HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/08/2016 - Planning And Zoning Board - Agenda - Regular MeetingPlanning and Zoning Board Page 1 March 8, 2016
Kristin Kirkpatrick, Vice Chair City Council Chambers
Gerald Hart, Vice Chair City Hall West
Jennifer Carpenter 300 Laporte Avenue
Jeff Hansen Fort Collins, Colorado
Emily Heinz
Michael Hobbs Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14
Jeffrey Schneider on the Comcast cable system
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make
special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-6001) for assistance.
Regular Hearing
March 8, 2016
6:00 PM
• ROLL CALL
• AGENDA REVIEW
• CITIZEN PARTICIPATION (30 minutes total for non-agenda and pending application topics)
CONSENT AGENDA (NOTE: Any public hearing item approved on the Consent Agenda shall be considered
to have been opened and closed. The information furnished in connection with any such item and provided to
this Board shall be considered as the only evidence presented for consideration. Approval of any public
hearing item as a part of the Consent Agenda constitutes adoption by this Board of the staff recommendations,
findings, and conditions of approval for those items.)
1. Draft Minutes for the February 11, 2016, P&Z Hearing
The purpose of this item is to approve the draft minutes from the February 11, 2016, Planning
and Zoning Board hearing.
2. Harmony Commons PDP 150027
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a P.D.P. for a 9.1 acre commercial center consisting
of three buildings located at the southwest corner of Harmony Road and
Lady Moon Drive. The site is zoned H-C, Harmony Corridor, and located
in the Basic Industrial Non-Retail Employment Activity Center sub area of
the Harmony Corridor Plan. One building would be a two-story, 25,000
Planning and Zoning
Board Agenda
1
Planning and Zoning Board Page 2 March 8, 2016
square foot medical office building which is defined as a primary use. Two
one-story buildings would contain a total of 25,600 square feet and include
a mix of retail, business services and standard/fast food (no drive-through)
restaurants which are defined as secondary uses. The site is a portion of
Tract S (24.71 acres) of the Harmony Technology Park Overall
Development Plan, Seventh Amendment, and represents phase one of a
larger commercial center.
OWNER / APPLICANT: Mr. Todd Parker
Brinkman Partners
3528 Precision Drive
Fort Collins, CO 80528
3. Dutch Bros. Coffee at Timberline Center, Major Amendment MJA150008
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a Major Amendment to construct a 754 square foot
drive-through restaurant on Lot Three of the Timberline Center located at
the northwest corner of Timberline Road and Bear Mountain Drive. The
plan includes one drive-through lane, a walk-up service option, patio
seating and 13 parking spaces. Lot Three is a component of a specifically
defined Convenience Shopping Center within the center. The parcel is .70
acre in size and zoned (I) Industrial.
APPLICANT: Mr. Nate Frary
One Fifty Five, LLC
729 Oklahoma Street
Kennewick, WA 99336
4. Home 2 Suites at Harmony Village PDP150031
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a P.D.P. for a four-story, 108-room hotel located on
Lot 11A of the Harmony Village shopping center. The building would
contain 64,862 square feet. There would be 106 parking spaces, 88 of
which exist as part of the overall shopping center. On the west side of the
site, 18 new spaces would be constructed. The site is vacant and located
between Cinemark Movie Theatre and Texas Roadhouse Restaurant.
Harmony Village is designated by the Harmony Corridor Plan as a
Community Shopping Center. The zoning is H-C, Harmony Corridor.
APPLICANT: Mr. Justin Mabey
East Avenue
1001 Cypress Creek Road, Suite 203
Cedar Park, TX 78613
5. St. Peters Anglican Church FDP150040
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for consideration of a Project Development Plan (P.D.P.)
for a 1 ½ story 10,400 square foot Place of Worship (church) with fully
shielded Wireless Telecommunication Equipment in its 74 foot tall tower.
The proposed development is on 2.3 acres of a 4.87 acre lot located at the
corner of East Trilby Road and Autumn Ridge Drive. The site includes two
access roads (one served off Autumn Ridge Drive, the other off
Candlewood Drive), a pick-up and drop-off porte cochere, 63 parking
spaces, and a columbarium.
The property is currently vacant with the east side (which is outside the
project’s limit of development) serves as a detention basin for the
Provincetown development to the south. There are two other churches in
2
Planning and Zoning Board Page 3 March 8, 2016
close proximity: Discovery Fellowship directly across Brittany Drive, and
Heart of the Rockies diagonal across the Trilby and Brittany intersection.
The proposed use of Place of Worship is subject to approval by
Administrative Review (Type 1) but the Wireless Telecommunication
Equipment requires review and approval by the Planning and Zoning
Board (Type 2).
APPLICANT: Lawrence Depenbusch
4260 E. Freemont Ave.
Centennial, CO 80122
6. 2133 South Timberline Road, Major Amendment MJA150009
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a Major Amendment to construct a one-story, 8,369
square foot commercial building with three tenants: a dental office (2,597
sf), an office (2,883 sf), and a restaurant (2,889 sf). The project is
proposed on Lot One of the Timberline Center (2nd Filing) located west of
Timberline Road and directly south of the existing Burger King restaurant.
The plan includes a saw tooth roof design, patios for each of the three
tenant spaces, and 46 parking spaces. The parcel is 1.48 acres in size,
zoned Industrial, and was originally approved as a Bank.
APPLICANT: Keith Meyer
1315 Oakridge Dr., Suite 120
Fort Collins, CO 80525
• DISCUSSION AGENDA
7. PROSPECT STATION II PDP150021
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for consideration of a Project Development Plan (P.D.P.)
and Modification of Standard for Prospect Station II. The proposed project
is located on a 1.04 acre site at 303 West Prospect Road.
The project is proposing a three story multi-family building containing 36
units and 54 bedrooms, with 18 one-bedroom and 18 two-bedroom units.
The proposed 25,750 square foot building will be constructed of brick,
stucco, board and batten, with architectural metal and stone accents. The
proposed parking area will provide 43 parking spaces, 11 of which are
reserved for the existing Prospect Station I building. The site is zoned
Employment (E) in which multi-family dwellings are permitted subject to
Planning and Zoning Board approval.
APPLICANT: Cathy Mathis
TB Group
444 Mountain Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80513
• OTHER BUSINESS
• ADJOURNMENT
3
Agenda Item 1
Item # 1 Page 1
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY March 8, 2016
Planning and Zoning Board
STAFF
Cindy Cosmas, Administrative Assistant
SUBJECT
Draft Minutes for the February 11, 2016, P&Z Hearing
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to approve the draft minutes from the February 11, 2016, Planning and Zoning
Board hearing.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft February 11, 2016, P&Z Minutes (DOC)
4
Kristin Kirkpatrick, Chair City Council Chambers
Gerald Hart, Vice Chair City Hall West
Jennifer Carpenter 300 Laporte Avenue
Jeff Hansen Fort Collins, Colorado
Emily Heinz
Michael Hobbs Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14
Jeffrey Schneider on the Comcast cable system
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special
communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-6001) for assistance.
Regular Hearing
February 11, 2016
Vice Chair Kirkpatrick called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
Roll Call: Carpenter, Kirkpatrick, Hansen, Hart, Heinz, Hobbs, and Schneider
Absent: None
Staff Present: Gloss, Yatabe, Burnett, Shepard, Holland, Langenberger, Everette, Ragasa,
Schmidt and Cosmas
Agenda Review
Chair Kirkpatrick provided background on the board’s role and what the audience could expect as to the
order of business. She described the following procedures:
• While the City staff provides comprehensive information about each project under consideration,
citizen input is valued and appreciated.
• The Board is here to listen to citizen comments. Each citizen may address the Board once for
each item.
• Decisions on development projects are based on judgment of compliance or non-compliance with
city Land Use Code.
• Should a citizen wish to address the Board on items other than what is on the agenda, time will
be allowed for that as well.
• This is a legal hearing, and the Chair will moderate for the usual civility and fairness to ensure
that everyone who wishes to speak can be heard.
Planning and Zoning
Board Minutes
5
Planning & Zoning Board
February 11, 2016
Page 2
Planning Director Gloss reviewed the items on the Consent and Discussion agendas, including several
changes:
• Verizon Wireless Facility has been pulled from consent and will be moved to the second item on
the discussion agenda; and
• Gardens on Spring Creek will be continued to the April 7th, 2016, Planning and Zoning hearing.
Public Input on Items Not on the Agenda:
None noted.
Consent Agenda:
1. Draft Minutes from January 14, 2016, P&Z Hearing
2. Windsong at Rock Creek PDP
3. Talon Estates PDP Final Plan Extension of Vested Rights
4. Request for 1-Year Extension for Planned Development Overlay District (PDOD)
Vice Chair Kirkpatrick read the following statement prepared by Assistant City Attorney Yatabe:
“Any public hearing item approved on the Consent Agenda shall be considered to have been opened
and closed. The information furnished in connection with any such item and provided to this Board shall
be considered as the only evidence presented for consideration. Approval of any public hearing item as a
part of the Consent Agenda constitutes adoption by this Board of the staff recommendations, findings,
and conditions of approval for those items.”
Public Input on Consent Agenda:
None noted.
Member Hart made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the February 11, 2016,
Consent agenda. Member Heinz seconded. Vote: 7:0.
Discussion Agenda:
5. Gardens at Spring Creek Major Amendment Continuance
6. Verizon Wireless Facility at Lifepointe Church
7. Brookfield Second Filing
8. Bucking Horse Filing Four Multi-Family
Assistant City Attorney Yatabe recused himself due to a conflict of interest at 6:06pm;
Sr. Assistant City Attorney Schmidt continued in his absence.
6
Planning & Zoning Board
February 11, 2016
Page 3
Project: Gardens at Spring Creek Major Amendment Continuance
Project Description: This is a continuation of the Major Amendment to the Centre for Advanced
Technology 22nd Filing, Community Horticulture Center, which is the formal name and location of the
Gardens on Spring Creek.
Member Heinz made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board continue the Gardens at
Spring Creek Major Amendment to the April 7th, 2016, Planning and Zoning Board hearing.
Member Hobbs seconded the motion. Vote: 7:0.
Assistant City Attorney Yatabe rejoined the hearing at 6:09pm
Project: Verizon Wireless Facility at Lifepointe Church
Project Description: This is a request to install new telecommunications equipment at Lifepointe
Church located at the northwest corner of East Prospect Road and Ellis Street, at 900 East Prospect
Road. The proposed site will include a total of six antenna structures mounted to a screen wall tower that
is incorporated into building's existing architecture on the roof of the church. Additional electronic
equipment associated with the wireless antennas will be placed on the ground, behind the church on the
north side of the building. The equipment will be surrounded by wood fencing that will match the color of
the existing building. The site is located in the Low Density Residential (R-L) zone district.
Recommendation: Approval
Applicant Presentation
Greg Dibona, an agent for Verizon Wireless, gave an overview of the wireless facility setup that was
being proposed. He discussed the time line of the project, the neighborhood outreach, and modifications
that were being made in response to neighbor concerns. He showed a map of the cabinet placements,
indicating the height of the structures. He discussed the improved public safety that would be provided
and how the wireless coverage would also be improved. He stated that Verizon is in compliance with the
FCC requirements, the third-party inspections, and the commonality of such facilities.
Staff Analysis
Regarding the perception of negative health effects, Assistant City Attorney Yatabe stated that, pursuant
to 47 USCS 332, subsection C.7.b.4, “no state or local government can regulate the placement,
construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental
effects of radiofrequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with commissions regulations
concerning such emissions”. He added that the P&Z Board would not be able to consider this criterion in
their deliberations but could only comment on issues related to the Land Use Code (LUC).
Planner Holland gave an overview of the code analysis and how neighborhood concerns were
addressed. He reviewed church renovation history, which had also been reviewed by Historic
Preservation staff, in order to determine whether the building is eligible for historic designation, which it
isn’t due to the 2008 renovation. Neighborhood concerns include the glare of lights, maintenance items,
and the current health issues. He discussed the original equipment building that had been proposed; at
that time, residents had some strong objections, and the building was moved, and the generator was
reduced in scope. He showed the current proposed equipment building, which has been lowered in
7
Planning & Zoning Board
February 11, 2016
Page 4
elevation. He discussed the criterion that was considered: standards, setbacks, landscaping, color, and
materials. The following conclusions were made:
• zoning is appropriate for this area;
• setbacks are straight-forward and appropriate;
• stealth technology is adequate (concealing wireless use);
• large existing trees will help to soften transition and context;
• height criteria is appropriate;
• will not preclude other wireless providers from using tower;
• landscaping requirements were met;
• design of tower element was positively received; and
• outdoor lighting issues were identified and resolved.
Public Input
Heather Lahdenpera, 280 Circle Drive, opposes this project, and she was given 15 minutes to speak on
behalf of a number of other residents as well. She gave several reasons for her opposition, including
health issues, potential decline of home values, and documentation of safe distances for cell towers.
She also stated the moral and ethical issues at stake: unknown effects of radio frequency (RF) radiation
on the human body. She is concerned with the proximity of nearly schools and that many parents
weren’t properly notified. She listed several studies as evidence of adverse health effects of such towers
and suggested that other sites be considered.
Abigail Hartley, 340 Circle Drive, is also opposed to this project for similar reasons: health concerns and
decreasing property values. She mentioned that other government entities are changing their standards
based on such health risks.
Megan Skeehan, 808 E. Lake Street, is opposed to this project. She focused on the health, moral and
ethical concerns associated with this. She is concerned with the lack of communication on this issue,
construction noise, the aesthetic look of the building, decreased property values, and the true size of the
project (30% increase over original).
Waydene Pixler, 841 Balsam Lane, is opposed to this project. She stated that she would like to see the
City of Fort Collins set strict guidelines for growth and projects. She asked the Board to deny this
project.
Dr. Jody Hansen, 860 Buckeye Street, is opposed to this project in terms of neighborhood aesthetics and
historic significance. She does not feel this project is a good fit with the overall neighborhood look.
Katie Cassis, 1308 Windjammer Cove, is opposed to this project, saying she was not properly informed
and may decide to make a change to her home situation if this tower is built.
Board Questions and Staff/Applicant Response
Travis Griffin, Senior Manager of RF Design for Verizon Wireless, and Mr. Dibona disputed the claims
that property values would decrease, saying that studies show that prospective homebuyers are
generally accepting of having local cell towers. Mr. Griffin stated that cellular phone towers promote
faster emergency response, and cell phones have more adverse health effects than the cell phone
towers due to proximity. He also said that most homebuyers value a strong, reliable signal.
8
Planning & Zoning Board
February 11, 2016
Page 5
Board members asked questions about:
• Distance to neighboring schools (answer: approximately 600 feet);
• Limits of exposure that are considered harmful (answer: operating within acceptable levels);
• Real-number statistics (answer: none pertaining specifically to this situation);
• Construction noise (answer: construction will be staggered to accommodate neighborhood
needs);
• Opportunities to direct frequencies away from schools (answer: antennas will be on non-
penetrating skids on the roof; cabinets in the back of the building);
• Materials for walls impacting RF waves (answer: walls will be RF transparent, smooth and can be
texturized to match building façade);
• How FCC guidelines apply (answer: antennas transmitting at acceptable levels – normally
operating at lower power)
• Operating wattage here (answer: 360 wattage total – within acceptable levels)
Planner Holland added that the neighborhood meeting notification was provided to surrounding
neighborhoods, in addition to online postings, and the outreach events that were held in accordance with
the sign posting. There is no formal process for notification of schools; generally it would be Poudre
School District that would be notified. There was more discussion on other cell towers being located in
proximity to other schools. Staff did not analyze property valuation impacts because this is not covered
within the LUC criteria. This project was not reviewed by Landmark Preservation Commission, because
the church is not eligible for landmark status; however, it was reviewed by Staff under the section 106
permit processes. The owners of Lifepointe Church were involved in the neighborhood outreach
meetings, and they helped to follow up with concerns by contacting citizens. There was more discussion
regarding the maximum height allowed (while the entire parapet of the building could be at tall as 40 feet,
it is much lower).
Board Deliberation
Member Carpenter acknowledged the emotions involved in this project, reminding the group that the role of
the P&Z Board is to consider this project in terms of the Land Use Code. Member Heinz stated that she
doesn’t feel this is compatible with the neighborhood feelings. Member Hansen is considering this project in
terms of its compatibility with the LUC, and he feels that the tower enhances the design of this church and
does not see a reason to disapprove. Vice Chair Hart feels the architectural features are compatible with the
area, and he doesn’t feel that the data presented indicates a significant negative impact on the
neighborhood. Member Hobbs acknowledged the neighbor concerns, but also that the P&Z Board decision
should be based on the LUC; he is concerned with lack of notification of parents with school children but
feels the project is compatible with the LUC. Member Schneider agreed and said that, while he has empathy
for parents, he also appreciates the applicant’s efforts to screen the tower. Chair Kirkpatrick restated the
role of the P&Z Board to determine whether the project is in compliance with the LUC; however, she
encouraged the residents to speak with other government entities involved in the process.
Member Hart made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the Verizon Wireless
Facility at Lifepointe Church PDP#150022, based on the findings of fact and conclusion on page 5 of
the staff report. Member Carpenter seconded. Vote: 6:1, with Member Heinz dissenting.
9
Planning & Zoning Board
February 11, 2016
Page 6
Project: Brookfield Second Filing
Project Description: This is a request for a Project Development Plan for Brookfield Second Filing
Tracts D and E, located at the northeast corner of Precision Dr. and Brookfield Dr. The proposal calls for
changes to 2 building types from a previously approved, but expired, plan. The stacked ranch condos
originally approved are now proposed as townhome-style condos. There are 12 buildings proposed with
a total of 68 units; the overall density of the site is 11.1 dwelling units per acre. The parcels are located in
the Harmony Corridor (HC) zone district
Recommendation: Approval
Staff and Applicant Presentations
Jason Sherrill, with Landmark Homes, gave an overview of the project, focusing on the important
features of the project, which is actually the final phase of a larger project that was previously approved
in 2002. Plans had to be resubmitted because the vested rights had expired and had to conform to the
new engineering standards. The buildings are now townhome-style condos, which is more appealing to
the current market; the units are larger but fewer overall. They will have private outdoor areas and 2-car
garages. He reviewed the few changes to the plan, illustrating the changes relative to the original plan
and their conformance with the new standards.
Staff Analysis
Planner Everette provided an analysis of the project, showing the location on a map and reviewing the
zoning compliance of this project; she stated that secondary uses had been previously identified on the
Harmony Park ODP. The project meets the development and dimensional standards established within
the LUC. Regarding open space requirements, Planner Everette stated that the necessary compliance
has been satisfied. She indicated that pocket parks are close by as well, and she showed a map of the
proximity of the project to other areas. Staff finds the project to be similar to the rest of the subdivision
and in compliance with the LUC.
Public Input
John Zac, 5038A Brookfield Drive, is the Chairman of the Townhome Homeowner’s Association, and he
stated his issues with this plan: 1.) he understood that the pool was going to be twice as large as the
current one proposed, and 2.) the clubhouse has an occupancy rate of less than 40 people. He would
like to know if original occupancy was incorporated into this plan or if it was reduced.
Board Questions and Staff/Applicant Response
Mr. Sherrill responded that he was not aware of the size of original proposed pool. Planner Everette
confirmed that the current proposed pool is similar to the original plan.
Board Deliberation
Member Carpenter made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve Brookfield Second
Filing – Tracts D and E PDP, based on the findings of fact and conclusions on page 5 of the staff
report. Member Hansen seconded. Vote: 7:0.
The Board took a 10-minute recess at 8:05pm – hearing resumed at 8:15pm.
10
Planning & Zoning Board
February 11, 2016
Page 7
Chair Kirkpatrick recused herself due to a conflict of interest; Vice Chair Hart will chair in her absence.
Project: Bucking Horse Filing Four Multi-Family PDP#150026
Project Description: This is a request for 322 multi-family units on 23.06 acres located within the Bucking
Horse development. There would be a mix of two housing types: 13 multi-family buildings (304 units)
and nine two-family buildings (18 units). There would be a total of 586 bedrooms served by a total of
573 parking spaces for a ratio of .97 spaces per bedroom and five spaces would be assigned to the
leasing office. Parking would be divided among surface, covered and garage spaces. A clubhouse,
pool, central green and community garden are provided. Primary access would be gained via Yearling
Drive and Miles House Avenue. In addition to two buildings fronting on Gooseberry Lane, there would be
two other access points from Cutting Horse Drive and a private driveway off Nancy Gray Avenue.
Recommendation: Approval
Staff and Applicant Presentations
Paul Mills, from Russell Mills Studios, gave an overview of Bucking Horse as an approved Master
Planned Community, this being the fourth filing piece of the development: the apartment complex. He
showed slides of the project, including the location, the connectivity to the surrounding neighborhood, the
on-street parking, the proximity to the railroad, garage placement to buffer the railroad noise, open
spaces and community amenities, parking spaces provided, and the pool and clubhouse proximity. He
discussed the transitional relationship to surrounding neighborhoods. Ian Shuff, with ALM2S Architects,
gave a brief presentation of the architectural features, including the massing and scale heights. He
showed illustrations of the various home styles for the various family types.
Chief Planner Shepard reminded the Board of the two conditions of approval: 1.) embellishing the
architecture to create greater differentiation within the buildings and 2.) vacating the public right-of-way.
He also stated that, while there are two housing types, the multi-family type is still dominant. He
concluded by restating the project’s overall compliance with the Addition of Permitted Use and with the
ODP.
Public Input
Morton Gerber, 2127 Cutting Horse Drive, stated his concern with traffic, which appears to be
significantly increasing. He feels that this project, combined with the railroad situation, will result in safety
issues for residents.
Robert Collins, 2102 Blue Yonder, discussed the traffic report that was prepared in 2012 and how the
expectation is a significant increase over the current traffic levels; he is afraid that surrounding streets
may become parking lots. He doesn’t believe that the developer is taking into consideration the negative
impacts of this development.
James Weimar, 2108 Yearling, is opposed to this project. He is concerned with potential traffic and
parking issues, since the streets are already narrow, and the safety concerns related to children. He
stated that more meetings were supposed to occur but didn’t.
Board Questions and Staff/Applicant Response
Mr. Mills responded that the neighborhood meetings have included a discussion of traffic and parking,
which also resulted in committees being formed. Matt Delich, Traffic Consultant, stated that he prepared
11
Planning & Zoning Board
February 11, 2016
Page 8
the original traffic study, making the distinction that this project was previously planned for apartments,
not townhomes. The current proposal is for 322 units, and the original proposal was for 300 units. He
discussed some of the traffic study points that were considered, concluding that the range of volume on
the collector streets is well within the acceptable standards.
With respect to parking counts, there are more spaces available than required by the standards. The
HOA Board will monitor garage use to ensure they will not be used for storage. More discussion
occurred regarding traffic-calming devices to reduce traffic flow.
Marc Ragasa, Engineering (sitting in for Traffic Operations), stated that traffic is being addressed by the
newly-formed Bucking Horse Neighborhood Transportation Committee and the City Traffic Operations
Development Department. Mitigation techniques, such as speed humps and radar feedback signs, are
being considered. He indicated the proposed location of these measures on the map. Regarding the
extension of Nancy Gray past Prospect, there is partial funding to complete Nancy Gray Drive but no
time frame proposed. Traffic forecast flows are expected to increases, but the volume is not known yet.
Board Deliberation
Members Carpenter and Heinz stated that they will support the project. Member Hansen will also
support the project, although he questions the reason for putting such a high pedestrian use as an island
in the middle of the project. Member Hobbs stated his belief that all projects will have traffic issues, and
he will support the project. Member Schneider stated that it complies with the LUC, so he will support
the project. Vice Chair Hart will support the project. The Board confirmed with the applicant that the
conditions are acceptable.
Member Hobbs made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the Bucking Horse
Multi-Family, Fourth Filing, #PDP150026, subject to the two proposed conditions relating to
building materials and based on the memo from Chief Planner Shepard dated February 5, 2016,
relating to vacated right-of-ways, and based on the findings of fact on page 14 of the Staff Report.
Member Carpenter seconded. Vote: 6:0.
Other Business
Vice Chair Hart asked that the motion relating to the Verizon Wireless Facility at Lifepointe Church be
amended to refer to the findings of fact on page 4 rather than on page 5 of the Staff report.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:12 pm.
Cameron Gloss, Planning Director Kristin Kirkpatrick, Chair
12
Agenda Item 2
Item # 2 Page 1
STAFF REPORT March 8, 2016
Planning and Zoning Board
PROJECT NAME
HARMONY COMMONS P.D.P., #150027
STAFF
Ted Shepard, Chief Planner
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
This is a request for a P.D.P. for a 9.1 acre commercial center
consisting of three buildings located at the southwest corner of
Harmony Road and Lady Moon Drive. The site is zoned H-C,
Harmony Corridor, and located in the Basic Industrial Non-Retail
Employment Activity Center sub area of the Harmony Corridor Plan.
One building would be a two-story, 25,000 square foot medical
office building which is defined as a primary use. Two one-story
buildings would contain a total of 25,600 square feet and include a
mix of retail, business services and standard/fast food (no drive-
through) restaurants which are defined as secondary uses. The site
is a portion of Tract S (24.71 acres) of the Harmony Technology
Park Overall Development Plan, Seventh Amendment, and
represents phase one of a larger commercial center.
OWNER / APPLICANT: Mr. Todd Parker
Brinkman Partners
3528 Precision Drive
Fort Collins, CO 80528
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. The P.D.P. is a component of, and in compliance with, Tract S of the Harmony
Technology Park Overall Development Plan, Seventh Amendment. This is a 270 acre
O.D.P., owned by multiple parties, where the primary and secondary uses have been
apportioned such that there is approximately 75% primary and 25% secondary uses.
B. The P.D.P. complies with the development standards of the H-C zone district.
13
Agenda Item 2
Item # 2 Page 2
C. The P.D.P. complies with the General Development Standards.
Comments:
1. Background:
The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
N: H-C Avago and Hewlett Packard Enterprises
S: H-C Vacant (Tract E, Harmony Technology Park)
S H-C Multi-Tenant Office (Tract e, Harmony Technology Park)
E: H-C Banner Health Hospital (Tract G, Harmony Technology Park)
W: H-C Vacant (Tract S, Harmony Technology Park)
W: H-C Intel (Tract A, Harmony Technology Park)
14
Agenda Item 2
Item # 2 Page 3
The property was annexed as part of the 156 acre Harmony Farm in 1984.
The first Harmony Technology Park Overall Development Plan consisted of 155 acres and was
approved in 1997 in conjunction with Celestica Manufacturing.
Since 1997, the following annexations occurred:
• Kendall-Harmony Annexation – June, 2000
• Johnson-Harmony Annexation – July, 2000
These annexations triggered cooperation among various land owners which created the
Harmony Tech. Park, First Amended O.D.P. (267 acres) – September, 2000
In 2004, the Harmony Technology Park, O.D.P., Second Amendment was approved which
added three residential properties and increased the total acreage of the O.D.P. from 267.19
acres to 270.19 acres.
Since 2004, five additional amendments to the O.D.P. were approved in response to the great
recession, parcel adjustment for various end-users, and re-allocation of the primary and
secondary uses.
The governing O.D.P. is the Seventh Amendment approved in 2014 and encompasses 270
acres among several property owners.
The following projects have been approved in the Harmony Technology Park:
Project Name Applicant/Use Year Site (acres)
H.T.P. 1st Filing Celestica/Intel 1998 34.4
H.T.P. 2nd Filing H-P South Campus 2001 60.14
Brookfield Townhomes Chateau Development 2002 42.39
H.T.P. 3rd Filing Custom Blending 2008 5.01
Presidio Apartments Multi-Family 2011 11.83
H.T.P. 3rd Filing Numerica 2012 4.90
Milestone Apartments Multi-Family 2013 10.20
Banner Health Hospital 2013 27.95
H.T.P. 4th Filing Fuse Office 2014 1.62
Main Street Health Long Term Care 2015 7.5
The following projects are under current review:
Project Name Proposed Use Site (acres)
Windsong Long Term Care Facility 3.34
Eye Center of Northern Colorado Medical Office 4.16
15
Agenda Item 2
Item # 2 Page 4
2. Compliance with Harmony Corridor Plan:
The entire 270 acre O.D.P. is within the Basic Industrial Non-Retail Employment Activity Center
(B.I.N.R.E.A.C). There are two proposed land uses:
• Medical Office Building – Primary Use
• Convenience Center – Secondary Uses
The Harmony Corridor Plan states:
“Secondary and supporting uses will also be permitted in the (BINREAC), but shall
occupy no more than 25% of the total gross area of the Office (or Business) Park,
Overall Development Plan or Planned Unit Development, as applicable.
Development of the subject parcel contributes to fulfilling the vision of the Harmony Corridor
being an area reserved for a variety of business-related uses on relatively large parcels within
an attractive industrial park setting which are supported by a secondary uses that are integrated
with and function with the primary uses.
3. Compliance with the Harmony Technology Park, Seventh Amendment Overall
Development Plan:
By being located within the BINREAC, and zoned H-C, the Overall Development Plan is divided
between 75% primary and 25% secondary uses. With approximately 270 acres, the uses are
divided as follows:
• Primary Uses 202 acres 75%
• Secondary Uses 68 acres 25%
Within the O.D.P., Tract S is further defined as containing 24.71 acres and the uses are divided
as follows:
• Primary Uses 17.14 acres
• Secondary Uses 7.57 acres
As can be seen, Tract S is required to not exceed 7.57 acres of secondary uses. The
secondary uses within the P.D.P. total 2.93 acres, which is under the maximum allowed by the
O.D.P. (This will require that future phases of the commercial center must be held to not
exceeding the 7.57 acre cap on secondary uses. This means that for the 15.61 acres in future
phases, there cannot be more than 4.64 of secondary uses.) The project, therefore, complies
with the approved Overall Development Plan.
16
Agenda Item 2
Item # 2 Page 5
4. Compliance with Applicable Harmony Corridor Zone District Standards:
As mentioned, both proposed uses are permitted. Since the P.D.P. contains one use that is
permitted subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Board (convenience shopping center)
the entire P.D.P. is similarly governed.
The buildings are below the maximum allowable height of six stories.
The applicant is participating with the master developer of the Harmony Technology Park
(M.A.V. Development) to establish and comply with the formation of the required 80-foot wide
buffer along Harmony Road. In addition, the applicant’s parcel fits within an integrated pattern
of streets in anticipation of the extensions of both Timberwood Drive and Technology Parkway.
For example, the P.D.P. is designed in conjunction with the expected arrangement of buildings,
drives, parking, landscaping, fire access and stormwater management of the entire 24.71 acre
Parcel S of the O.D.P.
5. Compliance with Applicable General Development Standards:
A. Section 3.2.1(C)(D) – Landscaping and Tree Protection
As mentioned, the 80-foot buffer along Harmony Road is not included within this P.D.P.
Rather, the landscaping, berming and the meandering eight-foot wide sidewalk will be
constructed by the master developer as part of a concurrent development plan.
Harmony Commons P.D.P., however, is obligated to provide landscaping along both
Lady Moon Drive (collector street) and Timberwood Drive (local street). In compliance
with the standard, street trees are provided in the parkways. Foundation shrubs are
placed between the buildings and the streets. Areas of low visual interest are screened.
B. Section 3.2.1(E)(4)(a) – Parking Lot Perimeter Landscaping
There are two rows of exposed parking stalls along public streets. Along Timberwood,
there are the 20 spaces facing south. These spaces are screened by a continuous row
of shrubs supplemented by a mix of evergreen trees behind the sidewalk. Along Lady
Moon, there are five spaces facing east which are similarly screened. Both areas are
landscaped in compliance with the standard.
C. Section 3.2.1(E)(5) – Parking Lot Interior Landscaping
The parking lots exceed the minimum required 10% interior landscaping in the form of
islands which complies with the required minimum for lots with greater than 100 spaces.
D. Section 3.2.2(B) – Access, Circulation and Parking
The parking and circulation system is specifically designed to serve not only the P.D.P.
(9.1 acres) but also the future phase of Tract S (15.61 acres). This is accomplished by
two internal private drives. The east-west private drive will ultimately connect Lady Moon
17
Agenda Item 2
Item # 2 Page 6
Drive on the east and Technology Parkway on the west. The north-south drive divides
the current and future phase and connects to Timberwood Drive. There is no direct,
head-in or diagonal parking along these two drives which eases the circulation within the
overall 24.71 acre Tract S.
E. Section 3.2.2 (C)(4) – Bicycle Parking
The standard requires that shopping centers provide one bike parking space per 4,000
square feet of gross leasable area. With 50,600 square feet, 13 spaces are required
with 20% (3) needing to be enclosed and 80% (10) being located in exterior fixed racks.
In compliance, 28 spaces are provided with 5 being enclosed and 23 being located in
fixed racks.
F. Section 3.2.2(C)(5) – Walkways
The P.D.P. provides multiple private walkways in compliance with the standard in the
following manner:
• Two walkways connect to Harmony Road;
• Three walkways connect to Lady Moon Drive;
• Two walkways connect to Timberwood Drive.
One of these walkways, along the west edge, traverses the entire site from north to
south connecting Harmony Road, to the entry plazas and to Timberwood Drive. Also,
the private east-west drive has detached sidewalks on both sides.
G. Section 3.2.2(C)(6) – Direct On-Site Access to Pedestrian and Bicycle
Destinations
As mentioned, the multiple sidewalks to the three adjoining public streets allow for both
bikes and pedestrians to connect to multiple destinations and the surrounding Harmony
Technology Park, including Transfort Route 16 which adjoins the site along Harmony
Road and Lady Moon Drive.
H. Section 3.2.2(J) – Setbacks for Vehicular Use Areas
As mentioned, there are only two areas where parking spaces face public streets. On
Lot 4, the five spaces are setback 10 feet and on Lot 5, 20 spaces are setback 15 from
the property line in compliance with the standard of 10 feet.
I. Section 3.2.2(K)(3) – Parking Lots – Maximum Number of Spaces
A shopping center is required to have no less than 2 and no greater than 5 spaces per
1,000 square feet of gross leasable area. A 20% bonus in the maximum parking is
available if there is no parking allowed on the two abutting public streets.
18
Agenda Item 2
Item # 2 Page 7
The P.D.P. contains a total of 50,600 square feet and includes 269 spaces for a parking
ratio of 5.3 spaces per 1,000 square feet. This exceeds the maximum allowed ratio of
5.00 spaces per 1,000 square feet, or 253 spaces, by 16.
In terms of determining the 20% bonus, Timberwood is classified as a local street and
allows for on-street parking, but Lady Moon is a collector that does not allow on-street
parking north of Rock Creek Drive. (Harmony Road is not factored as the 80-foot buffer
along a 6-lane major arterial renders the application of the 20% bonus as impractical.)
Lot 4, Building D, is located along Lady Moon Drive and features a direct connecting
walkway between the public sidewalk and the internal plaza. Practically speaking, staff
interprets only Lot 4 to be eligible for the 20% bonus based on ease and convenience of
access to Lady Moon.
With no parking along the frontage of Lot 4 on Lady Moon, and with 113 spaces
contained within Lot 4, the 20% bonus yields an extra 22 spaces. This bonus allows the
proposed number of spaces, 269 (16 over the 5.00 spaces/1,000 square feet ratio) to be
in compliance with the standard. In summary:
50,600 sq. ft. 5.0 spaces/1,000 sq. ft. = 253
Bonus 253 X 20% + 22
Total Allowed = 275
Proposed 5.3 spaces/1,000 sq. ft. = 269
J. Section 3.2.4 – Site Lighting
Parking lot pole lighting and wall-mounted sconces will feature down-directional and full
cut-off fixtures. There are no foot-candles that exceed the maximum allowable.
K. Section 3.5.1(B)(C)(E)(F) – Building Project and Compatibility
The essence of these standards is to encourage new commercial buildings to take their
architectural cues from the surrounding context, and where there is no established
context, to create new buildings that set an enhanced standard of quality. The context of
the area is influenced by following large buildings:
• East: Banner Health Hospital
• West: Intel
• North: Hewlett Packard Enterprises and Avago
• South: Fuse Office Building, Numerica, Custom Blending/Rodelle
Of these, the applicant states that the architectural theme is most influenced by the two
most recently constructed buildings in the vicinity: Banner Health Hospital and the Fuse
Office Building. The applicant’s project narrative states:
19
Agenda Item 2
Item # 2 Page 8
“Both the architecture and landscape will build on Contemporary design language
established by Banner Health and Fuse (Brinkman Office Building) and create a
fresh look for Fort Collins. Notable characteristics of this style include simplicity of
materials, clean and horizontal movement of forms and tasteful surface
articulation through massing, use of material, texture and color.”
The three proposed buildings exhibit the general character established by Banner Health
and Fuse Office to a certain degree. While not mimicking these buildings, the common
elements help unify the Harmony Technology Park with a level of cohesion that is
expected of a master planned business park.
For example, the three buildings all feature concrete masonry base, stucco field, with lap
siding, metal panels and overhangs as accents. There will be two types of masonry unit,
each with its own depth to create offsets that provide three-dimensional relief and
shadowing. Horizontal metal panels create a distinctive top. A pre-engineered wood
product draws attention to the entries and adds a warm tone to the mix of materials
Entries are also highlighted by steel canopies with supporting steel columns and
storefront glazing. The two-story medical office building includes areas of brick as an
added material.
The street-facing elevations of the two one-story buildings match the balance of the
building so there is no backside. The pattern of the two masonry units is repeated, doors
are accented with full height glass and transom windows and the metal panel accent is
repeated. These rear elevations allow the reverse mode layout to present an attractive
streetscape while also allowing south-facing entries, patios and plazas.
Overall, the architecture is compatible with the surrounding context and sets an example
of quality for the balance of Tract S. In compliance with the standard, all three buildings
demonstrate a distinctive base, middle and top on all four sides.
L. Section 3.5.3(B)(2) – Orientation to Build-to Lines for Streetfront Buildings
Building D (Lot 4) is placed along Lady Moon Drive such that there are no parking
spaces or drives located between the building and street. Building E (Lot 5) is placed at
the corner of Lady Moon Drive and Timberwood Drive in similar relationship to the two
public streets. Please note that Harmony Road is not factored into this standard due to
the more specific requirement for the 80-foot buffer.
M. Section 3.6.4 – Transportation Level of Service Requirements
A Transportation Impact Study was completed and analyzed the traffic impacts for the
entire 24.71 Tract S of the Harmony Technology Park at full build-out (see attached). A
subsequent Basic Development Review (BDR) application by the master developer
(M.A.V. Development) specifically identified a variety of public infrastructure
20
Agenda Item 2
Item # 2 Page 9
improvements (including transportation improvements) needed for this proposal. The
BDR has been approved by the City.
The following infrastructure improvements will be completed per the approved BDR:
• The extension of Technology Parkway from Harmony to Precision Drive;
• Access control limiting left turns out from Technology Parkway to Harmony;
• The construction of Timberwood between Technology Parkway and Lady Moon;
• Auxiliary turn lanes on Harmony Technology Parkway and Timberwood at the new
intersections; and
• A southbound right turn lane from Lady Moon onto Timberwood.
A new traffic signal at Harmony Road/Technology Parkway is not warranted with this
phase and will not yet be constructed.
With the above noted improvements, acceptable Levels of Service will be achieved at
intersections impacted by vehicular traffic from this proposal. Levels of Service are also
met for pedestrians, bicycle and transit modes.
6. Neighborhood Information Meeting:
A neighborhood information meeting was held on November 18, 2015. A summary is attached.
Briefly, the primary issues that were raised relate to traffic and the overall quality of the center
and are summarized as follows:
A. Traffic Conflicts on Lady Moon with Banner Health Hospital:
In response, there will be no conflicts with Banner Health due to the existing median in Lady
Moon Drive. This median restricts our east-west driveway to right-in/right-out only. Full
turning movements will be allowed at the intersection of Lady Moon Drive and Timberwood
Drive.
B. Lighting Spillover and Excessive Illumination with Hotel:
In response, the hotel would be in a future phase and is not a firm prospect at this point.
Lighting is regulated by the Land Use Code to be fully shielded and down directional.
C. Excessive Signage:
In response, all signage is regulated by the City’s Sign Code.
21
Agenda Item 2
Item # 2 Page 10
D. Drive-Through Restaurants:
In response, only standard (“sit-down”) and fast food (“carry-out”) restaurants are allowed in
the Harmony Corridor zone district.
E. Architecture:
In response, the theme of the architecture will be derived from the existing buildings in the
vicinity, primarily Banner Health Hospital and Fuse Office Building. The overall theme will
be contemporary with an emphasis on horizontal components. Entrances will be highlighted
by overhangs, supporting columns, and storefront glass.
F. Phasing:
Tract S is 24.71 acres and will be developed in phases as the market demand requires.
Future development is expected to be oriented toward a mix of primary and secondary uses.
The hospital is estimated to generate demand for convenience and business services and
“quick-serve” restaurants for employees in the area.
7. Findings of Fact/Conclusion:
In evaluating the request for Harmony Commons P.D.P., staff makes the following findings of
fact:
A. The P.D.P. is a component of, and in compliance with, Tract S of the Harmony
Technology Park Overall Development Plan, Seventh Amendment. This is a 270 acre
O.D.P., owned by multiple parties, and where the primary and secondary uses have
been apportioned such that there is approximately 75% primary and 25% secondary
uses.
B. The P.D.P. complies with the development standards of the H-C zone district of Article
Four.
C. The P.D.P. complies with the General Development Standards of Article Three.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Board make a motion to approve Harmony
Commons P.D.P., #150027, based on the Findings of Fact on pages 10 and 11 of the Staff
Report.
22
Agenda Item 2
Item # 2 Page 11
ATTACHMENTS
1. Planning Objectives (PDF)
2. Site Context (PDF)
3. Site Plan (PDF)
4. Rendered Site Plan (PDF)
5. Landscape Plan (PDF)
6. Architectural Elevations (PDF)
7. Perspective View From Harmony Road (PDF)
8. Transportation Impact Study (PDF)
23
Page 1
Harmony Commons PDP
Statement of Planning Objectives
December 1, 2015
The site is located at the southwest corner of Lady Moon Drive and Harmony Road. The
proposed use is for a Convenience Shopping Center containing retail, service and
restaurant space along the Harmony Road frontage. Also included is a freestanding office
building located at the Northwest corner of Lady Moon Drive and Timberwood Drive. The
property is zoned HC-Harmony Corridor. The site is currently a vacant parcel of land and is
platted as Lot 1 of the Harmony Technology Park, Second filing. There are no existing
improvements on the site.
The site is also Tract S of the Harmony Technology Park Overall Development Plan,
Seventh Amendment. The intent is to subdivide the entire Tract S into 6 Lots and 2 Outlots.
Two lots (3 and 4) will be developed as a Convenience Shopping Center and one lot (5) will
contain a two-story office building as a part of Phase 1.
