Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPARK SOUTH PUD - PRELIMINARY - 46-88C - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSV- STAFF REPORT PROJECT: Park South Amended Preliminary P.U.D., #46-88C APPLICANT: Middel Enterprises, Inc. Park South Joint Venture Limited c/o Stewart & Associates 214 North Howes Street Fort Collins, CO. 80521 OWNER: Middel Enterprises, Inc. Park South Joint Venture Limited c/o Marc Middel 1407 South College Avenue Fort Collins, CO. 80521 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request for Preliminary P.U.D. for 121 single family lots on 22.9 acres. The property is located south of Horsetooth Road, west of Manhattan Avenue, and east of Benthaven Drive. The site is zoned R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential. RECOMMENDATION: Approval EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The request conforms to the land use designation on the Amended Park South O.D.P. The proposed density of 5.3 dwelling units per acre is justified by the score of 70% on the Residential Uses point chart of the Land Development Guidance System. The land use of single family is compatible with the two adjacent single family subdivisions. The transportation system is designed to provide access to the collector street on the east, a local street on the west, with a local street connection to the commercial parcel to the north. The project is feasible from a traffic engineering standpoint. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 300 LaPorte Ave. P.O. Boa 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 (303) 221-6750 PLANNING DEPARTMENT ll r 0 Park South P.U.D. - Preliminary, #46-88C September 23, 1991 P & Z Meeting Page 2 COMMENTS 1. Background: The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: N: R-L-P; Vacant (proposed Park South O.D.P.) S: R-L-P; Existing single family (South Glen P.U.D.) E: H-B, R-P; Vacant W: R-L-P; Existing single family and duplexes (Four Seasons, and The Villages at Four Seasons) The original P.U.D. was approved in Larimer County in 1978. The property was annexed in 1980 with the agreement that the County approved P.U.D. had legal validity. This plan called for 143 single family, zero lot line homes, with common landscaped areas and served by private drives. Two streets improvements were constructed to serve the original P.U.D.: Manhattan Avenue and Stream Court. In August of 1988, the Planning and Zoning Board denied a request to amend the Park South Master Plan. In November of 1988, the City Council upheld this denial. The present request is proposing to amend the P.U.D. to reflect current market conditions, using public streets, and respecting dedicated drainage easements. The legal history of this site is important in terms of the contextual relationship with the surrounding property. In the late seventies and early eighties, the property to the east was being planned as the Minerva Business Park under the existing H-B, Highway Business, zoning (no P.U.D. condition). The property to the west was Master Planned as Parcel L-5 of the Four Seasons P.U.D. which called for clustered multiple -family units with common landscaped open space on 23 acres at an approximate density of five to six dwelling units per acre. Due to shifts in the residential and commercial markets, both the Minerva Business Park and the clustered multiple housing concept fell out of favor. Within Four Seasons, Parcel L-5 was converted to traditional single family detached housing with private yards (Four Seasons First Filing). The Minerva Business Park remains vacant. These same market conditions are driving the present request which reflects a more traditional housing product, public streets, and private yards. 0 0 Park South P.U.D. - Preliminary, #46-88C September 23, 1991 P & Z Meeting Page 3 The 23 acres of housing are part of the 34 acre amended Park South O.D.P. which is being considered concurrently with this proposal. 2. Land Use• The Amended Park South O.D.P., being considered concurrently, designates the 23 acres of the P.U.D. as single family housing with 121 units. The Preliminary P.U.D. request matches this designation in terms of both acreage and land use. The request, therefore, is in compliance with the Amended Park South O.D.P. The project was evaluated by the criteria of the Residential Uses point chart of the Land Development Guidance System. The project scores 70% based on proximity to a transit route, a regional shopping center (Foothills Fashion Mall), a neighborhood park (Troutman Park), and for contiguity to existing urban development (Four Seasons and South Glen). The score of 70% supports the proposed density of 5.3 dwelling units per acre. The land use and density, therefore, comply with existing plans and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan and the Land Development Guidance System. 