Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTHE SUMMIT ON COLLEGE PARKING GARAGE - MJA/FDP - FDP130056 - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORTITEM NO _________________ HEARING DATE March 5, 2014 _ STAFF Seth Lorson__ ____ ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING Planning Services 281 N College Ave – PO Box 580 – Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 fcgov.com/developmentreview/ 970.221.6750 STAFF REPORT PROJECT: The Summit on College Parking Structure FDP #130056 APPLICANT: Walker May Capstone Development Corp. 431 Office Park Drive Birmingham, AL 35223 OWNER: Fort Collins Associates, L.P. 431 Office Park Drive Birmingham, AL 35223 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This project proposes to construct a parking structure consisting of 440 parking spaces. It is proposed to be built over the top of the existing surface parking lot resulting in a net gain of 352 spaces over existing conditions. The parking structure consists of 4 levels, including parking on the roof, for an overall height of 3 ½ stories. The site is located just west of the intersection of South College Avenue and Stuart Street, where Stuart Street dead ends into the railroad tracks and the future MAX Bus Rapid Transit line. The lot is zoned General Commercial (C-G) and is also within the Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay Zone. The proposal is processed as a Major Amendment to the approved Choice Center (The Summit on College) Project Development Plan and is subject to review by an Administrative Hearing Officer at a public hearing. The project is requesting a Modification of Standard for a drive aisle width of 15 feet instead of the required 20 feet. Summit on College Parking Structure FDP #130056 Administrative Hearing March 5, 2014 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of The Summit on College Parking Structure FDP #130056 with the following conditions of approval: 1. The Capstone property is partially located within the FEMA-regulated Spring Creek 100-year high risk floodplain and floodway. The project shall comply with all applicable sections of Chapter 10 of the Fort Collins Municipal Code (Ch. 10 Code). 2. Capstone and its consultants and subconsultants shall execute all components of the action plan for amendment of the Floodplain Use Permit (FPUP) #11048 as outlined in the memorandum from Walker P. May on February 14, 2014. Specifically, all of the 5 bulleted items included in said memo shall be completed and approved prior to the issuance of a FPUP for any site work or building construction. 3. An approved FPUP and no-rise certification must precede any site work, building construction, or building or grading permits. No development work, as defined in Section 10-16 of the Ch. 10 Code, shall commence until the FPUP and no-rise certification are approved by the City of Fort Collins Floodplain Administration. The FPUP and no-rise documentation must clearly document compliance with the Floodproofing or venting requirements of Ch. 10 Code if elevation requirements of Section 10-37 cannot be satisfied. Capstone and its consultants and subconsultants shall complete all applicable items included in the City of Fort Collins Floodproofing Guidelines, provided previously by e-mail exchange and available online at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/fp-floodproofing.pdf. 4. A pre-construction FEMA Elevation Certificate shall be provided as part of the no-rise certification materials, and must be approved prior to obtaining any grading or building permits. 5. All no-rise certifications shall be re-certified by the professional engineer of record prior to obtaining a certificate of occupancy on the site. The no-rise re- certification shall include a FEMA Elevation Certificate of as-built conditions, and a certificate of occupancy shall not be issued until the as-built Elevation Certificate is approved by City of Fort Collins Floodplain Administration. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Capstone Development Corp. is proposing a parking structure in order to provide additional parking for the tenants of The Summit on College (The Summit) which has 665 bedrooms in 220 units. Currently, the project provides 185 parking spaces serving Summit on College Parking Structure FDP #130056 Administrative Hearing March 5, 2014 Page 3 27.8% of the bedrooms, as a ratio of parking spaces to bedrooms. The project proposes to add 352 parking spaces for a total of 537 spaces serving 80.8% of the bedrooms, as a ratio of parking spaces to bedrooms. The purpose of the parking structure is to relieve the “spill-over” parking that is being experienced in adjacent neighborhoods to the south and east of The Summit, and for the student housing development to remain competitive and marketable. Property and business owners directly to the east have expressed opposition to the project noting that it will contribute to the massing along College Avenue and that it is inconsistent with City policies and the original approval. The structure itself is constructed primarily with precast concrete spandrel panels with reveals. The ground level has a stone veneer with matching accent columns stretching the entire height of the building. Cementitious panel elements with windows are protruding on corners and in several locations along the façade to break up the overall size of the building. The exterior panels are painted to match the existing Summit buildings. The