The square footage breakdown is as follows:
Lot 3 - Convenience Shopping Center 8,000 square feet
Lot 4 - Convenience Shopping Center 16,800 square feet
Lot 5 - Office 25,000 square feet
The site is in the H-C zoning district. According to the Purpose Statement contained within
Article 4.26 of the Land Use Code, “The Harmony Corridor District is intended to implement
the design concepts and land use vision of the Harmony Corridor Plan -- that of creating an
attractive and complete mixed-use area with a major employment base.”
The area surrounding Harmony Commons contains a mix of residential, educational, office,
medical and employment. The site is ideal for these types of uses as it provides a
secondary retail center that is complimentary to the employment base. In addition, the
project will be constructing an office building, which is a primary use. According to the
approved ODP, Tract S is allowed to have 7.57 acres of secondary uses. Lots 3 and 4,
which contain the convenience shopping center totals 2.90 acres. The proposed project is
also located within walking and biking distance to Front Range Village and the surrounding
residential subdivisions and major employers in the area.
The project is proposing one access point from Lady Moon Drive and one curb cut off of the
proposed Timberwood Drive. All of the interior drives will be private. Parking areas are
located internally to minimize impacts on the neighborhood. There will be multiple
pedestrian connections into and through the site. The prominent pedestrian and bicycle
extension will be along the west proposed property line, extending from the Harmony Road
walkway to the proposed Timberwood Drive per the Overall Development Plan that is
recorded with the City. Vehicular crossing of this path will be minimized to enhance that
connectivity. There also will be connectivity within the site in an East to West direction
connecting the building uses and tying them into the perimeter walks and properties which
Attachment 1
24
Page 2
will tie into the existing neighborhood by extending streets, sidewalks and paths directly to
and through the center.
The buildings for the service, retail and restaurants are located along the Harmony Road
frontage in order to maximize visibility and create a strong gateway entry into Fort Collins.
This plan offers attractive and inviting pedestrian scale features and amenities such as
plazas and other outdoor spaces that will create a vibrant urban environment with benches,
landscape planters, outdoor café seating and public art opportunities. Pedestrian
connectivity is achieved by utilizing the 8’ path along Harmony Road with several
connections between the proposed buildings and the trail.
Both building architecture and landscape design will build upon the momentum of the
contemporary design language which has been introduced in the immediate vicinity of our
project by numerous projects including Banner Health Systems, Fuse (Brinkman Office
Building), Intel and Fossil Ridge High School. Our design will reinforce the existing design
style and create a fresh identity for our project in SE Fort Collins. Notable characteristics of
this design language include clean, horizontal roof lines, simplicity in materials and large
masses of buildings broken into smaller massings by placement of color, texture, material
and elevation change. Material selection is consistent with surrounding context buildings
incorporating masonry, architectural metals, exposed steel and stucco tones. The project
will offer high quality public spaces by utilizing outdoor plaza café seating areas. There will
be a concerted effort to incorporate local businesses into the development, drawing on a
community-centric vibrancy from the neighboring residences. The site and building
architecture function integrally. It is our intent to activate architectural spaces and
pedestrian experience through thoughtful indoor and outdoor connections.
Statement of appropriate City Plan Principles and Policies achieved by the proposed
plan:
Economic Health
Principle EH 3: The City will support local, unique, and creative businesses.
Policy EH 3.1 – Support Programs Emphasizing Local Business
Policy EH 4.1 –Prioritize Targeted Redevelopment Areas
Principle EH 4: The City will encourage the redevelopment of strategic areas within
the community as defined in the Community and Neighborhood Livability and
Neighborhood Principles and Policies.
Policy EH 4.2 – Reduce Barriers to Infill Development and Redevelopment
Harmony Commons will continue to promote and sustain local businesses thereby further
enhancing the economic health of Fort Collins. This represents job creation and business
retention for businesses that are successful and unique to Fort Collins.
Environmental Health
Principle ENV 19: The City will pursue opportunities to protect and restore the natural
function of the community’s urban watersheds and streams as a key component of
Attachment 1
25
Page 3
minimizing flood risk, reducing urban runoff pollution, and improving the ecological
health of urban streams.
Policy ENV 19.2 – Pursue Low Impact Development
Harmony Commons is implementing LID by incorporating new drainage bio-swales, water
quality pond, rain gardens, and permeable pavement areas with under drain systems (25%
of new pavement area will consist of permeable pavement).
Community and Neighborhood Livability
Principle LIV 38: Employment Districts will be the major employment centers in the
community, and will also include a variety of complementary uses to meet the needs
of employees. By design, they will be accessible to the City’s multimodal
transportation system and encourage walking, bicycling, car and van pooling, and
transit use.
Policy LIV 38.1 – Mix of Uses
Policy LIV 38.5 – Coordinate District Design
Policy LIV 38.7 – Address Parking
Policy LIV 38.8 – Provide Walkways and Bikeways
Harmony Commons mainly consists of a Convenience Shopping Center, which is a
secondary use that will offer a variety of choices for the employees of the tech park and the
nearby residents who live in the area. The area surrounding the Harmony Technology Park
contains a mix of residential, institutional, employment, office and retail. The site is located
in the Harmony Technology Park, which provides a campus-like setting, with platted lots,
streets, sidewalks, and infrastructure already in place. The visual impacts of the parking lots
have been reduced by placing the parking to the interior of the project.
Transportation
Principle T 9: Enhanced Travel Corridors will contain amenities and designs that
specifically promote walking, the use of mass transit, and bicycling.
Policy T 9.1 – Locating Enhanced Travel Corridors
Principle T10: Using transit will be a safe, affordable, easy, and convenient mobility
option for all ages and abilities.
Policy T 10.1 – Transit Stops
Policy T 10.6 – High Frequency Transit Service
Principle T11: Bicycling will be a safe, easy, and convenient mobility option for all
ages and abilities
The location of this project at the north end of an employment campus, near residential
subdivisions, Fossil Ridge High School and its proximity to Harmony Road will promote and
support the idea of a predominance of the daily trips of the employees of this project utilizing
alternative modes of transportation (walking/biking) or public transportation. The on-street
bike lanes will help to encourage safe cycling. Harmony Road is designated as an
enhanced travel corridor.
Attachment 1
26
Page 4
(ii) Description of proposed open space, wetlands, natural habitats and
features, landscaping, circulation, transition areas, and associated
buffering on site and in the general vicinity of the project.
There are no wetlands or significant natural habitats within the boundaries of
the site.
(iii) Statement of proposed ownership and maintenance of public and
private open space areas; applicant's intentions with regard to future
ownership of all or portions of the project development plan.
The buildings will be owned by the building developer/owner and will be
leased to individual tenants.
(iv) Estimate of number of employees for business, commercial, and
industrial uses.
30-50
(v) Description of rationale behind the assumptions and choices made by
the applicant.
The impetus of this project is to create a Convenience Retail Center that is a
complimentary use to the employment campus. This will offer more choices
for the residents and employees to go for meals, shopping, services, etc.
The office building is filling a need for potential medical users, as it is directly
across from the new Banner Hospital.
(vi) The applicant shall submit as evidence of successful completion of the
applicable criteria, the completed documents pursuant to these
regulations for each proposed use. The planning Director may require,
or the applicant may choose to submit, evidence that is beyond what is
required in that section. Any variance from the criteria shall be
described.
(vii) Narrative description of how conflicts between land uses or
disturbances to wetlands, natural habitats and features and or wildlife
are being avoided to the maximum extent feasible or are mitigated.
There are not existing wetlands, natural habitats or features currently located
on site.
(viii) Written narrative addressing each concern/issue raised at the
neighborhood meeting(s), if a meeting has been held.
A neighborhood meeting was held on November 18, 2015. Questions were
asked about circulation, future tenants, and road improvements. Concerns
were raised about a potential future use for a hotel and negative impacts that
might have on the neighborhood. Also, a few comments were made about
the architecture questioning if the buildings would have four-sided
architecture.
Attachment 1
27
Page 5
(ix) Name of the project as well as any previous name the project may have
had during Conceptual Review.
The project name is Harmony Commons and was called HTP Retail at the
PDR meeting.
Attachment 1
28
29
30
31
Xref .\BUILDING BASES\ACAD-10-29-2015_HTP_Retail Building 'C'_Floor Plan.dwg
Xref .\BUILDING BASES\ACAD-2015-13_HTP Retail Bldg-D - Matt Floor Plan First Plan.dwg
Xref .\BUILDING BASES\ACAD-11-10-2015_HTP_Building 'E' Floor Plan.dwg
OB
OB
BBS
BBS
BBS BBS
HS
HS
HS
BBS
BBS
LOT 3 BBS
LOT 4
LOT 5
LOT 2
LOT 6
HS HS HS HS
HS
HS
OB
OB
OB
HARMONY RD
LADY MOON DR
TIMBERWOOD DR
OB
OB
OB
OB
OB
OB
OB
OB
OB
OB
HS
HS
HS
HS
HS
OB
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
AP
AP
AP
AP
AP
OPEN BURLAP AROUND TRUNK.
CUT & REMOVE TOP 1/3 OF BURLAP
GROUND COVER & SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL
BACKFILL W/ 2/3 NATIVE SOIL
& 1/3 COMPOST. THOROUGHLY
WATER SETTLE
SLOW RELEASE FERTILIZER TABLET (TYP.)
3" MIN.
2"
AWAY FROM FOLIAGE
SECTION
EXISTING
SOIL
FOR SHRUBS
THAN DIA. OF
TO BE 6" LARGER
PLANTING HOLE
ROOTBALL FOR
DIA. OF ROOTBALL
12" LARGER THAN
GROUNDCOVER.
KEEP MULCH LAYER
FINISH GRADE
TOP OF ROOT CROWN TO BE 1"
HIGHER THAN FINISH GRADE
CEDAR MULCH RING TO BE TWICE
DIAMETER OF ROOT BALL - 2" DEPTH
MULCH - SEE NOTES - 5" DEPTH
MAXIMUM
TRUNK
TREE
2" MULCH
12" MIN.
SECTION
12" MIN.,
TYP.
NOTE:
CEDAR MULCH
TREE RING SHALL
BE 36" DIA.
BACKFILL W/ 2/3 NATIVE SOIL & 1/3
COMPOST. THOROUGHLY WATER
SETTLE
TIE GROMMETED NYLON STRAPS TO STAKE WITH WIRE. WIRE
ENDS SHALL BE BENT BACK TO ELIMINATE BURRS AND WHITE PVC
PIPE ALONG ENTIRE LENGTH OF WIRE FOR VISUAL AND SAFETY
THAN FINISH GRADE
TOP OF ROOT CROWN TO BE 1" HIGHER
EXISTING SOIL
SLOW RELEASE FERTILIZER TABLET (TYP.)
DRIVE TWO (2) T-POST STAKES PER
TREE.
REMOVE WIRE CAGE AND/OR TWINE. OPEN BURLAP
AROUND TRUNK. CUT & REMOVE TOP 1/3 OF BURLAP
PLAN
THAN DIA. OF
24" GREATER
ROOTBALL
FINISH GRADE
T-POST
East Bound Harmony Road - Speed Limit 55 MPH
by MAVD
Detached Sidewalk
by MAVD
Harmony Road Drainage Swale
80' - 0" Harmony Road Setback
Between 5' - 20'
Building Setbacks Vary
by MAVD
Landscaping
Lot 4
Retail Building
Harmony Road Median
T.O. Parapet
4943.7
Finished Floor
4918.5
James C. Gamble, "How Landscape Architects Contribute to
Context Sensitive Design of Thoroughfares,"
http://www.landdesigncollaborative.com/news/newsArticle1.htm
Artical appeared in the April 2006 Transportation Design Issue of
elevation:, newsletter of the Illinois chapter of the American Society
of Landscape Architects.
55 MPH
East Bound
Harmony Road
Lady Moon Drive
50.00°
2
1 OF 8
Issued
Drawing Number
Scale Accordingly if Reduced
Project No.: Drawn by:
Reviewed by:
In Association with:
ARCHITECTS
r4 architects.com
226 Remington
Unit #3
Fort Collins, CO 80524
phone 970/224-0630
www.r4architects.com
TB Group Planning / LA
444 Mountain Avenue
Berthoud, CO 80531
(970) 532-5891
Contact: Cathy Mathis
Email: cathy@tbgroup.us
AE Associates Mechanical & Plumbing
5587 West 19th Street
Greeley, CO 80634
(970) 330-5587
Contact: Alicia Thorpe
Email: alicia.thorpe@aeassociates.net
Engineer
APS, Inc. Electrical Engineer
9249 S. Broadway, #200-836
Highlands Ranch, CO 80129
(970) 381-7462
W1
W2
W4
W5
W6
6
W8
Metal Panel
Manuf: Metal Sales
Product: T2630 - wall panel (horiz)
Color: Slate Grey
Mechanical Screen
Manuf: Metal Sales
Product: T13-A wall panel (horiz)
Color: Sandstone
Cementitious Lap Siding
Manuf: James Hardie
Product: HardiePlank Lap Siding, Smooth, 8" exposure
Color: Tuscan Gold
Hard Coat Stucco
Manuf: Sto
Product: PowerWall
Color: Field - White Linen (fine texture)
Concrete Masonry Unit Veneer
Manuf: TBD
Product: 8x16 smooth face, running bond
with 4x16 banding
Colors: Body Color - Tan
Accent Bands - Light Tan
Issued
Drawing Number
Scale Accordingly if Reduced
Project No.: Drawn by:
Reviewed by:
In Association with:
ARCHITECTS
r4 architects.com
226 Remington
Unit #3
Fort Collins, CO 80524
phone 970/224-0630
www.r4architects.com
TB Group Planning / LA
444 Mountain Avenue
Berthoud, CO 80531
(970) 532-5891
Contact: Cathy Mathis
Email: cathy@tbgroup.us
AE Associates Mechanical & Plumbing
5587 West 19th Street
Greeley, CO 80634
(970) 330-5587
Contact: Alicia Thorpe
Email: alicia.thorpe@aeassociates.net
Engineer
APS, Inc. Electrical Engineer
9249 S. Broadway, #200-836
Highlands Ranch, CO 80129
(970) 381-7462
Contact: Chuck Polson
Floor Plan
100' - 0"
High Parapet
122' - 0"
Building Parapet
118' - 0"
South Parapet
119' - 0"
W1 W2 W1 W4 W1 W2 W1 W4 W1
6 W4
beyond
7 7 7
12
11
7
21
Truss Bearing
114' - 0"
Floor Plan
100' - 0"
High Parapet
122' - 0"
Building Parapet
118' - 0"
South Parapet
119' - 0"
6
11
55
8 12
beyond beyond beyond
12 12 12 12 12
6
2
1
W4 7
W1
W2 W4
color 2
W2 W2
W4
color 2
W5
beyond
Truss Bearing
114' - 0"
Floor Plan
100' - 0"
High Parapet
122' - 0"
Building Parapet
118' - 0"
South Parapet
119' - 0"
W4
color 2
W4
beyond
6
11
W1
W2
W4
W5
W6
6
W8
Metal Panel
Manuf: Metal Sales
Product: T2630 - wall panel (horiz)
Color: Slate Grey
Mechanical Screen
Manuf: Metal Sales
Product: T13-A wall panel (horiz)
Color: Sandstone
Cementitious Lap Siding
Manuf: James Hardie
Product: HardiePlank Lap Siding, Smooth, 8" exposure
Color: Tuscan Gold
Hard Coat Stucco
Manuf: Sto
Product: PowerWall
Color: Field - White Linen (fine texture)
Concrete Masonry Unit Veneer
Manuf: TBD
Product: 8x16 smooth face, running bond
with 4x16 banding
Colors: Body Color - Tan
Accent Bands - Light Tan
T.O. Masonry
6' - 0" AFG
W8 17 19 19
18
18
17 W8
T.O. Masonry
6' - 0" AFG
T.O. Masonry
6' - 0" AFG
W8 17
T.O. Masonry
6' - 0" AFG
17 W8
Issued
Drawing Number
Scale Accordingly if Reduced
Project No.: Drawn by:
Reviewed by:
In Association with:
ARCHITECTS
r4 architects.com
226 Remington
Unit #3
Fort Collins, CO 80524
phone 970/224-0630
www.r4architects.com
TB Group Planning / LA
444 Mountain Avenue
Berthoud, CO 80531
(970) 532-5891
First Floor Plan
100' - 0"
High Roof Parapet
125' - 0"
Low Roof Parapet
118' - 8"
W4
W2 W2 W1
W1 W4 W4
11 6 7 7
W2
W1
1
11 1
1
1
12
12
beyond
beyond
beyond
beyond
11
12 12 12
12
12
7
12
W4
W5
12
Oblique Elevation
21 21
First Floor Plan
100' - 0"
High Roof Parapet
125' - 0"
Low Roof Parapet
118' - 8"
W2
W4 W4
W1 W1
W2
W4
Beyond
6
12
W4
W4
W1
1
6
7 7
1
1 1
12 12 2 12 12 12 12 12 12
Beyond
6 6
W1
W5
39
40
41
42
HARMONY TECHNOLOGY PARK RETAIL
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
SEPTEMBER 2015
Prepared for:
Brinkman Partners Development
3528 Precision Drive
Fort Collins, CO 80528
Prepared by:
DELICH ASSOCIATES
2272 Glen Haven Drive
Loveland, CO 80538
Phone: 970-669-2061
FAX: 970-669-5034
Project #1556
Attachment 8
43
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS .......................................................................................... 2
Land Use ......................................................................................................................... 2
Streets ............................................................................................................................. 2
Existing Traffic ................................................................................................................. 5
Existing Operation ........................................................................................................... 5
Pederstrian Facilities ....................................................................................................... 9
Bicycle Facilities .............................................................................................................. 9
Transit Facilities .............................................................................................................. 9
III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................... 10
Trip Generation ............................................................................................................. 10
Trip Distribution ............................................................................................................. 10
Trip Assignment ............................................................................................................ 10
Background Traffic Projections ..................................................................................... 10
Total Traffic Forecasts ................................................................................................... 18
Signal Warrants ............................................................................................................. 18
Geometry ...................................................................................................................... 21
Operation Analysis ........................................................................................................ 21
Pedestrian Level of Service ........................................................................................... 29
Bicycle Level of Service ................................................................................................ 29
Transit Level of Service ................................................................................................. 36
IV. CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................... 37
LIST OF TABLES
1. Current Peak Hour Operation .................................................................................... 8
2. Trip Generation ....................................................................................................... 12
3. Short Range (2020) Background Peak Hour Operation ......................................... 24
4. Long Range (2035) Background Peak Hour Operation ........................................... 26
5. Short Range (2020) Total Peak Hour Operation ..................................................... 30
6. Long Range (2035) Total Peak Hour Operation ...................................................... 33
Attachment 8
44
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES
LIST OF FIGURES
1. Site Location ............................................................................................................. 3
2. Existing Geometry ..................................................................................................... 4
3. Recent Peak Hour Traffic .......................................................................................... 6
4. Balanced Recent Peak Hour Traffic .......................................................................... 7
5. Site Plan .................................................................................................................. 11
6. Trip Distribution ....................................................................................................... 13
7. Short Range (2020) Site Generated Peak Hour Traffic ........................................... 14
8. Long Range (2035) Site Generated Peak Hour Traffic ............................................ 15
9. Short Range (2020) Background Peak Hour Traffic ................................................ 16
10. Long Range (2035) Background Peak Hour Traffic................................................. 17
11. Short Range (2020) Total Peak Hour Traffic ........................................................... 19
12. Long Range (2035) Total Peak Hour Traffic ............................................................ 20
13. Short Range (2020) Geometry ................................................................................ 22
14. Long Range (2035) Geometry ................................................................................. 23
APPENDICES
A. Base Assumptions Form
B. Peak Hour Traffic Counts
C. Current Peak Hour Operation/Level of Service Descriptions/Fort Collins Motor
Vehicle LOS Standards (Intersections)
D. Peak Hour Signal Warrant
E. Short Range (2020) Background Peak Hour Operation
F. Long Range (2035) Background Peak Hour Operation
G. Short Range (2020) Total Peak Hour Operation
H. Long Range (2035) Total Peak Hour Operation
I. Pedestrian/Bicycle Level of Service Worksheets
Attachment 8
45
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 1
I. INTRODUCTION
This transportation impact study (TIS) addresses the capacity, geometric, and
control requirements for the proposed Harmony Technology Park (HTP) Retail. The
proposed HTP Retail site is located in the southwest quadrant of the Harmony/Lady Moon-
HP East intersection in Fort Collins, Colorado.
During the course of the analysis, numerous contacts were made with the
developer’s representative (Brinkman Partners Development), the project planning
consultant (TB Group), the project engineering consultant (Northern Engineering), and
Fort Collins Traffic Engineering. The Transportation Impact Study Base Assumptions form
and related documents are provided in Appendix A. This study generally conforms to the
format set forth in the Fort Collins TIS Guidelines in the “Larimer County Urban Area Street
Standards” (LCUASS). The study involved the following steps:
- Collect physical, traffic, and development data;
- Perform trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment;
- Determine peak hour traffic volumes;
- Conduct capacity and operational level of service analyses on key intersections;
- Analyze signal warrants;
- Conduct level of service evaluation of pedestrian, bicycle, and transit modes of
transportation
Attachment 8
46
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 2
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The location of the HTP Retail site is shown in Figure 1. It is important that a
thorough understanding of the existing conditions be presented.
Land Use
Land uses in the area are primarily commercial, industrial, and residential. There
are residential uses to the south of the site. There are commercial and industrial uses
to the north, south, and west of the site. The center of Fort Collins lies to the northwest
of the proposed HTP Retail site.
Streets
The primary streets near the HTP Retail site are Harmony Road, Ziegler Road,
and Lady Moon Drive. Figure 2 shows a schematic of the existing geometry at the key
intersections.
Harmony Road is to the north of (adjacent to) the HTP Retail site. It is an east-
west street designated as a six-lane arterial street on the Fort Collins Master Street
Plan. Currently, it has a six-lane cross section with an existing speed limit of 55 mph in
this area. At the Harmony/Ziegler intersection, Harmony Road has eastbound and
westbound left-turn lanes, three through lanes in each direction, and a westbound right-
turn lane. At the Harmony/Lady Moon intersection, Harmony Road has eastbound and
westbound left-turn lanes, three through lanes in each direction, and eastbound and
westbound right-turn lanes. The Harmony/Ziegler and Harmony/Lady Moon
intersections have signal control. At the Harmony/HP West intersection, Harmony Road
has an eastbound left-turn lane and three through lanes in each direction. The
Harmony/HP West intersection has stop sign control on the HP West Access.
Ziegler Road is to the west of the HTP Retail site. It is a north-south street
designated as a four-lane arterial street north of Rock Creek Drive, and designated as a
two-lane arterial street south of Rock Creek Drive on the Fort Collins Master Street
Plan. Currently, Ziegler has a four-lane cross section and an existing speed of 40 mph.
At the Harmony/Ziegler intersection, Ziegler Road has dual northbound and southbound
left-turn lanes, two through lanes in each direction, and a southbound right-turn lane.
Lady Moon Drive is a north-south street designated as a collector street south of
Harmony Road on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. Currently, Lady Moon Drive has
a two-lane cross section, with a center continuous two-way left-turn lane, south of the
Banner Medical Campus driveway. The north leg of the Harmony/Lady Moon
intersection serves the Hewlett-Packard campus. At the Harmony/Lady Moon
intersection, Lady Moon Drive has northbound and southbound left-turn lanes, a
northbound through lane, a southbound combined through/right-turn lane, and a
northbound right-turn lane. The existing posted speed is 30 mph on Lady Moon Drive.
Attachment 8
47
Harmony
Strauss Cabin
Kechter
Rock Creek
Ziegler
Timberwood
Lady Moon
Precision
Le Fever
Cinquefoil
Fossil Ridge
High School
Timberwood
Technology Technology
SCALE: 1"=1000'
SITE LOCATION Figure 1
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
HTP Retail TIS, August 2015
Page 3
Attachment 8
48
EXISTING INTERSECTION GEOMETRY Figure 2
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
HTP Retail TIS, August 2015
Page 4
- Denotes Lane
Ziegler
Harmony
HP
East
HP
West
Lady
Moon
Attachment 8
49
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 5
Existing Traffic
Recent peak hour traffic volumes at the Harmony/Ziegler, Harmony/HP West,
and Harmony/Lady Moon-HP East intersections are shown in Figure 3. The counts at
the Harmony/Ziegler and Harmony/Lady Moon-HP East intersections were obtained by
the City of Fort Collins in April and May 2013, respectively. The turning movement
counts at the Harmony/HP West intersection were obtained in February 2015. Raw
traffic count data is provided in Appendix B. Since there are no accesses or
intersections between Lady Moon Drive and the HP West Access, the link volumes from
the Harmony/Lady Moon intersection were used to determine the through volumes at
the Harmony/HP West intersections. The traffic volumes were averaged/balanced
between the key intersections, since the recent counts were performed on different
days. The balanced recent peak hour traffic is shown in Figure 4.
Existing Operation
The Harmony/Ziegler, Harmony/HP West, and Harmony/Lady Moon-HP East
intersections were evaluated and the peak hour operation is displayed in Table 1.
Calculation forms are provided in Appendix C. The key intersections are currently
operating acceptably with existing control, geometry, and signal timing in the morning
and afternoon peak hours, except for the Harmony/Ziegler and Harmony/HP West
intersections during the afternoon peak hour. With a small adjustment in the signal
timing, the Harmony/Ziegler intersection can achieve acceptable operation. It is
important to note that eastbound and northbound right-turn deceleration lanes are
warranted with the existing traffic volumes. At the Harmony/HP West intersection, some
movements (EB LT and SB LT) are shown to experience calculated delays
commensurate with LOS F. During traffic counting, the actual observed delays for
these movements averaged ≤20 seconds per vehicle. The calculated delays do not
reflect the substantial gaps created by the Harmony/Lady Moon signal. Delays
commensurate with level of service F are normal at stop sign controlled intersections
along arterial streets in an urban area. The intersections were evaluated using
techniques provided in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual. A description of level of
service for signalized and unsignalized intersections from the 2010 Highway Capacity
Manual and a table showing the Fort Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standards
(Intersections) are also provided in Appendix C. The HTP Retail site is in an area
termed “employment district,” which puts it in the category of “other” for analysis
purposes. In areas termed “other,” acceptable operation at signalized intersections
during the peak hours is defined as level of service D or better for the overall
intersection, and level of service E or better for any leg or movement. At unsignalized
intersections, acceptable operation during the peak hours is defined as level of service
E or better for any approach leg for an arterial/collector and level of service C or better
for any approach leg for a local and collector/local intersection.
Attachment 8
50
AM/PM
RECENT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 3
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
HTP Retail TIS, August 2015
Page 6
Ziegler
Harmony
HP
East
49/34
46/5
39/41
5/96
3/40
6/152
30/7
1392/2057
33/69
150/12
1805/1878
26/28
HP
Wast
221/230
340/265
47/71
61/120
208/403
537/608
106/108
1043/1460
148/222
462/743
1287/1275
87/99
10/112
1/15
33/3
1826/2005
173/21
1454/2118
Lady
Moon
Attachment 8
51
AM/PM
BALANCED RECENT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 4
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
Page 7
Ziegler
Harmony
HP
East
49/34
46/5
39/41
5/96
3/40
6/152
30/7
1392/2057
33/69
150/12
1805/1878
26/28
HP
Wast
221/230
340/265
47/71
61/120
208/403
537/608
106/108
1043/1460
148/222
462/743
1287/1275
87/99
10/112
1/15
33/3
1826/2005
173/21
1454/2118
Lady
Moon
Attachment 8
52
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 8
TABLE 1
Current Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM Delay (secs) PM Delay (secs)
Harmony/Ziegler
(signal)
EB LT E 55.0 E (E) 58.2 (59.2)
EB T C 27.8 C (D) 29.1 (35.3)
EB T/RT C 29.8 C (D) 32.2 (39.9)
EB APPROACH C 30.7 C (D) 31.9 (38.2)
WB LT E 60.6 F (E) 105.5 (70.6)
WB T C 34.2 C (C) 30.3 (33.2)
WB RT A 0.0 A (A) 0.0 (0.0)
WB APPROACH D 35.9 D (D) 35.7 (35.9)
NB LT D 37.2 D (D) 51.9 (48.0)
NB T E 64.0 E (E) 63.1 (63.1)
NB T/RT E 65.0 E (E) 65.1 (65.1)
NB APPROACH D 54.4 E (E) 59.0 (57.3)
SB LT E 69.6 F (E) 128.0 (78.4)
SB T D 50.5 D (D) 54.5 (52.7)
SB RT A 0.0 A (A) 0.0 (0.0)
SB APPROACH E 64.3 F (E) 98.7 (68.2)
OVERALL D 42.3 D (D) 50.5 (46.2)
Harmony/HP West
(stop sign)
SB LT F 162.2 F 98.5
SB RT C 24.4 E 44.6
SB APPROACH E 36.9 F 51.0
EB LT F 396.0 E 42.2
Harmony/Lady Moon-HP East
(signal)
EB LT E 60.4 E 62.9
EB T B 17.0 C 21.7
EB RT A 6.3 A 3.6
EB APPROACH B 17.9 C 21.7
WB LT D 37.3 D 46.6
WB T A 7.2 A 9.2
WB RT A 4.6 A 0.0
WB APPROACH A 7.4 A 9.7
NB LT D 46.1 D 53.1
NB T D 50.6 E 55.7
NB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
NB APPROACH D 48.3 D 53.4
SB LT D 49.3 D 47.7
SB T/RT D 51.0 D 50.1
SB APPROACH D 49.8 D 48.4
OVERALL B 13.0 B 18.0
(*) Adjusted Timing
Attachment 8
53
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 9
Pedestrian Facilities
There are sidewalks along Harmony Road and Ziegler Road, adjacent to
developed properties (Intel, Hewlett-Packard, etc.). There are sidewalks along the east
side of Lady Moon Drive, between Harmony Road and Precision Drive. South of
Precision Drive, there are sidewalks along both sides of Lady Moon Drive.
Bicycle Facilities
There are bicycle lanes along Harmony Road, Ziegler Road, and Lady Moon
Drive within the study area.
Transit Facilities
Currently, this area of Fort Collins is served by Transfort Route 16. Route 16
operates along Harmony Road, Ziegler Road, Rock Creek Drive, and Lady Moon Drive.
Attachment 8
54
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 10
III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The proposed HTP Retail development will include retail, restaurant, hotel, and
general office uses. Figure 5 shows a conceptual site plan of the HTP Retail site. The
short range analysis (Year 2020) includes development of the HTP Retail site and an
appropriate increase in background traffic due to normal growth and other potential
developments in the area. The long range analysis year is considered to be 2035. The
site plan shows that there will be two full-movement accesses to/from future
Timberwood Drive and a right-in/right-out access to/from Lady Moon Drive.
Trip Generation
Trip generation is important in considering the impact of a development such as this
upon the existing and proposed street system. A compilation of trip generation information
contained in Trip Generation, 9
th
Edition, ITE was used to estimate the trips that would be
generated by the proposed/expected uses at the HTP Retail site. A trip is defined as a
one-way vehicle movement from origin to destination. Table 2 shows the expected trip
generation for the HTP Retail site on a daily and peak hour basis. The trip generation for
full development of the HTP Retail site resulted in 4308 daily trip ends, 360 morning peak
hour trip ends, and 361 afternoon peak hour trip ends.
Trip Distribution
Trip distribution for the HTP Retail site was based on existing/future travel
patterns, land uses in the area, consideration of trip attractions/productions in Fort
Collins, and engineering judgment. Figure 6 shows the trip distribution for the short
range (2020) and long range (2035) analysis futures. The trip distribution was agreed to
by City of Fort Collins staff in the scoping discussions.
Trip Assignment
Trip assignment is how the generated and distributed trips are expected to be
loaded on the street system. The assigned trips are the resultant of the trip distribution
process. Figures 7 and 8 show the short range (2020) and long range (2035) full
development site generated peak hour traffic assignment, respectively.
Background Traffic Projections
Figures 9 and 10 show the respective short range (2020) and long range (2035)
background traffic projections. The short range (2020) background traffic was
developed by generally increasing the existing traffic counts by two percent per year.
The background traffic growth was agreed to by City of Fort Collins staff in the scoping
Attachment 8
55
SCALE: 1"=100'
SITE PLAN Figure 5
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
Page 11
Bldg. A Bldg. B Bldg. C Bldg. D
Bldg. E
Bldg. F
Attachment 8
56
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 12
TABLE 2
Trip Generation
Code Use Size
AWDTE AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Rate Trips Rate In Rate Out Rate In Rate Out
Building A
932 Sit-down
Restaurant
4.14
KSF 127.15 526 5.95 25 4.86 20 5.91 24 3.94 16
826 Specialty Retail 2.76
KSF 44.32 122 0.761 2 0.601 2 1.19 3 1.52 4
710 General Office 1.25
KSF 11.03 14 1.37 2 0.19 0 0.25 0 1.24 2
Building A Subtotal 662 29 22 27 22
Building B
932 Sit-down
Restaurant
4.05
KSF 127.15 514 5.95 24 4.86 20 5.91 24 3.94 16
826 Specialty Retail 2.7 KSF 44.32 120 0.761 2 0.601 2 1.19 3 1.52 4
710 General Office 1.25
KSF 11.03 14 1.37 2 0.19 0 0.25 0 1.24 2
Building B Subtotal 648 28 22 27 22
Building C
932 Sit-down
Restaurant
4.05
KSF 127.15 514 5.95 24 4.86 20 5.91 24 3.94 16
826 Specialty Retail 2.7 KSF 44.32 120 0.761 2 0.601 2 1.19 3 1.52 4
710 General Office 1.25
KSF 11.03 14 1.37 2 0.19 0 0.25 0 1.24 2
Building C Subtotal 648 28 22 27 22
Building D
932 Sit-down
Restaurant
9.81
KSF 127.15 1248 5.95 58 4.86 48 5.91 58 3.94 39
826 Specialty Retail 6.54
KSF 44.32 290 0.761 5 0.601 4 1.19 8 1.52 10
710 General Office 1.25
KSF 11.03 14 1.37 2 0.19 0 0.25 0 1.24 2
Building D Subtotal 1552 65 52 66 51
Building E
310 Hotel 100
Rooms EQ 522 0.31 31 0.22 22 0.31 31 0.29 29
Building F
710 General Office 25.0
KSF 11.03 276 1.37 34 0.19 5 0.25 6 1.24 31
Total 4308 215 145 184 177
1 0.5 (PM Rate) & Reverse Directional Split
Attachment 8
57
Harmony
Rock Creek
Lady Moon
Cinquefoil
Technology
Timberwood
Le Fever
Precision
55% 20%
nominal
25%
SCALE: 1"=500'
TRIP DISTRIBUTION Figure 6
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
Page 13
Attachment 8
58
SHORT RANGE (2020) SITE
GENERATED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 7
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
Page 14
Ziegler
HP
West
Harmony
Lady
Moon
42/58
RT
Access
HP
East
38/33
29/26
11/10
RT
Access
Timberwood
47/49
28/32
39/38
28/40
60/57
44/33
34/23
39/38
28/40
31/46
44/33
28/32
Access A
Access B
Timberwood
Intel
Banner
AM/PM
104/90
75/89
Technology
27/19
27/19
45/32
17/19
29/31
17/19
-10/-19
2/2
-3/-18
102/88
73/88
2/1
-15/-25
54/50
-14/-26
13/9
LONG RANGE (2035) SITE
GENERATED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 8
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
Page 15
Ziegler
52/57
13/9
13/19
RT
Access
HP
West
Harmony
Lady
Moon
RT
Access
HP
East
RT
Access
Timberwood
Intel
Banner
AM/PM
Rounded to Nearest
5 Vehicles
Access A
Access B
Timberwood
9/6
27/19
45/32
17/19
29/31
6/6
41/58
38/33
28/26
7/6
47/46
24/28
29/29
27/36
64/61
46/35
25/17
29/29
27/36
27/42
46/35
24/28
-11/-19
2/2
-4/-18
85/75
63/75
2/1
SHORT RANGE (2020) BACKGROUND
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 9
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
Page 16
254/264
392/307
56/86
74/165
242/466
590/679
164/133
1153/1645
170/255
514/834
1449/1434
103/118
Ziegler
HP
West
2/36
NOM
1/10
12/134
NOM
4/58
173/21
1596/2382
30/7
52/7
2052/2216
9/2
Harmony
Lady
Moon
204/130
10/6
24/46
RT
Access
HP
East
104/101
46/5
78/70
1483/2319
88/124
5/96
3/40
5/106
30/7
150/12
2004/2028
66/78
Intel
Banner
AM/PM
39/9
3/46
LONG RANGE (2035) BACKGROUND
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 10
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
Page 17
255/335
485/455
85/115
85/180
370/575
625/570
175/145
1935/1735
245/285
440/860
1370/2160
130/160
Ziegler
65/525
5/0
15/50
RT
Access
HP
West
50/365
NOM
30/210
15/135
NOM
10/75
175/25
2125/2315
345/80
55/10
1875/2680
225/50
50/15
385/90
135/25
15/60
NOM
5/20
20/5
45/395
85/35
10/70
NOM
15/95
Harmony
Lady
Moon
295/630
20/15
55/120
RT
Access
HP
East
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 18
discussions. With the construction of Technology Parkway, a portion of the site traffic
to/from the Intel facility will use the Harmony/Technology intersection. Redistribution of
Intel traffic was based upon the number of parking spaces in the various lots around the
site. In the long range (2035) future, existing traffic volumes were factored by one
percent per year and the entire Harmony Tech Park was assumed to be built and
occupied. For Harmony Road, the existing volumes east of Lady Moon Drive were
factored by one percent per year to get the long range (2035) total traffic (site plus
background). The site traffic was then backed out of the volumes to get the long range
(2035) background peak hour traffic at the intersections along Harmony Road.
Total Traffic Forecasts
Figures 11 and 12 show the respective short range (2020) and long range (2035)
total (site plus background) peak hour traffic assignment.
Signal Warrants
As a matter of policy, traffic signals are not installed at any location unless warrants
are met according to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The Harmony/
Ziegler and Harmony/Lady Moon-HP East intersections are currently signalized. In the
short range (2020) future at the Harmony/Technology intersection, it is important to
determine the level of development that will trigger the installation of the signal. The short
range (2020) total peak hour signal warrant for the Harmony/Technology intersection is
provided in Appendix D. The threshold volume for warranting a signal is 75 vehicles per
hour (vph). With the Intel traffic redistribution, the number of northbound left-turning
vehicles at the Harmony/Technology intersection would be 2 in the morning peak hour and
36 in the afternoon peak hour. Therefore, a total of 73 morning peak hour and 39
afternoon peak hour northbound left-turning vehicles would need to be produced by the
HTP Retail development in order to warrant a signal at the Harmony/Technology
intersection. It is difficult to determine a flat level of development of the HTP Retail site to
warrant the signal since some of the land uses have passby traffic rates applied to them.
However, based upon the short range (2020) site generated peak hour traffic, generally
development of approximately 45 percent of the HTP Retail site will warrant the signal at
the Harmony/Technology-HP West intersection. For example, construction of Buildings A,
B, C, and the Hotel would warrant the signal; or construction of Building D and the Hotel
(or almost any other single building) would warrant the signal. It is important to note that it
is likely that more of the site traffic from HP/Avago will utilize the Harmony/Technology-HP
West intersection when it is signalized. This assumed redistribution of HP/Avago traffic is
reflected in the short range (2020) peak hour traffic forecasts.
Attachment 8
63
SHORT RANGE (2020) TOTAL
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 11
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
Page 19
Ziegler
HP
West
75/124
NOM
3/11
12/134
NOM
4/58
173/21
1593/2364
132/95
52/7
2042/2197
11/4
Harmony
Lady
Moon
246/188
10/6
24/46
RT
Access
HP
East
38/33
186/268
11/10
RT
Access
Timberwood
29/26
97/212
71/40
42/58
NOM
17/20
44/35
208/124
42/24
6/12
NOM
28/52
111/109
46/5
113/120
1469/2293
101/133
5/96
3/40
5/106
30/7
150/12
1989/2003
LONG RANGE (2035) TOTAL
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 12
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
Page 20
255/335
485/455
95/120
85/180
370/575
650/590
175/145
1980/1770
245/285
460/880
1400/2195
135/165
Ziegler
115/580
20/10
30/70
RT
Access
HP
West
115/440
NOM
30/210
15/135
NOM
10/75
175/25
2120/2300
430/155
55/10
1865/2665
225/50
50/15
385/90
220/100
15/60
NOM
5/20
20/5
60/405
110/55
60/125
NOM
40/120
Harmony
Lady
Moon
335/690
20/15
55/120
RT
Access
HP
East
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 21
Geometry
Figure 13 shows a schematic of the short range (2020) geometry. As mentioned
earlier, eastbound and northbound right-turn deceleration/storage lanes are warranted
with the existing traffic volumes at the Harmony/Ziegler intersection. According to Figure
8-4, LCUASS, a right-turn deceleration lane is required on an arterial street with three
through-lanes in each direction when the right-turn volume exceeds 200 vph.
Figure 14 shows a schematic of the long range (2035) geometry. The geometry at
the Harmony/Ziegler intersection in the long range future reflects the maximum practical
geometry.
Operation Analysis
Operation analyses were performed at the Harmony/Ziegler, Harmony/Technology-
HP West, Harmony/Lady Moon-HP East, Lady Moon/Timberwood, Technology/
Timberwood, and the Site Access intersections. The operations analyses were
conducted for the short range and long range futures, reflecting year 2020 and 2035
conditions, respectively. The long range (2035) analyses are provided for informational
purposes.
Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 9, the key intersections operate in the
short range (2020) background traffic future as indicated in Table 3. Calculation forms for
these analyses are provided in Appendix E. The key intersections will operate acceptably
during the peak hours, except for the Harmony/Ziegler intersection during the afternoon
peak hour. As mentioned with the current traffic volumes and under the Geometry
section, eastbound and northbound right-turn deceleration/storage lanes are warranted
with the existing traffic volumes. Providing these right-turn lanes will improve the
operation/reduce the delay of the LOS F movements, with adjustments to the signal
timing.
Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 10, the key intersections operate in the
long range (2035) background traffic future as indicated in Table 4. Calculation forms for
these analyses are provided in Appendix F. The analysis assumed right-turn lanes on all
legs of the Harmony/Ziegler intersection. The Harmony/Ziegler intersection will not
achieve level of service E or better for all movements or achieve level of service D or
better overall during both peak hours with single eastbound and westbound left-turn lanes.
The intersection was also analyzed with dual eastbound and westbound left-turn lanes.
