The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLINDEN PARK (KEATING PROP.) - PDP - 62-98B - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSIV. CONCLUSIONS This study assessed the impacts of the Keating Property on the short range (2005) and long range (2020) transportation system in the vicinity of the proposed development. As a result of this analysis, the following is concluded: ' - The development of the Keating Property is feasible from a traffic engineering standpoint. At full development of this facility, ' approximately 1780 daily trip ends, 139 morning peak hour trip ends, and 188 afternoon peak hour trip ends will be generated at this development. - With the current peak hour traffic, all key intersections operate ' acceptably. There are no pedestrian, bicycle, or transit facilities adjacent to this site. There is very little pedestrian or bicycle activity at the existing intersections near this site. - Using the short range background traffic volumes, overall operation will be acceptable at all key intersections, except for the Timberline/Trilby intersection with stop sign control. With either a two step left turn or signalization, this intersection will operate acceptably. Using the long range background peak hour traffic, all intersections will operate acceptably. - In the short range future (year 2005 with full site development), operation will be acceptable, with two step left turns at the key intersections. The recommended short range geometry is shown in Figure 11. - In the long range future (year 2020), all key intersections will operate acceptably, except for the eastbound minor street left turns during the afternoon peak hours. The long range geometry is shown in Figure 12. - Acceptable level of service is achieved for pedestrian, bicycle, and transit modes based upon Fort Collins measures in the multi -modal transportation guidelines. 21 Trilby LONG RANGE GEOMETRY Chandler N Figure 12 20 Trilby SHORT RANGE GEOMETRY Chandler N Figure 11 19 Geometric Analysis ' The geometry at the various intersections was analyzed using the short range traffic forecasts. The recommended short range geometry is shown in Figure 11. ' Figure 12 shows the long range geometry at the various intersections. This geometry should be evaluated periodically, based upon future, albeit unknown, land development proposals in this area. It is expected that all streets will have appropriate bike lanes and sidewalks, per Fort Collins Design Standards. ' Pedestrian Level of Service Appendix G shows a map of the area that is within 1320 feet of this site. There will be one pedestrian destination within a quarter mile of ' the Keating Property. This is a future 3.1 acre commercial development in the northeast corner of the Timberline/Trilby intersection. ' This site is in an area type termed "other." The level of service determination assumes that future developments will build their streets in accordance with Fort Collins Standards. This being the case, pedestrian facilities will exist where they currently do not. This is a reasonable ' assumption. It is also expected that pedestrian facilities will be incorporated in the street cross section based upon Fort Collins Standards. The Pedestrian LOS Worksheet is provided in Appendix H. The minimum level of service for "other" is C for all measured categories. Bicycle Level of Service ' Based upon Fort Collins bicycle LOS criteria, there are no destination areas within 1320' of the Keating Property. Transit Level of Service Currently, there is no transit service in the area. In the future, transit service will be improved. It is anticipated that the level of service will be in the D category with implementation of the City's Transit Development Plan. L I 1 18 I I I I I I J I I I I I Fj I I I I Short Range TABLE 5 Total Peak Hour Operation L.11 Timberline/Trilby (stop sign) EB LT F [D] F [D] EB T/RT B [A] B [A] EB APPROACH F [D] F [C] WB LT C [C] E [C] WB T/RT A [A] A [A] WB APPROACH B [A] C [B] NB IT A A SB LT A A Timberline/Chandler EB LT F [D] F [D] EB T/RT A [A] B [A] EB APPROACH E [C] F [C] WB LT E [C] F [D] WB T/LT B [A] B [A] WB APPROACH C [B] D [C] NB IT A A SB LT A A level of service w/ two-step left turn TABLE 6 Long Range Total Peak Hour Operation g. W-, Timberline/Trilby (signal) EB C C WB C C NB C C SB C C OVERALL C C Timberline/Chandler (stop sign) EB LT F [D]- F [F] EB T/RT B [A] B [B] EB APPROACH F [C] F [E] WB LT F [D] F [D] WB T/RT B [A] B [A] WB APPROACH E [C] D [C] NB LT A B SB LT B A level of service wl two-step left turn I 17 I 11 L 71 u I forms are provided in Appendix E. Overall, the key intersections will operate acceptably, except for the eastbound minor street left turns during the morning and afternoon peak hours and the westbound minor street left turns during the afternoon peak hour. Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 9, the intersections operate in the long range condition as indicated in Table 6. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix F. All key intersections are expected to operate acceptably, except for the eastbound minor street left turns during the morning and afternoon peak hours. TABLE 3 Short Range Background Peak Hour Operation .>Y - I. .y. '4 is- �d S ! }='«vc'RN��'G ...._ i ✓ i iYa .. iY�YY� .Y• Y[ Yrvi -iiS' Ys°`Y Y't _Ri. � §.3 rli t�� tl~L«Ty`- ��rtl 4t� %YY'-46 Sd }: Y F.�/)s� +1• �rjy�i. F�N } s—S Timberline/Trilby (stop sign) EB LT F [D] F [D] EB T/RT B [A] B [B] EB APPROACH F [C] F [C] WB LT C [C] D [C] WB T/RT A [A] A [A] WB APPROACH B [A] C [B] NB LT A A SB LT A A Timberline/Chandler WB LT D [C] D [C] WB RT C B WB APPROACH C [C] C [B] SB LT A A [ ] - level of service w/ two-step left turn TABLE 4 Lon.�yg� Range Background Peak Hour Operation Ph" �%Xi:. icC��(S4i. `Mi YYiSSr YR N.' Gs "� h'.. ...!'�ryF . � •e Timberline/Trilby (signal) EB C C WB C C NB C C SB B C OVERALL C C Timberline/Chandler (stop sign) WB LT E [C] E [C] WB RT B B WB APPROACH D [C] C [B] SB LT B A [ ] - level of service w/ two-step left turn 1 16 Trilby LONG RANGE PEAK HOUR AND DAILY LINK VOLUMES AM/PM Daily H Chandler N Figure 10 15 Trilby LONG RANGE TOTAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC AM/PM Rounded to Nearest 5 Vehicles Chandler N Figure 9 14 traffic at the key intersections. Figure 9 shows the long range total peak hour traffic at the key intersections. Figure 10 shows the long range peak hour and daily traffic forecasts on various street segments adjacent to the Keating Property. Traffic forecasts on Timberline Road are expected to be at arterial street volumes. Traffic forecasts on Trilby Road west of Timberline Road are expected to be at minor arterial street volumes. The traffic forecasts will be at connector level volumes for the short segment of Chandler Street, just west of Timberline Road. A hundred feet or so west of Timberline Road, Chandler Street splits into three separate streets. Each of these streets will carry less than the upper threshold of a residential local street. Signal Warrants As a matter of policy, traffic signals are not installed at any ' location unless warrants are met according to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Using