Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHUMAN BEAN AT SPRING CREEK - PDP - 37-06 - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORTgeneration averages may be skewed and should be higher. Basically, the Board member would like to see the 31 day average calculated without the weekends included. Given any change in the average trip generation calculation (higher ADT), how will this change the design requirements of this project? Will a higher ADT warrant the need for a right turn lane to the site or an accelldecel lane? "There are not many samples from which to draw estimates for a drive-thru coffee shop. The applicant's engineer used ITE information and a variety of other sources and all are consistent. I do not believe that recalculating the trip generation is going to make much, if any difference in the analysis. As for the right turn lane, there are three overriding issues that would prevent the construction of a right turn lane. First, LUCASS, Table 8-4 does not require a right turn lane on 6 lane arterials until the right turn volume exceeds 200 vehicles. Second, the State Highway Access Code does not require right turn deceleration on a 40 mph facility until the volume exceeds 50 vehicles. Finally, there is approximately 50 feet between the driveway and Spring Creek that would prevent the construction of a right turn lane": As Eric noted, the TIS drew from a number of sources for trip generation data. Both the ITE information as well as the Oregon data were for weekdays only, and is consistent with the assumed trip generation for this study. In addition, by reviewing the auxiliary lane warrants, the trip generation could be significantly higher (60% higher) before the warrant for an auxiliary lane is met. 3. Finally, the T.I.S. does not include any background traffic analysis for the access to the Human Bean site. This property was owned, divided and sold by the Eye Care Center next door so it seems reasonable that this existing access point was and will continue to be used by the Eye Center customers since they will be able to access the Eye Center parking lot from the Human Bean access. Additionally, the Eye Center customers may also use the Human Bean parking spaces unless certain parking restriction signage and enforcement is implemented. Basically, it is the Board members opinion that the eye center trip generation (or a reasonable portion of it) should be included in the analysis of the Human Bean access and trip generation average calculations. "The Board member is correct that the analysis did not include the background traffic from the Eye Center. The Eye Center does not open until 9:OOam which is outside the AM peak hour and the PM peak hour trip generation of the coffee shop is so low that it appears to be insignificant" Again, as noted above, there is quite a bit of capacity in the turning volumes before turn lane warrants are met. In fact, there is enough capacity that the entire Vision Eyeland center's ITE trip generation (which does assume some am peak hour trips) could be added and the CDOT warrant for a lane would still not be met. ••• LRTINA ILKINSON,, LLC M E M Date: February 15, 2007 To: Troy Jones Shelby Sommer t ra f�ic 3405 Harbor Way Fort Collins, CO 80524 e1) neeIing .l nci phone:970-988-0143 Fx:970-472-0223 transportation planning martinawilkinsononnsn.com O R A N D U M From: Martina Wilkinson, P.E. PTOE RE: Human Bean Questions posed by Planning and Zoning board members are shown in bold. City traffic staff responses are in italics, and additional information is shown below that. 1. Why doesn't the T.I.S. address stacking at the College access? Does City staff anticipate any issues with stacking at the proposed access? "At the time of the scoping for the TIS, it was not believed that stacking on South College would be a problem when considering the "double drive thru" and the set back from the roadway. The initial trip generation estimate actually put the level of TIS at "Memorandum" but we decided to also look at the background traffic for the short term horizon. If a stacking analysis is requested by the P&Z Board, then it would be prudent to pull the item from the agenda and allow the applicants traffic engineer to prepare the analysis for next month's meeting". It is important that the vehicles entering in the development (especially in the am peak hour) waiting for service do not stack into the roadway. The current design shows that there is stacking room on the property for at least 10 vehicles. Assuming 31 entering cars in the peak hour, and a very conservative 5 minute wait, that would be a total of 155 vehicle waiting minutes, or an average of less than two cars present at the ordering windows during the am peak. It is recognized the am traffic does not arrive entirely consistently, but with a safety margin of 5 fold, this appears adequate. The North College Human Bean did on occasion stack onto the roadway during the am peak prior to the reconstruction that allowed the double drive thru lane. Since the reconstruction which, like the proposed South College Human Bean, has significantly more storage available, the stacking doesn't appear to be an issue on College Avenue. 