HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012 Ordinance No. 049ORDINANCE NO . dJ
SERIES OF 2012,
BY AUTHORITY
COUNCIL BILL NO. 47
INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL
MEMBER GTI,I.IT
A'< ORDINANCE APPRO\IIN(., TH£ OXFORD STATION To•--. f'LANN"ED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (PUD), DY CAl'IT ALP ARTNf:RS LOCATED .'\ T OXFO R.D A VENUE AND
SOUTH NAVAJO STREET, IN THE cm· OF ENGLEWOOD , COLORADO.
WHEREAS, LCP OXFORD LLC own<rs of the property?.! Oxford Avcm 1e and South Navajo
Street, Englewood, Colorado , submitted an application ,o rezone the property from 1-1 (Light
lndustnal 10 Pla·med Uttll Development (PUD) to allov. residential and commercial uses ; and
WHERE"-S, tltls propcny bas been occupied by Manin Plastics sU1ce 1920 o111d has been zoned
1-1 Light ~,dustrial since being annexed into the City of Eng lewood in 1970 ; 11nd
WHEREAS, the Oxfcrd Station TOD is a 3.504 acre site with the proposed mixed-use
development of residential and commercial uses ; and
WHEREAS, the Oxford Station TOD PUD will change the Pcnnitted Principal Use lo allow
multiple uml residential. commercial and pubhc uses; and
WllEREAS, the Oxford Station TOD PUD propose s for -lcnsc apanmculs , assoc iated parking
and recrea tional facili ;cs in , development designetl to benefit from the adjacent transit facilities ;
and
WHEREAS , the Planaing and Zoning Commission held Public Hearing on August 7, 2012; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission found th.11 the pro;iosed rcwnin~ is
consist:nt with the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Oxford TOD PU!) has en modified to include the maximum height :imitation
of I 00 fee t as recommended by thePranning a Zoning Co mmi ss ion ;
NOW , THEREFORE, l:ll:: IT O!WAlNELJ l:l THE CITY t..:OUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ENrn .F.woon, CO I..ORAOO , AS FOLLOWS :
Secqon I. Th e Oxford Station TOD Piarme<l Unit De velo pment (PIJD), for p1opert y lccated at
Oxford Avt11ue and Sou th Na\'ajo Street, in the Ci ty of Eng lewo od, Colorado, attached hereto as
Exhibi t A and the PVD Site Plan attached hereIO as Ex.liibit B, are hereb y approved .
Intr oduce d, read in full, and passed on fir st read in g on th e 4th day of Septe mb er, 20 12 .
11 b I
l'uhlishc d by T ,tlc as a Hill for an Orclina11cc 111 th o Cily 's official newspaper on th: 7th cl ;•y o f
September. 2012 .
Publ is hed as a Bill for an Ordinn11cc 011 the Ci ty's ol'licial websit : bcginni11g on the 51 h 1lay of
~cp tcmbcr, 20 12 for th :rty (10) 1la ys .
A Public Hc:irillg was held on Scr,tcmhcr 17, 201:!.
lh:;,d by litlc and pa ssed nn fin,11 n.:mlini; 0 11 1111: I :;1 da y or Oc 1nh :r, 2012 .
l'uh li shcd by ti tle m the Clly '.i. nflicial 11ewspi..1I>cr ;,s Orcl in:i ncc No .~ Ser i<.!:; of 2012 , fi ll
the St h day of October, 2012 .
Published by title on the Ci ty's official web site beginning on the 3rd day of
Or.tn h <:r . 201 2 for thirl y 00) day s.
I, Loucris:,;. A. F.ll is, City Clerk of the City of Englewood, Colorndo , hereby cc,tify Uta! the
nbove and foreg oing is/'tJfUC cnpy nf the OrC:initncc passed ri n final rc.,ding and pubE sh e:d by
titk as Orcli11oncc Nn. T.L , Series or 20 1 :?:.
OXFORD STATl')N TOD
LITTLETON CAPITAL PARTNERS
·,•Jr.{'.l, .. 14,,,,.«f.•.•
OXFORD STATION TOD
LITTLETON CAPITAL PARTNERS ,..__i,..,.,., .• , .. ,,, ... I(~!
-.. _,,_: __ ..,., .. · ..... .::. ·:. ·-·------.. ·-···-········
.. , ... _ .......... ~ .. -
. .. :.::::·.:.::.. : · .-._:·· .. · .. :. ::·;·: ....
·•· ., .. _,.,. ........ -.. -
:·~ --••••-•••h --~• .. , •.:•,•.,--::.::•:•••••
· .... : ~---· ...
.' _ ............ ·······-· .
____ :-.. ., __ -:.:-,.: ... · ......... .
_ ~. :}i4;1f~tf ~}}i~J::-
.• F!fl{;f,f ,c
i))'.~":.'/a' ,:.:;::-=;i):,-c,
..... ·-· -·:· .-.: '.:. ::.::,.-·:.; ~ .
·, .. :~:.:.' .:·_·_ .~: .. · .. -~ -:;::·~--. ·:.:~--· ..
11' II r:#o , A' I ~ •
.. aJII ........
am
2of 3
OXFORD STATION TOD
UTTLETO~.SA:~!I fl ~.fARTNERS
., ............ . n .......... ,.
HUM
PHlilH
POLI AKH!"CTS
OXFORD STATION TOD
LITTLETON CtP,.(°!:,~L PARTNERS
,·.•: IV 'Vj -. -·-1 ..
OXFORD STATION TOD
LITTLETON Ct ~.\""f~L PARTNERS
L :Jc.:.,:__
_I
I
.'t. ·''·,
~
. ' n
111r•r o;,fJ>,I
~ ..... • ... :q,
..
OXFORD STATION TOD
LITTLETON Ct.\~.(:~L PARTNERS
1·:--.. ___ ··----
OXFORD STATION TOD
LITTLETON CAPITAL PARTNERS
~ •• ,.,.ll ~._.,,
OXFORD STATION T.O .D .
LITTLETOt:J .f A~!T,~~-,PARTNERS
....
' _j
TCK·
1:._:-:·-..:
l'l.t1
POLI
AIICll!ffCU
s or B
OXFORD STATION TOD
LITTLETON CAPITAL PARTNERS <\JIMC..,_A ,,
6 of B
OXFORD STATION TOD
LITTLETON CAPITAL PARTNERS -.-: ~ ' . .,..,
: '""'
'•"''
HUM
PHliiES
POLI
Affll!"CTI
7 of 6
. I
l
I
,J
OXFORD STATION TOD
LITTLETON CAPITAL PARTNERS
I 1· .
'' ''
....... !• ~•, I
1 Er .-
---i---
I
.~,, .. ,.1 , ... " •. .,, ... , ., .. "
''•'1 "•'"
HUM
PHlilES
POLI
ARCN!"CTI
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
DATE : Sep1ember 4, 2012 AGENDA ITEM : SUBJECT : Ordin,111ce rezoning Oxiord
S1ation TOD from Light Industrial (l-1I to
11 a i Planned Unil Deve lopment (P UD)
INITIATED BY : STAI,-SOURCE : Audra L. Kirk, Plann er I
Community Dt>veloprnenl
COUNCIL GOAL AND PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION
There has be en no previous Council action cnncr rn ing th e prnposed Oxfo rd Slation Transit Oriented
Development Pldnn ed Unil Developrnenl.
PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
The Planning and Zoning Commission considered lhe Ox fo rd Stal ion TOD PUD al a Public Hearing on
Augusl 7, 2012. The Commission co nsidered publi c l esl irn ony and voted 8 to Oto forward the proposed
rezoning lo PUD lo Cily Council with a recommended actl ori for approva l with the fo ll owin g condition:
I . The maximum height li mita 1io11 be 100',
This limitation ha~ been included in 1h e Deve lopment Standa rds for lhl! PUD District Pla n.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Stafi recommends that Council approve the bill for ,111 refinan ce re,oning 1he Oxinrd Sl"rion TOD from
1.i ghl lndrislria l (l-1) •o PUD on first rea .uf:. Staff f11rlhe1 rernmrrHm rh lh al Council se l Se'.llember 17, 2012
as the date for Publi c Hea rin g to c-un~id !1r lE•<;r1111 nn y n11 tli e proposed rcz 1g.
BACKGROUND
The Planned Unit Developmen l Is a re zo n111g proces, 1h;,t es lab.ishes specilic wning and site planning
crileria to meel 1he nee ds of a specifi c dc•·,e lup111en t proposal !hat mav not be accommodaled wit hin
exis lin g zoning dcvclopmcnl reg ul alions. \ l'UD re 1.oning provide, lhe oppo rtJn ity for un ified
deve!op menl control fo r mulliple proµe11 ie, c,r 111u l1ipl e uses .
lhrs property rs a J.oU4 ,iet e si te oc c upr cd by ~•,a,1111 l'la,ttcs srn ce 19 20 . The sit e was rece n tl1• purchased
by th e applican t The p.1rcel h.,s bct•n zoned 1-1 Ligh t lndu slrial sin ce be ing annexed into the Cily of
Englewood in 1970 .
l'UDOVl'l!VIEW
The ()...;fo rd S1;1tion TOD PL.D ..ir O:do1d Avenue and So u1li Na v,1j,; S11cc t \-\111 1.k 111 uc th ..: Pc 11111 11 ed
Pr in e. ip,1I U !>l~~ lo ;1llovv 1rn1lliple unit H:si d enli.,I u ;es . 01lwr allo wc:d U $C!:. 0 1 llw l'l 11 ) ,,.,, o utlined un :I1· lht•
TJ<J le of All owed Uses i11 1h;, Wrill en S1,,1em enl.
Tli~ p ro p O~'~•d PUD will co 11t,1i11 2'.17. fn r-1 ... ;i .._~ ;-ip ;1r h1 w 111 •; Tl,.,"1• will h1• 111 1w 11 l 111il di 11w, 11 1,,t iUP r 11rn11•1 ·1t •d
.1 1 fl oor~ 1 1i1ro ugl1 5. The Planni1 1g ;11 1cl 7..1111inu C (ll 'ltlllS!--11111 l f!qlH'',1€:d 111 ,11 ,i h1•i ul11 l11,11l ,1t 1o n o r 10 11' Iii..:
se l .:,s i\ c: •diti :-,11 o f ,1ppnJVt,I. In adcl1li o n to lh l:' n nt~ ,irrl l\\'o tout r1 p ,11 1r 11 ·11\:i , lh l' :,1l t: wil l .il :,u i:c.ml ,\111
p.1rk111 g fu 1 the unit~, i i puul and reu-e fl :10 11 ~p,1 u!.
The p ,1rkin r, in th e pro post•1 PUO w ill h e I s p \,c ,~ lw l'Vtiry lltul , ,1ud v,..,I1111 p,11 l<11 1g a l I sp au: for C'vc ry 5
u 11its. Tl,e :1 Ino L1111 o f requir ed sp t1cc s would be 252 rr si dcnl p;u ~h,g sp :1u ::, ,in d !i 1 \d~it o r padd11g spa ce!>
fo r " 101,11 nf 303 space s. The applicant has provded ,, s1 1e ()Ian w1 1h ,, pa rk 1n1: charl 11ml ind r:,11 .. , 1ha1 a
1c,1;1I o f V~S !~p aces w o uld h e provide d lhf!' UDC rp q111n .. r, 1 :; ,;p ,11 "" w•1 11 11 11 , n r :, 1n 1.i l nf ·n H. Ahh n11~h
lhe p,op ose d p ,u ki11 g 1s 43 fewer sp.1 c c s th .111 Ci l y 1c quirc.•m c 111 •., ~1.,H is 1 .. 11i,.:i1>cl tl ,,11 ll11••1 r.o w ill he sufficie nt
parking fr11 1esid e n1s. l\cc es s to rt!s irlent p,1rkin g ,111 1h ~1 1c w ill be 011 lrn ll •U b y ,1 g.ih:. Rcs idc111 :; oi lhc
1m,p<1S<·!d ,fov1•!ll lp 111 ~111 V✓i ll 11::c.:t'iVL' 1.11 •L· ,u t t i:,!, 1.,11tf tu tl11 ~ 1 •:,1t lt:1 ,1 1•1111•11 1~ .111•,1~ 111 ·1 I 11 :1h1H)111 and w ill :,e
requm!d l o p;1 y ror adrliliun al sp aces. Tl 1is p,11'k ing s11 n1 ;.•m• w,1, c 1',111f'I 1\1,11 p .1 rkin r, dt1111,1n I w ill nu t exceed
th e ,iv.,il.,blc s 11pplv A ll g111-?s l p,1rl<in 14 will IJL' w 11lu11 tht-• pro1 !!ri v, 11111 w ill not 1t•q 1111" .i p ,1rk111 g access
c:;ud
The o n ei n al l.1n dsc Jpin e plt\11 pro\iid;,,rf In 11,p l'l i\1111 111,.; =\ll d /1111111 ~ C-·111111 11 -:~1011 d1cl not s hri w ,1 L;mdsca~w
C a lculation Ch 2rt. Al th:it 1i111u it w as u r cl r.:ar w h ~:lh t:!1 11,c p, p ~'"'ti l;111 cb c ;1p1 n 13 1111•1 Cit v ~l:mcbrds . ThE:!
nppllc ant h ,1s p1 ovid ~d an upcla1ed Lc1 nds:api11g Pl,,n (:;hec it r"i of II In L'(Hh11 A ) 1h a1 ,h,Jw ~; tl1at tl w provide d
la1nJ st.:,q .n1g ~Xl.t~t'd~ 1l1t! 11.:qu i11.:.:U ,1111 u1 111 1, iu l,u:1 1 .ll L'<1, 11 d rn ,111 ;11.1I.
T he pro p o se d signage in th e PUD would all o·..v 2 sq11arc fr·t·•I ol s•~~llJ Ae fo r l"ilt.:11 li11 e;1r fo o t of street
fron1ag e. Tlu s proposed a .. ount of sign ag e could be lip lo I J, "t11are feie l l,ir ger 1h,111 1he cu11·c nl sign code
would all ow. T l,ere are not a m ax imum numb er o f si ijns !h at wu uld b e ;1ll 0'-Vt·!d.
