The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 05/17/2016 - ALTERNATE REVIEW OF THE APRIL 7, 2016, PLANNING ANAgenda Item 21 Item # 21 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY May 17, 2016 City Council STAFF Cameron Gloss, Planning Manager SUBJECT Alternate Review of the April 7, 2016, Planning and Zoning Board Decision Approving the Major Amendment to the Centre For Advanced Technology 22nd Filing, Community Horticulture Center #MJA 150006 Pertaining to the Gardens on Spring Creek and First Reading of Ordinance No. 074, 2016, Modifying the April 7, 2016, Planning and Zoning Board Decision Approving the Major Amendment to The Centre For Advanced Technology 22nd Filing, Community Horticulture Center #MJA 150006 Pertaining To The Gardens On Spring Creek With Conditions. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to review the April 7 Planning & Zoning Board decision regarding the Gardens on Spring Creek amended Master Plan, formally known as the Major Amendment to the Centre for Advanced Technology 22nd Filing, Community Horticulture Center. The Board approved the Gardens amended master plan on the condition that: (1) the general standards related to time limitations, sound monitoring, and security and safety requirements set forth in attachment 3 (to the Board packet) be included in the notes set forth on the site plan; and (2) that the 14 foot high western sound mitigation wall be removed from the project. Under Section 2.2.12 of the Land Use Code, the Planning & Zoning Board decision on this City project is not subject to appeal. Instead, Section 2.2.12(B) provides for an “Alternate Review” by Council as requested by a City Councilmember within the 14 days following the Board’s decision. The Alternate Review permits the Council to review the Board’s decision on the City’s amended master plan as an exercise of its legislative power over a City development project and, after conducting a hearing, to adopt an ordinance overturning or modifying the Board’s decision if Council so desires in its sole discretion. The Ordinance modifying the Board decision is included for Council’s use if desired. The Ordinance: 1. Does not offer the option of overturning the Board’s approval of the Gardens amended master plan (with conditions), since this would leave the City without an approved amended plan and necessitate a new application by the Gardens; 2. Clarifies the Board’s decision by clearly identifying the “general standards” to be included on the amended site plan (since the Board reference to standards on “attachment 3” of its materials may have resulted in some confusion); and 3. Includes a possible modification to the Board decision to re-instate the westernmost sound wall, since the Board’s approval removed this element of the City’s plan and this is the portion of the decision that generated much of the discussion at the Board’s hearing and has an impact on the Garden’s operational plan, and a placeholder for other possible modifications (in case any are desired). If Council wishes to include other modifications to the Board Decision, such changes can be added to the Ordinance by amendment. Agenda Item 21 Item # 21 Page 2 If a motion to consider the Ordinance to modify fails for lack of a second or is postponed indefinitely, or if the Ordinance is voted down, then the Planning and Zoning April 7, 2016, decision will remain unmodified and in effect. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council conduct an Alternate Review of the Planning and Zoning Board decision. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The original master plan for the Gardens on Spring Creek was approved in 2001. At that time, the master plan included a number of future components, which are now planned in detail with the currently proposed Master Plan. Specifically, the amended components that are shown with these proposed plans include:  expanded garden areas;  a stage structure, sound walls, and attendance increase for music concerts;  a modified circulation and parking plan; and  site plan notes which update the operational and management standards for Gardens events, and include other standard City requirements (Attachment 3). 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 2001 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 2001 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. Because 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 triggered a Major Amendment review process. 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 Agenda Item 21 Item # 21 Page 3 Board in all instances, despite the fact that certain uses would otherwise have been subject to administrative review. 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, Solar Access, 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.  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. Agenda Item 21 Item # 21 Page 4  An updated floodplain memo has been 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 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.  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.  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 Agenda Item 21 Item # 21 Page 5 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 II - 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. 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 fifth 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. