Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWEBERG PUD - PRELIMINARY - 76-88F - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSITEM No. 9 PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING OF May 22,. 1989 STAFF REPORT PROJECT: Weberg PUD, Preliminary - #76-88F APPLICANT: Weberg Enterprises, Inc. c/o Vaught -Frye Architects 2900 S. College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80525 OWNER: Fred and Dorothy McClanahan 5001 S. College Fort Collins, CO 80525 PROJECT PLANNER: Sherry Albertson -Clark PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A request for preliminary approval of a 70,000 square foot Weberg Furniture showroom/warehouse, on 5.1 acres. The site is located on the west side of College Avenue, at Fairway Lane, approximately 1/3 mile south of Harmony Road and is zoned B-P, Planned Business, with a PUD condition. RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The applicant proposes a 70,000 square foot Weberg Furniture showroom/warehouse. The project scores 57% on the Auto -Related and Roadside Commercial Point Chart. A minimum of 50% is required for approval. Conditions addressing architectural elevations, signage, mitigation of existing tree loss and design of Fossil Boulevard have been placed on the preliminary approval. CEVELOPMENT 300 LaPorte Ave. - PC Sox 580 - Fort Coffins, ColoratlC310 80522 - (3' d7�3 SEHV'10ES' PLANNING CEPARTMENT Weberg PUD, Preliminary - #76-88F P & Z Meeting - May 22, 1989 Page 2 COMMENTS 1. Back -ground: The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: N: T; Fossil Creek Nursery (in Larimer County) S: b-p; Mill Brothers Nursery E: B-L; Fred Schmid's (Fairway Estates Business Annexation) W: FA-1; vacant (in Larimer County) This is the first phase of the Weberg PUD Master Plan. The site presently contains a residence and outbuildings and has been annexed as the McClanahan Annexation. The zoning is B-P, Planned Business, with a Planned Unit Development condition. The preliminary plan was reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Board on April 26, 1989 and was tabled until the May meeting, so that the applicant could work on a number of issues identified by Board members and staff. As a result, a master plan for the entire site has been submitted along with this preliminary phase plan. 2. Land Use: The proposed use consists of Weberg's 35,000 square foot showroom and attached 35,000 square foot warehouse. The land use proposed on this preliminary site plan was evaluated under the criteria of the Auto -Related and Roadside Commercial Point Chart. Using Point Chart D, the project achieves 57%. Points were awarded for not being located at two arterials; having primary access from a non -arterial street (access is from Fairway Lane); being on a site larger than 2 acres; for providing joint parking and for contiguity to existing urban development (Fred Schmid's). 3. Design: At the April 26, 1989 Board review of the preliminary plan for the entire Weberg's site, the item was continued and a number of suggestions made for the applicant to consider. In addition to the recommended staff conditions, Board members suggested consideration be given to increasing setbacks and landscaping, straightening the alignment of Fairway Lane through the site and evaluation of the location of Fossil Boulevard. These items have been addressed on the revised site plan and are discussed in the following sections of the staff report. The building planned for this project is the Weberg Furniture facility, which includes 35,000 square feet of showroom and 35,000 square feet of warehouse. Parking for the building is located in front of the structure and is within City guidelines for this type of low -intensity use. The proposed showroom portion Weberg PUD, Preliminary - #76-88F P & Z Meeting - May 22, 1989 Page 3 of Weberg's is a maximum of 18' in height, while the warehouse has a maximum height of 26'. The applicant has reduced the height of the warehouse from it's original proposed height of 36', in response to neighborhood and staff concerns. Setbacks along the south property line have been increased. The showroom portion of the structure is 20' from the south property line, while the warehouse is 30' from property line. The north edge of the proposed building is a minimum of 