Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMCKINLEY COTTAGES - Filed GC-GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE - 2006-08-15oei.ates civil engineering consultants Mr. Mark Virata, P.E. 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80524 Via hand delivery Re: McKinley Cottages - Sight Distance Easement Dear Mark We had several conversations with Katie Moore regarding the sight distance easement in the northwest corner of Lot 1. We came to agreement on the layout for this easement, but we were not able to get her a drawing for approval before she left. The enclosed exhibit shows our rationale for the layout of this easement. The exhibit shows the locations of two vehicles, one southbound on McKinley just north of the site and one exiting the driveway on Lot 2. The purpose of the sight distance easement is to provide a clear line of sight for the southbound vehicle. The proposed sight distance easement also provides an unobstructed view for the southbound vehicle once that vehicle turns west on Leland Avenue, prior to continuing south on McKinley. We believe this will provide adequate sight distance for these vehicle movements. Should you have any questions, please give me a call. Sincerely, Kent 4- ort, RE 204 walnut street, suite c, fort collins, co 80524 9 office: 970.416.0600 • fax: 970.416.0601 Don Bachman June 7, 2005 Page 2 of 3 We believe that the classification of Laporte Avenue as a minor collector is not supported by current transportation conditions. On behalf of the applicant, we request that the City change its classification to major collector. In the event that the City chooses to continue the minor collector classification, we request a variance from the requirement to dedicate ROW on the property to result in 38 feet of half ROW, and rather to dedicate ROW on the property to result in 33 feet of half ROW. The rationale for either request is the same, and is presented below. Justification. We believe that the major collector classification/66' ROW is justified based on three rationale: vehicle counts for this portion of Laporte Avenue are in the major collector range; it is unlikely that the City would choose to acquire the ROW associated with a 76' section from so many property owners in order to allow for a consistent minor collector cross section in this portion of Laporte Avenue; and classification of Laporte Avenue as a minor collector with parking creates an unsafe condition. First, the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards state that minor collectors are expected to carry between 2,500 and 3,500 vehicle trips per day; major collectors are expected to carry between 3,500 and 5,000 vehicle trips per day. According to Steve Gilchrist of the Traffic Operations Department, trip count data for this portion of Laporte indicate 4,100 trips per day for westbound traffic, and 4,500 trips per day for eastbound traffic. Second, the existing ROW width for Laporte Avenue at this location is 60 feet, and the current flowline-to-flowline width of the street is 36 feet. Widening of Laporte Avenue to a 76-feet wide section, with a 50-feet wide street surface, would require purchase of 8 feet of ROW from every homeowner along Laporte Avenue. This would create a large number of potential setback problems, with some existing residences already at or near minimum for both front and side setbacks. Third, it would be more prudent for safety considerations to classify Laporte Avenue as a major collector, without parking. The current 18-foot half road, allows for a 10-foot travel lane and 8 feet for parking. No allowance is made for a bike lane (see Photo 1). Due to this narrow cross section, very little parking along Laporte is actually done; residents have, for safety reasons, moderated their behavior to recognize a de facto major collector section. In comparison, the half -road in Mountain Avenue is 30 feet in width, allowing for 10 feet for parking, a five-foot bike lane, fourteen feet for travel, and a one -foot painted margin along the median curb (see Photo 2). Sidewalks along the north side of Laporte are narrow and attached. Potentially unsafe situations exist for traffic in a narrow travel lane, for a person exiting a parked car, for a bicyclist competing with moving traffic and parked vehicles, and for pedestrians navigating the narrow attached walks. Additionally, Laporte Avenue is a transit route, with bus stops located immediately west of the project, is a snow route, and is a chief means of accessing Putnam Elementary. Thus, for this variety of safety reasons, Laporte should be classified as a major collector, without parking. This would allow for a seven -foot bike lane and an 11-foot travel lane and only slight deviations from the standard major collector cross section. The applicant in this case was not allowed time to provide input to the staff in this matter. We were told that the Transportation Coordination meeting addressing this issue would not occur until June 9, 2005. Instead, staff rendered their decision on June 2 without contacting us to let us know that discussion would occur on this earlier date. We were very surprised to hear that a decision with such large impact to our project would be made without our input being considered. We believe that all of the above support a decision to classify Laporte as a major collector. However, we would consider as a compromise 5 feet of additional front yard setback as a plat P9Pmjm\141011mw bvmtmevt\Coneepwe ce\Vmiwce_rDUx 06.07.05.