No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 03/17/2015 - RESOLUTION 2015-038 ADOPTING THE WEST CENTRAL AREA Agenda Item 12 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY March 17 , 2015 City Council - STAFF Ted Shepard , Chief Planner Rebecca Everette , Associate Planner Cameron Gloss , Planning Manager Amy Lewin , Transportation Planner Paul Sizemore , FC Moves Program Manager SUBJECT Resolution 2015-038 Adopting the West Central Area Plan as an Element of the Comprehensive Plan of the City and Repealing the West Central Neighborhoods Plan as an Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan . EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to adopt the West Central Area Plan (the " Plan" ) comprised of the neighborhoods south and west of the CSU Main Campus . Subarea plans are a key component in implementing the City Plan vision to create an overall community that is innovative , sustainable and connected . The West Central Area Plan will help citizens address a wide variety of challenges and opportunities to ensure that these neighborhoods continue to be great places to live , work , shop , learn and play. The Plan strives to provide policy, guidance and direction on three primary topics : Land Use and Neighborhood Character, Transportation and Mobility, and Open Space Networks . In addition , other subject areas include urban design , housing , community facilities , and a strategic approach to delivering effective public services . The Plan also includes new conceptual designs for Prospect Road and Lake Street (from Shields Street to College Avenue) , which are intended to improve the safety and comfort of pedestrians , bicycles , buses and cars on both roadways . The Plan also considers various alternatives for making a range of improvements along Shields Street between Prospect Road and Laurel Street, including a potential grade -separated crossing . Extensive public outreach was conducted over the course of the planning process using a range of strategies . Beginning in January 2014 and concluding with an open house in March 2015 , a broad range of citizens , a stakeholder committee , and various organizations have participated and contributed to the formation of the Plan . STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution . The approval of the West Central Area Plan contains two major components : • The first component addresses the vision , policies and action items related to Land Use and Neighborhood Character, Transportation and Mobility , and Open Space Networks . In addition , the Plan provides a preliminary analysis of potential improvements for Shields Street between Prospect Road and Laurel Street with an emphasis on safe crossings for bicyclists and pedestrians at key intersections , including a potential grade-separated crossing . • The second component is more focused on transportation capital improvements with a primary emphasis on upgrading Prospect Road between College Avenue and Shields Street. In conjunction Item # 12 Page 1 Agenda Item 12 with revitalizing Prospect Road , improvements to Lake Street are recommended in order to supplement east-west travel for all modes . BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The West Central Area Plan is an important roadmap that provides a clear but flexible framework to guide positive change and development over the next 20 years . The Plan is an update and builds upon the 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan which was the first sub-area plan to be implemented after the original adoption of City Plan in 1997 . The adoption of the West Central Area Plan will result in repealing and replacing the 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan . The Plan includes three primary topic areas and corridor roadway designs : Land Use and Neighborhood Character, Transportation and Mobility ( including an analysis of the Shields Corridor) , Open Space Networks , and Prospect Road/Lake Street Conceptual Design . In addition , the Plan recognizes that the proposed CSU Stadium has been approved and various impacts have been identified that will need to be addressed . Relationship to City Plan and Other Plans City Plan , the City's comprehensive plan , was updated in 2011 , and provides the policy direction for continuing to improve specific neighborhoods : " Principle LIV 20 : Subarea and corridor planning efforts will be developed and updated as needed , tailoring City Plan 's citywide perspective to more focused area of the community, such as individual neighborhoods , districts , corridors and edges . " " Policy LIV 20 . 3 : Subarea plan policies are intended to supplement broader City Plan policies and provide additional guidance for specific areas . " The West Central Area Plan also builds upon the other key planning efforts : • Bicycle Master Plan (2014) • Nature in the City (anticipated adoption 2015) • Arterial Intersection Priority Study (ongoing ) • Colorado State University Master Plan (2014) Topic Area One : Land Use and Neighborhood Character Overall Vision: When planning in the West Central Area, we will strive to preserve, enhance and create diverse and vibrant neighborhoods that provide a high quality of life for present and future generations. The vision is further defined as : • Desirable , safe , and attainable neighborhoods that are a source of pride • Conveniently located parks , trails , open space , services and employment • New development that is compatible with existing development • A range of incomes and a wide variety of housing options • Well-integrated campus community • A collaborative design process that respects neighborhood concerns The analysis of Land Use and Neighborhood Character includes a full discussion of the following sub -topic areas : • Areas Stability, Enhancement and Development • Code Enforcement and Education • Neighborhood Services • Neighborhood Character Item # 12 Page 2 Agenda Item 12 Action Items : The Implementation Summary identifies 49 action items devoted to Land Use and Neighborhood Character. Key action items include : • Support efforts to establish a Police Services sub-station in the Plan area • Fund an additional staff position to support the Neighborhood Services Department and the Community Liaison position • Form a joint City-CSU committee for ongoing coordination and planning • Fill in missing gaps and widen sidewalks , particularly narrow attached sidewalks • Add street trees , particularly along West Prospect Road west of Shields Street • Update Land Use Code standards related to design and compatibility of high -density development projects Topic Area Two : Transportation and Mobility (Includes Shields Corridor Analysis) Overall Vision: When planning in the West Central Area, we will strive to build a connected network that supports people safely walking, biking, or using public transit as a primary way to travel while balancing the need for efficient auto travel throughout the area. The vision is further defined as : • Safe routes to school , CSU , and other major destinations • Safe , reliable , arterial streets that are easy to cross and serve residents and commuters • Option for residents to live without a car • Reshaped and retrofitted streets that meet the needs of all ages , abilities , and modes • Safe and efficient travel by car with adequate , convenient parking • Improved transit service and convenient stops • Easy access to transit (including MAX) The analysis of Transportation and Mobility includes a full discussion of the following sub-topic areas : • Safe Routes • Multi- Modal Options • Street Retrofitting • Parking • Potential Intersection and Roadway Projects • Shields Corridor Analysis Action Items : The Implementation Summary identifies 35 action items devoted to Transportation and Mobility. Key action items include : • Complete the Shields Corridor Analysis to identify future improvement projects between Prospect Road and Laurel Street • Further evaluate transportation needs along West Elizabeth Street through the upcoming West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor ( ETC) Plan • Retrofit Prospect Road west of Shields to include safe crossings , medians , and other safety and aesthetic improvements • Add intersection and roadway improvements to the citywide Capital Improvement Program • Monitor neighborhoods and implement Residential Parking Permit Program as needed Topic Area Three : Open Space Networks Overall Vision: When planning in the West Central Area, we will strive to establish a functional network of public and private lands that supports and connects wildlife, plants, and people. Item # 12 Page 3 Agenda Item 12 The vision is further defined as : • Access to nature , recreation , and environmental stewardship opportunities • Parks and open spaces that offer a variety of settings and experiences • Attractive urban landscape that supports habitat, character, and shade • Preserved and enhanced wildlife habitat and corridors • Comprehensive and ecological approach to stormwater management The analysis of Open Space Networks includes a full discussion of the following sub-topic areas : • Access to Parks and Open Space • Quality of Experience • Quantity and Location of Parks and Open Space • Alignment with Nature in the City Action Items : The Implementation Summary identifies 40 action items devoted to Open Space Networks . Key action items include : • Improve Lilac Park and coordinate with CSU and Gardens on Spring Creek • Upgrade two regional detention ponds : Skyline/Elizabeth , Taft/Glenmoor • Construct bridge crossings at three locations to connect neighborhoods • Pilot a residential tree canopy improvement project • Coordinate improvements , programs and code revisions with Nature in the City Topic Area Four: Prospect Road Corridor Overall Vision: When planning for the Prospect Corridor, we will strive to design and construct an attractive and functional, well-integrated, mixed-use corridor that serves the mobility needs of nearby neighborhoods, CSU and the community. The vision is further defined as : • Safe and comfortable corridor for all modes of travel • Safe crossings • Attractive gateway to campus , downtown , and midtown • Seamless connection to MAX Prospect Road between College Avenue and Shields Street has served our growing community since it was dedicated as a section line road with 60 feet of right-of-way in the nineteenth century. Since that time , the major improvements have been mostly limited to the key intersections . Even today, the width of the public right-of-way ranges generally between only 60 feet and 85 feet. In contrast, the standard for a constrained arterial roadway is 102 feet. The Plan strives to chart a path for improving Prospect Road in a practical manner while recognizing these existing constraints . Improvements to Lake Street are intended to relieve pressure off Prospect Road by providing significant upgrades for bicyclists and pedestrians . The overall approach for the conceptual designs for both Prospect Road and Lake Street is based on the following approach : • Provide holistic designs so that Prospect and Lake are connected • Develop a custom cross-section for Prospect that is narrower than standard while still providing improvements Item # 12 Page 4 Agenda Item 12 • Maintain the right-of-way line on the south side in front of houses to minimize costs and right-of-way acquisitions • Focus right-of-way acquisition primarily on the north side , zoned HMN • Coordinate with CSU 's master plans and other approved plans for redevelopment Prospect Road - Conceptual Design Elements : • Four travel lanes • Center turn lane/median • Tree lawn • Detached sidewalk / shared bike and pedestrian path • Mid-block bike / pedestrian crossing • Transit stops / pullouts Lake Street - Conceptual Design Elements : • Two travel lanes On-street parking • Protected bike lanes with planted buffer • Detached sidewalk • Tree lawn (selected locations ) • Mid-block bike / pedestrian crossings Transit stops CSU Stadium When planning in the West Central Area, we acknowledge the pending IGA with Colorado State University and will strive to continue to work with the University to mitigate potential short and long term impacts in order to preserve the quality of life in the surrounding neighborhoods. Traffic and Parking: To mitigate traffic , a Stadium Event Management Plan should consider temporary route adjustments and incorporate ways for Sheely/Wallenberg residents to be able to get in and out of their neighborhood . Public infrastructure improvements and wayfinding signs should be implemented to accommodate increased bicycle and pedestrian traffic , particularly crossing Prospect Road and Shields Street. An underpass at Prospect Road and Center Avenue would alleviate congestion and promote safety. Shuttle buses should be used between parking lots and the stadium . Noise: To mitigate the sound associated with games and concerts , there should be multiple speakers that are smaller and dispersed versus a large single source . Speakers should be narrow-cast and carefully aimed within the venue versus broad-cast over a large area . Massing at the south end of the stadium would help reduce decibel levels in the neighborhoods to the south . Concerts should be monitored and required to end at a specified time . Lighting: To mitigate lighting , all in -stadium fixtures should be aimed so that there is no spillover outside the venue . Again , massing at the south end would block spillover. Surrounding lighting should be down -directional with sharp cut-off light patterns versus flood lighting . Tailgating: To mitigate tailgating , pre and post-game activities should be directed to specific locations and not permitted within the neighborhoods . Note : Public comments on the stadium are included in Appendix B . Item # 12 Page 5 Agenda Item 12 CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS A key finding of the Plan is that funding will be needed for one new staff position to support the Community Liaison Office in order to strengthen existing Neighborhood Services and Off-Campus Life partnership programs . This position would be responsible for implementing new programs . This funding is the exception as most all other actions items can be funded from existing sources . For example , effective implementation may require the formation of an interdepartmental team that is able to deliver a variety of services with a wide range of scale and complexity. While the exact make-up of this team has yet to be finalized , there may be a need to adjust staff time allotments and administrative support. Such organizational efforts are not anticipated to require new funding . The capital projects identified in the Plan are expected to be funded over time at the discretion of City Council and only through established procedures for funding prioritization . For Prospect Road and Lake Street, the Plan provides a cost estimate for the conceptual designs and identifies three distinct phases of funding and implementation ; this approach is typical for a capital project of this magnitude . The Shields Street Corridor Analysis is ongoing . Smaller capital projects may seek to leverage opportunities afforded by grants from a variety of State and Federal sources or from existing programs such as the Street Maintenance Program . Additional funding could be pursued from existing funded capital project wherever a rational nexus allows . Most of the action items identified in the Implementation Summary can be accommodated within the existing budgetary framework for the various departments and service areas . Action items are spread out into a variety of timeframes (immediate , short-term , mid-term , and ongoing ) , so there remains flexibility on the funding sources . BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION City Council Work Sessions The Plan has been presented to the City Council at the following work sessions : • August 26 , 2014 • November 25 , 2014 In response to the November 25 Work Session , the Plan reflects the direction provided by City Council in the following manner: • Land Use and Neighborhood Character: the Conditional Rezoning process is not a recommendation item in the Plan and it is assumed that such a process would be initiated by applicants and not the City of Fort Collins . • Transportation and Mobility, the Plan provides an analysis of the Shields Corridor that explores options for a grade-separated crossing , as well as at-grade improvements to improve conditions for bicyclists and pedestrians crossing Shields Street. • Open Space Networks : the Plan emphasizes the benefits of wildlife movement in consideration of improving connectivity among open space areas in addition to recreational benefits . Also , the Plan recommends improvements to two regional , City-owned stormwater detention ponds in order to naturalize and improve the qualitative aspects of these open space tracts . • Prospect Corridor/Lake Street Design : the Plan provides a phasing plan for implementation and , through cooperation with CSU , includes for the future underpass at Center Avenue . The Plan also acknowledges the potential for partnering with CSU on various aspects of the future Lake Street Item # 12 Page 6 Agenda Item 12 improvements , and the Plan acknowledges that Prospect Road west of Shields Street would benefit from improved crossings and landscaping (shown in Appendix E ) . In addition to the two work sessions , separate memoranda were submitted to the City Council that indicated progress to date , next steps , opportunities for citizen participation , and the results of the triple bottom line analysis . BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION On March 12 , 2015 , the Planning and Zoning Board will meet to make a recommendation to City Council . Results of the Board ' s decision will be provided to the Council prior to the Council meeting . In addition , the following boards have taken formal action to support the Plan : • Parks and Recreation Board • Natural Resources Advisory Board • Transportation Board PUBLIC OUTREACH The following City boards and commissions and community organizations were consulted and participated in the formation of the West Central Area Plan : City Boards and Commissions : • Affordable Housing Board • Air Quality Advisory Board • Bicycle Advisory Committee • Commission on Disability • Land Conservation Stewardship Board • Landmark Preservation Commission • Natural Resources Advisory Board • Parking Advisory Board • Parks and Recreation Board • Planning and Zoning Board (4 work sessions) • Senior Advisory Board • Transportation Board Community Organizations : • Board of Realtors , Government Affairs Committee • Chamber of Commerce , Local Legislative Affairs Committee • ClimateWise Biz Ed Group • Turning Point Board of Directors • UniverCity Connections Transit & Mobility Task Force • Ongoing coordination with CSU staff In addition , valuable feedback was provided by the Stakeholder Committee which met formally six times over the last year. Ideas and concepts were exchanged in a spirit of cooperation , mutual respect, with a deep dedication to our community. Membership was diverse and included various interests representing the following : • Neighborhood residents • Business owners • Major landowners Item # 12 Page 7 Agenda Item 12 Apartment complex managers • CSU students and staff ATTACHMENTS 1 . November 25 Work Session Summary ( PDF ) 2 . Natural Resources Advisory Board Recommendation , February 19 , 2015 ( PDF ) 3 . Parks and Recreation Board minutes , February 25 , 2015 (draft) ( PDF ) 4 . Transportation Board minutes , February 18 , 2015 (draft) ( PDF ) 5 . PowerPoint Presentation ( PDF ) Item # 12 Page 8 ATTACHMENT 1 City, of Planning, Development & Transportation Fort Collins 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 970.221 .6376 970.224.6134 - fax MEMORANDUM DATE: November 26, 2014 TO: Mayor Weitkunat and City Coun{cidmembers THROUGH: Darin Atteberry, City Manager Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Manage Karen Cumbo, Director of Planning, Devefopment & Transportation IV* (jer KC ) Laurie Kadrich, Community Development & Neighborhood Services Director Paul Sizemore, FC Moves Program Manager v Cameron Gloss, Planning Services Manager FROM: Ted Shepard, Chief Planner 'IS Amy Lewin, Transportation Planner aZ Rebecca Everette, City Plannerov RE: November 25, 2014 Work Session Summary — West Central Area Plan and Prospect Corridor Design Update Attendees: City Council: Mayor Karen Weitkunat, Mayor Pro-Tem Gerry Horak, Councilmember Gino Campana, Councilmember Ross Cunniff, Councilmember Lisa Poppaw Absent. Councilmember Bob Overbeck, Councilmember Wade Troxell City Staff: Darin Attebeiry, Karen Cumbo, Rebecca Everette, Mark Jackson, Tim Kemp, Amy Lewin, Ted Shepard, Paul Sizemore, Martina Wilkinson Discussion Summary: Conditional Rezoning ■ Concerns that issues similar to those raised for the Addition of a Permitted Use (APU) process would arise with Conditional Rezoning. ■ Request for more information about how this would be applied to the West Central area and the implications for surrounding neighborhoods. ■ Request to delay discussion on this topic until the APU process has been further discussed by City Council. ■ Acknowledgement that this tool provides an opportunity to modify zoning where it may be appropriate, while safeguarding neighborhoods from incompatible uses. ■ Support for the process being initiated by developers and/or property owners. No support for wholesale rezoning along arterials by the City. `ityofVColUns Prospect Corridor Design ■ Support for the current designs for Prospect and Lake, and confirmation that these designs support the Prospect Corridor vision. ■ Recognition that not all of the needed right-of-way could be acquired through developer dedication upon redevelopment. Concern about impacts to existing buildings that could result from the designs. ■ Recommendation to develop an implementation plan that identifies timetables and triggers for each phase of the project. ■ Interest in improvements to the section of Prospect west of Shields. ■ Engage CSU on the Lake design to set the expectation for partnerships related to funding and implementation, since the primary users of Lake are CSU students, staff, and visitors. ■ Make other needed street improvements in conjunction with the Prospect and Lake designs (e.g., proposed underpass at Prospect and Center) . ■ Recognition that intersection improvements at Shields & Prospect and Shields & Lake are critical to the success of the Prospect and Lake designs. Transportation & Mobility ■ Support for the street retrofit concepts, particularly for collector streets that have a need for traffic calming. Request to coordinate with the Stormwater Department to ensure that drainage needs are met for the curb "bulb-outs." ■ Support for additional focus on the aesthetics and crossings along arterials. ■ Concern that the pedestrian crossing treatments on arterials are inconsistent city-wide. Recognition that many crossings do not meet current City standards. Any crossings in the West Central area that do not meet standards should be identified and prioritized for improvement to improve the safety and confidence of pedestrians. ■ Support for additional focus on the improvements that may be needed along the Shields corridor, particularly in terms of bike and pedestrian crossings. ■ Support for adding an item to the BOB 2.0 (sales tax renewal) for the rebuilding of arterial roads, which could be applied to a number of projects identified throughout the city. Open Space Networks ■ Recommendation to include photos in the plan to illustrate open space recommendations and provide more guidance for developers. ■ Direction to explore additional opportunities for recreation and habitat improvements on stormwater sites (e.g., the site at Plum and Taft Hill). ■ Emphasis on connectivity for wildlife in addition to recreational access, and balancing the multiple values of open space. Follow-up Items: ■ At the upcoming discussion of the APU process (January 27 Work Session), staff will provide additional information on the Conditional Rezoning process, how it relates to other zoning and development review tools, and how it could be applied in the West Central area. Staff appreciates the opportunity to discuss the West Central Area Plan with the City Council and received valuable feedback and direction for the project. For more information regarding the project, please visit: btttp://www.fcgov.corWwcstcentral. The updated plan will be presented to City Council for consideration of adoption in March 2015. November 25, 2014 Council Work Session Summary Page 2 West Central Area Plan and Prospect Corridor Design update ATTACHMENT 2 Environmental Services City of 215 Mason � PO Boo x 580 Collins Fort Collins, 80522 9F6rt70.221 -6600 970.224-6177 - fax fcgov. com MEMORANDUM NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD DATE : February 19, 2015 TO : Mayor and City Council Members FROM: John Bartholow, on behalf of the Natural Resources Advisory Board (NRAB) SUBJECT : West Central Area Plan — Open Space Recommendations The NRAB endorses the Open Space Recommendations that are a portion of the update to the West Central Neighborhoods Plan. We received a briefing on the plan update at our last regular meeting, with particular attention given to the opportunities for additional open spaces and access to those areas. The Board was pleased to see how a variety of environmental concerns have been considered and integrated into the proposed plan. It is also gratifying to know that the draft "Nature in the City" effort is already earning dividends . Most of the questions from Board members dealt with the interface between the West Central Area and other areas of the city, particularly CSU and the Mason corridor. But the open space recommendations were considered solid and should contribute nicely to cross-cutting goals that support wildlife habitat, floodplain management, and greater public access . We urge Council to adopt these components of the draft plan in March. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions regarding this recommendation. Respectfully Submitted, John Bartholow Chair, Natural Resources Advisory Board cc : Darin Atteberry Susie Gordon ATTACHMENT 3 Parks and Recreation Board esses and that contribute to a variety of experiences for human en' ent February 25 , 2015 he proposed Land Use Code amendments. The three areas o cus are: DRAFT minutes :omposition when objective is a more naturalized lands e; and Board — In monitoring butterflies, what do they tell us? Staff — We monitored birds and butterflies and birds give us information about landscape qu and butterflies give us information about individual site quality. For example, urban agriculture sites, likely due to all of the wering plants, had the highest observations for number of butterfly species. Board — Are you looking for a recommendation this evening? Staff — That would be welcomed. Motion made by Bruce Henderson: Board recommends approv of the proceeding Nature in the City Strategic Plan as specified at the meeting. Second: Scott Sinn Discussion: Board — Since this is a new and such a broad pro' t, it' s hard to visualize what this is really going to look like once it' s implemented, but if it continues to coordinat ith Parks and Recreation goals and objectives it will, conceptually, be a good project. Board — How was the site identified f e living wall? Staff — It' s been a long process, an is will be the third site that we have examined. We wanted this initial site to be in an urban setting with high visib ' ty to show how you can incorporate nature into an urban environment. Board — I think we need to - ude that the Board also supports this because it supports the Parks & Recreation goals. Board — Will design pla e a part of this? Staff — Yes, and the ign plans will be developed this fall . Amendment t otion : Board recommends approval of the proceeding Nature in the City Strategic Plan as specified at the meetin the Board feels the Strategic Plan also supports Parks & Recreation goals. Second : cott Sinn VOT 9 :0 in favor West Central Area Plan — Rebecca Everette and Amy Lewin : To update the Board on the West Central Area Plan, we started the process in February 2014 evaluating the existing and future conditions and updating the vision. We then moved to outlining the plan and developing design options and next were developing the policies and action items. So, now we 're at plan preparation and hopeful adoption by Council on March 17. The vision sets the stage for recommendations and action items related to land use & neighborhood character, transportation & mobility, open space networks and the Prospect Corridor. Focusing on the Open Space Networks we are collaborating with Nature in the City to pilot both Plans at a neighborhood scale. The key parks and open space action items include clarifying open space requirements for new development, constructing additional trail connections and ditch crossing, improve way-finding, enhance Stormwater detention areas, reconfigure Lilac Park to better serve adjacent neighborhood and pilot a tree canopy program. Discussion Board — Where is the tree canopy program being implemented? Staff — The focus is on the Avery Park neighborhood. We wanted a diverse neighborhood where there was a need for revitalization. Board — Where are the trees coming from? Staff— We have started partnering with various organizations, including local nurseries, to help select trees, help with planting and provide education for the home owner on tree maintenance. Board — How would it be determined where a tree would be planted? Staff— The homeowner would have to apply to be considered and the City would determine if the area was appropriate. Board — Do you think a renter would put much care into the maintenance of a new tree? Staff— That's why it's a pilot, we need to identify if there is a difference between owner occupied or rental property with regards to maintenance. Board — If you find a diverse neighborhood doesn't work well, will you try another neighborhood with mostly owner-occupied homes? Staff— Maybe. Parks & Recreation Board Meeting — February 25 , 2015 Page 3 of 6 Board — Once the pilot is underway, what determines the success? Staff — That is not fully established criteria yet. Board — I thought ditch companies didn't like having bridges built over them? Staff — Most ditch companies have criteria for bridges that involve no liability on their part, no impediment of water and a fee to be paid to them to allow the crossing. Board — What happen if there ' s a flood? Staff— Typically bridges of this nature are built to allow it to breakaway and swing to the side to keep any debris from building up. Board — What's the difference between the West Central Area Plan and Nature in the City? Staff— The West Central Area Plan is a policy plan specific to an area of the community, whereas Nature in the City provides direction citywide. If both plans are adopted there will be design policy that will act as a guiding principle as there is overlap . Board — It may be helpful to have one slide in your presentation that shows this relationship for clarification. Board — Are you looking for a recommendation or endorsement this evening? Staff— That would be welcomed. Motion made by Scott Sinn: Board recommends approval of the West Central Area Plan as presented. Second: Bruce Henderson Discussion: Board — I think the Board can give general approval of the whole Plan, but since we visited specifically about the Open Space Network, I think that should be part of the motion. Board — How will this be funded? Staff — Various projects in the West Central Area Plan would be funded differently, which would include: City budget through a BFO process, capital improvement funds, grants, private/public partnerships, etc. Amendment to Motion : Board recommends approval of the West Central Area Plan, specifically the Vision & Policy portion of the Open Space Network as presented. Second : Bruce Henderson VOTE: 9 :0 in favor STAFF UPDATES Parks Updates • Gardens — Michelle has been working with some partnerships to secure funding for the build out and operations e Garden. • Maple Hill Park = This is a four acre parcel ready for development, so we' ll be having a neighborhoo eting to discuss the process and construction schedule and get their input on design/amenity choices. The park shoul completed by 2016 . Recreation Updates • Retirements: Pat Moore who worked at the Senior Center; and Mike McDonnell, eation Manager at EPIC both retired. We hired Marc Rademacher as the new Recreation Manager to replace Mike; a arc will be in charge of Northside Aztlan Center, Foothill Activity Center and Sports. Steve Budner will be in char EPIC and Adaptive Recreation. • Construction of the FAC has started and we're still expecting to be mo in by November 2015 . Discussion • Board — The reduced fee statistics you provided are great. W will the funding for this program come from once KFCG money is no longer available? • Staff— The hope is that the voters will keep the KFC nded, but if not it will be an area of concern. • Board — How does someone get a reduced fee an at is the fee? • Staff— They have to apply and qualify yearly d if they qualify they are allowed a pass for $6.00 for a 6 month pass for youth and $25 .00 for a 6 month pass for ts. • Board — I noticed in the Recreator its s if a sport is for boys or girls, but flag football does not have this designation; is it w co-ed? If so, it might be good to flag football as co-ed in the Recreator. • Staff— Yes it is a co-ed sport. Park Planning Updates • Southeast Co nity Park — Met with neighborhood and about 80+ attended meeting and we had mostly positive feedback ut the new design direction. They felt they were heard and appreciated the effort we made to yonoandlCity. date their concerns. We did get comment cards for some hard data. • Ranch Community Gardens — Met with about 15 people on-site with representative from all sides, pro, It was agreed by everyone to relocate the gardens and so we are exploring a possible site in the Parks & Recreation Board Meeting — February 25 , 2015 Page 4 of 6 TRANSPORTATION BOARD February 18 , 2015 (draft) ATTACHMENT 4 BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT — Greg Oakes Boardmember Oakes was absent . 7 . DI USSION/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS • 2014 gional Transportation Plan Josh Johnson , orth Front Range Metropolitan Planning OrganizZTransportation Planner, discuss the requirement of the MPO to develop a to -range transportation plan . He discussed a need for east-west connections and ' ing of bike route gaps in the region . Additionally , Johnson discussed the public ou each process the MPO has undertaken thus far. Becky Karasko , North Front Ra e MPO , stated a goal of this plan is to accurately reflect the existing transportation resourc s in the re ' n . Jackson asked about possible ways for e MPO and/or this plan to help bridge the philosophical divide between the eas n est sides of 1 -25 . Ms . Karasko stated the MPO represents both side of 1 -25 to the est of its ility and noted moving people and goods through the region efficiently is common goal r the region . • Bluetooth Traffic Da — Joe Olson , City Traffic ngineer Joe Olson , City Tr c Engineer, discussed the City' s form system used to measure transportation s em performance and discussed the Blueto technology the City is now using to the asure performance of its transportation system , ting the data is complete ) nonymous . Additionally , Olson discussed the variatio between travel times when C is in session and when it is not and the advantages of this pe of data for the City . e detailed the differences between recurring and non - recurring c gestion as well a discussed various congested areas around town . Olson stated there a approximately 30 tracking devices around town with a total cost of $ 140 , 000 . 8 . ACTION ITEMS • West Central Area Plan Amy Lewin , FC Moves Senior Transportation Planner, discussed the history of this plan and its current components . Lewin noted the plan does not currently have funding sources and will be incorporated into the larger City-wide prioritization process in order to acquire funding for the next steps . Thomas asked if any of the quarter-cent sales tax on the April ballot would be used for implementation of this plan , should it be approved . Lewin replied some of the BOB 2 . 0 programs could potentially include some of these steps . Lewin went on to discuss the Shields Street analysis which is now part of the plan and detailed the proposed plans for Prospect Road . Jackson noted City staff will be touring new CSU facilities and construction projects at the end of the month in hopes of developing collaborative opportunities . 2 Lewin went on to mention the West Elizabeth Enhanced Corridor Plan and requested Board feedback . Thomas asked if there is any way to assure voters that no BOB 2 . 0 dollars will be spent to fund CSU ' s on -campus stadium . Jackson replied Council would need to make a specific policy direction . The Board had a brief discussion regarding items related specifically to game days versus items beneficial to the general public at all times . Thomas noted there is widespread opposition to the stadium which could potentially lead to less support for the BOB 2 . 0 package should the proposed projects not be able to be isolated from the stadium issue . Jackson noted terms could be defined as impacts as defined in the IGA which will be signed between the City and CSU . Jackson commended the Plan as a whole . Thomas asked if the Board could place a caveat on its support of the Plan that the City ensures the IGA with CSU covers all stadium - related expenses . Lewin noted the Plan itself does not go into details related to the stadium , except in the context of considerations and public process input . Jackson suggested language involving a clear identification of costs to be borne by CSU as the process moves forward . Thomas made a motion , seconded by Shenk , that the Board accept and endorse the transportation recommendations as spelled out in the West Central Area Plan , but also encourages a clear identification of the infrastructure costs to be borne directly by CSU as a result of the on -campus stadium impacts as part of the negotiations between the City and Colorado State University . Simonson expressed concern regarding the language addition and its relationship to the election . M The Board held a discussion regarding the motion wording . The motion was adopted unanimously . Recommendation for a Roundabout at Lincoln/International Bo and Marc Virata , ineering , stated this intersection will likely b uilt as part of the Capstone Cottages develop t . Martina Wilkinson , Traffic Ope ions , stat ere are two options for the development of this intersection , a traditional signals intersection and a single- lane roundabout , and discussed the impacts of each ing the dabout requires less right-of-way and is less expensive . Wilkinson als ated roundabouts a afer for bicyclists and pedestrians and discussed the main ance costs of both types of inter ions . Virata n d the sustainability assessment of the roundabout propo indicated this is a p ve project . 3 ATTACHMENTS West Central Area Plan City Council Regular Meeting Resolution 2015= 038 March 17 , 2015 Ted Shepard , Chief Planner Amy Lewin , Senior Transportation Planner Rebecca Everette , City Planner 1 �11West Central Fort�Collin5 � Area Plan '"`�� Project Overview n MULBERRY ST • 1 Plan Update to 999 a ELIZABETH ST CqW • Address ongoing & : • - • • - - • - - • • - • • - • • • - • • • - • • - • • • • -. LAKE ST emerging Issues : PROSPECT RD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • ~ 12 month process + LU LU J a J V! Z H W J UL J H � V DRAKE RD JI& West Central Area Plan Prospect Corridor Design 2 � West Central Fort Collins � Area Plan Community Engagement 4 Listening Sessions 20 Walking & Bike Tours 2 Visioning Workshops Open Houses 2 Prospect Corridor Workshops 3 Online Surveys - . Online . • r, 1 CommunityDrake Road Farmers ' Market CSU Lagoon Concert Series Gardens on Spring Creek Events Property Owner Outreach Presentations CKY of West Central • Collins Area a Community Engagement City Boards & Commissions : Other Groups : • Affordable Housing Board 0 Board of Realtors • Air Quality Advisory Board • Chamber of Commerce • Bicycle Advisory Committee • ClimateWise Biz Ed Group • Commission on Disability • UniverCity Connections • Landmark Preservation Commission Transit & Mobility Task Force • Land Conservation & Stewardship Board Stakeholder Committee : • Natural Resources Advisory Board* 0 Neighborhood residents • Parking Advisory Board 0 Business owners • Parks & Recreation Board* 0 Major landowners • Planning & Zoning Board* • Apartment complex managers • Senior Advisory Board 0 CSU students and staff • Transportation Board* *Recommendations to City Council 4 � West Central Fort Collins � Area Plan Vision Policies rco Land Use & Action - Neighborhood Character Open Space Transportation & Networks Mobility Prospect Corridor Design CKY of West Im lementation Summa � p rY AreaPlan Central WtCollins Implementation Summary • 100 + Action Items ( more than half ongoing ) • Timeframes — Immediate (within 120 days of adoption ) — Short- Term ( 2015 - 2016 ) — Mid - Term ( 2017 - 2024 ) — Ongoing • Implementation Team — Inter- departmental — Annual Status Report — Performance Monitoring 6 � West Central Fort Collins � Area Plan Land Neighborhood Character 7 � West Central Fort Collins � Area Plan Land Use & Neighborhood Character Key action Itemsm. Police Services sub - station Additional• position for Neighborhood Services/ Community Liaisond - - Joint •Fill in missing sidewalks , widen - a W narrow • - . Update Land Use code standards re : design and compatibility of high � density developmentoty M �j%IRM CentralWest s QCollins Area T mom ransportation Mobility moo 0000000000 West Central Fort Collins 9 � � Area Plan Transportation Mobilmity Key action items : • Complete Shields Corridor Analysis • West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor ( ETC ) project • Retrofit West Prospect Road (west of Shields ) • Add intersection and roadway improvements to citywide CIP • Bike & pedestrian priority snow removal routes • Template for retrofitting sidewalks • Monitor neighborhoods and implement Residential Parking Permit Program as needed 10 � West Central Fort Collins � Area Plan iaLWi s I Shields Corridor MMST,®r jy -- • Updated cross - sections '� ( Prospect to Laurel ) • Median installations — • At- grade crossing improvements T • Grade - separated crossings # --• �7� G • Roadway realignments - ! — Pitkin / Springfield — Lake / Bennett 'ter°` - = Ly Legend �'�� '"� � F`West Central i PoNaMISM City H0Aisk FWdpWm ; 11 Area Plan # Undapamannp 24rr requred CSU Aeeari Foundation Owned Plrape�y M Plamedlow Stress Bike Dorridor (GSIJ Qity Bike Plans) - - — _ — ,.t. IF Fr Open Space ILL Networks MIV West Central Fort Collins 12 Area Plan NEEL Open Space Networks Key action items : • Nature in the City implementation • Neighborhood tree canopy pilot program • Lilac Park outreach • Upgrade two regional detention ponds • Construct bridge crossings to connect neighborhoods 13 � West Central Fort Collins � Area Plan Prospect Corridor Design 40 1 West Central � Fort Collins 14 Area Plan Design Approach • Design Prospect & Lake to complement each other as one corridor • Custom cross - section for Prospect narrower than standard • Maintain right - of-way ( ROW ) line along south side residential to minimize construction costs & ROW impacts • Focus ROW impacts on areas likely to redevelop • Coordinate with CSU and other redevelopment plans West Central Fort Collins 15 Area Plan ShieldsProspect Conceptual Design to • • • Four travel lanes • Center turn lane/ median • Tree lawn • Detached sidewalk/shared bike and pedestrian path • Mid - block bike / pedestrian crossing • Transit stops/ pullouts West Central Fort Collins 16 Area Plan ShieldsLake Conceptual Design to • • • Two travel lanes • On - street parking • Protected bike lanes with planted buffer • Detached sidewalk • Tree lawn ( select locations ) • Mid - block bike / pedestrian crossings • Transit stops/ pullouts West Central Fort Collins 17 Area Plan CSU Stadium • Discussed throughout the planning process • Referenced in the plan document • CSU Stadium Considerations Appendix : — Addresses considerations related to the West Central Area Plan policies — Public comment collected during the West Central Area Plan process — Alignment of specific improvements with the IGA 18 � West Central Fort Collins � Area Plan Resolution 2015 = 038 • Adoption of the West Central Area Plan West Central ��� Area Plan L.$A `�S DRAFT 3110/15 West Central Fort Collins 19 � � Area Plan RESOLUTION 2015 -038 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS ADOPTING THE WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN AS AN ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY AND REPEALING THE WEST CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOODS PLAN AS AN ELEMENT OF THE CITY ' S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEREAS, by Resolution 1999-033 , the Council of the City of Fort Collins adopted the West Central Neighborhoods Plan as an element of the Comprehensive Plan of the City; and WHEREAS , the West Central Area Plan (the "Plan") updates and builds upon the West Central Neighborhoods Plan and is intended to replace the West Central Neighborhoods Plan; and WHEREAS , the purpose of the Plan is to help citizens address a wide variety of challenges and opportunities to ensure that the West Central Area neighborhoods continue to exist as desirable places to live, work, shop, learn and play; and WHEREAS , the Plan has as its purpose the provision of policy, guidance and direction on three primary topics, being : land use and neighborhood character, transportation and mobility, and open space networks ; and WHEREAS , additional subject areas included in the Plan are urban design, housing, community facilities, and a strategic approach to delivering effective public services ; and WHEREAS, the Plan also includes new conceptual designs for Prospect Road and Lake Street (from Shields Street to College Avenue) which are intended to improve safety and comfort for pedestrians, bicyclists, buses and motor vehicles on both roadways ; and WHEREAS, the Plan also offers various alternatives for making a range of improvements along Shields Street between Prospect Road and Laurel Street, including a potential grade- separated pedestrian crossing; and WHEREAS, the staff has conducted extensive public outreach over the course of the planning project, holding open houses involving a broad range of citizens, a stakeholder committee, two work sessions with the City Council, public outreach to numerous City boards and commissions and community organizations ; and WHEREAS , the City Council has determined that it is in the best interests of the City that the Plan be adopted as an element of the Comprehensive Plan of the City and that the West Central Neighborhoods Plan be repealed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, that the West Central Area Plan, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A", be adopted as an element of the Comprehensive Plan of the City and that the West Central Neighborhoods Plan be repealed as an element of the Comprehensive Plan of the City. - 1 - Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 17th day of March, A.D. 2015 . Mayor ATTEST : City Clerk - 2 - EXHIBIT A West Are • • • City of F A � L Y- Ar \ w y • J Y• y 7� • Collin DRAFT1 Acknowledgments Fort Collins City Council • Karen Weitkunat, Mayor • Gerry Horak, Mayor Pro Tem, District 6 • Bob Overbeck, District 1 • Lisa Poppaw, District 2 • Gino Campana, District 3 • Wade Troxell , District 4 • Ross Cunniff, District 5 Project Management Team • Ted Shepard, Chief Planner • Mark Jackson, Planning, Development and • Amy Lewin, Senior Transportation Planner Transportation Deputy Director • Rebecca Everette, City Planner • Laurie Kadrich, Community Development and • Cameron Gloss, Planning Manager Neighborhood Services Director • Paul Sizemore, FC Moves Program Manager • Emily Allen, Community Liaison • Clay Frickey, Associate Planner • Lindsay Ex, Senior Environmental Planner • • Karen Cumbo, Planning, Development and Tim Kemp, Engineering Capital Projects Transportation Director • Martina Wilkinson, Traffic Operations Technical Advisory Committee City of Fort Collins Departments : • Communications and Public Involvement • Park Planning & Development • Economic Health Office • Parking Services • Engineering Services • Planning Services • FC Moves • Police Services • Forestry • Social Sustainability • Gardens on Spring Creek • Streets • Historic Preservation • Traffic Operations • Natural Areas • Transfort • Neighborhood Services • Utilities Services • Operations Services Other Agencies : • Colorado State University (CSU) • CSU Research Foundation (CSURF) • Fort Collins Housing Authority • University of Colorado Health - CanDo ii DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN City Boards and Commissions • Affordable Housing Board • Parking Advisory Board • Air Quality Advisory Board • Parks and Recreation Board • Bicycle Advisory Committee • Planning and Zoning Board • Commission on Disability • Senior Advisory Board • Land Conservation Stewardship Board • Transportation Board • Landmark Preservation Commission • Natural Resources Advisory Board Stakeholder Committee • Susan Ballou • Kelly Ohlson • Rick Callan Tara Opsal • Susan Dominica • Jeannie Ortega • Becky Fedak • Jean Robbins • Colin Gerety Steve Schroyer • Carrie Ann Gillis Andy Smith • Per Hogestad • Logan Sutherland • Ann Hunt • Lloyd Walker • Greg McMaster • Nicholas Yearout Consultant Team Russell + Mills Studios Fehr & Peers • Craig Russell, Principal, Project Manager • Ann Bowers, Principal, Traffic Engineer • Paul Mills, Principal • Charlie Alexander, Traffic Engineer • John Beggs, Senior Planner/Landscape Architect • Carly Sieff, Transportation Planner • Shelley La Mastra, Landscape Architect • Nell Conti , GIS Specialist • Darren Duroux, Landscape Architect • Mary Taylor, Landscape Architect Special thanks to all of the residents, property owners, business owners, organizations, and other stakeholders who participated in the development of the West Central Area Plan. WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 iii Table of Contents Overview 1 Shields Corridor Analysis 58 What is the West Central Area Plan? 2 Overview 58 Why Does the Plan Need to be Updated? 2 Cross-Section Options 59 Plan Organization 2 Grade-Separated Crossings 60 How to Use this Plan 3 At-Grade Intersection Improvements 53 Planning Process 3 Median Improvements 64 Community Engagement Summary 4 Roadway Realignment Options 65 Planning Context 5 Summary and Next Steps 66 About the West Central Area 6 Open Space Networks 67 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan 6 Vision 68 Relationship to City Plan 8 Policies 69 Related Planning Efforts 8 Access 69 Study Area Change Over Time 14 Quality 74 Existing Conditions 16 Quantity 77 West Central Area Vision 17 Potential Open Space Improvements & 78 Additions Land Use & Neighborhood Character 21 Prospect Corridor 81 Vision 22 Existing Conditions 82 Areas of Stability, Enhancement & 23 Vision 84 Development Policies 26 Overall Approach 84 Code Enforcement & Education 27 Alternatives Development & Evaluation 84 Neighborhood Services 29 Conceptual Designs 85 Neighborhood Character 31 Potential Phasing 91 Cost Estimates 91 Transportation & Mobility 39 Implementation Strategies 92 Vision 40 Design & Construction Process 93 Policies 41 Safe Routes 42 Implementation Summary 95 Action Items 96 Multi-Modal Options 44 Street Retrofitting 50 Implementation Team 106 Parking 52 Ongoing Monitoring & Outreach 106 Potential Projects 53 Funding 107 iv DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility Appendices Appendix A: Community Engagement Summary Appendix B: CSU On-Campus Stadium Considerations Appendix C: Existing Conditions Maps Appendix D: Transportation Existing & Future Conditions Appendix E: West Prospect Road Median Concepts Appendix F. Prospect Corridor Alternatives Note: The Prospect Corridor 30% Design is provided in a separate document. Figures 7Figurest Central Area Plan Boundary 2 y Components of the West Central Area Plan 2 Figure 3 . 1974 Aerial Photo 14 Figure 4. Changes between 1974 and 1999 14 Figure 5. Changes between 1999 and 2015 15 Figure 6. Areas of Stability, Enhancement & Development 25 Figure 7. Potential Redevelopment Scenarios in the HMN Zone 32 Figure 8. Single-Family Residential Addition & Renovation Examples 35 Figure 9. Design Guidelines for Multi-Family Redevelopment & Infill 36 Figure 10 . Mixed-Use Design Guidelines 37 Figure 11 . Key Destinations Map 43 Figure 12. Bike Share Station Planning Map 45 Figure 13. Future Transit Vision 47 Figure 14. Bus Stop Improvements 48 Figure 15. Example Street Retrofit Concept - Springfield Drive 50 Figure 16. Example Street Retrofit Concept - Shields Street 51 Figure 17. Example Street Retrofit Concept - West Prospect Road 51 Figure 18. Potential Intersection Projects 54 Figure 19. Potential Roadway Projects 56 Figure 20. Shields Corridor Influences and Connections 58 Figure 21 . Shields Street Cross-Section Options 59 Figure 22. Shields Corridor Grade-Separated Crossing Options 60 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 v Figures (continued) Figure Page Figure 23. Shields Corridor Grade-Separated Crossing Pros & Cons 62 Figure 24. Potential Shields Street Medians 64 Figure 25. Summary of Potential Improvements to the Shields Corridor 66 Figure 26. 10-Minute Walk to Public Open Space (Including Arterial Crossings) 71 Figure 27. 10-Minute Walk to Public Open Space (Not Including Arterial Crossings) 72 Figure 28. Standard City of Fort Collins Process for Constructing Ditch Crossings 73 Figure 29. Areas of Potential Open Space Improvements & Additions 79 Figure 30. Prospect Corridor Design Development Process 82 Figure 31 . Prospect Corridor Existing Right-of--Way Constraints 83 Figure 32. Prospect Road Conceptual Design & Cross-Sections 86 Figure 33 . Lake Street Conceptual Design & Cross-Sections 88 Figure 34. Prospect Road Conceptual Design (looking west near Prospect Lane) 90 Figure 35. Lake Street Conceptual Design (looking west near Centre Avenue) 90 Figure 36. Prospect Corridor Potential Phasing 91 Figure 37. Design and Construction Process 93 Tables 21 Table 1 . Short- to Mid-Term Bus Stop Improvements (0-10 years) 49 Table 2. Longer-Term Bus Stop Improvements (10+ years) 49 Table 3. Short- to Mid-Term Intersection Projects (0-10 years) 55 Table 4. Longer-Term Intersection Projects (10+ years) 55 Table 5. Short- to Mid-Term Roadway Projects (0-10 years) 57 Table 6. Longer-Term Roadway Projects (10+ years) 57 Table 7. Shields Corridor Grade-Separated Crossing Evaluation Matrix 61 Table 8. Potential Open Space Projects 78 Table 9. Prospect Corridor Cost Estimates 91 Table 10. Immediate Actions (Within 120 Days of Adoption) 97 Table 11 . Short-Term Actions (2015-2016) 98 Table 12. Mid-Term Actions (2017-2024) 99 Table 13 . Ongoing Programs & Actions 102 Table 14. Potential Funding Sources 107 vi DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN wd fN 41 f IN IN NO p 0,4 1 . , iNie � : 0 - r� . PJ NA kv f . � IN1 1 AND 461 NOW, a 00 i i 1 ti L 0 Overview MENNEMEN E 1 What is the West Central Area Plan? MULBERRY ST The West Central Area Plan provides a vision and policy Ro direction for the neighborhoods generally bounded by Mulberry Street and Lake Street to the north, Shields Street and the Mason Corridor to the east, Drake Road ELIZABETH ST to the south, and Taft Hill Road to the west. This plan contains policies, programs, projects, and action items LAKE ST intended to support the quality of life in this core area of ; the city. The topics addressed in this plan include land : PROSPECT RD use, development, housing , neighborhood character, : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : transportation and mobility, public services, parks and LLJ open space, and environmental quality. H Q 0 FREED Why Does the Plan Need to be J o z lJJ Updated ? tZ w Cn J In the 16 years since the 1999 West Central H V Neighborhoods Plan was initially adopted, a number of changes have occurred and issues have arisen that DRAKE RD require new approaches and updated policy guidance . Several new development projects have been approved and constructed in the area, with varying degrees of benefit and impact to the surrounding neighborhoods . West Central Area Plan Given City Plan's emphasis on accommodating growth prospect Corridor Design through infill development rather than sprawl , CSU's enrollment projections, and the plans for an on-campus Figure 1 . West Central Area Plan boundary stadium, it is now time to re-assess plans and policies so the quality of life and character of the West Central area are preserved and enhanced for years to come. The purpose of the plan update is to revisit and refine the original vision and goals, policy directives, and implementation actions based on emerging issues and trends . The 2015 West Central Area Plan incorporates new information from related planning efforts in the Policy area and provides updated direction related to a number Chapters of topics . gas Plan Organization The recommendations in the West Central Area Plan are organized into a number of topic areas . The Planning Opvn Space Transportation Context chapter describes the area and sets the stage Netwotks Mobility for policy guidance. The community-driven vision serves as the foundation for the plan's recommendations . The Plan's policies and action items are divided into three topic areas : Land Use and Neighborhood Character, Transportation and Mobility, and Open Space Networks . The Transportation and Mobility chapter includes a special focus on the Shields Corridor. The Prospect Corridor chapter presents new conceptual designs for Prospect Road and Lake Street (from Shields Street Implementation Action Plan to College Avenue) . Implementation strategies and action items that support the Plan's policy direction are Figure 2. Key components synthesized in the Implementation Summary chapter. 2 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Overview How to Use this Plan This plan is intended to coordinate local stakeholder needs with the larger community's goals (as represented in City Plan) . The recommendations contained within this plan are intended to be used by City Staff, the Planning & Zoning Board, the Transportation Board, and City Council to assist in understanding where the community, local leaders, and elected officials should focus their efforts . Residents, developers and other stakeholders should refer to the plan for guidance in terms of land use and character and coordination with policies and recommendations . i .r Staff & Decision- Makers City staff and decision-makers should reference the recommendations of this plan when developing work programs, allocating funding for programs and projects, reviewing new development proposals, and Listening sessions - adopting new regulations that impact this area . Residents & Stakeholders Residents, property owners, business owners, and neighborhood organizations should use this plan as the foundation for conversations with decision- makers and developers about the needs and priorities for this area . Developers _ Applicants fordevelopment projects should reference the guidance in this plan when proposing new infill or redevelopment projects and as a starting point for i a dialogue with neighbors about such proposals . l Partners : V11 �r �r. ~ Colorado State University, Poudre School District, 1414, and other partner organizations should review the r ' plan to better understand the community's vision for Neighborhood walking tours (April , , this area . Planning Process The West Central Area Plan was developed through a 12-month planning process consisting of five phases : - Phase 1 : Evaluate Existing and Future Conditions s Phase 2 : Update Vision Phase 3 : Outline Plan and Develop Prospect Design Alternatives Phase 4: Develop Policies and Action Items Phase 5 : Plan Preparation and Adoption som , , WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 3 Community Engagement Summary City Boards & Commissions Extensive public input was gathered over the course • Planning & Zoning Board (Jan . , Aug . , and Dec . of the planning process using a range of strategies . 2014; Jan . , Feb . , and Mar. 2015) The community engagement process consisted of the • Transportation Board (Apr. and Aug . 2014; Feb . following activities during each phase. Additional detail 2015) is provided in Appendix A. • Parking Advisory Board (Apr. 2014) • Affordable Housing Board (Sept. 2014) Phase 1 : Evaluate Existing & Future Conditions • Air Quality Advisory Board (Sept. 2014) (January — June 2014) • Senior Advisory Board (Sept. 2014) • Postcard mailing to all property owners and • Parks and Recreation Board (Sept. 2014; Feb . tenants in the West Central area 2015) • 4 listening sessions (175 total attendees) • Commission on Disability (Oct. 2014) • 20 neighborhood walking tours (83 total attendees) • Landmark Preservation Commission (Oct. 2014) • Online "WikiMap" (41 users and 248 total • Natural Resources Advisory Board (Oct. 2014; Feb . comments) 2015) • Citywide Planning and Transportation Projects • Land Conservation Stewardship Board (Feb . 2015) Open House (154 attendees) • Bicycle Advisory Committee (Feb . 2015) • Air Quality Advisory Board Public Forum (25 attendees) External Presentations Phase 2 : Update Vision (January — June 2014) • Ongoing CSU coordination • Postcard mailing • UniverCity Connections Transportation and • 2 visioning events (74 total attendees) Mobility Task Force (Apr. 2014) • Online visioning survey (337 respondents) • ClimateWise Biz Ed Group (June 2014) • Outreach at the Drake Road Farmers' Market, CSU • Board of Realtors Government Affairs Committee Lagoon Concert Series, and Gardens on Spring (Aug . 2014) Creek events • Chamber of Commerce Local Legislative Affairs • Presentations to advisory boards and commissions Committee (Nov. 2014, Mar. 2015) Phase 3 : Outline Plan & Develop Prospect Design Stakeholder Committee Alternatives (July — October 2014) Through an application process, a diverse group of • Postcard mailing community members was selected for a Stakeholder • City Council Work Session (August 25) Committee to help guide the development of the plan . • Open house (85 attendees) The group met six times over the course of the project • Online survey (263 respondents) to review materials, discuss policy direction, and provide • Prospect Corridor Design survey (303 respondents) input to staff and consultants . • 2 Prospect Corridor workshops (69 total attendees) • Outreach to property owners along the Prospect Corridor • Presentations to advisory boards and commissions Phase 4 : Develop Policies & Action Items ' (November 2014 — January 2015) ■ • City Council Work Session (November 25) • Presentations to advisory boards and commissions •,�a Phase 5 : Plan Preparation & Adoption (January — March 2015) - • Postcard mailing A • Draft Plan open house (162 attendees) • Presentations to advisory boards and commissions • Online comment form mmittee meeting 4 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN TW ' ' _ ter. . . - � t ..w.ips l " pit c 1 O rif 16 #:' - i � ' • "4 - ll 0 too *irrim f r { i• l , 1 / j.� fu- dt. .r lift too 0 wi r .ft Planning Context About the West Central Area Theadditionof higher density multi-family developments designed to accommodate students and other renters The West Central area consists of several neighborhoods has further shaped the area and will continue as CSU and commercial centers generally south and west of the enrollment grows and City policies encourage infill Colorado State University (CSU) main campus . development and redevelopment. Accommodating There are many distinct neighborhoods and districts this growth will continue to require additional support within the West Central Area Plan boundaries, which have services (police, fire, emergency medical , commercial , evolved over 150 years of incremental development. At retail , and other services) ; infrastructure (utilities, one point in time, Prospect Road and the CSU main stormwater management, parking , sidewalks, and street campus formed the southern edge of the City of Fort upgrades) ; and parks and open space to adequately Collins; yet today, the West Central area is located in the serve current and future residents . heart of the city. The University is, a major influence on the area's land 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan use, transportation circulation, open space networks, Plan Overview and overall character. The CSU main campus anchors the northeast corner of the planning area, while the The predecessor to this plan, the West Central south campus and Veterinary Teaching Hospital anchor Neighborhoods Plan, was adopted in 1999 . That plan the southeastern corner. CSU 's influence is felt in several established a vision and goals for the area, as well as ways, including : specific policies and implementation actions related to land use, housing , transportation, historic preservation , • The need for housing and services in close parks and open lands, public services, and other topics . proximity the campus The plan was developed through significant effort by • Transportation ion patterns for all modes of travel a Citizens Advisory Committee, with support from • Contributions to the city s population growth City staff, and set the stage for a number of programs through the addition of students, faculty, staff, and improvements in the West Central area . The employees of related agencies, and families recommendations and lessons learned from the 1999 • The wide cultural diversity that CSU provides Plan form the basis of this plan update . • CSU's role as the area's principal economic generator MULBERRY ST n ELIZABETH ST x LAKE ST , PROSPECT RD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : w Q �J c~n w - J 1~i LLJ4111111111111111111 J West Central DRAKE RD Neighborhoods Av El®®t of Fort Collins West Central Area Plan Prospect Corridor Design an I CITYPLAN West Central Area Plan boundary West Central Neighborhoods Plan (1999) 6 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Planning Context 1999 Plan Vision Housing Completed Actions The following vision statements were included in the Additional student housing provided on-campus, 1999 Plan : including Laurel Village, Academic Village and • " Maintain and enhance the diverse character of the Aggie Village North West Central Neighborhoods, comprised of long- New multi-family developments constructed near and short-term residents such as families, senior CSU campus citizens, and students, as well as small businesses, Student Housing Action Plan developed to improve schools, and public/private institutions and compatibility with existing neighborhoods facilities . Strengthen the collaboration between the Increase in overall diversity in housing types City, CSU , and the West Central Neighborhoods Transportation Completed Actions • Continue to provide housing opportunities, • Completion of Centre Avenue road extension/ infrastructure, and lifestyle options to meet the multi-modal corridor from Research Boulevard to needs of this diverse group of neighborhoods Prospect Road • Facilitate and improve existing transportation • Completion of Taft Hill Road widening across from systems to allow all residents to have good , safe, Blevins Middle School for on-street bike lanes and convenient, and multi-modal transportation options . wider sidewalks Adapt to meet the needs of the dynamic and • Completion of Elizabeth Street streetscape in ever-changing West Central Neighborhoods and Campus West Area provide balanced opportunities in development, • Multiple bikeways established in neighborhoods redevelopment, and maintenance • Construction of traffic calming devices at Implementation of the 1999 Plan Constitution Ave. and Valley Forge/Scarborough St. • Parking structure constructed on CSU campus at Recommendations that were implemented since the Prospect Road and Centre Avenue 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan fall into three • Buffered bike lanes striped along Shields Street overall categories : neighborhood character, housing, • Residential parking permit program established in and transportation . Significant recommendations from several neighborhoods the plan that have been completed are listed below. • East/west transit connections established to MAX Neighborhood Character Completed Actions Lessons Learned from the 1999 Plan • Resolved inconsistencies between the current The previous plan offers several key lessons that are zoning districts and the plan's recommendations applied to the West Central Area Plan : through use of selective rezoning • Developed more detailed design standards and • Simplify the structure of plan and develop a highly guidelines to encourage appropriate development graphic, easily understood document and compatibility between adjacent land uses • Focus on key vision statements and policies that • Addition of a Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zone implement the vision with fewer and more focused district near Shields Street and Stuart Street to objectives allow for neighborhood commercial and services • Clarify the distinction between vision, goals, policies, uses issues, and action items throughout the plan • Developed a more detailed plan for the Campus • Develop a clear, purposeful, and measurable West area through a later planning study (2001 ) implementation strategy for each policy • Construction of Red Fox Meadows Natural Area • Utilize a variety of outreach techniques to capture a stormwater and habitat enhancements wide demographic and allow for a variety of types • Canal Importation Ponds and Outfall (CIPO) of input stormwater improvements • Implementation of mixed-use project in Campus West area at corner of Elizabeth Street and City Park Avenue • Enhancements to Avery Park • New places of worship/cultural centers established I l 1 • Construction of Phase I for the Gardens on Spring N„r Creek facility l • Enhanced code enforcement strategies developed to handle code violations • Senior Center expansion completed _ 1 Shopping . . . Plan WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 7 Relationship to City Plan City Plan is the comprehensive plan that provides a vision, priorities, and action plan for the City of Fort Collins for the next 25 years and 0 � beyond . The 2011 update to City Plan offers the following relevant guidance for the West Central Area Plan . Vision Through innovation, sustainability, and connections the City of Fort Collins aspires to create a vibrant, world- class community. The City of Fort Collins is committed to providing leadership and exceptional service to citizens, City Plan Fort Collins but recognizes that the entire community must be involved to achieve the vision . Relevant Policy Direction Land Use & Neighborhood Character • Promote infill development in active areas innovate -sustain connect • Consider adjacency, scale, and buffering in the design of City Plan (2011 ) welcoming neighborhoods • Encourage volunteerism and community service • Promote acceptance, inclusion and respect for diversity • Promote collaboration and strong partnerships Transportation & Mobility • Expand the public transit system to include high-frequency transit service along all major arterials • Ensure land use and transportation are fully integrated • Create safe, reliable, convenient, effective, multi-modal transportation networks • Encourage overall healthy lifestyles through opportunities in recreation and active transportation Open Space Networks • Maintain a system of publicly-owned open lands • Regulate development along waterways • Provide and maintain access to open space • Improve connectivity between open space areas • Improve water quality and stormwater management • Provide neighborhood natural areas Related Planning Efforts The primary related planning efforts influencing the West Central area are described in this section , and include the following : Land Use & Neighborhood Character Open Space Networks • Student Housing Action Plan (2013) • Natural Areas Master Plan (2014) • Campus West Community Commercial District • Nature in the City (2015) Planning Study Report (2001 ) Colorado State University Planning Efforts • Land Use Code : Revised Neighborhood Compatibility, Transition & Preservation Standards (2013) • CSU Master Plan (2014) • CSU Parking and Transportation Master Plan Transportation & Mobility (2014) • Transportation Master Plan (2011 ) • CSU Bicycle Master Plan (2014) • Bicycle Master Plan (2014) • CSU On-Campus Stadium (ongoing) • Pedestrian Plan (2011 ) • Transfort Strategic Operating Plan (2009) • Arterial Intersection Prioritization Study (ongoing) 8 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Planning Context Land Use & Neighborhood Character _ Student Housing Action Plan (2013) w • The Student Housing Action Plan brought together representatives from CSU, Front Range Community College ( FRCC), neighbors, students, `► �� property owners, developers, and other stakeholders to identify strategies to address the increasing need for multi-family student k housing, identify key issues related to new development projects, and identify potential related impacts and compatibility issues . Vision. The Student Housing Action Plan strives to develop community Student Housing Action Plan driven strategies that encourage and provide quality student housing while maintaining neighborhood quality and compatibility. Action Items • Zone all multi-family housing developments outside of the Transit- Oriented Development District (TOD) for Medium Density Mixed- Use Neighborhoods City 00 Fort Collins • Require Planning and Zoning Board hearings for multi-family �— project greater than 50 units or 75 bedrooms Student Housing Action • . • Clearly define and promote compatibility of new development with existing neighborhoods Campus West • Establish additional parking and landscape standards Comawnity Commercial Distrid • Create architectural "gradients" between multi- and single-family Planning Study Report housing developments ' • Enforce Noise Control and Party Registration Program • Educate parents and students about off-campus neighborhood living • CSU will strive to provide on-campus housing for all first year students as well as 25% of returning students and incentivize students to live on campus for a second year and beyond - • Build a pedestrian crossing (above- or below-grade) near Shields and Elizabeth Streets • Increase and implement multi-modal transportation connections as defined by Plan Fort Collins , and assess pedestrian use of intersections and trails Campus West Community Commercial District Planning Study Report (2001 ) This report explains the land use designation of Campus West as a "Community Commercial District" in the City's Comprehensive Plan, us West Community Commercial District which reflects a vision of bringing together a mix of uses and encouraging Planning Study Report walking, bicycling, and transit in addition to accommodating cars . As the primary destination for eating and drinking establishments and other commercial services near the CSU campus, Campus West is intended to serve as a "mini-downtown;' with a memorable identity and sense of pride. u The study was prompted by the need to explore the inconsistencies between the outdated car-oriented development pattern (dating back '�► to the 1960's) and the newly established "Community Commercial" zoning designation for the area . The key recommendation was for a , new special street design with continuous sidewalks, better bike lanes, and median islands, including a mid-block pedestrian crossing of West Elizabeth Street. The new street design was subsequently implemented , removing a significant obstacle to redevelopment and fitting the vision for the area . Some redevelopment has occurred more recently near West Elizabeth Street and City Park Avenue, which exemplifies the application of the zoning designation, as adapted to market realities . WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 9 Land Use Code : Revised Compatibility, Transition & Preservation Standards (2013) The revised Compatibility, Transition and Preservation Standards in the Land Use Code address the following land use and preservation concepts for new development projects . 1 Landscape Elements • Ensure buffering between dissimilar uses and activities • Interrelationship between new and existing elements a Building & Project Compatibility • Ensure height, size, mass, bulk, and scale are similar to existing designs • If different, visually integrate through details and building form Land Use Transition Example historic house in the Sheely neighborhood • Form transition zones between distinct and potentially incompatible adjoining land uses Fort Collins • Implement buffer yards and passive open space where necessary to promote compatibility Operational & Physical Compatibility • Consider compatibility in hours of operation, lighting, noise, loading , delivery zones, parking, and trash management < - Protection of Historic Properties • Recognize historic, architectural , and geographic importance of properties = r • Incorporate historic elements into new developments Transportation Master Plan % FortCollins • Alterations cannot adversely affect the integrity of historic Feb. ... s. 111 properties • New buildings in historic districts should reflect the historic character through the following : reflection of roof lines, patterns, A material choices, door and window placement, and characteristic entry features « • The Landmark Preservation Commission will provide guidance for innovate ,sustaimconnect development of historic and/or adjacent properties Transportation Master Plan (2011 ) Transportation & Mobility Transportation Master Plan (2011 ) The Transportation Master Plan (TMP) documents the vision for the City's long-term multimodal transportation system . The plan provides policy direction for decisions regarding the implementation of the transportation system to achieve the City's vision, mission, and values as a World Class Community. The TMP sets the vision planning horizon at 2035 and is typically updated approximately every five years . The TMP provides priority actions and strategies for implementing projects and services to meet short-term needs, while working toward the long-range goals for the community's ultimate transportation system . It references four Enhanced Travel Corridors (ETCs) that were introduced in the 2004 TMP (Mason Corridor, Harmony Road, Timberline Road/ Power Trail , and Mountain Vista Road), plus two additional ETCs (West Elizabeth Street and Prospect Road) , as uniquely designed corridors that are planned to incorporate high-frequency transit, bicycling, and walking . ETCs are intended to support opportunities for mixed-use, transit-oriented development and to support Fort Collins' active lifestyles and environmental stewardship goals . The West Elizabeth ETC, as defined in the TMP, extends from the CSU Main Campus to the CSU Foothills Campus near Overland Trail . The West Elizabeth ETC Plan is funded in the 2015-16 budget, and the planning process is expected to begin in spring 2015 . The Prospect Road ETC, as defined in the TMP, extends from the Mason Corridor to 1 -25 . The Prospect Corridor chapter of this plan addresses a separate segment of Prospect Road, from Shields Street to College Avenue, which is an important pre-cursor to planning for the full ETC . 10 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Planning Context The Master Street Plan (MSP) is an appendix to the TMP and serves as a map of the City's long-range vision for the major street network. The - - • • roadways within the West Central area are predominantly already built with the number of through-lanes identified in the MSP, so additional projects would likely focus on intersection improvements and upgrading streets to meet current standards . Bicycle Master Plan (2014) The Bicycle Master Plan envisions Fort Collins as a world-class city for bicycling, where people of all ages and abilities have access to a � comfortable, safe, and connected network of bicycle facilities, and where _ _ 3 + bicycling is an integral part of daily life and the local cultural experience . The Bicycle Master Plan sets a vision for the year 2020, when one in five people will ride a bike, and bicycle-related crashes will be fewer than today. r The Bicycle Master Plan integrates existing city plans, best practices and innovative thinking, and proposes a comprehensive set of strategies to create a safe and comfortable bicycling environment for people of ' all ages . The Plan includes several appendices with details pertaining to existing conditions, public engagement, existing bicycle programs, _ bicycle facility design and wayfinding guidelines, and implementationi"k details . The plan focuses on the development of a network of low-stress ' bicycle travel corridors, several of which pass through the West Central area . The recommendations from the Bicycle Master Plan have been incorporated into the Transportation and Mobility chapter of this plan . Pedestrian Plan (2011 ) � The purpose of the Pedestrian Plan is to promote a pedestrian- friendly environment that encourages walking throughout the city. To Pedestrian Plan Fort Collins accomplish this, the plan identifies way to create pedestrian-friendly 1�� Febmap 15. 2011 environments, including along public streets, off-street paths, and other public spaces that offer a high level of comfort, convenience, safety, hip and quality of user experience. The plan also updates and prioritizes the list of pedestrian improvement projects throughout the city. The t West Central area is home to several of the Pedestrian Priority Areas K and some projects identified in the plan , which have been included in lastainiconnect the recommendations in the Transportation and Mobility chapter of this Pedestrian plan . Transfort Strategic Operating Plan (2009) - - The Transfort Strategic Operating Plan (TSOP) was developed through a collaborative effort between the City of Fort Collins (Transfort), the City of Loveland (COLT), and Poudre School District (PSD) . The purpose 1 was to provide a coordinated update to the TSOP and the COLT Transit Plan, and to analyze opportunities related to public transportation for PSD high schools . Three phases are proposed in the plan, each taking - � steps toward creating a more grid-like transit network, expanding service frequencies, and providing additional regional routes . In the j , � West Central area, additional service is provided on a variety of routes r , serving CSU, and future high-frequency service is proposed along West Elizabeth Street to eventually connect with the existing MAX corridor. r WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 1 1 Arterial Intersection Prioritization Study (ongoing) The purpose of the Arterial Intersection Priority Study is to identify intersections that are in need of mobility and safety improvements . The study applies "a wide breadth of evaluation criteria to ensure that the selected projects addressed specific transportation needs and also aligned with the City's core values " Thirty-two intersections throughout the City were recently carried forward for further analysis, including four within the West Central area : Elizabeth Street and Shields Street; Drake Y Road and Shields Street; Drake Road and McClelland Drive; and Drake Road and Redwing Road/ Bay Road . N Drake Road and Shields Street is the only intersection that has been - carried forward to concept design . The design for this intersection -- began in the summer of 2014, with the main goals to add northbound J*JP6 and southbound right-turn lanes and bring the Shields Street bike lanes up to standard through the intersection . Intersection of Drake • . . . . . Shields Street Open Space Networks Natural Areas Master Plan (2014) The Natural Areas Master Plan establishes the priorities for conservation ►. ' and stewardship of the City's natural areas system for the next ten years based on the values and functions of the natural areas system as a whole, community input, and emerging trends and needs . Vision.' "Through the work of the Natural Areas Department, a diverse system of conserved and restored lands will connect community members to nature. These conserved lands will protect nature and contribute to the health and wellbeing of our community. " ' , . . 1 Natural Areas Master Plan Priorities • Land and water conservation, including water rights acquisition to enhance and sustain habitat ' • Improve water quality, quantity and overall health of the Cache La Poudre River ecosystem • Connect people to nature through education, outreach and volunteer coordination Natural Areas Master Plan (2014) • Create "Wilderness in the City"-oriented spaces • Maintain high-quality ranger and visitor services • Construct and maintain high quality recreation, public ` improvements and facilities ;, • Conserve and restore cultural resources • Conserve working agricultural lands with prime soils and water • Prepare or update management plans for all natural areas NATURE ZiA Nature in the City Strategic Plan (2015) IN THE CITY The purpose of the Nature in the City Strategic Plan is to ensure that, DRAFT STRATEGICPLA„ FEBRUARY9, 2015 as our community grows to its build-out population, all residents have access to high-quality, natural spaces close to where they live and work. Nature in the City Objectives • Ensure every resident is within a 10-minute walk to nature from their home or workplace • Have natural spaces that provide diverse social and ecological opportunities • Continue to shift the landscape aesthetic from lawns to more diverse PIoiit�!'s landscapes that support healthy environments for all species 12 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Planning Context CSU Planning Efforts CSU Master Plan (2014) Colorado State University l .9:_. � P The CSU Master Plan maps the physical needs of the University and , , , , provides a tool to assess and plan for the future. This document provides r the 21st Cent4 University leadership with an outline of current and future program needs and budget requirements to successfully direct and build projects that support future enrollment. The plan separates the campus into three campus areas — (I ) Foothills Campus, (2) Main Campus, and (3) South Campus —to depict current and future conditions and framework maps . The plan includes a history of the campus master plan, zoning conditions, projects under construction, funded projects, pedestrian and green space, access, transit, and housing redevelopment plans . , CSU Parking & Transportation Master Plan (2014) The CSU Parking and Transportation Master Plan provides strategies for improving overall campus access, circulation , and parking; supporting alternative modes of transportation; and improving customer service for CSU students, faculty, staff, and visitors. The plan includes an - overview of current parking management strategies, Transportation Demand Management existing conditions and best practices, a „vvle> s community engagement and strategic communications plan, traffic 'i`r impact assessment and traffic simulation model , and demand modeling ,__ ` for parking . In addition to this plannign effort, CSU recently collected - data related to the number of pedestrians and bicyclists crossing Shields Street to get to campus . This data informed the Shields Corridor University Analysis presented in this plan . 7 Colorado StR2041 " 1 CSU Bicycle Master Plan (2014) pP Th CSU Bicycle Master Plan aims to enhance campus sustainability and reduce automobile travel and parking demands by supporting - increased bicycling . The plan was completed simultaneously with the City of Fort Collins Bicycle Master Plan so as to align both planning efforts . The plan provides a vision and policy guidance related to bicycle 14i network improvements, bicycle parking , education , enforcement, - encouragement, data collection, and priority actions and investments . CSU On-Campus Stadium (ongoing) s . In December 2014, the CSU Board of Governors approved the development of a new 36,000-seat stadium, to be constructed on the CSU Main Campus; groundbreaking is currently planned for summer - 2015 with opening in fall 2017. As part of the planning for the stadium, CSU commissioned several studies to determine potential impacts and mitigation related to traffic, parking, noise, and light. CSU is currently working on an intergovernmental agreement with the City identifying specific mitigation steps, event management, and funding responsibilities . The effects of the stadium on the surrounding roadways and neighborhoods have been considered during the planning process w� of the West Central Area Plan . Specific ideas related to land use and - neighborhood character, transportation and mobility, open space networks, and the Prospect Corridor design have been identified and GUBicycle Master Plan (2014) included in Appendix B, in addition to public comments received through the West Central Area Plan outreach . WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 13 Study Area Change Over Time Figure 3 . 1974 Aerial Photo The character of the area's individual neighborhoods — — — — Study Area Boundary r New Residential Development has been shaped by several forces over time, Arterial Road including : Earl• agricultural land use • y g Mulberry Street • Incremental expansion of the city • Colorado State University's growth and changes to its campuses • Increased residential, commercial , and institutional development A Elizabeth Street • Continued expansion of City services ' The earliest of the planned developments in the O West Central area dates to 1911 , though very little development occurred before World War 11 . Many of the — Prospect Road post-war subdivisions were planned and built with their Aggie own distinct features, creating a variety of development wa lenberg Village patterns, architectural design styles, and character. Neighborhood south 1974 Conditions In 1974, a substantial portion of the area north v of Prospect Road and south of Mulberry Street ca ! was built- out as it currently exists . The single- and Moore family residential neighborhoods south of Elizabeth Neighborhood Street had also been established . The area south of Prospect Road existed primarily in agricultural use, Drake Road except for the Rolland Moore West single-family residential neighborhood near the corner of Taft Hill Road and Drake Road ; the Sheely-Wallenberg Figure 4. Changes between 1974 and 1999 neighborhood east of Shields Street and south of — — — Study Area Boundary New Residential Development Prospect Road ; and the Aggie Village South student Spring Creek Trail IF' New Mixed-Use Development housing at Whitcomb Street and Prospect Road . The Arterial Road New Commercial Development commercial center at College Avenue and Prospect New Institutional Stormwater Management Road had also been constructed . New Parks and Open Space ur A . u` 7 Changes between 1974 and 1999 Mulberry Street Significant infill development occurred between 1974 and 1999, particularly south of Prospect Road . Additional student-oriented multi-family R. 4. development occurred north of Elizabeth Street and -- ' west of Shields Street, in the Campus West area . Elizabeth street -- CSU r Commercial development was focused around AveryQD the area surrounding Drake Road and Shields ••V Park y Street as well as the " Rite-Aid Shopping Center" at i t � Prospect Road and Shields Street. Some additional Prospect Road commercial development occurred in the Campus West area and near Prospect Road and College Avenue . The Veterinary Teaching Hospital began - r �►` CSU 'S develo ment of the South Campus . Lexington preen Rill Pond p p Neighborhood Neighborhood � •r Red Fox Meadows Natural Area is a major stormwater a f �f I 1 detention facility that was constructed near the Ccovo� corner of Prospect Road and Taft Hill Road , creating I Rolland Moore Park cSu additional wildlife habitat and a new recreational I M / Veterinary amenity. The creation of Rolland Moore Park also " •bq;r *- AA* School added a significant open space and recreational r ke Road asset to the area . 14 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Planning Context Changes between 1999 and 2015 Figure 5 . Changes between 1999 and 2015 The construction of Centre Avenue launched ++ Mason Corridor Development , New Institutional associated development along that corridor, Centre Avenue Corridor New Parks and Open Space including the construction of the Gardens on Spring �' Development Creek, expansion and build-out of the area around Study Area Boundary New Residential Development — — — the Veterinary Teaching Hospital, and commercial New Mixed-use Development development directly to the west of the Veterinary Spring Creek Trail � New Commercial Development Teaching Hospital . In addition, The Grove student- New Bike Route/ Lane oriented multi-family housing was completed along �' Arterial Road New Religious Development Centre Avenue, and multi-family housing continued O Stormwater Management to be added in the Campus West area and near N Prospect Road and Mulberry Street. Bike lane striping occurred on many of the Mulberry Street neighborhood collector and local streets, as well as West Elizabeth Street. The development of the MAX Bus Rapid Transit and the Mason Trail (Mason Corridor) represents a significant improvement , �.,�. _ Elizabeth tr et to the overall transit and bike/pedestrian network, r Csu acting as a primary north-south connector. N � � � - - - - - '� Prospect Road Red Fox I Meadows r }i at— y Natural Area — � Garfl?Pson � o Spring Creek The e ' _ Grove Y _ ~ t P� csu - e Veterinary y oe�tt school ., Drake Road al The Drake Centre shopping center .6 AM r t � :r- _ T r t 1 - , � �•. WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 15 Existing Conditions The West Central area has the highest concentration of residents of any area in Fort Collins, with a resident population of approximately 20, 5561 . With a land area of approximately 3 . 6 square miles, the West Central presently houses about 14. 2% of the City's entire population (144, 3292) on 6 . 7% of its total land area' . Based on the latest North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization (NFRMPO) data, the population growth in the West Central Area is expected to outpace growth citywide between now and 2035, which indicates a demand for additional residential development and redevelopment in this area . Moreover, CSU anticipates adding approximately 8, 000 students and 1 , 000 faculty and staff by 2024, which will impact the area's housing demand and public and private service needs . Typical houses in the Rolland Moore West neighborhood Additional information on existing conditions in the West Central area is provided in Appendices C and D. there are ongoing concerns that infill and redevelopment Land Use & Neighborhood Character will impact the character and desirability of existing neighborhoods and may have an impact on adjacent The West Central area is comprised of several stable historic structures . neighborhoods at the edge of the Colorado State Several historic structures and one historic district, the University Campus with a variety of housing types and Sheely Neighborhood, exist within the West Central densities throughout. The neighborhoods are directly area . Preserving the integrity of these historic features influenced by student and other population growth . has become a concern for many residents and others Plans for a new CSU on-campus stadium and other as pressure from new development increases . Due facilities have further increased the perception of to the age of many of the buildings within the West multiple pressures on these neighborhoods . Central area (approaching 50 years or older) , there are The demand for rental housing , driven in part by the many additional structures that could be recognized recent recession and the trend of "millenials" delaying for historic characteristics in the near future . As with home ownership, has created pressure for additional other older neighborhoods in the city, this could result apartments, townhome, and single-family rental houses in additional restrictions or requirements for additions, in this area . In addition, CSU houses only a portion of renovations, and redevelopment of potentially historic its students on-campus, so the remaining students buildings . must find housing elsewhere in the city. This results A number of commercial and institutional development in the conversion of many single-family dwellings into rental units and short-term occupancy, with associated projects have altered the West Central area over time: the Campus West commercial district, Drake Centre challenges related to property maintenance, renter behavior, differing lifestyles, and over-occupancy Shopping Center, Centre for Advanced Technology, of homes within neighborhoods . Maintaining the Raintree Plaza, and Spring Creek Medical Center provide affordability and desirability of these neighborhoods for retail , restaurants, medical care, and other services to a range of residents, including students and families, neighborhood residents . A number of grocery stores has long been a priority for the West Central area . are located around the perimeter, though outside the boundary, of the West Central area . However, since the Current zoning, notably the High Density Mixed-Use closure of the Steele's Market near Drake Road and Neighborhood (HMN) and Neighborhood Conservation Shields Street, there is no longer a grocery store within Buffer (NCB) districts, allows for increased density on convenient walking or bicycling distance for many area key properties within the West Central area ; however, residents . 1 U .S. Census Bureau . (2012). American Community Survey. Transportation & Mobility Accessed from : http:gfactfinder2.census.gov/ 2 U .S. Census Bureau . (2012). American Community Survey. Due to the incremental growth and development Accessed from : http:gfactfinder2.census.gov/ of the West Central area, roads, sidewalks, and 3 Note: The figures provided here differ from those provided in the other transportation facilities have been developed 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan (Chapter 1 , Page 3) . The previous plan relied on a different dataset, which included the inconsistently and to various standards over time. CSU Main Campus in its population estimates. These population Constrained, high traffic arterial roads, such as Prospect estimates do not include the resident student population on the Road and Shields Street, are perceived as barriers for CSU campus outside the West Central Area. 16 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Planning Context crossing to and from campus, schools, community space corridor for both wildlife habitat and recreation facilities, shopping centers, or other destinations . Bike and is an important connection between other parks and and pedestrian facilities along these corridors typically open spaces . Three major irrigation ditches traverse the do not meet current City standards and feel unsafe area : New Mercer Canal, Larimer County Canal Number or uncomfortable to users . Discontinuous sidewalks, 2, and the Arthur Ditch . These serve multiple functions, a lack of convenient crossings along arterial roads, providing habitat, managing stormwater, and delivering and the need for sufficient traffic calming within water to customers . There may be future opportunities neighborhoods present challenges for residents and to improve recreational access in some locations along commuters alike. Alternative routes and connections ditches . The open space network also includes a number for bikes and pedestrians are often lacking, so there is of stormwater detention areas located on both public a need for a more effective multi-modal network of bike and private property, which also present opportunities and pedestrian facilities in order to provide safe, easy, for future enhancement. and convenient alternatives to driving . As development occurs, it is important to maintain an The high population density and concentration of adequate amount of open space to provide both wildlife schools and destinations in the area results in higher habitat and recreational opportunities for current and transit ridership than other areas of the city. Routes future residents . Residents have expressed a desire to along the West Elizabeth corridor have the highest ensure new development continues to provide adequate ridership, and CSU has helped fund additional routes access to high-quality parks and open space. and service to better meet the demand of students commuting to campus in recent years . At the same Prospect Corridor time, there is still unmet demand and opportunity to Prospect Road was an early transportation corridor improve transit service and connections, particularly to in the city, and was developed in a rural setting . Early the MAX, in the West Central area . housing development along this corridor constrained Maintaining adequate parking in neighborhoods, the public right-of-way, which is now limited in its particularly close to the CSU campus and for multi- ability to meet existing and projected transportation family developments, is an ongoing challenge . The needs . This high-traffic corridor is uncomfortable for Residential Parking Permit Program (RP3) has been bicyclists and pedestrians to travel along and across successfully implemented in the Sheely and Wallenberg and requires a number of improvements to meet the neighborhoods and could eventually be applied to other needs of all users — vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, neighborhoods to address parking concerns . and transit riders . Given the constrained right-of-way conditions on Prospect Road, improvements to Lake Open Space Networks Street (one block north and parallel to Prospect Road) There is a concentration of parks, recreation , open were evaluated in conjunction with design options for space, and trail amenities within the West Central area, Prospect Road . There are opportunities to improve including Rolland Moore Park, Avery Park, Red Fox both Prospect Road and Lake Street to better serve Meadows Natural Area , Ross Natural Area, the Senior residents and commuters, accommodate through- Center, Gardens on Spring Creek, the Spring Creek Trail , traffic, and connect to the MAX bus rapid transit line . and the Mason Trail . Spring Creek is a primary open ti Ditch running through Red Fox Meadows Natural Area Lack of bike facilities along w Prospect Road WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 17 This page intentionally left blank 18 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN IF1r6 - mom 41W L Op a1 F • � , a } r di - I% � � � aT 0 Jmor % . " 1 '- �+ ` r , rkap Ilk • �� � 'S - r A rc •. qp ZE i ' 1 � 1 i ' r t '' a . APE F . , ML is fir + or + I Jr. 106 oft . 00 OL { dor op dp F 4 4 r m 416 III III West Central Area Vision The intent of the vision is to reflect: Given the area's history and diversity, envisioning a ' The features that are most valued by residents and unifying and cohesive future character was one of the stakeholders and that should be preserved first priorities in the planning process . The vision was ' Opportunities to improve the current state of the developed through extensive community engagement, area and better support quality of life including two visioning workshops , an online survey, the Citywide goals and policies that are relevant to the West Central area work of two advisory committees , and outreach to City Boards , Commissions, and City Council . Land Use & Neighborhood Character Vibrant and diverse neighborhoods that provide a high quality of life. Desirable, safe, and attainable neighborhoods that are a source of pride Conveniently located parks, trails, open space, services and employment ® New development that is compatible with existing development A range of incomes and a wide variety of housing options Well -integrated campus community _ A collaborative design process that respects neighborhood concerns OTransportation & Mobility A connected network that supports people safely walking, biking, or using public transit as a primary way to travel while balancing the need for efficient auto travel throughout the area. Safe routes to school, CSU , and other major destinations Safe, reliable, arterial streets that are " easy to cross and serve residents and commuters Option for residents to live without a car Reshaped and retrofitted streets that meet the needs of all ages, abilities, and modes - Safe and efficient travel by car with adequate, convenient parking 4 Improved transit service and convenient ;• : stops Easy access to transit (including MAX) 18 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Vision The vision of the West Central Area Plan is described for These vision statements provide a foundation for the four primary focus areas '. Land Use and Neighborhood policies, projects, and programs in the plan , as well as Character, Transportation and Mobility, Open Space the design for the Prospect Corridor. The policies and Networks, and the Prospect Corridor. The four vision recommendations of the West Central Area Plan align categories represent a unified and holistic vision for the with the vision statements presented here . Where a overall project, with some level of overlap between each particular policy corresponds to one or more vision topic area . statements, the icon for that statement (e . g . , LU1 ) is included . 1 Open Space Networks A functional network of public and private lands that supports and connects wildlife, plants, and people. Access to nature, recreation , and , . ' environmental stewardship opportunities ® Parks and open spaces that offer a variety it ' of settings and experiences Attractive urban landscape that supports INV&-+ habitat, character, and shade ® Preserved and enhanced wildlife habitat ' ' and corridors ' sir . t Comprehensive and ecological ' approaches to stormwater management ' Prospect Corridor Attractive and functional, well-integrated, mixed-use corridor that serves the mobility needs of nearby neighborhoods, CSU, and the community. c y `' lift - Safe and comfortable corridor for all �r.,ff T 1 IT modes of travel ro III Safe crossings Attractive gateway to campus, downtown, � - - - —� and midtown r Seamless connection to MAX w WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 19 This page intentionally left blank 20 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN I - } - t it Fit 10 IL EAD RED FO . • ..for J VASTOKbowINN r ONN _ ,1*ot� J i - ` _ .t Land Use & Neighborhood ' Character Vision Vibrant and diverse neighborhoods that provide a high quality of life Desirable, safe, and attainable a neighborhoods that are a source of pride ® Conveniently located parks, trails, open space, services and employment New development that is compatible with ® existing development ' . . Y ® A range of incomes and a wide variety of 4 , housing options - Well - integrated campus community " E A collaborative design process that respects neighborhood concerns - - + fff il IA IL I o- K 1� 22 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Land Use & Neicihborhood Character Areas of Stability, _ Enhancement & Development The West Central area has been divided into four general — :�:� "'"' classifications based on the level of development or redevelopment that is expected in specific areas : • Areas of significant new development or � � `�" ; redevelopment } • Areas of some new development or redevelopment • Areas requiring neighborhood enhancements • Areas of stability These areas are described below and are further detailed in Figure 6 . Significant New Development or Redevelopment Significant new development or redevelopment is anticipated on key vacant or under-utilized parcels, potentially resulting in change of use or intensity. Specific areas identified for potentially significant new development or redevelopment include: - • The High Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (HMN) Vacant 20-acre area near Prospect Road and Shields Street District (North of Prospect Road between Shields Vacant 20-Acre Parcel South of Prospect Road and East Street and Whitcomb Street) of Shields Street • Vacant 20-acre parcel south of Prospect Road and east of Shields Street This site is the largest undeveloped tract in the • Various vacant or under-utilized parcels throughout West Central area and includes two zone districts, the area, primarily along Shields Street, Prospect Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and Medium Density Road , and other arterial streets Mixed-Use Neighborhood (MMN) . The NC zone is approximately ten acres in size and acts as the core High Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (HMN) District of the parcel , with exposure along Shields Street. This This area is the only location where the High Density area is expected to develop in an urbanized commercial Mixed-Use Neighborhood (HMN) zoning occurs within manner. Opportunities exist for dwelling units above the city, which was created as a result of the 1999 West commercial space. The MMN zone surrounds the Central Neighborhoods Plan . This district represents an commercial core and is intended to offer a variety of edge condition and provides a transition between the housing options, as well as a land use transition for the Sheely neighborhood and the CSU Main Campus . Given Sheely neighborhood to the east. There is potential for the numerous parcels that comprise this area, new a well-designed cohesive development that creatively development will likely occur through multiple small- or addresses both the market potential and neighborhood medium-scale projects . Sensitivity to historic structures desires for the site. will require careful design solutions and collaboration Various Vacant or Under-Utilized Parcels with the Landmark Preservation Commission . These parcels are scattered throughout the plan area This area is expected to build out in accordance with the and are generally under market pressure to redevelop in existing zoning, with residential density at a minimum a manner greater than would otherwise be allowed by of 20 dwelling units per acre . While five-story buildings the current parameters of the Low Density Residential are allowed , the height, mass, and scale of buildings (RL) or Neighborhood Conservation Buffer (NCB) zone will be critically evaluated to achieve compatibility with districts . Such redevelopment will be carefully evaluated adjacent development and to positively impact the so that new uses protect neighborhood character, are neighborhood and community. The allowable density well-designed, and mitigate traffic and other external and proximity to campus create opportunities for mixed- impacts . Collaboration with surrounding neighbors is use buildings and campus-related uses, as well . expected to result in land uses that are appropriate with a design that is sensitive to the surrounding context. WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 23 Some New Development or Redevelopment Areas of Stability Some market driven infill and redevelopment is likely to Mature, stable areas unlikely to change significantly in occur in some locations in the West Central area . The the coming years . The neighborhoods designated as most notable location of potential development is the "areas of stability' feature a variety of housing styles Campus West commercial area . along quiet neighborhood streets . These neighborhoods Campus West Commercial Area will be preserved and enhanced , with infrastructure improvements where needed . While stable, these The existing commercial centers should be neighborhoods experience some pressures related to strengthened to serve as a cohesive "main street" along the demand for rental housing, the short-term nature West Elizabeth Street. This area is expected to build out of students and other tenants, and an overall increase with a high degree of urban character in accordance in population and traffic in the West Central area . with the current Community Commercial (CC) zone There are no proposed land use changes for the stable district. Redevelopment is encouraged to provide street- neighborhoods . facing patios and other features that would animate the streetscape. Mixed-use development is strongly encouraged to provide housing opportunities above commercial space. Corporate prototype design will be discouraged or modified so the district remains distinct and builds upon its unique character. The West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor (ETC) Project will further explore the integration between transportation and land use in this area . Neighborhood Enhancements Some reinvestment in infrastructure, services, and - programs is appropriate for some neighborhoods within the West Central area . Typical single-family house in the neighborhood south of Campus West These neighborhoods are generally located between Mulberry Street and Prospect Road , and between Taft Hill Road and Shields Street. The neighborhoods were generally developed over the decades following World War II , typically as one-story ranch-style residences . Many of the residences in this area are currently rental homes, and there is likely to be an increasing interest in renovations and remodels of these houses as housing prices increase throughout Fort Collins . Infrastructure improvements to roadways, street lighting, other - aesthetic and safety improvements, and additional neighborhood services and programs will be prioritized in this area . neighborhoodExisting stable west of Rolland Moore Park a � - IIIIIII iUA L �. a.aw: , -1-- _ AlL. 24 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Land Use & Neighborhood Character Figure 6 . Areas of Stability, Enhancement & Development The map below designates areas of stability, enhancement and development to depict a vision for where the greatest future change is most likely to occur, where enhancements are needed, and where existing stable areas should be protected and preserved . Developers and decision-makers should refer to the map when considering changes in zoning or Additions of Permitted Use (APU) . �C Mulberry St ,. '*'-City Park`' Dunn Elementary r = z School s Laurel St Lab/ Polaris West Elizabeth " Main School Street" � * Moby Arena y � T Campus King � West Soopers Avery Park - - - — CSU Campus P - - - - - _ _ � Core Bennett Elementary Future CSU School Stadium Lake St HMN Zone Prospect Rd Commercial > Center j� Q Red Fox Meadows Cn t al � Natural Area Neighborhood Center o F w i� t Commer ial Spring Creek Trail ardens o . Cent f Sprin Cree , Fischer Natural Area t� T Blevins Rolland �� Natural Middle Moore Park Resources 11 School * Research Center Whole Foods/ Ross King Safeway atural Area CSU Soopers Shopping Senior Center * Veterinary Center Commercial Teaching m 1 T Center p ta Commercial " Drake Rd Center Legend O Existing Elements Potential Opportunities West Central Area Boundary AREAS OF STABILITY, ENHANCEMENT & DEVELOPMENT: t' — West Elizabeth " Main Street" Significant New Development/Redevelopment - Significant new ff Arterial Road development/redevelopment anticipated on vacant parcels, potentially potential Key Destinations Parks & Open Space resulting in change of use or intensity O CSU Property 0 Some New Development/Redevelopment - Some market-driven infill and P y redevelopment likely to occur Major Trail O Neighborhood Enhancements - Some reinvestment in infrastructure and i Schools potential additions/renovations O Areas of Stability - Stable areas unlikely to change significantly, some new �C Key Destinations programs or services may be appropriate WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 25 Policies Code Enforcement & Education The Land Use and Neighborhood Character policies 1 . 1 Promote good property maintenance and yard care practices to contribute to attractive, emphasize the importance of strengthening desirable neighborhoods neighborhoods and providing adequate services in the West Central area . Neighborhoods should be desirable, 1 . 2 Maintain the livability of neighborhoods for a safe, and a source of pride for all residents, with variety of residents through existing occupancy convenient access to parks, trails, open space, services, limits and employment. This section provides guidance 1 . 3 Support programs and initiatives that seek for new development to ensure compatibility with to educate renters, landlords and property existing neighborhoods, while accommodating future managers, and long-time residents about living urbanization . A variety of housing types will ensure as part of a diverse community that residents from all socio-economic levels may find l • � good Services suitable housing in the area . y " "' Thefollowing policies areorganized into three categories : 1 . 4 Ensure that the West Central area remains a safe Code Enforcement and Education , Neighborhood place to live, work, travel, and play for all ages Services, and Neighborhood Character. 1 . 5 Construct new public improvements and upgrade aging infrastructure to better serve neighborhood residents 1 . 6 Maintain and improve streets to support neighborhood aesthetics and environmental quality 1 . 7 Maintain employment opportunities and access to amenities Neighborhood Character 1 . 8 Maintain established, mature neighborhoods as ,. areas of stability list, 4 -11 1 . 9 Provide guidelines to ensure new development is compatible with adjacent neighborhoods 1 . 10 Emphasize and respect the existing heritage and character of neighborhoods through a collaborative design process that allows for a neighborhood dialogue Recent commercial development in the West Central area 1 . 11 Encourage a variety of housing types so that residents from all socio-economic levels may r find suitable housing in the area n 1 . 12 Encourage Colorado State University ` involvement in neighborhood planning and development efforts and participation in �� `• `S1 M1 activities that strengthen neighborhoods LO low 26 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Land Use & Neicihborhood Character Code Enforcement & Education properties . Such a program would require contact information for landlords, tenants, and property managers to improve communication . Promote good property maintenance Continue to strengthen the effective enforcement and yard care practices to contribute to of nuisance ordinances. Focus enforcement attractive, desirable neighborhoods WON efforts on neighborhoods with proportionately Continue to pursue a proactive approach to identifying, • higher number Code monitoring, and responding to code violations . Update the City Code to clarify the enforcement violations related to dead grass and bare dirt in Continue to prevent recurring code violations on front yards . individual properties through increased fines or other • Review the current strategy for the escalation of escalating enforcement measures . fines and other enforcement measures for repeat Efforts to educate and improve the maintenance and code/public nuisance violations, and update as management of rental properties should focus on both needed . landlords and renters . • Provide annual education of residents related to unscreened trash to reduce the number of Action Items violations . Education • Develop a strategy to proactively enforce sidewalk shoveling by property owners along important • Promote the annual Neighborhood Services pedestrian routes (e. g . , to schools, parks, and other Landlord Training Program, which offers landlords major destinations) (see also Policy 2 . 2) . and property managers an opportunity to stay current with all applicable building and property What We Heard maintenance codes . Adopt a " Preferred Landlord" credential for participants and incentivize Management and maintenance of rental properties participation . has been an ongoing concern in these neighborhoods • Encourage rental tenants' participation in a training for many years. program and adopt a "Preferred Tenant" credential for participants . Utilize the CSU Off-Campus Life - education programs as a starting point for tenant Maintain the livability of neighborhoods certification . Rent discounts or priority access for km for a variety of residents through existing renters to available units could provide additional Loccupancy limits incentives for participation . r • Support the establishment of networking and Continue the enforcement of the City's existing professional development group for landlords and occupancy ordinances, commonly referred to as 11U+2" property managers that meets casually to socialize or "three-unrelated " Extra occupancy rental houses are and discuss ideas and challenges related to property not permitted in the Low Density Residential (RL) District management. but may be considered in the other zoning districts Enforcement within the West Central area . • Form a committee to explore the creation of Action Items a citywide landlord registration or licensing • Expand education efforts related to the impacts program as a means to improve building safety, and requirements of occupancy limits in improve compliance with City codes, and increase partnership with CSU and Front Range Community accountability for the management of single-family College (FRCC) . • When community service is required as a penalty for violations, apply the community service to the neighborhoods in which the violations frequently occur. Signs of occupancy ordinance violation . . WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 1 U / 1 5 27 Support programs and initiatives that seek Schedule annual meetings with neighborhood i to educate renters, landlords and property residents within the West Central area . As managers, and long -time residents about part of these meetings, attendees can share living as part of a diverse community ® their experiences related to living in a diverse �■� neighborhood and discuss expectations for property owners, landlords, renters, law Improve education of renters on the responsibilities of enforcement, and City staff. Such meetings should living in a neighborhood, how to be a good neighbor, be discussion-based, interactive, and fun . and how to get involved in neighborhood organizations . Leverage existing neighborhood newsletters Education efforts should occur both prior to and in to improve communication to neighborhood response to the occurrence of violations . residents and property owners . The City should Improve communication with property owners and provide additional information and education neighborhood residents about the codes that are in through Neighborhood News (City of Fort Collins), place and how they are enforced . Efforts should be taken homeowners association and apartment complex to ensure that residents and code compliance staff have newsletters, Northern Colorado Rental Housing similar expectations about how code enforcement will Association newsletter, Nextdoor (social media occur in neighborhoods . site), and other newsletters and forums used by Participation in education programs should be included neighborhood residents .Support the efforts of Police Services and the as part of the penalties associated with public nuisance, CSU Police Department to include educational occupancy, drug and alcohol, code violations, and other information and programs as part of their offenses . For example, CSU students issued certain enforcement and community outreach strategy. tickets are already required to attend a class about living Continue to hold neighborhood meetings regarding in the community. crime activity and safety concerns as needed . Action Items Include educational information about City code Renter Education requirements as part of the code violation letters sent to residents . A summary of the most common • Continue existing educational programs offered violations and strategies for avoiding them should by Neighborhood Services and CSU Off-Campus be included . Life. Strengthen CSU Off-Campus Life's existing programs for educating students about the Data Management responsibilities of living off-campus and being • Improve the utilization of code violation data to a good neighbor (e . g . , Party Smart, Community identify trends, problem areas, and communicate Welcome, Ice Cream Welcome Wagon, First- with the public . Year Seminar Classes, Where Will I Live Next Year • Create an online, publicly-accessible map of code Seminars) . violation data to serve as a communication and • Fund an additional staff position to support the education tool . Community Liaison position . Such a position would strengthen existing Neighborhood Services What We Heard and Off-Campus Life partnership programs, as Neighborhood residents would like to see additional well as the implementation of new programs and renter education provided on an annual basis. strategies . The costs of this position should be shared between the City and CSU . • Work with Front Range Community College to develop a program for educating students about _ r living in the community. Landlord Education • Create a program that requires landlords to attend a class on rental property management in response to public nuisance ordinance violations . Neighborhood Outreach & Education ; r p. � • Support the establishment and growth of organized neighborhood groups . The I' Neighborhood Services department will continue to serve as a resource for existing and new neighborhood organizations . 28 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Land Use & Neighborhood Characte Neighborhood Services Construct new public improvements and upgrade aging infrastructure to better serve neighborhood residents Ensure that the West Central area remains •,•,. �# a safe place to live, work, travel , and play for all ages As the infrastructure in the West Central area continues to age, regularly maintain and upgrade facilities to better The need for additional public services should be closely serve the neighborhoods . Sidewalk connections, traffic monitored over time in an effort to maintain public calming, pedestrian safety features, and aesthetic safety and retain neighborhood vitality for all ages and improvements are all priorities . income groups . Action Items In order to enhance safety, public street lighting should . Upgrade existing bridges to include sidewalks and be added and/or retrofitted to fill existing gaps along safety railings, particularly over irrigation ditches . public streets and bring illumination levels up to current . Improve neighborhood identity and aesthetics with standards. Consider installing back-side shields to mitigate entry signage. light spillage onto private property, where needed . • Add shelters to existing and future bus stops (see Action Items also Policy 2 . 7) . • Establish a Police Services sub-station within • Continue to widen existing attached sidewalks the West Central area . Such a center could also where feasible. Fill in missing gaps in sidewalks include community-oriented services, such as a within neighborhoods . shared community room, office space for CSU • Provide information to neighborhood residents and community organizations, or other amenities . about Access Fort Collins, an application that Consider including the new sub-station within a allows users to directly report issues to City future CSU parking structure near Shields Street departments . and West Elizabeth Street. • Coordinate among City departments to make • Monitor crime incidents and trends in the West specific improvements in the West Central area : Central area to determine if additional patrols, Planning , Streets , Traffic Operations , Transfort, safety features, or other resources are needed . Neighborhood Services, Engineering , Stormwater, • Coordinate with the Light & Power department to and other relevant departments . map gaps in lighting and opportunities to bring existing light fixtures up to current standards along What We Heard major streets and within neighborhoods . Consider There is a need for upgraded infrastructure within a range of safety and privacy considerations neighborhoods such as sidewalks, bridges and other when determining whether additional lighting is safety measures, as well as aesthetic upgrades, necessary. Ensure all new light fixtures are down- such as street trees. directional , shielded from adjacent residences, and energy efficient. • Review and update current policies for upgrading and adding street lighting to ensure that it allows for the adequate protection of public safety within - neighborhoods . • Continue to trim tree branches that block sight distance at intersections and stop signs . • Continue to identify locations for physical traffic calming or radar speed indicators . • Regularly maintain curb paint to prevent parked cars from blocking driveways and interfering with sight distance at intersections . • Continue to identify locations where additional lighting , sidewalk connections, traffic calming , and other neighborhood safety improvements are needed over time . —U Fill in missing gaps in sidewalks WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 29 Maintain and improve streets to Maintain employment opportunities and support neighborhood aesthetics and access to amenities environmental quality. t Allow for a greater mix of land uses within existing Continue regular street sweeping and street commercial centers in order to fill vacancies, activate maintenance to beautify neighborhood streets, reduce the area, and offer amenities in close proximity to flooding impacts, and support public health and safety. neighborhoods . Action Items Consider a wider range of potential land uses within • Properly notify neighborhood residents of routine under-utilized commercial centers to promote street sweeping operations to ensure that street economic viability than would otherwise be permitted parking is cleared so debris can be effectively under current zoning . Non-traditional uses such as removed . Explore strategies for better informing employment, entertainment, or cultural activities may residents of the street sweeping schedule. be appropriate in some cases . • Continue to implement the Street Maintenance Action Items Program within the West Central area to ensure • Maintain the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) that aging infrastructure is repaired and upgraded zone district to allow for future development of a as needed . mixed-use neighborhood center near Shields and • Continue to add street trees throughout the area , Prospect. particularly along Prospect Road west of Shields . Encourage businesses to locate in existing, Street, along collector roads, and near entrances to underutilized commercial buildings whenever neighborhoods . possible. What We Heard The results of two online surveys indicate the demand for additional services within the West Central area. The top three desired amenities for a neighborhood center are restaurant, grocery, and r open space uses. s r s> 1 sI Vacant parcel zoned for a neighborhood commercial center near Prospect Road and Shields Street 30 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Land Use & Neighborhood Character Neighborhood Character The following principles should guide new development in the West Central area : • Design of new development must be sensitive • Maintain established , mature to the general context and overall character L neighborhoods as areas of stability ® �I of the neighborhood , influenced by local �i� attributes, and demonstrate cohesiveness with Protectthe qualityof life in existing stable neighborhoods adjacent properties . Out-of-scale development within the West Central area . Neighborhoods that are in relationship to existing development will be zoned for Low Density Residential (RL) should not be discouraged . considered for further housing densification, such as • Compatibility can be achieved through careful allowing existing houses to convert to duplexes or by site planning so that mass and scale are adding accessory dwelling units . mitigated and located away from existing Density that exceeds three dwelling units per acre or houses . Careful use of open space, yards and includes accessory dwelling units (e. g . , carriage houses, building setbacks, within an urban context, will basement apartments) should be steered tothefollowing help with density transitions . zone districts : Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood • Building entrances should be oriented toward (LMN), Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood public streets . (MMN), Neighborhood Conservation Buffer (NCB) , and . Height should be stepped back and buildings set High Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood ( HMN) . back so that taller buildings do not loom over Action Items the street and shadowing of private property is • Create a development guide or workbook that shows minimized . the potential opportunities for improving aging • Parking lots should be located to the side and homes so that the existing housing stock is better rear of buildings . equipped to serve the next several generations . • Building forms are expected to be responsive to the individual context of the site. Provide guidelines to ensure new • Each site will relate to the street by a plaza , development is compatible with adjacent courtyard , entry feature or other ground floor neighborhoods cook amenities that enliven pedestrian interest and enhance the public streetscape. The height, mass, and scale of new development in the • Additions and renovations to all properties are High Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (HMN) zone encouraged to be toward the side and rear and district, Neighborhood Commercial (NC), Community follow the Secretary of Interior Standards for the Commercial (CC) and other areas of development or preservation of historic properties . redevelopment should be compatible with adjacent development and sensitive to the context of the area . Additionally, New development should be pedestrian- oriented , mixed-use and contribute to a vibrant streetscape to support and integrate with surrounding neighborhoods . Action Items • Update the Land Use Code standards for the HMN zone district to clarify requirements related to mass, scale, and building design . 1► What We Heard It is important to residents that new multi-family developments should be compatible with the character of the neighborhoods in which they are built. New development should complement existing r neighborhoods WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 31 Figure 7 . Potential Redevelopment Scenarios in the HMN Zone (Policy 1 . 9) The High Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (HMN) zone is generally located between Prospect Road and the CSU main campus . The HMN zone is comprised primarily of small lots varying in size, which could potentially be consolidated to successfully accommodate new development. The examples below illustrate a variety of lot consolidation scenarios addressing access, parking, setback and design strategies to assist with breaking up the overall mass of structures . Providing larger south facing courtyards and/or upper story setbacks will help avoid a monotonous "wall " along the street and create a perception of a series of smaller structures to improve compatibility. There are several houses in that are potentially eligible for local landmark designation . Designers of new buildings will need to pay close attention to architectural details in order to comply with both Chapter 14 of the City Code (Landmark Preservation) and Section 3 .4.7 of the Land Use Code (Historic and Cultural Resources) . Informal consultation with the Landmark Preservation Commission is encouraged in order to find design solutions that are beneficial to all parties . Articulation of building facade Fifth story Establish east-west South facing Establish east-west setback bike/ped connections courtyards bike/ped connections 400 NA 1 2 Lots Large front Single building 4 Lots Large front Consolidate setback fronting street setback from driveway access from main main road road Encourage parking behind Encourage parking Encourage buildings and shared between lots behind buildings and access from shared between lots minor collector Parking drive on property road line connects to other lots r JL od a s:-- 6 Lots Southern Promote north-south 8 Lots Consolidate Southern facing facing bike/ped connections driveway access courtyards courtyards 32 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Land Use & Neighborhood Character Emphasize and respect the existing :vhat We Heard heritage and character of neighborhoods Residents feel a sense of pride in the historic through a collaborative design process character of the Sheely Historic District, located that allows for a neighborhood dialogue south of Prospect Road along Sheely Drive. Design attributes for new development are intended to contribute to livable neighborhoods . All new 14 development will be encouraged to contribute to a sense of unity, yet without replication , with the prevailing v patterns and character of the surrounding area . New xLi development is expected to be distinctive and not a ; formulaic or corporate prototype so that as the area rMl grows, neighborhood character is enhanced and not LIMw diminished . New development that appears to be VV imported from outside the region without consideration to local neighborhood character will be discouraged . The neighborhoods are generally characterized Craftsman , Prairie, and Mid-Century Modern architectural styles (and theirvarious derivations) . These styles are well-accepted and should serve as a starting point for achieving neighborhood compatibility. Styles that differ radically from the established character will be discouraged . neighborhood Extensive neighborhood collaboration and dialogue is expected to be a key part of the design review process . Action Items • Update relevant sections of the Land Use Code to ensure that new multi-family and mixed- use development is compatible with adjacent neighborhoods . • Sites that have structures that are officially recognized as local , state, or national historic landmarks are encouraged to consult with the , Y Landmark Preservation Commission or their _ _ Pr Design Review Subcommittee in order to gain — valuable feedback. In addition , applicants are encouraged to apply for the Design Assistance Grant Program, which offers financial assistance for specialized professional architectural , services . Other resources, such as the Old - Town Neighborhoods Design Standards and Guidelines, may also serve as a reliable source for ideas on preserving neighborhood heritage . New development adjacent to the Sheely Historic - District will be required to demonstrate sensitivity to established character of the historic homes . Landmark apartments, located near the Sheely and Wallenberg • Developers should consider additional neighborhood neighborhoods meetings beyond the standard requirement , interactive design charrettes, and individual meetings with affected property owners to demonstrate a high level of collaboration with neighborhood residents WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 33 Encourage a variety of housing types so Encourage Colorado State University that residents from all socio-economic involvement in neighborhood planning and levels may find suitable housing in the area development efforts and participation in =10 ® activities that strengthen neighborhoods i ® ® ® A variety of housing types and densities should be encouraged for new development or redevelopment Ensure that CSU faculty, staff, and students are involved projectsto offera rangeof options within the area . Single- in long-range planning efforts relevant to the university family houses, duplexes, townhomes, apartments, as well as neighborhood activities and events . condos, accessory units, and other types should be Action Items considered . Multi-family projects should consider both rental units and owner-occupied units . Single-family Form a joint City-CSU committee that meets attached housing should act as a transition to adjacent, regularly to assist with communication and established neighborhoods . Avoiding the dominance of coordination related to the on-going planning a single housing type creates opportunities for housing efforts of both entities . that is attainable for a range of income levels . Encourage CSU to engage neighborhood residents Housing types should be designed to accommodate in the University's plans for long-term growth and new development projects . a range of tenants over time. Housing variety is Engage CSU student groups (e . g . , clubs, sports encouraged in order to attract and retain families and teams, sororities and fraternities, majors with allow seniors to age in place . A diverse mix of occupants community service requirements) in volunteer contributes to neighborhood stability. efforts to improve the West Central neighborhoods . Student-oriented housing should located be in close Encourage the involvement of CSU students in proximity to the CSU and FRCC campuses and should neighborhood organizations, neighborhood meetings, be accessible by walking, bicycling or transit. Student- Neighborhood Night Out, and other events . oriented housing should not be so specialized as to preclude other populations in the future . Such housing What We Heard should be adaptable to serve various demographic groups and not preclude amenities that would attract CSU leadership is essential to mitigating the a variety of occupants . Housing relying solely on four- impacts of campus growth on the surrounding bedroom units should be discouraged, as a diverse mix neighborhoods. of bedrooms per unit provides greater flexibility, serves a broader range of tenants, and may allow an easier conversion to owner-occupied units should the demand ` arise. _ Action Items • Update relevant sections of the Land Use Code ' to require variety in the number of bedrooms rp , W 'l" ; ' ►� � � " ; provided in multi-family developments . • Ensure that the requirements of the Land Use Code continue to support a variety of housing types and densities within the West Central area . ld ' precludepopulations • Explore the creation of a program that supports the retention of owner-occupied homes to maintain ♦ . the stability of neighborhoods . • Continue to enforce building codes that protect the health and safety of tenants in rental �. 1 " housing particularly for older properties in need of ' - I improvement and properties where unauthorized remodeling and building additions have occurred . ,p What We Heard "Protect the affordability of the neighborhoods in the " West Central area. " 34 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Land Use & Neicihborhood Character Figure 8 . Single- Family Residential Addition & Renovation Examples (Policies 1 . 91 1 . 10, 1 . 11 ) Many of the West Central neighborhoods offer a convenient location with an affordable price point, which will likely lead to greater interest in additions or renovations to homes over time. As renovations and additions to single-family residential neighborhoods occur, thoughtful approaches that maintain the character of the neighborhood should be encouraged . For example, locating an addition to the side or rear of the existing structure reduces its visual impact. Two-story additions that preserve much of the existing horizontal roofline typical in these neighborhoods show sensitivity to the surrounding context. The examples below were selected from communities outside Fort Collins to illustrate concepts that should be encouraged , such as cross-gable entries and additions, emphasis on vertical additions near the middle of structures to preserve horizontal planes, rear additions, and the expansion or renovation of garage space where appropriate. The examples are intended to provide guidance to property owners and builders . _ E3WW1 Rear additiongableporch/entryI I . 11 I 11 1 I I II M ft Won" � LL F r Expansion I previous garage • I porch/carport • • . I • • . I Before & After Examples 10 00 J _ Before addition/renovationI . . I $ a 6W . - . - . II I I I articulation4V After: Preserve • • • ss- After: Preserve horizontalityI • ry cross- gab \ • I • • • • • . • - WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 35 Figure 9 . Design Guidelines for Multi - Family Redevelopment & Infill ( Policies 1 . 9 , 1 . 10, 1 . 11 ) Multi-family redevelopment and infill should emphasize compatibility with adjacent neighborhoods and relate to a dominant residential character. The guidelines emphasize means of articulation or modulation to reduce large, monotonous masses and feel more residential in scale. In addition, consistent yet varied rooflines, front porches, human-scale detail (such as brackets/corbels and consistent fenestration patterns) are encouraged . Commercial- type multi-family structures lacking these elements are discouraged . Roof line variation/ nested gables Corbels/brackets provide residential scale and detailing �F THIS NOT THIS Consistent fenestration and residential detailing Scale and massing variation Roof line variation and articulation / I '', � l 1 TTHIS Massing and scale variation , articulation and residential character ♦ �1rJI' AT►s 'mil ANN 14 a+-- iN 16 t t NOTTHIS Front porches, color and materials with residential character Aw 1. It L - _ :HIS TTHIS Consistent roof pitch and balcony style with residential character 36 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Land Use & Neicilhborhood Character Figure 10 . Mixed - Use Design Guidelines (Policies 1 . 9, 1 A 01 1 A 1 ) The following design guidelines provide guidance to developers and decision makers and are intended to complement the Fort Collins Land Use Code standards . Though more flexible and less stringent than the Fort Collins Land Use Code standards, utilizing the guidelines should allow development applicants a greater level of support from Planning and Zoning staff and should assist in gaining neighborhood approval . Mixed-use development should be explored in the HMN , NC, and CC zone districts under the following guidelines : • Emphasize height and mass transitioning to upper stories • Horizontal , vertical and edge modulation and material variation • Ground floor transparency, with windows for at least 75% of the facade • Provide courtyards, plazas and open space both for gathering areas and as a means of further breaking down the perceived scale of structures 4 . . � w - rr i • . • k � � CE!tTFNNIA� GRIII "eig — t f � ?ighboring residential land use fill 10 • • owl r - rE .O 4ft r . . . . . WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 37 This page intentionally left blank 38 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN r�s� », r ter , � \ • �.tiw �_ �O ri- M -I MOP of iA t"glej wr MeA vqs�RIMAO Op VIA X 03 9wa ire, No oat � ter: ., . .. ,�• ° � �%' k - �.�:. - - •�� Ado of Woof 15 If$So ► _ .r < /• ,Flo h Cof : f " ,fit,• l t,Yr p 1 Aim ML .�.` , , ST ,•AV)/f. 7 J t * r : a 1r8�C �AA A fro � , 9► �s, '� r� a � i� '' -i of ' _ 6�u„ F •. oraobb of N to For oi raa pp IMP fit r t� r J Poo — rr � - a. z `..I 4�I i. �l•� � ♦. . h.; ter. ado, 1- '. r y . ; .♦ y' + ,1r / ' ` -`y • _ , or I.V of ov of aa - - � ...7 � . ( . _� ,i ' 7 , , _ ice►. � � �� . O' l Vol oa� *a OPEN ,� , ./ �' .` RJ w �_ �.+4 . _"' 1• 1 Transportation & Mobility Vision A connected network that supports people safely walking, biking , or using public transit as a primary way to travel while balancing the need for efficient auto travel throughout the area . Safe routes to school , CSU, and other major destinations Safe, reliable, arterial streets that are easy to cross and serve residents and commuters Option for residents to live without a car Reshaped and retrofitted streets that meet the needs of all ages, abilities, and modes Safe and efficient travel by car with LF adequate, convenient parking Improved transit service and convenient stops Easy access to transit ( including MAX) r 40 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility Policies Safe Routes 2 . 1 Prioritize improvements that support safe routes Transportation and mobility policies emphasize the to schools and community facilities importance of providing safe, efficient, multi-modal 2 . 2 Provide safe routes for bicyclists and pedestrians access to destinations throughout the area with during snow events specific improvements related to street retrofitting in neighborhoods, arterial crossing improvements, as well Multi-Modal Options as improvements in the Prospect and Shields corridors . 2 . 3 Encourage safe and efficient travel for all modes Projects are identified as either near-term (0-10 years) or through infrastructure improvements, education, long-term (greater than 10 years) and will be prioritized and enforcement for funding and incorporated into the larger citywide 2.4 Support car and bike sharing prioritization process . The projects and policies directly support and are coordinated with other city planning 2. 5 Ensure high quality, comfortable first- and last- efforts, such as the 2014 Bicycle Master Plan and mile connections to transit ongoing Arterial Intersection Prioritization Study. 2 . 6 Explore shared parking opportunities for transit The policies are organized under four categories of Safe users Routes, Multi-Modal Options, Street Retrofitting and Parking : 2 . 7 Provide additional transit service and amenities to encourage transit use Street Retrofitting 2 . 8 Pursue opportunities to retrofit neighborhood streets to improve aesthetics, provide a buffer from adjacent land uses, and calm traffic 2 . 9 Pursue opportunities to retrofit arterial streets to improve aesthetics, minimize crossing distances, and improve safety, mobility, and comfort for all users Parking 2 . 10 Minimize parking congestion in neighborhoods to preserve quality of life 2. 11 Ensure adequate vehicle and bicycle parking is provided to serve new development and redevelopment projects AO 2 . 12 Encourage the use of car storage and shared parking to meet parking needs 2. 13 Manage special events to minimize traffic and parking impacts on neighborhoods Buffered bike lane on Shields Street WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 41 0 Safe Routes © Provide safe routes for bicyclists and pedestrians during snow events QPrioritize improvements that support safe " Go routes to schools and community facilities Explore the potential for prioritizing snow removal on LaceI key routes for bicyclists and pedestrians, and provide When implementing transportation improvement information about those routes to the public . projects, whenever possible prioritize improvements Action Items that support safe walking and biking to key destinations, Establish Priority 1 pedestrian and bicycle routes such as schools and activity centers . for snow removal by the Streets Department. Action Items Match priority snow removal bicycle routes to the low-stress network identified in the Bicycle Master • Continue further analysis of potential Plan . improvements to the Shields corridor between Establish Priority 1 routes for snow removal Laurel and Prospect to facilitate access to such with enforcement by Code Compliance and destinations as CSU and Bennett Elementary education on property owner responsibilities by School (see Shields Corridor Analysis section for Neighborhood Services more detail) Communicate priority routes to CSU and the public • Support implementation of the Pedestrian Plan through the Pedestrian Needs Assessment • Assess the impacts of projects on safe routes through the creation of performance measures and evaluation strategies Ar Ensure snow removal occurs along bike lanes and paths 1 • • • H 1 10 rti _ r c owl 1 42 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility Figure 11 . Key Destinations Map (Policies 2 . 1 and 2 . 2) The map below identifies key destinations within the West Central area , such as schools, parks , community centers, and other community amenities . This map should be used to help identify transportation projects within the project area by prioritizing improvements that support a safe multi -modal network. Mulberry St ity P Dunn Elementary School Laurel St Lab/ School laris West Elizabeth "Main King Street" * Moby Arena Soopers Elizabeth St Commercial Center • Avery Park CSU Campus Core Future CSU Bennett Stadium Lake St Elementary • • • • • • • • • • • • • School • Pros ect Rd IVM Commercial > Center Red Fox Meadows Potential Natural Area Neighborhood Center U Spring Creek Trail Commer ial Gardens on Fischer Cent f + Spring CreekJi Natural Area 0 IIIIIT■ Blevins Rolland Q Natural Resources Middle Moore Park �� Research School Center * • . Whole foods/ King — • Soopers Safeway Ross CSU Y Sho in N tural Area Senior PP 9 Veterinary Center * Center Commercial Teaching cc Commercial Center \ Hospital Center J� Drake Rd T � _ Legend �N ' West Central Area Boundary M& Schools Arterial Road * Existing Key Destinations Parks & Open Space E West Elizabeth "Main Street" CSU Property * Potential Key Destinations Major Trails WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 43 Multi - Modal Options Support car and bike sharing mm © Encourage safe and efficient travel Bike sharing and car sharing programs provide for all modes through infrastructureconvenient transportation options by providing a improvements, education, and enforcessystem of cars and bikes available on-demand and for short-term use. Car and bike share systems offer people the freedom to travel around town without needing to own a personal vehicle while supporting a truly multi- Encouraging safe travel behavior for everyone will modal transportation system . require a multi-faceted approach, involving infrastructure Action Items improvements that increase predictability and visibility of users, as well as education and effective enforcement. • Evaluate the feasibility of incorporating car share Action Items and bike share options into the Land Use Code and/or Development Review process • Support completion of the low-stress bicycle • Identify and provide strategically placed car network, per the 2014 Bicycle Master Plan sharing spaces accessible to public and private • Coordinate with CSU on education and continue car sharing companies Safe Routes to School (SRTS) efforts • Work to implement the recommendations of the Bike • Continue to assess traffic enforcement needs and Share Business Plan coordinate with Police Services and the CSU Police Department T' • Coordinate with other ongoing city programs, such as the Bus Stop Improvement Programs Street Maintenance Program (SMP) , and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to make improvements in a cost-effective and efficient manner • Pursue sustainable funding strategies for ��� dr improvements that benefit all modes • Work towards achieving Climate Action Plan goals to reduce VMT through bike, pedestrian, and transit improvements • Provide education on safe user behavior as new ° crossing improvements are implemented What We Heard r "Need for traffic calming on collector streets through neighborhoods " P ■ ■ c � Bike rental station saw NNW 44 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility Figure 12 , Bike Share Station Planning Map (Policy 2 . 4) The map below presents the proposed bike share station locations included in Phase 1 of the 2014 Bike Share Business Plan . The proposed stations are centered around Downtown , CSU , and the MAX stations . Stations planned within the West Central area are shown in blue . Other stations are shown in gray. Future potential expansion could occur in areas South of Drake Road and further east along Harmony Road . ■ • a ■ a ■ a l • • a a • ■ a a a a a a if t'IYQ`Q]�l try ■ 3 ' < S C • � � ■ • Q nay - • ' • • t,ua■r0e 8 Sunxr �+ g • Ave W Yrff • st AAvec S Dr Weihuw Ave v7 W Myme Le r� vwo .aa CS veatrce• asa A t` I3 W 'lll �� g = Lau el MA w Brsr+ Biwa - ° S ation • r PI 5t $t M r3 n n W Laur S. B Bjoac.�•r. Pr T k Ba tam : R � 1 L a�"5• a Oq Pi W Pain 91 • mom 'Ae P, mCr a < -F W "LLM 51 7 Or ■ .T St �•7 d a West Elizabeth Campus WeS4 , ea CSU Transit taWopUniversity W. FY1aD•P gt oby Center Ce er Station L y a a Uhry ary Ave • a Unaenar Ar• ■ LrrMrtatr a . _ nnn Me 3 r7 ll•e © F a � r• ra ■n � Saun Of • WbMAro 0+ • Etl Or 9arta O Cr a a a LMnwa}v Or nngr c Q Benneean ■ South Campus • �r Or i F • ■ aa ■ • aa • • ■ • a • ■ ■ ■ ■ • ■ -• m's8aae — • w A W Like a . ,.:p 9 (`� W `sr,a 5t Q St !;c•rvn•r 51 baw'ILCI 'I Cy J tyroap•p y R ■ CI 'Pikt • Jr.ntr•r ♦n a g■r � r � • • P ■ ' wrOtlla, € ■ � 80 'Moo e • rarnet7le _ W _S►3ft _ 9t ,� L. a ,J 7 ■ e t Ra CAe .lzs �� s Gardens on : elst °'s • y,Aa u w,p"= s°"'° cr*Q& " �Z,d j � Spring Creek f or r • :u•nl St. C I � fr I••da1��^ �~ O�yY 111�'y ■ - 6 S ' ""� a<� s~eonoerrn Rd92- 7on! War t © • FA ■ u Glmvood r7 Q1. Sun"?or G 8Frr+ Ci • �' • Dr or • ` "r+atwawore a w _a 4 ■ dr O b Eat or i ■ • Q Q i Wmd•d Cl ■ a S1 4 A Q C�"%0430 Ce • c7 • Scarborough Or Fvrww rt a s , a Vol" Fargo Arm SG CL a _ c A" ; ; ru rp1100d d °• Dr CSU Veterinary a a `� Hospital B • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • ■ • a • a • • ■ a a a a • • a • a • a a • •a • a a • • • a • • • a a a a a • • a ■ a A" ■ a a a a a Q cone. Legend ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ West Central Area Boundary Phase 1 Proposed Station Phase 1 Proposed Station (West Central area) Parks/Open Space WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 45 0 10Ensure high quality, comfortable first- and ® Provide additional transit service and mast- mile connections to transit amenities to encourage transit use . It is important to consider a transit user's whole trip, The West Central area is served by some of the routes including access to and from the transit stop . When with the highest productivity in Transfort's system . At implementing transportation improvement projects, the same time, the existing service does not adequately whenever possible prioritize improvements that support meet demand (e. g . , on the West Elizabeth corridor), and safe and comfortable walking and biking to transit (e . g . , some neighborhoods (such as the neighborhood north sidewalk connections, bicycle parking racks) . of Prospect and west of Shields), may warrant direct Action Items transit connections similar to the route that serves Plum • Continue to consider transit stop locations in bicycle north of West Elizabeth (shown as Route 22 in Figure10) . In addition, several of the existing stops do not have and pedestrian network planning (ongoing) amenities, such as shelters and benches . Stops were © rated based on amenities and accessibility, and locations Explore shared parking opportunities for with a " Medium" or lower rating were identified and transit users m o2 prioritized as short- to mid-term or longer-term (Figure 11 ) . These improvements could also be coordinated Providing adequate parking along transit routes can with other roadway projects to improve efficiency and reduce congestion and parking impacts in the West minimize construction impacts in the area . Central area while increasing transit use. Acton Items Some of the priority corridors in which to explore the • Incorporate transit service recommendations establishment of Park-n-Rides through shared parking for the West Central area into Transfort budget arrangements are shown in the Future Transit Vision requests and future Transfort Strategic Operating Map (Figure 10) and include West Elizabeth, Taft Hill , Plan updates (see Figure 13) Shields, and Centre . • Evaluate future West Elizabeth corridor transit Action Items needs in the upcoming West Elizabeth Enhanced • Work with CSU to explore shared Park- n - Ride Travel Corridor Plan arrangements south and west of campus • Integrate short- to mid-term bus stop improvements into the citywide Bus Stop Improvement Program (see Figure 14) • Coordinate bus stop improvements with other roadway improvement projects, where applicable • Seek opportunities to provide additional , high-quality bike parking at bus stops r _ lie � • ram I I-ITFKIPI UsTeW 46 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility Figure 13 , Future Transit Vision (Policy 2 . 7) The map below outlines some concepts for future transit improvements within and outside the West Central area . Examples of desired concepts include the areas in need of additional transit service, a future enhanced travel corridor, improved connections to MAX and potential east-west bus crossing improvements . The map shows the Phase 3 routes from the Transfort Strategic Operating Plan (TSOP) , as well as new routes added since the adoption of the TSOP. - - 1 City PurK 7t� i W MULBERRY ST 21 t i h . I N . N r W LAUREL ST Existing CSU e t sr Transit Cent ' vr � i :MST � � of :Et l ST - f < FutmW. aftaew► EOmbodh--d CorrWEW * — t� .• ! al All : i „n�I � � il Rite-Fit _ iMnN ST Traiisrt Servoct. I S U Improved CO W PROSPECT RD tli MAX, E PROSPECT RD 8 MAX A W ST1MT ;T ESTUART ST t • � 1V Raa>nd Moom CSU COLLOWA 4D Cote Pork C3� Vet < School Yr Dk(l RD E DRAKE 0.D ! p w o rto i t; r j . .' HORSETOOTH RI) Legend IM 'C ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ West Central Area Boundary © Parking Garage Potential Additional Transit Service Potential East-West Bus Crossing Improvement Future West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor Existing Transit Center Improved Connections to MAX MAX Stations Corridors in Which to Explore Shared Park-n-Ride Transfort Strategic Operation Plan (TSOP) Phase 3 Arrangements - � - Other Routes Added Since TSOP WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 47 Figure 14. Bus Stop Improvements (Policy 2 . 7) The map below shows bus stop improvements categorized as either short- to mid--term priority or longer-term priority. Stops were rated based on amenities and accessibility, and locations with a " Medium" or lower rating were identified as needing improvements . Wherever possible, bus stop improvements would be coordinated with other roadway projects to improve efficiency and minimize construction impacts in the area . These improvements would ultimately be rolled into the citywide Bus Stop Improvement Program for potential funding . B- 1 uara : rc�+ ssf ■ oil a� wweswe a ■ Dar ■ xl U a p< B-WWW"" Aw 2 a W Myrna Lt RR a f y^ y, tS z cJe.t . o•. a W 0 g W ervi d 9KA 81 : a Orchard PI SIB • _`. ba W Lanai S a U i B- 13 B 15 B 17 81 oa • • • • w wulw s7 a hbrl W N. 5L • • • a a a �, B - 12 B- 14 B 16 B 18 � D Mr 1 B- 6 u - 1 • o B - 54 d 7 B B-9 B- 10 B-11 utwirtwvA" a xCL Lea�ear E ' �Pp c S • • S°un Dr 8 .�. Rd 1 Are A 3 Waaar w0 D R EO 00.,,00 + urA srr.. rn\cr g 4M°'"°°e3 Or w vir� y 6 OrIN B-19 ynr�y„a a 8 a OUA M IN ,.r" c a o Benroe ae • Or 9 p • '-` w 15-22 W �ya 'S[ 4 W Lam B1126 28 6uvw Cr . b cgo B-30 B 21 lomw Rd c ew« L� B 31 0 B-23 es&5 B27 B-29 _ C � ; �No CW any In B-36 a `fie�y,, SftwOy a - w Sa3n sr B-32 . - 1 Ra �y "- C `"•rB 6 �I 9hi•rt $t is Klrq�I ODA D• �- j� -`mod'^' 4w^7 CniM In 0 { W_SIU4" S1._ _ c I j Of M gy�p� ArrU M u pGMnaood v(rl O ~ � qC manpN Way O H ■ @ a Q `�, s:r enn d Of r soft B-37 2VO r4 window Ct 0a9 seffborough a+ - ..B-38 y v Dr ins 'r 39 d ; a 'inky F«o. AnCGw CAf M ■ ,.� a W corword B-40 ri c� • a p"� • B-41 B-42 0 zr�a a srAc>ra rrT t HaraA 0o Wagmrana•1 or CYt� � r Ai I:t W =tV*W Or y Legend O N ■ IN IF IF IN West Central Area Boundary Near-Term priority Long-Term priority 48 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility Bus Stop Improvements The table below outlines the near and long term bus stop improvement projects located within the West Central Area . The table lists the locations and bus stop rating based on an inventory conducted in 2013 . These projects were identified through several City studies and the development of the West Central Area Plan . Table 1 . Short- to Mid -Term Bus Stop Improvements (0 - 10 years) Project ID Bus Stop B7 Elizabeth & Glenmoor South Very Low B9 Elizabeth & Skyline South Low B10 Elizabeth & Constitution North Very Low B13 Constitution Ram's Village West Very Low B15 Constitution Ram's Village East Very Low B16 City Park & Plum Medium B18 Plum & Bluebell Very Low B23 Prospect & Skyline South Low B25 1 Prospect & Constitution South Low B26 Prospect & Heatheridge North Medium B37 Centre & Rolland Moore SE Low Table 2 . Longer-Term Bus Stop Improvements 10+ ears) Project ID Bus Stop Location Bus Stop Rating B1 Mulberry & Taft Hill Very Low B2 Mulberry & Cook Very Low B3 Mulberry & Bryan Very Low B4 Mulberry & City Park Very Low B5 Elizabeth & Taft Hill South Low B6 Elizabeth & Glenmoor North Very Low B8 Elizabeth & Skyline North Very Low Bl 1 Elizabeth & City Park South Low B12 Constitution p Ram's Village Very Low B14 Constitution Ram's Village Very Low B17 Plum & Columbine Very Low B19 Taft Hill & Clearview SE Very Low B20 Taft Hill & Manchester Low B21 Pros ect & Taft Hill East Medium B22 Prospect & Skyline North Very Low B24 Prospect & Constitution North Very Low B27 Prospect & Shields North Very Low B28 Prospect & Sheely North Very Low B29 Prospect & Sheely South Very Low B30 Prospect & Whitcomb North Very Low B31 Prospect & Centre SW Very Low B32 Shields & Stuart West Low B33 Shields & Shire East Medium B34 Shields & Shire West Low B35 Shields & Centre Low B36 Centre & Bay East Low B38 Centre & Research South Low B39 Centre & Worthington North Low B40 Centre & Worthington South Low B41 Drake & Worthington Medium B42 Drake & CSU Vet School Very Low WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 49 1 Street Retrofitting QPursue opportunities to retrofit program introduced in the 2014 Bicycle Master Plan . neighborhood streets to Improve Improvements could include sidewalk widening, bulb- aesthetics, provide a buffer from adjacen outs, and/or additional landscaping . land uses, improve safety and mobility, and Action Items ca lm traffic i ��i _ i0 Pursue opportunities to implement neighborhood Street retrofitting supports the Transportation street retrofitting in conjunction with the Street Master Plan goal of reshaping streets in a way that Maintenance Program and Capital Projects • Develop a template for widening sidewalks emphasizes lower vehicle speeds and encourages I Explore the potential for incorporating related walking, bicycling, and transit modes in the existing stormwater and low- impact development ( LID) cross-sections of roadways (see Figure 15 below) . This improvements into street retrofits approach would build on the Neighborhood Greenways Figure 15 , Example Street Retrofit Concept = Springfield Drive Springfield Drive is included in the low-stress bicycling network identified in the Bicycle Master Plan . The following example shows how street retrofitting concepts could potentially be applied to a neighborhood street. New retrofit bulb-outs at Potential bus stop I intersections New retrofit tree islands at mid-block Maintains existing flowline Maintains existing flowline / > _ • c 1 o17 v Springfield Dr a' N � C T 1 O r U Co / N O Before After bulb-outshit- Retrofit Springfield Drive and Current intersection condition - Springfield Drive and Constitution Avenue Constitution Avenue (Maintains existing lanes and curbs) tiefore Y Current street condition Springfield Drive and Constitution I • . I 50 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility 4 Pursue opportunities to retrofit arterial Figure 16 . Example Street Retrofit Concept - streets to improve aesthetics, minimize Shields Street crossing distances, and improve safet The diagram below identifies potential locations for mobility, and comfort for all users median improvements along Shields Street between i West Elizabeth Street and Pitkin Street. The medians Supporting the Transportation Master Plan goal of are designed to maintain as much access to existing reshaping streets, this effort will rethink and reshape driveways and intersection streets as possible. The existing arterial streets to improve the safety and Shields Corridor Analysis section includes a full layout of comfort of all modes of travel . Example improvements potential medians on Shields Street between Prospect include median treatments, pedestrian refuges, buffered Road and Laurel Street. bike lanes, and road diets . Two examples of potential median implementations Elizabeth St + are provided . The introduction of medians on Shields Street would likely be combined with other crossing improvements and would have a primary goal of minimizingcrossing distances and providing a safe Planted g p g median, typ refuge for bicyclists and pedestrians . New medians on West Prospect would also provide additional landscaping opportunities in a corridor that currently University Ave lacks street trees . . v Action Items �CO • Retrofit Shields Street (between Prospect Road South Dr and Laurel Street) to include medians and other aesthetic and safety improvements (see Figure 16 to the right) . ` • Retrofit Prospect Road (west of Shields Street) to ` include medians and other aesthetic and safety Westward Dr improvements (see Figure 17 below) . Y Access N point, typ O Pitkin St Figure 17 , Example Street Retrofit Concept - West Prospect Road The diagram below identifies potential locations for median improvements along Prospect Road west of Shields Street. The medians were designed to maintain as much access to existing driveways and intersection streets as possible and could include a combination of planted medians and smaller concrete medians . Appendix E includes a layout of potential median implementation on West Prospect Road between Taft Hill Road and Shields Street, and this roadway segment is noted as a potential project on Figure 16 . Access point, typ Planted median, typ o a' 0 0 C o m � O] C t J C N J p O O N L c O X cc L.L = Concrete median Planted understory Median trees Travel Lane Concrete median Curb and gutter Upright/Columnar — — — Curb and gutter At— — - - - Potential Median Implementation Legend Potential Median = - - - - -- ------- - ----- - - - - ' � Access Point WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 51 0 Parking V Encourage the use of car storage and t parking Minimize parking congestion in Explore and promote opportunities for shared parking neighborhoods to preserve quality of li and car storage to support multi-family developments, mixed-use projects, special events, and CSU campus Ensure that adequate parking is provided in parking demand . neighborhoods to support a variety of land uses and Action Items housing types . • Identify parking lots that generally have additional Action Items capacity at certain times or days of the week for • Monitor issues and complaints related to residen- shared parking opportunities . tial parking on a day-to-day basis, and consider the • Facilitate public-private partnership arrangements application of the Residential Parking Permit Pro- that allow for shared parking or car storage gram (RP3) or other approaches to reduce impacts, arrangements . as warranted . • Determine a consistent strategy for applying the - RP3 program and other parking management — - strategies to existing and new multi-family devel- opments . - • Coordinate with CSU to implement the CSU Park- ing & Transportation Master Plan, with a focus on - minimizing the impacts of student, faculty, staff, and visitor parking in neighborhoods . ? Evaluate existing g lots to . • • capacity is ®Ensure adequate vehicle biccle parking y p g possible is provided to serve new development and Manage special events to minimize traffic redevelopment projects and arking impacts on neighborhoods New residential, commercial , and mixed use development projects should provide minimize impacts Coordinate with special events providers (e . g . , CSU to surrounding neighborhoods by providing enough stadium, Gardens on Spring Creek) to minimize parking parking to support the intensity of the use. and traffic impacts in neighborhoods . Action Items Action Items • Evaluate the parking demand created by new Work with City and CSU Special Events Coordinators multi-family developments to ensure that to ensure that event management plans include adequate parking is provided to support those provisions for adequate parking and traffic control . projects . • Ensure that new development complies with the recently adopted Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay Zone parking standards, where applicable. ONQ z : - - . ` SUMMIT p ,, °.-�-• , .-_�_ PARKING ® ONLY OIL ALL OTHERS lam' WILL BEV. - TOWED KR neighborhoodsParking demands for redevelopment should not strain parking needs for Special event parking will need to be monitored to minimize parking in adjacent land uses adjacent 52 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility Potential Projects Some potential projects were carried forward from ' previous planning efforts, and other projects were identified based on technical analyses related to mobility and safety and through public input. As is standard practice, the City of Fort Collins will continue to monitor roadways and intersections to identify needs for future improvements . Some areas were also identified for future monitoring . The projects presented in this section will need to be further reviewed and evaluated to see what, if any, improvements might be feasible. Cost estimates will then be developed , and the feasible projects could then be included in the larger citywide prioritization process . Potential project locations for both intersections and longer roadway segments have been identified in the ' following maps and tables . Action Items - t Continue to assess the needs and refine designs • �- for the intersection and roadway projects identified in Figures 18 and 19 and Tables 3-6 . • As potential projects are refined, add them to the City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) . • Coordinate the potential projects identified in the West Central Area Plan with other ongoing city programs to make improvements in a cost- effective and efficient manner (e. g . , Bus Stop Improvement Program, Street Maintenance Program (SMP), and Capital Improvement Program (CIP)) . \ Y WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 53 Figure 18 . Potential Intersection Projects The map below shows potential intersection projects within the West Central area . Some of the projects were identified in the recently adopted Bike Plan or the ongoing Arterial Intersection Prioritization Study, and others were identified through the West Central Area Plan process . These projects require further review and evaluation to determine the feasibility of specific improvements . Any proposed improvements would then need to have costs developed , and the projects would be prioritized based on project needs citywide. For the purposes of planning and prioritizing within the West Central area, the projects have been categorized as either near-term (likely to be implemented within 10 years), long-term (likely to be implemented in 10 years or more), or flagged for future monitoring . gg 1-1 9 A I-2 1-3 2LM a �! a ��� as=a car ss g M O rra 6 twaG?�i~ti ■a■ade B suaur y �. COMO y (-�q Ave W Myma at Ar■ ➢ E rA Wiy �A .. or VMMWOO AvV a j; % 97 W Myme Sr �VrwNd Q� [jz Gn:mor■ ■ F1 ra 5 � w L cP N Onmafo PI M fl■:� <' flR1 St fl s 2 {� St A 1-4 6 e e ■s.N,. yr € o eay� or 3 I-5 al on m St w 9 sr d, _ w va.± sr- " - - � - 1-6 w PL UM 8T a M■n a ris MrJlwYer 1 s Q rstrnor a w :ao■u, I-9 a t Wu arvr A ttUrNaenMbra u 1-10- Sdum or a •A• r� mL1S.yt" Or C14 E l8 w oa, Or- Uri 1-12 d S w too ftnr4m Rd q `R % 'to Oro a w L,.. 1-13 rraz ir�".`tY� . . 40 �s ' sc 2 st s erwrsa ■ Ah I-16 - - I-19 I-20 1-14 P Por`^ 1-15�'lqr wynr0"w "' 1-17 t thy, ; I-21 Jur�»r t o fl y p� P a �qe ■ gekV p �M Rd F ■ Y @ s ■ S 2 4 Mnyy rdmMYde 1-2 � W SLL _ St 1-22 �'b^ta0p' N �IrS J9t r POngQ qo "We ,,.s?' ma's 124■k -�� C ' �„c "°t So" Creek t� w■ or Sruwt 5) a Ili y VMad a G403 yMf or ra - t Fr a Trled f d� ;` VN'ts�d $ Mnarmere C Rd. '^■'a C� 0"f W )�. Y NNdiiiArplu v 8 Grrwrow 4 ' Sunder d shov �Q� ! s 4 or SAD Q ct �n ' Aow■w Mare c � 946" Mrs Q a 1 VJPm6%M 4 9 q 4 �mNVr " ry ji Scarnerwaa °r 1 25 Frwr�tar -r Valey Fapa Aw } lm rn Ct °r I-26 - :.