HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/07/2016 - Planning And Zoning Board - Agenda - Regular MeetingJennifer Carpenter, Chair
Kristin Kirkpatrick, Vice Chair
Jeff Hansen
Gerald Hart
Emily Heinz
Michael Hobbs
Jeffrey Schneider
City Council Chambers
City Hall West
300 Laporte Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado
Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14
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
April 7, 2016
6:00 PM
• ROLL CALL
• AGENDA REVIEW
• CITIZEN PARTICIPATION (30 minutes total for non -agenda and pending application
topics)
• CONSENT AGENDA
1. Draft March 8. 2016. P&Z Hearina Minutes
The purpose of this item is to approve the draft minutes for the March, 8, 2016, Planning
and Zoning Board hearing.
2. E. Prospect at Boxelder Creek Annexation and Zoning
PROJECT This is a request to annex a segment of East Prospect Road right -
DESCRIPTION: of -way. The request is related to a City Utilities and Engineering
project to improve the Boxelder Creek crossing of the road for
flood management purposes. The segment is located east of
Summitview Drive and west of the Interstate 25 frontage road.
The segment is approximately 1,000 feet in length.
Proposed zoning is a combination of U-E, Urban Estate, and E,
Employment consistent with the City Structure Plan and existing
zoning on adjacent properties.
Planning and Zoning Board April 7, 2016
1
PETITIONERS: Thomas Moore
PO Box 449, Fort Collins CO 80521
Thomas and Laura B. Glanz
3755 Bromley Dr., Fort Collins CO 80525
3. Various Revisions to the Land Use Code Relatina to Dust Prevention and Control
PROJECT This is a request for a Recommendation to City Council regarding
DESCRIPTION: various revisions to the Land Use Code to implement regulations
and a set of consistent best practices (Dust Control Manual) for
(thirteen) specific activities that generate dust to follow, in order to
reduce health impacts and nuisances associated with dust
generating activities. Per Council direction during the February 9th
work session, staff has developed an exception for small residential
projects (less than 10,000 square feet), whereby these projects do
not have to employ the Dust Control Manual to prevent, control, and
minimize dust generation unless two written warnings have been
issued within a one year period.
In addition to the regulations and set of best practices outlined in the
Dust Control Manual, staff has developed and is implementing a
tracking system for fugitive dust complaints. In addition, per Council
direction, the City has enacted an Administrative Policy applying the
Dust Control Manual to all City projects, so that the City is leading
by example.
Revisions to the Land Use Code must be evaluated by the Planning
and Zoning Board before City Council approval.
APPLICANT: City of Fort Collins
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
• DISCUSSION AGENDA
4. Mountain's Edae Annexation and Zonina #ANX160002
PROJECT This is a request to annex and zone 18.52 acres located at the
DESCRIPTION: northeast corner of West Drake Road and South Overland Trail.
This is a 100% voluntary annexation. The parcel currently consists
of one single family home. The parcel is west of the Brown Farm
Subdivision and south of the drive-in movie theater. In accordance
with the City Plan 's Structure Plan Map, the requested zoning for
this annexation is L-M-N, Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood.
APPLICANT: Mr. Jeff Mark
Landhuis Company.
212 North Wahsatch Avenue, Suite 301
Colorado Springs, CO. 80903
Planning and Zoning Board
April 7, 2016
011
5. Centre for Advanced Technology 22nd Filing, Community Horticulture Center #MJA150006
PROJECT This is a Major Amendment to the Centre for Advanced
DESCRIPTION: Technology 22nd Filing, Community Horticulture Center,
which is the formal name and location of the Gardens on
Spring Creek. The proposed plan reflects the major
components outlined in the original master plan, which was
approved in 2001. At that time, the master plan included a
number of future components, which are now planned in detail
with this amended plan. Specifically, the amended
components that are shown with these proposed plans
include:
• expanded garden areas including — Plant Select
Garden, Fragrance Garden,
• Rose Garden, Moon Garden, Undaunted Garden,
Prairie Garden, Bird Garden, and Foothills Garden;
• a stage structure and sound walls for outdoor
performances;
• modified circulation through the gardens and to the
existing Spring Creek Trail;
• a parking area for approximately 150 bikes;
• small arbor structures at various gardens and one
larger structure in the Undaunted Garden; and
• operational and management standards for events.
APPLICANT: John Beggs
Senior Landscape Architect
Russell + Mills Studios
141 South College Avenue, Suite 104
Fort Collins, CO 80524
• OTHER BUSINESS
• ADJOURNMENT
Planning and Zoning Board
Page 3
April 7, 2016
3
Agenda Item 1
STAFF
Cindy Cosmas, Administrative Assistant
SUBJECT
Draft March 8, 2016, P&Z Hearing Minutes
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to approve the draft minutes for the March, 8, 2016, Planning and Zoning Board
hearing.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft March 8, 2016; P&Z Minutes (DOC)
Item #1 Pagel
M
Kristin Kirkpatrick, Chair
Gerald Hart, Vice Chair
Jennifer Carpenter
Jeff Hansen
Emily Heinz
Michael Hobbs
Jeffrey Schneider
City Council Chambers
City Hall West
300 Laporte Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado
Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14
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
Vice Chair Kirkpatrick called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
Roll Call:
Absent:
Staff Present:
Agenda Review
Kirkpatrick, Carpenter, Hart, Heinz, and Schneider
Hansen, Hobbs
Gloss, Yatabe, Leeson, Wilkinson, Shepard, Lorson, Ragasa, Virata, Sexton and
Cosmas
Planning Director Gloss reviewed the items on the Consent and Discussion agendas for the audience,
noting that Prospect Station ll, PDP, has been moved to the discussion agenda.
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.
5
Planning & Zoning Board
March 8, 2016
Page 2
• 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.
Public Input on Items Not on the Agenda:
None noted.
Consent Agenda:
1. Draft Minutes from February 11, 2016, P&Z Hearing
2. Harmony Commons PDP#150027
3. Dutch Bros. Coffee at Timberline Center, MJA#150008
4. Home 2 Suites at Harmony Village PDP#150031
5. St. Peter's Anglican Church FDP#150040
6. 2133 S. Timberline Rd MJA#150009
Public Input on Consent Agenda:
None noted.
Member Hart made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board pull Prospect Station II,
PDP#150021, from the Consent agenda and place it on the Discussion agenda. Member Heinz
seconded the motion. Vote: 5:0.
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."
Member Heinz made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the March 8, 2016,
Consent agenda as amended. Member Schneider seconded. Vote: 5:0.
Discussion Agenda:
7. Prospect Station II PDP#150021
Project: Prospect Station II PDP#150021
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
no
Planning & Zoning Board
March 8, 2016
Page 3
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.
Recommendation: Approval
Staff and Applicant Presentations
Rayno Caesar, representing the owner team of Prospect Station 11, gave an overview of the project,
including some history of the property itself. He showed some maps of the development, and he
discussed some of the plans to memorialize the original building. He wants to keep the scale of the
building down but still have ample parking. His goal is to build something for young professionals,
offering a mix of 1- and 2-bedroom units, aiming for an estimated completion date in 2017. The project
team has considered traffic issues and feels there will be minimal impact on Prospect Avenue.
Cathy Mathis, with TB Group (landscape architects), addressed some of the questions that came up at
the work session: she discussed the proposed parking space locations (which should be ample based
on City requirements), the central gathering spaces (City requirements are being met), and landscaping
features (several pergolas and outdoor features will be utilized). Ian Shuff, project architect with ALM2S,
reviewed the phase I buildings that are built along with the proposed phase II buildings. He discussed
the materials that would be used, planned colors, and a variety of fenestration to create offsets and
compliments to the phase I buildings. He also showed slides of elevations and perspectives.
Planner Lorson presented some of the highlights of the project, including the modification of standard
request for secondary uses, saying that the overall district will be increased to a total of 22% secondary
usage. This meets the standard that requires the modification to be nominal and inconsequential with
respect to the whole project. He also discussed the three concerns brought up at the work session:
public gathering spaces, building elevations and design, and transportation impact study. He addressed
the section of the Land Use Code that exempts multi -family projects that are in the Transit Overlay
District (TOD) from two different standards: access to a public gathering places and the 15-foot minimum
setback. Martina Wilkinson, Traffic Operations, gave the Board some statistics of proposed traffic
volumes during rush hours, impacts to drivers, coordination with other projects (including CSU projects)
and improvements.
Public Input
None noted.
Board Questions and Staff Response
Member Hart asked whether the left -turn movements would be limited; Ms. Wilkinson stated the left-hand
turns are somewhat self-regulating, even during peak hours, and she does not recommend any type of
limitation at this time.
Board Questions and Staff Response
None noted.
7
Planning & Zoning Board
March 8, 2016
Page 4
Board Deliberation
Member Heinz acknowledged that her prior concerns have been mitigated. Member Heinz made a
motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the request for modification section
4.27(D)(2) secondary uses, since the plan, as submitted, will not diverge from the standards of
the Land Use Code except in a nominal and inconsequential way, when considered from the
perspective of the entire development plan, and will continue to advance the purposes of the LUC
as contained in section 1.2.2, as taken from page 8 in the staff report. Member Carpenter
seconded. Member Hart suggested that the correct page reference in the staff report should be pages 8
and 9, rather than just 8. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe agreed and suggested that this should be
amended. Chair Kirkpatrick amended the motion to include this amendment. Vote: 5:0.
Member Heinz made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve Prospect Station II,
PDP#150021, based on the findings of fact and conclusions on pages 8 and 9 of the staff report.
Member Carpenter seconded the motion. Vote: 5:0.
Other Business
Member Hart mentioned that the concept of a mixed -use development was questioned because of the
project details; he would like to look at the mixed -use requirement overall to determine how it works best
and perhaps only require it in certain areas. Planning Director Gloss agreed and stated that this would
be one of the topics that will be scrutinized as part of the City Plan Update. The City Plan Update will be
reviewed at the next work session. Member Heinz asked if the Board members could do anything
special to prepare for this topic; Planning Director Gloss responded that the Board members could
continue speaking with staff or doing an interactive brainstorming exercise as an assignment (urgent
issues could include: affordable housing, neighborhood character, infill, etc.). Chair Kirkpatrick will also
compile notes from meetings that could be used for this purpose. It was decided that the next work
session may realistically continue until 5:OOpm as a result of these items.
The meeting was adjourned at 6:51 pm.
Cameron Gloss, Planning Director
Kristin Kirkpatrick, Chair
EOO
Agenda Item 2
PROJECT NAME
E. PROSPECT AT BOXELDER CREEK ANNEXATION AND ZONING
STAFF
Clark Mapes, City Planner
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request to annex a segment of East Prospect Road right-of-way.
The request is related to a City Utilities and Engineering project to improve
the Boxelder Creek crossing of the road for flood management purposes.
The segment is located east of Summitview Drive and west of the
Interstate 25 frontage road. The segment is approximately 1,000 feet in
length.
PETITIONERS:
RECOMMENDATION:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. Background
Proposed zoning is a combination of U-E, Urban Estate, and E,
Employment consistent with the City Structure Plan and existing zoning on
adjacent properties.
Thomas Moore
PO Box 449, Fort Collins CO 80521
Thomas and Laura B. Glanz
3755 Bromley Dr., Fort Collins CO 80525
Staff recommends approval of the annexation and placement into the U-
E, Urban Estate, and E, Employment zone districts.
The City initiated this annexation to enable efficient design and construction of the Boxelder Creek
crossing project. Annexation allows the project to proceed without involving Larimer County reviews and
approvals of work in the right-of-way. The County supports the project and the annexation.
Two abutting properties are involved in the project, and the owners are cooperating directly with the City,
including signing the petition to annex. Small portions of the two affected properties will be purchased
for additional City right-of-way as part of the project.
Item # 2 Page 1
9
Agenda Item 2
The area to be annexed is located within the Fort Collins Growth Management Area and is eligible for
annexation.
According to policies and agreements between the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County contained in
the Intergovernmental Agreement for the Fort Collins Growth Management Area (GMA), the City agrees
to consider annexation of property in the GMA when the property is eligible according to State law.
The subject property gains the required one -sixth (16.66%) contiguity to existing city limits from several
abutting properties. 42% of the total perimeter is contiguous to the existing municipal boundary, thus
exceeding the required minimum.
This annexation request is in conformance with the State of Colorado Revised Statutes as they relate to
annexations, the City of Fort Collins Comprehensive Plan, and the Larimer County and City of Fort
Collins Intergovernmental Agreements.
This annexation of right-of-way fills two small gaps in existing city limits along East Prospect Road which
clarifies and consolidates responsibility. The annexation creates two enclaves, one of 15.4 acres and
the other of 1.8 acres. The enclaves contain undeveloped property, with the exception of one single
family house.
2. Abutting zoning and land uses
Direction
Zone District
Existing Land Uses
North
E, Employment District and County FA, Farming
District
Large -lot single-family houses and vacant property
South
County FA and P-O-L, Public Open Lands
District
Large -lot single-family house, vacant property, and State
Visitors Welcome Center
East
C-G, General Commercial District
Prospect Road right-of-way near the 1-25 frontage road
West
C-C-R, Community Commercial River District
Prospect Road right-of-way near Hageman Earth Cycle
landscape materials and recycling business
FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. The property meets the eligibility requirements included in State law to qualify for a voluntary
annexation to the City of Fort Collins.
B. The annexation of this area is consistent with the policies and agreements between Larimer
County and the City of Fort Collins contained in the Intergovernmental Agreement for the Fort
Collins Growth Management Area.
C. The requested zoning, U-E, Urban Estate and E, Employment, is in conformance with the
City's Comprehensive Plan (Structure Plan Map).
D. The request is in conformance with Section 2.9, Amendment to the Zoning Map, of the City of
Fort Collins Land Use Code.
E. On April 5, 2016,
the
City
Council
approved a resolution
that
accepted the annexation petition
and determined
that
the
petition
was in compliance
with
State law. The resolution also
Item # 2 Page 2
10
Agenda Item 2
initiated the annexation process for the property by establishing the date, time and place
when a City Council public hearing would be held regarding the readings of the Ordinances
annexing and zoning the area.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning board make a motion to recommend that City Council
approve the East Prospect at Boxelder Creek Annexation and Zoning #ANX160001, and place the
property into the U-E, Urban Estate and E, Employment zone districts, based on the Findings of Fact in
the Staff Report.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Vicinity Map (PDF)
2. Plat E Prospect Annex Small (PDF)
3. Structure Plan Map (PDF)
4. Zoning Map (PDF)
Item # 2 Page 3
11
Attachment
ETros
Legend
ct°Rd
City Limits - Area
City Limits - Outline
Annexation Area
Annexation
Area
&qjl
East Prospect at Boxelder
Creek Annexation
is p
LO
N
ca
L
1 inch = 500 feet
12
EAST PROSPECT AT BOXELDER CREEK ANNEXATION
VICINITY MAP
SW COR SEC 16-7-89
W-/2D KISMINM L
P LA T IRON EAST
PROSPECT ROAD
FIRST ANNEXATION
DESCRIPTION
— 51/4 COR. SEC 16-7-
2-1/2- ALUMINUM OF
sTOWPEO Ls loan
TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTH HALF OF SECTION 16, AND THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION 21,
TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 68 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN; LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO
GRAPHIC SCALE
I INCH = 60 FEET
CZ
BID
jali
AM
FRI
DO
P 10 S P E C T ROAD SOUDI LINE OF SW 1/4, BECTON 16-7-68
NBBRI'25-W 261 OP51S N, BGRINGs
A TRACT OF HAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTH HALF OF SECTION 16 AND THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 68 WEST OF THE SIXTH P.M.;
COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO; BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 16, AND CONSIDERING THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 16 TO BEAR
N88'21'25W, SAID ONE BEING MONUMENTED ON ITS EAST ENO BY A 2-1/2- BRASS CPR STAMPED US 14823, AND ON ITS WEST END BY A 2-1/2" ALUMINUM CAP
STAMPED ITS 14823, BASED UPON CPS OBSERVATIONS AND THE CITY OF FORT COWNS COORDINATE SYSTEM, WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE
THERETO;
THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER, IL P25"W, A DISTANCE OF 1,716.87 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST ONE OF INTERSTATE LANDS
FIRST ANNEXANON TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS. SAID POINT BEING ME POINT OF BEGINNING:
THENCE ALONG SAID EAST LINE, S01'3835"W. A DISTANCE OF 30.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE MOWN LINE OF THE VISITOR CENTER AT THE ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER
ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS;
THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH LINE. N8621'2514. A DISTANCE OF 215.33 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID ANNEXATION:
THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID ANNEXATION, S0915'501N, A DISTANCE OF 42.51 FEET;
THENCE NST21'25YI, A DISTANCE OF 709.34 FEET;
THENCE NOT15'33"E. A DISTANCE OF 42.51 FEET;
THENCE NST22'55TI1, A DISTANCE OF 160.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE FLATIRON EAST PROSPECT ROAD FIRST ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS;
THENCE ALONG SAID EAST LINE, N0015'33'E, A DISTANCE OF 60.02 FEED
THENCE SE8'22'S5"E, A DISTANCE OF 159.97 FEET;
THENCE S66'2Y25"E, A DISTANCE OF 120.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF THE INTERSTATE LANDS SECOND ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS;
THENCE ALONG THE WEST AND SOUTH LINES OF SAID ANNEXATION THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) COURSES:
1. 500'11'351V, A DISTANCE OF 60U2 FEET;
2. S88'21'2YE, A DISTANCE OF 514.24 FEET;
3. N01'38'35'E, A DISTANCE OF 10250 FEET;
THENCE SBB'2Y25"E. A DISTANCE OF 290,40 FEET TO A POINT ON THE BOUNDARY OF SAID INTERSTATE LANDS SECOND ANNEXATION;
THENCE ALONG SAID BOUNDARY, 501'3835Y1, A DISTANCE OF COCO FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING 76.714 SQUARE FEET (IJ61 ACRES). MORE OR LESS. AND BEING SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS -OF -WAY OF RECORD OR THAT NOW EXIST
ON THE GROUND.
DATE:
CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
ENGINEERING DIVISION
P
NOTES
1. THIS PLAT AND DESCRIPTION SHOW THE BOUNDARY OF THE AREA TO BE ANNEXED
TO ME CITY OF FORT COLLINS. ME PLAT AND DESCRIPTION WERE PREPARED USING
EXISTING ANNEXATION MAPS, PLATS AND DEEDS. THE DESCRIPTIONS OF THE SECTION
CORNERS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON THE MOST RECENT MONUMENT RECORDS ON
FILE AND HAVE NOT BEEN FIELD VERIFIED. THE SECTION CORNER DATABASE IS BASED
UPON THE CITY OF FORT COWNS GROUND MASTER COORDINATE SYSTEM. THE EXISTING
BEARINGS AND DISTANCES AS SHOWN ON THE PREVIOUSLY RECORDED ANNEXATION
PLATS MAY HAVE BEEN CHANGED TO FACILITATE CLOSURE WITH THE CURRENT CITY
SECTION CORNER DATABASE.
INTERSTATE LANDS
E I R S T ANNEXATION
N'BBBi 72.50'
_ PROPOSED RIOHT_OF_WAY
PT. Ci REGXMXC
1]I6.8]'
WCOO,
2
PROP030 RINT-CE_WAY
O
n 6
W CO
W
VN I SI T OR CETER AT
F-
T HE ENVIRONMENTAL
LEA RNINC CENTER
Q CP
AXXEXA710IN
6
%
r
z
jULLo
ZDE
APPROVED_
I, JOHN STEVEN VON NIEDA, A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR IN
THE STATE OF COLORADO. 00 HEREBY STATE THAT THIS ANNEXATION PLAT. TO
BE KNOWN AS EAST PROSPECT AT BOXELDER CREEK ANNEXATION, WAS
PREPARED UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION, THAT THE ANNEXATION PLAT 15
BASED UPON PREVIOUSLY RECORDED ANNEXATIONS. PLATS AND DEEDS AND
NOT ON AN ACTUAL FIELD SURVEY, AND THAT AT LEAST ONE-SI%TH (1/6) OF
THE BOUNDARY OF THE SAID ANNEXATION IS CONTIGUOUS TO TIE PRESENT
BOUNDARY OF TIE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO, AND
THAT IT IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY PROFESSIONAL
KNOWLEDGE, BELIEF AND OPINION.
JOHN STEVEN VON NIEDA, BIDS 31169
COLORADO PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR
FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
BY DRAWN BY 'APPROVED BY'.
THIS PLAT TO BE KNOWN AS EAST PROSPECT AT BOXELDER CREEK ANNEXATION
TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO BY
ORDINACE NO PASSED AND ADOPTED ON FINAL READING AT A
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF FORT COLLINS COLORADO HELD ON
THIS DAY OF 20_
APPROVED AS TO FORM_
CITY ENGINEER DAIS
PT. OF COMMENCEMENT
SE COR. SEC 6-7-68
2-1/2 BRASS CAP
e TAMPED US tK A33
TOTAL AREA___.____ 1761 ACBERF
CONTIGUOUS BOUNDARY _____ 1097.1F
TOTAL PERIMETER.. __...-__
2579 W
1/61M PERIMETER______.___
62889'
DENOTES
CURRENT GTY BOUNDARY
City of _
Collins SCALE DATE I JSV CHECKED BY DATE, EAST PROSPECT AT BOXELDER CREEK ANNEXATION 1 OF
Engineering 1"=50' 12-23-2015 ,MAC XX-XX-io'5 1
13
East Prospect at Boxelder Creek Anne. g 9, it3
Structure Plan Map
Lake Canal
Boxelder Creek '
s.
�O
Annexation Area
LO
N
E;Prospect°Rd
O �
L
Legend
OWN "N.l
OW�"No: City Limits -Area
® Fort Collins GMA
® Annexation Area
- Downtown District
- Community Commercial District
General Commercial District
1 inch = 500 feet N
A
Campus District Urban Estate
Employment District Low Density Mixed -Use
Industrial District Medium Density Mixed -Use
= Neighborhood Commercial District
Open Lands, Parks anrater Corridors
UE
�� Proposed
LZoning: UE
E`Pros ect Rd -------- 1
_p
Legend
City Limits - Outline
® Annexation Area
POL
E
E
CG
created
Proposed
Zoning: E
East Prospect at Boxelder
Creek Annexation Zoning
E
is p
\ oUare
E
1 inch = 500 feet
15
Agenda Item 3
PROJECT NAME
VARIOUS REVISIONS TO THE LAND USE CODE RELATING TO DUST PREVENTION AND CONTROL
STAFF
Lindsay Ex, Environmental Program Manager
Lucinda Smith, Environmental Sustainability Director
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a Recommendation to City Council regarding various
revisions to the Land Use Code to implement regulations and a set of consistent
best practices (Dust Control Manual) for (thirteen) specific activities that
generate dust to follow, in order to reduce health impacts and nuisances
associated with dust generating activities. Per Council direction during the
February 9 Work Session, staff has developed an exception for small residential
projects (less than 10,000 square feet), whereby these projects do not have to
employ the Dust Control Manual to prevent, control, and minimize dust
generation unless two written warnings have been issued within a one year
period.
In addition to the regulations and set of best practices outlined in the Dust
Control Manual, staff has developed and is implementing a tracking system for
fugitive dust complaints. In addition, per Council direction, the City has enacted
an Administrative Policy applying the Dust Control Manual to all City projects, so
that the City is leading by example.
Revisions to the Land Use Code must be evaluated by the Planning and Zoning
Board before City Council approval.
APPLICANT: City of Fort Collins
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The proposed revisions are to the following Sections:
2.6.3(H) Stockpiling Permit and Development Construction Permit Review Procedures
2.7.3(G)(H) Building Permit Review Procedures
3.4.2(A) Air Quality General Standard
5.1.2 Definitions
Item # 3 Page 1
16
Agenda Item 3
Background: As directed by Council in its 2014 Work Plan, staff in the Environmental Services Department has
developed an approach to address fugitive dust issues that includes proposed code changes and a guidance
manual. The Municipal Code changes require dust generating activities to comply with the manual, and the
manual outlines 12 dust generating activities, e.g., site grading, street sweeping, stockpiles, saw cutting and
grinding, etc. and provides a suite of required and optional control measures to control dust tailored to each
activity.
Several minor Land Use Code changes are necessary in order to require compliance with the proposed fugitive
dust regulations; these changes are outlined in Attachment 1. Staff has discussed these recommendations with the
Planning and Zoning Board during several Work Session meetings over the past year.
Overall Approach: On February 9, 2016, City Council reviewed the potential approaches to preventing,
minimizing, and controlling dust within Fort Collins. Council directed staff to address dust control in four main ways:
1. First, lead by example as a Municipal Organization in adopting the Manual (see Attachment 3) into the
City's Administrative Policy.
2. Second, to collect additional data on the implications (from a cost perspective) to applying the proposed
dust prevention and control regulations on residential properties. Council noted the significant community
discussion around housing affordability as a key concern.
3. Third, Council asked staff to begin tracking dust complaints immediately, so that they can better assess the
extent of the problem and tailor potential solutions in the future.
4. Finally, Council directed staff to develop a hybrid approach to regulating fugitive dust by requiring all sites
to prevent, minimize and control dust; but to only apply the Manual on sites over a certain size. Council
directed staff to ascertain what the right threshold (size) is to apply the Manual based on a data -driven
approach and through additional stakeholder outreach. As discussed with Council, once adopted, staff is
proposing that enforcement of these regulations be delayed until November 1, 2016 in order to allow for
training and outreach to occur prior to enforcement.
1. Lead by Example
While City operations and capital projects have consistently addressed dust on individual project sites, based on
feedback from City Council, the City Manager has adopted the Manual into the City's Administrative Policy in
March 2016. Staff met with over thirteen City Departments and developed the following approach to leading by
example:
• City operations — will use the Manual to implement dust prevention and control immediately upon adoption
into City Administrative Policy
• City Contracts —
o New bids and Requests for Proposals (RFPs) — The Manual will be incorporated into the
specifications or supplemental terms on all new bids as of March 2016.
o In -process bids and RFPs — An addendum will be initiated if timing allows, or it will be incorporated
in conjunction with contract negotiations.
o Existing contracts — City staff will begin working on a process to amend existing contracts, either at
the time of renewal or via change order or amendment, to ensure that all existing contracts are in
compliance with the Manual by November 1, 2016 (proposed date for when the private sector shall
comply with the proposed regulations).
2. Collect additional data on the cost implications of implementing the regulations, especially from a
housing affordability perspective
As discussed during the February 9 Work Session, staff worked with AECOM and members of the Fugitive Dust
Working Group to determine the impact, from a cost perspective, of implementing the proposed regulations around
dust prevention and control. Since the Work Session, the cost data have been broken out according to the required
versus additional best management practices and an additional data point has been developed for the costs for
single family homes, see the table below.
Item # 3 Page 2
17
Agenda Item 3
Dust Mitigation Cost
Dust Cost
Total
as % of
Required
Additional
Total
BMPs
BMPs
Costs
Project
Overall
Project
Cost
Cost
Notes
1. Infill Single
$700
$0
$700
$3537620
0,2%
Estimated
Family Home —
(0.2%
costs, minimal
estimate 1*
required)
dust control
2. Infill Single
$63090
$6,080
$73355
$3607275
3,4%
Estimated
Family Home —
(1.7%
costs,
estimate 2*
required)
maximum dust
control
3. Greenfield
$700
$0
$700
$5873530
0,1%
Estimated
Single Family
(0.1 %
costs, minimal
Home — estimate 1
required)
dust control
4. Greenfield
$63090
$85580
$143670
$6003000
2,4%
Estimated
Single Family
(1.0%
costs,
Home — estimate 2
required)
maximum dust
control
5. Horsetooth and
$323420
$35320
$353740
$353045501
1,1%
Actual costs
Timberline
(1.0%
Intersection
required)
6. 222 Laporte City
$407000
$105000
$503000
$1050005000
0,5%
Actual costs
Building
(0.4%
required)
3. Tracking of dust complaints
To begin to track the overall number and type of complaints associated with dust generating activities, staff has
developed a tracking spreadsheet that is available on a SharePoint site, where all City staff can access, enter, and
track complaints. Two complaints in 2016 have been entered thus far. The spreadsheet has been shared with the
Air Quality Advisory Board and Fugitive Dust Working Group and amended based on their feedback.
4. The Hybrid Approach to Preventing, Minimizing, and Controlling Dust
Based on feedback from Council, staff has developed the following hybrid approach for preventing, minimizing,
and controlling fugitive dust:
1. All projects must cover loads of aggregate material (Section 3.6 of the Manual) and implement the required
saw cutting and grinding best management practices (Section 3.10 of the Manual).
2. All projects must comply with the provisions outlined in the dust control manual, except that residential
projects under 10,000 square feet (measured by lot size) are exempt from this requirement (though they
are still required to prevent and control dust, but they do not have to use the best management practices
outlined in the manual).
o There are two exceptions to this rule:
■ First, if a builder is constructing multiple lots that are contiguous to each other, and the
total area of these contiguous lots exceeds 10,000 square feet, then the manual applies.
■ Second, if a builder or operator receives two written warnings within a one year period,
then the builder or operator has to utilize the dust control manual to address fugitive dust
on their site.
3. Staff is proposing that enforcement of these regulations be delayed until November 1, 2016 in order to
allow for training and outreach to occur prior to enforcement.
These requirements are further described below:
• Requiring all projects to cover loads and use the required saw cutting and grinding BMPs: Staff
recommends requiring all projects to adhere to these standards because these dust generating activities
Item # 3 Page 3
Agenda Item 3
can have significant impacts on neighbors and have minimal costs to control via the dust mitigation
techniques outlined in the manual.
o For example, not covering loads is one of the most frequent complaints staff receives related to
fugitive dust, and both of the required BMPs result in negligible to no additional costs to the
operator.
o Saw cutting and grinding was one of the activities that, when BMPs were applied, dust generated
was reduced between 95-99% in the controlled observations. In addition, utilizing water when
cutting or grinding is a technique that extends the life of the saw and is recognized as a best
practice in the industry.
• Exemotina residential Droiects under 10.000 square feet from aoDlvina the BMPs outlined in the Manual
upfront:
o During the Council Work Session, Councilmembers reiterated the community -wide concerns
related to housing affordability. Staff was directed to develop a data -driven approach to finding the
right threshold for which the manual would only apply if problems occurred.
o Staff reviewed building permits from 2015 and found that 80% of single family detached permits
were for lots under 10,000 square feet. In addition, this threshold is comparable to when erosion
control planning requirements are applied to sites (though that threshold is based on disturbed
area instead of lot size).
o Based on these data, staff shared these proposed thresholds with the Fugitive Dust Working
Group, the Planning and Zoning Board, the Air Quality Advisory Board, and City staff. All groups
felt that exempting residential projects under 10,000 square feet addressed the concerns related to
housing affordability and encompassed the majority of residential housing projects that do not tend
to generate significant amounts of dust.
o The one exception to this threshold is when builders are constructing contiguous lots that exceed
the 10,000 square foot threshold. Staff proposes that if a builder is constructing multiple lots that
are contiguous to each other, and the total area of these contiguous lots exceeds 10,000 square
feet, then the manual should apply.
• Delayed enforcement: As discussed at the Council Work Session, staff is still proposing that enforcement
be delayed until November 1, 2016. If adopted by City Council, staff would propose the following timeline
for training, outreach, and enforcement:
o May -June Develop training and enforcement materials
o June -August Conduct training sessions with City staff and the private sector
o June -October Conduct outreach on the regulations and the manual
o June/July - October Soft enforcement (no fines) of the regulations
o November Official enforcement begins
ATTACHMENTS
1. Fugitive Dust Code Changes - Problem Statement (DOCX)
2. Draft Land Use Code Ordinance (DOCX)
3. Dust Prevention and Control Manual (PDF)
Item # 3 Page 4
19
Attachment 1
Amend Sections 2.6.3(H) — Stockpiling Permit, 2.7.3(G)(H) — Building Permit
Procedures, 3.4.2(A) — Air Quality and 5.1.2 Definitions in order to fully implement
a comprehensive approach to improve air quality by enacting regulations that
govern fugitive dust on a city-wide basis.
Problem Statement:
The City of Fort Collins presently lacks a comprehensive approach to controlling fugitive
dust that results from a variety of activities. The current regulatory approach is to rely
on existing regulations, permitting and enforcement that are in place at the State and
County levels. As the City has grown, and the various activities that produce fugitive
dust proliferate, State and County regulatory systems, while well-intentioned, have not
kept pace thus impacting our air quality.
Proposed Solution Overview:
The proposed solution is to amend both the Land Use Code and City Code to enact
regulations that address a wide range of activities that generate fugitive dust. The
current definition of Fugitive Dust is proposed to be deleted from the Land Use Code
and then re -defined and placed into City Code.
Proposed Land Use Code Revisions:
Article 2 — Administration:
2.6.3(H) Stockpiling Permit and Development Construction Permit Review Procedures
(H) Step 8 (Standards — Stockpiling Permit): Not applicable, and in substitution therefor,
an application for a Stockpiling Permit shall be reviewed for compliance with the City
Code and all regulations related to such permit adopted by the city by reference or
otherwise, as amended, including, without limitation, the erosion control standards as
contained in the Stermwater DesignCriteria and i`r nStrL iction Standards
MaRUal. stormwater criteria manual and the dust control measures contained in the dust
control manual to the extent required therein.
Step 8 (Standards — Development Construction Permit): Not applicable, and in
substitution therefor, an application for a Development Construction Permit shall be
reviewed for compliance with the Site Specific Development Plan, the City Code and all
regulations related to such permit adopted by the city by reference or otherwise as
amended.- , including, without limitation, the erosion control standards as contained in
the stormwater criterial manual and the dust control measures contained in the dust
control manual to the extent required therein.
Fugitive Dust
20
Attachment 1
2.7.3(G)(H) Building Permit Review Procedures
(G) Step 7 (Public Hearing): Not applicable, and in substitution therefor, an application
for a Building Permit shall be processed, reviewed, considered and approved, approved
with modifications, or denied by the Building and Zoning Director based on its
compliance with the site specific development plan, the City Code and allbuildiRg
regulations related to such permit adopted by the city by reference or otherwise, as
amended.
(H) Step 8 (Standards): Not applicable, and in substitution therefor, an application for a
Building Permit shall be reviewed for compliance with the site specific development
plan, the City Code and all buildiRg regulations related to such permit adopted by the
city by reference or otherwise, as amended; and if the Building Permit is for the
enlargement of a building and/or for the expansion of facilities, equipment or structures
regulated under the provisions of Division 1.6, such application shall also comply with
Division 1.6.
Article 3 - General Development Standards:
3.4.2(A) Air Quality
(A) General Standard. The project shall conform to all applicable local, state and federal
air quality regulations and standards, including, but not limited to, those regulating odor,
dust, fumes or gases which are noxious, toxic or corrosive, and suspended solid or
liquid particles. The project shall be designed and constructed to comply with the dust
control measures contained in the dust control manual to the extent required therein.
