HomeMy WebLinkAboutSCOTT PLAZA - Filed GC-GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE - 2016-08-17 (2)NORTHERN
ENGINEERING
ADDRESS: PHONE:970.221.4158 WEBSITE:
200 S. College Ave. Suite 10 www.northernengineering.com
Fort Collins, CO 80524 FAX: 970.221.4159
Administrative Engineering Variance Request Letter
Date: December 19, 2013
Project: Scott Plaza
Fort Collins, Colorado
Attn: Mr. Tyler Siegmund
Engineering Development Review
City of Fort Collins
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado 80524
Dear Tyler:
Project No. 948-001
Public safety and convenience, maintaining public use, and optimizing the use of limited physical capacity
of right-of-way are among the objectives of the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS)
Repealed and Reenacted April 1, 2007. It is with those considerations in mind that this variance request
letter has been prepared. This letter is provided pursuant to Section 1.9.4 of LCUASS to document an
existing condition, as well -as a proposed site condition, which do not comply with the current standards.
The variances requested with this letter are driven primarily by the condition of the existing streets
surrounding the site, as well as the desire to create a more urban, pedestrian -centered streetscape
environment as opposed to the suburban, residential feel that often results from strict adherence to
LCUASS. The infrastructure along West Plum Street predates LCUASS, and consequently, much of it does
not meet current standards. When matching or maintaining existing roadways that do not satisfy LCUASS,
it is not feasible for new improvements to explicitly comply with said criteria.
The first existing condition in question is the location of the Scott Plaza high volume driveway itself.
Currently, this driveway serves to access the public right-of-way of Scott Avenue. However, with the
proposed right-of-way vacation, this curb cut will no longer be an existing public street, but rather will
become a private driveway. According to the Access Management section of LCUASS Table 7-3, the
minimum distance between high volume driveways and intersections is 200', since Plum Street is a Major
Collector. The existing distance between the high volume driveway on the south side of Plum Street
(currently Scott Avenue) and Bluebell Street (north of Plum Street) is approximately 72' (on -centers).
This segment of Plum Street is striped as a single lane in each direction with bike lanes. The subject
intersection and driveway are offset such that there could be left -turn conflicts on Plum Street. Delich
Associates has analyzed the probability of left turns to each access arriving at the same time. Their "Scott
Plaza Apartments Transportation Impact Study," dated September 2013, shows Scott Avenue in its
current location. The westbound left -turning vehicles entering this driveway are forecasted to be 11 and
49 in the respective AM and PM peak and hours. Bluebell Street (east of high volume driveway, north
side of Plum Street) is expected to generate 3 and 3 eastbound left -turning vehicles in same respective
peak hours. Delich calculated the probability of a concurrent eastbound left -turn onto Bluebell and a
westbound left -turn onto Scott to be 0.058 percent in the AM peak hour and 0.27 percent in the PM peak
hour.
No Text
"sty
I lww'
S,
}+�i•G *jam'"" `z.. `y
Conceptual sketch looking west down Elizabeth across Shields, depicting the look and feel of street -fronting buildings, a new signalized
intersection at a new Scott Street, and a complement of urban design features. Latertesting of stormwater implications of this concept showed
that in this stretch of Elizabeth, any new buildings would need to be substantially raised with steps, ramps, wags, and railings.
Besides creating value, these aspects of the vision were seen as
solutions to other issues in line with. City Flan:
a They would provide logical new access to consolidated, rear
parking, likely to be at least partly in parking strictures. This would
eliminate driveway and parking lot conflicts which currently
characterize the area, freeing up more of the street for safer, more
appealing sidewalks, people places, bike lanes, and medians.
• Redevelopment could include some housing in new buildings.
This would add vitality and ambience to the district, add interest to
new architecture, and add housing choices in a very convenient
location.
POINTS AND ISSUES RAISED BYTHIS PLAN VISION
Current Landlords and Tenants. Discussion highlighted the
natural dilemma of a community vision for updated development:
Current owners, who control initiative, perceive no benefits equal to
the disruption and risk for themselves and their tenants. Land
assembly or coordination of multiple properties needed for a new
Scott Street would involve multiple owners with widely varying
interests.
Engineering Objectives for a Wider Street. The vision also
highlighted fundamental competing objectives between CC District
policies for streets, and certain engineering objectives for vehicle
traffic and flood drainage. In response, storm drainage questions are
evaluated and explained in Section 8; and a recommended street
design is explained in Section 9.
42 Viawn fm a tMatlnaUan kctM{y Center
Campus West Comnwniry Commercial DkVict Plannlny Study Report
March 31, 2014
Mayor Weitkunat and Council Members:
Re: Scott Avenue Development Plan — Scott Ave Vacate Hearing
My name is Jake Taylor, one of four partners of Taylor Fitzpatrick Capital (TFC). The three other partners
are my father Ted Taylor, Randy Fitzpatrick and Mike Jensen. I'm writing in response to the letter
submitted by Mr. Chris Ray last week on March 261 and forwarded to us last Friday. TFC is close-knit
merchant investor/operator with deep roots and love for Fort Collins and Colorado State University. I
grew up in the Denver area and graduated from Colorado State University as did Mike Jensen. Mike
Jensen has been a Fort Collins resident since 1992 and a huge advocate of smart development and growth.
Of equal importance is our design and professional team who bring passion and vision for improving our
overall community, those include; Ripley Design, VFLA Architects and Brinkman Partners. Our project,
Scott Avenue Development Plan (PDP) is a development Mike Jensen and TFC have collectively worked on
for 8+ years. The PDP was approved by the Planning and Zoning Board January 6th, 2014.
Background
Our Design Team began work on this project 14 months ago. We held a neighborhood meeting on August
22nd, 2013. Those attending the meeting were supportive of the project. Additionally, we met with the
adjacent property owners, including Kathy Nichols, representatives of St. Paul's Episcopal Church to the
south and of the Campus west Condominiums to the west to understand and incorporate their individual
concerns into the design. In our meetings with Mr. Ray he did not discuss his concern regarding the Scott
Avenue ROW vacation during the process and didn't voice his objection at the Planning and Zoning Board
meeting when the project was approved.
City staff was aware of the 13-year old study that Mr. Ray refers to. The City staff believed while it was
important to maintain and improve the pedestrian and bike connection between Plum Street and the
activity center on Elizabeth Street, they did not believe an automobile connection was necessary or
desirable. O'City staff requested that the ROW be vacated, but that a pedestrian access easement be
maintained. The Scott Plaza projects esigne o accommodate pedestrian and bike access both now
and in the future. Furthermore, the public access easement and associated amenities will be maintained
by the developer/owner of the project relieving the City of the financial burden to improve and maintain
this core Campus West pedestrian spine.
The property proposed to be vacated is one half of a street ROW and represents approximately 25% of
the ROW that would be required to establish a mid -block City street connection between Plum and
Elizabeth Streets. The ROW was dedicated in 1962 and is the only ROW that the City has acquired in the
area.
If Scott Avenue became a City Street at this location it would not meet City Street Standards. The City
would have to grant a variance for conflicting left turning movements associated with the proximity of
Blue Bell Street located north of Plum Street and offset approximately 60.5 feet to the east. Per Larimer
County Urban Area Street Standards, this offset is required to be 250 feet.
Direct Response to Issues Raised in Mr. Ray Letter
1) The Campus West Community Commercial District Planning Study Report was done in 2001, more
than 13 years ago. The Study was just that, a "Study". It was never elevated to the level of an
official City Policy Plan. Therefore it was not something that the Applicant could have or should
have relied upon. The Planning and Zoning Board was aware of the Study and agreed with City
staff that a through street wasn't needed or desirable in this location.
The local street connection illustrated conceptually in the Study is not shown on the City's
Master Street Plan.
2) We contend that the City does not lose the ability of making Scott Avenue a through street. The
Scott Plaza project will create a safe, convenient, attractive pedestrian /bike connection to the
south. When properties along Elizabeth redevelop (and we agree with Mr. Ray that they will
someday in the future) those owners will be required to continue the up -graded pedestrian/bike
access to Elizabeth. Imagine how valuable and interconnected Campus West becomes for both
Mr. Ray's property and those property owners along Elizabeth Street to have a well -designed
pedestrian friendly pathway to enjoy walking to the shops and restaurants much like they do in
Old Town. In contrast, the idea of more traffic creating congestion and pedestrian conflicts
doesn't fit with good urban design practices.
3) Shields Street and City Park Avenue meet the City's minimum requirement for intersection
spacing along an arterial street (Elizabeth Street) There are lots of ways to calm traffic along
Elizabeth Street without adding automobile congestion to achieve it. Some of these have already
been incorporated in the Elizabeth Street improvements that were done over the past six years.
