HomeMy WebLinkAboutSPRING CREEK CENTER PUD PRELIMINARY - 17 90C - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTS6
ITEM NO. 2
MEETING DATE 4128197
iiA STAFF Mike Ludlgi 9
Citv of Fort Collins PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD
STAFF REPORT
PROJECT: Spring Creek Center PUD, Preliminary, #17-90C
APPLICANT: The W. W. Reynolds Companies
c/o Cityscape Urban Design, Inc.
3555 Stanford Road, Suite 105
Fort Collins, CO 80525
OWNER: The W. W. Reynolds Companies
4875 Pearl East Circle, Suite 300
Boulder, CO 80301
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This is a request for a Preliminary PUD for 86,055 square feet of mixed use
development to include office, business services, and auto -related convenience uses in
seven buildings on 11.6 acres. The property is located at the southeast corner of the
intersection of E. Prospect Road and Timberline Road, north of Midpoint Drive, and
west of Specht Point Road. The property is zoned E, Employment.
RECOMMENDATION:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Approval with a condition.
The request for Preliminary PUD approval:
• meets all applicable All -Development Criteria of the LDGS.
• earns 75% of the maximum applicable points on the Auto Related and Roadside
Commercial Uses Point Chart of the LDGS, exceeding the minimum required
50%.
• earns 83% of the maximum applicable points on the Business Service Uses
Point Chart of the LDGS, exceeding the minimum required 50%.
• is in compliance with the Prospect Road Streetscape Program.
• complies with the City's Transportation policies for traffic volumes and levels of
service.
• is compatible with surrounding neighborhoods.
COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. PO. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 (970) 221-6750
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
No Text
BMC WEST
- - - - - - ---.._ ___ - --8EVEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK
-v
NEAST PROSPECT ROAD
�� -- - 1
- I p
i
/
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
/ 19E EUNG CRMM c1Ce1V lllPelfil IFUD
i
CONTEXT MAP
NIGH PROFLLE.IEdVT Da ETbbNK
Iq°IMLT bIN'LES
rALTCI�IATE nLe ae eTARDFn eEAn rETALI
LM SIOM—dTICKFAWIA � LLOfO YRAFKD CLLVNe
I4TE m mb m STUCCO) r/ -`IIMAm dtlL1U
TYPICAL FRONT ELEVATION
TYPICAL CHARACTER OF RETAIL STORES/OFFICE
e ALP ... I.O'
LIWTBV RCpL E94ALL Mg yF I!WD
CRIOC CO.l AT ALL CMILPIE6
1FPER FLRT 6 m LDm ,Ai w
Tewac AxN `URAL I!LD etucw, oR wooD MD�
FRONT ELEVATION
TYPICAL CHARACTER OF CONVENIENCE STORES
ICALE W . T-O•
TYPICAL FRONT ELEVATION (SIDE SIMILAR) EUILDPr, REaxeS xuE rs WILORtl
N MATHCEen O TER6 WILD.
Acwee SF£cuT roN mw
TYPICAL CHARACTER OF OFFICE BUILDINGS/RETAIL
eDALE W . I.V-
1Kyl g LX.HEAVT 0IMEN&0
ApRNOLT MINGLES
I4TE M TTILE L &TNID dlf M MALI
IIXFA9CIA —LAP MDIIG
14TET m M OR SNCCOI
TYPICAL SIDE ELEVATION
NraN F T W I a oF'6ISIwK
d LT11IM TIE T LEe
rALTERIATE TLLE CR 9T.YOKa PfdM FE14J
SIDE ELEVATION
TN ELEVATIONS APE Nt6mED to ILLLb1AATE CRYEPNLL
ELEVAT VNEIA"I C n ft ELEVATICNq. ALTEFiUTE
EJ.EVAT HAT EE CpCIDEI✓ED AT FILL.
. C ATWLITT 6 ELEVATIONS JLL CE C ATED T1lpTICiI T!
I 6MAt bAI ta.Ptl. CCNe1DE ATPO WLL
ALW wWY TO TIE E)tleTMi CWLVN .HATERI.LLS.Y0
caLow eusaa+row T1E BRE.
I. MA AL LIST IIIIIM a TO EE DEIEN911® AT FNM.I
PDVIF - N FR , I l DIEhEIONAL ASFNALT blKiEs.
TILE, oR e7. m scab MTAL
MDNG - pNO( eTpE. ORTNT. TIA m "DDP emNG, CR
ARCIETECNft4 WNC
onER MATE A-G MAY W CONMDERlO w A CAFE MY CAPE
eaeln
7IEZ!�I.�'
C•itygc�ope
I'I I'; III 1, I I: Ir
CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS I- w
MR
0 D
mi9n.
BMMG CREM ���� �j�
TYPICAL CROSS SECTION
.m. 5.a
Activity A: ALL DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA..
ALL CRITERIA aPo _
_ UC„tyL CRITc
• ___-.. _-._ Y.AQ GYQt10fl W171. UfQ RIAz.0NLY
-
__ _
CRr=LION 3 Yes INo If no. please explain
a,. conntiwNi�r-w
' P
s
u
1.1 Solar Orientation
oi
1.2 Comorehensive
1.3 Wildlife Habitat
1.= Mineral0eoosit
1:5 =�aloeic211y Ser.
1.c Lands gf ACrICJIi
1.7 Energy Conseryai
_ 1.8 Air Oualtv
� _wage and Was
and
I
�
Y '1s90b
i
ACTIVITY,
Auto -Related and Roadside .Commercic
DEFINITION;
Those retail and wholesale commercial activities which are generally considered and typically found
along highways and arterial streets. Uses include free-standing department stores; -auction rooms;
automobile service stations, repair facilities, car washes; boat, car, trailer, motorcycle showrooms, sales,
and repair, fuel and ice sales; greenhouses and nurseries; warehouses and storage; repair or rental of any
article; exterminating shops; drive-in restaurants; adult bookstores; eating places with adult amusement
or entertainment; adult photo studios; adult theaters; any uses intended to provide adult amusement or
entertainment; and, other uses which are of the same general character.