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS City financial impacts were not reviewed with the project’s Major Amendment development review process. PUBLIC OUTREACH Prior to initial consideration by the Planning and Zoning Board, three neighborhood meetings were held for the proposed project on July 24, 2014; September 8, 2014; and February 8, 2016. The project was originally presented to the Planning and Zoning Board at its December 15, 2015 hearing. At the hearing, the Board continued this item, and directed staff to continue neighborhood outreach efforts.  On February 8, 2016, the City hosted an additional 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.  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. A detailed meeting summary letter was also mailed to all residents within the notification area summarizing the changes. Agenda Item 21 Item # 21 Page 6  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 for music concerts was also added, which includes a direct override control at the mixing console. 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  Floodplain/Environmental Assessment  Other/Grove/Lilac Park Comments captured at the February 8, 2016 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. Through a polling exercise conducted at the meeting, noise, parking, enforcement, and trespassing issues were the top concerns of those attending. Based on comments and questions staff received at the meeting, mitigation techniques are incorporated into the Garden’s operations in two ways:  Addressed with the Site Plan Notes as General Standards which are included with the proposed amended Master Plan. Attachment 3 provides a full list of these noted standards that are included with the proposed plan.  Addressed by Gardens Staff as operating agreements to be finalized with neighbor input through the formation of a Neighborhood Committee. Attachment 2 provides a summary of neighborhood concerns Agenda Item 21 Item # 21 Page 7 and a matrix comparison of the noted standards that are included with the proposed plan (Attachment 3) and the additional standards that are not included with these plan notes, which are addressed separately by Gardens staff. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map (PDF) 2. Summary of Standards to Address Neighborhood Concerns (PDF) 3. Site Plan Notes (Operational Standards and other notes) (PDF) 4. Site Plan Color Rendering (PDF) 5. West Wall Photo Simulation (PDF) 6. Floodplain Exhibit (PDF) 7. Floodplain effective / ineffective flow exhibit (PDF) 8. Planning and Zoning Board minutes, April 7, 2016 (PDF) 9. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) Colorado State University Colorado State University Spring Creek Country Day School Har Shalom Preschool And Kindergarten Bennett Elementary Trinity Lutheran Church Preschool Creekside Park Rolland Moore Community Park Lilac Park Spring Park Spring Creek Rolland Moore Pond «¬287 Bay Rd South Dr W Pitkin St East Dr Sheely Dr Frontage Rd Shire Ct Mathews St H a rva r d S t Birky Pl S Whitcomb St Meridian Ave H i l l P ond R d Y a l e A v e Juniper Ln Roll a n d Mo o re Dr Hobbit St Parker St E Lake St Balsam Ln Wallenberg Dr G 1 of 6 Gardens on Spring Creek Major Amendment Planning and Zoning Board Continued Hearing April 7, 2016 Summary of Neighborhood Concerns and Plan Changes: Neighborhood Concern Addressed in Proposed Plans and Notes See plan notes (Attachment 6, Sheet LS003) Addressed by Gardens Staff General Standards to address Event Sound and Scope What’s Changed on the plan:  Garden’s property line to the west now included in enforcement of sound levels.  A new sound wall added along the western boundary of the site. Addressed in plans and notes: • All events must meet City code: 55 dB(A): 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. 50 dB(A): 8 p.m. to 7 a.m. • No more than 8 Music Concerts per year. • Attendance cap of 1,500 persons at music concerts. • All Music Concerts shall be ticketed. • Maximum attendance to be managed and regulated through ticket sales. • Festivals/multi-day concerts prohibited. Addressed by Gardens Staff: • All Music Concerts to occur between May and September. • Music Concerts will be coordinated and not overlap with major CSU events. Time Limitations to Address Noise and Sound Addressed in plans and notes: • Music for all events to end by 8 p.m. • Music Concerts: visitors to leave by 9 pm. • 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. Addressed by Gardens Staff: 2 of 6 Scope of Events – Definitions and limitations to address:  Problems with the terms “ticketed events” and “non- ticketed events”; terms could be misinterpreted in the future allowing additional concerts.  