Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
COUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 09/25/2018 - MONTAVA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PRE-APPLICATION H
Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY September 25, 2018 City Council STAFF Rebecca Everette, Senior Environmental Planner Tom Leeson, Director, Comm Dev & Neighborhood Svrs Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Manager Brad Yatabe, Legal SUBJECT Montava Planned Unit Development Pre-Application Hearing. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to allow the prospective applicant of the Montava development project in northeast Fort Collins to receive preliminary comments from the City Council regarding the prospective Planned Unit Development (PUD) Master Plan and to assist the developer in determining whether to file a PUD application. The order of the proceedings at the public hearing will be: 1. Director’s Overview 2. Prospective Applicant’s Presentation 3. Staff Response to Applicant Presentation 4. Public Comment 5. Applicant Response to Public Comment 6. Staff Response to Public Comment 7. Council Questions and Discussion STAFF RECOMMENDATION None. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Pre-Application Hearing In accordance with Land Use Code (LUC) Sec. 2.1.6.B, prospective Planned Unit Development (PUD) applicants are afforded the right to an optional Pre-Application PUD Overlay Proposal Review with the Planning and Zoning Board (for projects 50-640 acres in size) or City Council (for projects >640 acres in size). Such review is intended to provide an opportunity to present conceptual information to City Council regarding the proposed development, including how site constraints will be addressed and issues of controversy or opportunities related to the development. In the preapplication review, the developer should present specific plans showing how, if at all, they intend to address any issues raised during the initial comments received from staff and affected property owners. The prospective applicant for the Montava project has requested such a hearing and the Community Development & Neighborhood Services Director has determined that the project in northeast Fort Collins would have community wide impact. Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 2 The Montava developer previously held a pre-application hearing with City Council on December 13, 2017, which is permitted for complex development projects under a separate section of the Land Use Code. The initial pre-application hearing was more general in nature, while the September 25 hearing will focus on the PUD Master Plan more specifically. At the December 13 hearing, Council discussed and provided feedback on the potential metro district and governance structure, contribution to needed transportation improvements, approaches to conserving agricultural land and promoting urban agriculture, protecting natural corridors, Nature in the City opportunities, night sky protection, housing types and affordable housing, multigenerational amenities, provision of child care, renewable energy production, use of industrial and employment lands, and water supply and service challenges. The full December 13 hearing can be viewed online: <https://fortcollinstv.viebit.com/player.php?hash=DwfcrGG6ScCC#>. PUD Process and Review Criteria The PUD process and regulations were adopted by City Council on July 17, 2018. The process is optional for development projects greater than 50 acres in size to be developed in multiple phases. The PUD Master Plan is intended to provide an overall vision for long-term development of a site, including the project phasing and the elements for which the applicant has requested entitlement to specific land uses, densities, modifications to land use design standards, and variances to engineering standards. The Master Plan must have sufficient detail to serve as the overall guiding vision for the long-term development. After a PUD Master Plan is approved, each subsequent development phase is subject to the Project Development Plan (PDP) process. PDP applications would be evaluated for consistency and substantial conformance with the approved PUD Master Plan. Major components of a PUD Master Plan application include the following: • List of uses, densities, and development standards to be added, modified, and/or vested • Overall site plan indicating the intensity and general configuration of the proposed uses • Transportation system, including vehicular, transit, bicycle and pedestrian circulation • Location of open space, natural habitat and features, floodways and other areas designated for preservation • Architectural concept plan including renderings, photographs, illustrations and supporting text describing architectural design intent • Phasing plan including a projected timeframe for each phase • List of use and design standards applicable to the PUD Master Plan PUD applications are reviewed for conformance with the following criteria in Land Use Code Sec. 4.29.B: 1. The project must provide public benefits greater than those typically achieved through the application of a standard zone district, including one or more of the following as may be applicable: a. Diversification in the use of land; b. Innovation in development; c. More efficient use of land and energy; d. Public amenities commensurate with the scope of the development; e. Furtherance of the City’s adopted plans and policies; and f. Development patterns consistent with the principles and policies of the City’s Comprehensive Plan and adopted plans and policies. 2. Ensure high-quality urban design and environmentally-sensitive development that takes advantage of site characteristics. 3. Promote cooperative planning and development among real property owners within a large area. 4. Protect land uses and neighborhoods adjacent to a PUD Overlay from negative impacts. Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 3 One advantage of the PUD process for an applicant is the opportunity to create a vested property right for specific land uses, densities, development standards and variances from engineering standards. As specified in LUC Sec. 2.2.11.C.2, the term of the vested property right is generally three years unless the City and developer enter into a development agreement that vests the property right for a longer period of time, as appropriate. Council shall adopt any such development agreement as a legislative act. Plan Amendment Process In order to accomplish the goals of its PUD Master Plan, the Montava applicant also plans to request amendments to the Mountain Vista Subarea Plan and Master Street Plan. The process for amendments to adopted subarea plans, including the Mountain Vista Subarea Plan, is outlined in City Plan and includes the following procedures: 1. Citizens and development applicants may submit requests for plan amendments, and such amendments may be processed concurrently with development applications 2. City Council is the decision-maker for plan amendments, with recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Board, staff, and any boards and commissions that have a legitimate interest in the proposed amendment 3. City Council must find that the plan is (1) in need of an amendment and (2) that the proposed amendment will promote the public welfare and will be consistent with the vision, goals, principles and policies of City Plan and its related elements The process for amendments to the Master Street Plan includes: 1. Technical analysis and review is conducted by various City departments, including travel demand modeling and consideration of relevant Transportation Master Plan and City Plan policies 2. City Council is the decision-maker for Master Street Plan amendments, with recommendations from the Transportation Board, Planning and Zoning Board, and staff Mountain Vista Subarea Plan Guidance The 2009 Mountain Vista Subarea Plan describes the vision for this area of the community as: “…an area of Fort Collins known for its impressive views of the mountains and recognized for its successful and innovative community design. This subarea will be distinct and attractive with a comfortable, town-like atmosphere that residents and businesses identify with and take pride in. Neighborhoods, parks, schools, shopping district and business centers within this subarea will be connected and served by a variety of travel choices including vehicle, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian modes…” Other key elements of the subarea plan’s vision and policies include: • Mixed-use neighborhoods composed of a variety of housing types and prices ranges • Commercial centers and amenities in close proximity to neighborhoods • A new community commercial district with a small town-like pattern of streets and blocks and pedestrian focus • Network of streets and trails that are attractive, safe and pedestrian-oriented • Range of job opportunities for the area, community and region on industrial and employment lands • Access, mobility and connectivity for all travel modes, with strategically located transit hubs • Preservation and enhancement of existing natural features, historic resources, and scenic views • Schools, parks and recreation opportunities linked by a greenway network • Well designed and attractive landscaping, signage and lighting with high-quality and innovative building design Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 4 In 2016, City Council reviewed the vision and framework plan for the Mountain Vista subarea. In their work session discussions, Council reinforced their support for a land use framework that integrates open lands, including agricultural production, parks, natural habitat, and stormwater areas with new residential neighborhoods, public facilities and employment areas - with particular focus on agri-urban development, affordable housing, and implementation of Nature in the City goals. Northeast Community Park In addition to providing feedback on the proposed development, staff is seeking Council’s guidance related to the future Northeast Community Park, which would be incorporated into the Montava development. The Northeast Community Park is intended to be a regional park that serves the entire community, similar to Twin Silo or Spring Canyon Park. Staff seeks Council input on the following topics as part of the pre-application hearing: 1. Alternative Park Delivery: The developer would like to construct a portion of the park as part of the initial phases of development. To accomplish this, the developer proposes that Park Planning & Development funds to be set aside for property purchase ($5-7 million) be instead used to construct a first phase of the park. As development occurs, and as park impact fees are collected, the City would pay back the developer for the cost of the land. 2. Reduced Park Size: The Parks & Recreation Policy Plan lists Northeast Community Park at 100 acres. The applicant currently proposes an 80-acre park instead. 3. Phased Park: The total cost of an 80-acre park is estimated at $30 million. A first phase project ($7 million) would build a very small portion of the park, with the remaining park to be constructed as fees are collected. This approach would likely require 20+ years to build the park completely. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS Unknown at this time. PUBLIC OUTREACH Notification of the hearing was conducted in accordance with Land Use Code Sec. 2.1.6.C and Sec. 2.2.6.A-D, as applicable, including posted and mailed notice not less than fourteen (14) days prior to the hearing. If the Montava developer proceeds with a PUD application, two neighborhood meetings will be required: the first meeting held prior to the application submittal, and then a follow-up neighborhood meeting after the initial round of development review has been completed. ATTACHMENTS 1. PowerPoint Presentation (PDF) 2. Applicant Packet (PDF) September 25, 2018 Montava PUD Pre-Application Hearing Rebecca Everette, Development Review Manager ATTACHMENT 1 Purpose of Hearing • Pre-Application Hearing for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) • Raise awareness of pending PUD submittal • Hear from potential developer • Ask questions and provide preliminary feedback to both applicant and staff 2 Agenda 1. Overview 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Staff Response 4. Public Comment 5. Applicant Response 6. Staff Response 7. Council Questions & Discussion 3 4 PUD Process • Optional for development projects >50 acres • Projects 50-640 acres Planning & Zoning Board • Projects 640+ acres City Council • Two neighborhood meetings • Significant coordination among City departments and external agencies • Subsequent development phases follow standard development review process, reviewed for conformance with PUD Master Plan 5 PUD Master Plan Benefits of PUD: • Generates additional public benefit and high-quality design • Provides overall vision for long-term development • Ensures consistent, coordinated development over multiple phases Plan Includes: • Uses, densities and development standards • Transportation network • Open space network • Preliminary utility information • Architectural concept plan • Phasing plan 6 Plan Amendment Process • Montava PUD would require amendments to: • Master Street Plan • Mountain Vista Subarea Plan • Processed concurrently with PUD process • City Council is decision-maker 7 Agenda 1. Overview 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Staff Response 4. Public Comment 5. Applicant Response 6. Staff Response 7. Council Questions & Discussion 8 City Plan Conformance A community built on Fort Collins Values Normally a developer will have a concept for what they want developed, then they will take the city regulations and contort them to fit what the developer wanted to build in the first place. That is not how we began Montava. This project stands on the shoulders of all that Fort Collins has been, is, and wants to be. We took the decades of work that have gone into City Plan, the Mountain Vista Sub Area Plan, the Climate Action Plan and more to inform what the land we are developing needed to be. We started with the end in mind, and worked backwards. If you read through any of these plans you will see how this is true. The chart that follow is just a high level example of the dozens of City Plan Policy’s that Montava was build around. ATTACHMENT 2 Housing Types How to build a new community that looks old Blending Housing Types/Sizes Building houses is essentially an outdoor factory. The more efficient you can make the factory, the faster things get built and the more profitable it is. That is why the trend in community development over the past few decades has very little creativity and variety. It’s driven by manufacturing economics. We have set out from the beginning to create a community plan that provides the kind of housing mix you see in downtown Fort Collins. It’s based on what is called the Transect Plan. The closer you get to the town center, the more dense the blending of housing is per acre. The farther away you get, the looser this gets with larger lots and housing types. Every transect however has a blend of almost every housing type. The %’s shift from one transect to the other. Large Single Family, Medium Single Family, Small Single Family, Micro Cluster, Cottage Courts, Townhomes/Condo’s, Small Multi Family, Medium Multi Family, Live/work, and others. All blended together to create the fabric of an old downtown feel with new home value. Our housing type book is attached. This is not normal. It is not easy to do. It is exceptional, extraordinary, and very challenging. But that is one more aspect of Montava that will make this Fort Collins community unlike any other. MONTAVA Building Types Summary Fort Collins, Colorado Montava | ©2017 DPZ CoDESIGn b 9/18/2018 Development Program ................................. 1 PUD Distrcts Map .................................................... 2 Unit Mix by PUD District ....................................... 3 Building Types ............................................. 5 Large Single Family House .................................... 6 Medium Single Family House ............................... 7 Small Single Family House ................................... 8 Micro Single Family House (Cottage Cluster) .... 9 Townhouse ................................................................ 10 Small Multi-Family Building ................................ 11 Medium Multi-Family Building ............................ 12 Live/Work Building ................................................. 13 Mixed-Use Building ................................................ 14 Shop Building ........................................................... 15 Employment Building (Office) .............................. 16 HF2M Max Moss Jeff Drinkard Sam Drinkard DPZ Galina Tachieva Matthew Lambert Dylan Wassell Heather Wassell Chris Ritter Michael Mabaquiao Michael Huston Martin Serrano BHA Design Bruce Hendee Angela Milewski PROJECT TEAM CONTENTS Montava | ©2017 DPZ CoDESIGn 9/18/2018 1 DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Montava | ©2017 DPZ CoDESIGn DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 2 9/18/2018 PUD DIStRICtS MaP 0’ 400’ 800’ 1,200’ 1,600’ 3,200’ T5 Urban Center / Mixed-use T4 General Urban Neighborhood T3 Sub-urban Neighborhood T2 Rural Neighborhood Agricultural City Park & Open Space Poudre School District Natural Areas & Stormwater Industrial & Employment SD-H* Phase 1 * SD-H IS AN AREA OF T4 NEAR THE FARM WHICH IS CALCULATED BASED UPON LAND AREA RATHER THAN FRONTAGE. THIS AREA IS INTENDED TO HAVE A HIGHER CONCENTRATION OF COTTAGE CLUSTERS THAN ELSE- WHERE IN MONTAVA. CALCULATIONS ON THE OPPOSITE PAGE SPECIFY THIS AREA SEPARATELY FROM OTHER T4 PROPERTIES FOR CALCULATION PURPOSES ONLY. Montava | ©2017 DPZ CoDESIGn DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 9/18/2018 3 UnIt MIX bY PUD DIStRICt BUILDING TYPES Type Lot / Module Size Average Building Details Average Net Density Current Market Montava Phase 1 Montava Buildout ID Name Width Depth Area Lot Coverage Unit Size Non-Res Area Res. Stories Non-Res. Stories Total Stories Bldgs/ Lot DU / Site DU Price Range Historical Sales Total Lots Total Units Total Lots Total Units A Large Single Family 60 ft 90 ft 5,400 sf 40% 4,300 sf 0 sf 2 0 2 1 1 1 8 du/ac $700k + 5% 9 lots 9 du 284 lots 284 du B Med. Single Family 48 ft 90 ft 4,300 sf 50% 3,200 sf 0 sf 1.5 0 1.5 1 1 1 10 du/ac $500 - $700k 16% 35 lots 35 du 547 lots 547 du C Small Single Family 36 ft 90 ft 3,200 sf 70% 2,200 sf 0 sf 1 0 1 1 1 1 14 du/ac $400 - $500k 20% 96 lots 96 du 443 lots 443 du D Micro SF Cluster 180 ft 90 ft 16,200 sf 80% 1,200 sf 0 sf 1 0 1 7 1 7 19 du/ac $300 - $400k 38% 98 lots 98 du 553 lots 553 du E Townhouse/Condo 22 ft 90 ft 2,000 sf 90% 2,000 sf 0 sf 2 0 2 1 1 1 22 du/ac $300 - $400k 21% 194 lots 194 du 533 lots 533 du F Small Multi-Family 66 ft 90 ft 5,900 sf 60% 1,500 sf 0 sf 2 0 2 1 5 5 37 du/ac 24 lots 120 du 121 lots 605 du G Med. Multi-Family 130 ft 120 ft 15,600 sf 60% 1,200 sf 0 sf 2 0 2 1 14 14 39 du/ac 11 lots 154 du 46 lots 644 du H Live/Work 25 ft 90 ft 2,300 sf 70% 3,200 sf 1,200 sf 2 1 3 1 1 1 19 du/ac 19 lots 19 du 29 lots 29 du J Mixed-Use 210 ft 100 ft 21,000 sf 100% 900 sf 12,000 sf 2.5 1 3.5 1 25 25 52 du/ac 9 lots 225 du 16 lots 448 du K Shop 30 ft 120 ft 3,600 sf 0 sf 1,500 sf 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 du/ac 22 lots 40 lots L Employment 210 ft 180 ft 37,800 sf 0 sf 17,500 sf 0 2 2 1 0 0 0 du/ac 0 lots 16 lots M Industrial 200 ft 300 ft 60,000 sf 0 sf 9,000 sf 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 du/ac 0 lots 28 lots 517 lots 950 du 2,656 lots 4,086 du ** “CURRENT MARKET” DATA IS EXISTING & NEW HOME SALES OVER THE PAST 18 MONTHS IN FORT COLLINS, WELLINGTON, SEVERANCE, TIMNATH, LAPORTE, AND WINDSOR. TOTAL UNITS SOLD = 7,138 NOTE: MIXED-USE IS CALCULATED AT 2 STORIES OF HOUSING ABOVE RETAIL AS AN AVERAGE TO ACCOUNT FOR SOME SINGLE-STORY AND TWO-STORY STRUCTURES MIXED WITH 4-STORY STRUCTURES. ** THE LOT AREA FOR MICRO SF CLUSTER IN THE CALCULATIONS ON THE OPPOSITE PAGE REFERS TO THE OVERALL AREA OF THE ENTIRE CLUSTER, NOT A SINGLE LOT IN THAT CLUSTER. THE DATA TABLE WITHIN THE BUILDING TYPES SECTION OF THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS LOT INFORMATION FOR INDIVIDUAL BUILD- INGS. FOR CALCULATION PURPOSES, THE ENTIRE CLUS- TER (7 UNIT AVERAGE) MUST BE ANALYZED, WHICH IS REFLECTED IN THE TABLE. 