25' from the right-of-way line of Fairway Lane. Substantial setbacks have been maintained along the site's College Avenue frontage, where the Weberg's showroom is setback 160' from r-o-w. The increased setbacks along the north and south sides of the building represent a substantial improvement over those on the previous plan. Additional landscaping has been provided on the site, with an emphasis placed on providing screening for the Weberg facility. Berming has been incorporated at the entrance to the site and at the back of the furniture store along Fossil Boulevard, to screen the service and loading areas of the furniture store. Berming 34' in height will also be used along the north and south walls of the building. Screening of the parking lot from College Avenue will be accom- plished through the use of street trees, shrubbery and the existing elevation change from College Avenue to the site. Staff believes that the landscape plan is a substantial improvement over the previous reviewed preliminary plan. There are a number of existing trees located on the site. Some of the existing trees in the vicinity of Fossil Boulevard and the furniture warehouse would be removed by the proposed development plan. The City Forester has been asked to valuate these trees and to recommend ways of mitigation of any potential loss prior to the review of final plans. Staff is recommending a condition that the applicant provide mitigation for the loss of existing trees on the final plans. Signage has been indicated on the building elevations and would consist of "Weberg Furniture" and the corporate logo on the west and east elevations and "Weberg's" on the east elevation. The only illumination proposed is that of "Weberg Furniture" on the east side of the building. An ID sign has also been designated for the site. Staff is recommending a condition that a unified signage design for the entire site be provided with the final plans. The proposed building materials consist of exposed aggregate tilt -up panels and painted concrete panels for the entryway. Of concern to staff is the expanse of blank walls and the lack of visual interest and relief. Some improvement has occurred in the design of the entry feature on the east elevation; however, staff has been concerned that the majority of the elevations remain very stark and uninteresting. As a result of the Board's review and comments at the April 26, 1989 Board meeting, the applicant has proposed the addition of three 4" recessed horizontal bands in the exposed aggregate finish, as a means of providing for shadow relief. Staff has evaluated other existing exposed aggregate structures in the community and believes that additional work is still needed in the appearance of the building. The introduction of fluting in selected areas of the exposed aggregate would provide for additional color, Weberg PUD, Preliminary - #76-88F P & Z Meeting - May 22, 1989 Page 4 texture and linear contrast in the construction of the exposed aggregate panels. There is also a need for a consistent architectural theme to be established for structures throughout the site. Staff will continue to work with the applicant's architect on this matter. Staff is recommending a condition that final building elevations provide fluting in the exposed aggregate panels on all elevations of the Weberg building and that a consistent architectural theme for the entire site be established. 4. Neighborhood Compatibility: A neighborhood meeting was held on this proposal on March 1, 1989 (see attached summary). Issues raised at this meeting may be summarized as relat- ing to storm drainage, building height and architecture, buffering and setbacks. Resolution of these issues is as follows: Storm drainage - Residents expressed concerns over how stormwater would be handled and whether on -site detention would be required. Refer to storm drainage section of staff report. Building height and architecture - The warehouse portion of the proposed Weberg Furniture building has been reduced in height from 36' to 26'. The showroom height of 18' remains the same. The applicant initially proposed tilt -up concrete panels as the building material for Weberg's. In response to staff and neighborhood concerns, the materials have been revised and now consist of exposed aggregate tilt -up panels