CRITERIA.
Each of the following applicable criteria must be answered "yes" and implemented within the
- "-
development plan.
Yes No N/A'
1. Does the project gain its primary vehicular access from a street other than ❑
South College Avenue?
2. Are all repair, painting and bodywork including
activities, the storage of ❑ ❑
refuse and vehicle parts, planned to take place within an enclosed
structure.
3. If the project contains any uses intended to provide adult amusement or ❑ d
entertainment, does it meet the following requirements?
a. Is the use established, operated or maintained no less than 500 feet
from a residential neighborhood, church,.and/or school meeting all of
the requirements of the compulsory education laws of the State of
Colorado?;
b. Is the use established, operated, or maintained no less than one
thousand (1,000') feet from another similar use?
4. DOES THE PROJECT EARN AT LEAST FIFTY (50%) PERCENT OF ❑
THE MAXIMUM POINTS AS CALCULATED ON POINT CHART
"B" FOR THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA?
a. Is the activity located other than at the intersection of two arterial streets?
b. Is the project contiguous to and, functionally a part of an existing neighborhood or
community/regional shopping center, office, or industrial park?
c. Is the prim-ary access to the activity from a non -arterial street?
d. Is the project on at least,two (2) acres of land?
e. Does the project contain two (2) or more significant uses (for instance. retail, office, residential,
hotel/motel, or recreation)?
Land Development_ Guidance, System
The City of Fort Collins, Color
68
Planned Unit Developments
Revised March 1994
c.
M ; .ma x�
f t Y2 t
efx
s 4 `kOv'�Y}}����``��''��}i,�,
-^ »%v:j.:.:k`53� .i+`n. `�.`"fs?.:�`i rc" vT-. a..t °w •rv'Gi •4 1.v` 'y t.rSCfv.. -'v •L VEd ... Vy f f x x:: c Y..;
_4.,•.�:.'mn.+.-s-J. n.•.�s_.% �..�I..�.w..,.....�..Y ..��.. ...� _l�.r-Y i�ivi t£
. t"�4fF,i•'%»'W�"rv�s;�.�• «a�a r.0 ul 2 y.�. i7•".:`.teN r-. 'awes -w{,wa.•.`€tiu.7•+.+f.
-+.a��
%ASO
ny d 2 r 4i••.•�„• i "yr a y �SyIV �ry z v c i'p 1 E t 'Lfia
I..r- 1 C *;a 3 -4
/ i•'f'a�r� y
Autcz Relafied°Ilona. R 'CFO e Comrr�$ercia(- i
U 1 c
a.�con •.w.n :e�r�/yi1�,...s.: � a'_y': c �^.� .�4 �. � x � t at.. � y.Y y`•'t r .�'
-: -...._.,:«...r-r.=rti.-arcaaia.•.�7r'.,,•J`C* a+,F•e.uv� vT' ,`t„'',�``:pri.s r' ..
•-?s - - ��---•..••`...�-...v-w"`Lax?:�x:-'...+:c^:.."'�i'c..�-P.'t;Y.�.^.^.Y"a'*"-•'^" +.f-r—.-�-- ....
, "`.w..T.a"^^'L- ""_'di'alCri'�..5'1. .T^«.'SSc.T.:s3e2Farrva�_�w
•i"?%"}ram a$>'Y•"c$•-w y :. o y,- r�..rl.w.i....•n• •...a. v ..y t 3 -
f Is there direct vehicular and pedestrian access between on -site parking -And adjacent existing ''
or future off site parking areas which contain more than ten (18) spaces?
g Does the activity, reduce non renewable energy usage through the application: of alternative energy
- - systems or through energy conservation measures beyond those normally requurd by the Model
Energy Code as adopted by the City? Refer to Appendix:"E" far energy conservation methods to
'use for calculating energy conservation-
_ po - `-
h. Is the project located with at. least one-sixth(1/0) of its property boundary contiguous; to sting
urban development? exi— --- .
i If the site contain i building or place in which a histonc event occprred, has Special public value -
.�.
because of notable arehitecture, or is of cultural significance, does the project fulfill the following;
_cn na
1 Prevent creation of influences adverse to its preservation, -
2 Assure that new structures and uses will jig m keeping with the character of the banding or
�d _ place Imitation of period styles should be avoided;,_and
3 Propose adaptive rise of the building or place that will lead to its continuance; conservation,
and improvement in an appropriate manner while respecting.ttie integrity of the; ;
neighborhood:
A
- "' "M"+'e�ry- ra:+ra - �,'.�" '+w .w v ..�..,i c' .r•.r. Pam\ .A:rd.
Lan
d Development Guidance System for Plianned Unit Developments -
;, The City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised March 1994
_ yt 't x --c •x r - i.. `` �; '` Salt i ,r v`�t _ - '- �' '
Z-h', h x » YrE-dF a+ 1 ' ll9.` -�(,s/",•r•.f i..e'St'YC ^'" o yi y �s� ¢ ,s.i`z.,. s. ur �. '>' :.',k"
.r' ;T _ 1.at�+ 5 ci t r�s +"' '_ + �t ii�-" s.F."1x')'t`e- S 2 "'S'ti_i..�iay-r3 r sy. -r �{Sy'Ck4 •• t�7 1}}I+ E -" f't�.vua,�.iT .X�. - rr . y yaN a� y,r,4a C 9 »•� ( r. w' � :-.. �+, v+ ^,t - ..{� '.
t t �4.tF. "`<� , • 3 s. a z � s, #`�'i ra .+r L;�� c-,ti af-0wa. � � � � t �����
♦ �'•*i� ^t�p'�� �i7�:� s 7 � f .. e .� � L•. .y� k._.1"r$t 'Y}� �Y le r �z`• r 4'� �4 h4T '�- , `2� ..