Article 5 — Definitions:
Section 5.1.2
MMIEr
mr ON"
0
MR
MOO
IN
�Vq
IN AS
w
W
M.
�•
••
• •
•
•
•
•
uI••�
• •
•
• •m
• IN
•
• .
.
u
•
•
. •
• • u
. .
• •
•
.
•
•
•
•
u
•
•
.11 •
u
.
.
•
. •
.
• Ah Ah
• •
•
•
•L
IN a
Dust control manual shall mean the dust control and prevention standards enacted to
protect air quality adopted under the Chapter 12 of the Fort Collins City Code.
Stormwater criterial manual shall mean the standards for design, planning, and
implementation of practices and improvements to manage stormwater adopted under
Chapter 26 of the Fort Collins City Code.
Fugitive Dust
21
Attachment 2
ORDINANCE NO. 92015
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING THE LAND USE CODE BYTHE ADDITION OF
PROVISIONS PERTAINING TO FUGITIVE DUST
WHEREAS,
on December 2, 19971
by its adoption of Ordinance
No. 190, 1997, the City
Council enacted the
Fort Collins Land Use
Code (the "Land Use Code");
and
WHEREAS, at the time of the adoption of the Land Use Code, it was the understanding
of staff and the City Council that the Land Use Code would most likely be subject to future
amendments, not only for the purpose of clarification and correction of errors, but also for the
purpose of ensuring that the Land Use Code remains a dynamic document capable of responding
to issues identified by staff, other land use professionals and citizens of the City; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the City Plan Environmental Health Vision, which
includes the aspirational goal of continuous improvements in air quality; and
WHEREAS, City Plan contains numerous policies supporting air quality, including
Policy ENV 8.6 which directs staff to promote prevention of air pollution at its source as the
highest priority approach in reducing air pollution emissions; and
WHEREAS, in furtherance of the Air Quality Advisory Board's 2015 Work Program,
which calls for addressing fugitive dust as a priority air quality initiative, City staff has proposed
amendment of Chapter 12 of the Fort Collins City Code to protect air quality by adopting dust
control and prevention standards set forth in the "Dust Prevention and Control Manual" adopted
therein;
WHEREAS, in addition to amendment of the City Code, City staff has proposed Land
Use Code changes to align with such City Code amendments adopting the Dust Prevention and
Control Manual; and
WHEREAS, City staff has vetted these proposed changes through a Fugitive Dust
Working Group composed of contractors, interested stakeholders, and City staff, as well as
through numerous public events and a project website; and
WHEREAS, City staff and the Planning and Zoning Board have reviewed the proposed
Land Use Code changes regarding fugitive dust and have recommended to the City Council that
they be adopted; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the recommended Land Use Code
amendments are in the best interest of the City and its citizens.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FORT COLLINS as follows:
22
Attachment 2
Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes any and all determinations and
findings contained in the recitals set forth above.
Section 2. That Section 2.6.3(H) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as
follows:
.11
2.6.3 Stockpiling Permit and Development Construction Permit Review
Procedures
(H) Step 8 (Standards — Stockpiling Permit): Not applicable, and in
substitution therefor, an application for a Stockpiling Permit shall be
reviewed for compliance with the City Code and all regulations related to
such permit adopted by the city by reference or otherwise, as amended,
including, without limitation, the erosion control standards as contained in
the Sto f,nwater llesigr. Criteria
and Coast- fu .tio Standards
stormwater
criteria manual and the dust control measures contained in the dust control
manual to the extent required therein.
Step 8 (Standards — Development Construction Permit): Not applicable,
and in substitution therefor, an application for a Development
Construction Permit shall be reviewed for compliance with the Site
Specific Development Plan, the City Code and all regulations related to
such permit adopted by the city by reference or otherwise as amended ,
including, without limitation, the erosion control standards as contained in
the stormwater criterial manual and the dust control measures contained in
the dust control manual to the extent required therein.
Section 3. That Section 2.7.3(G) and 2.7.3(H) of the Land Use Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
2.7.3 Building Permit Review Procedures
(G) Step 7 (Public Hearing): Not applicable, and in substitution therefor, an
application for a Building Permit shall be processed, reviewed, considered
and approved, approved with modifications, or denied by the Building and
Zoning Director based on its compliance with the site specific
development plan, the City Code and all'""regulations related to
such permit adopted by the city by reference or otherwise, as amended.
(H) Step 8 (Standards): Not applicable, and in substitution therefor, an
application for a Building Permit shall be reviewed for compliance with
the site specific development plan, the City Code and all building
23
Attachment 2
regulations related to such permit adopted by the city by reference or
otherwise, as amended; and if the Building Permit is for the enlargement
of a building and/or for the expansion of facilities, equipment or structures
regulated under the provisions of Division 1.6, such application shall also
comply with Division 1.6.
Section 4. That Section 3.4.2(A) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as
follows:
3.4.2 Air Quality
(A) General Standard. The project shall conform to all applicable local, state and
federal air quality regulations and standards, including, but not limited to, those
regulating odor, dust, fumes or gases which are noxious, toxic or corrosive, and
suspended solid or liquid particles. The project shall be designed and constructed
to comply with the dust control measures contained in the dust control manual to
the extent required therein.
Section 5.
That
the definition
"Fugitive Dust" contained in Section 5.1.2 of the Land
Use Code is hereby
deleted
in its entirety
as follows:
r��ru
-
-
-
,.
::-
:.
:.
_
. .
.
.
.
.
-
.
•
. .
.
.
:.
r
11111M
•:
:-OM
- --
:.
:-
-:
..
.. ..
..
use:.
Section 6. That Section 5.1.2 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the
addition of the following definitions, to be inserted in the listing set forth therein in alphabetical
order;
Dust control manual shall mean the dust control and prevention standards enacted to
protect air quality adopted under the Chapter 12 of the Fort Collins City Code.
Stormwater criterial manual shall mean the standards for design, planning, and
implementation of practices and improvements to manage stormwater adopted under
Chapter 26 of the Fort Collins City Code.
Section 6. That the standards set forth herein shall be effective June 1, November 1,
2016.
Attachment 2
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 51h day of
April, A.D. 2016, and to be presented for final passage on the 19th day of April, A.D. 2016,
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 19"' day of April, A.D. 2016.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
25
7 rni ie
As ALE
I .
' � a
•«•llrlr•j■►Vir.
14 ..,_ ..
/• "Rol i
I
0 1p
• '
dp
Attachment 3
CONTENTS
1.0
Introduction
1
1.1
Title
1
1.2
Purpose of Manual
1
1.3
Applicability
1
1.4
Definitions
2
2.0 Fugitive Dust and the Problems it Causes 5
2.1 What is Fugitive Dust, Generally? 5
2.2 Why is the City Addressing Fugitive Dust? 5
2.3 Health and Environmental Effects 6
2.4 Nuisance and Aesthetics 6
2.5 Safety Hazard and Visibility 6
3.0 Best Management Practices
7
3.1
Earthmoving Activities
8
3.2
Demolition and Renovation
10
3.3
Stockpiles
12
3.4
Street Sweeping
14
3.5
Track-out/Carry-out
15
3.6
Bulk Materials Transport
16
3.7
Unpaved Roads and Haul Roads
18
3.8
Parking Lots
20
3.9
Open Areas and Vacant Lots
22
3.10
Saw Cutting and Grinding
24
3.11
Abrasive Blasting
26
3.12
Mechanical Blowing
28
4.0 Dust Control Plan for Land Development Greater Than Five Acres 30
5.0 Resources 34
5.1 Cross Reference to Codes, Standards, Regulations, and Policies 34
5.2 City of Fort Collins Manuals and Policies 37
5.3 References for Dust Control 37
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote - Legal Review Pending Page i
27
Attachment 3
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Title
The contents of this document shall be known as the Dust Prevention and Control Manual ("the
Manual").
1.2 Purpose of Manual
The purpose of the Manual is to establish minimum requirements consistent with nationally recognized
best management practices for controlling fugitive dust emissions and to describe applicable best
management practices to prevent, minimize, and mitigate off -property transport or off -vehicle transport
of fugitive dust emissions pursuant to Article X of the Fort Collins City Code (§12-150 et. seq) for specific
dust generating activities and sources.
The purpose of Article X of the Code is to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public, including
prevention of adverse impacts to human health, property, sensitive vegetation and areas, waters of the
state, and other adverse environmental impacts and to prevent visibility impairment and safety hazards
caused by emissions of particulate matter into the air from human activities.
1.3 Applicability
As set forth in Code §12-150, this Manual applies to any person who conducts, or is an owner or
operator of, a dust generating activity or source, as defined in the Code and described in this Manual,
within the City of Fort Collins, subject to the exclusion set forth in Code §12-15-(b)(3).
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
Page 1
COO
Attachment 3
1.4 Definitions
Abrasive blasting shall mean a process to
smooth rough surfaces; roughen smooth
surfaces; and remove paint, dirt, grease, and
other coatings from surfaces. Abrasive blasting
media may consist of sand; glass, plastic or
metal beads; aluminum oxide; corn cobs; or
other materials.
Additional best management practice shall
mean using at least one additional measure if
the required best management practices are
ineffective at preventing off -property transport
of particulate matter.
Additional requirements shall mean when
applicable, any measure that is required, e.g., a
dust control plan when project sites are over 5
acres in size.
Best management practice shall mean any
action or process that is used to prevent or
mitigate the emission of fugitive dust into the
air.
Bulk materials transport shall mean the
carrying, moving, or conveying of loose
materials including, but not limited to, earth,
rock, silt, sediment, sand, gravel, soil, fill,
aggregate, dirt, mud, construction or demolition
debris, and other organic or inorganic material
containing particulate matter onto a public road
or right-of-way in an unenclosed trailer, truck
bed, bin, or other container.
Chemical stabilization shall mean the
application of chemicals used to bind soil
particles or increase soil moisture content,
including, but not limited to, dust suppressants,
palliatives, tackifiers, surfactants, and soil
stabilizers. Asphalt -based products or any
product containing cationic polyacrylamide or
products deemed environmentally incompatible
with Code §26-498, or defined as a pollutant
per Code §26-491, or explicitly prohibited by
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or quote — Legal Review Pending
the state of Colorado may not be used for
chemical stabilization. Water soluble plant -
based oils or gums, clay additives, or other
synthetic polymer emulsion that are non -toxic,
non-combustible, and harmless to fish, wildlife,
plants, pets, and humans may be used for
chemical stabilization.
Code shall mean the Fort Collins City Code, as
amended from time to time.
Dust control measure shall mean any action
or process that is used to prevent or mitigate
the emission of fugitive dust into the air,
including but not limited to the best
management practices identified in this
Manual.
Dustgenerating activity or source shall
mean a process, operation, action, or land use
that creates emissions of fugitive dust or causes
off -property or off -vehicle transport. Dust
generating activity or source shall include a
paved parking lot containing an area of more
than one half (1/2) acre.
Earthmoving shall mean any process that
involves land clearing, disturbing soil surfaces,
or moving, loading, or handling of earth, dirt,
soil, sand, aggregate, or similar materials.
Fugitive dust shall mean solid particulate
matter emitted into the air by mechanical
Page 2
29
Attachment 3
processes or natural forces but is not emitted
through a stack, chimney, or vent
Local wind speed shall mean the current or
forecasted wind speed for the Fort Collins area
as measured at the surface weather
observation station KFNL located at the Fort
Collins Loveland Municipal Airport or at
Colorado State University's Fort Collins or
Christman Field weather stations or as
measured onsite with a portable or hand-held
anemometer. The City will use anemometers
whenever practicable.
Maximum speed limit shall mean the speed
limit on public rights -of -way adopted by the City
pursuant to Fort Collins Traffic Code adopted
pursuant to City Code Section 28-16 For private
roadways, a speed limit shall be established as
appropriate to minimize off -site transportation
of.
Mechanical blower shall mean any portable
machine powered with an internal combustion
or electric -powered engine used to blow leaves,
clippings, dirt or other debris off sidewalks,
driveways, lawns, medians, and other surfaces
including, but not limited to, hand-held, back-
pack and walk -behind units, as well as blower -
vacuum units.
Off -property transport shall mean the visible
emission of fugitive dust beyond the property
line of the property on which the emission
originates or the project boundary when the
emission originates in the public right-of-way or
on public property.
Off -vehicle transport shall mean the visible
emission of fugitive dust from a vehicle that is
transporting dust generating materials on a
public road or right-of-way.
On -tool local exhaust ventilation shall mean
a vacuum dust collection system attached to a
construction tool that includes a dust collector
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or quote — Legal Review Pending
(hood or shroud), tubing, vacuum, and a high
efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter.
On -tool wet dustsuppression shall mean the
operation of nozzles or sprayers attached to a
construction tool that continuously apply water
or other liquid to the grinding or cutting area by
a pressurized container or other water source.
Open area shall mean any area of undeveloped
land greater than one-half acre that contains
less than 70 percent vegetation. This includes
undeveloped lots, vacant or idle lots, natural
areas, parks, or other non-agricultural areas.
Recreational and multi -use trails maintained by
the City are not included as an open area.
Operator or owner shall mean any person
who has control over a dust generating source
either by operating, supervising, controlling, or
maintaining ownership of the activity or source
including, but not limited to, a contractor,
lessee, or other responsible party of an activity,
operation, or land use that is a dust generating
activity or source.
Particulate matter shall mean any material
that is emitted into the air as finely divided solid
or liquid particles, other than uncombined
water, and includes dust, smoke, soot, fumes,
aerosols and mists.
Required best management practices shall
mean specific measures that are required to be
implemented if a dust generating activity is
occurring.
Sensitive area shall mean a specific area that
warrants special protection from adverse
impacts due to the deposition of fugitive dust,
such as natural areas (excluding buffer zones),
sources of water supply, wetlands, critical
wildlife habitat, or wild and scenic river
corridors.
Soil retention shall mean the stabilization of
disturbed surface areas that will remain
Page 3
30
Attachment 3
exposed and inactive for 30 days or more or
while vegetation is being established using
mulch, compost, soil mats, or other methods.
Stockpile shall mean any accumulation of bulk
materials that contain particulate matter being
stored for future use or disposal. This includes
backfill materials and storage piles for soil,
sand, dirt, mulch, aggregate, straw, chaff, or
other materials that produce dust.
Storm drainage facility shall mean those
improvements designed, constructed or used to
convey or control stormwater runoff and to
remove pollutants from stormwater runoff after
precipitation.
Surface roughening shall mean to modify the
soil surface to resist wind action and reduce
dust emissions from wind erosion by creating
grooves, depressions, ridges or furrows
perpendicular to the predominant wind
direction using tilling, ripping, discing, or other
method.
Synthetic or natural cover shall mean the
installation of a temporary cover material on
top of disturbed soil surfaces or stockpiles, such
as tarps, plastic sheeting, netting, mulch, wood
chips, gravel or other materials capable of
preventing wind erosion.
Track -out shall mean the carrying of mud, dirt,
soil, or debris on vehicle wheels, sides, or
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
undercarriages from a private, commercial, or
industrial site onto a public road or right-of-
way.
Vegetation shall mean the planting or seeding
of appropriate grasses, plants, bushes, or trees
to hold soil or to create a wind break. All seeded
areas must be mulched, and the mulch should
be adequately crimped and or tackified. If
hydro -seeding is conducted, mulching must be
conducted as a separate, second operation. All
planted areas must be mulched within twenty-
four (24) hours after planting.
Wetsuppression shall mean the application of
water by spraying, sprinkling, or misting to
maintain optimal moisture content or to form a
crust in dust generating materials and applied
at a rate that prevents runoff from entering any
public right-of-way, storm drainage facility or
watercourse.
Wind barrier shall mean an obstruction at
least five feet high erected to assist in
preventing the blowing of fugitive dust,
comprised of a solid board fence, chain link and
fabric fence, vertical wooden slats, hay bales,
earth berm, bushes, trees, or other materials
installed perpendicular to the predominant
wind direction or upwind of an adjacent
residential, commercial, industrial, or sensitive
area that would be negatively impacted by
fugitive dust.
31
Attachment 3
2.0 Fugitive Dust and the Problems it Causes
2.1 What is Fugitive Dust, Generally?
Dust, also known as particulate matter, is made up of solid particles in the air that consist primarily of
dirt and soil but can also contain ash, soot, salts, pollen, heavy metals, asbestos, pesticides, and other
materials. "Fugitive" dust means particulate matter that has become airborne by wind or human
activities and has not been emitted from a stack, chimney, or vent. The Colorado Department of Public
Health and Environment (CDPHE) estimates that more than 4,300 tons of particulate matter are emitted
into the air in Larimer County annually. The primary sources of this particulate matter include
construction activities, paved and unpaved roads, and agricultural operations.
The quantity of dust emitted from a particular activity or area and the materials in it can depend on the
soil type (sand, clay, silt), moisture content (dry or damp), local wind speed, and the current or past uses
of the site (industrial, farming, construction).
2.2 Why is the City Addressing Fugitive Dust?
Colorado state air regulations and Larimer County air quality standards generally require owners and
operators of dust generating activities or sources to use all available and practical methods that are
technologically feasible and economically reasonable in order to prevent fugitive dust emissions.
However, state regulations and permitting requirements typically apply to larger stationary sources
rather than to activities that generate dust. Larimer County fugitive dust standards apply only to land
development.
Although state and county requirements apply to many construction activities, they do not address
many sources of dust emissions and City code compliance officers do not have authority to enforce state
or county regulations. Fort Collins is experiencing rapid growth and development that has contributed
to local man-made dust emissions. The City has established Article X of Chapter 12 of the Code (§§12-
150-12-159) to address dust generating activities and sources that negatively impact citizens in Fort
Collins.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
Page 5
32
Attachment 3
2.3 Health and Environmental Effects
Dust particles are very small and can be easily inhaled. They can
enter the respiratory system and increase susceptibility to respiratory
infections, and aggravate cardio-pulmonary disease. Even short-term
exposure to dust can cause wheezing, asthma attacks and allergic
reactions, and may cause increases in hospital admissions and
emergency department visits for heart and lung related diseases.
Fugitive dust emissions can cause significant environmental impacts as well as health effects. When
dust from wind erosion or human activity deposits out of the air, it may impact vegetation, adversely
affect nearby soils and waterways, and cause damage to cultural resources. Wind erosion can result in
the loss of valuable top soil, reduce crop yields, and stunt plant growth.
According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), studies have linked particulate matter
exposure to health problems and environmental impacts such as:
•Health Impacts:
o Irritation of the airways, coughing, and difficulty breathing
c Reduced lung function and lung cancer
c Aggravated asthma and chronic bronchitis
o Irregular heartbeat and increases in heart attacks
•Environmental Impacts:
o Haze and reduced visibility
o Reduced levels of nutrients in soil
2.4 Nuisance and Aesthetics
Dust, dirt and debris that become airborne eventually settle back down to
the surface. How far it travels and where it gets deposited depends on the
size and type of the particles as well as wind speed and direction. When this
material settles, it can be deposited on homes, cars, lawns, pools and ponds,
and other property. The small particles can get trapped in machinery and
electronics causing abrasion, corrosion, and malfunctions. The deposited
dust can damage painted surfaces, clog filtration systems, stain materials and
cause other expensive clean-up projects.
2.5 Safety Hazard and Visibility
Blowing dust can be a safety hazard at construction sites and on roads and
highways. Dust can obstruct visibility and can cause accidents between
vehicles and bikes, pedestrians, or site workers. Dust plumes can also
decrease visibility across a natural area or scenic vistas. The "brown cloud",
often visible along the Front Range during the winter months, and the
brilliant red sunsets that occur are often caused by particulate matter and
other pollutants in the air.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
33
Attachment 3
3.0 Best Management Practices
This Manual describes established best management practices for controlling dust emissions that are
practical and used in common practice to prevent or mitigate impacts to air quality from dust generating
activities and sources occurring within Fort Collins. The objective of the dust control measures included
in this Manual are to reduce dust emissions from human activities and to prevent those emissions from
impacting others and are based on the following principles:
Prevent— avoid creating dust emissions through good project planning and modifying or
replacing dust generating activities.
Minimize— reduce dust emissions with methods that capture, collect, or contain emissions.
Mitigate — when preventing fugitive dust or minimizing the impacts are not feasible, the
Manual provides specific measures to mitigate dust.
More specifically, the Manual establishes the following procedures for each dust generating activity
outlined in this Chapter:
1. Required Best Management Practices — this section includes the specific measures that are
required to be implemented if the dust generating activity is occurring. For example, high wind
restrictions (temporarily halting work when wind speeds exceed 30 mph) are required best
management practices for earthmoving, demolition/renovation, saw cutting or grind, abrasive
blasting, and leaf blowing.
2. Additional Best Management Practices —this section includes additional measures if the
required best management practices are ineffective at preventing off -property transport of
particulate matter. At least one of the additional best management practices outlined in the
Manual must be implemented on the site to be in compliance with the Manual and Code.
3. Additional Requirements —When applicable, additional measures are also required, e.g., a dust
control plan when project sites are over 5 acres in size.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
Page 7
34
Attachment 3
3.1 Earthmoving Activities
Above: This figure illustrates earthmoving, which is an activity that can generate dust.
Dust emissions
from earthmoving activities depend on
the
type and
extent of activity being conducted,
the amount of
exposed surface area, wind conditions,
and
soil type
and moisture content, including:
• Site preparation (clearing, grubbing, scraping)
• Road construction
• Grading and overlot grading
• Excavating, trenching, backfilling and compacting
• Loading and unloading dirt, soil, gravel, or other earth materials
• Dumping of dirt, soil, gravel, or other earth materials into trucks, piles, or receptacles
• Screening of dirt, soil, gravel, or other earth materials
Best Management Practices to Control Dust
(a) Required Best Management Practices: Any person, owner, or operator who conducts earthmoving
that is a dust generating activity or source shall implement the following best management practices to
prevent off -property transport of fugitive dust emissions:
(i)
Minimize disturbed area:
plan the project or activity so
that the minimum
amount of
disturbed soil or surface area
is exposed to wind or vehicle
traffic at any one
time.
(ii)
Reduce vehicle
speeds:
establish a
maximum speed limit
or install traffic
calming devices to
reduce speeds to a
rate to
mitigate off
-property transport of
dust entrained
by vehicles.
(iii) Minimize drop height: Drivers and operators shall unload truck beds and loader or
excavator buckets slowly, and minimize drop height of materials to the lowest height possible,
including screening operations.
(iv)
High winds restriction: temporarily
halt work
activities during high wind events greater than
30
mph if operations would result in off
-property
transport.
(v) Restrict access: restrict access to the work area to only authorized vehicles and personnel
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
35
Attachment 3
(b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.1(a)(i)-(v) are ineffective to prevent off -
property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best
management practices:
(i) Wet suppression: apply water to disturbed soil surfaces, backfill materials, screenings, and
other dust generating operations as necessary and appropriate considering current weather
conditions, and prevent water used for dust control from entering any public right-of-way,
stormwater drainage facility, or watercourse.
(ii) Wind barrier: construct a fence or other type of wind barrier to prevent wind erosion of top
soils.
(iii) Vegetation: plant vegetation appropriate for retaining soils or creating a wind break.
(iv) Surface roughening: stabilize an active construction area during periods of inactivity or
when vegetation cannot be immediately established.
(v) Synthetic or natural cover: install cover materials during periods of inactivity and properly
anchor the cover.
(vi) Soil retention: stabilize disturbed or exposed soil surface areas that will be inactive for more
than 30 days or while vegetation is being established.
(vii) Chemical stabilization: apply chemical stabilizers using manufacturer's recommended
application rates. Avoid over -application and prevent runoff of chemical stabilizers into any
public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. Asphalt -based products or any
product containing cationic polyacrylamide or products deemed environmentally incompatible
with Code §26-498, or defined as a pollutant per Code §26-491, or explicitly prohibited by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or the state of Colorado may not be used for chemical
stabilization. Water soluble plant -based oils or gums, clay additives, or other synthetic polymer
emulsion that are non -toxic, non-combustible, and harmless to fish, wildlife, plants, pets, and
humans may be used for chemical stabilization.
(c) Additional requirements: Any person, owner, or operator who conducts earthmoving that is a dust
generating activity or source at a construction site or land development project with a total disturbed
surface area equal to or greater than five (5) acres also shall implement the following measures:
(i) Dust Control Plan: submit a plan that describes all potential sources of fugitive dust and
methods that will be employed to control dust emissions with the development construction
permit application or development review application (see Chapter 4 of this Manual). A copy of
the Dust Control Plan must be onsite at all times and one copy must be provided to all
contractors and operators engaged in dust generating activities at the site.
(ii) Construction sequencing: include sequencing or phasing in the project plan to minimize the
amount of disturbed area at any one time. Sites with greater than 25 acres of disturbed surface
exposed at any one time may be asked to provide additional justification, revise the sequencing
plan, or include additional best management practices.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
36
Attachment 3
3.2 Demolition and Renovation
Above: This photo illustrates restricting access (a mandatory measure) and a wind barrier (an
engineering control) for demolition and renovation activities.
Dust generated from demolition activities may contain significant levels of silica, lead, asbestos, and
particulate matter. Inhalation of silica and asbestos is known to cause lung cancer, and exposure to
even small quantities of lead dust can result in harm to children and the unborn.
In addition to complying with the dust control measures below, any person engaged in demolition or
renovation projects must comply with applicable state and federal regulations for asbestos and lead
containing materials and notification and inspection requirements under the State of Colorado Air
Quality Control Commission's Regulation No. 8, Part B Control of Hazardous Air pollutants.
Best Management Practices to Control Dust
(a) Required Best Management Practices: Any person, owner, or operator who conducts demolition or
renovation that is a dust generating activity or source shall implement the following best management
practices to prevent off -property transport of fugitive dust emissions:
(i) Asbestos and lead containing materials: demolition and renovation activities that involve
asbestos or lead containing materials must be conducted in accordance with Code Chapter 5
Sec. 5-27 (59) §3602.1.1;
(ii) Restrict access: restrict access to the demolition area to only authorized vehicles and
personnel;
(iii) High winds restriction: temporarily halt work activities during high wind events greater than
30 mph if operations would result in off -property transport; and
(iv) Minimize drop height: Drivers and operators shall unload truck beds and loader or excavator
buckets slowly, and minimize drop height of materials to the lowest height possible, including
screening operations.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
Page 10
37
Attachment 3
(b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.2(a)(i)-(iv) are ineffective to prevent off -
property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best
management practices:
(i) Wet suppression: apply water to demolished materials or pre -wet materials to be
demolished as necessary. Prevent water used for dust control from entering any public right-of-
way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse.
(ii) Chemical stabilization: apply chemical stabilizers to demolished materials or materials to be
demolished using manufacturer's recommended application rates. Avoid over -application and
prevent runoff of chemical stabilizers into any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or
watercourse. Asphalt -based products or any product containing cationic polyacrylamide or
products deemed environmentally incompatible with Code §26-498, or defined as a pollutant
per Code §26-491, or explicitly prohibited by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or the
state of Colorado may not be used for chemical stabilization. Water soluble plant -based oils or
gums, clay additives, or other synthetic polymer emulsion that are non -toxic, non-combustible,
and harmless to fish, wildlife, plants, pets, and humans may be used for chemical stabilization.
(iii) Wind barrier: construct a fence or other type of wind barrier to prevent onsite dust
generating materials from blowing offsite.
(c) Additional requirements:
(i) Building permit compliance: comply with all conditions and requirements under any building
required pursuant to the Code and/or the Land Use Code.
Above: This photo illustrates reducing drop height, a required best
management practice.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
Page 11
Attachment 3
3.3 Stockpiles
Above: This photo illustrates wet suppression, an additional best management practice for stockpiles.
Stockpiles are used for both temporary and long-term storage of soil, fill dirt, sand, aggregate,
woodchips, mulch, asphalt and other industrial feedstock, construction and landscaping materials.
Fugitive dust can be emitted from stockpiles while working the active face of the pile or when wind
blows across the pile. The quantity of emissions depends on pile height and exposure to wind, moisture
content and particle size of the pile material, surface roughness of the pile, and frequency of pile
disturbance.
Best Management Practices to Control Dust
(a) Required Best Management Practices: Any owner or operator of a stockpile that is a dust generating
activity or source shall implement the following best management practices to prevent off property
transport of fugitive dust emissions:
(i) Minimize drop height: Drivers and operators shall unload truck beds and loader or excavator
buckets slowly, and minimize drop height of materials to the lowest height possible, including
screening operations.
(b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.3(a)(i) is ineffective to prevent off -property
transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best management
practices:
(i) Wet suppression: Apply water to the active face when working the pile or to the entire pile
during periods of inactivity. Prevent water used for dust control from entering any public right-
of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse.
(ii) Synthetic or natural cover: install cover materials during periods of inactivity and anchor the
cover.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
Page 12
39
Attachment 3
(iii) Surface roughening: stabilize a stockpile during periods of inactivity or when vegetation
cannot be immediately established.
(iv) Stockpile location: locate stockpile at a distance equal to ten times the pile height from
property boundaries that abut residential areas.
(v) Vegetation: seed and mulch any stockpile that will remain inactive for 30 days or more.
(vi) Chemical stabilization: apply chemical stabilizers using manufacturer's recommended
application rates. Avoid over -application and prevent runoff of chemical stabilizers into any
public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. Asphalt -based products or any
product containing cationic polyacrylamide or products deemed environmentally incompatible
with Code §26-498, or defined as a pollutant per Code §26-491, or explicitly prohibited by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or the state of Colorado may not be used for chemical
stabilization. Water soluble plant -based oils or gums, clay additives, or other synthetic polymer
emulsion that are non -toxic, non-combustible, and harmless to fish, wildlife, plants, pets, and
humans may be used for chemical stabilization.
(vii) Enclosure: construct a three -sided structure equal to or greater than the height of the pile
to shelter the pile from the predominant winds.
(c) Additional requirements:
(i) Stockpile permit compliance: comply with all conditions and requirements under any
stockpile permit required under the Code or the Land Use Code.
(ii) Erosion control plan compliance: implement and comply with all conditions and
requirements in Section §26-500 "Fort Collins Storm Criteria"; specifically, Volume 3 Chapter 7
"Construction BMPs". The criteria requirement may require the use of Erosion Control
Materials, soil stockpile height limit of ten feet, watering, surface roughening, vegetation, silt
fence and other control measures as contained in that chapter.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
Left: This
picture
illustrates
one of the
additional
best
management
practices for
stockpiles —
to use a
synthetic
cover.
Page 13
.O
Attachment 3
3.4 Street Sweeping
Left: This figure illustrates the use
of a wet suppression and vacuum
system, an additional best
management practice for street
sweeping.
Street sweeping is an effective method for removing dirt and debris from streets and preventing it from
entering storm drains or becoming airborne. Regenerative air sweepers and mechanical sweepers with
water spray can also be effective at removing particulate matter from hard surfaces.
Best Management Practices to Control Dust
(a) Required Best Management Practices: Any owner or operator that conducts sweeping operations or
services on paved or concrete roads, parking lots, rights -of -way, pedestrian ways, plazas or other solid
surfaces, and whose operations are a dust generating activity or source shall implement the following
best management practices to prevent off -property transport of fugitive dust emissions:
(i) Uncontrolled sweeping prohibited: the use of rotary brushes, power brooms, or other
mechanical sweeping for the removal of dust, dirt, mud, or other debris from a paved public
road, right-of-way, or parking lot without the use of water, vacuum system with filtration, or
other equivalent dust control method is prohibited. Mechanical or manual sweeping that occurs
between lifts of asphalt paving operations or due to preparation for pavement markings are
excluded from this prohibition, due to engineering requirements associated with these
operations.
(b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.4(a)(i) is ineffective to prevent off -property
transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best management
practices:
(i) Wet suppression: use a light spray of water or wetting agent applied directly to work area or
use equipment with water spray system while operating sweeper or power broom. Prevent
water used for dust control from entering any storm drainage facility or watercourse.
(ii) Vacuum system: use sweeper or power broom equipped with a vacuum collection and
filtration system.
(iii) Other method: use any other method to control dust emissions that has a demonstrated
particulate matter control efficiency of 80 percent or more.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
Page 14
41
Attachment 3
3.5 Track -out / Carry -out
Above: This figure illustrates an installed grate (left) and a gravel bed (right), both of which are
additional best management practices associated with track-out/carry-out.
Mud, dirt, and other debris can be carried from a site on equipment's wheels or undercarriage onto
public roads. When this material dries, it can become airborne by wind activity or when other vehicles
travel on it. This is a health concern and can cause visibility issues and safety hazards.
Best Management Practices to Control Dust
(a) Required Best Management Practices: Any owner or operator of any operation that has the
potential to result in track -out of dirt, dust, or debris on public roads and rights -of -way and whose
operation is a dust generating activity or source shall implement the following best management
practices to prevent off -property transport of fugitive dust emissions:
(i) Contracts and standards: comply with track -out prevention requirements and construction
best management practices as set forth in the Code, City regulations, or policies and as
specified in applicable contract documents or Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual.
(ii) Remove deposition: promptly remove any deposition that occurs on public roads or rights -
of -way as a result of the owner's or operator's operations. Avoid over -watering and prevent
runoff into any storm drainage facility or watercourse.
(b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.5(a)(i)-(ii) are ineffective to prevent off -
property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best
management practices:
(i) Install rails, pipes, grate, or similar track -out control device.
(ii) Install a gravel bed track -out apron that extends at least 50 feet from the intersection with a
public road or right-of-way.
(iii) Install gravel bed track -out apron with steel cattle guard or concrete wash rack.
(iv) Install and utilize on -site vehicle and equipment washing station.
(v) Install a paved surface that extends at least 100 feet from the intersection with a public road
or right-of-way.
(vi) Manually remove mud, dirt, and debris from equipment and vehicle wheels, tires and
undercarriage.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
Page 15
42
Attachment 3
3.6 Bulk Materials Transport
PW
Above: This figure illustrates covered loads, a required best management practice for bulk materials
transport.
Haul trucks are used to move bulk materials, such as dirt, rock, demolition debris, or mulch to and from
construction sites, material suppliers and storage yards. Dust emissions from haul trucks, if
uncontrolled, can be a safety hazard by impairing visibility or by depositing debris on roads, pedestrians,
bicyclists, or other vehicles.
Best Management Practices to Control Dust
(a) Required Best Management Practices: Any owner or operator of a dust generating activity or source
for which vehicles used for transporting bulk materials to and from a site within the City on a public or
private road or on a public right-of-way shall prevent off -vehicle transport of fugitive dust emissions. To
prevent off -vehicle transport of fugitive dust to and from the site, the owner or operator shall
implement the following measures:
(i) Cover Loads: Loads shall be completely covered or all material enclosed in a manner that
prevents the material from blowing, dropping, sifting, leaking, or otherwise escaping from the
vehicle. This includes the covering of hot asphalt and asphalt patching material with a tarp or
other impermeable material.