and concrete panels for the entryway. Staff still has concerns regarding the architecture of the Weberg structure and is proposing a condition to this effect. Buffering and setbacks - The setbacks between buildings and the south property line have been increased from 15' to 20' along the showroom and 30' along the warehouse. Greater setbacks have also been provided along the north side of the building, with a minimum of 25' to right-of-way. Additional landscaping and berming have also been added to this setback area, to further buffer the proposed buildings from the property to the south. A combination of trees, shrubbery and foundation plantings provides visual interest along Weberg's north and south elevations and helps to break up the long facade. Additional landscaping elsewhere on the site, particularly along the College Avenue frontage, also provides visual buffering for the proposed building. 5. Transportation: Access to the site is from an extension of Fairway Lane west of College Avenue. The alignment of Fairway Lane has been shifted slightly, so that greater setbacks between the north side of the building and the street are provided. The intersection of Fairway Lane with College Avenue has not shifted. The proposed re -circulation street, Fossil Boulevard, is also shown on the site plan and would eventually be linked to the north and south of this site. A change in the southern alignment of Fossil Boulevard has resulted in the existing trees to the south being located within a median on Fossil Weberg PUD, Preliminary - #76-88F P & Z Meeting - May 22, 1989 Page 5 Boulevard. Additional design work will be needed to verify this location of the proposed street, as well as how the design addresses City standards. Staff is recommending a condition that preliminary design for Fossil Boulevard off -site be provided with the final plans. 6. Storm Drainage: This site is located within the Fossil Creek Drainage Basin. The Fossil Creek Basin Master Drainageway Planning Study, produced in 1982, uses 100-year undetained developed flows for determining the floodplain for Fossil Creek. This was done for several reasons: floodplain limits vary little from historic flow to developed flows (since Fossil Creek is generally contained in defined stream corridors); existing soil conditions differ little from developed conditions as it relates to storm runoff; and the Fossil Creek Basin is traversed by roadway and railroad embankments that temporarily store storm runoff waters, reducing peak flows. Because of a project's location in the basin, detention may be necessary to mitigate downstream impacts. It is standard practice in the City to not require stormwater detention for those developments located adjacent to stream corridors unless site conditions dictate otherwise. On -site detention is being required for this particular site. This site drains to Highway 287 and then down to Fossil Creek. The State Highway Department requires that only historic flows may be released onto their right-of-way; therefore, detention must be provided. The applicant is providing a stormwater treatment facility in the southeast corner of the site, to filter sediment and other substances commonly found in parking lots from stormwater before it is released from the site into a drainage system. RECOMMENDATION Staff finds that the Weberg PUD Preliminary meets the criteria of the Auto - Related and Roadside Commercial Point Chart and the All Development Chart of the Land Development Guidance System. There are several concerns that must be addressed prior to final PUD review. Therefore, staff is recommend- ing approval with the following conditions: 1. The applicant provide mitigation for the loss of existing trees on the final plans. 2. A unified signage design be provided with the final plans. 3. Final building elevations provide fluting in selective areas of the exposed aggregate panels for all elevations of the Weberg building, and a consistent architectural theme for the entire site be established. 4. Preliminary design for Fossil Boulevard off -site be provided with the final plans. STEM WEBERG PUD —Preliminary NUMBER 76-88F • 0 IOU VJZONED i _ •EPl„a -� �.