.R '-a.'nvf -� '>_s�•r^ 9 aft �s ri_x< < n P, hii� 3.l 'c�Yv'i'`�.S S ' S -'4 +t' r "k' 3_ Ly':
' vF�'_ ^�3.G•;: yam, � ' R.. Y,- ai �ysY�`-C ''ir A�`;7 �"'�i;¢cs ��'". � r,�, ��� � v"^ �'^'�
'A411 - �oaanl ,�..:.rt.r _sue-*�.�..._=�. fit. �•`-n _� =.�' �? .. __ .7 ;"}' :.:t"�_ _ -::•t. 3 --
No Text
k:K eawm pm- I *EUA * napqoc
ACTIVITY:
Business Service Uses
DEFINITION:
Those a;dvid,:;1,,,ich and services uses Which would,not qualify as a
. I C, :goinacoly re
neighborhood service, reig7b d convenience,
ommunity/regional shopping center. Uses
retail -shops; offices, personal service shops; financial institutions; ho tels/motels; medical clinics; health
clubs; membership clubs; standard and fast-food restaurants - hospitals;
Is: mortuaries: indoor theaterr,
recreation uses, small animal veterinary clinics; printing and newspaper offices; and, other uses which
are of the same gene
ral character.
CRITERIA:
Each of the following applicable criteria must be answered "yes" and implemented within the
development plan.
Yes No N/A
1. Does the project gain its primary vehicular access from a street other than
South College Avenue?
2. DOES THE PROJECT EARN AT LEAST F=.(50c7b)PERCE1NT OF Q00000 Q
THE MkICIMIM POINTS AS CALCULATED ON PONT CHART
tti, FOR THE #bLLowiNGcRiTER1A?
a. Is the activity contiguous to an existing transit route (not applicable
for uses of less than twenty-five thousand (25,000] square feet GLA or
with less than twenty-five (25] employees, or located in the Central
Business District)?
b. Is the project located outside of the "South College Avenue Corridor"?
c. Is the project contiguous to and functionally a 'of a neighborhood
garE 4
or community/regional shopping center, an office or industrial Pat
located in the Central Business District, or in the case of a single user, employ or. will employ a
total of more than one hundred (100) full-time employees during a single eight (8) hour shift?
d. Is the project on at least two (2) acres of land, or located in the Central Business District?
e.. Does the project contain two (2) or more significant uses (for instance retail, office, residential,
hotel/motel, or recreation)?
f. Is them direct vehicular and pedestrian access between on -site parldng areas and adjacent existing
or future off -site parldng areas which.contain more than ten (10) spaces?
g. Does the activity reduce nQn-renewable energy usage through the application of alternative energy
systems or through energy conservation measures beyond those normallyrequired by the Model
Energy Code as adopted by the City? Refer to Appendix "E" for energy conservation methods to
use Coi calculating energy conservation points.
Land Development Guidance System fdr Planned Unit Developments
The City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised March 1994
-71 -
Business Service Uses (confinued)
It. Is p
the Project located with at least one -sixth (116) of its property boundary contiguous to existing
urban develoment?
L If the site contains a building orplacem' which a historic event, occurred, has special public value
because of notable architecture, or is of culumil significance, does the project fulfill the following
criteria? I
1. Prevent creation of influences adverse to its preservation;
2. Assure that new structures and uses will be in �eeping with the character of the building or
Place. Imitation of period styles should be avoided; and
3. Propose adaptive use of the building or place that will lead to its continuance, conservation,
and improvement in an appropriate manner while respecting the integrity of the
neighborhood.
Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments
The City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised March 1994
-72-
Spring Creek Center PUD, Preliminary, #17-90C
April 28, 1997 P & Z Meeting
Page 2
COMMENTS:
Background:
The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
N: E; Spring Creek Channel; E. Prospect Road; existing commercial (BMC
West); existing office park (Seven Lakes Business Park).
S: E; Midpoint Drive; vacant; existing office/industrial park (Centerpoint Park
2nd Filing); County jail.
E: E; Specht Point Drive; existing office/industrial park (One Prospect PUD).
W: E; Timberline Road; vacant.
This property was annexed into the City as part of the East Prospect Street First
Annexation on September 6, 1973. The development application was submitted on
November 22, 1996 which was prior to the effective date of Ordinance No. 161, 1996
(Temporary Delay In The Acceptance of Certain Land Use Applications) and prior to the
effective date of the CityPlan Land Use Code. Therefore, this development application
has been processed according to the Land Development Guidance System (LDGS).
2. Land Use:
This is a request for a Preliminary PUD for 86,055 square feet of mixed use
development to include office, business services, and auto -related convenience uses in
seven buildings on 11.6 acres.
A. Prospect Road Streetscape Program
The subject property is located within the Business Park Style District of the Prospect
Streetscape Program. The proposed development complies with all applicable
standards related to Prospect Road Setbacks, Grading, Access/Circulation, Fencing
and Screening, Lighting, Architectural Design, Parking and Service Areas, and
Landscaping.
B. All -Development Criteria of the L.D.G.S.
This P.U.D. request meets all applicable All -Development Criteria of the Land
Development Guidance System.
.0
BUSINESS
SERVICE USES
POINT CHART E
For All Criteria
Applicable Criteria only
Criterion
criterion
Appicabie
Cr ec e
th
II
muftwer
III IV
points Moftum.
Earned APPOca
Yes Pb
coff I Oct Score
Pointsble
1XII
a.
Transit Route
X
0
0
L4
LA
.b.
South College Corridor
x
X
0
8
c-.
Part of Center
X
X
0
3
6
d.
Two Acres or More
X
X
2
0
3
6
e.
Mixed -Use
X
X
Q
0
3 —
(10
6
f.
Joint Parking
X
1
2
0
3
cx�
g.
Energy Conservation
X
112
31
2
1 2
8
h.
Contiguity
X
X
0
5
5
S
10
10
1.
