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