HomeMy WebLinkAboutBRAZIL 99 (CAMPUS WEST REDEVELOPMENT) - PDP - 45-98 - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSBrazil 99 Renovation (Campus West Theatre) - Project Development Plan,
#45-98
April 15, 1999 P & Z Hearing
Page 9
recognizes these designations and provides for the dedication
of an additional 17.5 feet of right-of-way along West Elizabeth
Street and an additional 6 feet of right-of-way along City Park
Avenue.
Transportation Level of Service Requirements
• A Transportation Impact Study (TIS) was conducted. The
Transportation Department has determined that the TIS does in
fact meet the specified Level of Service Requirements for all
modes of transportation to and from the site.
FINDINGS OF FACT/CONCLUSIONS
After reviewing the Brazil 99 Project Development Plan, #45-98, staff makes the
following findings of fact and conclusions:
1. The proposed land uses, retail establishment and standard restaurant, are
permitted in the CC — Community Commercial zone district.
2. The Project Development Plan complies with all applicable district standards
of Section 4.14 of the Land Use Code, the CC — Community Commercial
zone district.
3. The Project Development Plan complies with all applicable General
Development Standards contained in Article 3 of the Land Use Code except
in the two cases where alternative compliance is requested and in the three
cases where a modification is requested.
4. The application meets the criteria for alternative compliance requests for
Sections 3.2.1(D)(1)(c) full tree stocking, and 3.2.1(E)(2)(d) Foundation
Plantings for the area between the existing building and the west property
line.
5. The first request for modification is to Section 3.5.3(C)(1) of the LUC which
states, "Horizontal masses shall not exceed a height : width ratio of 1:3
without substantial variation in massing." Staff feels that this modification
request accomplishes equally well the purposes of Section 3.5.3 Mixed -Use,
Institutional and Commercial Buildings than would a plan that complies with
the standard, and strict application of the standard would render the project
infeasible. The applicant intends to add architectural features (new masonry
openings for windows, new shade canopies, and aesthetic steel trusses).
Table 2
Short Range Total Peak Hour Traffic Operation
Level of Service
Intersection NOON P-M
Elizabeth/City Park (signal) B B
Elizabeth/Access (stop sign)
NB LT/T/RT C C
SB LT/T/RT C B
EB LT A A
WB LT A A
OVERALL A A
City Park/Access (stop sign)
WB LT/RT B B
SB LT A A
OVERALL A A
Table 3
Long Range Total Peak Hour Traffic Operation
Level of Service
Intersection NOON PSI
Elizabeth/City Park (signal) B B
Elizabeth/Access (stop sign)
NB LT/T/RT D C
SB LT/T/RT D C
EB LT A A
WB LT A A
OVERALL A A
City Park/Access (stop sign)
WB LT/RT B B
SB LT A A
OVERALL A A
TABLE I
Trip Generation
AWDTE
Noon Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Code
Land Use
Size
Rate l Trips
Rate
In Rate Out
Rate
In Rate Out
814
Retail Center
11.2 KSF
40.67 1 455
3.08
34 1. 3.33 37
2.81
31 1 2.12 24
832
Restaurant & Bar
11.2 KSF
130.34 1 1450
7.16
80 1 7.46 83
10.66
119 1 8. 72 97
If
Totals
1905
114 i i 120
150 1211
minute service for approximately 12 hours per day. Route 11 travels
between the Elizabeth/Constitution intersection and CSU. It provides
20 minute service for approximately 12 hours per day. According to
the Fort Collins - 2015 Transit System map, West Elizabeth Street
will be a high frequency corridor with 20 minute service. This site
does and will have excellent transit service to CSU and the Fort
Collins CBD. These destinations will have a level of service B
rating: The Foothills Fashion Mall and Fort Collins High School will
have a level of service D rating. Transit level of service for this
site is/will be acceptable.
i'3�C V1Y3PLVR
CO
tC)
C
QJ
o
TO: Rex Miller
0
`n
Jim Birdsall, Kenney Associates
0
City of Fort Collins Staff
0
CD
p
FROM: Matt Delich
U
•
<
DATE: February 18, 1999
0
z
LL_
SUBJECT: Brazil 99 Renovation --Response to staff comments
w
o
(File: 9861ME02)
J
•
(D
LL
o
N
This memorandum responds to staff comments pertaining to the
>
Q
o)
"Campus West Redevelopment Transportation Impact Study," July 1998.
CO
The Campus West Redevelopment has been renamed Brazil 99 Renovation.
z
w
'a
p
The floor area of the building is slightly higher than that
used in the transportation study.The previous floor area was 14,260
Z
UJ
z
square feet. The new floor area is�22,257 square feet. For analysis
C7
purposes, it is assumed that the building would have 50% retail and
N
d
50% restaurant. Table 1 shows the recalculated trip generation. The
C\J
additional traffic was reassigned to the key intersections. Figures
N
6, 9, and 10 in Appendix A show the revised traffic forecasts with
the new trip generation. Tables 2 and 3 show the short _range
operation and long range operation, respectively, at the key
intersections. All of the key intersections are expected to operate
acceptably. Calculation forms for the short range operation and the
long range operation are provided in Appendix B and C, respectively.
A bicycle level of service worksheet for this proposed use is
provided in Appendix D. This worksheet includes evaluation of nearby
residential uses who would have the opportunity to access this land
use by bicycle and Colorado State University. These land uses are
connected to the site via bicycle lanes/routes on West Elizabeth
Uj
Street, City Park Avenue, Plum Street, and Shields Street.
[L
Z
The Brazil 99 Renovation is in the "Pedestrian District"
category. Level of service criteria for this category are A for all
=w
Z
measures except for street crossings which is B. The.sidewalk system
V
O
is essentially in place, but parts of it do not meet current City
J
Z
W
standards. As other properties redevelop in the future, it is
W
o
expected that the sidewalk system will be improved. A revised
pedestrian level of service worksheet is provided in Appendix E. The
Q0
F
revisions assume that improvements will be made to the sidewalk
p
system adjacent to nearby properties. The assumed sidewalk
'7
y
improvements will elevate the level of service in the continuity,
Z
a
visual interest and amenities, and security categories.
`
¢
'
5
W
~
This site is served by Transfort Routes 2, 3, and'll, which
U
have stops within 1320 feet of the site. Route 2 is a loop route
LL
that goes by the site in the eastbound direction on West Elizabeth.
¢
It provides 30 minute service for approximately 12 hours per day.
Q
Route 3 is a loop route that travels on Plum Street, City Park
Avenue, and West Elizabeth Street. It generally travels westbound
C
G
on West Elizabeth Street near City Park Avenue. It provides 30
VII. CONCLUSIONS
This study assessed the potential impacts of the Campus West
Redevelopment in Fort Collins, Colorado. As a result of the analysis, the
following conclusions were drawn:
- The potential impacts of the proposed project were evaluated at
the following intersections: West Elizabeth/City Park and the site access
driveways.
- The traffic impact analyses were performed for existing conditions
and future Years 2000 and 2018. Future background traffic conditions
without the project and the total traffic conditions with completion of the
proposed project, were evaluated.
- Under existing conditions, each of the study intersections is
currently operating at an acceptable level of service.
- For Year 2000 background and total traffic conditions, the.study
intersections are projected to operate at acceptable levels of service.
- For Year 2018 future background and total traffic conditions, the
study intersections are projected to operate at acceptable levels of
service. The required geometry in both the short range future and long
range future is shown in Figure 11. The access driveways to the street
system will be consolidated.
- Pedestrian access to and from the proposed Campus West
Redevelopment is/will be direct and continuous. Pedestrian level of
service will be acceptable for some criteria. Improvements should be made
to the sidewalk system in the area as other properties redevelop or through
a City initiated improvement program. Bicycle level of service will be
acceptable. It is anticipated.that the transit level of service will be
acceptable in the future.
