February 5, 2020MONTAVA PUD POSITION PAPER

Project Feasibility. City Council should not grant final approval of the Montava PUD unless evidence has been presented demonstrating that development in accordance with the PUD phasing plan is reasonably feasible. Once the PUD is approved, with 25-year vested rights and a metro district, the developer obtains certain development rights (zoning and land use) and an expectation that development will be allowed to proceed in a timely manner. The developer’s lenders and investors have that same exception.

At a meeting on January 24, City traffic engineers agreed that the Turnberry Road / Suniga Drive connection is a critical traffic mitigation project to provide residents of Montava safe and convenient access to commercial services, such as a full service grocery store, and reduce additional traffic generated by Montava on Country Club Road. City engineers stated that completion of the Turnberry Road / Suniga Drive connection would require significant funding from developers, in addition to Montava, and the City.There are significant uncertainties and complexities regarding the construction of the Turnberry Road / Suniga Drive connection that make it impossible to estimate when it will be in place:

A. Cost and funding sources;B. Connection must cross private property in Larimer County;C. More than 2 miles of right-of-way must be obtained from private property owners; andD. Connection must cross two significant canals: the Larimer and Weld Canal and the Lake

Canal.Figure 1 illustrates the scale and complexities associated with construction of the Turnberry Road / Suniga Drive connection.

of 1 6

Montava

Suniga DriveN. L

eMay

Ave

nue

N. T

imbe

rline

Roa

d

Col

lege

Ave

nue

E. Vine DriveGreat Western Railroad

Turnberry Rd / Suniga Dr Connection City Limits

Larimer County

City of Fort CollinsCity of

Fort Collins

City of Fort Collins

City of Fort Collins

City

of F

ort

Col

lins

Larimer County

Larimer CountyLarimer County

Larimer County

Larimer County

City of Fort

Collins

Turn

berr

y R

oad

Railroad Overpass

Country Club Road

Mt. Vista Drive

Figure 1

February 5, 2020

Current Status of Turnberry Road / Suniga Drive Connection: In an email dated January 31, Dan Woodward, Interim Capital Projects Manager, explained that at this time there are no funds to further design beyond approximately 10%. There is no timeline for when this could actually be constructed as those funds would need to come through City Council and formal budget processes. City staff is only now beginning to work with a private consultant to look at feasibility and preliminary design options. Questions:

1. Is it feasible to anticipate that the Turnberry Road / Suniga Drive connection will be in place within the next 10 - 15 years?

2. If total funding was available today, what is a reasonable time frame for completion of project design, right-of-way acquisition, and the project?

3. Is it reasonable to anticipate that development will be allowed to proceed in a timely manner when there is no timeframe for when the major street extension mitigation measures called for in the developer’s Master TIS to meet the City’s Level of Service (LOS) standards for transportation will be in place?

4. Does City staff anticipate having to grant exceptions to the City’s Level of Service Standards for transportation in order to recommend approval of subsequent Preliminary Development Plans?

Developer Expectations. The developer has stated that he plans to start construction of Phase 1A some time in 2021. That means that the developer certainly anticipates submitting Preliminary Development Plan applications prior to the Turnberry Road / Suniga Drive connection being in place. The developer expects, and rightfully so, that subsequent PDP applications will be processed in accordance with provisions in the City’s development code.

City’s Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance: As stated in Section 3.7.3 of the City’s development code, the fundamental purpose for the adequate public services standards is “to establish an ongoing mechanism which ensures that public facilities and services needed to support development are available concurrently with the impacts of such development”. This purpose statement is consistent with the following City Council policy statement: “Development will not be permitted where it cannot be adequately serviced by critical public facilities and services” (source, Fort Collins Transportation Master Plan 2004, pg. 2-5). Transportation facilities are included in the term public facilities. However, Section 3.7.3 also includes provisions for granting exceptions to the stated purpose. Building permits may be issued if the Director determines that the street improvements necessary to meet the City’s Level of Service standards are “not reasonably related to and proportional to the impact of the development …”. Certain types of guarantees are required to ensure that the necessary improvements are made sometime in the future, but the reality is that the improvements will not be in place concurrent with the impacts.

