Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRIVER DISTRICT BLOCK 8 MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT (OLD ELK DISTILLERY - PDP - PDP140016 - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSAttachment 7 IV. CONCLUSIONS This study assessed the impacts of the Old Elk Distillery on the street system in the vicinity of the proposed development in the short range (2016) future. As a result of this analysis, the following is concluded: - The development of the Old Elk Distillery is feasible from a traffic engineering standpoint. At full development, the Old Elk Distillery will generate approximately 1,322 daily trip ends, 63 morning peak hour trip ends, and 132 afternoon peak hour trip ends. - Current operation at the Lincoln/Willow and Willow/Linden intersections is acceptable. - The Lincoln/Willow and Willow/Linden intersections will not meet peak hour signal warrants and do not meet the signal spacing criteria and will not be signalized. - In the short range (2016) future, given development of Old Elk Distillery and an increase in background traffic, the Lincoln/Willow and Willow/Linden intersections will operate acceptably with existing control and the existing and future geometry. - The short range (2016) geometry is shown in Figure 9. - Acceptable level of service is achieved for bicycle and transit modes based upon the measures in the multi -modal transportation guidelines. For pedestrians continuity factor could not achieve the desired level of service for a "pedestrian district' for one pedestrian destination. As the area redevelops, this deficiency will be corrected. This area of Fort Collins was built prior to the current LCUASS Document being adopted. —// LDELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 -71 [-ASSOCIATES Page 19 Attachment 7 There are a number of bus routes (5, 8, 14, and 81) within one block of the Old Elk Distillery site. The Downtown Transit Center (MAX and many additional bus routes) is 3-4 blocks from the Old Elk Distillery site. Bicycle parking facilities will be provided at the Old Elk Distillery site. Pedestrian Level of Service There are/will be sidewalks to the southwest (to Old Town) and to the northeast (Poudre Trail). Sidewalks will be constructed related to the Feeder Supply Project. Sidewalks will be constructed along Willow Street adjacent to this site. Appendix F shows a map of the area that is within 1320 feet of the Old Elk Distillery development. There are three pedestrian destinations within 1320 feet of the Old Elk Distillery development. These are: 1) the commercial/industrial area to the southwest; 2) the Poudre Trail to the northeast; and 3) the industrial/recreational area to the northwest. The Old Elk Distillery site is located within an area termed as "pedestrian district," which sets the level of service threshold at LOS A for all measured categories, except for street crossings which is LOS B. Pedestrian level of service is not achieved for all pedestrian destinations with regard to continuity for one pedestrian destination. The continuity gap is along Willow Street, northwest of Linden Street. As the area redevelops, this deficiency will be corrected. The Pedestrian LOS Worksheet is provided in Appendix H. The practical limits of pedestrian improvements would be on the Old Elk Distillery site itself. Bicycle Level of Service Appendix F shows a map of the area that is within 1320 feet of the Old Elk Distillery development. There is one bicycle destination within 1320 feet of the Old Elk Distillery development. This is the Poudre Trail to the northeast. The Bicycle LOS Worksheet is provided in Appendix H. The minimum level of service for this site is B. This site is connected to bike lanes on Linden Street. Therefore, it is concluded that level of service B can be achieved. Transit Level of Service This area of Fort Collins is served by Transfort Routes 5, 8, 14 and 81. Routes 5 and 14 run along Jefferson Street and have bus stops near the Jefferson/Linden intersection. Routes 8 and 81 run along Willow Street and Linden Street and have bus stops near the Willow/Linden intersection. LDELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 -7,1 [—ASSOCIATES Page 18 Attachment 7 TABLE 3 Short Range (2016) Background Peak Hour Operation Intersection Movement Level of Service AM PM Lincoln/Willow (Stop Sign)(Existing Geometry) SEB LT/RT B D NEB LTIT A A Lincoln/Willow (Stop Sign) (Lincoln Corridor Plan Geometry) SEB LT B C SEB RT A B SEB APPROACH B C NEB LT A A Willow/Linden (All -Way Stop) SEB LT/T/RT B B NWB LT/T/RT A B NEB LT/T/RT A B SWB LT/T/RT A B TABLE 4 Short Range (2016) Total Peak Hour Operation Intersection Movement Level of Service AM PM Lincoln/Willow (Stop Sign)(Existing Geometry) SEB LT/RT B D NEB LT/T A A Lincoln/Willow (Stop Sign) (Lincoln Corridor Plan Geometry) SEB LT B A B C SEB RT B SEB APPROACH C NEB LT A A Willow/Linden (All -Way Stop) SEB LT/T/RT B B NWB LT/T/RT A B NEB LT/T/RT A B SWB LT/T/RT B B -// L--DELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 -7.# r-ASSOCIATES Page 17 Attachment 7 N - Denotes Lane - Lincoln Corridor Plan Geometry SHORT RANGE (2016) GEOMETRY Figure 9 --/I L—DELICH Old Elk DistilleryTIS, October 2014 -71 (—ASSOCIATES Page 16 Attachment 7 Geometry Figure 9 shows a schematic of the short range (2016) geometry. According to the Lincoln Corridor Plan, the Lincoln/Willow intersection will have separate left -turn and right - turn lanes on Willow Street and Lincoln Avenue will have an eastbound left -turn lane, a through lane in each direction, and a westbound right -turn lane. Since it is not known when this will occur, the short range analysis was conducted with the existing geometry and the Lincoln Corridor Plan Geometry. Operation Analysis Capacity analyses were performed at the Lincoln/Willow and Willow/Linden intersections. The operations analyses were conducted for the short range future, reflecting year 2016 conditions. Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 6, the Lincoln/Willow and Willow/Linden intersections operate in the short range (2016) background condition as indicated in Table 3. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix D. The key intersections will operate acceptably with both the existing geometry and future geometry. Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 8, the Lincoln/Willow and Willow/Linden intersections operate in the short range (2016) total traffic future as indicated in Table 4. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix E. The key intersections will operate acceptably with both the existing geometry and future geometry. Parking The site plan shows that off-street parking will not be provided for either employees or visitors/customers. However, parking for trucks, related to the shipping/receiving of product and materials, will be provided at the east end of the building. The trucks will enter from Willow Street and exit via an "alley" to Lincoln Avenue. The exiting trucks will make a right turn on Lincoln Avenue to reach the Jefferson-Riverside/Lincoln-Mountain signalized intersection. Employees, who drive personal vehicles to/from work, will park at available on - street spaces or in public parking lots in the area. There are two City operated parking garages within 3-4 blocks of the Old Elk Distillery site. There are time parking limits along many streets in this area of Fort Collins. It is likely that the two parking garages will be utilized by many employees. Visitors and customers are expected to utilize the available on -street parking in the area, since they will generally not require long term (more than 2 hours) parking. The on - street parking is utilized for other similar land uses in this area of Fort Collins. While the implementation schedule is not known, there are plans to introduce considerable on -street parking on Willow Street in the future. —//' DELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 -71 [—ASSOCIATES Page 15 Attachment 7 SHORT RANGE (2016) TOTAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC --// LDELICH -71 [—ASSOCIATES f AM/PM Figure 8 Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 Page 14 Attachment 7 SITE GENERATED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC _—// L—DELICH —71 [—ASSOCIATES N f AM/PM Figure 7 Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 Page 13 Attachment 7 N f- AM/PM SHORT RANGE (2016) BACKGROUND PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 6 --// I—DELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 -7,1 [—ASSOCIATES Page 12 Attachment 7 COO 4( M TRIP DISTRIBUTION _--11L—DELICH -71 [—ASSOCIATES N Figure 5 Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 Page 11 Attachment 7 facilities would not be used on a daily basis. It is expected that parking for the events would occur at available on -street spaces or in the parking garages. Due to the infrequency of events at the Old Elk Distillery, rigorous analyses of the key intersections were not conducted at event times. Given the location of this site and nature of the parking in the area, the traffic impacts of an event would be spread over a large area (a number of square blocks). Specific impacts to key intersections are difficult to determine and evaluate. Trip Distribution Trip distribution for the Old Elk Distillery development was based on existing/future travel patterns, land uses in the area, consideration of trip attractions/productions in the area, and engineering judgment. Figure 5 shows the trip distribution for the short range (2016) analysis future. The trip distribution was agreed to by City of Fort Collins staff in the scoping discussions. Background Traffic Projections Figure 6 shows the short range (2016) background traffic projections. Background traffic projections for the short range future horizon were obtained by reviewing the North Front Range Regional Transportation Plan and traffic studies prepared for this area of Fort Collins. The other traffic studies in this area are Feeder Supply and Block One. Based upon these sources, it was determined that traffic volumes would increase by approximately 4% per year in the short range future. The Feeder Supply and Block One traffic was added to determine the background volumes. 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 site generated peak hour traffic assignment of the Old Elk Distillery site. Figure 8 shows the short range (2016) total (site plus background) peak hour traffic assignment. 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. The Lincoln/Willow and Willow/Linden stop sign control intersections will not meet peak hour signal warrants and do not meet the signal spacing criteria. Therefore, they will not be signalized. —/I LDELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 -7 1 [—ASSOCIATES Page 10 Attachment 7 L LP"N STREET c � s .I n p i l Y I I � i I I 6 I � 8 I 0�� JO li F I I / SITE PLAN Figure 4 _—.