roofline is capped with a sheet metal cornice. In an effort to bring the Summit project into compliance with current Land Use Code (LUC) standards, this proposal is including an additional 272 bicycle parking spaces configured in a mix of outdoor bike racks, sheltered and secured bike racks, and indoor bike stands available at tenant request. The 3 ½ story structure is sited with vehicular access from the north (toward the existing Summit residences) with a drive aisle continuing west from Stuart Street. A pedestrian sidewalk is provided along the east side leading to Creek Side Park to the south. City Staff has worked with the development team to ensure an adequate landscape buffer between the park and the parking structure by accepting a fee-in-lieu of constructing/planting the full landscape plan until after the City’s Parks and Stormwater Departments are done improving the Spring Creek channel and surrounding banks (anticipated in 2016). The parking structure is partially sited in the Spring Creek floodplain and is taking measures to ensure compliance with floodplain requirements. Because of the floodplain, no landscaping is permitted along the west side of the structure. Summit on College Parking Structure FDP #130056 Administrative Hearing March 5, 2014 Page 4 COMMENTS: 1. Background The site is in the General Commercial (C-G) Zone District and the TOD Overlay Zone. The purpose of the TOD Overlay Zone is to encourage transit-supported, compact, walkable infill and redevelopment projects. Adopted in 2006-07, the TOD Overlay Zone standards removed minimum parking requirements for mixed-use and multi-family dwellings. The intent was to incentivize redevelopment on challenging infill sites, show commitment to the MAX Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) investment, and to encourage urban densities as a result of the Growth Management Area (GMA). The amount of parking was expected to be driven by market demand, balancing the need to provide adequate parking as an amenity, with the constraints of maximizing development potential on difficult infill sites. The Summit was approved as Choice Center in 2011 as a transit-oriented development which is why the parking currently provided is lower than is required outside the TOD Overlay Zone. When asked about the lower amount of parking, which is now deemed to be inadequate, the applicant responded as follows: During the early planning and design phases of The Summit, Capstone anticipated that we would be able to provide on-site parking for roughly 50% of our 665 beds and 7,400 sf of retail development. As it turned out, to meet City and FEMA regulations for storm water and flood mitigation, we were only able to build on-site parking for about 30% of our residents. Our strategy and hope was that roughly 30 to 50% of our residents annually would be able to park on campus with commuter passes, and roughly 20 to 30% of our residents annually would not have a car. Working closely with senior City officials who led discussions with CSU officials, Capstone believed a verbal understanding was reached with CSU officials that residents of The Summit would be able to park without restriction in designated commuter parking lots on the CSU campus. Capstone and City officials sought to have this understanding confirmed in writing by CSU, but we and City officials were told that since this was consistent with CSU’s parking policies, no special dispensation or agreement was needed or desired by CSU. Since several of CSU’s storage parking lots were in the southeast quadrant of the campus and thus convenient to The Summit, we marketed this parking option to our residents during the months leading to our initial opening in August 2013, and indicated Summit on College Parking Structure FDP #130056 Administrative Hearing March 5, 2014 Page 5 Capstone would purchase the first year commuter parking pass for residents choosing this parking option. (Roughly 200 residents elected this parking option during the pre-leasing phase, roughly 161 opted for an on-site, reserved space, and roughly 174 indicated they would not need either parking option). In the summer of 2013, just months before our scheduled opening, Capstone was informed by CSU officials that with the loss of on-campus parking spaces to the BRT and other developments on-campus, that CSU would not be able to issue permits allowing Summit residents to park on an extended basis in on- campus commuter lots. This was a major departure from the understanding we believed we had, and from CSU’s stated policies. As a result, much discussion ensued between Capstone, City and CSU officials about whether this decision could be changed or postponed, and if not, how we could ease or overcome the impact of this decision both near term (in the first operating year), and long term (in future operating years). The City has heard from many community members that spill-over parking from Summit into their neighborhood has impacted their ability to park and to accommodate guests. 2. Public Comment Discussion Adjacent property owner, Les Kaplan, and business owners Jeffrey Leef, David Rose and Angela King have provided comment letters in opposition to the proposed parking structure (attached). They have five primary concerns: 1. Off-site parking should be required, as it was part of the approval for URA funding and it encourages transit use. 2. The project should be marketed as a “transit-oriented development,” with full disclosure to students and parents that parking is limited. 