20
e
done to completely satisfy all of the criteria, although improvements can
be made in tree area which will make walking a more pleasant experience.
Bicycle Level of Service
This site is directly connected to the on -street bike lanes on West
Elizabeth Street. Therefore, the base connectivity is at level of service
B as shown on Appendix G. Logic would indicate that neither "public school
sites or "recreation sites., are priority destinations for the proposed
uses. The site is in an existing commercial area.
Transit Level of Service
Ttlere is transit service along West Elizabeth Street and City Park.
The current routes (2, 3, and 11) are within 1320 feet of the site. The
combination of these routes provides good service for this site. Future
transit level of service will be acceptable.
19
d
Table 5
Short Range Total Peak Hour Traffic Operation
Level of Service
Intersection BM PM
Elizabeth/City Park (signal) B B
Elizabeth/Access (stop sign)
NB LT/T/RT C C
SB LT/T/RT C B
EB LT A A
WB LT A A
OVERALL A A
City Park/Access (stop sign)
WB LT/RT B B
SB LT A A
OVERALL A A
Table 6
Long Range Total Peak Hour Traffic Operation
Level of Service
Tnt , on � PP1
Elizabeth/City Park (signal) g B
Elizabeth/Access (stop sign)
NB LT/T/RT C C
SB LT/T/RT p B
EB LT A A
WB LT A A
OVERALL A A
City Park/Access (stop sign)
WB LT/RT B B
SB LT A A'
OVERALL A A
18
c
164
a
I—
U
E
N
McDonalds
Site I
SHORT RANGE / LONG RANGE
GEOMETRY
W. ELIZABETH
Legend:
— - Denotes Lane
Figure 11
17
Table 3
Short
Range
Background Peak Hour
Traffic Operation
Level of Service
Intersection
PM
Elizabeth/city Park (signal)
B
B
Elizabeth/Access
(stop
sign)
NB LT/T/RT
C
B
SB LT/T/RT
C
B
EB LT
A
A
WB LT
A
A
OVERALL
A
A
City Park/Access
(stop
sign)
WB LT/RT
B
B
SB LT
A
A
OVERALL
A
A
Table 4
Long
Range
Background Peak Hour
Traffic Operation
Level of Service
Intersection
plq
Elizabeth/City Park (signal)
B
B
Elizabeth/Access
(stop
'sign)
NB LT/T/RT
C
C
SB LT/T/RT
C
B
EB LT
A
A
WB LT
A
A
OVERALL
A
A
City Park/Access
(stop
sign)
WB LT/RT
B
B
SB LT
A
A
OVERALL
A
A
16
VI. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
The previous two chapters described the development of future traffic
forecasts both with and without the proposed project. Intersection
capacity analyses are conducted in this chapter for both scenarios to
assess the potential impact of the proposed project -generated traffic on
the local street system. Other transportation modes are also addressed in
this chapter.
Traffic Analysis - Year 2000
The peak hour background and total traffic volumes for Year 2000,
illustrated on Figures 7 and 9, respectively, were analyzed to determine
the intersection delay and corresponding level of service. Tables 3 and
4 summarize the results for the respective Year 2000 background and total
traffic conditions. The level of service worksheets for Year 2000
background and total traffic conditions are provided in Appendix C and D,
respectively. As indicated in Tables 3 and 4, the traffic movements at
each of the study intersections are expected to operate at an acceptable
level of service under future traffic conditions for Year 2000. The short
range intersection geometry is depicted on Figure 11. Consolidation of the
multiple driveways is indicated in Figure 11.
Traffic Analysis - Year 2018
The Year 2018 peak hour traffic volumes for background and total
traffic conditions were analyzed to determine the intersection delay and
corresponding level of service. Tables 5. and 6 summarize the results.
Appendix E contains worksheets for Year 2018 background conditions and
Appendix F for Year 2018 total traffic conditions. The level of service
analyses shown, in Tables 5 and 6 indicate that the study intersections will
operate at acceptable levels of service. The long range intersection
geometry is depicted on Figure 11. The geometry will not change between
the short range and long range futures.
Pedestrian Level of Service
The study area for pedestrians is, by definition, destinations which
are within 1320 feet of the site. The potential destinations are shown on
the graphic in Appendix G. The site itself falls into the "Pedestrian
District" category. As mentioned earlier, the site is connected to all of
the potential destinations by existing sidewalks, although some of those
sidewalks do not meet current City Standards. Improvements should be made
to the sidewalk system, especially along West Elizabeth Street. However,
this redevelopment could not be expected to make those improvements as a
condition of approval.
The Pedestrian LOS Worksheet is provided in Appendix G. The minimum
levels of service for activity center are A and B for all measured
categories. This level of service will not likely be satisfied for all
categories either currently or in the future. There is little that can be
15
0 0
115/90
^Loo
545/585
fir- 70/65
-125/95
665/555 - ► u-) t
80/75 -� LO c
r7o
0
LO�
� 10/l0
.,---15/15
McDonalds
o ,�
0 o i
--k- 65/30
< z v
— 635 625
�— 255
45 20 r
760 645 O
35/50 - o Z
r) N
Site
� �- - �
Noon/PM
. ELIZABETH
Rounded to the Nearest
5 Vehicles.
YEAR 2000 TOTAL
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 9
McDonalds
NO �.
CDN
\LO �
-12 5/95
:' �
660 710
r
75 70
135/105 —J
� f I
810/670 —
85/80
O n
'Y
u7
N
o�
N LO 10/10
r15/15
Q
LIk
YEAR 2018 TOTAL
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
�
�- 65/30
Z
1 775 65
fir-- 25 35 W
Y
925479020
LO
35/50 -� M
M N
Site
��—.�00
Noon/PM
ABETH
Rounded to the Nearest
5 Vehicles.
Figure 10
r
14
V. FUTURE TOTAL TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS
The future total traffic projections reflect future traffic
conditions with the traffic from the proposed Campus West Redevelopment
project. The future total traffic projections were developed for Years
2000 and 2018.
Total Traffic Year 2000
The total traffic for Year 2000 was developed by adding traffic from
the proposed project to the background traffic for Year 2000. The
resulting peak hour total traffic projections for Year 2000 are shown on
Figure 9.
Total Traffic Year 2018
The total traffic for Year 2018 was developed by adding traffic from
the proposed project to the background traffic for Year 2018. The
resulting peak hour total traffic projections for Year 2018 are shown on
Figure 10.
13
oW)
o � o
�-105/80
_NL0o
+ 525/560
70/65
,,r--
12Y95
640 520 - O t Lo
80/75 LO
LO
rn w
0
N
LM
�Z
�-
NOM.
NOM.
le
Q
I
a
a
a�
Z
C3
04
N
U
McDonalds
O ,n
LO
65/30
z v 635/625
/'— NOM. W. ELIZABETH
45 20 - } r
760 645 =i
NOM. Z Z Z
Site
Noon/PM
Rounded to the Nearest
5 Vehicles.
46,
N
YEAR 2000 BACKGROUND
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 7
McDonalds
N � O N
n m
o o
115/85
Lo
/685
1
/— 75/70
135/105 -1 � } r
785/635 0 LO LO
85/80 —� o a
v O
N
N
00
F, z NOM.
j � ,--NOM.
Q f r
Q CDLO
a �z
M LO
0 o LO65/30
Z — 775/765
-r-NOM. W. ELIZABETH
45 20
� 92590
NOM. Z Z Z
Site
YEAR 2018 BACKGROUND
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
Noon/PM
Rounded to the Nearest
5 Vehicles.
Figure 8
12
4
IV. FUTURE BACKGROUND TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS
In order to properly evaluate the potential impact of the proposed
Campus West Redevelopment project on the local traffic conditions, future
traffic volumes were first estimated for the study area wi ho,r the
project. These future forecasts reflect the growth that is expected from
overall development in this area of the City of Fort Collins.