�■ 3 cw ooro d' f e. rfernra M W o ■ Ana r M ■ d }°'"a" 1-27 1 I-28 1-29 rad, yy py. pd - ■ ■ » � � � � i ■ 1 ■ ■ ■ .l-=7T�Ta T-�11' l.l.li � rtr ■ ■; ■ ■ . �1T1't-l.a. -r� r aZ7Ta. � _egend • ■ ■ ■ ■ West Central Area Boundary Shields Corridor Analysis T Prospect Corridor Design Short/Mid-Term Priority Longer-Term Priority 54 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility Table 3 . Short- to Mid -Term Intersection Projects (0 - 10 years) CoordinationPotential 1 JProject • • Description/Comment Bus St • • Street Maintenance Notes • • • (2015- 16) High crash location, bike and pedestrian 1-2 City Park & Mulberry conflicts ✓ Review for bike/pedestrian crossing improvements 1-4 Taft Hill & Orchard Review for bike/pedestrian V/ improvements 1-5 Shields & Laurel Review for bike/pedestrian See Shields improvements Section High crash location, high vehicle delays, See Shields 1-6 Shields & Plum high bike and pedestrian usage Section Review for multi-modal improvements High crash location, high vehicle delays, See Shields 1-9 Shields & Elizabeth high bike and pedestrian usage Section Review for multi-modal improvements 1-10 Shields and South Review for bike/pedestrian See Shields improvements Section 1-11 Taft Hill & Clearview Review for bike/pedestrian V/ ✓ Bike Plan project improvements High crash location, offset intersections 1-12 Shields el Pitkin/ Review for bike/pedestrian See Shields Springfield improvements Section Offset intersections See Shields 1-13 Shields & Lake • Review for bike/pedestrian Section improvements 1-16 Lynnwood & Prospect ' Review for bike/pedestrian ✓ ✓ Bike Plan project improvements • High crash location, high pedestrian See Prospect 1-17 Shields & Prospect usage ✓ Review for multi-modal improvements Corridor Design 118 Whitcomb & Prospect High pedestrian usage �/ V/ See Prospect Review for multi-modal improvements Corridor Design 1-19 Centre & Prospect ' High bike and pedestrian usage �/ V/ See Prospect Review for multi-modal improvements Corridor Design 1-21 College & Prospect High crash location, high vehicle delays ✓ See Prospect • Review for multi-modal improvements Corridor Design Review for bike/pedestrian 124 Taft Hill & Stuart improvements ✓ Bike Plan project 1-25 Constitution & Valley • Review for bike / pedestrian V/ Fore improvements (visibility) • High vehicle delays 1-27 Shields & Drake Project: additional turn lane, bike lane Funded (2015) stripinci Research/Meadowlark High vehicle delays Coordinate w/ 1-28 • Review for large vehicle operations and & Drake multi-modal improvements CSU 1-29 Drake & McClelland ' High vehicle delays Funded (2015) Pro ect: additional turn lane Table 4, Longer-Term Intersection Projects ( 10+ years) 1Project Location SnuircP2 Notes: I-1 Taft Hill & Mulberry BP 1 . See Bus Stop Improvements (Tables 1 and 2) 1-3 Shields & MulberrV BP 2. Sources: AIPS: Arterial Intersection Prioritization Study (ongoing) 1-7 Taft Hill & Elizabeth BP BP. Bike Plan (2014) EJE Cit Park & Elizabeth AIPS, BP WCAP. West Central Area Plan 4 Taft Hill & Prospect AIPS 1-15 Underhill/Skyline & Prospect WCAP 1-20 Mason Trail & Prospect BP 1-22 Shields & Stuart AIPS 1-23 Constitution & Stuart WCAP 1-26 Shields & Raintree AIPS WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 55 Figure 19 . Potential Roadway Projects The map below shows potential roadway projects within the West Central area . Some of the projects were identified in the recently adopted Bike Plan and others were identified through the West Central Area Plan process . These projects require further review and evaluation to determine the feasibility of specific improvements. Any proposed improvements would then need to have costs developed , and the projects would be prioritized based on project needs citywide. For the purposes of planning and prioritizing within the West Central area, the projects have been categorized as either short- to mid-term (higher priority, likely to be implemented within 10 years), or longer-term (likely to be implemented in 10 years or more) . R-1 MVA z� s � edw is R-3 � canb @ � d Avs w ►IYruest or nesar. Ave st a: W Mrroe tell, d 4 VO yaph CS Z c�e.tr•o.e 3j 0(ch" P id Brt ^rn ffi ii y 51 A S W Uk" St &wWe� iM R-2 : nywra Or U `p str —�^ wa S KUM uust n or w PLC, SL � — R-4 d d wx°ar T wow" or Ct < �v eera�otn sc R-5 o` R-6 a b a o Ury� Ave j UntiersfYAw XS s lwMw G Y V C 7fZ—914 SOU0Dr 6 AO ` a _ A Wenrad a R 7 . R-8 G p W5�11 ee w Ra R-9 y r G W ` s w use r St ewv"s Cl R 11 y( R-10 h 4iln !' R-12 Q a j i ulfylfln a r • a" s P l 4 �� rtbw 1deYe Cy any R r Q Rd - Klg ! .J! CIL �Yr-�i- ....1 Gt $W+'D C/M4 In p� o S'•uYt 8t Its w SluMI._� _ NedoK'S ��wuWx- ga WOY .f .�nfvS Or TttGa,Y so a rJ C J S►+; OV1101 MIIrWr14R Rd �1 Wil ` 60 -131 DCwrtw 9 Soof ! Cr Sroe 4� .e $ soOf0 01 svr S -.l M R 4 g S2 4 aa,odon G M Scerbolglyl: Or FvvrW.x C b L} vW+Y F&V Are cc Aw R-1 Yn .us"" Arra R 16 n R-17 R-18 Re, Legend Shields Corridor AnalysisN ' ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ West Central Area Boundary Prospect Corridor Design Short/Mid Term Priority Longer-Term Priority 56 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility Table 5 . Short - to Mid -Term Roadway Projects (0 - 10 years) Potential Coordination Street ID Project Location Description/Comment Bus . . Maintenance Notes ImprovementsProgram (2015- 16) Bike Plan project; have received some Springfield Implementation of Low-Stress Transportation R-8 between Taft Hill & Bike Network per Bike Plan ✓ Alternatives Program Shields (TAP) grant funding ; see Policy 2. 9 and Shields section Lake between • Strengthen bike/pedestrian spine Pedestrian Plan R-g project; see Prospect Shields & College as described in this document Corridor section Prospect between Council expressed interest in See Policy 2. 9, R- 10 Taft Hill & Shields addition of medians Appendix E for concept design • Narrow sidewalks, no bike Pedestrian Plan R- 11 Prospect between facilities, crossing challenges ✓ project; see Prospect Shields & College Implementation of draft design Corridor section described in this document Taft Hill between Busy area with turning R- 13 Stuart & Sheffield* movements, school traffic, and ✓ Bike Plan project pedestrian crossing Table 6 . Longer-Term Roadway Projects ( 10 + years) ID Project Location Source7n R- 1 Mulberry between Crestmore & Shields PP, WCAP R-2 City Park between Mulberry & Elizabeth WCAP R-3 Shields between Mulberry & Laurel PP WCAP R-4 Shields between Laurel & Prospect WCAP R-5 Elizabeth between City Park & Shields WCAP R-6 Taft Hill between Elizabeth & Prospect WCAP R-7 Castlerock between Elizabeth & Prospect WCAP R-12 Shields between Prospect & Hobbit WCAP R-14 Constitution between Stuart and Drake WCAP R-15 Taft Hill between Valley Forge & Drake WCAP R-16 Shields between Centre/ Raintree & Drake WCAP R-17 Drake between west of Raintree & Worthington WCAP R-18 Drake between Research & Mason Trail WCAP Notes: 1 . Sources: PP. Pedestrian Plan WCAP : West Central Area Plan WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 57 I Shields Corridor Analysis Corridor Options Development & Evaluation Based on the existing conditions analysis, the following aspects of the corridor are currently being explored by Overview a design review committee, consisting of City Staff and During the planning process, the Shields Corridor stood Colorado State University/Colorado State University out as needing additional analysis based on the crash Research Foundation representatives : history, observations of unsafe behavior, and public Street cross-section options input, as well as the expected increase in demand on • Intersection treatment options (at-grade) and crossing the facility in the future. Therefore, a study • Options for grade-separated crossings was initiated to holistically analyze the Shields Street • Options for medians/access considerations corridor between Laurel Street and Prospect Road . . Opportunities for street realignments to address The analysis is ongoing; a summary of work to-date offset (non-aligned) intersections is included in this section, and future work has been identified as an action item within this Plan . Figure 20 shows the corridor influences and connections that Figure 20 . Shields Corridor Influences and were considered in this analysis . Connections Corridor Issues Key corridor issues and influences identified for Shields Q Street from Prospect Road to Laurel Street include: @ Baystone Dr in • Lack of adequate facilities for bicycles and pedestrians, especially on the west side of the Transit Connector street =00fturn St m _ Plum St • Lack of safe bicycle/pedestrian crossings between Prospect Road and Elizabeth Street I • A series of non-aligned roadways connecting CSU to the neighborhoods south of Elizabeth Street Enhanced Travel Corridor to West Prospect Road, resulting in a lack of rniversity eth St__ connectivity • Multi-modal conflicts at the Shields Street and Elizabeth Street intersection — need for Ave intersection improvements • Redevelopment potential on the west side of . . South Elizabeth Street; Campus West is likely a near-term exception to this, as property owners feel that it is < Westward Dr v currently functioning adequately M IL cu • Constrained existing right-of-way >I, akewood Dra . . Low-Stress Bike Corridor U ■4F Pitkin St Overall Approach � SpringfieldcDrnr , The overall approach to analyzing the corridor and ., developing designs was based on the following strategy: ConnettrRdBe -� • Provide holistic concepts that create overall i - , , Protected Bike Cnrrldor' connectivity between the CSU campus and the BENNETT Lake neighborhoods to the west. ELEMENTARY g scNooL • Develop a custom cross-section for Shields Street C that is narrower than the standard City of Fort ' Collins cross-section, while still providing improved P illo N facilities . • Preserve existing street trees and shared bike/ped Major Campus Gateway path along the campus edge. Local Road • Develop recommendations consistent with the City Collector Road -' Minor Campus Gateway and CSU Bike Plans . Arterial Road Signalized Intersection • Focus impacts like) to Campus Core Connection property ps on areas y = Significant Potential for redevelop. Some Potential for Development/Redevelopment • Coordinate with CSU 's master plans and other Development/Redevelopment approved plans for redevelopment. 58 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility attached walks on both sides of the road, and the north Cross - Section Options portion of the corridor includes a 6' attached walk on the Cross-section options for Shields Street were developed western side and 8' multi-use detached path with street primarily based on right-of-way constraints and the trees on the east side. desireto improve conditions forall travel modes . Existing South Cross-Section (Proposed) rights-of-way vary throughout the corridor, and efforts were made to minimize the amount of additional right- The proposed south cross-section includes the following of-way required . In addition , the Bicycle Master Plan features : recommendation of a protected bike lane on Shields • Four 10' travel lanes Street was integrated into the proposed cross-section . • 10' median/turn lane The corridor was divided into two segments: south • 6' raised bike lane (Prospect Road to Westward Drive) and north (Westward • 6' tree lawn Drive to Laurel Street) . The cross-sections provided • 6' detached sidewalk represent the proposed typical conditions for each segment. The south cross-section reflects private land North Cross-Section (Proposed) uses on each side of the roadway, and the north cross- The north cross-section includes the following features : section reflects private land uses on the west side of the • Four 10 travel lanes road , with the CSU campus on the east side of the road . . 10' median/turn lane Existing Cross-Section • 6' raised bike lane • 12'-15' tree lawn (east side) As shown in Figure 21 , the existing cross-section • 6' tree lawn (west side) typically includes four 10 . 5' travel lanes with a 12' 8' shared bike/ped path (east side) center turn lane. 6' bike lanes exist on both sides of the 6' sidewalk (west side) roadway. The south portion of the corridor includes 6' Figure 21 . Shields Street Cross - Section Options South Cross-Sections North Cross-Sections 78' Existing Right-of-Way Width 75' Existing Right-of-Way Width Bike Ian Travel lane Bike lane Sir Ian Travel lane Bike Existing tree lawn Attached sidewalk Turn lane I Attached sidewalk Turn lane lane Existing k�2 sidewalk o¢, ` _` ■ I 6' 6' 10.5' 10.5' 12' 10.5' 10.5' 6' Var12-1ies S, 5' Approx. 50' 6' 6' 1 0.5'f 10.5' 12' 10.5' 10.5' 6' 6 Approx. 50' 94' Required Right-of-Way Width 79' Required Right-of-Way Width Raised bike lane Raised planted median Raised Existing tree lawn • Tree lawn Raised bike lane Raised bike lane Sidewalk Tree Travel Travel lane bike lane Existing I I lawn _ lane I sidewalk Sidewalk Turn Travel 1 Tree lawn i Lane lane of r uM 9 t wi Iw L � + !i I` I IL 'I-6'-�-Ei '-7� 10'-- 10, 8' --1`T"- 10' - 10' - 6'-'r12-15'Varies 8 --T 6' 6' 6 t 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 6' 6' 6' 1 1 27 2'2' O Z O Z > m -2 Q pe 0 1 ¢ � 'O • m vai 3 � w m rn 3 � E w Shields St Shields St o v WD tp O q q O ,p WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 59 0 Figure 22 . Shields Corridor Grade- Separated Crossing Options Grade- Separated Crossings Alternative locations for grade-separated crossings were explored - - - - - - � Laurel St throughout the Shields corridor, including both underpass and overpass r � - - - - - ' :a 9 9 P P alternatives . Underpasses can typically be constructed 10' below i grade — requiring 200' of ramp length . Overpasses typically require 14' of clearance with an additional 1 ' (minimum) of supporting structure — requiring 300' of ramp length . Due to the additional ramp length and perceived inconvenience of overpasses, it was determined that overpasses are generally less desirable as a means of road crossing in this area, particularly because other at-grade crossing opportunities are — ' available. Plum St Plum St .. Potential ramp configurations for underpass options are depicted in � • Figure 22, along with floodplain constraints, impacted parcels, and J other considerations such as integration with the planned Pitkin Street/ Springfield Drive Low-Stress Bike Corridor (a recommendation from the IF, N CSU and City Bicycle Master Plans) . a JN CSU Opportunities & Constraints — �; Locations including and to the north of Elizabeth Street: Elizabeth St • Bicycle and pedestrian crossing volumes higher in this area . • Elizabeth Street - Floodplain constraints, existing commercial businesses and integration of two-way bike facilities on one side of the street make this intersection extremely challenging as an underpass location . • Plum Street - Existing land uses at both intersections (sorority University Ave house and apartment building) present challenges for land acquisition . This intersection typically functions well as an at- grade crossing . Laurel Street - CSU -owned property on the western side of road - . South Dr could minimize land acquisition costs . However, connectivity from ` - tit this parcel to western neighborhoods is inconvenient, and demand _LT-7 is lower at the north edge of campus . Locations to the south of Elizabeth Street: Westward Dr _ Bicycle and pedestrian crossing volumes lower in this area . i` • University Avenue/South Drive - Private property acquisition required on west side, with some disruption to CSU uses and Pitkin st inconvenient ramp locations on east side. Minor floodplain constraints . • Pitkin Street/Springfield Drive/Westward Drive - CSURF-owned Sprid or I property on the southeast side could minimize land acquisition costs . Private property acquisition required on the west side. -Burton Ct Integration with the planned Pitkin low-stress bike corridor could help form a connected network here . J U Lake Street/Bennett Road - CSURF-owned property on the east side Bennett Rd _ could minimize land acquisition costs here. Private property acquisition required on the west side. Integration with the planned Lake Street protected bike lanes would assist with resolving a connection here; Lake St however, ramp configurations on the west are inconvenient and the location at the south edge of campus is not ideal . Legend - - Impacted Property Pw City Floodway Potential Plaza City High-Risk Floodplain N ♦ _ _ ♦ Underpass Ramp Required) CSU Research Foundation Owned Property Prospect Rd O (200' Planned Low-Stress Bike Corridor (CSU, City Bike Plans) 60 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility Evaluation Recommendations Each location considered for a grade-separated crossing Further study is recommended for the following potential was compared and evaluated based on a number of locations, based on this analysis: factors . The matrix in Table 7 shows comparative relative Pitkin Street/Springfield Drive - Demand is medium, ratings for the potential crossing locations, with a low/ cost is relatively low, and integration with the planned medium/high rating based on the following criteria : Pitkin Low-Stress Bike Corridor are advantages here. • Underpass Feasible? - Is it physically feasible to An alternative for this location is a new bike/pedestrian construct an underpass at this location? crossing signal, which would require right-of-way • Overpass Feasible? - Is it physically feasible to acquisition and could have slight impacts on traffic construct an overpass at this location? flow. Impacts to traffic flow could be avoided with an • Opportunity Parcel(s) on East or West Side - Is underpass. there a property owned by the City, CSU/CSURF, Lake Street - Demand is medium, cost is medium, and utility, or other government entity on the east or integration with the Lake Street Corridor is desirable. Land west side of Shields Street that can be used for the use on the west side is lower in intensity and could have grade separation approach? more flexibility for right-of-way acquisition, as well . Lake • Immediate Redevelopment Potential/ also has fewer utility conflict than some other locations. Underutilized Parcel on East or West Side - If a Note that although the crossing demand is currently higher property is not owned by the City, CSU/CSURF, at the intersections in the vicinity of Elizabeth Street, these utility, or other government entity, does it have locations have a loweroverall feasibility due tofloodplain, land redevelopment potential? use restrictions, and utility locations. Although the feasibility of • Relative Demand - Volumes from the CSU Parking constructing an underpass at Laurel Street is high, that location and Transportation Master Plan reveal the level of has lower crossing demand overall due to its location at the bike and pedestrian demand of each intersection . north edge of the CSU campus. In addition, Plum Street and Figure 23 provides a summary of pros/cons foreach potential Laurel Street have the potential to function well as at-grade grade-separated crossing location . intersections with some more cost-effective improvements, as noted in the At-Grade Intersection Improvements section. Table 7 . Shields Corridor Grade - Separated Crossing Evaluation Matrix Location Underpass Overpass Opportunity Near-term Opportunity Near-term Relative Additional Pros/Cons Potential Feasible?. Feasible?* Parcel(s) on Redevelopment Parcel(s) on Redevelopment Demand* Cost (Floodplam, West - Potential on East Side Potential Land-use, West Side East Side Laurel • Anticipated demand is low. • Existing at-grade crossing Street • • at traffic signal sufficiently 13 bike/18 ped. accommodates need. • Existing at-grade crossing Plum • • • • ' • • sufficiently accommodates need. Street • Grade separation would require $ $ Utilities/Land-Use 76 bike/183 ped. out-of-direction travel for pedestrians and bicyclists. Elizabeth • • • • • • • Grade separation would require Street out-of-direction travel for $ $ $ Floodplain/ 98 bike/212 ped. pedestrians and bicyclists. Utilities/Land-Use University _ Street • • • • • • Anticipated demand is low. $ $ South • • • • Less expensive at-grade crossing • • Drive enhancements have high $ $ 20bike/9ped. feasibility • Would enhance the planned Pitkin Street Low-Stress Bike Corridor. Pitkin • • • • • • - • Less expensive at-grade crossing $ Street enhancements have medium z66ike/16ped. feasibility (ROW acquisitions required) • Existing at-grade crossing Lake sufficiently accommodates need. • • • • • • • Grade separation would require $ $ Street out-of-direction travel for labike/31 ped. pedestrians and bicyclists. Relative Rating * Due to the additional ramp length requried and perceived inconvenience of overpasses, it was determined that overpasses are not currently recommended, particularly because other at-grade • Low Medium High crossing improvements may be more cost-effective. WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 61 I Figure 23 . Shields Corridor Grade- Separated Grade-Separated Crossing Pros/Cons Summary Crossing Pros & Cons Below is a summary of pros/cons for each potential N grade-separated crossing location : O1'el St Ba stone Dr Pros CSU property on west side, low cost C/' Cons North edge location, lack of connectivity to west m Plum St TRANSIT CONNECTORPlum Stre 4W i , Proe High demand , direct connectivity Cons Current intensive uses on west side, high cost, at-grade crossing functions well Elizabeth St ENHANCED TRAVEL CORRIDOR abeth Street FIFZ Pros High demand, direct connectivity Cons Floodplain constraints, current intensive uses on west side, high cost, constrained ROW, integration of two way bike path challenging Csu University Ave DriveUniversity Avenue/South Pro.c Lower cost South Dr - Cons Lack of connectivity to west, lower demand, mid-block location Westward Dr Street/Springfielditkin Drive 'ros Connection to future Low-Stress Bike Corridor, lower cost, at-grade crossing improvements Pitkin St are less expensive but would have greater Springfield Dr LOW STRESS BIKE CORRIDOR LOW-STRESS BIKE right-of-way impacts CORRIDOR Cons Medium demand :Burton Ct Bennett Rd Pros Connection to Lake St . protected bike corridor Lake St PROTECTED BIKE CORRIDOR Cons South edge location , low demand, medium cost egend ,See Prospect Corridor for Existing Elements Potential opportunities Intersection improvements , PP Arterial Road Future Low Stress Bike Corridor Pros ect Rd 6L I +� / Collector Road ♦ Future Enhanced Travel Corridor OF Local Road Location Evaluated for Potential Grade-Separated Crossing 62 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility At- Grade Intersection Improvements A second dedicated eastbound left-turn lane would Preliminary concepts were developed for key intersection eliminate the need for a split signal phase at the intersection ; this could be accommodated by both improvements that are currently being explored in alternatives described below. The configuration of this greater detail . The intersections analyzed include: intersection will be further evaluated during the West Laurel Street, Plum Street, Elizabeth Street, South Drive, Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor (ETC) planning effort. and Pitkin Street/Springfield Drive. Preliminary plans for intersection improvements and associated descriptions Alternative 1 are found below. The first proposed alternative to consider at the Shields Street & Laurel Street intersection of Shields Street and Elizabeth Street is two-stage turn queue boxes on the east and west legs, Improvements to the intersection of Shields Street and a bike box on the west leg, green colored pavement in Laurel Street should address pedestrian convenience the bike lanes at conflict points and channelized islands and overall safety. Improvements to the transition onto for the southbound right-turn and eastbound right-turn . the existing Shields Street bike lane for southbound Alternative 2 cyclists should also be reviewed . The second proposed alternative at the intersection Shields Street & Plum Street of Shields Street and Elizabeth Street is a Dutch-style Improvements to the intersection of Shields Street and protected intersection that carries the protection of Plum Street should address the comfort and safety the bike lane through the intersection . This is done with of pedestrians and bicyclists crossing Shields Street refuge islands, located at all four corners . Special signal and turning onto and off of Plum Street. Candidate operations are also required to reduce or eliminate improvements include two-stage turn queue boxes on conflicts between vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians . the east and west legs, an additional bike box on the Additional analysis is needed to determine the feasibility east leg, and green colored pavement in the bike lanes of this option . at conflict points . Additionally, improvements should address delays for westbound buses from campus, while maintaining overall safety. Shields Street & Elizabeth Street Improvements to the intersection of Shields Street and Elizabeth Street should address the comfort and safety of pedestrians and bicyclists crossing Shields Street and turning movements on Elizabeth Street. Additionally, improvements should also address pedestrian convenience and safety, as well as vehicle operations, as previously noted (see Table 3) . • 0 Bicycle crossing © Bicycle stop line © Bicycle Queuing area Q Corner deflection island © Pedestrian curb ramp r i Q Pedestrian crossing Q Pedestrian refuge island � 0 4 f � 0 0 ` n � I I Exampleof • protected • • Toole Design Group, Bicycle Master Plan, 2014) WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 63 1) Shields Street & South Drive Figure 24 , Potential Shields Street Medians Additional pedestrian and bicyclist infrastructure is Laurel St recommended at the intersection of Shields Street and South Drive to facilitate crossings of Shields Street. The implementation of a crosswalk with a pedestrian hybrid beacon and potentially a median island refuge at the south and east legs should be considered . Additionally, green-colored pavement can be added to the bike lane at conflict points . South Drive is currently a one-way street in the east direction . This configuration may be Plum St Plum St maintained, reversed, or converted to two-way travel in the future. Shields Street & Springfield Drive/ Pitkin Street Additional pedestrian and bicyclist infrastructure is recommended at the intersection of Shields Street and 17 Springfield Drive/ Pitkin Street to facilitate crossings of Shields Street. The implementation of a crosswalk with a traffic signal or pedestrian hybrid beacon, and Elizabeth St potentially a median island refuge at the south leg should be considered . Additionally, because Pitkin Street is proposed as a low-stress bike corridor, a protected bicycle facility that allows for bicyclists to travel east to CSU west between Springfield Drive and Pitkin Street should University Ave be considered . This location is also being considered for a potential underpass, the timing and feasibility of which could influence if and when at-grade improvements are South Dr made. Median Improvements ; Potential locations for medians were explored Westward Dr } throughout the corridor. Medians could provide some n traffic calming , diminish the scale of the overall roadway, �4 improve the safety of turning movements, and develop ♦"� an improved corridor aesthetic . Locations were identified cn Pitkin St based the desire to maintain access to existing access points and left-turn movements at intersections while Springfield Dr providing pedestrian refuges for at-grade crossings and reducing risky turning behavior. Medians will be n Burton Ct designed according to City of Fort Collins standards and ; � would typically include the following : Bennett Rd • 1 ' striped buffer between travel lanes and median A face of curb • 8' width from curb face to curb face Lake St • 2' of splash plate and interior curb around median _ ' perimeter for maintenance access $ • 41 planting area including small trees and low-water r use plantings • Narrow median section at turn lanes Median configurations and locations shown on the Prospect Rd diagram to the left are preliminary and will require further O design and outreach as plans for the corridor evolve . Legend Potential Median Access Points 64 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility Roadway Realignment Options Lake Street & Bennett Road People cross Shields Street at various locations Realignment of Lake Street to Bennett Road is best throughout the corridor, which is particularly difficult accomplished on the east side of the road , and the south of Elizabeth Street where streets are offset, and following considerations should be taken into account: there is a general lack of connectivity between the • CSU Research Foundation-owned parcels exist in neighborhoods and the CSU campus . Pedestrians and most of the affected area bicyclists in this area are typically observed crossing • Conversations with CSU and the CSU Research two lanes to the center turn lane and waiting for vehicle Foundation should continue regarding potential traffic to allow crossing an additional two lanes of traffic . implications/shared costs of this effort The planning team explored the possibility of roadway • The planned Lake Street protected bike lane realignments in this segment of the corridor in order to concept could be effectively integrated with facilitate a more direct crossing of Shields Street. Transit implementation of this realignment and vehicular connections would also potentially benefit • Transfort routes from CSU to the neighborhoods from aligned roadways in this segment of the corridor. west of campus could function more effectively The street realignment concept was explored for Pitkin • Because Lake is a collector street, a greater Street/Springfield Drive and Lake Street/ Bennett Road, turning radius is generally required to meet street as described below. Street realignments could potentially standards; tightening the turning radii would be used instead of a grade-separated crossing at these reduce impacts to privately owned parcels . locations . Considerations for each realignment are listed • A replat of parcels surrounding the realigned below, and these concepts will continue to be further portion of Lake Street should be carefully refined, including the determination of costs, right-of- investigated to maximize feasibility for new way needs, and additional outreach to property owners . development here. CSU Research Foundation and other property owners should be consulted to help Pitkin Street & Springfield Drive determine optimal feasibility for replatting parcels, Realignment of Pitkin Street to Springfield Drive is best as well as the intended use of the parcels in the accomplished on the west side of the road and the future following considerations should be taken into account: • The planned Pitkin Low-Stress Bike Corridor concept could be effectively integrated with implementation of this realignment. - • Transfort routes from CSU to the neighborhoods *.y west of campus could function more effectively. • As a local street, Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS) allow for tighter turning radii, which would reduce impacts to privately owned parcels . • Two privately owned parcels are affected, and property owners should be contacted to inquire about interest in selling these parcels . • A replat of parcels surrounding the realigned portion of Springfield Drive should be carefully investigated _ to maximize feasibility for new development. � , � -�110a_ k 4i',. Existing conditions at Shields Stre( itkin Street WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 65 I Figure 25 . Summary of Potential Summary and Next Steps Improvements to the Shields Corridor This section documents the initial results of the ongoing analysis of Shields Street between Prospect • Road and Laurel Street. Travel along and across the ■ corridor for all users could be improved through a !4 �� - package of improvements, including : Ba stone Dr I I Updated cross-section with protected bike lanes, 4, IV wider sidewalks, and planted medians Grade-separated crossing at Pitkin Street/ 1 I Springfield Drive (part of the Low-Stress Bike O° Plum St TRANSIT CONNECTOR - Corridor) • At-grade intersection improvements on Shields at ♦� Laurel Street, Plum Street, Elizabeth Street, and 1 Ig — South Drive -1 Iw Realignment of Lake Street and Bennett Road Y 1 I� with at-grade crossing improvements I- Figure 25 summarizes this preliminary set of Elizabeth St 1 10 ri improvements for the Shields Corridor. ENHANCED TRAVELCORRID Next steps will include continuing to refine the designs initially explored, continuing outreach to stakeholders and property owners, and securing funding for Z JI I improvements . gwl I m QI University Ave w A I CSU ■ I I South Dr �y t1 II Westward Dr I I II I Pitkin St ' LOW-STRESS BIKE CORRIDOR Springfield Dr LOW-STRESS BIKE CORRIDOR li Burton Ct I I _ Bennett Rd - Legend 11 1 Lake St Existing Elements Potential Opportunities PR <E CORRIDOR kL Arterial Road Low-Stress Bike Corridor PIP Collector Road + — =+ Enhanced Travel Corridor Local Road ..wrrn►• Potential Median Potential At-Grade Crossing/ See Prospect Corridor for Intersection Improvements Intersection improvements Potential Underpass Prospect Rd N ♦ ♦ Protected Bike Lane Potential Road Realignment 66 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN I y o y�����k� 'Fla I .. • � r- J � u1 Y � j�e{'r]i^/q■eJ��T• 'y. Y. .,u'I' • '. 1p Ilk IF 41, 10 40 12 if; ice 191 ' OF �NIr o ( j •) I r I.( ~� ' 3 } 1' •y1 flay t� �I ` / • ) � r r 1: FYI • • ' ✓: ]1 l} MO r: • � . . i ` t !� . I x . ✓ � r •. }� t 40 At I J T _ �� �_ ► - — It ks r . . / �� i } _ = \ � ! J — 'I , ! cn dMoeiiiiiit S S • 1 ` .� w POPIf` 1It a �_ (mil * _ NO - 1 I It dl to t • day+ � �' • / •� rv __ . a �� T / " � 1 / • f - - S'�- ice ♦ ' �O , WAS wit ! Amp. �! 404 X G �. 00 0 cn • r r l V. ♦ �i J 111 Open Space Networks Vision A functional network of public and private 1, lands that supports and connects wildlife, plants, and people . Access to nature, recreation , and F � 4 environmental stewardship opportunities * • Fynr . �ip - . i Parks and open spaces that offer a variety TA of settings and experiences - � � . 3 L _ .ell.L • L L • % •• ., pT r y_ • Attractive urban landscape that supports f 4; - � ; • R � • . habitat, character, and shade Preserved and enhanced wildlife habitat rfi _ �• , • f and corridors r L.+ S , I or ® Comprehensive and ecological � �' 4 • ' • 11 approaches to stormwater management L F• 'w f} _ � . b yyy���... , _ l r O.f.^ F . L11 � • Yra� ti. - III �- I r % 2 z_ OP bil_ , i 'y lit It' Lr r to tra *11s � 4 p 1 - S trees access ope iki v PI naar >w ■ . .,. pc ' WeI life — stand ffmm »� �.1 kF1�F v++ r r 68 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Open Space Networks Policies Access The Plan provides guidance for the protection of new Ensure that residents are adequately areas of open space while improving connections ® served by parks and open space as infill to existing open space. A variety of principles guide and redevelopment occur opportunities for recreation while protecting and adding Gas valuable habitat and wildlife corridors . The following policies are organized into three categories : Access, As development and redevelopment activities add Quality and Quantity. increased population and commercial uses into the West Central area, high-quality natural spaces should be maintained and expanded to serve existing and future Access residents . A range of social and ecological opportunities 3 . 1 Ensure that residents are adequately served by should be provided for the benefit of all residents and parks and open space as infill and redevelopment species . Land Use Code changes should be designed to occur provide flexibility to allow site-specific solutions based on context, scale and objectives . For example, high 3 .2 Continue to create a connected network of parks density zone districts (e. g . , the High Density Mixed-Use and open space Neighborhood and the Community Commercial zone 3 .3 Ensure that parks and open space are easily districts) may have different requirements than lower accessible by all modes of transportation and for density zone districts (e. g . , Low Density Residential , Low all ages and abilities Density Mixed-Use Neighborhoods) . 3 .4 Allow for appropriate access along and across Action Items ditches In conjunction with the implementation of Nature Quality in the City, update open space standards in the Land Use Code to add clarity for developers and 3 . 5 Provide for a variety of settings, experiences, decision-makers related to the amount and type and recreational opportunities in parks and open of open space required in conjunction with new space development and redevelopment. Requirements 3 . 6 Improve safety in public parks, open space, and should include a mix of qualitative and quantitative along trails standards that provide flexible options for the provision of functional natural spaces during a 3 .7 Explore the multiple ecological values that project's development or redevelopment. ditches provide, including irrigation, stormwater Through the implementation of Nature in the City, management, and wildlife habitat develop a Design Guidelines document illustrating 3 .8 Protect and enhance existing wildlife habitat strategies for incorporating natural features and open space into new and existing developments . Quantity • Evaluate recent development contributions for 3 .9 Identify opportunities for additional wildlife parks and determine how to best apply available habitat funds to new or enhanced parks in the West Central area . 3 . 10 Approach stormwater management • Engage neighborhood organizations and comprehensively and at the system scale homeowners associations to assist with the 3 . 11 Enhance and add to the urban tree canopy along stewardship of existing and new open space. streets and within neighborhoods • Identify funding mechanisms for improvements to existing parks, open space and trails and for acquisition of new parks, open space and trails, as needed . What We Heard "Ensure that residents still have access to high- quality open space as more development occurs. " WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 69 Continue to create a connected network of Ensure that parks and open space parks and open space (a ls ® m are easily accessible by all modes of transportation and for all ages and abilities Identify gaps in the open space network, both for public as access and wildlife habitat. Prioritize acquisition or protection of new open space areas that contribute Parks, natural areas, and other open space areas to a connected network of wildlife corridors and/ should be accessible by walking, bicycling, and transit, or recreation opportunities . Focus public park and in addition to vehicle access . All residents should have open space improvements at the neighborhood scale . access to nature within a 10-minute walk of their home. Prioritize trail connections that provide access between Action Items neighborhoods and parks, schools, natural areas, and other destinations . • Improve the underpass at the crossing of Shields Improve existing parks, open spaces and trails in select Street and the Spring Creek Trail to improve locations to better protect wildlife habitat, serve the visibility for bicyclists and reduce flooding issues . surrounding neighborhoods, and provide ecosystem • Improve the underpass at the crossing of Centre services (such as stormwater management, air quality Avenue and the Spring Creek Trail to better improvement, and the mitigation of fugitive dust) . accommodate the high volume of users and reduce flooding issues . Focus public park and open space improvements at the • Coordinate with CSU on the planning, construction, neighborhood scale. Prioritize the acquisition of sites and funding of a future trail connection between for new parks and open space that would benefit the the proposed underpass at Centre Avenue and surrounding neighborhoods . Prospect Road to the Spring Creek Trail . Action Items • Establish a wayfinding system for parks and open space, in conjunction with efforts to improve • Create spur trails that better connect wayfinding along trails and bikeways throughout neighborhoods to parks, natural areas, schools, the city. the Spring Creek Trail, Mason Trail, and other open • In conjunction with the Transportation and Mobility space areas . recommendations, add safe pedestrian crossings • In coordination with the implementation of Nature along arterials to provide residents with more direct in the City, identify gaps in the open space network access to parks and open space . for both wildlife and recreation, and develop a list • Identify gaps in transit service near existing or of short-term and long-term projects that help to fill future parks and open space . Consider access to the gaps . open space when making changes to Transfort bus • See recommended programs and projects in Policies routes and bus stop locations as part of the next 3 .4 and 3 . 5 . update to the Transfort Strategic Plan . • Continue to coordinate among City Departments to align priorities for improving access to open space (Parks, Park Planning & Development, Natural Areas, ? Planning, FC Moves, and Transfort) . ,ra % # ` What We Heard 1 I "Make it easier to get from neighborhoods to parks and natural areas. " Habitat enhancement • •1f►i. - M a r. along a trail 70 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Open Space Networks gure 26 . 10 - Minute Walk to Public Open Space (Including Arterial Crossings) The map below identifies public lands and open space and the areas within a five- to ten-minute walk. This map takes into account a resident crossing an arterial road to reach an area of open space . This map also identifies both major and minor existing trail networks within the West Central area . W M berry St 0111111111 W Laurel St W Elizabeth St Cn - cn W Prospect Rd Cn F- Rod INA fV DrakIPRd Miles Paved Major Trail Public Open Space 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 . 4 — — — Natural Surface Major Trail 5 Minute Walk to Protected Lands and Trails Paved Minor Trail 10 Minute Walk to Protected Lands and Trails — — — Natural Surface Minor Trail West Central Neighborhoods WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 71 Figure 27 . 10 ' Minute Walk to Public Open Space (Not Including Arterial Crossings) The map below identifies public lands and open space and the areas within a five- to ten-minute walk. This map does not take into account the ability for a resident to cross an arterial road to reach an area of open space. This map also identifies both major and minor existing trail networks within the West Central area . 77 W M berry St W Laurel St _ _ '► W Elizabeth St � � I GC Cn W Prospect Rd H i •� cn L I � 4W DraW Rd Miles Paved Major Trail Public Open Space 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 . 4 — — — Natural Surface Major Trail 5 Minute Walk to Protected Lands and Trails Paved Minor Trail 10 Minute Walk to Protected Lands and Trails — — — Natural Surface Minor Trail West Central Neighborhoods 72 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Open Space Networks • Allow for appropriate access along and across ditches New crossings of ditches in key locations will improve pedestrian connectivity in neighborhoods . Additional public access should be considered along ditches, but low A IL should primarily be focused along segments of ditches that cross public property (e . g . , Rolland Moore Park), rather than private property (e . g . , private backyards) . Action Items • Construct a crossing of the Arthur Ditch near Whitcomb and Wallenberg to connect the neighborhood to the Spring Creek Trail . The crossing should provide an informal pedestrian connection that does not introduce significant pedestrian or bicycle traffic into the neighborhood . 100 ,� • Construct a crossing of Larimer County Canal Number 2 at Westview Ave . to improve neighborhood connectivity. • Construct a crossing of Larimer County Canal Example of ditch crossing connecting neighborhood to open space Number 2 between Lynwood Drive and Bennett Elementary School to support Safe Routes to What We Heard School . • Remove obstacles for wildlife movement along 'Allow additional access along ditches and canals as ditches, including replacement of old fencing with a recreational amenity near neighborhoods. " wildlife-friendly fencing, as appropriate. • Coordinate with ditch companies to allow for appropriate access along ditches . Figure 28 , Standard City of Fort Collins Process for Constructing Ditch Crossings Service Area Requests Identify Project City Manager Approves Project & Neighborhood Owner Allocates Funding Meeting(s) Site I Survey Transportation Contract Design Consultant Real Estate Coordination Meeting (Parks Department) Research Ditch Crossing Ditch Crossing Agreement Payment (+-$5,000) Structural City Preliminary Design Review Final Design (Parks Department) Construction (Pre-Approved Construction Accept Ditch Contractor) Management Crossing +- 2 Months (Design Consultant) (City of Fort Collins) . WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 73 Quality Action Items • Improve Lilac Park to better serve the nearby neighborhoods and complement the Gardens on Provide for a variety of settings, Spring Creek, wetland improvements on adjacent experiences, and recreational opportunities CSU property, and the proposed relocation of in parks and open space 00 the CSU Horticulture Center to the north of the park. Conduct neighborhood outreach regarding Focus on the unique characteristics and type of potential improvements to Lilac Park. experiences offered by individual parks and open space. • Provide open space improvements to serve Program parks and open spaces in a way that fits the residents in the Campus West area. The existing, character of the place and serves the surrounding City-owned stormwater detention area on the neighborhoods . Consider the role each area serves northeast corner of Skyline and West Elizabeth within the greater open space network. should be improved to provide additional Offer opportunities for the enjoyment of nature, passive opportunities for passive recreation in a natural setting . Wildlife habitat improvements should be recreation , exercise, sports, social gathering, urban included alongside any recreational enhancements . agriculture/community gardening, off-leash dog areas, • Improve the existing stormwater management and other recreational activities within the overall open site at Taft Hill and Glenmoor to provide enhanced space network. wildlife habitat and passive recreation (e . g . , soft Provide trail amenities within and between parks and surface path) . open space areas . In some settings, soft surface paths • Support the establishment of community gardens may provide a more desirable experience than paved in public areas or areas managed by neighborhood trails . organizations or HOAs . Ensure that recreational access in open space is • Identify locations (either within existing open sensitive to, and does not conflict with , the ecological space or new locations) that could potentially and habitat values that open space provides . accommodate off-leash dog use. • Coordinate with the Parks , Park Planning and Ensure that a range of natural settings are provided Development, and Stormwater departments to throughout the West Central area, including: incorporate a broader range of settings and experiences as part of future work plans for parks • Highly natural settings with an in the West Central area . emphasis on wildlife habitat and limited recreational access • Passive, unprogrammed open space What We Heard with opportunities to quietly enjoy nature 'Access to recreational amenities, including parks, is • Areas that include playgrounds, fields, or essential in an area with such a dense population. " other recreational amenities • Highly programmed common areas that allow for social gathering and sports (e. g ., picnic shelters or soccer fields) • Larger parks and open space that accommodate multiple settings and - experiences (e. g . , Rolland Moore Park) • Educational programs and stewardship opportunities (e. g . , Gardens on Spring Creek) tj •�1 Aid r S Playground adjacent • neighborhood Community garden within neighborhood 74 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Open Space Networks Improve safety in public parks, open space, Explore the multiple ecological values and along trails G G G that ditches provide, including irrigation , stormwater management, and wildlife Ensure trails and open spaces are safe for all users habitat as at all times of day. Improve lighting where necessary and appropriate. Ensure that any additional lighting Recognize the importance of ditches for stormwater complies with the City's "dark skies11 policies and limits conveyance and flood management. impacts to wildlife habitat. Recognize the potential These waterways also serve as important wildlife conflict between bikes and pedestrians on shared trails, movement corridors, and they provide a unique and work to address unsafe behavior, such as bicycle opportunity for creating a more connected network of speeding . high-quality wildlife habitat in the West Central area . Action Items Improve habitat and the recreational value in stormwater • Conduct a safety inventory along the Spring detention areas . Creek Trail to identify locations that present safety Action ltPmc concerns, such as poor nighttime visibility, visibility around corners, and areas of potential conflict • Partner with ditch management companies to between bicyclists and pedestrians . protect and improve wildlife habitat along irrigation • Monitor complaints and crime reports in City of waterways . Fort Collins parks, natural areas, and along trails to • See recommended programs and projects in Policies improve law enforcement and ranger patrols in those 3 . 4 and 3 . 5 . areas . What We Heard Y{ T "Streams, creeks and canals should be protected and TIM i F , enhanced for wildlife and people. " lie - - ,1 NNW fe - = 1 �- � - , , INC titJf -�v l 1 4 Ab i A%&3k , WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 75 Protect and enhance existing wildlife habitat a Identify opportunities to enhance or add to network of wildlife habitat within the West Central area . New development and redevelopment should be designed in such a way that minimizes impacts or enhances the area's natural areas, wetlands, and wildlife habitats . Recognize the importance of the Spring Creek and its tributaries for wildlife habitat and stormwater management. Ensure that recreation improvements do = not compromise the Spring Creek's role in flood control . Action Items _ — • Through the implementation of Nature in the City, . identify specific locations where existing wildlife habitat can be improved within the West Central area . - - • Renovate existing stormwater detention areas to improve wildlife habitat and aesthetics . Where appropriate, consider including soft surface trails and other recreational amenities . • Identify sections the Spring Creek corridor where - - stormwater management and /or wildlife habitat r , could be improved . .ot i 1 Y 1 • • • • • • • Example of • • • stormwater detention • • Y ,104 . . : • r �' , Y a: . /, .' - • ! . a «x�:. • rck :7!!� ti 76 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Open Space Networks Quantity Approach stormwater management comprehensively and at the system scale Identify opportunities for additional wildlife � Plan stormwater improvements at the drainage habitat Go basin level, while recognizing the impacts of localized Opportunities to protect additional wildlife habitat on conditions on the stormwater system . both public and private land should be further explored . Account for the impacts and stormwater management needs related to high-density infill and redevelopment. Action Items Ensure stormwater is adequately addressed through • Through the implementation of Nature in the City, the development review process . Ensure that future identify specific locations where new wildlife habitat development in vacant areas does not compromise the can be added within the West Central area . Spring Creek Basin's Storm Drainage Plan . • Encourage habitat enhancement on private property Action Items through the Natural Areas Certification and Natural Areas Enhancement Fund programs . • Raise the bridge on the spur trail to the west of the Sheely/Wallenberg neighborhood to mitigate flooding of the trail . • Encourage Low Impact Development (LID) techniques as part of new development and capital projects . • Regularly review the adequacy of stormwater protection and provide additional stormwater protection where needed . Planted landscape islands treat stormwater run off 60 T AMM MeWR wzww ==ILL Stormwater planting adjacent to street WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 77 Enhance and add to the urban tree canopy Potential Open Space along streets and within neighborhoods a c m Improvements & Additions Recognize the importance of an expanded urban tree canopy in reducing heat island effects, improving air Table 8 . Potential Open Space Projects quality, supporting wildlife habitat, and providing shade. This table identifies the potential open space projects Encourage the use of xeriscape and drought-tolerant in the West Central area . Locations for the potential plant species in landscaping on private property and projects are shown in Figure 28 . Additional funding within the public right-of-way. needs to be secured to implement each of these projects . Encourage the creation of tree stands with a mix of sizes, Additional public outreach, planning, and design may ages, and species of trees to support a more diverse and also be necessary. attractive landscape . ID.JwLocation Description Retrofit existing streetscapes to include additional Shade Canopy trees . O1 Westview Avenue Ditch Crossing of Larimer Crossing County Canal Number 2 Preserve and enhance the tree canopy in neighborhoods Habitat improvements and Stormwate Detention by incentivizing the planting of new trees on residential 02 Taft Hill & r Detenortion Area recreation amenities (e.g., property. soft surface trail Action Items Elizabeth & Skyline Habitat improvements and 03 Stormwater Detention Area recreation amenities (e.g., • Develop and pilot a neighborhood tree canopy soft surface trail) improvement program in collaboration with local nurseries, non-profit organizations, and CSU Bennett Elementary School Crossing n Larimer p g 04 Ditch Crossing County Canal Number 2 student groups . • Proactively create additional tree cover in areas 05 Trail connection from Centre Future trail connection dominated by ash trees to mitigate the potential Avenue to Spring Creek trail impacts of the emerald ash borer. 06 Spring Creek Trail Underpass Reduce flooding impacts • Support neighborhood grant applications that at Centre Avenue seek to improve parks, open space, and tree Whitcomb & Wallenberg canopy within the West Central area . 07 Ditch Crossing Crossing of Arthur Ditch • Continue current policies for including street trees Improve to complement as part of all new developments and City capital Spring Creek Trail, Gardens projects . 08 Lilac Park on Spring Creek, and the • Identify funding mechanisms for improving habitat CSU Horticulture Center and urban tree canopy on private property. 09 Spring Creek Trail Underpass Improve visibility and at Shields Street reduce flooding impacts . _ . AL LM Jip Ali Y y F . JY•� r Y r i r , . . 41F �` 4 y . w - 9 .9 IF - •F' S Street tree planting in new development . trees in a residential 78 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Open Space Networks gure 29 . AreaF -if Potential Open Space Improvements & Addition .r The map below identifies the existing open space and parks, as well as several existing conditions within the West Central area . This map helps to identify areas of open space improvements and additions . s u) c� ulberry 9 Z It co Dun r = Elementary , School 20 Laurel St c� Lab/Polaris Ji School T t Avery ParkLW � F y Bennett Elementary I - - - Future - K School CSU Stadium a - - - eSt - - Prospect Rd * �k i Meadows Natural = Area10/0 ~ U) Spring Creek Tram Gardens on Sprj�ng Cree Fis er Natdal Area ,q) Q Blevins - = - - Middle + Vo- School , Rolland V O Moore ParkIr ca U R i _ R - 0 o'ss Natural o Area m Drake Rd INS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Legend Existing Elements Potential Opportunities — - - - West Central Area Boundary Major Paved Multi-Use Trail Potential Ditch Crossing Arterial Road Minor Paved Multi-Use Trail Opportunity for Open Space Existing Open Space Natural Surface Trail Improvements & Additions Existing Park orm Schools Existing Water Body * Opportunity for Open Space/Pocket Parks Provided by New Development Existing Irrigation Canal and Habitat Existing Fort Collins Natural Area CSU Property WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10/ 15 79 This page intentionally left blank 80 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN 1 1 l ti- s ��;: ol ,. fe Y l f 40� r _ :a Prospect Corridor Existing Conditions Existing Conditions Analysis Existing corridor conditions, including right-of-way Conceptual designs have been developed for Prospect (ROW) widths, existing and future land use, north-south Road and Lake Street (between Shields Street and connections, travel lane widths, access points, traffic College Avenue) . The design development process volumes, multi-modal level of service and transit stop included an evaluation of existing conditions to identify locations were analyzed to assist in developing three areas of improvement, establishment of a vision for design alternatives . Details are included in Appendix D. the future, and developing and evaluating a range of alternatives for each of the roadways . The conceptual Corridor Issues designs reflect the results of technical assessments, Based on public input and site observations, a set of public input, and sustainability evaluations . The next corridor issues and influences were identified to reflect steps in the process will be to secure funding for Final the concerns of residents, property owners and other Design , right-of-way acquisition, and construction of users on Prospect Road and Lake Street. They included the proposed improvements . The design development the following : process and conceptual designs are summarized in this chapter and further detailed in Appendix F. The Prospect Lack of adequate facilities for bicycles and Corridor 30% Design is provided in a separate document. pedestrians • Lack ofbicycle/pedestrian crossings between Whitcomb and Shields Figure 30 , Prospect Corridor Design • Perception of unsafe conditions along sidewalks Development Process • Potential to utilize Lake Street as parallel bike network • Lack of street trees and other streetscape Existing Conditions elements • Constrained existing right-of-way (ROW) • Conflict between bicycles and parked cars on Lake Street Visioning Alternatives Development Alternatives • nj - Technical/ Sustainability Advisory public Input Operational Assessment Committees Conceptual Designs • . 82 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Prospect Corridc Figure 31 , Prospect Corridor Existing Right - of-Way Constraints WHITCOMB TO SHIELDS TO WHITCOMB CENTER CENTER TO COLLEGE North Side: 22 parcels North Side: 4 parcels North Side: 8 parcels LAKE ST 7- - - � - - & 1 » 81' 10 - 81 8 0 81.�. so ,z PROSPECT RD IT7 South Side: 24 parcels South Side: 2 parcels South Side: 6 parcels I , W N f0 > K Q W O 13 U J W ~ z LL = Z Y J N �+ U m U Legend NORTH rzow wmt TOTAL NUMBER OF PARCELS: Existing Right-of-Way Width (in feet) Source: City of Fort Collins document survey North Side: 34 parcels and parcel data. --------• 100 foot Right-of-Way South Side: 32 parcels Note: Standard 4-1-ane Arterial ROW width is 115' (e.g., Lemay Avenue north of Fossil Creek Parkway) Constrained 4-1-ane Arterial ROW width is 100'-102' (e.g., Horsetooth Road between Timberline Road and Ziegler Road) 0 i ; r Existing conditions on Prospect Road Existing conditions on Lake Street i t t • WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 83 Vision three alternatives are described below, with additional I detail provided in Appendix F. Attractive and functional , well-integrated, mixed-use corridor that serves the mobility Alternative A - 'All About Pedestrians" needs of nearby neighborhoods, CSU, and the Alternative A maintained the existing curb lines and community roadway width while enhancing pedestrian facilities, with the overall idea being a renovation and retrofit 0 Safe and comfortable corridor for all that better accommodates pedestrians . The following modes of travel design elements were included : Safe crossings • 4 travel lanes throughout • U detached sidewalk Attractive gateway to campus, downtown, • 8' tree lawn and midtown • Planted median Seamless connection to MAX Alternative B - "Boulevard" Alternative B emphasized minimal right-of-way (ROW) Overall Approach acquisition , replacing one travel lane with a buffered bike lane on each side of the road west of Whitcomb . The overall approach to developing the conceptual Pedestrian enhancements were also prioritized . The designs for Prospect Road and Lake Street was based following design elements were included : on the following strategy: • Provide holistic designs so that Prospect and Lake 2 travel lanes west of Whitcomb Street, 4 travel lanes east of Whitcomb Street are connected and complement each other • Develop a custom cross-section for Prospect ' Center turn lane west of Whitcomb Street ' tree lawn that is narrower than the standard City of Fort D Collins cross-section, while still providing improved Detached sidewalk/shared bike and pedestrian path facilities • Maintain the curb along the south side residential ' 5 buffered bike lanes west of Whitcomb Street, area of Prospect to minimize construction costs shared bike/ pedestrian path east of Whitcomb Street and property impacts Str • Focus Prospect property impacts on areas likely to ' Planted median redevelop (primarily on the north side) Alternative C - "Complete Street" • Coordinate with CSU 's master plans and other approved plans for redevelopment Alternative C maintained existing travel lanes and added a detached, shared bike/pedestrian path while minimizing Alternatives Development and right-of-way (ROW) acquisition on the south side of Evaluation Prospect Road . The following design elements were included : Based on the existing conditions analysis and vision . 4 travel lanes throughout for the corridor, three alternatives each were developed . 10' shared bike/pedestrian path for Prospect Road and Lake Street. These alternatives ' 6 tree lawn were then evaluated based on a variety of criteria . Draft ' Planted median east of Whitcomb Street conceptual designs, utilizing various elements of the alternatives, were then developed . Based on the technical analysis, Alternatives B and C generally provided the greatest improvement for Prospect Road all users compared to existing conditions, with the Three distinct alternatives were developed for Prospect notable exception that Alternative B was projected to Road , including : increase delays and congestion in the western segment (Shields to Whitcomb), which was reduced to two travel • Alternative A - "All About Pedestrians" lanes . Community input varied considerably across all • Alternative B - " Boulevard " alternatives . In general , stakeholders favored elements • Alternative C - "Complete Street" of the alternatives that improved the safety of all modes These concepts were developed based on the vision while minimizing impacts to property owners along the statements and were further refined based on feedback roadway. from technical staff, propertyowners, and residents . The 84 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Prospect Corridor Lake Street Conceptual Designs The primary issue on Lake Street is a general conflict With the adoption of the West Central Area Plan , the between bicycles and parked vehicles, with car doors conceptual designs described below become the opening into bike lanes and vehicles pulling out into designs of record in regard to right-of-way dedication for travel lanes without scanning for oncoming bikes . development projects along both streets . The alternatives focused on three alternatives for prospect Road Conceptual Design incorporating protected bike lanes into the roadway. A conceptual design was developed based primarily Alternative on the attributes of Alternative B and Alternative C, Alternative A provided a protected bike lane on the north and was further refined in response to public input. and south side of Lake Street, with a planted median The conceptual design maintains four travel lanes providing separation from vehicle parking . The following throughoutthe corridor, with the addition of a centerturn design elements were included : lane west of Whitcomb Street. A shared bike/pedestrian • 2 travel lanes path is provided along the majority of the roadway. • On-street parking The need for right-of-way acquisition was minimized • 6' one-way protected bike lanes on the south side of the road to minimize impacts to • Tree lawn (select locations) residences located close to the roadway, while focusing • 6' attached sidewalk potential right-of-way acquisitions on the north side of Alternative 8 the road where redevelopment is more likely to occur. Alternative B provided a two-way protected bike lane The conceptual designs for Prospect Road are divided on the north side of Lake Street with a planted median into three segments: (1 ) Shields Street to WhitcombStreet, (2) Whitcomb Street to Centre Avenue, and (3) providing separation from vehicle parking . This took Centre Avenue to College Avenue. advantage of the lower number of access points on he prospect Road - Conceptual Design Elements north side, where the Colorado State University Main Campus is the dominant land use. The following design • Four travel lanes elements were included : • Center turn lane/median • Tree lawn • 2 travel lanes • Detached sidewalk/shared bike and pedestrian • On-street parking path • 12' two-way protected bike lanes (6' per lane) • Mid-block bike/pedestrian crossing • Tree lawn (select locations) • Transit stops/pullouts • 6' attached sidewalk Lake Street Conceptual Design Alternative C The conceptual design for Lake Street was developed Alternative C maintained the existing curb lines and through stakeholder input on the three alternatives . The roadway width and removed on-street parking , while conceptual design is generally based on Alternative A incorporating a protected bike lane on the north and and includes the elements described below. south side of Lake Street, with a planted median Lake Street - Conceptual Design Elements providing separation from travel lanes . • Two travel lanes The following design elements were included : • On-street parking • 2 travel lanes • Protected bike lanes with planted buffer • 6' one-way protected bike lanes • Attached/detached sidewalk • Tree lawn (select locations) • Tree lawn (select locations) • 6' attached sidewalk • Mid-block bike/pedestrian crossings • No on-street parking • Transit stops All three alternatives were comparable in terms of improving The draft design includes on-street parking . However, as conditions for all users compared to existing conditions. development plans along Lake Street (including the new Alternative C provided slightly better conditions for CSU stadium) come to fruition, it may be determined pedestrians than Alternatives B and C due to the removal that removing on-street parking better meets the needs of on-street parking . Community input varied, with more and vision for the corridor. Removing on-street parking support for the 6' protected bike lanes (Alternatives A and while providing the other elements listed above may be C) than the 12' two-way protected bike lanes (Alternative B) . possible without the need to move the existing curbs, thus reducing construction costs . Potential refinements will be further explored in Final Design . WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 85 i-' igure 32 . Prospect Road Conceptual Design & Cross- Sections Shields to Whitcomb Enhanced intersection treatment Plymouth Congregational with refuge islands Church Potential north/ south connection 10' Shared bike/ped Street tree Access point, Transfort Right-of- Path F 40' O.C., tYP _ .— Access �\ s; p, typ_ , Way line ,•_ _ . 6' Tree lawn MENSS � f Ah6 AIL 4LT -' — 8 Sidewalk Gateway corner refuge Interim condition required i with existing , yp. h cn + land use t Potential sidewalk SePy connection to Spring p . v Creek Trail �P Whitcomb to College I CSU - Aggie Village North i I CSU - Parking Garage I Right-of-Way line l Raised median ' Right-of Way line T Shared bike/ped path Potential a 10' Shared bike/ Raised median I underpass 2 r ped path w 6' Tree lawn z •. , U _r —_ — I Transfort stop, 6' Tree lawn 10' Shared bike/ped path 0 ltyp. Rake box Existing trees 10' Shared bike/ � IPotentials Ito remain aped path > underpass ) m 1 Lo At k :! i 0. , .__ � MAN u� Hilton Fort Collins 10' Shared bike/ped path Legend Potential Right-of-Way (ROW) • pedestrian Wayfinding C••••, Transfort Stop 1 j Interim condition dedication/acquisition •.,.• 16 � 111111 .m required with existing land use Typical Cross-Section Typical Cross-Section Shields Street to Whitcomb Street Whitcomb Street to Centre Avenue Center turn lane = Raised planted median Tree lawn Shared bike/ped Tree lawn Shared bike/ped path Sidewalk - is spruce trees CSU-Aggie o 0 o Village c cc X cc South a =_ - `- y X SU-Aggie Villa g X X w North W W ! �W 'm` ; r II I PML ' III I South Side 6' 6' 10'-10'-10'-10'l0' 6' 10' North Side South 10' 6'T10' 10'S 8' ti 10" 10'T 60f 10 North Side I-xi 2. 5' Side 2 ng 1 . 5'OW 2 - Existing ROW - 60' � -{—Existing ROW - 60' —{� Total Required ROW - 83' Total Required ROW - 88' *Note - Total required ROW dimension includes 30" curb/ *Note - Total required ROW dimension includes 30" curb/ gutter along street per LCUASS standards gutter along street and 18" curb/gutter around median (s) per LCUASS standards 86 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Prospect Corridor Potential options for 8" Future condition on Whitcomb - Tree 1 I sidewalk connections lawn detached sidewalk and bike lane to Lake Street I 10 Shared bike/ped path Potential pedestrian Right-of- Access point, typ. E activated crossing Way line o 6' Tree lawn 16' Sidewalk i6' Tree lawn r• I � I J Existing Residential I v Neighborhood Q N a , I o Connection to Lake Street Enhanced intersection 0 treatment with refuge Mason Trail islands Interim condition o required with existing Enhanced Enhanced a' a land use, typ. Bus pull- crosswalk crosswalk w/ Desired bus Gatewa corner � out for Mason ped . signal pull-out y refuge v Corridor trail o I — - - .'AV 351rojEw 'L „r— k Sidewalk connectlo r Prospect St M Refer to Midtown in Motion for ! � College Ave corridor Mason trail Note: Specific and detailed intersection improvement decisions will be refined through various 0 50 100 150 � design and other project processes . This includes City capital projects, identified requirements due to area developments, and stadium mitigation measures . For example, the intersection of Prospect Road and Centre Avenue is currently being considered for northbound and southbound double left-turns . Typical Cross-Section Centre Avenue to College Avenue Center turn lane Shared bike/ped Shared bike/ped path 3 path 0 0 rn c c � w w w w y Milk AM is SokSideo' e' to' to' to' 10' to' s' to' North Side z.s z.s' 1 Existing ROW - 60' r Total Required ROW - 8T *Note - Total required ROW dimension includes 30" curb/gutter along street per LCUASS standards WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 87 Figure 33 . Lake Street Conceptual Design & Cross - Sections Shields to Whitcomb it Sidewalk connection to Pitkin Street Bike box Buffer crossing, 11 ' Travel lanes 4' Planted buffer Gateway corner refuge typ. Pedestrian 8' Parallel 6' Striped bike lane CSU - PERC crossing parking 6' Sidewalk _ . '•. _ „ Access point, typ. Right-of-Way line 6' Bike lane 6' Striped buffered bike lane Islamic Plymouth Congregational Center Church Interim condition required with existing off-street 90 II degree parking IQ I m Whitcomb to College Pedestrian beacon i Wider tree lawn to avoid impacts to ex. Future CSU p 12 Bike path to Project 11 ' Travel lanes steam chillers potential underpass Bus turnaround Ia - - - - - - - - - - - ; 8' Parallel parking LBuffer crossing Right-of Way line � = i =' - •+s- - - - - - - - - - - - - ---- -- *. may.► ; � � . . ♦ ♦ -♦ - 1 ♦ " = « . • � i= z� � J Existing curb ;• •109% Pedestrian I = maintained •...• :•�•: crossing (South only) Q v CSU - Parking ..:, • `m Garage - I � u CSU - Aggie Village North :•�+; D I - � • r I r � . � • �o potential • ' ,� s _ underpass Legend J1 Potential Right-of- Way (ROW) • Pedestrian Wayfinding Note- Specific and detailed intersection improvement dedication/acquisitiondecisions will be refined through various design and other r � 7 Interim condition required with ; Transfort Stop project processes. This includes City capital projects, L _ J existing land use Identified requirements due to area developments, and stadium mitigation measures . Typical Cross-Section Parallel parking Travel lane Bike lane Planted Attached walk buffer misting curb CSU - Aggie i Village 0 0 North 2 2 w w ; South Side g' g' 4' 8' 8' 4, 6' 6' North Side 1 .5' 1 . 5' Existing ROW - 60' Total Required ROW - 75' Note - Total required ROW dimension includes 18" curb/gutter around planted buffer per LCUASS standards. The south side maintains the existing curb/gutter. 88 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Prospect Corridor Future CSU Stadium Transfort stopt Future yp iCSU Buffer crossing, Project Buffer tree, p. - - ; ♦; 1 fad ♦ D Pedestrian crossing 6' Bike lane 4' Striped bufferng curb 6' Sidewalk zainedm h only) 0 Existing Residential 7Potential sidewalk connection Neighborhood �Prospect RoadFuture condition lk Whitcomb Tree lawn detached sidewalk and bike lane 44 8' Parallel parking m 11 ' Travel lanes 0 Access point, < o 6' Striped buffered bike lane r typ. I 10' Shared bike/ I1 Iped path A n - - - - - - - - - - - - - - • . f�rt�- r - - - - - - - � _ + � �* �♦ s. Lake Street — — — o Existing curb/sidewalk Potential transit interline maintained (South only) service or transfer stops Mason trail 0 0 Cr +� Gateway corner refuge :alp 0 50 100 150 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 89 Figure 34 . Prospect Road Conceptual Design (looking west near Prospect Lane) 10' Travel lane, Potential street light Pedestrian/bicyclist typical gateway banners activated crossing 8' Sidewalk 6' Tree lawn Raised, planted 6' Tree lawn 10' Shared bike/ped path median tf r • , Vf 1 47 74. - r _ 1 • f Figure 35 , Lake Street Conceptual Design (looking west near Centre Avenue) Aggie Village North redevelopment Buffer crossing Campus spine 11 ' Travel lane, CSU parking 8' Parallel parking, 4' Planted buffer, 6' Bike lane, 6' Sidewalk, typical north and typical garage typical typical typical north and south sides } kt Center Ave. south sides k Yo- Y Y r L 4 -f " - 1 - V ; s or k I { �y f 90 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Prospect Corridc Potential Phasing Cost Estimates The conceptual designs provide a basis for further The following costs have been roughly estimated for the detailed design efforts and will likely require some level conceptual designs for Prospect Road and Lake Street. of modification during Final Design . Implementation will Costs include the development of final designs, right- likely occur over a period of time, in multiple phases : of-way acquisition, and construction of the proposed Phase I - reconstructing the roadway from College improvements . The designs for both Prospect Road and Avenue to Whitcomb Street. Work will likely consist of Lake Street would require reconstruction of a substantial the following : portion of the roadway, so the construction costs for • Acquire necessary right-of-way both roadways are similar. • Remove existing roadway features (curb, gutter, Table 9 . Prospect Corridor Cost Estimates road surface, sidewalk, utilities) • Construct new roadway features (curb, gutter, road Category Prospect Road Lake Street surface, raised median, tree lawn , 10 ' shared bike/ Final Design $ 1 . 1 Million $ 1 . 0 Million ped path, vegetation , utilities, corner enhancements, pedestrian underpass) Right-of-way $ 1 . 4 Million $ 500 Thousand Phase II - roadway reconstruction from Whitcomb Street Construction $ 5 . 5 Million $ 5 . 7 Million to Shields Street. Work will likely consist of the following : Total $8 Million $7 . 2 Million • Acquire necessary right-of-way, • Remove existing roadway features (curb, gutter, Cost estimates will be finalized during Final Design . road surface, sidewalk, utilities) Final costs will likely change based on : • Construct new roadway features (curb, gutter, road . How much ROW is acquired (i . e. , purchased) surface, raised median, tree lawn, 10' shared bike/ versus dedicated through redevelopment or ped path, vegetation , utilities) easements Phase III - If funding is unavailable during construction • Final intersection designs of the first two phases, intersection improvements • Detailed existing conditions surveys revealing and enhancements may occur as Phase III of the unknown conditions at the time of this plan (i . e . , implementation process . This work will consist of the utility information) following : • Build new enhancement features ( enhanced pedestrian refuge islands, path connections) at Shields Street & Prospect Road and at College Avenue & Prospect Road Figure 36 . Prospect Corridor Potential Phasing Phase II Phase I Shields St. Whitcomb Ave. Centre Ave. College Ave. M .. Phase III ( intersections) WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 91 Implementation Strategies 5 . Acquire right-of-way 1 . Obtain funding to develop construction plans Potential locations requiring acquisition of additional right-of-way or easements have been identified on the Final Design and construction plans are required to conceptual design plans . Landowner negotiations will advance the plan, requiring funding for City staff and take place prior to construction . A flowchart illustrating design consultants . this process is shown in Figure 32 . 2 . Prepare Final Design/construction plans and 6 . Conduct construction operations to minimize obtain approvals . impacts to businesses and residences Construction drawings will require a detailed existing Roadway construction projects can be disruptive to conditions site survey as a basis of design efforts to businesses, residents and other users of the corridor. further define roadway plans, profiles, and extents Strategies will be developed to help reduce these of impacts to private properties . Construction plans impacts and allow businesses to continue to function , will illustrate and define all information necessary residents to have continued access, and pedestrians, for a contractor to bid and install the project, as well bicycles and vehicles to continue to use the corridor to as provide a basis for review and approval by various the greatest extent possible . departments within the City of Fort Collins . During this phase, outreach and communication with the various 7 . Establish roadway and landscape maintenance property owners along the corridor will be critical for regimes success, as well as discussions and negotiations with A plan for operating and maintaining the reconstructed property owners potentially affected by right-of-way corridor will be developed and the project will be acquisitions necessary to successfully complete the incorporated into the City Streets Maintenance Program . corridor. The City of Fort Collins Parks Department will provide 3 . Finalize potential phasing ongoing landscape maintenance along the corridor. Construction of the roadway in segments is Iry v recommended to reduce construction impacts as much as possible along the entire roadway. However, it may be deemed necessary due to funding and/or other opportunities/constraints to construct the corridor in a manner requiring more or fewer overall phases . 4 . Obtain funding for construction Gaining support from the community and its elected and appointed leaders is key in order to receive adequate funding through allocations of sales taxes or other city - funds . A commitment by the community to fund the project will allow the city to apply for matching grants from state and federal agencies, and will give property owners and the development community confidence to invest in improvements and redevelopment projects . The Planted medianexample benefits of the project need to be clearly communicated to the citizens of Fort Collins . ta r � Jim j } w l %i F + JIM r'•- Protected bike lane example Shared bike/pedestrian path example 92 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Prospect Corridor Design & Construction Process There are a number of steps in the design and construction process for a new or reconfigured roadway. Each of these steps requires time and funding, so some projects can take more or less time than others to be constructed . At this time, funding has yet to be secured for future phases of design and construction for the Prospect Corridor. When the City of Fort Collins re-designs a roadway, there is often a need to acquire public access easements or additional public right-of-way from private properties along the roadway. The City has an established process for working with property owners to acquire right-of-way. The diagram below outlines the general process for a roadway project, including design, right-of-way acquisition, and construction . Figure 37 , Design and Construction Process 1 Conceptual Design Phase * * Contained in this plan —9-15 months Results in a recommended design based on public input and the 3a 3b issues and needs identified. Site Meetings between Notice of Interest Letter Property Owners & City This letter officially informs Staff owners of the property interests needed by the City, To discuss project design as discussed in previous 2 and acquisition needs. meetings. Final Design Phase —24-30 months A more detailed , Final Design process to address any remaining 3d 3C City Appraisal / Value issues and needs. Requires Determination of Falr additional funding. Market Value Estimates A fair market value is Appraisals and value determined from the results estimates are completed of the appraisals/value for the needed acquisitions estimates. and any affected property 3 improvements- Right-of-Way Acquisition Phase — 18 months (overlaps with design 3e City Offer of Fair 3f phase) � � � �' Market Value Negotiations Includes a combination of dedicated City staff will work with right-of-way through redevelopment The City presents an offer property owners to and right-of-way purchases from in the amount of the fair negotiate an agreement for market value for the needed the urchase of the needed individual property owners. p acquisition areas and acquisition areas. affected improvements_ 4 Construction Phase Closing — 12-15 months per phase Once an agreement has been reached and any necessary releases obtained (mortgage liens, The final construction of the new taxes, etc.), the City will hold a closing with a title roadway may occur in phases, company and funds will be disbursed to property depending on funding and other owners for the compensation due- constraints- WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 93 This page intentionally left blank 94 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN i _ • V r dol 40 ri *it ifill ip Alf i � 1 Oil 1' y . , l� 'I{� �_ 4/i•.. �� `�� � cn •' ' ' • l , •y try J 114 It r • %poll' �� fnl{ . � O ' , T r . / ►ro ■ � it . 1 f Vol I id" 40 ' . ,, f r Y 1 •I I P i i 66 Plot It 1w �0001 • rn• i J JI� 1 J i JFl Implementation Summary Action Items This section sum marizesthe action items presented in the : + Land Use and Neighborhood Character, Transportation and Mobility, and Open Space Networks chapters . Implementation of some of the recommendations of the West Central Area Plan will begin immediately with the adoption of the plan , with other actions identified for the near- and longer-term . The timeframes below indicate when a particular item should be initiated, though many items outlined in the plan are already in progress or will continue beyond the specified timeframe (e . g . , implementation of new education programs) . Funding for many of the action items has not yet been identified . _ The following four timeframes apply to the action items presented in the tables that follow. . • Immediate Actions (Within 120 Days of Adoption) • Items identified for completion concurrently with or immediately following adoption of the West Central Area Plan . Short-Term Actions (2015-2016) • Items identified for completion within the current � �« 4 i Budgeting for Outcomes ( BFO) budget cycle. Mid-Term Actions (2017-2024) = • High - priority items that should be initiated and implemented in alignment with upcoming budget cycles . Ongoing Programs & Actions • Items that are already in progress, do not have a specified timeframe, or generally require ongoing me IT mmai coordination to implement. 0. Open space to be improved at West Elizabeth Street and Skyline Drive - r- 96 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Implementation Summary Table 10 . Immediate Actions (Within 120 Days of Adoption) RelatedNo. Action Item Policies Responsibility 1 Update the City Code to clarify the enforcement of 1 . 1 Neighborhood Services violations related to dead grass and bare dirt in front yards. 2 Include educational information about City code 1 .3, 1 . 1 , 1 . 2 Neighborhood Services requirements as part of the code violation letters sent to residents . A summary of the most common violations and strategies for avoiding them should be included . 3 Make the following updates to the Land Use Code: 1 . 9, 1 . 10, 1 . 11 , Planning , Historic • Clarify requirements related to mass, scale, and 2 . 4 Preservation, FC Moves building design for the HMN zone district • Update compatibility standards for multi-family and mixed-use development • Require variety in the number of bedrooms provided in multi-family developments • Evaluate the feasibility of incorporating car share and bike share options into the Land Use Code and/or Development Review process 4 Form a joint City-CSU committee that meets regularly 1 . 12 City Manager's Office, to assist with communication and coordination related Planning , Development & to the on-going planning efforts of both entities . Transportation 5 Continue further analysis of potential improvements 2 . 1 FC Moves, Engineering, to the Shields corridor between Laurel and Prospect Traffic Operations, to facilitate access to such destinations as CSU and Planning Bennett Elementary School . 6 Establish Priority 1 pedestrian and bicycle routes 2.2, 1 . 1 , 1 . 3 Streets, FC Moves, for snow removal by the Streets Department. Match Neighborhood Services priority snow removal bicycle routes to the low- stress network identified in the Bicycle Master Plan . Provide enforcement and education on property owner responsibilities along Priority 1 snow removal routes . Communicate priority snow removal routes to CSU and the public . 7 Evaluate future West Elizabeth corridor transit needs 2 . 7 FC Moves, Transfort in the upcoming West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor Plan . 8 Develop a template for widening sidewalks . 2 . 8 Engineering , Streets 9 Determine a consistent strategy for applying the RP3 2 . 10 Parking Services, Planning program and other parking management strategies to existing and new multi-family developments . 10 Conduct neighborhood outreach regarding potential 3 . 5 Park Planning improvements to Lilac Park. & Development, Neighborhood Services, Planning 11 Pilot a residential tree canopy improvement project 3 . 11 Planning , Forestry, in collaboration with local nurseries, non-profit Neighborhood Services organizations, and CSU student groups . WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 97 We 11 . Short-Term Actions (2015 -201 C No. Action Item &Iated Policies Responsibility 12 Review the current strategy for the escalation of fines 1 . 111 . 2 Neighborhood Services and other enforcement measures for repeat code/ public nuisance violations, and update as needed . 13 Create a development guide or workbook that shows 1 . 8, 1 . 101 1 . 11 Planning, Historic the potential opportunities for improving aging homes Preservation so that the existing housing stock is better equipped to serve the next several generations . 14 Identify and provide strategically placed car sharing 2 . 4 FC Moves spaces . 15 Work with CSU to explore shared Park-n-Ride 2 . 6, 2 . 12 FC Moves, Transfort arrangements south and west of campus . 16 Integrate short- to mid-term bus stop improvements 2 . 7 Transfort into the citywide Bus Stop Improvement Program . 17 Explore the potential for incorporating related 2 . 8 , 3 . 10 Utilities, Engineering , stormwater and low-impact development (LID) Streets improvements into street retrofits . 18 Action items to be implemented in conjunction with 3 . 11 3 . 21 3 . 5 Planning, Natural Areas, Nature in the City: Park Planning and • Update open space standards in the Land Use Development Code to add clarity for developers and decision- makers related to the amount and type of open space required with new development and redevelopment. Requirements should include a mix of qualitative and quantitative standards that provide flexible options for the provision of functional natural spaces . • Develop a Design Guidelines document illustrating strategies for incorporating natural features and open space into new and existing developments . 19 Evaluate recent development contributions for parks 3, 113 . 5 Park Planning & and determine how to best apply available funds to Development new or enhanced parks in the West Central area . 20 Coordinate with the Stormwater department, Ram's 3 . 5 Stormwater, Park Planning Village Apartment complex, and other stakeholders & Development, Planning to explore potential improvements to the stormwater detention site at Skyline and West Elizabeth . 21 Improve the existing stormwater management site at 3 . 5 Stormwater, Park Planning Taft Hill and Glenmoor to provide enhanced wildlife & Development, Planning habitat and passive recreation (e. g . , soft surface path) . 98 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Implementation Summary Table 12 . Mid - Term Actions (2017 - 2024) No. Action Item Related Policies Responsibility• 22 Form an exploratory committee to evaluate the 1 . 1 , 1 . 2, 1 . 3 Planning, Building feasibility and potential effectiveness of a citywide Services, Neighborhood landlord registration or licensing program . Services 23 Create an interdisciplinary group to explore the creation 1 , 1 , 1 . 2, 1 . 3 Planning, Neighborhood of " Preferred Landlord" and " Preferred Tenant" Services programs, or other incentive-based programs to improve property management. 24 Create a program to provide annual education of 1 . 111 . 3 Neighborhood Services residents related to unscreened trash to reduce the number of violations . 25 Develop a strategy to proactively enforce sidewalk 1 . 11 2 . 11 2 . 2 Neighborhood Services shoveling by property owners along important pedestrian routes (e. g . , to schools, parks, and other major destinations) 26 Create an online, publicly-accessible map of code 1 . 311 . 1 Neighborhood Services, violation data to serve as a communication and GIS education tool . 27 Create a program that requires landlords to attend a 1 . 31 1 . 111 . 2 Neighborhood Services, class on rental property management in response to Police Services public nuisance ordinance violations . 28 Schedule annual meetings with neighborhood 1 . 31 1 . 9 Neighborhood Services, residents within the West Central area . As part of Planning these meetings, attendees can share their experiences related to living in a diverse neighborhood and discuss expectations for property owners, landlords, renters, law enforcement, and City staff. 29 Fund an additional staff position to support the 1 ,311 . 9 Neighborhood Services Community Liaison position . Such a position would strengthen existing Neighborhood Services and Off- Campus Life partnership programs, as well as the implementation of new programs and strategies . The costs of this position should be shared between the City and CSU . 30 Work with Front Range Community College to develop 1 . 3 , 1 . 2 Neighborhood Services a program to educate students about living in the community. Expand education efforts related to the impacts and requirements of occupancy limits in partnership with CSU and Front Range Community College. 31 Establish a Police Services sub-station within the 1 . 4 Police Services West Central area . Such a center could also include community-oriented services, such as a shared community room, office space for CSU and community organizations, or other amenities . Consider including the new sub-station within a future CSU parking structure near Shields Street and West Elizabeth Street . WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 99 Table 12 . Mid - Term Actions (2017 - 2024) - Continued No. Action item Related Policies Responsibility • 32 Map gaps in lighting and opportunities to bring 1 . 4 Light & Power, existing light fixtures up to current standards along Neighborhood Services major streets and within neighborhoods . 33 Review and update current policies for upgrading 1 . 411 . 5 Light & Power, and adding street lighting to ensure that it allows Neighborhood Services, for the adequate protection of public safety within Planning neighborhoods . 34 Upgrade existing bridges to include sidewalks and 1 . 5 Streets, Engineering safety railings, particularly over irrigation ditches . 35 Explore strategies for better informing residents of 1 . 6 Streets, Neighborhood the street sweeping schedule and the need to move Services vehicles from the street during sweeping operations . 36 Explore the creation of a program that supports the 1 . 11 Planning, Neighborhood retention of owner-occupied homes to maintain the Services stability of neighborhoods . 37 Incorporate transit service recommendations for the 2 . 7 Transfort West Central area into Transfort budget requests and future Transportation Strategic Operating Plan updates . 38 Retrofit Shields Street (between Prospect Road and 2 . 9 Engineering Laurel Street) to include medians and other aesthetic and safety improvements . 39 Retrofit Prospect Road (west of Shields Street) to 2 . 9 Engineering include medians and other aesthetic and safety improvements . 40 Identify parking lots that generally have additional 2 . 12. 2 . 6 Parking Services capacity at certain times or days of the week for shared parking opportunities . 41 Action items to be implemented in conjunction with 3 . 21 3 . 81 3 .9 Planning, Natural Areas, Nature in the City: Park Planning and • Identify gaps in the open space network for both Development wildlife and recreation , and develop a list of short- term and long-term projects that address the gaps . • Identify specific locations where wildlife habitat can be improved or added within the West Central area . 42 Identify gaps in transit service near existing or future 3,312 . 7 Transfort, Parks, Park parks and open space . Consider access to open space Planning & Development when making changes to Transfort bus routes and bus stop locations as part of the next update to the Transfort Strategic Plan . 43 Improve underpass at the crossing of Shields Street 3.3, 2 . 1 , 2 . 3 Parks, Engineering, and the Spring Creek Trail to improve visibility for Stormwater bicyclists and reduce flooding issues . 44 Improve underpass at the crossing of Centre Avenue 3.3, 2 . 1 , 2 . 3 Parks, Engineering, and the Spring Creek Trail to better accommodate the Stormwater high volume of users and reduce flooding issues . 100 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Implementation Summary Table 12 . Mid - Term Actions (2017 - 2024) - Continued No. Action Item Related Policies Responsibility• 45 Coordinate with CSU on the planning , construction, 3,312 . 11 2. 3 Parks, Park Planning & and funding of a future trail connection between the Development, Engineering intersection of Centre Avenue and Prospect Road and the Spring Creek Trail . 46 Establish a wayfinding system for parks and 3 . 3 Parks, Park Planning & open space, in conjunction with efforts to improve Development, FC Moves wayfinding along trails and bikeways throughout the city. 47 Construct a crossing of the Arthur Ditch near 3 .413 . 3 Planning, FC Moves, Whitcomb and Wallenberg to connect the Engineering neighborhood to the Spring Creek Trail . 48 Construct a crossing of Larimer County Canal 3 .413 . 3 Planning, FC Moves, Number 2 at Westview Ave. to improve neighborhood Engineering connectivity. 49 Construct a crossing of Larimer County Canal Number 3 . 413 . 3 Planning, FC Moves, 2 between Lynwood Drive and Bennett Elementary to Engineering support Safe Routes to School . 50 Identify locations (either within existing open space or 3 . 5 Stormwater, Park Planning new locations) that could potentially accommodate off- & Development, Planning, leash dog use . Neighborhood Services 51 Improve Lilac Park to better serve the nearby 3 . 5 Park Planning & neighborhoods and complement the Gardens on Development, Gardens on Spring Creek, wetland improvements on adjacent Spring Creek, Planning CSU property, and the proposed relocation of the CSU Horticulture Center to the north of the park. 52 Conduct a safety inventory along the Spring Creek Trail 3 . 6 Parks, FC Moves to identify locations that present safety concerns, such as poor nighttime visibility, visibility around corners, and areas of potential conflict between bicyclists and pedestrians . 53 Raise the bridge on the spur trail to the west of the 3 . 10 Parks, Engineering, Sheely/Wallenberg neighborhood to mitigate flooding Stormwater of the trail . 54 Proactively create additional tree cover in areas 3 . 11 Forestry dominated by ash trees to mitigate the potential impacts of the emerald ash borer. 55 Pursue funding to develop Final Design and Prospect Engineering, FC Moves construction plans for the Prospect Corridor. WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 101 Table 13 . Ongoing Programs & Actions • Action Item Related Policies Responsibility 56 Promote the annual Neighborhood Services Landlord 1 . 111 . 3 Neighborhood Services Training Program, offered by the City of Fort Collins and CSU, offering landlords and property management firms an opportunity to stay current with all applicable building and property maintenance codes . 57 Support the establishment of networking and 1 . 111 . 3 Neighborhood Services professional development group for landlords and property managers that meets casually to socialize and discuss ideas and challenges related to property management. 58 Continue to strengthen the effective enforcement of 1 . 111 . 2 Neighborhood Services, nuisance ordinances . Focus enforcement efforts on Police Services neighborhoods with proportionately higher number of violations . 59 When community service is required as a penalty 1 . 2 Neighborhood Services, for violations, apply the community service to the Police Services neighborhoods in which the violations frequently occur. 60 Support existing educational programs offered by 1 . 3 Neighborhood Services Neighborhood Services and CSU Off-Campus Life . Strengthen CSU Off-Campus Life's existing programs for educating students about the responsibilities of living off-campus and being a good neighbor. 51 Support the establishment and growth of organized 1 . 3 Neighborhood Services neighborhood groups within the West Central area . 62 Leverage existing neighborhood newsletters to 1 . 3 Neighborhood Services improve communication to neighborhood residents and property owners . 63 Support the efforts of Police Services and the CSU 1 . 311 . 4 Police Services, Police Department to include educational information Neighborhood Services and programs as part of their enforcement and community outreach strategy. Continue to hold neighborhood meetings regarding crime activity and safety concerns as needed . 54 Improve the utilization of code violation data to 1 . 3 Neighborhood Services, identify trends, problem areas, and communicate with Police Services the public . 65 Monitor crime incidents and trends in the West 1 . 4 Police Services Central area to determine if additional patrols, safety features, or other resources are needed . 66 Continue to identify locations where additional lighting , 1 . 4, 1 . 5 Light & Power, sidewalk connections, and other neighborhood safety Engineering, Street, Traffic improvements are needed over time . Operations, FC Moves, Planning 67 Continue to trim tree branches that block sight 1 . 4 Forestry, Traffic distance at intersections and stop signs, as needed . Operations 68 Continue to identify locations for physical traffic 1 . 412 . 3 Traffic Operations, FC calming or radar speed indicators . Moves 102 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Implementation Summary Table 13 . Ongoing Programs & Actions - Continued No, Action Item Related Policies Responsibility 69 Continue to regularly maintain curb paint to prevent 1 .412 . 3 Traffic Operations parked cars from blocking driveways and interfering with sight distance at intersections . 70 Provide information to neighborhood residents about 1 . 511 . 1 Neighborhood Services, Access Fort Collins, an application that allows users to Planning directly report issues to City departments . 71 Improve neighborhood identity and aesthetics 1 . 5 Planning, Neighborhood with entry signage. Support efforts initiated by Services neighborhoods to make improvements . 72 Continue to widen existing attached sidewalks where 1 . 5 FC Moves, Engineering, feasible. Fill in missing gaps in sidewalks within Streets, Traffic Operations neighborhoods . 73 Continue to add street trees throughout the area, 1 . 6, 3 . 11 Planning, Forestry particularly along Prospect Road west of Shields Street, along collector roads, and at entrances to neighborhoods . 74 Continue to implement the citywide Street 1 . 6 Streets Maintenance Program within the West Central area to ensure that aging infrastructure is repaired as needed . 75 Maintain the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zone 1 . 7 Planning district to allow for future development of a mixed-use neighborhood center near Shields and Prospect. 76 Encourage businesses to locate in existing , 1 . 7 Planning , Economic Health underutilized commercial buildings in the West Central area whenever possible. 77 Sites that have structures that are officially recognized 1 . 10 Planning, Historic as local, state, or national historic landmarks are Preservation encouraged to consult with the Landmark Preservation Commission or their Design Review Subcommittee in order to gain valuable feedback. In addition , applicants are encouraged to apply for the Design Assistance Grant Program, which offers financial assistance for specialized professional architectural services . 78 Developers should consider additional neighborhood 1 . 10 Planning meetings beyond the standard requirement, interactive design charrettes, and individual meetings with affected property owners to demonstrate a high level of collaboration with neighborhood residents . Ensure that the requirements of the Land Use Code 1 . 11 Planning continue to support a variety of housing types and densities within the West Central area . 80 Continue to enforce building codes that protect 1 . 11 Planning, Building Services the health and safety of tenants in rental housing , particularly for older properties in need of improvement and properties where unauthorized remodeling and building additions have occurred . WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 103 Table 13 . Ongoing Programs & Actions - Continued No, Action Item Related Policies Responsibility Encourage CSU to engage neighborhood residents in 1 . 12 Planning, Neighborhood the University's plans for long-term growth and new Services development projects . 82 Engage CSU student groups (e. g . , clubs, sports teams, 1 . 12 Neighborhood Services sororities and fraternities, majors with community service requirements) in volunteer efforts to improve the West Central neighborhoods . 83 Encourage the involvement of CSU students in 1 . 12 Neighborhood Services neighborhood organizations, neighborhood meetings, Neighborhood Night Out, and other events . 84 Support implementation of the Pedestrian Plan through 2 . 1 Engineering , FC Moves the Pedestrian Needs Assessment. 85 Assess the impacts of projects on safe routes through 2 . 1 FC Moves the creation of performance measures and evaluation strategies . 86 Continue to assess the needs and refine designs for Potential FC Moves, Traffic the intersection and roadway projects identified in Projects, 2 . 3 Operations, Engineering Figures 18 and 19 and Tables 3-6. 87 As potential projects are refined, add them to the City's Potential FC Moves Capital Improvement Program (CIP) . Projects, 2 . 3 88 Coordinate the potential projects identified in the West Potential FC Moves, Traffic Central Area Plan with other ongoing city programs to Projects, 2 . 3 Operations, Engineering , make improvements in a cost-effective and efficient Streets, Transfort manner (e. g . , Bus Stop Improvement Program, Street Maintenance Program (SMP), and Capital Improvement Program (CIP)) . 89 Provide education on safe user behavior as new 2 . 3 FC Moves, Traffic crossing improvements are implemented . Operations 90 Support completion of the low-stress bicycle network, 2 . 3 FC Moves per the 2014 Bicycle Master Plan . 91 Coordinate with CSU on education and continue Safe 2 . 3 FC Moves Routes to School (SRTS) efforts . 92 Continue to assess traffic enforcement needs and 2 . 3 FC Moves, Police Services coordinate with Police Services and the CSU Police Department. 93 Pursue sustainable funding strategies for 2 . 3 FC Moves improvements that benefit all travel modes . 94 Work towards achieving Climate Action Plan goals 2 . 3 FC Moves, Environmental to reduce VMT through bike, pedestrian, and transit Services improvements . 95 Work to implement the recommendations of the Bike 2 . 4 FC Moves Share Business Plan . 96 Consider transit stop locations in bicycle and 2 . 5 FC Moves, Transfort pedestrian network planning . 104 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Implementation Summary Table 13 . Ongoing Programs & Actions - Continued • Action Item Related Policies Responsibility 97 Add shelters to existing and future bus stops . 2 ,7) 1 . 5 Transfort Coordinate bus stop improvements with other roadway improvement projects, where applicable . 98 Seek opportunities to provide additional, high-quality 2 . 7 Transfort, FC Moves bike parking at bus stops . 99 Pursue opportunities to implement neighborhood 2 . 8 Parking Services, Traffic street retrofitting in conjunction with the Street Operations Maintenance Program and Capital Projects . 100 Monitor issues and complaints related to residential 2 . 10 Parking Services parking on a day-to-day basis, and consider the application of the Residential Parking Permit Program (RP3) or other approaches to reduce impacts, as warranted . 101 Coordinate with CSU to implement the CSU Parking 2 . 10 Parking Services, FC & Transportation Master Plan, with a focus on Moves minimizing the impacts of student, faculty, staff, and visitor parking in neighborhoods . 102 Evaluate the parking demand created by new multi- 2 . 11 Planning, Parking Services family developments to ensure that adequate parking is provided to support those projects . 103 Ensure that new development complies with the 2 . 11 Planning recently adopted Transit-Oriented Development Overlay Zone parking standards, where applicable. 104 Facilitate public-private partnership arrangements 2. 121 2 . 6 Planning, Parking Services that allow for shared parking or car storage arrangements . 105 Work with City and CSU Special Events Coordinators 2 . 13 Parking Services, Traffic to ensure that event management plans include Operations provisions for adequate parking and traffic control . 105 Engage neighborhood organizations and homeowners 3 . 1 Planning, Neighborhood associations to assist with the stewardship of existing Services and new open space. 107 Identify funding mechanisms for improvements to 3 . 11 3 . 21 3 . 5 Parks, Park Planning & existing and acquisition of new parks, open space and Development, Natural trails, as needed . Areas 108 Create spur trails that better connect neighborhoods 3 . 2 Planning, Parks, Park to parks, natural areas, schools, the Spring Creek Trail , Planning & Development, Mason Trail , and other open space areas . Natural Areas, FC Moves 109 Coordinate among City Departments to align priorities 3 . 3 Parks, Park Planning & for improving access to open space. Development, Natural Areas, Planning, FC Moves, Transfort 110 Continue to add safe pedestrian crossings along 3 . 312 . 1 FC Moves, Traffic arterials to provide residents with more direct access Operations, Planning , to parks and open space. Engineering WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 105 • Action • Policies • • • 111 Coordinate with ditch companies to allow for 3 . 4 Planning, Development & appropriate access along ditches . Transportation 112 Remove obstacles for wildlife movement along 3,41 3 . 71 3 . 8 Planning ditches, including the replacement of old fencing with wildlife fencing, as appropriate . 113 Coordinate with the Parks, Park Planning and 3 . 5 Stormwater, Park Planning Development, and Stormwater departments to & Development, Planning incorporate a broader range of settings and experiences as part of future work plans for parks in the West Central area . 114 Support the establishment of community gardens 3 . 5 Neighborhood Services, in public areas or areas managed by neighborhood Parks organizations or HOAs . 115 Identify locations (either within existing open space or 3 . 5 Parks, Park Planning & new locations) that could potentially accommodate Development off-leash dog use. 116 Monitor complaints and crime reports in City of Fort 3 . 5 Parks, Natural Areas, Collins parks, natural areas, and along trails to improve Police Services law enforcement and ranger patrols in those areas . 117 Partner with ditch management companies to 3 . 7 Planning, Development & protect and improve wildlife habitat along irrigation Transportation , Natural waterways. Areas 118 Renovate existing stormwater detention areas 3 . 8 Stormwater, Parks, Natural to improve wildlife habitat and aesthetics . Where Areas, Park Planning & appropriate, consider including soft surface trails and Development, Planning other recreational amenities . 119 Identify sections the Spring Creek corridor where 3 . 8 Parks, Natural Areas stormwater management and/or wildlife habitat could be improved . 120 Encourage habitat enhancement on private property 3 . 9 Natural Areas through the Natural Areas Certification and Natural Areas Enhancement Fund programs . 121 Encourage Low Impact Development (LID) techniques 3 . 10 Stormwater as part of new development and capital projects . 122 Regularly review the adequacy of stormwater 3 . 10 Stormwater protection and provide additional stormwater protection where needed . 123 Support neighborhood grant applications that seek to 3 . 11 Neighborhood Services improve parks, open space, and tree canopy within the West Central area . 124 Continue current policies for including street trees as 3 . 11 Planning, Forestry part of all new developments and City capital projects . 125 Identify funding mechanisms for improving habitat 3 . 11 Planning, Forestry, and urban tree canopy on private property. Neighborhood Services 106 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Implementation Summary Implementation Team Ongoing Monitoring & Outreach The City, other public agencies, residents, developers, and private sector groups all play an important role "In order to be effective, planning must not be static in achieving the vision of the West Central Area Plan . but rather always dynamic, incorporating a process of Following adoption of the plan, an interdisciplinary team planning, taking action, checking progress, and acting of City staff will be assembled to coordinate and monitor to change course where needed. " - City Plan, 2011 the implementation of the plan . The responsibilities of this team will include the prioritization of action items, Tracking the implementation of the West Central Area identifying and pursuing potential funding sources, Plan programs and projects is critical to achieving convening work teams for specific action items, and the vision and outcomes outlined in the plan . monitoring the development of new programs and Implementation monitoring is a qualitative exercise, projects . The team should include designated staff tracking public policy and investment actions . The leads from the following City departments : implementation team, outlined above, will ensure that • FC Moves continuous progress occurs to carry out the policies • Engineering Services and action items in the plan . The status of action items • Neighborhood Services will be continually monitored and published in an annual • Planning Services status report, which will be posted to the West Central Area Plan website . The following City departments should also be consulted It is important that the plan remains relevant and adapts or included in the implementation of specific programs over time . The overall effectiveness of the plan will be or projects: evaluated periodically over the next 10 to 15 years, until • Communications & Public Involvement an update to the plan is determined to be necessary. If • Economic Health minor changes or additions are deemed necessary prior • Environmental Services to a major update, the plan may be partially updated as • Forestry needed . • Gardens on Spring Creek Ongoing outreach to residents, developers, and other • Historic Preservation stakeholders is essential to determining the effectiveness • Natural Areas of the plan's action items, projects, and programs at • Operations Services serving the needs of this area and working toward the • Parks vision outlined in the plan . As items are implemented , • Park Planning & Development information should be made available through the • Parking Services City's website, email and mailed notifications, and at • Police Services neighborhood meetings within the West Central area . • Social Sustainability Certain action items may require additional outreach , as • Streets • Traffic Operations necessary. • Transfort • Utilities Services The following external agencies or organizations play a critical role in the implementation of the West Central Area Plan , and should also be consulted or included in the implementation of specific programs or projects : • Colorado State University (CSU) Facilities Department • CSU Off-Campus Life • CSU Police Department • Fort Collins Housing Authority • Poudre School District WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 107 Funding Many of the projects and programs identified in this plan are not currently funded . Implementation of the plan's recommendations will likely be funded in a variety of ways . Some of the potential funding sources for projects and programs are listed below, along with a brief description and indication of which topic area (s) might be most applicable. Table 14. Potential Funding Sources source Description M Applicability General Fund The City's General Fund could be a funding source, primarily through the All (City) Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) process used to develop the City's two-year budget. The current budget is set for 2015- 16 and includes several projects that could provide funding for projects and programs within the West Central area . Key examples include: • Bicycle Infrastructure Investments • Pedestrian Sidewalk and Americans with Disabilities Act Compliance Program • Safe Routes to School Strategic Traffic Infrastructure Program • Bridge Replacements and Maintenance Program • Neighborhood Revitalization Projects • Traffic Calming Study and Infrastructure Program The process for the 2017- 18 budget will begin in 2016. Keep Fort Collins Fort Collins voters approved a 0 . 85 percent sales tax initiative, Keep Fort All Great (City) Collins Great (KFCG), to provide funding for city projects . KFCG funds projects in many different categories, including fire, police, transportation and streets, and parks . KFCG funds are typically allocated through the City's Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) process . Voter-Approved Fort Collins currently has a capital improvement tax in place, the latest in All Sales Tax a series of such taxes beginning in 1973 . The current tax is set to expire at Initiative (City) the end of 2015 . The City Council has adopted Resolution 2015-012, placing an extension of the current tax on the April 7, 2015, municipal election ballot. Several of the projects currently included in the Capital Improvement Program proposal could provide funding for projects and programs within the West Central area, if the sales tax extension is approved by voters . Key examples include: • Arterial Intersection Improvements • Pedestrian Sidewalk/Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Compliance — Safe Routes to Everywhere • Bicycle Plan Implementation • Bicycles Infrastructure Improvements — Safe Routes to Everywhere • Bus Stop Improvements — Safe Routes to Everywhere • Bike/ Ped Grade Separated Crossings Fund • Arterial Intersection Improvements Fund • Implementing Nature in the City • Gardens on Spring Creek Visitor's Center Expansion If the current sales tax renewal passes, it will last for ten-years; subsequent capital improvement programs funded by voter-approved sales taxes could be additional sources of funding in the future. 108 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Implementation Summary ApplicabilitySource Description Art in Public Art in Public Places (APP) encourages and enhances artistic expression All Places (City) throughout the city and as part of new development projects . City capital projects with a budget greater than $250, 000 must designate 1 % of their budget to providing public art. The program could be applied to enhance neighborhood identity and placemaking within the West Central Area . Innovation Fund The Innovation Fund is an internal grant program open to all City All (City) employees . Proposed projects may be implemented by any City department. Submissions are accepted once a year during the application period , and proposals may not exceed $30,000 . Natural Areas For projects designed to enhance or restore private or public natural areas Open Space Enhancement in Fort Collins . Examples of projects might include native tree and shrub Networks Fund (City) plantings, removal of exotic pest trees, wetland restoration , or native grassland revegetation . Applications for enhancement funds are accepted each fall . Neighborhood For projects designed to enhance or restore private natural areas or public All Grants Program lands, other than those managed by the Natural Areas Department, in Fort (City) Collins . Street Oversizing Fort Collins collects transportation impact fees through developer Transportation , Fund (City) contributions in order to finance the Street Oversizing program for Land Use & collectors and arterials . Neighborhood Character Improvement Municipalities have the option of raising funds for special projects by All Districts implementing improvement districts . Improvement districts overlay specific parts of the city that stand to benefit from the new project. Land owners within the district often pay either additional property taxes or special assessments . While cities can propose improvement districts, they must then be approved by landowners within the district boundaries . State and Federal Several recent large-scale transportation projects in Fort Collins have All Grants received state and federal funds, including the MAX Bus Rapid Transit and North College Avenue Improvement projects . These projects received grants because they will increase mobility and enhance alternative transportation methods . One major source of federal funds is the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) section of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21 st Century Act (MAP-21 ) . Another potential state-funded option would be Funding Advancement for Surface Transportation & Economic Recovery (FASTER) grant money. The FASTER program provides funding for large capital purchases that have significant regional impacts . Funds are awarded on a two-year cycle. Other federal grant funding sources may include: • FASTER Safety Program • Hazard Elimination Program (HES) • Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) Program • Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program • Surface Transportation Program (STP) Metro Grants • Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) • Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grants • Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Smart Growth Grants • Housing and Urban Development (HUD) programs WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 109 This page intentionally left blank 110 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN L m E cn W O C.) x a This page intentionally left blank Appendix A - Community Engagment Summary The following appendix summarizes the various community outreach events and activities that occurred throught the West Central Area Plan development process . The following summaries are included here : Community Engagement 1 . Listening Sessions Summary (March-April 2014) 2 . Neighborhood Walking Tours Summary (April -May 2014) 3 . WikiMap Summary (March- May 2014) 4 . Visioning Events Summary ( May-June 2014) 5 . Fall 2014 Outreach Summary (September-October 2014) 6 . Prospect Corridor Survey Summary ( November- December 2014) 7 . Draft Plan Comments Summary (February- March 2015) Stakeholder Committee 8 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting # 1 - Summary 9 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting #2 - Summary 10 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting #3 - Summary 11 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting #4 - Summary 12 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting # 5 - Summary 13 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting # 6 - Summary This page intentionally left blank O ■ � L CA a O 0 cn CL E O cn CM) Q CSU On - Campus Stadium ' The High Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (HMN) District (located immediately south of the stadium site) is intended to be a setting for higher density In December 2014, the CSU Board of Governors approved multi-family housing and group quarter residential the development of a new stadium, to be constructed on uses (dormitories , fraternities , sororities , etc . ) the CSU Main Campus . A wide range of concerns and closely associated with , and in close proximity to, comments related to the stadium have been collected the Colorado State University Main Campus . Per throughout the West Central Area Plan process . Below the Land Use Code, any private sector development is a summary of considerations and recommendations would be held to the maximum allowable off-site for the new CSU stadium, as they relate to the various lighting spillage into the entire HMN zone of 0 . 1 foot- topic areas of the West Central Area Plan . candle . If illumination levels from the stadium are not mitigated, potential re-development of this area Land Use & Neighborhood would be negatively impacted . Character • The glare from sports lighting impacts a driver's ability to distinguish objects and impairs overall Noise visibility. If it is discovered that the glare created by • Based on noise studies provided by CSU , the stadium lighting would be problematic, then light anticipated decibel levels during football games and level reductions or other mitigation measures should concert events would exceed that which is allowed be implemented . by the City Code for all nearby residential zone Additional massing along the south end of the districts (maximum of 55 dBA between 7 : 00 a . m . stadium would have the benefit of shielding nearby and 8: 00 p . m .) . The impact of noise on residents in properties from light spillage, glare, and noise. all directions of the stadium needs to be adequately Safety, Aesthetics & Waste Management addressed through the design of the stadium and Measures should be taken to address issues related event management. to tailgating activities in nearby neighborhoods . • A design change that raises the wall on the south Tailgating should be directed to approved locations . end of the stadium is recommended to more Tailgating in neighborhoods should be limited to effectively lower the off-site decibels impacting the the extent possible, and public nuisance violations neighborhoods to the south . Adjustments could also should be swiftly enforced to prevent large outdoor be made to the loud speaker arrangement to better gatherings . direct sound away from neighborhoods . As people travel through the neighborhoods near • Over the long term, music concerts have the potential the stadium, both before and after football games of creating more disturbances for nearby residents and other events , there is an increased potential than football games . The plan recommends that CSU for disruptive behavior. Police patrols and law enter into a formal agreement with the City of Fort enforcement presence should be increased within Collins regarding the number of concerts per year neighborhoods before, during , and after events to and sound management for such events . If concerts prevent and address disruptions . are not an important part of stadium programming, Tailgating activities and pedestrian traffic through consider agreeing to hold concerts only on the neighborhoods may result in a significant amount of granting of a special use permit from the City as a trash left behind in the street, along sidewalks, and prerequisite for holding a concert. in yards . Neighborhood clean- up activities should • The plan recommends that CSU establish a time- be coordinated immediately following events to certain conclusion for concerts and other evening mitigate impacts . Outreach should be targeted at events . CSU students and other event patrons to prevent • Monitor sound levels as events are occurring to such issues to the extent possible. adjust sound management in real-time in response to CSU should make significant efforts to improve issues that arise, in conjunction with Neighborhood communication and coordination with adjacent Services, Police Services, and other City staff. neighborhoods for football games and other events . ' ighting The City of Fort Collins , CSU , and neighborhood residents should be mutually viewed as partners in preventing and mitigating the impacts of stadium events on neighborhood character. B 2 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN CSU On -Campus Stadium Transportation & Mobility Transit Operational Plan Implement enhanced transit service to reduce the • Given the tremendous expense and feasibility need for stadium attendees to drive through the challenges of infrastructure construction , it is West Central area . prudent to address as many needs as possible As many as 3, 000 parking spaces may be used for through operational enhancements (such as a major event. Many of those spaces will be at the additional transit service), and multi-modal traffic south campus, tennis courts, or Natural Resources management . This will require a comprehensive Research Center (NRRC), so shuttles will be needed plan that includes outreach, education, detailed between parking and the stadium . parking information, transportation demand Traffic Impacts management, and gameday operational plans for Even with enhanced transit service and a robust all modes . implementation of traffic management strategies, • Use variable message signs prior to events to there are areas around campus that will be critical suggest alternate routes before and after stadium "pinch points" for the mobility of stadium attendees events . and nearby residents . These are areas that require Parking Impacts infrastructure changes to accommodate the • For potential off-campus parking in area additional bike, pedestrian, and vehicular traffic . neighborhoods, consider expanding and broader In addition to major events (sellouts) , it's also use of the City's Residential Parking Permit important to consider the non-capacity events that Program (RP3) to mitigate stadium-related parking will occur at the stadium on a much more regular basis . Some of those may not have dedicated impacts . traffic control management and the transportation • Residents of neighborhoods near the CSU campus impacts need to be accommodated primarily with are concerned about gameday parking on residential on-the-ground infrastructure . streets . The City has implemented a Residential . Determine the necessary infrastructure Parking Permit Program (RP3) to help address this improvements needed , identify costs, and issue. Currently, there are three neighborhoods in determine who pays for the improvements the program (Spring Court, Sheely, and Mantz. ) By . There will be a need to accommodate increased the time the stadium is built, it is likely that several bicycle and pedestrian traffic, particularly crossing additional neighborhoods will be added . The RP3 Prospect and Shields, as well as east-west travel to requires a permit to park in a residential permit zone . and from the stadium Only residents of the zone are allowed to obtain Designate recommended bicyclist and pedestrian permits . Incorporating a more proactive approach routes to ensure safety and to minimize disruption with signs and enforcement officers may be needed in residential neighborhoods for gamedays (and other non-football events, as well) . r ,P y 1 We i' WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 B 3 Open Space Networks Prospect Corridor rvoise df Lignung In December 2014, the CSU Board of Governors approved • As described in the Land Use & Neighborhood the development of a new stadium , to be constructed Character chapter, both sporting and other events on the CSU Main Campus . Below is a summary of at the stadium will likely result in significant noise considerations and recommendations for the new CSU and lighting impacts . Noise and light pollution stadium, as they relate to the Prospect Corridor. both impact environmental quality, and the City of Prospect may experience an increase in traffic on Fort Collins has enacted a number of policies and event days. The Event Management Operational Plan regulations that seek to minimize these impacts should consider temporary route adjustments and citywide. Measures should be taken to minimize the noise and lighting impacts of the stadium beyond incorporate ways for the Sheely/Wallenberg residents the CSU campus . to be able to get into and out of neighborhood (only • As described in Land Use & Neighborhood Character, accessed via Prospect for vehicles) . a sound wall could be erected on the south end of the Incorporate wayfinding and infrastructure stadium to reduce impacts. Such a wall could include improvements to accommodate increased bicycle live plant material as a feature to soften the mass of and pedestrian traffic, particularly crossing Prospect the wall and provide an open space amenity within and Shields, which re-emphasizes the importance of the stadium site. an underpass of Prospect at Center. Construction & Operation Consider ways of handling game day traffic on • The use of sustainable building materials and Prospect and Lake through a combination of practices is strongly encouraged to minimize impacts infrastructure improvements and operations to the natural environment. management. • Sustainable operation and management practices, such as water and energy efficiency measures , should be employed to minimize impacts to the natural environment. • Protect the existing CSU arboretum and Plant Environmental Research Center (PERC) facilities to the maximum extent possible during construction . Stormwater Management • Any impacts to the stormwater system created by the construction or operation of the stadium should be fully mitigated . Improvements that address existing stormwater issues should be made whenever possible . T y B 4 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN CSU On -Campus Stadium Public Input Wait until the stadium decision is made - no need to do it over. (Question 19) • Please oppose the new stadium plans ! ! This is bad for The following section summarizes the public input the West Central area in many ways . The transportation received regarding the Colorado State University (CSU) difficulties seen now will magnify many times over on-campus stadium that was approved by the CSU with this disastrous project . I live just Southwest of Board of Governors in December 2014. Comments Drake and Shields and I work on campus (but am not shared through online surveys during the West an employee of CSU) . Please --this affects me greatly! Central Area Plan process are compiled below. When (Question 19) possible, the comments are stated verbatim . Spelling The huge impact will be the CSU Stadium, if it is built. and grammatical corrections were made to improve This will totally foul traffic in this area , especially readability, as needed . Prospect. (Question 19) Additional community input related to the development I am also not opposed to the stadium if done right. of an on-campus stadium, as compiled by a Community (Question 19) Design Development Advisory Committee (CDDAC) can be found at the following website: http:// The area is great and we have most what we need here. csudesignadvisorycommittee. com/. The area is a focus for CSU and we should be cognizant of the fact that is the way it is . Complaining about living May 2014 Visioning Survey near the campus is counterproductive and those that do should vote with their feet. I have lived/worked near • Traffic flow on Prospect, esp . if new stadium is built at a university since 1980 and it is a great benefit, not the CSU . (Question 2) opposite. Go Rams, build the new stadium ! (Question • Parking for residents will be important especially 19) with over-crowded stadium parking , student housing, It's pretty pointless to go very far on this process etc . Make parking part of builders ' responsibilities . until we know about the proposed football stadium . (Question 6) (Question 19) • Trying to get on and off of the CSU campus via Prospect October 2014 Online Survey / September 2014 Rd . BIG delays on Whitcomb and Prospect every day between 4-5 . . . can't imagine how everyone is going to Open House Questionnaires leave campus if they build the stadium in that area . . . . With French Field events, Rolland Moore events, The is anyone doing any studies on the evacuation time Grove block parties, CSU 's new stadium and the Ex- via car to get 35, 000 students plus faculty/staff off Garden's Amphitheater how will we even hear ourselves the campus for emergency or when Tony Frank calls think? No less find a parking place . (Question 3) a snow day at 10 am? (Question 7) • Avoid adding businesses and activities that would ' You talk about natural areas but build more apartment increase traffic, such as the proposed CSU on-campus complexes with inadequate parking and talk about stadium . (Question 9) natural areas and now a stadium in an area that does not fit properly in the area . The current stadium has • Concerned about thefts at southwest CSU stadium at more than adequate room for parking . Stop wasting parking lot north of Pineridge. (Question 12) our tax money. (Question 13) • What it doesn 't need is a new CSU stadium located • Moving traffic - especially if the stadium is built . nearby. (Question 15) (Question 17) • Projects such as the proposed CSU on-campus stadium • DO NOT spend taxpayer funds on infrastructure should be avoided , as it would greatly increase traffic improvements for the proposed on-campus stadium ! on Prospect. (Question 15) (Question 20) • Prospect is a travel corridor, but I wouldn't encourage • Do not let the stadium cloud yourjudgment! We don 't higher density traffic due to the fact that there are so want a stadium ! (Question 20) many residences that are on Prospect. This is one . Why is the city wasting money on Prospect planning reason I object to the on-campus stadium proposal . before the fate of the new stadium is known? (Question The infrastructure to handle the additional traffic 20) doesn 't exist and would be difficult to implement . (Question 15) • I am not against the on-campus stadium . (Question 20) • A new stadium nearby would be disastrous for this corridor and should be resisted with every effort possible. (Question 15) • All bets are off for Prospect if CSU stadium happens . (Question 19) • No stadium ! (Question 19) WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 B 5 • We must stop ADDING housing , event centers , HEED CSU AND COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDER shopping centers etc . to this area until the traffic OPPOSITION TO THE STADIUM ON THE MAIN issues are resolved . Prospect is extremely dangerous, CAMPUS, ALREADY HAVING A PERFECTLY GOOD ONE especially from Shields to College. It's difficult to drive ON THE FOOTHILLS CAMPUS, AND THE PHENOMENAL on due to how narrow it is and we are increasing TRAFFIC CONGESTION THAT THERE WOULD BE ON traffic on that road with EVERY project that is done or PROSPECT, COLLEGE, SHIELDS AND BLOCKS AND proposed (Grove, shopping center, housing project at BLOCKS AWAY FROM THE CAMPUS . ALTHOUGH A Hill Pond and Gilgalad , amphitheater at the Gardens, SATURDAY, IT WOULD MAKE RUSH HOUR ON WEEK daycare, CSU parking garages, CSU stadium) . Prospect DAYS LOOK SPARSE AND FLOWING . (Question 5) is already a nightmare and we will drive people AWAY Worried about the traffic snarls, delays with all the foot, from this area if we are not very careful . And MAX does bicycle and bus traffic this plan will create . Then CSU not resolve the problems . No one is going to walk from wants to build their campus stadium that this area a shopping center on Shields and Stuart all the way to cannot handle the increased traffic in will cause . This a Max station . That's not an easy walk either. Walking down Prospect is downright dangerous . Taking the trail city is too congested as it is . NO TO THE STADIUM . is an option until you get to Center where it is OFTEN (Question 5) flooded . Crossing Center is dangerous . Then you have How will a new stadium impact everything we're trying to get across the tracks to get to the Max. So, you can to do? Will a new vision need to include the larger cross at Prospect, again quite dangerous or you can community of football fans stateside? (Question 5) walk all the way down to the bridge. Neither of these The goals are admirable . Will you be able to achieve option are good ones on bikes either. I 'm an avid cyclist these goals if the proposed new stadium is built on and it's not easy getting over that bridge on a bike due Lake? (Question 5) to the sharp turns and no one in their right mind would bike down Prospect. (Question 20) • Prospect needs to stay 2 lanes for each direction otherwise the congestion will be too much - especially • How much can you plan for until you know for certain since the stadium was approved (Question 5) what is going to happen with the proposed football stadium?? (Question 20) I 'm assuming this will be forthe new stadium looking to go in . How do you propose to make travel as effective • Get rid of stadium (Open House questionnaire) if not more along the prospect corridor with the • What considerations are being given to improving the integration of the stadium? (Question 5) Prospect corridor if the new CSU stadium is being built? Be certain there are NO cuts allowed for a new (Open House questionnaire) stadium . Be certain there are NO road modifications Prospect Corridor Online Survey (November to accommodate a new stadium . Do NOT disrupt 2014 Prospect for new water and sewer and electrical for a new stadium . (Question 5) • How much has a possible new stadium been involved 1 assume that this is mainly being done in anticipation in the planning ! (Question 5) for the new stadium? But the intersection of Prospect • 1 support the project, but I am against the construction & Center needs revamping regardless . (Question 5) of a new campus stadium . (Question 5) This is the most difficult, traffic volume wise, so the • No money for on-campus stadium ! (Question 5) City must use its influence to protect surrounding users from an on -campus stadium . The silence so • None will apply if the stadium is built. (Question 5) far has been maddening for me . When committee • The vision will be impaired at all levels by the chair ( McClusky) said CSU does not need to heed construction of an on-campus stadium . (Question 5) surrounding people, I was floored . City let us down . • This just continues to pave the way for stadium traffic . (Question 5) At taxpayer expense (Question 5) Why put all this money into this without knowing about the on-campus stadium in the area . Shouldn't • What are your plans if the stadium is built? (Question 5) CSU be at least partly responsible for upgrades and • Don't let CSU build a main campus stadium (Question improvements here? (Question 5) 5) Movement through the corridor must also be fast . • Should be developed with CSU's proposed on-campus Anything that is done to the corridor should NOT make stadium in mind (Question 5) it less efficient to move through . ( Especially with a stadium going in) (Question 5) B 6 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN CSU On -Campus Stadium • We just wonder if all this attention to this particular Nothing is attractive about long traffic backups along area is because of the proposed stadium? Granted this Prospect with the advent of MAX and the pedestrian section of road leaves much to be desired in terms of crossings on either side of the tracks and at Center needed renovations, but since we happen to oppose Ave. Not a good way to impress visitors and tourists, the stadium, we wonder what the underlying reasons particularly the new stadium is added to the mix. Put in are that so much attention is being given to this those underpasses before it becomes an even bigger particular area . It is already pretty much a nightmare issue . (Question 8) at certain times of the day. The improvements to this Graded down because City is silent when McClusky corridor would be welcome, but the addition of stadium reiterated every meeting that CSU need not be traffic even with improvements will just make it a big responsible for on-campus stadium traffic, not only nightmare all over again . What is the honest answer? Is game day. (Question 9) the stadium the reason for the concern to improve this corridor or is city street improvement for the citizens This plan likely will not accommodate the additional of Fort Collins the reason? (Question 5) traffic generated by an on-campus stadium . Given the • If/when they build the on campus stadium is it wise to likelihood of CSU proceeding with their plans, does this have the built up medians? (Question 7) mean the new design will be effectively outdated within a year or two of completion . (Question 9) • Bus not mentioned . Will bus stop in traffic lane? What The stadium would completely negate this positive about quantity of traffic-- long back-ups at rush hour, vision and plan for both CSU and the community. lunch times, and due to trains and games at Moby (Question 10) and now soon on - campus stadium ? Sometimes intersections are blocked . How can emergency vehicles On-campus stadium bad idea not sufficiently claimed get through? (Question 7) during on-campus stadium debate, the 1 % is ignoring • I keep thinking about how this will be changed with the the 99% as usual by the rich . (Question 10) stadium and how it will be affected then if the stadium Although it seems premature to make these decisions is really being put in . This is a long term thought . If now that it looks like CSU will build a new Football the stadium does not go in , I would score higher on all Stadium off Lake in this corridor. (Question 10) areas . (Question 7) • A new on-campus stadium should require truly major • Wow! Neat! However, tell Tony Frank and the CSU BOG financial contributions from CSU . (Question 11 ) that if they want to continue to pursue Frankenfield at . Be prepared for the stadium . (Question 11 ) Grahamdoggle Stadium, they need to be prepared to get approval for a funding for a second level on Prospect t NOT allow a decent plan to be disrupted by a new s or high-speed monorail from Foothills Campus to stadium on campus (Question 11 ) 1 -25, which would help with weekday congestion , too . • How can any decisions be made before the stadium (Question 7) decision? (Question 11 ) • These ratings are if there is NO on campus stadium . • See previous comment about impacts of on-campus If the stadium is built, I think there will be a lot more stadium plans . (Question 11 ) traffic on game days and this will need to be addressed . They look good . All that would change if CSU builds (Question 7) a new stadium . Traffic and noise will be off the chart. • If the on-campus stadium is built the Prospect corridor (Question 11 ) improvements will be extremely more challenging and . Don 't think Prospect is solved . Looks better, but still difficult to achieve . (Question 7) inadequate to meet demand . I am not sure there is a • Ratings depend on how heavy the traffic is - whether solution given right of way restrictions, but I think it there is a new stadium north of Lake Street! (Question will still be marginal even before the new housing and 7) the stadium pushes it well below marginal . Lake looks • Seems that 10-foot traffic lanes are very minimal for significantly improved (Question 11 ) such a busy corridor and will be even more critical when What if CSU builds an on-campus stadium? Will the the stadium is built. (Question 7) current designs be adequate? This is a big unknown . • The on-campus stadium makes this plan moot on If not in the near future, CSU will eventually build an on game days . City needs to rebel when McClusky says campus stadium and from what I have been reading it CSU is exempt from taking responsibility for causing will likely be sooner than later. (Question 11 ) serious game day and multiple ceremonial activities to Acquisition of ROW is going to be expensive ! Like pay for the expensive stadium on land needed for CSU having a bit more space in the driving lanes . Not sure future expansion for daily needs . (Question 7) about mixing ped and bike traffic on the sidewalks . • A great vision statement is out the window, however, if Both will need some updating when the new stadium stadium on main campus goes through . (Question 8) is built. Lake is way too narrow, even in this scenario to accommodate game-day traffic . City staff report on the traffic impacts is way too optimistic. (Question 11 ) WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 B-7 • It appears that the design will be driven and constrained by the proposed CSU stadium . CSU should buy and donate land along Spring Creek between Shields and Centre Ave for the city to build another east west artery for traffic . CSU should pay for changes related to cost and traffic burden caused by the stadium . (Question 11 ) • Have these designs taken into account the likelihood of an on-campus stadium? It would be foolish to design and build this corridor only to have it be insufficient to handle event-related traffic . It seems likely also that doing the improvements may need to involve the purchase of additional right-of-way along the corridor, including purchase of single family residential properties to facilitate widening of the street section to accommodate adequate transportation improvements to meet long-term future needs . (Question 11 ) • Traffic is going to be a big issue throughout the coming years as CSU grows and if the stadium ever action moves on campus then traffic will be a nightmare . Unless 6 lanes can be squeezed in . (Question 11 ) • What is the university's contribution to this costly upgrade? It primarily serves students . It will make the stadium a more likely outcome and it is a burden to taxpayers (Question 11 ) • A campus stadium would create congestion and increased danger to the Prospect corridor. It should not be built! (Question 11 ) • If the CSU new stadium plan is approved for the on -campus location , review these plans to best accommodate large crowds during those times . Try to have temporary route adjustments prepared for such events . (Question 11 ) • With the stadium now being an initiative to go forward , I would like to see more thought given to making Lake Street the main access point for the campus and stadium . (Question 11 ) B 8 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN 0 0 CM) W MCI CM) This page intentionally left blank Appendix C - Existing Conditions Maps The maps in this appendix describe the existing conditions within the boundary of the West Central Area Plan . Additional existing and future conditions information related to transportation and the Prospect Corridor can be found in Appendix D. The following maps are included here : Land Use & Neighborhood Character 1 . Population (by census block) 2 . Percentage of Non-White Population (by census block) 3 . Neighborhoods 4 . Structure Plan (City Plan) 5 . Zoning 6 . Land Use 7 . Current Development Proposals, Under-Utilized Land , and Vacant Land 8 . Maximum Building Height 9 . Age of Buildings 10 . Historic Features 11 . Code Violations Transportation & Mobility 12 . Master Street Plan 13 . Pedestrian Facilities Open Space Networks 14 . Schools, Natural Areas, Parks, and Trails 15 . Floodplains and Floodways 16 . Drainage Basins 17 . Proposed Stormwater Projects This page intentionally left blank c O ■ � O L LL ca Lb O Q. i x d a This page intentionally left blank This page intentionally left blank W *+ rML 0 0 0 L am LLJ a This page intentionally left blank OProspect Corridor West Prospect Potential Median Concepts Potential locations of medians along West Prospect Road, between Shields Street and Taft Hill Road. Example of street retrofitting opportunities along arterial roads. Access point, typ Planted median, typ c o ' c 0 Cc ? w tt t t t t t CO m � 0 Prospect Rd ` - - - - - - - ' o � v ' -o >N > 1 Access point, typ Planted median, typ 3' Paved median 0 ' o Q ¢ o ' N ° � C 3 ' U m T t t t t t t t t N Prospect Rd c N aA�y Concrete median Planted understory Median trees Travel Lane Concrete median Curb and gutter Upright/Columnar Curb and gutter V - - - - - - Potential Median Enlargement Legend 1 Potential Median t Access Points WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 3 OProspect Corridor This page intentionally left blank WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 4 W W C L 4) Q L 0 L L 0 CM) V 0 L am c LL a a Q This page intentionally left blank Appendix F - Prospect Corridor Alternatives Table of Contents Prospect Road — Alternative A — "All About Pedestrians" F-1 Prospect Road — Alternative B — " Boulevard" F-3 Prospect Road — Alternative C — "Complete Street" F-5 Prospect Road — Multi-Modal Performance Measures F-7 Prospect Road — Conceptual Design F-8 Prospect Road — View Looking West Near Prospect Lane F-10 Prospect Road — Interim Condition F-11 Prospect Road — Removed/Proposed Trees F-12 Lake Street — Alternative A F-13 Lake Street — Alternative B F-14 Lake Street — Alternative C F-15 Lake Street — Multi-Modal Performance Measures F-16 Lake Street — Conceptual Design F-17 Lake Street — View Looking West Near CSU Parking Garage F-19 This page intentionally left blank L m E cn W O C.) x a This page intentionally left blank Appendix A - Community Engagment Summary The following appendix summarizes the various community outreach events and activities that occurred throught the West Central Area Plan development process . The following summaries are included here : Community Engagement 1 . Listening Sessions Summary ( March -April 2014) 2 . Neighborhood Walking Tours Summary (April - May 2014) 3 . WikiMap Summary (March- May 2014) 4 . Visioning Events Summary ( May-June 2014) 5 . Fall 2014 Outreach Summary (September-October 2014) 6 . Prospect Corridor Survey Summary ( November- December 2014) 7 . Draft Plan Comments Summary ( February- March 2015) Stakeholder Committee 8 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting # 1 - Summary 9 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting #2 - Summary 10 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting # 3 - Summary 11 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting #4 - Summary 12 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting # 5 - Summary 13 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting # 6 - Summary West Central Fort of Area Planf� West Central Area Plan — Listening Sessions Summary March 26 — April 3, 2014 Background The West Central Area Plan ( WCAP ) process began in March 2014 . The purpose of the WCAP update is to revisit and refine the original MULBERRY ST vision and goals, policy directives, and implementation actions from the 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan based on emerging issues WELIZABETHST and trends . The updated plan will provide a new overall , community- supported vision for the plan area , as well as a clear roadmap for implementing that vision . The plan is anticipated to be presented to PROSPECT RD Council for consideration for adoption in early 2015 . 0 0 o J F' Listening Sessions Overview 0 0 w Four listening sessions were held between March 26 and April 3 to Q c o U) gain insight into the character and features that define the West DRAKE RD :2E Central area , along with potential areas of improvement . The purpose of these meetings was to elicit feedback from the community about WEST CENTRAL AREA the West Central area , including ideas and concerns related to land PLAN BOUNDARIES use, transportation , housing, urban design , natural systems, and quality of life amenities . Date Session • • March 26 6 : 00 - 8 : 00 p . m . Westminster Presbyterian Church 60 March 27 6 : 00 - 8 : 00 p . m . Durrell Seminar Room ( CSU Campus ) 22 March 31 6 : 00 - 8 : 00 p . m . Drake Centre 32 April 3 6 : 00 - 8 : 00 p . m . Plymouth Congregational Church 64 Total 178 The listening sessions began with an introduction to the West Central Area Plan update, an overview of public involvement activities, and a roadmap for the public engagement process moving forward . Participants were asked to break into groups to discuss different broad topic areas, including : the overall West Central area , the Prospect Road Corridor specifically, and the Master Plan for the Colorado State University ( CSU ) Main and South campuses . Each group had access to maps associated with the topic area and was encouraged to share any thoughts, concerns, or questions they had related to the topic . Participants could either relay those thoughts to staff facilitators at each table, record their thoughts on the map, or provide staff with their thoughts on comment sheets passed out at the beginning of the listening session . Each group had roughly 25 minutes to discuss the topic before moving to one of the other topic areas . Page 2 of 4 Theme Descriptions West Central Area : The purpose of this table was to garner feedback about the West Central Area as a whole . City staff sought guidance on how to best preserve desirable features of the West ', i ■ Central area while still allowing the area to ■ respond to changing conditions, new growth pressures, and emerging needs . , o Prospect Road Corridor : The Prospect Road Corridor from Shields Street to College Avenue is one of the most constrained arterial roadway sections in Fort Collins . The purpose of this table was to understand the nature of the corridor' s challenges, listen to resident and commuter concerns, and brainstorm ideas for improvement . CSU Master Plan : Representatives from CSU ' s Facilities Management department gave participants an overview of how the university plans to expand over the next 10 to 15 years and how the plans for the Main and South Campuses relate to the surrounding neighborhoods . Get Involved Table : The success of the West Central Area Plan will depend on the quality of engagement with those impacted by the plan , including residents, property owners, business owners, employees, developers, and other interested groups . The purpose of the 'Get Involved ' table was to get participants' feedback on how to best communicate and engage with them throughout the planning process . Attendees had the opportunity to sign up for neighborhood walking tours, comment on their preferred event types and communication methods, and apply to be on the Stakeholder Committee , which will work with the City to guide the planning process . What We Heard — Key Themes The project team heard a number of concerns, opportunities, and comments during the group discussions and on comment forms . The following list of key themes summarizes the ideas and comments shared by participants at each table over the course of the four listening sessions . The West Central Area • Spillover parking from high density developments is a problem that needs to be addressed • New multi -family developments are not providing enough parking • Many of the intersections along Shields are not bike/ pedestrian friendly ( Plum , Elizabeth , Lake , Laurel and Prospect in particular) • Protect historically significant buildings in the West Central area and along Prospect Road • Preserve the character of existing single -family neighborhoods • New multi -family developments should match the character of the neighborhoods in which they are built as best as possible Page 3 of 4 • Ensure the area still has access to open space as more development occurs • CSU needs to take a leadership role in mitigating the impacts their developments have on the surrounding neighborhoods • Construct pedestrian overpasses/underpasses at high volume intersections around CSU such as Plum , Elizabeth , and Center • Need adequate bicycle and pedestrian connections that allow people to avoid major arterials Prospect Corridor • Many commuters avoid Prospect — altogether because it is too congested and unsafe ! - • The sidewalks are too narrow and make pedestrians feel unsafe • Bicyclists avoid Prospect because of the narrow lanes � , a • Snow gets pushed onto sidewalk during ` ; , the winter time • More bike and pedestrian crossings 3 (, would make Prospect feel safer • Pedestrian and bike traffic should be re - routed to Lake from Prospect • Concern that MAX will add to the congestion on Prospect • More east-west bus routes could help alleviate congestion • Introduce traffic calming measures to enhance safety • Consider a variety of design alternatives, and if right- of-way acquisition is included , address the implications and impacts • High density zoning will bring developments that could add to congestion • Construct pedestrian overpasses/underpasses at Center Ave . CSU Master Plan • CSU is not providing enough parking for students and the result is spillover parking on to neighborhood streets • New developments on campus are adding to congestion on city streets • CSU operates in a bubble and should better consider its impacts on surrounding areas Get Involved At the 'Get Involved ' table, participants were asked how the City can best engage with them throughout the planning process . One of the questions asked was how participants would like to be involved in the West Central Area Plan moving forward through events and other outreach methods . Staff provided a list of potential planning activities and participants put a dot next to their preferred methods of engagement . Below is a summary of responses . Page 4 of 4 How would you like to be involved in the WCAP ? 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 t°NZ47 °�`y �y °��� teat' alb\ r°�y ��ey `��e° °��y - omay �y 0 po e \z �� ` �`' 1•° F°`may �a\�\� o°�� ��`�` ����2 �� %° �4?� ���o� �� `` Q�ey�� ��rQ � �`°may rro�r O ,\� CI V, er0 e ° 09 Participants were also asked about their preferred method of receiving information from the City. Below is a chart showing how people would like to receive correspondence from the city about the West Central Area Plan . What is the best way to reach you ? 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 °t tee; �et� �° O\te °y�`a�a Q o�,co r West Central Fort of Area Planf� West Central Area Plan — Neighborhood Tours Summary April 21 - May 23, 2014 Background The purpose of the West Central Area Plan ( WCAP ) update is to revisit and refine the original vision , goals, policy MULBERRY ST directives, and implementation actions from the 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan based on emerging issues and trends . The updated plan will provide a new community- W ELIZABETHST supported vision for the plan area , as well as a clear roadmap for implementing that vision through policy guidance and a prioritized list of action items . The WCAP PROSPECT RD process began in March 2014 . The plan is anticipated to be presented to Council for consideration for adoption in early o 0 2015 . co J U) Walking Tours Overview 00 � z Twenty walking and bicycling tours were held between April ¢ a:: 0 21 and May 23 to gain insight into how people experience DRAKE RD the West Central Area on a daily basis . The purpose of these tours was to invite community members to lead city staff on a walk through their neighborhood to better understand the WEST CENTRAL AREA specific opportunities and challenges facing each part of the PLAN BOUNDARIES West Central area . Date Session Location Participants April 21 1 : 30 - 3 : 00 p . m . Lexington Green & Village West 3 6 : 30 - 8 : 00 p . m . City Park South 7 12 : 00- 1 : 00 p . m . Prospect Corridor : Shields - College 9 April 22 4 : 00 - 5 : 30 p . m . Red Fox Meadow 8 4 : 15 - 5 : 45 p . m . Lexington Green & Village West 2 6 : 00 - 7 : 30 p . m . Avery Park 3 April 23 12 : 00- 1 : 00 p . m . Centre for Advanced Technology 5 6 : 00 - 7 : 30 p . m . Hill Pond & Gilgalad Way 6 April 24 10 : 00- 11 : 30 a . m . Campus West South 5 12 : 00- 1 : 00 p . m . Sheely, Wallenberg & Landmark 5 8 :00 -9 : 30 a . m . Campus West 3 April 25 2 : 00 - 3 : 30 p . m . Shields : Mulberry - Prospect 2 4 : 00 - 5 : 30 p . m . Campus West 6 April 26 9 : 00- 11 : 00 a . m . Spring Creek Trail - Bike Tour 2 Page 2 of 15 Date SessionLocation . . April 30 12 : 00- 1 : 30 p . m . CSU Campus 5 4 : 00 - 5 : 00 p . m . Campus West & Shields 3 May 1 9 : 00-10 : 30 a . m . CSU Campus 1 May 16 4 : 30-6 :00 p . m . Sheely & Wallenberg 8 May 22 3 :00-5 :00 p . m . Prospect Road & Centre Avenue 2 Shields, Campus West & City Park South — May 23 10 : 00 a . m . - 12 : 00 p . m . 2 Bike Tour Total 87 For many of the tours, neighborhood residents helped develop the tour routes and led the tours in concert with city staff. This helped ensure the routes were indicative of the true character of the neighborhoods and the key issues and features in each distinct area . Each tour lasted one to two hours, depending on the length of the route . Each tour included City staff to record thoughts, questions or concerns voiced by participants on the walking tour . Participants could also record their own notes on comment sheets made available by staff. City staff took note of immediate action items for the City ( nuisance, property maintenance issues, etc . ) , in addition to comments related to longer- range priorities and needs . The more pressing issues will be relayed to the appropriate party, with the goal of resolving immediate issues as soon as possible . In all , there were 87 participants (though some people attended multiple tours ), and hundreds of comments and photos were gathered . What We Heard - Key Themes „ „ _ _ . 12 To get a sense for the character Shields St and conditions of the entire West Central Area , City staff broke the _ planning area into sub - areas . To iCSU the right is a map of the West Central planning area and each of its sub - areas . What follows is ' a summary of the recurring „ themes from the walking and bicycling tours in each sub-area . 6 The recurring themes have been lap organized into three major topic areas : Land Use & Character, Transportation , and Open Space4 Ova r_ Networks . Please note that for \j(J some sub - areas, there were fewer comments than for others . _ 13 Spring Creek Trail Page 3 of 15 Area 1 - City Park South rip 13 Opp M Land Use & Character • Diverse architectural styles adds to character of area 1 • Incompatibility of new multi-family i• - .� � � it Vie -0 711 developments with existing single-family character ( architecture, height, setbacks, w density, lack of parking) • Property maintenance concerns ELIZABETH • Need for better screening of trash receptacles • Desire for more proactive nuisance enforcement • Support for U +2 and greater accountability for landlords rr a ' •a Transportation • Sidewalks are constrained and in need of repairs ( narrow, discontinuous in places ) • Curb paint, bike lane striping, and crosswalks in need of repainting • Need for traffic calming and improved sight lines on Crestmore • Bicycle/pedestrian safety concerns on City Park Ave . • Preference for detached sidewalks on Mulberry • Need for more proactive traffic and parking planning/management • Need for east-to-west bicycling alternatives to West Elizabeth and north - to-south connections to Spring Creek and Poudre Trails • Dead ends increase traffic on major streets Open Space Networks • Hazardous trees overhanging sidewalks ` • Safety and fence maintenance at ditches • Need for better connectivity across ditches Page 4 of 15 Area 2 - Campus West North Fill Land Use & Character UJ • Preference for student apartments near campus, Ui rather than rental homes in neighborhood , BIRCH • Property maintenance lacking for both rental 2 homes and apartment complexes • City ordinances need to be more strictly enforced • Need better education for new renters each year • CSU should play a role in reducing impacts of student rentals on neighborhoods in this area • Focus on preserving and enhancing what is already present • Preference for apartments that are set back from the roadway and include more open space • Need to protect affordability of neighborhood - _ - • The mixed use development at City Park Ave . and West Elizabeth has been well - received and would be a good model for other redevelopment - a 1 Transportation • Concerns about parking and traffic impacts from �1 planned multi -family developments • Need for safer routes and connections for bikes • The major streets in the area ( Shields, Elizabeth and Plum ) are constrained , which is challenging for all modes navigating the area • Crossing arterials is unsafe ( Shields, Elizabeth, Mulberry) ' = • Need a comprehensive approach to spillover parking and parking requirements for new � I I development T • City Park Ave . needs improvements as bike route • Concerns about sight distances around parked cars near intersections Open Space Networks • Stormwater drainage concerns in some locations • Encourage more trees and landscaping - urban forest canopy • Discourage trees that pose maintenance/safety issues ( e . g. , Siberian elms ) Page 5 of 15 Area 3 = Avery Park Single-story character defines the 40 0 neighborhood The neighborhood generally feels safe Chronic code compliance and • C � � - Land Use & Character " neighborhood problems (visi trash cans, newspaper accumulation, lack of landscaping and property maintenance ) .. � - . ate ' • ' - � � - - � . T . • - • • • Park and �• . t Z along • • • s ( e .g ., Springfield ) Transportation Traffic calming needed on Constitution and " ►tom. Castlerock More frequent street sweeping is needed to clear away • • chip seal , broken glass • other debris Gaps in sidewalk - • Existing sidewalks are often too narrow to safely use ?� - - - - - - - � Open Avery it . amenity - • neighborhood Dead trees in the park and along the ditch �5 . present hazar Street sweeping into gutters and/or lack of sweeping creates flooding issues .�43a 9 v Page . of 15 Campus • • • Use & Character1 ' Proximity to Rolland Moore, schools, services, ' , R3FfFZX and other destinations is the best feature of the neighborhood ""• ' 1 • � yam . 9 The diverse mix of people in the neighborhood is importantO ► 1 v I - r • 9 Concern about conversion of owner-occupied homes to rentals by investors 9 Issues with management and maintenance of rental 1 properties .1 � • S L Persistent code compliance issues, especially with annual rental turnover (trash cans on the street, noise, parties, congestion from parked cars, etc . ) Need for a grocery store and other local services Lack of maintenance of vacant properties Support for a police substation in or near the neighborhood Desire for • re cohesive character among Campus West shopping centers Transportation 9 Spillover parking is an issue and could get worse with the new '� Iq•�'. 4M��7 � 1 developments; • for a new Intersectionsapproach to parking management along Shields difficult to • concerns about crossing 9 Interest in a grade-separated crossing ( under/overpass ) across Shields Right along conflicts between • bikes J �W Open Space I Landscaping at intersections needs to be trimmed to maintain sight linesand protect sa _ Page 7 of 15 R Area 5 - Prospect Corridor VU Ual Land Use & Character Uj • Concerns about new developments' 7 impact on existing traffic and parking issues in the area • Preserve, repurpose, and enhance historic properties while integrating with new development • Noise and safety concerns 4 • Preference for uses that generate less rA_ traffic or divert traffic from Prospect in new development • Ensure that zoning requirements are appropriate for the area • Concerns about impact of a new stadium on the corridor Transportation • Re-configure Prospect to either be AN more pedestrian/ bike friendly or direct other modes to safer routes • • _ • Consider Lake Street as a complement ■ M to Prospect • Create additional bike and pedestrian connections between Prospect and La ke s _ • Concern about long traffic delays due to a combination of factors (trains, MAX, campus events ) • Ensure new developments provide adequate parking � '' • Access management challenges, particularly along south side of Prospect • Provide safe east-west connections to MAX • Improve wayfinding for safe walking/ biking routes • Improve safety of intersections/ crossings Page 8 of 15 Area 6 — West Prospect/West Stuart Land Use & Character PROSPECT • Desirable location , centrally located within the 6 city - _ - 9 • Shopping center at Prospect and Shields seemst ., I i b3-rUART ST go 00 = inactive and underutilized ; inconvenient to enter/exit; lack of business signage • Red Fox Meadows : quiet, well - maintained neighborhood with a balanced mix of owners/ renters and sense of community and 8 stability • Enforcement of noise and occupancy l ordinances has limited parties and other '� 1 nuisances Transportation • Eliminate gaps in sidewalks, or add crosswalks in areas where sidewalks are missing on one "f side of the street _ - • Bus stops are convenient, but more frequent service is desired ( especially in the summer) • Red Fox Meadow neighborhood is under- parked, and visitor and spillover parking makes parking an issue ` M, 9 • Consider park-and- rides or shared parking in underutilized shopping centers • Crosswalk at Prospect and Heatheridge is a good model for pedestrian crossings `I ' M Open Space Networksy' • Red Fox Meadows Natural Area is a great .c amenity, " hidden treasure" • Issues with off- leash dogs and clean up j • Ditches offer a nice natural feature in the area , • Stormwater improvements have been beneficial _ in this area ""� Page 9 of 15 Area 7 — Sheely, Wallenberg & Fn . . � . . . Landmark Land Use & Character Jim & Pride in historic character of the Sheely rW neighborhood • Concerns about negative impacts from STUART ST. the proposed stadium • RP3 has been very effective at reducing spillover parking from campus • New multi-family developments in the area pose compatibility challenges; new y , housing should complement the Nil character of the neighborhood . . ,'� r • Interest in a small grocery store, ;+ ■ w services, offices, and/or well-designed y ' multi-family development on vacant land to the west of Sheely/Wallenberg Transportation • Missing sidewalks in some areas • Difficult to enter/exit the neighborhood on Prospect due to high traffic volumes • Would like better access to city trails r from the neighborhood Open Space Networks � . �` • Emphasize open space and recreation a4k , opportunities as part of new 0. - developments - �' _ * - • Area is prone to flooding due to drainage issues • Need for safer and more convenient access to Rolland Moore Park �� • Desire for a connection to the Spring Creek trail on the east end of the 4 neighborhood • Desire for a small dog park • • • eti f 7 - . �-- VUART ST. 7 • , i tiO• / / ♦ I I FFiE1 s , 1 dId Q f s 'S4i►� ? 1, O was - • • • • • • • • - • • - - .',t ' ', =s ' . �; '1UI DRAKE RD.44 - ri o� el • . �. ilp ss�d 4 n iY • - - • - - • - • - - - - - t,i � � rip �r� i M Y 1 � '.3y Page 11 of 15 SHEELY DR Area 9 - Hill Pond & Gilgalad Way MLLENBERG DR Land Use & Character • Preference for ranch -style homes • New development should be compatible with the existing residential character • The neighborhood is stable, quiet, and centrally located 0 • Low turnover in occupants, even in rental Cn units • Desire for convenient access to a grocery store • Proximity to Senior Center and Rolland * Moore Park are important amenities Transportation ,qia • Shields underpass ramp is steep and blind, safety concerns Open Space Networks • Need to clarify roles and responsibilities for managing drainage, especially with HOAs and for new developments • Trail access is a major asset • Wetlands, groundwater, and floodplain constrain new development • Drainage and flooding concerns in some ` - locations • Need for better education about drainage and flooding for new residents in the area Page 12 of 15 Area 10 - Raintree *Note : only one person attended the walking tour , in this area, so the discussion was less extensive y than for other areas. i 74 Land Use & Character 0 • Landscaping along Drake is nice • Buildings with vinyl siding need better CENTRE maintenance • Raintree shopping center appears to be thriving Transportation DRAKE _ D • Detached sidewalks are preferred • Loud traffic noise from Drake Road t, LT iLl _ Zq Er III PROSPECT RD . • - • BALSAM LN J/ JUNIPER LN HOBBIT ST 7 BIRKY PL •, � fbvqslaHEELY DR SVMLLENBERG OR � ' - - • • • • • • 1 • • • H1LL POND RO, O~n , _ � • • . • • • ' • • CA 7-1 + l .�, • • • N I P l - MO dx � - III:y — — • • _ _ _ • ' _ _ _ • ' • • ' ' • t 'g j i. T _ ? sc n} w • . : a1y r Y ow t , p S •�T � ;, ,% a Page 14 of 15 Area 12 - Shields Corridor - Mulberry to Prospect Land Use & Character • There are opportunities for more affordable student housing in 12 the area • • Shields St • Crime/safety concerns at shopping center at Mulberry and Shields % Transportation • Protected bike lanes or a cycle track along Shields would improve , safety and visibility of bicyclists • There are numerous conflict points between cars, bikes and y pedestrians along the corridor • Concern about increasing traffic impacts with new development Al • Lack of landscaping maintenance along narrow sidewalks creates r c safety and visibility issues v v U • Need for additional and improved pedestrian and bicycle crossings along Shields . Options to consider include : o Add an underpass o Extend pedestrian light cycles o Create more space for pedestrians at intersections • Multiple access points for the shopping centers along Shields and Elizabeth create issues/conflicts • Need a comprehensive approach to CSU spillover parking impacts G . OF cc �r A . - 1 ♦ �. � � r�_ r ; . . pry .a , �l . ,�y, _ Area 13 = Spring Creek Trail Land Use & Character The trail is an important amenity for adjacent neighborhoods a. Transportation The trail is a good connector to �� , �•3•. L 7• .rR : 1 it ff••�� . f _• L "�■r' Page 15 of 15 Need better wayfincling at • " - intersectionof Spring Spring The trail is scenic and does a good l job accommodating -T runners/walkers and cyclists Used extensively for both recreation and commuting Open Space Interest texting system • users tocheck - conditionsof trails Interest in more opportunities for landscaping projects • L. entrances ( like Rolland Moore !. ! L l_ �.y rose Fort Collins West Central Area Plan �l MiMap - Things 1 Value � NEX �� t CO' N �Vlulberry St ' w L Z , 0 m U 4 O 0 - SUNSETAVE F N •CORVID WA • w W MYRTLE ST z a 0 o a Cn w m c�7 W MYRTLE ST i p w Q i CRESTMORE PL M NTZ PIT > < _ Z3 / � CRESTMORE PL - BIRCH Sr w Z - (n V/ BIRCH ST Er ;}r. yI � ! ^'•r. _ "� ORCHARD PL w z ■ Oz \.ti .1 r} • r - ._ o J lr✓ V NMOORDR BROADVIEWPL - x fa . =.-� U,l Laurel St - Z a BAYSTONE DR ry -�� - y a N - - Tile it Ell K U w i s_ � arseles _` p IY r W PLUM ST ' w W PLUM ST ¢ •. t . i >beer Ed _ J O o ' M MCALLISTER CTall uT m _ •-4� &md ° o W Elizabeth St� o - r w O Clw UNIVERSITY m o -qRWrAVC - w c7 LEESDALE CT - O Of O W SOUTH DR a here, w /- O z F -SIs CE w O WESTWARD DR 1 F _ i Call . 0000R o SKYLINE DR o LAKEWOOD DR - Z_ W W PITKIN ST e` OPKW z w ` ^ r OU 0 SPRINGFIELD DR V J JAMES CT - '". E7 JAMESCT � � , f _ ` 1 ) <" v m - p BENNETT RD ( - - �..� w 2 � Fr . � ��r •.i all 0 ry 0 N1 a - F _ .J - _ a - 0 SUMMER ST massal = J m W Prospect Rd . r w w 4 a BALSAM LN O -- t Z o O O z 5 IY 6 a JUNIPER LN BAY DR v / HOBBIT ST 9 g LONGWORTHRID 3V C4� i T�?i� l7 � 0�11 v_ a: STEELY DR ;r 3 rell ` �= fie. $ ) al 't . -q - - Vy STUART ST \ -"� - + � `� tN / WALLENBERG DR I\1 - 1- 74ti �tt ed says, I Q- .so ally; ^ aJ - - t • a iT �. eas z - z U FR0E00M w � ) o �21 alo L p z ED H O (7 U 8/1 z z (D F o WIEhOR \14T �Q z z iu 13 � HILL PONDRD J YI _ 5 w X GLENWOODDR V= �2 - �� �Q�� 16 - z m 3 Oy ' SHIRE CT O x P - X w sh�ct�i �SSEX OR w T e,% ROLLAND MOORE DR 14 , O o OR t, OmA WINDSOR CT 0 -- by SCARBOROUGH DR - _ w � 1 EVENSTAR OT 0 �.� VALLEY FORGE AVE p �__ p A" - �._ O� ' 15 z -� � w _ CONCORD DR 03 16 '• ` %opy , all .11 We IOU �. tYORKTOWN AVE FO :\ g/ , .- n z 1191 0 be - �� -r-r-ram ■ N E R ra Re �E ff ■ ■ �_ _ as Ed O r -, N CITY OF FORTCOLLINS Legend GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS merommaaea.m all t nwa,yaaageatuaaae What e,ainpaeb npeemaecc�rm�u.,,raanm�,.ww�mro a a of concern does this areareresent? and dead be drandonded ounhanded N, a HP P re Fran UNDERLYINGEderuk papg.am.a.o ESaa..yF us.wn„u. 0 lan0 Use + NegEConwN Fell ¢name$ earn Ty poe Wsa mK dereardetherfirenhaddenrobbe Independent senficareen cal date rentered hers,should be abbess therseproduetarruna'�+ ryanv�*a lial amcersa�n.ee order mdintrev .•n mm n:e O Open Space NelwoAs Scale 1 :4,000 Miles • T.anspnnal + MnMllly Printed: July 31 , 2014 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 04 ® West CeM lNeghDon WikiMap = Things I Value Comments Land Use + Neighborhood Character PERC ( Plant Environment Research Center) ! Stadium here would be most unfortunate . • Mittry-Young House City Landmark. Moyer House City Landmark. Wells House City Landmark. Galyardt- Puleson House City Landmark. This drainage is home to Red -wing blackbirds and other birds and connects Red Fox Meadows Natural Area to Spring Creek. McCluskey House City Landmark. Shawver House City Landmark. This little bridge over the ditch is a neat little local landmark . Annual Halloween bonfire and bobbing for apples hosted here . Fourth of July breakfast and bike parade starts here . Gardens on Spring Creek. Prohibit building developments on land for sale by an individual home owner; land should not be sold to a developer and divided up to avoid congestion , traffic, noise problems . Best tennis ! Looking forward to reopening of the Senior Center. Value the natural area for beauty, walks, exercise on trail . Great to have a theater within biking distance . We use this area for errands, bagels, restaurants. Do not use closer sites at Shields/Stuart and Shields/ Prospect because the mix of businesses and site design is unappealing . Shields/ Prospect does not offer " neighborhood services " - coffee, restaurant, cleaners, and groceries. Farmers' Market. Open Space Networks 1� Avery Park is a great place to walk, enjoy the outdoors, and meet people with dogs. 20 CSU Horticulture Gardens and Trees. 