Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLIND PROPERTY, 2ND FILING - PDP - 39-94D - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSVICZM MAP m�mt.s.m .o.m LAND USE BREAKDOWN AREA dOV IAimµ riK• OA6 la�lmY- _ MRMLM10.V IfpOnl,M1@M.TYI! tORY •l'K MIOV.IMq W.. Y�'m[fY@IIEI t>.n0µ Ipibµ iMK 111K IQ I.aeeM L]I Ke DM�111111P'm5 IMW PMY.Y wTIIO6 xta�lRn LUY =&UM OPlmlIY � ♦T'd µ SOIARORFNI®LOTS Mi.rw/Is- ea• 1�®ptnrl.IglM,q Tf.lnµ sd � n nre� Iwaacvna sa.ImM m M11bd.WA tRlaM6 1� tmelwnmecnge 14uxM •I, IOfxmQIM1m IAl1.mgR ad PIDORMU 1®MM1npNNlill mI.LO VB MrIPV1MPAleUPp pRDYIDPlt awre pRylNp ouP mP urge :I VI! OYI®MCQ�YL/CaI�A,R MAIdWM&N31910 H001T wwrA.. •oaaee Mo 1]emn oae na.e xulnma seleava .nd, mro �dW� c"`drw�c it �n RPM b vMwa s COMWJNI TY CENTER LAND USE BREAKDOWN Y,IEA cvnaemd,m farmµ snK cVJfn1� 'r.,w�cuvn 'd pet9'Q i]aa. m'IDµ bJ[ rorxAw, lan+w sea p�ppq Apt pWR01 MYIMR npagt 11}mg6 MPINILL'R INWXO pIWVID® a o}s PMYIA mw.veaa nP a,R�,r GENERAL NOTES 1. smemwatxnwmuluTv:+i FM p®JIIPIlLMM116lOf/li6Tb dmtCIAMOIa1]H m LIIRIB MOYMR 1 FIdRnRRIO VLLPRCfdG(EDOM1mldit'mLOE®O,dIR\ 1 mwV]nasal BrAaaeMNal/JImW]a YeMlMp®YnGV M9Wi NeliVplC damAm m a Mvrtxnm nAla'eTe,mnmmnav a 9V61Vd1{V Wf11OT1dY(tllme✓9A!!?CY.1WRiOWY1R : Mmaexurl{R41e.'Ie1KebWCdssq.Kmsxoonmuoays s PdlwnselvasercauwlaMvaveabar reR'uvmmnlswbMr IbITRIObt 1 /11 Kr1IJeQMIX1e0.V MtV19V MoelllCdd/1LddaeltPeMl6 IGUlQ1 YfIM IAOIM.r�eppVleAVnmglC9eaeYaIVYRIfCMa .W ®I,i®dM1An YL. ellleb'®MI,IMMIpmM11eN1Cfle OIYI.[otRITIIM wMRW mtamMl0.ve UlV6WWetwAom6MTMInOY.Ve11Mv dm6XV.RO WRIIMnxipOKnOMGQee0.TMrzeOTMTMT}p)m mMnw. sroM mwnme d Ona W KleOnaldatmdOYLTMµN]I neeIECMI.WA'llfeuOliVMd.Y1¢M W VxYl6wMedMe.Vt mR1dM WO WLL6HMCI®.d{dIC)IOTNele6 WIPYf.V oowmrm Tuevlomsuv b Q�YABpeiar.MLmaINVaY9eWla MdLiP011Mf11@lf.V11bOM .vp lgla N111 w N W M fF f bl9V l d w d,wneO MOY W O tl. MrRaectY.u.mcmmwnmPsnruiwelwavosl.maams oeleevmnntrssa� IL WIbn WIN1MM1aCTl11VLNM.YMIIOnQIQfd11b1anfMOldi IrMYRe(YaOIR b..utmsxnnRvmrzova znK�vmziarmxloA®mt,.mr..aasevnn rmucmlar PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Y..lYrpYlv4ir.YYwn. •r.wYa.titrarww�µ.ar�trn,+pY+.��.r SIGNATURES oevv doer Tal �.mmv°'ODitwi�n•Mw.Mo ��,w.rwm'.:` Y•,®rr.twrl�V. m4 VnVYYrr.�r A��Y �ww mdtudtAx� a�.n� ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE vaam arrw t>e Atc4l, murc I�ne SY• el.m.,n{ a..vlt� 'Iv.leM.�an�a •s 1MU1•rO,Y 3.6.3 STREET PATTERN AND WNNECTMTYSTANDAf95 neximrwremwuT¢aemrouv.m�usce,aa rwcn.mv�+ YW Iptt l,IRf C'A6TOAMDIIOY.MYmROfM?0115N0 ECn2b.'Cll RIY.IQIY. T69M.pld 9 W 11G16®RN Rf. sew+ gMes'L eRIdIRCIImeKLV9Mf/EIBI II W IY®O'R/ 1. MWIWnVO11Y0lOOM'QbOnpPM1R4VlbiMMlOMAYy®1�I tmW MPRPe11YRmpYMYNIef.PNNeRMI11ASAYxRINTRVLRa1W.A ouevddozmMim OPMi VOVIYTmiiaRYe[rdpeaalprv.elite INMG,M1Tb,mIM two MraeleYrrtAdeM1 VeR rro wluisllar msacdaroMwmRdYrRiaevrYgiom ma weal MAOKMTfYtlaIM1Y WISdMB]tlfMee Lf MllnlQlY.NOw MM® nurse msmeenmeroM IaRn ememm wraMra.nnrcacaw.rzK v N W TNealxdG M W Ipp, lllmeRn emeMb'IO M W 18 M pRl4 lm.yVBOMedMnpl.NnYAM1MMTix IT MOfbMdMMVIM IIOQDw Nim21®lpll QNY4 d MddnllY bMlLgl WL9111f ReGlalll6e®a i 4KAmM,ebM16TAMT/ORmMIKee11Y MMLL/YDYIW RmE,eMmKtTlllTtngllMPO'®!®salve M W f.NO.W wEIOIM,de6lnry NM®dYIIW. SHEET INDEX 1. cmasar z mxw s. dimropaRM a ovmar.woKvcrlw v nTaz�.wss'rsellM e ..wnsrwxeawsav 1. Mbnm,spzvsvnrrn 0 Q O 0 � 0 C' COVER SHEET .arum 1 m8 IV. CONCLUSIONS This study assessed the impacts of the Lind Property Development on the short range (2008) street system in the vicinity of the proposed development. As a result of this analysis, the following is concluded: The development of the Lind Property Development is feasible from a traffic engineering standpoint. At full development, the Lind Property Development will generate approximately 4875 daily trip ends, 381 morning peak hour trip ends, and 512 afternoon peak hour trip ends. Current operation at the key intersections is acceptable with existing controls and geometry. Using the short range (2008) background traffic forecasts, peak hour signal warrants are likely to be met at the Timberline/Vine, Mountain Vista/Timberline, and CR11/Country Club intersections using speed greater than 40 mph. Using the short range (2008) total traffic forecasts, peak hour signal warrants are on the threshold of being met at the CR11/CR52 intersection using speed greater than 40 mph. However, acceptable operation may be achieved with stop sign control and improved geometry, or the City may desire to delay installation of signals by using all -way stop sign control or roundabout control. In the short range (2008) future, given development of the Lind Property Development and an increase in background traffic, most key intersections are shown to operate acceptably with improved geometry, all -way stop sign control, roundabout control, or warranted signalization at some intersections. Many of the geometric improvements, particularly at off -site intersections, are necessary with the background traffic. As such, these improvements should not be the sole responsibility of the Lind Property. The Lemay/Vine intersection will not operate acceptably without geometric improvements. The Timberline/Vine intersection will operate acceptably with geometric improvements. Acceptable level of service is achieved for pedestrian and bicycle modes based upon the measures in the multi -modal transportation guidelines. The is no transit service in this area of Fort Collins. 24 are: 1) Richard's Lake residential and the homes adjacent to Fort Collins Country Club and 2) future Maple Hill residential. This site is in an area type termed "other." The level of service determination assumes that future residential developments (namely, Richard's Lake and Gillespie) will build their streets and adjacent streets in accordance with Fort Collins Standards. This being the case, pedestrian facilities will exist where they currently do not. This is a reasonable assumption. If this does not occur or is not accepted by the City, then acceptable pedestrian level of service cannot be achieved. The Pedestrian LOS Worksheet is provided in Appendix F. The minimum level of service for "other" is C for all categories. With the assumed future pedestrian facilities along future streets, the pedestrian level of service will be acceptable. Bicycle Level of Service Appendix F shows a map of the area that is within 1320 feet of the Lind Property Development. Based upon Fort Collins bicycle LOS criteria, there are no bicycle destinations within 1320 feet of the Lind Property Development. A bicycle LOS worksheet is provided in Appendix F. Transit Level of Service This area of Fort Collins is not/will not be served by transit service according to the Fort Collins Transit Plan. 23 O 0 z z 0 U ® 540 -� Lu� DAILY TRAFFIC FORECAST Figure 9 22 existing intersections may not be prudent. Contributions from developments that impact these intersections would be more practical. A funding formula could be determined that provides a fair contribution for all future developments. That formula should have a component that includes the existing traffic that uses the intersections. The auxiliary