Clarify that “non- ticketed events” shall not include large, free concerts. Addressed in plans and notes: • “Music Concert” is defined and replaces “ticketed events”: • “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.” • A “General Event” replaces “non- ticketed event” and is 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, 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:  Clarify scope and limitations. Addressed in plans and notes: • “Private events include all private rentals such as weddings, birthdays, etc.” • Private events may not have DJ’s and any proposed music must be approved by Gardens staff. Addressed by Gardens Staff: 3 of 6 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: • Music Concerts: Security staff at entrance points and perimeter of premises. Staff to be Gardens staff 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. Addressed by Gardens Staff: • Gardens staff will manage event policies and refine operations as needed. Alcohol Sales and Monitoring Addressed in plans and notes: • Any alcoholic beverages sold during events shall be served by trained and licensed servers. • Servers shall follow all City regulations, consistent with other City facilities and events. Addressed by Gardens Staff: • 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. • No permanent alcohol signage or advertising will be allowed. ATTACHMENT 2 4 of 6 Port-a-Lets Addressed in plans and notes: • Port-a-Lets will be elevated above regulated flood level. • Port-a-Lets will be ground anchored. Addressed by Gardens Staff: • Port-a-Lets will be onsite for as minimal time as necessary for vendor schedule. • 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: • “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. • Anticipated minimum off-street parking quantities are shown on the land use table on Sheet LS100. • 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. Addressed by Gardens Staff: • Parking instructions and options will be provided and included with ticket purchase for all music concert events. • Neighborhood parking enforcement will be addressed through a windshield pass system, active barricade, or other agreeable method. ATTACHMENT 2 5 of 6 Trespass/Loitering/ Camping Addressed by Gardens Staff: • 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  More explanation of proposed plan and floodplain requirements provided to neighbors.  Similar park examples provided.  More clarification and notes added to the plans. Addressed in plans and notes: • All structures and sound walls (including anchoring design) must be designed by a licensed structural engineer and shall meet all City floodplain and building permit requirements. • Stage design as a concrete pad, elevated above flood level with earthwork, terraced by stone walls. • Floodplain modeling exhibit provided (Attachment 8) showing areas above the flood levels in green. • 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. Addressed by Gardens Staff: • Gardens staff is aware of floodplain restrictions and will continue to actively manage property based on the Floodplain Use Permit. 6 of 6 • 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 Enforcement Concerns Addressed in plans and notes: • As noted in the plan requirements, changes to the plans or scope of operations may require an amendment to plans to be approved. Addressed by Gardens Staff: • 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.) ATTACHMENT 2 1 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. ATTACHMENT 3 2 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 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. ATTACHMENT 3 3 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. 2. “NO PUBLIC ON-STREET PARKING” SHALL BE STRICTLY ENFORCED FOR GSC 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 REVIEWED AND APPROVED. 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 SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSES POLICIES AND ACTIONS THAT WILL BE 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. ATTACHMENT 3 4 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 COMMUNITY AS 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 ATTACHMENT 3 5 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 ACTIVITIES WILL OCCUR DURING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT. 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. 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 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. ATTACHMENT 3 6 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. 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. ATTACHMENT 3 russell+mills studios Gardens on Spring 0 15 30 60’ Creek S P R I N G C R E E K T R A I L GREAT LAWN UNDAUNTED GARDEN COMMUNITY GARDEN Overall Site Plan PARKING C E N T R E A V E SPRING CREEK STORM WATER DETENTION/ WETLANDS ROCK GARDEN CAFE GROVE Backdrop Planting Evergreen Screening adjacent to sound mitigation wall Proposed Fence, typ. Future Trail Connection to PERC Existing Tree, typ. Stage Tents Stage 35’x40’ Terraced Shade Seating Moon Garden Sound Mitigation Walls Sound Mitigation Wall along west property line Fragrance Garden russell+mills studios Gardens on Spring Creek West Soundwall Photosimulation Existing view looking south on Spring Creek Trail Existing buffer planting between Existing Evergreen Trees Spring Creek Trail trail and adjacent neighborhood $77$&+0(17 ATTACHMENT 5 russell+mills studios Gardens on Spring Creek West Soundwall Photosimulation Existing buffer planting between trail and adjacent neighborhood View looking south on Spring Creek Trail Spring Creek Trail Sound Mitigation Wall - 14’ height Step back at end of wall Evergreen Screen Planting - (Height Shown at Time of Planting) Existing Evergreen Trees Beginning of step back for sound mitigation wall - 10’ wall height $77$&+0(17 ATTACHMENT 6 russell+mills studios Gardens on Spring Creek Floodplain Design Criteria • Primary Gardens site is storage/ not conveyance - CUT AND FILL MUST BE BALANCED IN GRADING PLAN • Volume calculations required for site elements, including temporary elements • New Floodplain Use Permit will become overriding permit document for The Gardens • No enclosed structures within floodplain • Portable restrooms to be cabled and on raised platform - removed after each event Floodplain Criteria ATTACHMENT 7 Planning & Zoning Board April 7, 2016 DRAFT minutes Project: Centre for Advanced Technology 22nd Filing, Community Horticulture Center #MJA150006 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:  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. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe recused himself due to a conflict of interest; Senior City Attorney Schmidt sat in for him for this project. Recommendation: Approval Staff and Applicant Presentations Planner Holland gave some updates and highlights of this project, including the reason for the major amendment being proposed, the additional neighborhood outreach performed, and the concerns that were previously addressed. He reviewed the various outreach efforts and mediation procedures performed, polling that was done, comments received, and the sound mitigation plan. He showed some slides to indicate the changes to the sound model that were made since the last presentation and how the mitigation has been redesigned. He reviewed the more gradual sound transition, the colors proposed, the landscaping proposed to fill gaps, and details regarding the floodplain regulations and risks. He explained the restrictions tied to the Gardens proposal, the changes that have been made, and the possibility of another amendment process. Top neighborhood concerns:  Sound  Parking  Trespassing/Loitering  Sound and scope  Time limitations to address noise and sound  General enforcement concerns Michelle Provasnik, Director of the Gardens at Spring Creek, recapped the history of this proposed project and the changes that were made since the first presentation last December Planning & Zoning Board April 7, 2016 DRAFT minutes 2015. The size of the proposed bandstand has increased to 1,400; capacity has increased to 1,500; and the number of concerts would be limited to 8 per year. Her goal has been to establish a maximum capacity to meet the community’s demand while maintaining the character of the community. She showed diagrams of the Great Lawn and how the maximum numbers would look. She also discussed the neighborhood outreach recently performed and how input has been considered and developed into additional solutions. She discussed forming a Neighborhood Advisory Committee and a Neighborhood Plan for dates, parking, etc. She is also proposing a neighbor hotline for real-time issues. Her team has explored several different sound systems; some were cost-prohibitive (for ongoing maintenance and calibration). An additional sound wall would be built to buffer crowd noise and reduce noise level at the property lines (it will have conifers covering it during the summer and will be a neutral color for winter). She confirmed that this project will meet the sound ordinance (< 55 sound decibels). All concerts will end by 8pm, and guests will be exit the property by 9pm. In addition, all events will be ticketed to control capacity. They do not plan to rent the facility for other concert events. They will ensure there is no parking in neighborhoods during events by providing information on available parking, working with partners to finalize parking strategy, and work with the Advisory Committee on this. Regarding the possibility of loitering, she said that their gates would open early before the show, and there would be security along the trail. In addition, Lilac Park will be addressed by the City’s Park Planning Department, including upcoming neighborhood outreach for planning purposes. Secretary Cosmas reported that 4 emails in support of this major amendment had been received, and 1 email opposing the increase of allowed numbers for events on the Great Lawn. Public Input Mary Kopco, 2126 Friar Tuck Court, is the Executive Director of the Fort Collins Symphony, and she supports this project and praised it for being well thought-out and planned. Larry Kendall, 4007 Harbor Walk Lane, supports this project, and believes the prior concerns have been addressed. He stated that this is another example of how the City is keeping Fort Collins great. Jesse Eastman, 2625 Meadowlark Avenue, is on the Board of Directors of Gardens on Spring Creek and is in favor of this project. He further stated that this plan fits well with the City’s Master Plan, as it is centrally located in mid-town, is the only facility located in this area, and will provide enhancement through arts and botany. Barbara Albert, 603 Gilgalad Way, has concerns that issues are address by City Staff and may not be properly communicated – she feels that all of the concessions should be made part of the plans and notes. She is also concerned about the placement of the wall (that it should be on the Great Lawn rather than not next to the neighborhood properties. Dulcie Willis, 219 N. Overland Trail, supports the project, believes this project represents a good compromise between the various parties involved and that this plan is a good representation of City goals by building community through arts and culture. Bruce Freestone, 701 Pear Street, one of the cofounders of Open Stage Theatre Company, supports this proposal and feels that the community engagement fostered by these outdoor Planning & Zoning Board April 7, 2016 DRAFT minutes events has been key. Connie Hanrahan, 8334 Coeur D’Alene Drive, supports this