- Historic Preservation
X
1
2
0
0
2
cow
=010
.j.
1
2
0
k.
1
2
01
I.
11
12
0
Totals
401 48
='A
Percentage Earned Of Maximum Applicable Points
V/VI = VII 93%
Vil
Land Development IopitneGuidance. System for Planned Unit Developments
Cityof
Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised March 1994
-73.
0
SPRING CREEK CENTER
SITE ACCESS STUDY
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
NOVEMBER 1996
i
Prepared for:
W. W. Reynolds Companies
1600 Specht Point Drive
f Fort Collins, CO 80525
Prepared by:
MATTHEW J. DELICH, P.E.
2272 Glen Haven Drive
Loveland, CO 80538
Phone: 970-669-2061
FAX: 970-669-5034
I. INTRODUCTION
This site access study addresses the capacity, geometric, and
control requirements at and near a proposed commercial development
known hereinafter as Spring Creek Center. It is located near the
intersection of Prospect Road and Timberline Road in Fort Collins,
Colorado.
During the course of the analysis, numerous contacts were made
with the project planning consultant (Cityscape Urban Design) and
the Fort Collins Traffic Engineering Division. This study
generally conforms to the format set forth in typical traffic
impact study guidelines. 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.
I.I. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The location of Spring Creek Center 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 commercial. Commercial
development exists all around the site. There are office buildings
located to the north (across Prospect. Road) and to the east (across
Specht Point Drive). There is a beverage distribution center to
the south (across Midpoint Drive). The lot to the west (across
Timberline. Road) contains four silos and an "agricultural truck"
scale. There is a "proposed development" sign on this site. The
Spring Creek Center site itself is vacant. Land in the immediate
area is flat. There is an increase in elevation to the south and
west, away from the key intersections. The center of Fort Collins
lies to the northwest of Spring Creek Center. There are sidewalks
around the site along Prospect Rand and part of Timberline Road...
There are bicycle lanes located along the shoulder of Timberline
Road.
1
0 0
L
4995
t7.
.-Y
ISubsta
%
4.9
5
L
1j. 600
.... .... .. 4 3
.... ..
f
Refi
North Yards
6LbRADO- •-Black: Pollc w
Junction
V,
ffzl
L C
Y,wntown 8 iSinnard 10
Ar
4
F
A Collins
Airpark G ravel Pit 'COLORADO
i
Di
w vi
ga 4
sal tz
Rosel
'Cem towheadOTE.iIGHWAY14� TJ
1510
BM49S4
150
T NW ER T.V,;. . .
. . . . . . . .
i 1-16
Gravel PR LU
S
i 1,F
PROSPECT ROAD
o- Radin
It
SPRING CREEK
23#
Fm,
J
.�;�CENTER Th
% 120 n L-�-% 2 1 J1
0 x
w
birakes
z
w:
DRAKE ROAD
c
•-8M 4874 IL
on of
d 6
26 k
.5
J .
L
2§1
0
F
9
k 76
36 4991- 5,
32
hie Clellandti
2
Har-mun),
Cem
1503
=�z
NO SCALE
SITE LOCATION Figure I
0 0
Roads
The primary streets near Spring Creek Center are Prospect
Road, Timberline Road, Midpoint Drive, and Specht Point Drive.
Prospect Road borders Spring Creek Center on the north. It is an
east --west street designated as an arterial in the "North Front
Range Regional Transportation Plan," (NFRRTP) 10/94 and the Fort
Collins Master Street Plan. Prospect. Road has a four lane cross
section with a concrete median west of Timberline and a painted
median east of Timberline. The existing speed limit in this area
is 35 mph.
Timberline Road is west of Spring Creek Center. It is a
north -south street designated as a major arterial on the Fort
Collins Master Street Plan. It is a two lane road that terminates
several hundred feet north of Prospect. The Prospect/Timberline
intersection has signal control.
Midpoint. Drive and,Specht
provide access to the Spring
commercial uses located south
intersection.
Existing Traffic
Point Drive are local streets that
Creek Center site and the other
and east of the Prospect/Timberline
Recent peak hour turning movements at the Prospect/Timberline,
Prospect/Specht Point, and Timberline/Midpoint intersections are
shown in Figure 2. Raw traffic count data is provided in Appendix
A. These counts were obtained in September, 1996..
Existing Operation
The Prospect/Timberline, Prospect/Specht Point, and
Timberline/Midpoint intersections were evaluated. The peak hour
operation is shown in Table 1. The calculation forms are provided
in Appendix B. Appendix C describes level of service for
signalized and unsignaliaed intersections from the 1994 Highway
Capacity Manual. All movements at these intersections operate
acceptably, -with the exception of the westbound left turns at the
Timberline/Midpoint intersection and the northbound left turns at
the Prospect/Specht Point intersection. These operate at level of
service F. Thin is normal for minor street left -turn movements
along arterials during the peak hours. Acceptable operation during
the peak hours is defined as level of service D or better.
Experience indicates that if level of service D can be achieved
during the peak hours, operation will be at level of service C or
better for 20-22 hours of an average weekday.
P)
1
1996 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 2
0 0
Table 1
1996 Peak Hour Operation
Level of Service
Intersection AM PM
Prospect/Timberline (signal) C D
Prospect/Specht Point (stop sign)
NB LT D F
NB RT A A
WB LT A A
Timberline/Midpoint (stop sign)
WB LT F F
WB RT B B
SB LT B A
III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
Spring Creek Center is a proposed mixed use commercial
development, located at the intersection of Prospect Road and
Timberline Road in Fort Collins. Figure 3 shows a schematic of the
site plan of Spring Creek Center. At the present time, definitive
users have not been determined. Lots 1 and 6 are shown to have
convenience/gas stores. Lot 2 is shown as a fast food restaurant.