3. Neighborhood Compatibility: A neighborhood meeting was held on July 16, 1991. The minutes to this meeting are attached. The primary concern of the affected property owners was the relationship between the existing homes in Four Seasons along Benthaven Drive and the future homes in Park South that will also front on Benthaven. The blending and compatibility of these two neighborhoods will occur on Benthaven Drive and the treatment of this street is critical to preserving neighborhood quality. As originally proposed, there were nine homes that would front on Benthaven Drive. Except for the two end lots, these lots were less than 60 feet in lot width with an average lot size of 7,283 square feet. As amended, eight lots are proposed with all lots meeting or exceeding 60 feet in lot width, with an average lot size of 9,787 square feet. The revised lots meet or exceed the minimum requirements of the R-L-P, Low Density Planned Residential zone district. All lots on Benthaven will be setback a minimum of 20 feet from the property line. By reducing and enlarging the lots along Benthaven, the applicant has promoted neighborhood compatibility between single family subdivisions. 0 Park South P.U.D. September 23, 1991 Page 4 4. Design• - Preliminary, #46-88C P & Z Meeting The project will be developed in two phases. Phase one consists of the nine homes along Benthaven and the 17 homes on Stream Court. Phase two will be developed as market conditions warrant. Dennison will not be connected until Phase two. The primary design feature of Park South P.U.D. is the small lot size. Clearly, the objective is to capture the first time home buyer. Front setbacks, with the exception along Benthaven, will be staggered for variety. Each lot will feature one, 1-1/2 inch caliper, deciduous street tree per street frontage with the exception of Manhattan. No vehicular access will be allowed to Manhattan. Street trees will be planted along Manhattan at 40 foot intervals, regardless of the lot line location, with proper spacing at the streetlight. The fencing along Manhattan Avenue will be uniform featuring a six foot high shadowbox design. 5. Transportation: The project is served by Manhattan, a collector street, and Benthaven, a local street. Dennison provides an indirect east to west connection designed to discourage "cutting through". Rockaway provides a local street connection north to the commercial areas of the Park South O.D.P. A pedestrian connection north of Lots 48 and 112 will provide access to Benthaven in the area of the Villages at Four Seasons. The ultimate design of Manhattan is not in final form at this preliminary stage. The location of the sidewalk, curb, ramps, and gutter are not finalized but will be analyzed at the time of final submittal. Stream Court was constructed in the early eighties as a private drive in the County. It is proposed to be upgraded to current City standards and be dedicated as public right-of-way. The proposed number of homes can be served by the existing and proposed street system. The traffic impacts associated with the proposed development have been reviewed by the Transportation Engineer. The project is feasible from a traffic engineering standpoint. 0 0 Park South P.U.D. September 23, 1991 Page 5 RECOMMENDATION: - Preliminary, #46-88C P & Z Meeting The request for 121 single family lots on 22.9 acres conforms to the Amended Park South O.D.P. The density of 5.3 dwelling units per acre is justified by the score of 70% on the Residential Uses point chart of the Land Development Guidance System. The single family land use is compatible with the two adjacent single family subdivisions. Staff, therefore, recommends approval of the Park South Amended Preliminary P.U.D., #46-88C. Develo*nt Services • Planning Department MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Zoning Board Members FROM: Sherry Albertson -Clark, Chief Planner RE: Park South PUD Preliminary DATE: September 23, 1991 Based on analysis of legal documents relating to Park South PUD and Manhattan Avenue improvements, staff has determined that the City has the authority to require that a sidewalk be constructed along one side of Manhattan Avenue. Therefore, staff recommends that the following condition be added to Park South PUD Preliminary: A four foot detached sidewalk be required along the west side of Manhattan Avenue as part of the development of Park South PUD Preliminary. 281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (303) 221-6750 No Text No Text 0 SCHOOL PROJECTIONS PROPOSAL: Park South PUD DESCRIPTION: 122 single family homes on 22.9 acres DENSITY: 5.3 du/acre General Population 122 (units) x 3.5 (persons/unit) = 427 School Age Population Elementary - 122 (units) x .450 Junior High - 122 (units) x .210 Senior High - 122 (units) x .185 Affected Schools Lopez Elementary Webber Junior High Rocky Mountain Senior High (pupils/unit) = 54.9 (pupils/unit) = 25.6 (pupils/unit) = 22.6 Design Capacity Enrollment 546 (+mobile) 564 740/approx 762 1250 1142 0 TEWART&ASSOCIATES Consulting Engineers and Surveyors August 5, 1991 Mr. Ted Shepard, Project Planner City of Fort Collins Planning Department P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 Dear Ted: The following are planning objectives for Park South P.U.D. Park South P.U.D. is located south of West Horsetooth Road and west of Manhattan Avenue. It