lanes at the Mountain Vista/CR9, Mountain Vista/Timberline, CR11/Country Club, and CR11/CR52 intersections are required with the background peak hour traffic._ As such, construction of these auxiliary lanes should be the responsibility of the City (and the County, where appropriate). While the center left -turn lanes will not be necessary on CR52 at Access A and Access B from an operational point of view, they will be required based upon the street standards. The geometry on the west leg of CR52 should be the responsibility of developments that are served by that leg. : The northbound right -turn lane at the CR11/CR52 intersection is warranted because of the bind Property site generated traffic. Site generated traffic from the yet undeveloped property to the south will also contribute some traffic to this movement in the future. At the CR11 and Site Access intersections, the southbound left - turn lanes are only required because of the default criteria in the street standards for a two-lane arterial street. Street Classifications Figure 9 shows the daily traffic forecast at each of the accesses to the Lind Property, Filing 2 from the external street system. Volumes will generally decrease further into the site. The Fort Collins Master Street Plan shows that the Lind Property has a number of collector streets within it. The range of traffic volumes for collector streets is 2500-3800 vehicles per day for a minor collector and 3500-5000 vehicles per day for a major collector. Figure 9 indicates that none of the streets within the Lind Property meet the volume threshold of a collector street. The volumes are at levels that would indicate that they should all be local streets, except for Access C, which should be a connector street. The street system in this area of Fort Collins has higher classified streets than traffic forecasts show. It is not known why this is the case, but the classifications are not consistent with that in the remainder of the City. This issue has been raised a number of times with City staff. Given this analysis, it is recommended that streets in this area of the City be -reevaluated with regard to classification and the streets within the Lind Property be classified as local streets or a connector street at Access C. Pedestrian Level of Service Appendix F shows a map of the area that is within 1320 feet of the Lind Property Development. There will be two pedestrian destinations within 1320 feet of the Lind Property Development. These 21 1 Q CR11/Access D OLemayNne OTimt,wAineNine OCR11/Country Club I © CR11/CR52 JIB IO CR11/Access C 1 � CR11/Access G OTimberline/Mtn a ® Mtn Vsta/CR9 T CR52/Access A 11 CR11/Access E ® CR52/Access B 12 CR11/Access F --mm- - Denotes Lane Road 1 Vine a) c a) U- ORT RANGE (2008) GEOMETRY 504 Mountain Vista /a0 d Figure 8 20 Continued from previous page TABLE 4 Short Range (2008) Total Peak Hour Operation (.� ^tY V' Y`�'�`^"Y. c'^��^} y. f}�r}�-^Y wec'a J'h E}�_L'.r�✓t VjTi�!'� '+f� �l. t4)i 1'.@ `r �T1A�4Y }YR^.. 4i-1�ry ��Ifvi{.. .iY Y•t.n 4�.1�..Y F,�.,Y.f�PK` tl 3 °i""^�{S• 1,,,, �U2',*}I �Y'FYyyyyy 4, iIi� �T'...�lL} @'M.�:!iM�Tt �^'lN�+i#�l,Fl j'�1�1'�-T;1•-p�lr-H�oi�i�.� Y�ryC {� ^M�nS �s.} k✓�IIIA�+'.Mv .4.YfL. `fr���� �r��n���y,?,p` pJ� Tti eT��sf ���'�"1NI I•�f i4YCN .41ii..-.i�.�,°iS�M Vhi CR11/Access C (stop sin WB LT/RT B B SB LT A A CR11/Access D (stop sign WB LT/RT B B SB LT A A CR11/Access E (stop sign WB LT/RT B B SB LT A A CR11/Access F stop sign) WB LT/RT B B SB LT A A CR11/Access G (stop sign) EB LT/T/RT A A WB LT/T/RT B B NB LT A A SB LT A A CR11/Access H (stop sin WB LT/RT B B SB LT A A 19 Continued from previous page TABLE 4 Short Range (2008) Total Peak Hour Operation 't.i �! g a�}I ? +'�j� )�SJ�j 14.�iy{f Yn�yb� ri.YM ''-,:. +srlrtpr t'r,,;:.`.:;'�?r !,. =Wru 3� itw y.'C�,:vr,C e?.'hr:,��ti� [Rtl(j 31.I�i•j1G 1'M4 }. +•.v= .Rrai:=T pr '1"an? .ri'�ti"'.• �Maf ..+,.°� K w4wa lty`v..S .(1 roe" .=ut y-'i+o ysw^;r.. as':' li .ph`1 ly 1��- } 'i,;4'S� CR11/Country Club (signal) EB C C WB C C NB B B SB B B OVERALL B B CR11/CR52 (stop sign) EB LT C D EB T/RT B B EB APPROACH B B WB LT E F WB T/RT A B WB APPROACH E F NB LT A A SB LT A A CR11/CR52 (all -way stop) EB LT B B EB T/RT B A EB APPROACH B B WB LT B B WB T/RT A A WB APPROACH B B NB LT A A NB T/RT B F NB APPROACH B F SB LT A A SB T E C SB APPROACH E C OVERALL D F CR11/CR52 (roundabout) a*��.VEC?Raho�"" 0.10/0.12 Latdlfowe�tioial �='r'' EB 0.05/0.06 WB 0.12/0.14 0.12/0.15 NB 0.24/0.28 0.64/0.76 SB 0.50/0.60 0.32/0.39 CR11/CR52 (signal) EB C C WB C C NB B B SB B B OVERALL B B CR52/Access A (stop sign) NB LT/T/RT A A SB LTIr/RT A A EB LT A A WB LT A A CR52/Access B (stop sign) NB LT/T/RT A A SB LT/T/RT A A EB LT A A WB LT A A �onunuea on nex[ page 18 TABLE 4 Short Range (2008) Total Peak Hour Operation fie MOO 0 7-0,, 17.77 .......... 4, ....... ...... Lemay/Vine (signal) EB_ C F WB E E NB B F SB E B OVERALL E E Timberline/Vine (signal) EB C E WB C c NB D E SB B B OVERALL C D Mountain Vistarrimberline (all -way stop) EBT B C EB RT C D EB APPROACH C C WB LT B C WB T B D WB APPROACH B D SB LT B F SB RT A B SB APPROACH B F OVERALL C E Mountain Vistarrimberfine (roundabout) EB 0.70/0.84 0.47/0.57 WB 0.27/0.32 0.6410.79 NB 0.26/0.32 0.64/0.77 Mountain Vistarl'imberline (signal) EB B B WB B B NB C C OVERALL B C Mountain VistaICR9 (stop sign) SB LT/RT C B EB LT/T A A CRI I lCountry Club (all -way stop) EB LT B D EB T/RT B B EB APPROACH B C WB LT B B WB T/RT B B WBAPPROACH B B NB LT B C NB T/RT B F NB APPROACH B F SB LT A .13 SBT E D SB APPROACH E D OVERALL D F CR1 I /Country Club (roundabout) v, K &RaQdqbppLe EB 0.34/0.43 0.45/0.55 WB 0.06/0.08 0.08/0.10 NB 0.26/0.31 0.8010.98 SB 0.69/0.83 0.49/0.60 Continued on ne)d page 17 TABLE 3 Short Range (2008) Background Peak Hour Operation �1 .l.,Jt > n} :. r4-i i .1, .. )� ! <'4.-, .w.• C ?4 A i rrr'�. ../ � 4iq+ YK'3-F 4 d YY* '4 II�TT4„ J rT Y.4 R✓Y `1 J.iV .j :/llr .�.. ..Y bVr. if�l LemayMne (signao EB C E WB D D E SB p B OVERALL D D Timberline/Vine (signal) EB C C WB C C NB C D SB B B OVERALL C C Mountain Vistammberline (stop sign) NB LT C F NB RT B B NB APPROACH B F WB LT A A Mountain VistaTmberline (all -way stop) EB T B B EB RT B B EB APPROACH B B WB LT B C WB T A C WB APPROACH B C SB LT B C SB RT A B SB APPROACH B C OVERALL B C Mountain Vista/CR9 (stop sign) SB LT/RT B B EB LT/T A A CR11/Country Club (all -way stop) EB LT B C EB T/RT B B EB APPROACH B B WB LT B B WB T/RT A B WB APPROACH A B NB LT B B NB T/RT B C NB APPROACH B C SB LT A B SB T B B SB APPROACH B B OVERALL B C CR11/CR52 (stop sign) EB LT BC EB T/RT B A EB APPROACH B B WB LT C C WB T/RT A B WB APPROACH C C NB LT A A SB LT A A 16 streets. The roundabout would still experience delays due to the railroad and, as such, was deemed to not be a reasonable solution. Since acceptable operation is achieve at other arterial/arterial intersections, the roundabout analysis is not necessary at this time. Operation Analysis Capacity analyses were performed at the key intersections. The operations analyses were conducted for the short range analysis, reflecting a year 2008 condition. The intersection geometry used in the various analyses is that which is currently existing or needed to achieve acceptable operation in the short range future. Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 5, the key intersections operate in the short range (2008) background condition as indicated in Table 3. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix D. The key intersections will operate acceptably during the peak hours with improved geometry, all -way stop sign control, roundabout control, or warranted signalization. Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 7 and the recommended geometrics, the key intersections operate in the short range (2008) total condition as indicated in Table 4. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in Appendix E. The key intersections will operate acceptably during the peak hours with improved geometry, all -way stop sign control, roundabout control, or warranted signalization with some exceptions. The Lemay/Vine intersection will experience delays that are commensurate with level of service E. The minimum operation at this intersection is level of service D. This intersection will experience adequate public facilities (APF) issues without improvements. It is not known whether the necessary improvements will be made by the year 2008 (short range future). At the Timberline/Vine intersection, the south and west legs will experience delays that are commensurate with level of service E in the afternoon peak hour. Provision of northbound and southbound left -turn lanes of Timberline Road will enable this intersection to operate acceptably. Geometry Figure 8 shows the schematic of the short range (2008) geometry at the key intersections. The lengths of the auxiliary lanes are provided in the design drawings provided by the project civil engineer (The Sear - Brown Group). The "Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards" was used to establish the design of the auxiliary lanes. The geometry shown at the Lemay/Vine and Timberline/Vine intersections, in their current locations, would require acquisition of right-of-way on the east and west legs of both intersections. Given the City's plan to build the Lemay Avenue and Timberline Road overpasses, expenditure of funds, public or private, to improve the 15 OLemay/Vine 0 o m 0 130215 345270 J i 1� 1175/130 45/1255 4 200/405 w o 90/100 LO 0 11) CR11/Country Club LO 1- o 0 m LO N v in +- 15110 J 1 /-3525 100280 J f 5/15 150/125CO f� OTimberline/Vine LO to �o o 25/45 N m -a*- 165/150 J l 180/115 80235 - f I 1051145 110/165 LA 0 c (A) CR11/CR52 r> O f- NOM loono 1015 — f f I NOM 0 0 0 55/35 LO N � m N OTimberline/Mtn Vista ® Mtn Vista/CR9 0 0 m � 0 0_ f 105290 25/80 1651185 1701365 270/155 -y ( 50195 475/315 - y IW IW 335/195 -i T CR52/Access A `NOM �0p �* Z Z -� 30/30 0/5 Is/)0 20/35 NOM ZZZ- ® CR52/Access B o m o \�--5/15 N Z r 1025 -J 1 /- 5/10 520 —� f 15/15 NOM o Z Z OCR11/Access C 0 CR11/Access D CR11/Access E 2 CR11/Access F o o a LO o o `� N o `C. 5/0 o `C� 5/5 ,'� 515 N 5/5 �3020 �4025 �70/45 �4025 �C �� �La a� LON V CR11/Access G I L� CR11/Access H a �-515 0 f Z \ r-- AM/PM `n r 0 +-NOM NOM 1s/10 Roun5Nearest �3020 j Vehicles 5/5 f NOM to o 10 0 LO 15/10 LO oLOa N 1' Road 1' �y 12� 11 10 �' Vine ,4; = CR52 U Imo 'SHORT RANGE (2008) TOTAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC U- Mountain Vista 0 Figure 7 14 ) Lemay/Vne OTimberlineir/ine O Timberline/Mtn Vista I , 4) Mtn Vsta/CR9 533 35124 381/E 7/6+ Q o) leme. CO In. �6/17 28/94 m CO CR11/Country Club © CR11/CR52 � N CO CO l � 55! 18164� L� o ° J CR11/Access C LO 0 qT C i CR11/Access G �a N —3/2 -29/20 1 Q CR11/Access D 0 N 4l3 �40126 CO N f0 14 CR11/Access H I I m Na fV W N --w- 9/33 28/18 — 161l107 CO P- C-4 LO T CR52/Access A O v 0/1 r 18111 13147 6/20 11 CR11/Access E \-3/2 �. '�-281 6117 r 9/33 28/18 -� ® CR52/Access B CD It 6116 �— 0/1 6/20 110 12 CR11/Access F ®-- AM/PM Rounded to Nearest 5 Vehicles —413 37/24 \\ W ;SITE GENERATED Figure 6 'PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 13 future horizon was obtained by reviewing the NFRRTP and various traffic studies prepared for this area of Fort Collins. The other traffic studies in this area are for Richard's Lake PUD, Hearthfire PUD, Maple Hill, Trailhead, Eastridge, and Lind Property Development, Filing 1. In addition to site generated traffic from other developments, existing traffic volumes were increased by 2% per year on all area streets. Since site generated traffic from other developments would likely be included in the 2% per year increase, background traffic forecasts are considered to be conservative. 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 6 shows the site generated peak hour traffic assignment. Figure 7 shows the total (site plus background) short range (2008) peak hour traffic at the key intersections. Signal Warrants As a matter of policy, traffic signals are not installed at any location unless warrants are met according to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Using the short range (2008) background traffic forecasts, peak hour signal warrants are likely to be met at the Timberline/Vine, Mountain Vista/Timberline, and CR11/Country Club intersections using speed greater than 40 mph. Using the short range (2008) total traffic forecasts, peak hour signal warrants are on the threshold of being met at the CR11/CR52 intersection using speed greater than 40 mph. However, acceptable operation may be achieved with stop sign control and improved geometry, or the City may desire to delay installation of signals by using all -way stop sign control or roundabout control. Peak hour signal warrant analyses are provided in Appendix C. Roundabouts It is reasonable to perform roundabout analyses at currently signalized intersections or those which will meet signal warrants in the short range future. These are the Lemay/Vine, Timberline/Vine, Mountain Vista/Timberline, and CR11/Country Club intersections. The roundabout analyses were not performed at the Lemay/Vine and Timberline/Vine intersections for two reasons. There are railroad tracks adjacent to these intersections which would possibly go through the roundabout. While research indicates that there are roundabouts with railroad tracks in other countries, it is not clear whether that would be accepted in Fort Collins. The other reason is that in the long range future, City plans indicate that both intersections will involve overpasses of the railroad tracks with T-intersections for the 12 OLemay/\Ane 130/215 c �- 290/235 140/105 35/85 f 1801350 -.