project for its educational possibilities and for the botanical benefits. She cited the success of the Lagoon concerts at CSU and stated that there have not been any issues with these events. Stacey Poncelow, 620 Gilgalad Way, opposed this project, and she said that many neighbors did not receive notification of the proposed wall. She is concerned with potential flood issues concerning the proposed wall and also any amplified performances other than concerts. Justin Larson, 424 Stover Street, supports this project and thinks this is an intuitive project; he feels the efforts to control the sound have been excellent. Allison Marshall, 626 Gilgalad Way, opposes this project and would like to see all of the concessions in writing. She has concerns about the future of Lilac Park and the floodplain issues; she would like to see a plan for Lilac Park with consideration to the floodplain limitations. Steve Newman, 2312 Hampshire Court, supports this project, saying he feels this area provides an excellent teaching tool for his students, and these cultural events enhance the overall CSU experience. Kevin Barrier, 602 Gilgalad Way, opposes this project, saying he is concerned with the zoning proposed for the Lilac Park area. He feels that this project does not support the horticulture and education of the Gardens. He also cited past events when flood water created huge issues in the neighborhood. Jeff Cullers, 2427 Maple Hill Drive, supports this project. He is on the Board for Friends of the Gardens and he feels that this is very special lifestyle project for Fort Collins. Ed Peyronnin, 632 Gilgalad, supports the Gardens and music but does not support this project. He believes that the original attendance numbers proposed were adequate, but he is now concerned with the currently proposed numbers. He also has a concern with the lack of toilet facilities. The Board recessed at 8:00pm – they reconvened at 8:10pm. Board Questions and Staff Response Ms. Provasnik addressed several citizen concerns:  she stated that she is willing to put all items formally on the Plan (she was hoping to keep some flexibility by not detailing all items); and  she stated that the intent in putting up the wall was not meant to be punitive - a sound wall was found to improve the sound control. Planner Holland also addressed some of the concerns by saying:  the purpose of the proposed site plan notes was to have the vast majority of notes and conditions memorialized so that any changes to the Plan would require formal amendments as needed; and Planning & Zoning Board April 7, 2016 DRAFT minutes  the Plan would provide a framework for mitigation items (they are listed as general standards, like time limitations of events). Member Schneider asked if these items could be consolidated to reduce complexity and to avoid micro-managing the plan. Planner Holland confirmed that the document in question is in fact attached to the Plan. Member Carpenter suggested that changes are noted by Garden Staff and the Advisory Committee, so the neighborhood will be confident that changes will not be arbitrarily made without notice. Planner Holland agreed to this plan. He continued by explaining the adequacy of the distance from the event area to the sound and flood lines. He also confirmed that the mailings were sent to the proper neighborhood residents, that there was no returned mail, and how the City Staff have tried to be thorough with these mailings. He discussed the plans for Lilac Park, which will not be finalized until the other surrounding projects are confirmed. Heidi Hanson, Flood Plain Management, responded to the flood concerns by saying how the flood flow areas have been mitigated since the last big flood, which now meets the City of Fort Collins flood regulations. Regarding the 500-year flood discussions, there isn’t enough information to indicate potential impacts at this time. The proposed wall is not in the flood plain and would not have any effect on flood patterns. Groundwater is not part of the flood plain review, so that is not being considered at this time. Play structures within Lilac Park should be allowed in the future. Permanent toilets are available in the main building and adjacent to the main entrance, which they have found to be sufficient during past events. Planner Holland discussed the landscaping measures to provide buffering for sound in conjunction with the proposed wall. Craig Russell, architect for Russell+Mills, also addressed this question by saying that an unlimited number of trees could be established, but the walls will also be treated with a sound-absorption material to enhance the reduction of sound. The height of the wall depends on the proximity to the stage (closer to the stage, the higher the wall). Ben Bridgewater, Sound Engineer, stated that the goal was to minimize the impact of the wall (the shorter the better). Member Hansen inquired about the acoustics analysis, and Mr. Bridgewater explained this is based on code interpretation. Member Hobbs questioned the proposal of building a wall relative to the sound monitoring devices. Planner Holland responded that the wall is needed to be in compliance with the LUC at the Gardens property line. More discussion followed on the acceptable sound levels, how to maintain them at the proper levels, why the project has changed since the original presentation to now require a sound wall, and the differences between an HOA entity and a