is zoned R.L.P. It is bounded on the south by South Glen P.U.D. which is a single family residential P.U.D. and on the west by Four Seasons P.U.D. which is also a single family residential P.U.D. It is bounded on the east by a partially developed multi —family P.U.D. and by an undeveloped parcel zoned H.B. The land lying north of Park South P.U.D. is a part of the Park South P.U.D. Master Plan that contains a proposed neighborhood convenience shopping center and more residential uses. A part of Park South P.U.D. was previously platted as a patio home planned unit development in Larimer County before it was annexed to the City of Fort Collins. Manhattan Avenue and Stream Court were constructed under the old P.U.D.; however, there were no homes constructed. The other part of Park South P.U.D. is a portion of Four Seasons P.U.D. that was not developed along Benthaven Street and Dennison Avenue. It is planned that Park South Venture, under the direction of Mr. Marc Middel, will develop the P.U.D., and the homes will be built by Stonybrook Homes. The parcel is an "infill" project that has urban services including water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, gas, power, telephone and cable T.V. available within and adjacent to the site. It has access from Manhattan Avenue which is a collector street that feeds to West Horsetooth Road. Because it is an "infill" project, it is near to neighborhood and regional shopping centers and near to an elementary school and neighborhood park. The regional shopping center and surrounding businesses are major employment centers. Due to the existing facilities, the project is able to earn a credit of 120% on the density chart. A majority of the lots are less than 6000 square feet and less than 60 feet wide which are the standards for a single family subdivision. This requires that the project be developed as a planned unit development. South Glen P.U.D., adjacent to Park South on the south, was developed under the same standards. The density is 5.3 units per acre which is lower than the James H. Stewart and Associates, Inc. 214 N. Howes Street PO. Box 429 Ft. Collins, CO 80522 303/482-9331 Mr. Ted Shepard, Project Planner August 5, 1991 Page 2 maximum density for R.L. zoned property. The smaller lots will provide affordable housing for the majority of the community. They will also decrease the amount of water needed for irrigation of a typical lot. The smaller lots and affordable residences will buffer the larger homes existing in Four Seasons from the multi —family and Highway Business zoning lying east of Manhattan Avenue. More than fifty percent (50%) of the proposed lots will provide the potential for good passive solar gain because they are north and south facing lots. The P.U.D. will provide standard local street construction which was not required in the old Larimer County approved P.U.D. because of a grandfather clause. Due to the infill potential, availability of utilities, good access, bus service, closeness to existing shopping, neighborhood park and elementary school, Park South will become an attractive residential neighborhood. If you have any questions concerning this planned unit development, please call. Sincerely, a - Richard A. Rutherford, P.E. & L.S. President irr NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING MINUTES PROJECT: Park South Amended Master Plan and First Phase Preliminary P.U.D. APPLICANT: Marc Middel, Middel Enterprises REPRESENTATIVE: Frank Vaught, Vaught -Frye Architects and Planners PROJECT PLANNER: Ted Shepard DATE: July 16, 1991 QUESTIONS, CONCERNS, COMMENTS 1. What is the price range of the homes, including lot costs? RESPONSE: The homes, including lot, will range from $95,000 to 115,000. 2. It is imperative that the new development, especially the homes on Benthaven, be compatible with Four Seasons. The homes that front on Benthaven will be considered, for all practical purposes, as part of Four Seasons. This area along Benthaven is considered one of the entries to the subdivision and the positive impression that is made on that street must be maintained. RESPONSE: The builder has constructed homes in Four Seasons. Two or three of the models will be similar to what is found in Four Seasons. It is anticipated that these models will be priced around $100,000. 3. Judging from the lot size, it appears that the homes on Benthaven will be smaller than the existing homes in Four Seasons. This does not look like compatibility but a threat to our property values. What are the lot sizes along Benthaven? RESPONSE: These lots are presently shown to be 50 x 125 for a total of 6,250 square feet. The homes will range from 1,473 to 1,700 square feet (does not include basement). 4. Will the homes have basements? RESPONSE: Yes. 5. Will the lots be raised? Will the homes sit on ground that will be higher than it is at present? RESPONSE: Yes, the grade will be slightly elevated. 0 6. What about the balance of the residential further east? How many lots are proposed and at what square footage? RESPONSE: This area will have 122 lots with an average lot size of 50 x 100 for a lot size of 5,000 square feet. 7. Will the residential area feature any open space? RESPONSE: There will be no commonly held open space, just private yards. 