� 90/100 m [) TimberlinelVine -� CD U) m moo �20125 165/150 J + ` 180/115 501140 ---/ ) I I f r 105/145 -+� 110/165 ( �f) CR11/Country Club CR11/CR52 5/5 N ND --15/10 35/25 i-- NOM 45/35 rj /- 801215 n 1015 r 5/15 w 0 NOM inO 1501125 ,� 55/35 N 5 , m to OTimberline/Mtn vista ® Mtn VSta/CR9 _ ov 0 �- 95/255 20l60 165/185 J 160/330 240/135 310/205 -y dy 45 50/95 305/175 -m- f- AM/PM Rounded to Nearest 5 Vehicles SHORT RANGE (2008) BACKGROUND Figure 5 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 11 TRIP DISTRIBUTION Vista Figure 4 10 I SITE PLAN Figure 3 1 III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The Lind Property Development, Filing 2 is a residential development, located in the northeast quadrant of the CR11/CR52 intersection in Fort Collins. Figure 3 shows a site plan of the Lind Property Development, Filing 2. The short range analysis (Year 2008) includes development of the Lind Property Development, Filing 2 and an appropriate increase in background traffic, due to normal growth and other potential developments in the area. The long range future was analyzed in "Centex Homes ODP Transportation Impact Study," March 2001. Therefore, a long range analysis was not included in this study. The site plan shows access to the Lind Property Development, Filing 2 via two accesses to CR52 and six accesses to CR11. Trip Generation Trip generation is important in considering the impact of a development such as this upon the existing and proposed street system. A compilation of trip generation information contained in Trip Generation, 7t' Edition, ITE was used to estimate trips that would' be generated by the proposed/expected uses at this site. Table 2 shows the expected trip generation on a daily and peak hour basis. TABLE 2 Trip Generation r Y 7fg "g, ,rkx tv XNv, Whr '�' v `W +y { +s' 'tip . k rezG^e�% .r- .7 i..��"i`.5���,'�� n. -..:-v , � , a . -.� � •—• �r6 .Sv... �.�vri.A i.�n .e S ' If RIM 7� 230 Townhome 30 D.U. 5.86 176 0.07 2 0.37 11 0.35 11 0.17 5 210 Single Family 491 D.U. 9.57 4699 0.19 93 0.56 275 0.64 314 0.37 182 Total 4875 95 286 325 187 Trip Distribution Directional distribution of the generated trips was determined for Filing 2 of the Lind Property Development based upon gravity model analysis, the location of trip productions for these types of land uses, and engineering judgment. Future year ,data was obtained from the NFRRTP and other traffic studies. Figure 4 shows the trip distribution used for the Lind Property Development. Background Traffic Projections Figure 5 shows the short range (2008) background traffic projections. Background traffic projections for the short range 8 Manual and a table showing the Fort Collins Motor Vehicle LOS Standards (Intersections) are also provided in Appendix B. The .key intersections operate acceptably overall during both the morning and afternoon peak hours. Acceptable operation at signalized intersections during the peak hours is defined as level of service D or better. At unsignalized intersections, acceptable operation is considered to be at level of service D for any approach leg for an arterial/collector or arterial/. local intersection and level of service D for any approach leg for an collector/local intersection in low density mixed -use residential areas. Pedestrian Facilities Currently, there are few pedestrian facilities along the area streets. However, when these roads are built to arterial standards, sidewalks will be included in the respective cross sections. Sidewalks are/will be incorporated within this development. Bicycle Facilities Bicycle lanes exist within the cross section of Lemay Avenue, Timberline Road, Vine Drive, and Mountain Vista Drive. Currently, there are no bicycle facilities along the other area streets. However, when these roads are built to arterial standards, bicycle lanes will be included in the respective cross sections. Transit Facilities Transfort does not serve this area of Fort Collins. 7 TABLE 1 Current Peak Hour Operation INS R Lemay/Vine (signal) EB C C WB c C NB B C SB C B OVERALL c C Tim . bedine/Vine (all -way stop) EB B B WB B B NB B C SB B B OVERALL B 8 Mountain Vista/Timberline (stop sign) NB LT/RT B C WB LT/T A A Mountain Vista/CR9 (stop sign) SB LURT B B EB LT/T A A CRI II/Country Club (stop sign) EB LURT B B NB LTIT A A CR1 1/CR52 (stop sign) EB LT/T/RT A A WB LT/TIRT A A NB LT/T/RT A A SB LTIT/RT A A Country Club 26/34 123/90 m t�l N N 92/177 `c iO—169/154 J i [� 45145 20/4a 132/211 — 80/90 w 0 R in m a a T «t E m o: U 1/2 + O/0 6/10 CR52 m � +541123 �. 137/139 i 128/63 —o 143/75 N N 16389 -m- \ \ L �( Y 'O 130/122 l 70131 21/49\\\ r I Vine 118/135 m CD 134/86 � co to m c m E H RECENT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC rn U 15/46 �- 100/168 Mountain Vista +-- AM/PM Figure 2 9 east of Timberline Road and classified as is two-lane arterial west of Timberline Road. Currently, it has a two-lane cross section east of CR11. At Timberline Road, Mountain Vista Drive has the eastbound and westbound approaches in a single lane. The existing speed limit in this area is 45 mph. Mountain Vista Drive provides access to Interstate 25. County Road 11 is to the west of the Lind Property Development site. It is classified as a two-lane arterial on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. Currently, CR11 has a two-lane cross section north of Mountain Vista Drive. At Country Club Road and CR52, CR11 has the northbound and southbound approaches in a single lane. The CR11/Country Club intersection has stop sign control on Country Club Road. The CR11/CR52 intersection has stop sign control on CR52. The existing speed limit in this area is 45 mph. Country Club Road is southwest of the Lind Property Development site. It is an east -west street designated.as a two-lane arterial west of CR11 and classified as a collector street east of CR11. Currently, it has a two-lane cross section west of CR11. At CR11, Country Club Road has the eastbound approach in a single lane. The existing speed limit in this area is 35 mph. County Road 52 (Richard's Lake Road) is south of the Lind Property Development site. It is an east -west street designated as a two-lane arterial on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. Currently, it has a two-lane cross section near the Lind Property Development site. At CR11, CR52 has the eastbound and westbound approaches in a single lane. The existing speed limit in this area is 45 mph. Existing Traffic Recent peak hour traffic counts at the key existing intersections are shown in Figure 2. The traffic data for the Timberline/Vine intersection was collected in May 2002. The traffic data for the other key intersections was collected in September 2002. Raw traffic counts are provided in Appendix A. Casual observation indicated that traffic counts have not changed significantly in this area. Since traffic forecasts were based upon the development/occupancy of adjacent developments, the historic traffic counts were used. Forecasts would reflect the appropriate traffic increases. There is little traffic in this area that is not/will not be related to development that is not reflected in the available traffic counts. Existing Operation The counted intersections were evaluated using techniques provided in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. Using the peak hour traffic shown in Figure 2, the peak hour operation is shown in Table 1. Calculation forms are provided in Appendix B. A description of level of service for signalized and unsignalized intersections from the 2000 Highway Capacity 4 SCALE la=4000' SITE LOCATION Figure 1 II. EXISTING CONDITIONS The location of the Lind Property 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 