(ii) Minimize drop height: Drivers and operators shall unload truck beds and loader or excavator
buckets slowly, and minimize drop height of materials to the lowest height possible, including
screening operations.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
Page 16
43
Attachment 3
(b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.6(a)(i)-(ii) are ineffective to prevent off -
vehicle transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best
management practices:
L]
(i) Wet suppression: apply water to bulk materials loaded for transport as necessary to prevent
fugitive dust emissions and deposition of materials on roadways. Prevent water used for dust
control from entering any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse.
(ii) Chemical stabilization: apply chemical stabilizers using manufacturer's recommended
application rates. Avoid over -application and prevent runoff of chemical stabilizers into any
public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. Asphalt -based products or any
product containing cationic polyacrylamide or products deemed environmentally incompatible
with Code §26-498, or defined as a pollutant per Code §26-491, or explicitly prohibited by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or the state of Colorado may not be used for chemical
stabilization. Water soluble plant -based oils or gums, clay additives, or other synthetic polymer
emulsion that are non -toxic, non-combustible, and harmless to fish, wildlife, plants, pets, and
humans may be used for chemical stabilization.
(iii) Other technology: use other equivalent technology that effectively eliminates off -vehicle
transport, such as limiting the load size to provide at least three inches of freeboard to prevent
spillage.
4
N
%4tt`\�\, `
.,
A
Above: This figure illustrates minimizing drop heights, a required best management practice for bulk
materials transport.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
Page 17
MA
Attachment 3
3.7 Unpaved Roads and Haul Roads
Above: This figure illustrates surface improvements on an unpaved road, an additional best management
practice.
Road dust from unpaved roads is caused by particles lifted by and dropped from rolling wheels traveling
on the road surface and from wind blowing across the road surface. Road dust can aggravate heart and
lung conditions as well as cause safety issues such as decreased driver visibility and other safety hazards.
Best Management Practices to Control
Dust
(a) Required
Best Management Practices:
Any owner or operator
of an unpaved road located on a
construction
site greater than five acres on private property or an
unpaved road used as a public right-
of-way shall
implement the following best
management practices
to prevent off -property transport of
fugitive dust
emissions:
(i)
Reduce vehicle
speeds: establish a
maximum speed limit or install traffic calming devices to
reduce speeds to a rate that prevents
off -property transport
of dust entrained by vehicles.
(ii) Restrict access: restrict travel on unpaved roads by limiting access to only authorized vehicle
use.
(b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.7(a)(i)-(ii) are ineffective to prevent off -
property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best
management practices:
(i) Wet suppression: apply water to unpaved road surface as necessary and appropriate
considering current weather conditions, and prevent water used for dust control from entering
any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse.
(ii) Surface improvements: install gravel or similar materials with sufficient depth to reduce dust
or pave high traffic areas.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
45
Attachment 3
(iii) Chemical stabilization: apply chemical stabilizers appropriate for high traffic areas using
manufacturer's recommended application rates. Avoid over -application and prevent runoff of
chemical stabilizers into any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse.
Asphalt -based products or any product containing cationic polyacrylamide or products deemed
environmentally incompatible with Code §26-498, or defined as a pollutant per Code §26-491,
or explicitly prohibited by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or the state of Colorado
may not be used for chemical stabilization. Water soluble plant -based oils or gums, clay
additives, or other synthetic polymer emulsion that are non -toxic, non-combustible, and
harmless to fish, wildlife, plants, pets, and humans may be used for chemical stabilization.
(iv) Access road location: locate site access roads away from residential or other populated
areas.
Above: This figure illustrates wet suppression, an additional best management practice for
unpaved and haul roads.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
Page 19
EEO
Attachment 3
3.8 Parking Lots
Above: This figure illustrates an unpaved parking lot in Fort Collins.
This section applies to paved and unpaved areas where vehicles are parked or stored on a routine basis
and includes parking areas for shopping, recreation, or events; automobile or vehicle storage yards; and
animal staging areas.
Best Management Practices to Control Dust- Unpaved Parking Lots
(a) Required Best Management Practices: Any owners or operator of an unpaved parking lot greater
than one-half acre shall use at least one of the following best management practices to prevent off -
property transport of fugitive dust emissions
(i) Surface improvements: install gravel or similar materials with sufficient depth to reduce dust
or pave high traffic areas.
(ii) Vegetation: plant vegetation appropriate for retaining soils or creating a wind break.
(iii) Wet suppression: apply water as necessary and appropriate considering current weather
conditions to prevent off -property transport of fugitive dust emissions. Prevent water used for
dust control from entering any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse.
(iv) Chemical stabilization: apply chemical stabilizers appropriate for high traffic areas using
manufacturer's recommended application rates. Avoid over -application and prevent runoff of
chemical stabilizers into any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse.
Asphalt -based products or any product containing cationic polyacrylamide or products deemed
environmentally incompatible with Code §26-498, or defined as a pollutant per Code §26-491,
or explicitly prohibited by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or the state of Colorado
may not be used for chemical stabilization. Water soluble plant -based oils or gums, clay
additives, or other synthetic polymer emulsion that are non -toxic, non-combustible, and
harmless to fish, wildlife, plants, pets, and humans may be used for chemical stabilization.
(v) Wind barrier: construct a fence or other type of wind barrier.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
Page 20
47
Attachment 3
(vi) Reduce vehicle
speeds: establish a maximum speed limit
or
install traffic calming devices to
reduce speeds to a
rate that prevents off
-property transport
of
dust entrained by vehicles.
(vii) Restrict access:
restrict travel in
parking
lots to only those vehicles with essential duties and
limit access to hours
of operation or
specific
events.
Best Management Practices to Control Dust- Paved Parking Lots
(a) Required Best Management Practices: An owner or operator of a paved parking lot greater than
one-half acre and shall use at least one of the following best management practices to prevent off -
property transport of fugitive dust emissions.
(i) Maintenance: repair potholes and cracks and maintain surface improvements.
(ii) Mechanical sweeping: Sweep lot with a vacuum sweeper and light water spray as necessary
to remove dirt and debris. Avoid overwatering and prevent runoff from entering any public
right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse.
(iii)
Reduce vehicle
speeds: establish a maximum speed limit
or
install traffic calming devices to
reduce speeds to a
rate that prevents off
-property transport
of
dust entrained by vehicles.
(iv) Restrict
access: restrict travel
in parking
lots to only those vehicles with essential duties and
limit access
to hours of operation
or specific
events.
Above: This photo represents improving the surface of a parking area, which is one measure to
comply with the Manual.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote - Legal Review Pending
Page 21
Attachment 3
3.9 Open Areas and Vacant Lots
Above: These photos illustrate open areas in Fort Collins, which have the potential to generate dust.
Open areas are typically not a significant source of wind-blown dust emissions if the coverage of
vegetation is sufficient or soil crusts are intact. However, if soils in open areas are disturbed by vehicle
traffic, off -highway vehicle use, bicycling or grazing, or if they have become overpopulated by prairie
dogs, dust emissions can become a problem.
Best Management Practices to Control Dust
(a) Required Best Management Practices: Any owner or operator of an open area greater than one-half
acre shall use at least one of the following best management practices to stabilize disturbed or exposed
soil surface areas that are intended to or remain exposed for 30 days or more and to prevent off -
property transport of fugitive dust emissions:
(i) Vegetation: plant vegetation appropriate for retaining soils or creating a wind break.
(ii) Synthetic or natural cover: install cover materials over exposed areas during periods of
inactivity and properly anchor the cover.
(iii) Surface roughening: stabilize an exposed area during periods of inactivity or when
vegetation cannot be immediately established.
(iv) Soil retention: stabilize disturbed or exposed soil surface areas that will be inactive for more
than 30 days or while vegetation is being established, using mulch, compost, soil mats, or other
methods.
(v) Wet suppression: apply water to disturbed soil surfaces as necessary and appropriate
considering current weather to prevent off -property transport of fugitive dust emissions.
Prevent water used for dust control from entering any public right-of-way, storm drainage
facility, or watercourse.
(vi) Wind barrier: construct a fence or other type of wind barrier to prevent wind erosion of top
soils.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
Page 22
. •
Attachment 3
(vii) Chemical stabilization: apply chemical stabilizers using manufacturer's recommended
application rates. Avoid over -application and prevent runoff of chemical stabilizers into any
public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. Asphalt -based products or any
product containing cationic polyacrylamide or products deemed environmentally incompatible
with Code §26-498, or defined as a pollutant per Code §26-491, or explicitly prohibited by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or the state of Colorado may not be used for chemical
stabilization. Water soluble plant -based oils or gums, clay additives, or other synthetic polymer
emulsion that are non -toxic, non-combustible, and harmless to fish, wildlife, plants, pets, and
humans may be used for chemical stabilization.
Above: This photo represents adding vegetation by hydroseeding, which is one measure
to comply with the Manual.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
Page 23
50
Attachment 3
3.10 Saw Cutting and Grinding
Above: This photo illustrates concrete cutting and how the activity can generate dust.
Cutting and grinding of asphalt, concrete and other masonry materials can be a significant short-term
source of fugitive dust that may expose workers and the public to crystalline silica. Inhalation of silica
can cause lung disease known as silicosis and has been linked to other diseases such as tuberculosis and
lung cancer. Using additional best management practices during cutting and grinding operations can
significantly reduce dust emissions.
Best Management Practices to Control Dust
(a) Required Best Management Practices: Any person, owner, or operator that cuts or grinds asphalt,
concrete, brick, tile, stone, or other masonry materials and whose operations are a dust generating
activity or source shall use the following best management practices to prevent off -property transport
of fugitive dust emissions:
(i) Restrict access: prevent the public from entering the area where dust emissions occur.
(ii) High winds restriction: temporarily halt work activities during high wind events greater than
30 mph if operations would result in off -property transport.
(iii) Equipment and work area clean up: use wet wiping, wet sweeping, or vacuuming with HEPA
filtration for equipment and work area clean up and do not cause dust to become airborne
during clean up.
(iv) Slurry clean up: prevent water used for dust control or clean up from entering any public
right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse by using containment, vacuuming,
absorption, or other method to remove the slurry, and dispose of slurry and containment
materials properly. Follow additional procedures prescribed in the City's Fort Collins Stormwater
Criteria Manual or contract documents and specifications.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
Page 24
51
Attachment 3
(b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.10(a)(i)-(iv) are ineffective to prevent off -
property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best
management practices:
(i) On -tool local exhaust ventilation: use a tool -mounted dust capture and collection system.
(ii) On -tool wet suppression: use a tool -mounted water application system.
(iii) Vacuuming: use a vacuum equipped with a HEPA filter simultaneously with cutting or
grinding operations.
(iv) Wet suppression: use a water sprayer or hose simultaneously with cutting or grinding
operations.
(v) Enclosure: conduct cutting or grinding within an enclosure with a dust collection system or
temporary tenting over the work area.
Q
r
Above: These photos illustrate how dust generated from cutting can be minimized by applying on -tool
wet suppression, an additional best management practice associated with saw cutting and grinding.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
Page 25
52
Attachment 3
3.11 Abrasive Blasting
Above: This photo illustrates abrasive blasting without dust mitigation in place.
Abrasive blasting is used to smooth rough surfaces; roughen smooth surfaces; and remove paint, dirt,
grease, and other coatings from surfaces. Abrasive blasting media may consist of sand; glass, plastic or
metal beads; aluminum oxide; corn cobs; or other materials. Abrasive blasting typically generates a
significant amount of fugitive dust if not controlled. The material removed during abrasive blasting can
become airborne and may contain silica, lead, cadmium or other byproducts removed from the surface
being blasted.*
Best Management Practices to Control Dust
(a) Required Best Management Practices: Any person, owner, or operator who conducts outdoor
abrasive blasting or indoor abrasive blasting with uncontrolled emissions vented to the outside and
whose operations are a dust generating activity or source shall implement the following best
management practices to prevent off -property transport of fugitive dust emissions:
(i) Restrict access: prevent the public from entering the area where dust emissions occur.
(ii) High winds restriction: temporarily halt work activities during high wind events greater than
30 mph if operations would result in off -property transport.
(iii) Equipment and work area clean up: use wet wiping, wet sweeping, or vacuuming with HEPA
filtration for equipment and work area clean up and do not cause dust to become airborne
during clean up.
(iv) Slurry clean up: prevent water used for dust control or clean up from entering any public
right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse by using containment, vacuuming,
absorption, or other method to remove the slurry, and dispose of slurry and containment
materials properly.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
Page 26
53
Attachment 3
(b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.11(a)(i)-(iv) are ineffective to prevent off -
property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best
management practices:
(i) Enclosure: conduct abrasive blasting within an enclosure with a dust collection system or
temporary tenting over the work area.
(ii) Wet suppression blasting: use one of several available methods that mix water with the
abrasive media or air during blasting operations.
(iii) Vacuum blasting: conduct air -based blasting that uses a nozzle attachment with negative air
pressure to capture dust.
(iv) Abrasive media: select less toxic, lower dust -generating blasting media.
*Blasting on surfaces that contain lead paint or wastes from sandblasting that contain hazardous materials maybe subject
to additional state and federal requirements.
Above
This photo illustrates wet suppression blasting, an additional best management practice.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
Page 27
54
Attachment 3
3.12 Mechanical Blowing
Above: This photo illustrates mechanical blowing without dust mitigation in place.
Mechanical blowers are commonly used to move dirt, sand, leaves, grass clippings and other
landscaping debris to a central location for easier pick-up and removal. Mechanical blowing with a leaf
blower can be a significant source of fugitive dust in some situations and can create nuisance conditions
and cause health effects for sensitive individuals. Mechanical blowing can resuspend dust particles that
contain allergens, pollens, and molds, as well as pesticides, fecal contaminants, and toxic metals causing
allergic reactions, asthma attacks and exacerbating other respiratory illnesses.
Best Management Practices to Control Dust
(a) Required Best Management Practices: Any person, owner, or operator who operates a mechanical
leaf blower (gas, electric, or battery -powered) in a manner that is a dust generating activity or source
shall use the following best management practices as necessary to prevent off -property transport of
fugitive dust emissions
(i) Low speed: use the lowest speed appropriate for the task and equipment.
(ii) Operation: use the full length of the blow tube and place the nozzle as close to the ground as
possible.
(iii) High winds restriction: temporarily halt work activities during high wind events greater than
30 mph if operations would result in off -property transport.
(b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.11(a)(i)-(iii) are ineffective to prevent off -
property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best
management practices:
(i)
Alternative method: use an
alternative such
as a rake,
broom, shovel, manually push
sweeper or a vacuum machine
equipped with a
filtration
system.
(ii) Prevent impact: do not blow dust and debris off -property or in close proximity to people,
animals, open windows, air intakes, or onto adjacent property, public right-of-way, storm
drainage facility, or watercourse.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote — Legal Review Pending
55
Attachment 3
(iii) Minimize use on dirt: minimize the use of mechanical blower on unpaved surfaces, road
shoulders, or loose dirt.
(iv) Wet suppression: use a light spray of water, as necessary and appropriate considering
current weather conditions, to dampen dusty work areas. Prevent water, dirt, and debris from
entering any storm drainage facility, or watercourse.
(v) Remove debris: remove and properly dispose of blown material immediately.
z
L
Above: These photos illustrate alternative methods to mechanical blowing that can minimize dust
generation.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote - Legal Review Pending
Page 29
56
Attachment 3
4.0 Dust Control Plan for Land Development Greater Than Five Acres
A dust control plan is required for all development projects or construction sites with a total disturbed
surface area equal to or greater than five (5) acres. If the project is required to obtain a development
construction permit, then the dust control plan shall be submitted with the development review
application or the development construction permit application. A copy of the dust control plan shall be
available onsite at all times for compliance and inspection purposes.
For dust control plans associated with a Development Construction Permit (DCP), applications for the
DCP are available online at www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/applications.php. The dust control plan
may be submitted on the Dust Control Plan Form included in Chapter 4 of this Manual or other
equivalent format and shall include the following information:
• Project name and location.
• Name and contact information of property owner.
• Project start and completion dates.
• Name and contact information of the developer, general contractor, and each contractor or
operator that will be engaged in an earthmoving activity.
• Total size of the development project or construction site in acres.
• A description of the
project phasing or
sequencing
of the project to minimize the amount of
disturbed surface area
at any one time
during the
project.
• A list of each dust generating activity or source associated with the project.
• A list of each best management practice and engineering control that will be implemented for
each dust generating activity or source.
• A list of additional best management practices that will be implemented if initial controls are
ineffective.
• A signed statement from the property owner, developer, general contractor, and each
contractor or operator engaged in an earthmoving activity acknowledging receipt of the Dust
Control Plan and an understanding of and ability to comply with the best management practices
in the plan.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote - Legal Review Pending
Page 30
57
Attachment 3
City of
r F6rt Collins DUST CONTROL PLAN
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Name
Project Location
Start and Completion Dates
Total Size of Project Site (acres)
Maximum disturbed surface area at
any one time (acres)
Property Owner
name, address, phone, e-mail
Developer
name, address, phone, e-mail
General Contractor
name, address, phone, e-mail
Subcontractor or Operator
of a dust generating activity or source
name, address, phone, e-mail
Subcontractor or Operator
of a dust generating activity or source
name, address, phone, e-mail
Subcontractor or Operator
of a dust generating activity or source
name, address, phone, e-mail
PROJECT PHASING OR SEQUENCING
Provide a description of how this project will be phased or sequenced to minimize the disturbed surface
area. Attach phasing plan or map if available.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or quote - Legal Review Pending
Page 31
Attachment 3
DUST CONTROL PLAN CERTIFICATION
I certify the information and attachments contained in this Dust Control Plan are true and correct to the
best of my knowledge and that I and the project's subcontractors have received a copy of this Dust
Control Plan and acknowledge my understanding
of and ability to comply with best management
practices for controlling fugitive dust emissions. I
hereby permit City officials to enter upon the property
for the purpose of inspection of any dust generating
activity or source for which I am the responsible
person, owner, or operator.
Name:
Title:
Role on project:
Address:
Phone:
Signature:
Date:
***********************************************************
List of Subcontractors:
Title:
Role on project:
Title:
Role on project:
Title:
Role on project:
Title:
Role on project:
Title:
Role on project:
Title:
Role on project:
Title:
Role on project:
Title:
Role on project:
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote - Legal Review Pending
Page 32
59
Attachment 3
Instructions: Place an X in each box indicating all best management practices that will be implemented for each dust
generating activity. Please refer to the Dust Prevention and Control Manual for requirements.
Dust Generating Activity b
/Best Management Practice b
UA
C
>
0
W
C Q
o
+' >
O Q
c
(U
�
N
'
U
O
�,
bD
'Q
v
N
+�
v
N
L
i
f0
�'
7
O
U
.(_LO
a, o
o a
m
V
c6 c6
�° �°
a
N
_
D 0
0
J
c°
Y
a
M
v
Q
Q
O
L
O
+ a
3 C
U 'ME:a,
(10
N
•—
N
6
co
U1
N
M
Q
110
C
3
o
pp
J
Abrasive media
Asbestos or lead materials
Building permit
Chemical stabilization
Construction sequencing
Drop height
Enclosure
Equipment &work area clean up
Erosion Control plan
High winds restriction
Load cover
Leaf blowing techniques
Location
Minimize disturbed area
On -tool local exhaust ventilation
On -tool wet suppression
Other method
Reduce vehicle speeds
Remove deposition
Restrict access
Slurry clean up
Soil retention
Stockpile permit
Surface improvements
Surface roughening
Sweeping
Synthetic or natural cover
Track -out prevention system
Uncontrolled sweeping prohibited
Vacuum
Vegetation
Wet suppression
Wind barrier
Describe any additional dust generating activities and best management practices that will be used:
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or quote - Legal Review Pending
Page 33
Attachment 3
5.0 Resources
5.1 Cross Reference to Codes, Standards, Regulations, and Policies
Earthmoving Activities
Fort Collins Land Use Code Article 3 General Development Standards §3.2.2 Access, Circulation and
Parking.
Fort Collins Land Use Code Article 3 General Development Standards §3.4.1(N) Standards for Protection
During Construction.
Fort Collins Land Use Code Article 3 General Development Standards §3.4.2 Air Quality.
Fort Collins City Code, Chapter 5 Buildings and Building Regulations, Section 5-27 (59) §3602.1.1
Building demolitions.
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances
prohibited.
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 23 Public Property §23-16. Permit required; exception in case of
emergency.
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control.
Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, Volume 3, Chapter 7, Section 1.3 Policy, Standards and
Submittal Requirements, §1.3.3.e.5.
Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual — Fact Sheet SM-1 Construction Phasing/Sequencing and Fact
Sheet EC-1 Surface Roughening.
Larimer County Land Use Code §8.11.4. Fugitive dust during construction.
State of Colorado, Air Quality Control Commission, 5 CCR 1001-3, Regulation No. 1, §III.D.2.b
Construction Activities.
OSHA Safety and Health Regulations for Construction 29 CFR Part 1926.55 Gases, vapors, fumes, dusts,
and mists.
Demolition and Renovation
Fort Collins Land Use Code, Division 2.7 Building Permits §2.7.1
Fort Collins City Code, Chapter 5 Buildings and Building Regulations, Section 5-27 (59) §3602.1.1
Building demolitions.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote - Legal Review Pending
Page 34
61
Attachment 3
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances
prohibited.
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control.
State of Colorado, Air Quality Control Commission, Regulation Number 8, Part B Control of Hazardous
Air Pollutants, 5 CCR 1001-10.
Stockpiles
Fort Collins Land Use Code, Division 2.6 Stockpiling Permits and Development Construction Permits
§2.6.2.
Fort Collins Land Use Code §2.6.3 (K) Stockpiling Permit and Development Construction Permit Review
Procedures.
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances
prohibited.
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control.
Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual Volume 3, Chapter 7, Section 1.3 Policy, Standards and
Submittal Requirements, §1.3.3.e.7.
Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual - Fact Sheet MM-2 Stockpile Management.
State of Colorado, Air Quality Control Commission, 5 CCR 1001-3, Regulation No. 1, §III.D.2.c Storage and
Handling of Materials.
Street Sweeping
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances
prohibited.
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control.
Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual - Fact Sheet SM-7 Street Sweeping and Vacuuming.
Track-out/Carry-out
Fort Collins Traffic Code, Part 1407 Spilling loads on highways prohibited.
Fort Collins Land Use Code §5.2.1 Definitions Maintenance (of a newly constructed street).
Fort Collins City Code: Chapter 20 — Nuisances, Article V - Dirt, Debris and Construction Waste, §Sec.
20-62. Depositing on streets prohibited.
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote - Legal Review Pending
Page 35
62
Attachment 3
Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, Volume 3, Chapter 7, Section 1.3 Policy, Standards and
Submittal Requirements, §1.3.3.e.8.
Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual — Fact Sheet SM-4 Vehicle Tracking Control.
Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual — Fact Sheet SM-7 Street Sweeping and Vacuuming.
State of Colorado, Air Quality Control Commission, 5 CCR 1001-3, Regulation No. 1, §III.D.2.a.(ii).(B)
General Requirements.
Bulk Materials Transport
Fort Collins Traffic Code, Part 1407 Spilling loads on highways prohibited.
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances
prohibited.
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control.
State of Colorado, Air Quality Control Commission, 5 CCR 1001-3, Regulation No. 1, §III.D.2.f Haul Trucks.
Colorado Revised Statutes. 42-4-1407 Spilling loads on highways prohibited.
Unpaved Roads and Haul Roads
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances
prohibited.
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control.
State of Colorado, Air Quality Control Commission, 5 CCR 1001-3, Regulation No. 1, §III.D.2.a Roadways
and §III.D.2.e Haul Roads.
Parking Lots
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances
prohibited.
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control.
Open Areas and Vacant Lots
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances
prohibited.
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control.
Saw Cutting and Grinding
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances
prohibited.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote - Legal Review Pending
Page 36
63
Attachment 3
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control.
Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual — Fact Sheet SM-12 Paving and Grinding Operations.
Colorado Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction,
Section 208.04 Best Management Practices for Stormwater.
Abrasive Blasting
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances
prohibited.
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control.
Mechanical (Leaf) Blowing
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances
prohibited.
Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control.
5.2 City of Fort Collins Manuals and Policies
Fort Collins
Stormwater Criteria
Manual http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-
developers/development-forms-guidelines-regulations/stormwater-criteria
City of Fort Collins
Parks and Recreation Environmental Best Management
Practices
Manual 2011,
Chapter Four: Best
Management Practices for Construction http://www.fcgov.com/parks/pdf/bmp.pdf
City
of Fort Collins Building Design and Construction
Standards,
Oct. 2013
http://www.fcgov.com/opserv/pdf/building-design-standards2.pdf?1390850442
City of Fort Collins, Recommended Species and Application Rates of Perennial Native Upland Grass Seed
for Fort Collins, Colorado.
City of Fort Collins Plant List, April 2011.
5.3 References for Dust Control
Leaf Blowing
A Report to the California Legislature on the Potential Health and Environmental Impacts of Leaf
Blowers, California Environmental Protection Agency —Air Resources Board, Feb. 2000.
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/mailouts/msc0005/msc0005.pdf
Abrasive Blasting
Sandblasting and Other Air -based Blasting Fact Sheet, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Dec. 2011.
Protecting Workers from the Hazards of Abrasive Blasting Materials, OSHA Fact Sheet.
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote - Legal Review Pending
Page 37
•A
Attachment 3
California Air Resources Board, Abrasive Blasting Program.
http://www.arb.ca.gov/ba/certabr/certabr.htm
Saw Cutting
OSHA Fact Sheet on Crystalline Silica Exposure
https://www.osha.gov/OshDoc/data General Facts/crystalline-factsheet.pdf
State
of New Jersey
— Dry Cutting
and Grinding Fact
Sheet
http://www.state.ni.us/health/surv/documents/dry
cutting.pdf
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention - Engineering Controls for Silica in Construction
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/silica/cutoffsaws.html
Shepherd-S; Woskie-S, Controlling
Dust from Concrete
Saw Cutting.
Journal
of Occupational and
Environmental
Hygiene, 2013 Feb;
10(2):64-70.
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/nioshtic-2/20042808.html
Akbar-Khanzadeh F. Milz SA, Wagner CD, Bisesi MS, Ames AL, Khuder S, Susi P, Akbar-Khanzadeh M,
Effectiveness of dust control methods for crystalline silica and respirable suspended particulate matter
exposure during manual concrete surface grinding. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene,
2010 Dec;7(12):700-11. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21058155
HSE, On -Tool Controls to Reduce Exposure to Respirable Dusts in the Construction Industry —A Review.
Health and Safety Executive, RR926, 2012, Derbyshire, U.K.
http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr926.pdf
Croteau G, Guffey S, Flanagan ME, Seixas N, The Effect of Local Exhaust Ventilation Controls on Dust
Exposures During Concrete Cutting and Grinding Activities. American Industrial Hygiene Association
Journal, 2002 63:458-467
http://deohs.washington.edu/sites/default/files/images/general/CroteauThesis.pdf
Unpaved Roads, Parking Lots, and Open Areas
Dust Control from Unpaved Roads and Surfaces, Code 373, USDA-NRCS, April 2010.
http://www.nres.usda.gov/Internet/FSE DOCUMENTS/nres143 025946.pdf
CPWA, 2005, Dust Control for Unpaved Roads, A Best Practice by the National Guide to Sustainable
Municipal Infrastructure, Canadian Public Works Association.
Colorado Forest Road Field Handbook, Colorado State Forest, Editor: Richard M. Edwards, CF; CSFS
Assistant Staff Forester, July 2011.
Fay L., Kociolek A., Road Dust Management and Future Needs: 2008 Conference Proceedings, Western
Transportation Institute, March 2009.
Chemical Stabilizers
Interim Guidelines on Dust Palliative Use in Clark County, Nevada. Nevada Division of Environmental
Protection, Feb. 2001. http://ndep.nv.gov/admin/dustpal.pdf
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote - Legal Review Pending
65
Attachment 3
Bolander, Peter, ed. 1999. Dust Palliative Selection and Application Guide. Project Report. 9977-1207-
SDTDC. San Dimas, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, San Dimas Technology and
Development Center. http://www.fs.fed.us/eng/pubs/html/99771207/99771207.html
Techniques for Fugitive Dust Control — Chemical Suppressants, City of Albuquerque NM, website last
accessed on Oct. 25, 2014.
http://www.cabq.gov/airguality/business-programs-permits/ordinances/fugitive-dust/fugitive-dust-
contmi
USDA BioPreferred Catalog: Dust Suppressants
http://www.biopreferred.gov/BioPreferred/faces/catalog/Catalog.xhtml
USGS Columbia Environmental Research Center Project: Environmental Effects of Dust Suppressant
Chemicals on Roadside Plant and Animal Communities,
http://www.cerc.usgs.gov/Promects.aspx?Proiectld=77
Street Sweeping
U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Stormwater Best Management
Practices: Street Sweeper Fact Sheet. http://environment.fhwa.dot.gov/ecosystems/ultraurb/3fs16.asp
Agriculture and Livestock
Agricultural Air Quality Conservation Measures - Reference Guide for Cropping Systems and General
Land Management, USDA-NRCS, Oct. 2012.
http://www.nres.usda.gov/Internet/FSE DOCUMENTS/stelprdb1049502.pdf
Dust
Control from Animal Activity on
Open Lot Surfaces,
Code 375, USDA-NRCS,
Sept. 2010.
http://www.nres.usda.gov/Internet/FSE
DOCUMENTS/nres143
025821.pdf
Residue and Tillage Management, Reduced Till, Code 345, USDA-NRCS, Dec. 2013.
http://www.nres.usda.gov/Internet/FSE DOCUMENTS/stelprdb1251402.pdf
Herbaceous Wind Barriers, Code 603, USDA-NRCS, Jan. 2010.
http://www.nres.usda.gov/Internet/FSE DOCUMENTS/nres143 025927.pdf
Michalewicz, D. A., J. D. Wanjura, B. W. Shaw, and C. B. Parnell. 2005. Evaluation of sources and controls
of fugitive dust from agricultural operations. In Proc. 2005 Beltwide Cotton Conference.
http://caages.tamu.edu/Publication-Particulate%20Matter.html
Harner J., Maghirang R., Razote E., Water Requirements for Dust Control on Feedlots, from the
proceedings of Mitigating Air Emissions From Animal Feeding Operations Conference, May 2008.
http://www.extension.org/pages/23966/water-regui rements-for-dust-control-on-feedlots
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association Agriculture Clearinghouse
httP://www.capcoa.org/ag-clearinghouse
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote - Legal Review Pending
Page 39
••
Attachment 3
U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service - Nevada, Fugitive Dust: A Guide
to the Control of Windblown Dust on Agricultural Lands in Nevada. Jan. 2007.
http://www.cdsn.org/images/FugitiveDustGuide v7 201 .pdf
Demolition and Renovation
CDPHE, Demolition and Asbestos Abatement forms and information
https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/asbestos-forms
Earthmoving Activities
CDPHE, An Overview of Colorado Air Regulations for Land Development, August 2014
https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/sites/default/files/AP Land -Development -Guidance -Document 1.pdf
Working With Dirt When the Wind Blows
http://www.gradingandexcavation.com/GX/Articles/Working With Dirt When the Wind Blows 5455
.aspx
EPA —
Stormwater
Best
Management Practices:
Dust
Control
http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/swbmp/Dust-Control.cfm
EPA—Stormwater
Best
Management Practices:
Wind
Fences
and
Sand
Fences
http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/swbmp/Wind-Fences-and-Sand-Fences.cfm
EPA—Stormwater
Best
Management Practices:
Construction
Sequencing
http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/swbmp/Construction-Sequencing.cfm
EPA—Stormwater
Best
Management Practices:
Construction
Entrances
http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/swbmp/Construction-Entrances.cfm
An Overview of Colorado Air Regulations for Land Development. Colorado Department of Public Health
and Environment —Air Pollution Control Division.
https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/sites/default/files/AP Land -Development -Guidance -Document 1.pdf
Health Effects of Particulate Matter
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Integrated Science Assessment for Particulate Matter.
EPA/600/R-08/139F Dec. 2009.
http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=216546#Download
World Health Organization, Health Effects of Particulate Matter- Policy. 2013
http://www.euro.who.int/ data/assets/pdf file/0006/189051/Health-effects-of-particulate-matter-
final-Eng.pdf
Preventing Silicosis in Construction Workers, NIOSH http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/96-112/
General
Dust Abatement Handbook, Maricopa County Air Quality Department, June 2013.
http://www.maricopa.gov/ag/divisions/compliance/dust/docs/pdf/Rule%20310-Dust%2OHandbook.pdf
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote - Legal Review Pending
67
Attachment 3
Fugitive Dust Control: Self Inspection Handbook, California Air Resources Board, 2007.
http://www.arb.ca.gov/pm/fugitivedust large.pdf
WRAP Fugitive Dust Handbook, Western Governors' Association. Sept. 2006.
Managing Fugitive Dust: A Guide for Compliance with the Air Regulatory Requirements for Particulate
Matter Generation, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. March 2014.
Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, Rules and Regulations, Rule 805 Odors and Dust
http://cogcc.state.co.us/
DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual
Do not cite or Quote - Legal Review Pending
Page 41
Agenda Item 4
LA
PROJECT NAME
MOUNTAIN'S EDGE ANNEXATION AND ZONING #ANX160002
STAFF
Ted Shepard, Chief Planner
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is
a
request to annex and zone 18.52
acres
located
at the northeast
corner
of
West Drake Road and South
Overland
Trail.
This is a 100%
voluntary annexation. The parcel currently consists of one single family
home. The parcel is west of the Brown Farm Subdivision and south of the
drive-in movie theater. In accordance with the City Plan's Structure Plan
Map, the requested zoning for this annexation is L-M-N, Low Density
Mixed -Use Neighborhood.
APPLICANT/OWNER: Mr. Jeff Mark
Landhuis Company.
212 North Wahsatch Avenue, Suite 301
Colorado Springs, CO 80903
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the annexation and placement into the L-
M-N, Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood zone district as well as the
Residential Neighborhood Sign District.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This is a request to annex and zone 18.52 acres which is located at the northeast corner of West Drake
Road and South Overland Trail and addressed as 2430 South Overland Trail. According to the
Intergovernmental Agreement with Larimer County, the City agrees to consider annexing parcels that
are within the Growth Management Area and are contiguous to the municipal boundary. Of the total
perimeter boundary, the annexation has 84.3% contiguity thus exceeding the necessary one -sixth
(16.66%) contiguity. Because of the location within an established residential area, the parcel will be
placed into the Residential Neighborhood Sign District which is consistent with the surrounding area.
Item # 4 Page 1
Agenda Item 4
COMMENTS:
1, Background:
The property is located within the Fort Collins Growth Management Area. According to policies and
agreements between the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County contained in the (1.) Intergovernmental
Agreement for the Fort Collins Growth Management Area, the City will agree to consider annexation of
property in the GMA when the property is eligible for annexation according to State law.