Background Traffic Year 2000
The growth reflected in Year 2000 Background Traffic is based on area
wide growth and development. Based upon historical traffic growth and
October 1994, the information from the North Front Range Regional Transportation
background Plan,
background traffic forYear OOOrisfdepictedwas de Figure eine7 . The peak hour
Background Traffic Year 2018
Future projections of background traffic for Year 2018 were obtained
using the North Front Range Regional Transportation Plan. The peak hour
background traffic for Year 2018 is depicted on Figure 8.
11.
1<
0
g
CD
N
I
b\
Lo
_ 30%-35% W. ELIZABETH 30%-35% `
Y
Q
a
TRIP DISTRIBUTION — Figure 5
McDonalds A&
N
10/11
-- 21/22
25/34 --
�
7
4�Z-7�q
��
a 9/9
--14/15
Q
co
a M
34/47
Site
r— 25/34
M N
N
Noon/PM.
TH
SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC Figure 6
10
Table
2
Trip Generation
Land Use
Daily
A.M.
Peak
Trips
Trips
Trips
in
out
Retail -
2.7 KSF
110
8
9
(Rate)
(40.67)
(3.08)
(3.33)
Retail -
3.4 KSF
140
10
11
(Rate)
(40.67)
(3.08)
(3.33)
Restaurant
s Bar - 8.1 KSF
1055
_ 58
60
(Rate)
(130.34)
(7.16)
(7.46)
TOTAL
1305
76
80
9
P.M. Peak
Trips Trips
in out
8 6
(2.81) (2.12)
10 7
(2.81) (2.12)
86 71
(10.66) (8.72)
104 84
:1
SITE PLAN
. ELIZABETH ST
A&
N
NO SCALE
Figure 4
a
III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The project site is proposed to have retail and restaurant uses. The
project site, depicted on Figure 4, is located east of City Park Avenue on
the south side of West Elizabeth Street. The multiple driveways to each
street will be reduced to one to each street.
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 (Trio GenpratiQu. 6th ditinn
to
estimate trip generation. Table 2 shows the trip generation used
the
proposed project. Land use code 814 (Specialty Retail) and 832 (High
Turnover Restaurant) were used. Peak hour of the generator rates were used
as a conservative analyses procedure.
Trip Distribution
The directional distribution of the generated trips was determined
for the Campus West Redevelopment. The distribution was determined based
upon a gravity model process, in addition to analysis of the existing
traffic patterns in the area and the type of use proposed at the site. The
trip distribution is provided on Figure 5. It is expected that most
traffic will access the site via the West Elizabeth Street access.
Trip Assignment
Trip assignment is how the generated and
expected to be loaded on the street system. The
resultant of the trip distribution process. Figure
site generated traffic for the proposed project.
7
distributed trips are
assigned trips are the
6 shows the peak hour
Pedestrian Facilities
Currently, there are pedestrian facilities adjacent to the project
site and adjacent to both key streets near the project site. Some of these
sidewalks were built under former City Street Standards and, therefore, do
not have the parkway between the street and the sidewalk. Some sidewalks
do not meet current or former City Street Standards. These should be
improved when adjacent properties redevelop or the City should make {
improvements under an overall improvement program. There are handicap
ramps at 3 of the 4 corners of the West Elizabeth/City Park intersection.
Bicycle Facilities
There are bike lanes striped along West Elizabeth Street. This is
a major bike route for CSU students.
Transit Facilities
Transfort currently serves this area with Routes 2, 3, and 11. There
are transit stops within close proximity of the site.
6
n
to
'%-- 97/71
2
I/— 64/594/59
117/86 --'0' ) r I
624/501— N co .r
74/69 U
0
No0
Y
Q
f-
U
McDonalds
L
a
— 57/27
M
— 541 /525
4/4
fir-
W. ELIZABETH
}
D
41/17
647 431-
O
0/5 —y
o n
Noon/PM
I&
N
1998 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 2
McDonalds A&
Lo
CDu7 0
co L �
\--100/75
51 545
65 60
12/'90
625 505 Ln c n
75/70 Ln o
N cn
Y
Q
a
C)
o c)�
65/30
v o .r
— 620/610
�-- 5/5 W. ELIZABETH
45Y20
740 630 - r
5/5
Ln o u\7
Noon/F
Rounds
5 Vehk
ADJUSTED 1998 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
4
.. ,. r.: .+.�.. .tip .,;� M •.M a� P ��Tc f
Table 1
Current Peak Hour Operation
Level of Service
Noon ply
Elizabeth/City Park (signal)
B
B
Elizabeth./Access (stop sign)
NB LT/T/RT
SB LT/T/RT
B
B
EB LT
C
B
WB LT
A
A
OVERALL
A
A
A
A
5
d
MULI IERR
c
d
x
<
Site Q
a
c
W
y
OSPECT
�a
1 "=1500,
SITE LOCATION Figure 1
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The location of the proposed Campus West Redevelopment is shown on
Figure 1. It is important that a thorough understanding of the existing
conditions be presented.
Land Use
Land uses in the area are commercial and residential. The topography
surrounding the site is essentially flat. The center of Fort Collins is
located east of this site.
Roads
The primary streets, which will serve the proposed project in the
study area, are West Elizabeth Street and City Park Avenue. The
intersection of West Elizabeth/City Park is signal controlled. The site
accesses to West Elizabeth Street and City Park Avenue are stop sign
controlled. There are two driveways to each street.
West Elizabeth Street is an east/west arterial street. Within the
study area, West Elizabeth Street accommodates five travel lanes: two
through lanes in each direction and a center left -turn lane. The left -turn
lane is striped as a two-way continuous left -turn lane adjacent to the
site..
City Park Avenue is a local street that primarily serves the
residential uses north and south of West Elizabeth Street. It has
exclusive left -turn lanes at the West Elizabeth/City Park intersection.
There is no striping adjacent to the site.
Existing Motor Vehicle Traffic
Peak hour traffic counts at the key intersections are shown on Figure
2. The key intersections included in this study are: West Elizabeth/City
Park and the site accesses. Raw count data is provided in Appendix A.
Since some of these counts were obtained during the summer, they were
adjusted and balanced to reflect a school time condition. The resulting
traffic volumes are shown in Figure 3.
Existing Motor Vehicle Operation
Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 3 and the existing control,
the key intersections operate as indicated in Table 1. Calculation forms
for these analyses are provided in Appendix B. Appendix B also describes
level of service for unsignalized intersections as provided in the 1994
Highway Capacity Manual_ Operation at the key intersections is acceptable.
Acceptable level of service is defined as level of service D or better.
I. INTRODUCTION
This transportation impact study addresses the capacity, geometric,
and control requirements at and near the proposed Campus West
Redevelopment, located south of West Elizabeth Street and east of City Park
Avenue. This transportation analysis addresses potential vehicular impacts
upon the street system, the pedestrian network surrounding the study area,
the bicycle system, and the availability of transit facilities. Traffic
projections will be prepared for future Years 2000 and 2018.
During the course of the analysis, numerous contacts were made with
the project architect/planner (Kenney & Associates), the owner (Rex
Miller), and City staff. 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.
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;
- Determine the geometrics at key intersections;
- Determine the impacts of site generated traffic at key intersections;
- Determine pedestrian, bicycle, and transit levels of service.
Information used in this report was obtained from the City of Fort
Collins, the planning and engineering consultants, the developer, research
sources (ITE, TRB, etc.), and field reconnaissance.
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Site Location ........................................
Pave
3
1.
2.
Recent Peak Hour Traffic .............................
4
3.
Recent Adjusted/Balanced Peak Hour Traffic ...........
4
4.
Site Plan ............................................