03 I love Red Fox Meadows . Beautiful ! ® Drainage area/ park . . . will need to be careful of over- use on the paths here . 05 Red Fox Meadows- lovely peaceful area in town to walk and observe wildlife . © There is a little unofficial dirt bike park here - little hills to bump around . I see college kids as well as neighborhood kids using it, and have witnessed some really lovely friendly and helpful interactions between those often separate groups. �7 The native vegetation ( rabbit brush, etc ) along this trail is fantastic . ® Wildlife right here in Fort Collins ! If we can keep some of the mature trees and a bit of the space, that would be fantastic . Perhaps south and east of the planned W. Stuart street could be maintained as an open space buffer around Spring Creek - corridors for wildlife are so important to long -term population persistence . �9 Hill Pond - pond behind townhomes on Winterberry Way and larger home owned by [ name removed ] . Hill Pond HOA has some water rights to this pond and used to use it as an irrigaiton source . �0 This stretch of wild grasses, etc . is lovely in summer. Kids ' favorite exploring adventure and picnic spot. 11 Spring Creek Pond . Geese coming and going . Pelicans dropping in like motorcycle gang at a church picnic . Ducks muttering . Occasional muskrat or beaver. Fox prints on the ice . O2 Creek and trees on trail . O3 Wildlife and mature pines, cottonwoods and lilac bushes - there is proposed development plan for property at Hill Pond & Gilgalad . Request to save as much of mature landscaping as possible . ® Ducks like to hang out in the creek behind the medical park. �5 Natural Areas/ Parks . © Deer hang out by the NRRC ( Natural Resources Research Center) detention pond . Lots of spring froggy singing . Path undeveloped , only a few people seem to know about it. (it Best park in town . Transportation + Mobility 10 Value the bike route through CSU ( from Center/ Lake to east of Lory to Laurel/ Meldrum . The bike trail through the forest is lovely. Nice job on the new trail alignment. Recreational trail is a huge asset to the area . Opportunity/threat: overuse for size of trail . City is ON IT when it comes to snow removal from the bike trail ! Thanks ! Drainage/natural area flood protection AND habitat for birds/ rodents/fox. Underpass below railroad . City needs more crossings. Kudos to Windtrail Townhomes which keeps its half of this link clear of snow and ice during winter. Sometime they even do Windtrail at Spring Creek's half. • Bike Trail . 10 This link from Spring Creek Trail to Points West, north of Drake . rose Fort Collins West Central Area Plan �l MiMap = New Opportunities - - } , . - . - � r. - � > ,, y � � L7 � : a P a t ON �Mulberry St = w a m } y0 z - � , z > O m m D 4 O 0❑ - SUNSETAVE m •CORVID WA • w W MYRTLE ST z a ❑ a Cn w m c 7 W MYRTLE ST i p w Q i CRESTMORE PIT M NTZ PIT > < m W r^ // �� • a days - .CRESTMOREPT - BIRCH ST w z m - •y : - - V J Cn .,:w!1 - m _ BIRCH ST ❑ ;}r• �{ y, ' � ! ^'•r. _ m "� ORCHARD PL w ■ Oz \.ti .1 r}z • r - ._ o J lr V BROADVIEW PL < NMOOR DR - - � ❑ fa . -" . kma ,l Laurel St - Z < BAYSTONE DR ry -,� y < a Ell U w Of_x p `all o r ❑beer W PLUM ST � - � - w � ¢ W PLUM ST 0 _ Ed CE J O 0 1��•.}Q MCALLISTER CT U Y U y � � p r -'T m, m ally F o W Elizabeth St `n ` �'! -'r : 1. - 00 O O IP10 _� UNIVERSITYA z UNIVERSITYAVE g VERSITYAVE w w ❑ z ¢ LEESDALE CT - / ^ ¢ a F beer of < p w ❑ w SOUTH DR < w w z � O� P`iE O l/11 z LV J ,. Or: - a; -w - AST O G\-EPRv\E 0 WESTWARD DR L� f w o U z F 4 z } � m DR < F m LAKEWOOD DR • _ Z_ w ❑ �. OPKWOOD p SKYLINE DR z ❑ b+✓ PITKIN ST E<c W PITKIN S� � • - Olt O O m U ❑ SPRINGFIELD DR JAMES CT • ' tt JAMESCT I ' = A 2 BENNETT RD • " 1f� _ ry N p SUMMER ST ❑ ads Of 0 1` = J m W Prospect Rd / J ❑ r z i w z w w 3� /� a BALSAM LN U -_ l l ❑ �/ qL �� m All T v / = 4•- - HOBBIT ST - a JUNIPER LN r� - BAY DR 5 J _ I ' • BIRKY PL - • �LONGWORTH RD- ear r1• - 4v O �=`a - SHEELV DR , .may 'Ile st _ / Vy STUART ST WALLEN BERG DR C - - bel as ? I lor Is r•I- � o I ' •• '1 � �N o z - z 0 - - FREEDOM . o p of w z O U z o WINFIELD OR a z - Z z HILL POND RD 5 m J GLENWOOD DR 3 Oy SHIRE CT P X w Sy���i �SSEX DR w ROLLAND MOORE DR R OG WINDSOR CT ram' , mA ' SCARBOROUGH DR - - w EVENSTAR CT U r•� ( VALLEY FORGE AVE p � ' p � -- O� z _ a -. CONCORD DR 3 � - t F ` P �� tt Z r O all at . YORKTOWNAVEyaQ z t < - - 4D n. a " vv N E R ra e Rd 0 - AVOCET RD N CITY OF FORTCOLLINS GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS er,�nes,nd all.b.�,a.,.a.d � d°a, . ,<<.F � .. a.� w��m Legend m•ma�� �w�m•.a, IN E ..enand da h6moi�amaersons cool orpat.e::..rtheral.0 anyu+....a.r iamra�mWve .c � ��ea,...a.c thermal What type of concern does this area represent? FAUL� and aau rezponv nesNs the Wsie y. • ^o•. le i�ntsenfii�°^�.°'r^m°=dhe°ar^hom a;w,��^a Land Use + Neighborhood Character u 'desta adds m .m mrdimd indi a,��...d.r...d.�.s�.�ftmtey�ppAd.�su..= • Scale 1 :4,000 • Transportation + Mobility Mlles West Central Neighborhoods Printed: August 01 , 2014 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 WikiMap = New Opportunities Comments Land Use + Neighborhood Character lO The market easily exists for a small to mid - sized grocery store near Elizabeth and Shields, given the number of student residences within close walking distance . Residents of the Landmark Apartments use this former pasture to fly kites, play ball , and exercise their dogs . It would make a great park/open space . Small shopping center with lofts above stores - e . g . , coffee shop, restaurant, specialty shop 16 Opportunity for a neighborhood commercial center with elan , vigor and community. Would be great if this area had a few " social " opportunities, such as a pub ( but catered to middle age crowd ) and coffee shop . Would be nice if playground/park was added as approved in the Gardens on Spring Creek Project Development Plan or elsewhere in area ( perhaps near Young 's/Otterbox) . Large geographic area with no school or park playground; Rolland Moore is not walkable for children . Transportation + Mobility Bicycle or walking path along canal . Add a bike path that connects City Park Ave . with Prospect from here . This shopping center needs a boost in some way. It would be great if the neighborhoods from the east ( Sheely Addition , Wallenberg ) could access the planned shopping area by bike or foot from the back. I love what has happened with the alleys downtown , and see that as a great example for how to use space . So rather than showing an unsightly back step to the trail and the neighborhoods, a welcoming front with cafes and access through to shopping would be just wonderful . There is plenty of already - paved ground here for a parking structure rather than just open lot. Need a new trail connection from Wallenberg to Spring Creek Trail here . City made serious error by allowing The Summit to be developed without sufficient parking . The MAX is no substitute . Proposed parking structure to fix the problem needs ground level commercial and attractive neighborhood gathering development along the Spring Creek ( sunny side ) and College Avenue frontages. Allowing it to be developed for cars only at ground level will make it an atrocity. And we aren ' t talking a little sandwich shop convenience store in the corner ( Lake Street Market) . Too bad the TOD tax break can ' t be retrieved - at least make Capstone do the garage correctly as a mixed use development that fronts the park with attractive venues . They can make money at it - it just needs more work and imagination, and maybe a bit less immediate profit, but that would only be in the short run . Faster access over the train and Bus Rapid Transit ( BRT) ways would be fantastic . The overpass serves the Federal campus pretty well , but serves bike commuters less well . I 've tried the overpass on my bike : it's very long and tall and not engineered for biking , so I ' m probably going to skip and continue through to College and take the horrible sidewalk to the Whole Foods shopping center. Fort Collins West Central Area Plan 7I7 WikiMap as Things That Could Be Improved - r 1 m ❑ ., . . .�. . o . / Mulberry St w a z - i z }. •,- C M>, x Ya [SUNSETAVE w 0 m 0 ° w MYRTLE ST aORVID a MYRTLE ST MZPIT Q Q CRESTMORE - y BIRCH ST m w (n V/PL 1 . . �K� - m _ BIRCH ST U ❑ - ti - O •-� . ORCHARD PL w _ . � � Oz �.�, r_m .. p. ._ o o al BROADVIEW PL - Q a -. �^�'�� ,nV/ L_-fureI St _ �. . . - z - - - BAYSTONE DR all C2 W17) cc A C W + W p A. ❑ � I a a W LUj i a W PLUM ST VJ MCALLIST ER CT Ed Elf 3 mf+ 4Al 3 A � J W Elizabeth St 0 °1 r UNIVERSITYAVE O - UN A m 0 z ¢ LEESDALE CT - ¢ r ' 0❑ w vU ❑ w se. - -- SOUTH DR a j = _ 1 W w � . a c7 a 5 ❑ - —z A ST 0 NIPe ° z �� 6 . a. a O �PRV\E 0 O WESTWARD DR J o. . . o _ < I. $ 7 m IY - o OPK�00° °R U z O LAKEWOOD DR _ Z- W _ W PITKIN ST _ mil. W PITKIN 00 0 SPRINGFIELD DR �9J JAMES CT tt JAMES CT �• - r➢ (n 0 BENNETT RD 1 Of O <G W • an ❑ O O Q ■ \ L. �11 SUMMER ST - - - W • 2 m - 12 2 > p tt W Prospect Rd m a1 J �� 115 1J 0 22 24 26 27 29 i 17 21 BALSAMw 23 25jai 30 W ❑ ` sli _ O JUNIPER LN 0 BAY DR z HOBBIT ST O Q U LONGWORTH RD i 4 _ BIRKY PL 31 ?¢ SHEELV DR in W STUART ST / � 3 3 6 Ij 32 WALLENBERG DR /36i z z eReE°°M N �P \_i 37 , o $ z - z o 'All L° DR 39 41 z z O Z _ 40 HILL POND RD z w w GLENWOOD DR 2 2 �2 - Q- ( \,� / SHIRE CT X �/ , - - 9 ROLLAND MOORE DR sy a 0 41 mill - — w Q 43 OR OG WINDSCR CT a � ? 4 m - - . . r r EVENSTAR CT O . w� VALLEY FORGE AVE �p Y + ' 146 z _ Pm �. z O _ z _ a CONCORD DR id, j m Z O - all • <� ' Q > . -F % a° ��yA �47 YORKTOWN AVE - �� Sir . r 49 50 W ra e _ _ ad L _r N C" OF FORTCOLLINS Legend GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS Tanandepal and all aw.,y.dae a�aa.e ceeb.peem.ecc�rm�u.,,raanm�,.ww�mro What a of concern does this arearepresent? TheCtindnesnalleydayeableadar N, a HP re Fran p.pq.ama:.o ESaa..yF us.wn„ur • lan0 Use + NegEColl CEa2tler UNDERLyini a enn and ananat all tern earn Ty poe ayz�vr�q thesepindenuesnaruna'.e+ by �*a India LF�L� ma..mmy. .•n mm uy Open Siace Nelyl Scale 1 :4,000 d: August 01 , 2014 Miles • Tranepnnallan + Mobility g 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 yydwesmenbal Negnbom000s WikiMap = Things That Could Be Improved Comments Land Use + Neighborhood Character Due to its proximity to City Park, this commercial area could be better utilized to provide services to Park patrons and local residents . Failed development project currently a large slab of cement at approximately 800 W Prospect - eyesore, can this land be used for something ? Landmark Apartments has a trash problem . Their dumpsters overflow into the pasture and drainage and often contains noxious junk like burned couches and mattresses Small neighborhood shopping center with lofts, coffee shop, nice restaurant. Area needs neighborhood services, especially groceries given planned densities . Need to avoid creation of urban desert with lack of healthy food . A lovely feature of this shopping area is the greasy BBQ smoker parked in the lot. I ' m not sure what the problem is but there is some kind of arrest or traffic ticket given daily around here . Flashing police lights at night here are incredibly common . The stretch between the bike path and the creek up to the railroad ROW is dicey. Trash , hobo camps, railroad debris, mysterious mounds of moldering materials, windblown construction debris from projects both recent and days of yore . Could use a semi -annual cleanup, just enough to keep it wild but attended to . Like a hedgerow. Care Housing trash enclosures are inadequate . Windblown and rain -washed trash fills the detention pond and blows into neighboring properties . Open Space Networks 10 Piles of tree debris - safety and appearance concern . 2� Piles of tree debris - safety hazard in flood and unsightly. Transportation + Mobility The Mulberry corridor west of Shields could benefit from bike lanes . Narrowing the driving lanes and increasing bike and pedestrian options could help to slow traffic and increase safety for bikers and pedestrians using this corridor. City Park is, in my opinion , one of the most dangerous streets in Fort Collins for bikes. Students don ' t know how to drive around a bike . And students don 't know how to bike safely. Lots of paint and signs should be installed here that essentially teach basic driving skills on - location to students in the area . There could be a better pedestrian crossing at Skyline across Elizabeth . The current crossing is between Skyline and Castlerock, which is hard to access with a bicycle or a stroller due to the narrow sidewalk. Plus many motorists run the red light at the pedestrian signal , probably because they don ' t want to be stuck at a red light for minute . A flashing pedestrian crossing signal would be great. This intersection sucks for bikes and peds. An underpass would be awesome . Marked/signalized crosswalk needed crossing Shields on south border of intersection with South Dr. South border preferred to provide space for median island without interfering with southbound to eastbound left turns . Increasing numbers of pedestrians, bikers and boarders are crossing partway, and then waiting for the chance to cross the rest of the way across Shields . The distance between Lake and Elizabeth seems too far without a crosswalk given the numbers of people crossing . Tradeoffs in ability to cross vs . through car traffic will need to be made if we are to continue to add density. ( Currently, it seems getting traffic through is taking priority) . It's very hard to turn left onto Taft Hill from Clearview ( facing west out of Clearview) . It's hard to see without inching out into the bike lane and even though there is a pedestrian light/walk, it's rarely in use . At rush hour it's nearly impossible . Could a sensor be put in the street that would make the light turn red for the Taft Hill traffic when a car is present on Clearview? This would be good for both sides of the street. #b southbound Taft Hill at Clearview stop requested . Needed to reduce stop spacing from Yz - mile to 1/4- mile . Crosswalk needed across Shields between Pitkin and Springfield . Special emphasis on bicycle movement need - ed , as Springfield/ Pitkin could function as a " poor- man 's " Prospect bike route . Prospect Ave . , being so close to campus and located between the main campus and vet school , ought to be bike friendly, transportation friendly, and safe for students, families, and others . It needs a facelift, much like West Elizabeth . The sidewalk is too narrow and there are very few turn lanes . Pedestrians traveling on foot after a rain or snow get drenched by splashing puddle as cars travel or turn . . . I 've seen it happen numerous times. I 've seen students ( likely new to the area ) biking down the right lane . . . a death wish if you ask me . Have yellow blinking lights to caution cars to slow down , slope sidewalk with road to increase sidewalk size for bikes and peds and have additional cross walks for students . This road divides the campus. . . get people to SLOW down and allow more time for students to cross . Traffic light not visible to those going north/south - find this very confusing . Difficult to cross as a pedestrian or cyclist at Heatherridge & Prospect. • Dangerous intersection . Can crossings be improved for bikers who do not feel comfortable using bike lanes? Saw biker this morning trying to maneuver bike to get to button for walk signal . • Cyclist and vehicular traffic accidents may be reduced with a stop light camera and ticketing . Get easement on 929 W. Prospect to permit lane straightening due to dangerous lane shift. Also widen walks to two persons wide . • Sidewalks on south side of Prospect are not safe or accessible to all . • The sidewalks along Prospect feel unsafe . They are very narrow and close to traffic . • Students from Landmark Apartments cross Prospect here and go through the church parking lot to get to CSU . They do this because it's not safe to walk along Prospect and no fun to walk along Shields. • Current lack of rights- of-way leads to car/ bike/ped cut-through traffic and related impacts between Centre & La ke . • Prospect is signed 35mph , but speeds of 40-45 are very common . More enforcement would be good , and could help limit the severity of accidents . • The half- mile to mile of Prospect between Shields and Center or Shields and College is really unique . Prospect will always be a through -fare for folks heading out to the freeway, etc . , but this one section is simply different from most of the rest of Prospect because of the neighborhood on one side, and campus and a grade - school on the other. The sidewalks are too narrow, and a bike lane is really needed . Could this section go to three lanes plus a bike lane like on Laporte ? People would get used to a short slower section on their drive . No access to Lake St. Prospect sidewalk too narrow for safe bicycle and pedestrian traffic . • Please keep the visual sensor for bikes and cars on year round ! It seems to have been turned off, yet students still use it for summer school , local residents use it to get to work anywhere north , and commuters who come from the Spring Creek trail use it too . IS Pedestrian safety at the intersection and along Prospect. 11* Need a left- hand turn signal for vehicles traveling north on Centre ( or Center, according to CSU ) . Is there a way to reconfigure to add a northbound bike lane approaching Center & Prospect. Bikers frequently go between the right turn lane and the straight-through lane, especially when there is a long line of cars waiting to go straight. Sidewalks here are ridiculously close to traffic and too narrow. The sidewalks along here are too close to fast- moving traffic . There needs to be some sort of buffer ( boulevard ) between the sidewalk and the traffic that's going along at 40 mph +. It's very unnerving to walk along here . I did see a car drive up onto the sidewalk one day and it's a miracle no one was walking there . Continue bike path at Prospect and tracks north to CSU campus ! Multiple stop lights at the RR tracks/ MAX are causing serious traffic back- ups . How is additional heavy traffic to the " proposed " stadium going to be managed ? Multiple obstructions to cyclists attempting left turn onto Mason Trail immediately after crossing MAX on the north sidewalk of Prospect. #b northbound and southbound stops requested at Taft Hill at Suffolk. Needed to reduce walking distance and increase desirability of transit. • This section of trail is really heavily used , which is great. Would it be possible to widen it with gravel to the N so that joggers and bikers have fewer run - ins ? Joggers create little side paths in any case, so making an official one, on just one side, would be both safer and prettier. Informal bike and ped cut- offs downhill from Centre to bike path has grown dramatically in past year or so . Increased density and bike/ ped use has spillover impacts on area . The bike/ pedestrian underpass at Shields can be quite dangerous when bicyclists speed through the area . I have almost been hit several times by bicyclists speeding downhill going east on the wrong side of the path . 11* The Spring Creek Trail could use some maintenance . Lots of concrete blocks are sticking up creating a pretty bumpy ride from the Gardens on Spring Creek west to Shields St. Make some kind of deal with Windtrail on Spring Creek HOA to include the spur connecting Gilgalad to the bike trail in the snow- clearing schedule . A perpetual hazard , never shoveled all winter. 11* Blind corner for cyclists - dangerous . • Traffic light/ pedestrian crossing area needs to be moved ; crossing at grade school is not sufficient for all the foot/bike/car traffic trying to cross on Stuart. • # 19 southbound Shields at Hill Pond stop requested . Needed for access to medical offices on west, and residen - tial neighborhood on east. • Marked/signalized crosswalk of Shields at Hillpond needed to reduce distance between the two flanking sig - nalized crosswalks . This sidewalk needs corners smooth out/widening to accommodate student housing development traffic . Relocate # 19 southbound stop from Shields at Shire to Shields at Rolland Moore Park, nearside . Needed to reduce the desirability of jaywalking , as stop is at signalized intersection . ADA- compliant access is best provided nearside with new pad , due to sidewalk slope . • Consider putting a traffic light at Phemister/ Rolland Moore and Centre . Since Rolland Moore now connects to Centre, it has become very difficult at high traffic times to turn onto Centre . Also, the lanes on Phemister have not been repainted so there 's no indication of which lane you should be in if you are going straight. The only options are turn left or turn right. • The solid guardrail on the east side of Centre just south of Phemister prevents people turning onto Centre from Phemister from seeing northbound traffic . It is extremely dangerous and should be replaced with an open style guardrail . • This is a blind left turn onto Constitution for cyclists travelling west on Scarborough . • # 19 northbound bus stop is not ADA accessible . A grass strip exists today; a concrete pad is required by ADA law. • Bike lane on Shields from Drake to Centre is way too narrow. • Connection from Spring Creek Trail to Drake could be improved . Not bad , just ordinary. • It is nearly impossible to turn right out of the veterinary clinic . • This is a really awkward series of lights for bicyclists and vehicle drivers also . West Central City of For Area Plants West Central Area Plan — Visioning Events Summary May 21 — June 30, 2014 Background The purpose of the West Central Area Plan ( WCAP ) update is to revisit and update the 1999 West Central Neighborhoods MULBERRY ST Plan based on emerging issues and trends . The Plan will incorporate new information from related planning efforts and will serve as a guide for : VV ELIZABETH ST • Land Use & Neighborhood Character ( e . g . , zoning, density, historic preservation ) • Transportation & Mobility ( e . g . , connections to the PROSPECT RD a new MAX bus rapid transit system , bicycle and • ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MCI ■ ■ * pedestrian enhancements, intersection safety ) o O • Open Space Networks ( e . g . , parks and open space, c~i) wildlife habitat, drainage and floodplain management ) J o = J O The project will also include a new conceptual design for U. = z Prospect Road from Shields Street to College Avenue . C/) 0 0 Alternatives will be developed and evaluated to establish a p DRAKE RD � preferred design that is functional , safe, and well - marked for pedestrians, bicycles, buses, and cars . WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN BOUNDARIES The WCAP process began in March 2014 . The plan is PROSPECT CORRIDOR DESIGN anticipated to be presented to Council for consideration for adoption in early 2015 . Visioning Events Following a series of listening sessions, Date Time onug-ly-ma neighborhood walking tours, and other initial May 21 5 : 30 - 7 : 30 p . m . Drake Centre 38 outreach , two community workshops were held in late May to review and update the May 29 5 : 30 - 7 : 30 p . m . Senior Center 36 vision for the West Central Area Plan . Staff Total 74 gave a presentation about the history and current context of the West Central Area , followed by keypad polling and small -group discussions about the vision and priorities for Land Use & Neighborhood Character, Transportation & Mobility, Open Space Networks, and the Prospect Corridor . The keypad polling included questions from the online Visioning Survey, described in further detail below . Visioning Survey In conjunction with the Visioning Workshops, an online Visioning Survey gave those interested in the plan an opportunity to share their ideas on the vision for the West Central Area , regardless of whether Page 1 West Central City of For Area Plants they were able to attend one of the events . Planning staff attended the Drake Road Farmers' Market and CSU Lagoon Concert Series to provide information on the planning effort and collect additional surveys in person . The survey was also advertised on the WCAP website, on the postcard mailing that announced the visioning events, and through multiple newsletters and email lists . In total , 337 people provided feedback through the survey, which complemented the keypad polling and discussions at the Visioning Workshops . The survey questions are provided in Appendix A . Survey Results The results of the Visioning Survey are summarized by question below . Some questions allowed open - ended comments or "Other" responses, which have been summarized narratively . The full survey results can be found in Appendix B . SECTION A . INTEREST IN THE WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Q1 . Using the map [of the West Central Area], which of the following apply to you ? (Please select all that apply.) 60 % 56% 50 % - 40 % 30% 27% 30% 27oi T'o 20% -- — 14% 12% 10% 5% 0% Live in the West Own property in Work in the West Own a business CSU student CSU faculty/staff Don't live or work Central Area the West Central Central Area in the West in the area but Area Central Area travel through and/or use the area Page 2 West Central City of For Area Plants SECTION B . LAND USE & NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER Q2. If you could re-envision land use and neighborhood character within the West Central Area, which of the following is most important to you ? (Select up to 3.) 70% 65% 60% 58% — 50% — 40% — 34% 33% 30% - 20% i1% - 15 0 0 10% � — 0% I Access to cultural Access to retail Additional Height and Streetscape Variety of Other and recreational and services employment architectural enhancements — housing types amenities—(e .g . , opportunities compatibility of (e .g . , sidewalks, parks , pools , new buildings street trees , bike senior center) lanes) The most common theme from the open -ended comments was preserving the family character of the neighborhoods in the area . Opinions on how to maintain this neighborhood character ranged from maintaining the U + 2 occupancy ordinance to limiting the escalation of density and various other policies . In contrast, many commenters felt that the area should be more densely populated and targeted towards students, due to the area ' s proximity to the CSU Main Campus . Some commenters asked for a relaxation of U + 2 in the area or increase to U + 3 . Some other commenters asked to reserve the area for student housing, requesting that the West Central Area be higher density and more diverse, and others asked for more affordable student housing . Code compliance and nuisance issues were also a common theme . Several commenters asked for greater enforcement of city ordinances related to yard upkeep and maintenance . Others asked for cleaner streets, the disallowance of trailers and boats in front of homes, better overall property maintenance, and posting signs for street sweeping to improve the effectiveness of sweeps . Many commenters spoke about transportation issues . A sentiment shared by many commenters was the desire to improve traffic flow and minimize congestion . Other transportation - related comments included adding off- street bikeways, increased bike safety on Shields, and enforcement of parking requirements . The final theme from the comments centered on open space . Many commenters requested that there be a continued effort to provide more open space as the area becomes more densely populated . Page 3 West Central City of For Area Plants Q3. The map provided shows the land within the West Central Area that is currently vacant or may be considered for redevelopment in the near future. Which statement best describes your vision for future housing density (number of housing units or square feet of commercial space per acre) for the areas in yellow and orange ? The responses to this question were split Higher between those who would prefer to see no density overall , more change in density and those who would mixed use welcome increased density on vacant land . and multi- family Most of the commenters that expressed an buildings interest in higher density development 13% Little or no noted that high density development future should occur close to campus or at major Medium change in density, density intersections to respect the character of the some new mixed use 46% neighborhoods . Other recurring themes and multi- included preserving open space, ensuring family housing affordability, the provision of buildings 41 % adequate parking, and continued enforcement of U + 2 with new development . Q4. How important is the preservation of historically significant structures (>50 years in age with special historic features) within the West Central Area ? The prevailing sentiment regarding the preservation of historic homes in the West Not at all Central area is that there need to be strict criteria important on what qualifies for preservation beyond the age 15% of the structure . Commenters noted that many structures in the area will become eligible for Very historic designation due to their age but might important not contribute to the area in a meaningful way, 46% and the criteria for historic designation should be Moderately based on the significance of the structure . Most important agreed that historically significant structures 39% should be preserved and that these structures make Fort Collins unique and appealing . Some commenters did not see the need to protect historic structures in the area . Page 4 West Central City of For Area Plants Q5. While there are grocery stores near the West Central Area, there are currently no full-service grocery stores contained within the area. How important is it to provide a neighborhood commercial center with a grocery store, retail stores, and other services within the West Central Area ? Most commenters agreed that a full -service grocer like King Soopers and Safeway is not needed due to the presence of full -service Very grocers abutting the plan area . Many felt that Not at all important important 29% the grocers adjacent to the plan area provided 34% ample service to residents in the West Central area . Other commenters felt that despite the presence of full -service grocers on the edge of the planning area , a small , neighborhood grocer like Beaver' s Market would be welcome . Moderately Some noted that if there were to be a new important neighborhood -scale grocer, it should occupy 37% vacant commercial space as opposed to building a new structure . SECTION C . TRANSPORTATION & MOBILITY Q6. Which of the following statements best describes how you would rate the convenience of parking where you live, work, or attend school in the West Central Area ? According to commenters, parking is a hot button issue in and around the CSU campus Not and in areas frequented by students . While applicable 13% parking is an issue for those who use cars, Very Not at all convenient many of the commenters noted that their convenient 34% primary mode of transportation is biking or 11 % walking and that parking issues do not generally affect them . Others commented that while parking can be a challenge around campus at peak hours, they can still usually find a parking spot . Moderately convenient 42% Page 5 West Central City of Area Plantf�s Q7. Which statement best describes your daily trips (e. g... to work or school) through or within the West Central Area ? Not The consensus among commenters was that applicable commute- related stress levels are highest Very 4% during peak hours and when CSU is in stressful 5% session . Peak hours in the West Central Area include rush hour and in the late Not at all stressful afternoon when school lets out at local high 25% schools, middle schools, and CSU . Many Moderately commenters indicated their stress levels are stressful 19% til highest when using Prospect or Shields . The 1Wchallenges on Prospect and Shields were wide - ranging and depended on the mode of transportation being used . A little stressful 47% Q8. What is the primary mode you use for your daily trips through or within the West Central Area ? Other Not 2 % applicable Many commenters noted that they use Bus/Transit I � 2% 2 % � multiple forms of transportation , depending on various factors . Many noted that they Walking bike more frequently during the summer 6°/ q Y g months and less so during the winter . Car 61 % Page 6 West Central Fort Collins Area Plan Q9. If you could re-envision your commute within the West Central Area, which of the following improvements would reduce your stress level most significantly? (Select up to 3.) 35% 31 % 32% 31 % 30% - 27% 27% 25% - 22% 20% i I 15% 13% 10% - 7% 5% - 0% 41 o Ile ayye, . y�QoaG a`oaa o�ra� �ay�� aa. P Commenters were evenly divided among options for re-envisioning their commute in the West Central Area . Most of the comments dealt with alleviating congestion, but the methods for relieving congestion varied . Some thought enhanced public transportation should be emphasized . Others thought that providing more bike/ pedestrian infrastructure would help reduce conflicts between cars and improve their commute . There was also a group of commenters that felt a renewed focus on cars would benefit the area most . Another group called for traffic calming measures on arterial roads to enhance safety. Page 7 West Central City of For Area Plants Q10. Which of the following areas have the greatest need for pedestrian/bike facilities within the West Central Area ? (Select up to 3.) 70% 62% 60% 50% 45% 40% 30% 0 24% 23% 20% 17% - — — 14% 10% 5% 0% Drake Rd Lake St Mulberry St Prospect Rd Shields Rd Taft Hill Rd West Elizabeth Other St Most commenters mentioned that Prospect is the road in greatest need for pedestrian /bike facilities . Bicyclists, pedestrians and drivers all agreed that Prospect needs modifications to make it a safer and more comfortable corridor for all modes of transportation . The methods to achieve safer conditions on Prospect ranged widely . Some commenters want additional bike and pedestrian infrastructure on Prospect . Others want more bike and pedestrian infrastructure on parallel streets to make Prospect a more auto-centric corridor . Shields and Mulberry were also referenced as being dangerous roads that need additional pedestrian and bike facilities . Page 8 West Central Fort Collins Area Plan SECTION D . OPEN SPACE NETWORKS Q11 . Natural systems within the West Central Area include the network of parks, open space, floodways, urban tree canopy, wildlife habitat, and other natural features. If you could re-envision natural systems within the West Central Area, which of the following do you see as most important ? (Select up to 3.) 60% 60% 50% 40% 38% ° 37% 39% 30% ° 24% 20% 10% 4% 0% o`a� may any any Q`�o' oQ� e�`y roe agora roy\Ga ��aQ a�a� �ayoa ooGm� c�°off O ado aoo aoo era �� era Z� o�yQ a aa` oyy Pa '�° otoa ood` �o� ANS `ono Paa The general sentiment in the comments was that the existing natural systems in the West Central Area are satisfactory. Many commenters applauded the City' s efforts thus far in preserving the natural systems in the West Central Area . Some commenters asked for expanding and enhancing these natural systems . For those who saw room for improvement, many commenters asked for more trees . Others asked for more trails throughout the area . Page 9 West Central Fort Collins Area Plan Q12. Which of the following statements best describes how you would rate the convenience of access to parks and recreation facilities in the West Central Area ? Not at all Comments ranged depending on the convenient proximity of the commenter to parks and 5% natural areas . Commenters tended to note how close they are to their closest neighborhood park or natural area . Very convenient 44% Moderately convenient 51 % Q13. Which of the following statements best describes how you would rate the convenience of access to natural areas and open space in the West Central Area ? Not at all convenient 7% Comments ranged depending on the proximity of the commenter to parks and natural areas . Commenters tended to note how close they are to their closest Very neighborhood park or natural area . convenient 34% Moderately convenient 59% Page 10 West Central Fort Collins Area Plan SECTION E . PROSPECT CORRIDOR Q14. On average, how often do you travel on Prospect Road through or within the West Central Area ? Almost never 4% Once a month 6% Once a week Daily (or 16% multiple times each day) 40% 3-5 times per week 34% Q15. Which of the following statements describes how you feel about Prospect Road ? (Select all that apply) 80 . 0% 72 .5% 70 .0% 60 .0% 51 .0% 49 . 3% 50 .0% 47 . 3% 40 .0% 30 .0% - -P 20.0% 10.0% 6.8% 0 .0% - Prospect Road is/should Prospect Road needs Prospect Road needs Prospect Road needs Other remain primarily a aesthetic and character bicycle improvements pedestrian "through" or "travel' improvements improvements corridor — a way to get from point A to point B Page 11 West Central City of For Area Plants Some commenters thought that pedestrian and bicycle improvements would be the most beneficial , and others called for adding bike lanes and/or widening sidewalks . Others felt that improving connectivity across Prospect to enhance north - south travel would be best . Some thought that moving bikes and pedestrians to parallel streets would make more sense than expanding the infrastructure on Prospect itself. Others opined that they see Prospect as an auto travel corridor and that enhancements should be focused on vehicular travel . Some commenters proposed widening Prospect to add more travel lanes, and others want to see the speed limit raised to encourage quicker travel through the city . Another group suggested making no alterations to Prospect but also not adding significant population to the area to prevent further congestion of the corridor . Q16. How saf%omfortable do you feel when walking along or crossing Prospect Road? Very safe/ The majority of commenters agreed that comfortable Prospect is a dangerous corridor for Not 7 % pedestrians . Many commenters did note applicable 11 % that they feel safer on certain sections of Prospect than others . Other commenters said they avoid Prospect entirely because Moderately they perceive it as unsafe . The solutions Not at all safe/ proposed by commenters to the safety safe/ comfortable issues of Prospect varied . comfortable 43% 39% Q17. How willing would you be to spend 2 additional minutes driving through Prospect Road in order to improve pedestrian comfort and safety ? Not Many commenters wanted more explanation appliocable of the question and wondered how this result Not at all could be achieved . Some were skeptical a two - willing minute delay could be achieved and felt that it 14% might balloon to a longer delay or create delays and congestion elsewhere . Those that Very willing were in favor of safety improvements had 49% many ideas, including moving bikes and Moderately pedestrians to Lake Street, improving willing 35% crossings, the addition of bike lanes, or building over/underpasses to alleviate congestion on Prospect . Page 12 West Central City of For Area Plants Q18. How important is it to provide additional north/south pedestrian and bike access to Prospect Road and north/south pedestrian and bike crossings along Prospect Road ? Not Commenters were split amongst three applicable � different outlooks on north/south bike and pedestrian connections across Prospect . One Not at all group of commenters did not feel important 8% north /south bike and pedestrian connections were the most pressing issue in the West Central Area . Others felt that east/west Very connectivity deserves more attention . The Moderately important proposed improvements varied , but many important 52% dealt with new over or underpasses to 36% prevent creating further vehicular congestion on Prospect . SECTION F . GENERAL COMMENTS Q19. Do you have any additional comments or thoughts for the West Central Area Plan and/or Prospect Corridor Design ? Comments for this question were wide - ranging due to the nature of the question , but responses tended to focus on a few key issues . The potential on -campus stadium at CSU concerned many commenters . Some felt that this planning effort should be delayed until after the stadium issue is resolved as it will potentially have a significant impact on the area around campus . A related theme that was echoed in many comments was the need to preserve the character of the West Central Area . A number of commenters worried that the single-family character of the area is being eroded and that the West Central Area Plan should address ways to preserve the character of the area . Others noted that rental properties as not always well - maintained and that the plan needs to address property maintenance . Others called for fewer student housing developments to ensure the character of the area is protected . Many commenters weighed in on the U + 2 ordinance and called for continued enforcement of the ordinance . Pedestrian and bike connections were another major theme among commenters . Similar to the comments on other survey questions, many commenters asked for better pedestrian/bike connectivity . The lack of north/south connections was mentioned in numerous comments . Many other commenters advocated for more over/underpasses to enhance pedestrian and bike connectivity . A number of commenters also asked for improved connectivity to trails and other areas of Fort Collins . Page 13 West Central City of Area Plan Coll SECTION G . DEMOGRAPHICS Q20. What is your gender? Q21 . What is your age ? Prefer not to Prefer not to er 18 answer answer Undo 2% 3% � � 0% 65-74 3 9% Male 25% 43% Female 55-64 55% 19% ' 25-34 14% 45-54 15% 35-44 12% Q22. If you live in the West Central Area, do Q23. What is your annual household income ? you own or rent your residence ? Prefer not to $21 ,999 or less answer 19% $250 , 000 or � 21 % 1 do not live more in the West Own 1 % Central Area 40% 36% $ 150 , 000- 1 $227000— 249 , 000 587999 5% 22% $88,000- 149 , 000 20% $59,000- 871999 Prefer not to —/ Rent 13% answer 22% 2 % Page 14 West Central City of Area Plan West West Central Area Plan - Outreach Summary September — October 2014 Background The purpose of the West Central Area Plan ( WCAP ) update is to revisit and update the 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan based on emerging MULBERRYST issues and trends . The Plan will incorporate new information from related planning efforts and will serve as a guide for : ELIZABETH ST • Land Use & Neighborhood Character . . . . . . . . . . ..... • Transportation & Mobility ' PROSPECTRD . . . . ... . .. . . .. . . ... . . . . . . _ . - . . • Open Space Networks a _J W N The project also includes new conceptual designs for Prospect Road and = o Z w Lake Street (from Shields Street to College Avenue ) that are functional , a = Q o Cn safe , and well - marked for pedestrians, bicycles, buses, and cars . DRAKE RD The WCAP process began in March 2014 . The plan is anticipated to be it Vol ' presented to Council for consideration for adoption in early 2015 . West Central Area Plan Prospect Corridor Design Open House City staff held an Open House on September 18t" to refine the vision and Event Event Details Participants gather input on potential policies and Open House Sept . 18, 4 : 00 - 7 : 00 p . m . 79 Fort Collins Senior Center action items for the West Central Area Sept . 22, 5 : 30 - 7 : 30 p . m . Plan and Prospect Corridor Design . The Prospect Corridor Plymouth Congregational 58 Open House built upon the input received Design Workshop Church from previous outreach efforts . Total 137 Prospect Corridor Design Workshop Additional input on the proposed design alternatives for the Prospect Corridor was sought at a workshop on September 22 "d . The goal of the Prospect Corridor Design Workshop was to have more focused conversations about the design options for Prospect Road and Lake Street . The various design alternatives were presented , followed by facilitated small -group discussions for each proposed alternative . Responses from a questionnaire and feedback from the facilitated discussions informed additional updates to the Prospect Road and Lake Street designs . West Central Area Plan Online Survey #2 An online survey gave those interested in the plan an opportunity to share their ideas on more specific components of the Plan ' s vision , regardless of whether they were able to attend one of the events . The survey was advertised on the WCAP website, a postcard mailing, and through multiple newsletters and email lists . In total , 263 people provided feedback through the survey . The survey questions are provided in Appendix A . Page 1 West Central City of For Area Plants Survey Results The results of Survey #2 are summarized by question below . Some questions allowed for open - ended comments or "Other" responses, which have been summarized narratively . The full survey results can be found in Appendix B . SECTION A . INTEREST IN THE WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Q1 . Using the map [of the West Central Area], which of the following apply to you ? (Please select all that apply.) 70% 61% 60% — 50% 44% 40% 30% 27% 20% 16 % 11% 10% 0 0% Live in the West Own property in Don't live or workCSU faculty/staff Work in the West CSU student Own a business Central Area the West Central in the area but Central Area in the West Area travel through Central Area and/or use the area Q2. If you live in the West Central Area, do you own or rent your residence ? Prefer not to answer 0 . 8% ANk Rent 11 .5% I do not live in the West Central Area Own 54 . 0% 33 . 7% Page 2 West Central City of For Area Plants SECTION B . LAND USE & NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER Q3. What types of additional services or improvements related to land use and neighborhood character should be considered in the West Central Area (select up to 3) ? 60 % 53% r 50% 47% 43% 40% 32% 30% 29% 26% 22% 20% 15% 10% — 0% Code and Sidewalk Enhancement New Law Street Street Lighting Other Nuisance Improvements of Existing Parks/Open Enforcement Maintenance Enforcement Parks/Open Space ( Police) Space The most common theme from the open -ended comments was making the area more bike and pedestrian friendly. Specific ideas ranged from dedicated bike lanes to buffered bike lanes along major arterials, and even a dedicated bike - only road . Comments related to pedestrian improvements focused on safer sidewalks and crossings at arterials, including suggestions for overpasses and/or underpasses at key locations to make crossings easier and safer . Preserving the single-family character of the area was another common theme . Several commenters shared concerns about the increasing prevalence of student-oriented housing in the area . Other commenters feel the City should find ways to encourage more families settle in the area . Some suggested that property owners and tenants of rental housing need education on property maintenance, which contributes to the character of neighborhoods . Safety was also a shared concern . Many commenters asked for improved lighting to enhance the safety of streets and parks . Others think that traffic calming measures like speed bumps should be implemented , where appropriate, to reduce travel speeds on neighborhood streets . Page 3 West Central City of For Area Plants Q4. What types of development are most appropriate in the Areas of Development in pink and red on the map (select up to 3) ? 45% ° 40% 36% 35% 35% 33% 30% 28% 25% 25% 20% 20% - 14% 15% - 12 10 % 5% 0% �5 to Oa Z5 5 e5 e& Q ° a��,�O m��� °tea°� e��G � \eF G °� 5° Many commenters expressed an interest in a mix of housing types and/or uses within the Areas of Development . Some participants wrote in that they would welcome commercial uses in the Areas of Development, as well . Others felt that a mix of residential unit types would bring more diversity to the area . Some commented the student- oriented residential developments should be located near the CSU campus . Another prevalent theme was that of minimizing development, particularly given increased traffic and other issues in recent years . Some commenters do not support additional student- oriented housing, and others felt that vacant should remain undeveloped or turned into Natural Areas . Page 4 West Central Fort Collins Area Plan Q5. Which of the following identifying features or neighborhood character enhancements would you like to see in the neighborhood in which you live (select up to 3) ? 60% 64% 50% 43% 40% 39% 30% 20% % °� ° 10% 0% Trees and other Public art or other Street lighting Entry signage None of the Above Other plantings along decorative features streets There was little consensus amongst commenters regarding identifying features or neighborhood enhancements . Many commenters feel their neighborhood is fine the way it is . Some commenters noted a preference for more street trees and public art, especially between Shields and Taft Hill on Prospect . Others would prefer better sidewalks as an enhancement to their neighborhood . Q6. If a new neighborhood center is developed in the West Central area, what are the top 3 features or land uses that should be included? 60% 52% 50% 4696 42% 40% o 30% 20% 19% 18% 17% 14% 14% 10% 9% 8% 0% SQaoo 5 e� a� Qm�OQ �o � 000�5 CbN Off' Page 5 West Central Fort Collins Area Plan A large number of commenters did not want a new neighborhood center . A number of respondents would prefer the land remain open space or be converted to a park . A group of commenters noted that there are already neighborhood centers within the West Central Area that have many vacancies and that those vacancies should be filled before a new neighborhood center is developed . SECTION C . TRANSPORTATION & MOBILITY Q7. What are the top 2 intersections that you think should be considered for safety improvements ? 100 91 90 RA 80 70 - 64 60 - - 50 - - 40 - - 30 - - - 22 21 21 19 20 - - - - - - - 18 17 11 11 8 10 - - - - - - - - - - - - 3 0 ° �5� 54r �4r \��a5 ��' �`� \�a �4r \��a J¢� ��� opt \off oQ �G' �,����' \�5r �G� �� �G� Q�oS� ��' \�`� �,� ' � �G \�a�e ��o G°4 Q4� Page 6 West Central Fort of Area Planf� Q8. What are the top 2 sections of road that you think should be considered for safety improvements ? 160 149 140 120 100 80 66 60 41 40 — — 3 27 25 20 20 18 20 — — — — 8 10 8 8 8 7 7 5 4 0 �Qe i per boo ���t` `m`ti �o� S�oG �` �o G� a ° a Q o5 �`� �O �o x00 °� ���` �o �O Q o r �ti 0 o 0 0 t` o o 4R4 J�� oi° Z� °COOo4 Xo �°5�� o5Q° . �ay� oer 5r�o ��G °�\ ate\ ��\ �`�� o�� �`\ �'�� `��e °gyp °�� Page 7 West Central Fort Collins Area Plan Q9. What would encourage you to walk or bike more often in the West Central area (select up to 3) ? 60% 0 60% 50% 46% 40% — — 30% 97 tl 20% � i"6% 13% 13% 13% 10% - - - - - 6% 5% 4% 3% 0% • a\ oe °x5 ore &\A °�e o° �\Io S°, 'AZ °t 0 �� �� �� 5 a .C� t a ��a� ��J 5�\m� z e m a�o� a�°a° `���° Q��o� 5`°�°� �°�° ��o•�o� ���of °o46 °�a got` Y °t° �r 5r6 m °� �,�° mom°' J 6 of The majority of comments dealt with ways to improve biking on major streets . Many commenters expressed an interest in buffered bike lanes on major streets such as Shields, Prospect and Drake . Commenters noted that they currently take alternate routes to avoid those streets and that buffered bike lanes would make their commutes shorter and safer . Others noted that many cyclists use sidewalks in these areas, creating a dangerous situation for pedestrians . These commenters requested better separation of pedestrians and bikes . Their suggestions for achieving this separation included wider sidewalks, better education and buffered bike lanes . A group of motorists shared the concerns of cyclists and suggested ways to improve driving through the area . Some commenters suggested using bike lanes, as opposed to shared lanes . These respondents pointed out that drivers do not understand the markings on the road and it creates safety issues for drivers and cyclists . Others suggested widening travel lanes for cars and bikes to minimize conflicts . Page 8 West Central City of For Area Plants SECTION D . OPEN SPACE NETWORKS Q12. 1 would like to see open space improvements that focus on the following types of features or facilities (select up to 3) : 80 % 70% 68% 60% 50% 0 40% 30% 28% 22% 20% 19% 20% 13% 10% — 7% 2% 1 % 0% ta�� `�a5 ��5 a�5 a��5 m�5 ata� ooa o�5 rot rod N's� nor C�r ,P6 ce Q 5Qa a° O Most commenters expressed an interest in improving connectivity between existing parks and open space . Some felt that the existing trail network does an inadequate job of connecting the various open spaces together . Suggested improvements included converting informal paths into formal connections, creating naturalized pathways, and developing more trails . Q13. Please complete the following sentence: "My ideal nature experience in the West Central area looks like. . . " The following word cloud summarizes the comments for this question . Many commenters emphasized their desire for trails that allow them to enjoy open space, natural areas and/or parks comfortably on foot or bike . Other desirable features identified by commenters include wildlife, safe and easy access and nature that is in the neighborhood or close by . Many commenters described the experience or setting they prefer when spending time in nature . Page 9 West Central Fort Collins Area Plan Open Space Networks — Word Cloud trees • access o eri trails P P kids gos ace bknq foothills quiet nature feel play time water ,d fox meadows canals nice M running garden connect paths sasfe � wildlife many Y place w n doghouse parkt community gardens small enjoy great rolland moore picnic plenty people neighborhood creek pond deer see family ride spring creek trail u ra I areas SECTION E . PROSPECT CORRIDOR Q14. Please rate each of the sidewalk options on a scale of 1 (least preferred) to 5 (most preferred). Shared off-s upped path 1 Detached sidewalk with tree lawn 3 . 8 2 Wide attached sidewalk 1 3 . 2 3 Narrow attached sidewalk 1 .4 4 While most respondents noted they preferred a shared off-street bike/ pedestrian path , many commenters ( both cyclists and pedestrians ) expressed safety concerns regarding shared paths . Since cyclists move at higher speeds, a shared path can conflict with pedestrian movement . Drivers commented that shared paths create dangerous situations at right turns, as cars have difficulty seeing bikes on shared paths . Others noted that they chose a shared path as their preferred option due to the impracticality of adding dedicated bike lanes to Prospect, noting that this was the best compromise . Page 10 West Central City of For Area Plants Q15. Please rate each of the median options on a scale of 1 (least preferred) to 5 (most preferred). MedianOptions Average Rating ( 1-5) Rank Wide median with trees 3 . 6 1 on Wide median with hardscape/ 3 . 5 2 plantings Painted center turn lane 2 . 8 3 Narrow median 2 . 5 4 While most respondents desire a wide median of some sort on Prospect, some commenters noted caveats . Many were worried about traffic flow with a center median , some noting that they would prefer a median so long as traffic flow was not constricted . Others preferred the median but were concerned that it would come at the expense of a travel lane, thus constricting traffic flow . Other commenters preferred a wide median with trees or plantings but were concerned about maintenance . In order to minimize upkeep, some suggested using drought tolerant plants, xeriscaping, or tall grasses that can go dormant in the summer months . Some were skeptical of adding medians due to the limited space on Prospect . Some felt that wider sidewalks should be prioritized over medians . Others preferred a center turn lane throughout the corridor to handle traffic backups, allow better access for emergency vehicles, and make it easier for bicyclists to cross . Q16. Please rate each of the bike facility options on a scale of 1 (least preferred) to 5 (most preferred). • • • W3 .R6 Shared off-street bike/ ped path Two-way protected bike lane 2 Protected bike lane 3 .4 3 Buffered bike lane 2 . 8 4 Opinions on bike facilities varied . Most respondents agreed that some sort of separation for bikes and cars would be preferable on Prospect, and some commenters noted that any of the options would be preferable over existing conditions . Other commenters did not like the idea of bikes and pedestrians sharing a path , since it creates an uncomfortable environment for both cyclists and pedestrians . Others thought physically separated bike and automobile facilities make more sense than just a painted buffer . Some commenters did not support any bike facilities on Prospect, due to lack of space or concerns about feasibility . Others questioned the cost and ability to maintain bike facilities in the winter months due to snow . Page 11 West Central City of For Area Plants Q18. Rank the following modes of travel in order of priority for improvements on Prospect Road (rank from 1 (most important) to 4 (least important)) : Travel • • - Score Rank Bicycle 690 Automobile 614 2 Pedestrian 565 3 Public Transit 423 4 Q17. Which roadway design elements are most important on Prospect Road (select up to 3) ? 70% 60% 60% 55% 50% 43% 41 % 40% — 30% 23% 21 % 20% 10% 6% 0% Sidewalks Shared On-street bike Center turn lane Planted median Tree lawn (next Other bike/pedestrian lanes to sidewalk) path Many commenters were concerned about traffic flow and lose space for vehicles if any of the above design elements are implemented . Some commenters requested wider travel lanes to improve vehicle flow . Page 12 West Central City of For Area Plants Q19. Considering the potential improvements to Prospect Road and Lake Street, which east-west route are you most likely to walk or bike along in the future ? Pitkin Street 3 . 50/( Other 2 .2% Lake Street 21 . 1 % Spring Creek Trail 1 43 .5% Prospect Road 29 . 7% Comments for this section varied , as they tended to focus on the specific corridor chosen and thus no larger themes emerged from the comments . SECTION F . GENERAL COMMENTS Q20. Do you have any additional comments or thoughts for the West Central Area Plan and/or Prospect Corridor Design ? Comments were wide- ranging due to the nature of the question , but responses tended to focus on a few key issues . The potential on - campus stadium at CSU concerned many commenters . Some felt that this planning effort should be delayed until after the stadium issue is resolved as it will potentially have a significant impact on the area around campus . A related theme that was echoed in many comments was the need to preserve the character of the West Central area . A number of commenters worried that the single-family character of the area is being eroded and that the West Central Area Plan should address ways to preserve the character of the area . Others noted that rental properties are not always well - maintained and that the plan needs to address property maintenance . Others called for fewer student housing developments to ensure the character of the area is protected . Many commenters weighed in on the U + 2 ordinance and called for its continued enforcement . Similar to the comments on other survey questions, many commenters asked for better pedestrian/ bike connectivity . Some automobile users commented on improving traffic flow in the area , especially on Prospect . However, these commenters expressed a desire for improved bike and pedestrian infrastructure as well . Others advocated for more over/underpasses to enhance pedestrian and bike connectivity . A number of commenters requested increased parking for new student- oriented housing developments . Page 13 West Central City of For Area Plants SECTION G . DEMOGRAPHICS Q20. What is your gender? Q21 . What is your age ? Prefer not to Prefer not to answer 4 . 3% 75+ 3 . 1 % answer 3 . 1 % Under 18 0 .0 /o 18-24 7.7% 25-34 14 .2% 65-74 19.2% Male 44 . 0% L'I40 Female 35-4414 . 6% 51 . 7% 55-64 23 . 1 45-54 15.0% Q23. What is your annual household income ? $21 ,99 $250 , 000 Prefer not 9 or or more to answer less 1 .2% 18 .2% . 0 ° $22 , 000- 58 , 999 $ 1507000— 18 .2% 2497000 9 . 3% $59 ,000— $88 ,000— 87 , 999 1497000 20 .9% 24 .0% Page 14 West Central % Area Plan Prospect Corridor Design Survey Prospect Corridor Design Survey — November/December 2014 Key Themes — Open-Ended Comments Q5. Do you have any comments on the Prospect Corridor Vision ? • General support for the vision statements as presented • Support for safety as a top priority • Support for improving vehicle traffic flow • Concern about the impact of a new on -campus stadium on the vision • Support for improved accommodations for pedestrians and bicycles Q7. How well does the design for Prospect Road serve each mode of travel? • Car : Majority of respondents felt that it serves car travel well or very well ( 74. 8%) • Bicycle : Majority of respondents felt that it serves bicycle travel well or very well ( 59 .4%) • Walking: Majority of respondents felt that it serves pedestrian travel well or very well (70 . 2% ) • Transit ( Bus) : People generally felt that transit is well -served by the design, though about one- third of respondents selected "not sure . " More information was needed for some to feel comfortable answering the question . • Comments : o Need for more north -south crossings o Interest in bus pullouts to reduce traffic stoppages o Interest in traffic calming to slow vehicle speeds o Concern that design does not extend to the west and east along Prospect o Concerns about bikes and pedestrians sharing a path , both for efficiency of bike travel and safety of pedestrians; suggestions that this needs to be well- marked and separating bikes and pedestrians should be considered o Concern that shared path is only on north side of road, and concerns about the visibility and safety of eastbound bicyclists on the north side of the street o Support for tree lawn o Support for bike/ped underpass at Centre Ave to improve crossing safety o Interest in an overpass or underpass at the railroad crossing, or other solutions to reduce congestion between the Mason Corridor and College Ave o Concern that the design may not function well with the traffic that would be generated by an on-campus stadium o Concern about amount of right-of-way ( ROW) needs shown in some areas o Desire for left turn arrows at the intersection of Centre and Prospect o Interest in dedicated, on-street bike lane instead of a shared path o Concern that medians will increase traffic congestion o Concern about median at Bay Road restricting access to Hilton and Colorado Parks & Wildlife o Concern about the ability of 10' lanes to accommodate large trucks 1 West Central % Area Plan Prospect Corridor Design Survey Q8. How well does the design for Prospect Road meet the vision statements ? • P1 — Safe and Comfortable corridor for all modes of travel : Majority of respondents felt that it supports this vision statement well or very well ( 66 . 3% ) • P2 - Safe crossings : Majority of respondents felt that it supports this vision statement well or very well ( 59 . 5 % ) 0 P3 — Attractive gateway to campus, downtown, and midtown : Majority of respondents felt that it supports this vision statement well or very well ( 74 . 8%) 0 P4 — Seamless connection to MAX : Majority of respondents felt that it supports this vision statement well or very well ( 52 . 5 % ), though many responded that they were not sure ( 28 . 6%) 0 Comments : o Preference for separate bicycle and pedestrian facilities o Concern about impact of an on-campus stadium on the ability to meet the vision o Concern that design does not significantly improve connectivity to MAX for pedestrians and drivers o Comments that a bus route along this stretch of Prospect would be the best improvement for connecting to MAX o Concerns about the amount of right-of-way needed for the design o Comments that safe crossings can only be achieved by reducing travel speeds o Requests for more details about how the design would be implemented o Support for underpasses for bikes and pedestrians across Prospect, and for vehicles at the railroad crossing o Concern about the safety of mid - block crossings Q9. How well does the design for Lake Street serve each mode of travel? • Car : Majority of respondents felt that it serves car travel well or very well ( 71 . 3 % ) • Bicycle : Majority of respondents felt that it serves bicycle travel well or very well (89 . 5 %) 0 Walking: Majority of respondents felt that it serves pedestrian travel well or very well (91 . 5%) 0 Transit ( Bus) : People generally felt that transit is well -served by the design (47 .4%), though more than one-third of respondents selected "not sure" ( 37 . 2%) 0 Comments : o Requests for more information about how buses would use the corridor o Interest in removing on -street parking o Support for separate bicycle and pedestrian facilities o Support for the raised planted buffer protecting the bike lane o Interest in additional crossings, particularly between Shields and Whitcomb o Concern about amount of right-of-way needed for the design o Concern that parked cars and planted buffers could create visual barriers for bikes and cars trying to make turns o Interest in removing tree lawns on the south side or both sides o Comments related to the need for wayfinding and signage for all users 2 West Central % Area Plan Prospect Corridor Design Survey o Concern that Lake isn't an ideal bicycle corridor because it doesn't continue to the east of College or west of Shields o Concern about safety of bicyclists at intersections, and visibility at driveways due to parked cars o Concern that the design may not fit with plans for an on -campus stadium o Concern about maintenance and snow removal for the protected bike lanes o Concern about emergency access and sufficient fire lane widths Q10. How well does the design for Lake Street meet the vision statements ? • P1 - Safe and Comfortable corridor for all modes of travel : Majority of respondents felt that it supports this vision statement well or very well ( 80 . 3% ) • P2 - Safe crossings : Majority of respondents felt that it supports this vision statement well or very well ( 70 . 3 % ) 0 P3 - Attractive gateway to campus, downtown, and midtown : Majority of respondents felt that it supports this vision statement well or very well ( 83 . 8%) 0 P4 - Seamless connection to MAX : Majority of respondents felt that it supports this vision statement well or very well ( 56 . 7%), though many responded that they were not sure ( 30 . 6%) • Comments : o Comments that crossings and transit connections are not clear in the designs o Concern that buildings would have to be demolished to implement the design o Suggestions that CSU should fund improvements and/or maintain Lake Street o Question about improvements that would be made from Prospect to Lake on Shields o Suggestion for 45 -degree angled parking o Suggestion for a roundabout at Lake and Center Q1 . Do you have any additional comments related to the Prospect Road or Lake Street designs ? • Support for encouraging bicycle traffic to use Lake rather than Prospect • Suggestion to place a crossing guard at the mid - block crossing of Prospect to help children safely get to Bennett Elementary School • Concerns about the timing of pedestrian crossing signals, and the impact of changing signals on traffic flows • Concern about impacts to the properties directly on Prospect • Concern about the cost of planted medians • Concern about visibility issues related to tree lawns • Need for clarification about whether the designs are being proposed together or as separate options • Suggestion for emergency call boxes and water fountains along the corridor • Concern about lighting and safety at existing underpasses • Support for xeriscape treatments in tree lawns and medians • Preference for prioritizing functional improvements over aesthetic enhancements 3 West Central Fort of Area Plan West Central Area Plan — Draft Plan Open House and Comment Forms Summary February - March , 2015 Background The purpose of the West Central Area Plan ( WCAP ) update is to revisit and update the 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan based on emerging issues and trends . The Plan will MULBERRY ST incorporate new information from related planning efforts and will serve as a guide for : ELIZABETH ST • Land Use & Neighborhood Character ( e . g . , zoning, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . density, historic preservation ) LAKE ST • Transportation & Mobility ( e . g . , connections to the : PROSPECT RD new MAX bus rapid transit system , bicycle and ••• • pedestrian enhancements, intersection safety ) Q • Open Space Networks ( e . g . , parks and open space, J y W wildlife habitat, drainage and floodplain management ) _ z0 w H W V� J The project will also include a new conceptual design for < rx v Prospect Road from Shields Street to College Avenue . DRAKE RD Alternatives will be developed and evaluated to establish a ' preferred design that is functional , safe, and well - marked for pedestrians, bicycles, buses, and cars . The WCAP process West Central Area Plan began in March 2014 . The plan is anticipated to be presented to Council for consideration for adoption in early 2015 . € ,... Prospect Corridor Design Draft Plan Open House and Survey Overview In February, City staff released a draft version Date Time Location Participants of the West Central Area Plan . To solicit feedback from community members, staff Feb 12 4 - 7 p . m . Senior Center 162 held an open house and collected comment N/A N/A Comment Forms 85 forms . The open house was composed of dedicated stations for each section of the draft plan . Each station had a copy of the section of the plan , supporting materials, and one or more staff to answer questions and address any issues participants had . 162 community members were in attendance . To allow feedback opportunities for those who couldn 't attend the open house, staff posted the draft plan online with an associated comment form . In total , 85 community members provided their feedback online through comment forms, both online and at the open house . What follows is a brief summary of the feedback received from community members who provided input at the draft plan open house and/or through comment forms . West Central Fort of Area Plan Draft Plan Comment Form Summary Question 4 - Are there any policies or general information that appear to be missing from the Draft Plan ? Commenters with suggestions for additional policies and information focused on two main themes . Some commenters expressed a desire for more information on transportation related issues, such as future traffic volumes, traffic from the CSU stadium , traffic from a growing student body at CSU , the potential for underpasses and overpasses on major roads, and improved Transfort service to areas outside CSU . Others had concerns with the lack of information regarding CSU - related activities . Specifically, these commenters desired more information about the CSU stadium , parking, student housing, and whether CSU will be funding any of the proposed implementation items of the plan . Question 5 - What changes could be made to make the plan more understandable and easy to read ? Most commenters had no proposed improvements to make the plan more understandable and easy to read . A couple of respondents noted the length of the plan and that they would prefer a less wordy, lengthy document . Question 6 - Do you have any comments specific to the Prospect Corridor design ? Many commenters were concerned about the impact of the stadium on the proposed design for Prospect . These respondents generally expressed concern about increased congestion when the stadium is in use and whether or not the new design can accommodate this increase in traffic volume . Some commenters were not supportive of medians and street trees throughout the corridor, with concerns about maintenance, visibility of pedestrians, and the effect of medians on safe travel for all users . Other commenters shared additional safety concerns, noting that there is still a need for more safe crossings for pedestrians across Prospect . Some of the proposed interventions included additional signalized crossings for pedestrians and under/overpasses . Question 7 - Do you have any additional comments on the Draft Plan ? Funding was a chief concern among commenters . Many commenters would like further discussion about how the implementation items in the plan will be funded . Other commenters did not feel the plan will promote home ownership and compatible development, with a fear of greater instability and a higher prevalence of rental housing in neighborhoods . Others noted that the bicycle network is still incomplete and wanted an increased emphasis placed on connection bike lanes to trails and improved connectivity for cyclists . West Central Fort Collins Area Plan art Collins Draft Plan Open House Comments Summary As part of the Draft Plan Open House, City staff encouraged community members to choose their top five highest priority implementation items from the plan . Below are the results of this exercise . Asterisks note that a community member picked that item as one of their highest priority implementation items . The items have been re - ordered based on the amount of support from open house participants . Short- Term Actions (2015-2016) Top Action Item Priority? * * * * * Update relevant sections of the Land Use Code to ensure that new development is compatible with adjacent neighborhoods . * * * * Form a joint City-CSU committee that meets regularly to assist with communication and coordination related to the on-going planning efforts of both entities . * * * Coordinate among City departments to make specific improvements in the West Central area : Planning, Streets, Traffic Operations, Transfort, Neighborhood Services, Engineering, Stormwater, and other relevant departments . * * * Evaluate recent development contributions for parks and determine how to best apply available funds to new or enhanced parks in the West Central area . * * Review the current strategy for the escalation of fines and other enforcement measures for repeat code/ public nuisance violations and update as needed . * * Evaluate future West Elizabeth corridor transit needs in the upcoming West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor Plan . * * Explore the potential for incorporating related stormwater and low-impact development ( LID ) improvements into street retrofits . * * Determine a timeline for upgrades to the Spring Creek Trail underpasses at Shields Street and Centre Avenue . * Upgrade existing bridges to include sidewalks and safety railings, particularly over irrigation ditches . * Update the Land Use Code standards for the HMN zone district to clarify requirements related to mass, scale, and building design . * Evaluate the feasibility of incorporating car share and bike share options into the Land Use Code and/or Development Review process. * Integrate near-term bus stop improvements into the citywide Bus Stop Improvement Program . * Develop a template for widening sidewalks . * In conjunction with the implementation of Nature in the City, update open space standards in the Land Use Code to add clarity for developers and decision - makers related to the amount and type of open space required in conjunction with new development and redevelopment . Requirements should include a mix of qualitative and quantitative requirements that provide flexible options for the provision of functional natural spaces during a project' s development or redevelopment . * In coordination with the implementation of Nature in the City, identify gaps in the open space network for both wildlife and recreation, and develop a list of short-term and long-term projects that help to fill the gaps. Update the City Code to clarify the enforcement of violations related to dead grass and bare dirt in front yards . West Central Fort Collins Area Plan Collins Include educational information about City code requirements as part of the code violation letters sent to residents . A summary of the most common violations and strategies for avoiding them should be included . Update relevant sections of the Land Use Code to require variety in the number of bedrooms provided in multi-family developments. Determine a consistent strategy for applying the RP3 program and other parking management strategies to existing and new multi-family developments. Through the implementation of Nature in the City, develop a Design Guidelines document illustrating strategies for incorporating natural features and open space into new and existing developments . Conduct neighborhood outreach regarding potential improvements to Lilac Park. Coordinate with the Stormwater department, Ram ' s Village Apartment complex, and other stakeholders to explore potential improvements to the stormwater detention site at Skyline and West Elizabeth . Coordinate with the Stormwater department to explore habitat and recreation improvements to the stormwater site at Taft Hill and Glenmoor. Through the implementation of Nature in the City, identify specific locations where wildlife habitat can be improved or added within the West Central area . Pilot a residential tree canopy improvement project in collaboration with local nurseries, non - profit organizations, and CSU student groups . Mid- Term Actions (2017-2020) Top Action Item Priority? * * * * * * Explore the creation of a program that supports the retention of owner-occupied homes to maintain the stability of neighborhoods . * * * * * Form an exploratory committee to evaluate the feasibility and potential effectiveness of a landlord registration or licensing program . * * * * * Incorporate transit service recommendations for the West Central area into Transfort budget requests and future Transportation Strategic Operating Plan updates . * * * * Improve underpass at the crossing of Shields Street and the Spring Creek Trail to improve visibility for bicyclists and reduce flooding issues . * * * Develop a strategy to proactively enforce sidewalk shoveling by property owners along important pedestrian routes ( e .g., to schools, parks, and other major destinations) * * * Schedule annual meetings with neighborhood residents within the West Central area . As part of these meetings, attendees can share their experiences related to living in a diverse neighborhood and discuss expectations for property owners, landlords, renters, law enforcement, and City staff. Such meetings should be discussion-based, interactive, and fun . * * Create an interdisciplinary group to explore the creation of "Preferred Landlord" and "Preferred Tenant" programs, or other incentive- based programs to improve property management . * * Convene a group to explore potential locations and eventually establish a Police Services sub- station . * * Retrofit Shields Street ( between Prospect Road and Laurel Street) to include medians and other aesthetic and safety enhancements . * * Improve underpass at the crossing of Centre Avenue and the Spring Creek Trail to better accommodate the high volume of users and reduce flooding issues . * * Coordinate with the Forestry Department and local nurseries to develop and implement a West Central Fort Collins Area Plan art Collins residential tree canopy incentive grant program . * Create an online, publicly-accessible map of citywide code violation data to serve as a communication and education tool . * Explore the creation of a program that requires landlords to attend a class on rental property management in response to public nuisance ordinance violations. * Fund an additional staff position to support the Community Liaison position . Such a position would strengthen existing Neighborhood Services and Off- Campus Life partnership programs, as well as the implementation of new programs and strategies . * Work with Front Range Community College to develop a program for educating students about living in the community . Expand education efforts related to the impacts and requirements of occupancy limits in partnership with CSU and Front Range Community College ( FRCC) . * Retrofit street lighting in the Avery Park neighborhood ( between West Elizabeth Street and Prospect Road, and between Taft Hill Road and Shields Street) . * Explore strategies for better informing residents of the street sweeping schedule and the need to move vehicles from the street during sweeping operations. * Identify parking lots that generally have additional capacity at certain times or days of the week for shared parking opportunities. * Construct a crossing of the Arthur Ditch near Whitcomb and Wallenberg to connect the neighborhood to the Spring Creek Trail . * Identify locations (either within existing open space or new locations ) that could potentially accommodate off- leash dog use . * Conduct a safety inventory along the Spring Creek Trail to account for safety needs, such as lighting, visibility around corners, and areas of potential conflict between bicyclists and pedestrians . * Proactively create additional tree cover in areas dominated by ash trees to mitigate the potential impacts of the emerald ash borer. Support the establishment of networking and professional development group for landlords and property managers that meets casually to socialize and discuss ideas and challenges related to property management. Create a program to provide annual education of residents related to unscreened trash to reduce the number of violations. Provide information to neighborhood residents about Access Fort Collins, an application that allows users to directly report issues to City departments. Explore the creation of a program that requires landlords to attend a class on rental property management in response to public nuisance ordinance violations. Review Light & Power's current policies for upgrading and adding street lighting to ensure that it allows for the adequate protection of public safety within neighborhoods. Improve neighborhood identity and aesthetics with entry signage . Establish Priority 1 routes for snow removal by Streets Department . Establish Priority 1 routes for snow removal with enforcement by Code Compliance and education on property owner responsibilities by Neighborhood Services . Communicate priority snow removal routes to CSU and the public . Provide education on safe crossings, purpose of the center turn lanes, and other infrastructure . Identify and provide strategically placed car sharing spaces. Work with CSU to explore shared Park-n - Ride arrangements south and west of campus. Retrofit Prospect Road (west of Shields Street) to include medians and other aesthetic and West Central Fort Collins Area Plan art Collins safety improvements . Identify gaps in transit service near existing or future parks and open space . Consider access to open space when making changes to Transfort bus routes and bus stop locations as part of the next update to the Transfort Strategic Plan . Coordinate with CSU on the planning, construction, and funding of a future trail connection between the intersection of Centre Avenue and Prospect Road and the Spring Creek Trail . Establish a wayfinding system for parks and open space, in conjunction with efforts to improve wayfinding along trails and bikeways throughout the city. Construct a crossing of Larimer County Canal Number 2 at Westview Ave . to improve neighborhood connectivity. Construct a crossing of Larimer County Canal Number 2 near Bennett Elementary to support Safe Routes to School . Raise the bridge on the spur trail to the west of the Sheely/Wallenberg neighborhood to mitigate flooding of the trail . West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #1 Area Plan May 7, 2014 Stakeholder Committee Meeting # 1 West Central Area Plan May 7, 2014 — 5 : 30-7 :00 p . m . Present Absent Sue Ballou Lars Eriksen Rick Callan Ann Hunt Susan Dominica Jeannie Ortega Becky Fedak Steve Schroyer Colin Gerety Lloyd Walker Carrie Ann Gillis Nicholas Yearout Per Hogestad Greg McMaster Staff & Consultants Kelly Ohlson Ted Shepard, Chief Planner Tara Opsal Paul Sizemore, FC Moves Program Manager Jean Robbins Amy Lewin, Transportation Planner Andy Smith Rebecca Everette, Associate Planner Logan Sutherland Craig Russell, Project Manager (Russell Mills Studios) Notes 1 . Welcome from Gerry Horak ( Mayor Pro Tem ) 2 . Introductions 3 . Overview a . Description of the purpose of the Stakeholder Committee ( SC ) b . Background on the West Central Area Plan c . Planning process and anticipated schedule for SC meetings d . Roles and expectations for the committee e . Meeting guidelines 4 . 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan a . Overview of 1999 Plan b . Vision statement and goals from 1999 Plan 5 . Discussion: Plan outcomes from the 1999 Plan a . Discussion about whether some of the intended outcomes of the 1999 Plan have actually been achieved, including : preservation of Spring Creek as wildlife habitat; the evolution of Campus West as a commercial center; and the preservation of single family character in neighborhoods Page 1 of 4 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #1 Area Plan May 7, 2014 b . There have been some outcomes since 1999 that differed from what the previous plan envisioned c . The previous plan had great intentions, many of which should be carried forward , but it has not been effectively implemented d . Concerns that West Central Area has not been adequately addressed by City Plan, the citywide Capital Improvements Plan ( CIP ), and other recent planning efforts — compared to other parts of the city e . Moving forward, the new plan should include an Action Plan with specific code changes and actionable, measurable priorities 6 . Brainstorming Exercise: Future Outcomes a . The committee split into three groups to brainstorm goals for the West Central Area Plan . Each group focused on a different theme : Land Use & Character, Transportation , and Natural Systems . The results of the discussion are presented below . Brainstorming Exercise Notes Transportation — Desired Outcomes 1 . Ability to live without a car ➢ Decreasing automobile traffic around Campus West ➢ Walkable community with actual sidewalks ➢ Should be able to meet daily needs without a car 2 . Prospect becomes a successful urban corridor ➢ Prospect from Shields to College should look like Mountain Ave ➢ If a stadium is built, traffic should be reduced in the Prospect area 3 . Strong transit system that connects to MAX and works for neighborhood use ➢ Buses that run regularly or late [at night] ➢ Buses that connect to MAX or Drake ➢ Bus connection to Mason 4 . Safe and effective biking and walking ➢ Bike and pedestrian crossings on Prospect and Shields ➢ Underpass/overpass for bikes across Shields ➢ Protected bike lanes on major streets ➢ Kids should be able to walk to school unaccompanied ➢ Take care of dirt trails ( not community trails) in Rolland Moore Natural Systems — Desired Outcomes 1 . Wildlife habitat/fragmentation ➢ Green infrastructure incorporated into all transportation projects ➢ Maintain or increase level of wildlife habitat ➢ Enhanced wildlife habitat/biodiversity ➢ Wildlife movement corridors ( prevent habitat fragmentation ) Page 2 of 4 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #1 Area Plan May 7, 2014 ➢ Benefits of open space and impact on other city objectives considered in decision making 2 . Stormwater ➢ Operations and maintenance related to stormwater ➢ Proper Stormwater design ➢ Natural restoration of irrigation ditches ➢ Open space/stormwater considered in all new/re-development 3 . Connectivity/movement corridors for wildlife ➢ Connectedness of natural areas — not isolated ( prevent fragmentation ) ➢ Natural area that are accessible by bike or foot only ➢ Nature in the city ➢ Restore and enhance wildlife habitat 4 . Education ➢ Education about benefits and functionality of natural systems Land Use & Character — Desired Outcomes 1 . Prioritize historic houses and preserve valuable buildings ➢ Controlled Landmark Preservation Commission ( LPC) historical designation ➢ Important for historical preservation, to be credible, don't over- reach [ regarding contributing features] ➢ Most houses in 15 years to be potentially eligible ➢ Conflict between zoning and historic preservation, needs design 2 . Value neighborhood character and fabric ➢ Neighborhoods should be : o Full service : shopping, recreation, employment o Integrated in design : scale, mass, compatibility o Connected o Preserved o Fine grain ➢ Code enforcement and strengthening o Exterior upkeep o Reduce neighborhood graffiti ➢ Aesthetically pleasing from design standards with and without parking ➢ Incentives for owner-occupied houses ➢ Police and city services further strengthened ➢ More boulevards 3 . Neighborhood diversity ➢ How do we develop the diverse character of our area ➢ Diversity has diminished since ' 99 o Shifted to young adults — change in character ➢ Multi -generational access Page 3 of 4 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #1 Area Plan May 7, 2014 4 . Neighborhood connectivity ➢ Safe and effective access to/from CSU ➢ More direct bike connection to activity centers 5 . Mix of housing ➢ Variety of housing stock within West Central Area ➢ Achievable land use code from an affordability point of view ➢ Land use code review, to allow for maintaining diversity of housing — design review ➢ Avoiding barriers between student and other types of housing ➢ Ensure health and safety of tenants 6 . Mixed -use/commercial development ➢ More mixed- use centers @ key intersections ➢ Required mixed - use ➢ Don't undercut parking requirements because of TOD philosophy ➢ Fix dual/mixed zone areas Page 4 of 4 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #2 Area Plan July 16, 2014 Stakeholder Committee Meeting #2 West Central Area Plan July 16, 2014 — 5 : 30-7 : 30 p . m . Present Absent Sue Ballou Rick Callan Susan Dominica Lars Eriksen Becky Fedak Carrie Ann Gillis Colin Gerety Jeannie Ortega Per Hogestad Jean Robbins Ann Hunt Greg McMaster Staff & Consultants Kelly Ohlson Ted Shepard, Chief Planner Tara Opsal Amy Lewin, Transportation Planner Steve Schroyer Rebecca Everette, Associate Planner Andy Smith Clay Frickey, Planning Intern Logan Sutherland Craig Russell, Project Manager (Russell + Mills Lloyd Walker Studios) Nicholas Yearout Notes 1 . Introductions 2 . Project Updates a . Process and schedule update b . Community outreach to date c . Visioning Survey results d . Existing and future conditions analysis e . CSU on-campus stadium update 3 . Activity: Draft Vision Review a . Presentation of updated vision statements for the West Central Area Plan, including vision statements for: i . Land Use & Neighborhood Character ii . Transportation & Mobility iii . Open Space Networks iv. Prospect Corridor b . The committee split into groups to discuss the vision statements and supporting materials . Each group focused on a different theme : Land Use & Neighborhood Character, Transportation & Mobility, Open Space Networks, and Prospect Corridor. Page 1 of 6 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #2 Area Plan July 16, 2014 The groups rotated twice to discuss three different topics . The results of the discussion are presented below. Vision Review Activity Notes Land Use & Neighborhood Character 1 . Comments on Land Use & Neighborhood Character Vision board a . Vision: Vibrant and diverse neighborhoods that provide a high quality of life i . Police sub-district in Campus West, fine grain b . New development that complements existing developments and accommodates future growth i . Replace "complements" with compatibility ii . Can't exceed height of tallest tree within 200 feet iii . New development needs to be in scale - not like the Summit iv. Height can be terraced and well designed, not imposing v. Height is an issue b . Diverse residents and housing options i . Density needs capital improvements ( etc. ) ii . Diverse residents vs . diverse housing iii . Housing needs create impacts on neighborhoods iv. Parking is a big issue, but is fine grain in nature v. Livable community for all ages and incomes vi . Pull diversity stats for the area since 1980, and get as fine grain as possible vii . Need for diversity in the building stock in addition to complementing existing development viii . We need to draw a line on diversity because 6 people crammed into one house # diversity ix. Hard to quantify the diversity of land uses in the area x . Would like to see more ways to make the neighborhoods friendlier to aging in place c . Well-integrated campus community i . Add bullet for housing ii . Historic preservation needs a bullet d . Don 't see a circle that addresses student housing 2 . Comments on Land Use & Neighborhood Character maps a . Areas of Stability, Enhancement and Development map i . May need further clarification and more categories ii . Red areas need to be compatible with surrounding neighborhoods b . WCAP is what % of total city population ? Density is _ d . u ./acre ? i . Show that this area is the most densely populated in town ii . Are we addressing the associated needs for police, fire and other services ? c . Diversity = social fabric and is positive Page 2of6 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #2 Area Plan July 16, 2014 i . Income ii . Age iii . Architecture d . Trends/metrics over time and projections to the future e . Student housing — on -campus preferred f. Show historic properties/ potentially historic properties g . Need to link mobility with land use and character - Show this graphically on a map 3 . Land Use & Neighborhood Character general comments a . Photos are great but how do you quantify the vision statements ? i . Developers need #sin order for this document to be useful b . Do historic structures fit into this framework somewhere ? c . I feel the visions are valid but we need to know what these vision statements mean in terms of implementation d . Would like to see comments on the survey question about density e . Need to acknowledge that a lot of people commute through the area f. This area has always been changing and that is what makes it unique, would hate to see the plan lock down the area ' s character Transportation & Mobility 1 . Comments on Transportation & Mobility Vision board a . Retrofitting streets, green streets, downgrading streets should be added to the vision statements and recommendations i . This concept needs to be a very high priority for the plan ii . E . g . , Stuart Street, undoing mistakes on West Prospect ( concrete medians, lack of landscaping) iii . Avoid concrete facilities in the future iv. Improve streetscape and attractiveness along streets in neighborhoods v. Slow traffic down in neighborhoods vi . Green streets, narrower streets, fundamentally reconfiguring certain streets vii . Redesign streets with room for medians/boulevards, even in neighborhoods 2 . Comments on Transportation & Mobility maps a . Underpass on Shields i . As an interim strategy, install a crosswalk to test a potential location for an underpass before committing to the investment ii . Preference for an underpass at Elizabeth b . Bike facilities i . Bike lanes are needed on Shields from Laurel to Mulberry ii . Bike lanes needed on both sides of Mulberry iii . Mason Trail through campus is confusing c . Other roadways that weren 't highlighted on the map Page 3 of 6 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #2 Area Plan July 16, 2014 i . Constitution south of Prospect is a difficult road to get across, with blind corners, unsafe crosswalks, and so few locations to cross along the street — this needs to be added to the map ii . Constitution & Scarborough and Constitution & Stuart both have issues iii . Stuart and Constitution are collector streets that handle a lot of traffic, and need enhanced restriping, reinforcement of bike lanes, expanded sidewalks — simple, low-cost improvements iv. Make sure boundary arterials (Taft Hill, Mulberry, Drake ) get addressed and aren't neglected in the plan d . Crossing improvements i . Intersection of Shields and Prospect — need a better way to get people from Prospect to Lake, including better wayfinding ii . Need more medians and pedestrian refuges iii . Very hard to connect to Red Fox Meadows from north of Prospect 3 . Transportation & Mobility general comments a . What level of feasibility should you show in the plan ? What is feasible now vs . in the future vs . may never be feasible ? i . Should show concepts that are feasible now in addition to those that may not be immediately feasible to reflect our aspirations for the plan and keep options open b . Parking i . More parking is needed within the transit-oriented development overlay zone to support new residential development ii . To the extent we can, make sure CSU contributes their share and takes responsibility for their impact; they are not adequately addressing the problem now but are working on it iii . The RP3 program in the Sheely/Wallenberg neighborhood has been very successful , and needs to be considered in other areas; lots at CSU won't be filled if there' s free parking in neighborhoods iv. There is a particular distance that students are willing to walk to campus from parking; test out this walking radius to determine potential boundaries for an RP3 program v. Use a CSU shuttle out to Hughes stadium for parking storage, or add a stop to Hughes or another parking storage location on an existing bus route (e . g . , the new route to Foothills campus) vi . Parking is an issue that wasn 't fully envisioned or addressed in the 1999 Plan c . Funding i . BOB 2 . 0 funding should focus on sidewalk improvements and fixing gaps throughout the West Central Area d . Need a much better plan for maintenance of bike and pedestrian facilities, including snow removal, street sweeping, clean up, etc. e . Make sure land use and transportation are integrated to better inform one another Page 4 of 6 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #2 Area Plan July 16, 2014 f. This area services the most intense use in town [CSU ] , and for its land use area it handles the largest load of population and transportation issues; this is the most critical area of the city to address Open Space Networks 1 . Comments on Open Space Networks Vision board g. Vision: A balanced, connected network of public and private lands for wildlife, plants and people i . Remove balanced and connected ii . Balanced - needs to be more habitat emphasis iii . Connected implies trails - focus on wildlife corridors h. Access to nature, recreation, and environmental stewardship opportunities i . Show neighborhood xeriscape projects as one of the bubbles i. Attractive urban tree canopy that supports habitat, character and shade i . Proactively plant trees before they die, e . g . , Ash ii . Parkway, medians, maintenance - replant iii . Preserve trees during development, redevelopment j. Preserved and enhanced wildlife habitat corridors i . Pursue additional natural area acquisition ii . Development allows established animal trail preservation iii . Xeriscaping iv. Native, low water use v. City assume liability for trails vi . No formal trails vii . Maintain ditches through community projects Prospect Corridor 1 . Comments on Prospect Corridor Vision board a. Safe and comfortable corridor for all modes i . Need to acknowledge that the bike and pedestrian accommodations might happen on Lake instead of Prospect 2 . Comments on Prospect Corridor maps a . Coming from the west on Prospect, what are your choices/options for getting to Lake Street if there' s no bike lane or safe crossing on Prospect? i . Need to create north -south linkages at or near the intersections, as it' s a hard intersection for a bike to make a left turn ( Prospect & Shields) ii . Take advantage of CSU/CSURF land in the area b . Need to view how Prospect connects to the rest of the area from land use, mobility, and open space perspectives 3 . Prospect Corridor general comments a . Concern about how Prospect west of Shields will be addressed in the plan Page S of 6 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #2 Area Plan July 16, 2014 i . This stretch has its own issues and shouldn't be neglected in the planning process b . Is Prospect, as it is now, too constrained to accommodate new development according to City standards ? c . Anything that could be done on Prospect would just be dressing it up and wouldn 't be able to fully address mobility for all modes i . Lake Street is critical to making things work ii . Properties in between Lake and Prospect should be developed in a way that addresses both streets iii . Can't accommodate all modes on Prospect d . Quantify the potential buildout of the high -density mixed use zoning district between Prospect and Lake i . Historic properties inhibit buildout of the HMN zone ii . Need to be able to achieve our larger community goals, rather than allowing a single historic property to limit development e . Feeling that the City' s hands may be tied on Prospect in terms of acquiring new right-of- way f. If additional bike and pedestrian facilities area added, they need to be very well - maintained , particularly in regard to snow and ice removal in the winter, since it' s already a problem all along Prospect g. Expand the Around the Horn campus shuttle to Lake Street with 5 - 10 minute headways Overall Comments on Draft Vision 1 . Housing was one of the primary topics in the 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan, and needs to be more strongly emphasized in the updated vision for the West Central Area Plan 2 . These vision statements are general concepts, and a lot more specificity is needed to expand upon and explain these concepts a . The 1999 Plan had much more fine-grain detail b . The 1999 Plan is still mostly valid, including the goal statements, and should be heavily incorporated in the updated plan c . The appendices of the 1999 Plan provide important context and should be incorporated in the updated plan , perhaps as appendices once again Page 6 of 6 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #3 Area Plan September 10, 2014 Stakeholder Committee Meeting #3 West Central Area Plan September 10, 2014 — 5 : 30-7 : 30 p . m . Present Absent Sue Ballou Lars Eriksen Rick Callan Becky Fedak Susan Dominica Kelly Ohlson Colin Gerety Jeannie Ortega Carrie Ann Gillis Jean Robbins Per Hogestad Steve Schroyer Ann Hunt Greg McMaster Staff & Consultants Tara Opsal Ted Shepard, Chief Planner Andy Smith Amy Lewin, Transportation Planner Logan Sutherland Rebecca Everette, Associate Planner Lloyd Walker Craig Russell (Russell + Mills Studios) Nicholas Yearout Paul Mills (Russell + Mills Studios) Notes 1 . Welcome/ Introductions 2 . Project Updates a . Process and schedule update b . Recent and upcoming outreach c . Final Vision Statements 3 . Discussion: Draft Introductory Text ( prepared by Lloyd Walker for the Stakeholder Committee to review) a . Discussion about the purpose of the text and how it should be incorporated into the plan . b . Clarification by Lloyd Walker that this is an updated version of the introduction from the previous plan , and the vision statements reflect his own understanding of the vision for the area . c . Decision by the committee to review the text individually and send any comments to staff. Staff will then incorporate the text into the draft plan as appropriate . 4 . Keypad Polling: What topics would the group like to focus on tonight? a . Group could select from 1 ) Land Use & Neighborhood Character, 2 ) Transportation & Mobility, 3 ) Open Space Networks, and 4) Prospect Corridor b . Land Use & Neighborhood Character was the top choice overall , and was discussed first Page 1 of 5 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #3 Area Plan September 10, 2014 c . Following the discussion of Land Use & Neighborhood Character, the committee broke into small groups to focus on the other topics 5 . Large Group Discussion : Land Use & Neighborhood Character a . Areas of Stability, Enhancement, and Development Map i . Should the Sheely neighborhood be classified as " Neighborhood Enhancements" rather than an "Area of Stability?" There is development pressure within and surrounding the neighborhood, which causes tension . The Sheely Historic District is stable, but remodels and additions might be appropriate in the rest of the neighborhood . ii . Is this map descriptive or prescriptive ? We want to show what we would like in these areas, not just what we expect to see . iii . Just because there are rentals in a neighborhood doesn 't mean the character isn 't good . iv. High intensity/density development and small -scale single family homes can co- exist in close proximity . There are examples in other cities with historic neighborhoods adjacent to new development . v. Even taller than 5 stories might be appropriate in some areas . vi . Add Safeway at Taft Hill/Drake to map . vii . Spring Creek Medical Park may be outdated . b . Affordable Housing i . Concern about affordability in the West Central area . Investors out-compete families looking for more affordable housing ( e . g. , starter homes or homes for families) . ii . Staff commented that the City is currently working on a Housing Affordability Policy Study, and will send follow up information on that effort. iii . Should be recommending affordable housing in the Areas of Development on the map c . Neighborhood Character i . There are a lot of locational advantages to the West Central area . A lot of people live here for the location . ii . Consider a tax-credit, deed restrictions, or other incentives and requirements for owner-occupied homes in areas currently dominated by rental houses ( e .g ., Avery Park) . iii . Enforcement of ordinances helps keep neighborhoods desirable and affordable . This requires active involvement and cooperation from neighbors . iv. Some portion of neighborhoods needs to be stable/owner-occupied . Is there a standard percentage for what is considered stable ? v. Don 't want to get rid of the students; that' s part of the diversity, part of what we like about the neighborhood . d . Student Housing i . West Elizabeth corridor and the HMN zone are good for new student housing . Page 2 of 5 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #3 Area Plan September 10, 2014 ii . New student housing developments — consider an incentive for developers to include an affordable component for students with lower incomes . This might help attract students away from rental houses in the neighborhoods . iii . It would be nice for CSU to build more housing for their students . iv. MAX and transit are changing where it' s convenient for students to live . v . If CSU continues to grow, it will be distributed throughout the city, not that many more students could be fit into this area . e . HMN zone i . It' s about choices . The HMN zone is a good place for high -density student housing, but it also has historic properties . ii . Good, high -quality design is key in the HMN zone . iii . Consider greater design standards for particular areas ( e .g. , HMN ) or uses ( e .g ., multi -family housing) . f. Growth and Density i . Fort Collins is a landlocked community that will only continue to grow. We've gone way beyond being just a college town . ii . More density means more intense use in this area, which will stress services, infrastructure, parks, etc . Need to figure out how to address that . iii . Density feels dense when it is underserved . iv. Encourage and facilitate good non- residential uses, bike and pedestrian connections, and open space to serve the neighborhoods . g . Open Space i . When new development comes in, how are they going to provide open space outside the dwellings ? 6 . Small Group Discussions: a . Land Use & Neighborhood Character ( continued discussion ) i . Don't lose focus on redevelopment opportunities on West Elizabeth . ii . Land Use #5 "Well - integrated campus community" should be supplemented with a reference to such attributes as safety and well- being, or somehow promoting a "good neighbor policy ." iii . Support for the Police Sub- District . iv. Recommend the formation and active use of a Neighborhood Design Review Advisory Committee to advise on design issues but would not function like an H . O .A. This was recommended in the 1999 Plan but never implemented . Such committee could work in conjunction with the Landmark Preservation Commission or the Planning and Zoning Board and would not apply to single family detached homes . v. Recommend the new development be guided by established design that reflects the vernacular of the neighborhoods . Design styles should be identified and encouraged such as mid -century modern, craftsman , prairie, but not the international style . Page 3 of 5 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #3 Area Plan September 10, 2014 vi . The mass of large buildings must be mitigated and not over- power the neighborhoods . vii . Compatibility should be emphasized when evaluating new development . viii . The 20-acre Blue Ocean property should be allowed to focus on compatibility, sensitive design, forms that are the appropriate scale, avoiding huge blocks of apartments, and that there should be flexibility to allow the developer to accomplish these objectives . b . Transportation & Mobility i . Need better updates for changes in Transfort routes for students . ii . Need to prune trees on the sidewalk on City Park Ave . iii . Don't focus on just bikes, pedestrians are important too . iv. Crossing Shields needs improvement — look at an underpass . v. Safety and maintenance concerns for underpasses and overpasses, especially in the winter. vi . There are accidents all the time at Drake and Raintree, add to the map to consider improvements . vii . Prospect and Shields intersection — it is difficult for bikes to safely turn northbound from Prospect, as they have to cross multiple lanes to get into the turn lane . viii . Shields and Elizabeth intersection — bicyclists don't always look back for cars, and cars aren't always paying attention ; need more awareness where the bike lane meets the turn lane . ix. Support for newly installed buffered bike lanes on Shields, Stuart, etc . x. A crossing from Hill Pond to the Spring Creek Medical Park would improve safety . xi . Support for the green bike lanes and bike box . Bike boxes at Prospect & Shields and Prospect & Center were suggested . Concern that the paint gets slippery in wet/snowy conditions . xii . Support for the corner and mid- block bulb-outs to increase the visibility of pedestrians and encourage drivers to slow down . Support for the use of reflectors in conjunction with these . c . Open Space Networks i . No discussion occurred on this topic . d . Prospect Corridor i . Overall support for concepts shown in Alternative B above other alternatives . ii . Support for on -street bike lanes as shown in Alternative B for efficiency and ease of movement for bicyclists . This is especially important from Whitcomb to Shields due to excessive access points and concern for bike/vehicle conflicts . iii . Medians are a positive addition in all alternatives, particularly Alternative B . Include medians throughout corridor wherever possible . iv. Support for pedestrian/bike crossing between Whitcomb and Shields . Need to integrate with a pedestrian refuge if possible . Page 4 of 5 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #3 Area Plan September 10, 2014 v. Need to improve Mason Trail crossing and overall configuration for wayfinding, ease of movement and safety. vi . Street trees are desirable to create a corridor with consistent character. vii . Support for including bicycle facilities as depicted in Alternative B and C. viii . Ensure corridor designs are acting as a catalyst for new development . ix . Support for Lake Street Alternative B and/or C . The two-way bike lane on the north side of the street is positive because it has fewer access points and easier access to the CSU campus than the south side . Page 5 of 5 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #4 Area Plan November 19, 2014 Stakeholder Committee Meeting #4 West Central Area Plan November 19, 2014 — 5 : 30-7 : 30 p . m . Present Absent Rick Callan Sue Ballou Susan Dominica Lars Eriksen Becky Fedak Carrie Ann Gillis Colin Gerety Tara Opsal Per Hogestad Lloyd Walker Ann Hunt Nicholas Yearout Greg McMaster Kelly Ohlson Staff & Consultants Jeannie Ortega Ted Shepard, Chief Planner Jean Robbins Amy Lewin, Transportation Planner Steve Schroyer Rebecca Everette, City Planner Andy Smith Craig Russell (Russell+Mills Studios) Logan Sutherland Notes 1 . Welcome/Dinner 2 . Project Updates a . Process and schedule update b . Recent and upcoming outreach 3 . Discussion: Plan Organization a . Include callouts specifically for residents, developers, and other audiences — highlight areas that are most relevant, explain how to get involved , etc . b . Show the three policy topics all overlapping with each other ( as a triangle, rather than linearly) c . Identify linkages with the Climate Action Plan and other relevant plans 4 . Policy Discussion : Land Use & Neighborhood Character a . Map : Make colors of the various areas (stable, enhancements, development/ redevelopment) more distinctly different b . Design & Compatibility i . How do residential architectural styles ( e .g . , Craftsman ) translate to larger buildings? ii . How prescriptive will the design guidelines be ? Page 1 of 3 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #4 Area Plan November 19, 2014 iii . Specific standards would be easier to enforce iv. How will energy efficiency and other functional features of a development be addressed ? 1 . Could create development standards for the West Central area or city- wide, such as the standards that were developed for the Eastside and Westside neighborhoods 2 . Utilities offers an Integrated Design Assistance Program, which could be helpful v. Even buildings that satisfy design guidelines can still be " bad" vi . Reference the Centerra design guidelines for Craftsman style vii . Neighborhood context and character are more important than specific architectural styles viii . Need implementation mechanisms for design 1 . Should be more than just advisory, but not too prescriptive 2 . Photos and examples are very helpful c . Physical enhancements are needed in all areas — stable, enhancement, and development areas . Additional programs are most appropriate in the enhancement areas . d . Neighborhood character is influenced by the school district boundaries, which can sometimes have the effect of segmenting out low- income areas, resulting in disinvestment i . Are there ways to influence the school district boundaries to ensure that they are equitable ? 5 . Policy Discussion : Transportation & Mobility a . Intersections i . The intersection of Prospect and Heatheridge needs improvements to address safety issues and high traffic volumes; consider a fully signalized intersection ii . The Shields and Elizabeth intersection needs improvements; doesn't adequately accommodate peak hour traffic — especially westbound left turns onto Elizabeth and northbound left turns onto Shields b . Prospect (west of Shields ) i . Need a pedestrian crossing of Prospect at or near the Red Fox Meadows neighborhood ii . Need a safe crossing to access bus stop iii . Consider medians and median refuges on Prospect from Shields to Taft Hill ; this segment needs aesthetic and crossing improvements iv. Need better crossings to get to Bennett Elementary School c . Street retrofits i . Street retrofit improvements should be about aesthetics too, not just traffic calming ii . Could also include raised crosswalks at intersections for additional visibility of pedestrians and traffic calming Page 2 of 3 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #4 Area Plan November 19, 2014 iii . Consider maintenance, sweeping, snow removal, and drainage issues related to the bulb-outs d . Shared off-street paths need extra maintenance; debris quickly accumulates e . Need more signage that pedestrians have the right-of-way, like in Boulder and mountain towns f. Need to do a betterjob with street sweeping, snow removal, and street drainage, in general g . Transit i . Need safe crossings to bus stops ii . Consider a bus-only access point along Prospect, west of the Sheely neighborhood ; could reduce issues with left turn movements for buses at Shields and Prospect; could connect to MAX 6 . Policy Discussion : Open Space Networks a . Clarify that open space could be incentivized or purchased within the areas identified for enhancement b . Clarify whether open space would be public or private, and that acquisition would only occur with a willing seller c . Neighborhood Center/Young's Pasture properties ( near Shields and Prospect) i . Concern that too much open space is shown on these properties , as well as support for maintaining amount of open space currently shown ii . Clarify how a potential connection to the Spring Creek trail would occur d . Consider stormwater management with street retrofits e . Look at informal properties that are already publically owned f. Connectivity can be just for wildlife, it doesn't always have to be for people g . State in the Plan that there is the potential for additional open space purchases within the West Central area, beyond what's shown on the map h . Make sure connectivity ( e .g . , ditch crossings) does not fragment wildlife habitat i . Need connected human spaces that recognize actual human behavior ( e .g ., for pocket parks, courtyards, etc. ); spaces should be comfortable j . Some of the images shown are more appropriate for the Land Use & Neighborhood Character section, not Open Space Networks i . Photos should be more naturalized ii . Include a photo of the Spring Creek Trail iii . Show photos of how individual open space areas connect to the larger network k. Staff should present the West Central Area Plan to the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board 7 . Review & Discussion : Prospect Corridor Design a . Committee members reviewed the Prospect and Lake Draft Designs and had one-on -one conversations with staff about the designs 8 . Next Meeting ( early 2015 ) : will send draft Plan for review prior to meeting Page 3 of 3 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #5 Area Plan January 28, 2015 Stakeholder Committee Meeting #5 West Central Area Plan January 28, 2015 — 5 :30-7 : 30 p . m . Present Absent Sue Ballou Per Hogestad Rick Callan Tara Opsal Susan Dominica Jeannie Ortega Becky Fedak Logan Sutherland Colin Gerety Lloyd Walker Carrie Ann Gillis Ann Hunt Staff & Consultants Greg McMaster Ted Shepard, Chief Planner Kelly Ohlson Amy Lewin, Transportation Planner Jean Robbins Rebecca Everette, City Planner Steve Schroyer Clay Frickey, Associate Planner Andy Smith Craig Russell (Russell+Mills Studios) Nicholas Yearout Notes 1 . Welcome/Dinner 2 . Project Updates a . Process and schedule update b . Recent and upcoming outreach c . City Council Work Session summary d . Plan organization (Table of Contents ) e . Plan production timeline 3 . Discussion: Draft Plan Review a . Overall comments i . Recommendations for new wording for a number of sections of the plan . ii . Implementation strategies and action items seem weak throughout the document — more are needed . Action items need to have realistic timetables and more definitive language . iii . What is the difference between programs, projects and action items? Need to clarify. Page 1 of 3 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #5 Area Plan January 28, 2015 iv. There is a lot of guidance that can 't be quantified for a developer, need more specifics on timeframes, how to meet the policies, etc . What does it actually mean for a developer? v . The 1999 Plan was too vague — this plan should not repeat that mistake . vi . Add a section on what worked , what didn 't work, and lessons learned from the 1999 Plan . b . Readability of Draft Plan i . There is duplication in a number of sections, which is unnecessary. ii . The implementation priorities in the Transportation & Mobility chapter are clearer than the other chapters . c . Prospect Corridor i . Why is Lake Street included ? This is not a major road for most Fort Collins residents . ii . Lake Street complements Prospect Road for bike/pedestrian movement, it' s the " back door" for the HMN zone, reduces congestion and the need for access points along Prospect, and accommodates transit . iii . Who pays and who benefits for improvements on Lake Street ? CSU is the primary beneficiary. d . Improvements to Prospect Road west of Shields i . How does this get addressed in implementation , and where will the funding come from ? ii . Is it separate from the stadium conversation, or can it be included in the intergovernmental agreement ? iii . This stretch of Prospect should also be a priority, particularly the addition of safe pedestrian crossings . iv. Not as significant a need as Prospect between Shields and College, but there may be economies of scale of constructing improvements along both segments at the same time . v . There is a need to balance and prioritize capital projects citywide in a rational way. Not all improvements in the West Central area will be top priorities right away. e . Open Space Networks i . Have any locations been identified for community gardens? f. Land Use & Neighborhood Character i . Design guidelines — want some flexibility, don't want it to be completely rule- driven . ii . Developers need predictability, and neighborhoods want the ability to influence a project . Need to allow for neighborhood input . iii . Need more discussion about the realities of the HMN zone, including potential conflicts between historic properties and new development . Page 2 of 3 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #5 Area Plan January 28, 2015 iv. Need more definitive projects and statements, like the Transportation & Mobility section . However, the City has less control over some land use and neighborhood character topics than it does for capital projects . v . There' s a difference in intensity of use between a 4- bedroom apartment and a 2- or 3- bedroom apartment — need to make that distinction . Concern about fair housing issues when it comes to regulating who can and can't live in an apartment complex . Recommendations for new wording for policy 1 . 10 . vi . Need to make a distinction between single-family rental houses and multi -family apartments in the policies . g . Plan monitoring i . Who is responsible for implementing the plan and moving it along? ii . Create an interdisciplinary implementation team 4 . Next Meeting — February 4, 5 : 30-7 : 30 p . m . (follow- up meeting to continue discussion ) Page 3 of 3 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #6 Area Plan February 4, 2015 Stakeholder Committee Meeting #6 West Central Area Plan February 4, 2015 — 5 : 30-7 : 30 p . m . Present Absent Sue Ballou Susan Dominica Rick Callan Becky Fedak Colin Gerety Carrie Ann Gillis Per Hogestad Kelly Ohlson Ann Hunt Tara Opsal Greg McMaster Jeannie Ortega Jean Robbins Andy Smith Steve Schroyer Lloyd Walker Logan Sutherland Nicholas Yearout Staff & Consultants Ted Shepard, Chief Planner Amy Lewin, Transportation Planner Rebecca Everette, City Planner Notes 1 . Welcome 2 . Continued discussion from previous meeting: Draft Plan Review a . Open Space Networks i . Bennett Park was never implemented following the 1999 Plan, as the area "exceeded the standard amount" for open space at the time . Is this still a consideration ? Will it limit the creation of new parks/open space in this area ? ii . Supportive of the Arthur Ditch crossing at Whitcomb and Wallenberg as long as it isn't used for pedestrian traffic to the stadium . iii . Young' s pasture was initially considered for open space, should be reconsidered . iv. Factor the Spring Creek Trail into the 10- minute walk to open space analysis v . The need to cross arterial roads is a major issue for accessing open space ( e .g ., crossing West Prospect Road to get to Red Fox Meadows) . Reference pedestrian crossing improvements in the open space chapter . vi . Add an action item regarding wayfinding to open space . vii . Clarify " Levels of Service" for parks and open space . What does this mean for the area ? viii . What is "desired " open space ? Desired by who ? Revise wording . Page 1 of 2 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #6 Area Plan February 4, 2015 ix. Use "ditches" instead of " irrigation waterways" or "canals ." x . Add guidance related to xeriscaping and the use of drought-tolerant plant species . xi . We are going to lose a lot of canopy trees to the emerald ash borer. Need to proactively plant new trees . b . Prospect Corridor i . What would be the impact of the new mid - block pedestrian crossing on traffic flow? ii . The proposed pedestrian crossing interferes with access to the "Slab ." Consider moving farther east or west to align with other pedestrian connections . iii . Emphasize that this is just a conceptual design . iv. What is the timeline for improvements to Prospect and Lake? c . CSU Stadium i . Use variable message signs ahead of events to warn people to avoid the area ( like is done downtown for New West Fest and other events ) . ii . Concerns about value engineering of the stadium , which could reduce the quality of lighting and sound systems and create additional impacts to neighborhoods . iii . Noise will create impacts in all directions, not just to the south of the stadium . d . Transportation & Mobility i . Need to make sidewalks wider throughout the West Central area — add to street retrofitting policies ii . Create a template for widening sidewalks (action item ) iii . Sidewalks are not well- maintained along arterial roads . Need better enforcement to ensure property owner compliance . e . Land Use & Neighborhood Character i . Improved lighting in neighborhoods — ensure that the types of new light fixtures comply with the Climate Action Plan and minimize light pollution ii . Consider a range of safety concerns for adding lighting. Concerns that new lights attract more people to congregate under light fixtures . 3 . Next Meeting — small group discussion on building design, compatibility, and other land use and neighborhood character topics (to be scheduled ) Page 2of2 O ■ � L O cn CL E O cn 0 d Q CSU On - Campus Stadium ' The High Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (HMN) District (located immediately south of the stadium site) is intended to be a setting for higher density In December 2014, the CSU Boardof Governors approved multi-family housing and group quarter residential the development of a new stadium, to be constructed on uses (dormitories , fraternities , sororities , etc . ) the CSU Main Campus . A wide range of concerns and closely associated with , and in close proximity to, comments related to the stadium have been collected the Colorado State University Main Campus . Per throughout the West Central Area Plan process . Below the Land Use Code, any private sector development is a summary of considerations and recommendations would be held to the maximum allowable off-site for the new CSU stadium, as they relate to the various lighting spillage into the entire HMN zone of 0 . 1 foot- topic areas of the West Central Area Plan . candle . If illumination levels from the stadium are not mitigated, potential re-development of this area Land Use & Neighborhood would be negatively impacted . Character • The glare from sports lighting impacts a driver's ability to distinguish objects and impairs overall Noise visibility. If it is discovered that the glare created by • Based on noise studies provided by CSU , the stadium lighting would be problematic, then light anticipated decibel levels during football games and level reductions or other mitigation measures should concert events would exceed that which is allowed be implemented . by the City Code for all nearby residential zone Additional massing along the south end of the districts (maximum of 55 dBA between 7 : 00 a . m . stadium would have the benefit of shielding nearby and 8 : 00 p. m .) . The impact of noise on residents in properties from light spillage, glare, and noise. all directions of the stadium needs to be adequately Safety, Aesthetics & Waste Management addressed through the design of the stadium and Measures should be taken to address issues related event management. to tailgating activities in nearby neighborhoods . • A design change that raises the wall on the south Tailgating should be directed to approved locations . end of the stadium is recommended to more Tailgating in neighborhoods should be limited to effectively lower the off-site decibels impacting the the extent possible, and public nuisance violations neighborhoods to the south . Adjustments could also should be swiftly enforced to prevent large outdoor be made to the loud speaker arrangement to better gatherings . direct sound away from neighborhoods . As people travel through the neighborhoods near • Over the long term, music concerts have the potential the stadium, both before and after football games of creating more disturbances for nearby residents and other events, there is an increased potential than football games . The plan recommends that CSU for disruptive behavior. Police patrols and law enter into a formal agreement with the City of Fort enforcement presence should be increased within Collins regarding the number of concerts per year neighborhoods before, during , and after events to and sound management for such events . If concerts prevent and address disruptions . are not an important part of stadium programming, Tailgating activities and pedestrian traffic through consider agreeing to hold concerts only on the neighborhoods may result in a significant amount of granting of a special use permit from the City as a trash left behind in the street, along sidewalks, and prerequisite for holding a concert. in yards . Neighborhood clean- up activities should • The plan recommends that CSU establish a time- be coordinated immediately following events to certain conclusion for concerts and other evening mitigate impacts . Outreach should be targeted at events . CSU students and other event patrons to prevent • Monitor sound levels as events are occurring to such issues to the extent possible. adjust sound management in real-time in response to CSU should make significant efforts to improve issues that arise, in conjunction with Neighborhood communication and coordination with adjacent Services, Police Services, and other City staff. neighborhoods for football games and other events . ► ighting The City of Fort Collins , CSU , and neighborhood residents should be mutually viewed as partners in preventing and mitigating the impacts of stadium events on neighborhood character. B 2 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN CSU On -Campus Stadium Transportation & Mobility Transit Operational Plan Implement enhanced transit service to reduce the • Given the tremendous expense and feasibility need for stadium attendees to drive through the challenges of infrastructure construction, it is West Central area . prudent to address as many needs as possible As many as 3, 000 parking spaces may be used for through operational enhancements (such as a major event. Many of those spaces will be at the additional transit service), and multi-modal traffic south campus, tennis courts, or Natural Resources management . This will require a comprehensive Research Center (NRRC), so shuttles will be needed plan that includes outreach, education, detailed between parking and the stadium . parking information, transportation demand Traffic Impacts management, and gameday operational plans for Even with enhanced transit service and a robust all modes . implementation of traffic management strategies, • Use variable message signs prior to events to there are areas around campus that will be critical suggest alternate routes before and after stadium "pinch points" for the mobility of stadium attendees events . and nearby residents . These are areas that require Parking Impacts infrastructure changes to accommodate the • For potential off-campus parking in area additional bike, pedestrian, and vehicular traffic . neighborhoods, consider expanding and broader In addition to major events (sellouts) , it's also use of the City's Residential Parking Permit important to consider the non-capacity events that Program (RP3) to mitigate stadium-related parking will occur at the stadium on a much more regular basis . Some of those may not have dedicated impacts . traffic control management and the transportation • Residents of neighborhoods near the CSU campus impacts need to be accommodated primarily with are concerned about gameday parking on residential on-the-ground infrastructure . streets . The City has implemented a Residential . Determine the necessary infrastructure Parking Permit Program (RP3) to help address this improvements needed , identify costs, and issue. Currently, there are three neighborhoods in determine who pays for the improvements the program (Spring Court, Sheely, and Mantz.) By . There will be a need to accommodate increased the time the stadium is built, it is likely that several bicycle and pedestrian traffic, particularly crossing additional neighborhoods will be added . The RP3 Prospect and Shields, as well as east-west travel to requires a permit to park in a residential permit zone. and from the stadium Only residents of the zone are allowed to obtain Designate recommended bicyclist and pedestrian permits . Incorporating a more proactive approach routes to ensure safety and to minimize disruption with signs and enforcement officers may be needed in residential neighborhoods for gamedays (and other non-football events, as well) . FF _ 1 i -� • \, rla 1k WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 B 3 Open Space Networks Prospect Corridor rvoise df Lignung In December 2014, the CSU Board of Governors approved • As described in the Land Use & Neighborhood the development of a new stadium , to be constructed Character chapter, both sporting and other events on the CSU Main Campus . Below is a summary of at the stadium will likely result in significant noise considerations and recommendations for the new CSU and lighting impacts . Noise and light pollution stadium, as they relate to the Prospect Corridor. both impact environmental quality, and the City of Prospect may experience an increase in traffic on Fort Collins has enacted a number of policies and event days. The Event Management Operational Plan regulations that seek to minimize these impacts should consider temporary route adjustments and citywide. Measures should be taken to minimize the noise and lighting impacts of the stadium beyond incorporate ways for theSheely/Wallenberg residents the CSU campus . to be able to get into and out of neighborhood (only • As described in Land Use & Neighborhood Character, accessed via Prospect for vehicles) . a sound wall could be erected on the south end of the Incorporate wayfinding and infrastructure stadium to reduce impacts . Such a wall could include improvements to accommodate increased bicycle live plant material as a feature to soften the mass of and pedestrian traffic, particularly crossing Prospect the wall and provide an open space amenity within and Shields, which re-emphasizes the importance of the stadium site. an underpass of Prospect at Center. Construction & Operation Consider ways of handling game day traffic on • The use of sustainable building materials and Prospect and Lake through a combination of practices is strongly encouraged to minimize impacts infrastructure improvements and operations to the natural environment. management. • Sustainable operation and management practices, such as water and energy efficiency measures , should be employed to minimize impacts to the natural environment. • Protect the existing CSU arboretum and Plant Environmental Research Center (PERC) facilities to the maximum extent possible during construction . Stormwater Management • Any impacts to the stormwater system created by the construction or operation of the stadium should be fully mitigated . Improvements that address existing stormwater issues should be made whenever possible . T top a i B 4 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN CSU On -Campus Stadium Public Input Wait until the stadium decision is made - no need to do it over. (Question 19) • Please oppose the new stadium plans ! ! This is bad for The following section summarizes the public input the West Central area in many ways. The transportation received regarding the Colorado State University (CSU) difficulties seen now will magnify many times over on-campus stadium that was approved by the CSU with this disastrous project . I live just Southwest of Board of Governors in December 2014. Comments Drake and Shields and I work on campus (but am not shared through online surveys during the West an employee of CSU) . Please --this affects me greatly! Central Area Plan process are compiled below. When (Question 19) possible, the comments are stated verbatim . Spelling The huge impact will be the CSU Stadium, if it is built. and grammatical corrections were made to improve This will totally foul traffic in this area , especially readability, as needed . Prospect. (Question 19) Additional community input related to the development I am also not opposed to the stadium if done right. of an on-campus stadium, as compiled by a Community (Question 19) Design Development Advisory Committee (CDDAC) can be found at the following website: http:// The area is great and we have most what we need here . csudesignadvisorycommittee. com/ . The area is a focus for CSU and we should be cognizant of the fact that is the way it is . Complaining about living May 2014 Visioning Survey near the campus is counterproductive and those that do should vote with their feet. I have lived/worked near • Traffic flow on Prospect, esp . if new stadium is built at a university since 1980 and it is a great benefit, not the CSU . (Question 2) opposite. Go Rams, build the new stadium ! (Question • Parking for residents will be important especially 19) with over-crowded stadium parking, student housing, It's pretty pointless to go very far on this process etc . Make parking part of builders ' responsibilities . until we know about the proposed football stadium . (Question 6) (Question 19) • Trying to get on and off of the CSU campus via Prospect October 2014 Online Survey / September 2014 Rd . BIG delays on Whitcomb and Prospect every day between 4-5 . . . can't imagine how everyone is going to Open House Questionnaires leave campus if they build the stadium in that area . . . . With French Field events, Rolland Moore events, The is anyone doing any studies on the evacuation time Grove block parties, CSU 's new stadium and the Ex- via car to get 35, 000 students plus faculty/staff off Garden's Amphitheater how will we even hear ourselves the campus for emergency or when Tony Frank calls think? No less find a parking place . (Question 3) a snow day at 10 am? (Question 7) • Avoid adding businesses and activities that would ' You talk about natural areas but build more apartment increase traffic, such as the proposed CSU on-campus complexes with inadequate parking and talk about stadium . (Question 9) natural areas and now a stadium in an area that does not fit properly in the area . The current stadium has • Concerned about thefts at southwest CSU stadium at more than adequate room for parking . Stop wasting parking lot north of Pineridge. (Question 12) our tax money. (Question 13) • What it doesn 't need is a new CSU stadium located • Moving traffic - especially if the stadium is built . nearby. (Question 15) (Question 17) • Projects such as the proposed CSU on-campus stadium • DO NOT spend taxpayer funds on infrastructure should be avoided , as it would greatly increase traffic improvements for the proposed on-campus stadium ! on Prospect. (Question 15) (Question 20) • Prospect is a travel corridor, but I wouldn't encourage • Do not let the stadium cloud yourjudgment! We don 't higher density traffic due to the fact that there are so want a stadium ! (Question 20) many residences that are on Prospect . This is one . Why is the city wasting money on Prospect planning reason I object to the on-campus stadium proposal . before the fate of the new stadium is known? (Question The infrastructure to handle the additional traffic 20) doesn 't exist and would be difficult to implement . (Question 15) • I am not against the on-campus stadium . (Question 20) • A new stadium nearby would be disastrous for this corridor and should be resisted with every effort possible. (Question 15) • All bets are off for Prospect if CSU stadium happens . (Question 19) • No stadium ! (Question 19) WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 B 5 • We must stop ADDING housing , event centers , HEED CSU AND COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDER shopping centers etc . to this area until the traffic OPPOSITION TO THE STADIUM ON THE MAIN issues are resolved . Prospect is extremely dangerous, CAMPUS, ALREADY HAVING A PERFECTLY GOOD ONE especially from Shields to College. It's difficult to drive ON THE FOOTHILLS CAMPUS, AND THE PHENOMENAL on due to how narrow it is and we are increasing TRAFFIC CONGESTION THAT THERE WOULD BE ON traffic on that road with EVERY project that is done or PROSPECT, COLLEGE, SHIELDS AND BLOCKS AND proposed (Grove, shopping center, housing project at BLOCKS AWAY FROM THE CAMPUS . ALTHOUGH A Hill Pond and Gilgalad , amphitheater at the Gardens, SATURDAY, IT WOULD MAKE RUSH HOUR ON WEEK daycare, CSU parking garages, CSU stadium) . Prospect DAYS LOOK SPARSE AND FLOWING . (Question 5) is already a nightmare and we will drive people AWAY Worried about the traffic snarls, delays with all the foot, from this area if we are not very careful . And MAX does bicycle and bus traffic this plan will create . Then CSU not resolve the problems . No one is going to walk from wants to build their campus stadium that this area a shopping center on Shields and Stuart all the way to cannot handle the increased traffic in will cause . This a Max station . That's not an easy walk either. Walking down Prospect is downright dangerous . Taking the trail city is too congested as it is . NO TO THE STADIUM . is an option until you get to Center where it is OFTEN (Question 5) flooded . Crossing Center is dangerous . Then you have How will a new stadium impact everything we're trying to get across the tracks to get to the Max. So, you can to do? Will a new vision need to include the larger cross at Prospect, again quite dangerous or you can community of football fans stateside? (Question 5) walk all the way down to the bridge . Neither of these The goals are admirable . Will you be able to achieve option are good ones on bikes either. I 'm an avid cyclist these goals if the proposed new stadium is built on and it's not easy getting over that bridge on a bike due Lake? (Question 5) to the sharp turns and no one in their right mind would bike down Prospect. (Question 20) • Prospect needs to stay 2 lanes for each direction otherwise the congestion will be too much - especially • How much can you plan for until you know for certain since the stadium was approved (Question 5) what is going to happen with the proposed football stadium?? (Question 20) I 'm assuming this will be forthe new stadium looking to go in . How do you propose to make travel as effective • Get rid of stadium (Open House questionnaire) if not more along the prospect corridor with the • What considerations are being given to improving the integration of the stadium? (Question 5) Prospect corridor if the new CSU stadium is being built? . Be certain there are NO cuts allowed for a new (Open House questionnaire) stadium . Be certain there are NO road modifications Prospect Corridor Online Survey (November to accommodate a new stadium . Do NOT disrupt 2014 Prospect for new water and sewer and electrical for a new stadium . (Question 5) • How much has a possible new stadium been involved 1 assume that this is mainly being done in anticipation in the planning ! (Question 5) for the new stadium? But the intersection of Prospect • 1 support the project, but I am against the construction & Center needs revamping regardless . (Question 5) of a new campus stadium . (Question 5) This is the most difficult, traffic volume wise, so the • No money for on-campus stadium ! (Question 5) City must use its influence to protect surrounding users from an on -campus stadium . The silence so • None will apply if the stadium is built. (Question 5) far has been maddening for me . When committee • The vision will be impaired at all levels by the chair ( McClusky) said CSU does not need to heed construction of an on-campus stadium . (Question 5) surrounding people, I was floored . City let us down . • Thisjust continues to pave the way for stadium traffic . (Question 5) At taxpayer expense (Question 5) • Why put all this money into this without knowing about the on-campus stadium in the area . Shouldn't • What are your plans if the stadium is built? (Question 5) CSU be at least partly responsible for upgrades and • Don't let CSU build a main campus stadium (Question improvements here? (Question 5) 5) • Movement through the corridor must also be fast . • Should be developed with CSU 's proposed on-campus Anything that is done to the corridor should NOT make stadium in mind (Question 5) it less efficient to move through . ( Especially with a stadium going in) (Question 5) B 6 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN CSU On -Campus Stadium • We just wonder if all this attention to this particular Nothing is attractive about long traffic backups along area is because of the proposed stadium? Granted this Prospect with the advent of MAX and the pedestrian section of road leaves much to be desired in terms of crossings on either side of the tracks and at Center needed renovations, but since we happen to oppose Ave. Not a good way to impress visitors and tourists, the stadium, we wonder what the underlying reasons particularly the new stadium is added to the mix. Put in are that so much attention is being given to this those underpasses before it becomes an even bigger particular area . It is already pretty much a nightmare issue. (Question 8) at certain times of the day. The improvements to this Graded down because City is silent when McClusky corridor would be welcome, but the addition of stadium reiterated every meeting that CSU need not be traffic even with improvements will just make it a big responsible for on-campus stadium traffic, not only nightmare all over again . What is the honest answer? Is game day. (Question 9) the stadium the reason for the concern to improve this corridor or is city street improvement for the citizens This plan likely will not accommodate the additional of Fort Collins the reason? (Question 5) traffic generated by an on-campus stadium . Given the • If/when they build the on campus stadium is it wise to likelihood of CSU proceeding with their plans, does this have the built up medians? (Question 7) mean the new design will be effectively outdated within a year or two of completion . (Question 9) • Bus not mentioned . Will bus stop in traffic lane? What The stadium would completely negate this positive about quantity of traffic-- long back-ups at rush hour, vision and plan for both CSU and the community. lunch times , and due to trains and games at Moby (Question 10) and now soon on - campus stadium ? Sometimes intersections are blocked . How can emergency vehicles On-campus stadium bad idea not sufficiently claimed get through? (Question 7) during on-campus stadium debate, the 1 % is ignoring • I keep thinking about how this will be changed with the the 99% as usual by the rich . (Question 10) stadium and how it will be affected then if the stadium Although it seems premature to make these decisions is really being put in . This is a long term thought . If now that it looks like CSU will build a new Football the stadium does not go in, I would score higher on all Stadium off Lake in this corridor. (Question 10) areas . (Question 7) • A new on-campus stadium should require truly major • Wow! Neat! However, tell Tony Frank and the CSU BOG financial contributions from CSU . (Question 11 ) that if they want to continue to pursue Frankenfield at . Be prepared for the stadium . (Question 11 ) Grahamdoggle Stadium, they need to be prepared to get approval for a funding for a second level on Prospect t NOT allow a decent plan to be disrupted by a new s or high-speed monorail from Foothills Campus to stadium on campus (Question 11 ) 1 -25, which would help with weekday congestion , too . • How can any decisions be made before the stadium (Question 7) decision? (Question 11 ) • These ratings are if there is NO on campus stadium . • See previous comment about impacts of on-campus If the stadium is built, I think there will be a lot more stadium plans . (Question 11 ) traffic on game days and this will need to be addressed . They look good . All that would change if CSU builds (Question 7) a new stadium . Traffic and noise will be off the chart. • If the on-campus stadium is built the Prospect corridor (Question 11 ) improvements will be extremely more challenging and . Don 't think Prospect is solved . Looks better, but still difficult to achieve . (Question 7) inadequate to meet demand . I am not sure there is a • Ratings depend on how heavy the traffic is - whether solution given right of way restrictions, but I think it there is a new stadium north of Lake Street! (Question will still be marginal even before the new housing and 7) the stadium pushes it well below marginal . Lake looks • Seems that 10-foot traffic lanes are very minimal for significantly improved (Question 11 ) such a busy corridor and will be even more critical when What if CSU builds an on-campus stadium? Will the the stadium is built. (Question 7) current designs be adequate? This is a big unknown . • The on-campus stadium makes this plan moot on If not in the near future, CSU will eventually build an on game days . City needs to rebel when McClusky says campus stadium and from what I have been reading it CSU is exempt from taking responsibility for causing will likely be sooner than later. (Question 11 ) serious game day and multiple ceremonial activities to Acquisition of ROW is going to be expensive ! Like pay for the expensive stadium on land needed for CSU having a bit more space in the driving lanes . Not sure future expansion for daily needs . (Question 7) about mixing ped and bike traffic on the sidewalks . • A great vision statement is out the window, however, if Both will need some updating when the new stadium stadium on main campus goes through . (Question 8) is built. Lake is way too narrow, even in this scenario to accommodate game-day traffic. City staff report on the traffic impacts is way too optimistic. (Question 11 ) WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 B 7 • It appears that the design will be driven and constrained by the proposed CSU stadium . CSU should buy and donate land along Spring Creek between Shields and Centre Ave for the city to build another east west artery for traffic . CSU should pay for changes related to cost and traffic burden caused by the stadium . (Question 11 ) • Have these designs taken into account the likelihood of an on-campus stadium? It would be foolish to design and build this corridor only to have it be insufficient to handle event-related traffic . It seems likely also that doing the improvements may need to involve the purchase of additional right-of-way along the corridor, including purchase of single family residential properties to facilitate widening of the street section to accommodate adequate transportation improvements to meet long-term future needs . (Question 11 ) • Traffic is going to be a big issue throughout the coming years as CSU grows and if the stadium ever action moves on campus then traffic will be a nightmare . Unless 6 lanes can be squeezed in . (Question 11 ) • What is the university's contribution to this costly upgrade? It primarily serves students . It will make the stadium a more likely outcome and it is a burden to taxpayers (Question 11 ) • A campus stadium would create congestion and increased danger to the Prospect corridor. It should not be built! (Question 11 ) • If the CSU new stadium plan is approved for the on -campus location , review these plans to best accommodate large crowds during those times . Try to have temporary route adjustments prepared for such events . (Question 11 ) • With the stadium now being an initiative to go forward, I would like to see more thought given to making Lake Street the main access point for the campus and stadium . (Question 11 ) B 8 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN CA a 0 ■ � 0 CM) MCa a a This page intentionally left blank Appendix C - Existing Conditions Maps The maps in this appendix describe the existing conditions within the boundary of the West Central Area Plan . Additional existing and future conditions information related to transportation and the Prospect Corridor can be found in Appendix D. The following maps are included here : Land Use & Neighborhood Character 1 . Population (by census block) 2 . Percentage of Non -White Population (by census block) 3 . Neighborhoods 4 . Structure Plan (City Plan) 5 . Zoning 6 . Land Use 7 . Current Development Proposals, Under- Utilized Land , and Vacant Land 8 . Maximum Building Height 9 . Age of Buildings 10 . Historic Features 11 . Code Violations Transportation & Mobility 12 . Master Street Plan 13 . Pedestrian Facilities Open Space Networks 14 . Schools, Natural Areas, Parks, and Trails 15 . Floodplains and Floodways 16 . Drainage Basins 17 . Proposed Stormwater Projects Fort of West Central Area Plan Population CZulberr St R1 =ITO 10"E, OT-71 7E EEL Cn Cn EE- W Laurel St Jair Eliz b { h St �J l Lp 1 � 1 I 1 1 1 1 i o �f 1' �/� i W Drake Rd I Legend Miles 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 . 4 ® West Central Neighborhoods Population 10 - 62 63 - 137 138 - 264 N 265 - 487 " e 488 - 771 s Printed : February 25 , 2015 Fort Collins West Central Area Plan Percent Non- White LL n.. c� cn ,\ ulberry St �TM EE 0 c RI =To ITMo W Laurel St Eliz b { h St ffE � 1 n �I , it Ij Rd kit I 2 - ; C o i �/� W Drake Rd Legend Miles 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 . 4 ® West Central Neighborhoods Percent Non -White 0% - 7% 8% - 14% 15% - 22% N 23% - 33% w E - 34% - 55% s Printed : February 25 , 2015 11 All r MEMO ■ ■I��I �� IIG III I. I�111: �. ,I� : m°u'1: � ��i���i �� • • • Illlllli�i�i�� Y1iul �111111 11111111 1111115 �� ill ! ��� �Itl ■lllll I' I1111 ' ■■uu■ �. .. asoil - . _Il II: _II �� n : - — —■ ' _ MEMO ■E■■ luIN lll■Il■ll _�- ■ �- ■■ '° 'll llll IIIIIIIC IIII II■ ��� ■� -■ Inr, . , . �, ■ r (LAG NORTH Illff■ ■I111111 I . -- IM -- ilk �� �� Cp a... ��' ■ iU �- ■ U. � �� 1,�fflf ■� n � � ICI - %� � '�r r- i� rf,•� �R� - III011lllllll■�+ I ••tll�l � � � WIN -- ■- - - Intl■ t� �t••••llrf ii fllllla/� � ■ ■ -- -- -- - ■ !!al! ■llllPM LEM ■� tttt � I■� == • N IN •. IN .► . - .. .. .. _ MEMO 171, MEMO MEMO MEMO MEMO MEMO MEMO I �- -,••,- :■i- ••••�� i i i■ ,!■!filamr �1II1 ���������� • ■� .■- II�II� ol miliiiil d IIII� I III r ■■■■► %U�� i�� �� ` Ifl■fffl■11 Illnupuuu■r „ Gnnl6�� � ��►�niiiuiiu = , ' ' � � �•�■Ill! � � -IA 1111 '�� •• , ,1.� II Iwllllllllll! IN .► ♦ . .• . ltl� . �' Is►j �� '■„I �. .V♦ �. . llilit / • s 1f ■. . .. . •i. . ♦ : .fan 1 � rr.,� � a:.�i.�u innr - r■ -■ r r. i- -�/■a i ��1 �� ■at/t1� ■ � mnn � u,mm:%j !u. umu ; � ■■ ; ■ r� �-i alfllll■ i� �s unt.Elim11►la�li■llunflJl .iceoil '. 1 • ♦♦ �� sir r- -r 1� •s r� �- /Ulta i �� s�■� .f ■. .■ ■-11► Iffl1 ■IIIlfllf111111 fltlill; Illllut ��1 � �� p■fs►� fnfulflmfff ���� � �. � � MINE pnu �� .. p �ffflf!! ■ Il• iPEP 1lfwool IRA FRIE21ER fp ���� Si WIN ■ p1 MEMO MEMO MEMO MEMO MEMO MEMO MEMO MEMO -� a - • ' • • • • � C 1ZIIIIUUIIIE7''� p � o �■iiiillip 111111 ttn ■ ■� Igloo - �♦ - 1 _-�! ■■affl !llllf �. \/� II I F�rtcol! ins West Central Area Plan G' Structure Plan 28 W Mulberry St 2 cn a� 87 0 287 287 W Laurel abeth C S U I Pros oil - co Rd H co - J I. W Drake Rdin Districts Neighborhoods Edges Corridors Downtown District Urban Estate Community Separator Open Lands, Parks and Water Corridors Community Commercial District Low Density Mixed-Use Foothills Poudre River Corridor General Commercial District Medium Density Mixed-Use Rural Lands Enhanced Travel Corridor (Transit) Neighborhood Commercial District West Central Neighborhoods Campus District N Employment District Industrial District Adopted : February 18, 1997 W E Amended : January 6 , 2015 Printed : February 25 , 2015 5 11;■ 1� ���� - ■ OEM � '- :II�IIY3yME, _ _ = =11= .III= 'IL" • 'es _,- - \ ■• _ :�I�I I Irk II11 ■!• 1� �, ■r` nl ii III■I�Illl�i IIIIII IIIIIII! II� IIIIII, ■ks ■ ,1 i� '91- \\I IIII-e�IIII MI MM =P1 III .�I�!1�1119111111! :IIIIIII91 ,II������II�_ IIIIIII: IIIIIII: IIIIIII ■�� — Oman 5 31111 1 %` ■II �-IIIIII illlll l 11!: lh i��lll illll�l�lllll'1`111111111111 illlllll illlllll illlll: lin �IIIIIIIP_I IIIIIIII ' �.IIIIIIIIA Allll! IIIIIII '-nnmm�, nlmunm 111111161 IIIIIIII !IIIIIE =11 ' ` �■�1 i11111111i1 illlll IIIIIIII 11111111 illlllll °°°°°I"°°°°II" IIIIIII= illlll-n ull ■E - - !nnnm nnnnnl - - - - — ,�i :� IIII' IIIIIIII ;Illlllliillllllllllll : 111 ■_ - '= 91 _ ' ° i ■■ ��oul I� IIIIIIII a1 = _I9 ' III . i■ ■e IIIIas = E■ aa ■Illi ' a :■ IIII = = — MM `' — ■ ■IIIIII _ , rY pe■ �� ■T :■ 1■ lidlll IIIIII IIIII Illlln ME; ■■ I■TI IIII ■= at Illlllllli == lin = I�Iu� MAN r � I mp — — /- oil = a I� HIM MIN rii .IS 0■ 1 - Illllllli =nn - - - \\ 11' : - ■ I � 11 r• 11 IIIIIII i11► ■ «jQP. CII :IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII . a :_ • - - �` ■■ . ■ ' - IIIIIII ■ III: IIII: 1�111_ I. 11 I - - .■ • -I vrp► nl■ , .A■ .� ■ ■ . IIIIII � p - ..IIIL I'll- :_III. �, : - �,�. .. . — t ►�.,... __. _nnnllrinnnln - - — ► - -'I' - -- _ I: i++I/ .r �1\_ Illrlrrl�rr .� - --.r ■ a;� i' �111111 ;IIII IIII 1111I10 :� m. _ ■1 -= noon :■. -- 11II 1 = '�� 'J!�y i �I♦♦IIIIIIIIIIJ i�� !i•1"��Yt�i� �r iiiiii�I7 •-.. `�,■f��y♦I _ __ ap :L.1 :• ,,,,.` ♦ O ♦ p - = : �;I♦"IIII :L 11: :111� - Ill lr_ ■n = _ - nlr_ =I = . I. _ Inniil,:� -.r:_ 'vi::.nnunll♦ I�. ■�■■Il�i -m\•non ■_ .nm=: - - _. :►.n 11/ ,,. - _ _ _ e = - - - - - ?�nnn .- ■-•-"' - ■ ♦i .. .nnn�� P - ♦ ■■nr . C:' Y'_.� A�.■ =ice_ =_ e -- - = e _.� ♦ ,.R ,, ullll �uuuln: Gin ■- _ _ -- 'I�_ ■� - IIIIII` - - G intlnn -� •-■ I - - IIIIIIIII■■■■ ■ n■ttnnm � � -- ■ ■ -a � ■ • _ � _ - _= p � -. ;, .■u■■■ ■'r"Ii ■■ .II IIII 11111. .11111■ ` � ■l■ ■ III' -- -- ---:_ nnI1IlI - mm�nn U11 Il. _ -• ••• - � - •""""' � .II � il■ IIIIIIII -' .►�: :- :: �: : Y ' illlll: = IIII = _ '�[I?'�•nu n= � --- IIIII■■■:�� �,.,..� a IIIII = =-■ 1_= _ •- :_ : � � IIIIIIII'. ■ _ � Ills tO l= ■i1 - -IIII' ' '7■ niiil�i: ... _ nm- : : n ■ . •- , ■ IIIIIIII �1= - -- - � � ■IIIIIII: - _ I , "� ■ • II 1111111111 111111111 ; 11111111 111/= -_ IIII■IIII; .. -- -- =■�y�Yr -:_ ' - 111 -= ■■ III■t11111■ ■- � '■� •■1■■ ■■ � • m °? : Iur'fil•on :: •��p:pC±:: -■ _'� �• � ■• - III IIIII 11111111 � Ilse:I 'II t111,Itftl -- 1♦I•♦♦1 ■��'•:: -'�: -: - IIIII ■ i■ IIII IIII■11 i111111 '1� I�-E-- •! IIAA ■ :�:�1�♦Ij♦I♦'i�1♦ ■���-i':iiii i ■■�..;a Glln� :� � - - � - _ _IIIIIIII IIIIIIIORIIII. -- ■■itl�;:I ■■.�� ,j♦♦♦.:♦�i ? �� • i -'�� ■/I +' ■ illlllll •IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII ■: ■ ■■■fill �� ♦ ♦ ♦� ■. • I�♦/I � 111■L�od1111�■• _ _� = p ■ ' `.1 ♦i■ .. nn ■/ � ��- ► .♦ .l >f . �'^�-'i-� _ _ _ I_ .IIIIIIIII : IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII L- IIII ,i ■ ■� .- I � �♦♦ ' ■ .■ .. A . . IIIII■.O■■■r ■ •• ■■ •• ■- - n mnn■■ ♦nut'+'! ♦ • •• •• •• - • null , +' ■'e - 9 IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII :IIIIIII IIII[:IIII AM �� ♦ nI11II� 1r1. . .�:.. .. ■ - �■ - ■�: :: :: -: i� ��♦ice \♦i�■ ♦',t••OO t■ �� ■IIII■\•� AFL--■■ :- o - ■ ■■11■c ■ - �.\I IIIII'llr\■ ■-�■M■ ■■ _■ - �._ w�■�1♦♦♦♦Q■I■ ■■ IIIIII■\♦ ■■•a■ +�:�■ ■ ■ ■■■1■•■■■1■ • I" �p ■ - ,II- ar 111■ ■ ,�,�� ■p ■- IIIIIm11I�■ --;-: ■- -■ -ri r �■ _■�♦ - ■ ■■!���■;l■•- ■ IIIIIt1■IIII • __ - - ■ . �■ y.-■ -■ -: --.-- ■ (IIII■� ♦ ' n1 ' .. ► ■ ■ --•■�■■�- �■ �IIIII� 1 I ■1�I� .� II 11 a ■ p ■■_-- =■ -■,a■ -II■a, ♦■ ► I♦�♦,� ■ ■ y r IIIIIIIIIIIIII ILi■ __ a■•IIII Or\ .■I IIII IIII (IIII■► Pt ' ' � o --c■■�� \`•: . . - ,.. ,ter ♦�■■n■ I•\■■ ■ -•■- ■aJI/���1 . = ■,' . is o s ��- • I 111 IIIII I II IIIII: � ■ ',�I■I1: I::1::�"11e�.. III■.■� -- '♦,- - % :: nitt■��` • ■ • ■ m u ■ ■ ■ . ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ .•. : ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ . • _ 1 :1I _ .- ■■ .■1 LUMII _ - n ■I - 111 �■ ■II q_ Emi_ • ■ - ' ■ r ■■,■Illttl■Itt■■■ - ■~ • ._ � 'a z = „'='M ���n■nmm� : _ 0 1 IIII ; i1111�i j' . ♦aj� • riiiiiilil"i►� j ;C nn Yet■im ��l ■ _ 1 ■ Am tn� I�♦-ii �,1,►1���n�.� �►►t/nn■► _' uunttnn - • - - � - arl' liy ♦iI im mlrl♦ n■un■■a �i - �1 ■41■ili�iinn■ - - _. ■ ..-�1 �■ ■IIIL „�:Ilt■■ ■ntI. 1■►glula•► � ■ I �.vJnl�Inn.■ � , . , GI�■ 11■III � ■■ ♦� ip,O! ••ram Ii 1 If� anu■■■n ■ 1■ __ IIIII IIII■■■: pp - �'� �� � .. • ■++ r �\I/m/��1./\♦ ■ �, - = t ���II■■�■■'�t�i ■ 10. !+++���+►+ 0 �Ii�+•� Ii■■i1■�-' :��a■a ' 11. . �1 �p11 ♦ n +IIIIIIIIII ' IIIIIIIIIIIIIili1 � ( 'Q O��O+�.y*�.�6w■■.■ �•i:un1■ ,DII� � � IIs,�II�Lt�/-, :f D♦�D♦♦f, ., r _ r_ nl Co+ � i ♦IIII ..,......... i1f � ► II r�-' , - ➢■■■■.�'i1� i�.j•t1■■ - ■I � � � ■ IIIII ���ri _ �tII� •� P I, a.7�r t � /I�� �Q Gi •♦/���intll /1„ 11♦�Ifir • ■■�'i�■■■1 :!,l► ♦- ■: : 11i, +q VL a+ i/ p♦ 1♦♦�IQ♦,,,�■■ �IIIIuu■o♦ ► _ .�gnnn�� . 1♦�I� lip IIII ■ ■ 1►�� III�� QIIII/•♦ ♦i♦ /s♦-. - .■ ■■- V: ■► .� :.• NO " ♦♦ ♦� f IA • ■ ■IaL�■ 11,�1♦♦.,Q�'�♦♦q .. ♦♦1♦1♦I♦♦♦♦1\ � ■ :!�■ ■■!-:2,�F-■ -/•� ��♦♦' �Q ��p\A►'�♦♦♦� �1■IYI■■ IIIIIII • - ■ ■" \. �1 � ♦ ♦♦♦♦Iltl IS ■ �'■ ♦ -Ih i ■ t■t■ 1■ i� ��a�, 'I , ■ l � ' lam\ tno��♦ y . ♦: y� i �►iiw��►nlnii'ul 6�Ii�I■q ; III/� �11 ■■.■I♦♦jam r� ► / • �►♦I♦���„�� ♦�K\� i `.l O ■ ■■ o.' IN ice.1101�\I IIIIII IQ♦,.n� ♦♦A ■■/ • r�1� •.1���� �tl .��1il • ■MAE■ - ■ ■-:-6 -� ■II�II�I P;C mil♦ ♦♦♦ ►♦ q►L►9►�•�►��■ �� ,♦ ♦ I 1♦♦ QII�i ■��� ■ IN ■ o - '.� ■ - tP �l.A`�I%�'♦♦� �'�♦i♦,,♦ �♦�%� i:yi��■� �♦1 �•�•� �•��■t���I� I1�/�� • o. y --■ ■ ■IIIIIII ME Ill• �f. /►♦i0 ♦�♦�1��;■n .a ■�♦♦�i� �i i I si�I ■IIIIf■�� :r :: iA��1111 111 I►�� i Int♦��0�+♦♦♦i!07y��1 �/ ♦ �■ ■ nq���� ■■ iunm h�: ♦♦� p!I■♦�'♦+'pi ♦♦i:::E •liiiii iliilln . . . . loll i ■ ril♦♦ �i: � ii i♦♦loom pF ■In►♦i ♦♦. is♦D ♦�l�'''�.�■ �,�,�., �♦� �, - . . \As /�i.. . ♦ G� �11A1111 ►■■ �- ►♦�1 �11 1a�1/1� 'IIII►1♦��-- • :: ------ ■►���`��III ►,- .I ♦ r . IIII ■ •Y■ _ Y, ' :: ::':■ .� �. 1`�;���♦ 7�IIIIIIi'y : : : �\■■11;�� � • s ♦♦l♦l ' 11111111 "�ta 1`'L♦� .♦ IIIII IIIIII ♦ l.11 ■ -, ♦ l 1-= = 1,,.,,....,- .■ : �■�r ;�� ♦� IIII � I � � • ■f ♦♦ - ■111111111■ p' IA�iy�� �� � PIIIIIII■ ■ .\�� � �- C1►�%/11��' 1111I11111 ,■u d�� -- ■liiiann- - :■ p1I/' - Ilp IIIIIIIIIIIpIinE ,�. , : - - -� m IIIIIII ■ ■III■ - •• .+— III' tii p iitliit imnni ml : �� : :nn: "ilin -t�mnn - . n► � nm : - .non none . �. .► . . • .�nno nnnm: moon■. _._ = a �♦ - Imam - ► f a u' i 'i iu■►♦ �• a :IIIIIII G■IIIIII -_ -_ -- ri man --.: [/p ■ - dIII�I IIIII■Iq I ■/ 4i cm., ♦ ��,�IIII -- --� - - - ■ ■■ MIN ■iiIin : vA:YY111uYnlfinl `�1111111� i��p ���\� �• : : ���1♦♦♦11� �■- JI!■- ■IIIIIIII --_-�---- \ 1\IIII/����•' 1 ♦ ♦ ♦ �� ♦ - �I . 1.irm,'' - I a IIII■■■►♦♦ ". I ..t 1� ■IIIIIIIII ■■�. -■ '�'►�l �� a ■ ♦ 11 a --�- ■IIIIII :■ -- a o o :� �♦�I� :�►I\��' - - ♦♦♦♦♦`17♦II,♦1 -- � x / /IIIIIIIIII III ■� � Ii--i- - � ��'. a ■■ ■- sa @ 11 IIII\.♦♦a♦ � i� ♦ �\ ■■ i - �, . s � 111 . �- ► n - •- --.r Ii♦1' ♦♦1►n\C�♦ �� .E' I� � r♦ .� q�.■ \ III � ram\ is /♦♦i ♦�i♦i �Q?. ►��►�►�♦►♦Ii" ♦ � :�� i "c.!♦ � � ♦ Di!!♦♦i�I►. m_ 'i■r�♦i♦♦ ! �Ii .� •♦♦ �I �I�I-�f► � ♦�/ ♦► �i'.�,� - - � ♦ ;♦O G!!J Ipp ♦ �11♦i �1♦II C� .. ■ �_ — IIm\I1♦ �1pF�•♦c•A' ■::.�.. :�..E��il�ju-i3� ■ �I► �i`■ ` n ♦ � ,• 1♦��: ■11'• II :inn ■ ..' ,��p / soon ME soon -■ IIIII ■1 �nn�n/♦ ��. u ♦ I ' -�'♦ ' :M 101MAN I� oil-■i-_ I Am �I! Ra�: � � Ilrn■ ■■■■■+���_ ♦�♦'��� _ ■■ 11■/,� -: , . . . • . : . , . , , . , . IIII■ . . ., . , ,. , ., IIII■ " , . , , , . IIII■ ' , III■ IIII■ IIII■ IIII■ ■■J Illr� � � IIIIIIIII � •� ■■un11 . 1� I� I�. - 1 'll�?pI111 N '1 11111 i -"IF �= i i♦*rMMM IIIIIIIII I :I II" I s— I / ` `- - vIQ► Rw i�1■ '■� s . — � �:� �nl a li uu a u_&, wnn 1 � .. . Win:,,,, onm . �� 1111' 11 �� ' ► > ///■Rsa �fi ' r1■rYt/ I'■ -- •� ♦11 �1.. I� - ■ 1 - . �I m I �i �� ��• �� '•�iA .� .. C: n��C �I111' ll . II Ium 11111 = =11 = `: N I, . your uR �► . 1 - ,� — _ ^` ? �•1 �i :. dRwm / �: iIIIII� �iunNll :■e■■ ■ j man — — — � . :I:Illlwq■r■■■■■ nnnnnu G � nnn ■■ .■ ■f ■p : �` .�,�. NO ■- .null % �. �, R _ I 111_ uI �• uu1111� � nuu■■nt � � �' � . in �--ti wCi�C � � 111 11■■■� sr �— - fillin - , F1ii . : Iibloi 11114M Will on In on = : M 13h911JQ� 1 .1wow ! lillJ r ' �i '.� ni. I■ r1 CM In Cm ice ' =!qF �; , S�i�•el• : nuunuugl 1 t/rn ;euu�m■ Untl Qry: . 'IIIN�/� �j�' �� m in inlyll C: 7: ON M :,umr ■ ,q in 1 �1 r. ■ItIt1<l1 . im In in r. �! llll/r i Now Im v . ■ ■� �� �� -- inIS nrri�/�111� - Z- -- -- _ I��IuuuN�aiirr �i�j ��,1� :. M.M. -- -- t �lllllllllllllll up 'INbll I,�IEI ►�,, , ,. �� ►1■1 Otrta1 ` ti —.�■prw.�r�_ tt/ in m No m in m gill — .in ■ . :.. ■. t1. .. . .." Mar ►. _ Hillis 1 _01 milli IS 11 o11 S �II will ,go NO RIO 14 login an 1111 Ing in 1146 J 1 �a 1.` WON ■rrrtlltun_r' o ■1 AI Chi •rrrne ■■uu - I� ✓ �! t■■■■■■o■■■ IN � 11 ■■■11■ONE . ■ �rnrgyllisp - I� 1111111� .' rj r ■ �turri� , 11►�• �jf,►� = = =a�. ��.,� .. ;G liiu1i111_ne 1►�. •alrtrimoll I r�l ;:: On I* ONO 1■ � '-- M-:-- �► � ♦ ♦♦♦ la► � .� I \�p.i Aurf Itnrlr I�sl ���■ = Ills .umnrr ■■tat ••• ❑ 011111110 �. - - — , ll _ . ..� 111 .1 ..E / .-. ♦ ° ; 1 an r1i1�/�� �t111t11111 \fir Ir■ lid _ +-. .i.- / - r:,,'* , off an .. C��r,• ice, r.l .�' . .I �—�- ♦'.:arm _an Al ids rs�_■1-!1 ► /1,1�}_I � ,.�' ' ■ ��/►�: I111111r1■EA1111 �0g moose Ir • BIMINI qry �. �- oll "now jib MIN hi •` lO _ram \IIIIIIII IIIF �R111111111 -111111I� : -oilrIlk 311! �: . , _s-�f �'_„ ' ��i::i :! 1`7i■ 1 - -3" '"an .n:!i :r':====-��_ = � .ii',.�'��* �` � Lt.• ► - I Legend MWest Central NeighborhoodsHospital Land Use General Multi-family Services Not Defined Government facilities Oth family er tax exempt Single Group quarters II • • do - - • • • • • }=�is�♦ a (L� � t 4bR.i ! t( a y - It ire ti A * YSi • • ` I L 01, It - It 1116 INp • " It VI amm en - 14 � I. of a Igloo - , V I iJ • a_ J '. L IN . , t r -, - ! t Y t ,� . 1 - _ _ r It It fir" a ) • r f a I 7 IF , i 1 glad goo 1116 krrl • • i i may. I a It. - !. A '.1JAL to ir _ `�_ y .lz• '1 1� 1 1� I IIt � � . 4 t,�Jl .?'T t __.I 1 d >♦ •� s � � i.i� - is cc . . J4 w .F )` J - • - � Phi �' � j , ' �S : j ! < '�_ � ' er flip 16 ft 0 air. - DrFl� 11h 0 • Fort Collins West Central Area Plan - Maximum Building Height z W Mulberry St MMN y CSU W Laurel St z � ■ . tdc nm � ,. MM _ ■` C.Ca� rn sill■ W Elizasbeth ■����� ■■ s - cn m cn RL_ z LMN � ■�■ ..■■1■dill i�■■Iloil = �= IN A Jw Pr-�o '?pect R 0, d �N c�i 111� ► ■ , o POL MMN RL L Idiom■ NG ■ RL POL cf) ��� ■ CSU W Drake Rd 00/ Miles Legend 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 .4 Max . Building Height ( Stories) 0 s = 0 - 4 2 .5 - 5 N ® West Central Neighborhoods W E s Printed : February 25 , 2015 ELI ..�. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ► . . . . . . . ���= mll�■IIII IIIII 111111 mom. .� :�I — I1�7 _ ■ ■ . :. ■'r7 1 � ON MIl\II �� ��� :, . .._ _ • ■11■1■■ � � � � - • _ = • - IIII ■ � Illm '_I �� �I l nnu . minn nnn_ ■ ■ . IIII ■ F� ■ t'� II,■ + • -ono• � , 1 _ ranua. as ■ III 1 ■�1■� . �R !■ ■, . �• �■ . � �� a, �� :�►�\ n�:Ir"v�j♦♦ ��111:�■ IL .IIII■ — ■CIA , ■ �_ � � �_ �_ • MEIN ME ME ME : ruunvn•rm� IN ' ■■�■■Illllllrr■ R� ■ ■Fi �1�' - �� ■ ■■I�11 vigl11II ■ ■ ■ :' � ■IIIIIs►r I � � �� ` ' ip ■■■ �i i ■■ ' IL Jam ' ■ ■ 1 �'■ • G - �11-. `„■I■ ■= U01\A All\'I• . . ■ 'jlll■ 1■' sue` ■ ■��� ��t=:� ' r �■ ■11 ■ ■■ ■fr.■ ■ 11 11 � „''� III �� ���/11� � �� � �� ■ ■ ■� ems:■■ ■■ ■ .,7..r�� i __ SEEMS SEEMS � OWN IN � -. 'y111:■ ■ IIIII I �■Fi�'�.=_:=\■ U�� �• ` 1/��� ■ ■ ■■rr1■■ � � j � IIII IIII 1 �� ��'■,►� �■ ■►►��� i is. ■■lam IIII• .. . f� NICE IIN �11 ir'a ■■\ /i C i :i' •IIII I 1 1s' ■��,11r m it � IIIII / T �1 ■ ■■ • ��Itf� �� � C �1111 ���aim ., ■ ■■■■■ ��.■111� f■ ■j IIIII jj11 ��� i ■ 14 1 ■ ■ :■■MEE �■ ■. �■.��I■\��►� manor• 11 ■. Ig ■_ -■■ .■ ■■. .NFlSffi��i��r����1� �! �� TSB' _ r ■ ■ E■11►f Ilt�Ia�GIII■111��■ ■� �i \■■► lai L� _ ��' MEMO �� �f ■� �■ eaw w�1A Im■1■r1 Ir♦�I��� IIIII■1■11�111 mill r • . - - ■ �,■/III /■■■I■■/I■■■■■■ ■►�� 1 � IIIII i� ■■ ■i ■11■■Ilrrr' ■�,Q � i ' M ■ � ♦ 1■■�►��■■IIII■ � �r�� � 'I ►III■ _: ■r.� ��� � �� Jim ■ an:eviacur - ■ I , =j ■� n�a•� �r oaor♦ �, ■r■■A�' ■�+ . � ����'�• ��� ■ ■IIII ■ :�■■1■■■I ■�1��■ �� � �� i�����Y' ��V'��Y'=,■ !��C�,�+��a�� � II ■ . . 1 - - 111 ' ll 111 • 1 1 11 1 ' • 1 • 1 1 / 1 1 1 ' 1 City F IC I ins West Central Area Plan Historic Features • ��` W MJIberry St ! • I W Laurel St • • • • 69 • W Elizabeth St C = W Prospect Rd a� U • U) U) Sheely Drive I W Drake Rd Miles 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 . 4 Legend • Designated Histo7Properties Historic Districts " ® West Central Neighborhoods W E s Printed : February 25 , 2015 City of West Central Area Plan Fort Collins Code Violations ago 0 W M 0 om OM u l berry St��e 9 s �1= � iii ' 4 ° Wp° ° ° � �a r, _.. to pFI' a o10 4) o000 o o°p Q :s p O° 8 FIaA� Ujlam V ul lr . . � , a000ax)co OO 800 0N, O O O 4 , � . f O g CD 0 0 0 0 ' <<►i K W Laurel St • ff- f1_l = 1; IN CO 0 0 CD Cr Ito 08 8 WAIF 07ab8etjh�St ' o [ - _ . , '`+' �1� r?����,N n 00 ••�� F - _ Tip- SAl o il °O g ° .° O 0 O � � c 8 O 09 0 0 8DA(@ 0 t7 10 8 �S Om CD (DO �_P - 6 ° W_Oo o o0 °8 �" 3 �p8 °° °J Qy� Quo: „' 1 �0 �tjj M �$ 0 8o 0 o cm a oo 0 go % O o p O p 0 �0 01 SoD0000 CD O 0711 1pl" O rY�p o O O 8 80 8 0 Og o 80o 8 O o o r, . O° � ° O O Q Qo ° o V�rPrxOsp: tRd ° °°o°p aB o8 O ca o $ o o MD CO ° ° 8 ° owo 0 CD � �it,�a��� ° @o 000 80 o ,q 8 � ° ,, "mod'' o : GO ° O O R�tr Q o n IWO o 8p V p0 6 o .iC�'D�' ° C =i, -•' , lr!%9iC O W ° Q V ' `l y - -£ i�.� Ir �r ' iNt . Ir 1 , •/n o O p 0 C O p 0 00 0 � � trp 00 ° �rin ` C Rd Miles Legend 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 . 4 Violation Type • ROW Encroachment Note : The following categories have been consolidated O Housing Over Occupancy O Snow and contain the following types of violations . 0 Multiple • Trash N O Outdoor Storage • Vehicle Trash - rubbish , unscreened trash Vehicle - inoperable vehicle , parking on yards O Public Nuisance Ordinance 0 Yard w AlAill Yard - dilapidated fence , dirt yard , forestry, noxious weeds , ® West Central Neighborhoods weeds s Printed : February 25 , 2015 .67tcoulrl5 West Central Area Plan rjMaster Street Plan Cn W M ( berry St 0 (n W Laurel St W Elizabeth St Mr W P ros pact Rd Cn Cn J V i w V E Mike$ ® West Central Neighborhoods — Collector 2 Lanes 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 .4 s Railroads Arterial 2 Lanes Streets Arterial 4 Lanes Scale 1 : 16,648 ® Potential Grade Separated Rail Crossing Major Arterial 6 Lanes Note: Other collector and local streets not shown will be developed O Potential Interchange in accordance with adopted sub-area, corridor, and neighborhood plans of the city. Streets and Arterials outside of GMA are shown for contextual purposes only Adopted : March 17 , 1981 and are not part of the Master Street Plan. Amended : December 17, 2013 The City of Fort Collins is not fiscally responsible for these improvements. Printed : February 25 , 2015 `i1 111 1 ■i � �,� .I ��1�: i�•� ��� I NINE III IIIIIr _ ■.II■ r�•d1I11111r- � ■1111�� .■111■II■I■■■■■■ IIIIIIIIr111 � � 1■ � 111111■■III � - �Ir �Ilrrr■■I� I - � IIIIIIIIIIr� 11111r■� SEE 111111��: 1■�� ■���1111 •• ISO• •■ ■_• 1 IILlJ I i �� �A im i� I■ . �I111111 ■I■■■,■■I �Q ■� /1■III mm III mm EL ■ ■- -■ ■- ■ . �IIL �. `■■ -- ■■ ■■ ■ ■ ■■11■ `� . �•����11■ --� i1111■\ ■`7■ �. ■■ ■■ - ■ ■■r1■ ■rllr� ■rl■■■■, ' �— ��Q ■ ■. 111■�11�� ■ ■ ■■ .. .■ ■■ ■ :,. N I ����11■ ■� �� ��� ■ ■ ■: :: :: ■: - ■■IIIIII■1111_ MONSOONMENOMONEE= Q■Ip . � - ■ - ( �111111111111111 . .. .. .. �QII� ��` ■ sOEM= ■ ■. . -. � ■■� � ■ ■■ SIP• ■ III{. I . :'�= �:�..•:/� : : :: "'� ��������� • � �1■■■Ily;1 = III ■1 �illl■ ■II��� - 1 �� , � 1■ ■11111111111■ ■ I • e - - • , �,1 �� ■IrIIIIIIIIr■ � �. �� ■Imn i1i1i �� - . A�I■IrIIrlIIr11■�- I �,�I•�i■11■r■IIIIIr I WO,, ■■■■■■■�■� `r 11m■IINESINIIi ^��I • �I m y� - - 111II � =�■- � �111111111■11WIN ME 01 : : :: �► �■ ■ ����� 1! ���A�A�� �'�.- 1 � '1�� �11.i rt id1111�11111 ' ■ �■ ■■ ■- ■■ ■/ �� �1■ Ai./ir ��� I -� :IIEiMI 11 ..MEMO nn . ■t �� 711r1■rl■ ��`A■ � � i ■ nip. ni■- � ���� •���� i� son! / II •I.,����111R ■ ■ ■ N Q� ■■1 IGIr7�I�i: �11■1�d11��111 �■■1��r �Iu,Uli��■I �;,I Ell go - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - � ►1111111111111 - - . I ■- 1 . ._ • ,11111111 see II I West Central Area Plan Schools, Natural Areas, Parks & Trails Poutlre w D ° " m Juni er ;, w y n shingt0 ParK .Iaryerson Community Jana m N Lelan Ave E_ - o Fullana E I Civic 1 _� Academy - U S - '" 3 3 Elementa , z ter Pak Q S[ et Park Buckingham 3 North , N °as Pa}K PSD apo a ve v ° _ r PP < v m 8 8 v as a N �wlc , 14 aih Services rc v a' ¢ "> _ Chiltlrens ouse - q 9 C�nrl o e PSD m 8 o y - Monies! Dri 9db� q`n rs � S[Jos Atlministretion - he g Schoc I z z p , Z Grandview z z School LL W Mo nfain Ave in Cemetery Mount; InAlz 1 oun aln ve OSchaol m , Oak [ Poutlre oak St - St Sr High w a' 1 Plaza Eoak s _ 1 Par Library GQ BE m Aki Ave a' E ' Park `m w Olive s City Park ¢ u - , E o ' ¢ St m Nine Golf City i°i W a°toi0 m Impala i , ` Course Park ¢ a Me a st 0 I Z Yo ngPeoples E Ma naive St a g Sheldon Lake 9ne 3 I w Leamiog = I Cen[ei 1 1� Mulberries Sit M bile C Well m� Sunset Ave Dunnafter , c 8 sMe Ave Element ry Wl Rogers We NA - ens 9 1 Avenue I E M Me St _ �rK Rev 0 3 far W 1 Timber C " rest ore PI Birchst Chtltlrens .8 1 rc OrderedPI ? Workshop Cer High�E ka reI St AP B J - Laurelrel S� t m Lab - o ea one Dr 3 m 11 I a Cf PoI ri E N Main BE II 1 A'n ,� z rc I You Fg Peaple E PI m St WPU o' 1 Learning e Center E final a �i` hoc ist St f° We s E Eirds bend St Open Arms B Po Mr or Hams a' Cotord awe W Ave � Christian Bilingual o Tamaac er m E Eie Leestlel WE State \ I Preschool Immer;io s F_ o v •� cf _ University 1 Our Ma St Crabtree Br ra t7 U o` south Dr 6 ASb , p a q 1 E seardsS arvi¢w Ave Avery 2 WeatwaM Or O Park m' L ¢waotl 0 W Pitk S[ n ' E Pi kin St oO�IOS�kwooa Or `a t S n fiel or Presch�l T - 3 0 ° \ , p` A I CIOn ,r, N 5 yo , ucke e S mm Z 3 Bennet) Rd mes Ctm ' U o Bennett I ■ > Elementary ke St 1 uorer Brief s ' ad _ r Elementary go 0 8 15 Balsam kn No Oro 9 0 . u Dein Cov h as to � , 3 1 B ¢° io - Joni er Ln s - h , HIlk\o m Hobbit St N a rY•'.n� �\ i �k,�¢ Bi PI arkers ° U. Lon of Rd 7/ � ^ T(ix}�+ Vili Sheer Dr S Aloe Aveth �o fo1 ITV .,...t...", 1 ParkCi m % - 11¢nbe Or Eu) Estua Sther ° °� elan a rom n _ ` 5 \ Ter niry Lutheran ° D as off\ r k m r c goy orou96 D $ Park C Pa sLilac itle Church Preschool) o Ct Ave om a ohnson or w s _ " Spring Creek Spring m R a Blevins Coun c i d°A Day Sc o l Park e Park Glenwood or - na Rd 2 M1ire I Oa y Blevins = F o Marino Middle 3 c� pd - or Rm eba Ave a School r W ripp v t m i r 207 A a _ S a ♦ o \\ Duke On Rolland Moore Colorado a S o o rndaor ct % Community Park State ° a, University o a �z .r d S raN w ♦ C.ors¢11 Ave or Car ^ E Evens r Cs Ya ay Or ¢ Val) Vall Fo eAve I cf made cf " C �Freehou e � - i �% intree ` °m - � O•pea M1 ontessoh Nor shire Little Pnncelon Ra Bears Child Care Inc Cot n Ava e 1� � S I r f otli ♦ amps I c A Har-Shalom Fox cf W r sale On Glen Haven or War onwneeI or PreschoolAntl e KindergalYeo @ Ease o = Woodwest ` 1 g Has in sDr r' Davi o� Wincnes er Br Park ¢ @ '¢ U. 1 P erhom Dr ThundeNbd t 01 Marshwoo Dr 1 c 8 > MofoA 'sham ° F!'cker ' a �° a o+' 1 Fremomc _ in'rlerc are a ° 2 H list 1�+ 3 0 2 Mae v o Li o- ' poor E M 2 Leisure Rude Anne I Chiltlrens Centers °� o / ' rc p W H R° t Park P WOilrshop Rocky �� MOSm 8 Del Clair Rd 2, o Mountain H line o s oa Sr High _ Z a d Beattie e 1 a Elementary 0 ° 1 l �� Frontier c1 ' E _ C cf 2 Beattie June � Icmnisontor eas .e q Park cf +o t C east ¢ 3 m E sw law R I Spring Canyon u w swallow d - tl Dr aln M1am Sf Sio x BI U' Zyv it i COmmunfly'Pdtl( Rossborough Rom I �N r led Park _ onaw ` ez Porous ay cf do see cf Um 1INI11 IN E Major Roads Paved Major Trail ® West CentralArea Plan Boundary �'/i/1,IIJLr\1`I� Minor Roads - Natural Surface Major T20 schools S Srale 1:6000 Paved Minor Trail MM Parks 0 ozs s o/s t Mlle - Natural Surface Minor T2A _ City of Fort Collins Natural Area a Cm OF wrsr COLLINS GEOGRAPHIC lNFaHMIQIOH scatter MAP PROWCR Toess,deara around WE al 2vgne data WE doers wua%geey arm amuv as maml orde M. aide near hol retail w handed For pandual use WE didenesersa e°b mils no mprewsowia°wn o (- am Wdiv deal ndm��%amp in are TEury OF FORT City l)I �m� N� Fort Collins scandalFar and Woods all responal code deal and furtherhaddeenants and aressal War Was this assured�:m haddleas f� bouldrearranday Printed Febbuary 19, 2B14 I II` :11�1111 �■ ■ ■ o'a _ „ �/„�J�//��� •: : V ■ ■ �'� ICI o 11,� 1�III Il. 11i � � . IIIIIII ♦� ■■■ ■� Mill Mill ■ ���''�� i�-� � ■II IIII 11111111 11 ■ ��II � IIIIII �� IIII - �. :� � i�� I � / - - � = " '__ � : � � , �I III � IIIIIII �' IIIIIII 1 - _- - IIII �♦ �'// ! �! ■ ■ ■ � _- - /ii/// Ian •11111111 �� — MI (IIII •ram ■ �- �� -- - �.��i�i/ -L II- _III_ 1�II1�� III -� � _ IIII �■ ■ ■� r ' � = = - - — — ■IIII PIIIII 11111 IIP IIIIoil pll■� I- • �� _ � _ � _ — _ — _ � I� �1� IIIIIIIIIIII � IIIIIII �■ =� . :: :� ■■-ice ■ _ � = = rM 1■ - IIIIIII■11 C � J- ■I ■ _ IIIIIIII� � 11111••: ��`7 1. 1111111�� b IIII ■IIIIIII. /�, "• : _. , _ a am a am ■■ ■_ mmmm — �� %�■ ram= i �ti �_■■1 III ■ /� �i liming. IIIIII II■■■ ■■I a IIIIIIr ■■ ■■ ■ ■■II■ ■■III nr■ �_ -- -- -- — 1111111111111111 �7 =_ NEW 11111 I II I ■ �QIII /. _� III ■ � �i (IIII\� � ' � � � � � � � a� IN ■■■ I ■ ��IIIIII■ � �I •'��I•IIIIII � „I 1��,II1 I 11� I • • All, - • �� ■iiiiiiiiiiil : ��� 1 MEMO Milli I - - � ■nnnnm - '` ■IIIIII■IINIII : ■ pill ♦ ♦�� /■IIII ■IIIII•� 1 ■_ ■ • � , ��/rrr �� � • ���• o■nUll■ IIIIIII _■ ■ MIMI■MIf nn m ` ' .