The subject property gains the required one -sixth contiguity to existing City limits in the following
manner:
East: Herring Annexation, 103 acres, (1977), now known as the Brown Farm
Subdivision.
South: Dixon Creek Annexation, 58.7 acres, (1980), now known as the Quail Hollow
Subdivision.
West: Pine Ridge Third Annexation, 102 acres, (1999), now part of the Pine Ridge
Natural Area.
As a result, 84.3% of the total perimeter is contiguous to the existing municipal boundary which exceeds
the required minimum (16.66%).
This annexation request is in conformance with the State of Colorado Revised Statutes as they relate to
annexations, the City of Fort Collins Comprehensive Plan, and the Larimer County and City of Fort
Collins Intergovernmental Agreements.
The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
N: County FA-1 Drive -In Movie Theatre
S: R-L Quail Hollow and Burns Ranch Subdivisions
E: R-L Brown Farm Subdivision
W: P-O-L Pine Ridge Natural Area
2. Zoning:
Per the Structure Plan Map, the proposed zoning for the subject annexation is L-M-N, Low Density
Mixed -Use Neighborhood. The Land Use Code describes this district as:
"...intended to be a setting for a predominance of low density housing combined with
complementary and supporting land uses that serve a neighborhood and are developed and
operated in harmony with the residential characteristics of a neighborhood. The main purpose of
the District is to meet a wide range of needs of everyday living in neighborhoods that include a
variety of housing choices, that invite walking to gathering places, services and conveniences, and
that are fully integrated into the larger community by the pattern of streets, blocks, and other
linkages. A neighborhood center provides a focal point, and attractive walking and biking paths
invite residents to enjoy the center as well as the small neighborhood parks. Any new development
in this District shall be arranged to form part of an individual neighborhood.
Item # 4 Page 2
70
Agenda Item 4
Typically, Low Density Neighborhoods will be clustered around and integral with a Medium Density
Mixed -Use Neighborhood with a Neighborhood Commercial Center at its core. For the purposes of
this Division, a neighborhood shall be considered to consist of approximately eighty (80) to one
hundred sixty (160) acres, with its edges typically consisting of major streets, drainageways,
irrigation ditches, railroad tracks and other major physical features."
3. Findings of Fact:
A. The property meets the eligibility requirements included in State law to qualify for a voluntary
annexation to the City of Fort Collins.
B. The annexation of this area is consistent with the policies and agreements between Larimer
County and the City of Fort Collins contained in the Intergovernmental Agreement for the Fort
Collins Growth Manaaement Area.
C. The requested zoning, L-M-N, Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood, is in conformance with
the policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan (Structure Plan Map).
D. The request is in conformance with Section 2.9, Amendment to the Zoning Map, of the City of
Fort Collins Land Use Code.
E. On April 5, 2016, the City Council approved a resolution that accepted the annexation petition
and determined that the petition was in compliance with State law. The resolution also
initiated the annexation process for the property by establishing the date, time and place
when a City Council public hearing would be held regarding the readings of the Ordinances
annexing and zoning the area.
F. Since the parcel is
located north and west of
existing
residential subdivisions, and east of a
City -owned natural
area, Staff recommends
that the
parcel be included in the Residential
Neighborhood
Sign
District. This
is consistent
with
the
surrounding
area.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning board make a motion to approve the 18.52 acre
Mountain's Edge Annexation and Zoning #ANX160002, and placement into the L-M-N, Low Density
Mixed -Use Neighborhood zone district. Further Staff recommends placement into the Residential
Neighborhood Sign District. These recommendations are based on the Findings of Fact on pages three
and four of this Staff Report.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Vicinity Map (PDF)
2. Structure Plan (PDF)
3. Zoning Map (PDF)
4. Annexation Plat (PDF)
5. Annexation Petition (PDF)
Item # 4 Page 3
71
Attachment 1
0
Hughes
Stadium Stuart st
1N r
— — — —' M
d
Rd 42C
r
9
O
Y W Drake Rd
Site = Mountain's Edge
Annexation & Zoning
no
x
w
H
LE
w
W Horsetooth Rd
Major Street Names
Annexation
City Limits
Growth Management Area
0
Mountains's Edge Annexation & Zoning
Vicinity Map 1 inch =2,00"et
J
Fort
utryf Collins Mountain's Edge Annexation
Structure Plan Plan Fort Collins
Boundaries
Fort Collins GMA
Potential GMA Expansion
City Limits
County Boundary
Districts Neighborhoods Edges Corridors
- Neighborhood Commercial District Urban Estate Foothills Open Lands, Parks and Water Corridors
- Campus District Low Density Mixed -Use Enhanced Travel Corridor (Transit)
Medium Density Mixed -Use
1 in = 0.4 miles
i77TiTi �Y.TTiX� �i �iTa!�"iTiT:a'FTi iTi
MOUNTAINS EDGE ANNEXATION
A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH,
RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO
DESCRIPTION
A PORTION OFTE3E SW W OF SECITON 21, TOWNSIBP ]NORM$ RANGE 0 WEST OF TIW 6TH PM, CONEM OF LARd9t
STATE OF COLORADO, OESCMM AS FOLLOWS: BEGINENG AT THE SW CORNER OF SECTION 21 AND ROD THENCE EAST
655 sl FEET; THENCE NORTH 139319 FEET; THENCE WEST 651 MB FIEF MORE OR LESS, TO THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 21.
T1EiCE SOUSE R 1393 FEET, MORE OR LES S TO THE POINT OF BEGESTRNG;
LESS THAT FRTION AS CONVEYED TO THE CRY OF FORT COLLNS IANOARY 251967 IN BOOK 1353 AT PAGE NO, AND
THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO LARINER(SOCIETY FEBRHARY 21,1969 N BOOK 1380 AT PAGE 296
Sva purcet of lmacmdwa Is 516 ames, more m las(TF ava u mG": R, mY'ANA-wry" 11,..asmevm of re<ma mas mw
aaYivg on said aomlroi pawvl of Ima.
SUR4YYNOTES:
1.EbumIAarcsA am DOgahlyfED,by Weasse.eyox.Any imdmulienad TTI,g reema essememx. aeinimq me nfbm
aonmmta mtl might WA DO quality ofti@ B 11 trawl of lava was obdived fiom ri@ Cmvmimamt No.
s9zxa<335za071 -0s9, awed Apn13q 2015 by xaage tale company_
2. Used of Beviogr MLe West TOO me Smmwert Qomla of Sectim 21, Towoxhry ]Nmm Rsoge 69 Wert o£me 6W P M as
beenvg NOM(W I729' Eml(mmmai bematg)
3. UaU ofineume u US. Suaory Fa[
ANNEXATION
TOTAL PERRO
C845"'
CONTIGUOUS BOUNDARY_ LESS50'
METENNM CONLEG000SFERRfETERFEETREQONEO____. 540.53'
CUILUENTZONING FAI-PARb@fG (LAR0.ER COIMLY)
PROPOSED ZONING: LMN-LOW DENSITY MONO ONE (FORT COLLINS)
INDICATES PRESENT CITY BOUNDARY LINE
�PK�D
® NORTH
( IN LLS. SVRKY FEET )
l mrn - W It
FALL urn.Y U�owm (FINGER
COLNmw" dm.
cd HRNmft
UTILITY NOTE
THE LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UNTITIES ARE NOT SHOWN THE
EXACT LOCATION OF ANY UNDERGROUND UFFILTHES SHOULD BE
SURVEYOR'S SLATENHOLL
L Ens R SmAIT a Colm•ao Regasluea Pm@sxmvel Lead Swgov do hexeby slate Wm this map of lava Imposed 10 be A,,I 10
the (AN OILED Collins, Covvly of Lmwm, Sme Of Colmeao wes psepum vvaa my aueat'HIM in® Rom 171 &'=ME
ofaema, and that theamne m Had ma smwd TO ahe b,A,fmy O,,d dg,, i W,mwu,, ma belief
I Emma aWe thatmt lead than ouesmh of We F®me s,OfWe men pmposea to bea®md n,,UTE,s TO me bomauy fate o£
me Ciry of Foal Covina, Covmy of Lmwa Sme Ot Colmaao
EeLat aR SmamT, haH o£Nmmw Fngivemwg
Colmaao Regixla mat 37997
Iava Sur ryor No.3 ]98]
SITE
VICINITY MAP
• YDDD'
RONOURNERFOUND
mNNEN NwxD AS DFSCINBED
Line LeNend
BWND/NYUNE
RN HTq WAY UNE
e wen.TFNR•Rv� l I
fOIM C/1lM V➢
TM
21
�T8•li 1N
P.
5
b
�m
Z co
W ¢
se
r Z
€E
pwp
Z
5
Zw
J
�cl
H
00
Z
<O
wui
O?
J
O
OV
U�
00
41 LL
N
N
Sheet
�121l:11 {G �y;II:111!; ;lya:•1:1
Of 1 Sheet
75
PETITION FOR ANNEXATION
THE UNDERSIGNED (hereinafter referred to as the "Petitioners") hereby petition the Council of
the City of Fort Collins, Colorado for the annexation of an area, to be referred to as the
MOUNTAINS EDGE ANNEXATION Annexation to the City of Fort
Collins. Said area, consisting of approximately 806,546 SQ, FT 18.516 acres, is more
particularly described on Attachment "A," attached hereto.
The Petitioners allege:
1. That it is desirable and necessary that such area be annexed to the City of Fort Collins.
2. That the requirements of Sections 31-12-104 and 31-12-105, C.R.S., exist or have been
met.
3. That not less than one -sixth (1/6) of the perimeter of the area proposed to be annexed is
contiguous with the boundaries of the City of Fort Collins.
4. That a community of interest exists between the area proposed to be annexed and the
City of Fort Collins.
5. That the area to be annexed is urban or will be urbanized in the near future.
6. That the area proposed to be annexed is integrated with or capable of being integrated
with the City of Fort Collins.
7. That the Petitioners herein comprise more that fifty percent (50%) of the landowners in the
area and own more than fifty percent (50%) of the area to be annexed, excluding public
streets, alleys and lands owned by the City of Fort Collins.
8. That the City of Fort Collins shall not be required to assume any obligations respecting the
construction of water mains, sewer lines, gas mains, electric service lines, streets or any
other services or utilities in connection with the property proposed to be annexed except
as may be provided by the ordinance of the City of Fort Collins.
Further, as an express condition of annexation, Petitioners consent to the inclusion into the
Municipal Subdistrict, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District (the "Subdistrict") pursuant to §37-
45-136(3.6) C.R.S., Petitioners acknowledge that, upon inclusion into the Subdistrict, Petitioners'
property will be subject to the same mill levies and special assessments as are levied or will be levied on
other similarly situated property in the Subdistrict at the time of inclusion of Petitioners' lands. Petitioners
agree to waive any right to an election which may exist pursuant to Article X, §20 of the Colorado
Constitution before the Subdistrict can impose such mill levies and special assessments as it has the
authority to impose. Petitioners also agree to waive, upon inclusion, any right which may exist to a refund
pursuant to Article X, §20 of the Colorado Constitution.
WHEREFORE, said Petitioners request that the Council of the City of Fort Collins approve the
annexation of the area described on Attachment "A." Furthermore, the Petitioners request that said area
be placed in the LMN Zone District pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins.
revised 3/31/08 76
In (Check box if
applicable).
The Petitioners reserve the
right to withdraw this petition and their
signatures therefrom
at any time
prior to the commencement
of the roll call of the City Council for the
vote upon the second reading of
the annexation ordinance.
Individual Petitioners signing this Petition represent that they own the portion(s) of the area
described on Attachment "A" as more particularly described below:
A tract of land situate in the County of Larimer, State of Colorado, to -wit:
SEE LEGAL DESCRIPTION ON ATTACHMENT'A'.
INSTRUCTIONS: INSERT HERE the legal description of individual parcels, or if only
ownership, type "See Legal Description on Attachment `A'."
IN WITNESS WHEROF, I/we have executed this Petition for Annexation this
,201
V z /l
Address
City
s/Owner's Signature
wosskk4 be., Yt#t 301
GO
State
Petitioner's/Owner's Signature
Address
Zip City
State
day of
Zip
revised 3131108 77
ATTACHMENT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ANNEXATION
A tract of land situate in the County of Larimer, State of Colorado, to -wit:
A PORTION OF THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M.,
COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SW CORNER
OF SECTION 21 AND RUN THENCE EAST 655.51 FEET; THENCE NORTH 1393.18 FEET; THENCE WEST 651.78
FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 21; THENCE SOUTH 1393 FEET, MORE OR LESS TO
THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
LESS THAT PORTION AS CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS JANUARY 25, 1967 IN BOOK 1353 AT
PAGE 280, AND THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO LARIMER COUNTY FEBRUARY 21, 1968 IN BOOK 1380 AT
PAGE 296
Said parcel
of land contains
18.516 acres, more or
less (t), and is subject to any rights -of -way or other easements of
record or as
now existing on
said described parcel
of land.
revised 3131108 78
ATTACHMENT "B"
STATE OF COLORADO )
)ss.
COUNTY OFR )
51 'aa_sco
The undersigned, being first duly sworn upon his oath states:
That he was the circulator of the attached Petition for Annexation and that each signature therein
is the signature of the person whose name it purports to be.
by
bed and sworn to beforeyne this �' Z' day of re4;r6k4�V , 2!,
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Commission Expiration
Notary Public
S ALM VANCIL
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF COLORADO
NOTARY ID 19MO20M
revised 3131108
79
ATTACHMENT "C"
ATTORNEY CERTIFICATION
is /,at"' rk / i• �r6rA c2k , an attorney licensed to practice in the State of
Colorado, hereby certify that, as of the date of this certificate, the signers of this Annexation Petition for
the area referred to as the MOUNTAINS EDGE Annexation to the City of
Fort Collins are the owners of real property in the area proposed for annexation. Furthermore, I certify
that said owners constitute more than 50% of the landowners in the area proposed for annexation, as
said area is described on Attachment "A" of said Annexation Petition, and own more than 50% of the
land in said area, exclusive of streets and alleys,
ruori a3 an/ (o
Date
0
nature
A - WI/Cp4
3�ks67
Attorney Reg. No.
revised 3131108
80
Agenda Item 5
PROJECT NAME
CONTINUED HEARING FOR THE CENTRE FOR ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 22ND FILING, COMMUNITY
HORTICULTURE CENTER #MJA150006
STAFF
Jason Holland, City Planner
U:tea]X4&91►I&INJi/_yl1l[*]►
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a 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. The proposed plan reflects the major components
outlined in the original master plan, which was approved in 2001. At that time, the
master plan included a number of future components, which are now planned in
detail with this amended plan. Specifically, the amended components that are
shown with these proposed plans include:
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
RECOMMENDATION:
• expanded garden areas including — Plant Select Garden, Fragrance
Garden;
• Rose Garden, Moon Garden, Undaunted Garden, Prairie Garden, Bird
Garden, and Foothills Garden;
• a stage structure and sound walls for music concerts;
• modified circulation through the gardens and to the existing Spring Creek
Trail;
• a parking area for approximately 150 bikes;
• small arbor structures at various gardens and one larger structure in the
Undaunted Garden; and
• Updated operational and management standards for events.
John Beggs
Senior Landscape Architect
Russell + Mills Studios
141 South College Avenue, Suite 104
Fort Collins, CO 80524
City of Fort Collins
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
Approval
Item #5 Page 1
Agenda Item 5
400 200 0
Gardens on Spring Creek
Major Amendment
400 Feet
1 inch = 400 feet
N
W E
S
Item #5 Page 2
Agenda Item 5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Centre for Advanced Technology 22nd Filing, Community Horticulture Center Major Amendment (MJA),
commonly referred to as the Gardens on Spring Creek, complies with the applicable requirements of the City of
Fort Collins Land Use Code (LUC), more specifically:
• The MJA complies with the Common Development Review Procedures for Development Applications of
Article 2 - Administration.
• The MJA complies with the relevant standards of the Employment District (E) located in Division 4.27 of
Article 4.
• The MJA complies with the relevant standards located in Article 3 - General Development Standards.
COMMENTS:
1, Summary of Changes since the December 15, 2015 Planning and Zoning Board Hearing:
• On February 8, 2016 the City of Fort Collins hosted a neighborhood meeting to discuss ways to address
concerns from neighbors in relation to the Garden's development proposal, specifically the increase in
capacity of the music venue from 350 to 1500 people.
• A meeting
summary letter was
mailed to all residents
within the notification area summarizing the changes
described
below. A copy of the
letter is attached with
this staff report.
• After the meeting, changes were made to the Operational Standards to further clarify the scope of the
facility's use and the management practices for all events.
• An additional sound wall was added along the Gardens' western property boundary to further mitigate
noise impacts from music concerts as well as events which are already programmed.
• A noise monitoring system is now provided for music concerts with a direct override control at the
mixing console.
Of those that attended
the meeting, many
expressed a
lack of support for the project or have concerns. Staff
utilized
keypad
polling
technology
and
got
the following
response:
QUESTION
RESPONSES
PERCENTAGE
Terrible idea and it should not be built in this
location
15
40%
1 am highly concerned about negative impacts to
the neighborhood
11
30%
1 am slightly concerned but also support the idea
6
16%
1 can't wait to see the schedule of events
4
11 %
Other
1
3%
Total
37
100%
Item #5 Page 3
Agenda Item 5
The starting point of the conversation for the February 8, 2016 neighborhood meeting was the following list of
concerns generated from previous neighborhood meetings:
• Noise/Sound
• Parking
• Trespass/Loitering/Camping
• Non-ticketed/Private Events
• Port -a -Lets
• Alcohol
• Enforcement
• Flood plain/Environmental Assessment
• Other/Grove/Lilac Park
Through the polling exercise, noise, parking, enforcement, and trespassing issues were the top concerns of
those attending.
The following information was presented, and additions have been made, based on comments and questions
from the meeting. The mitigation techniques listed below will be incorporated into the Garden's operations in
two ways:
• As General Standards that will be included with the plan notes presented at the upcoming Planning
and Zoning hearing or;
• As operating agreements to be finalized with neighbor input.
Items where full details are not yet finalized are also noted below. The Gardens Staff is interested in and
supports the formation of a Neighborhood Committee to help develop and refine details and processes to limit
the impacts to the neighborhood.
Concern: Noise and Sound
• No more than 8 music concert events per year (to occur between May and September) and to not
overlap with other major CSU events. All music concert events shall be ticketed.
• Music for all events to end by 8 PM.
• Active enforcement and sound level monitoring to occur throughout all music concerts.
• Sound enforcement for all events will now be further restricted by measuring the sound levels from the
Garden's property line (not the receiving residential property lines further west of the Gardens
property).
• Sound walls are included in the proposed plan. Wall placement is being reconsidered and adjusted
following feedback from the February 8 meeting.
Concern: Parking
• Parking instructions and options will be provided and included with ticket purchase for all music
concert events.
• "No public on -street parking" shall be strictly enforced for all music concerts on Centre Avenue and on
streets in the Windtrail and Sheely neighborhoods.
• Neighborhood parking enforcement will be addressed through a windshield pass system, active
barricade, or other agreeable method.
Concern: Trespass/Loitering/Camping
• Garden gates will open one hour (or time most suitable as determined by Gardens and neighbors)
prior to show times to allow ticket holders onto property.
• The Gardens will work with the Parks Department, Rangers, Neighborhood Services, and Police
Services to address any unlawful and disruptive behaviors either on Gardens property or on adjacent
public property.
Item #5 Page 4
Agenda Item 5
Concern: Non -ticketed Events, Private Events, and questions regarding unlimited concert events
Concerns were expressed that the different types of events need to be better defined in order to provide
assurances that music performances with an attendance of 1,500 people will be limited to 8 events per year. In
order to provide these assurances staff is considering the following definitions and limitations:
• The terms "ticketed events" and "non -ticketed events" are problematic. Concerns were expressed that
the term "non -ticketed events" might allow the opportunity for free concerts, such as the City Orchestra
or programs such as Bohemian Nights, and therefore the limitation of 8 performances per year could
be expanded. To provide assurances that this is not the case, staff proposes a definition of the term
"music concert event" to clarify that concerts shall be limited:
"There shall be a maximum of (8) music concert events per year with an attendance cap of
1,500 persons. The maximum attendance shall be managed and regulated through ticket
sales. All music concert events shall be ticketed."
• To further clarify that "non -ticketed events" shall not include large, free concerts, these events can be
called "General Events" defined as:
"A general event shall be defined as any event which uses all or a portion of the gardens,
other than day-to-day attendance for the purpose of viewing the gardens, in which attendance
is anticipated to be more than 100 persons for the event."
• "General Events" that are already occurring at the Gardens will also be noted. The intent is to fully
describe the scope of all events that may occur at the Gardens and to provide further assurances that
large free concerts shall not take place.
General Events would include: garden of lights tour, school field trips, education programs and
tours, articulture/sculpture in the garden, spring plant sale, yoga in the gardens, garden a'fare,
nature's harvest fest, halloween enchanted garden. There shall be no attendance cap for
general events. Such events may provide amplified music in compliance with the municipal
code.
• Private events will also be addressed in the plan's operating agreement. Private events include all
private rentals such as weddings, birthdays etc. Private events are limited to 350 attendees and they
must end by 8PM with everyone off -site by 9PM. Private events may not have DJs and any proposed
music must be approved by Gardens staff and is often restricted based on location and type.
• The Gardens does not currently, nor do they intend, to allow private concerts onsite.
Concern: Port -a -Lets
The Gardens will rely on GSI Sanitation recommendations for number of needed Port -a -lets (currently
estimated at 5 for a 3-hour event.)
• Port -a -Lets will be onsite for as minimal time necessary for vendor schedule.
• Port -a -Lets will be ground anchored.
• Bike
path will
not be used or impacted during pick-up
or delivery.
• The
proposed
plan does provide space for additional
Port -a -Lets should the need arise.
Concern: Alcohol and Intoxication
The Gardens has no desire to have intoxicated people on -site or on adjacent property.
• Alcohol sales could be limited by drink number or by limiting times of sales (i.e. alcohol only available
from 5:30-7:30.) Details are not finalized.
• Any limitations on alcohol made available will be determined by Gardens with neighbor committee
input.
• Sales conducted by trained and licensed servers.
• No permanent alcohol signage or advertising will be allowed.
Item #5 Page 5
Agenda Item 5
Concern: Enforcement
• The Gardens is committed to being a good neighbor and to working directly with appropriate
enforcement staff to ensure illegal and disruptive behaviors are addressed in a timely manner.
• The Gardens supports the creation of a Neighborhood Committee and an Event Hotline. (Details have
not been finalized.)
At the meeting neighbors continue to express the lack of information and rationale for expanding the
amphitheater attendee limit from 350 to 1500. Many expressed a desire to negotiate this number or return it to
the 350 originally proposed. Gardens on Spring Staff provided the following information in the letter. The
proposed 1500 number is based on:
• Size and projected future growth in Fort Collins
• Filling a niche venue size that currently does not exist in Fort Collins
• Creating a venue that can support desired performances at a $40-$50 ticket price
Comments captured at the meeting:
• More clarity on tangible mitigation for each subject item.
• Preference for a distributed sound system. Concern with loitering/event crashing along Spring Creek
Trail and Lilac Park area.
• Sound transition and stage orientation unreasonably impacts areas to the SW, in particular 603
Gilgalad Way.
• Overall effects of impacts -- in particular, sound levels, number of concert events per year, and the
ticketed scope of the venue, seems out of place at this location. i.e., Too much program for the
location.
• Parking/enforcement for un-ticketed events.
• Renters (like the symphony) can't use the venue — counts against 8.
• First, I love it. Yay! —Second... In case it hasn't been addressed... is the local mobile network robust
enough for the increased usage during events?
• 1500 capacity, negotiable?
• Do 500 Capacity at Gardens + 1500 where there are TOILETS like the new SE area Park & not next to
homes.
• No alcohol, only family concerts to promote the love of nature + get families outdoors.
• Do non -ticketed events get to have amplified music?
• Noise citation— criminal (mandatory court appearance).
• How will you stop the additional 1500 spectators from gathering outside the fence line for ticketed
concerts
• Automated sound control: have the sound level meter directly connected to the sound board. That way
any exceedance would be automatically addressed, w/o needing human intervention.
• Trash/litter along Spring Creek?
• Consider 500 year flood rather than 100; given that 100-yr flood is likely inaccurate due to outdated
FEMA regulations.
• Outside security/police to monitor safe transit along Spring Creek to Shields to the west and railroad
overpass to the east. Essentially Sheely, Gilgalad neighborhoods.
• Free/discounted tickets for neighbors?
Item #5 Page 6
me
Agenda Item 5
2, Background/Approval History:
The surroundina zonina and land uses are as follows:
Direction
Zone District
Existing Land Uses
North
Employment (E)
Undeveloped CSU parcel
South
Employment (E)
Child care facility, residential student housing
East
Employment (E)
Offices, including the Natural Resources Research
Center (NRRC)
West
Low Density Residential (R-L)
Residential - single-family lots and open space tracts
• The property was annexed in September 1965 as part of the 4th College Annexation.
• The property was included in the Centre for Advanced Technology Overall Development Plan (ODP) in
1983. At that time, the use for the property was designated as Recreation on the ODP. The ODP was
revised in 1985, 1988, 1994, and 1999, all with the same Recreation use designation for the parcel. The
ODP was then revised several times from 2002 through 2012.
• As
the current
use was finalized with the
approved
master plan for the Gardens on
Spring Creek facility,
the
parcel was
eventually removed from
the Centre
for Advanced Technology ODP
boundary.
• The Gardens on Spring Creek (GSC) facility was approved by a Hearing Officer in 2001 as the Centre for
Advanced Technology 22nd Filing Community Horticulture Center. The approved plan includes two
primary uses - Community Facility and Neighborhood Park. The park designation applies to portions of the
Plan along the Spring Creek Trail, known as Lilac Park. The approved plan includes all of the elements of
the GSC facility that currently exist today, including the main facility building and greenhouse/conservatory,
themed gardens, parking area, trail alignment and perimeter landscaping. The approved plan also includes
several elements to be built with future phase construction, including additional themed gardens, a great
lawn, gazebo and bandstand. In conjunction with the great lawn, gazebo and bandstand, the approved
plan proposes a maximum of 350 people on -site for amplified music performances and other events. A
copy of the current plan is included with this staff report. The amended plans propose to expand the scope
of the amplified music performances to accommodate a maximum of 1,500 people. This change in scope
triggers a review of the approved plans as a Major Amendment.
3. Compliance with Applicable Employment Standards:
The project remains in compliance with all applicable Employment District standards with the following relevant
comments provided:
A. Section 4.27 - Permitted Uses
While the current approval describes the Gardens on Spring Creek facility as a "Community Horticulture Center",
the designated permitted use per the Land Use Code (LUC) is community facility. This specific land use
designation is listed in Section 4.27(B)(2)(b)(4) of the Employment District as a permitted use subject to
Administrative Review with a Hearing Officer.
However,
effective July 21, 2015, under Ordinance No.
82, 2015, all projects in which
the City
is
the applicant are
reviewed
by the Planning and Zoning Board. The new
review process is described in
Division
2.17:
City Projects. Development projects for which the City is the applicant shall be processed in the manner
described in this Land Use Code, as applicable, but shall be subject to review by the Planning and Zoning
Board in all instances, despite the fact that certain uses would otherwise have been subject to
administrative review.
Item #5 Page 7
Agenda Item 5
Additionally, the process may include an Alternate Review as follows:
Section 2.2.12 - Step 12: Appeals/Alternate Review
(A) Appeals. Appeals of any final decision of a decision maker under this Code shall be only in accordance
with Chapter 2, Article Il, Division 3 of the City Code, unless otherwise provided in Divisions 2.3 through
2.11 and 2.16 of this Code.
(B) Alternate Review. Despite the foregoing, if the City is the applicant for a development project, there
shall be no appeal of any final decision regarding such development project to the City Council. In
substitution of an appeal of a development project for which the City is the applicant, the City Council may,
by majority vote, as an exercise of its legislative power and in its sole discretion, overturn or modify any
final decision regarding such project, by ordinance of the City Council. Any Councilmember may request
that the City Council initiate this exercise of legislative power but only if such request is made in writing to
the City Clerk within fourteen (14) days of the date of the final decision of the Planning and Zoning Board.
City Council shall conduct a hearing prior to the adoption of the ordinance in order to hear public testimony
and receive and consider any other public input received by the City Council (whether at or before the
hearing) and shall conduct its hearing in the manner customarily employed by the Council for the
consideration of legislative matters. When evaluating City projects under alternate review, the City Council
may, in its legislative discretion, consider factors in addition to or in substitution of the standards of this
Land Use Code.
4. 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
The project plan, as amended, remains in compliance with the standards in this Division of the code, which
includes Landscaping and Tree Protection, Access, Circulation and Parking, So/arAccess, Orientation and
Shading, Site Lighting, and Trash and Recycling Enclosures. The majority of the site elements that relate to these
standards have already been constructed, including the on -site parking lot, main building/conservatory, street trees
along Centre Avenue, alignment of the Spring Creek Trail, and perimeter plantings.
1) Section 3.2.4 - Site Lighting. A photometric plan is provided for the additional light fixtures that are included in
the amended phases of the facility. The additional lighting provided incorporates down -directional and sharp cut-off
fixtures. All lighting complies with the lighting levels and design standards of this section.
2) Section 3.2.2 - Access, Circulation and Parking. The amended plans comply with the minimum parking
required by providing off -site parking for events as needed. The minimum parking required is based on the City's
standards for Alternative Compliance, and is based on the minimum parking required for the peak demand
anticipated at a ticketed performance event, for a maximum of 1,500 people.
Parking demand for a 1,500 person event is anticipated to arrive using the following travel modes:
• 150 visitors travel to events via bicycle
• 50 visitors travel to events via MAX
• 1300 visitors travel to events via car w/2 persons per vehicle average.
This demand estimate requires total of 650 parking spaces. A total of 700 parking spaces are provided with the
plans as follows:
• 65 vehicles will utilize the existing Gardens on Spring Creek on -site parking lot, of the 74 spaces available
in this parking lot.
• 350 vehicles will utilize the NRRC facility parking lot located across Centre Avenue to the east.
Item #5 Page 8
Agenda Item 5
• 285 vehicles will utilize the CSU Research Blvd parking Lot, which is located 1,800 feet (.34 miles) along
Center Avenue to the south of the Gardens.
The applicant's alternative compliance narrative attached with this staff report provides more detail. Staff finds that
the off -site parking arrangement provides an adequate solution within acceptable proximity to the facility to
accommodate larger planned events. The operational standards provided with the site plan outline the need for
traffic control and other measures that will be provided in conjunction with this off -site event parking.
B. Division - 3.3 Engineering Standards
Utility Plans are provided for the amended project which demonstrate compliance with all City requirements. Site
grading and stormwater drainage design are the major focus of these plans. The proposed design and drainage
analysis demonstrates that the project complies with the original design from the approved drainage and erosion
control report for the project, dated January 31, 2003 and prepared by EDAW, Inc.
Portions of the site are in the City floodplain and a Floodplain Use Permit is required, which must show that there
will be no rise in the Base Flood Elevation on neighboring properties.
• An updated floodplain memo has been attached with this staff report which is provided by the Garden's
consulting engineer. The floodplain memo and associated plans must be provided in final form and a
Floodplain Use Permit issued prior to construction. A summary of the floodplain requirements outlined in
the memo are as follows:
• All development activities on all properties located within a Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) regulatory floodplain are subject to the requirements of Chapter 10 of the City Municipal Code.
This includes the Gardens on Spring Creek property, which is in the FEMA regulatory 100-year floodplain
for Spring Creek. As required by city code, the project's engineer has provided City staff with a detailed
floodplain analysis. The analysis must demonstrate that the Garden's proposed improvements will not
increase existing flood risk in the area. All new construction of structures as well as filling, excavation, or
grading associated with the proposed site work in the floodplain are considered in the analysis. The
analysis confirms that: The proposed improvements will not cause a rise in the FEMA Base Flood
Elevation (BFE), will not change the boundaries of the FEMA floodplain boundaries, and will not reduce the
required regulatory flood storage volume in the area. Compliance with these requirements is achieved
through several measures:
• All proposed earthwork is balanced so that any proposed raise in grade (fill) is offset by lowering the grade
(cut) in other areas of the site. The floodplain model must also be updated to reflect the proposed
improvements and show no increase in the Base Flood Elevation. The result of these analyses is called a
"No -Rise Certification" which must be provided to the city along with the Floodplain Use Permit. The
certification includes required volume calculations for all site elements, including temporary elements. The
calculations also take into account proposed plant material.
• All new accessory structures must be "flood vented" or elevated above the Regulatory Flood Protection
Elevation (RFPE), which is defined as 12 inches above the base flood elevation (BFE). The RFPE
elevation is 4,999.42 feet. The term "flood vented" means that the proposed structures (such as the
proposed pergolas), must not be fully enclosed. Examples of open structures in the FEMA floodplain can
be found in City Parks such as Edora, Spring Creek, Lee Martinez, and Rolland Moore. These parks have
open structures in the flood pla i n/floodway (such as picnic shelters) but not enclosed buildings. Enclosed
structures at these parks, such as bathrooms, are outside of the regulatory FEMA floodplain. In addition to
flood venting, all permanent features such as the garden's pergolas must be permanently anchored.
• Outdoor storage of materials that might float away is prohibited. All outdoor materials will be confined
inside latched utility sheds behind the stage and within the Garden's maintenance/service yard buildings,
anchored and removed after each event, or will be elevated above regulatory flood levels.
Item #5 Page 9
we
Agenda Item 5
• The proposed finished elevation of the new stage deck (the lowest floor level of the structure) is 4999.50
feet, above the required flood protection elevation of 4999.42 feet.
• The stage structure is elevated above the RFPE through earthwork and terracing with stone walls. Portions
of the walls of the stage structure below the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation (RFPE) of 4999.42 feet
are required to be permanently anchored and constructed of Class 4 and 5 flood resistant materials as
defined in FEMA Technical Bulletin 2: Flood Damage -Resistant Materials Requirements and as required
per Section 10-39 (5) of the Municipal Code. The stage structure meets these requirements by using a
concrete pad on an elevated earthen berm, without any voids or enclosed spaces within the stage area,
and by using permanently anchored stone walls surrounding the stage structure to achieve grade
transition to the surrounding lawn seating area.
C. Section 3.4.1 Natural Habitats and Features
The project is located within 500 feet of a number of special features that require protection, including the Spring
Creek and associated wetlands, the re-routed Sherwood Lateral ditch and associated wetlands, and a series of
small wetlands on the eastern edge of the site. Based on the updated Ecological Characterization Study for the
site and the requirements of Section 3.4.1(E), the following Natural Habitat Buffer Zones apply to this project,
which have been delineated on the site and landscape plans:
• Spring Creek Corridor and wetlands (100 feet)
• Sherwood Lateral Ditch and wetlands (50 feet)
• Two groups of wetlands on east side of property (50 feet for each wetland area)
Section 3.4.1(E) limits the type of development activity that may occur within these buffer zones. As proposed, this
project conflicts neither with the intended purpose nor the specific requirements for these buffer zones. While some
disturbance will occur within the buffers (e.g., the addition of paths and walkways), these impacts will be
adequately mitigated through the restoration of disturbed areas with additional plantings and habitat enhancements
throughout the site.