2. The trip generation data provided in the T.I.S. includes weekends (avg taken for 31 days) which, in the opinion of one PU Board member, would be relatively low volume days compared to weekdays. Therefore, true representative trip 000 consistent. 1 do not believe that recalculating the trip generation is going to make much, if any difference in the analysis. As for the right turn lane, there are three overriding issues that would prevent the construction of a right turn lane. First, LUCASS, Table 8- 4 does not require a right turn lane on 6 lane arterials until the right turn volume exceeds 200 vehicles. Second, the State Highway Access Code does not require right turn deceleration on a 40 mph facility until the volume exceeds 50 vehicles. Finally, there is approximately 50 feet between the driveway and Spring Creek that would prevent the construction of a right turn lane': 3. Finally, the T.I.S. does not include any background traffic analysis for the access to the Human Bean site. This property was owned, divided and sold by the Eye Care Center next door so it seems reasonable that this existing access point was and will continue to be used by the Eye Center customers since they will be able to access the Eye Center parking lot from the Human Bean access. Additionally, the Eye Center customers may also use the Human Bean parking spaces unless certain parking restriction signage and enforcement is implemented. Basically, it is the Board members opinion that the eye center trip generation (or a reasonable portion of it) should be included in the analysis of the Human Bean access and trip generation average calculations. `The Board member is correct that the analysis did not include the background traffic from the Eye Center. The Eye Center does not open until 9:00am which is outside the AM peak hour and the PM peak hour trip generation of the coffee shop is so low that it appears to be insignificant. If any additional information regarding the Traffic Impact Study is needed, please do not hesitate to contact Engineering Staff. The final question was about the assignment of parking spaces, and whether or not Vision Eyeland customers will be permitted to use the five proposed parking spaces on the Human Bean site. The applicant has indicated that parking will be provided on a first -come, first -served basis and Vision Eyeland customers are welcome to park in the Human Bean parking area, and a connecting walkway will be provided to both building entrances. 2 Community Planning and Environmental Services Current Planning City of Fort Collins TO: Planning and Zoning Board FROM: Randy Maizland, Development Review Engineer Shelby Sommer, Associate Planner DATE: February 12, 2007 RE: Human Bean at Spring Creek — Traffic Questions Posed at P&Z Worksession. This memorandum to the Planning and Zoning Board has been prepared in response to questions raised during the Worksession regarding the Human Bean at Spring Creek proposal. One member of the board asked the following traffic related questions. A response to those questions has been provided by the City Traffic Engineer Eric Bracke and is shown italics below each question. 1. Why doesn't the T.I.S. address stacking at the College access? Does City staff anticipate any issues with stacking at the proposed access? 'At the time of the scoping for the TIS, it was not believed that stacking on South College would be a problem when considering the "double drive thru" and the set back from the roadway. The initial trip generation estimate actually put the level of TIS at "Memorandum" but we decided to also look at the background traffic for the short term horizon. If a stacking analysis is requested by the P&Z Board, then it would be prudent to pull the item from the agenda and allow the applicants traffic engineer to prepare the analysis for next month's meeting" 2. The trip generation data provided in the T.I.S. includes weekends (avg taken for 31 days) which, in the opinion of one P&Z Board member, would be relatively low volume days compared to weekdays. Therefore, true representative trip generation averages may be skewed and should be higher. Basically, the Board member would like to see the 31 day average calculated without the weekends included. Given any change in the average trip generation calculation (higher ADT), how will this change the design requirements of this project? Will a higher ADT warrant the need for a right turn lane to the site or an accel/decel lane? `There are not many samples from which to draw estimates for a drive-thru coffee shop. The applicant's engineer used ITE information and a variety of other sources and all are 281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 9 (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020 Human Bean at Spring Creek PDP— #37-06 February 15, 2007 P & Z Meeting Page 10 5. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the request for Buffer Reduction for the Human Bean at Spring Creek PDP. Staff recommends approval of The Human Bean at Spring Creek PDP Type II- #37-06. Attachments: Site, Landscape and Building Elevation Plans Traffic Impact Study Request for Buffer Reduction Human Bean at Spring Creek PDP— #37-06 February 15, 2007 P & Z Meeting Page 9 pedestrians between the building entrance and the street sidewalk along South College Avenue. A plaza is situated directly along the streetfront connected via walkways to the building entrance, and features human - scaled elements such as benches, bicycle racks and landscaping. This design allows proper stacking room for vehicles, while still accommodating and encouraging pedestrian activity on the site. 5) Character and Image [Section 3.5.3(D)]: The building has been designed to complement surrounding development and natural features. The building features a brick base treatment with EIFS above. The top of the building is differentiated with a curved parapet with copper anodized aluminum awnings. A walk-up window encourages pedestrian activity and two drive -through windows accommodate the drive -through customers. 4. Findings Of Fact I Conclusion: After reviewing the Human Bean at Spring Creek PDP, Staff makes the following findings of fact and conclusions: A. The proposed land use (drive-in restaurant) is permitted in the Commercial District (C) subject to Planning and Zoning Board approval. B. The PDP complies with all standards located in Division 4.21 — Commercial District (C) of the Land Use Code. C. The PDP Complies with all applicable General Development Standards located in Division 3 of the Land Use Code, with the following exception: • the standard located in Section 3.4.1(E) —Establishment of Buffer Zones. A request for reduction of and construction within the buffer zone has been submitted for consideration per the Buffer Zone Performance Standards in this section. D. Staff finds that the project as submitted, based on the proposed land use and its contextual compatibility with the surrounding land uses, is not detrimental to the public good. E. Staff finds that the buffer zone performance standards described in Section 3.4.1(E) — Establishment of Buffer Zones have been satisfied with this development proposal and the development activity within and near the buffer zone will not negatively impact the existing stream corridor. Human Bean at Spring Creek PDP— #37-06 February 15, 2007 P & Z Meeting Page 8 walkways or other directly connecting outdoor spaces such as plazas, courtyards, squares or gardens." The applicant's justification for the exception request is as follows: "The alternative design qualifies for the exception because it abuts a 6-lane street and the established pattern of existing buildings on properties adjacent to this site establishes a substantial narrowness of the site, which limits the ability to provide turning movements such that a vehicle cannot maneuver to avoid crossing the "connecting walkway." The site is approximately 97 feet in width north to south. We hereby request that the Director determine that the proposed alternative to build -to line design serves the purpose of Orientations to a Build -to Lines for Streetfront Buildings standard. This standard is part of the Mixed -Use, Institutional and Commercial Buildings standards, whose purpose is explained in 3.5.3(A) of the Land Use Code, where it states, "These standards are intended to promote the design of an urban environment that is built to human scale to encourage attractive street fronts and other connecting walkways that accommodate pedestrians as the first priority, while also accommodating vehicular movement. " The nature of the drive-in restaurant use with this specific building program (dual drive through lanes) does not lend itself to building frontage. The pedestrian activity that would typically be promoted by having building frontage is being addressed in the alternative design. The proposed alternative design is built to a human scale which encourages attractive street fronts and accommodates pedestrians as the first priority as follows: a) An urban plaza with benches and tables is located up next to the street sidewalk to encourage pedestrian activity at least equally well as would simple building frontage; b) Where the walkway crosses the vehicle use area, the walkway will be delineated with colored concrete; c) Signs will be posted to warn vehicle users to yield to pedestrians; d) Pedestrian lighting will be provided; e) Landscaping will be provided to allow an unobstructed view between the driver and the pedestrian; There is a bus stop on College Avenue immediately adjacent to the proposed urban plaza. The plaza will provide a pleasant pedestrian environment at the bus stop." The Director has determined that the exception request satisfies the purpose of the build -to line standards equally well as a compliant proposal, due to the auto -oriented nature of the use and the established pattern of existing development surrounding the site. While the use is oriented primarily towards vehicles, there is a strong connection for Human Bean at Spring Creek PDP— #37-06 February 15, 2007 P & Z Meeting Page 7 shrubs so that it does not impact the creek corridor. A new water quality pond will be constructed as part of the drainage improvements, which will improve the quality of runoff that leaves the site and will drain into Spring Creek. 