Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPARK SOUTH PUD - MASTER PLAN - 46-88 - CORRESPONDENCE - APPLICANT COMMUNICATION• UAUGHT 40 FRYE architects July 27, 1988 Sherry Albertson -Clark ( Senior City Planner City of Fort Collins P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 RE: Park South P.U.D. Master Plan/8-14 Revised 7-26-88 Dear Sherry, Further to our meeting on 7-21-88, with Rick Endsdorf, yourself and our traffic consultants, we herewith submit three copies of our revised Master Plan, dated 7-26-88, and the Traffic Study Drawing #2 dated 7-18-88. This letter is meant as a commentary to the revised plan, but should also be read in conjunction with the Traffic Impact Study Addendum, being presented by Matt Delich. The overall layout and function of the Park South P.U.D., as Master Planned, remains the same. It is to provide a quality mixed -use planned development of neighborhood retail, service, office, commercial and residential uses, sited so as to respect both the location on major arterial and collector streets, and to be sympathetic to the established surrounding neighborhood character and land uses. Thus, the retail center at the major street intersection, and the graduated transitional uses to west and south, through commercial to residential -styled office, and then to residential homes. We contend that the basic anatomy of the plan is logical and represents the best of land -use and economic planned practices. It is clear that the frontages along Horsetooth and Manhattan are not at all suitable for residential use, given the high traffic volumes, and the vehicular noise, air and visual pollution, experienced there. The frontage on Manhattan, while experiencing less but still substantial traffic volumes, also looks out to HB Zoned Land of untapped commercial potential, and planned apartment blocks on the RP land to the south. land planning • architecture 2900 S.College Avenue Fort Collins. Colorado.80525 (303) 223-2808 • 0 Page Two It is also clear that it would be very unsociable planning to bring disparate land uses together at the land -locked west and south sectors of the Master Plan. Here we respect neighborhood uses and expectations by aligning single-family with single-family housing on the south and south west property lines, and 'soft' residential- styled one and two storied office buildings on the west property line, adjoining the senior housing in the Village at Four Seasons. This is adequately buffered and landscaped, and protected by restrictions on building on height and setback, as stated on the Master Plan. Internally we plan to buffer Office use from Retail use, with an ample landscaped green space between parcels C & D, and served by a pedestrian way linking the residential parcels to the Retail Center and Office Areas. This pedestrian way will also connect to the public sidwalks leading to the existing neighborhood to the west. Thus neighbors will be able to leave the car at home and walk to the neighborhood retail center. We feel there is a need for some further explanation of the uses proposed at the intersection of two major streets on the 11 acre Parcel 'D', titled 'Neighborhood Services/Retail Center' on the Master Plan. It is our intent to provide a neighborhood retail and services center that also has some community uses. It is to take advantage of the fine location at the Horsetooth/Manhattan intersection, and the close - proximity of the South College Regional Shopping Center. It is both to service the immediate neighborhood and to serve and intercept the high traffic volumes already on Horsetooth and Manhattan, and bound for College Avenue. The Center will not have a Grocery Store anchor, such as Safeway:- Albertsons and Steeles are just around the corner, and, in our opinion, it would be economic suicide for another such store to locate within this area. Rather, the Center will seek to attract such as Furniture Showrooms and Home Improvement Centers as anchors, and around them their allies and satelites, like Lighting, Wallcovering, Paint, Sof Furnishings, Carpet, Tile and Home Appliance Showrooms. These are large building uses, low intensity traffic generators, requiring modest parking and lower rentals then those on College, if they are to remain in good economic health. • Page Three The Center wi11 have both a community -serving, and a neighborhood -serving, function. It is not to be thought of as a Regional Center, with a Walmart or a Cub Foods. Those are Regional uses and they will certainly not locate off the South College Corridor, for obvious economic reasons. The Center might have a Homestead Furnishing or similar operator as its anchor. An anchor seeking a high -use arterial location, close to College, but enjoying the benefits of lower rents, more space, good identity and easy auto -access. The neighborhood, while also being served by the anchors described above, will be provided with handy small -scaled convenience and personal service shops, within easy walking, biking and driving distance. There may be a neighborhood convenience store with ancillary gas service and car wash facilities. There may also be restaurants, serving both the neighborhood and 'interceptor -traffic' on Horsetooth and Manhattan. Thus they will not increase traffic generation, but simply syphon -off the already passing traffic, with the possible community -benefit of removing some traffic from College. There may be a bank or credit union, a post office branch, or a liquor store outlet. A laundry, dry cleaner, hairdressing salon, florist, bike store, sporting goods sales, video store, automobile parts and spares, computer sales and schooling, photographer, health club or 24 hour emergency medical outpatient clinic. The list of potential retail uses on the Master Plan has been amended to include a junior department store, at the expense of a full-scale department store, which is unlikely to locate here in preference to a College address. The above has given you a brief description of the uses and functions planned for Park South, with particular emphasis being laid on Parcel 'D', the neighborhood services/retail center. This parcel is the highest traffic generator according to the traffic impact studies, and we are sensitive to its impact on the neighborhood and on the collector street, Manhattan. The traffic impact study has shown that the landuse density of 175,000 s.f. of retail uses on Parcel 'D' creates unacceptable levels of traffic on the collector street, and the applicant, therefore, has proposed a 150 reduction in building floor area to 148,000 s.f.. In addition, floor areas on commercial/office Parcels 'B' & 'E' have been reduced an overall 5,000 s.f.. So the total reduction