the traffic volumes shown in Figures 5 and 8, it is likely that signal warrants will be met at the Timberline/Trilby intersection. Signals are not expected to be warranted at the ' Timberline/Chandler intersection in either the short range or long range futures. Key intersections should be monitored with regard to when traffic signal warrants would be met. Peak hour signal warrant analyses are provided in Appendix B. Signal Progression ' Signal progression analyses were not conducted, since the Timberline/Trilby intersection is an appropriate arterial/arterial intersection, which is expected to be signalized. if intermediate signals are required due to unforeseen circumstances, signal progression should be conducted at that time. ' Operations Analysis Capacity analyses were performed on key intersections adjacent to and near the Keating Property. The analyses correspond with the traffic forecasts shown in Figures 5, 6, 8, and 9. Using the background traffic volumes shown in Figure 5, the key intersections operate in the short range condition as indicated -in Table 3. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix C. Overall, the key intersections will operate acceptably, except for the Timberline/Trilby intersection with stop sign control. With signalization, this intersection will operate acceptably. Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 6, the key intersections operate in the long range future as indicated in Table 4. Calculation forms are provided in Appendix D. The key intersections are expected to operate acceptably. The Timberline/Trilby intersection was analyzed with traffic signals. Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 8, the key intersections operate in the short range condition as indicated in Table 5. Calculation 1 13 U- 0 o� o� 0 100/75 a _ `%1 "I v --w— NOM J i L, 50M 7700145 } NOM —� 40/25 CD � o to M (o 0 0 v m o ` L 60M Lo o N N f 15110 J j � 20/15 f Trilby 180/125 10/30 35I20 Lo N o N N v SHORT RANGE TOTAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC AM/PM Rounded to Nearest 5 Vehicles Chandler A& N Figure 8 12 i 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Trilby AM/PM SITE GENERATED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 11 Chandler N Figure 7 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 i 1 Trilby AM/PM Rounded to Nearest 5 Vehicles LONG RANGE BACKGROUND PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 10 Chandler po Figure 6 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Trilby AM/PM Rounded to Nearest 5 Vehicles SHORT RANGE BACKGROUND PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Chandler N Figure 5 9 Site I 10% Trilby 0 N TRIP DISTRIBUTION I Figure 4 n Z Barrington PUD SITE PLAN Timberline .04 Keating Property Figure 3 I I I I I I I I I III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The Keating Property is a proposed residential development. It is located between Trilby Road and CR36 along Timberline in Fort Collins. Figure 3 shows the site plan with 186 lots. This site is assumed to be developed over a 4-5 year period. For analysis purposes, it was assumed to be fully built and occupied by the year 2005. Trip Generation Trip generation is important in considering the impact of a development such as this upon the existing and proposed street system. A compilation of trip generation information, prepared by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (Trip Generation, 6th Edition), was used to project trips that would be generated by the proposed uses at this site. Table 2 shows the trip generation at full development of the Keating Property. Land use code 210 (Single Family Detached) was used for the site. This proposal will generate 1780 daily trip ends, 139 morning peak hour trip ends, and 188 afternoon peak hour trip ends. TABLE 2 Trip Generation PA'"g.-g4fZt" '"°. aY#3q*i5" -<fy"",y`.�e"� -.-�.i$ tM.k3%211C HO7'li".++r`� zy •� KiVTi ,f -e+ .-,.a.rt�. Cods' � x`I�auti�IIs� �� 8iza rou4« Yu^x210 Single Family 186DU n 0.19 35 0.56 104 0.65 121 .036 67 q'Qq'AL 35 104 121 67 Trip Distribution The directional distribution of the generated trips was determined for the Keating Property. The distribution was determined based upon engineering judgment knowing where present and future residential trip attractions will be. The trip distribution is shown in Figure 4. Background Traffic Background traffic is defined as the traffic that is and/or will be on the area streets that is not related to the proposed development. Short range background traffic was developed by adding traffic generated from known, approved developments in the area to the existing peak hour traffic. This is shown in Figure 5. Long range background traffic was developed using cited traffic studies and forecasts reflected in the "North Front Range Regional Transportation Plan." Long range background traffic is shown in Figure 6. Trip Assignment Trip assignment is how the generated and distributed trips are expected to be loaded on the street system. The assigned trips are the resultant of the trip distribution process. Figure 7 shows the peak hour site generated traffic. Figure 8 shows the short range total peak hour 1 6 r Pedestrian Facilities There are no pedestrian facilities along either Trilby Road or Timberline Road adjacent to or near this site. This site is not within 1320 feet of existing residential areas, except for Paragon Point. Paragon Point residential area is west of the Keating Property, across the railroad tracks. Pedestrian activity at the key intersection was observed and found to be non-existent. Sidewalks are/will be incorporated to this and other developments that are within the city limits of Fort Collins. Bicycle Facilities Bicycle facilities along Timberline Road and Trilby Road are not well defined. The occasional bicycle activity was judged to be recreational (exercising) rather than commuter trips. rTransit Facilities Transfort currently does not serve this area of Fort Collins. I I I 0 r i 11 i i a� �. E E i 1� 1 1 1 m N n co 1 Trilby 1 aa/83 30/15 cD CD Lo NN N N ch i AM/PM RECENT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 1 4 Fa Figure 2 Harmony Road 1 v ' 1 i f County Road 36 m o m �2cP tY E� o / H U ti C KEATING o PROPERTY �R I t Trilby Road I/ r f � \ Fossil Creek y Reservoir I Y7 � r I l SITE LOCATION 3 Figure 1 I n II. EXISTING CONDITIONS The location of the Keating Property is shown in Figure 1. It is important that a thorough understanding of the existing conditions be presented. 