8
5.
Trip Distribution ....................................
10
6.
Site Generated Traffic ...............................
10
7.
Short Range Background Peak Hour Traffic .............
12
8.
Long Range Background Peak Hour Traffic ..............
12
9.
Short Range Total Peak Hour Traffic ..................
14
10.
Long Range Total Peak Hour Traffic ...................
14
11.
Short Range/Long Range Geometry ......................
17
APPENDIX
A Recent Peak Hour Traffic
B Current Peak Hour Operation/Description of Level of Service
C Year 2000 Background Traffic Analyses
D Year 2000 Total Traffic Analyses
E Year 2018 Background Traffic Analyses
F Year 2018 Total Traffic Analyses
G Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Transit Level of Service
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.
Introduction
Paae
.........................................
1
II.
Existing Conditions ..................................
2
Land Use
.......................
2
Roads
............ .....................................
2
Existing Motor Vehicle Traffic
.......................
Existing Motor Vehicle Operation
2
.....................
Pedestrian Facilities
2
................................
Bicycle Facilities
6
...................................
Transit Facilities
6
...................................
6
III.
Proposed Development .................................
7
Trip Generation
......................................
Trip Distribution
7
....................................
Trip Assignment ......................................
7
7
IV.
Future Background Traffic Projections ................
11
Background Traffic Year 2000 .........................
Background Traffic Year 2018
11
.........................
11
V.
Future Total Traffic Projections .....................
13
Total Traffic Year 2000
.........................0....
Total Traffic Year 2018
13
..............................
13
VI.
Traffic Impact Analysis ..............................
15
Traffic Analysis Year 2000
...........................
Traffic Analysis Year 2018
15
...........................
Pedestrian Level of Service :...........
15
.... ..........
Bicycle Level of Service
15
.............................
Transit Level of Service
19
..............................
19
VII.
Conclusions...................0......................
20
LIST OF TABLES
1. Current Peak Hour Operation .......................... 5
2. Trip Generation ...................................... 9
3. Short Range Background Peak Hour Traffic Operation ... 16
4. Short Range Total Peak Hour Traffic Operation ........ 16
5. Long Range Background Peak Hour Traffic Operation .... 18
6. Long Range Total Peak Hour Traffic Operation ......... 18
CAMPUS WEST REDEVELOPMENT
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
JULY 1998
Prepared for:
Rex Miller
3833 Spruce Drive
Fort Collins, CO 80521
Prepared by:
MATTHEW J. DELICH, P.E.
2272 Glen Haven.Drive
Loveland, CO 80538
Phone: 970-669-2061
FAX: 970-669-5034
We believe that the proposed building renovation design is a tremendous
improvement of the existing facility and that it satisfies the intent and purpose
of the Land Use Code as well as possible for an existing building.
Because of the reasons and justifications stated above, the applicant
requests that the Planning and Zoning Board look favorably at the
modification requests above, and would like to thank you for your time and
consideration.
Sincerely,
OW�v
Catherine Scott Birdsall
Architect Landscape Architect
KENNEY & ASSOCIATES KENNEY & ASSOCIATES
Justification for Modification
The request for modification is based on the criteria in both (A) and (B)
above. The design of this element is not detrimental to the public good nor
does it impair the intent and purposes of this Land Use Code. Additionally,
the proposed design element in dispute advances and protects the public
interests and purposes of the standard for which the modification is requested
equally well than would a plan which complies with the standard for which the
modification is requested. The reasons are as follows:
a). We understand the purpose of the above requirements to ensure that
new development provides attractive, appropriately scaled and
visually pleasing buildings. We agree with the intent and purpose of
these requirements but feel that the requirements must provide
flexibility for existing buildings. The south and west facades of the
existing building do not have a "recognizable" base and top treatment
as required by the current Land Use Code.
b). The proposed design creates a very attractive building from an
unattractive existing building, and reduces it's bulk to a pedestrian
scale, as well. The facades of this building, and the masonry materials
used are existing. The proposed design retains this construction but
adds color to the existing monotonous building. The addition of
exposed steel truss elements, windows, and shade canopies help
create a visually pleasing building from a bland, featureless,
warehouse scaled box.
c). We believe the proposed design satisfies the intent of the Land Use
Code regarding base and top treatments. We do not wish to add a
cornice to the top of the south and west facades, as we feel that this
element would compete with the other proposed design features,
providing visual clutter that would be detrimental to the overall project
design.
Summary
The circular signage canopy is the intended central feature and main entry of
the building. It is sized accordingly. To reduce the size, or eliminate this
element will undermine the very design concept of the renovation. We
believe the proposed design enhances the building and it's surroundings, and
is not detrimental to the public. It serves the intent of the Land Use Code.
Request for 3'" Modification
The applicant is requesting a modification of the building standards of Article
3, General Development Standards, Division 3.5, Mixed -Use, Institutional and
Commercial Buildings, Section 3.53[D][6](a) and (b) of the Land Use Code
which states "Base and Top Treatments. All facades shall have:
(a). A recognizable "base" consisting of (but not limited to):
1. thicker walls, ledges or sills;
2. integrally textured materials such as stone or other
masonry;
3, integrally colored and patterned materials such as
smooth -finished stone or tile;
4. lighter or darker colored materials, mullions or panels;
or
5. planters.
(b). a recognizable "top" consisting of (but not limited to):
1. cornice treatments, other than just colored "stripes" or
"bands," with integrally textured materials such as
stone or other masonry or differently colored materials;
2. sloping roof with overhangs and brackets;
3. stepped parapets.
We request a modification from strict conformance to the above requirements
for the south and west facades of the existing building.
Article 2, Division 2.7 of the Land Use Code permits the Planning and Zoning
Board to grant modifications to the General Development Standards of Article
3 for overall development plans and project development plans which are
pending approval at the time that the request for proposed modification is
filed. A modification request may be granted if the Planning and Zoning
Board, as a Type 2 review, determines and finds that the granting of the
modification would neither be detrimental to the public good nor impair the
intent and purposes of the Chapter, and if the applicant demonstrates either:
(A) the granting of the modification would neither be detrimental to the
public good nor impair the intent and purposes of this Land Use Code,
and
(B) that the plan as submitted will advance or protect the public
interests and purposes of the standard for which the modification is
requested equally well or better than would a plan which complies
with the standard for which a modification is requested.
The structure is an open ring (no roof) suspended from a pole, which
is centered on a landscape wall. This landscape wall is located at the
center of the pedestrian entry plaza. The canopy enhances the
pedestrian experience by helping define the outdoor space. The
outdoor space becomes a more intimate and inviting pedestrian
friendly environment. The balance between the pedestrian plaza and
canopy is critical to the pedestrian experience and the entry of the
project.
The design clearly supports the following other sections of the Land
Use Code:
4.14[E]{1)(a) Building Orientation. The configuration of shops in the
Community Commercial District shall orient primary ground -floor
commercial building entrances to pedestrian -oriented streets,
connecting walkways, plazas, parks or similar outdoor spaces, not to
interior blocks or parking lots. Anchor tenant retail buildings may have
their primary entrances from off-street parking lots; however, on -street
entrances are strongly encouraged. The lot size and layout pattern for
individual blocks within the Community District shall support this
requirement.
4.14[E]{1](b) Central Feature of Gathering Space. At least one (1)
predominant location within each geographically distinct Community
Commercial District shall include a convenient outdoor open space or
plaza with amenities such as benches, monuments, kiosks, and public
art. These uses may be placed on "civic blocks," and may include
other civic uses or buildings such as libraries, government offices or
public meeting spaces.
b). West Elizabeth Street is intended for classification as a major arterial.
City of Fort Collins Major Arterial Standards require that the edge of
traffic (inclusive of the bike lane) be 53.5' from the center of the
roadway. The engineering department PDP comments require that
the edge of the right-of-way be 57.5' from the center of the roadway.