4CoDESIGn 9/18/2018 Montava | ©2017 DPZ This page is intentionally left blank. Montava | ©2017 DPZ CoDESIGn 9/18/2018 5 BUILDING TYPES Montava | ©2017 DPZ CoDESIGn BUILDING TYPES 6 9/18/2018 Lot Width 60-100 ft Lot Depth 90-120 ft Average Lot Area 5,400 sf Lot Coverage 40% Average Unit Size 4,300 sf Retail Area 0 sf Employment Area 0 sf Residential Stories 1-2 Non-Res. Stories 0 Total Stories 1-2 Dwelling Units 1 Avg. Res. Density 8 du/ac LaRGE SInGLE FaMILY HoUSE A Kentlands, MD B New Town St. Charles, MO C Norton Commons, KY A B C Current Market Price Range $700k + Historical Sales 5% Montava | ©2017 DPZ CoDESIGn BUILDING TYPES 9/18/2018 7 MEDIUM SInGLE FaMILY HoUSE Lot Width 40-60 ft Lot Depth 90 ft Average Lot Area 4,300 sf Lot Coverage 50% Average Unit Size 3,200 sf Retail Area 0 sf Employment Area 0 sf Residential Stories 1-2 Non-Res. Stories 0 Total Stories 1-2 Dwelling Units 1 Avg. Res. Density 10 du/ac A New Town St. Charles, MO B Norton Commons, KY C Village of Providence, AL A B C Current Market Price Range $500 - $700k Historical Sales 16% tYPICaL oF CURREnt MaRKEt “nEW ConStRUCtIon” HoUSInG Montava | ©2017 DPZ CoDESIGn BUILDING TYPES 8 9/18/2018 Lot Width 30-40 ft Lot Depth 90 ft Average Lot Area 3,200 sf Lot Coverage 70% Average Unit Size 2,200 sf Retail Area 0 sf Employment Area 0 sf Residential Stories 1-2 Non-Res. Stories 0 Total Stories 1-2 Dwelling Units 1 Avg. Res. Density 14 du/ac SMaLL SInGLE FaMILY HoUSE A B C A Carlton Landing, OK B New Town St. Charles, MO C Norton Commons, KY Current Market Price Range $400 - $500k Historical Sales 20% MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING • CURREnt HoUSInG StoCK In FoRt CoLLInS • bIG MISSInG PIECE In nEW ConStRUCtIon DRIvE to QUaLIFY • FIRSt MovE UP/DUaL-InCoME/DoWnSIZE oPtIon Montava | ©2017 DPZ CoDESIGn BUILDING TYPES 9/18/2018 9 Lot Width 24-30 ft Lot Depth 60 ft Average Lot Area 1,800 sf Lot Coverage 80% Average Unit Size 1,200 sf Retail Area 0 sf Employment Area 0 sf Residential Stories 1-2 Non-Res. Stories 0 Total Stories 1-2 Dwelling Units 1 Avg. Res. Density 19 du/ac MICRo SInGLE FaMILY HoUSE (CottaGE CLUStER) A B C A Carlton Landing, OK B New Town St. Charles, MO C Bywater, New Orleans, LA Current Market Price Range $300k - $400k Historical Sales 38% MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING • DoES not EXISt In “nEW HoME” MaRKEt In FoRt CoLLInS • PRIMaRILY WELLInGton anD SEvERanCE MaRKEtS FIRSt tIME HoME bUYER/EMPtY nEStER/SInGLE PRoFESSIonaL/YoUnG CoUPLE WItH KIDS Montava | ©2017 DPZ CoDESIGn BUILDING TYPES 10 9/18/2018 Lot Width 18-24 ft Lot Depth 90 ft Average Lot Area 2,000 sf Lot Coverage 90% Average Unit Size 2,000 sf Retail Area 0 sf Employment Area 0 sf Residential Stories 2-3 Non-Res. Stories 0 Total Stories 2-3 Dwelling Units 1 Avg. Res. Density 22 du/ac toWnHoUSE/ConDo A Cornelius, NC B Habersham, SC C Kentlands, MD A B C Current Market Price Range $300k - $400k Historical Sales 21% MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING • FIRSt tIME bUYER/SInGLE PRoFESSIonaL/CoMInG oUt oF aPaRtMEntS SEEKInG LIFEStYLE anD aMEnItIES IDEaLLY Montava | ©2017 DPZ CoDESIGn BUILDING TYPES 9/18/2018 11 Lot Width 66 ft Lot Depth 90 ft Average Lot Area 5,900 sf Lot Coverage 60% Average Unit Size 1,500 sf Retail Area 0 sf Employment Area 0 sf Residential Stories 2-3 Non-Res. Stories 0 Total Stories 2-3 Dwelling Units 4-6 Avg. Res. Density 37 du/ac SMaLL MULtI-FaMILY bUILDInG A B C A Habersham, SC B Norton Commons, KY C Rosemary Beach, FL Montava | ©2017 DPZ CoDESIGn BUILDING TYPES 12 9/18/2018 Lot Width 130 ft Lot Depth 120 ft Average Lot Area 15,600 sf Lot Coverage 60% Average Unit Size 1,200 sf Retail Area 0 sf Employment Area 0 sf Residential Stories 2-3 Non-Res. Stories 0 Total Stories 2-3 Avg. Dwelling Units 14 Avg. Res. Density 39 du/ac MEDIUM MULtI-FaMILY bUILDInG A Kentlands, MD B Legacy Town Center, TX C New Town St. Charles, MO A B C Montava | ©2017 DPZ CoDESIGn BUILDING TYPES 9/18/2018 13 Lot Width 22-30 ft Lot Depth 90 ft Average Lot Area 2,300 sf Lot Coverage 70% Average Unit Size 3,200 sf Retail Area 1,200 sf Employment Area 0 sf Residential Stories 2 Non-Res. Stories 1 Total Stories 3 Dwelling Units 1 Avg. Res. Density 19 du/ac LIvE/WoRK bUILDInG A B C A Kentlands, MD B New Town St. Charles, MO C Rosemary Beach, FL Montava | ©2017 DPZ CoDESIGn BUILDING TYPES 14 9/18/2018 Approx. Lot Width 210 ft Approx. Lot Depth 100 ft Average Lot Area 37,800 sf Lot Coverage 35% Average Unit Size 900 sf Retail Area 12,000 sf Employment Area 0 sf Residential Stories 2-3 Non-Res. Stories 1-3 Total Stories 2-4 Avg. Dwelling Units 36 Avg. Res. Density 74 du/ac MIXED-USE bUILDInG A Norton Commons, KY B Village at Hendrix, AR C Village of Providence, AL A B C NOTE: PARKING IS GENERALLY ACCOM- MODATED IN SHARED FACILITIES, NOT PRIMARILY WITHIN THE LISTED LOT AREA. Montava | ©2017 DPZ CoDESIGn BUILDING TYPES 9/18/2018 15 Lot Width 30 ft Lot Depth 120 ft Average Lot Area 3,600 sf Lot Coverage 50% Average Unit Size 0 sf Retail Area 1,500 sf Employment Area 0 sf Residential Stories 0 Non-Res. Stories 1-2 Total Stories 1-2 Dwelling Units 0 Avg. Res. Density 0 du/ac SHoP bUILDInG A B C A Kentlands, MD B Legacy Town Center, TX C Mashpee Commons, MA Montava | ©2017 DPZ CoDESIGn BUILDING TYPES 16 9/18/2018 EMPLoYMEnt bUILDInG (oFFICE) Approx. Lot Width 210 ft Approx. Lot Depth 180 ft Average Lot Area 37,800 sf Lot Coverage 35% Average Unit Size 0 sf Retail Area 0 sf Employment Area 17,500 sf Residential Stories 0 Non-Res. Stories 1-3 Total Stories 1-3 Dwelling Units 0 Avg. Res. Density 0 du/ac A Kentlands, MD B Legacy Town Center, TX C Mashpee Commons, MA A B C Montava | ©2017 DPZ CoDESIGn 9/18/2018 17 This page is intentionally left blank. Prepared by DPZ CoDesign in partnership with: BHA Design SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES © 2018 DPZ CODESIGN | SENIOR HOUSING | DRAFT 07/06/2018 1 CONTENTS Location and Character in Montava .................... 2 Architectural Simplicity ........................................ 3 Lining the Street ...................................................... 4 Fronting the Street .................................................. 5 Providing an External Face to Services .............. 6 Minimize and Hide Parking .................................. 6 Sharing Parking ....................................................... 6 Sharing a Block ........................................................ 7 Sample Site Constraints ........................................ 8 The Sheridan in Birmingham, Michigan ............ 9 Kentlands Manor in Gaithersburg, Maryland .... 10 Pine Trails in Castle Rock, Colorado .................... 12 2 © 2018 DPZ CODESIGN | SENIOR HOUSING | DRAFT 07/06/2018 LOCATION AND CHARACTER IN MONTAVA SITE CONTEXT The character of Montava varies from dense and urban at the town center to rural and agricultural towards the edges. If your site is located near the town center, buildings and site planning are expected to be urban in character. If your site is located away from the town center, buildings and site planning are expected to be less urban or rural in character, the further away from the town center a site is located. When choosing a site, keep in mind the expectations of building character. Towards the town center, we expect buildings to be very close to sidewalks, taller, with parking areas minimized and hidden behind buildings. Away from the town center, we expect buildings to be separated from sidewalks, lower in scale, with parking areas hidden by buildings or landscaping. Selection of a building site brings our expectations of character with it. © 2018 DPZ CODESIGN | SENIOR HOUSING | DRAFT 07/06/2018 3 ARCHITECTURAL SIMPLICITY SITE CONFIGURATION Montava is defined by a character of community. Each building individually adds just a little bit to the whole of the community, which in return contributes to the lifestyle of building residents. In most other developments, each building competes with its neighbors architecturally to appear important and attractive. At Montava we ask that each building be restrained in its architectural expression, simple. Adornment is appropriate at entries, where streets terminate on the building, and at block corners. Roof forms should be simple, designed to either shed water and snow where a pitched roof is used, or to shield rooftop equipment from view where flat roofs are used. We expect good windows, a rhythm of windows, and quality cladding, but not much else from upper floors. Together, the collection of buildings in an area provide diversity and interest. Where we expect the most architectural attention to be paid is at the ground floor along sidewalks. The experience of pedestrians walking to or past your building must be pleasant and interesting. Long blank walls and mechanical equipment must never be located along community sidewalks. Where residential units occupy the ground floor, we expect that units have individual entries or collective entries no less frequent than 75 feet. A clear definition between public, semi-public, and private space should be provided by low walls, fencing, or hedges, and clarity between public and private building entrances. Where non-residential spaces occupy the ground floor, we expect that they are well glazed and designed as shopfronts. 4 © 2018 DPZ CODESIGN | SENIOR HOUSING | DRAFT 07/06/2018 LINING THE STREET SITE CONFIGURATION At Montava, we consider streets to be public spaces. To make streets feel comfortable, they need to be lined with buildings near the sidewalk, creating an outdoor room. In the more intense areas of Montava, nearest the town center, we expect buildings to be located within 10 feet of the sidewalk. We expect that property lines along streets be lined with buildings along nearly their entire length. Where streets are not lined with buildings, walls or fencing should continue the building line, shielding parking are service areas. Courtyards may recessed portions of the building along streets, incident with entries. Away from the town center, nearer the farm and surrounding agricultural land, buildings may be located further from sidewalks and fencing may be lower in scale or replaced by hedges. © 2018 DPZ CODESIGN | SENIOR HOUSING | DRAFT 07/06/2018 5 FRONTING THE STREET SITE CONFIGURATION In addition to lining the street, buildings are expected to front the street, that is to present their primary entry and orient their facade towards the street. Where there are 2 or more streets along a property, the primary facade should be along the street of greater importance. Retail streets are of the highest importance. Typically the next streets in line of importance are larger streets, except that arterials and collectors may be less desirable to front services onto. Along other streets, in the town center, entries are expected at least once in 75 feet. Where ground floor businesses are located along sidewalks, they are expected to have shop fronts. Shop fronts are highly glazed and transparent portions of the facade on the first floor, providing visual access to the interior space and activities of the business. For retail busi- nesses, the shop front should be merchandised. For service businesses, the shop front often gives to a waiting area. For F&B, the shop front gives to a portion of the dining area. 6 © 2018 DPZ CODESIGN | SENIOR HOUSING | DRAFT 07/06/2018 PROVIDING AN EXTERNAL FACE TO SERVICES MINIMIZE AND HIDE PARKING SHARING PARKING SITE CONFIGURATION At Montava, we consider streets to be public spaces. To make streets feel comfortable, they need to be lined with buildings near the sidewalk, creating an outdoor room. In the more intense areas of Montava, nearest the town center, we expect buildings to be located within 10 feet of the sidewalk. We expect that property lines along streets be lined with buildings along nearly their entire length. Where streets are not lined with buildings, walls or fencing should continue the building line, shielding parking are service areas. Courtyards may recessed portions of the building along streets, incident with entries. Away from the town center, nearer the farm and surrounding agricultural land, buildings may be located further from sidewalks and fencing may be lower in scale or replaced by hedges. Providing more parking than is necessary is both a waste of money and detrimental to the vibrancy of Montava. Vibrancy is supported by co-locating a high density of differ- ent land uses. As single land uses take up larger footprints, they decrease vibrancy. Surface parking is a large user of land which returns zero vibrancy. Reducing parking is key, along with locating parking such that it is not along sidewalks, especially on retail streets. Where land uses are in close proximity, they are often able to share parking, reduc- ing the amount required for each individually. The greatest sharing opportunities are often between residential and offices uses or retail and religious. But many other uses can share by estimating their peak usage time and amounts. Even a little reduction through sharing can help increase vibrancy. © 2018 DPZ CODESIGN | SENIOR HOUSING | DRAFT 07/06/2018 7 SHARING A BLOCK SITE CONFIGURATION When the land area your development will require is minimized, it is possible to share a block with other properties and reduce your site planning burdens. Occupying an entire block requires a significant amount of building and street screening along the block edges. By right-sizing your site to your development needs, additional properties may be retained, to be developed by others, filling out the block. 8 © 2018 DPZ CODESIGN | SENIOR HOUSING | DRAFT 07/06/2018 SITE CONFIGURATION SAMPLE SITE CONSTRAINTS The above two images show considerations for two larger sites near the town center. These identify where it is important to line streets with services, where parking should be accessed from, and other important considerations. In both cases, sharing the block with other lots, as described above, reduces the burden of creating active edges along your development. © 2018 DPZ CODESIGN | SENIOR HOUSING | DRAFT 07/06/2018 9 THE SHERIDAN IN BIRMINGHAM, MICHIGAN DESIGN EXAMPLE This recently completed facility in Michigan exemplifies the goals of integrat- ing senior housing into Montava near the town center. The building format is urban with ground floor shop front glazing along the sidewalk, giving to internal building services. The architecture could be further simplified, however. 10 © 2018 DPZ CODESIGN | SENIOR HOUSING | DRAFT 07/06/2018 KENTLANDS MANOR IN GAITHERSBURG, MARYLAND DESIGN CRITIQUE In Kentlands, a DPZ community, a large senior housing facility is located at the edge of the town center. The building lines the street with buildings and hides parking, as desired. From the air it seems to function well. But at the street level, it does not engage the street, attempting to make up for this with additional architectural detail. One of the streets it lines is a retail street, which suffers from the senior housing. This street would be the ideal location to externalize services and bring the building close to the sidewalk to participate in the streetscape. The additional building setback along the larger street is appropriate, but at the retail street it is a detriment. Generally, the practice of berming landscape along the streets detracts from the development and neighborhood, including at the main entry which is obscured with landscaping. Overall the physical location of buildings and parking on the site is positive, but the building facade and relationship to the sidewalk is negative. © 2018 DPZ CODESIGN | SENIOR HOUSING | DRAFT 07/06/2018 11 KENTLANDS MANOR IN GAITHERSBURG, MARYLAND DESIGN CRITIQUE 12 © 2018 DPZ CODESIGN | SENIOR HOUSING | DRAFT 07/06/2018 PINE TRAILS IN CASTLE ROCK, COLORADO DESIGN CRITIQUE This example is intended to illustrate what is not desirable at Montava. The building is located at the middle of the site with parking and leftover space along the site’s edge. This development could be sited on a parcel 1 or 2 acres less in area. The building’s architecture appears of a high quality, but it is obscured by parking and landscaping. © 2018 DPZ CODESIGN | SENIOR HOUSING | DRAFT 07/06/2018 13 PINE TRAILS IN CASTLE ROCK, COLORADO DESIGN CRITIQUE PREPARED BY IN PARTNERSHIP WITH: HF2M BHA DESIGN NELSON/NYGAARD Affordable and Missing Middle Housing Affordable and Missing Middle Everyone knows that housing affordability is a big problem. We set out from the beginning of Montava’s plans to create a community where both affordable and attainable housing is blended into the community seamlessly. We have been working for months to create a systematic solution that will require many parties to participate. The City, Land Trusts, local affordable partners like Habitat and Housing Catalyst, Development Teams in NE Fort Collins, and others. There are some exciting opportunities that exist, and much work remains. We are committed to making a wide range of affordable and attainable “missing middle” housing part of the fabric of Montava from day one. In fact, we’ve already put our name on the dotted like with the City Land Bank, and that’s only the beginning. One way we are working on this is to partner with Housing Catalyst to be the initial developer of housing in and around the town center. What follows is our first renderings of how this project could take hold. Creating a single building on the Main Street that looks like live works, with retail on the first floor that becomes coffee shops and other uses. But in reality it is one building with 20-30 units of affordable long term housing. Our goal: Break the mold & make a difference Native Hill Farm @ Montava Agri Urbanism Defined One of the first concepts in the Mountain Vista Sub Area Plan that caught my attention was the idea of retaining the historical agricultural connection in future development. When I began to explore this idea, it became apparent that this concept was not well understood. So I got on a plane and went to visit other communities and farms that were working to create that environment. We visited Serenbe, Willowsford Farms, Agritopia, and others. I learned many things along the way, the most important of which is if you don’t have a great operating framer you are dreaming. The Second thing I learned is, even when people want to do this with the best intentions, it is very difficult and often fails. We have kept all the specific lessons in mind as we focused on making this agri urban idea a reality. Partnering with Native Hill farms was #1 on the priority list. Nic and Katie have been serving this community for over 10 years, and are world class. Locating the farm on the best dirt, planning it’s shape and orientation, dealing with the salinity of our water, creating a water plan, creating a management structure that works, and many other things are where we have found ourselves for the last few months. The end result will be an incredible organic farm for all of Fort Collins, and the beginning of something beautiful for Montava. Max Moss / HF2M COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY 430 N College Soil, Water & Plant Testing Laboratory Fort Collins, CO 80524 Room A320, NESB Fort Collins, CO 80523-1120 Phone: 970-491-5061 / Fax: 970-491-2930 Date Received: 8/9/18 Date Reported: 8/16/18 Billing: CC15823 IRRIGATION WATER ANALYSIS LAB # W299 I SOURCE: Larimer County Well "Routine Package" North Poudre Ditch Results Results Conductivity 1369 µmhos/cm pH 8.4 pHc 7.1 mg/L meq/L Calcium 76.1 3.80 Magnesium 67.2 5.53 Sodium 94.4 4.10 Potassium 1.92 0.05 Carbonate <0.1 <0.1 Bicarbonate 198 3.25 Chloride 11.3 0.32 Sulfate 479 9.98 Nitrate 0.2 0.2 Nitrate-Nitrogen 0.1 0.1 Boron 0.31 Pounds of Sulfate 426 per acre foot Pounds of Nitrate per acre foot 0.2 Salinity Sodium SAR 1.9 Hazard Medium Hazard Low COMMENTS: This water is classified as medium salinity hazard irrigation water. It should not cause problems due to salt accumulation in the soil if a moderate amount of leaching occurs and soil drainage is adequate. Irrigation at Montava Landscape and Non-Potable System Irrigation of landscaping There are two major opportunities we have in using the existing coffin wells to irrigate landscaping. 