2) Design and Aesthetics [Section 3.4.1 (1)]: The project has been designed to complement Spring Creek based on the design suggestions made by City Staff. Mitigation measures include native plant species and enhanced landscaping that will complement the existing visual context of the Spring Creek corridor. The north facing embankment of the creek is adjacent to the proposed development and contains a mixture of deciduous trees and shrubs that stabilize the slope and provide wildlife habitat. The proposed plantings along the top of the embankment will screen views into the property, will be an improvement to the existing conditions and will blend into the overall vegetation pattern along this portion of the corridor. D. Building Standards [Section 3.5] 1) Building and Project Compatibility [Section 3.5.1]: The architecture of this project is compatible with the existing buildings. The building is articulated by variations in color and massing that are proportional to the massing and scale of nearby structures. 2) Building Materials [Section 3.5.3(E)]: The materials include EFIS and a brick base treatment. 3) Building Color [Section 3.5.1(F)]: The colors chosen for the project are within the realm of the colors of existing buildings in the area. The colors are acceptable for the Spring Creek Corridor area and include shades of tan EFIS and warm brown brick. 4) Relationship of Building to Streets, Walkways and Parking [Section 3.5.3(B)]: The applicant has submitted a request for exception to the build -to line standards per the following section of the Land Use Code: Section 3.5.3(B)(2)(d) "Exceptions to the build -to line standards are permitted if the building abuts a four or six -lane arterial street and the Director has determined that an alternative to the street sidewalk better serves the purpose of connecting commercial destination due to an established patter of existing buildings that makes a pedestrian - oriented streetfront infeasible. Such alternative to the street sidewalk must include a connecting walkway(s) and may include internal Human Bean at Spring Creek PDP— #37-06 February 15, 2007 P & Z Meeting Page 6 and Spring Creek, enhancing the area for wildlife using the Spring Creek corridor and protecting wildlife from human disturbances. According to the Buffer Zone Table found in Section 3.4.1(E) of the Fort Collins Land Use Code, a 100-foot buffer is suggested along Spring Creek. The applicants are requesting that a reduction to this standard distance be allowed in this circumstance. The proposed development shown in our site plan decreases the existing paved area, by providing a landscaped edge where there currently is asphalt. Additionally, native plant species will enhance and protect wildlife habitat adjacent to the site." Staff has evaluated this request and supports the request to reduce and build within the buffer zone. On this property, the standard 100 foot buffer would extend to the north property line. The proposed development will not encroach further into the Spring Creek corridor any more than the existing conditions, and will actually offer an improvement over the existing parking lot conditions. In addition, the PDP adds plant materials on the southern edge of the development, where none currently exist. The development will meet the Buffer Zone Performance Standards as articulated in Section 3.4.1(E) and discussed below. The project has been designed to enhance the ecological character and wildlife use by creating a dense landscape buffer along the south property line adjacent to Spring Creek. The plants selected are native species that will improve wildlife habitat within the corridor. The amount of asphalt paving will be reduced from the existing condition, which allows for the vegetative buffer to cover more area and reduce the amount of stormwater runoff that leaves the site. This property is in a'developed part of Fort Collins and lies above and beyond the physical boundaries of the creek. Wildlife species within the corridor are accustomed to urban conditions and will not be adversely impacted. The addition of a landscape buffer consisting of native plant species will enhance wildlife movements within the corridor as the dense plantings will provide cover and act as a food source for a variety of wildlife species. The proposed development will protect and promote the ecological character and wildlife use. The proposal retracts the existing pavement from the top of the creek embankment, and adds vegetation to help to minimize noise associated with drive through establishments. Furthermore, the site lighting will be located such that lighting will be directed into the site and be screened by backlight shields, trees and Human Bean at Spring Creek PDP— #37-06 February 15, 2007 P & Z Meeting Page 5 16) Handicap Parking [Section 3.2.2(K)]: This PDP proposes 5 parking spaces, one of which is a van accessible handicap space, which meets the code requirements. 