8. Will there be covenants, and if so, when will they become available? RESPONSE: Yes there will be covenants. These covenants have not been drafted but will be filed some time after approval of the project. 9. When will you decide if you will develop Parcel B as either residential duplex or office? RESPONSE: This decision will be made after Phase One (residential) and will be determined on market conditions. No final P.U.D. will be filed on Parcel B until a decision has been made as to the land use. 10. The need for a neighborhood convenience shopping center is questioned. There is an Albertson's one-half mile to the east, and a 7-Eleven just to the west on Horsetooth Road. The proposed commercial area will just add more traffic to the neighborhood and create more of a hazard in getting out to Horsetooth Road. RESPONSE: Horsetooth and Manhattan is an arterial/collector intersection. As such, if the traffic volumes warrant, this intersection will become signalized. Also, the request is merely for an Overall Development Plan, not a Planned Unit Development. It will be required of a P.U.D. to conduct a traffic impact analysis. such an analysis may result in restricting turn movements off Horsetooth to right-in/right-out only, depending on the location of the median. The City Transportation Department will evaluate the traffic impact analysis and require that the improvements recommended be implemented to mitigate traffic problems. 11. Will Troutman ever cross the railroad tracks? This would greatly improve access to the neighborhood. RESPONSE: Such a crossing would benefit the entire community. However, it is difficult to negotiate with the railroad and ultimate approve rests with the Public Utilities Commission. The last crossing, Swallow Road, was a long and tortuous approval process. Perhaps if such a crossing were an underpass or overpass, then the approval may be swifter, but construction costs would be higher. 12. Will our water pressure be affected by the new development? RESPONSE: We have heard of no problems of water pressure in the area. 13. Will there be any planned access from commercial area to the residential area, or will sole access be from Horsetooth and Manhattan? RESPONSE: There will be local street access to both Parcel C (residential) and Parcel B (office/duplex). Such access would keep unnecessary trips off the collector street (Manhattan). 14. There will be a negative impact of 122 homes on Lopez Elementary School and Troutman Park. Overcrowding will be an inconvenience for existing residents. RESPONSE: According to Poudre R-1, students that are presently brought to Lopez from outside the square mile section will be diverted to other schools. Clarendon Hills will have a new elementary school by Fall of 1992. It is anticipated that Lopez will be a "walk-in" school only and serve only students within the section. Typically, elementary schools are planned to serve the number of students in one section. Since the Park South project has been an approved project of record since the late seventies, prior to annexation into the City, it is assumed that school planners accounted for this area to develop and generate students. Similarly, Troutman Park was designed to serve the entire square mile section at build -out. 15. The lots and homes on Benthaven should be the same size as the existing homes across the street in Four Seasons. This is the only way to achieve compatibility. Dissimilar property values on Benthaven will lower our values. There should be equal value to preserve our investments. RESPONSE: There presently is a variety of housing values in Four Seasons. Certainly the Villages at Four Seasons is a different housing type than the traditional single family homes. Variety offers housing choices for consumers in all areas of the City. 16. What is the typical square footage of your most popular model? RESPONSE: The "Crystal" model is very popular and it totals 1,480 square feet. Our smallest model totals 1,370 square feet. 17. The nine lots planned to front on Benthaven will contrast sharply with the existing six homes on the west side of the street. This will cause the street to look crammed, tight, and cheap. This is undesirable. These lots should be widened and reduced in number to match the existing density. By matching density, you can charge more and capture the value of the ambiance already created by the value of the existing homes. This would result in no financial loss and preserve the values of our homes. 18. The existing patio homes in Four Seasons are on 6,000 square foot lots and you are proposing 5,000 square foot lots. With small lots, the area will look cluttered. For instance, our H.O.A. works very hard to enforce the covenants to keep boats, trailers, R.V. Is, campers, snowmobiles, wood piles, etc. out of the front yard. With 5,000 square foot lots, where will these items be stored? Will your covenants address these aesthetic concerns? Our neighborhood is uncluttered. Your project has the potential to be very cluttered. Enforcement is a serious issue since ultimate compliance rests with civil legal action. RESPONSE: Our initial concept is to have covenants but not a formal homeowner's association since there will be no common open space. If covenants are violated, then civil remedies remain available. 