Al 1hc Pl .:mning .,nd Zoning Commisst()n public he,1ri 11g, tr affi c 1111 p,1 c ts ,md p e cl es tri;m acc ess were raised
i s , o n cerns. Tiu: trnffi c impact a r,aly ~is concludc:f thc1 1 th e dcvclnpmc nl w o uld h,W <! ,1 hn1 11ed imp.1 ct on
d1 ~ suno undi11 ~ s t11.:!e l 11~1wu1k. AcLurtli11~ 10 lli t-1t ciffic im p ,,c l 1m,1 ly"is, lhf• ft11t11 e le ... e l of service ;i t the
O:o.:fo rd/Navajo inll~1scc 1ior would be improved w ith th e ,1 ddi11 011 or p rotc ct(.'d /p c nnis si ve lc h turn ph asing
fu r 11 u r1hl1111111d lcfl turns o nto w cs tb u und U xl ur d. Public \o\lo rks s1.1fl rec0111rn e 11ds munitonns th e
c r,11ges 1:·.m le v els al this inte rsectio n i n thP future 111 u rd i.:r lu ilddn!1,,, th e rnnttN at tlhlt tim e. ·rti e
o!l l,li cJni's traffi c cons ullant ha s "'s pw,ded 10 staff 1r:1Hi c i111 p,1r t c o1111n en1s (alla ched ) Jnd lhe lraffic
iP 1J ,1c t ,:m alysis is b e i:lg re vise d bi1sed l ll\ th (....,t.' c 111nir11:.'11 1'> ·n u:.> reque~l e d chanrws w ill not result in
sig,,ifican tly diffl!1r n1 concl u!i io n~ cu nc..-111 i11g 11 .1tli , i1 np,1<..l!i.
Pe des1ri an .:1c cess from the sou1h 10 lhL· Ox fu ··d H,;hl r,1ll st.11 1011 is C:L1r1 ently a d1 .i lle11gc . Ther e is 11 u
pedestri an crosswalk on 11 ,e w es l leg ,,r lh c 1n11•1 scchon du e 10 l:i~ high lev el of lruc k lraHic !urn ing lef;
from Na vajo. The 1raffic i111pa ct anal ys is reco 1111111,ml 1 es 1,1 bli shing 1his crossw,1lk if 1he leh lum phas ing
nol e d above is impleme nled . The sign,11 ph,1s ing ,111alvsis nee d, lo be co mple1 e d and conclu sions agreed
lo by Publi c Work s staff I lntil this n r rnrs . Pnli lir Wor ks slaff ha, co ncPrns ahoul es lablishing lhis
c ro~swal k. In .1rlc.fi1ion, a propose d "bLd b-o ul" at th o so ut hw esl co rner o ( th e Oxford/N;w.ijo intersection
rais ed a concern about crenting ,1 0 111lict w ith ll'll ck, ll.un lng right or1to Nav ,1jo . This ''bulb-o ut" has b een
rec omm ended 10 he dele1ed .
Pedestrian connections are being sIudied as part of the siation area planning proce ss u,rrenllv underway
and recommen dat ions for im provements will be forthcoming. The applicant is involve d in Ihe ;tat,on ar e,;
p la nning process and has indicated a des ire to accommudale reason abl e requests for improvem ents
affecting the Sl1bjecI property, including improvements akmg NavaJo . Improvi ng pedestrian access to the
Oxford light rail stali on does not and should not rest so lely with this app licant. Dec isions regarding
pedestrian improvem enIs should be deferred until the issuance of a buildi11g per111it for this p1u j1,ct.
lmprovemc n1 s tn trdHi c signttls, 0;;ilJl:!walk!I ,tnd the right-of-way in ge,eral are nol part of th e PUD sin e<.· th e
PUD covers only the pr ivate properly involved in th e rezani ng. However, the applicant is reqL es ting
financial assistance for impr ovements being proposed in ~he right -of-way. App rov,,I of financia l ass islance is
,It th e conceptual level an d derails will need to be finalized as Ihe stalion ar ea plan progresses and before
th e fin,-,I ,,ite plan is app roved as part of lhe bu ilding perrrit for !his de velopme n t.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Th e Ci :y o f Englewood w ill collecl a one -tim e Build ing Use Ta x of app ro ximat ely $472 ,5 00, an esti mated
furniture , fixtures and equipment use ta x of S 17,500, a one-time building p ~rmit fe e oi approxima tely
$87,500 and the rezoning application fee of S 1,500. In addition, the Cit)' ,,_ ill collect property tax of
approximatel y $26,000 per year at full b .1i ldouI. This is an in cr ease of appro ximately $22 ,700 p er year over
current property taxes collected on the propert)'. Ac tual re ver-ues collec tPd may change if Councrl
approves all or part of the incentive requ es t b eing propos ed by th e applicant.
LIST OF ATTACHMFNTS
Planning and Zoning Commission Sraff Report
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes
Planning and Zoning Com 111i5sion Findings of F:ict
Traffic Impact Analysis & Response to Staff Comments
Bill for OrC:,nance
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT:
Planning and Zoni ng Commission
Alan Wh ite, Director, Community Development
Audra L. Kirk, r:anner 1
Au gust 7, 2012
Case ZON2012-005 -Public Hearing
O xford Station
LCP Oxford LLC
5711 South Ne,ada Str ee t
Littl eton, CO 801 20
PROPERTY OWNERS:
LCP Oxford LLC
5711 South Nevada Street
Littleton, CO 80120
PROPERTY ADDRESS:
1366 West Oxford Avenue
REQUEST:
Th e applicant has submitted an applicaliu11 lo rezone th e above parcel from 1-1 Light
Industrial zoni ng to a PU D Plann ed Unit Development . Th e proposed PUD w ill have 252
(two hundred and fi ity tw o) dwelling u nits.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Department of Community Development recomm ends that the Pl an ning and Zoning
Co mmission approve Oxford Station PUD as with th e tollowin g conditions :
1. Remove bu lb ouls from Navajo.
2. Provide landscape ca lculations.
and forward a recommendation of approval lo City Council.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
THAT PART OF THE SE 1/4 OF SEC 4-5-6 8 DESC AS BEG 5 FT W & 32.7 5 FT N OF N E
(OR OF .. or 1 G OORMAN'S INDUSTRIAL SUB Trl W 340.63 FT TO A PT ON ELY ROW
LIM OF AT & SF RR TH NEL Y ALG SD ROW 557 FT M /L TO /1 PT ON THE S ROVV LIN E
OF W OXFORD AVE TH NE 16 :i r-T M /L TH SF ,2 .g4 FT TH S 83 AR FT THE 5.5 FT TH S
'130 l'T M/L THE 1.57 FT TH S 3 t ,1.46 FT TO BEG SEC 4-5 -68
ZONF. DISTRICT:
1-1 Li ght lnduslri al
l'ROl'El!Ty LOCATION AND SURRO UNDING LAND L;SE:
The s 11bjt'CI property of th is PUD is lut:.1led at th e so uthwest cor :11::I of Oxfc11d /\venue ,111d
5ou1h N,w,1jo S11<,e l. Sunuu11 cli ng land 10 1he 110 rlh, sou 1h ,m d e.isl is also zoned 1-1. Land
cl 1r ec ll y l u lhe w e sl Is ihe RTD U ~h l Rail l rac k ; ,i nd lh e BSNF r,1ilwad lr,1r.k s and no l within
1h e Ci l y o f l:n glewond li,n i,s.
PUD PROCEDURE:
Rezoni ng lo a PUD requirc-,s th e appli cant l o h,w e a pre-applicalion 111eeling w il h ::t~ff. a
neighborhood 111eeti11g wilh owners and 1e na11t s loc:a1 ed 1.000 fee l of 1hr prop ,isN I Pl lf1 .
Afl er th e 11 ce ighhn rh ood meeti11c a iormal s11 l.>r11 i11al is rnad e In 1h e Ci l y .111 d reviewed by
Ci l y dep'1rt 111 c n1 ; and o th er ;1ffec1ed n ul s1de <1gc11 c ies. A pub li c hea,;11 g b l,eld before 1h r,
l'lan 11i 11g ,11 ,cl Zo ning Co1111 n iss ic11, ;111 cl City Co u11cil . If lhe Pt.,I) i, :ipproved there is a 30
day rdere11d11 11 1 tim e period before p ,,irni l s can be gran tcu.
BACKGROUN0 :
rl1 e Planned U nil Devclo p,ncn l 1s ti rezo ning pro ces ~ thr1 1 es1.1b .i(,hes speci fi c l.'0 11i11 g ,rnU
site planni11g crile1ia tc meet the nee ds o f a sp etifi c cleve lopn,enl proposa l th,11 may no t be
acco11 1111odat<'rl wi thin existin g zo 11111g development re gu lat ions. A PUD r<'.zoni11g provides
the oppor llrnity for unifi ed d eve lo11men t rci nlrnl for 111 11lt iple prnpe,lies o r mLdtipl c uses.
This property is a 3 . .'i04 ,,c ,e site ocL upied by,, Martin Plas ti cs sin ce 1920. This parcel has
bcC'n w ned 1-1 Light Industrial since b eing annexed into th e Cit y o f Englew no d in 1970.
NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING SUMMARY:
Pursuant lo the Unified Development Code PUD prucedu,e, the ap plic,111t conducted a
ncigliburlioud 111eeti11g on Wednesday, March I, 20 12, prior to submitting the PUD
application. N o ti ce of the pre-appli cation meeting was m ail ed to owners and tenanls o 1
property loca ted wi thin 1 000 fr:et of the p roposed PUD property. A 111c eti11g summary is
atta ched (See bhibit /\1.
CITY DEPARTMfNT ANU DIVISION REVIEW:
The applicants had a p re-applic,1 ti o11 m C?e ling wilh staff in late 20 11 . Is sues that were
idenlifi ed during th e pre-applica ti on m ee ting were add rcc,scd by the a~plicant and ihe fi nal
Osford St;,tio n l'UD packet was submit1 ecl 0 11 July 6 , 2012 . The fi nal plans we re revi ewed
b y Ci ty and o utside Agencies and the fo ll owing commen ts were made:
Tri -County Health Department :
1. Contact TCHD to discuss t he plan to aba:1du11 th e ,anilary sewe r sys tem .
2. Sec tio , 16-6-2 of the Englewood Unified Municipal Code (U DC) requires a
flammable gas testing and approval fo r devel opment loca ted with.:, one th o us.1 nd
fee t of a former l~ndfill. TCHD recommends th at th e applic ant work w ith a qualifie d
2
environmental consultant to pre;iare a flammable gas investigation plan for the site.
This will be required prior to the issuing of a building permit.
Xcel Energy:
1. l he Public Service Compar,y of Colorado (P SCo) owns and operates existing natural
gas and electric distribution facilities within the proposed project area. The
developer must conta ct the Builder's Call Line at 1-il0 0-628 -2121 and complete the
applicati o n process for any new gas o r electri c ser ,i,e, or modific-.1tion to existing
facilities .
2. The d eveloper must conta c t Robyn Larn, (R icht-oi-Way A gent at 303-7 I 6 -2043 for
re,nlution to easemP.nt issues .
BNSf-:
1. No comment.
Colorado D epartment of Trans portation :
I . N o comme nt.
RTD MC#2 4
Comments were not prc.v idecl from this Agency .
City of Si;erid an
page 2 oLl,
1. What p:ocess does your conditional use follow? A re they m:tlined in the UDC ? If
so, where? You might want to spell the process out on the PUD or refer to th e
process in the code .
Desigr Standards & Guidelines
2. The language is good, but use more specifics on design guidelines especially.
3. "The elements in the following standards" ... is the following th e standards?
P.1ge 2 of B
4. Won't this have other us es be>sides residential/ Do you rea ll y w ant a sec urity gate?
5 . Is the south building a 5 story building as we11 ?
6 . Only o ne entrance to th e b uilding? VI/he re is th e emergency entrance/exit to
developm ent?
7 . Add "current" to Zoning 1-1, Current Use: Auto parts wareh ouse.
8. FPnce arrnrnd pool?
9. Basement parking; in both buildings?
10. Landscapin g?
11 . ls th:s a garage entrance? (north end of east building).
1 ]. "N ew 5'0" wide sidl'walk/steps from R.O .W . to fire drive aisle" Where is the fir e
drivP. aisle?
13. Slairs -label stairs to the pedestrian bridge .
She el 5 of 8
14. D eveloprncnt is rnis~p cll et!. clr.1•1 ge lu re au PUD Site Plan
1 j_ MaintenanLe Nole? Irri ga tion?
S1Pet 7 o f R
16 Roof line co uld have more articulat io n.
City o f l:n glewnod D epa rtm e nt Rc v;ews :
Utililies:
1. Pur~uant 10 C it ~, Orclin~111 c:e, f!ac h r.ep ;uate bund in g i,~ a pla11ne d unit cevelopment
~ha ll ha ve il separa te se rv ice lin e.
2. f-lre I•r ote cti o 11 r<,quire111e 11 ts nIay require mult ip le iire lines for th e bui ldi11~.
l 'i1c :
I . Lor.;1ti nn :,ncl width of propo r.e d r,rr.uriIy gal e :ind fir e hyclrant r, mee t" fir e
dep ;1n111 enl ,,pprova l. Th e sec urity g.ite will ue oe~uire:J lu l,;,ve ,, Kn ox Access Key.
Tr,1ffi c:
I . Th e r;1111p on th e south h ui!ding, is th is fu ll tinw acce ss? Is it to;, p,uking g,or .ige?
Engi11 ee 1in g :
1. Rr~vi~r•d rlr;i i11.1g~ r<-'pnrt w ;ti, ..;11 l11n ill Pd )11ly , 1. :>nl ]. a11rl i!-c11rr,.i ntl y 0111 for r Pvievv
~-SIa irc, at th e Oxford ;o 11d N .,v,;o wi ll nee d to b e· stru ctur;olly engin ee ring .
3. T .i ke tlt e luc.it iu 11 uf th e peue stri;,11 bridge o ff. Add: Will g·a11t City of [11 gl ewood
bridge ea seme nt when loca loon is dc ter111inr.rl.
4. St.iff reque sted that th e bulb outs be ,.,,moved irom th e site plan and t'1e curb and
gullr,,r re1w 1in :i s is . Th e ap pli cant ha d decided tu le;,vc th e bulb outs in the plan .
The hub out s will not b e ;1p 1Jroved. S!,,ff w ,11 cu 11tinu e to work with the applicant to
fi.1ci a so lution that is acceptabl e by staff and th r-. a[>pli ca nt.