There is plenty of re -development potential for Campus West that can include commercial development
without adding a City street in a location that would add to traffic congestion, not meet City standards
and create safety issues for pedestrians and bikes. The intent is to create a safe interconnected village
and reduce conflicts between pedestrians, bikes and cars. Our pedestrian spine contributes to the
interconnected village concept in Campus West. If we as a community wait to develop as Mr. Ray suggests
then years and years go by and nothing ever happens to improve where we are today. We envision
1,000's of students utilizing the spine shopping our retail corner, at Kathy Nichols retail stores, those along
Elizabeth Street and perhaps on Mr. Ray's property if/when it is redeveloped with an element of
commercial space. Compare Old Town Square to any other commercial streets with cars. Pedestrian
plazas are not only safer, but more functional, more attractive and can be even more economically
successful for the community.
We thank you for your time and look forward to doing our part to build a better community helping
accelerate the Campus West vision and lifestyle.
i (Reards,,Jaked Taylor, Randy Fitzpatrick, Mike Jensen and the entire design team.
Planning, Development and Transportation
Administration
281 N. College Ave.
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6601
970.416.2081 - fax
fcgov.com
MEMORANDUM
Date: April 1, 2014
To: Mayor Weitkunat and City Councilmembers
From: Karen Cumbo, Director, Planning, Development, and Transportation
Rick Richter, Infrastructure Services Director
Tyler Siegmund, Civil Engineer I
RE: Read before re: Item 9- First Reading of Ordinance No. 053, 2014 Vacating Scott Avenue Right -
of -Way as Dedicated at Book 1174, Page 543 of the Larimer County Records.
Attached for your consideration are three (3) documents related to Item 9- First Reading of Ordinance No.
053, 2014, Vacating Scott Avenue Right -of -Way as Dedicated at Book 1174, Page 543 of the Larimer
County Records.
The first document is a letter that was submitted by the property owner at 1113 Plum Street opposing the
Scott Avenue right-of-way vacation. This letter was previously emailed to you on March 26, 2014 by
Chris Ray.
The second document is an email from Tyler Siegmund in the Engineering Department providing
additional information on the Scott Avenue and Plum St right-of-way vacation requests. This email was
previously forwarded to you by Steve Roy, City Attorney, on March 27, 2014.
The third document is a letter that was recently submitted by the Scott Plaza developer and current
property owner at 1201 Plum Street. This is the property owner requesting the Scott Avenue and Plum
Street right-of-way vacations.
Tyler Siegmund
From: Clark Mapes
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 4:07 PM
To: Tyler Siegmund; Seth Lorson; Cameron Gloss
Subject: ScottVacationSupport
I haven't been involved in the vacation process, but I can not help wondering if Council can even process what's
happening here without a healthy background explanation. Maybe you guys are all over this.
But Chris Ray has asked "why would staff support this vacation?"
Here is some background along with what I would say. (Not wordsmithed, but the basic story is here.)
The very last point, that the access easement would not prevent a future vehicular connection, is something I've never
discussed or heard so I'm out on a limb there. Would that be true? ( I KNOW — don't hold your breath.)
The 2001 Study identified major benefits of a new cross street in the Y mile stretch between Shields and City Park St. As
an alternative, a pedestrian spine connection was also identified as beneficial if a street per se is not feasible.
The % mile long block is too long. it elicits speeding. It thwarts movement between high density student housing along
Plum Street and restaurants, shops and services on Elizabeth Street without a needed cross connection.
Scott Street is a fragment of ROW that serves as unpaved access on a rental housing property that has reached the end
of its useful life and needs to be redeveloped. It happens to be situated halfway in the mile stretch between Shields
and City Park street and would be a perfect location for a new street connection. It was identified as an opportunity to
begin conversations about the benefits of a new street connection. Three owners of 3 other properties would have to
participate. These conversations were held during the study process. There was zero interest in any such plan for
changes to properties.
Since that time, there have been several development initiatives with prospective developers proposing redevelopment
of the Scott property. Staff from planning engineering have explored the potential for a future street multiple times over
the years.
Staff repeatedly find three roadblocks:
1)There has been zero interest, and a degree of opposition, from owners of the 3 other properties that would have to
participate in a new street by changing their properties.
2) There is a physical constraint of a change in grade between two of the properties. This could probably be engineered
but would add a complication and a cost.
3) The financing constraints of coordinating changes on 4 different properties plus a new intersection with Elizabeth
Street would be a very difficult challenge even if all owners were interested in redevelopment.
Unfortunately, there has been no outline of a viable solution to these roadblocks; and with this latest proposal, staff was
finally satisfied that the access easement as proposed would be an acceptable solution in lieu of a street. Extending that
facility, or at least a walkway portion of it, appears more viable in a foreseeable planning horizon.
At this time, even the idea of opening up a fence to allow a pedestrian connection across other properties was opposed,
but the Scott Plaza plan provides for a possible future connection.
Bottom line: a future street would be great, but the idea has been explored and gone nowhere. The proposed
pedestrian spine connection looks more promising, and the access easement would even allow future consideration of
vehicular connection if all 4 owners ever agree on the benefits of it in the future.
Clark Mapes, AICP
City Planner
crnaoes(rDfcoov,com
670-221-6225
LILEY, ROGERS & MARTELL, LLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
April 9, 2014
Mayor Karen Weitkunat
and Members of the Fort
Collins City Council
City Hall West
300 LaPorte Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80521
Re: Second Reading Consideration on April 15, 2014
Ordinance No. 052, 2014, Vacating Scott Avenue Right -of -Way
Mayor Weitkunat and Councihnembers:
This firm represents Taylor Fitzpatrick Capital, LLC ("Applicant"), applicant for
approval of Ordinance No. 052, 2014 (the "Ordinance"). We have been advised that objections
to the passage of the Ordinance were raised by a single neighboring property owner and a
neighborhood resident on first reading on April 1, 2014, and that such objections resulted in a
split 4-3 vote of approval. The Applicant, having reached the final stages in the review and
approval of its project, Scott Plaza (the "Project"), is concerned that the entire Project, and the
significant amount of time and financial resources that have been invested, may now be in
jeopardy if this routine technical right-of-way vacation is not approved. It is critical that you
have all of the necessary background information prior to second reading on April 15, 2014.
City Council Approval Authority
The authority to vacate street right-of-way is reserved to the City Council. The process
set forth in the Municipal Code is relatively simple and the criteria for approval are limited.
When coupled with a development plan review, as in this case, the appropriateness of the right-
of-way vacation, policy considerations, compliance with the Land Use Code and any conditions
therefor are thoroughly vetted by City Staff, review agencies, utility providers, etc., with ample
opportunities for citizen comment throughout the process. Only after this thorough review and
after approval of the development plan, which is conditioned upon completion of the technical
right-of-way vacation process, is the official right-of-way vacation application processed and
presented to City Council.
LUCIA A. ULEY d JAMES A. MARTELL ■ TODD W. ROGERS a JOSHUA C. ULEY
THE PETER ANDERSON HOUSE • 300 SOUTH HOWES STREET • FORT COLUNS, COLORADO 80521
TELEPHONE: (970) 221-4455 a FAX: (970) 221-4242
Mayor and City Council Members
April 9, 2014
Page 2
Cily Review Process
From early in the planning process, the Project has incorporated the plan to vacate the
Scott Avenue right-of-way (the right-of-way vacation was specifically mentioned at the
neighborhood meeting, and is shown on the plans and was discussed in the Staff Report).
Following is a summary outline of the procedural steps that have occurred on the Project prior to
first reading of the Ordinance:
• Conceptual Review by City Staff on February 25, 2013
• Neighborhood meeting with notice (including objecting property owner) on
August 22, 2013 — note no objections to right-of-way vacation
• Notice of Planning and Zoning Board hearing extended to 1000 feet
• Planning and Zoning Board Staff Report made available to public on January 2,
2014 — note Staff recommendation of approval of PDP
- Planning and Zoning Board hearing on January 9, 2014 — note no objections to
right-of-way vacation
• Project approved unanimously on consent by Planning and Zoning Board
• Appeal period expires on January 23, 2014 — note no appeal filed — PDP approval
stands
• Applicant submits FDP on January 29, 2014 in reliance on approved PDP
Concurrently with the Project review process, the City Engineer followed the required
review process for the right-of-way vacation, including routing to utility agencies, City Staff,
emergency service providers and affected property owners, and the City Staff s recommendation
to City Council is for approval of the Ordinance.