� . J _ J � r cc ml F / LL of = �^ •• _ L 1L �J FIITIIRE TqN TO OFT-911E n i i I e ^rs • PAPI(NO CO TAMN, TEN OR \`\�i�T'nJl 3 MOfd: 5P9f,YP1 K S I I II� m �• ` 1 Y LASACREB II�I( \� � WEFURR,E Pt.I�lNWARETAL/WAARE,gUSER ��/ ape / bp II ••_—j ��,•__jr III VICINITY MAP s••1•: +' • I—' II % LOT 9 , A �- �y IW�BEO PLD. MASTER PLAN PARCEL. - BEwc ANNED PESSTXULi MNT/RETAIOFS P , - L I I PAPItHG CONTA•HIO 1ElI ORE / / '1 MORE SPACES(TYP) . °• u A• *!7, WEBV FURNITUR 3500{iSF WAREHOUSE ,L �m 77 ` ` \ I� AILS BROTNERS <\ bP ZONED NOTES SITE ANALYSIS \ YkA\ \1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION PLANNING OBJECTIVES + ( LOT ONE A PLO" R.O.W. ONLY) ........ :.,..,, jj s� ` . . u u . r . .0 uru "• : x, ,..[11r+... u .e serves W. , ♦ .. u w:n .t ..a. nw.eM �......<..: s. a .. «... ,.. . . ..... 1.1 ., ABBREVIATIONS �� FFAIRWAILLANE z Z w us, ,Q\ W NIy J } ¢ om, U .: N Rl P t CONNEC�TIDN�,q ..,e BL ZONED WEBERGPUD. WEBERG ENTERPRISES PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN & PRELIMINARY PLAT NAUGHT o a eT. FRYE °-`• ® rx t—,D-0Y 1 40 s ,e-ea � IFOSSIL CREEK NURSERY / I I-- �LUH�I(`• iED RESTAIFiANTNB:TAA/OFFICES � I I o 4 a,. J ' 1 J 'i F IRWAY LANE - . < _ LOCAL STREETcc fr - - - — - w O W Z Z o l . Z LU J X m W U WEBERG� URNITURE MILL BROTHERS NURSERY WEBERG PUD PLANT KEY NOTES: '' Y Ei�STING TREES ORNAMENTAL TREES I. STREET TREE9 SMALL BE LOCATED OUTSIDE OF THE FRONT UTILITY EASEMENTS WHERE POSSIBLE. WEBERG ENTERPRISES DECIDUOUS TREES, �n 1tA. VV 1 • SHRUBS IN ALL CASES THEY WILL BE PLACED A MINIMUM OF B' HORIZONTALLY FROM UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. 2. THE ISTING TREES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN THAT AEXRE TO BE REMOVED WILL RECEIVE A VAL UATION INSPECTION BY THE CITY FORESTER PRION TO FINAL PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN ® CON WEROUS TREES GROUND COVE/ RS PERENNIALS APPROVAL. 3. FOUNDATION PLANTINGS AROUND THE BUILDING PADS WILL BE FINALIZED AT THEIR RESPECTIVE PHASE PLAN REVIEWS. THE LANDSCAPE TREATMENT WILL MEET OR EXCEED _ VA(I(I T I' It}'I a SOItl SEO REQUIREMENTS AS SPECIFIED IN THE DEVELOPMENT MANUAL THE - ((:(ry} 6 BO © FOR CITY OF FORT COLLINS. '�"'� g'- - I _�•��tr.., ` - i - =�'c-s ;� - � :art-'k:�:ti' --�"-` ' - - - - -- •:..AR NORTH ELEVATION SIGNAGE ua.mn�wm rnra� 1 EBERG FUiNMiE' HON-l1UMNAlED ON WEST FACADE 'WEBURG FURNRURE', LLUMNATED ON EAST FACADE OF SHOWROOM, AS SHOWN. EAST ELEVATION WALLS TLT-P CONCRETE PANELS - 3 TO AFT BERMS ON Mi S. WALLS E%POSED AGGREGATE FNi9H A NCH RECESSED BANDS FOR SHADOW RELIEF ENTRANCE STOREFRONT DOORS AND WNOOW8, RT UP CONCRETE PANELSPANIED EARTH TONE, A DARNER SHADE THAN EXPOSED AGGREGATE BULDNG HEIGHT WAREHOUSE 28 FT TO TOP OF WALL FROM FAL FLOOR SHOWROOM 18FT TO TOP OF WALL FROM M FLOOR 1 . ,. ...t . ENTRY DETAL 23" TO TOP OF W ALL FR01A FN. FLOOR SOUTH ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION WEBERG MID WEBERG ENTERPRISES ELEVATIONS ® VflUGHT 3l-88 FRYE Tx ataB mh— o-1s w 6 14 BY O 8FT I I PANT KEY I 'l Tw • 1 ' � � TL-N9E I!u.it I NEsip m. O < v� P F' IRWLDDALAY LANE - c. �sTL/ t� WEBERG URNITURE Ylll BROlHER9 NUFBFRr TES STREET TREES SHALL BE LDCATEU OUTSIDE Of MF FRONT UIILIT♦ EASEMENI6 WHENE POSSIBLE lL GABES WRL BE PLACED A TU4 Of AORII ONTAL IY iRO4 UNDERGROUNNDD UTILITIES E EAISTING TREES SHOWN ON 1NI4 PI AN THAT ARE TO BE NEYOVEO w TL RECEIVE VALUATION INSPECTION 8v HE CIT1 FOPEl'E- 10 FINAL APP.- PRIOR 3 FOUNDATION PLANTINGS AROUND THE BUILDING PADS WILL SE fIULIZED AT THEIR RESPECIIVE PHASE PLAN REVIE W8 THE LANDSCAPE TREAT"'"?WAl MEET OR EACEED .EOUINE4E.. AB BPECBEO IN THE DEVELOPMENT NANUAI lUR THE CITY OF FORT 1—INB • L � JUL, am Lu .Lu -Liu w.,_' 3L 1J .! u WEBERG PUD. WEBERG ENTERPRISES PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN SEG I � ® AAM 1111E -6_0_h- . _ NORTH ELEVATION • 9NNAOE u.