D. Municipal Code Chapter 20, Article 11 - Noise.
Noise levels from the Gardens on Spring Creek Facility must be below the maximum decibel levels (dBA) at the
following adjacent receiving land uses:
Low Density Residential District (R-L):
7:00
a.m.
to
8:00
p.m.
55
dBA
8:00
p.m.
to
7:00
a.m.
50
dBA
Employment District (E):
7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. 70 dBA
8:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 65 dBA
An acoustical model was developed by the applicant's consultant in conjunction with the design of the outdoor
stage and great lawn seating area. An updated design narrative provided by the applicant is attached with this staff
report. In conjunction with the outdoor stage orientation, a series of sound walls are provided to absorb and diffuse
sound from amplified music performances. The design recommends a series of four sound barrier walls, ranging in
height between 14 and 19.5 feet above the stage level, with a new sound wall located along the western boundary
of the site. The proposal demonstrates that compliance with the maximum permissible noise levels at the receiving
land uses can be achieved.
5. Neighborhood Meeting
Two City neighborhood meetings were held for the proposed project prior to the December 15, 2015 hearing, with
an additional neighborhood meeting held on February 8, 2016. Neighborhood meeting summaries are attached.
Item #5 Page 10
•e
Agenda Item 5
6. Findings of Fact/Conclusion
A. The Major Amendment
complies with
the process
located in
Division 2.2 -Common Development
Review Procedures for
Development
Applications
of Article
2 - Administration.
B. The Major Amendment complies with relevant standards located in Article 3 - General Development
Standards.
C. The Major Amendment complies with the applicable Employment District standards in Division 4.27 of
Article 4.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Planning and Zoning Board approval with the following motion:
Approve the Major Amendment of the Centre for Advanced Technology 22nd Filing, Community Horticulture
Center #MJA150006 based on the findings of fact found on page 11 of the staff report.
ATTACHMENTS
Updated attachments for the continued hearing:
1. Color Rendering of Site Plan (PDF)
2. Neighborhood Meeting Summary Letter (from Feb. 8, 2016 meeting) (PDF)
3. Updated Operational and Management Standards (PDF)
4. Sound Wall Photo Simulation for New West Sound Wall (PDF)
5. Noise Monitoring Location Exhibit (PDF)
6. Updated Site Plan, Elevations and Perspectives (PDF)
7. Updated Landscape Plan (PDF)
8. Floodplain Modeling Exhibit (PDF)
9. Letters from Residents (PDF)
10. Notes - 1st neighborhood meeting (PDF)
11. Notes - 2nd neighborhood meeting (PDF)
Attachments from the December 15, 2015 hearing (not re -attached but available):
12.
Zoning map (PDF)
13.
Applicant's Planning Narrative (PDF)
14.
Alternative Compliance Parking Request (PDF)
15.
Off -site parking letter of intent (PDF)
16.
Traffic analysis memorandum (PDF)
17.
Drainage memorandum (PDF)
18.
Ecological characterization memo (PDF)
19.
Utility Plans (PDF)
20.
Meeting notification boundary map (PDF)
21.
1st neighborhood meeting letter (PDF)
22.
2nd neighborhood meeting letter (PDF)
23.
Supplemental letter for 2nd neighborhood meeting (PDF)
24.
Sound demonstration notes from 2nd N'hood meeting (PDF)
25.
Background - Alternate Review Ordinance 082,2015 (PDF)
26.
Background - Gardens planning objectives from 2000 (PDF)
27.
Background - Approved site plan from 2003 (PDF)
28.
Background - 2001 decision and staff report (PDF)
29.
Background - Ecological Study 2001(PDF)
30.
Background - Windtrail PUD plat (PDF)
Item #5 Page 11
91
Fence
Evergreen
adjacent
��E�s M
on prang trek
4 rus
f studios
SPRING CREEK Future Trail Connection
,i
g Tree, typ. R A I L' '
iosed Fence, typ.
\\�
1 150
FTeT
rc3�,tadents �.
�SingleTrack
I I
I I
I ,
,
,
I
fI
,
I
,
ontial
I
I
,tea
GARDEN Overl000k\�-
AdventureTrai
Weather
station r"
PRAIRIE
GARDEN
Backdro Planti�I roo\,Irucks'
Backdrop Plan
g - \ _ Stream_ -..
.S+ound Hummingbird C
N GREAT Garde ��
Mitigation �
C... LAWN 'Chaparral. _
Planting
j��" /ij /UNDAUNTED
Terraced%/ GARDEN
Shade Outdoor
Seating-- --- Classroom.
g
� .Cactus Pl�ippng°
cCARE` Cottage
./ GROVeEE Planting
Historic
ntSelect i R�4�K�E Grove
;arder) GARDEN��� \ //
LATER
k
�j
1/
Vdhicle
Access
KING c\qi
i
i
--STORM WATER%
\ DETENTION
WETLANDS;
i
COMMUNITY
GARDEN
i
Ci
�7 or
7 � \* I
Gardens
LA
0 is M 0)
on Spring Creek
Overall Site Plan
City of
Fort Collins
February 22, 2016
Dear Neighbor,
City Manager's Office
City Hall
300 LaPorte Ave.
PO Box 580
Fort Collins. CO 80522
970.221.6505
970.224.6107 - fax
fcgov. com
On February 8, 2016 the City of Fort Collins hosted a meeting at the Gardens on Spring Creek to discuss
ways to address concerns staff has heard from neighbors in relation to the Garden's development
proposal, specifically the increase in capacity of the music venue from 350 to 1500 people.
The Planning and Zoning Board originally began their consideration of this proposal at the December 17,
2015 hearing. The Board voted to continue the hearing and is scheduled to further consider this item at
their regular hearing on April 7, 2016. All materials from the Board's December 17, 2015 hearing can be
found here: http://www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/planning-zoning.php. Materials for the April 7 hearing will
also be posted at this link.
Of those
that attended
the meeting, it
was clear that many
do
not support the project at all or have strong
concerns.
We utilized "clicker"
polling
technology and got
the
following response:
QUESTION
RESPONSES
PERCENTAGE
Terrible idea and it should not be built in this
location
15
40%
1 am highly concerned about negative impacts
to the neighborhood
1 1
30%
1 am slightly concerned but also support the
idea
6
16%
1 can't wait to see the schedule of events
4
11 %
Other
1
3%
Tota 1
37
100%
The City wanted to acknowledge the feelings amongst neighbors, however, the purpose of the meeting
was to propose and discuss actions to address concerns. From a previous meeting with a smaller group of
neighbors, staff compiled the following list of concerns:
■ Noise/Sound
■ Parking
■ Trespass/Loitering/Camping
■ Non-ticketed/Private Events
■ Port -a -Lets
■ Alcohol
■ Enforcement
■ Flood plain/Environmental Assessment
■ Other/Grove/Lilac Park
1
93
Fort Collins
Through the polling exercise noise, parking, enforcement, and trespassing issues were the top concerns of
those in the room.
The following information was presented and additions have been made based on comments and
questions from the meeting. The mitigations listed below will be incorporated into the Garden's operations
in two ways:
■ As General Standards that will be included with the plan notes presented at the upcoming
Planning and Zoning meeting or;
■ As operating agreements to be finalized with neighbor input.
Items where full details are not yet finalized are also noted below. The City is interested in and supports
the formation of a Neighborhood Committee to help develop and refine details and processes to limit the
impacts to the neighborhood.
An updated draft of the General
Standards can be viewed
online at
the link below, under the
"neighborhood meeting" heading
for the Gardens, click on "General
Notes proposed for the Major
Amendment": http://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/aciendas.php
Concern: Noise and Sound
■ No more than 8 music concert events per year (to occur between May and September) and to not
overlap with other major CSU events. All music concert events shall be ticketed.
■ All music for all events to end by 8 PM.
■ Active enforcement and sound level monitoring to occur throughout all music concerts.
■ Sound enforcement for all events will now be further restricted by measuring the sound levels from
the Garden's property line (not the receiving residential property lines further west of the
Gardens property)
■ Sound walls included in proposed plan. Wall placement is being reconsidered and adjusted
following feedback from February 8 meeting (not yet finalized.)
■ Gardens investigating distributed sound system and a system with a direct override to control the
sound board. (Not yet finalized.) This was noted as a strong neighborhood preference.
Concern: Parking
■ Parking instructions and options will be provided and included with ticket purchase for all music
concert events.
■ "No public on -street parking" shall be strictly enforced for all music concerts on Centre Avenue
and on streets in the Windtrail and Sheely neighborhoods.
■ Neighborhood parking enforcement will be addressed through a windshield pass system, active
barricade, or other agreeable method.
Concern: Trespass/Loitering/Camping
■ Garden gates will open one hour (or time most suitable as determined by Gardens and neighbors)
prior to show times to allow ticket holders onto property.
■ The Gardens will work with the Parks department, Rangers, Neighborhood Services, and Police
Services to address any unlawful and disruptive behaviors either on Gardens property or on
adjacent public property.
Concern: Non -ticketed Events, Private Events, and questions regarding unlimited concert events
Concerns were expressed that the different types of events need to be better defined in order to provide
assurances that music performances with an attendance of 1,500 people will be limited to 8 events per
year. In order to provide these assurances staff is considering the following definitions and limitations:
Fort Collins
■ The terms "ticketed events" and "non -ticketed events" are problematic. Concerns were expressed
that the term "non -ticketed events" might allow the opportunity for free concerts, such as the City
Orchestra or programs such as Bohemian Nights, and therefore the limitation of 8 performances
per year could be expanded. To provide assurances that this is not the case, staff will propose the
term "music concert event" to clarify that concerts shall be limited:
"There shall be a maximum of (8) music concert events per year with an attendance cap of 1,500
persons. The maximum attendance shall be managed and regulated through ticket sales. All music
concert events shall be ticketed."
■ To
further
clarify that "non -ticketed
events" shall not include large, free concerts, these events can
be
called
"General Events"
defined
as:
"A general event shall be defined as any event which uses all or a portion of the gardens, other
than day-to-day attendance for the purpose of viewing the gardens, in which attendance is
anticipated to be more than 100 persons for the event."
■ "General Events" that are already occurring at the Gardens will also be noted. The intent is to
fully describe the scope of all events that may occur at the Gardens and to provide further
assurances that large free concerts shall not take place.
General Events would include: garden of lights tour, school field trips, education programs and
tours, articulture/sculpture in the garden, spring plant sale, yoga in the gardens, garden a'fare,
nature's harvest fest, halloween enchanted garden. There shall be no attendance cap for general
events. Such events may provide amplified music in compliance with the municipal code.
■ Private events will also be addressed in the plan's operating agreement. Private events include all
private rentals such as weddings, birthdays etc. Private events are limited to 350 attendees and
they must end by 8PM with everyone off -site by 9PM. Private events may not have DJs and any
proposed music must be approved by Gardens staff and is often restricted based on location and
type.
The Gardens does not currently, nor do they intend, to allow private concerts onsite.
Concern: Port -a -Lets
The Gardens will rely on GSI Sanitation recommendations for number of needed Port -a -lets (currently
estimated at 5 for a 3-hour event.)
■ Port -a -Lets will be onsite for as minimal time necessary for vendor schedule.
■ Port -a -Lets will be ground anchored.
■ Bike path will not be used or impacted during pick-up or delivery.
■ The proposed plan does provide space for additional Port -a -Lets should the need arise.
Concern: Alcohol and Intoxication
The Gardens has no desire to have intoxicated people on -site or on adjacent property.
■ Alcohol sales could be limited by drink number or by limiting times of sales (i.e. alcohol only
available from 5:30-7:30.) Details are not finalized.
■ Any limitations on alcohol made available will be determined by Gardens with neighbor
committee input.
■ Sales conducted by trained and licensed servers.
■ No permanent alcohol signage or advertising will be allowed.
95
Fort Collins
Concern: Enforcement
■ The Gardens is committed to being a good neighbor and to working directly with appropriate
enforcement staff to ensure illegal and disruptive behaviors are addressed in a timely manner.
■ The Gardens supports the creation of a Neighborhood Committee and an Event Hotline. (Details
have not been finalized.)
Concern: Floodplain
All development activities on all properties located within a Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) regulatory floodplain are subject to the requirements of Chapter 10 of the City Municipal Code.
This includes the Gardens on Spring Creek property, which is in the FEMA regulatory 100-year floodplain
for Spring Creek. As required by City code, the project's engineer has provided City staff with a detailed
floodplain analysis. The analysis must demonstrate that the Garden's proposed improvements will not
increase existing flood risk in the area. All new construction of structures as well as filling, excavation, or
grading associated with the proposed site work in the floodplain are considered in the analysis. The
analysis must confirm that: The proposed improvements will not cause a rise in the FEMA Base Flood
Elevation (BFE), will not change the boundaries of the FEMA floodplain boundaries, and will not reduce the
required regulatory flood storage volume in the area. Compliance with these requirements is achieved
through several measures:
■ All proposed earthwork is balanced so that any proposed raise in grade (fill) is offset by lowering
the grade (cut) in other areas of the site. The result is called a "No -Rise Certification" which must
be provided to the city along with a Floodplain Use Permit. The certification includes required
volume calculations for all site elements, including temporary elements. The calculations also take
into account proposed plant material.
■ All new accessory structures, including the proposed stage, must be elevated above the Regulatory
Flood Protection Elevation (RFPE), which is defined as 12 inches above the base flood elevation
(BFE), or "flood vented". The RFPE elevation is 4,999.42 feet. The term "flood vented" means that
the proposed structures (such as the proposed stage and pergolas), must be open on the sides and
not fully enclosed. Examples of open structures in the FEMA floodplain can be found in City Parks
such as Edora, Spring Creek, Lee Martinez, and Rolland Moore. These parks have open structures
in the floodplain/floodway (such as picnic shelters) but not enclosed buildings. Enclosed structures
at these parks, such as bathrooms, are outside of the regulatory FEMA floodplain. In addition to
flood venting, all permanent features such as the garden's pergolas must be permanently
anchored. There are also restrictions on the types of materials used for structures below the
Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation.
■ Outdoor storage of materials that might float away is prohibited. All outdoor materials will be
confined inside latched utility sheds behind the stage and within the Garden's maintenance/service
yard buildings, anchored and removed after each event, or will be elevated above regulatory
flood levels.
At the meeting neighbors continue to express the lack of information and rationale for expanding the
amphitheater attendee limit from 350 to 1500. Many expressed a desire to negotiate this number or
return it to the 350 originally proposed.
The proposed 1500 number is based on:
■ Size and projected future growth in Fort Collins
■ Filling a niche venue size that currently does not exist in Fort Collins
■ Creating a venue that can support desired performances at a $40-$50 ticket price
■■
Fort Collins
Comments captured at the meeting:
■ More clarity on tangible mitigation for each subject item.
■ Preference for a distributed sound system. Concern with loitering/event crashing along Spring
Creek Trail and Lilac Park area.
■ Sound transition and stage orientation unreasonably impacts areas to the SW, in particular 603
Gilgalad Way.
■ Overall effects of impacts -- in particular sound levels, number of concert events per year, and the
ticketed scope of the venue, seems out of place at this location. IE: Too much program for the
location.
■ Parking/enforcement for un-ticketed events.
■ Renters (like the symphony) can't use the venue — counts against 8.
■ First, I love it. Yay! —Second... In case it hasn't been addressed... is the local mobile network
robust enough for the increased usage during events?
■ 1500 CAPACITY NEGOTIABLE?
■ Do 500 Capacity at Gardens + 1500 where there are TOILETS like the new SE area Park & not
next to homes.
■ No alcohol, only family concerts to promote the love of nature + get families outdoors.
■ Do non -ticketed events get to have amplified music?
■ NOISE CITATION — CRIMINAL (MANDATORY COURT APPEARANCE).
■ How will you stop the additional 1500 spectators from gathering outside the fence line for
ticketed concerts
■ Automated sound control: have the sound level meter directly connected to the sound board. That
way any exceedance would be automatically addressed, w/o needing human intervention.
■ Trash/litter along Spring Creek?
■ Consider 500 year flood rather than 100; given that 100-yr flood is likely inaccurate due to
outdated FEMA regulations.
■ Outside security/police to monitor safe transit along Spring Creek to Shields to the west and
railroad overpass to the east. Essentially Sheely, Gilgalad neighborhoods.
■ Free/discounted tickets for neighbors?
If you
have questions
or
comments regarding the meeting please contact Ginny Sawyer at
gsawyer
C&fcgov.com
or
224-6094.
For project specific questions please contact Jason Holland at iholland&fcgov.com or 224-61 26.
Thank you.
Ginny Sawyer
97
Notes included with the Gardens on Spring Creek Amended
Plan (See sheet LS003 of the Site Plan)
DRAFT 3-23-2016
THE FOLLOWING GENERAL OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT STANDARDS SHALL
REMAIN IN EFFECT FOR ALL FUTURE GARDENS ON SPRING CREEK EVENTS.
GENERAL EVENT STANDARDS:
1. ALL EVENTS, INCLUDING MUSIC CONCERT EVENTS OR GENERAL EVENTS
SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE FORT COLLINS MUNICIPAL CODE NOISE
STANDARDS OF CHAPTER 20, ARTICLE II: SOUND SHALL BE LIMITED TO 55
dB(A) FROM 7 A.M. TO 8:00 P.M. AND 50 dB(A) FROM 8:00 P.M. TO 7:00 A.M. AT
THE GARDENS ON SPRING CREEK PROPERTY LINE ADJACENT TO THE LOW
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-L) ZONE DISTRICT, AND SHALL BE LIMITED TO 70
dB(A) FROM 7 A.M. TO 8:00 P.M. AND 65 dB(A) FROM 8:00 P.M. TO 7:00 A.M. AT
THE GARDENS ON SPRING CREEK PROPERTY LINE ADJACENT TO THE
EMPLOYMENT (E) ZONE DISTRICT.
2. THERE SHALL BE A MAXIMUM OF (8) MUSIC CONCERT EVENTS PER YEAR WITH
AN ATTENDANCE CAP OF 1,500 PERSONS. THE MAXIMUM ATTENDANCE SHALL
BE MANAGED AND REGULATED THROUGH TICKET SALES. ALL MUSIC CONCERT
EVENTS SHALL BE TICKETED.
3. THERE SHALL BE NO MULTI -DAY MUSIC CONCERT EVENTS SUCH AS MUSIC
FESTIVALS.
4. A GENERAL EVENT SHALL BE DEFINED AS ANY EVENT WHICH USES ALL OR A
PORTION OF THE GARDENS, OTHER THAN DAY-TO-DAY ATTENDANCE FOR THE
PURPOSE OF VIEWING THE GARDENS, IN WHICH ATTENDANCE IS ANTICIPATED
TO BE MORE THAN 100 PERSONS FOR THE EVENT. GENERAL EVENTS INCLUDE:
GARDEN OF LIGHTS TOUR, SCHOOL FIELD TRIPS, EDUCATION PROGRAMS AND
TOURS, ARTICULTURE/SCULPTURE IN THE GARDEN, SPRING PLANT SALE,
YOGA IN THE GARDENS, GARDEN A'FARE, NATURE'S HARVEST FEST,
HALLOWEEN ENCHANTED GARDEN. ADDITIONAL EVENTS MAY BE
CONSIDERED. THERE SHALL BE NO ATTENDANCE CAP FOR GENERAL EVENTS.
SUCH EVENTS MAY PROVIDE AMPLIFIED MUSIC IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE
MUNICIPAL CODE.
5. PRIVATE EVENTS SHALL BE ADDRESSED IN THE GARDEN'S OPERATIONS AND
MANAGEMENT PLAN. PRIVATE EVENTS INCLUDE ALL PRIVATE RENTALS SUCH
AS WEDDINGS, BIRTHDAYS, ETC. PRIVATE EVENTS SHALL NOT HAVE DJ'S AND
ANY PROPOSED MUSIC MUST BE APPROVED BY GARDENS STAFF.
it
ALL EVENTS SHALL FOLLOW STANDARDS AS DESCRIBED BELOW,
TIME LIMITATION STANDARDS:
1. ALL MUSIC AND ANY ASSOCIATED SOUNDS GENERATED FROM ANY EVENT
SHALL CONCLUDE NO LATER THAN 8PM.
2. EGRESS FOR ALL VISITORS DURING MUSIC CONCERT EVENTS SHALL BEGIN AT
8 P.M. AND CONCLUDE NO LATER THAN 9 P.M. NO PERFORMANCE RELATED
SOUNDS SHALL BE GENERATED DURING THIS TIMEFRAME.
3. ALL EVENT OPERATIONS PERSONNEL SHALL EXIT THE GARDENS ON SPRING
CREEK PREMISES NO LATER THAN 10 P.M.
4. ALL GENERAL EVENTS SHALL CONCLUDE BY 9 P.M. AND ALL PERSONNEL
SHALL EXIT THE GARDENS ON SPRING CREEK PREMISES NO LATER THAN 10
P.M.
5. ALL PRIVATE EVENTS SHALL CONCLUDE BY 8 P.M. WITH EVERYONE OFF -SITE
BY 9 P.M.
SOUND MONITORING STANDARDS:
1. DURING ALL AMPLIFIED MUSIC CONCERT EVENTS, A PROFESSIONAL SOUND
ENGINEER SHALL BE PRESENT ON SITE AND ACTIVELY MONITOR AND
REGULATE SOUND LEVELS TO MEET THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MUNICIPAL
CODE NOISE STANDARDS. SOUND MONITORING LOCATIONS WILL BE TIED TO
CENTRAL OVERRIDE SYSTEM AT THE MIXING STATION.
2. FOR ALL OTHER EVENTS, GARDENS ON SPRING CREEK STAFF SHALL BE
PRESENT ON SITE AND ACTIVELY MONITOR AND REGULATE SOUND LEVELS TO
MEET THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MUNICIPAL CODE NOISE STANDARDS.
3. MORE SPECIFIC MONITORING OPERATIONS, MANAGEMENT AND
ENFORCEMENT THAT MAY BE REQUIRED SHALL BE OUTLINED IN THE GSC
OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT PLAN.
SECURITY AND SAFETY REQUIREMENTS:
1. DESIGNATED SECURITY STAFF SHALL BE PRESENT AT THE GARDENS ON
SPRING CREEK ENTRY POINTS AND PERIMETER OF THE PREMISES DURING
ALL MUSIC CONCERT EVENTS. DESIGNATED SECURITY STAFF SHALL CONSIST
OF EITHER GARDENS ON SPRING CREEK STAFF OR A PRIVATE SECURITY
CKe]►VAIW_1►1',g to] ►11:L1"II19111:CZ01lei :■I.IcKeL1:49711►6Yo7►1 Rl,:4IReyy:»II:q
2. EGRESS LIGHTING CONSISTING OF LOW LIGHT LEVEL, FULL CUT-OFF
PEDESTRIAN LEVEL LIGHTS SHALL BE USED TO FACILITATE EGRESS FROM ALL
MUSIC CONCERT EVENTS. ALL EGRESS AND EVENT -RELATED LIGHTING SHALL
BE TURNED OFF NO LATER THAN 10 P.M.
Pi
99
3. CROSSING ASSISTANTS SHALL BE PRESENT AT CENTRE AVENUE TO
FACILITATE CROSSING FROM THE N.R.C.S. PARKING LOT DURING ALL MUSIC
CONCERT EVENTS, UNLESS A SIGNALIZED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING IS
CONSTRUCTED AT THIS LOCATION IN THE FUTURE.
ADDITIONAL GENERAL STANDARDS:
1. ANY ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES SOLD DURING EVENTS SHALL REQUIRE A
PROFESSIONAL CONCESSIONAIRE TO SERVE AND FOLLOW ALL ASSOCIATED
REGULATIONS AND MONITORING AS REQUIRED WITH ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE
SALES AT OTHER COMMUNITY FACILITIES WITHIN THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS.
MORE SPECIFIC ALCOHOL OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE
DEVELOPED WITH THE GSC OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT PLAN.
f�#i1►[�ll�J:��[�Z�7►Q.9�:���■�_\:�:�1►[eIf[.9:1_1��:��.9�:�[���'��►17�]:Z�l��l7�]:ZeZ.Yy
EVENTS AND DAY-TO-DAY GSC OPERATIONS ON CENTRE AVENUE AND ON
STREETS IN THE WINDTRAIL AND SHEELY NEIGHBORHOODS. MORE SPECIFIC
PARKING MANAGEMENT AND ENFORCEMENT PRACTICES SHALL BE OUTLINED
IN THE GSC OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT PLAN.
3. OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS: ANTICIPATED MINIMUM OFF-STREET
PARKING QUANTITIES FOR GARDENS USES ARE SHOWN ON THE LAND USE
TABLE ON SHEET LS100. THE PARKING QUANTITIES SHOWN ON LS100
REPRESENT ANTICIPATED MINIMUMS, AND SHALL BE ADJUSTED TO MEET THE
PARKING DEMANDS FOR EVENTS IF NEEDED. PARKING LOCATIONS ARE
SHOWN ON SHEET LS002. AGREEMENTS FOR OFF -SITE PARKING LOCATIONS
SHALL BE MAINTAINED AND SHALL BE ADJUSTED, IF NEEDED, TO MEET
PARKING DEMANDS FOR ALL GARDENS EVENTS.
4. THE PROJECT IS REQUIRED TO COMPLETE ALL IMPROVEMENTS AND
CONDUCT ALL OPERATIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FINAL PLANS. ANY
MODIFICATIONS TO THESE PLANS SHALL REQUIRE A PLAN AMENDMENT TO BE
1:1 ELVII XTdl III b1G101D1_1„GZe1v111191
5. THE OPERATIONAL AND MANAGEMENT STANDARDS NOTED WITH THESE
PLANS REPRESENT THE GENERAL STANDARDS FOR THE PROJECT. IN
ADDITION TO THE GENERAL STANDARDS OUTLINED HERE, GSC SHALL
DEVELOP A COMPREHENSIVE OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT
y, to] l9[o7_\Iw/_\9797Sol a&9xygo] Ito] l26y_\►191_T"II 01R21:/_II&VITAI10no] 0
ADMINISTERED FOR ALL EVENTS AND COMMUNITY FACILITY ACTIVITIES.
NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTATIVES SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE
DEVELOPMENT, IMPLEMENTATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE OPERATIONS
AND MANAGEMENT PLAN. THE OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT PLAN MAY BE
PERIODICALLY AMENDED WITHOUT AMENDING THESE PLANS, PROVIDED THAT
SUCH AMENDMENTS REMAIN IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE GENERAL STANDARDS
OUTLINED WITH THIS FINAL PLAN. THE GSC OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT
SHALL AT A MINIMUM ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING:
a) CREATION AND ON -GOING ENGAGEMENT OF A NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMITTEE.
91
100
b) PARKING MANAGEMENT AND ENFORCEMENT.
c) SOUND/NOISE MANAGEMENT AND ENFORCEMENT.
d) MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS FOR ALL OUTDOOR
PRIVATE EVENTS, INCLUDING LIMITATIONS FOR MUSIC AND INSTRUMENT
AMPLIFICATION AND VOCAL PERFORMANCES.
e) ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDURES FOR EVENT IMPACTS THAT MAY OCCUR
INCLUDING: LOITERING, DAY -CAMPING AND LITTERING.
f) MANAGEMENT OF ALCOHOL SALES AT ALL EVENTS.
g) THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A NEIGHBORHOOD HOTLINE FOR THE
COORDINATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF GSC IMPACTS THAT MAY OCCUR.
h) COORDINATION OF GSC EVENTS WITH NEIGHBORHOOD EVENTS.
REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIC TO THIS PLAN APPROVAL:
1. USE AND OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENTS: THE DESIGNATED USE PER THE CITY
LAND USE CODE FOR THE GARDENS ON SPRING CREEK IS A COMMUNITY
FACILITY, WHICH IS DEFINED AS A PUBLICLY OWNED OR PUBLICLY LEASED
FACILITY OR OFFICE BUILDING WHICH IS PRIMARILY INTENDED TO SERVE THE
RECREATIONAL, EDUCATIONAL, CULTURAL, ADMINISTRATIVE OR
ENTERTAINMENT NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITYAS A WHOLE. SPECIFIC TO THE
APPROVAL OF THIS COMMUNITY FACILITY, ALL PROPERTY ASSOCIATED WITH
THIS PLAN SHALL REMAIN IN OWNERSHIP AND BE OPERATED DIRECTLY BY
THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS. ANY REQUEST TO TRANSFER OWNERSHIP OR
MANAGEMENT OF THE FACILITY TO AN ENTITY OTHER THAN THE CITY SHALL
BE CONSIDERED A CHANGE OF USE REQUIRING A MAJOR AMENDMENT TO
THESE PLANS WHICH MUST BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED PRIOR TO ANY
SUCH TRANSFER.
2. LILAC PARK: PORTIONS OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF THE SPRING
CREEK TRAIL SHALL BE RESERVED FOR THE EXPANSION OF LILAC PARK AND
SHALL BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS A SEPARATE AMENDMENT TO THESE
PLANS.
FLOODPLAIN NOTES:
1. PORTIONS OF THIS PROPERTY ARE LOCATED IN THE FEMA REGULATORY 100-
YEAR FLOODPLAIN AND FLOODWAY FOR SPRING CREEK.
2. ALL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN MUST COMPLY WITH THE
FLOODPLAIN REGULATIONS OF CHAPTER 10 OF CITY OF FORT COLLINS
MUNICIPAL CODE.
3. NON-STRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENT (FENCES, DETENTION PONDS, HARD
SURFACE PATHS, FILL, DRIVEWAYS, PARKING AREAS, VEGETATION, ETC.) IS
ALLOWED WITHIN THE 100 YEAR FLOODWAY, PROVIDED THE DEVELOPMENT
WILL NOT CAUSE A RISE IN THE BASE FLOOD ELEVATION OR A CHANGE TO
THE FLOODWAY OR FLOOD FRINGE BOUNDARIES. NON-STRUCTURAL
rd
101
DEVELOPMENT IS NOT RESTRICTED IN THE FLOOD FRINGE. REFER TO THE
PROJECT'S FLOODPLAIN USE PERMIT AND FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT PLAN
FOR FURTHER DETAILS AND RESTRICTIONS.
4. ALL STRUCTURES PROPOSED IN THE FLOODPLAIN SHALL BE PERMANENLTY
ANCHORED AND SHALL MEET ALL CITY STRUCTURAL REQUIREMENTS. REFER
TO THE PROJECT'S FLOODPLAIN USE PERMIT AND FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT
PLAN FOR STRUCTURE DETAILS, RESTRICTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS.
NATURAL AREA BUFFER REQUIREMENTS:
1. STANDARDS FOR PROTECTION DURING CONSTRUCTION -THE DIRECTOR
SHALL ESTABLISH A "LIMITS OF DEVELOPMENT" ("LOD") LINE(S) TO ESTABLISH
THE BOUNDARY OF THE PROJECT OUTSIDE OF WHICH NO LAND DISTURBANCE
IGZK � DI � � I �.y►�U I � ��ZKK�J :a �1�1:� I ► [ej � . I �K�] ► [.9 � :i�IK � [�] ► [�] � � : I �, :Z�111 xK M
2. ALL AREAS WITHIN THE SPRING CREEK, SHERWOOD LATERAL AND WETLAND
AREA BUFFER ZONES SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A NATIVE LANDSCAPE. SEE
SECTION 3.4.1 OF THE LAND USE CODE FOR ALLOWABLE USES WITHIN THE
BUFFER ZONES.
3. CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE ORGANIZED AND TIMED TO MINIMIZE THE
DISTURBANCE OF SENSITIVE SPECIES OCCUPYING OR USING ON -SITE AND
ADJACENT NATURAL HABITATS OR FEATURES, INCLUDING THE SPRING CREEK
CORRIDOR, SHERWOOD LATERAL DITCH AND WETLAND AREAS.
51 W6191►699:i9LK0M01Kelm anymll: ION 111:»21►[@]1►[eL9a_1IN:1a,:ie]1/11]21D1_llsIME1941 5110 111
THE DEVELOPMENT DURING CONSTRUCTION.
STANDARD PLAN NOTES AND REQUIREMENTS:
1. REFER TO FINAL UTILITY PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS AND CONSTRUCTION
INFORMATION FOR STORM DRAINAGE STRUCTURES, UTILITY MAINS AND
SERVICES, PROPOSED TOPOGRAPHY, STREET IMPROVEMENTS.
2. REFER TO THE SUBDIVISION PLAT AND UTILITY PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS,
AREAS AND DIMENSIONS OF ALL EASEMENTS, LOTS, TRACTS, STREETS,
WALKS AND OTHER SURVEY INFORMATION.
3. ALL CONSTRUCTION WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT PLAN MUST BE COMPLETED IN
ONE PHASE UNLESS A PHASING PLAN IS SHOWN WITH THESE PLANS.
4. ALL EXTERIOR LIGHTING PROVIDED SHALL COMPLY WITH THE FOOT-CANDLE
REQUIREMENTS IN SECTION 3.2.4 OF THE LAND USE CODE AND SHALL USE A
CONCEALED, FULLY SHIELDED LIGHT SOURCE WITH SHARP CUT-OFF
CAPABILITY SO AS TO MINIMIZE UP -LIGHT, SPILL LIGHT, GLARE AND
UNNECESSARY DIFFUSION.
5. FIRE HYDRANTS MUST MEET OR EXCEED POUDRE FIRE AUTHORITY
STANDARDS. ALL BUILDINGS MUST PROVIDE AN APPROVED FIRE
EXTINGUISHING SYSTEM.
I✓
102
6. ALL BIKE RACKS PROVIDED MUST BE PERMANENTLY ANCHORED.
7. ALL SIDEWALKS AND RAMPS MUST CONFORM TO CITY STANDARDS.
ACCESSIBLE RAMPS MUST BE PROVIDED AT ALL STREET AND DRIVE
INTERSECTIONS AND AT ALL DESIGNATED ACCESSABLE PARKING SPACES.
ACCESSABLE PARKING SPACES MUST SLOPE NO MORE THAN 1:48 IN ANY
DIRECTION. ALL ACCESSIBLE ROUTES MUST SLOPE NO MORE THAN 1:20 IN
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL AND WITH NO MORE THAN 1:48 CROSS SLOPE.