� ` � ��■■ it I = nu n _ Innn� 'r' n� 1 1 �= � : ■111�1= ■;� unnu n■ • -= =' ' I INS I NMI monsoon MINION r, : IIIIII■IIIIII ■II■11 a I�un: �;, 1. ■� :: am IIII■ ■ ��IIIIIIIITIIIIILI,♦ : MINIM• ■. ■IIII ■���� ■��IIIIIIIIIIIIII►��■ amlr �`� 1 1 1 1 1 Legend 17■1West Central Neighborhoods . . . City High Risk Floodplains FEMA High Risk Floodplains City Moderate Risk Floodplain FEMA Moderate Risk Floodplain I ■ 111: .■� -1 �� .ill■�.- I oii■■ I � � iiiii"""�■ nmm■■•. . J � - l1berry St OLD TOWN BASIN - lim W Drake ' • II I Fort Collins West Central Area Plan GIs Proposed Stormwater Projects W M=u 11b'e rry St _ UDALL SUBBASIN 1�.7C.` '113C 2!.?e . LU_ItnRlE'. N �� WV Alt AN 4 W Eliz - beth St LOCUST SUBBASIN v - - r ` i i mIN awl •• wlwu�.wr'. -� :.1 �` - n , . 1 B�. LJ. . . . �1 p ■ ° II+�- W Pr<ospec't Rd TjLl ���GIIIII '��✓� - ` �� � i t 1 I�JIwNV.rr{�4u017u11Wii 7 yy LW �3�dn0��Yf ' ANA 61 a'��A� 'J�" r4pE�+y� .� . 1 1'1I111Z 'r '�� � •�sT ,_. ' y , ICI» ���r :�rJSAOIwt ' "� �CC� 1 �� '� �1 a ♦ ems/ kI�9rtr , 1f 9 9 r .r. �- le L ZA ar �c F7! �!E ► !i6lY iC- f �1, a Ul r uG. � = 6C►i1AN526W .ri�arr rwc� iLn�� � .� .♦ I= —� '' Ills AR Om [ �Vj �j—ljnl IRA etir�(�C r w1JNlI��!l�7 ap�, - n°9GG®�GG3iC�All . r�:J ►� uGi� Ii: IJl L . ' Cjl�. O ��?lIF:� . �i%� r;'7L�71�E9 :79►'aRlb ���7 b � '�" WC nn �. rhitiC�� [111GCb .�� W Dra�ke�� R.d. _ � y BURLINGTONINORTHERNISUBBASIN „�--+• . . Sri Miles Legend 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 . 4 ® West Central Neighborhoods • Proposed Detention Ponds O Proposed Mechanical Upgrades N Proposed Grading Contours w E Proposed Improvement Areas Proposed Pipelines s Printed : February 25 , 2015 O ■ � O L 0 LL ca Lb O O Q. L d a Q This page intentionally left blank WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN AND PROSPECT ROAD CORRIDOR STUDY Source: City of Fort Collins 8 / 13 / 2014 Transportation - Existing and Future Conditions City of F6rt Collins Fort Collins, Colorado Contents LISTOF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 LISTOF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 LIST OF GRAPHS . . . . . 3 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 HISTORY . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 LITERATURE REVIEW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 DATACOLLECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 EXISTING CONDITIONS : EVALUATION OF WEST CENTRAL AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Levelof Service Criteria . .. ............... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ........ .. .. ............... .. .. .. ................. .. . .. .. ............. .... .. ...... 20 Roadways ... .. ................. .. .. .. ................. .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ............... .. .. .. ........... .. ...... . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .... 20 Intersections. .. ................... .. .. ................. .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .... 22 IntersectionLevel of Service .. of of 00000000000000000 of of 00000000 of of osos000eopope pope DO DO 000000000eope pop000 o DO DO es00000eope @a pope DO 000000 22 CapacityAnalysis . ......... ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ...... 23 CrashHistory .... .. ........... .. .. ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .... 29 Bicycleand Pedestrian Facilities .. .. ............... .. .. ........ .. .. ............. .. .. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .... 30 Transit ........ .. .. ................. .. .. .. ................... .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ............. .. .. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. ....40 Parking ........ .. ................. .. .. .. ................... .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. ....43 EXISTING CONDITIONS: EVALUATION OF THE PROSPECT ROAD AND LAKE STREET CORRIDORS 46 Roadway .. ... .. ................. .. .. ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. ....46 TravelPatterns ... .. .. ........... ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ............. .... .. .. ............. ...... . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .... 54 Intersections. .. ................... .. ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ........... .. ...... . .. .. ........... .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .... .. .. ........ . .. .... 56 CrashHistory .... .. ........... .. .. ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .... 57 Bicycleand Pedestrian Facilities .. .. ....... .. .. .. .. .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ............. .. .. .. . .. .. ........... .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. ........ . .. .... 57 Transit .......... .. ................. .. .. .. ................... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ........ .. .. ........... .. .. .. .. .. ........... .. .. .. .. . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .... 59 Parking ........ .. ................. .. .. .. ........... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ........ .. .. ........... .. .. .. .. .. ........... .. .. .. .. . .. .. ........... .. .. .. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .... 59 FUTURECONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 FutureData Methodology .... .. ........... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .... 59 Evaluationof the West Central Area .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .... 59 Levelof Service Criteria . .. ......... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ............. .. .. .. . .. .. ........... .. .. .. .. ...... 60 Roadways .. .. ................. .. .. ................. .. .... .. .. .. .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ...... 60 Intersections .... .. ............... .. ................. .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ............... .. .. .. ............. ...... . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ...... 61 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities ... .. ........... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ...... 61 Transit. .. ..... .. ................. .. .. .. ................. .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ...... 61 Parking . .. ... .. ................. .. .. .. ............... .. .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ............. .. .. .. .. ........... .. ...... . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ...... 68 r� big D1 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study CSU Multipurpose Stadium : Transportation and Parking Study ( DRAFT- 2014 ) .. .. .. ............. 69 Evaluation of Prospect Road and Lake Street ....... .. .. ............. .. .. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .... 69 Roadway .. .. ............... .. .. .. ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ...... 69 TravelPatterns ...... .. ....... ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ...... 70 Intersection ..... ........... .. .. .. ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ...... 70 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities . .. ............. .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ...... 71 Transit. .. ..... .. ................. .. .. ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ...... 71 Parking . .. ... .. ................. .. .. ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ............. .. .. .. .. ........... .. ...... . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ...... 71 CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 D2 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado LIST OF TABLES Table 1 : Recommendations from Previous Plans For West Central Area . .. ...... .. .. ........... .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. ........ . .. .. . 17 Table 2 : Intersection Level -of- Service Criteria ... .. .. .. .. .. ............... .. .. .. ................. .. . .. .. ............. .... .. ..... .. .. .. .. .. ........ . .. .. . 23 Table 3 : West Central Area Existing Intersection Level -of -Service. .................. .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .. . 24 Table 4 : WCAP Intersections with Highest Excess Crash Cost per Year ......... . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .. . 29 Table 5 : Transfort Transit Routes, Descriptions and Headways .. ... ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .. . 40 Table 6 : Prospect Road and Lake Street Roadway LOS . .. ............. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .. . 47 Table 7: Prospect Road and Lake Street Intersection and Approach LOS ...... .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .. . 56 Table 8 : Prospect and Lake Intersections with Highest Excess Crash Cost per Year ....... .. .............. .. .. ........ . .. .. . 57 Table 9: Prospect and Lake Future ( 2035 ) Intersection Level Of Service.. .. .... .. .. ........... .. .... .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .. . 70 Table 10: Summary of Locations with Operational and Safety Concerns ....... .. .. ............. .... .. ..... .. .. .. .. .. ........ . .. .. . 72 LIST OF FIGURES Figure1 : Study Area Map .. .. ................. .... .. .. .. .. .. ........ .. .. ............... .. .. .. ................. .. . .. .. ............. .... .. ..... .. .. .. .. .. ........ . .. .. .. .. 5 Figure 2 : 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Figure3 : Bikeway System Map .. ..................... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .. . 15 Figure 4: Existing Roadway Traffic Volumes ...... ...... .. .. ............... .. .. .. ................. .. . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ..... .. .. .. .. .. ........ . .. ... 21 Figure 5 : Existing Roadway Level of Service ....... .. .. .. .. ................. .. .. ............. ...... . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. ... 27 Figure 6: Existing Intersection Volumes and Level of Service .. ....... ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. ... 28 Figure7: Crash History .. .. ... ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. ... 31 Figure 8a and 8b: Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Volumes. .. ....... ............. ...... . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ........... .. .. ....... 32, 33 Figure9a : Existing and Proposed Bikeways ......... .. .. .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. ... 36 Figure 9b: Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress..... .. ** 00 00*6*606 *a ** *a *a * *a *a *a *a********* *a *a **#eases a ** *so 37 Figure I Oa and 1 Ob: Existing Pedestrian Facilities . .. .. ............. .. .. .. .. ........... .. ...... . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ........... .. .. ....... 38, 39 Figure1 1 : Existing Transit Service ............ .. .. .. .. .. ........ .. .. ............... .. .. .. ................. .. . .. .. ............. .... .. ..... .. .. .. .. .. ........ . .. ... Al Figure1 2 : Bus Stop Ratings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44 Figure1 3 : Existing Parking Inventory .. ........... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . ..... 45 Figure 14 : Prospect Road and Lake Street Access Map .... .. .. ......... ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . ..... 48 Figure 15 : Existing Right-of-Way and Cross- Section Locations .. ... ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . ..... 49 Figure 16a and 16b: Prospect Road Cross- Sections. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ....... 501 51 Figures 17a and 17b: Lake Street Cross- Sections . .. .. .. ............... .. .. .. ................... . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ........... .. .. ....... 521 53 Figure1 8 : Future Roadway Traffic Volume........................ .. .. ............... .. .. .. .. ......... ....... .. .. .. .. ......... .. ............. .. .. .. ....... 63 Figure 1 9: Future Roadway Level of Service . . . . . . . . a * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * sows owes ass * * * at * * * * sets * * * * * 860606A Figure 20: Future Intersection Volume . . @assesses @ * awes @ease * * * a a * @ a * @ a * @ ass a oe*65 Figure2 1 : Bus Stop Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 Figure 22 : Future Transit Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Figure23 : CSU Parking Garages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .68 LIST OF GRAPHS Graph 1 : West Central Area Transit Ridership, June 2014 .. .. .. .. ... ............... .. .. . .. .. ............. .... .. ..... .. .. .. .. .. ........ . .. .. . 42 FAT D3 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study Graph 2 : West Central Area Passengers per Hour, June 2014 ... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . .. .. . 42 Graph 3 : Eastbound Travel Time between Taft Hill Road and Shields Street .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . .. .. . 55 Graph 4 : Westbound Travel Time between Shields Street and Taft Hill Road . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . .. .. . 55 Graph 5 : Eastbound Travel Time between Shields Street and College Avenue . . .. .. .. . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . .. .. . 55 Graph 6 : Westbound Travel Time between College Avenue and Shields Street .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . .. .. . 56 D4 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado west central area plan and prospect road corridor study TRANSPORTATION - EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS INTRODUCTION This report documents the literature review, data collected , existing -rMULBERRYST conditions and future conditions for the West Central Area and Prospect Road corridor. Fehr & Peers is working closely with the City of Fort Collins and the design team to understand the current and ''•' r' 1%° aF-" V potential future challenges, issues, and opportunities associated with the transportation infrastructure throughout the West Central PROSPECTRD neighborhood . Fehr & Peers is also focusing on the existing and future or conditions and identifying areas of concern for Prospect Road from X o Shields Street to College Avenue . N J o O 2 � U � w The West Central community is within the heart of Fort Collins and is in o close proximity to the main campus of Colorado State University (CSU ), DRAKE RD College Avenue, and Horsetooth Reservoir. It is bounded by Mulberry Street to the north, Taft Hill Road to the west, Drake Road to the south, WEST CENTRAL ARE and Mason Trail and Shields Street to the east ( see Figure 1 ) . PLAN BOUNDARIES FIGURE 1 : STUDY AREA MAP HISTORY In 1999, a group of citizens, business owners, residents, developers, City staff, and the general public developed the original West Central Neighborhoods Plan . Its vision was to " maintain and enhance the diverse character . . . strengthen the collaboration between the City, CSU, and neighborhood . . . provide housing opportunities, infrastructure, and lifestyle . . . facilitate and improve existing transportation systems . . . adapt to meet the needs of the dynamic and ever-changing neighborhood . . and provide opportunities in development, redevelopment, and maintenance. " The plan identified three major goal topics: ( 1 ) character of the neighborhoods, ( 2 ) housing , and ( 3 ) transportation . Within each topic there are subcategories with specific goals to address the most important issues, challenges, and opportunities. There were 27 goals for transportation, which are summarized below : • Provide clear, distinctive rights - of - way for all modes of travel and increase the number of alternative mode trips by neighborhood residents. • Develop ordinances that are enforceable and enforced . • Improve the efficiency, safety, and convenience for all modes and provide the highest levels- of - service for all modes of travel . • Create design standards for new streets to have a better sense of "neighborhood . " ,� D5 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study • Maintain safe access for children traveling to/from the neighborhood schools. • Provide connectivity for pedestrians throughout the neighborhood and link to primary destinations. • Allow bicyclists to travel freely, conveniently, and efficiently . • Ensure bus routes are safe, convenient, frequent, and efficient while serving the demand . • Provide adequate parking for the neighborhood land uses and limit the overflow from CSU , shopping centers, and park events onto residential streets. • Maintain all types of infrastructure on a regular schedule or as needed and to equal levels of satisfaction. The original West Central Neighborhoods Plan outlined policies and plans for the three main goal topics. The transportation section focused on improving the " movement of goods, services, and people within the planning area in a safe and efficient manner and to help encourage the use of alternative transportation modes. " The plan also provided a list of improvements related to transportation . The status of the projects mainly fit into four categories—completed , ongoing , partially completed, or not completed . The completed projects include the following : • A pedestrian and bicycle signal was installed on Prospect Road just to the west side of the intersection with Heatheridge Road . • Centre Avenue was constructed from Research Boulevard to Prospect Road with a bridge over Spring Creek Trail . The trail connects to the Mason Trail . • Taft Hill Road was widened in the vicinity of Blevins Middle School to accommodate bike lanes and complete the sidewalks. • Pedestrian crossing markings were added or improved at major intersections. • Constitution Avenue near Valley Forge Avenue, Scarborough Drive, and Stuart Street has been restriped to provide narrower travel lanes, bike lanes, and on - street parking . There have been crosswalks, school crossing signs, and speed detection signs installed along the roadway, where necessary. These improvements are mild traffic- calming devices to increase the safety for all transportation modes. • Bike lanes were added to the following roadways: o Centre Avenue from Research Boulevard to Prospect Road , o Research Boulevard from Centre Avenue to Drake Road , o Lake Street from Shields Street to College Avenue ( defined as a functional alternative to Prospect Road ) , and o Lynnwood Drive from Prospect Road to Springfield Drive (currently has sharrows and is slated to have a bike facility added in the near future ) . • A pedestrian path was constructed at these locations: o Between the canals from Spring Creek Trail to Centre Avenue, D6 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado o Links from Red Fox Meadows to the surrounding neighborhoods, Stuart Street, and Taft Hill Road , and o College Avenue via the underpass under the railroad tracks. • Sidewalks and street crossings were installed at these locations: o Taft Hill Road to Sheffield Street ( pedestrian / bicycle - activated signal ) and o Taft Hill Road on the east side near Blevins Middle School . • A " good neighbor" educational program created to increase awareness of the community expectations. The Fort Collins Neighborhood Services department provides various programs and resources for the citizens to utilize . Some of the resources are : Nextdoor — a private social network, videos and articles on hot topics, adopt- a - neighbor, and links to rules and regulations. See Figure 2 for a map of these completed projects. Ongoing projects include: • Neighborhood organizations and City staff work together to ensure the posted speed limits are accurate and to install adequate signage to notify drivers of speed limit. • Regular monitoring and enforcement of speeds. An educational program is ongoing to prevent speeding and educate drivers of the potential consequences. Where speeding is a chronic problem, the community will work with City staff to implement traffic- calming devices. • Crash reports are monitored to identify trends and problematic locations. • Bicycle plans are coordinated between the City and CSU . • Bike lanes need to have sufficient width on major arterials and , where necessary, street- widening projects should be added to the Capital Improvement Plan ( CIP ) . • The snow removal system continues to be modified for bicycle and pedestrian access around West Central Area and CSU . • Allocation of funds to the school crossing guard program and busing services. • Periodic surveys of transit users to understand the demand and needs of the users. • Citywide policy and street design standard for bicycle left- turn movements through major intersections. The 2008 Bicycle Plan includes some guidelines on bikeway design and innovative solutions for bicycle left-turn movements. The Bicycle Plan is concurrently being updated with this study and will include policies and street design standards for bicycle left-turn movements. Partially completed projects include the following : • Taft Hill Road was widened from Elizabeth Street to Mulberry Street to allow for wider sidewalks and bike lanes. The sidewalks continue to be five feet wide, but bike lanes have been added to the roadway. • Drake Road and Constitution Avenue crosswalks were replaced with colored , stamped concrete to enhance the pedestrian crossing and provide a neighborhood entryway design . It was recommended that the crossing distance be reduced ; however, this was not completed with the enhancements. r� ,� D7 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study • The east crosswalk at the Stuart Street and Heatheridge Road intersection was reconstructed as a raised crosswalk to enhance the pedestrian crossing and provide a neighborhood entryway design . It was recommended that the crossing distance be reduced ; however, this was not completed with the reconstruction . • Some of the existing , underutilized pedestrian links were enhanced within the neighborhoods. • The size and schedule frequency of buses during low - demand times was reduced as necessary . • Parking solutions were developed to reduce parking issues within the neighborhood . The City provides the Residential Parking Permit program, which is a voluntary opt- in program that restricts parking locations and times. There is only one neighborhood in the West Central Area that is a part of this program, which is the Sheely/Wallenberg neighborhood . • CSU has identified locations where seven new parking facilities should be installed . The most recent Transportation and Parking Master Plan (April 2014 ) discusses the timeline for implementation . The projects that have not been completed and should be reevaluated in this study include the following : • Intersection improvements for increasing pedestrian and bicycle safety on Prospect Road at Whitcomb Street and Shields Street. These intersections currently provide crosswalks, push buttons, and pedestrian signal heads; however, no additional improvements have been implemented since the original plan . • Neighborhood entryway design features were proposed to provide reduced and safer pedestrian crossing distance at these intersections: o Taft Hill Road and Stuart Street, o Prospect Road and Constitution Avenue, and o Elizabeth Street and Constitution Avenue. • Landscaped medians along Prospect Road between Taft Hill Road and Shields Street. • Traffic-calming devices along Springfield Drive to increase the safety for all modes. • Designated bikeways were identified for the following roadways: o Valley Forge Road from Taft Hill Road to Constitution Avenue, o Heatheridge Road from Stuart Street to Prospect Road , o Springfield Drive from City Park Avenue to Shields Street ( already a bike route west of City Park Avenue ) , o Skyline Drive from Orchard Place to Crestmore Place ( one 200 -foot block between two bikeways ), and o Hobbit Street from Shields Street to Spring Creek Trail ( currently has a worn dirt trail ) . • Sidewalks and street crossings to be installed or improved at these locations: o Taft Hill Road between Prospect Road and Mulberry Street, D8 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado o Intersection of Prospect Road and Shields Street, o Prospect Road near Castle Rock Drive, o Prospect Road from Shields Street east to College Avenue (this will be included in the current study ), and o Lake Street from Shields Street east to College Avenue (this will be included in the current study ) . • Cost- effective methods to collect riders within the West Central Area and connect to the local and regional transit routes. • City parking regulations and codes to be reviewed and changed to address parking issues. Parking at Rolland Moore Park should be increased . It was recommended that the current facilities increase the number of parking spaces and during special events utilize off - site lots. The 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan set the groundwork for setting the community goals, defining neighborhood policies, and identifying deficiencies in the transportation infrastructure . Many of the listed projects have been completed , and those that have not been completed will be reevaluated to potentially be included within the recommendation of the updated Plan . The original Plan provides guidelines for the visioning of the updated Plan and will be utilized to ensure the updated Plan continues to meet the expectations of the community members. See Figure 2 for a map of the projects from the 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan that have been completed . The 1999 vision was to " maintain and enhance the diverse character . . . strengthen the collaboration between the City, CSU , and neighborhood . . . provide housing opportunities, infrastructure, and lifestyle . . . facilitate and improve existing transportation systems . . . adapt to meet the needs of the dynamic and ever-changing neighborhood . . and provide opportunities in development, redevelopment, and maintenance. " r� ,� D9 City Park City Park Q N y Lake W MULBERRY ST m (AZ D m 0 E MULBERRY ST 1 O O a J a ^� I C I LAURELST Z ELAUREL ST = r 0 I I v W PLUM ST I LJ 0 ccLu T > L W ELIZAB TH ST I I Q E ELIZABETH ST I Colorado State University � W I J Legend I Z ml 0 C D O I u Ped/Bike Signal J I 7 w l N Bike Lane 0 E PITKIN ST Sidewalk z 0 I Pedestrian Path W LAKE ST I U I W LAKE ST _ _ _ New Road I _ _ _ _ _ _ 1 � Traffic Calming W PROSPECT RD 1 E PROSPECT RD Roadway Widening I I General Completed Projects • Pedestrian crossing markings were added or improved 1 at major intersections. W STUART ST 1 E STUART ST 1 • A "good neighbor" educational program was created to 1 ae NDn increase awareness of community expectations. 44/ hP Q Z to Note: Projects shown are those that have been completed ZRolland Moore Colorado State I COLUMBIA RD from the West Central Neighborhoods Plan (1999). Only u Community Park University I projects listed in the West Central Neighborhoods Plan q� Veterinary Hospitall are illustrated. Other improvements may also have occurred. 9 Fi 10y`L i 0 1,000 2,000 4,OOeet igure 2 I W DRAKE RD 1 _ E DRAKE RD West Central Neighborhoods Plan (1999) Improvements West Central Area Plan Fort Collins, Colorado LITERATURE REVIEW Fort Collins values its transportation network and understands the need for accessibility, mobility, and capacity associated with all modes: automobile, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit. Recently the City has worked with consultant teams and citizens to evaluate each transportation element and to develop the Transportation Master Plan (TMP ) ( February 2011 ) and City Plan ( February 2011 ) . These master plans were reviewed along with the following studies/plans: 1 ) 2008 Bicycle Plan ( October 2008 ) This plan covered the traditional four " E 's"— engineering , education, encouragement, and enforcement as well as three additional components — economy, environment and community, specifically targeting the values expressed by Fort Collins residents. The 2008 bikeway network consisted of approximately 280 miles of bicycle lanes, 30 miles of hard - surfaced , multi - use paths, and many more miles of local street bicycle routes. Future bike lane projects will take place in tandem with new street construction or reconstruction of existing facilities, as established in the City ' s Master Street Plan . The City will continue to explore rail and water corridors for future multi - use path development, as well as signal detection loops and innovative bicycle traffic solutions. Some bike facilities that were considered are bike boxes and bike boulevards. "The City will improve multimodal connectivity by expanding opportunities for linking multiple transportation modes through construction of facilities such as bicycle parking at transit stops/stations and the installation of showers and changing rooms at major destinations." The improvements identified in the Bicycle Plan within the West Central Area neighborhood are listed in Table 1 . It should be noted that this plan is currently being updated ( 201 A ) . 2 ) Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Final Report (August 2009) The Transit Strategic Plan ( TSP ) was a collaborative effort between the City of Fort Collins - Transfort, the City of Loveland - COLT, and the Poudre School District ( PSD) . It updated the 2002 Transfort Strategic Operating Plan ( TSOP ), the 200A COLT Transit Plan, and an analysis of the opportunities public transportation offers PSD high schools. The plan also addressed the Mason Corridor MAX project and its impact on othier transit services within the City ; identified funding mechanisms and practical phasing options; and developed financial solutions required to create and sustain a high - performing transit system . Six primary goals were developed to guide the development of this plan : ( 1 ) meet the Transportation Master Plan and City plan policies, ( 2 ) exceed the 2008 Climate Action Plan goal, ( 3 ) provide enhanced mobility for transit- dependent populations, (A ) develop a transit system that reduced roadway - related costs, ( 5 ) provide funding recommendation for implementation and ( 6 ) stimulate the local economy . The plan outlined three phases of proposed phased service concepts: • Phase 1 — Planned near-term ( 3 - year horizon ) transit service improvements that were recommended to enhance efficiency . These improvements included changes in the schedules of seven routes, the elimination of one route, the addition of one route, and the implementation of MAX and coordination of other routes. Partial implementation of Phase 1 occurred in May 201 A with the implementation of MAX BRT service, full Phase 1 improvements are yet to be fully realized . r� fig D 1 1 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study • Phase 2 — short-term ( 5 -year horizon ) solutions to provide better connectivity and accessibility locally and regionally . This phase recommended significant expansion of the current transit service in Fort Collins, additional regional connections to Denver, and continued refinement of local routes to coordinate with MAX . Phase 2 introduces a transition to a grid network in Fort Collins and provides greater route coverage, higher service frequencies, and longer span of service. A portion of the Phase 2 recommendations have been implemented . • Phase 3 — long -term (7- year horizon ) plan for additional transit growth in Fort Collins. This phase included longer service hours and limited Sunday transit service, as well as expansion of regional service to Denver, Boulder, Berthoud , and Longmont. This phase assumed the implementation of additional MAX services that extend outside of the Mason Corridor and completed the transition to a full grid network in Fort Collins. In May 201 A, the MAX had its grand opening to showcase the newest transit link in Fort Collins. This Bus Rapid Transit ( BRT) system runs along the Mason Corridor from the South Transit Center ( south of M Harmony Road ) to downtown . It serves the major (11 / _ i activity and employment centers of Fort Collins. It links kiu I ' transit routes, park- n - rides, and trails, while minimizing delays as compared to those experienced on parallel 1 corridors. 3 ) Master Street Plan ( 201 1 ) The Master Street Plan (MSP ) is a map of the City ' s long - range vision for its major street network. This includes existing and future vehicle, bicycle , and pedestrian connections throughout the City and its growth management area . The MSP also reflects the classification of roadways ( collector, arterial, etc. ) and the general location for planning transportation connections. Final street alignments are determined and designed at the time of development. One of the major outcomes of the 2010 - 11 update was that no streets were identified to change their current street classification through the 2035 horizon year. This indicates that the current roadway network provides adequate capacity for the existing and projected vehicle volumes. In some cases, the updated plan proposed to reduce the classification for specific street segments to redefine the purpose and mode (hierarchy. The MSP also includes an overlap map to identify roadways that should be redesigned as Enhanced Travel Corridors ( ETC ) . ETCs provide direct and accessible connections between major activity centers like downtown, CSU, Midtown, employment centers, shopping destinations, and neighborhoods. While ETCs have a general purpose to decrease travel times along the corridor, each individual corridor will have a different, unique way to provide the specific needs and connections. The ETCs are defined as special focus areas that emphasize enhanced infill and redevelopment along the corridor and define space for each of the travel modes. The City ' s current ETCs include : • College Avenue/Mason Corridor — connecting downtown to the communities approximately 1/2 mile south of Harmony Road (Mason Corridor Environmental r� D 12 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado Assessment Technical Report was completed in 2008, the MAX BRT Re - evaluation was completed in 2010, and the Midtown in Motion : College Avenue Transportation Study is ongoing ) ; • Harmony Road — connecting 1 - 25 to Front Range Community College ( FRCC ), which will be extended to the Mason Corridor ( Harmony Road ETC Master Plan and Alternatives Analysis was completed in 201 3 ) ; Mountain Vista Drive/North College Avenue Corridor — connecting the Downtown Transit Center to Mountain Vista neighborhood ; • Prospect Road ( from CSU /Mason to 1 - 25 ) ; • Timberline Road / Power Trail — connecting Harmony Road to Mountain Vista ; and • West Elizabeth Street (from CSU to Overland /CSU Foothills) . 4 ) Pedestrian Plan ( February 201 1 ) The Pedestrian Plan outlined issues and proposed solutions to problems for pedestrians with the ultimate goal of providing safe, easy, and convenient pedestrian travel for all members of the community. This effort also updated and prioritized the City ' s list of pedestrian improvement projects and explored potential funding options. The purpose of the Pedestrian Plan was to promote a pedestrian - friendly environment that will encourage the choice to walk for visitors, students, and residents. The plan utilized a new analysis GIS tool that forecasted pedestrian demand using citywide " indices" of walking demand . These forecasts were used to evaluate future pedestrian improvements. The 2010 - 11 update includes a Cpllln` pedestrian priority project list. This list combines 1 'edestrianPlan *front remaining 2004 Capital Improvement Program ( CIP ) projects and new projects identified by citizens over the sh� MA previous year. The improvements identified in the Pedestrian Plan within the West Central Area neighborhood are listed in Table 1 . 5 ) Colorado State University Master Plan Update (Spring 2012 ) The CSU Master Plan is the document that maps the physical needs of the University and provides a tool to assess and plan for the future. This document provided University leadership with an outline of current and future program needs and budget requirements to successfully direct and build a legacy for future generations. This plan provided a collection of maps, conceptual designs, and graphical displays that updated the 2004 Campus Master Plan, including a history of the campus master plan, zoning conditions, projects under construction, funded projects, pedestrian and green space, access, transit, and housing redevelopment. The plan separated the campus into three sections—( I ) Foothills, ( 2 ) Main Campus, and ( 3 ) South Campus—to depict current and future conditions and a framework diagram . FT fig D 13 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study It is important to note that the West Central Area Plan needs to work directly with and complement the plans set forth by CSU . These two locations are connected by transportation elements, citizens, and similar visions. Throughout the process of the West Central Area Plan, the design team will work with those developing the CSU plans. 6) Arterial Intersection Prioritization Study ( March 2012 ) The purpose of the Arterial Intersection Priority Study was to identify intersections that are in need of mobility and safety improvements. This was a data - heavy analysis, which included an evaluation of traffic volume, intersection accidents, intersection delay, pedestrian and bicycle safety and transit operations. The analysis also relied on input from the community to help clarify local concerns and provide input on arterial intersections throughout the City. The community values developed in Plan Fort Collins was used to evaluate the intersections utilizing a data - driven process. The study applied " a wide breadth of evaluation criteria to ensure that the selected projects addressed specific transportation needs and also aligned with the City ' s core values." The evaluation process included three main steps: • Level 1 - Initial screening to identify intersections with the greatest safety and operational needs. Based on those results, and input from staff and others stakeholders, various alternatives or improvement options were developed for further consideration and evaluation . • Level 2 - Detailed evaluation of the alternatives. This evaluation was based on community values and designed to test options to find alternatives that meet these values and address the safety and operational issues identified in the initial screening . • Level 3 - Conceptual designs were developed for the final set of intersections. Thirty -two intersections throughout the City were carried forward from Level 1 to the Level 2 analysis, including four within the West Central area : ( 1 ) Elizabeth Street and Shields Street; ( 2 ) Drake Road and Shields Street; ( 3 ) Drake Road and McClelland Drive; (A ) Drake Road and Redwing Road / Bay Road . Drake Road and Shields Street was the only intersection carried forward to Level 3 concept design . The design for this intersection began in the summer of 201 A, with the main goals to add northbound and southbound right-turn lanes and bring the Shields Street bike lanes up to standard through the intersection . An update to this study is currently in progress. For more details on the performance of intersections within the West Central area , refer to the Intersections section . 7) Capital Improvement Plan Documentation ( December 2012 ) "The Transportation Capital Improvement Plan ( CIP ) is an inventory of all multimodal transportation projects throughout the City and is a part of the Transportation Master Plan (TMP ) . The CIP was updated using an interdisciplinary team and `triple bottom line ' approach that included environmental, economic, and social factors as project prioritization criteria in conjunction with the traditional transportation criteria . The CIP is a tool that facilitates the allocation of resources based on project- and system - level prioritization reflecting the TMP visions and community needs. The focus of the 2012 update was to ensure that the CIP is accurate, up -to - date, and more user -friendly than previous versions by refining project r� D 14 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado rankings, better identifying a fiscally constrained list and assisting with the project selection process for funding and grant applications. The update also supported the action steps specified in the 2011 TMP . This is an administrative update to the CIP ." Source : www.fcgov.com. 8 ) Fort Collins Bikeway System Map ( 2012 ) W Mc ,. ,�� ( � 1 r� + � t ,J ' J C�aOv Max j r The Fort Collins bikeway system map was updated in - - M> e; ""'" "{ ' ` ` '" " 4 l '''�� F W .. fr " lit 9 O°• rM �^� ea 2012 to show the most recent existingand proposed _ 3 aa`aaa I soft- surface multi - use trails hard - surface multi - use trails, ' � Ell si, � • ` 11�y ". 1 , J s.. � ui ra° c i ° J I I ar^' bike lanes, and designated bike routes. The portion of ° ° ' e \ Tj'! : I , •� �il `"^ _° •�• IEM the bike map including the West Central Planning Area r a ! �" is shown in Figure 3 . There are a significant number of on - and off -street bicycle facilities within the West i , !`° �' t".a ° ,^-- 3- w �e Central area that connect to the surrounding � e � � � • ,. ,; 4,t% mi ._° .. m - communities. � ; ` •�.°i �, _ : ...,. f w onu m ;••• see 9 ) Paved Recreational Trail Master Plan ( November 2013 ) FIGURE 3 : BIKEWAY SYSTEM MAP The Paved Recreational Trail Master Plan is the first comprehensive trail - planning effort that has been conducted by the City . The plan looked at how well the trail system is meeting the current needs of the community and how the trail system can be improved to meet future needs. The plan focused primarily on the recreational uses and design of the trail system . The plan proposed recreational trail design standards that are intended to provide trail planners and designers guidance to produce an enjoyable, safe trail system for all users and ensure the trail is durable and efficient to maintain . This plan recommends the expansion of the Mason Corridor shared - use path north of Prospect Road , which has since been implemented along with the neighboring MAX BRT. It also recommends that the Spring Creek Trail, east of Centre Avenue, be replaced and realigned . This project was completed recently, and the Spring Creek Trail has an improved connection to the Mason Trail . 10 ) Student Housing Action Plan ( February 2013 ) The Student Housing Action Plan ' s mission was to "strive to develop community - driven strategies that encourage and provide quality student housing while maintaining neighborhood quality and compatibility . " The purpose of this effort was to work with stakeholders including Colorado State University ( CSU ), Front Range Community College ( FRCC), neighbors, students, property owners, and developers to "identify strategies to address the increasing need for multifamily student housing ; identify key issues for development or redevelopment; and understand potential impacts and compatibility issues. " In particular, staff was asked to address developments near existing single -family residential neighborhoods. As a result of this, the following items have been adopted by City Council : • Apply elements of the Land Use Code and the City ' s development standards for the Medium - Density Mixed - Use Neighborhood zone district. It should be applied to FT V11 D 15 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study all multi -family projects outside of the TOD (transit—oriented development) Overlay Zone by incorporating those requirements into the general standards of the Land Use Code. • Modify requirements in the Neighborhood Conservation zone district to restrict 100 percent secondary uses, such as residential development on land parcels of five acres or less, rather than the previous allowance of 10 acres or less. • Require any multi—family project with greater than 50 units or 75 bedrooms to have a Type 2 Hearing . 1 1 ) Traffic Safety Summary (September 2013 ) This report summarizes the traffic crash history from 2009 to 2013 that have occurred on public streets throughout Fort Collins. It includes a summary of crashes, evaluation of the most common types of crashes, and identification of locations with a high frequency of crashes. For a detailed review of crashes that have occurred within the West Central area , refer to the Crash History section . 12 ) Midtown in Motion : College Avenue Transportation Study ( Ongoing — Expected 2014 ) This is a transportation -focused project for College Avenue from Prospect Road to Harmony Road . College Avenue is the most important north/'south roadway in Fort Collins, but lacks the world class character the corridor deserves and the community desires. Multimodal updates are necessary to support the land use and transportation changes occurring in the corridor. The goals of the plan are to make College Avenue safer for all modes; strengthen bicycle and pedestrian connections to the new MAX route; create a well - functioning , high quality and attractive street; and provide universal designs for all ages and abilities. 13 ) Colorado State University Parking and Transportation Master Plan ( April 2014 ) "This Parking and Transportation Master Plan provided strategies to improve overall campus access, developed a more sustainable program of transportation alternatives, and improved customer service for the CSU community going forward ." This plan included an overview of current parking management strategies, TDM ( Transportation Demand Management) existing conditions and best practices, a community engagement and strategic communications plan, traffic impact assessment and traffic simulation model , PARK + for campus parking and multimodal demand modeling . The key recommendations in this plan that may impact West Central Area neighborhoods are as follows: 1 . Adopt a lower parking space to population ratio as the key parking planning benchmark moves forward . D 16 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado 2 . Develop an aggressive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) and Transportation Alternatives Program . 3 . Prioritize short-term parking development projects. 4 . Integrating the new Around the Horn Internal Campus Circulator Shuttle in late summer 2014 in conjunction with the inauguration of the MAX Bus Rapid Transit Service and Transit Route Enhancements by Transfort. 5 . Determine parking pricing options and mobility management support. 6 . Develop strategic communications, campus parking and mobility program branding and marketing and ongoing program monitoring and benchmarking . 7. Expand local and regional transportation planning and funding strategies. 8 . Adopt a range of new parking and planning technologies. 9 . Leverage parking and transportation to support campus sustainability and climate commitment goals. Kimley - Horn is currently working on the traffic impacts related to the proposed CSU Stadium . The game - day traffic is anticipated to travel along many of the West Central Area arterials and collectors, which may have negative implications when the event traffic enters and exits the area . The study has yet to be accepted and approved ; therefore it has not been included in the literature review. The recommendations from the aforementioned plans to improve the connectivity and /or quality of the roadways, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and transit routes within the West Central neighborhoods are included in Table 1 . The numbers in the source column references to the above list of previous studies and plans. TABLE 1 : RECOMMENDATIONS FROM PREVIOUS PLANS FOR WEST CENTRAL AREA Recommendation Location Source (s ) Castlerock Dr from Prospect Rd to Springfield Dr 11718 Or shared lane markings Constitution Ave from Prospect Rd to Springfield Dr 118 Constitution Ave from Elizabeth St to Prospect Rd 7 Add Bike Lanes Lynwood Dr from Prospect Rd to Springfield Dr 118 Lynwood Dr from Springfield Dr to Stuart St 7 City Park Ave from Mulberry St to Springfield Dr 7 Shields St from Laurel St to Poudre River Trail 117 Prospect Rd from Shields St to Center/Mason Trail 1 Or off-street facility Widen Bike Lanes Taft Hill Rd from Mulberry St to Prospect Rd 117 Elizabeth St west of Taft Hill Rd 1 Install Bike Signage Shields St north of Laurel St 1 Taft Hill Rd from Elizabeth St to Laporte Ave 1 Red D17 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study Recommendation Location Source ( s ) Add Bike Path Expand Mason Corridor Trail North of Prospect Road (complete) 9 Potential Grade Mason Trail and Drake Rd 11317 Separated Crossing Implement new Route 23 with service along Prospect and Stuart 2 Modify Transit Routes Eliminate Route 3 and replace with Route 2 and 23 2 Eliminate Route 1 1 and replace with Route 22 2 Modify Route 2 2 Enhanced Travel Prospect Rd from CSU/Mason Corridor to 1-25 3 Corridor West Elizabeth St from CSU to Overland /CSU Foothills 3 Prospect Rd from Shields St to College Ave 417 Prospect Rd from College Ave to Stover St 4 Install and /or widen Prospect Rd from Stover St to Lemay Ave 4 Sidewalk Shields St from Laurel Ave to Mulberry St 417 Lake St from Shields St to CSU Ped/Bike Path 417 Mulberry St from Shields St to City Park Ave 417 Widen Roadway Elizabeth St from Taft Hill Rd to Constitution Ave (4 lanes) 7 Upgrade to Arterial Prospect Rd from College Ave to Lemay Ave (4 lanes) 7 Standards Taft Hill Rd from Laporte Ave to Prospect Rd (4 lanes) 7 Shields St and Plum St (expected year of construction 2024 ) 13 Add 1 EB left-turn lane and 1 WB left-turn lane Shields St and Elizabeth St (expected year of construction 2024 ) 13 Add 2°d EB left-turn lane, 1 NB right-turn lane, and 1 WB right- turn lane Shields St and Prospect Rd (expected year of construction 2024) 13 Add 1 WB right-turn lane Drake Rd and Shields St 7 Add E/W dual left-turn lanes Intersection Or add E/W Right Turn Lanes and Median 6 Improvements Lake St and Whitcomb St 13 Signalize and add 1 NB left-turn lane Or Roundabout Lake St and Center Ave 13 Add 1 WB left-turn lane Prospect Rd and Whitcomb St 13 Add 2 SB left-turn lanes and make 1 shared through/ right-turn lane; Add 1 NB left-turn lane Prospect Rd and Center Ave 13 Add 1 NB left-turn lane Construct Parking New Parking Garages on CSU Campus: ( 1 & 2 ) On Center Dr north of 13 Facility south campus, ( 3 ) East of Shields St between Elizabeth St and Plum St, (4 ) north of Prospect Rd just east of Whitcomb St, (5 ) south of Pitkin St just west of Meridian Ave, ( 6 ) north of Lake St just west of College Ave, (7) Redwing Rd south of Prospect Rd. D 18 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado The following completed projects were listed in one or more of the previous plans and are in addition to those identified in the 1999 West Central Area Plan ( See History Section ) : • Drake Road from Shields Street to College Avenue: Improve railroad crossing ; add bicycle facilities through College Avenue intersection • Spring Creek Trail from Shields Street to College Avenue : Build a trail providing improved access from Shields Street • Mason Trail / NRRC : Build a grade separated rail crossing • Mason Trail from Drake Road to Prospect Road : Construct the trail • Mason Trail from Spring Creek Trail to Lake Street: Construct the trail DATA COLLECTION Existing data was collected from various sources: Fort Collins staff, CSU consultants, and consultants working on other projects within the City. The following existing data was collected and the format is listed : • Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Counts: PDF and CSU studies • Average Daily Traffic (ADT ) : GIS • Traffic Model : Synchro and TransCAD ( and future data ) • Signal Timing : Synchro • Crash Data : GIS • Pedestrian Facilities: GIS • Bicycle and Pedestrian Counts: PDF and CSU studies • Transit Data : PDF • Cross Section : Aerial photography and GIS • Roadway Classification : GIS • Bike Routes and Facilities: GIS and System Map • Bicycle Level - of - Service: GIS • Parking : Aerial photography • Base Mapping Data including parks, parcels, current development proposals, contours, and hydrology r� ,� D 19 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study EXISTING CONDITIONS : EVALUATION OF WEST CENTRAL AREA The collected data included the entirety of the City of Fort Collins. The first step was to reduce the amount of data to focus on the West Central Area . Then it was reviewed , sorted , processed , and organized by transportation element: roadway, intersection, crash, bicycle and pedestrian, transit, and parking . Geospatial analysis, transportation modeling , and illustrative graphics were created to interpret and reveal patterns, deficiencies, opportunities, and challenges in the existing conditions. The following sections and figures describe the existing conditions within the West Central Area . Level of Service Criteria To measure and describe the operational status of the local roadway network and corresponding intersections, transportation engineers and planners commonly use a grading system called level - of - service ( LOS ) put forth by the Transportation Research Board' s HCM 2000 . LOS characterizes the operational conditions of an intersection ' s traffic flow, ranging from LOS A ( indicating free flow traffic conditions with little or no delay ) to LOS F ( representing over - saturated conditions where traffic flows exceeds the design capacity, resulting in long queues and delays) . These grades represent the perspective of drivers and are an indication of the comfort and convenience associated with driving . Although LOS A through C are desired levels, LOS D is considered acceptable in urban conditions. Traffic conditions with LOS E or F are generally considered unacceptable and represent significant travel delay, increased accident potential, and inefficient motor vehicle operation. Roadways The West Central Area has numerous, important arterials that connect vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles, and transit to the community and the rest of Fort Collins. The main arterials are : Mulberry Street, Elizabeth Street, Prospect Road , Drake Road , Taft Hill Road , and Shields Street. The 2011 Master Street Plan identifies these roadways as four - lane arterials in the existing and future conditions. The MSP highlights Constitution Avenue/ Plum Street, Stuart Street, Lake Street, Centre Avenue, Research Boulevard , and Rolland Moore Road as two - lane collectors. All of these study arterials and collectors are anticipated to have enough capacity for future estimated traffic volumes. Average Daily Traffic (ADT) counts were collected between 2009 and 2014 for arterials, collectors, and local streets. Figure 4 provides the ADT for mid - block locations on arterials, collectors, and local streets throughout the community . The arterial roadways ranged from 10,000 to 33 ,000 vehicles per day (vpd ) . The collectors ranged from 1 , 200 to 8,500 vpd . The local streets ranged from 200 up to 5 , 300 vpd . The relative magnitude of traffic volumes can be seen by the size of the blue circles. As expected , the majority of traffic travels on the arterials with the highest volume on Shields Street. The following ADT ranges occurred on the arterials: • Shields Street: from 20,400 vpd near Mulberry Street to 30,000 vpd near Prospect Road • Taft Hill Road : from 19,500 vpd near Mulberry Street to 24,400 vpd near Drake Road • Mulberry Street: from 9,400 vpd west of the City Park Lake to 16,600 vpd east of the lake • Prospect Road : from 14,900 vpd near Taft Hill Road to 29,700 vpd near the College Avenue • Drake Road : from 19,600 vpd near Taft Hill Road to 29,400 vpd near Research Boulevard D 20 ,� F W City Park a H Z N m cr o 3 o J L Park Lake 9:4 ✓♦16:6 W MULBERRY ST O J O y O N Vl •3.9 VI 20.4 F 1A ua Z 0 OF C W LAUREL ST D 0 z v f a 19.5 26.7 W '� W PLUM ST y 2-7 ♦4.3 0 • 1.3 5 • 5.4 28.2 W UW ELIZABETH ST 16,5J2. 15-3 18A 2.8 Colorado State University Lu33.1 W J Legend O � ' 1.2 • 5.3 I- U Average Daily Traffic Volumes x 1,000 40 ~ EPI IN ST 0 - 3 24.4 N J - - - - z 1 • 4 - 6 u w W LAKE ST ' 1.2 m 1 • 7 - 20 - -- W LAKE ST 6:2� � 7,5 • AWL • 5.2 e 21 - 25 1'4:9 19:8 21-8 24.4�299 W PROSPECT RD • 1.3 22.6 1 • 26 - 33 0 RED FOX MEADOWS 289 1 z — Major Arterial NATURALAREA 1 O W STUART ST // - - 1 - - Z - - - - - -- Arterial �1.4 � FISCHER ,8.8 1 m � Collector ru " NATURAL 1 23.1 , AREA ,�, f _ _ LOCd ligRrST Z �Q�P 1 f Study Area Sa : 1.4 G�? 1 m Average daily traffic volumes were collected at mid-block > 27.6 1 p 1 3 • • 1 z survey locations from 2009-2014. F W X Rolland Moore Colorado State Z 1 W 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 V Community Park 29.4 University 1 Q E Feet LL �9Fs Veterinary Hospital 1 W m9�C J Vl • 6:5--♦•5:7 • 0.8 ROSS 'S 0 _ NATURALAREA 31 2.900 r 244 '; o (A Figure 4 2.91ML • 3.3 1 1ARL 9:6 21-4 • 02 20:9 24:2 26.6 29:4 Existing Roadway W DRAKE RD W Traffic Volumes 3a West Central Area Plan west central area plan and prospect road corridor study A capacity analysis for the roadway segments was performed using the methodology issued within the HCM 2000 . The methodology classifies the arterials based on the distance between intersections and the link speeds. To determine the LOS for arterials, the speed and travel time are calculated . Figure 4 summarizes the roadway LOS calculated in Synchro (version 8, HCM 2000 methodology ) . All roadways operate at LOS D or better, except for the following roadway segments: AM Peak Hour • Elizabeth Street - Eastbound between City Park Avenue and Shields Street • Drake Road - Eastbound between Bay Road and MAX Westbound between Worthington Avenue and Shields Street • Shields Street - Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road Northbound between Stuart Street and Prospect Road • Whitcomb Street - Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road • Center Avenue — Northbound and Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road PM Peak Hour • Taft Hill Road - Southbound between Valley Forge Avenue and Drake Road • Shields Street - Southbound between Plum Street and Elizabeth Street Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road Southbound between Centre Avenue and Drake Road • Whitcomb Street - Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road • Center Avenue - Northbound and Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road Westbound between Research Boulevard and Shields Street • Elizabeth Street - Eastbound between City Park Avenue and Shields Street • Drake Road - Eastbound between Research Boulevard and Bay Road Westbound between Worthington Road and Shields Street Intersections The traffic operations analysis evaluated stop -controlled and signalized intersection operations using the procedures and methodologies contained in the HCM 2000 for the weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic operations. Study intersection operations were evaluated using LOS calculations as analyzed in the Synchro software (version 8 ) . Intersection Level of Service The LOS is determined differently depending on the type of control at the intersection . At signalized intersections, the operation analysis uses various intersection characteristics ( such as traffic volumes, lane geometry, and signal phasing ) to estimate the intersection ' s volume -to -capacity (v/c) ratio. For signalized r� D 22 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado intersections the HCM defines the intersection LOS as the average delay per vehicle for the overall intersection, which includes all movements and approaches. At stop -controlled intersections, the operation analysis uses various intersection characteristics ( such as traffic volumes, lane geometry, and stop -controlled approaches) to estimate the intersection ' s volume -to- capacity (v/c) ratio. For stop - controlled intersections the HCM defines the intersection LOS as the average delay per vehicle for the worst approach intersection . Table 2 summarizes the relationship between delay and LOS for stop -controlled and signalized intersections. TABLE 2 : INTERSECTION LEVEL-OF-SERVICE CRITERIA StoppedAverage Levelmofm so Description e A < 10 < 10 Very low delay. Most vehicles do not stop . B > 10 to 20 > 1 0 to 15 Generally good progression of vehicles. Slight delays. C > 20 to 35 > 15 to 25 Fair progression. Increased number of stopped vehicles. p > 35 to 55 > 25 to 35 Noticeable congestion . Large portion of vehicles stopped . E > 55 to 80 > 35 to 50 Poor progression . High delays and frequent cycle failure . F > 80 > 50 Oversaturation. Forced flow. Extensive queuing . Source: Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, 2000), Capacity Analysis Turning movement counts were provided by the City of Fort Collins and the consultant team working with CSU ' s master plans. The hourly intersection counts were collected between 2012 and 2013 . This study focused on the arterial /arterial and arterial collector intersections. Twenty -seven intersections were evaluated . The majority of the study intersections are signalized , with three stop -controlled intersections on Lake Street. The existing intersection operations were analyzed with the AM and PM peak hours. The existing Synchro model, provided by the City, included the existing roadways, intersection geometry, traffic control , signal timing , and traffic parameters ( e. g . peak hour factor) . The lane configurations and intersection peak hour factors were verified and updated as necessary . FT ,1 D 23 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study Analysis included assessing the delay, LOS performance, and queuing for each of the studied intersections. The existing conditions provided a baseline for the future analyses. The capacity analysis indicated that all of the intersections currently operate at LOS D or better in both peak hours. Table 3 provides the existing overall and approach delay and LOS for the study intersections. The overall intersection LOS is bold . TABLE 3: WEST CENTRAL AREA EXISTING INTERSECTION LEVEL-OF-SERVICE 2012/2013 Existing No. Intersection Control Approach Delay • Delay • Overall 16 B 20 C Taft Hill Rd and EB 34 C 36 D 1 Signal WB 27 C 23 C Mulberry St NB 5 A 11 B SB 11 B 18 B Overall 29 C 36 D EB 42 D 51 D 2 Mulberry St and Signal WB 28 C 40 D Shields St NB 16 B 21 C SB 26 C 34 C Overall 7 A 20 B Shields St and Laurel Signal WB 46 D 45 D 3 St NB 4 A 13 B SB 3 A 11 B Overall 12 B 10 A Shields St and Plum EB 52 D 66 E 4 Signal WB 36 D 51 D St/ North Dr NB 9 A 3 A SB 6 A 5 A Overall 18 B 25 C Taft Hill Rd and EB 32 C 34 C 5 Signal WB 29 C 37 D Elizabeth St NB 10 A 12 B SB 14 B 22 C Overall 5 A 6 A EB 4 A 4 A Elizabeth St and b Signal WB 2 A 4 A Constitution Ave NB 20 B 21 C SB 21 C 22 C Overall 6 A 8 A EB 2 A 2 A 7 Elizabeth St and City Signal WB 3 A 4 A Park Ave NB 20 B 23 C SB 20 B 21 C Overall 18 B 42 D Shields St and EB 47 D 78 E 8 Signal WB 49 D 48 D Elizabeth St NB 7 A 24 C SB 8 A 40 D Overall 7 A 8 A Shields St and Lake Signal WB 47 D 51 D 9 Rd NB 5 A 5 A SB 7 A 2 A D 24 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado No . Intersection Control Approach Delay • Delay • EB 12 B 12 B 10 Lake Rd and 4 -Way WB 10 B 13 B Whitcomb St Stop NB 13 B 11 B SB 9 A 11 B 11 Lake Rd and Center Side Street EB 10 A 8 A Ave Stop WB 10 A 9 A NB 10 A 8 A EB 7 A 4 A 12 Lake Rd and East Dr Side Street WB 0 A 0 A Stop NB 10 B 10 B Overall 22 C 21 C 13 Taft Hill Rd and EB 35 C 31 C WB 30 C 32 C Prospect Rd Signal NB 13 B 12 B SB 19 B 15 B Overall 35 C 29 C 14 Prospect Rd and EB 44 D 44 D WB 50 D 44 D Shields St Signal NB 32 C 22 C SB 18 B 18 B Overall 7 A 14 B 15 Prospect Rd and EB 2 A 3 A WB 7 A 10 A Whitcomb St Signal NB 45 D 37 D SB 48 D 49 D Overall 19 B 22 C 16 Prospect Rd and EB 12 B 14 B WB 13 B 13 B Center Ave Signal NB 41 D 42 D SB 37 D 46 D Overall 7 A 8 A 17 Shields St and Stuart EB 46 D 52 D St Signal NB 2 A 6 A SB 5 A 6 A Shields St and Overall 2 A 4 A 18 Rolland Park Access WB 50 D 55 D Rd / Rolland Moore Signal NB 1 A 2 A Dr SB 1 A 3 A Overall 19 B 29 C Shields St and EB 43 D 44 D 19 Raintree Dr/ Centre Sinal WB 36 D 78 E Ave g NB 12 B 11 B SB 20 B 26 C Overall 5 A 6 A Taft Hill Rd and 20 WB 35 C 37 D Valley Forge Ave Signal NB 2 A 2 A SB 3 A 4 A 0 D 25 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study 2012/2013 Existing No. Intersection Control Approach Delay • Delay • Overall 26 C 29 C 21 Taft Hill Rd and EB 33 C 32 C WB 31 C 29 C Drake Rd Signal NB 23 C 30 C SB 21 C 26 C Overall 5 A 4 A 22 Drake Rd and EB 2 A 4 A Constitution Ave Signal WB 2 A 3 A SB 40 D 23 C Overall 7 A 7 A EB 2 A 7 A 23 Drake Rd and Dunbar WB 3 A 5 A Ave Signal NB 36 D 21 C SB 33 C 21 C Overall 35 C 41 D 24 Drake Rd and Shields EB 44 D 59 E WB 53 D 36 D St Signal NB 31 C 36 D SB 21 C 39 D Overall 6 A 7 A 25 Drake Rd and WB 3 A 2 A Worthington Ave Signal NB 49 D 47 D SB 48 D 52 D Overall 11 B 20 B Drake Rd and EB 3 A 6 A 26 Research Blvd / WB 10 A 17 B Meadowlark Ave Signal NB 44 D 42 D SB 43 D 57 E Overall - B - C EB - C - D Drake Rd and Signal / WB - B - B 27 Redwing Rd /Bay Stop (SB NB ( Bay Rd) - D - E Rd/McClleland * Bay Rd ) Ng (McClleland ) B C SB (MAX) - D - D * This intersection is very complex and includes two intersections that operate as one. The peak hour LOS was provided by the City of Fort Collins since this intersection has unconventional traffic control. Figure 5 provides the existing roadway level of service. Figure 6 illustrates the lane configuration, traffic control and turning movement counts for the studied intersections within West Central Area . The figure also provides the level - of- service for the AM and PM peak hours for the existing conditions. D 26 ,� W MULBERRY ST W MULBERRY ST I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 1 W ELIZABETH ST W ELIZABETH ST I I Ir' I I o f If g l — N ` N IN IN N 1 I N I W LAKE ST �` — — — — — � � W LAKE ST — — — — — — — IW PROSPECT RD I II I I W PROSPECT RD � I c I LL I I I 1 I Pie I I P�� I I I I I 'pe. I I I `9 ao I 1 I f I W DRAKE RD Q � I W DRAKE RD AM Level of Service PM Level of Service Legend I � StudyArea Level of Service . Major Arterial A or B �• — Arterial — C Figure 5 — Collector ° Existing Roadway Level of Service Local � E or F o T,000 z,000 a,00eet West Central Area Plan 0 J W_ Z � Z c- - g 24 61 > 35 (139;i r=rad �- 113 (243) `�„ � 109 (120) ( ) 121 (531 ) N 1 r68 (221) ) 51® 12 (19) )27s (703) Q Wrlos (341) Laurel St38 (80) Mulberry5t ♦ E Weeeeee p♦ lake St I165 (262) I m 81 (35) t �.l y r 76 (360) City 92 (70) �r _ 3 w U43 (459) —� - 124 105 638 (463) —t. U L O J 55 (179) 25 (30) 00 Mulberry St t♦p� 57 (42) �e� o m or 1 Q 38 (27) o yt 293 (218) _ 103 (64) ` g fk- 38 (90) A r_ 1 - 136 (441) Y -- zr�lr � 4 : Z Y 1k 31 (72) O _ G Elbabeth St o <o 5 12 52 (59) -o ( ) Q r 391 (483) �� 9 32 0 T 39 (63) �1 1 fi (60) _ WPLUM ST W Pm,n so - � lIe- 31 (58) A 53 (64) tW-- 26 (11) - �— _ a 50 (53) 161 (102) �l � 91 (316) 39 (56)70 (162) W EL BETH SIT - ® Lake St elzabethSt at 115 (145) --A �� w 133 (98) 233 (151) __4 268 (296) —t. 4 *g 40 (74) 72 (159) 128 (144) ---A CN M 2 - �-� 15 (47) p v m Lake St 1150 (622) F m - 2 (q) 154 (94) 1k 2 (39) 5 (4) 44 (188) 32 (46) er eimne<n sr Mee, F 11 r 4 (51) 11 r 21 (113) ® a' E PI KI ) a N '4 490 (531) 0 Elimbeth St R �� Lake St �v ` —► U 286 (318) - A I ♦p� Z " m Q - f1L 152 (52) 5 (6) ---Se, o 2 ) �— 575 (957) Ve 84 (334) ST 60 ( 9 )85 (236) Legend �l122 (346) 11 Rd 1L r qg (227) Q W 98 (28) �r r �� WCAP Study Area W PROSPECT RD J 760 (808) —� PfOSpM Rd 1P1 (gg) 90 (70)' ��' ` m - , Signalized 411 (219) —� I -- w U U N Stop Controlled Lane Configuration 115 (151 r RED FOX MEADOWS /� 217 (625) �l 2 r NATURALAREA 11 r 86 (242) VV"' O Illegal Movement stoam st l9 Q m AM PM Peak Hour Traffic Prospect Rd �r Z N �� 155 (64) ( ) O 234 (147) J 78 (66) -ter I^ ~ 432 (1001) AM Peak LOS .l 697 (409) 77 (71) a m w �k, r 17 (31) w ST(JAR. ST + ' - 175 (152) � N mom P 111 (32) �r • P LOSeA or Bak S ce C e � 16 (17) 836 (668) y LOS C 18 12 O r 116'(22) 17 (7) 0 LOS D 1D (�) v ~ Rolland Moore ♦♦ • LOS L or L h O m a 1 (1 fi) T IIeI W Valley Forge (1) J — y�. 47 65 ♦p� = - 40 (101) " 3 2 3 (30) �1 Note P ( ) O "_ F� - �t� O- - 137 (62) 6 (23) _ C 388 (1025) 343 (1059) F- 533 (1296) 55 (39) r, A � r 22 (118) I�. r 24 (97) Mee,Drake Rd m � 21 (114) 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 = 3 (8) Drake 'd(,) 0 30 (151) 1 + : - Drake y d.l + r 43 (177) �o . � 62�25) �t ) 1 r Feet 834 (673) 935 (667) —i _ y t : � 959 (804) —t. 41 Drake at Bay/ Redwig SB is stop controlled 00 69 (82) �e m Ra97 (125)�Itre t �fL 27 (33) �� Pe NN 156 (61) —. o � 26 (3) Figure 6 h m 135 (KS: 30 (87) # 823 (1295) 4 141 (526: W D E R ® � r 65 (50) r55 (170) Drake Rd (� Existing Intersection w °)Drake � � TTr a 1 '` ,W Aw 57 (1068' —' Volumes and Level of Service 363 (287) —� _ aapt' /y- wy, 9 (12) 54 (279) � ,i . - i1L a. .:a.i h. y�i . L '.-. :' s .. a+ .L ef . West Central Area Plan Fort Collins, Colorado Crash History The City of Fort Collins regularly analyzes the crash trends for the entirety of the City . The purpose of the document is to track progress on mitigation measures implemented to reduce crashes and severity, as well as to determine the appropriate strategies and countermeasures needed to achieve the set crash reduction goals. The latest Traffic Safety Summary was completed in 2013 and provided a description of crash history along public streets in Fort Collins between years 2008 and 2012 . This section provides a summary of traffic crashes within the West Central Area which was extrapolated from the data and methodology utilized in the 20 7 3 Traffic Safety Summary. The 2073 Traffic Safety Summary shows the distribution of all Fort Collins crashes by a number of variables including type of crash, severity, day of week, time of day, location and age . The study performed an additional analysis to identify intersections that experienced more crashes than was expected . Variables used to determine this include traffic volume, roadway geometry and type of traffic control . This analysis applies a methodology published by the Transportation Research Board ( TRB ) and American Association of State Highway and Transportation officials (AASHTO ) in the Highway Safety Manual (HSM) that accounts for the random nature of crashes. The state - of -the practice method compares the actual reported crashes to the predicted number of crashes. To predict the anticipated number of crashes, this method utilizes a regression equation to estimate the number of crashes based on the traffic volumes, roadway geometry, and type of traffic control . If the experienced number of crashes exceeds the number of crashes predicted by the model, than it is identified as a location that has an unusually high number of crashes. Fort Collins utilizes the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ( NHTSA) study to estimate the cost of the experienced and predicted number of crashes. The difference in cost is the Annual Excess Expected Crash Value . The cost of safety improvements needs to be considered in order to understand the cost- benefit ratio . Table 4 lists the top ten intersections within the West Central Area based on excess crash cost per year, based on the cost associated with crashed of each level of severity . TABLE 4: WCAP INTERSECTIONS WITH HIGHEST EXCESS CRASH COST PER YEAR Model Predicted Actual Adjusted Intersection Crashes Per Year Crashes Per Year Excess Crash and Cost Prop.AADT Fatal/ Fatal / Streetl Street2 Total Injury Total Injury Damage Only Shields St Elizabeth St 411137 19. 2 4.7 27.6 5 .8 7.2 1 .2 $ 206,516 Shields St Plum St 31 ,754 1 1 . 1 2.8 16.5 3.9 4.3 1 . 1 $ 173, 120 Shields St Stuart St 29,776 4.2 1 .0 6.3 2. 3 0.8 1 .3 $ 161 ,075 Heatheridge Rd Prospect Rd 23,300 2. 1 0A 3.9 0.9 1 A 0.5 $71 ,494 Shields St Mulberry St 35,433 14.7 3 .5 21 .2 3 .5 6.5 0.0 $ 69,081 City Park Ave Elizabeth St 21 ,878 7.4 1 .9 7.6 2.5 -0.4 0.6 $67, 189 Taft Hill Rd Mulberry St 24,908 9A 2 . 3 9. 1 2. 8 -0.8 0.5 $54, 141 Shields St Pitkin St 36,929 3.5 0.7 3.6 1 . 1 -0.3 0.4 $47,864 Shields St Prospect Rd 50,301 26. 1 6. 2 28. 1 6.4 1 .8 0.2 $46,538 City Park Ave Mulberry St 20,576 2.5 0.5 4.0 0.8 1 .3 0.2 $4 Ill 99 r� D 29 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study The intersection with the highest excess number of crashes and associated cost is Shields Street and Elizabeth Street. This is the same intersection with the highest overall delay and LOS in the PM peak hour. It has a high volume of traffic on all approaches with a significant amount of bicycle and pedestrian activity. There are five intersections along Shields Street that are on the top ten list of intersections with safety concerns. Figure 7 illustrates the density of crashes located within the West Central Area ( provided by the City of Fort Collins) . It can be seen that the majority of the arterial /arterial intersections experience a high number of crashes. As seen in Table 4 and in Figure 7, Shields Street has the most safety concerns within the study area . The City of Fort Collins further evaluated the crash data to identify locations with crashes involving bicycles and pedestrians. Figure 7 provides a graphical representation of the bicycle - related crashes within the West Central Area . There were over 12 crashes between 2009 and 2013 on Elizabeth Street at two intersections: ( 1 ) Shields Street and ( 2 ) City Park Avenue . This high number of crashes is likely related to the large number of cyclists traveling through the intersection, which are assumed to be destined for the university . Intersections that had between eight and 1 1 crashes during the five - year period include: Taft Hill Road and Elizabeth Street, Shields Street and Prospect Road , Shields Street and Stuart Street, Shields Street and Centre Avenue, and Shields Street and Drake Road . Figure 7 shows a graphical representation of locations where pedestrian - related crashes have occurred . There were three locations within the study area that had four or more pedestrian related crashes between 2009 and 2013 . These locations are ( 1 ) Shields Street and Plum Street, ( 2 ) Prospect Road and Whitcomb Street, and ( 3 ) Prospect Road and College Avenue. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Bicycle and pedestrian facilities serve as an important component of the Fort Collins transportation network by providing transportation options for visitors, students and residents. These facilities are intended to provide safe, easy, and convenient alternatives to driving . They are particularly important in pursuing the long -term goals and vision of the City and promoting an environment where public spaces offer a high level of comfort, convenience, efficiency, quality of experience and safety . Figure 8 shows bicycle and pedestrian volumes at all intersections where data was available. The data was collected from the City and CSU studies. The yellow boxes show AM and PM peak volumes of pedestrians in the crosswalks traveling in both directions. Blue boxes show the same values for bicyclists. Volumes inside of the intersection show bicycle turning movements for bikes riding on the roadway. The highest bicycle volumes were documented at: • Shields Street and Plum Street/North Drive • Shields Street and Elizabeth Street • Prospect Road and Center Avenue • Drake Road and Redwing Road / Bay Road (Mason Corridor) D 30 ,� West Central Area - All Crash Types West Central Area - Bicycle Crashes West Central Area - Pedestrian Crashes 11112009 - 1213112013 11112009 - 1213112013 11112009 - 12/31/2013 rJ , t NNY yf A P � ` i; �IVHlI i� • _ W b 1 W MT w 'RO-SPMNo u - _— ��0��� ■ . p■M.r®O.�IIII1Y W■R . f [�w[�w . ; T ■T. �� .U ■q. '` � - , Ox! ■h (� Figure 7 Crash History West Central Area Plan 0(4) /" 0 (0) a (()) 4— 1 (13) 0 (14) 1 (0) 0 (0) 0 ((1) ] (3) 2 (3) —(• t aaa t City Pa t t 0 (0)-A ) 1 K ' YP7 7 0 (0 •— o (o) 0 0 0 (0)--• •— 0 (0) P o 0 (0) I ,� , (o) '7 0 (0)�' I Ir 0 (o) ^o a o S 0 (0)� ) I 0 (0) 0 1 � 1 � 1 1 0 4-- 1 (5) 1(0) o 1 (4) 0(,) 1 (2) OIO) 1 (1) 1 (3) —(♦ 0 (0) O (0) —(♦ 58 (39) 3 (21) F O (8) 1 (2) - th t atia o f Colorado o � f Legend c o 0 (0) � � 0 (1) ' •� e a 70 (39) o (a) s (0) —� -2 (17) o o WCAP Study Area a^ 0 0 (0) �1 } �r r0 (3) o o W MULBERRY ST 4 (15) al (8)ofuz _ <M( o >6 +>r X (Y) AM (PM) Pedestrian Crossings in Crosswalk 1 1 (3) 0 (4) 12 COM ,K X(Y) AM (PM) Bicycle Crossings in Crosswalk 3 (}}z) ,o�-(ay) 0 (]) 0 X (v) 70) 6 (1) F WLAUREL T �— X (v) AM (PM) Bicycle Turning Movements in t Ir X (v) Roadway Z Data from CSU Master Plan and collected ` o 7 (2}-a f0 S w / 1 from a different source and time On) 0 (0) 2 2 (0 f �- 0 (1) o m (0)�� �{ ° (1) 9 Q - m t o > o t a �. Sao ti (13) 0 (3) on) 1 (o) RED FOX M 1-- o (o) - O 3 (6) 1 D) ---� 2 (0) —�R f �r �- 0 (2) o o NATURALAR 3}i�' 2 (0) t — t •f 0 0 (0) �1 I I 0 (0) o o /\ 1 0= o t _ ol � Io j o ` V 4 (1 0 0) 9 NI-A 1� p (0 0 `. 1 1 M 4— 2(2) O (0) FISCHER 0 N)y �— 0 (0) o o °` 0 (3)� r 0} 0 (0) 0 (0) _ NATURAL a n_ 0 NT-4 R 1I r n (0) AREA W LAK ST 2(U 0(0) --► f /-- o(o) m AKE ST ~ 2 (2) m ' •4'� t o o t 3 (o) w W o (5) .� 1 �. 0 (3) ` `' L oUnive States ' i Nate {- 0 (0) 0 (0) 7 (0) y �— 0 (3) o o Moore W o (o) o(o) —► 2 (1) �1 � � r0 (2) ^o a ity Park University Z t o o W 0 4,000 t aaa oag y Hospi'tbl I 4 -- 2(4) 1 (1) 0 0 0 (0) J Al 0 (0) r. r. 0(2) 0(o) 1— 1M 0 (1) 0(3) 0 (2) —� 0 (0) — } - 0 (1) 0 0 0 (0) 0(0) 2 (0) 1 (1) '--� t oOo t P R 0 (0) � r0 (0) o WSTUA ST 1 t ; (9) ' ; figure 8a (1 w ~ o ") w (3 1 ° `3' 01 � N T � r � l j Existing Bicycle and 1n) odl —► RTRrs��. � c 0)� � I} � � 1 (3) � � 0 � moo ♦ f l 1 4-- 3 (1) ,y Pedestrian Volumes 1 of 2 .. �E ._ _ __s �_ _:, ._ ,_ . _ _ �. .. ,. . , ..• .. .K.....� �- a(1) "�' � � � West Central Area Plan (,) 0 J W_ N Z h H Z 0 W City Park a y N a Q L1Jf'. 4— 1 (25) 0 (0) N g W 3 (27) 0 1 8 (14) 6(3) W W '1 0 (9) 0 (3) 9 (9) 1 (2) J 3 (6) 1 (0) t omiv t UL 'g N'o 0 0 � t o o w � 0 (8) o m^ o � � � e 'o o 2 (1) J —' o w a o 1 (0}-a ° (1 85 (7) —op } � 2 (55) o v 0 1 (1� j � 0 (a) .y g 47 (,6)—� f �3 (4fi o 1 (0) � ° (a) 9 62 (38)—� �3 (69) o o " ° r o (o M ° (°)� � rr � ° ( a� a -- "ems �-- 0 (27) 2 (17) \� 1 g ♦ v 1 (38) 0 (8) 1402) 6 (8) 0 (6) 011:1 291u 2 (8) W ABETH ST end 0 (9) 0 (12) Universit y 4(19) 9(5) Legend w 1 (40) 8(1) Q t o^ a t j WCAP Study Area 0 0 F 4 (7) 2(a) o0 6p-A + R-° (11 L?rT= ; `; X (Y) AM (PM) Pedestrian Crossings in Crosswalk 1 ) o ° 1 (0) 9 �- > V w t o 0 0>` X(Y) AM (PM) Bicycle Crossings in Crosswalk X (Y) o (a} n _ ,� ° 7 w + t- 2 (3) 1 (3) �— X (Y) AM (PM) Bicycle Turning Movements in WLAKE ST 9 ( 8 (103) 0 o F 0 (0) o (o) 1 (2) 3 (1) X (Y) Roadway F 2 ( I�I ° (7) 0 0 (0) 1 (0) o o I ,j1 N o Data from CSU Master Plan and collected I ♦ /� 1!' from a different source and time 4- 0(1) W PROSP + � � W 1 (1) � � 1 � � z (o) �' 2 (3) /-- 1 (3) 1 (3) F1 1 0 0 o t 3 (6) 1 (0) r . F o c 0 (0) U oeo j omo 6 (2) �} RED FOX MEADOWS 0 (3) 1 (3) 0 0 0 (0) � I t I r ° (0) J _ a (1) 9 (3) 0 o NATURALAREA 1 W STUART ST a ' ``� ' 1 Bo(2) 0 (2) 1 (0) 0 (0) ART S. o0 oa 0 0 'r �� r = o (aYr � • !t _ ° (0)� I r 1 (0) - ss f 0s9 St Note o o ( ) �r 00 p (1) "0 o ( ) —• ° ( )o (s) oa) o ( > t OR 7 1 o i,000 z,000 a,000 o ( on) o(o) t - o (0) 0 (o) 0) Fe et oM) 0)t t = 0 o I o 0 Z � z ppp 72 ((2°)) �"f T I NATURALAREA 1 �(0) 00) ' --� Figure 8b 10 WD ERD -- 0 (n) o (o) -- - -- -- - - - Existing Bicycle and 0 (0) o (o) . Pedestrian Volumes 2 of 2 m "' p, mp71p', — West Central Area Plan west central area plan and prospect road corridor study The highest pedestrian volumes were recorded at: • Shields Street and Plum Street/North Drive • Shields Street and Elizabeth Street • Prospect Road and Whitcomb Street • Prospect Road and Center Avenue • Prospect Road and Shields Street • Shields Street and Lake Street Figure 9a depicts the existing bikeways, facility types, and location ( on -street and off - street) within the West Central Area . The map also provides the proposed bike facilities. Figure 9b depicts Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress ( LTS) within the West Central Area . Bicycle crash data is displayed in the previous section on crash history. The bicycle LTS was determined in a concurrent study as part of the 2014 Fort Collins Bicycle Master Plan . The study takes into account several variables to calculate an overall LTS score . The variables included in this study were intersection crossings, traffic speeds, traffic volumes, illegal parking , bike lane width, and number of lanes. The methodology scores each variable for each individual street segment and then combines those variables to calculate the overall LTS score . Figure 9b illustrates three of the input variables (volume stress, intersection stress, and speed stress) in addition to the overall LTS score ( overall stress) . It can be seen that the high traffic volumes significantly contributed to the overall LTS score along Prospect Road east of Shields Street, along Shields Street north of Plum Avenue, and along Mulberry Street east of City Park Avenue . Intersection stress is apparent for segments that intersect with arterials. Speed stress is also apparent along the majority of arterials including Drake Road , Prospect Road , Shields Street ( south of Prospect Road ), and Taft Hill Road ( south of Prospect Road ) . Within the study area the majority ( 68 percent) of road segments experience very low stress with only 16 percent experiencing high to very high stress. This is due to the majority of roadways within the study area being local residential roadways. When evaluating the arterials and collectors only, there are only six percent with very low stress and 53 percent with high to very high stress, which is expected due to the high volumes and speeds of vehicular traffic. The majority of the collector roadways within the West Central Area experience low to medium stress. The overall LTS score is highest along these roadway segments: • Mulberry Street between Taft Hill Road and Shields Street • Prospect Road east of Shields Street • Shields Street between Mulberry Street and Plum Street, as well as between Prospect Road and Hobbit Street • Taft Hill Road between Plum Street and Elizabeth Street Figure 10a shows pedestrian infrastructure provided by the City of Fort Collins engineering department. Pedestrian crash data is displayed in the previous section on crash history . The figure illustrates the sidewalk condition ( good, fair, poor), types of curb ramps, and where sidewalks and curb ramps are missing . There are approximately 73 miles of sidewalks within the West Central Area . According the data , r� D 34 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado only 20 of those miles ( about 25 percent) are in good condition. The majority of the existing sidewalks are in fair to poor condition . There are approximately 10 miles of missing sidewalks, which are mostly along local streets, including Bay Road which is missing approximately two miles of sidewalk. Curb ramps are missing throughout the study area with 77 percent missing curb ramps at locations that require curb ramps. It should be noted that the percentage of missing curb ramps is high throughout Fort Collins and is not specific to the West Central Area . Currently, the Pedestrian Needs Assessment is working through the sidewalk improvements systematically . Figure 10b uses the same data source to show sidewalk type ( attached verses detached ) and sidewalk width . There are approximately 52 miles of attached sidewalks and 11 miles of detached sidewalks within the West Central Area . The detached sidewalks occur chiefly along Center Avenue, Prospect Road between Taft Hill Road and Shields Street, and some sections along Elizabeth Street. The sidewalk width throughout the area ranges from two feet to 14 . 5 feet with the majority of sidewalks falling in the three to five foot range . The current sidewalk standard design requires a minimum width of five feet. Many of the sidewalks in this area were built under previous standards and have not been widened to meet the new standard . Both sidewalks and curb ramps include information on ADA compliance which is also illustrated in Figure 10b. Fifty - four percent of total existing sidewalk is ADA compliant, but only 20 percent of the existing curb ramps are ADA compliant. The majority of sidewalks that are not ADA compliant are located in the northern section of the study area between Prospect Street and Mulberry Street. ADA non - compliant curb ramps occur throughout the study area . F fig D 35 City Park a H Z a Yf 0 W N City Park Lake O J W. MULBERRY ST H c I I N a I Z o I m I I W LAUREL ST FO e Z O r O I I, t' o. 1 W LUM ST II K LL 1 1 0 \L' Lu + 1 1 WE ABETH ST Colorado State UniversityL 0 Lu V w Lu I Q Jj O D 1 Legend _ UI F H 1 Study Area E PI KIN ST 1 H OJ , - - - Bike and Pedestrian Trails W , • U • N I 1111 Existing Bike Ways W LAKE ST • • I II Bike Lanes • • S • 1 • � � I � Multi-Use Trail • 1 • I II� W PROSPECT RD Bike Route 1 , Soft Surface Trail No Bicycling + ` - -- - -r,1Pt1FOX M DOWSE ' �� 1 11 Z Mason St. Trans. Corridor it NATURALAREA _ I O �• . _ _ W STUART ST ` `� 1 11 H Proposed Bike Ways 1 1 z • • • Proposed Bike Lanes f O FISCHER It • Proposed Multi-Use Trail r 4i NATURAL zWST ; AREA J4 1 ;1 • • Proposed Bike Route 0 Proposed Soft Surface Trail 1 H Rolland Moore Colorado State I ;1 J p Community Park University 1 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 F u LL Veterinary Hospital II W II Feet 9 Q�S;P9 fA J I JROSS I NATURALAREA @ I Uj 1 `a I � ; Figure 9a 1 I _ _ _ _ _ a _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ a _ _� �� Existing and W DRAKE RD mw , Proposed Bikeways ' West Central Area Plan W MULBERRY ST W MUL ERRY T 1 - J Volume Stress 1 Intersection Stress Low 1 1 Low Medium -may ELI BETH I Medium 1 ELI BETH S 1 1 High 1 aaa>• High L New 1 `I F a. n N N J _ J F I W PROSPECT RLD ¢ I y ° � i 1 II o J 1 i 1 r I � 1 I 1 I Segment Stress 1 1 1 DRAKE R I Very High - W DRAKE RD WN, assitono MEN& mos High Volume Stress Intersection Stress Medium t6%Low W_ M_ULBERRY ST W MULBERRY T Very L°w 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 4D Miles I Speed Stress ET Final Segment Stress Low — Very Low Medium I — Low Segment Stress ELI BETHS ABETH Medium Arterials and Collectors Only classes High High Very High Very High High Medium — _ — PE 2 — LOW Very Low N i1 0 i If D 1 2 3 4 5 6 Miles I Figure 9b DRAKE RD I DRAKE RD Bicycle Speed Stress Overall Stress Level of Traffic Stress West Central Area Plan W MULBERRY ST W MULBERRY ST 1 _ I 1 _ I Sidewalk Condition Good ELIZ BETH Si I Fair —W ELIZ BETH ST — a Poor rA l l J �1 L e i GO bon = J _W L 1 I.. W PROSPECT RD = `� F I W PROSP ZC�T RD = F I T"(�► i i u I F I 0 O I I I I v Sidewalk Condition by Number of Miles W DRAKE RD % I I W DRAKE RD I Missing Sidewalk Condition Missing Sidewalks Poor Fair W MULBERRY ST W MULBERRY ST Good a GO I • a • �•• I Curb Ramps = ��� `• • - • 0 10 20 30 40 • • 10 i •is � • � 'tiT I • Drive Approach � • SO 40 GO • . Miles I • • .`' I •�•� I • � • Intersection • � r gims I 7 W ELIZ oBETHI aN ELIZ BETH Mid-Block • •�Sir Existing vs. Missing Curb Ramps 1 y • F- o . ' • 7.1 • •q zl FaV-lIIlI •, ++• i _H L �•. . •••. rI mJLL� i • �t• *a• • •� J 1�t .• f•�am� _••• • .0 Elm • N• see • �• •GO • •• II ' Gags alLe see *of • J .I • • •� • ' � �` � ' • • , I I map 410 so 46 �. • � I Woo, . � • I Figure 1Oa I � �� I • • DRAKE RD • I �,�.� DRAKE RD • I Map 1 of 2 — ' - - ' � ` - - - - �� Existing Curb Ramps Missing Curb Ramps VAPedestrian Facilities West Central Area Plan W MULBERRY ST W MULBERRY ST I I 1 �. � I Sidewalk Width I < 4 I Sidewalk Type I I ELIZABETH 1 6 I ELIZ BETH S r Attached I I Detached cc 1A _ � s is z n JI � JI C J _ L _ _ _ I _ L LL W PROSPECT RD = _ LL t = V d -- 11 FI ° m1 I � I I o I I I 1 v r I r I + I + I > idewalk Type I I I I Detached W DRAKE RA I I DRAKE R Sidewalk Width Sidewalk Type Attached 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 W MULBERRY ST _ W MULBERRY ST Miles 1 I ADA Compliant ADA Compliant I Yes Yes 90% ADA Compliance 80% ELIZABETH I No ELIZABETH S� NO 70% M' 60% ~ I ~ 50% o L _ z I -- cc 40% I ' wl �_ w . I 30% 20% 4 I 4 10% ip 0% � I f ' Yes No Yes No Orrr ( Sidewalks Ramps I r 4w- + I I I I I Figure 10b W DRAKE R I DRAKE R j Map 2 of 2 - - - - . ' —I —I - - � Existing Sidewalk ADA Compliance Curb Ramp ADA Compliance Pedestrian Facilities West Central Area Plan west central area plan and prospect road corridor study Transit Comprehensive transit coverage in the City of Fort Collins provides an important alternative to driving for visitors, residents, and students. The Transfort Strategic Operating Plan cites that the April 2008 survey results of weekday transit use indicated that the " highest ridership activity experienced at non -transit center stops occurred at stops located throughout the residential areas west of CSU . " This is consistent with the fact that CSU is the largest employer in the area and has 26,775 enrolled students ' . A reliable, frequent and comprehensive transit alternative is even more important given that congestion along corridors within the West Central Area is expected to increase, according to the Transfort Strategic Operating Plan . It is important that transit serve the West Central Area to not only connect to CSU , but to other destinations within the community and City. Figure 11 shows all transit routes and bus stops within the West Central Area . There are twelve bus routes that travel into and through the West Central Area ; three of which only operate when CSU is in session (fall /spring semesters ) . Table 5 provides a description and headway for each route in the system . Graph 1 shows June ridership for transit routes within the West central Area . TABLE 5 : TRANSFORT TRANSIT ROUTES, DESCRIPTIONS AND HEADWAYS Name Description Headway MAX Downtown Transit Center, Mason Corridor, South Mon-Sat, every 10 minutes during peak hours, year- Transit Center round HORN Moby Arena, CTC, Lake Street Garage Mon-Sat, every 10 minutes when CSU is in session and every 30 minutes when CSU is out of session GOLD Downtown, Laurel, Elizabeth, Prospect, College Fri-Sat, every 15 min. between 10:30 p.m. — 2:30 a.m., year-round GREEN Downtown, Mulberry, Taft Hill, Drake, College Fri -Sat, every 15 min. between 10: 30 p.m. — 2 : 30 a.m., year-round 2 CSU Campus and west Fort Collins Mon-Sat, every 30 minutes, year round b West Fort Collins from CSU Transit Center to the Mon -Sat, every 60 minutes, year round Foothills Mall 7 CSU campus, Senior Center, Drake Road and Mon-Sat, every 30 minutes during peak times, and Rigden Farm every 60 minutes in the evening, year- round 10 Downtown, City Park and CSU Mon-Sat, every 60 minutes, year- round CSU, Rocky Mountain High School and Front Mon -Fri, every 60 minutes, year-round. When Poudre 19 Range Community College along Shields Street School District or CSU is in session, it runs every 30 minutes during AM & PM peak travel periods 31 CSU campus and Campus West Mon-Fri, every 20 minutes, when CSU is in session 32 CSU campus and West Fort Collins Mon-Fri, every 30 minutes, when CSU is in session 33 Starts August 25 - schedule coming soon None of the transit routes through the West Central Area offer service on Sundays. The non - numbered routes have a shorter headway than numbered routes, which come generally every half hour or hour. The number of currently enrolled students was found at colostate .edu. D 40 ,� ley W I ity Parko°� O¢' ,P O �JyOSpF JyOSp�i City Park ¢P J0¢F J0¢�P} ecJ� O rm�u - W MULEASTJZ Lake O E MULBERRY ST S f in W LAUREL ST �a Z E LAUREL ST '� 1 �k' S t5 AS ¢P� eCPY� 33 J Ud W MA V .O If CSUTRANSIT CENTER W ELIZAB . ;i U IIIIIIIIS E ELIZABETH ST Sea �e�Jo� nnPP��Qp¢� N Colorado State University GOLD HORN Legend n Inn P�P��lE Oo2 Q w I Study Area `V Z E PITKIN ST Roads FVi 1 �eY`P � Major Arterial r Arterial <PF Z �¢� �� p Collector W LAKE ST I 0& O e} ? 4Y W �� .�P� ¢ ¢e� U �� J�o �� °�� 1AISE ST s�� <5 Local OS¢ 0� CO �J CF' Qpp �S,F1p�S,tl Q¢OS�4¢' QPpS Bus Stops PROSPECT RD O Bus Stops Serving 1-3 Transit Lines I W PROSPECT RD �Ct�0 `� °P �.2 oS�S�JP Qpo <,O OS��¢- Q�oS¢`�pSo i O Bus Stops Serving 4-5 Transit Lines ¢moo`' VQ I Transit Lines � 2 GINEENED32 J W STUART ST J I E STUART STINEEMEND 6 INEEMEND 33 HJQP� SJ�� GINEENED 7 aaa000n Gold Joru �S oSCal S 10 40000001 Green �AA Z Cal w 5� 0 �00 T- 3 � 19 � HORN �¢, k, �O �¢4. D 31 MAX P 6 J Q O .1 4S' O 1 3yJ Sa I �P�0� �SS �J ° CQ�P �Sp� SQ�P�� ?O > > �OJ4 Gk� 5 Q ut 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 inw Feet C l7 ¢� Z Rolland Moore �S �` J OLUMBIA RD D ape `�� PF Colorado State J ¢o¢" U Community Park ¢.�`' O University N GO& @�9Veterinary Hospital Op C W DRAKE RD S� ¢4� oep� O�p¢� °� p o��S Figure 11 E DRAKE RD e} o� A Cal Existing Transit Service ee �� , West Central Area Plan O o� west central area plan and prospect road corridor study GRAPH 1 : WEST CENTRAL AREA TRANSIT RIDERSHIP, JUNE 2014 Green 1474 Gold 10047 19 2,261 10 112, 357 6 ` 3,808 7 34926 2 7, 059 o—o MAX 870598 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 8D000 90000 Transfort provided the transit data for the month of June 2014, which does not include ridership associated with CSU . Bus Routes 31 , 32 and 33 only run when CSU is in session, and data for the HORN route was not available, therefore these routes are not displayed in Graph 1 . Transfort estimates that 35 percent of their ridership is by students. It is important to note that there have been a number of service changes in the system in the Spring and Summer of 201 A and a continued evaluation of ridership data is important. Amongst the seven routes with ridership data in June, there was an average of 4, 200 passengers per day. It can be seen that the new MAX BRT route has the highest ridership out of all the routes within the West Central Area . There was an average of 3 ,400 passengers utilizing the MAX transit, which is 80 percent of the total ridership on the displayed routes. The next highest ridership is about 270 passengers per day on Route 2 , which links the CSU Campus to west Fort Collins. Graph 2 illustrates the number of passengers per hour per route . GRAPH 2 : WEST CENTRAL AREA PASSENGERS PER HOUR , JUNE 2014 i Green 7 . 4 Gold =Elm wal= L 16 . 3 19 8 . 4 10 14.8 6 9 . 5 7 6.4 Bus 2 18. 1 I MAX 0 33. U 10 11_ .4) 30 35 MAX had the highest number of passengers per hour at 33 . 21 which is nearly double that of the second highest route . Route 2 had the second highest number of passengers per hour at 18 . 1 and Route GOLD in a close third at 16 . 3 . Route 7 has the least amount of passengers per hour at 6 .4 . r� D 42 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado The data also highlighted that approximately 7 percent of riders had their bicycles. Additional data will be provided when CSU is in session to better understand all the routes through the West Central Area . Figure 12 shows a rating of each bus stop in the west central area , based on its shelter and bench conditions, lighting , trash availability, ADA condition, and location on the arterial . Parking The West Central Area has a high demand for parking given its proximity to the CSU campus and College Avenue corridor. With planned campus building projects moving forward , new parking demand is being generated and existing parking capacity is being lost. The CSU Parking and Transportation Master Plan ( 2014 ) takes an aggressive stance on managing parking demand and creating a denser, more urbanized campus. The plan lays out an extensive and progressive Transportation Demand Management ( TDM) program in order to achieve the desired results of mitigating parking demand on and around campus by enhancing access to campus and utilization of transportation alternatives. Parking demand and access to parking is an important consideration in this study . It recommends the construction of seven parking facilities on campus that will serve the demand and relieve the neighborhood from overflow parking . Figure 13 identifies the location where on -street parking is available on arterials and collectors within the West Central Area . The only arterial that offers a significant amount of on - street parking is Mulberry Street near the City Park Lake . Taft Hill Road also has small sections of on - street parking near Blevins Middle School . The following collectors provide on -street parking along the majority of the length : Constitution Avenue ( north and south sections), Stuart Street, Research Boulevard , and Lake Street. The figure also highlights the one neighborhood , Sheely, that participates in the Residential Parking Permit Program ( RP3 ) . The purpose of this program is to provide on - street parking for residents and reduce the number of non - resident vehicles during specified time periods. The program can be tailored to each individual neighborhood to meet its needs and goals. FT ,1 D 43 Q� P City Park � avf' City Park OO Q- � Lake i� O�Q• > y~j N W MULBERRY ST H CA Z �� W 0 MULBERRY ST �p� I 0 x E Q ^� P ' z y�`S S'� ¢��� Q rFil � c C I �P°.;, 0O P°�� Q�J� o �0Q' W LAUREL ST W Z E LAUREL ST = D I °°� e y 5J� S°��� P�� �"�` la III ~ Y r qy Qp� ` �Q�Jet 0 Z o cc Y W ELIZAB TH ST i Q4'p �.��� iJ •— 9 J�`0 a P�,F —• 1 S.Ttiv' Colorado State University E ELIZABETH ST Q I o 5 F �s� soy v, I o 0S O'SQ ,tye Fy� 1 OS���� E PITKIN ST C°2 oOQ t �QQ 1 F0 The bus stop rating takes into account the ZQ� 0500 OS I a oN� 93�P following factors: W LAKE ST I -CFQ� S'Ea3 ,2 S .%W0 5,2,0�' Q�' 0� 1 S�Qb�' 1, C. 2eQ� S°? Q3. V. 4Y p} pY py Q q}� � � � � 'c LW.L L T -Shelter condition °SQ QQG� SQQ� SQ�� yQ0 QQ QQ Qv �� -Bench condition QQo Qp °S Qo QQo Ogg' o`' moo`' �QQ' -Lighting availability •��Q --� '�s' ll P SPECT RD Q PROSPECT RD -Trash availability �_� • a -ADA condition 4r��y° Q& ¢2�p SOP I -Location on an arterial (only relevent if stop is not already a shelter) � 1 Q�°SQ Q�°yam Q�d? I Legend ti W STUART ST S� 6 I E STUART ST Bus Stop Rating SAl 5�,�0 � tr0 I • Very Low 40 0 �O°p �0 I SP ING ARK DR 0g 0 Low wyt Medium p • �1Q�°r' G,�2 e`er I j N High 4Y F P oP OU �j Very High Rolland Moore Colorado State 1 0 OLUMBIA RD Fermi z Community Park ,�FQ cF?Q o University I O Not Rated Veterinary Hospitall F. 02 S S� c 02 h P� 1 0& o 1,000 2,000 4,000 ? .I. OSQ V Feet ♦��O O�Sfi 20Pp 1 p}° S°So OP~�~� SQF�` 40' + J-A J I �ti0�OS ,`P}OP �4}pOc'SJ ,`4Y S °�� •� ���� °�� �� °� Ww DRAKE RD E DRAKE RD Figure 12 ��` ""� • Bus Stop Rating o °��� West Central Area Plan W MOUNTAINAVE 2 W MOUNTAIN AVE r Cache La Poudre River y Z I � w City Park a N z a H N O w City Park Lake 20 ; Oct w U L B E R RY S T O m OJ -� N c 1 I F. C o I I D U a I I W LAUREL ST o O I I E o u T W PLUM ST I 1 I lJ I I W ELIZABETH ST I Colorado State University w - I a 1 w J I a I o I U F.I z wo I— — — — E PI KIN ST Legend U ' On Street Parking W LAKE ST I '� _ W_LAKE ST — — - - Major Arterial ' — Arterial W PROSPECT RD 1 Collector RP3�Parking I Local Program RED FOX MEADOWS Program 1 z Streams NATURALAREA W STUART ST 1 O Waterbodies I 1 Z G I FISCHER C Parks NATURAL y IyST`- I >W AREA �.� 1 Natural Areas P t Study Area Sa O I F ® Sheely Neighborhood el y Rolland Moore Colorado State 1 = 21 u Community Park University 1 z LLI .P.Yeterinary Hospital 1 w FI _ / F.y9 1 J 0 1,000 2,000 4,000e[ �I ROSS 0 2 I ~ NATURALAREA 1 I U O I I W DRAKE RD m w Z Q Figure 13 w On Street Parking a _ , West Central Area Plan Y west central area plan and prospect road corridor study EXISTING CONDITIONS : EVALUATION OF THE PROSPECT ROAD AND LAKE STREET CORRIDORS This plan takes a detailed look at the Prospect Road and Lake Street corridors since Prospect Road from Mason to 1 - 25 is proposed to be an Enhanced Travel Corridor ( ETC) and Lake Street can support Prospect Road . Prospect Road is one of the primary east- west corridors within this study area and provides a direct link to the CSU campus, College Avenue, 1 - 25 , and other popular destinations in Fort Collins. Since Prospect Road is a direct connection to popular destinations, it has a high volume of vehicular traffic as well as bicycle, pedestrian, and transit users. In order to make east- west travel through this study area safer, more efficient, and more convenient for all users, this study looks at Lake Street as an alternative corridor for specific users, particularly non - motorized travel . It should be rooted that there is potential to utilize Pitkin Street as an alternative to Lake Street since it provides additional connectivity to the east. Roadway There is a high density of access along Prospect Road with a total of 66 accesses from Shields Street to College Avenue . Figure 14 identifies the access points along Prospect Road . Access points are distinguished as arterials, collectors, local roads, parking lot access roads, or private driveways. There are two arterials, one collector, five local streets, 15 parking lot accesses, and A3 residential driveways within the one - mile stretch . On Lake Street there are a total of 59 accesses on the one - mile stretch : two arterials, one collector, three local streets, 35 parking lot accesses, and 18 residential driveways. This is a lower volume and lower posted speed roadway compared to Prospect Road ; however, it has a high amount of access points. The quantity of access points along both Prospect Road and Lake Street results in a large number of conflict areas for all travel modes and can cause additional congestion or reduced safety. Vehicles turning into and out of driveways frequently along the corridor also result in additional vehicle delay and poor mobility . The roadway and right- of - way ( ROW) widths along Prospect Road vary due to the changes in providing a two-way left-turn lane . The bicycle and pedestrian facilities vary along the corridor as well ( see the Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Section for further discussion ) . Prospect Road between Shields Street and College Avenue has two travel lanes in each direction, with no bicycle facility . Between Shields Street and Whitcomb Street, Prospect Road does not have a center two - way left-turn lane and it is the most constrained section . From Whitcomb Street until College Avenue, the five - lane configuration with a two-way left-turn lane returns. All of the travel lanes range between eight and 12 .5 feet. Lake Street has the same configuration for the entire one mile stretch between Shields Street and College Avenue—one travel lane, a bike lane and on - street parking in each direction . Lane and sidewalk widths and the presence of a sidewalk buffer vary throughout the corridor. Figure 15 shows the right-of - way width along the two corridors and is a key map for the existing roadway cross sections. It can be seen that the right- of - way width changes throughout the study corridor. The shown ROW was derived from parcel data and may not be accurate enough for design purposes. The City of Fort Collins will be surveying the Prospect Road and Lake Street right- of -ways during the summer and the data will be updated accordingly . This data should be available by mid - July . r� D 46 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado Figures 16a and 16b illustrate the roadway cross sections for four locations along Prospect Road . Figures 17a and 17b illustrate the five cross - section variations along Lake Street. Each of the cross- sections within the corridors was illustrated to show the differences in lane configurations, availability of bikeways, buffers, and sidewalk widths. Roadway LOS on Prospect Road and Lake Street are displayed in Table 6 and shown on Figure 5 . The operations were evaluated for each direction and between major intersections. Prospect Road westbound between Shields Street and Whitcomb Street and eastbound between Center Avenue and Whitcomb Street operate at LOS D in both the AM and PM. Lake Street operates at LOS C or better, between Shields Street and College Avenue . TABLE 6: PROSPECT ROAD AND LAKE STREET ROADWAY LOS RoadwayDay Direction 1.01 EB B AM WB D Shields St to Whitcomb St EB B PM WB D EB D AM Prospect Rd Whitcomb St to Center Ave WB C EB D PM WB C EB C AM WB C Center Ave to College Ave EB B PM WB C EB C AM Lake St Shields St to Whitcomb St WB C EB B PM WB C a D 47 .. . 1h.- oil 01 1111irf5eal t I i . rf 91 � � lj��+t � kl� ` t: �Td•�"40, " g Ct , ��� a�, � "` � �ii ►t -_ • � service vehicles/ . . ` i � gill peds only y / ri e LA I I W LAKE SIT I I I W I W Fri II II IW J Um! looloot " mi I I cc I z I F PROSPECT RD o I Ou 'I V) w + a i U m I � a , .}� LU LU om ,� �' F • ` q` V L Legend Residential driveway Parking lot access F> Local road to� Collector ,I rterial77 MAX BRT o Prospect Road/ Lake Street Figure 14 Prospect Road and Lake Street Access Map ,� West Central Area Plan f W PITKIN ST I I I F I z C 0 I F- I a L W N I I 60' 67' S9 60' 59' 62' GH I - - - - - - - - X - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ' � Ir- I 1 W LAKE ST K I W H I Q = W O 1 11 W I J rn p h 91' 81' 80' 81, 82' 86' U .� 71' 70' 62' 60' 65' J 63' 70' ul I W PROSPECT RD p I W Q I m a L W O F- I U Ir- W o U z m ; I o I u ari I F I I Legend o 500 1,000 Feet Cross-Section Locations %, 1 Study Area XX' - Right-of-Way* I Approximate Right-of-Way Width *Right-of-way measurements estimated from City of Fort Collins parcel data. FAT Figure 15 Existing Right- of-Way and Cross - Section Locations Prospect Road and Lake Street :l r « - :-It 3.5 ft. 1 IS ft. 11 .5 ft. 11 ft. 12 ft. 5 ft. Sidewalk Eastbound Travel Lanes Westbound Travel Lanes Sidewalk 47-48 ft. `I I ROW= 60-91 ft. A-A: Between Shields Street and Whitcomb Street s 6-8 ft. 9- 9.5 ft` 9-10 ft. 11 ft. 9-10 ft. 8-9 ft. 8-9 ft. Sidewalk Eastbound Travel Lanes 2-Way Left Westbound Travel Lanes Sidewalk Turn Lane 47-48 ft. ROW= 60 ft. B- B: Between Whitcomb Street and Center Avenue d , 5 ft. 20 ft. 9.5 ft.` 9.5 ft. 11 ft. 9.5 ft. 8-9 ft. 9 ft. Sidewalk Buffer Eastbound Travel Lanes 2-Way Left Westbound Travel Lanes Sidewalk Turn Lane 47-48 ft. I ROW= 82 ft. C-C: Between Center Avenue and Bay Road , Figure 16a Prospect Road Cross Sections 1 of 2 ,� West Central Area Plan s � 6-8 ft. 9- 9.5 ft: - ft.oft. 10.5-11 .5 ft. 9-10 ft. 10-11 ft. 8-12 ft. Sidewalk Eastbound Travel Lanes 2-Way Left Westbound Travel Lanes Sidewalk Turn Lane 47-48 ft. ROW= 63-86 ft. D-D: Between Bay Road and College Avenue Figure 16b � Prospect Road Cross Sections 2 of 2 ,� West Central Area Plan s S . •Y n. -3 f 8 ft. 5 ft. 11 .5 ft. 9.5 ft. 4 ft. 7 ft. Sidewalk Parking Bike Eastbound Westbound Bike Parking Lane Travel Lane Travel Lane Lane I45 ft. I ROW= 60 ft. E-E: Between Shields Street and 300 feet east i .f j4% 5.5 ft. 12.5 ft. 8 ft. 5 ft. 11 .5 ft. 9.5 ft. 4.5 ft. 8 ft. Sidewalk Buffer Parking Bike Eastbound Westbound Bike Parking Lane Travel Lane Travel Lane Lane I46.5 ft. I ROW= 67 ft. F-F: Between 300 feet to 660 feet east of Shields Street 5- � 6-7 ft. 8.5 ft. I`5 ft. 9.5-10.5 ft. 10 ft. 4 ft. 8 ft. 7-11 ft. 5.5-6.5 ft. Sidewalk Parking Bike Eastbound Westbound Bike Parking Buffer Sidewalk Lane Travel Lane Travel Lane Lane I�45-46 ft��-46 f . ROW= 59 ft. G-G: Between 600 feet to 1 ,250 feet east of Shields , Figure 17a Lake Street Cross Sections 1 of 2 ,� West Central Area Plan 5 Fk.• dr ® ;y) 3 17 8 ft. `5 ft. 10.5-11 .5 ft. 9.5 ft. 5 ft. 8 ft. 5-7 ft. Sidewalk Parking Bike Eastbound Westbound Bike Parking Sidewalk Lane Travel Lane Travel Lane Lane Iit 46-47 ft. I ROW= 59-60 ft. H-H: Between 1 ,250 east of Shields Street and 390 feet east of Whitcomb Street lam 1 7-8.5 ft. 8 ft. 5 ft. 9.5- 11 .5 ft. 9.5 ft. 5 ft. 8 ft. 7-9 ft. Sidewalk Parking Bike Eastbound Westbound Bike Parking Sidewalk It Lane Travel Lane Travel Lane Lane IV 45-47ft. I ROW= 59-62 ft. 1-1 : Between 390 feet east of Whitcomb Street and College Avenue Figure 17b Lake Street Cross Sections 2 of 2 ,� West Central Area Plan west central area plan and prospect road corridor study Travel Patterns The City of Fort Collins installed Bluetooth readers along Prospect Road to collect travel time data . The available data was during summer 2014 when CSU was out of session . It is anticipated that more data will be provided once CSU is back in session . Some interesting observations of the summer data are as follows: • Average speed on Prospect Road from Taft Hill Road to College Avenue is: o Eastbound : 26 mph o Westbound : 25 mph • Travel time between Taft Hill Road and Shields Street is consistent throughout the day in both directions, ranging from 1 minute 46 seconds to 2 minutes 4 seconds . o Eastbound : The PM peak travel time is 2 minutes 5 seconds, which equates to 29 . 2 mph ( shown in Graph 3 ) . o Westbound : The PM peak travel time is 1 minute 58 seconds, which equates to 30 .5 mph ( shown in Graph 4 ) . • Travel time between Shields Street and College Avenue has distinct peaks at 9 :00am and 6 : 00pm in both directions. o Eastbound : In the off - peak, the travel time is 2 minutes 5 seconds. The travel time increases by 40 seconds in the peak period . It peaks at 2 minutes 45 seconds ( 22 mph ) and decreases after 6 : 00pm (shown in Graph 5 ) . o Westbound : In the off - peak, the travel time is 2 minutes 5 seconds. The travel time increases by 25 - 52 seconds in the peak period . The morning peak period is around 2 minutes 30 seconds with a significant increase in the PM peak at 2 minutes 57 seconds ( 20.4 mph ) . The travel time decreases after 6 :00pm ( shown in Graph 6 ) . It was anticipated that the travel time would change throughout the day on Prospect Road between Shields Street and College Avenue due to the number of signalized intersections, accesses, destinations along or near the arterial , proximity to CSU, and the high volume of traffic. West of Shields Street, Prospect Road does not have as many factors that impact the travel time . D 54 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado GRAPH 3: EASTBOUND TRAVEL TIME BETWEEN TAFT (HILL ROAD AND SHIELDS STREET 11 os � 140 e E 0E E 115 Eastbound - PM Peak Travel Time = 2 :05 sec. or 29 . 2 mph 0 so O JS 000 g g g g g — Competlwn index • I ()level time) GRAPH 4: WESTBOUND TRAVEL TIME BETWEEN SHIELDS STREET AND TAFT HILL ROAD 140 r E 1 11 E Westbound - PM Peak Hour Travel Time = 1 :58 sec. or 30 .5 mph 01, F 0J1 OW g $ $ 8 g Compoison Inde■ e 1 arwel t~i GRAPH 5 : EASTBOUND TRAVEL TIME BETWEEN SHIELDS STREET AND COLLEGE AVENUE ) iv J $0 r 1 E E 140 r Eastbound PM Peak Travel Time = 2 :45 sec. or 22 .0 mph 050 0 00 — Compullnn Inde■ el ItrAwl II011e1 D 55 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study GRAPH 6: WESTBOUND TRAVEL TIME BETWEEN COLLEGE AVENUE AND SHIELDS STREET Histoncal Trends for Prospect College to Shields 1 io e E " I n E Westbound - PM Peak Hour Travel Time = 2 : 57 sec. or 20 .4 vm UOU — COMPArnon Index a WAVWI limwl Intersections There are four signalized intersections on Prospect Road within the study area . These are at Shields Street, Whitcomb Street, Center Avenue, and College Avenue . There is also a pedestrian/ bicycle activated signal just west of Heatheridge Road . There is one signalized intersection on Lake Street, at Shields Street, and three stop -controlled intersections at Whitcomb Street, Center Avenue, and East Drive . The delay and LOS per intersection and peak hour are displayed in Table 7. TABLE 7: PROSPECT ROAD AND LAKE STREET INTERSECTION AND APPROACH LOS 2012 Existing Number Intersection Control Approach Delay • Delay • Overall 7 A 8 A 9 Shields St and Lake Signal WB 47 D 51 D Rd NB 5 A 5 A SB 7 A 2 A EB 12 B 11 B Lake Rd and WB 10.2 B 13 B 10 Whitcomb St 4 -Way Stop NB 13 B 11 B SB 8.5 A 11 B EB 10 A 8 A 11 Lake Rd and Center Side Street WB 10 A 9 A Ave Stop NB 10 A 8 A EB 7 A 4 A Lake Rd and East Dr WB 0 A 0 A 12 Side Street NB 10 B 10 B Stop SB - - - - Overall 35 C 29 C 14 Prospect Rd and EB 44 D 44 D Shields St Signal WB 50 D 44 D NB 32 C 22 C D 56 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado SB 18 B 18 B Overall 7 A 14 B 15 Prospect Rd and Wg 7 A 10 A Whitcomb St Signal NB 45 D 37 D SB 48 D 49 D Overall 18 B 22 C 16 Prospect Rd and Wg 12 B 13 B Center Ave Signal NB 41 D 42 D SB 37 D 46 D Overall 31 C 38 D Prospect Rd and EB 55 E 46 D 28 College Ave Signal WB 25 C 50 D NB 23 C 30 C SB 26 C 36 D The study intersections on Prospect Road and Lake Street operate at LOS D or better. All of the approaches also operate at LOS D or better. The intersections on Prospect Road at Shields Street and Center Avenue experience the highest overall delays. Crash History Of the top 48 intersections analyzed in the 20 7 3 Traffic Safety Summary, there were four intersections that are within the study corridor of Prospect Road and Lake Street. The only intersection that experienced more crashes than predicted was Prospect Road at Shields Street. Table 8 lists the intersections on Prospect Road or Lake Street that were evaluated in the safety study . TABLE 8 : PROSPECT AND LAKE INTERSECTIONS WITH HIGHEST EXCESS CRASH COST PER YEAR Intersection Model Predicted Actual Adiusted Excess Crash and Cost Crashes Per Year Crashes Per Year AADT Fatal/ Fatal / Prop. Fatal / Cost Per Streetl Street2 Total Injury Total Injury Damage Only Shields St Prospect Rd 50,301 26. 1 6. 2 28. 1 6A 1 .8 0.2 $46,538 Shields St Lake St 38,450 9.2 2. 2 5.6 2. 1 -3.5 -0. 1 -$401480 Center Ave Prospect Rd 34,316 14.5 3 .6 11 , 2 3.4 - 3. 1 -0. 2 - $50,227 Whitcomb St Prospect Rd 26,488 8.9 2.3 5.3 1 .7 -3.0 -0.6 -$961530 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities As shown in Figure 9, Prospect Road doesn 't have any bicycle facility between Shields Street and College Avenue . Lake Street has bike lanes in both directions between Shields Street and College Avenue ranging in width from four to five feet. Sidewalk type and conditions are shown in Figure 10a and lOb . Both corridors have sidewalks on both sides of the street through the study area , except for a small section ( 300 feet) on the north side of Lake Street just east of Shields Street. The sidewalks on Prospect Road are mostly in fair conditions, with very FT ,1 D 57 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study few sections in poor condition and some segments in good condition . Sidewalk widths east of Shields Street vary, with some sections less than four feet and others as wide as seven feet, with almost all as attached . The sidewalks on Lake Street are mostly in fair condition and have a large number of missing curb ramps. Sidewalk widths on Lake Street west of Whitcomb Street are less than five feet with some sections as narrow as two feet. Sidewalk widths between Whitcomb Street and College Avenue are mostly seven feet. Nearly all sidewalks on the Lake Street corridor are attached . D 58 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado Transit Figure 11 shows the multiple transit routes that use the Prospect Road and Lake Street corridors. Route 2 uses Prospect Road west of Whitcomb Street and Routes 19 and GOLD travel along Prospect Road through the study area from Shields Street to College Avenue. Routes HORN ( starting August 2014 ) and 7 use Lake Street through the study area . The MAX BRT also crosses Prospect Road , just west of College Avenue, with a station just north of Prospect Road . These routes link to local destinations and regional transit routes. The routes that utilize Prospect Road and Lake Street have some of the highest ridership and passengers per hour when compared to the other West Central buses. Removing MAX from the ridership data , the other four routes have 70 percent of the riders within the study area . On average these buses have 12 . 3 passengers per hour. The bus ridership data is not available per bus stop ; therefore, corridor evaluation was not conducted . It should be noted that there is a westbound bus pullout on Prospect Road between College Avenue and the MAX line that is currently in design . Parking There is only on - street parking on Lake Street. FUTURE CONDITIONS This section of the report analyzes the potential future transportation infrastructure challenges, issues, and opportunities associated with 2035 traffic conditions in the West Central Area . Future Data Methodology The future data for daily traffic volumes was estimated from the 2009 and 2035 Travel Demand Models and adjusted by the 2012 collected volume with the Difference Method . It is the state of the practice to utilize the Difference Method instead of the ratio and blend methods. The Difference Method captures the specific impacts and unique growth characteristics per roadway and minimizes the range of error in the models. The future traffic volumes were calculated with Equation 1 : Equation 1 : 203 %01 = 2012Count + 2035Mode1 — 2012Count * (2035Model 2009Mode� 2035Model — 2009Model It should be noted that the average growth rate for the West Central Area was 0. 5 percent annually . This was determined by a comparison of the 2035 and 2009 model volumes and verified with the Difference Method . On Prospect Road and Lake Street, the existing intersection turning movement counts were projected with an annual growth rate of 0 . 3 percent. This percentage was estimated from the Travel Demand Models. Evaluation of the West Central Area The future data was utilized to determine the operational performance of the transportation facilities. The following sections and figures describe the 2035 future conditions within the West Central Area . FT ,1 D 59 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study Level of Service Criteria The vehicular level of service criteria are the same as presented in Existing Conditions. Roadways Average Daily Traffic (ADT) counts were estimated based on the 2035 Travel Model , using the methodology described above for arterials, collectors, and local streets. Figure 18 provides the ADT for mid - block locations on arterials, collectors, and local streets throughout the community . The arterial roadways ranged from 9, 300 to 34,500 vehicles per day (vpd ) . The collectors ranged from 1 , 200 to 10,800 vpd . The local streets ranged from 7,000 up to 8 ,800 vpd . The relative magnitude of traffic volumes can be seen by the size of the blue circles. As expected , the majority of traffic travels on the arterials with the highest volume on Shields Street. The following ADT ranges occurred on the arterials: • Shields Street: from 20,700 vpd near Mulberry Street to 31 ,700 vpd near Prospect Road • Taft Hill Road : from 20, 100 vpd near Mulberry Street to 26,700 vpd near Drake Road • Mulberry Street: from 9,300 vpd west of the City Park Lake to 18, 300 vpd east of the lake • Prospect Road : from 16, 100 vpd near Taft Hill Road to 31 ,000 vpd near the College Avenue • Drake Road : from 20,400 vpd near Taft Hill Road to 34,500 vpd near Research Boulevard A capacity analysis for the roadway segments was performed using the methodology issued within the HCM 2000 . The methodology classifies the arterials based on the distance between intersections and the link speeds. To determine the LOS for arterials, the speed and travel time are calculated . Figure 19 summarizes the roadway LOS calculated in Synchro (version 8, HCM 2000 methodology ) . The operations were evaluated for each direction and between major intersections. All roadways operate at LOS D or better, except for the following roadway segments: AM Peak Hour • Elizabeth Street - Eastbound between City Park Avenue and Shields Street • Drake Road - Eastbound between Dunbar Avenue and Shields Street Westbound between Worthington Avenue and Shields Street • Shields Street - Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road Northbound between Stuart Street and Prospect Road • Whitcomb Street - Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road • Center Avenue — Northbound and Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road PM Peak Hour • Taft Hill Road - Southbound between Valley Forge Avenue and Drake Road • Shields Street - Southbound between Plum Street and Elizabeth Street Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road Southbound between Centre Avenue and Drake Road D 60 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado • Whitcomb Street - Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road • Center Avenue - Northbound and Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road • Elizabeth Street - Eastbound between City Park Avenue and Shields Street • Drake Road - Eastbound between Research Boulevard and Bay Road Westbound between Worthington Road and Shields Street Intersections Figure 20 illustrates the lane configuration, traffic control and turning movement counts for the studied intersections within West Central Area for the 2035 future conditions. Intersection Level of Service for future conditions was not analyzed for the entirety of the WCAP area . This was analyzed for Prospect Road and Lake Street and is described in the following section . Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities The 2008 Bicycle Plan was concurrently updated with the West Central Area Plan . The 2014 Bicycle Plan was recently adopted . Together with City staff and the community, Toole Design Group evaluated the existing bicycle infrastructure and proposed future connections, wayfinding strategies, design guidelines, and policy recommendations. Transit Transfort anticipates updating their Strategic Plan within the next few years to determine the future transit services and changes. Since May 2014, Transfort has made several changes to various routes and MAX BRT was opened . It will take some time to determine any deficiencies and opportunities that can help define the future services. The City staff met with Transport and CSU staff on October 20, 2014 to discuss coordination of transit within the West Central Area . It was determined that there is a need for enhanced transit services throughout the study area and on the south end of campus, specifically near the dormitories on Pitkin Street, at the MAX station, and the potential development on College Avenue between Prospect Road and Lake Street. The following topics and future options were discussed and will be evaluated to determine which provides the best connections and addresses service needs: CSU Campus Connections • Add or extend a route along City Park Avenue, south to Springfield Drive, east towards Shields Street and south to Pitkin Street. This connects the West Central neighborhoods and campus. • Add a second on -campus shuttle routing to additional locations. • Move one or more routes from Prospect Road to Lake Street to connect MAX station and campus. • Add a route along Pitkin Street or South Drive . • Re - route MAX C or D to serve the south end of campus. • Designate Lake Street as a main transit corridor through campus, similar to Plum Street. r� ,� D 61 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study • Incentivize more transit ridership for CSU staff, faculty, and students with free parking at one or more off - site locations ( e . g . church parking lots) . Bus Stop Enhancements • Encourage transit use with more and better bus shelters, specifically the shelters located on Centre Avenue at Research Boulevard and on Centre Avenue at Rolland Moore Drive need to be improved . • Provide bus stops and shelters at curb bulb - outs on collector streets that are proposed to be retrofitted . • Prioritize funding for improvements at bus stops within the West Central Area . • Provide a temporary bus stop at Center Avenue near Aggie Village North . • Figure 21 illustrates the prioritization of bus stop improvements into near and long term improvements based on existing ridership and bus stop ratings. Other Considerations • Add one westbound through lane on Plum Street at Shields Street to reduce the delay of buses as they wait for left-turning vehicles to clear the intersection . • Prioritize snow plowing on major transit corridors ( e . g . Plum Street, Pitkin Street/Springfield Drive, and Center Avenue ) . • Restrict vehicular traffic on Plum Street between Constitution Avenue and Elizabeth Street to create a bike, pedestrian and transit corridor. It is important that transit serve in the West Central Area not only connect to CSU, but continues to connect to other destinations within the community and City . Figure 22 shows the future transit vision of the West Central Area . D 62 ,� City 9.3 Park Lake 18.3 Ak 8.8 • 20.7 27 20.1 0 U b -- 28.8 0 7.4 0 16.2 16 19.6 U Leg ,1.2 z5.2 Future (2035) Average Daily Traffic Volumes x 1,000 — — — 2 - 5 1 • 6 - 14 31.7 7.6 7.9 • 15 - 21 16.1 18.9 23.9 7 25.7 31 • 22 27 z4.6 10.2 I • 28 - 35 1 1 — Major Arterial 1 1.91 r 10.8 1 Arterial z 5.3 I Collector Local 18 z8s / f Study Area 1 Note: Future ADT was provided by the City of Fort zes I Collins within the 2035 Travel Demand Model. It was adjusted by the 2012 counts with the Difference Method . 1 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 Feet 7.1 317( 1 4.5 26.7 Ij,� r 22 23 26.5 28.4 34.5 I Figure 18 20.4 1 MW Future (2035) Roadway Traffic Volumes West Central Area Plan W MULBERRY ST ' I I W MULBERRY ST ^ 1 I I j I I 1 E5 1 I I l W ELIZABETH ST I I W ELIZABETH ST l I I I W 1 I o I W LAKE ST! — I ' — — — — — W LAKE ST. — — — — II — W PROSPECT RD W PROSPECT RD II I I I I LL I 14 I I I 1 1 I ITW 1 1 1P��Fv I I 9Fsm P I 1 1[. �� 1 1 II TW 7�T� AM Level of Service PM Level of Service Legend � Study Area Level of Service . Major Arterial � A or B Arterial C Figure 19 Collector o Future Roadway Level of Service (2035) Local � E or F o i,000 z,000 4,OOee[ West Central Area Plan 0 J W_ N Z Z e *-� 26 68 m 39 (155) o, 126 (272) o o 122 (134) �� ( ) �`, r 135 (595) Z 41 � 76 (247) ) 57 (142) 309 (78&) it O w City Park 0r118 (3e2) r Laurel St o > 13 21 42 (89) Mulberryst ♦p W Drake Rd ♦p" lake S[ I185 (293) I m O 195 (150) I 90 (39) t �.l y t� 85 (403) City 103 (78) 3 w 1 721 (514) —� — 139 117 �► 715 (519) —t. U L - O J 73 (200) oa 28 (33) Mulberry St t♦p� 63 (47) ��� — D Ca M 42 (30) � _ yt 328 (244) N tt 42 (100) 152 (494) 34 (80) O a' _ W H ERaabem St 1� 513 O 58 (66) ( ) / 438 (541) —. CO 10 (35) o , CIO Ve e (70) n (s7) 7 h 34 (65) R 3eee W PLUM ST w plum sr 9 (71) T� `a � �� 29 12 _ yt 56 (59) 180 (114) 18 (181) ) 43 1621 U � 78 (181) WEL BETHST _ Lake St Elizabeth St at 129 (162) w 14 ( 3) 261 (178) 300 (332) �� 44 (83) 80 (178) 143 (151) � 2 -� 16 (52) p Lake St Ua 0, o 1168 (697) F Cati 2 (q) 172 (105) fit. Y -1 1L 2 (43) 5 (31) " 49 (210) 35 (51) ERzabahSt F 4 (57) 23 (126) ® a' E PI KI 29 (52) 0 — Lake St Y .. N� E 550 (595) — 0 3205(36) y 3256 " o o 170 (58) E' S (6) U 29 (10) _ Q< w f�.— 645 (1073) � 18 (374) Ira ST91 (3 )� 95 (264) _ _ t Legend 136 (388) Vrospect Rd 1L r 53 (254) W PROSPECT RD G , J r 107 (31) �r r �� WCAP Study Area Prospect Rd J 852 (906) —m .x' 135 (109) 100 (78)' —!e " m o m Signalized 461 (245) —► ._ w U -- 85 71 �► m _ U N Stop Controlled ( ) F. —J �— Lane Configuration 29 (1701 1 RED FOX MEADOWS f m m r 243 (701) ZIL MATURALAREA 11 lIkr 06 (271) �.• O r Illegal Movement Stuart st '��' U Prospect Rd Z � 173 ( )71 AM (PM) Peak Hour Traffic " Li . 262 (164) 87 (74) -a ~ 484 (1123) 4 782 (458) J 86 (79) m o w �kr 19 (34) w�T(JA 196 (170) y �- o < Pros and T > -�..� _ 124 (35) — C _ _ t� 17 (19) 937 (749) y 2 �I 4 0 (1) 19 (7) � 4 (41) v ~ Rolland Moore ♦♦ h ( ) ` 1 (17) T IRI W Valley Forge o 0 0tD 0 (1) J _ —_ s 52 (76) O tL 44 (113) _ �t� 3 (2)- 3 (43) �� Q�, ,. �� 153 (fig) Note 6 (26) C �— 435 (1150) _ �— 384 1188 ` �- 61 43 J ( ) 598 (1454) O m J A f r 24 (132) e o 1k 26 (108) `I' Drams na h 23 (127) 0 4,000 _ Drake Rd 0— 33 (159) ( "' Drake IdR �r Feet 1r 48 (108) t 69�28) -- r I I 935 (755) 1083 (748) —i N - a �St l I I m �• � 1o7 � ) c,aRlntr Ceness (9z o ( 7)108 (140) k4 s . 175 (68) —. O —� 31 (3) Figure 20 F 151 (3001 33 (W) 923 (1452) 0- 158 (5901 W D E R o m r 72 (56) r61 (190) Drake Rd R Future (2035 ) Intersection Drake Rd w , .,,. . •-, 46 (39) Q 1 tdt I i ( ' 1073 (1198) y E 407322 —� � 1 � r � ' g arc ^� � 1013 Volumes L 4 97 (313) � tt; ���r.i'1Fii 'G4.'e ti. yql . L '.-. i' s s+ _a �i � ` ✓ 9 l � ? iL', ( ) �L, m a West Central Area Plan W MULBERRY ST w • 'a V) V) Z Uj o o O a I in 2 E W LAUREL ST N F w Vtr I o ryrw PL• ST •�-• •- - I Z I ti3 y yy A • �ti y00 I Z LU • W ELIZABETH ST • IQ' Colorado State a tio•? University Z Q; I•� � I titi Z Q� y3 •� U W LAKE ST W LAKE ST �Or W PROSPECT RD ��o• • z 0 3 J I w •Qi J FLLQ I W STUART ST V) oti I III•Q'a� j••Q' l9�� o �Q�e• I I > LU 0 ON p4iUR oanoore Community Park CSUA t°' Vet Q tr School a I ti``a �yti I by h� • 1 �•� W DRAKE RD •� •�h I 0 0. 5 1 Legend Mile • Near-Term Improvement Note: Prospect Corridor stop improvements may be implemented upon • Longer-Term Improvement corridor reconstruction, per the Prospect Corridor Design . Improvements were prioritized based on existing ridership and bus stop rating (very low through The West Elizabeth Corridor will be analyzed and evaluated in the medium were flagged for improvements). upcoming West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor Plan (2015 - 16); additional stop improvements may be identified through that too effort. • Figure 21 Bus Stop Improvements West Central Area Plan MAX B F?spa City Park o J N W MULBERRY ST 21 ' 1 I I Z 0 W LAUREL ST Existing CS ~ E LA REL ST Transit enr 22 W PLUM ST W ELIZABETH ST i r W MAX C E ELIZA ST Future W. Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor FF Colorado Stat 1 O r University HORN Potential Additional r - - - ■ E PITKIN ST 1 ■ 1 F Transit Service � LAKE S 1 ZO ■ • - - - - - - • - - - - . W PROSPECT RD 1 Improved Connec ions 1 B = to MAX P 1 E PROSPECT RD 1 1 1 ' MAX A 1 W STUART ST E STUART ST 7 1 23 W STUART ST 1 1 Rolland Moore CSU W COLUMBIA RD Community Park 34 Vet 1 w 1 � N ' School 1 > 0I o 1 W DRAKE RD 1 N E DRAKE RD 10 . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - r.••.-.•�+ w w a 3 a Z < J r- ° 3 o W SWALLOW RD F 5 0 J W_ H N W HORSETOOTH RD . 0 0.5 1 legend © Parking garage Mile Potential additional transit service ■ Potential east-west bus crossing improvement Future W. Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor � Existing Transit Center — Improved connections to MAX 4L Corridors in which to explore shared MAX Stations park-n-ride arrangements Transfort Strategic Operation Plan (TSOP) Phase 3 -�- Other routes added since TSOP r Is Is Is Is West Central Area Boundary Figure 22 Future Transit Vision rii west central area plan and prospect road corridor study Parking The West Central Area is expected to have 4 demand for parking due to the anticipated groI CSU and potential redevelopment within the area . At this time, there are no plans to increase :� v street parking on the arterials or provide h ., - M -I additional parking within the neighborhood . The ' �j 5 is potential for neighborhoods to voluntarily be 7�f � ( � • .�'� ; + Tp g Y � — a part of the Residential Parking Permit Program ( RP3 ) that reduces the number of non - resident vehicles during specific time periods. � .a° °� _ 1 _ r CSU has identified locations on -campus where "°"`` °" ° . . ALI seven new parking facilities should be installed - r _ ( see Figure 23 ) . CSU estimates that the populatio will increase by 29 . 6 percent from 2012 to 202z The CSU Transportation and Parking Master Plan ( April 201 4 ) predicted that the traffic patterns w will shift with the proposed parking facilities base roadway capacity, and location of parking acces geometric or traffic control changes to the followi West Central Area if all of the parking facilities w Ri • Shields Street and Plum Street — one left-turn lane for each of the eastbound and westb(ou°n approache. and Trasnportation Master Plan) • Shields Street and Elizabeth Street — dual left-turn lanes on the eastbound approach and one right-turn lane on each of the westbound and northbound approaches. • Lake Street and Whitcomb Street — signalize and add one northbound left-turn lane OR a construct a single - lane roundabout. • Lake Street and Center Avenue — one left-turn lane on the westbound approach . • Prospect Road and Shields Street — one right-turn lane on the westbound approach . • Prospect Road and Whitcomb Street — dual left-turn lanes on the southbound approach and one left-turn lane on the northbound approach . • Prospect Road and Center Avenue — dual left-turn lanes on the northbound approach. • Prospect Road and College Avenue — dual left-turn lanes on each of the eastbound and westbound approaches, one right-turn lane on the northbound approach . • Center Avenue and Bay Road — one through lane on each of the northbound and southbound approaches. D 68 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado The CSU Transportation and Parking Master Plan (April 2014 ) discusses the timeline for implementation of the parking facilities. CSU Multipurpose Stadium : Transportation and Parking Study ( DRAFT = 2014 ) The Draft CSU Stadium Transportation and Parking Study analyzes the transportation impacts of the new proposed stadium site at the northwest corner of the Lake Street and Whitcomb Street intersection . The study applies traffic counts from existing parking structures at CSU to a Park + tool created specifically for CSU . This model applies a unique algorithm to determine the effect of the stadium on parking and traffic during game day conditions in 2016, given the anticipated 2016 opening of the stadium . A 1 .0426 growth factor was applied . According to this study, the following intersections with the West Central Area were forecasted to have an LOS E or F: • Drake Street and Shields St • Pitkin Street and Shields Street • Prospect Road and Shields Street • Prospect Road and Center Avenue The stadium study further analyzes the above intersections with LOS E or below, making recommendations in the report to improve LOS and address the increased stadium traffic. The study also recommends a road closure at Pitkin Street at the northern edge of the Stadium and the closure of Meridian Avenue on game days between Lake Street and South Drive . The study recommends a number of pedestrian improvements including sections of improved sidewalk, path connections and the consideration of a grade separated crossing of Prospect Road near Center Avenue . Transit improvements will include a shuttle between south campus parking areas and the stadium, increased Transfort service on special event days, and alternate routes for those impacted by the Pitkin Road closure . The study recommends that bikes be directed towards Lake Street to access the stadium using the designated bike lanes. Lastly, various Transportation Demand Management strategies are recommended to increase the dissemination of information on alternative modes and circulation . The study concludes that given the proposed proper mitigation treatments, as identified in the study, additional traffic resulting from the new stadium will be accommodated by the street network and available parking . Evaluation of Prospect Road and Lake Street Prospect Road and Lake Street were considered in detail in the future conditions since Prospect Road is proposed to be an Enhanced Travel Corridor ( ETC ) and Lake Street can support Prospect Road . The technical memo titled Multimodal Performance Measures Alternatives Analysis dated October 16, 2014 goes into detail on these two corridors. This memo describes a methodology for calculating multimodal performance measures for these corridors for2035 conditions for the existing configuration and three proposed alternatives. Roadway The access points and right of way along Prospect Road and Lake Street are not proposed to change in future conditions. These can be seen in Figures 14, in the Existing Conditions section . F fig D 69 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study The preferred design for Prospect Road proposes a landscaped medians and center turn lanes between major intersections along the corridor. The roadway level of service on Prospect Road and Lake Street is shown in Figure 19, as a part of the Roadway LOS for the entire study area . Prospect Road westbound between Shields Street and Whitcomb Street and eastbound between Center Avenue and Whitcomb Street operate at LOS D in both the AM and PM. Lake Street operates at LOS C or better between Shields Street and College Avenue. The section of Prospect Road and Lake Street that do not have sufficient data from which to determine a LOS is Lake Street between College Avenue and Whitcomb Street. Travel Patterns Travel patterns were studied along Prospect Road using Bluetooth readers to collect travel time data . Data was collected during summer 2014 when CSU was out of session . More data will be collected in the near future to capture traffic from the university. Findings from the available data are documented in the existing conditions travel pattern section. If volume increases in the future, as predicted in the 2035 travel model , travel time along the corridor will increase as well . Intersection The future conditions overall and approach delay and LOS for all study intersections on Prospect Road and Lake Street are shown in Table 9 . The overall intersection LOS is shown in bold . LOS and delay are the some for both 2035 conditions without project implementation and 2035 conditions with the implementation of the proposed design on Lake and Prospect. TABLE 9: PROSPECT AND LAKE FUTURE (2035) INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE 2035 Future Number Intersection Control Approach Delay PM • Delay • Overall 6 A 8 A 9 Shields St and Lake Signal WB 47 D 51 D Rd NB 4 A 4 A SB 6 A 2 A EB 11 B 12 B Lake Rd and WB 10 A 13 B 10 Whitcomb St 4-Way Stop NB 12 B 11 B SB 8 A 11 B EB 9 A 8 A 11 Lake Rd and Center Side Street WB 10 A 9 A Ave Stop NB 10 A 8 A EB 7 A 4 A Lake Rd and East Dr WB 0 A 0 A 12 Side Street NB 10 B 10 B Stop SB - - - - Overall 32 C 37 D 14 Prospect Rd and WB 47 D 57 DE Shields St Signal NB 30 C 26 C SB 16 B 29 C 15 Prospect Rd and Overall 6 A 14 B Whitcomb St Signal EB 1 A 3 A D 70 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado WB 4 A 10 A NB 45 D 37 D SB 49 D 49 D Overall 16 B 22 C 16 Prospect Rd and WB 9 A 12 B Center Ave Signal NB 42 D 42 D SB 37 D 46 D Overall 38 D 51 D Prospect Rd and EB 53 D 44 D 28 College Ave Signal WB 38 D 68 E NB 32 C 37 D SB 30 C 57 E Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities The 2014 City of Fort Collins Bicycle Plan does not propose specific recommendations for Prospect Road or Lake Street. The conceptual design in this plan proposes a ten foot shared use path on Prospect Road from Shields Street to College Avenue . The conceptual design for Lake Street proposes six foot buffered bike lanes and a six foot sidewalk from Shields Street to College Avenue. Transit The following improvements were discussed between City staff, Transfort and CSU staff regarding transit along Prospect Road corridor: • Link the proposed pedestrian crossings to the bus stops • Design for adequate space to construct a bus shelter • Adjust location of bus stops o Prospect Road and Sheely Drive — move to the west by 30 feet (both eastbound and westbound stops) o Prospect and Centre Avenue — move to be just east of the intersection with Whitcomb Street (eastbound) • Add bus stops o Just east of Centre Avenue (eastbound) o Just west of Centre Avenue (westbound) • Develop intersection improvements for Prospect Road at Center Avenue • (Ped.lBike) Connect Lake Street to the underpass at College Avenue Parking CSU has identified 7 new parking facilities in the West Central Area , as shown in Figure 19 . One of these facilities is between Prospect and Lake on Whitcomb Street and another is on the northern side of Lake Street. The CSU Transportation and Parking Master Plan (April 2014 ) predicted changes in traffic due to FT ,I D 71 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study resulting changes in traffic patterns. The plan recommended operational changes in order to address these changes. If all of the parking facilities are constructed , the study recommends the following for Prospect Road and Lake Street: • Lake Street and Whitcomb Street — signalize and add one northbound left-turn lane OR a construct a single - lane roundabout. • Lake Street and Center Avenue — one left-turn lane on the westbound approach. • Prospect Road and Shields Street — one right-turn lane on the westbound approach . • Prospect Road and Whitcomb Street — dual left-turn lanes on the southbound approach and one left-turn lane on the northbound approach . • Prospect Road and Center Avenue — dual left-turn lanes on the northbound approach . • Prospect Road and College Avenue — dual left-turn lanes on each of the eastbound and westbound approaches, one right-turn lane on the northbound approach . CONCLUSION An evaluation of the existing and future conditions in the West Central Area indicates there are areas that have some vehicular operational issues, lack the presence of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and have safety concerns for all users. In summary, the following roadways and intersections have LOS below the acceptable LOS D and /or a high safety concern (Table 9 ) : TABLE 10: SUMMARY OF LOCATIONS WITH OPERATIONAL AND SAFETY CONCERNS OperationalConcerns due to High and/or Bicycles Elizabeth St - EB between City Park Ave Shields St and Elizabeth St Shields St and Plum and Shields Shields St and Plum St St/ North Dr Drake Rd - WB between Worthington Ave Shields St and Stuart St Shields St and Elizabeth St and Shields St, EB between Research Prospect Rd and Center Blvd and Bay Rd , EB between Bay Rd Heatheridge Rd and Prospect Rd Ave and MAX Shields St and Mulberry St Prospect Rd and Whitcomb Shields St - SB between Lake Stand St Prospect Rd , NB between Stuart St and City Park Ave and Elizabeth St Prospect Rd , and SB between Plum St Prospect Rd and Shields St Taft Hill Rd and Mulberry St and Elizabeth St and Centre Ave and Shields St and Lake St D 72 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado Drake Rd Shields St and Pitkin St Drake Rd and Redwing Whitcomb St = SB between Lake St and Shields St and Prospect Rd Rd / Bay Rd Prospect Rd City Park Ave and Mulberry St Center Ave = SB between Lake St and Prospect Rd , NB between Lake St and Prospect Rd , and NB between Prospect Rd and Lake St Taft Hill Rd = SB between Valley Forge Ave and Drake Rd Once all of the data is received and processed , improvements will be recommended in order to make this area safer and more efficient for all modes. Prospect Road will be considered in greater detail, due to the corridor ' s direct linkage to the CSU campus, fair LOS and high safety issues, and the need for access management. Recommendations will build off of previous planning efforts as well as the analysis discussed in this report. r� ,� D 73 W 40 0 CM) 0 L am a� LLJ a a a This page intentionally left blank OProspect Corrido , West Prospect Potential Median Concepts Potential locations of medians along West Prospect Road, between Shields Street and Taft Hill Road. Example of street retrofitting opportunities along arterial roads. Access point, typ Planted median, typ 0 L ; ? o N v s -O N N �. �• ,•- - !! � g Na Prospect Rd y Y 1 a Am I ' �' � a y � '� 1y . � v � .l � 1 ' l. � �. �1 gyp. •. • ' Access point, typ Planted median, typ 3' Paved median N a' 14:9. , } CO t t t t t t t t- y _ ♦ • Prospect _ L +i U) 1 q6 � / s .- �1 Ot r v f N r Concrete median Planted understory Median trees Travel Lane Concrete median Curb and gutter Upright/Columnar Curb and gutter Potential Median Enlargement Legend = = =______-" Potential Median ? Access Points WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 3 OProspect Corrido , This page intentionally left blank WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 4 L 4) Q L 0 L L 0 CM) V Q. 0 L am c LL a a Q This page intentionally left blank OProspect Corrido ' Prospect Road — Alternative A - "All About Pedestrians" Alternative A maintains existing curb lines and roadway width while adding pedestrian enhancements with the overall idea being a renovation and retrofit which better accommodates pedestrians. The following design elements are included: 4 travel lanes 6' detached sidewalk 8' tree lawn Planted median Potential north/ Plymouth Congregational IF Potential 8' sidewalk connection to Lake Street Potential future condition south connection Church - on Whitcomb - Treelawnl Right-of-Way detached sidewalk and bike Enhanced intersection Street tree Access point, Transfort 6' sidewalk Right-of-Way line Potential pedestrian line 4 ¢ lane treatment with refuge 40' 0 C., t t tsto t activated crossing Access 6' sidewalk islands _ YP YP R YP _ r . . 8' treelawn point, — �g� treelawn Raised - _ _ -- — tYP Mr- Wr UP 7W - -- - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - _ _ - - - - - - ' - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ rn : r a li E Potential sidewalk S m Existing o v connection to �PPy i y Residential P. t Spring Creek Trail O, o Neighborhood s CSU - Aggie Village NLmedian �� ! Connection to ? Enhanced Lake Street ° m I CSU - crosswalk for Right-of-W ewalk Ra Parking Mason Corridor m ��— Ri ht-of-Wa Raised 6' sidewalk trail line Garage 9 Y Street tree ITransfort $ 8' tree lawn line median 1. 8' tree lawn 40' O.C., typ. stop, typ. - - c� �rJ � ` �• u.ii,� ,::�., . , - ITransfort Potential ) �gike box Existing trees Existing walk to m U Desired Enhanced intersection stop, typ. underpass Jto remain remain ° _ ¢ o bus pull- treatment with refuge Hilton Fort Collins m� out islands L.. � Nj Legend - Potential Right-of-Way (ROW) dedication/acquisition Pedestrian Wayfinding ■ a Transfort Stop WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-1 OProspect Corrido , Prospect Road — Alternative A - "All About Pedestrians" Section A-A' - Shields Street to Whitcomb Street Tree lawn Detached sidewalk 0 0Cc AM66 � � o w w 6' 8' 11 ' 11 ' 11 ' 11 ' 8' 6' Existing curb to curb dimension `Existing ROW - 60'�` -}—Total Required ROW - 72' }- Shields Street to Whitcomb Street tl Bike Transit Impacted Properties Impacted Pr (North) (South 4 Travel Lanes 6' Detachetl Sidewalk N/A Stops 13 Properties: High 23 Properties. High 8'Tree Lawn Planted Median (where applicable) Section B-B' - Whitcomb Street to Center Avenue Section C-C' - Center Avenue to College Avenue Raised planted median ROW Dedication/Acquisition Range Turn lane Tree lawn Detached sidewalk I Low = o-s Netlium = s-1o' Attached sidewalk Detached sidewalk Existing spruce trees o 0 0 Cc CSU-Aggie Villa e South, .y CSU-Aggie Village North w w _ m 5As 61�`8' 10'110, 9' 10't10't8'46'-�- � 8' 10' 10'-�-9';10' 10' 8' 6' Existing ROW 0Existingir � Total Required ROW 77 4Total Required ROW - 7 — Whitcomb �,- Street to Center Avenue 4Aot Bike Transit Impacted Properties (North) Impacted Properties (South) Center Avenue to College Avenue hArstri-Veh Bike Transit impacted Properties (Noah) Inn 4 Travel Lanes 6' Detached Sidewalk N/A Stops 2 Properties: Medium 2 Properties: Medium AdLi B'Tree Lawn Planted Median 4Travel Lanes 6' Detached Sidewalk N/A Stops 11 Properties: Medium 4 Properties: Medium 8'Tme Lawn Planted Median (where applicable) WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F 2 OProspect Corridor Prospect Road — Alternative B - "Boulevard" Alternative B emphasizes minimal right - of - way (ROW) acquisition, replacing one travel lane with a buffered bike lane on each side of the road west of Whitcomb, and includes pedestrian enhancements such as a detached 6' walk way. 2 travel lanes west of Whitcomb Street, 4 travel lanes east of Whitcomb Street 6' tree lawn Detached sidewalk/shared bike and pedestrian path 5' buffered bike lanes west of Whitcomb Street, 10' shared use bike/pedestrian path east of Whitcomb Street Planted median Plymouth _ � Potential8' sidewalk Future condition onWhitcombl v Potential north/ Congregational c connection to Lake - Tree lawn detached sidewalk! Enhanced intersection south connection Church Street and bike lane treatment with refuge Transfort o laee islands Street tree (Access point, (stop, typ. 16' sidewalk Right-of-Way Potential (Right-of-Way Access 6' sidewalk 1 ¢ Raised median o 40' O.C., typ. typ. 1 6' tree line — pedestrian !line point, typ. ' - - - - - _ lawn — activated crossing — 6'ltr IQ x � � — # • tr. � 5' bike lane - 5' bikelane including 2 buffer including 2' buffer \ hP m I a Desirpeull out Bike pagh ' S \ Existingd bus throw � �y0� a v � Residential Potential sidewalk Neighborhood \ connection to Spring P Creek Trail o_ I + - L lip i CSU - Aggie Village North - v I " .t Enhanced Connection to Lake c crosswalk Street 10' shared bike/ 1 m I < for Mason a ped path sed v CSU - Corridor trail - v Parkewalk Lkight-of-W�y meld an +w Garalge Right-of-Way Raised 6' 8idree lawn 1 U Street tree 40' O.C., t �SSaonsiort o 8' tree lawn line median I , I — I Yp ., YP I . _cam - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - � ' 10' shared bike/ 1 m (Transfort Potential Bike box Existing trees �0 shared bike/ 110' shared bike/ I I ���--- T Desired ped path stop, typ. underpassItoo ped path 1 pros ect bus pull- Enhanced remain ped path cc Station o out intersection y Hilton Fort Collins m 1 treatment withislands + it Legend O IPotential Right-of-Way (ROW) dedication/acquisition Pedestrian Wayfinding Transfort Stop WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F 3 OProspect Corrido , Prospect Road — Alternative B - "Boulevard" Section A-A' - Shields Street to Whitcomb Street Raised planted median Buffered bike lane Tree lawn 0l-. - 4511" 6' o c- . hi AMMIllillir mXW6' 6' 5' 10' 8' 1 2' Buffer 2' Buffer Existing ROW - 60' 4 Total Required ROW - 67' Shields Street to Whitcomb Street Motor Vehicle Bike Transit Impacted Properties (Npph) Impacted Purperties (South) 2 Travel Lanes h' Detached Sidewalk B' Bike Lane w/2' Buffer Stops 13 Properties: Law 0 Properties (Planted Median) Section B-B' - Whitcomb Street to Center Avenue Section C-C' - Center Avenue to College Avenue Raised planted median ROW Dedication/Acquisition Range Turn lane Tree lawn Shared bike/ped path Low - o-s' Medium = s-16 High = I0' andabove Shared bike/ped path Detached sidewalk _ �' Existingsprucetrees 0 - - "►`; CS tlAggie V' x Cc x `- w w CSU-Aggie Vill w North 10' 8' 10' 10' 9' 10' 10' 8' 10' 10' 110' 10' -9' 10' 10' 8' 6' �- Existing o al Requuired ROW ' 8w -}—Total Required ROW - Whitcomb Street to Center Avenue Center Avenue to College Avenue Mot Bike Transit Impacted Properties (N Bike Transit 4 Travel Lanes IO'Shared Path 16 Shared Path Stops 2 Properties: High 2 Properties: High 4 Travel Lanes Detached/Attached I Shared Path to Stops 11 Properties: Medium 4 Properties: High (Planted median) Sidewalk Mason Trail Detached/Artached WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-4 OProspect Corridor Prospect Road — Alternative C - "Complete Street" Alternative C maintains existing travel lanes and adds a detached shared bike/pedestrian path while minimizing right - of - way (ROW) acquisition on the south side of Prospect Road. 4 travel lanes Planted median east of Whitcomb Street 1 O' shared bike/pedestrian path 6' tree lawn Planted median east of Whitcomb Street nI Plymouth n '� ' Potential 8' sidewalk Future condition on Potential north/south Congregational .-.-- . connection to Lake Whitcomb - Tree lawn on ChurchrmKEL, .. Street detached sidewalk and bike Enhanced intersection 10' shared bike/ lane treatment with refuge Street tree Access Right-of-Way (Transfort 10' shared bike/ped pathotentrian ped path / Q �Olyi stands 40' 0 C., typ. point, typ. line Mop typ. Pactivated t tossing Tway line Typ ss point 6' tree awn 6' treelawn • � - r— --` I 110' shared bike/ped path shared bike/ I6 tree lawn — Y ped path w \-ov � / ¢ oExisting Potential P Y I Py Residential connection to Spring� p o r N Creek Trail ry`P a Neighborhood I n 1 � CSU - ' I I II Parking v CSU - Aggie Village North II Garage Enhanced Connection to c Lake Street crosswalk for � 10' shared bike/ped / m Mason Corridor Right-of-Way- prath. Raised median ro 10' shared bike/ped / 2� trail o, line path Right-of-Way Raised 10' shared bike/ped Transfort a, 6' treelawn line median path = ,, r ,� 6' tree lawn Street tree stop, typ. _ — _ ' O.C., typ. • � , -WL WIL — _ _ o E r 110' shared bike/ 6' tree lawn 1 m -o • . o ' -; s —��< Transfort Potentia Exlstin trees 110' shared bike/ I O' shared bike/ U n I ped path 1 Bike box 9. d Desired Enhanced intersection stop, typ. underpass � � to remain ped at q ped path / o I I T1 y bus pull- treatment with refuge ; Hilton Fort Collins m owl out islands (Ill , N N � Legend Potential Right-of-Way (ROW) dedication/acquisition Pedestrian Wayfinding ■ Transfort Stop WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-5 OProspect Corrido , Prospect Road — Alternative C - "Complete Street" Section A-A' - Shields Street to Whitcomb Street Tree lawn Shared bike/ped Shared bike/ped path of � Lpath xwl j � A 10' 6' 10' Existing ROW - 60' �— Total Required ROW - 72' Shields Street to Whitcomb Street 6=&k Bike (North 4 Travel Lanes 10' Sharetl path (Noah 10• Shared Path (Noon Stops 17Properties - 14-High 20 Properties: l&Low 1 Center turn lane Side) side) 3 - Low 4Medium 8' Sitlewalk (South B' Sitlewalk (South side) Raised median Side) Section B-B' - Whitcomb Street to Center Avenue Section C-C' - Center Avenue to College Avenue Raised planted median oqqROW Dedication/Acquisition Range Turn lane Tree lawn Shared bike/ped path ' Low = o-s Metliam = s-1o' High = loantlamve Attached Shared Detached Shared Bike/Ped Pat Bike/Ped Path o _ kExistingce treeso 0CSU-Aggie VilSouthwggie Villag Pot rz im r 10' 6' 10' 10' 10''� 10' 1011 61 10' } 10' 10' 10' 9' 10'� 10' 6' 10' OW al Required ROW 08L -1 Total Requiirreed ROW t Whitcomb Street to Center Avenue Center Avenue to College Avenue Moto Transit Impacted Properties (North) Impacted Properties (South) Impactetl Properties (North) Impacted Properties (South) 4 Travel Lanes IIT Shared Path 10' Shared Path Stops 2 Properties: High 2 Properties: High 4Travel Lanes 10' Shared Path IIT Shared Path Stops 15 Properties-High 6 Properties Medium Raised Median 1 Center turn lane Pullouts Raised median WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-6 OProspect Corrido , Prospect Road — Multi - Modal Performance Measures PROSPECT ROAD Multimodal Level of Service (MMLOS) for Prospect Road was evaluated using state-of-the-practice techniques for each mode of transportation. The pedestrian score is based on built environment factors that affect walkability. The bicyclist score, Level of Traffic Stress (LTS), is based on roadway factors that affect bicyclist comfort. The transit score is based on factors that affect transit vehicle reliability and built environment factors that affect a transit passenger's experience. Performance for automobiles is based on roadway segment level of service (LOS), which accounts for vehicle travel speed, and intersection level of service (LOS), which accounts for vehicle delay at intersections. Alternative A shows modest improvements for pedestrians and transit users. Alternatives B and C most improve the pedestrian score of Prospect Road by constructing wide, continuous walkways along Prospect Road. Alternatives B and C also improve bicyclist comfort (Level of Traffic Stress) and the transit score as compared to the existing configuration and Alternative A Alternative B, which has two travel lanes west of Whitcomb Street (one in each direction), slightly reduces automobile LOS compared to the existing configuration and Alternative C which maintain four travel lanes west of Whitcomb Street. PEDESTRIAN BICYCLE TRANSIT AUTO Z LAKE ST LAKE ST LAKE ST O LAKE ST O O VI f O F O F O n O Wr� W PROSPECT RD r ut m M PROSPECT RD m M PROSPECT RD PM AM m m yr PROSPECT RD M � � � � � _ _ W w w PM 7�7 a a W a a N 1<II y m N m 0 m a LAKE ST D LAKE ST D LAKE ST LAKE ST n F N D N o o y o Zut PROSPECT RD m PROSPECT RD m in PROSPECT RD m 0 PROSPECT RD PM AM _ m 0 �AF1 W w a w D D < = pM a F 2 < 2 < QN m N m 1211 m m co W LAKE ST LAKE ST LAKE ST LAKE ST n O n n F r o O Q M r h O O H Z in PROSPECT RD m m PROSPECT RD m ut _ _ PROSPECT RD _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ m u• PROSPECT RD AM m W w D W D W D PM D QM T V21 m N T A T V LAKE ST LAKE ST n n LAKE ST n LAKE ST n F O F O 0f O Za r M r m PROSPECT RD m M PROSPECT RD m vt PROSPECT RD m Q . PROSPECFRO PM AM m S D D JQ M m W m 0m vi m Pedestrian Score Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Transit Score Roadway LOS Intersection LOS Low The pedestrian score is based on sidewalk LTS applies the same methodology Low The transit score is based on transit reliability (roadway A or B A or B Roadway and intersection LOS are 000 • • 2 width, buffer width and distance to the that is used in the 2014 Bicycle Master Plan. LOS) and built environment factors including proximate AM based on 2035 traffic volumes and nearest crossing. • • • 3 The score from 1-5 represents the level of walkways and bikeways and bus stop amenities. C C �( HCM 2000 methodologies. Medium 000 5 bicyclist comfort based on traffic volume, speed, Medium D D �C number of lanes, and presence and quality of E or F PM the bikeway. High E or F High N/A WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F 7 OProspect Corridor Prospect Road - Conceptual Design A conceptual design was then developed based on attributes of Alternative B and Alternative C. This was then refined in response to stakeholder input. The conceptual design maintains 4 travel lanes throughout the corridor, while adding a center turn lane with planted medians west of Whitcomb Street. A typical 1 O' shared used bike/pedestrian path is provided on both the north and south sides of the roadway. The need for right-of-way (ROW) acquisition was minimized on the south side of the road, due to proximity of residences to the ROW as well as aligning future ROW acquisitions with established ROW lines on the north side of the road. Prospect Road - Conceptual Design Elements: Four travel lanes Center turn lane/median Tree lawn Detached sidewalk/shared bike and pedestrian path Mid-block bike/pedestrian crossing Transit stops/pullouts Note: Specific and detailed intersection improvement decisions will be refined through various design and other project processes. This includes City capital projects, identified requirements due to area developments, and stadium mitigation measures. For example, the intersection of Prospect Road and Centre Avenue is currently being considered for northbound and southbound double left-turns. Enhanced intersection Plymouth Potential Future condition on Whitcomb - Treel; v trement with refuge islands y _ v Congregational Church 8' sidewalk - lawn detached sidewalk and bike ' I Potential north/south connections to lane connection 10' Shared bike/ped path Lake Street Street tree Access Transfort Right-of- Potential pedestrian o Right-of- Access point, typ. 10' Shared bike/ped path 40' O.C., typ point, typ stop typ Way line activated crossing Way line hh - - - - - - -- . .«— - s 6' Treelawn --- - - - - _ - - - - - Y - - - - - - - ' • � _� -..1' - - - - -- - ' Tree lawn �_ .. .. 1t 8' Sidewalk 16 Sidewalk 16' Tree lawn i-r is II . ' ~ Gateway corner refuge Interim condition required `Potential sidewalk with existing land use, typ. connection to 1 S1P a Existing Residential I r Spring Creek Trail Py� ` o Neighborhood Lki �� rn i P a 0 i+ � a Enhanced r 0 � '' CSU - Parkin Connection to intersection I v CSU - Aggie Village North g o Lake Street treatment with i o Garage N refuge islands ' v IRight-of-Way line Raised median m Mason Trail > g Y Right-of-Way line Interim condition s a bike/ped path Potential 10' Shared bike/ required with existing Enhanced- Enhancedwn under ass ed ath Raised median land use, t pull-out foBus � Masolk crosswalk n ped. s gnalw/ pulliroed bus Gateway L refuee1� rrI P P P YP2La2ne - - - - _ Trail , � i I 6' Tree lawn 10' Shared bike/ped path ""-" ' - ' - - """'-' - - -c3 _...........x....... _ Sidewalk conneetr Transfort } } .�._._. _ _ ._.._. _ _.._ _ o . r stop, typ. Potential ) Bike box with Existing trees 10 Shared o 10' Shared bike/ped underpass realigned bike to remain bike/ped path path i n Refer to Midtown in lane striping m - Mason Trail Motion for CollegeI Hilton Fort Collins Ave corridor _ Legend O Potential Right-of-Way (ROW) dedication/acquisition Pedestrian Wayfinding a Transfort Stop Interim condition required with existing land use WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F 8 OProspect Corrido , Prospect Road - Typical Street Sections Typical Cross-Section - Whitcomb Street to Center Avenue Tree lawn Raised planted median I Shared bike/ped path Existing spruceACSU-Aggie Village -South SU-Aggie North Knit f South Side 10' 6' 10' 10' 8' 10', 10' 6' 10' North Side 2.5' 1 .5' 1 .5' 2.5' Existing ROW - 60' 4 Total Required ROW - 88' *Note - Total required ROW dimension includes 30" curb/gutter along street and 18" curb/gutter around median(s) per LCUASS standards Whitcomb Street to Center Avenue Bike Transit Impacted Prop Impacted Prope (North) (South) 4 Travel Lanes 10' Shared Path 10' Shared Path Stops 2Properties: 2-High 2Properties: 2-High Raised median &Tree Lawn Typical Cross-Section - Shields Street to Whitcomb Street Typical Cross-Section - Center Avenue to College Avenue Tree lawn Center turn lane ROW Dedication/Acquisition Range Center turn lane bike/ped path uw = 0-s Medium High = lo' andahove Shared bike/ped Shared bike/ped Sidewalk path I path a, o 0 El o jShared X South Side 6' 6' 10' 10' 10' 10' 100' North Side South Side 10' �6' 10, 101, 10' �10, 10' 6' 10' � North Side 2.5' 2.5' xisting ROW - 60' 2.5' 2.5' Total Required ROW - 83' Existing ROW - 60' Total Required ROW - 87' *Note - Total required ROW dimension includes 30" curb/gutter along street per *Note - Total required ROW dimension includes 30" curb/gutter along street per LCUASS standards LCUASS standards Shields Street to Whitcomb Street Center Avenue to College Avenue Motor Vehicle Bike Transit Impactetl Properties Impacted Properties (North) (South) Tran Impacted Proper0es Impacted Properties MEL A&ML 4 Travel Lanes 10' Shared Path (Noah) 10' Shared Path (North) Stops 15 Properties: l 54igh 13 Properties: 7-Low 4 Lanes 10'Shar Path 10' Shared Path Stops 15 Properties: l6-High & Properties & Medium 1 center turn lane &8'Sitlewalk(South) "' Sidewalk (South) 6- Metlium l centerenter t turn lane &' Tree Lawn Pullouts Raised Median &Tree Lawn Raised Median WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F 9 OProspect Corrido , Prospect Road - View looking west Pedestrian/bicyclist 10' Travel lane, typical Potential street light activated crossing gateway banners 8' Sidewalk 6' Tree lawn Raised, planted 6' Tree lawn 10' Shared bike/ped median path 1 'Ymow 4M Al e r VL 11 ll 'l_t y..l . (iG I I a La t 1 4. Ir i • � I I I I I I I ( tit l , _ I I WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-10 OProspect Corrido , Prospect Road Conceptual Design - Interim Condition This diagram includes potential interim designs that may be used if existing land uses are still in place at the time of Final Design and Construction. I� s a CSU - Parking Garage _ I10' Shared bike/ped path Interim condition Raised median Interim condition Bus pull-out Enhanced crosswalk for a1 - — -Attached -Attached 6' sidewalk Mas0n Corridor trail> 1 - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - I - - - - - - - �. �$ � a i Interim condition AL 1 # I& � - - - � _ � Allill o Existing trees to 10' Shared bike/ped - Attached 10' Shared bike/ped path - Bike box remain path r c Hilton Fort Collins m . v Angle parking - 45 degree stalls Interim condition Interim condition - Turning Point -No gateway corner refuge and no refuge island 10' shared bike/ped path parking realignment and attached 10' shared bike/ped path m ! Interim condition Right-of-Way Street tree jbikZhpad0' red Raised median 1y -6' attached sidewalk line, t p 40�D.C., t - 6' Tree lawn Access point, typ. -L \ path �6' Tree lawn �8 YP YP � �Z ® 7% , 8Sidewalk6' Sidewalk Tree lawnInterim condition 1 6' attached sidewalkAccess point, typ. Gateway corner refuge _ Existing Residential Neighborhood WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-11 OProspect Corridor Prospect Road - Removed/Proposed Trees v Plymouth v I v Congregational Church v I � I � m E treet tree 40 0 C , typ. line c H- H 11 ■ 1 1, 1 - 1 1 _ _ _I 1 _- __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ L _ Right-of-WayI' 1 L - I' 1 - 1-= -�' _ _ - I - 1 1 - I i �i F- 11 - 1 L1 � 1 1 - nlu 11 1- 1 1 - 1 1 - 1 I , 13 - I I q Existing Residential I Neighborhood o I a I 1 • I 1 CSU - Aggie Village North I CSU - Parking w I _ I Garage 5 < U N Right-of-Way line --.. Right-of-Way line Raised median y v + -111_ I Id 1 ■ M J I K I1 11 4 11 11 • 11 -i 11 .. 11 11 •. 11 d1 11-- 1 11 _ - - � - - 1 I a Existing trees `v to remain ¢° Prospect Station Hilton Fort Collins Legend \ N. i ( � Tree to be removed Prospect Corridor - Conceptual Design - Tree Removal/Proposed Trees to be Removed Proposed Trees Additional Trees Proposed Tree 115 180 65 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-12 OProspect Corrido , Lake Street — Alternative A Alternative A provides a protected bike lane on the north and south side of Lake Street with a planted median providing separation from vehicle parking. The following design elements are included- 2 travel lanes On-street parking 6' one-way protected bike lanes Tree lawn (select locations) 6' attached sidewalk 1 1 1 1 Future Stadium 1 Future CSU 1 4' planted buffer a 1 project 1 1 1 1 1 Parallel parking 6' bike lane 6' sidewalk r a MX Mr! Lake Stre t _ CSU - Aggie Village North a V 3 J U r11 O Section A-A' arking Drive lane Planted buffer gt,Paralleip 0MENEM w 6' 6' 81— 10' +10, +8' 6' 6' 4' 4' -_Existing ROW - 60' �— 4--Total Required ROW - 74' WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-13 OProspect Corrido , Lake Street — Alternative B Alternative B provides a two-way protected bike lane on the north side of Lake Street with a planted median providing separation from vehicle parking. This takes advantage of the lower number of access points here, where Colorado State University main campus land-use is dominant. The following design elements are included- 2 travel lanes On-street parking 6' two-way protected bike lanes (6' per lane) Tree lawn (select locations) 6' attached sidewalk 4' planted buffer Future Stadium 1 Future CSU 1 a 1 project 1 tall parking 'd Ik 1 1s ewa r _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ a _ Pa elprotected bike Y 6 protecte i e lane Lake Street —( VF i 6' sidewalk 6' tree lawn 9 CSU - Aggie Village a p North _ < A r 4 O Section A-A' Parallel parking Drive lane Planted buffer Two-wa ted bike lane _ :O � t CSU - Aggie t o t l L I - illage North 0 it x w W 6' 6' S' 10' 10' 8' N-12' 6' —} Existing ROW - 60' Total Required ROW - 70' � WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-14 OProspect Corridor Lake Street — Alternative C Alternative C maintains existing curb lines and roadway width and removes on street parking while incorporating a protected bike lane on the north and south side of Lake Street with a planted median providing separation from travel lanes. The following design elements are included: 2 travel lanes 6' one-way protected bike lanes Tree lawn (select locations) 6' attached sidewalk Future Stadium = 1 Future CSU 1 4' planted buffer a 1 project 1 1 1 Twowaytra el lane - no 12' widetwobwy IE fisting 1 1 parking on either side 1 protecteda lane lsidewalk R - A& + ram 1 Y I _ 76' tree lawn 16' sidewalk QU - AggieVillage o •i• � . orth — I m r > t a v" _ Ol O Section A-A' Drive lane Planted buffer Two-way protected bike lane �,- Exi s ewalk CSU - Aggie - • �� Village North o 0 m m C - N X W W } Existing ROW - 60' k- 1—Total Required ROW - 65' t- WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-15 OProspect Corrido , Lake Street — Multi-Modal Performance Measures LAKE STREET Multimodal Level of Service (MMLOS) for Lake Street was evaluated using state-of-the-practice techniques for each mode of transportation. The pedestrian score is based on built environment factors that affect walkability. The bicyclist score, Level of Traffic Stress (LTS), is based on roadway factors that affect bicyclist comfort. The transit score is based on factors that affect transit vehicle reliability and built environment factors that affect a transit passenger's experience. Performance for automobiles is based on roadway segment level of service (LOS), which accounts for vehicle travel speed, and intersection level of service (LOS), which accounts for vehicle delay at intersections. Alternative C most improves the pedestrian score of Lake Street by removing on-street parking. Each alternative similarly improves bicyclist comfort (Level of Traffic Stress) and the transit score as compared to the existing configuration. No alternatives significantly change automobile LOS as compared to the existing configuration. PEDESTRIAN BICYCLE TRANSIT AUTO tz F n N O u~ O N O W a LAKE ST O LAKE ST m p LAKE ST m O PM AM m Wn W41 9 m W • T AM m m m Q W n r n F n F n Q N O N r N O N O LAKE 5T W LAKE ST n p LAKE ST �_ m O PM AM m W W m m w � � � � � � �� m AM •� m Q N I<II w m N m w PM m m W Q N O N 0 N 0 0 O r O LAKE ST m O LAKE ST m p LAKE ST �� MMMMIMMMM m O t••eer•� aM m W w m w m w � � � � � � �� m AM PM n Q y m u—Zi m u—Zi m N PM m u W F n n r n F n Q w O r N r N O p LAKE ST m C LAKE ST m p LAKE ST �_ _ _ _ — m O L AM m le J n w n w a —eras n W w m m � � � � � �� m AM m a u=i N N N PM m m m m Pedestrian Score Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Transit Score Roadway LOS Intersection LOS w0000n Low The pedestrian score is based on sidewalk • • • 2 LTS applies the same methodology an an Low The transit score is based on transit reliability (roadway � A or B A or B Roadway and intersection LOS are MMMME width, buffer width and distance to the 909 4 that is used in the 2014 Bicycle Master Plan. ME LOS) and built environment factors including proximate AM based on 2035 traffic volumes and C nearest crossing. The score from 1-5 represents the level of ME Medium walkways and bikeways and bus stop amenities. C HCM 2000 methodologies. Medium bicyclist comfort based on traffic volume, speed, _ _ D D number of lanes, and presence and quality of � E or F PM the bikeway. an an High � E or F High mmmmm N/A A WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-16 OProspect Corridor Lake Street Conceptual Design The conceptual design for Lake Street was developed through stakeholder input on the three alternatives. Based on input from Colorado State University and the City, on street parking was desired to be maintained. Concerns were also expressed regarding a two-way protected bike lane on the north side, where minimizing turning conflicts could prove to be a challenge. The conceptual design is generally based on Alternative A. Lake Street - Conceptual Design Elements: Two travel lanes On-street parking Protected bike lanes with planted buffer Attached/detached sidewalk Tree lawn (select locations) Mid-block bike/pedestrian crossings Transit stops Note: Specific and detailed intersection improvement decisions will be refined through various design and other project processes. This includes City capital projects, identified requirements due to area developments, and stadium mitigation measures. E Buffer 11 ' Travel lanes Sidewalk connection to Pitkin - - - CSU - PERC \ Future CSU Stadium Bikebox :=3 Street ' � Transfort ' Future ' Gateway corner refuge i rossing, 8� Parallel 6' Striped bike lane 6' Sidewalk Buffer crossing, t \. stop, typl_ • CSU � • • yp parking 9' yp � Project, Access point, typ. Right-of-Way line I ' Buffer tree, typ .rs _ ` . • - — - - _ - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - -------- ---- -- --- - --- _ _ __ ___ _ _ __ __ ___ ____ ___ _____ _ _ ______ _ _ - _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ e ane Planted buffer _ ' —P T Pedestrian crossing c - J i - Pedestrian - - - -- - - - - - !son - - _ •- L - • • } ; � 6' Striped buffered ` - ' ¢ g Plymouth crossing 6' Bike lane 4' Striped buffer 16' Sidewalk w I bike lane Congregational Church Interim condition Existing curb - _ Islamic required with on maintained Center off-street 90 degree (South only) Existing Residential in • Potential sidewalk connection parking Potential sidewalk to Neighborhood to Prospect Road connection Prospect Road E I Future condition on Whitcomb - Tree lawn detached sidewalk and bike lane t I II 3 i • Pedestrian beacon r Wider tree lawn to 8' Parallel parking Future CSU avoid impacts to 12' Bike path to .> , Project 11 ' Travellanes ex. steam chillers 4 a potential underpass4rossingRight-of-Way rnaround 11 ' Travellanes o + Access point, �, v 1 8 Parallel parking Bike lanes A Buffer line ro' r - - u ere lean R P e/ ,- - - - - - -- - -------- - d b k I e ♦ �i ♦ ♦ 1i 1 . sjt w Stripe Sha bik♦, —♦ # i -- -- — --- `----------- ed Late ---- - -c — o+ Yp I ` ♦ -- t - ♦ ♦ n * ♦ s ♦ - --- -- - ■ Existing curd �Pedgstrian Existing curb/ Potential transit -°o i 'i 0 maintained - � ` • ' sidewalk maintained interline service or ^ crossing o Mason Trail (Sortth only) 4 a v (South only) transfer stops 0 1 . > CSU - Parking _ I - ` ' • ' % • • a Garage - I •`o _ Gateway corner refuge . . N y _ CSU - Aggie Village North � • � � _ m •,-•� �To potential 1 L) bmderpass Legend Potential Right-of-Way (ROW) dedication/acquisition Pedestrian Wayhnding ■ i a Transfort Stop Interim condition required with existing land use WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-17 OProspect Corrido , Lake Street Conceptual Design Typical Cross-Section N Parallel parking Travel lane Bike lane Planted Attached walk buffer Existing curb — I Ln 3 34LL . . rclstv Aillage ` N NorthW , I / w South Side J�8'�P��6'44' 8'-11 '-11 '­ 844' 6' 6' North Side 1 .51 Existing ROW - 60' Total Required ROW - 75, Note - Total required ROW dimension includes 18" curb/gutter around planted buffer per LCUASS standards. The south side maintains the existing curb/gutter. ROW Dedication/Acquisition Range Whitcomb Street to Center Avenue Low = Oh' Medium = FID' High = 1Bond above Bike Transit cted Properties (South) 2 Travel Lanes (11) 6' Sidewalk 6' Protected Lane Stops (TBD) 9 Properties: None Parallel Parking (8) ] Properties - High 2 Properties - Medium Shields Street to Whitcomb Street ME Center Avenue to College Avenue Motor Vehicle Ped Bike Transit Impacted Properties (North) Impacted Properties (South) Motor Vehicle a Transit Impacted Properties (North) Impactetl Properties (South 2 Travel Lanes (11) 6' Sitlewalk MBufferetl/Protectetl Stops (TBD) 5 Properties -Metlium None 2Travel Lanes 5' Sitlewalk 6' Buffe,etl/Protectetl Stops (TIED) 7 Properties- Metlium 4 Properties - Low Parallel Parking (8) Lane Parallel Parking 10' Shared Use Path Lane WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-18 OProspect Corrido , Lake Street - View looking west near CSU parking garage 8' Parallel parking, typical Aggie Village North Buffer crossing Campus spine 6' Sidewalk, redevelopment typical north and south sides 11 ' Travel lane, CSU parking 4' Planted 6' Bike lane, typical garage buffer, typical typical north and Center Avenue south sides tit 4-4 < ` I � ry WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-19 OProspect Corrido , Prospect Road and Lake Street Conceptual Designs — Multi- Modal Performance Measures PROSPECT ROAD LAKE STREET Multimodal Level of Service (MMLOS) for Prospect Road and Lake Street was evaluated using state-of-the-practice techniques for each mode of transportation. The pedestrian score is based on built environment factors that affect walkability. The bicyclist score, Level of Traffic Stress (LTS), is based on roadway factors that affect bicyclist comfort. The transit score is based on factors that affect transit vehicle reliability and built environment factors that affect a transit passenger's experience. Performance for automobiles is based on roadway segment level of service (LOS), which accounts for vehicle travel speed, and intersection level of service (LOS), which accounts for vehicle delay at intersections. The conceptual designs for Prospect Road and Lake Street improve each roadway's pedestrian score, bicyclist score (Level of Traffic Stress) and transit score by constructing continuous walkways and bikeways among other improvements. The conceptual designs for Prospect Road and Lake Street do not significantly change automobile LOS as compared to the existing configurations. EXISTING CONCEPTUAL DESIGN EXISTING CONCEPTUAL DESIGN Z LAKE ST D LAKE ST D m 0 O u� O w PROSPECT RD PROSPECT RD Or m 0 LAKE ST m O LAKE ST r m m F J m J m Q N I T N m M G N G a m m LAKE ST O LAKE ST n LU F O f O n n N r N r H H .Ar, PROSPECT RD m 0 PROSPECT RD m N N W w _ _ -- • _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ W LAKE ST m W LAKE ST D mm D m w m v m m m 1 LAKE ST LAKE ST n n F O N r N O o O m r Z w PROSPECT RD m ROS�EC_R r N r 0 r � � M M � � � � "• O �E S� m Jp LAKE ST m W D W D W W F ✓ I<II N m N N LAKE ST LAKE ST n n 0 m - AM PROSPECT RD m a . AM PROSPECT RD m m Or m Or PM a nn h AM PM —� < _ CAM PM� ��� < apM �I— _ C1 PM�I=M weIII ' C1 m ti m N PM < N PM m Pedestrian Score Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Transit Score Roadway LOS Intersection LOS High The pedestrian score is based on sidewalk 000 2 LTS applies the same methodology � M High The transit score is based on transit reliability (roadway � A or B • A or B Roadway and intersection LOS are width, buffer width and distance to the 000 3 that is used in the 2014 Bicycle Master Plan. � M LOS) and built environment factors including proximate � C • C AM based on 2035 traffic volumes and Medium nearest crossing. 4 The score from 1-5 represents the level of M � Medium walkways and bikeways and bus stop amenities. D ABC HCM 2000 methodologies. 