1. We have the ability to use this historically utilized natural resource to reduce the treated water needed for a development like Montava by approximately 50%. 2. We have the salinity issues which need to be taken into consideration for the turf grass and landscape for the homes and community overall. This provides a tremendous opportunity for innovation. We engaged Hines Irrigation to assess and plan the non potable irrigation system. Attached here you will find a briefing of that report giving you details that may interest you. We have also been working with Dr. Yaling Qian from the CSU Horticulture department. Dr. Qian is an expert in turf grass, landscape materials, and the effects of salinity. I’ve attached a proposal we will be executing for her involvement in our plans as we move to the next phase of the development. This is a critical component of Montava, and it is another area where the Metro District can play a vital role. Colorado | Texas | Arizona o 970-282-1800 | www.hinesinc.com Mr. Max Moss HF2M Colorado 430 North College Ave, Suite 410 Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 Dear Max, Following, please find the results of an extensive Water Resources analysis & Non- Potable Irrigation requirements study executed by our firm. We are please to note that your property is substantially supplied with non-potable water via existing groundwater wells located throughout the site. As you will see, based on our conservative calculations, after all irrigation water requirements are met, you have an annual surplus of over 1,700 acre-feet. In response to your excellent question regarding the underlying aquifer supplies beneath your property: we have researched this supply with the State Engineer, the Water Commissioner’s office, & our internal water resources team. The alluvial aquifers supplying the Montava property are incredibly robust & are supplied from mountain run-off & sub-surface water run-off from surrounding agricultural operations. In an extreme drought, your property may need to apply a drought response watering initiative to protect high value landscape while letting native areas go completely dormant. However, this will be no less significant than what your property would experience if supplied from a municipal potable water system. Given the considerable excess water supply you possess, your firm commitment to significant water conservation practices applied to this project, & the conservative nature of our existing irrigation water estimates, we do not find any reason for concern as to the long-term reliability of your groundwater supply. Kind Regards, James N Hines Memorandum The purpose of this memorandum is to outline the concept for non-potable irrigation infrastructure at the Montava development. Information provided in this memorandum corresponds to equipment and concepts shown on the non-potable master plan provided to your office. Concept Approach The design concept and intent at Montava is to develop non-potable water infrastructure to irrigate all landscape material on the site. The development of the non-potable irrigation system will significantly reduce impact on local potable water providers and will save you, the developer, cost over the life of the project. 1. Non-potable Irrigation Approach 1.1. Irrigation Wells The Montava site contains numerous irrigation wells with large annual decrees compared to the anticipated landscape demands. Of the seven (7) quarter sections that Montava is composed of only one (1) does not contain an operational irrigation well; SW quarter of section 33 (Quadrant 5). An abandoned well is located on Quadrant 5 and may possibly be rehabilitated. 1.2. Water Storage The site irrigation wells will be used to fill irrigation ponds that will double as a site aesthetic feature and raise the value of the development. Irrigation ponds are sized so that 3 days of irrigation water and evaporation losses are contained in the top 12- inches of the surface; This ensures that each pond is not drawn down excessively in the event that well pumps are not operational and the pond cannot be filled. Ponds will be constructed with a minimum 8-foot depth, 4:1 side slopes and clay liners to minimize losses from seepage. Water from irrigation wells may only be stored for up to 3 days according to Colorado State water rights law. Due to 3 days worth of irrigation water being stored in the top 12-inches of the pond, the 7 feet of depth below must be filled each season using surface water with a storage right. Date: September 17, 2018 To: Mr. Max Moss From: Hines INC. Re: Montava Non-Potable Irrigation Concept Memorandum Colorado Office 323 West Drake Road, Suite 204 Fort Collins, CO 80526 Phone: 970-282-1800 Fax: 970-226-4662 RE: Montava Non-Potable Irrigation Concept Memorandum June 8, 2018 2 1.3. Water Pumping and Distribution Water will be pumped from the irrigation ponds to serve all site landscape. One (1) high efficiency vertical turbine pump station with multiple motors will be constructed at each irrigation pond. The pump motors and shafts will be set on a steel skid on top of a circular concrete wet well, approximately 12 feet deep, with an intake pipe routed to the bottom of the pond. The irrigation pump stations are sized to provide enough instantaneous flowrate to complete all site irrigation within an 8-hour window. Downstream of the irrigation pumping station PVC pipe will deliver water to irrigation points-of-connection (POC's) serving landscape in all public areas and residential, commercial and industrial lots. Distribution pipe will be routed along the back of residential lots and a 3/4-inch tap will be installed at each residential lot capable of providing 10 GPM to the lot irrigation system. An irrigation tap will be provided to each commercial and industrial lot and will be sized based on lot landscape area. 1.4. Water Balance and Accounting Each irrigation well on site is decreed to serve only a specific quarter section (hereafter referred to as a Quadrant) of the site. The current irrigation master plan shows water from multiple wells being pumped across Quadrant lines into centralized ponds, therefore water accounting will be necessary to prove each well is only being pumped to serve landscape on its' respective Quadrant. Downstream of each Quadrant's well pump a meter will be installed to measure the volume of water pumped out of each well. A meter will be installed downstream of each irrigation pump station and at every location that the irrigation distribution system crosses a Quadrant line. This configuration of meters will allow the site water manager to balance the volume of water being pumped out of and into each Quadrant. 1.5. Public Space Landscape Irrigation The irrigation distribution system will provide irrigation POC's to strategic site locations sized based on flowrate and pressure demand. Downstream of the irrigation POC's irrigation systems will be installed to serve all site landscape. Class 200 PVC mainline will deliver water to sprinkler and drip valves. Rotor sprinklers will be used to serve large areas of turf grass and native grass in parks, open spaces and natural areas. Rotary and spray sprinklers will be used to serve small areas of turf grass. Point source drip irrigation will be used to serve shrubs beds and trees. ET based smart irrigation controllers will operate irrigation systems in public space and have remote access capability through the cloud. 1.6. Lot Landscape Irrigation Irrigation taps will be provided to all residential, commercial and industrial lots. Downstream of the irrigation tap the lot owner will be responsible for construction and maintenance of their irrigation system. An annual or monthly HOA or Metro- District fee may be assessed to resident lot owners to cover the operational costs of the non-potable irrigation system. Industrial and commercial lots will be provided a water meter at their non-potable irrigation POC and may be charged per thousand gallons like a typical water utility provider. RE: Montava Non-Potable Irrigation Concept Memorandum June 8, 2018 3 2. Non-potable Irrigation Infrastructure Master Plan: Establishment of Natural Areas The site contains a large tract of Natural areas in Quadrants 2, 5 and 6 that may require establishment irrigation in coordination with the City of Fort Collins prior to the development of the non-potable irrigation systems described previously in this memo. Temporary systems may be developed for establishment of these areas: 2.1. Natural Areas System 1 Natural Areas System 1 will serve establishment irrigation to natural areas located at the Eastern and Northern edge of Quadrant 2. A direct connection will be made to Well #10 and or 11. A sand separator will be installed downstream of the well pump to filter out large debris. Water will be pumped into an irrigation system where large rotor sprinklers will irrigate native grass and point source drip emitters will serve trees and shrubs. A temporary irrigation controller will be installed to operate irrigation zones. 2.2. Natural Areas System 2 Natural Areas System 2 will serve establishment irrigation to natural areas located at the Eastern and Southern edge of Quadrant 6. A direct connection will be made to Well #3. A sand separator will be installed downstream of the well pump to filter out large debris. A temporary irrigation controller will be installed to operate irrigation zones Water will be pumped into an irrigation system where large rotor sprinklers will irrigate native grass and point source drip emitters will serve trees and shrubs. 2.3. Natural Areas System 3 Natural Areas System 3 will serve establishment irrigation to natural areas located at the Eastern edge of Quadrant 5. A temporary irrigation pump station will be installed at the Farm Irrigation Pond. Water will be pumped into an irrigation system where large rotor sprinklers will irrigate native grass and point source drip emitters will serve trees and shrubs. If you have any questions about the information provided in this memorandum please don't hesitate to reach out to our office. QUADRANT NE 41 OF SECTION 1 32 NW QUADRANT 41 OF SECTION 2 33 QUADRANT SW 41 OF SECTION 3 32 QUADRANT SE 41 OF SECTION 4 32 SW QUADRANT 41 OF SECTION 5 33 NW QUADRANT 41 OF SECTION 6 4 NE QUADRANT 41 OF SECTION 7 4 QUADRANT 3 · SW 1 4 OF SECTION 32 · PORTNER WELLS #1 & 2 · ESTIMATED ANNUAL IRRIGATION WATER USE: 136.9 ACRE-FEET · DECREED ANNUAL WATER AVAILABLE: 200 ACRE-FEET · SURPLUS WATER: 63.1 ACRE-FEET QUADRANT 4 · SE 1 4 OF SECTION 32 · WELLS #18 & 19 · ESTIMATED ANNUAL IRRIGATION WATER USE: 70.9 ACRE-FEET · DECREED ANNUAL WATER AVAILABLE: 300.0 ACRE-FEET · SURPLUS WATER: 229.1 ACRE-FEET QUADRANT 5 · SW 1 4 OF SECTION 33 · WELL #9 (ABANDONED) - POTENTIAL FOR REHABILITATION · ESTIMATED ANNUAL IRRIGATION WATER USE: 82.5 ACRE-FEET · DECREED ANNUAL WATER AVAILABLE: 0.0 ACRE-FEET · SURPLUS WATER: -82.5 ACRE-FEET QUADRANT 6 · NW 1 4 OF SECTION 4 · WELLS #2 & 3 · ESTIMATED ANNUAL IRRIGATION WATER USE: 14.9 ACRE-FEET (DOES NOT INCLUDE SCHOOL GROUNDS) · DECREED ANNUAL WATER AVAILABLE: 405.2 ACRE-FEET · SURPLUS WATER: 390.3 ACRE-FEET QUADRANT 7 · NE 1 4 OF SECTION 4 · WELLS # 4, 5 & 6 · ESTIMATED ANNUAL IRRIGATION WATER USE: 34.6 ACRE-FEET · DECREED ANNUAL WATER AVAILABLE: 300.0 ACRE-FEET · SURPLUS WATER: 265.4 ACRE-FEET QUADRANT 1 · NE 1 4 OF SECTION 32 · WELLS #16 & 17 · ESTIMATED ANNUAL IRRIGATION WATER USE: 102.8 ACRE-FEET · DECREED ANNUAL WATER AVAILABLE: 600 ACRE-FEET · SURPLUS WATER: 497.2 ACRE-FEET QUADRANT 2 · NW 1 4 OF SECTION 33 · WELLS #10 & 11 · ESTIMATED ANNUAL IRRIGATION WATER USE: 32.4 ACRE-FEET + 160.0 ACRE-FEET (FARM); 192.4 ACRE-FEET TOTAL · DECREED ANNUAL WATER AVAILABLE FROM WELLS: 575.0 ACRE-FEET Montava Farm Landscape Development Yaling Qian, PhD Professor Horticulture and Landscape Architecture Colorado State University Montava Farm will be developed in Northeast Fort Collins with a community-wide non-potable irrigation system that uses well water to irrigate the entire community. Based on water tests for samples collected in March 2018, the underground well water has a salinity level of 1700 ppm and sodium content of 103 ppm; these levels are likely higher in the growing season. The well water with this quality may have potential impacts on: 1) the establishment and growth of landscape plants and turfgrass; and 2) changes in soil physical and chemical properties after long-term use for irrigation. The developer has expressed the desire to work with the Department of Horticulture and Landscape Architecture at CSU in landscaping and common area (80 acre park) development for the community. Based on email discussions, I outline the project with the following objectives: Objectives: 1. Evaluate water and soil analysis results, as it pertains to landscape plants and soils and consider landscape plants’ sensitivity to constituents in the water. 2. Recommend turfgrass that will grow well on this site. Determine how that grass is delivered/planted both in large common areas and individual homes. 3. Establish demonstration plots at CSU research farm where different turfgrasses are irrigated with saline ground water (plots will be maintained from 2018 to 2020). 4. Provide recommendations about cultural practices that landscape managers and home owners can do that would lessen the effects of saline water on plants. 5. Identify shrubs and trees that can better adapt to the water source, and identify ones that shouldn’t be used for common areas and/or landscaping for individual homes. 6. Establish an onsite testing center that is open to the public and showcases this collaborative work with water, irrigation, plants, etc. The purpose of this on-site testing center could be multifold: a) To conduct an onsite study to evaluate and compare different commercial products (such as liquid aerators, surfactant treatments, and seaweed extracts) for reducing soil salinity on saline ground water-irrigated landscapes. b) To showcase: i. Different turfgrass plots; ii. Different soil preparation techniques; iii. Different irrigation technologies; iv. Resource efficient and eco-friendly landscapes. Project for objective 6 may be defined on an annual basis. General budget estimates are provided for each of three tiers (from least to most ambitious): Tier 1: To address objectives 1-4. Dr. Qian will be in charge of these tasks. A cost in the range of $20,000 - $25,000 will be needed to complete these objectives. Tier 2: In addition to objectives 1-4, objective 5 will be included. A current graduate student who has substantial experience with trees and shrubs will conduct a literature review and will visit different landscape sites to evaluate landscape plants that are currently under saline ground water for irrigation. Some plant tissue analysis will be done. We will reimburse the graduate student for his time. Estimated cost is about $15,000 – $18,000 for objective 5. Tier 3: In addition to objectives 1-5, objective 6 will be included: Objective 6 will involve other faculty members in the department and require at least one graduate student along with undergraduate student hourly. Under the direction of interested CSU faculty members, a Ph.D. student in the Department of Horticulture and Landscape Architecture at Colorado State University will be managing all aspects of the onsite testing center, including planning and implementation of various projects. The budget will be $30,000-40,000 per year for one graduate student. Undergraduate student hourly will contribute to the onsite test center maintenance at $15,000-20,000 per year. In addition, budget ($10,000) is needed to cover the cost of materials and supplies. The budget may be re-visited with the sponsor and modified on an annual basis. The university will charge about an additional 32% indirect cost. Budget: Objectives 1-4: $15000 - $20000 Objective 5: $15000 – $18000 Objective 6: $55,000-70,000 per year Energy Strategy An ever changing opportunity Montava is Energy Bruce Hendee was the first local team member brought into the Montava family. Energy conservation was front and center, and Bruce helped us understand this from day 1. In fact even the name Montava is founded on this bedrock. Tava is the Ute Indian word for Sun, which had dual value for us. Bringing the past of this land together with its future. My favorite definition for innovation is “The positive reinforcement of ideas.” This is why our office is in the Powerhouse, and why we have worked with Bryan Willson from the beginning. Combining Bruce, Bryan, the incredible staff of the Fort Collins Utilities Light and Power and the nations most energy focused home builders has opened doors to amazing possibilities. Our vision is far beyond PV on roof tops, and I look forward to discussing this with you on the 25th. We will use renewable energy throughout Montava. We will be an integral partner of the Fort Collins Utilities Light and Power at Montava. We will be the largest ZERH community in the country. We will be an ongoing platform for innovation at Montava. DOE Zero Energy Ready Home www.buildings.energy.gov/ZERO Zero Energy Ready Home Development in Fort Collins Sam Rashkin, Chief Architect, U.S. DOE Building Technologies Office September 10, 2018 What is Zero Energy Ready Home: • Top 1% highest performance homes nationwide • ~20% greater efficiency than 2015 IECC along with requirements for ensured comfort, water protection, and indoor air quality. • Performance measures included are often missing in code homes which can lead to failures. Zero Energy Ready Home Benefits for Fort Collins: • Benefit calculations are based on the following data/analytical findings: - ~5,500 units committed to 100% Zero Energy Ready Home (Thrive Home Builders and Mantava development) - $400 annual energy savings per home compared to 2015 IECC home - Incremental cost of ~$4,000 for ZERH vs. 2015 IECC home assumed for analysis - 7.2% annual residential property tax rate for Fort Collins - 1 Kw peak demand reduction per home • Benefits to Fort Collins for ~5,500 homes projected over first 30-year mortgage include: - ~$60 million energy savings that can be spent locally in the community - ~$45 million of additional tax revenue attributed to higher value homes - ~.5 billion gallons of water saved going down the drain waiting for hot water - ~5,500 Kw peak demand reduction for City of Fort Collins - Utilities - ~15,000 residents with less sick days and lower medical expenses - 17+ million tons CO2 emission reductions - 2030 Carbon Neutral Goal readiness with full infrastructure development (e.g., trade skills, builder experience, product distribution) at no expense to Fort Collins Zero Energy Ready Home Empirical Results • Nearly 3,000 homes certified • Certifications doubled for 3 straight years • ~10,000 homes committed to future certification • ~200 home profiles in DOE Tour of Zero demonstrate outstanding performance • Oregon Governor’s executive order calls for ZERH in 2023 code Water Conservation From house to metro districts Water Conservation Many things will drive conservation of water in Montava. Economic necessity, a sense of urgency, a desire to set a standard for