11 Land Use I I I I I I Land uses in the area are primarily vacant (agricultural) or residential. Residential uses exist or are planned to the north and east of the Keating Property. Land is essentially flat from a traffic operations perspective. The center of Fort Collins lies to the north of the Keating Property. Roads The primary streets near the Keating Property are Timberline Road (CR11) and Trilby Road (CR34). Timberline Road is west of the site. It is a north/south street designated as an arterial street on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. Within the study area, it currently has a paved two lane cross section. Timberline Road intersects with Trilby Road at a stop sign controlled intersection. Trilby Road is designated as an east/west arterial street. At Timberline Road, it has a two lane cross section. Currently, Trilby Road terminates at Timberline Road. Existing Motor Vehicle Traffic Peak hour traffic flow at the key intersection is shown in Figure 2. These counts were obtained in 1998. These traffic counts were taken from the "Barrington PUD TIS." Existing Motor Vehicle Operation Table 1 shows the operation at the key intersection during the peak hours. Calculation forms are provided in Appendix A. Overall, the key intersection operates acceptably. TABLE 1 Current Peak Hour Operation '"`^^ss Timberline/Trilby EB LT/RT C C NB LT A A (stop sign) 2 ,I I. INTRODUCTION This transportation impact study addresses the capacity, geometric, and control requirements at and near the proposed Keating Property residential development, located near them Timberline/Trilby intersection in Fort Collins, Colorado. This transportation study addresses the overall development plan (ODP) issues at full development of the site in the short range analysis future (year 2005) condition and the long range future (year 2020) condition. The short range analysis may satisfy the Transportation Impact Analysis for the project development plan (PDP) submittal requirements, depending upon the specific PDP proposal. During the course of the analysis, numerous contacts were made with the project planning consultants (VF Ripley). This study generally conforms to the format set forth in the Fort Collins Transportation Impact Study Guidelines. The study involved the following steps: Collect physical, traffic, and development data; Perform trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment; - Determine peak hour traffic volumes and daily traffic volumes; Conduct capacity and operational level of service analyses for all pertinent modes of transportation; Analyze signal warrants; Analyze signal progression. This report is prepared for the following purposes: = Evaluate the existing conditions; Estimate the trip generation by the proposed/assumed developments; Determine the trip distribution of site generated traffic; - Evaluate level of service for all transportation modes; - Determine the geometrics at key intersections; Determine the impacts of site generated traffic at key intersections. Information used in this report was obtained from the City of Fort Collins, the planning and engineering consultants, the developers, research sources (ITE, TRB, etc.), and field reconnaissance. The following traffic study was reviewed and considered in preparing this study: - "Barrington PUD TIS," September 1998 The key intersections included in this traffic study are Timberline/Trilby and Timberline/Chandler intersections. I I i LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Site Location ........................................ 3 2. Recent Peak Hour Traffic ............................. 4 3. Site Plan ............................................ 7 4. Trip Distribution .................................... 8 5. Short Range Background Peak Hour Traffic ............. 9 6. Long Range Background Peak Hour Traffic .............. 10 7. Site Generated Peak Hour Traffic ..................... 11 8. Short Range Total Peak Hour Traffic .................. 12 9. Long Range Total Peak Hour Traffic ................... 14 10. Long Range Daily Traffic ............................. 15 11. Short Range Geometry ................................. 19 12. Long Range Geometry ................................... 20 APPENDIX A Current Peak Hour Operation B Signal Warrant Analysis C Short Range Background Traffic Operation D Long Range Background Traffic Operation E Short Range Total Traffic Operation F Long Range Total Traffic Operation G Pedestrian Level of Service Worksheets 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. Introduction ......................................... 1 II. Existing Conditions .................................. 2 LandUse ............................................. 2 Roads................................................. 2 Existing Motor Vehicle Traffic ::..................... Existing Motor Vehicle Operation 2 2 Pedestrian Facilities 5 Bicycle Facilities ................................... 5 Transit Facilities ................................... 5 III. Proposed Development ................................. 6 Trip Generation ...................................... Trip Distribution .................................... 6 6 Background Traffic ................................... 6 Trip Assignment ...................................... 6 Signal Warrants ...................................... SignalProgression ................................... 13 13 Operations Analysis .................................. 13 Geometric Analysis ................................... 18 Pedestrian Level of Service .......................... 18 Bicycle Level of Service 18 Transit Level of Service ............................. 18 IIV. Conclusions .......................................... 21 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Current Peak Hour Operation .......................... 2 I2. Trip Generation ...................................... 6 3. 4. Short Range Background Traffic Operation ............. Long Range Background Traffic Operation .............. 16 16 5. Short Range Total Traffic Operation .................. 17 6. Long Range Total Traffic Operation ................... 17 It I 1 1 THE KEATING PROPERTY TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FORT COLLINS, COLORADO MAY 1999 Prepared for: Mike Sollenberger P.O. Box 272469 Fort Collins, CO 80527-2469 Prepared by: MATTHEW J. DELICH, P.E. 2272 Glen Haven Drive Loveland, CO 80538 Phone: 970-669-2061 FAX: 970-669-5034 Multimodal Transportation Level of Service Manual LOS Standards for Development Review - Bicycle Figure 7. Bicycle LOS Worksheet u [2 level of service - connectivity F;a;] F tual proposed base connectivity: specific connections to priority sites: description of applicable destination area within 1,320' including address FoTuxe 5lk& - l7 \\ *T2N I L C� 2 72AC-K S J destination area classification (see text) [Imlmimll p. 20 City of fort Collins Transportation Master Plan APPENDIX B Multimodal Transportation Level of -Service Manual LOS Standards for Development Review . Pedestrian Figure 6. Pedestrian LOS Worksheet project location classification: (enter as ma=apply) destination area level of service pninimum based on project location classification) classification eew ,i'°J (see text) alirr<mess caainuiry vwYngr inlrrrsl8 .wwiy ?,at /� n uimYtln a?atVMTtOA) nmdnunn C l_ 1 l� �tTG.' actual "/A AAA -VIA Al/A ) R proposed A A rWA A A �65tOEufrgL 771' proposed A A (✓ %� r• meminun actual proposed amiiinumi aclunl ' proposed description of applicable destination area within 1,320' including address FuTv2G 31KG P6p T;a A l L C�� Teac rs �/tsST l.NasE mnvrnun C Q. UA /t%//Q WA � �i p. 18 � City of Port Collins Transportation Master Plan APPENDIX A «Z ..................... -- ool Sol H IMMI INS IN IPA :Isom 100 e MOM �o Mom f 0 Isa ®oil v® Mom ®; o sa, Aso ss . .:....::.:.. SITE PLAN� Figure 2 FUTURE PED/BIKE TRAIL 13200 TRILBY w _z J w m H CR 36. FUT�E WE T HA E N PEDESTRIAN LOS AREA Figure 1 I would concur that the interim striping on Timberline Road should include a southbound right -turn lane. This is especially true since it is expected that Timberline Road will be built to its full arterial width in front of Linden Park and then transition back to a two lane cross section, both north and south of Linden Park. I have forwarded a conceptual striping plan of the area in front of Linden Park to VF Ripley for inclusion in any plans that may be submitted to the City. The two-step left turns can be accomplished as long as there are center left -turn lanes on Timberline Road as shown on both the interim striping plan and ultimate striping plan. There is nothing special about two-step left turns from minor streets. They occur all over the City where the cross section of the major street allows them to be considered. Certainly, this segment of Timberline Road will allow them to occur. cc) MEMORANDUM co L o v TO: Mike Sollenbergei O ro Louise Herbert, VF Ripley City of Fort Collins CC o p � FROM: Matt Delich -- r Qo U • " a DATE: December 10, 1999 z u w SUBJECT: Linden Park (Keating Property) Transportation Study - o Response to staff comments (File: 9930ME01) J • CD u' (D cu This memorandum responds to specific comments from P P M o) "Transportation Planning" regarding pedestrian and bicycle level of Q(0 service and comments regarding striping and operation from "Traffic o Operations." Two destinations were added to the ped/bike analysis: a the future ped/bike trail on the UPRR tracks and the future West Chase residential development to the east. An additional request was z z made with regard to whether bike lanes would be needed on Linden Parkway. �, a NFigure 1 shows the Pedestrian LOS Area around the Linden Park development. The future ped/bike trail and future West Chase development fall within 1320 feet of Linden Park. Appendix A shows the Pedestrian LOS Worksheet showing these as destination areas. The site plan for Linden Park shows a ped/bike connection from Prairie Hill Drive to the future ped/bike trail. This will provide the opportunity for a direct connection to this future facility from Linden Park. It is expected that a pedestrian crosswalk will be painted on Timberline Road connecting this development to the future West Chase development. This will provide a direct connection between these two residential developments. As shown on the Pedestrian LOS Worksheet, the pedestrian level of service will be Wacceptable. A pedestrian signal is not recommended at the Timberline Road crosswalk. a: z Z � A Bicycle LOS Worksheet is provided in Appendix B. The future Y P PP w ped/bike trail will be directly connected to the Linden Park i development via the aforementioned connection. The bicycle level of V z service for this destination would be acceptable as indicated in J W Appendix B. It is expected that there will also be bike lanes on W o Timberline Road which will provide a second direct connection to a Q a r bicycle facility. o A concern was raised whether Linden Parkway should have bicycle ran lanes. Figure 2 shows a site plan of the Linden Park development. ¢ Linden Parkway is the middle, east/west street that is within this ` 5 development. Base upon a dwelling unit count and internal trip UJ as assignment, Linden Parkway will not carry traffic volumes in excess c) of 1000 vehicles per day. Therefore, Linden Parkway should be LL classified as a local street. According to the City of Fort Collins design standards, local streets are not required to have bike lanes. cc ~ CQ C VICINITY MAP 10/12/99 #62-9813 Linden Park Project Development Plan Type 1 1„=600• Linden Park, Project Development Plan, File #62-9813 June 12, 2000, Type 1 Administrative Hearing Page 13 6. RECOMMENDATION: A. Staff recommends approval of the request for alternative compliance request for Section 3.2.1(D) Tree Planting Standards (2) Street Trees (a). B. Staff recommends approval of the request for alternative compliance for Section 3.6.3 Street Pattern and Connectivity Standards (F) Utilization and Provisions of Sub -Arterial Street Connections to and from Adjacent Developments and Developable Parcels. C. Staff recommends approval of the Linden Park, Project Development Plan, Current Planning File #62-98B. Linden Park, Project Development Plan, File #62-986 June 12, 2000, Type 1 Administrative Hearing Page 12 parkway strip and front yards. Visual quality and continuity is uninterrupted with the proposed alternative as are issues of screening and mitigation of potential conflicts, the enhancement of outdoor spacing, the reduction of stormwater runoff, and the mitigation of air pollution are all equally well addressed with the same given number of trees regardless of whether they are spaced within the parkway or within 10 feet behind the sidewalk in the front yard. E. Staff finds that the proposed alternative compliance request to Section 3.6.3 Street Pattern and Connectivity Standards (F) Utilization and Provisions of Sub -Arterial Street Connections to and from Adjacent Developments and Developable Parcels is equal to or better than a plan, which complies with the Land Use Code. The purpose statement for this section of the land use code states, "This Section is intended to ensure that the local street system is well designed with regard to safety, efficiency and convenience for automobile, bicycle, pedestrian and transit modes of travel." Street connectivity is restricted to the north due to existing wetlands and is restricted to the west by the Union Pacific Railroad. The north boundary's length would require four street connections to service re - developable properties to the north. The Linden Park PDP design minimizes impacts on the a natural area to the north, provides two pedestrian/bike connections in addition to bike lanes provided on the connecting streets which fosters non -vehicular access. Further, the design provides for neighborhood continuity and connectivity with existing developing areas and provides street stubs to the north and south for the future adjacent development of surrounding developments. Residents will have the ability to access the schools, commercial areas, recreational opportunities, parks and other destinations via the existing and future local and arterial street system in developments to the north, south and east, as well as by future bicycle/pedestrian trails through open space areas in those developments. The reduction in from four street connections to three street connections with two bike/pedestrian stubs allows the plan to continue to provide as safe, efficient, and convenient of network of connectivity as possible, staff finds that the alternative design accomplishes this purpose equally well as would a plan that complies with the standard. F. The Linden Park, Project Development Plan is compatible with the surrounding land uses. G. The Linden Park, Project Development Plan will be required to meet Land Use Code Division 2.5 FINAL PLAN; Division 2.6 DEVELOPMENT CONSTRUCTION PERMITS; and, Division 2.7 BUILDING PERMITS. Linden Park, Project Development Plan, File #62-986 June 12, 2000, Type 1 Administrative Hearing Page 11 detached dwelling shall be at least two thousand (2,000) square feet. FINDING: This Project Development Plan is required to provide a minimum of two housing types based on fact that the project is more than 30 acres. The applicant more than satisfies this requirement by providing the following four housing types: (1) standard lot detached single-family detached dwellings (lots containing 6000 s.f. or more), (2) small lot single- family detached dwellings (lots containing less than 6000 s.f.), (3) two-family dwellings and (4) single-family attached dwellings. 