000 D bicyclist comfort based on traffic volume, speed, � PM Low 000 5 number of lanes, and presence and quality of Low F the bikeway. � N/A Notes: • Automobile LOS is based on 2035 traffic volumes and HCM 2000 methodology. • The conceptual design for Prospect Road adds channelized right-turns at the Prospect Road/Shields Street intersection and the Prospect Road/College Avenue intersection. These channelized right-turns may slightly reduce automobile delay(not shown on diagram) The conceptual design for Prospect Road adds a center turn lane between Sheely Drive and Whitcomb Street. This center turn lane Prospect Road and Lake Street Multimodal Performance Measures will improve operations and safety for side street traffic turning to/from Sheely Drive and Prospect Lane. (not shown on diagram) • Roadway segment LOS on Lake Street is worse than some segments of Prospect Road due to the posted speed limit of these roadways. West/e St Central t ra I Area Plan Lake Street's posted speed limit is 25 MPH and Prospect Road's posted speed limit is 35 MPH. V V WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-20 Agenda Item 12 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY March 17 , 2015 City Council - STAFF Ted Shepard , Chief Planner Rebecca Everette , Associate Planner Cameron Gloss , Planning Manager Amy Lewin , Transportation Planner Paul Sizemore , FC Moves Program Manager SUBJECT Resolution 2015-038 Adopting the West Central Area Plan as an Element of the Comprehensive Plan of the City and Repealing the West Central Neighborhoods Plan as an Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan . EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to adopt the West Central Area Plan (the " Plan" ) comprised of the neighborhoods south and west of the CSU Main Campus . Subarea plans are a key component in implementing the City Plan vision to create an overall community that is innovative , sustainable and connected . The West Central Area Plan will help citizens address a wide variety of challenges and opportunities to ensure that these neighborhoods continue to be great places to live , work , shop , learn and play. The Plan strives to provide policy, guidance and direction on three primary topics : Land Use and Neighborhood Character, Transportation and Mobility, and Open Space Networks . In addition , other subject areas include urban design , housing , community facilities , and a strategic approach to delivering effective public services . The Plan also includes new conceptual designs for Prospect Road and Lake Street (from Shields Street to College Avenue) , which are intended to improve the safety and comfort of pedestrians , bicycles , buses and cars on both roadways . The Plan also considers various alternatives for making a range of improvements along Shields Street between Prospect Road and Laurel Street, including a potential grade -separated crossing . Extensive public outreach was conducted over the course of the planning process using a range of strategies . Beginning in January 2014 and concluding with an open house in March 2015 , a broad range of citizens , a stakeholder committee , and various organizations have participated and contributed to the formation of the Plan . STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution . The approval of the West Central Area Plan contains two major components : • The first component addresses the vision , policies and action items related to Land Use and Neighborhood Character, Transportation and Mobility , and Open Space Networks . In addition , the Plan provides a preliminary analysis of potential improvements for Shields Street between Prospect Road and Laurel Street with an emphasis on safe crossings for bicyclists and pedestrians at key intersections , including a potential grade-separated crossing . • The second component is more focused on transportation capital improvements with a primary emphasis on upgrading Prospect Road between College Avenue and Shields Street. In conjunction Item # 12 Page 1 Agenda Item 12 with revitalizing Prospect Road , improvements to Lake Street are recommended in order to supplement east-west travel for all modes . BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The West Central Area Plan is an important roadmap that provides a clear but flexible framework to guide positive change and development over the next 20 years . The Plan is an update and builds upon the 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan which was the first sub-area plan to be implemented after the original adoption of City Plan in 1997 . The adoption of the West Central Area Plan will result in repealing and replacing the 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan . The Plan includes three primary topic areas and corridor roadway designs : Land Use and Neighborhood Character, Transportation and Mobility ( including an analysis of the Shields Corridor) , Open Space Networks , and Prospect Road/Lake Street Conceptual Design . In addition , the Plan recognizes that the proposed CSU Stadium has been approved and various impacts have been identified that will need to be addressed . Relationship to City Plan and Other Plans City Plan , the City's comprehensive plan , was updated in 2011 , and provides the policy direction for continuing to improve specific neighborhoods : " Principle LIV 20 : Subarea and corridor planning efforts will be developed and updated as needed , tailoring City Plan 's citywide perspective to more focused area of the community, such as individual neighborhoods , districts , corridors and edges . " " Policy LIV 20 . 3 : Subarea plan policies are intended to supplement broader City Plan policies and provide additional guidance for specific areas . " The West Central Area Plan also builds upon the other key planning efforts : • Bicycle Master Plan (2014) • Nature in the City (anticipated adoption 2015) • Arterial Intersection Priority Study (ongoing ) • Colorado State University Master Plan (2014) Topic Area One : Land Use and Neighborhood Character Overall Vision: When planning in the West Central Area, we will strive to preserve, enhance and create diverse and vibrant neighborhoods that provide a high quality of life for present and future generations. The vision is further defined as : • Desirable , safe , and attainable neighborhoods that are a source of pride • Conveniently located parks , trails , open space , services and employment • New development that is compatible with existing development • A range of incomes and a wide variety of housing options • Well-integrated campus community • A collaborative design process that respects neighborhood concerns The analysis of Land Use and Neighborhood Character includes a full discussion of the following sub -topic areas : • Areas Stability, Enhancement and Development • Code Enforcement and Education • Neighborhood Services • Neighborhood Character Item # 12 Page 2 Agenda Item 12 Action Items : The Implementation Summary identifies 49 action items devoted to Land Use and Neighborhood Character. Key action items include : • Support efforts to establish a Police Services sub-station in the Plan area • Fund an additional staff position to support the Neighborhood Services Department and the Community Liaison position • Form a joint City-CSU committee for ongoing coordination and planning • Fill in missing gaps and widen sidewalks , particularly narrow attached sidewalks • Add street trees , particularly along West Prospect Road west of Shields Street • Update Land Use Code standards related to design and compatibility of high -density development projects Topic Area Two : Transportation and Mobility (Includes Shields Corridor Analysis) Overall Vision: When planning in the West Central Area, we will strive to build a connected network that supports people safely walking, biking, or using public transit as a primary way to travel while balancing the need for efficient auto travel throughout the area. The vision is further defined as : • Safe routes to school , CSU , and other major destinations • Safe , reliable , arterial streets that are easy to cross and serve residents and commuters • Option for residents to live without a car • Reshaped and retrofitted streets that meet the needs of all ages , abilities , and modes • Safe and efficient travel by car with adequate , convenient parking • Improved transit service and convenient stops • Easy access to transit (including MAX) The analysis of Transportation and Mobility includes a full discussion of the following sub-topic areas : • Safe Routes • Multi- Modal Options • Street Retrofitting • Parking • Potential Intersection and Roadway Projects • Shields Corridor Analysis Action Items : The Implementation Summary identifies 35 action items devoted to Transportation and Mobility. Key action items include : • Complete the Shields Corridor Analysis to identify future improvement projects between Prospect Road and Laurel Street • Further evaluate transportation needs along West Elizabeth Street through the upcoming West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor ( ETC) Plan • Retrofit Prospect Road west of Shields to include safe crossings , medians , and other safety and aesthetic improvements • Add intersection and roadway improvements to the citywide Capital Improvement Program • Monitor neighborhoods and implement Residential Parking Permit Program as needed Topic Area Three : Open Space Networks Overall Vision: When planning in the West Central Area, we will strive to establish a functional network of public and private lands that supports and connects wildlife, plants, and people. Item # 12 Page 3 Agenda Item 12 The vision is further defined as : • Access to nature , recreation , and environmental stewardship opportunities • Parks and open spaces that offer a variety of settings and experiences • Attractive urban landscape that supports habitat, character, and shade • Preserved and enhanced wildlife habitat and corridors • Comprehensive and ecological approach to stormwater management The analysis of Open Space Networks includes a full discussion of the following sub-topic areas : • Access to Parks and Open Space • Quality of Experience • Quantity and Location of Parks and Open Space • Alignment with Nature in the City Action Items : The Implementation Summary identifies 40 action items devoted to Open Space Networks . Key action items include : • Improve Lilac Park and coordinate with CSU and Gardens on Spring Creek • Upgrade two regional detention ponds : Skyline/Elizabeth , Taft/Glenmoor • Construct bridge crossings at three locations to connect neighborhoods • Pilot a residential tree canopy improvement project • Coordinate improvements , programs and code revisions with Nature in the City Topic Area Four: Prospect Road Corridor Overall Vision: When planning for the Prospect Corridor, we will strive to design and construct an attractive and functional, well-integrated, mixed-use corridor that serves the mobility needs of nearby neighborhoods, CSU and the community. The vision is further defined as : • Safe and comfortable corridor for all modes of travel • Safe crossings • Attractive gateway to campus , downtown , and midtown • Seamless connection to MAX Prospect Road between College Avenue and Shields Street has served our growing community since it was dedicated as a section line road with 60 feet of right-of-way in the nineteenth century. Since that time , the major improvements have been mostly limited to the key intersections . Even today, the width of the public right-of-way ranges generally between only 60 feet and 85 feet. In contrast, the standard for a constrained arterial roadway is 102 feet. The Plan strives to chart a path for improving Prospect Road in a practical manner while recognizing these existing constraints . Improvements to Lake Street are intended to relieve pressure off Prospect Road by providing significant upgrades for bicyclists and pedestrians . The overall approach for the conceptual designs for both Prospect Road and Lake Street is based on the following approach : • Provide holistic designs so that Prospect and Lake are connected • Develop a custom cross-section for Prospect that is narrower than standard while still providing improvements Item # 12 Page 4 Agenda Item 12 • Maintain the right-of-way line on the south side in front of houses to minimize costs and right-of-way acquisitions • Focus right-of-way acquisition primarily on the north side , zoned HMN • Coordinate with CSU 's master plans and other approved plans for redevelopment Prospect Road - Conceptual Design Elements : • Four travel lanes • Center turn lane/median • Tree lawn • Detached sidewalk / shared bike and pedestrian path • Mid-block bike / pedestrian crossing • Transit stops / pullouts Lake Street - Conceptual Design Elements : • Two travel lanes On-street parking • Protected bike lanes with planted buffer • Detached sidewalk • Tree lawn (selected locations ) • Mid-block bike / pedestrian crossings Transit stops CSU Stadium When planning in the West Central Area, we acknowledge the pending IGA with Colorado State University and will strive to continue to work with the University to mitigate potential short and long term impacts in order to preserve the quality of life in the surrounding neighborhoods. Traffic and Parking: To mitigate traffic , a Stadium Event Management Plan should consider temporary route adjustments and incorporate ways for Sheely/Wallenberg residents to be able to get in and out of their neighborhood . Public infrastructure improvements and wayfinding signs should be implemented to accommodate increased bicycle and pedestrian traffic , particularly crossing Prospect Road and Shields Street. An underpass at Prospect Road and Center Avenue would alleviate congestion and promote safety. Shuttle buses should be used between parking lots and the stadium . Noise: To mitigate the sound associated with games and concerts , there should be multiple speakers that are smaller and dispersed versus a large single source . Speakers should be narrow-cast and carefully aimed within the venue versus broad-cast over a large area . Massing at the south end of the stadium would help reduce decibel levels in the neighborhoods to the south . Concerts should be monitored and required to end at a specified time . Lighting: To mitigate lighting , all in -stadium fixtures should be aimed so that there is no spillover outside the venue . Again , massing at the south end would block spillover. Surrounding lighting should be down -directional with sharp cut-off light patterns versus flood lighting . Tailgating: To mitigate tailgating , pre and post-game activities should be directed to specific locations and not permitted within the neighborhoods . Note : Public comments on the stadium are included in Appendix B . Item # 12 Page 5 Agenda Item 12 CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS A key finding of the Plan is that funding will be needed for one new staff position to support the Community Liaison Office in order to strengthen existing Neighborhood Services and Off-Campus Life partnership programs . This position would be responsible for implementing new programs . This funding is the exception as most all other actions items can be funded from existing sources . For example , effective implementation may require the formation of an interdepartmental team that is able to deliver a variety of services with a wide range of scale and complexity. While the exact make-up of this team has yet to be finalized , there may be a need to adjust staff time allotments and administrative support. Such organizational efforts are not anticipated to require new funding . The capital projects identified in the Plan are expected to be funded over time at the discretion of City Council and only through established procedures for funding prioritization . For Prospect Road and Lake Street, the Plan provides a cost estimate for the conceptual designs and identifies three distinct phases of funding and implementation ; this approach is typical for a capital project of this magnitude . The Shields Street Corridor Analysis is ongoing . Smaller capital projects may seek to leverage opportunities afforded by grants from a variety of State and Federal sources or from existing programs such as the Street Maintenance Program . Additional funding could be pursued from existing funded capital project wherever a rational nexus allows . Most of the action items identified in the Implementation Summary can be accommodated within the existing budgetary framework for the various departments and service areas . Action items are spread out into a variety of timeframes (immediate , short-term , mid-term , and ongoing ) , so there remains flexibility on the funding sources . BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION City Council Work Sessions The Plan has been presented to the City Council at the following work sessions : • August 26 , 2014 • November 25 , 2014 In response to the November 25 Work Session , the Plan reflects the direction provided by City Council in the following manner: • Land Use and Neighborhood Character: the Conditional Rezoning process is not a recommendation item in the Plan and it is assumed that such a process would be initiated by applicants and not the City of Fort Collins . • Transportation and Mobility, the Plan provides an analysis of the Shields Corridor that explores options for a grade-separated crossing , as well as at-grade improvements to improve conditions for bicyclists and pedestrians crossing Shields Street. • Open Space Networks : the Plan emphasizes the benefits of wildlife movement in consideration of improving connectivity among open space areas in addition to recreational benefits . Also , the Plan recommends improvements to two regional , City-owned stormwater detention ponds in order to naturalize and improve the qualitative aspects of these open space tracts . • Prospect Corridor/Lake Street Design : the Plan provides a phasing plan for implementation and , through cooperation with CSU , includes for the future underpass at Center Avenue . The Plan also acknowledges the potential for partnering with CSU on various aspects of the future Lake Street Item # 12 Page 6 Agenda Item 12 improvements , and the Plan acknowledges that Prospect Road west of Shields Street would benefit from improved crossings and landscaping (shown in Appendix E ) . In addition to the two work sessions , separate memoranda were submitted to the City Council that indicated progress to date , next steps , opportunities for citizen participation , and the results of the triple bottom line analysis . BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION On March 12 , 2015 , the Planning and Zoning Board will meet to make a recommendation to City Council . Results of the Board ' s decision will be provided to the Council prior to the Council meeting . In addition , the following boards have taken formal action to support the Plan : • Parks and Recreation Board • Natural Resources Advisory Board • Transportation Board PUBLIC OUTREACH The following City boards and commissions and community organizations were consulted and participated in the formation of the West Central Area Plan : City Boards and Commissions : • Affordable Housing Board • Air Quality Advisory Board • Bicycle Advisory Committee • Commission on Disability • Land Conservation Stewardship Board • Landmark Preservation Commission • Natural Resources Advisory Board • Parking Advisory Board • Parks and Recreation Board • Planning and Zoning Board (4 work sessions) • Senior Advisory Board • Transportation Board Community Organizations : • Board of Realtors , Government Affairs Committee • Chamber of Commerce , Local Legislative Affairs Committee • ClimateWise Biz Ed Group • Turning Point Board of Directors • UniverCity Connections Transit & Mobility Task Force • Ongoing coordination with CSU staff In addition , valuable feedback was provided by the Stakeholder Committee which met formally six times over the last year. Ideas and concepts were exchanged in a spirit of cooperation , mutual respect, with a deep dedication to our community. Membership was diverse and included various interests representing the following : • Neighborhood residents • Business owners • Major landowners Item # 12 Page 7 Agenda Item 12 Apartment complex managers • CSU students and staff ATTACHMENTS 1 . November 25 Work Session Summary ( PDF ) 2 . Natural Resources Advisory Board Recommendation , February 19 , 2015 ( PDF ) 3 . Parks and Recreation Board minutes , February 25 , 2015 (draft) ( PDF ) 4 . Transportation Board minutes , February 18 , 2015 (draft) ( PDF ) 5 . PowerPoint Presentation ( PDF ) Item # 12 Page 8 ATTACHMENT 1 City, of Planning, Development & Transportation Fort Collins 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 970.221 .6376 970.224.6134 - fax MEMORANDUM DATE: November 26, 2014 TO: Mayor Weitkunat and City Coun{cidmembers THROUGH: Darin Atteberry, City Manager Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Manage Karen Cumbo, Director of Planning, Devefopment & Transportation IV* (jer KC ) Laurie Kadrich, Community Development & Neighborhood Services Director Paul Sizemore, FC Moves Program Manager v Cameron Gloss, Planning Services Manager FROM: Ted Shepard, Chief Planner 'IS Amy Lewin, Transportation Planner aZ Rebecca Everette, City Plannerov RE: November 25, 2014 Work Session Summary — West Central Area Plan and Prospect Corridor Design Update Attendees: City Council: Mayor Karen Weitkunat, Mayor Pro-Tem Gerry Horak, Councilmember Gino Campana, Councilmember Ross Cunniff, Councilmember Lisa Poppaw Absent. Councilmember Bob Overbeck, Councilmember Wade Troxell City Staff: Darin Attebeiry, Karen Cumbo, Rebecca Everette, Mark Jackson, Tim Kemp, Amy Lewin, Ted Shepard, Paul Sizemore, Martina Wilkinson Discussion Summary: Conditional Rezoning ■ Concerns that issues similar to those raised for the Addition of a Permitted Use (APU) process would arise with Conditional Rezoning. ■ Request for more information about how this would be applied to the West Central area and the implications for surrounding neighborhoods. ■ Request to delay discussion on this topic until the APU process has been further discussed by City Council. ■ Acknowledgement that this tool provides an opportunity to modify zoning where it may be appropriate, while safeguarding neighborhoods from incompatible uses. ■ Support for the process being initiated by developers and/or property owners. No support for wholesale rezoning along arterials by the City. `ityofVColUns Prospect Corridor Design ■ Support for the current designs for Prospect and Lake, and confirmation that these designs support the Prospect Corridor vision. ■ Recognition that not all of the needed right-of-way could be acquired through developer dedication upon redevelopment. Concern about impacts to existing buildings that could result from the designs. ■ Recommendation to develop an implementation plan that identifies timetables and triggers for each phase of the project. ■ Interest in improvements to the section of Prospect west of Shields. ■ Engage CSU on the Lake design to set the expectation for partnerships related to funding and implementation, since the primary users of Lake are CSU students, staff, and visitors. ■ Make other needed street improvements in conjunction with the Prospect and Lake designs (e.g., proposed underpass at Prospect and Center) . ■ Recognition that intersection improvements at Shields & Prospect and Shields & Lake are critical to the success of the Prospect and Lake designs. Transportation & Mobility ■ Support for the street retrofit concepts, particularly for collector streets that have a need for traffic calming. Request to coordinate with the Stormwater Department to ensure that drainage needs are met for the curb "bulb-outs." ■ Support for additional focus on the aesthetics and crossings along arterials. ■ Concern that the pedestrian crossing treatments on arterials are inconsistent city-wide. Recognition that many crossings do not meet current City standards. Any crossings in the West Central area that do not meet standards should be identified and prioritized for improvement to improve the safety and confidence of pedestrians. ■ Support for additional focus on the improvements that may be needed along the Shields corridor, particularly in terms of bike and pedestrian crossings. ■ Support for adding an item to the BOB 2.0 (sales tax renewal) for the rebuilding of arterial roads, which could be applied to a number of projects identified throughout the city. Open Space Networks ■ Recommendation to include photos in the plan to illustrate open space recommendations and provide more guidance for developers. ■ Direction to explore additional opportunities for recreation and habitat improvements on stormwater sites (e.g., the site at Plum and Taft Hill). ■ Emphasis on connectivity for wildlife in addition to recreational access, and balancing the multiple values of open space. Follow-up Items: ■ At the upcoming discussion of the APU process (January 27 Work Session), staff will provide additional information on the Conditional Rezoning process, how it relates to other zoning and development review tools, and how it could be applied in the West Central area. Staff appreciates the opportunity to discuss the West Central Area Plan with the City Council and received valuable feedback and direction for the project. For more information regarding the project, please visit: btttp://www.fcgov.corWwcstcentral. The updated plan will be presented to City Council for consideration of adoption in March 2015. November 25, 2014 Council Work Session Summary Page 2 West Central Area Plan and Prospect Corridor Design update ATTACHMENT 2 Environmental Services City of 215 Mason � PO Boo x 580 Collins Fort Collins, 80522 9F6rt70.221 -6600 970.224-6177 - fax fcgov. com MEMORANDUM NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD DATE : February 19, 2015 TO : Mayor and City Council Members FROM: John Bartholow, on behalf of the Natural Resources Advisory Board (NRAB) SUBJECT : West Central Area Plan — Open Space Recommendations The NRAB endorses the Open Space Recommendations that are a portion of the update to the West Central Neighborhoods Plan. We received a briefing on the plan update at our last regular meeting, with particular attention given to the opportunities for additional open spaces and access to those areas. The Board was pleased to see how a variety of environmental concerns have been considered and integrated into the proposed plan. It is also gratifying to know that the draft "Nature in the City" effort is already earning dividends . Most of the questions from Board members dealt with the interface between the West Central Area and other areas of the city, particularly CSU and the Mason corridor. But the open space recommendations were considered solid and should contribute nicely to cross-cutting goals that support wildlife habitat, floodplain management, and greater public access . We urge Council to adopt these components of the draft plan in March. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions regarding this recommendation. Respectfully Submitted, John Bartholow Chair, Natural Resources Advisory Board cc : Darin Atteberry Susie Gordon ATTACHMENT 3 Parks and Recreation Board esses and that contribute to a variety of experiences for human en' ent February 25 , 2015 he proposed Land Use Code amendments. The three areas o cus are: DRAFT minutes :omposition when objective is a more naturalized lands e; and Board — In monitoring butterflies, what do they tell us? Staff — We monitored birds and butterflies and birds give us information about landscape qu and butterflies give us information about individual site quality. For example, urban agriculture sites, likely due to all of the wering plants, had the highest observations for number of butterfly species. Board — Are you looking for a recommendation this evening? Staff — That would be welcomed. Motion made by Bruce Henderson: Board recommends approv of the proceeding Nature in the City Strategic Plan as specified at the meeting. Second: Scott Sinn Discussion: Board — Since this is a new and such a broad pro' t, it' s hard to visualize what this is really going to look like once it' s implemented, but if it continues to coordinat ith Parks and Recreation goals and objectives it will, conceptually, be a good project. Board — How was the site identified f e living wall? Staff — It' s been a long process, an is will be the third site that we have examined. We wanted this initial site to be in an urban setting with high visib ' ty to show how you can incorporate nature into an urban environment. Board — I think we need to - ude that the Board also supports this because it supports the Parks & Recreation goals. Board — Will design pla e a part of this? Staff — Yes, and the ign plans will be developed this fall . Amendment t otion : Board recommends approval of the proceeding Nature in the City Strategic Plan as specified at the meetin the Board feels the Strategic Plan also supports Parks & Recreation goals. Second : cott Sinn VOT 9 :0 in favor West Central Area Plan — Rebecca Everette and Amy Lewin : To update the Board on the West Central Area Plan, we started the process in February 2014 evaluating the existing and future conditions and updating the vision. We then moved to outlining the plan and developing design options and next were developing the policies and action items. So, now we 're at plan preparation and hopeful adoption by Council on March 17. The vision sets the stage for recommendations and action items related to land use & neighborhood character, transportation & mobility, open space networks and the Prospect Corridor. Focusing on the Open Space Networks we are collaborating with Nature in the City to pilot both Plans at a neighborhood scale. The key parks and open space action items include clarifying open space requirements for new development, constructing additional trail connections and ditch crossing, improve way-finding, enhance Stormwater detention areas, reconfigure Lilac Park to better serve adjacent neighborhood and pilot a tree canopy program. Discussion Board — Where is the tree canopy program being implemented? Staff — The focus is on the Avery Park neighborhood. We wanted a diverse neighborhood where there was a need for revitalization. Board — Where are the trees coming from? Staff— We have started partnering with various organizations, including local nurseries, to help select trees, help with planting and provide education for the home owner on tree maintenance. Board — How would it be determined where a tree would be planted? Staff— The homeowner would have to apply to be considered and the City would determine if the area was appropriate. Board — Do you think a renter would put much care into the maintenance of a new tree? Staff— That's why it's a pilot, we need to identify if there is a difference between owner occupied or rental property with regards to maintenance. Board — If you find a diverse neighborhood doesn't work well, will you try another neighborhood with mostly owner-occupied homes? Staff— Maybe. Parks & Recreation Board Meeting — February 25 , 2015 Page 3 of 6 Board — Once the pilot is underway, what determines the success? Staff — That is not fully established criteria yet. Board — I thought ditch companies didn't like having bridges built over them? Staff — Most ditch companies have criteria for bridges that involve no liability on their part, no impediment of water and a fee to be paid to them to allow the crossing. Board — What happen if there ' s a flood? Staff— Typically bridges of this nature are built to allow it to breakaway and swing to the side to keep any debris from building up. Board — What's the difference between the West Central Area Plan and Nature in the City? Staff— The West Central Area Plan is a policy plan specific to an area of the community, whereas Nature in the City provides direction citywide. If both plans are adopted there will be design policy that will act as a guiding principle as there is overlap . Board — It may be helpful to have one slide in your presentation that shows this relationship for clarification. Board — Are you looking for a recommendation or endorsement this evening? Staff— That would be welcomed. Motion made by Scott Sinn: Board recommends approval of the West Central Area Plan as presented. Second: Bruce Henderson Discussion: Board — I think the Board can give general approval of the whole Plan, but since we visited specifically about the Open Space Network, I think that should be part of the motion. Board — How will this be funded? Staff — Various projects in the West Central Area Plan would be funded differently, which would include: City budget through a BFO process, capital improvement funds, grants, private/public partnerships, etc. Amendment to Motion : Board recommends approval of the West Central Area Plan, specifically the Vision & Policy portion of the Open Space Network as presented. Second : Bruce Henderson VOTE: 9 :0 in favor STAFF UPDATES Parks Updates • Gardens — Michelle has been working with some partnerships to secure funding for the build out and operations e Garden. • Maple Hill Park = This is a four acre parcel ready for development, so we' ll be having a neighborhoo eting to discuss the process and construction schedule and get their input on design/amenity choices. The park shoul completed by 2016 . Recreation Updates • Retirements: Pat Moore who worked at the Senior Center; and Mike McDonnell, eation Manager at EPIC both retired. We hired Marc Rademacher as the new Recreation Manager to replace Mike; a arc will be in charge of Northside Aztlan Center, Foothill Activity Center and Sports. Steve Budner will be in char EPIC and Adaptive Recreation. • Construction of the FAC has started and we're still expecting to be mo in by November 2015 . Discussion • Board — The reduced fee statistics you provided are great. W will the funding for this program come from once KFCG money is no longer available? • Staff— The hope is that the voters will keep the KFC nded, but if not it will be an area of concern. • Board — How does someone get a reduced fee an at is the fee? • Staff— They have to apply and qualify yearly d if they qualify they are allowed a pass for $6.00 for a 6 month pass for youth and $25 .00 for a 6 month pass for ts. • Board — I noticed in the Recreator its s if a sport is for boys or girls, but flag football does not have this designation; is it w co-ed? If so, it might be good to flag football as co-ed in the Recreator. • Staff— Yes it is a co-ed sport. Park Planning Updates • Southeast Co nity Park — Met with neighborhood and about 80+ attended meeting and we had mostly positive feedback ut the new design direction. They felt they were heard and appreciated the effort we made to yonoandlCity. date their concerns. We did get comment cards for some hard data. • Ranch Community Gardens — Met with about 15 people on-site with representative from all sides, pro, It was agreed by everyone to relocate the gardens and so we are exploring a possible site in the Parks & Recreation Board Meeting — February 25 , 2015 Page 4 of 6 TRANSPORTATION BOARD February 18 , 2015 (draft) ATTACHMENT 4 BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT — Greg Oakes Boardmember Oakes was absent . 7 . DI USSION/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS • 2014 gional Transportation Plan Josh Johnson , orth Front Range Metropolitan Planning OrganizZTransportation Planner, discuss the requirement of the MPO to develop a to -range transportation plan . He discussed a need for east-west connections and ' ing of bike route gaps in the region . Additionally , Johnson discussed the public ou each process the MPO has undertaken thus far. Becky Karasko , North Front Ra e MPO , stated a goal of this plan is to accurately reflect the existing transportation resourc s in the re ' n . Jackson asked about possible ways for e MPO and/or this plan to help bridge the philosophical divide between the eas n est sides of 1 -25 . Ms . Karasko stated the MPO represents both side of 1 -25 to the est of its ility and noted moving people and goods through the region efficiently is common goal r the region . • Bluetooth Traffic Da — Joe Olson , City Traffic ngineer Joe Olson , City Tr c Engineer, discussed the City' s form system used to measure transportation s em performance and discussed the Blueto technology the City is now using to the asure performance of its transportation system , ting the data is complete ) nonymous . Additionally , Olson discussed the variatio between travel times when C is in session and when it is not and the advantages of this pe of data for the City . e detailed the differences between recurring and non - recurring c gestion as well a discussed various congested areas around town . Olson stated there a approximately 30 tracking devices around town with a total cost of $ 140 , 000 . 8 . ACTION ITEMS • West Central Area Plan Amy Lewin , FC Moves Senior Transportation Planner, discussed the history of this plan and its current components . Lewin noted the plan does not currently have funding sources and will be incorporated into the larger City-wide prioritization process in order to acquire funding for the next steps . Thomas asked if any of the quarter-cent sales tax on the April ballot would be used for implementation of this plan , should it be approved . Lewin replied some of the BOB 2 . 0 programs could potentially include some of these steps . Lewin went on to discuss the Shields Street analysis which is now part of the plan and detailed the proposed plans for Prospect Road . Jackson noted City staff will be touring new CSU facilities and construction projects at the end of the month in hopes of developing collaborative opportunities . 2 Lewin went on to mention the West Elizabeth Enhanced Corridor Plan and requested Board feedback . Thomas asked if there is any way to assure voters that no BOB 2 . 0 dollars will be spent to fund CSU ' s on -campus stadium . Jackson replied Council would need to make a specific policy direction . The Board had a brief discussion regarding items related specifically to game days versus items beneficial to the general public at all times . Thomas noted there is widespread opposition to the stadium which could potentially lead to less support for the BOB 2 . 0 package should the proposed projects not be able to be isolated from the stadium issue . Jackson noted terms could be defined as impacts as defined in the IGA which will be signed between the City and CSU . Jackson commended the Plan as a whole . Thomas asked if the Board could place a caveat on its support of the Plan that the City ensures the IGA with CSU covers all stadium - related expenses . Lewin noted the Plan itself does not go into details related to the stadium , except in the context of considerations and public process input . Jackson suggested language involving a clear identification of costs to be borne by CSU as the process moves forward . Thomas made a motion , seconded by Shenk , that the Board accept and endorse the transportation recommendations as spelled out in the West Central Area Plan , but also encourages a clear identification of the infrastructure costs to be borne directly by CSU as a result of the on -campus stadium impacts as part of the negotiations between the City and Colorado State University . Simonson expressed concern regarding the language addition and its relationship to the election . M The Board held a discussion regarding the motion wording . The motion was adopted unanimously . Recommendation for a Roundabout at Lincoln/International Bo and Marc Virata , ineering , stated this intersection will likely b uilt as part of the Capstone Cottages develop t . Martina Wilkinson , Traffic Ope ions , stat ere are two options for the development of this intersection , a traditional signals intersection and a single- lane roundabout , and discussed the impacts of each ing the dabout requires less right-of-way and is less expensive . Wilkinson als ated roundabouts a afer for bicyclists and pedestrians and discussed the main ance costs of both types of inter ions . Virata n d the sustainability assessment of the roundabout propo indicated this is a p ve project . 3 ATTACHMENTS West Central Area Plan City Council Regular Meeting Resolution 2015= 038 March 17 , 2015 Ted Shepard , Chief Planner Amy Lewin , Senior Transportation Planner Rebecca Everette , City Planner 1 �11West Central Fort�Collin5 � Area Plan '"`�� Project Overview n MULBERRY ST • 1 Plan Update to 999 a ELIZABETH ST CqW • Address ongoing & : • - • • - - • - - • • - • • - • • • - • • • - • • - • • • • -. LAKE ST emerging Issues : PROSPECT RD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • ~ 12 month process + LU LU J a J V! Z H W J UL J H � V DRAKE RD JI& West Central Area Plan Prospect Corridor Design 2 � West Central Fort Collins � Area Plan Community Engagement 4 Listening Sessions 20 Walking & Bike Tours 2 Visioning Workshops Open Houses 2 Prospect Corridor Workshops 3 Online Surveys - . Online . • r, 1 CommunityDrake Road Farmers ' Market CSU Lagoon Concert Series Gardens on Spring Creek Events Property Owner Outreach Presentations CKY of West Central • Collins Area a Community Engagement City Boards & Commissions : Other Groups : • Affordable Housing Board 0 Board of Realtors • Air Quality Advisory Board • Chamber of Commerce • Bicycle Advisory Committee • ClimateWise Biz Ed Group • Commission on Disability • UniverCity Connections • Landmark Preservation Commission Transit & Mobility Task Force • Land Conservation & Stewardship Board Stakeholder Committee : • Natural Resources Advisory Board* 0 Neighborhood residents • Parking Advisory Board 0 Business owners • Parks & Recreation Board* 0 Major landowners • Planning & Zoning Board* • Apartment complex managers • Senior Advisory Board 0 CSU students and staff • Transportation Board* *Recommendations to City Council 4 � West Central Fort Collins � Area Plan Vision Policies rco Land Use & Action - Neighborhood Character Open Space Transportation & Networks Mobility Prospect Corridor Design CKY of West Im lementation Summa � p rY AreaPlan Central WtCollins Implementation Summary • 100 + Action Items ( more than half ongoing ) • Timeframes — Immediate (within 120 days of adoption ) — Short- Term ( 2015 - 2016 ) — Mid - Term ( 2017 - 2024 ) — Ongoing • Implementation Team — Inter- departmental — Annual Status Report — Performance Monitoring 6 � West Central Fort Collins � Area Plan Land Neighborhood Character 7 � West Central Fort Collins � Area Plan Land Use & Neighborhood Character Key action Itemsm. Police Services sub - station Additional• position for Neighborhood Services/ Community Liaisond - - Joint •Fill in missing sidewalks , widen - a W narrow • - . Update Land Use code standards re : design and compatibility of high � density developmentoty M �j%IRM CentralWest s QCollins Area T mom ransportation Mobility moo 0000000000 West Central Fort Collins 9 � � Area Plan Transportation Mobilmity Key action items : • Complete Shields Corridor Analysis • West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor ( ETC ) project • Retrofit West Prospect Road (west of Shields ) • Add intersection and roadway improvements to citywide CIP • Bike & pedestrian priority snow removal routes • Template for retrofitting sidewalks • Monitor neighborhoods and implement Residential Parking Permit Program as needed 10 � West Central Fort Collins � Area Plan iaLWi s I Shields Corridor MMST,®r jy -- • Updated cross - sections '� ( Prospect to Laurel ) • Median installations — • At- grade crossing improvements T • Grade - separated crossings # --• �7� G • Roadway realignments - ! — Pitkin / Springfield — Lake / Bennett 'ter°` - = Ly Legend �'�� '"� � F`West Central i PoNaMISM City H0Aisk FWdpWm ; 11 Area Plan # Undapamannp 24rr requred CSU Aeeari Foundation Owned Plrape�y M Plamedlow Stress Bike Dorridor (GSIJ Qity Bike Plans) - - — _ — ,.t. IF Fr Open Space ILL Networks MIV West Central Fort Collins 12 Area Plan NEEL Open Space Networks Key action items : • Nature in the City implementation • Neighborhood tree canopy pilot program • Lilac Park outreach • Upgrade two regional detention ponds • Construct bridge crossings to connect neighborhoods 13 � West Central Fort Collins � Area Plan Prospect Corridor Design 40 1 West Central � Fort Collins 14 Area Plan Design Approach • Design Prospect & Lake to complement each other as one corridor • Custom cross - section for Prospect narrower than standard • Maintain right - of-way ( ROW ) line along south side residential to minimize construction costs & ROW impacts • Focus ROW impacts on areas likely to redevelop • Coordinate with CSU and other redevelopment plans West Central Fort Collins 15 Area Plan ShieldsProspect Conceptual Design to • • • Four travel lanes • Center turn lane/ median • Tree lawn • Detached sidewalk/shared bike and pedestrian path • Mid - block bike / pedestrian crossing • Transit stops/ pullouts West Central Fort Collins 16 Area Plan ShieldsLake Conceptual Design to • • • Two travel lanes • On - street parking • Protected bike lanes with planted buffer • Detached sidewalk • Tree lawn ( select locations ) • Mid - block bike / pedestrian crossings • Transit stops/ pullouts West Central Fort Collins 17 Area Plan CSU Stadium • Discussed throughout the planning process • Referenced in the plan document • CSU Stadium Considerations Appendix : — Addresses considerations related to the West Central Area Plan policies — Public comment collected during the West Central Area Plan process — Alignment of specific improvements with the IGA 18 � West Central Fort Collins � Area Plan Resolution 2015 = 038 • Adoption of the West Central Area Plan West Central ��� Area Plan L.$A `�S DRAFT 3110/15 West Central Fort Collins 19 � � Area Plan RESOLUTION 2015 -038 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS ADOPTING THE WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN AS AN ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY AND REPEALING THE WEST CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOODS PLAN AS AN ELEMENT OF THE CITY ' S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEREAS, by Resolution 1999-033 , the Council of the City of Fort Collins adopted the West Central Neighborhoods Plan as an element of the Comprehensive Plan of the City; and WHEREAS , the West Central Area Plan (the "Plan") updates and builds upon the West Central Neighborhoods Plan and is intended to replace the West Central Neighborhoods Plan; and WHEREAS , the purpose of the Plan is to help citizens address a wide variety of challenges and opportunities to ensure that the West Central Area neighborhoods continue to exist as desirable places to live, work, shop, learn and play; and WHEREAS , the Plan has as its purpose the provision of policy, guidance and direction on three primary topics, being : land use and neighborhood character, transportation and mobility, and open space networks ; and WHEREAS , additional subject areas included in the Plan are urban design, housing, community facilities, and a strategic approach to delivering effective public services ; and WHEREAS, the Plan also includes new conceptual designs for Prospect Road and Lake Street (from Shields Street to College Avenue) which are intended to improve safety and comfort for pedestrians, bicyclists, buses and motor vehicles on both roadways ; and WHEREAS, the Plan also offers various alternatives for making a range of improvements along Shields Street between Prospect Road and Laurel Street, including a potential grade- separated pedestrian crossing; and WHEREAS, the staff has conducted extensive public outreach over the course of the planning project, holding open houses involving a broad range of citizens, a stakeholder committee, two work sessions with the City Council, public outreach to numerous City boards and commissions and community organizations ; and WHEREAS , the City Council has determined that it is in the best interests of the City that the Plan be adopted as an element of the Comprehensive Plan of the City and that the West Central Neighborhoods Plan be repealed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, that the West Central Area Plan, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A", be adopted as an element of the Comprehensive Plan of the City and that the West Central Neighborhoods Plan be repealed as an element of the Comprehensive Plan of the City. - 1 - Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 17th day of March, A.D. 2015 . Mayor ATTEST : City Clerk - 2 - EXHIBIT A West Are • • • City of F A � L Y- Ar \ w y • J Y• y 7� • Collin DRAFT1 Acknowledgments Fort Collins City Council • Karen Weitkunat, Mayor • Gerry Horak, Mayor Pro Tem, District 6 • Bob Overbeck, District 1 • Lisa Poppaw, District 2 • Gino Campana, District 3 • Wade Troxell , District 4 • Ross Cunniff, District 5 Project Management Team • Ted Shepard, Chief Planner • Mark Jackson, Planning, Development and • Amy Lewin, Senior Transportation Planner Transportation Deputy Director • Rebecca Everette, City Planner • Laurie Kadrich, Community Development and • Cameron Gloss, Planning Manager Neighborhood Services Director • Paul Sizemore, FC Moves Program Manager • Emily Allen, Community Liaison • Clay Frickey, Associate Planner • Lindsay Ex, Senior Environmental Planner • • Karen Cumbo, Planning, Development and Tim Kemp, Engineering Capital Projects Transportation Director • Martina Wilkinson, Traffic Operations Technical Advisory Committee City of Fort Collins Departments : • Communications and Public Involvement • Park Planning & Development • Economic Health Office • Parking Services • Engineering Services • Planning Services • FC Moves • Police Services • Forestry • Social Sustainability • Gardens on Spring Creek • Streets • Historic Preservation • Traffic Operations • Natural Areas • Transfort • Neighborhood Services • Utilities Services • Operations Services Other Agencies : • Colorado State University (CSU) • CSU Research Foundation (CSURF) • Fort Collins Housing Authority • University of Colorado Health - CanDo ii DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN City Boards and Commissions • Affordable Housing Board • Parking Advisory Board • Air Quality Advisory Board • Parks and Recreation Board • Bicycle Advisory Committee • Planning and Zoning Board • Commission on Disability • Senior Advisory Board • Land Conservation Stewardship Board • Transportation Board • Landmark Preservation Commission • Natural Resources Advisory Board Stakeholder Committee • Susan Ballou • Kelly Ohlson • Rick Callan Tara Opsal • Susan Dominica • Jeannie Ortega • Becky Fedak • Jean Robbins • Colin Gerety Steve Schroyer • Carrie Ann Gillis Andy Smith • Per Hogestad • Logan Sutherland • Ann Hunt • Lloyd Walker • Greg McMaster • Nicholas Yearout Consultant Team Russell + Mills Studios Fehr & Peers • Craig Russell, Principal, Project Manager • Ann Bowers, Principal, Traffic Engineer • Paul Mills, Principal • Charlie Alexander, Traffic Engineer • John Beggs, Senior Planner/Landscape Architect • Carly Sieff, Transportation Planner • Shelley La Mastra, Landscape Architect • Nell Conti , GIS Specialist • Darren Duroux, Landscape Architect • Mary Taylor, Landscape Architect Special thanks to all of the residents, property owners, business owners, organizations, and other stakeholders who participated in the development of the West Central Area Plan. WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 iii Table of Contents Overview 1 Shields Corridor Analysis 58 What is the West Central Area Plan? 2 Overview 58 Why Does the Plan Need to be Updated? 2 Cross-Section Options 59 Plan Organization 2 Grade-Separated Crossings 60 How to Use this Plan 3 At-Grade Intersection Improvements 53 Planning Process 3 Median Improvements 64 Community Engagement Summary 4 Roadway Realignment Options 65 Planning Context 5 Summary and Next Steps 66 About the West Central Area 6 Open Space Networks 67 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan 6 Vision 68 Relationship to City Plan 8 Policies 69 Related Planning Efforts 8 Access 69 Study Area Change Over Time 14 Quality 74 Existing Conditions 16 Quantity 77 West Central Area Vision 17 Potential Open Space Improvements & 78 Additions Land Use & Neighborhood Character 21 Prospect Corridor 81 Vision 22 Existing Conditions 82 Areas of Stability, Enhancement & 23 Vision 84 Development Policies 26 Overall Approach 84 Code Enforcement & Education 27 Alternatives Development & Evaluation 84 Neighborhood Services 29 Conceptual Designs 85 Neighborhood Character 31 Potential Phasing 91 Cost Estimates 91 Transportation & Mobility 39 Implementation Strategies 92 Vision 40 Design & Construction Process 93 Policies 41 Safe Routes 42 Implementation Summary 95 Action Items 96 Multi-Modal Options 44 Street Retrofitting 50 Implementation Team 106 Parking 52 Ongoing Monitoring & Outreach 106 Potential Projects 53 Funding 107 iv DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility Appendices Appendix A: Community Engagement Summary Appendix B: CSU On-Campus Stadium Considerations Appendix C: Existing Conditions Maps Appendix D: Transportation Existing & Future Conditions Appendix E: West Prospect Road Median Concepts Appendix F. Prospect Corridor Alternatives Note: The Prospect Corridor 30% Design is provided in a separate document. Figures 7Figurest Central Area Plan Boundary 2 y Components of the West Central Area Plan 2 Figure 3 . 1974 Aerial Photo 14 Figure 4. Changes between 1974 and 1999 14 Figure 5. Changes between 1999 and 2015 15 Figure 6. Areas of Stability, Enhancement & Development 25 Figure 7. Potential Redevelopment Scenarios in the HMN Zone 32 Figure 8. Single-Family Residential Addition & Renovation Examples 35 Figure 9. Design Guidelines for Multi-Family Redevelopment & Infill 36 Figure 10 . Mixed-Use Design Guidelines 37 Figure 11 . Key Destinations Map 43 Figure 12. Bike Share Station Planning Map 45 Figure 13. Future Transit Vision 47 Figure 14. Bus Stop Improvements 48 Figure 15. Example Street Retrofit Concept - Springfield Drive 50 Figure 16. Example Street Retrofit Concept - Shields Street 51 Figure 17. Example Street Retrofit Concept - West Prospect Road 51 Figure 18. Potential Intersection Projects 54 Figure 19. Potential Roadway Projects 56 Figure 20. Shields Corridor Influences and Connections 58 Figure 21 . Shields Street Cross-Section Options 59 Figure 22. Shields Corridor Grade-Separated Crossing Options 60 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 v Figures (continued) Figure Page Figure 23. Shields Corridor Grade-Separated Crossing Pros & Cons 62 Figure 24. Potential Shields Street Medians 64 Figure 25. Summary of Potential Improvements to the Shields Corridor 66 Figure 26. 10-Minute Walk to Public Open Space (Including Arterial Crossings) 71 Figure 27. 10-Minute Walk to Public Open Space (Not Including Arterial Crossings) 72 Figure 28. Standard City of Fort Collins Process for Constructing Ditch Crossings 73 Figure 29. Areas of Potential Open Space Improvements & Additions 79 Figure 30. Prospect Corridor Design Development Process 82 Figure 31 . Prospect Corridor Existing Right-of--Way Constraints 83 Figure 32. Prospect Road Conceptual Design & Cross-Sections 86 Figure 33 . Lake Street Conceptual Design & Cross-Sections 88 Figure 34. Prospect Road Conceptual Design (looking west near Prospect Lane) 90 Figure 35. Lake Street Conceptual Design (looking west near Centre Avenue) 90 Figure 36. Prospect Corridor Potential Phasing 91 Figure 37. Design and Construction Process 93 Tables 21 Table 1 . Short- to Mid-Term Bus Stop Improvements (0-10 years) 49 Table 2. Longer-Term Bus Stop Improvements (10+ years) 49 Table 3. Short- to Mid-Term Intersection Projects (0-10 years) 55 Table 4. Longer-Term Intersection Projects (10+ years) 55 Table 5. Short- to Mid-Term Roadway Projects (0-10 years) 57 Table 6. Longer-Term Roadway Projects (10+ years) 57 Table 7. Shields Corridor Grade-Separated Crossing Evaluation Matrix 61 Table 8. Potential Open Space Projects 78 Table 9. Prospect Corridor Cost Estimates 91 Table 10. Immediate Actions (Within 120 Days of Adoption) 97 Table 11 . Short-Term Actions (2015-2016) 98 Table 12. Mid-Term Actions (2017-2024) 99 Table 13 . Ongoing Programs & Actions 102 Table 14. Potential Funding Sources 107 vi DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN wd fN 41 f IN IN NO p 0,4 1 . , iNie � : 0 - r� . PJ NA kv f . � IN1 1 AND 461 NOW, a 00 i i 1 ti L 0 Overview MENNEMEN E 1 What is the West Central Area Plan? MULBERRY ST The West Central Area Plan provides a vision and policy Ro direction for the neighborhoods generally bounded by Mulberry Street and Lake Street to the north, Shields Street and the Mason Corridor to the east, Drake Road ELIZABETH ST to the south, and Taft Hill Road to the west. This plan contains policies, programs, projects, and action items LAKE ST intended to support the quality of life in this core area of ; the city. The topics addressed in this plan include land : PROSPECT RD use, development, housing , neighborhood character, : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : transportation and mobility, public services, parks and LLJ open space, and environmental quality. H Q 0 FREED Why Does the Plan Need to be J o z lJJ Updated ? tZ w Cn J In the 16 years since the 1999 West Central H V Neighborhoods Plan was initially adopted, a number of changes have occurred and issues have arisen that DRAKE RD require new approaches and updated policy guidance . Several new development projects have been approved and constructed in the area, with varying degrees of benefit and impact to the surrounding neighborhoods . West Central Area Plan Given City Plan's emphasis on accommodating growth prospect Corridor Design through infill development rather than sprawl , CSU's enrollment projections, and the plans for an on-campus Figure 1 . West Central Area Plan boundary stadium, it is now time to re-assess plans and policies so the quality of life and character of the West Central area are preserved and enhanced for years to come. The purpose of the plan update is to revisit and refine the original vision and goals, policy directives, and implementation actions based on emerging issues and trends . The 2015 West Central Area Plan incorporates new information from related planning efforts in the Policy area and provides updated direction related to a number Chapters of topics . gas Plan Organization The recommendations in the West Central Area Plan are organized into a number of topic areas . The Planning Opvn Space Transportation Context chapter describes the area and sets the stage Netwotks Mobility for policy guidance. The community-driven vision serves as the foundation for the plan's recommendations . The Plan's policies and action items are divided into three topic areas : Land Use and Neighborhood Character, Transportation and Mobility, and Open Space Networks . The Transportation and Mobility chapter includes a special focus on the Shields Corridor. The Prospect Corridor chapter presents new conceptual designs for Prospect Road and Lake Street (from Shields Street Implementation Action Plan to College Avenue) . Implementation strategies and action items that support the Plan's policy direction are Figure 2. Key components synthesized in the Implementation Summary chapter. 2 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Overview How to Use this Plan This plan is intended to coordinate local stakeholder needs with the larger community's goals (as represented in City Plan) . The recommendations contained within this plan are intended to be used by City Staff, the Planning & Zoning Board, the Transportation Board, and City Council to assist in understanding where the community, local leaders, and elected officials should focus their efforts . Residents, developers and other stakeholders should refer to the plan for guidance in terms of land use and character and coordination with policies and recommendations . i .r Staff & Decision- Makers City staff and decision-makers should reference the recommendations of this plan when developing work programs, allocating funding for programs and projects, reviewing new development proposals, and Listening sessions - adopting new regulations that impact this area . Residents & Stakeholders Residents, property owners, business owners, and neighborhood organizations should use this plan as the foundation for conversations with decision- makers and developers about the needs and priorities for this area . Developers _ Applicants fordevelopment projects should reference the guidance in this plan when proposing new infill or redevelopment projects and as a starting point for i a dialogue with neighbors about such proposals . l Partners : V11 �r �r. ~ Colorado State University, Poudre School District, 1414, and other partner organizations should review the r ' plan to better understand the community's vision for Neighborhood walking tours (April , , this area . Planning Process The West Central Area Plan was developed through a 12-month planning process consisting of five phases : - Phase 1 : Evaluate Existing and Future Conditions s Phase 2 : Update Vision Phase 3 : Outline Plan and Develop Prospect Design Alternatives Phase 4: Develop Policies and Action Items Phase 5 : Plan Preparation and Adoption som , , WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 3 Community Engagement Summary City Boards & Commissions Extensive public input was gathered over the course • Planning & Zoning Board (Jan . , Aug . , and Dec . of the planning process using a range of strategies . 2014; Jan . , Feb . , and Mar. 2015) The community engagement process consisted of the • Transportation Board (Apr. and Aug . 2014; Feb . following activities during each phase. Additional detail 2015) is provided in Appendix A. • Parking Advisory Board (Apr. 2014) • Affordable Housing Board (Sept. 2014) Phase 1 : Evaluate Existing & Future Conditions • Air Quality Advisory Board (Sept. 2014) (January — June 2014) • Senior Advisory Board (Sept. 2014) • Postcard mailing to all property owners and • Parks and Recreation Board (Sept. 2014; Feb . tenants in the West Central area 2015) • 4 listening sessions (175 total attendees) • Commission on Disability (Oct. 2014) • 20 neighborhood walking tours (83 total attendees) • Landmark Preservation Commission (Oct. 2014) • Online "WikiMap" (41 users and 248 total • Natural Resources Advisory Board (Oct. 2014; Feb . comments) 2015) • Citywide Planning and Transportation Projects • Land Conservation Stewardship Board (Feb . 2015) Open House (154 attendees) • Bicycle Advisory Committee (Feb . 2015) • Air Quality Advisory Board Public Forum (25 attendees) External Presentations Phase 2 : Update Vision (January — June 2014) • Ongoing CSU coordination • Postcard mailing • UniverCity Connections Transportation and • 2 visioning events (74 total attendees) Mobility Task Force (Apr. 2014) • Online visioning survey (337 respondents) • ClimateWise Biz Ed Group (June 2014) • Outreach at the Drake Road Farmers' Market, CSU • Board of Realtors Government Affairs Committee Lagoon Concert Series, and Gardens on Spring (Aug . 2014) Creek events • Chamber of Commerce Local Legislative Affairs • Presentations to advisory boards and commissions Committee (Nov. 2014, Mar. 2015) Phase 3 : Outline Plan & Develop Prospect Design Stakeholder Committee Alternatives (July — October 2014) Through an application process, a diverse group of • Postcard mailing community members was selected for a Stakeholder • City Council Work Session (August 25) Committee to help guide the development of the plan . • Open house (85 attendees) The group met six times over the course of the project • Online survey (263 respondents) to review materials, discuss policy direction, and provide • Prospect Corridor Design survey (303 respondents) input to staff and consultants . • 2 Prospect Corridor workshops (69 total attendees) • Outreach to property owners along the Prospect Corridor • Presentations to advisory boards and commissions Phase 4 : Develop Policies & Action Items ' (November 2014 — January 2015) ■ • City Council Work Session (November 25) • Presentations to advisory boards and commissions •,�a Phase 5 : Plan Preparation & Adoption (January — March 2015) - • Postcard mailing A • Draft Plan open house (162 attendees) • Presentations to advisory boards and commissions • Online comment form mmittee meeting 4 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN TW ' ' _ ter. . . - � t ..w.ips l " pit c 1 O rif 16 #:' - i � ' • "4 - ll 0 too *irrim f r { i• l , 1 / j.� fu- dt. .r lift too 0 wi r .ft Planning Context About the West Central Area Theadditionof higher density multi-family developments designed to accommodate students and other renters The West Central area consists of several neighborhoods has further shaped the area and will continue as CSU and commercial centers generally south and west of the enrollment grows and City policies encourage infill Colorado State University (CSU) main campus . development and redevelopment. Accommodating There are many distinct neighborhoods and districts this growth will continue to require additional support within the West Central Area Plan boundaries, which have services (police, fire, emergency medical , commercial , evolved over 150 years of incremental development. At retail , and other services) ; infrastructure (utilities, one point in time, Prospect Road and the CSU main stormwater management, parking , sidewalks, and street campus formed the southern edge of the City of Fort upgrades) ; and parks and open space to adequately Collins; yet today, the West Central area is located in the serve current and future residents . heart of the city. The University is, a major influence on the area's land 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan use, transportation circulation, open space networks, Plan Overview and overall character. The CSU main campus anchors the northeast corner of the planning area, while the The predecessor to this plan, the West Central south campus and Veterinary Teaching Hospital anchor Neighborhoods Plan, was adopted in 1999 . That plan the southeastern corner. CSU 's influence is felt in several established a vision and goals for the area, as well as ways, including : specific policies and implementation actions related to land use, housing , transportation, historic preservation , • The need for housing and services in close parks and open lands, public services, and other topics . proximity the campus The plan was developed through significant effort by • Transportation ion patterns for all modes of travel a Citizens Advisory Committee, with support from • Contributions to the city s population growth City staff, and set the stage for a number of programs through the addition of students, faculty, staff, and improvements in the West Central area . The employees of related agencies, and families recommendations and lessons learned from the 1999 • The wide cultural diversity that CSU provides Plan form the basis of this plan update . • CSU's role as the area's principal economic generator MULBERRY ST n ELIZABETH ST x LAKE ST , PROSPECT RD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : w Q �J c~n w - J 1~i LLJ4111111111111111111 J West Central DRAKE RD Neighborhoods Av El®®t of Fort Collins West Central Area Plan Prospect Corridor Design an I CITYPLAN West Central Area Plan boundary West Central Neighborhoods Plan (1999) 6 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Planning Context 1999 Plan Vision Housing Completed Actions The following vision statements were included in the Additional student housing provided on-campus, 1999 Plan : including Laurel Village, Academic Village and • " Maintain and enhance the diverse character of the Aggie Village North West Central Neighborhoods, comprised of long- New multi-family developments constructed near and short-term residents such as families, senior CSU campus citizens, and students, as well as small businesses, Student Housing Action Plan developed to improve schools, and public/private institutions and compatibility with existing neighborhoods facilities . Strengthen the collaboration between the Increase in overall diversity in housing types City, CSU , and the West Central Neighborhoods Transportation Completed Actions • Continue to provide housing opportunities, • Completion of Centre Avenue road extension/ infrastructure, and lifestyle options to meet the multi-modal corridor from Research Boulevard to needs of this diverse group of neighborhoods Prospect Road • Facilitate and improve existing transportation • Completion of Taft Hill Road widening across from systems to allow all residents to have good , safe, Blevins Middle School for on-street bike lanes and convenient, and multi-modal transportation options . wider sidewalks Adapt to meet the needs of the dynamic and • Completion of Elizabeth Street streetscape in ever-changing West Central Neighborhoods and Campus West Area provide balanced opportunities in development, • Multiple bikeways established in neighborhoods redevelopment, and maintenance • Construction of traffic calming devices at Implementation of the 1999 Plan Constitution Ave. and Valley Forge/Scarborough St. • Parking structure constructed on CSU campus at Recommendations that were implemented since the Prospect Road and Centre Avenue 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan fall into three • Buffered bike lanes striped along Shields Street overall categories : neighborhood character, housing, • Residential parking permit program established in and transportation . Significant recommendations from several neighborhoods the plan that have been completed are listed below. • East/west transit connections established to MAX Neighborhood Character Completed Actions Lessons Learned from the 1999 Plan • Resolved inconsistencies between the current The previous plan offers several key lessons that are zoning districts and the plan's recommendations applied to the West Central Area Plan : through use of selective rezoning • Developed more detailed design standards and • Simplify the structure of plan and develop a highly guidelines to encourage appropriate development graphic, easily understood document and compatibility between adjacent land uses • Focus on key vision statements and policies that • Addition of a Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zone implement the vision with fewer and more focused district near Shields Street and Stuart Street to objectives allow for neighborhood commercial and services • Clarify the distinction between vision, goals, policies, uses issues, and action items throughout the plan • Developed a more detailed plan for the Campus • Develop a clear, purposeful, and measurable West area through a later planning study (2001 ) implementation strategy for each policy • Construction of Red Fox Meadows Natural Area • Utilize a variety of outreach techniques to capture a stormwater and habitat enhancements wide demographic and allow for a variety of types • Canal Importation Ponds and Outfall (CIPO) of input stormwater improvements • Implementation of mixed-use project in Campus West area at corner of Elizabeth Street and City Park Avenue • Enhancements to Avery Park • New places of worship/cultural centers established I l 1 • Construction of Phase I for the Gardens on Spring N„r Creek facility l • Enhanced code enforcement strategies developed to handle code violations • Senior Center expansion completed _ 1 Shopping . . . Plan WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 7 Relationship to City Plan City Plan is the comprehensive plan that provides a vision, priorities, and action plan for the City of Fort Collins for the next 25 years and 0 � beyond . The 2011 update to City Plan offers the following relevant guidance for the West Central Area Plan . Vision Through innovation, sustainability, and connections the City of Fort Collins aspires to create a vibrant, world- class community. The City of Fort Collins is committed to providing leadership and exceptional service to citizens, City Plan Fort Collins but recognizes that the entire community must be involved to achieve the vision . Relevant Policy Direction Land Use & Neighborhood Character • Promote infill development in active areas innovate -sustain connect • Consider adjacency, scale, and buffering in the design of City Plan (2011 ) welcoming neighborhoods • Encourage volunteerism and community service • Promote acceptance, inclusion and respect for diversity • Promote collaboration and strong partnerships Transportation & Mobility • Expand the public transit system to include high-frequency transit service along all major arterials • Ensure land use and transportation are fully integrated • Create safe, reliable, convenient, effective, multi-modal transportation networks • Encourage overall healthy lifestyles through opportunities in recreation and active transportation Open Space Networks • Maintain a system of publicly-owned open lands • Regulate development along waterways • Provide and maintain access to open space • Improve connectivity between open space areas • Improve water quality and stormwater management • Provide neighborhood natural areas Related Planning Efforts The primary related planning efforts influencing the West Central area are described in this section , and include the following : Land Use & Neighborhood Character Open Space Networks • Student Housing Action Plan (2013) • Natural Areas Master Plan (2014) • Campus West Community Commercial District • Nature in the City (2015) Planning Study Report (2001 ) Colorado State University Planning Efforts • Land Use Code : Revised Neighborhood Compatibility, Transition & Preservation Standards (2013) • CSU Master Plan (2014) • CSU Parking and Transportation Master Plan Transportation & Mobility (2014) • Transportation Master Plan (2011 ) • CSU Bicycle Master Plan (2014) • Bicycle Master Plan (2014) • CSU On-Campus Stadium (ongoing) • Pedestrian Plan (2011 ) • Transfort Strategic Operating Plan (2009) • Arterial Intersection Prioritization Study (ongoing) 8 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Planning Context Land Use & Neighborhood Character _ Student Housing Action Plan (2013) w • The Student Housing Action Plan brought together representatives from CSU, Front Range Community College ( FRCC), neighbors, students, `► �� property owners, developers, and other stakeholders to identify strategies to address the increasing need for multi-family student k housing, identify key issues related to new development projects, and identify potential related impacts and compatibility issues . Vision. The Student Housing Action Plan strives to develop community Student Housing Action Plan driven strategies that encourage and provide quality student housing while maintaining neighborhood quality and compatibility. Action Items • Zone all multi-family housing developments outside of the Transit- Oriented Development District (TOD) for Medium Density Mixed- Use Neighborhoods City 00 Fort Collins • Require Planning and Zoning Board hearings for multi-family �— project greater than 50 units or 75 bedrooms Student Housing Action • . • Clearly define and promote compatibility of new development with existing neighborhoods Campus West • Establish additional parking and landscape standards Comawnity Commercial Distrid • Create architectural "gradients" between multi- and single-family Planning Study Report housing developments ' • Enforce Noise Control and Party Registration Program • Educate parents and students about off-campus neighborhood living • CSU will strive to provide on-campus housing for all first year students as well as 25% of returning students and incentivize students to live on campus for a second year and beyond - • Build a pedestrian crossing (above- or below-grade) near Shields and Elizabeth Streets • Increase and implement multi-modal transportation connections as defined by Plan Fort Collins , and assess pedestrian use of intersections and trails Campus West Community Commercial District Planning Study Report (2001 ) This report explains the land use designation of Campus West as a "Community Commercial District" in the City's Comprehensive Plan, us West Community Commercial District which reflects a vision of bringing together a mix of uses and encouraging Planning Study Report walking, bicycling, and transit in addition to accommodating cars . As the primary destination for eating and drinking establishments and other commercial services near the CSU campus, Campus West is intended to serve as a "mini-downtown;' with a memorable identity and sense of pride. u The study was prompted by the need to explore the inconsistencies between the outdated car-oriented development pattern (dating back '�► to the 1960's) and the newly established "Community Commercial" zoning designation for the area . The key recommendation was for a , new special street design with continuous sidewalks, better bike lanes, and median islands, including a mid-block pedestrian crossing of West Elizabeth Street. The new street design was subsequently implemented , removing a significant obstacle to redevelopment and fitting the vision for the area . Some redevelopment has occurred more recently near West Elizabeth Street and City Park Avenue, which exemplifies the application of the zoning designation, as adapted to market realities . WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 9 Land Use Code : Revised Compatibility, Transition & Preservation Standards (2013) The revised Compatibility, Transition and Preservation Standards in the Land Use Code address the following land use and preservation concepts for new development projects . 1 Landscape Elements • Ensure buffering between dissimilar uses and activities • Interrelationship between new and existing elements a Building & Project Compatibility • Ensure height, size, mass, bulk, and scale are similar to existing designs • If different, visually integrate through details and building form Land Use Transition Example historic house in the Sheely neighborhood • Form transition zones between distinct and potentially incompatible adjoining land uses Fort Collins • Implement buffer yards and passive open space where necessary to promote compatibility Operational & Physical Compatibility • Consider compatibility in hours of operation, lighting, noise, loading , delivery zones, parking, and trash management < - Protection of Historic Properties • Recognize historic, architectural , and geographic importance of properties = r • Incorporate historic elements into new developments Transportation Master Plan % FortCollins • Alterations cannot adversely affect the integrity of historic Feb. ... s. 111 properties • New buildings in historic districts should reflect the historic character through the following : reflection of roof lines, patterns, A material choices, door and window placement, and characteristic entry features « • The Landmark Preservation Commission will provide guidance for innovate ,sustaimconnect development of historic and/or adjacent properties Transportation Master Plan (2011 ) Transportation & Mobility Transportation Master Plan (2011 ) The Transportation Master Plan (TMP) documents the vision for the City's long-term multimodal transportation system . The plan provides policy direction for decisions regarding the implementation of the transportation system to achieve the City's vision, mission, and values as a World Class Community. The TMP sets the vision planning horizon at 2035 and is typically updated approximately every five years . The TMP provides priority actions and strategies for implementing projects and services to meet short-term needs, while working toward the long-range goals for the community's ultimate transportation system . It references four Enhanced Travel Corridors (ETCs) that were introduced in the 2004 TMP (Mason Corridor, Harmony Road, Timberline Road/ Power Trail , and Mountain Vista Road), plus two additional ETCs (West Elizabeth Street and Prospect Road) , as uniquely designed corridors that are planned to incorporate high-frequency transit, bicycling, and walking . ETCs are intended to support opportunities for mixed-use, transit-oriented development and to support Fort Collins' active lifestyles and environmental stewardship goals . The West Elizabeth ETC, as defined in the TMP, extends from the CSU Main Campus to the CSU Foothills Campus near Overland Trail . The West Elizabeth ETC Plan is funded in the 2015-16 budget, and the planning process is expected to begin in spring 2015 . The Prospect Road ETC, as defined in the TMP, extends from the Mason Corridor to 1 -25 . The Prospect Corridor chapter of this plan addresses a separate segment of Prospect Road, from Shields Street to College Avenue, which is an important pre-cursor to planning for the full ETC . 10 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Planning Context The Master Street Plan (MSP) is an appendix to the TMP and serves as a map of the City's long-range vision for the major street network. The - - • • roadways within the West Central area are predominantly already built with the number of through-lanes identified in the MSP, so additional projects would likely focus on intersection improvements and upgrading streets to meet current standards . Bicycle Master Plan (2014) The Bicycle Master Plan envisions Fort Collins as a world-class city for bicycling, where people of all ages and abilities have access to a � comfortable, safe, and connected network of bicycle facilities, and where _ _ 3 + bicycling is an integral part of daily life and the local cultural experience . The Bicycle Master Plan sets a vision for the year 2020, when one in five people will ride a bike, and bicycle-related crashes will be fewer than today. r The Bicycle Master Plan integrates existing city plans, best practices and innovative thinking, and proposes a comprehensive set of strategies to create a safe and comfortable bicycling environment for people of ' all ages . The Plan includes several appendices with details pertaining to existing conditions, public engagement, existing bicycle programs, _ bicycle facility design and wayfinding guidelines, and implementationi"k details . The plan focuses on the development of a network of low-stress ' bicycle travel corridors, several of which pass through the West Central area . The recommendations from the Bicycle Master Plan have been incorporated into the Transportation and Mobility chapter of this plan . Pedestrian Plan (2011 ) � The purpose of the Pedestrian Plan is to promote a pedestrian- friendly environment that encourages walking throughout the city. To Pedestrian Plan Fort Collins accomplish this, the plan identifies way to create pedestrian-friendly 1�� Febmap 15. 2011 environments, including along public streets, off-street paths, and other public spaces that offer a high level of comfort, convenience, safety, hip and quality of user experience. The plan also updates and prioritizes the list of pedestrian improvement projects throughout the city. The t West Central area is home to several of the Pedestrian Priority Areas K and some projects identified in the plan , which have been included in lastainiconnect the recommendations in the Transportation and Mobility chapter of this Pedestrian plan . Transfort Strategic Operating Plan (2009) - - The Transfort Strategic Operating Plan (TSOP) was developed through a collaborative effort between the City of Fort Collins (Transfort), the City of Loveland (COLT), and Poudre School District (PSD) . The purpose 1 was to provide a coordinated update to the TSOP and the COLT Transit Plan, and to analyze opportunities related to public transportation for PSD high schools . Three phases are proposed in the plan, each taking - � steps toward creating a more grid-like transit network, expanding service frequencies, and providing additional regional routes . In the j , � West Central area, additional service is provided on a variety of routes r , serving CSU, and future high-frequency service is proposed along West Elizabeth Street to eventually connect with the existing MAX corridor. r WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 1 1 Arterial Intersection Prioritization Study (ongoing) The purpose of the Arterial Intersection Priority Study is to identify intersections that are in need of mobility and safety improvements . The study applies "a wide breadth of evaluation criteria to ensure that the selected projects addressed specific transportation needs and also aligned with the City's core values " Thirty-two intersections throughout the City were recently carried forward for further analysis, including four within the West Central area : Elizabeth Street and Shields Street; Drake Y Road and Shields Street; Drake Road and McClelland Drive; and Drake Road and Redwing Road/ Bay Road . N Drake Road and Shields Street is the only intersection that has been - carried forward to concept design . The design for this intersection -- began in the summer of 2014, with the main goals to add northbound J*JP6 and southbound right-turn lanes and bring the Shields Street bike lanes up to standard through the intersection . Intersection of Drake • . . . . . Shields Street Open Space Networks Natural Areas Master Plan (2014) The Natural Areas Master Plan establishes the priorities for conservation ►. ' and stewardship of the City's natural areas system for the next ten years based on the values and functions of the natural areas system as a whole, community input, and emerging trends and needs . Vision.' "Through the work of the Natural Areas Department, a diverse system of conserved and restored lands will connect community members to nature. These conserved lands will protect nature and contribute to the health and wellbeing of our community. " ' , . . 1 Natural Areas Master Plan Priorities • Land and water conservation, including water rights acquisition to enhance and sustain habitat ' • Improve water quality, quantity and overall health of the Cache La Poudre River ecosystem • Connect people to nature through education, outreach and volunteer coordination Natural Areas Master Plan (2014) • Create "Wilderness in the City"-oriented spaces • Maintain high-quality ranger and visitor services • Construct and maintain high quality recreation, public ` improvements and facilities ;, • Conserve and restore cultural resources • Conserve working agricultural lands with prime soils and water • Prepare or update management plans for all natural areas NATURE ZiA Nature in the City Strategic Plan (2015) IN THE CITY The purpose of the Nature in the City Strategic Plan is to ensure that, DRAFT STRATEGICPLA„ FEBRUARY9, 2015 as our community grows to its build-out population, all residents have access to high-quality, natural spaces close to where they live and work. Nature in the City Objectives • Ensure every resident is within a 10-minute walk to nature from their home or workplace • Have natural spaces that provide diverse social and ecological opportunities • Continue to shift the landscape aesthetic from lawns to more diverse PIoiit�!'s landscapes that support healthy environments for all species 12 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Planning Context CSU Planning Efforts CSU Master Plan (2014) Colorado State University l .9:_. � P The CSU Master Plan maps the physical needs of the University and , , , , provides a tool to assess and plan for the future. This document provides r the 21st Cent4 University leadership with an outline of current and future program needs and budget requirements to successfully direct and build projects that support future enrollment. The plan separates the campus into three campus areas — (I ) Foothills Campus, (2) Main Campus, and (3) South Campus —to depict current and future conditions and framework maps . The plan includes a history of the campus master plan, zoning conditions, projects under construction, funded projects, pedestrian and green space, access, transit, and housing redevelopment plans . , CSU Parking & Transportation Master Plan (2014) The CSU Parking and Transportation Master Plan provides strategies for improving overall campus access, circulation , and parking; supporting alternative modes of transportation; and improving customer service for CSU students, faculty, staff, and visitors. The plan includes an - overview of current parking management strategies, Transportation Demand Management existing conditions and best practices, a „vvle> s community engagement and strategic communications plan, traffic 'i`r impact assessment and traffic simulation model , and demand modeling ,__ ` for parking . In addition to this plannign effort, CSU recently collected - data related to the number of pedestrians and bicyclists crossing Shields Street to get to campus . This data informed the Shields Corridor University Analysis presented in this plan . 7 Colorado StR2041 " 1 CSU Bicycle Master Plan (2014) pP Th CSU Bicycle Master Plan aims to enhance campus sustainability and reduce automobile travel and parking demands by supporting - increased bicycling . The plan was completed simultaneously with the City of Fort Collins Bicycle Master Plan so as to align both planning efforts . The plan provides a vision and policy guidance related to bicycle 14i network improvements, bicycle parking , education , enforcement, - encouragement, data collection, and priority actions and investments . CSU On-Campus Stadium (ongoing) s . In December 2014, the CSU Board of Governors approved the development of a new 36,000-seat stadium, to be constructed on the CSU Main Campus; groundbreaking is currently planned for summer - 2015 with opening in fall 2017. As part of the planning for the stadium, CSU commissioned several studies to determine potential impacts and mitigation related to traffic, parking, noise, and light. CSU is currently working on an intergovernmental agreement with the City identifying specific mitigation steps, event management, and funding responsibilities . The effects of the stadium on the surrounding roadways and neighborhoods have been considered during the planning process w� of the West Central Area Plan . Specific ideas related to land use and - neighborhood character, transportation and mobility, open space networks, and the Prospect Corridor design have been identified and GUBicycle Master Plan (2014) included in Appendix B, in addition to public comments received through the West Central Area Plan outreach . WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 13 Study Area Change Over Time Figure 3 . 1974 Aerial Photo The character of the area's individual neighborhoods — — — — Study Area Boundary r New Residential Development has been shaped by several forces over time, Arterial Road including : Earl• agricultural land use • y g Mulberry Street • Incremental expansion of the city • Colorado State University's growth and changes to its campuses • Increased residential, commercial , and institutional development A Elizabeth Street • Continued expansion of City services ' The earliest of the planned developments in the O West Central area dates to 1911 , though very little development occurred before World War 11 . Many of the — Prospect Road post-war subdivisions were planned and built with their Aggie own distinct features, creating a variety of development wa lenberg Village patterns, architectural design styles, and character. Neighborhood south 1974 Conditions In 1974, a substantial portion of the area north v of Prospect Road and south of Mulberry Street ca ! was built- out as it currently exists . The single- and Moore family residential neighborhoods south of Elizabeth Neighborhood Street had also been established . The area south of Prospect Road existed primarily in agricultural use, Drake Road except for the Rolland Moore West single-family residential neighborhood near the corner of Taft Hill Road and Drake Road ; the Sheely-Wallenberg Figure 4. Changes between 1974 and 1999 neighborhood east of Shields Street and south of — — — Study Area Boundary New Residential Development Prospect Road ; and the Aggie Village South student Spring Creek Trail IF' New Mixed-Use Development housing at Whitcomb Street and Prospect Road . The Arterial Road New Commercial Development commercial center at College Avenue and Prospect New Institutional Stormwater Management Road had also been constructed . New Parks and Open Space ur A . u` 7 Changes between 1974 and 1999 Mulberry Street Significant infill development occurred between 1974 and 1999, particularly south of Prospect Road . Additional student-oriented multi-family R. 4. development occurred north of Elizabeth Street and -- ' west of Shields Street, in the Campus West area . Elizabeth street -- CSU r Commercial development was focused around AveryQD the area surrounding Drake Road and Shields ••V Park y Street as well as the " Rite-Aid Shopping Center" at i t � Prospect Road and Shields Street. Some additional Prospect Road commercial development occurred in the Campus West area and near Prospect Road and College Avenue . The Veterinary Teaching Hospital began - r �►` CSU 'S develo ment of the South Campus . Lexington preen Rill Pond p p Neighborhood Neighborhood � •r Red Fox Meadows Natural Area is a major stormwater a f �f I 1 detention facility that was constructed near the Ccovo� corner of Prospect Road and Taft Hill Road , creating I Rolland Moore Park cSu additional wildlife habitat and a new recreational I M / Veterinary amenity. The creation of Rolland Moore Park also " •bq;r *- AA* School added a significant open space and recreational r ke Road asset to the area . 14 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Planning Context Changes between 1999 and 2015 Figure 5 . Changes between 1999 and 2015 The construction of Centre Avenue launched ++ Mason Corridor Development , New Institutional associated development along that corridor, Centre Avenue Corridor New Parks and Open Space including the construction of the Gardens on Spring �' Development Creek, expansion and build-out of the area around Study Area Boundary New Residential Development — — — the Veterinary Teaching Hospital, and commercial New Mixed-use Development development directly to the west of the Veterinary Spring Creek Trail � New Commercial Development Teaching Hospital . In addition, The Grove student- New Bike Route/ Lane oriented multi-family housing was completed along �' Arterial Road New Religious Development Centre Avenue, and multi-family housing continued O Stormwater Management to be added in the Campus West area and near N Prospect Road and Mulberry Street. Bike lane striping occurred on many of the Mulberry Street neighborhood collector and local streets, as well as West Elizabeth Street. The development of the MAX Bus Rapid Transit and the Mason Trail (Mason Corridor) represents a significant improvement , �.,�. _ Elizabeth tr et to the overall transit and bike/pedestrian network, r Csu acting as a primary north-south connector. N � � � - - - - - '� Prospect Road Red Fox I Meadows r }i at— y Natural Area — � Garfl?Pson � o Spring Creek The e ' _ Grove Y _ ~ t P� csu - e Veterinary y oe�tt school ., Drake Road al The Drake Centre shopping center .6 AM r t � :r- _ T r t 1 - , � �•. WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 15 Existing Conditions The West Central area has the highest concentration of residents of any area in Fort Collins, with a resident population of approximately 20, 5561 . With a land area of approximately 3 . 6 square miles, the West Central presently houses about 14. 2% of the City's entire population (144, 3292) on 6 . 7% of its total land area' . Based on the latest North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization (NFRMPO) data, the population growth in the West Central Area is expected to outpace growth citywide between now and 2035, which indicates a demand for additional residential development and redevelopment in this area . Moreover, CSU anticipates adding approximately 8, 000 students and 1 , 000 faculty and staff by 2024, which will impact the area's housing demand and public and private service needs . Typical houses in the Rolland Moore West neighborhood Additional information on existing conditions in the West Central area is provided in Appendices C and D. there are ongoing concerns that infill and redevelopment Land Use & Neighborhood Character will impact the character and desirability of existing neighborhoods and may have an impact on adjacent The West Central area is comprised of several stable historic structures . neighborhoods at the edge of the Colorado State Several historic structures and one historic district, the University Campus with a variety of housing types and Sheely Neighborhood, exist within the West Central densities throughout. The neighborhoods are directly area . Preserving the integrity of these historic features influenced by student and other population growth . has become a concern for many residents and others Plans for a new CSU on-campus stadium and other as pressure from new development increases . Due facilities have further increased the perception of to the age of many of the buildings within the West multiple pressures on these neighborhoods . Central area (approaching 50 years or older) , there are The demand for rental housing , driven in part by the many additional structures that could be recognized recent recession and the trend of "millenials" delaying for historic characteristics in the near future . As with home ownership, has created pressure for additional other older neighborhoods in the city, this could result apartments, townhome, and single-family rental houses in additional restrictions or requirements for additions, in this area . In addition, CSU houses only a portion of renovations, and redevelopment of potentially historic its students on-campus, so the remaining students buildings . must find housing elsewhere in the city. This results A number of commercial and institutional development in the conversion of many single-family dwellings into rental units and short-term occupancy, with associated projects have altered the West Central area over time: the Campus West commercial district, Drake Centre challenges related to property maintenance, renter behavior, differing lifestyles, and over-occupancy Shopping Center, Centre for Advanced Technology, of homes within neighborhoods . Maintaining the Raintree Plaza, and Spring Creek Medical Center provide affordability and desirability of these neighborhoods for retail , restaurants, medical care, and other services to a range of residents, including students and families, neighborhood residents . A number of grocery stores has long been a priority for the West Central area . are located around the perimeter, though outside the boundary, of the West Central area . However, since the Current zoning, notably the High Density Mixed-Use closure of the Steele's Market near Drake Road and Neighborhood (HMN) and Neighborhood Conservation Shields Street, there is no longer a grocery store within Buffer (NCB) districts, allows for increased density on convenient walking or bicycling distance for many area key properties within the West Central area ; however, residents . 1 U .S. Census Bureau . (2012). American Community Survey. Transportation & Mobility Accessed from : http:gfactfinder2.census.gov/ 2 U .S. Census Bureau . (2012). American Community Survey. Due to the incremental growth and development Accessed from : http:gfactfinder2.census.gov/ of the West Central area, roads, sidewalks, and 3 Note: The figures provided here differ from those provided in the other transportation facilities have been developed 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan (Chapter 1 , Page 3) . The previous plan relied on a different dataset, which included the inconsistently and to various standards over time. CSU Main Campus in its population estimates. These population Constrained, high traffic arterial roads, such as Prospect estimates do not include the resident student population on the Road and Shields Street, are perceived as barriers for CSU campus outside the West Central Area. 16 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Planning Context crossing to and from campus, schools, community space corridor for both wildlife habitat and recreation facilities, shopping centers, or other destinations . Bike and is an important connection between other parks and and pedestrian facilities along these corridors typically open spaces . Three major irrigation ditches traverse the do not meet current City standards and feel unsafe area : New Mercer Canal, Larimer County Canal Number or uncomfortable to users . Discontinuous sidewalks, 2, and the Arthur Ditch . These serve multiple functions, a lack of convenient crossings along arterial roads, providing habitat, managing stormwater, and delivering and the need for sufficient traffic calming within water to customers . There may be future opportunities neighborhoods present challenges for residents and to improve recreational access in some locations along commuters alike. Alternative routes and connections ditches . The open space network also includes a number for bikes and pedestrians are often lacking, so there is of stormwater detention areas located on both public a need for a more effective multi-modal network of bike and private property, which also present opportunities and pedestrian facilities in order to provide safe, easy, for future enhancement. and convenient alternatives to driving . As development occurs, it is important to maintain an The high population density and concentration of adequate amount of open space to provide both wildlife schools and destinations in the area results in higher habitat and recreational opportunities for current and transit ridership than other areas of the city. Routes future residents . Residents have expressed a desire to along the West Elizabeth corridor have the highest ensure new development continues to provide adequate ridership, and CSU has helped fund additional routes access to high-quality parks and open space. and service to better meet the demand of students commuting to campus in recent years . At the same Prospect Corridor time, there is still unmet demand and opportunity to Prospect Road was an early transportation corridor improve transit service and connections, particularly to in the city, and was developed in a rural setting . Early the MAX, in the West Central area . housing development along this corridor constrained Maintaining adequate parking in neighborhoods, the public right-of-way, which is now limited in its particularly close to the CSU campus and for multi- ability to meet existing and projected transportation family developments, is an ongoing challenge . The needs . This high-traffic corridor is uncomfortable for Residential Parking Permit Program (RP3) has been bicyclists and pedestrians to travel along and across successfully implemented in the Sheely and Wallenberg and requires a number of improvements to meet the neighborhoods and could eventually be applied to other needs of all users — vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, neighborhoods to address parking concerns . and transit riders . Given the constrained right-of-way conditions on Prospect Road, improvements to Lake Open Space Networks Street (one block north and parallel to Prospect Road) There is a concentration of parks, recreation , open were evaluated in conjunction with design options for space, and trail amenities within the West Central area, Prospect Road . There are opportunities to improve including Rolland Moore Park, Avery Park, Red Fox both Prospect Road and Lake Street to better serve Meadows Natural Area , Ross Natural Area, the Senior residents and commuters, accommodate through- Center, Gardens on Spring Creek, the Spring Creek Trail , traffic, and connect to the MAX bus rapid transit line . and the Mason Trail . Spring Creek is a primary open ti Ditch running through Red Fox Meadows Natural Area Lack of bike facilities along w Prospect Road WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 17 This page intentionally left blank 18 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN IF1r6 - mom 41W L Op a1 F • � , a } r di - I% � � � aT 0 Jmor % . " 1 '- �+ ` r , rkap Ilk • �� � 'S - r A rc •. qp ZE i ' 1 � 1 i ' r t '' a . APE F . , ML is fir + or + I Jr. 106 oft . 00 OL { dor op dp F 4 4 r m 416 III III West Central Area Vision The intent of the vision is to reflect: Given the area's history and diversity, envisioning a ' The features that are most valued by residents and unifying and cohesive future character was one of the stakeholders and that should be preserved first priorities in the planning process . The vision was ' Opportunities to improve the current state of the developed through extensive community engagement, area and better support quality of life including two visioning workshops , an online survey, the Citywide goals and policies that are relevant to the West Central area work of two advisory committees , and outreach to City Boards , Commissions, and City Council . Land Use & Neighborhood Character Vibrant and diverse neighborhoods that provide a high quality of life. Desirable, safe, and attainable neighborhoods that are a source of pride Conveniently located parks, trails, open space, services and employment ® New development that is compatible with existing development A range of incomes and a wide variety of housing options Well -integrated campus community _ A collaborative design process that respects neighborhood concerns OTransportation & Mobility A connected network that supports people safely walking, biking, or using public transit as a primary way to travel while balancing the need for efficient auto travel throughout the area. Safe routes to school, CSU , and other major destinations Safe, reliable, arterial streets that are " easy to cross and serve residents and commuters Option for residents to live without a car Reshaped and retrofitted streets that meet the needs of all ages, abilities, and modes - Safe and efficient travel by car with adequate, convenient parking 4 Improved transit service and convenient ;• : stops Easy access to transit (including MAX) 18 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Vision The vision of the West Central Area Plan is described for These vision statements provide a foundation for the four primary focus areas '. Land Use and Neighborhood policies, projects, and programs in the plan , as well as Character, Transportation and Mobility, Open Space the design for the Prospect Corridor. The policies and Networks, and the Prospect Corridor. The four vision recommendations of the West Central Area Plan align categories represent a unified and holistic vision for the with the vision statements presented here . Where a overall project, with some level of overlap between each particular policy corresponds to one or more vision topic area . statements, the icon for that statement (e . g . , LU1 ) is included . 1 Open Space Networks A functional network of public and private lands that supports and connects wildlife, plants, and people. Access to nature, recreation , and , . ' environmental stewardship opportunities ® Parks and open spaces that offer a variety it ' of settings and experiences Attractive urban landscape that supports INV&-+ habitat, character, and shade ® Preserved and enhanced wildlife habitat ' ' and corridors ' sir . t Comprehensive and ecological ' approaches to stormwater management ' Prospect Corridor Attractive and functional, well-integrated, mixed-use corridor that serves the mobility needs of nearby neighborhoods, CSU, and the community. c y `' lift - Safe and comfortable corridor for all �r.,ff T 1 IT modes of travel ro III Safe crossings Attractive gateway to campus, downtown, � - - - —� and midtown r Seamless connection to MAX w WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 19 This page intentionally left blank 20 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN I - } - t it Fit 10 IL EAD RED FO . • ..for J VASTOKbowINN r ONN _ ,1*ot� J i - ` _ .t Land Use & Neighborhood ' Character Vision Vibrant and diverse neighborhoods that provide a high quality of life Desirable, safe, and attainable a neighborhoods that are a source of pride ® Conveniently located parks, trails, open space, services and employment New development that is compatible with ® existing development ' . . Y ® A range of incomes and a wide variety of 4 , housing options - Well - integrated campus community " E A collaborative design process that respects neighborhood concerns - - + fff il IA IL I o- K 1� 22 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Land Use & Neicihborhood Character Areas of Stability, _ Enhancement & Development The West Central area has been divided into four general — :�:� "'"' classifications based on the level of development or redevelopment that is expected in specific areas : • Areas of significant new development or � � `�" ; redevelopment } • Areas of some new development or redevelopment • Areas requiring neighborhood enhancements • Areas of stability These areas are described below and are further detailed in Figure 6 . Significant New Development or Redevelopment Significant new development or redevelopment is anticipated on key vacant or under-utilized parcels, potentially resulting in change of use or intensity. Specific areas identified for potentially significant new development or redevelopment include: - • The High Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (HMN) Vacant 20-acre area near Prospect Road and Shields Street District (North of Prospect Road between Shields Vacant 20-Acre Parcel South of Prospect Road and East Street and Whitcomb Street) of Shields Street • Vacant 20-acre parcel south of Prospect Road and east of Shields Street This site is the largest undeveloped tract in the • Various vacant or under-utilized parcels throughout West Central area and includes two zone districts, the area, primarily along Shields Street, Prospect Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and Medium Density Road , and other arterial streets Mixed-Use Neighborhood (MMN) . The NC zone is approximately ten acres in size and acts as the core High Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (HMN) District of the parcel , with exposure along Shields Street. This This area is the only location where the High Density area is expected to develop in an urbanized commercial Mixed-Use Neighborhood (HMN) zoning occurs within manner. Opportunities exist for dwelling units above the city, which was created as a result of the 1999 West commercial space. The MMN zone surrounds the Central Neighborhoods Plan . This district represents an commercial core and is intended to offer a variety of edge condition and provides a transition between the housing options, as well as a land use transition for the Sheely neighborhood and the CSU Main Campus . Given Sheely neighborhood to the east. There is potential for the numerous parcels that comprise this area, new a well-designed cohesive development that creatively development will likely occur through multiple small- or addresses both the market potential and neighborhood medium-scale projects . Sensitivity to historic structures desires for the site. will require careful design solutions and collaboration Various Vacant or Under-Utilized Parcels with the Landmark Preservation Commission . These parcels are scattered throughout the plan area This area is expected to build out in accordance with the and are generally under market pressure to redevelop in existing zoning, with residential density at a minimum a manner greater than would otherwise be allowed by of 20 dwelling units per acre . While five-story buildings the current parameters of the Low Density Residential are allowed , the height, mass, and scale of buildings (RL) or Neighborhood Conservation Buffer (NCB) zone will be critically evaluated to achieve compatibility with districts . Such redevelopment will be carefully evaluated adjacent development and to positively impact the so that new uses protect neighborhood character, are neighborhood and community. The allowable density well-designed, and mitigate traffic and other external and proximity to campus create opportunities for mixed- impacts . Collaboration with surrounding neighbors is use buildings and campus-related uses, as well . expected to result in land uses that are appropriate with a design that is sensitive to the surrounding context. WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 23 Some New Development or Redevelopment Areas of Stability Some market driven infill and redevelopment is likely to Mature, stable areas unlikely to change significantly in occur in some locations in the West Central area . The the coming years . The neighborhoods designated as most notable location of potential development is the "areas of stability' feature a variety of housing styles Campus West commercial area . along quiet neighborhood streets . These neighborhoods Campus West Commercial Area will be preserved and enhanced , with infrastructure improvements where needed . While stable, these The existing commercial centers should be neighborhoods experience some pressures related to strengthened to serve as a cohesive "main street" along the demand for rental housing, the short-term nature West Elizabeth Street. This area is expected to build out of students and other tenants, and an overall increase with a high degree of urban character in accordance in population and traffic in the West Central area . with the current Community Commercial (CC) zone There are no proposed land use changes for the stable district. Redevelopment is encouraged to provide street- neighborhoods . facing patios and other features that would animate the streetscape. Mixed-use development is strongly encouraged to provide housing opportunities above commercial space. Corporate prototype design will be discouraged or modified so the district remains distinct and builds upon its unique character. The West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor (ETC) Project will further explore the integration between transportation and land use in this area . Neighborhood Enhancements Some reinvestment in infrastructure, services, and - programs is appropriate for some neighborhoods within the West Central area . Typical single-family house in the neighborhood south of Campus West These neighborhoods are generally located between Mulberry Street and Prospect Road , and between Taft Hill Road and Shields Street. The neighborhoods were generally developed over the decades following World War II , typically as one-story ranch-style residences . Many of the residences in this area are currently rental homes, and there is likely to be an increasing interest in renovations and remodels of these houses as housing prices increase throughout Fort Collins . Infrastructure improvements to roadways, street lighting, other - aesthetic and safety improvements, and additional neighborhood services and programs will be prioritized in this area . neighborhoodExisting stable west of Rolland Moore Park a � - IIIIIII iUA L �. a.aw: , -1-- _ AlL. 24 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Land Use & Neighborhood Character Figure 6 . Areas of Stability, Enhancement & Development The map below designates areas of stability, enhancement and development to depict a vision for where the greatest future change is most likely to occur, where enhancements are needed, and where existing stable areas should be protected and preserved . Developers and decision-makers should refer to the map when considering changes in zoning or Additions of Permitted Use (APU) . �C Mulberry St ,. '*'-City Park`' Dunn Elementary r = z School s Laurel St Lab/ Polaris West Elizabeth " Main School Street" � * Moby Arena y � T Campus King � West Soopers Avery Park - - - — CSU Campus P - - - - - _ _ � Core Bennett Elementary Future CSU School Stadium Lake St HMN Zone Prospect Rd Commercial > Center j� Q Red Fox Meadows Cn t al � Natural Area Neighborhood Center o F w i� t Commer ial Spring Creek Trail ardens o . Cent f Sprin Cree , Fischer Natural Area t� T Blevins Rolland �� Natural Middle Moore Park Resources 11 School * Research Center Whole Foods/ Ross King Safeway atural Area CSU Soopers Shopping Senior Center * Veterinary Center Commercial Teaching m 1 T Center p ta Commercial " Drake Rd Center Legend O Existing Elements Potential Opportunities West Central Area Boundary AREAS OF STABILITY, ENHANCEMENT & DEVELOPMENT: t' — West Elizabeth " Main Street" Significant New Development/Redevelopment - Significant new ff Arterial Road development/redevelopment anticipated on vacant parcels, potentially potential Key Destinations Parks & Open Space resulting in change of use or intensity O CSU Property 0 Some New Development/Redevelopment - Some market-driven infill and P y redevelopment likely to occur Major Trail O Neighborhood Enhancements - Some reinvestment in infrastructure and i Schools potential additions/renovations O Areas of Stability - Stable areas unlikely to change significantly, some new �C Key Destinations programs or services may be appropriate WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 25 Policies Code Enforcement & Education The Land Use and Neighborhood Character policies 1 . 1 Promote good property maintenance and yard care practices to contribute to attractive, emphasize the importance of strengthening desirable neighborhoods neighborhoods and providing adequate services in the West Central area . Neighborhoods should be desirable, 1 . 2 Maintain the livability of neighborhoods for a safe, and a source of pride for all residents, with variety of residents through existing occupancy convenient access to parks, trails, open space, services, limits and employment. This section provides guidance 1 . 3 Support programs and initiatives that seek for new development to ensure compatibility with to educate renters, landlords and property existing neighborhoods, while accommodating future managers, and long-time residents about living urbanization . A variety of housing types will ensure as part of a diverse community that residents from all socio-economic levels may find l • � good Services suitable housing in the area . y " "' Thefollowing policies areorganized into three categories : 1 . 4 Ensure that the West Central area remains a safe Code Enforcement and Education , Neighborhood place to live, work, travel, and play for all ages Services, and Neighborhood Character. 1 . 5 Construct new public improvements and upgrade aging infrastructure to better serve neighborhood residents 1 . 6 Maintain and improve streets to support neighborhood aesthetics and environmental quality 1 . 7 Maintain employment opportunities and access to amenities Neighborhood Character 1 . 8 Maintain established, mature neighborhoods as ,. areas of stability list, 4 -11 1 . 9 Provide guidelines to ensure new development is compatible with adjacent neighborhoods 1 . 10 Emphasize and respect the existing heritage and character of neighborhoods through a collaborative design process that allows for a neighborhood dialogue Recent commercial development in the West Central area 1 . 11 Encourage a variety of housing types so that residents from all socio-economic levels may r find suitable housing in the area n 1 . 12 Encourage Colorado State University ` involvement in neighborhood planning and development efforts and participation in �� `• `S1 M1 activities that strengthen neighborhoods LO low 26 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Land Use & Neicihborhood Character Code Enforcement & Education properties . Such a program would require contact information for landlords, tenants, and property managers to improve communication . Promote good property maintenance Continue to strengthen the effective enforcement and yard care practices to contribute to of nuisance ordinances. Focus enforcement attractive, desirable neighborhoods WON efforts on neighborhoods with proportionately Continue to pursue a proactive approach to identifying, • higher number Code monitoring, and responding to code violations . Update the City Code to clarify the enforcement violations related to dead grass and bare dirt in Continue to prevent recurring code violations on front yards . individual properties through increased fines or other • Review the current strategy for the escalation of escalating enforcement measures . fines and other enforcement measures for repeat Efforts to educate and improve the maintenance and code/public nuisance violations, and update as management of rental properties should focus on both needed . landlords and renters . • Provide annual education of residents related to unscreened trash to reduce the number of Action Items violations . Education • Develop a strategy to proactively enforce sidewalk shoveling by property owners along important • Promote the annual Neighborhood Services pedestrian routes (e. g . , to schools, parks, and other Landlord Training Program, which offers landlords major destinations) (see also Policy 2 . 2) . and property managers an opportunity to stay current with all applicable building and property What We Heard maintenance codes . Adopt a " Preferred Landlord" credential for participants and incentivize Management and maintenance of rental properties participation . has been an ongoing concern in these neighborhoods • Encourage rental tenants' participation in a training for many years. program and adopt a "Preferred Tenant" credential for participants . Utilize the CSU Off-Campus Life - education programs as a starting point for tenant Maintain the livability of neighborhoods certification . Rent discounts or priority access for km for a variety of residents through existing renters to available units could provide additional Loccupancy limits incentives for participation . r • Support the establishment of networking and Continue the enforcement of the City's existing professional development group for landlords and occupancy ordinances, commonly referred to as 11U+2" property managers that meets casually to socialize or "three-unrelated " Extra occupancy rental houses are and discuss ideas and challenges related to property not permitted in the Low Density Residential (RL) District management. but may be considered in the other zoning districts Enforcement within the West Central area . • Form a committee to explore the creation of Action Items a citywide landlord registration or licensing • Expand education efforts related to the impacts program as a means to improve building safety, and requirements of occupancy limits in improve compliance with City codes, and increase partnership with CSU and Front Range Community accountability for the management of single-family College (FRCC) . • When community service is required as a penalty for violations, apply the community service to the neighborhoods in which the violations frequently occur. Signs of occupancy ordinance violation . . WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 1 U / 1 5 27 Support programs and initiatives that seek Schedule annual meetings with neighborhood i to educate renters, landlords and property residents within the West Central area . As managers, and long -time residents about part of these meetings, attendees can share living as part of a diverse community ® their experiences related to living in a diverse �■� neighborhood and discuss expectations for property owners, landlords, renters, law Improve education of renters on the responsibilities of enforcement, and City staff. Such meetings should living in a neighborhood, how to be a good neighbor, be discussion-based, interactive, and fun . and how to get involved in neighborhood organizations . Leverage existing neighborhood newsletters Education efforts should occur both prior to and in to improve communication to neighborhood response to the occurrence of violations . residents and property owners . The City should Improve communication with property owners and provide additional information and education neighborhood residents about the codes that are in through Neighborhood News (City of Fort Collins), place and how they are enforced . Efforts should be taken homeowners association and apartment complex to ensure that residents and code compliance staff have newsletters, Northern Colorado Rental Housing similar expectations about how code enforcement will Association newsletter, Nextdoor (social media occur in neighborhoods . site), and other newsletters and forums used by Participation in education programs should be included neighborhood residents .Support the efforts of Police Services and the as part of the penalties associated with public nuisance, CSU Police Department to include educational occupancy, drug and alcohol, code violations, and other information and programs as part of their offenses . For example, CSU students issued certain enforcement and community outreach strategy. tickets are already required to attend a class about living Continue to hold neighborhood meetings regarding in the community. crime activity and safety concerns as needed . Action Items Include educational information about City code Renter Education requirements as part of the code violation letters sent to residents . A summary of the most common • Continue existing educational programs offered violations and strategies for avoiding them should by Neighborhood Services and CSU Off-Campus be included . Life. Strengthen CSU Off-Campus Life's existing programs for educating students about the Data Management responsibilities of living off-campus and being • Improve the utilization of code violation data to a good neighbor (e . g . , Party Smart, Community identify trends, problem areas, and communicate Welcome, Ice Cream Welcome Wagon, First- with the public . Year Seminar Classes, Where Will I Live Next Year • Create an online, publicly-accessible map of code Seminars) . violation data to serve as a communication and • Fund an additional staff position to support the education tool . Community Liaison position . Such a position would strengthen existing Neighborhood Services What We Heard and Off-Campus Life partnership programs, as Neighborhood residents would like to see additional well as the implementation of new programs and renter education provided on an annual basis. strategies . The costs of this position should be shared between the City and CSU . • Work with Front Range Community College to develop a program for educating students about _ r living in the community. Landlord Education • Create a program that requires landlords to attend a class on rental property management in response to public nuisance ordinance violations . Neighborhood Outreach & Education ; r p. � • Support the establishment and growth of organized neighborhood groups . The I' Neighborhood Services department will continue to serve as a resource for existing and new neighborhood organizations . 28 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Land Use & Neighborhood Characte Neighborhood Services Construct new public improvements and upgrade aging infrastructure to better serve neighborhood residents Ensure that the West Central area remains •,•,. �# a safe place to live, work, travel , and play for all ages As the infrastructure in the West Central area continues to age, regularly maintain and upgrade facilities to better The need for additional public services should be closely serve the neighborhoods . Sidewalk connections, traffic monitored over time in an effort to maintain public calming, pedestrian safety features, and aesthetic safety and retain neighborhood vitality for all ages and improvements are all priorities . income groups . Action Items In order to enhance safety, public street lighting should . Upgrade existing bridges to include sidewalks and be added and/or retrofitted to fill existing gaps along safety railings, particularly over irrigation ditches . public streets and bring illumination levels up to current . Improve neighborhood identity and aesthetics with standards. Consider installing back-side shields to mitigate entry signage. light spillage onto private property, where needed . • Add shelters to existing and future bus stops (see Action Items also Policy 2 . 7) . • Establish a Police Services sub-station within • Continue to widen existing attached sidewalks the West Central area . Such a center could also where feasible. Fill in missing gaps in sidewalks include community-oriented services, such as a within neighborhoods . shared community room, office space for CSU • Provide information to neighborhood residents and community organizations, or other amenities . about Access Fort Collins, an application that Consider including the new sub-station within a allows users to directly report issues to City future CSU parking structure near Shields Street departments . and West Elizabeth Street. • Coordinate among City departments to make • Monitor crime incidents and trends in the West specific improvements in the West Central area : Central area to determine if additional patrols, Planning , Streets , Traffic Operations , Transfort, safety features, or other resources are needed . Neighborhood Services, Engineering , Stormwater, • Coordinate with the Light & Power department to and other relevant departments . map gaps in lighting and opportunities to bring existing light fixtures up to current standards along What We Heard major streets and within neighborhoods . Consider There is a need for upgraded infrastructure within a range of safety and privacy considerations neighborhoods such as sidewalks, bridges and other when determining whether additional lighting is safety measures, as well as aesthetic upgrades, necessary. Ensure all new light fixtures are down- such as street trees. directional , shielded from adjacent residences, and energy efficient. • Review and update current policies for upgrading and adding street lighting to ensure that it allows for the adequate protection of public safety within - neighborhoods . • Continue to trim tree branches that block sight distance at intersections and stop signs . • Continue to identify locations for physical traffic calming or radar speed indicators . • Regularly maintain curb paint to prevent parked cars from blocking driveways and interfering with sight distance at intersections . • Continue to identify locations where additional lighting , sidewalk connections, traffic calming , and other neighborhood safety improvements are needed over time . —U Fill in missing gaps in sidewalks WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 29 Maintain and improve streets to Maintain employment opportunities and support neighborhood aesthetics and access to amenities environmental quality. t Allow for a greater mix of land uses within existing Continue regular street sweeping and street commercial centers in order to fill vacancies, activate maintenance to beautify neighborhood streets, reduce the area, and offer amenities in close proximity to flooding impacts, and support public health and safety. neighborhoods . Action Items Consider a wider range of potential land uses within • Properly notify neighborhood residents of routine under-utilized commercial centers to promote street sweeping operations to ensure that street economic viability than would otherwise be permitted parking is cleared so debris can be effectively under current zoning . Non-traditional uses such as removed . Explore strategies for better informing employment, entertainment, or cultural activities may residents of the street sweeping schedule. be appropriate in some cases . • Continue to implement the Street Maintenance Action Items Program within the West Central area to ensure • Maintain the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) that aging infrastructure is repaired and upgraded zone district to allow for future development of a as needed . mixed-use neighborhood center near Shields and • Continue to add street trees throughout the area , Prospect. particularly along Prospect Road west of Shields . Encourage businesses to locate in existing, Street, along collector roads, and near entrances to underutilized commercial buildings whenever neighborhoods . possible. What We Heard The results of two online surveys indicate the demand for additional services within the West Central area. The top three desired amenities for a neighborhood center are restaurant, grocery, and r open space uses. s r s> 1 sI Vacant parcel zoned for a neighborhood commercial center near Prospect Road and Shields Street 30 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Land Use & Neighborhood Character Neighborhood Character The following principles should guide new development in the West Central area : • Design of new development must be sensitive • Maintain established , mature to the general context and overall character L neighborhoods as areas of stability ® �I of the neighborhood , influenced by local �i� attributes, and demonstrate cohesiveness with Protectthe qualityof life in existing stable neighborhoods adjacent properties . Out-of-scale development within the West Central area . Neighborhoods that are in relationship to existing development will be zoned for Low Density Residential (RL) should not be discouraged . considered for further housing densification, such as • Compatibility can be achieved through careful allowing existing houses to convert to duplexes or by site planning so that mass and scale are adding accessory dwelling units . mitigated and located away from existing Density that exceeds three dwelling units per acre or houses . Careful use of open space, yards and includes accessory dwelling units (e. g . , carriage houses, building setbacks, within an urban context, will basement apartments) should be steered tothefollowing help with density transitions . zone districts : Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood • Building entrances should be oriented toward (LMN), Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood public streets . (MMN), Neighborhood Conservation Buffer (NCB) , and . Height should be stepped back and buildings set High Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood ( HMN) . back so that taller buildings do not loom over Action Items the street and shadowing of private property is • Create a development guide or workbook that shows minimized . the potential opportunities for improving aging • Parking lots should be located to the side and homes so that the existing housing stock is better rear of buildings . equipped to serve the next several generations . • Building forms are expected to be responsive to the individual context of the site. Provide guidelines to ensure new • Each site will relate to the street by a plaza , development is compatible with adjacent courtyard , entry feature or other ground floor neighborhoods cook amenities that enliven pedestrian interest and enhance the public streetscape. The height, mass, and scale of new development in the • Additions and renovations to all properties are High Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (HMN) zone encouraged to be toward the side and rear and district, Neighborhood Commercial (NC), Community follow the Secretary of Interior Standards for the Commercial (CC) and other areas of development or preservation of historic properties . redevelopment should be compatible with adjacent development and sensitive to the context of the area . Additionally, New development should be pedestrian- oriented , mixed-use and contribute to a vibrant streetscape to support and integrate with surrounding neighborhoods . Action Items • Update the Land Use Code standards for the HMN zone district to clarify requirements related to mass, scale, and building design . 1► What We Heard It is important to residents that new multi-family developments should be compatible with the character of the neighborhoods in which they are built. New development should complement existing r neighborhoods WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 31 Figure 7 . Potential Redevelopment Scenarios in the HMN Zone (Policy 1 . 9) The High Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (HMN) zone is generally located between Prospect Road and the CSU main campus . The HMN zone is comprised primarily of small lots varying in size, which could potentially be consolidated to successfully accommodate new development. The examples below illustrate a variety of lot consolidation scenarios addressing access, parking, setback and design strategies to assist with breaking up the overall mass of structures . Providing larger south facing courtyards and/or upper story setbacks will help avoid a monotonous "wall " along the street and create a perception of a series of smaller structures to improve compatibility. There are several houses in that are potentially eligible for local landmark designation . Designers of new buildings will need to pay close attention to architectural details in order to comply with both Chapter 14 of the City Code (Landmark Preservation) and Section 3 .4.7 of the Land Use Code (Historic and Cultural Resources) . Informal consultation with the Landmark Preservation Commission is encouraged in order to find design solutions that are beneficial to all parties . Articulation of building facade Fifth story Establish east-west South facing Establish east-west setback bike/ped connections courtyards bike/ped connections 400 NA 1 2 Lots Large front Single building 4 Lots Large front Consolidate setback fronting street setback from driveway access from main main road road Encourage parking behind Encourage parking Encourage buildings and shared between lots behind buildings and access from shared between lots minor collector Parking drive on property road line connects to other lots r JL od a s:-- 6 Lots Southern Promote north-south 8 Lots Consolidate Southern facing facing bike/ped connections driveway access courtyards courtyards 32 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Land Use & Neighborhood Character Emphasize and respect the existing :vhat We Heard heritage and character of neighborhoods Residents feel a sense of pride in the historic through a collaborative design process character of the Sheely Historic District, located that allows for a neighborhood dialogue south of Prospect Road along Sheely Drive. Design attributes for new development are intended to contribute to livable neighborhoods . All new 14 development will be encouraged to contribute to a sense of unity, yet without replication , with the prevailing v patterns and character of the surrounding area . New xLi development is expected to be distinctive and not a ; formulaic or corporate prototype so that as the area rMl grows, neighborhood character is enhanced and not LIMw diminished . New development that appears to be VV imported from outside the region without consideration to local neighborhood character will be discouraged . The neighborhoods are generally characterized Craftsman , Prairie, and Mid-Century Modern architectural styles (and theirvarious derivations) . These styles are well-accepted and should serve as a starting point for achieving neighborhood compatibility. Styles that differ radically from the established character will be discouraged . neighborhood Extensive neighborhood collaboration and dialogue is expected to be a key part of the design review process . Action Items • Update relevant sections of the Land Use Code to ensure that new multi-family and mixed- use development is compatible with adjacent neighborhoods . • Sites that have structures that are officially recognized as local , state, or national historic landmarks are encouraged to consult with the , Y Landmark Preservation Commission or their _ _ Pr Design Review Subcommittee in order to gain — valuable feedback. In addition , applicants are encouraged to apply for the Design Assistance Grant Program, which offers financial assistance for specialized professional architectural , services . Other resources, such as the Old - Town Neighborhoods Design Standards and Guidelines, may also serve as a reliable source for ideas on preserving neighborhood heritage . New development adjacent to the Sheely Historic - District will be required to demonstrate sensitivity to established character of the historic homes . Landmark apartments, located near the Sheely and Wallenberg • Developers should consider additional neighborhood neighborhoods meetings beyond the standard requirement , interactive design charrettes, and individual meetings with affected property owners to demonstrate a high level of collaboration with neighborhood residents WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 33 Encourage a variety of housing types so Encourage Colorado State University that residents from all socio-economic involvement in neighborhood planning and levels may find suitable housing in the area development efforts and participation in =10 ® activities that strengthen neighborhoods i ® ® ® A variety of housing types and densities should be encouraged for new development or redevelopment Ensure that CSU faculty, staff, and students are involved projectsto offera rangeof options within the area . Single- in long-range planning efforts relevant to the university family houses, duplexes, townhomes, apartments, as well as neighborhood activities and events . condos, accessory units, and other types should be Action Items considered . Multi-family projects should consider both rental units and owner-occupied units . Single-family Form a joint City-CSU committee that meets attached housing should act as a transition to adjacent, regularly to assist with communication and established neighborhoods . Avoiding the dominance of coordination related to the on-going planning a single housing type creates opportunities for housing efforts of both entities . that is attainable for a range of income levels . Encourage CSU to engage neighborhood residents Housing types should be designed to accommodate in the University's plans for long-term growth and new development projects . a range of tenants over time. Housing variety is Engage CSU student groups (e . g . , clubs, sports encouraged in order to attract and retain families and teams, sororities and fraternities, majors with allow seniors to age in place . A diverse mix of occupants community service requirements) in volunteer contributes to neighborhood stability. efforts to improve the West Central neighborhoods . Student-oriented housing should located be in close Encourage the involvement of CSU students in proximity to the CSU and FRCC campuses and should neighborhood organizations, neighborhood meetings, be accessible by walking, bicycling or transit. Student- Neighborhood Night Out, and other events . oriented housing should not be so specialized as to preclude other populations in the future . Such housing What We Heard should be adaptable to serve various demographic groups and not preclude amenities that would attract CSU leadership is essential to mitigating the a variety of occupants . Housing relying solely on four- impacts of campus growth on the surrounding bedroom units should be discouraged, as a diverse mix neighborhoods. of bedrooms per unit provides greater flexibility, serves a broader range of tenants, and may allow an easier conversion to owner-occupied units should the demand ` arise. _ Action Items • Update relevant sections of the Land Use Code ' to require variety in the number of bedrooms rp , W 'l" ; ' ►� � � " ; provided in multi-family developments . • Ensure that the requirements of the Land Use Code continue to support a variety of housing types and densities within the West Central area . ld ' precludepopulations • Explore the creation of a program that supports the retention of owner-occupied homes to maintain ♦ . the stability of neighborhoods . • Continue to enforce building codes that protect the health and safety of tenants in rental �. 1 " housing particularly for older properties in need of ' - I improvement and properties where unauthorized remodeling and building additions have occurred . ,p What We Heard "Protect the affordability of the neighborhoods in the " West Central area. " 34 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Land Use & Neicihborhood Character Figure 8 . Single- Family Residential Addition & Renovation Examples (Policies 1 . 91 1 . 10, 1 . 11 ) Many of the West Central neighborhoods offer a convenient location with an affordable price point, which will likely lead to greater interest in additions or renovations to homes over time. As renovations and additions to single-family residential neighborhoods occur, thoughtful approaches that maintain the character of the neighborhood should be encouraged . For example, locating an addition to the side or rear of the existing structure reduces its visual impact. Two-story additions that preserve much of the existing horizontal roofline typical in these neighborhoods show sensitivity to the surrounding context. The examples below were selected from communities outside Fort Collins to illustrate concepts that should be encouraged , such as cross-gable entries and additions, emphasis on vertical additions near the middle of structures to preserve horizontal planes, rear additions, and the expansion or renovation of garage space where appropriate. The examples are intended to provide guidance to property owners and builders . _ E3WW1 Rear additiongableporch/entryI I . 11 I 11 1 I I II M ft Won" � LL F r Expansion I previous garage • I porch/carport • • . I • • . I Before & After Examples 10 00 J _ Before addition/renovationI . . I $ a 6W . - . - . II I I I articulation4V After: Preserve • • • ss- After: Preserve horizontalityI • ry cross- gab \ • I • • • • • . • - WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 35 Figure 9 . Design Guidelines for Multi - Family Redevelopment & Infill ( Policies 1 . 9 , 1 . 10, 1 . 11 ) Multi-family redevelopment and infill should emphasize compatibility with adjacent neighborhoods and relate to a dominant residential character. The guidelines emphasize means of articulation or modulation to reduce large, monotonous masses and feel more residential in scale. In addition, consistent yet varied rooflines, front porches, human-scale detail (such as brackets/corbels and consistent fenestration patterns) are encouraged . Commercial- type multi-family structures lacking these elements are discouraged . Roof line variation/ nested gables Corbels/brackets provide residential scale and detailing �F THIS NOT THIS Consistent fenestration and residential detailing Scale and massing variation Roof line variation and articulation / I '', � l 1 TTHIS Massing and scale variation , articulation and residential character ♦ �1rJI' AT►s 'mil ANN 14 a+-- iN 16 t t NOTTHIS Front porches, color and materials with residential character Aw 1. It L - _ :HIS TTHIS Consistent roof pitch and balcony style with residential character 36 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Land Use & Neicilhborhood Character Figure 10 . Mixed - Use Design Guidelines (Policies 1 . 9, 1 A 01 1 A 1 ) The following design guidelines provide guidance to developers and decision makers and are intended to complement the Fort Collins Land Use Code standards . Though more flexible and less stringent than the Fort Collins Land Use Code standards, utilizing the guidelines should allow development applicants a greater level of support from Planning and Zoning staff and should assist in gaining neighborhood approval . Mixed-use development should be explored in the HMN , NC, and CC zone districts under the following guidelines : • Emphasize height and mass transitioning to upper stories • Horizontal , vertical and edge modulation and material variation • Ground floor transparency, with windows for at least 75% of the facade • Provide courtyards, plazas and open space both for gathering areas and as a means of further breaking down the perceived scale of structures 4 . . � w - rr i • . • k � � CE!tTFNNIA� GRIII "eig — t f � ?ighboring residential land use fill 10 • • owl r - rE .O 4ft r . . . . . WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 37 This page intentionally left blank 38 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN r�s� », r ter , � \ • �.tiw �_ �O ri- M -I MOP of iA t"glej wr MeA vqs�RIMAO Op VIA X 03 9wa ire, No oat � ter: ., . .. ,�• ° � �%' k - �.�:. - - •�� Ado of Woof 15 If$So ► _ .r < /• ,Flo h Cof : f " ,fit,• l t,Yr p 1 Aim ML .�.` , , ST ,•AV)/f. 7 J t * r : a 1r8�C �AA A fro � , 9► �s, '� r� a � i� '' -i of ' _ 6�u„ F •. oraobb of N to For oi raa pp IMP fit r t� r J Poo — rr � - a. z `..I 4�I i. �l•� � ♦. . h.; ter. ado, 1- '. r y . ; .♦ y' + ,1r / ' ` -`y • _ , or I.V of ov of aa - - � ...7 � . ( . _� ,i ' 7 , , _ ice►. � � �� . O' l Vol oa� *a OPEN ,� , ./ �' .` RJ w �_ �.+4 . _"' 1• 1 Transportation & Mobility Vision A connected network that supports people safely walking, biking , or using public transit as a primary way to travel while balancing the need for efficient auto travel throughout the area . Safe routes to school , CSU, and other major destinations Safe, reliable, arterial streets that are easy to cross and serve residents and commuters Option for residents to live without a car Reshaped and retrofitted streets that meet the needs of all ages, abilities, and modes Safe and efficient travel by car with LF adequate, convenient parking Improved transit service and convenient stops Easy access to transit ( including MAX) r 40 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility Policies Safe Routes 2 . 1 Prioritize improvements that support safe routes Transportation and mobility policies emphasize the to schools and community facilities importance of providing safe, efficient, multi-modal 2 . 2 Provide safe routes for bicyclists and pedestrians access to destinations throughout the area with during snow events specific improvements related to street retrofitting in neighborhoods, arterial crossing improvements, as well Multi-Modal Options as improvements in the Prospect and Shields corridors . 2 . 3 Encourage safe and efficient travel for all modes Projects are identified as either near-term (0-10 years) or through infrastructure improvements, education, long-term (greater than 10 years) and will be prioritized and enforcement for funding and incorporated into the larger citywide 2.4 Support car and bike sharing prioritization process . The projects and policies directly support and are coordinated with other city planning 2. 5 Ensure high quality, comfortable first- and last- efforts, such as the 2014 Bicycle Master Plan and mile connections to transit ongoing Arterial Intersection Prioritization Study. 2 . 6 Explore shared parking opportunities for transit The policies are organized under four categories of Safe users Routes, Multi-Modal Options, Street Retrofitting and Parking : 2 . 7 Provide additional transit service and amenities to encourage transit use Street Retrofitting 2 . 8 Pursue opportunities to retrofit neighborhood streets to improve aesthetics, provide a buffer from adjacent land uses, and calm traffic 2 . 9 Pursue opportunities to retrofit arterial streets to improve aesthetics, minimize crossing distances, and improve safety, mobility, and comfort for all users Parking 2 . 10 Minimize parking congestion in neighborhoods to preserve quality of life 2. 11 Ensure adequate vehicle and bicycle parking is provided to serve new development and redevelopment projects AO 2 . 12 Encourage the use of car storage and shared parking to meet parking needs 2. 13 Manage special events to minimize traffic and parking impacts on neighborhoods Buffered bike lane on Shields Street WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 41 0 Safe Routes © Provide safe routes for bicyclists and pedestrians during snow events QPrioritize improvements that support safe " Go routes to schools and community facilities Explore the potential for prioritizing snow removal on LaceI key routes for bicyclists and pedestrians, and provide When implementing transportation improvement information about those routes to the public . projects, whenever possible prioritize improvements Action Items that support safe walking and biking to key destinations, Establish Priority 1 pedestrian and bicycle routes such as schools and activity centers . for snow removal by the Streets Department. Action Items Match priority snow removal bicycle routes to the low-stress network identified in the Bicycle Master • Continue further analysis of potential Plan . improvements to the Shields corridor between Establish Priority 1 routes for snow removal Laurel and Prospect to facilitate access to such with enforcement by Code Compliance and destinations as CSU and Bennett Elementary education on property owner responsibilities by School (see Shields Corridor Analysis section for Neighborhood Services more detail) Communicate priority routes to CSU and the public • Support implementation of the Pedestrian Plan through the Pedestrian Needs Assessment • Assess the impacts of projects on safe routes through the creation of performance measures and evaluation strategies Ar Ensure snow removal occurs along bike lanes and paths 1 • • • H 1 10 rti _ r c owl 1 42 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility Figure 11 . Key Destinations Map (Policies 2 . 1 and 2 . 2) The map below identifies key destinations within the West Central area , such as schools, parks , community centers, and other community amenities . This map should be used to help identify transportation projects within the project area by prioritizing improvements that support a safe multi -modal network. Mulberry St ity P Dunn Elementary School Laurel St Lab/ School laris West Elizabeth "Main King Street" * Moby Arena Soopers Elizabeth St Commercial Center • Avery Park CSU Campus Core Future CSU Bennett Stadium Lake St Elementary • • • • • • • • • • • • • School • Pros ect Rd IVM Commercial > Center Red Fox Meadows Potential Natural Area Neighborhood Center U Spring Creek Trail Commer ial Gardens on Fischer Cent f + Spring CreekJi Natural Area 0 IIIIIT■ Blevins Rolland Q Natural Resources Middle Moore Park �� Research School Center * • . Whole foods/ King — • Soopers Safeway Ross CSU Y Sho in N tural Area Senior PP 9 Veterinary Center * Center Commercial Teaching cc Commercial Center \ Hospital Center J� Drake Rd T � _ Legend �N ' West Central Area Boundary M& Schools Arterial Road * Existing Key Destinations Parks & Open Space E West Elizabeth "Main Street" CSU Property * Potential Key Destinations Major Trails WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 43 Multi - Modal Options Support car and bike sharing mm © Encourage safe and efficient travel Bike sharing and car sharing programs provide for all modes through infrastructureconvenient transportation options by providing a improvements, education, and enforcessystem of cars and bikes available on-demand and for short-term use. Car and bike share systems offer people the freedom to travel around town without needing to own a personal vehicle while supporting a truly multi- Encouraging safe travel behavior for everyone will modal transportation system . require a multi-faceted approach, involving infrastructure Action Items improvements that increase predictability and visibility of users, as well as education and effective enforcement. • Evaluate the feasibility of incorporating car share Action Items and bike share options into the Land Use Code and/or Development Review process • Support completion of the low-stress bicycle • Identify and provide strategically placed car network, per the 2014 Bicycle Master Plan sharing spaces accessible to public and private • Coordinate with CSU on education and continue car sharing companies Safe Routes to School (SRTS) efforts • Work to implement the recommendations of the Bike • Continue to assess traffic enforcement needs and Share Business Plan coordinate with Police Services and the CSU Police Department T' • Coordinate with other ongoing city programs, such as the Bus Stop Improvement Programs Street Maintenance Program (SMP) , and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to make improvements in a cost-effective and efficient manner • Pursue sustainable funding strategies for ��� dr improvements that benefit all modes • Work towards achieving Climate Action Plan goals to reduce VMT through bike, pedestrian, and transit improvements • Provide education on safe user behavior as new ° crossing improvements are implemented What We Heard r "Need for traffic calming on collector streets through neighborhoods " P ■ ■ c � Bike rental station saw NNW 44 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility Figure 12 , Bike Share Station Planning Map (Policy 2 . 4) The map below presents the proposed bike share station locations included in Phase 1 of the 2014 Bike Share Business Plan . The proposed stations are centered around Downtown , CSU , and the MAX stations . Stations planned within the West Central area are shown in blue . Other stations are shown in gray. Future potential expansion could occur in areas South of Drake Road and further east along Harmony Road . ■ • a ■ a ■ a l • • a a • ■ a a a a a a if t'IYQ`Q]�l try ■ 3 ' < S C • � � ■ • Q nay - • ' • • t,ua■r0e 8 Sunxr �+ g • Ave W Yrff • st AAvec S Dr Weihuw Ave v7 W Myme Le r� vwo .aa CS veatrce• asa A t` I3 W 'lll �� g = Lau el MA w Brsr+ Biwa - ° S ation • r PI 5t $t M r3 n n W Laur S. B Bjoac.�•r. Pr T k Ba tam : R � 1 L a�"5• a Oq Pi W Pain 91 • mom 'Ae P, mCr a < -F W "LLM 51 7 Or ■ .T St �•7 d a West Elizabeth Campus WeS4 , ea CSU Transit taWopUniversity W. FY1aD•P gt oby Center Ce er Station L y a a Uhry ary Ave • a Unaenar Ar• ■ LrrMrtatr a . _ nnn Me 3 r7 ll•e © F a � r• ra ■n � Saun Of • WbMAro 0+ • Etl Or 9arta O Cr a a a LMnwa}v Or nngr c Q Benneean ■ South Campus • �r Or i F • ■ aa ■ • aa • • ■ • a • ■ ■ ■ ■ • ■ -• m's8aae — • w A W Like a . ,.:p 9 (`� W `sr,a 5t Q St !;c•rvn•r 51 baw'ILCI 'I Cy J tyroap•p y R ■ CI 'Pikt • Jr.ntr•r ♦n a g■r � r � • • P ■ ' wrOtlla, € ■ � 80 'Moo e • rarnet7le _ W _S►3ft _ 9t ,� L. a ,J 7 ■ e t Ra CAe .lzs �� s Gardens on : elst °'s • y,Aa u w,p"= s°"'° cr*Q& " �Z,d j � Spring Creek f or r • :u•nl St. C I � fr I••da1��^ �~ O�yY 111�'y ■ - 6 S ' ""� a<� s~eonoerrn Rd92- 7on! War t © • FA ■ u Glmvood r7 Q1. Sun"?or G 8Frr+ Ci • �' • Dr or • ` "r+atwawore a w _a 4 ■ dr O b Eat or i ■ • Q Q i Wmd•d Cl ■ a S1 4 A Q C�"%0430 Ce • c7 • Scarborough Or Fvrww rt a s , a Vol" Fargo Arm SG CL a _ c A" ; ; ru rp1100d d °• Dr CSU Veterinary a a `� Hospital B • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • ■ • a • a • • ■ a a a a • • a • a • a a • •a • a a • • • a • • • a a a a a • • a ■ a A" ■ a a a a a Q cone. Legend ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ West Central Area Boundary Phase 1 Proposed Station Phase 1 Proposed Station (West Central area) Parks/Open Space WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 45 0 10Ensure high quality, comfortable first- and ® Provide additional transit service and mast- mile connections to transit amenities to encourage transit use . It is important to consider a transit user's whole trip, The West Central area is served by some of the routes including access to and from the transit stop . When with the highest productivity in Transfort's system . At implementing transportation improvement projects, the same time, the existing service does not adequately whenever possible prioritize improvements that support meet demand (e. g . , on the West Elizabeth corridor), and safe and comfortable walking and biking to transit (e . g . , some neighborhoods (such as the neighborhood north sidewalk connections, bicycle parking racks) . of Prospect and west of Shields), may warrant direct Action Items transit connections similar to the route that serves Plum • Continue to consider transit stop locations in bicycle north of West Elizabeth (shown as Route 22 in Figure10) . In addition, several of the existing stops do not have and pedestrian network planning (ongoing) amenities, such as shelters and benches . Stops were © rated based on amenities and accessibility, and locations Explore shared parking opportunities for with a " Medium" or lower rating were identified and transit users m o2 prioritized as short- to mid-term or longer-term (Figure 11 ) . These improvements could also be coordinated Providing adequate parking along transit routes can with other roadway projects to improve efficiency and reduce congestion and parking impacts in the West minimize construction impacts in the area . Central area while increasing transit use. Acton Items Some of the priority corridors in which to explore the • Incorporate transit service recommendations establishment of Park-n-Rides through shared parking for the West Central area into Transfort budget arrangements are shown in the Future Transit Vision requests and future Transfort Strategic Operating Map (Figure 10) and include West Elizabeth, Taft Hill , Plan updates (see Figure 13) Shields, and Centre . • Evaluate future West Elizabeth corridor transit Action Items needs in the upcoming West Elizabeth Enhanced • Work with CSU to explore shared Park- n - Ride Travel Corridor Plan arrangements south and west of campus • Integrate short- to mid-term bus stop improvements into the citywide Bus Stop Improvement Program (see Figure 14) • Coordinate bus stop improvements with other roadway improvement projects, where applicable • Seek opportunities to provide additional , high-quality bike parking at bus stops r _ lie � • ram I I-ITFKIPI UsTeW 46 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility Figure 13 , Future Transit Vision (Policy 2 . 7) The map below outlines some concepts for future transit improvements within and outside the West Central area . Examples of desired concepts include the areas in need of additional transit service, a future enhanced travel corridor, improved connections to MAX and potential east-west bus crossing improvements . The map shows the Phase 3 routes from the Transfort Strategic Operating Plan (TSOP) , as well as new routes added since the adoption of the TSOP. - - 1 City PurK 7t� i W MULBERRY ST 21 t i h . I N . N r W LAUREL ST Existing CSU e t sr Transit Cent ' vr � i :MST � � of :Et l ST - f < FutmW. aftaew► EOmbodh--d CorrWEW * — t� .• ! al All : i „n�I � � il Rite-Fit _ iMnN ST Traiisrt Servoct. I S U Improved CO W PROSPECT RD tli MAX, E PROSPECT RD 8 MAX A W ST1MT ;T ESTUART ST t • � 1V Raa>nd Moom CSU COLLOWA 4D Cote Pork C3� Vet < School Yr Dk(l RD E DRAKE 0.D ! p w o rto i t; r j . .' HORSETOOTH RI) Legend IM 'C ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ West Central Area Boundary © Parking Garage Potential Additional Transit Service Potential East-West Bus Crossing Improvement Future West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor Existing Transit Center Improved Connections to MAX MAX Stations Corridors in Which to Explore Shared Park-n-Ride Transfort Strategic Operation Plan (TSOP) Phase 3 Arrangements - � - Other Routes Added Since TSOP WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 47 Figure 14. Bus Stop Improvements (Policy 2 . 7) The map below shows bus stop improvements categorized as either short- to mid--term priority or longer-term priority. Stops were rated based on amenities and accessibility, and locations with a " Medium" or lower rating were identified as needing improvements . Wherever possible, bus stop improvements would be coordinated with other roadway projects to improve efficiency and minimize construction impacts in the area . These improvements would ultimately be rolled into the citywide Bus Stop Improvement Program for potential funding . B- 1 uara : rc�+ ssf ■ oil a� wweswe a ■ Dar ■ xl U a p< B-WWW"" Aw 2 a W Myrna Lt RR a f y^ y, tS z cJe.t . o•. a W 0 g W ervi d 9KA 81 : a Orchard PI SIB • _`. ba W Lanai S a U i B- 13 B 15 B 17 81 oa • • • • w wulw s7 a hbrl W N. 5L • • • a a a �, B - 12 B- 14 B 16 B 18 � D Mr 1 B- 6 u - 1 • o B - 54 d 7 B B-9 B- 10 B-11 utwirtwvA" a xCL Lea�ear E ' �Pp c S • • S°un Dr 8 .�. Rd 1 Are A 3 Waaar w0 D R EO 00.,,00 + urA srr.. rn\cr g 4M°'"°°e3 Or w vir� y 6 OrIN B-19 ynr�y„a a 8 a OUA M IN ,.r" c a o Benroe ae • Or 9 p • '-` w 15-22 W �ya 'S[ 4 W Lam B1126 28 6uvw Cr . b cgo B-30 B 21 lomw Rd c ew« L� B 31 0 B-23 es&5 B27 B-29 _ C � ; �No CW any In B-36 a `fie�y,, SftwOy a - w Sa3n sr B-32 . - 1 Ra �y "- C `"•rB 6 �I 9hi•rt $t is Klrq�I ODA D• �- j� -`mod'^' 4w^7 CniM In 0 { W_SIU4" S1._ _ c I j Of M gy�p� ArrU M u pGMnaood v(rl O ~ � qC manpN Way O H ■ @ a Q `�, s:r enn d Of r soft B-37 2VO r4 window Ct 0a9 seffborough a+ - ..B-38 y v Dr ins 'r 39 d ; a 'inky F«o. AnCGw CAf M ■ ,.� a W corword B-40 ri c� • a p"� • B-41 B-42 0 zr�a a srAc>ra rrT t HaraA 0o Wagmrana•1 or CYt� � r Ai I:t W =tV*W Or y Legend O N ■ IN IF IF IN West Central Area Boundary Near-Term priority Long-Term priority 48 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility Bus Stop Improvements The table below outlines the near and long term bus stop improvement projects located within the West Central Area . The table lists the locations and bus stop rating based on an inventory conducted in 2013 . These projects were identified through several City studies and the development of the West Central Area Plan . Table 1 . Short- to Mid -Term Bus Stop Improvements (0 - 10 years) Project ID Bus Stop B7 Elizabeth & Glenmoor South Very Low B9 Elizabeth & Skyline South Low B10 Elizabeth & Constitution North Very Low B13 Constitution Ram's Village West Very Low B15 Constitution Ram's Village East Very Low B16 City Park & Plum Medium B18 Plum & Bluebell Very Low B23 Prospect & Skyline South Low B25 1 Prospect & Constitution South Low B26 Prospect & Heatheridge North Medium B37 Centre & Rolland Moore SE Low Table 2 . Longer-Term Bus Stop Improvements 10+ ears) Project ID Bus Stop Location Bus Stop Rating B1 Mulberry & Taft Hill Very Low B2 Mulberry & Cook Very Low B3 Mulberry & Bryan Very Low B4 Mulberry & City Park Very Low B5 Elizabeth & Taft Hill South Low B6 Elizabeth & Glenmoor North Very Low B8 Elizabeth & Skyline North Very Low Bl 1 Elizabeth & City Park South Low B12 Constitution p Ram's Village Very Low B14 Constitution Ram's Village Very Low B17 Plum & Columbine Very Low B19 Taft Hill & Clearview SE Very Low B20 Taft Hill & Manchester Low B21 Pros ect & Taft Hill East Medium B22 Prospect & Skyline North Very Low B24 Prospect & Constitution North Very Low B27 Prospect & Shields North Very Low B28 Prospect & Sheely North Very Low B29 Prospect & Sheely South Very Low B30 Prospect & Whitcomb North Very Low B31 Prospect & Centre SW Very Low B32 Shields & Stuart West Low B33 Shields & Shire East Medium B34 Shields & Shire West Low B35 Shields & Centre Low B36 Centre & Bay East Low B38 Centre & Research South Low B39 Centre & Worthington North Low B40 Centre & Worthington South Low B41 Drake & Worthington Medium B42 Drake & CSU Vet School Very Low WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 49 1 Street Retrofitting QPursue opportunities to retrofit program introduced in the 2014 Bicycle Master Plan . neighborhood streets to Improve Improvements could include sidewalk widening, bulb- aesthetics, provide a buffer from adjacen outs, and/or additional landscaping . land uses, improve safety and mobility, and Action Items ca lm traffic i ��i _ i0 Pursue opportunities to implement neighborhood Street retrofitting supports the Transportation street retrofitting in conjunction with the Street Master Plan goal of reshaping streets in a way that Maintenance Program and Capital Projects • Develop a template for widening sidewalks emphasizes lower vehicle speeds and encourages I Explore the potential for incorporating related walking, bicycling, and transit modes in the existing stormwater and low- impact development ( LID) cross-sections of roadways (see Figure 15 below) . This improvements into street retrofits approach would build on the Neighborhood Greenways Figure 15 , Example Street Retrofit Concept = Springfield Drive Springfield Drive is included in the low-stress bicycling network identified in the Bicycle Master Plan . The following example shows how street retrofitting concepts could potentially be applied to a neighborhood street. New retrofit bulb-outs at Potential bus stop I intersections New retrofit tree islands at mid-block Maintains existing flowline Maintains existing flowline / > _ • c 1 o17 v Springfield Dr a' N � C T 1 O r U Co / N O Before After bulb-outshit- Retrofit Springfield Drive and Current intersection condition - Springfield Drive and Constitution Avenue Constitution Avenue (Maintains existing lanes and curbs) tiefore Y Current street condition Springfield Drive and Constitution I • . I 50 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility 4 Pursue opportunities to retrofit arterial Figure 16 . Example Street Retrofit Concept - streets to improve aesthetics, minimize Shields Street crossing distances, and improve safet The diagram below identifies potential locations for mobility, and comfort for all users median improvements along Shields Street between i West Elizabeth Street and Pitkin Street. The medians Supporting the Transportation Master Plan goal of are designed to maintain as much access to existing reshaping streets, this effort will rethink and reshape driveways and intersection streets as possible. The existing arterial streets to improve the safety and Shields Corridor Analysis section includes a full layout of comfort of all modes of travel . Example improvements potential medians on Shields Street between Prospect include median treatments, pedestrian refuges, buffered Road and Laurel Street. bike lanes, and road diets . Two examples of potential median implementations Elizabeth St + are provided . The introduction of medians on Shields Street would likely be combined with other crossing improvements and would have a primary goal of minimizingcrossing distances and providing a safe Planted g p g median, typ refuge for bicyclists and pedestrians . New medians on West Prospect would also provide additional landscaping opportunities in a corridor that currently University Ave lacks street trees . . v Action Items �CO • Retrofit Shields Street (between Prospect Road South Dr and Laurel Street) to include medians and other aesthetic and safety improvements (see Figure 16 to the right) . ` • Retrofit Prospect Road (west of Shields Street) to ` include medians and other aesthetic and safety Westward Dr improvements (see Figure 17 below) . Y Access N point, typ O Pitkin St Figure 17 , Example Street Retrofit Concept - West Prospect Road The diagram below identifies potential locations for median improvements along Prospect Road west of Shields Street. The medians were designed to maintain as much access to existing driveways and intersection streets as possible and could include a combination of planted medians and smaller concrete medians . Appendix E includes a layout of potential median implementation on West Prospect Road between Taft Hill Road and Shields Street, and this roadway segment is noted as a potential project on Figure 16 . Access point, typ Planted median, typ o a' 0 0 C o m � O] C t J C N J p O O N L c O X cc L.L = Concrete median Planted understory Median trees Travel Lane Concrete median Curb and gutter Upright/Columnar — — — Curb and gutter At— — - - - Potential Median Implementation Legend Potential Median = - - - - -- ------- - ----- - - - - ' � Access Point WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 51 0 Parking V Encourage the use of car storage and t parking Minimize parking congestion in Explore and promote opportunities for shared parking neighborhoods to preserve quality of li and car storage to support multi-family developments, mixed-use projects, special events, and CSU campus Ensure that adequate parking is provided in parking demand . neighborhoods to support a variety of land uses and Action Items housing types . • Identify parking lots that generally have additional Action Items capacity at certain times or days of the week for • Monitor issues and complaints related to residen- shared parking opportunities . tial parking on a day-to-day basis, and consider the • Facilitate public-private partnership arrangements application of the Residential Parking Permit Pro- that allow for shared parking or car storage gram (RP3) or other approaches to reduce impacts, arrangements . as warranted . • Determine a consistent strategy for applying the - RP3 program and other parking management — - strategies to existing and new multi-family devel- opments . - • Coordinate with CSU to implement the CSU Park- ing & Transportation Master Plan, with a focus on - minimizing the impacts of student, faculty, staff, and visitor parking in neighborhoods . ? Evaluate existing g lots to . • • capacity is ®Ensure adequate vehicle biccle parking y p g possible is provided to serve new development and Manage special events to minimize traffic redevelopment projects and arking impacts on neighborhoods New residential, commercial , and mixed use development projects should provide minimize impacts Coordinate with special events providers (e . g . , CSU to surrounding neighborhoods by providing enough stadium, Gardens on Spring Creek) to minimize parking parking to support the intensity of the use. and traffic impacts in neighborhoods . Action Items Action Items • Evaluate the parking demand created by new Work with City and CSU Special Events Coordinators multi-family developments to ensure that to ensure that event management plans include adequate parking is provided to support those provisions for adequate parking and traffic control . projects . • Ensure that new development complies with the recently adopted Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay Zone parking standards, where applicable. ONQ z : - - . ` SUMMIT p ,, °.-�-• , .-_�_ PARKING ® ONLY OIL ALL OTHERS lam' WILL BEV. - TOWED KR neighborhoodsParking demands for redevelopment should not strain parking needs for Special event parking will need to be monitored to minimize parking in adjacent land uses adjacent 52 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility Potential Projects Some potential projects were carried forward from ' previous planning efforts, and other projects were identified based on technical analyses related to mobility and safety and through public input. As is standard practice, the City of Fort Collins will continue to monitor roadways and intersections to identify needs for future improvements . Some areas were also identified for future monitoring . The projects presented in this section will need to be further reviewed and evaluated to see what, if any, improvements might be feasible. Cost estimates will then be developed , and the feasible projects could then be included in the larger citywide prioritization process . Potential project locations for both intersections and longer roadway segments have been identified in the ' following maps and tables . Action Items - t Continue to assess the needs and refine designs • �- for the intersection and roadway projects identified in Figures 18 and 19 and Tables 3-6 . • As potential projects are refined, add them to the City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) . • Coordinate the potential projects identified in the West Central Area Plan with other ongoing city programs to make improvements in a cost- effective and efficient manner (e. g . , Bus Stop Improvement Program, Street Maintenance Program (SMP), and Capital Improvement Program (CIP)) . \ Y WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 53 Figure 18 . Potential Intersection Projects The map below shows potential intersection projects within the West Central area . Some of the projects were identified in the recently adopted Bike Plan or the ongoing Arterial Intersection Prioritization Study, and others were identified through the West Central Area Plan process . These projects require further review and evaluation to determine the feasibility of specific improvements . Any proposed improvements would then need to have costs developed , and the projects would be prioritized based on project needs citywide. For the purposes of planning and prioritizing within the West Central area, the projects have been categorized as either near-term (likely to be implemented within 10 years), long-term (likely to be implemented in 10 years or more), or flagged for future monitoring . gg 1-1 9 A I-2 1-3 2LM a �! a ��� as=a car ss g M O rra 6 twaG?�i~ti ■a■ade B suaur y �. COMO y (-�q Ave W Myma at Ar■ ➢ E rA Wiy �A .. or VMMWOO AvV a j; % 97 W Myme Sr �VrwNd Q� [jz Gn:mor■ ■ F1 ra 5 � w L cP N Onmafo PI M fl■:� <' flR1 St fl s 2 {� St A 1-4 6 e e ■s.N,. yr € o eay� or 3 I-5 al on m St w 9 sr d, _ w va.± sr- " - - � - 1-6 w PL UM 8T a M■n a ris MrJlwYer 1 s Q rstrnor a w :ao■u, I-9 a t Wu arvr A ttUrNaenMbra u 1-10- Sdum or a •A• r� mL1S.yt" Or C14 E l8 w oa, Or- Uri 1-12 d S w too ftnr4m Rd q `R % 'to Oro a w L,.. 1-13 rraz ir�".`tY� . . 40 �s ' sc 2 st s erwrsa ■ Ah I-16 - - I-19 I-20 1-14 P Por`^ 1-15�'lqr wynr0"w "' 1-17 t thy, ; I-21 Jur�»r t o fl y p� P a �qe ■ gekV p �M Rd F ■ Y @ s ■ S 2 4 Mnyy rdmMYde 1-2 � W SLL _ St 1-22 �'b^ta0p' N �IrS J9t r POngQ qo "We ,,.s?' ma's 124■k -�� C ' �„c "°t So" Creek t� w■ or Sruwt 5) a Ili y VMad a G403 yMf or ra - t Fr a Trled f d� ;` VN'ts�d $ Mnarmere C Rd. '^■'a C� 0"f W )�. Y NNdiiiArplu v 8 Grrwrow 4 ' Sunder d shov �Q� ! s 4 or SAD Q ct �n ' Aow■w Mare c � 946" Mrs Q a 1 VJPm6%M 4 9 q 4 �mNVr " ry ji Scarnerwaa °r 1 25 Frwr�tar -r Valey Fapa Aw } lm rn Ct °r I-26 - :.