Justification for Vacation
The Municipal Code outlines two requirements for approval of a right-of-way vacation,
i.e. (i) that the right-of-way being considered for vacation is no longer needed for right-of-way
purposes, and (ii) that it is in the public's best interest to vacate the same. City Engineering and
the Director of Planning Development and Transportation recommended approval of the
Ordinance citing that these criteria have been met. In further support, we wish to advise you of
the following facts:
The dedication of this right-of-way in 1962 was only 25 feet wide; this width is
insufficient for construction of a street that meets City standards
Mayor and City Council Members
April 9, 2014
Page 3
• The adjacent property is developed and no right-of-way for the other one-half of
Scott Avenue has been made
• The Master Street Plan does not include the extension of Scott Avenue to
Elizabeth Street
• The right-of-way does not extend to Elizabeth; in order to do so an existing
building would have to be demolished
• Even if constructed as a street, the intersection of Scott Avenue with Plum Street
does not comply with LCUASS requirements for offset left turning movements
with Blue Bell Street
• The only purpose served by the right-of-way since 1962 has been access to three
properties; the owner of these properties is the party that has requested the
vacation as street access from Scott Avenue is no longer necessary with
redevelopment of these properties
The approved Project provides the same rights to the public as exist now: public
access for pedestrians, bicycles, vehicles using the on -site parking structure,
emergency vehicles, services vehicles and utility installation
• Critical elements of the approved Project could not be accommodated because
they are not permitted in street right-of-way under current regulations and there
are no other workable locations on the site for such features, e.g. permeable
pavers and underground detention to increase efficiency of stormwater solutions,
and landscaping and pedestrian amenities to enhance public experience
■ The approved Project and the right-of-way vacation are supported by numerous
City Plan principles and policies that encourage the following: alternate modes of
travel and reduced automobile usage; health benefits of alternate modes of
transportation; safe, convenient, direct and attractive access routes for pedestrians
and bicycles to commercial areas, CSU, services and recreation; interconnected
pedestrian network; pedestrian connectivity and circulation with neighborhoods;
and creative design that contributes to interesting neighborhoods
The primary objection to the right-of-way vacation is based on an informal study
that was never adopted by the City as a component of City Plan or the governing
land use regulations
NORTHERN
ENGINEERING Scott Plaza I Variance Request 1 12.19.13
Their analysis conservatively assumes that all of the generated traffic would arrive in the same half-hour of
the respective peak hours. Delich concludes that the probability of left -turning vehicles from opposite
directions arriving at the same time is minimal (<1 percent). In addition to the small probability, it should
be noted that this stretch of Plum Street is devoid of horizontal or vertical variations, thus avoiding sight
line constraints. Delich further concludes that the offset intersections are not detrimental to the public
health, welfare and safety for the prudent driver.
The street section along the West Plum Street frontage does not meet the prescriptive greenfield standards
outlined in LCUASS. Rather, it is a site -specific section that has been thoroughly vetted as part of multiple
redevelopment proposals in the project area. This stretch of Plum Street carries forward many of the
concepts and objectives established with The District at Campus West project, which is currently under
construction immediately north of the subject property. Table 1 summarizes the various components of
the street cross-section.
Table 1— West Plum Street
PROPOSED
Existing
Current
Current
Minimum
LCUASS
DESIGN ELEMENT
SCOTT
Condition
Adjusted
Reference
PLAZA
Standard
Standard'
CROSS SECTION
Roadway Width
40'
40'
50'
38'
M
Figure
7-5 F
Right -of -Way Width (south half)
31.5'
varies
(25' & 411
38'
29'
Figure
7-5F
Travel Lanes
12'
14'
11'
11'
Figure
7-5F
Bike Lanes
81
6'
81
71
Figure
7-5F
10' combined
Figure
Parkway Width
6.5'
none
81
w1sidewalki!7-5F
5'
3'
5'
10' combined
Figure
Sidewalk Width
detached°
attached
detached
w arkwa b
7-5F
Curb and Gutter
30" vertical
Hollywood
30" vertical
6" vertical
(no gutter seam)
Figure
7-5F
Horizontal Clearance for Sidewalks
2.0' min.
N/A
1' - 2'
N/A
Figure
16-1
Utility Easement"
none
varies
none & 9'
9
possible
9' ?
Figure
7-5F
a. This non -official alternative is identified In the Campus West Community ComtT* ai Dist ict Planning away Report (Dec. zuu 1).
b. The previous planning recommendation for West Plum St. contained 10' attached sidewalks with 5'x7' tree grates.
c. 5' width is provided within the right-of-way throughout. Additional width (on the private side) is provided in some areas.
d. Per the Utility Coordination Meeting held October 16, 2013, no utility easement along Plum St. is necessary.
While the Campus West Community Commercial District Planning Study Report (CWCCDPSR) is not an
enforceable engineering document, it does do a great job at inventorying the existing conditions in this
area. Not only are the deficiencies in the public transportation system identified, but the right-of-way
limitations and other constraints are well documented. As a result, the CWCCDPSR developed a
preliminary "Minimum Adjusted Standard" street section for West Plum Street. Again, this is not an
official LCUASS cross section, but it is included in the table above as a point of reference. The street
section for West Plum proposed with the Scott Plaza development exceeds the CWCCDPSR Minimum
Adjusted Standard in virtually every category. Additionally, the proposed cross section offers vast
improvement over the existing condition, particularly with respect to pedestrian and bicycle safety and
mobility.
Page 2 of 3
Mayor and City Council Members
April 9, 2014
Page 4
Request for ADD=
In summary, a vote of the City Council to not approve the Ordinance, despite the
overwhelming evidence in support of the vacation and the lack of any objection until the
eleventh hour, would render the Project completely infeasible. Such a decision would also
undermine the City's diligent and careful review of the Project and the public outreach
conducted by City Staff. Finally, such a decision would allow an objector to refrain from raising
applicable issues during the lengthy development review process, and instead allow them to be
raised at the tail end of the project after the appeal deadline had passed and after the applicant
had spent a considerable amount of time and money in reliance on the fact that there were no
significant issues.
We request therefore on the Applicant's behalf, that the City Council approve the
Ordinance on second reading.
Sincerely,
LILEY, ROGERS & MARTELL, LLC
LAL/jpk
Pc: Taylor Fitzpatrick Capital, LLC
Linda Ripley, Ripley Design, Inc.
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING
PROJECT: Scott Avenue right-of-way vacation
DATE: April 28, 2014
LOCATION: Colorado State University Durrell Center, Conference Room C
CITY PLANNING: Cameron Gloss, Seth Lorson, Clark Mapes
CITY ENGINEERING: Tyler Siegmund
Cameron Gloss opened the meeting by introducing himself and City staff
representatives. An overview and presentation of the Scott Avenue right-of-way
vacation request to be heard at the May 6, 2014 City Council meeting was presented as
it relates to the surrounding neighborhood and its Campus West context.
Existing Scott Avenue, if vacated, is proposed to become an enhanced pedestrian spine
with decorative pavers within the existing footprint of Scott Avenue. There was
discussion of the 2001 Campus West Study which highlights this piece of Scott Avenue
right of way as a potential opportunity to spur a needed street or pedestrian spine
connection that will connect Plum Street to Elizabeth Street.
QUESTIONS, CONCERNS, COMMENTS AND RESPONSES:
1. Question: (Citizen) Is there still room for a street in the future, if we vacate this
right-of-way now?
Response: (City) Yes, the footprint of Scott Avenue is proposed to be retained as a
public pedestrian access easement along with utility and emergency access easements.
Whatever physical room is there currently on the four affected properties, will still
remain. Using this room for a street will continue to be dependent on all four abutting
property owners agreeing on the idea, the same as in the past.
2. Statement: (Citizen) 1109 W Plum Street is not required to provide a sidewalk
unless redeveloped. Vehicle access should not be limited. There is congestion on
Plum Street already caused by the infill projects that will back up traffic.
Response: (City) If the 1109 W Plum Street property redevelops in the future, sidewalk
will be required to be installed along Plum Street if missing.
3. Question: (Citizen) Could the City build a pedestrian plaza along Scott Ave right-
of-way without the Scott Plaza apartment building?
1
Response: (City) It would require a unique, very unusual City capital project. It does
not look viable without being part of redevelopment because Scott Avenue is the
driveway and parking lot for the existing buildings.
4. Question: (City) Engineering, please explain what will be needed to provide a
full width road at Scott Avenue.
Response: (City) To meet our minimum street standard width for a local access road
the 3 neighboring properties would each need to dedicate 26 additional feet of property
to get the 51 feet of required right-of-way to build a full width road. The 51-foot-wide
road is the minimum standard and provides for one 16-foot travel lane, two 7-foot on -
street parking areas and the standard 6-foot parkway and 4.5-foot sidewalk.
However, it has never been the intent to implement the minimum street design
standard. Any future design for a street at this location may not be a standard City
street but a special, customized design. That could involve public access easements
instead of right-of-way. Again, it would continue to depend on the abutting property
owners wanting a street.
5. Comment: (Citizen) As a closely involved person working with Campus West
properties, I can say that the 3 other properties in question will never dedicate the right-
of-way needed for a street. Directly south, where the road will need to go, you have an
existing building that will need to lose 3,500 square feet of leasable space. The Church
property to the south has a sacred ash burial area where the road would need to go and
they will never agree to a road at this location. The best solution is a pedestrian
connection.
Response: (Citizen) I don't mind a pedestrian connection but the Plum Street bike route
has been ruined. With additional cars proposed by the Scott Plaza development,
turning cars will collide with bikes. More traffic on Plum Street creates more conflict and
accidents with bikes. The "green bike box' may not work with this new level of auto
traffic. Plum Street is the most important bike access across Shields to Colorado State
University.