// L—DELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 %,1 rASSOCIATES Page 9 Attachment 7 III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The Old Elk Distillery development consists of a 34,640 square foot distillery, a 5,939 square foot restaurant, an 11,694 square foot corporate office, a 3,593 square foot retail component, and a 14,975 square foot event venue. Figure 4 shows a site plan of the Old Elk Distillery. The short range analysis (Year 2016) includes full development of the Old Elk Distillery and an appropriate increase in background traffic due to normal growth and other potential developments in the area. The site plan shows that trucks/service vehicles will have an access to Willow Street. Trip Generation Trip generation is important in considering the impact of a development such as this upon the existing and proposed street system. Light Industrial (Code 110), High -Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurant (Code 932), Corporate Office (Code 714), and Specialty Retail (814) in Trip Generation, 9th Edition, ITE were used to estimate the trips that would be generated by the proposed Old Elk Distillery development. A trip is defined as a one-way vehicle movement from origin to destination. The calculated trip generation is 1322 daily trip ends; 63 morning peak hour trip ends; and 132 afternoon peak hour trip ends. Table 2 shows the expected trip generation on a daily and peak hour basis. TABLE 2 Trip Generation Code Use Size AWDTE AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour nab Taps Rate In Rats Out Rao In Raft Out 110 Light Industrial 34.64 KSF 6.97 242 0.81 28 0.11 4 0.12 4 0.85 29 932 Restaurant 5.939 KSF 127.15 756 5.91 35 3.94 23 714 Corporate Office 11.694 KSF 7.98 94 1.41 17 0.11 1 0.14 2 1.27 15 814 1 Retail 3.593 KSF 64.03 230 2.59 9 1.22 4 3.41 12 3.41 12 Total 1322 1 1 54 1 9 1 53 79 * Not Open Event Venue There is a banquet room and a number of private dining rooms within the Old Elk Distillery building. The largest number of event guests would be 250, however, an event of this size would not be frequent. Events would generally occur on weekends (wedding receptions or similar activity), which would not impact the conventional weekday peak hours of the street. Some events could occur on weekday evenings, which could impact a portion of the afternoon peak hour of the street. The end of this type of event would not impact the peak hour of the street. The private dining rooms have limited seating and would not be used on a regular basis. There are conference rooms on the second floor which are designed to accommodate 136 people. These -J- LDELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 -7,f [—ASSOCIATES Page 8 Attachment 7 TABLE 1 Current Peak Hour Operation Intersection Movement Level of Service AM PM Lincoln/Willow (Stop Sign) SEB LT/RT B C NEB LT/T A A Willow/Linden (All -Way Stop) SEB LT/T/RT A A NWB LT/T/RT A B NEB LT/T/RT A A SWB LT/T/RT A A -/I' DELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 -7 ,1 [—ASSOCIATES Page 7 Attachment 7 Existing Operation The Lincoln/Willow and Willow/Linden intersections were evaluated using techniques provided in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual. Using the morning and afternoon peak hour traffic shown in Figure 3, the peak hour operation is shown in Table 1. Calculation forms are provided in Appendix C. The key intersections are currently operating acceptably with existing control and geometry in the morning and afternoon peak hours. A description of level of service for unsignalized intersections from the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual and a table showing the Fort Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standards (Intersections) are also provided in Appendix C. This site is in an area termed "mixed use district." In areas termed "mixed use district," acceptable overall operation at stop sign controlled intersections, acceptable level of service level of service F for any approach leg at arterial/collector intersection. In urban and urbanizing corridors, delays commensurate with level of service E and F are typical for minor street left -turns at stop sign controlled intersections along arterial streets during the peak hours. These delays are generally accepted by the traveling public. Pedestrian Facilities There are sidewalks along Linden Street and portions of Lincoln Avenue. There is no sidewalk along the Willow Street. The Poudre Trail is to the northeast of the Old Elk Distillery site. Bicycle Facilities Bicycle lanes exist along Lincoln Avenue and Linden Street. The Poudre Trail is to the northeast of the Old Elk Distillery site. Transit Facilities Currently, this area of Fort Collins is served by Transfort Routes 5, 8, 14 and 81. Routes 5 and 14 run along Jefferson Street and have bus stops near the Jefferson/Linden intersection. Routes 8 and 81 run along Willow Street and Linden Street and have bus stops near the Willow/Linden intersection. --/y t—DELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 -7 1 [—ASSOCIATES Page 6 Attachment 7 RECENT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC _—Ili --DELICH -71 FASSOCIATES N � - Denotes Lane Figure 3 Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 Page 5 Attachment 7 EXISTING GEOMETRY —// I--DELICH —7 1 [—ASSOCIATES A& N do - Denotes Lane Figure 2 Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 Page 4 Attachment 7 Old E I k Distillery :3 `s ,Coln venue Q ���� Lino A m 0 U Mountain Avenue SCALE: 1 "=500' SITE LOCATION _—// t—DELICH —71 [—ASSOCIATES Figure 1 Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 Page 3 Attachment 7 II. EXISTING CONDITIONS The location of the Old Elk Distillery development is shown in Figure 1. It is important that a thorough understanding of the existing conditions be presented. Land Use Land uses in the area are primarily industrial and commercial. There are industrial uses to the south, east, and north of the site. There are commercial uses to the south of the site. The proposed Old Elk Distillery site is currently vacant. The center of Fort Collins lies to the south of the proposed Old Elk Distillery development site. Streets The primary streets near the Old Elk Distillery site are Lincoln Avenue, Linden Street, and Willow Street. Figure 2 shows a schematic of the existing geometry at the key intersections. Lincoln Avenue is southeast of the Old Elk Distillery site. It is an east -west street classified as a two-lane arterial on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. Currently, Lincoln Avenue has a two-lane cross section. At the Lincoln/Willow intersection, Lincoln Avenue has all movements combined into a single lane. The Lincoln/Willow intersection has stop sign control on Willow Street. The posted speed limit in this area of Lincoln Avenue is 35 mph. Willow Street is northeast of (adjacent to) the Old Elk Distillery site. It is a northwest -southeast street classified as a two-lane collector on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. Currently, Willow Street has a two-lane cross section. At the Lincoln/Willow intersection, Willow Street has all movements combined into a single lane. At the Willow/Linden intersection, Willow Street has all movements combined into a single lane. The Willow/Linden intersection has all -way stop sign control. The posted speed limit in this area of Willow Street is 25 mph. Linden Street is northwest of (adjacent to) the Old Elk Distillery site. It is a northeast -southwest street classified as a two-lane collector street on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. Currently, Linden Street has a two-lane cross section. At the Willow/Linden intersection, Linden Street has all movements combined into the single lane. The posted speed limit in this area of Linden Street is 25 mph. Existing Traffic Recent morning and afternoon peak hour traffic volumes are shown in Figure 3. The traffic counts at the Lincoln/Willow and Willow/Linden intersections were obtained in September 2014. Raw traffic count data are provided in Appendix B. —41LDELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 -7,1 [—ASSOCIATES Page 2 Attachment 7 I. INTRODUCTION This transportation impact study (TIS) addresses the capacity, geometric, and control requirements at and near the proposed Old Elk Distillery development. The proposed Old Elk Distillery site is located in the southeast quadrant of the Linden/Willow intersection in Fort Collins, Colorado. During the course of the analysis, numerous contacts were made with the project developer (Blue Ocean), the project architect (Oz Architecture), the project planning consultant (Ripley Design), and Fort Collins Traffic Engineering. The Transportation Impact Study Base Assumptions form and related documents are provided in Appendix A. This study generally conforms to the format set forth in the Fort Collins TIS Guidelines in the "Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards" (LCUASS). Due to the trip generation, this is an intermediate transportation impact study. 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; - Conduct capacity and operational level of service analyses on key intersections; - Analyze signal warrants; - Conduct level of service evaluation of pedestrian, bicycle, and transit modes of transportation —/,( '—DELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 -7i r-ASSOCIATES Page 1 Attachment 7 LIST OF FIGURES 1. Site Location.............................................................................................................3 2. Existing Geometry .....................................................................................................4 3. Recent Peak Hour Traffic.......................................................................................... 5 4. Site Plan....................................................................................................................9 5. Trip Distribution.......................................................................................................11 6. Short Range (2016) Background Peak Hour Traffic................................................12 7. Site Generated Peak Hour Traffic...........................................................................13 8. Short Range (2016) Total Peak Hour Traffic...........................................................14 9. Short Range (2016) Geometry ................................................................................16 APPENDICES A. Base Assumptions Form B. Peak Hour Traffic Counts C. Current Peak Hour Operation/Level of Service Descriptions/Fort Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standards (Intersections) D. Short Range (2016) Background Peak Hour Operation E. Short Range (2016) Total Peak Hour Operation F. Pedestrian/Bicycle Level of Service Worksheets —// LDELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 -71 rASSOCIATES Attachment 7 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................1 II. EXISTING CONDITIONS..........................................................................................2 LandUse.........................................................................................................................2 Streets............................................................................................................................. 2 ExistingTraffic.................................................................................................................2 ExistingOperation........................................................................................................... 6 PederstrianFacilities.......................................................................................................6 BicycleFacilities..............................................................................................................6 TransitFacilities.............................................................................................................. 6 III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT................................................................................. 8 TripGeneration............................................................................................................... 8 EventVenue.................................................................................................................... 8 TripDistribution.............................................................................................................10 Background Traffic Projections.....................................................................................10 TripAssignment............................................................................................................10 SignalWarrants.............................................................................................................10 Geometry......................................................................................................................15 OperationAnalysis........................................................................................................15 Parking..........................................................................................................................15 Pedestrian Level of Service........................................................................................... 