For projects whose property boundary has 0 - 10% contiguity; 10 - 15% For projects whose property boundary has 10 - 20% contiguity; 15 - 20% For projects whose property boundary has 20 - 30% contiguity; 20 - 25% For projects whose property boundary has 30 - 40% contiguity; 25 - 30% For projects whose property boundary has 40 -5$0% contiguity. k If it can be demonstrated that the project will reduce non-renewable energy usage either through the application of alternative energy systems or through committed energy conservation measures beyond those normally required by City Code, a 5% bonus may be earned for every 5% reduction in energy use. j Calculate a 1% bonus for every 50 acres included in the project. M Calculate the percentage of the total acres in the project that are devoted to recreational use. Enter 1/2 of that percentage as a bonus. n If the applicant commits to preserving permanent off -site open space that meets the City's minimum requirements, calculate the percentage of this open space acreage to the total development acreage and enter this percentage as a bonus. 0 If part of the total development budget is to be spent on neighborhood public transit facilities which are not otherwise required by City Code, enter a 2% bonus for every $100 per dwelling unit invested. p If part of the total development budget is to be spent on neighborhood facilities and services which are not otherwise required by City Code, enter a 1% bonus for every $100 per dwelling unit invested. a If a commitment is being made to develop a specified percentage of the total number of dwelling units for low income families, enter that percentage as a bonus, up to a maximum of 30%. Zr O If a commitment is being made to develop a specified percentage of the total number of dwelling units for Type "A" and Type "B" handicapped housing as defined by the City of Fort Collins, calculate the bonus as follows: "A" "A" m Type .5 x Type Units Total Units In no case shall the combined bonus be greater than 30% Type "B" 1.0 x Type "B" Units Total Units $ If the site or adjacent property contains a historic building or place, a bonus may be earned for the following: 3% For preventing or mitigating outside influences adverse to its preservation (e.g. environmental, land social factors); use, aesthetic, economic and 3% For assuring that new structures will be in keeping with the character of the building or place, while avoiding total units; 3% For proposing adaptive use of the building or place that will lead to its continuance, preservation, and improvement in an appropriate manner. t If a portion or all of the required parking in the multiple family project is provided underground, within the building, or in an elevated parking structure as an accessory use to the primary structure, a bonus may be earned as follows: 9% For providing 75% or more of the parking in a.structure; 6% For providing 50 - 74% of the parking in a structure; 3% For providing 25 - 49% of the parking in a structure. U If a commitment is being made to provide approved automatic fire extinguishing systems for the dwelling units, enter a bonus of 10%. TOTAL (off ACTIVITY: Residential Uses DEFINITION: ICI All residential uses. Uses 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 recreational 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 development plan. 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.) 2. DOES THE PROJECT EARN THE MINIMUM PERCENTAGE POINTS AS CALCULATED ON THE FOLLOWING "DENSITY CHART' FOR THE PROPOSED DENSITY OF THE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT? The required earned credit for a residential project shall be based on the following: Yes No N/A :d ❑ �e ■ 30 - 40 percentage points = 3 - 4 dwelling units per acre 40 - 50 percentage points = 4 - 5 dwellin units per acre f 0 _ ercentage points = 5 - dwellin units per acre 1�Pw�ii-t lFi 3, l� '0u/i6m� percentage points = 0 dwelling units per acre U 70 - 80 percentage points = 7 - 8 dwelling units per acre 80 - 90 percentage points = 8.