C ommunity r>c,elop on e nt :
1. Se c co mments bel ow.
PUD OVERVIEW:
The Oxford Station PUD al O xford Ave nu e and So uth Navajo Stre et will change th e
Per mitted Principa l Uses to allow a residential us es. Other allowed us es in the PUD ar e
o utlined un der th e Table of Allowed Uses in th e W ritl en Stalemeni.
Site Plan: Tlte app l ,canl i s propos ing l o build 252 uni t for-l ease apartments. The e111ir e
sit~ is 3.504 ac res and will consist o f two apartment buildings connected at the seconcl
fl oo r. The site al so includes parking for th e units, a pool and ,ecrea tion are ,1.
landscaping : The aµµl ica nt is proposing th e fulluwing la ndscaping 111ini111um s:
r r ees: 1/4 50 square iecl of Required Landscape Area (RLA)
Shrubs: 1 /50 square feel of RLA
4
Minimum number of trees between the principal structure and curb: 1 /50 linear
feet.
Minimum number of shrubs between the principal structure and curb: None
Although the number of trees the applicant is requiring is more than the City requirement.
the amount of shrubs and number of trees a11u sliruu, uetwecn principal structure and curb
is less than City requirements . Table 16-6-7 .4 Minimum Landscape Requirements in
Commercial and Medical zones has a requirement of a minimum of 50% of trees to be
placed between the principal structure and the curb. A minimum 40% of shrubs should be
placed between the principal structure and the curb. This is a requirement for si dewalk1
greater th an 3' wide. Sidewalks les s than 3' wide may be landscaped w ith living and non-
living plant material. The site plan did not indicate the width of the sidewalk.
The landscape c~lnrl,1tinns on the site plan have been removed. It is unclear al this time if
th e propose d PUD will mt ~t the minimum requirem ents for the City of Engl ewood.
Th e Cily of Englewood requests that landscapi ng b e brought up to City standards .
Signage : The proposed PUD will allow 2 square feet of signage for each linear foot of
street frontage. The UDC allows the following:
1.5 s . ft.ii fom
1.0 SQ . ft .I I foot
0.4 S . ft .ii fool
The proposed sign area could be up to 1.6 square feet larger than the UDC would allow.
There is no ma ximum number of si gn s that would be allowed.
Individual businesses would each be allowed 1 projecting sign, not to exceed 1 2 square
feet in area .
Parkin~: The parking in the proposed PUD will be one ( 1) space for every unit, and v isitor
parking at 1 space for e\ ery 5 units. The amou . o f requi re d spaces would be 152 resi dent
parking spaces an d 5 1 visitor parking sp aces for a total of 303 spa ces . The applicant has
provided a site plan with a parking cha1l. T! e p ar king chart indicates that a total of 335
spaces would be provided .
The UDC requir es 1.5 spaces p er unit and guest parking of 1 space per 5 units. Ac.rorning
to the UDC parking requirements, this project would need to have 378 sp ac es for resident
parking and 51 spaces for visitors for a total o f 429 spaces .
Staff is requesting a Parking Management Plan or Par king Incentive Plan be provided. The
Plan should address the shortage in parking and how parking will be handled on th e site.
SUMMARY:
I he .1pplicant 1s proposing re-zoning an existing 1-1 (1.ighl Industrial) to a PUD to include
residential use s. Staff is requesting at this time that the land scapinc he brou3h 1 up 10 the
<t.,nd.,rds of the UDC. Staff is also requesting that a Parking Managemcnl Plan or Parking
In c entive Plan be a cumliliu11 uf appruv.il.
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS;
The Commission n,u,1 det ermin e if the PUD is consislent with the Englewood 2003
Compr ehe 11 siv e rlan . The Planning :md Zc>11ing Commission can approve, i.ipprove will 1
conditions or den\' lhe proposed f'UD .
PUD Dislrirt 1'1;111
The Di strict Plan sets f:irth the zoning regulations under which th e proposed arnend111e11ls
will o r.nir.
1. Tlt e PU IJ District Plan i"i, nr ii:; nnl, in innfr>rm;i n,~e \•Vilh tli i; ... n is lr ict Plan 1equi,ements and
tl ,e Compreh ensiv~ Plan
The proposed f'UD is in co nformance w11h th e Uis:ri ct Plan ;111cl the Com prehensive
Plan . Th e Oxford 1.ight Rai l Transit Station is specifically addre ssed in th e Roadmap
En3lewood : 2003 Eng lewood Co111p1ehensive Plan . II states, "The pro ;pects for
develo pment in th e ar eas around the Oxford LRT Station are pru111isirog. I.and uses
and properties that have been s1.1gna11t or in decline for a number of yp:;rs may give
way to vibrant new commercial uses ,1t lra ctecl to the a rea due to th,~ pro ximity of a
light rail transit sl~lion and th e llresence c,f the Englewood Recreatio n Center and
En glewood Golf Course".
2 . All re quirer! document;, drawing.s, re fe rral.,, recommendations, and approv,1/.< h,ive /,~en
receivecl.
All appropriate documents concerning Oxford Statiu11 PUD have been rec eived ;
however the proposed f'UD has not been approved by all departments.
J . T/J e PUD District Plan is ,on.<is,e nt with adopted and gen erally a ccept ed standards of
cif'vclopment in th e Ci.y o( Engl e wood.
The Ox iord Station PUD District Plan , remains consiste nt with accepted
development standards established by the Citv of Englewood .
4 . The PUD District Plan is substantially c:on sistent wirh ihe goal;, objectives, design
guide/mes, policies and any or her O!din,mce, law or require ment o( the City .
Oxford Stati on PUD is in conformance with all o ther ordinances, laws and
requirements oi the City.
5. When the PUD District Plan is within 1he Englewood Downtown Developmen1 Authonly
(EDDA) area, the Plan is consistent with th e EDDA approved designs, policies and plans.
,\Jot applicable.
PUD Site Plan
The Site Plan sets forth the site p lan nin g ,mrl d,,sig11 param eters under which the proposed
amendments will occur.
1. The PUD Site Plan is, or is not, in conformanre wit h th ,• O,s trict Plan rP<711irP ;mmts.
Oxford Station PUD site plan es tJ 11lishes th e arra , ,g,'ment, orientation, location, and
!he building e nvelopes on the site wl •·ch a t': in conformance with the District Plan .
The proposed impro ve ments on Navajo have not been approved . Staff will continue
to wo rk with the applicant to resoive these issues.
2. All rPquirerl documents, drawing s, refenals. rec ommendations, and approvals have beer,
received.
All required site plan ma terials have b ee n received. The proposed PUD has not
been approved by all departments.
3. Th e PUD Site Plan is consistent 1•,.1 !, adopt e d and generally acrP(>lerl standards of
development of the City of Englewood.
The O xfo rd PUD is consistent with development standards set forth in the Distri ct
Plan. The Development Review Team reviewed the site plan and determined that
the a substantial amount of the P' ,posal meets established City development
standards, '1owever there are uo,res, .-,•d issues. Staff will continue to work with the
arplirant tn rP.,nlve these issues .
4. The /'UV Si '~ /'Ian is subslantia//y con sis rem wir/J rhe goals, objective., dllJ policies and/or
any o th er ordinance, /aw or req11irP m en 1 .-,( lh P City.
Th e proposed PUD Site Plan presented is in confo rmal'ce with all other ordinances,
laws and req uirem e nts of th e City .
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A: O xiortl Sta :1u11 PUD Written Sta tement
Fxh ibit B: Oxford Station PUD Site Plan
Exhibit C: Ne ighborhood Meeting Summary -March 16, 2011
7
Planning t.nd Zoning Commission
Public Heiring
Cast #USE2012 -009 Brewery and #ZON2012-00l Martin Plastic, PUD
August 7, 2012
Page. I of 7
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING ANO ZONING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
August 7, 2012
Minutes and audio are available at:
http · 1/www .en~lr.wuodgov.om/Index .aspx ?pa~e-J 5 2
I. CALL ro OKDEK
Lf?ll1
The regular meeting of the Cit y Plaru,ing and Zoning Commission was called to order at
7:01 p .m. in the City Council Chambers of the Englewood Civic Center, Chair Brick
presiding.
Present :
Absent:
Staff:
Bl eile, R,";.,, King, Knoth, Fish, Brick, Kinton, To w nley
F: c-,. mir r (alt ~rnatc)
Welke:
Alan White, Community Development Director
Brook Bell , Planner II
Audra Kirk, Planner I
Nancy Reid , Assistant City A ttorney
II. PUBLIC HEARING
i!flli
CASE #USE2012-009
Cunditiunill Us" appruvill lo .tlluw a Nanu-CrJfl Br.,wcrt al 3445 S Bruatlw.ty
Ble ile moved :
Knot~ seconded : TO OPEN THE PU BLIC HEARING FOR CASE #USE 2012-009
AY[S:
NAYS :
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT :
Bleile, Roth, Knoth, Fish, King, Brick, Kinton, Townley
None
None
Welker
Motion carried.
Mr. Bell p resented the case. He staled the applicants are seeking approval of a Conditional
Use Pe1111 i l appli ed lion to aUow a nanu·crdft bt ewery .al 3445 S Bt oadway. S1aff
recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve Case #USE2012-009 to
allow a na~o-craft brewer\' to be located within the MU-B-1 M rxed -Use Central Busin ess
Zone District at 3445 S Broad way wit h the follo w ing condition s:
l'l :11111111b :me! Z o111n1: Cumm 1ss10n
l't1l 1lu.: I lc :uint~
C:1st: lilJSE21Jl 2-00li Brewery and 'fZON201 :!-005 M anin l'\:,sUc:, PL'U
/h11;11.\I 7 20 12
l'a,:;c '2 111 7
Tl,e "l-'Plica 11 ·s sh,111 obta in all permits and requ ired licens ~s p rior 10 cc111111encin 3
o p er,,1iuns.
2. Th e ;,pplica 111 s shall c,.·,mply wilh ,•II u lli e, <1pp l c,,IJ le Federd, S1 li e, ;11,d local codes.
J . All sal es from !h f> op pr;11i on shall bP. rel.iii ; who les;,le di stributio:i sha ll 1101 b~ pcnni11~:I.
4. All oulsicle sea lin g shall comply wilh ,'ubli c Works Deparlment requ ire1T1e1 .:-lrn
cu 1d oor seating ,1nd use of th e public ri ght -,)f-way .
S. Any o utsi de smoking area 111u sl 111 ee l tl 1e 111i11 i11 1u 111 requirer1 n~111 s fo r the Col ur <1Uo
Clean All Act.
6. To lh te maximum ex ten t, the ap pli ca 11l sha ll 1'1 ke all ,,ossib le 1x~::-••,•i ,)11s and mea sur es
10 control odors produced by rhe operation.
7. App 101,a l of Condili onal Use Permit docs nol consii lule appr ova l o f .0,pplic;u,t 's
concep tu al sit e or Ooor plan at lac.he d lo c:1pµlil dliu 11 . Fu11 11ill t.!pprova l of sile or bu ild ing
improve ments shall be base d on pl ans ~ncl doc u men ts req ~1ired fo r ll uilcling, Accessory,
or 01he r as socia 1ecl Permits .
l:l. l'ruduL1.iu11 u f beer sha ll be limit ed 10 2,400 blr re ls or 74,'-00 ga ll ons pe" ye ar from the
date prod uclion st.iris. The appli can t shall mai ntain a log of ihe beer production a1d
ma ke it ,wa il ~b le to the Ci ty upon request.
'J. The Cily Manaiier or d es1gnec shall ri!view th e Condit ional Use on an a nnu al bas is for
compliance with all terms of ~p prov~I of the Condition .al Use Permit.
~-If the Conditional Use is found to be in comp li rn1ce wil '1 the te rm s o f th e
CorH.J iti o11al U,c ;•erm it, the p e rmi , sha ll be renewed io r 011 e (1) year .
b. If th e Conrliiional Use is 110 longer operating, the Co ndit iona l Use Pe rmit sha ll ::>e
vo irl ed ~nd no ticP shall b e recorded with the office of the Arapahoe County Clark
a nd Record er.
c It the Con dit 1011 a! Use 1s found 11 01 to be 111 co111p li ance w,th th e term : .: th e
Con ditional Us e PP.rm it, Ir r Coru li1i rinal Usi~ ,hall h0 subjec t to e nforcement action s
pursua nt lo the Engl 2wood Iv un icip a l Co de.
:iai1
Ap 11 licanl Tes timony
M1. l'ac,I Webster, the appli ca nt , was swoni in . He slate d Erig kwuud 11ceeds su11 1e lhi11 g lu
bri,1g 11 lo life again. This is a great location, rigi,t do wntow n. Hopef ull y, we are goi ng lo
draw oth er businessP.s to th e Cit y. Afte r lalkin e w ith a number o f residents Engle woo d
needs a ni ce establishment to go to that they can enjoy. We will remain small; we don't
have the desire to gro w too larg e. We will also be 3 coff ee shop so people who don't dri nk
beer ca n come ha ve coffee and te a. Proposed h,Ju rs are 7 am to 9 p m Sunday thr ough
Planning :md Zoning Comnuss1on
Public Hcarmg
Cas e ffUSE2012 ·009 B,ewcry and #ZON2012-00S Mill in Plastic s PUD
August 7, 2012
Page J of7
Thursrlay anri 7 ;,m lo 10 or 11 pm nn Frir.ay anri Saturda y. Customers will hP able to bu \'.:
64 ounce jug to remove from the prem ises. That will be the on ly package that will be
allowed lo leav e th e property an:! that Is ac ce ptable in the State license. The pla:1 is to
ope n the sout h side o' the bu ilding arid put a patio ou t 1here if appr.:w ed by the City . H e
stated he has been brewing for 24 years. There w ill be some reinforce m en t of the building
needed and he st ated they hope to expan d into the w ~ole buildin g in tim e.
llul1
Public Testimony
Mr Paul Houck was sworn in . He stated he, i, a partner in the busines s.
Mr Kinton asked how far into th e sidewalk th e pal'o will extend. Mr. Houck said
approximately six feel. That leaves appro ximat ely six feet for pcdc ;trians.
Chair llrick asked if th ere was anyone else who wished to speak regarding thi s case . Th ere
wa; n o o ne.