3. The parking demand evaluation should not be completed until after the MAX is operational and can fulfill the intent of a TOD development. 4. A bike and pedestrian path extending to the north to Prospect Road was required to be built by The Summit, but has not yet happened. 5. The project is adding to the building massing along College Avenue and blocks views of the mountains. The first four concerns were forwarded to the applicant to which their responses are as follows. The concern regarding views of the mountains is addressed by the Land Use Code for buildings greater than 40 feet in height. Because the proposed parking structure is less than 40 feet in height, Section 3.5.1(G)(1)(a)(1)Views is not applicable. Summit on College Parking Structure FDP #130056 Administrative Hearing March 5, 2014 Page 6 1. Off-site parking should be required, as it was part of the approval for URA funding and it encourages transit use. Capstone was and remains committed to provide a significant percentage of parking for Summit residents in off-site, shared parking lots. We have concluded, however, that we need to provide at least 60 to 80% parking on- site in order for our community to be marketable and economically viable. (Background to this discussion is found in the previous section of this staff report.) During the summer and early fall of 2013, Capstone officials spent months evaluating and pursuing alternative off-site parking options with CSU, City staff, and various landowners, churches, retailers with large unused parking areas, and brokers in the area. These explorations yielded little in the way of satisfactory, workable, sustainable parking alternatives. CSU ultimately agreed to provide commuter storage parking for one year for only 150 residents, in a lot that was over 1 mile from The Summit. Capstone purchased parking passes in this lot for all students who would use them, but the designated location (in Lot 240), proved too far and not particularly appealing to Summit residents. After searching the Midtown Corridor, we ultimately were able to lease enough spaces to meet demand in the nearby Discount Tire lot and in a remote lot we improved and leased from the Foothills Assembly Church (roughly 1.2 miles south of The Summit). We have utilized shuttle transportation to provide access to this remote parking location. Going forward, the CSU Lot and the Discount Tire lot will not be available beyond this first operating year (assuming Discount Tire goes through with its plans to rebuild its College Avenue store); Foothills Assembly has been approached by the City for BRT parking. Additionally, each of these off-site options are at distances and locations that the majority of Summit tenants have told us is unacceptable, contributing to the overflow parking into neighborhoods and businesses surrounding our development. As Capstone approaches the renewal and re-leasing of The Summit for Operating Year 2, it is clear that the shortage of on-site parking is proving to be a leasing dis-incentive, as we are currently only19% leased for the 2014- 15 operating year. By comparison, we only have 39% of the new leases this year as we had at the same time last year, which is alarming considering we Summit on College Parking Structure FDP #130056 Administrative Hearing March 5, 2014 Page 7 were under construction. Capstone, our equity investment partners, and our lender are very concerned about this situation and the clear negative feedback we have received from residents and prospects about our on-site parking deficiency. Given the low tolerance of most Summit residents and prospective students for non-proximate off-site parking, we have concluded that for the Summit to maintain economic viability, and avoid catastrophic results, we will need to provide on-site parking for 60% to 70% of our residents, another 2.5 % handicap spaces, and 5% parking for visitors and guests. This ratio is consistent with the policy we understand the City has adopted on an interim basis for TOD zones and student housing generally. We have further concluded that we can only achieve this improvement in the overall on-site parking ratio by constructing a multi-level parking structure on the surface parking lot south of our Building 1. Even after constructing this structure, this will leave roughly 31% of the total beds without on-site parking spaces. So it will continue to be our goal to attract this percentage of residents annually who will (a) not have a car, or (b) be willing to accept an off-site shared or storage parking solution. 2. The project should be marketed as a “transit-oriented development,” with full disclosure to students and parents that parking is limited. The Summit management and leasing staff, through handout materials, posters, website and verbal communications, has and continues to represent that The Summit is a walking and biking friendly community located in a transit-oriented district adjacent to the (future) MAX BRT, with limited on-site parking. Our lease states, “Parking is limited and subject to change”. 