Cherry Creek North and Country Club Historic RNOs and TDA Colorado Cherry Creek North BID Cumulative...

Cherry Creek North and Country Club Historic RNOs andTDA Colorado

Cherry Creek North BIDCumulative Traffic Study

What CCNNA Supports and Desires

Cherry Creek economic successBID development growth & vitalityProtection and enhancement of small BID businesses

– CC uniquenessBalance – commercial & residentialSmart growth, not over-developmentManage and mitigate traffic from growthSeek transit solutionsAnnual study of traffic impact and growth

2

Cumulative Traffic Study

Review of Planned Development

4

Cherry Creek North Residential

Residential Properties Expanding in BID

Primary Residential

Area

Proposed Developments

1. East Side of Columbine (WD)

2. Columbine (Old Post Office Site)

3. Fillmore Plaza Condos

4. 1st Bank Office

5. Coors Foundation Office Building

6. 1st / Steele (NE Corner)

7. 1st / Steele (SE Corner)

8. Cherry Creek (Alameda) Triangle

Cherry Creek Shopping Center

CCN BID

6th Avenue

Colorado Blvd

York / Josephine

1st Avenue1st Avenue

12

7

8

4

5

36

CHERRY CREEKTRIANGLE

900,000 SF or 10% of BID Under Development

5

Cherry Creek North Residential

Residential Properties Expanding in BID

Primary Residential

Area

Other Areas for Future Development

9. West End of Shopping Center

10. East End of Shopping Center

11. Possible Sears Property

12. East Side of Josephine

13. Cherry Creek Square

14. 1st / Colorado Gateway

15. Bayaud Commercial

Cherry Creek Shopping Center

CCN BID

6th Avenue

Colorado Blvd

York / Josephine

1st Avenue1st Avenue

12

6

7

4

5

9 10

1312

143

8

11

15

CHERRY CREEKTRIANGLE

Mix of Proposed and Future Cherry Creek Community Developments

4+ high rise office buildings 100+ condominiums High end apartments – 905+ units

– NE 1st / Steele Corner – 175 units– SE 1st / Steele Corner – 250 units– Jackson / Cedar (CCE) – 190 units– Cherry Creek Triangle – 290 units

Shopping Center retail expansion 1+ possible hotels – 2nd Avenue & Shopping Center

6


Projection of BID Development Growth


Study LeadersTDA Colorado – Dave Leahy

CCNNA – Wayne New, Gene Hohensee, John Albers, Bob Vogel

Country Club Historic – Buzz Geller, Bob Fuller, Bill Brayshaw

Study was funded by generous donations from CCN and Country Club RNOs and their residents.


Key Questions

1. What will be the cumulative traffic effects from BID development growth?

2. What effects will growth have on parking needs in the BID?

3. What will be the specific effects on BID and neighborhood intersections?

4. How can future traffic be mitigated?

9

B I D P A R C E L M A P

Current BID Sq Ft Worksheet

11

Property # Street # Street Name Lot Sq Ft Building Sq Ft Use Year Built1 322 University 9,375 7,733 Resident 19552 300 University 12,500 4,864 Retail 19763 278 University 7,500 6,356 Office 20064 200 University 120,124 133,527 Office 19797 303 Josephine 18,675 7,039 Restaurant 20088 300 Josephine 13,250 19,180 Retail 19829 2445 3rd 13,251 6,832 Retail 199710 2414 3rd 6,250 7,038 Retail 197011 268 Josephine 12,500 0 Parking XXX12 240 Josephine 12,500 10,083 Restaurant 1971

BID Property Analysis - 2013Properties in Map Location Order

Source: Denver Property Assessment and Taxation System - June, 2013

Sample data illustration of the over 130 BID properties in Study database.