&c .. I k Don Bachman June 7, 2005 Page 3 of 3 condition, rather than an additional 5 feet of ROW dedication. If you have any questions regarding this request, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Best regards, QED Associates Kent Bruxvoort, P.E. cc: Troy Jones, Mikal Torgerson Architects Michael Jensen, owner Photo 1. Laporte Ave, looking east from project. Photo 2. Mountain Avenue, near Pearl Street. P:�j"U4-101 J.In ..t\C.rta d.-6Venmce_C-Us ' 0e 07.0s.d Transportation Services Engineering Department Development Review Engineering June 17,2005 Mr. Kent Bruxvoort QED Associates 204 Walnut Street, Suite C Fort Collins, CO 80524 Re: The variance request for classification of Laporte Avenue as a Collector without parking between Shields Street and Taft Hill Road Dear Mr. Bruxvoort, This letter is in response to your request for a variance to the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards. The variance requested was for Laporte Avenue between Shields Street and Taft Hill Road to be classified as a collector without parking. This variance has been denied by the City Engineer. However, the City Engineer has offered that the northern -most 5 feet of land that would typically be dedicated as Right of Way (and is the location where the sidewalk will be constructed), may be dedicated as a public access easement instead, for this project only. As with all variances to the street standards, the variance granted for this project is based on the particular situation under design and the judgment that we (the designer and the City) apply to determine whether there is a public safety concern. The variance for this project in no way sets any precedence for relaxing these standards on other projects without complete analysis and justification. Should you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, Katie Moore Project Engineer City of Fort Collins cc: file Anne Aspen 281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 380 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6605 • FAX (970) 221-6378 www.fcgov.com Transportation Services Engineering Department Development Review Engineering June 21.2005 Mr. Kent Bruxvoort QED Associates 204 Walnut Street, Suite C Fort Collins, CO 80524 Re: The variance request for alley paving for 1310 Laporte Avenue, McKinley Cottages Dear Mr. Bruxvoort, This letter is in response to your request for a variance to the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards. The variance requested was to allow the project's alley frontage to remain unpaved as opposed to designing and constructing the alley according to LCUASS. This variance has been denied by the City Engineer due to the increased traffic created by this project, as well as increased maintenance costs associated with an unpaved alley. As with all variances to the street standards, this variance may be appealed in accordance with LCUASS Section 1.9.4.8.1. Should you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, Katie Moore Project Engineer City of Fort Collins cc: file Anne Aspen 281 North College Avenue • F.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6605 • FAX (970) 221-6378 www.fcgov.com From: "Bob Gowing" <bobg@qedassoc.com> To: "'Dan DeLaughter "' <DDeLaughter@fcgov.com> Date: 11/2/2005 1:30:47 PM Subject: RE: driveways Thanks Dan, based on that we will not show the driveways. The maximum impervious cover allowed is called out on both the grading plan and on the plat, so this should be picked up when the building permits are submitted. We'll let the developer know this will be something the builders will need to handle later. -----Original Message ----- From: Dan DeLaughter [mailto:DDeLaughter@fcgov.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 5:02 PM To: BobG@QEDassoc.com Subject: driveways Bob, regarding the paved surfaces, the language is in section 3.2.2 (D) (3) of the LUC: "All open o£fstreet parking and vehicular use areas shall be surfaced with asphalt, concrete, or other material in conformance with city specifications." An administrative interpretation was made by Cameron G1ss, our Current Planning Director in 2003 regarding the issue of "other materials", and it specifically bans the use of grass-crete. The language clearly leans toward high strength, solid materials- i can fax you a copy if you'd like. I looked at the drainage report in our files though, and it seems to me that 2300 s.f. of impervious driveway area was already accounted for in the imperviousness calculation. We don't neccessarily require the paved driveways to be shown on the plans (for private drives), but the city does have the authority to require that a paved surface be installed through the building/inspection process. I'll get back to you tomorrow on the other items. -Dan SOUTHBOUND