Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutGATEWAY AT PROSPECT REZONE - REZ160001 - MINUTES/NOTES - CORRESPONDENCE-NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGbe east of 1-25 since boundaries for these schools will not include areas west of I- 25. We acknowledge, however, that PSD has a school of choice option if schools are not at capacity serving their boundary area. 34. To what extent will you be improving the open space between the ditches? A. Our plan is to keep this area unimproved and natural. For example, there would be no bluegrass turf and irrigation. As mentioned, the City's regional trail is planned to go through this area so there may be some benches, and the like, but overall, the area is expected to serve passive not active uses. 35. Will Buckeye Street be extended to the east? A. No, we do not intend to extend Buckeye and it currently terminates at a house. 36. We need a transition in density for the benefit of the County residents. A. As mentioned, we think that a sensitive transition can be provided by not only the significant distances between the existing houses but also by the landscaping and buffering that we commit to providing per the conditions that we have already agreed during the A.P.U. process. RE 29. How do you define "peak hour?" A. The a.m. peak is between 7:30 — 8:30 and the p.m. peak is between 4:30 and 5:30. 30. Does the traffic study account for stadium traffic? A. No, stadium traffic, as is currently the case with Hughes Stadium and will be the case with the new stadium, is a considered an event and not a daily occurrence. Response from City Traffic Engineer: Our analysis for the new stadium is that the traffic will on a game day (typically Saturday) will be roughly equivalent to the peak traffic on a Thursday p.m. 31.1 mentioned at the last meeting that by not having four lanes on Prospect between 1-25 and the Poudre River causes the project to fail the requirements for having adequate public facilities. Response from City Traffic Engineer: Please note that we measure traffic levels of service at intersections and not along any particular segment of roadway. Since congestion occurs at intersections with turn movements, through traffic volumes between intersections is not measured. Now, having said that, we are looking at requiring a westbound right turn lane on Prospect to go north on Summitview. 32. Turning left out at Hageman's on a Saturday afternoon is pretty scary. Response from City Traffic Engineer: We know. We are thinking of constructing a three -lane cross-section along Hageman's so exiting vehicles can make a two - stage left -turn exit and then merge with through traffic. Again, please note that there is no capital funding available for this improvement at this time. 33.At the previous meetings, we have mentioned that there will soon be a cumulative effect of increasing traffic on Prospect due to the stadium, Poudre School District plan for a high school/middle school campus in Timnath and the new C.S.U. Health Center at College and Prospect. Are these facilities accounted for in the traffic studies? A. Yes, our traffic studies include pending developments, existing background traffic and an annual growth rate in the background traffic. Then we factor in the proposed project and project out the traffic impacts for five years. The scope of our traffic studies are approved by the City. Response from City Traffic Engineer: We are aware of the PSD plans for a high school and middle school campus. Most of the trips for these two schools should Ez These two attributes will complement the existing City of Fort Collins Natural Areas (Riverbend Ponds and Running Deer) and the Poudre River floodplain. 23.Is the open space between the ditches zoned Urban Estate and, if so, can this acreage be used to determine the number of potential units under a Cluster Development Plan? A. Yes, this area is zoned U-E and, therefore, these acres could be counted as part of the basis that determines the maximum allowable number of dwelling units that could be within a Cluster Plan. Keep in mind that under a Cluster Plan, no less than 50% of the total land area (zoned U-E) must be preserved as open space. Without a Cluster Plan, the required minimum lot size in the U-E is .5 acre. 24. From what I see, there are two access points into the portion of the O.D.P. that is west of the Frontage Road. Is that correct? A. Yes, there is full -turning access, by way of a planned round -about, at the Frontage Road. And there is three-quarter access (no left -out) at a planned intersection at Prospect Road. 25. Will this round -about be a single lane or a two-lane? A. A single lane will have sufficient capacity to handle the anticipated level of traffic. 