The remaining uses will be a mix of retail and office. Since
Spring Creek Center is i.n a business park, land use code 770
(Business Park) was used to estimate the trip generation. The
short range future is assumed to be the year 1999. For analysis
purposes, full build -out of the site was assumed to be completed
by the short range future. The long range future analysis is for
the year 2015. The site plan shows two accesses from Midpoint
Drive and two accesses from Specht Point Drive. All four are full
movement accesses. Driveway accesses to/from local streets are
generally not analyzed. The key intersections that were analyzed
were those lasted earlier.
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, Sth.Edition, ITE and the 1995 Update 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.
Trip Distribution
Directional distribution of the generated trips was determined
for Spring Creek Center. Future year data was obtained from the
NFRRTP and other traffic studies. This data accounts for the
proposed. extension of Timberline Road from Prospect Road, north to
SH14. Figure 4 shows the trip distributions used.
Several land use generators, such as shopping centers, drive-
in (fast food) restaurants, high turn -over restaurant, service
stations, convenience markets, and other support services (banks,
etc..), capture trips from the normal traffic passing by the site.
For many of these trips, the stop at the site is a secondary part.
of a linked trip such as from work to shopping center to home. In
all of these cases, the driveway volumes at the site are higher
than the actual amount of traffic added to the adjacent street
system, since• some of the site generated traffic was already
3
N
NO SCALE
SITE PLAN Figure 3
Table 2
Trip Generation
Daily A.M. Peak P.K. Peak
Land Use Trips
Trips
Trips
Trips
Trips
in
out
in
out
Lot 1
Gas/C-store with 8 pumps 1170
44
43
50
50
Lot 2
Fast Food Restaurant - 2130
85
82
57
53
3.0 KSF
Lot ,3
Business
Park
- 6.0
KSF
90
Lot 4
Business
Park -
7.2
KSF
100
Lot 5
Business
Park -
7.2
KSF
100
Lot 6
Gas/C-store with 12
pumps
1750
Lot 7
Business
Park -
31.2
KSF
450
Lot 8
Business
Park -
31.2
KSF
450
TOTAL 6240
8
1
2
7
10
2
2
8
.10
2
2
8
66
64
74
74
43
7
10
36
43
7
10
36
309
208
207
272
Spring Creek Center PUD, Preliminary, #17-90C
April 28, 1997 P & Z Meeting
Page 3
C. Auto Related and Roadside Commercial Uses Point Chart
This P.U.D. request was evaluated against the Auto Related and Roadside Commercial
Uses Point Chart of the LDGS and achieves 75% (36 out of 48) of the maximum
applicable points, exceeding the minimum required 50%. Points were awarded for the
following:
b. Being contiguous to and functionally a part of an existing neighborhood or
community/regional shopping center, office, or industrial park - 6 points.
C. Having primary access to the activity from a non -arterial street - 8 points.
d. Being on at least two acres of land - 6 points.
e. Containing at least two or more significant uses - 6 points.
h. Having at least one -sixth of its property boundary contiguous to existing
urban development - 10 points.
D. Business Service Uses Point Chart
This P.U.D. request was also evaluated against the Business Service Uses Point Chart
of the LDGS and achieves 83% (40 out of 48) of the maximum applicable points,
exceeding the minimum required 50%. Points were awarded for the following:
a. Being contiguous to an existing transit route - 4 points.
b. Being located outside of the South College Corridor - 8 points.
C. Being contiguous to and functionally a part of a neighborhood or
community/regional shopping center, an office or industrial park, located
in the Central Business District, or in the case of a single user, employ or
will employ a total of more than one hundred (100) full-time employees
during a single eight (8) hour shift - 6 points.
d. Being located on at least 2 acres of land or in the Central Business District
- 6 points.
e. Containing at least two or more significant uses - 6 points.
h. Having at least one -sixth of its property boundary contiguous to existing
urban development - 10 points.
TRIP DISTRIBUTION FOR
R
NON-PASSBY TRIPS
f
N
NO SCALE
Figure 4
is
counted in the adjacent street traffic. Pass -by assumptions) were
45% for the fast food restaurants, and 60% for convenience/gas
stores. The directional split was based upon the current counts.
The procedure used to account for both pass -by traffic and
primary destination traffic is as follows:
Estimate the trip generation rate as is currently done and
determine the total number of trips forecast to occur, based
on the size of the development.
Estimate the percentage of pass -by trips, and split the total
number of trips into two components, one for pass -by trips and
one for new trips..
Estimate the trip distributions for the two individual
components. The distribution of pass -by trips must reflect
the predominant commuting directions on adjacent and nearby
roadway facilities. Most peak period pass -by trips are an
intermediate link in a work trip.
- Conduct two separate trip assignments, one for pass -by trips
and one for new trips. The distribution for pass -by trips
will require that trips be subtracted from some intersection
approaches and added back to others. Typically, this will
involve reducing through -roadway volumes and increasing
certain turning movements.
Combine the assigned trips to yield the total link loadings,
and proceed with capacity analysis as normally done.
Background Traffic Projections
Background traffic projections for the short range and long
range future horizons were obtained by reviewing the NFRR..TP and
various traffic studies prepared. for other developments in this
area of Fort Collins. Background traffic projections reflect the
Timberline Road extension to the north.
'This pass -by factor was obtained by averaging pass -by factors
from the following sources:
1. Transportation Engineering Design Standards_, City of Lakewood,
June 1985.
2.
3.,
4.
Development and Application of Trip
USDOT, January 1985.
"A Methodology for Consideration.of
Impact Analyses for Shopping Centers,
August 1986, Pg.37.
Generation Rates, FHWA/
Pass -by Trips in Traffic
" Smith, S., ITE Journal,
Trip Generation, 5th Edition, ITE and 1995 Update.