18 BicycleLevel of Service................................................................................................ 18 Transit Level of Service................................................................................................. 18 IV. CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................................... 19 LIST OF TABLES 1. Current Peak Hour Operation.................................................................................... 7 2. Trip Generation......................................................................................................... 8 3. Short Range (2016) Background Peak Hour Operation..........................................17 4. Short Range (2016) Total Peak Hour Operation..................................................... 17 —// LDELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS, October 2014 -7,f I=ASSOCIATES Attachment 7 RIVER DISTRICT BLOCK 8 MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT (OLD ELK DISTILLERY) TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY FORT COLLINS. COLORADO OCTOBER 2014 Prepared for: Blue Ocean Enterprises, Inc. 401 Mountain Avenue, Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80521 Prepared by: DELICH ASSOCIATES 2272 Glen Haven Drive Loveland. CO 80538 Phone:970-669-2061 FAX: 970-669-5034 Project # 1470 Lincoln Corridor Preferred Alternative - Lincoln Bridge 00 ryl CAUlnS levation Lincoo Corridor Plan a- Lincoln Corridor Preferred Alternative - West Segment 'Enhpncemant+ Pert Of FYnPa PmlPcl %1�L , 1 Nalphacan. O y Menum+nl y N mom �T, k M Neer rn ROW Aenul+lean lo. �. Ike 1 } fQ Buckingham Perk event oe+pn _� "1 t 'k x FUahh.l'I"a. L Payw.Vlan llpnt w-- An —had W.I. R+te p w.a atelier # GO LlrcO n II 'N a Berm PO AC4 1 IVan br vlNCnlenl+m+m et rt On+lpn _ _ 14 `Oal Faboleum Ranch -Way onai, Feeds Enginuefrs " ., N Torm NOW j1 BrrgkBj i. ,.., 1� �IhM1n+naa } cu 981-1 ...,anr Pnllaly � ^� .a. r'1s..y� Me+.+ l0 Nntuea far EhPY rk�H ebnument r �• O an10n: V InM.I.P •!{ISIOfIC T B etrotwm PO1nl a - Tree Udall \ In .Inp Im bl P Natural Area ono eap m Udall Natural Area Nr Tam PO AagYl+lnm tar 91n+1 chI Ranch- iy Way Feeds Parking Ranch -Way LEGEND _.. _.. Feeds Parkng } t.VaN1A'.N N'caea IN �NmAI P, PN.ta[ a Nr mvno.m.now NGe TCHM apW Ac.nhthh.N D /P +nay 1DNa iegN POW KOUIBnION tii : \ ` 1- .cAPe 0 ... J \ acda.NL PAuV' Manatee. acuLmu 3 CAI, M Lncoin FOl t� 11n5 1%Corridor Fawn CD 01.15.14 1 Attachment 6 APPENDIX A Attachment 6 TABLE 1 Short Range (2016) Background Peak Hour Operation Intersection _ _Level of f Service Movement i- - AM PM Lincoln/Willow (Stop Sign)(Existing Geometry) SEB LT/RT B (13.7) D (29.6) A (8.8) NEB LT/T A (7.9) Lincoln/Willow (Stop Sign) (Lincoln Corridor Plan Geometry) SEB LT B (13.0) A (9.5) C (22.0) B (10.8) SEB RT SEB APPROACH -- B (12.3) C (18.7) NEB LT A (7.7) A (8.1) Willow/Linden (All -Way Stop) SEB LT/T/RT B (10.3) B (11.7) NWB LT/T/RT A (9.6) B (12.4) NEB LT/T/RT A (9.4) B (10.9) B (11.9 SWB LT/T/RT A (9.7) TABLE 2 Short Range (2016) Total Peak Hour Operation Intersection Movement Level of f Service AM PM Lincoln/Willow (Stop Sign)(Existing Geometry) SEB LT/RT B (14.0)_ D (34.6) NEB LT/T A (8.0) A (8.8) (StopSign) (Stop Sign) (Lincoln Corridor Plan Geometry) SEB LT B (13.2) A (9.5) C (23.8) B (10.9) SEB SEB RT SEB APPROACH B (12.4) C (19.8) A (8.1) NEB LT A (7.7) Willow/Linden (All -Way Stop) SEB LT/T/RT B (10.9) B (12.9) NW13 LT/T/RT A (10.0) B (14.2) NEB LT/T/RT A (9.8) SWB LT/T/RT B (10.1) B (12.9) =// LDELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS Addendum, November 2014 -71 rASSOCIATES Attachment 6 At the Lincoln/Willow intersection, the southwest approach volume in bith peak hours on Lincoln Avenue meets the right -turn lane criteria in LCUASS, Figure 8-4 with the existing traffic and the forecasted traffic According to LCUASS. Figure 8-5, this right -turn lane should be 435 feet long, including bay taper. There is a constraint with regard to providing this right -turn lane. The bridge is approximately 60 feet east of the Lincoln/Willow intersection. Provision of this lane would require widening the bridge. The Lincoln Corridor Plan does not show a southwest right -turn lane on Lincoln Avenue. Graphics from the Lincoln Corridor Plan showing the Lincoln/Willow intersection Preferred Alternative are provided in Appendix A. Apparently the constraint was recognized and this right -turn lane was not included in the Lincoln Corridor Plan. At the Lincoln/Willow intersection, the southeast approach volumes on Willow Street do not meet the right -turn lane criteria in LCUASS, Figure 8-4 with the short range (2016) total peak hour traffic. It is acknowledged that the Lincoln Corridor Plan shows separate left -turn and right -turn lanes on Willow Street approaching Lincoln Avenue. Since timing of the implementation of the Lincoln Corridor Plan is not known, it is recommended that the approach on Willow street be in a single lane for the foreseeable future. The operation at the key intersections was reported as acceptable with the existing geometry and the Lincoln Corridor Plan geometry. Tables 1 and 2 show the comparative level of service and the associated delay for the various movements at the key intersections. In the cited TIS, it was reported that trucks, related to the shipping/receiving of product and materials, would enter from Willow Street and exit to Lincoln Avenue via the existing "alley." It was determined that truck traffic leaving Old Elk Distillery would not use the alley to exit onto Lincoln Avenue. Therefore, Old Elk Distillery truck traffic will enter and exit onto Willow Street. Do not hesitate to contact me if you have questions or desire additional information. /I' DELICH Old Elk Distillery TIS Addendum, November 2014 7,1=—ASSOCIATES Attachment 6 DELICI-I ASSOCIATES Traffic & Transportation Engineering 2272 Glen Haven Drive Loveland. Colorado 80538 Phone: (970) 669-2061 Fax: (970) 669-5034 �71 r r1w, ileI:TAL1911Li TO: Brandon Grebe, Blue Ocean Enterprises N M o %.Fo Linda Ripley, Ripley Design Martina Wilkinson, Fort Collins Traffic Engineering 93 FROM: Joseph Delich o� / �<c ;ON DATE ENG\ DATE: November 4, 2014 SUBJECT: River District Block 8 Mixed -Use Development (Old Elk Distillery) Transportation Impact Study Addendum - Response to comments (File: 1470ME01) This memorandum addendum provides a response to comment 2 under Traffic Operation by Martina Wilkinson, with regard to the "River District Block 8 Mixed -Use Development (Old Elk Distillery) Transportation Impact Study," (TIS) October 2014, as contained in a letter from Ted Shepard dated October 15, 2014. Comment 2. The study indicates that intersections 'operate acceptably' with existing and future geometry. Please provide an addendum to the study to address what geometry is warranted per the LCUASS standards — both on terms of LOS and the geometric warrants for turn lanes. If auxiliary lanes are warranted with the Old Elk traffic — especially at Lincoln and Willow then that needs to be discussed. At the Willow/Linden intersection, it is recommended that all of the legs have single lane approach geometry. Using left -turn lane criteria in LCUASS, Figure 8-1, left -turn lanes are not warranted at the Willow/Linden intersection. At the Willow/Linden intersection, the approach volumes on Willow Street and Linden Street do not meet the right -turn lane criteria in LCUASS, Figure 8-4. Left -turn lanes are required at intersections on arterial roadways. Lincoln Avenue is classified as a two-lane arterial. Therefore, a northeast bound left -turn lane is required at the Lincoln/Willow intersection. The Lincoln Corridor Plan shows a left -turn lane at this location. It is not known when the Lincoln Corridor Plan will be implemented. There is curb and gutter on the north side of Lincoln Avenue, west of Willow Street adjacent to a developed property. Therefore, provision of the left -turn lane approaching the Lincoln/Willow intersection would require widening on the south side of Lincoln Avenue. This widening could be temporary pending the implementation of the "finished cross section" shown in the Lincoln Corridor Plan. The Old Elk Distillery contributes 3.2% and 1.9% of the traffic on the northeast bound leg at the Lincoln/Willow intersection. Water Tower Storage Vessel Volume Requirement A 2" displacement water meter will flow 80 GPM using the AW WA 50% design criteria for continuous flow, and 130 GPM maximum. The calculated average daily use is 114.011 gallons (GPD) with a peak flow rate of 175.2 GPM for the entire building. Using the continuous design criteria, the building will use 95 GPM more than can be delivered by the water service; using the 80% recommended design criteria, the difference drops to 45 GPM. Assuming the process would be in this deficit for 3.6 hours per day (from the original water usage calculation spreadsheet), an additional 20,520 gallons of storage will be needed above the minimum 10,000 gallons needed for process cooling. Therefore, a cold water storage tank capable of holding 30,520 gallons will be necessary for this facility. Based on these calculations it is recommended that a 31,000 — 40,000 gallon water tower vessel be provided; which will provide additional time to react in case there is an issue with the water service or the cooling system. Water Tower Structure, Placement and Footprint The Water Tower's structural legs and their taper angle are also a consideration in regards to the ultimate height of the water storage tank relative to its associated footprint within the service yard. Adequate water tower height must be maintained to allow for the thick stillage tanks to fit within the skeletal structure of the legs and allow for sufficient circulation between them. A proportional taper angle must be maintained from the base footprint which is anchored into the foundation to support and counteract any seismic displacement of the water tower vessel. The anchorage of the foundation system is further bolstered by the inclusionary weight of the stillage tanks set on top of the Water Tower mat slab foundation system. RIVER DISTRICT BLOCK 8 MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT I Fort Collins, Colorado I 18 April 2016 ROOF TOWER 68'-0" S UPPER TOWER S' 55'-0' TRUSS BEARING 33'-0" LEVEL 2 S 18'-0" LOW MEZ. Ti r10'0'T 1" LEVEL 1 00'-0" S Water Tower Height Requirement based on Mechanical Process Engineering 1. Emergency cooling - If a failure occurs in the main distribution pumps, the water tank can gravity feed water through the 10 condensers to keep them cool and keep the alcohol in a liquid form until the corresponding stills can safely be brought down. The highest condensing equipment in the distillery tower is 60'-1" above the finished floor level, and the pressure drop across the condenser to achieve the flow required drives the height of the bottom of the water tower vessel to be 60'-1" above the ground. Otherwise, alcohol vapor could over -run the condensers, spirit safe and eventually the spirit tanks and potentially create an unsafe condition for the operators. There are dual pumps in the system but a lightning strike could take them both out at the same time, for which the Water Tower will be providing lighting protection to the facility and must maintain the highest point relative to the site. 2. Failure in the secondary cooling pumps will cause an over -heating condition where gravity flow from the water tower will keep the system cool and avoid temperature relief valves from popping and potentially damaging the equipment. 