private resident. Other types of walls were discussed, but none appear to be feasible. Other locations were also explored, but any movement will impact both visual and auditory performance. Board Deliberation Member Hart stated that he was under the impression that more outreach was needed after the first hearing; he is concerned that there were subsequent changes made to the overall plan. Member Carpenter said that her only issue now is the newly-proposed wall; she feels that it will be important to properly screen the wall. She also wants to ensure that changes are supported by the community. Member Hansen feels that the wall will cause a disconnect within the community, and he would like the proposed wall to be eliminated from the plan. Planning & Zoning Board April 7, 2016 DRAFT minutes Senior Assistant Attorney Schmidt stated that the LUC indicates that, if noise source is located on public property, noise will be measured at the property line. Member Hobbs supports the current plan without the inclusion of the wall proposal. Member Hansen added that he feels that the commitment to sound mitigation has been excellent. Member Schneider agreed but questions whether the wall will enable better performances; he acknowledged that the crowd noise may not be mitigated. Member Heinz agreed that the wall detracts from the neighborhood and prefers the monitoring at the origin of the noise. Member Hart agreed with the other Board members. There was more discussion of the noise impacts made only by crowds. Chair Kirkpatrick asked what the impact would be if the proposed wall was discontinued. Planner Holland responded that the project will not meet City code without the wall. Board members appear to be uncomfortable approving this project with this new addition to the project. Ms. Provasnik is not in favor of the wall; however, the design will blend well into the Gardens décor. Compliance with City codes was further discussed. Ms. Provasnik expressed her concern that, without the wall, the sound decibels would have to be significantly lowered, which could significantly impact the event experience. Planner Holland suggested that options could still be developed to ensure code compliance while minimizing neighborhood impacts. Ms. Provasnik is willing to continue working on solutions. Director Gloss added that nominal changes to the site plan could be made that would not alter the intent of the approval; changes should be gauged for materiality. Other solutions were also discussed. Member Carpenter made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the major amendment for the Centre for Advanced Technology 22nd Filing, Community Horticulture Center, #MJA150006, based on the findings of fact on page 11 of the staff report, adding that the landscape screening of the wall be re-examined and that all of the items in the Summary of Neighborhood Concerns and Plan Changes be addressed by Garden staff and the Neighborhood Advisory Committee. Member Hart seconded the motion. More discussion continued around the LUC application with consideration to the sound wall and the sound mitigation. A friendly amendment was suggested to approve this project without the wall initially, with the caveat that the operation complies with the City code and, and, after a period of operation, they may want to re-evaluate the operation by adding the wall, which could pose a separate amendment. Planner Holland suggested an Administrative Interpretation that the wall isn’t needed at some future time. Member Schneider made a friendly amendment to approve this project as presented without the sound mitigation wall. Member Hobbs seconded. After more discussion, Member Hobbs withdrew his friendly amendment. The Board members expressed concerns with approving this project with the current alterations. The Board feels that a friendly amendment is appropriate to allow the applicants to make refinements to the final design, which could also be scrutinized later through an Administrative Interpretation within compliance with the LUC. Senior Assistant Attorney Schmidt counselled the Board against giving up their responsibility to evaluate the plan details. The Board decided the best solution would be to approve the project as it is presented with amendments, if necessary. Planning Director Gloss reviewed the Alternate Review process (there is no longer an appeal process on City-initiated projects); this new process would be initiated by a Council member, and the decision made on this project would then be up for discussion. At that time, there would be a legislative determination whether to move forward with the project in question. Planning & Zoning Board April 7, 2016 DRAFT minutes Chair Kirkpatrick reviewed the motion still on the table, without the friendly amendment. Vote: 3:4 with Hobbs, Hanson, Heinz, and Schneider dissenting. The motion did not pass. There was more discussion regarding the impact of the newly-proposed sound wall. Member Schneider made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the Centre for Advanced Technology 22nd Filing, Community Horticulture Center, #MJA150006, based on the findings of fact on page 11 of the staff report, to include the amendment on Attachment 3 along with the removal of the sound mitigation wall. The Board has also imposed two conditions for approval: 1.) that the general standards related to time limitations, sound monitoring, and security and safety