VEHICLE SOUTHBOUND VEHICLE LOS LELAND A VENUE it-11.11 airu r_nc_uiev Ve RIiC Ud WIOTFI) i J;N 20 0 20 FEET SCALE: I " = 20 Feet ------------ LOT 1 PROP SIGHT DISTANCE EASEMENT ----------------------� r-------r r-----------� I I I I l i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ssociates June 7, 2005 Don Bachman City Engineer City of Fort Collins Engineering Department 281 North College Ave P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 Re: McKinley Cottages Subdivision Request for Variance, Gravel Alley Dear Mr. Bachman, civil engineering • project management • This letter is to request a variance from the alley design requirements presented in Section 3.6.2(J)(2) of the Land Use Code and the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards. Presented below are an overview of the project, a statement of the request, and justification for the variance. Project Overview. McKinley Cottages is a proposed subdivision of a single large lot into four single-family residential lots. An existing house, located at 1310 Laporte Avenue, will remain on one of the four lots. Each of the lots created by the subdivision would be greater than 6,000 square feet in area (see the attached exhibit). The property is zoned N-C-L, Neighborhood Conservation, Low Density District. The existing lot is bounded to the south by Laporte Avenue, to the west by McKinley Avenue, to the north by Leland Avenue and an existing gravel alley, and to the east by a neighboring residence. The existing alley is located behind homes that front either McKinley or Columbine Court, and loops from the intersection of Leland and McKinley northward to the intersection of McKinley with Maple Street. The plat for the neighborhood indicates a varying right of way width for this alley, and it measures at approximately 18 to 22 feet in width. Nineteen lots addressed either to McKinley or Columbine back to this alley, as well as two lots that address to Maple Street. The existing lot at 1310 Laporte derives primary access from Laporte Avenue; its garage is open toward Laporte. However, this lot is frequently accessed from the existing alley. The neighbor at 1304 Laporte Avenue cannot access from this alley due to lot depth. The neighbor at 1302 Laporte Avenue also has primary access from Laporte, although the house is set back deep in the lot such that the rear of the home is approximately 10 feet from the alley ROW. No commercial access to the alley exists. The proposed project will result in removal of the existing driveway access from Laporte Avenue at 1310 Laporte. Two shared driveways are proposed, each accessing two detached rear garages. One driveway will be located off McKinley Avenue, accessing Lots 2 and 3. The other will be located off the alley, accessing Lots 1 and 4. The amount of lot frontage along the alley ROW is about 65 feet. 204 walnut street, suite c, fort collins, co 80524 9 office: 970.416.0600 • fax: 970.416.0601 Don Bachman June 7, 2005 Page 2 of 3 Statement of Variance Request. Section 3.6.2(J)(2) states, "Design Construction Requirements. All public alleys shall be constructed in conformance with the Design and Construction Criteria, Standards and Specifications for Streets, Streetscapes, Sidewalks, Alleys and Other Public Ways as adopted by the City Council by ordinance or resolution, except those public alleys within the N-C- L, N-C-M, and N-C-B zone districts that do not abut commercially zoned properties and that provide access only for carriage houses and habitable accessory buildings as such terms are described in Article 4. Dead-end alleys shall not be allowed." Design criteria for public alleys are presented in the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards, and require a hard surface (concrete for the inverted crown cross section, and either concrete or asphalt a cross section with drainage to one side, per Figures 7-11F and 7-12F). On behalf of the applicant, we request a variance from the hard surface requirement referenced above to allow the public alley adjacent to the property to remain a gravel surface. Justification. We believe that the requested variance is justified based on four rationale: the alley has functioned well for a long time as a gravel surface, the incremental impact of this project on the existing system will be minor, a paved surface adds to increased storm water runoff, and a gravel surface is perceived to contribute to lower vehicle speeds and greater safety. The neighborhood was developed in the mid-1940s; the alley has functioned with a gravel surface for about 60 years. During this time, residents have adapted in their use of the alley margins. Some have planted within the ROW, others have placed an additional gravel pad, and some, like the neighbor immediately to the north, at 220 N. McKinley Ave., have built a concrete pad to extend their usable patio/yard into the alley ROW (see Photo 1). The gravel alley has become a part of the neighborhood structure. The existing alley is approximately 815 long. The frontage along the alley ROW of the property proposed to be subdivided is about 65 feet long, or about 8% of the total alley length. It is