6. Question: (Citizen) The City plans for the long term. Can't we wait until the right-
of-way is needed in the future?
Response: (City) Since the 2001 study report, there have been several redevelopment
projects proposed at this location that have tried to incorporate a road without success.
It does not look feasible in any reasonable planning time frame. There has been zero
interest and even opposition by the affected owners. A connection at this location is
needed and with the Scott Plaza development proposing a pedestrian spine, as
identified in the study report, this project will provide 1/2 of the needed connection to
2
Elizabeth Street. Even the missing connection of the pedestrian spine may require
some waiting.
7. Question: (Citizen) This Scott Plaza project is severely under parked, it would
not be approved now.
Response: (City) This issue is addressed in the staff report for the Planning and Zoning
Board when they approved the project. The project provides 95 spaces. None were
required but subsequent requirements were put in place and, if they had been in place,
103 would have been required instead of the 95 provided. There are some other factors
in addition that were considered including two shared Zipcars available to tenants.
8. Question: (Citizen) What is the remedy for the issue with the notification, why is
it not going back through the Planning and Zoning Board process?
Response: (City) Legal notice was provided with the sign posing on the property and
the newspaper posting that complies with our code requirements. The mailing notice
was deficient and it was not realized until after the Planning and Zoning Board hearing
appeal period. Staff acknowledges the mistake. It involved a change in vendors for the
mailing list. It was an innocent administrative mistake that was unfortunate.
9. Comment: (Citizen) Was the sign posted on the property?
Response: (City) Yes, it was posted according to our code requirements.
10. Comment: (Citizen) During walking tours for the West Central Area Plan in the
last few days, even staff was concerned about the traffic. Crossing Shields is
dangerous. Haven't we learned anything?
11. Comment: (Citizen) Colorado State University has some responsibility to provide
a safe crossing as well.
12. Comment: (Citizen) This has to go back to the Planning and Zoning Board
hearing
Response: (City) The period for an appeal to the City Council has expired and there is
no authority for the project to be taken back to the Planning and Zoning Board for a
rehearing.
13. Comment: (Citizen) Colorado State University Police said the best Shields
Street crossing is at Plum Street, but this is ruining it and City staff is not on the same
page.
3
14. Question: (Citizen) Can the City easily get right-of-way from the Church
property?
Response: (City) To get right-of-way from the Church property, the Church would need
to dedicate right-of-way to the City or the City would have to purchase property from the
Church. The church property involves unique difficulties as noted earlier.
15. Comment: (Citizen) If Scott Avenue is vacated can the city get the right-of-way
back? Can we word it in a way that if it's needed in the future, we can get it back, even
with compensation if that's necessary?
Response: (City) Typically, the City will not vacate property if we need it back in the
future. If future property owners ever got together and agreed on the need for a certain
kind of vehicular connection, they could come up with the right-of-way dedications of
property and build a street. They could also come up with a private street with a special
design. Staff has always thought this might be more feasible than a City street per se.
The Scott Plaza development's access easement would not preclude that kind of street
in the future if the property owners desired.
16. Comment: (Citizen) Can they block the pedestrian easement? Could they put a
fence across it?
Response: (City) No, nothing permanent can be built on access easements that
prevent access.
17. Comment: (Citizen) These projects are under parked. Parking is spilling over
into commercial properties and neighborhoods. You have women having to park and
walk. That's not safe. A safety parking standard does not exist.
4
Chi w
J
CD
CD
CD
r-+
-P
rQ
�`
M
1 Q.
ri
n
�506N
CA
cr
c�
N
curl
3
TO: Seth Lorson, City Planner
FROM: Carl Wangsvick, homeowner, 1509 Westview Ave.
RE: Vacation of Scott Ave.
DATE: April 28, 2014
Why the City should reject the vacation of Scott Avenue for Scott Plaza.
1. Public notice of Scott Plaza hearings was incomplete.
2. Fire access concerns for Scott Plaza remain unresolved.
3. Though this area could use a small redevelopment project, the
size of this project in this small space-5 stories, 200 beds, and
(with couples) 250 plus residents —is overkill given that the
street is soon to see the opening of the District, a four block by
one block apartment complex, with 660 beds and at least 460
autos. Putting 860 rental units where there were about 65 is
too much for the area to absorb. The area in question should
host a much smaller development, without cars, one that fits
into the current rental footprint, which excludes Scott Avenue.
Also, calculating future demand for apartments here shows
little need for it at all, other than for its retail elements.
4. The 2001 document updating the West Central Area Plan, has
already considered Scott Avenue as a pedestrian route to be
developed for access to the West Elizabeth commercial area.
That can be done without apartments. Really, Plum Street most
needs a pocket park w/a walkway.
5. The redevelopment of the West Elizabeth St. commercial area,
something that would involve Scott Avenue, is listed as the
WCAP concern in this section of the area, according to recent
documents describing area "walkthroughs" with city planners.
The new WCAP committee should be the one to decide what is
best for Scott Avenue. A vacation now, means it's gone for
good. The WCAP may choose to vacate it, but I doubt seriously
doubt they will.
6. The planner's assertion to Council of "no environmental
impact" is untrue. (Recently, that has become a standard denial
on all projects. As Kelly Ohlson noted at the recent hearing,
developers "cook the numbers" and planners go along with,
and pass along, unrealistically low figures about impacts.)
7. The numbers in the traffic studies for this project and the
District tell a frightening tale. Problems created by the District
will be exacerbated by any large apartment development on
the south side of Plum Street. First, one set of numbers is
wrong, certainly the District's. While Scott Plaza's study shows
a believable (but still low) 600 trips/day-300 roundtrips or
3/auto—for its 100 cars, the District's study (whose figures are
part of the analysis of "tolerable impacts" in the Plaza study)
estimates a puny 280 trips/100 of its 460 cars, only 1,300/day
total, instead of a realistic 2,760 trips/day. (They figured only
1.4 roundtrips/auto. Ridiculously low, and half that of the
other "expert" analysis.) Together, both projects would amount
to 3,360 trips/day, 95 % to and from Shields. So clearly, once
the District opens, there's no room for other cars here without
even more intolerable traffic impacts.
8. One crucial, related problem is the safety of bike and
pedestrian traffic, a problem actually mentioned in the March,
2012, traffic report for the District, despite the report's being
ridiculous in concluding no adverse effects of almost any other
kind (such as "no impact on intersections," etc.). Reports for
developers regularly say what developers like, so judge for
yourself. That document shows 1,300 trips daily (more
truthfully 2,760), trips by the District's residents in their
garage a half block from the intersection. New traffic, that does
not even include visits of friends to the 660 residents. That is
"impact on an intersection," even without using the accurate
count, which would be double that. The otherwise glowing
traffic report of "no real change to anything via the
development," nevertheless says the dangerous
bike/pedestrian/auto mix there should be a "high priority" for
the City to solve, "albeit not the developer's responsibility."
Amazing! The Scott Plaza report simply ignores the
bike/pedestrian safety problem altogether, when the Plaza
would certainly put bikers into a "crossfire" of traffic from the
south, just at peak times. The Plaza's report views the bike
route as worthless, saying "two lane streets do not have bike
lanes elsewhere in town." As noted, the District's report
recognized this route as "one of the highest corridors for
bike/pedestrian traffic in the city." Then, as noted, the traffic
report says the City should urgently act to fix the problem this
project is about to increase exponentially! I doubt we can get a
bike tunnel dug soon.
9. The concept of a "bike box" on Plum at Shields worked well to
take half the bikes off W. Elizabeth, the most traveled and
dangerous route in town, considering car/bike accidents.
Because of low traffic on Plum, the bike box worked perfectly,
holding that traffic back, and giving bikes precedence. Safety
was greatly improved for students biking into campus.
Construction of the District killed the route during
construction, and will hurt it, even if it is restored. But Scott
Plaza will kill it (as their analysis implies), since the bike lane
on the south side of Plum, which is the important one that
collects bikes to cross to the east, will be cut frequently by cars
from the south accessing Plum and then turning onto Shields.
(Bikes headed west can safely pool on campus streets.) The
extremely safe bike box will be dead. Keeping the south side of
Shields car free is the best hope to preserve some of the
usefulness of the Plum Route, already at much risk from the
District, as its own traffic report above describes on page 18.
Campus police asked me to inform you they adamantly oppose
the loss of this one safe, lighted bike crossing of Shields, and
say it is the only location possible for such a crossing anywhere
between Prospect and Mulberry. In future, someone should
consult them about traffic related to developments around the
campus. They have knowledge the traffic report "traffic expert
apologists" lack. The Plum Route was a safe bike/road location
where cars and bikes both were aware of what everyone was
supposed to do, and when. That's why campus police loved it.
No accidents.