others and community support are important ones. The homes will be built to the EPA WaterSense standards. We have already discussed the non- potable approach to irrigation which plays a critical role. New urbanism also helps by reducing the amount of lawn and landscaping that needs irrigation in residential areas. Another significant benefit can be enabled by the Metro District which can be used to both encourage conservation, and hold people accountable through billing tiers based on use. We believe the home of tomorrow will use much less water than the existing housing stock. Montava can put systems in place that maximize this opportunity while still allowing people to live their lives to the fullest. Attached is an evaluation that was done of the actual water use in the Revive Project which was built with new urbanist principals, to WaterSense standards, and shows substantially reduced water usage. This is the model for Montava, and more. Water Efficiency at Revive Revive homes were designed and certified to meet the EPA WaterSense program. The data used removed exterior water use, and focused on internal water use only by using the winter months for occupied homes as the benchmark. All homes in Revive performed better than the WaterSense standards including townhomes and duplexes which represent the Single Family component in this study. The duplexes are two dwelling units built as one. 2016 High-efficiency benchmark for existing Homes 108 gpd 2016 EPA Standard 96 gpd 2011 WaterSense study of new homes 110 gpd Revive townhomes (interior only) 50 gpd Revive duplexes (interior only) 96 gpd Townhome % of ELCO indoor only dedication requirement 25% Duplex % of ELCO indoor only dedication requirement 33% Specifications of the Revive homes were: # Homes in Study Sq ft Lot Sq ft Bed Bathrooms Shower Tubs Dishwasher Washer Townhomes Lily 4 1172 1233-1332 2 1.5 0 1 1 1 Lotus 6 1444 1233-1333 2 4 1 1 1 1 SF/Duplex Stanley 5 2488 4066-4318 3 + studio 4 1 2 2 2 McIntosh 3 2096 4066-4319 2 + studio 4 1 2 2 2 North Star 2 2224 4066-4320 3 + studio 4 1 2 2 2 Total 20 The Water Sense criteria included: 1. Indoor Water Use a. Plumbing i. Third party testing for leaks ii. Service Pressure (60 psi or less) iii. Hot water delivery (no more than 0.5 gal between source and outlet) b. Plumbing Fixtures – WaterSense Labeled i. Toilets ii. Bathroom and Kitchen faucets iii. Showerheads c. Appliances i. Dishwasher – Energy Star ii. Clothes washers – Energy Star and Water Factor <6.0 gal/ft3 d. Water Using Equipment i. Evaporative cooling, Water softeners & Drinking water treatment – none were used at Revive And are further described in https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017- 02/documents/ws-specification-home-spec-v1.1.pdf Single Family/Duplex Site Plan and Sample Floor Plan (Stanley) Townhome Site Plan and Sample Floor Plan (Lotus) INDOOR WATER USE EFFICIENCY CHECKLIST To Be Completed by Applicant Page 1 of 2 I certify that the subject project meets the specified requirements of the Soquel Creek Indoor Water Use Efficiency Ordinance. Signature Date Project Information □ Single Family □ Multi-Family □ Commercial □ Industrial □ Public □ Irrigation only □ Other: Applicant Name (print): Contact Phone #: Project Site Address: Project Area (sq.ft.): # of Units: # of Meters: Residential Non-Residential Toilets ≤ 1.28 gpf ≤ 1.28 gpf □ Yes □ No or or WaterSense WaterSense Urinals ≤ 0.5 gpf ≤ 0.5 gpf □ Yes □ No or or WaterSense WaterSense Showers ≤ 2.0 gpm ≤ 2.0 gpm □ Yes □ No or or WaterSense WaterSense Bathroom faucets ≤ 1.5 gpm ≤ 0.5 gpm □ Yes □ No or or WaterSense ≤ 0.20 gpc Kitchen faucets ≤ 1.8 gpm ≤ 1.8 gpm □ Yes □ No Clothes washers □ Yes □ No Dishwashers □ Yes □ No Cooling towers -- ≥ 5 to 10 cycles □ Yes □ No or ≥ 2.5 LSI Food steamers -- □ Yes □ No Ice machines -- Energy Star Qualified □ Yes □ No Pre-rinse spray valves -- ≤ 1.1 gpm □ Yes □ No Automatic vehicle wash facilities -- ≥ 75% of the water is recycled □ Yes □ No Energy Star Qualified Project Meets Requirements Number of Devices Boilerless or Self- Contained Fixture or Appliance Requirements Energy Star Qualified Energy Star Qualified Energy Star Qualified Soquel Creek Water District, 5180 Soquel Drive, Soquel, CA 95010, Telephone: (831) 475-8500, Fax: (831) 475-4291 INDOOR WATER USE EFFICIENCY CHECKLIST To Project Be Completed Information, by Agency Continued Page 2 of 2 Residential Non-Residential -- Closed loop □ Yes □ No or Air-cooled □ Yes □ No To To Be Be Completed Completed by by Agency Soquel Creek Water District Reviewer Name: Materials Received and Reviewed: □ Indoor Water Use Efficiency □ Indoor Water Use Efficiency Checklist Ordinance □ Project Plans □ Information on qualifying fixtures and appliances □ Other: Date Reviewed: □ Follow up required (explain): Date Resubmitted: □ Other: Date Approved: Comments: Selected Definitons: gpf gallons per flush gpm gallons per minute gpc gallons per cycle LSI Langlier Saturation Index sq.ft. square feet > greater than ≤ less than or equal to ≥ greater than or equal to Material Distributed to Applicant Individual meter for each unit Fixture or Appliance Requirements Individual meter for each unit Meters Measures Recommended to Applicant □ Hot water recirculation system □ Dual-plumbing for graywater Energy Star Qualified Products: www.energystar.gov/ www.epa.gov/WaterSense/ WaterSense Qualified Project Meets Requirements Commercial refrigeration Number of Devices Soquel Creek Water District, 5180 Soquel Drive, Soquel, CA 95010, Telephone: (831) 475-8500, Fax: (831) 475-4291 OUTDOOR WATER USE EFFICIENCY CHECKLIST TIER II SINGLE-FAMILY, MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT To Be Completed by a Certified Professional ________________ Signature Title Date Project Information Applicant Name (print): Contact Phone #: Project Site Address: Email address: Assessor's Parcel Number: # of Units: # of Meters: Parcel Area (sq. ft.): Turf Area (sq.ft.): High Water Use Plant Area (sq. ft.): Water Feature Surface Area (sq.ft.): Landscape Parameter Requirements General Limits □ Yes □ No Turf Limits □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No Plants Plants are grouped by hydrozones □ Yes □ No Hydrozones are irrigated separately □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No Irrigation System Design □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No Low-volume irrigation used for all non-turf areas No overhead sprinkler systems within 24 inches of non-permeable surfaces Manual shut-off valve present Page 1 I certify that the subject project meets the requirements of the Soquel Creek Water Conservation in Landscaping Ordinance. For a new Tier II single-family (one or two-unit) residential project, enter this information. For all other projects, input an aggregate value for the entire project. Only very low to low water use plants on slopes greater than 33% Project Type: □ Tier II Single-Family □ Multi-Family □ Commercial □ Industrial □ Public □ Other Total Landscape Area (sq. ft.): Combined area of turf, moderate to high water use plants and water features is less than 25% of the total landscape area No turf in street medians, traffic islands, planter strips, and parking lot islands ____________________________________ _________________________________________ No turf in areas less than 10 feet wide in any direction All turf is planted on slopes less than 12% Turf is a water-conserving species (moderate water use as defined by WUCOLS). Contact District Staff if WUCOLS factor is not available. The use of rainwater and/or graywater for irrigation was evaluated □ Tier II (≥ 10,000 sq. ft. parcel) Plants are selected and planted appropriately based on their adaptability to the area and water use and at least one listed method for planting OUTDOOR WATER USE EFFICIENCY CHECKLIST TIER II SINGLE-FAMILY, MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT Project Information, Continued Page 2 Landscape Parameter Requirements □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No Irrigation System Efficiency □ Yes □ No Irrigation Schedule □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No Soil Management □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No Metering □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No Water Features □ Yes □ No □ Yes □ No Covers for pools and spas □ Yes □ No Stormwater Stormwater Management Management □ Yes □ No Documentation Checklist complete □ Yes □ No Water Allowance Calculation Worksheet complete □ Yes □ No Landscape & Irrigation System Design Plans complete □ Yes □ No Project Meets Requirements Private irrigation submeter (recommended for Tier II SF) Repairs to be made using identical or improved parts Irrigation schedule provided to appropriate personnel and posted near irrigation controller Irrigation system to be inspected regularly and maintained in good working condition Moisture sensor/rain sensor shutoffs installed Check valves installed at lowest point(s) on each valve run Backflow prevention device installed when dedicated landscape meters are required No overspray or runoff Drip emitters or bubblers installed at each tree, maximum 1.5 gallons per minute, on separate valves At least 3-inches of mulch on exposed soil surfaces Automatic, self-adjusting irrigation controllers installed (i.e., weather or sensor-based) Compacted soils are transformed to friable conditions (recommended) Irrigation schedule to be adjusted seasonally based on plant needs Overhead turf irrigation to occur between 8 PM and 10 AM Irrigation will be avoided during windy or freezing weather and is prohibited within 48 hours of rainy weather Landscape maintenance schedule to be followed Sprinkler heads and emission devices have matched precipitation rates OUTDOOR WATER USE EFFICIENCY CHECKLIST TIER II SINGLE-FAMILY, MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT Page 3 Reviewer Name: Date Received: Date Approved: Recommendations and Comments: Soquel Creek Water District, 5180 Soquel Drive, Soquel, CA 95010 Telephone: (831)475-8500, Fax: (831)475-4291 Master Street Plan Amendment The Roads We have a tremendous opportunity to improve the Master Street Plan road network in NE Fort Collins. By returning to the grid, and making logical transportation connections based on multi modal strategies, we can create a fluid and effective road network that allows development to happen and allows the community to flourish and flow. This is a critical component of what you will be seeing in the coming months. I have attached our traffic study that will enable you to study this in detail as you desire. If you have questions, we will be available to answer them on the 25th. MONTAVA |MASTER STREET PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSPORTATION REPORT City of Fort Collins Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | i MASTER STREET PLAN AMENDMENT Transportation Report August 2018 MONTAVA |MASTER STREET PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSPORTATION REPORT City of Fort Collins Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | i Table of Contents Page 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................1-1 2 Master Street Plan Recommendations Overview .............................................................2-1 3 Technical Analysis ...........................................................................................................3-1 Methodology .......................................................................................................................................... 3-1 #1 TIMBERLINE ROAD Vine Drive to Mountain Vista Drive .......................................................... 3-4 #2 GIDDINGS ROAD Suniga Drive to Richards Lake Road ......................................................... 3-5 #3 TURNBERRY ROAD Suniga Drive to Richards Lake Road ....................................................... 3-6 #4 MOUNTAIN VISTA DRIVE Turnberry Road to I-25 Interchange ............................................ 3-7 #5 SUNIGA DRIVE Turnberry Road to Giddings Road ............................................................... 3-8 #6 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD Turnberry Road to Giddings Road .................................................. 3-9 #7 CONIFER STREET Timberline Road to Suniga Drive ............................................................... 3-10 #8 RICHARDS LAKE ROAD Turnberry Road to Busch Drive ....................................................... 3-10 #9 BAR HARBOR Richards Lake Road to Country Club Road ................................................... 3-11 Figures Page Figure 2-1 Current & Proposed Master Street Plan Network ......................................................... 2-2 Figure 3-1 Year 2040 Adjusted Average Daily Traffic, Project Daily Trips, and Total Daily Traffic ...................................................................................................................................... 3-3 Tables Page Table 2-1 Master Street Plan Recommendations Summary ............................................................ 2-3 Table 3-1 Street Classifications and ADT Maximum Traffic Volume Threshold by Classification .......................................................................................................................... 3-2 MONTAVA |MASTER STREET PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSPORTATION REPORT City of Fort Collins Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 1-1 1 INTRODUCTION The Montava development project (“project”) is situated in a primarily undeveloped area of northeast Fort Collins and would comprise approximately 900 acres bounded by Richards Lake Road to the north, Mountain Vista Drive to the south, Busch Drive to the east and Turnberry Road to the west. The Project Applicant has requested an amendment to City of Fort Collins (City) Master Street Plan to reclassify and/or modify existing and future roadways that would provide direct, multimodal access and connectivity to the project and the Mountain Vista Subarea. The project would include an agri-urban community that blends urban farming and agricultural resources with an array of open space, parklands and trails, neighborhood-serving commercial businesses, and a variety of residential homes. To accommodate this planned community and create a network that supports active living and sustainable transportation choices for future residents, businesses, and visitors, the project would introduce a series of new streets that interweave the development into the fabric of the Mountain Vista area of Fort Collins. The proposed roadway network for the project largely originates from the multimodal framework and Master Street Plan documented in the City’s Mountain Vista Subarea Plan (2009). This document includes the following chapters: Chapter 2: Master Street Plan Recommendations Overview – summary of recommended modifications and/or proposed new streets to be incorporated into the City’s Master Street Plan. Chapter 3: Transportation Analysis – detailed profiles of each recommendations, including operations analysis based on long-range (Year 2040) traffic forecasts provided by North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization (NFRMPO) and estimated traffic volumes with implementation of the project under a full buildout scenario. MONTAVA |MASTER STREET PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSPORTATION REPORT City of Fort Collins Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-1 2 MASTER STREET PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS OVERVIEW The Master Street Plan compliments the Transportation Master Plan, Amended December 17, 2013 in supporting the vision, principles, and policies established by the City, and provides a map of the City’s long-range vision for its major street network. The Master Street Plan includes the existing and proposed street classification and location of transportation connections throughout Fort Collins. It is important to note that the Master Street Plan is intended to be living document and through the City’s planning process, the street classification network is meant to be amended to address new infrastructure and development. This chapter provides an overview of the current Master Street Plan per the City’s Transportation Master Plan and proposed modifications to the Master Street Plan network with overall growth in the Mountain Vista Subarea plus implementation of the Montava project. For purposes of this document, the geographic context (or affected area) is generally defined by the boundaries of the project, specifically Richards Lake Road to the north, Mountain Vista Drive to the south, Busch Drive to the east, and Turnberry Road to the west. However, given the expanse of the project, the street network under evaluation and included in the City’s Master Street Plan extend beyond these boundaries and therefore, other existing/planned streets within the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County are also included in the discussion. Figure 2-1 present the City’s current and proposed Master Street Plan within the vicinity of the project and the recommended street classifications in and around the project area. MONTAVA |MASTER STREET PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSPORTATION REPORT City of Fort Collins Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-2 Figure 2-1 Current & Proposed Master Street Plan Network City of Fort Collins Master Street Plan Network Proposed Master Street Plan Amendment Network Source: Transportation Master Plan, City of Fort Collins, CO. Source: HF2M Colorado; DPZ, 2018. Table 2-1 on the following page presents a summary table of current and proposed changes to street classifications and recommended modifications and/or additions to the street network associated with the Montava project. MONTAVA |MASTER STREET PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSPORTATION REPORT City of Fort Collins Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2-3 Table 2-1 Master Street Plan Recommendations Summary Location Current MSP Designation Recommended Designation Additional Recommendations Timberline Road (Vine Drive to Mountain Vista Drive) (Mountain Vista Drive to Country Club Road) (Country Club Road to Giddings Road) Four-Lane Arterial Four-Lane Arterial Two-Lane Arterial Two-Lane Collector Timberline will extend north of Mountain Vista and create an intersection with four approaches The extension of Timberline will result in a NE-SW orientation from Mountain Vista to Giddings Road and allow for connection with Country Club Road extension Classify as two-lane arterial between Mountain Vista Drive and Country Club Road and classify as two-lane collector between Country Club Road and Giddings Road within project site Giddings Road (Suniga Drive to Richards Lake Road) Two-Lane Arterial Two-Lane Arterial Maintain two-lane arterial between Mountain Vista Drive and Richards Lake Road Create new connections within project site to Giddings Road Extend Giddings Road further south of Mountain Vista Drive as two-lane arterial and connect to Suniga Drive extension Turnberry Road (Richards Lake Road to Suniga Drive) Two-Lane Arterial Two-Lane Arterial Extend Turnberry Road south of Mountain Vista Drive to Suniga Drive Mountain Vista Drive (Timberline Road to I-25 Interchange) (Turnberry Road to Timberline Road) Four-Lane Arterial Two-Lane Arterial Four-Lane Arterial Two-Lane Arterial Consider a phased approach to widening of Mountain Vista Drive from two to four-lane roadway between Timberline Road and I-25 interchange and align widening with adjacent development to the north/south of the roadway Maintain two-lane arterial classification between Turnberry Road and Timberline Road Suniga Drive (Turnberry Road to Timberline Road) Four-Lane Arterial Four-Lane Arterial Extend Suniga Drive farther east of Turnberry Road to connect to Giddings Road (extension) Conifer Street (Turnberry Road to Suniga