This helped to mitigate most of the unacceptable levels of service. Selected traffic
movements at the Harmony/Ziegler intersection are very high. Unless some traffic
seeks alternative routes, there is little that can be practically done to mitigate the
calculated delay. The Lady Moon/Timberwood-Banner intersection will not achieve level
of service E or better for the eastbound approach during the afternoon peak hour. The
other key intersections will operate acceptably.
Attachment 8
66
SHORT RANGE (2020) GEOMETRY Figure 13
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
Page 22
Ziegler
HP
West
Harmony
Lady
Moon HP
East
Timberwood
Access A
Access B
Timberwood
Intel
Banner
Technology
RT
Access
RT
Access
- Required/Proposed Lane
- Existing Lane
Attachment 8
67
LONG RANGE (2035) GEOMETRY Figure 14
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
Page 34
Ziegler
HP
West
Harmony
Lady
Moon HP
East
Timberwood
Intel
Banner
Access A
Access B
Timberwood
Technology
RT
Access
RT
Access
RT
Access
- Denotes Lane
Attachment 8
68
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 24
TABLE 3
Short Range (2020) Background Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM Delay (secs) PM Delay (secs)
Harmony/Ziegler
(signal)
(With existing geometry)
EB LT E 77.3 F† 82.2
EB T C 34.7 D 49.5
EB T/RT D 38.0 E 59.9
EB APPROACH D 40.5 D 55.0
WB LT E 60.3 F† 89.5
WB T D 45.1 D 37.1
WB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
WB APPROACH D 46.1 D 41.1
NB LT D 38.2 D 47.4
NB T E 68.6 E 68.0
NB T/RT E 69.6 E 70.5
NB APPROACH E 57.8 E 60.2
SB LT E 70.8 F† 82.8
SB T D 54.6 D 51.7
SB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
SB APPROACH E 66.1 E 70.2
OVERALL D 49.7 D 54.8
Harmony/Ziegler
(signal)
(With EB & NB RT Lanes)
EB LT E 77.3 E 66.2
EB T C 31.6 D 37.9
EB RT C 25.4 C 25.5
EB APPROACH D 36.5 D 39.0
WB LT E 60.3 E 69.6
WB T D 45.1 D 38.5
WB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
WB APPROACH D 46.1 D 40.9
NB LT D 38.7 D 49.2
NB T E 59.8 E 60.6
NB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
NB APPROACH D 51.5 E 55.3
SB LT E 62.8 E 71.9
SB T D 54.6 D 52.2
SB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
SB APPROACH E 60.4 E 63.9
OVERALL D 46.5 D 46.8
Continued on next page
† Does not meet the LOS standard
Attachment 8
69
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 25
Continued from previous page
TABLE 3
Short Range (2020) Background Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM Delay (secs) PM Delay (secs)
Harmony/Technology-HP
West
(signal)
EB LT E 56.9 E 58.6
EB T B 13.0 B 19.0
EB RT A 8.3 A 0.0
EB APPROACH B 17.3 B 19.4
WB LT D 53.8 D 53.3
WB T C 20.9 A 7.7
WB T/RT C 22.3 A 7.7
WB APPROACH C 21.6 A 8.1
NB LT D 40.9 D 39.2
NB T/RT A 0.0 A 0.0
NB APPROACH D 40.9 D 39.2
SB LT D 41.0 D 40.3
SB T/RT A 0.0 A 0.0
SB APPROACH D 41.0 D 40.3
OVERALL B 19.6 B 19.2
Harmony/Lady Moon-HP East
(signal)
EB LT E 62.8 E 59.9
EB T A 0.9 A 1.7
EB RT A 0.1 A 0.1
EB APPROACH A 2.1 A 1.9
WB LT D 40.8 D 46.4
WB T A 8.7 A 8.6
WB RT A 5.0 A 0.0
WB APPROACH A 9.5 A 9.9
NB LT D 51.7 D 51.9
NB T D 52.2 D 54.9
NB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
NB APPROACH D 51.9 D 52.1
SB LT D 54.3 D 49.0
SB T/RT E 55.9 E 60.3
SB APPROACH D 54.8 D 53.2
OVERALL A 8.2 A 8.3
Lady Moon/RT Access
(RT-in/RT-out) WB RT A 9.7 A 9.3
Lady Moon/Banner
(stop sign)
WB LT/RT B 12.7 B 12.4
SB LT A 8.0 A 7.7
Attachment 8
70
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 26
TABLE 4
Long Range (2035) Background Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM Delay (secs) PM Delay (secs)
Harmony/Ziegler
(signal)
(With single EB & WB LT
Lanes)
EB LT E 68.6 F‡ 90.2
EB T D 46.4 C 31.3
EB RT C 23.2 C 21.1
EB APPROACH D 46.8 C 34.8
WB LT E 76.5 E 58.2
WB T D 37.0 D 40.4
WB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
WB APPROACH D 40.4 D 41.6
NB LT D 43.1 F‡ 100.7
NB T E 57.2 F‡ 135.4
NB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
NB APPROACH E 56.5 F‡ 120.7
SB LT F‡ 222.0 F‡ 91.3
SB T D 53.3 F‡ 85.7
SB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
SB APPROACH F‡ 159.3 F‡ 88.5
OVERALL E‡ 67.2 E‡ 57.9
Harmony/Ziegler
(signal)
(With dual EB & WB LT
Lanes)
EB LT E 61.2 F‡ 82.7
EB T D 48.9 C 31.0
EB RT C 23.6 C 20.9
EB APPROACH D 48.4 C 34.1
WB LT E 58.2 E 56.4
WB T C 34.7 D 40.4
WB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
WB APPROACH D 36.7 D 41.5
NB LT D 37.8 E 64.4
NB T E 69.0 E 74.1
NB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
NB APPROACH E 67.4 E 70.0
SB LT E 63.3 E 67.4
SB T D 52.6 E 60.3
SB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
SB APPROACH E 59.3 E 63.8
OVERALL D 49.0 D 46.8
Continued on next page
‡ Does not meet LOS standard
Attachment 8
71
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 27
Continued from previous page
TABLE 4
Long Range (2035) Background Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM Delay (secs) PM Delay (secs)
Harmony/Technology-HP
West
(signal)
EB LT D 53.2 E 61.6
EB T A 9.2 C 24.1
EB RT A 5.9 B 12.4
EB APPROACH B 12.0 C 24.4
WB LT E 66.8 E 61.5
WB T A 6.9 C 29.2
WB T/RT A 7.0 C 33.0
WB APPROACH B 13.2 C 31.1
NB LT E 59.0 E 59.3
NB T/RT A 0.0 D 43.3
NB APPROACH E 59.0 E 55.5
SB LT E 64.0 E 69.7
SB T/RT A 0.0 A 0.0
SB APPROACH E 64.0 E 69.7
OVERALL B 13.2 C 30.9
Harmony/Lady Moon-HP East
(signal)
EB LT E 57.7 E 61.0
EB T A 0.6 D 36.3
EB RT A 0.4 A 6.1
EB APPROACH A 4.0 C 35.0
WB LT D 48.6 D 52.2
WB T B 14.1 B 16.1
WB RT A 8.9 A 0.0
WB APPROACH B 18.6 B 19.6
NB LT E 55.6 E 62.6
NB T/RT D 49.5 D 52.6
NB APPROACH D 54.1 E 61.1
SB LT E 62.8 E 69.3
SB T E 0.055.8 E 59.5
SB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
SB APPROACH E 59.3 E 67.1
OVERALL B 14.7 C 32.6
Continued on next page
Attachment 8
72
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 28
Continued from previous page
TABLE 4
Long Range (2035) Background Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM Delay (secs) PM Delay (secs)
Lady Moon/RT Access
(RT-in/RT-out) WB RT B 10.4 C 15.9
Lady Moon/Timberwood-
Banner
(stop sign)
EB LT/T E 46.3 F§ 132.8
EB RT B 11.3 B 10.8
EB APPROACH E 36.8 F§ 96.2
WB LT/T/RT E 47.6 F§ 53.9
NB LT A 8.6 A 8.1
SB LT A 8.5 A 8.8
Timberwood/Access A
(stop sign)
NB LT/RT A 9.5 A 9.8
WB LT/T A 7.6 A 7.4
Timberwood/Access B
(stop sign)
NB LT/T/RT B 10.4 A 9.5
SB LT/T/RT A 8.4 A 9.2
EB LT/T/RT A 7.4 A 7.5
WB LT/T/RT A 7.5 A 7.3
Technology/Timberwood-Intel
(stop sign)
EB LT/T/RT C 18.1 C 15.6
WB LT/T C 20.2 C 17.4
WB RT A 8.8 B 11.6
WB APPROACH C 15.6 B 14.9
NB LT A 8.3 A 7.4
SB LT A 7.8 A 8.3
Technology/RT Access
(RT-in/RT-out) WB RT A 8.7 B 12.5
§ Does not meet LOS standard
Attachment 8
73
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 29
Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 11, the key intersections operate in the
short range (2020) total traffic future, with recommended control, as indicated in Table 5.
Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix G. The key intersections
will operate acceptably during the peak hours, except for the Harmony/Ziegler intersection.
The southbound left-turn movement will experience delays commensurate with level of
service F during the morning peak hour. Many movements, as well as the overall
operation of the intersection will operate unacceptably during the afternoon peak hour. As
mentioned earlier, eastbound and northbound right-turn deceleration/storage lanes are
warranted with the existing traffic volumes. Providing these right-turn lanes will improve
the operation/reduce the delay of the LOS F movements, with adjustments to the signal
timing.
Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 12, the key intersections operate in the
long range (2035) total traffic future as indicated in Table 6. Calculation forms for these
analyses are provided in Appendix H. The analysis assumed right-turn lanes on all legs of
the Harmony/Ziegler intersection. As with the long range (2035) background traffic, the
Harmony/Ziegler intersection will not achieve level of service E or better for all movements
or achieve level of service D or better overall during both peak hours with single eastbound
and westbound left-turn lanes. The intersection was also analyzed with dual eastbound
and westbound left-turn lanes. This helped to mitigate most of the unacceptable levels of
service. Selected traffic movements at the Harmony/Ziegler intersection are very high.
Unless some traffic seeks alternative routes, there is little that can be practically done to
mitigate the calculated delay. The Lady Moon/Timberwood-Banner intersection will not
achieve level of service E or better for the eastbound approach during the afternoon peak
hour. The other key intersections will operate acceptably.
Pedestrian Level of Service
Appendix I shows a map of the area that is within 1320 feet of the HTP Retail
site. There will be three pedestrian destinations within 1320 feet of the HTP Retail.
These are: 1) Avago to the north of the site; 2) the Banner Medical Campus to the east
of the site; and 3) Intel. This site is in an area type termed “other.” The level of service
determination assumes that future developments will build their streets and adjacent
streets in accordance with Fort Collins Standards. This being the case, pedestrian
facilities will exist where they currently do not. This is a reasonable assumption. The
Pedestrian LOS Worksheet is provided in Appendix I. The minimum level of service for
“other” is C for all categories. With the assumed future pedestrian facilities along future
streets, the pedestrian level of service will be acceptable.
Bicycle Level of Service
Based upon Fort Collins bicycle LOS criteria, there are no bicycle destinations
within 1320 feet of the HTP Retail.
Attachment 8
74
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 30
TABLE 5
Short Range (2020) Total Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM Delay (secs) PM Delay (secs)
Harmony/Ziegler
(signal)
(With existing geometry)
EB LT E 77.3 F** 82.2
EB T D 36.4 D 52.2
EB T/RT D 40.2 E 63.5
EB APPROACH D 42.0 E 57.8
WB LT E 66.6 F** 109.0
WB T D 48.1 D 36.3
WB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
WB APPROACH D 49.5 D 42.5
NB LT D 37.5 D 46.9
NB T E 72.7 E 69.2
NB T/RT E 74.7 E 72.4
NB APPROACH E 61.0 E 61.0
SB LT F** 81.4 F** 90.8
SB T D 54.6 D 51.7
SB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
SB APPROACH E 73.8 E 75.2
OVERALL D 53.3 E** 57.4
Harmony/Ziegler
(signal)
(With EB & NB RT Lanes)
EB LT E 77.3 E 62.4
EB T C 32.9 D 39.0
EB RT C 25.0 C 25.6
EB APPROACH D 37.6 D 39.6
WB LT E 66.6 E 70.0
WB T D 48.1 D 37.6
WB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
WB APPROACH D 49.5 D 40.4
NB LT D 38.7 D 49.2
NB T E 59.8 E 60.6
NB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
NB APPROACH D 51.5 E 55.3
SB LT E 70.4 E 79.0
SB T D 54.6 D 52.2
SB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
SB APPROACH E 66.0 E 68.3
OVERALL D 49.1 D 47.8
Continued on next page
** Does not meet LOS standard
Attachment 8
75
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 31
Continued from previous page
TABLE 5
Short Range (2020) Total Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM Delay (secs) PM Delay (secs)
Harmony/Technology-HP
West
(signal)
EB LT E 56.0 E 58.4
EB T B 12.9 B 18.9
EB RT A 8.8 B 10.2
EB APPROACH B 16.8 B 19.0
WB LT D 53.9 D 53.4
WB T C 20.8 B 13.4
WB T/RT C 22.2 B 13.9
WB APPROACH C 21.5 B 13.7
NB LT D 45.5 D 46.9
NB T/RT A 0.0 A 0.0
NB APPROACH D 45.5 D 46.9
SB LT D 41.0 D 40.3
SB T/RT A 0.0 D 39.5
SB APPROACH D 41.0 D 40.0
OVERALL B 19.8 B 17.7
Harmony/Lady Moon-HP East
(signal)
EB LT E 62.7 E 60.1
EB T A 0.9 A 1.8
EB RT A 0.1 A 0.1
EB APPROACH A 2.0 A 1.9
WB LT D 42.7 D 48.8
WB T A 8.6 A 8.5
WB RT A 5.0 A 0.0
WB APPROACH B 10.3 B 10.9
NB LT D 52.8 D 53.1
NB T D 52.2 D 54.9
NB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
NB APPROACH D 52.6 D 53.2
SB LT D 54.3 D 49.0
SB T/RT E 55.9 E 60.3
SB APPROACH D 54.8 D 53.2
OVERALL A 8.8 A 8.9
Continued on next page
Attachment 8
76
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 32
Continued from previous page
TABLE 5
Short Range (2020) Total Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM Delay (secs) PM Delay (secs)
Lady Moon/RT Access
(RT-in/RT-out)
EB RT A 9.6 B 10.2
WB RT B 10.0 A 9.7
Lady Moon/Timberwood-
Banner
(stop sign)
EB LT/T C 17.5 C 16.5
EB RT A 9.0 A 9.8
EB APPROACH C 15.1 B 14.8
WB LT/T/RT C 15.9 C 15.3
NB LT A 7.6 A 7.9
SB LT A 8.0 A 7.7
Timberwood/Access A
(stop sign)
SB LT/RT A 9.6 A 9.6
EB LT/T A 7.5 A 7.4
Timberwood/Access B
(stop sign)
SB LT/RT A 9.6 A 9.7
EB LT/T A 7.5 A 7.5
Attachment 8
77
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 33
TABLE 6
Long Range (2035) Total Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM Delay (secs) PM Delay (secs)
Harmony/Ziegler
(signal)
(With single EB & WB LT
Lanes)
EB LT E 68.6 F†† 90.2
EB T D 50.6 C 32.3
EB RT C 23.2 C 21.4
EB APPROACH D 50.4 D 35.6
WB LT F†† 81.6 E 58.0
WB T D 37.5 D 43.3
WB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
WB APPROACH D 41.4 D 44.3
NB LT D 47.0 F†† 100.7
NB T E 57.1 F†† 135.4
NB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
NB APPROACH D 53.6 F†† 120.7
SB LT F†† 244.9 F†† 101.2
SB T D 53.3 F†† 85.7
SB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
SB APPROACH F†† 175.4 F†† 93.6
OVERALL E†† 71.2 E†† 60.0
Harmony/Ziegler
(signal)
(With Dual EB-WB LT Lanes)
EB LT E 61.2 F†† 82.7
EB T D 54.9 C 31.8
EB RT C 23.7 C 21.1
EB APPROACH D 53.5 C 34.7
WB LT E 58.1 E 55.8
WB T C 34.9 D 42.1
WB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
WB APPROACH D 37.0 D 43.0
NB LT D 40.9 E 64.4
NB T E 69.0 E 74.1
NB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
NB APPROACH E 59.3 E 70.0
SB LT E 69.8 E 73.4
SB T D 52.6 E 60.3
SB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
SB APPROACH E 63.6 E 67.0
OVERALL D 51.6 D 48.1
Continued on next page
†† Does not meet LOS standard
Attachment 8
78
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 34
Continued from previous page
TABLE 6
Long Range (2035) Total Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM Delay (secs) PM Delay (secs)
Harmony/Technology-HP
West
(signal)
EB LT D 53.2 E 61.2
EB T B 10.6 C 23.8
EB RT A 7.1 B 13.0
EB APPROACH B 13.2 C 23.8
WB LT E 66.9 E 61.6
WB T A 8.1 C 28.7
WB T/RT A 8.3 C 32.3
WB APPROACH B 14.3 C 30.5
NB LT E 58.5 E 64.6
NB T/RT A 0.0 D 43.3
NB APPROACH E 58.5 E 60.2
SB LT E 64.0 E 69.7
SB T/RT A 0.0 A 0.0
SB APPROACH E 64.0 E 69.7
OVERALL B 14.9 C 31.1
Harmony/Lady Moon-HP East
(signal)
EB LT E 57.7 E 61.0
EB T A 0.6 D 35.0
EB RT A 0.4 A 6.2
EB APPROACH A 4.0 C 33.6
WB LT D 52.4 E 57.2
WB T B 14.1 B 16.1
WB RT A 9.0 A 0.0
WB APPROACH B 20.0 C 20.9
NB LT E 55.7 E 64.8
NB T/RT D 50.1 E 67.1
NB APPROACH D 54.1 E 65.3
SB LT E 62.8 E 69.3
SB T E 55.7 E 58.8
SB RT A 0.0 A 0.0
SB APPROACH E 59.3 E 67.0
OVERALL B 15.6 C 33.2
Lady Moon/RT Access
(RT-in/RT-out)
EB RT B 14.1 B 11.7
WB RT B 10.8 C 17.2
Continued on next page
Attachment 8
79
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 35
Continued from previous page
TABLE 6
Long Range (2035) Total Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM Delay (secs) PM Delay (secs)
Lady Moon/Timberwood-
Banner
(stop sign)
EB LT/T F‡‡ 122.1 F‡‡ 426.6
EB RT B 11.6 B 11.1
EB APPROACH F‡‡ 95.8 F‡‡ 322.7
WB LT/T/RT F‡‡ 63.7 F‡‡ 70.8
NB LT A 8.8 A 8.2
SB LT A 8.5 A 8.8
Timberwood/Access A
(stop sign)
NB LT/T/RT B 10.5 B 11.1
SB LT/T/RT B 11.6 B 11.1
EB LT/T/RT A 7.5 A 7.5
WB LT/T/RT A 7.7 A 7.4
Timberwood/Access B
(stop sign)
NB LT/T/RT B 12.8 B 11.2
SB LT/T/RT B 11.5 B 11.1
EB LT/T/RT A 7.7 A 7.8
WB LT/T/RT A 7.6 A 7.4
Technology/Timberwood-Intel
(stop sign)
EB LT/T/RT D 26.2 C 23.4
WB LT/T C 20.5 D 28.4
WB RT A 8.1 B 12.6
WB APPROACH C 20.5 C 20.3
NB LT A 8.3 A 7.4
SB LT A 8.1 A 8.7
Technology/RT Access
(RT-in/RT-out) WB RT A 9.1 B 13.6
‡‡ Does not meet LOS standard
Attachment 8
80
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 36
Transit Level of Service
Currently, this area of Fort Collins is served by Transfort Route 16. Route 16
operates along Harmony Road, Ziegler Road, Rock Creek Drive, and Lady Moon Drive.
According to the Fort Collins Transit System Plan, Harmony Road will be an enhanced
transit corridor with 10 minute service and Ziegler Road will have a feeder route with 30
minute service. Transit level of service will be in the B category.
Attachment 8
81
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 37
IV. CONCLUSIONS
This study assessed the impacts of the HTP Retail site on the street system in the
vicinity of the proposed development in the short range (2020) and long range (2035)
future. As a result of this analysis, the following is concluded:
- The development of HTP Retail is feasible from a traffic engineering standpoint.
The trip generation for the HTP Retail development resulted in 4308 daily trip ends,
360 morning peak hour trip ends, and 361 afternoon peak hour trip ends.
- The key intersections operate acceptably with the existing traffic and geometry, with
timing adjustments at the Harmony/Ziegler intersection.
- The Harmony/Ziegler and Harmony/Lady Moon-HP East intersections are currently
signalized. A signal will be warranted at the Harmony/Technology-HP West
intersection. It is difficult to determine a flat level of development of the HTP Retail
site to warrant the signal since some of the land uses have passby traffic rates
applied to them. However, based upon the short range (2020) site generated peak
hour traffic, generally development of approximately 45 percent of the HTP Retail
site will warrant the signal at the Harmony/Technology-HP West intersection. For
example, construction of Buildings A, B, C, and the Hotel would warrant the signal;
or construction of Building D and the Hotel (or almost any other single building)
would warrant the signal. It is important to note that it is likely that more of the site
traffic from HP/Avago will utilize the Harmony/Technology-HP West intersection
when it is signalized.
- In the short range (2020) future, given development of the HTP Retail site and an
increase in background traffic, the key intersections will operate acceptably, except
for the Harmony/Ziegler intersection during the afternoon peak hour. Eastbound
and northbound right-turn deceleration/storage lanes are warranted with the
existing traffic volumes. Providing these right-turn lanes will improve the
operation/reduce the delay of the LOS F movements, with adjustments to the
signal timing. Selected traffic movements at the Harmony/Ziegler intersection
are very high. Unless some traffic seeks alternative routes, there is little that can
be practically done to mitigate the calculated delay.
- In the long range (2035) future, given development of the HTP Retail site and an
increase in background traffic, the Harmony/Ziegler intersection will not achieve
level of service E or better for all movements or achieve level of service D or better
overall during both peak hours with single eastbound and westbound left-turn lanes.
The intersection was also analyzed with dual eastbound and westbound left-turn
lanes. This helped to mitigate most of the unacceptable levels of service. Selected
traffic movements at the Harmony/Ziegler intersection are very high. Unless
some traffic seeks alternative routes, there is little that can be practically done to
mitigate the calculated delay. The Lady Moon/Timberwood-Banner intersection
will not achieve level of service E or better for the eastbound approach during the
afternoon peak hour. The other key intersections will operate acceptably.
Attachment 8
82
DELICH HTP Retail TIS, September 2015
ASSOCIATES Page 38
- The short range (2020) geometry is shown in Figure 13. As mentioned earlier,
eastbound and northbound right-turn deceleration/storage lanes are warranted
with the existing traffic volumes at the Harmony/Ziegler intersection. According to
Figure 8-4, LCUASS, a right-turn deceleration lane is required on an arterial street
with three through-lanes in each direction when the right-turn volume exceeds 200
vph.
- The long range (2035) geometry is shown in Figure 14. This is the maximum
practical geometry at the key intersections.
- Acceptable level of service is achieved for pedestrian, bicycle, and transit modes
based upon the measures in the multi-modal transportation guidelines and future
improvements to the street system in the area.
Attachment 8
83
Agenda Item 3
Item # 3 Page 1
STAFF REPORT March 8, 2016
Planning and Zoning Board
PROJECT NAME
DUTCH BROS. COFFEE AT TIMBERLINE CENTER, MAJOR AMENDMENT, #MJA150008
STAFF
Ted Shepard, Chief Planner
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
This is a request for a Major Amendment to construct a 754 square
foot drive-through restaurant on Lot Three of the Timberline Center
located at the northwest corner of Timberline Road and Bear
Mountain Drive. The plan includes one drive-through lane, a walk-
up service option, patio seating and 13 parking spaces. Lot Three is
a component of a specifically defined Convenience Shopping
Center within the center. The parcel is .70 acre in size and zoned, I,
Industrial.
APPLICANT: Mr. Nate Frary
One Fifty Five, LLC
729 Oklahoma Street
Kennewick, WA 99336
OWNER: Blue Gramma Properties
c/o Mr. Fred Crocci
2219 Charolais Lane
Fort Collins, CO 80526
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. The request represents a change of use of the Timberline Center Final Plan from Retail
to Drive-Through Restaurant. This change of use is considered a change of character
which triggers the Major Amendment. It is noteworthy that the restaurant provides for no
indoor seating but includes a walk-up service option as an alternative.
84
Agenda Item 3
Item # 3 Page 2
B. A Drive-Through Restaurant is a permitted use in the Industrial zone, but, this use is
qualified as being allowed only if located within a Convenience Shopping Center.
C. Lot Three is contained within a specifically defined Convenience Shopping Center,
consisting of 5.97 acres, per the approved Timberline Center Final Plan, as amended in
2008.
D. The Industrial zone development standards require that, as part of a Convenience
Shopping Center, the Major Amendment is subject to review by Section 3.5.3 of the
General Development Standards – Institutional, Mixed-Use and Commercial Buildings.
The Major Amendment complies with the applicable General Development Standards, including
Section 3.5.3.
The Major Amendment also complies with the established design guidelines of the Timberline
Center Final Plan.
85
Agenda Item 3
Item # 3 Page 3
Comments:
1. Background:
A. The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
N: I Lot 2, Timberline Center Big O Tire
S: I Lot 10, Timberline Center Burger King
E: L-M-N Bucking Horse Neighborhood Single Family Attached
W: I Lots 4 - 7, Timberline Center Vacant
B. Annexation and Zoning
In 1997, Timberline Center was annexed as a portion of the 435 acre Timberline Annexation.
This was an enclave annexation that brought in five parcels owned by separate entities and
included the area bounded by the Union Pacific Railroad on the west, the Great Western
Railroad on the east and Drake Road and beyond on the south. The original zoning was T,
Transitional.
In 2001, the property was placed into the Industrial zone district.
Timberline Center was originally a component of Spring Creek Farms, owned by the Johnson
Brothers, whose family farmhouse was preserved and moved into Rigden Farm where it now
serves as the community building. Neighborhoods and projects that have developed within this
area include:
• Commercial Center in Rigden Farm;
• Sidehill;
• Bucking Horse;
• Spring Creek Farms North
• City of Fort Collins Police Services
• Trails at Timberline Apartments
C. Development History:
In 2006, Timberline Center was approved as a 14 lot subdivision, zoned Industrial, and
specifically designed and intended to offer a variety of primary and supporting uses. Within the
18-acre center, a 6-acre Convenience Shopping Center was formed to allow for the permitted
supporting uses.
In 2007, a Minor Amendment was approved to adjust the building envelopes and allow
construction of the Timberline Self-Storage Facility on Lot 14.
In 2008, a Minor Amendment was approved that adjusted the boundary and size of the
Convenience Shopping Center.
86
Agenda Item 3
Item # 3 Page 4
In 2008, Burger King was approved on Lot 10, within the Convenience Shopping Center.
In 2015, Big O Tire was approved on Lot 2.
In 2015, Ascent Climbing Gym was approved on Timberline Second Filing, being a Replat of
Lots 11 – 13. This was a consolidation of three lots into two and located on Lot 2 of the Second
Filing, within the Convenience Shopping Center.
In 2015, a Major Amendment was approved to allow a 3,096 square foot standard restaurant,
Serious Texas Barbecue, on Lot 1 of the First Filing.
Concurrent with this Major Amendment, is a request for a one-story, mixed-use building (office
and restaurant) on Lot 1 of the Second Filing, 2133 Timberline Road, which is also a Major
Amendment.
As mentioned, Timberline Center is an approved Final Plan that is zoned Industrial. It is not a
part of a Sub-Area Plan or a part of an Overall Development Plan. In 2006, the subject Lot was
originally approved for a 7,500 square foot retail building. In 2008, the lot was brought into the
revised Convenience Shopping Center. The request for a
Drive-Through Restaurant is considered to be a change of character and thus subject to a
Major Amendment.
2. Compliance with the Industrial Zone District Land Use and Standards:
A. Section 4.28(B)(3) – Permitted Uses:
The Industrial zone district allows for Drive-Through Restaurants as a permitted use subject to
review by the Planning and Zoning Board. But, this use is qualified as being allowed only if
located within a Convenience Shopping Center. For reference, a Convenience Shopping
Center is defined as follows:
“Convenience shopping center shall mean a shopping and service center situated on seven (7) or fewer
acres with four (4) or more business establishments with separate exterior entrances, located in a complex
which is planned, developed and managed as a single unit, and located within and intended to primarily
serve the consumer demands of adjacent employment areas. The principal uses permitted include retail
stores; business services; convenience retail stores with fuel sales (possibly including an accessory one-
bay automatic carwash); personal business and service shops; standard or fast food restaurants (without
drive-up windows); vehicle minor repair, servicing and maintenance uses; liquor sales (for on- or off-
premise consumption); beauty or barber shops; dry-cleaning outlets; equipment rental (not including
outdoor storage); limited indoor recreational uses; pet shops; and uses of similar character. Secondary
uses may include professional offices; limited banking services such as branch banks (with limited drive-up
facilities) and automated teller machines; multi-family dwellings; medical offices and clinics; small animal
veterinary clinics; child care centers; and elderly day care facilities.”
87
Agenda Item 3
Item # 3 Page 5
In 2006, the original Timberline Center Final Plan included a Convenience Shopping Center
that was specifically defined as including containing Lots 4-9 and 12, 13. As mentioned, in
2008, the boundary of the Convenience Shopping Center was adjusted to add Lots 3 (subject
lot) and 10 (Burger King). The Major Amendment complies with this designation.
B. Section 4.28(E)(2)(a) – Development Standards, Building Design, Applicability of Section
3.5.3:
The development standards in the Industrial zone make a distinction between primary uses and
supporting uses. Consequently, supporting uses are specifically governed by the development
standards of Section 3.5.3 – Mixed-Use, Institutional and Commercial Buildings. Three General
Development Standards are discussed in the following sub-section.
3. Compliance With Applicable General Development Standards:
A. Section 3.2.1(C )(D) – Landscaping and Tree Protection
Lot Three contains 30,544 square feet (.70 acre) but is encumbered by platted access, utility
and drainage easements to the point where only 17,626 square feet (.40 acre) is developable.
As a result, the land area outside the building envelope, parking lot, drive-through lane and
drainage swale is landscaped in a dense arrangement to compensate for these encumbrances.
For example, the area between building and the stormwater drainage swale along Timberline
features a mix of six Evergreen trees and eight Spring Snow Crab ornamental trees. These
trees are closely spaced and complement the landscape design of the existing buildings along
Timberline Road (Burger King and Big O Tire) and the future building (Serious Texas Barbecue)
which include the same mix of trees.
In addition, street trees are provided along Bear Mountain Drive and the private north-south
drive. Foundation shrubs are shown where there is no drive-through lane or patio. The area
enclosed by the drive-through lane features a small lawn of approximately 1,750 feet which is
framed by a mix of trees and shrubs. Finally, the drive-through lane is screened such that
headlights will not cause glare on Timberline Road.
B. Section 3.2.1(E)(4)(a) – Parking Lot Perimeter Landscaping
There are 13 parking spaces six of which face Bear Mountain Drive. These six spaces are
buffered from Bear Mountain Drive by a landscaped area 13 feet in width, which includes a
continuous shrub bed five feet in width, located behind the public sidewalk in excess of the
standard.
C. Section 3.2.1(E)(5) – Parking Lot Interior Landscaping
The parking lot exceeds the minimum required 6% interior landscaping in the form of islands
which complies with the required minimum for lots with less than 100 spaces.
88
Agenda Item 3
Item # 3 Page 6
D. Section 3.2.2(B) – Access Circulation and Parking
As mentioned, the north-south private drive is a dedicated private access easement that
provides direct access to Lots 1 - 5 of the Timberline Center. It is noteworthy that the drive-
through lane takes access off this private drive, not Bear Mountain Drive.
E. Section 3.2.2 (C)(4) – Bicycle Parking
The standard requires 1.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet, or a minimum of four, and that they all
may be located outside in fixed racks. The plan provides seven spaces in a single rack located
on the front patio.
F. Section 3.2.2(C)(5) – Walkways
The P.D.P. features three private walkways all of which are six feet in width:
• One walkway connects to Bear Mountain Drive;
• One walkway connects to the private north-south access drive; and
• One walkway is aligned along the frontage of the north-south drive that connects to Big
O Tire, the adjoining lot to the north.
Note that a direct connecting walkway to Timberline Road is precluded by the grades of the
existing stormwater drainage swale.
G. Section 3.2.2(C)(6) – Direct On-Site Access to Pedestrian and Bicycle Destinations
The site is a relatively small parcel within a 14-lot commercial center. It is connected to parcels
within the center by an existing and planned network of private drives and walkways. The
walkway that connects to Bear Mountain Drive is 90 feet from the public sidewalk on Timberline
Road which is a signalized intersection. The site is within one-quarter mile of the Police
Services Building. By use of the public sidewalks along either Timberline Road or Joseph Allen
Drive, the site is within roughly one-half mile of all the units at the Trails at Timberline
Apartments. The nearest bus stop is Transfort Route 7 at the intersection of Timberline and
Drake Roads.
H. Section 3.2.2(H) – Drive-In Facilities
This standard requires drive-through restaurants to comply with the following:
(1.) Potential pedestrian / vehicle conflicts are avoided by the two direct connecting
walkways to Bear Mountain Drive and north-south private drive neither of which
crosses the drive-through lane.
(2.) There is stacking for eight cars behind the order/pick-up window. This is considered
to be adequate based on the operational history throughout the restaurant chain. In
times where there may be in excess of eight stacking spaces, the impact would be on
89
Agenda Item 3
Item # 3 Page 7
the north-south private drive, which is of sufficient width to allow by-passing, not Bear
Mountain Drive.
(3.) The site plan indicates that directional signage is logically placed.
(4.) As mentioned, while there is no indoor dining however a walk-up service option with
covered patio is provided.
I. Section 3.2.2(J) – Setbacks for Vehicular Use Areas
The six parking spaces facing Bear Mountain Drive are setback 19 feet from back of the public
sidewalk in excess of the standard.
J. Section 3.2.2(K)(3) – Parking Lots – Maximum Number of Spaces
A drive-through restaurant is required to have no less than seven spaces per 1,000 square feet
and no greater than 15 spaces per 1,000 square feet. A 20% bonus is allowed if there is no
available on-street parking. For the 754 square foot building, this means there can be no less
than five and no more than 11 spaces. Since there is no available on-street parking, the 20%
bonus allows a maximum of 13 spaces. The Major Amendment provides 13 spaces in
compliance with the standard.
K. Section 3.2.4 – Site Lighting
The parking and drives will feature pole lights that are fully-shielded and down-directional. Wall
sconces will be similarly screened. The under-canopy lights will be flush-mount and flat lens to
obscure the light source from view.
L. Section 3.5.3 –Mixed-Use, Institutional and Commercial Buildings
As required by the Industrial zone district development standards under Section 4.28(E), a
drive-through restaurant is subject to the commercial building standards versus standards for
industrial buildings. The Major Amendment complies in the following manner:
(1.) Section 3.5.3(B) – General Development Standard
The standard requires that commercial buildings have:
o Architectural interest;
o Not be dominated by a large single mass;
o Be sensitive to the pedestrian scale; and
o Establish an attractive street and walkways.
In response, at only 754 square feet, the building is architecturally challenged more
by its small scale versus having a large mass. The orientation is angled toward Bear
Mountain Drive not Timberline Road. While not exactly a reverse mode orientation to
90
Agenda Item 3
Item # 3 Page 8
Timberline Road, like Big O Tire, nor side-loaded like Burger King, this orientation is
designed to allow for both a direct connecting walkway to Bear Mountain Drive and
provide for adequate stacking in the drive-through lane.
(2.) Section 3.5.3(C)(1) – Relationship of Buildings to Streets, Walkways and Parking
The front of the building does not contain a building entrance. Instead, the front features
a covered patio and walk-up service which are angled toward Bear Mountain Drive. As
noted, there is six foot-wide walkway that connects to the public sidewalk which does not
cross the drive-through lane or parking lot.
(3.) Section 3.5.3(C)(2) – Orientation to Build-to Lines for Streetfront Buildings
Normally, the standard would have the building brought up to the corner of Timberline
Road and Bear Mountain Drive with build-to lines being no greater than 25 feet and 15
respectively. While the building is indeed located at the corner, with no vehicular use
area between the building and the streets, the setbacks from each street are 38 feet.
As mentioned, Lot Three is encumbered by three easements, two of which are located
along the two public streets:
• Timberline Road: 15-foot utility easement and 15-foot drainage easement for a total
of 30 feet.
• Bear Mountain Drive: 9-foot utility easement and 4-foot drainage easement for a total
of 13 feet.
The standard allows for exceptions. Along Timberline Road, an exception is allowed if
the site abuts a six lane arterial street and if pedestrian connectivity is better served by
other walkways rather than a direct walkway out to the arterial street, or by a constraint
due to the land form. In this case, Timberline Road is designated as a major arterial
street (six lanes at full build-out), and the existing drainage swale is a land form
constraint. Further, pedestrian travel will more likely be to and from other destinations
within Timberline Center to the north, south and west, not east to Timberline Road.
Consequently, the 38-foot setback from Timberline Road is justified.
Along Bear Mountain Drive, an exception is allowed if the project provides an outdoor
space such as a plaza, courtyard, patio or garden between the building and the sidewalk.
The patio on the southeast side of the building faces Bear Mountain Drive. This patio is
partially covered and includes the walk-up service option. As a result, this arrangement
complies with exception provision and the 38 foot setback from Bear Mountain is also
justified.
Staff finds the orientation of the building to the two public streets is visually consistent
with the building-to-streets relationship established by Burger King (south) and Big O
Tire (north) which are similarly constrained by the same easements and existing
91
Agenda Item 3
Item # 3 Page 9
drainage swale. Given the existing constraints of the building envelope being determined
by the platted easements and encumbrances, the relationship of the building to the
public streets is reasonable and practical and does not impact any established urban
design along either street.
(4.) Section 3.5.3(D) – Variation in Massing
Even though the scale of the building is small, there is a variation in the mass
established by the two projecting canopies, partial pitched roof and sloping parapets.
(5.) Section 3.5.3(E)(1) – Character and Image – Site Specific Design
Because the Major Amendment represents a chain restaurant within commercial center,
along a major arterial street, the entire standard is offered verbatim for emphasis:
“Building design shall contribute to the uniqueness of a zone district, and/or the Fort Collins community
with predominant materials, elements, features, color range and activity areas tailored specifically to the
site and its context. In the case of a multiple building development, each individual building shall include
predominant characteristics shared by all buildings in the development so that the development forms a
cohesive place within the zone district or community. A standardized prototype design shall be modified
as necessary to comply with the requirements of this subsection.”
The Timberline Center was adopted in 2006 as a subdivision of 14 relatively small lots
without a primary anchor. Knowing that each individual lot would develop over time with its
own end-user, and in order to establish a degree of visual cohesion, design guidelines were
established. These guidelines, along with the requirements of the standard, have been, and
will continue to be, the governing parameters so that there is a unified character within the
center over the entire 18.30 acres. These guidelines are evident in the three existing
structures constructed to date, all of which comply with the design guidelines.
• Burger King
• Timberline Self-Storage (the buildings fronting on Joseph Allen Drive)
• Big O Tire
A fourth building, Ascent Climbing Gym, has been approved and is in the process of pulling
a building permit. Its design complies with both Section 3.5.3 and the specific design
guidelines of the center.
The Timberline Center requires each individual building to feature the following:
Material: Color:
Asphalt Shingles Tan or Charcoal, or
Metal Roofing Sage or Green
Synthetic Stucco Tan or Off-White
92
Agenda Item 3
Item # 3 Page 10
Masonry Tan or Brown
Storefront Glass Bronze or Green
Synthetic Stone Tan or Brown.
Further, in order to incorporate consistency among 14 commercial buildings, the guidelines
call for fully or partially pitched roofs or sloping parapets of sufficient height so as to read as
if the roofs were pitched. Flat roofs are discouraged. The intent is to avoid an 18-acre
center, with 14 lots, where all the roofs are flat. The reasons for these guidelines is to avoid
repetitiveness, mitigate the potential box-like appearance of small commercial buildings and
build upon the quality and character of the Police Services Building, a unique structure that
sets a high level of quality for surrounding area.
The proposed building features a pitched roof for over one-half its length. The balance of
the roof features sloping parapets that rise four feet over the roof deck. This allows roof-top
mechanical equipment to be set in the well and be properly screened. Further, Dutch Bros.
Coffee has modified its prototype design. The otherwise heavy use of blue accents,
characteristic of the chain’s prototype, has been reduced in scope.
In compliance with the design guidelines, building features:
• Base Material – Synthetic Stone, Tan
• Field – Synthetic Stucco, Tan/Beige
• Roof – Asphalt Fiberglass Shingles, Black
Staff finds that while the proposed building does not mimic the character elevations that are
illustrated on the 2006 Final Plan, as a Major Amendment, the building sufficiently conforms
to the established guidelines. In addition, by modifying the prototype to a certain degree,
the building satisfied the intent of Section 3.5.3(E)(1).
(6.) Section 3.5.3(E)(2-6,9) – Facades, Entrances, Awnings, Base and Top Treatments
and Illumination Prohibition
As indicated, the building features a distinct base and top. The façade is proportioned.
There are no illumination features that violate the standard.
M. Section 3.6.4 – Transportation Level of Service Requirements
Since this type of use was anticipated with the original approval, no further traffic study is
needed.
4. Neighborhood Information Meeting:
No neighborhood information was held. The meeting was waived per the allowance of Section
2.2.2(A) which allows the Director to determine that the development proposal would not have
significant neighborhood impact. This determination was based on the fact that since initial
neighborhood meetings for the original P.D.P. in 2006, several neighborhood meetings were
93
Agenda Item 3
Item # 3 Page 11
held in conjunction with various development proposals on individual lots. Attendance at these
meetings was sparse. The subject lot is separated from Bucking Horse by a six-lane, major
arterial street, and its development is viewed as a logical build-out of an approved commercial
center and not having any neighborhood impact.
5. Findings of Fact/Conclusion:
In evaluating the request for Dutch Bros. Coffee at Timberline Center, Staff makes the following
findings of fact:
A. The proposal represents a Major Amendment of the approved land use and development
approval of Lot Three, Timberline Center Final Plan.
B. A Drive-Through Restaurant is a permitted use in the Industrial zone, but this use is
qualified as being allowed only if located within a Convenience Shopping Center.
C. Lot Three is contained within a specifically defined Convenience Shopping Center,
consisting of 5.97 acres, per the approved Timberline Center Final Plan, as amended in
2008.