19. Will there be direct street access into the Villages? RESPONSE: No. 20. Will the commercial development be speculative? RESPONSE: No, the commercial area will only be developed if there are firm tenants. Its too risky to build commercial floor space on a speculative basis. 21. A recent developer just received approval for the Four Seasons 8th Filing. This single family subdivision has lots averaging about 8,000 square feet. This is an example of compatibility. We are particularly concerned about the lots on Benthaven not being as large as across the street. These lots will essentially be considered part of Four Seasons, not Park South. 22. Will Dennison be connected with Phase One? RESPONSE: No, Dennison will connect Manhattan to Benthaven in Phase Two. 23. What kind of home will be built on Stream Court (17 lots). RESPONSE: These will be single family detached homes on 5,000 square foot lots, not duplexes as originally approved. 24. It looks as though the commercial area will still generate too much traffic for the neighborhood. RESPONSE: The amount of square footage proposed for Parcel A is half of the 1988 plan. We think the traffic can be handled by the surrounding streets (Horsetooth and Manhattan). 25. How will the drainage be handled? Will there be a concrete trickle channel? RESPONSE: The plan is to have an open swale in the backyards that leads to the detention facility. At present, there are no plans for a concrete trickle channel. 26. Will there be height restrictions on Parcel B? RESPONSE: Yes, there will be height restrictions based on the setback from the west property line, similar to what was proposed in 1988. 27. As residents of the Villages, we would like to go on record as preferring office rather than the duplexes. 28. Why are there no common open spaces? Without common open areas, kids will play in the street which is very unsafe. RESPONSE: Our concept is to put open space into the private yards. We would like to promote affordability by not forming a homeowner's association with monthly or annual dues. Sometimes, these dues will prevent a buyer from qualifying for a mortgage. 29. Speeds are too high on Manhattan, this project will only make traffic worse. RESPONSE: Speeding is a problem on many collector streets within neighborhoods. We believe this is an enforcement issue, not an issue related to the proposed development. Reports of speeding should be made to the City's Transportation Department and Police Department. 30. Will the homes have two car garages? RESPONSE: Yes. 31. We want covenants for the protection of the area. We would like to see a copy of the covenants when they are available. 32. Not all residents agree. Covenants are private contractual arrangements between private parties. The City should not interfere with any covenants, or lack thereof, by the owner and future lot owners. 9 0 Leigh, Scott & Cleary, Inc. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & TRAFFIC ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS Offices in Denver and Colorado Springs August 6, 1991 Mr. Marc Middel Middel Enterprises, Inc. 1407 S. College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80524 Dear Mr. Middel: 1889 York Street Denver, Colorado 80206 (303) 333-1105 Fax: (303) 333-1107 RE: Park South PUD, Ft Collins, CO (LSC #910600) We have completed our Traffic Impact Analysis of the revised Park South PUD plan in Fort Collins, Colorado. This plan, which supersedes one prepared in 1988, significantly lowers the amount of commercial development on the site and thus decreases the amount of traffic generated by the development. The following report summarizes our findings and conclusions. Current Traffic Conditions Present street and traffic conditions in the vicinity of the Park South PUD are given in Figure 1. This Figure shows the results of recent traffic volume counts conducted by Leigh, Scott & Cleary (on Monday, July 22, 1991) which established morning and evening peak hour traffic volumes at the intersection of Horsetooth Road and Manhattan Avenue, and directional, hourly traffic volumes on Horsetooth Road west of Manhattan and on Manhattan south of Horsetooth Road. These directional, hourly traffic volume counts were conducted over an 11-hour period. Estimated 24-hour traffic volumes for the three roadway segments at this intersection were estimated based upon a comparison of present and previous traffic volume counts conducted in 1988. As shown in Figure 1, traffic on Horsetooth east of the intersection increased about 15 percent, on Horsetooth Road west of Manhattan about 16 percent, and on Manhattan south of Horsetooth about 34 percent. More data on traffic volumes are contained in the Appendix of this report. Appendix A shows the results of the 1991 mechanical road -tube