<o.a..m. rn. a`cer 'wERERc rwNRwE' NDN lIUTANATED Q•1 WEST FACADE W E'. NATEDOMON EASEAST FACADE F SrgWROOAr, AS SHOWN EAST ELEVATION Wuls Tli wCOxCRE IE RANEES - 1 TO AFT SERx3 ON Nl S wAlE3 E X-D AGGREGATE ENBH A NCH RECESSED BANDS fOR SXADOW REIEF EMigANCE STORE C- OOORS $wN E. li w CONCRETE RANEESRANTED EARTn TONE ♦ DAPotFR SNADE iwAN EEVO5E0 AGGREGATE WIDMO REANIT WAR-SEPSFT TO TOROf Wu 1-1N rimo WEBERG ENTERPRISES ELEVATIONS WEST ELEVATIONTI rti r o wET yry- I I r V /WIK6- PKr-JJM_ ALL DEVELOPMENT; NUMBERED CRITERIA CHART ALL CRITERIA APPLICABLE CRITERIA ONLY CRITERION Is the criterion applicable? Will the criterion - be satisfied? If no, please explain °0 0��' F,c°' °° Yes No NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATABILITY 1. Social Compatability 2. Neighborhood Character 3. Land Use Conflicts 4. Adverse Traffic Impact PLANS AND POLICIES 5, Comprehensive Plan PUBLIC FACILITIES & SAFETY 6, Street Capacity 7. Utility Capacity 8. Design Standards 9. Emergency Access 10, Security Lighting 11. Water Hazards RESOURCE PROTECTION 12. Soils & Slope Hazard 13 Significant Vegetation 14, Wildlife Habitat 15 Historical Landmark 16 Mineral Deposit 17 Eco-Sensitive Areas 18 Agricultural Lands ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS 19. Air Quality 20. Water Quality 21. Noise 22. Glare & Heat 23. Vibrations 24. Exterior Lighting 25. Sewages & Wastes SITE DESIGN 26. Community Organization 27. Site Organization 28. Natural Features 29. Energy Conservation 30.Shadows 31. Solar Access 32. Privacy 33, Open Space Arrangement 34. Building Height 35, Vehicular Movement 36. Vehicular Design 37. Parking 38. Active Recreational Areas 39. Private Outdoor Areas 40, Pedestrian Convenience 41, Pedestrian Conflicts 42, Landscaping/Open Areas 43. Landscaping/Buildings 44, Landscaping/Screening 45, Public Access 46 Signs —12— • AUTO -RELATED AND ROADSIDE COMMERCIAL POINT CHART D For All Critera Applicable Criteria Only Criterion Is The Criterion Applicable Yes No II lu IV Circle The Correct Score Yes VW No Multiplier Points Earned 1x11 Maximum Applicable Points a. Notattwo arterials X X� 0 2 4 b. Part of planned center X X 2(0 3 6 c. On non -arterial X XP 0 4 8 d. Two acres or more X X 0 3� 6 e. Mixed -use X X 2� 3 6 f. Joint parking X 2 0 3 3 (� g. Energy conservation X 1 2 0 4 0 8 h. Contiguw,, X X 0 5 /0 10 i. Historic preservation k 1 2 0 2 — — j. 1 2 0 k. 1 210 I. 1 210 " VW — Very Well Done Totals 31 5-41 V VI Percentage Earned of Maximum Applicable Points V/VI = VII S Vil -21- 0 I:WINC Engineering Consultants 2900 South College Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 303/226-4955 May 16, 1989 Ms. Susan Hayes Storm Drainage Department City of Fort Collins P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 RE: WEBERG FURNITURE VARIANCE REQUEST Dear Susan: I am writing you this letter to request variance from the use of a reduction factor for the curb drainage capacity calculation on the Weburg Furniture P.U.D. The proposed Weberg Furniture is lo- cated about 1/2 mile south of Harmony Road adjacent to the west side of Highway 287. Existing drainage into Highway 287, at the southeast corner of this site, during a 10 year storm, is calculated to be 17.8 cfs. The curb and gutter can drain 18.9 cfs, at this location, based on mannings formula. This flow would be reduced to 13.8 cfs if I used a reduction factor of 0.73 from Figure 4-2 in the City Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards manual. Four main reasons are given here to suggest that the reduction factor does not apply in this situation. The first is that park- ing is not allowed on this stretch of Highway 287. Parked car tires are a big factor in the use of the above safety factor. The second reason is that existing grade, just a few feet west of R.O.W. is much higher than flowline in this area and areas im- mediately south. The third reason is that this development is not creating any more flow, than what could exist now, during a 100-year storm. The last reason is that about 400 feet south of this site an inlet exists that will intercept some of the flows. I believe that you will find this variance request satisfactory. Please call if you have any further questions. Sincerely, �RB-D.,, Inc. Brian Cole, P.E. Project Engineer cc: 332-002 Other Offices: Vail, Colorado 303/476-6340 • Colorado Springs, Colorado (719) 598-4107 0 NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING SUMMARY On Wednesday, March 1, 1989 at 7:00 P.M. at the REA Building, a neighborhood meeting was held on the Weberg Furniture Project, located at the west side of College Avenue, south of Harmony. In attendance at this meeting was Frank Vaught, of Vaught -Frye Architects; and Sherry Albertson -Clark, Project Planner for the City Planning Department. Approximately 25 residents/property owners attended the meeting. The meeting began with an introduction by Sherry Albertson -Clark