The signage canopy element in the proposed design extends to the
edge of this right-of-way. This is 4' back from the edge of the
roadway in the major arterial standards. While it does exceed the 5'
projection allowed in section 3.5.3[D][7] of the Land Use Code,
canopy does not encroach into future roadway space. In the proposed
design it is above sidewalk and well away from the road. If West
Elizabeth meets major arterial standards in the future, the signage
canopy will be above a portion of the sidewalk and planting areas
adjacent to the roadway.
to five (5) feet into front setbacks and public rights -of -way, provided that they
are not less than eight (8) feet above the sidewalk. No such improvements
shall encroach into alley rights -of -way." The circular signage canopy in the
proposed design projects ten (10) feet into the building setback. We request a
modification from strict conformance to the building setback requirement
above. The proposed design element in dispute is critical to the use and
success of this project.
Article 2, Division 2.7 of the Land Use Code permits the Planning and Zoning
Board to grant modifications to the General Development Standards of Article
3 for overall development plans and project development plans which are
pending approval at the time that the request for proposed modification is
filed. A modification request may be granted if the Planning and Zoning
Board, as a Type 2 review, determines and finds that the granting of the
modification would neither be detrimental to the public good nor impair the
intent and purposes of the Chapter, and if the applicant demonstrates either:
(A) the granting of the modification would neither be detrimental to the
public good nor impair the intent and purposes of this Land Use Code,
and
(B) that the plan as submitted will advance or protect the public
interests and purposes of the standard for which the modification is
requested equally well or better than would a plan which complies
with the standard for which a modification is requested.
Justification for Modification
The request for modification is based on the criteria in both (A) and (B)
above. The design of this element is not detrimental to the public good nor
does it impair the intent and purposes of this Land Use Code. Additionally,
the proposed design element in dispute advances and protects the public
interests and purposes of the standard for which the modification is requested
equally well than would a plan which complies with the standard for which the
modification is requested. The reasons are as follows:
a). The circular signage canopy structure is designed to clearly announce
the building entry. In the proposed design the main entry to the
building remains in it's existing location, which is not visible when
approaching the building from the west. This canopy is necessary to
announce building entry to pedestrians and motorists travelling east.
The signage canopy is designed to match the diameter of the paved
pedestrian entry below. The bottom of this canopy is 11' above grade.
Justification for the Modification
This request for a modification is based on the criteria stated in both (A) and
(B) above. The entire CMU and brick west facade shown on the elevations is
existing. The proposed design leaves this existing structure in place because
removing or modifying it proves impracticable. Allowing an existing condition
to remain would not be detrimental to the public good, as the condition
currently exists.
The proposed design does in fact improve the existing condition, which
supports the criteria of statement (B) above. While leaving the existing
construction in place, the proposed design addresses this facade in order to
make a more attractive elevation. This is achieved as follows:
a). The proposed design includes new masonry openings for windows.
All masonry openings shown on the west elevation are new.
b). New shade canopies of steel construction are provided at each
masonry opening (window) on the west facade. Aside from their
benefit in providing shade, these canopies provide articulation and
visual interest to the west facade, thus reducing the monotonous
effect of the existing large masonry mass.
c). At the southwest corner of the building, trusses and large entry/shade
canopies over a raised pedestrian space further reduce the monotony
of the existing wall. In addition, these trusses, canopies and the
raised pedestrian space help to identify a building entry.
d). At the northwest corner of the building, a steel truss has been added
for visual interest. This truss integrates with the other new trusses
along the north facade. In doing so, it helps aid the eye in turning the
corner of the building and reduces the effect of the existing
monotonous masonry corner.
e). The steel shade canopies and trusses will be painted a color which
contrasts with the brick and painted CMU facade, providing further
visual interest to the west building elevation.
Request for 2nd Modification
The applicant is also requesting a modification of the building standards of
Article 3, General Development Standards, Division 3.5, Mixed -Use,
Institutional and Commercial Buildings, Section 3.53[D][7] of the Land Use
Code which states "...Trellises, canopies and fabric awnings may project up
Date: 3.22.99
Troy Jones
City Planner
Current Planning Department
City of Fort Collins
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
Re: Brazil 99 Renovation
Amended Modification Requests
Dear Mr. Jones,
Request for 1" modification
The applicant, Mr. Rex Miller, is requesting a modification of the building
standards of Article 3, General Development Standards, Division 3.5, Mixed -
Use, Institutional and Commercial Buildings, Section 3.53[C][1] of the Land
Use Code which states "Horizontal masses shall not exceed a height: width
ratio of 1:3 without substantial variation in massing that includes a change in
height and a projecting or recessed elements". The requested modification
is to allow for existing conditions.
Article 2, Division 2.7 of the Land Use Code permits the Planning and Zoning
Board to grant modifications to the General Development Standards of Article
3 for overall development plans and project development plans which are
pending approval at the time that the request for proposed modification is
filed. A modification request may be granted if the Planning and Zoning
Board, as a Type 2 review, determines and finds that the granting of the
modification would neither be detrimental to the public good nor impair the
intent and purposes of the Chapter, and if the applicant demonstrates either:
(A) the granting of the modification would neither be detrimental to the
public good nor impair the intent and purposes of this Land Use Code,
and
(B) that the plan as submitted will advance or protect the public
interests and purposes of the standard for which the modification is
requested equally well or better than would a plan which complies
with the standard for which a modification is requested.
343 east fourth street
loveland colorado 80537
970.663.0548
fax 970.669.2384
kenney c° associates
architects landscape architects urban designers planners
W
/
A
—CENTERLINE OF WEST
ELIZAESETN AVENUE
— EXISTING EDGE OF M0111
— EXISTING CURD _ ------—
L I Z A B E T H A V E N U C51
- BECApUDLIC SIDEWALK
VITH CAP ��9:��«� e
Plan View
TIgR.
J\nL�
T
�P, O
p
CANOPY //
4
—CURVED SIGN
p.
CANOPY, TYR,
r an
ASPHALT
—SUPPORT POLE
IN LANDSCAPE
WALL
7
MH 1
_
G
d .
d
Brazil 99 Renovation None
Scale 1" = 20'-0"
Easement Study
j
2
NPIM III
-
i
I6_I iL
i
I I L
i
>I
a l
II
I
ul I
ZI
wl
ml
Z. I
QI
NI
91 1
WI
�I
I
31
of
obl
�I
�I
YI
�CI
ul
WI
;I
2I
Cal
LuI i
�-i
ff
�I
i
West
Elevation
Brazil 99 Renovation
Scale 3/32" =1'-0"
Easement Study Section at N.W. Corner of Building
Partial West Elevation - Egress Door Condition
(number & location(s) to be determined)
Brazil 99 Renovation _ ,.
Scale 1" -4, -0
Elevation Study
��ee��� ' k i
1%wnld"'� 11: �.
1325.`-'r.
-' ,.S 3 .
ti
__ a,
-y-
_:
a
��� �t���1�3 ai ��.
t a.®M.0 CM
I a. C♦pN \IMIp
r.r.
res+a a cx rw
WmPLL
GEDAIR SCREEN PENCE
�r1 TRAS^I ENCLOSJRE E_E ✓A-"!OV ,'Wa SOOT-1, EAS- 5 DES
PwuCup.
nW fJn Pwy .O Wip
meat rw,e[i nycvJ.
�^ TRAS1 ENCLOSURE ELE'/ATIOV iNOR-� S CE'
ty. ..' �
4
•P.va..oe
'_
a�
. ��ronm.,o rya
��
cwe�am.
�.--•
ui� -pie " -�_
I
.,.a.,e, � .�.,.,
_
-�
xclm
�
Eno`
_In F�.
m.a�.r,tna>v,.nn�r..,
-•.. w. wa r..n,,...