5. FINDINGS OF FACT/ CONCLUSION: A. The Linden Park, Project Development Plan contains uses permitted in the LMN - Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood Zoning District, subject to administrative review. B. The Linden Park, Project Development Plan meets applicable standards as put forth in the LUC, including Division 3.2 - Site Planning and Design Standards, Division 3.3 — Engineering Standards, Division 3.4 Environmental, Natural Area, Recreational and Cultural Resource Protection Standards, Division 3.5 - Building Standards, Section 3.6 — Transportation and Circulation, Division 3.7 - Compact Urban Growth Standards and Division 3.8 — Supplementary Regulations of ARTICLE 3 - GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS with the exception of Section 3.2.1(D) Tree Planting Standards (2) Street Trees (a) and Section 3.6.3(F) Utilization and Provision of Sub -Arterial Street Connections to and from Adjacent Developments and Developable Parcels. C. The project meets applicable standards set forth in the Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Plan. D. Staff finds that the proposed alternative compliance request to Section 3.2.1(D) Tree Planting Standards (2) Street Trees (a) is equal to or better than a plan, which complies with the Land Use Code. The "purpose" of the section to which the alternative compliance language refers, is listed in Section 3.2.1(B), which states, the intent of this Section is to require preparation of landscape and tree protection plans that ensure significant canopy shading to reduce glare and heat build-up, contribute to visual quality and continuity within and between developments, provide screening and mitigation of potential conflicts between activity areas and site elements, enhance outdoor spaces, reduce erosion and stormwater runoff, and mitigate air pollution. This has proven to be an unworkable scenario when attempting to coordinate utility services and driveways for these lots. Section 3.2.1(D)(2)(a) of the LUC requires street trees be spaced at 30'— 40' spacing in the center of parkways. The applicant has proposed an alternative design that averages the minimum 50-foot spacing along the front and sides of the block between curb and sidewalk and ornamental trees where possible behind the sidewalk. The PDP provides an average treespacing of at least 34-foot spacing intervals and total minimum number of trees is the same as it would have been if the trees were spaced at literal 30 — 40 foot intervals. Glare and heat build-up are reduced equally well with the same given number of trees regardless of whether they are spaced at literally at 30 — 40 foot intervals or whether at 34-foot intervals utilizing the Linden Park, Project Development Plan, File #62-986 June 12, 2000, Type 1 Administrative Hearing Page 10 Neighborhood District (LMN) subject to an administrative review with a Public Hearing as is the proposed neighborhood park. (D) Land Use Standards. (1) Density. (a) Residential developments in the Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood District shall have an overall minimum average density of five (5) dwelling units per net acre of residential land, except that residential developments (whether overall development plans or project development plans) containing twenty (20) acres or less and located in the area defined as "infill area" need not comply with the requirement of this subparagraph (a). (b) The maximum density of any development plan taken as a whole shall be eight (8) dwelling units per gross acre of residential land, except that affordable housing projects (whether approved pursuant to overall development plans or project development plans) containing ten (10) acres or less and located in the Infill Area may attain a maximum density, taken as a whole, of twelve (12) dwellings units per gross acre of residential land. (c) The maximum density of any phase in a multiple -phase development plan shall be twelve (12) dwelling units per gross acre of residential land. FINDING: The LMN zoning district requires a minimum overall average density of 5 dwelling units/net acre of residential land, and a maximum overall average density of 8 dwelling units/gross acre of residential land. The proposal meets the minimum net density with 5.36 units per acre and maximum gross density with 5.23 units per acre. Hence, this PDP conforms to all required minimum and maximum density requirements. (2) Mix of Housing. A mix of permitted housing types shall be included in any individual development plan, to the extent reasonably feasible, depending on the size of the parcel. In order to promote such variety, the following minimum standards shall be met: (a)A minimum of two (2) housing types shall be required on any project development plan containing thirty (30) acres or more, including such plans that are part of a phased overall development; and a minimum of three (3) housing types shall be required on any such project development plan containing forty-five (45) acres or more. (b)Lot sizes and dimensions shall be varied for different housing types to avoid monotonous streetscapes. For example, larger housing types on larger lots are encouraged on corners. Smaller lots are encouraged adjacent to common open spaces. (c)The following list of housing types shall be used to satisfy this requirement: 1. Standard lot single-family detached dwellings (lots containing six thousand [6,000] square feet or more). 2. Small lot single-family detached dwellings (lots containing less than six thousand [6,000] square feet). 3. Two-family dwellings. 