�■ 3 cw ooro d' f e. rfernra M W o ■ Ana r M ■ d }°'"a" 1-27 1 I-28 1-29 rad, yy py. pd - ■ ■ » � � � � i ■ 1 ■ ■ ■ .l-=7T�Ta T-�11' l.l.li � rtr ■ ■; ■ ■ . �1T1't-l.a. -r� r aZ7Ta. � _egend • ■ ■ ■ ■ West Central Area Boundary Shields Corridor Analysis T Prospect Corridor Design Short/Mid-Term Priority Longer-Term Priority 54 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility Table 3 . Short- to Mid -Term Intersection Projects (0 - 10 years) CoordinationPotential 1 JProject • • Description/Comment Bus St • • Street Maintenance Notes • • • (2015- 16) High crash location, bike and pedestrian 1-2 City Park & Mulberry conflicts ✓ Review for bike/pedestrian crossing improvements 1-4 Taft Hill & Orchard Review for bike/pedestrian V/ improvements 1-5 Shields & Laurel Review for bike/pedestrian See Shields improvements Section High crash location, high vehicle delays, See Shields 1-6 Shields & Plum high bike and pedestrian usage Section Review for multi-modal improvements High crash location, high vehicle delays, See Shields 1-9 Shields & Elizabeth high bike and pedestrian usage Section Review for multi-modal improvements 1-10 Shields and South Review for bike/pedestrian See Shields improvements Section 1-11 Taft Hill & Clearview Review for bike/pedestrian V/ ✓ Bike Plan project improvements High crash location, offset intersections 1-12 Shields el Pitkin/ Review for bike/pedestrian See Shields Springfield improvements Section Offset intersections See Shields 1-13 Shields & Lake • Review for bike/pedestrian Section improvements 1-16 Lynnwood & Prospect ' Review for bike/pedestrian ✓ ✓ Bike Plan project improvements • High crash location, high pedestrian See Prospect 1-17 Shields & Prospect usage ✓ Review for multi-modal improvements Corridor Design 118 Whitcomb & Prospect High pedestrian usage �/ V/ See Prospect Review for multi-modal improvements Corridor Design 1-19 Centre & Prospect ' High bike and pedestrian usage �/ V/ See Prospect Review for multi-modal improvements Corridor Design 1-21 College & Prospect High crash location, high vehicle delays ✓ See Prospect • Review for multi-modal improvements Corridor Design Review for bike/pedestrian 124 Taft Hill & Stuart improvements ✓ Bike Plan project 1-25 Constitution & Valley • Review for bike / pedestrian V/ Fore improvements (visibility) • High vehicle delays 1-27 Shields & Drake Project: additional turn lane, bike lane Funded (2015) stripinci Research/Meadowlark High vehicle delays Coordinate w/ 1-28 • Review for large vehicle operations and & Drake multi-modal improvements CSU 1-29 Drake & McClelland ' High vehicle delays Funded (2015) Pro ect: additional turn lane Table 4, Longer-Term Intersection Projects ( 10+ years) 1Project Location SnuircP2 Notes: I-1 Taft Hill & Mulberry BP 1 . See Bus Stop Improvements (Tables 1 and 2) 1-3 Shields & MulberrV BP 2. Sources: AIPS: Arterial Intersection Prioritization Study (ongoing) 1-7 Taft Hill & Elizabeth BP BP. Bike Plan (2014) EJE Cit Park & Elizabeth AIPS, BP WCAP. West Central Area Plan 4 Taft Hill & Prospect AIPS 1-15 Underhill/Skyline & Prospect WCAP 1-20 Mason Trail & Prospect BP 1-22 Shields & Stuart AIPS 1-23 Constitution & Stuart WCAP 1-26 Shields & Raintree AIPS WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 55 Figure 19 . Potential Roadway Projects The map below shows potential roadway projects within the West Central area . Some of the projects were identified in the recently adopted Bike Plan and others were identified through the West Central Area Plan process . These projects require further review and evaluation to determine the feasibility of specific improvements. Any proposed improvements would then need to have costs developed , and the projects would be prioritized based on project needs citywide. For the purposes of planning and prioritizing within the West Central area, the projects have been categorized as either short- to mid-term (higher priority, likely to be implemented within 10 years), or longer-term (likely to be implemented in 10 years or more) . R-1 MVA z� s � edw is R-3 � canb @ � d Avs w ►IYruest or nesar. Ave st a: W Mrroe tell, d 4 VO yaph CS Z c�e.tr•o.e 3j 0(ch" P id Brt ^rn ffi ii y 51 A S W Uk" St &wWe� iM R-2 : nywra Or U `p str —�^ wa S KUM uust n or w PLC, SL � — R-4 d d wx°ar T wow" or Ct < �v eera�otn sc R-5 o` R-6 a b a o Ury� Ave j UntiersfYAw XS s lwMw G Y V C 7fZ—914 SOU0Dr 6 AO ` a _ A Wenrad a R 7 . R-8 G p W5�11 ee w Ra R-9 y r G W ` s w use r St ewv"s Cl R 11 y( R-10 h 4iln !' R-12 Q a j i ulfylfln a r • a" s P l 4 �� rtbw 1deYe Cy any R r Q Rd - Klg ! .J! CIL �Yr-�i- ....1 Gt $W+'D C/M4 In p� o S'•uYt 8t Its w SluMI._� _ NedoK'S ��wuWx- ga WOY .f .�nfvS Or TttGa,Y so a rJ C J S►+; OV1101 MIIrWr14R Rd �1 Wil ` 60 -131 DCwrtw 9 Soof ! Cr Sroe 4� .e $ soOf0 01 svr S -.l M R 4 g S2 4 aa,odon G M Scerbolglyl: Or FvvrW.x C b L} vW+Y F&V Are cc Aw R-1 Yn .us"" Arra R 16 n R-17 R-18 Re, Legend Shields Corridor AnalysisN ' ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ West Central Area Boundary Prospect Corridor Design Short/Mid Term Priority Longer-Term Priority 56 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility Table 5 . Short - to Mid -Term Roadway Projects (0 - 10 years) Potential Coordination Street ID Project Location Description/Comment Bus . . Maintenance Notes ImprovementsProgram (2015- 16) Bike Plan project; have received some Springfield Implementation of Low-Stress Transportation R-8 between Taft Hill & Bike Network per Bike Plan ✓ Alternatives Program Shields (TAP) grant funding ; see Policy 2. 9 and Shields section Lake between • Strengthen bike/pedestrian spine Pedestrian Plan R-g project; see Prospect Shields & College as described in this document Corridor section Prospect between Council expressed interest in See Policy 2. 9, R- 10 Taft Hill & Shields addition of medians Appendix E for concept design • Narrow sidewalks, no bike Pedestrian Plan R- 11 Prospect between facilities, crossing challenges ✓ project; see Prospect Shields & College Implementation of draft design Corridor section described in this document Taft Hill between Busy area with turning R- 13 Stuart & Sheffield* movements, school traffic, and ✓ Bike Plan project pedestrian crossing Table 6 . Longer-Term Roadway Projects ( 10 + years) ID Project Location Source7n R- 1 Mulberry between Crestmore & Shields PP, WCAP R-2 City Park between Mulberry & Elizabeth WCAP R-3 Shields between Mulberry & Laurel PP WCAP R-4 Shields between Laurel & Prospect WCAP R-5 Elizabeth between City Park & Shields WCAP R-6 Taft Hill between Elizabeth & Prospect WCAP R-7 Castlerock between Elizabeth & Prospect WCAP R-12 Shields between Prospect & Hobbit WCAP R-14 Constitution between Stuart and Drake WCAP R-15 Taft Hill between Valley Forge & Drake WCAP R-16 Shields between Centre/ Raintree & Drake WCAP R-17 Drake between west of Raintree & Worthington WCAP R-18 Drake between Research & Mason Trail WCAP Notes: 1 . Sources: PP. Pedestrian Plan WCAP : West Central Area Plan WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 57 I Shields Corridor Analysis Corridor Options Development & Evaluation Based on the existing conditions analysis, the following aspects of the corridor are currently being explored by Overview a design review committee, consisting of City Staff and During the planning process, the Shields Corridor stood Colorado State University/Colorado State University out as needing additional analysis based on the crash Research Foundation representatives : history, observations of unsafe behavior, and public Street cross-section options input, as well as the expected increase in demand on • Intersection treatment options (at-grade) and crossing the facility in the future. Therefore, a study • Options for grade-separated crossings was initiated to holistically analyze the Shields Street • Options for medians/access considerations corridor between Laurel Street and Prospect Road . . Opportunities for street realignments to address The analysis is ongoing; a summary of work to-date offset (non-aligned) intersections is included in this section, and future work has been identified as an action item within this Plan . Figure 20 shows the corridor influences and connections that Figure 20 . Shields Corridor Influences and were considered in this analysis . Connections Corridor Issues Key corridor issues and influences identified for Shields Q Street from Prospect Road to Laurel Street include: @ Baystone Dr in • Lack of adequate facilities for bicycles and pedestrians, especially on the west side of the Transit Connector street =00fturn St m _ Plum St • Lack of safe bicycle/pedestrian crossings between Prospect Road and Elizabeth Street I • A series of non-aligned roadways connecting CSU to the neighborhoods south of Elizabeth Street Enhanced Travel Corridor to West Prospect Road, resulting in a lack of rniversity eth St__ connectivity • Multi-modal conflicts at the Shields Street and Elizabeth Street intersection — need for Ave intersection improvements • Redevelopment potential on the west side of . . South Elizabeth Street; Campus West is likely a near-term exception to this, as property owners feel that it is < Westward Dr v currently functioning adequately M IL cu • Constrained existing right-of-way >I, akewood Dra . . Low-Stress Bike Corridor U ■4F Pitkin St Overall Approach � SpringfieldcDrnr , The overall approach to analyzing the corridor and ., developing designs was based on the following strategy: ConnettrRdBe -� • Provide holistic concepts that create overall i - , , Protected Bike Cnrrldor' connectivity between the CSU campus and the BENNETT Lake neighborhoods to the west. ELEMENTARY g scNooL • Develop a custom cross-section for Shields Street C that is narrower than the standard City of Fort ' Collins cross-section, while still providing improved P illo N facilities . • Preserve existing street trees and shared bike/ped Major Campus Gateway path along the campus edge. Local Road • Develop recommendations consistent with the City Collector Road -' Minor Campus Gateway and CSU Bike Plans . Arterial Road Signalized Intersection • Focus impacts like) to Campus Core Connection property ps on areas y = Significant Potential for redevelop. Some Potential for Development/Redevelopment • Coordinate with CSU 's master plans and other Development/Redevelopment approved plans for redevelopment. 58 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility attached walks on both sides of the road, and the north Cross - Section Options portion of the corridor includes a 6' attached walk on the Cross-section options for Shields Street were developed western side and 8' multi-use detached path with street primarily based on right-of-way constraints and the trees on the east side. desireto improve conditions forall travel modes . Existing South Cross-Section (Proposed) rights-of-way vary throughout the corridor, and efforts were made to minimize the amount of additional right- The proposed south cross-section includes the following of-way required . In addition , the Bicycle Master Plan features : recommendation of a protected bike lane on Shields • Four 10' travel lanes Street was integrated into the proposed cross-section . • 10' median/turn lane The corridor was divided into two segments: south • 6' raised bike lane (Prospect Road to Westward Drive) and north (Westward • 6' tree lawn Drive to Laurel Street) . The cross-sections provided • 6' detached sidewalk represent the proposed typical conditions for each segment. The south cross-section reflects private land North Cross-Section (Proposed) uses on each side of the roadway, and the north cross- The north cross-section includes the following features : section reflects private land uses on the west side of the • Four 10 travel lanes road , with the CSU campus on the east side of the road . . 10' median/turn lane Existing Cross-Section • 6' raised bike lane • 12'-15' tree lawn (east side) As shown in Figure 21 , the existing cross-section • 6' tree lawn (west side) typically includes four 10 . 5' travel lanes with a 12' 8' shared bike/ped path (east side) center turn lane. 6' bike lanes exist on both sides of the 6' sidewalk (west side) roadway. The south portion of the corridor includes 6' Figure 21 . Shields Street Cross - Section Options South Cross-Sections North Cross-Sections 78' Existing Right-of-Way Width 75' Existing Right-of-Way Width Bike Ian Travel lane Bike lane Sir Ian Travel lane Bike Existing tree lawn Attached sidewalk Turn lane I Attached sidewalk Turn lane lane Existing k�2 sidewalk o¢, ` _` ■ I 6' 6' 10.5' 10.5' 12' 10.5' 10.5' 6' Var12-1ies S, 5' Approx. 50' 6' 6' 1 0.5'f 10.5' 12' 10.5' 10.5' 6' 6 Approx. 50' 94' Required Right-of-Way Width 79' Required Right-of-Way Width Raised bike lane Raised planted median Raised Existing tree lawn • Tree lawn Raised bike lane Raised bike lane Sidewalk Tree Travel Travel lane bike lane Existing I I lawn _ lane I sidewalk Sidewalk Turn Travel 1 Tree lawn i Lane lane of r uM 9 t wi Iw L � + !i I` I IL 'I-6'-�-Ei '-7� 10'-- 10, 8' --1`T"- 10' - 10' - 6'-'r12-15'Varies 8 --T 6' 6' 6 t 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 6' 6' 6' 1 1 27 2'2' O Z O Z > m -2 Q pe 0 1 ¢ � 'O • m vai 3 � w m rn 3 � E w Shields St Shields St o v WD tp O q q O ,p WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 59 0 Figure 22 . Shields Corridor Grade- Separated Crossing Options Grade- Separated Crossings Alternative locations for grade-separated crossings were explored - - - - - - � Laurel St throughout the Shields corridor, including both underpass and overpass r � - - - - - ' :a 9 9 P P alternatives . Underpasses can typically be constructed 10' below i grade — requiring 200' of ramp length . Overpasses typically require 14' of clearance with an additional 1 ' (minimum) of supporting structure — requiring 300' of ramp length . Due to the additional ramp length and perceived inconvenience of overpasses, it was determined that overpasses are generally less desirable as a means of road crossing in this area, particularly because other at-grade crossing opportunities are — ' available. Plum St Plum St .. Potential ramp configurations for underpass options are depicted in � • Figure 22, along with floodplain constraints, impacted parcels, and J other considerations such as integration with the planned Pitkin Street/ Springfield Drive Low-Stress Bike Corridor (a recommendation from the IF, N CSU and City Bicycle Master Plans) . a JN CSU Opportunities & Constraints — �; Locations including and to the north of Elizabeth Street: Elizabeth St • Bicycle and pedestrian crossing volumes higher in this area . • Elizabeth Street - Floodplain constraints, existing commercial businesses and integration of two-way bike facilities on one side of the street make this intersection extremely challenging as an underpass location . • Plum Street - Existing land uses at both intersections (sorority University Ave house and apartment building) present challenges for land acquisition . This intersection typically functions well as an at- grade crossing . Laurel Street - CSU -owned property on the western side of road - . South Dr could minimize land acquisition costs . However, connectivity from ` - tit this parcel to western neighborhoods is inconvenient, and demand _LT-7 is lower at the north edge of campus . Locations to the south of Elizabeth Street: Westward Dr _ Bicycle and pedestrian crossing volumes lower in this area . i` • University Avenue/South Drive - Private property acquisition required on west side, with some disruption to CSU uses and Pitkin st inconvenient ramp locations on east side. Minor floodplain constraints . • Pitkin Street/Springfield Drive/Westward Drive - CSURF-owned Sprid or I property on the southeast side could minimize land acquisition costs . Private property acquisition required on the west side. -Burton Ct Integration with the planned Pitkin low-stress bike corridor could help form a connected network here . J U Lake Street/Bennett Road - CSURF-owned property on the east side Bennett Rd _ could minimize land acquisition costs here. Private property acquisition required on the west side. Integration with the planned Lake Street protected bike lanes would assist with resolving a connection here; Lake St however, ramp configurations on the west are inconvenient and the location at the south edge of campus is not ideal . Legend - - Impacted Property Pw City Floodway Potential Plaza City High-Risk Floodplain N ♦ _ _ ♦ Underpass Ramp Required) CSU Research Foundation Owned Property Prospect Rd O (200' Planned Low-Stress Bike Corridor (CSU, City Bike Plans) 60 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility Evaluation Recommendations Each location considered for a grade-separated crossing Further study is recommended for the following potential was compared and evaluated based on a number of locations, based on this analysis: factors . The matrix in Table 7 shows comparative relative Pitkin Street/Springfield Drive - Demand is medium, ratings for the potential crossing locations, with a low/ cost is relatively low, and integration with the planned medium/high rating based on the following criteria : Pitkin Low-Stress Bike Corridor are advantages here. • Underpass Feasible? - Is it physically feasible to An alternative for this location is a new bike/pedestrian construct an underpass at this location? crossing signal, which would require right-of-way • Overpass Feasible? - Is it physically feasible to acquisition and could have slight impacts on traffic construct an overpass at this location? flow. Impacts to traffic flow could be avoided with an • Opportunity Parcel(s) on East or West Side - Is underpass. there a property owned by the City, CSU/CSURF, Lake Street - Demand is medium, cost is medium, and utility, or other government entity on the east or integration with the Lake Street Corridor is desirable. Land west side of Shields Street that can be used for the use on the west side is lower in intensity and could have grade separation approach? more flexibility for right-of-way acquisition, as well . Lake • Immediate Redevelopment Potential/ also has fewer utility conflict than some other locations. Underutilized Parcel on East or West Side - If a Note that although the crossing demand is currently higher property is not owned by the City, CSU/CSURF, at the intersections in the vicinity of Elizabeth Street, these utility, or other government entity, does it have locations have a loweroverall feasibility due tofloodplain, land redevelopment potential? use restrictions, and utility locations. Although the feasibility of • Relative Demand - Volumes from the CSU Parking constructing an underpass at Laurel Street is high, that location and Transportation Master Plan reveal the level of has lower crossing demand overall due to its location at the bike and pedestrian demand of each intersection . north edge of the CSU campus. In addition, Plum Street and Figure 23 provides a summary of pros/cons foreach potential Laurel Street have the potential to function well as at-grade grade-separated crossing location . intersections with some more cost-effective improvements, as noted in the At-Grade Intersection Improvements section. Table 7 . Shields Corridor Grade - Separated Crossing Evaluation Matrix Location Underpass Overpass Opportunity Near-term Opportunity Near-term Relative Additional Pros/Cons Potential Feasible?. Feasible?* Parcel(s) on Redevelopment Parcel(s) on Redevelopment Demand* Cost (Floodplam, West - Potential on East Side Potential Land-use, West Side East Side Laurel • Anticipated demand is low. • Existing at-grade crossing Street • • at traffic signal sufficiently 13 bike/18 ped. accommodates need. • Existing at-grade crossing Plum • • • • ' • • sufficiently accommodates need. Street • Grade separation would require $ $ Utilities/Land-Use 76 bike/183 ped. out-of-direction travel for pedestrians and bicyclists. Elizabeth • • • • • • • Grade separation would require Street out-of-direction travel for $ $ $ Floodplain/ 98 bike/212 ped. pedestrians and bicyclists. Utilities/Land-Use University _ Street • • • • • • Anticipated demand is low. $ $ South • • • • Less expensive at-grade crossing • • Drive enhancements have high $ $ 20bike/9ped. feasibility • Would enhance the planned Pitkin Street Low-Stress Bike Corridor. Pitkin • • • • • • - • Less expensive at-grade crossing $ Street enhancements have medium z66ike/16ped. feasibility (ROW acquisitions required) • Existing at-grade crossing Lake sufficiently accommodates need. • • • • • • • Grade separation would require $ $ Street out-of-direction travel for labike/31 ped. pedestrians and bicyclists. Relative Rating * Due to the additional ramp length requried and perceived inconvenience of overpasses, it was determined that overpasses are not currently recommended, particularly because other at-grade • Low Medium High crossing improvements may be more cost-effective. WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 61 I Figure 23 . Shields Corridor Grade- Separated Grade-Separated Crossing Pros/Cons Summary Crossing Pros & Cons Below is a summary of pros/cons for each potential N grade-separated crossing location : O1'el St Ba stone Dr Pros CSU property on west side, low cost C/' Cons North edge location, lack of connectivity to west m Plum St TRANSIT CONNECTORPlum Stre 4W i , Proe High demand , direct connectivity Cons Current intensive uses on west side, high cost, at-grade crossing functions well Elizabeth St ENHANCED TRAVEL CORRIDOR abeth Street FIFZ Pros High demand, direct connectivity Cons Floodplain constraints, current intensive uses on west side, high cost, constrained ROW, integration of two way bike path challenging Csu University Ave DriveUniversity Avenue/South Pro.c Lower cost South Dr - Cons Lack of connectivity to west, lower demand, mid-block location Westward Dr Street/Springfielditkin Drive 'ros Connection to future Low-Stress Bike Corridor, lower cost, at-grade crossing improvements Pitkin St are less expensive but would have greater Springfield Dr LOW STRESS BIKE CORRIDOR LOW-STRESS BIKE right-of-way impacts CORRIDOR Cons Medium demand :Burton Ct Bennett Rd Pros Connection to Lake St . protected bike corridor Lake St PROTECTED BIKE CORRIDOR Cons South edge location , low demand, medium cost egend ,See Prospect Corridor for Existing Elements Potential opportunities Intersection improvements , PP Arterial Road Future Low Stress Bike Corridor Pros ect Rd 6L I +� / Collector Road ♦ Future Enhanced Travel Corridor OF Local Road Location Evaluated for Potential Grade-Separated Crossing 62 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility At- Grade Intersection Improvements A second dedicated eastbound left-turn lane would Preliminary concepts were developed for key intersection eliminate the need for a split signal phase at the intersection ; this could be accommodated by both improvements that are currently being explored in alternatives described below. The configuration of this greater detail . The intersections analyzed include: intersection will be further evaluated during the West Laurel Street, Plum Street, Elizabeth Street, South Drive, Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor (ETC) planning effort. and Pitkin Street/Springfield Drive. Preliminary plans for intersection improvements and associated descriptions Alternative 1 are found below. The first proposed alternative to consider at the Shields Street & Laurel Street intersection of Shields Street and Elizabeth Street is two-stage turn queue boxes on the east and west legs, Improvements to the intersection of Shields Street and a bike box on the west leg, green colored pavement in Laurel Street should address pedestrian convenience the bike lanes at conflict points and channelized islands and overall safety. Improvements to the transition onto for the southbound right-turn and eastbound right-turn . the existing Shields Street bike lane for southbound Alternative 2 cyclists should also be reviewed . The second proposed alternative at the intersection Shields Street & Plum Street of Shields Street and Elizabeth Street is a Dutch-style Improvements to the intersection of Shields Street and protected intersection that carries the protection of Plum Street should address the comfort and safety the bike lane through the intersection . This is done with of pedestrians and bicyclists crossing Shields Street refuge islands, located at all four corners . Special signal and turning onto and off of Plum Street. Candidate operations are also required to reduce or eliminate improvements include two-stage turn queue boxes on conflicts between vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians . the east and west legs, an additional bike box on the Additional analysis is needed to determine the feasibility east leg, and green colored pavement in the bike lanes of this option . at conflict points . Additionally, improvements should address delays for westbound buses from campus, while maintaining overall safety. Shields Street & Elizabeth Street Improvements to the intersection of Shields Street and Elizabeth Street should address the comfort and safety of pedestrians and bicyclists crossing Shields Street and turning movements on Elizabeth Street. Additionally, improvements should also address pedestrian convenience and safety, as well as vehicle operations, as previously noted (see Table 3) . • 0 Bicycle crossing © Bicycle stop line © Bicycle Queuing area Q Corner deflection island © Pedestrian curb ramp r i Q Pedestrian crossing Q Pedestrian refuge island � 0 4 f � 0 0 ` n � I I Exampleof • protected • • Toole Design Group, Bicycle Master Plan, 2014) WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 63 1) Shields Street & South Drive Figure 24 , Potential Shields Street Medians Additional pedestrian and bicyclist infrastructure is Laurel St recommended at the intersection of Shields Street and South Drive to facilitate crossings of Shields Street. The implementation of a crosswalk with a pedestrian hybrid beacon and potentially a median island refuge at the south and east legs should be considered . Additionally, green-colored pavement can be added to the bike lane at conflict points . South Drive is currently a one-way street in the east direction . This configuration may be Plum St Plum St maintained, reversed, or converted to two-way travel in the future. Shields Street & Springfield Drive/ Pitkin Street Additional pedestrian and bicyclist infrastructure is recommended at the intersection of Shields Street and 17 Springfield Drive/ Pitkin Street to facilitate crossings of Shields Street. The implementation of a crosswalk with a traffic signal or pedestrian hybrid beacon, and Elizabeth St potentially a median island refuge at the south leg should be considered . Additionally, because Pitkin Street is proposed as a low-stress bike corridor, a protected bicycle facility that allows for bicyclists to travel east to CSU west between Springfield Drive and Pitkin Street should University Ave be considered . This location is also being considered for a potential underpass, the timing and feasibility of which could influence if and when at-grade improvements are South Dr made. Median Improvements ; Potential locations for medians were explored Westward Dr } throughout the corridor. Medians could provide some n traffic calming , diminish the scale of the overall roadway, �4 improve the safety of turning movements, and develop ♦"� an improved corridor aesthetic . Locations were identified cn Pitkin St based the desire to maintain access to existing access points and left-turn movements at intersections while Springfield Dr providing pedestrian refuges for at-grade crossings and reducing risky turning behavior. Medians will be n Burton Ct designed according to City of Fort Collins standards and ; � would typically include the following : Bennett Rd • 1 ' striped buffer between travel lanes and median A face of curb • 8' width from curb face to curb face Lake St • 2' of splash plate and interior curb around median _ ' perimeter for maintenance access $ • 41 planting area including small trees and low-water r use plantings • Narrow median section at turn lanes Median configurations and locations shown on the Prospect Rd diagram to the left are preliminary and will require further O design and outreach as plans for the corridor evolve . Legend Potential Median Access Points 64 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Transportation & Mobility Roadway Realignment Options Lake Street & Bennett Road People cross Shields Street at various locations Realignment of Lake Street to Bennett Road is best throughout the corridor, which is particularly difficult accomplished on the east side of the road , and the south of Elizabeth Street where streets are offset, and following considerations should be taken into account: there is a general lack of connectivity between the • CSU Research Foundation-owned parcels exist in neighborhoods and the CSU campus . Pedestrians and most of the affected area bicyclists in this area are typically observed crossing • Conversations with CSU and the CSU Research two lanes to the center turn lane and waiting for vehicle Foundation should continue regarding potential traffic to allow crossing an additional two lanes of traffic . implications/shared costs of this effort The planning team explored the possibility of roadway • The planned Lake Street protected bike lane realignments in this segment of the corridor in order to concept could be effectively integrated with facilitate a more direct crossing of Shields Street. Transit implementation of this realignment and vehicular connections would also potentially benefit • Transfort routes from CSU to the neighborhoods from aligned roadways in this segment of the corridor. west of campus could function more effectively The street realignment concept was explored for Pitkin • Because Lake is a collector street, a greater Street/Springfield Drive and Lake Street/ Bennett Road, turning radius is generally required to meet street as described below. Street realignments could potentially standards; tightening the turning radii would be used instead of a grade-separated crossing at these reduce impacts to privately owned parcels . locations . Considerations for each realignment are listed • A replat of parcels surrounding the realigned below, and these concepts will continue to be further portion of Lake Street should be carefully refined, including the determination of costs, right-of- investigated to maximize feasibility for new way needs, and additional outreach to property owners . development here. CSU Research Foundation and other property owners should be consulted to help Pitkin Street & Springfield Drive determine optimal feasibility for replatting parcels, Realignment of Pitkin Street to Springfield Drive is best as well as the intended use of the parcels in the accomplished on the west side of the road and the future following considerations should be taken into account: • The planned Pitkin Low-Stress Bike Corridor concept could be effectively integrated with implementation of this realignment. - • Transfort routes from CSU to the neighborhoods *.y west of campus could function more effectively. • As a local street, Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS) allow for tighter turning radii, which would reduce impacts to privately owned parcels . • Two privately owned parcels are affected, and property owners should be contacted to inquire about interest in selling these parcels . • A replat of parcels surrounding the realigned portion of Springfield Drive should be carefully investigated _ to maximize feasibility for new development. � , � -�110a_ k 4i',. Existing conditions at Shields Stre( itkin Street WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 65 I Figure 25 . Summary of Potential Summary and Next Steps Improvements to the Shields Corridor This section documents the initial results of the ongoing analysis of Shields Street between Prospect • Road and Laurel Street. Travel along and across the ■ corridor for all users could be improved through a !4 �� - package of improvements, including : Ba stone Dr I I Updated cross-section with protected bike lanes, 4, IV wider sidewalks, and planted medians Grade-separated crossing at Pitkin Street/ 1 I Springfield Drive (part of the Low-Stress Bike O° Plum St TRANSIT CONNECTOR - Corridor) • At-grade intersection improvements on Shields at ♦� Laurel Street, Plum Street, Elizabeth Street, and 1 Ig — South Drive -1 Iw Realignment of Lake Street and Bennett Road Y 1 I� with at-grade crossing improvements I- Figure 25 summarizes this preliminary set of Elizabeth St 1 10 ri improvements for the Shields Corridor. ENHANCED TRAVELCORRID Next steps will include continuing to refine the designs initially explored, continuing outreach to stakeholders and property owners, and securing funding for Z JI I improvements . gwl I m QI University Ave w A I CSU ■ I I South Dr �y t1 II Westward Dr I I II I Pitkin St ' LOW-STRESS BIKE CORRIDOR Springfield Dr LOW-STRESS BIKE CORRIDOR li Burton Ct I I _ Bennett Rd - Legend 11 1 Lake St Existing Elements Potential Opportunities PR <E CORRIDOR kL Arterial Road Low-Stress Bike Corridor PIP Collector Road + — =+ Enhanced Travel Corridor Local Road ..wrrn►• Potential Median Potential At-Grade Crossing/ See Prospect Corridor for Intersection Improvements Intersection improvements Potential Underpass Prospect Rd N ♦ ♦ Protected Bike Lane Potential Road Realignment 66 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN I y o y�����k� 'Fla I .. • � r- J � u1 Y � j�e{'r]i^/q■eJ��T• 'y. Y. .,u'I' • '. 1p Ilk IF 41, 10 40 12 if; ice 191 ' OF �NIr o ( j •) I r I.( ~� ' 3 } 1' •y1 flay t� �I ` / • ) � r r 1: FYI • • ' ✓: ]1 l} MO r: • � . . i ` t !� . I x . ✓ � r •. }� t 40 At I J T _ �� �_ ► - — It ks r . . / �� i } _ = \ � ! J — 'I , ! cn dMoeiiiiiit S S • 1 ` .� w POPIf` 1It a �_ (mil * _ NO - 1 I It dl to t • day+ � �' • / •� rv __ . a �� T / " � 1 / • f - - S'�- ice ♦ ' �O , WAS wit ! Amp. �! 404 X G �. 00 0 cn • r r l V. ♦ �i J 111 Open Space Networks Vision A functional network of public and private 1, lands that supports and connects wildlife, plants, and people . Access to nature, recreation , and F � 4 environmental stewardship opportunities * • Fynr . �ip - . i Parks and open spaces that offer a variety TA of settings and experiences - � � . 3 L _ .ell.L • L L • % •• ., pT r y_ • Attractive urban landscape that supports f 4; - � ; • R � • . habitat, character, and shade Preserved and enhanced wildlife habitat rfi _ �• , • f and corridors r L.+ S , I or ® Comprehensive and ecological � �' 4 • ' • 11 approaches to stormwater management L F• 'w f} _ � . b yyy���... , _ l r O.f.^ F . L11 � • Yra� ti. - III �- I r % 2 z_ OP bil_ , i 'y lit It' Lr r to tra *11s � 4 p 1 - S trees access ope iki v PI naar >w ■ . .,. pc ' WeI life — stand ffmm »� �.1 kF1�F v++ r r 68 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Open Space Networks Policies Access The Plan provides guidance for the protection of new Ensure that residents are adequately areas of open space while improving connections ® served by parks and open space as infill to existing open space. A variety of principles guide and redevelopment occur opportunities for recreation while protecting and adding Gas valuable habitat and wildlife corridors . The following policies are organized into three categories : Access, As development and redevelopment activities add Quality and Quantity. increased population and commercial uses into the West Central area, high-quality natural spaces should be maintained and expanded to serve existing and future Access residents . A range of social and ecological opportunities 3 . 1 Ensure that residents are adequately served by should be provided for the benefit of all residents and parks and open space as infill and redevelopment species . Land Use Code changes should be designed to occur provide flexibility to allow site-specific solutions based on context, scale and objectives . For example, high 3 .2 Continue to create a connected network of parks density zone districts (e. g . , the High Density Mixed-Use and open space Neighborhood and the Community Commercial zone 3 .3 Ensure that parks and open space are easily districts) may have different requirements than lower accessible by all modes of transportation and for density zone districts (e. g . , Low Density Residential , Low all ages and abilities Density Mixed-Use Neighborhoods) . 3 .4 Allow for appropriate access along and across Action Items ditches In conjunction with the implementation of Nature Quality in the City, update open space standards in the Land Use Code to add clarity for developers and 3 . 5 Provide for a variety of settings, experiences, decision-makers related to the amount and type and recreational opportunities in parks and open of open space required in conjunction with new space development and redevelopment. Requirements 3 . 6 Improve safety in public parks, open space, and should include a mix of qualitative and quantitative along trails standards that provide flexible options for the provision of functional natural spaces during a 3 .7 Explore the multiple ecological values that project's development or redevelopment. ditches provide, including irrigation, stormwater Through the implementation of Nature in the City, management, and wildlife habitat develop a Design Guidelines document illustrating 3 .8 Protect and enhance existing wildlife habitat strategies for incorporating natural features and open space into new and existing developments . Quantity • Evaluate recent development contributions for 3 .9 Identify opportunities for additional wildlife parks and determine how to best apply available habitat funds to new or enhanced parks in the West Central area . 3 . 10 Approach stormwater management • Engage neighborhood organizations and comprehensively and at the system scale homeowners associations to assist with the 3 . 11 Enhance and add to the urban tree canopy along stewardship of existing and new open space. streets and within neighborhoods • Identify funding mechanisms for improvements to existing parks, open space and trails and for acquisition of new parks, open space and trails, as needed . What We Heard "Ensure that residents still have access to high- quality open space as more development occurs. " WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 69 Continue to create a connected network of Ensure that parks and open space parks and open space (a ls ® m are easily accessible by all modes of transportation and for all ages and abilities Identify gaps in the open space network, both for public as access and wildlife habitat. Prioritize acquisition or protection of new open space areas that contribute Parks, natural areas, and other open space areas to a connected network of wildlife corridors and/ should be accessible by walking, bicycling, and transit, or recreation opportunities . Focus public park and in addition to vehicle access . All residents should have open space improvements at the neighborhood scale . access to nature within a 10-minute walk of their home. Prioritize trail connections that provide access between Action Items neighborhoods and parks, schools, natural areas, and other destinations . • Improve the underpass at the crossing of Shields Improve existing parks, open spaces and trails in select Street and the Spring Creek Trail to improve locations to better protect wildlife habitat, serve the visibility for bicyclists and reduce flooding issues . surrounding neighborhoods, and provide ecosystem • Improve the underpass at the crossing of Centre services (such as stormwater management, air quality Avenue and the Spring Creek Trail to better improvement, and the mitigation of fugitive dust) . accommodate the high volume of users and reduce flooding issues . Focus public park and open space improvements at the • Coordinate with CSU on the planning, construction, neighborhood scale. Prioritize the acquisition of sites and funding of a future trail connection between for new parks and open space that would benefit the the proposed underpass at Centre Avenue and surrounding neighborhoods . Prospect Road to the Spring Creek Trail . Action Items • Establish a wayfinding system for parks and open space, in conjunction with efforts to improve • Create spur trails that better connect wayfinding along trails and bikeways throughout neighborhoods to parks, natural areas, schools, the city. the Spring Creek Trail, Mason Trail, and other open • In conjunction with the Transportation and Mobility space areas . recommendations, add safe pedestrian crossings • In coordination with the implementation of Nature along arterials to provide residents with more direct in the City, identify gaps in the open space network access to parks and open space . for both wildlife and recreation, and develop a list • Identify gaps in transit service near existing or of short-term and long-term projects that help to fill future parks and open space . Consider access to the gaps . open space when making changes to Transfort bus • See recommended programs and projects in Policies routes and bus stop locations as part of the next 3 .4 and 3 . 5 . update to the Transfort Strategic Plan . • Continue to coordinate among City Departments to align priorities for improving access to open space (Parks, Park Planning & Development, Natural Areas, ? Planning, FC Moves, and Transfort) . ,ra % # ` What We Heard 1 I "Make it easier to get from neighborhoods to parks and natural areas. " Habitat enhancement • •1f►i. - M a r. along a trail 70 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Open Space Networks gure 26 . 10 - Minute Walk to Public Open Space (Including Arterial Crossings) The map below identifies public lands and open space and the areas within a five- to ten-minute walk. This map takes into account a resident crossing an arterial road to reach an area of open space . This map also identifies both major and minor existing trail networks within the West Central area . W M berry St 0111111111 W Laurel St W Elizabeth St Cn - cn W Prospect Rd Cn F- Rod INA fV DrakIPRd Miles Paved Major Trail Public Open Space 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 . 4 — — — Natural Surface Major Trail 5 Minute Walk to Protected Lands and Trails Paved Minor Trail 10 Minute Walk to Protected Lands and Trails — — — Natural Surface Minor Trail West Central Neighborhoods WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 71 Figure 27 . 10 ' Minute Walk to Public Open Space (Not Including Arterial Crossings) The map below identifies public lands and open space and the areas within a five- to ten-minute walk. This map does not take into account the ability for a resident to cross an arterial road to reach an area of open space. This map also identifies both major and minor existing trail networks within the West Central area . 77 W M berry St W Laurel St _ _ '► W Elizabeth St � � I GC Cn W Prospect Rd H i •� cn L I � 4W DraW Rd Miles Paved Major Trail Public Open Space 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 . 4 — — — Natural Surface Major Trail 5 Minute Walk to Protected Lands and Trails Paved Minor Trail 10 Minute Walk to Protected Lands and Trails — — — Natural Surface Minor Trail West Central Neighborhoods 72 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Open Space Networks • Allow for appropriate access along and across ditches New crossings of ditches in key locations will improve pedestrian connectivity in neighborhoods . Additional public access should be considered along ditches, but low A IL should primarily be focused along segments of ditches that cross public property (e . g . , Rolland Moore Park), rather than private property (e . g . , private backyards) . Action Items • Construct a crossing of the Arthur Ditch near Whitcomb and Wallenberg to connect the neighborhood to the Spring Creek Trail . The crossing should provide an informal pedestrian connection that does not introduce significant pedestrian or bicycle traffic into the neighborhood . 100 ,� • Construct a crossing of Larimer County Canal Number 2 at Westview Ave . to improve neighborhood connectivity. • Construct a crossing of Larimer County Canal Example of ditch crossing connecting neighborhood to open space Number 2 between Lynwood Drive and Bennett Elementary School to support Safe Routes to What We Heard School . • Remove obstacles for wildlife movement along 'Allow additional access along ditches and canals as ditches, including replacement of old fencing with a recreational amenity near neighborhoods. " wildlife-friendly fencing, as appropriate. • Coordinate with ditch companies to allow for appropriate access along ditches . Figure 28 , Standard City of Fort Collins Process for Constructing Ditch Crossings Service Area Requests Identify Project City Manager Approves Project & Neighborhood Owner Allocates Funding Meeting(s) Site I Survey Transportation Contract Design Consultant Real Estate Coordination Meeting (Parks Department) Research Ditch Crossing Ditch Crossing Agreement Payment (+-$5,000) Structural City Preliminary Design Review Final Design (Parks Department) Construction (Pre-Approved Construction Accept Ditch Contractor) Management Crossing +- 2 Months (Design Consultant) (City of Fort Collins) . WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 73 Quality Action Items • Improve Lilac Park to better serve the nearby neighborhoods and complement the Gardens on Provide for a variety of settings, Spring Creek, wetland improvements on adjacent experiences, and recreational opportunities CSU property, and the proposed relocation of in parks and open space 00 the CSU Horticulture Center to the north of the park. Conduct neighborhood outreach regarding Focus on the unique characteristics and type of potential improvements to Lilac Park. experiences offered by individual parks and open space. • Provide open space improvements to serve Program parks and open spaces in a way that fits the residents in the Campus West area. The existing, character of the place and serves the surrounding City-owned stormwater detention area on the neighborhoods . Consider the role each area serves northeast corner of Skyline and West Elizabeth within the greater open space network. should be improved to provide additional Offer opportunities for the enjoyment of nature, passive opportunities for passive recreation in a natural setting . Wildlife habitat improvements should be recreation , exercise, sports, social gathering, urban included alongside any recreational enhancements . agriculture/community gardening, off-leash dog areas, • Improve the existing stormwater management and other recreational activities within the overall open site at Taft Hill and Glenmoor to provide enhanced space network. wildlife habitat and passive recreation (e . g . , soft Provide trail amenities within and between parks and surface path) . open space areas . In some settings, soft surface paths • Support the establishment of community gardens may provide a more desirable experience than paved in public areas or areas managed by neighborhood trails . organizations or HOAs . Ensure that recreational access in open space is • Identify locations (either within existing open sensitive to, and does not conflict with , the ecological space or new locations) that could potentially and habitat values that open space provides . accommodate off-leash dog use. • Coordinate with the Parks , Park Planning and Ensure that a range of natural settings are provided Development, and Stormwater departments to throughout the West Central area, including: incorporate a broader range of settings and experiences as part of future work plans for parks • Highly natural settings with an in the West Central area . emphasis on wildlife habitat and limited recreational access • Passive, unprogrammed open space What We Heard with opportunities to quietly enjoy nature 'Access to recreational amenities, including parks, is • Areas that include playgrounds, fields, or essential in an area with such a dense population. " other recreational amenities • Highly programmed common areas that allow for social gathering and sports (e. g ., picnic shelters or soccer fields) • Larger parks and open space that accommodate multiple settings and - experiences (e. g . , Rolland Moore Park) • Educational programs and stewardship opportunities (e. g . , Gardens on Spring Creek) tj •�1 Aid r S Playground adjacent • neighborhood Community garden within neighborhood 74 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Open Space Networks Improve safety in public parks, open space, Explore the multiple ecological values and along trails G G G that ditches provide, including irrigation , stormwater management, and wildlife Ensure trails and open spaces are safe for all users habitat as at all times of day. Improve lighting where necessary and appropriate. Ensure that any additional lighting Recognize the importance of ditches for stormwater complies with the City's "dark skies11 policies and limits conveyance and flood management. impacts to wildlife habitat. Recognize the potential These waterways also serve as important wildlife conflict between bikes and pedestrians on shared trails, movement corridors, and they provide a unique and work to address unsafe behavior, such as bicycle opportunity for creating a more connected network of speeding . high-quality wildlife habitat in the West Central area . Action Items Improve habitat and the recreational value in stormwater • Conduct a safety inventory along the Spring detention areas . Creek Trail to identify locations that present safety Action ltPmc concerns, such as poor nighttime visibility, visibility around corners, and areas of potential conflict • Partner with ditch management companies to between bicyclists and pedestrians . protect and improve wildlife habitat along irrigation • Monitor complaints and crime reports in City of waterways . Fort Collins parks, natural areas, and along trails to • See recommended programs and projects in Policies improve law enforcement and ranger patrols in those 3 . 4 and 3 . 5 . areas . What We Heard Y{ T "Streams, creeks and canals should be protected and TIM i F , enhanced for wildlife and people. " lie - - ,1 NNW fe - = 1 �- � - , , INC titJf -�v l 1 4 Ab i A%&3k , WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 75 Protect and enhance existing wildlife habitat a Identify opportunities to enhance or add to network of wildlife habitat within the West Central area . New development and redevelopment should be designed in such a way that minimizes impacts or enhances the area's natural areas, wetlands, and wildlife habitats . Recognize the importance of the Spring Creek and its tributaries for wildlife habitat and stormwater management. Ensure that recreation improvements do = not compromise the Spring Creek's role in flood control . Action Items _ — • Through the implementation of Nature in the City, . identify specific locations where existing wildlife habitat can be improved within the West Central area . - - • Renovate existing stormwater detention areas to improve wildlife habitat and aesthetics . Where appropriate, consider including soft surface trails and other recreational amenities . • Identify sections the Spring Creek corridor where - - stormwater management and /or wildlife habitat r , could be improved . .ot i 1 Y 1 • • • • • • • Example of • • • stormwater detention • • Y ,104 . . : • r �' , Y a: . /, .' - • ! . a «x�:. • rck :7!!� ti 76 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Open Space Networks Quantity Approach stormwater management comprehensively and at the system scale Identify opportunities for additional wildlife � Plan stormwater improvements at the drainage habitat Go basin level, while recognizing the impacts of localized Opportunities to protect additional wildlife habitat on conditions on the stormwater system . both public and private land should be further explored . Account for the impacts and stormwater management needs related to high-density infill and redevelopment. Action Items Ensure stormwater is adequately addressed through • Through the implementation of Nature in the City, the development review process . Ensure that future identify specific locations where new wildlife habitat development in vacant areas does not compromise the can be added within the West Central area . Spring Creek Basin's Storm Drainage Plan . • Encourage habitat enhancement on private property Action Items through the Natural Areas Certification and Natural Areas Enhancement Fund programs . • Raise the bridge on the spur trail to the west of the Sheely/Wallenberg neighborhood to mitigate flooding of the trail . • Encourage Low Impact Development (LID) techniques as part of new development and capital projects . • Regularly review the adequacy of stormwater protection and provide additional stormwater protection where needed . Planted landscape islands treat stormwater run off 60 T AMM MeWR wzww ==ILL Stormwater planting adjacent to street WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 77 Enhance and add to the urban tree canopy Potential Open Space along streets and within neighborhoods a c m Improvements & Additions Recognize the importance of an expanded urban tree canopy in reducing heat island effects, improving air Table 8 . Potential Open Space Projects quality, supporting wildlife habitat, and providing shade. This table identifies the potential open space projects Encourage the use of xeriscape and drought-tolerant in the West Central area . Locations for the potential plant species in landscaping on private property and projects are shown in Figure 28 . Additional funding within the public right-of-way. needs to be secured to implement each of these projects . Encourage the creation of tree stands with a mix of sizes, Additional public outreach, planning, and design may ages, and species of trees to support a more diverse and also be necessary. attractive landscape . ID.JwLocation Description Retrofit existing streetscapes to include additional Shade Canopy trees . O1 Westview Avenue Ditch Crossing of Larimer Crossing County Canal Number 2 Preserve and enhance the tree canopy in neighborhoods Habitat improvements and Stormwate Detention by incentivizing the planting of new trees on residential 02 Taft Hill & r Detenortion Area recreation amenities (e.g., property. soft surface trail Action Items Elizabeth & Skyline Habitat improvements and 03 Stormwater Detention Area recreation amenities (e.g., • Develop and pilot a neighborhood tree canopy soft surface trail) improvement program in collaboration with local nurseries, non-profit organizations, and CSU Bennett Elementary School Crossing n Larimer p g 04 Ditch Crossing County Canal Number 2 student groups . • Proactively create additional tree cover in areas 05 Trail connection from Centre Future trail connection dominated by ash trees to mitigate the potential Avenue to Spring Creek trail impacts of the emerald ash borer. 06 Spring Creek Trail Underpass Reduce flooding impacts • Support neighborhood grant applications that at Centre Avenue seek to improve parks, open space, and tree Whitcomb & Wallenberg canopy within the West Central area . 07 Ditch Crossing Crossing of Arthur Ditch • Continue current policies for including street trees Improve to complement as part of all new developments and City capital Spring Creek Trail, Gardens projects . 08 Lilac Park on Spring Creek, and the • Identify funding mechanisms for improving habitat CSU Horticulture Center and urban tree canopy on private property. 09 Spring Creek Trail Underpass Improve visibility and at Shields Street reduce flooding impacts . _ . AL LM Jip Ali Y y F . JY•� r Y r i r , . . 41F �` 4 y . w - 9 .9 IF - •F' S Street tree planting in new development . trees in a residential 78 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Open Space Networks gure 29 . AreaF -if Potential Open Space Improvements & Addition .r The map below identifies the existing open space and parks, as well as several existing conditions within the West Central area . This map helps to identify areas of open space improvements and additions . s u) c� ulberry 9 Z It co Dun r = Elementary , School 20 Laurel St c� Lab/Polaris Ji School T t Avery ParkLW � F y Bennett Elementary I - - - Future - K School CSU Stadium a - - - eSt - - Prospect Rd * �k i Meadows Natural = Area10/0 ~ U) Spring Creek Tram Gardens on Sprj�ng Cree Fis er Natdal Area ,q) Q Blevins - = - - Middle + Vo- School , Rolland V O Moore ParkIr ca U R i _ R - 0 o'ss Natural o Area m Drake Rd INS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Legend Existing Elements Potential Opportunities — - - - West Central Area Boundary Major Paved Multi-Use Trail Potential Ditch Crossing Arterial Road Minor Paved Multi-Use Trail Opportunity for Open Space Existing Open Space Natural Surface Trail Improvements & Additions Existing Park orm Schools Existing Water Body * Opportunity for Open Space/Pocket Parks Provided by New Development Existing Irrigation Canal and Habitat Existing Fort Collins Natural Area CSU Property WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10/ 15 79 This page intentionally left blank 80 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN 1 1 l ti- s ��;: ol ,. fe Y l f 40� r _ :a Prospect Corridor Existing Conditions Existing Conditions Analysis Existing corridor conditions, including right-of-way Conceptual designs have been developed for Prospect (ROW) widths, existing and future land use, north-south Road and Lake Street (between Shields Street and connections, travel lane widths, access points, traffic College Avenue) . The design development process volumes, multi-modal level of service and transit stop included an evaluation of existing conditions to identify locations were analyzed to assist in developing three areas of improvement, establishment of a vision for design alternatives . Details are included in Appendix D. the future, and developing and evaluating a range of alternatives for each of the roadways . The conceptual Corridor Issues designs reflect the results of technical assessments, Based on public input and site observations, a set of public input, and sustainability evaluations . The next corridor issues and influences were identified to reflect steps in the process will be to secure funding for Final the concerns of residents, property owners and other Design , right-of-way acquisition, and construction of users on Prospect Road and Lake Street. They included the proposed improvements . The design development the following : process and conceptual designs are summarized in this chapter and further detailed in Appendix F. The Prospect Lack of adequate facilities for bicycles and Corridor 30% Design is provided in a separate document. pedestrians • Lack ofbicycle/pedestrian crossings between Whitcomb and Shields Figure 30 , Prospect Corridor Design • Perception of unsafe conditions along sidewalks Development Process • Potential to utilize Lake Street as parallel bike network • Lack of street trees and other streetscape Existing Conditions elements • Constrained existing right-of-way (ROW) • Conflict between bicycles and parked cars on Lake Street Visioning Alternatives Development Alternatives • nj - Technical/ Sustainability Advisory public Input Operational Assessment Committees Conceptual Designs • . 82 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Prospect Corridc Figure 31 , Prospect Corridor Existing Right - of-Way Constraints WHITCOMB TO SHIELDS TO WHITCOMB CENTER CENTER TO COLLEGE North Side: 22 parcels North Side: 4 parcels North Side: 8 parcels LAKE ST 7- - - � - - & 1 » 81' 10 - 81 8 0 81.�. so ,z PROSPECT RD IT7 South Side: 24 parcels South Side: 2 parcels South Side: 6 parcels I , W N f0 > K Q W O 13 U J W ~ z LL = Z Y J N �+ U m U Legend NORTH rzow wmt TOTAL NUMBER OF PARCELS: Existing Right-of-Way Width (in feet) Source: City of Fort Collins document survey North Side: 34 parcels and parcel data. --------• 100 foot Right-of-Way South Side: 32 parcels Note: Standard 4-1-ane Arterial ROW width is 115' (e.g., Lemay Avenue north of Fossil Creek Parkway) Constrained 4-1-ane Arterial ROW width is 100'-102' (e.g., Horsetooth Road between Timberline Road and Ziegler Road) 0 i ; r Existing conditions on Prospect Road Existing conditions on Lake Street i t t • WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 83 Vision three alternatives are described below, with additional I detail provided in Appendix F. Attractive and functional , well-integrated, mixed-use corridor that serves the mobility Alternative A - 'All About Pedestrians" needs of nearby neighborhoods, CSU, and the Alternative A maintained the existing curb lines and community roadway width while enhancing pedestrian facilities, with the overall idea being a renovation and retrofit 0 Safe and comfortable corridor for all that better accommodates pedestrians . The following modes of travel design elements were included : Safe crossings • 4 travel lanes throughout • U detached sidewalk Attractive gateway to campus, downtown, • 8' tree lawn and midtown • Planted median Seamless connection to MAX Alternative B - "Boulevard" Alternative B emphasized minimal right-of-way (ROW) Overall Approach acquisition , replacing one travel lane with a buffered bike lane on each side of the road west of Whitcomb . The overall approach to developing the conceptual Pedestrian enhancements were also prioritized . The designs for Prospect Road and Lake Street was based following design elements were included : on the following strategy: • Provide holistic designs so that Prospect and Lake 2 travel lanes west of Whitcomb Street, 4 travel lanes east of Whitcomb Street are connected and complement each other • Develop a custom cross-section for Prospect ' Center turn lane west of Whitcomb Street ' tree lawn that is narrower than the standard City of Fort D Collins cross-section, while still providing improved Detached sidewalk/shared bike and pedestrian path facilities • Maintain the curb along the south side residential ' 5 buffered bike lanes west of Whitcomb Street, area of Prospect to minimize construction costs shared bike/ pedestrian path east of Whitcomb Street and property impacts Str • Focus Prospect property impacts on areas likely to ' Planted median redevelop (primarily on the north side) Alternative C - "Complete Street" • Coordinate with CSU 's master plans and other approved plans for redevelopment Alternative C maintained existing travel lanes and added a detached, shared bike/pedestrian path while minimizing Alternatives Development and right-of-way (ROW) acquisition on the south side of Evaluation Prospect Road . The following design elements were included : Based on the existing conditions analysis and vision . 4 travel lanes throughout for the corridor, three alternatives each were developed . 10' shared bike/pedestrian path for Prospect Road and Lake Street. These alternatives ' 6 tree lawn were then evaluated based on a variety of criteria . Draft ' Planted median east of Whitcomb Street conceptual designs, utilizing various elements of the alternatives, were then developed . Based on the technical analysis, Alternatives B and C generally provided the greatest improvement for Prospect Road all users compared to existing conditions, with the Three distinct alternatives were developed for Prospect notable exception that Alternative B was projected to Road , including : increase delays and congestion in the western segment (Shields to Whitcomb), which was reduced to two travel • Alternative A - "All About Pedestrians" lanes . Community input varied considerably across all • Alternative B - " Boulevard " alternatives . In general , stakeholders favored elements • Alternative C - "Complete Street" of the alternatives that improved the safety of all modes These concepts were developed based on the vision while minimizing impacts to property owners along the statements and were further refined based on feedback roadway. from technical staff, propertyowners, and residents . The 84 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Prospect Corridor Lake Street Conceptual Designs The primary issue on Lake Street is a general conflict With the adoption of the West Central Area Plan , the between bicycles and parked vehicles, with car doors conceptual designs described below become the opening into bike lanes and vehicles pulling out into designs of record in regard to right-of-way dedication for travel lanes without scanning for oncoming bikes . development projects along both streets . The alternatives focused on three alternatives for prospect Road Conceptual Design incorporating protected bike lanes into the roadway. A conceptual design was developed based primarily Alternative on the attributes of Alternative B and Alternative C, Alternative A provided a protected bike lane on the north and was further refined in response to public input. and south side of Lake Street, with a planted median The conceptual design maintains four travel lanes providing separation from vehicle parking . The following throughoutthe corridor, with the addition of a centerturn design elements were included : lane west of Whitcomb Street. A shared bike/pedestrian • 2 travel lanes path is provided along the majority of the roadway. • On-street parking The need for right-of-way acquisition was minimized • 6' one-way protected bike lanes on the south side of the road to minimize impacts to • Tree lawn (select locations) residences located close to the roadway, while focusing • 6' attached sidewalk potential right-of-way acquisitions on the north side of Alternative 8 the road where redevelopment is more likely to occur. Alternative B provided a two-way protected bike lane The conceptual designs for Prospect Road are divided on the north side of Lake Street with a planted median into three segments: (1 ) Shields Street to WhitcombStreet, (2) Whitcomb Street to Centre Avenue, and (3) providing separation from vehicle parking . This took Centre Avenue to College Avenue. advantage of the lower number of access points on he prospect Road - Conceptual Design Elements north side, where the Colorado State University Main Campus is the dominant land use. The following design • Four travel lanes elements were included : • Center turn lane/median • Tree lawn • 2 travel lanes • Detached sidewalk/shared bike and pedestrian • On-street parking path • 12' two-way protected bike lanes (6' per lane) • Mid-block bike/pedestrian crossing • Tree lawn (select locations) • Transit stops/pullouts • 6' attached sidewalk Lake Street Conceptual Design Alternative C The conceptual design for Lake Street was developed Alternative C maintained the existing curb lines and through stakeholder input on the three alternatives . The roadway width and removed on-street parking , while conceptual design is generally based on Alternative A incorporating a protected bike lane on the north and and includes the elements described below. south side of Lake Street, with a planted median Lake Street - Conceptual Design Elements providing separation from travel lanes . • Two travel lanes The following design elements were included : • On-street parking • 2 travel lanes • Protected bike lanes with planted buffer • 6' one-way protected bike lanes • Attached/detached sidewalk • Tree lawn (select locations) • Tree lawn (select locations) • 6' attached sidewalk • Mid-block bike/pedestrian crossings • No on-street parking • Transit stops All three alternatives were comparable in terms of improving The draft design includes on-street parking . However, as conditions for all users compared to existing conditions. development plans along Lake Street (including the new Alternative C provided slightly better conditions for CSU stadium) come to fruition, it may be determined pedestrians than Alternatives B and C due to the removal that removing on-street parking better meets the needs of on-street parking . Community input varied, with more and vision for the corridor. Removing on-street parking support for the 6' protected bike lanes (Alternatives A and while providing the other elements listed above may be C) than the 12' two-way protected bike lanes (Alternative B) . possible without the need to move the existing curbs, thus reducing construction costs . Potential refinements will be further explored in Final Design . WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 85 i-' igure 32 . Prospect Road Conceptual Design & Cross- Sections Shields to Whitcomb Enhanced intersection treatment Plymouth Congregational with refuge islands Church Potential north/ south connection 10' Shared bike/ped Street tree Access point, Transfort Right-of- Path F 40' O.C., tYP _ .— Access �\ s; p, typ_ , Way line ,•_ _ . 6' Tree lawn MENSS � f Ah6 AIL 4LT -' — 8 Sidewalk Gateway corner refuge Interim condition required i with existing , yp. h cn + land use t Potential sidewalk SePy connection to Spring p . v Creek Trail �P Whitcomb to College I CSU - Aggie Village North i I CSU - Parking Garage I Right-of-Way line l Raised median ' Right-of Way line T Shared bike/ped path Potential a 10' Shared bike/ Raised median I underpass 2 r ped path w 6' Tree lawn z •. , U _r —_ — I Transfort stop, 6' Tree lawn 10' Shared bike/ped path 0 ltyp. Rake box Existing trees 10' Shared bike/ � IPotentials Ito remain aped path > underpass ) m 1 Lo At k :! i 0. , .__ � MAN u� Hilton Fort Collins 10' Shared bike/ped path Legend Potential Right-of-Way (ROW) • pedestrian Wayfinding C••••, Transfort Stop 1 j Interim condition dedication/acquisition •.,.• 16 � 111111 .m required with existing land use Typical Cross-Section Typical Cross-Section Shields Street to Whitcomb Street Whitcomb Street to Centre Avenue Center turn lane = Raised planted median Tree lawn Shared bike/ped Tree lawn Shared bike/ped path Sidewalk - is spruce trees CSU-Aggie o 0 o Village c cc X cc South a =_ - `- y X SU-Aggie Villa g X X w North W W ! �W 'm` ; r II I PML ' III I South Side 6' 6' 10'-10'-10'-10'l0' 6' 10' North Side South 10' 6'T10' 10'S 8' ti 10" 10'T 60f 10 North Side I-xi 2. 5' Side 2 ng 1 . 5'OW 2 - Existing ROW - 60' � -{—Existing ROW - 60' —{� Total Required ROW - 83' Total Required ROW - 88' *Note - Total required ROW dimension includes 30" curb/ *Note - Total required ROW dimension includes 30" curb/ gutter along street per LCUASS standards gutter along street and 18" curb/gutter around median (s) per LCUASS standards 86 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Prospect Corridor Potential options for 8" Future condition on Whitcomb - Tree 1 I sidewalk connections lawn detached sidewalk and bike lane to Lake Street I 10 Shared bike/ped path Potential pedestrian Right-of- Access point, typ. E activated crossing Way line o 6' Tree lawn 16' Sidewalk i6' Tree lawn r• I � I J Existing Residential I v Neighborhood Q N a , I o Connection to Lake Street Enhanced intersection 0 treatment with refuge Mason Trail islands Interim condition o required with existing Enhanced Enhanced a' a land use, typ. Bus pull- crosswalk crosswalk w/ Desired bus Gatewa corner � out for Mason ped . signal pull-out y refuge v Corridor trail o I — - - .'AV 351rojEw 'L „r— k Sidewalk connectlo r Prospect St M Refer to Midtown in Motion for ! � College Ave corridor Mason trail Note: Specific and detailed intersection improvement decisions will be refined through various 0 50 100 150 � design and other project processes . This includes City capital projects, identified requirements due to area developments, and stadium mitigation measures . For example, the intersection of Prospect Road and Centre Avenue is currently being considered for northbound and southbound double left-turns . Typical Cross-Section Centre Avenue to College Avenue Center turn lane Shared bike/ped Shared bike/ped path 3 path 0 0 rn c c � w w w w y Milk AM is SokSideo' e' to' to' to' 10' to' s' to' North Side z.s z.s' 1 Existing ROW - 60' r Total Required ROW - 8T *Note - Total required ROW dimension includes 30" curb/gutter along street per LCUASS standards WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 87 Figure 33 . Lake Street Conceptual Design & Cross - Sections Shields to Whitcomb it Sidewalk connection to Pitkin Street Bike box Buffer crossing, 11 ' Travel lanes 4' Planted buffer Gateway corner refuge typ. Pedestrian 8' Parallel 6' Striped bike lane CSU - PERC crossing parking 6' Sidewalk _ . '•. _ „ Access point, typ. Right-of-Way line 6' Bike lane 6' Striped buffered bike lane Islamic Plymouth Congregational Center Church Interim condition required with existing off-street 90 II degree parking IQ I m Whitcomb to College Pedestrian beacon i Wider tree lawn to avoid impacts to ex. Future CSU p 12 Bike path to Project 11 ' Travel lanes steam chillers potential underpass Bus turnaround Ia - - - - - - - - - - - ; 8' Parallel parking LBuffer crossing Right-of Way line � = i =' - •+s- - - - - - - - - - - - - ---- -- *. may.► ; � � . . ♦ ♦ -♦ - 1 ♦ " = « . • � i= z� � J Existing curb ;• •109% Pedestrian I = maintained •...• :•�•: crossing (South only) Q v CSU - Parking ..:, • `m Garage - I � u CSU - Aggie Village North :•�+; D I - � • r I r � . � • �o potential • ' ,� s _ underpass Legend J1 Potential Right-of- Way (ROW) • Pedestrian Wayfinding Note- Specific and detailed intersection improvement dedication/acquisitiondecisions will be refined through various design and other r � 7 Interim condition required with ; Transfort Stop project processes. This includes City capital projects, L _ J existing land use Identified requirements due to area developments, and stadium mitigation measures . Typical Cross-Section Parallel parking Travel lane Bike lane Planted Attached walk buffer misting curb CSU - Aggie i Village 0 0 North 2 2 w w ; South Side g' g' 4' 8' 8' 4, 6' 6' North Side 1 .5' 1 . 5' Existing ROW - 60' Total Required ROW - 75' Note - Total required ROW dimension includes 18" curb/gutter around planted buffer per LCUASS standards. The south side maintains the existing curb/gutter. 88 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Prospect Corridor Future CSU Stadium Transfort stopt Future yp iCSU Buffer crossing, Project Buffer tree, p. - - ; ♦; 1 fad ♦ D Pedestrian crossing 6' Bike lane 4' Striped bufferng curb 6' Sidewalk zainedm h only) 0 Existing Residential 7Potential sidewalk connection Neighborhood �Prospect RoadFuture condition lk Whitcomb Tree lawn detached sidewalk and bike lane 44 8' Parallel parking m 11 ' Travel lanes 0 Access point, < o 6' Striped buffered bike lane r typ. I 10' Shared bike/ I1 Iped path A n - - - - - - - - - - - - - - • . f�rt�- r - - - - - - - � _ + � �* �♦ s. Lake Street — — — o Existing curb/sidewalk Potential transit interline maintained (South only) service or transfer stops Mason trail 0 0 Cr +� Gateway corner refuge :alp 0 50 100 150 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 89 Figure 34 . Prospect Road Conceptual Design (looking west near Prospect Lane) 10' Travel lane, Potential street light Pedestrian/bicyclist typical gateway banners activated crossing 8' Sidewalk 6' Tree lawn Raised, planted 6' Tree lawn 10' Shared bike/ped path median tf r • , Vf 1 47 74. - r _ 1 • f Figure 35 , Lake Street Conceptual Design (looking west near Centre Avenue) Aggie Village North redevelopment Buffer crossing Campus spine 11 ' Travel lane, CSU parking 8' Parallel parking, 4' Planted buffer, 6' Bike lane, 6' Sidewalk, typical north and typical garage typical typical typical north and south sides } kt Center Ave. south sides k Yo- Y Y r L 4 -f " - 1 - V ; s or k I { �y f 90 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Prospect Corridc Potential Phasing Cost Estimates The conceptual designs provide a basis for further The following costs have been roughly estimated for the detailed design efforts and will likely require some level conceptual designs for Prospect Road and Lake Street. of modification during Final Design . Implementation will Costs include the development of final designs, right- likely occur over a period of time, in multiple phases : of-way acquisition, and construction of the proposed Phase I - reconstructing the roadway from College improvements . The designs for both Prospect Road and Avenue to Whitcomb Street. Work will likely consist of Lake Street would require reconstruction of a substantial the following : portion of the roadway, so the construction costs for • Acquire necessary right-of-way both roadways are similar. • Remove existing roadway features (curb, gutter, Table 9 . Prospect Corridor Cost Estimates road surface, sidewalk, utilities) • Construct new roadway features (curb, gutter, road Category Prospect Road Lake Street surface, raised median, tree lawn , 10 ' shared bike/ Final Design $ 1 . 1 Million $ 1 . 0 Million ped path, vegetation , utilities, corner enhancements, pedestrian underpass) Right-of-way $ 1 . 4 Million $ 500 Thousand Phase II - roadway reconstruction from Whitcomb Street Construction $ 5 . 5 Million $ 5 . 7 Million to Shields Street. Work will likely consist of the following : Total $8 Million $7 . 2 Million • Acquire necessary right-of-way, • Remove existing roadway features (curb, gutter, Cost estimates will be finalized during Final Design . road surface, sidewalk, utilities) Final costs will likely change based on : • Construct new roadway features (curb, gutter, road . How much ROW is acquired (i . e. , purchased) surface, raised median, tree lawn, 10' shared bike/ versus dedicated through redevelopment or ped path, vegetation , utilities) easements Phase III - If funding is unavailable during construction • Final intersection designs of the first two phases, intersection improvements • Detailed existing conditions surveys revealing and enhancements may occur as Phase III of the unknown conditions at the time of this plan (i . e . , implementation process . This work will consist of the utility information) following : • Build new enhancement features ( enhanced pedestrian refuge islands, path connections) at Shields Street & Prospect Road and at College Avenue & Prospect Road Figure 36 . Prospect Corridor Potential Phasing Phase II Phase I Shields St. Whitcomb Ave. Centre Ave. College Ave. M .. Phase III ( intersections) WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 91 Implementation Strategies 5 . Acquire right-of-way 1 . Obtain funding to develop construction plans Potential locations requiring acquisition of additional right-of-way or easements have been identified on the Final Design and construction plans are required to conceptual design plans . Landowner negotiations will advance the plan, requiring funding for City staff and take place prior to construction . A flowchart illustrating design consultants . this process is shown in Figure 32 . 2 . Prepare Final Design/construction plans and 6 . Conduct construction operations to minimize obtain approvals . impacts to businesses and residences Construction drawings will require a detailed existing Roadway construction projects can be disruptive to conditions site survey as a basis of design efforts to businesses, residents and other users of the corridor. further define roadway plans, profiles, and extents Strategies will be developed to help reduce these of impacts to private properties . Construction plans impacts and allow businesses to continue to function , will illustrate and define all information necessary residents to have continued access, and pedestrians, for a contractor to bid and install the project, as well bicycles and vehicles to continue to use the corridor to as provide a basis for review and approval by various the greatest extent possible . departments within the City of Fort Collins . During this phase, outreach and communication with the various 7 . Establish roadway and landscape maintenance property owners along the corridor will be critical for regimes success, as well as discussions and negotiations with A plan for operating and maintaining the reconstructed property owners potentially affected by right-of-way corridor will be developed and the project will be acquisitions necessary to successfully complete the incorporated into the City Streets Maintenance Program . corridor. The City of Fort Collins Parks Department will provide 3 . Finalize potential phasing ongoing landscape maintenance along the corridor. Construction of the roadway in segments is Iry v recommended to reduce construction impacts as much as possible along the entire roadway. However, it may be deemed necessary due to funding and/or other opportunities/constraints to construct the corridor in a manner requiring more or fewer overall phases . 4 . Obtain funding for construction Gaining support from the community and its elected and appointed leaders is key in order to receive adequate funding through allocations of sales taxes or other city - funds . A commitment by the community to fund the project will allow the city to apply for matching grants from state and federal agencies, and will give property owners and the development community confidence to invest in improvements and redevelopment projects . The Planted medianexample benefits of the project need to be clearly communicated to the citizens of Fort Collins . ta r � Jim j } w l %i F + JIM r'•- Protected bike lane example Shared bike/pedestrian path example 92 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Prospect Corridor Design & Construction Process There are a number of steps in the design and construction process for a new or reconfigured roadway. Each of these steps requires time and funding, so some projects can take more or less time than others to be constructed . At this time, funding has yet to be secured for future phases of design and construction for the Prospect Corridor. When the City of Fort Collins re-designs a roadway, there is often a need to acquire public access easements or additional public right-of-way from private properties along the roadway. The City has an established process for working with property owners to acquire right-of-way. The diagram below outlines the general process for a roadway project, including design, right-of-way acquisition, and construction . Figure 37 , Design and Construction Process 1 Conceptual Design Phase * * Contained in this plan —9-15 months Results in a recommended design based on public input and the 3a 3b issues and needs identified. Site Meetings between Notice of Interest Letter Property Owners & City This letter officially informs Staff owners of the property interests needed by the City, To discuss project design as discussed in previous 2 and acquisition needs. meetings. Final Design Phase —24-30 months A more detailed , Final Design process to address any remaining 3d 3C City Appraisal / Value issues and needs. Requires Determination of Falr additional funding. Market Value Estimates A fair market value is Appraisals and value determined from the results estimates are completed of the appraisals/value for the needed acquisitions estimates. and any affected property 3 improvements- Right-of-Way Acquisition Phase — 18 months (overlaps with design 3e City Offer of Fair 3f phase) � � � �' Market Value Negotiations Includes a combination of dedicated City staff will work with right-of-way through redevelopment The City presents an offer property owners to and right-of-way purchases from in the amount of the fair negotiate an agreement for market value for the needed the urchase of the needed individual property owners. p acquisition areas and acquisition areas. affected improvements_ 4 Construction Phase Closing — 12-15 months per phase Once an agreement has been reached and any necessary releases obtained (mortgage liens, The final construction of the new taxes, etc.), the City will hold a closing with a title roadway may occur in phases, company and funds will be disbursed to property depending on funding and other owners for the compensation due- constraints- WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 93 This page intentionally left blank 94 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN i _ • V r dol 40 ri *it ifill ip Alf i � 1 Oil 1' y . , l� 'I{� �_ 4/i•.. �� `�� � cn •' ' ' • l , •y try J 114 It r • %poll' �� fnl{ . � O ' , T r . / ►ro ■ � it . 1 f Vol I id" 40 ' . ,, f r Y 1 •I I P i i 66 Plot It 1w �0001 • rn• i J JI� 1 J i JFl Implementation Summary Action Items This section sum marizesthe action items presented in the : + Land Use and Neighborhood Character, Transportation and Mobility, and Open Space Networks chapters . Implementation of some of the recommendations of the West Central Area Plan will begin immediately with the adoption of the plan , with other actions identified for the near- and longer-term . The timeframes below indicate when a particular item should be initiated, though many items outlined in the plan are already in progress or will continue beyond the specified timeframe (e . g . , implementation of new education programs) . Funding for many of the action items has not yet been identified . _ The following four timeframes apply to the action items presented in the tables that follow. . • Immediate Actions (Within 120 Days of Adoption) • Items identified for completion concurrently with or immediately following adoption of the West Central Area Plan . Short-Term Actions (2015-2016) • Items identified for completion within the current � �« 4 i Budgeting for Outcomes ( BFO) budget cycle. Mid-Term Actions (2017-2024) = • High - priority items that should be initiated and implemented in alignment with upcoming budget cycles . Ongoing Programs & Actions • Items that are already in progress, do not have a specified timeframe, or generally require ongoing me IT mmai coordination to implement. 0. Open space to be improved at West Elizabeth Street and Skyline Drive - r- 96 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Implementation Summary Table 10 . Immediate Actions (Within 120 Days of Adoption) RelatedNo. Action Item Policies Responsibility 1 Update the City Code to clarify the enforcement of 1 . 1 Neighborhood Services violations related to dead grass and bare dirt in front yards. 2 Include educational information about City code 1 .3, 1 . 1 , 1 . 2 Neighborhood Services requirements as part of the code violation letters sent to residents . A summary of the most common violations and strategies for avoiding them should be included . 3 Make the following updates to the Land Use Code: 1 . 9, 1 . 10, 1 . 11 , Planning , Historic • Clarify requirements related to mass, scale, and 2 . 4 Preservation, FC Moves building design for the HMN zone district • Update compatibility standards for multi-family and mixed-use development • Require variety in the number of bedrooms provided in multi-family developments • Evaluate the feasibility of incorporating car share and bike share options into the Land Use Code and/or Development Review process 4 Form a joint City-CSU committee that meets regularly 1 . 12 City Manager's Office, to assist with communication and coordination related Planning , Development & to the on-going planning efforts of both entities . Transportation 5 Continue further analysis of potential improvements 2 . 1 FC Moves, Engineering, to the Shields corridor between Laurel and Prospect Traffic Operations, to facilitate access to such destinations as CSU and Planning Bennett Elementary School . 6 Establish Priority 1 pedestrian and bicycle routes 2.2, 1 . 1 , 1 . 3 Streets, FC Moves, for snow removal by the Streets Department. Match Neighborhood Services priority snow removal bicycle routes to the low- stress network identified in the Bicycle Master Plan . Provide enforcement and education on property owner responsibilities along Priority 1 snow removal routes . Communicate priority snow removal routes to CSU and the public . 7 Evaluate future West Elizabeth corridor transit needs 2 . 7 FC Moves, Transfort in the upcoming West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor Plan . 8 Develop a template for widening sidewalks . 2 . 8 Engineering , Streets 9 Determine a consistent strategy for applying the RP3 2 . 10 Parking Services, Planning program and other parking management strategies to existing and new multi-family developments . 10 Conduct neighborhood outreach regarding potential 3 . 5 Park Planning improvements to Lilac Park. & Development, Neighborhood Services, Planning 11 Pilot a residential tree canopy improvement project 3 . 11 Planning , Forestry, in collaboration with local nurseries, non-profit Neighborhood Services organizations, and CSU student groups . WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 97 We 11 . Short-Term Actions (2015 -201 C No. Action Item &Iated Policies Responsibility 12 Review the current strategy for the escalation of fines 1 . 111 . 2 Neighborhood Services and other enforcement measures for repeat code/ public nuisance violations, and update as needed . 13 Create a development guide or workbook that shows 1 . 8, 1 . 101 1 . 11 Planning, Historic the potential opportunities for improving aging homes Preservation so that the existing housing stock is better equipped to serve the next several generations . 14 Identify and provide strategically placed car sharing 2 . 4 FC Moves spaces . 15 Work with CSU to explore shared Park-n-Ride 2 . 6, 2 . 12 FC Moves, Transfort arrangements south and west of campus . 16 Integrate short- to mid-term bus stop improvements 2 . 7 Transfort into the citywide Bus Stop Improvement Program . 17 Explore the potential for incorporating related 2 . 8 , 3 . 10 Utilities, Engineering , stormwater and low-impact development (LID) Streets improvements into street retrofits . 18 Action items to be implemented in conjunction with 3 . 11 3 . 21 3 . 5 Planning, Natural Areas, Nature in the City: Park Planning and • Update open space standards in the Land Use Development Code to add clarity for developers and decision- makers related to the amount and type of open space required with new development and redevelopment. Requirements should include a mix of qualitative and quantitative standards that provide flexible options for the provision of functional natural spaces . • Develop a Design Guidelines document illustrating strategies for incorporating natural features and open space into new and existing developments . 19 Evaluate recent development contributions for parks 3, 113 . 5 Park Planning & and determine how to best apply available funds to Development new or enhanced parks in the West Central area . 20 Coordinate with the Stormwater department, Ram's 3 . 5 Stormwater, Park Planning Village Apartment complex, and other stakeholders & Development, Planning to explore potential improvements to the stormwater detention site at Skyline and West Elizabeth . 21 Improve the existing stormwater management site at 3 . 5 Stormwater, Park Planning Taft Hill and Glenmoor to provide enhanced wildlife & Development, Planning habitat and passive recreation (e. g . , soft surface path) . 98 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Implementation Summary Table 12 . Mid - Term Actions (2017 - 2024) No. Action Item Related Policies Responsibility• 22 Form an exploratory committee to evaluate the 1 . 1 , 1 . 2, 1 . 3 Planning, Building feasibility and potential effectiveness of a citywide Services, Neighborhood landlord registration or licensing program . Services 23 Create an interdisciplinary group to explore the creation 1 , 1 , 1 . 2, 1 . 3 Planning, Neighborhood of " Preferred Landlord" and " Preferred Tenant" Services programs, or other incentive-based programs to improve property management. 24 Create a program to provide annual education of 1 . 111 . 3 Neighborhood Services residents related to unscreened trash to reduce the number of violations . 25 Develop a strategy to proactively enforce sidewalk 1 . 11 2 . 11 2 . 2 Neighborhood Services shoveling by property owners along important pedestrian routes (e. g . , to schools, parks, and other major destinations) 26 Create an online, publicly-accessible map of code 1 . 311 . 1 Neighborhood Services, violation data to serve as a communication and GIS education tool . 27 Create a program that requires landlords to attend a 1 . 31 1 . 111 . 2 Neighborhood Services, class on rental property management in response to Police Services public nuisance ordinance violations . 28 Schedule annual meetings with neighborhood 1 . 31 1 . 9 Neighborhood Services, residents within the West Central area . As part of Planning these meetings, attendees can share their experiences related to living in a diverse neighborhood and discuss expectations for property owners, landlords, renters, law enforcement, and City staff. 29 Fund an additional staff position to support the 1 ,311 . 9 Neighborhood Services Community Liaison position . Such a position would strengthen existing Neighborhood Services and Off- Campus Life partnership programs, as well as the implementation of new programs and strategies . The costs of this position should be shared between the City and CSU . 30 Work with Front Range Community College to develop 1 . 3 , 1 . 2 Neighborhood Services a program to educate students about living in the community. Expand education efforts related to the impacts and requirements of occupancy limits in partnership with CSU and Front Range Community College. 31 Establish a Police Services sub-station within the 1 . 4 Police Services West Central area . Such a center could also include community-oriented services, such as a shared community room, office space for CSU and community organizations, or other amenities . Consider including the new sub-station within a future CSU parking structure near Shields Street and West Elizabeth Street . WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 99 Table 12 . Mid - Term Actions (2017 - 2024) - Continued No. Action item Related Policies Responsibility • 32 Map gaps in lighting and opportunities to bring 1 . 4 Light & Power, existing light fixtures up to current standards along Neighborhood Services major streets and within neighborhoods . 33 Review and update current policies for upgrading 1 . 411 . 5 Light & Power, and adding street lighting to ensure that it allows Neighborhood Services, for the adequate protection of public safety within Planning neighborhoods . 34 Upgrade existing bridges to include sidewalks and 1 . 5 Streets, Engineering safety railings, particularly over irrigation ditches . 35 Explore strategies for better informing residents of 1 . 6 Streets, Neighborhood the street sweeping schedule and the need to move Services vehicles from the street during sweeping operations . 36 Explore the creation of a program that supports the 1 . 11 Planning, Neighborhood retention of owner-occupied homes to maintain the Services stability of neighborhoods . 37 Incorporate transit service recommendations for the 2 . 7 Transfort West Central area into Transfort budget requests and future Transportation Strategic Operating Plan updates . 38 Retrofit Shields Street (between Prospect Road and 2 . 9 Engineering Laurel Street) to include medians and other aesthetic and safety improvements . 39 Retrofit Prospect Road (west of Shields Street) to 2 . 9 Engineering include medians and other aesthetic and safety improvements . 40 Identify parking lots that generally have additional 2 . 12. 2 . 6 Parking Services capacity at certain times or days of the week for shared parking opportunities . 41 Action items to be implemented in conjunction with 3 . 21 3 . 81 3 .9 Planning, Natural Areas, Nature in the City: Park Planning and • Identify gaps in the open space network for both Development wildlife and recreation , and develop a list of short- term and long-term projects that address the gaps . • Identify specific locations where wildlife habitat can be improved or added within the West Central area . 42 Identify gaps in transit service near existing or future 3,312 . 7 Transfort, Parks, Park parks and open space . Consider access to open space Planning & Development when making changes to Transfort bus routes and bus stop locations as part of the next update to the Transfort Strategic Plan . 43 Improve underpass at the crossing of Shields Street 3.3, 2 . 1 , 2 . 3 Parks, Engineering, and the Spring Creek Trail to improve visibility for Stormwater bicyclists and reduce flooding issues . 44 Improve underpass at the crossing of Centre Avenue 3.3, 2 . 1 , 2 . 3 Parks, Engineering, and the Spring Creek Trail to better accommodate the Stormwater high volume of users and reduce flooding issues . 100 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Implementation Summary Table 12 . Mid - Term Actions (2017 - 2024) - Continued No. Action Item Related Policies Responsibility• 45 Coordinate with CSU on the planning , construction, 3,312 . 11 2. 3 Parks, Park Planning & and funding of a future trail connection between the Development, Engineering intersection of Centre Avenue and Prospect Road and the Spring Creek Trail . 46 Establish a wayfinding system for parks and 3 . 3 Parks, Park Planning & open space, in conjunction with efforts to improve Development, FC Moves wayfinding along trails and bikeways throughout the city. 47 Construct a crossing of the Arthur Ditch near 3 .413 . 3 Planning, FC Moves, Whitcomb and Wallenberg to connect the Engineering neighborhood to the Spring Creek Trail . 48 Construct a crossing of Larimer County Canal 3 .413 . 3 Planning, FC Moves, Number 2 at Westview Ave. to improve neighborhood Engineering connectivity. 49 Construct a crossing of Larimer County Canal Number 3 . 413 . 3 Planning, FC Moves, 2 between Lynwood Drive and Bennett Elementary to Engineering support Safe Routes to School . 50 Identify locations (either within existing open space or 3 . 5 Stormwater, Park Planning new locations) that could potentially accommodate off- & Development, Planning, leash dog use . Neighborhood Services 51 Improve Lilac Park to better serve the nearby 3 . 5 Park Planning & neighborhoods and complement the Gardens on Development, Gardens on Spring Creek, wetland improvements on adjacent Spring Creek, Planning CSU property, and the proposed relocation of the CSU Horticulture Center to the north of the park. 52 Conduct a safety inventory along the Spring Creek Trail 3 . 6 Parks, FC Moves to identify locations that present safety concerns, such as poor nighttime visibility, visibility around corners, and areas of potential conflict between bicyclists and pedestrians . 53 Raise the bridge on the spur trail to the west of the 3 . 10 Parks, Engineering, Sheely/Wallenberg neighborhood to mitigate flooding Stormwater of the trail . 54 Proactively create additional tree cover in areas 3 . 11 Forestry dominated by ash trees to mitigate the potential impacts of the emerald ash borer. 55 Pursue funding to develop Final Design and Prospect Engineering, FC Moves construction plans for the Prospect Corridor. WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 101 Table 13 . Ongoing Programs & Actions • Action Item Related Policies Responsibility 56 Promote the annual Neighborhood Services Landlord 1 . 111 . 3 Neighborhood Services Training Program, offered by the City of Fort Collins and CSU, offering landlords and property management firms an opportunity to stay current with all applicable building and property maintenance codes . 57 Support the establishment of networking and 1 . 111 . 3 Neighborhood Services professional development group for landlords and property managers that meets casually to socialize and discuss ideas and challenges related to property management. 58 Continue to strengthen the effective enforcement of 1 . 111 . 2 Neighborhood Services, nuisance ordinances . Focus enforcement efforts on Police Services neighborhoods with proportionately higher number of violations . 59 When community service is required as a penalty 1 . 2 Neighborhood Services, for violations, apply the community service to the Police Services neighborhoods in which the violations frequently occur. 60 Support existing educational programs offered by 1 . 3 Neighborhood Services Neighborhood Services and CSU Off-Campus Life . Strengthen CSU Off-Campus Life's existing programs for educating students about the responsibilities of living off-campus and being a good neighbor. 51 Support the establishment and growth of organized 1 . 3 Neighborhood Services neighborhood groups within the West Central area . 62 Leverage existing neighborhood newsletters to 1 . 3 Neighborhood Services improve communication to neighborhood residents and property owners . 63 Support the efforts of Police Services and the CSU 1 . 311 . 4 Police Services, Police Department to include educational information Neighborhood Services and programs as part of their enforcement and community outreach strategy. Continue to hold neighborhood meetings regarding crime activity and safety concerns as needed . 54 Improve the utilization of code violation data to 1 . 3 Neighborhood Services, identify trends, problem areas, and communicate with Police Services the public . 65 Monitor crime incidents and trends in the West 1 . 4 Police Services Central area to determine if additional patrols, safety features, or other resources are needed . 66 Continue to identify locations where additional lighting , 1 . 4, 1 . 5 Light & Power, sidewalk connections, and other neighborhood safety Engineering, Street, Traffic improvements are needed over time . Operations, FC Moves, Planning 67 Continue to trim tree branches that block sight 1 . 4 Forestry, Traffic distance at intersections and stop signs, as needed . Operations 68 Continue to identify locations for physical traffic 1 . 412 . 3 Traffic Operations, FC calming or radar speed indicators . Moves 102 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Implementation Summary Table 13 . Ongoing Programs & Actions - Continued No, Action Item Related Policies Responsibility 69 Continue to regularly maintain curb paint to prevent 1 .412 . 3 Traffic Operations parked cars from blocking driveways and interfering with sight distance at intersections . 70 Provide information to neighborhood residents about 1 . 511 . 1 Neighborhood Services, Access Fort Collins, an application that allows users to Planning directly report issues to City departments . 71 Improve neighborhood identity and aesthetics 1 . 5 Planning, Neighborhood with entry signage. Support efforts initiated by Services neighborhoods to make improvements . 72 Continue to widen existing attached sidewalks where 1 . 5 FC Moves, Engineering, feasible. Fill in missing gaps in sidewalks within Streets, Traffic Operations neighborhoods . 73 Continue to add street trees throughout the area, 1 . 6, 3 . 11 Planning, Forestry particularly along Prospect Road west of Shields Street, along collector roads, and at entrances to neighborhoods . 74 Continue to implement the citywide Street 1 . 6 Streets Maintenance Program within the West Central area to ensure that aging infrastructure is repaired as needed . 75 Maintain the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zone 1 . 7 Planning district to allow for future development of a mixed-use neighborhood center near Shields and Prospect. 76 Encourage businesses to locate in existing , 1 . 7 Planning , Economic Health underutilized commercial buildings in the West Central area whenever possible. 77 Sites that have structures that are officially recognized 1 . 10 Planning, Historic as local, state, or national historic landmarks are Preservation encouraged to consult with the Landmark Preservation Commission or their Design Review Subcommittee in order to gain valuable feedback. In addition , applicants are encouraged to apply for the Design Assistance Grant Program, which offers financial assistance for specialized professional architectural services . 78 Developers should consider additional neighborhood 1 . 10 Planning meetings beyond the standard requirement, interactive design charrettes, and individual meetings with affected property owners to demonstrate a high level of collaboration with neighborhood residents . Ensure that the requirements of the Land Use Code 1 . 11 Planning continue to support a variety of housing types and densities within the West Central area . 80 Continue to enforce building codes that protect 1 . 11 Planning, Building Services the health and safety of tenants in rental housing , particularly for older properties in need of improvement and properties where unauthorized remodeling and building additions have occurred . WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 103 Table 13 . Ongoing Programs & Actions - Continued No, Action Item Related Policies Responsibility Encourage CSU to engage neighborhood residents in 1 . 12 Planning, Neighborhood the University's plans for long-term growth and new Services development projects . 82 Engage CSU student groups (e. g . , clubs, sports teams, 1 . 12 Neighborhood Services sororities and fraternities, majors with community service requirements) in volunteer efforts to improve the West Central neighborhoods . 83 Encourage the involvement of CSU students in 1 . 12 Neighborhood Services neighborhood organizations, neighborhood meetings, Neighborhood Night Out, and other events . 84 Support implementation of the Pedestrian Plan through 2 . 1 Engineering , FC Moves the Pedestrian Needs Assessment. 85 Assess the impacts of projects on safe routes through 2 . 1 FC Moves the creation of performance measures and evaluation strategies . 86 Continue to assess the needs and refine designs for Potential FC Moves, Traffic the intersection and roadway projects identified in Projects, 2 . 3 Operations, Engineering Figures 18 and 19 and Tables 3-6. 87 As potential projects are refined, add them to the City's Potential FC Moves Capital Improvement Program (CIP) . Projects, 2 . 3 88 Coordinate the potential projects identified in the West Potential FC Moves, Traffic Central Area Plan with other ongoing city programs to Projects, 2 . 3 Operations, Engineering , make improvements in a cost-effective and efficient Streets, Transfort manner (e. g . , Bus Stop Improvement Program, Street Maintenance Program (SMP), and Capital Improvement Program (CIP)) . 89 Provide education on safe user behavior as new 2 . 3 FC Moves, Traffic crossing improvements are implemented . Operations 90 Support completion of the low-stress bicycle network, 2 . 3 FC Moves per the 2014 Bicycle Master Plan . 91 Coordinate with CSU on education and continue Safe 2 . 3 FC Moves Routes to School (SRTS) efforts . 92 Continue to assess traffic enforcement needs and 2 . 3 FC Moves, Police Services coordinate with Police Services and the CSU Police Department. 93 Pursue sustainable funding strategies for 2 . 3 FC Moves improvements that benefit all travel modes . 94 Work towards achieving Climate Action Plan goals 2 . 3 FC Moves, Environmental to reduce VMT through bike, pedestrian, and transit Services improvements . 95 Work to implement the recommendations of the Bike 2 . 4 FC Moves Share Business Plan . 96 Consider transit stop locations in bicycle and 2 . 5 FC Moves, Transfort pedestrian network planning . 104 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Implementation Summary Table 13 . Ongoing Programs & Actions - Continued • Action Item Related Policies Responsibility 97 Add shelters to existing and future bus stops . 2 ,7) 1 . 5 Transfort Coordinate bus stop improvements with other roadway improvement projects, where applicable . 98 Seek opportunities to provide additional, high-quality 2 . 7 Transfort, FC Moves bike parking at bus stops . 99 Pursue opportunities to implement neighborhood 2 . 8 Parking Services, Traffic street retrofitting in conjunction with the Street Operations Maintenance Program and Capital Projects . 100 Monitor issues and complaints related to residential 2 . 10 Parking Services parking on a day-to-day basis, and consider the application of the Residential Parking Permit Program (RP3) or other approaches to reduce impacts, as warranted . 101 Coordinate with CSU to implement the CSU Parking 2 . 10 Parking Services, FC & Transportation Master Plan, with a focus on Moves minimizing the impacts of student, faculty, staff, and visitor parking in neighborhoods . 102 Evaluate the parking demand created by new multi- 2 . 11 Planning, Parking Services family developments to ensure that adequate parking is provided to support those projects . 103 Ensure that new development complies with the 2 . 11 Planning recently adopted Transit-Oriented Development Overlay Zone parking standards, where applicable. 104 Facilitate public-private partnership arrangements 2. 121 2 . 6 Planning, Parking Services that allow for shared parking or car storage arrangements . 105 Work with City and CSU Special Events Coordinators 2 . 13 Parking Services, Traffic to ensure that event management plans include Operations provisions for adequate parking and traffic control . 105 Engage neighborhood organizations and homeowners 3 . 1 Planning, Neighborhood associations to assist with the stewardship of existing Services and new open space. 107 Identify funding mechanisms for improvements to 3 . 11 3 . 21 3 . 5 Parks, Park Planning & existing and acquisition of new parks, open space and Development, Natural trails, as needed . Areas 108 Create spur trails that better connect neighborhoods 3 . 2 Planning, Parks, Park to parks, natural areas, schools, the Spring Creek Trail , Planning & Development, Mason Trail , and other open space areas . Natural Areas, FC Moves 109 Coordinate among City Departments to align priorities 3 . 3 Parks, Park Planning & for improving access to open space. Development, Natural Areas, Planning, FC Moves, Transfort 110 Continue to add safe pedestrian crossings along 3 . 312 . 1 FC Moves, Traffic arterials to provide residents with more direct access Operations, Planning , to parks and open space. Engineering WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 105 • Action • Policies • • • 111 Coordinate with ditch companies to allow for 3 . 4 Planning, Development & appropriate access along ditches . Transportation 112 Remove obstacles for wildlife movement along 3,41 3 . 71 3 . 8 Planning ditches, including the replacement of old fencing with wildlife fencing, as appropriate . 113 Coordinate with the Parks, Park Planning and 3 . 5 Stormwater, Park Planning Development, and Stormwater departments to & Development, Planning incorporate a broader range of settings and experiences as part of future work plans for parks in the West Central area . 114 Support the establishment of community gardens 3 . 5 Neighborhood Services, in public areas or areas managed by neighborhood Parks organizations or HOAs . 115 Identify locations (either within existing open space or 3 . 5 Parks, Park Planning & new locations) that could potentially accommodate Development off-leash dog use. 116 Monitor complaints and crime reports in City of Fort 3 . 5 Parks, Natural Areas, Collins parks, natural areas, and along trails to improve Police Services law enforcement and ranger patrols in those areas . 117 Partner with ditch management companies to 3 . 7 Planning, Development & protect and improve wildlife habitat along irrigation Transportation , Natural waterways. Areas 118 Renovate existing stormwater detention areas 3 . 8 Stormwater, Parks, Natural to improve wildlife habitat and aesthetics . Where Areas, Park Planning & appropriate, consider including soft surface trails and Development, Planning other recreational amenities . 119 Identify sections the Spring Creek corridor where 3 . 8 Parks, Natural Areas stormwater management and/or wildlife habitat could be improved . 120 Encourage habitat enhancement on private property 3 . 9 Natural Areas through the Natural Areas Certification and Natural Areas Enhancement Fund programs . 121 Encourage Low Impact Development (LID) techniques 3 . 10 Stormwater as part of new development and capital projects . 122 Regularly review the adequacy of stormwater 3 . 10 Stormwater protection and provide additional stormwater protection where needed . 123 Support neighborhood grant applications that seek to 3 . 11 Neighborhood Services improve parks, open space, and tree canopy within the West Central area . 124 Continue current policies for including street trees as 3 . 11 Planning, Forestry part of all new developments and City capital projects . 125 Identify funding mechanisms for improving habitat 3 . 11 Planning, Forestry, and urban tree canopy on private property. Neighborhood Services 106 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Implementation Summary Implementation Team Ongoing Monitoring & Outreach The City, other public agencies, residents, developers, and private sector groups all play an important role "In order to be effective, planning must not be static in achieving the vision of the West Central Area Plan . but rather always dynamic, incorporating a process of Following adoption of the plan, an interdisciplinary team planning, taking action, checking progress, and acting of City staff will be assembled to coordinate and monitor to change course where needed. " - City Plan, 2011 the implementation of the plan . The responsibilities of this team will include the prioritization of action items, Tracking the implementation of the West Central Area identifying and pursuing potential funding sources, Plan programs and projects is critical to achieving convening work teams for specific action items, and the vision and outcomes outlined in the plan . monitoring the development of new programs and Implementation monitoring is a qualitative exercise, projects . The team should include designated staff tracking public policy and investment actions . The leads from the following City departments : implementation team, outlined above, will ensure that • FC Moves continuous progress occurs to carry out the policies • Engineering Services and action items in the plan . The status of action items • Neighborhood Services will be continually monitored and published in an annual • Planning Services status report, which will be posted to the West Central Area Plan website . The following City departments should also be consulted It is important that the plan remains relevant and adapts or included in the implementation of specific programs over time . The overall effectiveness of the plan will be or projects: evaluated periodically over the next 10 to 15 years, until • Communications & Public Involvement an update to the plan is determined to be necessary. If • Economic Health minor changes or additions are deemed necessary prior • Environmental Services to a major update, the plan may be partially updated as • Forestry needed . • Gardens on Spring Creek Ongoing outreach to residents, developers, and other • Historic Preservation stakeholders is essential to determining the effectiveness • Natural Areas of the plan's action items, projects, and programs at • Operations Services serving the needs of this area and working toward the • Parks vision outlined in the plan . As items are implemented , • Park Planning & Development information should be made available through the • Parking Services City's website, email and mailed notifications, and at • Police Services neighborhood meetings within the West Central area . • Social Sustainability Certain action items may require additional outreach , as • Streets • Traffic Operations necessary. • Transfort • Utilities Services The following external agencies or organizations play a critical role in the implementation of the West Central Area Plan , and should also be consulted or included in the implementation of specific programs or projects : • Colorado State University (CSU) Facilities Department • CSU Off-Campus Life • CSU Police Department • Fort Collins Housing Authority • Poudre School District WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 107 Funding Many of the projects and programs identified in this plan are not currently funded . Implementation of the plan's recommendations will likely be funded in a variety of ways . Some of the potential funding sources for projects and programs are listed below, along with a brief description and indication of which topic area (s) might be most applicable. Table 14. Potential Funding Sources source Description M Applicability General Fund The City's General Fund could be a funding source, primarily through the All (City) Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) process used to develop the City's two-year budget. The current budget is set for 2015- 16 and includes several projects that could provide funding for projects and programs within the West Central area . Key examples include: • Bicycle Infrastructure Investments • Pedestrian Sidewalk and Americans with Disabilities Act Compliance Program • Safe Routes to School Strategic Traffic Infrastructure Program • Bridge Replacements and Maintenance Program • Neighborhood Revitalization Projects • Traffic Calming Study and Infrastructure Program The process for the 2017- 18 budget will begin in 2016. Keep Fort Collins Fort Collins voters approved a 0 . 85 percent sales tax initiative, Keep Fort All Great (City) Collins Great (KFCG), to provide funding for city projects . KFCG funds projects in many different categories, including fire, police, transportation and streets, and parks . KFCG funds are typically allocated through the City's Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) process . Voter-Approved Fort Collins currently has a capital improvement tax in place, the latest in All Sales Tax a series of such taxes beginning in 1973 . The current tax is set to expire at Initiative (City) the end of 2015 . The City Council has adopted Resolution 2015-012, placing an extension of the current tax on the April 7, 2015, municipal election ballot. Several of the projects currently included in the Capital Improvement Program proposal could provide funding for projects and programs within the West Central area, if the sales tax extension is approved by voters . Key examples include: • Arterial Intersection Improvements • Pedestrian Sidewalk/Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Compliance — Safe Routes to Everywhere • Bicycle Plan Implementation • Bicycles Infrastructure Improvements — Safe Routes to Everywhere • Bus Stop Improvements — Safe Routes to Everywhere • Bike/ Ped Grade Separated Crossings Fund • Arterial Intersection Improvements Fund • Implementing Nature in the City • Gardens on Spring Creek Visitor's Center Expansion If the current sales tax renewal passes, it will last for ten-years; subsequent capital improvement programs funded by voter-approved sales taxes could be additional sources of funding in the future. 108 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Implementation Summary ApplicabilitySource Description Art in Public Art in Public Places (APP) encourages and enhances artistic expression All Places (City) throughout the city and as part of new development projects . City capital projects with a budget greater than $250, 000 must designate 1 % of their budget to providing public art. The program could be applied to enhance neighborhood identity and placemaking within the West Central Area . Innovation Fund The Innovation Fund is an internal grant program open to all City All (City) employees . Proposed projects may be implemented by any City department. Submissions are accepted once a year during the application period , and proposals may not exceed $30,000 . Natural Areas For projects designed to enhance or restore private or public natural areas Open Space Enhancement in Fort Collins . Examples of projects might include native tree and shrub Networks Fund (City) plantings, removal of exotic pest trees, wetland restoration , or native grassland revegetation . Applications for enhancement funds are accepted each fall . Neighborhood For projects designed to enhance or restore private natural areas or public All Grants Program lands, other than those managed by the Natural Areas Department, in Fort (City) Collins . Street Oversizing Fort Collins collects transportation impact fees through developer Transportation , Fund (City) contributions in order to finance the Street Oversizing program for Land Use & collectors and arterials . Neighborhood Character Improvement Municipalities have the option of raising funds for special projects by All Districts implementing improvement districts . Improvement districts overlay specific parts of the city that stand to benefit from the new project. Land owners within the district often pay either additional property taxes or special assessments . While cities can propose improvement districts, they must then be approved by landowners within the district boundaries . State and Federal Several recent large-scale transportation projects in Fort Collins have All Grants received state and federal funds, including the MAX Bus Rapid Transit and North College Avenue Improvement projects . These projects received grants because they will increase mobility and enhance alternative transportation methods . One major source of federal funds is the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) section of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21 st Century Act (MAP-21 ) . Another potential state-funded option would be Funding Advancement for Surface Transportation & Economic Recovery (FASTER) grant money. The FASTER program provides funding for large capital purchases that have significant regional impacts . Funds are awarded on a two-year cycle. Other federal grant funding sources may include: • FASTER Safety Program • Hazard Elimination Program (HES) • Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) Program • Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program • Surface Transportation Program (STP) Metro Grants • Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) • Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grants • Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Smart Growth Grants • Housing and Urban Development (HUD) programs WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 109 This page intentionally left blank 110 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN L m E cn W O C.) x a This page intentionally left blank Appendix A - Community Engagment Summary The following appendix summarizes the various community outreach events and activities that occurred throught the West Central Area Plan development process . The following summaries are included here : Community Engagement 1 . Listening Sessions Summary (March-April 2014) 2 . Neighborhood Walking Tours Summary (April -May 2014) 3 . WikiMap Summary (March- May 2014) 4 . Visioning Events Summary ( May-June 2014) 5 . Fall 2014 Outreach Summary (September-October 2014) 6 . Prospect Corridor Survey Summary ( November- December 2014) 7 . Draft Plan Comments Summary (February- March 2015) Stakeholder Committee 8 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting # 1 - Summary 9 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting #2 - Summary 10 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting #3 - Summary 11 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting #4 - Summary 12 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting # 5 - Summary 13 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting # 6 - Summary This page intentionally left blank O ■ � L CA a O 0 cn CL E O cn CM) Q CSU On - Campus Stadium ' The High Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (HMN) District (located immediately south of the stadium site) is intended to be a setting for higher density In December 2014, the CSU Board of Governors approved multi-family housing and group quarter residential the development of a new stadium, to be constructed on uses (dormitories , fraternities , sororities , etc . ) the CSU Main Campus . A wide range of concerns and closely associated with , and in close proximity to, comments related to the stadium have been collected the Colorado State University Main Campus . Per throughout the West Central Area Plan process . Below the Land Use Code, any private sector development is a summary of considerations and recommendations would be held to the maximum allowable off-site for the new CSU stadium, as they relate to the various lighting spillage into the entire HMN zone of 0 . 1 foot- topic areas of the West Central Area Plan . candle . If illumination levels from the stadium are not mitigated, potential re-development of this area Land Use & Neighborhood would be negatively impacted . Character • The glare from sports lighting impacts a driver's ability to distinguish objects and impairs overall Noise visibility. If it is discovered that the glare created by • Based on noise studies provided by CSU , the stadium lighting would be problematic, then light anticipated decibel levels during football games and level reductions or other mitigation measures should concert events would exceed that which is allowed be implemented . by the City Code for all nearby residential zone Additional massing along the south end of the districts (maximum of 55 dBA between 7 : 00 a . m . stadium would have the benefit of shielding nearby and 8: 00 p . m .) . The impact of noise on residents in properties from light spillage, glare, and noise. all directions of the stadium needs to be adequately Safety, Aesthetics & Waste Management addressed through the design of the stadium and Measures should be taken to address issues related event management. to tailgating activities in nearby neighborhoods . • A design change that raises the wall on the south Tailgating should be directed to approved locations . end of the stadium is recommended to more Tailgating in neighborhoods should be limited to effectively lower the off-site decibels impacting the the extent possible, and public nuisance violations neighborhoods to the south . Adjustments could also should be swiftly enforced to prevent large outdoor be made to the loud speaker arrangement to better gatherings . direct sound away from neighborhoods . As people travel through the neighborhoods near • Over the long term, music concerts have the potential the stadium, both before and after football games of creating more disturbances for nearby residents and other events , there is an increased potential than football games . The plan recommends that CSU for disruptive behavior. Police patrols and law enter into a formal agreement with the City of Fort enforcement presence should be increased within Collins regarding the number of concerts per year neighborhoods before, during , and after events to and sound management for such events . If concerts prevent and address disruptions . are not an important part of stadium programming, Tailgating activities and pedestrian traffic through consider agreeing to hold concerts only on the neighborhoods may result in a significant amount of granting of a special use permit from the City as a trash left behind in the street, along sidewalks, and prerequisite for holding a concert. in yards . Neighborhood clean- up activities should • The plan recommends that CSU establish a time- be coordinated immediately following events to certain conclusion for concerts and other evening mitigate impacts . Outreach should be targeted at events . CSU students and other event patrons to prevent • Monitor sound levels as events are occurring to such issues to the extent possible. adjust sound management in real-time in response to CSU should make significant efforts to improve issues that arise, in conjunction with Neighborhood communication and coordination with adjacent Services, Police Services, and other City staff. neighborhoods for football games and other events . ' ighting The City of Fort Collins , CSU , and neighborhood residents should be mutually viewed as partners in preventing and mitigating the impacts of stadium events on neighborhood character. B 2 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN CSU On -Campus Stadium Transportation & Mobility Transit Operational Plan Implement enhanced transit service to reduce the • Given the tremendous expense and feasibility need for stadium attendees to drive through the challenges of infrastructure construction , it is West Central area . prudent to address as many needs as possible As many as 3, 000 parking spaces may be used for through operational enhancements (such as a major event. Many of those spaces will be at the additional transit service), and multi-modal traffic south campus, tennis courts, or Natural Resources management . This will require a comprehensive Research Center (NRRC), so shuttles will be needed plan that includes outreach, education, detailed between parking and the stadium . parking information, transportation demand Traffic Impacts management, and gameday operational plans for Even with enhanced transit service and a robust all modes . implementation of traffic management strategies, • Use variable message signs prior to events to there are areas around campus that will be critical suggest alternate routes before and after stadium "pinch points" for the mobility of stadium attendees events . and nearby residents . These are areas that require Parking Impacts infrastructure changes to accommodate the • For potential off-campus parking in area additional bike, pedestrian, and vehicular traffic . neighborhoods, consider expanding and broader In addition to major events (sellouts) , it's also use of the City's Residential Parking Permit important to consider the non-capacity events that Program (RP3) to mitigate stadium-related parking will occur at the stadium on a much more regular basis . Some of those may not have dedicated impacts . traffic control management and the transportation • Residents of neighborhoods near the CSU campus impacts need to be accommodated primarily with are concerned about gameday parking on residential on-the-ground infrastructure . streets . The City has implemented a Residential . Determine the necessary infrastructure Parking Permit Program (RP3) to help address this improvements needed , identify costs, and issue. Currently, there are three neighborhoods in determine who pays for the improvements the program (Spring Court, Sheely, and Mantz. ) By . There will be a need to accommodate increased the time the stadium is built, it is likely that several bicycle and pedestrian traffic, particularly crossing additional neighborhoods will be added . The RP3 Prospect and Shields, as well as east-west travel to requires a permit to park in a residential permit zone . and from the stadium Only residents of the zone are allowed to obtain Designate recommended bicyclist and pedestrian permits . Incorporating a more proactive approach routes to ensure safety and to minimize disruption with signs and enforcement officers may be needed in residential neighborhoods for gamedays (and other non-football events, as well) . r ,P y 1 We i' WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 B 3 Open Space Networks Prospect Corridor rvoise df Lignung In December 2014, the CSU Board of Governors approved • As described in the Land Use & Neighborhood the development of a new stadium , to be constructed Character chapter, both sporting and other events on the CSU Main Campus . Below is a summary of at the stadium will likely result in significant noise considerations and recommendations for the new CSU and lighting impacts . Noise and light pollution stadium, as they relate to the Prospect Corridor. both impact environmental quality, and the City of Prospect may experience an increase in traffic on Fort Collins has enacted a number of policies and event days. The Event Management Operational Plan regulations that seek to minimize these impacts should consider temporary route adjustments and citywide. Measures should be taken to minimize the noise and lighting impacts of the stadium beyond incorporate ways for the Sheely/Wallenberg residents the CSU campus . to be able to get into and out of neighborhood (only • As described in Land Use & Neighborhood Character, accessed via Prospect for vehicles) . a sound wall could be erected on the south end of the Incorporate wayfinding and infrastructure stadium to reduce impacts. Such a wall could include improvements to accommodate increased bicycle live plant material as a feature to soften the mass of and pedestrian traffic, particularly crossing Prospect the wall and provide an open space amenity within and Shields, which re-emphasizes the importance of the stadium site. an underpass of Prospect at Center. Construction & Operation Consider ways of handling game day traffic on • The use of sustainable building materials and Prospect and Lake through a combination of practices is strongly encouraged to minimize impacts infrastructure improvements and operations to the natural environment. management. • Sustainable operation and management practices, such as water and energy efficiency measures , should be employed to minimize impacts to the natural environment. • Protect the existing CSU arboretum and Plant Environmental Research Center (PERC) facilities to the maximum extent possible during construction . Stormwater Management • Any impacts to the stormwater system created by the construction or operation of the stadium should be fully mitigated . Improvements that address existing stormwater issues should be made whenever possible . T y B 4 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN CSU On -Campus Stadium Public Input Wait until the stadium decision is made - no need to do it over. (Question 19) • Please oppose the new stadium plans ! ! This is bad for The following section summarizes the public input the West Central area in many ways . The transportation received regarding the Colorado State University (CSU) difficulties seen now will magnify many times over on-campus stadium that was approved by the CSU with this disastrous project . I live just Southwest of Board of Governors in December 2014. Comments Drake and Shields and I work on campus (but am not shared through online surveys during the West an employee of CSU) . Please --this affects me greatly! Central Area Plan process are compiled below. When (Question 19) possible, the comments are stated verbatim . Spelling The huge impact will be the CSU Stadium, if it is built. and grammatical corrections were made to improve This will totally foul traffic in this area , especially readability, as needed . Prospect. (Question 19) Additional community input related to the development I am also not opposed to the stadium if done right. of an on-campus stadium, as compiled by a Community (Question 19) Design Development Advisory Committee (CDDAC) can be found at the following website: http:// The area is great and we have most what we need here. csudesignadvisorycommittee. com/. The area is a focus for CSU and we should be cognizant of the fact that is the way it is . Complaining about living May 2014 Visioning Survey near the campus is counterproductive and those that do should vote with their feet. I have lived/worked near • Traffic flow on Prospect, esp . if new stadium is built at a university since 1980 and it is a great benefit, not the CSU . (Question 2) opposite. Go Rams, build the new stadium ! (Question • Parking for residents will be important especially 19) with over-crowded stadium parking , student housing, It's pretty pointless to go very far on this process etc . Make parking part of builders ' responsibilities . until we know about the proposed football stadium . (Question 6) (Question 19) • Trying to get on and off of the CSU campus via Prospect October 2014 Online Survey / September 2014 Rd . BIG delays on Whitcomb and Prospect every day between 4-5 . . . can't imagine how everyone is going to Open House Questionnaires leave campus if they build the stadium in that area . . . . With French Field events, Rolland Moore events, The is anyone doing any studies on the evacuation time Grove block parties, CSU 's new stadium and the Ex- via car to get 35, 000 students plus faculty/staff off Garden's Amphitheater how will we even hear ourselves the campus for emergency or when Tony Frank calls think? No less find a parking place . (Question 3) a snow day at 10 am? (Question 7) • Avoid adding businesses and activities that would ' You talk about natural areas but build more apartment increase traffic, such as the proposed CSU on-campus complexes with inadequate parking and talk about stadium . (Question 9) natural areas and now a stadium in an area that does not fit properly in the area . The current stadium has • Concerned about thefts at southwest CSU stadium at more than adequate room for parking . Stop wasting parking lot north of Pineridge. (Question 12) our tax money. (Question 13) • What it doesn 't need is a new CSU stadium located • Moving traffic - especially if the stadium is built . nearby. (Question 15) (Question 17) • Projects such as the proposed CSU on-campus stadium • DO NOT spend taxpayer funds on infrastructure should be avoided , as it would greatly increase traffic improvements for the proposed on-campus stadium ! on Prospect. (Question 15) (Question 20) • Prospect is a travel corridor, but I wouldn't encourage • Do not let the stadium cloud yourjudgment! We don 't higher density traffic due to the fact that there are so want a stadium ! (Question 20) many residences that are on Prospect. This is one . Why is the city wasting money on Prospect planning reason I object to the on-campus stadium proposal . before the fate of the new stadium is known? (Question The infrastructure to handle the additional traffic 20) doesn 't exist and would be difficult to implement . (Question 15) • I am not against the on-campus stadium . (Question 20) • A new stadium nearby would be disastrous for this corridor and should be resisted with every effort possible. (Question 15) • All bets are off for Prospect if CSU stadium happens . (Question 19) • No stadium ! (Question 19) WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 B 5 • We must stop ADDING housing , event centers , HEED CSU AND COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDER shopping centers etc . to this area until the traffic OPPOSITION TO THE STADIUM ON THE MAIN issues are resolved . Prospect is extremely dangerous, CAMPUS, ALREADY HAVING A PERFECTLY GOOD ONE especially from Shields to College. It's difficult to drive ON THE FOOTHILLS CAMPUS, AND THE PHENOMENAL on due to how narrow it is and we are increasing TRAFFIC CONGESTION THAT THERE WOULD BE ON traffic on that road with EVERY project that is done or PROSPECT, COLLEGE, SHIELDS AND BLOCKS AND proposed (Grove, shopping center, housing project at BLOCKS AWAY FROM THE CAMPUS . ALTHOUGH A Hill Pond and Gilgalad , amphitheater at the Gardens, SATURDAY, IT WOULD MAKE RUSH HOUR ON WEEK daycare, CSU parking garages, CSU stadium) . Prospect DAYS LOOK SPARSE AND FLOWING . (Question 5) is already a nightmare and we will drive people AWAY Worried about the traffic snarls, delays with all the foot, from this area if we are not very careful . And MAX does bicycle and bus traffic this plan will create . Then CSU not resolve the problems . No one is going to walk from wants to build their campus stadium that this area a shopping center on Shields and Stuart all the way to cannot handle the increased traffic in will cause . This a Max station . That's not an easy walk either. Walking down Prospect is downright dangerous . Taking the trail city is too congested as it is . NO TO THE STADIUM . is an option until you get to Center where it is OFTEN (Question 5) flooded . Crossing Center is dangerous . Then you have How will a new stadium impact everything we're trying to get across the tracks to get to the Max. So, you can to do? Will a new vision need to include the larger cross at Prospect, again quite dangerous or you can community of football fans stateside? (Question 5) walk all the way down to the bridge. Neither of these The goals are admirable . Will you be able to achieve option are good ones on bikes either. I 'm an avid cyclist these goals if the proposed new stadium is built on and it's not easy getting over that bridge on a bike due Lake? (Question 5) to the sharp turns and no one in their right mind would bike down Prospect. (Question 20) • Prospect needs to stay 2 lanes for each direction otherwise the congestion will be too much - especially • How much can you plan for until you know for certain since the stadium was approved (Question 5) what is going to happen with the proposed football stadium?? (Question 20) I 'm assuming this will be forthe new stadium looking to go in . How do you propose to make travel as effective • Get rid of stadium (Open House questionnaire) if not more along the prospect corridor with the • What considerations are being given to improving the integration of the stadium? (Question 5) Prospect corridor if the new CSU stadium is being built? Be certain there are NO cuts allowed for a new (Open House questionnaire) stadium . Be certain there are NO road modifications Prospect Corridor Online Survey (November to accommodate a new stadium . Do NOT disrupt 2014 Prospect for new water and sewer and electrical for a new stadium . (Question 5) • How much has a possible new stadium been involved 1 assume that this is mainly being done in anticipation in the planning ! (Question 5) for the new stadium? But the intersection of Prospect • 1 support the project, but I am against the construction & Center needs revamping regardless . (Question 5) of a new campus stadium . (Question 5) This is the most difficult, traffic volume wise, so the • No money for on-campus stadium ! (Question 5) City must use its influence to protect surrounding users from an on -campus stadium . The silence so • None will apply if the stadium is built. (Question 5) far has been maddening for me . When committee • The vision will be impaired at all levels by the chair ( McClusky) said CSU does not need to heed construction of an on-campus stadium . (Question 5) surrounding people, I was floored . City let us down . • This just continues to pave the way for stadium traffic . (Question 5) At taxpayer expense (Question 5) Why put all this money into this without knowing about the on-campus stadium in the area . Shouldn't • What are your plans if the stadium is built? (Question 5) CSU be at least partly responsible for upgrades and • Don't let CSU build a main campus stadium (Question improvements here? (Question 5) 5) Movement through the corridor must also be fast . • Should be developed with CSU's proposed on-campus Anything that is done to the corridor should NOT make stadium in mind (Question 5) it less efficient to move through . ( Especially with a stadium going in) (Question 5) B 6 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN CSU On -Campus Stadium • We just wonder if all this attention to this particular Nothing is attractive about long traffic backups along area is because of the proposed stadium? Granted this Prospect with the advent of MAX and the pedestrian section of road leaves much to be desired in terms of crossings on either side of the tracks and at Center needed renovations, but since we happen to oppose Ave. Not a good way to impress visitors and tourists, the stadium, we wonder what the underlying reasons particularly the new stadium is added to the mix. Put in are that so much attention is being given to this those underpasses before it becomes an even bigger particular area . It is already pretty much a nightmare issue . (Question 8) at certain times of the day. The improvements to this Graded down because City is silent when McClusky corridor would be welcome, but the addition of stadium reiterated every meeting that CSU need not be traffic even with improvements will just make it a big responsible for on-campus stadium traffic, not only nightmare all over again . What is the honest answer? Is game day. (Question 9) the stadium the reason for the concern to improve this corridor or is city street improvement for the citizens This plan likely will not accommodate the additional of Fort Collins the reason? (Question 5) traffic generated by an on-campus stadium . Given the • If/when they build the on campus stadium is it wise to likelihood of CSU proceeding with their plans, does this have the built up medians? (Question 7) mean the new design will be effectively outdated within a year or two of completion . (Question 9) • Bus not mentioned . Will bus stop in traffic lane? What The stadium would completely negate this positive about quantity of traffic-- long back-ups at rush hour, vision and plan for both CSU and the community. lunch times, and due to trains and games at Moby (Question 10) and now soon on - campus stadium ? Sometimes intersections are blocked . How can emergency vehicles On-campus stadium bad idea not sufficiently claimed get through? (Question 7) during on-campus stadium debate, the 1 % is ignoring • I keep thinking about how this will be changed with the the 99% as usual by the rich . (Question 10) stadium and how it will be affected then if the stadium Although it seems premature to make these decisions is really being put in . This is a long term thought . If now that it looks like CSU will build a new Football the stadium does not go in , I would score higher on all Stadium off Lake in this corridor. (Question 10) areas . (Question 7) • A new on-campus stadium should require truly major • Wow! Neat! However, tell Tony Frank and the CSU BOG financial contributions from CSU . (Question 11 ) that if they want to continue to pursue Frankenfield at . Be prepared for the stadium . (Question 11 ) Grahamdoggle Stadium, they need to be prepared to get approval for a funding for a second level on Prospect t NOT allow a decent plan to be disrupted by a new s or high-speed monorail from Foothills Campus to stadium on campus (Question 11 ) 1 -25, which would help with weekday congestion , too . • How can any decisions be made before the stadium (Question 7) decision? (Question 11 ) • These ratings are if there is NO on campus stadium . • See previous comment about impacts of on-campus If the stadium is built, I think there will be a lot more stadium plans . (Question 11 ) traffic on game days and this will need to be addressed . They look good . All that would change if CSU builds (Question 7) a new stadium . Traffic and noise will be off the chart. • If the on-campus stadium is built the Prospect corridor (Question 11 ) improvements will be extremely more challenging and . Don 't think Prospect is solved . Looks better, but still difficult to achieve . (Question 7) inadequate to meet demand . I am not sure there is a • Ratings depend on how heavy the traffic is - whether solution given right of way restrictions, but I think it there is a new stadium north of Lake Street! (Question will still be marginal even before the new housing and 7) the stadium pushes it well below marginal . Lake looks • Seems that 10-foot traffic lanes are very minimal for significantly improved (Question 11 ) such a busy corridor and will be even more critical when What if CSU builds an on-campus stadium? Will the the stadium is built. (Question 7) current designs be adequate? This is a big unknown . • The on-campus stadium makes this plan moot on If not in the near future, CSU will eventually build an on game days . City needs to rebel when McClusky says campus stadium and from what I have been reading it CSU is exempt from taking responsibility for causing will likely be sooner than later. (Question 11 ) serious game day and multiple ceremonial activities to Acquisition of ROW is going to be expensive ! Like pay for the expensive stadium on land needed for CSU having a bit more space in the driving lanes . Not sure future expansion for daily needs . (Question 7) about mixing ped and bike traffic on the sidewalks . • A great vision statement is out the window, however, if Both will need some updating when the new stadium stadium on main campus goes through . (Question 8) is built. Lake is way too narrow, even in this scenario to accommodate game-day traffic . City staff report on the traffic impacts is way too optimistic. (Question 11 ) WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 B-7 • It appears that the design will be driven and constrained by the proposed CSU stadium . CSU should buy and donate land along Spring Creek between Shields and Centre Ave for the city to build another east west artery for traffic . CSU should pay for changes related to cost and traffic burden caused by the stadium . (Question 11 ) • Have these designs taken into account the likelihood of an on-campus stadium? It would be foolish to design and build this corridor only to have it be insufficient to handle event-related traffic . It seems likely also that doing the improvements may need to involve the purchase of additional right-of-way along the corridor, including purchase of single family residential properties to facilitate widening of the street section to accommodate adequate transportation improvements to meet long-term future needs . (Question 11 ) • Traffic is going to be a big issue throughout the coming years as CSU grows and if the stadium ever action moves on campus then traffic will be a nightmare . Unless 6 lanes can be squeezed in . (Question 11 ) • What is the university's contribution to this costly upgrade? It primarily serves students . It will make the stadium a more likely outcome and it is a burden to taxpayers (Question 11 ) • A campus stadium would create congestion and increased danger to the Prospect corridor. It should not be built! (Question 11 ) • If the CSU new stadium plan is approved for the on -campus location , review these plans to best accommodate large crowds during those times . Try to have temporary route adjustments prepared for such events . (Question 11 ) • With the stadium now being an initiative to go forward , I would like to see more thought given to making Lake Street the main access point for the campus and stadium . (Question 11 ) B 8 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN 0 0 CM) W MCI CM) This page intentionally left blank Appendix C - Existing Conditions Maps The maps in this appendix describe the existing conditions within the boundary of the West Central Area Plan . Additional existing and future conditions information related to transportation and the Prospect Corridor can be found in Appendix D. The following maps are included here : Land Use & Neighborhood Character 1 . Population (by census block) 2 . Percentage of Non-White Population (by census block) 3 . Neighborhoods 4 . Structure Plan (City Plan) 5 . Zoning 6 . Land Use 7 . Current Development Proposals, Under-Utilized Land , and Vacant Land 8 . Maximum Building Height 9 . Age of Buildings 10 . Historic Features 11 . Code Violations Transportation & Mobility 12 . Master Street Plan 13 . Pedestrian Facilities Open Space Networks 14 . Schools, Natural Areas, Parks, and Trails 15 . Floodplains and Floodways 16 . Drainage Basins 17 . Proposed Stormwater Projects This page intentionally left blank c O ■ � O L LL ca Lb O Q. i x d a This page intentionally left blank This page intentionally left blank W *+ rML 0 0 0 L am LLJ a This page intentionally left blank OProspect Corridor West Prospect Potential Median Concepts Potential locations of medians along West Prospect Road, between Shields Street and Taft Hill Road. Example of street retrofitting opportunities along arterial roads. Access point, typ Planted median, typ c o ' c 0 Cc ? w tt t t t t t CO m � 0 Prospect Rd ` - - - - - - - ' o � v ' -o >N > 1 Access point, typ Planted median, typ 3' Paved median 0 ' o Q ¢ o ' N ° � C 3 ' U m T t t t t t t t t N Prospect Rd c N aA�y Concrete median Planted understory Median trees Travel Lane Concrete median Curb and gutter Upright/Columnar Curb and gutter V - - - - - - Potential Median Enlargement Legend 1 Potential Median t Access Points WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 3 OProspect Corridor This page intentionally left blank WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 4 W W C L 4) Q L 0 L L 0 CM) V 0 L am c LL a a Q This page intentionally left blank Appendix F - Prospect Corridor Alternatives Table of Contents Prospect Road — Alternative A — "All About Pedestrians" F-1 Prospect Road — Alternative B — " Boulevard" F-3 Prospect Road — Alternative C — "Complete Street" F-5 Prospect Road — Multi-Modal Performance Measures F-7 Prospect Road — Conceptual Design F-8 Prospect Road — View Looking West Near Prospect Lane F-10 Prospect Road — Interim Condition F-11 Prospect Road — Removed/Proposed Trees F-12 Lake Street — Alternative A F-13 Lake Street — Alternative B F-14 Lake Street — Alternative C F-15 Lake Street — Multi-Modal Performance Measures F-16 Lake Street — Conceptual Design F-17 Lake Street — View Looking West Near CSU Parking Garage F-19 This page intentionally left blank L m E cn W O C.) x a This page intentionally left blank Appendix A - Community Engagment Summary The following appendix summarizes the various community outreach events and activities that occurred throught the West Central Area Plan development process . The following summaries are included here : Community Engagement 1 . Listening Sessions Summary ( March -April 2014) 2 . Neighborhood Walking Tours Summary (April - May 2014) 3 . WikiMap Summary (March- May 2014) 4 . Visioning Events Summary ( May-June 2014) 5 . Fall 2014 Outreach Summary (September-October 2014) 6 . Prospect Corridor Survey Summary ( November- December 2014) 7 . Draft Plan Comments Summary ( February- March 2015) Stakeholder Committee 8 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting # 1 - Summary 9 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting #2 - Summary 10 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting # 3 - Summary 11 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting #4 - Summary 12 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting # 5 - Summary 13 . Stakeholder Committee Meeting # 6 - Summary West Central Fort of Area Planf� West Central Area Plan — Listening Sessions Summary March 26 — April 3, 2014 Background The West Central Area Plan ( WCAP ) process began in March 2014 . The purpose of the WCAP update is to revisit and refine the original MULBERRY ST vision and goals, policy directives, and implementation actions from the 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan based on emerging issues WELIZABETHST and trends . The updated plan will provide a new overall , community- supported vision for the plan area , as well as a clear roadmap for implementing that vision . The plan is anticipated to be presented to PROSPECT RD Council for consideration for adoption in early 2015 . 0 0 o J F' Listening Sessions Overview 0 0 w Four listening sessions were held between March 26 and April 3 to Q c o U) gain insight into the character and features that define the West DRAKE RD :2E Central area , along with potential areas of improvement . The purpose of these meetings was to elicit feedback from the community about WEST CENTRAL AREA the West Central area , including ideas and concerns related to land PLAN BOUNDARIES use, transportation , housing, urban design , natural systems, and quality of life amenities . Date Session • • March 26 6 : 00 - 8 : 00 p . m . Westminster Presbyterian Church 60 March 27 6 : 00 - 8 : 00 p . m . Durrell Seminar Room ( CSU Campus ) 22 March 31 6 : 00 - 8 : 00 p . m . Drake Centre 32 April 3 6 : 00 - 8 : 00 p . m . Plymouth Congregational Church 64 Total 178 The listening sessions began with an introduction to the West Central Area Plan update, an overview of public involvement activities, and a roadmap for the public engagement process moving forward . Participants were asked to break into groups to discuss different broad topic areas, including : the overall West Central area , the Prospect Road Corridor specifically, and the Master Plan for the Colorado State University ( CSU ) Main and South campuses . Each group had access to maps associated with the topic area and was encouraged to share any thoughts, concerns, or questions they had related to the topic . Participants could either relay those thoughts to staff facilitators at each table, record their thoughts on the map, or provide staff with their thoughts on comment sheets passed out at the beginning of the listening session . Each group had roughly 25 minutes to discuss the topic before moving to one of the other topic areas . Page 2 of 4 Theme Descriptions West Central Area : The purpose of this table was to garner feedback about the West Central Area as a whole . City staff sought guidance on how to best preserve desirable features of the West ', i ■ Central area while still allowing the area to ■ respond to changing conditions, new growth pressures, and emerging needs . , o Prospect Road Corridor : The Prospect Road Corridor from Shields Street to College Avenue is one of the most constrained arterial roadway sections in Fort Collins . The purpose of this table was to understand the nature of the corridor' s challenges, listen to resident and commuter concerns, and brainstorm ideas for improvement . CSU Master Plan : Representatives from CSU ' s Facilities Management department gave participants an overview of how the university plans to expand over the next 10 to 15 years and how the plans for the Main and South Campuses relate to the surrounding neighborhoods . Get Involved Table : The success of the West Central Area Plan will depend on the quality of engagement with those impacted by the plan , including residents, property owners, business owners, employees, developers, and other interested groups . The purpose of the 'Get Involved ' table was to get participants' feedback on how to best communicate and engage with them throughout the planning process . Attendees had the opportunity to sign up for neighborhood walking tours, comment on their preferred event types and communication methods, and apply to be on the Stakeholder Committee , which will work with the City to guide the planning process . What We Heard — Key Themes The project team heard a number of concerns, opportunities, and comments during the group discussions and on comment forms . The following list of key themes summarizes the ideas and comments shared by participants at each table over the course of the four listening sessions . The West Central Area • Spillover parking from high density developments is a problem that needs to be addressed • New multi -family developments are not providing enough parking • Many of the intersections along Shields are not bike/ pedestrian friendly ( Plum , Elizabeth , Lake , Laurel and Prospect in particular) • Protect historically significant buildings in the West Central area and along Prospect Road • Preserve the character of existing single -family neighborhoods • New multi -family developments should match the character of the neighborhoods in which they are built as best as possible Page 3 of 4 • Ensure the area still has access to open space as more development occurs • CSU needs to take a leadership role in mitigating the impacts their developments have on the surrounding neighborhoods • Construct pedestrian overpasses/underpasses at high volume intersections around CSU such as Plum , Elizabeth , and Center • Need adequate bicycle and pedestrian connections that allow people to avoid major arterials Prospect Corridor • Many commuters avoid Prospect — altogether because it is too congested and unsafe ! - • The sidewalks are too narrow and make pedestrians feel unsafe • Bicyclists avoid Prospect because of the narrow lanes � , a • Snow gets pushed onto sidewalk during ` ; , the winter time • More bike and pedestrian crossings 3 (, would make Prospect feel safer • Pedestrian and bike traffic should be re - routed to Lake from Prospect • Concern that MAX will add to the congestion on Prospect • More east-west bus routes could help alleviate congestion • Introduce traffic calming measures to enhance safety • Consider a variety of design alternatives, and if right- of-way acquisition is included , address the implications and impacts • High density zoning will bring developments that could add to congestion • Construct pedestrian overpasses/underpasses at Center Ave . CSU Master Plan • CSU is not providing enough parking for students and the result is spillover parking on to neighborhood streets • New developments on campus are adding to congestion on city streets • CSU operates in a bubble and should better consider its impacts on surrounding areas Get Involved At the 'Get Involved ' table, participants were asked how the City can best engage with them throughout the planning process . One of the questions asked was how participants would like to be involved in the West Central Area Plan moving forward through events and other outreach methods . Staff provided a list of potential planning activities and participants put a dot next to their preferred methods of engagement . Below is a summary of responses . Page 4 of 4 How would you like to be involved in the WCAP ? 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 t°NZ47 °�`y �y °��� teat' alb\ r°�y ��ey `��e° °��y - omay �y 0 po e \z �� ` �`' 1•° F°`may �a\�\� o°�� ��`�` ����2 �� %° �4?� ���o� �� `` Q�ey�� ��rQ � �`°may rro�r O ,\� CI V, er0 e ° 09 Participants were also asked about their preferred method of receiving information from the City. Below is a chart showing how people would like to receive correspondence from the city about the West Central Area Plan . What is the best way to reach you ? 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 °t tee; �et� �° O\te °y�`a�a Q o�,co r West Central Fort of Area Planf� West Central Area Plan — Neighborhood Tours Summary April 21 - May 23, 2014 Background The purpose of the West Central Area Plan ( WCAP ) update is to revisit and refine the original vision , goals, policy MULBERRY ST directives, and implementation actions from the 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan based on emerging issues and trends . The updated plan will provide a new community- W ELIZABETHST supported vision for the plan area , as well as a clear roadmap for implementing that vision through policy guidance and a prioritized list of action items . The WCAP PROSPECT RD process began in March 2014 . The plan is anticipated to be presented to Council for consideration for adoption in early o 0 2015 . co J U) Walking Tours Overview 00 � z Twenty walking and bicycling tours were held between April ¢ a:: 0 21 and May 23 to gain insight into how people experience DRAKE RD the West Central Area on a daily basis . The purpose of these tours was to invite community members to lead city staff on a walk through their neighborhood to better understand the WEST CENTRAL AREA specific opportunities and challenges facing each part of the PLAN BOUNDARIES West Central area . Date Session Location Participants April 21 1 : 30 - 3 : 00 p . m . Lexington Green & Village West 3 6 : 30 - 8 : 00 p . m . City Park South 7 12 : 00- 1 : 00 p . m . Prospect Corridor : Shields - College 9 April 22 4 : 00 - 5 : 30 p . m . Red Fox Meadow 8 4 : 15 - 5 : 45 p . m . Lexington Green & Village West 2 6 : 00 - 7 : 30 p . m . Avery Park 3 April 23 12 : 00- 1 : 00 p . m . Centre for Advanced Technology 5 6 : 00 - 7 : 30 p . m . Hill Pond & Gilgalad Way 6 April 24 10 : 00- 11 : 30 a . m . Campus West South 5 12 : 00- 1 : 00 p . m . Sheely, Wallenberg & Landmark 5 8 :00 -9 : 30 a . m . Campus West 3 April 25 2 : 00 - 3 : 30 p . m . Shields : Mulberry - Prospect 2 4 : 00 - 5 : 30 p . m . Campus West 6 April 26 9 : 00- 11 : 00 a . m . Spring Creek Trail - Bike Tour 2 Page 2 of 15 Date SessionLocation . . April 30 12 : 00- 1 : 30 p . m . CSU Campus 5 4 : 00 - 5 : 00 p . m . Campus West & Shields 3 May 1 9 : 00-10 : 30 a . m . CSU Campus 1 May 16 4 : 30-6 :00 p . m . Sheely & Wallenberg 8 May 22 3 :00-5 :00 p . m . Prospect Road & Centre Avenue 2 Shields, Campus West & City Park South — May 23 10 : 00 a . m . - 12 : 00 p . m . 2 Bike Tour Total 87 For many of the tours, neighborhood residents helped develop the tour routes and led the tours in concert with city staff. This helped ensure the routes were indicative of the true character of the neighborhoods and the key issues and features in each distinct area . Each tour lasted one to two hours, depending on the length of the route . Each tour included City staff to record thoughts, questions or concerns voiced by participants on the walking tour . Participants could also record their own notes on comment sheets made available by staff. City staff took note of immediate action items for the City ( nuisance, property maintenance issues, etc . ) , in addition to comments related to longer- range priorities and needs . The more pressing issues will be relayed to the appropriate party, with the goal of resolving immediate issues as soon as possible . In all , there were 87 participants (though some people attended multiple tours ), and hundreds of comments and photos were gathered . What We Heard - Key Themes „ „ _ _ . 12 To get a sense for the character Shields St and conditions of the entire West Central Area , City staff broke the _ planning area into sub - areas . To iCSU the right is a map of the West Central planning area and each of its sub - areas . What follows is ' a summary of the recurring „ themes from the walking and bicycling tours in each sub-area . 6 The recurring themes have been lap organized into three major topic areas : Land Use & Character, Transportation , and Open Space4 Ova r_ Networks . Please note that for \j(J some sub - areas, there were fewer comments than for others . _ 13 Spring Creek Trail Page 3 of 15 Area 1 - City Park South rip 13 Opp M Land Use & Character • Diverse architectural styles adds to character of area 1 • Incompatibility of new multi-family i• - .� � � it Vie -0 711 developments with existing single-family character ( architecture, height, setbacks, w density, lack of parking) • Property maintenance concerns ELIZABETH • Need for better screening of trash receptacles • Desire for more proactive nuisance enforcement • Support for U +2 and greater accountability for landlords rr a ' •a Transportation • Sidewalks are constrained and in need of repairs ( narrow, discontinuous in places ) • Curb paint, bike lane striping, and crosswalks in need of repainting • Need for traffic calming and improved sight lines on Crestmore • Bicycle/pedestrian safety concerns on City Park Ave . • Preference for detached sidewalks on Mulberry • Need for more proactive traffic and parking planning/management • Need for east-to-west bicycling alternatives to West Elizabeth and north - to-south connections to Spring Creek and Poudre Trails • Dead ends increase traffic on major streets Open Space Networks • Hazardous trees overhanging sidewalks ` • Safety and fence maintenance at ditches • Need for better connectivity across ditches Page 4 of 15 Area 2 - Campus West North Fill Land Use & Character UJ • Preference for student apartments near campus, Ui rather than rental homes in neighborhood , BIRCH • Property maintenance lacking for both rental 2 homes and apartment complexes • City ordinances need to be more strictly enforced • Need better education for new renters each year • CSU should play a role in reducing impacts of student rentals on neighborhoods in this area • Focus on preserving and enhancing what is already present • Preference for apartments that are set back from the roadway and include more open space • Need to protect affordability of neighborhood - _ - • The mixed use development at City Park Ave . and West Elizabeth has been well - received and would be a good model for other redevelopment - a 1 Transportation • Concerns about parking and traffic impacts from �1 planned multi -family developments • Need for safer routes and connections for bikes • The major streets in the area ( Shields, Elizabeth and Plum ) are constrained , which is challenging for all modes navigating the area • Crossing arterials is unsafe ( Shields, Elizabeth, Mulberry) ' = • Need a comprehensive approach to spillover parking and parking requirements for new � I I development T • City Park Ave . needs improvements as bike route • Concerns about sight distances around parked cars near intersections Open Space Networks • Stormwater drainage concerns in some locations • Encourage more trees and landscaping - urban forest canopy • Discourage trees that pose maintenance/safety issues ( e . g. , Siberian elms ) Page 5 of 15 Area 3 = Avery Park Single-story character defines the 40 0 neighborhood The neighborhood generally feels safe Chronic code compliance and • C � � - Land Use & Character " neighborhood problems (visi trash cans, newspaper accumulation, lack of landscaping and property maintenance ) .. � - . ate ' • ' - � � - - � . T . • - • • • Park and �• . t Z along • • • s ( e .g ., Springfield ) Transportation Traffic calming needed on Constitution and " ►tom. Castlerock More frequent street sweeping is needed to clear away • • chip seal , broken glass • other debris Gaps in sidewalk - • Existing sidewalks are often too narrow to safely use ?� - - - - - - - � Open Avery it . amenity - • neighborhood Dead trees in the park and along the ditch �5 . present hazar Street sweeping into gutters and/or lack of sweeping creates flooding issues .�43a 9 v Page . of 15 Campus • • • Use & Character1 ' Proximity to Rolland Moore, schools, services, ' , R3FfFZX and other destinations is the best feature of the neighborhood ""• ' 1 • � yam . 9 The diverse mix of people in the neighborhood is importantO ► 1 v I - r • 9 Concern about conversion of owner-occupied homes to rentals by investors 9 Issues with management and maintenance of rental 1 properties .1 � • S L Persistent code compliance issues, especially with annual rental turnover (trash cans on the street, noise, parties, congestion from parked cars, etc . ) Need for a grocery store and other local services Lack of maintenance of vacant properties Support for a police substation in or near the neighborhood Desire for • re cohesive character among Campus West shopping centers Transportation 9 Spillover parking is an issue and could get worse with the new '� Iq•�'. 4M��7 � 1 developments; • for a new Intersectionsapproach to parking management along Shields difficult to • concerns about crossing 9 Interest in a grade-separated crossing ( under/overpass ) across Shields Right along conflicts between • bikes J �W Open Space I Landscaping at intersections needs to be trimmed to maintain sight linesand protect sa _ Page 7 of 15 R Area 5 - Prospect Corridor VU Ual Land Use & Character Uj • Concerns about new developments' 7 impact on existing traffic and parking issues in the area • Preserve, repurpose, and enhance historic properties while integrating with new development • Noise and safety concerns 4 • Preference for uses that generate less rA_ traffic or divert traffic from Prospect in new development • Ensure that zoning requirements are appropriate for the area • Concerns about impact of a new stadium on the corridor Transportation • Re-configure Prospect to either be AN more pedestrian/ bike friendly or direct other modes to safer routes • • _ • Consider Lake Street as a complement ■ M to Prospect • Create additional bike and pedestrian connections between Prospect and La ke s _ • Concern about long traffic delays due to a combination of factors (trains, MAX, campus events ) • Ensure new developments provide adequate parking � '' • Access management challenges, particularly along south side of Prospect • Provide safe east-west connections to MAX • Improve wayfinding for safe walking/ biking routes • Improve safety of intersections/ crossings Page 8 of 15 Area 6 — West Prospect/West Stuart Land Use & Character PROSPECT • Desirable location , centrally located within the 6 city - _ - 9 • Shopping center at Prospect and Shields seemst ., I i b3-rUART ST go 00 = inactive and underutilized ; inconvenient to enter/exit; lack of business signage • Red Fox Meadows : quiet, well - maintained neighborhood with a balanced mix of owners/ renters and sense of community and 8 stability • Enforcement of noise and occupancy l ordinances has limited parties and other '� 1 nuisances Transportation • Eliminate gaps in sidewalks, or add crosswalks in areas where sidewalks are missing on one "f side of the street _ - • Bus stops are convenient, but more frequent service is desired ( especially in the summer) • Red Fox Meadow neighborhood is under- parked, and visitor and spillover parking makes parking an issue ` M, 9 • Consider park-and- rides or shared parking in underutilized shopping centers • Crosswalk at Prospect and Heatheridge is a good model for pedestrian crossings `I ' M Open Space Networksy' • Red Fox Meadows Natural Area is a great .c amenity, " hidden treasure" • Issues with off- leash dogs and clean up j • Ditches offer a nice natural feature in the area , • Stormwater improvements have been beneficial _ in this area ""� Page 9 of 15 Area 7 — Sheely, Wallenberg & Fn . . � . . . Landmark Land Use & Character Jim & Pride in historic character of the Sheely rW neighborhood • Concerns about negative impacts from STUART ST. the proposed stadium • RP3 has been very effective at reducing spillover parking from campus • New multi-family developments in the area pose compatibility challenges; new y , housing should complement the Nil character of the neighborhood . . ,'� r • Interest in a small grocery store, ;+ ■ w services, offices, and/or well-designed y ' multi-family development on vacant land to the west of Sheely/Wallenberg Transportation • Missing sidewalks in some areas • Difficult to enter/exit the neighborhood on Prospect due to high traffic volumes • Would like better access to city trails r from the neighborhood Open Space Networks � . �` • Emphasize open space and recreation a4k , opportunities as part of new 0. - developments - �' _ * - • Area is prone to flooding due to drainage issues • Need for safer and more convenient access to Rolland Moore Park �� • Desire for a connection to the Spring Creek trail on the east end of the 4 neighborhood • Desire for a small dog park • • • eti f 7 - . �-- VUART ST. 7 • , i tiO• / / ♦ I I FFiE1 s , 1 dId Q f s 'S4i►� ? 1, O was - • • • • • • • • - • • - - .',t ' ', =s ' . �; '1UI DRAKE RD.44 - ri o� el • . �. ilp ss�d 4 n iY • - - • - - • - • - - - - - t,i � � rip �r� i M Y 1 � '.3y Page 11 of 15 SHEELY DR Area 9 - Hill Pond & Gilgalad Way MLLENBERG DR Land Use & Character • Preference for ranch -style homes • New development should be compatible with the existing residential character • The neighborhood is stable, quiet, and centrally located 0 • Low turnover in occupants, even in rental Cn units • Desire for convenient access to a grocery store • Proximity to Senior Center and Rolland * Moore Park are important amenities Transportation ,qia • Shields underpass ramp is steep and blind, safety concerns Open Space Networks • Need to clarify roles and responsibilities for managing drainage, especially with HOAs and for new developments • Trail access is a major asset • Wetlands, groundwater, and floodplain constrain new development • Drainage and flooding concerns in some ` - locations • Need for better education about drainage and flooding for new residents in the area Page 12 of 15 Area 10 - Raintree *Note : only one person attended the walking tour , in this area, so the discussion was less extensive y than for other areas. i 74 Land Use & Character 0 • Landscaping along Drake is nice • Buildings with vinyl siding need better CENTRE maintenance • Raintree shopping center appears to be thriving Transportation DRAKE _ D • Detached sidewalks are preferred • Loud traffic noise from Drake Road t, LT iLl _ Zq Er III PROSPECT RD . • - • BALSAM LN J/ JUNIPER LN HOBBIT ST 7 BIRKY PL •, � fbvqslaHEELY DR SVMLLENBERG OR � ' - - • • • • • • 1 • • • H1LL POND RO, O~n , _ � • • . • • • ' • • CA 7-1 + l .�, • • • N I P l - MO dx � - III:y — — • • _ _ _ • ' _ _ _ • ' • • ' ' • t 'g j i. T _ ? sc n} w • . : a1y r Y ow t , p S •�T � ;, ,% a Page 14 of 15 Area 12 - Shields Corridor - Mulberry to Prospect Land Use & Character • There are opportunities for more affordable student housing in 12 the area • • Shields St • Crime/safety concerns at shopping center at Mulberry and Shields % Transportation • Protected bike lanes or a cycle track along Shields would improve , safety and visibility of bicyclists • There are numerous conflict points between cars, bikes and y pedestrians along the corridor • Concern about increasing traffic impacts with new development Al • Lack of landscaping maintenance along narrow sidewalks creates r c safety and visibility issues v v U • Need for additional and improved pedestrian and bicycle crossings along Shields . Options to consider include : o Add an underpass o Extend pedestrian light cycles o Create more space for pedestrians at intersections • Multiple access points for the shopping centers along Shields and Elizabeth create issues/conflicts • Need a comprehensive approach to CSU spillover parking impacts G . OF cc �r A . - 1 ♦ �. � � r�_ r ; . . pry .a , �l . ,�y, _ Area 13 = Spring Creek Trail Land Use & Character The trail is an important amenity for adjacent neighborhoods a. Transportation The trail is a good connector to �� , �•3•. L 7• .rR : 1 it ff••�� . f _• L "�■r' Page 15 of 15 Need better wayfincling at • " - intersectionof Spring Spring The trail is scenic and does a good l job accommodating -T runners/walkers and cyclists Used extensively for both recreation and commuting Open Space Interest texting system • users tocheck - conditionsof trails Interest in more opportunities for landscaping projects • L. entrances ( like Rolland Moore !. ! L l_ �.y rose Fort Collins West Central Area Plan �l MiMap - Things 1 Value � NEX �� t CO' N �Vlulberry St ' w L Z , 0 m U 4 O 0 - SUNSETAVE F N •CORVID WA • w W MYRTLE ST z a 0 o a Cn w m c�7 W MYRTLE ST i p w Q i CRESTMORE PL M NTZ PIT > < _ Z3 / � CRESTMORE PL - BIRCH Sr w Z - (n V/ BIRCH ST Er ;}r. yI � ! ^'•r. _ "� ORCHARD PL w z ■ Oz \.ti .1 r} • r - ._ o J lr✓ V NMOORDR BROADVIEWPL - x fa . =.-� U,l Laurel St - Z a BAYSTONE DR ry -�� - y a N - - Tile it Ell K U w i s_ � arseles _` p IY r W PLUM ST ' w W PLUM ST ¢ •. t . i >beer Ed _ J O o ' M MCALLISTER CTall uT m _ •-4� &md ° o W Elizabeth St� o - r w O Clw UNIVERSITY m o -qRWrAVC - w c7 LEESDALE CT - O Of O W SOUTH DR a here, w /- O z F -SIs CE w O WESTWARD DR 1 F _ i Call . 0000R o SKYLINE DR o LAKEWOOD DR - Z_ W W PITKIN ST e` OPKW z w ` ^ r OU 0 SPRINGFIELD DR V J JAMES CT - '". E7 JAMESCT � � , f _ ` 1 ) <" v m - p BENNETT RD ( - - �..� w 2 � Fr . � ��r •.i all 0 ry 0 N1 a - F _ .J - _ a - 0 SUMMER ST massal = J m W Prospect Rd . r w w 4 a BALSAM LN O -- t Z o O O z 5 IY 6 a JUNIPER LN BAY DR v / HOBBIT ST 9 g LONGWORTHRID 3V C4� i T�?i� l7 � 0�11 v_ a: STEELY DR ;r 3 rell ` �= fie. $ ) al 't . -q - - Vy STUART ST \ -"� - + � `� tN / WALLENBERG DR I\1 - 1- 74ti �tt ed says, I Q- .so ally; ^ aJ - - t • a iT �. eas z - z U FR0E00M w � ) o �21 alo L p z ED H O (7 U 8/1 z z (D F o WIEhOR \14T �Q z z iu 13 � HILL PONDRD J YI _ 5 w X GLENWOODDR V= �2 - �� �Q�� 16 - z m 3 Oy ' SHIRE CT O x P - X w sh�ct�i �SSEX OR w T e,% ROLLAND MOORE DR 14 , O o OR t, OmA WINDSOR CT 0 -- by SCARBOROUGH DR - _ w � 1 EVENSTAR OT 0 �.� VALLEY FORGE AVE p �__ p A" - �._ O� ' 15 z -� � w _ CONCORD DR 03 16 '• ` %opy , all .11 We IOU �. tYORKTOWN AVE FO :\ g/ , .- n z 1191 0 be - �� -r-r-ram ■ N E R ra Re �E ff ■ ■ �_ _ as Ed O r -, N CITY OF FORTCOLLINS Legend GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS merommaaea.m all t nwa,yaaageatuaaae What e,ainpaeb npeemaecc�rm�u.,,raanm�,.ww�mro a a of concern does this areareresent? and dead be drandonded ounhanded N, a HP P re Fran UNDERLYINGEderuk papg.am.a.o ESaa..yF us.wn„u. 0 lan0 Use + NegEConwN Fell ¢name$ earn Ty poe Wsa mK dereardetherfirenhaddenrobbe Independent senficareen cal date rentered hers,should be abbess therseproduetarruna'�+ ryanv�*a lial amcersa�n.ee order mdintrev .•n mm n:e O Open Space NelwoAs Scale 1 :4,000 Miles • T.anspnnal + MnMllly Printed: July 31 , 2014 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 04 ® West CeM lNeghDon WikiMap = Things I Value Comments Land Use + Neighborhood Character PERC ( Plant Environment Research Center) ! Stadium here would be most unfortunate . • Mittry-Young House City Landmark. Moyer House City Landmark. Wells House City Landmark. Galyardt- Puleson House City Landmark. This drainage is home to Red -wing blackbirds and other birds and connects Red Fox Meadows Natural Area to Spring Creek. McCluskey House City Landmark. Shawver House City Landmark. This little bridge over the ditch is a neat little local landmark . Annual Halloween bonfire and bobbing for apples hosted here . Fourth of July breakfast and bike parade starts here . Gardens on Spring Creek. Prohibit building developments on land for sale by an individual home owner; land should not be sold to a developer and divided up to avoid congestion , traffic, noise problems . Best tennis ! Looking forward to reopening of the Senior Center. Value the natural area for beauty, walks, exercise on trail . Great to have a theater within biking distance . We use this area for errands, bagels, restaurants. Do not use closer sites at Shields/Stuart and Shields/ Prospect because the mix of businesses and site design is unappealing . Shields/ Prospect does not offer " neighborhood services " - coffee, restaurant, cleaners, and groceries. Farmers' Market. Open Space Networks 1� Avery Park is a great place to walk, enjoy the outdoors, and meet people with dogs. 20 CSU Horticulture Gardens and Trees. 