Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWZ-02-15'~J e City of Whed l&dge ~ . Depertmrrt of Public Works October 8, 2003 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS (303) 235-2868 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE WHEAT RIDGE, CO 80033 FAX (303) 235-2857 Mr. Daniel DeLange, P.E. Martin/Martin 12499 West Colfax P.O. Box 151500 Lakewood, CO 80215 Re: - Fourth Review Comments of Final Drainage Report/Plan, Grading & Erosion Control Plan, and Street Construction Plans. Dear Mr. DeLange, I have completed the fourth review of the above referenced documents for the Exempla Lutheran 32nd Avenue Deceleration Lane project received on September 29, 2003 and have the following comments: Drainage Report 1. Drainage Report has been approved and a copy returned. Street Construction Drawings: Sheet C1.2 (Existing Conditions) 1. Please include enough information for the proposed Right-of-Way and Easement dedications to be able to locate these in the field, including a tie to the section (see redline plan). This information can either be placed on this Sheet, or on the Plan & Profile or Layout Sheet if preferred. A suggested configuration for the west end of the 5' sidewalk easement is given on Sheet C1.3. Sheet C1.3 (Plan & Profile) 1. See above comment for Sheet C1.2. Sheets CIA & 1.4A Y-Sections) FOR ALL CROSS-SECTIONS: 1. The minimum patch-back width is to be 2' (as indicated on the standard section on Sheet C LO). Please adjust the saw-cut line(s) for all cross-sections Sheet C 1.5 (Layout Plan) 1. Modify driveway type to CD2 (TYP). 2. Add the one dimension as shown on the Vertical Curb with Drive-cut Detail as indicated on the redline plan. 3. Show the hatched area as "9" FULL DEPTH HBP" as indicated on the redline plan. 4. A Note stating that native seeding is to be placed in the 5' tree-lawn area needs to be included on this sheet until the adjacent property is developed. Sheet C1.7 (Overall Utility Plan) 1. Correct the spelling error as shown on redline plan. Sheet C1 8(Detail Sheet) 1. Please remove the word MINIMUM from the Detached Sidewalk Section detail. 2. Adjust the Sidewalk Chase detail to accurately reflect the 2.5' Type CG2 curb & gutter and 5.00' landscape strip as shown on the redline. Sheet C 1.9 (Demolition Plan) 1. If the existing curb, gutter and sidewalk are to be removed, it needs to be shown on this Sheet. The Public Works Department requires 2 signed and stamped copies of the Street Construction Plans. Please provide these with the next submittal. Public Improvement Agreement Upon City approval of the Final Development Plan, a Public Improvement Agreement (PIA) will need be executed by the project owner/developer. The City of Wheat Ridge Community Development Department will provide the PIA to the project owner/developer. Public Improvements Cost Estimate & Performance Guarantee (Letter of Credit) Prior to any construction commencing for the required public improvements within the 32"d Avenue Right-of-Way, an itemized engineer's cost estimate will need to be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval. Upon acceptance of this estimate, an Irrevocable Letter of Credit reflecting the total of the approved cost estimate plus 25% (125% of engineer's estimate) will need to be submitted by the owner/developer for review and approval. Application for Minor Dumping/Landfill Permit Prior to the commencement of any onsite grading, an Application for Dumping/Landfill Permit, along with the fees due will need to be submitted for review and approval. This Permit is generally issued at the time of the Building Permit. Right-of-Way Construction Permit(s)/Licensing Prior to any construction of the public improvements, the necessary Right-of-Way construction permit(s) and respective licensing will need to be submitted for processing by the City. Right-of-Way Construction Permits are issued only after approval of all required technical documents, including but not limited to, the Final Drainage Report & Plan, Final Plat, Final Development Plan, Traffic Impact Study, Storm Sewer Plans, Street Construction Plans, Grading & Erosion Control Plan, and easement or ROW dedications. Please return all redlined prints with the next submittal. If you have any questions, please contact me at 303-235-2864. Sincerely, A-7- David F. Brossman, P.L.S. Development Review Engineer Cc: Steve Nguyen, Engineering Manager ion Reynolds, Projects Supervisor Dave Menter, Traffic Planner Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner File Exempla Lutheran De JLane-mew4.hr ,t City of Wheat Ridge Department of Public Works September 10, 2003 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS (303) 235-2868 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE WHEAT RIDGE, CO 80033 FAX (303) 235-2857 Mr. Daniel DeLange, P.E. Martin/Martin 12499 West Colfax P.O. Box 151500 Lakewood, CO 80215 Re: - Third Review Comments of Final Drainage Report/Plan, Grading & Erosion Control Plan, and Street Construction Plans. Dear Mr. DeLange, I have completed the third review of the above referenced documents for the Exempla Lutheran 32nd Avenue Deceleration Lane project received on August 29, 2003 and have the following comments: Drainage Report 1. Drainage Report is hereby approved. I am returning the approved copy. FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION SHEETS: 1. The Legends need to be consistent for all Sheets. 2. The proposed ROW line is not to extend beyond the existing ROW line. 3. Unless otherwise deemed necessary to accommodate the proposed design, the proposed ROW width shall be a consistent 32.00' width throughout the project frontage, with the exception of the portion angled to match the existing ROW. 4. Include a bearing and distance for proposed ROW from the angled point to the existing ROW line. 5.. If the proposed ROW line is not to extend the entire length of the Exempla property, include a bearing and distance for the length of the area to be dedicated, and include a tie to the Section Corner. Street Construction Drawings: Sheet C1.0 (Cover Sheet) 1. Please include the 3 asphalt lifts on the Typical Section as shown on the redline plan. Sheet C1.1Sheet C1.1 (Grading& Erosion Control Plan) Control Plan) 1. See above comments for ALL CONSTRUCTION SHEETS. Sheet C1.2 (Existing Conditions) 1. See above comments for ALL CONSTRUCTION SHEETS. Sheet C1.3 (Plan & Profile) 1. Include the bearing for the baseline. 2. Add a Note stating that the baseline and the centerline are one and the same. 3. See above comments for all Construction Sheets. Sheets CIA & 1AA (X-Sections) FOR ALL CROSS-SECTIONS: 1. Show baseline offset distances to the sawcuts and also to the lip of gutter. 2. Identify the relationship of the baseline to the centerline. Please state that the centerline of the cross-section is the baseline. Sheet C1.5 (Layout Plan) 1. See above comments for ALL CONSTRUCTION SHEETS. 2. The driveway detail shown is for mountable (Hollywood) curb and gutter. Since there is to be no Hollywood curb & gutter on this project, please replace the current driveway detail with the driveway detail for vertical curb & gutter (Type CD2). Sheet C1.6 (Signage & Striping Plan) 1. Remove the proposed ROW line -not needed on this Sheet. Sheet C 1.7 (Overall Utility Plan) 1. See above comments for ALL CONSTRUCTION SHEETS. Sheet C1.8 (Detail Sheet) 1. Please remove the word MINIMUM from the Detached Sidewalk Section detail. 2. Adjust the Sidewalk Chase detail to accurately reflect the 2.5' Type CG2 curb & gutter and 5.00' landscape strip as shown, on the redline. Sheet C 1.9 (Demolition Plan) 1. See above comments for ALL CONSTRUCTION SHEETS. Transportation Planner Comments (Previous Comments) A copy of the 32nd Avenue Street Construction plans has been forwarded to the City's Transportation Planner, Mr. Dave Menter, 303-235-2866 for review and has the following comments: Based on my review of the above-named project, against the City's Streetscape Program requirements, I have the following comments. 1. The developer needs to include in the construction drawings details for irrigation of the treelawn (landscaped area between back of curb and the sidewalk that includes street tress and groundcover) and/or how the developer will provide water to the landscaping in the treelawn. 2. Turf groundcover is preferred (lower water varieties) in the treelawn. (However, other possible groundcover may be considered if needed). Groundcover to be used needs to be added to the construction drawings. 3. The developer needs to add street trees (at 35' to 40' intervals) to the treelawn in the construction drawing. Please refer to the Streetscape and Architectural Design Manual for acceptable varieties (3" cal. preferred). Street trees and arrangement need to be added to the construction drawings. 4. A Maintenance Agreement will need to be signed by the Developer (for landscaping maintenance of the treelawn) prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. (A form is attached for signing and submittal. The Public Works Department requires 2 signed and stamped copies of the Street Construction Plans. Please provide these with the next submittal. Public Improvement Agreement Upon City approval of the Final Development Plan, a Public Improvement Agreement (PIA) will need be executed by the project owner/developer. The City of Wheat Ridge Community Development Department will provide the PIA to the project owner/developer. Public Improvements Cost Estimate & Performance Guarantee (Letter of Credit) Prior to any construction commencing for the required public improvements within the 32"d Avenue Right-of-Way, an itemized engineer's cost estimate will need to be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval. Upon acceptance of this estimate, an Irrevocable Letter of Credit reflecting the total of the approved cost estimate plus 25% (125% of engineer's estimate) will need to be submitted by the owner/developer for review and approval. Application for Minor Dumping/Landfill Permit Prior to the commencement of any onsite grading, an Application for Dumping/Landfill Permit, along with the fees due will need to be submitted for review and approval. This Permit is generally issued at the time of the Building Permit. Right-of-Way Construction Permit(s)/Licensing Prior to any construction of the public improvements, the necessary Right-of-Way construction permit(s) and respective licensing will need to be submitted for processing by the City. Right-of-Way Construction Permits are issued only after approval of all required technical documents, including but not limited to, the Final Drainage Report & Plan, Final Plat, Final Development Plan, Traffic Impact Study, Storm Sewer Plans, Street Construction Plans, Grading & Erosion Control Plan, and easement or ROW dedications. Please return all redlined prints with the next submittal. If you have any questions, please contact me at 303-235-2864. Sincerely, David F. Brossman, P.L.S. Development Review Engineer Cc: Steve Nguyen, Engineering Manager Jon Reynolds, Projects Supervisor Dave Menter, Traffic Planner Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner File Exempla Luthemn Decel Lane - mviewlit MARTIN /MARTIN 7"' CONSULTING ENGINEERS ~ S ANDREA M. SCHLAPPE, PE 4251 KIPLING P.O. BOX 4001 PROJECT ENGINEER WHEAT RIDGE, COLORA00 80034 303.431.61 DO EXT 333 FAX 303.431,4029 ASCHLAPPE@MARTINMARTIN. COM ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE COST MARTIN /MARTIN CONSl1 LTING ENGINEEfiS Project: 32ND AVE. DECEL LANE Location: CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE Subject: EARTHWORK, PAVING & CURB COST Client: EXEMPLA LUTHERAN M.C. Date: 29-Jul-03 Job No.: 15373.C.06 Prep. By: PK Ckd. By: SHEET 1 OF 1 Note: Any opinions of price, probable project costs or construction costs rendered by MARTIN/MARTIN represent its best judgment and are furnished for general guidance. MARTIN/MARTIN makes no warranty of guarantee, either expressed or implied as to the accuracy of such opinions as compared to bid or actual cost. Item No. Item Description Units Quantity Unit Price Item Cost 1 EARTHWORK IMPORT CY 162 $ 5.00 $ 810.00 2 EARTHWORK CUT & FILL CY 165 $ 1.50 $ 247.50 3 6" ASPHALT SY 190 $ 18.90 $ 3,591.00 4 6" CURB AND GUTTER W/ 2' PAN LF 484 $ 15.00 $ 7,260.00 5 SIDEWALK SY 130 $ 27.00 $ 3,510.00 6 LANDSCAPING SF 2280 $ 1.25 $ 2,850.00 7 FENCE LF 410 $ 20.00 $ 8,200.00 8 SIDEWALK CHASE 2' X 6" LS $ 2,000.00 9 RIP RAP TYPE M CY 105 $ 40.00 $ 4,200.00 10 TRAFFIC PAINT SF 195 $ 1.50 $ 292.50 11 SIGNAGE LS $ 1,200.00 12 RELOCATION OF OHE POLE LS $ 6,000.00 13 RELOCATION OF WATER METER LS $ 6,000.00 14 RELOCATION OF FIRE HYDRANT LS $ 6,000.00 15 RELOCATION OF TELE. BOX & POLE LS $ 6,000.00 16 CONCRETE SPLITER BOX EA 2 $ 1,000.00 $ 2,000.00 17 12" PVC IRR. LINE LF 410 $ 44.00 $ 18,040.00 18 8"X12" INCREASER EA 1 $ 450.00 $ 450.00 ALTERNATIVE TO IRR. LINE 1 12" PVC IRR. LINE LF 876 $ 44.00 $ 38,544.00 Remarks: Cost of Items: $ 117,195.000 15% -Contingencies- $ 17,SM-4 4- 2$070 ~2g8.7 (rZ5 j,G9G TOTifG IN(a Sr93.75 City of Wheat Wdge Depwtrncd of Pubk Woft July 11, 2003 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS (303) 235-2868 7500 WEST 29T" AVENUE WHEAT RIDGE, CO 80033 FAX (303) 235-2857 Mr. Daniel DeLange, P.E. Martin/Martin 12499 West Colfax P.O. Box 151500 Lakewood, CO 80215 Re: - First Review Comments of Final Drainage Report/Plan, Grading & Erosion Control Plan, and Street Construction Plans. Dear Mr. DeLange, I have completed the first review of the above referenced documents for the Exempla Lutheran 32"d Avenue Deceleration Lane project received on June 24, 2003, and have the following comments: Drainage Report (Discussion) 1. Please provide P.E. seal and signature on the Final Drainage Report. 2. Please discuss if any curb overtopping is anticipated during the major (or minor) storm event. 3. Need to correct the typo on the cover of the Report (change Decal to Decel). 4. Please revise the V sentence under section 3.0 found on page 1 of the report to clarify the impact (or lack of) on the downstream detention pond `D'. Drainage Report (Appendix) 1. Please provide P.E. seal and signature on the Final Drainage Report. Drainage Plan 1. Please provide P.E. seal and signature on the Final Drainage Plan. 2. The benchmark referred to for the datum is located at I-70 and Garrison Street (instead of Holland Street). NOTE: There is a City of Wheat Ridge benchmark (elevation = 5531.25) located at 32nd Avenue and Carr Street (SW comer of the NW '/4, Section 26) that lies within the area of the project. 3. Please show the roadway Right-of-Way lines, property lines, and identify the Exempla property (ownership boundary) on the Drainage Plan. 4. Please indicate if there is an existing drainage easement for the swale that drains into detention pond`D'. 5. Include x-sections for A-A and B-B on the Plan. Please provide 2 signed and stamped sets of the Final Drainage Report and Plan with the next submittal. Grading & Erosion Control Plan 1. No comments. Street Construction Drawings: Sheet CI-0 (Cover Sheet) 1. Regarding Note 15: The benchmark at 32°d and Carr (ext.) elevation = 5532.25 should be incorporated into this project as it lies within the project. The benchmark stated as being located at Holland & I-70 is actually at Garrison & I-70, and is 1.5 miles north of this project. Sheet Cl.l (Grading & Erosion Control Plan) 1. No comments (the distance shown pertains to the Detail Sheet C1.5). Sheet C1.2 (Existing Conditions) 1. No comments. Sheet C13 (Plan & Profile) 1. Please re-evaluate the grade-break at station 2+00 (please see redline comments on profile). If the grade change is greater than 0.50%, a vertical curve will be required utilizing the K-values per AASHTO 1990 specifications for sag vertical curves for Collector Streets. 2. Benchmark used should be 32"d and CarT (ext.). 3. Please extend 4. Need to include the following, either on this Sheet or on Sheet C1.5 (Layout Plan): a. Baseline information. Either use the section line (S. line of the NW '/4 of Section 26), or include tie(s) to the section line. b. Existing and proposed Right-of-Way lines. c. Proposed 5.0' sidewalk easement. d. Construction limits (including patch-back, or asphalt match limits). e. Property boundaries both affected and adjacent, and indicate Exempla ownership. f Station and offset (to the lip of gutter and to the back of the walk) for: all PCR's, angle points, construction limits, radius points, the centerline of the chase section and any vertical curve BVC/EVC/PVI info (if necessary). g. Show the 1/4 Corner monument (32nd & Carr ext.). h. Identify the existing edge of asphalt (both sides of 32"d) Sheets CIA & IAA (X-Sections) 1. Please indicate both horizontal and vertical scales. 2. Show the existing and proposed (or typical) cross-slopes, including offset information at grade breaks. 3. Identify the baseline. If the centerline of the cross-section is the baseline, please indicate. Sheet C 1.5 1. Please extend the existing improvements 15-20' to the north on Lutheran Parkway & identify the station/offset for the match point. 2. Please show curb-cuts at driveways. 3. The Vertical Curb Corner Ramp detail will need to be revised to reflect the detached sidewalk as shown on the plan view. 4. If the information as stated in comment 4 for Sheet C13 above is not shown on C L3, please include this information on this Sheet. 5. Complete the gutter pan on the plan view, and that it matches the Corner Ramp Detail. 6. Identify the 5.0' landscape strip, and also the 5.0' easement. 7. Include existing and proposed ROW lines. Sheet Cl.b Si nape & Striping Plan) 1. Please identify lane widths for the pavement striping. Sheet C1 7 (Overall Utility Pan) 1. Add a note above the Tee Ditch irrigation pipe referring the reader to the Pipe Detail found on Sheet C1.8. Sheet CI .8 (Detail Sheet) 1. The sidewalk curb chase details will need to be revised to reflect the detached sidewalk. 2. Please specify (as shown on the Utility Plan) the type of Rip-Rap to be used, depth, and elevation. 3. Please include the following City of Wheat Ridge Standard Details: a. Vertical Curb and Gutter. b. Detached Sidewalk. c. Asphalt Pavement Section for Collector Streets. d. Typical Section for Asphalt Patchbacks. e. Concrete Driveway. Traffic Engineering A copy of the 32nd Avenue Street Construction plans has been forwarded to the City's Projects Supervisor, Mr. Jonathan P. Reynolds, PE., 303-235-2863 for review and has the following comments: Overall Comments: 1. Overall, legend symbols and linetypes for existing and proposed features do not seem to correspond on all sheets. The legend should be checked carefully against the plans. 2. Existing Property/ ROW lines must be shown on all drawings. 3. Existing features which are to be removed or reset should not continue to show in the background of proposed development plan sheets. Rather, the proposed feature locations should be shown. Provide a demolition plan to better identify all existing items which are to be removed/ reset prior to construction. Street Construction Drawings: Sheet C1 1 (^Grading & Erosion Control Plan) 1. The grades along the flowline of the proposed comer ramp appear too flat for drainage. Engineer should review same and make appropriate modifications to flowline grades. 2. The proposed silt fence and haybales as shown on the legend appear to be in the existing category. 3. All spot grades shown require detailed review by a professional engineer against the proposed design. Grades do not appear to represent the proposed curb & gutter/ sidewalk cross section. 4. The proposed silt fence should be moved closer to the project. Sheet C1.2 (Existing Conditions) 1. All existing linetypes and symbols as shown on this survey sheet should be identified with a legend. The legend shown on Sheet Cl.l does not appear to be accurate to the existing features shown on this sheet. 2. Current property/ ROW lines must be shown on this drawing. 3. Some underground utility lines are shown on this sheet, but not others. Please show all existing underground utilities on this drawing to be consistent. Sheet C1.3 (Plan & Profile) 1. This drawing should be presented at the same scale as the other sheets for clarity. 2. Plan and profile stationing should be aligned on the sheet. 3. Proposed features (curb lines, sidewalk, etc. are difficult to determine, as they are not darker than existing features. 4. Please identify the limits of proposed asphalt work with shading or hatching. 5. Show proposed sawcut lines. 6. Station baseline must be extended on plan view to include all corner curb ramp improvements (with sat/ offset from baseline). 7. Please identify all lines on profile with a note (existing flowline grade?) Sheet C1.5 1. The turning area delineated by hatching at Lutheran Pkwy. may require expansion to accommodate larger trucks. Applicant should apply turning templates for largest vehicle (may be fire vehicles), and expand this area as necessary. Hatching color and striping width needs to be defined. 2. Please identify proposed white striping. 3. Plans should show proposed tree, shrub and grass plantings within the landscaping strip and indicate method of irrigation or watering. 4. Plans must be revised to show existing property/ ROW lines. 5. Plans must be revised to show proposed edge of sidewalk easement. 6. Legend should be modified to reflect correct linetypes. 7. Items to be removed or reset should not be shown on this plan. Please show relocated features only. 8. Proposed fence reset location needs to be shown. 9. The dimensions of the deceleration lane transition need to be modified to match the proposed City Plan previously provided to the applicant (additional copy enclosed). The transition segment should be designed at a 10' horiz: 1' taper slope, with a resultant length of 120' as redlined on the drawings. The remaining straight stacking segment is approximately 238' as redlined on the drawings. Plan must be revised accordingly and resubmitted for additional review. 10. Underground utilities should not be shown on this drawing. 11. Please identify the dark line in the center of the existing roadway. 12. Traffic Control Note #2 needs to read submitted to the City for approval 72 hours..." Sheet C1.6 (Si¢na¢e & Striping Ian) L Limits and position of solid white line should be better defined. The line(s) in this area still appear to be dashed. 2. Plan should show method and color of hatched striping area at intersection of Lutheran Pkwy. (show limits of existing striping and how it will be removed). 3. Right Lane Must Turn Right signs to be relocated as shown. 4. Pavement turn arrows to be relocated/ placed as shown. 5. Identify status/ disposition of existing signage. 6. Turn off all features which were removed via demolition this sheet. 7. Standard City sign base detail to be provided on the drawings. 8. Identify method of striping on the drawing. Painting is required per City Standards. 9. A note should be provided indicating the existing Centerline striping which shall remain. 4 Sheet C1 7 (Overall Utility lan) 1. All manholes within the proposed limits of work require adjustment to meet proposed grades. 2. The proposed stormwater manhole rim elevation appears too low when compared to the adjacent proposed comer curb ramp grades. 3. Plan must identify disposition of existing 12" storm pipe which appears to be abandoned to east of proposed storm manhole. 4. City Fire Hydrant placement detail needs to be shown on the drawings. 5. Proposed Flared End Structure symbol does not match legend. 6. Disposition of existing mailbox must be shown. 7. Are gates going to be provided in the proposed fence at existing driveways? 8. Existing property/ ROW lines to be shown on this plan. Traffic Planner Comments A copy of the 32 d Avenue Street Construction plans has been forwarded to the City's Traffic Engineer, Mr. Dave Mentor, 303-235-2866 for review and has the following comments: Based on my review of the above-named project, against the City's Streetscape Program requirements, I have the following comments. 1. The developer needs to include in the construction drawings details for irrigation of the treelawn (landscaped area between back of curb and the sidewalk that includes street tress and groundcover) and/or how the developer will provide water to the landscaping in the treelawn. 2. Turf groundcover is preferred (lower water varieties) in the treelawn. (However, other possible groundcover may be considered if needed). Groundcover to be used needs to be added to the construction drawings. 3. The developer needs to add street trees (at 35' to 40' intervals) to the treelawn in the construction drawing. Please refer to the Streetscape and Architectural Design Manual for acceptable varieties (3" cal. preferred). Street trees and arrangement need to be added to the construction drawings. 4. A Maintenance Agreement will need to be signed by the Developer (for landscaping maintenance of the treelawn) prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. (A form is attached for signing and submittal. The Public Works Department requires 2 signed and stamped copies of the Street Construction Plans, Grading & Erosion Control Plan, and Final Drainage Report / Plan. Please provide these with the neat submittal. Public Improvement Agreement Upon City approval of the Final Development Plan, a Public Improvement Agreement (PIA) will need be executed by the project owner/developer. The City of Wheat Ridge Community Development Department will provide the PIA to the project owner/developer. Public Improvements Cost Estimate & Performance Guarantee (Letter of Credit) Prior to any construction commencing for the required public improvements within the 32nd Avenue Right-of-Way, an itemized engineer's cost estimate will need to be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval. Upon acceptance of this estimate, an Irrevocable Letter of Credit reflecting the total of the approved cost estimate plus 25% (125% of engineer's estimate) will need to be submitted by the owner/developer for review and approval. Application for Minor Dumping/Landfill Permit Prior to the commencement of any onsite grading, an Application for Dumping/Landfill Permit, along with the fees due will need to be submitted for review and approval. This Permit is generally issued at the time of the Building Permit. Right-of-Way Construction Permit(s)/Licensing Prior to any construction of the public improvements, the necessary Right-of-Way construction permit(s) and respective licensing will need to be submitted for processing by the City. Right-of-Way Construction Permits are issued only after approval of all required technical documents, including but not limited to, the Final Drainage Report & Plan, Final Plat, Final Development Plan, Traffic Impact Study, Storm Sewer Plans, Street Construction Plans, Grading & Erosion Control Plan, and easement or ROW dedications. Please return all redlined prints with the second submittal. If you have any questions, please contact me at 303-235-2864. Sincerely, David F. BTOssman, P.L.S. Development Review Engineer Cc: Steve Nguyen, Engineering Manager Jon Reynolds, Projects Supervisor Dave Menter, Traffic Planner Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner File Exempla Lv hermi D=1 Lane - m%iewl.ltr Kinsley, Paula, 08:03 AM 6/18/2003 -0600, RE: City of Wheat Ridge Pagel of 1 Subject: RE: City of Wheat Ridge Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 08:03:22 -0600 X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: City of Wheat Ridge Thread-Index: AcMloPryvAK3UTLJTcmrOQix5G9flwAAIVEw From: "Kinsley, Paula" <KinsleyP@exempla.org> To: "Meredith Reckert" <meredith@ci.wheatridge.co.us> Meredith: No info, but I will check with Al. You are welcome to call/email Al or I in a couple of days. I hope to have an answer for you by then. Paula 303-425-2539 -----Original Message----- From: Meredith Reckert [mailto:meredith@ci.wheatridge.co.us] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 7:52 AM To: Kinsley, Paula Cc: daveb@ci.wheatridge.co.us Subject: City of Wheat Ridge Hi, Paula- Thanks for the help on getting the mylars for the new MOB and power plant expansion. I appreciate it. Another outstanding item that we need to resolve is a public improvements agreement. This is a standard requirement whenever there is a requirement for the installation of public improvements. In this situation Exempla/Lutheran is responsible for the construction of a decel lane at the 32nd Avenue entrance. The agreement is a document that ends being signed by the city and the developer and then is recorded with the mylar. One of the attachments to the document is a letter of credit for 125% of the cost of the improvements. I know that our development review engineer, Dave Brossman, has been working with someone from Martin & Martin on the cost estimate. I wanted to touch base with you to see if you had any info. Thanks- Meredith 303-235-2848 Printed for Meredith Reckert <meredith@ci.wheatridge.co.us> 9/5/2003 CIT OF WHEAT RIDGE 04/10/03 2222 PM cdb H+L ARCHITECTURE RECEIPT 1410-C'pi491F AMOUNT FMSD G@NIi96 REIMDURE~MENT 540.00 ZREIM } POMENT RECEIVED AMOUNT CK 4_Y.-„ i ' 540. GD TOTAL 540.00 CIT.' OF WHEAT RIDGE 06/06/03 3!Y l FN cdb !y,'L ARMITEi:IURE RECEIPT 90001=229 AMOUNT FM_,D _ONING NISCELLANFGU; 100„C!) ToMI PAYMENT RECEIVED AMOUNI' CK 4_77% TOTAL 100.011, 100.00 of Wheat, Rime \ ~ MEMORANDUM Department merrt of Public Works TO: Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner FROM: Dave Brossman, Development Review Engineer DATE: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 SUBJECT: Case No. WZ-02-15; Exempla Lutheran Medical Center Dear Meredith, The Public Works Department has the following comments for the site expansion: 1. A NPDES permit will need to be obtained from the State of Colorado. A copy of this permit shall be submitted to the City of Wheat Ridge. 2. A westbound right-turn deceleration lane on W. 32nd Avenue at Lutheran Parkway will be required. An engineering plan showing the design of the deceleration lane will need to be submitted for approval. Right-of-Way dedication will be necessary to accommodate the deceleration lane as per the City of Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, Section 26-620. The City of Wheat Ridge acknowledges that the group may not currently own the property at 8321 W. 32nd Avenue at this time. However, at the time said property is under the ownership of the Exempla Lutheran group; the lane addition shall be constructed. 3. A Final Drainage Study discussing the impact of the deceleration lane will be required. 4. An approval letter for the final design from the Rocky Mountain Ditch Company will need to be submitted to the City of Wheat Ridge. Please let me know if I may be of further assistance in this matter. Sincerely, David F. Brossman, P.L.S. .s submitted a ~o~m t ~~~u~t to eat ~f i i ! A Y°W Yffi"i'Tl T`k 'Y^I dV 'Ywe sr'W awV w s+w ^w ~r aim > a m •m-m..m.. ...~®m .m ~ ..®m ~_.....e_ .m~__. _ v.. _ _ _ _A_ , _ ~EMPLA LUTHERAN MED I~LANNE~ I~t~SPITAL DEVELPMEN~ ~ME ~ITRAL UTILITY LENT ADDITI tIEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING N AN OFFi~IAL D~~~LOPMENT PL C IN THE CIT UJ LD1 NC ~A1~A r.  # 4 {Iii Y i \ 4i 0 1 \ ! ! • t/ ~ ! 1 \r~/ 1 \ + a c BASIS OF BEARINGS eve aces r~~ s xis ~ s s n N m on campus = 2,148 BEARII~TGS ARE BASED ON THE WEST LINE of I'F~ N SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST (~F fiHE SIXTH PRINCIPAL M OF WHEAT RIDGE HORIZONTAL CONTROL POINT NO AND A BRASS CAP (CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE HORIZON r ~r aria sus. ro QUARTER CORNER OF THE SECTION 26 AND W~IICH Plant 1 per staff at max. shift = 4 staff = 4 T '1_.t_'._._~ LrA ~n nn CHAPEL EMERGENCY ORIGINAL HOSPITAL DEPARTMENT DECONTAMIIVATION SHOWER. ~ • • ~ EAST WING ~'a- J 1 EXISTING CENCRAL ' ' i," PLANT - i n PA'T'IENT TOWER i -.5.~ - F 4 v RADIATION ONCOLOGY l _ ' I r SOUTH W1NCi 7 i RADIATION ONCOLOGY 'r ADDIITON i 2-.... - M.O.B.1 -"ix-- PROJECT LOCATION `a f j E V.t~ r~ uired by this proposal 2,200 ~i gage 378 r~ i ~f OWNER'S CERTIFTCATI The below signed legally designated agent theirof, does J F~ legally described herein will be developed as a Planned Devel '-1-' _~1_ ♦ t r err ~ .t ~s~ y TPChtirt1'innc anl~ rnnr~itinnc rnn4oinorl in Tic Flo na ac may n s i I 3 t f 4 WZ-02-07 accompanying plan accurately rep WZ-02-OS ately represents said survey. a~eraao, on the day of A.D. 20 Reception No. A WZ-92-2 Jefferson County Clerk and Recorder by. WZ-90-10 Signature _ Surveyor's Seal Duty r f^.. I n " w ~ \ ~ x x ~ x x ~ _ 0 i Y.1 c" x nx jj7, / ~ 1 / / Ifl ~ ~ ~ ■ -3 a ~ ~ x 0 1 , i r ,r,, ._._..,w.---.~---.~-.. - -..x'.~-,,rte".'--`~-~_. _ ,,,~rm.~.~.. - ~ ~ 4 p C~ 'x ~ I I / ~ - - - C,3 . ~ l / ~ f ~ 1- 1, ~!l;l, ! ~ _ 1 _ ~ - 5. ~1 .,i~~ 1, i, ~ ~ . ~ , . / , / Nnn, r' ~ f , ,1,/ . I ~ % ~ Id i E i~ h r K1 x x x A r , t , ~ ~ I~ ~ , , , , I ` - ~r 1 ~n i ~ \ w ~ ' ~ 1 'r ~ N ~ \ ~ v s , ~ v1 ~ ; ~ mar/ ~ - _ - x x x r X n ~~r-''''' / x q F / / a e'' / ~ 1. 111 Ml 1 ~ r- . ~,5 1 1 l / r "ill r \ r -~Y^ •1, i / / tl \ ~ t k K ~ ~ X ~ ~ _s~~- _ N~{ ~ Fi dl . ~ i A, ~ ~ , 1 1f~ ~ / / , \ „L s.. d x 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ r1 ~ chi . - 1 a X ~ ~ n /IQ► /1►I~„7 II / a7 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ _ l ~ Q f X ~ ~ k i 'tom` F i ~ ~ 11 ' t tI ~ i t 4 i / C ' 4) 1 t f F 1 w ~ K ~ ~ f j _~F•_ y tai f Z _ 1 x xx Q ~~f I r . . I ~ ~ ,n ~ ' ~ 0 l id ) ~ 1 ! ~ i _ ~C L ...n 'A \ e ~ E ~3 I i ~ ~ ~ . ~ v. ~ / J I _W / - _ _ _ ~ ~ I j f i° ~ ti ~ ~:I I ~ _ 1 r --~.,I ~'r► ~ ~ ~ , 1; ~ ~ / t _ / E t ~ I I I , : N _ ~ ~ ~ 1 r' 1 > ~ i X / ~ v i ;y I r t ~ j ~J`~f N i % ) 1 I , , i e.-.- V' lE / 1 41 ! i ~ / / ll t ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 i r I. ~ r~ ~ 1 V / ! N 1 ~ f' ` ~ ~ ~ X / S I ,r j l , t...,.,1" f y~ ~ ~ i ij ` / ~ 1/ x ~ ~ !~~y t % ~ i'~C ~ , `r f i ! f i ~ C~ O f X I o I r; 1 i sT I _ / ~ a 4~ E ~ r x ~ ~ fi a~ , , jam" / , / Y_ I N m ~ b / ~ ~ o _._`~'C ,r ~ ~ / *~i- o ~ ~ ~ t. i~r / J ~ ! -i• /t ,~5~i~~~ ~ ~ i _J ,/i x i / Qi r , ~ , w ~ • .x ~ ~ ~ t . _r. 3 f D r ~ x ,i ~ , / { s- , i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , , i i tS K s;, ~ ~ ~ / ~ ~ i~ o a X y y 1► w ~ X , x ~ ; r ~ ~ /„%1~ / ' ~ up7 y I ~ ~ ~ ,r, r X ,i i ~ I i X h ~ ~ y _ ~ A 5~ ~Q / t i -5! r~r~ i QW r rf ~ o$ ~~r r r. i t ~ M X ` v~• 5 ~ a r ~ ~ n X ~ /''''"i'`''"""''~' X i p ♦ j I I i ° X ~ _ _ _ I "r.~ .i P Y r ~Y_ -~5"^_ / ~ 0.....~.. ~i f~ i. - ~3X ~ ~3 n ~ ~x a a ~h . i . r,,---- ~ ~n 1 1 t ~ f~ - _ a ~ _ I x f• • ~ i ~i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~r t ~ a i M ~ ~ t ,n X t ',~+Yd '~74b6Y 1 i Jl n r ~ i T h ~ • r x x 1 i i 1 ~ h i, 2"U F F X s ~ X X i . ~~s_' ~~i o X X t ___~w~ X .w._ ~ r ~,e,u., a o x X x ~ t~ Ix i ~ ~ t~.1 r x x, W ~ cu z3 E 0,0 " ix c ix l v f 0 C*4 -(U o p~ C z x x x a 1 i - 1 CO M 4.4 c- Cl) SJ to nl cTi~ n rz r~3 n "C ct! Ix X ix a - ~ w r ,E t, 1 i I sct a; by `Y??3 H _a ~~9 xS1826 ~~5491.1 v S 85.3 x SO -"°~g~g~ ~ 54526 X543.4 x • ~t~~~~~1~ 1 r ~~~o~~~a~~~ x54933 5494.2 X4.7 x • 1E 5481.3 xS483.1 . 5 X Q st9~a ~ ~ H ~ n~• 3 S48l.~ • yF 34x84.4 .4 X 25 ~lf~~ ~~r~ X ~ea0 349 ~~3 0 a486~,4 x .4 ~ &188.4 x ~~~o~~~o°~~~~ .4 5482,3 X5484.'4 - S49d.4 ~ 1 5483~2 x ~ i X x xS~aB.D 34925 5483►1 X r 4 X x DENSE TR ~ES-~ f I l 1 1 ~`1 Y~~ .7J r J ~ is 'e+~ ~~ot~ ~ ~~Da~~~~ ' j 4 Q ~ 3 I + J ru P - s f p f~ ~ , x. 1 s+esa Q rte' ana ~ ~ \ I y f L r ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ 1 \1 ~ ssm.t j / X s+~~.s s Y'- ~ f--r  ~ \ 'L,J ~ ~ \ ~ ~I 1 ~ j ~ E S/ , ~~-=------v- ~ / ~ 54R3.~ ~ r ~ 5~l83,4 ~ X 1 ~ ~ i xs,eo.a ~ t ~ \ , \ ~ i ~47~.~ r , f u \ ~ ~ X4724 m Xaws.z ~n s ~47q.~ X i X i ' I t' N ! x5so2o x s c'f1 ~ I I I ~ I' l I ~ 4 ~ 4 ` ~ • i ~ Xis ~ X3303.5 _ • cs ice- ~ ~ b501.3 j o • S i 'ate t~ rti ! i l~J 4 W I i 5505 \ _^l ~ ~ M ~o - ~Y . j 0 X~~ 5505 INu N~_ Y4 i. i T tl ~ xr.~p3,3 Gorrpac Ga~ 5510 F, (F jW_ _ t7NAL A oR£fEREN l pl 1 r ~ ~ti 4"` c T PA Gor~pact Ga .Si4FE'N \4~i 1 1 _f n r. ~o .r SS7p .,4LL Af~1 ~/VD _ 1 ,ur-. TA GiR'F j fA7t7 7t7UANDOflN UfTAR7~" AREA s i ~ x~~ ~ AS'FI~rGIC T z ~ i scow ~ J"~ l 4i D 7 1 F/NAL APPROAQN } Y RD~£RENCE AREA 1 a t i A/ z r It j 5510 i~ r t S ~i I i f T, L~ 1 ~ 7~, l( ,fin ~ ^ . ..nM.a'',''!!'~",^{~~ M ~ ~ ~'J}~:•~ S,t(~, t ~r~ ~I~'1 !tk~ ~~f~l,,ydnrr~w~.~~~rr~..:~:.n.~~.~..~ ~f ~~+A4[.IiiSi ~ /y,~(~ x~.,.t...«.t~':--~°.r~` '{d'~`~ ~f 4 ~ ~,~.r~.~^r^r~rx~^°~c~~'~:~x.~.:-~ri7'.'.~I~~ ~.{u~r+ ~~ai ~1i7 ~~6.i./{.ftr► R f t f f _ y,.~. _ '.x ~~'.~.-„X:'ti; J~,",S~ ~~~~C.~7:5 rC :S""P^'f`~ C"' r 5+,~_..~ r , . r+^Sva".~'.~~•"...a".a.~..C"K,. ~ r. t~. ~ "~...,'.°Z°...`~r;'rl ~ :.;.~...~':~-rwr~+-`, .~-r-^a- ~ ref -lrrM.~.a~,~..°-•1• . r.^~ 6~ , "..F`GC 'i,.a .'7'..:C: :T.! :'L;: ~':.,,.°.t ...Cs C ....C,.. w.,,r....,..f::;:° r..r. ~ r L., "~rx.~';3'""`" `e:~.~~:,r•...'S"'~"N' a`..F~.+.."C..w~r.. h`.""i'"Y" ^tc~'~~~~"z;.CS'^Y?. ~ i ,~i 'ci."""'Y'r~~, ...;.'',XH""iv-,mac ...-51~7;:~S.ii F.iSr;~tM .r., , ,t...« ..r;.d.. f rSk ~ .w=~w~-~-~+,i ~ ".~"4w M~ ~ .i :C'v ~ M4 :~t;"S"."~,r.'.1;~','...,C~'~..~i`~r1!f'(S x-^.~'Yi''s.'".`."i-..~~ Y'^'.~C" ~_..",T` f; t~. 16f 11 ~I~i ~~w~p~ }cwt ww~ ..,L..:,r„'K;' ~ ~>w. ~ a J S I~ ~}.c 'c'._"" . rS.4"" 1"`" ~ "G., ""5.."'4".'~.' Y" . i. 1 '1 ~ 7 ✓ 1 1 ~ 1 WV V t `A ;t'2.'r 2r F. ~ y rr`~;._rl "i:~}~w~„f 7. .4,. ~..t'..t.,.-~-Y;~y.. ~.5..~.., w,:~ {:C,.,:, .CY a Y~:'F i i S 1 t.. ,.CY ,ry Z .,s ' ;.I'~~'~ .FT,~, '.r.» ^~f~, y...~ ~"S.ry.•'"'". ~ w., ~ r. .;;...LA y..:....*w ✓ ~i ~~~Q~~g C i~ fi~~'.;.K'A, .i ~'7 L t E. T C. Y.CZ K.~ 3, "~l:~. ate,,.. ~'"wr-N~~.,.~. ~~"+~w*`~~7:"~'v"'...: "°'i.."'~a', ~~~~c~ ~~d~~~p~~~ j _,y~ ..s..~. n..,,n». L, t ` ~r r ~L:"S`{'":~ !.,h':;....,..~'f,„-...~: ~..~^r.-+ (}~'R"C1 ~ i.; c. 7+'~,~~~~.1 ~M 3~' iK:.:,:.:.~:L. w.t ~ ` Lt -~,;.~tTJ;+ !S r, 1 ..C'y Z" "X"" «r~-..Wfw»' .5;. ,.»J«~.' *irriy M;. .t_ .a i r4~1, ~ G r"Y°"",~'. ~ 1"~ r t n3f.. tf, r # i . 7 7 ~ 3 , ~ 4TN FLT < ~~4 S Oft i~.~ ~-.,~7::~ ~ ~ 7 F r_ y~ Ne : ~ j f!Y"~ ~`~~4r~GNf w/V~ r~~~. s 1 5~4 -5 Ifs i t il" ~C~ f CCC.`3" K c ; t,_t,yi C ' r 't_ w -~5 ~ry: `S.c~_.~.,.:ti~.l wy.u~X .r7 c _ _ Y W q.~ r+.Y++-M..+r.~^~,~ V.~r~ro.Krt~...brr wf.`."~Mw.w~ -+N,~~t".~~ j; r ~ ,..,,w f b ~„rt„~., yi..~, ...,r~ rl , JJJ ~ 1 ~Ytl .+~.,r.. ~'w+ ~A.~. ~ ..A..r....... w g) t"" ",..~.`"""'"''c.r"","~T`f"'Lt"^" ,~;::::.x , c c s _x t~ixx ..i~.t.J';~:.e~ .tt.~~ ^rx.~_.r".i _ a~ [ r.., a rf sr , $ , c s .~tS iP tG k `is: Y.f ~ 'T' ...i".~.~.n ~ t^ 1. .y; J'"F-.M-rw..L.~.''".T ',,.._...,..r ~.~f.. i ~ ~ (F"S. wi ~ _.l ~ 1 i , ~ I FK'.`.".'4..r"~^'`~.''r"":'1 ...'C{~".., w.+. r r 4 . j . S i ~ F /,~y~ ]y~w(~ _ ~~~+-e+---~r. ._r., .~"'C;'7.'a,.I''".C _ _ fir. s. ..c _c r ''~L Z r..._, ~ r xr~ ;,-'r`:':'~ ~c ~r.:~: ~,~~z°:,..c~: rc~~ .T L.,.i '.C,`.._.~..wZ~`:T:'..G'rT C..~„...,.T„Y. ~-w,~.l.«+,.+3~t L..+.~.+,rt ~ .,,;,,,.wry,: -w. r~A S Z.:C.` yY ,S„L ~--.s .I S:' .t._ ._...1._..,.. :..~;4 T t. ..Y "'_"2. . l_:'. ~ +..=wC "'TL""S ~ L C r 1 r ~ ~~4 a 7,'+ ~ ~ 'L C., 1. ♦r .,.,«..,r tK : S ~ t .~~tu ~1~ ..Z ~._a z'"'::.C: _x_rN« '7:";"%w~;Y'~LwI='~.Z~K:.~.~r1 1: ~.a...,:....~. :X...w".n.':-`.I..tiik:~A j t' ~.,'.~_....~..+...u ~.C~:..w'+-:..a~..xi "."Xw.L:+'.1:.~.f.=r~,Wi..e.aV.S.i~.Ji :..-1,.. ~~5.+:. ....L.... L:..2, .,.r . ~ ~ i i 1 i i T:"" ' ;7:".'f" 'C;'.::; ~'rL: 3:~:C~..3.-t.'L:C~'C":I":ly:(: m.C:' ~ i:. ki'.:t:: I:,:S:'.'l:y.i'::L.: ~7.:L...K.,.;: `~..v.- ..«n. e -~av r .,.,.r f ~ r C'1 ~1'~~:` b ' i"~, .",.f'.':4 .It +...!',V•.. I~. i.A~ 1,Y '.VN _ 1 t ~ s ,per .fit i r ~ ~ ~ ~i ~ ~ i~~tf~ K~ ~ i % ~ ~ ai:. # I~i ' ry ~`r~'i : t._ ri„ Diu Ij ' KR~ uµti «r~~ L .t:. ~ u-, "t: R~ ~ r,'':rr z.~.r~.r~; {j r L~ 3 ` ~y~ ~ .1' i~ .F r ,~S i ~ S C.. Y>~3 1,, f i r,. b~ ~ ~ ~ ` ,'iS,;t1 ~ ~~.c:;~l ~1~~ p~ ,}~r :'t~ ~ i~E . rfla/ ~LVWR _ -Y... ~ - ~ 1.~:.iu~..:,~.:` 1 {a ~ y„`.u~.n:ati.,,.,.~:,~l:et~.,~tiM,,.~~.,;.~?,..~,~,r ~ ` i .CM,.. .....t.~. ~,tn 5.,. ~ . .w 1 :'rYTc~a 1 ~:I s w~ . A~ ai aJCM E~~'"41~ _ r w - ~ ~ `i I i...  i ~ c x- x.: ~ c ~ z. ,F _ . r ^ ~ ~ux~ { .y, , ti ai t- i t~ ~j R )i t ~ LJ r, ~y • F r- It' w 4 ~t . '~.Y .t_ SCiI~tLE: NT5 1 a ~r F - r , j., , ~ c w ~ ~ r c' r ~ X. L~ r t . e kn ~.1~ ~ A I ~ S ~ ~ ~I ~ _ .i ~ a.. . - f YA}}~ 1 ,'.t f f !1 F I ; ~A - w.n.wt..w..« «.Jm.....A. W,S.,..o,... wL, e ...w....~.... .w.~.m.S«d-.,,6.J,...,.,., ..F ~ ,..e _..mw.r.~.w...~,.,._ IT 5 l• *N& EVAT ,~T CENTRAL UTILITY PLANT GENERATOR EL- ION 08SCALE 3 32' 1'-0~ i. . z d LY.~C+!.S z-S+: , 1,:r •..y~.;~ `~'7, 1 „'F.la ,7'f ` L"'1`.a='~a'..`"`"- '+t~S...v7: t<,~E,s r1}~>. alit r.;~ Pf.1.r3..,: v, 7 rE:~ ,::7.~i..-+~~'rirl. „r ~G.... ~ ~ ''"'"""M1'^ '~t~"'r..7n.."'. „w't_k, 7 . .'i :.7 t i , 1, t i 7'"' „v3 ~r±v,~a ~t:. i~~ .I ......_".*x':r. t. c t.. '~.,s ~ 7 ;.F.t,: 7 r~'~'s'a ~':5;... ~ • I~ r'^:., { : c I. ._.t I 2 a ~ ~ I ..<l.~': ri:.~'~,~# i+ ,~~"~~..c s, r r t rt y ~ S..•n-.t..a„,.,f J.>? k ,fir. ~ C. n r ,:a... t ~ fv tf. i 1. t. ~,'f±0 3 ! , . ....:7"""`."z`~I..C,~.... irf,;'7' I•i7€ .i~""'.'":f....-.,.^:"'3"'~..._."T."'~'.'~"'t nt<.t1 ~<`^.F% n . t I ''P w n°"f•'n.. 3 .,,....i s„I I s , ..tti 's,,,, , iiw k F':_. t T`" { ?,~';'t~ttj _ J Y ' r ,s, r ~ ay.,s ~ { it{'#. t~ • s,., c~>~i `k7 tau ~Sv»-.~.w+. R:;,M.~'"^'•. , U 7 i 1 1 E~ ?•.I ,...,.r..wr........... '".,'i. ~ { , ~9J•I,~ ~~k ~.+,,.e..'~M~S.+...=,~..s...w I".~.>o < Ii<!, t r 11. "tf t ~ I(,. 1. f fYt:' C,.!",, ~t..r; -"+'w' ""'v'~^t t` y~W +<w k °szs ri .:...---C~ ...t-..••rr-.w.ro :,i .#i:>lr i .h. ~ Kr ,-..-~r~w-~,`,u~sr,k'~-c~~ ^i! raw r' n;s, r ~ " "1. x.e ,.r,l A,. a.L.J f 1'~';"";°.`t .:.4 iii., Jtr,, "7'.,".~',,..x. +ce;1.. ~C,, I ~t,.. 4 t .Y. , ,c t J i 3'- 1 r~ : ~f~ t r~ F...I~i E .~:-:.....fl.::w,~~ ~s~~. h i 1 f i E . L.,..~,~..'3, :aSa7.c.::~:.:~.:.e:::c':,.,ukwl:;uw. .,:...1:,.:5.s.~~:......,.I.,...:.,.,... .a..Us.J..,`'u~ i...;,~,,,...,.,, ' i ,~..~,t,~ ~.•i:~u~:. t ,s.,: ..t.~t:.:~:.7d.% r^~*x ~ c :..,..:::r;::;~~ i i :.4.,..,.;..~ ~ ',M,,,.,....~ j J "i.-t t f } i ~ ~ I i :t x',~.~ ,7 , G«. ~ ~i-,-` , ~ 1~ i , .o ^-a=.-, ~-'.°.t 'C".`-"~:...C.n x i ~.~"'~""~l`_',.,.""°" i ~ w =d r ~rr w:c _ :.z_ _,.s.:.s. ;.~,>.a .a., r TMTM>~-.:h..,..,, ,.~`...nL ~ S;:M , f ~r,„.,,;.L. r! , r ~..t=,..•. C. ~ .l ~ i .+';."'r. .~7 wr ~..r-»y 1 ti....,,G I ~ ; jf f ~ ~.,.A-# .c Y.4 7~ ^".C:.~ - i ~.-,3,""''"ti...1_°' ~i..'.'~;c'~• ~j" L'''am--'=?;.t;,'""~"r ~.~-+.,r..,t^„k,"" ? f; j tr 'r i I i 1 / U .m, •+r-:w ~ :.:1`?'h""'"~r. ~ ~ 1 { f iC...:-^.y"'. r ~.*,7.,,r..`'..C~..r.sj 1 Y.,::w`~..~.Y.. .+~r -v-w.,..w j f J~ 1 r . ~ < , • S~Tw J ~ 5'Y",r.L',,,,:.,.. .'j f ! "`:.""t'`"' ....,....z.,. ~ ...4..L~ r.,7,.p.._, rqa. ~ y.~C..:~ f u..:,. r ~ -yl.. J'., .4. '."L~ ~ f r :..f C':L.; ..t ~ ~ C _„C.,,».. j."'j CY C,r.GwS ".J-:w"~ t ' Y~~ ~ G ',~C ~ ~ ~ .:4: ~ 'L7 .L" 'nA"!^`. ''j 'L,"..~."r"~y~„"X'f;:".."'1(^v'( £ "5. "".!""'"'7.a..'k'".'*u'_ G,_t~""3,'%`C';""~' i i^~x^rA i•-~~ t >+n~."al ~""c ~X~"~"."~} '1 , ~.1 A..:T`o~t i 'T' I 'Y ...L"~ f ,.rn+^t F•~,..u«j r~ .µi,*~ ~'.~.a~`~~clx } fi.c.~t;.TM .,..~.~.a,,,.,u r~ '_Y.,.~I""".,:'~•~:...~ ~ ~ ` T- ' r rE,. y (r `°13. i.f Yf .S 4i E;t 13`! !`tF ~ .C. _..a:!':.'""'t"'' t-,;fir r<{ `K..3. ~ -ti: , si , t""'",.S SE: ;;i'f`{: . I.t: ri: " 7,R ~ ,.._r-arc . _ -'"'^~"c . A;:'t~;l, i;;lY .rct:'^w:, ,..r.;'~~....tlt:~. :.t. ;(t;;~ ;°r~i_._ .fir-r-r,,, f f +r' ^ ~s s!k =a.'"~`Sk T"~"'Z >t JJ .>7 f t ._t k . t ~..#.~.~j 'i:~ ,r-, r . ~ r 1t t' :-~yk I ,rkd.. 1. < r I tr'a• kr~r r . r. .;kE.E r. I t..v,.l.. f ~.,,,.,,~:,:~.»;~i I.t t ,I 1 a.._. ~ .i~, ~f ~S~ 4... " ~t fy. i f rYZ'. , rs..~~~'~r~r.. ~,~,y#x,4j.,. ~ . >n: <p, r ,R,, w. ~r~~ A, ~ t,x. ....-Gam:--.., t-,;.,::... ~ ;Ei•i' n.'rr t j iti~r p~~,,;., nnr~s>+ 3 .:i>! "~z,i :t t ~ ^f? s. ,tr.< ~~-^w-,s'~., ~ ,,~,~Nnuw l "!£4 I~r},.r:S" y , ~ .:err tis5 ~;.Y~( _.k',,,~.. .'~t~ h. ,,..t;t~k `+"s•-•~•..k~., Via,( ,.,~.I'~".,.vr< 1 „s..,,..... ..S IEft 4 r t .-..w..~t"..A._ ..,.r:.., i f r ~t~ I~fF ~ i r 'r i~ f h`t Ilrs• s 4 f~ ~Y .5•.::_.~:;,... _~r F , > f i ,f<it ~~i,~.:h Ir s ~ii;.~ y t -^r"~ h ~ '•r... s r,:._.-r -1-c-~--`«':"-r+ f t '~r'y.....r~'c^: ° ~ r~ . ~ L.,s:f., f :_.lt,. : :f r .r >t r,r: , T,. n" a .s:{.~ It ;i ~ 'i ..°,Y.:,t c ~ Ma. .,e,..,_ tt ~#r. a c.,,.3.,r.. -s».,..~:Y:i~:..~i..: ~s ,~U r tt.S O~h}E~i~~>..+ .'t;.:~,;a'sa ~ Nh,•~.;...~. kk ; I . t 9~ ,.~...:.,...i i ~"";C.""" H.w# w.. ~ 1 3..,...., . •.ra ~ ..4 ss r (r....t}:I.. e• 1 r~~.,.e~~n....w..r.~".-r...w.~r«......~.....j ~,:~.:~w~...'. r~~.^..:'~'~.~.i.~.'T.w~. f y i ~~~~~~p ~0~~~.~~ ,ti, h At ::C ,~+n.G.R.,-,.,.,..G..v r w! f 1 i S f.w< i.. - C ~ 1.""r ,..y a..t 2 #-x,.7 4 n ..3....:: ( ' ,L .w~.~ ,«4, I C`,. ~'"7 i i..a.,'~"w.....~... 1 S":;e,.-.:;.;.r;..w ~ ,fi.,a ~,..,~.t,~.s.,,. s. ,~.::L~i,:.;,,,... ( ;,~,t i j h~ -c C. L 11 G 3,:::: i , .,.,C'?"".~"'~~+~ f I .=^•+v~"Y.jw'~~ ,x..w..?~-w.. q j,;,". CCS . , 3~ .,..~.,ti's^^°:.,~..,.,'~~,~ 1:w' ti l r Y i .s., . I c. r `~~~3~ 7 ~ r,.'r` ~1~~~~ ~~a~~~®~ a Vt i C .f rr i~Y ~ . ~ x. r c _ ,r, i I 3 L t f ~ ~ t ~r ,.t , , i - E~ MI r i.. r... :d.r 3i ~q,~ i~,q*~~r6e~ _ r ~w ' t i~~n N!:Id <t~ .i.'r ~ ..f I, S7',~> if f;;'t' t7 ~<:i !'tjt'i , ..fi<f. i; 'itEa i; t'; F,. t(':` ~,i: , i !t rif k; ~~7~',7_°ii{ I,l~1tl ?}{r. i l~li!fff.:lf i ti':°I e.nW...... I rMC'""..'"T",_Y_. '.:.f^"tt'",'T"`C~.xw....~7"'""..:,~.'., ..L' '1"'."`°"" .:G`•'."CT`"""'.."""'b'•"'~".. _"1":r~..`"_C'"".S"'."` 1M/• 'r .I.r..;.,C v 1./.,~ .:X ..4._ti..L ~l rl~,..., X. . C., ~ ' Y. ~..t .Y ..I-. I.v. L. X.' _ Y'.- t 5.... 5...,...-I < .S ~ 1 . ~ ; I E M ~D ~ . 1. ( C z C;"~ I . K, C . Yx.i 5.~= : Y.. z:Y. _.S:''(:' :7:'"5~,:.• .:"E:~S i C_-..... .~.i.... ..7. .r:'~,:' ~r:7.r...._.C.. , 7 -.a-~ , .Y ~ L...r+..i C .I: _ :K , I C ;"I ,.":7' k~. ..,a :7:. l.,... _ ..AV r.., ,.r `;.....f.'~''I,:]. .C..C:`,.7.v 'X._'...r C.,:-, S 7" -r,,,r,,,~,;, ~..""..e~,~+~',r..~l.'."`.,~... =.`..~...'~„~."rY "'...'"".w.