26. Will the developer be required to construct any public improvements along Summitview Drive? A. No. (What about a westbound right -turn lane?) 27.At one point, for eastbound Prospect traffic, we had a separate left -turn arrow at the traffic signal so we could make a protected left turn to north on Summitview. Then, mysteriously, this left turn arrow was taken away. With all the westbound traffic coming in to town from 1-25, this left -turn arrow was very convenient. Could the City bring back this protected left turn? Response from City Traffic Engineer: We can look into this. From traffic engineering perspective, there are pros and cons to providing a separate left -turn arrow. On the one hand, the protected left turn makes it safer to turn left to go north. On the other hand, our crash data suggest that there would be an increase in rear -end collisions. 28. With 276 multi -family units on 20.8 acres, what is the traffic impact? A. This would generate approximately 230 peak hour trips during the peak hour. This a ratio of .833 trips per unit during peak. VA street that goes over Boxelder Creek and ties into the commercial area. Please note that multi -family residents will be able to walk to the future public neighborhood park (distance xx) and the future regional trail which abuts the site (Running Deer Natural Area distance xx). 19. So a grocery store is allowed in the C, Commercial zone? A. Yes, that's correct. 20.As I mentioned, last time, it seems like an abrupt transition between our County lots and the proposed M-M-N parcel. A. We are aware of this concern that has been raised at the previous two meetings. As a result, we have committed to providing a landscape buffer on the west side of our future north -south street that ranges in width from nine to 88 feet that can be densely landscaped. Most of the houses to our west front on Summitview Drive and are separated from our multi -family parcel by varying distances. One house is 35 feet west of our site and we have met with this owner and this person has indicated support for our project. All the other houses front on Summitview and range from 640 to 787 feet from our project boundary. In addition, our future buildings will also be setback from our future north -south street (76 feet of public right-of-way) creating even more separation. We think with these separations, combined with effective landscaping, we will successfully mitigate any impacts associated with our multi -family project. We also think that be capping our density, our project will be roughly similar in scope as if it were an L-M-N development. 21.1'm concerned that even if the CDOT project, with the City and Town and landowner participation, results in widening Prospect Road, and combined with the developer's obligation for their frontage, there will still be gaps between the river and the Frontage Road. When can we expect these gaps to be fully improved? Response from City Traffic Engineer: As you know, we are aware of these concerns. At this time, there currently is no City capital project that is designated to address this segment of East Prospect Road. Since this gap is considered an existing deficiency as part of the regional arterial system, it is not the developer's obligation to address. Instead, the completion of this segment to the arterial standard will fall to the City as a future capital improvement just like what you see going on at the intersection of Prospect and Timberline. 22.1'm concerned about the wildlife that uses the area. There are typically lots of geese that are attracted to the site. A. Keep in mind that we will not develop the open space to the north between the two ditches. And, we will be required to provide a buffer along Boxelder Creek. A the Employment parcel (8.4 acres), please note that there is no residential development density cap in the E zone. 15. If there are no density caps in either the M-M-N or the E zones, then how can we expect the future developer to hold to your commitment to density of 13 to 14 dwelling units per acre? A. We are willing to add a condition to our Rezoning request that would cap our gross residential density just as we did for our A.P.U. 16. So if the 12.4 acres remained as L-M-N, the maximum allowable density could range from 112 units (9.00 d.u./a) to 149 units (12.00 d.u./a)? A. That's correct and we are suggesting that these 12.4 acres come in between 13 and 14 d.u./a for a range of 161 to 174 units under M-M-N zoning but as conditioned by the same parameters as the request for an Addition of Permitted Use. B. We would like to emphasize that our Rezoning to M-M-N will be conditioned just like the request for an Addition of Permitted Use. We would commit to a cap of 14 dwelling units per acre. We are proposing a multi -family project of approximately 276 units on a total combined M-M-N parcel of 20.8 acres which equates to 13.27 dwelling units per acre. We are suggesting a cap of 14 d.u./a due to the fact that after surveying the site, land may be taken out of the gross acreage for public roads, private roads and various other dedications and easements for utilities which would drive up the dwelling -units -per -acre ratio but without adding units. 