requirements become part of the overall plan, and 2.) that the proposal to build a sound wall be withdrawn. Member Hansen seconded. More discussion continued regarding the compatibility and ultimate inclusion of the sound wall. In addition, they discussed the criteria for future discussions with this Board. Ms. Provasnik conceded that, if the project is approved without the sound wall, she will retain the option of returning to the Board at such time as she feels the wall is necessary for performance enhancement. Vote: 7:0. Other Business None noted. The meeting was adjourned at 10:20 pm. 1 Staff Presentation Cameron Gloss, Planning Manager Gardens on Spring Creek May 17, 2016 ATTACHMENT 8 2 Gardens on Spring Creek Background • Originally approved in 2001, included: • Themed gardens, parking lot, main building, neighborhood park; • Amplified music performance venue for 350 people; • “Great lawn” and “Gazebo/Bandstand“ for music events 3 Gardens on Spring Creek Background Not Included in Plan: • Sound mitigation design; • Operational guidelines and restrictions not addressed. (notes on plan). 4 A. Noise/Sound - 25% B. Parking - 20% C. Trespass/Loitering/Camping -12% D. Non-ticketed/Private Events - 10% E. Enforcement - 14% F. Port-a-Lets - 5% G. Alcohol - 4% H. Floodplain - 8% I. Other - 2% Feedback from Feb. 8th Meeting TOP CONCERNS 5 Proposed West Sound Wall Sound Walls 17’,19’,19.5’ Height Added Sound Wall 14’ Height 12’ Stage Wall 6 Proposed Sound Walls Gardens Boundary Windtrail H.O.A. Gilgalad Added Sound Wall 14’ height Sound Walls Spring Creek Trail spur Stage/ Sound 115’ Wall 30’ Spring Creek Trail 7 West Sound Wall – Before View 8 West Sound Wall – Proposed View 9 West Wall – Close-up 10 Existing Conditions -- Site Photos West of Gardens Sound wall Replaces existing 6’ fence 11 Existing Conditions -- Site Photos West of Gardens 12 Sound Wall Landscaping 13 Floodplain Concerns • Floodplain Modeling and Use Permit Required. • Sound walls elevated, structural design for anchoring/wind loads • Stage design -- concrete pad, elevated above flood level with earthwork, terraced by stone walls. • Examples of open structures in the FEMA floodplain can be found in City Parks such as Edora, Spring Creek, Lee Martinez, and Rolland Moore. 14 Current Sound Model West Boundary +/- 5 Dba below max. 15 Previous Model Current Model Sound Model – Western Transition > 55 dB Grey: 50 to 55 dB Windtrail Property 16 Summary of changes Nine Mitigation Topics: Noise/Sound, Parking, Trespass/Loitering/Camping, Non- ticketed/Private Events, Enforcement, Port-a-Lets, Alcohol, Floodplain, Lilac Park, Other/Grove. Addressed Through: 1) Review staff – addressed with plan notes as General Standards (attachment 3). 2) Plan changes – 5th sound wall, sound monitoring system. 3) Gardens staff – through neighborhood plan and Gardens policy. -1- ORDINANCE NO. 074, 2016 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MODIFYING THE APRIL 7, 2016, PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD DECISION APPROVING THE MAJOR AMENDMENT TO THE CENTRE FOR ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 22 nd FILING, COMMUNITY HORTICULTURE CENTER #MJA 150006 PERTAINING TO THE GARDENS ON SPRING CREEK WITH CONDITIONS WHEREAS, the Centre for Advanced Technology 22 nd Filing, Community Horticulture Center (the “Major Amendment), informally known as the “Gardens on Spring Creek” or “Gardens”; and WHEREAS, the City is the owner of certain property known as the “Gardens on Spring Creek” (or “Gardens”) and the Applicant for the Major Amendment to the Centre for Advanced Technology 22nd Filing, Community Horticulture Center (the “Major Amendment); and WHEREAS, the Major Amendment reflects a proposed plan to complete development by the City of a number of future components outlined in the original master plan for the Gardens approved in 2001, including new and expanded garden areas, the “great lawn” area that includes a covered stage structure and improvements for outdoor performances (referred to herein as the “Performance Area”), modified circulation through the gardens and to the Spring Creek Trail, a bicycle parking area, garden and arbor structures in various gardens and operational and management standards for events in the Performance Area (collectively, the “Project”); and WHEREAS, in addition the stage and related improvements such as the sound system and mixing station, the Performance Area includes five sound mitigation walls - four in close proximity to the stage and a fifth sound mitigation wall fourteen feet high, stepping down to 10 feet on either end, with a length of approximately 240 feet in length along the west boundary of the Gardens (referred to herein as the “Western Sound Wall”) intended to mitigate the impact of sound from music and other performances on the neighborhood adjacent to the Gardens on the west; and WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on April 7, 2017, the City’s Planning and Zoning Board (the “Board”) considered the Project proposed by the Major Amendment, held a duly noticed public hearing, and considered citizen comment and input on the Project; and WHEREAS, after discussion, the Board voted unanimously to approve the Centre for Advanced Technology 22 nd Filing, Community Horticulture Center, #MJA 150006 on the condition that: (1) the general standards related to time limitations, sound monitoring, and security and safety requirements set forth in