03 I love Red Fox Meadows . Beautiful ! ® Drainage area/ park . . . will need to be careful of over- use on the paths here . 05 Red Fox Meadows- lovely peaceful area in town to walk and observe wildlife . © There is a little unofficial dirt bike park here - little hills to bump around . I see college kids as well as neighborhood kids using it, and have witnessed some really lovely friendly and helpful interactions between those often separate groups. �7 The native vegetation ( rabbit brush, etc ) along this trail is fantastic . ® Wildlife right here in Fort Collins ! If we can keep some of the mature trees and a bit of the space, that would be fantastic . Perhaps south and east of the planned W. Stuart street could be maintained as an open space buffer around Spring Creek - corridors for wildlife are so important to long -term population persistence . �9 Hill Pond - pond behind townhomes on Winterberry Way and larger home owned by [ name removed ] . Hill Pond HOA has some water rights to this pond and used to use it as an irrigaiton source . �0 This stretch of wild grasses, etc . is lovely in summer. Kids ' favorite exploring adventure and picnic spot. 11 Spring Creek Pond . Geese coming and going . Pelicans dropping in like motorcycle gang at a church picnic . Ducks muttering . Occasional muskrat or beaver. Fox prints on the ice . O2 Creek and trees on trail . O3 Wildlife and mature pines, cottonwoods and lilac bushes - there is proposed development plan for property at Hill Pond & Gilgalad . Request to save as much of mature landscaping as possible . ® Ducks like to hang out in the creek behind the medical park. �5 Natural Areas/ Parks . © Deer hang out by the NRRC ( Natural Resources Research Center) detention pond . Lots of spring froggy singing . Path undeveloped , only a few people seem to know about it. (it Best park in town . Transportation + Mobility 10 Value the bike route through CSU ( from Center/ Lake to east of Lory to Laurel/ Meldrum . The bike trail through the forest is lovely. Nice job on the new trail alignment. Recreational trail is a huge asset to the area . Opportunity/threat: overuse for size of trail . City is ON IT when it comes to snow removal from the bike trail ! Thanks ! Drainage/natural area flood protection AND habitat for birds/ rodents/fox. Underpass below railroad . City needs more crossings. Kudos to Windtrail Townhomes which keeps its half of this link clear of snow and ice during winter. Sometime they even do Windtrail at Spring Creek's half. • Bike Trail . 10 This link from Spring Creek Trail to Points West, north of Drake . rose Fort Collins West Central Area Plan �l MiMap = New Opportunities - - } , . - . - � r. - � > ,, y � � L7 � : a P a t ON �Mulberry St = w a m } y0 z - � , z > O m m D 4 O 0❑ - SUNSETAVE m •CORVID WA • w W MYRTLE ST z a ❑ a Cn w m c 7 W MYRTLE ST i p w Q i CRESTMORE PIT M NTZ PIT > < m W r^ // �� • a days - .CRESTMOREPT - BIRCH ST w z m - •y : - - V J Cn .,:w!1 - m _ BIRCH ST ❑ ;}r• �{ y, ' � ! ^'•r. _ m "� ORCHARD PL w ■ Oz \.ti .1 r}z • r - ._ o J lr V BROADVIEW PL < NMOOR DR - - � ❑ fa . -" . kma ,l Laurel St - Z < BAYSTONE DR ry -,� y < a Ell U w Of_x p `all o r ❑beer W PLUM ST � - � - w � ¢ W PLUM ST 0 _ Ed CE J O 0 1��•.}Q MCALLISTER CT U Y U y � � p r -'T m, m ally F o W Elizabeth St `n ` �'! -'r : 1. - 00 O O IP10 _� UNIVERSITYA z UNIVERSITYAVE g VERSITYAVE w w ❑ z ¢ LEESDALE CT - / ^ ¢ a F beer of < p w ❑ w SOUTH DR < w w z � O� P`iE O l/11 z LV J ,. Or: - a; -w - AST O G\-EPRv\E 0 WESTWARD DR L� f w o U z F 4 z } � m DR < F m LAKEWOOD DR • _ Z_ w ❑ �. OPKWOOD p SKYLINE DR z ❑ b+✓ PITKIN ST E<c W PITKIN S� � • - Olt O O m U ❑ SPRINGFIELD DR JAMES CT • ' tt JAMESCT I ' = A 2 BENNETT RD • " 1f� _ ry N p SUMMER ST ❑ ads Of 0 1` = J m W Prospect Rd / J ❑ r z i w z w w 3� /� a BALSAM LN U -_ l l ❑ �/ qL �� m All T v / = 4•- - HOBBIT ST - a JUNIPER LN r� - BAY DR 5 J _ I ' • BIRKY PL - • �LONGWORTH RD- ear r1• - 4v O �=`a - SHEELV DR , .may 'Ile st _ / Vy STUART ST WALLEN BERG DR C - - bel as ? I lor Is r•I- � o I ' •• '1 � �N o z - z 0 - - FREEDOM . o p of w z O U z o WINFIELD OR a z - Z z HILL POND RD 5 m J GLENWOOD DR 3 Oy SHIRE CT P X w Sy���i �SSEX DR w ROLLAND MOORE DR R OG WINDSOR CT ram' , mA ' SCARBOROUGH DR - - w EVENSTAR CT U r•� ( VALLEY FORGE AVE p � ' p � -- O� z _ a -. CONCORD DR 3 � - t F ` P �� tt Z r O all at . YORKTOWNAVEyaQ z t < - - 4D n. a " vv N E R ra e Rd 0 - AVOCET RD N CITY OF FORTCOLLINS GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS er,�nes,nd all.b.�,a.,.a.d � d°a, . ,<<.F � .. a.� w��m Legend m•ma�� �w�m•.a, IN E ..enand da h6moi�amaersons cool orpat.e::..rtheral.0 anyu+....a.r iamra�mWve .c � ��ea,...a.c thermal What type of concern does this area represent? FAUL� and aau rezponv nesNs the Wsie y. • ^o•. le i�ntsenfii�°^�.°'r^m°=dhe°ar^hom a;w,��^a Land Use + Neighborhood Character u 'desta adds m .m mrdimd indi a,��...d.r...d.�.s�.�ftmtey�ppAd.�su..= • Scale 1 :4,000 • Transportation + Mobility Mlles West Central Neighborhoods Printed: August 01 , 2014 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 WikiMap = New Opportunities Comments Land Use + Neighborhood Character lO The market easily exists for a small to mid - sized grocery store near Elizabeth and Shields, given the number of student residences within close walking distance . Residents of the Landmark Apartments use this former pasture to fly kites, play ball , and exercise their dogs . It would make a great park/open space . Small shopping center with lofts above stores - e . g . , coffee shop, restaurant, specialty shop 16 Opportunity for a neighborhood commercial center with elan , vigor and community. Would be great if this area had a few " social " opportunities, such as a pub ( but catered to middle age crowd ) and coffee shop . Would be nice if playground/park was added as approved in the Gardens on Spring Creek Project Development Plan or elsewhere in area ( perhaps near Young 's/Otterbox) . Large geographic area with no school or park playground; Rolland Moore is not walkable for children . Transportation + Mobility Bicycle or walking path along canal . Add a bike path that connects City Park Ave . with Prospect from here . This shopping center needs a boost in some way. It would be great if the neighborhoods from the east ( Sheely Addition , Wallenberg ) could access the planned shopping area by bike or foot from the back. I love what has happened with the alleys downtown , and see that as a great example for how to use space . So rather than showing an unsightly back step to the trail and the neighborhoods, a welcoming front with cafes and access through to shopping would be just wonderful . There is plenty of already - paved ground here for a parking structure rather than just open lot. Need a new trail connection from Wallenberg to Spring Creek Trail here . City made serious error by allowing The Summit to be developed without sufficient parking . The MAX is no substitute . Proposed parking structure to fix the problem needs ground level commercial and attractive neighborhood gathering development along the Spring Creek ( sunny side ) and College Avenue frontages. Allowing it to be developed for cars only at ground level will make it an atrocity. And we aren ' t talking a little sandwich shop convenience store in the corner ( Lake Street Market) . Too bad the TOD tax break can ' t be retrieved - at least make Capstone do the garage correctly as a mixed use development that fronts the park with attractive venues . They can make money at it - it just needs more work and imagination, and maybe a bit less immediate profit, but that would only be in the short run . Faster access over the train and Bus Rapid Transit ( BRT) ways would be fantastic . The overpass serves the Federal campus pretty well , but serves bike commuters less well . I 've tried the overpass on my bike : it's very long and tall and not engineered for biking , so I ' m probably going to skip and continue through to College and take the horrible sidewalk to the Whole Foods shopping center. Fort Collins West Central Area Plan 7I7 WikiMap as Things That Could Be Improved - r 1 m ❑ ., . . .�. . o . / Mulberry St w a z - i z }. •,- C M>, x Ya [SUNSETAVE w 0 m 0 ° w MYRTLE ST aORVID a MYRTLE ST MZPIT Q Q CRESTMORE - y BIRCH ST m w (n V/PL 1 . . �K� - m _ BIRCH ST U ❑ - ti - O •-� . ORCHARD PL w _ . � � Oz �.�, r_m .. p. ._ o o al BROADVIEW PL - Q a -. �^�'�� ,nV/ L_-fureI St _ �. . . - z - - - BAYSTONE DR all C2 W17) cc A C W + W p A. ❑ � I a a W LUj i a W PLUM ST VJ MCALLIST ER CT Ed Elf 3 mf+ 4Al 3 A � J W Elizabeth St 0 °1 r UNIVERSITYAVE O - UN A m 0 z ¢ LEESDALE CT - ¢ r ' 0❑ w vU ❑ w se. - -- SOUTH DR a j = _ 1 W w � . a c7 a 5 ❑ - —z A ST 0 NIPe ° z �� 6 . a. a O �PRV\E 0 O WESTWARD DR J o. . . o _ < I. $ 7 m IY - o OPK�00° °R U z O LAKEWOOD DR _ Z- W _ W PITKIN ST _ mil. W PITKIN 00 0 SPRINGFIELD DR �9J JAMES CT tt JAMES CT �• - r➢ (n 0 BENNETT RD 1 Of O <G W • an ❑ O O Q ■ \ L. �11 SUMMER ST - - - W • 2 m - 12 2 > p tt W Prospect Rd m a1 J �� 115 1J 0 22 24 26 27 29 i 17 21 BALSAMw 23 25jai 30 W ❑ ` sli _ O JUNIPER LN 0 BAY DR z HOBBIT ST O Q U LONGWORTH RD i 4 _ BIRKY PL 31 ?¢ SHEELV DR in W STUART ST / � 3 3 6 Ij 32 WALLENBERG DR /36i z z eReE°°M N �P \_i 37 , o $ z - z o 'All L° DR 39 41 z z O Z _ 40 HILL POND RD z w w GLENWOOD DR 2 2 �2 - Q- ( \,� / SHIRE CT X �/ , - - 9 ROLLAND MOORE DR sy a 0 41 mill - — w Q 43 OR OG WINDSCR CT a � ? 4 m - - . . r r EVENSTAR CT O . w� VALLEY FORGE AVE �p Y + ' 146 z _ Pm �. z O _ z _ a CONCORD DR id, j m Z O - all • <� ' Q > . -F % a° ��yA �47 YORKTOWN AVE - �� Sir . r 49 50 W ra e _ _ ad L _r N C" OF FORTCOLLINS Legend GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS Tanandepal and all aw.,y.dae a�aa.e ceeb.peem.ecc�rm�u.,,raanm�,.ww�mro What a of concern does this arearepresent? TheCtindnesnalleydayeableadar N, a HP re Fran p.pq.ama:.o ESaa..yF us.wn„ur • lan0 Use + NegEColl CEa2tler UNDERLyini a enn and ananat all tern earn Ty poe ayz�vr�q thesepindenuesnaruna'.e+ by �*a India LF�L� ma..mmy. .•n mm uy Open Siace Nelyl Scale 1 :4,000 d: August 01 , 2014 Miles • Tranepnnallan + Mobility g 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 yydwesmenbal Negnbom000s WikiMap = Things That Could Be Improved Comments Land Use + Neighborhood Character Due to its proximity to City Park, this commercial area could be better utilized to provide services to Park patrons and local residents . Failed development project currently a large slab of cement at approximately 800 W Prospect - eyesore, can this land be used for something ? Landmark Apartments has a trash problem . Their dumpsters overflow into the pasture and drainage and often contains noxious junk like burned couches and mattresses Small neighborhood shopping center with lofts, coffee shop, nice restaurant. Area needs neighborhood services, especially groceries given planned densities . Need to avoid creation of urban desert with lack of healthy food . A lovely feature of this shopping area is the greasy BBQ smoker parked in the lot. I ' m not sure what the problem is but there is some kind of arrest or traffic ticket given daily around here . Flashing police lights at night here are incredibly common . The stretch between the bike path and the creek up to the railroad ROW is dicey. Trash , hobo camps, railroad debris, mysterious mounds of moldering materials, windblown construction debris from projects both recent and days of yore . Could use a semi -annual cleanup, just enough to keep it wild but attended to . Like a hedgerow. Care Housing trash enclosures are inadequate . Windblown and rain -washed trash fills the detention pond and blows into neighboring properties . Open Space Networks 10 Piles of tree debris - safety and appearance concern . 2� Piles of tree debris - safety hazard in flood and unsightly. Transportation + Mobility The Mulberry corridor west of Shields could benefit from bike lanes . Narrowing the driving lanes and increasing bike and pedestrian options could help to slow traffic and increase safety for bikers and pedestrians using this corridor. City Park is, in my opinion , one of the most dangerous streets in Fort Collins for bikes. Students don ' t know how to drive around a bike . And students don 't know how to bike safely. Lots of paint and signs should be installed here that essentially teach basic driving skills on - location to students in the area . There could be a better pedestrian crossing at Skyline across Elizabeth . The current crossing is between Skyline and Castlerock, which is hard to access with a bicycle or a stroller due to the narrow sidewalk. Plus many motorists run the red light at the pedestrian signal , probably because they don ' t want to be stuck at a red light for minute . A flashing pedestrian crossing signal would be great. This intersection sucks for bikes and peds. An underpass would be awesome . Marked/signalized crosswalk needed crossing Shields on south border of intersection with South Dr. South border preferred to provide space for median island without interfering with southbound to eastbound left turns . Increasing numbers of pedestrians, bikers and boarders are crossing partway, and then waiting for the chance to cross the rest of the way across Shields . The distance between Lake and Elizabeth seems too far without a crosswalk given the numbers of people crossing . Tradeoffs in ability to cross vs . through car traffic will need to be made if we are to continue to add density. ( Currently, it seems getting traffic through is taking priority) . It's very hard to turn left onto Taft Hill from Clearview ( facing west out of Clearview) . It's hard to see without inching out into the bike lane and even though there is a pedestrian light/walk, it's rarely in use . At rush hour it's nearly impossible . Could a sensor be put in the street that would make the light turn red for the Taft Hill traffic when a car is present on Clearview? This would be good for both sides of the street. #b southbound Taft Hill at Clearview stop requested . Needed to reduce stop spacing from Yz - mile to 1/4- mile . Crosswalk needed across Shields between Pitkin and Springfield . Special emphasis on bicycle movement need - ed , as Springfield/ Pitkin could function as a " poor- man 's " Prospect bike route . Prospect Ave . , being so close to campus and located between the main campus and vet school , ought to be bike friendly, transportation friendly, and safe for students, families, and others . It needs a facelift, much like West Elizabeth . The sidewalk is too narrow and there are very few turn lanes . Pedestrians traveling on foot after a rain or snow get drenched by splashing puddle as cars travel or turn . . . I 've seen it happen numerous times. I 've seen students ( likely new to the area ) biking down the right lane . . . a death wish if you ask me . Have yellow blinking lights to caution cars to slow down , slope sidewalk with road to increase sidewalk size for bikes and peds and have additional cross walks for students . This road divides the campus. . . get people to SLOW down and allow more time for students to cross . Traffic light not visible to those going north/south - find this very confusing . Difficult to cross as a pedestrian or cyclist at Heatherridge & Prospect. • Dangerous intersection . Can crossings be improved for bikers who do not feel comfortable using bike lanes? Saw biker this morning trying to maneuver bike to get to button for walk signal . • Cyclist and vehicular traffic accidents may be reduced with a stop light camera and ticketing . Get easement on 929 W. Prospect to permit lane straightening due to dangerous lane shift. Also widen walks to two persons wide . • Sidewalks on south side of Prospect are not safe or accessible to all . • The sidewalks along Prospect feel unsafe . They are very narrow and close to traffic . • Students from Landmark Apartments cross Prospect here and go through the church parking lot to get to CSU . They do this because it's not safe to walk along Prospect and no fun to walk along Shields. • Current lack of rights- of-way leads to car/ bike/ped cut-through traffic and related impacts between Centre & La ke . • Prospect is signed 35mph , but speeds of 40-45 are very common . More enforcement would be good , and could help limit the severity of accidents . • The half- mile to mile of Prospect between Shields and Center or Shields and College is really unique . Prospect will always be a through -fare for folks heading out to the freeway, etc . , but this one section is simply different from most of the rest of Prospect because of the neighborhood on one side, and campus and a grade - school on the other. The sidewalks are too narrow, and a bike lane is really needed . Could this section go to three lanes plus a bike lane like on Laporte ? People would get used to a short slower section on their drive . No access to Lake St. Prospect sidewalk too narrow for safe bicycle and pedestrian traffic . • Please keep the visual sensor for bikes and cars on year round ! It seems to have been turned off, yet students still use it for summer school , local residents use it to get to work anywhere north , and commuters who come from the Spring Creek trail use it too . IS Pedestrian safety at the intersection and along Prospect. 11* Need a left- hand turn signal for vehicles traveling north on Centre ( or Center, according to CSU ) . Is there a way to reconfigure to add a northbound bike lane approaching Center & Prospect. Bikers frequently go between the right turn lane and the straight-through lane, especially when there is a long line of cars waiting to go straight. Sidewalks here are ridiculously close to traffic and too narrow. The sidewalks along here are too close to fast- moving traffic . There needs to be some sort of buffer ( boulevard ) between the sidewalk and the traffic that's going along at 40 mph +. It's very unnerving to walk along here . I did see a car drive up onto the sidewalk one day and it's a miracle no one was walking there . Continue bike path at Prospect and tracks north to CSU campus ! Multiple stop lights at the RR tracks/ MAX are causing serious traffic back- ups . How is additional heavy traffic to the " proposed " stadium going to be managed ? Multiple obstructions to cyclists attempting left turn onto Mason Trail immediately after crossing MAX on the north sidewalk of Prospect. #b northbound and southbound stops requested at Taft Hill at Suffolk. Needed to reduce walking distance and increase desirability of transit. • This section of trail is really heavily used , which is great. Would it be possible to widen it with gravel to the N so that joggers and bikers have fewer run - ins ? Joggers create little side paths in any case, so making an official one, on just one side, would be both safer and prettier. Informal bike and ped cut- offs downhill from Centre to bike path has grown dramatically in past year or so . Increased density and bike/ ped use has spillover impacts on area . The bike/ pedestrian underpass at Shields can be quite dangerous when bicyclists speed through the area . I have almost been hit several times by bicyclists speeding downhill going east on the wrong side of the path . 11* The Spring Creek Trail could use some maintenance . Lots of concrete blocks are sticking up creating a pretty bumpy ride from the Gardens on Spring Creek west to Shields St. Make some kind of deal with Windtrail on Spring Creek HOA to include the spur connecting Gilgalad to the bike trail in the snow- clearing schedule . A perpetual hazard , never shoveled all winter. 11* Blind corner for cyclists - dangerous . • Traffic light/ pedestrian crossing area needs to be moved ; crossing at grade school is not sufficient for all the foot/bike/car traffic trying to cross on Stuart. • # 19 southbound Shields at Hill Pond stop requested . Needed for access to medical offices on west, and residen - tial neighborhood on east. • Marked/signalized crosswalk of Shields at Hillpond needed to reduce distance between the two flanking sig - nalized crosswalks . This sidewalk needs corners smooth out/widening to accommodate student housing development traffic . Relocate # 19 southbound stop from Shields at Shire to Shields at Rolland Moore Park, nearside . Needed to reduce the desirability of jaywalking , as stop is at signalized intersection . ADA- compliant access is best provided nearside with new pad , due to sidewalk slope . • Consider putting a traffic light at Phemister/ Rolland Moore and Centre . Since Rolland Moore now connects to Centre, it has become very difficult at high traffic times to turn onto Centre . Also, the lanes on Phemister have not been repainted so there 's no indication of which lane you should be in if you are going straight. The only options are turn left or turn right. • The solid guardrail on the east side of Centre just south of Phemister prevents people turning onto Centre from Phemister from seeing northbound traffic . It is extremely dangerous and should be replaced with an open style guardrail . • This is a blind left turn onto Constitution for cyclists travelling west on Scarborough . • # 19 northbound bus stop is not ADA accessible . A grass strip exists today; a concrete pad is required by ADA law. • Bike lane on Shields from Drake to Centre is way too narrow. • Connection from Spring Creek Trail to Drake could be improved . Not bad , just ordinary. • It is nearly impossible to turn right out of the veterinary clinic . • This is a really awkward series of lights for bicyclists and vehicle drivers also . West Central City of For Area Plants West Central Area Plan — Visioning Events Summary May 21 — June 30, 2014 Background The purpose of the West Central Area Plan ( WCAP ) update is to revisit and update the 1999 West Central Neighborhoods MULBERRY ST Plan based on emerging issues and trends . The Plan will incorporate new information from related planning efforts and will serve as a guide for : VV ELIZABETH ST • Land Use & Neighborhood Character ( e . g . , zoning, density, historic preservation ) • Transportation & Mobility ( e . g . , connections to the PROSPECT RD a new MAX bus rapid transit system , bicycle and • ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MCI ■ ■ * pedestrian enhancements, intersection safety ) o O • Open Space Networks ( e . g . , parks and open space, c~i) wildlife habitat, drainage and floodplain management ) J o = J O The project will also include a new conceptual design for U. = z Prospect Road from Shields Street to College Avenue . C/) 0 0 Alternatives will be developed and evaluated to establish a p DRAKE RD � preferred design that is functional , safe, and well - marked for pedestrians, bicycles, buses, and cars . WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN BOUNDARIES The WCAP process began in March 2014 . The plan is PROSPECT CORRIDOR DESIGN anticipated to be presented to Council for consideration for adoption in early 2015 . Visioning Events Following a series of listening sessions, Date Time onug-ly-ma neighborhood walking tours, and other initial May 21 5 : 30 - 7 : 30 p . m . Drake Centre 38 outreach , two community workshops were held in late May to review and update the May 29 5 : 30 - 7 : 30 p . m . Senior Center 36 vision for the West Central Area Plan . Staff Total 74 gave a presentation about the history and current context of the West Central Area , followed by keypad polling and small -group discussions about the vision and priorities for Land Use & Neighborhood Character, Transportation & Mobility, Open Space Networks, and the Prospect Corridor . The keypad polling included questions from the online Visioning Survey, described in further detail below . Visioning Survey In conjunction with the Visioning Workshops, an online Visioning Survey gave those interested in the plan an opportunity to share their ideas on the vision for the West Central Area , regardless of whether Page 1 West Central City of For Area Plants they were able to attend one of the events . Planning staff attended the Drake Road Farmers' Market and CSU Lagoon Concert Series to provide information on the planning effort and collect additional surveys in person . The survey was also advertised on the WCAP website, on the postcard mailing that announced the visioning events, and through multiple newsletters and email lists . In total , 337 people provided feedback through the survey, which complemented the keypad polling and discussions at the Visioning Workshops . The survey questions are provided in Appendix A . Survey Results The results of the Visioning Survey are summarized by question below . Some questions allowed open - ended comments or "Other" responses, which have been summarized narratively . The full survey results can be found in Appendix B . SECTION A . INTEREST IN THE WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Q1 . Using the map [of the West Central Area], which of the following apply to you ? (Please select all that apply.) 60 % 56% 50 % - 40 % 30% 27% 30% 27oi T'o 20% -- — 14% 12% 10% 5% 0% Live in the West Own property in Work in the West Own a business CSU student CSU faculty/staff Don't live or work Central Area the West Central Central Area in the West in the area but Area Central Area travel through and/or use the area Page 2 West Central City of For Area Plants SECTION B . LAND USE & NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER Q2. If you could re-envision land use and neighborhood character within the West Central Area, which of the following is most important to you ? (Select up to 3.) 70% 65% 60% 58% — 50% — 40% — 34% 33% 30% - 20% i1% - 15 0 0 10% � — 0% I Access to cultural Access to retail Additional Height and Streetscape Variety of Other and recreational and services employment architectural enhancements — housing types amenities—(e .g . , opportunities compatibility of (e .g . , sidewalks, parks , pools , new buildings street trees , bike senior center) lanes) The most common theme from the open -ended comments was preserving the family character of the neighborhoods in the area . Opinions on how to maintain this neighborhood character ranged from maintaining the U + 2 occupancy ordinance to limiting the escalation of density and various other policies . In contrast, many commenters felt that the area should be more densely populated and targeted towards students, due to the area ' s proximity to the CSU Main Campus . Some commenters asked for a relaxation of U + 2 in the area or increase to U + 3 . Some other commenters asked to reserve the area for student housing, requesting that the West Central Area be higher density and more diverse, and others asked for more affordable student housing . Code compliance and nuisance issues were also a common theme . Several commenters asked for greater enforcement of city ordinances related to yard upkeep and maintenance . Others asked for cleaner streets, the disallowance of trailers and boats in front of homes, better overall property maintenance, and posting signs for street sweeping to improve the effectiveness of sweeps . Many commenters spoke about transportation issues . A sentiment shared by many commenters was the desire to improve traffic flow and minimize congestion . Other transportation - related comments included adding off- street bikeways, increased bike safety on Shields, and enforcement of parking requirements . The final theme from the comments centered on open space . Many commenters requested that there be a continued effort to provide more open space as the area becomes more densely populated . Page 3 West Central City of For Area Plants Q3. The map provided shows the land within the West Central Area that is currently vacant or may be considered for redevelopment in the near future. Which statement best describes your vision for future housing density (number of housing units or square feet of commercial space per acre) for the areas in yellow and orange ? The responses to this question were split Higher between those who would prefer to see no density overall , more change in density and those who would mixed use welcome increased density on vacant land . and multi- family Most of the commenters that expressed an buildings interest in higher density development 13% Little or no noted that high density development future should occur close to campus or at major Medium change in density, density intersections to respect the character of the some new mixed use 46% neighborhoods . Other recurring themes and multi- included preserving open space, ensuring family housing affordability, the provision of buildings 41 % adequate parking, and continued enforcement of U + 2 with new development . Q4. How important is the preservation of historically significant structures (>50 years in age with special historic features) within the West Central Area ? The prevailing sentiment regarding the preservation of historic homes in the West Not at all Central area is that there need to be strict criteria important on what qualifies for preservation beyond the age 15% of the structure . Commenters noted that many structures in the area will become eligible for Very historic designation due to their age but might important not contribute to the area in a meaningful way, 46% and the criteria for historic designation should be Moderately based on the significance of the structure . Most important agreed that historically significant structures 39% should be preserved and that these structures make Fort Collins unique and appealing . Some commenters did not see the need to protect historic structures in the area . Page 4 West Central City of For Area Plants Q5. While there are grocery stores near the West Central Area, there are currently no full-service grocery stores contained within the area. How important is it to provide a neighborhood commercial center with a grocery store, retail stores, and other services within the West Central Area ? Most commenters agreed that a full -service grocer like King Soopers and Safeway is not needed due to the presence of full -service Very grocers abutting the plan area . Many felt that Not at all important important 29% the grocers adjacent to the plan area provided 34% ample service to residents in the West Central area . Other commenters felt that despite the presence of full -service grocers on the edge of the planning area , a small , neighborhood grocer like Beaver' s Market would be welcome . Moderately Some noted that if there were to be a new important neighborhood -scale grocer, it should occupy 37% vacant commercial space as opposed to building a new structure . SECTION C . TRANSPORTATION & MOBILITY Q6. Which of the following statements best describes how you would rate the convenience of parking where you live, work, or attend school in the West Central Area ? According to commenters, parking is a hot button issue in and around the CSU campus Not and in areas frequented by students . While applicable 13% parking is an issue for those who use cars, Very Not at all convenient many of the commenters noted that their convenient 34% primary mode of transportation is biking or 11 % walking and that parking issues do not generally affect them . Others commented that while parking can be a challenge around campus at peak hours, they can still usually find a parking spot . Moderately convenient 42% Page 5 West Central City of Area Plantf�s Q7. Which statement best describes your daily trips (e. g... to work or school) through or within the West Central Area ? Not The consensus among commenters was that applicable commute- related stress levels are highest Very 4% during peak hours and when CSU is in stressful 5% session . Peak hours in the West Central Area include rush hour and in the late Not at all stressful afternoon when school lets out at local high 25% schools, middle schools, and CSU . Many Moderately commenters indicated their stress levels are stressful 19% til highest when using Prospect or Shields . The 1Wchallenges on Prospect and Shields were wide - ranging and depended on the mode of transportation being used . A little stressful 47% Q8. What is the primary mode you use for your daily trips through or within the West Central Area ? Other Not 2 % applicable Many commenters noted that they use Bus/Transit I � 2% 2 % � multiple forms of transportation , depending on various factors . Many noted that they Walking bike more frequently during the summer 6°/ q Y g months and less so during the winter . Car 61 % Page 6 West Central Fort Collins Area Plan Q9. If you could re-envision your commute within the West Central Area, which of the following improvements would reduce your stress level most significantly? (Select up to 3.) 35% 31 % 32% 31 % 30% - 27% 27% 25% - 22% 20% i I 15% 13% 10% - 7% 5% - 0% 41 o Ile ayye, . y�QoaG a`oaa o�ra� �ay�� aa. P Commenters were evenly divided among options for re-envisioning their commute in the West Central Area . Most of the comments dealt with alleviating congestion, but the methods for relieving congestion varied . Some thought enhanced public transportation should be emphasized . Others thought that providing more bike/ pedestrian infrastructure would help reduce conflicts between cars and improve their commute . There was also a group of commenters that felt a renewed focus on cars would benefit the area most . Another group called for traffic calming measures on arterial roads to enhance safety. Page 7 West Central City of For Area Plants Q10. Which of the following areas have the greatest need for pedestrian/bike facilities within the West Central Area ? (Select up to 3.) 70% 62% 60% 50% 45% 40% 30% 0 24% 23% 20% 17% - — — 14% 10% 5% 0% Drake Rd Lake St Mulberry St Prospect Rd Shields Rd Taft Hill Rd West Elizabeth Other St Most commenters mentioned that Prospect is the road in greatest need for pedestrian /bike facilities . Bicyclists, pedestrians and drivers all agreed that Prospect needs modifications to make it a safer and more comfortable corridor for all modes of transportation . The methods to achieve safer conditions on Prospect ranged widely . Some commenters want additional bike and pedestrian infrastructure on Prospect . Others want more bike and pedestrian infrastructure on parallel streets to make Prospect a more auto-centric corridor . Shields and Mulberry were also referenced as being dangerous roads that need additional pedestrian and bike facilities . Page 8 West Central Fort Collins Area Plan SECTION D . OPEN SPACE NETWORKS Q11 . Natural systems within the West Central Area include the network of parks, open space, floodways, urban tree canopy, wildlife habitat, and other natural features. If you could re-envision natural systems within the West Central Area, which of the following do you see as most important ? (Select up to 3.) 60% 60% 50% 40% 38% ° 37% 39% 30% ° 24% 20% 10% 4% 0% o`a� may any any Q`�o' oQ� e�`y roe agora roy\Ga ��aQ a�a� �ayoa ooGm� c�°off O ado aoo aoo era �� era Z� o�yQ a aa` oyy Pa '�° otoa ood` �o� ANS `ono Paa The general sentiment in the comments was that the existing natural systems in the West Central Area are satisfactory. Many commenters applauded the City' s efforts thus far in preserving the natural systems in the West Central Area . Some commenters asked for expanding and enhancing these natural systems . For those who saw room for improvement, many commenters asked for more trees . Others asked for more trails throughout the area . Page 9 West Central Fort Collins Area Plan Q12. Which of the following statements best describes how you would rate the convenience of access to parks and recreation facilities in the West Central Area ? Not at all Comments ranged depending on the convenient proximity of the commenter to parks and 5% natural areas . Commenters tended to note how close they are to their closest neighborhood park or natural area . Very convenient 44% Moderately convenient 51 % Q13. Which of the following statements best describes how you would rate the convenience of access to natural areas and open space in the West Central Area ? Not at all convenient 7% Comments ranged depending on the proximity of the commenter to parks and natural areas . Commenters tended to note how close they are to their closest Very neighborhood park or natural area . convenient 34% Moderately convenient 59% Page 10 West Central Fort Collins Area Plan SECTION E . PROSPECT CORRIDOR Q14. On average, how often do you travel on Prospect Road through or within the West Central Area ? Almost never 4% Once a month 6% Once a week Daily (or 16% multiple times each day) 40% 3-5 times per week 34% Q15. Which of the following statements describes how you feel about Prospect Road ? (Select all that apply) 80 . 0% 72 .5% 70 .0% 60 .0% 51 .0% 49 . 3% 50 .0% 47 . 3% 40 .0% 30 .0% - -P 20.0% 10.0% 6.8% 0 .0% - Prospect Road is/should Prospect Road needs Prospect Road needs Prospect Road needs Other remain primarily a aesthetic and character bicycle improvements pedestrian "through" or "travel' improvements improvements corridor — a way to get from point A to point B Page 11 West Central City of For Area Plants Some commenters thought that pedestrian and bicycle improvements would be the most beneficial , and others called for adding bike lanes and/or widening sidewalks . Others felt that improving connectivity across Prospect to enhance north - south travel would be best . Some thought that moving bikes and pedestrians to parallel streets would make more sense than expanding the infrastructure on Prospect itself. Others opined that they see Prospect as an auto travel corridor and that enhancements should be focused on vehicular travel . Some commenters proposed widening Prospect to add more travel lanes, and others want to see the speed limit raised to encourage quicker travel through the city . Another group suggested making no alterations to Prospect but also not adding significant population to the area to prevent further congestion of the corridor . Q16. How saf%omfortable do you feel when walking along or crossing Prospect Road? Very safe/ The majority of commenters agreed that comfortable Prospect is a dangerous corridor for Not 7 % pedestrians . Many commenters did note applicable 11 % that they feel safer on certain sections of Prospect than others . Other commenters said they avoid Prospect entirely because Moderately they perceive it as unsafe . The solutions Not at all safe/ proposed by commenters to the safety safe/ comfortable issues of Prospect varied . comfortable 43% 39% Q17. How willing would you be to spend 2 additional minutes driving through Prospect Road in order to improve pedestrian comfort and safety ? Not Many commenters wanted more explanation appliocable of the question and wondered how this result Not at all could be achieved . Some were skeptical a two - willing minute delay could be achieved and felt that it 14% might balloon to a longer delay or create delays and congestion elsewhere . Those that Very willing were in favor of safety improvements had 49% many ideas, including moving bikes and Moderately pedestrians to Lake Street, improving willing 35% crossings, the addition of bike lanes, or building over/underpasses to alleviate congestion on Prospect . Page 12 West Central City of For Area Plants Q18. How important is it to provide additional north/south pedestrian and bike access to Prospect Road and north/south pedestrian and bike crossings along Prospect Road ? Not Commenters were split amongst three applicable � different outlooks on north/south bike and pedestrian connections across Prospect . One Not at all group of commenters did not feel important 8% north /south bike and pedestrian connections were the most pressing issue in the West Central Area . Others felt that east/west Very connectivity deserves more attention . The Moderately important proposed improvements varied , but many important 52% dealt with new over or underpasses to 36% prevent creating further vehicular congestion on Prospect . SECTION F . GENERAL COMMENTS Q19. Do you have any additional comments or thoughts for the West Central Area Plan and/or Prospect Corridor Design ? Comments for this question were wide - ranging due to the nature of the question , but responses tended to focus on a few key issues . The potential on -campus stadium at CSU concerned many commenters . Some felt that this planning effort should be delayed until after the stadium issue is resolved as it will potentially have a significant impact on the area around campus . A related theme that was echoed in many comments was the need to preserve the character of the West Central Area . A number of commenters worried that the single-family character of the area is being eroded and that the West Central Area Plan should address ways to preserve the character of the area . Others noted that rental properties as not always well - maintained and that the plan needs to address property maintenance . Others called for fewer student housing developments to ensure the character of the area is protected . Many commenters weighed in on the U + 2 ordinance and called for continued enforcement of the ordinance . Pedestrian and bike connections were another major theme among commenters . Similar to the comments on other survey questions, many commenters asked for better pedestrian/bike connectivity . The lack of north/south connections was mentioned in numerous comments . Many other commenters advocated for more over/underpasses to enhance pedestrian and bike connectivity . A number of commenters also asked for improved connectivity to trails and other areas of Fort Collins . Page 13 West Central City of Area Plan Coll SECTION G . DEMOGRAPHICS Q20. What is your gender? Q21 . What is your age ? Prefer not to Prefer not to er 18 answer answer Undo 2% 3% � � 0% 65-74 3 9% Male 25% 43% Female 55-64 55% 19% ' 25-34 14% 45-54 15% 35-44 12% Q22. If you live in the West Central Area, do Q23. What is your annual household income ? you own or rent your residence ? Prefer not to $21 ,999 or less answer 19% $250 , 000 or � 21 % 1 do not live more in the West Own 1 % Central Area 40% 36% $ 150 , 000- 1 $227000— 249 , 000 587999 5% 22% $88,000- 149 , 000 20% $59,000- 871999 Prefer not to —/ Rent 13% answer 22% 2 % Page 14 West Central City of Area Plan West West Central Area Plan - Outreach Summary September — October 2014 Background The purpose of the West Central Area Plan ( WCAP ) update is to revisit and update the 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan based on emerging MULBERRYST issues and trends . The Plan will incorporate new information from related planning efforts and will serve as a guide for : ELIZABETH ST • Land Use & Neighborhood Character . . . . . . . . . . ..... • Transportation & Mobility ' PROSPECTRD . . . . ... . .. . . .. . . ... . . . . . . _ . - . . • Open Space Networks a _J W N The project also includes new conceptual designs for Prospect Road and = o Z w Lake Street (from Shields Street to College Avenue ) that are functional , a = Q o Cn safe , and well - marked for pedestrians, bicycles, buses, and cars . DRAKE RD The WCAP process began in March 2014 . The plan is anticipated to be it Vol ' presented to Council for consideration for adoption in early 2015 . West Central Area Plan Prospect Corridor Design Open House City staff held an Open House on September 18t" to refine the vision and Event Event Details Participants gather input on potential policies and Open House Sept . 18, 4 : 00 - 7 : 00 p . m . 79 Fort Collins Senior Center action items for the West Central Area Sept . 22, 5 : 30 - 7 : 30 p . m . Plan and Prospect Corridor Design . The Prospect Corridor Plymouth Congregational 58 Open House built upon the input received Design Workshop Church from previous outreach efforts . Total 137 Prospect Corridor Design Workshop Additional input on the proposed design alternatives for the Prospect Corridor was sought at a workshop on September 22 "d . The goal of the Prospect Corridor Design Workshop was to have more focused conversations about the design options for Prospect Road and Lake Street . The various design alternatives were presented , followed by facilitated small -group discussions for each proposed alternative . Responses from a questionnaire and feedback from the facilitated discussions informed additional updates to the Prospect Road and Lake Street designs . West Central Area Plan Online Survey #2 An online survey gave those interested in the plan an opportunity to share their ideas on more specific components of the Plan ' s vision , regardless of whether they were able to attend one of the events . The survey was advertised on the WCAP website, a postcard mailing, and through multiple newsletters and email lists . In total , 263 people provided feedback through the survey . The survey questions are provided in Appendix A . Page 1 West Central City of For Area Plants Survey Results The results of Survey #2 are summarized by question below . Some questions allowed for open - ended comments or "Other" responses, which have been summarized narratively . The full survey results can be found in Appendix B . SECTION A . INTEREST IN THE WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN Q1 . Using the map [of the West Central Area], which of the following apply to you ? (Please select all that apply.) 70% 61% 60% — 50% 44% 40% 30% 27% 20% 16 % 11% 10% 0 0% Live in the West Own property in Don't live or workCSU faculty/staff Work in the West CSU student Own a business Central Area the West Central in the area but Central Area in the West Area travel through Central Area and/or use the area Q2. If you live in the West Central Area, do you own or rent your residence ? Prefer not to answer 0 . 8% ANk Rent 11 .5% I do not live in the West Central Area Own 54 . 0% 33 . 7% Page 2 West Central City of For Area Plants SECTION B . LAND USE & NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER Q3. What types of additional services or improvements related to land use and neighborhood character should be considered in the West Central Area (select up to 3) ? 60 % 53% r 50% 47% 43% 40% 32% 30% 29% 26% 22% 20% 15% 10% — 0% Code and Sidewalk Enhancement New Law Street Street Lighting Other Nuisance Improvements of Existing Parks/Open Enforcement Maintenance Enforcement Parks/Open Space ( Police) Space The most common theme from the open -ended comments was making the area more bike and pedestrian friendly. Specific ideas ranged from dedicated bike lanes to buffered bike lanes along major arterials, and even a dedicated bike - only road . Comments related to pedestrian improvements focused on safer sidewalks and crossings at arterials, including suggestions for overpasses and/or underpasses at key locations to make crossings easier and safer . Preserving the single-family character of the area was another common theme . Several commenters shared concerns about the increasing prevalence of student-oriented housing in the area . Other commenters feel the City should find ways to encourage more families settle in the area . Some suggested that property owners and tenants of rental housing need education on property maintenance, which contributes to the character of neighborhoods . Safety was also a shared concern . Many commenters asked for improved lighting to enhance the safety of streets and parks . Others think that traffic calming measures like speed bumps should be implemented , where appropriate, to reduce travel speeds on neighborhood streets . Page 3 West Central City of For Area Plants Q4. What types of development are most appropriate in the Areas of Development in pink and red on the map (select up to 3) ? 45% ° 40% 36% 35% 35% 33% 30% 28% 25% 25% 20% 20% - 14% 15% - 12 10 % 5% 0% �5 to Oa Z5 5 e5 e& Q ° a��,�O m��� °tea°� e��G � \eF G °� 5° Many commenters expressed an interest in a mix of housing types and/or uses within the Areas of Development . Some participants wrote in that they would welcome commercial uses in the Areas of Development, as well . Others felt that a mix of residential unit types would bring more diversity to the area . Some commented the student- oriented residential developments should be located near the CSU campus . Another prevalent theme was that of minimizing development, particularly given increased traffic and other issues in recent years . Some commenters do not support additional student- oriented housing, and others felt that vacant should remain undeveloped or turned into Natural Areas . Page 4 West Central Fort Collins Area Plan Q5. Which of the following identifying features or neighborhood character enhancements would you like to see in the neighborhood in which you live (select up to 3) ? 60% 64% 50% 43% 40% 39% 30% 20% % °� ° 10% 0% Trees and other Public art or other Street lighting Entry signage None of the Above Other plantings along decorative features streets There was little consensus amongst commenters regarding identifying features or neighborhood enhancements . Many commenters feel their neighborhood is fine the way it is . Some commenters noted a preference for more street trees and public art, especially between Shields and Taft Hill on Prospect . Others would prefer better sidewalks as an enhancement to their neighborhood . Q6. If a new neighborhood center is developed in the West Central area, what are the top 3 features or land uses that should be included? 60% 52% 50% 4696 42% 40% o 30% 20% 19% 18% 17% 14% 14% 10% 9% 8% 0% SQaoo 5 e� a� Qm�OQ �o � 000�5 CbN Off' Page 5 West Central Fort Collins Area Plan A large number of commenters did not want a new neighborhood center . A number of respondents would prefer the land remain open space or be converted to a park . A group of commenters noted that there are already neighborhood centers within the West Central Area that have many vacancies and that those vacancies should be filled before a new neighborhood center is developed . SECTION C . TRANSPORTATION & MOBILITY Q7. What are the top 2 intersections that you think should be considered for safety improvements ? 100 91 90 RA 80 70 - 64 60 - - 50 - - 40 - - 30 - - - 22 21 21 19 20 - - - - - - - 18 17 11 11 8 10 - - - - - - - - - - - - 3 0 ° �5� 54r �4r \��a5 ��' �`� \�a �4r \��a J¢� ��� opt \off oQ �G' �,����' \�5r �G� �� �G� Q�oS� ��' \�`� �,� ' � �G \�a�e ��o G°4 Q4� Page 6 West Central Fort of Area Planf� Q8. What are the top 2 sections of road that you think should be considered for safety improvements ? 160 149 140 120 100 80 66 60 41 40 — — 3 27 25 20 20 18 20 — — — — 8 10 8 8 8 7 7 5 4 0 �Qe i per boo ���t` `m`ti �o� S�oG �` �o G� a ° a Q o5 �`� �O �o x00 °� ���` �o �O Q o r �ti 0 o 0 0 t` o o 4R4 J�� oi° Z� °COOo4 Xo �°5�� o5Q° . �ay� oer 5r�o ��G °�\ ate\ ��\ �`�� o�� �`\ �'�� `��e °gyp °�� Page 7 West Central Fort Collins Area Plan Q9. What would encourage you to walk or bike more often in the West Central area (select up to 3) ? 60% 0 60% 50% 46% 40% — — 30% 97 tl 20% � i"6% 13% 13% 13% 10% - - - - - 6% 5% 4% 3% 0% • a\ oe °x5 ore &\A °�e o° �\Io S°, 'AZ °t 0 �� �� �� 5 a .C� t a ��a� ��J 5�\m� z e m a�o� a�°a° `���° Q��o� 5`°�°� �°�° ��o•�o� ���of °o46 °�a got` Y °t° �r 5r6 m °� �,�° mom°' J 6 of The majority of comments dealt with ways to improve biking on major streets . Many commenters expressed an interest in buffered bike lanes on major streets such as Shields, Prospect and Drake . Commenters noted that they currently take alternate routes to avoid those streets and that buffered bike lanes would make their commutes shorter and safer . Others noted that many cyclists use sidewalks in these areas, creating a dangerous situation for pedestrians . These commenters requested better separation of pedestrians and bikes . Their suggestions for achieving this separation included wider sidewalks, better education and buffered bike lanes . A group of motorists shared the concerns of cyclists and suggested ways to improve driving through the area . Some commenters suggested using bike lanes, as opposed to shared lanes . These respondents pointed out that drivers do not understand the markings on the road and it creates safety issues for drivers and cyclists . Others suggested widening travel lanes for cars and bikes to minimize conflicts . Page 8 West Central City of For Area Plants SECTION D . OPEN SPACE NETWORKS Q12. 1 would like to see open space improvements that focus on the following types of features or facilities (select up to 3) : 80 % 70% 68% 60% 50% 0 40% 30% 28% 22% 20% 19% 20% 13% 10% — 7% 2% 1 % 0% ta�� `�a5 ��5 a�5 a��5 m�5 ata� ooa o�5 rot rod N's� nor C�r ,P6 ce Q 5Qa a° O Most commenters expressed an interest in improving connectivity between existing parks and open space . Some felt that the existing trail network does an inadequate job of connecting the various open spaces together . Suggested improvements included converting informal paths into formal connections, creating naturalized pathways, and developing more trails . Q13. Please complete the following sentence: "My ideal nature experience in the West Central area looks like. . . " The following word cloud summarizes the comments for this question . Many commenters emphasized their desire for trails that allow them to enjoy open space, natural areas and/or parks comfortably on foot or bike . Other desirable features identified by commenters include wildlife, safe and easy access and nature that is in the neighborhood or close by . Many commenters described the experience or setting they prefer when spending time in nature . Page 9 West Central Fort Collins Area Plan Open Space Networks — Word Cloud trees • access o eri trails P P kids gos ace bknq foothills quiet nature feel play time water ,d fox meadows canals nice M running garden connect paths sasfe � wildlife many Y place w n doghouse parkt community gardens small enjoy great rolland moore picnic plenty people neighborhood creek pond deer see family ride spring creek trail u ra I areas SECTION E . PROSPECT CORRIDOR Q14. Please rate each of the sidewalk options on a scale of 1 (least preferred) to 5 (most preferred). Shared off-s upped path 1 Detached sidewalk with tree lawn 3 . 8 2 Wide attached sidewalk 1 3 . 2 3 Narrow attached sidewalk 1 .4 4 While most respondents noted they preferred a shared off-street bike/ pedestrian path , many commenters ( both cyclists and pedestrians ) expressed safety concerns regarding shared paths . Since cyclists move at higher speeds, a shared path can conflict with pedestrian movement . Drivers commented that shared paths create dangerous situations at right turns, as cars have difficulty seeing bikes on shared paths . Others noted that they chose a shared path as their preferred option due to the impracticality of adding dedicated bike lanes to Prospect, noting that this was the best compromise . Page 10 West Central City of For Area Plants Q15. Please rate each of the median options on a scale of 1 (least preferred) to 5 (most preferred). MedianOptions Average Rating ( 1-5) Rank Wide median with trees 3 . 6 1 on Wide median with hardscape/ 3 . 5 2 plantings Painted center turn lane 2 . 8 3 Narrow median 2 . 5 4 While most respondents desire a wide median of some sort on Prospect, some commenters noted caveats . Many were worried about traffic flow with a center median , some noting that they would prefer a median so long as traffic flow was not constricted . Others preferred the median but were concerned that it would come at the expense of a travel lane, thus constricting traffic flow . Other commenters preferred a wide median with trees or plantings but were concerned about maintenance . In order to minimize upkeep, some suggested using drought tolerant plants, xeriscaping, or tall grasses that can go dormant in the summer months . Some were skeptical of adding medians due to the limited space on Prospect . Some felt that wider sidewalks should be prioritized over medians . Others preferred a center turn lane throughout the corridor to handle traffic backups, allow better access for emergency vehicles, and make it easier for bicyclists to cross . Q16. Please rate each of the bike facility options on a scale of 1 (least preferred) to 5 (most preferred). • • • W3 .R6 Shared off-street bike/ ped path Two-way protected bike lane 2 Protected bike lane 3 .4 3 Buffered bike lane 2 . 8 4 Opinions on bike facilities varied . Most respondents agreed that some sort of separation for bikes and cars would be preferable on Prospect, and some commenters noted that any of the options would be preferable over existing conditions . Other commenters did not like the idea of bikes and pedestrians sharing a path , since it creates an uncomfortable environment for both cyclists and pedestrians . Others thought physically separated bike and automobile facilities make more sense than just a painted buffer . Some commenters did not support any bike facilities on Prospect, due to lack of space or concerns about feasibility . Others questioned the cost and ability to maintain bike facilities in the winter months due to snow . Page 11 West Central City of For Area Plants Q18. Rank the following modes of travel in order of priority for improvements on Prospect Road (rank from 1 (most important) to 4 (least important)) : Travel • • - Score Rank Bicycle 690 Automobile 614 2 Pedestrian 565 3 Public Transit 423 4 Q17. Which roadway design elements are most important on Prospect Road (select up to 3) ? 70% 60% 60% 55% 50% 43% 41 % 40% — 30% 23% 21 % 20% 10% 6% 0% Sidewalks Shared On-street bike Center turn lane Planted median Tree lawn (next Other bike/pedestrian lanes to sidewalk) path Many commenters were concerned about traffic flow and lose space for vehicles if any of the above design elements are implemented . Some commenters requested wider travel lanes to improve vehicle flow . Page 12 West Central City of For Area Plants Q19. Considering the potential improvements to Prospect Road and Lake Street, which east-west route are you most likely to walk or bike along in the future ? Pitkin Street 3 . 50/( Other 2 .2% Lake Street 21 . 1 % Spring Creek Trail 1 43 .5% Prospect Road 29 . 7% Comments for this section varied , as they tended to focus on the specific corridor chosen and thus no larger themes emerged from the comments . SECTION F . GENERAL COMMENTS Q20. Do you have any additional comments or thoughts for the West Central Area Plan and/or Prospect Corridor Design ? Comments were wide- ranging due to the nature of the question , but responses tended to focus on a few key issues . The potential on - campus stadium at CSU concerned many commenters . Some felt that this planning effort should be delayed until after the stadium issue is resolved as it will potentially have a significant impact on the area around campus . A related theme that was echoed in many comments was the need to preserve the character of the West Central area . A number of commenters worried that the single-family character of the area is being eroded and that the West Central Area Plan should address ways to preserve the character of the area . Others noted that rental properties are not always well - maintained and that the plan needs to address property maintenance . Others called for fewer student housing developments to ensure the character of the area is protected . Many commenters weighed in on the U + 2 ordinance and called for its continued enforcement . Similar to the comments on other survey questions, many commenters asked for better pedestrian/ bike connectivity . Some automobile users commented on improving traffic flow in the area , especially on Prospect . However, these commenters expressed a desire for improved bike and pedestrian infrastructure as well . Others advocated for more over/underpasses to enhance pedestrian and bike connectivity . A number of commenters requested increased parking for new student- oriented housing developments . Page 13 West Central City of For Area Plants SECTION G . DEMOGRAPHICS Q20. What is your gender? Q21 . What is your age ? Prefer not to Prefer not to answer 4 . 3% 75+ 3 . 1 % answer 3 . 1 % Under 18 0 .0 /o 18-24 7.7% 25-34 14 .2% 65-74 19.2% Male 44 . 0% L'I40 Female 35-4414 . 6% 51 . 7% 55-64 23 . 1 45-54 15.0% Q23. What is your annual household income ? $21 ,99 $250 , 000 Prefer not 9 or or more to answer less 1 .2% 18 .2% . 0 ° $22 , 000- 58 , 999 $ 1507000— 18 .2% 2497000 9 . 3% $59 ,000— $88 ,000— 87 , 999 1497000 20 .9% 24 .0% Page 14 West Central % Area Plan Prospect Corridor Design Survey Prospect Corridor Design Survey — November/December 2014 Key Themes — Open-Ended Comments Q5. Do you have any comments on the Prospect Corridor Vision ? • General support for the vision statements as presented • Support for safety as a top priority • Support for improving vehicle traffic flow • Concern about the impact of a new on -campus stadium on the vision • Support for improved accommodations for pedestrians and bicycles Q7. How well does the design for Prospect Road serve each mode of travel? • Car : Majority of respondents felt that it serves car travel well or very well ( 74. 8%) • Bicycle : Majority of respondents felt that it serves bicycle travel well or very well ( 59 .4%) • Walking: Majority of respondents felt that it serves pedestrian travel well or very well (70 . 2% ) • Transit ( Bus) : People generally felt that transit is well -served by the design, though about one- third of respondents selected "not sure . " More information was needed for some to feel comfortable answering the question . • Comments : o Need for more north -south crossings o Interest in bus pullouts to reduce traffic stoppages o Interest in traffic calming to slow vehicle speeds o Concern that design does not extend to the west and east along Prospect o Concerns about bikes and pedestrians sharing a path , both for efficiency of bike travel and safety of pedestrians; suggestions that this needs to be well- marked and separating bikes and pedestrians should be considered o Concern that shared path is only on north side of road, and concerns about the visibility and safety of eastbound bicyclists on the north side of the street o Support for tree lawn o Support for bike/ped underpass at Centre Ave to improve crossing safety o Interest in an overpass or underpass at the railroad crossing, or other solutions to reduce congestion between the Mason Corridor and College Ave o Concern that the design may not function well with the traffic that would be generated by an on-campus stadium o Concern about amount of right-of-way ( ROW) needs shown in some areas o Desire for left turn arrows at the intersection of Centre and Prospect o Interest in dedicated, on-street bike lane instead of a shared path o Concern that medians will increase traffic congestion o Concern about median at Bay Road restricting access to Hilton and Colorado Parks & Wildlife o Concern about the ability of 10' lanes to accommodate large trucks 1 West Central % Area Plan Prospect Corridor Design Survey Q8. How well does the design for Prospect Road meet the vision statements ? • P1 — Safe and Comfortable corridor for all modes of travel : Majority of respondents felt that it supports this vision statement well or very well ( 66 . 3% ) • P2 - Safe crossings : Majority of respondents felt that it supports this vision statement well or very well ( 59 . 5 % ) 0 P3 — Attractive gateway to campus, downtown, and midtown : Majority of respondents felt that it supports this vision statement well or very well ( 74 . 8%) 0 P4 — Seamless connection to MAX : Majority of respondents felt that it supports this vision statement well or very well ( 52 . 5 % ), though many responded that they were not sure ( 28 . 6%) 0 Comments : o Preference for separate bicycle and pedestrian facilities o Concern about impact of an on-campus stadium on the ability to meet the vision o Concern that design does not significantly improve connectivity to MAX for pedestrians and drivers o Comments that a bus route along this stretch of Prospect would be the best improvement for connecting to MAX o Concerns about the amount of right-of-way needed for the design o Comments that safe crossings can only be achieved by reducing travel speeds o Requests for more details about how the design would be implemented o Support for underpasses for bikes and pedestrians across Prospect, and for vehicles at the railroad crossing o Concern about the safety of mid - block crossings Q9. How well does the design for Lake Street serve each mode of travel? • Car : Majority of respondents felt that it serves car travel well or very well ( 71 . 3 % ) • Bicycle : Majority of respondents felt that it serves bicycle travel well or very well (89 . 5 %) 0 Walking: Majority of respondents felt that it serves pedestrian travel well or very well (91 . 5%) 0 Transit ( Bus) : People generally felt that transit is well -served by the design (47 .4%), though more than one-third of respondents selected "not sure" ( 37 . 2%) 0 Comments : o Requests for more information about how buses would use the corridor o Interest in removing on -street parking o Support for separate bicycle and pedestrian facilities o Support for the raised planted buffer protecting the bike lane o Interest in additional crossings, particularly between Shields and Whitcomb o Concern about amount of right-of-way needed for the design o Concern that parked cars and planted buffers could create visual barriers for bikes and cars trying to make turns o Interest in removing tree lawns on the south side or both sides o Comments related to the need for wayfinding and signage for all users 2 West Central % Area Plan Prospect Corridor Design Survey o Concern that Lake isn't an ideal bicycle corridor because it doesn't continue to the east of College or west of Shields o Concern about safety of bicyclists at intersections, and visibility at driveways due to parked cars o Concern that the design may not fit with plans for an on -campus stadium o Concern about maintenance and snow removal for the protected bike lanes o Concern about emergency access and sufficient fire lane widths Q10. How well does the design for Lake Street meet the vision statements ? • P1 - Safe and Comfortable corridor for all modes of travel : Majority of respondents felt that it supports this vision statement well or very well ( 80 . 3% ) • P2 - Safe crossings : Majority of respondents felt that it supports this vision statement well or very well ( 70 . 3 % ) 0 P3 - Attractive gateway to campus, downtown, and midtown : Majority of respondents felt that it supports this vision statement well or very well ( 83 . 8%) 0 P4 - Seamless connection to MAX : Majority of respondents felt that it supports this vision statement well or very well ( 56 . 7%), though many responded that they were not sure ( 30 . 6%) • Comments : o Comments that crossings and transit connections are not clear in the designs o Concern that buildings would have to be demolished to implement the design o Suggestions that CSU should fund improvements and/or maintain Lake Street o Question about improvements that would be made from Prospect to Lake on Shields o Suggestion for 45 -degree angled parking o Suggestion for a roundabout at Lake and Center Q1 . Do you have any additional comments related to the Prospect Road or Lake Street designs ? • Support for encouraging bicycle traffic to use Lake rather than Prospect • Suggestion to place a crossing guard at the mid - block crossing of Prospect to help children safely get to Bennett Elementary School • Concerns about the timing of pedestrian crossing signals, and the impact of changing signals on traffic flows • Concern about impacts to the properties directly on Prospect • Concern about the cost of planted medians • Concern about visibility issues related to tree lawns • Need for clarification about whether the designs are being proposed together or as separate options • Suggestion for emergency call boxes and water fountains along the corridor • Concern about lighting and safety at existing underpasses • Support for xeriscape treatments in tree lawns and medians • Preference for prioritizing functional improvements over aesthetic enhancements 3 West Central Fort of Area Plan West Central Area Plan — Draft Plan Open House and Comment Forms Summary February - March , 2015 Background The purpose of the West Central Area Plan ( WCAP ) update is to revisit and update the 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan based on emerging issues and trends . The Plan will MULBERRY ST incorporate new information from related planning efforts and will serve as a guide for : ELIZABETH ST • Land Use & Neighborhood Character ( e . g . , zoning, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . density, historic preservation ) LAKE ST • Transportation & Mobility ( e . g . , connections to the : PROSPECT RD new MAX bus rapid transit system , bicycle and ••• • pedestrian enhancements, intersection safety ) Q • Open Space Networks ( e . g . , parks and open space, J y W wildlife habitat, drainage and floodplain management ) _ z0 w H W V� J The project will also include a new conceptual design for < rx v Prospect Road from Shields Street to College Avenue . DRAKE RD Alternatives will be developed and evaluated to establish a ' preferred design that is functional , safe, and well - marked for pedestrians, bicycles, buses, and cars . The WCAP process West Central Area Plan began in March 2014 . The plan is anticipated to be presented to Council for consideration for adoption in early 2015 . € ,... Prospect Corridor Design Draft Plan Open House and Survey Overview In February, City staff released a draft version Date Time Location Participants of the West Central Area Plan . To solicit feedback from community members, staff Feb 12 4 - 7 p . m . Senior Center 162 held an open house and collected comment N/A N/A Comment Forms 85 forms . The open house was composed of dedicated stations for each section of the draft plan . Each station had a copy of the section of the plan , supporting materials, and one or more staff to answer questions and address any issues participants had . 162 community members were in attendance . To allow feedback opportunities for those who couldn 't attend the open house, staff posted the draft plan online with an associated comment form . In total , 85 community members provided their feedback online through comment forms, both online and at the open house . What follows is a brief summary of the feedback received from community members who provided input at the draft plan open house and/or through comment forms . West Central Fort of Area Plan Draft Plan Comment Form Summary Question 4 - Are there any policies or general information that appear to be missing from the Draft Plan ? Commenters with suggestions for additional policies and information focused on two main themes . Some commenters expressed a desire for more information on transportation related issues, such as future traffic volumes, traffic from the CSU stadium , traffic from a growing student body at CSU , the potential for underpasses and overpasses on major roads, and improved Transfort service to areas outside CSU . Others had concerns with the lack of information regarding CSU - related activities . Specifically, these commenters desired more information about the CSU stadium , parking, student housing, and whether CSU will be funding any of the proposed implementation items of the plan . Question 5 - What changes could be made to make the plan more understandable and easy to read ? Most commenters had no proposed improvements to make the plan more understandable and easy to read . A couple of respondents noted the length of the plan and that they would prefer a less wordy, lengthy document . Question 6 - Do you have any comments specific to the Prospect Corridor design ? Many commenters were concerned about the impact of the stadium on the proposed design for Prospect . These respondents generally expressed concern about increased congestion when the stadium is in use and whether or not the new design can accommodate this increase in traffic volume . Some commenters were not supportive of medians and street trees throughout the corridor, with concerns about maintenance, visibility of pedestrians, and the effect of medians on safe travel for all users . Other commenters shared additional safety concerns, noting that there is still a need for more safe crossings for pedestrians across Prospect . Some of the proposed interventions included additional signalized crossings for pedestrians and under/overpasses . Question 7 - Do you have any additional comments on the Draft Plan ? Funding was a chief concern among commenters . Many commenters would like further discussion about how the implementation items in the plan will be funded . Other commenters did not feel the plan will promote home ownership and compatible development, with a fear of greater instability and a higher prevalence of rental housing in neighborhoods . Others noted that the bicycle network is still incomplete and wanted an increased emphasis placed on connection bike lanes to trails and improved connectivity for cyclists . West Central Fort Collins Area Plan art Collins Draft Plan Open House Comments Summary As part of the Draft Plan Open House, City staff encouraged community members to choose their top five highest priority implementation items from the plan . Below are the results of this exercise . Asterisks note that a community member picked that item as one of their highest priority implementation items . The items have been re - ordered based on the amount of support from open house participants . Short- Term Actions (2015-2016) Top Action Item Priority? * * * * * Update relevant sections of the Land Use Code to ensure that new development is compatible with adjacent neighborhoods . * * * * Form a joint City-CSU committee that meets regularly to assist with communication and coordination related to the on-going planning efforts of both entities . * * * Coordinate among City departments to make specific improvements in the West Central area : Planning, Streets, Traffic Operations, Transfort, Neighborhood Services, Engineering, Stormwater, and other relevant departments . * * * Evaluate recent development contributions for parks and determine how to best apply available funds to new or enhanced parks in the West Central area . * * Review the current strategy for the escalation of fines and other enforcement measures for repeat code/ public nuisance violations and update as needed . * * Evaluate future West Elizabeth corridor transit needs in the upcoming West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor Plan . * * Explore the potential for incorporating related stormwater and low-impact development ( LID ) improvements into street retrofits . * * Determine a timeline for upgrades to the Spring Creek Trail underpasses at Shields Street and Centre Avenue . * Upgrade existing bridges to include sidewalks and safety railings, particularly over irrigation ditches . * Update the Land Use Code standards for the HMN zone district to clarify requirements related to mass, scale, and building design . * Evaluate the feasibility of incorporating car share and bike share options into the Land Use Code and/or Development Review process. * Integrate near-term bus stop improvements into the citywide Bus Stop Improvement Program . * Develop a template for widening sidewalks . * In conjunction with the implementation of Nature in the City, update open space standards in the Land Use Code to add clarity for developers and decision - makers related to the amount and type of open space required in conjunction with new development and redevelopment . Requirements should include a mix of qualitative and quantitative requirements that provide flexible options for the provision of functional natural spaces during a project' s development or redevelopment . * In coordination with the implementation of Nature in the City, identify gaps in the open space network for both wildlife and recreation, and develop a list of short-term and long-term projects that help to fill the gaps. Update the City Code to clarify the enforcement of violations related to dead grass and bare dirt in front yards . West Central Fort Collins Area Plan Collins Include educational information about City code requirements as part of the code violation letters sent to residents . A summary of the most common violations and strategies for avoiding them should be included . Update relevant sections of the Land Use Code to require variety in the number of bedrooms provided in multi-family developments. Determine a consistent strategy for applying the RP3 program and other parking management strategies to existing and new multi-family developments. Through the implementation of Nature in the City, develop a Design Guidelines document illustrating strategies for incorporating natural features and open space into new and existing developments . Conduct neighborhood outreach regarding potential improvements to Lilac Park. Coordinate with the Stormwater department, Ram ' s Village Apartment complex, and other stakeholders to explore potential improvements to the stormwater detention site at Skyline and West Elizabeth . Coordinate with the Stormwater department to explore habitat and recreation improvements to the stormwater site at Taft Hill and Glenmoor. Through the implementation of Nature in the City, identify specific locations where wildlife habitat can be improved or added within the West Central area . Pilot a residential tree canopy improvement project in collaboration with local nurseries, non - profit organizations, and CSU student groups . Mid- Term Actions (2017-2020) Top Action Item Priority? * * * * * * Explore the creation of a program that supports the retention of owner-occupied homes to maintain the stability of neighborhoods . * * * * * Form an exploratory committee to evaluate the feasibility and potential effectiveness of a landlord registration or licensing program . * * * * * Incorporate transit service recommendations for the West Central area into Transfort budget requests and future Transportation Strategic Operating Plan updates . * * * * Improve underpass at the crossing of Shields Street and the Spring Creek Trail to improve visibility for bicyclists and reduce flooding issues . * * * Develop a strategy to proactively enforce sidewalk shoveling by property owners along important pedestrian routes ( e .g., to schools, parks, and other major destinations) * * * Schedule annual meetings with neighborhood residents within the West Central area . As part of these meetings, attendees can share their experiences related to living in a diverse neighborhood and discuss expectations for property owners, landlords, renters, law enforcement, and City staff. Such meetings should be discussion-based, interactive, and fun . * * Create an interdisciplinary group to explore the creation of "Preferred Landlord" and "Preferred Tenant" programs, or other incentive- based programs to improve property management . * * Convene a group to explore potential locations and eventually establish a Police Services sub- station . * * Retrofit Shields Street ( between Prospect Road and Laurel Street) to include medians and other aesthetic and safety enhancements . * * Improve underpass at the crossing of Centre Avenue and the Spring Creek Trail to better accommodate the high volume of users and reduce flooding issues . * * Coordinate with the Forestry Department and local nurseries to develop and implement a West Central Fort Collins Area Plan art Collins residential tree canopy incentive grant program . * Create an online, publicly-accessible map of citywide code violation data to serve as a communication and education tool . * Explore the creation of a program that requires landlords to attend a class on rental property management in response to public nuisance ordinance violations. * Fund an additional staff position to support the Community Liaison position . Such a position would strengthen existing Neighborhood Services and Off- Campus Life partnership programs, as well as the implementation of new programs and strategies . * Work with Front Range Community College to develop a program for educating students about living in the community . Expand education efforts related to the impacts and requirements of occupancy limits in partnership with CSU and Front Range Community College ( FRCC) . * Retrofit street lighting in the Avery Park neighborhood ( between West Elizabeth Street and Prospect Road, and between Taft Hill Road and Shields Street) . * Explore strategies for better informing residents of the street sweeping schedule and the need to move vehicles from the street during sweeping operations. * Identify parking lots that generally have additional capacity at certain times or days of the week for shared parking opportunities. * Construct a crossing of the Arthur Ditch near Whitcomb and Wallenberg to connect the neighborhood to the Spring Creek Trail . * Identify locations (either within existing open space or new locations ) that could potentially accommodate off- leash dog use . * Conduct a safety inventory along the Spring Creek Trail to account for safety needs, such as lighting, visibility around corners, and areas of potential conflict between bicyclists and pedestrians . * Proactively create additional tree cover in areas dominated by ash trees to mitigate the potential impacts of the emerald ash borer. Support the establishment of networking and professional development group for landlords and property managers that meets casually to socialize and discuss ideas and challenges related to property management. Create a program to provide annual education of residents related to unscreened trash to reduce the number of violations. Provide information to neighborhood residents about Access Fort Collins, an application that allows users to directly report issues to City departments. Explore the creation of a program that requires landlords to attend a class on rental property management in response to public nuisance ordinance violations. Review Light & Power's current policies for upgrading and adding street lighting to ensure that it allows for the adequate protection of public safety within neighborhoods. Improve neighborhood identity and aesthetics with entry signage . Establish Priority 1 routes for snow removal by Streets Department . Establish Priority 1 routes for snow removal with enforcement by Code Compliance and education on property owner responsibilities by Neighborhood Services . Communicate priority snow removal routes to CSU and the public . Provide education on safe crossings, purpose of the center turn lanes, and other infrastructure . Identify and provide strategically placed car sharing spaces. Work with CSU to explore shared Park-n - Ride arrangements south and west of campus. Retrofit Prospect Road (west of Shields Street) to include medians and other aesthetic and West Central Fort Collins Area Plan art Collins safety improvements . Identify gaps in transit service near existing or future parks and open space . Consider access to open space when making changes to Transfort bus routes and bus stop locations as part of the next update to the Transfort Strategic Plan . Coordinate with CSU on the planning, construction, and funding of a future trail connection between the intersection of Centre Avenue and Prospect Road and the Spring Creek Trail . Establish a wayfinding system for parks and open space, in conjunction with efforts to improve wayfinding along trails and bikeways throughout the city. Construct a crossing of Larimer County Canal Number 2 at Westview Ave . to improve neighborhood connectivity. Construct a crossing of Larimer County Canal Number 2 near Bennett Elementary to support Safe Routes to School . Raise the bridge on the spur trail to the west of the Sheely/Wallenberg neighborhood to mitigate flooding of the trail . West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #1 Area Plan May 7, 2014 Stakeholder Committee Meeting # 1 West Central Area Plan May 7, 2014 — 5 : 30-7 :00 p . m . Present Absent Sue Ballou Lars Eriksen Rick Callan Ann Hunt Susan Dominica Jeannie Ortega Becky Fedak Steve Schroyer Colin Gerety Lloyd Walker Carrie Ann Gillis Nicholas Yearout Per Hogestad Greg McMaster Staff & Consultants Kelly Ohlson Ted Shepard, Chief Planner Tara Opsal Paul Sizemore, FC Moves Program Manager Jean Robbins Amy Lewin, Transportation Planner Andy Smith Rebecca Everette, Associate Planner Logan Sutherland Craig Russell, Project Manager (Russell Mills Studios) Notes 1 . Welcome from Gerry Horak ( Mayor Pro Tem ) 2 . Introductions 3 . Overview a . Description of the purpose of the Stakeholder Committee ( SC ) b . Background on the West Central Area Plan c . Planning process and anticipated schedule for SC meetings d . Roles and expectations for the committee e . Meeting guidelines 4 . 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan a . Overview of 1999 Plan b . Vision statement and goals from 1999 Plan 5 . Discussion: Plan outcomes from the 1999 Plan a . Discussion about whether some of the intended outcomes of the 1999 Plan have actually been achieved, including : preservation of Spring Creek as wildlife habitat; the evolution of Campus West as a commercial center; and the preservation of single family character in neighborhoods Page 1 of 4 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #1 Area Plan May 7, 2014 b . There have been some outcomes since 1999 that differed from what the previous plan envisioned c . The previous plan had great intentions, many of which should be carried forward , but it has not been effectively implemented d . Concerns that West Central Area has not been adequately addressed by City Plan, the citywide Capital Improvements Plan ( CIP ), and other recent planning efforts — compared to other parts of the city e . Moving forward, the new plan should include an Action Plan with specific code changes and actionable, measurable priorities 6 . Brainstorming Exercise: Future Outcomes a . The committee split into three groups to brainstorm goals for the West Central Area Plan . Each group focused on a different theme : Land Use & Character, Transportation , and Natural Systems . The results of the discussion are presented below . Brainstorming Exercise Notes Transportation — Desired Outcomes 1 . Ability to live without a car ➢ Decreasing automobile traffic around Campus West ➢ Walkable community with actual sidewalks ➢ Should be able to meet daily needs without a car 2 . Prospect becomes a successful urban corridor ➢ Prospect from Shields to College should look like Mountain Ave ➢ If a stadium is built, traffic should be reduced in the Prospect area 3 . Strong transit system that connects to MAX and works for neighborhood use ➢ Buses that run regularly or late [at night] ➢ Buses that connect to MAX or Drake ➢ Bus connection to Mason 4 . Safe and effective biking and walking ➢ Bike and pedestrian crossings on Prospect and Shields ➢ Underpass/overpass for bikes across Shields ➢ Protected bike lanes on major streets ➢ Kids should be able to walk to school unaccompanied ➢ Take care of dirt trails ( not community trails) in Rolland Moore Natural Systems — Desired Outcomes 1 . Wildlife habitat/fragmentation ➢ Green infrastructure incorporated into all transportation projects ➢ Maintain or increase level of wildlife habitat ➢ Enhanced wildlife habitat/biodiversity ➢ Wildlife movement corridors ( prevent habitat fragmentation ) Page 2 of 4 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #1 Area Plan May 7, 2014 ➢ Benefits of open space and impact on other city objectives considered in decision making 2 . Stormwater ➢ Operations and maintenance related to stormwater ➢ Proper Stormwater design ➢ Natural restoration of irrigation ditches ➢ Open space/stormwater considered in all new/re-development 3 . Connectivity/movement corridors for wildlife ➢ Connectedness of natural areas — not isolated ( prevent fragmentation ) ➢ Natural area that are accessible by bike or foot only ➢ Nature in the city ➢ Restore and enhance wildlife habitat 4 . Education ➢ Education about benefits and functionality of natural systems Land Use & Character — Desired Outcomes 1 . Prioritize historic houses and preserve valuable buildings ➢ Controlled Landmark Preservation Commission ( LPC) historical designation ➢ Important for historical preservation, to be credible, don't over- reach [ regarding contributing features] ➢ Most houses in 15 years to be potentially eligible ➢ Conflict between zoning and historic preservation, needs design 2 . Value neighborhood character and fabric ➢ Neighborhoods should be : o Full service : shopping, recreation, employment o Integrated in design : scale, mass, compatibility o Connected o Preserved o Fine grain ➢ Code enforcement and strengthening o Exterior upkeep o Reduce neighborhood graffiti ➢ Aesthetically pleasing from design standards with and without parking ➢ Incentives for owner-occupied houses ➢ Police and city services further strengthened ➢ More boulevards 3 . Neighborhood diversity ➢ How do we develop the diverse character of our area ➢ Diversity has diminished since ' 99 o Shifted to young adults — change in character ➢ Multi -generational access Page 3 of 4 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #1 Area Plan May 7, 2014 4 . Neighborhood connectivity ➢ Safe and effective access to/from CSU ➢ More direct bike connection to activity centers 5 . Mix of housing ➢ Variety of housing stock within West Central Area ➢ Achievable land use code from an affordability point of view ➢ Land use code review, to allow for maintaining diversity of housing — design review ➢ Avoiding barriers between student and other types of housing ➢ Ensure health and safety of tenants 6 . Mixed -use/commercial development ➢ More mixed- use centers @ key intersections ➢ Required mixed - use ➢ Don't undercut parking requirements because of TOD philosophy ➢ Fix dual/mixed zone areas Page 4 of 4 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #2 Area Plan July 16, 2014 Stakeholder Committee Meeting #2 West Central Area Plan July 16, 2014 — 5 : 30-7 : 30 p . m . Present Absent Sue Ballou Rick Callan Susan Dominica Lars Eriksen Becky Fedak Carrie Ann Gillis Colin Gerety Jeannie Ortega Per Hogestad Jean Robbins Ann Hunt Greg McMaster Staff & Consultants Kelly Ohlson Ted Shepard, Chief Planner Tara Opsal Amy Lewin, Transportation Planner Steve Schroyer Rebecca Everette, Associate Planner Andy Smith Clay Frickey, Planning Intern Logan Sutherland Craig Russell, Project Manager (Russell + Mills Lloyd Walker Studios) Nicholas Yearout Notes 1 . Introductions 2 . Project Updates a . Process and schedule update b . Community outreach to date c . Visioning Survey results d . Existing and future conditions analysis e . CSU on-campus stadium update 3 . Activity: Draft Vision Review a . Presentation of updated vision statements for the West Central Area Plan, including vision statements for: i . Land Use & Neighborhood Character ii . Transportation & Mobility iii . Open Space Networks iv. Prospect Corridor b . The committee split into groups to discuss the vision statements and supporting materials . Each group focused on a different theme : Land Use & Neighborhood Character, Transportation & Mobility, Open Space Networks, and Prospect Corridor. Page 1 of 6 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #2 Area Plan July 16, 2014 The groups rotated twice to discuss three different topics . The results of the discussion are presented below. Vision Review Activity Notes Land Use & Neighborhood Character 1 . Comments on Land Use & Neighborhood Character Vision board a . Vision: Vibrant and diverse neighborhoods that provide a high quality of life i . Police sub-district in Campus West, fine grain b . New development that complements existing developments and accommodates future growth i . Replace "complements" with compatibility ii . Can't exceed height of tallest tree within 200 feet iii . New development needs to be in scale - not like the Summit iv. Height can be terraced and well designed, not imposing v. Height is an issue b . Diverse residents and housing options i . Density needs capital improvements ( etc. ) ii . Diverse residents vs . diverse housing iii . Housing needs create impacts on neighborhoods iv. Parking is a big issue, but is fine grain in nature v. Livable community for all ages and incomes vi . Pull diversity stats for the area since 1980, and get as fine grain as possible vii . Need for diversity in the building stock in addition to complementing existing development viii . We need to draw a line on diversity because 6 people crammed into one house # diversity ix. Hard to quantify the diversity of land uses in the area x . Would like to see more ways to make the neighborhoods friendlier to aging in place c . Well-integrated campus community i . Add bullet for housing ii . Historic preservation needs a bullet d . Don 't see a circle that addresses student housing 2 . Comments on Land Use & Neighborhood Character maps a . Areas of Stability, Enhancement and Development map i . May need further clarification and more categories ii . Red areas need to be compatible with surrounding neighborhoods b . WCAP is what % of total city population ? Density is _ d . u ./acre ? i . Show that this area is the most densely populated in town ii . Are we addressing the associated needs for police, fire and other services ? c . Diversity = social fabric and is positive Page 2of6 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #2 Area Plan July 16, 2014 i . Income ii . Age iii . Architecture d . Trends/metrics over time and projections to the future e . Student housing — on -campus preferred f. Show historic properties/ potentially historic properties g . Need to link mobility with land use and character - Show this graphically on a map 3 . Land Use & Neighborhood Character general comments a . Photos are great but how do you quantify the vision statements ? i . Developers need #sin order for this document to be useful b . Do historic structures fit into this framework somewhere ? c . I feel the visions are valid but we need to know what these vision statements mean in terms of implementation d . Would like to see comments on the survey question about density e . Need to acknowledge that a lot of people commute through the area f. This area has always been changing and that is what makes it unique, would hate to see the plan lock down the area ' s character Transportation & Mobility 1 . Comments on Transportation & Mobility Vision board a . Retrofitting streets, green streets, downgrading streets should be added to the vision statements and recommendations i . This concept needs to be a very high priority for the plan ii . E . g . , Stuart Street, undoing mistakes on West Prospect ( concrete medians, lack of landscaping) iii . Avoid concrete facilities in the future iv. Improve streetscape and attractiveness along streets in neighborhoods v. Slow traffic down in neighborhoods vi . Green streets, narrower streets, fundamentally reconfiguring certain streets vii . Redesign streets with room for medians/boulevards, even in neighborhoods 2 . Comments on Transportation & Mobility maps a . Underpass on Shields i . As an interim strategy, install a crosswalk to test a potential location for an underpass before committing to the investment ii . Preference for an underpass at Elizabeth b . Bike facilities i . Bike lanes are needed on Shields from Laurel to Mulberry ii . Bike lanes needed on both sides of Mulberry iii . Mason Trail through campus is confusing c . Other roadways that weren 't highlighted on the map Page 3 of 6 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #2 Area Plan July 16, 2014 i . Constitution south of Prospect is a difficult road to get across, with blind corners, unsafe crosswalks, and so few locations to cross along the street — this needs to be added to the map ii . Constitution & Scarborough and Constitution & Stuart both have issues iii . Stuart and Constitution are collector streets that handle a lot of traffic, and need enhanced restriping, reinforcement of bike lanes, expanded sidewalks — simple, low-cost improvements iv. Make sure boundary arterials (Taft Hill, Mulberry, Drake ) get addressed and aren't neglected in the plan d . Crossing improvements i . Intersection of Shields and Prospect — need a better way to get people from Prospect to Lake, including better wayfinding ii . Need more medians and pedestrian refuges iii . Very hard to connect to Red Fox Meadows from north of Prospect 3 . Transportation & Mobility general comments a . What level of feasibility should you show in the plan ? What is feasible now vs . in the future vs . may never be feasible ? i . Should show concepts that are feasible now in addition to those that may not be immediately feasible to reflect our aspirations for the plan and keep options open b . Parking i . More parking is needed within the transit-oriented development overlay zone to support new residential development ii . To the extent we can, make sure CSU contributes their share and takes responsibility for their impact; they are not adequately addressing the problem now but are working on it iii . The RP3 program in the Sheely/Wallenberg neighborhood has been very successful , and needs to be considered in other areas; lots at CSU won't be filled if there' s free parking in neighborhoods iv. There is a particular distance that students are willing to walk to campus from parking; test out this walking radius to determine potential boundaries for an RP3 program v. Use a CSU shuttle out to Hughes stadium for parking storage, or add a stop to Hughes or another parking storage location on an existing bus route (e . g . , the new route to Foothills campus) vi . Parking is an issue that wasn 't fully envisioned or addressed in the 1999 Plan c . Funding i . BOB 2 . 0 funding should focus on sidewalk improvements and fixing gaps throughout the West Central Area d . Need a much better plan for maintenance of bike and pedestrian facilities, including snow removal, street sweeping, clean up, etc. e . Make sure land use and transportation are integrated to better inform one another Page 4 of 6 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #2 Area Plan July 16, 2014 f. This area services the most intense use in town [CSU ] , and for its land use area it handles the largest load of population and transportation issues; this is the most critical area of the city to address Open Space Networks 1 . Comments on Open Space Networks Vision board g. Vision: A balanced, connected network of public and private lands for wildlife, plants and people i . Remove balanced and connected ii . Balanced - needs to be more habitat emphasis iii . Connected implies trails - focus on wildlife corridors h. Access to nature, recreation, and environmental stewardship opportunities i . Show neighborhood xeriscape projects as one of the bubbles i. Attractive urban tree canopy that supports habitat, character and shade i . Proactively plant trees before they die, e . g . , Ash ii . Parkway, medians, maintenance - replant iii . Preserve trees during development, redevelopment j. Preserved and enhanced wildlife habitat corridors i . Pursue additional natural area acquisition ii . Development allows established animal trail preservation iii . Xeriscaping iv. Native, low water use v. City assume liability for trails vi . No formal trails vii . Maintain ditches through community projects Prospect Corridor 1 . Comments on Prospect Corridor Vision board a. Safe and comfortable corridor for all modes i . Need to acknowledge that the bike and pedestrian accommodations might happen on Lake instead of Prospect 2 . Comments on Prospect Corridor maps a . Coming from the west on Prospect, what are your choices/options for getting to Lake Street if there' s no bike lane or safe crossing on Prospect? i . Need to create north -south linkages at or near the intersections, as it' s a hard intersection for a bike to make a left turn ( Prospect & Shields) ii . Take advantage of CSU/CSURF land in the area b . Need to view how Prospect connects to the rest of the area from land use, mobility, and open space perspectives 3 . Prospect Corridor general comments a . Concern about how Prospect west of Shields will be addressed in the plan Page S of 6 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #2 Area Plan July 16, 2014 i . This stretch has its own issues and shouldn't be neglected in the planning process b . Is Prospect, as it is now, too constrained to accommodate new development according to City standards ? c . Anything that could be done on Prospect would just be dressing it up and wouldn 't be able to fully address mobility for all modes i . Lake Street is critical to making things work ii . Properties in between Lake and Prospect should be developed in a way that addresses both streets iii . Can't accommodate all modes on Prospect d . Quantify the potential buildout of the high -density mixed use zoning district between Prospect and Lake i . Historic properties inhibit buildout of the HMN zone ii . Need to be able to achieve our larger community goals, rather than allowing a single historic property to limit development e . Feeling that the City' s hands may be tied on Prospect in terms of acquiring new right-of- way f. If additional bike and pedestrian facilities area added, they need to be very well - maintained , particularly in regard to snow and ice removal in the winter, since it' s already a problem all along Prospect g. Expand the Around the Horn campus shuttle to Lake Street with 5 - 10 minute headways Overall Comments on Draft Vision 1 . Housing was one of the primary topics in the 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan, and needs to be more strongly emphasized in the updated vision for the West Central Area Plan 2 . These vision statements are general concepts, and a lot more specificity is needed to expand upon and explain these concepts a . The 1999 Plan had much more fine-grain detail b . The 1999 Plan is still mostly valid, including the goal statements, and should be heavily incorporated in the updated plan c . The appendices of the 1999 Plan provide important context and should be incorporated in the updated plan , perhaps as appendices once again Page 6 of 6 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #3 Area Plan September 10, 2014 Stakeholder Committee Meeting #3 West Central Area Plan September 10, 2014 — 5 : 30-7 : 30 p . m . Present Absent Sue Ballou Lars Eriksen Rick Callan Becky Fedak Susan Dominica Kelly Ohlson Colin Gerety Jeannie Ortega Carrie Ann Gillis Jean Robbins Per Hogestad Steve Schroyer Ann Hunt Greg McMaster Staff & Consultants Tara Opsal Ted Shepard, Chief Planner Andy Smith Amy Lewin, Transportation Planner Logan Sutherland Rebecca Everette, Associate Planner Lloyd Walker Craig Russell (Russell + Mills Studios) Nicholas Yearout Paul Mills (Russell + Mills Studios) Notes 1 . Welcome/ Introductions 2 . Project Updates a . Process and schedule update b . Recent and upcoming outreach c . Final Vision Statements 3 . Discussion: Draft Introductory Text ( prepared by Lloyd Walker for the Stakeholder Committee to review) a . Discussion about the purpose of the text and how it should be incorporated into the plan . b . Clarification by Lloyd Walker that this is an updated version of the introduction from the previous plan , and the vision statements reflect his own understanding of the vision for the area . c . Decision by the committee to review the text individually and send any comments to staff. Staff will then incorporate the text into the draft plan as appropriate . 4 . Keypad Polling: What topics would the group like to focus on tonight? a . Group could select from 1 ) Land Use & Neighborhood Character, 2 ) Transportation & Mobility, 3 ) Open Space Networks, and 4) Prospect Corridor b . Land Use & Neighborhood Character was the top choice overall , and was discussed first Page 1 of 5 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #3 Area Plan September 10, 2014 c . Following the discussion of Land Use & Neighborhood Character, the committee broke into small groups to focus on the other topics 5 . Large Group Discussion : Land Use & Neighborhood Character a . Areas of Stability, Enhancement, and Development Map i . Should the Sheely neighborhood be classified as " Neighborhood Enhancements" rather than an "Area of Stability?" There is development pressure within and surrounding the neighborhood, which causes tension . The Sheely Historic District is stable, but remodels and additions might be appropriate in the rest of the neighborhood . ii . Is this map descriptive or prescriptive ? We want to show what we would like in these areas, not just what we expect to see . iii . Just because there are rentals in a neighborhood doesn 't mean the character isn 't good . iv. High intensity/density development and small -scale single family homes can co- exist in close proximity . There are examples in other cities with historic neighborhoods adjacent to new development . v. Even taller than 5 stories might be appropriate in some areas . vi . Add Safeway at Taft Hill/Drake to map . vii . Spring Creek Medical Park may be outdated . b . Affordable Housing i . Concern about affordability in the West Central area . Investors out-compete families looking for more affordable housing ( e . g. , starter homes or homes for families) . ii . Staff commented that the City is currently working on a Housing Affordability Policy Study, and will send follow up information on that effort. iii . Should be recommending affordable housing in the Areas of Development on the map c . Neighborhood Character i . There are a lot of locational advantages to the West Central area . A lot of people live here for the location . ii . Consider a tax-credit, deed restrictions, or other incentives and requirements for owner-occupied homes in areas currently dominated by rental houses ( e .g ., Avery Park) . iii . Enforcement of ordinances helps keep neighborhoods desirable and affordable . This requires active involvement and cooperation from neighbors . iv. Some portion of neighborhoods needs to be stable/owner-occupied . Is there a standard percentage for what is considered stable ? v. Don 't want to get rid of the students; that' s part of the diversity, part of what we like about the neighborhood . d . Student Housing i . West Elizabeth corridor and the HMN zone are good for new student housing . Page 2 of 5 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #3 Area Plan September 10, 2014 ii . New student housing developments — consider an incentive for developers to include an affordable component for students with lower incomes . This might help attract students away from rental houses in the neighborhoods . iii . It would be nice for CSU to build more housing for their students . iv. MAX and transit are changing where it' s convenient for students to live . v . If CSU continues to grow, it will be distributed throughout the city, not that many more students could be fit into this area . e . HMN zone i . It' s about choices . The HMN zone is a good place for high -density student housing, but it also has historic properties . ii . Good, high -quality design is key in the HMN zone . iii . Consider greater design standards for particular areas ( e .g. , HMN ) or uses ( e .g ., multi -family housing) . f. Growth and Density i . Fort Collins is a landlocked community that will only continue to grow. We've gone way beyond being just a college town . ii . More density means more intense use in this area, which will stress services, infrastructure, parks, etc . Need to figure out how to address that . iii . Density feels dense when it is underserved . iv. Encourage and facilitate good non- residential uses, bike and pedestrian connections, and open space to serve the neighborhoods . g . Open Space i . When new development comes in, how are they going to provide open space outside the dwellings ? 6 . Small Group Discussions: a . Land Use & Neighborhood Character ( continued discussion ) i . Don't lose focus on redevelopment opportunities on West Elizabeth . ii . Land Use #5 "Well - integrated campus community" should be supplemented with a reference to such attributes as safety and well- being, or somehow promoting a "good neighbor policy ." iii . Support for the Police Sub- District . iv. Recommend the formation and active use of a Neighborhood Design Review Advisory Committee to advise on design issues but would not function like an H . O .A. This was recommended in the 1999 Plan but never implemented . Such committee could work in conjunction with the Landmark Preservation Commission or the Planning and Zoning Board and would not apply to single family detached homes . v. Recommend the new development be guided by established design that reflects the vernacular of the neighborhoods . Design styles should be identified and encouraged such as mid -century modern, craftsman , prairie, but not the international style . Page 3 of 5 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #3 Area Plan September 10, 2014 vi . The mass of large buildings must be mitigated and not over- power the neighborhoods . vii . Compatibility should be emphasized when evaluating new development . viii . The 20-acre Blue Ocean property should be allowed to focus on compatibility, sensitive design, forms that are the appropriate scale, avoiding huge blocks of apartments, and that there should be flexibility to allow the developer to accomplish these objectives . b . Transportation & Mobility i . Need better updates for changes in Transfort routes for students . ii . Need to prune trees on the sidewalk on City Park Ave . iii . Don't focus on just bikes, pedestrians are important too . iv. Crossing Shields needs improvement — look at an underpass . v. Safety and maintenance concerns for underpasses and overpasses, especially in the winter. vi . There are accidents all the time at Drake and Raintree, add to the map to consider improvements . vii . Prospect and Shields intersection — it is difficult for bikes to safely turn northbound from Prospect, as they have to cross multiple lanes to get into the turn lane . viii . Shields and Elizabeth intersection — bicyclists don't always look back for cars, and cars aren't always paying attention ; need more awareness where the bike lane meets the turn lane . ix. Support for newly installed buffered bike lanes on Shields, Stuart, etc . x. A crossing from Hill Pond to the Spring Creek Medical Park would improve safety . xi . Support for the green bike lanes and bike box . Bike boxes at Prospect & Shields and Prospect & Center were suggested . Concern that the paint gets slippery in wet/snowy conditions . xii . Support for the corner and mid- block bulb-outs to increase the visibility of pedestrians and encourage drivers to slow down . Support for the use of reflectors in conjunction with these . c . Open Space Networks i . No discussion occurred on this topic . d . Prospect Corridor i . Overall support for concepts shown in Alternative B above other alternatives . ii . Support for on -street bike lanes as shown in Alternative B for efficiency and ease of movement for bicyclists . This is especially important from Whitcomb to Shields due to excessive access points and concern for bike/vehicle conflicts . iii . Medians are a positive addition in all alternatives, particularly Alternative B . Include medians throughout corridor wherever possible . iv. Support for pedestrian/bike crossing between Whitcomb and Shields . Need to integrate with a pedestrian refuge if possible . Page 4 of 5 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #3 Area Plan September 10, 2014 v. Need to improve Mason Trail crossing and overall configuration for wayfinding, ease of movement and safety. vi . Street trees are desirable to create a corridor with consistent character. vii . Support for including bicycle facilities as depicted in Alternative B and C. viii . Ensure corridor designs are acting as a catalyst for new development . ix . Support for Lake Street Alternative B and/or C . The two-way bike lane on the north side of the street is positive because it has fewer access points and easier access to the CSU campus than the south side . Page 5 of 5 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #4 Area Plan November 19, 2014 Stakeholder Committee Meeting #4 West Central Area Plan November 19, 2014 — 5 : 30-7 : 30 p . m . Present Absent Rick Callan Sue Ballou Susan Dominica Lars Eriksen Becky Fedak Carrie Ann Gillis Colin Gerety Tara Opsal Per Hogestad Lloyd Walker Ann Hunt Nicholas Yearout Greg McMaster Kelly Ohlson Staff & Consultants Jeannie Ortega Ted Shepard, Chief Planner Jean Robbins Amy Lewin, Transportation Planner Steve Schroyer Rebecca Everette, City Planner Andy Smith Craig Russell (Russell+Mills Studios) Logan Sutherland Notes 1 . Welcome/Dinner 2 . Project Updates a . Process and schedule update b . Recent and upcoming outreach 3 . Discussion: Plan Organization a . Include callouts specifically for residents, developers, and other audiences — highlight areas that are most relevant, explain how to get involved , etc . b . Show the three policy topics all overlapping with each other ( as a triangle, rather than linearly) c . Identify linkages with the Climate Action Plan and other relevant plans 4 . Policy Discussion : Land Use & Neighborhood Character a . Map : Make colors of the various areas (stable, enhancements, development/ redevelopment) more distinctly different b . Design & Compatibility i . How do residential architectural styles ( e .g . , Craftsman ) translate to larger buildings? ii . How prescriptive will the design guidelines be ? Page 1 of 3 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #4 Area Plan November 19, 2014 iii . Specific standards would be easier to enforce iv. How will energy efficiency and other functional features of a development be addressed ? 1 . Could create development standards for the West Central area or city- wide, such as the standards that were developed for the Eastside and Westside neighborhoods 2 . Utilities offers an Integrated Design Assistance Program, which could be helpful v. Even buildings that satisfy design guidelines can still be " bad" vi . Reference the Centerra design guidelines for Craftsman style vii . Neighborhood context and character are more important than specific architectural styles viii . Need implementation mechanisms for design 1 . Should be more than just advisory, but not too prescriptive 2 . Photos and examples are very helpful c . Physical enhancements are needed in all areas — stable, enhancement, and development areas . Additional programs are most appropriate in the enhancement areas . d . Neighborhood character is influenced by the school district boundaries, which can sometimes have the effect of segmenting out low- income areas, resulting in disinvestment i . Are there ways to influence the school district boundaries to ensure that they are equitable ? 5 . Policy Discussion : Transportation & Mobility a . Intersections i . The intersection of Prospect and Heatheridge needs improvements to address safety issues and high traffic volumes; consider a fully signalized intersection ii . The Shields and Elizabeth intersection needs improvements; doesn't adequately accommodate peak hour traffic — especially westbound left turns onto Elizabeth and northbound left turns onto Shields b . Prospect (west of Shields ) i . Need a pedestrian crossing of Prospect at or near the Red Fox Meadows neighborhood ii . Need a safe crossing to access bus stop iii . Consider medians and median refuges on Prospect from Shields to Taft Hill ; this segment needs aesthetic and crossing improvements iv. Need better crossings to get to Bennett Elementary School c . Street retrofits i . Street retrofit improvements should be about aesthetics too, not just traffic calming ii . Could also include raised crosswalks at intersections for additional visibility of pedestrians and traffic calming Page 2 of 3 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #4 Area Plan November 19, 2014 iii . Consider maintenance, sweeping, snow removal, and drainage issues related to the bulb-outs d . Shared off-street paths need extra maintenance; debris quickly accumulates e . Need more signage that pedestrians have the right-of-way, like in Boulder and mountain towns f. Need to do a betterjob with street sweeping, snow removal, and street drainage, in general g . Transit i . Need safe crossings to bus stops ii . Consider a bus-only access point along Prospect, west of the Sheely neighborhood ; could reduce issues with left turn movements for buses at Shields and Prospect; could connect to MAX 6 . Policy Discussion : Open Space Networks a . Clarify that open space could be incentivized or purchased within the areas identified for enhancement b . Clarify whether open space would be public or private, and that acquisition would only occur with a willing seller c . Neighborhood Center/Young's Pasture properties ( near Shields and Prospect) i . Concern that too much open space is shown on these properties , as well as support for maintaining amount of open space currently shown ii . Clarify how a potential connection to the Spring Creek trail would occur d . Consider stormwater management with street retrofits e . Look at informal properties that are already publically owned f. Connectivity can be just for wildlife, it doesn't always have to be for people g . State in the Plan that there is the potential for additional open space purchases within the West Central area, beyond what's shown on the map h . Make sure connectivity ( e .g . , ditch crossings) does not fragment wildlife habitat i . Need connected human spaces that recognize actual human behavior ( e .g ., for pocket parks, courtyards, etc. ); spaces should be comfortable j . Some of the images shown are more appropriate for the Land Use & Neighborhood Character section, not Open Space Networks i . Photos should be more naturalized ii . Include a photo of the Spring Creek Trail iii . Show photos of how individual open space areas connect to the larger network k. Staff should present the West Central Area Plan to the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board 7 . Review & Discussion : Prospect Corridor Design a . Committee members reviewed the Prospect and Lake Draft Designs and had one-on -one conversations with staff about the designs 8 . Next Meeting ( early 2015 ) : will send draft Plan for review prior to meeting Page 3 of 3 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #5 Area Plan January 28, 2015 Stakeholder Committee Meeting #5 West Central Area Plan January 28, 2015 — 5 :30-7 : 30 p . m . Present Absent Sue Ballou Per Hogestad Rick Callan Tara Opsal Susan Dominica Jeannie Ortega Becky Fedak Logan Sutherland Colin Gerety Lloyd Walker Carrie Ann Gillis Ann Hunt Staff & Consultants Greg McMaster Ted Shepard, Chief Planner Kelly Ohlson Amy Lewin, Transportation Planner Jean Robbins Rebecca Everette, City Planner Steve Schroyer Clay Frickey, Associate Planner Andy Smith Craig Russell (Russell+Mills Studios) Nicholas Yearout Notes 1 . Welcome/Dinner 2 . Project Updates a . Process and schedule update b . Recent and upcoming outreach c . City Council Work Session summary d . Plan organization (Table of Contents ) e . Plan production timeline 3 . Discussion: Draft Plan Review a . Overall comments i . Recommendations for new wording for a number of sections of the plan . ii . Implementation strategies and action items seem weak throughout the document — more are needed . Action items need to have realistic timetables and more definitive language . iii . What is the difference between programs, projects and action items? Need to clarify. Page 1 of 3 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #5 Area Plan January 28, 2015 iv. There is a lot of guidance that can 't be quantified for a developer, need more specifics on timeframes, how to meet the policies, etc . What does it actually mean for a developer? v . The 1999 Plan was too vague — this plan should not repeat that mistake . vi . Add a section on what worked , what didn 't work, and lessons learned from the 1999 Plan . b . Readability of Draft Plan i . There is duplication in a number of sections, which is unnecessary. ii . The implementation priorities in the Transportation & Mobility chapter are clearer than the other chapters . c . Prospect Corridor i . Why is Lake Street included ? This is not a major road for most Fort Collins residents . ii . Lake Street complements Prospect Road for bike/pedestrian movement, it' s the " back door" for the HMN zone, reduces congestion and the need for access points along Prospect, and accommodates transit . iii . Who pays and who benefits for improvements on Lake Street ? CSU is the primary beneficiary. d . Improvements to Prospect Road west of Shields i . How does this get addressed in implementation , and where will the funding come from ? ii . Is it separate from the stadium conversation, or can it be included in the intergovernmental agreement ? iii . This stretch of Prospect should also be a priority, particularly the addition of safe pedestrian crossings . iv. Not as significant a need as Prospect between Shields and College, but there may be economies of scale of constructing improvements along both segments at the same time . v . There is a need to balance and prioritize capital projects citywide in a rational way. Not all improvements in the West Central area will be top priorities right away. e . Open Space Networks i . Have any locations been identified for community gardens? f. Land Use & Neighborhood Character i . Design guidelines — want some flexibility, don't want it to be completely rule- driven . ii . Developers need predictability, and neighborhoods want the ability to influence a project . Need to allow for neighborhood input . iii . Need more discussion about the realities of the HMN zone, including potential conflicts between historic properties and new development . Page 2 of 3 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #5 Area Plan January 28, 2015 iv. Need more definitive projects and statements, like the Transportation & Mobility section . However, the City has less control over some land use and neighborhood character topics than it does for capital projects . v . There' s a difference in intensity of use between a 4- bedroom apartment and a 2- or 3- bedroom apartment — need to make that distinction . Concern about fair housing issues when it comes to regulating who can and can't live in an apartment complex . Recommendations for new wording for policy 1 . 10 . vi . Need to make a distinction between single-family rental houses and multi -family apartments in the policies . g . Plan monitoring i . Who is responsible for implementing the plan and moving it along? ii . Create an interdisciplinary implementation team 4 . Next Meeting — February 4, 5 : 30-7 : 30 p . m . (follow- up meeting to continue discussion ) Page 3 of 3 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #6 Area Plan February 4, 2015 Stakeholder Committee Meeting #6 West Central Area Plan February 4, 2015 — 5 : 30-7 : 30 p . m . Present Absent Sue Ballou Susan Dominica Rick Callan Becky Fedak Colin Gerety Carrie Ann Gillis Per Hogestad Kelly Ohlson Ann Hunt Tara Opsal Greg McMaster Jeannie Ortega Jean Robbins Andy Smith Steve Schroyer Lloyd Walker Logan Sutherland Nicholas Yearout Staff & Consultants Ted Shepard, Chief Planner Amy Lewin, Transportation Planner Rebecca Everette, City Planner Notes 1 . Welcome 2 . Continued discussion from previous meeting: Draft Plan Review a . Open Space Networks i . Bennett Park was never implemented following the 1999 Plan, as the area "exceeded the standard amount" for open space at the time . Is this still a consideration ? Will it limit the creation of new parks/open space in this area ? ii . Supportive of the Arthur Ditch crossing at Whitcomb and Wallenberg as long as it isn't used for pedestrian traffic to the stadium . iii . Young' s pasture was initially considered for open space, should be reconsidered . iv. Factor the Spring Creek Trail into the 10- minute walk to open space analysis v . The need to cross arterial roads is a major issue for accessing open space ( e .g ., crossing West Prospect Road to get to Red Fox Meadows) . Reference pedestrian crossing improvements in the open space chapter . vi . Add an action item regarding wayfinding to open space . vii . Clarify " Levels of Service" for parks and open space . What does this mean for the area ? viii . What is "desired " open space ? Desired by who ? Revise wording . Page 1 of 2 West Central Stakeholder Committee Meeting #6 Area Plan February 4, 2015 ix. Use "ditches" instead of " irrigation waterways" or "canals ." x . Add guidance related to xeriscaping and the use of drought-tolerant plant species . xi . We are going to lose a lot of canopy trees to the emerald ash borer. Need to proactively plant new trees . b . Prospect Corridor i . What would be the impact of the new mid - block pedestrian crossing on traffic flow? ii . The proposed pedestrian crossing interferes with access to the "Slab ." Consider moving farther east or west to align with other pedestrian connections . iii . Emphasize that this is just a conceptual design . iv. What is the timeline for improvements to Prospect and Lake? c . CSU Stadium i . Use variable message signs ahead of events to warn people to avoid the area ( like is done downtown for New West Fest and other events ) . ii . Concerns about value engineering of the stadium , which could reduce the quality of lighting and sound systems and create additional impacts to neighborhoods . iii . Noise will create impacts in all directions, not just to the south of the stadium . d . Transportation & Mobility i . Need to make sidewalks wider throughout the West Central area — add to street retrofitting policies ii . Create a template for widening sidewalks (action item ) iii . Sidewalks are not well- maintained along arterial roads . Need better enforcement to ensure property owner compliance . e . Land Use & Neighborhood Character i . Improved lighting in neighborhoods — ensure that the types of new light fixtures comply with the Climate Action Plan and minimize light pollution ii . Consider a range of safety concerns for adding lighting. Concerns that new lights attract more people to congregate under light fixtures . 3 . Next Meeting — small group discussion on building design, compatibility, and other land use and neighborhood character topics (to be scheduled ) Page 2of2 O ■ � L O cn CL E O cn 0 d Q CSU On - Campus Stadium ' The High Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (HMN) District (located immediately south of the stadium site) is intended to be a setting for higher density In December 2014, the CSU Boardof Governors approved multi-family housing and group quarter residential the development of a new stadium, to be constructed on uses (dormitories , fraternities , sororities , etc . ) the CSU Main Campus . A wide range of concerns and closely associated with , and in close proximity to, comments related to the stadium have been collected the Colorado State University Main Campus . Per throughout the West Central Area Plan process . Below the Land Use Code, any private sector development is a summary of considerations and recommendations would be held to the maximum allowable off-site for the new CSU stadium, as they relate to the various lighting spillage into the entire HMN zone of 0 . 1 foot- topic areas of the West Central Area Plan . candle . If illumination levels from the stadium are not mitigated, potential re-development of this area Land Use & Neighborhood would be negatively impacted . Character • The glare from sports lighting impacts a driver's ability to distinguish objects and impairs overall Noise visibility. If it is discovered that the glare created by • Based on noise studies provided by CSU , the stadium lighting would be problematic, then light anticipated decibel levels during football games and level reductions or other mitigation measures should concert events would exceed that which is allowed be implemented . by the City Code for all nearby residential zone Additional massing along the south end of the districts (maximum of 55 dBA between 7 : 00 a . m . stadium would have the benefit of shielding nearby and 8 : 00 p. m .) . The impact of noise on residents in properties from light spillage, glare, and noise. all directions of the stadium needs to be adequately Safety, Aesthetics & Waste Management addressed through the design of the stadium and Measures should be taken to address issues related event management. to tailgating activities in nearby neighborhoods . • A design change that raises the wall on the south Tailgating should be directed to approved locations . end of the stadium is recommended to more Tailgating in neighborhoods should be limited to effectively lower the off-site decibels impacting the the extent possible, and public nuisance violations neighborhoods to the south . Adjustments could also should be swiftly enforced to prevent large outdoor be made to the loud speaker arrangement to better gatherings . direct sound away from neighborhoods . As people travel through the neighborhoods near • Over the long term, music concerts have the potential the stadium, both before and after football games of creating more disturbances for nearby residents and other events, there is an increased potential than football games . The plan recommends that CSU for disruptive behavior. Police patrols and law enter into a formal agreement with the City of Fort enforcement presence should be increased within Collins regarding the number of concerts per year neighborhoods before, during , and after events to and sound management for such events . If concerts prevent and address disruptions . are not an important part of stadium programming, Tailgating activities and pedestrian traffic through consider agreeing to hold concerts only on the neighborhoods may result in a significant amount of granting of a special use permit from the City as a trash left behind in the street, along sidewalks, and prerequisite for holding a concert. in yards . Neighborhood clean- up activities should • The plan recommends that CSU establish a time- be coordinated immediately following events to certain conclusion for concerts and other evening mitigate impacts . Outreach should be targeted at events . CSU students and other event patrons to prevent • Monitor sound levels as events are occurring to such issues to the extent possible. adjust sound management in real-time in response to CSU should make significant efforts to improve issues that arise, in conjunction with Neighborhood communication and coordination with adjacent Services, Police Services, and other City staff. neighborhoods for football games and other events . ► ighting The City of Fort Collins , CSU , and neighborhood residents should be mutually viewed as partners in preventing and mitigating the impacts of stadium events on neighborhood character. B 2 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN CSU On -Campus Stadium Transportation & Mobility Transit Operational Plan Implement enhanced transit service to reduce the • Given the tremendous expense and feasibility need for stadium attendees to drive through the challenges of infrastructure construction, it is West Central area . prudent to address as many needs as possible As many as 3, 000 parking spaces may be used for through operational enhancements (such as a major event. Many of those spaces will be at the additional transit service), and multi-modal traffic south campus, tennis courts, or Natural Resources management . This will require a comprehensive Research Center (NRRC), so shuttles will be needed plan that includes outreach, education, detailed between parking and the stadium . parking information, transportation demand Traffic Impacts management, and gameday operational plans for Even with enhanced transit service and a robust all modes . implementation of traffic management strategies, • Use variable message signs prior to events to there are areas around campus that will be critical suggest alternate routes before and after stadium "pinch points" for the mobility of stadium attendees events . and nearby residents . These are areas that require Parking Impacts infrastructure changes to accommodate the • For potential off-campus parking in area additional bike, pedestrian, and vehicular traffic . neighborhoods, consider expanding and broader In addition to major events (sellouts) , it's also use of the City's Residential Parking Permit important to consider the non-capacity events that Program (RP3) to mitigate stadium-related parking will occur at the stadium on a much more regular basis . Some of those may not have dedicated impacts . traffic control management and the transportation • Residents of neighborhoods near the CSU campus impacts need to be accommodated primarily with are concerned about gameday parking on residential on-the-ground infrastructure . streets . The City has implemented a Residential . Determine the necessary infrastructure Parking Permit Program (RP3) to help address this improvements needed , identify costs, and issue. Currently, there are three neighborhoods in determine who pays for the improvements the program (Spring Court, Sheely, and Mantz.) By . There will be a need to accommodate increased the time the stadium is built, it is likely that several bicycle and pedestrian traffic, particularly crossing additional neighborhoods will be added . The RP3 Prospect and Shields, as well as east-west travel to requires a permit to park in a residential permit zone. and from the stadium Only residents of the zone are allowed to obtain Designate recommended bicyclist and pedestrian permits . Incorporating a more proactive approach routes to ensure safety and to minimize disruption with signs and enforcement officers may be needed in residential neighborhoods for gamedays (and other non-football events, as well) . FF _ 1 i -� • \, rla 1k WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 B 3 Open Space Networks Prospect Corridor rvoise df Lignung In December 2014, the CSU Board of Governors approved • As described in the Land Use & Neighborhood the development of a new stadium , to be constructed Character chapter, both sporting and other events on the CSU Main Campus . Below is a summary of at the stadium will likely result in significant noise considerations and recommendations for the new CSU and lighting impacts . Noise and light pollution stadium, as they relate to the Prospect Corridor. both impact environmental quality, and the City of Prospect may experience an increase in traffic on Fort Collins has enacted a number of policies and event days. The Event Management Operational Plan regulations that seek to minimize these impacts should consider temporary route adjustments and citywide. Measures should be taken to minimize the noise and lighting impacts of the stadium beyond incorporate ways for theSheely/Wallenberg residents the CSU campus . to be able to get into and out of neighborhood (only • As described in Land Use & Neighborhood Character, accessed via Prospect for vehicles) . a sound wall could be erected on the south end of the Incorporate wayfinding and infrastructure stadium to reduce impacts . Such a wall could include improvements to accommodate increased bicycle live plant material as a feature to soften the mass of and pedestrian traffic, particularly crossing Prospect the wall and provide an open space amenity within and Shields, which re-emphasizes the importance of the stadium site. an underpass of Prospect at Center. Construction & Operation Consider ways of handling game day traffic on • The use of sustainable building materials and Prospect and Lake through a combination of practices is strongly encouraged to minimize impacts infrastructure improvements and operations to the natural environment. management. • Sustainable operation and management practices, such as water and energy efficiency measures , should be employed to minimize impacts to the natural environment. • Protect the existing CSU arboretum and Plant Environmental Research Center (PERC) facilities to the maximum extent possible during construction . Stormwater Management • Any impacts to the stormwater system created by the construction or operation of the stadium should be fully mitigated . Improvements that address existing stormwater issues should be made whenever possible . T top a i B 4 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN CSU On -Campus Stadium Public Input Wait until the stadium decision is made - no need to do it over. (Question 19) • Please oppose the new stadium plans ! ! This is bad for The following section summarizes the public input the West Central area in many ways. The transportation received regarding the Colorado State University (CSU) difficulties seen now will magnify many times over on-campus stadium that was approved by the CSU with this disastrous project . I live just Southwest of Board of Governors in December 2014. Comments Drake and Shields and I work on campus (but am not shared through online surveys during the West an employee of CSU) . Please --this affects me greatly! Central Area Plan process are compiled below. When (Question 19) possible, the comments are stated verbatim . Spelling The huge impact will be the CSU Stadium, if it is built. and grammatical corrections were made to improve This will totally foul traffic in this area , especially readability, as needed . Prospect. (Question 19) Additional community input related to the development I am also not opposed to the stadium if done right. of an on-campus stadium, as compiled by a Community (Question 19) Design Development Advisory Committee (CDDAC) can be found at the following website: http:// The area is great and we have most what we need here . csudesignadvisorycommittee. com/ . The area is a focus for CSU and we should be cognizant of the fact that is the way it is . Complaining about living May 2014 Visioning Survey near the campus is counterproductive and those that do should vote with their feet. I have lived/worked near • Traffic flow on Prospect, esp . if new stadium is built at a university since 1980 and it is a great benefit, not the CSU . (Question 2) opposite. Go Rams, build the new stadium ! (Question • Parking for residents will be important especially 19) with over-crowded stadium parking, student housing, It's pretty pointless to go very far on this process etc . Make parking part of builders ' responsibilities . until we know about the proposed football stadium . (Question 6) (Question 19) • Trying to get on and off of the CSU campus via Prospect October 2014 Online Survey / September 2014 Rd . BIG delays on Whitcomb and Prospect every day between 4-5 . . . can't imagine how everyone is going to Open House Questionnaires leave campus if they build the stadium in that area . . . . With French Field events, Rolland Moore events, The is anyone doing any studies on the evacuation time Grove block parties, CSU 's new stadium and the Ex- via car to get 35, 000 students plus faculty/staff off Garden's Amphitheater how will we even hear ourselves the campus for emergency or when Tony Frank calls think? No less find a parking place . (Question 3) a snow day at 10 am? (Question 7) • Avoid adding businesses and activities that would ' You talk about natural areas but build more apartment increase traffic, such as the proposed CSU on-campus complexes with inadequate parking and talk about stadium . (Question 9) natural areas and now a stadium in an area that does not fit properly in the area . The current stadium has • Concerned about thefts at southwest CSU stadium at more than adequate room for parking . Stop wasting parking lot north of Pineridge. (Question 12) our tax money. (Question 13) • What it doesn 't need is a new CSU stadium located • Moving traffic - especially if the stadium is built . nearby. (Question 15) (Question 17) • Projects such as the proposed CSU on-campus stadium • DO NOT spend taxpayer funds on infrastructure should be avoided , as it would greatly increase traffic improvements for the proposed on-campus stadium ! on Prospect. (Question 15) (Question 20) • Prospect is a travel corridor, but I wouldn't encourage • Do not let the stadium cloud yourjudgment! We don 't higher density traffic due to the fact that there are so want a stadium ! (Question 20) many residences that are on Prospect . This is one . Why is the city wasting money on Prospect planning reason I object to the on-campus stadium proposal . before the fate of the new stadium is known? (Question The infrastructure to handle the additional traffic 20) doesn 't exist and would be difficult to implement . (Question 15) • I am not against the on-campus stadium . (Question 20) • A new stadium nearby would be disastrous for this corridor and should be resisted with every effort possible. (Question 15) • All bets are off for Prospect if CSU stadium happens . (Question 19) • No stadium ! (Question 19) WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 B 5 • We must stop ADDING housing , event centers , HEED CSU AND COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDER shopping centers etc . to this area until the traffic OPPOSITION TO THE STADIUM ON THE MAIN issues are resolved . Prospect is extremely dangerous, CAMPUS, ALREADY HAVING A PERFECTLY GOOD ONE especially from Shields to College. It's difficult to drive ON THE FOOTHILLS CAMPUS, AND THE PHENOMENAL on due to how narrow it is and we are increasing TRAFFIC CONGESTION THAT THERE WOULD BE ON traffic on that road with EVERY project that is done or PROSPECT, COLLEGE, SHIELDS AND BLOCKS AND proposed (Grove, shopping center, housing project at BLOCKS AWAY FROM THE CAMPUS . ALTHOUGH A Hill Pond and Gilgalad , amphitheater at the Gardens, SATURDAY, IT WOULD MAKE RUSH HOUR ON WEEK daycare, CSU parking garages, CSU stadium) . Prospect DAYS LOOK SPARSE AND FLOWING . (Question 5) is already a nightmare and we will drive people AWAY Worried about the traffic snarls, delays with all the foot, from this area if we are not very careful . And MAX does bicycle and bus traffic this plan will create . Then CSU not resolve the problems . No one is going to walk from wants to build their campus stadium that this area a shopping center on Shields and Stuart all the way to cannot handle the increased traffic in will cause . This a Max station . That's not an easy walk either. Walking down Prospect is downright dangerous . Taking the trail city is too congested as it is . NO TO THE STADIUM . is an option until you get to Center where it is OFTEN (Question 5) flooded . Crossing Center is dangerous . Then you have How will a new stadium impact everything we're trying to get across the tracks to get to the Max. So, you can to do? Will a new vision need to include the larger cross at Prospect, again quite dangerous or you can community of football fans stateside? (Question 5) walk all the way down to the bridge . Neither of these The goals are admirable . Will you be able to achieve option are good ones on bikes either. I 'm an avid cyclist these goals if the proposed new stadium is built on and it's not easy getting over that bridge on a bike due Lake? (Question 5) to the sharp turns and no one in their right mind would bike down Prospect. (Question 20) • Prospect needs to stay 2 lanes for each direction otherwise the congestion will be too much - especially • How much can you plan for until you know for certain since the stadium was approved (Question 5) what is going to happen with the proposed football stadium?? (Question 20) I 'm assuming this will be forthe new stadium looking to go in . How do you propose to make travel as effective • Get rid of stadium (Open House questionnaire) if not more along the prospect corridor with the • What considerations are being given to improving the integration of the stadium? (Question 5) Prospect corridor if the new CSU stadium is being built? . Be certain there are NO cuts allowed for a new (Open House questionnaire) stadium . Be certain there are NO road modifications Prospect Corridor Online Survey (November to accommodate a new stadium . Do NOT disrupt 2014 Prospect for new water and sewer and electrical for a new stadium . (Question 5) • How much has a possible new stadium been involved 1 assume that this is mainly being done in anticipation in the planning ! (Question 5) for the new stadium? But the intersection of Prospect • 1 support the project, but I am against the construction & Center needs revamping regardless . (Question 5) of a new campus stadium . (Question 5) This is the most difficult, traffic volume wise, so the • No money for on-campus stadium ! (Question 5) City must use its influence to protect surrounding users from an on -campus stadium . The silence so • None will apply if the stadium is built. (Question 5) far has been maddening for me . When committee • The vision will be impaired at all levels by the chair ( McClusky) said CSU does not need to heed construction of an on-campus stadium . (Question 5) surrounding people, I was floored . City let us down . • Thisjust continues to pave the way for stadium traffic . (Question 5) At taxpayer expense (Question 5) • Why put all this money into this without knowing about the on-campus stadium in the area . Shouldn't • What are your plans if the stadium is built? (Question 5) CSU be at least partly responsible for upgrades and • Don't let CSU build a main campus stadium (Question improvements here? (Question 5) 5) • Movement through the corridor must also be fast . • Should be developed with CSU 's proposed on-campus Anything that is done to the corridor should NOT make stadium in mind (Question 5) it less efficient to move through . ( Especially with a stadium going in) (Question 5) B 6 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN CSU On -Campus Stadium • We just wonder if all this attention to this particular Nothing is attractive about long traffic backups along area is because of the proposed stadium? Granted this Prospect with the advent of MAX and the pedestrian section of road leaves much to be desired in terms of crossings on either side of the tracks and at Center needed renovations, but since we happen to oppose Ave. Not a good way to impress visitors and tourists, the stadium, we wonder what the underlying reasons particularly the new stadium is added to the mix. Put in are that so much attention is being given to this those underpasses before it becomes an even bigger particular area . It is already pretty much a nightmare issue. (Question 8) at certain times of the day. The improvements to this Graded down because City is silent when McClusky corridor would be welcome, but the addition of stadium reiterated every meeting that CSU need not be traffic even with improvements will just make it a big responsible for on-campus stadium traffic, not only nightmare all over again . What is the honest answer? Is game day. (Question 9) the stadium the reason for the concern to improve this corridor or is city street improvement for the citizens This plan likely will not accommodate the additional of Fort Collins the reason? (Question 5) traffic generated by an on-campus stadium . Given the • If/when they build the on campus stadium is it wise to likelihood of CSU proceeding with their plans, does this have the built up medians? (Question 7) mean the new design will be effectively outdated within a year or two of completion . (Question 9) • Bus not mentioned . Will bus stop in traffic lane? What The stadium would completely negate this positive about quantity of traffic-- long back-ups at rush hour, vision and plan for both CSU and the community. lunch times , and due to trains and games at Moby (Question 10) and now soon on - campus stadium ? Sometimes intersections are blocked . How can emergency vehicles On-campus stadium bad idea not sufficiently claimed get through? (Question 7) during on-campus stadium debate, the 1 % is ignoring • I keep thinking about how this will be changed with the the 99% as usual by the rich . (Question 10) stadium and how it will be affected then if the stadium Although it seems premature to make these decisions is really being put in . This is a long term thought . If now that it looks like CSU will build a new Football the stadium does not go in, I would score higher on all Stadium off Lake in this corridor. (Question 10) areas . (Question 7) • A new on-campus stadium should require truly major • Wow! Neat! However, tell Tony Frank and the CSU BOG financial contributions from CSU . (Question 11 ) that if they want to continue to pursue Frankenfield at . Be prepared for the stadium . (Question 11 ) Grahamdoggle Stadium, they need to be prepared to get approval for a funding for a second level on Prospect t NOT allow a decent plan to be disrupted by a new s or high-speed monorail from Foothills Campus to stadium on campus (Question 11 ) 1 -25, which would help with weekday congestion , too . • How can any decisions be made before the stadium (Question 7) decision? (Question 11 ) • These ratings are if there is NO on campus stadium . • See previous comment about impacts of on-campus If the stadium is built, I think there will be a lot more stadium plans . (Question 11 ) traffic on game days and this will need to be addressed . They look good . All that would change if CSU builds (Question 7) a new stadium . Traffic and noise will be off the chart. • If the on-campus stadium is built the Prospect corridor (Question 11 ) improvements will be extremely more challenging and . Don 't think Prospect is solved . Looks better, but still difficult to achieve . (Question 7) inadequate to meet demand . I am not sure there is a • Ratings depend on how heavy the traffic is - whether solution given right of way restrictions, but I think it there is a new stadium north of Lake Street! (Question will still be marginal even before the new housing and 7) the stadium pushes it well below marginal . Lake looks • Seems that 10-foot traffic lanes are very minimal for significantly improved (Question 11 ) such a busy corridor and will be even more critical when What if CSU builds an on-campus stadium? Will the the stadium is built. (Question 7) current designs be adequate? This is a big unknown . • The on-campus stadium makes this plan moot on If not in the near future, CSU will eventually build an on game days . City needs to rebel when McClusky says campus stadium and from what I have been reading it CSU is exempt from taking responsibility for causing will likely be sooner than later. (Question 11 ) serious game day and multiple ceremonial activities to Acquisition of ROW is going to be expensive ! Like pay for the expensive stadium on land needed for CSU having a bit more space in the driving lanes . Not sure future expansion for daily needs . (Question 7) about mixing ped and bike traffic on the sidewalks . • A great vision statement is out the window, however, if Both will need some updating when the new stadium stadium on main campus goes through . (Question 8) is built. Lake is way too narrow, even in this scenario to accommodate game-day traffic. City staff report on the traffic impacts is way too optimistic. (Question 11 ) WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 B 7 • It appears that the design will be driven and constrained by the proposed CSU stadium . CSU should buy and donate land along Spring Creek between Shields and Centre Ave for the city to build another east west artery for traffic . CSU should pay for changes related to cost and traffic burden caused by the stadium . (Question 11 ) • Have these designs taken into account the likelihood of an on-campus stadium? It would be foolish to design and build this corridor only to have it be insufficient to handle event-related traffic . It seems likely also that doing the improvements may need to involve the purchase of additional right-of-way along the corridor, including purchase of single family residential properties to facilitate widening of the street section to accommodate adequate transportation improvements to meet long-term future needs . (Question 11 ) • Traffic is going to be a big issue throughout the coming years as CSU grows and if the stadium ever action moves on campus then traffic will be a nightmare . Unless 6 lanes can be squeezed in . (Question 11 ) • What is the university's contribution to this costly upgrade? It primarily serves students . It will make the stadium a more likely outcome and it is a burden to taxpayers (Question 11 ) • A campus stadium would create congestion and increased danger to the Prospect corridor. It should not be built! (Question 11 ) • If the CSU new stadium plan is approved for the on -campus location , review these plans to best accommodate large crowds during those times . Try to have temporary route adjustments prepared for such events . (Question 11 ) • With the stadium now being an initiative to go forward, I would like to see more thought given to making Lake Street the main access point for the campus and stadium . (Question 11 ) B 8 DRAFT 3 / 10 / 15 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN CA a 0 ■ � 0 CM) MCa a a This page intentionally left blank Appendix C - Existing Conditions Maps The maps in this appendix describe the existing conditions within the boundary of the West Central Area Plan . Additional existing and future conditions information related to transportation and the Prospect Corridor can be found in Appendix D. The following maps are included here : Land Use & Neighborhood Character 1 . Population (by census block) 2 . Percentage of Non -White Population (by census block) 3 . Neighborhoods 4 . Structure Plan (City Plan) 5 . Zoning 6 . Land Use 7 . Current Development Proposals, Under- Utilized Land , and Vacant Land 8 . Maximum Building Height 9 . Age of Buildings 10 . Historic Features 11 . Code Violations Transportation & Mobility 12 . Master Street Plan 13 . Pedestrian Facilities Open Space Networks 14 . Schools, Natural Areas, Parks, and Trails 15 . Floodplains and Floodways 16 . Drainage Basins 17 . Proposed Stormwater Projects Fort of West Central Area Plan Population CZulberr St R1 =ITO 10"E, OT-71 7E EEL Cn Cn EE- W Laurel St Jair Eliz b { h St �J l Lp 1 � 1 I 1 1 1 1 i o �f 1' �/� i W Drake Rd I Legend Miles 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 . 4 ® West Central Neighborhoods Population 10 - 62 63 - 137 138 - 264 N 265 - 487 " e 488 - 771 s Printed : February 25 , 2015 Fort Collins West Central Area Plan Percent Non- White LL n.. c� cn ,\ ulberry St �TM EE 0 c RI =To ITMo W Laurel St Eliz b { h St ffE � 1 n �I , it Ij Rd kit I 2 - ; C o i �/� W Drake Rd Legend Miles 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 . 4 ® West Central Neighborhoods Percent Non -White 0% - 7% 8% - 14% 15% - 22% N 23% - 33% w E - 34% - 55% s Printed : February 25 , 2015 11 All r MEMO ■ ■I��I �� IIG III I. I�111: �. ,I� : m°u'1: � ��i���i �� • • • Illlllli�i�i�� Y1iul �111111 11111111 1111115 �� ill ! ��� �Itl ■lllll I' I1111 ' ■■uu■ �. .. asoil - . _Il II: _II �� n : - — —■ ' _ MEMO ■E■■ luIN lll■Il■ll _�- ■ �- ■■ '° 'll llll IIIIIIIC IIII II■ ��� ■� -■ Inr, . , . �, ■ r (LAG NORTH Illff■ ■I111111 I . -- IM -- ilk �� �� Cp a... ��' ■ iU �- ■ U. � �� 1,�fflf ■� n � � ICI - %� � '�r r- i� rf,•� �R� - III011lllllll■�+ I ••tll�l � � � WIN -- ■- - - Intl■ t� �t••••llrf ii fllllla/� � ■ ■ -- -- -- - ■ !!al! ■llllPM LEM ■� tttt � I■� == • N IN •. IN .► . - .. .. .. _ MEMO 171, MEMO MEMO MEMO MEMO MEMO MEMO I �- -,••,- :■i- ••••�� i i i■ ,!■!filamr �1II1 ���������� • ■� .■- II�II� ol miliiiil d IIII� I III r ■■■■► %U�� i�� �� ` Ifl■fffl■11 Illnupuuu■r „ Gnnl6�� � ��►�niiiuiiu = , ' ' � � �•�■Ill! � � -IA 1111 '�� •• , ,1.� II Iwllllllllll! IN .► ♦ . .• . ltl� . �' Is►j �� '■„I �. .V♦ �. . llilit / • s 1f ■. . .. . •i. . ♦ : .fan 1 � rr.,� � a:.�i.�u innr - r■ -■ r r. i- -�/■a i ��1 �� ■at/t1� ■ � mnn � u,mm:%j !u. umu ; � ■■ ; ■ r� �-i alfllll■ i� �s unt.Elim11►la�li■llunflJl .iceoil '. 1 • ♦♦ �� sir r- -r 1� •s r� �- /Ulta i �� s�■� .f ■. .■ ■-11► Iffl1 ■IIIlfllf111111 fltlill; Illllut ��1 � �� p■fs►� fnfulflmfff ���� � �. � � MINE pnu �� .. p �ffflf!! ■ Il• iPEP 1lfwool IRA FRIE21ER fp ���� Si WIN ■ p1 MEMO MEMO MEMO MEMO MEMO MEMO MEMO MEMO -� a - • ' • • • • � C 1ZIIIIUUIIIE7''� p � o �■iiiillip 111111 ttn ■ ■� Igloo - �♦ - 1 _-�! ■■affl !llllf �. \/� II I F�rtcol! ins West Central Area Plan G' Structure Plan 28 W Mulberry St 2 cn a� 87 0 287 287 W Laurel abeth C S U I Pros oil - co Rd H co - J I. W Drake Rdin Districts Neighborhoods Edges Corridors Downtown District Urban Estate Community Separator Open Lands, Parks and Water Corridors Community Commercial District Low Density Mixed-Use Foothills Poudre River Corridor General Commercial District Medium Density Mixed-Use Rural Lands Enhanced Travel Corridor (Transit) Neighborhood Commercial District West Central Neighborhoods Campus District N Employment District Industrial District Adopted : February 18, 1997 W E Amended : January 6 , 2015 Printed : February 25 , 2015 5 11;■ 1� ���� - ■ OEM � '- :II�IIY3yME, _ _ = =11= .III= 'IL" • 'es _,- - \ ■• _ :�I�I I Irk II11 ■!• 1� �, ■r` nl ii III■I�Illl�i IIIIII IIIIIII! II� IIIIII, ■ks ■ ,1 i� '91- \\I IIII-e�IIII MI MM =P1 III .�I�!1�1119111111! :IIIIIII91 ,II������II�_ IIIIIII: IIIIIII: IIIIIII ■�� — Oman 5 31111 1 %` ■II �-IIIIII illlll l 11!: lh i��lll illll�l�lllll'1`111111111111 illlllll illlllll illlll: lin �IIIIIIIP_I IIIIIIII ' �.IIIIIIIIA Allll! IIIIIII '-nnmm�, nlmunm 111111161 IIIIIIII !IIIIIE =11 ' ` �■�1 i11111111i1 illlll IIIIIIII 11111111 illlllll °°°°°I"°°°°II" IIIIIII= illlll-n ull ■E - - !nnnm nnnnnl - - - - — ,�i :� IIII' IIIIIIII ;Illlllliillllllllllll : 111 ■_ - '= 91 _ ' ° i ■■ ��oul I� IIIIIIII a1 = _I9 ' III . i■ ■e IIIIas = E■ aa ■Illi ' a :■ IIII = = — MM `' — ■ ■IIIIII _ , rY pe■ �� ■T :■ 1■ lidlll IIIIII IIIII Illlln ME; ■■ I■TI IIII ■= at Illlllllli == lin = I�Iu� MAN r � I mp — — /- oil = a I� HIM MIN rii .IS 0■ 1 - Illllllli =nn - - - \\ 11' : - ■ I � 11 r• 11 IIIIIII i11► ■ «jQP. CII :IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII . a :_ • - - �` ■■ . ■ ' - IIIIIII ■ III: IIII: 1�111_ I. 11 I - - .■ • -I vrp► nl■ , .A■ .� ■ ■ . IIIIII � p - ..IIIL I'll- :_III. �, : - �,�. .. . — t ►�.,... __. _nnnllrinnnln - - — ► - -'I' - -- _ I: i++I/ .r �1\_ Illrlrrl�rr .� - --.r ■ a;� i' �111111 ;IIII IIII 1111I10 :� m. _ ■1 -= noon :■. -- 11II 1 = '�� 'J!�y i �I♦♦IIIIIIIIIIJ i�� !i•1"��Yt�i� �r iiiiii�I7 •-.. `�,■f��y♦I _ __ ap :L.1 :• ,,,,.` ♦ O ♦ p - = : �;I♦"IIII :L 11: :111� - Ill lr_ ■n = _ - nlr_ =I = . I. _ Inniil,:� -.r:_ 'vi::.nnunll♦ I�. ■�■■Il�i -m\•non ■_ .nm=: - - _. :►.n 11/ ,,. - _ _ _ e = - - - - - ?�nnn .- ■-•-"' - ■ ♦i .. .nnn�� P - ♦ ■■nr . C:' Y'_.� A�.■ =ice_ =_ e -- - = e _.� ♦ ,.R ,, ullll �uuuln: Gin ■- _ _ -- 'I�_ ■� - IIIIII` - - G intlnn -� •-■ I - - IIIIIIIII■■■■ ■ n■ttnnm � � -- ■ ■ -a � ■ • _ � _ - _= p � -. ;, .■u■■■ ■'r"Ii ■■ .II IIII 11111. .11111■ ` � ■l■ ■ III' -- -- ---:_ nnI1IlI - mm�nn U11 Il. _ -• ••• - � - •""""' � .II � il■ IIIIIIII -' .►�: :- :: �: : Y ' illlll: = IIII = _ '�[I?'�•nu n= � --- IIIII■■■:�� �,.,..� a IIIII = =-■ 1_= _ •- :_ : � � IIIIIIII'. ■ _ � Ills tO l= ■i1 - -IIII' ' '7■ niiil�i: ... _ nm- : : n ■ . •- , ■ IIIIIIII �1= - -- - � � ■IIIIIII: - _ I , "� ■ • II 1111111111 111111111 ; 11111111 111/= -_ IIII■IIII; .. -- -- =■�y�Yr -:_ ' - 111 -= ■■ III■t11111■ ■- � '■� •■1■■ ■■ � • m °? : Iur'fil•on :: •��p:pC±:: -■ _'� �• � ■• - III IIIII 11111111 � Ilse:I 'II t111,Itftl -- 1♦I•♦♦1 ■��'•:: -'�: -: - IIIII ■ i■ IIII IIII■11 i111111 '1� I�-E-- •! IIAA ■ :�:�1�♦Ij♦I♦'i�1♦ ■���-i':iiii i ■■�..;a Glln� :� � - - � - _ _IIIIIIII IIIIIIIORIIII. -- ■■itl�;:I ■■.�� ,j♦♦♦.:♦�i ? �� • i -'�� ■/I +' ■ illlllll •IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII ■: ■ ■■■fill �� ♦ ♦ ♦� ■. • I�♦/I � 111■L�od1111�■• _ _� = p ■ ' `.1 ♦i■ .. nn ■/ � ��- ► .♦ .l >f . �'^�-'i-� _ _ _ I_ .IIIIIIIII : IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII L- IIII ,i ■ ■� .- I � �♦♦ ' ■ .■ .. A . . IIIII■.O■■■r ■ •• ■■ •• ■- - n mnn■■ ♦nut'+'! ♦ • •• •• •• - • null , +' ■'e - 9 IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII :IIIIIII IIII[:IIII AM �� ♦ nI11II� 1r1. . .�:.. .. ■ - �■ - ■�: :: :: -: i� ��♦ice \♦i�■ ♦',t••OO t■ �� ■IIII■\•� AFL--■■ :- o - ■ ■■11■c ■ - �.\I IIIII'llr\■ ■-�■M■ ■■ _■ - �._ w�■�1♦♦♦♦Q■I■ ■■ IIIIII■\♦ ■■•a■ +�:�■ ■ ■ ■■■1■•■■■1■ • I" �p ■ - ,II- ar 111■ ■ ,�,�� ■p ■- IIIIIm11I�■ --;-: ■- -■ -ri r �■ _■�♦ - ■ ■■!���■;l■•- ■ IIIIIt1■IIII • __ - - ■ . �■ y.-■ -■ -: --.-- ■ (IIII■� ♦ ' n1 ' .. ► ■ ■ --•■�■■�- �■ �IIIII� 1 I ■1�I� .� II 11 a ■ p ■■_-- =■ -■,a■ -II■a, ♦■ ► I♦�♦,� ■ ■ y r IIIIIIIIIIIIII ILi■ __ a■•IIII Or\ .■I IIII IIII (IIII■► Pt ' ' � o --c■■�� \`•: . . - ,.. ,ter ♦�■■n■ I•\■■ ■ -•■- ■aJI/���1 . = ■,' . is o s ��- • I 111 IIIII I II IIIII: � ■ ',�I■I1: I::1::�"11e�.. III■.■� -- '♦,- - % :: nitt■��` • ■ • ■ m u ■ ■ ■ . ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ .•. : ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ . • _ 1 :1I _ .- ■■ .■1 LUMII _ - n ■I - 111 �■ ■II q_ Emi_ • ■ - ' ■ r ■■,■Illttl■Itt■■■ - ■~ • ._ � 'a z = „'='M ���n■nmm� : _ 0 1 IIII ; i1111�i j' . ♦aj� • riiiiiilil"i►� j ;C nn Yet■im ��l ■ _ 1 ■ Am tn� I�♦-ii �,1,►1���n�.� �►►t/nn■► _' uunttnn - • - - � - arl' liy ♦iI im mlrl♦ n■un■■a �i - �1 ■41■ili�iinn■ - - _. ■ ..-�1 �■ ■IIIL „�:Ilt■■ ■ntI. 1■►glula•► � ■ I �.vJnl�Inn.■ � , . , GI�■ 11■III � ■■ ♦� ip,O! ••ram Ii 1 If� anu■■■n ■ 1■ __ IIIII IIII■■■: pp - �'� �� � .. • ■++ r �\I/m/��1./\♦ ■ �, - = t ���II■■�■■'�t�i ■ 10. !+++���+►+ 0 �Ii�+•� Ii■■i1■�-' :��a■a ' 11. . �1 �p11 ♦ n +IIIIIIIIII ' IIIIIIIIIIIIIili1 � ( 'Q O��O+�.y*�.�6w■■.■ �•i:un1■ ,DII� � � IIs,�II�Lt�/-, :f D♦�D♦♦f, ., r _ r_ nl Co+ � i ♦IIII ..,......... i1f � ► II r�-' , - ➢■■■■.�'i1� i�.j•t1■■ - ■I � � � ■ IIIII ���ri _ �tII� •� P I, a.7�r t � /I�� �Q Gi •♦/���intll /1„ 11♦�Ifir • ■■�'i�■■■1 :!,l► ♦- ■: : 11i, +q VL a+ i/ p♦ 1♦♦�IQ♦,,,�■■ �IIIIuu■o♦ ► _ .�gnnn�� . 1♦�I� lip IIII ■ ■ 1►�� III�� QIIII/•♦ ♦i♦ /s♦-. - .■ ■■- V: ■► .� :.• NO " ♦♦ ♦� f IA • ■ ■IaL�■ 11,�1♦♦.,Q�'�♦♦q .. ♦♦1♦1♦I♦♦♦♦1\ � ■ :!�■ ■■!-:2,�F-■ -/•� ��♦♦' �Q ��p\A►'�♦♦♦� �1■IYI■■ IIIIIII • - ■ ■" \. �1 � ♦ ♦♦♦♦Iltl IS ■ �'■ ♦ -Ih i ■ t■t■ 1■ i� ��a�, 'I , ■ l � ' lam\ tno��♦ y . ♦: y� i �►iiw��►nlnii'ul 6�Ii�I■q ; III/� �11 ■■.■I♦♦jam r� ► / • �►♦I♦���„�� ♦�K\� i `.l O ■ ■■ o.' IN ice.1101�\I IIIIII IQ♦,.n� ♦♦A ■■/ • r�1� •.1���� �tl .��1il • ■MAE■ - ■ ■-:-6 -� ■II�II�I P;C mil♦ ♦♦♦ ►♦ q►L►9►�•�►��■ �� ,♦ ♦ I 1♦♦ QII�i ■��� ■ IN ■ o - '.� ■ - tP �l.A`�I%�'♦♦� �'�♦i♦,,♦ �♦�%� i:yi��■� �♦1 �•�•� �•��■t���I� I1�/�� • o. y --■ ■ ■IIIIIII ME Ill• �f. /►♦i0 ♦�♦�1��;■n .a ■�♦♦�i� �i i I si�I ■IIIIf■�� :r :: iA��1111 111 I►�� i Int♦��0�+♦♦♦i!07y��1 �/ ♦ �■ ■ nq���� ■■ iunm h�: ♦♦� p!I■♦�'♦+'pi ♦♦i:::E •liiiii iliilln . . . . loll i ■ ril♦♦ �i: � ii i♦♦loom pF ■In►♦i ♦♦. is♦D ♦�l�'''�.�■ �,�,�., �♦� �, - . . \As /�i.. . ♦ G� �11A1111 ►■■ �- ►♦�1 �11 1a�1/1� 'IIII►1♦��-- • :: ------ ■►���`��III ►,- .I ♦ r . IIII ■ •Y■ _ Y, ' :: ::':■ .� �. 1`�;���♦ 7�IIIIIIi'y : : : �\■■11;�� � • s ♦♦l♦l ' 11111111 "�ta 1`'L♦� .♦ IIIII IIIIII ♦ l.11 ■ -, ♦ l 1-= = 1,,.,,....,- .■ : �■�r ;�� ♦� IIII � I � � • ■f ♦♦ - ■111111111■ p' IA�iy�� �� � PIIIIIII■ ■ .\�� � �- C1►�%/11��' 1111I11111 ,■u d�� -- ■liiiann- - :■ p1I/' - Ilp IIIIIIIIIIIpIinE ,�. , : - - -� m IIIIIII ■ ■III■ - •• .+— III' tii p iitliit imnni ml : �� : :nn: "ilin -t�mnn - . n► � nm : - .non none . �. .► . . • .�nno nnnm: moon■. _._ = a �♦ - Imam - ► f a u' i 'i iu■►♦ �• a :IIIIIII G■IIIIII -_ -_ -- ri man --.: [/p ■ - dIII�I IIIII■Iq I ■/ 4i cm., ♦ ��,�IIII -- --� - - - ■ ■■ MIN ■iiIin : vA:YY111uYnlfinl `�1111111� i��p ���\� �• : : ���1♦♦♦11� �■- JI!■- ■IIIIIIII --_-�---- \ 1\IIII/����•' 1 ♦ ♦ ♦ �� ♦ - �I . 1.irm,'' - I a IIII■■■►♦♦ ". I ..t 1� ■IIIIIIIII ■■�. -■ '�'►�l �� a ■ ♦ 11 a --�- ■IIIIII :■ -- a o o :� �♦�I� :�►I\��' - - ♦♦♦♦♦`17♦II,♦1 -- � x / /IIIIIIIIII III ■� � Ii--i- - � ��'. a ■■ ■- sa @ 11 IIII\.♦♦a♦ � i� ♦ �\ ■■ i - �, . s � 111 . �- ► n - •- --.r Ii♦1' ♦♦1►n\C�♦ �� .E' I� � r♦ .� q�.■ \ III � ram\ is /♦♦i ♦�i♦i �Q?. ►��►�►�♦►♦Ii" ♦ � :�� i "c.!♦ � � ♦ Di!!♦♦i�I►. m_ 'i■r�♦i♦♦ ! �Ii .� •♦♦ �I �I�I-�f► � ♦�/ ♦► �i'.�,� - - � ♦ ;♦O G!!J Ipp ♦ �11♦i �1♦II C� .. ■ �_ — IIm\I1♦ �1pF�•♦c•A' ■::.�.. :�..E��il�ju-i3� ■ �I► �i`■ ` n ♦ � ,• 1♦��: ■11'• II :inn ■ ..' ,��p / soon ME soon -■ IIIII ■1 �nn�n/♦ ��. u ♦ I ' -�'♦ ' :M 101MAN I� oil-■i-_ I Am �I! Ra�: � � Ilrn■ ■■■■■+���_ ♦�♦'��� _ ■■ 11■/,� -: , . . . • . : . , . , , . , . IIII■ . . ., . , ,. , ., IIII■ " , . , , , . IIII■ ' , III■ IIII■ IIII■ IIII■ ■■J Illr� � � IIIIIIIII � •� ■■un11 . 1� I� I�. - 1 'll�?pI111 N '1 11111 i -"IF �= i i♦*rMMM IIIIIIIII I :I II" I s— I / ` `- - vIQ► Rw i�1■ '■� s . — � �:� �nl a li uu a u_&, wnn 1 � .. . Win:,,,, onm . �� 1111' 11 �� ' ► > ///■Rsa �fi ' r1■rYt/ I'■ -- •� ♦11 �1.. I� - ■ 1 - . �I m I �i �� ��• �� '•�iA .� .. C: n��C �I111' ll . II Ium 11111 = =11 = `: N I, . your uR �► . 1 - ,� — _ ^` ? �•1 �i :. dRwm / �: iIIIII� �iunNll :■e■■ ■ j man — — — � . :I:Illlwq■r■■■■■ nnnnnu G � nnn ■■ .■ ■f ■p : �` .�,�. NO ■- .null % �. �, R _ I 111_ uI �• uu1111� � nuu■■nt � � �' � . in �--ti wCi�C � � 111 11■■■� sr �— - fillin - , F1ii . : Iibloi 11114M Will on In on = : M 13h911JQ� 1 .1wow ! lillJ r ' �i '.� ni. I■ r1 CM In Cm ice ' =!qF �; , S�i�•el• : nuunuugl 1 t/rn ;euu�m■ Untl Qry: . 'IIIN�/� �j�' �� m in inlyll C: 7: ON M :,umr ■ ,q in 1 �1 r. ■ItIt1<l1 . im In in r. �! llll/r i Now Im v . ■ ■� �� �� -- inIS nrri�/�111� - Z- -- -- _ I��IuuuN�aiirr �i�j ��,1� :. M.M. -- -- t �lllllllllllllll up 'INbll I,�IEI ►�,, , ,. �� ►1■1 Otrta1 ` ti —.�■prw.�r�_ tt/ in m No m in m gill — .in ■ . :.. ■. t1. .. . .." Mar ►. _ Hillis 1 _01 milli IS 11 o11 S �II will ,go NO RIO 14 login an 1111 Ing in 1146 J 1 �a 1.` WON ■rrrtlltun_r' o ■1 AI Chi •rrrne ■■uu - I� ✓ �! t■■■■■■o■■■ IN � 11 ■■■11■ONE . ■ �rnrgyllisp - I� 1111111� .' rj r ■ �turri� , 11►�• �jf,►� = = =a�. ��.,� .. ;G liiu1i111_ne 1►�. •alrtrimoll I r�l ;:: On I* ONO 1■ � '-- M-:-- �► � ♦ ♦♦♦ la► � .� I \�p.i Aurf Itnrlr I�sl ���■ = Ills .umnrr ■■tat ••• ❑ 011111110 �. - - — , ll _ . ..� 111 .1 ..E / .-. ♦ ° ; 1 an r1i1�/�� �t111t11111 \fir Ir■ lid _ +-. .i.- / - r:,,'* , off an .. C��r,• ice, r.l .�' . .I �—�- ♦'.:arm _an Al ids rs�_■1-!1 ► /1,1�}_I � ,.�' ' ■ ��/►�: I111111r1■EA1111 �0g moose Ir • BIMINI qry �. �- oll "now jib MIN hi •` lO _ram \IIIIIIII IIIF �R111111111 -111111I� : -oilrIlk 311! �: . , _s-�f �'_„ ' ��i::i :! 1`7i■ 1 - -3" '"an .n:!i :r':====-��_ = � .ii',.�'��* �` � Lt.• ► - I Legend MWest Central NeighborhoodsHospital Land Use General Multi-family Services Not Defined Government facilities Oth family er tax exempt Single Group quarters II • • do - - • • • • • }=�is�♦ a (L� � t 4bR.i ! t( a y - It ire ti A * YSi • • ` I L 01, It - It 1116 INp • " It VI amm en - 14 � I. of a Igloo - , V I iJ • a_ J '. L IN . , t r -, - ! t Y t ,� . 1 - _ _ r It It fir" a ) • r f a I 7 IF , i 1 glad goo 1116 krrl • • i i may. I a It. - !. A '.1JAL to ir _ `�_ y .lz• '1 1� 1 1� I IIt � � . 4 t,�Jl .?'T t __.I 1 d >♦ •� s � � i.i� - is cc . . J4 w .F )` J - • - � Phi �' � j , ' �S : j ! < '�_ � ' er flip 16 ft 0 air. - DrFl� 11h 0 • Fort Collins West Central Area Plan - Maximum Building Height z W Mulberry St MMN y CSU W Laurel St z � ■ . tdc nm � ,. MM _ ■` C.Ca� rn sill■ W Elizasbeth ■����� ■■ s - cn m cn RL_ z LMN � ■�■ ..■■1■dill i�■■Iloil = �= IN A Jw Pr-�o '?pect R 0, d �N c�i 111� ► ■ , o POL MMN RL L Idiom■ NG ■ RL POL cf) ��� ■ CSU W Drake Rd 00/ Miles Legend 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 .4 Max . Building Height ( Stories) 0 s = 0 - 4 2 .5 - 5 N ® West Central Neighborhoods W E s Printed : February 25 , 2015 ELI ..�. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ► . . . . . . . ���= mll�■IIII IIIII 111111 mom. .� :�I — I1�7 _ ■ ■ . :. ■'r7 1 � ON MIl\II �� ��� :, . .._ _ • ■11■1■■ � � � � - • _ = • - IIII ■ � Illm '_I �� �I l nnu . minn nnn_ ■ ■ . IIII ■ F� ■ t'� II,■ + • -ono• � , 1 _ ranua. as ■ III 1 ■�1■� . �R !■ ■, . �• �■ . � �� a, �� :�►�\ n�:Ir"v�j♦♦ ��111:�■ IL .IIII■ — ■CIA , ■ �_ � � �_ �_ • MEIN ME ME ME : ruunvn•rm� IN ' ■■�■■Illllllrr■ R� ■ ■Fi �1�' - �� ■ ■■I�11 vigl11II ■ ■ ■ :' � ■IIIIIs►r I � � �� ` ' ip ■■■ �i i ■■ ' IL Jam ' ■ ■ 1 �'■ • G - �11-. `„■I■ ■= U01\A All\'I• . . ■ 'jlll■ 1■' sue` ■ ■��� ��t=:� ' r �■ ■11 ■ ■■ ■fr.■ ■ 11 11 � „''� III �� ���/11� � �� � �� ■ ■ ■� ems:■■ ■■ ■ .,7..r�� i __ SEEMS SEEMS � OWN IN � -. 'y111:■ ■ IIIII I �■Fi�'�.=_:=\■ U�� �• ` 1/��� ■ ■ ■■rr1■■ � � j � IIII IIII 1 �� ��'■,►� �■ ■►►��� i is. ■■lam IIII• .. . f� NICE IIN �11 ir'a ■■\ /i C i :i' •IIII I 1 1s' ■��,11r m it � IIIII / T �1 ■ ■■ • ��Itf� �� � C �1111 ���aim ., ■ ■■■■■ ��.■111� f■ ■j IIIII jj11 ��� i ■ 14 1 ■ ■ :■■MEE �■ ■. �■.��I■\��►� manor• 11 ■. Ig ■_ -■■ .■ ■■. .NFlSffi��i��r����1� �! �� TSB' _ r ■ ■ E■11►f Ilt�Ia�GIII■111��■ ■� �i \■■► lai L� _ ��' MEMO �� �f ■� �■ eaw w�1A Im■1■r1 Ir♦�I��� IIIII■1■11�111 mill r • . - - ■ �,■/III /■■■I■■/I■■■■■■ ■►�� 1 � IIIII i� ■■ ■i ■11■■Ilrrr' ■�,Q � i ' M ■ � ♦ 1■■�►��■■IIII■ � �r�� � 'I ►III■ _: ■r.� ��� � �� Jim ■ an:eviacur - ■ I , =j ■� n�a•� �r oaor♦ �, ■r■■A�' ■�+ . � ����'�• ��� ■ ■IIII ■ :�■■1■■■I ■�1��■ �� � �� i�����Y' ��V'��Y'=,■ !��C�,�+��a�� � II ■ . . 1 - - 111 ' ll 111 • 1 1 11 1 ' • 1 • 1 1 / 1 1 1 ' 1 City F IC I ins West Central Area Plan Historic Features • ��` W MJIberry St ! • I W Laurel St • • • • 69 • W Elizabeth St C = W Prospect Rd a� U • U) U) Sheely Drive I W Drake Rd Miles 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 . 4 Legend • Designated Histo7Properties Historic Districts " ® West Central Neighborhoods W E s Printed : February 25 , 2015 City of West Central Area Plan Fort Collins Code Violations ago 0 W M 0 om OM u l berry St��e 9 s �1= � iii ' 4 ° Wp° ° ° � �a r, _.. to pFI' a o10 4) o000 o o°p Q :s p O° 8 FIaA� Ujlam V ul lr . . � , a000ax)co OO 800 0N, O O O 4 , � . f O g CD 0 0 0 0 ' <<►i K W Laurel St • ff- f1_l = 1; IN CO 0 0 CD Cr Ito 08 8 WAIF 07ab8etjh�St ' o [ - _ . , '`+' �1� r?����,N n 00 ••�� F - _ Tip- SAl o il °O g ° .° O 0 O � � c 8 O 09 0 0 8DA(@ 0 t7 10 8 �S Om CD (DO �_P - 6 ° W_Oo o o0 °8 �" 3 �p8 °° °J Qy� Quo: „' 1 �0 �tjj M �$ 0 8o 0 o cm a oo 0 go % O o p O p 0 �0 01 SoD0000 CD O 0711 1pl" O rY�p o O O 8 80 8 0 Og o 80o 8 O o o r, . O° � ° O O Q Qo ° o V�rPrxOsp: tRd ° °°o°p aB o8 O ca o $ o o MD CO ° ° 8 ° owo 0 CD � �it,�a��� ° @o 000 80 o ,q 8 � ° ,, "mod'' o : GO ° O O R�tr Q o n IWO o 8p V p0 6 o .iC�'D�' ° C =i, -•' , lr!%9iC O W ° Q V ' `l y - -£ i�.� Ir �r ' iNt . Ir 1 , •/n o O p 0 C O p 0 00 0 � � trp 00 ° �rin ` C Rd Miles Legend 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 . 4 Violation Type • ROW Encroachment Note : The following categories have been consolidated O Housing Over Occupancy O Snow and contain the following types of violations . 0 Multiple • Trash N O Outdoor Storage • Vehicle Trash - rubbish , unscreened trash Vehicle - inoperable vehicle , parking on yards O Public Nuisance Ordinance 0 Yard w AlAill Yard - dilapidated fence , dirt yard , forestry, noxious weeds , ® West Central Neighborhoods weeds s Printed : February 25 , 2015 .67tcoulrl5 West Central Area Plan rjMaster Street Plan Cn W M ( berry St 0 (n W Laurel St W Elizabeth St Mr W P ros pact Rd Cn Cn J V i w V E Mike$ ® West Central Neighborhoods — Collector 2 Lanes 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 .4 s Railroads Arterial 2 Lanes Streets Arterial 4 Lanes Scale 1 : 16,648 ® Potential Grade Separated Rail Crossing Major Arterial 6 Lanes Note: Other collector and local streets not shown will be developed O Potential Interchange in accordance with adopted sub-area, corridor, and neighborhood plans of the city. Streets and Arterials outside of GMA are shown for contextual purposes only Adopted : March 17 , 1981 and are not part of the Master Street Plan. Amended : December 17, 2013 The City of Fort Collins is not fiscally responsible for these improvements. Printed : February 25 , 2015 `i1 111 1 ■i � �,� .I ��1�: i�•� ��� I NINE III IIIIIr _ ■.II■ r�•d1I11111r- � ■1111�� .■111■II■I■■■■■■ IIIIIIIIr111 � � 1■ � 111111■■III � - �Ir �Ilrrr■■I� I - � IIIIIIIIIIr� 11111r■� SEE 111111��: 1■�� ■���1111 •• ISO• •■ ■_• 1 IILlJ I i �� �A im i� I■ . �I111111 ■I■■■,■■I �Q ■� /1■III mm III mm EL ■ ■- -■ ■- ■ . �IIL �. `■■ -- ■■ ■■ ■ ■ ■■11■ `� . �•����11■ --� i1111■\ ■`7■ �. ■■ ■■ - ■ ■■r1■ ■rllr� ■rl■■■■, ' �— ��Q ■ ■. 111■�11�� ■ ■ ■■ .. .■ ■■ ■ :,. N I ����11■ ■� �� ��� ■ ■ ■: :: :: ■: - ■■IIIIII■1111_ MONSOONMENOMONEE= Q■Ip . � - ■ - ( �111111111111111 . .. .. .. �QII� ��` ■ sOEM= ■ ■. . -. � ■■� � ■ ■■ SIP• ■ III{. I . :'�= �:�..•:/� : : :: "'� ��������� • � �1■■■Ily;1 = III ■1 �illl■ ■II��� - 1 �� , � 1■ ■11111111111■ ■ I • e - - • , �,1 �� ■IrIIIIIIIIr■ � �. �� ■Imn i1i1i �� - . A�I■IrIIrlIIr11■�- I �,�I•�i■11■r■IIIIIr I WO,, ■■■■■■■�■� `r 11m■IINESINIIi ^��I • �I m y� - - 111II � =�■- � �111111111■11WIN ME 01 : : :: �► �■ ■ ����� 1! ���A�A�� �'�.- 1 � '1�� �11.i rt id1111�11111 ' ■ �■ ■■ ■- ■■ ■/ �� �1■ Ai./ir ��� I -� :IIEiMI 11 ..MEMO nn . ■t �� 711r1■rl■ ��`A■ � � i ■ nip. ni■- � ���� •���� i� son! / II •I.,����111R ■ ■ ■ N Q� ■■1 IGIr7�I�i: �11■1�d11��111 �■■1��r �Iu,Uli��■I �;,I Ell go - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - � ►1111111111111 - - . I ■- 1 . ._ • ,11111111 see II I West Central Area Plan Schools, Natural Areas, Parks & Trails Poutlre w D ° " m Juni er ;, w y n shingt0 ParK .Iaryerson Community Jana m N Lelan Ave E_ - o Fullana E I Civic 1 _� Academy - U S - '" 3 3 Elementa , z ter Pak Q S[ et Park Buckingham 3 North , N °as Pa}K PSD apo a ve v ° _ r PP < v m 8 8 v as a N �wlc , 14 aih Services rc v a' ¢ "> _ Chiltlrens ouse - q 9 C�nrl o e PSD m 8 o y - Monies! Dri 9db� q`n rs � S[Jos Atlministretion - he g Schoc I z z p , Z Grandview z z School LL W Mo nfain Ave in Cemetery Mount; InAlz 1 oun aln ve OSchaol m , Oak [ Poutlre oak St - St Sr High w a' 1 Plaza Eoak s _ 1 Par Library GQ BE m Aki Ave a' E ' Park `m w Olive s City Park ¢ u - , E o ' ¢ St m Nine Golf City i°i W a°toi0 m Impala i , ` Course Park ¢ a Me a st 0 I Z Yo ngPeoples E Ma naive St a g Sheldon Lake 9ne 3 I w Leamiog = I Cen[ei 1 1� Mulberries Sit M bile C Well m� Sunset Ave Dunnafter , c 8 sMe Ave Element ry Wl Rogers We NA - ens 9 1 Avenue I E M Me St _ �rK Rev 0 3 far W 1 Timber C " rest ore PI Birchst Chtltlrens .8 1 rc OrderedPI ? Workshop Cer High�E ka reI St AP B J - Laurelrel S� t m Lab - o ea one Dr 3 m 11 I a Cf PoI ri E N Main BE II 1 A'n ,� z rc I You Fg Peaple E PI m St WPU o' 1 Learning e Center E final a �i` hoc ist St f° We s E Eirds bend St Open Arms B Po Mr or Hams a' Cotord awe W Ave � Christian Bilingual o Tamaac er m E Eie Leestlel WE State \ I Preschool Immer;io s F_ o v •� cf _ University 1 Our Ma St Crabtree Br ra t7 U o` south Dr 6 ASb , p a q 1 E seardsS arvi¢w Ave Avery 2 WeatwaM Or O Park m' L ¢waotl 0 W Pitk S[ n ' E Pi kin St oO�IOS�kwooa Or `a t S n fiel or Presch�l T - 3 0 ° \ , p` A I CIOn ,r, N 5 yo , ucke e S mm Z 3 Bennet) Rd mes Ctm ' U o Bennett I ■ > Elementary ke St 1 uorer Brief s ' ad _ r Elementary go 0 8 15 Balsam kn No Oro 9 0 . u Dein Cov h as to � , 3 1 B ¢° io - Joni er Ln s - h , HIlk\o m Hobbit St N a rY•'.n� �\ i �k,�¢ Bi PI arkers ° U. Lon of Rd 7/ � ^ T(ix}�+ Vili Sheer Dr S Aloe Aveth �o fo1 ITV .,...t...", 1 ParkCi m % - 11¢nbe Or Eu) Estua Sther ° °� elan a rom n _ ` 5 \ Ter niry Lutheran ° D as off\ r k m r c goy orou96 D $ Park C Pa sLilac itle Church Preschool) o Ct Ave om a ohnson or w s _ " Spring Creek Spring m R a Blevins Coun c i d°A Day Sc o l Park e Park Glenwood or - na Rd 2 M1ire I Oa y Blevins = F o Marino Middle 3 c� pd - or Rm eba Ave a School r W ripp v t m i r 207 A a _ S a ♦ o \\ Duke On Rolland Moore Colorado a S o o rndaor ct % Community Park State ° a, University o a �z .r d S raN w ♦ C.ors¢11 Ave or Car ^ E Evens r Cs Ya ay Or ¢ Val) Vall Fo eAve I cf made cf " C �Freehou e � - i �% intree ` °m - � O•pea M1 ontessoh Nor shire Little Pnncelon Ra Bears Child Care Inc Cot n Ava e 1� � S I r f otli ♦ amps I c A Har-Shalom Fox cf W r sale On Glen Haven or War onwneeI or PreschoolAntl e KindergalYeo @ Ease o = Woodwest ` 1 g Has in sDr r' Davi o� Wincnes er Br Park ¢ @ '¢ U. 1 P erhom Dr ThundeNbd t 01 Marshwoo Dr 1 c 8 > MofoA 'sham ° F!'cker ' a �° a o+' 1 Fremomc _ in'rlerc are a ° 2 H list 1�+ 3 0 2 Mae v o Li o- ' poor E M 2 Leisure Rude Anne I Chiltlrens Centers °� o / ' rc p W H R° t Park P WOilrshop Rocky �� MOSm 8 Del Clair Rd 2, o Mountain H line o s oa Sr High _ Z a d Beattie e 1 a Elementary 0 ° 1 l �� Frontier c1 ' E _ C cf 2 Beattie June � Icmnisontor eas .e q Park cf +o t C east ¢ 3 m E sw law R I Spring Canyon u w swallow d - tl Dr aln M1am Sf Sio x BI U' Zyv it i COmmunfly'Pdtl( Rossborough Rom I �N r led Park _ onaw ` ez Porous ay cf do see cf Um 1INI11 IN E Major Roads Paved Major Trail ® West CentralArea Plan Boundary �'/i/1,IIJLr\1`I� Minor Roads - Natural Surface Major T20 schools S Srale 1:6000 Paved Minor Trail MM Parks 0 ozs s o/s t Mlle - Natural Surface Minor T2A _ City of Fort Collins Natural Area a Cm OF wrsr COLLINS GEOGRAPHIC lNFaHMIQIOH scatter MAP PROWCR Toess,deara around WE al 2vgne data WE doers wua%geey arm amuv as maml orde M. aide near hol retail w handed For pandual use WE didenesersa e°b mils no mprewsowia°wn o (- am Wdiv deal ndm��%amp in are TEury OF FORT City l)I �m� N� Fort Collins scandalFar and Woods all responal code deal and furtherhaddeenants and aressal War Was this assured�:m haddleas f� bouldrearranday Printed Febbuary 19, 2B14 I II` :11�1111 �■ ■ ■ o'a _ „ �/„�J�//��� •: : V ■ ■ �'� ICI o 11,� 1�III Il. 11i � � . IIIIIII ♦� ■■■ ■� Mill Mill ■ ���''�� i�-� � ■II IIII 11111111 11 ■ ��II � IIIIII �� IIII - �. :� � i�� I � / - - � = " '__ � : � � , �I III � IIIIIII �' IIIIIII 1 - _- - IIII �♦ �'// ! �! ■ ■ ■ � _- - /ii/// Ian •11111111 �� — MI (IIII •ram ■ �- �� -- - �.��i�i/ -L II- _III_ 1�II1�� III -� � _ IIII �■ ■ ■� r ' � = = - - — — ■IIII PIIIII 11111 IIP IIIIoil pll■� I- • �� _ � _ � _ — _ — _ � I� �1� IIIIIIIIIIII � IIIIIII �■ =� . :: :� ■■-ice ■ _ � = = rM 1■ - IIIIIII■11 C � J- ■I ■ _ IIIIIIII� � 11111••: ��`7 1. 1111111�� b IIII ■IIIIIII. /�, "• : _. , _ a am a am ■■ ■_ mmmm — �� %�■ ram= i �ti �_■■1 III ■ /� �i liming. IIIIII II■■■ ■■I a IIIIIIr ■■ ■■ ■ ■■II■ ■■III nr■ �_ -- -- -- — 1111111111111111 �7 =_ NEW 11111 I II I ■ �QIII /. _� III ■ � �i (IIII\� � ' � � � � � � � a� IN ■■■ I ■ ��IIIIII■ � �I •'��I•IIIIII � „I 1��,II1 I 11� I • • All, - • �� ■iiiiiiiiiiil : ��� 1 MEMO Milli I - - � ■nnnnm - '` ■IIIIII■IINIII : ■ pill ♦ ♦�� /■IIII ■IIIII•� 1 ■_ ■ • � , ��/rrr �� � • ���• o■nUll■ IIIIIII _■ ■ MIMI■MIf nn m ` ' .