4. Single-family attached dwellings. (d) A single housing type shall not constitute more than ninety (90) percent of the total number of dwelling units. If single-family detached dwellings are the only housing types included in the mix, then the difference between the average lot size for each type of single-family Linden Park, Project Development Plan, File #62-9813 June 12, 2000, Type 1 Administrative Hearing Page 9 Road (an arterial street). In reviewing the proposed alternative plan, the Decision Maker shall also take into account whether the proposed plan minimized the impacts on natural areas and features, fosters nonvehicular access, provides for distribution of the development's traffic without exceeding level of service standards, enhances neighborhood continuity and connectivity and provides direct sub -arterial street access to any parks, schools, neighborhood Commercial Districts within or adjacent to the development from existing or future adjacent development within the same section mile. It appears that there is little adverse effect by permitting alternative compliance since there is sufficient vehicular access and circulation and based upon the level of standards specified in the traffic study (attached to staff report). The Linden Park PDP design minimizes impacts on the a natural area to the north, provides two pedestrian/bike connections in addition to bike lanes provided on the connecting streets which fosters non -vehicular access. Further, the design provides for neighborhood continuity and connectivity with existing developing areas and provides street stubs to the north and south for the future adjacent development of surrounding developments. (9) Division 3.6.4 - Transportation Level of Service Requirements FINDING: The Traffic Operations Department, Engineering Department and Transportation Planning Department reviewed the traffic impact study and the development is well within the range anticipated of the overall traffic carrying capacity of the surrounding streets. (E) Division 3.7 - Compact Urban Growth Standards (10) Section 3.7.2. Contiguity FINDING: The Linden Park, PDP development proposal is exempt from the applicable Contiguity standards, based on the exception of lands within Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Plan designation. 4. ARTICLE 4 - DISTRICT STANDARDS (E) Division 4.4 - Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood District (11) Division 4.4 of the Land Use Code, Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood District (LMN) (B) Permitted Uses (2) The following uses are permitted in the L-M-N District, subject to administrative review. (a) Residential Uses. FINDING: In accordance with Section 4.4(2)(a) of the Land Use Code, single-family detached and single-family attached dwellings are allowed in the Low Density Mixed -Use Linden Park, Project Development Plan, File #62-9813 June 12, 2000, Type 1 Administrative Hearing Page 8 including right-of-way widths, are in conformance with city standards based upon the Poudre Fire Authority and City of Fort Collins Engineering Department's review of the proposed Project Development Plan. Hence, the proposed internal street system provides adequate circulation for the anticipated traffic within the development. (8) Division 3.6.3 — Street Pattern and Connectivity Standards (B) General Standard. (E) Distribution of Local Traffic to Multiple Arterial Streets. (F) Utilization and Provision of Sub -Arterial Street Connections to and from Adjacent Developments and Developable Parcels. FINDING: Based upon the applicant's request of alternative compliance, the Linden Park, PDP satisfies Section 3.6.3 (F), requiring street connections to surrounding properties be provided at intervals not to exceed 660 feet, unless rendered infeasible due to unusual topographic features, existing development, or a natural area or feature. The applicant provided justification for an alternative compliance request to Section 3.6.3 (dated January 11, 2000) that is attached to this staff report. The request is to limit road connectivity to the north to three (3) streets rather than the required four (4) with the addition of two (2) pedestrian connection stubs. Street connectivity is further restricted to the west due to the existing Union Pacific Rail Road. The Decision Maker is authorized to grant alternative compliance to this ordinance upon finding the alternative plan accomplishes the purposes of the section equally well or better than a plan which complies with the standards of this Section. The purpose statement for this section of the land use code states, "This Section is intended to ensure that the local street system is well designed with regard to safety, efficiency and convenience for automobile, bicycle, pedestrian and transit modes of travel." Staff finds that the alternative design accomplishes this purpose equally well, as would a plan that complies with the standard. Street connectivity is restricted to the north due to existing wetlands and is restricted to the west by the Union Pacific Railroad. The north boundary's length would require four street connections to service re -developed properties to the north. Hence, dispersions of pedestrian and vehicular movements are provided in this residential development at an average separation, which meets the intent of the Land Use Code. Residents will have the ability to access the schools, commercial areas, recreational opportunities, parks via the existing and future local and arterial street system in developments to the north, south and east, as well as by future bicycle/pedestrian trails through open space areas in those developments. The proposed Linden Park PDP local street system consists of local and connector street system to be accessed from Timberline Linden Park, Project Development Plan, File #62-98B June 12, 2000, Type 1 Administrative Hearing Page 7 (5) 3.5.2 — Residential Building Standards (B) Detached Housing Model Variety FINDING: The Linden Park, PDP Site Plan commits to providing at least four types of single family housing models, as outlined in Section 3.5.2(B)(1)-(3) of the LUC. The applicant committed that typical elevations of the proposed models be submitted to the City for review prior to issuance of any single family building permits. (D) Residential Building Setbacks. (1) Setback from Arterial Streets. The minimum setback of every residential building from any arterial street right-of-way shall be thirty (30) feet. (2) Setback from Nonarterial Streets. (3) Side and Rear Yard Setbacks. FINDING: The Linden Park, PDP Site Plan did not show and/or identify a minimum setback for every residential building from a public street right-of-way other than an arterial street right-of-way of fifteen (15) feet nor has it shown the required side yard setback of five feet and rear yard setback of fifteen (15) feet as required per Section 3.5.2(D) of the LUC. Building setbacks will be enforced at the building permit stage. (E) Garage Doors. FINDING: As required, all street facing garage doors will be recessed behind either the front fagade of the living area portion of the dwelling or a covered porch (measuring at least 6 feet by 8 feet in plan) by at least 4 feet, and no more than 50% of the ground floor street -facing facades will be comprised of garage doors. This will be enforced at the building permit stage. (D) Division 3.6 — Transportation and Circulation (6) Division 3.6.1 - Master Street Plan FINDING: The Master Street Plan identifies Timberline Road adjacent to the site as arterial street. The development plan complies with the Master Street Plan. (7) Division 3.6.2 — Streets, Streetscapes, Alleys and Easements FINDING: The proposed internal subdivision street system provides adequate circulation to carry the traffic within the development. The developer is required to provide improvements to the City's street system in accordance to the City's street grid system policy and Master Street Plan. All street improvements, Linden Park, Project Development