to the purpose of the meeting. Frank Vaught then provided an overview of the proposed project, after which, questions and comments were addressed. The following summarizes the questions asked and responses given by the developer's representative, as well as comments made by the residents. uestion: Does drainage from site go into Fossil Creek? Response: Yes, released at the historic rate. uestion: Is there a connection with Weberg's at the new Pace site? Response• No. uestion: What facilities will exist for storm detention? Response: Detention pond, with a pipe to release flow into College Avenue. Detention will also occur in parking areas and on rooftops. uestion: Will parking areas be asphalt or concrete? Response: Concrete is being considered. Question : Does building appearance resemble Pace? Response: No, but would be tilt -up concrete panels and is five separate buildings on the site, rather than one large one. uestion: What is height of buildings on site and how do they compare with Fred Schmid? Response: Buildings are one-story, with Weberg's warehouse being 36' tall. Schmid's is about 36'. uestion: What is elevation of site? Response: At about 4997'. Question: Would there be any plans to widen Fairway Lane east of College with this project? C Response: Not aware of any, would depend on traffic study. Question: Would this project trigger a signal at Fairway Lane? Response: Don't know, would depend on traffic study and meeting warrant study. Question: What are traffic projections for project? Response: Traffic study is being completed, won't know until then, but believe Weberg's is low generator (14 cars/hour). Parking lot is 75 spaces with 25-30% open space on site. Comment: State Farm Insurance would like to go on record of supporting a traffic signal at Fairway Lane and College Avenue. uestion: What is planned phasing of project? Response: Weberg's first, other buildings later. uestion: What are setbacks from College? Response: 170' for showroom, 90' for closest pad to College. Question : How many employees would there be? Response: About 30 for Weberg's. uestion: What about deliveries? Response: Two a week (semis), suppliers (2 a day) deliveries out (3 a day) others (customers for own pickups). Comment: Concerned about traffic increases in area, impacts on streets, air quality, school, safety services, increasing taxes, utilities, area becoming a factory area rather than a residential area. Question : Would utilities be City or district? Response: District. Comment: Concerned about the increasing costs of development and the resulting impact on facilities and existing businesses in area. Comment: Concerned about number of warehouses in area. Why do we need warehouses on College when there is zoned land on Harmony for this? Response: Use here is not really warehouse, but a retail store (furniture). Along Harmony are warehouses with industrial uses. Not the same thing. uestion: What is tilt -up concrete? Response: Pre -cast concrete panels, can be colored concrete, have design bands incorporated. -2- Question: What type of lighting would be use? Lit 24 hours? Response: Downward angled in parking lot. Hours of operation vary during week/weekend, typically close by 9 or 9:30. Question: What about signage? Response: No design yet, must meet sign code. uestion: What is elevation of College? Building top? Response: College drops. Building is at grade of College, with 36' max. height. Comment: Concerned about growth of city, increasing number of discount stores on College Avenue. Comment: Concerned about land use policies and inconsistent interpretation of policies by city staff. uestion: How is increased runoff being handled? Response: Detaining water beyond what the historic rate is. uestion: Is plan for drainage going to impact Fossil Creek or Mail Creek? Response: No, now being required to detain on -site. uestion: Is storm drainage requirement for this site same as used for other sites in area? Response: Yes. Comment: Concerned about water quality from storm drainage off parking lots. Comment: Concerned that city isn't looking at the big picture in environmental issues. Question : Is traffic signal integral to Weberg's? Response: No. Question: Is there an open space requirement? Response: No, depends on setbacks and landscape combination. uestion: Will