D. The Industrial zone development standards require that, as part of a Convenience
Shopping Center, the Major Amendment is subject to Section 3.5.3 of the General
Development Standards – Institutional, Mixed-Use and Commercial Buildings.
E. The Major Amendment complies with the applicable General Development Standards,
including Section 3.5.3.
F. The Major Amendment complies with the established design guidelines of the Timberline
Center Final Plan.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Board make a motion to approve Dutch Bros.
Coffee at Timberline Center, Major Amendment, #150008, based on the Findings of Fact found
on pages 12 – 13 of the Staff Report.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Project Narrative (PDF)
2. Timberline Center Overall Plan (PDF)
3. Site Plan (PDF)
4. Landscape Plan (PDF)
5. Architectural Elevations (PDF)
6. Rendered Architectural Elevations and Site Plan (PDF)
94
Statement of Planning Objectives Page 1 of 5 Printed: December 17, 2015
Dutch Bros on Timberline
Major Amendment to Timberline Center PUD
Lot 3
Statement of Planning Objectives
Prepared 12/11/2015
By Lee Martin, RLA
Landmark Engineering, Ltd.
Introduction
Dutch Bros is a purveyor of specialty coffees, in addition to smoothies, teas, freezes, energy drinks, and a
few pre‐packaged foods (no food is prepared on site). The brand is targeted primarily to young, active
adults, although the customer base is diverse. Founded as a small push‐cart over twenty years ago in
Oregon, Dutch Bros quickly evolved into a series of small drive‐through coffee stands.
The drive‐through concept is the foundation of the Dutch Bros business model. Many of these are very
small, some less than 400 square feet. All Dutch Bros have a walk‐up service window, and nearly all have
a small outdoor patio seating area for those patrons who prefer to linger over their drinks outside. A total
of two of its two hundred fifty stores allow customers inside the building (these are located in a
downtown area and on a college campus; neither location could support a drive‐through). The company
has learned that the vast majority of its customer base strongly prefers a quick and efficient drive‐through
experience: approximately 80% of Dutch Bros sales are via the drive‐through window, and most of these
are during the morning commute. This coffee delivery system allows Dutch Bros employees to focus on
making outstanding specialty coffee with great customer service, and allows the company to control costs
by minimizing expensive seating areas and maintenance of those areas.
Dutch Bros stands are locally owned and operated franchises. Dutch Bros is unusual in that its franchises
are sold only to company employees once they meet certain qualifications. The applicant, Mr. Nate Frary,
currently owns four Dutch Bros stores in Washington, and is in the process of relocating his family to Fort
Collins. He intends to sell his Washington stores to open a series of Northern Colorado locations,
eventually with multiple locations in Fort Collins. While details have not been finalized, several of
Mr. Frary’s employees intend to relocate to the Fort Collins area to assist with the management and
operation of these stores as they are developed. One store is in the city development approval process in
Loveland, and appears to be set to open in 2016. The Lot 3 store will be the second Dutch Bros in
Northern Colorado owned and operated by the applicant.
1. Statement of appropriate City Plan Principles and Policies achieved by the proposed plan:
• Policy LIV 11.2 – Incorporate Public Spaces:
The entire site layout was based upon creating a visually prominent outdoor space adjacent
to the Bear Mountain Drive / Timberline Road intersection. While details such as benches and
tables have not been determined, the intent is to include these within the patio to make the
space usable.
• Policy LIV 12.1 – Design for Crime Prevention and Security
The building orientation and site design is such that the entire property can be surveilled
from the building.
• Policy LIV 12.2 – Utilize Security Lighting & Landscaping
Plants were selected to minimize potential hiding spots. The intent of the lighting plan is to
provide a consistent lighting solution across the property with minimal glare and/or spillover.
95
Statement of Planning Objectives Page 2 of 5 Printed: December 17, 2015
• Policy LIV 14.2 – Promote Functional Landscape
The landscape design is utilitarian, while attractive. Shrubs and evergreen trees between the
drive‐through lane and Timberline Road were selected and placed to minimize headlight
glare into the public right of way. A row of shrubs along both the southern and western
extents of the parking lot were intended to create a visual separation between the parking lot
and adjacent street. Trees were proposed within parking areas for shade, and within the
center of the drive‐through queuing area to supplement the outdoor seating area concept.
• Policy LIV 14.3 – Design Low Maintenance Landscapes
Areas of irrigated turf are minimized, except where turf was already in place (i.e., along
Timberline Road), and in the center of the queuing area so that the space might be used for
impromptu picnicking.
• Policy LIV 15.1 – Modify Standardized Commercial Architecture
The Dutch Bros prototypical architecture has been modified considerably to suit this
particular piece of property. The table below compares the Dutch Bros approach on a typical
property to the Timberline Center Lot 3 property.
Traditional Approach Lot 3 Approach
Drive‐Through Two 13’ width drive‐through
lanes (one on each side of
building)
One 10’ width drive‐through lane
(on side of building away from
Timberline Road)
Building Façade
Materials & Colors
Consistent light gray painted
plywood or stucco, with bright
blue trim.
White and tan stucco, with
synthetic stone masonry
wainscot. The bright blue trim is
proposed to remain as part of
brand identity.
Roof Material &
Colors
Bright blue metal roof to act as a
visual anchor within a city
streetscape. Roof‐mounted
mechanical equipment is normally
exposed.
Charcoal gray roof materials to
conform to the surrounding
aesthetic. Roof‐mounted
mechanical equipment will be
screened by a parapet wall.
Outdoor Seating &
Service
A small outdoor seating area
(<150 SF) can be offered adjacent
to the front building elevation
order window, depending on the
size of the property and layout.
Few amenities, other than a small
picnic table, are provided.
The seating area is prominently
displayed along the front and
right elevation, and at about 675
SF is considerably larger. Final
details are to be determined,
although the patio is likely to
Statement of Planning Objectives Page 3 of 5 Printed: December 17, 2015
• Policy LIV 15.2 – Seek Compatibility with Surrounding Development
The proposed building architecture is intended to fit within the Timberline Center design
standards while reflecting the Dutch Bros brand.
• Policy LIV 30.3 – Improve Pedestrian and Bicycle Access
A sidewalk was added parallel to the private drive along the west property line of Lot 3,
connecting the Big O Tires lot to Bear Mountain Drive.
• Policy LIV 30.4 – Reduce Visual Impacts of Parking
The parking was located to the rear (west) of the property to maximize the separation
between the parking lot and Timberline Road.
2. Description of proposed open space, wetlands, natural habitats and features, landscaping,
circulation, transition areas, and associated buffering on site and in the general vicinity of the
project.
Lot 3 of Timberline Center is located at the northwest corner of Bear Mountain Drive and
Timberline Road. Timberline Road is an arterial street. Bear Mountain Drive is a collector street.
Timberline Center is partially built out. All of the public streets have been constructed, utilities are
in, and all lots have been overlot graded. Several lots have been developed. No open space,
wetlands, or natural features exist within Timberline Center.
A stormwater detention pond designed to accommodate most of the drainage from Lot 3 is north
of the northeast corner of the property. Most of this pond is irrigated turf.
Timberline Road forms the west boundary of the site. All landscaping within Timberline Road is
complete. This includes a turf tree lawn and four Bur Oaks in good condition.
Bear Mountain Drive forms the south boundary. Landscaping within Bear Mountain is also
complete, with a turf tree lawn and four Redmond Lindens in good condition.
Big O Tire is immediately north of Lot 3. The Big O Tire building was completed in October 2015. A
pedestrian walk connecting the Big O parking lot to Timberline Road forms much of the north
property line.
An unnamed private drive forms the west property boundary. This drive has a curb and gutter and
is paved, but was not landscaped adjacent to Lot 3.
The Bucking Horse / Sidehill neighborhood is east of Timberline Road, across from Lot 3. The
nearest residential property (as measured in Google Earth) is about one hundred sixty feet from the
proposed Dutch Bros building.
3. Statement of proposed ownership and maintenance of public and private open space areas;
applicant’s intentions with regard to future ownership of all or portions of the project
development plan:
The property will be owned and maintained by the applicant, although a portion of the existing turf
along the west Timberline Road right of way may continue to be maintained by the property
owner’s association.
4. Estimate of number of employees:
Approximately ten employees are anticipated when the store is fully operational. A typical shift will
be two or three employees, depending on the day and season.
5. Description of rationale behind the assumptions and choices made by the applicant:
97
Statement of Planning Objectives Page 4 of 5 Printed: December 17, 2015
Once the decision was made to invest in Fort Collins, the Lot 3 property was selected for its
proximity to (and visibility from) Timberline Road, the potential number of customers within
reasonable walking distance (i.e., Bucking Horse, the Fort Collins Police Station, other Timberline
Center businesses), basic infrastructure already in place (water, sewer, access, etc.), and favorable
zoning. Other Fort Collins locations were evaluated at a preliminary level, but it was believed that
the Lot 3 property would be ideal.
The building’s location at the southeast corner of the property made the most sense concerning
visibility, particularly with regard to at least coming close to the “build‐to” line along Timberline
Road. It should be noted that the building is very close to the eastern extent of the building
envelope. Grading and drainage constraints, especially maintaining the same basin sizes identified
within the master drainage plan for Timberline Center, make pushing the building further west
problematic. In addition, the building’s location allowed the drive‐through lane to play a very minor
role architecturally as viewed from Timberline Road. The drive‐through window itself will not be
visible from Timberline Road.
The building’s orientation – rotated about 30° from an east‐west axis – solved two problems. First,
the patio could be located along the southeastern and southwestern building elevations. In addition
to their visual prominence from Timberline Road, these orientations are most desirable for
capturing morning sun and using the building as a windbreak. Second, the drive‐through functioned
much more effectively with the building rotated, as there are no sharp turns in the drive‐through
lane.
Access to the property relied on two curb cuts already in place. One of these was from the
unnamed private drive along the west property line. This 24’ width curb cut is to remain
unchanged, and will be the primary point of vehicular access to the property. The second point of
access is an internal connection to the new Big O Tire store to the north. Because the Big O Tire
parking lot lane immediately adjacent to the Dutch Bros northern access point was constructed at
only a 20’ width, the curb and gutter east of the existing ramp is to be removed so that this access
can be widened to 24’, and therefore function as intended in the approved Timberline Center PUD.
In addition, the curb and gutter constructed on the property line between Lots 2 and 3 will be
removed to provide the connection between the two lots. It should be noted that we do not expect
the internal connection between parking lots to be used as a fire access lane. There is a fire hydrant
to remain in place at the southwestern corner of Lot 3, and we believe that the fire department
would be most likely to use Bear Mountain Drive to access the proposed Dutch Bros building.
From a vehicular standpoint, it made the most sense to have parking along the western and
southern property lines. While not immediately adjacent to the walk‐up window, the accessible
parking is less than a sixty foot walk from the walk‐up window.
Finally, it should be noted that the trash enclosure had been proposed near the northwest corner
of the site on the concept review drawing. As design development progressed, the enclosure was
moved to the east side of the same parking aisle. This change was made to resolve drainage
concerns adjacent to the existing drain inlet at the northwest corner of the property, and to avoid
water and sewer service lines going to the Big O Tire building to the north.
6. Evidence of successful completion of the applicable criteria:
Not applicable.
7. Narrative description of how conflicts between land uses or disturbances to wetlands, natural
habitats and features and/or wildlife are being avoided to the maximum extent feasible or are
mitigated:
98
Statement of Planning Objectives Page 5 of 5 Printed: December 17, 2015
Not applicable. The project site was overlot graded with the initial infrastructure improvements to
the Timberline Center.
8. Neighborhood meeting narrative:
Not applicable. The requirement for a neighborhood meeting was waived.
9. Name of the project as well as any previous name the project may have had during Conceptual
Review:
This application is called “Major Amendment to Timberline Center PUD.” The project has been
alternatively referred to as “2039 South Timberline Road,” “Dutch Bros Coffee on Timberline,” or
just “Dutch Bros.”
10. Parking narrative describing the parking demand generated with consideration of: the number of
employees, tenants, and/or patrons; the amount and location of parking provided; where
anticipated spillover parking will occur; and, any other considerations regarding vehicle parking:
Parking on the property should be adequate. Given the fast food use, the minimum parking
required in Fort Collins is five spaces, based on seven spaces per thousand square feet and a
building area of seven hundred twenty square feet. The parking maximum is fifteen spaces per
thousand square feet, plus an additional twenty percent for lack of shared parking, which comes to
thirteen spaces. The typical employee shift will be two or three employees on shift at any given
time. Past experience suggests that about 80% of Dutch Bros customers will use the drive‐through,
and will not park on the property. The remaining parking lot spaces on site are expected to
accommodate any potential rush.
It should be noted that the drive‐through stacking lane is designed to accommodate an additional
nine full‐size vehicles without affecting parking lot circulation. In the event that the drive‐through
lane overflows, at least nine more vehicles could be stacked on private property without affecting
public right of way. Based on past experience, we believe this scenario to be very unlikely.
99
100
101
102
103
104
Agenda Item 4
Item # 4 Page 1
STAFF REPORT March 8, 2016
Planning and Zoning Board
PROJECT NAME
HOME 2 SUITES AT HARMONY VILLAGE, P.D.P., #PDP150031
STAFF
Ted Shepard, Chief Planner
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a P.D.P. for a four-story, 108-room hotel located on
Lot 11A of the Harmony Village shopping center. The building would
contain 64,862 square feet. There would be 106 parking spaces, 88 of
which exist as part of the overall shopping center. On the west side of the
site, 18 new spaces would be constructed. The site is vacant and located
between Cinemark Movie Theatre and Texas Roadhouse Restaurant.
Harmony Village is designated by the Harmony Corridor Plan as a
Community Shopping Center. The zoning is H-C, Harmony Corridor.
APPLICANT: Mr. Justin Mabey
East Avenue
1001 Cypress Creek Road, Suite 203
Cedar Park, TX 78613
OWNER: Riverside Pikesville Associates, LLC
9595 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 700
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. Lot 11A, between Cinemark and Texas Roadhouse, is the last vacant parcel in the Harmony
Village shopping center, a Mixed-Use Activity Center per the Harmony Corridor Plan.
B. Lodging Establishments are both anticipated by the Harmony Corridor Plan for Mixed-Use
Activity Centers and are a permitted use per the Harmony Corridor zone district. Within a
Community Shopping Center, Lodging Establishments are not considered a secondary use
limited to 25% of a development plan.
C. The P.D.P. complies with the applicable General Development Standards of Article Three.
105
Agenda Item 4
Item # 4 Page 2
Comments:
1. Background:
A. The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
N: H-C Texas Roadhouse Restaurant
S: H-C Cinemark Movie Theatre
E: H-C Old Chicago Restaurant, Schrader’s Country Store
W: H-C Multi-Tenant Commercial, Industrial, Business Services
106
Agenda Item 4
Item # 4 Page 3
The property was annexed and zoned in 1989. In 1993, the parcel was included in the 74-acre
Harmony Crossing Overall Development Plan which included the Harmony Crossing residential
neighborhood to the south.
The 33-acre Preliminary P.U.D. was approved in November of 1998 as a Community-scaled shopping
center in accordance with the Amended Harmony Corridor Plan. The Final P.U.D. was approved in
February of 1999.
A Replat affecting Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 11 and 12 was approved in June of 2000. This Replat
created Lot 11A, the subject parcel.
In 2001, a Major Amendment was approved allowing a change of use from Assisted Living Center to
Medical Office Buildings on Lot 9, south of Wilmington Drive.
2. Compliance with Harmony Corridor Plan:
The Harmony Corridor Plan generally divides the area between:
• Basic Industrial Non-Retail Employment Activity Center (BINREAC)
• Mixed-Use Activity Center (MUAC)
The southwest corner of Harmony Road and Timberline Road was designated as a Mixed-Use Activity
Center – Community Shopping Center on the original Harmony Corridor Plan and all subsequent
amendments.
With regard to Lodging Establishments, the Harmony Corridor Plan identifies “Hotels/Motels” as
acceptable secondary uses in the BINREAC. The Plan then goes on to describe the MUAC as follows:
“Locate a broader range of land uses in areas for the Harmony Corridor known as Mixed-Use
Activity Centers as shown on the Land Use Map. The Mixed-Use Activity Center provides, in
addition to the uses listed in the Basic Industrial and Non-Retail Employment Activity Center, a
variety of retail and commercial uses in shopping centers.”
“The Plan provides for a range of retail, non-retail and residential uses to occur in the Mixed-Use
Activity Centers, including shopping centers which satisfy the consumer demands of residents
and employees who live and work in the adjacent surrounding neighborhoods, as well as from
the community and region.”
The Plan goes on to define a Community Shopping Center as follows:
“A shopping and service center located in a complex that is planned and developed as a unit,
and intended to serve consumer demands from the residents and employees who live and work
in the adjacent surrounding neighborhoods, as well as from the community as a whole. A
community shopping center provides, in addition to the convenience goods of a neighborhood
service center, a wider range of facilities for the sale of goods, such as (but not limited to) food,
books apparel and furniture. Multi-family residential, as well as non-retail employment
generating uses (such as professional offices) may be located amongst the retail component of
the center.”
Based on these policies and definitions, the placement of a hotel within an existing Community
Shopping Center is in compliance with the vision for the Harmony Corridor.
107
Agenda Item 4
Item # 4 Page 4
3. Compliance with Applicable Harmony Corridor Zone District Standards:
Lodging Establishments are a permitted use in the H-C zone, subject to review by the Planning and
Zoning Board [(4.26(B)(3)(c)]. Although Lodging Establishments are also listed as a secondary use, this
status is only applicable if the use were located within the BINREAC. By being located within a
Community Shopping Center, and within a MUAC, the requirement for being only 25% of a primary use
development plan does not apply [4.26(D)(2)].
The four-story building is below the maximum allowable height of six stories [4.26(D)(3)(a)].
As mentioned, Lot 11A is part of the 33-acre Harmony Village shopping center which is characterized by
an integrated pattern of streets (Delaney Drive and Wilmington Drive), outdoor spaces, building styles
and land uses [4.26(E)(2)(a)].
4. Compliance with Applicable General Development Standards:
A. Section 3.2.1(C )(D) – Landscaping and Tree Protection
The parking lot on the east side of the lot was developed and landscaped as part of the overall
shopping center. The building pad and the west parking lot will be developed with this P.D.P. and
includes new landscaping primarily along the south side of the building. Five street trees will be
planted on the north side of the east – west drive aisle that separates the hotel from Texas
Roadhouse. Foundation shrubs are provided except at entries and the two patios.
With regard to mitigation, two existing trees will be removed on the north side of the Cinemark
Theatre to be mitigated by seven Ornamental Trees at 3-inches in caliper.
B. Section 3.2.1(E)(4)(a) – Parking Lot Perimeter Landscaping
The new westerly parking lot will be screened from the abutting commercial property by a continuous
row of trees and shrubs including eight Evergreen Trees.
C. Section 3.2.1(E)(5) – Parking Lot Interior Landscaping
The new westerly parking lot exceeds the minimum required 6% interior landscaping in the form of
islands which complies with the required minimum for lots with less than 100 spaces.
D. Section 3.2.2(B) – Access, Circulation and Parking
The parking lots and internal private drives are established. The existing cross-access to the
abutting commercial property to the west will remain. The shopping center will continue to allow all
users to randomly park on any available space despite the center being platted into individual lots.
One new east-west access drive will be constructed between the proposed hotel and Texas
Roadhouse creating a vehicle connection, with sidewalk, between the existing parking and proposed
parking lots.
E. Section 3.2.2(C)(4) – Bicycle Parking
A hotel is required to provide a minimum of one bike parking space per four units with 60% being
enclosed and 40% in an exterior fixed rack. With 108 rooms, a total of 27 spaces are required with
108
Agenda Item 4
Item # 4 Page 5
16 enclosed and 11 in fixed racks. The P.D.P. provides at total of 28 spaces with 16 enclosed and
12 in fixed racks in compliance with the standard.
F. Section 3.2.2(C)(5) – Walkways
Walkways will surround the building and tie into existing walks that serve Cinemark and Texas
Roadhouse. Cross walks are provided at the drives.
G. Section 3.2.2(C )(6) – Direct On-Site Access to Pedestrian and Bicycle Destinations
As mentioned, the proposed walkways will tie into the existing shopping center network. This allow
for access both to the north and south (Cinemark, Texas Roadhouse and Macaroni Grill) as well as
east-west (Old Chicago, Schrader’s Country Store and other miscellaneous business and service
establishments).
H. Section 3.2.2(J) – Setbacks for Vehicular Use Areas
The new parking lot is setback from the west property line by ten feet in excess of the minimum
required five feet.
I. Section 3.2.2(K)(3) – Parking Lots – Minimum/Maximum Number of Spaces
A Lodging Establishment is required to have no less than 0.5 spaces per unit and no more than
1.0/spaces per unit. The P.D.P. includes 108 rooms with 106 spaces for a ratio of .98 spaces per
room which complies with the standard.
J. Section 3.2.4 – Site Lighting
Both the parking lot pole lighting and building-mounted lighting will be fully shielded and down-
directional. The lighting under the porte cochere will be recessed with flush-mount and flat lens
fixtures to minimize the glare of the light source.
K. Section 3.5.1(B)(C)(E)(F) – Building and Project Compatibility
This standard requires that the hotel demonstrate a level of compatibility with the Harmony Village
shopping center. The shopping center, however, is mostly characterized by a variety of one story
commercial and medical office buildings where the degree of design cohesion is not strong. The one
notable exception to the overall mass and height found in the center is the Cinemark Theatre to the
south which acts as the entertainment anchor for the center.
While the proposed hotel and existing movie theatre roughly equivalent in size (Home 2 Suites – 64,
862 square feet and Cinemark – 54,965 square feet) they are dissimilar in mass and shape. As a
result, the hotel makes an effort to blend in within the contextual area mostly by use of materials and
colors. For example:
• Distinctive Base: The east elevation features local stone (Loveland Buff Sandstone) up to the
top of the second floor. This stone wraps around portions of both the north and south elevations
up to the top of the first floor. Columns for the porte cochere and patio overhangs will match.
• Distinctive Middle: The building field will be synthetic stucco (E.I.F.S.) and be divided among four
separate colors, all being neutral earth tones.
109
Agenda Item 4
Item # 4 Page 6
• Distinctive Top: The top floor windows feature matching stone headers and the rooflines are
relieved by two types of cornices with varying dimensions designed to create effective shadow
lines.
These features are intended to demonstrate compatibility with the surrounding commercial area. In
order for the building to create an individual presence, however, the following features and accents
are provided:
• A vertical element, that projects off the wall plane, extends from grade to above the parapet, and
is featured on both the east and west elevations. On the east elevation, next to the main
entrance and porte cochere, this tower is colored light green tone as to highlight the accent
feature. On the west elevation, the color is a more subdued gray tone. Vertical relief is provided
by four reveals that align with each story.
• Horizontal relief is provided by a recessed building bay located midpoint along both north and
south elevations.
• Columns and overhangs call attention to the entrances and patios.
• The top of the east elevation is capped by a cubed-shaped accent feature, measuring 4’ 3” in
height, 10’ 9” in width and 12’ 11” in length. This rooftop element is designed to finish and tie
together all the accent features on the front elevation.
With locally sourced stone and synthetic stucco painted in neutral colors, the materials are those that
are found throughout the shopping center and in the Harmony Corridor. The accent features are
mostly relegated to the front elevation in a manner that is compatible with center. Overall, the
building generally conforms to its surrounding context in compliance with the standard, and is at an
appropriate scale for a Community Shopping Center as defined by the Harmony Corridor Plan.
L. Section 3.5.1(G) – Building Height Review
While six stories are allowed for non-residential buildings in the Harmony Corridor zone, buildings
over 40 feet are to be reviewed by two General Development standards.
The purpose of the standard states:
• To encourage creativity and diversity of architecture and site design within a context of
harmonious neighborhood planning and coherent environmental design;
• To protect access to sunlight;
• To preserve desirable views;
• To define and reinforce downtown and designated activity centers.
The height of the building is summarized as follows:
50 feet, 6 inches to top of the primary parapet;
56 feet, 4 inches to the top of the east and west tower component;
62 feet, 10 inches to the top of the parapet of the cube feature on the east elevation.
110
Agenda Item 4
Item # 4 Page 7
(1.) Light and Shadow
A shadow analysis was provided and simulates the shadowing at two times per day (9:00 a.m.
and 3:00 p.m.) at three times per year during a 90-day timeframe (November 7th, December 21st
and February 7th). The analysis reveals that for the 3:00 p.m. condition on all three dates, there
is partial to full shadowing of Texas Roadhouse with the December 21st condition being the most
acute. This standard states the following:
o Buildings greater than 40 feet in height shall be designed so as not to have substantial
adverse impact on the distribution of natural and artificial light on adjacent public and
private property;
o Adverse impacts include, but are not limited to, casting shadows on adjacent property
sufficient to preclude the functional use of solar energy;
o Creating glare such as reflecting sunlight or artificial lighting at night;
o Contributing to the accumulation of snow and ice; and
o Shading windows or gardens for more than three months of the year.
As can be seen by the purpose statement and the review criteria, the fundamental intent of the
standard is to consider a broad range of issues associated with buildings over 40 feet. Staff
interprets the standard such that the shadowing of a commercial property within a shopping
center is not on par with issues related to neighborhood compatibility and impacts on houses.
For example, with a commercial property, there are no people residing, there are no living room
or bedroom windows and there are no backyards and gardens. While snow and ice
accumulation is a factor, removal is a typical operational aspect of commercial property
management that is usually budgeted for and accounted as a fixed cost of doing business in our
climate. Staff finds that while there is indeed an impact on December 21st, this impact is not
substantial or adverse as it relates to a commercial restaurant in a shopping center.
(2.) Privacy
There are no privacy issues with a commercial property such as a restaurant.
M. Section 3.2.3(E) - Shading
This standard states that buildings be located and designed so as to not cast a shadow onto
structures on adjacent property greater than the shadow which would be cast by a 25-foot
hypothetical wall located along the property line between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. MST, on
December 21st.
An exhibit has been submitted describing this condition. A side-by-side comparison of the
shadowing caused by the angle of the sun at 3:00 p.m. and the 25-foot high hypothetical wall at the
property line on December 21st shows that the shadowing is equivalent under two scenarios. With
the various heights of the proposed hotel, the impact on Texas Roadhouse is practically equal to that
of the 25-foot high hypothetical wall. Staff concludes that at the proposed height and the resulting
shadows, the P.D.P. complies with the Shading standard.
N. Section 3.6.4 – Transportation Level of Service Requirements
The trip generation for a 108-room hotel is roughly comparable to other uses (such as retail,
restaurant, offices, business services, etc.) that were expected to occupy the shopping center at the
111
Agenda Item 4
Item # 4 Page 8
time of its initial approval. The shopping center is served by existing public improvements including
a signalized intersection at Timberline Road. Access to the center is gained on all four sides.
Consequently, a Transportation Impact Study was not required for the P.D.P.
In terms of internal circulation, however, the location of the porte cochere was reviewed so that the
alignment of the north-south drive that serves the entire center would not be impacted.
5. Neighborhood Information Meeting:
No neighborhood information was held. The meeting was waived per the allowance of Section 2.2.2(A)
which allows the Director to determine that the development proposal would not have significant
neighborhood impact. This determination was based on the fact that the Harmony Crossing
neighborhood to the south is separated from the P.D.P. by a medical office park and the Cinemark
Theatre, and the proposed development is viewed as a logical build-out of an existing shopping center
that does not have any neighborhood impact.
6. Findings of Fact/Conclusion:
In evaluating the request for Home 2 Suites at Harmony Village P.D.P., Staff makes the following
findings of fact:
A. The P.D.P. represents the build-out and complies with the expectation of the land use and
scale of an approved Harmony Corridor Mixed-Use Activity Center - Community Shopping
Center.
B. Lodging Establishments are both anticipated by Harmony Corridor Plan for Mixed-Use
Activity Centers and are a permitted use per the Harmony Corridor zone district. Within a
Community Shopping Center, Lodging Establishments are not considered a secondary use
limited to 25% of a development plan.
C. The P.D.P. complies with the applicable General Development Standards of Article Three.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Board make a motion to approve Home 2 Suites at
Harmony Village, P.D.P., #150031, based on the Findings of Fact on page 10 of the Staff Report.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Planning Objectives (PDF)
2. Rendered Site Plan (PDF)
3. Architectural Elevations - North (Side) and West (Rear) (PDF)
4. Architectural Elevations East (Front) & South (Side) (PDF)
5. Photo Simulation - East Elevation (PDF)
6. Citizen Letter (PDF)
112
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Home2 Suites at Harmony Village
Project Development PlanStatement of Planning Objectives
Project Description & Introduction
Homes2 Suites at Harmony Village is proposed to be built on a 1.85 acre site, Lot 11A of the Harmony
Village PUD. Currently there are no existing structures built on the site however the subject property
does have an existing 98 car parkinglot which allows for shared vehicular access drives and cross
parking which are currently used by other adjacent uses within the Harmony Village PUD. The
Harmony Village PUD is located at the southwest intersection of the Harmony & Timberline Roads. Lot
11A is specifically located north ofthe Cinemark Theater and south of the Texas Roadhouse Restaurant.
The Harmony Village PUD is a commercial, retailand entertainment development consisting of a movie
theater, bank, restaurants, office, and miscellaneous retail uses. Harmony Village PUD is bounded by
Harmony Road on the north, Timberline Road on the east, Harmony Crossing subdivision on the south
and Union Pacific Railroad to the west. The site is zoned HC-Harmony Corridor. Two major points of
vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle access to the site currently exist. Delany Drive provides access to the
site for travelers heading east and west bound along Harmony Road. For those traveling north or
south along Timberline Drive there is a signalized intersection at Timberwood Drive which provides
access to the site via Delany Drive.
The applicant believes the 1.85 acre site is ideally suited for extended stay lodging and is proposing to
build a Home2 Suites by Hilton Hotels on the site. Lodging is a permitted use within the HC-Harmony
Corridor Zoning District. Home2 Suites by Hilton is an innovative mid-scale, all-suite extended stay
hotel thoughtfully designed for savvy, sophisticated, cost-conscious travelers that may be staying only
a few nights or for several months. Designed with comfort and convenience in mind visitors will find a
world of complimentary amenities at the Harmony Village location. Such amenities include expansive
community spaces, fitness center and an outdoor heated pool and patio. Home2 Suites hotels are pet
friendly which comes in handy especially in a dog friendly community like Fort Collins. The Developer
believesthat the continual rise in market demand for extended stay mid-scale lodging opportunities
combined with the current mix of Dining,Entertainment and Employmentwithin the Harmony Village
PUD and the surrounding area makes this site ideal for a Home2 Suites Hotel. The proposed Home2
Suites property is also conveniently located approximately 500 feet south of the Transfort Route #16
Transit Route which serves the East Harmony Road Employment Corridor with easy access to the South
Fort Collins Transit Center and Fossil Ridge High School.With this new Home2 Suites Hotel being
located within the Harmony Corridor it can be expected to further foster the overall goals and
objectives of the Harmony Corridor Master Plan.
Attachment 1
113
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Development Proposal
The Home2 Suites Hotel is proposed as a four (4) story structure containing 108 guest rooms and will
be fully fire sprinkled. The site will provide a total of 106 parking spaces (88 existing spaces and 18
proposed spaces) all located entirely on-site. The hotel has a ground floor area of approximately
17,387 square feet and a total building square footage of approximately 64,862 square feet. The
hotels main entrance will be located on the east side of the building and will provide aPorte Cochere
for loading and unloading of guests. The existing parking lot located on the east side of the site with 88
parking spaces will accommodate the majority of the hotel guests while 18 additional parking spaces
will be developed on the west side of the building along with a new 24 foot wide access drive
shallprovide vehicular connectivity and Emergency Access to the existing adjacent properties both
north and south of the proposed hotel site. Pedestrian and vehicle connectivity shallalso be provided
from the existing parking lot on the east side of the hotel to the proposed west parking area via a
permeable paver and concrete access drive located on the north side of the hotel. A portion of this
north access drive has also been designed to serve as access for Emergency Vehicles. Thesite lies
within the McClelland drainage basin and generally slopes and drains from west to east. The fully
developed the site will continue to drain from west to east through a series of proposed LID basins
which during large storm events will then discharge as surface flow and be shall be conveyed to an
existing detention pond located along the far east side of the Harmony Village PUD adjacent to
Timberline Road. For additional information regarding site drainage see the attached Storm Drainage
Report. JR Engineering has also provided a Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis which demonstrates that
the existing 8 inch Sanitary Sewer located on the west side of the subject property has the residual
capacity necessary to carry the expected flows from the Home2 Suites hotel development. For
additional information regarding the Off-Site Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis see the previously
submitted report dated 08/04/2015.
Property Ownership and Development Phasing
x Current Property Owner:
Riverside Pikesville Associates, LLC
9595 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 700
Beverly Hills, California 89021
x East Avenue Development,LLC is currently under contract to purchase the property and will
serve as the Developer, Owner and Operator of the proposed Home2 Suites Hotel facility.
x Proposed Developer, Owner & Operator:
East Avenue Development,LLC
Justin Maybe
1001 Cypress Creek Road
Cedar Park, Texas 78613
x The Home2 Suites project will be developed in a single phase. Construction is expected to
begin Late Summer/Fall of 2016 with completion expected in the Fall of 2017.
Attachment 1
114
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
JR Engineering is serving as East Avenue Development’s (the applicant)Planning and
Engineering Consultant and is submitting the PreliminaryProject Development
Planapplication with the full knowledge and consent of the current property owner
(Riverside Pikesville Associates, LLC).
Conceptual Review
x The proposed development had a Conceptual Review Meeting on July 20, 2015.
x The design concern brought up during the Conceptual Review was the build-to requirements of
the Land Use code. The nature of a Memory Care facility requires a drop off area at the front of
the building which limits the ability to push the building up toward the street as required by the
code. In further discussions with the planning department and some site design changes a
consensus was reached that with the proposed pedestrian amenities, this design is an
acceptable exception to the required build-to standard.
x The original design showed an emergency access only drive exiting onto Ziegler Road. The
planning department requested that the fire department consider alternative designs. The civil
engineer on the project met with Poudre Fire Authority and they discussed the current
proposal, which provides an emergency access easement to the northern property line. When
the site to the north develops, a connection could be made to provide a through fire access
drive.
Design Rationale
x Site Design - The site is designed to orient the main entry toward Timberline Road. The east
facing entry will providegood exposure for the drop-off area and weather protection for guest
and visitors. The site is designed with a shared access drive on the east side of the hotel that
connects to existing developments north and south of the site. Additionally there is also a
north/south access drive that will be developed on the west side of the building as well that will
connect to the existing drives.The front entry and drop off area has been designed to allow
vehicles to return to the parking area east of the main hotel entry and a drive connection on
the north side of the hotel shall connect the parking areas on both the east and west sides of
the hotel.
x Existing Site Features - No existing natural features or wetlands exist on-site and all existing on-
site trees will remain and shall be protected during the construction of the hotel and its
facilities.
x Pedestrian Access - The site has been designed with extensive pedestrian sidewalks with
enhanced pedestrian crosswalks that are direct and safe. The pedestrian walkways will
encourage pedestrian connectivity to the existing uses and developments located north and
south of the hotel site.
x Building Services – Service locations have been placed on the west side of the hotel site in an
area farthest from the public right-of-way and away from the main entry of the hotel and other
Attachment 1
115
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
adjacent uses. Trash and Recycling is provided along the west side of the property and is
screened with screed with both a 6 foot high masonry wall with metal gates and appropriate
landscape material.
x Onsite Low Impact Design Stormwater Management is proposed and has been incorporated
into the overall landscape design.
x The building is a three story structure that is compatible with the surrounding area. The
building is an appropriate size for the site and is in character with the use and the surrounding
developments. The materials and colors proposed have been selected to be regionally
compatible with the south Fort Collins area.
x Building and Project Compatibility - Section 3.5.1 of the City’s Land Use Code requires that the physical
and operational characteristics of the proposed buildings and their uses be compatible with the context
of the surrounding area. The proposed development, we believe can be determined to be compatible
based upon the existing business and commercial uses in close proximity to the site.
x Architectural Character - The architectural character of the existing Harmony Village developments to
the north and south of the proposed Home2 Suites hotel along with the existing uses within the PVH
Health Care South Campus east of Timberline Road have influenced the design of the Home2
Suiteshotel with its blending of materials and colors.
x Building Size, Height, Bulk, Mass and Scale - The proposed building’s size, height, mass, and scale of the
Home2 Suites hotel are all integral to the intended use as well as adding to the commercial
neighborhood’s scale, character and overall material quality.
x Building Materials - Home2 Suites shall incorporate commonly used building construction materials for
the project. Similar building forms, architectural detailing, color and texture, will be used in order to
enhance the overall architectural experience in the Harmony Village Development and the surrounding
area.
o Glare: Building materials will not create excessive glare. No highly reflective building materials
are proposed, such as aluminum, unpainted metal or highly reflective glass.
o Building Color: Wall color shades are intended to be neutral. The color shades of building
materials shall draw from the range of color shades that already exist in the region (locally
quarried stone) and the surrounding natural environment.
x Building Height -The height of the proposed building will be compliant with building heights allowed by
the City’s code in the HC- Harmony Corridor Zoning District. The impact of this project on access to
sunlight and on desirable views has been considered. No undesirable effects are anticipated by the
proposed height or placement of the hotel building.
Neighborhood Meeting
x No Neighborhood Meeting was required for the Project.
Attachment 1
116
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Home2 Suites at Harmony Village
City Plan Principles & Policies
Home2 Suites at Harmony Village Project Development Plan (PDP) is supported by the following City
Plan Principles and Policies as found in City Plan Fort Collins adopted February 15, 2011.
The Principles and Policies achieved by the proposed Home2 Suites development are as follows:
Economic Health
EH 1.1 – Support Job Creation:
Home2 Suites at Harmony Village will provide approximately 20to 25 skilled labor and
professional jobs to the Fort Collins community. These jobs will support the economic health of
the community.
EH 3.1 – Support Programs Emphasizing Local Business:
Providing extended stay hotel facilities like the Home2 Suites project allow visitors to Fort
Collins and their families to stay in Fort Collins rather than look for extended stay services
outside of the community.
Environmental Health
ENV 8.3 - Employ a Citywide Approach &
ENV 8.6 – Prevent Pollution:
Providing the unique extended stay services offered by the Home2 Suites project has the
potential to reduce emissions by keeping visitors and their family members from traveling
outside the city to get the services they need.
ENV 19.2 – Pursue Low Impact Development:
This project will meet the City’s Low Impact Development (LID) requirements to minimize the
impact of the development on urban watersheds.
ENV 20.2 – Follow Design Criteria for Stormwater Facilities:
Home2 Suites at Harmony Village utilizes Best Management Practices (BMPs). The site specific
BMPs proposed includes permeable interlocking concrete pavers, bioswales, and an extended
storwater detention to promote stormwater infiltration and enhanced water quality treatment.
Community and Neighborhood Livability
Attachment 1
117
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
LIV 5.4 – Contribute to Public Amenities:
The site development for this project includes public facilities adjacent the site including ADA
accessible pedestrian amenities, landscaped tree lined pedestrian walks, and site amenities
available to hotel guests.
LIV 6.2 – Seek Compatibility with Neighborhoods &
LIV 6.3 – Encourage Introduction ofNeighborhood-Related, Non-Residential Development:
This project is compatible with the surrounding area in use and intensitybased upon the
existing business, commercial use and residences in close proximity to the site. The building
design is compatible with other nearby commercial developments.
LIV 10.1 – Design Safe, Functional, and Visually Appealing Streets &
LIV 10.2 – Incorporate Street Trees
LIV 10.5 – Retrofit Existing Streetscapes:
Harmony Village will be enhanced with the addition of trees, landscaping and by strategically
placing pedestrian entry points near building entrances. The proposed landscape design will
greatly improve the visual quality and character of the existing Harmony Village development
as viewed from the surrounding uses, pedestrian ways, and vehicles passing by.
LIV 12.1 – Design for Crime Prevention and Security &
LIV 12.2 – Utilize Security Lighting and Landscaping:
The landscape and lighting for the project is designed with security in mind. The lighting layout
provides visibility in areas with additional security needs like parking areas and on pedestrian
walkways. The landscape plan is designed to avoid hidden area and to promote visibility over
and across landscape areas
LIV 14.1 – Encourage Unique Landscape Features &
LIV 14.2 – Promote Functional Landscape &
LIV 14.3 – Design Low Maintenance Landscapes:
The landscape design is centered on providing a reasonably maintainable, safe and natural
living environment for the guests of the Home2 Suites facility. More than half the planting
areas consist of low and very low water use plant materials. Lawns have been confined to areas
of high visual impact. Landscaping has been designed to be very functional, especially in areas
where stormwater management and LID measures are implemented
LIV 15.2 – Seek Compatibility with Surrounding Development:
Home2 Suites at Harmony Village is compatible with the surrounding area in use and
intensitybased upon the existing business, commercial use and residences in close proximity to
Attachment 1
118
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
the site. The building design is compatible with other commercial developments within the
Harmony Village development as well as those developments in the surrounding area.
LIV 30.1 – Provide a Balanced Circulation System &
LIV 30.3 – Improve Pedestrian and Bicycle Access &
LIV 30.4 – Reduce Visual Impacts of Parking:
Home2 Suites at Harmony Village includes public pedestrian improvements, improved access to
surrounding developments and buffers parking areas from adjacent properties. Bicycle parking
is provided at both entrances, which are connected by private onsite sidewalks to the public
sidewalks.
LIV 31.2 – Site Layout and Building Orientation &
LIV 31.4 – Design for Pedestrian Activity &
The primary entrance of the Home2 Suites hotel is oriented to the east and towards pedestrian
areas and provides enhanced pedestrian connections to the existing restaurant and
entertainment uses within the Harmony Village development.
LIV 38.3 –Land Use Transitions
This project is within the HC-Harmony Corridor zoning district.
With the Home2 Suites Hotel being located within the Harmony Corridor it can be expected to
further foster the overall goals and objectives of the Harmony Corridor Master Plan.
With the continual rise in market demand for extended stay mid-scale lodging opportunities
combined with the current mix of existing Dining, Entertainment and Employmentwithin the
Harmony Village PUD and the surrounding Harmony Corridor this site ideal for a Home2 Suites
Hotel. The proposed Home2 Suites property is also conveniently located approximately 500
feet south of the Transfort Route #16 Transit Route which serves the East Harmony Road
Employment Corridor with easy access to the South Fort Collins Transit Center and Fossil Ridge
High School.
Safety and Wellness
SW 1.5 - Maintain Public Safety through Design:
Home2 Suites at Harmony Village is designed with security in mind. The lighting layout
provides visibility in areas with additional security needs such as parking areas and on
pedestrian walkways. The landscape plan is designed to avoid hidden area and to promote
visibility across the site.