Plan, File #62-98B June 12, 2000, Type 1 Administrative Hearing Page 6 Standards FINDING: The developer is required to provide street and infrastructure improvements in accordance to city requirements. To minimize potential impacts to natural areas to the north of the development, the City requested the developer minimize the number of street stubs to the western portion of the north property line (see Linden Park PDP plan). The applicant proposes three street connections and two additional pedestrian connections (see also (8) Section 3.6.3 Alternative Compliance Request below). There are no natural area buffer zones impacting the Linden Park PDP that will need to be closely coordinated with staff. Linden Park PDP improvements, including vegetation of the open space, detention areas, park lands, and, street and pedestrian corridor connections are required to be in conformance with city standards. If this PDP application is approved, site improvements will require additional review for Final Compliance Review. (C) Division 3.5 - Building Standards (4) Division 3.5.1 - Building and Project Compatibility (B) Architectural Character. (C) Building Size, Height, Bulk, Mass, Scale. (D) Building Orientation. (E) Privacy Considerations. (F) Building Materials. FINDING: The residential component of this proposal complies with Section 3.5.1(D) Building orientation, since building orientation of the buildings allows residents to enter and exit the buildings directly to and from walkways. Further, Section 3.5.1 (F) Building materials is met since the proposed homes will consist of the following building materials: • High profile asphalt composition shingles; • 9 inch lap siding; • Facade colors: neutral tones of tan, beige, brown -gray; • Trim colors: off-white/cream; • 14 inch louvered shutters; • Shutter colors: green, blue -gray, brown and copper; • Brick; • Brick colors: blonde and reddish tones; • Stucco and stone may be utilized upon build -out. The homes will be consistent with the size, scale, and materials of homes in surrounding neighborhoods in compliance with Sections 3.5.1(B) - 3.5.1(F) of the LUC. The Current Planning Department, prior to the issuance of building permits, will review the elevations for conformance with Land Use Code provisions. Linden Park, Project Development Plan, File #62-98B June 12, 2000, Type 1 Administrative Hearing Page 5 demonstrates innovative design and use of plat materials and other landscape elements." Because the reason for the alternative compliance request is to emphasize the architectural design of the building entrance, and because the alternative plan provides more trees than otherwise would have been required to be provided, staff has determined that the proposed alternative plan does in fact demonstrate innovative design and use of landscape elements. Minimum Species Diversity - As required, no more that 15% of the landscaping consists of a single species. The largest single percentage of one species is under 10%. (2) Division 3.2.2 - Access, Circulation and Parking (C) Development Standards (5) Walkways. (a) Directness and continuity. (b) Street Crossings. (c) Direct On -site Access to Pedestrian and Bicycle Destinations. FINDING: The development proposal provides for an internal sidewalk network that includes detached walkways along the arterial, local, and connector streets. Primary pedestrian crossings will be defined with pavement treatment and striping different from that of the vehicular lanes. In accordance with the Land Use Code, onsite pedestrian systems provide directness, continuity, and safety and minimize the number of driveway and drive aisle crossings. Further, the developer proposes enhanced pedestrian refuges and crosswalks with all traffic circles. (K) Parking Lots — Required Number of Spaces for Type of Use. FINDING: The applicant provides off-street and garages spaces for the detached and attached single-family dwelling units. The sufficient number of required on -site parking spaces for the detached single family portion of the project development would be enforced at the building permit stage. (3) Section 3.2.3. Solar Access, Orientation, Shading The LINDEN PARK, PDP satisfies Section 3.2.3(B) Solar -Oriented Residential Lots. One hundred eighty four (184) single-family lots in the Linden Park development are subject to the City's adopted Solar Orientation Ordinance and a total of one hundred seventy two (172) of the lots meet the intent of and definitions in the ordinance. This equals 93%, which meets the requirement with a minimum of 65% of all single family lots comply with the ordinance. (B) Division 3.4 - Environmental, Natural Area, Recreational and Cultural Resource Protection Linden Park, Project Development Plan, File #62-9813 June 12, 2000, Type 1 Administrative Hearing Page 4 landscape and tree protection plans that ensure significant canopy shading to reduce glare and heat build-up, contribute to visual quality and continuity within and between developments, provide screening and mitigation of potential conflicts between activity areas and site elements, enhance outdoor spaces, reduce erosion and stormwater runoff, and mitigate air pollution. The alternative landscape plan deviates from the standards of this section in that the tree spacing does not occur literally in 30-foot to 40-foot spacing intervals in parkway strips between curb and sidewalk along local streets where residential lots are fronting. This PDP is providing several street blocks that are lined with typical 50-foot wide lots. In order to accommodate 30-foot to 40-foot street tree spacing along a block face of 50-foot lots, the street trees would be located at different locations in front of these lots for each lot along that block frontage. This has proven to be an unworkable scenario when attempting to coordinate utility services and driveways for these lots. The applicant has proposed an alternative design that averages the minimum 50-foot spacing along the front and sides of the block between curb and sidewalk and ornamental trees where possible behind the sidewalk. With parkway and yard trees provided, Linden Park's trees average out to one tree per 33.67 feet (34 feet) of lineal street frontage, thereby satisfying the street tree spacing requirements as an average rather than a literal tree by tree measurement. Staff has determined that the alternative design satisfies the purposes of this Section equally well as a plan that satisfies the standards: A. Because the alternative plan does provide an average of at least 34-foot spacing intervals, the total minimum number of trees is the same as it would have been if the trees were spaced at literal 30 — 40 foot intervals. B. Glare and heat build-up are reduced equally well with the same given number of trees regardless of whether they are spaced at literally at 30 — 40 foot intervals or whether they are spaced on the average at 34-foot intervals utilizing the parkway strip and front yards. C. The visual quality and continuity within and between developments could actually be better when providing one tree per lot, spaced evenly up and down the block frontage than spacing that could