either vacant (agriculture) or residential. ,A residential development (Richard's Lake) to the west of the site and a residential development (Hearthfire) to the northwest of the site are under construction. Land adjacent to the site is flat (<2% grade) from a traffic operations perspective. The center of Fort Collins lies to the southwest of the proposed Lind Property Development. Roads The primary streets near the Lind Property Development site are Lemay Avenue, Timberline Road, Vine Drive, Mountain Vista Drive, County Road 11, Country Club Road, and CR52. Lemay Avenue is to the west of the Lind Property Development site. It is classified as a four -lane arterial south of Country Club Road and classified as a two-lane arterial north of Country Club Road. Currently, Lemay Avenue has a .two-lane cross section north and south of Vine Drive. At Vine Drive, Lemay Avenue has the northbound and southbound approaches in a single lape. The Lemay/Vine intersection has signal control. The existing speed limit in this area is 35 mph. Timberline Road is to the south of the Lind Property Development site. It is classified as a six -lane arterial south of Vine Drive and classified as a four -lane arterial north of Vine Drive. Currently, Timberline Road has a two-lane cross section south of Mountain Vista Drive. At Vine Drive, Timberline Road has the northbound and southbound approaches in a single lane. The Timberline/Vine intersection has all - way stop sign control. At Mountain Vista, Timberline Road has the northbound approach in a single lane. The Mountain Vista/Timberline intersection has stop sign control on Timberline Road. The existing speed limit in this area is 45 mph. Vine Drive is south of the Lind Property Development site. It is an east -west street designated as a four -lane arterial on the Fort Collins Master Street Plan. Currently, it has a two-lane cross section in the subject segments. At Lemay Avenue, Vine Drive has eastbound and westbound left -turn lanes, and combined through/right-turn lanes. At Timberline Road, Vine Drive has the eastbound and westbound approaches in a single lane. The existing speed limit in this area is 45 mph. Mountain Vista Drive is south of the Lind Property Development site. It is an east -west street designated as a four -lane arterial 2 I. INTRODUCTION This transportation impact study (TIS) addresses the capacity, geometric, and control requirements at and near the proposed Filing 2 of the Lind Property Development. The proposed Lind Property Development is located in the northeast quadrant of the CR11/CR52 intersection in Fort Collins, Colorado. During the course of the analysis, numerous contacts were made with the project planning consultant, the project engineering consultant, and the project owner/developer. This study generally conforms to the format set forth in the Fort Collins transportation impact study guidelines as contained in the "Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards." Since this development is a continuation of the Filing 1 of the Lind Property, the same Base Assumptions form was used. This Base Assumptions form is provided in Appendix A. 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. A TIS for Filing 1 of the Lind Property Development was submitted in February 2003. 1 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Site Location ........................................ 3 2. Recent Peak Hour Traffic ............................. 5 3: Site Plan ............................................ .9 4. Trip Distribution .................................... 10 5. Short Range (2008) Background Peak Hour Traffic ...... 11 6. Site Generated Peak Hour Traffic ..................... 13 7. Short Range (2008) Total Peak Hour Traffic ........... 14 8. Short Range (2008) Geometry .......................... 20 9. Daily Traffic Forecast ............................... 22 APPENDIX A Base Assumptions Form/Peak Hour Traffic Counts B Current Peak Hour Operation/Level of Service Descriptions C Signal Warrant Analysis D Short Range Background Traffic Operation E Short Range Total Traffic Operation F Pedestrian/Bicycle Level of Service Worksheets TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. Introduction ......................................... 1 II. Existing Conditions .................................. 2 LandUse ............................................. 2 Roads................................................ 2 Existing Traffic ..................................... 4 Existing Operation ................................... 4 Pedestrian Facilities ................................ 7 Bicycle Facilities ................................... 7 Transit Facilities ................................... 7 III. Proposed Development ................................. 8 Trip Generation ...................................... 8 Trip Distribution .................................... 8 Background Traffic Projections ....................... 8 Trip Assignment ...................................... 12 Signal Warrants ...................................... 12 Roundabouts .......................................... 12 Operation Analysis ................................... 15 Geometry............................................. 15 Pedestrian Level of Service .......................... 21 Bicycle Level of Service ............................. 23 Transit Level of Service ............................. 23 IV. Conclusions .......................................... 24 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Current Peak Hour Operation .......................... 6 2. Trip Generation ...................................... 8 3. Short Range (2008) Background Traffic Peak Hour Operation .......................... 16 4. Short Range (2008) Total Traffic Peak Hour Operation .......................... 17 THE LIND PROPERTY, FILING 2 TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY FORT COS L IN, C LC)' DO.. M20.f14 h Prepared for: Centex Homes 9250 East Costilla Avenue, #200 Englewood, CO 80112 Prepared by: MATTHEW J. DELICH; P.E. 2272 Glen Haven Drive Loveland, CO 80538 Phone: 970-669-2061 FAX 970-669-5034 Project Comments Sheet ISelected Departments City of. Fort Collins Department: Traffic Operations Date: July 12, 2004 Project: LIND PROPERTY 2ND FILING PDP - TYPE I All comments must be received by Bob Barkeen in Current Planning, no later than the staff review meeting: June 02, 2004 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Eric Bracke Topic: Traffic Number: 64 Created: 6/9/2004 [6/9104] APF is at issue with this project. The project is more than a mile away from the intersection of Vine/Lemay and produces <10,000 trips/day. However, this project does affect the intersection and the discussion of APF needs to occur. Number: 65 Created: 6/9/2004 [6/9/04] Offsite improvements are called for at Timberline/Vine, CR11/Country Club, MT Vista/CR9, and Vine/Lemay. Who is responsible for these improvements and when will they occur? Number: 66 Created: 6/16/2004 [6/16/04] After further discussion, the APF trigger is considered pulled. The intersection of Vine/Lemay falls