BID Property Data and Building SF Projection Method

2.575 million SF of current BID building SF 2.4 million SF of current property lot SF Comparison – Shopping Center: 1.15 million SF Projection Building Blocks:

Existing BID building SF Developments underway building / pending Identified likely development sites Surface parking lots for development Future growth for other BID properties

Time Frames – Now to 10 years; 11 to 20+ years

12

Approved BID Development Underway or Pending

13

Property # Street # Street Name Lot Sq Ft Total Build SF Planned Use Progress 2nd - 3rd24-26 200-250 Columbine 62,500 248,000 Western Devel 2013 Yes

17 245 Columbine 20,837 92,000 Sullivan/Farber 2013-4 Yes

82 175 Milwaukee 26,500 33,000 Fillmore Place Apts Underway No

96 3095 2nd 18,37595 231 St Paul 6,250

102 210 St Paul 25,000 57,000 222 St Paul Pending Yes105 150 St Paul 25,334106 100 St Paul 26,288127 128 Steele 6,845128 114 Steele 6,537129 102 Steele 6,250130 100 Steele 6,250114 149 Steele 18,923 60,000 1st Bank Phase 2 Future No

Present Approved Development Underway or Pending

2013

No

37,000Coors Found

Offices

210,000

Underway

170,000 Zocalo 2013-4

Yes

No1st Bank Tower

Other Identified BID Possible Development Project Sites

14

Property # Street # Street Name Lot Sq Ft Building Sq Ft Individ / Assemb Present Use Total BID 2nd & 3rd

10 2414 3rd 6,250 7,038 Assemble Shaver/Ram11 268 Josephine 12,500 0 Assemble Parking Lot12 240 Josephine 12,500 10,083 Assemble Restaurant27 2625 3rd 18,750 10,510 Individual CC Dance 75,000 065 235 Fillmore 18,999 20,713 Assemble Retail66 201 Fillmore 22,813 16,836 Assemble Retail85 3000 3rd 29,156 35,384 Assemble CC Square94 3000 3rd 22,325 0 Assemble CC Square

125,000

205,924205,924

167,248

Identified Possible Properties for Future Development (Individual / Assemble)

125,000

167,248

Surface Parking Lots for Development

15

Property # Street # Street Name Lot Sq Ft Building Sq Ft Present Use Progress Total BID 2nd & 3rd115 131 Steele 8,131 0 Parking XXX 32,524 092 301 St Paul 6,875 0 Parking XXX 27,500 058 315 Fillmore 6,250 0 Parking XXX 25,000 054 242 Detroit 3,125 0 Parking XXX 12,500 1250055 242 Detroit 3,125 0 Parking XXX 12,500 12500

Surface Parking Lots for Development

Future development will likely eliminate present surface parking lots.

Projection of Future BID Growth

Projected BID SF Growth – Building Blocks:1. Existing BID building SF (Actual)2. Developments underway building SF (Actual)3. Identified likely development sites lot SF X FAR (net)4. Surface parking for development lot SF X FAR (net)5. Future growth (1 lot SF less 2 – 4 lot SF) X FAR (net)

Present to next 10 years – 50% growth 11 to 20+ years – 100% build out Uses – Retail (13%), Office (39%), and Residential (48%) FAR assumption used – 3.97 (actual 250 Columbine)

16

Forecasting model is a flexible planning tool with assumptions that can be easily changed for future development, traffic, and parking

estimations. Residential development use will be a key future issue.

Future 1,377,000 sq ft

Future 2,813,000 sq ft

Total6,387,000 sq ft


Present 10 to 20+ YearsNow to 10 Years

Full BID AreaBuilding Square Feet

Surface Parking

Surface Parking

Identified Proposed468,000 sq ft

Underway/Pending 799,000 sq ft

104% increase in Floor space


7 mil

3 mil

5 mil

4 mil

6 mil

1 mil

2 mil

Squa

re F

eet



Existing BID Buildings2,575,000 sq ft



Present

Net Future Development2,753,000 sq ft

10 to 20+ YearsNow to 10 Years

Net Future Development1,377,000 sq ft






Existing BID Buildings875,000 sq ft

(January 2013)


(January 2013)

Surface Parking

Surface Parking

BID Area 2nd to 3rdBuilding Square Feet


(January 2013)




mil

1 mil

2 mil

4 mil

3 mil

Squa

re F

eet

Most significant development growth will be between 2nd and 3rd Avenues

Residential Unit Growth at 48% Use

19

FAR Used for Growth

Projections

50% BID Net Building SF

Growth

SF 48% Residential

Use

# of Apartments @ 1200 SF

# of Condominiums

@ 2000 SF

# of Units Per BID

Street (1)

3.97 FAR 2,178,000 1,045,440 871 523 87

3.00 FAR 1,645,844 790,005 658 395 66

(1) 6 Streets Used: Clayton, Detroit, Fillmore, Milwaukee, St. Paul, Steele

Residential Dwelling Unit Growth Projections2nd and 3rd Avenue

10 Year Projection and 50% Redevelopment


TDA Traffic and Parking Projections


Estimate future PM peak hour vehicle-trip growth Use counts from City’s April 2013 report Apply trip rates to net new development Compare growth to City’s 10% 20-year