17. Do the extra units gained by the M-M-N zoning have any bearing on the recommendations of the Traffic Study? A. The gain in multi -family units versus L-M-N zoning results in approximately an increase of 100 trips during the peak hour. This increase does not result in any changes to the recommendations in the T.I.S. (Seems high — 174-149 = 25, so how doe we get up to 100?) 18.1'm concerned that you are putting 276 units of multi -family, and all those residents, in area where there is no walkability to a grocery store or other convenient services. Under typical City Plan zoning, M-M-N would be near commercial area that would have a grocery store and similar services. A. While we may not have N-C (Neighborhood Commercial) zoning next to our proposed M-M-N, we do have 27 acres of land zoned C, Commercial, which, as I recall, allows most of the same uses as allowed under N-C. In terms of walkability, we will be providing a trail along Boxelder Creek and we have approached the City about widening the public sidewalk on the future east -west 5 A. As we have noted, there is a significant portion of the site that is mapped as being the Boxelder Creek floodplain. But, this area will reduced as a result of the new culverts under both 1-25 and Prospect Road and overflow weir that were constructed this past year by the Boxelder Basin Stormwater Regional Authority. This included five new culverts (total of seven) under Prospect and opening two closed culverts under 1-25 (total of four). The overflow weir is 2.7 acres. This is why Prospect was closed for three months this past summer. In addition, the BBSRA is in the process of constructing a system of flood control improvements, including a new reservoir, further upstream from our property. The result is that the extent of the floodplain on our property will be reduced. Once these improvements have been completed, FEMA will amend their floodplain maps accordingly and remove the floodplain. We anticipate that the new mapping will be in place in 2018. All told, these flood control improvements cost $10,851,588 million dollars. 11.Are there areas of the site that are not in the Boxelder Creek floodplain? A. Yes, the further away from Boxelder Creek to the west, this area is not impacted by the FEMA floodplain. 12. Will you be making any changes to the two ditches? A. No, there will be no changes to the two ditches. 13. With a potential of 20.8 acres of M-M-N, combined with the fact that multi -family is a permitted use in the E, Employment zone, of which there are an additional 51.6 acres within the O.D.P., I'm concerned about a possible massive multi- family project on 72.4 acres. A. We are not intending to develop the site in that fashion. And, we are restricted from this happening by the Land Use Code. This is because multi -family in the E zone is a secondary use and is restricted from taking up more than 25% of the 51.6 acres. The balance of the E zone, 75%, must be developed as primary uses. 14.1'm concerned about the additional traffic generated by the density allowed by rezoning to M-M-N. A. Yes, based on our previous meetings we are keenly aware of the traffic issues related to our project within the context of the immediate area. Please keep in mind that we are rezoning only 12.4 acres of L-M-N. Overall, across a multi - phased project, residential gross density in the L-M-N is capped at 9.00 dwelling units per acre. L-M-N zoning also allows a single phase to be up to 12.00 dwelling units per acre as long as the overall does not exceed 9.00 d.u./a. Our multi -family project comes in around 13 to 14 d.u./a. Regarding the rezoning of 0 A. Yes, this has not changed. The area between the two ditches will be set aside as open space. This area would be difficult to develop. The exception is that this area is being considered as a logical location for the future regional bike trail per the City's Parks and Recreation Master Plan. 5. As the land owner going through the entitlement process, is it still your intention to sell the property in the future to a developer? A. Yes. & Will the future developer be obligated by the parameters of the both the Rezoning and O.D.P.? A. Yes, that is correct. 7. 1 live to the north in Sunrise Acres. Will any of our neighborhood streets be extended into your development? I'm concerned about Locust Street and Sherry Drive being used by future residents of your project. A. Due to the constraints of the two ditches, and consistent with our previous presentations, we are not planning on extending any of the streets in Sunrise Acres into our project. Response from City Traffic Engineer: As you can see, Locust Street currently terminates in a dead-end at the applicant's property. In order to provide a standard turn -around on a public street, we will be requiring the developer to provide a turn -around on their property. This will help fire trucks navigate Sunrise Acres. 8. And, just to be sure, your plan still shows no street connections to the west into Boxelder Estates? A. Yes, as we have discussed in our previous presentations, due to the H.O.A. purchasing a buffer strip, we are precluded from any street connections to the west. And, south of the H.O.A. buffer strip, we do not plan for any street connections. 