below the required LOS of D or better. It is suggested that the land owners, developer, and City discuss improvement district options. Number: 67 Created: 6/16/2004 [6/16/04] With the APF issue at hand, the project can move forward through final design. However, no building permits can be issued until the intersection of Vine/Lemay are corrected and the off -site improvements are completed. Signature Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site Drainage Report Other_ Utility Redline Utility Landscape Page 1 JUL-12-2004 MON 10:08 AM KRUG & SOBEL, LLC FAX NO. 3038318482 P. 03 July 11, 2004 Bob Barkeen Page 2 5' The Andarko entities have >1 notice from Centex about a hearing to be held on the application by the City on July ji I understand from Yvonne Seaman, Land Acquisition and Planning Director for Centex, that the purpose of the hearing is to obtain approval from the City for only a preliminary plat for the Property. This letter is to inform you about the status of negotiations between Centex and the Anadarko entities. The parties appear to be in substantial agreement as to the terms to be included in a surface use agreement for the compatible development of the surface and oil and gas estates; however, the parties have not to date entered into a final written agreement. The Anadarko entities anticipate that they will receive notices of hearing on applications filed in connection with this matter pursuant to C.R.S. 31-23-215 and C.R.S. 24- 6-402(7) and C.R.S. 24-65.5-101 e .seq. Please have notices of all land use hearings for the Property sent to the Anadarko entities as follows: Anadarko E&P Company LP P.O. Box 9149 Houston, Texas 77387-9147 Attention: Manager, Land -Western Division Anadarko Land Corp. P.O. Box 9149 Houston, Texas 77387-9147 Attention: Manager, Prope>3y and Rights -of -Way Thank you for your consideration in this matter. If you have any questions, please call me. Sincerely, KRUG & SOBEL, LLC Molly Sommerville cc: Donna Powers, Esq. Don Ballard Dan Casper Mike Dollarhide Yvonne Seaman/Centex Horyles \"04m 440cumctk§WNHWCWM RuUca I101.02dw JUL-12-2004 MON 10:07 AM KRUG & SOBEL, LLC FAX NO, 3038318482 P, 02 2 KRUC, 6-SOBEL, LLC ( L ATTORNEYS AT 7LAW 4 Via Telefax and U.S. Mail Bob Barkeen Current Planning Department City of Fort Collins 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522-0580 July 11, 2004 1700.B.roadw.ax .SyiIc 508 Denver, Colorado 80290 Telephone:303-831-8450 Facsimile: 303-831-8482 E-mail: law@krug-snhcl.com NOTICE OF STATUS OF SETTLEMENT Centex Homes/ Anadarko Re: Lind Property/Centex Homes Township 8 North,, Ranee 68 West Section 29: W/2 (approximate 45 acre parcel) Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado Dear Mr. Barkeen: This letter follows up my letters to you dated November 6, 2002 and May 6, 2003 concerning the application that Centex Homes ("Centex' has filed with the City of Fort Collins ("City") for the development of property that is described as a portion of the W/2 of Section 29, Township 8 North, Rarige 68 West in Larimer County ("Property"). As you know, Anadarko RkP Company LP ("Anadarko E&P"), formerly known as Union Pacific Resources Company, and Anadarko Land Corp. ("Anadarko Land"), formerly known as Union Pacific Land Resources Corporation, own all of the minerals that underlie the Property. As you may recall, the Anadarko entities filed an objection to the application by my letter dated May 6, 2003 to the members of the Planning Commission and the City Council. The Anadarko entities subsequently withdrew their objection in light of the agreement that they reached with Centex and the stipulation of the parties on the record that an agreement between the Anadarko entities and Centex with respect to the oil and gas interests that the Anadarko entities own for the Property would be a condition to the approval by the City of a final plat. hit �aa I phi . itNall "f'o-111�1t'a TV v1allorrTs POTEKnNL PINK LIST "® o..2Ut mY n ran ti.�� w ..ie.Y va o ^^moi....nv r.�nroi •.�o.m ow..o.Y.i o.Y..Yr as e mv�nr.+m C b.Y M..../ymq�' J,nY\IYIYIq fOl 0 d 4w/i.W. yy�yy�r.� f0[ 0 O 4���.�YWY 6Y.Yl.IW.O�t f�a. 0 w •.r �_ �Yrr. �r � e N drW 0� B 11VIlp11K.�OY.®.�I�fYAl01WOOTm M Y.wMn.n.y.Y.YYY' .W �0� .9l 0 1I 11 1 w.Yvw.w FF..��.. T M Fr. ��A.YO.r LOO 0 PLAMItiG IiD Q¢ �O LLj Z .m.Y.mews......w.m...�,..�.Y...�.�,..a.u..o...�.�,� ^ .v.w.Y�..Y.w ui a..... ui U ,..�.�.� ..�,.m.M...� LEGEND norwmav¢>® �' .POOtliM1rtN010 TTICAL LANDSCAPE PLAN .RfR • /��tM1 MI1 7 or6 POTENTIAL PLANT LIST MACW MR6! 0.cMueu cm. wm. snPPm. wn« cAmPnrwn RPYp6a QPn ,.cn,xlMw'wnwmp' ..,nun. mO. M,P�. ra Q cl. c+rw.obA• wrwn nnpR Za c.! c.m. ocmmw common ree,.y ra ® oq, c„wl, vn..,oy,,,n w..M,omn w.uun ttaa uor oeMclmwAm rn.,Ma. clrP., HM.fM! tvru O rmf F. HM 741d FaIWAW Ya i�J r,Pw rlam p..Mnl+m rn.nar wPRl n.e�.R ra OFm. fe.ouu pnmtlseA4amn<' PmmeM Ta O Pryi F,Waupe•MMwRe 4nne5ge' Pnnv Sp.eM SU O 416E 01•.Ybn n. FemY S40em.tiv" SReelww.rtb+f.n,M Ta Q' 4� Neaw m.Irom.SMemuel 6RW,nner NPPfln! Ta O�+ g•n�+•n.a.a w�M..ylRs.. ro. ® w. wu n.sMr Rtl.n u.RmA terra �. raven we. xa e.,ur RM Bencn o.erq. tvra nn� nPM. spoor s,w smc m.. u.v.Pfe tvYa Gvw PtpWe u,pmW Pl. cAwnm. ra QP� vNw..wnm,n PuwnHPn tSW ® PpC Pynr olln>vie CTmktivy Om,ekLmPv I1?OI 'J N. Tn mmuluM xeJmme' Reamwq W ra O Try lM•mJw ae•n SPYe' O,aaiSW.lLtlm ra Pwrrmc NOTES M,Pwc.v+. w!v e.Ma. uPuorolawMrowm.amwc A. oe%�amlmw ia.av�riaeniA.ncMtnam,mwerolMommwrMimAM • u � ro!!uo R aaaw.m nor mmnw A mm.® . uoam.roaoe.®Am eam.snerAlamrwave l AIMdIY MOTI�RlA[Mil®AYO.INRAMIM.V!•I..OA�.Tm AMnICO•rt0•W.lIl.GR6i Olt.mIM0•IM.YIAIIOn.NPnOann011.. lMNtu� CIOfIMI.IIAA V9®1111M1,OCA111111AAlf1AOFlOCIA®v/®rt NAM V.MIYIOMMrNexP•PWA1fn�llm®VRIAU.IAAGRAAIOMY.M®n M.Y?LMn[MOM'InMM..l00WllMO.lRGidlnllRillm.V 11AI1.rA9n111C IRIrttlnlnnM MArA oA.mnRAr. r.nexavuroaw•�mu..ar Mnnwa.omvo MnnnFa.nnucmmmmlwiM•mrtn !PmllRmrMP.o. mlrsn®uima waalrmn.MrwwmMlelMwPo.osMnwssur nv P..�.asn •. iPPimAn6Pmnnanawaa emulua,umnom rAAn loon umm�um,mnn nuronMne ,., nRMunmM.MP.wamrlumMnlevaA..mnwlP�msrn® ,TM, M® .in.m%.wrrala.w Mo.®lMamwalmMolnwromwennno.oMn. mmnnml.anwoA®®+mmnnwa.em.lnmmmllMan,omruval.. Aon�maoc�..a+rA.oACM�..ama.clvn.a O[fgAROr�OPM11m MlaOlMnMO<aRA00DM1NMRM WITCnImILMI. AAm'M �aR 1en110W10.AOIIr OIR101491O111111[i. Rn.IQ1An ALY1/dO1llOMdAMO O.Om.CNAOIlA.1MIM10Yi.1.•illnfXV.!®,0T[l®n.4lIN•0 e�l®OOfNF .nPl�Nla.11lpiaAl..rN. APIIOMOt\P4 ROOYOIeY.NAnl4eMT A/.iYNf. R1A.l,ID MInPA,rlYR.®A �POmrtl61M11niAM A.YRYC NW lOiOlQndRlMo•1�Mn`w•aOYdfo00MsiM.KMYM.I tO�A,A,NM16A M.�[nYl. W.III}11mn.vilw�F POS MvvI[04•t�.Y W! 0/®Y!O[ � 0M•IAO191M.S.YOAMW ,O IOOTY WCS..IOM�iMrFnp MMWSO/!�lInFAOIMIAeLIMiMR9i.leR tIIMIJ 4R.Tvi1.6 MY1. manor manann,m M��'awlm:a�M.m.m�n¢ ni M"uavon�na.ma°�ra°' Mlmm�M"`�'a.�.•�m•lr�.eo,aMa u,m.,c`roieri�M! m'`!e'�ixansrm,erem�inr °�evm,�`�" .A wrocs lmua+. va wm nMw w! wm. ro AamcrM ue! alP,A,m�.a Pw! lumro M Ilona n,a. �annwAw.s.aile,ownnwusws.