Drive) Two-Lane Arterial Two-Lane Arterial Extend Conifer from Timberline Road east to Giddings Road Busch Drive (Richards Lake Road to Mountain Vista Drive) Two-Lane Collector Two-Lane Collector None Richards Lake Road (Turnberry Road to Busch Drive) Two-Lane Arterial Two-Lane Arterial None Country Club Road (Turnberry Road to Giddings Road) Two-Lane Collector Two-Lane Collector Extend Country Club Road to connect into Montava Town Center, and connect with Timberline Road Maple Hill Road MONTAVA |MASTER STREET PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSPORTATION REPORT City of Fort Collins Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-1 3 TECHNICAL ANALYSIS This chapter provides a detailed assessment of the recommended changes to the current street classification system per the Master Street Plan and analysis details for specific locations. METHODOLOGY The technical analysis provided herein adheres to the evaluation standards and methodology established by the City. Each affected roadway within the Master Street Plan was evaluated based on current classification, future Year 2040 traffic volumes from on the North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization (NFRMPO) regional travel demand model, and the additional daily vehicle trips generated by the project. A technical project travel demand methodology and scenario development memorandum prepared by Nelson\Nygaard was approved by City staff as of May 18, 2018. It should be noted that the current NFRMPO model estimated approximately 38,000 trips in the zones that would encompass the entire project site. The daily trips estimated in the above referenced memoranda with the proposed Montava development plan would result in approximately 42,000 trips. This assessment includes a two-step process: 1. Determine projected Year 2040 traffic volumes along affected roadways in the Master Street Plan that are in the project area (as defined in previous chapters) and identify if these future volumes are in compliance with the current street designations in the Master Street Plan; and 2. Determine projected Year 2040 traffic volumes with the additional traffic generated by the project and identify if these future volumes are in compliance with the recommended street designations in the Master Street Plan. As stated in Subsection 4.4.5 in Chapter 4 – Transportation Impact Study Guidelines of Larimer County Urban Area Streets Standards (April 1, 2007), the Applicant shall provide roadway functional classification recommendations based on “total traffic projections”, which includes “existing traffic, plus the future background traffic, plus the project-generated traffic.” For purposes of this analysis and per the City-approved scope of work, this assessment used Year 2040 traffic volumes and these future baseline volumes with the additional traffic generated by the project, as defined above. It is assumed that background traffic volumes and/or vehicle trips generated by approved but unbuilt projects in Fort Collins are accounted for in the Year 2040 projections. Because the NFRMPO included land-use and roadway volumes in Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) within the project boundaries and thus, assumed development in the project area and associated vehicle trips were subtracted from 2040 volumes to avoid overestimation of total vehicle traffic with implementation of the project. It is noted that under Year 2040 conditions, no additional planned transportation improvements proposed by the City of Fort Collins or Larimer County were incorporated into the future network and travel demand modeling. Figure 3-1 MONTAVA |MASTER STREET PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSPORTATION REPORT City of Fort Collins Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-2 presents the Year 2040 baseline (no project) volumes, the projected-generated average daily trips, and the total average daily traffic volumes along study roadways. As a general guideline, roadway classifications are determined by their functionality with respect to the daily carrying capacity (i.e., number of vehicles relative to number of travel lanes), access and connectivity to surrounding land uses and local context, mode priority, street design standards and streetscape elements. The table below summarizes the general description of roadway classifications, mode priority, and general average daily traffic (ADT) ranges.1 Table 3-1 Street Classifications and ADT Maximum Traffic Volume Threshold by Classification Classification Mode Priority Description1 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) Range2 Arterial Bicycle: Pedestrian: Transit: Vehicle: Provide access and safe crossings for all travel modes along regional corridors. Accommodates distribution of trips to collector streets and connections to mixed commercial areas. Six-Lane: 35,000+ ADT Four-Lane: 15,001 – 35,000 ADT Two-Lane: 5,000 – 15,000 ADT Collector Bicycle: Pedestrian: Transit: Vehicle: Distributes trips to residential and commercial areas. Balanced level of service for vehicle, transit, bicycles and pedestrians where possible. 1,000 – 7,000 ADT Local Bicycle: Pedestrian: Transit: Vehicle: Prioritizes walking and biking, low-traffic streets in neighborhood and mixed-use areas, and distributes local traffic to collector streets. Less than 1,000 ADT = High Priority = Medium Priority = Low Priority Notes: 1. Descriptions are general in terms of functionality and purpose. 2. ADT ranges are general guidelines and actual volume thresholds may vary depending on function. Source: Nelson\Nygaard, 2018; City of Fort Collins, Master Street Plan. 1 Detailed descriptions regarding street design standards per roadway classification are provided in Chapter 7 – Street Design and Technical Criteria, Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (April, 2007). MONTAVA |MASTER STREET PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSPORTATION REPORT City of Fort Collins Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-3 Figure 3-1 Year 2040 Adjusted Average Daily Traffic, Project Daily Trips, and Total Daily Traffic MONTAVA |MASTER STREET PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSPORTATION REPORT City of Fort Collins Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-4 #1 TIMBERLINE ROAD Vine Drive to Mountain Vista Drive Description: Maintain a key, multimodal “gateway” arterial street connection between the Mountain Vista Subarea and central Fort Collins, and provide connections to major east-west corridors. Existing Classification: Four-Lane Arterial Recommendation: Four-Lane Arterial with the following: Continue to align Timberline Road as a true north-south roadway between Vine Drive and Mountain Vista Drive. Create standard, four-way intersection at Mountain Vista Drive. Future traffic volumes would allow for a two-lane arterial designation. However, the future traffic volumes with project-generated vehicle would exceed ADT capacity thresholds for a two-lane arterial designation. A four-lane arterial designation would support the overall functionality of the roadway, including accommodating multimodal traffic (including transit, bicyclists, and pedestrians). Existing Volumes (2018): 5,700 average daily trips 2040 Projected Volumes: Scenario Roadway ADT Year 2040 Baseline 9,500 Year 2040 with Project 14,600 - 20,100 Source: NFRMPO Model; Nelson\Nygaard, 2018. Additional Considerations: The proposed roadway classification supports the City’s vision of Timberline Road per the Transportation Master Plan. The proposed capacity of a four-lane arterial can accommodate multiple modes of travel and adequate capacity to allow for a mix of both general traffic, transit vehicles, and bicycle travel. Timberline Road would be designated as an Enhanced Travel Corridor (ETC), a uniquely designed corridor that is planned for high-frequency transit, bicycling and walking as part of the corridor. The intention of Timberline Road ETC is to enhance travel time through the corridor to connect primary destinations. Within the Montava development, the roadway will narrow to a two-lane arterial north of Mountain Vista Drive to Country Club Road (extension). From the intersection Country Club Road, the alignment will shift from a north-south orientation to a northeast- southwest orientation that connects to Giddings Road to the east and the County Club Road extension to the west. It is recommended that the roadway transition to a two-lane collector from Country Club Road to Giddings Road. The estimated auto traffic along this segment will diffuse as the presence of several residential streets will distribute and lessen traffic demand. Although traffic demand would exceed ADT capacity thresholds for two-lane arterial and two-lane collector along the planned extension north of Mountain Vista Drive into the MONTAVA |MASTER STREET PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSPORTATION REPORT City of Fort Collins Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-5 project site, the roadway would provide multiple connections to residential streets and driveways, distribute traffic within the site, allow for slower-moving vehicles, and comfort to multimodal users such as bicyclists and pedestrians. Potential widening to a four-lane arterial along any portion of the roadway north of Mountain Vista Drive is not recommended and will not support the residential characteristic along the corridor. Create a focal route for the planned Montava Town Center and accommodate for appropriate land-use development, densities, and provide a high degree of multimodal access to surrounding uses. #2 GIDDINGS ROAD Suniga Drive to Richards Lake Road Description: Enhance north-south arterial street connection to accommodate multimodal traffic between Mountain Vista Subarea and major east-west corridors. Existing Classification: Two-Lane Arterial Recommendation: Two-Lane Arterial with the following: Serve as a north-south arterial between Mountain Vista Road and Richards Lake Road. Recommended to maintain two-lane roadway although estimated traffic demand in the future with project volumes would marginally exceed ADT capacity thresholds. A two- lane arterial roadway would coincide with residential character of the corridor, the planned access points to adjacent neighborhoods, local-serving commercial, and farmland areas. Existing Volumes (2018): 3,100 average daily trips 2040 Projected Volumes: Scenario Roadway ADT Year 2040 Baseline 7,500 Year 2040 with Project 17,300 – 19,400 Source: NFRMPO Model; Nelson\Nygaard, 2018. Additional Considerations: The proposed roadway classification supports the City’s vision per the Transportation Master Plan to continue a two-lane arterial linkage between Mountain Vista Drive and Richards Lake Road. Giddings will serve as a primary north-south route for the planned residential uses and the proposed farm. The character of this roadway will provide buffered bike lanes and sidewalks for pedestrian access to adjacent uses; no on-street parking is planned. Maintaining a two-lane arterial south of Mountain Vista Drive to a future connection to Suniga Drive would provide adequate carrying capacity with buildout of the area. This includes the project, planned combined high school and middle school along the corridor and other development in the area. Expanding roadway to a four-lane arterial is not recommended and could result in adverse environmental effects, including induced MONTAVA |MASTER STREET PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSPORTATION REPORT City of Fort Collins Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-6 traffic demand, noise, air quality, and unnecessary land takings that could preclude development potential. Giddings Road, south of connection to Mountain Vista Drive, to provide main access to planned middle and high schools, therefore allowing for distribution of vehicle trips and alleviated potential traffic congestion along other adjacent routes, including Timberline Road and Mountain Vista Drive. This section will also provide a roadway connection to future adjacent development. #3 TURNBERRY ROAD Suniga Drive to Richards Lake Road Description: Establish a north-south arterial street connection that extends south of Mountain Vista Drive. This extension will allow for a greater connected roadway network to serve the Mountain Vista Subarea and the adjacent areas of Larimer County. Existing Classification: Two-Lane Arterial Recommendation: Two-Lane Arterial with the following: Maintain two-lane roadway between Richards Lake Road (and points further north) and Mountain Vista Drive. Extend two-lane roadway south of Mountain Vista Drive to provide connection to planned Conifer Street and Suniga Drive. Design to accommodate low vehicle speeds, striped and buffered bicycle lanes, no on- street parking and multiple access points to adjacent residences. A two-lane arterial designation would maintain the existing character and overall functionality of the roadway. Any widening would result in potentially adverse environment effects, including induced traffic levels, noise, air quality; none of which would not be conducive to the adjacent residential neighborhoods the roadway serves currently and in the future. Existing Volumes (2018): 3,800 average daily trips 2040 Projected Volumes: Scenario Roadway ADT Year 2040 Baseline 6,000 Year 2040 with Project 10,200 Source: NFRMPO Model; Nelson\Nygaard, 2018. Additional Considerations: The potential extension of Turnberry Road is still under consideration by City staff and the alignment and its planned connections are still under review. The roadway would serve as a north-south arterial route for the existing neighborhoods (e.g., Water’s Edge, Hearthfire, Maple Hill, Storybrook, Adriel Hills, and residents along Country Club Road in Larimer County).. The extension of Turnberry Road farther south of Mountain Vista Drive would also alleviate potential traffic congestion levels along other north-south roadways, including MONTAVA |MASTER STREET PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSPORTATION REPORT City of Fort Collins Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-7 Timberline Road, Giddings Road, while also reducing cut-through traffic demand along County Club Road. The Turnberry Road connection is anticipated to reduce future 2040 traffic on Country Club Road in the range of 4,000 to 7,000 vehicles. Please note the volumes shown earlier on Figure 3-1 reflect Country Club with these reductions. The projected volumes would indicate that Turnberry Road is necessary to provide desired traffic flows, pedestrian experience, and bicycle connections within the entire Mountain Vista Subarea. Therefore, it is recommended that the extension of Turnberry Road south of Mountain Vista Drive be included in the Master Street Plan. Extending Turnberry Road farther south of Suniga Drive to Vine Drive is not recommended, as the future design/alignment and functionality of Vine Drive is uncertain and under review by City staff. In addition, current residents along Vine Drive would have continued north-south access via Timberline Road. The design of the extension of Turnberry Road, south of Mountain Vista Drive, should be sensitive to the existing land uses. #4 MOUNTAIN VISTA DRIVE Turnberry Road to I-25 Interchange Description: Mountain Vista Drive is expected to be an active “gateway” to the Mountain Vista Subarea Area and a major east-west connection between the I-25 interstate and area-wide multimodal corridors. Existing Classification: Two-Lane Arterial (west of Timberline Road) Four-Lane Arterial (east of Timberline Road) Recommendation: Two-Lane Arterial and Four-Lane Arterial with the following: During Phase 1 of area-wide development, including Montava and potential adjacent properties, recommend the following: Four-lane arterial between Timberline Road to I-25 interchange Two-lane arterial between Turnberry Road and Timberline Road Establish a ‘boulevard’ design to accommodate multimodal traffic, including potential Transfort transit routes (per Phase 3 of the Transit Master Plan), buffered bike lanes, landscaped parkways, and wide pedestrian sidewalks/pathways. Existing Volumes (2018): 6,200 average daily trips 2040 Projected Volumes: Scenario Roadway ADT Year 2040 Baseline 10,700 – 15,000 Year 2040 with Project 14,900 – 29,800 Source: NFRMPO Model; Nelson\Nygaard, 2018. MONTAVA |MASTER STREET PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSPORTATION REPORT City of Fort Collins Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-8 Additional Considerations: The proposed roadway classification supports the City’s vision per the Transportation Master Plan to create a two- and four-lane arterial linkage between Turnberry Road and I-25 interchange. Roadway will serve as the primary east-west travel route for those destined to/from I-25 highway. Character of roadway is to serve regional and local multimodal traffic in northeast portion of Fort Collins, including future Transfort transit route service, and accommodate dedicated on-road and fully-separated bicycle and pedestrian facilities and access to adjacent properties. #5 SUNIGA DRIVE Turnberry Road to Giddings Road Description: Suniga Drive is a planned east-west, multimodal Enhanced Travel Corridor (ETC) that will provide connections to the Mountain Vista Subarea to downtown Fort Collins and provide key connections to north-south roadways, including College Avenue, Turnberry Road, Timberline Road, and Giddings Road. Currently Suniga is planned to extend east of Timberline and connect back to Vine Drive. Existing Classification: Four-Lane Arterial Recommendation: Four-Lane Arterial with the following: Continue to extend Suniga Drive east to connect to Turnberry Road (future extension), Timberline Road, and to Giddings Road (future extension). Design would support City’s vision of a four-lane with center median boulevard design and would be a designated ETC, providing greater east-west connectivity to downtown Fort Collins and neighborhoods to the north and east of downtown. Future traffic volumes per NFRMPO model (without project-generated traffic) would not exceed the ADT capacity thresholds for a four-lane arterial designation. However, with the proposed project traffic, the potential increase in vehicle traffic would marginally exceed these ADT capacity thresholds. Regardless, the potential widening to a six-lane roadway is not recommended. To maintain the character of the ETC-designated roadway and planned adjacent uses along the corridor, a six-lane roadway would create an east- west suburban highway as opposed to a local-serving, east-west arterial to accommodate multimodal traffic (including public transit and school buses), and provide a safer, convenience experience for non-auto users (bicyclists and pedestrians). Existing Volumes (2018): NA – Future Roadway 2040 Projected Volumes: Scenario Roadway ADT Year 2040 Baseline 26,400 Year 2040 with Project 40,200 Source: NFRMPO Model; Nelson\Nygaard, 2018. MONTAVA |MASTER STREET PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSPORTATION REPORT City of Fort Collins Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-9 Additional Considerations: The proposed roadway classification supports the City’s vision to provide a four-lane arterial linkage between College Avenue and the Mountain Vista Subarea. Roadway will serve as the primary east-west travel route for those destined to/from the Mountain Vista Subarea, planned schools, and I-25 highway. Design Suniga Drive to support a dedicated, buffered bicycle lane and serve as a main Transfort bus route, creating economic opportunity along the corridor as an ETC route. #6 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD Turnberry Road to Giddings Road Description: Maintain two-lane roadway to provide east-west connectivity between Larimer County and Fort Collins, providing connections between Highway 1 and Turnberry Road. Existing Classification: Two-Lane Collector Recommendation: Two-Lane Collector with the following: Maintain Country Club Road west and east of Turnberry Road as “Two-Lane Collector” Although future traffic volumes per NFRMPO model (with and without project-generated traffic) would exceed the ADT capacity thresholds, a “two-lane collector” designation would maintain the existing character and overall functionality of the roadway. Modify the current alignment shown in the Master Street Plan that indicates a connection to Giddings Road. Extend Country Club Road east of Thoreau Drive and realign to connect with the planned Timberline Road extension within Montava development. Existing Volumes (2018): 7,000 average daily trips 2040 Projected Volumes: Scenario Roadway ADT Year 2040 Baseline 8,500 Year 2040 with Project 10,500 Source: NFRMPO Model; Nelson\Nygaard, 2018. Additional Considerations: The extension of Country Club Road to the east into the Montava development will provide greater connectivity while limiting additional traffic to/from Giddings Road. Design of easterly extension of Country Club Road (i.e., east of Turnberry Road) to include two-way auto traffic with intermittent on-street parking and separate bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Within the Montava development a future two-lane collector street designation to function as a low-traffic route and provide a high level of access and connections to adjacent land uses, including planned residences and open space areas (including recreational trails and parkland). MONTAVA |MASTER STREET PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSPORTATION REPORT City of Fort Collins Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-10 #7 CONIFER STREET Timberline Road to Suniga Drive Description: Conifer Street is a planned two-lane roadway to provide east-west connectivity to Mountain Vista Subarea and downtown Fort Collins. Existing Classification: Two-Lane Arterial Recommendation: Two-Lane Arterial with the following: Extend two-lane roadway east of Timberline Road to Giddings Road Provide new connection to key north-south corridors, including Turnberry Road (extended), Timberline Road, and Giddings Road (extended) Roadway is expected to experience volumes that would not exceed capacity thresholds for two-lane roadway per NFRMPO model and with estimated increase in project-generated traffic. Existing Volumes (2018): Not Available (Future Roadway) 2040 Projected Volumes: Scenario Roadway ADT Year 2040 Baseline 8,200 Year 2040 with Project 14,600 Source: NFRMPO Model; Nelson\Nygaard, 2018. Additional Considerations: The extension of Conifer Street further east to connect to Turnberry Road, Timberline Road, and Giddings Road will serve as an additional east-west connection between existing neighborhoods north of downtown Fort Collins and the Mountain Vista Subarea, while creating better east-west distribution of traffic between Suniga Drive and Conifer Street. #8 RICHARDS LAKE ROAD Turnberry Road to Busch Drive Description: Maintain two-lane roadway to provide east-west connectivity to key corridors in northern portion of Fort Collins, including Turnberry Road and Giddings Road. Existing Classification: Two-Lane Arterial Recommendation: Two-Lane Arterial with no proposed changes. The additional vehicle trips associated with Montava in combination with existing and future estimated traffic demand will continue to allow for a two-lane arterial designation. Existing Volumes (2018): 1,400 average daily trips MONTAVA |MASTER STREET PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSPORTATION REPORT City of Fort Collins Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3-11 2040 Projected Volumes: Scenario Roadway ADT Year 2040 Baseline 4,300 – 5,200 Year 2040 with Project 4,700 – 5,600 Source: NFRMPO Model; Nelson\Nygaard, 2018. Additional Considerations: No proposed changes to Richards Lake Road. The proposed Montava network that connects to Richards Lake Road will provide access points into Montava and maintain the same connections as under existing conditions. #9 BAR HARBOR Richards Lake Road to Country Club Road Description: Maintain two-lane residential street to provide north-south connectivity for Maple Hill residents to Mountain Vista Subarea. Existing Classification: Two-Lane Collector Recommendation: Two-Lane Collector with the following: Discontinue two-lane roadway at Country Club Road due to needs of the City’s vision for a proposed park/recreational area. Connection between Richards Lake Road and Country Club Road would maintain access as exists today and terminating at Country Club Road to the south would avoid cut- through traffic within the Maple Hill neighborhood. Roadway is expected to experience volumes that would not exceed capacity thresholds for two-lane collector per NFRMPO model and with estimated increase in project-generated traffic. Existing Volumes (2018): 5,200 average daily trips 2040 Projected Volumes: Scenario Roadway ADT Year 2040 Baseline 5,200 Year 2040 with Project 5,300 Note 1. The regional model did not provide 2040 ADT volume data for Bar Harbor. It is assumed that the future baseline volumes would represent existing volumes as the roadway and adjacent neighborhood is fully built out. Source: NFRMPO Model; Nelson\Nygaard, 2018. Additional Considerations: The proposed Montava network would not connect directly to Bar Harbor Road but would connect to Country Club Road, providing Maple Hill residents with direct access to Montava and other planned roadways. Community Library and Rec Center Building Community I believe that one of the great community gathering places in the future could be the 21st century library. Fortunately with the Poudre River Public Library District, we have a wonderful opportunity to innovate and create this future. The best way to predict the future is to create it, and that’s what we intend to do. Our development approach for phase 1 of Montava also includes investing with the city of Fort Collins in a Public/Private partnership to build a Recreation Center for North East Fort Collins. We are in discussions with the city staff on this subject, but to us it feels like a much better investment than building a pool that only gets used 3 months out of the year. It would serve the entire community. Everything we do in Montava is meant to create a meaningful multi generational impact. The types of facilities and amenities we begin with will set the course for the future of the project, and establish our DNA for decades. We want to make this community unlike any other. Attached you will find a document that was prepared by a group of architects in a planning charrette with the Poudre River Public Library District that describes in wonderful fashion what kind of future we can create together. POUDRE RIVER PUBLIC LIBRARY DISTRICT opnarchitects.com @opnarchitects LIBRARY JOURNAL DESIGN INSTITUTE Design Institute is a bi-annual library building and design event hosted by Library Journal. The event brings together librarians and architects to collaborate on pressing challenges regarding library facilities to meet contemporary needs. This year’s event was held in partnership with Salt Lake County Library at the West Jordan Library in West Jordan, Utah. L + Design Challenge Overview Intent: Explore framework and guiding principles that would augment the creation of a building program for a newly proposed library in a the new community of Montava, in Northern Fort Collins, Colorado. Format: Facilitated by Mindy Sorg and Toby Olsen of OPN Architects. Participants included librarians from various library systems across the country. Activity Small groups problem ideation, visioning, and establishment of a charter The Fort Collins Community Situated on the Cache La Poudre River along the Colorado Front Range, Fort Collins is located 65 miles north of the state capitol in Denver. Home to approximately 161,000 residents, Fort Collins boasts excellent educational and economic opportunities. It consistently ranks among the best places to live and happiest cities to live in the United States. Poudre River Public Library District The district seeks to expand the needs and demands of a growing community by establishing a new branch library in the planned community of Montava where it would anchor it’s village center and be a heart and soul of this new community. History The library district was established 2006 by a citizen vote. The library system currently operates out of three branches and an administrative building. The branches are the Old Town Library, Harmony Library, and Council Tree Library. Stated Needs and Goals New library in new community called Montava as part of a major development in Fort Collins. New library must be innovative in every sense. It must encourage neighborliness for all ages and stages of life. It must function as part of a village center that is walkable and bike friendly. The new library should relate to urban agriculture and organic farming in the community. It should create a culture of experimentation. The new library must leverage technology and embrace automation. This facility must act as a community building agent with an emphasis on community space. It must act as an agent for sustainable practices and equity. Life cycle costs should be examined for operational sustainability. It is a space that should be media savvy. It must stand for something. The library should enable efficient staffing and knowledge specialists to thrive. What is Montava? Agri-Urban Development Smart City Village Center POUDRE RIVER PUBLIC LIBRARY DISTRICT - Sustainability Design Exercise OPN and the Poudre River Public Library District began with a presentation speaking to the long term continuous changes we have been observing in the design of libraries today. We also provided a discussion of the project brief and geography. Attendees were divided into two groups for the design exercise. Each group was given sustainability “cheat sheets” as reference material for their discussions, and blank sheets of paper. Using several key guiding principles, the teams were asked to develop a working charter for the proposed new library at Montava. Groups then discussed, debated and established optimal building program considerations, spaces needed, and goals for the project. Ideas were captured in video, photo, and notes. THE CHARTER: TO ESTABLISH, ENABLE, AND CONVEY GOALS AND ASPIRATIONS FOR THE FUTURE LIBRARY IN MONTAVA POUDRE RIVER PUBLIC LIBRARY DISTRICT | TOPIC 1 EQUITY Group Discussion - Equity Summary Outcomes Access Inclusion Cultural Awareness / Native Cultures Safety Gender Economic Age Ability Race & Ethnicity Homelessness Language / Language Barriers / Communication Literacies: Reading/Technology/Financial Humor Transportation World view / Political Historic and Heritage Traditions Outreach Programs / Services / Staffing Equity in design is an emergent theme in new civic project throughout the United States. Equity should matter to us all. The group was asked to imagine a library designed with a primary commitment to equity, diversity, and inclusion in every practice. Would it offer a greater ability to provide programming and spaces rooted in empathetic design, transparency, education, collaboration, and trust? The following list of items generated by the group demonstrate aspects of design and service they related to the concept of equity driven by empathetic design. Outcomes Space for art and heritage technologies Going beyond ADA compliance - consider universal design Wayfinding and Signage - info graphic versus text; signage in multiple languages Self-Service Areas Area of the building open 24/7 that includes tech, holds, wifi, and small collection Space to accommodate physical items needed at various life stages Spaces for dignity: (companion and gender neutral restrooms) Program rooms for patrons on autism spectrum Libraries embracing equity continue to evolve, become more humane, resilient, and sustainable. The group discussed the power in recognizing and relating to new and at-risk populations that may not feel visible at the library. This was recognized as an opportunity to better the patron and staff experiences at libraries by designers and directors alike. The list to the right was generated by the group for spaces that one may want to consider including in the program for a future library. Group Discussion - Equity Summary POUDRE RIVER PUBLIC LIBRARY DISTRICT | TOPIC 2 TECHNOLOGY Outcomes Internet everywhere Provide opportunities for a variety of content creation. The library is now a generator of content. Provide hardware and software solutions Coding classes and or events 3D Printing / CNC Machines / Laser Cutter / VR Augmented Reality Library Tech 101 - Training Heritage Technologies Drones Artificial Intelligence Automated Materials Handling Self Service Areas Soundbooth / Recording Studio Use technology to show art / indexing some aspect of the library and community Technology is integral to our lives. It enables greater access to ever increasing amounts of information, the dissolution of distance, sharing, collaborating, the sharing economy, and creativity. It is for these reasons, the library must ensure access to technology and foster digital literacy along side traditional literacy. The following list of topics were generated during group discussion. Group Discussion - Technology Summary Outcomes Roof learning garden Water collection area - learning opportunity Demonstration kitchen for healthy eating Urban agriculture spaces / farming Children’s area using technology for learning through play Play lab Flex spaces for events / training / tech fairs / classes People’s garden Technology den Technology petting zoo Content creation spaces with 3D printing, VR Spaces for heritage technologies, looms, quilting, handcrafts Synthesized through group discussion, the list to the right illustrates that technology spaces can be beautiful and special. It also indicates that spaces related to technology have the ability to also tell the story of sustainable features to be integrated into a future possible library. Group Discussion - Technology Summary POUDRE RIVER PUBLIC LIBRARY DISTRICT | TOPIC 3 SUSTAINABLE / URBAN AGRICULTURE Outcomes Opportunities to engage in urban farming Outdoor spaces Connection to nature and natural light No carbon burned on site Life-cycle cost analysis for evaluating building systems Educational opportunities Collection of rain water for site irrigation Promote local use of materials The library as an example to be followed by the community Sustainability is not only a primary concern for may libraries because of environmental responsibility. It is fundamental way in which economic derisions can be made to ensure the long-term dynamic vitality of an organization. The Committee on the Environment’s top ten measures for sustainability (as seen earlier in this document) were shared with the group. The list to the right outlined by group discussion describes ways to share sustainability as part of the proposed library’s story. Group Discussion - Sustainable Summary POUDRE RIVER PUBLIC LIBRARY DISTRICT | TOPIC 4 COMMUNITY Outcomes Community spaces should be flexible Flexible lobby space Gallery / Art Display Spaces to promote digital literacy Study rooms of varying size Classroom for distance learning Spaces that could open to the exterior - for large events like concerts Green roof Plaza Park nearby Promotes walking / biking The library should be the heart of Montava. It should be a natural place for gathering, growing, learning, and sharing ideas. The space should be flexible and able to be expanded over time to fit the needs of a growing and vibrant community. The library should reflect the values and aspirations of the community. It should be a place of joy, humor, reflection, literacy, and technological advancement. Group Discussion - Community Summary POUDRE RIVER PUBLIC LIBRARY DISTRICT | TOPIC 5 ICONIC Group Discussion - Iconic Summary Outcomes Provide indoor / outdoor connections. The building should make a visual statement. The size and scale of the building can be iconic. The building should have gravitas. The building should pull you in. Rather than trendy, the library should be trend-setting. It should have connections to nature. The building should read differently from varying perspectives and viewpoint. It should not be stale and read differently from different angles. It should have some sort of relationship other entities and buildings, both physical and referential. The building should provide depth to the user’s experience and provide layers of engagement. The building should be flexible. It should be source of inspiration that promotes: Comfort, Awe, Beauty, Welcoming, Safety, Belonging It should be a living room for the community. It can be both impressionist and expressionist. Whether it is challenging the status quo, honest use of building materials, or a poetic symbol for something great, buildings have the potential to be iconic landmarks in the community. We asked the participants what makes a library iconic. Their responses were thoughtful and demonstrated that it is not only beautiful architecture, but a layering of design elements and building program that contribute to making a library an icon in the community and even beyond. Outcomes Entry should offer a belonging and welcoming experience. Organization of the building should be intuitive. There should be sight-lines and glimpses into other spaces that offer a patron a preview of what is to come. Spaces should have views and vistas. The children’s area, tech space, and community event spaces were identified as priority spaces by the group. As the group discussed organizational needs of an iconic building, they began to examine certain spaces that may want to be proximate to others. The group also began to discuss how the entry should feel and the importance of intuitive wayfinding. Group Discussion - Iconic Summary PROGRAM AND SPACES FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION Oversized circulation desks create barriers to patron interaction. Wayfinding should be intuitive. Stacks should be low enough to promote patron engagement with collections. The lobby can be a flexible zone for events and a hub within the building. Courtyards, patios, and balconies are a huge amenity and provide connection to nature. Consider the flexibility of furniture you would like to see in a new building. Prototype in the existing branch locations! Consider civic gathering spaces and make them special and a destination. Consider a variety of collaboration spaces in various sizes. Ensure that shelving does not block views and vistas. The following pages, in addition to program items outlined in the prior group discussion summaries are intended to provide the Poudre River Public Library District with additional ideas, concepts, and spaces for consideration as you develop your vision for this possible new branch location. This is an exciting time for you! Creative and Maker Spaces Diverse Study Spaces Un-Conference vs. Conference Spaces Multi-Purpose and Community Spaces LIBRARY JOURNAL DESIGN INSTITUTE opnarchitects.com @opnarchitects OPN would like to thank Ken Draves and Eileen McCluskey for the opportunity to engage and discuss the future of the Poudre River Public Library District. Our discussions pre/post the Design Institute have hopefully provided value to the library as you think about how you will continue to serve the communities in your district. It is our recommendation that you embark on a visioning, charter building exercise to inform a future building program to underscore the best aspects of the library you wish to build. We also recommend you engage community leaders and library champions to help you articulate this vision when you are ready. We wish you the best in these efforts! You have a wonderful opportunity before you and staff that any community would envy. It was a pleasure to work with you on this Design