Attachment 1
119
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Transportation
T 3.1 – Pedestrian Mobility &
T 3.2 – Bicycle Facilities &
T 12.1 – Connections
T 12.4 – ADA Compliance:
Home2 Suites at Harmony Village includes ADA compliant pedestrian improvements designed
to increase access to thesurrounding existing developments. Bicycle parking is provided at both
the east and west hotel entrances, which are easily accessed and connected by private onsite
sidewalks and to private drives in order encourage bicycle usage and to provide bicycle
connectivity to existing on street bike lanes.
Attachment 1
120
121
4”X2”
EIFS-6
ALUMINUM WHITE COATING
LIGHTING COVE
STONE WINDOW HEADER
HOME 2 SUITES AT HARMONY VILLAGE
02/24/2016 NORTH AND WEST ELEVATIONS
LOVELAND BLUFF
SANDSTONE
122
EAST AND SOUTH ELEVATIONS
LOVELAND BLUFF
SANDSTONE
4”x4”
HOME 2 SUITES AT HARMONY VILLAGE
02/24/2016
123
EAST ELEVATION PHOTO SIMULATION
124
From: Cinthia Cox
To: Cindy Cosmas; Ted Shepard
Subject: Concerns With Project Home 2 Suites, #PDP150031
Date: Thursday, March 03, 2016 2:14:00 PM
To Whom It May Concern,
I live in Harmony Crossing and have some concerns about having a hotel going up in the business
park next to us. I am quite frustrated as it is, especially on weekends, trying to find parking for all of the
businesses that I frequent there. With the theater requiring many of the spaces for long periods of time,
parking is not easy. I feel, if you put a hotel in, taking up 88+ spaces, that parking will take even longer
to find. I said 88+ spaces because not always do customers only take one space. I’ve even seen buses
and RV’s take up quite a few spaces in hotel parking lots. I don’t know of anyone that likes taking 15-30
minutes trying to find a parking space. That would surely make the driver of the car late for their movie. I
know that I will no longer frequent any of the businesses in that area during the winter, if the hotel goes
up. I know that I am not the only one frustrated with the parking and I know that others will not frequent
the businesses either, if there were to be even less parking than there is now. I don’t feel that it is fair for
you to take business away from the other businesses because of an unwise decision of what you allow to
go in that lot. I feel that lot is really too small for a hotel in the first place, and building higher is only going
to take away from the curb appeal of the business park.
I also have a business at one of the entrances of the business park. My business was established
before the business park was even there. I was told by the builder that there were no plans for anything
to go in that lot for 10 years before I even considered purchasing a house in the lot it is in now. A year
later I heard there were plans to build. I have already encountered people using the business park,
parking at the place (in my neighborhood and not park property) where my preschool parents need to
park to keep their children safe from getting hit by cars passing by. If there is no parking available, the
parents have to park across the street, and when they are busy getting the second child out the first child
can run out in front of their car to get to my preschool and then run out into the street in front of another
car. It has happened and I would like to try to avoid it happening again. We may not be so lucky the
next time and lose a child. No hotel is worth the price of a child’s life. I’m sure you would agree with me
on that, or you would have no heart.
Please reconsider putting in a business that is going to take a large amount of parking spaces for long
periods of time in that lot. It is better to choose not to create the problem now, then suffer the
consequences of the all of the businesses going out of business because of all of the many customer’s
frustrations with the parking, or the great loss of a child.
Thank you in advance for considering my concerns.
Cinthia Cox
ABC Young N’ Special Preschool
1824 Jamison Court,
Fort Collins CO. 80528
970-282-7737
125
Agenda Item 5
Item # 5 Page 1
STAFF REPORT March 8, 2016
Planning and Zoning Board
PROJECT NAME
ST. PETERS ANGLICAN CHURCH, #FDP150040
STAFF
Seth Lorson, City Planner
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for consideration of a Project Development Plan (P.D.P.)
for a 1 ½ story 10,400 square foot Place of Worship (church) with fully
shielded Wireless Telecommunication Equipment in its 74 foot tall tower.
The proposed development is on 2.3 acres of a 4.87 acre lot located at the
corner of East Trilby Road and Autumn Ridge Drive. The site includes two
access roads (one served off Autumn Ridge Drive, the other off
Candlewood Drive), a pick-up and drop-off porte cochere, 63 parking
spaces, and a columbarium.
The property is currently vacant with the east side (which is outside the
project’s limit of development) serves as a detention basin for the
Provincetown development to the south. There are two other churches in
close proximity: Discovery Fellowship directly across Brittany Drive, and
Heart of the Rockies diagonal across the Trilby and Brittany intersection.
The proposed use of Place of Worship is subject to approval by
Administrative Review (Type 1) but the Wireless Telecommunication
Equipment requires review and approval by the Planning and Zoning
Board (Type 2).
APPLICANT: Lawrence Depenbusch
4260 E. Freemont Ave.
Centennial, CO 80122
OWNER: St. Peters Anglican Church
P.O. Box 271008
Fort Collins, CO 80527
RECOMMENDATION: Approval of St. Peters Anglican Church - Project Development Plan, FDP
#150040
126
Agenda Item 5
Item # 5 Page 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff finds that the proposed St. Peters Anglican Church - Project Development Plan complies with the
applicable requirements of the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code (LUC), more specifically:
· The P.D.P. complies with process located in Division 2.2 - Common Development Review
Procedures for Development Applications of Article 2 - Administration.
· The P.D.P. complies with relevant standards located in Article 3 - General Development
Standards.
· The P.D.P. complies with relevant standards located in Division 4.5 Low Density Mixed-Use
District (L-M-N) of Article 4 - Districts.
COMMENTS:
1. Background:
127
Agenda Item 5
Item # 5 Page 3
The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
Direction Zone District Existing Land Uses
North Low Density Residential (R-L)
Employment (E)
Single-family residential: Brittany Knolls
neighborhood Transfort facility
South Low Density Mixed-Use
Neighborhood (L-M-N)
Single- and Multi-family residential:
Provincetown
East Low Density Residential (R-L) Discovery Fellowship Church
West Low Density Mixed-Use
Neighborhood (L-M-N)
Single- and Multi-family residential:
Provincetown
2. Compliance with Article 4 of the Land Use Code - Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood
(L-M-N):
The project complies with all applicable Article 4 standards as follows:
A. Section 4.5(B) - Permitted Uses
The proposed land use of Place of Worship is subject to approval by Administrative
Review (Type 1) but the Wireless Telecommunication Equipment requires review and approval
by the Planning and Zoning Board (Type 2). The entire project will be reviewed by the Planning
and Zoning Board.
B. Section 4.5(E) - Development Standards
1) Section 4.4(E)(2) Nonresidential and Mixed-Use Buildings.
· Height: Section 4.5(E)(2)(c) permits a maximum height of 1 ½ - 2 ½ stories.
The proposed church is 1 ½ stories for a maximum height of 35 feet, 8 1/8 inches. The bell
and cross tower reaches a height of 74 feet and is constructed with wood beams designed to
match the entry feature of the church. Section 3.8.17 dictates how height is measured and
provides for exemptions. Subsection (C)(7) provides a height exemption to “monuments and
ornamental towers”. The proposed 74 foot tower which includes wireless telecommunication
equipment is exempt from the maximum height requirements in the LMN zone.
· Roof Form: Section 4.5(E)(2)(d) requires pitched roofs to be a minimum slope of 6:12 and
have at least 3 roof planes.
The proposed roof has a 6:12 pitch and there are multiple roof planes that create an
intersection (cross) at the center of the building and the porte cochere has another pitched
roof.
· Building Massing: Any building with a footprint greater than 10,000 s.f. is required to
incorporate recesses or projections.
The proposed building form is a cross which creates large wall projections on each of the four
sides of the building.
· Orientation: Building entrances are required to open directly onto the adjoining local street.
128
Agenda Item 5
Item # 5 Page 4
The proposed development does not have an adjoining local street and the building is as
closely oriented to the corner of Trilby Road (arterial) and Autumn Ridge Drive (collector) as
possible. Without an adjoining local street, the building entrance opens to the porte cochere,
access roads, and parking lot.
3. Compliance with Article 3 of the Land Use Code - General Development Standards
The project complies with all applicable General Development Standards except the noted modification
of standards; with the following relevant comments provided:
A. Division 3.2 - Site Planning and Design Standards
1) 3.2.1 Landscaping and Tree Protection:
· Section 3.2.1(D)(2) requires street trees to be provided in the detached sidewalk parkway at
an average spacing of 30 to 40 feet apart. The project is providing street trees along Trilby
Road, Autumn Ridge Drive, and Candlewood Drive at the required intervals as shown on the
landscape plan.
2) 3.2.2 Access, Circulation and Parking:
· Section 3.2.1(E) requires parking lots to provide interior landscaping in the amount of 6% of
the parking lot area, and perimeter landscaping to screen parking from adjacent streets.
The proposed parking lot interior landscaping is 8.8% of the total area. (parking lot area:
39,460 s.f.; interior landscaping: 3,490 s.f. (3,490/39,460=0.088=8.8%).
The perimeter landscaping consists of trees at 20 foot intervals and dense evergreen shrubs
along the edge to create an opaque screen to block headlights from spilling out of the
development.
· Section 3.2.2(K)(1)(h) requires Places of Worship or Assembly to provide a minimum of 1
parking space per 4 seats.
The development is proposing 240 seats which requires a minimum of 60 parking spaces
(240/4 = 60). The development is providing 63 parking spaces.
3) 3.2.4 Site Lighting
· The purpose of this section is to ensure that the exterior lighting function and security needs
of the project are being met in a way that does not adversely affect the adjacent properties or
neighborhood.
The proposed lighting plan (attached) complies with this section in terms of illumination levels
and concealed light sources. Additionally, the applicant has added a note to the photometric
plan that reads “site lights shall be on a timer controller to dim to 50% after 10 PM each
evening.”
129
Agenda Item 5
Item # 5 Page 5
B. Division 3.5 - Building Standards
1) 3.5.1 Building and Project Compatibility
· Section 3.5.1(C) requires that buildings shall be either similar in size and height or, if larger,
be articulated and subdivided into massing that is proportional to the mass and scale of other
structures adjacent to the subject property.
The proposed church is modest in size at 10,400 square feet and 1 ½ stories tall. The
adjacent residential developments vary in size from 2 story tall 6-unit attached dwelling
directly across Autumn Ridge Drive to 2 story single-family dwelling across Candlewood
Drive. The other churches in the area are 7,000 s.f. (Discovery Fellowship) and 7,178 s.f.
(Heart of the Rockies).
2) 3.5.3 Mixed-Use, Institutional and Commercial Buildings
· Section 3.5.3(C)(2) provides for build-to lines based on the size of the adjacent street. For
arterial streets the build-to line is 10 - 25 feet; and for smaller streets the build-to line is 0 - 15
feet. Exception to this standard is permitted if there is an “established drainage channel or
access drive, or other easement.”
The proposed church is setback 71’-4” from the Trilby Road right-of-way due to a 47 foot
wide drainage and utility easement that serves the Provincetown development.
3) 3.8.13 Wireless Telecommunication
· This section outlines the requirements for the proposed Wireless Telecommunication
Equipment proposed in the tower element. The standards require that the equipment tower
be setback from the property lines at least the height of the tower and that the equipment be
made to blend in or be shielded from view.
The 74 foot tower’s principal use is as a cross and bell feature of the church. It is setback 175
feet from the Trilby Road property line and 115 feet from the Autumn Ridge Drive property
line. The wireless telecommunication equipment is utilizing stealth technology so that it is
completely shielded from view by fiberglass screening that still allows the technology to
function.
4. Neighborhood Meeting
The City and applicant held a neighborhood information meeting regarding the proposed development
on October 29, 2015. Three neighbors of the project attended out of curiosity. The only concern was in
regard to the parking lot lighting at night. In response, the applicant has added a note to the lighting plan
that light levels will be reduced by 50% each night at 10 p.m. Otherwise, the participants expressed their
support and noted that the existing churches in the area are good neighbors.
130
Agenda Item 5
Item # 5 Page 6
5. Findings of Fact/Conclusion
In evaluating the request for the St. Peters Anglican Church - Project Development Plan, FDP
#1500040, Staff makes the following findings of fact:
1. The P.D.P. complies with process located in Division 2.2 - Common Development Review
Procedures for Development Applications of Article 2 - Administration.
2. The P.D.P. complies with relevant standards located in Article 3 - General Development
Standards.
3. The P.D.P. complies with relevant standards located in Division 4.5 Low Density Mixed-Use
District (L-M-N) of Article 4 - Districts.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the St. Peters Anglican Church - Project Development Plan, FDP
#1500040
ATTACHMENTS
1. Site Plan - St Peters Church (PDF)
2. Landscape Plan - St Peters Church (PDF)
3. Building Elevations - St Peters Church (PDF)
4. Lighting Plan - St Peters Church (PDF)
131
132
133
SHRUB PLANTING NOTES:
1. ANY BROKEN OR CRUMBLING ROOT
BALL WILL BE REJECTED.
2. PRUNE ALL DAMAGED OR
DEADWOOD IMMEDIATELY PRIOR
TO PLANTING.
2 X BALL DIA.
INSTALL TOP OF ROOTBALL 2" ABOVE
SURROUNDING FINISH GRADE
FINISH GRADE
PLACE DISH 2" ABOVE GRADE
SPECIFIED BACKFILL MIX.
ROUGHENED SIDE SLOPES OF PIT
EXISTING SOIL
SPECIFIED MULCH 3-4" OVER
FILTER FABRIC
CONIFEROUS TREE PLANTING NOTES
1. DO NOT CUT OR DAMAGE LEADER.
PRUNE DAMAGED OR DEAD WOOD
IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO PLANTING.
2. CUT TWINE AND BURLAP FROM
AROUND TRUNK, PULL BACK. REMOVE
ALL BURLAP AND WIRE BASKETS BEFORE
PLACING IN TREE PIT.
3. ANY BROKEN OR CRUMBLING ROOT
BALL WILL BE REJECTED. REMOVING THE
WIRE WILL NOT BE AN EXCUSE FROM
DAMAGED ROOT BALLS.
4. STAKE TREE LEAVING ENOUGH SLACK SO
TREE CAN DANCE.
5. USE 2 STAKES FOR TREES 8' AND
SMALLER. USE 3 OR MORE STAKES FOR
TREES LARGER THAN 8'.
6. REMOVE ALL STAKES 1 YEAR AFTER
PLANTING.
2 X BALL DIA.
INSTALL TOP OF ROOTBALL 2" ABOVE
SURROUNDING FINISH GRADE
FOR TREES PLANTED IN TURF, CREATE
TREE RING 1' PAST PLANTING HOLE,
PLACE 3 INCHES OF SHREDDED CEDAR
MULCH IN TREE RING.
FOR TREES PLANTED IN SHRUB BEDS,
MULCH WITH SHRUB BED MULCH.
FINISH GRADE
PLACE DISH 2" ABOVE GRADE
1
1
2" WIDE HEAVY NYLON STRAP
WITH EYELETS.
12 GAUGE GALVANIZED WIRE.
(DOUBLE STANDARD)
LODGEPOLE TREE STAKES
SPECIFIED BACKFILL MIX.
ROUGHENED SIDE SLOPES OF PIT
EXISTING SOIL
DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING NOTES
1. DO NOT CUT OR DAMAGE LEADER.
PRUNE DAMAGED OR DEAD WOOD
IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO PLANTING.
T T
F
W
co
co
co
co
4 " PERF
4 " PERF
4 INCH "
co
co
co
co
co
co
co
G
G G
(2) QUMA
(4) CEOC
(4) CASP
(4) GLTS 3" FOR
MITIGATION
EXISTING
THORNLESS COCKSPUR
HAWTHORNE TO REMAIN
5.5" NORWAY MAPLE
TO REMAIN
(2) PIPG
(3) PINI
(2) TICG
(2) PIPG
(2) PINI
(3) PIPG
(1) PIPG
(3) CASP
(2) GYDI
(2) PINI
EXISTING DETENTION
ALL LANDSCAPING TO
REMAIN
EXISTING STORM SEWER
EXISTING LANDSCAPING TO REMAIN SEED PARKWAY WITH DRYLAND GRASSES AS NEEDED
SEED PARKWAY WITH DRYLAND
GRASSES AS NEEDED
SEED OPEN LANDSCAPE AREAS WITH DRYLAND GRASSES
AS NEEDED, WHERE DISTURBED
OPEN TURF PLAY AREA
E. TRILBY ROAD
CANDLEWOOD DRIVE
BRITTANY DRIVE
9' UTIL. EASEMENT
AUTUMN RIDGE DRIVE
(4) TICG
(6) SYMP
(2) GYDI
(7) JUSG
(5) JUCH
(10) CAAK
136
137
138
139
140
Agenda Item 6
Item # 6 Page 1
STAFF REPORT March 8, 2016
Planning and Zoning Board
PROJECT NAME
2133 SOUTH TIMBERLINE ROAD, MAJOR AMENDMENT, #MJA150009
STAFF
Seth Lorson, City Planner
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a Major Amendment to construct a one-story, 8,369
square foot commercial building with three tenants: a dental office (2,597
s.f.), an office (2,883 s.f.), and a restaurant (2,889 s.f.). The project is
proposed on Lot One of the Timberline Center (2nd Filing) located west of
Timberline Road and directly south of the existing Burger King restaurant.
The plan includes a sawtooth roof design, patios for each of the three
tenant spaces, and 46 parking spaces. The parcel is 1.48 acres in size,
zoned Industrial, and was originally approved as a Bank.
APPLICANT: Keith Meyer
1315 Oakridge Dr., Suite 120
Fort Collins, CO 80525
OWNER: Same
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. The request represents a change of use of the Timberline Center Final Plan from bank with a
drive-through to mixed-use Commercial. This change of use is considered a change of character
which triggers the Major Amendment.
B. The proposed building design departs from the established design guidelines of the Timberline
Center Final Plan. This is also considered a change of character which triggers the Major
Amendment.
C. All proposed commercial uses: Offices and Standard Restaurants are permitted uses in the
Industrial zone.
The Major Amendment complies with the applicable General Development Standards, including Section
3.5.3.
141
Agenda Item 6
Item # 6 Page 2
The Major Amendment complies with the applicable Industrial District land use and development
standards in Section 4.28.
Comments:
1. Background:
A. The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
N: I Lot 10, Timberline Center Burger King
S: E Spring Creek Farms North Vacant
E: L-M-N Bucking Horse Neighborhood Single Family Attached
W: I Ascent Studio Indoor Recreation
B. Annexation and Zoning
In 1997, Timberline Center was annexed as a portion of the 435 acre Timberline Annexation. This was
an enclave annexation that brought in five parcels owned by separate entities and included the area
bounded by the Union Pacific Railroad on the west, the Great Western Railroad on the east and Drake
142
Agenda Item 6
Item # 6 Page 3
Road and beyond on the south. The original zoning was T, Transitional.
In 2001, the property was placed into the Industrial zone district.
Timberline Center was originally a component of Spring Creek Farms, owned by the Johnson Brothers,
whose family farmhouse was preserved and moved into Rigden Farm where it now serves as the
community building. Neighborhoods and projects that have developed within this area include:
Commercial Center in Rigden Farm;
Sidehill;
Bucking Horse;
Spring Creek Farms North
City of Fort Collins Police Services
Trails at Timberline Apartments
C. Development History:
In 2006, Timberline Center was approved as a 14 lot subdivision, zoned Industrial, and specifically
designed and intended to offer a variety of primary and supporting uses. Within the 18-acre center, a 6-
acre Convenience Shopping Center was formed to allow for the permitted supporting uses.
In 2007, a Minor Amendment was approved to adjust the building envelopes and allow construction of
the Timberline Self-Storage Facility on Lot 14.
In 2008, a Minor Amendment was approved that adjusted the boundary and size of the Convenience
Shopping Center.
In 2008, Burger King was approved on Lot 10, within the Convenience Shopping Center.
In 2015, Big O Tire was approved on Lot 2.
In 2015, Ascent Climbing Gym was approved on Timberline Second Filing, being a Replat of Lots 11 -
13. This was a consolidation of three lots into two and located on Lot 2 of the Second Filing, within the
Convenience Shopping Center.
In 2015, a Major Amendment was approved to allow a 3,096 square foot standard restaurant, Serious
Texas Barbecue, on Lot 1 of the First Filing.
Concurrent with this Major Amendment, is a request for a drive-through restaurant on Lot 3 of the First
Filing, Dutch Bros. Coffee, which is also a Major Amendment.
As mentioned, Timberline Center is an approved Final Plan that is zoned Industrial. It is not a part of a
Sub-Area Plan or a part of an Overall Development Plan. In 2006, the subject Lot was originally
approved for a two-story drive-through bank.
2. Compliance with the Industrial Zone District Land Use and Standards:
A. Section 4.28(B)(3) - Permitted Uses:
The Industrial zone district allows for Offices, financial services and clinics to be permitted subject to
143
Agenda Item 6
Item # 6 Page 4
administrative review (Type 1); and Standard and fast food restaurants (without drive-in or drive-through
facilities) to be permitted subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Board (Type 2). The Timberline
Center Final Plan was originally approved by the Planning and Zoning Board; therefore, the Major
Amendment (due to the proposed change in character) is subject to the same approval process.
B. Section 4.28(E)(2)(a) - Development Standards, Building Design, Applicability of Section 3.5.3:
The development standards in the Industrial zone make a distinction between primary uses and
supporting uses. Consequently, supporting uses, including Standard Restaurants, are specifically
governed by the development standards of Section 3.5.3 - Mixed-Use, Institutional and Commercial
Buildings. Three General Development Standards are discussed in the following sub-section.
3. Compliance With Applicable General Development Standards:
A. Section 3.2.1(C )(D) - Landscaping and Tree Protection
This parcel contains 64,420 square feet (1.48 acres) but is encumbered by platted access, utility and
drainage easements (15,780 s.f.) to the point where only 48,640 square feet (1.12 acres) are
developable. As a result, the land area outside the building envelope, parking lot and drive aisle,
detention swale is landscaped consistent with the existing landscaping in the Timberline Center.
For example, the area between building and the stormwater drainage swale along Timberline features a
mix of six Evergreen trees and eight Spring Snow Crab ornamental trees. These trees are closely
spaced and complement the landscape design of the existing buildings along Timberline Road (Burger
King and Big O Tire) and the future building (Serious Texas Barbecue) which includes the same mix of
trees.
B. Section 3.2.1(E)(4)(a) - Parking Lot Perimeter Landscaping
There is a 11 space parking lot on the north end of the building and 32 parking spaces along the north-
south access drive. The east side (Timberline Road frontage) is densely landscaped with evergreen
trees and shrubs. The other perimeter areas consist of pedestrian sidewalks and full landscaping.
C. Section 3.2.1(E)(5) - Parking Lot Interior Landscaping
The standard requires 6% (1,370 s.f.) of the total parking lot area (22,832 s.f.) to be landscaped. The
project is providing 7.9% or 1,811 s.f. of interior landscaping.
D. Section 3.2.2(B) - Access Circulation and Parking
The north-south private drive is a dedicated private access easement that provides direct access to Lots
8 & 9 (Filing One) and Lots 1 & 2 (Filing 2) of the Timberline Center.
E. Section 3.2.2 (C)(4) - Bicycle Parking
The standard requires 1 space per 1,000 square feet for restaurant (2,889 / 1,000 = 2.9), 1 space per
4,000 square feet for office (5,480 / 4,000 = 1.4) or a minimum of four. The plan provides twelve spaces
at the southwest corner of the building.
F. Section 3.2.2(C)(5) - Walkways
144
Agenda Item 6
Item # 6 Page 5
The P.D.P. provides connectivity throughout the site:
One 6 foot concrete sidewalk connects Timberline Road to the private north-south access drive;
One 6 foot concrete sidewalk along the north and west sides of the building connects the parking
lots to the building entries; and
Another soft surface path meanders along the east side of the building between Timberline Road
and the building’s patios.
G. Section 3.2.2(C)(6) - Direct On-Site Access to Pedestrian and Bicycle Destinations
The proposal connects to the Timberline Road sidewalk with a 6 foot sidewalk along the south property
line. This sidewalk will also provide the ability for the future development of Spring Creek Farms North
(currently a school is in the concept process) to easily connect to the Timberline Center. The site is
within one-quarter mile of the Police Services Building. By use of the public sidewalks along either
Timberline Road or Joseph Allen Drive, the site is within roughly one-half mile of all the units at the
Trails at Timberline Apartments. The nearest bus stop is Transfort Route 7 at the intersection of
Timberline and Drake Roads.
H. Section 3.2.2(K)(3) - Parking Lots - Maximum Number of Spaces
Land Use Size Requirement Provided
Dental office (Req. 2/1000 min. -
4.5/1000 max.)
2597 s.f. 5 - 12 spaces 10 parking spaces
Office (Req. 2/1000 min. - 3/1000
max.)
2883 s.f. 6 - 9 spaces 8 parking spaces
Restaurant (Req. 5/1000 min. -
10/1000 max.)
2889 s.f. 15 - 29 spaces 28 parking spaces
Total 8369 s.f. 26 - 50 spaces 46 parking spaces
(including 2 handicap
spaces)
I. Section 3.2.4 - Site Lighting
The parking and drives will feature pole lights that are fully-shielded and down-directional. Wall sconces
will be similarly screened. The under-canopy lights will be flush-mount and flat lens to obscure the light
source from view.
J. Section 3.5.3 -Mixed-Use, Institutional and Commercial Buildings
As required by the Industrial zone district development standards under Section 4.28(E), a standard
restaurant is subject to the commercial building standards versus standards for industrial buildings. The
Major Amendment complies in the following manner:
(1.) Section 3.5.3(B) - General Development Standard
The standard requires that commercial buildings have:
145
Agenda Item 6
Item # 6 Page 6
o Architectural interest;
o Not be dominated by a large single mass;
o Be sensitive to the pedestrian scale; and
o Establish an attractive street and walkways.
The proposed building is unique in design with a “sawtooth” roof form which allows for
additional day-lighting via clear story windows. Although the design is not consistent with the
originally approved Timberline Center design guidelines, it achieves the intended goal of
breaking up the roof plane. The building is one-story and pedestrian scaled with sidewalk
access and landscape planters on all sides.
(2.) Section 3.5.3(C)(1) - Relationship of Buildings to Streets, Walkways and Parking
Walkways are provided on all sides of the building and provide direct access to the building
entrances.
(3.) Section 3.5.3(C)(2) - Orientation to Build-to Lines for Streetfront Buildings
The standard requires that the building be built between 15 - 25 feet from the Timberline Road
property line. However, this requirement is precluded by a 68 foot-wide utility and drainage
easement. The building is proposed approximately 114 feet from the Timberline Road property
line. Between the easement and the building face are patios and a pedestrian path.
The standard allows for exceptions “if a larger or otherwise noncompliant front yard area is
required by the City to continue an established drainage channel or access drive, or other
easement”. Another permitted exception is “in order to form an outdoor space such as a plaza,
courtyard, patio or garden between a building and the sidewalk.” The proposed site plan meets
both of these criteria for exceptions and, therefore, the enlarged setback is justified.
(4.) Section 3.5.3(D) - Variation in Massing
The building’s design provides six different roof ridges, variation in building material, and patio
spaces that articulate the façade with screen walls.
(5.) Section 3.5.3(E)(1) - Character and Image - Site Specific Design
The proposed building is uniquely designed for its site. However, it does conform to the material
pallet that is required by the Timberline Center design guidelines:
Timberline Center design guidelines:
Material: Color:
Asphalt Shingles Tan or Charcoal, or
Metal Roofing Sage or Green
Synthetic Stucco Tan or Off-White
Masonry Tan or Brown
Storefront Glass Bronze or Green
Synthetic Stone Tan or Brown.
146
Agenda Item 6
Item # 6 Page 7
Proposed building materials:
Asphalt Shingles Charcoal
Metal Roofing N/A
Synthetic Stucco Tan
Masonry Brown
Storefront Glass Bronze
Synthetic Stone N/A
M. Section 3.6.4 - Transportation Level of Service Requirements
Since this type of use was anticipated with the original approval, no further traffic study is needed.
4. Neighborhood Information Meeting:
No neighborhood information meeting was held. The meeting was waived per the allowance of Section
2.2.2(A) which allows the Director to determine that the development proposal would not have significant
neighborhood impact. This determination was based on the fact that since initial neighborhood
meetings for the original P.D.P. in 2006, several neighborhood meetings were held in conjunction with
various development proposals on individual lots. Attendance at these meetings was sparse. The
subject lot is separated from Bucking Horse by a six-lane, major arterial street, and its development is
viewed as a logical build-out of an approved commercial center and not having any neighborhood
impact.
5. Findings of Fact/Conclusion:
In evaluating the request for 2133 Timberline, Staff makes the following findings of fact:
A. The proposal represents a Major Amendment of the approved land use and development
approval of Lot 11, Timberline Center Final Plan.
B. Offices, financial services and clinics, and Standard and fast food restaurants (without drive-in or
drive-through facilities) are permitted uses in the Industrial zone.
C. The Industrial zone development standards require that a Standard Restaurant is subject to
Section 3.5.3 of the General Development Standards - Institutional, Mixed-Use and Commercial
Buildings.
D. The Major Amendment complies with the applicable General Development Standards, including
Section 3.5.3.
E. The Major Amendment complies with the applicable standards in the Industrial District, Section
4.28.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Board make a motion to approve 2133 Timberline
Road, Major Amendment, #150009, based on the Findings of Fact found on pages 7 of the Staff Report.
147
Agenda Item 6
Item # 6 Page 8
ATTACHMENTS
1. Building Elevations - 2133 Timberline (PDF)
2. Site Plan - 2133 Timberline (PDF)
3. Landscape Plan - 2133 Timberline (PDF)
4. Lighting Plan - 2133 Timberline (PDF)
5. Plat - 2133 Timberline (PDF)
148
FIN. FLOOR
100' - 0"
12" WIDE FIBER CEMENT TRIM BOARD
FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING
PRE-FINISHED GUTTER
PRE-FINISHED OPEN FACED DOWNSPOUT
PRE-FINISHED BRAKE METAL COVERED
FASCIA BOARD
STUCCO
ALUMINUM STOREFRONT
PAINTED STEEL CHANNEL
24' - 5 3/8"
14' - 2 5/8"
10' - 8"
FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION
KNOX BOX
11' - 8"
FIN. FLOOR
100' - 0"
PRE-FINISHED BRAKE METAL COVERED
FASCIA BOARD
STUCCO
ALUMINUM STOREFRONT
EXTERIOR WALL SCONCE
13' - 4"
24' - 5 3/8"
11' - 8"
PAINTED STEEL CHANNEL
EXTERIOR FINISH SCHEDULE
FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING
SHINGLE ROOF
STOREFRONT
STUCCO
GLAZING
BRICK
STEEL & FLASHINGS
GENERAL NOTE:
ALL EXTERIOR WALL MOUNTED LIGHTS TO
BE FULL CUT-OFF.
TRANSLUCENT
BROWN STAIN
CHARCOAL GREY
DARK BRONZE
LIGHT TAN
BRONZE TINTED
MED. BROWN
DARK BRONZE
FIN. FLOOR
100' - 0"
PRE-FINISHED PARAPET CAP FLASHING
FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING
PRE-FINISHED BRAKE METAL COVERED
FASCIA BOARD
STUCCO
ALUMINUM STOREFRONT
BRICK
ALUMINUM STOREFRONT
ELECTRIC METERS, PAINT TO MATCH
WALL FINISH BEYOND
BRICK SCREEN WALL
28' - 0"
PRE-FINISHED METAL CAP FLASHING
STEEL POST
TRASH ENCLOSURE GATE:
1 1/2" DEEP STEEL DECK W/ 2" STEEL TUBE FRAME
BOLLARD
1' - 8" 10' - 0" 4' - 8" 10' - 0" 1' - 8"
16' - 0"
PRE-FINISHED METAL CAP FLASHING
BRICK
28' - 0"
19' - 0" 4' - 0" 5' - 0"
PRE-FINISHED METAL CAP FLASHING
BRICK
16' - 0"
PRE-FINISHED METAL CAP FLASHING
BRICK
STEEL ANGLE GUARD
4" 18' - 8" 4' - 0" 4' - 8" 4"
BOLLARD, TYP
4" 15' - 4" 4"
28' - 0"
4" 1' - 4" 10' - 0" 4' - 8" 10' - 0" 1' - 4" 4"
#5 VERT. @
32" O.C.
FILL ALL CELLS SOLID
2X2 TUBE AT TOP OF STEEL BOLLARD,
WELDED TO VERTICAL PAINTED STL.
ANGLE
CL
GATES: 2"X2" PAINTED STL. TUBE PERIM.
FRAME W/ 1"X1" STL. ANGLE INTERIOR FRAME
WELDED TO PERIMETER. GRIND ALL WELDS
SMOOTH. ATTACH PREFIN. MTL. SIDING PANELS
TO FRAME W/ SELF-TAPPING FASTENERS.
6" DIA. EXTRA STRONG PAINTED
STL. PIPE SLEEVE PIVOT HINGE
AS SHOWN ON 1" STL. PLATE
RING.
5" DIA. PAINTED. CONC. FILLED PIPE BOLLARD.
PAINT TO BE URETHANE, TYP., U.N.O.
3 1/2"
PERIM. TRIM @ MTL. PANELS AS
RECOMMENDED BY PANEL MFR.
FIELD WELD GATE FRAME TO PIPE SLEEVE
PIVOTS W/ 1/4"X4"X2 1/2" PLATES EA. SIDE
CL
3X3X5/16 GALV. STL. ANGLE ANCHORED
INTO CMU FULL HT. @ JAMBS
1' - 0" 5' - 10"
5" STL. BOLLARD POSTS
FILLED W/ CONC.
2X2 STL. TUBE FRAME
PREFIN. MTL. WALL PANEL
INFILL.
18" DIA CONC. SONOTUBE
@ FRONT CORNERS
EMBED POSTS IN CONC.
CANE BOLTS
1/8" STL. PL HANDLES
151
152
153
154
155
156
12
5
9
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
0.6
0.9
1.2
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
1.0
1.2
1.2
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.8
1.1
1.4
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.2
1.4
1.4
1.2
1.4
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.6
1.4
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.5
0.9
1.2
by separate
instrument, not plat
should only be access,
drainage and utility -
not emergency
access.
158
Agenda Item 7
Item # 7 Page 1
STAFF REPORT March 8, 2016
Planning and Zoning Board
PROJECT NAME
PROSPECT STATION II, #PDP150021
STAFF
Seth Lorson, City Planner
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for consideration of a Project Development Plan (P.D.P.)
and Modification of Standard for Prospect Station II. The proposed project
is located on a 1.04 acre site at 303 West Prospect Road.
The project is proposing a three story multi-family building containing 36
units and 54 bedrooms, with 18 one-bedroom and 18 two-bedroom units.
The proposed 25,750 square foot building will be constructed of brick,
stucco, board and batten, with architectural metal and stone accents. The
proposed parking area will provide 43 parking spaces, 11 of which are
reserved for the existing Prospect Station I building. The site is zoned
Employment (E) in which multi-family dwellings are permitted subject to
Planning and Zoning Board approval.
APPLICANT: Cathy Mathis
TB Group
444 Mountain Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80513
OWNER: Prospect Station, LLC
605 S. College Avenue, Suite 100
Fort Collins, CO 80524
RECOMMENDATION: • Approval of Modification of Standard (Section 2.8) to Section
4.27(D)(2).
• Approval of Prospect Station II Project Development Plan, PDP
#150021
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff finds that the Prospect Station II Project Development Plan complies with the applicable
requirements of the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code (LUC), more specifically:
159
Agenda Item 7
Item # 7 Page 2
· The P.D.P. complies with the process located in Division 2.2 - Common Development Review
Procedures for Development Applications of Article 2 - Administration.
· The P.D.P. complies with relevant standards located in Article 3 - General Development
Standards.
· The P.D.P. complies with relevant standards located in Division 4.27, Employment District (E)
of Article 4 - Districts, provided that the Modification of Standard to Section 4.27(D)(2) that is
proposed with this P.D.P. is approved.
COMMENTS:
1. Background:
The subject property was annexed in 1965 through the Fourth College Annexation (Ordinance 42-1965,
729.46 acres) and is part of the Griffin Plaza subdivision. The site was subsequently developed as an
office building with associated parking.
The majority of the site is covered with the existing Griffin office building and an existing parking lot.
There are also several large trees on the site. The existing building is currently vacant.
160
Agenda Item 7
Item # 7 Page 3
The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
Direction Zone District Existing Land Uses
North Community Commercial (CC)
and Colorado State University
(CSU)
Commercial, Institutional (CSU), Residential
South Employment (E) Vacant (Colorado State University Research
Foundation)
West Employment (E) Institutional (Colorado State Division of Wildlife)
East Community Commercial (CC) Mixed-use multi-family residential and
commercial
2. Compliance with Article 4 of the Land Use Code - Employment (E):
The project complies with all applicable Article 4 standards as follows:
A. Section 4.27(B) - Permitted Uses
The proposed land use of multi-family dwellings is considered a secondary use in
the Employment District, and is subject to review and approval by the Planning and
Zoning Board.
B. Section 4.27(D) - Land Use Standards
1) Section 4.27(D)(2) Secondary Uses. This section requires that the combined total
area of all secondary uses occupy no more than 25% of the total gross area of the
development plan.
· The project is proposing a 100% residential use on the site, which does not
comply with this standard. See Section 5 of this report for the applicant’s
request for a Modification of Standard to Section 4.27(D)(2).
2) Section 4.27(D)(4) Dimensional Standards. This section requires that the maximum
height of buildings shall be 4 stories.
· The proposed 3-story height of Prospect Station II complies with this standard.
3) Section 4.27(D)(5) Density and Intensity. This section requires all residential
development in the E District to have an overall minimum average density of 7
dwelling units per net acre of residential land.
· Prospect Station II complies with this standard by providing a residential
density of 34.6 dwelling units per acre.
4) Section 4.27(D)(7) Access to a park, central feature or gathering place. This section
requires that 90% of the dwellings of developments containing a residential
component “shall be located within 1,320 feet of either a neighborhood park, a
privately owned park or a central feature or gathering place.”
161
Agenda Item 7
Item # 7 Page 4
· Prospect Station II complies with this standard by providing a gathering space
along the building frontage on Prospect Street, and also by providing a
gathering space behind the building.
5) Section 4.27(D)(7)(b) establishes 6 criteria for the definition of a privately owned park.
The proposed project complies with the criteria in Section 4.27(D)(7)(b)(1-6) as
follows:
· Section 4.27(D)(7)(b)(1) requires that development projects with a gross area
of 2 acres or less provide a minimum of 6% of the gross site area for a park,
central feature, or gathering space. Prospect Station II complies with this
standard by providing a total of 3,220 square feet of gathering space on the
45,252 square foot site, or 7.1% of the gross site area.
· The majority of the proposed gathering space is highly visible from Prospect
Road, and sidewalk connections provide access to the additional gathering
space in the rear of the building.
· The gathering space is identified as open to the public on the site plan.
· Various features including seating areas, a picnic table, a pergola, and a
barbeque grill are provided.
· The gathering spaces will be privately owned and maintained by the developer
· The design of the gathering spaces does not result in slopes or gradients that
conflict with the recreational use of the gathering spaces.
3. Compliance with Article 3 of the Land Use Code - General Development Standards
The project complies with all applicable General Development Standards; with the following relevant
comments provided:
A. Division 3.2 - Site Planning and Design Standards
1) 3.2.1 Landscaping and Tree Protection:
· Trees are planted in the parking lot interior and perimeter as required in Section
3.2.1(D)(1)(b).
· Section 3.2.1(E)(5) requires that 6% of the interior space of the parking lot be
dedicated to landscaping. Prospect Station II complies with this standard by
providing a total of 876 square feet of interior landscaping in the 13,816 square
foot parking lot, or 6.3% of the parking lot area.
· The Prospect Station II landscape plan provides “full tree stocking” and street
trees as required in Sec. 3.2.1(D)(1)(c) and (2). A detailed tree mitigation plan is
provided with this P.D.P. in coordination with the City Forester. The City Forester
is comfortable with finalizing details regarding tree mitigation, tree locations, sizes,
and quantities at the time of Final Plan.
162
Agenda Item 7
Item # 7 Page 5
2) 3.2.2 Access, Circulation and Parking:
· Section 3.2.2(C)(4) requires one bicycle parking space per bedroom, split
60%/40% between enclosed parking and fixed parking respectively. With 54
bedrooms proposed the project is required to provide a total of 54 bicycle parking
spaces: 33 enclosed, and 21 fixed. The project is proposing to satisfy this
requirement by providing 36 covered spaces within the breezeways of the building
and 18 fixed spaces in bike racks at the perimeter of the building.
· The parking lot is screened by a 5 foot landscape setback as required in Section
3.2.2(J).
· The proposed project is located in the Transit-Oriented Development (TOD)
Overlay Zone as defined in Article 5. Section 3.2.2(K)(1)(a)(1) requires that multi-
family dwellings within the TOD Overlay Zone provide .75 parking spaces for each
one-bedroom dwelling unit and 1 parking space for each two bedroom dwelling
unit. With 18 one-bedroom units and 18 two-bedroom units, the proposed project
is required to provide a minimum of 32 parking spaces. A total of 43 parking
spaces are proposed; 11 spaces are reserved for the existing Prospect Station I
building. Prospect Station I satisfied their parking requirement with an off-site
agreement on the subject site and, therefore, is required to reserve 11 spaces on
the Prospect Station II site.
· The proposed building meets handicap parking requirements as outlined in
Section 3.2.2(K)(5) by providing two handicap-accessible parking spaces.
3) 3.2.4 Site Lighting:
· The proposed exterior light fixtures are fully shielded concealing the light source
with sharp cut-off capability as required in Sec. 3.2.4(D).
B. Division 3.4 - Environmental, Natural Area, Recreational and Cultural Resource Protection
Standards
1) 3.4.7 Historic and Cultural Resources:
· The existing building is not old enough to require historic review as required in
Section 3.4.7. However, the ownership group plans to provide photographs of the
existing building to be displayed near the proposed building’s entries to document
the contributions and significance of the existing Griffin office building.
C. Division 3.5 - Building Standards:
1) 3.5.1 Building and Project Compatibility
· The building size, height, bulk, mass, and scale is similar to the existing Prospect
Station I building to the east of the proposed building. Nearby properties range
from single-story commercial buildings to two- and three-story institutional
buildings. The Hilton Fort Collins is one-tenth of a mile from the proposed building.
The proposed building, at three stories, is compatible with the mass and scale of
other structures as required in Section 3.5.1(C).
163
Agenda Item 7
Item # 7 Page 6
· Because the proposed building is less than 40 feet in height, shadow and
view/visual analysis as outlined in Section 3.5.1(G) was not required.