proposed is from 275,000 s.f. down to 243,000 s.f. Page Four But it is in Parcel 'D' that the greatest reduction of traffic generation is effected. Our consultants have re-evaluated their criteria and calculations of trip -generation, in the light of the more specific land uses described above, but are confident that national mean average criteria are well-founded and applicable to Park South. Further to this reduction in floor area density, we propose a left hand turn entry only from Horsetooth at the major entrance to the site. You are referred to the traffic addendum which validates the improved traffic circulation that this offers, and the relief given to the collector, Manhattan. You are also referred to the attached copies of the Master Plan Traffic Study Drawing No. 2 by Vaught*Frye Architects. This illustrates to a scale of 1 inch = 50 feet the geometrics of both Horsetooth and Manhattan, in some detail. It shows the increased radii at entries on Horsetooth, and the continuous right -turn lane along the entire frontage, with the five -lane configuration reducing to three -lane south of Dennison, on Manhattan. It shows how the left -turn lane works and how there will be landscaped median islands at the main entrances for ease of ingress and egress to the site. With the above geometric design, the land use redefined, and the building floor area reductions, we are confident that acceptable levels of traffic on the collector, Manhattan, have been planned for, and that the street is adequate to the task. This seems only fair in light of the improvements along Horsetooth and Manhattan already incurred at great expense by the owner of the Park South Property. It remains for us to point out that while the applicant has responded and is sensitive to the criticism of too much traffic on the collector street, he feels that the onus for this situation should also be equally shared by the other planned developments at the Horsetooth/Manhattan intersection, i.e. Warren Farm P.U.D. Master Plan and the H.B. Zoned land to the east of Manhattan. He feels that their potential land -use and traffic impacts should be re-evaluated in the light of their recent histories and reasonable and workable land -use expectations. He asks that City Staff review again what are to be the acceptable land -uses and building floor areas for these two developments. The following notes are compiled with this aim in mind. Warren Farm P.U.D. Master Plan was approved by the City in 1986, and no commercial development has yet taken place. We understand the present owners are critically re -appraising the approved Master Plan, and may be seeking to reduce the intensity of land uses. • • Page Five The gross area of this land is 57 acres, of which 43 acres are planned residential, Multi- and single-family, 533 dwelling units in all. The remaining 14 acres along Horsetooth at the Meadowlark intersection are for offices and commercial uses in the sum of 190,000 s.f.. The Commercial Tract 'D', with a gross area of 10.29 acres, proposes 150,000 s.f. of building. The Net Developable Area is probably not much more than 9. acres given the serpentine routing of the Mercer Canal through the tract. If this is accepted then the expectation of 150,000 s.f. on 9 acres of land, a 38% ratio of building to net developable site, in our opinion, is over -optimistic. It is our feeling that a still very optimistic building coverage of about 120,000 s.f. (a 20% reduction from the Master -Plan) is a more realistic expectation for Tract 'D'. This still represents a very high 31% ratio of building square footage to net developable land. The HB-Zoned land, east of Manhattan has a gross area of 16.5 acres, but the actual net developable land, after the Mercer Canal and public streets have been allowed for is about 13.8 acres. In 1988, the Minerva P.U.D. was approved by the city for 252,000 s.f. (211,650 s.f. offices; 37,350 s.f. retail; 3,400 s.f . restaurant) . This represented a 41% ratio building to net land. A very high expectation indeed. The history of the last 7 years has proven that it was quite unrealistic! of course, the HB land can be developed with 'as -of -right' uses, such as retail, restaurants, offices, churches, child care centers, housing, subject to certain zoning conditions. Also, the HB land can be developed in any land use under the P.U.D. ordinances. However, any 'change of use' from the present use (vacant land), or any subdivision of the land, or any new curb cut on Horsetooth or Manhattan would necessitate some kind of city review, be it a special review, a subdivision review, or a traffic impact review called for by the City Transportation Engineer. At that point the questions of land -use, density and traffic generation would have to be addressed, just as they are at Park South, and the expectations of building square foot coverage critically appraised. Acknowledging the above, it is our feeling that a still very optimistic building floor area of about 200,000 s.f. (a 20% reduction from the Minerva P.U.D.) is a more realistic expectation for the HB site, knowing the impact on traffic generation in the area. This still represents a very high 33% ratio of building area to net land. • Page Six In addressing the concern that there will be excessive traffic on Manhattan we have advised our traffic consultants of the reduced floor areas and land use specifics shown on the revised Park South Master Plan. Also, we have asked them to consider a reduction of the expectations of land use and building floor areas on the two adjacent developments, as decribed above. You are again referred to the Traffic Impact Study Addendum to see how we propose to reduce traffic on Manhattan, to acceptable collector street levels. The Addendum addresses both traffic along the immediate frontages of Park South and traces the overall impact of traffic into the neighborhoods both North and South of Horsetooth. We submit that the measures, illustrated on the attached plans and analysed in the Traffic Impact Study, and taken by the applicant in response to City Staff's concerns of excessive traffic and too heavy land use, have now been effective in reducing to acceptable levels traffic adjacent to the site and the immediate neighborhoods. We, therefore, ask that City Staff support the revised Park South P.U.D. Master Plan, as a well -reasoned and logical, mixed -use development, that is both sensitive to the surrounding established neighborhood, and to the realities of its location along high -traffic arterial and collector -street frontages. Sincerely, Tony Hughes VAUGHT*FRYE Enclosure TH/kc ARCHITECTS cc: Rick Endsdorf, City Transportation Engineer Matt Delich Bob Leigh Marc Middel Bill Strickfaden