8. ANY DAMAGED CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALK EXISTING PRIOR TO
CONSTRUCTION, AS WELL AS STREETS, SIDEWALKS, CURBS AND GUTTERS,
DESTROYED, DAMAGED OR REMOVED DUE TO CONSTRUCTION OF THIS
PROJECT, SHALL BE REPLACED OR RESTORED TO CITY OF FORT COLLINS
STANDARDS AT THE DEVELOPER'S EXPENSE PRIOR TO THE ACCEPTANCE OF
COMPLETED IMPROVEMENTS AND/OR PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE FIRST
CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
GENERAL LANDSCAPE NOTES:
1. 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.
f���a�7�]�[��►�►/1►[eZ.9��_\:L��[�7►6Y.9:1_1��:��,:Z�]�Il�l��l:���►�U��►
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
3. 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.
11
103
oou
44-
e%� X e •. �� e? Q�� + A
I Y
%
k.' G jIlV
�►��p��rf ev:AW
1 '
r
\'�
`fit ra di s�
y /I
�A' , r y �' i`;dd.. \ ..R,b!✓,�r a, pc -
p E n
`�*.� `. vC"A; � r Aa iA S'i 1 � 1' '1� ���✓r'✓ +� r �.�
All Yy .. a ii'l. l a,/�'I�' ` , 4✓I. � :�.
i
I
i
—
I/
West of stage, near bridge
_
along HOA property
IN -- INiF
North end of barrier
n
j on \ \ 11
III �11111 IN\ \II I/•1IIIIII � I I \ \II \\
II I II\ II Illlllo I I 1 I /\ 1 Ifl IIII \ 1
Mixing Console
Ir
\ \ \ \<\ \
' l i
II II \ 1
Opposite side II /' 11 a Noise Monitoring System
of barrier iili i - Meter at mixing console (A) monitors near -field performance
I I I a
and crowd noise to ensure that 90 dBA limit is satisfied.
nh - Meters at remote locations (B, C, and D) measure sound level
\ 1 I I I I I �—
I� at property lines to ensure code compliance.
1 n I Permanent noise monitoring system consists of sound level
`I /Z meter, outdoor microphone, preamplifier, and docking station
and wiring/infrastructure to connect to central system.
Sends measurement results back to mixing console for live
feedback to system operator.
Integrated into DSP to automatically override system output
--J n ; ; I I / when noise limits are exceeded.
\I I
C
>
I
\
I
\
\
106
CENTRE FOR ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 22ND FILING COMMUNITY HORTICULTURE CENTER
MAJOR AMENDMENT - SITE PLAN
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
CENTRE FORADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 22ND FILING COMMUNITY HORTICULTURE CENTER
U �
N
n
w
W Lake St W Lake St
W Prospect Rd W Prospect Rd
SHEELY
ADDITION
Birky PI
— _ *0//&*nberg or
srofe Ct
dMoore Dr
RoFal�
It Rolland Moore Park
of Area
PRESERVE
School
to
Hilton Fort Collins
+Gardens on Spring Creek
Botanical garden with
educational events
E Pitkln St
Annual Flower
Trial Garden
E
Parker St
7LD PROSPECT
�O�Ztall
STOVER AREA
L
LS001
COVER SHEET
LS002
PROJECT DRGRAMS - NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY
LS003
OPERATIONAL AND MANAGEMENT STANDARDS
LS004
PREDICTED SOUND LEVEL MAP
LS100
CONTEXTUAL SITE PLAN
LS101
OVERALL SITE PUN
LS501
SITE DETAILS
LS502
SITE DETAILS
LS503
SITE DETAILS
LS504
SITE DETAILS
LS505
SITE DETAILS
c� eDr
O �
o Princeton Rd
40
W Drake Rd m E Dr
L
� I
n c
m y
m �
$ ° Dei Clair Rd
tc 'a o
n o
a
NO
OWNER'S CERTIFICATION
THE UNDERSIGNED DOES/00 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ARE THE LAWFUL OWNER'S OF THE REAL
PROPERTY DESCRIBED ON THIS SITE PUN AND DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT /WE ACCEPT THE CONDITIONS
AND RESTRICTIONS SET FORTH ON SAID SITE PIRA.
OWNERN
OWNER SIGNED DATE
(STATE OF
)ss
(COUNTY OF
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BE BEFORE THIS DAY OF 20 BY WITNESS MY HAND
AND OFFICIAL SEAL.
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES
PLANNING APPROVAL
BY THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS, COLORADO.
THISDAY OF 20_
MM M
u I
I I u
j
14
` 1141
40##1
GARDENS ON
SPRING CREEK
CONTEXT MAP
ZONING MAP
NORTH
SOUND MITIGATION WALL LOCATION DIAGRAM MODIFICATIONS - RESPONDING TO NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS
SOUND MITIGATION WALLS
WALL HEIGHT(S) : 24'
LOCATION OF WALLS ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE
LARGE PROMENADE WALK
1.'
t2 1.
7z 160,
-.
4
At..
C k # r
OVERALL SITE PLAN - MAY 2014
SOUND MITIGATION WALLS
WALL HEIGHT(S): 24'
LOCATION OF WALLS ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE
LARGE PROMENADE WALK
.\
` r M
CL�`:
I_
,,..�
OVERALL SITE PLAN - JUNE 2014
PARKING LOCATION DIAGRAM
Parking Totals
GoSC Existing Parking 74 1=X BRT STATION, ,
NRRC Parking 397
Total 1,371
r
PERC
GARDENS ON SPRING 1 i
tOJECT SITE CREEK EXISTING
PARKING LOT
NRRC PARKING LOT
PROPERTY OWNED BY
' STATE LAND BOARD
f
MIA
i
p.
i
CSU RESEARCH PARKING LOT
PROPERTY OWNED BY STATE
LAND BOARD
MASON CORRIDOR
Distance to Project Site
0.06 miles
NRRC Parking
350 ft
0.34 miles
CSU Research Parking
1,800 ft
0.71 miles
MAX BRT Station (Prospect)
3,750 ft
0.40 miles
MAX BRT Station (S. of Prospect)
2,150 ft
NOTE: COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITYAND STATE LAND
BOARD IS IN THE PROCESS OF DEVELOPING A SHARED
PARKING AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL PARKING AS
LISTEDABOVE
SIDE OF WALKTO EASTSIDE OF WALK CLOSER
TO STAGE AREA
WALL HEIGHT WAS DECREASED FROM 24'TO 17'
FOR THE NORTH, 19' FOR THE MIDDLE WALL AND
19.5' FOR THE SOUTHERN MOST WALL
F A
l
OVERALL SITE PLAN - FEBRUARY 2015
ORIGINAL EXTENTS IN JUNE 2014 PLAN OF GREAT
LAWN AREA.
FEBRUARY 2015 PLAN HAS SHI FEED EASTERN
EDGE OF GREAT LAWN APPROX. 00' TO THE EAST
SOUND MITIGATION WALL
LOCATIONS ADJACENT TO
l OVERALL SITE PLAN - MARCH2016
THE FOLLOWING GENERAL OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT STANDARDS SHALL REMAIN IN EFFECT FOR ALL FUTURE
GARDENS ON SPRING CREEK EVENTS.
GENERAL EVENT STANDARDS:
1. ALL EVENTS, INCLUDING MUSIC CONCERT EVENTS OR GENERAL EVENTS SHALL COMPLY WITH ALLAPPLICABLE FORT
COLLINS MUNICIPAL CODE NOISE STANDARDS OF CHAPTER 20, ARTICLE II: SOUND SHALL BE LIMITED TO 55 dB(A)FROM 7
A.M. TO 8:00 PM AND 50 dB(A) FROM 800 PM TO T:00 A.M. AT THE GARDENS ON SPRING CREEK PROPERTY LINE
ADJACENT TO THE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-Q ZONE DISTRICT, AND SHALL BE LIMITED TO 70 dB(A) FROM T A.M. TO
8.00 P.M. AND 65 dB(A) FROM 8:00 PM TO 7:00 A.M. ATTHE GARDENS ON SPRING CREEK PROPERTY LINEADJACENT TO
THE EMPLOYMENT (E) ZONE DISTRICT
2. THERE SHALL BEAMAXIMUM OF MUSIC CONCERT EVENTS PER YEAR WITH ANATTENDANCE CAP OF 1,500 PERSONS.
THE MAXIMUM ATTENDANCE SHALL BE MANAGEDAND REGULATED THROUGH TICKET SALES. ALL MUSIC CONCERT
EVENTS SHALL BE TICKETED.
3. THERE SHALL BE NO MULTI -DAY MUSIC CONCERT EVENTS SUCH AS MUSIC FESTIVALS.
4. A GENERAL EVENT SHALL BE DEFINEDAS ANY EVENT WHICH USES ALL ORA PORTION OF THE GARDENS, OTHER THAN
DAY -TO-DAYATTENDANCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF VIEWING THE GARDENS, IN WHICH ATTENDANCE IS ANTICIPATED TO BE
MORE THAN 100 PERSONS FOR THE EVENT GENERAL EVENTS INCLUDE: GARDEN OF LIGHTS TOUR, SCHOOL FIELD
TRIPS, EDUCATION PROGRAMS AND TOURS, ARTICULTURE/SCULPTURE IN THE GARDEN, SPRING PLANT SALE, YOGA IN
THE GARDENS, GARDEN A'FARE, NATURE'S HARVEST PEST, HALLOWEEN ENCHANTED GARDEN, WEDDING CEREMONIES.
ADDITIONAL EVENTS MAY BE CONSIDERED. THERE SHALL BE NO ATTENDANCE CAP FOR -GENERAL EVENTS. SUCH
EVENTS MAY PROVIDE AMPLIFIED MUSIC IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE MUNICIPAL CODE.
ALL EVENTS SHALL FOLLOW STANDARDS AS DESCRIBED BELOW:
1. ALL MUSIC AND ANY ASSOCIATED SOUNDS GENERATED FROM ANY EVENT SHALL CONCLUDE NO LATER THAN BPM.
2. EGRESS FOR ALL VISITORS DURING MUSIC CONCERT EVENTS SHALL BEG IN AT B P M. AND CONCLUDE NO LATER THAN
PM. NO PERFORMANCE RELATED SOUNDS SHALL BE GENERATED DURING THIS TIMEFRAME.
3. ALL EVENT OPERATIONS PERSONNEL SHALL EXITTHE GARDENS ON SPRING CREEK PREMISES NO LATER THAN 10 P M.
4. ALL GENERAL EVENTS SHALL CONCLUDE BY 9 P M. AND ALL PERSONNEL SHALL EXIT THE GARDENS ON SPRING CREEK
PREMISES NO LATER THAN 10 PM.
SOUND MONITORING STANDARDS:
1. DURING ALLAMPLIFIED MUSIC CONCERT EVENTS, A PROFESSIONAL SOUND ENGINEER SHALL BE PRESENT ON SITE AND
ACTIVELY MONITOR AND REGULATE SOUND LEVELS TO MEETTHE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MUNICIPAL CODE NOISE
STANDARDS. SOUND MONITORING LOCATIONS WILL BE TIED TO CENTRAL OVERRIDE SYSTEM AT THE MIXING STATION.
2. FOR ALL OTHER EVENTS, GARDENS ON SPRING CREEK STAFF SHALL BE PRESENT ON SITE AND ACTIVELY MONITOR AND
REGULATE SOUND LEVELS TO MEET THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MUNICIPAL CODE NOISE STANDARDS.
3. MORE SPECIFIC MONITORING OPERATIONS, MANAGEMENT AND ENFORCEMENT SHALL BE OUTLINED IN THE GSC
OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT PLAN.
SECURITY AND SAFETY REQUIREMENTS:
1. DESIGNATED SECURITY STAFF SHALL BE PRESENT AT THE GARDENS ON SPRI NO CREEK ENTRY POINTS AND PERI METER
OF THE PREMISES DURING ALL MUSIC CONCERT EVENTS. DESIGNATED SECURITY STAFF SHALL CONSIST OF EITHER
GARDENS ON SPRING CREEK STAFF ORA PRIVATE SECURITY COMPANY CONTRACTED THROUGH THE GARDENS ON
SPRING CREEK.
2. EGRESS LIGHTING CONSISTING OF LOW LIGHT LEVEL, FULL CUT-OFF PEDESTRIAN LEVEL LIGHTS SHALL BE USED TO
FACILITATE EGRESS FROM ALL MUSIC CONCERT EVENTS. ALL EGRESS AND EVENT -RELATED LIGHTING SHALL BE TURNED
OFF NO LATER THAN 10 P M.
3. CROSSING ASSISTANTS SHALL BE PRESENTAT CENTRE AVENUE TO FACILITATE CROSSING FROM THEN. R.C.S. PARKING
LOT DURING ALL MUSIC CONCERT EVENTS, UNLESS A SIGNALIZED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING IS CONSTRUCTEDAT THIS
LOCATION IN THE FUTURE.
ADDITIONAL GENERAL STANDARDS:
1. ANYALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES SOLD DURING EVENTS SHALL REQUIRE A PROFESSIONAL CONCESSIONAIRE TO SERVE AND
FOLLOW ALLASSOCIATED REGULATIONS AND MONITORING AS REQUIRED WITH ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE SALES AT OTHER
COMMUNITY FACILITIES WITHIN THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS. MORE SPECIFIC ALCOHOL OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS
SHALL BE DEVELOPED WITH THE GSC OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT PLAN.
2. "NO PUBLIC ON -STREET PARKING" SHALL BE STRICTLY ENFORCED FOR GSC EVENTS AND DAY-TO-DAY GSC OPERATI DNS
ON CENTRE AVENUE AND ON STREETS IN THE W INDTRAIL AND SHEELY NEIGHBORHOODS. MORE SPECIFIC PARKING
MANAGEMENT AND ENFORCEMENT PRACTICES SHALL BE OUTLINED IN THE GSC OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT PLAN.
3. OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS: ANTICIPATED MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING QUANTITIES FOR GARDENS USES
ARE SHOWN ON THE LAND USE TABLE ON SHEET LS100. THE PARKING QUANTITIES SHOWN ON LS100 REPRESENT
ANTICIPATED MINIMUMS, AND SHALL BE ADJUSTED TO MEET THE PARKING DEMANDS FOR EVENTS IF NEEDED. PARKING
LOCATIONS ARE SHOWN ON SHEET LS002. AGREEMENTS FOR OFFSITEPARKING LOCATIONS SHALL BE MAINTAINED AND
SHALL BE ADJUSTED, IF NEEDED, TO MEET PARKING DEMANDS FOR ALL GARDENS EVENTS.
4. THE PROJECT I S REQUIRED TO COMPLETE ALL I IMPROVEMENTS AND CONDUCT ALL OPERATIONS I N ACCORDANCE WITH
THE FINAL PLANS. ANY MODIFICATIONS TO THESE PLANS SHALL REQUIRE A PLAN AMENDMENT TO BE REVIEWEDAND
APPROVED.
5. THE OPERATIONALAND MANAGEMENT STANDARDS NOTED WITH THESE PLANS REPRESENT THE GENERAL STANDARDS
FOR THE PROJECT IN ADDITION TO THE GENERAL STANDARDS OUTLINED HERE, GSC SHALL DEVELOPA
COMPREHENSIVE OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT SPECIFICALLYADDRESSES POLICIES AND ACTIONS THAT
WILL BE ADMINISTERED FOR ALL EVENTS AND COMMUNITY FACILITYACTIVITIES. NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTATIVES
SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE DEVELOPMENT, IMPLEMENTATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE OPERATIONS AND
MANAGEMENT PLAN. THE OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT PLAN MAYBE PERIODICALLYAMENDED WITHOUTAMENDING
THESE PLANS, PROVIDED THAT SUCH AMENDMENTS REMAIN IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE GENERAL STANDARDS OUTLINED
WITH THIS FINAL PLAN. THE GSC OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT SHALLATA MINIMUM ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING:
a) CREATION AND ON -GOING ENGAGEMENT OF A NEIGHBORHOOD COMMITTEE.
E) PARKING MANAGEMENTAND ENFORCEMENT
c) SOUND/NOISE MANAGEMENTAND ENFORCEMENT
d) MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTSAND RESTRICTIONS FORALL OUTDOOR PRIVATE EVENTS, INCLUDING LIMITATIONS
FOR MUSICAND INSTRUMENTAMPLIFICATION AND VOCAL PERFORMANCES.
e) ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDURES FOR EVENT IMPACTS THAT MAY OCCUR INCLUDING'. LOITERING, DAY- CAMPING AND
LITTERING.
U MANAGEMENT OF ALCOHOL SALES AT ALL EVENTS.
g) THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A NEIGHBORHOOD HOTLINE FOR THE COORDINATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF GSC I IMPACTS
THAT MAY OCCUR.
h) COORDINATION OF GSC EVENTS WITH NEIGHBORHOOD EVENTS.
REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIC TO THIS PLAN APPROVAL:
1. USE AND OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENTS: THE DESIGNATED USE PER THE CITY LAND USE CODE FOR THE
GARDENS ON SPRING CREEK IS A COMMUNITY FACILITY, WHICH IS DEFINED AS A PUBLICLY OWNED OR
PUBLICLY LEASED FACILITY OR OFFICE BUILDING WHICH IS PRIMARILY INTENDED TO SERVE THE
RECREATIONAL, EDUCATIONAL, CULTURAL, ADMINISTRATIVE OR ENTERTAINMENT NEEDS OF THE
COMMUNITYAS A WHOLE. SPECIFIC TO THE APPROVAL OF THIS COMMUNITY FACILITY, ALL PROPERTY
ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PLAN SHALL REMAIN IN OWNERSHIP AND BE OPERATED DIRECTLY BY THE CITY OF
FORT COLLINS. ANY REQUESTTO TRANSFER OWNERSHIP OR MANAGEMENT OF THE FACILITY TO AN
ENTITY OTHER THAN THE CITY SHALL BE CONSIDEREDA CHANGE OF USE REQUIRING A MAJOR
AMENDMENT TO THESE PLANS WHICH MUST BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED PRIOR TO ANY SUCH
TRANSFER
2. UI_ACPARK: PORTIONS OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF THE SPRING CREEK TRAIL SHALL BE
RESERVED FOR THE EXPANSION OF LILAC PARK AND SHALL BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS A
SEPARATE AMENDMENT TO THESE PLANS.
FLOODPLAIN NOTES:
1. PORTIONS OF THIS PROPERTYARE LOCATED IN THE FEW REGULATORY 100-YEAR
FLOODPLAIN/FLOODWAYAND HIGH RISK FEW FLOOD FRINGE.
2. ALL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN MUST COMPLY WITH THE FLOODPLAIN REGULATIONS OF
CHAPTER 10 OF CITY OF FORT COLLINS MUNICIPAL CODE.
3. NON-STRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENT (FENCES, DETENTION PONDS, HARD SURFACE PATHS, FILL,
DRIVEWAYS, PARKING AREAS, VEGETATION, ETC.) IS ALLOWED WITHIN THE 100 YEAR FLOODWAY
PROVIDED THE DEVELOPMENT WILL NOT CAUSE A RISE IN THE BASE FLOOD ELEVATION ORA CHANGE TO
THE FLOODWAYOR FLOOD FRINGE BOUNDARIES. NON-STRUCTURALDEVELOPMENT IS NOT RESTRICTED
IN THE FLOOD FRINGE. REFER TO THE PROJECT'$ FLOODPLAIN USE PERMITAND FLOODPLAIN
MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR RESTRICTIONS.
4. ALL STRUCTURES PROPOSED IN THE FLOODPLAIN SHALL BE PERMANENLTYANCHOREDAND SHALL MEET
ALL CITY STRUCTURAL REQUIREMENTS. REFER TO THE PROJECT'S FLOODPLAIN USE PERMITAND
FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR STRUCTURE DETAILS, RESTRICTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS.
1. STANDARDS FOR PROTECTION DURING CONSTRUCTION- THE DIRECTOR SHALL ESTABLISH A"LIMITS OF
DEVELOPMENT' ("LOD") UNE(S) TO ESTABLISH THE BOUNDARY OF THE PROJECT OUTSIDE OF WHICH NO
LAND DISTURBANCE ACTIVITIES WILL OCCUR DURING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT
2. ALLAREAS WITHIN THE SPRING CREEK, SHERWOOD LATERALAND WETLAND AREA BUFFER ZONES SHALL
BE MAINTAINED IN A NATIVE LANDSCAPE. SEE SECTION 34.1 OF THE LAND USE CODE FORALLOWABLE
USES WITHIN THE BUFFER ZONES.
3. CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE ORGANIZED AND TIMED TO MINIMIZE THE DISTURBANCE OF SENSITIVE
SPECIES OCCUPYING OR USING ON -SITE AND ADJACENT NATURAL HABITATS OR FEATURES, INCLUDING
THE SPRING CREEK CORRIDOR, SHERWOOD LATERAL DITCH AND WETLAND AREAS.
4. CONSTRUCTION OF BARRIER FENCING SHALL BE PROVIDED AT THE LIMITS OF THE DEVELOPMENT
DURING CONSTRUCTION.
STANDARD PLAN NOTES AND REQUIREMENTS:
1. REFER TO FINAL UTI LITY PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS AND CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION FOR STORM
DRAINAGE STRUCTURES, UTILITY MAINS AND SERVICES, PROPOSED TOPOGRAPHY, STREET
IMPROVEMENTS.
2. REFER TO THE SUBDIVISION PLAT AND UTI LITY PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS, AREAS AND DIMENS IONS
OF ALL EASEMENTS, LOTS, TRACTS, STREETS, WALKS AND OTHER SURVEY INFORMATION.
3. ALL CONSTRUCTION WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT PLAN MUST BE COMPLETED I N ONE PHASE UNLESS
PHASING PLAN IS SHOWN WITH THESE PLANS.
4. ALL EXTERIOR LIGHTING PROVIDED SHALL COMPLY WITH THE FOOT-CANDLE REQUIREMENTS IN SECTION
3.2.4 OF THE LAND USE CODE AND SHALL USE A CONCEALED, FULLY SHIELDED LIGHT SOURCE WITH
SHARP CUT-OFF CAPABILITY SO AS TO MINIMIZE UP LIGHT, SPILL LIGHT, GLARE AND UNNECESSARY
DIFFUSION.
5. FI RE HYDRANTS MUST MEET OR EXCEED POUDRE FI RE AUTHORITY STANDARDS.
6. ALL BIKE RACKS PROVI DIED MUST BE PERMANENTLY ANCHORED.
T. ALL SIDEWALKS AND RAMPS MUST CONFORM TO CITY STANDARDS. ACCESSIBLE RAMPS MUST BE
PROVIDED AT ALL STREET AND DRIVE I NTERSECTIONS AND AT ALL DESIGNATED ACCESSIBLE PARKING
SPACES. ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES MUST SLOPE NO MORE THAN 148 IN ANY DIRECTION. ALL
ACCESSIBLE ROUTES MUST SLOPE NO MORE THAN 1:201N DIRECTION OF TRAVEL AND WITH NO MORE
THAN 148 CROSS SLOPE.
8. ANY DAMAGED CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALK EXISTING PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, AS WELLAS
STREETS, SIDEWALKS, CURBS AND GUTTERS, DESTROYED, DAMAGED OR REMOVED DUE TO
CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT, SHALL BE REPLACED OR RESTORED TO CITY OF FORT COLLINS
STANDARDS AT THE DEVELOPER'S EXPENSE PRIOR TO THE ACCEPTANCE OF COMPLETED
IMPROVEMENTS AND/OR PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE FIRST CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
GENERAL LANDSCAPE NOTES:
1. 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 JOINTLYAND SEVERALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
REGULAR MAINTENANCE OFALL 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.
2. 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
3. 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
u
47 5 Zoning ;
al
boundary
r
F
17 r
H
Min 17' above
— stage level,
idential Zoning 48.1/1 Stage walls
r
'H 7.7 —
r
Min 19' above stage level ;_ West wall 12'
above stage
51 .4 506 , ,
minimum
ova M109.5' above
stage level.
141 Min. 14' Tall
49.6 h !i barrier
V _A* `f
50.0 59.2 )ZA67O
63.1
61.8
-i
ployment Zon ing
(70 d... _____.
D. L. A
ASSOCIATES S Predicted Sound Level Map March �1, 2016 Figure 1
acoustics l performing arts I technology not to scale
H5360gden Street D*m .Cobradoso;H6
303/455-1S00 FA%303/4554n87
PREDICTED SOUND LEVEL MAP
0�
Line
<
35.0
dB
>
35.0
dB
IIIIIIIII� >
40.0
d8
C >
45.0
dB
>
50.0
dB
>
55.0
dB
>
60.0
dB
>
65.0
dB
>
70.0
dB
>
75.0
dB
>
80.0
dB
>
85.0
dB
NOTE: REFER TO SHEET LS003 FOR SOUND MONITORING
STANDARDS
z
J
o�
Z
,V
N
N
Z
Z
W
U
6
J
W
�
0
w
=
J
J
U
o
W
U
z
H
0
F
M
W
�
G
U
F
<z
w
�
6
0
U
W
a
z
w
U
w
Z
Q
0
Date: MARCH 2O16
Drawn By.
Checked By
Sheet
LS004
n CONTEXTUAL
i
SITE PLAN rmmmmmLmmrmmLmmmmmj
50' 0 25' 50' L00' NORTH
BIKE BACK - 15 BIKE RACKS TOTAIP EY.ISIING TREES
(150 BIKE CAPACITY)
TABLE & CMR5
EXISTING CO O O TIONTIO
HUTAC TRASH AND RECYCLING RECFPLE
PROPOSED CIXTOUR
CONCRETE PUNIER(5) NATURAL HABITAT BUFFER
SOUND MONRORING LOCATION
6o POLE LIGHT
♦ BUFFOON RECEPTACLE
PA PUNONG AREA
LIMIT OF WORK
EXISTING FENCE
— — — PROPOSED FENCE
In
ARBOR STRUCTURES)
CAERE)iffl
PERFORMANCE PLATFORM
o CONCRETE WALL
DRY STACK STONE WALL
MOLDERS
PAVEMENT SCHEOLILE
CONCRETE PAVEMENT -STD GRAY, 4' THICK
CONCRETE PAVEMENT -COLOR, 4' THICK
(COLOR -Tao)
CONCRETE PAVEMENT -STD GRAY, 6' THICK
CONCRETE PAVEMENT -COLOR. 6' THICK
(COLOR -Teo)
CRUSHER FINES PAVEMENT
FLAGSTONE PAVEMENT
GENERAL UND USE DATA
E%ISDNG ZONING
EMPLOYMENT
DISTRICT
EXISTING PMCEL SIZE
250.000 SF/5]4 AC
PROPOSED PROJECT LAND USE DATA
SIZE AREA (AC)
SHE AREA (5H
%TOTAL
PROPOSED
HARDSCARE 1.239
53.690 SF
21%
LANDSCAPE/OPEN SPACE 4.46 AC
195,310 OF
79%
TOTAL 5,74 AC
250,000 SF
100%
REQUIRED ONSITE YEHICIF PARKING
COUNT
NG SPACES
COMM. FACILITY 4,718 SF 13
3 PER 1,000 SF
BUTTON RECREATION 600 PEOPLE 60
0.1/WACHY
ACCESSORY USE-
HHEATER/COSERED PLATFORM) 1,500 SEATING 250
1 PER 6 SEATS
UIAL KLQUIRW AMICNIQUILLP
TOTAL MIOED ONSTE VEHCLE PIFKNG
9'-0' K 19'-0' STANDARD 62
9'-0' K 19'-0' ACCESSIBLE 4
0\2RSIZEO PARKING 8
TOTAL PROVIDED = 74
REQUIRED ONSNE BICYCLE PARKING
PROGRAm OF ARM REQUIRE) SEW IS
COUNT
MINIMUM
CLE PARKING SPACES
OUIWOR RECREATION 250,000 SF 125
1 PER 2,0:0 SF
TOTAL PROMPT BICYCLE PARKING
BIKE PARKING TOTAL = 150 SPACES
'SEE SHEET LS002 FOR OFF-STREET PARKING LOCATIONS
NOTE. REFER TO SHEET L8003 FOR ALL SITE
PLAN NOTES & NATURAL HABITAT BUFFER
REQUIREMENTS
z
LL
z
z
N
Z
Z
Wg
U
a_O
JW
LJ
z
F
H
U
7
(n
W
U
H
F
J
W
¢
O_
Q
�
z
j
X
LE1
Z
F—
¢
m
Z
of
O
O
p
U
U
W
K
z
Z
W
U
z
z
w
O
Date: MARCH 2O16
Drawn By. JB
Checked By CR
Sheet
LS 1,00
II
/ II
\ I/
I \I
111/
I /1
I
I
I
°I
I
II
II
II
1 /I
I /I
1
a d
\
I'.�rrr�rrrarrrrr►ter! �L\.,/_-I i /\ \ .���"' % \`\ \ _�
100'NANRN
HABITAT BUFFER
_----\-_-_-/FUTURE HIAC PORN` /��__��__ ��-__�--•�
__EYPANSON A
el
\ 1 I TOP OF BWrc
^I l
\ r* IIIII 11 I LEGEND
BIKE RACK - 15 BIKE WKS TOTAL .i42
(I50 BIKE CAPACRY) `IM1`O EXISTING TREES
II II 11 1♦ ; TABLE § CHAIRS - - - - _ _ EXISTING CONIouR
/ r / � 1 OO TRASH AND RECYCLING RECEPTACLE
PROPOSED CONTOUR
CONCRETE PVNTER(s) NATURAL HABITAT WFEA
I T �1 I I SOUND MONITORING LOCATION
IIIII /^V I p• POLE LIGHT
LI' I' I C I+ 1 • OUTDOOR RECEPTACLE
,7 IIII I I I i PA PLANING AREA
i I- I I I
I / —\ _ rr�4rr �� _ / / I ( ) I II I I � lwll� LIMN OF MRK
�_� / r_ ��•�T �y _ BIKE AREA -� PENCE TO IWCH EXISTING FENCE 'I I I I I I I I I I \ I ��
�L�" _� (150 BIKE GPPLAI1� _r CN-SHE I II IXISiING FENCE
I<
W .1
rAr
Lssol
WNCREIE
\
PE
i
SW�
\
- WLL41W. ISw
KNEW WHILK
I
<I
�\�fftl
LII
DENT\
\
I ► PLAN SELECT
L\ CARDEN \
\\ \
1 I I I
IU' WNL HEIGHT Al MU
I
UP WALL W/STEP-RNY(S \
G 1
11
\
Ill I 1 /
I
1 / I
'
I
n
OVERALL SITE
PLAN
\
HAREM
VpiAi BUFFER \�
EXISTING SPRING GREEK
TRAIL
COVERED PERFORMANCE PLATFORM
TEMPORARY STRUCTURE(S) /
DURING PERFORMANCES /
LIMIT 5W SF TOTAL _r
` ' E%IWNG DINGDENS 1 �`
Wlmlxc
9
"PORTABLE RECTOOM AREA M.
FUTURE POTENTML CONNECTION TO
/�ffRC
IUU1I \ ,
11k
ACCESS
>I
1
\
\
i ` \
\ ENISTNG PARKING \
LOT
f� \
/ li II 11 \I -" -"- PROPOSED FENCE
90WE / I STORMWATER IIIIII I
CRUSHER FINES ROME. IYP. DEIEINTO N/W£11AMRS I� III I 1 ARBOR STRUCTURE(S)
0GBAC / 1Y11111111
\ISl, sECTpxl6 I I I I 1� 1� 1 1 I/
1 I
I I
♦ COVERED PERFORMANCE PLATFORM
\ \ IIIIII II
'�� IIIIII II o CONCRETE WP1L
6awDnux
♦♦ illll II YIIIIIIIIIIIIIIS DRY STACK STONE WAUL
I IIII II
�i�l� // / `` BDUIDERS
�I II T
�.y 11 IIII lI WEROND
cl Jy IIIII I BUFFER PAVEMEM SCHEDULE
'rl 6'-0' I� 11 I \ EXISTING CONTOUR. ttPCONCRETE PAVEMENT-510 GRAY, 4 THICK
w,l I �1A1� 1 1 I I . 1 I
PROPOSED I / CONCRETE PAVENENi-WLOq, 4° THICK
/CONTOU. TIP. I I (COLOR-TRD)
1 � CONCRETE PAVEMENT -STD GRAY, 6- 1HYJK
� 1 I I IIIIII I
'BRINE / Llol E D NIT I CONCRETE PAVEMENT COLOR, 6' THICK
WREN I III I I I / I l (COLOR-iRD)
I ill' 11 1 / I 1 j CRUSHER FINES PAVFAIQTF
PRAIRIE NRZE
FLAGSTONE PAVEMENT
SHOP FIN I I I
l pl llll �501 Imo/ I I I GENERAL LAND USE DATA
11 I EXISTING TONING 2F DISTRICT
l 111 I I I I EXISTING PARCEL SIZE 250,00E 50,OW SF/524. AS
/ ACRNWAIIiR • I / / 111 l I l l / PROPOSED PROJECT LAND USE 04TA
�OTENTION/VIEfUNDS / / / /// 6WUTFERD / / 1 / ( PROPOSED SIR AREA (XI SITE AREA (SIT %OTAL
�K HAKUbC !, 1.23 AC 53,690 SF 21%
CRY STREAM 1 I I LANDSCAPE/OPEN SPACE 4.48 AC 195,310 SF 29%
TOTAL 5J4 AC 250,00E SF 100%
REQUIRED ON£HLLE PARKING OWN
PAVEMENT, PROGRAM SFffl( ROUIRED STALLS MINIMUM PARKING ONE COMM, FA 60 ] PER 1,00E SF OUTDOOR RECREATION 600 PEOPLE 60 0.1/G°PI&ITY
/N�p // / / / / I ACCESSORY USE-
/ // / LSwA UNOWNTED / (THEATER/COVERED PLATFORM) 1,500 SPARING 250 1 PER 6 SEATS
MUNm
KNOX LOCK PAD / / / / l / / l l•
LCCK Al G IL / / /� jTOTAL %NMOFD ONSTE VEHCLE PARKING
VEHICLE ACCESS l / / 1 // n / l/ I 9 0' X 19'-0' STANDARD fit
/ 9 0 % 19 -0 ACCESSIBLE 4
//� OVERSIZED PARKING B
BOULDER STE / / / I / / / // // TOTAL PROVIDED - 24
PROGRAM REQUIRED ONSIE REQUIRICYCLEED
D RKINGSTALL COUNT
S MINIMUM 31 PARKING SWES
OUTDOOR RECREATION 250,000 OF 125 1 PER 2,OW SF
TOTAL PROPOSED BIL/CLE PARKING
BIKE WORD TOTAL - ISO SWES
*SEE SHEET IS002 FOR 01 PLANNG LOCATIONS
NOTE: REFER TO SHEET LS003 FOR ALL SITE
PLAN NOTES & NATURAL HABITAT BUFFER
REQUIREMENTS
I
( / i / I /<�• 11 1 II II I
U
rmmmmmLmmrmmLmmmmmmj
40'
0
20'
40'
80'
NORTH
LOCATE LARGE
BOULDERS PER SITE
PLAN
SEE GRADING PLAN FOR
LANDSCAPE AREA 9" MIN. ELEVATION. TOP OF WALL SPOT
STANDARD GW1Y CONCRETE, p
1/2° RADIUS EDGES, EL - r I SEE SITE PUN
BROOM FINISH PARALLEL
W/LENGTH OF EDGER-
2` THICK STABIH_ZED GRANITE
CRUSHER FINES = = I =
4" OR 6" THICK CONCRETE o 1—
PAVING WITH FIBER i - 6" 2THICK CRUSHER FINES .I
SAWCUT CONTROL JOINT Ya OF SUB BASE s -1- GEOI EXOIE FABRIC.
