The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLAKE STREET TOWNHOME PUD - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2004-08-13CA) E j� 0 57� I ITF-M: /P-1 e 0 T -rO CjJAJ At IF-S o;�to co�,�,� 410 COMM ENTS: c- � - �-- - - �- � � —"-: ��- -� - � R F. I pjv- as S 00 e-) dtJr crib '.3 64i A1,646 Q./A/G Dg,lECTf SUM �,E,2 ST4E,iF-T i41 vc r AAl To 7/1le mF iAl- WIbT/.-` xAlh I/l Sp�� FoR TEE CuRuES i�,v a 6s iG;v u6owsIsr#� &FS . S7ANDA21�f �Q v�wc 1 Planting and Zoning Matter 0203-78/1.2ke Street Townhomes P.U.D., Prel. ?asp 2 (J. Frank/ja) iSSE Tt SGRI-i-TlOtl I. Land Use Data The petitioners are requesting preliminary P.U.D. plat approval for 3.3455 acres consisting of 20 townhouse units. The site is generally located north of Prospect Drive, east of Shields Street, and south of Lake Street, all within the municipal limits. The subject property is zoned R-L and is presently vacant. The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: North: R-L; Existing single family residences South: R-L; Existing single family residences East: R-L; Vacant West: R-L; Existing single family residences (Woods Subdivision) II. Discussion - 1. Relationship to Adopted Official Plans. Prospect Road and Shields Street are arterials -as designated on the City's Thoroughfare Plan. 2. Utility Service. Sewer and water service available at periphery of site. 3. Capital Improvement Implications. Minimal impact. III. Staff Comments 1. The use as proposed would be compatible with those of surrounding uses. 2. The plans as submitted do not meet the requirements for proper preliminary P.U.D. plat review. Prior to any Council approval, the petitioner will be required to submit the -following additional information: a- - Gross/net density calculations;- b. Development schedule; " C. Identification of existing trees; d. Location and dimension of all existing streets and easer_entsadjacent to the subdivision; e. Location and dimension of all proposed streets, easements, lot lines, and areas reserved for parks and open space; f. Location and size of existing utilities within or adjacent to the subdivision. 3. The preliminary site plan does meet the requirements for reservation of total open space but appears to be deficient in terms of active open space area as _ defined in the P.U.D. regulations (parcels of not less than 6,000 contiguous square feet and not less than 50 lineal feet in the smallest dimension). The petitioner should provide evidence to the Planning Board and staff that the active open requirement is being satisfied in this development. 4. The preliminary P.U.D. plat as submitted shows a 28' private street connecting with the existing Sur_aer Street, traversing the subject property, and ultimately intersecting Lake Street on the north. The City has projected that in the future, both Lake and Shields Streetswill carry an ever increasing voluc.e of student and other local vehicular traffic. The staff is concerned that as volumes increase on both these streets, the proposed extension of Su^er Street as proposed will eventually become a "short-cut" by those desiring to avoid the La'.ce Street/Shields Street intersection. In the conceptual plan review reeting concerning the subject property, both the petitioners and staff agreed that their mutual goal was to avoid making Sur-er Street a short cut. The staff Planning and Zoning Matter___�203_78/Lake Street Townhomes P.U.D., Pre l. Page 3 (J. Frank/ja) — --' - IS-1Uffs'. -DES CGRIPP100F III. Staff Comments (con't) suggested that the interior street system be oriented towards a "private drive" or parking lot design rather than a "through street" system. It is staffs experience such arrangements discourage through traffic more successfully than a connecting street system. The site plan as submitted, however, is an example of the latter system and will ultimately encourage through traffic. In addition, the staff would offer the following additional concerns and recommendations: a. The developer should provide a gradual transition in pavement width from the existing 40' width of Summer Street to the proposed 28' extension; b. In order to de-emphasize Summer Street as a major street, the entrance island should be eliminated; c. The "eye -brow" or "knuckle" on the west side of the proposed extension of Summer Street should be eliminated as it will create hazardous turning movements; d. The five space and three spac�,parking lots are poorly located relative to proper sight distance as a result of the extreme curve of Summer Street. The petitioner should re-e.valuate•the"plan on terms of -eliminating this condition; e. The curve at the west end of the development does not meet the minimum requirements for a safe turning radius as stipulated by City standard. The developer should re-evaluate the plan in terms of eliminating this condition. IV. Recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Board The staff of the Department of Planning and Development recommends denial of the preliminary plat of the Lake Street Townhouses P.U.D. Recommendation to the.City Council Subsequent to the preparation of this report and prior to the public hearing before the Planning and Zoning Board on January 8, 1979, the petitioners representative, Lester Kaplan, and City staff met to discuss the staff's objections to the site plan and to develop possible solutions. The product of this meeting was a revised preliminary P.U.D. plan that both the petitioner and the staff agreed upon. Tile revised plan was presented to the Planning Board during the hearing on the subject property. The Planning Board felt the revised plat met the requirements of the P.U.D. regulations and successfully responded to the original staff objections. The Planning and Zoning Board recomrended its approval with the condition that the peti- tioner work with the staff to "iron out" the final details. The petitioner agreed with this condition.. Following that meeting, the petitioner submitted a more refinec and detailed preliminary plat. The staff would recommend approval of the revised preliminary PAJ.D. plat of the Lake Street Townhomes, subject to the condition that the petitioners show on the final plat a minimum 25' driveway curb cut from Lake Street to the subject property. CONCEPTI. %L REVIEW STAFF COMMENTS MEETING DATE: January 25. 1982 ITEM: Lake Street Townhomes APPLICANT: Chris Moritz, 6752 E. Exposition Ave.. Denver, CO 80224 LAND USE DATA: 28 townhome units located south of Lake Street, north of Prospect, east of Shields COMMENTS: 1. Parking for project should meet City standards, i.e., 1.5 spaces per one bedroom; 1.75 spaces per 2-bedroom; and 2 spaces per 3+-bedroom units. 2. Summer Street would have to be a public cul-de-sac. Cul-de-sac would maintain 28-foot travel lanes, with sidewalks on both sides. 3. The City has been working with Colorado State University to develop a suitable traffic circulation system for the area. This project will have to be coordinated with those plans. 4. All parking areas will have to meet proper turning radius for fire vehicles. All structures to be within 150-feet of the access roadway for these units. A note to this effect should be provided on the plan. Additional hydrants may be required. 5. Curb cut up to property line will be concrete, and should be indicated on site plan. 6. Prospect Road will be improved to City standards as it abuts this property. 7. Setback from adjacent single-family does not appear adequate in itself to provide for compatability. Increased setbacks and/or extensive landscape treatment should be considered. 8. Minimum 20-foot setback from rear of sidewalks or curb (when no sidewalks) should be provided for all garages. 9. The staff would question the 20-foot width of the access -ways. The side- walks should be maintained on these access -ways. JF/fsr