� ` � ��■■ it I = nu n _ Innn� 'r' n� 1 1 �= � : ■111�1= ■;� unnu n■ • -= =' ' I INS I NMI monsoon MINION r, : IIIIII■IIIIII ■II■11 a I�un: �;, 1. ■� :: am IIII■ ■ ��IIIIIIIITIIIIILI,♦ : MINIM• ■. ■IIII ■���� ■��IIIIIIIIIIIIII►��■ amlr �`� 1 1 1 1 1 Legend 17■1West Central Neighborhoods . . . City High Risk Floodplains FEMA High Risk Floodplains City Moderate Risk Floodplain FEMA Moderate Risk Floodplain I ■ 111: .■� -1 �� .ill■�.- I oii■■ I � � iiiii"""�■ nmm■■•. . J � - l1berry St OLD TOWN BASIN - lim W Drake ' • II I Fort Collins West Central Area Plan GIs Proposed Stormwater Projects W M=u 11b'e rry St _ UDALL SUBBASIN 1�.7C.` '113C 2!.?e . LU_ItnRlE'. N �� WV Alt AN 4 W Eliz - beth St LOCUST SUBBASIN v - - r ` i i mIN awl •• wlwu�.wr'. -� :.1 �` - n , . 1 B�. LJ. . . . �1 p ■ ° II+�- W Pr<ospec't Rd TjLl ���GIIIII '��✓� - ` �� � i t 1 I�JIwNV.rr{�4u017u11Wii 7 yy LW �3�dn0��Yf ' ANA 61 a'��A� 'J�" r4pE�+y� .� . 1 1'1I111Z 'r '�� � •�sT ,_. ' y , ICI» ���r :�rJSAOIwt ' "� �CC� 1 �� '� �1 a ♦ ems/ kI�9rtr , 1f 9 9 r .r. �- le L ZA ar �c F7! �!E ► !i6lY iC- f �1, a Ul r uG. � = 6C►i1AN526W .ri�arr rwc� iLn�� � .� .♦ I= —� '' Ills AR Om [ �Vj �j—ljnl IRA etir�(�C r w1JNlI��!l�7 ap�, - n°9GG®�GG3iC�All . r�:J ►� uGi� Ii: IJl L . ' Cjl�. O ��?lIF:� . �i%� r;'7L�71�E9 :79►'aRlb ���7 b � '�" WC nn �. rhitiC�� [111GCb .�� W Dra�ke�� R.d. _ � y BURLINGTONINORTHERNISUBBASIN „�--+• . . Sri Miles Legend 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 . 4 ® West Central Neighborhoods • Proposed Detention Ponds O Proposed Mechanical Upgrades N Proposed Grading Contours w E Proposed Improvement Areas Proposed Pipelines s Printed : February 25 , 2015 O ■ � O L 0 LL ca Lb O O Q. L d a Q This page intentionally left blank WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN AND PROSPECT ROAD CORRIDOR STUDY Source: City of Fort Collins 8 / 13 / 2014 Transportation - Existing and Future Conditions City of F6rt Collins Fort Collins, Colorado Contents LISTOF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 LISTOF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 LIST OF GRAPHS . . . . . 3 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 HISTORY . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 LITERATURE REVIEW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 DATACOLLECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 EXISTING CONDITIONS : EVALUATION OF WEST CENTRAL AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Levelof Service Criteria . .. ............... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ........ .. .. ............... .. .. .. ................. .. . .. .. ............. .... .. ...... 20 Roadways ... .. ................. .. .. .. ................. .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ............... .. .. .. ........... .. ...... . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .... 20 Intersections. .. ................... .. .. ................. .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .... 22 IntersectionLevel of Service .. of of 00000000000000000 of of 00000000 of of osos000eopope pope DO DO 000000000eope pop000 o DO DO es00000eope @a pope DO 000000 22 CapacityAnalysis . ......... ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ...... 23 CrashHistory .... .. ........... .. .. ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .... 29 Bicycleand Pedestrian Facilities .. .. ............... .. .. ........ .. .. ............. .. .. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .... 30 Transit ........ .. .. ................. .. .. .. ................... .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ............. .. .. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. ....40 Parking ........ .. ................. .. .. .. ................... .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. ....43 EXISTING CONDITIONS: EVALUATION OF THE PROSPECT ROAD AND LAKE STREET CORRIDORS 46 Roadway .. ... .. ................. .. .. ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. ....46 TravelPatterns ... .. .. ........... ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ............. .... .. .. ............. ...... . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .... 54 Intersections. .. ................... .. ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ........... .. ...... . .. .. ........... .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .... .. .. ........ . .. .... 56 CrashHistory .... .. ........... .. .. ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .... 57 Bicycleand Pedestrian Facilities .. .. ....... .. .. .. .. .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ............. .. .. .. . .. .. ........... .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. ........ . .. .... 57 Transit .......... .. ................. .. .. .. ................... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ........ .. .. ........... .. .. .. .. .. ........... .. .. .. .. . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .... 59 Parking ........ .. ................. .. .. .. ........... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ........ .. .. ........... .. .. .. .. .. ........... .. .. .. .. . .. .. ........... .. .. .. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .... 59 FUTURECONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 FutureData Methodology .... .. ........... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .... 59 Evaluationof the West Central Area .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .... 59 Levelof Service Criteria . .. ......... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ............. .. .. .. . .. .. ........... .. .. .. .. ...... 60 Roadways .. .. ................. .. .. ................. .. .... .. .. .. .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ...... 60 Intersections .... .. ............... .. ................. .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ............... .. .. .. ............. ...... . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ...... 61 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities ... .. ........... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ...... 61 Transit. .. ..... .. ................. .. .. .. ................. .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ...... 61 Parking . .. ... .. ................. .. .. .. ............... .. .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ............. .. .. .. .. ........... .. ...... . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ...... 68 r� big D1 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study CSU Multipurpose Stadium : Transportation and Parking Study ( DRAFT- 2014 ) .. .. .. ............. 69 Evaluation of Prospect Road and Lake Street ....... .. .. ............. .. .. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .... 69 Roadway .. .. ............... .. .. .. ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ...... 69 TravelPatterns ...... .. ....... ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ...... 70 Intersection ..... ........... .. .. .. ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ...... 70 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities . .. ............. .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ...... 71 Transit. .. ..... .. ................. .. .. ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ...... 71 Parking . .. ... .. ................. .. .. ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ............. .. .. .. .. ........... .. ...... . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ...... 71 CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 D2 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado LIST OF TABLES Table 1 : Recommendations from Previous Plans For West Central Area . .. ...... .. .. ........... .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. ........ . .. .. . 17 Table 2 : Intersection Level -of- Service Criteria ... .. .. .. .. .. ............... .. .. .. ................. .. . .. .. ............. .... .. ..... .. .. .. .. .. ........ . .. .. . 23 Table 3 : West Central Area Existing Intersection Level -of -Service. .................. .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .. . 24 Table 4 : WCAP Intersections with Highest Excess Crash Cost per Year ......... . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .. . 29 Table 5 : Transfort Transit Routes, Descriptions and Headways .. ... ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .. . 40 Table 6 : Prospect Road and Lake Street Roadway LOS . .. ............. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .. . 47 Table 7: Prospect Road and Lake Street Intersection and Approach LOS ...... .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .. . 56 Table 8 : Prospect and Lake Intersections with Highest Excess Crash Cost per Year ....... .. .............. .. .. ........ . .. .. . 57 Table 9: Prospect and Lake Future ( 2035 ) Intersection Level Of Service.. .. .... .. .. ........... .. .... .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .. . 70 Table 10: Summary of Locations with Operational and Safety Concerns ....... .. .. ............. .... .. ..... .. .. .. .. .. ........ . .. .. . 72 LIST OF FIGURES Figure1 : Study Area Map .. .. ................. .... .. .. .. .. .. ........ .. .. ............... .. .. .. ................. .. . .. .. ............. .... .. ..... .. .. .. .. .. ........ . .. .. .. .. 5 Figure 2 : 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Figure3 : Bikeway System Map .. ..................... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. .. . 15 Figure 4: Existing Roadway Traffic Volumes ...... ...... .. .. ............... .. .. .. ................. .. . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ..... .. .. .. .. .. ........ . .. ... 21 Figure 5 : Existing Roadway Level of Service ....... .. .. .. .. ................. .. .. ............. ...... . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. ... 27 Figure 6: Existing Intersection Volumes and Level of Service .. ....... ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. ... 28 Figure7: Crash History .. .. ... ................... .. .......... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. ... 31 Figure 8a and 8b: Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Volumes. .. ....... ............. ...... . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ........... .. .. ....... 32, 33 Figure9a : Existing and Proposed Bikeways ......... .. .. .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . .. ... 36 Figure 9b: Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress..... .. ** 00 00*6*606 *a ** *a *a * *a *a *a *a********* *a *a **#eases a ** *so 37 Figure I Oa and 1 Ob: Existing Pedestrian Facilities . .. .. ............. .. .. .. .. ........... .. ...... . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ........... .. .. ....... 38, 39 Figure1 1 : Existing Transit Service ............ .. .. .. .. .. ........ .. .. ............... .. .. .. ................. .. . .. .. ............. .... .. ..... .. .. .. .. .. ........ . .. ... Al Figure1 2 : Bus Stop Ratings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44 Figure1 3 : Existing Parking Inventory .. ........... .. .. ........ .. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . ..... 45 Figure 14 : Prospect Road and Lake Street Access Map .... .. .. ......... ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . ..... 48 Figure 15 : Existing Right-of-Way and Cross- Section Locations .. ... ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ........ . ..... 49 Figure 16a and 16b: Prospect Road Cross- Sections. .. ................. .. .. ................... . .. .. ................. .. ........... .. .. ....... 501 51 Figures 17a and 17b: Lake Street Cross- Sections . .. .. .. ............... .. .. .. ................... . .. .. ........... .. .... .. ........... .. .. ....... 521 53 Figure1 8 : Future Roadway Traffic Volume........................ .. .. ............... .. .. .. .. ......... ....... .. .. .. .. ......... .. ............. .. .. .. ....... 63 Figure 1 9: Future Roadway Level of Service . . . . . . . . a * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * sows owes ass * * * at * * * * sets * * * * * 860606A Figure 20: Future Intersection Volume . . @assesses @ * awes @ease * * * a a * @ a * @ a * @ ass a oe*65 Figure2 1 : Bus Stop Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 Figure 22 : Future Transit Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Figure23 : CSU Parking Garages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .68 LIST OF GRAPHS Graph 1 : West Central Area Transit Ridership, June 2014 .. .. .. .. ... ............... .. .. . .. .. ............. .... .. ..... .. .. .. .. .. ........ . .. .. . 42 FAT D3 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study Graph 2 : West Central Area Passengers per Hour, June 2014 ... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . .. .. . 42 Graph 3 : Eastbound Travel Time between Taft Hill Road and Shields Street .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . .. .. . 55 Graph 4 : Westbound Travel Time between Shields Street and Taft Hill Road . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . .. .. . 55 Graph 5 : Eastbound Travel Time between Shields Street and College Avenue . . .. .. .. . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . .. .. . 55 Graph 6 : Westbound Travel Time between College Avenue and Shields Street .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . .. .. . 56 D4 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado west central area plan and prospect road corridor study TRANSPORTATION - EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS INTRODUCTION This report documents the literature review, data collected , existing -rMULBERRYST conditions and future conditions for the West Central Area and Prospect Road corridor. Fehr & Peers is working closely with the City of Fort Collins and the design team to understand the current and ''•' r' 1%° aF-" V potential future challenges, issues, and opportunities associated with the transportation infrastructure throughout the West Central PROSPECTRD neighborhood . Fehr & Peers is also focusing on the existing and future or conditions and identifying areas of concern for Prospect Road from X o Shields Street to College Avenue . N J o O 2 � U � w The West Central community is within the heart of Fort Collins and is in o close proximity to the main campus of Colorado State University (CSU ), DRAKE RD College Avenue, and Horsetooth Reservoir. It is bounded by Mulberry Street to the north, Taft Hill Road to the west, Drake Road to the south, WEST CENTRAL ARE and Mason Trail and Shields Street to the east ( see Figure 1 ) . PLAN BOUNDARIES FIGURE 1 : STUDY AREA MAP HISTORY In 1999, a group of citizens, business owners, residents, developers, City staff, and the general public developed the original West Central Neighborhoods Plan . Its vision was to " maintain and enhance the diverse character . . . strengthen the collaboration between the City, CSU, and neighborhood . . . provide housing opportunities, infrastructure, and lifestyle . . . facilitate and improve existing transportation systems . . . adapt to meet the needs of the dynamic and ever-changing neighborhood . . and provide opportunities in development, redevelopment, and maintenance. " The plan identified three major goal topics: ( 1 ) character of the neighborhoods, ( 2 ) housing , and ( 3 ) transportation . Within each topic there are subcategories with specific goals to address the most important issues, challenges, and opportunities. There were 27 goals for transportation, which are summarized below : • Provide clear, distinctive rights - of - way for all modes of travel and increase the number of alternative mode trips by neighborhood residents. • Develop ordinances that are enforceable and enforced . • Improve the efficiency, safety, and convenience for all modes and provide the highest levels- of - service for all modes of travel . • Create design standards for new streets to have a better sense of "neighborhood . " ,� D5 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study • Maintain safe access for children traveling to/from the neighborhood schools. • Provide connectivity for pedestrians throughout the neighborhood and link to primary destinations. • Allow bicyclists to travel freely, conveniently, and efficiently . • Ensure bus routes are safe, convenient, frequent, and efficient while serving the demand . • Provide adequate parking for the neighborhood land uses and limit the overflow from CSU , shopping centers, and park events onto residential streets. • Maintain all types of infrastructure on a regular schedule or as needed and to equal levels of satisfaction. The original West Central Neighborhoods Plan outlined policies and plans for the three main goal topics. The transportation section focused on improving the " movement of goods, services, and people within the planning area in a safe and efficient manner and to help encourage the use of alternative transportation modes. " The plan also provided a list of improvements related to transportation . The status of the projects mainly fit into four categories—completed , ongoing , partially completed, or not completed . The completed projects include the following : • A pedestrian and bicycle signal was installed on Prospect Road just to the west side of the intersection with Heatheridge Road . • Centre Avenue was constructed from Research Boulevard to Prospect Road with a bridge over Spring Creek Trail . The trail connects to the Mason Trail . • Taft Hill Road was widened in the vicinity of Blevins Middle School to accommodate bike lanes and complete the sidewalks. • Pedestrian crossing markings were added or improved at major intersections. • Constitution Avenue near Valley Forge Avenue, Scarborough Drive, and Stuart Street has been restriped to provide narrower travel lanes, bike lanes, and on - street parking . There have been crosswalks, school crossing signs, and speed detection signs installed along the roadway, where necessary. These improvements are mild traffic- calming devices to increase the safety for all transportation modes. • Bike lanes were added to the following roadways: o Centre Avenue from Research Boulevard to Prospect Road , o Research Boulevard from Centre Avenue to Drake Road , o Lake Street from Shields Street to College Avenue ( defined as a functional alternative to Prospect Road ) , and o Lynnwood Drive from Prospect Road to Springfield Drive (currently has sharrows and is slated to have a bike facility added in the near future ) . • A pedestrian path was constructed at these locations: o Between the canals from Spring Creek Trail to Centre Avenue, D6 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado o Links from Red Fox Meadows to the surrounding neighborhoods, Stuart Street, and Taft Hill Road , and o College Avenue via the underpass under the railroad tracks. • Sidewalks and street crossings were installed at these locations: o Taft Hill Road to Sheffield Street ( pedestrian / bicycle - activated signal ) and o Taft Hill Road on the east side near Blevins Middle School . • A " good neighbor" educational program created to increase awareness of the community expectations. The Fort Collins Neighborhood Services department provides various programs and resources for the citizens to utilize . Some of the resources are : Nextdoor — a private social network, videos and articles on hot topics, adopt- a - neighbor, and links to rules and regulations. See Figure 2 for a map of these completed projects. Ongoing projects include: • Neighborhood organizations and City staff work together to ensure the posted speed limits are accurate and to install adequate signage to notify drivers of speed limit. • Regular monitoring and enforcement of speeds. An educational program is ongoing to prevent speeding and educate drivers of the potential consequences. Where speeding is a chronic problem, the community will work with City staff to implement traffic- calming devices. • Crash reports are monitored to identify trends and problematic locations. • Bicycle plans are coordinated between the City and CSU . • Bike lanes need to have sufficient width on major arterials and , where necessary, street- widening projects should be added to the Capital Improvement Plan ( CIP ) . • The snow removal system continues to be modified for bicycle and pedestrian access around West Central Area and CSU . • Allocation of funds to the school crossing guard program and busing services. • Periodic surveys of transit users to understand the demand and needs of the users. • Citywide policy and street design standard for bicycle left- turn movements through major intersections. The 2008 Bicycle Plan includes some guidelines on bikeway design and innovative solutions for bicycle left-turn movements. The Bicycle Plan is concurrently being updated with this study and will include policies and street design standards for bicycle left-turn movements. Partially completed projects include the following : • Taft Hill Road was widened from Elizabeth Street to Mulberry Street to allow for wider sidewalks and bike lanes. The sidewalks continue to be five feet wide, but bike lanes have been added to the roadway. • Drake Road and Constitution Avenue crosswalks were replaced with colored , stamped concrete to enhance the pedestrian crossing and provide a neighborhood entryway design . It was recommended that the crossing distance be reduced ; however, this was not completed with the enhancements. r� ,� D7 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study • The east crosswalk at the Stuart Street and Heatheridge Road intersection was reconstructed as a raised crosswalk to enhance the pedestrian crossing and provide a neighborhood entryway design . It was recommended that the crossing distance be reduced ; however, this was not completed with the reconstruction . • Some of the existing , underutilized pedestrian links were enhanced within the neighborhoods. • The size and schedule frequency of buses during low - demand times was reduced as necessary . • Parking solutions were developed to reduce parking issues within the neighborhood . The City provides the Residential Parking Permit program, which is a voluntary opt- in program that restricts parking locations and times. There is only one neighborhood in the West Central Area that is a part of this program, which is the Sheely/Wallenberg neighborhood . • CSU has identified locations where seven new parking facilities should be installed . The most recent Transportation and Parking Master Plan (April 2014 ) discusses the timeline for implementation . The projects that have not been completed and should be reevaluated in this study include the following : • Intersection improvements for increasing pedestrian and bicycle safety on Prospect Road at Whitcomb Street and Shields Street. These intersections currently provide crosswalks, push buttons, and pedestrian signal heads; however, no additional improvements have been implemented since the original plan . • Neighborhood entryway design features were proposed to provide reduced and safer pedestrian crossing distance at these intersections: o Taft Hill Road and Stuart Street, o Prospect Road and Constitution Avenue, and o Elizabeth Street and Constitution Avenue. • Landscaped medians along Prospect Road between Taft Hill Road and Shields Street. • Traffic-calming devices along Springfield Drive to increase the safety for all modes. • Designated bikeways were identified for the following roadways: o Valley Forge Road from Taft Hill Road to Constitution Avenue, o Heatheridge Road from Stuart Street to Prospect Road , o Springfield Drive from City Park Avenue to Shields Street ( already a bike route west of City Park Avenue ) , o Skyline Drive from Orchard Place to Crestmore Place ( one 200 -foot block between two bikeways ), and o Hobbit Street from Shields Street to Spring Creek Trail ( currently has a worn dirt trail ) . • Sidewalks and street crossings to be installed or improved at these locations: o Taft Hill Road between Prospect Road and Mulberry Street, D8 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado o Intersection of Prospect Road and Shields Street, o Prospect Road near Castle Rock Drive, o Prospect Road from Shields Street east to College Avenue (this will be included in the current study ), and o Lake Street from Shields Street east to College Avenue (this will be included in the current study ) . • Cost- effective methods to collect riders within the West Central Area and connect to the local and regional transit routes. • City parking regulations and codes to be reviewed and changed to address parking issues. Parking at Rolland Moore Park should be increased . It was recommended that the current facilities increase the number of parking spaces and during special events utilize off - site lots. The 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan set the groundwork for setting the community goals, defining neighborhood policies, and identifying deficiencies in the transportation infrastructure . Many of the listed projects have been completed , and those that have not been completed will be reevaluated to potentially be included within the recommendation of the updated Plan . The original Plan provides guidelines for the visioning of the updated Plan and will be utilized to ensure the updated Plan continues to meet the expectations of the community members. See Figure 2 for a map of the projects from the 1999 West Central Neighborhoods Plan that have been completed . The 1999 vision was to " maintain and enhance the diverse character . . . strengthen the collaboration between the City, CSU , and neighborhood . . . provide housing opportunities, infrastructure, and lifestyle . . . facilitate and improve existing transportation systems . . . adapt to meet the needs of the dynamic and ever-changing neighborhood . . and provide opportunities in development, redevelopment, and maintenance. " r� ,� D9 City Park City Park Q N y Lake W MULBERRY ST m (AZ D m 0 E MULBERRY ST 1 O O a J a ^� I C I LAURELST Z ELAUREL ST = r 0 I I v W PLUM ST I LJ 0 ccLu T > L W ELIZAB TH ST I I Q E ELIZABETH ST I Colorado State University � W I J Legend I Z ml 0 C D O I u Ped/Bike Signal J I 7 w l N Bike Lane 0 E PITKIN ST Sidewalk z 0 I Pedestrian Path W LAKE ST I U I W LAKE ST _ _ _ New Road I _ _ _ _ _ _ 1 � Traffic Calming W PROSPECT RD 1 E PROSPECT RD Roadway Widening I I General Completed Projects • Pedestrian crossing markings were added or improved 1 at major intersections. W STUART ST 1 E STUART ST 1 • A "good neighbor" educational program was created to 1 ae NDn increase awareness of community expectations. 44/ hP Q Z to Note: Projects shown are those that have been completed ZRolland Moore Colorado State I COLUMBIA RD from the West Central Neighborhoods Plan (1999). Only u Community Park University I projects listed in the West Central Neighborhoods Plan q� Veterinary Hospitall are illustrated. Other improvements may also have occurred. 9 Fi 10y`L i 0 1,000 2,000 4,OOeet igure 2 I W DRAKE RD 1 _ E DRAKE RD West Central Neighborhoods Plan (1999) Improvements West Central Area Plan Fort Collins, Colorado LITERATURE REVIEW Fort Collins values its transportation network and understands the need for accessibility, mobility, and capacity associated with all modes: automobile, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit. Recently the City has worked with consultant teams and citizens to evaluate each transportation element and to develop the Transportation Master Plan (TMP ) ( February 2011 ) and City Plan ( February 2011 ) . These master plans were reviewed along with the following studies/plans: 1 ) 2008 Bicycle Plan ( October 2008 ) This plan covered the traditional four " E 's"— engineering , education, encouragement, and enforcement as well as three additional components — economy, environment and community, specifically targeting the values expressed by Fort Collins residents. The 2008 bikeway network consisted of approximately 280 miles of bicycle lanes, 30 miles of hard - surfaced , multi - use paths, and many more miles of local street bicycle routes. Future bike lane projects will take place in tandem with new street construction or reconstruction of existing facilities, as established in the City ' s Master Street Plan . The City will continue to explore rail and water corridors for future multi - use path development, as well as signal detection loops and innovative bicycle traffic solutions. Some bike facilities that were considered are bike boxes and bike boulevards. "The City will improve multimodal connectivity by expanding opportunities for linking multiple transportation modes through construction of facilities such as bicycle parking at transit stops/stations and the installation of showers and changing rooms at major destinations." The improvements identified in the Bicycle Plan within the West Central Area neighborhood are listed in Table 1 . It should be noted that this plan is currently being updated ( 201 A ) . 2 ) Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Final Report (August 2009) The Transit Strategic Plan ( TSP ) was a collaborative effort between the City of Fort Collins - Transfort, the City of Loveland - COLT, and the Poudre School District ( PSD) . It updated the 2002 Transfort Strategic Operating Plan ( TSOP ), the 200A COLT Transit Plan, and an analysis of the opportunities public transportation offers PSD high schools. The plan also addressed the Mason Corridor MAX project and its impact on othier transit services within the City ; identified funding mechanisms and practical phasing options; and developed financial solutions required to create and sustain a high - performing transit system . Six primary goals were developed to guide the development of this plan : ( 1 ) meet the Transportation Master Plan and City plan policies, ( 2 ) exceed the 2008 Climate Action Plan goal, ( 3 ) provide enhanced mobility for transit- dependent populations, (A ) develop a transit system that reduced roadway - related costs, ( 5 ) provide funding recommendation for implementation and ( 6 ) stimulate the local economy . The plan outlined three phases of proposed phased service concepts: • Phase 1 — Planned near-term ( 3 - year horizon ) transit service improvements that were recommended to enhance efficiency . These improvements included changes in the schedules of seven routes, the elimination of one route, the addition of one route, and the implementation of MAX and coordination of other routes. Partial implementation of Phase 1 occurred in May 201 A with the implementation of MAX BRT service, full Phase 1 improvements are yet to be fully realized . r� fig D 1 1 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study • Phase 2 — short-term ( 5 -year horizon ) solutions to provide better connectivity and accessibility locally and regionally . This phase recommended significant expansion of the current transit service in Fort Collins, additional regional connections to Denver, and continued refinement of local routes to coordinate with MAX . Phase 2 introduces a transition to a grid network in Fort Collins and provides greater route coverage, higher service frequencies, and longer span of service. A portion of the Phase 2 recommendations have been implemented . • Phase 3 — long -term (7- year horizon ) plan for additional transit growth in Fort Collins. This phase included longer service hours and limited Sunday transit service, as well as expansion of regional service to Denver, Boulder, Berthoud , and Longmont. This phase assumed the implementation of additional MAX services that extend outside of the Mason Corridor and completed the transition to a full grid network in Fort Collins. In May 201 A, the MAX had its grand opening to showcase the newest transit link in Fort Collins. This Bus Rapid Transit ( BRT) system runs along the Mason Corridor from the South Transit Center ( south of M Harmony Road ) to downtown . It serves the major (11 / _ i activity and employment centers of Fort Collins. It links kiu I ' transit routes, park- n - rides, and trails, while minimizing delays as compared to those experienced on parallel 1 corridors. 3 ) Master Street Plan ( 201 1 ) The Master Street Plan (MSP ) is a map of the City ' s long - range vision for its major street network. This includes existing and future vehicle, bicycle , and pedestrian connections throughout the City and its growth management area . The MSP also reflects the classification of roadways ( collector, arterial, etc. ) and the general location for planning transportation connections. Final street alignments are determined and designed at the time of development. One of the major outcomes of the 2010 - 11 update was that no streets were identified to change their current street classification through the 2035 horizon year. This indicates that the current roadway network provides adequate capacity for the existing and projected vehicle volumes. In some cases, the updated plan proposed to reduce the classification for specific street segments to redefine the purpose and mode (hierarchy. The MSP also includes an overlap map to identify roadways that should be redesigned as Enhanced Travel Corridors ( ETC ) . ETCs provide direct and accessible connections between major activity centers like downtown, CSU, Midtown, employment centers, shopping destinations, and neighborhoods. While ETCs have a general purpose to decrease travel times along the corridor, each individual corridor will have a different, unique way to provide the specific needs and connections. The ETCs are defined as special focus areas that emphasize enhanced infill and redevelopment along the corridor and define space for each of the travel modes. The City ' s current ETCs include : • College Avenue/Mason Corridor — connecting downtown to the communities approximately 1/2 mile south of Harmony Road (Mason Corridor Environmental r� D 12 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado Assessment Technical Report was completed in 2008, the MAX BRT Re - evaluation was completed in 2010, and the Midtown in Motion : College Avenue Transportation Study is ongoing ) ; • Harmony Road — connecting 1 - 25 to Front Range Community College ( FRCC ), which will be extended to the Mason Corridor ( Harmony Road ETC Master Plan and Alternatives Analysis was completed in 201 3 ) ; Mountain Vista Drive/North College Avenue Corridor — connecting the Downtown Transit Center to Mountain Vista neighborhood ; • Prospect Road ( from CSU /Mason to 1 - 25 ) ; • Timberline Road / Power Trail — connecting Harmony Road to Mountain Vista ; and • West Elizabeth Street (from CSU to Overland /CSU Foothills) . 4 ) Pedestrian Plan ( February 201 1 ) The Pedestrian Plan outlined issues and proposed solutions to problems for pedestrians with the ultimate goal of providing safe, easy, and convenient pedestrian travel for all members of the community. This effort also updated and prioritized the City ' s list of pedestrian improvement projects and explored potential funding options. The purpose of the Pedestrian Plan was to promote a pedestrian - friendly environment that will encourage the choice to walk for visitors, students, and residents. The plan utilized a new analysis GIS tool that forecasted pedestrian demand using citywide " indices" of walking demand . These forecasts were used to evaluate future pedestrian improvements. The 2010 - 11 update includes a Cpllln` pedestrian priority project list. This list combines 1 'edestrianPlan *front remaining 2004 Capital Improvement Program ( CIP ) projects and new projects identified by citizens over the sh� MA previous year. The improvements identified in the Pedestrian Plan within the West Central Area neighborhood are listed in Table 1 . 5 ) Colorado State University Master Plan Update (Spring 2012 ) The CSU Master Plan is the document that maps the physical needs of the University and provides a tool to assess and plan for the future. This document provided University leadership with an outline of current and future program needs and budget requirements to successfully direct and build a legacy for future generations. This plan provided a collection of maps, conceptual designs, and graphical displays that updated the 2004 Campus Master Plan, including a history of the campus master plan, zoning conditions, projects under construction, funded projects, pedestrian and green space, access, transit, and housing redevelopment. The plan separated the campus into three sections—( I ) Foothills, ( 2 ) Main Campus, and ( 3 ) South Campus—to depict current and future conditions and a framework diagram . FT fig D 13 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study It is important to note that the West Central Area Plan needs to work directly with and complement the plans set forth by CSU . These two locations are connected by transportation elements, citizens, and similar visions. Throughout the process of the West Central Area Plan, the design team will work with those developing the CSU plans. 6) Arterial Intersection Prioritization Study ( March 2012 ) The purpose of the Arterial Intersection Priority Study was to identify intersections that are in need of mobility and safety improvements. This was a data - heavy analysis, which included an evaluation of traffic volume, intersection accidents, intersection delay, pedestrian and bicycle safety and transit operations. The analysis also relied on input from the community to help clarify local concerns and provide input on arterial intersections throughout the City. The community values developed in Plan Fort Collins was used to evaluate the intersections utilizing a data - driven process. The study applied " a wide breadth of evaluation criteria to ensure that the selected projects addressed specific transportation needs and also aligned with the City ' s core values." The evaluation process included three main steps: • Level 1 - Initial screening to identify intersections with the greatest safety and operational needs. Based on those results, and input from staff and others stakeholders, various alternatives or improvement options were developed for further consideration and evaluation . • Level 2 - Detailed evaluation of the alternatives. This evaluation was based on community values and designed to test options to find alternatives that meet these values and address the safety and operational issues identified in the initial screening . • Level 3 - Conceptual designs were developed for the final set of intersections. Thirty -two intersections throughout the City were carried forward from Level 1 to the Level 2 analysis, including four within the West Central area : ( 1 ) Elizabeth Street and Shields Street; ( 2 ) Drake Road and Shields Street; ( 3 ) Drake Road and McClelland Drive; (A ) Drake Road and Redwing Road / Bay Road . Drake Road and Shields Street was the only intersection carried forward to Level 3 concept design . The design for this intersection began in the summer of 201 A, with the main goals to add northbound and southbound right-turn lanes and bring the Shields Street bike lanes up to standard through the intersection . An update to this study is currently in progress. For more details on the performance of intersections within the West Central area , refer to the Intersections section . 7) Capital Improvement Plan Documentation ( December 2012 ) "The Transportation Capital Improvement Plan ( CIP ) is an inventory of all multimodal transportation projects throughout the City and is a part of the Transportation Master Plan (TMP ) . The CIP was updated using an interdisciplinary team and `triple bottom line ' approach that included environmental, economic, and social factors as project prioritization criteria in conjunction with the traditional transportation criteria . The CIP is a tool that facilitates the allocation of resources based on project- and system - level prioritization reflecting the TMP visions and community needs. The focus of the 2012 update was to ensure that the CIP is accurate, up -to - date, and more user -friendly than previous versions by refining project r� D 14 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado rankings, better identifying a fiscally constrained list and assisting with the project selection process for funding and grant applications. The update also supported the action steps specified in the 2011 TMP . This is an administrative update to the CIP ." Source : www.fcgov.com. 8 ) Fort Collins Bikeway System Map ( 2012 ) W Mc ,. ,�� ( � 1 r� + � t ,J ' J C�aOv Max j r The Fort Collins bikeway system map was updated in - - M> e; ""'" "{ ' ` ` '" " 4 l '''�� F W .. fr " lit 9 O°• rM �^� ea 2012 to show the most recent existingand proposed _ 3 aa`aaa I soft- surface multi - use trails hard - surface multi - use trails, ' � Ell si, � • ` 11�y ". 1 , J s.. � ui ra° c i ° J I I ar^' bike lanes, and designated bike routes. The portion of ° ° ' e \ Tj'! : I , •� �il `"^ _° •�• IEM the bike map including the West Central Planning Area r a ! �" is shown in Figure 3 . There are a significant number of on - and off -street bicycle facilities within the West i , !`° �' t".a ° ,^-- 3- w �e Central area that connect to the surrounding � e � � � • ,. ,; 4,t% mi ._° .. m - communities. � ; ` •�.°i �, _ : ...,. f w onu m ;••• see 9 ) Paved Recreational Trail Master Plan ( November 2013 ) FIGURE 3 : BIKEWAY SYSTEM MAP The Paved Recreational Trail Master Plan is the first comprehensive trail - planning effort that has been conducted by the City . The plan looked at how well the trail system is meeting the current needs of the community and how the trail system can be improved to meet future needs. The plan focused primarily on the recreational uses and design of the trail system . The plan proposed recreational trail design standards that are intended to provide trail planners and designers guidance to produce an enjoyable, safe trail system for all users and ensure the trail is durable and efficient to maintain . This plan recommends the expansion of the Mason Corridor shared - use path north of Prospect Road , which has since been implemented along with the neighboring MAX BRT. It also recommends that the Spring Creek Trail, east of Centre Avenue, be replaced and realigned . This project was completed recently, and the Spring Creek Trail has an improved connection to the Mason Trail . 10 ) Student Housing Action Plan ( February 2013 ) The Student Housing Action Plan ' s mission was to "strive to develop community - driven strategies that encourage and provide quality student housing while maintaining neighborhood quality and compatibility . " The purpose of this effort was to work with stakeholders including Colorado State University ( CSU ), Front Range Community College ( FRCC), neighbors, students, property owners, and developers to "identify strategies to address the increasing need for multifamily student housing ; identify key issues for development or redevelopment; and understand potential impacts and compatibility issues. " In particular, staff was asked to address developments near existing single -family residential neighborhoods. As a result of this, the following items have been adopted by City Council : • Apply elements of the Land Use Code and the City ' s development standards for the Medium - Density Mixed - Use Neighborhood zone district. It should be applied to FT V11 D 15 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study all multi -family projects outside of the TOD (transit—oriented development) Overlay Zone by incorporating those requirements into the general standards of the Land Use Code. • Modify requirements in the Neighborhood Conservation zone district to restrict 100 percent secondary uses, such as residential development on land parcels of five acres or less, rather than the previous allowance of 10 acres or less. • Require any multi—family project with greater than 50 units or 75 bedrooms to have a Type 2 Hearing . 1 1 ) Traffic Safety Summary (September 2013 ) This report summarizes the traffic crash history from 2009 to 2013 that have occurred on public streets throughout Fort Collins. It includes a summary of crashes, evaluation of the most common types of crashes, and identification of locations with a high frequency of crashes. For a detailed review of crashes that have occurred within the West Central area , refer to the Crash History section . 12 ) Midtown in Motion : College Avenue Transportation Study ( Ongoing — Expected 2014 ) This is a transportation -focused project for College Avenue from Prospect Road to Harmony Road . College Avenue is the most important north/'south roadway in Fort Collins, but lacks the world class character the corridor deserves and the community desires. Multimodal updates are necessary to support the land use and transportation changes occurring in the corridor. The goals of the plan are to make College Avenue safer for all modes; strengthen bicycle and pedestrian connections to the new MAX route; create a well - functioning , high quality and attractive street; and provide universal designs for all ages and abilities. 13 ) Colorado State University Parking and Transportation Master Plan ( April 2014 ) "This Parking and Transportation Master Plan provided strategies to improve overall campus access, developed a more sustainable program of transportation alternatives, and improved customer service for the CSU community going forward ." This plan included an overview of current parking management strategies, TDM ( Transportation Demand Management) existing conditions and best practices, a community engagement and strategic communications plan, traffic impact assessment and traffic simulation model , PARK + for campus parking and multimodal demand modeling . The key recommendations in this plan that may impact West Central Area neighborhoods are as follows: 1 . Adopt a lower parking space to population ratio as the key parking planning benchmark moves forward . D 16 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado 2 . Develop an aggressive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) and Transportation Alternatives Program . 3 . Prioritize short-term parking development projects. 4 . Integrating the new Around the Horn Internal Campus Circulator Shuttle in late summer 2014 in conjunction with the inauguration of the MAX Bus Rapid Transit Service and Transit Route Enhancements by Transfort. 5 . Determine parking pricing options and mobility management support. 6 . Develop strategic communications, campus parking and mobility program branding and marketing and ongoing program monitoring and benchmarking . 7. Expand local and regional transportation planning and funding strategies. 8 . Adopt a range of new parking and planning technologies. 9 . Leverage parking and transportation to support campus sustainability and climate commitment goals. Kimley - Horn is currently working on the traffic impacts related to the proposed CSU Stadium . The game - day traffic is anticipated to travel along many of the West Central Area arterials and collectors, which may have negative implications when the event traffic enters and exits the area . The study has yet to be accepted and approved ; therefore it has not been included in the literature review. The recommendations from the aforementioned plans to improve the connectivity and /or quality of the roadways, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and transit routes within the West Central neighborhoods are included in Table 1 . The numbers in the source column references to the above list of previous studies and plans. TABLE 1 : RECOMMENDATIONS FROM PREVIOUS PLANS FOR WEST CENTRAL AREA Recommendation Location Source (s ) Castlerock Dr from Prospect Rd to Springfield Dr 11718 Or shared lane markings Constitution Ave from Prospect Rd to Springfield Dr 118 Constitution Ave from Elizabeth St to Prospect Rd 7 Add Bike Lanes Lynwood Dr from Prospect Rd to Springfield Dr 118 Lynwood Dr from Springfield Dr to Stuart St 7 City Park Ave from Mulberry St to Springfield Dr 7 Shields St from Laurel St to Poudre River Trail 117 Prospect Rd from Shields St to Center/Mason Trail 1 Or off-street facility Widen Bike Lanes Taft Hill Rd from Mulberry St to Prospect Rd 117 Elizabeth St west of Taft Hill Rd 1 Install Bike Signage Shields St north of Laurel St 1 Taft Hill Rd from Elizabeth St to Laporte Ave 1 Red D17 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study Recommendation Location Source ( s ) Add Bike Path Expand Mason Corridor Trail North of Prospect Road (complete) 9 Potential Grade Mason Trail and Drake Rd 11317 Separated Crossing Implement new Route 23 with service along Prospect and Stuart 2 Modify Transit Routes Eliminate Route 3 and replace with Route 2 and 23 2 Eliminate Route 1 1 and replace with Route 22 2 Modify Route 2 2 Enhanced Travel Prospect Rd from CSU/Mason Corridor to 1-25 3 Corridor West Elizabeth St from CSU to Overland /CSU Foothills 3 Prospect Rd from Shields St to College Ave 417 Prospect Rd from College Ave to Stover St 4 Install and /or widen Prospect Rd from Stover St to Lemay Ave 4 Sidewalk Shields St from Laurel Ave to Mulberry St 417 Lake St from Shields St to CSU Ped/Bike Path 417 Mulberry St from Shields St to City Park Ave 417 Widen Roadway Elizabeth St from Taft Hill Rd to Constitution Ave (4 lanes) 7 Upgrade to Arterial Prospect Rd from College Ave to Lemay Ave (4 lanes) 7 Standards Taft Hill Rd from Laporte Ave to Prospect Rd (4 lanes) 7 Shields St and Plum St (expected year of construction 2024 ) 13 Add 1 EB left-turn lane and 1 WB left-turn lane Shields St and Elizabeth St (expected year of construction 2024 ) 13 Add 2°d EB left-turn lane, 1 NB right-turn lane, and 1 WB right- turn lane Shields St and Prospect Rd (expected year of construction 2024) 13 Add 1 WB right-turn lane Drake Rd and Shields St 7 Add E/W dual left-turn lanes Intersection Or add E/W Right Turn Lanes and Median 6 Improvements Lake St and Whitcomb St 13 Signalize and add 1 NB left-turn lane Or Roundabout Lake St and Center Ave 13 Add 1 WB left-turn lane Prospect Rd and Whitcomb St 13 Add 2 SB left-turn lanes and make 1 shared through/ right-turn lane; Add 1 NB left-turn lane Prospect Rd and Center Ave 13 Add 1 NB left-turn lane Construct Parking New Parking Garages on CSU Campus: ( 1 & 2 ) On Center Dr north of 13 Facility south campus, ( 3 ) East of Shields St between Elizabeth St and Plum St, (4 ) north of Prospect Rd just east of Whitcomb St, (5 ) south of Pitkin St just west of Meridian Ave, ( 6 ) north of Lake St just west of College Ave, (7) Redwing Rd south of Prospect Rd. D 18 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado The following completed projects were listed in one or more of the previous plans and are in addition to those identified in the 1999 West Central Area Plan ( See History Section ) : • Drake Road from Shields Street to College Avenue: Improve railroad crossing ; add bicycle facilities through College Avenue intersection • Spring Creek Trail from Shields Street to College Avenue : Build a trail providing improved access from Shields Street • Mason Trail / NRRC : Build a grade separated rail crossing • Mason Trail from Drake Road to Prospect Road : Construct the trail • Mason Trail from Spring Creek Trail to Lake Street: Construct the trail DATA COLLECTION Existing data was collected from various sources: Fort Collins staff, CSU consultants, and consultants working on other projects within the City. The following existing data was collected and the format is listed : • Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Counts: PDF and CSU studies • Average Daily Traffic (ADT ) : GIS • Traffic Model : Synchro and TransCAD ( and future data ) • Signal Timing : Synchro • Crash Data : GIS • Pedestrian Facilities: GIS • Bicycle and Pedestrian Counts: PDF and CSU studies • Transit Data : PDF • Cross Section : Aerial photography and GIS • Roadway Classification : GIS • Bike Routes and Facilities: GIS and System Map • Bicycle Level - of - Service: GIS • Parking : Aerial photography • Base Mapping Data including parks, parcels, current development proposals, contours, and hydrology r� ,� D 19 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study EXISTING CONDITIONS : EVALUATION OF WEST CENTRAL AREA The collected data included the entirety of the City of Fort Collins. The first step was to reduce the amount of data to focus on the West Central Area . Then it was reviewed , sorted , processed , and organized by transportation element: roadway, intersection, crash, bicycle and pedestrian, transit, and parking . Geospatial analysis, transportation modeling , and illustrative graphics were created to interpret and reveal patterns, deficiencies, opportunities, and challenges in the existing conditions. The following sections and figures describe the existing conditions within the West Central Area . Level of Service Criteria To measure and describe the operational status of the local roadway network and corresponding intersections, transportation engineers and planners commonly use a grading system called level - of - service ( LOS ) put forth by the Transportation Research Board' s HCM 2000 . LOS characterizes the operational conditions of an intersection ' s traffic flow, ranging from LOS A ( indicating free flow traffic conditions with little or no delay ) to LOS F ( representing over - saturated conditions where traffic flows exceeds the design capacity, resulting in long queues and delays) . These grades represent the perspective of drivers and are an indication of the comfort and convenience associated with driving . Although LOS A through C are desired levels, LOS D is considered acceptable in urban conditions. Traffic conditions with LOS E or F are generally considered unacceptable and represent significant travel delay, increased accident potential, and inefficient motor vehicle operation. Roadways The West Central Area has numerous, important arterials that connect vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles, and transit to the community and the rest of Fort Collins. The main arterials are : Mulberry Street, Elizabeth Street, Prospect Road , Drake Road , Taft Hill Road , and Shields Street. The 2011 Master Street Plan identifies these roadways as four - lane arterials in the existing and future conditions. The MSP highlights Constitution Avenue/ Plum Street, Stuart Street, Lake Street, Centre Avenue, Research Boulevard , and Rolland Moore Road as two - lane collectors. All of these study arterials and collectors are anticipated to have enough capacity for future estimated traffic volumes. Average Daily Traffic (ADT) counts were collected between 2009 and 2014 for arterials, collectors, and local streets. Figure 4 provides the ADT for mid - block locations on arterials, collectors, and local streets throughout the community . The arterial roadways ranged from 10,000 to 33 ,000 vehicles per day (vpd ) . The collectors ranged from 1 , 200 to 8,500 vpd . The local streets ranged from 200 up to 5 , 300 vpd . The relative magnitude of traffic volumes can be seen by the size of the blue circles. As expected , the majority of traffic travels on the arterials with the highest volume on Shields Street. The following ADT ranges occurred on the arterials: • Shields Street: from 20,400 vpd near Mulberry Street to 30,000 vpd near Prospect Road • Taft Hill Road : from 19,500 vpd near Mulberry Street to 24,400 vpd near Drake Road • Mulberry Street: from 9,400 vpd west of the City Park Lake to 16,600 vpd east of the lake • Prospect Road : from 14,900 vpd near Taft Hill Road to 29,700 vpd near the College Avenue • Drake Road : from 19,600 vpd near Taft Hill Road to 29,400 vpd near Research Boulevard D 20 ,� F W City Park a H Z N m cr o 3 o J L Park Lake 9:4 ✓♦16:6 W MULBERRY ST O J O y O N Vl •3.9 VI 20.4 F 1A ua Z 0 OF C W LAUREL ST D 0 z v f a 19.5 26.7 W '� W PLUM ST y 2-7 ♦4.3 0 • 1.3 5 • 5.4 28.2 W UW ELIZABETH ST 16,5J2. 15-3 18A 2.8 Colorado State University Lu33.1 W J Legend O � ' 1.2 • 5.3 I- U Average Daily Traffic Volumes x 1,000 40 ~ EPI IN ST 0 - 3 24.4 N J - - - - z 1 • 4 - 6 u w W LAKE ST ' 1.2 m 1 • 7 - 20 - -- W LAKE ST 6:2� � 7,5 • AWL • 5.2 e 21 - 25 1'4:9 19:8 21-8 24.4�299 W PROSPECT RD • 1.3 22.6 1 • 26 - 33 0 RED FOX MEADOWS 289 1 z — Major Arterial NATURALAREA 1 O W STUART ST // - - 1 - - Z - - - - - -- Arterial �1.4 � FISCHER ,8.8 1 m � Collector ru " NATURAL 1 23.1 , AREA ,�, f _ _ LOCd ligRrST Z �Q�P 1 f Study Area Sa : 1.4 G�? 1 m Average daily traffic volumes were collected at mid-block > 27.6 1 p 1 3 • • 1 z survey locations from 2009-2014. F W X Rolland Moore Colorado State Z 1 W 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 V Community Park 29.4 University 1 Q E Feet LL �9Fs Veterinary Hospital 1 W m9�C J Vl • 6:5--♦•5:7 • 0.8 ROSS 'S 0 _ NATURALAREA 31 2.900 r 244 '; o (A Figure 4 2.91ML • 3.3 1 1ARL 9:6 21-4 • 02 20:9 24:2 26.6 29:4 Existing Roadway W DRAKE RD W Traffic Volumes 3a West Central Area Plan west central area plan and prospect road corridor study A capacity analysis for the roadway segments was performed using the methodology issued within the HCM 2000 . The methodology classifies the arterials based on the distance between intersections and the link speeds. To determine the LOS for arterials, the speed and travel time are calculated . Figure 4 summarizes the roadway LOS calculated in Synchro (version 8, HCM 2000 methodology ) . All roadways operate at LOS D or better, except for the following roadway segments: AM Peak Hour • Elizabeth Street - Eastbound between City Park Avenue and Shields Street • Drake Road - Eastbound between Bay Road and MAX Westbound between Worthington Avenue and Shields Street • Shields Street - Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road Northbound between Stuart Street and Prospect Road • Whitcomb Street - Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road • Center Avenue — Northbound and Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road PM Peak Hour • Taft Hill Road - Southbound between Valley Forge Avenue and Drake Road • Shields Street - Southbound between Plum Street and Elizabeth Street Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road Southbound between Centre Avenue and Drake Road • Whitcomb Street - Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road • Center Avenue - Northbound and Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road Westbound between Research Boulevard and Shields Street • Elizabeth Street - Eastbound between City Park Avenue and Shields Street • Drake Road - Eastbound between Research Boulevard and Bay Road Westbound between Worthington Road and Shields Street Intersections The traffic operations analysis evaluated stop -controlled and signalized intersection operations using the procedures and methodologies contained in the HCM 2000 for the weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic operations. Study intersection operations were evaluated using LOS calculations as analyzed in the Synchro software (version 8 ) . Intersection Level of Service The LOS is determined differently depending on the type of control at the intersection . At signalized intersections, the operation analysis uses various intersection characteristics ( such as traffic volumes, lane geometry, and signal phasing ) to estimate the intersection ' s volume -to -capacity (v/c) ratio. For signalized r� D 22 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado intersections the HCM defines the intersection LOS as the average delay per vehicle for the overall intersection, which includes all movements and approaches. At stop -controlled intersections, the operation analysis uses various intersection characteristics ( such as traffic volumes, lane geometry, and stop -controlled approaches) to estimate the intersection ' s volume -to- capacity (v/c) ratio. For stop - controlled intersections the HCM defines the intersection LOS as the average delay per vehicle for the worst approach intersection . Table 2 summarizes the relationship between delay and LOS for stop -controlled and signalized intersections. TABLE 2 : INTERSECTION LEVEL-OF-SERVICE CRITERIA StoppedAverage Levelmofm so Description e A < 10 < 10 Very low delay. Most vehicles do not stop . B > 10 to 20 > 1 0 to 15 Generally good progression of vehicles. Slight delays. C > 20 to 35 > 15 to 25 Fair progression. Increased number of stopped vehicles. p > 35 to 55 > 25 to 35 Noticeable congestion . Large portion of vehicles stopped . E > 55 to 80 > 35 to 50 Poor progression . High delays and frequent cycle failure . F > 80 > 50 Oversaturation. Forced flow. Extensive queuing . Source: Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, 2000), Capacity Analysis Turning movement counts were provided by the City of Fort Collins and the consultant team working with CSU ' s master plans. The hourly intersection counts were collected between 2012 and 2013 . This study focused on the arterial /arterial and arterial collector intersections. Twenty -seven intersections were evaluated . The majority of the study intersections are signalized , with three stop -controlled intersections on Lake Street. The existing intersection operations were analyzed with the AM and PM peak hours. The existing Synchro model, provided by the City, included the existing roadways, intersection geometry, traffic control , signal timing , and traffic parameters ( e. g . peak hour factor) . The lane configurations and intersection peak hour factors were verified and updated as necessary . FT ,1 D 23 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study Analysis included assessing the delay, LOS performance, and queuing for each of the studied intersections. The existing conditions provided a baseline for the future analyses. The capacity analysis indicated that all of the intersections currently operate at LOS D or better in both peak hours. Table 3 provides the existing overall and approach delay and LOS for the study intersections. The overall intersection LOS is bold . TABLE 3: WEST CENTRAL AREA EXISTING INTERSECTION LEVEL-OF-SERVICE 2012/2013 Existing No. Intersection Control Approach Delay • Delay • Overall 16 B 20 C Taft Hill Rd and EB 34 C 36 D 1 Signal WB 27 C 23 C Mulberry St NB 5 A 11 B SB 11 B 18 B Overall 29 C 36 D EB 42 D 51 D 2 Mulberry St and Signal WB 28 C 40 D Shields St NB 16 B 21 C SB 26 C 34 C Overall 7 A 20 B Shields St and Laurel Signal WB 46 D 45 D 3 St NB 4 A 13 B SB 3 A 11 B Overall 12 B 10 A Shields St and Plum EB 52 D 66 E 4 Signal WB 36 D 51 D St/ North Dr NB 9 A 3 A SB 6 A 5 A Overall 18 B 25 C Taft Hill Rd and EB 32 C 34 C 5 Signal WB 29 C 37 D Elizabeth St NB 10 A 12 B SB 14 B 22 C Overall 5 A 6 A EB 4 A 4 A Elizabeth St and b Signal WB 2 A 4 A Constitution Ave NB 20 B 21 C SB 21 C 22 C Overall 6 A 8 A EB 2 A 2 A 7 Elizabeth St and City Signal WB 3 A 4 A Park Ave NB 20 B 23 C SB 20 B 21 C Overall 18 B 42 D Shields St and EB 47 D 78 E 8 Signal WB 49 D 48 D Elizabeth St NB 7 A 24 C SB 8 A 40 D Overall 7 A 8 A Shields St and Lake Signal WB 47 D 51 D 9 Rd NB 5 A 5 A SB 7 A 2 A D 24 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado No . Intersection Control Approach Delay • Delay • EB 12 B 12 B 10 Lake Rd and 4 -Way WB 10 B 13 B Whitcomb St Stop NB 13 B 11 B SB 9 A 11 B 11 Lake Rd and Center Side Street EB 10 A 8 A Ave Stop WB 10 A 9 A NB 10 A 8 A EB 7 A 4 A 12 Lake Rd and East Dr Side Street WB 0 A 0 A Stop NB 10 B 10 B Overall 22 C 21 C 13 Taft Hill Rd and EB 35 C 31 C WB 30 C 32 C Prospect Rd Signal NB 13 B 12 B SB 19 B 15 B Overall 35 C 29 C 14 Prospect Rd and EB 44 D 44 D WB 50 D 44 D Shields St Signal NB 32 C 22 C SB 18 B 18 B Overall 7 A 14 B 15 Prospect Rd and EB 2 A 3 A WB 7 A 10 A Whitcomb St Signal NB 45 D 37 D SB 48 D 49 D Overall 19 B 22 C 16 Prospect Rd and EB 12 B 14 B WB 13 B 13 B Center Ave Signal NB 41 D 42 D SB 37 D 46 D Overall 7 A 8 A 17 Shields St and Stuart EB 46 D 52 D St Signal NB 2 A 6 A SB 5 A 6 A Shields St and Overall 2 A 4 A 18 Rolland Park Access WB 50 D 55 D Rd / Rolland Moore Signal NB 1 A 2 A Dr SB 1 A 3 A Overall 19 B 29 C Shields St and EB 43 D 44 D 19 Raintree Dr/ Centre Sinal WB 36 D 78 E Ave g NB 12 B 11 B SB 20 B 26 C Overall 5 A 6 A Taft Hill Rd and 20 WB 35 C 37 D Valley Forge Ave Signal NB 2 A 2 A SB 3 A 4 A 0 D 25 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study 2012/2013 Existing No. Intersection Control Approach Delay • Delay • Overall 26 C 29 C 21 Taft Hill Rd and EB 33 C 32 C WB 31 C 29 C Drake Rd Signal NB 23 C 30 C SB 21 C 26 C Overall 5 A 4 A 22 Drake Rd and EB 2 A 4 A Constitution Ave Signal WB 2 A 3 A SB 40 D 23 C Overall 7 A 7 A EB 2 A 7 A 23 Drake Rd and Dunbar WB 3 A 5 A Ave Signal NB 36 D 21 C SB 33 C 21 C Overall 35 C 41 D 24 Drake Rd and Shields EB 44 D 59 E WB 53 D 36 D St Signal NB 31 C 36 D SB 21 C 39 D Overall 6 A 7 A 25 Drake Rd and WB 3 A 2 A Worthington Ave Signal NB 49 D 47 D SB 48 D 52 D Overall 11 B 20 B Drake Rd and EB 3 A 6 A 26 Research Blvd / WB 10 A 17 B Meadowlark Ave Signal NB 44 D 42 D SB 43 D 57 E Overall - B - C EB - C - D Drake Rd and Signal / WB - B - B 27 Redwing Rd /Bay Stop (SB NB ( Bay Rd) - D - E Rd/McClleland * Bay Rd ) Ng (McClleland ) B C SB (MAX) - D - D * This intersection is very complex and includes two intersections that operate as one. The peak hour LOS was provided by the City of Fort Collins since this intersection has unconventional traffic control. Figure 5 provides the existing roadway level of service. Figure 6 illustrates the lane configuration, traffic control and turning movement counts for the studied intersections within West Central Area . The figure also provides the level - of- service for the AM and PM peak hours for the existing conditions. D 26 ,� W MULBERRY ST W MULBERRY ST I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 1 W ELIZABETH ST W ELIZABETH ST I I Ir' I I o f If g l — N ` N IN IN N 1 I N I W LAKE ST �` — — — — — � � W LAKE ST — — — — — — — IW PROSPECT RD I II I I W PROSPECT RD � I c I LL I I I 1 I Pie I I P�� I I I I I 'pe. I I I `9 ao I 1 I f I W DRAKE RD Q � I W DRAKE RD AM Level of Service PM Level of Service Legend I � StudyArea Level of Service . Major Arterial A or B �• — Arterial — C Figure 5 — Collector ° Existing Roadway Level of Service Local � E or F o T,000 z,000 a,00eet West Central Area Plan 0 J W_ Z � Z c- - g 24 61 > 35 (139;i r=rad �- 113 (243) `�„ � 109 (120) ( ) 121 (531 ) N 1 r68 (221) ) 51® 12 (19) )27s (703) Q Wrlos (341) Laurel St38 (80) Mulberry5t ♦ E Weeeeee p♦ lake St I165 (262) I m 81 (35) t �.l y r 76 (360) City 92 (70) �r _ 3 w U43 (459) —� - 124 105 638 (463) —t. U L O J 55 (179) 25 (30) 00 Mulberry St t♦p� 57 (42) �e� o m or 1 Q 38 (27) o yt 293 (218) _ 103 (64) ` g fk- 38 (90) A r_ 1 - 136 (441) Y -- zr�lr � 4 : Z Y 1k 31 (72) O _ G Elbabeth St o <o 5 12 52 (59) -o ( ) Q r 391 (483) �� 9 32 0 T 39 (63) �1 1 fi (60) _ WPLUM ST W Pm,n so - � lIe- 31 (58) A 53 (64) tW-- 26 (11) - �— _ a 50 (53) 161 (102) �l � 91 (316) 39 (56)70 (162) W EL BETH SIT - ® Lake St elzabethSt at 115 (145) --A �� w 133 (98) 233 (151) __4 268 (296) —t. 4 *g 40 (74) 72 (159) 128 (144) ---A CN M 2 - �-� 15 (47) p v m Lake St 1150 (622) F m - 2 (q) 154 (94) 1k 2 (39) 5 (4) 44 (188) 32 (46) er eimne<n sr Mee, F 11 r 4 (51) 11 r 21 (113) ® a' E PI KI ) a N '4 490 (531) 0 Elimbeth St R �� Lake St �v ` —► U 286 (318) - A I ♦p� Z " m Q - f1L 152 (52) 5 (6) ---Se, o 2 ) �— 575 (957) Ve 84 (334) ST 60 ( 9 )85 (236) Legend �l122 (346) 11 Rd 1L r qg (227) Q W 98 (28) �r r �� WCAP Study Area W PROSPECT RD J 760 (808) —� PfOSpM Rd 1P1 (gg) 90 (70)' ��' ` m - , Signalized 411 (219) —� I -- w U U N Stop Controlled Lane Configuration 115 (151 r RED FOX MEADOWS /� 217 (625) �l 2 r NATURALAREA 11 r 86 (242) VV"' O Illegal Movement stoam st l9 Q m AM PM Peak Hour Traffic Prospect Rd �r Z N �� 155 (64) ( ) O 234 (147) J 78 (66) -ter I^ ~ 432 (1001) AM Peak LOS .l 697 (409) 77 (71) a m w �k, r 17 (31) w ST(JAR. ST + ' - 175 (152) � N mom P 111 (32) �r • P LOSeA or Bak S ce C e � 16 (17) 836 (668) y LOS C 18 12 O r 116'(22) 17 (7) 0 LOS D 1D (�) v ~ Rolland Moore ♦♦ • LOS L or L h O m a 1 (1 fi) T IIeI W Valley Forge (1) J — y�. 47 65 ♦p� = - 40 (101) " 3 2 3 (30) �1 Note P ( ) O "_ F� - �t� O- - 137 (62) 6 (23) _ C 388 (1025) 343 (1059) F- 533 (1296) 55 (39) r, A � r 22 (118) I�. r 24 (97) Mee,Drake Rd m � 21 (114) 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 = 3 (8) Drake 'd(,) 0 30 (151) 1 + : - Drake y d.l + r 43 (177) �o . � 62�25) �t ) 1 r Feet 834 (673) 935 (667) —i _ y t : � 959 (804) —t. 41 Drake at Bay/ Redwig SB is stop controlled 00 69 (82) �e m Ra97 (125)�Itre t �fL 27 (33) �� Pe NN 156 (61) —. o � 26 (3) Figure 6 h m 135 (KS: 30 (87) # 823 (1295) 4 141 (526: W D E R ® � r 65 (50) r55 (170) Drake Rd (� Existing Intersection w °)Drake � � TTr a 1 '` ,W Aw 57 (1068' —' Volumes and Level of Service 363 (287) —� _ aapt' /y- wy, 9 (12) 54 (279) � ,i . - i1L a. .:a.i h. y�i . L '.-. :' s .. a+ .L ef . West Central Area Plan Fort Collins, Colorado Crash History The City of Fort Collins regularly analyzes the crash trends for the entirety of the City . The purpose of the document is to track progress on mitigation measures implemented to reduce crashes and severity, as well as to determine the appropriate strategies and countermeasures needed to achieve the set crash reduction goals. The latest Traffic Safety Summary was completed in 2013 and provided a description of crash history along public streets in Fort Collins between years 2008 and 2012 . This section provides a summary of traffic crashes within the West Central Area which was extrapolated from the data and methodology utilized in the 20 7 3 Traffic Safety Summary. The 2073 Traffic Safety Summary shows the distribution of all Fort Collins crashes by a number of variables including type of crash, severity, day of week, time of day, location and age . The study performed an additional analysis to identify intersections that experienced more crashes than was expected . Variables used to determine this include traffic volume, roadway geometry and type of traffic control . This analysis applies a methodology published by the Transportation Research Board ( TRB ) and American Association of State Highway and Transportation officials (AASHTO ) in the Highway Safety Manual (HSM) that accounts for the random nature of crashes. The state - of -the practice method compares the actual reported crashes to the predicted number of crashes. To predict the anticipated number of crashes, this method utilizes a regression equation to estimate the number of crashes based on the traffic volumes, roadway geometry, and type of traffic control . If the experienced number of crashes exceeds the number of crashes predicted by the model, than it is identified as a location that has an unusually high number of crashes. Fort Collins utilizes the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ( NHTSA) study to estimate the cost of the experienced and predicted number of crashes. The difference in cost is the Annual Excess Expected Crash Value . The cost of safety improvements needs to be considered in order to understand the cost- benefit ratio . Table 4 lists the top ten intersections within the West Central Area based on excess crash cost per year, based on the cost associated with crashed of each level of severity . TABLE 4: WCAP INTERSECTIONS WITH HIGHEST EXCESS CRASH COST PER YEAR Model Predicted Actual Adjusted Intersection Crashes Per Year Crashes Per Year Excess Crash and Cost Prop.AADT Fatal/ Fatal / Streetl Street2 Total Injury Total Injury Damage Only Shields St Elizabeth St 411137 19. 2 4.7 27.6 5 .8 7.2 1 .2 $ 206,516 Shields St Plum St 31 ,754 1 1 . 1 2.8 16.5 3.9 4.3 1 . 1 $ 173, 120 Shields St Stuart St 29,776 4.2 1 .0 6.3 2. 3 0.8 1 .3 $ 161 ,075 Heatheridge Rd Prospect Rd 23,300 2. 1 0A 3.9 0.9 1 A 0.5 $71 ,494 Shields St Mulberry St 35,433 14.7 3 .5 21 .2 3 .5 6.5 0.0 $ 69,081 City Park Ave Elizabeth St 21 ,878 7.4 1 .9 7.6 2.5 -0.4 0.6 $67, 189 Taft Hill Rd Mulberry St 24,908 9A 2 . 3 9. 1 2. 8 -0.8 0.5 $54, 141 Shields St Pitkin St 36,929 3.5 0.7 3.6 1 . 1 -0.3 0.4 $47,864 Shields St Prospect Rd 50,301 26. 1 6. 2 28. 1 6.4 1 .8 0.2 $46,538 City Park Ave Mulberry St 20,576 2.5 0.5 4.0 0.8 1 .3 0.2 $4 Ill 99 r� D 29 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study The intersection with the highest excess number of crashes and associated cost is Shields Street and Elizabeth Street. This is the same intersection with the highest overall delay and LOS in the PM peak hour. It has a high volume of traffic on all approaches with a significant amount of bicycle and pedestrian activity. There are five intersections along Shields Street that are on the top ten list of intersections with safety concerns. Figure 7 illustrates the density of crashes located within the West Central Area ( provided by the City of Fort Collins) . It can be seen that the majority of the arterial /arterial intersections experience a high number of crashes. As seen in Table 4 and in Figure 7, Shields Street has the most safety concerns within the study area . The City of Fort Collins further evaluated the crash data to identify locations with crashes involving bicycles and pedestrians. Figure 7 provides a graphical representation of the bicycle - related crashes within the West Central Area . There were over 12 crashes between 2009 and 2013 on Elizabeth Street at two intersections: ( 1 ) Shields Street and ( 2 ) City Park Avenue . This high number of crashes is likely related to the large number of cyclists traveling through the intersection, which are assumed to be destined for the university . Intersections that had between eight and 1 1 crashes during the five - year period include: Taft Hill Road and Elizabeth Street, Shields Street and Prospect Road , Shields Street and Stuart Street, Shields Street and Centre Avenue, and Shields Street and Drake Road . Figure 7 shows a graphical representation of locations where pedestrian - related crashes have occurred . There were three locations within the study area that had four or more pedestrian related crashes between 2009 and 2013 . These locations are ( 1 ) Shields Street and Plum Street, ( 2 ) Prospect Road and Whitcomb Street, and ( 3 ) Prospect Road and College Avenue. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Bicycle and pedestrian facilities serve as an important component of the Fort Collins transportation network by providing transportation options for visitors, students and residents. These facilities are intended to provide safe, easy, and convenient alternatives to driving . They are particularly important in pursuing the long -term goals and vision of the City and promoting an environment where public spaces offer a high level of comfort, convenience, efficiency, quality of experience and safety . Figure 8 shows bicycle and pedestrian volumes at all intersections where data was available. The data was collected from the City and CSU studies. The yellow boxes show AM and PM peak volumes of pedestrians in the crosswalks traveling in both directions. Blue boxes show the same values for bicyclists. Volumes inside of the intersection show bicycle turning movements for bikes riding on the roadway. The highest bicycle volumes were documented at: • Shields Street and Plum Street/North Drive • Shields Street and Elizabeth Street • Prospect Road and Center Avenue • Drake Road and Redwing Road / Bay Road (Mason Corridor) D 30 ,� West Central Area - All Crash Types West Central Area - Bicycle Crashes West Central Area - Pedestrian Crashes 11112009 - 1213112013 11112009 - 1213112013 11112009 - 12/31/2013 rJ , t NNY yf A P � ` i; �IVHlI i� • _ W b 1 W MT w 'RO-SPMNo u - _— ��0��� ■ . p■M.r®O.�IIII1Y W■R . f [�w[�w . ; T ■T. �� .U ■q. '` � - , Ox! ■h (� Figure 7 Crash History West Central Area Plan 0(4) /" 0 (0) a (()) 4— 1 (13) 0 (14) 1 (0) 0 (0) 0 ((1) ] (3) 2 (3) —(• t aaa t City Pa t t 0 (0)-A ) 1 K ' YP7 7 0 (0 •— o (o) 0 0 0 (0)--• •— 0 (0) P o 0 (0) I ,� , (o) '7 0 (0)�' I Ir 0 (o) ^o a o S 0 (0)� ) I 0 (0) 0 1 � 1 � 1 1 0 4-- 1 (5) 1(0) o 1 (4) 0(,) 1 (2) OIO) 1 (1) 1 (3) —(♦ 0 (0) O (0) —(♦ 58 (39) 3 (21) F O (8) 1 (2) - th t atia o f Colorado o � f Legend c o 0 (0) � � 0 (1) ' •� e a 70 (39) o (a) s (0) —� -2 (17) o o WCAP Study Area a^ 0 0 (0) �1 } �r r0 (3) o o W MULBERRY ST 4 (15) al (8)ofuz _ <M( o >6 +>r X (Y) AM (PM) Pedestrian Crossings in Crosswalk 1 1 (3) 0 (4) 12 COM ,K X(Y) AM (PM) Bicycle Crossings in Crosswalk 3 (}}z) ,o�-(ay) 0 (]) 0 X (v) 70) 6 (1) F WLAUREL T �— X (v) AM (PM) Bicycle Turning Movements in t Ir X (v) Roadway Z Data from CSU Master Plan and collected ` o 7 (2}-a f0 S w / 1 from a different source and time On) 0 (0) 2 2 (0 f �- 0 (1) o m (0)�� �{ ° (1) 9 Q - m t o > o t a �. Sao ti (13) 0 (3) on) 1 (o) RED FOX M 1-- o (o) - O 3 (6) 1 D) ---� 2 (0) —�R f �r �- 0 (2) o o NATURALAR 3}i�' 2 (0) t — t •f 0 0 (0) �1 I I 0 (0) o o /\ 1 0= o t _ ol � Io j o ` V 4 (1 0 0) 9 NI-A 1� p (0 0 `. 1 1 M 4— 2(2) O (0) FISCHER 0 N)y �— 0 (0) o o °` 0 (3)� r 0} 0 (0) 0 (0) _ NATURAL a n_ 0 NT-4 R 1I r n (0) AREA W LAK ST 2(U 0(0) --► f /-- o(o) m AKE ST ~ 2 (2) m ' •4'� t o o t 3 (o) w W o (5) .� 1 �. 0 (3) ` `' L oUnive States ' i Nate {- 0 (0) 0 (0) 7 (0) y �— 0 (3) o o Moore W o (o) o(o) —► 2 (1) �1 � � r0 (2) ^o a ity Park University Z t o o W 0 4,000 t aaa oag y Hospi'tbl I 4 -- 2(4) 1 (1) 0 0 0 (0) J Al 0 (0) r. r. 0(2) 0(o) 1— 1M 0 (1) 0(3) 0 (2) —� 0 (0) — } - 0 (1) 0 0 0 (0) 0(0) 2 (0) 1 (1) '--� t oOo t P R 0 (0) � r0 (0) o WSTUA ST 1 t ; (9) ' ; figure 8a (1 w ~ o ") w (3 1 ° `3' 01 � N T � r � l j Existing Bicycle and 1n) odl —► RTRrs��. � c 0)� � I} � � 1 (3) � � 0 � moo ♦ f l 1 4-- 3 (1) ,y Pedestrian Volumes 1 of 2 .. �E ._ _ __s �_ _:, ._ ,_ . _ _ �. .. ,. . , ..• .. .K.....� �- a(1) "�' � � � West Central Area Plan (,) 0 J W_ N Z h H Z 0 W City Park a y N a Q L1Jf'. 4— 1 (25) 0 (0) N g W 3 (27) 0 1 8 (14) 6(3) W W '1 0 (9) 0 (3) 9 (9) 1 (2) J 3 (6) 1 (0) t omiv t UL 'g N'o 0 0 � t o o w � 0 (8) o m^ o � � � e 'o o 2 (1) J —' o w a o 1 (0}-a ° (1 85 (7) —op } � 2 (55) o v 0 1 (1� j � 0 (a) .y g 47 (,6)—� f �3 (4fi o 1 (0) � ° (a) 9 62 (38)—� �3 (69) o o " ° r o (o M ° (°)� � rr � ° ( a� a -- "ems �-- 0 (27) 2 (17) \� 1 g ♦ v 1 (38) 0 (8) 1402) 6 (8) 0 (6) 011:1 291u 2 (8) W ABETH ST end 0 (9) 0 (12) Universit y 4(19) 9(5) Legend w 1 (40) 8(1) Q t o^ a t j WCAP Study Area 0 0 F 4 (7) 2(a) o0 6p-A + R-° (11 L?rT= ; `; X (Y) AM (PM) Pedestrian Crossings in Crosswalk 1 ) o ° 1 (0) 9 �- > V w t o 0 0>` X(Y) AM (PM) Bicycle Crossings in Crosswalk X (Y) o (a} n _ ,� ° 7 w + t- 2 (3) 1 (3) �— X (Y) AM (PM) Bicycle Turning Movements in WLAKE ST 9 ( 8 (103) 0 o F 0 (0) o (o) 1 (2) 3 (1) X (Y) Roadway F 2 ( I�I ° (7) 0 0 (0) 1 (0) o o I ,j1 N o Data from CSU Master Plan and collected I ♦ /� 1!' from a different source and time 4- 0(1) W PROSP + � � W 1 (1) � � 1 � � z (o) �' 2 (3) /-- 1 (3) 1 (3) F1 1 0 0 o t 3 (6) 1 (0) r . F o c 0 (0) U oeo j omo 6 (2) �} RED FOX MEADOWS 0 (3) 1 (3) 0 0 0 (0) � I t I r ° (0) J _ a (1) 9 (3) 0 o NATURALAREA 1 W STUART ST a ' ``� ' 1 Bo(2) 0 (2) 1 (0) 0 (0) ART S. o0 oa 0 0 'r �� r = o (aYr � • !t _ ° (0)� I r 1 (0) - ss f 0s9 St Note o o ( ) �r 00 p (1) "0 o ( ) —• ° ( )o (s) oa) o ( > t OR 7 1 o i,000 z,000 a,000 o ( on) o(o) t - o (0) 0 (o) 0) Fe et oM) 0)t t = 0 o I o 0 Z � z ppp 72 ((2°)) �"f T I NATURALAREA 1 �(0) 00) ' --� Figure 8b 10 WD ERD -- 0 (n) o (o) -- - -- -- - - - Existing Bicycle and 0 (0) o (o) . Pedestrian Volumes 2 of 2 m "' p, mp71p', — West Central Area Plan west central area plan and prospect road corridor study The highest pedestrian volumes were recorded at: • Shields Street and Plum Street/North Drive • Shields Street and Elizabeth Street • Prospect Road and Whitcomb Street • Prospect Road and Center Avenue • Prospect Road and Shields Street • Shields Street and Lake Street Figure 9a depicts the existing bikeways, facility types, and location ( on -street and off - street) within the West Central Area . The map also provides the proposed bike facilities. Figure 9b depicts Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress ( LTS) within the West Central Area . Bicycle crash data is displayed in the previous section on crash history. The bicycle LTS was determined in a concurrent study as part of the 2014 Fort Collins Bicycle Master Plan . The study takes into account several variables to calculate an overall LTS score . The variables included in this study were intersection crossings, traffic speeds, traffic volumes, illegal parking , bike lane width, and number of lanes. The methodology scores each variable for each individual street segment and then combines those variables to calculate the overall LTS score . Figure 9b illustrates three of the input variables (volume stress, intersection stress, and speed stress) in addition to the overall LTS score ( overall stress) . It can be seen that the high traffic volumes significantly contributed to the overall LTS score along Prospect Road east of Shields Street, along Shields Street north of Plum Avenue, and along Mulberry Street east of City Park Avenue . Intersection stress is apparent for segments that intersect with arterials. Speed stress is also apparent along the majority of arterials including Drake Road , Prospect Road , Shields Street ( south of Prospect Road ), and Taft Hill Road ( south of Prospect Road ) . Within the study area the majority ( 68 percent) of road segments experience very low stress with only 16 percent experiencing high to very high stress. This is due to the majority of roadways within the study area being local residential roadways. When evaluating the arterials and collectors only, there are only six percent with very low stress and 53 percent with high to very high stress, which is expected due to the high volumes and speeds of vehicular traffic. The majority of the collector roadways within the West Central Area experience low to medium stress. The overall LTS score is highest along these roadway segments: • Mulberry Street between Taft Hill Road and Shields Street • Prospect Road east of Shields Street • Shields Street between Mulberry Street and Plum Street, as well as between Prospect Road and Hobbit Street • Taft Hill Road between Plum Street and Elizabeth Street Figure 10a shows pedestrian infrastructure provided by the City of Fort Collins engineering department. Pedestrian crash data is displayed in the previous section on crash history . The figure illustrates the sidewalk condition ( good, fair, poor), types of curb ramps, and where sidewalks and curb ramps are missing . There are approximately 73 miles of sidewalks within the West Central Area . According the data , r� D 34 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado only 20 of those miles ( about 25 percent) are in good condition. The majority of the existing sidewalks are in fair to poor condition . There are approximately 10 miles of missing sidewalks, which are mostly along local streets, including Bay Road which is missing approximately two miles of sidewalk. Curb ramps are missing throughout the study area with 77 percent missing curb ramps at locations that require curb ramps. It should be noted that the percentage of missing curb ramps is high throughout Fort Collins and is not specific to the West Central Area . Currently, the Pedestrian Needs Assessment is working through the sidewalk improvements systematically . Figure 10b uses the same data source to show sidewalk type ( attached verses detached ) and sidewalk width . There are approximately 52 miles of attached sidewalks and 11 miles of detached sidewalks within the West Central Area . The detached sidewalks occur chiefly along Center Avenue, Prospect Road between Taft Hill Road and Shields Street, and some sections along Elizabeth Street. The sidewalk width throughout the area ranges from two feet to 14 . 5 feet with the majority of sidewalks falling in the three to five foot range . The current sidewalk standard design requires a minimum width of five feet. Many of the sidewalks in this area were built under previous standards and have not been widened to meet the new standard . Both sidewalks and curb ramps include information on ADA compliance which is also illustrated in Figure 10b. Fifty - four percent of total existing sidewalk is ADA compliant, but only 20 percent of the existing curb ramps are ADA compliant. The majority of sidewalks that are not ADA compliant are located in the northern section of the study area between Prospect Street and Mulberry Street. ADA non - compliant curb ramps occur throughout the study area . F fig D 35 City Park a H Z a Yf 0 W N City Park Lake O J W. MULBERRY ST H c I I N a I Z o I m I I W LAUREL ST FO e Z O r O I I, t' o. 1 W LUM ST II K LL 1 1 0 \L' Lu + 1 1 WE ABETH ST Colorado State UniversityL 0 Lu V w Lu I Q Jj O D 1 Legend _ UI F H 1 Study Area E PI KIN ST 1 H OJ , - - - Bike and Pedestrian Trails W , • U • N I 1111 Existing Bike Ways W LAKE ST • • I II Bike Lanes • • S • 1 • � � I � Multi-Use Trail • 1 • I II� W PROSPECT RD Bike Route 1 , Soft Surface Trail No Bicycling + ` - -- - -r,1Pt1FOX M DOWSE ' �� 1 11 Z Mason St. Trans. Corridor it NATURALAREA _ I O �• . _ _ W STUART ST ` `� 1 11 H Proposed Bike Ways 1 1 z • • • Proposed Bike Lanes f O FISCHER It • Proposed Multi-Use Trail r 4i NATURAL zWST ; AREA J4 1 ;1 • • Proposed Bike Route 0 Proposed Soft Surface Trail 1 H Rolland Moore Colorado State I ;1 J p Community Park University 1 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 F u LL Veterinary Hospital II W II Feet 9 Q�S;P9 fA J I JROSS I NATURALAREA @ I Uj 1 `a I � ; Figure 9a 1 I _ _ _ _ _ a _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ a _ _� �� Existing and W DRAKE RD mw , Proposed Bikeways ' West Central Area Plan W MULBERRY ST W MUL ERRY T 1 - J Volume Stress 1 Intersection Stress Low 1 1 Low Medium -may ELI BETH I Medium 1 ELI BETH S 1 1 High 1 aaa>• High L New 1 `I F a. n N N J _ J F I W PROSPECT RLD ¢ I y ° � i 1 II o J 1 i 1 r I � 1 I 1 I Segment Stress 1 1 1 DRAKE R I Very High - W DRAKE RD WN, assitono MEN& mos High Volume Stress Intersection Stress Medium t6%Low W_ M_ULBERRY ST W MULBERRY T Very L°w 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 4D Miles I Speed Stress ET Final Segment Stress Low — Very Low Medium I — Low Segment Stress ELI BETHS ABETH Medium Arterials and Collectors Only classes High High Very High Very High High Medium — _ — PE 2 — LOW Very Low N i1 0 i If D 1 2 3 4 5 6 Miles I Figure 9b DRAKE RD I DRAKE RD Bicycle Speed Stress Overall Stress Level of Traffic Stress West Central Area Plan W MULBERRY ST W MULBERRY ST 1 _ I 1 _ I Sidewalk Condition Good ELIZ BETH Si I Fair —W ELIZ BETH ST — a Poor rA l l J �1 L e i GO bon = J _W L 1 I.. W PROSPECT RD = `� F I W PROSP ZC�T RD = F I T"(�► i i u I F I 0 O I I I I v Sidewalk Condition by Number of Miles W DRAKE RD % I I W DRAKE RD I Missing Sidewalk Condition Missing Sidewalks Poor Fair W MULBERRY ST W MULBERRY ST Good a GO I • a • �•• I Curb Ramps = ��� `• • - • 0 10 20 30 40 • • 10 i •is � • � 'tiT I • Drive Approach � • SO 40 GO • . Miles I • • .`' I •�•� I • � • Intersection • � r gims I 7 W ELIZ oBETHI aN ELIZ BETH Mid-Block • •�Sir Existing vs. Missing Curb Ramps 1 y • F- o . ' • 7.1 • •q zl FaV-lIIlI •, ++• i _H L �•. . •••. rI mJLL� i • �t• *a• • •� J 1�t .• f•�am� _••• • .0 Elm • N• see • �• •GO • •• II ' Gags alLe see *of • J .I • • •� • ' � �` � ' • • , I I map 410 so 46 �. • � I Woo, . � • I Figure 1Oa I � �� I • • DRAKE RD • I �,�.� DRAKE RD • I Map 1 of 2 — ' - - ' � ` - - - - �� Existing Curb Ramps Missing Curb Ramps VAPedestrian Facilities West Central Area Plan W MULBERRY ST W MULBERRY ST I I 1 �. � I Sidewalk Width I < 4 I Sidewalk Type I I ELIZABETH 1 6 I ELIZ BETH S r Attached I I Detached cc 1A _ � s is z n JI � JI C J _ L _ _ _ I _ L LL W PROSPECT RD = _ LL t = V d -- 11 FI ° m1 I � I I o I I I 1 v r I r I + I + I > idewalk Type I I I I Detached W DRAKE RA I I DRAKE R Sidewalk Width Sidewalk Type Attached 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 W MULBERRY ST _ W MULBERRY ST Miles 1 I ADA Compliant ADA Compliant I Yes Yes 90% ADA Compliance 80% ELIZABETH I No ELIZABETH S� NO 70% M' 60% ~ I ~ 50% o L _ z I -- cc 40% I ' wl �_ w . I 30% 20% 4 I 4 10% ip 0% � I f ' Yes No Yes No Orrr ( Sidewalks Ramps I r 4w- + I I I I I Figure 10b W DRAKE R I DRAKE R j Map 2 of 2 - - - - . ' —I —I - - � Existing Sidewalk ADA Compliance Curb Ramp ADA Compliance Pedestrian Facilities West Central Area Plan west central area plan and prospect road corridor study Transit Comprehensive transit coverage in the City of Fort Collins provides an important alternative to driving for visitors, residents, and students. The Transfort Strategic Operating Plan cites that the April 2008 survey results of weekday transit use indicated that the " highest ridership activity experienced at non -transit center stops occurred at stops located throughout the residential areas west of CSU . " This is consistent with the fact that CSU is the largest employer in the area and has 26,775 enrolled students ' . A reliable, frequent and comprehensive transit alternative is even more important given that congestion along corridors within the West Central Area is expected to increase, according to the Transfort Strategic Operating Plan . It is important that transit serve the West Central Area to not only connect to CSU , but to other destinations within the community and City. Figure 11 shows all transit routes and bus stops within the West Central Area . There are twelve bus routes that travel into and through the West Central Area ; three of which only operate when CSU is in session (fall /spring semesters ) . Table 5 provides a description and headway for each route in the system . Graph 1 shows June ridership for transit routes within the West central Area . TABLE 5 : TRANSFORT TRANSIT ROUTES, DESCRIPTIONS AND HEADWAYS Name Description Headway MAX Downtown Transit Center, Mason Corridor, South Mon-Sat, every 10 minutes during peak hours, year- Transit Center round HORN Moby Arena, CTC, Lake Street Garage Mon-Sat, every 10 minutes when CSU is in session and every 30 minutes when CSU is out of session GOLD Downtown, Laurel, Elizabeth, Prospect, College Fri-Sat, every 15 min. between 10:30 p.m. — 2:30 a.m., year-round GREEN Downtown, Mulberry, Taft Hill, Drake, College Fri -Sat, every 15 min. between 10: 30 p.m. — 2 : 30 a.m., year-round 2 CSU Campus and west Fort Collins Mon-Sat, every 30 minutes, year round b West Fort Collins from CSU Transit Center to the Mon -Sat, every 60 minutes, year round Foothills Mall 7 CSU campus, Senior Center, Drake Road and Mon-Sat, every 30 minutes during peak times, and Rigden Farm every 60 minutes in the evening, year- round 10 Downtown, City Park and CSU Mon-Sat, every 60 minutes, year- round CSU, Rocky Mountain High School and Front Mon -Fri, every 60 minutes, year-round. When Poudre 19 Range Community College along Shields Street School District or CSU is in session, it runs every 30 minutes during AM & PM peak travel periods 31 CSU campus and Campus West Mon-Fri, every 20 minutes, when CSU is in session 32 CSU campus and West Fort Collins Mon-Fri, every 30 minutes, when CSU is in session 33 Starts August 25 - schedule coming soon None of the transit routes through the West Central Area offer service on Sundays. The non - numbered routes have a shorter headway than numbered routes, which come generally every half hour or hour. The number of currently enrolled students was found at colostate .edu. D 40 ,� ley W I ity Parko°� O¢' ,P O �JyOSpF JyOSp�i City Park ¢P J0¢F J0¢�P} ecJ� O rm�u - W MULEASTJZ Lake O E MULBERRY ST S f in W LAUREL ST �a Z E LAUREL ST '� 1 �k' S t5 AS ¢P� eCPY� 33 J Ud W MA V .O If CSUTRANSIT CENTER W ELIZAB . ;i U IIIIIIIIS E ELIZABETH ST Sea �e�Jo� nnPP��Qp¢� N Colorado State University GOLD HORN Legend n Inn P�P��lE Oo2 Q w I Study Area `V Z E PITKIN ST Roads FVi 1 �eY`P � Major Arterial r Arterial <PF Z �¢� �� p Collector W LAKE ST I 0& O e} ? 4Y W �� .�P� ¢ ¢e� U �� J�o �� °�� 1AISE ST s�� <5 Local OS¢ 0� CO �J CF' Qpp �S,F1p�S,tl Q¢OS�4¢' QPpS Bus Stops PROSPECT RD O Bus Stops Serving 1-3 Transit Lines I W PROSPECT RD �Ct�0 `� °P �.2 oS�S�JP Qpo <,O OS��¢- Q�oS¢`�pSo i O Bus Stops Serving 4-5 Transit Lines ¢moo`' VQ I Transit Lines � 2 GINEENED32 J W STUART ST J I E STUART STINEEMEND 6 INEEMEND 33 HJQP� SJ�� GINEENED 7 aaa000n Gold Joru �S oSCal S 10 40000001 Green �AA Z Cal w 5� 0 �00 T- 3 � 19 � HORN �¢, k, �O �¢4. D 31 MAX P 6 J Q O .1 4S' O 1 3yJ Sa I �P�0� �SS �J ° CQ�P �Sp� SQ�P�� ?O > > �OJ4 Gk� 5 Q ut 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 inw Feet C l7 ¢� Z Rolland Moore �S �` J OLUMBIA RD D ape `�� PF Colorado State J ¢o¢" U Community Park ¢.�`' O University N GO& @�9Veterinary Hospital Op C W DRAKE RD S� ¢4� oep� O�p¢� °� p o��S Figure 11 E DRAKE RD e} o� A Cal Existing Transit Service ee �� , West Central Area Plan O o� west central area plan and prospect road corridor study GRAPH 1 : WEST CENTRAL AREA TRANSIT RIDERSHIP, JUNE 2014 Green 1474 Gold 10047 19 2,261 10 112, 357 6 ` 3,808 7 34926 2 7, 059 o—o MAX 870598 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 8D000 90000 Transfort provided the transit data for the month of June 2014, which does not include ridership associated with CSU . Bus Routes 31 , 32 and 33 only run when CSU is in session, and data for the HORN route was not available, therefore these routes are not displayed in Graph 1 . Transfort estimates that 35 percent of their ridership is by students. It is important to note that there have been a number of service changes in the system in the Spring and Summer of 201 A and a continued evaluation of ridership data is important. Amongst the seven routes with ridership data in June, there was an average of 4, 200 passengers per day. It can be seen that the new MAX BRT route has the highest ridership out of all the routes within the West Central Area . There was an average of 3 ,400 passengers utilizing the MAX transit, which is 80 percent of the total ridership on the displayed routes. The next highest ridership is about 270 passengers per day on Route 2 , which links the CSU Campus to west Fort Collins. Graph 2 illustrates the number of passengers per hour per route . GRAPH 2 : WEST CENTRAL AREA PASSENGERS PER HOUR , JUNE 2014 i Green 7 . 4 Gold =Elm wal= L 16 . 3 19 8 . 4 10 14.8 6 9 . 5 7 6.4 Bus 2 18. 1 I MAX 0 33. U 10 11_ .4) 30 35 MAX had the highest number of passengers per hour at 33 . 21 which is nearly double that of the second highest route . Route 2 had the second highest number of passengers per hour at 18 . 1 and Route GOLD in a close third at 16 . 3 . Route 7 has the least amount of passengers per hour at 6 .4 . r� D 42 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado The data also highlighted that approximately 7 percent of riders had their bicycles. Additional data will be provided when CSU is in session to better understand all the routes through the West Central Area . Figure 12 shows a rating of each bus stop in the west central area , based on its shelter and bench conditions, lighting , trash availability, ADA condition, and location on the arterial . Parking The West Central Area has a high demand for parking given its proximity to the CSU campus and College Avenue corridor. With planned campus building projects moving forward , new parking demand is being generated and existing parking capacity is being lost. The CSU Parking and Transportation Master Plan ( 2014 ) takes an aggressive stance on managing parking demand and creating a denser, more urbanized campus. The plan lays out an extensive and progressive Transportation Demand Management ( TDM) program in order to achieve the desired results of mitigating parking demand on and around campus by enhancing access to campus and utilization of transportation alternatives. Parking demand and access to parking is an important consideration in this study . It recommends the construction of seven parking facilities on campus that will serve the demand and relieve the neighborhood from overflow parking . Figure 13 identifies the location where on -street parking is available on arterials and collectors within the West Central Area . The only arterial that offers a significant amount of on - street parking is Mulberry Street near the City Park Lake . Taft Hill Road also has small sections of on - street parking near Blevins Middle School . The following collectors provide on -street parking along the majority of the length : Constitution Avenue ( north and south sections), Stuart Street, Research Boulevard , and Lake Street. The figure also highlights the one neighborhood , Sheely, that participates in the Residential Parking Permit Program ( RP3 ) . The purpose of this program is to provide on - street parking for residents and reduce the number of non - resident vehicles during specified time periods. The program can be tailored to each individual neighborhood to meet its needs and goals. FT ,1 D 43 Q� P City Park � avf' City Park OO Q- � Lake i� O�Q• > y~j N W MULBERRY ST H CA Z �� W 0 MULBERRY ST �p� I 0 x E Q ^� P ' z y�`S S'� ¢��� Q rFil � c C I �P°.;, 0O P°�� Q�J� o �0Q' W LAUREL ST W Z E LAUREL ST = D I °°� e y 5J� S°��� P�� �"�` la III ~ Y r qy Qp� ` �Q�Jet 0 Z o cc Y W ELIZAB TH ST i Q4'p �.��� iJ •— 9 J�`0 a P�,F —• 1 S.Ttiv' Colorado State University E ELIZABETH ST Q I o 5 F �s� soy v, I o 0S O'SQ ,tye Fy� 1 OS���� E PITKIN ST C°2 oOQ t �QQ 1 F0 The bus stop rating takes into account the ZQ� 0500 OS I a oN� 93�P following factors: W LAKE ST I -CFQ� S'Ea3 ,2 S .%W0 5,2,0�' Q�' 0� 1 S�Qb�' 1, C. 2eQ� S°? Q3. V. 4Y p} pY py Q q}� � � � � 'c LW.L L T -Shelter condition °SQ QQG� SQQ� SQ�� yQ0 QQ QQ Qv �� -Bench condition QQo Qp °S Qo QQo Ogg' o`' moo`' �QQ' -Lighting availability •��Q --� '�s' ll P SPECT RD Q PROSPECT RD -Trash availability �_� • a -ADA condition 4r��y° Q& ¢2�p SOP I -Location on an arterial (only relevent if stop is not already a shelter) � 1 Q�°SQ Q�°yam Q�d? I Legend ti W STUART ST S� 6 I E STUART ST Bus Stop Rating SAl 5�,�0 � tr0 I • Very Low 40 0 �O°p �0 I SP ING ARK DR 0g 0 Low wyt Medium p • �1Q�°r' G,�2 e`er I j N High 4Y F P oP OU �j Very High Rolland Moore Colorado State 1 0 OLUMBIA RD Fermi z Community Park ,�FQ cF?Q o University I O Not Rated Veterinary Hospitall F. 02 S S� c 02 h P� 1 0& o 1,000 2,000 4,000 ? .I. OSQ V Feet ♦��O O�Sfi 20Pp 1 p}° S°So OP~�~� SQF�` 40' + J-A J I �ti0�OS ,`P}OP �4}pOc'SJ ,`4Y S °�� •� ���� °�� �� °� Ww DRAKE RD E DRAKE RD Figure 12 ��` ""� • Bus Stop Rating o °��� West Central Area Plan W MOUNTAINAVE 2 W MOUNTAIN AVE r Cache La Poudre River y Z I � w City Park a N z a H N O w City Park Lake 20 ; Oct w U L B E R RY S T O m OJ -� N c 1 I F. C o I I D U a I I W LAUREL ST o O I I E o u T W PLUM ST I 1 I lJ I I W ELIZABETH ST I Colorado State University w - I a 1 w J I a I o I U F.I z wo I— — — — E PI KIN ST Legend U ' On Street Parking W LAKE ST I '� _ W_LAKE ST — — - - Major Arterial ' — Arterial W PROSPECT RD 1 Collector RP3�Parking I Local Program RED FOX MEADOWS Program 1 z Streams NATURALAREA W STUART ST 1 O Waterbodies I 1 Z G I FISCHER C Parks NATURAL y IyST`- I >W AREA �.� 1 Natural Areas P t Study Area Sa O I F ® Sheely Neighborhood el y Rolland Moore Colorado State 1 = 21 u Community Park University 1 z LLI .P.Yeterinary Hospital 1 w FI _ / F.y9 1 J 0 1,000 2,000 4,000e[ �I ROSS 0 2 I ~ NATURALAREA 1 I U O I I W DRAKE RD m w Z Q Figure 13 w On Street Parking a _ , West Central Area Plan Y west central area plan and prospect road corridor study EXISTING CONDITIONS : EVALUATION OF THE PROSPECT ROAD AND LAKE STREET CORRIDORS This plan takes a detailed look at the Prospect Road and Lake Street corridors since Prospect Road from Mason to 1 - 25 is proposed to be an Enhanced Travel Corridor ( ETC) and Lake Street can support Prospect Road . Prospect Road is one of the primary east- west corridors within this study area and provides a direct link to the CSU campus, College Avenue, 1 - 25 , and other popular destinations in Fort Collins. Since Prospect Road is a direct connection to popular destinations, it has a high volume of vehicular traffic as well as bicycle, pedestrian, and transit users. In order to make east- west travel through this study area safer, more efficient, and more convenient for all users, this study looks at Lake Street as an alternative corridor for specific users, particularly non - motorized travel . It should be rooted that there is potential to utilize Pitkin Street as an alternative to Lake Street since it provides additional connectivity to the east. Roadway There is a high density of access along Prospect Road with a total of 66 accesses from Shields Street to College Avenue . Figure 14 identifies the access points along Prospect Road . Access points are distinguished as arterials, collectors, local roads, parking lot access roads, or private driveways. There are two arterials, one collector, five local streets, 15 parking lot accesses, and A3 residential driveways within the one - mile stretch . On Lake Street there are a total of 59 accesses on the one - mile stretch : two arterials, one collector, three local streets, 35 parking lot accesses, and 18 residential driveways. This is a lower volume and lower posted speed roadway compared to Prospect Road ; however, it has a high amount of access points. The quantity of access points along both Prospect Road and Lake Street results in a large number of conflict areas for all travel modes and can cause additional congestion or reduced safety. Vehicles turning into and out of driveways frequently along the corridor also result in additional vehicle delay and poor mobility . The roadway and right- of - way ( ROW) widths along Prospect Road vary due to the changes in providing a two-way left-turn lane . The bicycle and pedestrian facilities vary along the corridor as well ( see the Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Section for further discussion ) . Prospect Road between Shields Street and College Avenue has two travel lanes in each direction, with no bicycle facility . Between Shields Street and Whitcomb Street, Prospect Road does not have a center two - way left-turn lane and it is the most constrained section . From Whitcomb Street until College Avenue, the five - lane configuration with a two-way left-turn lane returns. All of the travel lanes range between eight and 12 .5 feet. Lake Street has the same configuration for the entire one mile stretch between Shields Street and College Avenue—one travel lane, a bike lane and on - street parking in each direction . Lane and sidewalk widths and the presence of a sidewalk buffer vary throughout the corridor. Figure 15 shows the right-of - way width along the two corridors and is a key map for the existing roadway cross sections. It can be seen that the right- of - way width changes throughout the study corridor. The shown ROW was derived from parcel data and may not be accurate enough for design purposes. The City of Fort Collins will be surveying the Prospect Road and Lake Street right- of -ways during the summer and the data will be updated accordingly . This data should be available by mid - July . r� D 46 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado Figures 16a and 16b illustrate the roadway cross sections for four locations along Prospect Road . Figures 17a and 17b illustrate the five cross - section variations along Lake Street. Each of the cross- sections within the corridors was illustrated to show the differences in lane configurations, availability of bikeways, buffers, and sidewalk widths. Roadway LOS on Prospect Road and Lake Street are displayed in Table 6 and shown on Figure 5 . The operations were evaluated for each direction and between major intersections. Prospect Road westbound between Shields Street and Whitcomb Street and eastbound between Center Avenue and Whitcomb Street operate at LOS D in both the AM and PM. Lake Street operates at LOS C or better, between Shields Street and College Avenue . TABLE 6: PROSPECT ROAD AND LAKE STREET ROADWAY LOS RoadwayDay Direction 1.01 EB B AM WB D Shields St to Whitcomb St EB B PM WB D EB D AM Prospect Rd Whitcomb St to Center Ave WB C EB D PM WB C EB C AM WB C Center Ave to College Ave EB B PM WB C EB C AM Lake St Shields St to Whitcomb St WB C EB B PM WB C a D 47 .. . 1h.- oil 01 1111irf5eal t I i . rf 91 � � lj��+t � kl� ` t: �Td•�"40, " g Ct , ��� a�, � "` � �ii ►t -_ • � service vehicles/ . . ` i � gill peds only y / ri e LA I I W LAKE SIT I I I W I W Fri II II IW J Um! looloot " mi I I cc I z I F PROSPECT RD o I Ou 'I V) w + a i U m I � a , .}� LU LU om ,� �' F • ` q` V L Legend Residential driveway Parking lot access F> Local road to� Collector ,I rterial77 MAX BRT o Prospect Road/ Lake Street Figure 14 Prospect Road and Lake Street Access Map ,� West Central Area Plan f W PITKIN ST I I I F I z C 0 I F- I a L W N I I 60' 67' S9 60' 59' 62' GH I - - - - - - - - X - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ' � Ir- I 1 W LAKE ST K I W H I Q = W O 1 11 W I J rn p h 91' 81' 80' 81, 82' 86' U .� 71' 70' 62' 60' 65' J 63' 70' ul I W PROSPECT RD p I W Q I m a L W O F- I U Ir- W o U z m ; I o I u ari I F I I Legend o 500 1,000 Feet Cross-Section Locations %, 1 Study Area XX' - Right-of-Way* I Approximate Right-of-Way Width *Right-of-way measurements estimated from City of Fort Collins parcel data. FAT Figure 15 Existing Right- of-Way and Cross - Section Locations Prospect Road and Lake Street :l r « - :-It 3.5 ft. 1 IS ft. 11 .5 ft. 11 ft. 12 ft. 5 ft. Sidewalk Eastbound Travel Lanes Westbound Travel Lanes Sidewalk 47-48 ft. `I I ROW= 60-91 ft. A-A: Between Shields Street and Whitcomb Street s 6-8 ft. 9- 9.5 ft` 9-10 ft. 11 ft. 9-10 ft. 8-9 ft. 8-9 ft. Sidewalk Eastbound Travel Lanes 2-Way Left Westbound Travel Lanes Sidewalk Turn Lane 47-48 ft. ROW= 60 ft. B- B: Between Whitcomb Street and Center Avenue d , 5 ft. 20 ft. 9.5 ft.` 9.5 ft. 11 ft. 9.5 ft. 8-9 ft. 9 ft. Sidewalk Buffer Eastbound Travel Lanes 2-Way Left Westbound Travel Lanes Sidewalk Turn Lane 47-48 ft. I ROW= 82 ft. C-C: Between Center Avenue and Bay Road , Figure 16a Prospect Road Cross Sections 1 of 2 ,� West Central Area Plan s � 6-8 ft. 9- 9.5 ft: - ft.oft. 10.5-11 .5 ft. 9-10 ft. 10-11 ft. 8-12 ft. Sidewalk Eastbound Travel Lanes 2-Way Left Westbound Travel Lanes Sidewalk Turn Lane 47-48 ft. ROW= 63-86 ft. D-D: Between Bay Road and College Avenue Figure 16b � Prospect Road Cross Sections 2 of 2 ,� West Central Area Plan s S . •Y n. -3 f 8 ft. 5 ft. 11 .5 ft. 9.5 ft. 4 ft. 7 ft. Sidewalk Parking Bike Eastbound Westbound Bike Parking Lane Travel Lane Travel Lane Lane I45 ft. I ROW= 60 ft. E-E: Between Shields Street and 300 feet east i .f j4% 5.5 ft. 12.5 ft. 8 ft. 5 ft. 11 .5 ft. 9.5 ft. 4.5 ft. 8 ft. Sidewalk Buffer Parking Bike Eastbound Westbound Bike Parking Lane Travel Lane Travel Lane Lane I46.5 ft. I ROW= 67 ft. F-F: Between 300 feet to 660 feet east of Shields Street 5- � 6-7 ft. 8.5 ft. I`5 ft. 9.5-10.5 ft. 10 ft. 4 ft. 8 ft. 7-11 ft. 5.5-6.5 ft. Sidewalk Parking Bike Eastbound Westbound Bike Parking Buffer Sidewalk Lane Travel Lane Travel Lane Lane I�45-46 ft��-46 f . ROW= 59 ft. G-G: Between 600 feet to 1 ,250 feet east of Shields , Figure 17a Lake Street Cross Sections 1 of 2 ,� West Central Area Plan 5 Fk.• dr ® ;y) 3 17 8 ft. `5 ft. 10.5-11 .5 ft. 9.5 ft. 5 ft. 8 ft. 5-7 ft. Sidewalk Parking Bike Eastbound Westbound Bike Parking Sidewalk Lane Travel Lane Travel Lane Lane Iit 46-47 ft. I ROW= 59-60 ft. H-H: Between 1 ,250 east of Shields Street and 390 feet east of Whitcomb Street lam 1 7-8.5 ft. 8 ft. 5 ft. 9.5- 11 .5 ft. 9.5 ft. 5 ft. 8 ft. 7-9 ft. Sidewalk Parking Bike Eastbound Westbound Bike Parking Sidewalk It Lane Travel Lane Travel Lane Lane IV 45-47ft. I ROW= 59-62 ft. 1-1 : Between 390 feet east of Whitcomb Street and College Avenue Figure 17b Lake Street Cross Sections 2 of 2 ,� West Central Area Plan west central area plan and prospect road corridor study Travel Patterns The City of Fort Collins installed Bluetooth readers along Prospect Road to collect travel time data . The available data was during summer 2014 when CSU was out of session . It is anticipated that more data will be provided once CSU is back in session . Some interesting observations of the summer data are as follows: • Average speed on Prospect Road from Taft Hill Road to College Avenue is: o Eastbound : 26 mph o Westbound : 25 mph • Travel time between Taft Hill Road and Shields Street is consistent throughout the day in both directions, ranging from 1 minute 46 seconds to 2 minutes 4 seconds . o Eastbound : The PM peak travel time is 2 minutes 5 seconds, which equates to 29 . 2 mph ( shown in Graph 3 ) . o Westbound : The PM peak travel time is 1 minute 58 seconds, which equates to 30 .5 mph ( shown in Graph 4 ) . • Travel time between Shields Street and College Avenue has distinct peaks at 9 :00am and 6 : 00pm in both directions. o Eastbound : In the off - peak, the travel time is 2 minutes 5 seconds. The travel time increases by 40 seconds in the peak period . It peaks at 2 minutes 45 seconds ( 22 mph ) and decreases after 6 : 00pm (shown in Graph 5 ) . o Westbound : In the off - peak, the travel time is 2 minutes 5 seconds. The travel time increases by 25 - 52 seconds in the peak period . The morning peak period is around 2 minutes 30 seconds with a significant increase in the PM peak at 2 minutes 57 seconds ( 20.4 mph ) . The travel time decreases after 6 :00pm ( shown in Graph 6 ) . It was anticipated that the travel time would change throughout the day on Prospect Road between Shields Street and College Avenue due to the number of signalized intersections, accesses, destinations along or near the arterial , proximity to CSU, and the high volume of traffic. West of Shields Street, Prospect Road does not have as many factors that impact the travel time . D 54 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado GRAPH 3: EASTBOUND TRAVEL TIME BETWEEN TAFT (HILL ROAD AND SHIELDS STREET 11 os � 140 e E 0E E 115 Eastbound - PM Peak Travel Time = 2 :05 sec. or 29 . 2 mph 0 so O JS 000 g g g g g — Competlwn index • I ()level time) GRAPH 4: WESTBOUND TRAVEL TIME BETWEEN SHIELDS STREET AND TAFT HILL ROAD 140 r E 1 11 E Westbound - PM Peak Hour Travel Time = 1 :58 sec. or 30 .5 mph 01, F 0J1 OW g $ $ 8 g Compoison Inde■ e 1 arwel t~i GRAPH 5 : EASTBOUND TRAVEL TIME BETWEEN SHIELDS STREET AND COLLEGE AVENUE ) iv J $0 r 1 E E 140 r Eastbound PM Peak Travel Time = 2 :45 sec. or 22 .0 mph 050 0 00 — Compullnn Inde■ el ItrAwl II011e1 D 55 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study GRAPH 6: WESTBOUND TRAVEL TIME BETWEEN COLLEGE AVENUE AND SHIELDS STREET Histoncal Trends for Prospect College to Shields 1 io e E " I n E Westbound - PM Peak Hour Travel Time = 2 : 57 sec. or 20 .4 vm UOU — COMPArnon Index a WAVWI limwl Intersections There are four signalized intersections on Prospect Road within the study area . These are at Shields Street, Whitcomb Street, Center Avenue, and College Avenue . There is also a pedestrian/ bicycle activated signal just west of Heatheridge Road . There is one signalized intersection on Lake Street, at Shields Street, and three stop -controlled intersections at Whitcomb Street, Center Avenue, and East Drive . The delay and LOS per intersection and peak hour are displayed in Table 7. TABLE 7: PROSPECT ROAD AND LAKE STREET INTERSECTION AND APPROACH LOS 2012 Existing Number Intersection Control Approach Delay • Delay • Overall 7 A 8 A 9 Shields St and Lake Signal WB 47 D 51 D Rd NB 5 A 5 A SB 7 A 2 A EB 12 B 11 B Lake Rd and WB 10.2 B 13 B 10 Whitcomb St 4 -Way Stop NB 13 B 11 B SB 8.5 A 11 B EB 10 A 8 A 11 Lake Rd and Center Side Street WB 10 A 9 A Ave Stop NB 10 A 8 A EB 7 A 4 A Lake Rd and East Dr WB 0 A 0 A 12 Side Street NB 10 B 10 B Stop SB - - - - Overall 35 C 29 C 14 Prospect Rd and EB 44 D 44 D Shields St Signal WB 50 D 44 D NB 32 C 22 C D 56 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado SB 18 B 18 B Overall 7 A 14 B 15 Prospect Rd and Wg 7 A 10 A Whitcomb St Signal NB 45 D 37 D SB 48 D 49 D Overall 18 B 22 C 16 Prospect Rd and Wg 12 B 13 B Center Ave Signal NB 41 D 42 D SB 37 D 46 D Overall 31 C 38 D Prospect Rd and EB 55 E 46 D 28 College Ave Signal WB 25 C 50 D NB 23 C 30 C SB 26 C 36 D The study intersections on Prospect Road and Lake Street operate at LOS D or better. All of the approaches also operate at LOS D or better. The intersections on Prospect Road at Shields Street and Center Avenue experience the highest overall delays. Crash History Of the top 48 intersections analyzed in the 20 7 3 Traffic Safety Summary, there were four intersections that are within the study corridor of Prospect Road and Lake Street. The only intersection that experienced more crashes than predicted was Prospect Road at Shields Street. Table 8 lists the intersections on Prospect Road or Lake Street that were evaluated in the safety study . TABLE 8 : PROSPECT AND LAKE INTERSECTIONS WITH HIGHEST EXCESS CRASH COST PER YEAR Intersection Model Predicted Actual Adiusted Excess Crash and Cost Crashes Per Year Crashes Per Year AADT Fatal/ Fatal / Prop. Fatal / Cost Per Streetl Street2 Total Injury Total Injury Damage Only Shields St Prospect Rd 50,301 26. 1 6. 2 28. 1 6A 1 .8 0.2 $46,538 Shields St Lake St 38,450 9.2 2. 2 5.6 2. 1 -3.5 -0. 1 -$401480 Center Ave Prospect Rd 34,316 14.5 3 .6 11 , 2 3.4 - 3. 1 -0. 2 - $50,227 Whitcomb St Prospect Rd 26,488 8.9 2.3 5.3 1 .7 -3.0 -0.6 -$961530 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities As shown in Figure 9, Prospect Road doesn 't have any bicycle facility between Shields Street and College Avenue . Lake Street has bike lanes in both directions between Shields Street and College Avenue ranging in width from four to five feet. Sidewalk type and conditions are shown in Figure 10a and lOb . Both corridors have sidewalks on both sides of the street through the study area , except for a small section ( 300 feet) on the north side of Lake Street just east of Shields Street. The sidewalks on Prospect Road are mostly in fair conditions, with very FT ,1 D 57 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study few sections in poor condition and some segments in good condition . Sidewalk widths east of Shields Street vary, with some sections less than four feet and others as wide as seven feet, with almost all as attached . The sidewalks on Lake Street are mostly in fair condition and have a large number of missing curb ramps. Sidewalk widths on Lake Street west of Whitcomb Street are less than five feet with some sections as narrow as two feet. Sidewalk widths between Whitcomb Street and College Avenue are mostly seven feet. Nearly all sidewalks on the Lake Street corridor are attached . D 58 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado Transit Figure 11 shows the multiple transit routes that use the Prospect Road and Lake Street corridors. Route 2 uses Prospect Road west of Whitcomb Street and Routes 19 and GOLD travel along Prospect Road through the study area from Shields Street to College Avenue. Routes HORN ( starting August 2014 ) and 7 use Lake Street through the study area . The MAX BRT also crosses Prospect Road , just west of College Avenue, with a station just north of Prospect Road . These routes link to local destinations and regional transit routes. The routes that utilize Prospect Road and Lake Street have some of the highest ridership and passengers per hour when compared to the other West Central buses. Removing MAX from the ridership data , the other four routes have 70 percent of the riders within the study area . On average these buses have 12 . 3 passengers per hour. The bus ridership data is not available per bus stop ; therefore, corridor evaluation was not conducted . It should be noted that there is a westbound bus pullout on Prospect Road between College Avenue and the MAX line that is currently in design . Parking There is only on - street parking on Lake Street. FUTURE CONDITIONS This section of the report analyzes the potential future transportation infrastructure challenges, issues, and opportunities associated with 2035 traffic conditions in the West Central Area . Future Data Methodology The future data for daily traffic volumes was estimated from the 2009 and 2035 Travel Demand Models and adjusted by the 2012 collected volume with the Difference Method . It is the state of the practice to utilize the Difference Method instead of the ratio and blend methods. The Difference Method captures the specific impacts and unique growth characteristics per roadway and minimizes the range of error in the models. The future traffic volumes were calculated with Equation 1 : Equation 1 : 203 %01 = 2012Count + 2035Mode1 — 2012Count * (2035Model 2009Mode� 2035Model — 2009Model It should be noted that the average growth rate for the West Central Area was 0. 5 percent annually . This was determined by a comparison of the 2035 and 2009 model volumes and verified with the Difference Method . On Prospect Road and Lake Street, the existing intersection turning movement counts were projected with an annual growth rate of 0 . 3 percent. This percentage was estimated from the Travel Demand Models. Evaluation of the West Central Area The future data was utilized to determine the operational performance of the transportation facilities. The following sections and figures describe the 2035 future conditions within the West Central Area . FT ,1 D 59 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study Level of Service Criteria The vehicular level of service criteria are the same as presented in Existing Conditions. Roadways Average Daily Traffic (ADT) counts were estimated based on the 2035 Travel Model , using the methodology described above for arterials, collectors, and local streets. Figure 18 provides the ADT for mid - block locations on arterials, collectors, and local streets throughout the community . The arterial roadways ranged from 9, 300 to 34,500 vehicles per day (vpd ) . The collectors ranged from 1 , 200 to 10,800 vpd . The local streets ranged from 7,000 up to 8 ,800 vpd . The relative magnitude of traffic volumes can be seen by the size of the blue circles. As expected , the majority of traffic travels on the arterials with the highest volume on Shields Street. The following ADT ranges occurred on the arterials: • Shields Street: from 20,700 vpd near Mulberry Street to 31 ,700 vpd near Prospect Road • Taft Hill Road : from 20, 100 vpd near Mulberry Street to 26,700 vpd near Drake Road • Mulberry Street: from 9,300 vpd west of the City Park Lake to 18, 300 vpd east of the lake • Prospect Road : from 16, 100 vpd near Taft Hill Road to 31 ,000 vpd near the College Avenue • Drake Road : from 20,400 vpd near Taft Hill Road to 34,500 vpd near Research Boulevard A capacity analysis for the roadway segments was performed using the methodology issued within the HCM 2000 . The methodology classifies the arterials based on the distance between intersections and the link speeds. To determine the LOS for arterials, the speed and travel time are calculated . Figure 19 summarizes the roadway LOS calculated in Synchro (version 8, HCM 2000 methodology ) . The operations were evaluated for each direction and between major intersections. All roadways operate at LOS D or better, except for the following roadway segments: AM Peak Hour • Elizabeth Street - Eastbound between City Park Avenue and Shields Street • Drake Road - Eastbound between Dunbar Avenue and Shields Street Westbound between Worthington Avenue and Shields Street • Shields Street - Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road Northbound between Stuart Street and Prospect Road • Whitcomb Street - Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road • Center Avenue — Northbound and Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road PM Peak Hour • Taft Hill Road - Southbound between Valley Forge Avenue and Drake Road • Shields Street - Southbound between Plum Street and Elizabeth Street Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road Southbound between Centre Avenue and Drake Road D 60 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado • Whitcomb Street - Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road • Center Avenue - Northbound and Southbound between Lake Street and Prospect Road • Elizabeth Street - Eastbound between City Park Avenue and Shields Street • Drake Road - Eastbound between Research Boulevard and Bay Road Westbound between Worthington Road and Shields Street Intersections Figure 20 illustrates the lane configuration, traffic control and turning movement counts for the studied intersections within West Central Area for the 2035 future conditions. Intersection Level of Service for future conditions was not analyzed for the entirety of the WCAP area . This was analyzed for Prospect Road and Lake Street and is described in the following section . Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities The 2008 Bicycle Plan was concurrently updated with the West Central Area Plan . The 2014 Bicycle Plan was recently adopted . Together with City staff and the community, Toole Design Group evaluated the existing bicycle infrastructure and proposed future connections, wayfinding strategies, design guidelines, and policy recommendations. Transit Transfort anticipates updating their Strategic Plan within the next few years to determine the future transit services and changes. Since May 2014, Transfort has made several changes to various routes and MAX BRT was opened . It will take some time to determine any deficiencies and opportunities that can help define the future services. The City staff met with Transport and CSU staff on October 20, 2014 to discuss coordination of transit within the West Central Area . It was determined that there is a need for enhanced transit services throughout the study area and on the south end of campus, specifically near the dormitories on Pitkin Street, at the MAX station, and the potential development on College Avenue between Prospect Road and Lake Street. The following topics and future options were discussed and will be evaluated to determine which provides the best connections and addresses service needs: CSU Campus Connections • Add or extend a route along City Park Avenue, south to Springfield Drive, east towards Shields Street and south to Pitkin Street. This connects the West Central neighborhoods and campus. • Add a second on -campus shuttle routing to additional locations. • Move one or more routes from Prospect Road to Lake Street to connect MAX station and campus. • Add a route along Pitkin Street or South Drive . • Re - route MAX C or D to serve the south end of campus. • Designate Lake Street as a main transit corridor through campus, similar to Plum Street. r� ,� D 61 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study • Incentivize more transit ridership for CSU staff, faculty, and students with free parking at one or more off - site locations ( e . g . church parking lots) . Bus Stop Enhancements • Encourage transit use with more and better bus shelters, specifically the shelters located on Centre Avenue at Research Boulevard and on Centre Avenue at Rolland Moore Drive need to be improved . • Provide bus stops and shelters at curb bulb - outs on collector streets that are proposed to be retrofitted . • Prioritize funding for improvements at bus stops within the West Central Area . • Provide a temporary bus stop at Center Avenue near Aggie Village North . • Figure 21 illustrates the prioritization of bus stop improvements into near and long term improvements based on existing ridership and bus stop ratings. Other Considerations • Add one westbound through lane on Plum Street at Shields Street to reduce the delay of buses as they wait for left-turning vehicles to clear the intersection . • Prioritize snow plowing on major transit corridors ( e . g . Plum Street, Pitkin Street/Springfield Drive, and Center Avenue ) . • Restrict vehicular traffic on Plum Street between Constitution Avenue and Elizabeth Street to create a bike, pedestrian and transit corridor. It is important that transit serve in the West Central Area not only connect to CSU, but continues to connect to other destinations within the community and City . Figure 22 shows the future transit vision of the West Central Area . D 62 ,� City 9.3 Park Lake 18.3 Ak 8.8 • 20.7 27 20.1 0 U b -- 28.8 0 7.4 0 16.2 16 19.6 U Leg ,1.2 z5.2 Future (2035) Average Daily Traffic Volumes x 1,000 — — — 2 - 5 1 • 6 - 14 31.7 7.6 7.9 • 15 - 21 16.1 18.9 23.9 7 25.7 31 • 22 27 z4.6 10.2 I • 28 - 35 1 1 — Major Arterial 1 1.91 r 10.8 1 Arterial z 5.3 I Collector Local 18 z8s / f Study Area 1 Note: Future ADT was provided by the City of Fort zes I Collins within the 2035 Travel Demand Model. It was adjusted by the 2012 counts with the Difference Method . 1 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 Feet 7.1 317( 1 4.5 26.7 Ij,� r 22 23 26.5 28.4 34.5 I Figure 18 20.4 1 MW Future (2035) Roadway Traffic Volumes West Central Area Plan W MULBERRY ST ' I I W MULBERRY ST ^ 1 I I j I I 1 E5 1 I I l W ELIZABETH ST I I W ELIZABETH ST l I I I W 1 I o I W LAKE ST! — I ' — — — — — W LAKE ST. — — — — II — W PROSPECT RD W PROSPECT RD II I I I I LL I 14 I I I 1 1 I ITW 1 1 1P��Fv I I 9Fsm P I 1 1[. �� 1 1 II TW 7�T� AM Level of Service PM Level of Service Legend � Study Area Level of Service . Major Arterial � A or B Arterial C Figure 19 Collector o Future Roadway Level of Service (2035) Local � E or F o i,000 z,000 4,OOee[ West Central Area Plan 0 J W_ N Z Z e *-� 26 68 m 39 (155) o, 126 (272) o o 122 (134) �� ( ) �`, r 135 (595) Z 41 � 76 (247) ) 57 (142) 309 (78&) it O w City Park 0r118 (3e2) r Laurel St o > 13 21 42 (89) Mulberryst ♦p W Drake Rd ♦p" lake S[ I185 (293) I m O 195 (150) I 90 (39) t �.l y t� 85 (403) City 103 (78) 3 w 1 721 (514) —� — 139 117 �► 715 (519) —t. U L - O J 73 (200) oa 28 (33) Mulberry St t♦p� 63 (47) ��� — D Ca M 42 (30) � _ yt 328 (244) N tt 42 (100) 152 (494) 34 (80) O a' _ W H ERaabem St 1� 513 O 58 (66) ( ) / 438 (541) —. CO 10 (35) o , CIO Ve e (70) n (s7) 7 h 34 (65) R 3eee W PLUM ST w plum sr 9 (71) T� `a � �� 29 12 _ yt 56 (59) 180 (114) 18 (181) ) 43 1621 U � 78 (181) WEL BETHST _ Lake St Elizabeth St at 129 (162) w 14 ( 3) 261 (178) 300 (332) �� 44 (83) 80 (178) 143 (151) � 2 -� 16 (52) p Lake St Ua 0, o 1168 (697) F Cati 2 (q) 172 (105) fit. Y -1 1L 2 (43) 5 (31) " 49 (210) 35 (51) ERzabahSt F 4 (57) 23 (126) ® a' E PI KI 29 (52) 0 — Lake St Y .. N� E 550 (595) — 0 3205(36) y 3256 " o o 170 (58) E' S (6) U 29 (10) _ Q< w f�.— 645 (1073) � 18 (374) Ira ST91 (3 )� 95 (264) _ _ t Legend 136 (388) Vrospect Rd 1L r 53 (254) W PROSPECT RD G , J r 107 (31) �r r �� WCAP Study Area Prospect Rd J 852 (906) —m .x' 135 (109) 100 (78)' —!e " m o m Signalized 461 (245) —► ._ w U -- 85 71 �► m _ U N Stop Controlled ( ) F. —J �— Lane Configuration 29 (1701 1 RED FOX MEADOWS f m m r 243 (701) ZIL MATURALAREA 11 lIkr 06 (271) �.• O r Illegal Movement Stuart st '��' U Prospect Rd Z � 173 ( )71 AM (PM) Peak Hour Traffic " Li . 262 (164) 87 (74) -a ~ 484 (1123) 4 782 (458) J 86 (79) m o w �kr 19 (34) w�T(JA 196 (170) y �- o < Pros and T > -�..� _ 124 (35) — C _ _ t� 17 (19) 937 (749) y 2 �I 4 0 (1) 19 (7) � 4 (41) v ~ Rolland Moore ♦♦ h ( ) ` 1 (17) T IRI W Valley Forge o 0 0tD 0 (1) J _ —_ s 52 (76) O tL 44 (113) _ �t� 3 (2)- 3 (43) �� Q�, ,. �� 153 (fig) Note 6 (26) C �— 435 (1150) _ �— 384 1188 ` �- 61 43 J ( ) 598 (1454) O m J A f r 24 (132) e o 1k 26 (108) `I' Drams na h 23 (127) 0 4,000 _ Drake Rd 0— 33 (159) ( "' Drake IdR �r Feet 1r 48 (108) t 69�28) -- r I I 935 (755) 1083 (748) —i N - a �St l I I m �• � 1o7 � ) c,aRlntr Ceness (9z o ( 7)108 (140) k4 s . 175 (68) —. O —� 31 (3) Figure 20 F 151 (3001 33 (W) 923 (1452) 0- 158 (5901 W D E R o m r 72 (56) r61 (190) Drake Rd R Future (2035 ) Intersection Drake Rd w , .,,. . •-, 46 (39) Q 1 tdt I i ( ' 1073 (1198) y E 407322 —� � 1 � r � ' g arc ^� � 1013 Volumes L 4 97 (313) � tt; ���r.i'1Fii 'G4.'e ti. yql . L '.-. i' s s+ _a �i � ` ✓ 9 l � ? iL', ( ) �L, m a West Central Area Plan W MULBERRY ST w • 'a V) V) Z Uj o o O a I in 2 E W LAUREL ST N F w Vtr I o ryrw PL• ST •�-• •- - I Z I ti3 y yy A • �ti y00 I Z LU • W ELIZABETH ST • IQ' Colorado State a tio•? University Z Q; I•� � I titi Z Q� y3 •� U W LAKE ST W LAKE ST �Or W PROSPECT RD ��o• • z 0 3 J I w •Qi J FLLQ I W STUART ST V) oti I III•Q'a� j••Q' l9�� o �Q�e• I I > LU 0 ON p4iUR oanoore Community Park CSUA t°' Vet Q tr School a I ti``a �yti I by h� • 1 �•� W DRAKE RD •� •�h I 0 0. 5 1 Legend Mile • Near-Term Improvement Note: Prospect Corridor stop improvements may be implemented upon • Longer-Term Improvement corridor reconstruction, per the Prospect Corridor Design . Improvements were prioritized based on existing ridership and bus stop rating (very low through The West Elizabeth Corridor will be analyzed and evaluated in the medium were flagged for improvements). upcoming West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor Plan (2015 - 16); additional stop improvements may be identified through that too effort. • Figure 21 Bus Stop Improvements West Central Area Plan MAX B F?spa City Park o J N W MULBERRY ST 21 ' 1 I I Z 0 W LAUREL ST Existing CS ~ E LA REL ST Transit enr 22 W PLUM ST W ELIZABETH ST i r W MAX C E ELIZA ST Future W. Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor FF Colorado Stat 1 O r University HORN Potential Additional r - - - ■ E PITKIN ST 1 ■ 1 F Transit Service � LAKE S 1 ZO ■ • - - - - - - • - - - - . W PROSPECT RD 1 Improved Connec ions 1 B = to MAX P 1 E PROSPECT RD 1 1 1 ' MAX A 1 W STUART ST E STUART ST 7 1 23 W STUART ST 1 1 Rolland Moore CSU W COLUMBIA RD Community Park 34 Vet 1 w 1 � N ' School 1 > 0I o 1 W DRAKE RD 1 N E DRAKE RD 10 . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - r.••.-.•�+ w w a 3 a Z < J r- ° 3 o W SWALLOW RD F 5 0 J W_ H N W HORSETOOTH RD . 0 0.5 1 legend © Parking garage Mile Potential additional transit service ■ Potential east-west bus crossing improvement Future W. Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor � Existing Transit Center — Improved connections to MAX 4L Corridors in which to explore shared MAX Stations park-n-ride arrangements Transfort Strategic Operation Plan (TSOP) Phase 3 -�- Other routes added since TSOP r Is Is Is Is West Central Area Boundary Figure 22 Future Transit Vision rii west central area plan and prospect road corridor study Parking The West Central Area is expected to have 4 demand for parking due to the anticipated groI CSU and potential redevelopment within the area . At this time, there are no plans to increase :� v street parking on the arterials or provide h ., - M -I additional parking within the neighborhood . The ' �j 5 is potential for neighborhoods to voluntarily be 7�f � ( � • .�'� ; + Tp g Y � — a part of the Residential Parking Permit Program ( RP3 ) that reduces the number of non - resident vehicles during specific time periods. � .a° °� _ 1 _ r CSU has identified locations on -campus where "°"`` °" ° . . ALI seven new parking facilities should be installed - r _ ( see Figure 23 ) . CSU estimates that the populatio will increase by 29 . 6 percent from 2012 to 202z The CSU Transportation and Parking Master Plan ( April 201 4 ) predicted that the traffic patterns w will shift with the proposed parking facilities base roadway capacity, and location of parking acces geometric or traffic control changes to the followi West Central Area if all of the parking facilities w Ri • Shields Street and Plum Street — one left-turn lane for each of the eastbound and westb(ou°n approache. and Trasnportation Master Plan) • Shields Street and Elizabeth Street — dual left-turn lanes on the eastbound approach and one right-turn lane on each of the westbound and northbound approaches. • Lake Street and Whitcomb Street — signalize and add one northbound left-turn lane OR a construct a single - lane roundabout. • Lake Street and Center Avenue — one left-turn lane on the westbound approach . • Prospect Road and Shields Street — one right-turn lane on the westbound approach . • Prospect Road and Whitcomb Street — dual left-turn lanes on the southbound approach and one left-turn lane on the northbound approach . • Prospect Road and Center Avenue — dual left-turn lanes on the northbound approach. • Prospect Road and College Avenue — dual left-turn lanes on each of the eastbound and westbound approaches, one right-turn lane on the northbound approach . • Center Avenue and Bay Road — one through lane on each of the northbound and southbound approaches. D 68 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado The CSU Transportation and Parking Master Plan (April 2014 ) discusses the timeline for implementation of the parking facilities. CSU Multipurpose Stadium : Transportation and Parking Study ( DRAFT = 2014 ) The Draft CSU Stadium Transportation and Parking Study analyzes the transportation impacts of the new proposed stadium site at the northwest corner of the Lake Street and Whitcomb Street intersection . The study applies traffic counts from existing parking structures at CSU to a Park + tool created specifically for CSU . This model applies a unique algorithm to determine the effect of the stadium on parking and traffic during game day conditions in 2016, given the anticipated 2016 opening of the stadium . A 1 .0426 growth factor was applied . According to this study, the following intersections with the West Central Area were forecasted to have an LOS E or F: • Drake Street and Shields St • Pitkin Street and Shields Street • Prospect Road and Shields Street • Prospect Road and Center Avenue The stadium study further analyzes the above intersections with LOS E or below, making recommendations in the report to improve LOS and address the increased stadium traffic. The study also recommends a road closure at Pitkin Street at the northern edge of the Stadium and the closure of Meridian Avenue on game days between Lake Street and South Drive . The study recommends a number of pedestrian improvements including sections of improved sidewalk, path connections and the consideration of a grade separated crossing of Prospect Road near Center Avenue . Transit improvements will include a shuttle between south campus parking areas and the stadium, increased Transfort service on special event days, and alternate routes for those impacted by the Pitkin Road closure . The study recommends that bikes be directed towards Lake Street to access the stadium using the designated bike lanes. Lastly, various Transportation Demand Management strategies are recommended to increase the dissemination of information on alternative modes and circulation . The study concludes that given the proposed proper mitigation treatments, as identified in the study, additional traffic resulting from the new stadium will be accommodated by the street network and available parking . Evaluation of Prospect Road and Lake Street Prospect Road and Lake Street were considered in detail in the future conditions since Prospect Road is proposed to be an Enhanced Travel Corridor ( ETC ) and Lake Street can support Prospect Road . The technical memo titled Multimodal Performance Measures Alternatives Analysis dated October 16, 2014 goes into detail on these two corridors. This memo describes a methodology for calculating multimodal performance measures for these corridors for2035 conditions for the existing configuration and three proposed alternatives. Roadway The access points and right of way along Prospect Road and Lake Street are not proposed to change in future conditions. These can be seen in Figures 14, in the Existing Conditions section . F fig D 69 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study The preferred design for Prospect Road proposes a landscaped medians and center turn lanes between major intersections along the corridor. The roadway level of service on Prospect Road and Lake Street is shown in Figure 19, as a part of the Roadway LOS for the entire study area . Prospect Road westbound between Shields Street and Whitcomb Street and eastbound between Center Avenue and Whitcomb Street operate at LOS D in both the AM and PM. Lake Street operates at LOS C or better between Shields Street and College Avenue. The section of Prospect Road and Lake Street that do not have sufficient data from which to determine a LOS is Lake Street between College Avenue and Whitcomb Street. Travel Patterns Travel patterns were studied along Prospect Road using Bluetooth readers to collect travel time data . Data was collected during summer 2014 when CSU was out of session . More data will be collected in the near future to capture traffic from the university. Findings from the available data are documented in the existing conditions travel pattern section. If volume increases in the future, as predicted in the 2035 travel model , travel time along the corridor will increase as well . Intersection The future conditions overall and approach delay and LOS for all study intersections on Prospect Road and Lake Street are shown in Table 9 . The overall intersection LOS is shown in bold . LOS and delay are the some for both 2035 conditions without project implementation and 2035 conditions with the implementation of the proposed design on Lake and Prospect. TABLE 9: PROSPECT AND LAKE FUTURE (2035) INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE 2035 Future Number Intersection Control Approach Delay PM • Delay • Overall 6 A 8 A 9 Shields St and Lake Signal WB 47 D 51 D Rd NB 4 A 4 A SB 6 A 2 A EB 11 B 12 B Lake Rd and WB 10 A 13 B 10 Whitcomb St 4-Way Stop NB 12 B 11 B SB 8 A 11 B EB 9 A 8 A 11 Lake Rd and Center Side Street WB 10 A 9 A Ave Stop NB 10 A 8 A EB 7 A 4 A Lake Rd and East Dr WB 0 A 0 A 12 Side Street NB 10 B 10 B Stop SB - - - - Overall 32 C 37 D 14 Prospect Rd and WB 47 D 57 DE Shields St Signal NB 30 C 26 C SB 16 B 29 C 15 Prospect Rd and Overall 6 A 14 B Whitcomb St Signal EB 1 A 3 A D 70 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado WB 4 A 10 A NB 45 D 37 D SB 49 D 49 D Overall 16 B 22 C 16 Prospect Rd and WB 9 A 12 B Center Ave Signal NB 42 D 42 D SB 37 D 46 D Overall 38 D 51 D Prospect Rd and EB 53 D 44 D 28 College Ave Signal WB 38 D 68 E NB 32 C 37 D SB 30 C 57 E Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities The 2014 City of Fort Collins Bicycle Plan does not propose specific recommendations for Prospect Road or Lake Street. The conceptual design in this plan proposes a ten foot shared use path on Prospect Road from Shields Street to College Avenue . The conceptual design for Lake Street proposes six foot buffered bike lanes and a six foot sidewalk from Shields Street to College Avenue. Transit The following improvements were discussed between City staff, Transfort and CSU staff regarding transit along Prospect Road corridor: • Link the proposed pedestrian crossings to the bus stops • Design for adequate space to construct a bus shelter • Adjust location of bus stops o Prospect Road and Sheely Drive — move to the west by 30 feet (both eastbound and westbound stops) o Prospect and Centre Avenue — move to be just east of the intersection with Whitcomb Street (eastbound) • Add bus stops o Just east of Centre Avenue (eastbound) o Just west of Centre Avenue (westbound) • Develop intersection improvements for Prospect Road at Center Avenue • (Ped.lBike) Connect Lake Street to the underpass at College Avenue Parking CSU has identified 7 new parking facilities in the West Central Area , as shown in Figure 19 . One of these facilities is between Prospect and Lake on Whitcomb Street and another is on the northern side of Lake Street. The CSU Transportation and Parking Master Plan (April 2014 ) predicted changes in traffic due to FT ,I D 71 west central area plan and prospect road corridor study resulting changes in traffic patterns. The plan recommended operational changes in order to address these changes. If all of the parking facilities are constructed , the study recommends the following for Prospect Road and Lake Street: • Lake Street and Whitcomb Street — signalize and add one northbound left-turn lane OR a construct a single - lane roundabout. • Lake Street and Center Avenue — one left-turn lane on the westbound approach. • Prospect Road and Shields Street — one right-turn lane on the westbound approach . • Prospect Road and Whitcomb Street — dual left-turn lanes on the southbound approach and one left-turn lane on the northbound approach . • Prospect Road and Center Avenue — dual left-turn lanes on the northbound approach . • Prospect Road and College Avenue — dual left-turn lanes on each of the eastbound and westbound approaches, one right-turn lane on the northbound approach . CONCLUSION An evaluation of the existing and future conditions in the West Central Area indicates there are areas that have some vehicular operational issues, lack the presence of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and have safety concerns for all users. In summary, the following roadways and intersections have LOS below the acceptable LOS D and /or a high safety concern (Table 9 ) : TABLE 10: SUMMARY OF LOCATIONS WITH OPERATIONAL AND SAFETY CONCERNS OperationalConcerns due to High and/or Bicycles Elizabeth St - EB between City Park Ave Shields St and Elizabeth St Shields St and Plum and Shields Shields St and Plum St St/ North Dr Drake Rd - WB between Worthington Ave Shields St and Stuart St Shields St and Elizabeth St and Shields St, EB between Research Prospect Rd and Center Blvd and Bay Rd , EB between Bay Rd Heatheridge Rd and Prospect Rd Ave and MAX Shields St and Mulberry St Prospect Rd and Whitcomb Shields St - SB between Lake Stand St Prospect Rd , NB between Stuart St and City Park Ave and Elizabeth St Prospect Rd , and SB between Plum St Prospect Rd and Shields St Taft Hill Rd and Mulberry St and Elizabeth St and Centre Ave and Shields St and Lake St D 72 ,� Fort Collins, Colorado Drake Rd Shields St and Pitkin St Drake Rd and Redwing Whitcomb St = SB between Lake St and Shields St and Prospect Rd Rd / Bay Rd Prospect Rd City Park Ave and Mulberry St Center Ave = SB between Lake St and Prospect Rd , NB between Lake St and Prospect Rd , and NB between Prospect Rd and Lake St Taft Hill Rd = SB between Valley Forge Ave and Drake Rd Once all of the data is received and processed , improvements will be recommended in order to make this area safer and more efficient for all modes. Prospect Road will be considered in greater detail, due to the corridor ' s direct linkage to the CSU campus, fair LOS and high safety issues, and the need for access management. Recommendations will build off of previous planning efforts as well as the analysis discussed in this report. r� ,� D 73 W 40 0 CM) 0 L am a� LLJ a a a This page intentionally left blank OProspect Corrido , West Prospect Potential Median Concepts Potential locations of medians along West Prospect Road, between Shields Street and Taft Hill Road. Example of street retrofitting opportunities along arterial roads. Access point, typ Planted median, typ 0 L ; ? o N v s -O N N �. �• ,•- - !! � g Na Prospect Rd y Y 1 a Am I ' �' � a y � '� 1y . � v � .l � 1 ' l. � �. �1 gyp. •. • ' Access point, typ Planted median, typ 3' Paved median N a' 14:9. , } CO t t t t t t t t- y _ ♦ • Prospect _ L +i U) 1 q6 � / s .- �1 Ot r v f N r Concrete median Planted understory Median trees Travel Lane Concrete median Curb and gutter Upright/Columnar Curb and gutter Potential Median Enlargement Legend = = =______-" Potential Median ? Access Points WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 3 OProspect Corrido , This page intentionally left blank WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 4 L 4) Q L 0 L L 0 CM) V Q. 0 L am c LL a a Q This page intentionally left blank OProspect Corrido ' Prospect Road — Alternative A - "All About Pedestrians" Alternative A maintains existing curb lines and roadway width while adding pedestrian enhancements with the overall idea being a renovation and retrofit which better accommodates pedestrians. The following design elements are included: 4 travel lanes 6' detached sidewalk 8' tree lawn Planted median Potential north/ Plymouth Congregational IF Potential 8' sidewalk connection to Lake Street Potential future condition south connection Church - on Whitcomb - Treelawnl Right-of-Way detached sidewalk and bike Enhanced intersection Street tree Access point, Transfort 6' sidewalk Right-of-Way line Potential pedestrian line 4 ¢ lane treatment with refuge 40' 0 C., t t tsto t activated crossing Access 6' sidewalk islands _ YP YP R YP _ r . . 8' treelawn point, — �g� treelawn Raised - _ _ -- — tYP Mr- Wr UP 7W - -- - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - _ _ - - - - - - ' - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ rn : r a li E Potential sidewalk S m Existing o v connection to �PPy i y Residential P. t Spring Creek Trail O, o Neighborhood s CSU - Aggie Village NLmedian �� ! Connection to ? Enhanced Lake Street ° m I CSU - crosswalk for Right-of-W ewalk Ra Parking Mason Corridor m ��— Ri ht-of-Wa Raised 6' sidewalk trail line Garage 9 Y Street tree ITransfort $ 8' tree lawn line median 1. 8' tree lawn 40' O.C., typ. stop, typ. - - c� �rJ � ` �• u.ii,� ,::�., . , - ITransfort Potential ) �gike box Existing trees Existing walk to m U Desired Enhanced intersection stop, typ. underpass Jto remain remain ° _ ¢ o bus pull- treatment with refuge Hilton Fort Collins m� out islands L.. � Nj Legend - Potential Right-of-Way (ROW) dedication/acquisition Pedestrian Wayfinding ■ a Transfort Stop WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-1 OProspect Corrido , Prospect Road — Alternative A - "All About Pedestrians" Section A-A' - Shields Street to Whitcomb Street Tree lawn Detached sidewalk 0 0Cc AM66 � � o w w 6' 8' 11 ' 11 ' 11 ' 11 ' 8' 6' Existing curb to curb dimension `Existing ROW - 60'�` -}—Total Required ROW - 72' }- Shields Street to Whitcomb Street tl Bike Transit Impacted Properties Impacted Pr (North) (South 4 Travel Lanes 6' Detachetl Sidewalk N/A Stops 13 Properties: High 23 Properties. High 8'Tree Lawn Planted Median (where applicable) Section B-B' - Whitcomb Street to Center Avenue Section C-C' - Center Avenue to College Avenue Raised planted median ROW Dedication/Acquisition Range Turn lane Tree lawn Detached sidewalk I Low = o-s Netlium = s-1o' Attached sidewalk Detached sidewalk Existing spruce trees o 0 0 Cc CSU-Aggie Villa e South, .y CSU-Aggie Village North w w _ m 5As 61�`8' 10'110, 9' 10't10't8'46'-�- � 8' 10' 10'-�-9';10' 10' 8' 6' Existing ROW 0Existingir � Total Required ROW 77 4Total Required ROW - 7 — Whitcomb �,- Street to Center Avenue 4Aot Bike Transit Impacted Properties (North) Impacted Properties (South) Center Avenue to College Avenue hArstri-Veh Bike Transit impacted Properties (Noah) Inn 4 Travel Lanes 6' Detached Sidewalk N/A Stops 2 Properties: Medium 2 Properties: Medium AdLi B'Tree Lawn Planted Median 4Travel Lanes 6' Detached Sidewalk N/A Stops 11 Properties: Medium 4 Properties: Medium 8'Tme Lawn Planted Median (where applicable) WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F 2 OProspect Corridor Prospect Road — Alternative B - "Boulevard" Alternative B emphasizes minimal right - of - way (ROW) acquisition, replacing one travel lane with a buffered bike lane on each side of the road west of Whitcomb, and includes pedestrian enhancements such as a detached 6' walk way. 2 travel lanes west of Whitcomb Street, 4 travel lanes east of Whitcomb Street 6' tree lawn Detached sidewalk/shared bike and pedestrian path 5' buffered bike lanes west of Whitcomb Street, 10' shared use bike/pedestrian path east of Whitcomb Street Planted median Plymouth _ � Potential8' sidewalk Future condition onWhitcombl v Potential north/ Congregational c connection to Lake - Tree lawn detached sidewalk! Enhanced intersection south connection Church Street and bike lane treatment with refuge Transfort o laee islands Street tree (Access point, (stop, typ. 16' sidewalk Right-of-Way Potential (Right-of-Way Access 6' sidewalk 1 ¢ Raised median o 40' O.C., typ. typ. 1 6' tree line — pedestrian !line point, typ. ' - - - - - _ lawn — activated crossing — 6'ltr IQ x � � — # • tr. � 5' bike lane - 5' bikelane including 2 buffer including 2' buffer \ hP m I a Desirpeull out Bike pagh ' S \ Existingd bus throw � �y0� a v � Residential Potential sidewalk Neighborhood \ connection to Spring P Creek Trail o_ I + - L lip i CSU - Aggie Village North - v I " .t Enhanced Connection to Lake c crosswalk Street 10' shared bike/ 1 m I < for Mason a ped path sed v CSU - Corridor trail - v Parkewalk Lkight-of-W�y meld an +w Garalge Right-of-Way Raised 6' 8idree lawn 1 U Street tree 40' O.C., t �SSaonsiort o 8' tree lawn line median I , I — I Yp ., YP I . _cam - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - � ' 10' shared bike/ 1 m (Transfort Potential Bike box Existing trees �0 shared bike/ 110' shared bike/ I I ���--- T Desired ped path stop, typ. underpassItoo ped path 1 pros ect bus pull- Enhanced remain ped path cc Station o out intersection y Hilton Fort Collins m 1 treatment withislands + it Legend O IPotential Right-of-Way (ROW) dedication/acquisition Pedestrian Wayfinding Transfort Stop WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F 3 OProspect Corrido , Prospect Road — Alternative B - "Boulevard" Section A-A' - Shields Street to Whitcomb Street Raised planted median Buffered bike lane Tree lawn 0l-. - 4511" 6' o c- . hi AMMIllillir mXW6' 6' 5' 10' 8' 1 2' Buffer 2' Buffer Existing ROW - 60' 4 Total Required ROW - 67' Shields Street to Whitcomb Street Motor Vehicle Bike Transit Impacted Properties (Npph) Impacted Purperties (South) 2 Travel Lanes h' Detached Sidewalk B' Bike Lane w/2' Buffer Stops 13 Properties: Law 0 Properties (Planted Median) Section B-B' - Whitcomb Street to Center Avenue Section C-C' - Center Avenue to College Avenue Raised planted median ROW Dedication/Acquisition Range Turn lane Tree lawn Shared bike/ped path Low - o-s' Medium = s-16 High = I0' andabove Shared bike/ped path Detached sidewalk _ �' Existingsprucetrees 0 - - "►`; CS tlAggie V' x Cc x `- w w CSU-Aggie Vill w North 10' 8' 10' 10' 9' 10' 10' 8' 10' 10' 110' 10' -9' 10' 10' 8' 6' �- Existing o al Requuired ROW ' 8w -}—Total Required ROW - Whitcomb Street to Center Avenue Center Avenue to College Avenue Mot Bike Transit Impacted Properties (N Bike Transit 4 Travel Lanes IO'Shared Path 16 Shared Path Stops 2 Properties: High 2 Properties: High 4 Travel Lanes Detached/Attached I Shared Path to Stops 11 Properties: Medium 4 Properties: High (Planted median) Sidewalk Mason Trail Detached/Artached WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-4 OProspect Corridor Prospect Road — Alternative C - "Complete Street" Alternative C maintains existing travel lanes and adds a detached shared bike/pedestrian path while minimizing right - of - way (ROW) acquisition on the south side of Prospect Road. 4 travel lanes Planted median east of Whitcomb Street 1 O' shared bike/pedestrian path 6' tree lawn Planted median east of Whitcomb Street nI Plymouth n '� ' Potential 8' sidewalk Future condition on Potential north/south Congregational .-.-- . connection to Lake Whitcomb - Tree lawn on ChurchrmKEL, .. Street detached sidewalk and bike Enhanced intersection 10' shared bike/ lane treatment with refuge Street tree Access Right-of-Way (Transfort 10' shared bike/ped pathotentrian ped path / Q �Olyi stands 40' 0 C., typ. point, typ. line Mop typ. Pactivated t tossing Tway line Typ ss point 6' tree awn 6' treelawn • � - r— --` I 110' shared bike/ped path shared bike/ I6 tree lawn — Y ped path w \-ov � / ¢ oExisting Potential P Y I Py Residential connection to Spring� p o r N Creek Trail ry`P a Neighborhood I n 1 � CSU - ' I I II Parking v CSU - Aggie Village North II Garage Enhanced Connection to c Lake Street crosswalk for � 10' shared bike/ped / m Mason Corridor Right-of-Way- prath. Raised median ro 10' shared bike/ped / 2� trail o, line path Right-of-Way Raised 10' shared bike/ped Transfort a, 6' treelawn line median path = ,, r ,� 6' tree lawn Street tree stop, typ. _ — _ ' O.C., typ. • � , -WL WIL — _ _ o E r 110' shared bike/ 6' tree lawn 1 m -o • . o ' -; s —��< Transfort Potentia Exlstin trees 110' shared bike/ I O' shared bike/ U n I ped path 1 Bike box 9. d Desired Enhanced intersection stop, typ. underpass � � to remain ped at q ped path / o I I T1 y bus pull- treatment with refuge ; Hilton Fort Collins m owl out islands (Ill , N N � Legend Potential Right-of-Way (ROW) dedication/acquisition Pedestrian Wayfinding ■ Transfort Stop WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-5 OProspect Corrido , Prospect Road — Alternative C - "Complete Street" Section A-A' - Shields Street to Whitcomb Street Tree lawn Shared bike/ped Shared bike/ped path of � Lpath xwl j � A 10' 6' 10' Existing ROW - 60' �— Total Required ROW - 72' Shields Street to Whitcomb Street 6=&k Bike (North 4 Travel Lanes 10' Sharetl path (Noah 10• Shared Path (Noon Stops 17Properties - 14-High 20 Properties: l&Low 1 Center turn lane Side) side) 3 - Low 4Medium 8' Sitlewalk (South B' Sitlewalk (South side) Raised median Side) Section B-B' - Whitcomb Street to Center Avenue Section C-C' - Center Avenue to College Avenue Raised planted median oqqROW Dedication/Acquisition Range Turn lane Tree lawn Shared bike/ped path ' Low = o-s Metliam = s-1o' High = loantlamve Attached Shared Detached Shared Bike/Ped Pat Bike/Ped Path o _ kExistingce treeso 0CSU-Aggie VilSouthwggie Villag Pot rz im r 10' 6' 10' 10' 10''� 10' 1011 61 10' } 10' 10' 10' 9' 10'� 10' 6' 10' OW al Required ROW 08L -1 Total Requiirreed ROW t Whitcomb Street to Center Avenue Center Avenue to College Avenue Moto Transit Impacted Properties (North) Impacted Properties (South) Impactetl Properties (North) Impacted Properties (South) 4 Travel Lanes IIT Shared Path 10' Shared Path Stops 2 Properties: High 2 Properties: High 4Travel Lanes 10' Shared Path IIT Shared Path Stops 15 Properties-High 6 Properties Medium Raised Median 1 Center turn lane Pullouts Raised median WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-6 OProspect Corrido , Prospect Road — Multi - Modal Performance Measures PROSPECT ROAD Multimodal Level of Service (MMLOS) for Prospect Road was evaluated using state-of-the-practice techniques for each mode of transportation. The pedestrian score is based on built environment factors that affect walkability. The bicyclist score, Level of Traffic Stress (LTS), is based on roadway factors that affect bicyclist comfort. The transit score is based on factors that affect transit vehicle reliability and built environment factors that affect a transit passenger's experience. Performance for automobiles is based on roadway segment level of service (LOS), which accounts for vehicle travel speed, and intersection level of service (LOS), which accounts for vehicle delay at intersections. Alternative A shows modest improvements for pedestrians and transit users. Alternatives B and C most improve the pedestrian score of Prospect Road by constructing wide, continuous walkways along Prospect Road. Alternatives B and C also improve bicyclist comfort (Level of Traffic Stress) and the transit score as compared to the existing configuration and Alternative A Alternative B, which has two travel lanes west of Whitcomb Street (one in each direction), slightly reduces automobile LOS compared to the existing configuration and Alternative C which maintain four travel lanes west of Whitcomb Street. PEDESTRIAN BICYCLE TRANSIT AUTO Z LAKE ST LAKE ST LAKE ST O LAKE ST O O VI f O F O F O n O Wr� W PROSPECT RD r ut m M PROSPECT RD m M PROSPECT RD PM AM m m yr PROSPECT RD M � � � � � _ _ W w w PM 7�7 a a W a a N 1<II y m N m 0 m a LAKE ST D LAKE ST D LAKE ST LAKE ST n F N D N o o y o Zut PROSPECT RD m PROSPECT RD m in PROSPECT RD m 0 PROSPECT RD PM AM _ m 0 �AF1 W w a w D D < = pM a F 2 < 2 < QN m N m 1211 m m co W LAKE ST LAKE ST LAKE ST LAKE ST n O n n F r o O Q M r h O O H Z in PROSPECT RD m m PROSPECT RD m ut _ _ PROSPECT RD _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ m u• PROSPECT RD AM m W w D W D W D PM D QM T V21 m N T A T V LAKE ST LAKE ST n n LAKE ST n LAKE ST n F O F O 0f O Za r M r m PROSPECT RD m M PROSPECT RD m vt PROSPECT RD m Q . PROSPECFRO PM AM m S D D JQ M m W m 0m vi m Pedestrian Score Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Transit Score Roadway LOS Intersection LOS Low The pedestrian score is based on sidewalk LTS applies the same methodology Low The transit score is based on transit reliability (roadway A or B A or B Roadway and intersection LOS are 000 • • 2 width, buffer width and distance to the that is used in the 2014 Bicycle Master Plan. LOS) and built environment factors including proximate AM based on 2035 traffic volumes and nearest crossing. • • • 3 The score from 1-5 represents the level of walkways and bikeways and bus stop amenities. C C �( HCM 2000 methodologies. Medium 000 5 bicyclist comfort based on traffic volume, speed, Medium D D �C number of lanes, and presence and quality of E or F PM the bikeway. High E or F High N/A WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F 7 OProspect Corridor Prospect Road - Conceptual Design A conceptual design was then developed based on attributes of Alternative B and Alternative C. This was then refined in response to stakeholder input. The conceptual design maintains 4 travel lanes throughout the corridor, while adding a center turn lane with planted medians west of Whitcomb Street. A typical 1 O' shared used bike/pedestrian path is provided on both the north and south sides of the roadway. The need for right-of-way (ROW) acquisition was minimized on the south side of the road, due to proximity of residences to the ROW as well as aligning future ROW acquisitions with established ROW lines on the north side of the road. Prospect Road - Conceptual Design Elements: Four travel lanes Center turn lane/median Tree lawn Detached sidewalk/shared bike and pedestrian path Mid-block bike/pedestrian crossing Transit stops/pullouts Note: Specific and detailed intersection improvement decisions will be refined through various design and other project processes. This includes City capital projects, identified requirements due to area developments, and stadium mitigation measures. For example, the intersection of Prospect Road and Centre Avenue is currently being considered for northbound and southbound double left-turns. Enhanced intersection Plymouth Potential Future condition on Whitcomb - Treel; v trement with refuge islands y _ v Congregational Church 8' sidewalk - lawn detached sidewalk and bike ' I Potential north/south connections to lane connection 10' Shared bike/ped path Lake Street Street tree Access Transfort Right-of- Potential pedestrian o Right-of- Access point, typ. 10' Shared bike/ped path 40' O.C., typ point, typ stop typ Way line activated crossing Way line hh - - - - - - -- . .«— - s 6' Treelawn --- - - - - _ - - - - - Y - - - - - - - ' • � _� -..1' - - - - -- - ' Tree lawn �_ .. .. 1t 8' Sidewalk 16 Sidewalk 16' Tree lawn i-r is II . ' ~ Gateway corner refuge Interim condition required `Potential sidewalk with existing land use, typ. connection to 1 S1P a Existing Residential I r Spring Creek Trail Py� ` o Neighborhood Lki �� rn i P a 0 i+ � a Enhanced r 0 � '' CSU - Parkin Connection to intersection I v CSU - Aggie Village North g o Lake Street treatment with i o Garage N refuge islands ' v IRight-of-Way line Raised median m Mason Trail > g Y Right-of-Way line Interim condition s a bike/ped path Potential 10' Shared bike/ required with existing Enhanced- Enhancedwn under ass ed ath Raised median land use, t pull-out foBus � Masolk crosswalk n ped. s gnalw/ pulliroed bus Gateway L refuee1� rrI P P P YP2La2ne - - - - _ Trail , � i I 6' Tree lawn 10' Shared bike/ped path ""-" ' - ' - - """'-' - - -c3 _...........x....... _ Sidewalk conneetr Transfort } } .�._._. _ _ ._.._. _ _.._ _ o . r stop, typ. Potential ) Bike box with Existing trees 10 Shared o 10' Shared bike/ped underpass realigned bike to remain bike/ped path path i n Refer to Midtown in lane striping m - Mason Trail Motion for CollegeI Hilton Fort Collins Ave corridor _ Legend O Potential Right-of-Way (ROW) dedication/acquisition Pedestrian Wayfinding a Transfort Stop Interim condition required with existing land use WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F 8 OProspect Corrido , Prospect Road - Typical Street Sections Typical Cross-Section - Whitcomb Street to Center Avenue Tree lawn Raised planted median I Shared bike/ped path Existing spruceACSU-Aggie Village -South SU-Aggie North Knit f South Side 10' 6' 10' 10' 8' 10', 10' 6' 10' North Side 2.5' 1 .5' 1 .5' 2.5' Existing ROW - 60' 4 Total Required ROW - 88' *Note - Total required ROW dimension includes 30" curb/gutter along street and 18" curb/gutter around median(s) per LCUASS standards Whitcomb Street to Center Avenue Bike Transit Impacted Prop Impacted Prope (North) (South) 4 Travel Lanes 10' Shared Path 10' Shared Path Stops 2Properties: 2-High 2Properties: 2-High Raised median &Tree Lawn Typical Cross-Section - Shields Street to Whitcomb Street Typical Cross-Section - Center Avenue to College Avenue Tree lawn Center turn lane ROW Dedication/Acquisition Range Center turn lane bike/ped path uw = 0-s Medium High = lo' andahove Shared bike/ped Shared bike/ped Sidewalk path I path a, o 0 El o jShared X South Side 6' 6' 10' 10' 10' 10' 100' North Side South Side 10' �6' 10, 101, 10' �10, 10' 6' 10' � North Side 2.5' 2.5' xisting ROW - 60' 2.5' 2.5' Total Required ROW - 83' Existing ROW - 60' Total Required ROW - 87' *Note - Total required ROW dimension includes 30" curb/gutter along street per *Note - Total required ROW dimension includes 30" curb/gutter along street per LCUASS standards LCUASS standards Shields Street to Whitcomb Street Center Avenue to College Avenue Motor Vehicle Bike Transit Impactetl Properties Impacted Properties (North) (South) Tran Impacted Proper0es Impacted Properties MEL A&ML 4 Travel Lanes 10' Shared Path (Noah) 10' Shared Path (North) Stops 15 Properties: l 54igh 13 Properties: 7-Low 4 Lanes 10'Shar Path 10' Shared Path Stops 15 Properties: l6-High & Properties & Medium 1 center turn lane &8'Sitlewalk(South) "' Sidewalk (South) 6- Metlium l centerenter t turn lane &' Tree Lawn Pullouts Raised Median &Tree Lawn Raised Median WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F 9 OProspect Corrido , Prospect Road - View looking west Pedestrian/bicyclist 10' Travel lane, typical Potential street light activated crossing gateway banners 8' Sidewalk 6' Tree lawn Raised, planted 6' Tree lawn 10' Shared bike/ped median path 1 'Ymow 4M Al e r VL 11 ll 'l_t y..l . (iG I I a La t 1 4. Ir i • � I I I I I I I ( tit l , _ I I WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-10 OProspect Corrido , Prospect Road Conceptual Design - Interim Condition This diagram includes potential interim designs that may be used if existing land uses are still in place at the time of Final Design and Construction. I� s a CSU - Parking Garage _ I10' Shared bike/ped path Interim condition Raised median Interim condition Bus pull-out Enhanced crosswalk for a1 - — -Attached -Attached 6' sidewalk Mas0n Corridor trail> 1 - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - I - - - - - - - �. �$ � a i Interim condition AL 1 # I& � - - - � _ � Allill o Existing trees to 10' Shared bike/ped - Attached 10' Shared bike/ped path - Bike box remain path r c Hilton Fort Collins m . v Angle parking - 45 degree stalls Interim condition Interim condition - Turning Point -No gateway corner refuge and no refuge island 10' shared bike/ped path parking realignment and attached 10' shared bike/ped path m ! Interim condition Right-of-Way Street tree jbikZhpad0' red Raised median 1y -6' attached sidewalk line, t p 40�D.C., t - 6' Tree lawn Access point, typ. -L \ path �6' Tree lawn �8 YP YP � �Z ® 7% , 8Sidewalk6' Sidewalk Tree lawnInterim condition 1 6' attached sidewalkAccess point, typ. Gateway corner refuge _ Existing Residential Neighborhood WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-11 OProspect Corridor Prospect Road - Removed/Proposed Trees v Plymouth v I v Congregational Church v I � I � m E treet tree 40 0 C , typ. line c H- H 11 ■ 1 1, 1 - 1 1 _ _ _I 1 _- __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ L _ Right-of-WayI' 1 L - I' 1 - 1-= -�' _ _ - I - 1 1 - I i �i F- 11 - 1 L1 � 1 1 - nlu 11 1- 1 1 - 1 1 - 1 I , 13 - I I q Existing Residential I Neighborhood o I a I 1 • I 1 CSU - Aggie Village North I CSU - Parking w I _ I Garage 5 < U N Right-of-Way line --.. Right-of-Way line Raised median y v + -111_ I Id 1 ■ M J I K I1 11 4 11 11 • 11 -i 11 .. 11 11 •. 11 d1 11-- 1 11 _ - - � - - 1 I a Existing trees `v to remain ¢° Prospect Station Hilton Fort Collins Legend \ N. i ( � Tree to be removed Prospect Corridor - Conceptual Design - Tree Removal/Proposed Trees to be Removed Proposed Trees Additional Trees Proposed Tree 115 180 65 WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-12 OProspect Corrido , Lake Street — Alternative A Alternative A provides a protected bike lane on the north and south side of Lake Street with a planted median providing separation from vehicle parking. The following design elements are included- 2 travel lanes On-street parking 6' one-way protected bike lanes Tree lawn (select locations) 6' attached sidewalk 1 1 1 1 Future Stadium 1 Future CSU 1 4' planted buffer a 1 project 1 1 1 1 1 Parallel parking 6' bike lane 6' sidewalk r a MX Mr! Lake Stre t _ CSU - Aggie Village North a V 3 J U r11 O Section A-A' arking Drive lane Planted buffer gt,Paralleip 0MENEM w 6' 6' 81— 10' +10, +8' 6' 6' 4' 4' -_Existing ROW - 60' �— 4--Total Required ROW - 74' WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-13 OProspect Corrido , Lake Street — Alternative B Alternative B provides a two-way protected bike lane on the north side of Lake Street with a planted median providing separation from vehicle parking. This takes advantage of the lower number of access points here, where Colorado State University main campus land-use is dominant. The following design elements are included- 2 travel lanes On-street parking 6' two-way protected bike lanes (6' per lane) Tree lawn (select locations) 6' attached sidewalk 4' planted buffer Future Stadium 1 Future CSU 1 a 1 project 1 tall parking 'd Ik 1 1s ewa r _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ a _ Pa elprotected bike Y 6 protecte i e lane Lake Street —( VF i 6' sidewalk 6' tree lawn 9 CSU - Aggie Village a p North _ < A r 4 O Section A-A' Parallel parking Drive lane Planted buffer Two-wa ted bike lane _ :O � t CSU - Aggie t o t l L I - illage North 0 it x w W 6' 6' S' 10' 10' 8' N-12' 6' —} Existing ROW - 60' Total Required ROW - 70' � WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-14 OProspect Corridor Lake Street — Alternative C Alternative C maintains existing curb lines and roadway width and removes on street parking while incorporating a protected bike lane on the north and south side of Lake Street with a planted median providing separation from travel lanes. The following design elements are included: 2 travel lanes 6' one-way protected bike lanes Tree lawn (select locations) 6' attached sidewalk Future Stadium = 1 Future CSU 1 4' planted buffer a 1 project 1 1 1 Twowaytra el lane - no 12' widetwobwy IE fisting 1 1 parking on either side 1 protecteda lane lsidewalk R - A& + ram 1 Y I _ 76' tree lawn 16' sidewalk QU - AggieVillage o •i• � . orth — I m r > t a v" _ Ol O Section A-A' Drive lane Planted buffer Two-way protected bike lane �,- Exi s ewalk CSU - Aggie - • �� Village North o 0 m m C - N X W W } Existing ROW - 60' k- 1—Total Required ROW - 65' t- WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-15 OProspect Corrido , Lake Street — Multi-Modal Performance Measures LAKE STREET Multimodal Level of Service (MMLOS) for Lake Street was evaluated using state-of-the-practice techniques for each mode of transportation. The pedestrian score is based on built environment factors that affect walkability. The bicyclist score, Level of Traffic Stress (LTS), is based on roadway factors that affect bicyclist comfort. The transit score is based on factors that affect transit vehicle reliability and built environment factors that affect a transit passenger's experience. Performance for automobiles is based on roadway segment level of service (LOS), which accounts for vehicle travel speed, and intersection level of service (LOS), which accounts for vehicle delay at intersections. Alternative C most improves the pedestrian score of Lake Street by removing on-street parking. Each alternative similarly improves bicyclist comfort (Level of Traffic Stress) and the transit score as compared to the existing configuration. No alternatives significantly change automobile LOS as compared to the existing configuration. PEDESTRIAN BICYCLE TRANSIT AUTO tz F n N O u~ O N O W a LAKE ST O LAKE ST m p LAKE ST m O PM AM m Wn W41 9 m W • T AM m m m Q W n r n F n F n Q N O N r N O N O LAKE 5T W LAKE ST n p LAKE ST �_ m O PM AM m W W m m w � � � � � � �� m AM •� m Q N I<II w m N m w PM m m W Q N O N 0 N 0 0 O r O LAKE ST m O LAKE ST m p LAKE ST �� MMMMIMMMM m O t••eer•� aM m W w m w m w � � � � � � �� m AM PM n Q y m u—Zi m u—Zi m N PM m u W F n n r n F n Q w O r N r N O p LAKE ST m C LAKE ST m p LAKE ST �_ _ _ _ — m O L AM m le J n w n w a —eras n W w m m � � � � � �� m AM m a u=i N N N PM m m m m Pedestrian Score Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Transit Score Roadway LOS Intersection LOS w0000n Low The pedestrian score is based on sidewalk • • • 2 LTS applies the same methodology an an Low The transit score is based on transit reliability (roadway � A or B A or B Roadway and intersection LOS are MMMME width, buffer width and distance to the 909 4 that is used in the 2014 Bicycle Master Plan. ME LOS) and built environment factors including proximate AM based on 2035 traffic volumes and C nearest crossing. The score from 1-5 represents the level of ME Medium walkways and bikeways and bus stop amenities. C HCM 2000 methodologies. Medium bicyclist comfort based on traffic volume, speed, _ _ D D number of lanes, and presence and quality of � E or F PM the bikeway. an an High � E or F High mmmmm N/A A WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-16 OProspect Corridor Lake Street Conceptual Design The conceptual design for Lake Street was developed through stakeholder input on the three alternatives. Based on input from Colorado State University and the City, on street parking was desired to be maintained. Concerns were also expressed regarding a two-way protected bike lane on the north side, where minimizing turning conflicts could prove to be a challenge. The conceptual design is generally based on Alternative A. Lake Street - Conceptual Design Elements: Two travel lanes On-street parking Protected bike lanes with planted buffer Attached/detached sidewalk Tree lawn (select locations) Mid-block bike/pedestrian crossings Transit stops Note: Specific and detailed intersection improvement decisions will be refined through various design and other project processes. This includes City capital projects, identified requirements due to area developments, and stadium mitigation measures. E Buffer 11 ' Travel lanes Sidewalk connection to Pitkin - - - CSU - PERC \ Future CSU Stadium Bikebox :=3 Street ' � Transfort ' Future ' Gateway corner refuge i rossing, 8� Parallel 6' Striped bike lane 6' Sidewalk Buffer crossing, t \. stop, typl_ • CSU � • • yp parking 9' yp � Project, Access point, typ. Right-of-Way line I ' Buffer tree, typ .rs _ ` . • - — - - _ - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - -------- ---- -- --- - --- _ _ __ ___ _ _ __ __ ___ ____ ___ _____ _ _ ______ _ _ - _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ e ane Planted buffer _ ' —P T Pedestrian crossing c - J i - Pedestrian - - - -- - - - - - !son - - _ •- L - • • } ; � 6' Striped buffered ` - ' ¢ g Plymouth crossing 6' Bike lane 4' Striped buffer 16' Sidewalk w I bike lane Congregational Church Interim condition Existing curb - _ Islamic required with on maintained Center off-street 90 degree (South only) Existing Residential in • Potential sidewalk connection parking Potential sidewalk to Neighborhood to Prospect Road connection Prospect Road E I Future condition on Whitcomb - Tree lawn detached sidewalk and bike lane t I II 3 i • Pedestrian beacon r Wider tree lawn to 8' Parallel parking Future CSU avoid impacts to 12' Bike path to .> , Project 11 ' Travellanes ex. steam chillers 4 a potential underpass4rossingRight-of-Way rnaround 11 ' Travellanes o + Access point, �, v 1 8 Parallel parking Bike lanes A Buffer line ro' r - - u ere lean R P e/ ,- - - - - - -- - -------- - d b k I e ♦ �i ♦ ♦ 1i 1 . sjt w Stripe Sha bik♦, —♦ # i -- -- — --- `----------- ed Late ---- - -c — o+ Yp I ` ♦ -- t - ♦ ♦ n * ♦ s ♦ - --- -- - ■ Existing curd �Pedgstrian Existing curb/ Potential transit -°o i 'i 0 maintained - � ` • ' sidewalk maintained interline service or ^ crossing o Mason Trail (Sortth only) 4 a v (South only) transfer stops 0 1 . > CSU - Parking _ I - ` ' • ' % • • a Garage - I •`o _ Gateway corner refuge . . N y _ CSU - Aggie Village North � • � � _ m •,-•� �To potential 1 L) bmderpass Legend Potential Right-of-Way (ROW) dedication/acquisition Pedestrian Wayhnding ■ i a Transfort Stop Interim condition required with existing land use WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-17 OProspect Corrido , Lake Street Conceptual Design Typical Cross-Section N Parallel parking Travel lane Bike lane Planted Attached walk buffer Existing curb — I Ln 3 34LL . . rclstv Aillage ` N NorthW , I / w South Side J�8'�P��6'44' 8'-11 '-11 '­ 844' 6' 6' North Side 1 .51 Existing ROW - 60' Total Required ROW - 75, Note - Total required ROW dimension includes 18" curb/gutter around planted buffer per LCUASS standards. The south side maintains the existing curb/gutter. ROW Dedication/Acquisition Range Whitcomb Street to Center Avenue Low = Oh' Medium = FID' High = 1Bond above Bike Transit cted Properties (South) 2 Travel Lanes (11) 6' Sidewalk 6' Protected Lane Stops (TBD) 9 Properties: None Parallel Parking (8) ] Properties - High 2 Properties - Medium Shields Street to Whitcomb Street ME Center Avenue to College Avenue Motor Vehicle Ped Bike Transit Impacted Properties (North) Impacted Properties (South) Motor Vehicle a Transit Impacted Properties (North) Impactetl Properties (South 2 Travel Lanes (11) 6' Sitlewalk MBufferetl/Protectetl Stops (TBD) 5 Properties -Metlium None 2Travel Lanes 5' Sitlewalk 6' Buffe,etl/Protectetl Stops (TIED) 7 Properties- Metlium 4 Properties - Low Parallel Parking (8) Lane Parallel Parking 10' Shared Use Path Lane WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-18 OProspect Corrido , Lake Street - View looking west near CSU parking garage 8' Parallel parking, typical Aggie Village North Buffer crossing Campus spine 6' Sidewalk, redevelopment typical north and south sides 11 ' Travel lane, CSU parking 4' Planted 6' Bike lane, typical garage buffer, typical typical north and Center Avenue south sides tit 4-4 < ` I � ry WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-19 OProspect Corrido , Prospect Road and Lake Street Conceptual Designs — Multi- Modal Performance Measures PROSPECT ROAD LAKE STREET Multimodal Level of Service (MMLOS) for Prospect Road and Lake Street was evaluated using state-of-the-practice techniques for each mode of transportation. The pedestrian score is based on built environment factors that affect walkability. The bicyclist score, Level of Traffic Stress (LTS), is based on roadway factors that affect bicyclist comfort. The transit score is based on factors that affect transit vehicle reliability and built environment factors that affect a transit passenger's experience. Performance for automobiles is based on roadway segment level of service (LOS), which accounts for vehicle travel speed, and intersection level of service (LOS), which accounts for vehicle delay at intersections. The conceptual designs for Prospect Road and Lake Street improve each roadway's pedestrian score, bicyclist score (Level of Traffic Stress) and transit score by constructing continuous walkways and bikeways among other improvements. The conceptual designs for Prospect Road and Lake Street do not significantly change automobile LOS as compared to the existing configurations. EXISTING CONCEPTUAL DESIGN EXISTING CONCEPTUAL DESIGN Z LAKE ST D LAKE ST D m 0 O u� O w PROSPECT RD PROSPECT RD Or m 0 LAKE ST m O LAKE ST r m m F J m J m Q N I T N m M G N G a m m LAKE ST O LAKE ST n LU F O f O n n N r N r H H .Ar, PROSPECT RD m 0 PROSPECT RD m N N W w _ _ -- • _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ W LAKE ST m W LAKE ST D mm D m w m v m m m 1 LAKE ST LAKE ST n n F O N r N O o O m r Z w PROSPECT RD m ROS�EC_R r N r 0 r � � M M � � � � "• O �E S� m Jp LAKE ST m W D W D W W F ✓ I<II N m N N LAKE ST LAKE ST n n 0 m - AM PROSPECT RD m a . AM PROSPECT RD m m Or m Or PM a nn h AM PM —� < _ CAM PM� ��� < apM �I— _ C1 PM�I=M weIII ' C1 m ti m N PM < N PM m Pedestrian Score Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Transit Score Roadway LOS Intersection LOS High The pedestrian score is based on sidewalk 000 2 LTS applies the same methodology � M High The transit score is based on transit reliability (roadway � A or B • A or B Roadway and intersection LOS are width, buffer width and distance to the 000 3 that is used in the 2014 Bicycle Master Plan. � M LOS) and built environment factors including proximate � C • C AM based on 2035 traffic volumes and Medium nearest crossing. 4 The score from 1-5 represents the level of M � Medium walkways and bikeways and bus stop amenities. D ABC HCM 2000 methodologies. 000 D bicyclist comfort based on traffic volume, speed, � PM Low 000 5 number of lanes, and presence and quality of Low F the bikeway. � N/A Notes: • Automobile LOS is based on 2035 traffic volumes and HCM 2000 methodology. • The conceptual design for Prospect Road adds channelized right-turns at the Prospect Road/Shields Street intersection and the Prospect Road/College Avenue intersection. These channelized right-turns may slightly reduce automobile delay(not shown on diagram) The conceptual design for Prospect Road adds a center turn lane between Sheely Drive and Whitcomb Street. This center turn lane Prospect Road and Lake Street Multimodal Performance Measures will improve operations and safety for side street traffic turning to/from Sheely Drive and Prospect Lane. (not shown on diagram) • Roadway segment LOS on Lake Street is worse than some segments of Prospect Road due to the posted speed limit of these roadways. West/e St Central t ra I Area Plan Lake Street's posted speed limit is 25 MPH and Prospect Road's posted speed limit is 35 MPH. V V WEST CENTRAL AREA PLAN DRAFT 3/ 10/ 15 F-20