17) Parking Stall Dimensions [Section 3.2.2(L)]: All parking spaces meet the minimum parking stall dimensions. 18) Site Lighting [Section 3.2.4]: The PDP proposes adequate lighting levels for pedestrian and auto safety without spilling over into neighboring lots. B. Engineering Standards [Section 3.3] 1) Plat Standards [Section 3.3.1 ]: The plat prepared for this project meets the applicable standards pertaining to lot layout and dedication of easements. 2) Development Improvements {Section 3.3.2]: The Final Plans of the PDP will be required to show all required public improvements. A Development Agreement will be prepared at the Final Plans stage of the project. C. Natural Habitats and Features [Section 3.4.1] 1) Establishment of Buffer Zones [Section 3.4.1(E). The typical established buffer zone for Spring Creek is 100 feet. The proposed development falls within the 100 foot buffer zone for Spring Creek. The applicant has submitted a request to develop within and reduce the width of this buffer zone, as follows: "The parking is an existing parking lot that has been in this location for over 30 years, originally built when the adjacent building, now an eye doctor and eyeglass store, was a restaurant. The applicants wish to develop the property into a drive -up coffee restaurant. The existing site is completely paved with the exception of a small parking lot island, a small parking lot peninsula, and a 5 foot strip of land between the edge of the asphalt parking lot and the southern property line. Wildlife activity does not occur on -site, and wildlife who use the adjacent Spring Creek are accustomed to the urban patterns of the area and this site's current vehicular usage. During development, paved area will be decreased and native shrub species desirable to birds and small mammals will be added between the paved area Human Bean at Spring Creek PDP— #37-06 February 15, 2007 P & Z Meeting Page 4 8) Access, Circulation and Parking [Section 3.2.21: This PDP safely and conveniently accommodates the movement of vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians and transit. 9) Curbcuts and Ramps [Section 3.2.2(C)2]: Curbcuts are located at every point in this PDP where sidewalks intersect with drive aisles. 10) Site Amenities [Section 3.2.2(C)(3)&(4)]: This PDP includes parking facilities for bicyclists, enhanced amenities for pedestrians, and ramps and walkways for clear and direct access to the entrance and walk-up window. 11) Walkways [Section 3.2.2(C)(5)]: This PDP features walkways connecting the street sidewalk and parking area to the building entry. Where the pedestrian walkway crosses the internal drive aisles, the crossings are marked using stamped, colored concrete. 12) Direct On -Site Access to Pedestrian and Bicycle Destinations [Section 3.2.2(C)(6)]: The design and layout of this PDP provides for direct connections to the existing Transfort bus service and Spring Creek Trail. The development provides a plaza featuring tables, chairs and bicycle racks adjacent to the street sidewalk in order to provide a direct connection to the'existing pedestrian and bicycle destinations in the area. 13) Parking Lot Layout [Section 3.2.2(E)]: The parking lot provides well- defined circulation routes for pedestrians, bicycles and vehicles. Raised curbs are used throughout the project to delineate landscape areas and walkways from drive areas. The walkways provided are logical and convenient and in the safest practical location, crossing the drive aisles in high -visibility locations. Potential points of conflict include special paving treatment, raised curbs and a safety railing. 14) Drive-in Facilities [Section 3.2.2(H)]: The design and layout of this proposed facility meets the requirements of this section to the maximum extent feasible. Pedestrian and vehicle conflicts have been avoided to the greatest extent possible. Adequate stacking space is provided and a walk-up window is provided as well. 15) Setbacks [Section 3.2.2(J)]: This proposal complies with the setback requirements of this section by providing a five foot wide landscaped setback area along the rear lot line. Human Bean at Spring Creek PDP— #37-06 February 15, 2007 P & Z Meeting Page 3 2) Development Standards: This project provides a pedestrian -oriented outdoor plaza as required per this code section. This pedestrian plaza is visible from College Avenue and is linked by sidewalks to other outdoor - oriented spaces in the area including the Spring Creek Trail and Creekside Park. 3. Compliance with General Development Standards The proposed project complies with the applicable general development standards contained in Division 3 of the Land Use Code as follows: A. Site Planning and Design Standards [Section 3.2] 1) Landscaping and Tree Protection [Section 3.2.1]—The PDP provides full tree stocking on the street frontages and landscaping throughout the project. The existing canopy street trees along College Avenue are preserved with this project and additional canopy and ornamental trees are proposed along the southern property line and in the parking lot landscaping area. 2) Landscape Buffering between Incompatible Uses and Activities [Section 3.2.1 (E)(1)1: The PDP provides for the preservation of an existing six foot privacy fence at the property line between this site and the residential property to the east. In addition, the setback area will be increased to five feet in width and will be adequately landscaped. 