!!elli
Fish moved :
Bleile sec onded : TO CLOSE THE PUB IC HEARING FOR CASE #USE7.012 -U09
AYES :
NAYS :
Bleile, Roth, Knoth, Fish, Kin g, Brick, Kint on, Townley
None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSE NT: Welker
Motion carried.
Discussion Points:
1. Liquor license required through Stat e, not City .
2. Cond itional Use regJlations for renewal.
3. What products will be allowed to leave the premises?
4. Sidewalk patio.
5. Reinforcement of b uilding to accom m odate use .
6 . Will be a coffee sho.J along with the 11 ano-craft brewerv .
7. Great acdition to Ci ty; good fit for ,'o•vntown.
8 . Traffi c not an is sue.
After discussio .1 the following motron was made :
I' ,11 1 mi t: ,mJ '/.1n11111~ f:ut,11:llS !>LUI!
l'uh lu: lh:: 11111:
C:i,;1• 1n_1 s1rn:12 OC~ R1 cwc :·y :in d t120NW l2 OCS M:ini n Pl ~ti ::. Pt.:D
Aui;11 <1 7 , 2n 12
P ,1!,:c <1 nf,
~;
l<no th mc;vcO'
llle ·le S<!Co 1,rl Prl :
0 :
Tl ·I A /' CAS t ti USE20 12-0 09 , CONO/T,ONA /. I.J S/: BE APP.'~OVED
ro ALLOW A NANO-CRAFT IW:Wrn\' TO Br l.OC:A "/ED
WITHI N Tl-IF Ml /-ll-1 M/Xf l )-IJ<;f er,!"[,?~, /ll)<;/,\iFSS /)!Si R IG
1\T 3,145 S BR0 1\DWI ,\' /\5 l'li::SfNTff1 WIii-/ CO,\/DITI ONS.
/\YES :
N,\YS
A[;:STA II':·
,,13 SE:--.i -,:
1.11,,il e, Ro th , Kno th , Fish , Kin g, 13rick , l(int o11, Tow11l ev
h J111lP
N o ne
V\lelk er
M o ti o 11 c ir,ied.
rl,e: C <1 m mi!.s on wi r.hcd th e J1.1plica nt good luc.:I: w ilh th e 11:rno brewery
~:~r
CI\SEIIZON2 01 2-0II S
f!p71111ing of U(,6 W Orforrl Avr•11111• (Marlin Pb slic,) l o a I'll[) l<1 all<1w r,•sirlenli;il "'"'
Ru ll i 111 uved :
K11 o th ~<::coi ,d t~d : TO OPEN THE PURI.I C I-lf:AR ING r-OR CAS E II 2'.0 N 20 12 -005
,,w r-~
NAY S:
/\l3STAIN:
ABSf-;,J T:
Bleile , Roth, l(noth, Fi sh, King, Brick, Kinion, Tow nley
None
Non0.
Welker
M o lion c,1nied.
Ms . l<irk prese nt ed the ca se. The applicant submitt ed an .ipolicati on to re zone 1 366 W e;I
Oxi nrrl Avfl111,-. f1n m 1-1 (! igh1 lnrh ,~tri~I ) tc, a Pl 1n (Pl ;innPrl I l nit [)PvPln 1i m Pnt) tn ;,llmv
rc,id cm ial 11 ,c. Th e Reco rding Secre tary dbt,ibutc cl a new copy of th e l,1 11 d sc,1 p c p lan fer
1h c p ro1;e rl y. Tlie appli ca11 t is fJrnp os in g l o build 1 :,2 fo r-lease apartm ents. Th e pro.ice! w ill
consis t u l one budd ing with a drive tl ,ru witl· ap,1 1·11110.n ts above l o con11 cct Ilic twu sid es.
Th P sit e is 3.5 04 acres ~n d will i11di 1d p ria rkin g, ;1 pnnl ;111d rPrrPa tinn ,1,,,,1 . 11"1 pa rking
spacer. w ill b e provided. A cces s to th e silc from lhc li ght ,ail sta ti o n wa,, dir,cu r.,,r.cl.
Plilllmn j? and ZoninJ? Commission
Public Hemng
Cas, #USE2012 -009 Brewery and #ZON20t2-005 Mar li n Ptasucs PUD
Aug11s17 . 2012
11.1ft. ~ of 7
il8'i1
Applicant Testimony
Mr Jonathan Bush, Princi~a l of Littl eton r ·,,p ita: l';irtn •.!rs, was sworn in . Th e property was
purc hased in Fel..,ruary of 2011 and work b l 6un ·,n th e p,ojecl. Th e project as presented is
rrimaril\' resi dential; commercial lay r ,at '., J r.,,1 . v rk
Mr. Tim Schlighling of Littleton Capit;:• f';,,.,_,s was sworn in . He discus,ed 1rn ki11g fo, the
project.
Mr. Jo se ph Poli of Humphries/Poli Arch itect, v.-as sworn ir.. H e prese nt ed a slide show of
the proposed de velopment and an sw ered qu cstiom from the Commi ss ion. Th e p roject wi ll
be named Oxford Sta tion. He stated the inte1t is to have the project oi.:t of the ground next
yea r. Items discussed in cluded a pedestrian b ri dge ac ro ss Oxio rd Ave11ue , drai nage,
int erse ctio n improveme11b Jl Ox(urJ Av t:11 ue and t,'avajo Street , publ ic art, .;ize o( unit s,
re ntal rat es, snow storage and bicycle access .
Public Tes timony
Chair Brick asked if ther e 1vas a11 yone who wished to speal: regarding this case. There was
no one .
~l
Fish moved:
Knot h seco nded : TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASE #ZON2012-00S
AYES:
NAYS:
Blei le, Ro th , Knot h, Fish, King, Brick, Kinton, Townley
None
ABSTA IN : None
ABSENT : Welker
Motion ca rried .
Discussion Points:
I . Need for a pedestria n bridge over O xfo rd .
2. Public access in qenera l.
3 . l'arking will be ·: 1d led through access ca rds .
4. Landscaping wi: : above City requi rements
5. PUD never expires
6 . Possibil ity of height restriction.
7. City of She ridan 's comments we re taken i~to account.
8 . Time fra m e: shou ld be out of th e grou nd next year .
9 . A Traffic Study was done, but was not prese nte d to th e Commission.
I 0. Pro Ie ct is p rimarily r esiden tial ; co mmercial la yuut did no t we , k.
1•1:11111i11 i; :m ,1 Z u mni.; Cu1tum:isin11
Puhl t: llc:i1111i,.:
C:,,._,. 111 1s 1:,r11 2 -0 (.IIJ H1c·Nc1y M rl lt7.0N20 12 -005 MrtH in H:istict. l'UO
A"Jt:11,.17,20 1'..!
l'a1 :~6ot 7
~ 1. On-:,ire .1mc--1111iP.~ in chuiP rnol , corn rn on ro om and pii l:.i lir: all .
· 2 Project will include 1 and 2 bedrooc1 for-,en t units .
i 3 . Gred t u se for site.
; 4 IJ ra inage ;ind snow storag e.
; S N av~j o 51 and Oxhrd Av~ str eet i,nprovrn ,cnt·;
16 Loca ti on o f re11try to proj ec t w,1s m ove d (or sa fel )' ,ca::0 11,
1 7 . Pnssibili :y uf ,avi11 ~ old liuildi11g 1101 feas ible.
i\fter cli sc.:~1ssio11 ;111cl J fri endly ~111 endme11t by Mr. Roth ;,s l<ing frn a 100 fno t h eight limn
,, ncl .,cce pt ed b y Mr. Kno th the fo ll owing mo tion w as made:
;'18.li
Knoth mov ed :
Ror·1 sP.r:o nrl ed : Tt·!A T CASE IIZ O N 20 1 2-00 5 REZONING 0 1' 1366 WES T
OXl'ORO A VENUE FROM /-/ {UGI IT IN OUSmlAI.) TO A r uo
/Plt\NNEO UNIT Of\lELOl 'IV/f:NT) TO .'\LI.OW RfSILJENTIAL
USES 13[ f<E COMMtNUt/J l·U /1 Al'l'IW\.'A I. TO CITY COUNCIL
WITH T/·IE FOi.i.OWiNG COI\JDITION.·
I . Maximum li eigh t limit t o be I Q() feet
AYES :
NAYS:
Bl eile, Roth , Knoth, Fi sh, Ki11g, l3n ck, Kinlo11, I ownky
None
ABSTAIN : Nnne
AB SENT : Wcl:«,r
Mot1 011 ea rned.
Th e Conunission felt that the pr,,iect is a good fit for the ;)ro perty and sup;:,c rt s Roadmap
(nglewoocl: 2003 EnglewuuJ Co111µnd1~11sive Plan .
Ill. PUBLIC FORUM :1~;
/\ngie Hunt and r<ya n White d iscus se d allowing rnk.1u Ji,lilleri •es i11 ,:,e City of F.11 glewood.
They stated the ir first choice of lo ca ti ons for thei r business ,s th e Ci ty of Eng lewood, but
di still eri es are not allowed. They ask ed if that can be changed . Both Littl eton and Lak ewood
~llnw rlistillP.ries in approp riately rn:ied areas.
D irector White stated the prohibition of di stilleri es in Englewood was put into th e Code in
1 963 and maybe it is time to look into addressing t~.e issue . He suggested the subj ect be
discu ssed at the SeptPmhPr 5'" study sessio n. Ms. Hunt and Mr. White were invited to
attend the September 5~' meeting.
Pl:umma and Zonin& Cornmiss.on
Puh:1c He:uing
Ca~e tfl l~F.20!2 -009 Brewery 3lld #ZON:?0l 2•005 Mani n Pl.uucs PUD
AU !:,'USl 1, 2012
Page 7 of7
IV. ATTORNEY'S CHOICE
1f?Jl~
Ms. Reid noted when the discussion of traffic issues on Oxford and Navajo is aga,n
dis cussed ;o please remember in order t ;i change the traffic µdtten, and/ur anything about
that intersectio'n we h~ve to deal with two railroads. RTD, COOT, City of Sheridan and City
of Englewood .
V. STAFF'S CHOICE
l~1
Director White stated Staff would like to move the August 21 " meeting to August 28". The
Craig I lospital vac ati on of the Clarkson Street right -of-way w ill be di;cu;;ec.
Mr. Bleile mo\'ed and Mr. Fish seconded to r:iove the meeting to the 28"' Mot,on pas i ed .
VI. COMMISSIONER 'S CHOICE
llSlll
Mr. llleile apologized fo , n~t being able to attend the ann ual Board, Commission and
Authority Appreciation Night at Pirate's Cove.
Mr. Knoth noted the City's industrial distric• is where we are going to get our density and
de ,elopers will be asking for height requests higher 1hn11 what people to the east w ant to
,ee. We need to figure out what we are going to do.
Mr. Brick asked Director W'iite when tile Pla1111i11g and Zoning Commission would be
rli<rnssing the station area plans . He stat ed there 1s a p~blic meeting on Augus t 6'" al 7:00
in Hampd~n Hall . The Commission will be asked to acopt this as a small area plan in the
future . He no ted Mr. Roth and Mr. Knoth have agreed to serve 011 the steering committee
Jnd the Commission can lo ok to them for updates . The consultants are to !)e fini<hPrl l he
first part of 201 3.
M,. Kinton co ncu rred with Mr. Knoth 's comments . The Co n1m 1ssion ne~c5 lo Jddress
he •ght. pedestrian c 1nnectivity and the context of things .
The meeting adjourned at I 0 :05 p.m.
CllY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF CASE #ZON2012-005
FINDINGS 01· FACT, CONCLUSIONS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE
REZONING OF 1366 WEST OXFORD AVE
FROM 1·1 (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) TO A PUD
(PLANNED UNIT [IEVELOPMENT) TO
ALLOW RESIDENTIAL USES
INITIATFO RV :
LCP Oxford LLC
5711 South Nevada Street
Littleton, Colorarlo 80120
flNDINGS Of FACT AND
CONCLUSI QI::, OF THE
CIW PLANNI NG AND
ZONIN(, CO MMISSION
Commission Members Present : Br ic k, Fish , Knoth, Roth, King, Blei le, Kinton, Townley
Freemire (a lt erna te)
Commission Members Absent: Welker
This matter was heard before the City Planning and Zoning Commission on August 7,
20 12 , in the City Council Chambers of the Englewood Ci~ic Center.
Test ir .,y was received from Staff, th e appli can t ant.I the µuulic. Th e Commission received
notice of Publi c Hearing, Certification of Posting, and Staff Report from St aff, which were
incorporated int9 and made a part of the reco rd of the Public Hearing .
Aiter consider in g statements of the wi tn esses, and re view in8 th e r,ertin enl dncurn Pn ts, th e
members o: ti ,e Ci ty Planning and Zoning Commissio n made th e fo ll owing Findings and
Co nclusions.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1 ... Tl !AT th •~ applic ati on was fil ed by LC I' Oxford LLC seeking appr oval to rezon e 1366
West Oxford Avenue from 1-1 (Light lndustriai) to PUD (P la nn ed Unit Development)
to allDw res1 c~ntial us es .
THAT Public Notice of the Pu bl ic H earine w~s given by pub lication in th e
fuglewood Herald on July 20, 2012 an d was on the City 's website from Jul 1•12,
20 12 through Augu;t 7, 20 12.
3, THAT the pruperty was posted as requi red, sa id posting se lling forth the d ate, t,me,
and place of th e Public Hearing .
4. rl·IAT pur suant to the Pl anned Uni! Development wocedure, a pre-a pp licatio n
mPrtine was held with Staif in late 2011 and a for ma l sub·11itta l rrl.lde to the City
The appl ica tion was re viewed by City Depar tm ent s and o the r «Heele d outside
t, 1.~enc1es.
S. THAT pu rs uan t tn tl,r, Plann er! U nit [)cvplnpmPnt pro,PdurP, 1he appli ,ant
conducted :, ne ir,hbr ··ho od meeti ng on Mnrch 1, 20 1 ~-
f,. fl-lAT no ti ce o f th e ne1gh bor ho od meeting wa s mailed to proper ty o"ners an c:
occupan ts of property wi thin 1000 fee t n f the si te.
THAT the fi nal Oxfo rd Stati o n PUD packe t was submilled on July 6, 2012.