__ _..y+~"`~ "~"'`""""y"'"".>TIC„.C..,-,.""t"~w"°.w...'"...,.,W.+. x e ~ r, a 3 . c s Y z ..k I. r. s_:';:::e:,:r,,...3 r Y z tic < z x Y...,.. . ,.):.»i '1' r' "x. 1 Y iY;r ! .Y.,. w.. ..'I. `S~ Yr4.T ~~C*1. ~Y_.~,.Y. 7,... .I,~C I ( S? ~ C:L S(. . Cz R., Y~ r ....r. ~'.f~ i ~,r f i .t _ .z..T...~ G,... r-. 'T'-T-'.' C '1 i K I I K.,.t. X 'K S' C 'i'": Tr:,""" 1~ .E y~'~" X l Y 'YiY t J Yr7I ..t~ 7. 7' t._.....Y,,,.T:. C..l~:.~.t :..1' ' :I:.. lv , f... ._i" t ~i. Y .,,.7 .,.T.. ~ r w...,... .~,_....r.,N_,...:..._._..,W....~..,.,~..r».,-,...,. . x r~-~' `r^ -'fi'r"'.._..--"'-->*..~-'~~'r. ' E ~ f J .a.. f. 7 _ _ ,r,l. _ ,.,...3. e .1. i y t. C 1. ~ . 1 .Y _ . ~ l y~•~Q, p W 7 1..- T i }}qq M ! ~t~ i f~„:~tia 7":i`- ;,t°' .E,,. M.`:~'q~ ..N':`'Y.. r + AEI 1` ~ r ~ , t~ . 4f i ,.4..9 w.4 t .:,1~. r., E w~.~ , }a "yam. > 7 u 1 ( q C,,,. ~ i• l.~ ~ ~ + i. v, , ' i:: r u :Tli r 1 I ~ _ ~ ,.i li ~ ii. _ . ..r.. ~ , ~ . _ _ } - `~v n__ x. b ~~/Mwiw ~LM 'w° ~!°n~~ _ ' J1 1 l F i Y i ~ tt ~11 E~iI .ri ;I;'~! 111 e ~ I iii Fil'zt i~i1~ ~~~r:~»- :L:.~;,'.~. ......ice-+:,~:.:~..~.4 .........w.t-.G.v:.. ..::".;::X: 7 z r i x. r x ,,,.....k t: t z 'Y.. . Y... 1 ~ T w i _ .,e. ' ~.~1 4 Trr.. fit. L C X:~ L - C', '"T 1]. r 1 ~ C I~ .r".^_ ......w ,;.,..i. .~.~,+..,:G,.,..- ..w,.W.,~-,_.w......,....,..x,r' ..w ,-'^w.'.,-,~.~..o ,,i.,:i-.. ^a+^ '.;-+-«,.~•,..-*--.c.<-5.,.~.-.'4.w.....- .....;is,,.,,.s,,,........,.~.,.,..r«.« o.... I' t~ 1 .,r.v 1 A .T . ,.t y f t .a7 ..3'~ .t.~ :C,. - ~ : C.^^. L ,.n.~;'~'«^.::'1...,.,,Y,..,Lr...-...~.~~.^~r+;~...~» ...w.,....: .a..f ~ •..-.x.+ ~.~,,,«.:1'.~ ~~~...Lw:'"~.5",.,,:"""w ,.'~~.L„"C .•~w-.±.'a, ":4.~• =~..a..,.,..n^...^'"~:pa,=r-,.,».>.. ^.+.wr r."`L"" "r--h"~~ YrMw~~~J~""`""",..."'r°,^ V- .",f,""x " ~.'...a.i,.~,... ~W~ ~ ~.~.y. ~ 1 r :4. t. . J~..n ..7._.~~Gk.. ~ .C.. 2.......x.C.,.K. .G f f... T .7. ..S,.wJ. S.a...'~:Z..:i.;"A'.~C~.I =.3±~ T .rw 3... T 1_C..:' :...~,..,Z1"'" :,~"`»."'..~,""",r"""~,..--~~ "k-;"'"'~".~'r°-"".::'>'~. o..-+ Y °G`.,.-.~'."'-~.• ' "°"!Y ~ TM T..~,..~ Y:,~:.~ -^v,+Ww. >~^`"NL„"A"G"'Ca",..>,...~.~.~.,'~"''~ _F-ti ~ X...i, 5..,.+...nrL.a. ~v.:,.-...r......r'~e~w.+m..w«~ ~.~.:.~w.^. ~ .f`$ r .1 1..,..,.. ~ I. 7 n..w w..w7~' .....n.,.p.a...:.,w,ww+r.... W,,..r~.mh~*+..~:n ~ w..+nMr+.+v..i...tir.".r^ ~}~~^~""H ~ . .+n..r.._ l ~ r x . x r z 1' z ,.c. r... 7 . A ~ r .:,c , ^S~' :wx....,5 .'...t~».;,~.~., y r t , t 1 _ { }.Y F.:. L. ~ l It E::' C x _ 7 ,w +~-Ya..y: ».,+,,....rL.-'i...„~+.w~.y„~..,~«,.. ~~r-ww.w«.,..~w>X ~ T,"" .~"6."'..~'"" ' ..,..`.e. v~4,^...~+A~-,~+-.:r..., ...1.~,. k r . 1 `a. r... w ..._.__.u .....„~,.`..L.;:...:..,.,„,,.. ,..:...~'s«M-,# Imo. . _w w r,_ .-r. _ _._.r.. ~ i . .z _ - _ _ , Y ~ ~ ~ ~ .7. 0 ..7 ~ . S.... t ~ Y. r , ~ ..~s.~. ~ _ , w~ ,..,n f, ` ~ r. r ..w. . r ._z... ~Ir L . L ~ ~ , ~ w~ w ,.w,,.... .+......m , P,.... ~ _ - maw,,...,".....:,,:.: TA, r ~ i-. T,a. WAIL I t SCALE 3 Z" ~ 1'-~Q" ' ~ ~ z-- IaT FLOOR 4E~4-5~ TA. ~1~ZY if 12t►1 dk i _.A f 1 SCALE ~ 3~" '~'_`V" i ~ 1_ k 1 T.O. M~3N~1" _ _ . , , . , j I~Q • f i ,.;q i ~ :::r E il.~F+~ ~:t' i ~.:r l::it s ~'.!r . ir.. :,<,e. t ..~,i i ri, y ~ r ~ I . ~ .......;.;y.,.~.s:,,..'S.,.:~;: % ....i,.i,~.G. ;..,...r'.~..& .:.:::Le..d--.,, .:G'f l:,,r:;-w-° 1..5.•-+-.-,:v ::.w-:,,G a,t^5.,."• ^j;a`f'"ry.w ,....~...~~~.~.~a ~:w~ .-,w'a:".:.::7w"'.4~~~ ~ '~.."~,."R~,„...e...~....' w', w..... W _ ...~w-,.~M., ,.ww»-•-_,...- SWi..::=r.'-": ='..-ww :'"""~,.v.~w~.~»-<, r `~`f"'. .-.~«Z-•S»,., ,;Y"'" f". "_'t". „ 7`".'..'.r:.:';.,""'."C'` . i., r t'S. `C~`~'.".;.;"X","9 : a ~ i-,- . _ t ..t'""' rS,.Z"'" . ~ x. x.... 1 ~ :r.,..,:, r t. ~ , l,f , i,...;3 'r.C,.;. f.y~A«..w~- i ~',a I . ~ ~a"` ..r<"'c.' _.!d'. r ~ ' w-«..,.,.«~+~a.~.~.,.^-+-- ^"i-a^^.t'r'»^;"'t^.t'T^•.'^, r c"M..",a'~~^r';^::3" w`'."'.""'.: x^:..:,~."d`"i_,~..1".r.,"..^"1„"t`S" ."'.'.N,,". . , ,,,.,~s '"^~'s __~`7'"""r ,"~.:.::~,.s'~'r ...,.:a;:. ~ .....;."~,.,z x`.. 'z.-t,_ry~~*" ti .r ~ a~r~;:r:~. r r L. .4,. r a w~~ , G.:. v ;.M1w».»w.,.. K^""A ,.~"'"t ,,."C'^,,.. . _ ..'°"""Y C`~e "^'^"'.c` ;'S ;.'.,S`^'9"`"'.v.: .~........_":~.:.1'"C [^.y'.°„Y"','^,'r"!^.'"t,,' ,~i, r r~r°•r~• ~ .cl; r a &._,..,~,~*,..3:.:M.~;.~"" S. ~.-""'"...-,.i:,,-.~ w,- 1 y'":.~.~"'"'^,,„„-„- ~ =~-Mw ^r ,°i:».:°Y=~~.'"~ . Z "2" ""f ,`r°"t~`~,"` Y 7. '+«"w'~~.s, l'"`i, nq..." ` 'TA":£..'"""'C~ """~f ~ s 1.vJ s. , mom„ 17... E ;"„l"?^.Y"G.'^P'°.' ~....'"S"~ "r'°`. G..L.,-.y...., "''~"'"..Y".w"." T" ~.+~.,..1. w.3~....----.•.'..",^"S.-e^-:: .^.,..w-°^ .".C'""k".'^"a'. ,x".. .`fi'r m°^r -r-•. .~^^-~'^rh,i.^„ a S. aY""2' £""r, Y ^'"'f' 'C Y, "'.~."W ~ r„ 1 ";1. w~^r r ~.,.,.,y ,~Y-'„wd ,»L C'"' ~r ',±-M.,.~. ._:,.:<..r.-'^~..:,-.P.-,--_rl ~.,"i'S"~" "1; ~ s a a. a , ^r"^.~l.,i-. 4'.......,.~M,.......1~..--,~.....r .y °Zl'~"!,. 7'°"."°' "XT" ~ t" a ~ . . ^r t....~..,...,.~.- ' .,-.~-,3-w-~rw.~..W-+^". ` , :,^w''.y°-eK-Y^r^.-.w.i~..~.~-r_'~"".~-Y'"r_:.._C. =Ti'_ _ :F"w ~  rrv T /1 Ad1Gr'i1~1dY v. _ w S m~i.; ~..v+~w,G..+C....Ow~ f~ ""ap~.~•wm~?W "~"Y`~++ ).mn ;~y, t.. X1.....1.. . R LI-A co M i e~c~c LEDOSE . a , w 4 r SHEET 7 of 10 CENTRAL UTILITY PLANT EAST COURTYARD ELEVATIO x t * 03SCALE 3/32 1 _0 i ~ / W _ - b '4. t1 tae, V' "",,,~F RflCN11EC1U~E 1820 Folsom Street Boulder, Colorado 8Q302 phone 303.449.8900 6 ~ ands ~X P Y• C~ ~ ~ ~ Sri . ti • ARCHITECTURE .,...~Y.a.~-~^^ , a ~ S~a~~ aWn • • + 0.-- e • i • • ♦ ♦ t • ♦ + a t♦•♦• ♦ + radon ~It`111 S , ~4 ~ • ~ • . N • 4 a r m ~ r 4 • • ~ • k 1621 18th Street i b ~ ~ `''C ♦ i~ f ♦ ~ f a r Suite 110 / i S ♦ ♦ ♦ • ♦ 1 • ♦ • 4 ♦ ♦ w v • • a ♦ ♦ • ♦ • • • ! ♦ ~ ♦ ♦ • •v e r ♦ f ♦ ♦ 4 • ♦ ♦ • fr • i..i ♦ ♦ ♦ s r Denver, Colorado 80202 ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ < ♦ ♦ • ~ ♦ ♦ d • a r e a ♦ ~ / y t. q ♦ ♦ ♦ • r ~ ♦ ♦ • . • . tr 1 j V 0 f t i 4♦ r s t a+ s a u phone 303.295.1792 ♦ • ♦ • ♦ ♦ 4 • ♦ ` • • • • ♦ ♦ • M ~ • • • • ~ ♦ r •tro r e r • ~ ♦ • ♦ • r ♦ i1 ♦ ♦ ♦ t i • ♦ t • ♦ 4 K . . e a r• w ♦ Y ♦ a a y.... • ♦ r • ♦ r • e ♦ s ♦ ~ 4. a 1\ ~ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ r ♦ • • r • ♦ a •♦t s • a ♦ ♦ v~♦ • • ♦ + r • r e ♦ • ♦ • v • v ♦ v • • • ♦ 9 ♦ ♦ Y • Y • ♦ • ♦ ♦ ♦L ,4 M'4 • ♦ • t Y s • 1 ♦ • f 4 • ♦ ♦ • v Y ♦ • ♦ 1 • ♦ Y • • ♦ • ♦ ♦ 4 ~ ♦ M 4 • • t ♦ M ♦ T • Y ♦ t ♦ 4 • ♦ ailed Qn1 to a last . 37 RA Y a ~ ath . a ~xAshl ♦ ♦ . ♦ • ~ • ailed ♦ 0 Y ♦ ♦ 0 ♦ f ♦ V • ♦ t • 4 • 4 ♦ ♦ r Y ♦ • # e s • 4 • r ♦ 4 ~I V ~~i 1~ 1 Y s 1 P 9 O • ♦ ♦ B 1 • ♦ • ♦ s ♦ tr e O f 9 • t ♦ ♦ ♦ ! • ♦ ♦ f s ♦ • k r r ♦ 9 O P 1 O • V A • s♦ • • ♦ • ♦ • 0 r ♦ ♦ 9 1 V • ♦ A Y ♦ O • t ♦ ♦ Y ♦ Y ♦ 4 • 9 ♦ Y • ♦ > s 8 ♦ ♦ 6 ♦ f ♦ ♦ • ♦ ♦ • ♦ ♦ ♦ O ♦ • ♦ 4 ♦ ♦ ♦ ' Y ■ 4 ' e4r j7 Lillibrid e k 1 nm a ~ • R • ` • ♦ a Y ♦ a ♦ • ♦ m Y • • • e • f r • ~ a B 4 • a ' • ' W ♦ • w r ♦ Y t + • ♦ Y ♦ r ♦ + • ♦ " ♦ » ♦ • • • Y • s ♦ ' m ♦ Y • e 4yf ♦ Y Y Y 222 Narth LaSalle Street + • t r s a . Y + v • • ♦ • M • • r • r ♦♦r 4 r♦a• Landsca Suite 410 y r a • r e 4 r r ~xe ♦1 6 4 M1 ♦ O O 'M Y r V e ♦ V U x and . Ar u X . • , + . • • • • ~ K r x. qn n Remain t ~ Chicago, Illinois 60641 • ♦ Y • r 1 r ~x P . ` . 'tce t w erf wl phone 312.408.1374 K ~ a a t 1 • • ! e r ~ ~ a • • ■ Y Y Q • • 4 • • • ~ ~r~!~+• 11 ~i I Y Y • 0. ♦ ! • • fl~iw ~rt Y » M A • e 4 • ■ R p k + M ■ Y~ Y s a ♦ ♦Y • • ♦ a • ♦ . Y • • • ♦ A • # x1S~i CC~ss • • Y I'~ ` . E ♦ ~V! ~M~W~~ aA ' tl• 9 A ♦ a Y ' a 9 ♦ •Y • + Y N B1 ♦ Y P e "Y Y Y ' ~ rnl a t ar dm cn .4 • p a r x ♦ ♦ ♦ , ir• k x. a , • ~ Y ° • a • . a ro • s 4 ■ ' Y • • ~herwise Noted P M Y • ■ A •Y . ♦ ® ' • + ' Y ♦ t.,y 4 • P p • M Y ♦ . Y • • • ~ cln rash n l'Vew s • s e • ♦ • ~ ♦ 4 ~ • ♦ • Y • s a Y• • 'J y ♦ • M Y ♦ • • Y ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ► Y i♦ i • • Y k r Y Y Y i ♦ Y Y • r r♦♦♦•• r r v • ♦ r ~ ; ' 3' Berm ,L Y Y ° k . . . • ~ ♦ y r ♦ r • • ♦ r ♦ ♦ ♦ •r r•• A6 i • ■rI ♦ • ♦ ♦ ♦ r ♦ ♦ r r o e r • ♦ ♦ ♦ 4 • 6 ♦ ♦ ♦ .l..... ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ . ♦ ♦ ♦ r + a r a e ♦ a _ a f~ M ♦ t . ~ .+a. ♦ (,J, ~ ♦ ♦ f ♦ ♦ • ,1{,i ~ t._ • • 6 AC (~eadplant) / New Trash or Generator Enclosure to City of Wheat Ridge Standards . e Y . Y ♦ ♦ 9 ♦ • b ♦ Y 8 Y R r • r ♦ i n i . ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ Y ♦ • • ♦ ♦ ♦ AY 0 Y r♦ ♦ s r r♦♦• Island x Y r ♦ b Y Y b M ~ ♦ r ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ A • ♦ b 9 Y Y O Y♦ b 4 Y♦ • ♦ • • ♦ it M O 11 PA (Russian Sage r ♦ Y Y b Y i Y Y Y Y ♦ b y i Y i ♦ ♦ i IY ♦ b Y Y i i ♦ ♦ b A b Y X 9 ♦ Y ♦ i ♦ ♦ ♦ i • ♦ ♦ ♦ M b ! 4 Y • Y ♦ ♦ , ♦ ♦ Y O 4 a ♦ ♦ i lams Remc~ln f ♦ Y ♦ M r ♦ ♦ • 1 ♦ ! Y Y ♦ 6 A ♦ P ♦ r s • r • ♦ r ♦ ♦ + a Y ♦ • Y Y • # O Y r F Y ♦ ♦ • • 9 ♦ ♦ ♦ Y • • ♦ Y ♦ ♦ Y ♦ ♦ ♦ b ♦ T ♦ ♦ ♦ b ♦ • r ♦ • r • ♦ # • + ■ !556 45 FG (Blue Fescue G ss) All New Mulch 1-2 size Rock, 3 deep • ~ Ali Shrub Beds to be Mulched ♦ M • • • i • • ♦ ♦ y M4 •Y • urb Gutter Re non halt C r~ ~X. AS ~ $ ; / ; ~a • ~ • • Y k • k ! • • k • • Y • k 11'- ♦ • r r / ♦ 7~ E fisting Access l d ♦ Y b r r ♦ 4 Y b ♦ Y ♦ ry r r • • b ♦ ♦ Y ♦ b M f • • b Y 1 p t 3J4i 1 r b ♦ ♦ ♦ t 1 W! y Y Y ~ r r♦ v e s t V! a T♦♦♦ Y i e r s s Y • y Y ♦ ♦ t W Y Y ♦ ♦ ~{S~VM !'bPl, lJ~lia~~ ♦ b r Y • YirMtl •Yb ♦Yi9♦ril r~ `11 PA to Remain ~ TQTAL PARKING SPACES 814 Y Y Y ♦ Y 4 ♦ Y ♦ Y ♦ Y i r+ Y i ♦ ♦ Y b ♦ ♦ M Y Y O i T i i • • T ~ i d s 4 1 ♦ M Y + ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ + Y Y ♦ ♦ Y ♦ Y ♦ M s f ♦ b Y r ♦ Y ; ~ _ 45 FG (Blue Fescue Grass) 4 TOTAL PARKING ISLAND AREA APPROX. ONE ACRE 't~E l"` D C ♦ • ♦ • M k ® • Y r ♦ T ♦ 9 9 1 > k • • r r Y r k ~ \ r ~ r P M i~~~ t 4 Y 41 i O • Y • • R • i f •Y a ♦ Y ♦ • • • • X ~ • Y Y 9 p \'b1,, • k P r ~ Y P • M ♦ y k k A Y r ♦ r • ro + ~ Y ~'y r• r • y • ♦ h• y• Y f 4 Y Y Y ~ • I♦ f ♦ • ' ♦ ♦ + Tr Remain • 2 lands ees EX Is ♦ • k ~ 9 . :2a~ r • Y • Y • M 1 • • ♦ ~ ~ Y • ♦ ♦ ♦ ~ • • ` a - ♦ • • A ♦ ~ ♦ ♦ • ♦ Y • • f x ♦ ♦ ♦ • hY • i w y M ' ♦ ♦ X • ® ♦ • , f • i • ' i • • • • •M Y • • • ! ♦ • ♦ ♦ ♦ f F r ti• ♦ ~ • r M ° • " • • i Y end Pavan . r A k t y y ~e » • ♦ ♦ k Y • • • [ ~ 11 IVY ♦ Gu • E No X. ♦ h o ♦ • . • ♦ ♦ • • • ♦ ■ • • M P ♦ ~/J~) k 1 ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ' r y ~ ♦ * Y ♦ • 2~ • • ~i rn v ' • ♦ ♦ ♦ • • ♦ p • • ♦ • ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ • i r;. t ♦ ♦ ♦ • ♦ t • ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ • ♦ ♦ ♦ r ♦ • • • ♦ ♦ ♦ • ♦ ♦ • ♦ ♦ • ♦ s ♦ r ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ • r « ♦ • ♦ ♦ i y ° ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ,S ~l~ ♦ i ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ i ♦ • M ♦ N ♦ • • • • ♦ / ► • ~'"+r ~ RT 2 Pav New - 1 3 ~ ~ ~ /s • ♦ ♦ ♦ t ♦ • t ♦ ♦ f ® i ♦ t_ ,n ♦ M ~ cl . , I . r4.~ ♦ r ♦ • ♦ ♦ ♦ • r r • • ♦ ~ ~N • • • f~i _ 1 ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ • • f ♦ • ♦ ♦ t i ♦ i i ♦ ♦ • ~ AS . . ♦ ♦ r i rt ~ 1` i • ♦ 1 5 ♦ ♦ J ♦ • ♦ ♦ ♦ • ♦ ♦ 4 + • ♦ i ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ • ♦ ♦ ~ CN r ♦ ♦ r♦• ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ i ♦ ♦ • r -Z r"•1 : ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ 1 A ♦ t ♦ ~ • ♦ ♦ • l s_ s ♦ • ♦ ♦ ♦ • • • • ♦ ♦ f • o r ♦ ♦ ♦ • •♦♦r k _a i G 4 ~t L a . 1  4 m ♦ Y • Y ♦ • @ O ♦ t w • • • • ♦ g ♦ P Y 1 f • P 9 • W • tl • • 4 f • ♦ Y r 9 t ♦ I • V b tl 9 M ♦ r m 4 w R♦• b♦ r 8 Y••♦ Y r♦ tl~Y s Y• r o AM 34 1 Achiilea milletdium c.:omman vvrnte Yarrow ► yap. 3 S • u y L.11 Y V%.* tivi PIN ♦ e♦ t e 4 b• 1 s r ♦ • t Y r♦ a t♦♦* t a A 0 r 9 4 ♦ 4 a ♦ ♦ ♦ a r a r • a b i t ♦ V 6 ♦ ♦ Y • ♦ ♦ b ♦ a ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ f • ♦ 4 1 f e 9 6 b ♦ ♦ O tl • Y Y • t ♦ ♦ Y tl ♦ ♦ ♦ • ♦ R Y ♦ ♦ O V ♦ PLANTING PLAN ♦ r ♦ r r t r♦♦♦♦ m r• a s s a s r s a ro- 9♦ tl Y r♦+ f a♦ Y m• a♦ ♦ s ro tl r♦ w♦• e r♦♦ r♦ 0 1 e•• r a♦ e ♦ r • w ♦ ♦ a r a ♦ ♦ ♦ 4 e ♦ e ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ FG 270 Festuca glauca Blue Fescue Grass 41 pot 8-12 x & Sun to Adapts 1211 Shade 552 0 ♦ I r o • a b m ♦ w r f + e 4 a ♦ ' ♦ e • a 4 ♦ P 1 ♦ M a ♦ ♦ ♦ k V • ♦ • T M tl b♦ Y • e ♦ r 4 1 X ♦ Y ♦ b 4 • ♦ r • ♦ • w Y ♦ ♦ r ♦ 9 ♦ 9 ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ 1 ♦ ♦ 1 V • ♦ t tl r Y b ♦ ♦ • ♦ • e ♦ a 6 ♦ a 30' 60 120 t ♦ ! t ♦ ♦ ♦ Y ♦ ♦ i a • . t ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ • r • ♦ Y r 9 R R r • ♦ r ♦ • • m ♦ Y t m ♦ M ♦ Gii~nr i nXnmi ~pncc r ♦ ♦ t x t Ex. Berm + Larwn NTH Remain to S52o ;pO i r ~ 1 I I~EC~UNE 1820 Folsom Street Boulder, Colorado 80302 phone 343.449.$900 ( n 1 ( 1 1 ARCHITECTURE 1621 1 Sth Street Suite 110 5 4 3 Denver, Colorado 80202 phone 303.295.1792 MECH. SCREEN BRICK MASONRY VENEER Lillibrid e T.O. PARAPET - - ~ 130 -2 I POSSIBLE FUTURE IMAgNG) 222 North LaSalle Street AREA POSSIBLE FUTURE WALKWAY Suite 410 _ ' Chicago, Illinois 60601 phone 312.408.1370 ~ - T ~ i~ --•-------------------1-a---- 1 I I i ~ z .....~.w.~.-.  °'---r-~'--"`--_ t---•-•-~-~--°er-------_rr _ i■ •i ~a a~ ~r--...--- ,i ~e tF is ~i Ei ~i u u i ~ r ~J r Y ~ ► . i ~ , e ~a NORTH EAST ELEVATICJN - M ~ g A Y r 2 i 1 i - t _ tl 1 it i t~°- i i H G .d ~~i MECH. SCREEN _ - ,-1-- - , .m._ BRICK MASONRY VENEER - ~e -.Z i I Fs i..~ t rr rv ~ - - - - - x c■ r ~ nr~e aaa~w `t  o ~ o ~l_~ I~ ICI ICJ 11 A~ 1 ~ FlRST BOOR W ~ ~ M [ELM 100 -0 00 +l . i.. ~i -tea SHEET 1~7 MOB 3 9of10 LLF~ fw ~i A8CH11ECTUflE 1820 Folsom Street Boulder, Colorado 84302 phone 303.449.8900 ARCHITECTI:TRE 1621 18th Street Suite 11 d Denver, Colorado 80202 phone 303.295.1792 w Lillibridge T.O. PARAPET 130 -2 222 North LaSalle Street s Suite 410 Chicago, Illinois 60601 •1 phone 312.408.1370 s j SECOND FLOOR 114 -0 1 1.  ' I 1 ! t ! _ i :i h~RST FL~R 1 t~ -~Q ~ ~r T.q. ~E~I~ SCR F T .J E i I # _~.a f  I ~ i ~ ~ I / \ 1 e r ~ m t ~ ~ ALUMINUM STOREFRONT 4pw SOUTHWEIb-T ELEVAT10 =s Robert L. Brown Direct Dial Number: (303) 299-8350 Fax: (303) 298-0940 E-mail: RBrow @sah.com March 10, 2003 VIA FACSIMILE Gil Hack H&L Architecture Ltd. 1621 18th Street Suite 110 Denver, CO 80202 Re: Exempla Lutheran Medical Center Power Plant and MOB Replat Dear Gil: In connection with ongoing negotiations between Exempla and Lillibridge Health Trust, L.P. for the purchase of MOBS 2 and 4 at the Lutheran Campus, Lillibridge's attorneys have requested that language such as the following be added to the Replat or PHD Amendment (however the map is denominated) (customizing such language to be consistent with the that map): If the control of the property subject to the [PUD] is separated, either by sale of the improvements and/or by ground lease of the land, violations of the [PUD] by the party owning or controlling one such portion of the property shall not invalidate or impair the approvals granted under the [PUD] with respect to the non-violating owner or controlling party or with respect to such party's portion of the property. I previously sent the proposed language to Meredith Reckert in the Wheat Ridge Planning Office. She has informed me that Wheat Ridge is agreeable to include such language on the Replat/PHD Amendment It would be helpful to me in representing Exempla in the Lillibridge negotiations to have a current version of the Replat/PHD Amendment. When you add the preceding language, would you please send me a copy of the map. Gil Hack March 10, 2003 Page 2 Thank you very much for your attention to this matter. Please telephone me with any questions or comments. Sincerely, Robert L. Brown RLB\rh cc: Chris Fisher (via e-mail) Fred Buenning (via e-mail) Gerald E. Dahl, Esq. (via e-mail) Meredith Reckert (via e-mail) David Hamm (via e-mail) Paul Meyer, Esq. (via e-mail) Shawn Janus (via e-mail) John Dudick (via e-mail) O\program files\qualcomm\eudora mail\attach\HACK 030703.LTR.DOC W 111W Engineering & Surveying, LLC im I" February 17, 2003 Ms. Mary Reckert, Planner Department of Planning and Development City of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 291h Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Re: Case No. Wz-02-15/H and L Architecture for Exempla HealthCare 8300 West 38`h Avneue Approval of an amendment to a PHD Final Development Plan Dear Mary: This letter is in response to your request for confirmation of the availability of sanitary sewer service for the above parcel. The subject project at the address referenced above is entirely within the boundary and service area of the Wheat Ridge Sanitation District. Treatment of sewage generated within the Wheat Ridge Sanitation District is provided by the Metro Wastewater Reclamation District (Metro). Wheat Ridge Sanitation District facilities in this area consist of an 8 inch sanitary sewer main within 38`h Avenue. An extensive private sewer system is present throughout the site which is connected to the District sewer main in 38`h Avenue. This parcel is subject to the assessment of both Wheat Ridge Sanitation District and Metro tap charges. The subdividers and/or developers may be required to extend sewer lines to their project sites and/or share in the cost of providing additional capacity to serve their projects. In addition, you should be aware that the District requires approval of plans for sewer main extension plans, service connections, determination and payment of tap fees, as well as inspection of construction by the District's Engineer. Very truly yours, Robert G iel, P.E. District E ineer Wheat Ri qe Sanitation District RRG/rg cc: District Office 7901 E. BelleviewAve. Ste 230 • Englewood, Co 80111 • Phone (303) 773-1605 • Fax (303) 773-3297 7500 West 29th Avenue The City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 Wheat Telephone 303/ 235-2846 Ridge November 27, 2002 The Wheat Ridge Department of Planning & Development has received a request for amendment to a Planned Hospital District final development plan at the property described below. Your response to the following questions and any comments on this proposal would be appreciated by December 27, 2002. No response from you by this date will constitute no objections or concerns regarding this proposal. CASE NO: WZ-02-151H and L Architecture for Exempla Healthcare LOCATION: 8300 West 38' Avenue REQUESTED ACTION: Approval of an amendment to a PHD final development plan PURPOSE: Construction of a 13,400 square foot addition to the existing power plant, construction of a 63,000 square foot medical office building with connectors to adjacent buildings and reconfiguration and expansion of associated parking including relocation of helipad APPROXIMATE AREA: 94.2 acres of site area Issues for consideration include the following • The adequacy of public facilities or services provided by your agency to serve this development. The availability of service lines to the development. The adequacy of capacities to service the development. • Servicing of this proposed development subject to your rules and regulations. • Specific easements that are needed on this or any other document. • Any comments which would affect approval of this request by your agency. Please reply to: r M. Reckert (303-235-2848) Department of Planning & Development Fax: 303/235-2857 DISTRIBUTION: XX Water District (Wheat Ridge) XX Sanitation District (Wheat Ridge) XX Fire District (Wheat Ridge) Adjacent City Q XX Xcel Energy XX Qwest Communications State Land Use Commission State Geological Survey Colorado Dept. Of Transportation Colorado Div. Of Wildlife Colorado Dept. of Natural Resources Completed by: (Name, Agency/Deepa"rttmenntt Dite))~~~ / Jeffco Health Department Jeffco Schools Jeffco Commissioners XX AT&T Broadband XX WHEAT RIDGE Post Office XX WHEAT RIDGE Police Department XX WHEAT RIDGE Public Works Dept. WHEAT RIDGE Park & Rec Commission XX WHEAT RIDGE Forestry Division XX WHEAT RIDGE Building Division WHEAT RIDGE Economic Development "The Carnation City" eAplanning\fo=\agendareEfrm 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ride, Colorado 80033 FAX 303/235-2857 February 14, X003 Gilbert Hack H & L Architecture 1621 18"' St., 110 Denver, CO 80202 Dear Mr. Hack: The City of Wheat Ridge At its meeting of February 10, 2003, City Council approved your request for approval of an amendment to a Planned Hospital District final development plan for property located at 8300 West 38' Avenue, for the following reasons: 1. All requirements for a Planned Hospital Development District final development plan have been met. 2. All minimum specifications of the Planned Hospital District have been met or exceeded. 3. All outside agencies continue to serve the property with improvements at the owner's expense. With the following conditions: 1. Sidewalk be constructed along the west side of Lutheran Parkway West between the southern limit of the parking lot south of building N and the intersection with Lutheran Parkway. 2. Sidewalk be constructed along the east side of Lutheran Parkway from the curb cut to West Pines north to the south side of the eastern parking lot for the main hospital. 3. A deceleration lane for the West 32"d Avenue entrance be constructed along the frontage of property at 8321 West 32nd Avenue. 4. The applicant work with the City Engineer to determine the best location for the hospital sign on West 32nd Avenue in conjunction with construction of the deceleration lane. Enclosed is a draft copy of the minutes stating the Council's decision. A blackline photographic mylar of the final development plan needs to be submitted for recording with Jefferson County within 60 days of final action. The fees for recording with Jefferson County are $10 per page. Enclosed is a copy of our fee schedule. Please submit payment along with the mylar. Gilbert Hack Page 2 February 14, 2003 As mentioned in previous correspondence, publication/public, notice fees in the amount of $540 are still needed. This is based on a mailing list (totaling 60 properties x 2 public hearings) in a 100 foot radius around the perimeter of the Planned Hospital Development which is over and above the average mailing costs. Payment is due upon receipt. Attached is a copy of our fee schedule. Please feel free to contact me at 303-235-2846 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Kathy Fiel Administrative Asst. Enclosure: Draft of Minutes cc: Exempla Healthcare 8300 W. 38`h Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 WZ-02-15 (case file) 6...\My Documents\Kathy\PCRPTS\PLANGCOM\CORRESP\2002\WZ0211 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: February 10, 2003 Page -2- PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING Item 1. Application for amendment to a Planned Hospital Development District final development plan. (Case No. WZ-02-15) (Exempla Lutheran) Case No. WZ-02-15 was introduced by Mr. Schneider, who also read the executive summary. Meredith Reckert, Community Development Department, was sworn in by the Mayor and presented the staff report. Gilbert Hack, representing Exempla Lutheran, was sworn in by the Mayor, and gave a brief presentation of their plan. Motion by Mr. Schneider to approve Case No. WZ-02-1.5, for the following reasons: 1. All requirements for a Planned Hospital Development District final development plan have been met. 2. All minimum specifications of the Planned Hospital District have been met or exceeded. 3. All outside agencies will continue to serve the property with improvements at the owner's expense. With the following conditions: 1. Sidewalk be constructed along the west side of Lutheran Parkway West between the southern limit of the parking lot south of Building N and the intersection with Lutheran Parkway. 2. Sidewalk be constructed along the east side of Lutheran Parkway from the curb cut to West Pines north to the south side of the eastern parking lot for the main hospital. 3. A deceleration lane for the West 32°d Avenue entrance be constructed along the frontage of property at 8321 West 32nd Avenue. 4. The applicant work with the City Engineer to determine the best location for the hospital sign on West 32"d Avenue in conjunction. with construction of the deceleration lane; seconded by Mr. Edwards; carried 8-0. aE W„EqT ITEM NO. a m REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Ot ORA00 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: February 10, 2003 TITLE: CASE NO. WZ-02-15/EXEMPLA LUTHERAN ® PUBLIC HEARINGS ❑ ORDINANCES FOR 1 ST READING ❑ BIDS/MOTIONS ❑ ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING ❑ RESOLUTIONS Quasi-Judicial: ® ❑ A Yes No Community Development Director City Manager RECOMMENDED ACTION: "I move to APPROVE Case No.WZ-02-15, a request for approval of an amendment to a Planned Hospital Development final development plan for property located at 8300 West 38th Avenue, for the following reasons: 1. All requirements for a Planned Hospital Development District final development plan have been met. 2. All minimum specifications of the Planned Hospital District have been met or exceeded. 3. All outside agencies will continue to serve the property with improvements at the owner's expense. With the following conditions: 1. Sidewalk be constructed along the west side of Lutheran Parkway West between the southern limit of the parking lot south of building N and the intersection with Lutheran Parkway. 2. Sidewalk be constructed along the east side of Lutheran Parkway from the curb cut to West Pines north to the south side of the eastern parking lot for the main hospital. 3. A deceleration lane for the West 32"d Avenue entrance be constructed along the frontage of property at 8321 West 32"d Avenue. 4. The applicant work with the city engineer to determine the best location for the hospital sign on West 32"d Avenue in conjunction with construction of the deceleration lane." EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The purpose of the request is to allow a 12,474 square foot utility plant addition, construction of a 63,000 square foot medical office building, and expansion and reconfiguration of associated parking. The existing helipad will be relocated to the west side of Lutheran Parkway West. The first area for consideration is located on the northern end of the campus, shown as detail 01 on sheet 2 of the plan set. This amendment increases the existing central utility plant by 12,474 square feet. The total coverage for the addition will be 16,000 square feet including the new cooling towers. The additions will occur in locations where there are currently drive areas and loading docks. Sheet 5 of the plan set shows more closely the proposed alterations. Sheets 6 and 7 are elevations of the proposed additions. The second area for consideration is on the southern portion of the campus shown as detail 02. Medical Office Building (MOB) 3 is proposed containing 63,000 square feet of total building area (39,000 sf on the first floor and 24,000 sf on the second floor). It will be located to the southeast of existing MOB 4 (building X on sheet 2) and MOB 2 (building T on sheet 2) and will displace existing parking. Additional site modifications in the MOB area include relocation of the main curb access from Lutheran Parkway to the south and the expansion and reconfiguration of the parking area south of the two existing medical office buildings. The expanded lot will have up to 800 spaces depending on final layout and striping, doubling the existing parking count in proximity to the MOB'S. The parking lot expansion displaces the existing helipad, which will be relocated to the western side of Lutheran Parkway West. FINANCIAL IMPACT: One-time review fees and use tax will be collected at the time of issuance of building permits. COMMISSION/BOARD RECOMMENDATION: Planning Commission reviewed this case at a public hearing held on January 16, 2003. A recommendation of approval was made for the following reasons: 1. All requirements for a Planned Hospital Development District final development plan have been met with the exception of the pedestrian links approved in 1992 and not yet constructed. 2. All minimum specifications of the Planned Hospital District have been met or exceeded. 3. All outside agencies continue to serve the property with improvements at the owner's expense. With the following conditions: Sidewalk be constructed along the west side of Lutheran Parkway West between the southern limit of the parking lot south of building N and the intersection with Lutheran Parkway prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 2. Sidewalk be constructed along the east side of Lutheran Parkway from the curb cut to West Pines north to the south side of the eastern parking lot for the main hospital prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 3. A deceleration lane for the West 32nd Avenue entrance be constructed upon acquisition of property at 8321 West 32"d Avenue. 4. The applicant work with the city engineer to determine the best location for the hospital sign on West 32"d in conjunction with construction of the deceleration lane. 5. Review and, if necessary, comply with ADA requirements for handicapped hospital parking. Three interested parties testified regarding the proposed development plan amendment. Richard Salmon, 3525 Allison Court, spoke in favor of the plan. Bonnie and Gene Pastor, 3815 Carr Street, testified regarding parking on the north portion of the development as occasionally hospital employees park in front of their house. PROJECT HISTORY: The Exempla Lutheran Medical Center property was rezoned in 1990 to PHD (Planned Hospital Development District). The most recent development plan amendment reviewed at public hearing was an expansion to the emergency services center on the northwest side of the hospital in 1992 pursuant to Case No. WZ-92-2. As an addendum to that case, Planning Commission reviewed and approved a pedestrian circulation plan for the hospital campus. The pedestrian connections approved include the following: 1. Sidewalk along the east side of Lutheran Parkway between the north edge of the West Pines facility and the south side of the east parking lot. 2. Paths running along the Rocky Mountain Ditch from the center of the campus to the east and west property lines. 3. Sidewalk along the west side of Lutheran Parkway West between the southern limit of parking lot A and the intersection with Lutheran Parkway. On sheet 2 of the plan set, parking lot A is located south of Building N. In 2002, two amendments to the existing final development plan were approved administratively by staff. Case No. WZ-02-05 accommodated a 1300 square foot addition to the radiology department to accommodate a linear accelerator (AA of the building use key on page 2 of the plan set). Case No. WZ- 02-07 allowed a 350 square foot contamination shower addition to the emergency center to deal with biohazard attacks (BB of the building use key on page 2 of the plan set). The entire campus encompasses 94.2 acres and has 319,145 sf of building footprint area (8% coverage) with 29.8 acres or 32% coverage in roadways and parking areas. STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES: To date, the only pedestrian links completed have been adjacent to the ditch in the interior of the site. The applicant has agreed to construction of the internal sidewalk connections and deceleration lane on West 32"d Avenue as recommended by staff. These improvements must be completed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the new medical office building. In regard to condition number 5 of the Planning Commission recommendation, the amount of handicapped parking provided has been reviewed with the conclusion that they are consistent with ADA standards. The plan does not meet the city's standards for parking lot island landscaping. Section 26-501.D.2. requires that one parking lot island be provided for every 30 spaces in a parking lot. The island must be equivalent in size to a parking stall (8-1/2' x 18') and be planted with one tree, four shrubs and acceptable ground cover. The proposed landscape plan accommodates existing mature landscaping and proposes xeriscaping in areas. Although not meeting city standards, this is a planned development and varying from city standards is permitted. The alternate design is supported by staff because of the drought situation and continued watering restrictions. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: N/A Report Prepared by: Meredith Reckert (303-235-2848) Reviewed by: Alan White mr/ Attachments: 1. Planning commission staff report 2. Neighborhood meeting attendance sheet and recap 3. Applicant's response to neighborhood meeting concerns 4. Plan set F. ECK WOA0I07PHDOC CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE OF MEETING: January 16, 2003 DATE PREPARED: January 6, 2003 CASE NO. & NAME: WZ-02-15/Exempla Lutheran CASE MANAGEIU°- Reckert ACTION REQUESTED: Amendment to a Planned Hospital Development District final development plan LOCATION OF REQUEST: NAME & ADDRESS OF APPLICANT(S) 8300 West 38t' Avenue H & L Architecture 1621 18°i Street Suite I10 Denver, CO 80202 NAME & ADDRESS OF OWNER(S) APPROXIMATE AREA: PRESENT ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE: SURROUNDING ZONING: SURROUNDING LAND USE: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Exempla Healthcare 8300 W. 38" Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO acres PHD, Planned Hospital Development Hospital Campus N: R-2 S: R-2, Jefferson County; E: R-2 &W: R-l, R-2, PCD N,E: Low density residential S: low density residential, open space W: low density residential, medical PB - Public/Semi-Public DATE PUBLISHED: January 2, 2003 DATE POSTED: January 2, 2003 DATED LEGAL NOTICES SENT: January 2, 2003 ENTER INTO RECORD: (X) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (X) ZONING ORDINANCE ( ) SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS (X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS (X) EXHIBITS ( ) OTHER JURISDICTION: The property is within the City of Wheat Ridge, and all notification and posting requirements have been met, therefore, there is jurisdiction to hear this case. ATTACHMENT 1 I. REQUEST The applicant is requesting approval of an amendment to a Planned Hospital Development District final development plan for property located at 8300 W. 38' Avenue. The purpose of the request is to allow a 12,747 square foot utility plant addition, construction of a 63,000 square foot medical office building and reconfiguration of associated parking. H. CASE HISTORY The Exempla Lutheran Medical Center property was rezoned in 1990 to PHD (Planned Hospital Development District) and has gone through a series of plan amendments since that time. The most recent amendment reviewed by Planning Commission was an expansion to the emergency services center on the northwest side of the hospital in 1992 pursuant to Case No. WZ-92-2. As an addendum to that case, Planning Commission reviewed and approved a pedestrian circulation plan for the hospital campus. The pedestrian connections approved include the following: 1. Sidewalk along the east side of Lutheran Parkway between the north edge of the West Pines facility and the south side of the east parking lot. 2. Paths running along the Rocky Mountain Ditch from the center of the campus to the east and west property lines. 3. Sidewalk along the west side of Lutheran Parkway West between the southern limit of parking lot A and the intersection with Lutheran Parkway. On sheet 2 of the plan set, parking lot A is located south of Building N. In 2002, two amendments to the existing final development plan were approved administratively by staff. Case No. WZ-02-05 accommodated a 1300 square foot addition to the radiology department to accommodate a linear accelerator (AA of the building use key on page 2 of the plan set). Case No. WZ-02-07 allowed a 350 square foot contamination shower addition to the emergency center to deal with biohazard attacks (BB of the building use key on page 2 of the plan set). The entire campus encompasses 94.2 acres and has 319,145 sf of building footprint area (8% coverage) with 29.8 acres or 32% coverage in roadways and parking areas. Coverage by bikepaths and miscellaneous paved areas comprises 1% of the site and the unbuilt areas, including landscaping, equals 55.9 acres or 59%. Public access to the campus is from West 38' Avenue on the north and West 32nd Avenue from the south. Both Lutheran Parkway and Lutheran Parkway West are private streets. The owner is in the process of acquiring the residentially zoned parcel immediately to the east of the 32',d Avenue entrance. Planning Commission Page 2 WZ-02-15/Exempla Lutheran Attached as Exhibit `A' is the zoning map for the area. Exhibit `B' is the second sheet of the current development plan. III. PROPOSED FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT This amendment is the 4th amendment to the Exempla Lutheran Planned Hospital Development since the current zoning was adopted in 1990. The campus-wide extent of the proposed alterations, which occurs in two areas, can best be viewed on sheet 2 of the PHD document. The first area for consideration is located on the northern end of the campus, shown as detail 01 on sheet 2 of the plan set. This amendment increases the existing central utility plant by 12,474 square feet. The total coverage for the addition will be 16,000 square feet including the new cooling towers. The additions will occur in locations where there are currently drive areas and loading docks. Sheet 5 of the plan set shows more closely, the proposed alterations. Sheets 6 and 7 are elevations of the proposed additions. The second area of amendment is on the southern portion of the campus shown as detail 02. Medical Office Building (MOB) 3 is proposed containing 63,000 square feet of total building area (39,000 sf on the first floor and 24,000 sf on the second floor). It will be located to the southeast of existing MOB 4 (building X on sheet 2) and MOB 2 (building T on sheet 2) and will displace existing parking. Enclosed walkways are proposed to connect MOB's 3 and 4 and MOB's 2 and 4. Additional site modifications in the MOB area include relocation of the main curb access from Lutheran Parkway to the south and the expansion and reconfiguration of the parking area south of the two existing medical office buildings. The expanded lot will have up to 800 spaces depending on final layout and striping, doubling the existing parking count in proximity to the MOB's. The parking lot expansion displaces the existing helipad, which will be relocated to the western side of Lutheran Parkway West. Exempla Lutheran is not a trauma hospital, therefore, the helipad is used only once or twice per year. Because of the small amount of anticipated traffic, FAA approval is not required. The applicant submitted a parking study, which concludes that, overall, there is adequate parking campus-wide. However, much of the available parking is located in proximity to the MOB's, not the main hospital. It is not convenient for patrons of the hospital to have to park in the MOB parking area when the hospital parking is at capacity. In the near future, the hospital must address long-term parking deficiciencies on the northern portion of the campus. A landscape plan for the MOB area is shown on sheet 8 of the PHD document. The plan does not meet the city's standards for parking lot island landscaping. Section 26-501.D.2. requires that Planning Commission Page 3 WZ-02-15/Exempla Lutheran one parking lot island be provided for every 30 spaces in a parking lot. The island must be equivalent in size to a parking stall (8-1/2' x 18') and be planted with one tree, four shrubs and acceptable ground cover. The proposed landscape plan accommodates existing mature landscaping and proposes xeriscaping in areas. Please refer to Exhibit `C'. Although not meeting city standards, this is a planned development and varying from city standards is permitted. The alternate design is supported by staff because of the drought situation and continued watering restrictions. A concern of staff is the required pedestrian links approved by Planning Commission in 1992. As indicated in Section II of this report, the pedestrian connections approved include the following: 1. Sidewalk along the east side of Lutheran Parkway between the north edge of the West Pines facility and the south side of the east parking lot. 2. Paths running along the Rocky Mountain Ditch from the center of the campus to the east and west property lines. 3. Sidewalk along the west side of Lutheran Parkway West between the southern limit of parking lot A and the intersection with Lutheran Parkway. On sheet 2, parking lot A is located south of building N. It does not appear that any of the specified pedestrian connections have been completed except for an unpaved path running along the ditch from the center of the campus to the eastern perimeter of the property. Staff is recommending that the sidewalk along Lutheran Parkway West and the connection from West Pines north to the southern limit of the eastern parking lot for the hospital be completed with the construction of MOB 3. The proposed building area results in an increase of 4% in roadway/parking coverage (33.8%), an increase in building footprint coverage by 1.2% (9%) and a 5°,, reduction in unbuilt area (54%). The proposed construction will be well within the maximum allowed building height of 65'. Although not required by the zoning code, the applicant held a pre-application neighborhood meeting on December 18, 2002, to discuss the proposed changes to the campus with area residents. All requirements for a planned development final development plan have been met. All minimum specifications for a PHD district have been met or exceeded. IV. AGENCY REFERRALS All outside service agencies will continue to serve the property with upgrades installed at the owner's expense. Planning Commission Page 4 WZ-02-15/Exempla Lutheran The Public Works Department has approved a drainage plan and report for the new construction, as well as a traffic impact report and parking study. They are requesting construction of a deceleration lane for the existing access on West 32 id Avenue when the acquisition of 8321 West 32"d Avenue has been finalized. This has been included as a condition of approval. Rocky Mountain Ditch has reviewed the preliminary plans and has no problem. They would like to review the final set of construction design documents. Xcel Energy has an existing gas line that will need to be relocated. Wheat Ridge Fire Protection District has no concerns. V. STAFF CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION Staff concludes that an amendment to the existing final development plan is required to accommodate new construction on the Exempla Lutheran campus. Staff further concludes that all requirements for a final development plan have been met and that all minimum specifications of the Planned Hospital District have been met or exceeded. Therefore a recommendation of approval is given with the following conditions: 1. Sidewalk be constructed along the west side of Lutheran Parkway West between the southern limit of the parking lot south of building N and the intersection with Lutheran Parkway. 2. Sidewalk be constructed along the east side of Lutheran Parkway from the curb cut to West Pines north to the south side of the eastern parking lot for the main hospital. A deceleration lane for the West 32"d Avenue entrance be constructed upon acquisition of property at 8321 West 32nd Avenue. VI. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS Option A: I move to recommend APPROVAL of Case No. WZ-02-15, a request for approval of an amendment to a Planned Hospital District final development plan for property located at 8300 West 38"' Avenue, for the following reasons: 1. All requirements for a Planned Hospital Development District final development plan have been met. 2. All minimum specifications of the Planned Hospital District have been met or exceeded. 3. All outside agencies continue to serve the property with improvements at the owner's expense. Planning Commission Page 5 WZ-02-15/Exempla Lutheran With the following conditions: 1. Sidewalk be constructed along the west side of Lutheran Parkway West between the southern limit of the parking lot south of building N and the intersection with Lutheran Parkway. 2. Sidewalk be constructed along the east side of Lutheran Parkway from the curb cut to West Pines north to the south side of the eastern parking lot for the main hospital. 3. A deceleration lane for the West 32"d Avenue entrance be constructed upon acquisition of property at 8321 West 32nd Avenue." Option B: "I move to recommend DENIAL of Case No. WZ-02-15, a request for approval of an amendment to a Planned Hospital District final development plan for property located at 8300 West 38" Avenue, for the following reasons: 1. 2. Y' Planning Commission Page 6 WZ-02-15/Exempla Lutheran 5W23 5E 22 I I 3 :II L= 1 YI =i =i .g (:E 'N-C' 7TF1 AVE do I a RI s W 8TH AV 15 E U6 o N ' a s O W ssss < .IF.FFF.RFinN OOIINTY a 8 sns am '„'D H arss sew MEVICAL I is PHD W Z M-2 L~[ i ]HO V • 42 u Qs >w° ~ BS W >sm >•I >ett z ~ ~ svs ELAN ms DARCEULOT BOUNDARY ;DESIGINATES OWNERSHIP) NATER FEATURE )ENOTES MULTIPLE ADDRESSES 00-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN APPROXIMATE LOCATION) s F s ~ 5U a R A a g q p Ir R-2 I WZ-92-2 PHD PBG-87.1 LUTHERAN MEDICAL PBG87.1 CENTER PHn,-'_•_ r Pd'r icccvocr OFFICIAL NE 27 ZONING MAP - SIGNA WHEAT RIDGE - WATER FE ® COLORADO DENOTES 100-YEAR o loo® F=d (APPROXII DEPARTMENTOF MAP ADOPTED: June 15, 199M<°,.