PANTING DETAIL �^
CESC.OJS -REE PLANTING DETA L t/ %CONi=ER
TREE-LANTING DETAI_
i
E. L i. J "A T r
r � �""�
rn,cp..a, "we .Y.1�1M4
•m an.. ul® �•
R
I
!', / F I� ii C
tw
u�w•
l
I L-'
� f I I
d-
uM1p Wa•.W i
rs rq•.a
4-'•'=
l.wl
rW.
ID "
WL s- °•
i
• •
nuwsu
µ. yi�ry
-
...
-AVG5GA-= \O-ES
m..rcaw.uw ".••w.-l•...t••w
q.•r�e.Yx..�w
_ � -
,W.P.•+�t
wI MIa O!°•4l
wunn.c
B.MOYiaFropr.ppM �
Y
GbMKRM
+.ww•tW'raW m.
7H
ba.�•Wa ��wro.nu
•
wW.� .~icoiPr � a
M YI I,...1 Ycpv.q •NY.
mxra cevnw
°p OI.t.A•
11 L
I
�
�_�
T
�a�O n,nl WO.M�x
w_... J—Y� K"•t
°. �•�w�m es•
\✓��.AFE F_A\
�
tC4E�'.10 .0' �a2 •pRlw
a Ypwxu .n a aQ.rte •mx nac
w.uxawpr_�•wa
- - _i
•wn-eaura'+u-Y
.n •a
•,m
aw u •cwiw
Ufwrt•N1wr�
•. •La m�•notl � _.YYY.o �npcMcaw r q W
61N M�! •
@�I�y`p,
•If I.
aY M�•fPoGl Y®t�
Mt1Y•OYI NaYY mYu o�i•K1.!•n•s
a:lc�msnl nac
° q.i.s�w••CC•m.•..a WMrw
.M M pTM
••n1 M •"awrtr•p•m
mpiq O¢pq M tlR.l IIt p M YpY IIY •
w•m nMwem•W rtimm
ry�NnM O•M�O.
41M p•.•Yi •,CI
�Rl16AnI0A 91llAl�pwl.
� owui
• na.e.v.u..w
•t K+WPM•M
y :lM�O tOY wb.Y11YR
I9t twt wt6wN li rubY.OM
t0 •µq�p-W. ty
� •w�lyarcw..w
Yta NTla
• 44 pw.M WL•+Y n.eY ••t4•d�•-ai
w
oY«+.um4a..Y,...
sNN.O RfM:Y.TW
. •I.1 MtlI1ap M1-nM� I YiWCr.M1.
M1O.tW RMt•W :IiM•�YYOOftDM
MrM M1wtK •m W`L ATp MYdi
M.V 'YA'• VM.tM +,MtW t�Y>ZW
WNIi®M•,II WItI
m Y'_Y:•¢W:t F#M pMvyu•r•a:p l.Lm xM •�•nCwr•a •r ry uie s. y:e
•La•YY
M•IY1•C•O.MC¢RVpaf•� WC.M•D'PYiH
�CtYI •ll•ll••i ♦aYp•fII••.VM•YPOM
tO � utx♦ ��
�"IOY TN.•IpF°IR
••-"•. •�♦aW.
• n.�aP�••ntle•�M.MgWwup•
Y-Y•• � °'�=.+`v-��°•T
a^wa . a •.
MNIKM.,M
Ylpm RYi t0
WOi MLL wH YMO
YYl M tNi
•alYBt•Ii Mt.
n aY1
M �x•�+�It.Tq.4.••�a�o
YpGM.MWt
V.n4 •GICb
o0 /LMW p1W
•--•Y' a �"M •� F`C�vt�a�iu�'�••W
P'�n•°�•�'.MIOY °`'•� �.Cpi�e Mu
♦ 4lliBI
WI LtW •d
Ct p•LRI CAIW
•
.mxu+lr w M
•wr uvk."aM Wnwn
Nr.[RMtW
M xY DWI®ewlMM1pnW
.®It I�M�gY16
IYL Rrt iOT �i.•R••Jf
Y•a-Vp•
•i•t.R. 4OM
Wr•"p0
- YM�YW qY"�� •VM�M"•• p
•Ywr.[t•b •OMtlmawN eo.WCM. WKWI ••V. �awnW u.Yna••Y•
'� r•'
f
r
rEyr ,�` • � - `.-.� l-'/YilObIRICLu. R�Y1A•4i l.A. -
.�.w si FIIzae
PROJECT SUMMARY
Y�.MWIs�. �ru •iw woM iYr
�a oa-�v.wrMMiarG�4M �Na
wegnAec uv
�wfiji a�l yw a..
C0Etl4
.NmxoNim��nwl�n ma ii.
e,tou wre,m.a n.
a+..tuowaer
�rvvry •nx r«CJ1NY.1
��.•�� iuµi.iiiw
;r: a rylgmla IYI
4fp.rP4 p.M 9N1N
�ww n��wd Mlbx L r.
xro •�^.e.e r.a. rr:
_ D�r+ibalwFKa M�a I N,o ri.+M
��ap jIp ywK�tl
ro M1�.�Ewa�W.aM
� Lnuw
.4p•+rgwnr
r� vrown
PIW
MwY6. GWi. Mi ...
Ia>Ilrtcn.iu nw.*�Da
rYMm rDDlrw
rwen.eD mrow a.+.�
`l •-I�YVOw ITT
xV1Tb.Gp'KF
�� LIlAD P/'[W CLVn�xO. e
\'{pM Y.yrVn1I.4 6[v�rq
1 i' 1TC
. IMfI.W . l J" 7 1- —
7-77
ENLARGED 5 TE PAN,
5 Tr- NOTIM
r nalmrwx.l¢Ilr ecve.Iw xlMx va
YMi YL w rw r.Yan.
.. IIw w w nlmww Yr.wm..I>o. n
PYIf WT KVIY IarW M. .IMi Ym.
P MV PV'yV[r
•. �A.r�tl ci �rai+i�iP'i��
• rlw aw wnK KYr.rYN raumwv.
w..
M FVCrtR Y YpfYD I�'«QM ��
V riw>YO.iOr4ATm pIf>}W
i fy1YDft• iD MYi WIwI.L M1.i1mn
YD WMI+RLP. 6li.f'd. MM Prl. Yp
.blKi iM p V1v1110V.
. fal✓CfQ. fD rq1' 4\ YlD CwprtlnLL
�w�. rnorfmn �wfrc rwa. io
.i �w�iw�oYnY win r.i�
meant. Wml.iu+
• 'm• JiM YWGY�rWAI OI.WO YP
i YY. A.i1R.LN.iP1 V f0 Y Ni'W FV
ry 1W Wlln pain N.ilw.
M1.1NGtYl PG.PIm!
�ZlVm GrYI WlY1. V wry
mfdM�Ym MOY wi D..C�Y x nE
Wll@1 -
G.
Mr
VYNeBfYi 6VQlrt. IwN.mw
[KYWK y1 Y.x�Ym q..r L.Yi
PI MY YT1 P1Tfl'G1P
fOarVG11w
• r.mY W W �m M pYx wI{LYY
b1fMM.YilIP.tYYi W'IV.
M M 4iBW.nK iY NW rurt Y YI lD
.III MI N'/d YYI IIOr l�. gWtlq�
4fr.wp �. RA1WRfDY11N f.'
x itlOf fll.ry .WFYIeWrPgY
01.4'6 Q.<Pr.Di® �Yw.wY
wMor�.�• rtO�CrW [IYw
YEiI T � T4K
• 4l NiP41 rDYDN4lmdpl.Mr. IY
M�DIGYV.D d M. tuiLL tMRL M x
fo.WMi IhiMl!