3) Landscape Area Treatment [Section 3.2.1(E)(2)]: All non -paved areas on the site are designed with appropriate landscape areas as described in this section. 4) Parking Lot Landscaping [Sections 3.2. 1 (E)(4)&(5)]: The project meets or the parking lot perimeter and interior landscaping standards and the landscape standards for walkways. 5) Screening [Section 3.2.1(E)(6)]: The garbage collection area is screened by a brick enclosure, shrubbery and landscaping. 6) Tree Protection [Section 3.2.1(F)&(G)]: All existing significant trees will be preserved per the specifications set forth in this section. 7) Sight Distance Triangles [Section 3.2.1 (L)]: All areas of potential conflict between vehicular traffic and pedestrians and between cars and other cars have been addressed with low plantings in the sight distance triangles and trees set back from the site distance triangle. Human Bean at Spring Creek PDP— #37-06 February 15, 2007 P & Z Meeting Page 2 COMMENTS 1. Background The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: N: C: Existing commercial uses (Vision Eyeland) E: LMN: Existing single-family residential uses S: C: Spring Creek, trail underpass, existing commercial uses (office building) W: C: Spring Creek, Creekside Park, existing commercial uses (Dairy Queen) This Project Development Plan includes a replat of the southern portion of the 1820 South College property. 2. Compliance with Zoning District Standards The proposed PDP complies with the applicable standards in Division 4.21 - Commercial District (C) standards as follows: A. Purpose: The purpose of the Commercial District (C) is to: "...to be a setting for development, redevelopment and infill of a wide range of community and regional retail uses, offices and personal and business services... While some Commercial District areas may continue to meet the need for auto -related and other auto -oriented uses, it is the city's intent that the Commercial District emphasize safe and convenient personal mobility in many forms, with planning and design that accommodates pedestrians." This PDP complies with the purpose of the Commercial District (C) in that while it is an auto -oriented use, it is designed to accommodate pedestrians and emphasizes safe and convenient mobility for pedestrians and automobiles. B. Permitted Uses: Drive-in restaurants are permitted in the Commercial District (C) subject to Planning and Zoning Board approval. C. Applicable Standards of the Commercial District (C): 1) Land Use Standards: The maximum building height in this district is four stories. This project proposes a one-story building that is 17 feet 2 inches at its highest point. ITEM NO. 2 MEETING DATE Feb .15 , 2007 STAFF Shelby Sommer City of Fort Collins PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD STAFF REPORT PROJECT: The Human Bean at Spring Creek PDP Type II- #37-06 APPLICANT: M. Torgerson Architects c/o Troy Jones 204 Walnut St., Suite D Fort Collins, CO 80524 OWNER: Piazza, LLC 204 Walnut St., Suite D Fort Collins, CO 80524 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The owner of the property at 1820 South College Avenue requests to redevelop the parking lot on the south side of the existing Vision Eyeland building (0.39 acres in size) into a drive -through coffee shop. The development proposal includes a 499 square foot structure, drive through lanes and a pedestrian plaza. The property is located on the east side of South College Avenue, directly north of Spring Creek in the Commercial Zoning District (C). RECOMMENDATION: Approval EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This is a request to redevelop the existing parking lot at 1820 South College Avenue into a Human Bean drive -through coffee restaurant. The property is located in the Commercial District (C). The purpose of the Commercial District (C) is to: "...to be a setting for development, redevelopment and infill of a wide range of community and regional retail uses, offices and personal and business services... While some Commercial District areas may continue to meet the need for auto - related and other auto -oriented uses, it is the city's intent that the Commercial District emphasize safe and convenient personal mobility in many forms, with planning and design that accommodates pedestrians." Drive-in restaurants are permitted in the Commercial District (C) subject to Planning and Zoning Board approval. This proposal complies with the intent of the Commercial District (C), the standards of the Commercial District (C-N), and the applicable General Development standards of the Land Use Code. A neighborhood meeting was held on December 19, 2006, and no neighbors attended. COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. P.O. Box580 Fort Collins, CO80522-0580 (970)221-6750 PLANNING DEPARTMENT