D. Division 3.6 - Transportation and Circulation:
1) 3.6.4 Transportation Level of Service Requirements:
· A Transportation Impact Study (TIS) was provided “in order to identify those
facilities that are necessary in order to comply with” transportation level of service
requirements. The City of Fort Collins Traffic Engineer accepted the TIS and
deemed the proposed site and facility design adequate to meet the City’s level of
service requirements.
E. Division 3.8.30 - Multi-Family Dwelling Development Standards:
1) Section 3.8.30(F) Design Standards for Multi-Family Dwellings
· Section 3.8.30(F)(4) requires that entrances be clearly visible from streets and
public areas. Connecting walkways, eaves, and landscaping clearly delineate
building entrances for the proposed building.
· Section 3.8.30(F)(6) requires that multi-family dwellings be “articulated with
projections, recesses, covered doorways, balconies, covered box or bay window
and/or other similar features, dividing large facades and walls into human-scaled
proportions.” The proposed building provides façade articulation with material
changes, roof and eave variations, subdivision of building mass, balconies, and a
distinct base element.
F. Division 3.10 - Development Standards for the Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay
Zone:
1) 3.10.3 Site Planning
· Sections 3.10.3(B) and (C) require a central feature, gathering place, and outdoor
spaces adjacent to a transit station such as “courtyards, plazas, arcades, terraces,
balconies and decks”. The proposed project is providing a gathering place at the
southeast corner of the property. Additionally, a gathering place is provided along
the north side of the building with seating and landscaping.
2) 3.10.4 Streetscape and Pedestrian Connections
· Section 3.10.4(A) Streetscape requires formal streetscape improvements,
including sidewalks, street trees, seating, and pedestrian light fixtures. The
proposed project provides detached sidewalks along the entire building frontage
that connect to the existing sidewalk network, consistent with the recently adopted
Prospect Corridor Design Standards. Street trees, seating, and pedestrian lighting
are also provided along Prospect Road.
· Section 3.10.4(C) Off-street Parking requires that off-street parking be located
“behind, above, within or below street-facing buildings to the maximum extent
164
Agenda Item 7
Item # 7 Page 7
feasible.” The parking for the proposed development is located entirely behind the
street-facing building.
3) 3.10.5 Character and Image
· Section 3.10.5(A) Articulation requires that “exterior building walls shall be
subdivided and proportioned to human scale…” The proposed project provides
exterior building articulation by bringing the middle sections of the building closer
to the property line, and by separating the building into four distinct masses.
Overhangs and accent trim elements provide additional architectural interest.
· Section 3.10.5(C) Materials and Colors requires exterior building material to be
high quality “including, but not limited to, brick, sandstone, other native stone,
tinted/textured concrete masonry units, stucco systems or treated tilt-up concrete
systems.” The proposed building consists of brick, two colors of stucco, panel
board and batten siding, and stone accents.
4. Neighborhood Meeting
A neighborhood meeting was held for the proposed project. A neighborhood meeting summary and a
record of public comment regarding this P.D.P. is attached with this staff report. Comments from
neighbors at the meeting primarily concerned the design of the sidewalk and any potential changes to
traffic patterns on Prospect Road. Neighbors were supportive of the detached sidewalk design, and the
applicant explained that the project would not change the traffic pattern on Prospect Road.
5. Compliance with Section 2.8 - Modification of Standards
A. The applicant has requested a modification to Section 4.27(D)(2) Secondary Uses. The
decision maker may grant a modification of standards only if it finds that the granting of
the modification would not be detrimental to the public good, and that:
(1) the plan as submitted will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the
modification is requested equally well or better than would a plan which complies with the
standard for which a modification is requested; or
(2) the granting of a modification from the strict application of any standard would, without
impairing the intent and purpose of this Land Use Code, substantially alleviate an
existing, defined and described problem of city-wide concern or would result in a
substantial benefit to the city by reason of the fact that the proposed project would
substantially address an important community need specifically and expressly defined
and described in the city's Comprehensive Plan or in an adopted policy, ordinance or
resolution of the City Council, and the strict application of such a standard would render
the project practically infeasible; or
(3) by reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional
situations, unique to such property, including, but not limited to, physical conditions such
as exceptional narrowness, shallowness or topography, or physical conditions which
hinder the owner's ability to install a solar energy system, the strict application of the
standard sought to be modified would result in unusual and exceptional practical
165
Agenda Item 7
Item # 7 Page 8
difficulties, or exceptional or undue hardship upon the owner of such property, provided
that such difficulties or hardship are not caused by the act or omission of the applicant; or
(4) the plan as submitted will not diverge from the standards of the Land Use Code that
are authorized by this Division to be modified except in a nominal, inconsequential way
when considered from the perspective of the entire development plan, and will continue
to advance the purposes of the Land Use Code as contained in Section 1.2.2.
Any finding made under subparagraph (1), (2), (3) or (4) above shall be supported by
specific findings showing how the plan, as submitted, meets the requirements and criteria
of said subparagraph (1), (2), (3) or (4).
B. Request for Modification to Section 4.27(D)(2) Secondary Uses, which requires that the
combined area dedicated to all secondary uses be limited to 25% of the total gross area
of the development plan.
The applicant is proposing a 100% residential building.
The applicant asks that the Planning and Zoning Board find that the requested
modification be granted on the grounds that it is not detrimental to the public good and
that the plan as submitted will not diverge from the standards of the Land Use Code that
are authorized by this Division to be modified except in a nominal, inconsequential way
when considered from the perspective of the entire development plan.
When considered within the context of the total Employment (E) District in the area of the
P.D.P., allowing a 1.04 acre lot to develop as residential increases the percentage of
secondary uses within the total E District by only .4%. “Total E District” was defined as
the general area bounded by Prospect Road to the north, Drake Road to the south,
Shields Street to the west and College Avenue to the east, not including property owned
by Colorado State University. Please see attached the applicant’s request for a
Modification of Standard.
5. Findings of Fact/Conclusion
In evaluating the request for the Prospect Station II Project Development Plan, P.D.P. #150021,
Staff makes the following findings of fact:
A. The P.D.P. complies with the process located in Division 2.2 - Common Development
Review Procedures for Development Applications of Article 2 - Administration.
B. The P.D.P. complies with relevant standards located in Article 3 - General Development
Standards.
C. The P.D.P. complies with relevant standards located in Division 4.27, Employment
District (E) of Article 4 - Districts, with the exception of the following Modification of
Standard to Section 4.27(D)(2).
D. The P.D.P. complies with a request for a Modification of Standard (Section 2.8) to allow a
100% residential development in the Employment District; in that it is not detrimental to
the public good and that the plan as submitted will not diverge from the standards of the
Land Use Code that are authorized by this Division to be modified except in a nominal,
166
Agenda Item 7
Item # 7 Page 9
inconsequential way when considered from the perspective of the entire development
plan. When considered within the context of the total Employment (E) District in the area
of the P.D.P., allowing a 1.04 acre lot to develop as residential increases the percentage
of secondary uses within the total E District by only .4%.
“Total E District” was defined as the general area bounded by Prospect Road to the
north, Drake Road to the south, Shields Street to the west and College Avenue to the
east, not including property owned by Colorado State University.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the Prospect Station II Project
Development Plan, P.D.P. #150021 based on the findings of fact found on page 10 of the staff report.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Prospect Station II - Site Plan (PDF)
2. Prospect Station II - Landscape Plans (PDF)
3. Prospect Station II - Elevations (PDF)
4. Prospect Station II - Photometric Plan (PDF)
5. Prospect Station II - Modification Request (PDF)
6. Prospect Station II - Neighborhood Meeting Summary (PDF)
7. Prospect Station II – Traffic Impact Study (PDF)
167
168
169
170
ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF -
BEIGE/GRAY
FIBER CEMENT VERTICAL
BOARD & BATTEN SIDING -
WARM GRAY
FIBER CEMENT TRIM - WHITE
STUCCO - BEIGE/TAN
BRICK VENEER - BROWNISH RED
VINYL WINDOWS
STEEL CHANNEL 'HUNG' DECK
- DARK GRAY/BLACK
DECK RAILING -
DARK GRAY/BLACK
FIBER CEMENT FASCIA
BOARD - WHITE
FIBER CEMENT PANEL -
DARK GRAY
BRICK VENEER - BROWNISH RED BRICK VENEER - BROWNISH RED
STEEL BRACE -
BROWNISH RED
37' - 0"
4" / 12"
4" / 12"
BICK VENEER -
BROWNISH RED
STUCCO - BEIGE/TAN
DECK RAILING -
DARK GRAY/BLACK
STEEL CHANNEL
'HUNG' DECK - DARK
GRAY/BLACK
FIBER CEMENT TRIM
BOARD - WHITE
FIBER CEMENT
VERTICAL BOARD &
BATTEN SIDING - GRAY
ASPHALT SHINGLE
ROOF - BEIGE/GRAY
37' - 0"
STUCCO - BROWNISH RED BRICK VENEER - BROWNISH RED
4" / 12"
5 4 3 2 1
A
B
C
D
PROJECT
DATE
DRAWN
712 WHALERS WAY SUITE, B-100
FORT COLLINS, CO 80525
(970) 223-1820
www.alm2s.com
PRINTED 2/1/2016 2:57:02 PM FILE NAME:
C 2015 alm2s
1533-Project-SD.rvt
BUILDING ELEVATIONS
1533
ksj
02.02.2016
ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF -
BEIGE/GRAY
FIBER CEMENT VERTICAL
BOARD & BATTEN SIDING -
WARM GRAY
FIBER CEMENT TRIM - WHITE
STUCCO - BEIGE/TAN
BRICK VENEER - BROWNISH RED
VINYL WINDOWS
STEEL CHANNEL 'HUNG' DECK
- DARK GRAY/BLACK
DECK RAILING -
DARK GRAY/BLACK
FIBER CEMENT FASCIA
BOARD - WHITE
FIBER CEMENT PANEL -
DARK GRAY
STUCCO - BROWNISH RED
STUCCO - BEIGE/TAN BRICK VENEER - BROWNISH RED
STUCCO - BROWNISH RED
STEEL BRACE - BROWNISH RED
37' - 0"
STUCCO - BROWNISH RED
STUCCO - BROWNISH RED
4" / 12"
4" / 12"
BICK VENEER -
BROWNISH RED
STUCCO - BEIGE/TAN
DECK RAILING -
DARK GRAY/BLACK
STEEL CHANNEL
'HUNG' DECK - DARK
GRAY/BLACK
FIBER CEMENT TRIM
BOARD - WHITE
FIBER CEMENT
VERTICAL BOARD &
BATTEN SIDING - GRAY
ASPHALT SHINGLE
ROOF - BEIGE/GRAY
37' - 0"
4" / 12"
TUBE STEEL POSTS AND STEEL
SWING DOORS - DARK GRAY
PRECAST CAP - BEIGE/BUFF
BRICK VENEER - BROWNISH RED
BRICK VENEER - BROWNISH RED
PRECAST CAP - BEIGE/BUFF
5' - 6"
8' - 4"
BRICK VENEER - BROWNISH RED
PRECAST CAP - BEIGE/BUFF
5' - 6"
15' - 8"
5 4 3 2 1
A
B
C
D
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.1
February 1, 2016
City of Fort Collins
Current Planning Department
281 North College Ave.
Fort Collins, CO 80524
Re: Prospect Station II
303 West Prospect Road
Please accept this request for a Modification of Standards to Division 4.27 Employment District
of the Land Use Code.
Background
The Prospect Station II PDP is located at 303 West Prospect Road. The project consists of a
three story multi-family building containing 36 units and 54 bedrooms. The proposed project
would replace the existing office building and asphalt parking area with a three-story 100%
residential building with a surface parking lot. The 1.04-acre site is bounded by Prospect Road to
the north and CSURF-owned land to the south. The existing Prospect Station apartment building
is directly to the east. Overall density 34.6 dwelling units per acre.
Modification to Section 4.27(D)(2)
Code Language: Section 4.27(D)(2) Secondary Uses states the following:
All secondary uses shall be integrated both in function and appearance into a
larger employment district development plan that emphasizes primary uses.
A secondary use shall be subject to administrative review or Planning and
Zoning Board review as required for such use in Section 4.27(B). The
following permitted uses shall be considered secondary uses in this zone
district and together shall occupy no more than twenty-five (25) percent
of the total gross area of the development plan.
(d) Residential uses (except mixed-use dwellings when the residential units
are stacked above a primary use which occupies the ground floor).
Requested Modification: The Prospect Station II project is requesting to have 100% of the
development plan be a residential use.
Modification Criteria
The request of approval for this modification complies with the standards per Review Criteria 2.8.2
(H)(1) and (2) in the following ways:
Attachment 5
174
2
1. The plan as submitted will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the
modification is requested equally well or better than would a plan which complies with
the standard for which a modification is requested.
2. Further, we feel that the granting of the modification would not be detrimental to the
public good.
Justification
We feel that the plan as submitted will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the
modification is requested equally well or better than would a plan which complies with the
standard for which a modification is requested for the following reasons:
• The proposed plan is in a location that is desirable for housing due to its proximity to CSU
and the nearby new CSU medical center. Although not specifically targeted towards the
student population, there is a housing need for CSU faculty, staff and other employees in
the adjacent neighborhood. This project will provide opportunities for affordable living for
this demographic.
• Further, the site lacks the qualities that employment-based users are typically seeking due
to its small 1-acre size.
• The proposed alternative plan continues to improve the design, quality and character of
new development by exceeding the building standards set forth in Section 3.5. The use of
high quality residential building materials, building articulation, projections and recesses,
along with pitched roof elements ensures sensitivity to and compatibility with the
surrounding neighborhood.
• We feel that the proposed alternative plan ensures sensitivity to the surrounding
neighborhood by building an attractive, desirable product in an infill site with a price point
that the market desires and that the community can be proud of.
• We believe that the granting of a Modification by allowing 100% of the 1.04-acre site to be
developed as a secondary land use is inconsequential when considered from the
perspective of the entire Employment district. The intent of employment in this area was
primarily intended for the CSURF-owned land to the south in the Centre for Advanced
Technology. By allowing a small, 1-acre lot to develop as residential is nominal and
inconsequential when considered from the perspective of the entire zone district.
Total Employment Zone = +/- 211.3 acres
Primary Uses 72.9 acres 34.5%
Secondary Uses 46.6 acres 22.1%
Vacant/Other 91.8 acres 43.5%
With Prospect Station II being built as housing, the total of the Secondary Uses goes up to
22.5%, representing an increase of .4%
• The addition of residential units only in this current Employment District will aid current
businesses in the neighborhood of Prospect and College Avenue, some of which are
struggling financially, with increased patronage and sales volume. Several businesses
Attachment 5
175
3
have closed their doors in the past few months due to lack of sales (El Monte and 900
Degree Pizza to name a few).
• Residential use, by those both living and working in the same neighborhood, rather than
employment uses will limit increased vehicular traffic along the Prospect Road corridor.
Allowing this project to be built as 100% residential in the Employment Zone will
substantially reduce the number of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT).
Attachment 5
176
Community Development &
Neighborhood Services
Planning
281 North College Avenue
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580
970.221.6376
970.224.6111- fax
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING SUMMARY
PROJECT: Prospect Station Phase II
DATE: October 6, 2015
LOCATION: Plymouth Congregational Church, 916 W. Prospect Rd.
PROJECT PLANNER: Seth Lorson
NUMBER OF ATTENDEES: 4
Project Planner Presentation Summary:
• Applicant has not formally applied yet – this is a pre-submittal neighborhood meeting. A
preliminary design review meeting was held May 20, 2015.
• The information from the neighborhood meetings will be forwarded to the decision maker for
the project, in this case the Planning and Zoning Board. No public hearing date has been set yet.
• Project consists of a parcel located at 303 West Prospect Rd.
• The parcel is zoned for Employment use and is also located in the Transit-Oriented Development
(TOD) Overlay Zone. The project proposes a multifamily dwelling of 36 units with 54 bedrooms.
As currently proposed, the project will require a modification because the Employment Zone
limits secondary uses (such as residential uses) to 25% of the total gross area of the
development plan.
Applicant Presentation Summary:
• Representatives from the TB Group, alm2s architects, property management for Prospect
Station I and the property owner all present.
• Rayno Seaser (owner): Has lived in FC for 27 years, owner of the Egg and I restaurant and
background in construction. Our goal with Prospect Station I was not to create student housing,
was to provide housing for young professionals and we’re proud to say that we achieved that
goal. We think we achieved our goal with the first phase of putting an attractive building
together that is a gateway to CSU.
• Alex Schuman (property management for project and existing building): Existing demographics
are primarily young professionals, CSU faculty.
• Griffin Foundation isn’t interested in being in the existing building at 303 W. Prospect anymore
• We have extra parking spaces in our first building that aren’t being used
• The existing building is transit-oriented, and that’s been very successful. Our goal for Phase 2 is
the same. We’re hoping when the University Health building goes in on Prospect, that people
working there will want to live nearby.
• Driveway that already exists will be shared with new building, no new curb cuts. Parking on
south side, 44 spaces (32 required).
Attachment 6
177
Prospect Station Phase II – Neighborhood Meeting Summary Page 2
October 6, 2015
• City has adopted a Prospect Road streetscape program, and our sidewalk will comply with those
guidelines. This will be one of the first projects under this newly adopted set of standards.
• 36 units, 18 one-bedroom and 18 two-bedrooms
• Differences between Phase 1 and Phase 2
o Phase 1 parking on main level (tuck-under parking)
o Phase 2 parking – this will be a walk-up project with a traditional surface lot with
breezeways. Residents can access building from both sides of building.
• Hip roof, like Phase 1 with some shed roof elements. Want to be similar to Phase 1 without
replicating exactly.
• Design tries to break up the building with breezeways that are very identifiable as entry points.
Break a long building down into smaller buildings, more of a human scale.
• Materials are brick/masonry below, vertical siding up high, stucco in the middle. Using
identifiable window treatments at different levels to add diversity to building.
Questions, Comments & Responses:
Q: (Citizen) What are the lease rates and square footage?
A: (Applicant) Studios $950 (just under 500 sf) – $1500 for 2 bedroom
Q: (Citizen) The housing problem is not going to last. What are you going to do with $950 studios when
the bubble pops?
A: (Applicant) We’ve been tracking the statistics. With CSU increasing enrollment, and the growth in
town…
Q: (Citizen) CSU’s enrollment numbers aren’t as big as you think
A: (Applicant) People are continuing to move to Northern Colorado
Q: (Citizen) I wish people would stop! If you stopped building, maybe they would stop coming. It’s not as
enjoyable as it used to be.
Q: (Citizen) Can you afford to lower your rent?
A: (Applicant) Yes, we could if the market dropped, but we don’t think we will have to do that. There’s
also been a trend nationwide toward smaller units, people will trade size for location if it’s a good
location. Proximity to CSU, shopping, and downtown is attractive.
Q: (Citizen) There’s still not East-West connectivity
A: (Applicant) We’ve been in Fort Collins a long time, and we love it as much as you do. We wanted to
build a nice building that people want to live in. Growth is a challenge, and we need to figure out how to
build density in a way that works. We had the ability to build more units, and we’ve chosen not to do
that.
Attachment 6
178
Prospect Station Phase II – Neighborhood Meeting Summary Page 3
October 6, 2015
Q: (Citizen) Where are you getting your utilities from?
A: (Applicant) Utilities are already in from Prospect, along the existing driveway.
Q: (Citizen) So you don’t need to come up from the south?
A: (Applicant) No.
Q: (Citizen) Will you put in any retail?
A: (Applicant) It took us awhile to fill our first retail space in Phase 1. We were willing to do live-work
units for people, and we were surprised that no one wanted to do that. The businesses across the street
have vacancies as well. And we didn’t want the traffic congestion. Quiet enjoyment by good tenants we
thought was a better use.
Q: (Citizen) Will Prospect be expanded? We don’t like being on Prospect right now.
A: (City) The Prospect streetscape project was to make Prospect better for bikes and pedestrians within
the existing right-of-way.
A: (Applicant) The landscaping you see is interactive. Places for people to rest, enjoy the day, etc.
Q: (Citizen) Will the current turning lane on Prospect stay?
A: (Applicant) Yes, we won’t be disturbing Prospect at all.
A: (City) This is a diagram of the future plan for Prospect. The future street cross-section is 2 10-foot
travel lanes on each side, a center turning lane, 2.5 foot sidewalks/bike facilities, and a tree lawn to
separate the sidewalk from the street.
Q: (Citizen) When I had a change in use, the city told me there would be some changes.
A: (City) You mean you had to dedicate right-of-way?
Q: (Citizen) It cost me quite a bit of money, and it’s still costing me money. I had to make changes to the
sidewalk, and deal with stormwater. I don’t have the parking I used to have because of the right-of-way I
had to dedicate for the railway. I have a parking problem, only enough parking for the operators of the
buildings and a few customers. My tenants are threatening to move out because there isn’t enough
parking.
A: (City) Thank you for doing that, thanks for making those improvements for the community.
Q: (Citizen) Can you talk a bit about the schedule/likely schedule? How long will it take until you’re ready
to break ground, and then how long to build once you do break ground?
A: (Applicant) Hope to start March 2016 and complete in May 2017.
Attachment 6
179
180
DELICH Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
ASSOCIATES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 1
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS .......................................................................................... 2
Land Use......................................................................................................................... 2
Streets............................................................................................................................. 2
Existing Traffic................................................................................................................. 2
Existing Operation........................................................................................................... 6
Pederstrian Facilities....................................................................................................... 6
Bicycle Facilities..............................................................................................................6
Transit Facilities ..............................................................................................................6
III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT................................................................................. 8
Trip Generation ............................................................................................................... 8
Trip Distribution ............................................................................................................. 10
Background Traffic Projections ..................................................................................... 10
Trip Assignment ............................................................................................................ 10
Signal Warrants............................................................................................................. 10
Operation Analysis ........................................................................................................ 19
Geometry ...................................................................................................................... 22
Pedestrian Level of Service........................................................................................... 22
Bicycle Level of Service ................................................................................................ 22
Transit Level of Service................................................................................................. 24
IV. CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................... 25
181
DELICH Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
ASSOCIATES
LIST OF TABLES
1. Current Peak Hour Operation.................................................................................... 7
2. Trip Generation ......................................................................................................... 8
3. Short Range (2018) Background Peak Hour Operation .......................................... 20
4. Long Range (2035) Background Peak Hour Operation........................................... 20
5. Short Range (2018) Total Peak Hour Operation ..................................................... 21
6. Long Range (2035) Total Peak Hour Operation...................................................... 21
LIST OF FIGURES
1. Site Location ............................................................................................................. 3
2. Existing Geometry..................................................................................................... 4
3. Recent Peak Hour Traffic .......................................................................................... 5
4. Site Plan.................................................................................................................... 9
5. Trip Distribution ....................................................................................................... 11
6. Short Range (2018) Background Peak Hour Traffic................................................ 12
7. Long Range (2035) Background Peak Hour Traffic................................................. 13
8. Short Range (2018) Assigned Site Generated Peak Hour Traffic ........................... 14
9. Short Range (2018) and Long Range (2035) Pass-by
Site Generated Peak Hour Traffic ........................................................................... 15
10. Long Range (2035) Assigned Site Generated Peak Hour Traffic............................ 16
11. Short Range (2018) Total Peak Hour Traffic ........................................................... 17
12. Long Range (2035) Total Peak Hour Traffic............................................................ 18
13. Short Range (2018) Geometry ................................................................................ 23
APPENDICES
A. Base Assumptions Form
B. Peak Hour Traffic Counts
C. Current Peak Hour Operation/Level of Service Descriptions/Fort Collins Motor
Vehicle LOS Standards (Intersections)
D. Short Range (2018) Background Peak Hour Operation
E. Long Range (2035) Background Peak Hour Operation
F. Short Range (2018) Total Peak Hour Operation
G. Long Range (2035) Total Peak Hour Operation
H. Pedestrian/Bicycle Level of Service Worksheets
182
DELICH Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
ASSOCIATES Page 1
I. INTRODUCTION
This Transportation Impact Study (TIS) addresses the capacity, geometric, and
control requirements for the proposed Prospect Station. The proposed Prospect Station
site is located along the south side of Prospect Road just west of the railroad tracks in Fort
Collins, Colorado.
During the course of the analysis, numerous contacts were made with the project
planning consultant (TB Group), the project architect (R4 Architects), the project civil
engineer (Interwest Consulting Group), and the City of Fort Collins Traffic Engineer. The
Transportation Impact Study Base Assumptions form and related documents are provided
in Appendix A. This study generally conforms to the format set forth in the Fort Collins TIS
Guidelines in the “Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards” (LCUASS). Scoping
discussions were held with the Fort Collins Traffic Engineering staff. The study involved
the following steps:
- Collect physical, traffic, and development data;
- Perform trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment;
- Determine peak hour traffic volumes;
- Conduct capacity and operational level of service analyses on key intersections;
- Analyze signal warrants;
- Conduct level of service evaluation of pedestrian, bicycle, and transit modes of
transportation
183
DELICH Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
ASSOCIATES Page 2
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The location of the Prospect Station is shown in Figure 1. It is important that a
thorough understanding of the existing conditions be presented.
Land Use
Land uses in the area are primarily residential and commercial/office. There are
residential uses to the north of the site. There are existing commercial uses to the
north, east, and west of the site. Colorado State University is to the north of the site.
This site is near the center of Fort Collins.
Streets
The primary street near the Prospect Station site is Prospect Road. Figure 2
shows the current geometry at the key intersections.
Prospect Road is north (adjacent to) of the proposed Prospect Station site. It is
an east-west street classified as a four-lane arterial street in this area on the Fort Collins
Master Street Plan. Currently, Prospect Road has two through lanes in each direction
and a two-way left-turn lane. The posted speed limit is 35 mph in this area pf Prospect
Road. The west driveway serves 3500 square feet of office use (Griffin Buildings) on
the south leg, and 16 apartment units and the Rocky Mountain Research Station on the
north leg. The center driveway serves a vacant gas station (Prospect Station Site) on
the south leg and 8 apartment units on the north leg. The east driveway serves a
vacant gas station (Prospect Station Site) on the south leg and a 2400 square foot
restaurant (Suh Sushi) and 3475 square feet of retail space on the north leg. The south
leg of the east driveway will be vacated with the proposed Prospect Station
development. All driveway accesses along Prospect Road have all movements
combined into a single lane.
Existing Traffic
Recent peak hour traffic volumes at the Prospect/West Driveway,
Prospect/Center Driveway, and Prospect/East Driveway intersections are shown in
Figure 3. The counts at the key intersections were obtained in February 2013. Raw
traffic count data is provided in Appendix B. It was observed that the traffic to/from the
south access at the Prospect/Center Driveway intersection was construction traffic for
the Mason Street Corridor/Max Project.
184
SCALE: 1"=500'
SITE LOCATION Figure 1
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
Page 3
College Avenue
Remington Street
Prospect Road
Lake Street
Pitkin Street
Centre Avenue
185
EXISTING GEOMETRY Figure 2
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
Page 4
West Driveway
Prospect
Road
Center Driveway
East Driveway
Prospect
Road
- Denotes Lane
186
RECENT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 3
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
Page 5
AM/PM
0/1
0/0
0/1
1/8
0/0
0/11
4/1
942/1108
0/0
14/5
923/1359
0/0
0/0
0/0
0/0
0/3
0/0
0/2
1/5
937/1120
0/0
1/4
940/1364
0/0
West Driveway
Prospect
Road
2/0
0/0
3/8
0/2
0/0
0/0
0/1
935/1117
7/2
0/0
935/1362
5/5
Center Driveway
East Driveway
187
DELICH Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
ASSOCIATES Page 6
Existing Operation
The Prospect/West Driveway, Prospect/Center Driveway, and Prospect/East
Driveway intersections were evaluated using techniques provided in the 2010 Highway
Capacity Manual. Using the morning and afternoon peak hour traffic shown in Figure 3,
the peak hour operation is shown in Table 1. Calculation forms are provided in
Appendix C. The key intersections are currently operating acceptably with existing
control and geometry in the morning and afternoon peak hours. At the Prospect/West
Driveway intersection, the calculated delays for the northbound and southbound
approaches are commensurate with level of service F in the afternoon peak hour. At
the Prospect/East Driveway intersection, the calculated delay for the southbound
approach is commensurate with level of service F in the afternoon peak hour. A
description of level of service for unsignalized intersection from the 2010 Highway
Capacity Manual and a table showing the Fort Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standards
(Intersections) are also provided in Appendix C. The Prospect Station site is in an area
termed “campus district.” The “campus district’ is considered to be a “mixed use district”
for the purpose of motor vehicle level of service standards. In areas termed “mixed use
districts,” acceptable operation at unsignalized intersections during the peak hours is
defined as level of service F for any approach leg for an arterial/local intersection. In
such areas, it is expected that there would be substantial delays to the minor street
movements at unsignalized intersections during the peak hours. This is considered to
be normal in urban areas.
Pedestrian Facilities
Pedestrian facilities in this area were built under earlier street standards.
Sidewalks exist along Prospect Road in this area. There are pedestrian crosswalks and
ramps at the Prospect/Centre and College/Prospect intersections.
Bicycle Facilities
There are no bicycle lanes along Prospect Road. Lake Street, one block to the
north, is the closest street with east-west bike lanes. The Spring Creek Trail is to the
south. A spur path to the Spring Creek trail runs along the west side of the railroad
tracks connecting to Prospect Road.
Transit Facilities
The study area is service by Transfort. This area is served (within 1320 feet) by
transit routes 1 and 7. Route 1 operates on College Avenue and Route 7 operates on
Centre Avenue.
188
DELICH Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
ASSOCIATES Page 7
TABLE 1
Current Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM PM
EB LT B B
WB LT A A
NB LT/T/RT A F
Prospect/West Driveway
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT B F
EB LT A B
WB LT B B
NB LT/T/RT D B
Prospect/Center Driveway
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT A C
EB LT B B
WB LT A A
NB LT/T/RT A A
Prospect/East Driveway
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT A F
189
DELICH Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
ASSOCIATES Page 8
III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The Prospect Station is proposed as a 29 unit (69 beds) apartment building and a
900 square foot retail use. In discussions with the project team members, it was
decided a likely use would be a coffee shop. In the long range future, it is expected that
lots 2 and 3 will develop as office uses. Figure 4 shows a site plan of the Prospect
Station. The short range analysis (Year 2018) includes development of the Prospect
Station (Lot 1) and an appropriate increase in background traffic due to normal growth
and other potential developments in the area. The long range analysis (Year 2035)
includes development of the Prospect Station (Lots 1, 2, and 3) and an appropriate
increase in background traffic due to normal growth and in general accordance with the
Fort Collins Structure Plan. The site plan shows that the Prospect Station will have one
access to Prospect Road. The south leg of the Prospect/East Driveway intersection will
be vacated. The south leg of the Center Driveway will be a public street (Tamasag).
Trip Generation
Trip generation is important in considering the impact of a development such as this
upon the existing and proposed street system. Trip generation information contained in
Trip Generation, 9th Edition, ITE was used to estimate the trips that would be generated by
the proposed/expected use at the Prospect Station site. Land use codes 220
(apartments), 936 (coffee shop), and 710 (general office) were used to determine the trip
generation of the site. A trip is defined as a one-way vehicle movement from origin to
destination. Table 2 shows the expected trip generation on a daily and peak hour basis.
The total short range (2018) trip generation of the Prospect Station development resulted
in 830 daily trip ends, 112 morning peak hour trip ends, and 58 afternoon peak hour trip
ends. The total long range (2035) trip generation of Prospect Station plus the lots to the
south resulted in 1216 daily trips, 167 morning peak hour trip ends, and 110 afternoon
peak hour trip ends.
TABLE 2
Trip Generation
AWDTE AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Code Use Size
Rate Trips Rate In Rate Out Rate In Rate Out
Short Range
220 Apartment 69 persons Eq. 174 0.06 4 0.22 15 Eq. 19 Eq. 10
Alternate Modes – 25% 44 1 4 5 2
Assigned Apartment Trips 130 3 11 14 8
936 Coffee Shop 0.9 KSF Data 700 55.27 50 53.01 48 20.38
18 20.38 18
Pass-by – 90% 630 44 44 16 16
Assigned Coffee Shop Trips 70 6 4 2 2
Short Range Total Assigned Trips 200 9 15 16 10
Long Range
710 General Office 35.0 KSF 11.03 386 1.37 48 0.19 7 0.25 9 1.24 43
Long Range Total Assigned Trips 586 57 22 25 53
190
191
DELICH Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
ASSOCIATES Page 10
Trip Distribution
Trip distribution for the Prospect Station was based on existing/future travel
patterns, land uses in the area, consideration of trip attractions/productions in the area,
and engineering judgment. Figure 5 shows the trip distribution for the short range
(2018) and long range (2035) analysis future. The trip distribution was agreed to by City
of Fort Collins staff.
Background Traffic Projections
Figures 6 and 7 show the respective short range (2018) background traffic and
long range (2035) background projections at the key intersections. Background traffic
projections for the short range and long range future horizon were obtained by
reviewing the North Front Range Regional Transportation Plan and various traffic
studies prepared for this area of Fort Collins. Based upon these sources, it was
determined that traffic volumes on Prospect Road would increase by approximately
2.0% per year plus other developments in the area. The developments included in this
TIS were the Grove and the Choice Center developments, which are approved and
under construction. The observed construction related vehicles on the south leg of the
center driveway were not included in the background peak hour traffic.
Trip Assignment
Trip assignment is how the generated and distributed trips are expected to be
loaded on the street system. The assigned trips are the resultant of the trip distribution
process. Figure 8 shows the short range (2018) assigned site generated peak hour traffic
assignment. Figure 9 shows the short range (2018) and long range (2035) pass-by site
generated peak hour traffic assignment. Figure 10 shows the long range (2035) assigned
site generated daily traffic assignment. Figure 11 shows the short range (2018) total (site
plus background) peak hour traffic at the key intersections. Figure 12 shows the long
range (2035) total (site plus background) peak hour traffic at the key intersections.
Signal Warrants
As a matter of policy, traffic signals are not installed at any location unless warrants
are met according to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. It is expected that
peak hour signal warrants will not be met at the any of the key stop sign control
intersections. In addition to this, arterial/driveway intersections would not meet the signal
spacing criteria.
192
TRIP DISTRIBUTION Figure 5
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
Page 11
Prospect Road
SITE
40% 60%
193
SHORT RANGE (2018) BACKGROUND
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 6
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
Page 12
AM/PM
0/1
0/0
0/1
1/8
0/0
0/11
4/1
1078/1263
0/0
14/5
1039/1570
0/0
West Driveway
Prospect
Road
0/0
0/0
0/0
0/2
0/0
0/0
0/1
1078/1274
0/0
0/0
1053/1573
0/0
Center Driveway
East Driveway
0/3
0/2
1/4
1053/1570
1/5
1077/1269
194
LONG RANGE (2035) BACKGROUND
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 7
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
Page 13
0/5
0/0
0/5
5/10
0/0
0/10
5/5
1490/1755
0/0
15/5
1450/2175
0/0
West Driveway
Prospect
Road
0/0
0/0
0/0
0/5
0/0
0/0
0/5
1490/1765
0/0
0/0
1465/2175
0/0
Center Driveway
East Driveway
0/5
0/5
5/5
1465/2170
5/5
1485/1760
AM/PM
Rounded to Nearest
5 Vehicles
195
SHORT RANGE (2018) ASSIGNED SITE
GENERATED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 8
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
Page 14
4/6
6/4
West Driveway
Prospect
Road
6/4
NOM
9/6
4/6
5/10
Center Driveway
East Driveway
5/10
9/6
AM/PM
196
SHORT RANGE (2018) AND LONG
RANGE (2035) PASS-BY SITE
GENERATED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 9
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
Page 15
West Driveway
Prospect
Road
22/9
22/7
-22/-7
22/7
-22/-9
22/9
Center Driveway
East Driveway
AM/PM
197
LONG RANGE (2035) ASSIGNED SITE
GENERATED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 10
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
Page 16
23/10
9/21
West Driveway
Prospect
Road
9/21
NOM
13/32
23/10
34/15
Center Driveway
East Driveway
34/15
13/32
AM/PM
198
SHORT RANGE (2018) TOTAL
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 11
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
Page 17
AM/PM
0/1
0/0
0/1
1/8
0/0
0/11
4/1
1082/1269
0/0
14/5
1045/1574
0/0
West Driveway
Prospect
Road
28/13
0/0
31/13
0/2
0/0
0/0
0/1
1056/1267
26/13
0/0
1031/1564
27/19
Center Driveway
East Driveway
0/3
0/2
1/4
1058/1580
1/5
1086/1275
199
LONG RANGE (2035) TOTAL
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 12
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
Page 18
0/5
0/0
0/5
5/10
0/0
0/10
5/5
1515/1765
0/0
15/5
1460/2195
0/0
West Driveway
Prospect
Road
30/30
0/0
35/40
0/5
0/0
0/0
0/5
1470/1755
45/20
0/0
1445/2165
55/25
Center Driveway
East Driveway
0/5
0/5
5/5
1500/2185
5/5
1500/1790
AM/PM
Rounded to Nearest
5 Vehicles
200
DELICH Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
ASSOCIATES Page 19
Operation Analysis
Operation analyses were performed at the Prospect/West Driveway,
Prospect/Center Driveway, and Prospect/East Driveway intersections. The operations
analyses were conducted for the short range future, reflecting a year 2018 condition, and
long range future, reflecting a year 2035 condition.
Using the short range (2018) background traffic volumes shown in Figure 6, the
Prospect/West Driveway, Prospect/Center Driveway, and Prospect/East Driveway
intersections operate as indicated in Table 3. Calculation forms for these analyses are
provided in Appendix D. The key intersections will operate acceptably. At the
Prospect/West Driveway intersection, the calculated delay for the northbound and
southbound approaches in the afternoon peak hour was commensurate with level of
service F. This is considered to be normal during the peak hours at stop sign controlled
intersections along arterial streets.
Using the long range (2035) background traffic volumes shown in Figure 7, the
Prospect/West Driveway, Prospect/Center Driveway, and Prospect/East Driveway
intersections operate as indicated in Table 4. Calculation forms for these analyses are
provided in Appendix E. The key intersections will operate acceptably. At the
Prospect/West Driveway intersection, the calculated delay for the northbound and
southbound approaches in the afternoon peak hour was commensurate with level of
service F. At the Prospect/East Driveway intersection, the calculated delay for the
southbound approach in the afternoon peak hours was commensurate with level of service
F. This is considered to be normal during the peak hours at stop sign controlled
intersections along arterial streets.
Using the short range (2018) total traffic volumes shown in Figure 11, the
Prospect/West Driveway, Prospect/Center Driveway, and Prospect/East Driveway
intersections operate as indicated in Table 5. Calculation forms for these analyses are
provided in Appendix F. The key intersections will operate acceptably. At the
Prospect/West Driveway intersection the calculated delay for the northbound and
southbound approaches in the afternoon peak hour was commensurate with level of
service F. At the Prospect/Center Driveway intersection the calculated delay for the
northbound approach in the morning and afternoon peak hours was commensurate with
level of service F. This is considered to be normal during the peak hours at stop sign
controlled intersections along arterial streets.
Using the long range (2035) total traffic volumes shown in Figure 12, the
Prospect/West Driveway, Prospect/Center Driveway, and Prospect/East Driveway
intersections operate as indicated in Table 6. Calculation forms for these analyses are
provided in Appendix G. The key intersections will operate acceptably. At the
Prospect/West Driveway intersection, the calculated delay for the northbound and
southbound approaches in the morning and afternoon peak hours was commensurate with
level of service E and F. At the Prospect/Center Driveway intersection, the calculated
delay for the northbound and southbound approaches in the morning and afternoon peak
201
DELICH Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
ASSOCIATES Page 20
TABLE 3
Short Range (2018) Background Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM PM
EB LT B B
WB LT A A
NB LT/T/RT A F
Prospect/West Driveway
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT B F
EB LT A B
WB LT A A
NB LT/T/RT A B
Prospect/Center Driveway
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT A C
Prospect/East Driveway EB LT B B
(stop sign) SB LT/RT A D
TABLE 4
Long Range (2035) Background Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM PM
EB LT B C
WB LT A A
NB LT/T/RT A F
Prospect/West Driveway
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT C F
EB LT A C
WB LT A A
NB LT/T/RT A A
Prospect/Center Driveway
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT A C
Prospect/East Driveway EB LT B C
(stop sign) SB LT/RT A F
202
DELICH Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
ASSOCIATES Page 21
TABLE 5
Short Range (2018) Total Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM PM
EB LT B B
WB LT A A
NB LT/T/RT A F
Prospect/West Driveway
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT B F
EB LT A B
WB LT B B
NB LT/T/RT F F
Prospect/Center Driveway
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT A C
Prospect/East Driveway EB LT B B
(stop sign) SB LT/T/RT A D
TABLE 6
Long Range (2035) Total Peak Hour Operation
Intersection Movement Level of Service
AM PM
EB LT B C
WB LT B C
NB LT/T/RT F F
Prospect/West Driveway
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT E F
EB LT B C
WB LT C C
NB LT/T/RT F F
Prospect/Center Driveway
(stop sign)
SB LT/T/RT F F
Prospect/East Driveway EB LT B C
(stop sign) SB LT/RT E F
203
DELICH Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
ASSOCIATES Page 22
hours was commensurate with level of service F. At the Prospect/East Driveway
intersection, the calculated delay for the southbound approach in the morning and
afternoon peak hours was commensurate with level of service E and F, respectively. This
is considered to be normal during the peak hours at stop sign controlled intersections
along arterial streets.
Geometry
Figure 13 shows a schematic of the short range (2018) geometry. This is the
existing geometry. If/when Lots 2 and 3 develop (as 35,000 square feet of office), the
eastbound right-turn volume in the morning peak hour will exceed the threshold requiring a
right-turn deceleration lane according to LCUASS, Figure 8-4.
Pedestrian Level of Service
Appendix H shows a map of the area that is within 1320 feet of the Prospect
Station development. There will be five pedestrian destinations within 1320 feet of the
Prospect Station development. These are: 1) Colorado State University to the north of
the site, 2) the residential area and office to the west of the site, 3) the commercial area
to the east, 4) the residential area to the east of the site, and 5) the Spring Creek Trail to
the south of the site. This site is in an area type termed “pedestrian district.” The
minimum level of service for “pedestrian district,” is A, except for Street Crossing which
is B. Acceptable pedestrian level of service cannot be achieved for all pedestrian
destinations. Continuity is not achieved, since Prospect Road was built under earlier
street standards. Street Crossing is not achieved to area 4, since College Avenue has
an eight lane cross section. Pedestrian LOS Worksheet is provided in Appendix H
Bicycle Level of Service
Appendix H shows a map of the area that is within 1320 feet of the Prospect
Station development. There are two destination areas within 1320 feet of the proposed
Prospect Station development: 1) Colorado State University to the north of the site and
2) the Spring Creek Trail to the south. Based upon Fort Collins bicycle LOS criteria, the
level of service threshold for bicycles is LOS C. The Prospect Station site is adjacent to
the Mason Street Multi-modal Corridor. The Mason Street Multi-modal Corridor will
install a Pedestrian/Bicycle signal crossing Prospect Road just west of the railroad
tracks. Prospect Station is connected to east-west bike lanes on Lake Street via the
Mason Street Multi-modal Corridor, which satisfies the LOS C criteria. The bicycle LOS
worksheet is provided in Appendix H.