3. The parking demand evaluation should not be completed until after the MAX is operational and can fulfill the intent of a TOD development. Based on a recent survey of residents, approximately 75% of our residents own cars and require storage parking. While the MAX Bus Rapid Transit will undoubtedly reduce the need for daily use of cars, it will not reduce the need for storage parking and we do not see that need decreasing materially in the foreseeable future. The feedback from current and prospective Summit residents is that the lack of resident and guest parking is the primary negative in considering a re-lease or lease at The Summit for next year. The need for at least 60% to 70% on-site parking is supported by resident feedback as well as the City’s adoption of recent parking minimums in the Land Use Code for Summit on College Parking Structure FDP #130056 Administrative Hearing March 5, 2014 Page 8 TOD projects. Our survey of Summit residents indicates that a majority (approximately 73% of students), walk or bike to campus on a daily basis, which indicates our efforts to encourage residents to utilize alternate forms of transportation whenever possible is succeeding. However, a vast majority still depend on their cars to travel to work, home, or to run errands. 4. A bike and pedestrian path extending to the north to Prospect Road was required to be built by Summit but has not yet happened. Capstone has for some time been working with one of our neighboring property owners to the north of The Summit to amend the easement for the bike path to allow for a slight reconfiguration of the pedestrian and bicycle pathway. This is being done in a cooperative effort to minimize the impact on the neighbor’s existing parking. The neighboring property owner is working with his lenders to obtain approval, which is reported to be imminent. We have a contractor lined-up to perform this work to create the pedestrian and bicycle pathway and we anticipate beginning construction this spring (late March/ early April), once local asphalt plants are back operational. We believe this pathway will further encourage bike/ pedestrian traffic flow, but on-site storage parking will still be needed. 3. Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses. Surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: Direction Zone District Existing Land Uses North General Commercial (C - G) Retail and Restaurant South General Commercial (C - G) Creekside Park East General Commercial (C - G) and Low-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (L – M – N) Retail along College Avenue and single- and multi- family residential farther to the east West Employment (E) and CSU Burlington Northern Railroad, MAX guideway, Spring Creek Trail, and vacant land. 4. Compliance with Division 4.21, Applicable C-G Zone District Standards. Staff finds that the Summit Parking Structure Major Amendment complies with the applicable standards in Division 4.21 General Commercial District, as explained below. Summit on College Parking Structure FDP #130056 Administrative Hearing March 5, 2014 Page 9 Section 4.18 (A) Purpose: The purpose of the General Commercial District is as follows: The General Commercial District is intended to be a setting for development, redevelopment and infill of a wide range of community and regional retail uses, offices and personal and business services. Secondarily, it can accommodate a wide range of other uses including creative forms of housing. While some General Commercial District areas may continue to meet the need for auto- related and other auto-oriented uses, it is the City’s intent that the General Commercial District emphasize safe and convenient personal mobility in many forms, with planning and design that accommodates pedestrians. The proposed parking structure supports the existing multi-family housing development and the project is providing adequate pedestrian connections and bicycle facilities. The applicant anticipates completion of the bicycle/pedestrian connection to Prospect Road by late March or early April 2014. Section 4.21(B) - Permitted Use: The proposed parking structure is considered an accessory use to the existing multi- family housing development and is thus permitted as a Major Amendment to the existing development plan. Major Amendments are processed in the same manner as required for the original approval so, in this instance; it is subject to Administrative Review. Section 4.21(E) – Development Standards: This standard requires pedestrian-oriented outdoor spaces to be placed next to activity areas that generate the users. This proposal is connecting to the existing network of plazas and sidewalks to the north and the public park to the south. 5. Compliance with Article Three – General Development Standards: Staff finds that The Summit on College Parking Structure Major Amendment complies with all applicable General Development Standards, as explained below. Section 3.2.1 – Landscaping and Tree Protection: Standards in this section require a fully developed landscape plan that addresses relationships of landscaping to the street, the building, abutting properties, and users on site. The project does not abut a public street and therefore is not required to provide Summit on College Parking Structure FDP #130056 Administrative Hearing March 5, 2014 Page 10 street trees. The landscape plan provides for dense landscaping along the east side of the property. The developer is providing a fee-in-lieu of constructing/planting the full landscape buffer area to the south until after the City’s Parks and Stormwater Departments are done improving Spring Creek (anticipated in 2016). Section 3.2.2 – Access, Circulation and Parking: Standards in this section require safe, convenient, efficient, parking and circulation improvements that add to the attractiveness of the development. At the time that The Summit