4
® 9
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. The City of Fort
Collins desired that the Timberline/Midpoint intersection become
a right-in/right-out intersection. This will definitely happen by
I_ the long rang future; however, it is not certain if it will happen
by the short range future. Therefore, it was evaluated under two
access scenarios in the short range future.. Figure 5 shows the
morning and afternoon peak hour site generated traffic with full
. build -out of Spring Creek Center, assuming full movement at the
Timberline/Midpoint intersection. Figure 6 shows the morning and
afternoon peak hour site generated traffic, assuming right -in/
right -out access at the Timberline/Midpoint intersection. Figure
7 shows the total (site plus background traffic) short range peak
hour traffic, assuming full movement at the Timberline/Midpoint
intersection. Figure 8 shows the total short range peak hour
traffic, assuming right-in/right--out access at the Timberline/
Midpoint intersection.. Figure 9 shows the total long range peak
hour traffic,, assuming right-in/night-out access at the. Timberline/
Midpoint intersection.
Signal Warrants
As a matter of policy, traffic signals are not installed at
1 any location unless warrants are met according to the Manual on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices. However, it is possible to
determine whether traffic signal warrants are likely to be met
I based upon estimated peak hour traffic forecasted in this study.
Using the peak hour traffic volumes shown in Figure 8, it is likely
that traffic signal warrants will be met at the Timberline/
1 Midpoint intersection. However, since the City of Fort Collins
wants this intersection modified to provide right-in/right-out
access in the future, signalization of this intersection is not
recommended. A signal is also warranted at the Prospect/Specht
Point intersection. However, since a signal will be installed at
the Prospect/Prospect Parkway intersection shortly, the Specht
Point. Drive signal was.not given further consideration.
Operation Analysis
Capacity analyses were performed on key intersections adjacent
to Spring Creek Center. The operations analyses were conducted
for the short range future and the long range future:
Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 7, the affected
intersections operate in the short range condition as indicated in
Table 3. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in
Appendix D. Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 8, the key
5
W
H AM / PM
i
SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC
WITH FULL MOVEMENT AT THE
TIMBERLINE / MIDPOINT INTERSECTION
1
I
Figure 5
W
F= AM / PM
SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC
WITH RIGHT -IN / RIGHT -OUT AT THE
TIMBERLINE / MIDPOINT INTERSECTION
Figure 6
co
�Zoo
�—
CD
n-0
4aoi270/310
_ PROSPECT ROj
110/210
610/620
225/220
135/65
470/440 —
o LLn o
350/435--�
c o c
'C'7MCV
Site
Ln
-125/170
80 185
— 705 '20
J(-- 50Y5
r
cQ
o P-7
e
AM / PM
Rounded to the Nearest
5 Vehicles.
SHORT RANGE TOTAL PEAK FLOUR TRAFFIC
WITH FULL MOVEMENT AT THE
TIMBERLINE / MIDPOINT INTERSECTION
Figure 7
IV
<1 fit— 270/3t0 -�- 720/985
LO
I� lM 440/580 PROSPECT ROAD 50 35
610/620
310/155 I
225/220 I
N \
530/470 0 � c
290/405 ��� F- N "'
0
nr�rir' Z
Site a.
z
U
Ln W
rl
c>L
-125/170 ANDPOINr
a
0 0
to
AM / PM
Rounded to the Nearest
5 Vehicles.
SHORT RANGE TOTAL PEAK. HOUR TRAFFIC
WITH RIGHT -IN / RIGHT -OUT AT THE
TIMBERLINE / MIDPOINT INTERSECTION
Figure 8
N
00o
2 0 0
455/510
-F-1370/1810
N N
--735/965
PROSPECT ROAD
—`ss/ao
2.75/585
1055/1080 -�
-
1
I
400/245
380/370
815/755 -
N S ti
4
455/675 -�
o rn
Z
O
Site a
o
�
z
o
w
IL
130/185
A4jDPnrj,..
u
Ln o
Q
N
O
\O
N V
Q
W
z
J
Q
W
m
g
F= AM / PM
Rounded to the Nearest
5 Vehicles.
LONG RANGE TOTAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Figure 9
Table 3
Short Range Peak Hour Operation
(Full Movement at Timberline/Midpoint)
Level of Service
Intersection AM PM
Prospect/Timberline (signal) D D
Prospect/Specht Point (stop sign)
NB LT D F
NB RT A A
WB LT A A
Timberline/Midpoint (stop sign)
WB LT F F
WB RT C C
SB, LT D g
Table 4
Short Range. Peak Hour Operation
(Right-in/Right-out at Timberline/Midpoint)
Level of Service
Intersection AM PM
Prospect/Timberline (signal) D D
Prospect/Specht Point (stop sign)
NB LT E F
NB RT A A
WB LT B A
Timberline/Midpoint (stop sign)
WB RT C C
intersections operate in the short range condition as indicated in
Table 4. Calculation forms for these analyses are provided in
Appendix E. All movements at these intersections operate
acceptably, with the exception of the westbound left turn at the
Timberline/Midpoint intersection, as shown in Table 3. The
analysis indicated poor operation at the Prospect/Specht Point and
Timberline/Midpoint intersections. A queuing analysis indicated
ithat the northbound left turns approaching Prospect Road would
conflict with the southbound left turns approaching Midpoint Drive.
It is recommended that this intersection be modified to aright-
! in/right-out during the course of the development of Spring Creek
Center. The City of Fort Col.l.ins plans to install a traffic signal
at the Prospect/Prospect Parkway intersection, which provides
access to the commercial uses mentioned earlier. This signalized
intersection, located approximately 0.3 miles east of
Prospect/Timberline, wi11 provide motorists with a safe alternative
to leaving this area. It was also assumed that this signal would
attract a significant number of the northbound left turns from
Specht Point Drive to Prospect Road. The Prospect/Timberline
intersection will operate acceptably during the peak hours with the
geometry indicated in Figure 10. Based upon forecasted traffic
volumes, an eastbound right -turn lane is shown on Prospect Road
Approaching Specht Point Drive. Due to the existing bridge, a full
lane may not be possible. An alternative to a full lane is a taper
and increased radius. With good signal progression on Prospect
Road, there will be gaps in the eastbound traffic that are not
accounted for in the analysis technique. The actual operation will
l be better than indicated in Table 4.