10. For travel time north/south on Shields at peak times,
again according to the above report, the District already will
delay that by 4.5 % in the AM. The Plaza adds 20 % more, to
equal 5.4 %. (All guestimates are from developers' reports, so
they are low, however.) And there is no room on Plum for turn
lanes right or left onto Shields, another big traffic problem.
What a headache this intersection is about to become for the
City.
11. This street needs to become usable as soon as possible.
Continued blocking of Plum Street for another development
means another year of poor/no access for current residents,
i.e., sororities. Ask them how that has been. Constant calls of
complaint were ignored. Rudeness toward residents seeking
access was the rule of the day among workers. And no
bicycle/pedestrian traffic will be possible on Plum for a long
time. That is disastrous.
12. The project is underparked, with 100 parking spaces for
200 beds, and 250 plus residents, at least 100 spaces short. The
"onsite rental car" to replace those spaces is just a gimmick and
does nothing to stop the inevitable "outlaw" parking of those
cars, which have to be "stored" somewhere, and will be
inevitably stored at neighboring homes, apartment lots, and
businesses, already under siege, and soon to get a good 100-
200 spillover from the District. Many owners are investigating
video surveillance for business lots and apartment lots to
protect their areas.
13. Nonresidents parking in these neighborhoods at night are
a danger to residents, and sometimes vice versa. Because the
City adopted market based parking in the TOD, apartment
tenants have to choose to pay an extra thousand a year, and at
Scott Plaza I Variance Request 1 12.19.13
The variances requested in this letter will not have an adverse impact on the City's capital and
maintenance costs, nor are they expected to reduce the design life of the respective improvements. While
there will be additional public sidewalk to maintain where ones previously did not exist (or existed in an
inadequate condition), the obligation resides with the adjacent private property owner(s), not the City. In
fact, it could be argued that the Scott Plaza project as a whole will result in a reduced burden to the City
due to the vacation of the Scott Avenue right-of-way.
The requested variances will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. Rather, the
proposed improvements serve to substantially enhance the experience of cyclists and pedestrians utilizing
this corridor, which is one of the heaviest traveled multimodal conduits into Colorado State University's
main campus. Portions of missing and inadequate sidewalks will be replaced with wide, detached walks
lined with interesting landscaping, street trees, enhanced paving, and other urban design features. Not
only does this create a great pedestrian environment, but it also will improve the capacity of the on -street
bike lanes by keeping pedestrians — who previously had to share the bike lane where sidewalks did not
exist — a safe distance from automobile and bicycle traffic.
The variances proposed with the Scott Plaza development combine to provide a plan that advances the
public purpose of the LCUASS sections equally well or better than a plan that is in strict compliance with
the prescribed standard street sections. The requested variances are necessary due to constrained existing
conditions, both on -site and where matching adjacent improvements. The proposed alternative design will
result in a superior public street environment over that prescribed by LCUASS. Additionally, the proposed
Scott Plaza project helps fill a much needed demand for safe, efficient, managed student housing. Its
proximity to campus and commercial services allows for a significantly reduced carbon footprint, and a
substantial reduction in resource consumption and impact on the City as a whole. The Scott Plaza student
housing community aligns perfectly with the vision of both City Plan and the Campus West Community
Commercial District Planning Study Report, and will upgrade an area of town in dire need of improvement.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Nicholas
ws, PE, LEED AP
cc: Ward Stanford — Fort Collins Traffic Operations
Seth Lorson — Fort Collins City Planner
2 .2 Page 3 of 3
least a third (or more, perhaps half, by some estimates) will
not do so. They will save that money by parking in the
neighborhood. Then, neighbors essentially pay for their
parking. Market based parking is only fair for the renters who
have no cars and no visitors, that's no one, meaning it is
unjustifiable.
14. The "parking wars" have already begun in this area, and
need to be deescalated, not escalated. Apartment managers
who tow "outlaw" cars report immediate retaliatory vandalism.
Business lots are being used as "park and rides." Last Friday,
the cable closing off the east end of the lot of Blessed John 23ra
Catholic Church was simply ripped off at the lock by "outlaw"
parkers. Parking in NO PARKING zones on City Park is
common, as planners noticed during last week's walking tours
of map area two of the West Central Area Plan map. Places like
Scott Plaza, with more cars than spaces, are sure to contribute
to this escalation.
15. The development is another in the dangerous Transit
Oriented District that now surrounds campus, an area that
eliminated parking safety standards of: available parking/close
to the residence/no extra cost. These standards exist for
apartment tenants and neighbors everywhere else in the city.
There is no justification possible for sacrificing safety
standards in this particular area, home to 10,000 college coeds,
a most vulnerable population as it is. Campus assaults on
women have become an issue of Presidential concern, and our
developments should not be contributing to it. The City,
according to local attorneys, can be held liable for the
increased dangers created by ending these safety standards.
This memo is submitted to be a part of the record of the hearing
on the issue of vacating Scott Avenue, conducted on April 28,
2014. It had to be modified because of the document you
provided. Thank you to all planners who attended. You were
helpful, and your dedication was clearly evident.
Dear Editors:
At the last Council meeting, the Mayor admonished community speakers not to
criticize city staff about what they advise. I do not wish to. But I am not naive. Given
that city planners have clearly been working with disregard for neighborhoods and
safety and transparency in many recent projects, I have to. (Ms Stephenson's recent
column names three we were blindsided with, and I would add the District and Scott
Plaza, both on Plum: 900 beds, 300/400 parking spaces less than needed.) City
planners have a dog in this fight, and it's not the neighbor's dog either. Their
"whoppers" and lack of "candor" that I saw related to Scott Plaza were significant.
Planners' testimony showed they do not care about neighborhoods, or the safety of
neighbors, of apartment dwellers, and of cyclists in the West Campus area. They
based their promotion of the terrible Scott Plaza apartments project on "no
environmental impact," when it's another 150 cars to be added to sidestreets,
already bracing for the extra 300 that won't fit into the insufficient parking provided
by The District." And, along with The District, it helps kill the only safe bike route
into CSU from the west, the new Plum Route, that was working perfectly. (Plum
Route, with low auto traffic and an innovative Green Zone, had taken half the bikes
off the busiest, and deadliest bike route in town, West Elizabeth, with the most
car/bike accidents by far. Look for even more now. If injured there now, you can
probably sue the city, as they knew the problem, solved it, then killed the solution.)
Planners asserted "appropriate public notice," was given for Scott Plaza's request
that the city give up a public street, Scott Avenue. I called for discussion of this
proposal, and Mr. Cuniff asked Council to delay approval for more public outreach.
Four on Council passed the approval anyway, without realizing, I am sure, that the
planners' own Outreach Section showed PUBLIC NOTICE of ONLY ONE PERSON, the
DEVELOPER! Wow! When asked if a two week delay for outreach would really hurt,
the city planner said, "The developer is ready to go." I am sure he is: the fewer the
questions, the better. When asked about Scott Avenue, the planner said the city and
the community had no use for it, not mentioning that he knew full well the
possibility and desirability of it as a pedestrian access to West Elizabeth shops,
something the city can do. He did not mention that his department's own call for the
creation of a West Central Area Plan specifically prioritizes redevelopment of that
commercial area and access to it, which would involve Scott Avenue. City planners
tend to be "eager beavers" who love to build, God Bless 'Em, but they need careful
scrutiny, as we now know, Madame Mayor. I hope your Council will do that. If not,
citizens will.
It's not all the fault of the planners either. There have been unforseen problems
from creating a Transit Oriented District along the MAX and around CSU that by
statute has fewer parking and safety requirements than everywhere else. One, the
end of the safety factor for apartment dwellers, especially women, obtained
elsewhere by requiring apartment owners to provide enough parking for all, close to
the entrances, at no additional cost. Gone in the TOD. A woman assaulted on a
nightly walk home in the TOD can, and should, sue the city. Two, the end of the
safety factor for neighbors who, elsewhere, do not have apartment dwellers from 10
blocks away parking overnight at their homes and businesses. In or near the TOD,
that is inevitable. Three, lowering development constraints that increase building
costs is succeeding in meeting the goal of the TOD, more infill building. But including
CSU neighborhoods which need no infill building in the TOD has given us gigantic
apartment complexes jammed into small areas, unlike the excellent ones we have
that followed the rules of good safety, parking, access, landscaping, etc. On street
parking (and the "outlaw" parking in our local complexes and businesses) will
produce high offsite auto density, the one factor most correlated with neighborhood
crime. Obviously, the TOD's boundaries need changing, and its development
standards need revising way upwards. Now. Another issue for citizens to watch.
Carl Wangsvick
• ,w .
• LILEY, &OGE&S & MA&TELL, LLC ■
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
April 30, 2014
Mayor Karen Weitkunat
and Members of the Fort
Collins City Council
City Hall West
300 LaPorte Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80521
Re: Ordinance No. 052, 2014, Vacating Scott Avenue Right -of -Way
Second Reading Consideration on May 6, 2014
Mayor Weitkunat and Councilmembers:
As you know, this firm represents Taylor Fitzpatrick Capital, LLC ("Developer'),
applicant for approval of Ordinance No. 052, 2014 (the "Ordinance") and developer of the Scott
Plaza PDP ("Project").