U. fl-lAT the applicant is proposing to buil d 252 for-lease apartm ent s w ith 1>a rki nr, a
pool an d a recrea ti on area.
9. THAT Planner Kirk testified the re ~ue st is for th e rez on111[: of 1 366 West Oxll'rd
Avrn11 e from t-1 (li ch 1 ind ustri al) to a PUD (Pla nned Unit D eve lopment) to all ow
re~;idcn 1i .. l 11~cs. Ms. Ki rk IC$lifl cd to the criten a th e Cor·1mi~sio n mus l consider
wla.:n 1evi ewin g d l'UD a1,plicat'on . M s. Kirk furth P.r tes tified that Staff reco mm end s
a1:,prova l of th e amendment.
10. THAT th e Oxford Station Planned Uni• Development is in co nforma nc e w it h
Roadmap [nglewood : 2003 E·,gle'Nood Comprehe nsi•;e Plan.
CONCLUSIONS
1. TMAT tl1e appl ica ti on WJS fil ed by 1.CP O xforu LI.C. see king apprc .. ,o retune
Ubb West Oxford Avenue from 1-1 (light indus tr ial) to a PUD (Planned Unit
Developm ent) lo allow re sidential uses .
2. THAT proper notificati on o f th e date, ·rne, anc place o f the Public Hearing was
given by p11blicatio11 rn th e official City newspaper, posting en th e City's w ebsi te and
by posting oi the p roper ty for th e req ui red len~th of lime.
3. THAT Jli tes timony •·eceived fr om staff members, the app licant and the public has
c,ee n 11,aue pa rt of tn e reco rd of th e Public Hea ring .
4. THAT th e request meets th e crit eria for a PUD .
5. Tl IAT the PUD is a p ositi ve imµ,oveme nl fw the µrope 11y aml is 11,., best use fur tli e
site.
2
6. THAT the proposed Planned L'nit Development is ,n confo rma n cP wi th Roadmap
Englewood: 2003 Engl~wood Compr ehensive Plan.
DFCISION
THfREFORE, it is the decision of th e City Pl anning an d Zoning Commission th ,.t th e
applica tion filed by LCP Oxford Ll.C for th e rezoning o f 1366 West Oxford from 1-1 (light
indu strial) to a PUD (Planned Un it Developrr>ent) 10 al lo w re sid enti al 11ses be
recommende d to City Council fo r approval.
Th e decision was re ad ··l upon a volt! on a rn• ;ion made at the meeting of the City
Planning and Zon ing Co rr ois sio n on August 7, 20'!. by M r . Knotr ,, ser-on r'erl hy Mr. Roth,
which motion states :
CASE IIZON2012·005, REZONING OF 13 66 WEST OXFORD
A VENUE FROM 1-1 (1 ICHT INDI !~TRIAi) TO A PUO (PL A NNED
UNIT OEVELOl'MENT) TO ALI.OW RES IDENTIA L USES Bf
RtCOMMENOED FOR APPR OVA L TO CITY COUNCIL WITH
THE FOLLOW/NC CONDITI ON:
I. Ma .,im urn height limit to be I 00 feet
AYES:
NAYS:
King, Knoth, Roth, 31eil e, Fish, Townley, Kinton, Brick
None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSEN T: , Welker
Th e motion carried .
The se Findings and Conclusions are effect ive as of the rn cc li ng on Aug u st 7, 2012.
: (0~ TH~ CITY~L~NNING & ZONING COMMISSION
. ---~---_L_ -
oh n Brick, C 1air
3
Th e re cording secretar)' conducted a poll of 9 Plan11ing and Zoning Comn,ission
111ernbe,s vid e-nMil fur tl ,e appruv,ol ur the A ug~sl 7, 2012 M inutes and the find i1gs
of Fact 111 Case #USl 201 2-00 9, Cond it iona l Us e for a nan o -c raft brewery loc~ted
wi thin a M U-13 -I M ix ed-Use Ce11tral Bu siness Distric t al 144 5 5 Broadw:iy and Case
IIZON :1012-005, rewnin~ o f 1366 W es t Oxford Avenue fr om 1-1 (L ight Industri al) te-
a PUD (l'l:,nnecl Unit Develop111e11t) to allow 1es ide11liai uses.
The !\ugus t 7, 20 12 Mi11 u t"s we,e .i I,:Jroved.
AYES :
NAYES :
/\13S[N I :
ABS TAIN :
lloth , Brick, K11 0 1h, Fish, King, K"nton, Town ley, Bl eil e
Nu11e
None
W elker
fh ~ Find,ngs of Fact in Case #U S[.1 ()12-009 we ,e ap p,oved.
AYES:
NAYE S:
ABSi:NT:
AIJ~T /\IN :
i(o th, Bri ck, K nu th, foh, King, Kin ton, fownlet, Bleil e
None
Non12
Welk e ,
Th0 f indings o f Fac t in C~H· IIZON20 12-00S were a:Jp roved .
AYES :
NAYES:
ABSlNI:
1\:3S TAIN :
Roth, Brick, ~noth, r-i sh, King , l<inl on, Tow nl ey, Oleil e
r~on e
None
Welker
FELSBURG
HOLT &
ULLEVIG
August 20. 2012
Mr. Steve Kurtz
Littleton Capital Partners, LLC
5711 South Nevada Street
Littleton, CO B0120-4615
Re : Oxford Station Traffic Impact Analysis -Response to City of Englewood Comments
FHU Reference No. 12-045-01
Dear Mr . KuMz :
This letter serves to provide responses and explanations to the City of Eng lewood General and
Specific comments on the Traffic Impact Study that was prepared by Felsburg Holt & Ullevig dated
July 5, 2012. City review com11ents are dated July 25, 2U12. This letter includes both the City
comment and our respon se and explanal on lo that comment, if needed.
City of Englewood~ Comments
1. Note lhat parls of lhis r,,porl require additional information in order for staff to issue
complete comments . Thererore . staff could have additional comments as TIA is revised.
Response : Comment understood .
2. Staff would not recommend a Windermere mid-block pedf!strian crossing at the Oxford
Station. The existing conditions (the roadway curve, th e hill and heavy truck traffic) make a
mid-block crossing less than desirable. However, if this recommendation stays in the
ropon, a safety assessment of this crossing shall be inc /11dod.
RP.!{pOn!=.e · A mid-block r.rnssing ,it this tncatinn w,is recnmmenried to ,iririress existing crossing
maneuvers currently being conducted by pedestrians accessing the Oxford/City of
Sheridan light rail station. However, th is irr,provement is not essential to the
success of Oxford Station -there are designated crosswalks at the Oxford
Avenue/N av ajo Street intersection that provide safe crossings for pedestrians . As
such, referenc e to this improvement will be removed from the rev is ed traffic study.
3. Staff noted that onG ofrecommendalions is a possible installa/iun of the northbound lt1ft tum
arrow at the Oxford and Navajo in lersoction . In that case , a detailed traffic signal
oporationnl anati•sis will be required for both a 75 second cycle and a 150 second cycle
(since it is doubtful that a left turn signal can be accommodated with the 75 second cycle).
Also, analysis will be required for th e 60 sar.onrl :mrl 120 .sRr.nnd cyr:IP..s for ;ill OFF peak
hour periods.
(,Kie• S,111r h Sy r:ll.WA' \X :,1r. ~\l lll' 6~1c, l ',nr \·n n,:d, t '.U ~('II 11 ,d l ('~ 7~1 14 4(1 i:" ~('l,,il l .l"'8)2
\\'\\'W 111111.: 1:,!.L i 1111 •n f, .<i11 th 1h'll !'.,f P lll
Mr . St ev.a Kur:z
Aug u st 20 . 2012
Pcigt· 2
lI 11tial 3nalyses on this issue indicated that th e add1t 1on of a northbound left tur~
phase w~uld be o f ber-ef1I both to 1nt ersecIion operations and towards reducing
northtound vehicle queuing on Navajo Street. More detai'ed a nalyses of th is
int ersection , an~ ils coord ination with the Santa Fe Bou levard/Oxford Avenue
intersection , will be und e rtaken and th e results will be incorpJ ra l ed ,nto th e revised
lraflic study (,ncludir.g the redistributio n of project traffic as identified in th e r e sponse
tc Specifi c Comment No. 5 I.
4. ThP. TIA .s l11rfy .shnulrl inc/111/P. ~ oen eral slale:nenl Ih a/ ii/when congestion at the
Navaj-,tOxlord intersection (caused by an increase in the background lraffic together with
1/Je proposed development traffic) takes place in f/J c futur e, f/10 mollor would have to be
[.ddrcsscd al that limo.
Res po nse: A statement will be added to the revised ll affi c sluuy that O x ford SI.iliun commits to
wurk with Ille City of Englewood to resolve ma ile rs at this intersection tha t are a
direct result of traffic impacts caused by Oxford Station .
5. The long-term so/ulmn fo r pedestnan ss lo 11,e Oxfnrd ::i lRfi on is the p edestrian bridge
over Oxford. The development shou/(1 m least preserve f/;e ROW for I/Je future pedestrian
JV8ff)cJSS.
Response : O xford Station commits to reserving ROW fur a future pede ·.'rian overpass at a
local ion that is mutually agreeable to Oxford Station and the· C ity .
City of Englewood SpP.r.ific Comments
t . Page 4 -the center of Oxford east of Navajo is ,,,arkod a~ a dual left furn la ne or TWL TL
(not as a median).
Response : Text on page 4 will be rev ised to ct,u ify th" uses uf the ct,nler of Oxford Avenue .
2. Page 6 -change Illegal crossing statement lo crossing without a crosswalk (unmarked
crosswalk}.
Response : Tnis text will be revised in the traffic study.
3. Pag e 8/11 -on oage B is stated that Navajo/Oxford norihbound left turn problems r'uring
the PM peak hours are often caused by we stbound queues from the Santa Fe/Oxf,,rrl
intersection . On page 11 is alsn nnf P.rl I/Jal th e northbound left turn signal at Navajo/0,tord
will so lve the left turn problem ar th is intersection . These s/a fe men/s seem to be in confl,c t.
Response: The detail ed traffic signa l nnnlys is previously noted in General Comment No. 3 will
be used to clarify this issut .
4. Paye 13 -assvmp/iu11 of 30% decrease in trip generafion due 10 TOD is probably too high;
20% would seem more reasonable. However, a change from 30% to 20% presents an
insignificant change in the trips .
Response: Comment noted; no changes will be undertaken in the rev'sed trdfic study,
however, given the ne9ligible change in vehicle-II ips that would result.
Mr. Steve Kurtz
August 20, 2C12
Page 3
5. Pa ge 14 -Distrib~tion to the north and east seems too small, and towards Santa Fe too
high . Staff would suggest to consider the following distribution:
t 0% north on Windermere
10% east on Oxford
10% sourn on Nava10
JS% north on Santa Fe
30% so uth on Santa Fe
5% west on Oxford
R~s ponse : The revised Traffic lmpac: Analysis will inco· ;•orate these revis ions .
If you havt, ~11y qu.,stiuns regartling the information co nta ined in the letter, please do not hesitate
to call.
Respectfully.
FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG
R ichard R. Follm er , PE , PTOE
Associate
OXFORD STATION
TRAFl'IC IMPACT ANALYSIS
Prepared for:
I 1ttleton Capital Partners, LLC
5711 South Nevada Street
Littleton . CO 80120-4615
3031797-9119
Project Manager:
Mr. Steve Kurtz
Prepared by:
Felsburg Holt & Ullevlg
€.;OO S . Syracuse Way , Suite 600
Centennial , CO 80111
3031721-1440
Project Manager:
Richard R. Follme r , P£=, PTOE
July 5, 2012
FHU Reference No. 12 -045
Oxforrl Staliun Tm/fie lm11act Anal!JSis
TA HLE or CONTENTS
.E.e9ll
INTRODUCTION--··········-----·············-·····-··-···-·---·----········ 1
1.1 Prnj?.r.l Dcsr.riplinn ••············•············-······ --···-·-··-·-··-···-·-•·······--············ 1
I 2 Study Area Boundary••·····-······················-··············-·-··-··················•······ I
II . SUMMA'!Y OF EXISTING CONDITIONS-----------····· 4
11 .1 Existing RoodwayS •····················· -• -·····-·······-··--·-·-··-··-··--···---······-···· 4
11 .2 Existinq Traffic Volu'T1eS •··-··········-···········-····-·--···-······--···--······---· -G
II.;> 1 Pertestri,m Volume -O•ford Aven ue/Navajo Street/Windermere Street
Intersection••·-·--····-·············-······-------··········---··-······--fi
11 .3 Operational An alyse s of E>isting Conditions••·····-·----···--·-··-···-·····--······--·-· 8
Ill. PROJECTED BACKGROUND CONDITIONS----··---·---··-··--·-····---··-···---·· 9
1:1 1 Year 2014 Background Traffi c Projections•-·-···-····-·········•· ......................... 9
I I' 2 OpArAlinn;il /\n,tlysP.s of Ye;ir ;>014 B;ickgrnmd Conditions-·-·---····-····---··-·--9
IV. P\!C.IECTED BUILD-OUT CONDITIONS -············-····--·-·--····················-···········12
~· '.1 Oxford Station Development Characterislics------·-----·--·-·-·-·---· .. ·-··----·--·--·-12
,,,.2 Trip Generation Estimates ---------------··· -······----·--·-12
IV 2 .1 Transit All r,wan ce----·····--·-···········-·····--·--······--·-·-·-··-····-··-·---·--•· 12
IV.3 Site -Generaled T•afic Volum es ;ind Trip Distrih"linn •····--·-·-···-····-··-··-···--•-14
IV .4 Total Traffic Volumes-•--···-----··-··---··-··-··--···-·-··-······--·-······-····--·-··--··--·-14
IV.5 Traffic Signalization Warrant Analysis -Navajo Stree:/Oxforcf Sta tion
\cccss Int e rsection ------------------------···········-·-· ---·---------------------····--····-14
IV.6 Deceleration lane Requirements•--···-·--···-····-·····-··-·····-······-·-··--···-···--·• 17
IV . 7 Operational Analyses of Build-Out (Year 2014) Conditions •··--··-····-···-·-·-·--•-17
IV .ll Pedeslri an Safety Issues -Oxford Light Rai l Station Access --·--····--·-··--··-··-18
IV .8.1 Site Obse ,vatiu11s·---·····-··--·-------·---· ----·---···--···-······· 18
IV .8.2 Pedestrian Safety Re commendalions••·-·-·--····-··-·--····-····-···-··--·· 19
IV .9 Infrastructure for Bu ild •Out (Year 2014) ConcitioM -············-····-·-··--·--·-·-·--·-20
V . SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS -------------------21
LIST OF AJ>l'ENDICES
APPENDIX /I EXISTING TRAFFIC COUNT DATA
APPENDIX B L::VEL OF SERVICE GRITFRIA FOR STOP·CONTROI.I.ED AND
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION S
APP[NDIX C Tl<AITIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEE;TS -[XISTl°'G CONDITIONS
APPENulX D TRAFFIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS -BACKGROUND CONDITIONS
APPENDIX E TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS -WARRANT 3, PEAK HOUR
APPENDIX F TRAFFIC ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS -BUILD-OUT CONDITIONS
•r:.11 FELSLIUHG
.H OLT&
ULLEVIG
Orford Statio11 Traffic lmpact Analysis
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.