3. The tower quickly provides water necessary to dilute the alcohol to below the flash point in the event of a spill in the still room. By quickly diluting the spill, a safer environment for the response team will be realized. ARCHITECTURE UPBFN DESIGN IMTEP10R DESIGN - 6waENwLare OLD ELK SOUTH ELEVATION RANCHWAY FEEDS SOUTH ELEVATION W rNVrLfM I 1-16 W-T OLD ELK EAST ELEVATION - FROM SERVICE YARD EXTERIOR ELEVATION HEIGHT COMPARISON 5EU[ENYOOPB - _ WRLER IOWER� II6YENII'V E RODF-TOWER W-T 6 UP RTOWER se-0. 6 TRUWR WG1 Tr-0' LEVEL26 1e 0' LEVEL 16 W-W 120.0' RMILNWAY F6ED6 95.-0 WITER TDWER� ROOF-Tp R6) or-P UP RTOV R y.-T B TRU SEMWO6] LT W IPNEL2 1R-P LEVFl I W-W 6 RIVER DISTRICT BLOCK 8 MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT I Fort Collins, Colorado ARCHITECTURE J/ URW DESIGN 18 April 2016 �l INTERIOR DESIGN 21:2e:.82 � ar rrr »r 9-0 MEN as u u u u..o u. _ yy�� ii X iw ri ii H. Y C Nit a Ci �iii iii MEN • o r r r r o r o r r .. s r f i f� i i F y�� m! ire .. N... .. .. 6C Oi It 0 1 a 1 e • RDR 6.11 "Genuine masonry, metal, concrete, structural steel and glass are preferred" RDR 6.17: Appropriate roof materials include standing seam metal roofs (low and narrow seam profile) and photovoltaic systems in dark matte, nonreflective finishes, for example. Composition shingles are also appropriate on smaller structures:' RIVER DISTRICT BLOCK 8 MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT I Fort Collins, Colorado I 18 April 2016 RDR 6.14: 'Architectural metals should convey a sense of human scale. For example, a sense of scale can be achieved through the use of smaller scaled panels, varying forms and designs, creating patterns To provide visual interest, or eliminating expanses of unarticulated wall space:' BUILDING 2 SOUTH ELEVATION -TYPICAL BAY HITECTURE V URBAN URB4H DESIGN INTERIOR DESIGN PHOTOMONTAGE FROM JEFFERSON STREET RIVER DISTRICT BLOCK 8 MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT I Fort Collins, Colorado I ARCHITECTURE URBAN oF 18 April DESIGN 2016 INTERIOR DESIGN RIVER DISTRICT BLOCK 8 MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT I Fort Collins, Colorado i 18 April 2016 PHOTOMONTAGE FROM JEFFERSON STREET V' ARCRREENRE URBYI DESIGN INIERIOP DESIGN RIVER DISTRICT BLOCK 6 MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT I Fort Collins. Colorado 16 April 2016 PHOTOMONTAGE FROM JEFFERSON STREET CHITECTURE URBAN NDESIGN INTERIOR DESIGN EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS AND MATERIALRY YAI PWYBIOR WYtMRP! IV WEST ELEVATION - LINDEN STREET wx NN,(itn - 1NV[I fiM1 0 ROOF GARAPET `m -00. v 1b-V� �LEVELt - I 0' EAST ELEVATION - FROM COURTYARD I EAST ELEVATION - FROM SERVICE YARD ------------ _ w1vN ..fir WEST ELEVATION - FROM COURTYARD B _ WI.TPW TOWER ROOF -TOWER Ba-P UPPER TOWER TRUBS BENBNGS l]'.0- LEVEL P - W1 OBP ROOF-TOWEae W-V UPPER TOWER BB-0' RIVER DISTRICT BLOCK 8 MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT I Fort Collins, Colorado mcmaEETURE URBAN DESIGN 18 April 2016 INTERIOR DESIGN SOON ui ii9 i� ... .N !! �! :: w :i :::: :::: :: is :: u ii :::: :u ::::::�� �� �� o u o n u N u u u o Y o .. .0 u..umr-v . —' :'. Ci : •i L`. xc = m: C0 6i :i e6 66 is i' ::: •:: •« «'`' NINE � :: :: :: :: :: :: :� :C :: .Yi N :: :: •N. •Y•� si.N :N :N .. RIVER DISTRICT BLOCK 8 MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT Fort Collins, Colorado CityofLandmark LJ I ARCHITECTURE Fort Collins PfB5BN8tiOf1 URBAN DESIGN Commission INTERIOR DESIGN PLANT UST nun wcwl..l wuamr.o.� mry ra.rcuuwrux. u... nlbM.l.4 Cdn.wKeNM� mH..�®.1♦�I V.bO TT WATER BUDGET CHART MmLazw m�O TREE PROTECTION NOTES l a R 3TRFFT TRFF NOTES 1 V �� !lTIM�YIO�S'.�IS�IMPN�MM �NYM ,�IY.MOOI�Y�II Vllr.�wMiOWf�Illw1��[M�IOGIO NO F Irmmsnirtm rrwmurwrwrelrwraarw♦n�olnilP,nw�weulnPmm.ranamawrw. i fOI1CIMPrgg101 m.rR �LLrtle,rlewwngrtMwlMMPFw�wwrPMTlP.rw /LL IIOM®mWKrr. NrM.mN.o,wPMws'Ncw.w wV.wPallt,iBlrMnKwlgw�,lylwll//wI:MP VP.1.w6 i rtIQ,9mwWll Vwp YOwYnmlMlYLPwlI!l.rwWlplMgGYlSPIIIIIIPpIt ♦ MPVBiw.11µlr•t/Q/LLO[llPwOwlrll®M9MAwO1wR..YL.IIIIMllrwl4'1101.MOY4�YYMMO,YPrPf fp.MglllIAPOI/LLwl@fll®MMIIUwC,WrrlfMlld,PY.1,.11Pi!®MOPI�1.lIiP911d.,il.m a i�rmwunalwowawawwrinwmm�na�almrn w.aww,aPnpwviu,rvxnwiay.nawlrwoi �.n�aT l�wcnwaaa i�am_ri� o�`rtn �wMsuePM.wiw..owm�rawa.naru.wrrrr.urws. +".l��mnowsl.:ww.owae+o.er�i u�iinrwenw�vwm�iswar swi.��amn.�in nw.r�ainl�w.o wl"v�m�l+ �.et°Pli:.anay.l�m're Mv�orrarawmu.: rer.aysow...wnr+oea.M�llr.�arrwma,w VALLOW BTREET BUI UM 3 00 1 0 00' 00 11 F�. vow 11 I��iill hull ll�`II� _ O:♦11 .. ♦.a: l^J TREE PLANTING DETAIL TREE PLANTING IN TREE GRATE DETAIL ✓I FDFNGEND i I � .r.i♦!!Y'rr.rp Ntl1IM .�r.m. scut: "-20'-W x.cuw..w M..WIfM..®l.f. � r_�� wn.mm.��wmw_wml�aw LOT 1. RIVER DISTRICT BLOCK EIGHT MUD USE FORT C M. W PDP IwYR �R �O� LANDSCAPE PLAN G LAND USE BREAKDOWN Lor ews _ naonoeowwn aas w_ naa�uwvwc aa+i w �] Imuuimexaof m,we! w olmiiw+eexo �a!]! w ePimP �r+PrtPerf rt'onP�m _ _ _ eYLLPei] P/n!ilNfuVfeW[ Iu! n Yn MfE nONMMM ...w! n +wweuwn ra-r - X,if.GVe,w]f. WN1V) ,+.,r! w wf.u.nwii.Wmn ++.mr w WWcwe.w �� +w ,rtWnwwaen h"a ]M +w Iwa+m +fofm oxamnWurn_wafwwouevnrt. e I ' low�e+.wc xwcr]awn. a _ .�fworew! 'ME/IIP6P�femwiFD Y.MIM1Pl1lI 0LN4iMMIPWIP9.AYPn+MP1+11C100YMP1 IfgMEVManpI+P /P1Mq/+IOIp6L Y]66 +.]n! IWnC]nCY16IY.M6 iwl+91116 — \IY V LLiWReW,fMRiwR+-IaN.�M�OivM ]fir LLY4i �l+! eemeww mru on! exumm y wYM01 1!f! y, r - - Y�w.rn1 ivrWa+rtou ems w ule�+lmY •ewvuiow�rrifw _. wu +r! Lfxrnouaw urrenfYsnama.wen aa.oeno"oaf+oe • eW cfm.wnm W.mw] n+! 0°1e1fn elueof+. meeYewerNL +rl.• •nf.aP®I eixriwclfromuaY rwi .ww... .+.+ow.ert.w.xr n®r..w w .+n+]n.n sno. w+! Pmx mnwa]v nsl..w cfouu+Yox am +mW oenml WILLOW STREET z Ww Y wdoeo >.00..L .nmxo im I l LEGEND O »� LOT 1, RNER DISTRICT BLOCK EIGHT MIXED USE FORT COW NS. CO er.ea�ewee+fl+s enwwwa.ePre�eo fw�mY rt/.ealf ufmxo mic+ax.mmrm.++ POP ppu, "0PM SITE PLAN +rfw SCALE: i+-2-]0'-O- mrwmsawrww"'�n ]Yi.� Attachment 2 Contact: Brandon Grebe 401 W. Mountain Ave, Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80521 (i) A list of names of all general and limited partners (if a partnership), all managers and directors (if a limited liability company) and/or officers and directors (if a corporation) involved as either applicants or owners of the project development plan. 360 Linden, LLC Manager: Kurt Hoeven Contact: Brandon Grebe 401 W. Mountain Ave, Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80521 Q) A development schedule indicating the approximate date when construction of the project, or stages of the same, can be expected to begin and be completed, including the proposed phasing of construction of public improvements and recreational and common space areas. Construction is expected to begin in Fall of 2016 and be completed Fall of 2017. Thinking outside of the box for over two decades 401 W. Mountain Ave., Suite 100 ■ Fort Collins, CO 80521 ■ tel. 970.224.5828 ■ fax 970.224.1662 ■ www.riploydesignine.com Attachment 2 that is beyond what is required in that section. Any variance from the criteria shall be described. All land uses proposed in the project are permitted uses in the zone district and no modifications or engineering variances are being requested. (vii) Narrative description of how conflicts between land uses or disturbances to wetlands, natural habitats and features and or wildlife are being avoided to the maximum extent feasible or are mitigated. The project does not affect any wetlands or natural habitats or features. (viii) Written narrative addressing each concern/issue raised at the neighborhood meeting(s), if a meeting has been held. A neighborhood meeting was held October 1st 2014 to provide an opportunity for neighboring property owners to see the proposal, ask questions and provide comments. (ix) Name of the project as well as any previous name the project may have had during Conceptual Review. Lot 1, River District Block 8 Mixed Use (Old Elk Distillery at PDR) (e) Response Letter (27 copies) addressing each of the applicable issues raised in the conceptual review letter. The project was presented at a Preliminary Design Review (PDR) meeting on August 27th See comment responses attached. (f) A complete list of the new street names requested in the proposed development. (2 copies) The Larimer County Street Inventory System can be accessed to determine the availability of street names. The Web site is: www.co.larimer.co.us/streets. No new streets are being proposed. (g) Legal description of the site. See attached (h) The name and address of each owner of property within the boundaries of the development plan area. 360 Linden, LLC Manager: Kurt Hoeven Thinkina outside of the box for over two decades. 401 W. Mountain Ave., Suite 100 ■ Fort Collins, CO 80521 ■ tel. 970.224.5828 ■ fax 970.224.1662 . www.ripleydesigninc.com Attachment 2 access, Downtown activity center goals and the Poudre River District design objectives. • Culture, Parks, and Recreation Policies that encourage art and culture as economic drivers for the Downtown, cultural education, and diverse cultural and artistic experiences. • Transportation Policies that encourage pedestrian mobility, bicycle facilities, and alternative modes of travel (ii) Description of proposed open space, wetlands, natural habitats and features, landscaping, circulation, transition areas, and associated buffering on site and in the general vicinity of the project. The site is highly urban and does not contain any natural habitats or features. The site design includes streetscapes along Linden and Willow with an alley -like pocket park on the south side adjacent to the Depot building. A private courtyard is situated between the two buildings. The outdoor spaces are designed to be consistent with the Fort Collins River District Design Guidelines. Some of the key site design features that are used to enhance the street edge are pedestrian -oriented entries, windows facing the street, small public spaces linked to the sidewalk, urban streetscape design and landscaping, and street furniture. The ultimate design for these outdoor spaces will also include special paving, water features, enhanced pedestrian scale lighting and other unique decorative features. (iii) Statement of proposed ownership and maintenance of public and private open space areas, applicant's intentions with regard to future ownership of all or portions of the project development plan. Blue Ocean, Inc. will own and maintain the private outdoor spaces inside the property line. (iv) Estimate of number of employees for business, commercial, and industrial uses. At full production, Old Elk Distillery will have around 35 employees, the restaurant could have 50 +/- depending upon the shifts. The project as a whole will likely push to 100 total employees at some point in the future which will include employment for the retail, tours, and other offerings. (v) Description of rationale behind the assumptions and choices made by the applicant. See introduction. (vi) The applicant shall submit as evidence of successful completion of the applicable criteria, the completed documents pursuant to these regulations for each proposed use. The Planning Director may require, or the applicant may choose to submit, evidence Thinking outside of the box for over two decades 401 W. Mountain Ave., Suite 100 ■ Fort Collins, CO 80521 ■ tel. 970.224.5828 ■ fax 970.224.1662 www.ripleydesigninc.com Attachment 2 between the two buildings a natural courtyard is formed. A variety of informal seating and gathering opportunities create a unique experience. The buildings architecture grows from the pedestrian nature of Linden and the celebration of existing historic buildings including the Depot next door. The proposed multi -use buildings respect the one-story nature of the Depot, following the transitional height requested by the district guidelines, with a similar one-story building as a plinth for a crescendo of heights as we get farther from the Depot. The facade along Linden