- 9 dwelling units per acre 90-100 percentage points = 9-10 dwelling units per acre 100 or more percentage points = 10 or more dwelling units per acre Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments The City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised March 1994 78 - Activity A: ALL DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA ALL CRITERIA APPLICABLE CRITERIA ONLY CRITERION Is the criterion applicable? Will the criterion be satisfied? If no, please explain r m s a T z Yes No Al. COMMUNITY -WIDE CRITERIA 1.1 Solar Orientation 1.2 Comprehensive Plan ✓ 1.3 Wildlife Habitat 1.4 Mineral Deposit 1.5 Ecologically Sensitive Areas reserved reserved 1.6 Lands of Agricultural Importance 1.7 Energy Conservation ✓ 1.8 Air Qualit ✓ 1.9 Water Quality 1.10 Sewage and Wastes ✓ A2. NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY CRITERIA 2.1 Vehicular, Pedestrian, Bike Transportation 1/1 2.2 Building Placement and Orientation 2.3 Natural Features ✓ 2.4 Vehicular Circulation and Parkin ✓ 2.5 Emergency Access ✓ _ 2.6 Pedestrian Circulation ✓ 2.7 Architecture 2.8 Building Height and Views ✓ 2.9 Shading 2.10 Solar Access ✓ 2.11 Historic Resources ✓ 2.12 Setbacks 2.13 Landscape ✓ 2.14 Signs 2.15 Site Lighting✓ 2.16 Noise and Vibration 2.17 Glare or Heat 2.18 Hazardous Materials A3. ENGINEERING CRITERIA 3.1 Utility Capacity✓ 3.2 Design Standards 3.3 Water Hazards 3.4 Geologic Hazards al I 1 I II 1 ✓i ; n RC;k'a = D.M`•ti f-'- I � / � �� 11 / s / s / /J p a , \\l / �•ry. � 1 ap /� I N/I � I TFM TFF / ✓� "aeo .v l¢>,>•� I i•+� �. � i" ^g � � � j C X /- �=c\3/ , / I ' � , J �[� / �. � �' �rz � j ,�, 31 � . �- � � I u I � �`' �"--�v J ,• Iv � V I �{ � I• V' I , � (�'•i.`i / 3 • 1<' w�j / I / t g ------- - -- --'I Y}. 10, ' /� - , Q.l s _" _ ", a .d � _ I Fa ..o.: _ / + � '� / ti • /.0/'•. � � � 11 - • I ,v {/ _� ,_-�✓ �_ __'�__ �� \�4..I ems__—�i•-_��' �', '/ /'' �' a' .0 / i // vim. /_ / / �' i � mot. ___ � //� p. s 5. .. P... •/' w� i ,y' _i " / I d / ' v er cur ou / � \ \ i� �• / /�� o / r ... s- -__ _ `p{vDu ¢,kLL P./nit o1y ¢hfINV frsa / ,•. SITE DATA ,.M raR a7ptr -try rrrw►. K •¢ I NkfIYG � � "a4' ,cm rwN °7,tw' u¢t. � a �� _ _ ' y B i N...f er Da✓awruaur— F�"w� ¢.OiLP1a4 C r4 -y J �Aa._ M.ar a✓M 8u .o c N..xr-L{., \ Ae•.aBesARooR � I \\ `�; Aaa.e_r_L ulna oato.a11.9 A�.v y `\�. A.p ..ar •_-yrL-y rL era aau S{91.. t N a au NDFML4 N � 6 MIJ � , 9uN 4 RIgNr•nr wr Wxr N,nec. .eY11k eWMik, AWO uo a- 1Nx NDJAzwt ut awxlc. LANDiGAPPf✓ LG(�ND ►Ylii. ?kx¢ 10 F6NM4 pjQ ryD(ow NuowD, M'. �W On101'Of{D pklDllNl(r LOr jkDs CPO 'rprw ,DKD¢, OK Liit ft .Tow k r tl 1 '� 4' 0.iJICK SUADq\'/n;qu , I ,_ II �� / j ' iprµsNT •S.I IaNIFS/��' I — ' I _ / � I ' /� ^ �,+ // ' i � - i � ' _ _ _ _—�_� _ - -_ � i �M✓y�Wl'}-Kw, � _ alr _ I_ _ 1 w . I / / e � i 8 i I 1 III ° I-�" '� •' -'�'=- `�*-�-- ---�' _I it ®� I // •Lb'aANM a+NT t v a r �` 1 I I ,a�r.� � I I ® a i a ©u,c ` � j I 2 rur 1#luree ,oe /ya s✓< 21 3 � ` V�.�1'�" �-� r��l "�' f\ �a...>- s �, �l � .r � y I � :. � I �� �I d•i��' 91� ®� �' � -- --- --- - r 9 N /� I I � ��.• a I ;'� 3 0 8 § r �:i A.R.. As_n11041 ---- awed nll O �, Cam- 1 �{�I, { I {� -� I �4 k ..�.� i�r�, O 7 � �'� O � I � 10 �� I� 3 >� ©�I �/• � I � � S { wircNw I C ©� ® w 1 ' YI li am is s i a'w3r. ,uNM4 w11111 ^ , �7I� �''� �i / ",�=a - 7 N — F /e'e.c r /_♦ I /w a j�a0 fj f I eeu um •• �I .�— cr xsuu .io0a-b liram �° — �-�x,�Ytvli � F 1.. ' / / II �NFG�bhNµ4 Y4r(M \ i:. _ _ �� Vu •. s S..0 i.w..- ♦: w _ y / SSTE DATA: w ' � � \\\ Si5'CSW'W i9f/ •�^—'I ', r Wa mm�o i.m a� � J y ��C•..NiI•CYO)L !�}H' 3 - a V Y _ fi�rµµr".Y�'u�W�.rri ��u ...l �.wr � � Nu..�.6a . UN.ra- 40 f"v 1SM.�... 1�...y ryy.l w�.'.' SF%' Q ♦ ` \. j ' 41toi3 D. ua ♦ = 91% J/N r.+/.c.. :=wa IrrMr r.r.r� w 0 r•- . r Lor ui ; \?.'� '11f. SF�►'�INiu'..0 r' ."r3i. w�ii. �n �.r..i. i .l.LRY[ _ \\\o. Pna.:N. S.. c.a-20.n .fu.r4n.... /U.rrs _ rr.'i..3r w..""..'.^'.. " .•RT: ;»:'.ru y I '— ���. � �e..c `\ . / ti .T.."...: r. �..urrr.; a .'r'R• S m.n J � al ... �JI L.u.Y \ A... . z.au,aasr A. • { � LL a Ty P 1GAl. SUR-DINL &NIAe FF RtAV -ISBN .'