°° PLANNING AND C JAN-02-2003 10:22 FROM:EXEMPLr HEALTHCARE 303 425 8598 - 3032352857 P.2/4 Exempla Lutheran Medical Center Community Meeting Regarding the December 2002 PHD Amendment Wednesday December 18, 2002 Community Questions and Comments MOB Where is the new MOB located? Where will parking for the new MOB expand? Will lighting from the expanded parking effect the neighborhood? How many stories will the new MOB be? Will the new MOB block the view to the North or West? What will the new MOB be used for? Are any more buildings planned for the future? Will a crane be set up to build the new MOB? When will the new MOB construction begin and when will it be complete? Will the helipad move, where and why? Central Utility Plant (CUP) How many chillers are being added? What is the tonnage of the chillers? Where is the new CUP located? Will "clouds" from the cooling towers be visible? When Will the CUP construction begin and when will it be complete? Will the open area between the hospital and Dudley Street remain? Will any construction of the CUP take place at night? Will there be increased noise with the proposed CUP? What will the CUP look like? What time do the units get turned on? Dudley Street residents think the current towers are too loud, especially in the summer. Will the CUP be quieter than the existing cooling towers? Are you moving the plant or adding to it? Will the CUP and MOB projects happen at the same time? Will the CUP generators run at the same time, can they alter? What is the purpose of expanding the CUP? What does the CUP do, does it service West Pines? Will a crane be set for the CUP project? Where will the water for the cooling towers come from? General Are there any plans for the area where the baseball field is? How many employees work on campus? Are there any plans for the area East of 30 & Dudley? Is parking being added to the front of the hospital? What is happening on the West side of the ED? (decon shower construction) ATTACHMENT 2 JRN-02-2003 10:22 FROM:EXEMPL~ HERLTHCRRE 303 425 8598 ''3032352857 P.3/4 Exempla Lutheran Medical Center Community Meeting Regarding the December 2002 PHD Amendment Wednesday December 18, 2002 Community Questions and Comments General (cont.) Can a walking path be put up all the way around to 32nd? The square blue sign with the "H° (city sign indicating a Hospital location) on it on 32"d Ave (for East bound traffic) is placed in such a spot that many vehicles turn into Cody Court (first street West of Lutheran Pkwy) instead of Lutheran Pkwy. The Cody Court is a dead end, so vehicles have to U-turn to get back out. Besides being an annoyance, the traffic is dangerous to children on the street. Can anything be done to move the sign closer to Lutheran Pkwy? JAN-02-2003 10:22 FROM:EXEMPL^ HEALTHCARE 303 425 8598 r_'3032352857 P.4/4 A.fj&lu4AB L/ST ~L/kC ~tit~GtUAri75' M60"46- ~~/g102 ii;UvpM. A&6061#6 MOA 6W84044MAW7_1 epty ~"e- vN4c'vY P"Af7-j N&-(-A40 Name Mailing Address Phone Number E-mail Address Of- O i rr~~ 60 O - 23 - O , E 353 S Da / S f 3-'+56 - 6s"8S Vor-Aakalpris er 39'f'54rAna14 3o3-¢z¢-4LS$ II I)VIJJq $f 303~F2~f -it 30 3 5(2 q- IFL 4-4 94.36*h 30 j-2. 38.44 U 3 2- 657 i~e3re x J~ -303-437-117-12 "jr a~4 32ft Reds ok S4 303-201-( o:k Frei +Gt- - 'a YaS Odll~ 303-.2 -qr,7 sCh(a 2-& E !,.`1000e&-Id oaf 3-LOO C'01 c*, X03 z37-3d S6 x,33 a vrrr~.r' a~--.~-o! 3~6~' 3es4Z.7~~ Tlui el pp,., 2 5 . 3o-q-j33-oy4q /<25i* Ft.G-6- 3.11OCOvr cT. 7 B3 -a3 y-9/a p H---L ARCHITECTURE -1631 18TH STREET, SUITE 110 DENVER. COLORADO 80202 VOICE: 303.295.1792 FACSIMILE: 303.292.6437 EMAIL: infc@hlarch.com WEB: .v.vav.hlarch.rom Memorandum January 31, 2003 City of Wheat Ridge 7500 W. 29" Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO. 80215 Attn: Meredith Reckert H+L Architects 1621 18Ih Street, suite 110 Denver, Colorado 80202 Re: PHD Amendment 04 Meredith, Below are the responses associated with the community meeting, held by Exempla Lutheran Medical Center in December, and to some of the Planning Commissions questions, January 16th 2003. • The new Medical Office Building, MOB III, will be located to the east of the existing office buildings and west of Lutheran Parkway. The new building will be situated in what is currently parking for the medical office buildings. With the construction of the new MOB the surf ace parking to the south of the buildings will be reconfigured and expanded. During construction a crane will be on site, however, the type of crane has not been decided. Tentatively the developer is looking for a May/June start date for the construction. • The new parking lot will be lighted following the current City of Wheat Ridge code requirements. The facility has recently replaced many of the existing light standards to meet the 18'-0' height requirement and lamped with high-pressure sodium lights in place of the current metal halide. The lowering of the light standards and bulb replacement should decrease the light trespass on the neighboring community. The new parking lot will provide the additional parking required for the MOB construction. Under the current City of Wheat Ridge Zoning Ordinance section 26-31, Article C, item 12. The handicap parking requirement will be 2% of the total parking spaces required. The new surface lot, with the doctor parking currently located between building II and IV, will have a total of 874 spaces. At the 2% rate 17.48 accessible spaces will be required. Current designs provide 18 accessible spaces. In addition to these spaces the design also includes 7 special needs spaces. These spaces are located in close proximity to building entries, and would be reserved for people who are temporarily disabled. • The new MOB will be two stories in height with screened mechanical units on the roof. The overall height of the building will not exceed the existing height of the three story buildings located directly to the west of this addition. The current tenant mix will include an out-patient imaging suite and multiple doctor offices. The development of the new MOB and the expansion of the parking surface dictated that the current heli-pad be relocated. We have contacted Flight for Life, for confirmation, on the number of flights to the facility. Per Flight for Life documentation there were 18 landings in 2001 and 19 landings in 2002. The location for the new pad is west of Lutheran Parkway West and to the north of the ball field. This location was decided upon for proximity to the Emergency Department and future campus development options. The proposed new location has been provided to the Flight for Life pilots and they are in agreement on the location. They have requested to be involved in the lighting of the pad and the placement of the windsock. ATTACHMENT 3 H-A ARCHITECTURE -1621 18TH STREET, SUITE 110 DENVER, COLORADO 80202 VOICE: 303.2911792 "FACSIMILE: 303.292.6437 F -EMAIL: nioCwhlarch.cam ,WEB: w...hlz,ch.com Memorandum The new central Utility Plant will be located east of the existing plant. Currently the area is utilized, by the facility, for supply receiving. The construction plans rotate the receiving docks to the west and opens the area for the expansion. The existing cooling towers will be removed and new enclosed towers will be constructed east of the plant. The primary construction of the plant will take place during standard business hours, similar to the schedule associated with the south wing addition. However, there will be times when night work will be required. The night work will primarily be associated with critical hospital tie-ins for electrical, mechanical, chilled water, etc. that need to be handled when load is at a minimum. A crane will be required for this construction, but is currently scheduled to be a mobile type unit, not a fixed type as used in the south wing. The plant expansion will locate all the chillers and generators in one area to facilitate easier monitoring by the staff. The chillers will be housed in the area between the existing plant and the hospital. The generators will be housed in a new addition to the north of the existing plant. The generators will be designed with remote radiators. These radiators will be located on the roof of the structure and screened on all sides, except the south. The south side opens to the existing roof area and will provide additional air floor for the radiators and the generator exhausts. In this configuration we are attempting to direct the sound back of the existing plant building and away from the neighborhood to the west and north. • The design of the Central Utility Plant is near completion. Construction documents are scheduled, for issue February 10th 2003. The contractor will begin pricing of the addition at this time. Current discussions with the contractor indicate an estimated start date in May 2003 with a completion in August 2004. The above information is provided to assist in a better understanding of the construction projects that are associated with this PHD Amendment 04 for the Exempla Lutheran Medical Center Campus. Tha ou, i Gilbert ack EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PLANNED HOSPITAL DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT NO.04 CENTRAL UTILITY PLANT ADDITION and VICINITY MAP MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING N0.03 AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN IN THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BUILDING DATA MaDMAOOR65 Central Utility NaBBAdditien and Medical Offia Building NO.03 Exempla LuNerm MedietCenty 6300 W.36th Avenue Whet Ridge, Colorado RMg-T AaPA FIRST FLOOR SQUARE FOOTAGENEW -8,474s.f. FIRST FLOOR SQUARE FOOTAGE RENOVATION - 2,15691.. BASEMENT SQUARE FOOTAGE NEW - 4,000s.E BASEMENT SQUARE FOOTAGE RENOVATION- 1,370s.f. MEDICAL OFFICE BUBDING 03 EMT FLOOR SQUAREFOOTAGE- 39,000af. SECOND FLOOR SQUARE FOOTAGE- 24,000s.11 Uniform Building Code-1997 Edition NFPA Life Safety Code-1997 Edition Colorado Department ofHeafh - Health Facility Regulations. Health & Human Services - Minimum Requirements ofConaruction PARIOM NdfMATM New spaces provided e required in parang analysis. CICCIIPAWY Group B, Type B l-hr (Medical Office Building) Group S, Div. 2 Type E F.R. Low Hazard (Central Utility plant) Ex®pla Lutheran Medical Centapro,o ses to develop ,proximarely 5.2 acres oftheir campus cumvJy zoned PHD. The proposed expansion will include and addition of 12,474 square fat to the xisliug Cornal Utility Plant building. This addition will be a single story addition with a basement. The overall land coverage for the plant addition will be 16,000 Sq. Feet, inclusive efthe new cooling towers. The second portion of the expansion will include a new Medical Once Building (MOB 03) and coenemors m the exiv , Medical Office Buildings. The new MOB will be approximmely 63,OW square feet ova me fioors. The first floor cavcage will be approximately 39.000 square feet and 24,000 square feet allocated to the second face. With the addition of the new Medical Office Building the paddeg area South ofthe medical office buildings will be reconfigured and expanded to approximately 950 teal spaces, ofth. 450 will be new spaces. The final portion of Nis development will be the relocation ofthe heli-stop to the west side ofLuthrmn parkway West and north ofthe existing ball field The complete development will provide approximately 79,800 square feet ofmw building area end 408,410 square feet ofadditionel Paved area The Central Utility Plant addition is ame addition, multi phased project. The new generators will all be banned in An addition directly north of the existing pleat Remote radiators, with screening, will be used for sound control. The cooling towers and chillers will be placed directly east of the existing plant, in the current location ofthef dines dock Brest. This will move the Daniel, towers further away from the re idrnnal Arens. The new Medical Office Building ID will Be located directly east Bad slightly south ofthe existing Medical Office Building W. The new building will be set back from the existing Colorado Ditches, as required by the existing easemers. The building will he two stories with a screened mechaoiwl area EASE HISTORY rx~ January, 2003 OVERALL SUM DATA: Existing So. FIE AD. Percentage Roadway/Par6'ng lens 1,298,198 29.8 32% Bikepadn/ Misc. paved 51,000 1.2 t% Building footprints 319,145 7.3 8% Remainderundeveloped 2,435,531 55.9 59% Total P. 4,103,874 94.2 100% Proposed So-Ft Acres Percentage RoadwayNarldng ton 1,473,880 33.8. 36% Bikepethx/ Misc. paved SLOW 11 I% Building footprivn 370,716 8.5 9% Remainder uudeveloved 2208278 50.7 54% Tmul Campus 4,103,874 94.2 100% PARKING ANALYSIS: Existing Hospital 1 per 5 bttls az 346=69 1 per staff at max. shift= IX I staff= 1,006 M.O.B.'s I per 150 S.F. at 105,108 S.F. =701 Torsi required=1,776 Existing stalls on campus =2,148 projohad: Central Utility Plant Ipec smffazmax. shift=4 sniff=4 Medical Office Building Iper150s1ct63,000s.f.=420 Total stals provided with this proposal 2378 Tend stns requited by this proposal 2,200 Total stall overage 378 SIGETAGE Ali Si,,, shall be in accordence with Article VII Ofthe Wbeto Ridge Code of Laws. LANDSCAPING All landscaping shall be in accordance with Sectov 26-502 ufth. When Ridge Code ofLms. LIGHTING All lighting shall be in acwrdance with Section 26-503 ofthe Wheat Ridge Code ofl.aw5. CROSS ACCESS EASEMENT LANGUAGE: The owner, his su newrs and assigns grants limited rights and privileges to access cod to bee movement through thou areas indicated as "cross-aces/ ingress<gass easements", as illustrated upon this plan. Such grant of easement shall be limited to the owners, reBann, customers, and guests ofthe owners, and shall furthermore grant antes to and fiee movement through said easements to those entering said easemwn from similarly recorded easements fiom adjacent properties and/or from abutting public seals. .U YORSCEBTBTCATE L env4 .R aocoe I.n.e BpmdmyvrFa~m Lob- MMus Cwv P4mer HMEin B-io-mt A-w td wmm by melt seinemyduNmpevitiau-I m me den yrmy x-I.,mlv,mmovterbJie( iu m,Emawim W.pplimble COlmmva~mnb. mein-i miaavnm,mdel. me' ~P^Yb8 Plm.gwYtlY mPmmO via wvq. S"- Smvp<'S Wf@AEAS. Eae„gh LUmvm MMial' hmmso O IXVtlq~meot Plm Amvi had RWg<'e appmrJgmmtb W An OI RiEge smtim 266--st31I L , fYtleallin. rte me lma lroBr ammilw. PROFERTY SfNATEO W THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECIDON 26.A BB THE NOmIffAST QUARTER OF BECTON r2, To"ESHn 3 SOTER. RANGE 0 WEST OFT S= FRDETAL MERmL1N.THEtrite OF wHEATR r'n. in UNFr OF on"B"50N. SEAEF OF COLORADO. BEING MORE PARMT3LLRLYDESCPDIEO AS FOLLOWS: BASE OF BEARN45 SEARIt ARE BASED ON THE WEST LINE OFT OF NORTHwBxE QUARTER OF SECTDON 26. TOED SIBP3 SOUTILBANGEUWFaTOFTHESIXnr PRnKrcA AffRIDIAN BEMG MONUA4MED BY A BRASS CAF (CRY OF WHEAT RIDGE HORIZONTAL CONROL P0IMNO.5AND AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 26 Ain, ABRASSCAP orrrY OF WIffAT RIDGE HOB320NTAL CONTROL ich I NO. was) AT THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF TIE S E ON 26 AM2WHan HAS A BFAROO OF N WMnI' W. OWNERS CFATTFlCATTON we am6cehyegmw,tmepvpvry Th Wm==yd kx o"demMS dnebPm u v PBmm Devtl W w ew~J®a wYE the we. -m. mammiam,memmm mml.vw.m..mrymEVpimM~gviml bylw.2 n ` . (xmeivnRrv¢Wtlme vppvvN VlFioJ 0.vebpoimlp~®demvmwu.vebl popq .VP/TrrjJ ;coy. vmaapepny d66u m.rmlr.dmma.mvePanmvtm m.prn;,bu or,mm x6.lzlormewaorr.w. orm~myarww Rtlgv ~L~( si~eemorARmt `'rr'~ ' 1, NOTARY PLPLM Eubai6-q m6ww uLV! m w,mme ter Eam+maEd4mn. Mymrmiumce- NOTARYSFAL S,vm .Nan `b7 V v' 0I-G'~^1 V O z TW VI U 0 LL O T W W 0 SAS) PROPERTY CO S At212 ACRES MORE OR LESS. KEY PLAN i IeR finery Cck mdRm,dv aY Ogmry 0 o;o CD 0 r.xF«.~ao9o= . _=ormo~m, m g o m - O N < = D 3p gg yg 39 99 0 -n ` ' y .1 1°.1 N mo M Z rnN 3.°3 a9ma E$~ a n m 1l 5 `\'1, _ v 5 5 1 ~d A ~60 O 3p X38.®2 F c a < D Ipo ~J" a npi 1° o CZP -n r N N m I I q 0 a s G V i t 5 y t p N N Va 0 m 5 e p ° p ° O p ,p p pp o °m °m~ m - EvOA ~ ~ p ~ ° 3~= ~ Q o 0 Eg Z y1 ° -C I g 9f o o o 55` ~a 0 5 E g i ]J ® I 41 °p N ~ ~p p '1 }gyp 9 \ • y, p ° o I 'I omz o _ _ 1,°a I a N l L D 1 ! C~,~ J C z p p m om. 1 pp 111 N o ~ O 't yy~ / i ~ 5 ~ y ~ o pp ( lop o p.. o - - o ~ Q ~ o n ° o I m 10 xI L N N SHEET ELMC CAMPUS SITE PLAN NORTH 3 of 10 o...,... N SHEET ELMC CAMPUS SITE PLAN SOUTH 4 of 10 rHYE:1 4 SP. FOOTHILLS M m O E N J J_ S O O 22 SP. 1 MAINT. 1 I 1 I 1 214 SP ' MPLOYE LOT D ' I I 1 3 8 t h A v e n u e U 93 SP. 102 SP. i ED O O I 0 MAIN Tank ° ° O HOSPITAL 0 11 72 SP. 11 PATIENT PENTHOUSE 9 s I EAST TOWER WING MR] WING 1 26 SP. I MOB #1 ONE WAY M.O.B. 2 VISITOR 2.3 SP. Tl-Il / POWER PLANT SITE PLAN wr-w N s WE WN ARCH111CiRRE 1820 Folsom 5t Boulder, Colorado 8030 phone 303.4498900 H+L ARCHITECTURE 162118th Sveet Suite no Darner, Cobrado 80202 ph. 3031^9W92 1 Lillibridge 222 Noah 1as411e sve , Su c 410 Chicago, IOimis 60601 phone 3R4001370 SI N b ME .}r 31 ~ N u Y W E O V Co. ® d > ad g~ Ln M E~ SHEET 5of10 PARKNG I I'I II li I;I'iil!'I I I II'IIIIII!I'.II I Boiler Plant' 1l CENTRAL UTILITY PLANT NORTH ELEVATION IV 10CENTRAL UTILITY PLANT WEST ELEVATION CENTRAL UTILITY PLANT ELEVATION PLAN 0 CENTRAL UTILITY PLANT SOUTH ELEVATION 080,914 UTILITY PLANT EAST GENERATOR ELEVATION 07CENTRAL UTILITY PLANT COOUNC TOWER SECTION m WOE ABCNIiECiuol 1820 Fob= SOe BO W, Col.& 8030 pho 3014498900 H+L ARCHITECTURE 16V 18th so-«t 5u w De , Cw do e0202 phone 3031911/92 Lillibridge 222 Nwh Wdle 5v t 5 410 Chi go, Illinois 60601 phone 384061310 8I N N C y 1o~n c 8 0. O -w :2u ad 4-J E~ ~15 $ Era3 „x, n- QGo SHEET 6of10 Y 0 CENTRAL UTILITY PLANT WEST RECEIVING DOCK ELEVATION 05CE~AL UTILITY PLANT NORTH COOLING TOWER ELEVATION CENTRAL UTILITY PLANT NORTH PEDESTRIAN RAMP ELEVATION c.eW." 03CENTRAL UTILITY PLANT EAST COURTYARD ELEVATION OZCENTRAL UTILITY PLANT EAST SCREEN WALL ELEV. 01CENTRALun rY PLANT SOUTH SCREEN WALL ELEVATION ARCHITECTURE 1820 F.M. Street Boulder, Colorado 8030 phora, 303.M92MI H+L ARCHITECTURE 162118th street Suite 110 Deswer, Colorado 80203 ph. 3031 IVE12` /I Lillibridge 211 North W.11e Stteet 5u 410 Chicago, IllFuwis 60801 phone 31240&1320 SHEET 7of10 tj ~i \ 5520 1 5525 \ 5520 PLANTING PLAN XERISCAPE PLAWIM SCFEOU.E TOral MMxac SEAMS All ION L NNMNG IsANO AREA APPRU ONE AWE See ow Memo ham °2 AreNENAture EoleG 2.onuory 2003 MI OmWem me Ionee,in, IN Le esA[et E, o lolly abmeleo IlroMIlA, arsten. 1f11 .l .NV tiro-,: RRCRITICiRRE 1820 F°lsam Shat Boulder, Calmado 40302 phoa303.449.8900 HA ARCHITECCURE 1621 IBth Bltaet Bode 110 D.,, Colmedo 111M phme303195.1792 Lillibridge 222 Nosh laSaBe Suat Suhe 410 Chleay°, IlFmois wl ;,o 312.408.1370 0 O N rve1 O G a 0 n E a Uta ,~....II ~V i•1 M U N o % 0 S r4 ~..I r CIS 45 't -ei + 4 C C a o~< C^d V~w".'l.II ^l N Iry .~1 ~ O lb W P~Q~ NNiE WE ,ePlM ICY OTY TED LURE _ WATFA RFNNRKS 1XIE1,111FIC NAR£ CQ.NIOJNMIE FE Ek53AlG %.(WTS W EASING IS WNEIS TOE E RETNNED 291Fr~las. Ti'a Rrusac "brttlg Tree in 16•Cmus. FSSyhva HC. Exeng SNUSIn Islands VaIS. NEND~DlIWS TREES 0 2 14pdm4aia laRalaa trldnran Tlee Z'cal. 425x25 Sn nmme _ Y91oaAwss NDr4 DEa6uau sNRUes AC 42 Mn°pha ranesrms l®dPlat Sp 2-0x24' Sn Dry Ra pleAaxas AS 151Nbipex. FcvNAn9~bIHl so 9n ' ' Lellavfloresm tl~le' V. lwdetl 9mDwg y - 4 atl i ~leaues - r W 20 iOm Nell milddnen IFenhuah 5,d Bid Sn Oy ' e.eSem wM 4AR Moms W 15oas ~~~A ()Aaf®eRahdMludl 5,d 14x14 SAO Ilpy Bls 9rM1 PP W IPao-Hda~ giaftlia IFI,m Se9e SSf 34x34' Sn Itry _ flue lasltlafiw¢s ' ' ' _ ~ 5 23 23-S _ BE N ,ren ~~Y Ma W~P:Iel01afi4o.~ Cn tl QOp Gtltl Ortp Pdemlla '1 x n I= E MI 34~Pkm5lahAO~AkI(a)'sVA'AE neraYs Mile P°Ielhll 5,L 25x23. Ar~pt ll 1 p lJarAetl. It S"en NNNlel I - RA 1m lRnx avnaim'(?utm/ - C1taf Fro lt9m Sgtl y T. P~ptslq ..as di l m dl fl li Rr URhus NlRlata _ llvce l.~SNlec SQL Spid 36x36 Sn ?Y -.-I-_.-- trYy y w " me" wv l w.as Red tal mlS I NEWEVER OLE4191RU6S r J8 i9 JIriPela Sadie BRTa BRkld Jumps , 554 1 tlk Safe LL:QVIaI .7 E`OW Bright aieSeen POBSIBIERDDRE PFREtAlpLS _ P!A 33 Ptlillea mille}tliVn Gmn WiteVamrv I 'a Lx2Ste, kpezvesplmtlilg FG Z/0 F~ua Dauca Sue Fesaetras 4'Ri &12x& Snl tq (PdalRS ' SNer NNell4nr,. ' .Setle _ 1Z _ I 1 alaimlnh NPfI WV41 GRASS F - 661Y _ 13rcx1- 07f NlQ Lmn IFevua alndraea Mxd5lnpva4 Vanme 1°m9 2Td; 'S ENO,,. l5en ~raxz SM,l 3 V.ell MI i 1r, Eiptnq Tree to h Rene'.e¢ v ems f I, Get nmt . "art nalaleo Emin9lree/e le rmvio O ~ o waoom r-E a mNo E.iaing Lmn to flemoi futn9 Pam, ...'ANN Io Name" j~ / GmYlnq NI Pve, A Sbnooro Sue U,... OOm,nne E-1 W1 = otbeoppeo PoMnq SN = Sp.U Needs 'E., S,A- 40 Mysloon Pmlrg 7 NA No. e, Gememee, ol-re E, ❑ E- ..E Side El",I a' vm Rae Y to oe., A, NI Vthia is mt24'k36' i~ eaao SHEET 8of10 I it ii RUCNITECTUUE 1820 Fob. 9~ Boulder, Cnlomdo 8D302 ph. 303.449.8900 i H+L ARCHITECLURE 1621 18th Sheet ' i Suite 110 4 / D®v¢, Colorado 802A2 I ph=303295.1792 Lillibridge 222 No f=e"io- Sheet Sure 410 McagO.)li100s6 l ph® 312.408.1370 i t i FT-F i M ' S I N M" (Z)IOR EAST ELEVATION MO 3 ° d 0 N 'e ~.y A ~~a..II rn Y v b a o d - M Wad' I SHEET n NORTHWEST ELEVATION - MOB 3 9 of 10 IfW9isdmvipv]§tQ1p{t29'k36" 6tI eCWR110WY. i T T ARMIECi➢BE 1820 FolsomS H.u ,,Cobmslo80302 *.303A49.8900 H+L 1621180 Sa 9 it+ ~7 POSTING CERTIFICATION CASE NO. l ~J 2- C7'~ -1 S PLANNING COMMISSION /CITY COUNCIL / ARD OF HEARING DATE: a Cj I ~3 r I, residing at (n a m (address) as the applicant for Case No. w~ - i hereby certify that I have posted the Notice of Public Hearing at (location) on this :?-q day of e o r~ ticr~s 20U--?, , and do hereby certify that said sign has been posted and remained in place for fifteen (15) days prior to and including the scheduled day of public hearing of this case. The sign was posted in the position shown on the map below. SignatureEw-' ~ c _L::) _ NOTE: This form must be submitted at the public hearing on this case and will be placed in the applicant's case file at the Department of Planning and Development. MAP ADJUSTMENT (Circle One) e:\planni ng\formslpostingcert Rev. 6/6101 9E 22 N_C~ a PCD (0 SSE s FOOTHILLS MEDICAL HAVE a GI I CE~R F a a , 3 - _WZ-66-9 H W WZ-76-1 N SW 23 I 3 :I I I I^ 1 .T1 l YI TI FI HD WZ.92-2 wz-9z-z LUTHERAN PHD MEDICAL PBGa7.1 CENTER PBCF87.1 PH'-- W MD PL .IFFFF.RSON WINTY jARCEULOT BOUNDARY OESIGINATES OWNERSHIP) NATER FEATURE )ENOTES MULTIPLE ADDRESSES 00-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN APPROXIMATE LOCATION) OFFICIAL NE 27 ZONING MAP WHEAT RIDGE ® COLORADO 0 IOJ® vx nu ms Z ~ yen E 4f' - PARCEUL( (DESIGINA - WATER FE * DENOTES 100-YEAR (APPROXII DEPAFTMENTOF MAP ADOPTED: June 15, 1994 -9. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT Last Revision: September 10, 7500 West 29th Avenue The City of Ridge FAX 303/235-2857 January 27, 2003 Dear Property Owner: This is to inform you of Case No. WZ-02-15 which is a request for approval of an amendment to a Planned Hospital Development final development plan for the purpose of constructing a 13,400 square foot addition to the existing power plant and constructing a 63,000 square foot medical office building on property located at 8300 West 38" Avenue. This request will be heard by the Wheat Ridge City Council in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex at 7500 West 29th Avenue. The meeting will be held on February 10, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. As an area resident or interested party, you have the right to attend this Public Hearing and/or submit written comments. If you are a property owner within 100 feet of this property, you may have the right to file a legal protest against the application which would require 3/4 majority vote of City Council to approve the request. A copy of the protest rights section of the code is enclosed. If you have any questions or desire to review any plans, please contact the Planning Division at 303-235-2846. Thank you. Planning Division. C:\ Documents and Seulnys\ athyWy Documents\Kathy\CC"TS\PMNOTIC 003\wz02I5.wpd a m c m 0: m a E 22 c w N N U d N ~ a y C Q ~ 7 m U U ~ d ~ a Z m 2 ml K C C C >I K 0 0 N ~ w -d N y E o a m U L O (0 as 0 E ° ' O _ - at ~n ~n u~ ~n 2 in to N- X~ m a d q N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N r v > > ~Nj > Q > > > V 0 O N IO d M Q M M M M M M M O m Q m V m O ` m cq °D L Q m N M 0 a m d m m ma0 m~m a0 =E0 -a0 mE0 m 0 EEO >`c0 d d W C U m M _ O m J d U 5 J m U N = N U ~ N U a 'O U ^2 N U M 0 N U M N 4 N y 2 U W u N 9❑.~ N N Qm.O M N ~j.p 3 N 6 mD U N ~O'O 1 m~9 N U d~'O N N 0 m 6 : Uma mrnK S'n~ m>~ O~ ' .m~ ' N f O N N V '6 a N r« t m m? O N M m m N« a M m W N M m oo N« M m r j Z m N w m O~ m a_ N N o m m L o C m N m m m L m ~ v m v _ ZS N -p aoi r D > > ~i 2i 2i > > C y yaj N N ~ Q E - ❑ 'E c W.1 C) U m`ox K W W E ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ m z W ~ ~ m ~ W arD ~ ~ M m v m v m v m a m v m a m a m v m { y w Y Q v v a a v v a m v v O / 0 O `o rn m ao rn m m m m m m 'o °rn m °rn m m °m m m rn UJ O V M M ° M ° M ° M ° M ° M ° M m M ° H > z a o a o < o m m a o a o n W Q W O n n n n Cl L CD N ❑ 0 Q Z a } O W z La 2 3 m Uf.- ~ a P~l d y U ~ N 3 ~ L N y ~ y C Q a+ Y N y ~ a ~ C ~ Z A d ~ of CS ~ J R C r J I > > 1-7 > > Sa o N C 1~ ~ N r - 4 N o E 0 ` a m 0 0 L o ~ 0 D 0 ~ .r r # ~ ~ to N ~ N N ~ Y1 ry D N N N N N N N N N N N o V N N N N N N N N N N U _ L Q • N ~ a M o d r M o M 0 M 0 M ° [M'l 0 M ° M ° p m i s O y°m m°m mUw . 0 U) 0 ~Um o 0j°D E o Ec w ` n 0 O ro mMw 0 3c ET O ~c0 E0 0 y~ °-~00 500 N o U U E O o V N U U J a N E U 0 D N U , Q U Q y U N U Up a -°i a aJU p OUw tq Ern LL M M =Qw , <M d a ¢ io x u Z`o m°a Q~v =Q;O 3m v s 2~0 omm K _ N " ~ N N N M J W N- N K M C CN' l w O> N N N o K M (6 Q K M N E W M N 6 ' a_ ` N Q 16 N U p M C M Q 2 G1 L O ' D L W J L ~L~jj L ~jL L L I >L ~ 0 m0 ~U 0 E m ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ z o m m N rn M m a m ~n rn M m r m 0 rn Cl) o U V d d' V V ° V m V m V m V m V m CO) LLI 'C Q a o ro ro a o ° ° O p a v °v a v v a v a ~ 00 m rn m m rn m m m m ~ a M M M o 0, 0m o 0, 0m M M M O Z M M n M > M M M M W Q W p n n r n O ~ p N 0 Z a z Un~ a ~I d 3 C d ~ d a c E U ~ v m o a ~ Q > 6 m ~ a K ~o v 9 ~ 3 Z NI L A o a c (A ~ S >I IV 7 > 7 1 ~o o N 1~ W ~ d : . N o a E o w a ~ ~ U L O N as 0 E 1 0 , N a a u ° d m N o N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 x m Q ° 5 3 3 3 A u I- O N O C R d d M M M M O M O M O M M G C A Q O .O W O t0 NO > N N TAN O "O NO N> aD NO W C cp O °D =p .O n U Nl ~ p p y Nl W O C O W - O (O > N O W 0 N Q E ~j E 0 0 O O N O N d a y N E O U N t0 O L O U c NO r L O ~~'U 2=0 (,~U ~ c O O 00 a OLU J E cpU C U' OU ) V) v -J N mmrn OJ >`Mrn 2_ U O M a WMrn Ul m - 6 wNrn L N om E OEm ai a Q a'm-o obi:? Q v A o , m N~a Q ao ° N, m z a ZQ;o Y d N QM of L ~ K C O d 'm,oW O w dmii V dmiE O rN of DV a: V 76A > M N C N A Q C Y V N M N N M N O d M N a N d 0p i0 M V UI C U (0 m - V ,0 G! N p d p J O N eD N >N d w N 2 N L D J > > C y N of U N N Q O O E C O N - X - U v i u1 E ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ m Z D7 N N N N d v N R N V N N < d' V d' V Cl) V `f m m m m LLI C Q m m m m w O O o e °v v v v a v rn v m v m ~ 00 m rn m m m m ~ a °m rn °m orn rn rn °m rn °rn O Z ° ° ° o ° o ° m ° H ~ c o < o c o c o c o c o c , c o ~ Q W r n n `r n n n n ll N O 0 Q Z a z } o W z x-02 c Un~ a ~I D d b 3' C d ~ a d ~ a y U c y N E d U d ~ a ~ C Q y O ` Z m ~ NI ~ d ~ C 7 J j O w m rn o ~ y .ti = N o a W ~ U L O tp O a C 0 0 . ~p w= ik N N N N N N N N N r a - V~ N y N O O O O O O O O O X Q U 2 2 ~ N1 2 m ° i i 5 i U _ 0 O m N a r O M M M ~ £ M E ° °J m o a o o Q 0 m o M 0 ~F 10 c O N 0•.• W N M 0 OJ a W N~ 9 N ~ W O N V VU aU 0 > CJQ O 05 . CUO [ > TQ O 0 10 _N UO] E O] JU O U O O N i VI W nm TO LU NL ' oU O aN m L ~mU U 62 Qm °C EN.U 0T E U N ` O C F O 0 c a M p U Y M O ~ N O 6] m> > n fn W d D Q U CIN f m W NO ° > OI U>a C N N f N 9 L U)N NO CO NU Q m N CN d _ d19 OJ Of rM O SO L M ° N N VN y ~ ° V O N ~M(0 C r M5 -O V v da N N A m - >rZ VJ y 0 ao ( Oj W i wm c N > m N J L eo L Q m L o j z c O N N L< a l0 Z (V L ° C y N w° w Q d i Q E E N N U U x C i E W ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ O Z N 01 O N M < N l0 d N N N N N N N N N U ' V V ° O V ° V ~ O ro V m V ° V m M C ~ w m m M w W C Q V O V V V V V V < V ~ O m m ~ 00 ~ rn rn rn m rn m rn O E o rn o m a m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 w 0 m LLI Q Q W z0 n n n n n w=~ 0 LL N 0 cD z n. z } I -~S _ Uti~ a ~I Q v O W bD .E m V FC w O E z N E 0. O a 7 N y N O E z„ Y U F- O C N T d h N U Q 0 E z F D R N 'I C J d ~ d D C ` C R N N U R J a _ ~ y -p K a Q R C Y R w m H ~ O R C Z R > R J ~ C >I ~ 2 > 1 = m mo N 1~ N w ~ m ~ o c O R E v 0 # N N N N N N N N v U- R NN N N N N N N N N m o V U Ny ~Nj ~NI ~Nj Q R U _ L O N d m M M M M M E M M M C O O O O O O R O O R O p R 'a Um ~U`o U°° BUM cUw mom =Uro 2.n 0 c0 ~c0 0 ~c0 "o occO ~c O O M J U y N U U = U 00 U LL o u C a o CO N U o N v X N I R X ~ m m m _ d m N m Q m O U N O V O N m O iJ R -a D R Q w~:4 Q D~n~ U Q Dina Q ,D aa I m~,v_ Q m ~o ~ I Q cN,D_ l duo R y N R N Q _ `mO~ L ~N~ r (OK N~ MK cn O ONE O d ~0~ ZM ROLL' O'10 410K O CD d R d'- R U 0- ~ R L M 10 M N U OM (0 H M (p m R c M !p W M N a t0 _ V R C ~ >N R >R >d N RN L Ul N > N rG ~ Y ' 0 O J N 0 c U U R I~ W O O N M 'V ~J R N N N N N N N N N ~ v a v v v m e ° ~ a m v m M Y Q m m m m m m O `o v °v a a v a v° rn a m v OD ` rn rn m rn rn rn m m a rn rn rn rn °m °rn rn 0 0 O W Q W p n n n n n n r Ol N Z 0 a Q } O W z LO a U D d w C d ~ d_ D d U C y y c Z D a N U a ~ O m y ` d K y C 7 D 7 -7 1 1 0 ~ d y rn O H C y y w - d : ' d E n 2 0 ` d y U 0 t O m p C E = o # N N N N N N N N N -Dd N N N N N N N ~ N N N a 3 3 S 3 U _ O •N O d d y M M M M M M M U j M G G .O c M > o M O M O T rn y M o M 0 N M 0 N M o y0 L M U o NO ,F m F U m . U m N > m p , d .O V m .O E U m O > m > m c> m O O y -2 :9 TO Q V5 -pO >oo OUm y OTO STO Q GL O Q CLO ~Q d~O N el m T c a U O¢ U M U ~ c 0 o Q U Y a U c U 85 w U E m U rn D m Mm U U m ~ m Mm Mm ~Mm a+ 6 co ENm E ao'D 2 E N tllN ' E o w oK N d a+ 0 v INK 0' m 'oK QM wm c K x K M y 0 M.. M m W M M f0 rn.. o m Q1-6 t M m 0 'M O M m d v N+~ Y m W O.. M m O.. K m m _ V N dmm ` a s s w o0(7 = s m= °°s mmr v N '6 K w 2 o D N Zi 3 t L y c m d Q _ NO r tea` ° ~ ~0 C) ~u°,w E ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ z N N N N d N N N N M " v v v o v a v v M C Q m m m m m m m ro m O O o e v v a v a a v a m OD - ~ m m m m m rn m m m m m rn m m m m rn O E °m rn °m °m °m rn °m rn rn W V ~ F 7 z Q Q W OZ n n n n r r N ❑ O Q ? a Z Z I_o= c g Q N 0 a E W oA C U O m E m z E O a O a A > N y d 0. 0 E zd ~ U H Q T p U ti 0. 0 E z F a v c a w a ~ - a m ` c d ' R N C V y n m a ' d y di vi d ~o ~ vi m O N o a y E o L U R o E I E R w r # N N N N N N j/) r a - x n UI ~ o 0 0 0 0 0 ~ NI ~ NI U _ NO O N 0 C C a # m am > a O N N O r M~ R C j.V m a t> N C N N N >N MN N 'O# O 00 >N c N a N V O N . m a N R m o N W d N N a 6:5 m m Q Oc c ~ o 0 X00 v?ia K °a ?i `m _ m d y r ~ 9 log R r K LL w 3 Y F M N 4 > O C = ( 6 m y L T_ O L C 1 OJ y t N m a N -p N s a O O^ J 6 m C N m o R N ` Q O LL y p w c a ~ o '0 r n ~U UKU°.w E ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ z N N d N N N N C N N N N N N O Q O V N V N V N O N v N v N OD ~ m m m m m m , ~ 2 0 O O N > Q W Z f o ( O `r N n N O f n n W 0 p N 0 Q z a moo= g d Una a m Q d T 0 E W bA c a L. 0 E R z R E h O 0. a° a > N ~i U O L E 0 U W F v c m T d N U R. O E O z F NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing is to be held before the City of Wheat Ridge CITY COUNCIL on February 10, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal Building at 7500 West 291h Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. All interested citizens are invited to speak at the Public Hearing or submit written comments. The following petition shall be heard: Case No. WZ-02-15: An application filed by H & L Architecture for Exempla Healthcare for approval of an amendment to a Planned Hospital Development final development plan for the purpose of constructing a 13,400 square foot addition to the existing power plant and constructing a 63,000 square foot medical office building on property located at 8300 West 38"' Avenue, zoned Planned Hospital Development (PHD) and legally described as follows: PROPERTY SITUATED IN THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 26, AND THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 26, THENCE N89°37'48"E ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION A DISTANCE OF 986.19 FEET; THENCE S00°09'53"E A DISTANCE OF 35.00' TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINIUING S00009'53"E A DISTANCE OF 1290.76 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 26 (SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE CAL-HAR ESTATES SUBDIVISION AS RECORDED AT BOOK 15, PAGE 61); THENCE ALONG SAID LINE N89°41'22'E A DISTANCE OF 269.47 FEET; THENCE S00°1 1'49"E A DISTANCE OF 878.64 FEET TO A POINT ON A LINE 447.40 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 26, (SAID LINE ALSO BEING THE NORTH LINE OF THE FOLLOWING THREE SUBDIVISIONS: LUCOCK SUBDIVISION AS RECORDED AT BOOK 10, PAGE 42, RIDGEVIEW ESTATES NO. 2 AS RECORDED AT BOOK 26, PAGE 40 AND THE BEBBER SUBDIVISION AS RECORDED AT BOOK 10, PAGE 48); THENCE ALONG SAID LINE S89°44'54"W A DISTANCE OF 842.49 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID BEBBER SUBDIVISION; THENCE S00°04'03"E ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID BEBBER SUBDIVISION AND PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 26, A DISTANCE OF 417.40 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID BEBBER SUBDIVISION, SUCH POINT BEING ON THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY OF WEST 32ND AVENUE; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY S89°44'54'W A DISTANCE OF 208.70 FEET; THENCE N00°04'03"W PARALLEL WITH SAID WEST LINE A DISTANCE OF 417.40 FEET; THENCE S89°44'54"W A DISTANCE OF 208.70 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 26; THENCE S00°04'03'E ALONG SAID LINE 417.40 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY OF WEST 32ND AVENUE; THENCE S89°29'36"W PARALLEL WITH AND 30.00 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 27 AND ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY A DISTANCE OF 200.00 FEET; THENCE N00°04'03"W PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 27, A DISTANCE OF 417.40 FEET; THENCE S89°29'36"W PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 27, A DISTANCE OF 607.84 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY OF DUDLEY STREET SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF DUDLEY ACRES SUBDIVISION AS RECORDED AT BOOK 22, PAGE 22 AND THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LUTHERAN SUBDIVISION AS RECORDED AT BOOK 66, PAGE 21; THENCE N00°07'05'W ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY A DISTANCE OF 1608.28 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 17 OF LONGVIEW SUBDIVISION AS RECORDED AT BOOK 6, PAGE 23; THENCE N89°33'52"E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 17 A DISTANCE OF 199.50 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 17; THENCE N00°07'05"W ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 17 A DISTANCE OF 122.89 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH BANK OF THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN DITCH, SAID POINT BEING ON THE SOUTH LINE OF FOOTHILLS MEDICAL CENTER SUBDIVISION AS RECORDED AT RECEPTION NO.87042655; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION AND ALONG THE SOUTH BANK OF SAID DITCH THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) COURSES: 1.)THENCE S80°55'20"E A DISTANCE OF 33.43 FEET; 2.)THENCE S78°10'03"E A DISTANCE OF 75.09 FEET; 3.)THENCE S73°33'52'E A DISTANCE OF 79.81 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID FOOTHILLS MEDICAL CENTER SUBDIVISION; THENCE N00°03'41 "W ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION A DISTANCE OF 487.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH 30.00 FEET OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 27; THENCE N89°37'28"E ALONG SAID LINE A DISTANCE OF 150.00 FEET; THENCE S00°04'03"E PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 27, A DISTANCE OF 5.00 FEET; THENCE N89°37'28"E PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER A DISTANCE OF 276.80 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE SO0°04'03 "E ALONG SAID EAST LINE A DISTANCE OF 10.00 FEET; THENCE N89°37'48"E PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SECTION 26, A DISTANCE OF 453.41 FEET; THENCE N00°04'03"W PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 26, A DISTANCE OF 10.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH 35.00 FEET OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 26; THENCE N89°37'48"E ALONG SAID NORTH LINE A DISTANCE OF 532.84 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PROPERTY CONTAINS 94.212 ACRES MORE OR LESS. Kathy Field, Administrative Assistant ATTEST: Wanda Sang, City Clerk To Be Published: Wheat Ridge Transcript Date: January 23, 2003 7500 West 29th Avenue The City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 Wheat Telephone 303/235-2846 Ridge FAX 303/235-2857 January 24, 2003 Gilbert Hack H & L Architecture 1621 18"' St., 110 Denver, CO 80202 Dear Mr. Hack: At its meeting of January 16, 2003, the Planning Commission has recommended approval of Case No. WZ-02-15, a request for approval of an amendment to a Planned Hospital District final development plan for property located at 8300 West 38" Avenue, for the following reasons: 1. All requirements for a Planned Hospital Development District final development plan have been met with the exception of pedestrian links approved in 1992 and not yet constructed. 2. All minimum specifications of the Planned Hospital District have been met or exceeded. 3. All outside agencies continue to serve the property with improvements at the owner's expense. With the following conditions: 1. Sidewalk be constructed along the west side of Lutheran Parkway West between the southern limit of the parking lot south of building N and the intersection with Lutheran Parkway prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 2. Sidewalk be constructed along the east side of Lutheran Parkway from the curb cut to West Pines north to the south side of the eastern parking lot for the main hospital prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 3. A deceleration lane for the West 32"d Avenue entrance be constructed upon acquisition of property at 8321 West 32"d Avenue. 4. The applicant work with the city engineer to determine the best location for the hospital sign on West 32"d in conjunction with construction of the deceleration lane. 5. Review and, if necessary, comply with ADA requirements for handicapped hospital parking. Gilbert Hack Page 2 January 24, 2002 Publication/public notice fees in the amount of $540 are needed. This is based on a mailing list (totaling 60 properties x 2 public hearings) in a 100 foot radius around the perimeter of the Planned Hospital Development which is over and above the average mailing costs. Payment is due upon receipt. Attached is a copy of our fee schedule. Your request is scheduled for a public hearing before City Council at 7:00 p.m. on February 10, 2003. Please feel free to contact me at 303-235-2846 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Kathy Fie Administrative Asst. Enclosure: Draft of Minutes cc: Exempla Healthcare 8300 W. 38th Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO WZ-02-15 (case file) cA...Wy Documents\Katlry\PCRPTS\PLANGCOM\CORRESP\2002\WZ0211 6. PUBLIC FORUM There were none present to address the Commission during this portion of the meeting. PUBLIC HEARINGS DIK"AFT A. Case No. WZ-02-14: An application filed by Craig Molenaar for approval of a rezoning from Commercial-One (C-1) to Residential-One (R-1 C) for property presently known as 6015 West 40"' Avenue. B. Case No. MS-02-08: An application filed by Craig Molenaar for approval of a 2-lot minor subdivision plat on property presently known as 6015 West 40"' Avenue. Due to a publication error, it was staff's recommendation to continue the above cases to February 6, 2003. It was moved by Commissioner McNAMEE and seconded by Commissioner COOPER that Case No. WZ-02-14 and Case. No. MS-02-08 be republished and continued to February 6, 2003. The motion passed 7-0. T C. Case No. WZ-02-15: An application filed by H&L Architecture for Exempla Healthcare for approval of an amendment to a Planned Hospital Development final development plan for the purpose of constructing a 13,400 square foot addition to the existing power plant and constructing a 63,000 square foot medical office building on property located at 8300 West 38"' Avenue and zoned Planned Hospital Development (PHD) Prior to staff presentation, Commissioner McNAMEE declared that she and her husband are employed by the applicant; however, staff agreed that their employment presented no conflict of interest in this case. The case was presented by Meredith Reckert. She advised the Commission that all noticing requirements had been met and there was jurisdiction to hear the case. She entered all pertinent documents into the record which were accepted by Chair WEISZ. Ms. Reckert reviewed the staff report and gave a digital presentation. Staff recommended approval of the application for reasons and with conditions as outlined in the staff report. Ms. Reckert distributed copies of notes from a neighborhood meeting conducted by the applicant. These notes were reviewed by the Planning Commission at this time. Commissioner SNOW expressed concern that adequate walking paths be available from the proposed parking lot to the new medical buildings as well as the hospital and questioned why the applicant did not complete sidewalks as required when the previous application was approved in 1992. Commissioner McMILLIN expressed concern about the helipad location. Ms. Reckert explained that Lutheran is not a trauma hospital and therefore the applicant has reported they have only two or three helicopter landings per year. Planning Commission Page 2 January 16, 2003 Everett Allan Davis DRAFT Lutheran Medical Center Mr. Davis, Director of Facilities for Lutheran Medical Center, was sworn in by Chair WEISZ. In answer to a question from Commissioner COOPER, Mr. Davis stated that property has been acquired on 32"d Avenue to provide a new entrance into the facility. In response to a question from Commissioner McMILLIN, Mr. Davis stated that the applicant would definitely meet the staff's requirements for pedestrian connections. Chair WEISZ asked why pedestrian connections required in 1992 were never completed. Mr. Davis replied that he understood that pathways and sidewalks which were constructed at the time met all requirements of their agreement. Commissioner McMILLIN asked if there were future plans for increased helicopter use. Mr. Davis replied that there are no plans to become a level one trauma center which is the only reason helicopter traffic would increase. Commissioner SNOW asked Mr. Davis to comment on the noise factor. Mr. Davis replied that the proposed cooling towers will be 150 feet closer to the hospital and will also have less noise level than the existing towers. Commissioner McMILLIN asked what future plans have been made to improve the parking situation and provide more close-in parking. Mr. Davis replied there are no plans at this time. Commissioner McMILLIN commented that other hospitals the size of Lutheran have parking structures. Mr. Davis replied that this is probably due to the cost involved for parking structures. Commissioner SNOW asked what percentage of handicapped parking is planned. Mr. Davis replied that handicapped parking is planned to exceed the percentage required by ADA. Gilbert Allan Hack H&L Architects Mr. Hack was sworn in by Chair WEISZ. He stated the proposed cooling towers will be 16 decibels less than the existing towers. The proposed generators will also produce less noise than existing generators. He stated that two or three helicopter flights are made each year for patient transport and the same approach will remain so the helicopters will not come in over a residential area. Commissioner McMILLIN asked if there would be a problem with moving the helipad further from the southern neighborhood perimeter. Mr. Hack replied that they would have to look at all aspects associated with such a move. One of the considerations is that they want the helipad close as possible to the emergency room. In response to a question from Commissioner McNAMEE, Mr. Hack stated that the present cooling units are not adequate. Planning Commission Page 3 January 16, 2003 David Schafer Oz Architecture Mr. Schafer was sworn in by Chair WEISZ. He stated that handicapped parking requirements will be exceeded. Richard Salmon 3525 Allison Court Mr. Salmon was sworn in by Chair WEISZ. He stated he is the closest neighbor to the hospital and spoke in favor of the plan and believed the proposed location of the additions is excellent. He also commented that he enjoys watching the helicopters which make two or three trips per month. Gene Pastor 3815 Carr Street Mr. Pastor was sworn in by Chair WEISZ. He expressed concern about parking and stated there have been problems in his neighborhood with employees parking in front of homes in his neighborhood. He asked if the additional parking will include space for employees. Meredith Reckert advised Mr. Pastor that she will look into the parking problem in his neighborhood and report back to him. In response to a question from Commissioner McMILLIN, Ms. Reckert stated that the plan calls for 160 more spaces than required. i Bonnie Pastor 3815 Carr Street Ms. Pastor was sworn in by Chair WEISZ. She urged the applicant to consider constructing a parking garage to alleviate parking problems in the area. Everett Allan Davis Commissioner McMillin questioned the discrepancy between the number of helicopter flights reported by Mr. Davis and Mr. Salmon. Mr. Davis stated he may have had the wrong information but would have the actual number of logged flights available for the City Council hearing. Commissioner SNOW asked if the hospital had received noise complaints. Mr. Davis replied that he has received no complaints concerning helicopter noise. He has received occasional complaints about generator test runs on Sundays and construction noise. Commissioner McNAMEE asked if patients are charged by helicopter distance or time and expressed concern that moving the helipad could be more costly for a patient. Commissioner MCMILLIN commented that it wouldn't be much farther away than it is now. Mr. Davis stated there is concern about a ravine and trees that could cause approach problems for the helicopter pilot if the helipad is moved. He will check into these concerns. Chair WEISZ asked if there were others present who wished to address this matter. There was no response. Planning Commission Page 4 January 16, 2003 It was moved by Commissioner COOPER and seconded by Commissioner SNOW to recommend approval of Case No. WZ-02-15, a request for approval of an amendment to a Planned Hospital District final development plan for property located at 8300 West 38th Avenue, for the following reasons: 1. All requirements for a Planned Hospital Development District. final development plan have been met with the exception of pedestrian links approved in 1992 and not yet constructed. 