there be rail deliveries? Response: No, cost prohibitive. Question : Is property value a consideration in compatibility? Response: No. -3- Question : Could there be a more compatible architectural design for buildings? Lower height, residential character? Response: Could look at this. Comment: Concerned that building architecture and height would not be compatible. Comment: South property line landscaping needs to be beefed-up. Comment: Concerned about buffering. The meeting adjourned at 8:45 P.M. -4- Engineering Consultants 2900 South College Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 303/226-4955 May 16, 1989 Ms. Susan Hayes Storm Drainage Department City of Fort Collins P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 RE: REVISED PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT FOR THE WEBER P.U.D. Dear Susan: The Weberg Furniture site is located about 1/2 mile south of Har- mony Road on the west side of Highway 287 (College Avenue in Fort Collins) in Larimer County Colorado. Annexation is currently underway to bring this site within City limits. More specifi- cally this location is in the east half of Section 2, Township 6 North, Range 69 West of the 6th Principal Meridian. This site currently is occupied by a residence with a large open grass field between it and College Avenue. The general slope of the property is at about 1% to 3% in a southeasterly direction. Existing drainage from this site flows in two directions. Basin H1 (on plan in pocket) drains to a drainageway that exists just south of this basin. Basin H1 is offsite and to the west of this site with an exception of proposed Basin A. Proposed Basin A will drain, however, in the direction of Highway 287. Drainage from Basin H2 drains directly into Highway 287. Calculations for the existing flows from Basin H2 is shown in the Appendix. Offsite flows from the north currently are captured into a drainage swale near the north property line. This drainage swale meanders on and off this property but exists primarily north of property line. The development of this area will require redefining this swale north of this site or make provisions for the offsite flows to safely pass through this site. The flows that enter highway 287 will drain in the existing curb and gutter as they travel south of the site. At a point about 400 ft. south of this site, an inlet will intercept some of the flows. This inlet collects the flows into a pipe which transports them to the east side of Highway 287, where the pipe Other Offices: Vail, Colorado 303/476-6340 • Colorado Springs, Colorado (719) 598-4107 daylights. The flows then sheet flow to a roadside ditch within the Fossil Creek Meadows Subdivision. Roadside ditches, along with culverts under existing roads within the subdivision, direct the flows to Fossil Creek. Flows that were not intercepted by the first inlet in Highway 287 will continue down the hill to another inlet. This inlet collects the flows to a pipe system which finally drains directly into Fossil Creek. This property is a part of the Fossil Creek Major Drainage Basin which is explained in the Fossil Creek Drainage Basin Master Drainageway Planning Study, by Simons, Li and Associates, Inc. August, 1982. Based on the above report, The City of Fort Col- lins does not require any storm water detention from this site in a totally developed condition. Under this condition, however, the City Stormwater Utility Department requires an agreement with the downstream property owners to accept the additional runoff generated without detention. Such an agreement would involve all property owners between this site and Fossil Creek. It should also be pointed out that the Colorado State Highway Department, in a letter to the City of Fort Collins, dated October 7, 1988, stated that on -site detention is to be required to limit flows onto Highway 287 to the historic runoff rate. The alternative that this report pursues is to release flows from this site at existing rates. This would require some storm water detention to keep the developed flows from exceeding existing flow rates. The preliminary design proceeded based on this design requirement. The first design step is to calculate existing flows in Highway 287 to ensure that these existing flows do not already exceed the City of Fort Collins