Just prior to the second reading on the right-of-way vacation ordinance scheduled for
April 15, 2014, we learned that there was an issue regarding the mailed notice for the Planning
and Zoning Board hearing where the Scott Plaza PDP was considered. While unrelated to the
question of whether the Scott Avenue right-of-way should be vacated based upon the City's
criteria for vacation, the Developer was concerned that misinformation about the notice, which
came to light only very late in the process, might prejudice the vote on the right-of-way vacation.
The Developer, therefore, agreed to a continuance of the second reading in order to determine
what actually happened and to work with City staff on getting additional neighborhood
participation in the right-of-way vacation issue. Here are the facts about the notice as they relate
to the Developer:
1. As required by the Land Use Code, the Developer caused the preparation of a
property owner notification list and mailing labels for the notice area required by the City
for the neighborhood meeting and in preparation for submittal of the project. The notice
area was determined to be approximately 800 feet from the project property lines as
depicted on the map provided by the City. Notice of the neighborhood meeting was
mailed by City staff (City staff is responsible for sending the required notice) using the
mailing labels provided by the Developer.
LUCIA A. ULEY M 1AMES A. MARTELL 0 TODD W. ROGERS ■ JOSHUA C. LILEY
THE PETER ANDERSON HOUSE ■ 300 SOUTH HOWES STREET • FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80521
TELEPHONE: (970) 221-4455 r FAX: (970) 221-4242
Fort Collins City Council
April 30, 2014
Page 2
2. After the neighborhood meeting, City staff determined that the original notice
area should be expanded by approximately 200 feet for the mailed notice of the Planning
and Zoning Board hearing, and provided a map identifying the original notification area
and the expanded notification area.
3. The Developer ordered the preparation of an additional property owner
notification list and mailing labels from a private vendor for the additional 200 feet and
submitted those materials to the City on September 20, 2013 (see attached transmittal).
4. The transmittal identified that the list and mailing labels were for the "1201 Plum
Expansion' (emphasis added) and were prepared per the attached map outlining only the
expanded notice area, which expanded notice area exactly matched the expanded
notification area identified on the City produced map.
5. No new property owner notification list or mailing labels were provided for the
original 800-foot notice area, as the City already had those labels that were originally
submitted by the Developer and there is no practice, policy or legal requirement to update
these until after six months has passed.
6. Notice of the Planning and Zoning Board hearing was only mailed to property
owners within the expanded notice area. Ironically, with the best of intentions to create
an expanded notice area, it also created the potential for confusion by having two
separate mailing lists.
7. In addition to the proper notice being mailed for the neighborhood meeting, notice
was properly posted and the date, time and place of the Planning and Zoning Board
hearing were published in accordance with the Land Use Code so that the public would
be aware of the hearing.
8. The Land Use Code specifically provides that, "Failure to mail such notice shall
not affect the validity of any hearing, meeting or determination by the decision maker."
(emphasis added)
9. The Planning and Zoning Board decision is final as the appeal period has long
since expired.
In good faith reliance on the City's processes and regulations and the Planning and
Zoning Board's approval of the Project, the Developer has invested a significant amount of time
and money to finalize its development plans, prepare construction drawings, terminate leases and
hire contractors.
Fort Collins City Council
April 30, 2014
Page 3
Regrettable as it is, the Developer is not responsible for a well-intentioned expansion of
the notice area, that was accompanied by an unfortunate error in the Planning and Zoning Board
notice process, and should not have its entire project now jeopardized by this fact when the only
remaining action before the City Council is the determination of the appropriateness of vacating
the Scott Avenue right-of-way which ought to be decided on its own merits.
The standards for a right-of-way vacation are: (i) the right-of-way is no longer needed
for right-of-way purposes; and (ii) the vacation is in the public's interest. The following facts
justify the right-of-way vacation:
1. The right-of-way is no longer needed for right-of-way purposes:
• The right-of-way terminates mid block; the Master Street Plan does not
include an extension of Scott Avenue through the remainder of the block to
Elizabeth Street;
The width of the right-of-way (25 feet) is insufficient for construction of a
street that meets City standards; there has been no dedication of the other
one-half right-of-way from the adjacent property, as it is fully developed; and
The right-of-way has never been improved or used as a street; its only use
since the 1962 dedication has been as a dirt driveway to three private
properties.
2. Vacation of the right-of-way in in the public's interest:
If constructed as a street, the Plum Street intersections (with Scott Avenue
and Blue Bell Street) would present safety and operational problems due to
noncompliance with LCUASS requirements;
The approved Project enhances the public's rights: public access easement
for pedestrians and bicycles is maintained and improved with streetscape
finishes and amenities; vehicular use is maintained to the on -site parking
structure; access to onsite parking prevents parking on neighborhood streets;
public access is maintained for emergency vehicles, services vehicles and
utility installation;
The Project repurposes the right-of-way area for innovative and sustainable
features, e.g. permeable pavers and underground detention to increase
efficiency of stormwater solutions, and landscaping and pedestrian amenities
to enhance public experience, which are not permitted in street right-of-way
under current regulations;
Fort Collins City Council
April 30, 2014
Page 4
The approved Project and the right-of-way vacation are supported by
numerous City Plan principles and policies that encourage the following:
alternate modes of travel and reduced automobile usage; health benefits of
alternate modes of transportation; safe, convenient, direct and attractive
access routes for pedestrians and bicycles to commercial areas, CSU, services
and recreation; interconnected pedestrian network; pedestrian connectivity
and circulation with neighborhoods; reduced vehicular/pedestrian conflicts;
and creative design that contributes to interesting neighborhoods (see the
attached list of applicable policies); and
The City's updated vision for the neighborhood is to accommodate and
promote multi -modal travel; this vision is advanced with the repurposing of
the right-of-way; the Campus West Community Commercial District
Planning Study Report (2001), although an informal study that was never
adopted by the City as a component of City Plan or the governing land use
regulations, contains a number of good concepts, including the option of
converting the Scott Avenue right-of-way from a street to a pedestrian
connection.
City staff followed all procedures regarding the proposed right-of-way vacation.
4. City staff held an additional neighborhood meeting for all of the expanded
notification area (1000 feet) so that potentially affected owners and residents would have
a full opportunity to ask questions and express any concerns about the vacation; 825
notice letters were mailed for this meeting and 6 individuals attended.
We request therefore on the Developer's behalf, that the City Council approve the
Ordinance on second reading.
Sincerely,
LILEY, ROGERS & MARTELL, LLC
sy
L A. L'
LAL/jpk
Pc: Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Steve Roy, City Attorney
Taylor Fitzpatrick Capital, LLC
Linda Ripley, Ripley Design, Inc.
{ APO of Colorado
125 S Howes, Suite 1040
Ft. Collins, Co 80521
970-493-9110 Fax 970-482-1886
September 20, 2013
Stephanie Sigler
Ripley Design, Inc
401 W Mountain Ave, Ste 100
Fort Collins CO 80521
The attached list of affected property owners (APO) was prepared by our office
for 1201 Plum Expansion . 492 names. APO distance is per City map with
designated boundaries.
To the best of our knowledge, this list is a current and accurate representation of
the owners of record and their respective addresses as recorded for tax notices
at the Larimer County Assessor's Office in the State of Colorado on September
17, 2013.
Our office used the site map with designated boundaries, provided by your
office or the City, to determine the area of affected property owners.
APO of Colorado expressly disclaims any responsibilities for errors, omissions or
inaccuracies, that may arise because of the results provided by the Larimer
County Assessor's Offices.
Respectfully submitted,
Sharon Spencer
Owner, APO of Colorado
We research and make mailing labels for affected property owners
of
F6rt Collins
MEMORANDUM
Date: May 6, 2014
To: Mayor Weitkunat and City Councilmembers
Planning, Development and
Transportation Services
Current Planning
281 North College Ave.
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
970.221.6760
970.224.6134 - fax
fcgov. corn/cufrentplanning
Thru: Darin A. Atteberry, City Manager
Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Manager
Karen Cumbo, Planning, Development, and Transportation Director
Laurie Kadrich, Community Development and Neighborhood Services Directo
From: Cameron Gloss, Planning Services Manager
Tyler Sigmund, Development Review Engineer 1'
Re: (Agenda item # 17) Second reading of ordinance no. 052, 2014, vacating Scott
Avenue right-of-way
On April 28, 2014, a neighborhood meeting was held to discuss the Scott Avenue right-of-
way vacation proposal. Attached are the meeting notes to supplement the AIS materials.
ARTERIAL STREET
12' r
LT
MEDIAN
LEFT TURN MEDIAN
ROA..._DW_ AY WIDTmi 53'
RIGHT 115' Cmia3
TRAVEL LANES, 4 lanes. 12' wide.
LEFT TON LANE, 12' wide.
-5KE LANES 2 lanes. 8' wWe.
PARKING, None.