not likely that any of the remainder of the alley will be modified to a concrete or asphalt surface. Additionally, the proposed subdivision would add access to only one additional lot from the alley. The amount of traffic for this one lot would be minimal; the additional lot would comprise one of 24 lots accessing the alley, or about 4% of the expected traffic. A short piece of hard surface alley required for a subdivision with such limited impact would be unnecessary and inconsistent with the remainder of the alley. The Old Town basin was modeled for runoff in its Master Storm Water Plan with the assumption of an aggregate 50 percent imperviousness. Conversion of a gravel alley, which allows infiltration and acts to filter storm water for water quality, to a paved surface would lead to an increase in storm water runoff, and a potential increase in the pollutants that are associated with vehicle use. The City recently conducted a number of neighborhood charrettes in consideration of an ordinance addressing alley house construction within Old Town. A common input of Old Town residents at these charrettes dealt with preferences for gravel versus paved alley surfaces. In general, most residents spoke in favor of a gravel surface due to a perception that a paved surface would lead to higher vehicle speeds and a decrease in safety. This concern would especially be relevant to a resident like that at 1302 Laporte Ave, whose home is set back to within 10' of the alley ROW. P:v oi«v\14-101 Jm hvm mt�uneapaodmm\Vmww_Aury 06.06.05doc Don Bachman June 7, 2005 Page 3 of 3 For all these reasons, we request that you grant a variance to allow the alley to remain a gravel surface. If you have any questions regarding this request, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Best regards, QED Associates Kent Bruxvoort,P.E. cc: Troy Jones, Mikal Torgerson Architects Michael Jensen, owner Photo 1. Rear alley, taken from access to 1310 Laporte Ave. Note extension of concrete pad into alley ROW (with ROW marked by chain link fence). P�Proj�\14101 Imam bvestmmHC cWnd oc\Vmmu AU06.06.05.&C R Mir Zax BLW 6E1 �'\ CAUTI PU �• � V1 'c 1� / fF911 f, L1NDI AVENUE PROP I3'1MIVSWAT FOR LOM2AND PROPFLOW ANRDW (M) PROPDONTOU sS ) P. i LAPORTE AVENUE I I N . (51�50]f l0 vrY �EN'+0)15. jam, 4 :INC. SWEWALA R. AND MEW 1LK iD S OVERHEAD .INES a.LErOmoND MST CRA VAr ALLEY TI:1 PROP ROLLOVER CW PROP IT DMEWAY FOR LOTS I AND MST GARAGG.VIO CONC PADS TO HE RLNIO U CURT [LOUSE TO RRMAW REMOVE ESISTNG DIOVEWAY .(nm NOW / I PROP ATTACHED RMS7SMMALK NG COANFCT TO F'.V' SIING fiIDRW.LLK R_..... —X! .e fwiWnn NORTH xo xa �o ERR, SGL£: I'�10 Pin dates June 7, 2005 Don Bachman City Engineer City of Fort Collins Engineering Department 281 North College Ave P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 Re: McKinley Cottages Subdivision Request for a Change in the Laporte Avenue Classification Dear Mr. Bachman, civil engineering • project management • This letter is to request a reconsideration of the staff decision to classify Laporte Avenue as a minor collector. Presented below are an overview of the project, a statement of the request, and justification for a classification of Laporte as a major collector. Project Overview. McKinley Cottages is a proposed subdivision of a single large lot into four single-family residential lots. An existing house, located at 1310 Laporte Avenue, will remain on one of the four lots. Each of the lots created by the subdivision would be slightly greater than the minimum 6,000 square feet in area (see the attached exhibit). The property is zoned N-C-L, Neighborhood Conservation, Low Density District and is located about four blocks west of Shields Street. The existing lot is bounded to the south by Laporte Avenue, to the west by McKinley Avenue, to the north by Leland Avenue and an existing gravel alley, and to the east by a neighboring residence. Subdivision as proposed will require dedication of additional ROW based on surrounding street classifications. A major collector has a standard ROW of 66 feet, and a minor collector (which allows for parking) has a standard ROW of 76 feet. As currently proposed, each of the four lots in the subdivision would have lot areas just greater than 6,000 square feet; dedication of additional ROW would result in an inability for all four proposed lots to exceed the minimum 6,000. The proposed project will result in improvements of the sidewalk on three sides of the property to meet Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. Statement of Request. According to a June 3, 2005 email correspondence from Katie Moore to Troy Jones, the applicant's planner, staff attending the Transportation Coordination meeting discussed the classification of Laporte Avenue in the vicinity of the project, and determined that, for the purposes of the project, Laporte Avenue should be classified as a minor collector, with parking. Thus, Ms. Moore indicated, the applicant will be required to dedicate 5 additional feet of ROW beyond what it would dedicate for a major collector. 204 walnut street, suite c, fort coliins, co 80524 9 office: 970.416.0600 • fax: 970.416.0601