204
SHORT RANGE (2018) GEOMETRY Figure 13
DELICH
ASSOCIATES
Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
Page 23
West Driveway
Prospect
Road
Center Driveway
East Driveway
Prospect
Road
- Denotes Lane
205
DELICH Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
ASSOCIATES Page 24
Transit Level of Service
The study area has extensive transit service. This area is served (within 1320
feet) by transit routes 1 and 7. The Prospect Station is adjacent to the MAX. The MAX
will have a station on the north side a Prospect Road. The MAX will provide convenient
north-south bus rapid transit to residents of Prospect Station. The Prospect Station
development is located in an area defined as “mixed-use centers and commercial
corridors” for the purpose of public transit level of service evaluation. In the future,
transit service will be improved as depicted on the Fort Collins Transit System Plan.
The future level of service will be in the B category.
206
DELICH Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
ASSOCIATES Page 25
IV. CONCLUSIONS
This study assessed the impacts of the Prospect Station on the street system in the
vicinity of the proposed development in the short range (2018) and long range (2035)
future. As a result of this analysis, the following is concluded:
- The development of the Prospect Station is feasible from a traffic engineering
standpoint. The total short range (2018) trip generation of the Prospect Station
development will generate approximately 830 daily trip ends, 112 morning peak
hour trip ends, and 58 afternoon peak hour trip ends. The total long range (2035)
trip generation of the Prospect Station plus the lots to the south will generate
approximately 1216 daily trip ends, 167 morning peak hour trip ends, and 110
afternoon peak hour trip ends.
- Currently, the Prospect/West Driveway, Prospect/Center Driveway, and
Prospect/East Driveway intersections operate acceptably with existing control and
geometry. At the Prospect/West Driveway intersection, the calculated delays for
the northbound and southbound approaches are commensurate with level of
service F in the afternoon peak hour. At the Prospect/East Driveway
intersection, the calculated delay for the southbound approach is commensurate
with level of service F in the afternoon peak hour. This is considered to be normal
during the peak hours at stop sign controlled intersections along arterial streets.
- It is expected that peak hour signal warrants will not be met at the any of the key
stop sign control intersections. In addition to this, arterial/driveway intersections
would not meet the signal spacing criteria.
- In the short range (2018) future, given development of the Prospect Station and an
increase in background traffic, the Prospect/West Driveway, Prospect/Center
Driveway, and Prospect/East Driveway intersections will operate acceptably. At
the Prospect/West Driveway intersection the calculated delay for the northbound
and southbound approaches in the afternoon peak hour was commensurate with
level of service F. At the Prospect/Center Driveway intersection the calculated
delay for the northbound approach in the morning and afternoon peak hours was
commensurate with level of service F. This is considered to be normal during the
peak hours at stop sign controlled intersections along arterial streets. The short
range (2018) geometry is shown in Figure 13.
- In the long range (2035) future, given development of the Prospect Station and an
increase in background traffic, the Prospect/West Driveway, Prospect/Center
Driveway, and Prospect/East Driveway intersections will operate acceptably. At the
Prospect/West Driveway intersection, the calculated delay for the northbound and
southbound approaches in the morning and afternoon peak hours was
commensurate with level of service E and F. At the Prospect/Center Driveway
intersection, the calculated delay for the northbound and southbound approaches in
the morning and afternoon peak hours was commensurate with level of service F.
207
DELICH Prospect Station TIS, February 2013
ASSOCIATES Page 26
At the Prospect/East Driveway intersection, the calculated delay for the southbound
approach in the morning and afternoon peak hours was commensurate with level of
service E and F, respectively. This is considered to be normal during the peak
hours at stop sign controlled intersections along arterial streets. If/when Lots 2 and
3 develop (as 35,000 square feet of office), the eastbound right-turn volume in the
morning peak hour will exceed the threshold requiring a right-turn deceleration lane
according to LCUASS, Figure 8-4.
- Acceptable level of service is achieved for bicycle and transit modes based upon
the measures in the multi-modal transportation guidelines and future improvements
to the street system in the area. Acceptable level of service cannot be achieved
for continuity and street crossings. Prospect Road was built under earlier street
standards.
208
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.5
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.7
0.5
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.2
1.6
1.7
1.4
1.1
0.6
0.6
1.3
0.8
0.4
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
1.9
2.4
2.3
1.6
1.2
0.7
1.0
3.1
3.4
0.8
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.6
2.1
2.1
1.6
1.3
0.8
1.3
5.4
8.5
1.5
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.9
1.3
1.5
1.4
1.1
0.8
1.4
6.9
9.2
1.7
0.3
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.7
1.1
3.7
6.0
1.2
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.7
1.0
1.1
1.1
0.9
0.7
0.7
2.0
2.1
0.6
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
1.2
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.1
0.7
0.5
0.5
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
2.1
2.3
2.2
1.7
1.3
0.7
0.5
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
2.1
2.3
2.2
1.7
1.3
0.7
0.5
0.5
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
1.2
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.2
0.7
0.8
1.5
2.1
0.6
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.7
1.0
1.1
1.1
0.9
0.7
1.1
3.5
5.9
1.1
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.7
0.8
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.8
1.4
5.7
8.6
1.5
0.3
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
1.1
1.3
1.5
1.4
1.1
0.8
1.5
7.1
7.3
1.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
1.9
2.1
2.1
1.6
1.2
0.8
1.2
4.2
3.3
0.7
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
2.4
2.4
2.3
1.7
1.2
0.7
0.8
2.1
0.9
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
1.5
1.8
1.8
1.6
1.1
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.8
1.2
1.3
1.2
0.9
0.7
0.6
0.9
0.6
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.8
0.8
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.7
0.9
2.6
2.7
0.6
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.9
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.0
0.7
1.3
5.9
6.8
1.2
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
1.8
1.8
1.9
1.6
1.1
0.8
1.5
8.4
8.9
1.6
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
2.6
2.5
2.3
1.8
1.2
0.8
1.3
5.5
5.9
1.4
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.2
2.0
2.2
2.3
2.0
1.3
0.8
0.9
2.4
2.9
1.2
0.5
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.3
1.2
1.9
2.2
2.2
1.4
0.8
0.6
0.8
1.7
1.0
0.6
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.9
1.3
2.0
2.3
1.3
0.7
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.4
2.0
2.4
2.3
2.2
1.5
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.3
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.5
0.8
1.2
2.3
2.2
1.0
0.6
0.7
1.1
1.3
1.5
3.1
4.3
3.3
3.2
4.3
3.3
1.7
1.3
0.9
0.5
0.2
0.2
0.5
0.8
1.1
1.9
3.5
2.4
1.0
0.7
0.8
1.3
1.9
2.3
2.9
3.6
2.2
2.1
3.0
2.6
1.9
1.7
1.0
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.9
1.5
2.9
4.3
2.6
1.1
1.1
1.5
2.0
2.4
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.2
1.8
1.3
1.0
0.9
1.0
0.6
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.6
1.4
2.4
3.0
1.7
1.1
2.7
6.4
8.9
7.7
4.9
5.2
7.3
7.4
4.7
2.0
0.4
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.1
FORT COLLINS, CO
PROSPECT
STATION II
PROJECT TITLE
REVISIONS
ISSUE DATE
SHEET TITLE
SHEET INFORMATION
DATE
SEAL
Feburary 3, 2016
DATE
PREPARED FOR
Photometric Site Plan
P 1
1 1/16" = 1'-0"
PHOTOMETRIC PLAN
2 NTS
POLE BASE MOUNTING DETAIL (GG2 & GG4)
GG2(E)
PHASE 1
CC(E)
GG2(E) CC(E)
GG4(N) GG4(N) GG4(R) GG4(R)
CC(N) CC(N) CC(N)
CC(N) CC(N) CC(N)
PHASE 2
PROPERTY LINE
20' BEYOND PROPERTY LINE
173
PROJECT
DATE
DRAWN
712 WHALERS WAY SUITE, B-100
FORT COLLINS, CO 80525
(970) 223-1820
www.alm2s.com
PRINTED 2/1/2016 2:57:21 PM FILE NAME:
C 2015 alm2s
1533-Project-SD.rvt
BUILDING ELEVATIONS
1533
ksj
02.02.2016
PDP-2
Fort Collins, Colorado
Prospect Station II
PDP-2 SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
3 SOUTH ELEVATION
PDP-2 SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
4 WEST ELEVATION
PDP-2 SCALE:
5 View from South West
NO ISSUE DATE
PDP-2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
1 TRASH ELEVATION NORTH
PDP-2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
2 TRASH ELEVATION SIDES
PDP-2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
6 TRASH ELEVATION SOUTH
NOTE:
ALL EXPOSED ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, AND MECHANICAL
EQUIPMENT AND METERS ARE TO BE SCREENED OR
OTHERWISE PAINTED TO MATCH THE BUILDING
172
PDP-1
Fort Collins, Colorado
Prospect Station II
PDP-1 SCALE:
3 View from North West
PDP-1 SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
1 NORTH ELEVATION
PDP-1 SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
2 EAST ELEVATION
NO ISSUE DATE
NOTE:
ALL EXPOSED ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, AND MECHANICAL
EQUIPMENT AND METERS ARE TO BE SCREENED OR
OTHERWISE PAINTED TO MATCH THE BUILDING
171
1.5
1.4
1.6
1.5
1.8
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.6
1.9
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.7
1.7
1.1
0.9
0.7
0.5
0.9
1.2
1.5
1.4
1.5
1.6
2.0
1.7
1.4
1.2
1.2
1.4
1.7
2.1
1.7
1.6
1.4
1.6
1.9
1.9
1.2
0.9
0.6
0.5
0.9
1.2
1.5
1.4
1.6
1.6
1.9
1.7
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.7
2.0
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.6
1.8
1.8
1.2
0.9
0.7
0.5
0.8
1.1
1.4
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.7
1.6
1.3
1.5
1.5
1.3
1.5
1.7
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.8
1.7
1.1
1.0
0.8
0.5
0.6
0.9
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.3
1.2
1.4
1.4
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.1
0.9
0.9
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.9
1.1
1.3
1.3
1.2
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.1
1.3
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.9
1.2
1.5
1.5
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.4
1.5
1.2
1.1
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.8
0.6
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.6
1.3
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.6
1.2
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.6
0.9
1.0
1.0
0.9
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.1
1.0
0.8
0.9
0.9
1.1
1.0
0.8
1.1
0.9
1.1
1.0
0.8
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.7
1.7
1.4
1.4
1.6
1.6
1.3
1.2
1.3
1.6
1.7
1.4
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.1
0.7
1.6
3.2
3.2
1.9
1.9
3.2
3.2
1.6
1.1
1.5
3.0
3.2
2.0
1.0
0.8
0.9
1.9
0.5
2.6
0.3
1.1
0.2
0.6
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.6
1.9
2.3
1.0
1.3
1.9
2.9
0.7
0.7
0.5
2.3
1.4
1.6
0.8
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.4
1.2
0.8
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.9
0.5
0.5
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.5
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.3
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.4
0.7
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.0
0.8
0.9
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.5
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.5
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.5
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.5
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
419 Canyon Avenue, Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80521
ph: 970.224.1191 www.VFLA.com
DRAWING NUMBER:
PROJECT NUMBER:
SEAL:
IN ASSOCIATION WITH:
Strength in design. Strength in partnership.
Strength in community.
VAUGHT FRYE LARSON ARCHITECTS, INC.
THIS DRAWING MAY NOT BE PHOTOGRAPHED, SCANNED, TRACED OR
COPIED IN ANY MANNER WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF VFLA.
CHECKED BY:
DRAWN BY:
COPYRIGHT:
Issued
No. Description Date
1 12-22-15
Revisions
2
3
4
5
6
No. Description Date
VAUGHT FRYE LARSONarchitects
PDP SUBMITTAL
CW
CW
LOT 1,
TIMBERLINE
CENTER,
THIRD
FILING
PDP RESUBMITTAL 02-04-16
2133 TIMBERLINE ROAD
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80525
2/2/2016 6:23:10 PM
7 OF 7
SITE
PHOTOMETRIC
PLAN
PDP RESUBMITTAL
2015-80
MECHANICAL ELECTRICAL PLUMBING
37127 Cullison Ridge Road
Windsor, CO 80550
Ph: 970.686.1004
Email: jeremyb@srbllc.net
larrys@srbllc.net
JOB # 15211
TYPE: AA3S, AA3T
TYPE: WW
LUMINAIRE LOCATIONS
Label MH Tilt
AA3T 25.0 0.0
AA3S 25.0 0.0
WW 6.8 0.0
LUMINAIRE SCHEDULE
Symbol Label Qty Catalog Number Description Lamp File Lumens LLF Watts
AA3S 2 DSX1_LED_40
C_700_30K_T3
M_MVOLT_HS
.ies
Absolute 1.00 89
WW 13 ITL61286.ies 4000 1.00 57.7
AA3T 3 DSX1_LED_30
C_700_30K_T3
M_MVOLT.ies
Absolute 1.00 136
DSX1 LED 40C 700
30K T3M MVOLT
HS
DSX1 LED WITH (2) 20
LED LIGHT ENGINES,
TYPE T3M OPTIC, 3000K,
@ 700mA WITH HOUSE
SIDE SHIELD
LED
S9275-CF50
DECORATIVE EXTERIOR
WALL SCONCE
CF40 40 WATT BIAX
COMPACT
FLUORESCENT 2G11
DSX1 LED 30C 700
30K T3M MVOLT
DSX1 LED WITH (1) 30
LED LIGHT ENGINES,
TYPE T3M OPTIC, 3000K,
@ 700mA
LED
STATISTICS
Description Symbol Avg Max Min Max/Min Avg/Min
Bldg. Surrounds
Boundary Spill
Parking
0.4 fc 3.2 fc 0.0 fc N / A N / A
0.1 fc 1.1 fc 0.0 fc N / A N / A
1.2 fc 2.1 fc 0.4 fc 5.3:1 3.0:1
157
1/8" STL. PL. HASP W/ HOLES
TO ACCEPT PADLOCK BY
OWNER
STL. PIPE PIVOT HINGES
STL. PIPE SLEEVES WELDED TO
POSTS TO SUPPORT HINGES
3' - 0"
10' - 0"
6" 4' - 5 1/2" 1" 4' - 5 1/2" 6"
8"X8"X16" CMU,
FILL CELLS SOLID
BOND BM. W/ TWO #5
CONT. REINF.
#5 VERT. @ 32" O.C.
GROUT REINFORCED CELLS
FULL
#6 VERT DOWELS @
48" O.C. EXTEND 2'-6"
INTO CMU
HORIZ. REINF. AT 16"
O.C.
6" CONCRETE SLAB WITH
#4 @ 18" O.C. EACH WAY.
SLOPE TO FRONT
6' - 0"
6"
2' - 6"
T.FRONTT.O. SLAB @ FRONT
RECIVIL RE CIVIL
VARIES
PRE-FINISHED METAL CAP FLASHING
W/ P.T. WD. BLOCKING
PAINTED 3"X3"X3/16"
STEEL ANGLE GUARD
#5 BENT REBAR W/
2' AND 3' LEGS
LEVELING CURB
1
1
BRICK VENEER
419 Canyon Avenue, Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80521
ph: 970.224.1191 www.VFLA.com
DRAWING NUMBER:
PROJECT NUMBER:
SEAL:
IN ASSOCIATION WITH:
Strength in design. Strength in partnership.
Strength in community.
VAUGHT FRYE LARSON ARCHITECTS, INC.
THIS DRAWING MAY NOT BE PHOTOGRAPHED, SCANNED, TRACED OR
COPIED IN ANY MANNER WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF VFLA.
CHECKED BY:
DRAWN BY:
COPYRIGHT:
Issued
No. Description Date
1 12-22-15
Revisions
2
3
4
5
6
No. Description Date
VAUGHT FRYE LARSON architects
PDP SUBMITTAL
AG
DC
LOT 1,
TIMBERLINE
CENTER,
THIRD
FILING
PDP RESUBMITTAL 02-04-16
2133 TIMBERLINE ROAD
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80525
2/3/2016 1:57:12 PM
2/3/2016 1:57:12 PM
C:\Users\Andy\Documents\2133 Timberline v16_Central_andy.rvt
6 OF 7
TRASH ENCLOSURE
PDP RESUBMITTAL
2015-80
3 1/4" = 1'-0"
TRASH ENCLOSURE - NORTH ELEVATION
5 1/4" = 1'-0"
TRASH ENCLOSURE - EAST ELEVATION
1 1/4" = 1'-0"
TRASH ENCLOSURE - SOUTH ELEVATION
2 1/4" = 1'-0"
TRASH ENCLOSURE - WEST ELEVATION
4 1/4" = 1'-0"
TRASH ENCLOSURE PLAN
7 1 1/2" = 1'-0"
TRASH ENCLOSURE GATE DETAIL
8 1/2" = 1'-0"
TRASH ENCLOSURE GATE ELEVATION
6 3/4" = 1'-0"
TRASH ENCLOSURE WALL SECTION
150
3' - 4"
10' - 8"
19' - 4"
24' - 5 3/8"
FIN. FLOOR
100' - 0"
ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOFING
PAINTED STEEL CHANNEL
FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING
PRE-FINISHED GUTTER
PRE-FINISHED OPEN FACED DOWNSPOUT
PRE-FINISHED BRAKE METAL COVERED
FASCIA BOARD
STUCCO
ALUMINUM STOREFRONT
11' - 8"
10' - 8"
19' - 4"
24' - 5 3/8"
419 Canyon Avenue, Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80521
ph: 970.224.1191 www.VFLA.com
DRAWING NUMBER:
PROJECT NUMBER:
SEAL:
IN ASSOCIATION WITH:
Strength in design. Strength in partnership.
Strength in community.
VAUGHT FRYE LARSON ARCHITECTS, INC.
THIS DRAWING MAY NOT BE PHOTOGRAPHED, SCANNED, TRACED OR
COPIED IN ANY MANNER WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF VFLA.
CHECKED BY:
DRAWN BY:
COPYRIGHT:
Issued
No. Description Date
1 12-22-15
Revisions
2
3
4
5
6
No. Description Date
VAUGHT FRYE LARSON architects
PDP SUBMITTAL
AG
DC
LOT 1,
TIMBERLINE
CENTER,
THIRD
FILING
PDP RESUBMITTAL 02-04-16
2133 TIMBERLINE ROAD
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80525
2/3/2016 2:07:32 PM
2/3/2016 2:07:32 PM
C:\Users\Andy\Documents\2133 Timberline v16_Central_andy.rvt
5 OF 7
EXTERIOR
ELEVATIONS
PDP RESUBMITTAL
2015-80
1 1/8" = 1'-0"
WEST ELEVATION
5
NW PERSPECTIVE
3 1/8" = 1'-0"
NORTH ELEVATION
2 1/8" = 1'-0"
EAST ELEVATION
4 1/8" = 1'-0"
PDP - SOUTH
149
(3) MABR
(5) MISG
(11) VITC
(10) CAAK
(13) JUCH
(1) GLTS
(3) JUSG
(8) JUCH
(3) VILA
(4) COSB
(4) JUSG
(11) MISG
(5) JUSG
(7) ROBO
(6) SYMP
(5) JUCH
(6) SYMP
(4) JUCH
(2) QUMA
(1) QUMA
(17) JUCH
(12) CODA
DASHED LINE SIGNIFIES AREA
USED FOR PARKING LOT
LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS
39,460 SF
4.5" AMERICAN LINDEN
TO REMAIN
(4) CASP
4" NORWAY MAPLE
TO REMAIN
(3) GLTS 3" FOR
MITIGATION
(2) CEOC
(3) ERNN
SEED PARKWAY WITH
DRYLAND GRASSES AS
NEEDED
(2) GLTS
(1) GLTS 3" FOR
MITIGATION
(1) GLTS 3" FOR
MITIGATION
(1) CASP
(1) GLTS
(2) PYCA
(14) PAVP
(3) VILA
(5) JUCH
(7) JUSG
8'
8'
8'
(8) JUSG
LANDSCAPE PLAN LEGEND
PROPERTY LINE
SHADE TREES
ORNAMENTAL TREES
DECIDUOS SHRUBS
ORNAMENTAL GRASSES
TURF GRASS
EVERGREEN SHRUBS
BOULDERS
UTILITY EASEMENT
FLOWLINE, CURB & GUTTER
PROPOSED WALK
LOT LINE
RIGHT OF WAY LINE
BUFFER LINE
DRYLAND SEED MIX
SHRUB BEDS
COBBLES
EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREES
EXISTING EVERGREEN TREES
NORTH
Planning Landscape Architecture Graphics
SHEET TITLE:
SHEET NO:
OF
PO Box 1889
Fort Collins, Colorado 80522-1889
970.472.9125 T
970.494.0728 F
www.vignettestudios.com
ACAD FILE:
DRAWN:
CHECKED:
JOB NO:
REVISIONS DATE
ISSUE DATE:
CLIENT
SCALE 1"=30'
0 15 30
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
LANDSCAPE PLANS
St. Peter's Anglican Church
Landscape Plan
2 2
50014
50014PDP1
TCH
TCH
1/27/16
2/18/16
Nov 9, 2015
60
Code Scientific Name Common Name Qty. Size Water Use
CASP Catalpa speciosa Western Catalpa 12 2" Cal Low
CEOC Celtis occidentalis Western Hackberry 6 2" Cal Low
GLTS Gleditsia triacanthos 'Inermis' Skyline Honeylocust 4 2" Cal Low
GLTS Gleditsia triacanthos 'Inermis' Skyline Honeylocust 9 3" Cal* Low
GYDI Gymnocladus dioicus 'Espresso' 'Espresso' KY Coffeetree 4 2" Cal Low
QUMA Quercus macrocarpa Burr Oak 5 2" cal Low
TICG Tilia cordata 'Greenspire Greenspire Linden 10 2" cal Mod
* = MITIGATION TREES
MABR Malus 'Brandywine' Brandywine Crabapple 3 1.5" Cal Mod
MASS Malus ' Spring Snow' Spring Snow Crabapple 2 1.5" Cal Mod
PYCA Pyrus calleryana 'Aristocat' Aristocat Pear 2 1.5" Cal Low
PINI Pinus nigra Austrian Pine 7 6' Ht. Low
PIPG Picea pungens 'Glauca' Colorado Blue Spruce 8 6' Ht. Mod
JUCH Juniperus chinensis 'Holbert' Holbert Juniper 67 5 gal Low
JUSB Juniperus sabina 'Buffalo' Buffalo Juniper 5 5 gal Low
JUSG Juniperus x media 'Sea Green' Sea Green Juniper 41 5 gal Low
COSB Cornus sericea 'Baileyi' Baily Dogwood 4 5 gal Mod
CODA Cotoneaster divaricatus Spreading Cotoneaster 28 5 gal Low
ERNN Ericameria nauseosa Tall Blue Rabbitbrush 7 5 gal Low
ROBO Rosa 'bonica' Bonica Rose 7 5 gal Low
SYMP Syringa patula 'Miss Kim Miss Kim Lilac 23 5 gal Low
VILA Viburnum lantana 'Mohican' Mohican Viburnum 6 5 gal Low
VITR Viburnum trilobum 'Baily Compact' Compact American Cranberry 11 5 gal Low
CAAK Calamagrostis acutiflor 'Karl..' Karl Forester Grass 34 1 gal Low
MISG Miscanthus sinensis 'Gracimilus' Maiden Grass 22 1 gal Low
PAVP Panicum virgatum 'Prairie Sky' Prairie Sky Switch Grass 12 1 gal Low
LANDSCAPE HYDROZONE CALCULATIONS
Item Area (sf) Hydrozone Annual Water Use
Turf Grass 37,150SF High @ 18 Gal / SF 668,700 Gal
Dryland Grass Seed Mix 131,313 SF Very Low @ 0 Gal / SF 0 Gal
Wetland Seed Mix 0 SF Very Low @ 0 Gal / SF 0 Gal
Low Water Shrub Beds 4,439 SF Low @ 3 Gal / SF 13,317 Gal
Mod Water Shrub Beds 0 SF Moderate @ 10 Gal / SF 0 Gal
TOTAL 172,902 SF 682,017 Gal
Average Seasonal Consumption: 3.94 Gal / SF
PARKING LOT LANDSCAPE CALCULATIONS
PARKING LOT AREA 39,460 SF
INTERIOR LANDSCAPE ISLANDS 3,490 SF
PERCENTAGE 8.8%
PARKING LOT STREET PERIMETER 340.0 LF
STREET PERMITER TREES REQUIRED 14 @ 1/ 25 LF
PERIMETER TREES PROVIDED 15
80% Bluegrass / 20% Fescue, "80/20 Xeriscape Blend" by Korby Sod, LLC, or approved equal. Install per supplier's
direction.
Dryland Seed Mix: "Grow Low Mix" by Pawnee Buttes Seed Company (pawneebuttesseed.com) or approved equal.
Contains: (25%) Canada Bluegrass, (25%) Sandberg Bluegrass, (25%) Rocky Mountain Fescue, (25%) Sheep Fescue.
Apply at the rate of 5 lbs.per 1,000 sf.
LEGEND
STREET TREE NOTES
A PERMIT MUST BE OBTAINED FROM THE CITY FORESTER BEFORE ANY TREES OR SHRUBS AS
NOTED ON THIS PLAN ARE PLANTED, PRUNED OR REMOVED IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. THIS
INCLUDES ZONES BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND CURB, MEDIANS AND OTHER CITY PROPERTY.
THIS PERMIT SHALL APPROVE THE LOCATION AND SPECIES TO BE PLANTED. FAILURE TO OBTAIN
THIS PERMIT IS A VIOLATION OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS CODE SUBJECT TO CITATION
(SECTION 27-31) AND MAY ALSO RESULT IN REPLACING OR RELOCATING TREES AND A HOLD ON
CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
135
NEVER LEAVE "V" CROTCHES OR DOUBLE
LEADER UNLESS TYPICAL OF SPECIES.
2. CUT TWINE AND BURLAP FROM
AROUND TRUNK, PULL BACK. REMOVE
ALL BURLAP AND WIRE BASKETS BEFORE
PLACING IN TREE PIT.
3. ANY BROKEN OR CRUMBLING ROOT
BALL WILL BE REJECTED. REMOVING THE
WIRE WILL NOT BE AN EXCUSE FROM
DAMAGED ROOT BALLS.
4. STAKE TREE LEAVING ENOUGH SLACK SO
TREE CAN SWAY IN WIND.
5. USE 2 STAKES FOR TREES 2 1/2" CAL. AND
SMALLER. USE 3 STAKES FOR TREES
LAGER THAN 2 1/2" CAL. REMOVE ALL
STAKES 1 YEAR AFTER PLANTING.
6. FOR WINTERIZATION WRAP ENTIRE
SURFACE OF TRUNK TO SECOND
BRANCH WITH TREE WRAPPING. SECURE
AT 2' INTERVALS WITH VINYL
ELECTRICAL TAPE. (REMOVE IN SUMMER.)
2 X BALL DIA.
INSTALL TOP OF ROOTBALL 2" ABOVE
SURROUNDING FINISH GRADE
FOR TREES PLANTED IN TURF, CREATE
TREE RING 1' PAST PLANTING HOLE, 4'
MIN DIA, PLACE 3 INCHES OF NON-DYED
SHREDDED CEDAR MULCH IN TREE RING.
FOR TREES PLANTED IN SHRUB BEDS,
MULCH WITH SHRUB BED MULCH.
FINISH GRADE
PLACE DISH 2" ABOVE GRADE
1
1
2" WIDE HEAVY NYLON STRAP
WITH EYELETS.
12 GAUGE GALVANIZED WIRE.
(DOUBLE STANDARD)
LODGEPOLE TREE STAKES
ADJUST TREE STAKES SO TOP IS
LEVEL WITH OR BELOW FIRST
BRANCHES.
SPECIFIED BACKFILL MIX.
ROUGHENED SIDE SLOPES OF PIT
EXISTING SOIL
4.5" AMERICAN LINDEN
FAIR CONDITION TO REMAIN
3" AMERICAN LINDEN
POOR CONDITION REMOVE
3" AMERICAN LINDEN
POOR CONDITION REMOVE
3.5" AMERICAN LINDEN
POOR CONDITION REMOVE
2" AMERICAN LINDEN
POOR CONDITION REMOVE
(2) 3" AMERICAN LINDEN
POOR CONDITION REMOVE
3.5" AMERICAN LINDEN
POOR CONDITION REMOVE
(2) 3" AMERICAN LINDEN
POOR CONDITION REMOVE
WILLOW POOR TO GOOD
CONDITION TO REMAIN
3" AMERICAN LINDEN
POOR CONDITION REMOVE
(3) THORNLESS HAWTHORNE
FAIR CONDITION TO REMAIN
5.5" NORWAY MAPLE
FAIR CONDITION TO REMAIN
4" NORWAY MAPLE
FAIR CONDITION TO REMAIN
4" NORWAY MAPLE
POOR CONDITION REMOVE
4" NORWAY MAPLE
POOR CONDITION REMOVE
3.5"NORWAY MAPLE
POOR CONDITION REMOVE
3" NORWAY MAPLE
POOR CONDITION REMOVE
4" NORWAY MAPLE
POOR CONDITION REMOVE
NORTH
Planning Landscape Architecture Graphics
SHEET TITLE:
SHEET NO:
OF
PO Box 1889
Fort Collins, Colorado 80522-1889
970.472.9125 T
970.494.0728 F
www.vignettestudios.com
ACAD FILE:
DRAWN:
CHECKED:
JOB NO:
REVISIONS DATE
ISSUE DATE:
CLIENT
SCALE 1"=30'
0 15 30
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
LANDSCAPE PLANS
St. Peter's Anglican Church
Landscape Notes
1 2
50014
50014pdp1
tch
tch
1/27/16
2/18/16
Nov 9, 2015
60
1. PLANT QUALITY $//3/$170$7(5,$/6+$//%($*5$'(2512*5$'(±)5((2)$1<'()(&762)1250$/+($/7++(,*+7
LEAF DENSITY AND SPREAD APPROPRIATE TO THE SPECIES AS DEFINED BY THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN (AAN)
STANDARDS. ALL TREES SHALL BE BALL AND BURLAP OR EQUIVALENT.
2. IRRIGATION: ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS WITHIN THE SITE INCLUDING TURF, SHRUB BEDS AND TREE AREAS SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH
AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM. THE IRRIGATION PLAN MUST BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
WATER UTILITIES DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT. ALL TURF AREAS SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH AN
AUTOMATIC POP-UP IRRIGATION SYSTEM. ALL SHRUB BEDS AND TREES, INCLUDING IN NATIVE SEED AREAS, SHALL BE IRRIGATED
WITH AN AUTOMATIC DRIP (TRICKLE) IRRIGATION SYSTEM, OR WITH AN ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE APPROVED BY THE CITY WITH
THE IRRIGATION PLANS. THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE ADJUSTED TO MEET THE WATER REQUIREMENTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL
PLANT MATERIAL.
3. TOPSOIL: TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT FEASIBLE, TOPSOIL THAT IS REMOVED DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY SHALL BE
CONSERVED FOR LATER USE ON AREAS REQUIRING REVEGETATION AND LANDSCAPING.
4. SOIL AMENDMENTS: SOIL AMENDMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED AND DOCUMENTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY CODE SECTION
12-132. THE SOIL IN ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS, INCLUDING PARKWAYS AND MEDIANS, SHALL BE THOUGHLY LOOSENED TO A DEPTH
OF NOT LESS THAN EIGHT(8) INCHES AND SOIL AMENDMENT SHALL BE THOROUGHLY INCORPORATED INTO THE SOIL OF ALL
LANDSCAPE AREAS TO A DEPTH OF AT LEAST SIX(6) INCHES BY TILLING, DISCING OR OTHER SUITABLE METHOD, AT A RATE OF AT
LEAST THREE (3) CUBIC YARDS OF SOIL AMENDMENT PER ONE THOUSAND (1,000) SQUARE FEET OF LANDSCAPE AREA. PRIOR TO
THE ISSUANCE OF ANY CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, A WRITTEN CERTIFICATION MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY THAT ALL
PLANTED AREAS, OR AREAS TO BE PLANTED, HAVE BEEN THOROUGHLY LOOSENED AND THE SOIL AMENDED, CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH IN SECTION 12-132.
5. INSTALLATION AND GUARANTEE : ALL LANDSCAPING SHALL BE INSTALLED ACCORDING TO SOUND HORTICULTURAL PRACTICES IN
A MANNER DESIGNED TO ENCOURAGE QUICK ESTABLISHMENT AND HEALTHY GROWTH. ALL LANDSCAPING FOR EACH PHASE MUST
BE EITHER INSTALLED OR THE INSTALLATION MUST BE SECURED WITH AN IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT, PERFORMANCE
BOND, OR ESCROW ACCOUNT FOR 125% OF THE VALUATION OF THE MATERIALS AND LABOR PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A
CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR ANY BUILDING IN SUCH PHASE.
6. MAINTENANCE: TREES AND VEGETATION, IRRIGATION SYSTEMS, FENCES, WALLS AND OTHER LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS WITH THESE
FINAL PLANS SHALL BE CONSIDERED AS ELEMENTS OF THE PROJECT IN THE SAME MANNER AS PARKING, BUILDING MATERIALS
AND OTHER SITE DETAILS. THE APPLICANT, LANDOWNER OR SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST SHALL BE JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY
RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REGULAR MAINTENANCE OF ALL LANDSCAPING ELEMENTS IN GOOD CONDITION. ALL LANDSCAPING SHALL
BE MAINTAINED FREE FROM DISEASE, PESTS, WEEDS AND LITTER, AND ALL LANDSCAPE STRUCTURES SUCH AS FENCES AND
WALLS SHALL BE REPAIRED AND REPLACED PERIODICALLY TO MAINTAIN A STRUCTURALLY SOUND CONDITION.
7. REPLACEMENT: ANY LANDSCAPE ELEMENT THAT DIES, OR IS OTHERWISE REMOVED, SHALL BE PROMPTLY REPLACED IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THESE PLANS.
8. THE FOLLOWING SEPARATIONS SHALL BE PROVIDED BETWEEN TREES/SHRUBS AND UTILITIES:
40 FEET BETWEEN CANOPY TREES AND STREET LIGHTS
15 FEET BETWEEN ORNAMENTAL TREES AND STREETLIGHTS
10 FEET BETWEEN TREES AND PUBLIC WATER, SANITARY AND STORM SEWER MAIN LINES
6 FEET BETWEEN TREES AND PUBLIC WATER, SANITARY AND STORM SEWER SERVICE LINES.
4 FEET BETWEEN SHRUBS AND PUBLIC WATER AND SANITARY AND STORM SEWER LINES
4 FEET BETWEEN TREES AND GAS LINES
9. ALL STREET TREES SHALL BE PLACED A MINIMUM EIGHT (8) FEET AWAY FROM THE EDGES OF DRIVEWAYS AND ALLEYS PER LUC
3.2.1(D)(2)(a).
10. PLACEMENT OF ALL LANDSCAPING SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SIGHT DISTANCE CRITERIA AS SPECIFIED BY THE CITY OF
FORT COLLINS. NO STRUCTURES OR LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS GREATER THAN 24" SHALL BE ALLOWED WITHIN THE SIGHT DISTANCE
TRIANGLE OR EASEMENTS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF DECIDUOUS TREES PROVIDED THAT THE LOWEST BRANCH IS AT LEAST 6'
FROM GRADE. ANY FENCES WITHIN THE SIGHT DISTANCE TRIANGLE OR EASEMENT MUST BE NOT MORE THAN 42" IN HEIGHT AND
OF AN OPEN DESIGN.
11. THE FINAL LANDSCAPE PLAN SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH ALL OTHER FINAL PLAN ELEMENTS SO THAT THE PROPOSED GRADING,
STORM DRAINAGE, AND OTHER DEVELOPMENT IMPROVEMENTS DO NOT CONFLICT WITH NOR PRECLUDE INSTALLATION AND
MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS ON THIS PLAN.
12. MINOR CHANGES IN SPECIES AND PLANT LOCATIONS MAY BE MADE DURING CONSTRUCTION -- AS REQUIRED BY SITE CONDITIONS
OR PLANT AVAILABILITY. OVERALL QUANTITY, QUALITY, AND DESIGN CONCEPT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE APPROVED
PLANS. IN THE EVENT OF CONFLICT WITH THE QUANTITIES INCLUDED IN THE PLANT LIST, SPECIES AND QUANTITIES ILLUSTRATED
SHALL BE PROVIDED. ALL CHANGES OF PLANT SPECIES AND LOCATION MUST HAVE WRITTEN APPROVAL BY THE CITY PRIOR TO
INSTALLATION.
13. ALL PLANTING BEDS SHALL BE MULCHED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF THREE INCHES.
NTS
TREE PLANTING DETAIL
NTS
SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL
NTS
EVERGREEN TREE PLANTING DETAIL
SCALE 1" = 100'
TREE PROTECTION NOTES
1. ALL EXISTING TREES WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND WITHIN ANY NATURAL AREA
BUFFER ZONES SHALL REMAIN AND BE PROTECTED UNLESS NOTED ON THESE PLANS FOR REMOVAL.
2. WITHIN THE DRIP LINE OF ANY PROTECTED EXISTING TREE, THERE SHALL BE NO CUT OR FILL OVER A
FOUR-INCH DEPTH UNLESS A QUALIFIED ARBORIST OR FORESTER HAS EVALUATED AND APPROVED
THE DISTURBANCE.
3. ALL PROTECTED EXISTING TREES SHALL BE PRUNED TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS FORESTRY
STANDARDS. TREE PRUNING AND REMOVAL SHALL BE PERFORMED BY A BUSINESS THAT HOLDS A
CURRENT CITY OF FORT COLLINS ARBORIST LICENSE WHERE REQUIRED BY CODE.
4. PRIOR TO AND DURING CONSTRUCTION, BARRIERS SHALL BE ERECTED AROUND ALL PROTECTED
EXISTING TREES WITH SUCH BARRIERS TO BE OF ORANGE FENCING A MINIMUM OF FOUR (4) FEET IN
HEIGHT, SECURED WITH METAL T-POSTS, NO CLOSER THAN SIX (6) FEET FROM THE TRUNK OR
21(+$/) ò
2)7+('5,3/,1(:+,&+(9(5,6*5($7(57+(5(6+$//%(126725$*(25
MOVEMENT OF EQUIPMENT, MATERIAL, DEBRIS OR FILL WITHIN THE FENCED TREE PROTECTION ZONE.
5. DURING THE CONSTRUCTION STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT, THE APPLICANT SHALL PREVENT THE
CLEANING OF EQUIPMENT OR MATERIAL OR THE STORAGE AND DISPOSAL OF WASTE MATERIAL SUCH
AS PAINTS, OILS, SOLVENTS, ASPHALT, CONCRETE, MOTOR OIL OR ANY OTHER MATERIAL HARMFUL TO
THE LIFE OF A TREE WITHIN THE DRIP LINE OF ANY PROTECTED TREE OR GROUP OF TREES.
6. NO DAMAGING ATTACHMENT, WIRES, SIGNS OR PERMITS MAY BE FASTENED TO ANY PROTECTED TREE.
7. LARGE PROPERTY AREAS CONTAINING PROTECTED TREES AND SEPARATED FROM CONSTRUCTION OR
LAND CLEARING AREAS, ROAD RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND UTILITY EASEMENTS MAY BE "RIBBONED OFF,"
RATHER THAN ERECTING PROTECTIVE FENCING AROUND EACH TREE AS REQUIRED IN SUBSECTION
(G)(3) ABOVE. THIS MAY BE ACCOMPLISHED BY PLACING METAL T-POST STAKES A MAXIMUM OF FIFTY
(50) FEET APART AND TYING RIBBON OR ROPE FROM STAKE-TO-STAKE ALONG THE OUTSIDE
PERIMETERS OF SUCH AREAS BEING CLEARED.
8. THE INSTALLATION OF UTILITIES, IRRIGATION LINES OR ANY UNDERGROUND FIXTURE REQUIRING
EXCAVATION DEEPER THAN SIX (6) INCHES SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED BY BORING UNDER THE ROOT
SYSTEM OF PROTECTED EXISTING TREES AT A MINIMUM DEPTH OF TWENTY-FOUR (24) INCHES. THE
AUGER DISTANCE IS ESTABLISHED FROM THE FACE OF THE TREE (OUTER BARK) AND IS SCALED FROM
TREE DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT AS DESCRIBED IN THE CHART BELOW:
Tree Diameter at Breast Height (inches) Auger Distance From Face of Tree (feet)
0-2 1
3-4 2
5-9 5
10-14 10
15-19 12
Over 19 15
9. ALL TREE REMOVAL SHOWN SHALL BE COMPLETED OUTSIDE OF THE SONGBIRD NESTING SEASON (FEB
1 - JULY 31) OR CONDUCT A SURVEY OF TREES ENSURING NO ACTIVE NESTS IN THE AREA.
TREE MITIGATION PLAN
GENERAL LANDSCAPE NOTES STREET TREE NOTES
1. A PERMIT MUST BE OBTAINED FROM THE CITY FORESTER BEFORE ANY TREES OR SHRUBS AS NOTED
ON THIS PLAN ARE PLANTED, PRUNED OR REMOVED IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. THIS INCLUDES
ZONES BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND CURB, MEDIANS AND OTHER CITY PROPERTY. THIS PERMIT
SHALL APPROVE THE LOCATION AND SPECIES TO BE PLANTED. FAILURE TO OBTAIN THIS PERMIT IS A
VIOLATION OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS CODE SUBJECT TO CITATION (SECTION 27-31) AND MAY
ALSO RESULT IN REPLACING OR RELOCATING TREES AND A HOLD ON CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
2. CONTACT THE CITY FORESTER TO INSPECT ALL STREET TREE PLANTINGS AT THE COMPLETION OF
EACH PHASE OF THE DEVELOPMENT. ALL MUST BE INSTALLED AS SHOWN ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN.
APPROVAL OF STREET TREE PLANTING IS REQUIRED BEFORE FINAL APPROVAL OF EACH PHASE.