IS
SLAB THICKNESS, 5 6 4r--= DRAINAGE FILL
WIDTH OF PAVEMENT / - ' f
\// COLLOIDAL CONCRETE
11-1
OR AS SHOWN ON DRAWINGS \ \ \ \ \ \ / N 2
BEHIND WALL
1' MAX. Jf, FILL
w _ ANGULAR
WITH BREEZE, / `t
a _ = SANDSTONE COLOR:
TO
NO. 4# REBAR, CONTINUOUS COLOR STONE
BUFF MIN. SIZE 6°
\\`/\`/\�`1 MATCH STONE
= rc ����\'/ \ \ FLAGSTONE, 3- — I III IN 1INTERLOCKINGUCE
=III III =11 II \\\\\\\\ _
Ili III III h' THICK MIN. — ) = MANNER TO FORM A
CONCRETE PAVEMENT 1" SAID SETTING = SINGLE MASS.
COMPACTED SUBGRADE '`` •` i i�� BED z
1. TES:CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGE TO EXISTING CONDRIONS \\/� 4° COMPACTED °' III : SEE SITE PLAN
NOTES: WALK, IRRIGATION, TO DURINGTREES
CONSTRUCTION -THIS INCLUDES EXISTING CONCRETE aAA�E.��i� ������ ii��i�� ���� ����= CON ACT 84SE III BASE COMPACTED SUBGRADE
1. EXPANSION JOINTS PLACED PER PUN, BUT NO LESS THAN 100' D.C. 2. CONTRACTOR TO TAKE SPECIAL PRECAUTION TO NOT OVER EXCAVATE AROUND 1� s SOIL TO 9RA s-
2. MAXIMUM SPACING OF CONTROL JOINTS, 100 SF. EXISTING TREES
3. CONCRETE TO HAVE FINE BROOM FINISH PERPENDICULAR TO CENTERLINE 3. BLEND STABILIZER: BLEND 12 TO 16 LEE OF STABILIZER PER TON OF NOTES:
OF PAVING, DECOMPOSED GRANITE FINES. IT IS CRITICAL THAT STABILIZER BE THOROUGHLY AND 1. FLAGSTONE COLOR TO MATCH EXISTING ROCK GARDEN FLAGSTONE. — —�
UNIFORMLY MIXED THROUGHOUT DECOMPOSED GRANITE FINES. 2. MINIMUM SURFACE AREA OF EACH FLAGSTONE PIECE TO BE 1'x1'. -III—I L=III=III=III=III=III=III=I I-
4. PLACE STABILIZED GRANITE FINES PER STABILIZER SOLUTIONS INC. APPROVED
METHOD.
CONCRETE PAVEMENT CRUSHER FINES FLAGSTONE PAVEMENT DRY STACK WALL
A Uv r.„? B xe1 l/:-r-o' oT-cwe-wo G eI'-f-o' m-mn-u -a D m-om-w
ELEV 98.60 2%
ONC. PLAZA
°al 2X12 P
IORESSURE
,. TREATED JOISTS
CIP GOING. (BEYOND), SPACED
F 12" O.C.
2X4 PRESSURE 2X6 PRESSURE TREATED ANGULAR
PINE WHEEL STOP
i TREATED DECKING 8 _p° 24`-30"
— 12°-18° X 4'-6' F.S. , GALVANIZED CARRIAGE BOLT, ROCK DRY
op
SANDSTONE BOULDER BOLT SIZE TO FIT POST STACK WITH a ° . #4 REBAR ® 18" O.C. ACCORDINGLY DRY JOINTS.
BOTH WAYS x 2° 2X12 PRESSURE TREATED F.G.
—III MIN. PINE GRAB BUM 15" TYP COMPACTED
III FIG III III I I I I III— z°x 4" KEY �tr
— o =1I III —I p 5 o SUBGRADE
=III ICI 'III Y_ s _ GALVANIZED POST ANCHOR III III—III-1 SETTING BED
.o =
° COMPACTED o)#a As SHOWN CONCRETE FOOTING
BASE _
�I11—I
1= ANGULAR 18•_2•
STRUCAGGREGATE L BACKFILL
—I —I —III—I =11—I �I II„ ROCK DR s ADK
—III— -2 e' _ =1I --III—III—III—I — COMPAC ED suBGRADE -11I —I I-
F I— — —III—III. WITH DRY
— —I I—II-
11=11—I1=" _I JOINTS. BUR
' I—= — — = BOTTOM
TT —I 1=I' _I L=1-1 L= L=1I L=1 -I II I1= = r J I —III —I 1=1 1=1 6" r BOULDER
--= 1=' =III=III- -III=III=III=III=1
2'-6"1'-0° =ITT—ITT=11=11 L—III=I
HOGBACKS - SECTION F LOADING DOCK G BOARDWALK H BOULDER STEPS m-
E ue1/Y=f-o' oT-Wal stm=9 N' -o' DT—•ail—a«La.g ar.1/e'=1—o' elemoom—mil—mpt
H
N
w
J
�
a
z
~
w
W
�
W
O
N
¢
s
Date: MARCH 2O16
Drawn By. JB
Checked By. CR
Sheet
LS,501
2D'-Ry"
(2) 9J"X17" J" THICK STEE
PLATE-POWDERCOAT BL
(4) SST 5/8" THROUGH
BOLTS- EACH POST
3.5"X 12" AIASKAN YELLOW
GLULAM BEAM
2"X6" CEDAR
2"x10" CEDAR POST (2) T
AT EACH GWLAM BEAM
ARBOR ELEVATIONS
13'-1
T
)4'
I
I
_
I
s"
TYP
u
ARBOR — PLAN
ARBOR — ELEVATION B
\CK
CEDAR
FS
a+'n LAI
NOTE: ALL CONCRETE FOOTINGS SHALL BE ENGINEERED BYA LICENSED STRUCTURAL
ENGINEER AND SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH ALL CITY FLOODPLAIN AND BUILDING PERMIT
REQUIREMENTS AS NEEDED.
)TAL ARBOR — ELEVATION A
Bsr� ,iz� _ ,._o.
3
(2) 9'"X17" }" THICK STEEL
PLATE-POWDERCOAT BLACK
(4) SST 5/8' THROUGH
BOLTS- EACH POST
3.5X12" ALASKAN YELLOW CEDAR
GLULAM BEAM
2"X6" CEDAR
2"x10" CEDAR POST (2)
TOTAL AT EACH GLULAM BEAM
CRUSHER FINES
1'-6"
FOOTING
2X8 CEDAR
2X6 CEDAR
ARCHITECTURAL AREA LIGHTING
UNIVERSE COLLECTION MEDIUM
BLANK TOP, SOLID RING
(T2/LED4K/700-3000K
COLOR TEMP)
2X6 CEDAR
DECORATIVE BANNERS
W/ ATTACHMENTS
)NDUIT (7 I I A' ELECTRICAL CONDUIT
OUTDOOR ELEC.
i� t RECEPTACLE
t TO BE MOUNTED
6" ABOVE B.F.E.
3OLT, }" CARRIAGE BOLT,
a
rc
t ow
�z
..'.CONCRETE TOOTER '^w
rc
I- 1 a
L' J
NOTE: ALL CONCRETE FOOTINGS SHALL BE ENGINEERED BYA LICENSED
STRUCTURAL ENGINEER AND SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH ALL CITY FLOODPLAIN
AND BUILDING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AS NEEDED.
'1 PEDESTRIAN LIGHT
'i.r{-ANCHOR BOLT
JJ "LLB'--
ti •1
..CONCRETE FOOTER
L'-_J
10'-6" 10'
I I I I
W(2) 9J"X17" is THICK STEEL
PLATE—POWDERCOAT BLACK
(4) SST 5/8" THROUGH BOLTS— EACH POST
- -
3.5"X12" AIASKAN YELLOW CEDAR
GLULAM BEAM
2"X6" CEDAR
I
I I I
ARBOR ELEVATIONS A
ARBOR -UNDAUNTED GARDEN - PLAN
A_o
4' 9"
12' 6" TYP
10 —6" TYP
3.50X12" ALSKAN YELLOW CEDAR
GWLAM BEAM
2"X6" CEDAR
9;•X12•-1/4" THICK STL
PLATE, POWDER COAT
BLACK
2"x10' CEDAR POST (2) TOTAL
AT EACH GLULPM BEAM
_
I I I I
9;"X24"-1/4" THICK STL
PLATE, POWDER COAT
BLACK
FS
NOTE: ALL CONCRETE FOOTINGS SHALL BE ENGINEERED BYA LICENSED STRUCTURAL ENGINEER AND SHALL BE COORDINATED
WITH ALL CITY FLOODPLAIN AND BUILDING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AS NEEDED.
ARBOR -UNDAUNTED GARDEN - ELEVATION A
B
�: yr = r-0•
NOTE. ALL CONCRETE FOOTINGS SHALL BE ENGINEERED BYA LICENSED STRUCTURAL ENGINEER AND SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH
ALL CITY FLOODPLAIN AND BUILDING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AS NEEDED.
ARBOR -UNDAUNTED GARDEN - ELEVATION B
„ Pw Vz' - f-v
2X12 PRESSURE
TREATED JOISTS
(BEYOND), SPACED
12" O.C.
2X4 PRESSURE
TREATED DECKING
THICKENED CONCRETE EDGE
TYPICAL BOTH ENDS OF BRIDGE
8'�
6" ROUGH
SAWN CEDAR
TOP RAIL 4"
TYP
I
i
2X12
PRESSURE4K,
TREATED III- $- --
PINE GRAB "-INI-A
BEAM -1I-III
-III-II --
-III-GAL ANC POST ANCHOR 11-� -III--
CONCRETE FOOTING :III- a III- hll I„ r
I�„ -III,-III 'ILL,
IN CEDAR a
TOTAL
8'-0' 8'-0"
MAX. MAX.
-- �2"X12" GIRTS 0 24" O.C.
III
- - o 0 2"R12° NAILER(36�10"X6"X4"
IHSS POST
I
I --
PYROK ACOUSTEMENT 40
CABLE STOP \
24 GAUGE GAL. METAL WALL
COPING
J" APA RATED SHEATHING
EACH FACE -METAL LATH ON TOP
2"X12" NAILER
PYROK ACOUSTEMENT 40
(1" THICK) APPLY PER \
MANUFACTURER'S
SPECIFICATIONS
A* GAL STL CABLE ROPE
SEE ENLARGEMENT -TOP LEFT
GALVANIZED METAL CASING
BEAD -SIZED TO THICKNESS OF
ACOUSTEMENT 40 (1" THICK)
I
2"1 NAILER
10"X6"X4" HSS POST
GALVANIZED METAL LATH
PYROK ACOUSTEMENT 40
(1" THICK) -APPLY PER
{ MANUFACTURER'S
SPECIFICATIONS
CABLE THIMBLE
4
IIII CABLE TENSIONER
III EACH FACE Am
SHEATHING
C'GA.m
CABLE ROPE
IIII VINE CABLE SYSTEM-8" O.C. CABLE STOP
III2Z VINE-VIRGINIA
CREEPER/ENGUSH SCALE: 1"=1'-O"
24"0 X 4" IVY
ALL (4) SIDES, TOP & BOTTOM
SEE ENLARGEMENT SCALE:
ABOVE
T T _
-
-III-II III-I-III-11111-III II= -
1I-I I I I I I � I I•' °� � I I I -I I I' I I=1I R I I -III -I I III � r
�E(�j=1 ? . °�_ - IIII-III-IIIdII-III I II I II I U
II I I I -I I HmT •�� I I -III I III-rL�TI-N I=I I I=- ---�I a
�1I�---C�II - �_ -�1�-IIII I�I� I • • uT In �I � mr
I I- I I -I I III -I I d l - I I I -III I I I •: 1E I �E
31 III -III � 11= = I-
j[C-11-LI III�IE
IIII II II II-IIH' ' -
24"0 CONCRETE DRILLED PIER
W 6 #6 VERT AND #3 HOOP II II,
II -II TIES 0 36" III II
.IIIII , CONCRETE FOOTING
�ITIII E'-.1'�iL''•
NOTE. ALL CONCRETE FOOTINGS SHALL BE ENGINEERED BYA LICENSED STRUCTURAL ENGINEER AND SHALL BE
COORDINATED WITH ALL CITY FLOODPLAIN AND BUILDING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AS NEEDED.
n SOUND WALL
B swe i/z' = f-o'
1
6" ROUGH SAWN CEDAR
TOP RAIL
n
2" ROUGH SAWN
a
CEDAR RAILING
3" ROUGH SAWN
CEDAR POST
2X12 PRESSURE TREATED
PINE GRAB BEAM
- GALVANIZED CARRIAGE BOLT,
BOLT SIZE TO FIT POST
-III--
ACCORDINGLY
GALVANIZED POST ANCHOR
SECTION 'I LITJ I' 'III III III- ELEVATION - E�,
-I�1-III
NOTE: ALL CONCRETE FOOTINGS SHALL BE ENGINEERED BYA LICENSED STRUCTURAL ENGINEER AND SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH ALL CITY
FLOODPLAIN AND BUILDING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AS NEEDED.
BRIDGE
Gswei/z'=r-a' ao-eieeaaN-mo--eaoz
FOOTING
EVERGREEN TREES
EVERGREEN TREES
PYROK ACOUSTEMENT 40 - EXAMPLE PHOTO
D WALL
E OF
-D TREE, SEE
PEE, TYP.
E OF
TREE.
40
—PYROK ACOUSTEMENT 40
COLOR TO BE EARTHTONE
DDE�^SEERRT TAN OR SIMILAR
SOUND WALL
—VINE CABLE
SYSTEM-8" O.C.
NOTE. ALL CONCRETE FOOTINGS SHALL BE ENGINEERED BVA LICENSED STRUCTURAL ENGINEER
AND SHALL BE COORDINATED WOHALL CITY FLOODPLAIN AND BUILDING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AS
n SOUND WALL SECTION NEEDED
Ii sc+Iti/r-P. DT-KUON-sax)-WU
SOUND MITIGATION WALL
STAGE AREA HAVE IN
TO
J- t STAGE AREA OM NOT
CHANGED FROM
FEBRUARV 2015 PLAN
PROPOSED
SOUND
MITIGATION WALL
ADJAGENTTO - !
WEST PL
Jos
41
1
k�
OVERALL SITE PLAN - MARCH 2O16
H
(n
�
w
J
a
z
~
w
W
w
O
N
s
Date: MARCH 2O16
Drawn By. JB
Checked By. OR
Sheet
LS,505
CENTRE FOR ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 22ND FILING COMMUNITY HORTICULTURE CENTER
MAJOR AMENDMENT - LANDSCAPE PLAN
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
CENTRE FORADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 22ND FILING COMMUNITY HORTICULTURE CENTER SHEETINDEX
LP001 COVER SHEET
LP101 TREE PROTECTION/TRANSPLANT PUN
LP102 OVERALL PUNTING PUN
LP103 OVERALL TREE PUNTING PUN
LP501 LANDSCAPE DETAILS
4L� rn Imm1
0 E Pitkin St
y Annual Flower
Trial Garden
W Lake St W Lake St
W Prospect Rd W Prospect Rd E Pro
SHI
ADDITION Hilton Fort Collins
Birky PI Parker St
7LD PROSPECT
— _ %//enberg or E Sti.
Gardens on Spring Creek — °`' � � INi
Botanical garden with
educational events
i,
ShTte Ct Da�
Moore or ty�Ztail
RoW6 N
STOVER AREA
A. Rolland Moore Park Colur
I L----_- _..
c� eDr
41 WlIII _.
O
rat Area o Princeton Rd GARDENS ON fill
....
SPRING CREEK
PRESERVE _ m
W Drake Rd E Dr
L
D n c
ountain d - —
School
gal 0 DO Clair Rd
t F
Fill
3 a o
1
CONTEXT MAP ZONING MAP
NORTH
/
s
IIII ,.
IIII
Ijl I
III I
lIlI
I
III /
— _ T28 5
' — T27 _
T20
LEGEND
s
IIII ,.
IIII
Ijl I
III I
lIlI
I
III /
— _ T28 5
' — T27 _
T20
LEGEND
TREE
INVENTORY CHART
NAME
SPECIES
SIZE
CONDITION
TRANSPLANT
TREE TO
O
BE TRANSPLANTED
T1
BUR OAK
5' CAL.
GOOD
T2
BUR OAK
4" CAL.
GOOD
TREE TO BE REMOVED
T3
CANYON MAPLE
3' CLUMP—
MIFAIR
®
POD REPLACED
T4
CANYON MAPLE
10' CLUMP—
MULR—STEM
FAIR
TS
CANYON MAPLE
10' CLUMP—
MULR—S1EM
GOOD
E%17ING TREES
T6
CANYON MAPLE
10' CLUMP—
MULTI
FAIR
TO REMAIN
T7
SW WHILE PINE
5' CAL. —
157 HT.
FAIR
T8
BLACK HILLS SPRUCE
4-5" CAL.
— 15' HT.
GOOD
T9
BLACK HILLS SPRUCE
4-5" CAL.
— 15' HT.
GOOD
FIG
BLACK HILLS SPRUCE
4-5" CAL
— 15' HE
GOOD
T11
BLACK HILLS SPRUCE
4-5" CAL
— 15' ILL
GOOD
T12
COLORADO BLUE SPRUCE
5m CAL. —
15' HT.
FAIR
NOTE: ALL TREE REMOVAL/TRANSPLANTING TO OCCUR
T13
PEKING TREE ❑LAC
10' HT.
GOOD
OUTSIDE
THE MIGRATORY SONGBIRD NESTING
T14
PEKING TREE ❑LAC
10' HE
GOOD
TRANSPLANT
SEASON
(FEB 1—JULY 31)
T15
PEKING TREE ❑LAC
10' HE
GOOD
TRANSPLANT
TI6
PEKING TEE LILAC
10' HE,
GOOD
TRANSPLANT
T17
PEKING TREE LILAC
10' HT,
GOOD
TRANSPLANT
T18
PEKING TREE UTAC
10' HT.
GOOD
TRANSPLANT
TO
USSURIAN PEAR
5" OAF.
GOOD
TRANSPLANT
/ �y�
� IIIII I
I I I I I I
Y !I-11�Ij C
!IIIII I II II
,7/ I-IIIII I II
�! II-IIII I II
/ IIIII I II
/ 1111111 11
I/ }II IIIII II
I I�IIIII II
I I IIII I I I
� iIHIII I I I I
I T\ I llil l I/
/ 411111 I
\ �I1111 I I I
�IIII I I II
FIIIIII II
1�11111 II
IIIII 11
T34
jjIII I IIII \ 1 .. I I
IILII I/ / I l 1 1 I I
I l I /I IIII I / I I I I I
I � j / IIIIIII j j 1 I I I l l j
I Fi i FFl 1 1 1 l (/
\
T20
COLORADO BLUE SPRUCE
4'
CAL.
GOOD
(TRIBUTE TREE)
T21
USSURIAN PLAN
5'
CAL.
GOOD
TRANSPLANT
T22
USSURIAN PEAR
5'
CAL.
GOOD
TRANSPLANT
T23
SW WHITE PINE
7'
CAL.
GOOD
TRANSPLANT
T24
PONDEROSA PINE
12'
Hi.
GOOD
TRANSPLANT
T25
REDMOND LINDEN
5"
CAL.
FAIR
(TRIBUTE TREE)
T26
TATARIAN MAPLE
3'
CAL.
DEAD
— REPLACE
T27
TATARIAN MAPLE
3'
CAL.
POOR
— REPLACE
T28
TATARIAN MAPLE
3'
CAL.
FAIR
T29
ROCKY MEN. JUNIPER
3'
CAL. —
10' HT.
GOOD
TRANSPLANT
T30
ROCKY MEN. JUNIPER
3'
CAL. —
10' HT.
GOOD
TRANSPLANT
T31
ROCKY MEN. JUNIPER
3'
CAL. —
10' HT.
GOOD
TRANSPLANT
T32
GAMBEL OAK
8'
HT.
GOOD
TRANSPLANT
T33
GAMBEL OAK
8'
HT.
GOOD
TRANSPLANT
T34
GAMBEL OAK
8'
HE
GOOD
TRANSPMT
T35*
(16) COTTONWOODS
2-4"
Ce
GOOD
(4) PEACH LEAF WILLOWS
(1) ALDER
TO BE TRANSPLANTED: 12
TOTAL TREES
NOTE: REFER TO SHEET LS003 FOR ALL SITE
PLAN NOTES & NATURAL HABITAT BUFFER
REQUIREMENTS
TREE PROTECTION/TRANSPLANT PLAN Q
30' 0 15' 30' 60' NORTH
// \\ III'
=_ -- ---'-- =
/ `�Yj\
____________
/
_ -
CFRGEN CESIGN INRNr
\ / ANKKf
1
LGON
u
OMINOUSTHE
IN THE
FEATURE
MOO
XIOOVA
I
LA
PLANTS WITH WHITE OR
1 \
/
LEND PETALS I
FRAGRPNI SPECIES TIMT ATIRACi
MAGG I
I
v I I
NOCTUflNAL POLLINANRCOLS
�MDaGARDEN
IN PUrvnrvc INTENF 1
- O FOUR O'CL OCK I I
1
EVENING PRIMROSE 1 \
M
MINING
i—
- ARCfL'S IRUMPR I I 1
--
hUSE
DESIGN NTENT'
IHOGW AVAIMEIY OF ROSE \ 1
HCHUG
SffGES \ f
_— \I
FRAGRANCE GULDEN DEIGNINTENT,
- HIGHOGHLINATIVE FRAGRANTIES f
SEATINALL AROUND POUNDS ARF/S
I
—�
'SPEC
FRAGRANCE CAREER PLANTING WENT\
- FRAGRANTPERSIANSTONECRESS I
II
VARIEGATED SWEET IRIS
LI
- ORNAMENTAL (HIGH
CHOCOLUE FLOWN
- PEWS CASTLE RIMER SAGE
/
1
- CARPER WINTER S9WRY
/ /
I
- GARDEN WE, SLLNA I
- GARLIC CHIVES
- STANDARD DWARF BEARDED IRIS
- ULAVENDER
- DRUMSTIM91 CK auuM
D
CATMINT
SILVER SAGE
SILVER
- VIREO FEVERFEW
\
EVERGREEN TREE PWRINGS FOR SCREENING'/
OF SOUND MTIIABON war_ WITH i
'
UNDERSTORY PLFNTInc - FULL LENGTH OF
WALL _ARPROX 24W /
TI
\
1
\
>I
I
nl
l
I
/
1
I
I
I
/ I
1 "
IY-
/1 I 1� / TOP OF BANK
I l \
IN
IIIIII\/ ♦ II 111
IIIIII 1' I ♦ / \\ 1 I I
Hillj°
IIIIII Of V \l
IIII
IIII II 1'
IIIII / I — ♦
IIII\1 � ♦ \
III
III \
IIII/ 1. _/ ; \
HitI 1
IIIII 1 ♦
IIIII I 1 ♦
IIIII ° ;
IIII 50'HA NATURAL
III 1 � — / WHAT BUFFER
/
11 l n
O
I �I IIII I \
fill
/
_/
—
SPAUG GOOD(
_7`0 ¢ new
IN
IUD' NATURAL HABITAT
�BUFFER
' O
Awn'
\\♦ 11 1 1 if
0
I I 1 1 1 1 I I
\ I+ \\ Ii` 1 1 \ I I I1 \I 1 1 I I I 111 11
/ \�\\1►I I{ \ Ia \11111111^♦ II1I1 /', 11j IIII 1
' IW' NATURAL WHAT
/-_BUFFER_ ____ I lI //I /,� 1 IIIII ♦ 1 I J III w
_ l II / r'j 1 1 ` ♦ III 1 11 II 1 s
//i
IC LI 1 a111 IIII j m11'p I /,�/ �I LJ
�
—�� U /' IIIII 1 I II/1 III III
I I I I I'
I
_ aaaaa / /' /I `/ ✓ 111E 11 I 1/ \ \�I II o III
II I I v 1 1 1 1 II I
wENND BUFFER
- HOT WINGS TITANIUM MAPLE
- CAROL MACKIE DAPHNE'
- SEVEN -son
-
D BROOM
- SPAT GOLD
- CORAL cprvran TTUxsauR
CORAL C4 ON T
\
WATCH MASS
- PINES PEAK PURPLE PENSIEMON
\\
- KORW! ETHER R D GRASS
- HARDY UVENOER ICE PUNT
- RED BIRDS A TREE
- COROWDO HYSSOP \
1
- VALLEY OI EV PWNS
- FWA ARTEMIE
f
\
BONDS
- SILVER BONDS EVENING PRIMROSE
RED
- RED MOUNTAIN ICE PVM
I
\
- sorvORAN sunsEr ROGER
_
\
1
_
_ \ter I /I I IIII 1/ II I I I I I I
I /� IIIIII I I/ I IIII IIM III II I
i if
// / ,r FDDrxnLs cAaDEx / DAM wrENr 1 1 1111 I 1 / I 11 - HICNIICHfINC FOOTHILLS I I I / I I/ I 1
�• I If I11 FODTHRLCCARCER PUNTING INTENT 'I
JI I I- ROCKY MOUNTAIN MAPLE I I I I I
N. ?' y 111E _ WIL ROSECURRENT III/^I 11�\
[I it - BOULDER RASPBERRY / 111 I
If I I I- COMMON JUNIPER I I 1111 I I l
G I C I - ROCKY MOUNTAIN JUNIPER
�> }t:
I- NNICK I CREP
♦J.p I I l_ CHOKECHERRYCON-GRME
1 .':: \~••4Y.'Y' /f% �I /� I -1 SHRUBBY CINQUEFOIL/ I II /l /I % Ll
1 1%UIPIE CAREER DESIGN INTENT:
IIII I - HINATIVE PRAIRIE PLANTS
I WHEN PLANTING
FMING INTENT
- WGARHEN : I l
/yIJ I
♦• ': ':: • /:,% • / I/ � IIy/ I/I//II/ I lI / ECUPS
- DESERIT FOU
R OCCLOCK
- IXCTOBER SKIEXIAROMAFIC ASTER
RAYTIONTS
- DREAM OFBEAUTYAROIATIC 4MR
•//// �/ Ipl1 !i - MOONSNINEEAASFOW i
NATIVE OAK GROVE /�/�//'/ - AWNS CAYFEATHER
/ SEEEC110N TBD BY CITY /?'/// - PURPLE PRAIRIE CLOVER
FORESTER �I/�//// - PRAIRIE BLUES LITRE BLUESRM / // /
- U BLUE FESCUE BLONDE
/ // - BLONDE AMBITION BLUE DRAWN, CRASS
- BLUE GRAND,
:�:'•''�/ j / j // / / �/ / / ♦ - HARDv FouNruN
%XX / wETIPND BUFF\� 1/4i%P ' j l' i CRjIt
IS
SHOWCASING
GARDEN REPACK INTENT' CORAGE CAPCEN PUNTING INIENP CACTUS GRDEN PLANTING INIENP / / / / / I /' \ � $
- WCASING CIMPPAIUl, - SONORANE MOCK ORANGE - TREE LEIIA / / / / / / 1 e
' CORA Ni0 _ SONORAN SUNSEIHfSSOP _ WHIPPI£ CHOLU H n r
O J COTTM£ WHEN PLANTS ROBUST ROSE SCARIST HEWEHOG
CHAPARRAL GARDEN FUNTING INTENT: - SILVER SAGE - FENDLER'S HEDGEHOG
APACHE PLUME - WMATAN DAIRY - LACE HEDGEHOG CACTUS E
/ /
FERNBUSH - SHADOW MOUNTNNPENSTEMON - KING CUP CIdTUS // / � m
NOTABLE SPECIES HSU HYSSOP - RED ROCKS PENSTEMON - NYLON HEDGEHOG CACTUS
1 GRWE NOW SUNSET HYSI - TITTLE TRUDYCATMINT - COMMON SENATE CACTUS AID,
$ a
h \ - SELECTION TOD BYNNAH CREEKBUCKWHEAT - SELECT BLUE CATMINT - HEIDER PINCUSHION CARMS / // 2 a
�) 1 CITY FORESTER aW MESA BUCKMHEAT - PURNUM WE - MAAVE PRICKLY PLAN
1 - AHIMMEREVENING PRIMROSE - SILVERTONBLUEALAT PENSTEMON - BRITTLE PRICKLY PEAR
SILVER BIPDEEVENING PRIMROSE - WINECUPS - TWIST SPINE PRICKLY PEAR
NOTABLE SPECIES - PANCHIM MANZANRA - TABLE MOUNTAIN ICE PUNT - NOR PRICKLY PEAR U'
- PAWNEE BUTTES SAND CHERRY - SHIMMER EVENING PRIMROSE - PLANS PRICKLY PZ
Y GROVE
TOD BY , - MOJAE SALE - SILVER BIPDEEVENING PRIMROSE - MOUNTAIN BALL CACTUS j 7
CITY FORESTER - BLUE MME HYSSOP PURPLE MOUNTNNSUN EASY - SMALLiLDWER FISHHOOK CACTUS
_ RED ROCKS PENSTEMON
/ I V I - GREEK VALERIAN 1 / /, , /, // I (]
Y. CATMIN _ „ / Z 3
V / /'/ vv z
DATE GROVE DESIGN INTENT: / / / / // ,, T LJ
- SHADED PLANTING AREA \_ i i // %%� j / / / / j /,
- CONTAINER P- LARGE UOUS SPINE WJTINC 1PCFS /ii/':/ l i' % i / / / i i / / A� / U W z
SHAM_ GARDEN PLANTING INTENT' .'//, 'i: - o K 0 w
CHETENNEMOCK ORANGE \ /�/j//� LANDSCAPE LEGEND: Z F z
M UFNTLOAIINEiOVER \//////ii NOTE: REFER TO SHEET 0 M Z
CASHMERE SAGE // // j// TURF EXISTING TREE(S) W U z W
- PLUMBBR coLDcowMBNE ://4/%/' ❑ LS003 FOR ALL SITE PLAN � g Q
FOXGLOVE //'' NOTES & NATURAL HABITAT 0 o d
- VARIEGATED YELLOW ARCHANGEL //, �/. CAREEN PUNnxc AREAS DECIDUOUS SxADE MEE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS z s J o
CRYSTAL RMRVEPONICA / //i ' 1
WOOLY VERONICA Q
Q
,♦ i '/'//' / I NATIVE SEED- FOOTHILLS EVERGREEN TREE Q Of
\\`♦ %
W LUJI
O O
O
HATE SPED- PERIMEN oPNUJEwa TREE L.1
C.) x
xATDrea LMHNAT euHEre w
t`IIILII III/% HATE SEED- PRAIRIE U
ILL\\\\\�1 // It , NOTE: ALL MAYS WITHIN THE SPRING CREEK,
SHERWOOD LATERAL ADD °\\\• \� A / �' ® D AREA
BUFFER ZONE SNARL BE MAINTUNED IN Date: MARCH 2O16
WERAND PLANTING A NAME UNMCAPE.
Drawn By. JB
OVERALL PLANTING PLAN Q Checked By CR
Sheet
40' 0 20' 40' 80' NORTH LP1D02
z
�' � * �� A 4 - I FIIIII I II i
/ I I 100' NATURAL HABITAT - - I I I 0
V / /11 III I BUFFER
Il II III IIII IIIII T+ /LIMIT OF WORK
1 \ I lll� IIII ♦ + `1 I I
\ \ *�II{IIIII/ } jl�l ll
III Owl II 'O 0 * p J \ \ II IIII lI /
I
11`VAI1 �� vv v ■ m I IICIIl
I `II Ill , � . � .� o• II \ _ ) j I/ l��Ii IIII l / i l I
LANDSCAPE I EGTND.