Present to next 10 years – 36% increase in peak hour traffic 11 to 20+ years – 48% increase Lower residential vehicle trip ratio is key to reduced traffic. Impacts much greater than represented

• CCN and BID residential quality of life• BID customer safety and convenience

21

Residential48%

Retail21%

Office39%

Residential35%

Retail31%

Office44%

Office51%

Residential18% *

Retail13%

Gross Building Square Footage

PM Peak Hour Vehicle Trips

BID ParkingCCAP White Paper

How Land Use Type Impacts Growth in Buildings, Traffic & Parking

Future Growth Projections Using BID Development Land Use Estimates

PM Peak Hour Vehicle Trip RatiosActual BID Data: All Land Uses = 2.2 Trips/1,000 SFNational Standards: Retail = 2.71 Trips/1,000 SF

Office = 1.49 Trips/1,000 SF ... Residential = 0.52 Trips/1,000 SF

PM Peak Hour Vehicle-Trip Growth Full BID

Existing BID Vehicle Trips

5,670

Vehi

cle

Trip

s



5,670


5,670

Underway/Pending1,040

Underway/Pending1,040

Future

Identified Proposed

Future

Identified Proposed

Total8,390

Total7,720

36% increase

48% increase

PM Peak Hour Vehicle-Trip GrowthArea 2nd to 3rd


5,670

Identified Proposed

Underway/Pending


5,670


5,670


Future

Underway/Pending

Identified Proposed

Future

Total7,320

Total7,890

Vehi

cle

Trip

s

29% increase

39% increase

Parking Ratio Comparisons

Use Present Zoning White Paper CM-X-5/ 8Office 300 SF 500 SF 800 SFRetail 300 SF 333 SF 800 Sf

Residential 2 / DU 1.5 / DU 0.75 / DU

Use Present Zoning White Paper CM-X-5/ 8Office 67 40 25Retail 33 30 13

Residential 40 30 15Total Spaces 140 100 53% Reduction XXX 45% 71%

Parking RatiosBuilding Space for Each Parking Space

Required Parking Spaces & % Reduction from Present Zoning

50,000 SF Building I llustrative Parking Example5 Story Building (1- Retail, 2 - Office, and 2 Residential)

20 Residential Units - 2,000 SF Per Unit

Cumulative Parking Supply

Existing 4,020 spaces (includes 555 metered spaces)

Apply Off-street rates per CCN Area Plan (office, retail, residential) Next 10 years 5,000 more off street spaces 11 to 20+ years 6,500 more than today Metered spaces remain at 555± spaces On-street parking space deficiency and reduced

off street development parking will put traffic pressure on CCN and Country Club residential.

26

27

Total4,020

Metered Spaces

Public Garages1,910

Private Garages1,550

Existing Parking4,020

Underway/Pending

Future2,410 Spaces

Identified Proposed

Total 9,020

124% increase in

Parking Spaces

Total 11,570

188% increase in

Parking Spaces

Future4,830 Spaces

Underway/Pending

Identified Proposed


Existing 10 to 20+ YearsNow to 10 Years

Parking Space Growth1

Full BID1. CCAP White Paper Rates

Par

king

Spa

ces

28

Total4,020

Metered Spaces

Public Garages1,910

Private Garages1,550



Underway/Pending

Future2,410 Spaces

Identified Proposed

Total 8,060

100% increase in

Parking Spaces

Future4,830 Spaces

Underway/Pending

Identified Proposed

Total 10,060

161% increase in

Parking Spaces

Existing 10 to 20+ YearsNow to 10 Years

Parking Space Growth1

Area 2nd to 3rd

1. CCAP White Paper Rates

Par

king

Spa

ces

Parking Supply Shortage

Parking Requirement

Now to 10 Years 11 to 20+ years

CCAP White Paper 5,000 7,550

CM-X 5-8 2,690 4,055

“Shortage” if All C-MX 5-8

2,310 3,495

CCAP White Paper Ratios vs. C-MX 5-8 Ratios(Parking Spaces)

Full BID Parking Supply Growth Comparison

An appropriate zoning parking ratio will be critical for managing traffic and providing customer service and residential quality of life.