developed, there were not minimum parking requirements within the TOD Overlay Zone for multi-family and mixed-use developments. Currently, there are minimum parking requirements both inside and outside the TOD Overlay Zone as indicated in the chart below (Sec. 3.2.2(K)). Summit Parking Analysis 665 Total Bedrooms In 220 units Existing Parking Required Outside TOD (required spaces per unit) Required Within TOD (required spaces per unit) Proposed Parking 18 1-Bd Units 27 (1.5) 19.8 (1.1) 54 2-Bd Units 91 (1.75) 62.4 (1.2) 53 3-Bd Units 100 (2.0) 70 (1.4) 95 4-Bd Units 303 (3.0) 212.1 (2.1) Total Spaces 185 521 364 537 % of Bds to Spaces 27.8% 78.4% 54.7% 80.8% The proposed increase in parking will create a total of 537 parking spaces including 12 staff spaces, 33 guest spaces, 8 short term spaces, 18 handicap spaces, and 466 leaseable spaces. With the proposed parking, 80% of bedrooms in the residential development will have an on-site parking space. Summit on College Parking Structure FDP #130056 Administrative Hearing March 5, 2014 Page 11 The applicant is requesting a modification to the drive aisle standard that requires a 20 foot wide drive aisle for diagonal parking at a 60 degree angle. The modification request is for one one-way drive aisle per floor of the parking structure. Further analysis of this request is in the modification section of this report. Section 3.2.2(C)(4) – Bicycle Parking Space Requirements: This standard requires at least one bicycle parking space per bedroom (665 spaces). 60% must be enclosed (399 spaces) and 40% must be fixed (266 spaces). The applicant has requested to meet the requirements of this section through alternative compliance as permitted in Sec. 3.2.2(C)(4)(c). (Request and plans are attached.) Adding to the existing 393 fixed bike spaces at Summit, this proposal will add 36 – 42 fixed bike spaces in the limited spaces around the residential buildings, an additional 112 – 118 in the parking garage in secured and covered spaces, and offer up to 118 bike stands for tenants to use within their units. This will provide a total of 665 bike parking spaces, equal to one per bedroom. Because the residential portion of this development was developed prior to these bike parking standards, the development did not originally provide additional space either within each unit or in the hallways for bike storage, as is commonly seen with multi-family developments. Staff finds that the additional bike parking that is being provided as an augmentation to an existing development plan accomplishes the purposes of this section equally well or better than would a plan that complies entirely with the standards of this section. Section 3.2.3 – Solar Access, Orientation, Shading The section requires that buildings not cast a shadow greater than that of a hypothetical 25 foot tall wall on the property line on the shortest day of the year (Dec. 21 between 9 am and 3 pm). The shadow study shows that the proposed parking structure does not cast a shadow larger than permitted in this section. Section 3.4.1 – Natural Habitats and Features This section applies to any development within 500 feet of a natural habitat or feature, in this case Spring Creek, to ensure protection of said habitat or feature. The project’s Ecological Characterization Study reports that the proposed parking structure is just north of Spring Creek and abuts Creekside Park. A Natural Habitat Buffer Zone is proposed to buffer the development from Spring Creek. The standard buffer requirement for Spring Creek is 100’ (Section 3.4.1(E)(1)), and the approved plans for the Summit provided an average 100’ buffer to the creek. The site’s habitat value is largely contained within the adjacent creek corridor; this corridor is highly impaired due Summit on College Parking Structure FDP #130056 Administrative Hearing March 5, 2014 Page 12 to College Avenue, the railroad, and the lack of woody vegetation cover. The site has also been evaluated for Threatened and Endangered species and no suitable habitat for such species was observed on the site. To meet the standards associated with Section 3.4.1, the project has proposed to apply the performance standards contained in Section 3.4.1(E). The plans for the parking structure would reduce the 100-foot buffer to: about 60 feet over a 60-foot length; 60 to 80 feet over a 30 foot length; and 70 to 80 feet over an 80-foot length. The project meets the standards in Section 3.4.1 by incorporating the following elements into the design: • No fencing is proposed between the creek and the development, which will allow for wildlife movement across the site (Section 3.4.1(E)(1)(b)). • As the buffer area proposed is less than 100’, the applicant has incorporated native plantings and extensive screening to ensure that the ecological value of the Spring Creek corridor is protected and enhanced to the maximum extent feasible. This will be achieved in two ways. First, the project proposes to install a multi-structured vegetation screen that includes 104 trees and shrubs and a native grass seed mix. Second, the applicant will provide a fee-in-lieu payment to the City of Fort Collins to enhance the planned restoration of Spring Creek, anticipated within the next two years. A conceptual landscape plan has been developed to determine the fee-in-lieu amount (Section 3.4.1(E)(1)(g)). • There is no light spillover into the buffer zone to minimize impacts to the area as a wildlife corridor (Section 3.4.1(E)(1)(e)). Section 3.2.4 – Site Lighting: All lighting is down-directional with sharp glare cutoff fixtures. No foot-candles levels exceed one-tenth as measured 20 feet from property lines as required under this standard. This section requires that maximum on-site lighting shall not exceed 10 foot- candles and yet inside the parking structure the light levels during the day reach levels in excess of 50 foot candles and then at night a photocell will automatically reduce the light level below the maximum of 10 foot-candles. Section 3.5.1 – Building and Project Compatibility: Standards in this Section require compatibility with the context of the surrounding area in terms of building size, massing proportions, design character and building materials. Where the established character of the relevant area is not definitively established, or is Summit on College Parking Structure FDP #130056 Administrative Hearing March 5, 2014 Page 13 not consistent with the purposes of the Land Use Code, projects must set an enhanced standard appropriate for the area. The proposed parking structure is compatible with surrounding development in terms of building size, height, bulk, mass, and scale in that it is 3 ½ stories tall (37’-9” with one stair tower extending to 49’-4”). The building to the east (known as the Maytag Building) is one story with a garden level and approximately 100 feet in length, and directly to the north is the residential portion of Summit which is 4 and 5 stories in height and a maximum length of 560 feet. The east and west sides of the parking structure is 230 feet in length and the north and south sides are 175 feet in length. The building materials and colors are designed to clearly indicate that it is part of the Summit development. It is constructed primarily with precast concrete spandrel panels with reveals. The ground level has a stone veneer with matching accent columns stretching the entire height of the building. Cementitious panel elements with windows are protruding on corners and in several locations along the façade to break up the overall size of the building. The panels are painted to match the existing Summit buildings. The roofline is capped with a sheet metal cornice. Section 3.5.3 – Mixed-Use, Institutional and Commercial Buildings: This section is intended to promote human scale development and to create attractive street fronts and walkways. Staff worked extensively with the applicant in order to bring the project into compliance with these standards. Buildings are supposed to orient to streets and utilize connecting walkways (Sec. 3.5.3(C)). The proposed parking structure is not abutting a public street and sits at the end of a private drive used to access the garage which is currently a parking lot. The site plan does provide a connecting sidewalk both to the residential portion of the development and to the public park to the south. This sidewalk connects to doorways on the east side that lead to the vehicle parking and bike parking. The building is required to vary its building mass so that it does not exceed a height:width ratio of 1:3 without projecting or recessed elements and shall relate to the interior spaces (Sec. 3.5.3(D)). The building provides stone veneer pillars and projections of cementitious siding and panels in varied colors to break up the massing of the building. The building may not have blank walls or building bays exceeding 30 feet in width without incorporating architectural features, and also have recognizable base and top Summit on College Parking Structure FDP #130056 Administrative Hearing March 5, 2014 Page 14 treatments (Sec. 3.5.3(E)). The principal material is precast architectural concrete spandrels with 3” wide and ¾” deep reveals to add visual interest. The voids that open into the parking garage are broken up with vertical concrete spans. The entire base is stone veneer protruding out from the concrete face. Each stone veneer pillar and cementitious projection panel extends above the concrete roofline providing variation and all rooflines are capped with sheet metal cornices. Section 3.6.4 – Transportation Level of Service: A Traffic Engineering Study was submitted and accepted by the City’s Traffic Operations Department. Staff finds that the project adequately provides vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle facilities necessary to maintain the City’s adopted standards Levels of Service. Section 3.10 – Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay Zone The standards in this section are to encourage land uses, densities, and design that enhance and support transit and mixed-use walkable developments. Where parking structures face the street, they are required to be wrapped in retail and other uses. The proposed parking structure does not face the street and thus this standard is not applicable. The site plan is required to provide outdoor gathering spaces (Sec. 3.10.3). This proposal is incorporating into an existing development that already includes plazas and courtyards. A public park is directly to the south with a connecting walkway, along which are benches. The auto entrances are required to minimize pedestrian/auto conflicts (Sec. 3.10.4). The auto entrance to the garage is oriented so that pedestrians will not be crossing in front of vehicles. The west side of the entrance directly abuts the floodplain in which there are no pedestrian improvements. Buildings in the TOD Overlay Zone are required to be constructed with high quality materials and utilize