3. STREET LANDSCAPING, INCLUDING STREET TREES, SHALL BE SELECTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL
CITY CODES AND POLICIES. ALL TREE PRUNING AND REMOVAL WORKS SHALL BE PERFORMED BY A
CITY OF FORT COLLINS LICENSED ARBORS WHERE REQUIRED BY CODE.STREET TREES SHALL BE
SUPPLIED AND PLANTED BY THE DEVELOPER USING A QUALIFIED LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR.
4. THE DEVELOPER SHALL REPLACE DEAD OR DYING STREET TREES AFTER PLANTING UNTIL FINAL
MAINTENANCE INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE BY THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS FORESTRY DIVISION.
ALL STREET TREES IN THE PROJECT MUST BE ESTABLISHED, WITH AN APPROVED SPECIES AND OF
ACCEPTABLE CONDITION PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE.
5. SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE CITY FORESTER -- STREET TREE LOCATIONS MAY BE ADJUSTED TO
ACCOMMODATE DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS, UTILITY SEPARATIONS BETWEEN TREES, STREET SIGNS AND
STREET LIGHTS. STREET TREES TO BE CENTERED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE LOT TO THE EXTENT
FEASIBLE. QUANTITIES SHOWN ON PLAN MUST BE INSTALLED UNLESS A REDUCTION IS APPROVED BY
THE CITY TO MEET SEPARATION STANDARDS.
STREET TREE NOTES
A PERMIT MUST BE OBTAINED FROM THE CITY FORESTER BEFORE ANY TREES OR SHRUBS AS
NOTED ON THIS PLAN ARE PLANTED, PRUNED OR REMOVED IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. THIS
INCLUDES ZONES BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND CURB, MEDIANS AND OTHER CITY PROPERTY.
THIS PERMIT SHALL APPROVE THE LOCATION AND SPECIES TO BE PLANTED. FAILURE TO OBTAIN
THIS PERMIT IS A VIOLATION OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS CODE SUBJECT TO CITATION
(SECTION 27-31) AND MAY ALSO RESULT IN REPLACING OR RELOCATING TREES AND A HOLD ON
CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
134
include multiple picnic tables,
attractive landscaping, boulders,
and other elements. The order
window on the front elevation is
purely decorative. For customer
comfort, the order window is
relocated below the canopy on
the right elevation.
96
40/35
705/495
10/5
RT
Access
Timberwood
120/45
415/355
180/100
50/150
30/15
25/55
65/25
275/475
45/25
30/80
10/35
35/55
235/530
50/5
105/275
1680/2365
360/210
5/100
5/45
5/160
120/10
180/15
1905/2095
380/275
Intel
Banner
AM/PM
Rounded to Nearest
5 Vehicles
Access A
Access B
5/20
NOM
5/25
55/85
NOM
25/35
Timberwood
NOM
5/70
10/100
25/35
NOM
25/40
160/80
150/70
20/5
25/5
40/145
35/30
45/35
70/80
65/15
100/20
70/75
25/15
Technology
Attachment 8
65
120/128
47/49
28/32
39/38
28/40
60/57
44/33
34/23
39/38
28/40
31/46
44/33
28/32
Access A
Access B
Timberwood
Intel
Banner
AM/PM
39/9
104/90
75/89
NOM
3/46
NOM
Technology
254/264
392/307
83/105
74/165
242/466
617/698
164/133
1198/1677
170/255
531/853
1478/1465
120/137
Attachment 8
64
680/470
Timberwood
90/20
410/350
180/100
10/90
30/15
15/45
40/5
275/475
45/25
30/80
10/35
35/55
230/520
50/5
70/225
1695/2390
350/200
5/100
5/45
5/160
120/10
180/15
1920/2120
325/225
Intel
Banner
AM/PM
Rounded to Nearest
5 Vehicles
Access B
5/40
NOM
0/5
95/20
105/35
20/5
Access A
5/20
NOM
5/25
Timberwood
25/5
15/105
5/0
40/40
100/20
45/50
65/15
5/70
10/100
Attachment 8
62
Technology
86/202
71/40
208/124
42/24
6/12
28/52
Attachment 8
61
87/77
13/9
23/19
52/57
22/25
-15/-25
54/50
-14/-26
12/9
6/8
35/50
26/20
28/26
7/6
41/58
10/12
Technology
Attachment 8
60
7/8
35/50
44/35
29/26
11/10
42/58
17/20
Attachment 8
59
W1 W8
W4
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 W4 1 8 16
W5
W1
5
11
Oblique Elevation
12
21
21
First Floor Plan
100' - 0"
High Roof Parapet
125' - 0"
Low Roof Parapet
118' - 8"
W4
W4 W4
W2
W2
W5 W1
12 2
12 12 12 12
12 12
16 12 12
11 W4
6
beyond beyond
11
1
W4 W1 W4
beyond beyond beyond
1 12 12 1
Oblique Elevation
First Floor Plan
100' - 0"
High Roof Parapet
125' - 0"
Low Roof Parapet
118' - 8"
W1 W1 W4
7 7 1
11
12
7 12
6 W2
W2
1
8 16 12
W1 W4 12
W8
W4
16Plan Step in
W1
7 12 12 12
W1
W2
W4
W5
W6
6
W8
Metal Panel
Manuf: Metal Sales
Product: T2630 - wall panel (horiz)
Color: Slate Grey
Mechanical Screen
Manuf: Metal Sales
Product: T13-A wall panel (horiz)
Color: Sandstone
Cementitious Lap Siding
Manuf: James Hardie
Product: HardiePlank Lap Siding, Smooth, 8" exposure
Color: Tuscan Gold
Hard Coat Stucco
Manuf: Sto
Product: PowerWall
Color: Field - White Linen (fine texture)
Concrete Masonry Unit Veneer
Manuf: TBD
Product: 8x16 smooth face, running bond
with 4x16 banding
Colors: Body Color - Tan
Accent Bands - Light Tan
First Floor Plan
100' - 0"
Low Roof Parapet
118' - 8"
12 12 12 12
6
1 1 1 1
W5 W5
W4 W2
W5
W1 W4
First Floor Plan
100' - 0"
High Roof Parapet
125' - 0"
Low Roof Parapet
118' - 8"
W4
W2 W1
W1
1
12 2
12
1
12
12
12 12 12 12
11
W4
21 21
First Floor Plan
100' - 0"
High Roof Parapet
125' - 0"
Low Roof Parapet
118' - 8"
EQ EQ EQ
2' - 8"
W4 W4
W2
W1
11
12 1
12
5 OF 8
5
5 OF 8
3
5 OF 8
1
5 OF 8
2
5 OF 8
4
5 OF 8
6
5 OF 8
7
Harmony Road
Lady Moon Drive
5 OF 8
2
Issued
Drawing Number
Scale Accordingly if Reduced
Project No.: Drawn by:
Reviewed by:
In Association with:
ARCHITECTS
r4 architects.com
226 Remington
Unit #3
Fort Collins, CO 80524
phone 970/224-0630
www.r4architects.com
TB Group Planning / LA
444 Mountain Avenue
Berthoud, CO 80531
(970) 532-5891
Contact: Cathy Mathis
Email: cathy@tbgroup.us
AE Associates Mechanical & Plumbing
5587 West 19th Street
Greeley, CO 80634
(970) 330-5587
Contact: Alicia Thorpe
Email: alicia.thorpe@aeassociates.net
Engineer
APS, Inc. Electrical Engineer
9249 S. Broadway, #200-836
Highlands Ranch, CO 80129
(970) 381-7462
Contact: Chuck Polson
Email: chuck@apsinc.biz
Interwest Consulting Group Civil Engineer
1218 Ash Street
Windsor, CO 80550
(970) 674-3300
Contact: Mike Oberlander
Email: moberlander@Interwestgrp.com
Brinkman Construction General Contractor
Developer
Larsen Structural Design Structural Engineer
3528 Precision Dr Ste. 100
Fort Collins, CO 80528
(970) 267-0954
Contact: Todd Parker
Email: Todd.Parker@brinkmanpartners.com
19 Old Town Square, Suite 238
Fort Collins, CO 80524
(970) 568-3355
Contact: Blake Larsen
Email: blake@larsensd.com
Brinkman Partners & Stahl Inc.
3528 Precision Dr Ste. 100
Fort Collins, CO 80528
(970) 267-0954
Contact: Todd Parker
Email: Todd.Parker@brinkmanpartners.com
Check Set
Harmony
Commons
ARCH
1 Submittal No.1 11/30/2015
2 Submittal No.2 01/20/2016
201 South College Ave. - Suite 203
Fort Collins, CO 80524
(970) 682-1555
Contact: Brian Stahl
Email: Brian@stahldevelopment.com
3 Check Set 02/17/2016
JDO
SA
Lot 4 Retail Building
Elevations
Lot 4
2015-13
Lot 4 Retail
Building
5 OF 8
3/32" = 1'-0"
1
North Building Elevation
3/32" = 1'-0"
2
South Building Elevation
3/32" = 1'-0"
4
West Building Elevation
3/32" = 1'-0"
3
East Building Elevation
Exterior Material Legend
Keynote Legend
Key Value Keynote Text
1 Steel column painted white on concrete base, refer to Struct.
2 Steel canopy, painted, refer to detail 14/A1.2
5 Electrical gear and meters painted to match adjacent building material
6 Mechanical screen by Metal Sales: T-13 panel installed horizontal per
manuf. standard details, color: Sandstone, see detail 15/A3.5
7 Collector head and 4"x6" open faced downspout, prefinished to match
adjacent building material, provide splash blocks at all roof to roof
downspouts
8 Fire Department Connection
11 Knox box per PFA requirements
12 Storefront system, refer to A7.1 and A7.2 for elevations, details, and
dimensions
14 Mechanical roof top unit (dashed)
16 Exterior insulated hollow metal door & frame w/ thermal threshold, painted
to match adjacent building material.
21 Exterior light fixture, refer to electrical
3/32" = 1'-0"
6
East Retail_West Building Elevation
3/32" = 1'-0"
7
West Retail_West Building Elevation
3/32" = 1'-0"
5
West Retail_South Elevation
Key Plan
No. Description Date
38
Contact: Cathy Mathis
Email: cathy@tbgroup.us
AE Associates Mechanical & Plumbing
5587 West 19th Street
Greeley, CO 80634
(970) 330-5587
Contact: Alicia Thorpe
Email: alicia.thorpe@aeassociates.net
Engineer
APS, Inc. Electrical Engineer
9249 S. Broadway, #200-836
Highlands Ranch, CO 80129
(970) 381-7462
Contact: Chuck Polson
Email: chuck@apsinc.biz
Interwest Consulting Group Civil Engineer
1218 Ash Street
Windsor, CO 80550
(970) 674-3300
Contact: Mike Oberlander
Email: moberlander@Interwestgrp.com
Brinkman Construction General Contractor
Developer
Larsen Structural Design Structural Engineer
3528 Precision Dr Ste. 100
Fort Collins, CO 80528
(970) 267-0954
Contact: Todd Parker
Email: Todd.Parker@brinkmanpartners.com
19 Old Town Square, Suite 238
Fort Collins, CO 80524
(970) 568-3355
Contact: Blake Larsen
Email: blake@larsensd.com
Brinkman Partners & Stahl Inc.
3528 Precision Dr Ste. 100
Fort Collins, CO 80528
(970) 267-0954
Contact: Todd Parker
Email: Todd.Parker@brinkmanpartners.com
Check Set
Harmony
Commons
ARCH
1 Submittal No.1 11/30/2015
2 Submittal No.2 01/20/2016
201 South College Ave. - Suite 203
Fort Collins, CO 80524
(970) 682-1555
Contact: Brian Stahl
Email: Brian@stahldevelopment.com
3 Check Set 02/17/2016
SA
MR
Lot 4 Retail Building
Elevations & 3D Views
Lot 4
2015-13
Lot 4 Retail
Building
4 OF 8
1
3D View of North East Corner
Exterior Material Legend
2
3D View of South West Corner
3
3D View of South East Corner
1/4" = 1'-0"
4
North Trash Enclosure Elevation
1/4" = 1'-0"
5
East Trash Enclosure Elevation
1/4" = 1'-0"
6
South Trash Enclosure Elevation
1/4" = 1'-0"
7
West Trash Enclosure Elevation
Keynote Legend
Key Value Keynote Text
17 Prefinished break metal cap flashing, refer to section details
18 Steel pipe bollard, typ. see detail on sheet 19/AS.1
19 Steel trash enclosure gate with 1 1/2" metal decking, factory primed field
painted to match "Weathered Copper" flashings. See details on sheet AS.1
& AS.2
No. Description Date
37
7
W2
W1
7
W1
12 12 12 12 12
beyond
6
21
21 21
21
Truss Bearing
114' - 0"
Floor Plan
100' - 0"
High Parapet
122' - 0"
Building Parapet
118' - 0"
South Parapet
119' - 0"
beyond
W4 W2 W4
color 2
W1
W5
1
12 5 5 16 11 8 12
11
2
7
21
21 Truss Bearing
114' - 0"
17 W8
15' - 4"
18
18
T.O. Masonry
6'-0" AFG
17 17
18
W8
2' - 4" 10' - 8" 2' - 4"
15' - 4"
18
19
T.O. Masonry
6'-0" AFG
16' - 8"
17
18
18
W8 T.O. Masonry
6'-0" AFG
W8
W8 18
17
16' - 8"
10' - 7 1/4" 4' - 1 1/2" 1' - 11 1/4"
19
T.O. Masonry
6'-0" AFG
W1
W2
W4
W5
W6
6
W8
Metal Panel
Manuf: Metal Sales
Product: T2630 - wall panel (horiz)
Color: Slate Grey
Mechanical Screen
Manuf: Metal Sales
Product: T13-A wall panel (horiz)
Color: Sandstone
Cementitious Lap Siding
Manuf: James Hardie
Product: HardiePlank Lap Siding, Smooth, 8" exposure
Color: Tuscan Gold
Hard Coat Stucco
Manuf: Sto
Product: PowerWall
Color: Field - White Linen (fine texture)
Concrete Masonry Unit Veneer
Manuf: TBD
Product: 8x16 smooth face, running bond
with 4x16 banding
Colors: Body Color - Tan
Accent Bands - Light Tan
Issued
Drawing Number
Scale Accordingly if Reduced
Project No.: Drawn by:
Reviewed by:
In Association with:
ARCHITECTS
r4 architects.com
226 Remington
Unit #3
Fort Collins, CO 80524
phone 970/224-0630
www.r4architects.com
TB Group Planning / LA
444 Mountain Avenue
Berthoud, CO 80531
(970) 532-5891
Contact: Cathy Mathis
Email: cathy@tbgroup.us
AE Associates Mechanical & Plumbing
5587 West 19th Street
Greeley, CO 80634
(970) 330-5587
Contact: Alicia Thorpe
Email: alicia.thorpe@aeassociates.net
Engineer
APS, Inc. Electrical Engineer
9249 S. Broadway, #200-836
Highlands Ranch, CO 80129
(970) 381-7462
Contact: Chuck Polson
Email: chuck@apsinc.biz
Interwest Consulting Group Civil Engineer
1218 Ash Street
Windsor, CO 80550
(970) 674-3300
Contact: Mike Oberlander
Email: moberlander@Interwestgrp.com
Brinkman Construction General Contractor
Developer
Larsen Structural Design Structural Engineer
3528 Precision Dr Ste. 100
Fort Collins, CO 80528
(970) 267-0954
Contact: Todd Parker
Email: Todd.Parker@brinkmanpartners.com
19 Old Town Square, Suite 238
Fort Collins, CO 80524
(970) 568-3355
Contact: Blake Larsen
Email: blake@larsensd.com
Brinkman Partners & Stahl Inc.
3528 Precision Dr Ste. 100
Fort Collins, CO 80528
(970) 267-0954
Contact: Todd Parker
Email: Todd.Parker@brinkmanpartners.com
Check Set
Harmony
Commons
ARCH
1 Submittal No.1 11/30/2015
2 Submittal No.2 01/20/2016
201 South College Ave. - Suite 203
Fort Collins, CO 80524
(970) 682-1555
Contact: Brian Stahl
Email: Brian@stahldevelopment.com
3 Check Set 02/17/2016
JDO
MR
Lot 3 Retail Building
Elevations
Fort Collins, CO
2015-13
Lot 3 Retail
Building
3 OF 8
1/8" = 1'-0"
1
North Building Elevation
1/8" = 1'-0"
2
South Building Elevation
1/8" = 1'-0"
3
East Building Elevation
1/8" = 1'-0"
4
West Building Elevation
1/4" = 1'-0"
5
North - Trash Enclosure Elevation
1/4" = 1'-0"
6
South - Trash Enclosure Elevation
1/4" = 1'-0"
7
East - Trash Enclosure Elevation
1/4" = 1'-0"
8
West - Trash Enclosure Elevation
Keynote Legend
Number Description
1 Steel column painted white on concrete base, refer to Struct.
2 Steel canopy, painted, refer to detail 13/A1.2
5 Electrical gear and meters painted to match adjacent building material
6 Mechanical screen by Metal Sales: T-13 panel installed horizontal per
manuf. standard details, color: Sandstone, see detail 16/A1.2
7 Collector head and 4"x6" open faced downspout, prefinished to match
adjacent building material
8 Fire Department Connection
11 Knox box per PFA requirements
12 Storefront system, refer to A7.1 and A7.2 for elevations, details, and
dimensions
16 Exterior insulated hollow metal door & frame w/ thermal threshold, painted
to match adjacent building material.
17 Prefinished break metal cap flashing, refer to section details
18 Steel pipe bollard, typ. see detail on sheet 10/AS.1
19 Steel trash enclosure gate 1 1/2" metal decking, factory primed field painted
to match "Weathered Copper" flashings. See details on sheet AS.1
21 Exterior light fixture, refer to electrical
0
Exterior Material Legend
No. Description Date
36
Email: chuck@apsinc.biz
Interwest Consulting Group Civil Engineer
1218 Ash Street
Windsor, CO 80550
(970) 674-3300
Contact: Mike Oberlander
Email: moberlander@Interwestgrp.com
Brinkman Construction General Contractor
Developer
Larsen Structural Design Structural Engineer
3528 Precision Dr Ste. 100
Fort Collins, CO 80528
(970) 267-0954
Contact: Todd Parker
Email: Todd.Parker@brinkmanpartners.com
19 Old Town Square, Suite 238
Fort Collins, CO 80524
(970) 568-3355
Contact: Blake Larsen
Email: blake@larsensd.com
Brinkman Partners & Stahl Inc.
3528 Precision Dr Ste. 100
Fort Collins, CO 80528
(970) 267-0954
Contact: Todd Parker
Email: Todd.Parker@brinkmanpartners.com
Check Set
Harmony
Commons
ARCH
1 Submittal No.1 11/30/2015
2 Submittal No.2 01/20/2016
201 South College Ave. - Suite 203
Fort Collins, CO 80524
(970) 682-1555
Contact: Brian Stahl
Email: Brian@stahldevelopment.com
3 Check Set 02/17/2016
SA
MR
Lot 3 Retail Building
Elevations & 3D Views
Fort Collins, CO
2015-13
Lot 3 Retail
Building
2 OF 8
Exterior Material Legend
1
3D View of North West Corner
3
3D View of South East Corner
2
3D View of South West Corner
No. Description Date
35
Contact: Chuck Polson
Email: chuck@apsinc.biz
Interwest Consulting Group Civil Engineer
1218 Ash Street
Windsor, CO 80550
(970) 674-3300
Contact: Mike Oberlander
Email: moberlander@Interwestgrp.com
Brinkman Construction General Contractor
Developer
Larsen Structural Design Structural Engineer
3528 Precision Dr Ste. 100
Fort Collins, CO 80528
(970) 267-0954
Contact: Todd Parker
Email: Todd.Parker@brinkmanpartners.com
19 Old Town Square, Suite 238
Fort Collins, CO 80524
(970) 568-3355
Contact: Blake Larsen
Email: blake@larsensd.com
Brinkman Partners & Stahl Inc.
3528 Precision Dr Ste. 100
Fort Collins, CO 80528
(970) 267-0954
Contact: Todd Parker
Email: Todd.Parker@brinkmanpartners.com
Check Set
Harmony
Commons
ARCH
1 Submittal No.1 11/30/2015
2 Submittal No.2 01/20/2016
201 South College Ave. - Suite 203
Fort Collins, CO 80524
(970) 682-1555
Contact: Brian Stahl
Email: Brian@stahldevelopment.com
3 Check Set 02/17/2016
SA
MR
Harmony Frontage
Renderings & Details
Fort Collins, CO
2015-13
1 OF 8
East Bound Traffic - Harmony Road
Section Detail @ 80' Harmony Road Setback
Typical Masonry Banding Detail
Driver's Cone of Vision
No. Description Date
34
TREE TRUNK
WIRE, TYP.
NOTE: THE WIRE BETWEEN THE STAKE
AND THE TREE MUST HAVE SLACK
5' MIN.
GROMMETED NYLON STRAP, TYP.
NOTE:
WIRE BASKETS AND TWINE SHALL BE COMPLETELY
REMOVED PRIOR TO TREE INSTALLATION.
THAN FINISH GRADE
TOP OF ROOT CROWN TO BE 1" HIGHER
DRIVE THREE (3) T-POSTS PER TREE
FOR TREES OVER 6' IN HEIGHT.
DRIVE TWO (2) T-POSTS FOR TREES
6' IN HEIGHT OR LESS. SPACE
ANCHORS EQUALLY AROUND TRUNK.
AVOID DAMAGE TO BRANCHES.
EXISTING SOIL
SLOW RELEASE FERTILIZER TABLET (TYP.)
BACKFILL W/ 2/3 NATIVE SOIL & 1/3
COMPOST. THOROUGHLY WATER
SETTLE
REMOVE WIRE CAGE AND/OR TWINE. OPEN BURLAP
AROUND TRUNK. CUT & REMOVE TOP 1/3 OF BURLAP
18" MIN.,
TYP.
SECTION
12" MIN.
ROOTBALL
THAN DIA. OF
24" GREATER
FINISH GRADE
PLAN
TREE TRUNK
T-POST
GROMMETED NYLON STRAP, TYP.
WIRE, TYP.
NOTE: THE WIRE BETWEEN THE STAKE
AND THE TREE MUST HAVE SLACK
TOP OF ROOT CROWN TO
BE 1" HIGHER THAN
FINISH GRADE
NOTE:
WIRE BASKETS AND TWINE SHALL BE COMPLETELY
REMOVED PRIOR TO TREE INSTALLATION.
DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING DETAIL CONIFER TREE PLANTING DETAIL
NOTE:
CEDAR MULCH TREE
RING SHALL BE 36" DIA.
2" MULCH
ROOTBALL
DEPTH
ROOTBALL
DEPTH
ROOTBALL
DEPTH
TIE GROMMETED NYLON STRAPS TO STAKE WITH WIRE. WIRE
ENDS SHALL BE BENT BACK TO ELIMINATE BURRS AND WHITE PVC
PIPE ALONG ENTIRE LENGTH OF WIRE FOR VISUAL AND SAFETY
OB
HS
BBS
AL
AP
PERENNIAL/WILDFLOWER SEED MIX
70% TALL FESCUE, 20%
BLUEGRASS, 10% SMOOTH BROME
IRRIGATED TURF
CEDAR WOOD MULCH
WOOD MULCH
STEEL EDGER
CRUSHER FINES
GRAY
500 S.F.
L2
NOTES, SCHEDULES AND
DETAILS
1. PLANT QUALITY: ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE A-GRADE OR NO. 1 GRADE - FREE OF ANY DEFECTS, OF NORMAL HEALTH, HEIGHT, LEAF DENSITY AND SPREAD APPROPRIATE TO THE
SPECIES AS DEFINED BY THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN (AAN) STANDARDS. ALL TREES SHALL BE BALL AND BURLAP OR EQUIVALENT.
2. IRRIGATION: ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS WITHIN THE SITE INCLUDING TURF, SHRUB BEDS AND TREE AREAS SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM. THE IRRIGATION
PLAN MUST BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS WATER UTILITIES DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT. ALL TURF AREAS SHALL BE
IRRIGATED WITH AN AUTOMATIC POP-UP IRRIGATION SYSTEM. ALL SHRUB BEDS AND TREES, INCLUDING IN NATIVE SEED AREAS, SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH AN AUTOMATIC DRIP
(TRICKLE) IRRIGATION SYSTEM, OR WITH AN ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE APPROVED BY THE CITY WITH THE IRRIGATION PLANS. THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE ADJUSTED TO MEET
THE WATER REQUIREMENTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL PLANT MATERIAL.
3. TOPSOIL: TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT FEASIBLE, TOPSOIL THAT IS REMOVED DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY SHALL BE CONSERVED FOR LATER USE ON AREAS REQUIRING
REVEGETATION AND LANDSCAPING.
4. SOIL AMENDMENTS: SOIL AMENDMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED AND DOCUMENTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY CODE SECTION 12-132. THE SOIL IN ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS, INCLUDING
PARKWAYS AND MEDIANS, SHALL BE THOUGHLY LOOSENED TO A DEPTH OF NOT LESS THAN EIGHT(8) INCHES AND SOIL AMENDMENT SHALL BE THOROUGHLY INCORPORATED INTO THE
SOIL OF ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS TO A DEPTH OF AT LEAST SIX(6) INCHES BY TILLING, DISCING OR OTHER SUITABLE METHOD, AT A RATE OF AT LEAST THREE (3) CUBIC YARDS OF SOIL
AMENDMENT PER ONE THOUSAND (1,000) SQUARE FEET OF LANDSCAPE AREA. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, A WRITTEN CERTIFICATION MUST BE
SUBMITTED TO THE CITY THAT ALL PLANTED AREAS, OR AREAS TO BE PLANTED, HAVE BEEN THOROUGHLY LOOSENED AND THE SOIL AMENDED, CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS
SET FORTH IN SECTION 12-132.
5. INSTALLATION AND GUARANTEE: ALL LANDSCAPING SHALL BE INSTALLED ACCORDING TO SOUND HORTICULTURAL PRACTICES IN A MANNER DESIGNED TO ENCOURAGE QUICK
ESTABLISHMENT AND HEALTHY GROWTH. ALL LANDSCAPING FOR EACH PHASE MUST BE EITHER INSTALLED OR THE INSTALLATION MUST BE SECURED WITH AN IRREVOCABLE LETTER
OF CREDIT, PERFORMANCE BOND, OR ESCROW ACCOUNT FOR 125% OF THE VALUATION OF THE MATERIALS AND LABOR PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR
ANY BUILDING IN SUCH PHASE.
6. MAINTENANCE: TREES AND VEGETATION, IRRIGATION SYSTEMS, FENCES, WALLS AND OTHER LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS WITH THESE FINAL PLANS SHALL BE CONSIDERED AS ELEMENTS OF
THE PROJECT IN THE SAME MANNER AS PARKING, BUILDING MATERIALS AND OTHER SITE DETAILS. THE APPLICANT, LANDOWNER OR SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST SHALL BE JOINTLY AND
SEVERALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REGULAR MAINTENANCE OF ALL LANDSCAPING ELEMENTS IN GOOD CONDITION. ALL LANDSCAPING SHALL BE MAINTAINED FREE FROM DISEASE,
PESTS, WEEDS AND LITTER, AND ALL LANDSCAPE STRUCTURES SUCH AS FENCES AND WALLS SHALL BE REPAIRED AND REPLACED PERIODICALLY TO MAINTAIN A STRUCTURALLY
SOUND CONDITION.
7. REPLACEMENT: ANY LANDSCAPE ELEMENT THAT DIES, OR IS OTHERWISE REMOVED, SHALL BE PROMPTLY REPLACED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THESE PLANS.
8. THE FOLLOWING SEPARATIONS SHALL BE PROVIDED BETWEEN TREES/SHRUBS AND UTILITIES:
40 FEET BETWEEN CANOPY TREES AND STREET LIGHTS
15 FEET BETWEEN ORNAMENTAL TREES AND STREETLIGHTS
10 FEET BETWEEN TREES AND PUBLIC WATER, SANITARY AND STORM SEWER MAIN LINES
6 FEET BETWEEN TREES AND PUBLIC WATER, SANITARY AND STORM SEWER SERVICE LINES.
4 FEET BETWEEN SHRUBS AND PUBLIC WATER AND SANITARY AND STORM SEWER LINES
4 FEET BETWEEN TREES AND GAS LINES
9. ALL STREET TREES SHALL BE PLACED A MINIMUM EIGHT (8) FEET AWAY FROM THE EDGES OF DRIVEWAYS AND ALLEYS PER LUC 3.2.1(D)(2)(A).
10. PLACEMENT OF ALL LANDSCAPING SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SIGHT DISTANCE CRITERIA AS SPECIFIED BY THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS. NO STRUCTURES OR LANDSCAPE
ELEMENTS GREATER THAN 24" SHALL BE ALLOWED WITHIN THE SIGHT DISTANCE TRIANGLE OR EASEMENTS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF DECIDUOUS TREES PROVIDED THAT THE LOWEST
BRANCH IS AT LEAST 6' FROM GRADE. ANY FENCES WITHIN THE SIGHT DISTANCE TRIANGLE OR EASEMENT MUST BE NOT MORE THAN 42" IN HEIGHT AND OF AN OPEN DESIGN.
11. COMMON OPEN SPACE AREAS AND LANDSCAPING WITHIN RIGHT OF WAYS, STREET MEDIANS, AND TRAFFIC CIRCLES ADJACENT TO COMMON OPEN SPACE AREAS ARE REQUIRED TO
BE MAINTAINED BY A PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION. THE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SNOW REMOVAL ON ALL ADJACENT STREET SIDEWALKS AND ON
ALL DRIVEWAYS, PRIVATE DRIVES AND PARKING AREAS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT.
12. THE DEVELOPER SHALL ENSURE THAT THE FINAL LANDSCAPE PLAN IS COORDINATED WITH ALL OTHER FINAL PLAN ELEMENTS SO THAT THE PROPOSED GRADING, STORM DRAINAGE,
AND OTHER DEVELOPMENT IMPROVEMENTS DO NOT CONFLICT WITH NOR PRECLUDE INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS ON THIS PLAN.
13. MINOR CHANGES IN SPECIES AND PLANT LOCATIONS MAY BE MADE DURING CONSTRUCTION -- AS REQUIRED BY SITE CONDITIONS OR PLANT AVAILABILITY. OVERALL QUANTITY,
QUALITY, AND DESIGN CONCEPT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE APPROVED PLANS. IN THE EVENT OF CONFLICT WITH THE QUANTITIES INCLUDED IN THE PLANT LIST, SPECIES AND
QUANTITIES ILLUSTRATED SHALL BE PROVIDED. ALL CHANGES OF PLANT SPECIES AND LOCATION MUST HAVE WRITTEN APPROVAL BY THE CITY PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.
14. ALL PLANTING BEDS SHALL BE MULCHED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF THREE INCHES.
15. IRRIGATED TURF SHALL BE TEXAS BLUEGRASS/KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS HYBRID REVEILLE OR APPROVED EQUAL.
16. EDGING BETWEEN GRASS AND SHRUB BEDS SHALL BE 18" X 4" STEEL SET LEVEL WITH TOP OF SOD OR APPROVED EQUAL.
17. LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION WITHIN THE BUFFER ZONE ENHANCEMENT AREA SHALL BE ESTABLISHED AND MAINTAINED FOR A PERIOD OF AT LEAST THREE YEARS UNTIL IT
REACHES AN AGREED UPON LEVEL OF SUCCESS, AT WHICH POINT THE CONTINUED MAINTENANCE WILL BE TURNED OVER TO STORMWATER. THE ESTABLISHMENT & MAINTENANCE
PERIOD MAY BE EXTENDED PAST 3 YEARS BY THE CITY TO ENSURE THE REQUIRED LEVEL OF ESTABLISHMENT HAS OCCURRED. PRIOR TO THE AREA BEING TURNED OVER FOR
MAINTENANCE TO STORMWATER THE DEVELOPMENT SHALL CONTACT CITY REPRESENTATIVES FROM STORMWATER, FORESTRY AND ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING FOR A SITE
INSPECTION. THE LEVEL OF ESTABLISHMENT MUST BE APPROVED BY TEH CITY PRIOR TO THE MAINTENANCE BEING TRANSFERRED TO STORMWATER. ALL SHADE AND EVERGREEN
TREES NEED TO BE IN PLACE AND ESTABLISHED.
18. NATURAL HABITAT AREA IS MEANT TO BE MAINTAINED IN A NATIVE LANDSCAPE.
19. REFER TO SECTION 3.4.1 OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS LAND USE CODE FOR ALLOWABLE USES WITHIN THE BUFFER ZONE ENHANCEMENT ZONE.
20. LANDSCAPING INCLUDING STREET TREES SHALL BE SECURED WITH A LETTER OF CREDIT, ESCROW, OR PERFORMANCE BOND OF 125% OF THE VALUE OF THE LANDSCAPING AND
INSTALLATION PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR ANY BUILDING. ALL CITY STREET TREES MUST BE INSTALLED, ESTABLISHED, OF AN APPROVED SPECIES
AND OF ACCEPTABLE CONDITION PRIOR TO FINAL RELEASE OF FINANCIAL SECURITY.
Street Tree Notes
1. A PERMIT MUST BE OBTAINED FROM THE CITY FORESTER BEFORE ANY TREES OR SHRUBS AS NOTED ON THIS PLAN ARE PLANTED, PRUNED OR REMOVED IN THE PUBLIC
RIGHT-OF-WAY. THIS INCLUDES ZONES BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND CURB, MEDIANS AND OTHER CITY PROPERTY. THIS PERMIT SHALL APPROVE THE LOCATION AND SPECIES TO
BE PLANTED. FAILURE TO OBTAIN THIS PERMIT IS A VIOLATION OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS CODE SUBJECT TO CITATION (SECTION 27-31) AND MAY ALSO RESULT IN REPLACING
OR RELOCATING TREES AND A HOLD ON CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
2. CONTACT THE CITY FORESTER TO INSPECT ALL STREET TREE PLANTINGS AT THE COMPLETION OF EACH PHASE OF THE DEVELOPMENT. ALL MUST BE INSTALLED AS SHOWN ON
THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. APPROVAL OF STREET TREE PLANTING IS REQUIRED BEFORE FINAL APPROVAL OF EACH PHASE.
3. STREET LANDSCAPING, INCLUDING STREET TREES, SHALL BE SELECTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL CITY CODES AND POLICIES. ALL TREE PRUNING AND REMOVAL WORKS SHALL BE
PERFORMED BY A CITY OF FORT COLLINS LICENSED ARBORS WHERE REQUIRED BY CODE.STREET TREES SHALL BE SUPPLIED AND PLANTED BY THE DEVELOPER USING A QUALIFIED
LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR.
4. THE DEVELOPER SHALL REPLACE DEAD OR DYING STREET TREES AFTER PLANTING UNTIL FINAL MAINTENANCE INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE BY THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
FORESTRY DIVISION. ALL STREET TREES IN THE PROJECT MUST BE ESTABLISHED, WITH AN APPROVED SPECIES AND OF ACCEPTABLE CONDITION PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE.
5. SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE CITY FORESTER -- STREET TREE LOCATIONS MAY BE ADJUSTED TO ACCOMMODATE DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS, UTILITY SEPARATIONS BETWEEN TREES,
STREET SIGNS AND STREET LIGHTS. STREET TREES TO BE CENTERED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE LOT TO THE EXTENT FEASIBLE. QUANTITIES SHOWN ON PLAN MUST BE INSTALLED
UNLESS A REDUCTION IS APPROVED BY THE CITY TO MEET SEPARATION STANDARDS.
Tree Protection Notes
1. ALL EXISTING TREES WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND WITHIN ANY NATURAL AREA BUFFER ZONES SHALL REMAIN AND BE PROTECTED UNLESS NOTED ON THESE
PLANS FOR REMOVAL.
2. WITHIN THE DRIP LINE OF ANY PROTECTED EXISTING TREE, THERE SHALL BE NO CUT OR FILL OVER A FOUR-INCH DEPTH UNLESS A QUALIFIED ARBORIST OR FORESTER HAS
EVALUATED AND APPROVED THE DISTURBANCE.
3. ALL PROTECTED EXISTING TREES SHALL BE PRUNED TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS FORESTRY STANDARDS. TREE PRUNING AND REMOVAL SHALL BE PERFORMED BY A
BUSINESS THAT HOLDS A CURRENT CITY OF FORT COLLINS ARBORIST LICENSE WHERE REQUIRED BY CODE.
4. PRIOR TO AND DURING CONSTRUCTION, BARRIERS SHALL BE ERECTED AROUND ALL PROTECTED EXISTING TREES WITH SUCH BARRIERS TO BE OF ORANGE FENCING A
MINIMUM OF FOUR (4) FEET IN HEIGHT, SECURED WITH METAL T-POSTS, NO CLOSER THAN SIX (6) FEET FROM THE TRUNK OR ONE-HALF (½) OF THE DRIP LINE, WHICHEVER IS
GREATER. THERE SHALL BE NO STORAGE OR MOVEMENT OF EQUIPMENT, MATERIAL, DEBRIS OR FILL WITHIN THE FENCED TREE PROTECTION ZONE.
5. DURING THE CONSTRUCTION STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT, THE APPLICANT SHALL PREVENT THE CLEANING OF EQUIPMENT OR MATERIAL OR THE STORAGE AND DISPOSAL OF
WASTE MATERIAL SUCH AS PAINTS, OILS, SOLVENTS, ASPHALT, CONCRETE, MOTOR OIL OR ANY OTHER MATERIAL HARMFUL TO THE LIFE OF A TREE WITHIN THE DRIP LINE OF
ANY PROTECTED TREE OR GROUP OF TREES.
6. NO DAMAGING ATTACHMENT, WIRES, SIGNS OR PERMITS MAY BE FASTENED TO ANY PROTECTED TREE.
7. LARGE PROPERTY AREAS CONTAINING PROTECTED TREES AND SEPARATED FROM CONSTRUCTION OR LAND CLEARING AREAS, ROAD RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND UTILITY
EASEMENTS MAY BE "RIBBONED OFF," RATHER THAN ERECTING PROTECTIVE FENCING AROUND EACH TREE AS REQUIRED IN SUBSECTION (G)(3) ABOVE. THIS MAY BE
ACCOMPLISHED BY PLACING METAL T-POST STAKES A MAXIMUM OF FIFTY (50) FEET APART AND TYING RIBBON OR ROPE FROM STAKE-TO-STAKE ALONG THE OUTSIDE
PERIMETERS OF SUCH AREAS BEING CLEARED.
8. THE INSTALLATION OF UTILITIES, IRRIGATION LINES OR ANY UNDERGROUND FIXTURE REQUIRING EXCAVATION DEEPER THAN SIX (6) INCHES SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED BY
BORING UNDER THE ROOT SYSTEM OF PROTECTED EXISTING TREES AT A MINIMUM DEPTH OF TWENTY-FOUR (24) INCHES. THE AUGER DISTANCE IS ESTABLISHED FROM THE
FACE OF THE TREE (OUTER BARK) AND IS SCALED FROM TREE DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT AS DESCRIBED IN THE CHART BELOW:
TREE DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT (INCHES) AUGER DISTANCE FROM FACE OF TREE (FEET)
0-2 1
3-4 2
5-9 5
10-14 10
15-19 12
OVER 19 15
9. ALL TREE REMOVAL SHOWN SHALL BE COMPLETED OUTSIDE OF THE SONGBIRD NESTING SEASON (FEB 1 - JULY 31) OR CONDUCT A SURVEY OF TREES ENSURING NO ACTIVE
NESTS IN THE AREA.
Plant List
Hydrozone Table
ZONE AREA WATER USE GALLONS
HIGH 0 SF 18 GAL/SF 0 GAL
MODERATE 28,303 SF 10 GAL/SF 283,030 GAL
LOW 19,103 SF 3 GAL/SF 57,309 GAL
VERY LOW X SF 0 GAL/SF 0 GAL
TOTAL / AVERAGE 47,406 SF 340,339 GAL 7.2 GAL/SF
A PERMIT MUST BE OBTAINED FROM THE CITY FORESTER BEFORE ANY TREES OR SHRUBS AS NOTED ON THIS PLAN ARE PLANTED, PRUNED OR REMOVED IN THE PUBLIC
RIGHT-OF-WAY. THIS INCLUDES ZONES BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND CURB, MEDIANS AND OTHER CITY PROPERTY. THIS PERMIT SHALL APPROVE THE LOCATION AND
SPECIES TO BE PLANTED. FAILURE TO OBTAIN THIS PERMIT IS A VIOLATION OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS CODE SUBJECT TO CITATION (SECTION 27-31) AND MAY ALSO
RESULT IN REPLACING OR RELOCATING TREES AND A HOLD ON CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
General Landscape Notes
Landscape Legend
Planting Details
3420 TIMBERWOOD DRIVE
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
80528
HARMONY
COMMONS
3528 Precision Dr.
Fort Collins, CO 80528
Of:
Sheet Number:
GROUP
landscape architecture|planning|illustration
444 Mountain Ave.
Behtroud,CO 80513
TEL
WEB
970.532.5891
TBGroup.us
PROJECT TITLE
REVISIONS
ISSUE DATE
SHEET TITLE
SHEET INFORMATION
DATE
SEAL
December 1, 2015
BRINKMAN DEVELOPMENT
DATE
PREPARED FOR
2
Staff Comments 01.20.16
33
AP
AP
AP
AP
AP AP
PERENNIAL/WILDFLOWER SEED MIX
70% TALL FESCUE, 20%
BLUEGRASS, 10% SMOOTH BROME
IRRIGATED TURF
CEDAR WOOD MULCH
WOOD MULCH
STEEL EDGER
CRUSHER FINES
GRAY
500 S.F.
LIGHT POLE
AA5
LIGHT POLE
AA2
OB
HS
BBS
AL
AP
L1
OVERALL LANDSCAPE PLAN
Landscape Legend
Plant List
SCALE 1" = 40'-0"
0 40' 60' 80'
NORTH
Landscape Plan
3420 TIMBERWOOD DRIVE
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
80528
HARMONY
COMMONS
3528 Precision Dr.
Fort Collins, CO 80528
Of:
Sheet Number:
GROUP
landscape architecture|planning|illustration
444 Mountain Ave.
Behtroud,CO 80513
TEL
WEB
970.532.5891
TBGroup.us
PROJECT TITLE
REVISIONS
ISSUE DATE
SHEET TITLE
SHEET INFORMATION
DATE
SEAL
December 1, 2015
BRINKMAN DEVELOPMENT
DATE
PREPARED FOR
2
Staff Comments 01.20.16
FUTURE PATIO
BY OWNER
FUTURE PATIO
BY OWNER
FUTURE PATIO
BY OWNER
LINEAR PAVING
PATTERN
80' BUFFER LANDSCAPE
AND 8' TRAIL BY OTHERS
TRANSFORMER
TRANSFORMER
32