Figure 2 .
Figure 3 .
Figure 4.
Figure 5.
Figure 6 .
Figure 7.
Figure 8 .
Fiyure 9 .
Figu,e 10.
.Efilm
Vicinity Map•·····--·····-············-····-········-··········-······························ 2
Oxford Station Site 0 1an -·--·····································-···-·•··•·······--········· 3
Ex ist ing Roadway Cha·acleristics······ ··-·········-·······-···-·························· 5
Existing Vehicle & Pec,es:rian Volumes -------·--······-····-··-······· 7
Ex isting Intersection GP.ometry & Levels of Servi~e ··········-----·········· 7
Year 2014 Background Traffic Volumes••····················--·------····· 10
Year 2014 Backgroun d Intersection Geometry & Levels of Service -··············10
Site•Generated Traffi c Volumes-············-········-----•·················· 15
Year 2014 Build-Out Traffic Volumes •-·································-·················· 16
Year 2014 Build-Out Intersection Geometry & Lev el s of Ser,ice •·····--·········· 16
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Estimates of Oxford Station Trip Generation -
Fram Trip Generation by the Institute of I rans portal.ion Engineers ·-······-······ 13
Table 2. Infrastructure Requirements for Build •Out (Year 2014) Conditions ·················20
•r'.i FELSBURG .IIOLT &
ULLE V I G
Oxford Station Traffic Impact A11aly s is
I. INTRODUCTION
i. I l'rnjcct Ocscriptiou
A new apar\menl complex, Oxford St~lion, is being proposed on a pa rcel of land in th e
southwest cor;ier of the Oxford Avenue/N ,wajo Slmet,Windermere Street intersection in ll1e City
of Englewood . l he project site is bounued by Oxfocr., Avenue on th e north , by Navajo Street on
the east, by Region;il Trans?orlation District Mr1 Burlington Northern & Sa nta Fe Railway trac<s
on the west . and by an industrial parcel to the south. The Oxford Station site was once
occupied by the Martin Plastics Converters bu siness, but ii is currently vacant. See Figure 1 for
a ropresenlotion of the project location .
Oxford Station is" proposed 250 unit apartment complex that will also include lob~y and
common arna-;, w!,ile a pou 1 plt:1 t.i:t i~ µwpln;~U c1s c:111 c111umity rur aµc1rtme11l ltman '.s. Oxford
Station µlans to ~lilize its location near the Oxlord/Clty of Sheridan light rail station as a
marketing point for l~e project: one t~at w ill allrac l apartment tena nts that desire to use hght rail
for typical commuter and recreationa l trip s. r'rox11nIty to th e 11gM rail slat,on wilt reduce lite
impact of new vehicl e-trips by having rail tra nsit access wilhi<, walking distance .
A single point of access is proposed on Navajo Street towards the southern boundary of ;he
project frontage . Please see Figure 2 for a rep resenlalbn of the project site plan, bui lding
orientations. and th e proposeo access point.
This r1nnlysis provic1P.s inform;::atlnn rnl.:11Ar1 t'l thA lr.:1tfir. imp:::acts for th e proposed aparlm eri t
complex and ii provides specific information o n:
• Exi sting functional and operational conditions
• P10Jected increases in BackyroumJ tra lfil: vulume l~vl:'ls r:tl the Built.I-Qui tir.-,ehame (or
th is project
·1 rip generation estimates tor the proposed apartment complex
• Evaluation of project impacts
, Summary of analyses and recommendations
1.2 St11dy Arca B01md111y
The information contained in thi s report focuse s on the 1.-ansport,1tion impacts and infrast ructure
requirements on t1 1e surrounding roadway system adjacen t to th'-3 existing prujt:!ct site;
specifically alu11y Ox'ord Avenue, and Navajo and Windermere Streets .
•r'..11 f~I.SRURG
'IIIHOLT &
IJL LEVI O Pnge1
Hamrden Aven11e
Oxford Avenue
Union Avenue
Figure 1
Vicin ity Map
~
Figure 2
Oxford Station Site Plun
Oxford Statio11 Traffic Impact Analysis
U. SUMMARY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
ll.1 Existing Roadways
The existing roadway netwa ,:, adjacent lo lhP. prnjAcl ~IIA consists of a state highway (United
Slates 85) and other public streets typically under the jurisdiction of the City of Englewood (east
of US 85) or the City of Sheridan (west of US 85). Figure 3 provides a graphical representation
uf the main roadways adjacent to the projecl and it includes roadway laneage , posled speed
limits. and traffic control information . Following is a more delailed description of these
roadways.
US 85 -This state highway is designated as an Expressway by the Colorado Department of
Transportation to the north and south of Oxford f venue. US 85 intersects Oxford Avenue via
on al-grade intersection and this intersection is controlled by a traffic signal . US 85 has six
lanes for normal vehicle movements wilh a concrete barrie' separalion between the northbound
and southbound d!rections of travel. The lanes adjacent 10 the median are used as a High
Occupancy Vehicle facility that is restricted to vehicles wllh two or more people and for
motorcycles and left turn movements during the AM (northbound) and PM (southbound) peak
hours. The posted speed limit is 55 miles per hour (mph) lo the north and south of Oxford
Avenue .
Oxford Avenue -This avenue provides easUwest access continuity :rom approximately Lowell
B:,ulevard e~stward through the C iti es of Sheridon ond Englewood, and into Cherry Hills
Village . This street typically has four travel lanes to the west of US 85, while two travel lanes
with a centAr striped median exisl lo the east of US 85 .
Oxford Avenue is controlled by a traffic signal at the Navaio Street/Windermere Street
intersection as well as at the River Point Parkway intersection on the west side of US 85. Other
traffic signals along Oxford Avenue are somewhat ciista~t from the project site, being at the
Federal Bou levard (to the west) and Broadway (to the, ast) Intersections . The posted speed
limit ;5 30 mph along Oxford Avenue to the east of US b5 and 35 mph to the west of US 85.
Navajo Streel/Windermere Street -This street is named differently to the south (Navajc Street)
and to the north (Windermere Street) of Oxford Avenue. Navajo Street provides continuc,us
access between Oxford Avenue and Belleview Avenue (and beyond), primarily serving light
industrial land uses . Windermere Street proceeds northward from Oxford Avenue , merging with
Kenyon Avenue for easUwest connectivity. This street also provides access to numerous light
industrial land uses . Windermere Street provides the vehicle access route to the existing
Oxford Avenue light rail station and it includes on -street parking for transit patrons (in limited
areas). The posted speed limit along Navajo and Windermerr, Streets is 30 mph.
Intersections -Public slreet intersections surrounding the project site have a variety of lane
configurations, from single aµproach lanes, to ones with three approach lanes and dual leh turn
lanes. lnte, sections are controlled by traffic signals at the River Point Pilrkway, US 85 and
Novojo Street/Win demere Street intersections along Oxford Avenue .
•r~ FELSBURO
1111 H C'.T &
ULLE\110 Pugr4
LE GEND -l
N111t1l tf!I nf Tr:wr.11.:u m:. I
(;1 .:. f't13 lP.d S1mm l l.11111ts
Cl " Tr:,lhc Sl y""' _______ _i
Figure 3
Existing Roadway Conditions
Oxford Station Traffic Impact A11alysis
11 .2 Existing ·rraffic \!0l11111cs
Daily traffic volumes were recorded for 24-hour periods along Oxforu Avenue, Navajo Slreet,
and Windermere Street adj acent to the project site and to the Oxford/City o! Sheridan light rail
stalion . These llata colleclion efforts included recording traffic volume levels on e typical
weekday for a 24-hour peri~d . Daily traffic volume levels on these streets were:
• Oxford Avenue=
Street
• Navajo Street =
• Windermere Street =
17,825 vehicles per day (vpd)(west of Navajo Stree!/VVindermere
7,175 vpd
5,735 vpd
Intersection turning movements were also recorded . Peak hour traffic volumes were recorded
on; oril 17, 2012 during the AM and PM hours r,f peak commuter times to identify the highest
level~ of adjacent traffic activity. Intersection turning movements were recorded al the followin~
locatic ns:
• Oxford Aver.ue/Navajo Street/Windermere Street intersection
• Oxford Avenue/US 85 intersection
Figure 4 is a graphical representation of the recorded lraffic volumes; the traffic count data can
be found in Appendix A. Traffic volume patterns al the US 85/Oxford Avenu e intersection
represent what can be expected at a major expressway intersection -heavy
northbou11dlsoutbbou~d volume along US 85, with turning movements to/from US 85 sometime&
approaching 300 vehicles per hour (vph). Movements across US 85 on Oxford Avenue are 450
vph or less during oither peak hour.
Eastbound and westbo,md movements at the Oxford Avenue/Navajo Street/Windermere Street
intc,section are 500 vph (westbound during lh;, PM peak hour) or less and have patterns on the
side sireets representing movements to/from the north (light raii stat on) and south (employment
opportunities) and oriented primarily to/from US 85 .
11.2.1 Pedestrian Volume -Oxford Avenue/Navajo Street/Windermere Street Intersection
Pedestrian movements were recorded al lh:s inter 3ection to understand the levels and patterns
across each approach. As information, pedestrian uosswalks and traffic signal indications are
provided fo r movements across the north, south and east approaches at the interseclion .
Pee'estrian volume was six or less using a ny cro~sw~I~. Juring the AM and PM peak hours. Of
note. pedestrians are crossing illegally along the west side of the intersection (no crosswalk or
pedestrian signa l indication). Three pedestrian; were recorded making this movement during
the AM peaK hour, wh ile six were recorded dunng the PM peak hour.
•r~ FELSBURG
11111 H O LT &
UL L EVI G Page6
l~-lGEND
xx :xxx, ,:-0
xxxx =
X/X}
Compo.tilt' f'tok llomr ?:10·8:3011m; ,1:J0 -5:JOpm
Oxford Avcru•e
17 ,825
A"1(1'M ) Peak HOJI Trame VOklnlCS
Di1ily Tr.:ill1r. Vohm11 :
/\M(l'M ) l"c 11k ltrn1r llcdostrian Vohnnc
Figure 4
Existing Vehicle & Pedestrian Volumes
Oxford Stafion Traffic Impact Analysis
fl.3 Operati:mal A11alyses of £.\'isti11g Co11ditim1s
Level of service (LOS ) analyses we re conducled for each intersection during the AM and PM peak
hours of vehicle activity. These analyses w ere conducted using the Synchro analysis software tool
which allows for calculation of control delay us ing the methodologl1Js of the Highway Capacity Manual.
Transportation Research Board , 2010 . These analyses use the existing lraffic volumes, intersection
geometry (i.e ., the number or through lanes and left or ri ght tum lanes), and intersection traffic control
to estimate levels of service . Signal tim ing data was obta'ned f•om the City or Englewood and from
COOT Reg io n 6 to conduct the ope rational analyses of th e evaluated intersect ions . Al the lime of
traffic data recording, the US 85/0xford Avenue intersection operated with a 120 second traffic signal
cycle length , while the Oxford Avenue/Navajo StreeVWindermere Street intersection operated with c· 60
second cycle length during both peak hours . II is unrterstnnd lhAt signAI timing hAS re r..mtiy be e ,
revised : th e new signal timing as provided by the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DR COG)
was used in evaluating future Background and Build-Out conditions.
Level of servi ce categorizes the ease or traffic flow through an intersection w ith ope rational
designations from A through F. Level of service A rep resents relatively un:ongested traffic flow with
little o r no ve hicle delay, while LOS F represents greater delay and more congestion . Level of se r1 ic3
analyses fu r sluµ-sign contro lle d or signalized intersections a re based on average vehicle d'-'i dy and
they follow the same LOS A to LOS F representa tions: however, the LOS delay parame\drs vary
between stop -sign controlled and signalized intersectio~s . Level of service delay chamclerlstics for
slop-controlled and signalized intersections is included in Appendix B.
The results of these ana lyses indicate the following :
us 85/0xford Avenue Inte rsection
• AM Peak Hour -LOS E existt :or overall intersection operations with several individual
movements operating at LOSE and LOS F. Of particu lar note , the northbound and
southbound left turn movements anc! the so uthbound th rough movement operate at
LOS F.
• PM Peak Hour -Severa l movement, operate with a LOS E or F designation which
re sults in LOS D fo r the entire Intersection . Movements operating at LOS F are the
e astbound , westbound and north~ound left tJrns and the westbou nd through n--.~vement.
Oxford Aven ue/Navajo StreeVWindermere Street lnte rs~clion
• AM Peak Hour -LOS B is currently found at this intersection . All indivi dual movements
operate at LOS C or better .
• PM Peak Hour -All movements exrept one operate at LOS B or better for a resultant
inte rsection LOS of C . The northbound left turn movement !rom Navajo Street onto
westbound Oxford Avenue currently operates al LOS F. It appears that LOS F is a
resul : of excessive westbound vehicle queuing at US 85 which fills the availa ble space
between US 85 and Navajo Street/Windermere Street such that northbou,1d left tums do
not have space to proceed rnlo .
Level of service results fo r e xisting cond itions is included on Figure 5: this figu ra also in clud es
the existing intersection geometry for the studied locations. Appendix C conta ins the traffic
analysis worksheets for existing cond itions .