N� mU IR'Y iD Y.1NM rtYr�.Ce W r W
x VfpN�YWL Kdr.D Id/IMV.
Cr M14iW 1Yl
Y�4.Yoi �V.10 uK Ya'v �.
iD Y fail® uM r IY!aurE
+m �wwYcil n.m.
VICIwrr�^HAw
Y....... rlY..inv
No Text
lw
Brazil 99 Renovation (Campus West Theatre) - Project Development Plan,
#45-98
April 15, 1999 P & Z Hearing
Page 11
rights -of -way, provided that they are not less than eight feet above the
sidewalk,"
• Section 3.5.3(D)(6) of the LUC which states that all facades must have
a "base" and "top" treatment.
3. Staff recommends approval of the Brazil 99 Renovation (Campus West
Theatre) - Project Development Plan, #45-98.
Brazil 99 Renovation (Campus West Theatre) - Project Development Plan,
#45-98
April 15, 1999 P & Z Hearing
Page 10
These additional architectural features will address the purpose of the
requirement which was to promote human scale building design by
discouraging long, uninteresting, blank walls and encourage visual variety on
all facades. The existing wall is located five feet from the west property line.
Requiring a variation in massing while maintaining setback requirements
would translate into at least a partial demolition of this existing wall, which
would render the project practically infeasible.
6. The second request for modification is to Section 3.5.3(D)(7) of the LUC
which states, "...trellises, canopies and fabric awnings may project up to 5
feet into front setbacks and public rights -of -way, provided that they are not
less than eight feet above the sidewalk." Staff feels that this modification
request accomplishes equally well the purposes of Section 3.5.3 Mixed -Use,
Institutional and Commercial Buildings than would a plan that complies with
the standard because the applicant has provided a creative alternative (an
open ring circular signage canopy designed to announce the main entry, and
to match the diameter of the paved pedestrian entry below) to the standard
while satisfying the purpose of the requirement.
7. The third request for modification is to Section 3,5.3(D)(6) of the LUC which
states that all facades must have a "base" and "top" treatment. Staff feels that
this modification request accomplishes equally well the purposes of Section
3.5.3 Mixed -Use, Institutional and Commercial Buildings than would a plan
that complies with the standard because the applicant has provided a creative
alternative (aesthetic steel trusses and partial base and top treatments) to
having complete base and top treatments all facades.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Staff recommends approval of the alternative compliance requests for
Sections 3.2.1(D)(1)(c) full tree stocking, and 3.2.1(E)(2)(d) Foundation
Plantings.
2. Staff recommends approval of all of the following modification requests:
• Section 3.5.3(C)(1) of the LUC which states, "Horizontal masses shall
not exceed a height : width ratio of 1:3 without substantial variation in
massing,"
• Section 3.5.3(D)(7) of the LUC which states, "trellises, canopies and
fabric awnings may project up to 5 feet into front setbacks and public
Brazil 99 Renovation (Campus West Theatre) - Project Development Plan,
#45-98
April 15, 1999 P & Z Hearing
Page 8
specifies that as long as the modification would result in the
project addressing the purposes of the standard equally well or
better than a plan that complies with the standard, a
modification can be granted by the Planning and Zoning Board.
This modification request accomplishes equally well the
purposes of Section 3 5.3 Mixed -Use Institutional and
Commercial Buildings than would a plan that complies with the
standard. Staff feels that the proposed design addresses the
purpose of the standard equally well as a design that complies
with the standard because the applicant has provided a creative
alternative (aesthetic steel trusses and partial base and top
treatments) to having complete base and top treatments all
facades.
• Encroachments - The applicant is seeking a modification to the
standards for the requirement that no awning or canopy may
project more than five feet into front setbacks. The applicant
wants to have a canopy sign that projects ten feet into the front
setback. As stated in 3.5.3[A] of the LUC, the purpose for this
section is 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."
Section 2.8.3 of the LUC specifies that as long as the
modification would result in the project addressing the purposes
of the standard equally well or better than a plan that complies
with the standard, a modification can be granted by the Planning
and Zoning Board. This modification request accomplishes
equally well the purposes of Section 3.5.3 Mixed -Use.
Institutional and Commercial Buildings than would a plan that
complies with the standard. Staff feels that the proposed design
addresses the purpose of the standard equally well as a design
that complies with the standard because the applicant has
provided a creative alternative (an open ring circular signage
canopy designed to announce the main entry, and to match the
diameter of the paved pedestrian entry below) to the standard
While satisfying the purpose of the requirement.
h. Master Street Plan
• The Master Street Plan identifies West Elizabeth Street as a 4
lane arterial, and City Park Avenue a local street. The PDP
Brazil 99 Renovation (Campus West Theatre) - Project Development Plan,
#45-98
April 15, 1999 P & Z Hearing
Page 7
g. Mixed -Use, Institutional and Commercial Buildings
• Relationship of Buildings to Streets, Walkways and Parking -
The building has a primary entrances oriented to the adjacent
pedestrian oriented street, and also to a connecting sidewalk,
thereby satisfying the pedestrian frontage requirements. The
proposed PDP also satisfies the build -to line requirements.
• Variation in Massing — The PDP satisfies this requirement
except for on the west facade. The applicant is requesting a
modification to the Variation in Massing standard for the west
facade. As stated in 3.5.3[A] of the LUC, the purpose for this
section is to "promote the design of an urban environment that
is built to human scale." Section 2.8.3 of the LUC specifies that
as long as the modification would result in the project
addressing the purposes of the standard equally well or better
than a plan that complies with the standard, a modification can
be granted by the Planning and Zoning Board. This
modification request accomplishes equally well the purposes of
Section 3.5.3 Mixed -Use Institutional and Commercial Buildings
than would a plan that complies with the standard and strict
application of the standard would render the project infeasible.
The proposed design leaves this existing structure in place.
The applicant does however intend to add architectural features
(new masonry openings for windows, new shade canopies, and
aesthetic steel trusses). These additional architectural features
will address the purpose of the requirement which was to
promote human scale building design by discouraging long,
uninteresting, blank walls and encourage visual variety on all
facades. The existing wall is located five feet from the west
property line. Requiring a variation in massing while
maintaining setback requirements would translate into at least a
partial demolition of this existing wall, which would render the
project practically infeasible.
• Base and top treatments — The applicant is seeking a
modification to the standards for the requirement that there be
base and top treatments on all portions of all facades. The
purpose behind the base and top treatment requirements are to
ensure that new development provides attractive, human scaled
and visually pleasing buildings. Section 2.8.3 of the LUC
Brazil 99 Renovation (Campus West Theatre) - Project Development Plan,
#45-98
April 15, 1999 P & Z Hearing
Page 6
• Parking Lot Layout - Allowed parking was calculated based on
50% of the building being a standard restaurant (10/1000 s.f.
max) and the other 50% of the building being general retail
(4/1000 s.f. max). Using these standards, 156 spaces would be
allowed. 85 spaces are being provided. This PDP meets the
handicap parking and parking stall dimension requirements.
Because of the size of the parking area, a minimum of 6% of the
interior parking lot space must be devoted to landscaping. The
PDP exceeds this requirement.
C. Site Lighting
• The PDP complies with the site lighting requirements that limit
the maximum on -site lighting levels to no more than 10 foot
candles except for loading and unloading areas and limit the
levels measured 20 feet beyond the property line to a maximum
of 0.1 foot candle.
d. Historic and Cultural Resources
• There are no historic sites or structures within the limits of the
PDP, or on adjacent or nearby sites that are eligible for historic
recognition.
e. Natural Habitats and Features
• There are no natural habitats and features on this site.
f. Building and Project Compatibility
The PDP substantially improves the existing condition of the
building currently known as the Campus West Theater with
regard to architectural detailing, scale, and proportions of the
building.
• The proposed building would also improve the character of the
Campus West neighborhood and is therefore considered
compatible with its surroundings.