incorporates a porous retail front with human scale elements, similar in proportions to Old Town facades. Extensive use of storefront glass allows transparency for pedestrians at the Linden and Willow intersection. As the building turns the corner along Willow, the retail and office facade will complement the distillery but integrate more refined and sophisticated detail. Wall penetrations will include larger openings at the pedestrian level with smaller openings above. The factory side of the distillery is expressed by a traditional two-story factory made of brick and large widows. The distillery doesn't hide systems such as a water tower, stills tower or silos, but rather integrates them to reinforce function. The facility, as a whole evokes, a sense of history influenced by Old Town as well as the industrial nature of the grain silos, the railroad tracks and other buildings/sites being redeveloped. The interior of the building follows a chronological discovery that articulates a reference to the commerce of spirits. The exterior materials include brick, steel detailing, metal siding, precast concrete, storefront, and industrial looking windows. The building facade will include a water tower and grain silos to help define the nature of the building use. (i) Statement of appropriate City Plan Principles and Policies achieved by the proposed plan. The River District Block 8 Mixed -Use Development project is supported by many City Plan Principles and Policies including: • Economic Health Policies having to do with job creation, diversifying the local economy, leveraging the Fort Collins brand, and supporting local, unique and creative businesses. • Environmental Health Policies that promote energy efficiency, waste management, recycling, hazardous materials management, water quality and storm water management. • Community and Neighborhood Livability Policies having to do with compact urban development, redevelopment in infill areas, community appearance and design, streetscapes and public spaces, ecologically sound landscape practices, commercial developments that contribute to Fort Collins visual quality and uniqueness, enhancement of historic resources, bicycle and pedestrian Thinking outside of the box for over two decades. 401 W. Mountain Ave., Suite 100 ■ Fort Collins, CO 80521 ■ tel. 970.224.5828 ■ fax 970.224.1662 . www.ripleydesigninc.com Attachment 2 land planning ■ landscape architecture ■ urban design ■ entitlement April 27, 2016 Lot 1, River District Block 8 Mixed Use Project Development Plan - Planning Objectives Introduction The Lot 1, River District Block 8 Mixed Use Project Development Plan is a mixed use project containing two buildings. It is located on a 1.25-acre site at the southwest corner of Linden Street and Willow Street in Old Town. The site falls within River Downtown Redevelopment District and the overlapping boundary of the Old Town Historic District. Surrounded by the rich history of the agricultural and industrial heritage of this district, the design takes these influences and incorporates them into the industrial proportions and materiality of the buildings. The larger building is 32,874 sf and contains a distillery and associated office space. It is 2-stories and 50'6" tall, with an iconic tower element that reaches 65'-7". Based around the main distillery building at the core of the site, a separate building along Linden will create a strong link to Old Town. This building is 10,251 sf and includes retail and office space associated with the distillery, and a pub. It is 2-stories and 37' tall. The proposed development takes a comprehensive approach to the use of the site, with a special focus on enhancing the street, providing for efficient functional site requirements and utilizing high quality and enduring materials. The new buildings reflect traditional development patterns and align with historic buildings at the street edge. A south facing alley -like area between the old Depot (currently Mawson Lumber) and the new building is celebrated as a link to the pub and gated courtyard beyond. Set Thinking outside of the box for over two decades. 419 Canyon Ave., Suite 200 ■ Fort Collins, CO 80521 ■ tel. 970.224.5828 ■ fax 970.224.1662 ■ www.ripleydesigninc.com The six Commission members voting in favor of the recommendation for approval stated the following reasons: 1) The water tower height of 95 feet is compatible with the proportions of the project as a whole and the engineering analysis provided to support the proposed height provides an adequate rationale for its design and scale. 2) The 95-foot water tower tank and supports are in proportion with each other, while the previously proposed 120-foot tower was out of scale with the project and the area of adjacency and the support legs were not in proportion with the tank. 3) The primary material of the whole composition of the project is brick masonry, which is compatible with the primary use of brick masonry in the area of adjacency. 4) The use of metal is appropriate based on both LUC 3.4.7 and the R-D-R Design Guidelines, which encourage the use of architectural metal and new industrial uses. The two Commission members who voted against the motion stated the following reasons: 1) While noting support for the quality and compatibility of the proposed design of the west, north, and east elevations of the distillery, the proposal does not adequately address that it is a four-sided building. The south elevation design is incompatible based on the scale and mass of metal building material that references newer metal buildings, not just historic buildings noted in the area of adjacency. The buildings in the area of adjacency are primarily composed of brick masonry. 2) The proposed material is composite metal panels rather than corrugated metal, which is typical of the metal buildings in the River District. -2- Planning, Development & Transportation `y of Community Development & Neighborhood Services College Avenue Port Collinsth P.O. Box 580 P.O.P. Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 970.416.2740 970.224.6134-fax fcgov.com MEMORANDUM DATE: April 28, 2016 TO: Planning and Zoning Board TH: Tom Leeson, Director of Community Development & Neighborhood Services Ted Shepard, Chief Planner FR: Maren Bzdek, Historic Preservation Planner RE: Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) Findings of Fact and Conclusions Pertaining to the River District Block 8 Mixed Use Project As provided for in Land Use Code Section 3.4.7(F)(6), in its consideration of the approval of plans for properties containing or adjacent to designated, eligible or potentially eligible sites, structure, objects or districts, the Decision Maker shall receive, and consider in making its decision, a written recommendation from the Landmark Preservation Commission. This memorandum contains the Landmark Preservation Commission's Findings of Facts and its motion for this project. At its April 27, 2016 Regular Meeting, the Landmark Preservation Commission conducted a review of the development project known as River District Block 8 mo(PDP140016) as authorized under LUC Section 3.4.7(F)(6). The Landmark Preservation Commission adopted the following motion on a vote of 6-2 with one member absent: That the Landmark Preservation Commission recommend to the Decision Maker approval of the River District Block 8 Mixed -Use Project (PDP140016), finding it is in compliance with the standards contained in the Land Use Code 3.4.7 and the River Downtown Redevelopment (R-D-R) Zone District Design Guidelines, in regard to compatibility with the character of the project's area of adjacency for the following reasons: 1) The project design uses massing and scale that is compatible with adjacent historic buildings. 2) The project uses appropriate step -backs and site design to mitigate height relative to the historic context. 3) The project relies on building materials that are compatible with adjacent historic properties. 4) The project uses window patterning and proportions that are typical of the adjacent historic context. m • The site is served by the following transit routes: o Routes 5 and 14 along Jefferson Street o Routes 8 and 81 along Willow and Linden • Staff's conclusion is that the development meets the Transportation Level of Service Requirements. 3. Neighborhood Information Meeting: A neighborhood information meeting was held on September 17, 2014. The proposed project was well - received by those attending. (Note that the building program and size has been reduced since the neighborhood meeting.) 4. Findinas of Fact/Conclusions: In evaluating the request for River District Block Eight, Old Elk Distillery, P.D.P., staff makes the following findings of fact: A. The P.D.P. complies with the Article Four, Section 4.17(D) Development Standards in the River Downtown Redevelopment zone district. B. The P.D.P. complies with the applicable Article Three General Development Standards. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that, based on the Findings of Fact on page 14 of the Staff Report, the Planning and Zoning Board make a motion to approve River District Block Eight, Old Elk Distillery, P.D.P. #PDP140016 ATTACHMENTS 1. L.P.C. Memorandum (DOCX) 2. Applicant's Planning Objectives (PDF) 3. Site Plan (PDF) 4. Landscape Plan (PDF) 5. Elevations and Perspectives (PDF) 6. Traffic Memo (PDF) 7. Transportation Impact Study (PDF) 8. Neighbor Letter (PDF) 9. LPC Draft Hearing Minutes (PDF) 3 0 r...-N� N Item # 5 Page 11 Agenda Item 5 (3.) Section 3.5.1(G)(1)(a)3. — Neighborhood Scale: The variety of proposed building heights is required by this standard to be compatible given the relationship of the site to Ranch -Way Feeds across Willow Street. The highest point is the proposed water tower at 95 feet. The existing two elevators and equipment at Ranch -Way are between 95 and 120 feet. The proposed Building Two fourth level tower is 68 feet which is roughly the mid -point between the top the three-story Ranch -Way building and the top of the elevators. The south elevation of Building Two is stepped back for the benefit of Mawson Lumber. Staff, therefore, finds that the proposed buildings and equipment that are over 40 feet in height are compatible with the scale of the neighborhood. H. Section 3.5.1(1) —Outdoor Storage Areas/Mechanical Equipment: All outdoor storage, trash and recycling, loading and electrical transformers are located behind a solid screen wall with solid gates. I. Section 3.5.1(J) — Operational/Physical Compatibility Standards: The operational aspects of a distillery, like a brewery, combine both indoor processes and outdoor silos, storage and loading dock functions. As noted above, the outdoor yard is well -screened and allows for loading and storage to not have a visual impact on the surrounding area. It is not necessary to screen the water tower and grain silos as these appurtenances are integral to the distilling process. J. Section 3.6.4 — Transportation Level of Service Requirements: A Transportation Impact Study (October 2014) and subsequent Memorandum Addendum (November 2014) was submitted with this P.D.P. (See attached.) It analyzed the anticipated traffic for the development, including the distillery, office space, and retail on the adjacent intersections. The following conclusions can be drawn from the study: • At full buildout, the development will generate approximately 1,322 daily trip ends, 63 morning peak hour trip ends, and 132 afternoon peak hour trip ends. • Current operation at the Willow/Linden intersections is acceptable, and no improvements or signal warrants are met with this study. • The operation of the Willow/Lincoln is also acceptable, and no signal warrant is met. However, the vehicular volumes for some turning movements at the intersection do meet thresholds for auxiliary turn lanes. This includes a northbound left turn lane and a southbound right turn lane from Lincoln onto Willow. The impact of this development