2. All minimum specifications of the Planned Hospital District have been met or exceeded. 3. All outside agencies continue to serve the property with improvements at the owner's expense. DIR"AFT With the following conditions: 1. Sidewalk be constructed along the west side of Lutheran Parkway West between the southern limit of the parking lot south of building N and the intersection with Lutheran Parkway prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 2. Sidewalk be constructed along the east side of Lutheran Parkway from the curb cut to West Pines north to the south side of the eastern parking lot for the main hospital prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 3. A deceleration lane for the West 32"d Avenue entrance be constructed upon acquisition of property at 8321 West 32"d Avenue. 4. The applicant work with the city engineer to determine the best location for the hospital sign on West 32"d in conjunction with construction of the deceleration lane. 5. Review and, if necessary, comply with ADA requirements for handicapped hospital parking. Commissioner McMILLIN expressed concern about the proximity of the proposed helipad to residential areas. He commented that his proposal would not move the helipad much farther from the emergency room. Commissioner SNOW asked the applicant if any objections to the helipad had been received at the neighborhood meeting. The applicant replied that no objections were received. Commissioner McMILLIN moved to amend the, motion to require the application to prepare an option for the helipad to be located south and east of the outfield of the existing baseball field before the City Council hearing. The motion died due to lack of second. A vote was taken on the main motion which passed 6-1 with Commissioner McMILLIN voting no. Commissioner McMILLIN explained that he voted against the motion because of his concern to placing a helipad so close to a residential neighborhood. (Chair WEISZ declared a brief recess at 8:43 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 8:50 p.m.) Planning Commission Page 5 January 16, 2003 PUBLIC HEARING ROSTER CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION January 16, 2003 Case No. WZ-02-15: An application filed by H & L Architecture for Exempla Healthcare for approval of an amendment to a Planned Hospital Development final development plan for the purpose of constructing a 13,400 square foot addition to the existing power plant and constructing a 63,000 square foot medical office building on property located at 8300 West 38th Avenue and zoned Planned Hospital Development (PHD). (Please print) Na a Address In Favor/Opposed Vo 1/ G 8-1~t 5~-Uvo u 3 5 -5 A tut,,- ong a V/G~- CA/~TL~%~wX Ic 1/ c ! - l~ C ifdl5 ~C ~fi2r CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE OF MEETING: January 16, 2003 DATE PREPARED: January 6, 20003 CASE NO. & NAME: WZ-02-15/Exempla Lutheran CASE MANAGER:Y'1V1. Reckert ACTION REQUESTED: Amendment to a Planned Hospital Development District final development plan LOCATION OF REQUEST: NAME & ADDRESS OF APPLICANT(S): 8300 West 38" Avenue H & L Architecture 1621 18'h Street Suite 110 Denver, CO 80202 NAME & ADDRESS OF OWNER(S) Exempla Healthcare 8300 W. 38°i Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO APPROXIMATE AREA: PRESENT ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE: SURROUNDING ZONING: SURROUNDING LAND USE: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 94.2 acres PHD, Planned Hospital Development Hospital Campus N: R-2 S: R-2, Jefferson County; E: R-2 &W: R-1, R-2, PCD N,E: Low density residential S: low density residential, open space W: low density residential, medical PB - Public/Semi-Public DATE PUBLISHED: January 2, 2003 DATE POSTED: January 2, 2003 DATED LEGAL NOTICES SENT: January 2, 2003 ENTER INTO RECORD: (X) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (X) ZONING ORDINANCE ( ) SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS (X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS (X) EXHIBITS ( ) OTHER The property is within the City of Wheat Ridge, and all notification and posting requirements have been met, therefore, there is jurisdiction to hear this case. ATTACHMENT I I. REQUEST The applicant is requesting approval of an amendment to a Planned Hospital Development District final development plan for property located at 8300 W. 38" Avenue. The purpose of the request is to allow a 12,747 square foot utility plant addition, construction of a 63,000 square foot medical office building and reconfiguration of associated parking. H. CASE HISTORY The Exempla Lutheran Medical Center property was rezoned in 1990 to PHD (Planned Hospital Development District) and has gone through a series of plan amendments since that time. The most recent amendment reviewed by Planning Commission was an expansion to the emergency services center on the northwest side of the hospital in 1992 pursuant to Case No. WZ-92-2. As an addendum to that case, Planning Commission reviewed and approved a pedestrian circulation plan for the hospital campus. The pedestrian connections approved include the following: 1. Sidewalk along the east side of Lutheran Parkway between the north edge of the West Pines facility and the south side of the east parking lot. 2. Paths running along the Rocky Mountain Ditch from the center of the campus to the east and west property lines. 3. Sidewalk along the west side of Lutheran Parkway West between the southern limit of parking lot A and the intersection with Lutheran Parkway. On sheet 2 of the plan set, parking lot A is located south of Building N. In 2002, two amendments to the existing final development plan were approved administratively by staff. Case No. WZ-02-05 accommodated a 1300 square foot addition to the radiology department to accommodate a linear accelerator (AA of the building use key on page 2 of the plan set). Case No. WZ-02-07 allowed a 350 square foot contamination shower addition to the emergency center to deal with biohazard attacks (BB of the building use key on page 2 of the plan set). . The entire campus encompasses 94.2 acres and has 319,145 sf of building footprint area (8% coverage) with 29.8 acres or 32% coverage in roadways and parking areas. Coverage by bikepaths and miscellaneous paved areas comprises 1% of the site and the unbuilt areas, including landscaping, equals 55.9 acres or 59%. Public access to the campus is from West 38" Avenue on the north and West 32" Avenue from the south. Both Lutheran Parkway and Lutheran Parkway West are private streets. The owner is in the process of acquiring the residentially zoned parcel immediately to the east of the 32nd Avenue entrance. Planning Commission - Page 2 WZ-02-15/Exempla Lutheran Attached as Exhibit `A' is the zoning map for the area. Exhibit `B' is the second sheet of the current development plan. III. PROPOSED FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT This amendment is the 4th amendment to the Exempla Lutheran Planned Hospital Development since the current zoning was adopted in 1990. The campus-wide extent of the proposed alterations, which occurs in two areas, can best be viewed on sheet 2 of the PHD document. The first area for consideration is located on the northern end of the campus, shown as detail 01 on sheet 2 of the plan set. This amendment increases the existing central utility plant by 12,474 square feet. The total coverage for the addition will be 16,000 square feet including the new cooling towers. The additions will occur in locations where there are currently drive areas and loading docks. Sheet 5 of the plan set shows more closely, the proposed alterations. Sheets 6 and 7 are elevations of the proposed additions. The second area of amendment is on the southern portion of the campus shown as detail 02. Medical Office Building (MOB) 3 is proposed containing 63,000 square feet of total building area (39,000 sf on the first floor and 24,000 sf on the second floor). It will be located to the southeast of existing MOB 4 (building X on sheet 2) and MOB 2 (building T on sheet 2) and will displace existing parking. Enclosed walkways are proposed to connect MOB's 3 and 4 and MOB's 2 and 4. Additional site modifications in the MOB area include relocation of the main curb access from Lutheran Parkway to the south and the expansion and reconfiguration of the parking area south of the two existing medical office buildings. The expanded lot will have up to 800 spaces depending on final layout and striping, doubling the existing parking count in proximity to the MOB's. The parking lot expansion displaces the existing helipad, which will be relocated to the western side of Lutheran Parkway West. Exempla Lutheran is not a trauma hospital, therefore, the helipad is used only once or twice per year. Because of the small amount of anticipated traffic, FAA approval is not required. The applicant submitted a parking study, which concludes that, overall, there is adequate parking campus-wide. However, much of the available parking is located in proximity to the MOB's, not the main hospital. It is not convenient for patrons of the hospital to have to park in the MOB parking area when the hospital parking is at capacity. In the near future, the hospital must address long-term parking deficiciencies on the northern portion of the campus. A landscape plan for the MOB area is shown on sheet 8 of the PHD document. The plan does not meet the city's standards for parking lot island landscaping. Section 26-501.D.2. requires that Planning Commission Page 3 WZ-02-15/Exempla Lutheran { _1 one parking lot island be provided for every 30 spaces in a parking lot. The island must be equivalent in size to a parking stall (8-1/2' x 18') and be planted with one tree, four shrubs and acceptable ground cover. The proposed landscape plan accommodates existing mature landscaping and proposes xeriscaping in areas. Please refer to Exhibit `C'. Although not meeting city standards, this is a planned development and varying from city standards is permitted. The alternate design is supported by staff because of the drought situation and continued watering restrictions. A concern of staff is the required pedestrian links approved by Planning Commission in 1992. As indicated in Section II of this report, the pedestrian connections approved include the following: 1. Sidewalk along the east side of Lutheran Parkway between the north edge of the West Pines facility and the south side of the east parking lot. 2. Paths running along the Rocky Mountain Ditch from the center of the campus to the east and west property lines. 3. Sidewalk along the west side of Lutheran Parkway West between the southern limit of parking lot A and the intersection with Lutheran Parkway. On sheet 2, parking lot A is located south of building N. It does not appear that any of the specified pedestrian connections have been completed except for an unpaved path running along the ditch from the center of the campus to the eastern perimeter of the property. Staff is recommending that the sidewalk along Lutheran Parkway West and the connection from West Pines north to the southern limit of the eastern parking lot for the hospital be completed with the construction of MOB 3. The proposed building area results in an increase of 4% in roadway/parking coverage (33.8%), an increase in building footprint coverage by 1.2% (9%) and a 5% reduction in unbuilt area (54%). The proposed construction will be well within the maximum allowed building height of 65'. Although not required by the zoning code, the applicant held a pre-application neighborhood meeting on December 18, 2002, to discuss the proposed changes to the campus with area residents. All requirements for a planned development final development plan have been met. All minimum specifications for a PHD district have been met or exceeded. IV. AGENCY REFERRALS All outside service agencies will continue to serve the property with upgrades installed at the owner's expense. Planning Commission Page 4 WZ-02-15/Exempla Lutheran The Public Works Department has approved a drainage plan and report for the new construction, as well as a traffic impact report and parking study. They are requesting construction of a deceleration lane for the existing access on West 32 d Avenue when the acquisition of 8321 West 32nfl Avenue has been finalized. This has been included as a condition of approval. Rocky Mountain Ditch has reviewed the preliminary plans and has no problem. They would like to review the final set of construction design documents. Xcel Energy has an existing gas line that will need to be relocated. Wheat Ridge Fire Protection District has no concerns. V. STAFF CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION Staff concludes that an amendment to the existing final development plan is required to accommodate new construction on the Exempla Lutheran campus. Staff further concludes that all requirements for a final development plan have been met and that all minimum specifications of the Planned Hospital District have been met or exceeded. Therefore a recommendation of approval is given with the following conditions: 1. Sidewalk be constructed along the west side of Lutheran Parkway West between the southern limit of the parking lot south of building N and the intersection with Lutheran Parkway. 2. Sidewalk be constructed along the east side of Lutheran Parkway from the curb cut to West Pines north to the south side of the eastern parking lot for the main hospital. 3. A deceleration lane for the West 32,d Avenue entrance be constructed upon acquisition of property at 8321 West 32' Avenue. VI. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS Option A: I move to recommend APPROVAL of Case No. WZ-02-15, a request for approval of an amendment to a Planned Hospital District final development plan for property located at 8300 West 38' Avenue, for the following reasons: All requirements for a Planned Hospital Development District final development plan have been met. All minimum specifications of the Planned Hospital District have been met or exceeded. All outside agencies continue to serve the property with improvements at the owner's expense. Planning Commission Page 5 WZ-02-15/Exempla Lutheran With the following conditions: 1. Sidewalk be constructed along the west side of Lutheran Parkway West between the southern limit of the parking lot south of building N and the intersection with Lutheran Parkway. 2. Sidewalk be constructed along the east side of Lutheran Parkway from the curb cut to West Pines north to the south side of the eastern parking lot for the main hospital. 3. A deceleration lane for the West 32"' Avenue entrance be constructed upon acquisition of property at 8321 West 32"d Avenue." Option B: "I move to recommend DENIAL of Case No. WZ-02-15, a request for approval of an amendment to a Planned Hospital District final development plan for property located at 8300 West 38' Avenue, for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3." Planning Commission Page 6 WZ-02-15/Exempla Lutheran OW 23 BE 22 L I :II I L. t YI =I = v g a FDDi„I HD -Tv nm FI "RH AMIE UB m AL MEDICAL CENTER sria ~ e ~ WZ46-9 PHD WZQ-2 ms sns 1 • g RI R ' 8 ' ~ Sasss F-• ~ ' W . ~V.a _ d, >sa H w >•j w u nt AVE g R s 8 z < sas ~ g / i\0.` z C' E U B p sus w && 8 ~ WZ-76-1 Y ° sass sus ({1 p s Q ssu saa O uJ ssss g 5 svs ssx f sus aao ~ L T . ERAN T g M [CAL sn C R n„ x R-2 WZ-92-2 LUTHERAN 9t _ SEAS EY 5U8 z PHD MEDICAL PSCM7.1 , o s Y CENTER 6 q = PBG-67.1 OLm WUTXAV E pp a PA M Rj D D H ark ems 3 $Q Z T a 45 W Sao PL a k ? !1 L w i16l ~ x]O m ~1 ~ Q O . >ffi E~ 19 2 , L mm, mom ~ . g 6 s g • ~ g $ sms •A s - s g g ~ e E Iccccvai .IFFFFk'50N COIiNTY OFFICIAL N E 27 ZONING MAP - PARCEL/ bARCEULOTBOUNDARY DESIGINATES OWNERSHIP) WHEAT RIDGE - WATER FE NATER FEATURE • DENOTES . )ENOTES MULTIPLE ADDRESSES ® COLORADO - 100-YEAR 00-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN D I® F"` (APPROXI! APPROXIMATE LOCATION) DEPARTMENTOF MAP ADOPTED: June 15, 199 < a U PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT Last Revision: September 10, EXHIBIT W SE 22 1 N.5T N W W 1 4 :I 1 1 L. I h1 MEDICAL CENTER PHD W WZ-76-1 WZ-92-2 D J 5 r M "ICAL C R R-2 wZ-92-2 =A8 EYBUB z PHD os m - PBG-67-1 LUTHERAN MEDICAL p6-67-1 CENTER N sus OW23 IFFFFRION COUNTY EXHIBIT 'B' N - cozI4 --1 P4 Ita""t L/ • ~j ~n r ~ L 1 Y ' ~ ~ 'N 1 I~ Ws C 'wry r w F x a N o. vm. _ a CLW LLI - Y' z x } V X EL 0 .Zda76dKddr~K,SYlfoi nl.s 97>ffig; EXHIBIT V MEMO To: Director of Planning and Development City of Wheatridge From: OZ Architecture Re: Parking Island Requirements Lutheran Exempla Medical Office Building 3 Date: 2 January 2003 The purpose of this memo is to ask for approval from the Wheatridge Director of Planning and Development for aggregating the required parking lot islands as larger islands and as interior divider strips. The following points illustrate that this aggregation of islands meets the intent and purpose of City Code Section 26-501 D.2.' 1. The proposed aggregated islands provide considerably more interior landscaped area than required. Explanation: We are proposing a total of 814 parking spaces. 814 - 30 = 27.13 (28) islands or island equivalents required. 28 x (8.5 x 18) = 4,284 s.fi of parking island area required. Our proposed plan shows over 50,000 s.f of parking island area. In other words, we are proposing more than ten times the minimum interior landscaped area. 2. The proposed islands provide more than the required number of trees. Explanation: Our proposed plan shows thirty trees located in parking lot islands or strips of land within the parking lot. New trees are the required two-inch caliper size. However, most of the trees in islands are existing trees. These existing trees are all larger than two inches in caliper. Many are mature trees providing significant shade and beauty. Additionally, since we are currently experiencing a drought of unknown length and severity, it makes sense to protect existing established trees that are much more likely to survive a restricted watering regime than to plant new trees which will need a quantity of supplemental water to survive. In fact, some experts are suggesting that new tree planting be delayed until our reservoirs reach normal levels again. 3. The proposed islands provide more than the required number of shrubs. Explanation: Thirty islands x 4 shrubs = 120 shrubs required. We are providing 150 new 5 gallon shrubs within the interior islands, and there are at least 16 existing shrubs that will be protected. 4. Finally, according to Sec. 26-502 C.1., "the intent of permitting variances is to allow for well- designed xeriscape (low water use) planting design." By designing the parking lot to conserve existing large trees and by specifying only low water requirement trees, shrubs and lawn grass (see plant list on planting plan), our proposed interior parking lot islands provide shade and beauty while minimizing the use of scarce water resources. For these reasons, we respectfully request approval from the Wheatridge Director of Planning and Development for aggregating the required parking lot islands as larger islands and as interior divider strips. I Wheatridge City Code Sec. 26-50 1D.2. islands. All parking areas in excess of thirty (30) spaces shall have at least one (I) interior landscaped island per thirty (30) spaces. Each such landscaped island shall occupy the equivalent of one (1) parking space (minimum) and each such required island shall be landscaped with a minimum of one (1) two-inch caliper tree or larger and four (4) shrubs or accepted groundcover. At the discretion of the owner, and with approval of the director of planning and development, based upon the intent and purpose of this section, an acceptable alternative to individual islands would be the equivalent aggregate landscaped area developed in larger islands or as interior divider strips. f ~ ~s sum~tt~ a I~~velo ant 1~~ ...rrr.. y~~n-ra~iarnt to ~►at Ri~cvxe [~'r-~clr.~ ~f`T a~Yre ✓c11A1~1 A 1 A ITLIC~ A Al 11ACir1 fi s . ~ . _ µ \I\1\II \ V 11 V 1\/ M ~ ~ ~ _ ~ _ ~ _ _ s , e.v a , .,.s w„ u.,.r ~ ~ e✓.i~. a, .1, • .►.tsA ~ it 1 l./ 1 A.l 1 d 11 i «/.L.1 V 1 ►I.T o V T i l: ra ,cv -~T'^~~p~.:.i..,. a~r{~~ v i i .~.i."e 11` V L' 1 x..111 ~I 1 V 1' 1.:11.: V li fi 1 V 11 Y ~..1. N New spaces provided as M.O.B.'s 1 p required in parking analysis. Tot r a f sA~~ ~Ro~E~T~ CAN 4 ~1 59 . 2A CRESM FOR] LII.ti LE~?~7. o a r~ u~re BASS ~F BE CAS OCCUPANCY Existing stalls on ca Group B, Type II 1-hr (Medical Office Building) Prapos~d: n~ ~ dQ BEA_RTNGS ARE BAF~ C) THE WF.~T I.TNE n T~F ~ TIDE NC►R.TH~EST (,~UA.RTE~.. GF ~ECT~GN TC~N ~ ~C~"PAL ~ZER~I,~L~AN BEING MOTTIJMEN~TET) I3~ A B~Z.A. CAS' (CITY NT NO, 509) AT T~~E Nt~RTHWEST CORNER Gl~ SE;~'T'I+~N fi R.IZUNTAL CtJNTR4L I'C)It~I' Nth, f~Q9) AT ~I~E-~E i~►~E~T Group 5, Div. 2 Type II F.R. Lo~~ Hazard (Central. Utility Plant} r ~7 ~C,~ ? t T ;LC1 1 7C1'r't • 2'1_T? z P"~ ic-~ ns~ n a a ~ n t~ z ~ Cenral U+i?ity Plan+ L~~ _ ~ EXPLANATIt7N OF AMENDMENT Medreal Office Buil Exempla Lutheran Medical Center proposes to develop Total stalls provided CHAPEL i EMERGENCY OR1G]NAG IIOSPITAL approximately 5.2 acres of their campus currently zoned PHD. The Total stalls required i DEPAR"I'MENT proposed expansion will include and addition of 12,474 square feet to the Total stall overage existing Central Utility Plant building. This addition will be a single story t,~ addition with a basement. The overall land coverage for the plant addition SIGNAGE t. i~ i DECON'I'AMINAT70N :.sue SHOWER will be 16,000 square feet, inclusive of the new cooling towers. All signage shall be in a The second portion of the expansion will include a new Medical Code of Laws. r f- . EAST WING Office Building (MOB U3) and connectors to the existing Medical Office Buildings. The new MOB will be approximately 63,000 square feet over TAI"' A ?`T®AT EXISTING ~ , , , , , two floors. The first floor coverage will be approximately 39,000 square ~ CENTRAL PLANT feet and 24,040 square feet allocated to the second floor. With the LANDSCAPING 1 PATIENT TOWER addition of the new Medical Office Building the parking area south of the All landscaping shall be i medical office buildings will be reconfigured and expanded to Ridge Code of Laws. .e i. approximately 950 total spaces, of these 450 will be new spaces. The final portion of this development will be the relocation of the it ~L RADIATION ONCOLOGY hell-stop to the west side of Lutheran Parkway West and north of the LIGHTING S- existing ball field. All lighting shall be in a The complete development will provide approximately 79,800 Ridge Code of Laws. i~ i LI~ SOiJTH WINO square feet of new building area and 408,410 square feet of additional nt t 4 paved area. J I. RADIATION ONCOLOGY ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION CROSS ACCESS EAS The Central Utility Plant addition is a two addition, multi phased The owner, his successo project. The new generators will all be located in an addition directly to access and to free mo north of the existing plant. Remote radiators, with screening, will be used "cross-acess/ ingress-egr for sound control. The cooling towers and chillers will be placed directly Such grant of easement s east of the existing plant, in the current location of the facilities dock area. and guests of the owners This will move the cooling towers further away from the residential areas. movement through said The new Medical Office Building III will be located directly east similarly recorded easem and slightly south of the existing Medical Office Building IV. The new abutting public streets. 7' .y ADDITION E M.O.B. 1 PROJECT LOCA'T'ION }i~r s g C f building will be set back from the existing Colorado Ditches, as required by the existing easements. The building will be two stories with a u screened mechanical area. ~ _ 1 r a ~ f CASE HISTORY SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE {i Case Number: I, Lutheran Medical Center Planne under my direct supervision and WZ-02-15 accordance with all applicable C s may at erwise be required by ~aw_ T  irately represents said survey. Pageraao, on the aay ot A.U. LU Reception No. lv in the t3oo_k WZ-02-07 accompanying plan accurately re WZ-02-OS Vszry pe% 111 Jefferson County Clerk and Recorder y•iga~ at ~ by: y, Deputy ` Vq µa;4• ~,A. ~~"I~~III~ 1 rcw r . , 1 ~t~ r I n 4 ~ ~ ~ E ~ Y1^ryV, 4X3 V ! IG i ~ } ;i`~ g t ~ ~ W r ~ ~ fJ M t r ~ tV,, V ~ 470 ua ~ ~ L 4X3 - - ~ -r T r / n w x n w ~,51~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'f ~ p ~3 Y ~ + ~ fi J n ~ X A p ~ ~ l Mf N ~ i P / n - r~ X ~ x mow- ~1. . S ! . x~ ~ sv ~ 1 i l ,1 i 1... S S I X f `1 ,1 ~ ~ J ~ ~ ~ I i ~ ~ ~,-~-r'.__1 ~ nX !.`.r ~ 1 _Y,~~~ 1. 1 1 t ~ ~ } 4 t t 4 k" 4. z ~ l q , ~ _~.n_.. ~ L K3 •7 w F ~ ~s ~ ~ t,> ~ ~ ~ \ !_/S V V' i eft C+ X ~ 1 ..,.....G„. i ~ h tC1 is X X X o M ~y \F1 ! i 4 n a • ~ lti X x J 4 ~ ~ d F i f 1 X J 1. ~~~r 1 t ~~1 t q X S 'rs i X 4 O 6 s i ~~?Y I'~^ ' 1 ' e,-'.- E 1 ~ ~ ~ ° ~ X ~ x ~ ~X ~ 'e P J L~ ~r _ X t t } ti...~~, a a ~ ~ ~ 1 ~i~ t 3~ ■ 1 e, / A ~ j~ r h L' ++i► ~V ~iJ~ ~ . X ~ ~ ~ ~ h X J~X i ~t t a a~ E .._,.,,M. ~ - ~ { f""1 ~ ti _ ~ t \ , ~ Q ~,t , ~i ~ r ~~r` , ,~--x ~ ~ Y f ! ~ ~ ! 0 / \ l ~ ~t~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ; ~ r ' ~ i i .1 t - t I` q ~ rf ' r ~ ' 4 l ~ ~ ~ , X _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ f ~ • ~ j / ~ ~ X 4y, L < , t~, tC~ ~ X r - ~ `~3, r r r } ~ ' 4,S ( ~ I Jf f r ai s ti s ~ a ~l ~M ~ ~ r a i ,i ~ . r; X f { 0 ~ P'~~ 1. Y_ c l t r x, .'r - ..__n...~.___-__f.. ,l L i w ~f~ .s r i r ~r X 3 X f ( a C7 f ~ ~ X '~-F..i t x =O ? r J ' iJ 1 L 1 i i. ~ , ~ ~ , ~ / J is f L. f ~ ,.i ~ ICI r 1 1.,~ X ~ ~ 4 L ~i > ~ ~ 1 f Q~ > X , s ~ ,.,r'' I.... ~ ~ Yt i ~a f' rs i~ ~ ~ J^} ~ fr (L'( ~ ~ ~ [J`~j f 7 V' V' / ~y, ~ 7 t d,, N ~ ^ i ' i _ - j 'l i•'' e ! q 1 i t' __...___,..a.,..... ~ 4.a t S i `3 L { X ~ ~ ~ .r <.l. 3 ~ t . 1 ~ X ~ / Y. / c> . ~ i f .,-.--.-::~y~ ~ 1 ~rfi t i ~ . ~ ~ .may a x } v ~ p j !i x ~ ~ f , U ~ / ~ / ~ 4' _ , v ~ < ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~5co ra, ~ f ~ < t ~ ~ ~ } . 1 i. I ~r s ~ x r ~ ~ X l1f1'A' 17'YIMadY I r a X 1 " S~ aX ~X 4 ~x e ~ 1 j h--~...w h c~ ~ ti. T_- ~ W._... . ~ ~ « ~ ~ ~ ~ 4~ ~ ~ 4 1! J n ~ ~ _ - ~ ~ q t S f~ ~ ~ < ~ I • ■ L Z ~ ~ ~ L . } i \ f a' t 7 J f x ~ - t X 0 s . - - ,e~ i l ~ ~ .w....., ~ ~ X ~ ii.r A X X .ti,, Y ` ~ ~ X { L~ .F J x x 1 ""~,,z ~ N 1 F' ~ ~ 1 ~ 4i -1 1 ■ i 1 ~ia Lj • rv i w X ~ ' ~ Irv %W -P- w m 9x x Li 11 n-~ ui a G) ~4) iv~:oc 0 2 a5 4-0 W 0 C'4*'4 c~ x cn :3 x LLJ ~8 '1 78 *2 78 x} 7 cl) w "T c z ~ /ry i f x x Ix- IX r X M d cu 4) L--O o 0 o wv o c_ CV CY) :3 0 - Y Q a EE E EE tom- ti• © Ut :3 t c-) ' E W X ~ n t tx x x vi 00 r-- N t j:~ 2~ d 0- d D~ 6 =i k C) NO cqr:) ,all X rr 5493.0 '~9 f a 54939 / _ - _ r 4 5491,.1 Hv 9ai 5 92,6 ~ C~ S~tQJ.9 ~ _ __._..__._._.____..~..,y....--,._ ...,r"~"" ' _ ter. 492,5 _ r ~~~~a~~~~a~~~ 5 .95:0 ( ,~z,,: • ti / - ~ 54~2:s 95:3 ~ ~ s ~ ~ ~ l r ~ . ~ r.:._.-...__..~.. .y.. 5493.4 ~r._ .t:.:m: ~ _ _ ___7;__.._ r . ~ 5485. 5493.3 ' '~i I ~ ~ 4 `i l t~ . 5494, 2 _ , ~ S ` X ~ ~ 5494.? - } .._a.. ,r f 493: t r~ ~ ~ x 4 , 5 y / 5491, 3 / 4 t . ~ k` ~ ' a_ ~ .,mm._ 5489 5 , p 3 ~ `i 7' O .~'t i ~~J ~ 5494:4 ~~~~~~s~~ X I a I ~ ~ 3 5 2, 5 ~ ~~~o~' ~o~~~~ ~ ~ X 5488.0 X 4 ~ 5490,3 5 .4 549448 ~ _ - ~ ~ 4 4 ~ 5 88~ rr,~"` 414 9, I F 5494,4 tF f 54895 x x - i i • • 5492:5 - t,~''_ 5490 ~ r~ e f X X , i ~ I ~ k w~ ~ ~w i" l c w ~ `,`y, t' 7 7 5494,3 i` 5494. ~ X e ~~~a~~~~~ ~~f~a~~~o~~~~ 1~._~ -----~-r--~-_....,,,~, - - F ~ t 2. i i r > i f t~ ' ~ 5499, 3 1 ~ jt F f MV ~ ~ 3az~ 5497. J ~ } t ~ t a I ~ ~ y 4 ^i, ■ I 5541.1 549Q,9 ~'ti ~ t I ~ ~ 5501 .4 ~ ~ ~ I 2. ! F ~ ~ • ~s ~ ' ' ~ 5499, A ..._.~__r---. i I 5476,.3 _~r_ 5499, 5 S_ } , f I ~ l i a499~2 54 $.6 ~ y ~ 4 - 57'2.4 ~ _ • .1 ` `~4 I ~ } k _ _ ti 505,9 P } 0 ~ 5542.4 l~ X T; ~t i IC t ~ - ~ ~ V ~ I o I ~ ~ ~ ~ J e-a ~~,t~, i o 1. i 5542, 5 X 5543, 5 v_.~_, E • to } 1,3 C~ n i 3 j ~a.,_ I ~ i ~~VJ N~ . i ~f I ~ `.~y J 1 ~ 55O4.Q 5544.7 5 os,Q X X50 i ~ o X ~_.w , ._w~ ~ Y.. i ~ w...~~,...~~a+~- t ~ Y~ ~ lyo Bpa, f j 1 c~ a', . Gom acc Gars 5543.3 p ,i X ~ ~ ~r I ; 1 e J ~ 551D ~ j . I I t is ~ ~ o ivy 1 ~ _W. ~ / ( ~ / ~ ~ X' PARKIN e c . ! ~ , Gom act Gars i a. r o ~ i 1, ~ v~ ~ ~ i - ~ ~ ~5 1p P ! Ir ~ ~ i ~ l `i ~ ¢-r~- I. 7 i ~ ~ ~ ~ C 1 I ASPNAL 5509.2 . ss X c 5 2.2 ` ~ ..f sN~w FENCE ~ .1 ,.Y- 1 i _ i I u' F ~ r ~rENt l ~ r ~ r 1 _ s= ASPHALT PARKING ~ I1) ) I I Cp T PAIOKW/; ♦ ~ ,,.l N ` i f,~.// v 1 \ \ t~- I SHEET 3 of 10 .ELMC CAMP-U-S -SITE PLAN NORTH SCALE 1 _ 75P-O" _ - ! f f 5510 , t _ . . _ ~ i ~ s 3 ~ 1 J f ~i} ~ „~r L~ v) ~ ~ r PA~rK~Nc t !e y. A ` I ~ Gomp~ct Gary `ti 5492.6 ~ ` i ~ ~ ---w___ _ 5488,9 `'DC~ - 88,3 ~ ~ ~ i tt ~ , ,r,> _ a.~..,,. ( 1 i ~ ~ ~ 4._~I I + ~~t " ~ ~ J 4 , ~ J~~f' ~ 1 ! ~ t 1 h . . ~ J .----k,, ~ _ i/ ~ ~ ~ ~r__ ~ f , ~ f` 1 ~ - 5505.9 X 5 ~ . S l `f` l - . y~ ~ _ ..w__.._. --.._...,i f e` ~ 5545,9 ~ t~ / ' / ~~`t`,-ti \ . 71.E . e s t i Hv 559,2 ~ i~ ~ E ~ 5 2,2 - _ -..v-- - ~ _ - ~ ~ , r., I N SNQw F~' GE ~ t ~ - y _ f ~ ~r a e ~ ~ ~ f ~f3-.---.~- i~; ~ ~ ~ x - ; ,,r E, { ~ i ~ f s~ ~ ~.r i ~ 1 ~ ~ R ~ ~ , /f C - f ~ ~ ~ l ~ % ~ 1 ~ \ ~ 1 i~ J. r~ f 'i i i` it _ t i 1\ 7 / a V l~l~ V" 1 5514, 7 r+ . i t i :'~r X s ; s 5514, 8 ~ - s i ? r 1 / \ t 1 t ~ I 1 / { i~ ~ / e 'i _ - 14 ~ ' # ~ ( ~ ~ ~ BASEBAIt ~1~LrD ~ lil jT 1~ 5515,3 i z -Y N } Y _ ~,1 ~ ~ ~I! > > , a ~ °i. r z. ~ T' V L~ n_ r `L 4~- ~ \ T~ T ~ 5 2 2 i x s~vow ~uc~ ~ r ~ ~ l t` ~ i i , a ~ I f f ~ }y' li ~ ~ y ~ i r l y..~~_--~. I r ; f I+~ I i;, I ` ~ C ! - 55 i , 20 4,i -r i ~ ' . ; ~i" j,, _ I1 -r _ - e ( ~ ~a~.__• C _ r- r~ I;, i I ,I . , I ~ I ~VG ~ i ! O ~ I 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ^~4~ ~ / I 4 \ i t r ! f ~ r..------- . _ ~ r~os i% ~ l ~ ~ , ~ ~ ti ~ '~~<< ~e.s ~ l , ti tS r 'r 33JdlDt ~ i ~ ~ ~ i' ~ ~ ~ r ~ f ~ ~ v ~ ' ~1l 1 ,1 ~ xsr~,~e / f ~ ~ 550 ~ , ht i ~ , f, ,t ~ ~ , ~ `ti i _ ~ ~ ~ ~ if r;~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ % P.1 ~ ~.r~ \ l / / Y / ~ i t l r t ~ ! } X t ~ I _ \ 55 ~ ~ - ~ 523. ~ . X f ~ X ~ ~ f ~ l i ~ ~ ~ , , , ~ ,-r- . - , . , , z.o _ --._....w._,_._.. F , a ~ ~ " 519, 4 ti , / f ~ a - `ti i~ f,... f ,i , . 5527.5 ~ W, S, 505 7 ~ ` ~ ~ 550, j ~.ti.,~ ~ I ~ , ~ 1 503.9 \ t , '.4~ X ~'l' , ~ l ,;i; j / / ~ 1 t ~ 5528, 3 ~ i X / ~,1,~ ~ , ,l t / ~ ~v. \ ~ r 5520.6 l / 5522.5 ~ X 1 ti 5506, ti7 ~ l Y ~ ~ 5520, 8 5520,6. \ ~ \ , 1 ~ ~ ~ \ ~ ~ ~ ~ \ ~ " 4 , f' ~ . fr- 534. ~ f r i 5,515,7 ~ ~..~...y'°`~..~-~--° / { ~ 1 T 5.,..50, 7 ~(5 2S X ~.7 X ~ 5532,7 553 5534,4 _ _ X4,9 I ,r ~ r ~ i 7 ` s _l....~..- ~ ~ - ~ 55 4 .e~ u i S I r ~ V_ ~ ) r 1-" ~i _ - s~ 5529, r ...A 1 5525,8 ~ e r r ~ ~ X ~ 5527,5 ~ ~ 'i! b 5527,5 5 27. ~ 5 2 .5 i~ 55 B 2 r ~ 5 29.9 ~ c . it ~ ~ ~ ,s- ~ r i ~ ~ ~'3 ~ r-s..,.~ - i f ~ .26.7 r~ x528.4 ~ f'" 1 1 4~t` fr, ~r 1 ~ t _ = f t ~ 1 L a4_ 0.7 ~ f'` L :..Y J 2. 5527,2 5529.4 ~j i ~ X ~ r Y ■ ~ f ~-Y..., r ~ r, } ; - \ r s _ - n f r ~ ~ 4'' 1r - ~ \ - ~ k~ ~ _ ` r ~ 5536,7 ~ ~ F~ i ~ 5532,8 t l t X ~ F. e ~ ~ w~ > l a,~ 1 Y ~ kr , f` ~ , 1 5536, 6)( j Y~y- t 5536, 3 L._ ~ f i ~ ~ _ti . ..w in A 1 e 5536.2 5535, 5 5537.5 ~ ~ X 1 sn ~ - t p 1~ _ _ - _~v_.._,.~.. `9tt3 A~ 5539.0 5540,9 1 X ~ r yn w ~Sr}.~R. ~ ~1F1Ln L i.J 5542.4 33 5a x X N SHEET ELMC CAMPUS SIT-E--PLAN SOUTH 4of10 i F n t; rV~ ~ i iMs k„r ~Ln A. ,,n~ w jt lil 1. i r 1 ~ c ~ L ~ t { [ ~ "t .x...>.~MawA4+~rF+k~wl ..Jr..1.:.4.:..u.....+u..,.:, ..z.. ~ .u.. sv.,n._xen.- G;, . y 1~fM f , { ~ w ~.....:y,..n ~ 3 ra ; ~ ' 1 1~~ . L w K, k 'Y A ~ 1 ' ~ . J; 1 4 1 .+fn ' i a 1• 1 ; ~ ' F ~ 1 . r. - u. c ml. ew-V.~.r Rw.,n.. ...r... ~ , m -r - . ~ a r e....,.a,., _ r..... r.. _ y. ~1 1 t r.~ y k u ~ f w 'i A n . 3 .J 1~'Y . t: s . . ' i. ? ~ ~ _ y . , S t. r ; , , , ~s~ ~ ~ i S - i- ~ i IF ~ E t~ . v.~Mn~:da. r.. ~ M... ~ ; ...r r 1 r y~y ~~i 1 1 s...~~...i. ...J - ! r • ~ ~ ~ 3 w ~R ~ _ Y 1 :PL 'h ' ~ y . 1 A { f .4 r. Y . . s ~ t; ~ E". ~r ' z -r.o. MA~ONR~f ~ n, _ ._~..--r-..-_. .v.µ. _ ,..a. . , , i~ - ~ 'r.' ` . 4~ t r _ . i . Tc°~. ~'1'VYW°'ET ' i~ ~ 1 ~ 1~ ~ ~ ..~J~. _ ~ ~ 4.: r .t ~ a°` ? ~ - ~ . ~ ~ t ~ : - R ~ . . r c E ~ i~it7.~ ~z4r a ~i..s,. 1 r z r sTE i.= ~ ~ ~ 1 1 S T 3 So. . 1 r 4,.,..„. s S- I 3- 4 , r j t Y ~j f _ , ~ ' ,F i, it I i ".lei' , , { i t t, t X13 c E ~ r_ - t ~ L t ~ . L }.1. J~ ` i.t: > s`r. z if i.i i f ,~r~ , Y'..,Y.k ~ a Y'.i ~ c::..a i r y ~ 1►~ ~ . z s r''s- 'r c ~ " t; c f ~ , . k z.. ~ r ~ s,., r" ~ : x x :r:r x r _ ~ z~...,_.. 7~~.`7:.1;'31.i1,.,.."I i i L f a .s ) :S.t s aW .,.,_z i.><'x-. i z<.z. z.r,.f.. , r t .ci.z . ~t, .r. t ~ 1 3 1 I 'C T. I t l .A ' ~ G':. 2 ..C 1 a +T ~ 7. _I I11fy. rf.~ t I7S} [.t.t i L z. 1 .t 1 ~ .z z. ] k...,... t, »Y ..Y 1."1...~''_L'A ~l_r.Y . _ S i 3 k. ^ a. s i I i k. Y 1 l k k..,.., t., t , ~x: if:; -i3tittfi ;li,;:'. ~ zt, r,-f:fr~~x: r s. _.,E; , f ..L. . x ~11 t ? i a L X i _ _t 1I 3 l_ C;,t. i.k. % .,X t 1 C 7w L J, LYX. L~„`.S7 L„_t v . ~ is". r' ~ L13}? t`~ t i t r~'rlsz~.x s~ ....t ,zf atv ~,i. r -X7. , 1, ..e~...::t~i 't'z`;!>x.~,:Y~, 4 A= ..1. . . r iL~ s11 ;.~~t .1_ ..~11 ~1i. E ...7.. a_ Lm.. d"r'X. t., _P ,C - ^,aG..~a J. "~5 ~.4~x.. .t i.. 1 . . ~ .,,_-m_ _-"1.~~ 'f.z. i .,.f,t~r r.. iY x, fY.~,~k : Y~k1is zt e.~' s: i ''jam ' ~ ; i d'i' T Y.A C.L' a 'x f r 7 I rLr i . . _ : ~ . . ` ':'i i ^ ,'Y. J z ~ ~ 1 A 1 ' 3" l . ,G.-'a `L , -L.,«Y .e;.,.w . r . ~7 , 7s l 7 ` ' S. _ . ~ . ! i_... t i . r . .,c ~°"~Zlr 3 i i I T ,S..r t ~ z . r" .,.'X: t r. r T l L~K { s r , r t ~ 7..tL ..y.F". ..L•Kz~k,. J, kC 1 a µ t.,......} , r7. .~d'::a,'~t._r... ' ~ k..'X.2k~..~ x <`:--'s:~,:~, t~' ~ lz _ f 2y rc t~ 1 z t:. r ~ l ' . Z':F~r2. " I.~f1 F F_ I . _ . ~ ..'R.p Mw.S., ii~~ ~~I ........._._...m,.~,.... .M.,. . ! CT. i s7_' z. 7:C1.~ 1.x;1' ~~.ti. r'ye' _ SCALE t - . J' Yrt J  ,'.i..~J 7~~JS"Cl ~T.`.Ii ..fl1ii.:.. ~ 1 S 1x ~ f 7 ~ x. a , 1., 7..I...YI',7.~ 13'~' ,LI I.,.xS.a.LLl.ft`.x13. 1.1 i.. .t i ~ .s:~. S. i c,,. .7 I...I `7 1_.7: S 7. = . t .-n: '.i.'. i ~ - : C~I'I: a ~.r~a ~ I r z z ~~,.7_~ 4 u T 'Y CAL L' rMr I A." - ? ,..3 t '.I., Il.a°1SI ~LJx.L4a.,r7.I7.a.. 2~TjIE L.;1 a t : T. ~Y ar ..z. L' L ~.S ~"1 :eTS i ,~I.I.1^i:rs i ~ ~ ~ 1 s ` I .1:`.~,7x z:Y;'7`1..1.I'`.'Y:'-S tZ1~ a.~L..l" ` , . kz t . ~ c.~: , ° S x x.11:; X._, S E T 7-`7 t L ~T"C ICI` 1 i t .;C L t-,a. 1 _i ] i I I'C'I 1 ~ 1 l Y x._t L L_ 1 7 T. Z T S.1 S,` A x ' C~iA.1: r T a~a::`'7~"z~ .TJr , °..~LT sy?r~ ',s rr.~ r~ a ~ - - - 1 i i f k e 1 J .._~r va-!ten I~ 1° ~LGaO~t 4F-~'S" t v► t I 1 L 1 r i~ 1 r s -!1 { i i~ ~f i t - L- I i„~ .-.-...-r.~. _ ...r.~......f.r.-~-- r. r... - ~ a y ;xsi.Li c }s`~ ~ ~ z 3 R ,_2 Z L~1 C ''"T ' x .N....w-. ~ - i.. ~ 7 - -4 3 ~L~7 j ~ ~ i „ T 1 . ~ . s r ty Ir s. ~,4, t '1 . L . X.~ °L I...~Sz s v~.s_.. l.r .1.:57.... ,.iz. 7 l ' } j i. ~ _ ¢ 3. f 1 iI~ f' ! f < ~ r r " 71E i t~ ' I CENTRAL UTILITY PLANT EAST CE-- N ERATO R-.,,,,.tO"LEVATIO N SCALE 3/32 U ~ J W Q ~ 0. ~ A~CNITEC~UflE j~ W 1820 Folsom Street V 1 Z ~ Boulder, Colorado 80302 k ~ \ phone 303.449.8940 . ~CJS~~~ ~.111~ !C1 I EX. PQC~t ~ r (~iCl ~~l ASS to m ♦ r ,y {t I[! e din' . R ~CtGlc~S ~ + 6 ♦ R t ! , t ,rr t ! * g r -MUB4 MC~B~ ~ R 1 r + s s C !s In I ! • ♦ r . t Ponds ~ , i~a ~ ! ! R R ~ w w R R t A ! ; f +rw a • e • ♦ ♦ r A * r r R r v r r ♦ e e r I A ! ! y RRS ♦ wRr w . r w w* r ♦ ~ 1 Y! + a w a + w r V R w R e + R w ! T! M M ♦ r w r ) ♦ • V r r r w r w w w f ♦ ! • • • 9 • ♦ • ♦ ~ A i ! r r r r r r • r r r . • • r . r e • • r • ~ r ~ • i Y ! I ♦ 1 ♦ ! ` ♦ o w • ♦ t r • ♦ r w ♦ ♦ • w ♦ a ♦ ♦ • r ARCHITECTURE 1 • 4 L • Install awn • ♦ ♦ ♦ ~ ♦ * • r r • din. limits t . ♦ to ra Y~ ♦ i • i• ~ • r i 9 0 • • ♦ • • t r * • ♦ • • f r • ♦ k+_ 1621 18th Street • • • ~ ~ S p • a ~ ~ r • • ♦ • ♦ A •r~ • ♦ ! r Suite 110 i • 1 ♦ • t ♦ ✓ • ♦ • ♦ ♦ • • r • ♦ I t • • • • • ♦rrr ♦ R • i • x r ♦ ♦ ♦ • • • ! 1 • ♦ • r +t r r t ♦ ~ * " Denver, Colorado 80202 • • • • ♦ • ♦ • • •fr' A ~ i1-^t ~ ♦ ♦ ♦ rr phone 303.295.1792 • r w • • •1 • • • • • ♦ • • • ~ ♦ 4 a • ~ ♦ ♦ r a • r v • ♦ i ~ S • • ♦ • ♦ • ♦ . . ♦ +,J.. Q , y • . r , • r . r • • ; s . • • s , . . r r ♦ . . r♦ • • • • ♦ ♦ ~ f«4 ~ Y ♦ M • • ♦ • • • ♦ lI • r ♦ r r r ♦ r. ♦ f • • r ♦ r ♦ ♦ r r a ♦ ♦ « a r r r a t ♦ r r♦ v r r r♦ r e r A♦ , . r r v r+ r r r r+ r • r r♦ r r r r r « r♦ v . • r r . r r ♦ r . ♦ . . s r f r • r s • r r ♦ ' ♦ • r r ♦ r ♦ ♦ ♦ r r r . • . ~i r s r ♦ r r ♦ ♦ r r ♦ • • r fled Onl RA to tie lnsta 31 Y A halt ath ♦ r r Ex s a . Ins 1 r r • ~1 ~ re ~~~4 iV r ..r. ♦ ♦ ~ t ♦ Y ♦ r ♦ ♦ • ♦ ♦ r • a r ♦ ♦ e r Y r r ♦ ♦ F . • r . ♦ ♦ ♦ r • ♦ ♦ Y Y • > r r . R • 1 Y ♦ ♦ ♦ r 4 . ♦ r • ♦ M ♦ ♦ Y ♦ ♦ y r • • ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ • • . ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ • t . b ♦ ♦ y . ♦ ♦ ♦ « ♦ r r ♦ r + • ♦ r f'`~ ♦ a ' F~ Lillibridge ~ X~ miY ~ r 1 m t ~ . ~ . r. . r . ~ ~ . y . ♦ 'I • , • , r♦ . i r ' a • ♦ ♦ ♦ « a ~ • . . 1~ J. r ♦ r I e ~ , ' ` ♦ . ♦J ray, a y ` . . 222 North LaSalle Street ♦ ♦ • ~ ♦ ♦ Suite 410 Y CC E ♦ r ♦ e • r ♦ ♦ ♦ /fir 4,+AJ~~.i4 r a ~ ♦ r r r a a r ♦ • s r X • r Chicago, Illinois 60601 x r r ound MOB . ♦ . , Ar r ♦ X. San X tC Remain ~ . phone 312.408.1370 • . r . r ~xC~ t there _ it Possible wh N . ~ • • X ♦ . ♦ • r ti . ♦ ~ ~+-y 1~ ~ ~ • . I • ~ ♦ ♦ ♦ p. . . • . . ♦ . . • ♦ y ♦ ti 'Access ~ . ~ . ~ Y . , ~X1S . - x . ~ ~ . . . • . ♦ • • ■ . y ~ . . fr r . . y 9 mi ~ X ~ a t ar . dm cn - ~ . x - ~ Ex. Walk ~ f ~ :h~rwise Noted _ . . Y ♦ • y • ~ f { . ~ • ♦ X r r , . . . ♦ n . ♦ f • • • • , r at . . r w • ~ • ♦ " s • ' e . « ♦ ♦ • C . rY•~ clo~ . hE l~ew ras n . b . ~ 1 ~ • • ~ • ~ • • ~ . • . " • ♦ • • . a r r r a r♦ ♦ a y ` r r r r« r r r.. a ti ` ♦ ♦ . r r r r . « • I w • ♦ ♦ ♦ r r r Z , V! ♦ a ♦ s y r I ♦ r ♦ Y Y • # X • ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ _ V r w - ♦ ♦ Y , ♦ ~ • ! Y Y r r w r r Y , ♦ r • Y Y 1 • ~ s Y Y•. w♦r..Y X. Island-~ .•„♦..r f.i. .•r~ Yr~r yr x r,~'- LJ V1:/ t t 'v ♦♦♦rir•rl r~r• r~ x LJ - x • r r Q U U ~ \ 11 PA (Russian Sage a . ♦ ~ , Y ♦ Y v r X 4 r r Y ♦ Y a., r Y Y Y V • r Y w ♦ r X Y Y Y . i ♦ Y 4 Y r ♦ r ♦ It i i ♦ Y i Y 4 ♦ 4 i r w r r r louts Remas~i , . ♦ , r•... . . P . 9 JB , rr . » • ♦ • ♦ • r t • . ~ i ~ . Y e . . ♦ s r . . . r . . • Y r ~ • ♦ s r Y ♦ r , ♦ . Y Y ♦ • M Y • w Y Y • ! / Y Y . Y C Y ♦ G3 . . , G7 CJ ` ~ s ♦ ♦ , . , ~ . ~ o act ~ Cars ~ ~ Cm . a ~ . fix. Shrubs ~ o %c~5~6 45 FG (Blue Fescue G ss) All New Mulch 1-2" size Rock, 3" deep j Afl Shrub Beds to be Mulched Y ♦ Y / y Y A f P ~ a µ M } ! t M ♦ , • Y Y e+ ~ Y Y ♦ t Curb Gutter R m . FX. AS hal ♦ p Q ~ _ ~ ~ Cgi'S /Q 1Q Q QC Cm ~g:• ~ j Y Y • , y ♦ Y M Y • 1 . , s , Y f , ; P a M r,, ~ /7 ~ • VVV/ • r - e~;c~.~ E asting Access , i r , r w , y , • r ♦ ♦ • 4 r ♦ • r ♦ • ♦ Xlslan v! Y Y x ~ x 4 Y r r + y• y y y ~ to Remain ~ TOTP;L PARKING SPACES 814 r~'"~~ .YY.r••.f.♦. TreesRemoin Y ♦ ♦ 4 i _ _ TOTAL PARKING ISLAND AREA APPROX. ONE ACRE ~ ~ 45 FG (Blue Fescue Grass) ~ . Y ,yC • ♦ Y • Y♦ 4 ♦ Y a ~ ~ See also Memo from OZ Architecture dated 2 Janu ~ a v , ! Y r ~ 4 Y"yra rr>i P i y 'F. i ♦ ♦ ♦ p y Y r ;'~1 ~ 6 AC fLeadnlant) ~ All ~ro~osed live landscaping to be serviced by a f X . Y a ~ e Y x . X , r ! Y ~ 1 . , . nds + Trees Remo~n ~ 2 . EX Islo r ~ • R • • ,..f ♦ ! • ~ Y • • • Y . ♦ t 1-: • • Y • ! L~ V ~y . ♦ • x ~.l ~ • • X t • ♦ , • ♦ : ♦ ♦ ~ y • • R ti i • ! t ♦ r ♦ • y ~ ~ • Y , . Y . ♦ ! . • Y ♦ P~ Y x , Y Pavin . ~ ~ tend rYtY Y ~x . . Y9 • , . ! ~ This. Edc o F Curb . , ~ N `ti, • ~ , ,Y y • ♦ • ! y i + - 5 CM ♦ • • • • • , • • ♦ . ♦ • • • • • • • • • • • • ♦ ♦ M • • • • • • f • • • f ♦ • • • • • • • • ♦ ♦ • • • • • • ~ • • • • • ~ ♦ ♦ ♦ • • i- T~ Y 5 Walk • • ~ t 1 • • • ♦ • • 5CN • • -r' . . 3 ~ T R r~ r ~ 1 1 1 `yam ti:: - r, ~ ~4V PoV~I N a r w _ ♦ ♦ AS , 5 . • ♦ • ♦ • 5 CM • • .ti I r • + ~4~., ♦ { ` ~ ♦ ♦ f • ~ ♦ ♦ • • 45 s~ • . • s`~. • . . • • • • ♦ • a• • 5CN • • - 1 J- J 5 AS • • R • . a~-+_ f • • 11 y l _ `f ~1 i • 5CN • . i • • • ~ a ♦ \ ♦ ~ '~+»ti • ♦ \ • • • p ♦ ►1 • tJJ • • • 1 A : I • , • 1 ♦ . . 1 y _ G~~ 1 _ - ~ L ~r • • + • • • • . ♦ • / « • r • • ♦ • • • .t i 45 FG 1 ~ , 1 =~e_ n 45 T .3. - - °s - _ $ r F f tT' ~  r r + r • • r + ♦ • r r r • • r ♦ • + i • r ♦ 9 • f a • ♦ f ♦ • ♦ Y ♦♦♦•4♦♦t.♦.♦...♦♦♦... + i f! ue Fescue ass -ode FG 270 eFestuca auc 1 F _ ____]colored in fall Dr 'y \ 520 . Y i Y f f ♦ • ♦ ♦ f ♦ ♦ • + t r.. r r t• r Y r ♦ r r + + + + t r • r f ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ r ♦ r r re r r♦ r+ r ' f ♦ f ♦ • • t✓1 f Q) 30' 60 + . . r . . . . . ~ t r^~ r i n e e rl►1 A C`C' f r . . Y . x r. Adapts to SHEET + Lawn Ex. Berm RTN L ii Dry; to Remain d f Does Deep root system ~~Wth 8of10 5520 525 M1 a, , , t ?L~-1~ v 5 4 3 z~ ~c~ . ~ _ _ a MECH. SCREEN - 4 t BRICK MASONRY VENEER r w.-_-. 1 I ~t 1 t I 1 - .i  ~..,~.,....J II If ~ ii i~ E ~ ~ ~ ~~~T ~c~a --a ~ ~ ~ - r~i c~ NORTHEAST ELEVATION - scar: ,/a' _ ,'-o• 2 a . - ~ C B A ~ . ~ MECH. SCREEN _ _ _ ~ _ T.~. TECH St~EEN ~ ~ BRICK MASONRY VENEER T,O. PAR~'El' ~ rr~ .w~.orww..r~~r®w~musrMrm ~ m.....w.wrrrrwu r _ _ , i v - 1 ~;r_- i l . . . . I I I I I ~ nil ~ POSSIBLE FUTURE WALKWAY ALUMINUM STOREFRONT i~ NORTH-WEST ELEVATION - 1 $flu SCALE: 1/00' i s WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS PARKING STUDY UPDATE LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER WHEAT RIDGE, CO Prepared for: Exempla Healthcare l ExemPa HEALTHGARE RECEIVED ,IA Pn ?nom, 4a WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS January 10, 2003 Mr. Bradley Forsyth Manager, Grounds and Parking Facilities Management Exempla Healthcare 1835 Franklin Street Denver, CO 80218-1 191 Re: Parking Study Updated Lutheran Medical Center, Wheat Ridge, CO Walker Project No. 23-6748.01 Dear Mr. Forsyth: WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS 505 Davis Road Elgin, IL 60123 Voice: 847.697.2640 Fax: 847,697.7439 ..walkerporung.com Attached is the report of the parking supply and demand report for Lutheran Medical Center study. We thank you for your contributions and welcome your comments. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us. Respectfully Submitted, WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS ar . Hofmo kel, P.E~ . 0L L 4 Senior Vice President oaf: Ri chard T. Klatt, P.E. Senior Transportation Engineer Enclosure -49 rl-%26. IQ& WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS PARKING STUDY UPDATE LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER DENVER, COLORADO Prepared for: EXEMPLA HEALTHCARE JANUARY 2003 LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY WALKER -0 PARKING CONSULTANTS JANUARY 2003 23 6748.01 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i INTRODUCTION 1 Background 1 Scope of Services 1 Definition of Terms 3 Study Methodology 3 Study Area 4 CURRENT CONDITIONS Parking Supply ............................................................6 Parking Occupancy 7 Parking Demand ..........................................................9 Parking Adequacy 12 FUTURE CONDITIONS 14 Future Parking Supply 14 Future Parking Demand 14 Parking Adequacy 17 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 20 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Table I: Parking Supply, 2002 Page 6 Table 2: Parking Occupancy, 2002 Page 8 Table 3: Survey Day Demand Page 11 Table 4: Design Day Demand Page 12 Table 5: Year 2002 Parking Adequacy Page 13 Table 6: Future Parking Supply, 2007 Page 14 Table 7: Current and Future Design Statistics Page 15 Table 8: Future Parking Demand, 2007 Page 17 Table 9: Future Parking Adequacy, 2007 Page 18 Figure 1: Study Area Page 5 Figure 2: Parking Supply by User Grou p Page 7 Figure 3: Parking Occupancy by User Group Page 8 Figure 4: Lutheran Medical Center Activity by User Group Page 9 Figure 5: Survey Day vs. Design Day Page 10 Figure 6: Future Site Plan Page 16 Figure 7: Effective Parking Supply vs. Parking Demand Page 19 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY WALKER -4 PARKING CONSULTANTS JANUARY 2003 23-6748.01 Walker Parking Consultants was engaged by Exempla Lutheran Medical Center to perform a parking supply/demand analysis for their campus located in downtown Denver, Colorado. This study is an update of a similar studies performed by Walker in 1998 and 2001. Since those studies, a number of variables have changed including increased staffing and patient volumes. The Medical Center is planning multiple changes that will further elevate parking demand. These plans include a new 54,000 sq. ft. Medical Office Building (MOB) and in the future, a 85,000 sq. ft. Hospital addition. The new MOB will be located southeast of MOB IV. As part of that project, the parking for MOB's I, IV and the new MOB will be reconfigured and expanded from 481 spaces to 950 sapces an increase of 469 spaces. Construction of the new MOB is scheduled to begin in April 2003. The current parking supply at the hospital is 2,182 spaces. However, when the supply is adjusted to reflect a cushion necessary for efficient operation, the effective supply is reduced to 2,025. Creating parking models and observing levels of parking on an average busy day determined current and future parking demand. Four inventory counts were performed on Wednesday, November 20'h, 2002. Walker's counts revealed that peak demand occurred at 10:00 a.m. when occupancy reached 1,942 vehicles. When reviewing current parking supply and demand in aggregate terms for this campus, it appears that the current supply is adequate to meet the current demand, however, these numbers are misleading. Certain user groups are currently experiencing difficulty in finding a space at peak times. Many parking locations were at their capacity, the Patient/Visitor Lot, except for the accessible spaces, Lots B, C and D were all completely filled at peak times while there are empty spaces in the MOB 2 and 4 lots. It appears that more space needs to be allocated to hospital and MOB I patients and visitors. To provide additional patient and visitor spaces Walker recommends that a portion of the spaces in Lot A be reassigned for patients and visitors. Since those spaces are further from the hospital, do not charge the patient and visitors a fee. We would suggest that about 50 spaces, those closest to the Hospital, be reserved for patients and visitors. Reassign the displaced employees from Lot A could be reassigned to the Temporary Shuttle Lot. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In the future, the MOB 2 and 4 lots will be reconfigured and expanded to 950 spaces when the new 54,000 square foot MOB is constructed, a net increase of 469 permanent parking spaces. The LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY JANUARY 2003 23-6748.01 temporary shuttle lot, with 150 spaces, will be lost, thus the net increase in parking spaces will be 319 spaces. By the year 2007 with the construction of the 54,000 square foot MOB there will be an overall small parking deficit of 21 spaces. There will, however, be a 167 parking space surplus when the future demand is compared to the proposed future parking supply, thus there will be adequate parking to meet the needs of the proposed 54,000 square foot MOB. The parking adequacy from existing conditions through the year 2007 is illustrated in the figure below. 2,400 2,300 w 2,200 2,100 a 2,000 E 1.900 1,800 1,700 ~ p S .Ldp nr ti G + ca s `.v id _p )i rv "t w `2023 ° t 'r~} 2023 zi e ~a a t Y~ 3+~ 4+~ r K1 y a. ,v r zs nr,o}~ •zq, TJ ;z tTf a"491 TA 1~ Ms3' 1 k Y :i ~j' Y tz: W`Ue?a.e,,,{a{~aT'xw a+v `:,,1,Zpv ;#.,ry r>ti 11 i ~M'' 2UM n„N, Survey Day Design Day 2007 Effective Parking Supply -Parking Demand WALKER -4 PARKING CONSULTANTS INTRODUCTION LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY JANUARY 2003 BACKGROUND 23-6748.01 Lutheran Medical Center I MCI is located in Wheat Ridge, Colorado, a suburb 20 minutes northwest of downtown Denver. Walker Parking Consultants performed a supply and demand study for the hospital in 1999 and 2001 Since those studies, a number of variables have changed including increased staffing and patient volumes. The Medical Center is planning multiple changes that will further elevate parking demand. These plans include a new 54,000 sq. h. Medical Office Building (MOB) and in the future, a 85,000 sq. ft. Hospital addition. The new MOB will be located southeast of MOB IV. As part of that project, the parking for MOB's I, IV and the new MOB will be reconfigured and expanded from 481 spaces to 950 sppces an increase of 469 spaces. Construction of the new MOB is scheduled to begin in April 2003. The hospital addition will be located on the site of the patient and visitor parking lot which means that a new parking facility will need to be constructed prior to the beginning the construction of the hospital addition. Construction of the hospital additiuon is scheduled to begin in 2006. This study shall focus on the current and projected state of parking at the Wheat Ridge-based campus through the construction of the medical office building only. SCOPE OF SERVICES Walker Parking Consultants was retained by Exempla Healthcare to provide parking consulting services. The purpose of this study was to determine the present and future parking needs of the campus. The following was our scope of services for this engagement: Objective: To determine current and future parking needs. Meet with hospital representatives once to confirm study objectives, boundaries, procedures, and project schedule. 2. Obtain and review existing reports/studies pertinent to parking or traffic at Lutheran Medical Center. 3. Review the hospital's master plan for its impact on parking supply and demand. Meet with H+L Architects to gain further understanding of the proposed new MOB. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY WALKER -4 PARKING CONSULTANTS JANUARY 2003 23-6748.01 4. Review the hospital's inventory of existing parking spaces to determine number, user assignment (employee/physician/visitor, time restrictions, fees, etc. 5. Collect and review historical data supplied by the hospital via a background information survey form supplied by Walker. This proposal assumes that a hospital representative will introduce a Walker representative to other hospital representatives who can provide historical data needed for this study. A Walker representative will work with hospital representatives on site to obtain background information needed for this project 6. Conduct parking space occupancy counts on a typical busy day in November 2002 for all spaces in the study area. This will determine the pattern of parking utilization, and identify/document unusual patterns. 7. Determine the present and future parking supply and demand. This will be based on data gathered from the hospital and parking demand ratios developed from Walker's database of other medical facilities. Compare 2002 parking demand ratios with those developed in 2001 and note any significant changes in statistics. 8. Summarize our findings and conclusions about parking adequacy in a draft report and discuss with appropriate hospital staff. 9. Incorporate one consolidated set of comments from staff into a final report. 2 LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY WALKER -0 PARKING CONSULTANTS JANUARY 2003 DEFINITION OF TERMS 23-6748.01 Several terms are used in this report that may need clarification. These terms are: • Survey Day. The day occupancy counts were taken at the hospital. This day should represent a typical busy day. • Design Day: The day that represents the level of parking demand the parking system is designed to accommodate. This level of activity is approximately the 85Ih percentile of absolute peak activity. A parking supply designed to handle the absolute peak level of demand typically contains too many spaces that remain unused most of the time. • Effective Supply. The total supply of parking spaces adjusted to reflect a cushion needed to provide for vehicles moving in and out of spaces, spaces unavailable due to maintenance/snow removal, and to reduce the time necessary for parking patrons to find the last few available spaces. The adjustment varies as to the amount and type of parking, but typically the effective supply is 85-95% of the total number of spaces. • Parking Demand: The number of spaces required for employees, physicians, patients and visitors at the hospital. • Demand Ratio: The ratio of the number of vehicles observed to occupy parking spaces compared to a reference number. For example, if there are 1,000 Full-time Equivalent (FTE) employees and an observed peak occupancy of 400 vehicles in the employee lot, the Demand Ratio is 0.40 (40011,000) for FTEs. STUDY METHODOLOGY For the methodology of this study, Walker, in conjunction with staff at Lutheran Medical Center, gathered demographic statistics from the hospital and conducted parking occupancy counts four times over the course of a typically busy day. The demographic information provided by the hospital was calibrated to the peak number of occupied spaces to determine parking demand ratios. These demand ratios were then used to distribute the current demand by each type of parking patron. Finally, the demand was compared to the effective supply to determine the current parking adequacy. In order to project future parking 3 LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY JANUARY 2003 23-6748.01 demand, the demand ratios calibrated from the parking occupancy counts were applied to growth statistics supplied by the hospital. STUDY AREA Lutheran Medical Center is located in Wheat Ridge, Colorado, a suburb of Denver. 38th Avenue to the north, residential development to the east, 32nd Avenue to the south and Foothills Medical Center to the west bound the study area. The study area is illustrated in Figure 1 on the following page. WALKER -4 PARKING CONSULTANTS 4 LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS JANUARY 2003 23-6748.01 Figure I: Study Area J Ll_ l l~ L T ~B o 7LON1'Y LOT D LTC I MOB .C4 Mj M.O.B. 2`L'l~ M.O.B. 2 LOT LOT ~ PaT1E PaR~cir~rc B. 4 5 CURRENT CONDITIONS LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY low WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS Iqqw JANUARY 2003 PARKING SUPPLY Walker inventoried the study area parking supply at Lutheran Medical Center to determine the number of spaces, the user assignments (e.g. employee, physician, and patient) and identified restrictions pertaining to campus parking. This inventory includes all spaces, including the Temporary Shuttle Lot, used by visitors, employees, physicians, and patients. The complete parking supply is shown in Table 1. Some lots such as MOB 2 and 4 provide parking for all three basic user groups, thus, some assumptions were made as to the distribution of parking supply as shown in Table 1 . The current parking supply at Lutheran Medical Center is 2,182 spaces, which is an increase of 38 spaces )2,182 - 2,144) over the supply in our June 2001 report. The effective parking supply is the total number of spaces adjusted to provide a necessary cushion for user convenience and to accommodate absolute peak levels of activity. Typically, the effective supply is 85% to 95% of the total number of spaces. The adjustment is based on the type of parking, the size of the area, and the uses of the area. The patient/visitor parking is adjusted by 90% due to their unfamiliarity with the parking system. Accessible parking spaces are adjusted by 85%. The employee parking is adjusted by 95%. The effective supply is 2,025 spaces. The distribution of the parking supply by user groups is illustrated in Figure 1. Table l: Parking Supply, 2002 User Group Effeeiive Patients/ Total Parking Parking Facility Visitors Valet Staff Physicians Reserved Accessible Supply Supply Effective Factor: 0.9 0.95 0.95 0.9 0.85 0.85 Potient/Visi or Lot 289 34 323 289 Handicap Lot 8 8 7 Lot A 38 157 195 185 Let8 450 450 428 LotC 72 72 6B Lot D 214 214 203 ER Lot 64 6 11 81 72 Radiation/Oncology Lot 25 2 27 23 MOB 2 Lot 95 95 25 16 231 212 MOB 4 Lot 97 97 25 9 228 210 MOB 2 Physician Lot 22 22 20 MOB Physician Lot 43 43 86 80 Hospital Physician Lot 91 4 95 85 Temporary Shuffle Lot 150 150 143 Totals 545 38 1,278 206 31 84 2,182 2,025 25% 2% 59% 9% 1% 4% 100% Source: Walker Parking Consultants field data, November 20, 2002 23-6748.01 CURRENT CONDITIONS 6 LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS JANUARY 2003 23-6748.01 Figure 2: Parking Supply by User Group 2% 59% B Pate nLSNisitom ■ Valet a Staff a Physicians ■ Reserved ® Accessible PARKING OCCUPANCY Demand is determined from occupancy counts conducted at typical busy times. Walker counted the number of parked cars throughout the study area at four different intervals of time. The occupancy count was conducted on Wednesday, November 20, 2002. The results of the occupancy counts are summarized and expressed in the following table and graph. The peak occupancy occurred at 10:00 am with a vehicle count of 1,942. This represents 96% (1,942=2,025) of the effective supply and 89% (1,942=2,182) of the total supply being occupied as shown in the following table. Figure 3 illustrates the parking occupancy by user groups. 7 ti 4i LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS JANUARY 2003 23-6748.01 Table 2: Parking Occ upancy, 2002 Wednesday, November 20,2W2 Peak% Peuk Parkin Facility Copociry 9:00 AM 10: 00AM 11 :00 AM 2:00 PM Occupied Occo pavay Pofiem/Visiior Lot 323 195 301 312 267 97% 312 Hondicap Lot 8 7 8 8 8 100% 8 Lot A V.I., 38 7 10 21 20 55% 21 Employees 157 133 153 148 137 97% 153 LotB 450 453 454 453 447 101% 454 LotC 72 72 71 72 72 100% 72 LotD 214 21d 213 208 211 100% 214 ER Lot 81 67 65 65 70 86% 70 Radiofian/Oncology Lot 27 16 17 1B 12 67% 1B MOB 11 lot 231 209 218 215 164 94% 218 MOB N Lot 228 135 143 140 137 63% 143 MOB 1181V Physician lot 22 21 21 19 75 95% 21 MOB I Physician Lot 06 69 83 82 73 97% 83 Hospital Physician Lot 95 87 89 87 75 94% B9 Temporary Shetio Lot 150 87 96 93 97 65% 97 Totals 2,182 1,772 1,942 1,941 1,805 90% 1,973 Occupancy% 81% 89% 89% 83% Empty Spaces 410 240 2,11 377 Spume: Walker Parking Consultants field dab, November 20, 2002 Many parking locations were at their capacity, the Patient/Visitor Lot, except for the accessible spaces, Lots B, C and D were all completely filled at peak times. Figure 3: Parking Occupancy by User Group 2,500 2,000 N d m 1,500 6 N m C Y 1,000 N a 500 0 ® Physicians ■ Staff PafientMsitors The allocation of patient and visitor parking spaces for the hospital and MOB I do not appear to be adequate. At 11:00 am the Patient/Visitor Lot was full with the exception of the accessible spaces, l while the valet parking Lot A) area had empty spaces. The peak occupancy of the MOB IV Lot was only 63%. It appears that more 8 Capacity 9:00 1000 11:00 1:00 Time LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS NOW JANUARY 2003 23-6748.01 parking spaces need to allocated to hospital and MOB I patients and visitors. PARKING DEMAND As seen in the following graph, the annual hospital activity' fluctuated significantly throughout the year, with January being the busiest month. The average activity of these months is 20,903 patient days. This is an increase of 1,331 patient days per month (7%) over 2000 data reported in Walker's June 2001 report. This equates to an approximate 3.5% annual growth in patient services. This activity includes: outpatient plus observation patients, ER registrations, and inpatient bed census. The ER registrations, however, are incorporated into the outpatient data. Figure 4: Lutheran Medical Center Activity by Month 24,000 23,000 22,000 Q 21,000 _T Z 20,000 C O 19,000 18,000 17,000 The level of activity on the survey day at the hospital campus was evaluated in comparison to peak levels of activity for inpatients, outpatients, and emergency room treatments. Walker recommends that hospitals should design their parking supply based on the 85th percentile level of patients' activity. This level is equivalent to a very busy day that may occur once or twice a month. Designing parking to meet the absolute peak level of parking would leave many unused spaces during the majority of the year. Conversely, designing for the average level would mean inadequate parking during half the year. Design Day demand statistics are based on the 85th percentile level of activity. The following graph compares the level of activity during our ' Data reflects December 2001 thru November 2002 hospital activity levels. 9 Dec- Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr- May, Jun- Jul-02 Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov- 01 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 Month LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS JANUARY 2003 23-6748.01 survey day to the level of activity during the design day j85" percentile(. The data used in the development of this graph was provided by hospital administration. Figure 5: Survey Day vs. Design Day 500 400 U `300 o c o' 200 100 0 ® Survey Day ■ Design Day This graph illustrates that during our survey day, levels of activity were lower for outpatients but slightly higher for inpatients than the level of activity projected for the design day. This comparison helps us to determine whether the conditions during observation are adequate upon which to base parking demand. To more precisely determine the number of spaces needed for each type of parking patron, the parking occupancy numbers are compared to group population statistics provided by the hospital'. From this comparison, a demand ratio is determined for each group, which is then used to project the number of parking spaces needed for each type of patron. The day Walker conducted the parking occupancy counts (November 20h, 2002) is referred to as the survey day. The following table displays the parking demand at Lutheran Medical Center on the survey day- 2 Statistical information provided by Exempla Healthcare. 10 Outpatients & ED Inpatient Census LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS JANUARY 2003 23,6748.01 Table 3: Survey Day Demand Design User Group Statistic Parking Demand Ratio Parking Demand Staff: Staff Physicians 800 x 0.11 /Physician = 88 Employees -FTE 1,234 0.66 /Employee = 814 Residents 0 x 0.40 /Resident = 0 Contract Employees 150 x 0.70 /Employee = 105 Medical Students 50 x 0.80 /Student = 40 Staff Total 1,047 Visitors: Inpatient 212 x 0.30 /Bed = 64 Outpatient 469 x 0.45 /Registration = 211 E/R Patient 208 x 0.34 /Registration = 71 Others 212 x 0.05 /Bed = 11 Volunteers 122 x 0.20 /Volunteer = 24 Patient/Visitor Total 381 MOB MOB Physicians 92 x 0.80 /MOB Physicians = 74 MOB Employees 323 x 0.77 /MOB Staff = 249 MOB Patients/Visitors 228 x 0.95 /MOB Patients = 217 MOB Total = 540 Grand Total = 1,968 These demand ratios are typical for hospitals. However, in some cases, the theoretical demand ratios may slightly differ from actual observed conditions on the survey day. These ratios are adjusted to match the peak observed occupancy on our survey day'. The majority of parking at -MC is designated for specific user groups and some employee lots require card access. Physician and employee numbers will fluctuate little from day to day during the week in most hospitals, regardless of the level of patient activity. Parking areas that are affected by different levels of activity are the patient and visitor parking areas. Data from December 2001 to November 2002 was evaluated to determine the 85'h percentile level of activity of bed census. This data was used to reflect the average conditions within the busiest month and create the design day parking demand. Lutheran Medical Center patient activity levels on our survey day were lower than the data developed for the design s These ratios differ from those employed in the 1998 survey. Adjustments have been made to allow the demand to match the peak observed occupancy during Walker's survey day. LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY WALKER -0 PARKING CONSULTANTS JANUARY 2003 23-6748.01 day, and therefore design day parking demand is greater. The following table shows the design day parking demand. Table 4: Desian Day Demand User Group Statistic Parking Demand Ratio Parking Demand staff: Staff Physicians 800 x 0.11 /Physician = 88 Employees -FTE 1,234 0.66 /Employee = 814 Residents 0 x 0.40 /Resident = 0 Contract Employees 150 x 0.70 /Employee = 105 Medical Students 50 x 0.80 /Student = 40 Staff Total 1,047 Visitors: Inpatient/Visitors 206 x 0.30 /Bed = 62 Outpatient 516 x 0.45 /Registration = 232 E/R Patient 239 x 0.34 /Registration = B1 Others 206 x 0.05 /Bed = 10 Volunteers 122 x 0.20 /Volunteer - 24 Patient/Visitor Total 409 MOB MOB Physicians 92 x 0.80 /MOB Physicians = 74 MOB Employees 323 x 0.77 /MOB Staff = 249 MOB Patients/Visitors 228 x 0.95 /MOB Patients - 217 MOB Total = 540 Grand Total = 1,996 A comparison between the design day and the survey day shows that the occupancy levels witnessed during our survey day were less than the demand expected on the design day. The level of demand during the design would be slightly higher. Therefore, to capture the 85th percentile level of demand, the current parking demand will be based upon the design day parking demand of 1,996 vehicles. The 2001 study determined a design day parking demand of 1,715 vehicles. The increase in parking demand (282 vehicles) from 2001 to 2002 is due to increased patient activity and additional employees. PARKING ADEQUACY Parking adequacy is measured in terms of supply vs. demand, resulting in a surplus or deficit. The parking surplus/deficit is the difference between the supply of parking spaces and the demand for those spaces. The demand is compared to both the actual supply and the effective supply. The following table represents the existing parking adequacy of the hospital in the year 2002. 12 LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY JANUARY 2003 23-6748.01 Table 5: Year 2002 Parking Adequacy Actual Actual Effective Parking Parking Surplus/ Parking Surplus/ User Group Supply Demand (Deficit) Supply (1) (Deficit)(2) Staff: Physicians 206 162 44 185 23 Employees 1,278 1,208 70 1,214 6 Visitors: Patient/Visitors 698 626 72 624 (2) Totals 2,182 1,996 186 2,023 27 Notes: 1. The effective parking supply is the total number of spaces adjusted to provide a cushion for user convenience. 2. The deficit is equal to the difference between the effective parking supply and parking demand Presently November 2002) there is a surplus of parking spaces for physicians and employees and a very small deficit for patient and visitors. Due to the small parking surplus for physicians and employees and a small deficit for patients and visitors, at times, their parking adequacy may seem inadequate. WALKER 44PARKING CONSULTANTS 13 FUTURE CONDITIONS LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY WALKER -4 PARKING CONSULTANTS JANUARY 2003 23-6748.01 FUTURE PARKING SUPPLY As part of costruction for the proposed 54,000 square foot MOB the parking for MOB's I, IV and the new MOB will be reconfigured and expanded from 481 spaces to 950 sapces an increase of 469 spaces. Construction of the new MOB is scheduled to begin in April 2003. During the costruction of the new MOB a new 20Gspace temporary shuttle lot will be provided west of Lutheran Parkway West The proposed future parking supply is shown in Table 6. Table 6: Future Parking Supply, 2007 User Group Effective Patients/ Told Parking Parking Facility Visitors Valet Staff Physicians Reserved Accessible Supply Supply Effective Factor: 0.9 0.95 0.95 a9 0.85 0.85 Potient/Visitor Lot 289 34 323 289 Handicap Lot 8 8 7 Lot A 38 157 195 185 Lot B 450 450 428 Lot C 72 72 68 Lot D 214 214 203 ER Lot 64 6 11 81 72 Radiotion/Oncology Lot 25 2 27 23 Reconfigured MOB Lot 411 412 75 52 950 873 MOB 2 Physician Lot 0 0 0 MOB Physician Lot 43 43 86 80 Hospital Physician Lot 91 4 95 85 Totals 764 38 1,348 209 31 111 2,501 2,313 31% 2% 54% 8% 1% 4% 100% FUTURE PARKING DEMAND Future demand is determined in much the some manner as current demand. Walker analyzed the planned changes and incorporated them into the parking demand model. All future changes as described by hospital administration have been accounted for. The future Lutheran Medical Center growth projections for future year 2007 are shown in Table 6. FUTURE CONDITIONS 14 LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS JANUARY 2003 2316748.01 Table 7: Current and Future Design Statistics Year Year % Change Hospital Statistic 2002 2007 vs. 2002 staff: Staff Physicians 800 845 5.63% Employees - FTE 1,234 1,320 6.97% Contract Employees 150 150 0.00% Medical Students 50 50 0.00% Patient/Visitors: Bed Census 190 220 15.79% Outpatients - daily 516 588 13.98% ER Patients - daily 239 260 8.81% Volunteers 122 122 0.00% The future scenario incorporates the parking needs for the proposed 54,000 sq. ft. MOB to be located southeast of MOB #4. See Figure 34 for the location of the new MOB and the reconfigured MOB parking lot. It does not include the proposed 85,000 sq. h. hospital addition. 15 LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER WALKER PARKING STUDY PARKING CONSULTANTS JANUARY 2003 23-6748.01 Figure 6: Future Site Plan ER T H SPITA~L LOT OOTHILLS MOB PARKING IIIpI~I ~ - a,k F T. LOT D L C V V 16 1. LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS JANUARY 2003 23-6748.01 The future (year 2007) parking demand for Lutheran Medical Center is projected to be 2,334 spaces as shown in Table 7. This represents a 338-space increase (16.9%) over the current demand. Table 8: Future Parking Demand, 2007 Design User Group Statistic Parking Demand Ratio Parking Demand staff: Staff Physicians 845 x 0.11 /Physician = 93 Employees - HE 11320 0.66 /Employee = 871 Residents 0 x 0.40 /Resident = 0 Contract Employees 150 x 0.70 /Employee = 105 Medical Students 50 x 0.80 /Student - 40 Staff Total 1,109 Visitors: Inpotient/Visitors 246 x 0.30 /Bed = 74 Outpatient 588 x 0.45 /Registration = 265 E/R Patient 260 x 0.34 /Registration = 88 Others 246 x 0.05 /Bed = 12 Volunteers 122 x 0.20 /Volunteer - 24 Patient/Visitor Total 463 MOB MOB Physicians MOB Employees MOB Patients/Visitors New MOB New MOB Physicians New MOB Employees New MOB Patients/Visitors 92 x 0.80 /MOB Physicians = 74 323 x 0.77 /MOB Staff = 249 228 x 0.95 /MOB Patients = 217 222 x 0.14 /MOB Physicians = 31 222 x 0.46 /MOB Staff = 102 222 x 0.40 /MOB Patients - 89 MOB Total = 762 Grand Total = 2,334 Note: The number of suites and physicians for the new MOB is not known at this time. The square footage of 54,000 was utilized to determine the parking demand. At this time the number of physicians and staff are not known for the new MOB, therefore, their total parking demand was determined from the average (Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) parking rate for Medical/Dental Clinic/Office. That rate is 4.11 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet, which equates to a total demand of 222 parking spaces (4.11 x 54). That 222 parking space demand was distributed (physicians, employees and patients) in the same proportions as was determined for the existing MOB 1, 3 and 4. PARKING ADEQUACY Again, the parking adequacy is measured in terms of supply vs. demand, resulting in a surplus or deficit. The design day parking 17 LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY WALKER -4 PARKING CONSULTANTS JANUARY 2003 23-6748.01 demand is again compared to both the actual and effective parking supply. Table 8 calculates the future 2007-parking adequacy for Lutheran Medical Center. Table 9: Future Parking Adequacy, 2007 Actual Actual Effective Parking Parking Surplus/ Parking Surplus/ User Group Supply Demand (Deficit) Supply (1) (Deficit)(2) Staff: Physicians 209 198 11 188 (10) Employees 1,348 1,367 (19) 1,281 (86) Visitors: Patient/Visitors 944 769 175 844 75 Totals 2,501 2,334 167 2,313 (21) Notes: 1. The effective parking supply is the total number of spaces adjusted to provide a cushion for user convenience. 2. The deficit is equal to the difference between the effective parking supply and parking demand When comparing the future parking supply to the future parking demand there will be a surplus of 167 parking spaces. There will be a small deficit of 21 parking spaces when the future effective parking supply is compared to the future parking demand. In essence the proposed future parking supply will be adequate to meet the parking demand with the proposed 54,000 square foot MOB. The parking adequacy from existing conditions through the year 2007 is illustrated in Figure 7. 18 LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS JANUARY 2003 23{6748.01 Figure 7: Effective Parking Supply vs. Parking Demand 2,400 L. 2,300 a 2,200 2,100 a 2,000 E 1,900 1,800 1,700 2007 19 Survey Day Design Day -Effect a Parking Supply -Parking Demand CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY WALKER -4 PARKING CONSULTANTS JANUARY 2003 23-6748.01 Following are the conclusions and recommendations that summarize the findings of the parking supply/demand: EXISTING CONDITIONS • Lutheran Medical Center (LMC) campus currently has a total parking supply of 2,182 spaces. These spaces are provided in 14 different parking facilities, all of which are surface parking lots. In order to provide an effective parking supply cushion that allows for the dynamics of vehicles moving in and out of parking stalls, to reduce search time, and to allow for minor construction and snow, the effective parking supply is estimated to be 2,025 spaces, or 93% of the total supply. • Parking occupancy counts were taken four times on Tuesday, November 20th, 2002. The overall peak occupancy occurred at 10:00 a.m. when 1,942 vehicles (89% of the hospital parking supply) were observed occupied. Currently, some facilities (four facilities) reach or exceed their capacity. For existing conditions, there was an overall parking surplus of 27 spaces when comparing the effective parking supply vs. the Design Day Parking Demand. When comparing to the total parking supply, there is an overall surplus of 1 86 spaces. • The allocation of patient and visitor parking spaces for the hospital and MOB I do not appear to be adequate. At 11 :00 am the Patient/Visitor Lot was full with the exception of the accessible spaces, while the valet parking Lot A) area had empty spaces. • The peak occupancy of the MOB IV Lot was only 63%. • It appears that more parking spaces need to allocated to hospital and MOB I patients and visitors. • From our observations and data collection on Wednesday, November 20, 2002, Walker would recommend the following parking management modifications at this time: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 20 LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING STUDY V WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS JANUARY 2003 23-6748.01 o Provide a portion of the spaces in Lot A for patients and visitors. Since those spaces are further from the hospital, do not charge the patient and visitors a fee. Would suggest that about 50 spaces, those closest to the Hospital, be reserved for patients and visitors. o Reassign the displaced employees from Lot A to the Temporary Shuttle Lot Lot. FUTURE CONDITIONS • By the year 2007 with the construction of the 54,000 square foot MOB there will be an overall small parking deficit of 21 spaces. There will be a 167 parking space surplus when the future demand is compared to the proposed future parking supply. • The parking adequacy from existing conditions through the year 2007 is illustrated in the figure on the following page. 2,400 2,300 2,200 2,100 n 2,000 E 1.900 1,800 1,700 Effective Parking Supply -Parking Demand 21 Survey Day Design Day 2007 City Wheat Ridge MEMORANDUM Department of Public Works TO: Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner FROM: Michael Garcia, Development Review Engineer DATE: Monday, January 6, 2003 SUBJECT: Case No. WZ-02-15; Exempla Lutheran Medical Center The Public Works Department has the following comments for the site expansion: 1. A NPDES permit shall be obtained from the State of Colorado. A copy of this permit shall be submitted to the City of Wheat Ridge. 2. A westbound right-turn deceleration lane on W. 32nd Avenue at Lutheran Parkway will be required. An engineering plan will be required for the design of this lane. Right-of-Way dedication may be necessary to accommodate the declaration lane as stated in the City Code Chapter 26, Section 26-620. The City of Wheat Ridge acknowledges that the property at 8321 W. 327d Avenue is not currently owned by the Exempla Lutheran group at this time but will require this lane addition to be constructed at such time the property is under the ownership of the group. 3. An approval letter for the final design from the Rocky Mountain Ditch Company be submitted to the City of Wheat Ridge. POSTING CERTIFICATION CASE NO. c: ,a - I ~~/rx E.~ ~lq L PLANNING COMMISSION / TY COUNCIL /BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (Circle One) HEARING DATE: 1 I O~ I, (n a in e) residing at E3 :3L--x::--) -Sp~ (address) as the applicant for Case No. , hereby certify that I have posted the Notice of Public Hearing at e"3c (location) on this day of to J~ E,_ 200 ,and do hereby certify that said sign has been posted and remained in place for fifteen (15) days prior to and including the scheduled day of public hearing of this case. The sign was posted in the position shown on the map below. Signature`~ NOTE: This form must be submitted at the public hearing on this case and will be placed in the applicant's case file at the Department of Planning and Development. MAP e Apla n ni n g%fo rmslposti n gcert Rev. 616/01 5W 23 SE 22 _ _ I ~I 0 I al I r I h~ t .I si N ° • m` PCD X o W 3M AW 15 E U8~ 0 3 2-- u, O 3555 G svs I IR R-2 I FOOTHILL: MEDICAL CENTER n PHD 1 WZ-~.Z WZ-76-1 E1RAN L J [CAL RR WZ-92-2 LUTHERAN PHD MEDICAL PSG-87-1 CENTEIR PBG-87-1 PHD ' , W 32ND PL awo x .IFFFFP'ON COUNTY 'ARCEULOT BOUNDARY 'DESIGNATES OWNERSHIP) MATER FEATURE )ENOTES MULTIPLE ADDRESSES 00-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN APPROXIMATE LOCATION) icmvoar OFFICIAL NE 27 ZONING MAP - (DEsGINA WHEAT RIDGE - WATER FE ® COLORADO • DENOTES 100-YEAR D I (APPROXII ® »E, DEPARTMENTOF MAP ADOPTED: June 15, 1994o~ q PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT Last Revision: September 10, F m 6 F 7500 West 29th Avenue The City of Ridge FAX 303/235-2857 January 2, 2003 Dear Property Owner: This is to inform you of Case No. WZ-02-15 which is a request for approval of an amendment to a Planned Hospital Development final development plan for the purpose of constructing a 13,400 square foot addition to the existing power plant and constructing a 63,000 square foot medical office building on property located at 8300 West 38th Avenue. This request will be heard by the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex at 7500 West 29th Avenue. The meeting will be held on January 16, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. As an area resident or interested party, you have the right to attend this Public Hearing and/or submit written comments. If you have any questions or desire to review any plans, please contact the Planning Division at 303-235-2846. Thank you. Planning Division. C Mocuments and Settings\kathyM4y Do<mnentsVmhyWC"TSTLANGCOW\ otice\2002\wz0215nvpd a d x c v ~ d a AR d v a N Q d K c ~ C ~ d o ~ O N OI N N d w - N ' O E a E ~ a d 'c o m E a c ~ t1.0 # N h N Y1 N N t[l N h Cry a - N % d R O o O O o O O O O U _U 0 N O lC a M Q M M M M O M O M O M O a C O d W O O . O O O O d r d O O ' O N O m W d G > w op y TM y~ W MOM L > w c0 O)U .N. O vas O da O d N W C O J N OU 7 N OU 3 C OU F- N OU N 'O O ~2 N N `1 N d d- dO a W N - 2 N M j _N d p d M N M U N a M d E m a U W a- O d :o m ff m rn Q d m d d rn ~co N HU m w m d 3: m rn a M C6 y a d :0 0 UM'O a drnK a ~aOD~ s a Ea°D~ _ o a dN~ ;p ~N N<O~ N R U ~-'O N I` t0 O N V 0 L O M N a N N M M w N M N N p L M Z M d ' d of N 0 W (,1 ~ N c' U R d ` a O d L ~ a] d d >L d >L ~ d t r d >L d L d L d >L 0L2 a > > > > > > C y N N 0 N E d N Q aa)i u 0 y~~o d ~SU C) for LLW E ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ d z 0 0 0 0 d U o W 0 aJ 0 m 0 m 0 N O O O O W O `O m °m m m m m m Q 00 ` rn rn rn m m m rn rn rn m n rn °m °m °m rn °m rn rn °m LIJ O 2 ° ° O ° ° N Q Z N m b < o < o ( p t p t p r ~ Q W O r n t ~ p N O ~ Q Z a } W Z k" n ~I U ~ a d K d a d U c d ' N C d U `I K a N Q y c 'm u ~ o m v c z ? of ar K c 7 v d y m O ~ . o E ¢ m o a U L Q ~ ¢a c ~ N d N O O O O O O O O O X 2 m°$ U C NI 5 2 C NI 5 ~ NJ 5 i u L O _ - • m o C~ a a M d M M O M O M N O M O M O M O C 0 c N O O N O n c N L C O O _ O N N y O O C O N w U. O O N O . O U O O c o w E O Q U O N p c ~ aw . 0 O N a 0 EO DLO O Qc O Uc 0) v u i o 2 = V E O ~0 v m ?D O o y E 0 ~ v w¢ o N o y + N y c Q rn a0 U xQ m pp m N Ern - ~-Nm m 'CN rn ~ Q a d u m Q m m:4 Z c uoo f0 Q ono m ' =Qa K ; a MM wm-o a m mo Z K y ma K E v Y y N K 0 N... N3E J N r~ 'N.- o d SM.. Nm v aro.- MIY OM.. A v QtO ~o (O 'O , Q M N ~.1 M W U W DM d M M M ME ~ N ' ` J Q L L L > O N u 0 ~ N 2 N 0 Q Q E ~ d a) mU d.. ¢ ~U O~LLw E ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ m z 0 0 0 0 0 d- V 0 W 0 W 0 N 0 W W N c0 Cl M O W ° Q V V O V O yOy V V y y ~ V ° O m aa0 m`r m w m m 00 ` m m m m m m m m m O m E m mm mm m mm mm m mm mm V ' z W Q W p N O~ Q Z n Z . Lu z F_ °S a Uti2 ~I i d A? ! ~ c ~ ~ d m' a ~ Q ~ ~ C O Z m > 4~ c n v n a y WI G ~ YS 5 O D a ~J 7 v 1 N t~ w ~ ~ N "'E0 a N W U L p ~ E O C N m w N i0 O O O N N x °m a m o 0 o NoOI N 0 0 0 X0N1 0 Q m° U 2i 5 U 0 O C lCa a W M M (O CM') M M M M tM+l C w A O N )°M O >w N O O O O E a$ 'p O Uro m M p 75 O ain°m 0 ` N oE0 N Q pL0 N O N me _ Q LO ~ N Q TLO U mc0 Ea0 O OEO N mc0 _ N m U U O y i-- U M (J m U M O y U 0 L U LL N U 0 O U (/1 a fnNm >`Mm QOa a W m -Qm WNm 00 67 OEm y a W ma 3 m~ ° IO m°a a Zp ZQ;O ,4; cm~ o o.0 N 00~ W va' M o ~ M N ~m~ A mMOK N M N V~ 'd G ' ~ > N N M m N t0 Q W N ~ ~ V N ~ W N M N eD N l0 rL N O d M n N M N O ~ U (p L D a . . N L 3 L 3 ~ J L 3 L L 0 L 3 ~ L L c d~ O Q 0 E w 0 a N y d' cU U~u0_w E 11 13 o m N A O N M O ~O 10 d O W O ro O O O W O c0 O M O W O a0 O aC 2 LLB O Q °v pa O `O m m m m m m m m m O 0 ` m m m m m rn rn rn rn N 1 1 O m E m m m m m m m O' M . . W V C l H > 2 Q W ZW O n n n n n n C) N O Q Z a Z ~ LO g U a ~I a v w c R ~ a a C y C ~ U ~ d N Q ~ C M ' 'd a U d a ~ ~ R p Z d ~ NI ~ m ~ C 7 a ~ y w v t O R C E 1=O ry R W # N ~ N ~ N M O N N r a - K ~ 8 y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ U _ O n R o. o M M M Q 'ion E M M W R c °D N Wo o a~. o 'N-~ >ap M " ' o N W Nm it0 m 0 N 0 W O Y V U a yU (0a N O U CO NQ ~O a V W JU ~ OU 0 N : y W t0U mO ~ oO `2 a J U CN ~n dJ nm x c v v a¢i c c M ai ~Rp m a Y M 6 Z y c o co R N_ N > N d ti y 9 m m co u ~ v 0 a - c m ~O c R> ry'u fn -a( O a1 Qa wN-a ~ - a+ H N N Q c m O M N- W MK al~~ C O R ra O Nro~ Z O W M R ~i O O K lL ~O N aCiM~ _ 6 Q a _ ` d O M N Z' O R r Z In V R y O .O N W (O > "O M M N _ N U O U N R a > E J L (J L Q m t A M K R j M N a ~ _ .rnWp v= cm2 `o N WO N d x U v i E ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ R Z r N ro ~O m N o tO t0 ~ (D M t0 v t0 (O d U O W O a0 O W O aD O aD O aD O W O W O W Cl) 0 0 LLJ ~ Q o 0 0 0 0 a 0 v 0 v v a Ue O o v v v v m rn rn m m ~ co m rn m m O ~ E o m 0 rn 0 m 0 rn 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m 1 ~ 1 ' ° m ° m ° ° ~ ° I- z a o ~ a o m m m Q Q W p n n n n n `n n ' 2 0 CD o N Q z n . } O W z L L U n 3: a il . a v w ~I d a c m c ~ ~ y a ' ¢ ~ a m y c „ W U c+ c z Z ° v Z K c ~ -I>i 2I M j O w N y O O C N 0 w ° a Eo w u 0 L O m o a c 1.0 # N N N N N N N N N O O O O O X U R n q O O O O O C NI ~ N1 M,2 u 5 5 v - o IQ O. ~ M o] M M M E M M "O M a O O O O N O O N O O O O O O O R O L O O ~U O. R O O 0 R R y m C m o . L W 00 O m O m C U m O=1 U OJ m U m U^ m v m > N O " ' 0 ~ c0 t c0 NCO TO Q c0 c0 ~~O N d ` _ J U N U U U U LL. U m 1 U > U U y X ~m m N m S N_ m ' (n N m N rn Q O Q ON m = ~Q m KQ m C O ~m rn d D 'O O RQ UN~ D Q N~ U Q MN Q 'a Na RN9 m; , L3 cN'O 12 y N y Q LOK dNK a K E m^ O o K z mm K m K (7aK -o o. uam sum pMm oMR ~c>R cam cMm cam = :4 m - 0 R V N c 't0 N r D ~ N F N R ~ >N N N L W O O d > RW 0 R ~ C N d d~ o N N Q Q C E N r'~a ° m NO ~U ciWiiw E R m m m ~ ° n n ~ ~ d ~ o m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m W (7 O ` m m m m m m m m m ~ 00 o ~ rn m m rn m rn m rn m ` O E m m m m m m m m o j ' a U H z 2 Q W p n n n n w Cl O N O Q Z a Z H = c J UI~~ a ~I y Q 0 a E W b_A U w O E R z N R Q. y a° v 0 U a U Q. w 0 E 7 z„ ~ U W FO a T V N J U (1. 0 d E z 0 F a a'' II w c W m ~ d S v y c v x N y a N ~ ~ Q C r > u J < c z > t ? , a ~ N O) O r C ~ N w ~Eo o. v ~ L O N O a C O m m ~n ~n m m m a O O O O O O O x U O q CONI O C NI N U _ 0 O O O t IO a y M M M M M M M M M M j M a ~ ` H .o .°o aio Yam O .o O ~ .o O aio O mo m O U yo m v. O Um a ~Um >m Q > o a o NUm EUm >m Q > Q c> EQ N ~`y TO U TO Q U d Iq"OO d U m OU N O O T LU O T LU N O CL U » O ~ U O NL L ~U _ N C L L M M C 5 O U p Y M ~m O J M a a N N OI ¢1 "O N M ` E m ma 1 2 w c N Orn p W N m 3 ' Orn ' g Z I ° ?i : E M OI ~ a N v d v Q mp K ~ " v mmp ~N p Oo K Ej w N m mmm ~ i m ~ ~ Ox K o .~o K o _ ' N_ - O' y c M r N M l0 M a W M Z6 O) r O t0 a Q O Q M r M N .O M r O M N N N« Y V N W O r M l0 O K m N a 6 U C ` L m 0 O L L m L m L l0 m L { p a a L>> > > L ' > > > > > > t C w N N O N N Q N > Q E d O. C a m d ~ m 0 O N n K E U Uw O E m m n m n n n m n Q7 n O m m N m M m w t o m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m 1 LU O Q V V V Q V V V O C7 ° o m m m m m m ~ OD m m rn m m m m m m O ~ E o m 0 m 0 m 0 rn 0 m 0 w 0 m 0 rn M 0 m M LL, V ~ M o M o M M ° M o M ° M ° °m z o g g o < o o g m c o Z Q Q W O n n n n n r` n W LL ~ p N O~Q Z a Z F- g LO C D d ~ W d ~ d . C ~ U J a ~ D ~ D W N C Q d ~ Zy c m Q Z i a' ~ C S- 7 7 1 , N O J N p~ 0 m w = al N o E o a a U O L ~a 6 U C E 01 ° at ~n ~n ~ m m m x~ m a m o 0 0 0 0 0 u O ~ ~ o o M c c G D #rn MO i V o" o C q O al0 t m c dm m 01 SON F aj0 m ON i Q O Y O_ m Q L- O 0<0 m m m =z 0 'ca _ d m d N N m 0 a U '~U o f TAO ymo V mM Ym0 N D j U N m c U - 0 E m U m Q 4 c N d Z5 a c 3: Jo y O o c o N O `m « N N LO ry.Q N r U p C N 7 3 F O a V C ~"o °''v. V ' m Ito m Wmm O ~md - v m mm °J coo r p N ~ ~ m N h D " .O ~O rL 7 ~~p U o O~J t rn O. t N O C N D v K U N D Q o O j LL ~ ! p ` N o n i N O x OU U ~ W LL W N ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ z v m m 0 r 0 m 0 m 0 m j~ o m 0 m m m m m pMj C °m °m a °m a a ~ Q s v v s v s a O o o m v m m m m m 0 co ~ rn m m rn m m d' O E °m °w °rn rn rn °m w U ~ M M ° M M o M ° M F- > Q W z m n n m n m r tQ r N O a z a z C> w z F-0= 5 t a ~I - itl Q O E G W o~q a w 0 E m z R a a° ro v v U N a O J z „ A U V N N T A N y a. 0 H J Z m F concerns regarding accessible parking spaces Page 1 of 1 To: "'meredith@city.ci.wheatridge.co.us"' <meredith@city.ci.wheatridge.co.us> Cc: "Gilbert A. Hack (E-mail)" <ghack@hlarch.com>, "Stephen Doyle (E-mail)" <sdoyle@lillibridge.com> Subject: concerns regarding accessible parking spaces Meredith, Gil from H+L is preparing a formal response to the comments raised at the planning commission meeting last week, and the information below will be included in that response, but I wanted to forward our comments regarding accessible parking directly to you ahead of that response. If you have any comments, or further questions, please let me know. Due to the concern raised by Nancy Snow, I have reviewed the ADA in conjunction with our site plan to determine whether we are in compliance with regard to the provision of handicapped parking spaces. What I have found is that we are above and beyond the minimum requirements of the code. The ADA requires that for parking lots between 500 and 1000 spaces large, 2% of the parking spaces must be accessible. With the doctor parking between MOB 2 & 4, we have a total of 874 parking spaces, and therefore, a requirement of 17.48 accessible spaces. We have provided 18 handicapped spaces on our site plan, with an additional 7 spaces labeled "SN" which stands for special needs. These spaces are located in close proximity to building entries, and would be reserved for people who are temporarily disabled. They are not oversized spaces with a clear path adjacent to them as is required for a full handicapped space, but if necessary, we could revise them to meet this standard without losing too many more parking spaces. Thanks again for your help-if you have any further recommendations, or concerns, please don't hesitate to contact me. David Schafer A.I.A. Principal OZ Architecture www.ozarch.com file://C:\DOCUME-1\reckert\LOCALS-l\Temp\eudl C.htm 1/21/2003 City of Wheat Ridge MEMORANDUM Department of Public Woks TO: Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner CC: Steven Nguyen, Traffic Engineer Greg Knudson, City Engineer Dave Brossman, City Surveyor FROM: Michael Garcia, Development Review Engineer DATE: Friday, January 17, 2003 SUBJECT: Lutheran Hospital - Deceleration Lane along W. 32°d Avenue The Public Works Department has been notified that the property at 8321 W. 32°d Avenue has been obtained by Exempla Lutheran Medical Center. Comments provided to the Planning Department on January 6, 2003, by the Public Works Department stated that a westbound right-turn deceleration lane on W. 32°d Avenue at Lutheran Parkway would be required when ownership of this property was obtained. An engineered plan for this design will be required for the design of this lane. Please note that Right-of- Way dedication may be necessary to accommodate the deceleration lane as stated in the City Code Chapter 26, Section 26-620. Construction plans and Right-of-Way documentation may take a significant amount of time to prepare and review. Therefore, the City strongly recommends that the Exempla engineering consultants submit the necessary plans for city review as soon as possible to minimize any delay of the C.O. The C.O. for the new MOB will not be approved by the Public Works Department until the lane is completed. Please call me at 303-235-2868 if you have any questions. A cce T i a n e_exe m p i a. rn em MEMORANDUM OZ ARCHITECTURE® 1820 Folsom Street Boulder, Colorado 80302 phone 303.449.8900 fax 303.449.3886 To: Meredith Reckert Date: City of Wheatridge From: David Schafer Project Subject planting plan comments Project#. CC: File January 2, 2003 Lutheran MOB 12050 Meredith, We have revised the planting plan to address the comments included in your response document dated Dec. 20, 2002 relative to page 8. Below, you will find a written response to items 4, 5 & 6 to supplement the drawings that were resubmitted. Page Eight Item 4: We will include a fully automated irreigation system to service all live landscaping. A note to this effect has been added to the drawing. Item 5: The planting labeled as KH was mis labeled. It should have been KP. We have revised this indication on our plan. Item 6: It is our intention to meet the city requirement for landscaping within parking areas, while maintaining as much of the existing mature landscape as possible. Our design exceeds the city requirement with regard to square footage of landscaping, but these islands are consolidated into larger, more continuous landscaping, rather than an abundance of smaller islands that meet the letter of the requirement. The attached memo outlines more specifically the benefits to our scheme, and why we believe it meets the intent of the zoning requirements. Please review the attached data, and let us know if such a solution would be acceptable. Sincerely, OZ Architecture David Schafer AIA Principal GA12050 LUTHERAN EXEMPLA\Co d \M \ iw\ N response 010203 d c 0 1 N V E B B 0 U L 0 E B S U M M I T C 0 U N T Y MEMO To: Director of Planning and Development City of Wheatridge From: OZ Architecture Re: Parking Island Requirements Lutheran Exempla Medical Office Building 3 Date: 2 January 2003 The purpose of this memo is to ask for approval from the Wheatridge Director of Planning and Development for aggregating the required parking lot islands as larger islands and as interior divider strips. The following points illustrate that this aggregation of islands meets the intent and purpose of City Code Section 26-501 D.2.' 