Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOAK RIDGE WEST 1ST FILING HEALTHCARE INTERNATIONAL - FINAL - 23-87B - - LUC REQUIREMENTSCITY OF FORT COLLINS OFFICE OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, PLANNING DEPARTMENT August 5, 1987 Bob Zakely Everitt Companies 3000 S. College Fort Collins, CO 80525 RE: Oak Ridge West (HCI) P.U.D. - Rule Drive Dear Mr. Zakely; Tom Peterson, Joe Frank and I have discussed the matter of the require- ment of the dedication of Rule Drive with Paul Eckman, and we have examined the City Code, including the Land Development Guidance System, to be sure that the City's requirement is reasonable, and made under proper authority of the Code. We remain convinced that our requirement is made under proper authority and is reasonable under the circumstances. The Everitt Companies Master Plan for the area has, from the outset, shown Rule Drive to extend to the west property line of the subject P.U.D. This Master Plan has been relied upon by the City and, incidentally, G.T. Land in the development of areas to the west. Recently, the City has received a preliminary plan from G.T. Land showing development of 1 a.nd to the.west of the subject P.U.D., relying upon the existence of Rule Drive to the west property line. We believe that the City's requirement is based upon sound principles of municipal planning and is well supported in the Code and Land Development Guidance System. The Land Development Guidance System under Activity "A" pertaining to all development criteria requires, as a part of the "Public Facilities, Services and Safety" requirements, that the project comply with all design standards, requirements, and specifications for streets. Section 99-5 of the Code contains certain of the City's design standard requirements, and in paragraph (B) (9) thereof prohibits the subdivider from reserving a strip of land between a dedicated street and adjacent property for the pur- pose of controlling access to such street from such property. It is our belief that your purpose in refusing to dedicate Rule Drive to the west boundary line of the subject P.U.D. is to control access to Rule Drive from G.T. Land. In a typical circumstance, the City has experienced the subdi- vider reserving a strip of land running parallel to a street and along the OFFICE OF DEVELOPMENT If 300 LaPorte Ave. • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 • (303) 221•6750 SERVICES, PLANNING side of it, rather than, if you will, perpendicular and at the end of it. We do not believe that the Code makes a distinction regarding the shape of the strip of land reserved and we believe that your intention falls squarely within prohibition of Section 99-5(B) (9). A fundamental principle of planning is to insure that the site design of the Planned Unit Development fits into the organizational scheme of the community and provides a cohesive development as it relates to the rest of the surrounding neighborhood. Indeed, that is what planning is all about.. Accordingly, I would refer you to the site design requirements of the Land Development Guidance System which are found on pages 9 and 10 of the LDGS under "All Development' Criteria". Particularly, I would call your atten- tion, to Site Design Criteria 26, 27, and 33, which require that the ele- ments of the site plan, as they relate to circulation, be arranged on the site so that activities are integrated with the organizational scheme of the community and neighborhood; and require that the circulation elements of the site plan be designed and arranged to produce an efficient, func- tionally organized and cohesive Planned Unit Development and require an affirmative answer to the question of whether the street system provides for the smooth., safe and convenient movement of vehicles both on and off the site. We do not believe that the elimination of Rule Drive will provide for the convenient movement of vehicles off of the site in a westerly direc- tion. We are absolutely confident that, in the future, lands to the west of the site will be developed for urban purposes and we believe that the extension of Rule Drive to the westerly boundary of the subject P.U.D. is necessary in order to afford some mechanism for the movement of vehicles from the site to the west without the necessity of re-entering Lemay Avenue and finding access to the west at some other point. In.the absence of this westerly access, we do not believe that the design produces an efficient, functionally organized, cohesive Planned Unit Development that is inte- grated with the organizational scheme of the community and neighborhood, or is indeed in compliance with the Master Plan that the Everitt Companies first submitted. Accordingly, the Planning staff must recommend denial of this project in the absence of the dedication of Rule Drive to the westerly boundary of the property. Sincerely, Debbie deBesche City Planner cc: Paul Eckman, Assistant City Attorney Tom Peterson, Director of Planning Joe Frank, Assistant Director of Planning Jim Newell, Ciwi1 Engineer I Lucia Liley Wiley Barner