traffic counts while Appendix B shows results of the intersection turning movement counts. Appendix C provides the 1988 mechanical road -tube traffic counts at Horsetooth and Manhattan. In Appendix D, a graphic comparison of the 1988 and 1991 traffic counts on Horsetooth Road are shown. These counts verify the relative accuracy of the present counts and they provide a graphic indication of the growth that has occurred since 1988. The key issues associated with this traffic impact analysis are the future magnitude of traffic on Horsetooth Road, the provision for access to this development from Horsetooth Transportation Systems • Transit • Parking • Vehicular Access • Pedestrian & Bicycle Planning • Traffic Operations & Safety • Signal Design • Traffic Impact Studies • • Mr. Marc Middel Page 2 August 6, 1991 Road, the magnitude of traffic on Manhattan Avenue between Horsetooth Road and Troutman Parkway, and the potential "cut -through" traffic that may occur between the Park South PUD and the adjacent residential area to the west (the Village at Four Seasons). Traffic Generation The revised plan for the Park South P1TD calls for the development of 122 dwelling units of single family housing on the bulk of the land area (the southern 75 percent of the entire tract), the development of a convenience commercial center in the northeastern corner near the intersection of Horsetooth Road and Manhattan Avenue, and the development of either a 24-dwelling unit complex of residential duplexes or 30,000 square feet of general offices immediately west of the convenience center. An estimate of future traffic to be generated by Park South is given in Table 1. Trip - generation rates are from the most recent (5th Edition) publication of "Trip -Generation" by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. As shown in Table 1, nearly 8,000 vehicle trips per day would be generated by the proposed PUD when general offices are used for the land use for Parcel B. This yields the highest traffic generation for the entire PUD or, the "worst case" scenario. The 7,976 vehicle trips per day shown on Table 1 compare with about 14,800 vehicle trips per day that would have been generated by the previous plan for Park South. Thus, the present plan would generate slightly more than half of the amount of traffic proposed in the previous plan. Directional Distribution of Traffic The expected directional distribution of traffic generated by Park South is given in Figure 2. This Figure illustrates percentages of total traffic, by major route and direction, for the years 1995 and 2010. By 1995, it is anticipated that the southern extension of Meadowlark Avenue will have been completed to Horsetooth Road (tying it to the Horsetooth/Manhattan intersection), and by 2010, there will have been constructed a crossing of the railroad track by Troutman Parkway linking the Manhattanll�outman and the College Avenue/Troutman intersections. The directional distribution of generated traffic shown in Figure 2 is very similar to that in the previous, 1988, traffic impact analysis. The most dramatic shift in traffic distribution will occur when the Troutman railroad crossing occurs, shifting more traffic to Manhattan Avenue south of Horsetooth and less traffic on Horsetooth east of Manhattan. When the area -wide directional distribution of traffic is reduced to the specific distribution at site access points, the results are shown in Figure 3. This diagram, showing the percentage of site -generated traffic at each access point, is reflective of the land use pattern of the development, the overall distribution pattern, and the specific access provisions available at each access point. Figure 3 illustrates the fact that about 15 percent of the total traffic is oriented to the residential component of the development while about 85 percent is oriented to the commercial (including office) development in the north portion of the site. The Figure also illustrates the proposed access plan for the E Mr. Marc Middel Page 3 August 6, 1991 major site access at Horsetooth Road (opposite the Riva Ridge Drive intersection). In this plan, there would be no direct access from the subdivision to the north to the Park South PUD by way of the Riva Ridge access. The Park South access, however, would provide full movement access for traffic on Horsetooth Road. Future Traffic Volumes When the trip -generation forecasts of Table 1 are applied to the trip distribution pattern of Figure 3, the resulting site -generated traffic volumes can be projected. These future volumes are shown for the years 1995 and 2010 in Figures 4 and 5, respectively. The greatest amounts of traffic will occur at both the site access on Horsetooth Road and the first site access on Manhattan south of Horsetooth. These two access points jointly serve the commercial and office uses. Background Traffic Background, or non -site -generated traffic on Horsetooth Road and Manhattan Avenue has been estimated based upon information provided by the City of Fort Collins Transportation Department. The department has projected Year 2010 traffic volumes to be in the