• ua 9 : ■IUM .� Id M M M .. ■ ■ r 1 \\ v0TY LIMITS . L 2 F � FUNo i ems` ❑ O p ° e�,K ❑ IiNNOMyF NiVi IG Aso S io 8 K. 91000 G -,t ii M s TfAA RIDGE-7 S� —�17 a o 0 p U c� s v � e rip ITEM: FALCON RIDGE PUD '' Preliminary, NUMBER: 2-94F SCHOOL PROJECTIONS PROPOSAL: FALCON RIDGE PUD - Preliminary DESCRIPTION: 61 single family lots on 21.49 acres DENSITY: General Population 61 (units) x 3.5 2.84 du/acre (persons/unit) = 213.5 School Age Population Elementary - 61 (units) x .450 Junior High - 61 (units) x .210 Senior High - 61 (units) x .185 Affected Schools Tavelli Elementary Lincoln Junior High School Poudre Senior High School (pupils/unit) = 27.45 (pupils/unit) = 12.81 (pupils/unit) = 11.29 Design Capacity Enrollment 728 620 740 653 1235 1121 Falcon Ridge PUD - Preliminary, #2-94F May 23, 1994 P & Z Meeting Page 4 7. Resource Protection: An existing single family residence, on 2.32 acres, is excluded from the Falcon Ridge P.U.D. to enable the owners to preserve two significant groves of trees in the middle of this property. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Falcon Ridge P.U.D., Preliminary - #2-94F, based on the following findings of fact: * The gross residential density is 3.13 dwelling units per acre, exceeding the minimum of 3 dwelling units per acre as required by the L.D.G.S.. * It scores 60% on the Residential Uses Density Point Chart in the L.D.G.S., which supports the proposed density of this development. * It meets the applicable All Development Criteria of the L.D.G.S. A total of 32 of the 58 lots, equalling 55%, comply with the City's Solar Orientation ordinance. Staff is recommending approval of a request for a variance to the criteria of the Solar Orientation Ordinance. Falcon Ridge PUD - Preliminary, #2-94F May 23, 1994 P & Z Meeting Page 3 lot". A total of 32 of the 58 lots, equalling 55%, comply with the ordinance. The applicants have requested a variance to the strict requirements of the ordinance for the following reasons: * They feel that they are significantly restrained in their ability to align the lots due to existing conditions. There are two large groves of trees in the middle of the property that they intend to preserve. There is an existing 6" natural gas line running diagonally across the eastern part of the development that restricts the lotting in that area. * The property is generally aligned north to south, in a rectangular shape, and one major north/south street is necessary, thereby forcing a large number of lots to face east and west. Staff supports the preservation of the tree groves within the development and feels that the shape of the property (650' east - west by 1280' north -south, along with the logical street alignments, presents constraints that make it difficult to meet the intent of the solar ordinance. Staff is recommending approval of a request for a variance to the criteria of the Solar Orientation Ordinance. 4. Neighborhood Compatibility: A neighborhood information meeting was held on December 15, 1993 to discuss a residential development proposal on this property. There were 30 affected property owners and potentially affected interests present. The concerns centered around the lack of bicycle/pedestrian connections in the area that could provide access to Tavelli Elementary School and Greenbriar Park, additional traffic impacts to Country Club Road, Ford Lane, and Spaulding Lane, and the perceived incompatibility of this urban density development with the existing developments, in rural settings, in Larimer County. Staff feels that this proposal is compatible with the existing and proposed uses in the surrounding area. 5. Transportation: Falcon Ridge P.U.D. will gain primary access from Country Club Road and Spaulding Lane via internal local street and cul-de-sacs. There will be two points of access into this development from the existing Ford Lane, a local street that intersects with Country Club Road and presently serves 7 lots in the Rimrock Subdivision (in Larimer County). A