•r:.11 fE LS!lUR G
l!IIH O L T &
ULLE \'I G
O~fo,·d Station Traffic Impact Analysis
Ill . PROJECTED BACKGROUND CONDITIONS
Wnen evaluating fu,~re conditions for a new p·oject, ii is necessary to undersland how traffi.:
along the existing roadway system is expected to grow and how well the local street network will
operate without the proposed projt ,I so that the impacts of the new project can be easily
identified. As such, lhis section evaluates the Backqround traffic levels and operational
conditions for Year 2014, an approximate two -y ear period from the time of preparation of thi ·,
report. Given project approval timeframes, and construction and tanant or.r.11pancy sr.hP.rl111 • s, a
Year 2014 evaluation is considered rP.asoMhle . This timeframP. will be referred to as the Build -
Out sr.P.narin for the remainder of this report .
The following sections discuss information related to the dovclopmcnt of traffic volume
estimates , projected LOS, and infrastructure requirements for the Build-Out timeframe .
ITl.1 )'eur 2014 B11ck:,;ruund ·rm/fie l'rujcctinus
The URCOG transportation prediction models fo r the Years 20 10 ancl 2035 were reviewed to
understand the projected inc;oases in traffic volume along the local street network in this area o:
the City of Englewood. To estimate increases in traffic volume leve .s at the study area
.ntersections for the Build-Out timeframe, a co'T1pounded annual growth rate was ca lcu lated
usin~ the DRCOG Year 2010 and Year 2035 dally 1ralfic volume estimates.
DRCOG predicts a compounded growth rate in daily traffic of appro:.imately 1.59% along Oxford
Avenue , with a higher rat e of 2.54% along Navaj~ Street. To predict Background traffic volume
levels for the Year 2014, a two-year prowth period, traffic along Oxford Avenao was increased
!:>y 1.59% per year for a total increase of 3.21%, while traffic along Navajo Street WA S increased
by 5 .14% to reflec: Background traffic for tho Build-Out eva,uet,on year. Traffic volumes at the
US 85/0xford Avenue Intersection that are influenced by movements along Oxford Av~nua were
also increased by 3.21%. Projected Background traffic volumes for Year 2014 are shown on
Figure 6 .
Tll.'l Operatia11al Analyses of Year 2014 8ackgro1111tl Conditions
As noted in the previous section, traffic volumes along the local street network are projected to
increase by the Year 2014 . As such, these levels of increase will impact the operations of the
surround ing intersections to some extent. Level of sP.rvir.e aaalyses were conducted using the
1raffir. vnl11mA Aslimates of Figure 6 and the Highway Capacity Manual melhodologies to
ascertain well intersections will operate for this future condition .
Additionally, signal timing data developed by DRCOG was used for the analysis of Backyrnund
conditions at both the US 85/0xlord Avenue and Oxford Ave11ue/Navajo StreeV Windermere
Sheet intersections.
•r~ fELSllURG • HOLT o.
ULLEVIO T'age9
Oxford Avenue
18 ,4D0
LEGEND
C, ....
j!
,:xx1xxx1 I.M(PMI Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
~X_X_X __ D_a-'llyc..T_ra_lf_1c_Vo_1u_m_e ___ ~ Figure 6
Year 2014 Background Traffic Volumes
Oxford Avenue
LEGEND
../ lane As~gmne ol a = iralfic Sig~~I
XIX = AMIPM Peak I lour lnlersecllon
level ol Serv ice
Figure 7
Vear 2014 Background Intersection Geometry & Levels of Service
-~~"11:WJK~.1::~Hrr~(~·~1ig:1iMf~~
(hf 1ml Station Tm/fie.: lmpactA,wlysis
The signal timing revis ,u ns increased the tmffic signal cyc'e ,englh al the US OS/Oxford Avenue
intersection to 150 seconds, while the cycle length at th e Oxford <\venue/Navajo
St reeVWindermere Street intersection was incrnasetl tu 75 st:!w11d~. These revis ions come with
changes also to the 1n div1duc1I µhn~es ctl ec1ch inter section .
The capacity analyses found that some peak hour intersection levels of service will see
unproved operations, while othors will set increased dela)'. For example, referring to Figures 5
and 7, the US 85/Oxlord Avenue inlersaction wil l see improvements during the AM peak hour
(LOS E lo LOS D), while the PM peak hour wi ll see a reduclkm in level of service /LOS D to
LOSE).
In regards to individual intersection movements. some movP.menls see improvements in
operations, while others do nnt. 01 note , the northbound left lurn movement from Navajo Street
;,nln wAstbound O.tord Avenue will continue to operate al LOS F during the PM peak hour (the
same as for existing conditions). Operational analyses ,nrlicato thot morked improvement (LOS
D to LOS C in the AM peak hour ond LOS r-lo LOS C during the f'M peak hour) v,oJld o ccu r for
t~is movement if a protect ed left turn phase (i.e ., green arrow) is provided . Northbound vt1l1ii:lt1
queue length is also reduced with this operational change .
Figure 7 rep1ese11ts th~ LOS results and the assoclatea geometric Infrastructure for the YP.ar
2014 Background time period . Appendix D Includes the operat ional analysis wor1<sieets for
Background conditions.
" Fl::LSBU 0,G , .HCLT & l UL L EVJG Png,11
01.ford Station Traffic Impact Analysis
IV. PROJECTED BUILD-OUT CONDITIONS
IV.I Oxford Station Development Cl,ararttristirs
Oxford Station is pror,osing to construct a new apartment complex with 250 dwelling units In the
southwest corner of the Oxford Avenue/Navajo Street/Windermere Street intersection In the C.,ty
of Englewood, Colorado. Oxford Station proposes a new site access oriented along Navajo
Street approximately 450' from the south flowline of Oxford Avenue . The apartment complex
will also include lobby and common areas, while a pool plaza is proposed as an amenity for
apartment tenants .
IV.2 1'rip Gc11eratio11 Estimu !cs
The close proximity of Oxford Station to tho Oxford/City of Sheridan light rail station will provide
an opportunity to promote the project as a transit-oriented residential development: one that will
attract apartment tenants that clesirn to use light rail for typical daily commuter trips . Proximity
to the light ral. station will reduce the impact of new vehicle-trips by having rail transit access
within walklnQ distance.
Estimates of new vehicle-trips for the apartment complex were first estimated based on
information contained In the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) publication I!iR.
Generation. B'" edition. Consideration of transit opportunities along with other factors must be
weighed, however, to properly evaluate the actual number of new vohicle-trips that Oxford
Station will add to the existing street network. The following section summarizes information on
trip-mak ing reductions that can be used to adjust the standard ITE trip rates for this project.
IV .2.1 Transit Allowance
Given the close proximity of the Oxford/City of Sheridan light rail station to the proposed Oxford
Station development, residents of Oxford Station will have the opportunity to use transit for trips
to/from work and for other pur;>oses . Oxford Station provides the opportunity for ~nose people
who wish to live near a tight rail station to take advantage of Its conve11i~11ce , while also
providing a housing option for those people who may he transit dependent. Oxford Station
residents will also use light rail to some extent for recreational trips .
To ascertain the level of potential transit trip reductions related In the proximity of the existing
light rail station , Information contai11ed in Effects of TOD on Housing. Parking. and Travel by the
Transit Coor,erative Research Program (TCRP Report 12B) was consulted. Section 2 of this
publication includes a specific case study on how projects adjacent to a rail station can attect
vehicle-trips . This case study researched 17 housing projects in four cities in the United States
and found that upwards of 50% of daily and AM and PM peak hour vehicle-trips are eliminated
when residential developments are located near rail stations .
•r~ FELSBU RG .H OLT &
ULLC VIU Pngc 12
0:1/ol'd Station Traffic Impact Analysis
Since this publication conducted their research in r,ilies with a higher density than lhe Denver
melrnJ')nlita n area, ,l's unlikely that Oxford Station will obtain these levels of trip reduction , As a
comparison , the Institute of Transportation Eng inee~s publicati on Trip Genera/ion Handbook
was co nsulted. This publication includes in Appendix B •· Effects of Transportation Demand
Manoqsmenl /TOM) and Transil on Trip Genera/ion inlormation on apo roximale reductions in
•1o hicle -lrips for developments with certain characteristics . The information contained in th is
publication implies that e 10% reduction in vehicle-trips coc ,d ~cc ur strictly given the wojects'
location .
As nolell, the empi rical data at the 17 TCRP sites lound a much higher trip generation reduct.,Jn
than what \TE would imply. As such , ii is estimated that Oxlord Station will have a trip reduction
capability somewhere between these two estimates.
DIiler Considerations
1. Bus Transit-A Regional TrP~sportation District bus route (Roule 51 ) is oriented along
Oxford Avenue wiU1 conne,,dons lo Hampden Avenue and other locations in the City of
Englewood as well as 1~ vther nearby llesllnations.
2 . Employment -Tt.~re is also the potential that some apartment residents could r.hnnse to
live at Oxford Station because the y will be within close proximity of numerous
employment opportunities. Living in an apartment at Oxfnrr1 Station would allow
someone lo walk or hike to nnA of the np.arby light industrial bus inesses.
When considering all of these factors, it is estimated that vehic le-trip reductions for a purely
residential proIect such as Oxford Station will be 30% during the AM and PM pc □k hours and
also on a d ai ly basis . The trip generation osti motos for tho 250 aportments wilh the allowance
for transit trip roduclions arc contained in Table 1 .
Table 1. Estimates of Oxford Station Trip Generation -
l'rom Trip Ge11cratir>11 by the Institute of Transportation Engineers
Apartment' DU 250
TOD Reductions (-30%)
TOTAL NEW TRIPS
\TE Lan d Use Category -220
•r-., FELSBU!\O
'IIIIHOLT&
ULLEVIO
1,639 25
-492 -8
1,147 17
101 126 101 54 155
-30 -38 -30 -16 -47
71 BB 71 JB 10B
Pa ge 13
O:,.ford Station Traffic Impact A11a/ysis
IV.3 Sitc-Gc11ernted Traffic Volumes n11d Trip Distrib11tio11
Oxford Station is proposing one access point for the project along N~vajo Street. As such . all
inbound and outbound vehicle movements will use this access and vehicle routes will be
oriented along Navajo Street to/from the north or nouth. Primary ~ccess routes have a high
orientation towards central Denver, i.e., lo/from the north along US 85 (Santa Fe Drive).
The trnffic volumc5 of Table 1 were assigned to the local street network based on th• propn~P.d
access scenario, on existing travel patterns and on engineering judgment. The estimated
distribution of all vehic:e-trips can be found on Figure 8 and are:
• 40% to/from th e north along US 85
• 35% to/from the south along US 05
• 5% to/from the easl alo,g Oxford Avenue
• 10% to/from tha west along Oxford Avenue
• 5% to/from the south along Navajo Street
• 5% lo/from the north along Windermere Street
IV.4 Total Trn.ffic Volumes
The Background traffic volume estimates for Year 2014 (Figure 6) were combined with the trip
generation assi9nment for Oxford Station to develop projections of taffic volumes when the
project is fully constructed and occupied (Year 2014). Figura 9 represents the projected traffic
volume levels for the Build-Out time period.
IV.5 Traffic Signalization Warrant A11alysis -Navajo Street/Oxford Station
Access I11tersectio11
The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices IMUTC.Ql outlines nine warrants that can be
used as guidance in determining when an intersection may benefit from the installation of a new
traffic signal. When evaluatins future intersection conditions, only one warrant, Warrant 3 -
Peak Hour, con be evaluated with any confidence since peak hour traffic volumes are typically
projected when analyzing the impacts of a new project.
It must be pointed out, however, that the MUTCQ. stale. •.hat this signal warrant should only be
used in "unusual cases, such as office complexes, manufacturing plants, industrial complexes,
or high-occupancy vehicle facilities that attract or dis charge largo numbers of vehicles over a
short time." This is not the case for the Navajo StreeVOxford Station Access inlerse:tion. It is
the best tool available, however, to provide an indication of whether or not an intersection could
benefit from the installation of a traffic signAI, Rnd ii does serve as a guide on whether or not
other signalization warrants may be met. These other warrants cannot be evaluated property,
however, until Oxford Station Is fully constructed aml oi;cupied. Traffic signal analyses using
Warrant 3 are only included in this analysis as a guide for the potential of signalization, not as a
recommendation .
•r'.il FELSl\uRG
IIIIIHOLT &
ULLEVIG
115
~
10 %
LEG END
XXX(XXXJ
xxxx
XX%
~ :=~r4\15)
l . :-2411~)
2(71 .. ~ r
~
AM(PM) Peak Hour Trallic Volumes
• Daily Traffic Volume
Sile Trip Distribution
975
M(S Gl7
1-ll'I 60 Oxforrl Av P.ntt L'
·1w +--+ ~:~ 5% ill
Figure 8
Site Generated Traffic Volumes
~~E'7i~~~1:z:;~~~:·;~er~7~r.~y;·:~-~-~~
LEGEND
XXX(XXX)
xxxx
AM [PM) Peak H~ur Traffic Volumes
Oal :v Traffic Vclume
I LEGEND
Oxford Avenue
19,375
Oxford Av~nue
...,I = I ,ne A.ssignrnr.nt a = Traffic Signal
XIX -AM/PM Peak Hour ln!e rscelion
!._ij\''!lul Sc1vii.:t:
>i/x -AM/PM Peak Hour Movement
Level ol Service
Sire Access
G7(3o!-' •-I
4(2 ·l ;-g
V: ~
.0 ;
~ ~ Figure 9
Year 2014 Build-Out Traffic Volumes
Site AT!?SS •1
..,t
b/r--< ~
,:a; ...
. a
~
~
Figure 10
Year 2014 1:Md·Out Intersection Geometry & Levels of Serv :ce
J!~~...\L*l-:.i ®S%,~~~~1fl•17'?lJf.!r.Mi7ITTm:m;:,--'i\
Ox(o.-,I Station Traffic Impact Analysis
The evaluation of this Intersection, using only Warront 3 criteria , indicotes thot this internocllon
is rot projected to meet the crileria for installation of a traffic signal for the Year 2014 time
period (see Appenciix E). Peak hour traffic volumes alon~ Navajo Stree\ and exiling \he Oxford
Station access are simply 1101 sufficient lo meet ",e crl\erla or th is w~rra11I and , therefore , uther
sig nali2at1on warrants are not expected to be met e \t11cr . As such, the Navajo StreeUOxford
Station access intersection will be analyzed for operat ·onal characteristics as a sto?-controll ed
intersecllon in subsequenl sections, 1.e., with a stop sign on the Oxford Station access approach
(1.e., eastbound direction).