order of 27,000 to 28,000 vehicles per day on Horsetooth Road east of Manhattan, and about 25,000 to 26,000 vehicles per day on Horsetooth Road west of Manhattan. On Manhattan Avenue itself, traffic is expected to be in the 6,000 to 7,000 vehicle per day range by the year 2010 if the Troutman railroad crossing project is completed. Given these traffic volume estimates, Leigh, Scott & Cleary, Inc. has projected peak -hour traffic volumes on Horsetooth Road, Manhattan and Meadowlark Avenues, and at the intersection of Horsetooth and Manhattan. These are shown in Figure 6. Total Traffic Volumes Total traffic volumes, the sum of background traffic and site -generated traffic, are shown in Figure 7 for the year 2010. Projections have not been made of 1995 traffic, because the year 2010 provides a more appropriate future horizon for evaluating traffic impacts associated with this development. Traffic Impacts The traffic impacts associated with the Park South PUD have been evaluated in two ways. First, the levels of service (LOS) at three key intersections have been determined. One of these is the major intersection between Horsetooth Road and Manhattan Avenue, which is expected to be improved to a full, four legged intersection with the northern extension of Manhattan Avenue (or the southern extension of Meadowlark Avenue). The other two intersections are those providing access to the commercial facilities and located just west of Manhattan on Horsetooth Road and just south of Horsetooth Road on Manhattan. The second evaluation of traffic impacts has compared the increment of traffic added to the roadway system by the development with the total traffic volume and then compared that volume with anticipated roadway capacity. 9 • Mr. Marc Middel Page 4 August 6, 1991 Table 2 summarizes the results of the intersection capacity analysis. The intersection of Manhattan and Horsetooth Road, in the year 2010, would operate "under" capacity in the morning peak -hour and "near" capacity in the evening peak -hour. This would be equivalent to level of service "C: during the morning peak -hour and level of service "D/E" during the evening peak -hour. The capacity of this intersection could be significantly improved in the future with the provision of a second westbound-to-southbound left -turn lane. This intersection improvement would not be needed until at least the year 2000 and perhaps not at all if Troutman is extended east across the railroad tracks. The two unsignalized access intersections would operate in a satisfactory manner although there would be anticipated delays for exiting left -turning traffic at both intersections. (Left - turning traffic invariably faces delays at unsignalized arterial intersections.) The projected traffic volumes indicate that signalization might be warranted, but in terms of this analysis, it would be appear that signalization is unnecessary. Another impact measure is the amount of traffic that Park South might impose on the adjacent Village at Four Seasons subdivision. Because the only connecting link between the two subdivisions is a local street, we anticipate that the only traffic on Dennison Avenue will be traffic that either originates within Park South or has a destination within Park South for traffic originating in the Village at Four Seasons. Required Improvements The Park South PUD complex would require the development of a modified intersection at the present intersection of Horsetooth Road and Riva Ridge. As indicated previously, there is a landscaped center median on Horsetooth Road which is continuous west of Manhattan Avenue and the Riva Ridge intersection operates as a right -in, right -out only intersection. Under the plan for Park South, a full movement access would be provided for the PUD. The recommended intersection plan for this access is shown in Figure 9. It would continue to control movements into and out of the residential subdivision immediately to the north, limiting these movements to westbound right -turns -in and southbound right -turns -out. Channelization in the intersection would allow unsignalized left turns into the Park South PUD from Horsetooth Road and northbound left turns out of it from the development. Conclusions From the foregoing analysis, the following conclusions can be made: 1. At full development, the revised plan for the Park South PUD would generate 7,976 vehicle trips per day. This amount is slightly more than half of the vehicle trip generation estimated under the previous PUD plan. 2. A single access to the development is proposed on Horsetooth Road. This would be an unsignalized access opposite the Riva Ridge Drive access, and it would be a controlled movement intersection prohibiting any through traffic between Park South PUD and the residential subdivision to the north. A total of three additional accesses to the PUD are planned on Manhattan Avenue. One, located 400 feet south of the Horsetooth Road intersection, would be a major • • Mr. Marc Middel Page 5 August 6, 1991 access into and out of the neighborhood convenience shopping center. The other two are minor local residential street intersections. Although there would be some delay for exiting, left -turning vehicles at the two major access points, their signalization does not appear to be warranted. 