PA AY, 10' Cmh3 width. Additional width optlonaL .
A 6' Cmh3 width. Additional width may be required for Ngher Pedestrian traffic in
activity areas.
Mom' 19' wide landscaped and 7' wide landscaped fi left turn lane areas.
Wmcxr AI Artery streets shorn on the Master Street Plan, when the traffic vok me on the
street is onticlpated to be 25.000 to 35.000 VP&
SP- Mr!) LM` 35-45 MPM
.g�c.F,,; ssV Access wt be Imtted, points of access .s: b: ad,Protied by the Gtty.
S' fences shad be setback a mhlmwm of 8' from the parkway edge of the sidewak.
_ PARKWAY LANDS A & Parkways shell be landscaped In prays and
in
whenever appropriate. IN accordance with the requirements of the Gty Farrestrer a principals.
TREE PLANTING' danaPy shade trees shal be
planted at 40 Not spacings In the center of all
parkways. Individualtrees shall not be closer than 30 feet from the next street tree. Canopy
shade trees shad be placed no closer than 30 feet from roadway intersections. 8' from driveways and
alleys and shall be no closer than 40 feet from any street light. MMiraum tree sloe shall be N nccordar
with City requirements. Species shad be selected from roved
y approved canopy shade tree bt.
r+EurAN �ANascAPi�c� d,WW,
Irrigation. and should aP� shad hcludes trees. shrubs. ground cover. mulch and
requirements of the Ci"Wa escape prdncOalL whenever appropriate. h accordance with the
CURB AND 2 trtvp. Vertical b and gutter.
VIM
CAMBRLD,GE
HOUSE
Dear Councilmembers,
March 21 th, 2014
My name is Chris Ray and I am the managing owner of the Cambridge House Apartments located at
1113 W. Plum Street in Fort Collins. My property abuts the east side of Scott Avenue in the Campus
West District. I am opposing the request to vacate the existing Scott Avenue right-of-way for the
following reasons:
1) The City of Fort Collins spent a considerable amount of time and money to study the Campus
West area and develop a Campus West Community Commercial District Planning Study Report.
The study was a comprehensive analysis of the feasibility of development in the Campus West
District. Even though an overall plan has not been proposed the report has many thoughtful
ideas and concepts to motivate development. If you look at the conceptual drawing on page 40
of the report (I have attached all exhibits), you will see how Scott Avenue is an ideal cross -street
and the Consultants refer to it as a "centerpiece of this plan vision" page 41.
2) If the City vacates Scott Avenue, they lose the ability to make that connection a thru street. A
Street from Plum to Elizabeth will add tremendous value to the redevelopment potential of the
west and east sides of Scott Avenue and an overall project. It would create two more corners for
retail and commercial uses. Page 13 states "1/4 mile long blocks from Shields to City Park are
too long, elicit speeding, thwart needed north -south access".
3) 1 have extracted other important parts of the study and attached them for review as they
pertain to Scott Avenue. Page 26-6, "tame the traffic". Another intersection would actually
slow down traffic and increase pedestrian flow.
Page 27- Campus west is currently "under -stored" relative to the size of the community around
it.
Page 39- Campus West Idea Log "City purchase property needed for future north -south street
connection:" This is completely opposite of giving a street away just because a developer wants
to do a project now.
Page 42- A conceptual drawing shows the new intersection at Scott and Elizabeth depicting
corner retail which adds much higher values to a future project.
In summary, I ask all Councilmembers to deny the request to vacate Scott Avenue. Please preserve and
protect the future development potential of Campus West and this critical connecting street. With the
increase in CSU's enrollment and the continued growth of Fort Collins the viability of redeveloping
Campus West retail is getting close. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Chris Ray
1113 W. Plum St., Fort Collins, CO 80521
www.vantagerentals.com 9 (970) 419-8394
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Engineering
tion Se
MEMORANDUM
Dave Stringer, Development Review Supervisor
Cam McNair, City Engineer
August 26, 1999
Modified Arterial Street Standards in Established Areas
With new developments in older sections of the City, questions often arise about the additional
pavement widths, right-of-way widths, and other design standards pertaining to our full arterial
streets. The City's older arterial streets were often built without medians or bike lanes, and they
may have narrower, attached sidewalks. When new developments or re -developments occur in
these areas, the policy is to apply our new standards (see attached Detail D-1-b) in order to
upgrade the arterials to the new standards. This sometimes seems unreasonable when there
appears to be little probability of upgrading an entire block or section to the new standards in the
foreseeable future.
Our approach in these situations is to require dedication of the necessary right-of-way and utility
easements, which would allow construction to the new standard sometime in the future. This
creates problems because it takes away land that would otherwise be developable in order to
prepare for some road improvements that may or may not occur in the distant future. It has been
suggested that the leap from the old ROW (typically 60-ft to 80-ft in width) to the new 115-foot
ROW is not practical on the inner city arterials.
A meeting on this subject was conducted on April 15, 1999. Attendees were as follows:
Cary Diede
Director of Transportation Operations
Eric Bracke
Traffic Engineer
Mike Herzig
Special Projects Engineer
Kathleen Reavis
Transportation Planner
Dave Stringer
Development Review Supervisor
Cam McNair
City Engineer
Mark Jackson
Transportation Planner
Matt Baker
Street Oversizing Program Manager
At this meeting, we agreed that the new arterial street standards might have to be modified in
some situations.
281 North College Avenue * PO. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 * (970) 221-6605
Page 2
Modified Arterial Street Standards in Established Areas
August 26, 1999
In addition, it was agreed that the minimum nwdified arterial street standard would consist of
the following.
• No landscaped median.
• Five travel lanes of 12-ft widths (the center lane would be a reversible turn lane).
• Two 7-ft bicycle lanes, one on each side of the street (6-ft would be acceptable if built using
a continuously poured concrete gutter pan).
• Two 8-ft landscaped parkways.
• Two 6-ft sidewalks.
This would result in a, right-of-way width of 102 feet (or 100-ft if the continuous concrete bike
lane is used). A map is attached that indicates the arterial streets where the new standards would
be fully applied as well as those that would be subject to a "modified standard".
It should be emphasized that this modified arterial standard is not the City's preference. The
City's new 115-ft standard as shown on the attachment is the preferred norm for arterial streets.
However, it is recognized that the 115-ft standard is unreasonable to apply today in certain
established portions of the City.
The minimums described above are provided as guidance for the development engineers. Good
judgment must be exercised in applying these guidelines. Research on the existing pavement
widths and ROW widths, as well as other development plans for the area in question, are
essential in establishing the City's requirements. This .is a decision that should be made only
after a thorough investigation of the surrounding area, and after consultation with the
Transportation Coordination Committee. Eric Bracke and I should be afforded the opportunity
to review the decision before it is made final.
Let me know if you have any questions on this.
cc: Gary Diede, Director of Transportation Operations
Susanne Edminster, Transportation Planning Manager
Eric Bracke, Traffic Engineer
IN
O
C�
o�
,mot` Cottins
MEMORANDUM
Date: May 14, 2014
To: Mayor Weitkunat and City Councilmembers
Planning, Development and
Transportation Services
Current Planning
281 North College Ave.
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
970.221.6750
970.224.6134 - fax
fcgov.com/currentplanning
Thru: Darin A. Atteberry, City Manager
Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Manager
.Karen Cumbo, Planning, Development, and Transportation Director
Laurie Kadrich, Community Development and Neighborhood Services Director
From: Cameron Gloss, Planning Services Manage ,,
Tyler Sigmund, Development Review Engine& 44
Re: (Agenda items #6, and 15) Second reading of ordinance no. 053, 2014, vacating a
portion of Plum Street right-of-way, and ordinance no. 052, 2014, vacating Scott
Avenue right-of-way
The Planning staff respectfully requests that City Council postpone consideration of
Agenda items #6 and 15, the second reading of the Scott Avenue and Plum Street right-of-
way vacations.
It has come to staff s attention that the Affected Property Owner mailing list supplied by
the applicant advertising the January 9, 2014 Planning and Zoning Board hearing, and
which contained the Scott Plaza Project Development Plan, was deficient. The mailing lists
failed to include some of the nearby property owners that are within the prescribed
notification area. The legal notice requirements for the Planning and Zoning Board hearing
were met, however, in that a sign was posted on the property, and a newspaper notice was
published at least seven days in advance of the hearing.
In light of the incorrect mailing list, staff wants to provide an opportunity for additional
public involvement prior to returning to the City Council for second readings of the Scott
Avenue and Plum Street right-of-way vacation ordinances.
NEW STREET
EvstinghWWWgs outsidestudyaim
EM EvstiWgbd/diV.5 witlW5tudyare8
MIA'nbabteirderelopmentrelated to new. streetsandatherlmpmmments
p` Parbngstructurelocadontosupportnewdemlopment
f�desryiancannect�onsandstr�+etscapebnpro�ments
, a..u.
b w<
Conceptual sketch of new street corner, buildings, and streescape looking west across St Paul's Church front lawn
(shown with ideas about civic quadrangle walkways).