NATIVE OAK GROVE
CITY �/��� O E%ISIING TREE(S) E4EPGREEN TREE
SELECTION TBD BY ii 11
FORESTER `'
NOTABLE SPECIES GROVE \ \ \ DECIDUOUS MADE EPEE O ORNAMENTAL MEE
SELECTION TBD BY v 0
111►4 / / I I A ` - 3 v A \ F ° CITY FORESTER v /� • , °I c
•+� `\ \\ \\\ 1 I II/ I \ \ \ \ � - ♦ 11 I ll I AI �_ / A o \ OMJNEVERGREEN
TREE OSEESDFRMORDAPCTBB
o
(39 TOTAL) att FORE51Efl
I
j l j � ` � I♦ I\ I l l l I I 1 ) Iav 0 1(\ v I
IIII o ♦ / \ 1 I 11 + \ �\
III 1 \\ (IeunsmPE Srxmulr
III I� �� / \ \ \ \ ` + { + \ _ , \ \ \ WETLAND BUFFER ♦ Dtt. srumL HGrnNIc WJAE cpuMary WJAE srzE
III, h \7\\ \ 1\ m \ —\ c--' R DEODUOUS TREES
Z
�' ♦ \ \ \,; 10 � nCER NECUN00 'SENSnTON' MENSAipN BO%ELDER R" GL
0 0 C�y�'
) O CATALPA MPECIOL, NORTHERN CATALPA 2" C!L w \v-v 1��,,yI ° NOTABLE SPECIES _ g 3 e
J b 5TA NATURAL _ g
✓ \ 1 9 aUERCUs STERNBERGII RICH AWNS OAK R C!L & e '�.x1 I GROVE .-
GOE HABITAT BUFFER I- / C - -� 1 w w e
II ' o o \ \1 \ \ • J p \ - SELECTION TBD BY �\ / O
/ ♦ o _
11 I ♦ \\ \I \\\ \\� m l \\ 'j 11 CITY FORESTER 9 /w\ CELns OCCIOENTALIS HACKBERRY z' CAL m E
IIII \ ♦ \ \ 'S' \ `\
v m l NOTABLE SPECIES ) ♦ a \ v, "- z
♦ ,° w 8 0
III 50' NATURAL co
y 6 GROVE / P
1 HABITAT BUFFER /�\ \ \ !q \ ` ' l 1 1 - SELECTION TBD BY I ! TWEEDS nuwATA uNCEONCE"nowooD z'cu.
I � \ \ \ 'Rr/ \ \ _ � � '� �✓ o ` Cltt FORESTER
5 . POPULUS SARGENT SAAGEW STRAW z' CAL Z
JERONIMUS' PLANS COTTONOOD
o
!S \ \ ��\� \ I 1\ \ NOTE: REFER TO SHEET 2 OOERcus MACPauRPA BUR DMc 2" AL N w d
II / ✓ / I (/ / 1 N
/ \ \ _ o (1\ \ / Z
LS003 FOR ALL SITE PLAN JUT
_ 12 + UIMER DAWU NY NDOMAN ELM 'CHUCE C2" GL r U
O // �� —';\\\ ° \ L\) ♦ \ NOTES & NATURAL HABITAT O J DOz z
\ y1
TRIP
\\\\\`\\ ,. `\ \\ BUFFER REQUIREMENTS pm. SYMBOL BOTANIC NAME COMMON NAME SUE HEIGHT WIDTH Z j Z EAU
ORNAMENTAL TREES U m J z
EVERGREEN TREES w U o- w
\ \ \\\ \ JUNIPERUS SCOPULORUM ROCKY MOUNTAIN JUNIPER 6' HE. 16-20' 8-17 - O ACER GANDIDENTATUM BIGTOOIH WEE (NULn-STEM) 6' HE I0-zO' 10-15' H F 2
12 O 0Of
W Q
51 G JUNIPERUS SCOPULORLM SKMOCKET JUNIPER 6' M. 12-2U' 2_p' ACER TATORIGUM 'HOT WINGS• HOT WINOS TATARIAN MAPLE 6' HT. 15-20' 12-15' V OS 0
(MIz
p \ - NUS TENUIFOLA THINLEAF ALDER (MULTI -STEM) 6' HT. 15-ZO' 15-20 >
tp RCEA PUNCENs COLgUDO SPRUCE 10-17 HE 80-100' 25-]0 A ¢ J
OUERCUS GNJBELII C+MBEE MK 6' HT. 15-YJ' 12-20' [C Q
9 FREA PUNGENs 'FAT ALBERY FAT HIiRT BLUE SPRUCE 10-12' HT. 50-60' 20-30' (MUm-STEM) R Q Of
w
III I.V-. m ! v e o
I I I 26 p PUPuws 1REMUN swmisx cowMAR AMEN 1s' CAL. PP-W' 1U-15' w >
11 PICEA GWJG 'OENMATA' BLACK HILLS SPRUCE 6' Hi. RO-10' 15-25' 'ERECTA' Oc 0
\ _ 12 Oi PRUNES NRGINIAA SUCKERPUNCH CHNECHERRY 1.5' CAL. I5-M 15-20' z
/ / I I11^III % 21 ® %NUS EDULS PINON PINE 6' HT. 12-20' 12-15' V
UJI
Cl I I ` e \ \ I I \ - PINES TILE%IS UMBER PINE 18-20 HI 20-25' 10-15 21 O 'AUTUMN
BIR % GRPRUIRUNA AENMN BRILLUNCE (MULTI -STEM) LS" CAL. IS-2U' 1U-IS'
'Auruury eMBLwcE' sEPVKmERRr Date: MARCH 2O16
R MINUS NEW TANNENBAUM' TANNENBAUM MUM PINE 6' HT. 12-15' 5-Drawn By JB
M
® 6' 3 MINI PEIIC01Ain PENING TREE UUC LS' CAL. ZO-25' 20-RS' Checked CR
A OVERALL TREE PLANTING PLAN Q Sheet
30' 0 15' 30' REP NORTH LP1,03
I AT 1/2 TREE HEIGHT
?AP
WOOD POSTS (2)
ROWN 2" ABOVE
GRADE.
GRADE.
WIRE TIES AND BURLAP
OP 3 OF FOOTBALL.
L MATERIAL.
DE.
n DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING
" scar: xrs m-o-ee-osNa.q
TREES
:EDED AREAS HOLD SEED
M TREE TRUNK 6" DW
iAN FOOTBALL. FORM A
NATER RING AND MULCH.
VRAP COTTONWOODS
WEBBING
CONSTRUCT A 4" DEEP
WATER HOLDING WELL
FROM COMPACTED SOIL
APPROX. LINE OF SLOPE
GUY WIRE WITH WEBBING
LOOPS AT FIRST
BRANCHES (MIN 4'-6"
ABOVE FINISH GRADE)
GUY ANCHOR. TOP OF
ANCHOR TO BE FLUSH
WITH FINISH GRADE.
TREE WRAP
WEED BARRIER
MULCH
PLANTING SOIL
SUBGRADE
�]N.131f'l"9Ni" 1' . rZiIJ11119L-
DECIDUOUS TREE ON SLOPE
r B e t12' -x' 57_7rceO7 d.q
SHRUB CENTER 1//2 O.C. SPACING MIN.
TR UT
WALL, CONIC HEADER,
OR TREE TRUNKS PAN SHALL BE EQUAL
DISTANT APART (SEE PUNT
E0. E0. LIST AND PUNT SPACING
OETPIL FOR SPACING)
2" MIN. MULCH OVER
ENTIRE BED; DO NOT
COVER CROWNS OF
PUNTS
Ar2' MOUNDED SAUCER
(D
TRIANGULAR SHRUB SPACING
E �� xn xT-PMl-gxsa-sPK
FABRIC
F PERENNIAL PLANTING qT-pmnnolarq
WEBBING AT i HEIGHT OF TREE.
GUY WIRE.
WARNING SLEEVE ON ALL GUYS
FOR ALL TREES IN LAWN OR
PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC AREAS.
ROOT CROWN 2" ABOVE EXISTING
GRADE.
MULCH.
FINISH GRADE.
REMOVE WIRE TIES AND BURLAP
FROM TOP 3 OF ROOTBALL.
GUY ANCHOR, TOP OF ANCHOR
TO BE FLUSH WITH FINISH GRADE.
BACKFILL MATERIAL.
COMPACTED SUBGRADE.
A¢ X ROOTBALL DIA.
n EVERGREEN TREE PLANTING
V SCN£'.N5 4e>my 'q
1/2 O.C. SPACING
MIN. TO WALLS, CONC HEADER
ATERIAL
SUBGRADE
)ES
n SHRUB PLANTING
U SGIf:xS M An
Date: MARCH 2O16
Drawn By.
Checked By
Sheet
LP501
HILL POND
O
J
PIN
NNmi
/--
i-
/
\ IIII II GI I I I I\ I I �I ♦
;I1; 11; I gI/ 1 1, '\`. '-- -_ - , 1 i ;J,• • ; ; ; , ; ;/ q;; 1,1
If
if k
/' III, • ✓ i L I 1♦ I I 1 1♦ \'
lil Ili ly.^\I,1 fl ° I \\lu_-` I Ir %1 , \ \, \\\�`\ I/, !l$,rl; /_ 4.♦`♦ 1 \\`♦ 1♦` 1\\\ \
INN)
i I
\ \ \ \
IN II 1111 1\\ \`\\♦\`\\;\\ `a`\
If
\1,
r
111�1 III 1 'r - T
, ili�lYll \ \, 4 I ____ , _ • ___-_____+��____- i� 6
I11 I _IN
' %'1 / /}{{11: 1 1 i I 1 `_r SPMNG CFEEK `- ��'.
'
IUINE, TYP PERIY
II -_+� , G ___ __~%- ` MMIR OF MORE( 1W
INNs� 1--- M \� -} �N - , I / -_ - 1 1 /
\ \\�
IIII \
J
;I;I �-
I
y
IIII G"ti: ( ♦ - ,
IIII F' oo /
IIII ((�� •K ` I
I)�
91
IN
IN.
,v
/�IIy
I � a
98
SUNNI 1YP /�rf, r' � J 1♦ 1\V ' 1-//gym /
W `t vim' G'� \ \ /
99
/
I
If t IV II
! /,r
l � i V
if.#" I• I `c /
111
I I %I % I T' x Ir O I\ l r C
II II
IS^
I
II III If I I I r i u3 C f\ f;
i1 t ] eF C, EXISTING
HORTICULTURE
CENTER at
II
11
11
II
11
II
11
11 1 I II ( I
1 I I I I I IIf I ; I 1
11 1 I 1 I
I I l l l P 11 I l
I 1 /l lll lj l
I I 1 I l I I I I
I 1111 Il I y l
i 1 1
1 I I I
I'%n/;/'
BASE fL00D
ELEVATIONS:
IJ,
CROSS SECTON
El£VATON NOTES:
//I ylI
199M
4997J6
19776
4990.88 FLOODWAY CONNEYMCf TINE
NNNNNNNNN
D651GNEB
KNEES
196M
499BH
,
KNEES
y' �
19620
499E41 SECTOR THROUGH STAGE
CHECDRUPAIKDY:
CHECKED BV:
CRH
CRH
19473
499B 39
JOE NUMBER
21
GATE.
1NR 901E
19392 999E10
ljil \
19266
4990.39
®JJA, INC
!/ I VIEW 4999.37
i
(7
e
10809
4990.37
Z
- I
I FfFNfI
W
,D
EASING STORM III PPE
Z W Q
1%
- - - - - -
IN WILT (LOUR) fFNA 100 M iL00DWAY
} W d
♦
01
PROPOSED CONTOURINK
W
F-
-4980
METRIC CONTOUR
O - ♦-
_
J
/
-
HEC-RM CROSS SECTION
=
W
w U H
Z
\♦ _
10609
HEC-RAS SECTION NUMBER
— - - —
GMDENS ON SPRING CREEK PROPERTY LINE
U = p
p
UNITS Of WORK FOR GIRDMS EWM90N
Q W
O
\1 \
MIMI
AREA Of GMOENS EIPM9ON MOLE
p
Z
p
I I I
BASE ROOD EIEVATONS
Q
\ I I
\\I
0O0
\VA\\V♦♦
PN
W
NN
♦`♦ \
---
� � _ ___
SHEET NUMBER
\
' -
ED
D ED 160
FIGURE 1
cr. E IN FEET
Attachment 9
Jason Holland
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Jason Holland
Wednesday, March 23, 2016 3:51 PM
Jason Holland
FW: Garden's develop. proposal
From: ELAYNE <ewmsdockmsn.com>
Date: February 29, 2016 at 7:29:20 PM MST
To: "gsgmerkfcgov.com" <gsavr ergfc o>
Subject: Garden's develop. proposal
Hi,
Since it seems like only those that have a "gripe" express their opinions I will
share mine. As I have property in the area under Willmeyer Properties I would
like to express my approval of this project. I think the Gardens are more than
adequately addressing the neighborhood concerns. I would expect much less of
a disturbance than what the Grove Apartments have done. I rather enjoy hearing
music in the distance. It seems like many of the comments are folks trying their hardest
to nit-pick just because they can.
Sincerely,
Elayne Williams
i
124
Attachment 9
Jason Holland
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Follow Up Flag:
Flag Status:
Kate Forgach <kateforgach@icloud.com>
Wednesday, March 02, 2016 2:12 PM
Jason Holland
Re the Gardens at Spring Creek
Follow up
Flagged
Reading through the mass of info sent to Sheely Addition neighbors and having taken my own "click" survey, it's clear we
do not want the stage structure at all!!!
Yet your notes make it clear you plan only on working to mitigate potential problems. Yet again, our neighborhood is
being treated as though we have no rights. We've been trampled upon by massive amounts of construction while CSU
continues to push its way into Whitcomb south of Prospect.
As far as I'm concerned, the loons have taken over Bedlam and we are paying the highest price.
Kate Forgach
Writer at Large
970-217-7444
1
125
Gardens on Spring Creek Master Plan
Major Amendment
Neighborhood Meeting
July 24th, 2014
1. Introductions
Proposed amendment to original Master Plan
2. Overview of West Central Area Plan (WCAP) also provided:
➢ Overview of WCAP
➢ Council work session August 26th
3. Main presentation for the proposed master plan amendment:
Presenters:
Consultants: Craig Russell and John Beggs with Russell Mills; Ben Seeps with DLM
associates in Denver
Applicant: Michelle Provaznik, Director, The Gardens on Spring Creek
Introductions of the vision
o Building on Master Plan from 2000
o Find new solutions for growing a garden
o Garden must be revenue generating
o Developing remaining 5 acres with various landscapes
Project goals and objectives
o Welcoming and inspirational settings for events, including 1500 people for
events
o Create a foothills landscape that "captures regional context"
o Develop Undaunted Garden—xeriscaping
➢ Storm water will grow slightly, but buffer along Spring Creek Trail will remain intact
➢ Large bike parking area
➢ Sound mitigation walls next to the stage will be nestled in trees 15-20 feet in height.
➢ More like a park setting and less like an amphitheater
➢ Themed gardens meant to be a showing/viewing area
➢ Stage structure will play off of structures already existing in the gardens, and is
shaped for sound mitigation
➢ CSU Master Plan
o Using shared parking with new tennis facility
o Currently in the stages of proposed plans that aren't currently funded
Connectivity
o MAX
it
126
o Potential CSU shared parking garage
o Bike parking off Spring Creek Trail
o Shared parking across the street
o Parking ratio: 1.4 people per vehicle
➢ Performances
o Frequency: 6-8 Events per season, 1 every 2 weeks
o Times: 6-8 PM -No music after 8pm
Q: have afternoon events been planned?
A: possibility
o Programming: Acoustic, adult contemporary
Q: Are tickets sold, to limit the number of people?
A: Yes
4. Question and answer portion
Q: Your sign said + or— 1500, what does this mean?
A: Current calculations are based on comfort of square foot per person, so about
15 feet per person
Q: Do you think people will sit on the trail, or around my house?
A: Security will be on site
Q: For how long?
A: No answer at this point in time
Q: The limit was capped before at 500, why is the cap expanding?
A: Another public process is needed to accommodate something of this size.
Standard will be enforced.
Q: Our property values will go down if we don't have life, liberty and the use of
our property. This is the city reviewing the city, and trust is gone. How will the
city enforce noise?
A: Decibel limits for sound levels are enforced by Neighborhood Services Code
Compliance staff
Q: Neighborhood Services doesn't show up now. Why will they show up then?
A: They respond as they can
Q: Why does the city need to be in this business? Why would you dump another
problem on our neighborhood? Would you buy my house right next to all of this?
None of this matters. What happens when a city blights another neighborhood?
Police don't show up when called.
A: That is not our intent as a city
Q: Is there a limit to weddings and smaller events?
K
127
A: Won't be going past 8 pm. Will be within sound limits required by the City of
Fort Collins in the municipal code
Q: Where do you measure these lines?
A: property lines with a decibel meter
C: Measure of decibels: 90, which is like a diesel truck 10 m away
C: The sound models proposed must be false (before sound mitigation walls)
because the sound on my porch from a wedding reception this past weekend
was much louder than your saying it will be.
A: We will be moving away from the wedding reception venue, and more of a
wedding ceremony event
A: Alternative sound options when moving the stage is the same amount of
decibels in an average household (50 -55 decibels)
A: Grove of trees around the wall sound barriers will begin at 15 feet, stucco and
transparent on top, surround the walls with Evergreen trees
Q:
Why are
the walls
so close to the
houses?
A:
There
is
plenty of
room
between
the
house and the wall
Q: Is topography accounted for here?
A: Floodplain technology used to account for that
C: The wall is an eyesore and it right up against our houses. The wall will have
too much graffiti.
A: Conifers will cover the wall
C: Conifers need space, they will die
A: What about vine covered walls?
C: They take too long to grow over a wall
C: You put the stage so close to the houses. Move Spring Creek Trail to move the
stage away from neighborhoods
A: This is the already approved framework
Q: Why go back to the Master Plan when you're trying to modify
Master Plan?
A: We are trying to make the Master Plan a reality
C: This is not implementing the Master Plan when you add 1000 people on top of
the 500 originally stated in the Master Plan
Q: Can the fence be moved?
Q: Is revenue not decent enough for the city right now?
A: We are trying to be a more self-sustaining
9
128
C: If you can't support yourself, tax us more
A: That is not my call
Q: Increasing number of attendees... will this help your business problem?
A: Admission revenues, donations, and grants
Q: Where did the 1500 people come from? Why 1500 of all numbers?
A: Quality acts to charge admission for, and people in the industry tell me this is
the game changer number
C:
Chataqua
in Boulder seats
1300, and this
is larger than Chataqua
A:
I was not
aware of that, I
will look into
that
Q: Has this money already been allocated?
A: No, we are in the process of getting donations
Q: What is the offer?
A: 2.5 million in total. Comprehensive capital campaign is in order. Building is 3
million and gardens are 2.5 million. We will raise 5.5 million and receive a
$500,000 endowment
Q: So this is under Bob 2 in the BFO?
A: Yes, we don't have the BFO numbers for this project yet, but we proposed 2
million
Q:
Are
you
asking for additional revenue from the city?
A:
We
will
be operating and supporting ourselves
Q: Is providing financial models part of the review process?
A: I don't know, I will look into it
Q: Will the 1500 be coming all at one time?
A: All attendance numbers are tracked
Q:
How
does
Lincoln Center get involved?
A:
They
handle
getting the performers involved
Q: Our neighborhood does not have a pocket park. There's no place for kids to
play. What do you think Ted?
A: Ted Shepard: Parks and Rec won't replicate services so close to Rolland
Moore. I understand the concern, we don't have an answer.
Q:
Are there
places around
here where a
playground could go?
A:
Currently
not supporting
pocket
parks
of the original
plan in the Master Plan
rd
129
Q: Flood plain issue, where the stage might sit in terms of flood plain. Our
neighborhood was adversely affected by the Grove by the changes in flood plain.
A: We have been working with flood plain folks. Great Lawn acts as a basin for
flood control
Q: What's the surface of the bike parking area? Will there be bike racks?
A: The bike parking area will be a permeable surface or permeable pavers. This
will be permanent bike parking.
Q: Concern about parking —only 66 guaranteed spots, but 1500 people coming
in, is this a concern?
A: Synergistic relationship between shared parking facilities, plus connections to
MAX and bike parking
Q: What is break down time like for performances?
A: By 9:00 everyone would be gone including performers and stray folks after
concerts
Q: Lighting impacts?
A: Small ball lighting in the ground
Q: Lighting around bike parking?
A: We haven't submitted anything yet
Q:
Will
the walls
impact
flood plain?
A:
That
shouldn't
be an
issue
Q: Are there any plans for all day festival events?
A: No
Q: Will people begin to park on our street?
A: Permits can be issued
Q: Gardens of Spring Creek is a failed operation. You are not paying interest. At
what point do you say this doesn't make any sense? Yes it's beautiful, but this is
not botanical
A: This is very botanical
Q: What are all of your revenue streams?
A: Charge admission, museum memberships, education programs, increasing
attendance in general with 60,000 residents last year with only half the facility
completed, donations, and an annual campaign. Essentially anyway a non-profit
supports themselves is what we are doing
I✓
130
Q: What other avenues have you explored to obtain the same objective other
than an event venue?
A: Other smaller options, but the Great Lawn is the fundraising magnet
Q: We need this place to raise money?
A: Encompassed by surrounding garden open 365 days per year which will bring
in revenue as well
Q: Can we stick with the original 500 as stated in the Master Plan?
A: There wasn't a lot of original thought in that number. This all depends on the
types of performers we are going to showcase. The types of performances we
will have will have larger crowds than 500 people
Q: Do they have police for trails in Boulder?
A: Yes
Q: I can envision trash in my yard, but your responsibility ends at your fence
lane. So that's alright, but then we would have to call the police which is another
responsive issue. They are slow to respond if they respond at all
A: We are trying to build in regulations to avoid creep in the future
Q:
Timing of this and public
input in
front
of City council
... what is this timeline?
A:
Public meetings will occur
where
all of
you will be
invited
Q: When will ground be broken to begin this project?
A: Spring of 2015
Q: Is private fundraising dependent on the whole package?
A: Assumption we would have to raise 5.5 million dollars (Spring Creek
representatives)
Q: Is this a Type 1 review, requiring an administrative hearing officer?
A: Cameron Gloss: Yes
Q: Why is this Type 1? Is it listed as a Type 1 review use?
A: Cameron Gloss: It's based on the original approval. Increasing number of
people from the Master Plan constitutes a Type 1 hearing and major
amendment.
Q: When will there be further detail in the progress of the plan?
A: In the coming months. Is there anything to be done to generally help with
your concern?
11
131
C:
move the
Great Lawn further away from
homes
C:
We don't
want the
dense
forest with no
lighting near the wall
Q: Has this facility seen more traffic from the Grove?
A: More kids at the bus stops, many coming in to volunteer but no significant
increase in traffic.
Q: What do you foresee as the demographics who would be interested in this
kind of music?
A: Middle aged
7
132
Gardens on Spring Creek Master Plan
Major Amendment
Neighborhood Meeting #2
September 8, 2014
Project Applicants:
• Consultants: Craig Russell and John Beggs of Russell + Mills Studios
• Michelle Provaznik, Gardens on Spring Creek Manager
Questions and answers:
Q: Question; A: Answer; C: Comment
(Unless noted, answers provided are from the applicants)
Q: Where does Lilac Park go?
A: We're having discussions with Park Planning. We want to create an expression of a
neighborhood pocket park and it would likely be more linear along the creek.
Q: Won't developing Lilac Park mean more people hanging out at Lilac Park during concerts?
A: There would be a separate planning and design process for Lilac Park.
C: Concern was expressed that reconfiguring Lilac Park would sacrifice the wildlife corridor for
the benefit of an event venue.
Q: The Employment zone doesn't allow for this as a permitted use. Starting at a macro level —
the amphitheater use is not permitted in the Employment zone district. Does this zone allow
for an amphitheater?
A: (City staff) Staff looked at the use when this question came up after the first neighborhood
meeting. The current use listed on the plan is a neighborhood park. The closest appropriate use
for the whole center is a Community Facility, and the amphitheater would be permitted as part
of the facility.
C: If it's a community facility, it has to be open to the community. This would be walled off and
there would be an entrance fee — the definition of a community facility does not speak to that.
Q: Concerns with ability of pedestrians to cross Center Avenue. Will there be a signal/light at
grade crossing?
A: Don't know yet, the City's traffic review might address this once the project is submitted for
staff review.
Q: Are the Gardens on Spring Creek a part of the Park Department? Is this proposal from them?
A: It is a facility within the Parks Department and owned by them.
it
133
C: Why would Parks Department pick a small site for an amphitheater? I don't remember an
amphitheater being a part of the mission/vision of the Gardens. The original approval was for
300 people, this is over 800% bigger. There are also already more than 6-8 events and they run
later than 8 p.m.
A: We would end the performance music at 8 p.m. and these events would be done by 8:30.
Q: Will alcohol be served?
A: Still undecided. May be served, cannot be sold.
C: We want to see the Garden's budget, rate of return, etc. We want to see the numbers.
We're worried that there will be a ton of events to make it work financially.
A: We're offering to cap the performance events.
C: Concern that fire truck/emergency vehicles can't get to great lawn.
A: (City staff) Poudre Fire Authority will be reviewing the access if the formal submittal comes
in for review.
Q: The original plan projected sound away from the residents. Why does this not need to go to
the Planning and Zoning Board?
A: (City staff) It's based on the original approval. Because the original approval was approved
by a hearing officer, the major amendment also is reviewed by a hearing officer.
Q: An appeal stills goes to City Council even if it's not a Planning and Zoning Board project?
A: (City staff) Yes, and appeal of a hearing officer would go to City Council, same as if the
Planning and Zoning Board reviewed the project.
Q: How will events be counted?
A: All performances would be hosted by the Gardens through the Lincoln Center, and we would
be able to count and schedule the number of events.
C: Concern with a multi -day event only being counted as one event.
A: There would not be any multi -day performance events.
Q: Will there still be wildlife corridors?
A: (City staff) There is still a buffer requirement along the Spring Creek corridor and the Gardens
would be required to provide an ecological study that staff will review with their formal
submittal.
Q: Will there be sound mitigation between the crowd and the residents?
A: Yes, the sound walls are intended to buffer crowd noise and the music. (Applicant continues
presentation showing where the proposed walls are located)
Q: What is the size of the walls and what will they look like?
N
134
Craig Russell continues the presentation showing the proposed wall design and buffer
landscaping.
Q: How do they know there won't be more or longer events? What happens if they don't
follow it?
A: (City staff) They would need to incorporate notes/requirements into the plans with a much
tighter approval document. The enforcement would be through City zoning.
C: An event needs to be defined as one day, not multi -day. You should also include the max
number of events per calendar year.
A: (Applicant) All events will be ticketed and we can control the timing of the events.
Q: How will security work and how far along trail will security be placed? Already concerns
now, will be worse with 1,500 people dispersing.
A: This could be provided by off -duty police and park rangers. It's unclear what a reasonable
distance would be. Security would make sure artists end on time.
C: This will be primarily foot and bike traffic, 1,500 people through the neighborhoods,
concerned if people linger after an event is over.
Q: Can there be additional lighting along the trail?
A: There will be some additional lighting within the grounds but not more along the trail due to
Parks Department policy on trail lighting.
Q: How did you decide on 1,500 people for an event?
A: Lincoln Center staff has advised that in order to get high quality ticketed events, this is the
number to make it work.
C: Need to make sure it's clear that this proposal is bigger than the Lincoln Center venue.
Craig Russell continues with a presentation of the revised master plan and sound level
exhibits, and an outline of the proposed event restrictions that will be in perpetuity with the
project.
Q: The music already seems over the allowable noise level. I can hear it in my basement. What
about when you include the crowd noise? That will push the noise levels louder.
A: Crowd noise is factored into the sound models.
Q: In "perpetuity" in the notes, what does that mean? When can it be changed?
A: (City Staff) There's no guarantee that a plan will not change and will remain the same "in
perpetuity". If they proposed a change, it would need to go through a review process and new
public hearing for any major change.
C: More concerns were expressed about how to enforce the plan and how to enforce
conditions written on the plan.
91
135
Q: Would this be viable with a smaller venue (less than 1,500 people)?
A: We don't think so, and the event stage is pretty common with other botanical gardens
around the country.
C: More concerns were expressed about the frequency of the events, and that 8 events per
season could be more than 2 events per month. Concerns were expressed that 8 events seem
like a lot for the surrounding neighborhoods.
C: Concerns were
expressed about how loud
1,500
people would be before, after and during
the performance
and the role alcohol would
play in
increasing the crowd noise.
Q: How can sound walls be put into the flood plain? What would happen if it flooded like in
1997?
A: The stage and lawn area is part of the flood storage zone, not the conveyance zone. Also all
of the removable structures must be cabled down.
Q:
Why do
the Gardens need
to be self-sustaining? Other City services are not.
A:
We are
currently 50% self
-funded.
Q: What about lowering the stage and lawn seating and putting it into a bowl?
A: We have lowered it about 3 feet, but there are ground water issues with lowering it further.
Q: What is the effect on noise levels if the sound wall and stage / lawn are moved further east?
A: The sound model shows only a small reduction in the sounds levels if the venue is moved
east.
C: The property line is not the correct line where the sound levels should be measured. This
should be the HOA line further east.
C: Other alternatives should be explored to generate revenue other than the performance
venue.
Q: Will the mission / vision of the gardens be re -done? The venue seems to be a change
philosophically.
With no more questions, the meeting was adjourned at approximately 8:15 p.m.
w
136
F6rt of
Gardens on Spring Creek Major Amendment
Planning and Zoning Board Continued Hearing
April 7, 2016
Summary of Neighborhood Concerns and Plan Changes:
Neighborhood
Addressed in Proposed Plans
Addressed by Gardens Staff
Concern
and Notes
See plan notes (Attachment 6, Sheet
LS003 )
General Standards
Addressed in plans and notes:
Addressed by Gardens Staff:
to address Event
• All events must meet City code:
• All Music Concerts to occur
Sound and Scope
55 dB(A): 7 a.m. to 8
between May and September.
p.m.
50 dB(A): 8 p.m. to 7 a.m.
• Music Concerts will be coordinated
What's Changed on the
and not overlap with major CSU
plan:
• No more than 8 Music Concerts per
events.
year.
➢ Garden's property
line to the west now
•Attendance cap of 1,500 persons at
included in
music concerts.
enforcement of sound
. All Music Concerts shall be
levels.
ticketed.
➢ A new sound wall
• Maximum attendance to be
added along the
managed and regulated through
western boundary of
ticket sales.
the site.
• Festivals/multi-day concerts
prohibited.
Time Limitations to
Addressed in plans and notes:
Addressed by Gardens Staff:
Address Noise and
• Music for all events to end by 8
• Garden gates will open one hour (or
Sound
p.m.
time most suitable as determined
by Gardens and neighbors) prior to
• Music Concerts: visitors to leave by
show times to allow ticket holders
9 pm.
onto property.
• General Events: end by 9 pm. and
visitors to leave by 10 pm.
• Private Events: end by 8 pm. and
visitors to leave by 9 pm.
1of6
137
Scope of Events —
Addressed in plans and notes:
Definitions and
• "Music Concert" is defined and
limitations to
replaces "ticketed events":
address:
• "There shall be a maximum of (8)
music concert events per year with
➢ Problems with the
an attendance cap of 1,500
terms "ticketed
persons. The maximum attendance
events" and "non-
shall be managed and regulated
ticketed events";
through ticket sales. All music
terms could be
concert events shall be ticketed."
misinterpreted in the
• A "General Event" replaces "non -
future allowing
ticketed event" and is defined as:
additional concerts.
Any event which uses all or a
portion of the gardens, other than
➢ Clarify that "non-
day-to-day attendance for the
ticketed events" shall
purpose of viewing the gardens, in
not include large, free
which attendance is anticipated to
concerts.
be more than 100 persons for the
event."
• General Events Include: Garden of
Lights Tour, school field trips,
education programs and tours,
sculpture in the garden, spring
plant sale, yoga in the gardens,
garden a 'fare, nature's harvest
fest, Halloween enchanted garden.
• Additional General Events may be
considered by Garden's staff.
• No attendance cap for General
Events. Such events may provide
amplified music in compliance with
the municipal code.
Private Events:
Addressed in plans and notes:
Addressed by Gardens Staff:
• "Private events include all private
• Private events will also be
➢ Clarify scope and
rentals such as weddings,
addressed in the Garden's
limitations.
birthdays, etc."
operating agreement
(Neighborhood Plan).
• Private events may not have DJ's
and any proposed music must be
• Private events are limited to 350
approved by Gardens staff.
attendees.
• No private concerts allowed.
2 of 6
138
Sound Monitoring
Addressed in plans and notes:
• Music Concerts: Active sound level
monitoring enforcement during
performance.
• Direct override control at the
mixing console (See Attachment 5).
• Perimeter monitoring stations
included.
• All other events: Active monitoring
by Gardens staff.
Addressed by Gardens Staff:
• Private events may not have DJ's
and any proposed music must be
approved by Gardens staff.
• Music Concerts: Active sound level
monitoring enforcement during the
performance event.
Security and Safety
Addressed in plans and notes:
Addressed by Gardens Staff:
• Music Concerts: Security staff at
• Gardens staff will manage event
entrance points and perimeter of
policies and refine operations as
premises. Staff to be Gardens staff
needed.
or private company contracted by
Gardens.
• Egress lighting provided; turned off
no later than 10 pm.
• Crossing Assistants provided to
help pedestrians at Centre Avenue.
Alcohol Sales and
Addressed in plans and notes:
Addressed by Gardens Staff:
Monitoring
• Any alcoholic beverages sold during
• Alcohol sales could be limited by
events shall be served by trained
drink number or by limiting times of
and licensed servers.
sales (i.e. alcohol only available
from 5:30-7:30.) Details are not
• Servers shall follow all City
finalized.
regulations, consistent with other
City facilities and events.
• Any limitations on alcohol made
available will be determined by
Gardens with neighbor committee
input.
• No permanent alcohol signage or
advertising will be allowed.
3 of 6
139
Port -a -Lets
Addressed in plans and notes:
Addressed by Gardens Staff:
• Port -a -Lets will be elevated above
• Port -a -Lets will be onsite for as
regulated flood level.
minimal time as necessary for
vendor schedule.
• Port -a -Lets will be ground
anchored.
• The Gardens will rely on GSI
Sanitation recommendations for
number of needed Port -a -lets
(currently estimated at 5 for a 3-
hour event) given the existing
restrooms on -site.
• The proposed plan provides space
for additional Port -a -Lets if needed.
• Bike path will not be used or
impacted during pick-up or delivery.
Parking Concerns
Addressed in plans and notes:
Addressed by Gardens Staff:
• "No public on -street parking" shall
• Parking instructions and options will
be strictly enforced for all music
be provided and included with
concerts on Centre Avenue and on
ticket purchase for all music concert
streets in the Windtrail and Sheely
events.
neighborhoods.
• Neighborhood parking enforcement
• Anticipated minimum off-street
will be addressed through a
parking quantities are shown on
windshield pass system, active
the land use table on Sheet LS100.
barricade, or other agreeable
method.
• These parking quantities are
anticipated minimums, and shall be
adjusted to meet the parking
demands of events if needed.
• Proposed parking locations are
shown on Sheet LS002.
• Agreements for off -site parking
locations shall be adjusted, if
needed, to meet parking demands
for events.
4 of 6
140
Trespass/Loitering/
Addressed by Gardens Staff:
Camping
• Garden gates will open one hour (or
time most suitable as determined
by Gardens and neighbors) prior to
show times to allow ticket holders
onto property.
• The Gardens will work with the
Parks Department, Rangers,
Neighborhood Services, and Police
Services to address any unlawful
and disruptive behaviors either on
Gardens property or on adjacent
public property.
• If necessary, Gardens will work with
Parks Department on a special
event permit to temporarily close
the portion of Lilac Park adjacent to
The Gardens during Music Concert
events.
Flooding Concerns
Addressed in plans and notes:
Addressed by Gardens Staff:
• All structures and sound walls
• Gardens staff is aware of floodplain
(including anchoring design) must
restrictions and will continue to
➢ More explanation of
be designed by a licensed
actively manage property based on
proposed plan and
structural engineer and shall meet
the Floodplain Use Permit.
floodplain
all City floodplain and building
requirements
permit requirements.
provided to
neighbors.
• Stage design as a concrete pad,
elevated above flood level with
➢ Similar park examples
earthwork, terraced by stone walls.
provided.
• Floodplain modeling exhibit
provided (Attachment 8) showing
➢ More clarification and
areas above the flood levels in
notes added to the
green.
plans.
• Outdoor storage of materials that
might float away is prohibited.
• Final City review and Floodplain
Use Permit required prior to
construction. Detailed summary of
floodplain requirements on page 9
and 10 of the staff report.
5 of 6
141
• All proposed earthwork is balanced
so that any proposed raise in grade
(fill) is offset by lowering the grade
(cut) in other areas of the site.
General
Addressed in plans and notes:
Addressed by Gardens Staff:
Enforcement
• As noted in the plan requirements,
• The Gardens is committed to being
Concerns
changes to the plans or scope of
a good neighbor and to working
operations may require an
directly with appropriate
amendment to plans to be
enforcement staff to ensure illegal
approved.
and disruptive behaviors are
addressed in a timely manner.
• The Gardens supports the creation
of a Neighborhood Committee and
an Event Hotline. (Details have not
been finalized.)
6 of 6
142