3. The PUD is designed to allow local street interconnection with the adjacent subdivision to the west, the Village at Four Seasons. This connection, by way of an extension of Dennison Avenue, would provide for local travel between the two subdivisions without encouraging any through traffic. Because of the existence of the Wabash Street east/west collector which ties the Village at Four Seasons to Manhattan Avenue south of Park South (see Figure 1), little or no through traffic is anticipated on Dennison Avenue. 4. There will be local street interconnections within the Park South PUD allowing residents within the residential part of the development to travel northward to the convenience shopping center without necessitating their access on to Manhattan Avenue or Horsetooth Road. This plan helps to maintain the integrity of the whole development. If there are any questions concerning this development, please contact me. Respectfully submitted, LEIGH, SCOTT & CLEARY, INC. by: Robert E. Leigh, PE _ 46,54 REL/wd ' ;�,r� •, ��:jc:��•• ae stun' Enclosures: Tables 1 and 2 V"'i: Figures 1 through 9 Appendices A - E City Co`C 61 u cc Diane Jones Tom Peterson Ted Shepard City of Fort Collins Cindy Lutz 707 Dennison Fort Collins, CO 80526 Dear Ms. Lutz: August 26, 1991 Thank you for your letter dated August 13, 1991, regarding Park South P.U.D. the proposed development at Horsetooth Road and Manhattan Avenue. On behalf of the City Council, I would like to respond to your concerns about the lack of greenbelt area and lot sizes. Troutman Park, the nearest available neighborhood park, is approximately 20 acres in size and is located directly in the middle of the square mile section that includes Park South P.U.D. It continues to be the policy of the City that one neighborhood park per square mile section of residential area is necessary to meet the needs of the residents. Because Troutman Park is available to the future residents of Park South P.U.D., an additional park site will not be required. The proposed lot sizes in Park South are smaller than the existing lots in Four Seasons. Smaller lot sizes are permitted to be submitted for review to the Planning Department, but the proposed density must satisfy the criteria of the Land Development Guidance System, an element of the City`s Zoning Code. According to the minutes of the July 16 neighborhood information meeting, the nine lots fronting on Benthaven are a primary concern for individual residents, as well as the Four Seasons Homeowners Association. Those attending the neighborhood meeting would like the nine lots reduced in number to establish a better blending of the two neighborhoods. The Planning Department has been in contact with the Four Seasons Homeowners Association. The issue of lot size and potential inclusion of the nine lots into the Association are concerns that will be addressed during the review of the Park South Preliminary P.U.D. It is my understanding that a meeting between the developer and the Four Seasons Homeowners Association will be facilitated by Ted Shepard, Project Planner, in early September. The -purpose of this meeting will be to explore opportunities for finding a consensus between the parties prior to the public hearing with the Planning and Zoning Board. The request for Park South Preliminary P.U.D. will be heard by the Planning and Zoning Board on September 23, 1991. I encourage you to stay involved during the plan review process that is currently underway. If you have any further questions or concerns, please contact Ted Shepard, Project Planner, 221-6750. Again, thank you for input on this matter. Sincerely, / Susan Kirkpatrick Mayor 300 LaPorte Aenue • P.O. Box 380 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 - (303) 221-6505 • M August 13, 1991 Planning Board City of Fort Collins 281 N College Fort Collins CO 80521 Gentlemen: D C�C�GOMFg n au� 15 is9i , I am writing to voice my concern over the development being proposed for the property at Horsetooth and Manhattan. As a home owner in Four Seasons, I don't believe the developer is working in the best interest of his future neighbors. I would like to see the following amendments to his proposal. 1. Add a greenbelt area. I see no reason not include include some park area in the development. The extra traffic at Troutman Park would take away from what we now enjoy. We're always willing to share community facilities, but a neightborhood the size of this development needs greenbelt space. 2. The lot and home sizes are small and will decrease the property values in Four Seasons. In particular - he is planning to put 9 houses on the property along Benthaven, the facing street in Four Seasons has 6 homes. Can he be encouraged to build larger homes on larger lots and still make a profit? If the development is not amended, I encourage you to turn down his request for development. S' erely, Cin y L z 707 Den son Fort Collings, CO 80526 CC: Town Council