The practice of issuing building permits before the street improvements are in place to meet the City’s Level of Service standards for transportation is generally based on the assumption that the detailed traffic impact studies required at the PDP level will demonstrate that the necessary

of 2 6

February 5, 2020improvements are “not reasonably related to and proportional to the impact of the development”. This assumption may be valid in cases where the new development is contiguous to existing urban level development supported by an existing urban level street network. This assumption is false with respect to the Montava PUD, due to its located in a rural area with only a basic 2-land rural road network and the unique traffic issues associate with the Great Western Railroad crossings.

The practice of issuing building permits prior to street improvements being in place to comply with the City’s street standards is the norm in the City. This process allows the City to collect street impact fees for each new dwelling unit to help pay for traffic mitigation projects in the future.However, this process is fatally flawed with respect to the Montava PUD. The street mitigation measures called for in the Master TIS, including the Turnberry Road / Suniga Drive connection, will not be in place for years if they are delayed until new homes in Montava have paid a sufficient level of street impact fees. Until then, the City will approve development in Montava by granting exceptions to the City’s Level of Service standards for transportation. As long as these approvals occur prior to the Turnberry Road / Suniga Drive connection being in place, this process will unquestionably have significant impacts on the existing rural road network, particularly Country Club Road.

Question: Is it reasonable to assume that Phases 1A and 1B and subsequent phases, as shown on the Montava Phasing Plan, will meet the stated fundamental purpose for the adequate public services standards, “to establish an ongoing mechanism which ensures that public facilities and services needed to support development are available concurrently with the impacts of such development?

As initial phases of the PUD move into the Preliminary Development Plan (PDP) process, the Planning Commission will be required to make certain findings regarding traffic impacts in order to grant approval.

Question: Given the rural nature of the existing street network and extensive street mitigation measures called for in the Master TIS, is it feasible to assume that initial Preliminary Development Plan applications will meet the requirement that the development be connected to a street that meets the City’s Level of Service standards for transportation, and if so, what street would that be?

Short Term Impacts. If the Turnberry Road / Suniga Drive connection is not in place when new homes are built in Montava, travel routes for new residents to access the rest of Fort Collins will be limited to either N. Timberline Road or Country Club Road. Country Club Road will be the most direct route to access a full scale grocery store and other regional commercial services.

Note: At a meeting on February 4, City staff explained that traffic delays associated with the railroad crossings at N. LeMay Avenue and N. Timberline Road are not factored into the calculations of Level of Service (LOS). Therefore, the LOS classifications discussed in Section A, below, do not accurately reflect traffic delays often experienced at this intersection.

A. N. Timberline Road: According the the Montava Master TIS, congestion at the intersection of N. Timberline Road and E. Vine Drive is currently at a LOS D, which generally means that the

of 3 6

February 5, 2020intersection is approaching unstable flows. To avoid this congestion, and long delays at the railroad crossing, residents often turn right on E. Vine Drive to access N. LeMay Avenue. The N. LeMay Avenue / E. Vine Drive intersection is currently at a LOS E, which generally means that the intersection is subject to extreme congestion, and very high delays and long queues unacceptable to most drivers (Source: Table 4 - Existing Weekday Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service). The City’s general LOS intersection standard is level D. The N. LaMay Avenue over pass at E. Vine Drive and the Great Western Railroad would mostly eliminate traffic congestion at this intersection. According to City staff, $12 million has been appropriated by City Council for this project. Total project cost is estimated to be $24 million. The remaining $12 million is subject to approval by City Council in future budget hearings. Therefore, City staff is unable to provide any certainty regarding completion of the overpass project. Conclusions:

1. The LOS D classification for the N. Timberline Road and E. Vine Drive intersection does do reflect the true level of traffic congestion or public safety hazard at that intersection.

2. Due to the severe traffic delays at the N. Timberline Road and E .Vine Drive intersection, new Montava residents will seek an alternative travel routes, other than N. Timberline Road, to access commercial services in Fort Collins.

3. Prior to the Turnberry Road / Suniga Drive connection being in place, this alternative travel route will be Country Club Road.

Questions: If total funding was available today, how long would it take to complete the overpass project?