1\/.6 Dc,crlcratio11 Lime Req11ircmc11ts
As can be seen on Figure 9, a relatively small number of vehicles w :11 proceed from Navajo
Street onto :he Oxford Station access -maxi mum number of turning vehicles is approximotL:\
one per minute in the PM peak hour. Auxiliary lanes for northbound Iott turn or southbo· ind right
turn movements are not deemed necessary for th is proj ect . As such, operational ;maly ms
conducled for the Build-Out co ndition (which are summarized in the next section) we,e
conducted assuming or:ly one la11tt fu, sllar<id veili1,; ~ 11,ovtmtenll:i in both the 11u1Ull.muad ancf
southbound directions of Navajo Street.
JV ,7 Opemti1111<1/ 1\11n/yscs of B11ild-011t (Ycnr 2014) Cm1ditim1s
Capacity analyses of the Bu,l d-Out condition , using the DRCOG signal liming parame1ers as
first described in Sectio, 111.2 , indicate that overall intersection levels of service for signallzeci
lnterser.tions will re.main mnstant with lllP. ar1dilion of Oxfnrci Statinn II is rer.ognl~ed that some
movemen1s w il l see increases in average vehicle delay f•om the Background analysis scenario
d ue to the addition or the site-generated traffic . Howeve·, these additional vehicles will not
Impact intersection operations sufficiently to cause a change ,n the levol of service designation .
One operational improvement should be considered, howeve·, to improve the level of service for
the northbound left turn movements from Navajo Street on\o westbound Oxforu Aw11ue.
Operational analyses indicate that marked improvement would occur for this movement If a
protected \eh turn phase (i.e., green arrow) is provided (LOS F to LOS C for the northbound left
turn movement and LOS D to LOS C for the intersection as a whole). The length of vehicle
queuing would also be grea tly reduced by the implementation or this opera1 ional change such
that modifications to the physical left turn lane length is not required .
These analyses also find that the new intersection along Navajo Street for move ments to/from
the Oxford Station access will oper,rle well during the peak hours of a typ ical we 11 kday . I OS r.
or belier can he ar.hiP.vP.rl
See Figure 10 for a representation of the intersection a nd movement LuS at the project
intersections. Appendix F includes the \eve, of service analysis worksheets for Build-Out
conditions .
•r:oil FEL Sl3 URG .. HOLT&
ULI.EVIG l'nge17
Oxford Station Traffic lmpac:t A,111lysis
lV.8 Pedestria11 Safety Issues -Oxford l.iglrt Rail Station lcccss
The analyses contained in lhe previous s~ctions uf lhis report have focused on vehicle
operations al lhe existing public street Intersections and at lhe ~ew sile access point . There are
some pedestrian safety Issues that should be addressed since Oxford Station will be promoting
additional pedestrian movements between lhe project site and lhe Oxford/City of Sheridan llghl
rail station .
The information contained in this section summarize observations of existing conditions and,
therefore, lhe recommendations of this section would provide a safer pedestrian environment for
existing City of Englewood residents and patrons of the existing light rail station. Since Oxford
Station will increase pedestrian movements between the project site and the light rail station,
these recommendations will benefit both e~isting and futurt pedestrians.
IV .8.1 Site Obsel"\·ations
The following are observations and points of fact that were found at the Oxford Avenue/Navajo
StreeUWindermere Street intersection and along Windermere Street:
• Pedestrian crosswalks and pedestrian traffic signa: indications exist on three sides of the
Oxford Avenue/Navajo Street/Windermere Street intersection -on lhe north, south and
east sides.
• A total of 19 pedestrians used one of the crosswalks at the Oxford Avenue/Navajo
Street/Windermere Street intersection during the AM peak hour, while 17 pedestr;,ins
used one of these crosswalks during the PM peak hour.
• Three pedestrians during :he AM peak hour and six during lhe PM peak hour crossed
Oxford Avenue along the west side of the Oxford Avenue/Navajo Street/Windermere
Street intersection -the west side of this Intersection does not have a designated
crosswalk or pedestrian signal indications .
• Some pedestrians crossed Windermere Street in a diagonally fashion just to the north of
Oxford Avenue (i.e., not within the crosswalk).
• There is a "Crosswalk Ahead" sign located on Windermere Street in advance of the
Oxford/City of Sheridan light rail station : however, a crosswalk for movements between
the east and west sides of 'Nindermere Street does not exist (i.e., no curb ramps,
crosswalk pavement markings , or signing).
• A few pedestrians walked southbound along the east side of Navajo Street to reach the
on-street parking spaces that exist app roximately 350' to the south of Oxford Avenue:
sidewalk does not exist along the east side of Navajo Street in this area.
•,~ FELSBURG
'1111 H OLT &
ULI.EVIG Png c 15
Oxful't-1 Station Traffic lmpact Analysis
IV .8.2 l'edeslrian Safety Recommendations
011ce Oxford Station Is constructed, 11 is recognized that more pedestrians wi"I walk between
Oxfu1d Stallor. and the Oxford/City of Sheridan light rail station . As such , providing a sale and
conve1ienl acces s route i.Jt!IWt!tlll the twu <lesl inalions is impor1an t. Two primary pedestrian
au:ess improve ments are re \,:ommended :
Pe d estrian Crossing of O x:ord Avenue (Existing Condition) -As noted in Section IV.8 .1,
pedestrians cross Odnr<t Street on the w est side of the Oxford Avenue/Navajo
StreeVWindermere Street intersection without the benefit of a marko<1 crMswalk or~
pedestrian traffic signal indication. Given existing conditions . it is recommended that
additional signing be provided to direct pedestrians to the existing cross walks lo
progress oetween the north and south sides of Oxford Streel. Signing sucl1 as shown
below {MU I c;;Q signs R9-3 and R9-3bP) should be installer! as close 10 the location
where th e ill &gal crossing maneuvers are occurring .
USE-+
CROSSWALK
As an alternative, and only if the installation of ~ no,thbrnind left tum phase (i.e ., greer,
arrow) is provided for the northbouna Navajo Street to westbound Oxford Avenue
movement (Section IV . 7), a new crosswalk could be inslalled across the west side of this
intersection. Consideration of the addition of this crosswalk should be thoroughly
evaluated relative to its impacts to vehicle movements al lhls intersection and lhe
interaction th is change could have with olner vehir.le movements along Oxford Avenue
and/or at the US 85/0xford Avenue intersection.
As , long-term solution , a grade-separated crossing oveI Oxford Avenue sl1ould be
considered. The construction of a grade-separated crossing could benefit existing City
of Englewood residents and light rai l patrons as well as the new Oxford Station tenants.
•r~ FELSllUR G 'IIIIH O LT&
U L LEV !G Pnge19
0:rford Station Traffic lmp11ct Analysis
2 . Now Crosswalk on W indermere Street -Also as noted in Section IV.8.1, pedestrians
cross Windermere Street just to the north of Oxford Avenue instead of using the
designated crosswalk at the Oxford Avenue/Navajo Street/Windermere Street
Intersection. The crossing maneuver is typically In a southeast to northwest direction ,
i.e .. diagonally across Windermere Street. Additionally , it was noted that there is a
signed pedestrian crossing near the light rail station; however, curh ramps, crosswalk
pavement Marking , and signing are not provided.
It is recommended that new curb ramps , crosswalk pavement markings , and crosswalk
signing be provided on Wind ermere Street ot the light rail stati on both as a safety
measure and as a means fo r pedestrians to recognize exactly where they should be
crossing W indermere Street
IV.9 lt1fm struct11re for B11il1l•011t (Y ear 2014) Co11ditio11 s
Table 2 summarizes the operational and physical improvements needed lo address the traffic
impacts and pedestrian safety improvements associated with the Build-Out of Oxford Station
and to address existing ~•edestrian safety concerns.
Table 2. lnfrastn•cture Requirements for Build-Out (Year 2014) Conditions
·. i(iipr~iitinjeht i:o~~iion ·· ·
Odord Avenue/Navajo
StreeVWlndermere Street
Intersection
Windermere Stre at at
Oxford/City of Sheridan
Liaht Rail Station
Navajo StreeVOxford
Station Acces s
lnte ·section
•r'a FEL SBU RO
'III HOL T &
U LL EV I G
. ;:::.-_: · .. ' i . -,:. ., .......... ,, ... ,.,.,,,,. •·;-, '\)/:,' .. i ,,., . : 1MP~0 y,.riie.ryt;"!)iP.• ·. '.. . .· .• :·: ..
-'• ,,-..
Add protected/permissive left tum phasing fo r the northbound left
turn lane . Coordinate this phasing change with exist:ng signal
timing parameters at the US 85/0xford Avenue interse-ction .
Install signing to restrict pedestrian crossing maneuvers a:ross the
west side of this intersection 2! install a pedestrian crosswalk on
the west side of this intersection if the left tum phasing Is installed
as noted above .
If left tum phasing for the northbound Navajo Street left turn
movement Is .!l!!1 installed , the no,thbound left turn lane and
centerline pavement markings s • ,, Id be modified to extend the
exisli11y 11orthl>ound left tum lant , the extent possi ble towards the
location of the proposed Oxford Station access . This improvement
will roquiro a restriction of the northernmost parking spaces on the
east side of Navaio Street, however.
Install curb ramps, crosswalk pavemen! markings, and appro priate
signing to create a new crossw~lk between the east and west sides
of Whdermere Street at the existina liaht rail station .
Install a stop sign on the Oxford Station access to control
~a stb ound move ments.
l'age lll
O:i.ford Station Traffic Impact Analy.<i5
V. SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS
Oxford Station, a new apartment complex, Is being proposed on a parcel at land in the
southwest corner at the Oxtord Avenue/Navajo Stree:/Windermere Street intersection ,n the City
of Eng ewo:id. The project site 1s bounded by Oxford Avenue on the north. by Navajo Street on
the east, by Regional Transportation District and Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway tracks
on the west, and by an industrial parcel to the south.
Oxford Station is proposing to construct a 250 unit apartment complex that will RIRn inch,ne
lohhy and common areas, while a pnol plaza is proposed as an amen ity for o?artment tenants .
Oxford Station plans to utilize its location near the Oxford/City of Sheridan ligh, rail station as a
markeling point for the project; one that w;II allract apartment tenants that desire to use light rail
for typical commuter and recreational trips. Proximity to the light ro il station will rcd!lce the
impact of 11-~w vehicle-trips by having rail transit access within walking distance .
A single poi11t uf ar:cess Is proposed on Navajo Street towards the southern boundary of the
project frontage.
Given the prox1m1ly of :he Oxford/City of Sheridan light rail station, many <1partment dwellers will
use transit for a portion of their daily trips. An estimate of 30% of all vehicle-trips is projected to
use rail transit or the existing bus transit along Oxford Avenue . As .Jch, about 1,150 daily
vehicle trips, 88 AM peak hour trips, and 110 PM peak hour trips are projected to be added to
the street network as a result of this project.
Operational analyses indicate that only two improvements are neenM tn enh~nr.P. veh1r.le
operntions:
1. ft is recommended that the Oxford Avenue/Navajo Street/Windermere Street intorsectior,
incfudo an oxctus,vc loft turn phase (i.e., "green arrow") for northbo~l\d lo ft turn
movements. Not only does this addition improve vehicle operations, it also reduces the
amount of northbound vehicle queuing on Navajo Street.
2. If the left tum phasing for the northbound left turn on Navajo S:reet Is ll.Ql installed, the
northbound left turn lane Street should be lengthened to the extent possible, I.e.,
towards the proposed Oxford Station access . This Improvement will require a restriction
of the northernmost parking spaces on the east sid' · of Navajo Street.
Recommender! pedestrian safety improvements include:
And signing tu direct per1estrians to use the existing crosswalks to reduce the number of
pedestrians that cross Oxford Avenue along the west side of the Oxford Avenue/Navajo
Street/Windermare Street intersection (i.e., a marked crosswalk and/or pedestrian :;,gnat
indications do not exist). Qr, install a ped'!otrien crosswalk on the west side of this
intersection if the left turn phasing is installed as noted above .
2. t .Jd a pedestrian crosswalk on Windermere Street at the location or the Oxford/City of
Sheridan light rail station to provide a defined crossing ,ocation. •r~ FEI.SBURG .HOLT&
ULLEVIG Pag<ll
Oxfo,·d Statio11 Traffic Impact Analysis
In summary , Oxford Stalio~ will have a limited impact on the surrounding street network . It w ill
contribute additional vehicl~s and pedestrian~ to the transportation system ; however, the
,mprovements identified in the table below are sufficient to address the impacts of the
construction of Oxford Station .
Infrastructure Requirements for Build-Out (Year 2014) Conditions
;)~iif 9~~\i{._nt._i'.~clitl~n:
Oxford Avenue/Nava10
StreeVWindermere Street
Intersection
Windermere Street at
Oxfo•d/City of Sheridan
Light Rail Station
Navajo StreeVOxford
Station Access
Intersection
•r~ FELSBURG "H O Li'&
ULLE\110
.. ;':,· -.· ... ·>: .i_~"P.~i ~f~~Mf~ii.t? ./ •· :: ·:;:',·::;-•' .. ., .·, •'
Add protected/perm issive lett turn phasing for th~ northbound lt:ft
turn lane . Coordinat0 this phasing change with existing signal
liming parameters at the US BS/Oxford Avenue intersection .
Install signing to restrict pedestrian crossing maneuvers across the
west side of !his intersection 2r install a pedestrian crnsswal~ on
the west side of this intersection if the left turn phasing is i ,stalled
as noted above .
If left turn phasing for the northbound Navajo Street left turn
movement is !!.2! Installed , the northbound left tu·n lane and
centerline pavement markings s hould be modified to extend the
existing northbound left tum lane to the extent possible towards the
location of the proposed Oxford Statio., access. This improvement
will require a res:riction of the northernmost parking ~paces on the
east side of Navajo Street, however.
Install curb ramps , crosswalk pavement markings, and appropriate
signing to create a new crosswa lk between the east and west sides
of Windermere Street at the existing light rail station .
Install a stop sign on th e Oxfnrd St~lion access to control
eastbound movements . -
Pagt22