Intersection Traffic Analysis

Intersection Level of Service; A through F PM Peak Hour

Existing LOS based on City of Denver traffic counts; January 2013

Future LOS with 10-year BID development projections

Possible mitigation of LOS F conditions

2ndAve

Existing January 2013 PM Peak Hour

Traffic Operation Level of ServiceExisting Laneage

Un

ivers

ity Jo

sep

hin

e

A

B

DD

DA

CD

31

2ndAve

Projected 10-Year BID DevelopmentPM Peak Hour

Traffic Operation Level of ServiceExisting Laneage

Un

ivers

ity Jo

sep

hin

e

A

C

DD

DA

DD

32

33

Existing Laneage University/2ndAve & Josephine/2ndAve


Traffic Operation Level of Service& Critical Queues

3rd Ave

1

Un

ivers

ity Jo

sep

hin

e Cla

yto

n

B

C

BCB

B

C

B

B

D

1 Queue occasionally reaches back to Josephine St.

34

B

AB

A

Colu

mb

in

e

3rd Ave

Un

ivers

ity Jo

sep

hin

e Cla

yto

n

B

C

CCB

B

C

B

B

D

35

B

BC

B

Colu

mb

in

e

Underway -- BID Development 18% increase in PM Peak Hour Volume


1 Queues often reach back to Josephine St.

1

3rd Ave

Un

ivers

ity Jo

sep

hin

e Cla

yto

n

B

D

CDB

A

D

B

B

E

36

C

BC

B

Colu

mb

in

e

Underway & Identified -- BID Development 25% increase in PM Peak Hour Volume


1

1 Queues often reach back to Josephine St. and beyond

3rd Ave

1

Un

ivers

ity Jo

sep

hin

e Cla

yto

n

B

F

DCB

B

F

B

C

F

37

C

BD

B

Colu

mb

in

e

Projected 10-Year BID Development 35% increase In PM Peak Hour Volume


2 3

1 Queues will exceed capacity for much of the peak period.

2 Queues may exceed capacity for much of the peak period

3 Delay greater than 50 seconds., diversion likely

3rd Ave

Un

ivers

ity Jo

sep

hin

e Cla

yto

n

B

F

DCB

B

CB

C

C

38

C

BD

B

Colu

mb

in

e

1

1 Delay at westbound Clayton (assume no mitigation) will be greater than 50 seconds, some diversion likely

Projected 10-Year BID Development36% increase in PM Peak Hour

Traffic Operation Level of Service

With Common Mitigation at Univ. & Josephine, see next slides

CC

Mitigation at University/3rd AveRemove Parking on westbound 3rd Ave to add separate Left Turn

lane

39

Mitigation at Josephine/3rd AveRemove Parking on westbound 3rd Ave to add separate Right Turn lane

40



41

3rd Ave

Ste

el

e

B

B

A

B

B

AB

BS

t.

Pau

l

3rd Ave

Detr

oit

B

B

A

B

42

3rd Ave

Ste

el

e

C

C

B

C

C

BC

BS

t.

Pau

l

3rd Ave

Detr

oit

C

D

B

B

Projected 10-Year BID DevelopmentPM Peak Hour


The represents acceptable operating conditions for these intersections

Zoning and Traffic Mitigation Issues & Concerns

Balance – How will BID C-CCN Zoning changes maintain the essential balance between commercial development and neighborhood quality of life?

Development – Can future traffic be managed by C-CCN Zoning changes and PUD use?

One Way Streets – Will BID 2nd and 3rd Avenues and 1st to 6th Avenue streets be considered as future one way streets?

Neighborhood Parking – Will the City try to reduce neighborhood street parking to widen streets and expedite traffic flow?

Transit – What CCN transit options should be considered to improve car traffic?

Future Use of Study

Utilize cumulative traffic study analyses in zoning and transit discussions.

Monitor building development use to understand whether residential use is maintained close to 48%.

Analyze future traffic mitigation options and solutions.

Seek acceptance and use of Cumulative Traffic Study Model for future traffic planning.

Seek a common strategy on future transit development of the Cherry Creek Community

45

Questions & Feedback

Cherry Creek North and Country Club Historic RNOs and TDA Colorado Cherry Creek North BID Cumulative...

Documents

Transcript of Cherry Creek North and Country Club Historic RNOs and TDA Colorado Cherry Creek North BID Cumulative...