4t7 Vision fa a Destl�atron Activity Geller
Cam{ws wNsi dunrnunhyCommsrcfel tNab�ctWa�MnP StuyrReport
G. Vision for a Destination
Activity Center
The plan vision explained in this section had been emerging as the
preferred alternative, in the exploratory process discussed in Section
5. The study process subsequently took a different direction, and
concluded that the time is not right for a plan proactively promoting
this kind of major urban redevelopment.
Still, the CC District designation is in place — another conclusion of
this study is to retain it. The City's original responsibility and intent
was to explore whether and how CC District ideas could work and be
positive; this section captures insights on those questions for possible
future reference. It describes elements of a physical solution that
would best solve the issues, meet policies, and achieve goals. All
graphics were done as conceptual depictions only, to aid discussion and
exploration of ideas.
MEANING AND USE OF A PLAN VISION
This plan vision prompted questions, concerns, and suspicions about
what it would mean. or how it would be used.
All along, the answer has been: a plan vision like this would be used
to guide changes as they occur over time. Private redevelopment
would only occur If initiated by developers acting in the .real estate
market.
In other words, such a vision is not a "project" in which the City
unilaterally steps in, clears property, and builds buildings as depicted.
Rather, a plan vision highlights potential opportunities, and provides a
framework for ongoing investments and other decisions. When
consensus can be reached at the vision level, then discussion can move
on to more specific choices about City street projects, financing
mechanisms, and possibly other capital projects as appropriate to
CENTERPIECE OF THIS PLAN VISION — A NEW CROSS STREET
(SCOTT STREET)
The "New Cross : treet vision, shown opposite and on the following
pages, is centered around a new section of Scott Street and its
intersection with Vilest Elizabeth. This vision was widely seen as
presenting the best opportunities for redevelopment, with increased
value to properties because of: 1) a new retailing corner, 2) new street
frontages, 3) a new traffic signal to slow traffic and increase exposure,
and 4) a memorable focus and center for the district.
Existing 1I2-block segment of Scott St. on south side
of Plum. R.O.W. is 20' wide, surface is unimproved
except for gravel.
Vision for a DestinnUon Actift Cetftr 41
Campus West Community CommervW District Planning Study Report
Informal "connection" between housing and
commercial services on Elizabeth Street
COMMUNITY APPEARANCE AND DESIGN
(INTEGRAL AND OVERLAPPING WITH STREET ISSUES)
The area is disjointed as a functioning district, with many disconnected
parts, e.g. the two sides of Elizabeth, housing and commercial
destinations, different segments of street sidewalk, street sidewalks
and buildings, and buildings on adjoining parcels.
The area is generally treated as suburban space with a sole site design
emphasis on vehicle access to parking lots, with neglect of other urban
design considerations and relationships.
The subdivision and development pattern creates numerous separate
on -site parking lots, with uncoordinated access and building
placement. This makes policies for continuity and connections difficult
to achieve in many areas.
Land subdivision has created relatively small, shallow parcels. Several
are 150-180 feet deep; the largest properties are under two acres. This
is a constraint to redevelopment, especially given updated standards
requiring more space for streets, landscaping, and utilities.
Aggressive arterial traffic on..Elizabeth bisects the District; thwarts
mutually supporting pedestrian activity between two sides of the street
and contributes to an overall sense of harshness for bicyclists and
Illl IVM pedestrians.
I '/.t-mile-lon blocks from Shields to City Park ar� e�too lo����;, elicit
s�veeding thwart needed north -sou access._._.
OWN
On -street parking is typically a crucial clement of urban activity
centers as described by CC District policies; but is precluded on
Elizabeth and Plum Streets by traffic engineering and bike route
Crossing Elizabeth Street considerations.
Consultants believe the nature of urban living may be shifting — more
in the direction of the livable mixed "urban village" policies for CC
Districts; strips such as Campus West are increasingly becoming
candidates for intensification and renewal.
Campus West may not continue to compete well with more complete
centers that focus on character or "place".
The area is a natural location for a place that is easy for pedestrians to
access and traverse, with high quality strectscapes providing amenities.
This would mean consolidating vehicle access and parking, yet possibly
increasing the parking supply as well (redevelopment would be the
best way to achieve goals; and it would probably depend on additional
parking.)
tpsuea 13
Campus West Community Commardat Dlstdcr Manning Study Report
5) Pulse the Development
Use key intersections (and/or major transit stops) to create walkable
cores; utilize higher densities to facilitate vertical mixed -use (3 stories
and above) and to achieve pedestrian concentrations which create an
active street in strategic places; use public investment/public-private
partnerships to create public facilities as seeds or inducements for
creating special focus areas (e.g., library, school, administrative centers;
and, use special development and public implementation tools (BIDS,
URAs, sales tax reimbursement, capital improvements) to achieve new
live -work, high -value community development.
6) lame the Tfaffic
Understand the purpose of the road - as a "seam" vs. "edge"; as a
seam - speeds <30 mph, volume/capacity accommodates the needs of
through and destination traffic, traffic includes primary destination,
stop -in and through; depending on its purpose, some traffic can be a
good thing (20,000 to 30,000/day), while too much traffic can be a
problem; transit may facilitate a role for residential, office, seasonal
retail employees; the role of pedestrians will be important in select
locations; limit vehicular and pedestrian conflicts by consolidating
driveways, connecting parcels, providing supporting roads, and
limiting median openings; and, size parking to demand, encourage
sharing.
7) Create tic Place
Create a distinct "Place Making Tool Kit" to foster concentration
points within a corridor, people are drawn to places that appeal to all
the senses - sight, smell, noise, touch and taste; educate the delivery
system to the following: the presence of people maximizes retail
health, rents and as a consequence capital value; and, a conceptualized
development co -located with other well conceptualized developments
is worth more in real estate value than a stand-alone building in a sea
of car parking. (See discussion below)
8) Diversy theClwr�acter
Improve the human scale of the street through mixed -use
developments; provide mixed -use designations in zoning; concentrate
mixed uses along larger streets, thus conserving adjacent single-family
neighborhoods; and, encourage mixed -use projects which serve to
create pedestrian usage in lieu of short -run. vehicular trips.
9) Eradicate the Ugliness
Advance the aesthetic experience of the environment - entrances,
outdoor space, and parking; improve arterial edges by introducing
medians, large nursery stock trees and green areas; improve the
pedestrian experience with sidewalks and crosswalks; introduce ample
and appropriate lighting, organized and appropriate signage, cafes and
outdoor dining; place retail and restaurant facilities close to and parallel
to the arterial road with parking behind; and, address architectural
excellence.
Markat Mal a
Z6 Campuc Wit tbmmunRy Commercief p�trkt WanfiMtg Study Report
10) Put Your Money and Regulations Where Your Policy Is
If a City expects others to invest, the City must invest; make capital
improvements that achieve multiple purposes (e.g., traffic flow,
aesthetic and environmental improvements); use public facilities as
part of your strategy (e.g., joint use); consider public purchases to deal
with parcelization and land assembly; zoning policy must implement
the strategy, including effective by -right development standards;
integrate public services and actions by multiple agencies; and, abate.
nuisances.
SUMMARY
Several demographic indicators for the Campus West Primary Trade
Area suggest steady, modest growth, based on past trends and existing
development. Still, communities throughout the Front .Range host
numerous examples of redevelopment and infill projects which have
provided the spark to enhance previous trends. The success of these
projects provides proof that slow population and household growth
should not be considered a deterrent to new investment in the Fort
Collins' Campus West area.
Campus West has the opportunity to penetrate target markets beyond
the immediate resident and student, including a large daytime
employment base, visitors, and commuters. if the area is able to
create a distinct "brand image" for itself that more consumers identify
with, and attract a mix of uses including unique destination -type uses,
it should be able to draw from beyond its primary trade area.
The Campus West area, while maintaining a significant inventory of
retail and commercial space, relative to the size of the communi is
under -stored. In other words, there are niche opportunities for select
store types which currently are not present in the area, thereby forcing
resident consumers to shop in other markets.
Based on the potential retail/service spending patterns of residents, the
trade area has the ability to support a level of retail. development
beyond what is present today, justifying its reemergence as a distinct
commercial/retail submarket within the City. Industry trends indicate
a growing demographic profile of knowledgeable and price -conscious
shoppers that are demanding a higher degree of merchandise selection,
price/value correlation and shopping convenience. Given this shopper
profile, the success of future retail development by both large chains
and small independent retailers will be dependent on their facilities
providing the most modern and strategic location., appropriate to meet
the needs of the area's demographics.
In summary, Campus West has the potential to be a unique
development opportunity — a place where live/wor.Wshop/play
activities are encouraged through increased concentrations of residents
and employees, mixing of appropriate land uses, and the creation of
pedestrian -oriented development and public streets.
Market a 27
Campus West Community CommerWai Oisrrkt Manning $, KJY Report