�m•oseMwnP.oaaowlm. M;Lojig L+eC.e.P.. V anf..ea.trt sn. n.nem6 4..PIW .en eauw, m m V Mo.Arev — Orwr66m c61lAw6ilm L A iM auu,�A eon Pnom. I � I amra LAND a PLAN Pwv M,Y 4 A6 No Text 111 �IIIIIIIIIIII 1111111 � ����� �� ����/ 111 IIIIIIIIII�IA 1111111 � �:� �' j, j �� � � /1111111/ /1111111/ I/,,,, ��� � , �� �1111�11/ ■C ��� 1111111 �� ■D MEN ■� ■ � pl/llllf,� ■� � ���—�n�� �11111 IIIIIMIN, lwE EMONOW O ■ #39-94D Lind Property, 2nd Filing PDP Type I (LUC) 3/30/04 1 inch : 600 feet Lind Phase II, Project Development Plan #39-94D Type I Administrative Review Page 7 FINDINGS OF FACT/CONCLUSIONS After reviewing the Lind Project Development Plan #39-94D, staff makes the following findings of fact and conclusions: 1. The proposed land uses are permitted in the Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood zone district. 2. The Project Development Plan complies with all applicable district standards of Section 4.4 of the Land Use Code, Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood zone district. 3. The Project Development Plan complies with all applicable General Development Standards contained in Article 3 of the Land Use Code. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Lind Project Development Plan, #39-94D, with the following conditions: 1. No building permits within this development plan may be released until such time the off -site Adequate Public Facilities issues have been resolved. 2. The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the underlying mineral rights owners concerning the location and access of future extraction activities within the development plan. Such agreement shall be completed prior approval of the final compliance plans Lind Phase 11, Project Development Plan #39-94D Type I Administrative Review Page 6 better. The traffic study indicates that this intersection would operate in the short term at LOS of E. There are no plans from the applicant or the City to improve this intersection. A possible solution may be to form an improvement district within the area. This district would collect funds from property owners which would be used to contribute to future road improvements along Vine Drive. Until such a solution is in place, no building permits may be issued for this project phase, or future phases remaining within the ODP. 3. Section 3.6.6, Emergency Access This project will allow for adequate emergency access to all buildings within the project. F. Division 3.7, Compact Urban Growth Standards Section 3.7.2, Contiguity The overall site is nearly 30 percent contiguous to existing urban development. This is greater than the 16% (1/6th) required by this section of the code 2. Section 3.7.3, Adequate Public Facilities The provision of adequate public facilities for transportation, water, wastewater, storm drainage, fire and emergency services, and electrical power will be in place prior to the issuance of a building permit, or adequate security posted for any such improvement not in place prior to the issuance of a building permit. At this time, transportation facilities are not adequate to support the project. 4. Neighborhood Information Meeting Neighborhood meetings are not required for Type I (Administrative) projects. Previous neighborhood meetings were held with adjacent neighbors from previous phases to discuss transportation impacts and street improvements. Previous arrangements that were made with the adjacent neighbors will not change as a result of this development phase of the Lind Property. The Current Planning Department has received letters from the law firm of Krug & Sobel, LLC. This firm represents the owners of the mineral rights which underlay this property. The letter states that the mineral right owners have an interest in pursuing extraction of these minerals. While verbal agreements have committed to providing a location for the possible extraction of future oil on the site, a written agreement has not been finalized. As such, the firm is requesting that the City place a condition on the project requiring the agreement to be in place prior to the City approving the final plat (final compliance plans) for Phase II of the Lind Property. Lind Phase 11, Project Development Plan #39-94D Type I Administrative Review Page 5 The PDP has been reviewed pursuant to the adopted design standards in place for water, sewer, storm drainage, electric, walkways and streets which will serve this development. C. Division 3.4, Environmental, Natural Area, Recreational and Cultural Resource Protection Standards Section 3.4.1, Natural Habitats and Features The site is not included within a mapped natural area, nor does it contain any natural features, as defined by this section. The adjacent canal to the east of the site does contain wildlife habitat or movement corridors adjacent to the project. A 50 foot buffer has been provided from the bank of this adjacent canal. Storm run-off from the site will be contained in a retention pond. This retention pond will be temporary, until a downstream outlet can be acquired. D. Division 3.5, Building Standards Section 3.5.1, Building and Project Compatibility The project is adjacent to existing single-family residential to the north and east of the site. This neighboring single-family development is generally single story in height. The project consists of both single and two story buildings, which would be considered consistent with the existing residential character of the area. 2. Section 3.5.2, Residential Building Standards Either a rear alley or the adjacent street will access buildings. Lots accessed by rear alleys will have the garage in the rear of the lot. Front loaded lots, will have the garage door recessed behind the front face of the building a minimum of 4 feet, and will not comprise of more than 50 percent of the street facing elevation. E. Division 3.6, Transportation and Circulation Section 3.6.1, Master Street Plan This PDP is in substantial compliance with the City of Fort Collins Streets Master Plan. 2. Section 3.6.4, Transportation Level of Service Requirements A Transportation Impact Study was submitted for the project. While this study found that the project will have a nominal impact on the existing transportation facilities, the intersection of Vine Drive and Lemay Avenue fall below the acceptable LOS of D or Lind Phase II, Project Development Plan #39-94D Type I Administrative Review Page 4 walls and building mass and identify common areas. All plant materials are of adequate size and diversity as required by this section. Canopy street trees will be planted at 40-foot intervals within the 'tree lawn' of the detached sidewalk along County Road 11 and County Road 52. The internal street network includes detached sidewalks and canopy trees as well. Presently, the site is generally void of existing trees and shrubs. No significant trees, as determined by the City Forester, will be removed by this project. Sight distance has been calculated along all street intersections. Easements have been platted in areas where the site distance falls outside of the platted right-of-way. Landscaping within these areas will be limited to canopy trees and ground covers. 2. Section 3.2.2, Access, Circulation and Parking The applicant will provide a minimum of two off-street parking spaces for each single-family dwelling. Single family residential must provide at least one off-street parking space for lots greater than 40 feet in width, and two spaces for lots with less than 40 feet of width. 