B. Country Club Road: Country Club Road west of Turnberry Road and the 13 intersections between Turnberry Road and Highway 1, including the intersection of Country Club Road and N. LeMay Avenue, were excluded from the Montava Master TIS. Therefore, the Master TIS provides no information regarding existing levels of service for these intersections. Country Club Road is a two-lane rural road physically constrained by its proximity to Long Pond, adjacent homes, existing utilities and location on top of a dam. These constraints make modifications to Country Club Road necessary to accommodate additional Montava traffic unfeasible. No funding is included in the County’s 5 Year Capital Improvement Plan for improvements to Country Club Road (Source: Larimer County 2017 Transportation Mater Plan). Between 2012 and 2018 traffic on Country Club Road increased from 6,000 to 8,000 average daily traffic (ADT), a 33% increase (Source: Letter From Larimer County Transportation Engineer). Zoning for Phases 1A and 1B of the Montava PUD would allow up to 1,100 new homes. Unless new residents are provided a convenient alternative travel route to a full service grocery store, Country Club Road will experience a significant increase in traffic, possibly as much as an additional 8,250 vehicle trips per day. These additional vehicle trips would doubling the current traffic on Country Club Road (Source: Montava Master Transportation Impact Study, Table 6 - Project Trip Generation Estimates, 7.5 vehicle trip per day - multifamily)Residents in several neighborhoods adjacent to Country Club Road (e.g. Nedrah Acres, Greenbriar, Country Club Estates) must utilize Country Club Road to exit their

of 4 6

February 5, 2020neighborhoods. Doubling traffic on Country Club Road would create long delays at residential intersections and result in a threat to public safety. Questions:

1. Given that initial phases of the Montava PUD will generate significant additional vehicle trips on Country Club Road, as described above, is it reasonable to assume that the 13 intersections along Country Club Road will meet applicable Larimer County level of service and public safety standards as development commences?

2. What options does City staff considered feasible to ensure safe vehicle travel conditions on Country Club Road with the additional vehicle trips generated by initial phases of Montava?

Purpose. The information provided herein is intended to assist City Council in making an informed and reasonable decision regarding the Montava PUD. The following are recommended actions and conditions City Council is respectfully requested to consider:

Preferred Action: Postpone final approval of the Montava PUD pending more certainty regarding the feasibility of the project being developed in a timely manner in accordance with the PUD phasing plan and without the necessity of granting exceptions to the City’s Level of Service Standards for transportation facilities as set forth in Section 3.7.3 (D) (1) of the City’s development code.

Recommended Conditions of Approval: 1. Country Club Road shall not be extended into the Montava PUD. Comment: The

developer agreed to this condition at the January 14, 2020 public hearing. 2. Prior to any construction associated with the Montava PUD, a Construction Traffic

Routing Plan shall be subject to approval by the Planning Commission at a duly noticed public hearing. The plan shall disallow any construction traffic on Country Club Road. Comment: The developer stated at the January 14, 2020 public hearing that he would never allow construction traffic to be routed to Country Club Road.

3. Notice of public hearings before the Planning Commission for Montava Preliminary Development Plans shall comply with the public hearing notice requirements for the Montava PUD. Comment: There were comments by some Council members at the January 14, 2020 hearing that, due to the significant number of people who attended the hearing, they wanted to make sure the same people were notified of future Planning Commission meetings.

4. Traffic impact studies for Preliminary Development Plans in Montava shall, at a minimum, include within their study areas Country Club Road extending from Turnberry Road west to Highway 1, including all intersections along this section of Country Club Road. Comment: This condition is necessary to ensure that this section of Country Club Road is not excluded from future traffic impact studies as was the case with the Montava Master TIS.

5. No Preliminary Development Plan shall be approved by the Planning Commission unless the traffic impact study clearly demonstrates that the development complies with the City’s Level of Service Standards for transportation facilities as set forth in Section 3.7.3 (D) (1) of the City’s development code, without the Director granting

of 5 6

February 5, 2020exceptions to those standards. Comment: At the January 14, 2020 hearing, some City Council members asked City staff to come back at second reading of the ordinances with recommended conditions of approval to provide some level of certainty that subsequent PDPs would comply with the City’s Level of Service Standards with respect to transportation facilities.

I respectively request that this information be made part of the official record regarding the Montava PUD and that City staff provide answers to the questions contained herein prior to City Council taking final action on the Montava PUD.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,Greg George

of 6 6