on those movements is limited, the improvements are not along frontage of the development and no current right-of-way exists to build the improvements. Therefore, these improvements are not the responsibility of the development — they are being considered in the design of the current Lincoln Avenue capital improvement project. • Acceptable level of service is achieved for bicycle and transit modes based upon the measures in the multi -modal transportation guidelines. For pedestrians, this development will construct all the appropriate pedestrian elements within their property and along their roadway frontage. Item # 5 Page 10 n • Agenda Item 5 the River District Block 8 Mixed -Use Project (PDP140016), finding it is in compliance with the standards contained in the Land Use Code 3.4.7 and the River Downtown Redevelopment (R-D-R) Zone District Design Guidelines, in regard to compatibility with the character of the project's area of adjacency. (LPC Memorandum attached.) F. Section 3.5.1 —Building and Project Compatibility: This standard requires that new development in existing developed areas be compatible with the established architectural character. While this standard is somewhat duplicative of the R-D-R and Historic and Cultural Resources standards, it is noteworthy the extent to which the two buildings complement the District. Both Ranch -Way Feeds and the Feeder Supply building (under renovation) influence the adjacent area. The two new buildings proposed for River District Block Eight respect these two historic assets both in form and function. G. Section 3.5.1(G) —Building Height Review: The maximum allowable height in the R-D-R zone is five stories. For buildings over 40 feet, however, Section 3.5.1(G) requires a height review. The architectural character of the height and mass of the two buildings is subject to the more specific standards in Article Four Section 4.17(D). The remaining issues addressed by these standards are shadowing, privacy and neighborhood scale. The height of the two buildings, and their various aspects, are as follows: • Building One — Restaurant: 18 feet • Building One — Middle (Retail/Office): 37 feet • Building One — End (Office): 38 feet • Building Two — 41" Level Tower: 66 feet • Building Two — 3rd Level Tower: 55 feet • Building Two — Distillery Floor 52 feet • Water Tower 95 feet • Silos 33 feet (1.) Section 3.5. 1 (G) (1) (a) 1. —Light and Shadow: A shadow analysis has been provided. (Note that the buildings are oriented 40-degrees northwest of an east -west line). Building Two, fourth level tower, at 68 feet, represents the most acute case of shadowing. The analysis reveals that for the three conditions (November, December, and February), the tower casts a slight shadow onto the El Burrito property. Most all other shadows fall upon public right-of-way. Per the standard, staff finds that the shadowing does not have a substantial adverse impact on the distribution of natural and artificial light on adjacent public and private property. Nor does the shadowing preclude the functional use of solar energy technology or cause an undue accumulation of snow and ice on adjacent property. (2.) Section 3.5. 1 (G) (1) (a) 2. — Privacy: This standard refers generally to preserving privacy for adjacent residential uses. The shadow analysis reveals that there is no shadowing on the adjacent blocks where upper -story, mixed -use dwellings have been proposed under future redevelopment scenarios. Item # 5 Page 9 Agenda Item 5 COmDliance with the Aaolicable Article Three General Develoament Standards: As can be seen by the previous section, the R-D-R zone district is contains a comprehensive list of development standards. This is because most of the guidelines in the Fort Collins R-D-R River Downtown Redevelopment Zone District Design Guidelines were codified into Article Four. For those standards not addressed in Section 4.17(D), a discussion of the applicable General Development Standards is provided. A. Section 3.2.1 —Landscaping and Tree Protection: Street trees will be provided along both streets in sidewalk cut outs protected by tree grates. This is consistent with the design established by the first phase of the City's capital improvement project along Linden Street between Jefferson Street and Willow Street. B. Section 3.2.2(C)(4)(b) — Bicycle Parking: The minimum required number of bicycle parking spaces is based on the square footage associated with the following uses: light industrial; retail; standard restaurant; and general office. These uses, and their square footage, yield a minimum requirement of 16 spaces, two of which must be enclosed. In response, the P.D.P. provides 16 spaces, two of which are enclosed. C. Section 3.2.2(K)(2)(a) — Non -Residential Parking Requirements in the Transit -Oriented Development Overlay Zone. - The purpose of discussing this standard is to explain that it's not applicable due to the application for the P.D.P. preceding the adoption of Ordinance Number 163, 2014 which established a required minimum number of parking spaces in the Transit -Oriented Development Overlay Zone. The P.D.P. was submitted on September 24, 2014 and has remained current by complying with the various deadlines and extension opportunities per Section 2.2.11(A) — Step 11: Lapse — Application Submittals. The Ordinance that established required minimum number of parking spaces in the T.O.D., however, was adopted on Second Reading on November 18, 2014. The standard in effect at the time of the application governs the P.D.P. Since the applicable governing standard required zero parking for non- residential uses in the T.O.D., the P.D.P., with zero off-street parking spaces, complies with the standard in effect upon the date of submittal. Despite there being no on -site parking, the applicant owns land in the immediate vicinity where off -site parking is planned for employees. D. Section 3.2.4 — Site Lighting: Outside the public roadway lighting, the lighting plan is designed to activate the areas along Linden Street at the two entrances to Building One and the courtyard. Along Willow Street, due to the building placement at the property line, illumination is provided solely by public street lighting. In the service yard and loading dock, lighting is calibrated to provide safe levels of illumination necessary to perform tasks at night. All fixtures will feature fully shielded, down -directional luminaires. E. Section 3.4.7 — Historic and Cultural Resources: Because the P.D.P is adjacent to sites that are designated, eligible or potentially eligible as historic resources, the two proposed buildings were forwarded to the Landmark Preservation Commission. At its April 27, 2016 meeting, the Landmark Preservation Commission conducted a review as authorized under LUC Section 3.4.7(F)(6). The L.P.C. voted 6-2 to recommend to the Decision Maker approval of Item # 5 Page 8 Agenda Item 5 M. Section 4.17(D)(3)(c)4. — Development Standards — Buildings — Character and Image — Materials: This standard requires that exterior materials contribute to the visual continuity within the District. In response, the predominant building material is brick. Along the south elevation, standing seam metal is used primarily along the projecting wing of the distilling floor. N. Section 4.17(D)(3)(c)5. —Development Standards —Buildings —Character and Image — Primary Entrance: This standard requires that primary entrances be clearly identified, oriented to the major street and feature a sheltering element. In response, there are two entrances along Linden Street. Both entrances are recessed behind the sidewalk and feature subtle overhangs. O. Section 4.17(D)(3)(c)6. —Development Standards —Buildings —Character and Image —Accent Features: This standard requires that accent features, where used, must complement and not dominate the overall composition and design of the building. Such features may include secondary entrances, loading docks, garage bays, balconies, canopies, cupolas, vertical elevator/stair shafts and other similar features. In response, while both Buildings One and Two mitigate their mass by a variety of forms and materials, the buildings do not rely upon the use of accent features. For example, the restaurant is the smallest component and features detailed articulation, yet it is not heavily accented. Staff does not interpret the water tower and grain silos to be accents as these elements are fully functional and support the distilling process. P. Section 4.17(D)(4)(b) — Site Design — Walls, Fences and Planters: This standard requires that walls, fences, and planters be designed to match the quality of materials, style and color of the local vernacular. In response, the screen wall along Willow Street is constructed of brick to match the building. In addition, all gates are solid. Planters are constructed of masonry materials. Q. Section 4.17(D)(4)(c) — Street Edge: This standard requires that the street edge must be well-defined and compatible with the streetscape in the public realm. In this case, the two buildings are brought up to the edge of both streets with one exception. As noted, the restaurant features a courtyard that begins behind the sidewalk and is 50 feet wide. The P.D.P. includes landscaping and streetscaping along Linden Street that is an extension of the existing improvements found along the frontage of Mawson Lumber. Along Willow Street, trees are placed in grates in compliance with the standards for a public street in the R-D-R District. R. Section 4.17(D)(4)(g) — Service Areas and Outside Storage Areas: This standard requires that service and outside storage areas be located to the side and rear of buildings, screened from view and not impact pedestrian movement. In response, the service area is in the back of the Building Two. This area features the loading dock, mechanical equipment, trash and recycles containers, grain silos and the water tower. It is screened by combination of brick walls and solid gates. The standard acknowledges that the grain silos and water tower, by necessity, may be only partially screened but only so long as the screening material is consistent with the ag/industrial character of the area. The use of brick to accomplish this partial screening complies with the standard. Item # 5 Page 7 Agenda Item 5 In response, Building One fronts on Linden Street and is subdivided into three components. The restaurant represents the least amount of mass due to its close proximity to Mawson Lumber. For example, while containing two stories, the total height is only 18 feet. The facade is richly detailed with its own distinct entrance and a generous amount of windows. The middle component is a larger mass with two stories achieving a height of 33 feet. Along the first floor, the storefront glass is full height, anchored by kick plates and accented by exposed steel beams. The second floor windows are smaller, symmetrical and emphasis a strong rectilinear pattern. This middle component is highly reflective of the ag/industrial character of the area. The third component anchors the corner and includes steel -framed windows for a more contemporary look. The different masses express their interior functions. Combined, the three components contribute to the character of the District without being overly duplicative. Building Two presents a bold visual image along Willow Street that is also broken up into three components. The four story tower and the three story distilling floor combine to create an impressive array of large, symmetrical windows that are highly evocative of the ag/industrial character of the District. The third floor clerestory windows are typical of large industrial buildings such as the Sugar Beet Plant. The end component consists of the water tower, grain silos, loading zone and outdoor storage all of which are screened by a decorative masonry screen wall. Building Two, while large, is articulated but not overly stylistic. Its rectilinear pattern is repeated