Challenge. Best, Mindy Sorg, Associate Toby Olsen, Project Architect L + NONFICTION The Key to Happiness Might Be as Simple as a Library or a Park By Pete Buttigieg Sept. 14, 2018 PALACES FOR THE PEOPLE How Social Infrastructure Can Help Fight Inequality, Polarization, and the Decline of Civic Life By Eric Klinenberg 277 pp. Crown. $28. This time of year, my wooden desktop in the Office of the Mayor looks very similar to my computer desktop: covered in spreadsheets. It’s budget season in South Bend, Ind. — the annual reckoning. Priorities jostle against one another, and sometimes it feels as if we must choose between investing in places (fire stations, streetscapes) and investing in people (after-school programs, job training). We do some of both, of course, but the process forces us to balance two concepts of what a city is: a place and a population. In “Palaces for the People,” Eric Klinenberg offers a new perspective on what people and places have to do with each other, by looking at the social side of our physical spaces. He is not the first to use the term “social infrastructure,” but he gives it a new and useful definition as “the physical conditions that determine whether social capital develops,” whether, that is, human connection and relationships are fostered. Then he presents examples intended to prove that social infrastructure represents the key to safety and prosperity in 21st-century urban America. Klinenberg is an N.Y.U. sociologist best known recently as Aziz Ansari’s co-author for “Modern Romance,” in which he helped the comedian apply social science tools to better understand dating. Here, he begins with questions he first addressed in an earlier book on a lethal heat wave that struck Chicago in 1995. He asked how two adjacent poor neighborhoods on the South Side, demographically similar and presumably equally vulnerable, could fare so differently in the disaster. Why did elderly victims in the Englewood neighborhood lose their lives at 10 times the rate of those in Auburn Gresham? The explanation had to do with social capital, the amount of interpersonal contact that exists in a community. In the neighborhood with fewer fatalities, people checked on one another and knew where to go for help; in the other, social isolation was the norm, with residents more often left to fend for themselves, even to perish in sweltering housing units. Crucially, these were not cultural or economic differences, but rather had to do with things like the density of shops and the vacancy rate along streets, which either helped or hurt people get to know one another in their communities. The new book’s exploration of this reality begins in the basement of a library in a low- income Brooklyn neighborhood, where an Xbox-based bowling competition pits local seniors against rival teams from a dozen library branches across the borough. The example of a virtual bowling league has particular poetic resonance two decades after Robert Putnam, the Harvard political scientist, raised fears of societal collapse in his study “Bowling Alone.” Where Putnam charted the decline of American communal participation through shrinking bowling league membership, Klinenberg’s basement of virtual bowlers illustrates how technology might actually enhance our social fabric — provided there are supportive spaces. Given what we have learned about the health impacts of social isolation among the elderly, lives may depend on creating more such opportunities. Klinenberg finds in libraries “the textbook example of social infrastructure in action,” a shared space where everyone from schoolchildren doing homework to the video-gaming elderly can get to know one another better. For him, the presence of destitute or mentally ill visitors is a feature, not a bug, of libraries, because it requires people to confront radical differences in a shared space. Klinenberg extends the idea of social infrastructure to grade schools, college campuses, public housing, private apartment buildings, coffee shops, sidewalks, pocket parks, churches, murals, even flood-management projects in Singapore and public pools in Iceland. Pretty much any space that can affect the social fabric is within the author’s scope. Here, social infrastructure is not a subset of what we call “infrastructure” but something broader, which makes his project ambitious but also perhaps too vague: After all, if it could include virtually all public and many private or even virtual spaces, is the category even useful? It is, especially when Klinenberg discusses social infrastructure in terms of quality, not just quantity. While some of his examples simply reinforce the inarguable fact that we need more of these resources (more libraries! more gyms! more gardens!), his most illuminating cases gauge what happens in spaces whose designs are either socially helpful or harmful. Social infrastructure becomes less a thing to maximize than a lens that communities and policymakers should apply to every routine decision about physical investment: Do the features of this proposed school, park or sewer system tend to help human beings to form connections? In case after case, we learn how socially-minded design matters. A vaunted housing project built in 1950s St. Louis quickly became a nightmare of crime and vandalism; a smaller, adjacent complex remained relatively free of trouble because its design promoted “informal surveillance” and care of common spaces by neighbors. The reconfiguration of large urban schools into smaller, more manageable ones now shows promise in boosting graduation rates in New York — partly because this allows parents, students and teachers to form a community in which problems are addressed informally before they can disrupt learning. Meanwhile, much of our built environment contains negative or “exclusive social infrastructure,” including gated communities in the United States and South Africa, and college fraternities, which Klinenberg condemns categorically based on their association with substance abuse and sexual assault. (The construction of a massive wall, unsurprisingly, is an example of public investment that is not conducive to social infrastructure.) Much of the book’s most interesting content has to do with climate security. From the informal network of Houston churches that kicked into gear after Hurricane Harvey, to the unlikely rise of the Rockaway Beach Surf Club in New York as a vital hub of recovery after Hurricane Sandy, we see how the right kind of social infrastructure can aid struggling communities and even save lives by connecting people during and after disasters. As Klinenberg observes, “when hard infrastructure fails … it’s the softer, social infrastructure that determines our fate.” Klinenberg’s approach even lets him apply appealing nuance to precincts of our social life that have become objects of simplistic head-shaking and finger-wagging. When it comes to social media, for example, he takes a look at online communities, especially for young people, and pointedly suggests that teenagers turn to the digital realm largely because they have little alternative. Modern parenting norms make it less likely they will be allowed to physically move around their neighborhoods and communities. When unable to use traditional spaces like streets or parks, young people have no choice but to rely on the internet as their primary social infrastructure. It’s a point that should invite introspection among parents who require their children to remain within sight, then scold them for spending too much time looking at screens. “Palaces for the People” reads more like a succession of case studies than a comprehensive account of what social infrastructure is, so those looking for a theoretical framework may be disappointed. But anyone interested in cities will find this book an engaging survey that trains you to view any shared physical system as, among other things, a kind of social network. After finishing it, I started asking how ordinary features of my city, from streetlights to flowerpots, might affect the greater well-being of residents. Physically robust infrastructure is not enough if it fails to foster a healthy community; ultimately, all infrastructure is social. Pete Buttigieg is the mayor of South Bend, Ind. His first book, “Shortest Way Home: One Mayor’s Challenge and a Model for America’s Future,” will be published in January. A version of this article appears in print on Sept. 15, 2018, on Page 19 of the Sunday Book Review with the headline: Public Space Storm Water Partnered with Natural Areas Storm Water and Natural Areas Montava is at the tail end of the Upper Cooper Slough Drainage Basin. The 160+ acres we must set aside is necessary for management of this off site storm water area. As with all other aspects of the project, we embrace this responsibility and have worked for months with city engineers on the necessary solutions. In addition, we have been working with Fort Collins Natural Areas to jointly improve this land as protected and restored natural areas that will be accessible and beneficial to all Fort Collins residents. This plan is not yet approved by the Natural Areas organization, but is in the process of design and potential approval where Montava is only a part of an overall plan that extends north of our project in a connected trail system and additional preserved land. Montava by itself represents a substantially sized parcel of land relative to other parcels owned and managed by Natural Areas. Attached please find a description of the initial plan designed by the Natural Areas organization which was presented to the Natural Areas Board by staff last week. Also find attached a detailed map of the Drainage Basin in question, as well as one sheet of plans representing the tremendous work our engineers have been doing with city staff and Icon, the city’s third party engineering firm. ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! MONTAVA CONTEXT MAP CONSERVATION EASEMENTS • City-owned and City as contributor E. County Road 58 E. County Road 56 E. Douglas Rd. Richards Lake Rd. N. Timberline Rd. Turnberry Rd. Giddings Rd. Mountain Vista Dr. E. Vine Dr. EXISTING PARKS THORNTON PARCEL • Potential purchase by Natural Areas CITY STORMWATER PARCEL • Continuation of proposed natural area WATER’S EDGE EAST MONTAVA POTENTIAL NATURAL AREA NATURAL AREA PROPOSED TRAILS PARKS MASTER PLAN TRAILS POTENTIAL TRAIL EXTENSION N . C ou n t y R d . 11 NO. 8 DITCH • Possible continuous trail connection North 0 1.5K 3K 6K Feet + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + MONTAVA NATURAL AREA DESIGN GUIDELINES UNDULATING, NATURALIZED TOPOGRAPHY • No sharp angles (no trapezoids or orthogonal geometries); slopes 4:1 preferred • Smooth transitions (e.g. rounded toe of slope and top of berm) • Diversity of forms and elevations to: 1) create opportunities to establish a variety of plant communities; 2) create a more dynamic environment for wildlife and people INTEGRATION OF HABITAT-ENHANCING FEATURES • Include natural elements that provide diverse cover, forage and nesting materials for pollinators and other wildlife (e.g. snags, pockets of bare ground for ground-nesting bees, fruit-bearing shrubs, +) DIVERSE VEGETATION THAT SUPPORTS A RANGE OF HABITAT TYPES + EXPERIENCES • Feature ecotypic plant communities that correspond to their topographic conditions (e.g. mesic at lowest levels of detention basin, upland/foothills on sloping terrain), and are self-sustaining (low H2O + maintenance) • Develop rich, multi-layered structural communities with naturalistic qualities (e.g. meandering clumps of ground, mid-story and canopy species within a seeded matrix) + + + + + + + + INTEGRATION OF PLACES FOR RESPITE, GATHERING, AND EDUCATION • Where appropriate, offer opportunities for outdoor environmental learning that connect community to place, (e.g. interpretive signage explaining the link between native pollinators and the farm or the benefits of naturalized stormwater management; an outdoor classrom tied to the new PSD school) • Provide diverse seating options that accommodate both solitary respite and family gathering CONNECTED CORRIDORS • Provide contiguous habitat across the site that supports movement corridors for wildlife • Provide a range of trail options that allow the community to customize their experience with nature, (e.g. a primary paved trail with secondary side paths for exploration and the creation of a quieter experience) USE OF TOPOGRAPHY TO FRAME, SHIELD AND ENHANCE • Frame scenic views to clustered planting zones, the farm or mountains beyond • Buffer wildlife from light and sound pollution with strategic berm placement • Screen infrastructure and housing to enhance the feeling of being surrounded by nature 231 34 26 31.2 438 237 31.1 31 31 POND A 21 31.1 907 242 74.1 74 842 833.1 77 891 MONTAVA 3-1 426 MONTAVA 2 73 MONTAVA 1 MONTAVA 3-2 833 424 822 21 427A 36 35 834 435 729 430 431 829 730 29 35 730 30 725 229 25 437 436 435 909 425 904 OVERFLOW 426 426_OVER 841 75 828 831 72 426 16 ICONENGINEERING, INC. Memorandum 7000 S. Yosemite Street, Suite 120, Centennial, CO 80112 p 303.221.0802 | f 303.221.4019 www.iconeng.com TO: Dan Evans, City of Fort Collins FROM: Craig Jacobson, Jaclyn Michaelsen, ICON Engineering, Inc. DATE: June 27, 2018, Revised September 13, 2018 RE: Impacts from Montava Development to Cooper Slough [Draft Memo] The purpose of this memo is to summarize the improvements and initial results and recommendations from the proposed Montava Development Stormwater Improvements, specifically relating to discharges along Cooper Slough and inflows and spills from the Larimer and Weld Canal (LWC). Description of Project: The Montava development is generally located north of the Larimer and Weld Canal (LWC), west of the Colorado and Southern Railroad (CSRR), south of Richards Lake Road, and east of the Number 8 Outlet ditch. There is also a small piece of the development that is located at the northwest corner of Mountain Vista and Timberline Road, west of the Number 8 Outlet ditch. The project site is located in and around several Selected Plan improvements for the Cooper Slough Basin. The development has been required by the City of Fort Collins to incorporate the following Selected Plan improvements into their development: 1) Remove existing spill at CSRR: The spill currently spills 460-cfs over the railroad and through the Anheuser Bush (AB) property. By removing this spill 1794-cfs will continue south through the proposed development. 2) Create a diversion off of the Number 8 Outlet Ditch: The main purpose of the diversion off the Number 8 Outlet Ditch is to remove the storm flows in the ditch, leaving only the decreed flow of 125-cfs. The Selected Plan spill was proposed downstream of the last inflow from surrounding developments. 3) Construction of the Colorado and Southern (C&S)/Crumb Regional detention pond: In the Selected Plan the regional pond is designed to detain the flow diverted from the Number 8 Outlet ditch, detain the flow that was previously being spilled over the CSRR, and to formalize the inadvertent detention at the proposed C&S pond location. The pond is necessary to maintain the downstream flows at or below existing conditions. The proposed Montava development incorporated these improvements into the design of their development. The impact of the proposed design is discussed below. Figure 1 shows the location of the proposed improvements. ICONENGINEERING, INC. Page 2 of 8 F:\Icon Projects\Upper Cooper Slough\Montava\Upper Cooper Slough - Montave Draft Memo - updated 9-13-18.docx Number 8 Outlet Ditch: The portion of the proposed development located west of the Number 8 Outlet Ditch is currently proposed to discharge directly into the Number 8 Outlet Ditch. The development discharges at the pre-developed 2-year release rate. Offsite basins that travel through the site are currently proposed to pass through the site undetained to the ditch. The total peak flow proposed out of the development is 191-cfs, this includes the offsite flow that is being routed through the development. Compared to the baseline hydrology model, inflows to the Number 8 Outlet Ditch are higher with the proposed development than under existing conditions. This is primarily attributed to the fact that the existing conditions hydrology model also identified the presence of inadvertent storage west of the ditch, thus detaining flows to 116-cfs. We suggest that the City consider additional compensatory storage to meet development regulation requirements, if applicable. Downstream of the development, flows on the Number 8 Outlet Ditch are also increased above those recommended by the Selected Plan (324-cfs versus 125-cfs). Differences here are that the proposed development has situated the proposed diversion from the Number 8 further upstream from the development, versus downstream, to regulate the flows. We suggest that the location of the diversion be modified more consistent with the master plan, or that the developer demonstrate the ditch’s abilities to convey the additional proposed flows to the LWC, and that the flows can be managed in this manner successfully. It should be noted that with the on-site detention and diversion as currently proposed, the flows along the Number 8 decrease to 324-fcs from the existing conditions flow of 505-cfs. Impacts of Development The proposed development east of the Number 8 Outlet ditch contains four (4) regional detention ponds. The first pond is located at the southwest corner of the CSRR and Richards Lake Road. This pond is approximately 190 ac-ft and discharges into the C&S regional detention pond through a drainage swale. The proposed C&S regional pond is approximately 222 ac-ft and overtops to an overflow pond located to the south while also discharging to the existing AB pond via dual 3ftx9ft RCBCs. The AB pond is proposed to discharge into the LWC as it currently does today. A new flume structure has been proposed above the LWC to discharge directly into the Cooper Slough channel downstream as well. Simultaneously, the overflow pond south of the main C&S pond includes a 24-inch outlet pipe that discharges directly into the LWC. ICONENGINEERING, INC. Page 3 of 8 F:\Icon Projects\Upper Cooper Slough\Montava\Upper Cooper Slough - Montave Draft Memo - updated 9-13-18.docx The following table summarizes the proposed development detention ponds: Table 1: Detention Pond Summary Comparison Location Proposed Discharge Location Proposed Pond Volume Proposed Pond Release Selected Plan Discharge Location Selected Plan Volume Selected Plan Release Montava A C&S Pond 190 ac-ft 756-cfs NA NA NA Onsite Development Detention Detention is being provided in the regional detention ponds. C&S Pond 170 ac-ft 100-cfs C&S Pond (pond 426) AB Pond 222 ac-ft 719-cfs Cooper Slough 216 ac-ft 546-cfs AB Pond (pond 425) Cooper Slough 55 ac-ft 540-cfs LWC 63 ac-ft 377-cfs LWC 392-cfs C&S Overflow Pond LWC 77 ac-ft 37-cfs NA NA NA Overall, the projects associated with the proposed development are providing 543 ac-ft of detention storage. In comparison, the Selected Plan proposes 449 ac-ft through regional and on-site detention. However, due to the configuration proposed, the timing of the over flows out of the AB pond and into Cooper Sough are changed for the 100-ear event from what was modeled for existing conditions. Downstream of the LWC, on Cooper Slough, the existing conditions flow is 743-cfs, Selected Plan is 654-cfs, and proposed development is 973-cfs. Also, Cooper Slough, downstream of the LWC, has two main sources of flow in the Selected Plan – the spill from the LWC and outflow from the proposed C&S regional pond. The development, as proposed, only connects with Cooper Slough via a spill from the LWC. Figure 1 shows the flow hydrographs into Cooper Slough with the Selected Plan improvements constructed as proposed: ICONENGINEERING, INC. Page 4 of 8 F:\Icon Projects\Upper Cooper Slough\Montava\Upper Cooper Slough - Montave Draft Memo - updated 