Attachment 3 to the Board packet be included in the Notes set forth in the Site Plan; and (2) that the Western Sound Wall be removed from the Project (the “Board’s Decision”); and WHEREAS, in July 2015, Council adopted Ordinance No. 082, 2015, which amended the Sections 2.17 and 2.2.12 of the Land Use Code to: (1) provide that all development projects for which the City is the applicant are subject to review by the Board; (2) eliminate appeals of -2- decisions under the Land Use Code pertaining to City development projects to City Council; and (3) permit the City Council to exercise its legislative power and in its sole discretion, to overturn or modify any decision regarding a City development project by adoption of an ordinance by majority vote (referred to as an “Alternate Review”); and WHEREAS, the Project is the first City development project to come forward since adoption of Ordinance No. 082, 2015; and WHEREAS, Councilmember Campana filed a written request for an Alternate Review of the Project within 14 days after the Board’s Decision as permitted under Section 2.2.12(b) of the Land Use Code; and WHEREAS, after a hearing to obtain public testimony, and receipt and consideration of any other public input (whether at or before the hearing), and evaluation of the Project considering factors in addition to or in substitution of the standards set forth in the Land Use Code, all in connection with the Alternate Review of the City Project, Council has determined to exercise its legislative power and in its sole discretion to modify the Board’s Decision as set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes any and all determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That the City Council hereby modifies the Board Decision as follows: A. To clarify that the requirements set forth on Exhibit “A” attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, are acceptable to the Council and shall constitute the conditions referred to in the Board Decision as the general standards related to time limitations, sound monitoring, and security and safety requirements. B. To reinstate the Western Sound Wall and approve its construction as a part of the Project. [C. Any other modifications desired by Council.] Section 3. That the Board Decision continues in effect unmodified except as expressly set forth herein. -3- Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 17th day of May, A.D. 2016, and to be presented for final passage on the 7th day of June, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on this 7th day of June, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ City Clerk 1 EXHIBIT A 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. 2 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. 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. 3 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 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 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. 2. “NO PUBLIC ON-STREET PARKING” SHALL BE STRICTLY ENFORCED FOR GSC 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 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 REVIEWED AND APPROVED. 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 SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSES POLICIES AND ACTIONS THAT WILL BE 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. 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 5 RECREATIONAL, EDUCATIONAL, CULTURAL, ADMINISTRATIVE OR ENTERTAINMENT NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY AS 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 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 6 THE BOUNDARY OF THE PROJECT OUTSIDE OF WHICH NO LAND DISTURBANCE ACTIVITIES WILL OCCUR DURING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT. 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. 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 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. 6. ALL BIKE RACKS PROVIDED MUST BE PERMANENTLY ANCHORED. 7 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. 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 8 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. Rose Garden Hummingbird Garden Chaparral Planting Cactus Planting Outdoor Classroom Cottage Planting Plant Select Garden Historic Grove Vehicle Access Food Trucks Gatehouse Existing Fence Portable Restrooms Bike Parking- 150 Bikes Single Track Adventure Trail Rock Outcrops/ Hogbacks Dry Stream Prairie Maze Overlook Weather station Gathering Area Potential Boardwalk Deck FOOTHILLS GARDEN PRAIRIE GARDEN S H E R W O O D L A T E R A L $77$&+0(17 ATTACHMENT 4 ATTACHMENT 2 • Private events will also be addressed in the Garden’s operating agreement (Neighborhood Plan). • Private events are limited to 350 attendees. • No private concerts allowed. ATTACHMENT 2 • 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. ATTACHMENT 2 i l g a l a d Wa y W o rt h in gt o n Ave A St Edwards St Ellis Dr Rutgers Ave Bay Dr W orthi n g ton C i r Vassar Ave Johnson Dr Loyola Ave James Ct Prospect Ln Dartmo u t h T r l Arthur Dr Botanical Ln Summer St Wind Trl W Stuart St Buckeye St Mathews St W Pitkin St James Ct W Lake St Centre Ave R esearch Blvd Center Ave E Pitkin St E Stuart St S Shields St S College Ave W Drake Rd W Prospect Rd Remington St E Drake Rd Gardens on Spring Creek / Major Amendment 900 450 0 900 Feet 1 inch = 900 feet Site ATTACHMENT 1