which is evocative of the ag/industrial genre. The various forms reveal the aspects of both interior functions and volumes. As with Building One, Building Two promotes visual cohesiveness and emphasizes historical attributes. J. Section 4.17(D)(3)(c)1. —Development Standards —Buildings —Character and Image —Outdoor Spaces: As mentioned, there is an outdoor courtyard between the restaurant and Mawson Lumber. In addition, the top of the restaurant features a deck which further activates the building and courtyard.. K. Section 4.17(D)(3)(c)2. —Development Standards —Buildings —Character and Image —Windows: This standard requires that windows be individually detailed, symmetrical and placed so as to visually establish and define building stories. Windows are intended to contribute to establishing a human scale and overall sense of proportion. In response, both Buildings One and Two employ a generous amount of windows in various patterns along both public streets. Along Linden Street, the window patterns alternate between the restaurant and the balance of the facade. Along Willow Street, the window arrangement between the tower and the distilling floor is impressively arrayed in symmetrical rectilinear patterns that significantly contribute to the character of the District. L. Section 4.17(D)(3)(c)3. —Development Standards —Buildings —Character and Image —Roof Forms: This standard requires that flat, shed and gable roof forms corresponding to massing and interior volumes/functions must be the dominant roof form. In response, for Building One, each of the three building components features a flat roof that is mitigated by cornice. A sloping metal roof protects the outdoor patio. For Building Two, the dominant roof form is a shed roof over the distilling floor that is topped by a subordinate shed that encloses the clerestory windows. The tower features a flat roof with a cornice. Item # 5 Page 6 Agenda Item 5 externally. All components of the two buildings are integral to the structures. There are no cosmetic effects or false fronts. (4.) Section 3.5.3(E)(2-6) — Character and Image — Facades, Entrances, Awnings, Base and Top Treatments: The two buildings combine to create a dramatic presence at two public streets and complement the character established by Ranch -Way Feeds and the Feeder Supply building. While there are a variety of materials, brick is prominently featured. Facades are articulated. Entrances are highlighted. The steel beams along Linden Street do not extend past the building. The two buildings both feature a distinctive base, middle and top. F. Section 4.17(D)(3)(b)1. —Development Standards— Buildings— Programming, Massing and Placement — HeighbMass: Building One is two stories but with varying heights, and Building Two is predominantly three stories with a partial fourth floor that is stepped back. The two buildings, therefore, comply with the maximum allowable height of five stories. Building Two also complies with the requirement that buildings not exceed three stories along a public street without the upper floors being stepped back. As noted, the partial fourth floor is stepped back from the third floor by seven feet. This standard also requires that new taller buildings (Building Two) next to existing shorter buildings (Mawson Lumber) must be stepped down in such a manner as to minimize their impact. In response, the south elevation of Building Two, along the extent of its relationship to Mawson Lumber, is three stories with the second floor stepped back from the first and the third floor stepped back from the second. (A perspective of the south elevation illustrates this concept.) G. Section 4.17(D)(3)(b)2.,3. — Development Standards — Buildings — Programming, Massing and Placement — Parking Lots and Street Frontage: These two standards require that parking lots and vehicular use areas must be located interior to the block, or to the sides of buildings, and that parking lots not exceed 50% of the site's street frontage. In response, the service yard is located interior to the block, at rear of Building Two, with only a 24-foot wide driveway intersection with Willow Street. There is no parking lot associated with the P.D.P. H. Section 4.17(D)(3)(b)5. — Development Standards — Buildings — Programming, Massing and Placement — Outdoor Spaces and Amenities: As mentioned, a courtyard is provided next to the restaurant outdoor patio. This courtyard is highly visible as it begins at the sidewalk along Linden Street and extends into the site a distance of 50 feet. The courtyard features special paving and raised planters. It is activated by adjoining the outdoor patio. I. Section 4.17(D)(3)(c) —Development Standards —Buildings —Character and Image: This standard requires that new buildings demonstrate compatibility with the historical agricultural/industrial character of the R-D-R District in order to promote visual cohesiveness and emphasize positive historical attributes. The standard goes on to list a wide variety of methods and techniques that may be used to achieve such compatibility. Item # 5 Page 5 Agenda Item 5 the aforementioned courtyard is not a driveway and there will be no curb cut that disrupts the continuity of the sidewalk. As designed, the P.D.P. complies with this standard. D. Section 4.17(D)(2)(c) — Development Standards — Streets and Walkways — Linden Streetscape: The P.D.P. is designed to extend the streetscape improvements that have been installed between Jefferson Street and Mawson Lumber. This includes diagonal on -street parking defined by landscaped curb extensions, wide sidewalks (14 feet, 10 inches) with trees in cutouts and tree grates and pedestrian light fixtures. E. Section 4.17(D)(3)(a) —Development Standards— Buildings— Industrial Buildings: This standard requires, by cross-reference, that all new industrial buildings comply with the standards for Mixed -use and Commercial Buildings contained in Section 3.5.3. In compliance with this standard, please note the following: (1.) Section 3.5.3(B) — General Standard: The two buildings provide significant architectural interest. Building One has two entrances, facade articulation, windows, steel beams, metal roof overhangs and kick plate detailing that provide a strong presence along Linden Street. The various functions within Building One are differentiated by architectural form, materials and window pattern. The articulation and window pattern is continued along the building's frontage along Willow Street. Building Two, along Willow Street, is broken up into three components. Beginning at Linden Street, the three-story tower features a symmetrical pattern of windows from grade up to the third level that reveal the internal workings of the distillery including the large stainless steel distillation tanks. These windows are topped by an arch. The tower then continues with a fourth level that is reduced in size and stepped back similar to a cupola, or the housing for an elevator bulkhead typically associated with grain elevators. Next to the tower component is the main portion of the distilling operation which is distinguished by two stories of windows that, again, are designed to reveal the internal operation. These two stories are topped with a third floor that primarily features a bay of clerestory windows for daylighting. Next to the distilling floor are the water tower and grain silos that are behind, and partially screened by, a decorative screen wall along Willow Street. Combined, these features allow the two buildings to comply with the general standard for Mixed -Use and Commercial Buildings. (2.) Section 3.5.3(C)(1)(2) — Relationship of Buildings to Streets, Walkways and Parking: The two buildings have a strong orientation to both Linden and Willow Streets by being placed at or near the property lines. Building One has two entrances on Linden Street. The building establishes a presence along Willow Street with the large bank of windows. The screen walls are brick and at varying heights to avoid the stockade effect. (3.) Section 3.5.3(D) — Variation in Massing: The two buildings feature a rich variation in massing by use of articulation, varying heights, recesses and projections and window patterns. The various internal functions are expressed Item # 5 Page 4 Agenda Item 5 COMMENTS: 1. Background: The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: N: R-D-R Existing Mixed -Use Commercial and Residential Buildings S: R-D-R Mawson Lumber and Kiefer Concrete E: R-D-R El Burrito and Ranch -Way Feeds W: R-D-R Feeder Supply Building (Ginger and Baker, under renovation) The site is Block 8 of the original Town Plat. For decades, it has been used as the outside storage yard for Kiefer Concrete at 360 Linden Street. 2. River Downtown Redevelopment Zone District— Design Guidelines: The Fort Collins River Downtown Redevelopment Zone District Design Guidelines were adopted in June of 2014. The document provides guidelines that promote the community's vision for the R-D-R zone through compatible new construction and redevelopment. The goal is to support investment that builds a strong, pedestrian -oriented urban fabric and encourages creative design that is compatible with the historic context. The guidelines outlined in this document were codified into the Land Use Code, under Article Four, in the R-D-R zone district development standards which are discussed in the next section. 3. Compliance with the R-D-R, River Downtown Redevelopment Zone District: A. Section 4.17(B)(2) — Land Use: A Standard Restaurant is a permitted use subject to Administrative Review. A Distillery that distills more than 15,000 gallons per year exceeds the allowable amount to be defined as a micro -distillery and is considered Light Industrial which is permitted subject to Planning and Zoning Board review. Since one of the two uses is a Type Two use, the P.D.P. in its entirety is considered a Type Two review. B. Section 4.17(D)(2)(a) —Development Standards— Streets and Walkways— Streets: The P.D.P. preserves the existing pattern of streets and blocks. There is no alley serving the site. The larger grid pattern is augmented by a courtyard located between the restaurant patio and the Mawson Lumber. This courtyard begins at the Linden Street sidewalk and is 50 feet in length and 20 feet in width for a total of 1,000 square feet. This courtyard is activated by the patio, raised planters and seat walls. At this scale, the courtyard is a fine-grained pedestrian amenity that helps break down the mass of the two buildings. The courtyard and patio also provide the benefit of pulling Building One 32 feet away from Mawson Lumber. C. Section 4.17(D)(2)(b) —Development Standards— Streets and Walkways— Driveways: The lot measures 489 feet along Willow Street and 136 feet along Linden Street. Along Willow Street, there is one driveway, 24-feet wide, that provides access to the service area at the back of the Distillery. The width is the minimum required for the turning radii for trucks. Due to the industrial operational aspects of this service area, this driveway will be gated and screened. Along Linden Street, however, Item # 5 Page 3 Agenda Item 5 Fort Collins Hentaae Park River District Block 8 Mixed -Use Development P.D.P. !T° Item # 5 Page 2 Agenda Item 5 STAFF REPORT May 12, 2016 � Planning and Zoning Board PROJECT NAME RIVER DISTRICT BLOCK EIGHT, MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT #PDP140016 STAFF Ted Shepard, Chief Planner PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a mixed -use project consisting of two buildings located at the southeast corner of Linden and Willow Streets. Building One would face Linden Street, be two stories in height and contain 10,251 square feet. This building includes a standard restaurant (2,271 square feet), and various ancillary functions such as tasting room and retail sales. Building Two would be along Willow Street, range in height between three and four stories and would contain 32,874 square feet for