1. The proposed aggregated islands provide considerably more interior landscaped area than required. Explanation: We are proposing a total of 814 parking spaces. 814 - 30 = 27.13 (28) islands or island equivalents required. 28 x (8.5 x 18) = 4,284 s.f of parking island area required. Our proposed plan shows over 50,000 s.f of parking island area. In other words, we are proposing more than ten times the minimum interior landscaped area. 2. The proposed islands provide more than the required number of trees. Explanation: Our proposed plan shows thirty trees located in parking lot islands or strips of land within the parking lot. New trees are the required two-inch caliper size. However, most of the trees in islands are existing trees. These existing trees are all larger than two inches in caliper. Many are mature trees providing significant shade and beauty. Additionally, since we are currently experiencing a drought of unknown length and severity, it makes sense to protect existing established trees that are much more likely to survive a restricted watering regime than to plant new trees which will need a quantity of supplemental water to survive. In fact, some experts are suggesting that new tree planting be delayed until our reservoirs reach normal levels again. 3. The proposed islands provide more than the required number of shrubs. Explanation: Thirty islands x 4 shrubs = 120 shrubs required. We are providing 150 new 5 gallon shrubs within the interior islands, and there are at least 16 existing shrubs that will be protected. 4. Finally, according to Sec. 26-502 C.1., "the intent of permitting variances is to allow for well- designed xeriscape (low water use) planting design." By designing the parking lot to conserve existing large trees and by specifying only low water requirement trees, shrubs and lawn grass (see plant list on planting plan), our proposed interior parking lot islands provide shade and beauty while minimizing the use of scarce water resources. For these reasons, we respectfully request approval from the Wheatridge Director of Planning and Development for aggregating the required parking lot islands as larger islands and as interior divider strips. I Wheatridge City Code Sec. 26-501 D.2. Idande. All parking areas in excess of thirty (30) spaces shall have at least one (1) interior landscaped island per thirty (30) spaces. Each such landscaped island shall occupy the equivalent of one (1) parking space (minimum) and each such required island shall be landscaped with a minimum of one (1) two-inch caliper tree or larger and four (4) shrubs or accepted groundcover. At the discretion of the owner, and with approval of the director of planning and development, based upon the intent and purpose of this section, an acceptable alternative to individual islands would be the equivalent aggregate landscaped area developed in larger islands or as interior divider strips. Xcel EnergySM Siting and Land Rights PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY 55015th Street, Suite 700 Denver, Colorado 80202-4256 Telephone: 3 03.571.7799 Facsimile: 303.571.7877 December 24. 2002 CITY OF WHEATRIDGE 7500 WEST 29TI AVENUE WHEATRIDGE, CO 80003 RE: Exempla Lutheran Medical Center (M. Reckert) Public Service Company of Colorado (PSCo) has reviewed the above captioned project and there is a conflict. PSCo has an existing 1 '/4' Intermediate Pressure Gas Line located within this proposed project. Any crossings, designations of open space, proposed landscaping or similar activities involving our existing right-of-way will require PSCo approval. These encroachments must be approved and documented with a license agreement to be executed by the adjacent land owner/developer and PSCo. Enclosed please find an encroachment application packet. Prior to any construction (including any grading activity), please have the property owner/developer complete the application as instructed and return to Mr. Tim Knowlton for review at the following address: Public Service Company of Colorado 1123 W 3rd Ave Denver. CO 80223 If you have any questions regarding the enclosed application or the review process, please contact Tim Knowlton at 303-571-3966. Sincerely, Ka hryt n Bauer Contract Right of Way Processor ENCROACHMENT APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS The Applicant for a proposed encroachment on Public Service Company right-of- way must complete the attached form and return it, together with the required sketch (example attached) and any other maps and plans of the proposed encroachment to: Public Service Company of Colorado 1123 W 3`d Ave Denver, CO 80223 Attn: Mr. Tim Knowlton Applications are processed as they are received. Most proposed encroachments require review and approval by Public Service Company engineering and/or operations staff. Typically, review and approval of a proposed encroachment takes 2-4 weeks depending on the type of encroachment and the completeness of the application. Upon approval of the proposed encroachment, Siting & Land Rights staff will prepare two copies of a License Agreement, or other encroachment authorization for signature by the Applicant. Public Service Company charges a fee for processing encroachment applications to recover its costs in doing so. The fee is $250.00. This fee is in addition to fees for the use of Public Service Company lands, if any. After execution of the encroachment authorization by the Applicant, both copies should be returned to Public Service Company, together with a check for the application fees and the land use fee (if any) for signature by Public Service Company. The proposed encroachment is not authorized until the encroachment authorization is signed by Public Service Company. APPLICATION FOR ENCROACHMENT ON PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY RIGHT-OF-WAY 1. Applicant Information: Applicant: Main Contact: Address: Phone: Fax: 2. If Applicant is a business; Applicant's authorized agent: 3. Location of the proposed encroachment: Street Address: Section Township Range County Nearest Street or Road Intersection: 4. Public Service Company Facility: Electric Transmission Gas Pipeline Electric Distribution Overhead Underground Other 5. Describe in detail the proposed encroachment (height, size, materials, use, etc.): 6. Provide a sketch (use the attached form) which shows: a. The location of the proposed encroachment on the right-of-way. b. The edges of the right-of-way or easement. c. The nearest poles, towers or other Public Service Company facilities. d. Tied into a section corner. Attach additional maps or plans as necessary, to fully explain the proposed encroachment. 7. Schedule for the construction/operation of the proposed: 8. Has Utility Notification Center of Colorado (UNCC) 1-800-922-1987 been called to locate facilities? Yes No Date Called 9. Applicant's Signature Date 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 3031235-2846 Fax: 303/235-2857 The City of Wheat Ridge December 20, 2002 H and L Architecture Gilbert Hack 1621 18th Street Suite 110 Denver, CO 80202 Dear Mr. Hack: This letter is in regard to your request for approval of an amendment to the Exempla/Lutheran PHD final development plan. I have reviewed the document and have the following comments: Page One 1. Relocate the title block to the top of the page. It should read: "Exempla Lutheran Medical Center Planned Hospital Development Amendment No. 4 Power Plant Additition and Medical Office Building 4 An Official Development Plan in the City of Wheat Ridge". 2. Add a Surveyor's Certification. 3. Add a case history box with the following case numbers: WZ-02-15, WZ-02-07, WZ-02-05, WZ-92-2, WZ-90-10... 4. Under Project Area, regarding medical office building, remove the word "addition" and add in parenthesis (MOB 3). If "MOB 3" is not the correct number, please change. 5. Under Project Occupant Load, please fill in the missing numbers or remove this section entirely. 6. Under Explanation of Amendment, revise the last two sentences to read:" The final portion of this development will be the relocation of the existing heli-stop to the west side of Lutheran Parkway West. The total square footage of the development will 79,795 of enclosed 7. Under Architectural Description, fifth line, change "facilities deck" to "facilities dock". If "deck" is correct, no change is necessary. 8. Under Architectural Description, first line of second paragraph, change "ot" to "to". 9. Under Overall Site Data, under both "existing" and "proposed", change "Remainder unpaved" to "Remainder undeveloped". 10. Add a signature line for the notarial certification. 11. Add a signature line for the "Community Development" Director. This title was recently changed from "Planning and Development" Director. 12. Change the sheet number to 1 of 10. All sheets to be recorded should be consecutively numbered. 13. Add the city's standard language for blanket cross access. See attached. Page Two 1. Change the title block to read "Official Development Plan Amendment No. Four". 2. See note 12 from above. Page Three 1. Label the "new mob" as "mob 3". 2. See note 12 from above. 3. In the title block, add "No. 4". Page Four 1. Label the "new mob" as "mob 3". 2. See note 12 from above. 3. In the title block, add "No. 4". Page Five 1. See note 12 from above. 2. In the title block, add "No. 4". Pages Six and Seven 1. See note 12 from above. 2. In the title block, add "No. 4" 3. Please specify which structures these are supposed to be. 4. Please denote elevation views. Page Eight 1. Label the "new mob" as "mob 3". 2. See note 12 from above. 3.. In the title block, add "No. 4". 4. Please add a note that all live landscaping will be serviced be a fully automated irrigation system. 5. What type of plant material is "KH"? Please add to the planting schedule. 6. The landscape plan does not meet our requirements for parking lot islands. Sectior. 26-501.D.2. of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws specifies that there should be an interior landscaped island for each 30 spaces in a parking lot. Further, that each of the islands be planted with 1 two- inch caliper tree and four shrubs or acceptable ground cover. How will this be addressed? Page nine, ten and eleven (floor plans) will not be reviewed by Planning Commission and City Council. There are no Planning Department comments regarding these sheets. Sheets Twelve and Thirteen 1. See note 12 from above. (These would become sheets 9 and 10 of the public hearing review set). 2. In the title block, add "No. 4" 3. Please specify which structures these are supposed to be. Sheet fourteen (lighting plan) will not be reviewed by Planning Commission and City Council. There are no Planning Department comments regarding these sheets. Please note that lighting standards are limited to a height 18'. Sheets fifteen, sixteen, seventeen, eighteen and nineteen will not be reviewed by Planning Commission and City Council. There are no reviewed by Planning Commission and City Council. There are no Planning Department comments regarding these sheets. Attached are referral comments received from other departments and outside agencies. All of their concerns must be addressed. An additional concern of the city are required pedestrian links approved by Planning Commission in 1992 as an addendum to the approval for the emergency room expansion. The pedestrian connections approved include the following: 1. Sidewalk along the east side of Lutheran Parkway between the north edge of the West Pines facility and the south side of the east parking lot. 2. Paths running along the Rocky Mountain Ditch from the center of the campus to the east and west property lines. 3. Sidewalk along the west side of Lutheran Parkway West between the southern limit of parking lot A and the intersection with Lutheran Parkway. It appears that all of the specified pedestrian connections have been completed except the one along Lutheran Parkway West between 35a' Avenue extended and the intersection of Lutheran Parkway West and Lutheran Parkway. The completion of this walk will be required as a condition of the building permit for MOB 3. This case is scheduled for public hearing in front of Planning Commission on January 16, 2003. I will need 15 - 11" x 17" copies plus three full size sets no later than January 3, 2003 for packet preparation. If you have questions, do not hesitate to contact me at 303-235-2848. Sincerely, Meredith Reckert, AICP Senior Planner C: Mike Garcia Case No. WZ-02-15 case file. City of Wheal Ridge Department of Public Works December 19, 2002 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 7500 WEST 29TI AVENUE _ WHEAT RIDGE, CO 80033 Mr. Duane A. Jansen, P.E. Martin/Martin Consulting Engineers, Inc. 4251 Kipling Street Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 (303) 235-2868 FAX (303) 235-2857 Re: Exempla Lutheran MOB- First Review Comments of Preliminary Drainage Study, Grading & Erosion Control Plan & Construction Plans Dear Mr. Jansen, I have completed the first review of the above referenced documents for the Lutheran MOB received on November 26, 2002, and have the following comments: Drainage Study (Discussion) 1. Please include discussion regarding the existing ground cover/condition. 2. Please discuss the effect of historic flows upon adjacent properties. 3. Include basin sizes in the discussion. 4. Please discuss the effect of developed flows upon adjacent properties. 5. Include discussion regarding the required modifications to the existing structure required in Pond C. 6. A NPDES permit shall be obtained from the State of Colorado. A copy of this permit shall be submitted to the City of Wheat Ridge. Please provide P.E. seal and signature on the final approved report. Drainage Plan 1. Please provide clear, concise cross-sections at the locations shown. The Rocky Mountain Ditch drainage easements need to be shown on the cross-section to verify if there is any impact to the ditch easement. If there is any impact, please submit a copy of the required information to the City as required by the Ditch Company in the November 22, 2002 letter. 2. Please provide P.E. seal and signature on the final approved report. Please provide 2 signed and stamped sets of the drainage report and plan with the second submittal. Grading & Erosion Control Plan 1. Please submit a copy of the erosion control plan for review and approval. Traffic Engineering A copy of the construction plans, traffic impact study and parking study has been forwarded to the City's Traffic Engineer, Mr. Steve Nguyen, P.E., 303-235-2862 for review and has the following comments: 1. A westbound right-turn deceleration lane on W. 32"d Avenue at Lutheran Parkway will be required. An engineering plan will be required for the design of the lane. Right-of-Way dedication may as necessary to accommodate the deceleration lane as stated in the City Code Chapter 26, Section 26-620. The City of Wheat Ridge acknowledges that the property at 8321 W. 32"d is not currently owned by the Exempla Lutheran group at this time but will required this lane addition to be constructed at such time the property is under the ownership of the group. 2. An eastbound right-turn deceleration lane on W. 38`" Avenue at Lutheran Parkway West will not be required since its placement will be off-site. Application for Minor Dumping/Landfill Permit Prior to the commencement of any onsite grading, an Application for Dumping/Landfill Permit, along with the fees due will need to be submitted for review and approval. For your information and submittal in the second review package, a copy of this permit is provided. Please return all redlined prints with the second submittal. If you have any questions, please contact me at 303-235-2868. Sincerely, Michael Garcia Development Review Engineer Cc: Greg Knudson, Interim Public Works Director Steve Nguyen, Interim City Engineer Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner File Lutheran reivewl.ltr Nov-22-2002 16:38 From-COORS + T-398 P.002/002 F-116 The Rocky Mountain Water Company P.O. Box 507 Golden, CO 80402-0507 Phone: (303) 277-6780 November 22, 2002 Mr. Andre Schlappe Marrin/Martin Consulting Engineers 4251 Kipling Street Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80034-4001 Re: Proposed Medical Office Building for Lutheran Medical Center Dear Mr. Schlappe: Thank you for forwarding me preliminary sketches of the proposed project by Lutheran Medical Center to construct a new medical office building adjacent to the Rocky Mountain Ditch. Based on our telephone discussion of the proposed project and the preliminary sketches, it would appear that the proposed project would not impact the Rocky Mountain Ditch easement. However, we would request that, as the project proceeds, we are provided with a more detailed construction drawing that better illustrates the final location of the building relative to our easement. Should the proposed project encroach upon our easement, we will require the project sponsor to obtain a license agreement in order to proceed with the project. I must also note that the ditch will not accept any stormwater flows from newly installed impervious surfaces. We appreciate your consideration of the potential impacts of the proposed project to the Rocky Mountain Ditch. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions. Sincerely, Matthc J. Cook, P.E. Manager, Field Operations DEC-03-2002 13:08 7500 West 29th Avenue The City of Wheat Ridl;e, Colorado 80033 Wheat Telephone 303( 235-2846 Ridge November 27, 2002 P.01 The Wheat Ridge Department of Planning & Development has received a request for amendment to a Planned Hospital District final development plan at the property described below. Your response to the followingquestions and any comments on this proposal would be appreciated by December 27, 2002. No response from you by this date will constitute no objections or concerns regarding this proposal. CASE NO: WZ-02-15/H and L Architecture for Exempla Healthcare LOCATION: 8300 West 381h Avenue REQUESTED ACTION: Approval of an amendment to a PHD final development plan PURPOSE: Construction of a 13,400 square foot addition to the existing power plant, construction of a 63,000 square foot medical office building with connectors to adjacent buildings and reconfiguration and tuTansion of associated parking including relocation of helipad APPROXIMATE AREA: 94.2 acres of site area Issues for consideration include the following: • The adequacy of public facilities or services provided by your agency to serve this development • The avai]ability of service lines to the development • The adequacy of capacities to service the development. ✓ • Servicing of this proposed development subject to your rules and regulations. r EIC,EJ/07 a J+`' '~"f ~T Specific easements that are needed on this or any other document. AlEE &EA Jv 4d44& • Any comments which would affect approval of this request by your agency. Please reply to: ~M.Reckert f303-235-28481 Department of Planning & Development Fax-. 303/239-2857 DISTRIBUTION: XX Water District (Wheat Ridge) XX Sanitation District (Wheat Ridge) XX Fire District (Wheat Ridge) Adjacent City 0 XX Xcel Energy XX Qwest Communications State Land Use Commission State Geological Survey Colorado Dept. Of Transportation Colorado Div. Of Wildlife Colorado Dept. of Natural Resources Completed by:Ll~ / 2 (Name, Agency/Departmeut, Date) Jeffco Health Department Jeffco Schools Jeffco Commissioners XX AT&T Broadband )LX WHEAT RIDGE Post Office XX WHEAT RIDGE Police Department XX WHEAT RIDGE Public Works Dept WHEAT RIDGE Park & Rec Commission XX WHEAT RIDGE Forestry Division XX WHEAT RIDGE Building Division WHEAT RIDGE Economic Development "The Carnation City" CAp1mnmgtfermslagrndaref frm TOTAL P.01 ?500 West 29th Avenue The City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 Wheat Telephone 303/ 235-2846 Ridge November 27, 2002 The Wheat Ridge Department of Planning & Development has received a request for amendment to a Planned Hospital District final development plan at the property described below. Your response to the following questions and any comments on this proposal would be appreciated by December 27, 2002. No response from you by this date will constitute no objections or concerns regarding this proposal. CASE NO: WZ-02-15/H and L Architecture for Exempla Healthcare LOCATION: 8300 West 38t'Avenue REQUESTED ACTION: Approval of an amendment to a PHD final development plan PURPOSE: Construction of a 13,400 square foot addition to the existing power plant, construction of a 63,000 square foot medical office building with connectors to adjacent buildings and reconfiguration and expansion of associated parking including relocation of helipad APPROXIMATE AREA: 94.2 acres of site area Issues for consideration include the following: The adequacy of public facilities or services provided by your agency to serve this development. The availability of service lines to the development. The adequacy of capacities to service the development. Servicing of this proposed development subject to your rules and regulations. • Specific easements that are needed on this or any other document. . 4. d,(.,,io • Any continents which would affect approval of this request by your agency. Y/p~7 :Es.5,~,gs ( o vii" ~c ow no r-..,.U tssaJ w4(b[. aX0 -tss CSC a5 neax a. '1 sC-S /Z-IZ-cp Z Please reply to: M. Reckert (303-235-2848) Completed by 4 - F,. Department of Planning & Development (Name, Agency/Department. Date) W~ r- Fax: 303/235-2857 XX Water District (Wheat Ridge) XX Sanitation District (Wheat Ridge) XX Fire District (Wheat Ridge) Adjacent City 0 XX Xcel Energy XX Qwest Communications State Land Use Commission State Geological Survey Colorado Dept. Of Transportation Colorado Div. Of Wildlife Colorado Dept. of Natural Resources Jeffco Health Department Jeffco Schools Jeffco Commissioners XX AT&T Broadband XX WHEAT RIDGE Post Office XX WHEAT RIDGE Police Department XX WHEAT RIDGE Public Works Dept. WHEAT RIDGE Park & Rec Commission XX WHEAT RIDGE Forestry Division XX WHEAT RIDGE Building Division WHEAT RIDGE Economic Development "The Carnation City eApianningWorms\agendareffm 7500 West 29th Avenue The City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 Wheat Telephone 303/ 235-2846 November 27, 2002 Ridge The Wheat Ridge Department of Planning & Development has received a request for amendment to a Planned Hospital District final development plan at the property described below. Your response to the following questions and any comments on this proposal would be appreciated by December 27, 2002. No response from you by this date will constitute no objections or concerns regarding this proposal. CASE NO: WZ-02-15/H and L Architecture for Exempla Healthcare LOCATION: 8300 West 38i6 Avenue REQUESTED ACTION: Approval of an amendment to a PHD final development plan PURPOSE: Construction of a 13,400 square foot addition to the existing power plant, construction of a 63,000 square foot medical office building with connectors to adjacent buildings and reconfiguration and expansion of associated parking including relocation of helipad APPROXIMATE AREA: 94.2 acres of site area Issues for consideration in clude the following: • The adequacy of public facilities or services provided by your agency to serve this development. The availability of service lines to the development. • The adequacy of capacities to service the development. • Servicing of this proposed development subject to your rules and regulations. • Specific easements that are needed on this or any other document. • Any comments which would affect approval of this request by your agency. Please reply to: t M. Reckert (303-235-2848) Department of Planning & Development Fax: 303/235-2857 DISTRIBUTION: XX Water District (Wheat Ridge) XX Sanitation District (Wheat Ridge) XX Fire District (Wheat Ridge) Adjacent City Q XX Xcel Energy XX Qwest Communications State Land Use Commission State Geological Survey Colorado Dept. Of Transportation Colorado Div. Of Wildlife Colorado Dept. of Natural Resources Completed by. (Name, Agency/Department, Date) Jeffco Health Department Jeffco Schools Jeffco Commissioners XX AT&T Broadband XX WHEAT RIDGE Post Office XX WHEAT RIDGE Police Department XX WHEAT RIDGE Public Works Dept. WHEAT RIDGE Park & Rec Commission XX WHEAT RIDGE Forestry Division XX WHEAT RIDGE Building Division WHEAT RIDGE Economic Development "The Carnation City" eAplanning\fonm\agendaref frm 7500 West 29th Avenue The City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 Wheat Telephone 303/ 235-2846 Ridge November 27, 2002 The Wheat Ridge Department of Planning & Development has received a request for amendment to a Planned Hospital District final development plan at the property described below. Your response to the following questions and any comments on this proposal would be appreciated by December 27, 2002. No response from you by this date will constitute no objections or concerns regarding this proposal. CASE NO: WZ-02-15/H and L Architecture for Exempla Healthcare LOCATION: 8300 West 38`h Avenue REQUESTED ACTION: Approval of an amendment to a PHD final development plan PURPOSE: Contraction of a 13,400 square foot addition to the existing power plant, construction of a 63,000 square foot medical office building with connectors to adjacent buildings and reconfiguration and expansion of associated parking including relocation of helipad APPROXIMATE AREA: 94.2 acres of site area Issues for consideration in clude the following: • The adequacy of public facilities or services provided by your agency to serve this development. • The availability of service lines to the development. • The adequacy of capacities to service the development. • Servicing of this proposed development subject to your rules and regulations. • Specific easements that are needed on this or any other document. • Any comments which would affect approval of this request by your agency. Please reply to: Reckert (303-235-2848) Completed by: Department of Planning & Development (Name, Agency/Department, Date) Fax: 303/235-2857 DISTRIBUTION: XX Water District (Wheat Ridge) XX Sanitation District (Wheat Ridge) XX Fire District (Wheat Ridge) Adjacent City Q XX Xcel Energy XX Qwest Communications State Land Use Commission State Geological Survey Colorado Dept. Of Transportation Colorado Div. Of Wildlife Colorado Dept. of Natural Resources Jeffco Health Department Jeffco Schools Jeffco Commissioners XX AT&T Broadband XX WHEAT RIDGE Post Office XX WHEAT RIDGE Police Department XX WHEAT RIDGE Public Works Dept. WHEAT RIDGE Park & Rec Commission XX WHEAT RIDGE Forestry Division XX WHEAT RIDGE Building Division WHEAT RIDGE Economic Development "The Carnation City" eAplanning\forms\agendaref fm 0 N FEMIVM NOV 2 6 2002' 04 FELSBURG ® HOLT & ULLEVIG engineering paths to transportation solutions EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING FINAL TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Prepared for: Exempla Healthcare 1835 Franklin Street Denver CO 80111-1191 Prepared by: Felsburg Holt & Ullevig 7951 East Maplewood Avenue, Suite 200 Greenwood Village, CO 80111 3031721-1440 Project Manager: David Hattan, P.E. Project Engineer: Corey Schuster, E.I. FHU Reference No. 02-200 November 2002 Lutheran Medical Office Building Traffic Impact Study TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I I. III. IV. V. INTRODUCTION -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 A. Project Overview----------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 B. Site Location and Study Area Boundaries--------------------------------------------------1 C. Description of the Site ---------------------------------------------------------------------------1 EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS -------------------------------------------------------------------4 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC -------------------------------------------------------------------------------7 PROPOSED PROJECT TRAFFIC A. Trip Generation B. Site Trip Distribution FUTURE TOTAL TRAFFIC FORECASTS VI. TRAFFIC OPERATIONS-------------- A. Short-Term Levels of Service B. Long-Term Levels of Service VII. SUMMARY APPENDIX A TRAFFIC COUNTS APPENDIX B EXISTING ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS APPENDIX C SHORT-TERM ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS APPENDIX D LONG-TERM ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS APPENDIX E SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS 10 10 10 13 16 16 16 22 10 FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG Lutheran Medical Office Building Traffic Impact Study LIST OF FIGURES Pape Figure 1. Vicinity Map ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2 Figure 2. Site Plan --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3 Figure 3. Existing Traffic Volumes ------------------------------------------------------------------------5 Figure 4. Existing Lane Configurations and Levels of Service -------------------------------------6 Figure 5. Short-Term (2005) Background Traffic Volumes------------------------------------------8 Figure 6. Long-Term (2022) Background Traffic Volumes ------------------------------------------9 Figure 7. Trip Distribution 11 Figure 8. Site Generated Traffic Volumes------------------------------------------------------------- 12 Figure 9. Short-Term (2005) Total Traffic Volumes------------------------------------------------- 14 Figure 10. Long-Term (2022) Total Traffic Volumes 15 Figure 11. Background Short-Term (2005) Lane Configuration and Levels of Service ------18 Figure 12. Total-Short Term (2005) Lane Configuration and Levels of Service ---------------19 Figure 13. Background Long-Term (2022) Lane Configuration and Levels of Service------- 20 Figure 14. Total Long-Term (2022) Lane Configuration and Levels of Service---------------- 21 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Site Trip Gen 10 FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG Lutheran Medical Office Building Traffic Impact Study INTRODUCTION A. Project Overview Exempla Healthcare is proposing a new medical office building (MOB) at Lutheran Medical Center in Wheat Ridge. The conceptual plan shows that the expansion will be approximately 75,000 square feet. In addition to this new MOB, 32,500 square feet on the 3rd and 4`h floors of the cardiology unit that was recently added to the main hospital building have been set aside for future expansion and are not currently occupied. Traffic forecasts for this unutilized space are also included in this study, based on information contained in the previous study (Lutheran Medical Center Expansion, Final Traffic Impact Study, Felsburg Holt & Ullevig, October 2001).. The purposes of this study are to estimate daily and peak hour traffic volumes generated by the anticipated development and to determine the impact of the traffic on critical intersections and roadways in the vicinity of the site. Short-term and long-term traffic projections were developed and analyzed as the basis for identifying necessary lane geometry and intersection traffic control needs. This report evaluates the following planning horizons: Short-Term Future in this study is defined as year 2005. Long-Term Future is defined as the year 2022 to reflect a 20-year planning horizon. B. Site Location and Study Area Boundaries Lutheran Medical Center is located ''/z mile west of Wadsworth Boulevard between 32nd Avenue and 38`h Avenue, as shown on Figure 1. Lutheran is currently served by three intersections: Lutheran Parkway/38th Avenue intersection, Lutheran Parkway/32"d Avenue intersection, and Lutheran Parkway West/38th Avenue intersection. C. Description of the Site The 75,000 square foot expansion will serve as a new medical office building as shown on Figure 2. As shown on the figure the existing access points to 32nd Avenue and 38th Avenue will be used, it is not anticipated that additional access points will be required. A driveway is planned to extend from Lutheran Parkway through the proposed parking lot and past the new building out to Lutheran Parkway West. North and west of the Lutheran complex is single family residential housing. South of the site is a cemetery and mortuary. East of the site along 38th Avenue is specialty retail. FELSBURG ~HOLT & ULLE V I G Page I N FELSBURG l HOLT 5 ULLEVIG PROJECT SITE Figure 1 Vicinity Map North Lutheran Medical Office Building 02-200 11/22/02 M FELSBURG OHOLT & ULLEVIG posed Medical ce Building 0 North Figure 2 Site Plan Lutheran Medical Office Building 02-200 11122/02 Lutheran Medical Office Building Traffic Impact Study II. EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Traffic counts at the intersections of Lutheran Parkway/38th Avenue, Lutheran Parkway/32"d Avenue, and Lutheran Parkway West/381h Avenue were recorded on November 6, 2002 during the AM and PM peak periods. Daily traffic counts utilized in the traffic study for the cardiology unit expansion were utilized in this study. Figure 3 illustrates these existing traffic volumes. Currently, the intersection of Lutheran Parkway/381h Avenue is signalized. The intersection consists of 38th Avenue as the east/west street and Lutheran Parkway as the north/south street, ending at 38th Avenue. The other two intersections are unsignalized and operate as two-way stop controlled intersections as shown on Figure 3. Peak hour capacity analyses were performed using procedures outlined in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual and the existing traffic volumes presented in Figure 3. Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative assessment of the traffic flow characteristics described by a letter designation ranging from "A" to " F". LOS A represents traffic conditions with essentially uninterrupted flow and minimal delay, whereas LOS F represents the breakdown of traffic flow with excessive congestion and delay. Unsignalized intersection analyses result in a LOS designation for each non-free flow intersection movement, whereas an overall LOS is reported for a signalized intersection. The LOS results can be seen in Figure 4 and the worksheets are in provided in Appendix B. Capacity analyses for existing conditions at the intersections indicate that the critical movements operate at LOS C or better, with the exception of the left-turn out of the site and the southbound movements at Lutheran Parkway West. The northbound left-turn movement operates at LOS D during the am peak hour. The northbound left-turn and southbound movements currently operate at LOS E during the pm peak hour. A poor LOS is not uncommon for a left-turn movement from a minor street approach, such as the left-turn movement from Lutheran Parkway West to 38th Avenue. The Highway Capacity Manual (Third Edition, updated 2000) states the following on pages 10-25: "it is important to note that LOS F may not always result in long queues but may result in adjustments to normal gap acceptance behavior, which are more difficult to observe in the field than queuing. In most cases at [two-way stop-controlled] intersections the critical movement is the minor-street left-turn movement. As such, the minor-street left-turn movement can generally be considered the primary factor affecting overall intersection performance. There are many instances, particularly in urban areas in which [delays are predicted] for minor-street movements under very low volume conditions on a minor street." Often, if drivers encounter significant delay in making a left-turn out of an unsignalized access, they will find an alternate route to incur less delay. The traffic signal at Lutheran Parkway and 38th Avenue provides this alternate route and more efficient means of making the left-turn movement onto 38th Avenue. PFELSRURG r/ HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 4 FELSBURG iHOLT & ULLEVIG ~O N o a 1(6) 347(609) 410(552) 38th Ave. 98(45) 13,780 F- 249(83) 13,270 sp) - - 51s(5~sj `1 - 580(457)-> r 111(75) 94(30) ovv ro~ p N N N N C7 ~ h 3 LUTHERAN Ic MEDICAL a s CENTER z c -c m j N J J G . (O r` ~rn 134(42) 235(277 _ 7,750 151(33) 251(302)- LEGEND XXX(XXX) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes XXXX = Average Daily Traffic Volumes --J Figure 3 Existing Traffic Volumes I, Lutheran Medical Office Building 02200 1112V02 M FELSBURG 4HOLT & ULLEVfG a/a A/A ve. --ir a/a - - ro u I ~ V y 0) ~s LUTHERAN 3 y MEDICAL a Y CENTER E G -G d J J 32nd Ave. L LEGEND .Q lV y a/a X/X = AM/PM Peak Hour Signalized Level of Service x/x = AM/PM Peak Hour Unsignalized Level of Service = Stop Sign = Traffic Signal J Figure 4 Existing Lane Configuration & Levels of Service North Lutheran Medical Office Building 02-200 11/22102 Lutheran Medical Office Building Traffic Impact Study III. BACKGROUND TRAFFIC Analysis of traffic impacts for a future year scenario requires projected background traffic volumes (future traffic on the roadway system not associated with the proposed development). Based on a comparison of the volume projections in DRCOG's 2020 regional transportation model to the daily traffic counts conducted in 2001, a growth factor of slightly greater than 1.6 percent per year was estimated and used to estimate future background traffic on 381h Avenue. In a similar manner, the growth factor for 32nd Avenue was determined to be 1.3 percent per year. Figure 5 illustrates the short-term background traffic (2005)and Figure 6 illustrates the long-term background traffic (2022). FELSBURG \HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 7 M FELSBURG l HOLT & ULLEVIG 32nd Ave. L-- 8,140 LEGEND G= °mtn t-5(5) J~L 360(615) 1430(580) 100(45) 14,660 F- 250(85) - - } -f 530(610 III 110(75) 0 otn to ro~ nN My O UO N M M ILO N ~ LUTHERAN Y MEDICAL a a CENTER ` m c c N j N J t J in O <p O ~ O m m 135(45) 245(290) _ 7 150(35) 260(315)- XXX(XXX) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes XXXX = Average Daily Traffic Volumes Figure 5 0 Short-Term (2005) Background Traffic Volumes North Lutheran Medical Office Building 02-200 11122102 FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG 18,380 N t___ 5(10) 455(770) 1530(745) ~ 100(45) 19,070 --250(85) 21 10(10)_ -_"-"-675(730r--~ 0(595)-> 110(75) 95(30) o N o N i mn r N N N O C N 32nd Ave. 10,020 LEGEND LUTHERAN Y MEDICAL a Y CENTER m i EL lU C t _ N J J to 0 N O 135(45) .J L 300(355) 150(35)--t 320(385)- XXX(XXX) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes XXXX = Average Daily Traffic Volumes 720 Figure 6 0 Long-Term (2022) Background Traffic Volumes North Lutheran Medical Office Building 02-200 11121/02 Lutberan Medical Office Building Trafflc Impact study IV. PROPOSED PROJECT TRAFFIC A. Trip Generation As mentioned, the proposed medical office building is estimated to include 75,000 square feet of hospital space. The unutilized 3rd and 4th floor office space that is part of a previous expansion includes 32,500 square feet of hospital space. The number of vehicle-trips generated was estimated based on the rates documented in Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Sixth Edition, 1997. The appropriate trip rates were used for the MOB and remainder of the hospital expansion. Table 1 presents estimated daily and evening peak hour vehicle-trips generated. As shown, the expansion will generate a total of 3,884 daily trips, 261 in the AM peak hour and 393 in the PM peak hour. A trip is defined as a one-way movement either into or out of the development. Table 1. Site Trip Generation Land Use Quantity - ITE Daily y AM Peak PM Peak Code In Out Total In Out Total Hospital 32,500 sf 610 545 23 9 32 5 25 30 Medical Office Building 75,000 720 2,852 146 36 182 74 200 275 Total 3,397 169 45 214 79 225 305 B. Site Trip Distribution Site trip distribution patterns were established based on existing travel patterns and the existing street network. Figure 7 illustrates the site trip distribution. It is expected that a majority of the trips (45 percent) will be oriented along 38th Avenue to and from Wadsworth Boulevard. Twenty-five percent of the trips are expected to travel along 38`h Avenue to and from the west. Fifteen percent of the trips are expected in each direction along 32nd Avenue. Figure 8 illustrates the estimate site generated traffic based on the trip generation and the trip distribution. FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 10 0 FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG 45% -0- 38th Ave. 25% % I LUTHERAN Y MEDICAL a Y CENTER z IM w 7z N 3 J 15% LEGEND J 15% XXX(XXX) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Figure 7 0 Trip Distribution North Lutheran Medical Office Building 02-200 11/22/02 FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG 3(13) 10(6) 38th Ave. 10(6) 509 F-- 66(30) 1,529 ) ----12(3 ~ ------I 31216 ~N MOD i d LUTHERAN Y n MEDICAL a a CENTER m c m w. ~ 01 J i Ave. ! - - 509 25(12)x' 509 LEGEND XXX(XXX) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes XXXX = Average Daily Traffic Volumes 0 \1~~1A Figure 8 Site Generated Traffic Volumes Lutheran Medical Office Building 02-20011/25/02 Lutheran Medical Office Building Traffic Impact Study V. FUTURE TOTAL TRAFFIC FORECASTS Total traffic is a summation of background traffic volumes (traffic on the roadway system not associated with the proposed development) and site generated traffic volumes. Figure 9 and Figure 10 show the total traffic volumes for the short-term and the long-term planning horizons, respectively. In the short-term planning horizon, total traffic volumes on 381h Avenue in the vicinity of the site range from 15,000 to 18,000 vehicles per day (vpd). On 32nd Avenue the traffic volumes range from 8,400 to 8,650 vpd. In the long-term planning horizon, total traffic volumes on 38th Avenue in the vicinity of the site range from 19,200 to 22,900 vpd. On 32nd Avenue the traffic volumes range from 10,200 to 10,500 vpd. FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 13 FELSBURG ~HOLT & ULLEVIG u to L 5(5) I - 363(628) 440(586) 38th Ave. L> ,--110(51) 15,170 316(115) 17,930 14,970 10(10)--`-}-----532(624)--~ > r ` 1 r' - 61 2(478) 122(78) 1 1 26(46) R G rn ch cv rn m N N W y LUTHERAN Y MEDICAL a Y CENTER C~u a t t m ~ . V 7 J O N N m 160(57) ' 2 32nd Ave. L - - - - - - - 8,410 8,650 175(47) 260(315)- LEGEND XXX(XXX) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traff ic Volumes XXXX = Average Daily Traffic Volumes Figure 9 Short- Term (2005) Total Traffic Volumes North Lutheran Medical Office Building 02-200 11125/02 M FELSBURG l HOLT & ULLEVIG + 38th Ave. t-5(10) - 458(783) ~ 110(51) 19 580 1540(751) 316(115) i- 22,87 ?30 10(10)x- 762(598)-> -------677(744 1 --__------I 122(78)- 126(46) ~ ~i1m N vc o I ~ r N c~ m I y ~ I LUTHERAN Y MEDICAL C Y CENTER m c i J I 3 I I J I I I I I I I I I f N m I, I I 160(57) nd Ave. --3~355L 10 10,530 175(47)--f 320(385)- LEGEND XXX(XXX) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes XXXX = Average Daily Traffic Volumes Figure 10 0 Long-Term (2022) Total Traffic Volumes North Lutheran Medical Office Building 02-200 11/25/02 Lutheran Medical Office Building Traffic Impact Study VI. TRAFFIC OPERATIONS A. Short-Term Levels of Service Capacity analyses were performed for the am and pm peak hours at each of the three site access points. The existing configurations were used to evaluate each intersection. Figures 11 and 12 summarize the expected operating conditions for the short-term scenario without site traffic and with site traffic, respectively. As can be seen, the critical movements at the intersections analyzed are projected to operate at LOS C or better, except for the left-turn out of the site and the southbound approach at Lutheran Parkway West. The left-turn out of the site operates at LOS E during the am and pm peak periods without site traffic, and LOS E during the am peak and LOS F during the pm peak with site traffic. The southbound approach at Lutheran Parkway West operates at a LOS D during the am peak and LOS E during the pm peak without site traffic, and LOS F during the pm peak with site traffic. The level of service worksheets are provided in Appendix C. Criteria outlined in the new MUTCD (Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Millennium Edition, Federal Highway Administration, 2001), was used to assess the need for a traffic signal at each location. There are eight separate warrants by which an intersection can be signalized. Three of these warrants are based on traffic volumes; the eight-hour, four-hour, and peak hour warrants. However, since current hourly counts were not available, only the peak hour signal warrant could be analyzed. Based on MUTCD criteria, a traffic signal is not warranted at either the Lutheran Parkway West/381h Avenue or Lutheran Parkway/32nd Avenue intersections. Signal Warrant analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix E. B. Long-Term Levels of Service Capacity analyses were again performed at each of the three intersections to asses long-term future traffic. The existing configurations were also used to perform the long-term analyses. Figure 13 and 14 summarize the expected operating conditions for the long-term scenario without site traffic and with site traffic, respectively. Long-term traffic volumes warrant a traffic signal at the Lutheran Parkway West/381h Avenue intersection, based on the peak hour traffic signal warrant presented in the MUTCD. The Lutheran Parkway/32nd Avenue intersection does not have sufficient volumes to warrant a signal. It should be noted that the MUTCD does not recommend installation of a traffic signal based on the peak hour warrant alone, unless the location exhibits unusually high peak hour volumes such as an exit to an office park. Since this is not the case here, additional traffic counts should be obtained and a more in-depth signal warrant analysis should be conducted before the intersection is signalized. Signal Warrant analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix E. The two signalized intersections operate at LOS A during both peak periods without site traffic. The unsignalized intersection of Lutheran Parkway/32"d Avenue operates at LOS D for FELSBURG OHOLT & ULLEVIG Page 16 Lutheran Medical O ilce Building Traffic Impact Study southbound left turns during both peak periods. The level of service worksheets are provided in Appendix D. FELSBURG ~HOLT S ULLEVIG Page 17 M FELSBURG iHOLT & ULLEVIG v A/A a/a ve. T a/a ZIP:: i LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER c N 01 J ~ U 32nd Ave. ~ ~ a/a LEGEND X/X = AM/PM Peak Hour Signalized Level of Service x/x = AM/PM Peak Hour Unsignalized Level of Service = Stop Sign a c m t J -A 0 = Traffic Signal Figure 11 0 Background Short-Term (2005) Lane Configuration & Levels of Service Lutheran Medical Office Building 02-2001125/02 M FELSBURG ~HOLT S. ULLEVIG a/a LEGEND X/g = AM/PM Peak Hour Signalized Level of Service x/x = AM/PM Peak Hour Unsignalized Level of Service = Stop Sign = Traff ic Signal Figure 12 Total Short-Term (2005) 0 Lane Configuration & Levels of Service North Lutheran Medical OH ice Building 02-200 11125/02 M FELSBURG l HOLT & ULLEVIG LEGEND A/A 3 a c m a~ s ~c u Jl a/a X/X = AM/PM Peak Hour Signalized Level of Service x/x = AM/PM Peak Hour Unsignalized Level of Service i = Stop Sign = Traffic Signal Figure 13 Background Long-Term (2022) 0 Lane Configuration & Levels of Service North Lutheran Medical Ott ice Building 02-20011/25/02 w "\O a/a ve. i a/b ~ Rf ~ FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG LEGEND A/A 38th Ave. ~ b/a a/a w ~ V I 'I h I LUTHERAN Y MEDICAL Y CENTER i a ~ c m I I 3 II y I I I i I I = l~c I I I I ~b 'Ave. T a /a A/A WITH SIGNAL w X/% = AM/PM Peak Hour Signalized Level of Service = Stop Sign = Traffic Signal Figure 14 Total Long-Term (2022) 0 Lane Configuration & Levels of Service Nnrth Lutheran Medical Office Building 02-200 11/25/02 Lutheran Medical Office Building Traffic Impact study VII. SUMMARY The following highlight the findings of this report. • The proposed 75,000 square foot medical office building and 32,500 square feet of currently unutilized office space in the cardiology unit is projected to generate a total of 3,400 daily trips, 215 in the AM peak hour and 305 in the PM peak hour. • Unsignalized intersection levels of service are anticipated to operate acceptably overall during both peak periods; however, left turn movements at the Lutheran Parkway West/381h Avenue intersection will generally operate at LOS E/F. • The intersection of Lutheran Parkway West/38`h Avenue will meet traffic signal warrants based on long-term traffic volumes. • The intersection of Lutheran Parkway/32nd Avenue does not meet traffic signal warrants in either the short or long term. • No other traffic improvements are deemed necessary. 