9-13-18.docx Figure 1: Flow Hydrographs to Cooper Slough from Selected Plan As shown in Figure 2, the total flow into the Cooper Slough has increased with the proposed development and improvements. The peak out of the C&S pond is occurring sooner than assumed by the Selected Plan. Figure 2: Flow Hydrographs to Cooper Slough from Proposed Development 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 Flow (-cfs) time (min) Selected Plan Regional Detention Ponds C&S Ditch spill to Cooper Slough Total flow to Cooper Slough AB 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00 45.00 50.00 Flow (-cfs) Time (min) Proposed Developement Pond Outflow to Cooper Slough Ditch Spill into Cooper Slough PondOutflow into ditch Total Flow into Cooper Slough 654-cfs 973-cfs ICONENGINEERING, INC. Page 5 of 8 F:\Icon Projects\Upper Cooper Slough\Montava\Upper Cooper Slough - Montave Draft Memo - updated 9-13-18.docx Recommended Modifications to the Design As part of this review, ICON performed a sensitivity analysis on the current improvement plan, proposed by Montava, to determine drivers regarding modifications to reduce the discharge to Cooper Slough. First, it is suggested that the detention effects on the immediate development be reviewed. Due to the significant sizes of the proposed regional ponds and outlets, it is feasible that effective detention is not being generated for the on-site runoff and generating higher discharges downstream. This may also be more prevalent for low flow events, which would essentially pass through the detention ponds. Second, it is suggested that the pond outlet configurations be adjusted to further delay the peak outflows from the proposed ponds. Specifically, adjustments could potentially be made to the outlet of the C&S pond and the C&S overflow pond. Our sensitivity run showed that by changing the C&S outlet to a staged outlet structure, consisting of a 36-in culvert placed at the invert of the pond with dual 3ft x 7ft RCBC located approximately 3ft above (sizes to be verified during final design), the hydrograph out of the pond will be delayed such that flows in Cooper Slough would no longer be increased. In addition to the staged outlet structure, more water can be conveyed to the Overflow Pond reducing the peak flow going to the AB pond and in turn Cooper Slough. Low Flow Impacts The Montava improvements propose to discharge the AB pond into the Cooper Slough. Currently, the only inflows from the Cooper Slough are a spill from the LWC which generally does not release into Cooper Slough until after the AB pond begins to overtop. As proposed, the AB pond will not overtop in the minor events (up to just below the 10-year event). Therefore, as long as the spill out of the LWC remains below existing conditions spills, durational impacts from base lows downstream on Cooper Slough would not be anticipated. Table 2 compares the peak flow from a range of storm events in the Cooper Slough, downstream of the LWC, between existing conditions and the proposed project. Table 2: Comparison of Peak flow in the Cooper Slough, downstream of the Larimer and Weld Canal 2-year 5-year 10-year 25-year 50-year 100-year Existing Conditions 0-cfs 0-cfs 20-cfs 193-cfs 341-cfs 743-cfs Proposed Project 0-cfs Not analyzed 36-cfs Not analyzed Not analyzed 740-cfs It is recommended that the proposed improvements be fine-tuned during preliminary and final design to ensure that flows into Cooper Slough remain similar to existing conditions during higher frequency runoff events such as the 2- through 10- year events. With the data presented in this memo, it is believed that this can be adequately achieved. ICONENGINEERING, INC. Page 6 of 8 F:\Icon Projects\Upper Cooper Slough\Montava\Upper Cooper Slough - Montave Draft Memo - updated 9-13-18.docx Impacts to the Larimer and Weld Canal The flow out of the LWC during a 100-year event is reduced along the length of the canal with the recommended adjustments to the Montava development. Table 3 indicates the reduction in spills resulting from the proposed improvements from the Montava development: Table 3: Spill out of the Larimer and Weld Spill Location At Cooper Slough Upstream I-25 Upstream of the Boxelder Spill At the Boxelder Spill Existing Conditions 743-cfs 0-cfs 1.4-cfs 2547-cfs Proposed Project 565-cfs* 0-cfs 3.9-cfs 2442-cfs * Peak flow in the Cooper Slough downstream of the LWC Spill has a peak flow of 740-cfs when considering the proposed overflow structure above the LWC from the AB Pond. Impacts of Future Selected Plan Improvements Upstream of Proposed Development Other drainage improvements upstream of the Montava development have been proposed as part of the 2017 Selected Plan of Improvements. These upstream improvements, including the North Poudre Reservoir No. 6 Spillway and Sod Farm Pond detention improvements, have the potential to affect the stormwater volume requirements for the Montava development. The impact from each of these improvements on the peak outflow and volumes at Montava is discussed below. In general, this evaluation assumes that Montava will develop prior to the implementation of these other improvements. North Poudre Reservoir No. 6 Spillway Improvements: The Selected Plan identifies the placement of an 8-in high iron weir plate on the existing spillway of the North Poudre Reservoir No. 6. This improvement would allow incoming stormwater to be stored above the existing spillway elevation, thus significantly reducing downstream flow and volumes within the eastern portion of the basin. This improvement would add approximately 307 ac-ft of flood storage on top of the existing irrigation reservoir. The peak outflows from the reservoir would be reduced by 207-cfs. This improvement was added into the EPA SWMM model to determine what the impacts would have on the development. The base model used was the development model with the recommended revisions to the design, as described above. ICONENGINEERING, INC. Page 7 of 8 F:\Icon Projects\Upper Cooper Slough\Montava\Upper Cooper Slough - Montave Draft Memo - updated 9-13-18.docx After implementation, the analysis showed that the No. 6 spillway improvements would generate only a negligible (2-cfs) reduction in peak discharge at Cooper Slough, immediately downstream of the LWC. However, reductions in overall pond volume was noted at both Montava A and the C&S ponds, where the volume was reduced by 51 ac-ft and 68 ac-ft, respectively. The volume in the AB Pond and overflow discharge into Cooper Slough did not change. Spills from the LWC also did not significantly change. With consideration of the North Poudre Reservoir No. 6 improvements, adjustments could be made to the Montava drainage improvements. Specifically, with the No. 6 improvements in- place, the site pond volumes could be reduced, or the outlet structure from the C&S pond to the AB pond could also be reduced in size. The ability to make these adjustments would be dependent on the timing of construction of the No.6 improvements compared to Montava. The following scenario goals could be considered. 1) Goal 1 - Reduce C&S Pond Outlet: This option would continue to use the full volume of the Montava A and C&S ponds, as currently proposed, 222 ac-ft and 190 ac-ft, respectively. Outlet structures from both ponds would be modified to minimize the infrastructure needed to cross the railroad at the C&S Pond. For this option to work effectively, the North Poudre Reservoir No. 6 improvements would need to be constructed prior to the Montava development or the development is phased to match the lesser outflow from the C&S Pond until the No. 6 improvements are made. 2) Goal 2 – Reduce Pond Volumes. With the construction of the North Poudre Reservoir No. 6 improvements, pond volume requirements for the C&S and Montava A Ponds could be reduced. Montava could consider developing creative phasing and grading plans which would modify the ponds in the future to remove excess storage and possibly increase development, or other uses within these areas. Sod Farm Pond Detention: The Selected Plan identified the construction of an improvement that will allow all stormwater flows in excess of the 125-cfs irrigation flow to be diverted from the No. 8 Outlet Ditch into an improved Sod Farm Detention Pond. The Sod Farm Detention Pond would increase detention from 112 ac-ft to 174 ac-ft, with a 55-cfs release back into the No. 8 Ditch. This improvement was added into the EPA SWMM model to determine what the impact it would have on the development. The base model used was the development model with the recommended revisions to the design (as described above). With only a minor volumetric change, the Sod Farm improvements alone provided very little impact to Montava, or the peak flow rate out of the LWC. The Sod Farm improvements also did not significantly reduce the peak flow into Cooper Slough downstream of the LWC. ICONENGINEERING, INC. Page 8 of 8 F:\Icon Projects\Upper Cooper Slough\Montava\Upper Cooper Slough - Montave Draft Memo - updated 9-13-18.docx North Poudre Reservoir No. 6 Spillway Improvements & Sod Farm Pond Detention Combined: Combining both the North Poudre Reservoir No. 6 Spillway improvements with the Sod Farm improvements, the Montava development was impacted beyond that for only the No. 6 Spillway improvements. The additional selected plan detention considering both improvements upstream provided overall detention reductions at the Montava A and the C&S ponds of 51 ac-ft and 101 ac-ft, respectively. Restriction of Irrigation Flow in the No. 8 Outlet Ditch during storm events: As discussed with the Montava development group, the No. 8 Irrigation Ditch Company has offered to shut down the irrigation flows in the No. 8 Outlet Ditch during large storm events. This potentially could reduce the flow discharging into the LWC, and ultimately reduce the spill out of the LWC and into Cooper Slough. This improvement was added into the EPA SWMM model, as well as the unsteady LWC HEC- RAS model, to determine what the impacts of removing the irrigation flows completely would have on the LWC. The base model used was the development model with the recommended revisions to the design, as described above. It was determined that the elimination of the irrigation flow provided very little impact to the peak spills from the LWC. The spill out of the LWC at Cooper Slough were reduced by only approximately 20-cfs. Regardless, restricting the irrigation flows in the No. 8 Ditch during flood events would be good practice and should be pursued. Should, it be feasible, a similar management approach along the LWC could also be considered. The removal of irrigation flows from the LWC would have a near direct benefit to the reduction in spills out of the LCW. Metro District Master Planned Community Necessity Metro District Value Attached is a document that shows the top 20 master planned community’s in Colorado, along with their corresponding Metro Districts. 100% of them have Districts, while some also have substantial HOA’s as well. These projects are using the Metro District tool to provide basic infrastructure, services and enhanced amenities that are required of large master planned communities. Our plan is to use up to 20 mills of our 60 mill cap as operating expenses to replace the need for the traditional HOA functions, and provide additional added value services for the community. Beyond trash service, landscape maintenance, architectural controls, and other traditional services, the Metro District will also bill for the non potable and possibly the potable water as well. Creating one integrated point of service for critical areas of our community, and enabling the future education and encouragement for creating a sustainable community. The only exception may be the intentional connection of each resident with the farm, which I will discuss in our meeting. We are building something extraordinary in Montava. It will be a national model, that does not exist anywhere in the world. It will require all possible and practical tools to succeed. MAPLE HILL SUBDIVISION STORYBOOK SUBDIVISION SOD FARM ANHEUSER BUSCH WATERGLEN SUBDIVISION TRAIL HEAD SUBDIVISION L&W CANAL NO. 8 DITCH L&W CANAL N. GIDDINGS RD. C&S RAILROAD I-25 RICHARDS LAKE RD. (CR 52) MOUNTAIN VISTA DR. (CR 50) 427.1 26.1 835 830 820 905 427B AB POND MARTIN/MARTIN C O N S U L T I N G E N G I N E E R S 12499 WEST COLFAX AVENUE, LAKEWOOD, COLORADO 80215 303.431.6100 MARTINMARTIN.COM NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION MONTAVA MASTER DRAINAGE PLAN DEVELOPED ROUTING SCHEMATIC D1 DIVERSION SUMMARY SWMM ELEMENT Q100 INFLOW (CFS) Q100 DIVERTED (CFS) Q100 REMAINING (CFS) 833.1 408 279 125 842 1000 617 384 POND SUMMARY SWMM ELEMENT Q100 IN (CFS) Q100 OUT (CFS) VOLUME (AC-FT) 425 1069 790 52 426 1170 743 264 430 231 29 6 435 468 415 30 436 1562 1547 25 438 856 0 112 426 OVERFLOW 214 161 94 MONTAVA 1 48 1.6 1 MONTAVA 2 260 171 3 MONTAVA 3-1 144 5.5 4 MONTAVA 3-2 94 3.5 3 POND A 1814 757 190 OUTFALL SUMMARY SWMM ELEMENT Q100 (CFS) 904 161 907 373 909 417 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID AREA (AC) % IMP Q100 (CFS) SB_A 19.4 80 144 SB_A-1 12.5 80 94 SB_B 14.0 50 58 SB_C 102.5 50 363 SB_D 42.2 60 195 SB_E 80.9 25 207 SB_E-1 5.5 80 48 SB_F1 30.7 60 134 SB_F2 16.0 60 104 SB_F3 18.6 60 116 SB_G1 43.7 80 278 SB_G2 33.7 80 220 SB_H 59.3 2 27 SB_I1 63.8 10 86 SB_I2 33.7 2 29 SB_J 64.4 50 313 SB_K 28.7 60 167 SB_L 108.0 60 287 SB_M 44.5 2 25 SB_N 129.1 81 818 SB_O 52.3 10 117 SB_OS-1 45.0 20 162 SB24 33.7 45 280 SB29 268.8 29 1000 SB30 33.5 49 231 SB37 34.6 23 148 SB38 290.7 5 469 SB_200 33.6 5 46 CONVEYANCE ELEMENT SUMMARY SWMM ELEMENT Q100 (CFS) 21 678 25 653 26 391 26.1 265 27 1546 29 682 30 27 31 496 31.1 481 31.2 279 34 757 35 468 72 310 73 139 74 125 74.1 408 75 403 77 1000 229 670 231 990 237 337 242 616 426 529 426_OVERFLOW 214 DESIGN POINT SUMMARY SWMM ELEMENT Q100 (CFS) 16 18 21 678 31 591 31.1 558 427 591 427.1 335 431 1124 435 415 437 353 725 670 729 1000 730 28 820 310 822 327 828 140 829 682 830 140 831 310 833 138 834 1787 835 408 841 408 891 311 905 214 CULVERT SIZE BY DESIGN POINT SWMM ELEMENT BARRELS-SIZE Q100 (CFS) HEADWATER DEPTH (FT) 21 4-8x4 678 4.8 31 4-7x4 591 4.4 31.1 3-8x4 558 4.5 427A 1-9x7 591 8.6 427B 3-7x3.5 591 5.8 427.1 2-6x3.5 335 4.9 431 1-15x10 & 1-5x2 1124 9.9 437 3-6x3 353 4.5 820 2-5X3 310 6.4 830 1-5X3 140 5.3 834 3-9X5 1787 6.7 835 2-5X4 408 6.7 841 2-5X5 408 6.3 905 1-5.5D 214 3.1 ++ + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + MONTAVA NATURAL AREA CONCEPTUAL PLAN GOALS Create a natural area that: • provides diverse, functional habitat for wildlife • increases opportunities for surrounding neighborhoods to connect with nature • enhances connectivity by securing a movement corridor for people and wildlife • supports ecological stormwater management objectives FUTURE PSD SCHOOL FUTURE NATIVE HILL FARM UNDULATING, NATURALIZED TOPOGRAPHY North 0 500 1K 2K Feet USE OF TOPOGRAPHY TO FRAME, SHIELD AND ENHANCE DIVERSE VEGETATION CONNECTED CORRIDORS • primary circulation path (paved, minimum 10’ wide) with secondary and tertiary natural surface trails PLACES FOR RESPITE, GATHERING AND EDUCATION • e.g. an outdoor classroom HABITAT-ENHANCING FEATURES Mountain Vista Dr. Larimer Weld Canal Giddings Rd. Richards Lake Rd. ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ANHEUSER BUSCH (AB) PLANT BOXELDER CREEK NO. 8 OUTLET DITCH LARIMER & WELD CANAL COLORADO & SOUTHERN RAILROAD BOXELDER WATERSHED DRY CREEK WATERSHED COOPER SLOUGH WATERSHED SH-14 INTERSTATE 25 SB INTERSTATE 25 NB N COUNTY ROAD 15 N COUNTY ROAD 9 N HIGHWAY 1 N COUNTY ROAD 17 N COUNTY ROAD 1 E VINE DR N COUNTY ROAD 3 N HIGHWAY 287 N COUNTY ROAD 7 E COUNTY ROAD 70 E COUNTY ROAD 82 E COUNTY ROAD 66 N OVER LAND TRL N SHIELDS ST E DOUGLAS RD W COUNTY ROAD 72 LAPORTE AVE E COUNTY ROAD 58 E COUNTY ROAD 64 W VINE DR W COUNTY ROAD 80 W MULBERRY ST E HIGHWAY 14 N TAFT HILL RD W COUNTY ROAD 54G N COUNTY ROAD 11 E COUNTY ROAD 48 E COUNTY ROAD 60 E COUNTY ROAD 56 E COUNTY ROAD 62 E COUNTY ROAD 52 W COUNTY ROAD 70 GIDDINGS RD E MULBERRY ST E LINCOLN AVE N COLLEGE AVE TURNBERRY RD RIVERSIDEAVE W ELIZABET H ST COUNTRY CLUB RD E COUNTY ROAD 74 TERRY LAKE RD E COUNTY ROAD 50 E COUNTY ROAD 72 E COUNTY ROAD 76 W COUNTY ROAD 68 W COUNTY ROAD 66 MOUNTAIN VISTA DR HACKAMORE R D S SHIELDS ST LINDENMEIER RD N COUNTY ROAD 5 REMINGTON ST E WILLOX LN N COUNTY ROAD 13 GREGORY RD W WILLOX LN W LAUREL ST S OVERLAND TRL S COUNTY ROAD 1 E COUNTY ROAD 66E LABRADO R LN S COUNTY ROAD 3 N COUNTY ROAD 19 S COUNTY ROAD 23 E COUNTY ROAD 62E N COUNTY ROAD 21 W DOUGLAS RD W COUNTY ROAD 60E S 6TH ST N 6TH ST W MOUNTAIN AVE W COUNTY ROAD 56 E COUNTY ROAD 54 E COUNTY ROAD 68 W COUNTY ROAD 60 W COUNTY ROAD 64 W COUNTY ROAD 78 N COUNTY ROAD 23E N COUNTY ROAD 9 E COUNTY ROAD 62 N COUNTY R OAD 19 N COUNTY ROAD 11 N COUNTY ROAD 11 E COUNTY ROAD 56 N COUNTY ROAD 17 E COUNTY ROAD 64 ¦¨§25 ¦¨§25 Cooper Slough Selected Plan (2017) Upper Cooper Slough Drainage Basin 0 1 $ Miles Legend Cooper Slough Basin Boundary Cooper Slough Boxelder Creek Irrigation Canal !! !! !! Drainage Paths ! !! ! ! Anheuser Busch Property C&S Pond Sod Farm Pond Cooper Slough (Turnberry Road to Timberline Road) Two-Lane Collector Two-Lane Collector Extend Maple Hill Road east of Bar Harbor Drive to Timberline Road extension within project site. Bar Harbor Drive (Richards Lake Road to Country Club Road) Two-Lane Collector Two-Lane Collector Due to needs of the City’s proposed park, Bar Harbor as it exists today would remain. The extension of Bar Harbor from Country Club to Mountain Vista would be eliminated. Source: DPZ; Nelson\Nygaard, June 2018. Landscape/Irrigation Maintenance Irrigation schedule to be reduced (frequency & duration) after plants are established (1 year) Irrigation schedule regulated by automatic irrigation controllers Overhead spray nozzle precipitation is less than 0.75 inches per hour Water features are recirculating No automatic fill valves Hardscape areas are constructed of pervious materials (recommended) Dedicated irrigation meter (not required for Tier II SF) Soil conditioned with 6 cubic yards organic amendment/1,000 sq. ft. topsoil Irrigation System Design, Continued Swing joints installed Soquel Creek Water District, 5180 Soquel Drive, Soquel, CA 95010 Telephone: (831)475-8500, Fax: (831)475-4291 hydrozones was utilized Invasive plants are not used (recommended) Master shut-off valve present High flow sensor present Project Meets Requirements A pressure regulator is used if the water pressure (at meter) is greater than 80 psi Irrigation system designed, maintained and managed to meet or exceed 75% efficiency for overhead spray and 81% for drip systems Soquel Creek Water District, 5180 Soquel Drive, Soquel, CA 95010 Telephone: (831)475-8500, Fax: (831)475-4291 · SURPLUS WATER: 382.6 ACRE-FEET WELL #2 WELL #3 WELL #4 WELL #5 WELL #6 WELL #10 WELL #11 WELL #12 WELL #13 WELL #14 WELL #15 WELL #20 WELL #18 WELL #19 PORTNER WELL #1 PORTNER WELL #2 WELL #16 WELL #17 Date Issued: Sheet Title: Sheet Number: Revision Title Date Designed: Drafted: Reviewed: Location: Project: Client: Client Address: FORT COLLINS, COLORADO MONTAVA HF2M, INC. 430 N. COLLEGE AVE., SUITE 410 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80524 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 W A T E R P L A N N I N G & D E S I G N 3 2 3 W D r a k e R o a d , S u i t e 2 0 4 F o r t C o l l i n s , C o l o r a d o 8 0 5 2 5 9 7 0 . 2 8 2 . 1 8 0 0 SH, MR, EP SH, MR MR, EP 09.17.2018 LI - 1.0 N O R T H 200' 400' 800' SCALE: 1"=400' 0' NON-POTABLE WATER USE STUDY DEVELOPMENT SCOPE & IRRIGATION WELLS DEVELOPMENT SCOPE & IRRIGATION WELLS ESTIMATED LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION WATER USE ESTIMATED ANNUAL IRRIGATION WATER USE: 635 ACRE-FEET DECREED ANNUAL VOLUME AVAILABLE FROM WELLS: 2,380 ACRE-FEET ANNUAL WATER SURPLUS: 1,745 ACRE-FEET *ESTIMATED ANNUAL IRRIGATION WATER USE IN THE TABLE ABOVE FOR QUADRANT 2 DOES NOT INCLUDE THE 160.0 ACRE-FEET FOR THE ORGANIC FARM.