neutral or earth tone colors (Sec. 3.20.5(C)). The entire base level façade is constructed with stone veneer and the upper section is tinted concrete. Both materials are noted in this section as acceptable. Summit on College Parking Structure FDP #130056 Administrative Hearing March 5, 2014 Page 15 6. Compliance with Modification of Standards (2.8) – Drive Aisle Width (3.2.2(L): The project is requesting a Modification of Standard for a drive aisle width of 15 feet instead of the required 20 feet found in Section 3.2.2(L) Table A for parking angled at 60 degrees for one drive aisle on each of 4 levels of the parking structure. The applicant asks that the Hearing Officer find that the requested modification be granted on the grounds that is not detrimental to the public good and that the plan as submitted will promote the general purpose of the drive aisle width for which the modification is requested equally well or better than would a plan which compiles with the drive aisle width as required in Section 3.2.2(L). The applicant hired parking consultants Desman Associates to analyze the proposed modification. The National Parking Association (NPA) has classified Level Of Service (LOS) for parking based on the conditions of the situation. In this case the applicant is basing the analysis on a composite vehicle that is in the 85 th percentile for size: Chevrolet Traverse and the user familiarity as “low turnover”. The NPA LOS chart for these categories recommends a drive aisle width of 15’-4” for a LOS B. Please see the attached modification request for more details. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSION: In evaluating the request for The Summit on College Parking Structure FDP #130056, staff makes the following finding of fact and conclusions: A. The request for a modification of standard to permit a reduction in the drive aisle width (Sec. 3.2.2(L)) is not detrimental to the public good and will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the modification is requested equally well or better than would a plan which compiles with said standard because the drive aisle width as proposed is considered wide enough to garner a Level Of Service B by national standards. B. The Major Amendment contains permitted uses and complies with the applicable land development standards of the General Commercial District in Article 4, Division 4.21 of the Land Use Code. C. The Major Amendment complies with the applicable General Development Standards of Article 3 of the Land Use Code with the exception of the requested modification of standard. Summit on College Parking Structure FDP #130056 Administrative Hearing March 5, 2014 Page 16 D. The Major Amendment complies with the applicable procedural and administrative requirements of Article 2 of the Land Use Code. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of The Summit on College Parking Structure FDP #130056 with the following conditions of approval: 1. The Capstone property is partially located within the FEMA-regulated Spring Creek 100-year high risk floodplain and floodway. The project shall comply with all applicable sections of Chapter 10 of the Fort Collins Municipal Code (Ch. 10 Code). 2. Capstone and its consultants and subconsultants shall execute all components of the action plan for amendment of the Floodplain Use Permit (FPUP) #11048 as outlined in the memorandum from Walker P. May on February 14, 2014. Specifically, all of the 5 bulleted items included in said memo shall be completed and approved prior to the issuance of a FPUP for any site work or building construction. 3. An approved FPUP and no-rise certification must precede any site work, building construction, or building or grading permits. No development work, as defined in Section 10-16 of the Ch. 10 Code, shall commence until the FPUP and no-rise certification are approved by City of Fort Collins Floodplain Administration. The FPUP and no-rise documentation must clearly document compliance with the Floodproofing or venting requirements of Ch. 10 Code if elevation requirements of Section 10-37 cannot be satisfied. Capstone and its consultants and subconsultants shall complete all applicable items included in the City of Fort Collins Floodproofing Guidelines, provided previously by e-mail exchange and available online at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/fp- floodproofing.pdf. 4. A pre-construction FEMA Elevation Certificate shall be provided as part of the no-rise certification materials, and must be approved prior to obtaining any grading or building permits. 5. All no-rise certifications shall be re-certified by the professional engineer of record prior to obtaining a certificate of occupancy on the site. The no-rise re- certification shall include a FEMA Elevation Certificate of as-built conditions, and a certificate of occupancy shall not be issued until the as-built Elevation Certificate is approved by City of Fort Collins Floodplain Administration. Summit on College Parking Structure FDP #130056 Administrative Hearing March 5, 2014 Page 17 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Site Plan 2. Landscape Plan 3. Elevations 4. Floor Plans 5. Plat 6. Photometric Plan 7. Shadow Study 8. Bike Parking Alternative Compliance Request 9. Drive Aisle Modification Request 10. Ecological Characterization Study 11. Ecological Characterization Study Checklist 12. Fee in Lieu Estimate for Landscape Buffer 13. Transportation Impact Study Memorandum 14. Public Comments