single point of access from Spaulding Lane is proposed at the southwest corner of this development. Both Country Club Road and Spaulding Lane are designated as collector streets. IJ Falcon Ridge PUD - Preliminary, #2-94F May 23, 1994 P & Z Meeting Page 2 COMMENTS: 1. Background• The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: N: R; existing single family residential (on acreages) in Larimer County S: C, Ml; existing single family residential in Larimer County (Valley View Subdivision, mobile home park) E: FA; existing single family residential in Larimer County (Rimrock Subdivision) W: C, M1, R; Terry Lake and vacant land in Larimer County The property was annexed into the City with City Council approval of the Sherman -Lawler First, Second, and Third Annexations in February, 1994. 2. Land Use• This is a request for 60 single family residential lots on 19.17 acres located east of Colorado Highway 1 (Terry Lake Road) and North College Avenue, south of Country Club Road, and north of Spaulding Lane. The gross residential density is 3.13 dwelling units per acre, exceeding the minimum of 3 dwelling units per acre as required by the Land Development Guidance System (L.D.G.S.). It was evaluated against the Residential Uses Density Point Chart and meets the applicable All Development Criteria of the L.D.G.S.. It scores 60% on the point chart, earning credit for being: a) within 4,000 feet of an approved regional shopping center (Country club corners); b) within 3,500 feet of an existing neighborhood park ( Greenbriar); c) within 3,000 feet of a major employment center (Evergreen Park); and d) being in "North" Fort Collins. The point chart supports the proposed density of this development. 3. Design: Landscaping: Street trees will be provided at approximately 50' on -center along the rear lot lines on Country Club Road and Spaulding Lane. Additionally, the developer will plant one street tree per lot frontage throughout the development. solar orientation: This development is subject to the City's Solar Orientation Ordinance that requires at least 65% of the lots in the Falcon Ridge P.U.D. to conform to the definition of a "solar -oriented -'Y ITEM NO. 28 MEETING DATE 5/ 23/ 94 STAFF Steve Olt , '"►`_ City of Fort Collins PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD STAFF REPORT PROJECT: Falcon Ridge P.U.D., Preliminary - #2-94F APPLICANT: Ed Lawler Sandcreek Associates, L.L.C. P.O. Box 9684 Fort Collins, CO. 80522 OWNER: Sandcreek Associates, L.L.C. P.O. Box 9684 Fort Collins, CO. 80522 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for 60 single family residential lots on 19.17 acres located east of Colorado Highway 1 (Terry Lake Road) and North College Avenue, south of Country Club Road, and north of Spaulding Lane. The property is zoned rp, Planned Residential. RECOMMENDATION: Approval EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This is a request for 60 single family residential lots on 19.17 acres located east of Colorado Highway 1 (Terry Lake Road) and North College Avenue, south of Country Club Road, and north of Spaulding Lane. The gross residential density is 3.13 dwelling units per acre, exceeding the minimum of 3 dwelling units per acre as required by the Land Development Guidance System (L.D.G.S.). It was evaluated against the Residential Uses Density Point Chart and meets the applicable All Development Criteria of the L.D.G.S.. It scores 60% on the point chart. The point chart supports the proposed density of this development. Street trees will be provided at approximately 50' on -center along the rear lot lines on Country Club Road and Spaulding Lane. Additionally, the developer will plant one street tree per lot frontage throughout the development. A total of 32 of the 58 lots, equalling 55%, comply with the City's Solar Orientation Ordinance. Staff is recommending approval of a request for a variance to the criteria of the Solar Orientation Ordinance. COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 (303) 221-6750 PLANNING DEPARTMENT