criteria during a 10 year storm. The allow- able flow calculated in Highway 287 at the south of this site is 18.9 cfs. Applying a city safety factor of 0.73 brings this al- lowable flow rate to 13.8 cfs. This flow rate is less than his- toric and therefore variance is requested from the use of the city safety factor. The next design step is to create detention ponds for the developed basins in order to reduce developed flows to historic rates. This is shown for the 100 year storm only because it is considered to be the major storm event. During final design, in- terim release rates will be required based on City criteria. The calculations for Basins A, B, C, D, and E show that ponds will be necessary, in these basins, to reduce flows to historic rates of Basin H2. The results of the calculations are shown in the following table: (cfs) 100 Year Design Storm Maximum Release Rate (cfs) 100 Year Historic Storm Maximum Flow Rate (Ac.-Ft.) Proposed Detention Pond Volume Basin "A" 1.2 -- 0.15 Basin "B" 0.5 -- 0.06 Basin "C" 0.9 -- 0.11 (roof top storage) Basin "D" 0.8 0.10 (roof top storage) Basin "E" 2.1 0.26 Basin "F" 1.7 -- Basin H2 7.5 -- NOTE: The release rate calculations (historic 100 year flows) can be seen in appendix. All of the basins have surface detention ponds, however, Basin E lacks the area for the required detention storage to be on the surface. This is due to the grading and site layout. For this reason, underground storage may be necessary. The preliminary calculations show that 0.16 acre feet of volume can be achieved on the ground surface. This leaves 0.10 acre feet of the required total detention volume (0.26 acre feet) to be detained by other means. If underground storage is used, about 154 lineal feet of 6 ft. diameter pipe is required. A second alternative would be to allow the Weberg facility to be stepped downward to the east. This would allow the possibility of attaining the required detention on the surface of the east parking lot. These alternatives will be evaluated during the final design. In any case the required detention for Basin E will be achieved. The pond grading, sizing of inlets, pipe sizes, storage facilities, orifice openings and emergency overflow structures will be accomplished during final design. Storm water from this proposed development drains into a water quality facility prior to draining from this site. Table 1, in Appendix, from the paper, National Perspectives on Urban Runoff Technologies, by Larry A. Roesner, Ph.D., P.E. of CDM, shows dif- ferent types of facilities that can be used along with the average amount of pollutants that they remove. The facility chosen for this development is the infiltration type. This type of facility, as shown on Table 1, removes on the average 90% of the following pollutants: A) Suspended Solids B) Phosphorous (P) C) Dissolved P D) Nitrogen (N) E) Lead F) Zinc The infiltration facility design for this development is a water quality control berm. This berm is at the pond outlet pipes. The berm consists of redwood post and synthetic filter fabric connected to wire fencing material with gravel bermed up on both sides (see plan in pocket for detail). The gravel is replaced periodically to remove the pollutants. • 0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1) This preliminary drainage report identities the proposed design approach as detaining drainage flows to release into Highway 287 at the 100 year existing rates. 2) Sizing and grading of drainage facilities will be covered in final design. REFERENCES 1) Fossil Creek Drainage Basin Master Drainageway Planning Study, by Simons, Li and Associates, Inc. August, 1982. 2) Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Construction Standards, by the City of Fort Collins, May, 1984. 3) Letter to Ms. Linda Ripley of the City of Fort Collins Plan- ning Department from the State of Colorado Division of High- way (DOH File 45100), October 7, 1988. 4) National Perspectives on Urban Runoff Technologies, by Larry A. Roesner, Ph.D., P.E. of CDM, this paper is from; Urban Runoff Water Quality Seminar by the American Public Works Association, American Society of Civil Engineers, American Water Resources Association and Urban Drainage and Flood Control District. Sincerely, RBD, Inc. C� Brian Cole, P.E. Project Engineer cc: 332-002