occur at 30-foot to 40-foot staggered intervals up and down the block. D. The issues of screening and mitigation of potential conflicts, the enhancement of outdoor spacing, the reduction of stormwater runoff, and the mitigation of air pollution are all equally well addressed with the same given number of trees regardless of whether they are spaced within the parkway or within 10 feet behind the sidewalk in the front yard. Section 3.2.1(N)(2) Alternative Compliance Review Criteria states that "in reviewing the proposed alternative plan for the purposes of determining whether it accomplishes the purposes of this Section, the decision maker shall take into account whether the alternative preserves and incorporates existing vegetation in excess of minimum standards, protects natural areas neighborhood continuity and connectivity, fosters nonvehicular access, or Linden Park, Project Development Plan, File #62-986 June 12, 2000, Type 1 Administrative Hearing Page 3 2. ARTICLE 2 -ADMINISTRATION Section 2.2.2. Step 2: Neighborhood Meetings FINDING: The LUC does not require that a neighborhood meeting be held for Type I development proposals; hence, a neighborhood meeting was not held. 3. ARTICLE 3 - GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS This LINDEN PARK, PDP proposal meets all applicable standards in ARTICLE 3 - GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS of the LUC, with the exception of the following: • Section 3.2.1(D) Tree Planting Standards (2) Street Trees (a) [a requested alternative compliance], and; • Section 3.6.3(F) Utilization and Provision of Sub -Arterial Street Connections to and from Adjacent Developments and Developable Parcels [a requested alternative compliance]. Of specific note is Division 3.2 - Site Planning and Design Standards, Division 3.4 - Environmental, Natural Area, Recreational and Cultural Resource Protection Standards, Division 3.5 - Building Standards, Division 3.6 - Transportation and Circulation, and Division 3.7 - Compact Urban Growth Standards. Further discussions of these particular standards follow. A. Division 3.2 - Site Planning and Design Standards (1) Division 3.2.1 - Landscaping and Tree Protection (2) Street Trees FINDING: The proposed street tree planting is not in accordance with Sections 3.2.1(D)(2)(a), since Linden Park PDP provides trees at spacing of generally 50' in 6' wide parkways (between curb and sidewalk) along the internal local streets. The applicant is requesting alternative compliance to Section 3.2.1(1))(2)(a) of the Land Use Code where it states, "wherever the sidewalk is separated from the street by a parkway, canopy shade trees shall be planted at thirty-foot to forty -foot spacing (intervals) in the center of all such parkway areas." Section 3.2.1(N) Alternative Compliance states that upon the request by the applicant, the decision maker may approve an alternative landscape plan in lieu of a landscape plan that meets the standards of this section if the decision maker finds that the proposed alternative plan accomplishes the purposes of this Section equally well or better than would a plan which complies with the standards of this section. The "purpose" of the section to which the alternative compliance language refers, is listed in Section 3.2.1(B), which states, "the intent of this Section is to require preparation of Linden Park, Project Development Plan, File #62-9813 June 12, 2000, Type 1 Administrative Hearing Page 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This Project Development Plan complies with the applicable requirements of the Land Use Code L( UC), specifically: • the process located in Division 2.2 - Common Development Review Procedures for Development Applications of ARTICLE 2 - ADMINISTRATION; • standards located in Division 3.2 - Site Planning and Design Standards, Division 3.4 - Environmental, Natural Area, Recreational and Cultural Resource Protection Standards, Division 3.5 - Building Standards, Section 3.6 - Transportation and Circulation, and Section 3.7 - Compact Urban Growth Standards of ARTICLE 3 - GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; • the applicable district standards located in ARTICLE 4 - DISTRICT STANDARDS of the LUC (Division 4.4 LMN - Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood Zoning District); • And the Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Plan. This PDP complies with the applicable requirements of the Land Use Code L( UC) and with the purpose of the LMN District as it is 38.20± acres in size and contains single family detached and attached (duplex) dwelling units with a neighborhood park. The property abuts the Union Pacific Railroad and the PDP provides trail connections stubs that could ultimately tie into the Union Pacific Trail System. The property abuts an arterial street (South Timberline Road) on its east property line providing access to surrounding single and multi -family residentially developed areas to the north. The proposed development is consistent with the objectives of the implementing developmental regulations contained in Section 4.4 of the Land Use Code (the LMN - Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood Zoning District). Further the Linden Park PDP request satisfies all applicable General Development Standards contained in Article 3 of the Land Use Code. COMMENTS: 1. BACKGROUND The surrounding zoning and land uses from the proposed project development plan are as follows N: FA-1 Farming District in Larimer County - existing large acreage residential S: FA-1 Farming District in Larimer County - existing large acreage residential E: FA-1 Farming District - existing agricultural (West Chase - Planned Unit Development) W: RL Low Density Residential in the City of Fort Collins - single family residential (Paragon 1 and 2) The property was annexed into the City as part of the Keating Annexation Nos. 1 & 2, May 1999 ITEM NO. 62-98B Lk&� `MEETING DATE 6-12-00 STAFF Ron Fuchs Citv of Fort Collins HEARING OFFICER STAFF REPORT ADMINISTRATIVE PUBLIC HEARING: June 12, 2000 PROJECT: Linden Park, Project Development Plan (PDP) - #62-98B (Type 1, Administrative Review in the Land Use Code (LUC)) APPLICANT: Ms. Louise Herbert VF Ripley and Associate 401 West Mountain Avenue Fort Collins. CO 80521-2604 OWNERS: Mr. Terry J. Keating Ms. Erleen K. Keating 3219 Nelson Lane Fort Collins, CO 80525 DEVELOPER: TMNFDS, Inc. 220 East Mulberry Fort Collins, CO 80524 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Linden Park Project Development Plan (PDP), request is for a division of 38.20+ acres of land into two hundred (200) residential dwelling units. The development will consist of single family detached and attached single family (duplex) dwelling units on lots ranging from 4,621square feet to 8,370 square feet and includes a neighborhood park. The property is north of Trilby Road and west of Timberline Road. The property is zoned Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood District (L- M-N). RECOMMENDATION: Approval COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. PO. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 (970) 221-6750 PLANNING DEPARTMENT