Using the traffic volumes shown in Figure 9 and recommended
geometrics, the intersections operate in the long range condition
as indicated in Table 5. Calculation forms for these analyses are
provided in Appendix F. All movements at these intersections
operate acceptably, with the exception of the northbound left turn
at the Prospect/Specht Point intersection. This is normal for
minor street left -turning movements along arterials during peak
hour conditions. The long range geometry is shown in Figure 11.
At the Prospect/Timberline intersection, Timberline is changed to
a four lane facility, plus turn lanes. The Fort Collins Master
Street Plan indicates Timberline Road as a six lane facility.
However; analysis shows that Timberline operates acceptably as a
four lane facility. Timberline may, however, require widening to
six lanes after the year 2015..Traffic volumes should be monitored
along Timberline Road and Prospect Road to determine when the
widening to six lanes should occur. Provision of dual left -turn
lanes for Prospect at Timberline, as indicated in Figure 11, is
necessary to achieve acceptable operation at this location.
The overall Prospect Business Park extends to the southeast
to within 0.5 miles of Drake Road. Consideration should be given
to providing a local street or collector street connection in this
area. This will require crossing City owned land. A connection
M
Spring Creek Center PUD, Preliminary, #17-90C
April 28, 1997 P & Z Meeting
Page 4
3. Neighborhood Compatibility:
This request includes business service convenience uses that will serve the office uses
which are also a part of this request as well as the surrounding office and industrial
parks in the area. None of these uses currently exist in the immediate area (more than
0.5 mile). The request complies with the Prospect Road Streetscape Program and
exceeds the minimum required points on both the Auto Related and Roadside
Commercial Uses Point Chart and the Business Service Uses Point Chart of the LDGS.
Therefore, Staff recommends that the request is compatible with surrounding land uses.
4. Design:
A. Layout
The proposed layout consists of seven lots. Gas station/convenience stores on Lots 1
and 5 are designed as reverse layout (buildings backing to the street, gas pumps and
canopy to the interior of the site). Buildings on lots 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 are oriented
towards an internal access drive and pedestrian spine which bisects the property.
Vehicular access is gained from Specht Point Drive and Midpoint Drive. Pedestrian
access is gained from Prospect Road, Timberline Road, Specht Point Drive and
Midpoint Drive. A bike/pedestrian path is proposed between the north facades of
buildings on Lots 2, 3, and 4 and the Spring Creek Channel. There is concern about
the proximity of this path to the downward slope of the Spring Creek channel. The
alignment of the path will be finalized during the review of the Final PUD application(s).
B. Architecture
Buildings on Lots 2, 3, and 4 are predominantly single -story with peaked roofs and a
maximum height of approximately 22 feet. Building materials consist of brick fascia, lap
siding (alternate brick or stucco), wood wrapped columns (alternate brick), and high -
profile, heavy dimensional asphalt shingles (alternate tile or standing seam metal).
Gas station convenience stores on Lots 1 and 5 are single -story with hip -roofs and a
maximum height of approximately 17 feet. Building materials consist of brick veneer
base, brick, architectural block, stucco, or wood siding upper portions, and high -profile,
heavy dimensional asphalt shingles (alternate tile or standing seam metal).
Gas pump canopies are approximately 18 feet in height. Both canopies will be
constructed with brick wrapped columns, and metal fascia. All canopy lighting will be
fully recessed.
Buildings on Lot 6 and 7 will be predominantly 3 stories stall with a maximum height of
approximately 38 feet. Building materials consist of brick veneer and bronze anodized
aluminum store front windows.
SHORT RANGE GEOMETRY Figure 10
LONG RANGE GEOMETRY Figure 11
Table 5
Long Range Peak Hour Operation
Level of Service
Intersection AM PM
Prospect/Timberline (signal) D D
Prospect/Specht Point (stop sign)
NB LT F F
NB RT A A
WB LT C B
Timberline/Midpoint (stop sign)
WB RT C B
of this type will provide an additional outlet from the business
�- park to the south. It has the potential of reducing selected
movements shown in Figure 9, thereby improving the operation at key
intersections. This suggestion is a system -wide improvement and
should be pursued as part of a capital improvement program.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
This study assessed the impacts of the Spring Creek Center
commercial development on the short range and long range street
system in the vicinity of the proposed development. As a result
of this analysis, the following is concluded:
The development of Spring Creek Center is feasible from a
traffic engineering standpoint. At full development, as proposed,
approximately 6200 trip ends will be generated at this site daily.
Some of these trip ends will be from background traffic already on
the adjacent streets.. There may also be some multi -purpose trip
ends not reflected in the daily trip end estimate.
Current operation at the Prospect/Timberline signalized
intersection is acceptable. The stop sign controlled intersections
along the arterial streets operate normally.
- In the short range future, all key intersections w.il.l
operate acceptably, provided that the Timberline/Midpoint
intersection is modified to a right-in/right-out access. The short
range geometry is shown in Figure 10.
In the long range future, key intersections will operate
acceptably during the peak hours, with the exception of the
northbound left -turn movement at the Prospect/Specht Point
intersection. If Midpoint Drive is extended south to meet Drake
Road, a system wide improvement will be made. The long range
geometry is shown in Figure ll,
- Sidewalks and bicycle lanes should be built and linked to
the existing system, per City of Fort Collins standard.
- With the recommended control geometries, the accident rate
should be at an acceptable level for typical urban conditions.
7
I]
April25, 1997 APR 2, g RECUO
Mr. Mike Ludwig
Community Planning
City of Fort Collins
281 N. College Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado 80524
re: Proposed Spring Creek Center
Prospect and Timberline
Fort Collins
Dear Mike:
•
SERVICES IN(
A concern has just been raised regarding the revised site layout for the proposed Spring
Creek Center to be located at the southeast comer of Prospect and Timberline Roads in Fort
Collins. This item is scheduled for preliminary review by the Planning and Zoning Board at its
April 28 meeting. As part of the layout, a gas station is shown on Lot 1 in the northeast portion
of the site. The concern raised is in regard to stormwater runoff from the gas station into Spring
Creek and the associated water quality issues.