the distilling operation. Offices would be divided between both buildings. The development includes a 95-foot high water tower, grain silos, two courtyardspputdoor patio dining aad a secend floor bridge-eeeAeeting--the tw&-6kr�. The site is 1.16 acres and zoned R-D-R, River Downtown Redevelopment. APPLICANT: 360 Linden, LLC c/o Ripley Design, Inc. r��c 419 Canyon Avenue, Suite 200 1 Fort Collins, CO 80521 n OWNER: 360 Linden, LLC c/o Brandon Grebe 401 West Mountain Avenue, Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80521 RECOMMENDATION: Approval EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The P.D.P. complies with the Article Four, Section 4.17(D) Development Standards in the River Downtown Redevelopment zone district. The P.D.P. complies with the applicable Article Three General Development Standards. Item # 5 Page 1 Ms. Dunn said the metal didn't bother her, using Ranchway Feeds as an example of the use of metal in the area, particularly the cloverleaf silos. She also questioned why they hadn't included the Quonset huts in the area of adjacency. They discussed the era of the structures and felt they were old enough to have been included. Ms. McWilliams said some of the Quonset huts along Riverside were eligible and some were not. Ms. Dunn likes that the water tower is lower and thinks the metal is appropriate with the metal of the Quonset huts in the area and Ranchway Feeds. Mr. Lingle appreciated the reduced height of the water tower and said it looks much better. Chair Sladek agreed that the proportions of the water tower are appropriate now, and appreciated the engineering analysis and rationale for the height. Mr. Ernest agreed, adding that he had researched historic water towers and this does have a historic feel and look to it. He also said that the proportionality was improved with the water tower itself and the entire site. Chair Sladek noted that they are not pushing Applicants to replicate historic structures, but in this case the historic looking water tower was the Applicant's own design choice. Mr. Hogestad again brought up the metal on the south elevation. At his request, Ms. McWilliams re- read a relevant portion of LUC Section 4,17. He then commented that many of the metal buildings in the area were 25 years old or less. Chair Sladek pointed out that the Quonset huts and Ranchway Feeds were well over 25 years old. Mr. Hogestad said Ranchway Feeds was mostly painted concrete block with a few metal pieces. Chair Sladek asked the Commission to look at the sample motions and findings of fact included in the staff report and asked whether anyone had any additional findings of fact for consideration, either for or against. Ms. Gensmer asked to confirm that the plan of protection would be provided and asked whether it would come before the LPC. Ms. McWilliams said it is required in the Municipal Code, but they don't usually bring those forward to the Commission. Mr. Yatabe said that they could look at it for informational purposes, but the Commission would not impose that as a condition. Ms. Gensmer requested to see it when it is available, purely for informational purposes. Mr. Yatabe noted that they should include specific findings of fact for the decision maker, in this case the Planning & Zoning Board (P&Z). Mr. Ernest asked whether the suggested findings in the staff report were sufficient. Mr. Yatabe said they were sufficient, but they could elaborate on any particular point(s). Chair Sladek said they don't have a good feel for what issues may be of concern to the P&Z. Mr. Yatabe said they should express their own concerns for the consideration of the P&Z in its review. Commission Deliberation Mr. Ernest moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission recommend to the Decision Maker approval of the River District Block 8 Mixed -Use Project (PDP140016), finding it is in compliance with the standards contained in Land Use Code section 3.4.7 and the River Downtown Redevelopment (R-D-R) Zone District Design Guidelines in regard to compatibility with the character of the project's area of adjacency for the following reasons: 1) The project design uses massing and scale that is compatible with adjacent historic buildings. 2) The project uses appropriate step -backs and site design to mitigate height relative to the historic context. 3) The project relies on building materials that are compatible with adjacent historic properties. 4) The project uses window patterning and proportions that are typical of the adjacent historic context. Ms. Gensmer seconded. Mr. Lingle suggested adding to the motion that it was also in compliance with the River Downtown Redevelopment (R-D-R) Zone District Design Guidelines. Mr. Ernest and Ms. Gensmer agreed, and the motion has been amended to reflect that. U City of Fort Collins square feet), and shared restrooms (600 square feet) at level 1 with office space (4,460 square feet) at level 2 and a total building height of 37 feet tall. The project also includes distillery equipment on the east side, including a 95- foot tall water tower composed of a 31,000 to 40,000 tank supported by tapered legs. APPLICANT: Brandon Grebe, Blue Ocean, Inc. Staff Report Ms. Bzdek presented the staff report. Applicant Presentation Mr. Grebe addressed the Commission briefly, and introduced Eduardo Illanes from Oz Architecture to give the Applicant Presentation. Mr. Illanes discussed the reduction of the water tower height to 95', while maintaining the same capacity. He pointed out that the engineering justification of the height is included in the packet. He reviewed the models of the proposed building in its context. Public Input None Commission Questions and Discussion Mr. Frick asked about the mechanical equipment on top of the building from the South Elevation shown on packet page 26. Mr. Illanes clarified the location of the mechanical equipment structure. Mr. Frick also referred to the pictures of the view from Jefferson Street on packet page 37, and suggested there should be brick on the upper part of the metal building to break up the gray. Chair Sladek asked whether a color change instead of a materials change would make a difference. Mr. Frick thought a brick -colored metal siding would help break up the material. Mr. Hogestad said the Land Use Code (LUC) is clear about using materials similar to the existing historic buildings, and he doesn't see that this amount of metal meets that requirement. He suggested a middle ground, pointing out that the primary material should be brick, but it could be a combination of brick and metal. Mr. Hogestad said that was a very large, primary elevation. Mr. Illanes said they have met the requirements in the guidelines. Mr. Hogestad asserted that Section 3.4.7 of the LUC is the standard, not the River District Design Guidelines. Mr. Lingle said the guidelines were also important, not just the Code. He pointed out that there were all kinds of materials in the area, and he believes the design meets the requirements. Mr. Hogestad disagreed, emphasizing that the four-sided building deserved the same attention on each side. Ms. Zink asked what a composite metal panel was, and Mr. Illanes explained it's not corrugated per se, it is insulated. Ms. Zink pointed out that the buildings included in the area of adjacency adopted for the project are masonry buildings. She said she understands Mr. Hogestad's position, but doesn't agree that the entire south elevation needed to be brick. She said the metal ties in with the industrial nature of the building. Ms. McWilliams read from Section 4.17 of the LUC, which contained more information about the Downtown and River District contexts. Mr. Yatabe noted that the LUC refers to the River District Design Guidelines, and suggested that if they feel the LUC and guidelines are not in agreement, they should attempt to harmonize 3.4.7 and the guidelines. He went on to say that the guidelines are incorporated into the LUC. Mr. Ernest pointed out that on packet page 15, the review criteria in the staff report refers to both 3.4.7 and the R-D-R (River District Redevelopment) Zone District Design Standards and Guidelines. He noted that this an industrial use which is encouraged on page 6 of the RDR. He said there is a lot of metal in the photos used on pages 25 & 26 of the RDR, and that page 58 states that architectural metals are appropriate. He thought the materials were appropriate and meet both 3.4.7 and the guidelines. City of Fort Collins April 27, 2016 Ron Sladek, Chair Doug Ernest, Vice Chair Meg Dunn Bud Frick Kristin Gensmer Per Hogestad Dave Lingle Alexandra Wallace Belinda Zink City Council Chambers City Hall West 300 Laporte Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado Cablecast on City Cable Channel 880 on the Comcast cable system in HD The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224- 6001) for assistance. Regular Meeting April 27, 2016 Minutes - River District Block 8 Excerpt • CALL TO ORDER Chair Sladek called the meeting to order at 5:33 p.m. • ROLL CALL PRESENT: Dunn, Zink, Hogestad, Gensmer, Lingle, Ernest, Frick, Sladek ABSENT: Wallace (excused) STAFF: McWilliams, Bzdek, Dorn, Yatabe, Schiager, Shepard 2. RIVER DISTRICT BLOCK 8 MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT (OLD ELK DISTILLERY—PDP140016 REQUEST FOR RECOMMENDATION TO DECISION MAKER PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The River District Block 8 Mixed -Use Development is located on 1.2 acres at 360 Linden Street on the southwest corner of Linden Street and Willow Street. The property is located in the core of the River Downtown Redevelopment (R-D-R) Zone District; the portion of the site facing Linden is within the Old Town National Register Historic District. The proposed mixed use development includes a distillery production facility (33,448 square feet) along Willow Street that is 51 foot tall at the main roof with a 68 foot tall building tower. The mixed use building (9,900 square feet) at the Linden and Willow intersection includes a retail space (2,180 square feet), pub (1,800 City of Fort Coffins a: -=e April 27, 2016 Attachment 8 From: Martha Roden rmailto:martharodenCalgmail.coml Sent: Monday, May 02, 2016 10:52 AM To: Ted Shepard Subject: Typos fixed -- Fort Collins: Choice City for Alcoholics? (#PDP140016) Dear Ted, I will be in California on the day of the public hearing regarding River District Block 8, Mixed - Use Development, #PDP 140016. Therefore, I want to send you my comments now. Please share them with the developers who are pushing this project. Suffice it to say, I do NOT want to see yet another alcohol -based business in my part of town. There are already 60 Alcoholic Anonymous meetings and 17 AI -Anon meetings per week in Fort Collins. I think that should tell Fort Collins that our community has a serious problem with alcohol! I am tired of seeing vomit on the sidewalks and encountering loud, inebriated young people (and some old) around town. We need another distillery like we need a hole in the head. Mobb Distillery is right across the street from the lot, O'Dell Brewery is 2 blocks north, and the Surfside and Blind Pig bars are just one block south on Linden. Plus, there is already a plethora of bars on or near College from Laporte south to Mulberry — let's see, Copper Muse Distillery, Trailhead Tavern, Elliot's Martini Bar, Drunken Monkey, and Tony's, just to name a few (not to mention New Belgium Brewing, Fort Collins Brewery, and Equinox Brewing)! If someone wants to do something useful with the lot on the comer of Linden and Willow, how about an affordable housing complex, a homeless shelter, a food Coop, or services that EVERYONE can benefit from .... not just alcohol -loving customers! Do you really want For Collins to turn into the "Choice City for Alcoholics?" Martha Roden Martha Roden Contract Technical Writer, Instructional Designer, and Usability Specialist (970) 225-2572 (home) martharoden@gmail.com "Making the complex simple"