9. Are you still willing to discuss various options as to long term maintenance of the buffer with the H.O.A.? A. Yes, we think we may have a mutual interest in how best to manage this buffer with the H.O.A. and we look forward to having that conversation. 10. Could you review the floodplain issues and timing associated with amending the FEMA maps? 3 Questions, Concerns, Comments 1. Could you explain the progress that is being made with regard to future widening of the 1-25 / Prospect Road interchange? A. Yes, we are working with CDOT to find a joint public/private funding mechanism to leverage the interstate widening project between Mulberry and Loveland by adding the interchange widening to the project scope. As you know, for this segment of the highway, CDOT plans on sending out for bid the widening of 1-25 from two lanes to three. This project is estimated to cost $235 million dollars. But, this project is funded for widening the lanes only and does not include improving the Prospect Road interchange. The cost of widening the interchange (bridge, ramps and roadway) is estimated to be an additional 28 million dollars. As a result of this added cost, we, along with the City of Fort Collins and the Town of Timnath and the other three adjoining properties (Colorado State University Research Foundation, Paradigm Properties LLC and the White Brothers) have committed to raising the 28 million dollars so the interchange is widened in conjunction with the larger CDOT project. If not done now, CDOT estimates that interchange improvements would be delayed until 2035. The four adjoining property owners have agreed to raise seven million with the balance raised by Fort Collins and Timnath (seven million dollars each.) B. The widened interchange would include a new seven -lane cross-section bridge, new ramps and widening of Prospect Road. CDOT anticipates that construction would begin in early 2018. 2. How far in each direction would be the extent of the four -lane widening? A. Our understanding at this time is that the four lanes would extend to the frontage roads. 3. That may not be sufficient to mitigate the traffic generated by the development. A. Keep in mind that as developers, we are obligated to improve the linear front footage along our property that adjoins Prospect Road. And, in conjunction with the recent stormwater improvements, we have already dedicated 43 feet of additional right-of-way along Prospect Road. Further, as each building permit is issued, for both commercial and residential buildings, the City will collect the Street Oversizing Fee which is earmarked for funding improvements to arterial and collector streets and sidewalks on a city-wide basis. In 2016, the Street Oversizing Fee for a multi -family dwelling unit is $2,143. (This fee is typically increased annually to keep pace with capital construction costs.) For 276 units, the total Street Oversizing Fee would be, based on 2016 rates, $591,468. 4. Is the area north of the Dry Creek Ditch still slated to be open space? 2 NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING PROJECT: The Gateway at Prospect Road Overall Development Plan and Rezoning LOCATION: Northwest quadrant of 1-25 and East Prospect Road DATE: December 19, 2016 APPLICANT: Tim McKenna, Fort Collinsl1-25 Interchange Corner LLC CONSULTANTS: Jim Birdsall, The Birdsall Group Kristin Turner, The Birdsall Group Stephanie Thomas, Northern Engineering Matt Delich, Delich and Associates CITY STAFF: Ted Shepard, Chief Planner Martina Wilkinson, Traffic Operations Engineer Project Description This item was formerly a Request for an Addition of Permitted Use to allow multi -family on 12.4 acres of land zoned L-M-N due to the request exceeding three development standards. Since multi -family is already a permitted use in the L-M-N per se, the development review process has now been adjusted to delete this request. This item now consists of a Rezoning of 12.4 acres of L-M-N and 8.4 acres E, Employment, a total of 20.8 acres, to M-M-N. This item is also being submitted in conjunction with an Amended Overall Development Plan (O.D.P.) on 177 acres land located generally at the northwest quadrant of 1-25 and East Prospect Road. This area was formerly known as Interstate Lands O.D.P. The purpose of an O.D.P. is to establish general planning and development control parameters for projects that will be developed in phases, with multiple submittals, while allowing sufficient flexibility to permit detailed planning in subsequent submittals. Approval of an O.D.P. does not establish any vested right to develop property in accordance with the plan. The requests for Rezoning and an Amended O.D.P. would have the effect of reducing the L-M-N zone from 68 to 55.6 acres, reducing the E zone from 60 to 51.6 acres and adding 20.8 acres of M-M-N zoning. Unless otherwise noted, all responses are from the applicant or the consulting team.