01FELSBURG OHOLT S ULLEVIG Page 22 Lutheran Medical Office Building Traffic Impact Study APPENDIX A TRAFFIC COUNTS FELSBURG HGLT & ULLEVIG All Traffic Data Services, Inc. 6214 Secrest Street Arvada, CO 80403 File Name : 32ND&PKWYPM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date :11/06/2002 Page No :1 LUTHERAN PKWY 32ND AVE LUTHERAN PKWY 32ND AVE Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Left Thru RIg Peas Lek Left Thru Ri ght Peds Left Thru Righ eas Int. ~ g f~ Total Factor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 04:00 PM 33 0 31 0 0 52 13 0 0 0 0 0 11 46 0 0 186 04:15 PM 12 0 47 0 0 68 12 0 0 0 0 0 11 56 0 0 206 04:30 PM 29 0 47 0 0 80 12 0 0 0 0 0 10 53 0 0 231 04:45 PM 17 0 38 0 0 68 10 0 0 0 0 0 10 63 0 0 206 Total 91 0 163 0 0 268 47 0 0 0 0 0 42 218 0 0 829 05:00 PM 33 0 56 0 0 76 7 0 0 0 0 0 8 77 0 0 257 05:15 PM 21 0 25 0 0 58 7 0 0 0 0 0 6 78 0 0 195 05:30 PM 26 0 46 0 0 75 18 0 0 0 0 0- 9 84 0 0 258 05:45 PM 11 0 25 0 0 36 22 5 0 0 0 0 9 52 0 0 160 Total 91 0 152 0 0 245 54 5 0 0 0 0 32 291 0 0 870 Grand Total 182 0 315 0 0 513 101 5 0 0 0 0 74 509 0 0 1699 Apprch % 36.6 0.0 63.4 0.0 0.0 82.9 16.3 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.7 87.3 0.0 ( 0.0 Total % 10.7 0.0 18.5 0.0 0.0 30.2 5.9 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.4 30.0 0.0 0.0 w c.+irc In rnvvr Td 11 49 315 0 182 0 00 Right Th. Left Peds *j 1 Nodh 11,062021690 11,06'cl]0217:45 UnsMRed +-i T lr Left Thin, Right Peds 0 0 0 1=1 E~ Out In Total 11 TiFRGN PI(INY ~A ~0 n ti v n All Traffic Data Services, Inc. 6214 Secrest Street Arvada, CO 80403 File Name : 32ND&PKWYPM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 11/06/2002 Page No :2 LUTHERAN PKWY 32ND AVE LUTHERAN PKWY 32ND AVE Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Let Thr Rig App. Thr Rig Pe App. Thr Rig App. Let Thr Rig App. Int. Time t u h[ it its Tota I Left u ht Js Tota I Left u ht d ds Total t u ht d s Total Tota I Peak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - P eak 1 of 1 Intersecti 04:45 PM on 1 27 30 Volume 97 0 0 262 0 42 0 319 0 0 0 0 0 33 0 0 335 916 5 7 2 Percent 37. 0.0 63. 0.0 85. 0.0 13. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.9 90. 0.0 0.0 0 0 8 2 1 High Int. 05:00 PM 05:30 PM 3:45: 00 PM 05:30 PM 05:30 Volume 26 0 46 0 72 0 75 18 0 93 0 0 0 0 0 9 84 0 0 93 258 Peak 0.73 0.85 0.90 0.88 Factor 6 8 1 8 Os In.. Tam' 0 65 0 971 L-01 Right 1Tru Left Pods 4 1 T North 11, 0216A5 11/06'X1021730 Unstdfted T lr Left Thru Right Peas 0 0 0 Out In Total z Do -i 9 All Traffic Data Services, Inc. 6214 Secrest Street Arvada, CO 80403 Grnuns Primnnt InshiRed File Name : 32ND&PKWYAM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date :11/06/2002 Page No :1 LUTHERAN PARKWAY 32ND AVENUE LUTHERAN PARKWAY 32ND AVENUE Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Rlgh Rlgh Int. Start Time Left Thru Peds Left Thru Right Peds Left Thru Right Peds Left Thru Peds t t Total Factor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 07:00 AM 9 0 1 0 0 66 27 0 0 0 0 0 28 43 1 0 175 07:15 AM 6 0 4 0 0 101 33 0 0 0 0 0 26 79 0 0 249 07:30 AM 13 0 8 0 0 39 36 0 0 0 0 0 36 70 0 0 202 0745 AM 10 0 9 0 0 54 35 0 0 0 0 0 45 49 0 0 202 Total 38 0 22 0 0 260 131 0 0 0 0 0 135 241 1 0 828 08:00 AM 2 0 12 0 0 41 30 0 0 0 0 0 44 53 0 08:15 AM 11 0 11 0 0 47 21 0 0 0 0 0 40 51 0 08:30 AM 6 0 11 0 0 42 18 0 0 0 0 0 28 46 0 08:45 AM 7 0 6 0 0 45 21 0 0 0 0 0 36 55 0 Total 26 0 40 0 0 175 90 0 0 0 0 0 148 205 0 Grand Total 64 0 62 0 0 435 221 0 0 0 0 0 283 446 1 Apprch % 50.8 0.0 49.2 0.0 0.0 66.3 33.7 I 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 38.8 61.1 0.1 Total % 4.2 0.0 4.1 0.0 0.0 28.8 14.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.7 29.5 0.1 CM Inr ^VV„Taal ® 1 62 0 64 0 Right Then tat Pecs 4'1L► o~ ~ gz Norte 11106200207M 11AN200208:45 Unsuited T F+ Let Th. Right pads 0 0 0 w 0 .I . Taa A 0 s c' 0 o_ 0 182 0 181 0 151 0 170 0 1 684 0 1512 0.0 0.0 All Traffic Data Services, Inc. 6214 Secrest Street Arvada, CO 80403 File Name : 32ND&PKWYAM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 11/06/2002 Page No :2 LUTHERAN PARKWAY 32ND AVENUE LUTHERAN PARKWAY 32ND AVENUE Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Let t Thr u Rig ht Pe ds App' Tote I Left Thr u Rig ht Pe ds App' Tote I Left Thr u Rig ht Pe ds App. Total Let t Thr u Rig ht Pe ds App. Total Int. Tota I Peak Hour From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - P eak 1 of 1 Intersecti 07:15 AM on Volume 31 0 33 0 64 0 2 134 0 369 0 0 0 0 0 5 Percent 48. 0.0 51. 0.0 0.0 63. 36. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4 6 7 3 High Int. 07:30 AM 07:15 AM 6:45: 00 AM Volume 6 0 4 0 10 0 10 33 0 134 0 0 0 0 0 Peak 0.76 0.68 Factor 2 8 15 25 0 0 402 835 1 1 37 62. . 0.0 0.0 6 4 07:30 AM 07:15 26 79 0 0 105 249 0.94 0.83 8 8 LUTHERAN PARKWAY Out h Tow 33 31 0 Right Thru Leh pets 4J L4 Do n Nodh = F > 1110&=07:15 z t 11A6200208A0 r rc Un"ed , O v m a 4-,Tr Left Thin Right Pads 01 01 0 w In TOW LUTHERAN PARKWAY All Traffic Data Services, Inc. 6214 Secrest Street Arvada, CO 80403 Groups Printed Unshift el File Name : 38TH&PKWYPM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date :11/06/2002 Page No : 1 LUTHERAN PKWY 38TH LUTHERAN PKWY 38TH Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Sta rt Time Left Thru Righ Peds Left Thru Righi Peds Left Thru Right Peds Left Thru Rlgh Peds Int. t Total Factor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 04 :00 PM 0 0 0 0 28 127 3 1 24 0 69 0 0 134 18 0 404 04 :15 PM 0 0 0 1 23 138 1 0 17 1 59 2 0 155 13 2 412 04 :30 PM 0 0 0 0 11 118 3 0 28 0 72 3 0 125 27 3 390 04 :45 PM 0 0 0 1 21 138 3 0 18 0 71 3 0 157 9 0 421 Total 0 0 0 2 83 521 10 1 87 1 271 8 0 571 67 5 1627 05:00 PM 0 0 0 1 28 158 0 0 18 0 75 1 0 139 26 0 446 05:15 PM 0 0 0 0 10 151 0 0 23 0 54 0 0 143 18 0 399 05:30 PM 0 0 0 0 26 141 0 0 27 0 54 7 0 106 28 3 392 0545 PM 0 0 0 0 48 132 0 0 13 0 42 0 0 112 24 0 371 Total 0 0 0 1 112 582 0 0 81 0 225 8 0 500 96 3 1608 Grand Total 195 1103 10 1 161 1 496 113 0 1071 163 11 3235 00. 1 1 224.7 0.1 72.8 2.3 0.0 86.2 13.1 0. 0 Total % 0.0 00 0.0 1 0. 60 341 0.3 M 52 0.0 153 05 00 331 50 0. w w,ne Inv rnvn Tall 11 0 0 0 3 Right Th. Left Peds 1 L+ r O a North 1W62002 6.W 11,06010217:45 unsll fled 4-, T + L~ Right Peas 16BI 11 496 1 ® 681 I Out In Total LUTHERAN PKWY L All Traffic Data Services, Inc. 6214 Secrest Street Arvada, CO 80403 EA' File Name : 38TH&PKWYPM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 11/06/2002 Page No : 2 LUTHERAN PKWY 38TH LUTHERAN PKWY 38TH Southbound Westbound Nonhbound Eastbound Start Lef Thr Rig Pe App' Thr Rig Pe App" Thr Rig Pe App. Lef Thr Rig Pe App. Int. in Time t u ht ds Tota Left U ht ds Tota Left u ht Its Total t u ht ds Total T I I Peak Hour I-rom U4:00 PM to U5:45 I'M - P eak 1 of 1 Intersecti 04:15 PM on Volume 0 0 0 3 3 83 5 7 0 642 81 1 277 9 368 0 57 75 5 656 1669 2 6 Percent 0.0 0.0 100 0.0 12. 86. 1.1 0.0 22. 0.3 75 2.4 0.0 87. 11. 0.8 0 9 0 0 3 8 4 High Int. 04:15 PM 05:00 PM 04:30 PM 04:15 PM 05:00 Volume 0 0 0 1 1 28 15 0 0 186 18 0 75 1 94 0 13 26 0 165 446 5 9 Peak 0.75 0.86 0.89 0.96 0.93 Factor 0 3 3 5 6 In Tctw 0 0 0 3 Right TMU Leff Peels 4-1 1L► 27 a ~ 1 North 11AY200216:15 1 LOfiIN0211d0 Uns dftetl Left Thou Right Peels 811 11 27 Out In Tcal Lg ~F All Traffic Data Services, Inc. 6214 Secrest Street Arvada, CO 80403 rr Primann-hiead File Name : 38TH&PKWYAM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 11/06/2002 Page No :1 LUTHERAN PKWY 38TH LUTHERAN PKWY 38TH Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Rlgh Righ Int. Sta rt Time Lett Thru Peds Left Thru Right Peds Left Thru Right Peds Left Thru I Peds t Total Factor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 07: 00 AM 0 0 0 1 54 120 1 0 7 0 14 0 0 105 28 0 330 07: 15 AM 0 0 0 0 66 111 1 0 7 0 11 0 0 142 23 1 362 07 :30 AM 0 0 0 0 55 89 0 0 10 0 26 0 0 146 30 8 364 07 :45 AM 0 0 0 0 74 90 6 0 8 0 15 0 0 123 30 0 346 Total 0 0 0 1 249 410 8 0 32 0 66 0 0 516 111 9 1402 08 00 AM 0 0 0 1) 60 111 11 0 11) 1) 17 1) 0 115 21 2 106 I 1 I l 08:45 AM 0 0 0 2 56 108 0 0 7 0 22 0 0 126 21 1 343 Grand Total 0 0 0 10 70 I 469 790 8 0 I 66 0 150 1 I 0 979 216 18 I 2704 Apprch % 0.0 0.0 0.0 37.0 62.4 0.6 0.0 30.4 0.0 69.1 0.5 0.0 80.7 17.8 1.5 Total % 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 17.3 29.2 0.3 0.0 2.4 0.0 5.5 0.0 0.0 36.2 8.0 0.7 LU I HLHNY PKWY QA In TO ® 7-114 0 0 0 7 Right Thru Left Peds 4~ 1L► Cie I NoM 11,06'N02 07W 1= 08.45 UnslYtetl 4~ Tr Let Tlw Right Peds E6 0 IWI 11 ® 2 an In TOW L HrHFRAN PKWY Lp ~o s m All Traffic Data Services, Inc. 6214 Secrest Street Arvada, CO 80403 L File Name : 38TH&PKWYAM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 11/06/2002 Page No : 2 LUTHERAN PKWY 38TH LUTHERAN PKWY 38TH Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Let Thr Rig Pe App' Thr Rig Pe App' Thr Rig Pe App. Lef Thr Rig Pe App. Int. Time t u ht ds Tote I Left u ht cis Tote I Left u ht ds Total t u ht tls Total Tote I eak 1 of 1 41 5 249 8 0 667 32 0 66 0 98 6 0 111 9 636 1402 0 37. 61. 32. 67 81. 17. 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 3 5 7 3 1 6 07:15 AM 07:30 AM 07:30 AM 07:30 55 89 0 0 144 10 0 26 0 36 0 74 30 8 184 364 6 0.93 0.68 0.86 0.96 7 1 4 3 VI a 0 Right Thnu Leff Peels +1L► g~ P~ L~ North 11rt1fi2aD207:00 11N6~A020T.45 Unshifle] +T+ Left Thiu Right Peis 32 0 fib Out In Tdel Peak Hour From 07:UU AM to 08:45 AM - F Inlersecti 07:00 AM on Volume 0 0 0 1 1 Percent 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 .0 High Int. 07:00 AM Volume 0 0 0 0 0 Peak 0.25 Factor 0 All Traffic Data Services, Inc. 6214 Secrest Street Arvada, CO 80403 PARKWAY WEST 38TH PARKWAY WEST 38TH Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Righ Peds Left Thru Right Peds Left Thru Right Peds Left Thru Rlgh Peds Int. t Total Factor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 04:00 PM 0 1 0 0 14 140 2 0 22 1 43 0 1 111 15 0 350 04:15 PM 0 0 0 0 13 124 3 0 31 1 35 0 3 126 14 1 351 04:30 PM 1 0 0 0 15 140 0 0 29 1 35 0 2 114 9 3 349 04:45 PM 1 0 2 0 10 136 1 1 31 2 52 0 2 122 10 1 371 Total 2 1 2 0 52 540 6 1 113 5 165 0 8 473 48 5 1421 05:00 PM 0 0 1 0 9 169 4 0 30 1 68 0 1 108 7 1 399 05:15 PM 0 0 0 0 11 164 1 0 20 0 49 0 2 113 4 0 364 05:30 PM 0 0 1 0 13 147 1 0 30 3 22 1 1 106 5 1 331 05:45 PM 1 0 0 0 13 144 0 0 19 1 12 0 4 109 13 0 316 Total 1 0 2 0 46 624 6 0 99 5 151 1 8 436 29 2 1410 Grand Total 3 1 4 0 98 1164 12 1 212 10 316 1 I 16 909 77 7 I 2831 Apprch % 37.5 12.5 50.0 0.0 7.7 91.3 0.9 0.1 39.3 1.9 58.6 0.2 1.6 90.1 7.6 0.7 Total % 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 3.5 41.1 0.4 0.0 7.5 0.4 11.2 0.0 0.6 32.1 2.7 0.2 0,6 rrvvwrIni vvcoi Tcd 41 11 3 0 r,-- Prmlatlt ~oahlft.d File Name : 38TH&PKWYWESTPM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 11/06/2002 Page No :1 Right Thru Leff Peds +j 1L► I North 11A6200216.0a 1= 217.45 UnslrXetl +i T F+ Left Thru Right Pais 212 10 3161 11 71 Out In Trial RGPHWevwzcr LA ~0 c -i 9 Peak Hour From uv:uu PM to ub:ab vM - P eak 1 on Intersecti 04:30 PM on Volume 2 0 3 0 5 45 60 6 1 661 110 4 204 0 318 7 45 30 5 499 1483 0 Percent 40. 0.0 60 0.0 92 6.8 0.9 0.2 34. 1.3 64 0.0 91 1.4 6.0 1.0 0 0 1 6 2 6 High Int. 04:45 PM 05:00 PM 05:00 PM 04:45 PM 05:00 Volume 0 0 1 0 1 9 16 4 0 182 30 1 68 0 99 1 10 7 1 117 399 6 8 Peak 0.41 0.90 0.80 0.92 0.92 Factor 7 8 3 4 9 All Traffic Data Services, Inc. 6214 Secrest Street Arvada, CO 80403 PARKWAY WEST 38TH PARKWAY WEST 38TH Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Lef Thr Rig Pe App' Thr Rig Pe App" Thr Rig Pe App. Let Thr Rig Pe App. Int. Time t u ht ds Tote I Left u ht ds Tota Left u ht ds Total t u ht ds Total Tote, I File Name : 38TH&PKWYWESTPM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 11/06/2002 Page No : 2 Out .......In Trial 0 3 0 2 0 Right TI-nu Left Pe 1 4 f~ £J g T North 11A6200216:30 itA6200217:15 unshift tl +iTr Left Thnr Right Petls 0 209 31 C w In Total Lp ~0 2 2 5 -i 9 08:00 AM 0 0 2 0 24 65 1 0 9 1 12 0 2 128 26 1 271 08:15 AM 0 2 1 0 25 79 0 0 4 0 11 0 4 143 18 0 287 08:30 AM 0 0 2 0 24 77 1 0 11 0 6 0 0 122 19 0 262 08:45 AM 1 0 2 2 19 96 3 1 10 0 22 0 1 112 16 0 285 Total 1 2 7 2 92 317 5 1 34 1 51 0 7 505 79 1 1105 Grand Total 3 2 18 3 190 664 6 1 51 1 83 0 13 1085 173 2 2295 Apprch % 11.5 7.7 69.2 11.5 22.1 77.1 0.7 0.1 37.8 0.7 61.5 0.0 1.0 85.2 13.6 0.2 Total % 0.1 0.1 0.8 0.1 8.3 28.9 0.3 0.0 2.2 0.0 3.6 0.0 0.6 47.3 7.5 0.1 All Traffic Data Services, Inc. 6214 Secrest Street Arvada, CO 80403 Grnimz Printed) lnshifled PARKWAY WEST 38TH PARKWAY WEST 38TH Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Righ Peds Left Thru Right Pads Left Thru Right Peds Left Thru Righ Reds Int. t Total Factor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 07:00 AM 0 0 4 1 19 109 0 0 6 0 9 0 4 119 7 0 278 07:15 AM 0 0 2 0 22 91 0 0 6 0 8 0 0 170 31 0 330 07:30 AM 0 0 4 0 20 80 1 0 1 0 9 0 1 157 27 1 301 07:45 AM 2 0 1 0 37 67 0 0 4 0 6 0 1 134 29 0 281 Total 2 0 11 1 98 347 1 0 17 0 32 0 6 580 94 1 1190 File Name : 38TH&PKWYWESTAM Site Code 00000000 Start Date : 11/06/2002 Page No : 1 Out ~nM..In Td l 8 3 3 Right ThN Left Peds 4' 1 4 Ii Im I North 110620D207.W 1%62W206A UnslJ 4, T F+ Left Thru Right Peds 511 11 83 ® i cut in TOW ZA O s C' ti Peak Hour From U CUU AM to Ub:40 AM - Y eaK 1 01 1 Intersecti 07:00 AM on Volume 2 0 11 1 14 98 3 1 0 446 17 0 32 0 49 6 58 94 1 681 1190 7 0 Percent 14. 0.0 78. 7.1 22. 77. 0.2 0.0 34. 0.0 65. 0.0 85. 0.9 13. 0.1 3 6 0 8 7 3 2 8 High Int. 07:00 AM 07:00 AM 07:00 AM 07:15 AM 07:15 Volume 0 0 2 0 2 22 91 0 0 113 6 0 8 0 14 0 17 31 0 201 330 0 Peak 0.70 0.87 0.81 0.84 0.90 Factor 0 1 7 7 2 All Traffic Data Services, Inc. 6214 Secrest Street Arvada, CO 80403 PARKWAY WEST 38TH PARKWAY WEST 38TH Southbound Westbountl Northbound Eastbound Start Let Thr Rig Pe App. Thr Rig Pe App. Thr Rig Pe App. Let Thr Rig Pe App. Int. Time t u ht ds Tota I Left u ht ds Tote I Left It ht ds Total t u ht ds Total Tote I File Name : 38TH&PKWYWESTAM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 11/06/2002 Page No : 2 QA .......In Total © 1 21 11 d 2 Right Thru tM Peds *-j 1 '4 E~ T NoM 11A 020790 11A 00207:46 Ur Iirtetl 4-] T F* Leff Thnt Right Peds 1 171 0 32 ® 4 241 Out In Total zA ~o 0 v Lutberan Medical Office Building Traffic Impact Study APPENDIX B EXISTING ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: 38th Ave & Lutheran Pkwy West J:\02200\Synchro\Existing AM.sy6 Lane Configurations T+ T'+ 4 r 4~ Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop ' Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 6 580 : 94 98 347 1 17 0 32, + 2 0 11 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 6 611 99 103 " 365 1 18 0 34 ` 2 0 12 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 366 709 1073 1245 660 1229 1294 183 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 88 89 100 92 98 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 1189 885 156 152 406 111 142 828 pirect n Lane# , Et EB 2 1N.BA UUt3 2 W6,3 TJS 1 rt 1B nSB.. st x. y Volume Total 6 709 103 244 123 18 34 14 Volume eft 6 0 > 103 0 0 18 < 0 2 Volume Right 0 99 0 0 1 0 34 12 cSH 1189 1700 885 1700 1700 - 156. 406 416 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.42 0.12 0.14 0.07 0.11 0.08 0.03 Queue Length (ft) > 0 0 10 0 0' 10 7 3 Control Delay (s) 8.0 0.0 9.6 0.0 0.0 31.0 14.7 13.9 Lane LOS A A D B B Approach Delay (s) 0.1 2.1 20.4 13.9 Approach LOS C B Average Delay 1.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.2% I CU Level of Service A Baseline FELSBUENGL-FF51 Synchro 5 Report Page 1 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: 38th Ave & Lutheran Pkwy East J:\02200\Synchro\Existing AM.sy6 --I'. ~ /I Lane Configurations ft r tT Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900' 19001, 11900 1900 1906, 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 -1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 : 0.95 1:00 0.95 1.00 ' Satd. Flow (Prot) 3539 1583 1770 3539 1770 1583 Fit Permitted 1.00 - 1.00' s 0.45 1:00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3539 1583 837 3539 1770 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) " 543, 117 262 432 34: 69. Lane Group Flow (vph) 543 117 262 432 34 69 Effective Green, g;(s) 50.5 50.5 ' 50.5 50.5 7.0; 71.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.11 0.11 Clearance Time (s) 50 510 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) ,2729 1220 r 645 2729 189 169 v/s Ratio Prot 0.15 0.12 0.02 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 c0.31 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.20 0.10 0.41 0.16 0.18 0.41 Uniform belay, d1 2.0 1.9 2.5 2.0 26.6 27.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0'5 1.6, Delay (s) 2.1 1.9 2.9 2.0 27.1 28.9 Level of Service A A A A C C Approach Delay (s) 2.0 2.3 28.3 Approach LOS A A C terse"',~efiort."SU~Snat W,. 7LM V ~ ~ ~ HCM Average Control belay,- ' 4-0 HCM Level of Service - . : ~ A" HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.41 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 65.5 Sum of,lost tune (s) 8.0- Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.9% ICU Level of Service A c Critical Lane Group Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 FELSBUENGL-FF51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 10: 32nd Avenue & Lutheran Pkwy J:\02200\Synchro\Existing AM.sy6 ' 4--- t ti r Lane Configurations T T ►t r Sign Control Free : Free Stop . Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 151 251 ? 235 134 31 33 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 159 264 247 141 33 35 Pedestrians Lane Width, (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent-Blockage; Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 388 900 318 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % - 86 88 95 cM capacity (veh/h) 1170 267 723 Volume Total 159 264 388 33 35 Volume Left 159 0 0 33 0 Volume Right 0 0 141 0 35 cSH 1170 1700 1700 267 723 Volume to Capacity 0.14 0.16 0.23 0.12 0.05 Queue Length (ft) 12 0 0 10 4 Control Delay (s) 8.6 0.0 0.0 20.3 102 Lane LOS A C B Approach Delay (s) 3.2 0.0 15.1 Approach LOS i C tnt on N" - ~M, Average Delay 2.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.8% ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 FELSBUENGL-FF51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: 38th Ave & Lutheran Pkwy West J:\02200\Synchro\Existing PM.sy6 Lane Configurations T+ Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume`(veh/h) 7 457 30- 45 609' 6 110 - ;.4 204, 2 0 3 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 7 481 32 47 641` 6 ` 116 4 215 2 0 3 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage , Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) VC, conflicting volume 647 513 930, 1254 497; 1452 -1266 324 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) IF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 pO queue free 99 95 45 97 59 96 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 934 1049 212 162 519 50 159 672 Orectfoj~,~L?00.E9 NW6~~1a~W$~2~W6~~3~NB7~7B;z~S~~1'? Volume Total 7 513 47 427 220 120 215 5 Volume Left 7 0 47 0 0' 116 0 2 Volume Right 0 32 0 0 6 0 215 3 cSH 934 1700 -1049 1700 1700 210 _ 519 113 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.30 0.05 0.25 0.13 0.57 0.41 0.05 Queue Length (ft) ; 1 0 r, 4 0 0 78 50 4 Control Delay (s) 8.9 0.0 8.6 0.0 0.0 42.9 16.8 38.3 Lane LOS A A E" 'C E Approach Delay (s) 0.1 0.6 26.1 38.3 Approach LOS D ? E ate ec it om" Surnrriat~`"' ~'.p~ Ave, rage'. Delay 6.1 Intersection Capacity Util ization 53.9% IC U Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 FELSBUENGL-FF51 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: 38th Ave & Lutheran Pkwy East J:\02200\Synchro\Existing PM.sy6 Lane Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 . 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 . " 1.0o 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (Prot) 3539 1583 1770 3539 1770 1583 FIt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.42- 1:00 0.95= 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3539 1583 787 3539 1770 1583 vuiurne tvpn) Oft) to 06 -00L C7'. 41f _ Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 606 79 87 581 85 292 Lane Group Flow (vph) 606 79 87 581 85 292 r w n ype rerm, Term Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases ` 2 6 4 . Actuated Green, G (s) 15.1 15.1 15.1 15.1 8.7 8.7 Effective Green, g (s) _16.1 16.1 C 16.1 16.1 9.7 9.7 ;r Actuated g/C Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.29 0.29 Clearance Time (s) 50 5.0 5.0 5.0 50 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 v/s Ratio Prot c0.17 0.16 0.05 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 ? 0.11 0.18" v/c Ratio 0.36 0.10 0.23 0.34 0.17 0.64 Uniform =Delay, d1 5:6 4.9 5.2 5.5 9.0 10.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d,2 0.1 0.1 0.3, 0.1 0.2- 3.1 Delay (s) 5.7 4.9 5.5 5.7 9.2 13.6 Level of !Service A A A A A B Approach Delay (s) 5.6 5.6 12.6 Approach LOS " A A B; HCM Average Control Delay : 7.2 HCM Level of Service,. HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.47 ActuatedCycle Length (s) 33.8 Sum of lost time (s) 8:0'' Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.5% ICU Level of Service A c Critical Lane Group Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 FELSBUENGL-FF51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 10: 32nd Avenue & Lutheran Pkwy J:\02200\Synchro\Existing PM.sy6 Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 33 302 277 42 97 165 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate'(veh/h) 35 318:, , 292 44 102 174 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (fUs) Percent; Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 336 701 314 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, st6ge2 conf,vol tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 97 74 76 cM capacity (veh/h) 1223 393 727 D rea~ rl Lame # ~ $ C~ EB 2 y MIWSSMUM O 0 INN . s ; _ K . , . Volume Total 35 318 336 102 174 Volume Left 35 ' 0 ' 0 102 0 Volume Right 0 0 44 0 174 cSH 1223 1700 1700 393 727. Volume to Capacity 0.03 0.19 0.20 0.26 0.24 Queue Length (ft)" 2 0 0 26 23 Control Delay (s) 8.0 0.0 0.0 17.3 11.5 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) 0.8 0.0 13.7 Approach LOS B Average Delay, ` 4.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 35.56/6 ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 FELSBUENGL-FF51 Lutheran Medical Office Building Traffic Impact Study APPENDIX C SHORT-TERM ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS .SFELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: 38th Ave & Lutheran Pkwy West J:\02200\Synchro\BG ST AM.sy6 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 #C,,2-stage(s)..;'` tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % - 100, 88, 85 96 91 ' 95: ; 96 99 cM capacity(veh/h) 1171 869 143 143 393 99 133 817 -5 2 WB a J@ 8 ~1~'~EB ~UB~1 sx~16< Mrec 7~0 FL~ane ~ 2 a Volume Total 5 732 105 253 132 26 37 21 Volumeeft; - 5' 0 -405 , 0 0 :,-21- 0 - -5 Volume Right 0 100 0 0 5 0 37 11 cSH 1171 . 1700' ; 869 1700 1700 143=` l 393 199 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.43 0.12 0.15 0.08 0.18 0.09 0.11 Queue L'ehgth (ft) - D 0 10, 0 0 9` Control Delay (s) 8.1 0.0 9.7 0.0 0.0 35.8 15.1 25.2 Lane LOS` . A A E C D Approach Delay (s) 0.1 2.1 23.7 25.2 Approach LOS C , D ante fi _.:.,...,,.,a c.W* n- Average~D"elay_ , , „ 2.4,'- Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.5% ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 FELSBUENGL-FF51 Volume (veh/h)` 5 600 - ' 95 1010 -360 5 .20 5 35`- 5 5 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: 38th Ave & Lutheran Pkwy East J:\02200\Synchro\BG ST AM.sy6 Lane Configurations ►j Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 , Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor ` 0.95 1.00 IM 0.95 1:00- 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1,00 - 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3539 1583 1770 3539 1770 1583 Satd. 1583 825 583 Volume (vph) 530 110 250 430 35 65 ; Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 558 116 i 263 453 37 68 Lane Group Flow (vph) 558 116 263 453 37 68 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm, i Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases ' 2 - . 6 ' 4` Actuated Green, G (s) 49.5 49.5 49.5 49.5 6.1 6.1 Effective Green, g;(s) 50.5 50.5 50.5, 50.5 7.1I 7.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.11 0.11 Clearance Time -(s) 5i0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 192 171 v/s Ratio Prot 0.16 0.13 0.02 WsRatio Perm 0.07 c0.32 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.20 0.10 0.41 0.17 0.19 0.40 Uniform Delay, d1' 2.1 1.9 2.6 2.0 26.6 27.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0:0 0.0 0.4 . 0.0 0.5 1:5 Delay (s) 2.1 1.9 3.0 2.0 27.1 28.8 Level of Service r A A A A C C_ Approach Delay (s) 2.1 2.4 28.2 Approach LOS A A C nte7seejon50mtna. rMa 1EW HCM Average Control Delay" 4.1 HCM Level of Service A r HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.41 Actuated Cycle Length (s) , 65.6 Sum of lost time (s)'' 8.0 i Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.3% ICU Level of Service A c Critical Lane Group Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 FELSBUENGL-FF51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 10: 32nd Avenue & Lutheran Pkwy J:\02200\Synchro\BG ST AM.sy6 _40. 4-- t \10- W Lane Configurations j, Sign Control:, Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume(veh/h) 150 260, 245 135 30r 35 - Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 158 274 : - 258 142 32 37 Pedestrians Right turn flare (veh) Median,type' None Median storage veh) . vC, conflicting volume 400 918 329 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2; stage 2.conf Vol tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free% 86 88 95 cm capacity (veh/h) 1159 260 712 EB*1 EBB ~S in-ma z $ 7'4 )N X1 ~ w . Volume Total 158 274 400 32 37 Volume Left 158 0 ° 0 32 0 Volume Right 0 0 142 0 37 cSH 1159 1700 1700 260 712 Volume to Capacity 0.14 0.16 024 0.12 0.05 Queue Length (ft) 12 .0 0 10 4' Control Delay (s) 8.6 0.0 0.0 20.7 10.3 Lane LOS A C B Approach Delay (s) 3.1 0.0 15.1 Approach LOS C n seufiorSprrima x r e ~ . _ F Average Delay I 2.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.31 ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 FELSBUENGL-FF51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: 38th Ave & Lutheran Pkwy West J:\02200\Synchro\BG ST PM.sy6 -I► F 4.\ I /I- aye?ia?5 EBT E g VYI1BBIN RISEN T Lane Configurations , _ t~ r Sign Control Free Free Stop, :Stop ' Grade 0% _ 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 5 475 - 30 45 615 5 r 110 . 6, -205 205 5 5 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 5 500 32 47 647 5 116 - 5 216 5 5 6 Pedestrians Lane W idtn (ft) ` Walking Speed (ft/s) ercent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None, ! None' Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 653 532 953 12714, 516, 1474 1287 ' -326 vC1, stage 1 conf vol VC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s), tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 00 queue free % 99 95 42' . 97 57S 89 97 99 CM capacity (veh/h) 930 1032 199 157 504 47 155 669 Volume Total 5 532 47 432 221 121 216 16 VolumeLeft 5 0 47, 0 0 116 0 5 Volume Right 0 32 0 0 5 0 216 5 cSH, - 930 1700 1032 1700 1700 196 : .504 103 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.31 0.05 0.25 0.13 0.62 0.43 0.15 QueueLength (ft) D 0 4 0 0 8&,. : i `,53- ;.13=- . . Control Delay (s) 8.9 0.0 8.7 0.0 0.0 49.0 17.4 46.2 Lane LOS A A E - C E Approach Delay (s) 0.1 0.6 28.8 46.2 Approach LOS D E. Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.9% ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 FELSBUENGL-FF51 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: 38th Ave & Lutheran Pkwy East J:\02200\Synchro\BG ST PM.sy6 Lane Configurations tt F I tt I F Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 , 1900 1900 , 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1A0':' 1.00 '0:95 '1:00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 1:00 1.00 ' 0.95-' 1:00. 0:95 1.00' _ Said. Flow (prot) 3539 1583 1770 3539 1770 1583 Flt Permitted 1.00 , 1.00 OAO, h00 0.95 -1.00 Said. Flow (perm) 3539 1583 749 3539 1770 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Floyu (vph) - 642" 79 89 ' 611 ~84 289' ) Lane Group Flow (vph) 642 79 89 611 84 289 Turn Type Perm iPerm Perm,,; Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases, 2- 6 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 9.4 9.4 EffectiVe Green, g(s) 17;0 17.0 11.0%- _17.0 10.4 40.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.29 0.29 Clearance Time (s) 50 5.0 - 5.0 5.0 5:0 5:0.. Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1700 760 360 1-700 520 465 v/s Ratio Prot c0.18 0.17 0.05 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 0.12 0.18 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.10 0.25 0.36 0.16 0.62 Uniform Delay, d1 ! 58 5.0 5.4 5.8 9.3 10.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 -0.1 0:1 X0.1 - .0.1 Delay (s) 6.0 5.1 5.8 5.9 9.4 114 Level of Service A A A A A B Approach Delay (s) 5.9 5.9 12.5 Approach LOS A A B MR mg i, n Sumr:~arY~ ~ ~ . _ . HCM.Average Control Delay, 7-3 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.47 Actuated) Cycle Length (s) 35A . ? Sum of lost time?(s) 8.0; Intersection Capacity Ut ilization 42.3% ICU Level of Service A c Critical Lane Group Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 FELSBUENGL-FF51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 10: 32nd Avenue & Lutheran Pkwy J:\02200\Synchro\BG ST PM.sy6 k, 4/ 7-2,'76 206 375 712 Volume Total 37 332 353 105 174 Volume Left, 37 0 10,51 ll, - Volume Right 0 0 47 0 174 me Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.4% ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 felsbuengl-ff51 Volume`(veh/h). 3 315' 290 '45 : :109 165 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flew rate (yeh%h). - -31,332 305 - 47 110-5- 1-74 Pedestrians Lane wiith (ft) IF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: 38th Ave & Lutheran Pkwy West J:\02200\Synchro\Total ST AM.sy6 1--io. l 'r 4\ t 1' 1 41 .5 cM capacity (veh/h) 1168 835 126 127 376 88 116 815 0?rec+t)o~E Lar~.ex R_& 1g?`; ~~U1/B 2s „W B3~~B ,6 56~ a Volume Total 11 777 116 255 133 35 39 21 0.1 2.3 29.1 27.8 Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 felsbuengl-ff51 Volume,(veh/h) 10'- 612 126'.--11'10 1'10 363 5 28 ' 5 37= 5 5- 16 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourlyflovi rate (yeh/h), 11 644 133 116 382 5 29 5 39` 5 5 1-1 Pedestrians tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.46 0.14 0.15 0.08 0.28 0.10 0.12 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: 38th Ave & Lutheran Pkwy East J:\02200\Synchro\Total ST AM.sy6 Lane Configurations tT F tt Vi F Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 ? 1900 1900 1900 " 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane_ Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00: 1:00 ' Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95" 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (Drot) 3539 1583 1770 3539 1770 1583 Flow Volume;(vph) , 532 122 : 316 440 38_ _831 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 560" 128 333 463 40= 87 Lane Group Flow (vph) 560 128 333 463 40 87 i urni,ype Farm ; germ Farm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted"Phases " i2 6 4" Actuated Green, G (s) 49.5 49.5 49.5 49.5 7.2 7.2 Effective`Green, g ,(s) 50.5 "50.5 50.5 50.5 82 _,&2, Actuated g/C Ratio 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.12 0.12 Clearance Time (s) 50 " 5.0 ' 5.0 5.0 5.0" " 5.0 " Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap:(vph) 2670 1199 623 2679 218 195 v/s Ratio Prot 0.16 0.13 0.02 v/s Ratio -Perm 0.08 ; c0.40 : cl v/c Ratio 0.21 0.11 0.53 0.17 0.18 0.45 Uniform~Delay,d1 2.3 2.1 3:3 2.3 "26.2 27.1 " Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0,0 0.9 0.0 0.4 1.6 Delay (s) 2.4 2.2 4.2 2.3 26.7 28.8 Level of Service - A A A A C C Approach Delay (s) 2.3 3.1 28.1 Approach "LOS A A C ; HCM Average Control Delay 4.7 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.52 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 66.7 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 " Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.2% ICU Level of Service A c Critical Lane Group' Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 felsbuengl-ff51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 10: 32nd Avenue & Lutheran Pkwy J:\02200\Synchro\Total ST AM.sy6 Volume (veh/h),', 175 260245 160 - 37` 42, Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow. rate (veh/h) 184 274 258 113 39 44 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free 84 83, 94, i cM capacity (veh/h) 1133 231 700 Volume Total 184 274 426 39 44 Volume' Left" 184 ; - 0 , 0` ' 39 . 0, Volume Right 0 0 168 0 44 6SH 1133 1700 1700. , 231 - 700` Volume to Capacity 0.16 0.16 0.25 0.17 0.06 Queue Length"(ft),"; , 14 Control Delay (s) 8.8 0.0 0.0 23.8 10.5 Lane LOS `,e," A" C B' Approach Delay (s) 3.5 0.0 16.7 Approach LOS'"> C Average Delay,- Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.4% ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 felsbuengl-ff51 -0, 4, \1, HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: 38th Ave & Lutheran Pkwy West J:\02200\Synchro\Total ST PM.sy6 Lane Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 10 478, 46 51 .628 5 153 5 219 5 5 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 11 503 48 ' 54 661 ' ' .5 16d 5 231 5' 5 " 5 Pedestrians Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent-Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None: , None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting v6Aw"me 666 552 994 1322 ` 5271: ' 1528 .1344 333 v61, stage 1 conf Vol vC2, stage 2 conf.voI tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % ` 99 '95 12 96 ' 53 87 96 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 919 1014 183 145 495 40 141 663 %rectCaiLaO$f 81EJ ,1:VVgrrWT/UB~.NBft BNB=. :w v Volume Total 11 552 54 441 226 166 231 16 Volume Left 19 - 'O , 54 ! 0 0 161 0 ! 5 Volume Right 0 48 0 0 5 0 231 5 cSH 919 1700 =1014 1700 1700 181 •'495. 89, Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.32 0.05 0.26 0.13 0.92 0.47 0.18 Queue Length.(ft) 1' 0: , . 4 0 0 175 61. 15' Control Delay (s) 9.0 0.0 8.7 0.0 0.0 98.7 18.4 54.1 Lane LOS A A F F Approach Delay (s) 0.2 0.7 52.1 54.1 Approach LOS F i F nt 70- echo Sumrn AverageDelay 13.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.0% ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 felsbuengl-ff51 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: 38th Ave & Lutheran Pkwy East J:\02200\Synchro\Total ST PM.sy6 Lane Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane LIU!. Factor 0:95 1.00 1.00" ,0:95 1.00 " 1.00, 'r Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1 J g/C Ratio 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.34 0.34 ce Time {s} 5'0' 5.0 5.0 5.0 5. - ,5.0 Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 v/s Ratio Prot c0.19 0.17 0.06 v/s Ratio Perm A:05 0.17 = c0.24 v/c Ratio 0.42 0.12 0.38 0.39 0.16 0.71 Unlform~Deloy,`d1 710 6.0 618,' 8.6 - 107 " Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremehtat Delay; d2 0.-2 0.1 0.8 . , 0.2 0.1` 4.5 Delay (s) 7.1 6.0 7.6 7.0 8.8 15.3 Level ofService ' ~A =A ' .,,,:A '-Al A , R 1 ADDroach Delav (s) 7.0 7.1 13.9 HCM Volume to Utilization 48.4% ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 felsbuengi-ff51 l t Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Protected Phases 2 6 4 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 10: 32nd Avenue & Lutheran Pkwy J:\02200\Synchro\Total ST PM.sy6 Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/hf 47 . 315 - 290 57 i35' 200, Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 49 332 305 60 142 211 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) - vC1, stage 1 confvol tC, 2-stage-(s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % - l 96- 60 70 cM capacity (veh/h) 1193 356 707 Volume Total 49 332 365 142 211 Volume Left 49 0 0 142 h' Volume Right 0 0 60 0 211 to Caoacitv 0.04 0.20 0.21 0.40 0 Control Delay (s) 8.1 0.0 0.0 21.7 12.2 Lane LOS A C B Approach Delay (s) 1.1 0.0 16.1 Approach LOS C Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.4% ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 felsbuengl-ff51 4- 41 Lutheran Medical Office Building APPENDIX D LONG-TERM ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS ~FELSBURG HOLT 6 ULLEVIG Traffic Impact Study HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: 38th Ave & Lutheran Pkwy West J:\02200\Synchro\BG LT AM.sy6 turn flare conf vol tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 cM capacity (veh/h) 1075 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 78'- . '94 88 94 94 95 309 59 89 759 Volume Total 11 889 105 319 165 26 37 26 Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.8% ICU Level of Service B Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 felsbuengl-ff51 'i f ~ 4- 41 t lr 1' 1 -V Approach Delay (s) 0.1 1.9 34.6 32.9 Approach LOS.,. ? D. ~=D Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 tlour~yflow,~ate(Veh/h) '19 789 z; 100 105' 479 5. 21 Pedestrians HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: 38th Ave & Lutheran Pkwy East J:\02200\Synchro\BG LT AM.sy6 Lane Ideal Flow (vphpl)- 1900 1900 1900- 1000' '19001 19001 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00, `'-1.00 x ° ..0.95 1.0'0 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 1.00 1.00 i" 0.951 . 1.00 0:95 1.00, Satd. Flow (Drot) 3539 1583 1770 3539 1770 1583 1770 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Floya,(vph) 711 116 263- 558 37 68 Lane Group Flow (vph) 711 116 263 558 37 68 Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases' 2 ` 6 1' ' 4 1 11 Actuated Green, G (s) 54.1 54.1 54.1 54.1 5.9 5.9 Effective Green, g-:(s)' 55.1 55;1 " 55.1 55.1 6.9 , . 6.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.10 0.10 Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 _ Vehicle 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2786 1246 559_ 2786 1,74 156, v/s Ratio Prot 0.20 0.16 0.02 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 c0.37 - 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.26 0.09 0.47 0.20 0.21 0.44 Uniform Delay, d1.; 2.0 1.7 2.5 1.9 29.0 29.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ]ncrementaMelay d2 0:0 0:0 0.6 0.0 0.6 1.9 Delay (s) 2.0 1.7 3.1 1.9 29.7 31.7 Level of Service A A A A C C' Approach Delay (s) 2.0 2.3 31.0 Approach LOS A A C Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 FELSBUENGL-FF51 Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.6% ICU Level of Service A c Crifical'Lane Group -1 1 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 10: 32nd Avenue & Lutheran Pkwy J:\02200\Synchro\BG LT AM.sy6 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 PO, queue free % . : 8,$. 86 . cM capacity (veh/h) 1103 219 661 Volume Total 158 337 458 32 37 VolumeLeft 158 ; . - `0,- 0. ;32'- " 0; - Volume Right 0 0 142 0 37 cSH- "110 170`6 ; 1700- .-.219-1 1 661';;' , Volume to Capacity 0.14 0.20 0.27 0.14 8.8 0.0 0.0 24.2 10.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.4% ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 felsbuengl-ff51 Volume(veh/h)', 150. 320 300 735 = 30' '.135 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate"(veh/h) 158.. 337' i =516 142 32 37` Pedestrians HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: 38th Ave & Lutheran Pkwy West J:\02200\Synchro\BG LT PM.sy6 ~ t T t ti 1 Lane Configurations Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h)., 10 595-, 11 30 -45 770- 10 s 110 ~ 5, 205 > 5 5 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 11 626 32 47, 811 11 116 5 216 5 5 5 Pedestrians flare Median 1171. 1519, ' . 642 '11776 1589 411 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage:(s)~ tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 134 101 417 23 100 590 i1aeE ES;y~la~tUa2s3.., s NO Volume Total 11 658 47 540 281 121 216 16 Volume Left 11 0 47 0 0 116 - 0 5 Volume Right 0 32 0 0 11 0 216 5 cSH" " 804 1700, 926 1700 1700" -132 54 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.39 0.05 0.32 0.17 0.92 0.52 0.29 Queue Length (ft) 0 4 , 0 Q . 152 .:25,% Control Delay (s) 9.5 0.0 1 9.1 0.0 0.0 121.4 22.6 96.3 Lahe,LOS ; A " A F C" F Approach Delay (s) 0.2 0.5 58.1 96.3 Approach LOS. Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 felsbuengl-ff51 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: 38th Ave & Lutheran Pkwy East J:\02200\Synchro\BG LT PM.sy6 7 j /1' Lane Configurations +F+ r Vi T+ IN Ideal Flow (vphpl) ' 1900 1900 . 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95. ,1 .00 1.00 ..0.95 .1.00 ; 1,00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1?00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3539 1583 1770 3539 1770 1583 Fit Perrri tted 1.00' 1.00 0.33 1 M 095 , '1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3539 1583 622 3539 1770 1583 Volume;(v0h) 730 75 85 745 80 275. Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 79 Protected Phases G 18.5 18.5 18.5 784 84 289 Perm 6 4 _4 18.5 9.8 9.8 Effective Green, g;(s) - 19 5 19.5 19:5 19.5 10.8` 10.8' Actuated g/C Ratio 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.28 0.28 Clearance Time(s) 5:0 5.0 5.0 . 