3. Section 3.2.4, Site Lighting The project does not propose exterior lighting, with the exception of porch lights and other accessory lights on the buildings. All lighting must comply with both on and off -site lighting standards within the LUC. B. Division 3.3, Engineering Standards 1. Section 3.3.1, Plat Standards The subdivision plat has been reviewed against the standards included within the LUC and found to be in substantial compliance with those standards. 2. Section 3.3.2, Development Improvements Prior to the approval of the final compliance plans, a development agreement will be drafted detailing the improvements required by the applicant as part of the building permit process, and the timing of installation of such improvements. 3. Section 3.3.5, Engineering Design Standards Lind Phase 11, Project Development Plan #39-94D Type I Administrative Review Page 3 B. Section 4.4(D)(2) Mix of Housing A minimum of two housing types shall be provided on all projects between 30 and 45 acres in size. The total area of the Lind project is just less than 45 acres in size. The project provides attached single family and detached single family with lot sizes ranging in size from 5,200 sq.ft. to 7,800 sq.ft. This range in residential housing is sufficient to satisfy the requirements of this section. C. Section 4.4(D)(3) Neighborhood Centers A minimum of 90% of the lots within the project must be located within 1/4 of a mile of a neighborhood Center. A neighborhood center is included within this phase of the PDP. This center includes two separate buildings which may be used for a church, day care, community center, offices, etc. and is located at the intersection of Brightwater Drive and Bar Harbor Drive. D. Section 4.4(D)(7) Small Neighborhood Parks A one -acre park is provided at the intersection of Brightwater Drive and Bar Harbor Drive. This park was included within Phase I of the Lind ODP and will serve this project, as well as future phases of the Lind CDP. All of the residential units are within 1/3 of a mile of this park. The PDP meets the applicable Development standards as follows: A. Section 4.4(E)(1) Streets and Blocks The local street system within the project provides a street network that results in blocks of lots that are less than 12 acres in size. All block faces are less than 700 feet in length. B. Section 4.4(E)(3) Maximum Building Height All buildings within the proposed project will be less than 2 '/2 stories in height, the maximum height limit for the LMN zone district. 3. Article 3 of the Land Use Code — General Development Standards The Project Development Plan complies with all applicable General Development Standards as follows: A. Division 3.2, Site Planning and Design Standards Section 3.2.1, Landscaping and Tree Protection Landscaping has been provided in all common open areas within the project. The landscape plan provides a variety of canopy trees, ornamental trees, shrubs and ground covers. The landscape plan has been designed to use plants to enhance building design, soften Lind Phase II, Project Development Plan #39-94D Type I Administrative Review Page 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This project has been reviewed in accordance with the applicable requirements of the Land Use Code (LUC) and was found to be in substantial compliance with the following: The process located in Division 2.1 — General Procedural Requirements, Division 2.2 — Common Development Review Procedures for Development Applications, and Division 2.4 — Project Development Plan located within Article 2 — Administration; and the design standards located within Article 3 — General Development Standards; and the standards located in Section 4.4, Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood (LMN) of Article 4 — Districts. COMMENTS: Background The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: N: LMN — Undeveloped S: LMN — Undeveloped (approved Single Family Residential) E: LMN — Undeveloped W: LMN — Single Family Residential The property was annexed in 1984 as part of the Country Club North First Annexation. 2. Division 4.4 of the Land Use Code Low Density Mixed - Use Neighborhood Zone District The use of single family residential is permitted in the LMN zone district subject to Administrative Review (Type 1). The PDP meets the applicable Land Use Standards as follows: A. Section 4.4(D)(1) Density Residential developments in the Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood District shall have an overall minimum average net density of 5 units/acre. The maximum residential density taken as a whole, shall be 8 units per gross acre of land. The PDP includes 159 residential units on 33.3 acres of net land, which achieves a net residential density of 4.8 units/acre. While this density is less than the minimum density required in this zone district, the density taken as a whole within the Overall Development Plan will be greater than 5 units/acre. ITEM NO. MEETING DATE 7 l� 6a STAFF tr � Citv of Fort Collins HEARING OFFICER STAFF REPORT PROJECT: Lind Property Phase II, Project Development Plan - #93-94 D [Type I Administrative Review] APPLICANT: Vignette Studios 144 North Mason Street, Suite 2 Fort Collins, C080524 OWNER: Centex Homes, Inc 9250 East Costilla Avenue, Suite 200 Greenwood Village, CO 80112 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Lind Property is a Project Development Plan for Phase II of the Lind Overall Development Plan. This phase includes 129 single-family residential units and 30 attached single family residential (townhomes) on 44 acres. The project is located at the northeast corner of County Road 11 and County Road 52. The PDP also includes a future neighborhood center to serve the project and surrounding neighborhood. Additional open space and connection to the City's proposed regional recreation trail. The property is currently undeveloped and is zoned LMN — Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood District. A subdivision plat is accompanying the project development plan. This plat will create individual lots for the proposed single family units, as well as dedicate necessary rights - of -way, easements and drainage and open space tracts of land to support the project. The PDP includes a site for a future oil well. This location was agreed upon by the applicant and the owners of the underlying mineral rights. A separate application must be filed to construct the well. A traffic study was submitted with the second Phase PDP. This study, however, indicates that the intersection of Vine Drive and Lemay Avenue falls below the acceptable Level Of Service criteria at this intersection. Accordingly, the PDP may be approved, however no building permits may be released until this intersection can be improved to accommodate additional traffic generated from this project. RECOMMENDATION: Approval COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO80522-0580 (970) 221-6750 PLANNING DEPARTMENT