Since the preliminary drainage plan was submitted by this office last fall, some changes
have been agreed to in the site grading and drainage which will address these concerns. In
meetings and phone conversations with the site developer, the W.W. Reynolds Companies and
with Mr. Basil Hamdan of the City's Storm Drainage Utility, it has been agreed that the site will
be graded so that runoff flows will be conveyed to the interior of the site and collected into a
storm sewer system.
By collecting the runoff in this manner, we will be able to apply existing technology for
Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control the water quality so as to meet or exceed current
standards. Standard methods, as approved by both the Storm Drainage Utility and the Poudre
Fire Authority already exist and will be used in the final design of this project. This is a relatively
common design and there is no question, either on my part or on the part of Storm Drainage, that
water quality will be properly handled with this project.
I hope that this can help clear up any questions on this matter. If you have any further
questions concerning this project, please feel free to contact me at your earliest convenience.
Sincerely,
NORTHERN EN�INEERI� rRVICES, INC.
Principal
420 SOUTH HOWES, SUITE 202, FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80521, (970) 221-4158, VAX (970) 221-4159
Spring Creek Center PUD, Preliminary, #17-90C
April 28, 1997 P & Z Meeting
Page 5
All building materials and colors will be finalized during the review of the Final PUD
application(s).
C. Landscaping
Deciduous street trees will be planted along all perimeter streets, along access drives,
in parking lot islands. Deciduous and coniferous trees and shrubs will be planted
around all buildings. A variety of native trees, shrubs and grasses are proposed along
the north sides of buildings and parking areas on Lots 2, 3, and 4 to provide screening
and a buffer between the manicured landscape and Spring Creek.
5. Transportation:
A. Traffic Impact Analysis
The traffic study which was submitted indicates that the site will generate approximately
6,240 average daily vehicle trips. However, this study was based on 8 lots/buildings
and a total of approximately 92,500 square feet of mixed use development. Therefore,
the total average daily vehicle trips for the now proposed 7 lots/buildings and a total of
86,055 square feet of mixed use development will be less than 6,240. As indicated in
the traffic study, the developer will be responsible for constructing a median in
Timberline Road to limit the Midpoint Drive/Timberline Road intersection to a right-
in/right out access. With this median, all intersections will continue to operate at
acceptable levels of service.
B. Bicycle/Pedestrian
Bicycle and pedestrian access is provided from all four surrounding street and sidewalk
systems. A bike/pedestrian path is proposed between the north facades of buildings on
Lots 2, 3, and 4 and the Spring Creek Channel. As noted before, staff will further
review the location of the proposed path and its relation to the Spring Creek channel
during the review of the Final PUD application(s) to ensure the safety of all users.
6. Stormwater:
This development application meets all Stormwater design criteria for Preliminary
PUD's. The most recent grading plan which was submitted showed some off -site
grading occurring along the bank of the Spring Creek Channel. The applicant has
stated that it is not their intent to have any off -site grading. Staff will further review the
proposed on -site grading and its relation to the Spring Creek Channel at Final PUD to
ensure that the existing grading of the Spring Creek Channel is not impacted.
Spring Creek Center PUD, Preliminary, #17-90C
April 28, 1997 P & Z Meeting
Page 6
FINDINGS OF FACT/CONCLUSION:
The Spring Creek Center PUD, Preliminary, #17-90C meets all applicable All -
Development Criteria of the LDGS.
2. The Spring Creek Center PUD, Preliminary, #17-90C earns 75% of the
maximum applicable points on the Auto Related and Roadside Commercial Uses
Point Chart of the LDGS, exceeding the minimum required 50%.
3. The Spring Creek Center PUD, Preliminary, #17-90C earns 83% of the
maximum applicable points on the Business Service Uses Point Chart of the
LDGS, exceeding the minimum required 50%.
4. The Spring Creek Center PUD, Preliminary, #17-90C is in compliance with the
Prospect Road Streetscape Program.
5. The Spring Creek Center PUD, Preliminary, #17-90C complies with the City's
Transportation policies for traffic volumes and levels of service.
6. The Spring Creek Center PUD, Preliminary, #17-90C is compatible with
surrounding neighborhoods.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the Spring Creek Center PUD, Preliminary, #17-90C with
the following condition:
1. The alignment of the proposed bike/pedestrian path between the north
facades of buildings on Lots 2, 3, and 4 and the Spring Creek Channel will
be further reviewed at the time of Final PUD application(s) to ensure the
safety of users.
Mull
iiii�iulrillll6Fix:
flOro*1
u, 1 ,
0
VICINITY MAP 02/02/96
#17-90C Spring Creek Center PUD "
Preliminary
1"= 600'
VICMTY MAP
I
3Mre
r-
ewaee.e
NERAL NOTES
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION N
MC WEST
VACANT \
VACANT
�j
I
I
I
r /
TRACT A
—% OT S
LOT a ee x.
n �. w °P<cea •.
n °rxEa � .e.rom aF erwcTt
on eF xev
ae
LOT S
LnOpTgy6
2.K,
\
1
23b.
1
\
1L
e}a0%16819F.-
10S 9�l1L�
%
E
r
I
q .1
_ —MIDPOINT
DRIVE
PROSPECT PARK EAST
LAND USE BREAKDOWN
ZVI
rver w•�.� .er
LEGEND
�IL.Y RIOI6e'sR�l]'r.R[
MEMO mnn
...ew w+rnu
•-rem., n.
` eemrrui e� mu
eseo em
® ma .unw ew+
PROOOPErCT
C 0 D
PRELMINARY SITE PLAN
1 5