• All rooftop mechanical equipment is located below the parapet,
and is therefore out of view.
Brazil 99 Renovation (Campus West Theatre) - Project Development Plan,
#45-98
April 15, 1999 P & Z Hearing
Page 5
access, or demonstrates innovative design and use of plant
materials and other landscape elements." Staff feels that these
review criteria have been met to the maximum extent possible
given the existing site constraints.
• All other issues in this Section (including street tree planting, full
tree stocking for the remainder of the site, minimum species
diversity, tree species and minimum sizes, buffering between
incompatible uses and activities, landscape area treatment,
foundation plantings for the remainder of the site, water
conservation, parking lot perimeter landscaping, parking lot
interior landscaping, screening, tree protection and
replacement, placement of required landscape elements,
maintenance and replacement of landscape materials, irrigation,
utility coordination, visual clearance / sight distance triangle, and
revegetation) have been adequately addressed.
b. Access, Circulation and Parking
• Safety Considerations - The parking and circulation system will
accommodate the movement of vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians
and transit safely and conveniently throughout the site and to
and from surrounding areas. A transit stop is placed on site in
the north-west corner of the site.
• Curbcuts and Ramps —Adequate curbcuts and ramps have
been provided at convenient, safe locations for the physically
disables, for bicyclists and for people pushing strollers or carts.
• Bicycle parking is provided close to entries and exceeds the
required number of spaces (5% of the 855 spaces provided for
automobile parking).
• Walkways - The onsite pedestrian system provides directness,
continuity and safety. Driveway pedestrian crossings are
adequately enhanced to ensure the recognition of the
pedestrian way.
• Access and Parking Lot Requirements — The vehicular use
areas are adequately safe, convenient, and attractive for all
modes of transportation that will use the system, including cars,
trucks, busses, bicycles, pedestrians, and emergency vehicles.
Brazil 99 Renovation (Campus West Theatre) - Project Development Plan,
#45-98
April 15, 1999 P & Z Hearing
Page 4
has reasoned that the alternative compliance request better
accomplishes the purpose of Section 3.2.1 Landscaping and
Tree Protection than would a plan that complies with the
standard. The west fagade is an existing exterior building wall,
and is located five feet from the west property line. A five foot
sidewalk is required by staff to be located in the five foot area
between the building wall and the property line, therefore "full
tree stocking" in that area is impossible. As part of the
alternative compliance review criteria specified in 3.2.1(N)(2) for
this section of the LUC, the P&Z Board "shall take into account
whether the alternative preserves and incorporates existing
vegetation in excess of minimum standards, protects natural
areas and features, maximizes tree canopy cover, enhances
access, or demonstrates innovative design and use of plant
materials and other landscape elements." Staff feels that these
review criteria have been met to the maximum extent possible
given the existing site constraints.
• The applicant is seeking alternative compliance to "foundation
plantings" requirement as specified in Section 3.2.1(E)(2)(d) for
the area between the building and the west property line. As
specified in 3.2.1(B), the purpose of this section is to "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." Because compliance with this standard in
this location is impossible given existing site constraints, staff
has reasoned that the alternative compliance request better
accomplishes the purpose of Section 3.2.1 Landscaping and
Tree Protection than would a plan that complies with the
standard. The west fagade is an existing exterior building wall,
and is located five feet from the west property line. A five foot
sidewalk is required by staff to be located in the five foot area
between the building wall and the property line, "foundation
plantings" in that area are impossible. As part of the alternative
compliance review criteria specified in 3.2.1(N)(2) for this
section of the LUC, the P&Z Board "shall take into account
whether the alternative preserves and incorporates existing
vegetation in excess of minimum standards, protects natural
areas and features, maximizes tree canopy cover, enhances
Brazil 99 Renovation (Campus West Theatre) - Project Development Plan,
#45-98
April 15, 1999 P & Z Hearing
Page 3
The CC zone district requires 4 block types:
• Mixed Use Blocks
• Office Blocks
• Residential Blocks
• Civic Blocks
The major block types in the surrounding area are Mixed Use,
Civic, and Residential. In the immediate vicinity, there are no
blocks that meet the definitions of office blocks. In fact, given that
the maximum block size for any of the 4 required blocks is 7 acres,
there are no definable blocks in this area (maximum sizes are
mixed use block — 7 acres; office, residential and civic blocks — 4
acres). Assuming block definitions could be met, this project would
contribute to a mixed -use block that includes the commercial uses
adjacent to the site along West Elizabeth Avenue. Adjacent blocks
would include a mixed -use block across Elizabeth Street, a civic
block directly south of the site, and residential block southwest of
the project.
4. Article 3 of the Land Use Code — General Development Standards
The applicant is requesting alternative compliance on two issues, and is seeking
a modification to the standards on three issues, which in turn pushes the project
to a type 2 review, bringing it to the Planning and Zoning Board. The Project
Development Plan complies with all applicable General Development Standards
as follows:
a. Landscaping and Tree Protection
• The applicant is seeking alternative compliance to the "full tree
stocking" requirement as specified in Section 3.2.1(D)(1)(c) for
the area between the building and the west property line. As
specified in 3.2.1(B), the purpose of this section is to "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." Because compliance with this standard in
this location is impossible given existing site constraints, staff
Brazil 99 Renovation (Campus West Theatre) - Project Development Plan,
#45-98
April 15, 1999 P & Z Hearing
Page 2
COMMENTS:
1.. Background
The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
N: CC; West Elizabeth Avenue, Campus West 2"d filing (restaurants
& retail), Town Square PUD (restaurants & retail),
S: CC; John XXII University Center (church and church owned
vacant land), One single family residence
E: CC; Campus West Subdivision 2"d filing, John XXII University
Center (church)
W: CC; City Park Avenue, gas station, 11�h Fairview filing (restaurant
& retail)
The property was annexed in June, 1964 as part of the Tenth South Shields
Street Annexation.
2. Division 4.14 of the Land Use Code, CC — Community Commercial Zone
District
The proposed uses of retail establishments and restaurants are permitted in the
CC zone district subject to administrative review.
The PDP meets the applicable Development Standards in section 4.14(E) of the
LUC as follows:
a. Site Planning
• Building Orientation — This requirement is satisfied because the
primary ground floor commercial building entrance faces West
Elizabeth Avenue which is a pedestrian -oriented street.
• Integration of the Transit Stop — This requirement is satisfied
because there is a transit stop provided on the north-west
corner of the property along West Elizabeth avenue.
b. Block Requirements — This criteria allows that if a development is
smaller than 10 acres, the development plan must demonstrate
how it contributes to the overall mix of block types within the
development.
ITEM NO. 3
`� 4/15 99
` MEETING DATE
STAFF Troy Jones
City of Fort Collins PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD
STAFF REPORT
PROJECT: Brazil 99 Renovation - (Campus West Theatre) - Project
Development Plan, #45-98
APPLICANT: Jim Birdsall
Kenny Associates Architects
343 East 4th Street
Loveland, CO 80537
OWNER: A & E Enterprises L.L.C.
4021 Spruce Drive
Fort Collins, CO 80526
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This is a request for a Project Development Plan to renovate an existing movie
theater into a mixed use 50% retail and 50% office building. The building has a
15,257 s.f. building footprint, and a total of 22,257 s.f. of floor area. The property
is zoned CC — Community Commercial.
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Retail establishments and restaurants are permitted in the CC zoning district.
The PDP complies with the District Standards contained in Section 4.14 of the
Land Use Code (the CC — Community Commercial zone district) and Article 3 of
the Land Use Code (the General Development Standards) except where two
request are made for alternative compliance and except where three requests
are made for modifications.
COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. P.O. Box580 Fort Collins, CO80522-0580 (970)221-6750
PLANNING DEPARTMENT