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 1802 806 317 , 1802 499 446 v/s Ratio Prot 0.22 c0.22 0.05 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 . 0.14 0.18 v/c Ratio 0.43 0.10 0.28 0.44 0.17 0.65 Uniform Delay, d1 5.9 4.9 - 5.4 5.9 10A 121 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 6.1 4.9 A A A A B B s) 5.9 6.1 14.2 _ A A B' HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.51 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 38.3. Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.8%o ICU Level of Service A c,' Critical Lane Group Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 FELSBUENGL-FF51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 10: 32nd Avenue & Lutheran Pkwy J:\02200\Synchro\BG LT PM.sy6 4- ik\r .t/ Lane Configurations Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 35 " 385 355 X45 160- " 165 r Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 37 405 374 47 105 174 Pedestrians Lane Width.(ft), turn Median None ime 421 876 397 Vol tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) " tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 97 66. . 73 cM capacity (veh/h) 1138 309 652 PRIAN W-INTAR W-2-11M W-0 Volume Total 37 405 421 105 174 Volume Left 37 0 0 105 0' Volume Right 0 0 47 0 174 cSH 1138 1700 1700 309 652 - Volume to Capacity 0.03 0.24 0.25 0.34 0.27 Queue Length (ft) 3 ' 0 0. 37 27, Control Delay (s) 8.3 0.0 0.0 22.6 12.5 Lane LOS A C B Approach Delay (s) 0.7 0.0 16.3 Approach LOS C 40.0% ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 felsbuengl-ff51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: 38th Ave & Lutheran Pkwy West J:\02200\Synchro\Total LTAM.sy6 7 r t 4\ t *1 Median type. None" " None, Median storage veh) vC, conflicting', olume , 487 935 1381. 116081"71 868 -1581. 1672 .244 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2c6nf v' - tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s). i tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free% ? 99 84 65 94 87"i 90 93 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 1072 728 84 86 295 53 79 757 ~f,jfrcRChR?6hW z „;r'lO-wE r2 VB yilB?~r 63 N 1 t7 Volume Total 11 935 116 321 166 35 39 26 Volume Left 11 0 ' 116 0 0 29 .0 5 " Volume Right 0 133 0 0 5 0 39 16 cSH 1072 1700 728 1700 1700 ,84 ?295 '.141. Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.55 0.16 0.19 0.10 0.41 0.13 0.19 Queue Length (ft) 1 '0'? 14' 0 0 41 11"" 16. Control Delay (s) 8.4 0.0 10.9 0.0 0.0 74.9 19.0 36.4 Lane LOS A B F C c E Approach Delay (s) 0.1 2.1 45.4 36.4 Approach LOS E E' >verage Delay 3.4 ntersection Capacity Utilization 70.0% ICU Level of Service C Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 felsbuengl-ff51 Volume (veh/h)' 10 7452 1245 110 ,458 5 28 5 37` 5 15 Peak Hour Factor " 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate,(ueh/h) 11 802 _133 'c116, - 482 5 .t 129-,::1-1 5 39 5 5 , -1-6 Pedestrians HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: 38th Ave & Lutheran Pkwy East J:\02200\Synchro\Total LT AM.sy6 Flow (Derm) 3539 1583 706 3539 1770 1583 Volume=(vph) - > - 67=7 122: 316 540 -38 83 , Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow'vph) 713,v-1-28::-1'333_ - 568--l 40° 87 ' . i urn type . Nerm. 'germ, term „ Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 "6 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 55.5 55.5 55.5 55.5 7.1 7.1 0. 3.0 v/s Ratio Perm z,: 1 0.08 c0.47 c0.05 v/c Ratio 0.26 0.10 0.61 0.21 0.20 0.49 Uniform-Delay; d1 2s2- 14- 2.1. 293 30.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental D61ay. d2 0.1 0.0 . 1.9 9.0". ' .0:5 2.1' Delay (s) 2.3 2.0 5.3 2.2 29.8 32.5 Levgl of Service, A. A` A A C C Approach Delay (s) 2.2 3.3 31.6 Approach LOS fA ? : 'C' HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.59 Intersection Caoacity Utilization 51 Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 felsbuengl-ff51 Flt Protected - 1 00 ' 1.00. 0.95 1:00 6.95'- 1:00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3539 1583 1770 3539 1770 1583 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 10: 32nd Avenue & Lutheran Pkwy J:\02200\Synchro\Total LT AM.sy6 4 4/ Volume (veh/h) 175 320`- _ 300. 160 37 -42,11,`:- Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow' rate(veh/h) 184 337 316 168 39 44 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent` Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type, None . Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 484, 1105 " 400" r - , vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage-2 conf vol tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 IC, 2 stage (s) IF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0-queue free% . 83 80 93 cM capacity (veh/h) 1079 193 650 ptreCtin t L'ahfe#8Bd2W 1~SB i SBA , , Volume Total 184 337 484 39 44 Volume Left 184, 0. " 0 39 0 Volume Right 0 0 168 0 44 c$H 1079 1100z- 1700 193 650 Volume to Capacity 0.17 0.20 028 0.20 0.07 Queue Length (ft) 15 0 j 0 18 5 Control Delay (s) 9.0 0.0 0.0 28.3 10.9 Lane LOS A D B Approach Delay (s) 3.2 0.0 19.1 Approach LOS C rapacity Utilization 50.4% ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 felsbuengl-ff51 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: 38th Ave & Lutheran Pkwy West J:\02200\Synchro\Total LT AM signal.sy6 4e t 4.\ t P Lane Configurations 3 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900, 1900-: A900 1900 ' 1900 1900 .-9900 1900 1900 1900, 1;900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95= 1X00 1:00 1.00 - - Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.92 Flt-Protected 0.95' 1.00 0.95 1.00` 0.96 ` 1.00 - - 0:99 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1823 1770 3534 1787 1583 1692 Satd. Flow (perm) 884 1823 383 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 11 802; 133 ; ` 116 4825 29 v'5 39 5 16 Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 935 0 116 487 0 0 34 39 0 26 0 Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 -2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 33.3 33.3 33.3 33.3 6.7 6.7 6.7 Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s; Vehicle Extension i 3.0 14 v/s Ratio Prot c0.51 0.14 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.30 0:02 c0.02 0:02 v/c Ratio 0.02 0.74 0.44 0.20 0.18 0.18 0.12 Uniform Delay, d1 2.3 4.6. 3.2 2.6! 182 18.2,'.' '18.1" Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 lhcremental Delay, 02 0:0 2.3; i 1.1 0.0. 0.4 0.4~ 0:2 Delay (s) 2.3 6.9 4.4 2.7 18.6 18.6 18.3 Level of Service A A ' A A B B` B Approach Delay (s) 6.9 3.0 18.6 18.3 Approach LOS A A B B HCM Average Control Delay 6A HCM Level of Service A s HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65 Actuated Cycle length {s) 48.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8:01 intersection Capacity Utilization 70.0% ICU Level of Service C c Critical Lane Group Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 felsbuengl-ff51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: 38th Ave & Lutheran Pkwy West J:\02200\Synchro\Total LT PM.sy6 conf vol tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC; 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free -0/6 - 99 94 0 94 44 73 94' 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 794 910 126 95 409 19 93 584 Volume Total 11 678 54 549 285 166 231 16 Volume ;Left, " 11, 0 54, 0 p 161= 5 Volume Right 0 48 0 0 11 0 231 5 cSH 794 1700 910 1700, 1700, 124'7 ;"11409' '46 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.40 0.06 0.32 0.17 1.34 0.56 0.34 Queue Length (ft) 1 0 5 0 0 273' 30" Control Delay (s) 9.6 0.0 9.2 0.0 0.0 261.6 24.5 118.5 Lane LOS ° A A F = ' C - : F Approach Delay (s) 0.1 0.6 123.9 118.5 Approach LOS F =F Ayeragebelay 25.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.7% ICU Level of Service B Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 felsbuengl-ff51 Volume (veh/h) 10 598 = 46 - s51 78310 153 - 5. 219 = -5 5 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vehlh) 11 629 48" 54 ' 824` - 11 161 >5 :231 5 5 5 Pedestrians vC, conflicting volume 835 -678 1202 1817 654= 1821 1636" "417 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: 38th Ave & Lutheran Pkwy East J:\02200\Synchro\Total LT PM.sy6 t< ~ 4\ /1P Lane Group Flow (vph) 783 82 121 791 98 381 Turn.Type Perm - Perm Perm Protected Phases 2 6 4 Permittel.Ahases- 2< ' ` 6 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 12.2 12.2 Effective'Green, g (S) 19.0 19.01 19.0 --13.2 • 13.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.33 6.33 Clearance Time`(s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 ' 5.0 5.0 '-5.0 , vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1673 : 748. ; 275 1673 5811 520 j v/s Ratio Prot 0.22 c0.22 0.06 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 ; 6.21 cO.N v/c Ratio 0.47 0.11 0.44 0.47 0.17 0.73 Uniform cDelay,d1 7,2 5.9:, , 7:1 7.2 9.6 11.9 - Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental 0elay;`d2 0.2' , 0.1 1.1 0.2 0.1 . 5.3 Delay (s) 7.4 6.0 8.2 7.4 9.7 17.2 Level ofService ~ Fl A A A A 13 Approach Delay (s) 7.3 7.5 15.7 Approach LOS A A B Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 felsbuengl-ff51 Lane Configurations T? IT Ti TT Ideal Fldw (vphpl) ' 1900 1900-100011'1900:_1190011 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane UtilI. Factor _ 0:95 . 1.00 1.00 '0495' 1.00: 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 40.2 Sum of-lost time (s) 8.0'- Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.9% ICU Level of Service A c - Critical1ane Group' HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 10: 32nd Avenue & Lutheran Pkwy J:\02200\Synchro\Total LT PM.sy6 Median 4.1 l 6.4 6.2 fC, 2 stage (s) , tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0,queue free 96 51 67 cM capacity (veh/h) 1126 292 647 Control Delay (s) 8.3 0.0 0.0 28.4 13.2 Baseline felsbuengl-ff51 Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Volume veh/h), i 47 385- 355: ;'S7 135 200 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 49 405 374 =60 ' 14 211 Pedestrians Lane LOS A D B Approach Delay (s) 0.9 0.0 19.4 Approach LOS C , Volume Total 49 405 434 142 211 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: 38th Ave & Lutheran Pkwy West J:\02200\Synchro\Total LT PM signal.sy6 Lane Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane LIM. Factor 1.00 " 1.00 1`.00 0.95 1.00 " 1.00=.. 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.96 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph)' 11 629 148 =54` 824' 11 161 5 231 = 5 5 5 Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 677 0 54 835 0 0 166 231 0 15 0 Permitted Phases-, ~ A8 2 "Free i 6 " Actuated Green, G (s) 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 10.2 37.2 10.2 Ratio 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.27 1.00 0.27 ne (s) 40 , 4.0 i 4.0, 4`0 4.0' 4.0 sion (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 v/s Ratio Prot c0.37 0.24 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 , 0:11 c0;12 " 0:151 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.04 0.72 0.22 0.46 0.45 0.15 0.03 Uniform Delay; d1 4 5 7.0 5.0 5.8 11-2 0.0 ° 9.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, Q- 0:1" 2.7 ? 0.5, 02 0.9 " ` . 0.2` 0.0 Delay (s) 4.6 9.7 5.5 6.0 12.1 0.2 9.9 Level of Service A " A A A B',,, A A Approach Delay (s) 9.6 6.0 5.2 9.9 Approach LOS, A A A A HCM Average Control Delay I " 7.1 ` HCM Level of Service A:? - HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.63 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 372 Sum of. lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.6% ICU Level of Service A c Critical Lane Group., Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 felsbuengl-ff51 Satd. Flow (perm) 567 1843 481 3532 1345 1583 1617 Lutheran Medical Office Building Traffic Impact Study APPENDIX E SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS P FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG aH> m W J 0 wxa O O ~ O W Q - _ W J Z Q w3 w W J W Z Z J W O (n w z rG J 1 . (L W O N m ~c C N 0-2 W Z ~ N ~f Q J W O O N . 1 O O O O O O O O O O O O co Lo V M N MINOR STREET HIGH VOLUME APPROACH - VPH O O O 0 0 0 0 O O O a O 0 co O 0 N O O O O O O O rn 0 O O O O n O O (O O O N O O v U1 i m N N ~ N o pl C C L_ N E N c A O O N ~ a~ o. 3 E o L O ~ U > L 0 > p, O a s °o m ~ C d N N N U1 `O 30 N E N N N m E.2 O O N O E 3 0 o. L > L 3 0 nL t ~ O L d d O m z N 0 L Q (0 (z ` W (1) 2 x L co co I_ I L r Y IZ cz (z a c) L -c W _I 06 N c m Q L 00 f7 F 3 0 O 2 = Y y. O ~ co U IL co h Y Lo Q CU O N (D 0 d N O E 9 `o 0) x L O W (n J II II 11 ■ • * 0 z w (D w J d m c t ~ m E L N 75 C M N O W O c E y o m N U c > d . ~ U tlJ c N ~ C O N j C L Q t0 L v vM O U O U E N ~ N N > U c o 0 n ~ t N m t m o m m ~ z £ o O °o m' s 0 m 0 1S C7 a r-7 a W0~ wxa .K. 0 0 N O W z a W J w W Z Q J W Z Z J °a Q W ¢ (n W Q ¢ O W ¢ N O >a co W ¢ O Z Q N J W ¢ O O N n 0 h ~N O O O O 0 O O O O 0 O O (O Lo O m N MINOR STREET HIGH VOLUME APPROACH - VPH 0 0 m 0 0 0 0 0 O N O O V 0 0 m O O N O O 0 0 0 O O m 0 O O O r` O O N 0 0 N 0 0 d m ~ 0 c C L N E W N N ~ O o ~ d a 3 EoS ~ O N S > p_ O a o n =0 O t6 w c ~ t0 N O c o m c o ~ E o w E o m N N O E 3 0 aL > t0 ,O a3o > L N O ~ N N O S a« O m z N > O Y 2 LL co W c: 0- .L< 'x o Ez O c0 C 0- J a 0 m ~ c m c N ce) U p 7 3 O p 2 = Y y. N N U d ~ 2 H Y 0 O O O N a) C) d V O C\j a E E ~ F c N m O x t 0 W rn J II 11 IyI 0 Z W O W J N v m' m 0 MEMORANDUM < WALKER 4v PARKING CONSULTANTS DATE: November 25, 2002 TO: AI Davis, Exempla Healthcare FROM: Richard Klatt RE: Lutheran Medical Center - Medical Office Building Submittal CC: Gil Hack, H+L Architecture Brad Forsyth, Exempla Healthcare WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS 505 Davis Road Elgin, IL 60123 Voice: 847.697.2640 Fax: 847.697.7439 www.walkerparking.com We understand that the City of Wheat Ridge is requiring an amendment to Walker Parking Consultants' June 2001 parking study as part of the planned hospital development (PHD) process for approval of the new 54,000 square foot medical office building (MOB). The purpose of this memo is to advise the City that Walker is in the process of updating our June 2001 report. Parking occupancy data was collected on Wednesday, November 20, 2002, and other relevant data was collected throughout all of last week. We will have completed our current parking study effort prior to the next PHD submittal and that updated parking study will be part of the January 14, 2003 submittal to the City. According to plans supplied to us by H+L Architecture, the new MOB facility will include a reconfigured and enlarged surface parking lot containing about 950 parking spaces. Presently, there are 482 MOB parking spaces. The new 950-space parking lot will result in a net increase of 468 parking spaces around the MOB complex, While we are not yet at a point in our study update to be able to confirm parking adequacy for the entire medical campus, based on our previous work, we anticipate this significant increase in parking count will satisfy parking needs for the immediate future, including the construction of the new MOB. vll~ lVim FCF sgrin! C:1 DOCUME-11 ghock 1 LOCALS-1I Temp 1 Memo 112502 AI Davis City PHD Submittal. doc AQr WALKER -14W PARKING CONSULTANTS PARKING SUPPLY / DEMAND ANALYSIS EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO Prepared for: EXEMPLA HEALTHCARE Exempla JUNE 18, 2001 WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS June 18, 2001 Mr. Al Davis Director of Facilities Management Exempla Healthcare 8300 West 38" Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Re: Parking Supply/Demand Study 2001 Walker Project #23-6748.00 Dear Mr. Davis: Walker Parking Consultants 6602 E. 75th Street, Suite 210 Indianapolis, IN 46250 Voice: 317.842.6890 Fax: 317.577.6500 ~.walkerporking.com Walker is pleased to submit the final report of the parking study for Lutheran Medical Center in Wheat Ridge, Colorado. This report includes all previous comments we received from you. Thank you for your assistance with finalizing this report and for the opportunity to serve the hospital. It has been a pleasure working with you and your staff. Sincerely, r Parking Consultants C~/CPS oh . Dorsett Vice President B. Chris Walls Parking Analyst WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO Prepared for: EXEMPLA HEALTHCARE 23-6748.00 JUNE 18, 2001 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................ii INTRODUCTION 1 SCOPE OF SERVICES 2 DEFINITION OF TERMS 3 STUDY METHODOLOGY 4 STUDY AREA 4 PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS Parking Supply 7 Effective Parking Supply 8 Survey Days 9 Parking Demand... 11 Current Conditions 1 1 Future Demand 14 Parking Adequacy 16 Current Conditions 16 Future Conditions 16 Conclusion 18 APPENDIX A Occupancy Count Information 19 WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1: Parking Supply Page 7 Table 2: Effecrve Parking Supply Page 8 Table 3: Occupancy Counts Page 10 Table 4: Survey Day Demand Page 13 Table 5: Design Day Demand Page 14 Table 6: Future Parking Demand Page 15 Table 7: Parking Demand Comparison Page 15 Table 8: Year 2001 Adequacy Page 16 Table 9: Year 2006 Adequacy Page 17 Photograph 1: Lutheran Medical Center Page 7 Photograph 2: Employee Lots A & B Page 8 Photograph 3: Physician Parking Page 9 Photograph 4: MOB Parking Page 10 Photograph 5: Employee Lot D Page 1 I Map 1: Medical Center Map Page 5 Graph 1: Distribution of Parking Page 7 Graph 2: Monthly Activity Page I 1 Graph 3: Survey Day vs. Design Day Page 12 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 Walker Parking Consultants was engaged by Exempla Healthcare to perform a parking study update at Lutheran Medical Center. A similar study was conducted by Walker in 1999. The hospital asked Walker to provide current and projected parking demands based on planned construction projects. These projects include a multi-level heart center, the addition of 35-50 beds, the creation of green space (that will replace the main lot), and the demolition and rebuilding of the older portion of the hospital. The current parking supply at the hospital is 2,144 spaces. However, when the supply is adjusted to reflect a cushion necessary for efficient operation, the effective supply is reduced to 1,970 spaces. Parking demand was determined by creating parking models and observing levels of parking on an average busy day. Four separate inventory counts were performed on Tuesday, March 27'", 2001. Walker's counts revealed that peak demand occurred at 10:30 a.m. when occupancy reached 1,720 vehicles. When reviewing current parking supply and demand in aggregate terms for this campus, it appears that the current supply is adequate to meet the current demand, however, these numbers are misleading. Certain patron groups are currently experiencing difficulty in finding a space at peak times. Over the course of the next 4-5 years the demand will continue to increase, while the supply will decrease. Consequently the medical center will be faced with a large parking deficit if it does not increase its parking supply. Similar to the current-year adequacy, the projected deficit of 404 spaces by 2006 doesn't realistically reflect the future need for spaces, especially for associates, visitors and patients. The campus totals show a surplus in MOB spaces, however these spaces are not convenient for patrons of the main hospital buildings and therefore, it is important to look at parking in two separate areas; the main hospital and the MOB's. The main hospital is projected to have a 634 space deficit, while the MOB is projected to have a 230 space surplus. The projected 634 space deficit in supply at the main hospital must be abated with additional supply. Once the main lot is removed and replaced with green space, the parking demand will overwhelm the supply. In consideration of the future parking issues facing Lutheran, Walker recommends that a minimum of 635 new spaces be created on the main campus to serve the medical center and its patrons. Immediate WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS attention is needed to provide additional parking in the main lot (60- 80 spaces for patients and visitors. EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 Lutheran Medical Center is located in Wheat Ridge, Colorado, a suburb 20 minutes northwest of downtown Denver. Walker Parking Consultants performed a supply and demand study for the hospital in 1999. Since that study, a number of variables have changed including increased staffing and patient volumes. The Medical Center is planning multiple changes that will further elevate parking demand. These plans include a new heart center consisting of several additional floors. Futhermore, visitor parking will be affected by the demolition of the older portion of the hospital that will be re-built. This study shall focus on the current and 5-year projected state of parking at the Wheat Ridge-based campus. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS INTRODUCTION EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 Walker Parking Consultants was retained by Exempla Healthcare to provide parking consulting services. The purpose of this study was to determine the present and future parking needs of the campus. The following was our scope of services for this engagement: Met with hospital representatives once and confirmed study objectives, boundaries, procedures, and project schedule. Reviewed the 1999 Walker report and any other existing reports/studies pertinent to parking or traffic at Exempla Lutheran Medical Center. Reviewed the hospital's master plan for its impact on parking supply and demand. 4. Reviewed the hospital's inventory of existing parking spaces to determine number, user assignment (employee/physician/ visitorj, time restrictions, fees, etc. 5. Collected and reviewed historical data supplied by the hospital via a background information survey form supplied by Walker. 6. Conducted occupancy counts at selected times on a typically busy day for all spaces in the study area. This determined the pattern of parking utilization, and helped to identify/document unusual patterns. We required level of activity information from the hospital on the day the survey was completed. Required was the number of outpatients, inpatients, ER patients, and MOB patients, along with the number of physicians and employees in the hospital and MOB. 7. Determined the present parking supply and demand. This was based on data gathered from the hospital and parking demand ratios developed from Walker's database of other medical facilities. Compared 2001 parking demand ratios with those developed in 1999. Summarized our findings and conclusions about current parking adequacy in this draft report and we will discuss with appropriate hospital staff. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS SCOPE OF SERVICES 9. Incorporate one consolidated set of comments from staff into a final report. EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS JUNE 18, 2001 Several terms may be used in this report that require clarification. DEFINITION OF TERMS These terms are defined as follows: 1 . Survey Day - The day occupancy counts were taken on the subject property. This day should represent a typical busy day. 2. Design Day - The day that represents the level of parking demand the parking system is designed to accommodate. This level of activity is a reasonably high percentile of absolute peak activity. 3. Effective Supply - The total supply of parking spaces is adjusted to reflect the cushion needed to provide for vehicles moving in and out of spaces, spaces unavailable due to maintenance, and to reduce the time necessary for parking patrons to find the last few available spaces. The adjustment varies as to the amount and type of parking, but typically the effective supply is 85% to 95% of the total number of spaces. 4. Parking Demand - The number of spaces required by various user groups and visitors to the subject property. 5. Demand Ratio - The ratio of the number of vehicles observed to occupy parking spaces compared to a reference number. For example, if there are 1,000 full-time equivalent (FTEj associates and an observed peak occupancy of 400 vehicles in the employee lot, the demand ratio is 0.40 1400/1000) for FTE's. L Optimum Utilization Factor - The factor applied to the calculated demand for parking to allow it to operate at maximum efficiency. The factor allows for a 5% to 15% "cushion" for vehicles moving in and pulling out of parking stalls and reduces the time necessary for patrons to find a space when few are available. 3 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 Walker Parking Consultants acquired annual bed census figures from Exempla Healthcare and conducted extensive occupancy counts on the survey day, Tuesday, March 27, 2001. This information was used to determine the parking patterns and utilization and generate demand ratios. The current parking supply/demand is determined before future projections are established. Lutheran Medical Center is located in Wheat Ridge, Colorado, a suburb of Denver. The study area is bound by 38" Avenue to the north, residential development to the east, 32nd Avenue to the south and Foothills Medical Center to the west. Maps of the campus, parking locations, and the area considered in this study are contained on the following pages. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS STUDY METHODOLOGY STUDY AREA 4 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER WALKER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS PARKING CONSULTANTS Iqlmw JUNE 18, 2001 AGO 1: Lutheran Medical Center Map Exempla Lutheran Medical Center Map t'dIAIR3 ♦rJ Employee Par mg D drdr:n axomr ~ ~ tlld Psting o c A4ammagraphp d kite Mediedl 011ice rdrL~ing C Exempla H EA ETH CARE Exempla Lutheran Medical Center 8300 W. 38th Ave. Wheat Ridgc CO 80033 Awwcrline: (303) 423-2929 38th Avenue stop light Towadn~xrih Ulvlf3 I- rhY!i[Idn rdr~'Inn -lid Tlx Blm R Hou a Drive i s Ted Room community ~ ~ Develanmeni ~ r T Emplnyeg Parld tg 440torcycle 03A .8inile Parking >iI I ESL: a Outpatient rarkng mpl yeeParkiwry B PhysiammdNOD Emplol" Wing Ftedical Oiiice Packing empla 4Y'tst PinvU N r~ 5 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY AND DEMAND STUDY WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS Now FIGURE 1: Study Area LEGEND: Study Area Boundary a ~ I NORTH 6 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 Walker inventoried the study area parking supply at Lutheran to determine the number of spaces, the user assignments (e.g. employee, physician, and patient) and identified restrictions pertaining to campus parking. This inventory includes all spaces used by visitors, staff, physician, patients, and the general public. The complete parking supply is shown in the following table. Table 1: Pa Type of Number of Parking Name of Location User Groups Spaces Surface Main Lot Patients, Visitors 398 Surface Lot A Employees 198 Surface Lot B Employees 451 Surface Lot C Employees 72 Surface Lot D Employees 211 Surface ER Lot Patients, Visitors 76 Surface Radiation/Oncology Lot Patients 26 Surface MOB Parking Lot Patients, Visitors 517 Surface MOB Physician Lot Physicians 95 Surface Hospital Physician Lot Physicians 100 Total 2,144 Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2001 The current parking supply at Lutheran is 2,144 spaces. This parking is available entirely in the form of surface parking. Graph 1 : Distribution of Parking Supply Distribution of Parking Supply 932 1,017 I IN Employee Parking p Patient Parking ❑ Physician Parking WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS PARKING SUPPLY Photograph I:Lutheran Medical Center 7 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 EFFECTIVE PARKING SUPPLY Once the inventory counts were performed, Walker applied an optimum utilization factor to the results. This factor represents the level that a parking area operates at peak efficiency. Often a facility will be perceived as full by potential patrons, even when there are still a small number of spaces available. Patrons may experience frustration and delays as they have to search for the last few vacant spaces or may avoid parking altogether. The optimum utilization factor engineers a "cushion" against this perception, assuring both the perception and reality of adequate parking. The factor is also applied as a "cushion" for spaces lost to poor or improper parking, snow removal, repair, derelict vehicles, and the like. Optimum utilization factors are adjusted by the type of patron and type of facility. Associates who tend to park in the same place every day necessitate a 95% factor. If the employee parks in a smaller, reserved parking area (e.g. physicians) the factor would be 100%. Patients and hospital visitors who are unfamiliar with the area will require a factor of 90%. This factor is applied to both large surface lots found on the hospital campus because of the relative difficulty of finding an open space during peak times. When the optimum utilization factor is applied to the total parking spaces in the study area, the effective supply is rendered. The effective parking supply for the Lutheran campus is 1,970. The following table displays the calculations used to determine the effective supply. Table 2: Effective Parkina Suoolv Number of Utilization Effective Name of Location Spaces Factor Supply Main Lot 398 90% 358 Lot A 198 95% 188 Lot B 451 90% 406 Lot C 72 100% 72 Lot D 211 95% 200 ER Lot 76 90% 68 Radiation/Oncology Lot 26 100% 26 MOB Parking Lot 517 90% 465 MOB Physician Lot 95 95% 90 Hospital Physician Lot 100 95% 95 2,144 1,970 Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2001 JLS*[ WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS Photograph 2: Employee Lots A & B 8 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 SURVEY DAYS Demand is determined from occupancy counts conducted at typical busy times. Based on conversations with officials at Lutheran Medical Center, it was determined that Tuesday is typically the busiest day of the week. VValker counted the number of parked cars throughout the study area at four different intervals of time. The occupancy count was conducted on Tuesday, March 27, 2001. The results' of the occupancy counts are summarized and expressed in the following table and graph. Photograph 3: Physician and Visitor Parking ' Complete breakdowns of the occupancy counts are contained in the attached Appendix A. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS 9 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 Table 3: Parking Occupancy Count Summary (March 27", 2001) Number Occupied Spaces at: Location of Spaces 8:30 AM 1030 AM 12:30 PM 2:30 PM Main Lot 398 243 351 340 375 Lot A 198 83 108 114 126 Lot8 451 383 394 384 357 Lot C 72 72 72 72 67 Lot D 21 1 198 210 207 205 ER Lot 76 49 53 65 58 Radiation/Oncology Lot 26 23 20 16 24 MOB Parking Lot 517 310 372 267 298 MOB Physician Lot 95 67 76 65 76 Hospital Physician Lot 100 71 64 85 61 2,144 1,499 1,720 1,615 1,647 1 1 U 1 0 1 d O E 1 D Z 1 1 Peak occupancy occurred at 10:30 a.m. revealing a car count of 1,720 vehicles. This level of occupancy represented 89% of the effective parking supply and 80% of the total supply. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS Photograph 4: MOB Parking 10 8:30 AM 10:30 AM 12:30 PM 2:30 PM EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 CURRENT CONDITIONS As seen in the following graph, the monthly activity levels at the hospital fluctuated significantly throughout the year', with May being the busiest month. The average activity of these months is 22,348 patient days. This activity includes: outpatient plus observation patients, ER registrations, and inpatient bed census. Graph 2: Lutheran Medical Center Activity by Month (Year 2000) 2 2 Q 2 a 2 0 2 0 2 N 21 20,0001 sc pA oe ~5` es ev ev es ocJ po Cho Pe ~J , P°o ego o\o orb ego Mme O 1 a~ Qeo The level of activity on the survey day at the hospital campus was evaluated in comparison to peak levels of activity for inpatients, outpatients, and emergency room treatments. Walker recommends that hospitals should design their parking supply based on the 85" percentile level of patient activity. This level is equivalent to a very busy day that may occur once or twice a month. Designing parking to meet the absolute peak level of parking would leave many unused spaces during the majority of the year. Conversely, designing for the average level would mean inadequate parking during half the year. Design day demand statistics are based on the 85" percentile level of activity. The following graphs compare the level of activity during our survey day to the level of activity during the design day (85" percentile). The data used in the development of these graphs was provided by hospital administration. ,:ii lq WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS PARKING DEMAND Photograph 5: Employee Lot D ' Data reflects 2000 hospital activity levels. EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 Graph 3: Survey Day vs. Design Day Activity 600 500 r 400 Q 0 300 E 200 a 100 0 • 00 m v (V N N Outpatients ER Patients Inpatient Census N a C 2 N C2 ? 5; U Q Survey Day Design Day These graphs illustrate that during our survey day, levels of activity closely mirrored the level of activity projected for the design day. The outpatient and inpatient numbers were actually higher during the survey day. The comparison of the activity levels helps us to determine whether the conditions during observation are adequate upon which to base parking demand. To more precisely determine the number of spaces needed for each type of parking patron, the parking occupancy numbers are compared to group population statistics provided by the medical center'. From this comparison, a demand ratio is determined for each group, which is then used to project the number of parking spaces needed for each type of patron. The day Walker conducted the original parking The statistics used in the study were provided by Exempla Healthcare WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS 12 ■Survey Day ❑ Design Day EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 occupancy counts (March 27'", 2001) is referred to as the survey day. The following table displays the parking demand at Lutheran on the survey day. Table 4: Survey Day Demand Design Parking Parking Patron Statistic Demand Ratios Demand Physicians 719 0.20 spaces/physician 144 Associates 1,646 0.40 spaces/associate 658 Volunteers 122 0.20 spaces/volunteer 24 Inpatients/Visitors 238 0.55 spaces/occupied bed 131 Outpatients 505 0.55 spaces/daily outpatients 278 ER Patients 182 0.35 spaces/ER visit 64 MOB Physicians 120 0.80 spaces/physician 96 MOB Staff 396 0.40 spaces/associate 158 MOB Patients 120 1.35 spaces/physician 162 Total 1,715 Design statistics provided by: Exempla Healthcare These demand ratios are typical for hospitals and MOB's. However, in some cases, the theoretical demand ratios may slightly differ from actual observed conditions on the survey day. While the majority of the parking supply at Lutheran Medical Center is designated for specific user groups, many of the areas of parking are abused (e.g. employees parking in areas intended for patient/visitor use). Consequently, it not possible to determine site-specific ratios for every group based on the occupancy counts. However, these ratios are typical for hospitals and reflect the overall picture of parking demand on the hospital campus. Physician and associate numbers will fluctuate little from day to day during the week in most hospitals, regardless of the level of patient activity. Parking areas that are affected by different levels of activity are the patient and visitor parking areas. Data from the year 2000 was evaluated to determine the 85" percentile level of activity of bed census. This data (see Graph 3) was used to reflect the average conditions within the busiest month and create the Design Day parking demand. The following table shows this information. Lutheran patient activity levels on our survey day are very similar to the data developed for the design day. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS 13 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 Table 5: Design Day Parking Demand Design Parking Parking Patron Statistic Demand Ratios Demand Physicians 719 0.20 spaces/physician 144 Associates 1,646 0.40 spaces/associate 658 Volunteers 122 0.20 spaces/volunteer 24 Inpatients/Visitors 224 0.55 spaces/occupied bed 123 Outpatients 484 0.55 spaces/daily outpatients 266 ER Patients 241 0.35 spaces/ER visit 84 MOB Physicians 120 0.80 spaces/physician 96 MOB Staff 396 0.40 spaces/associate 158 MOB Patients 120 1.35 spaces/physician 162 Total 1,717 Design statistics provided by: &emplo Healthcare A comparison between the design day and the survey day shows that the occupancy levels witnessed during our survey day very closely mirror the demand expected on the design day. A difference of only two spaces exists between the two days. This difference concludes that the activity observed (during the survey day) is adequate upon which to base current parking demand. FUTURE DEMAND Future demand is determined in much the same manner as current demand. Walker analyzed the planned changes and incorporated them into the parking demand model. All future changes as described by hospital administration and the Master Plan (October 1999) have been accounted for. The major changes considered in the future projections include the following: • Adding 35-50 beds over the next three to five years. • Planning a new, multi-level heart center in the south wing. • Replacing the main visitor/patient lot with an area consisting largely of "green space". The removal of this lot will reduce the future parking supply by 398 spaces. • Demolishing and re-building the older portion of the hospital on the northern side of the medical center. • 3% annual increase in employees . The future demand model is displayed in the following table. Actual employee projections were not provided by hospital administration and therefore, 3% annual increases were assumed. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS 14 I-. EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 Table 6: Future Parking Demand (Year 2006) Design Parking Parking Patron Statistic Demand Ratios Demand Physicians 834 0.20 spaces/physician 167 Associates 1,908 0.40 spaces/associate 763 Volunteers 1 22 0.20 spaces/volunteer 24 Inpatients/Visitors 275 0.55 spaces/occupied bed 151 Outpatients 531 0.55 spaces/daily outpatients 292 ER Patients 191 0.35 spaces/ER visit 67 MOB Physicians 143 0.80 spaces/physician 115 MOB Staff 473 0.40 spaces/physician 189 MOB Patients 143 1.35 spaces/physician 193 Total 1,961 The future (year 2006) demand for Lutheran Medical Center is projected to be 1,961 spaces. This represents an increase over the current demand of 246 spaces. The following table compares the parking demand by category between current (survey day) and future levels. Table 7: Parking Demand Comparison Increase/ Category Current Year Year 2006 Decrease Physicians 144 167 23 Associates 658 763 105 l Volunteers 24 24 O Inpatients/Visitors 131 151 20 Outpatients 278 292 14 ER Patients 64 67 3 MOB Physicians 96 1 15 19 MOB Staff 158 189 31 MOB Patients 162 193 31 Totals 1,715 1,961 246 The category that experiences the greatest increase in demand is associates. The demand for this patron group will increase by 105 spaces over the current demand. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS 15 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 CURRENT CONDITIONS Parking adequacy is the ability of the parking supply to handle the parking demand. The following table represents the parking adequacy of the hospital in the year 2001. This calculation was made by subtracting the estimated current parking demand from the current parking supply. The current parking adequacy of the hospital campus is a surplus of 263 spaces. Table 8: Year 2001 Parking Adequacy Parking Supply Spaces Current Current Patron Demand Factor Needed Supply Adequac Associates 658 900% 732 780 48 Volunteers 24 95% 26 30 4 Inpotients/Visitors 131 90% 145 178 33 Outpatients 278 90% 309 216 -93 ER Patients 64 900% 71 76 5 Hospital Subtotals ,299 1,433 1,380 -53 NtOB Physicians 96 95% 101 95 16 NOB Staff 158 95% 167 152 -15 MOB Patients 162 90% 180 517 337 AAOB Subtotals 416 448 764 316 Totals 1,715 1,881 2,144 263 Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2001 Although an overall surplus exists, it is important to individually analyze each user group. Several areas are experiencing a deficit including staff physicians, outpatients, MOB physicians, and MOB staff. Associates overall show a surplus, however individual lots like C and D routinely are 95-100% occupied, so patrons of those lots may perceive there is inadequate parking. The outpatient adequacy number is significant because it is indicative of the problem occurring on the main patient/visitor lot. This lot routinely fills to capacity and experienced a peak occupancy of 375 vehicles during our survey day. This number, when compared to the effective supply, represents the lot being 1 10% full. Additional parking needs to be created for this patron group. s Hospital administration feels that the physician parking supply is adequate. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS PARKING ADEQUACY 16 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 FUTURE CONDITIONS Hospital administration is anticipating ongoing changes in the future. Each of these changes will have an impact on the parking environment at the Medical Center campus. The new heart center, projected construction projects, and the increasing number of beds will create new demand for quality, close parking. In addition, the projected loss of the main patient/visitor lot (398 spaces) significantly impacts the need for new patient and visitor spaces. These future changes and how the parking will be impacted are summarized in the following table. Table 9: Year 2006 Parking Adequacy Parking Supply Spaces Future Future Patron Demand Factor Needed Supply Adequar 4~ „co. "1 Associates 763 900/ 848 780 68 Volunteers 24 95% 26 0 -26 Inpatients/Visitors 151 90% 168 0 -168 Outpatients 292 90% 324 26 -298 ER Patients 67 900/ 74 76 2 Hospital Subtotals 1,465 1,616 982 634 MOB Physicians 115 95% 121 95 -26 MOB Staff 189 95% 199 152 -47 MOB Patients 193 900/ 215 517 303 NOB Subtotals 497 534 764 230 Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2001 According to the above table, the campus as a whole will have a deficit of 404 parking spaces in the year 2006. However, as these numbers are analyzed it becomes clear that parking in certain areas is more inadequate than depicted by Table 9. The subtotals portray a more realistic picture of parking conditions on the campus. Many times the numbers portrayed in tables do not accurately depict the real parking issues facing different facilities. This is especially true at Lutheran Medical Center where the majority of vacancies exist on the MOB parking lot. While the MOB is projected to have a surplus of 230 spaces in 2006, the main hospital is projected to have a deficit in parking of 634 spaces. The MOB lot unfortunately does not provide close parking for individuals that are going to the main hospital. Therefore, the surplus that exists on the MOB lot cannot be considered a remedy to the parking deficit experienced on the main campus. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS 17 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 Lutheran Medical Center administration understands that parking is and will continue to be a concern throughout the campus. This supply and demand study has outlined the issues facing the current and future levels of demand. Walker has identified that although parking is currently adequate on a campus-wide basis, several patron groups are struggling to find an open space on a more localized basis. As the hospital continues its plan for growth in the future, additional parking demand must be met with additional supply. Walker has shown that Lutheran has a current deficit among certain user groups on the main campus and this deficit will increase in the future. In order to provide adequate parking for current demands, the medical center should immediately add 60-80 more visitor/patients spaces. In anticipation of future growth and development, coupled with the loss of the main lot, the medical center should consider adding within the next few years, a total of 635 parking spaces on the main campus, distributed among several user groups. While a decision about structured parking was not part of the scope of this study, it is apparent that this may soon become the most viable option for adding necessary parking supply. 44 WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS CONCLUSION 18 Cam. APPENDIX A EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 OCCUPANCY COUNT INFORMATION The occupancy count information contained in the body of the report represented the summary of the survey day. The following information is a detailed breakdown of the occupancy observed during the survey day at four separate intervals of time. Table l: Tuesday, March 27", 2001 (8:30 a.m.) Type of Total Occupancy Percent Parking Name of Location Capacity 830 a.m. Occupied Su ace Lot Main Lot 398 243 61% Surface Lot Lot A 198 83 42% Surface Lot Lot B 451 383 85% Surface Lot Lot C 72 72 100% Surface Lot Lot D 211 198 94% Surface Lot ER Lot 76 49 64% Surface Lot Radiation/Oncology Lot 26 23 88% Surface Lot MOB Parking Lot 517 310 60% Surface Lot MOB Physician Lot 95 67 71% Surface Lot Hospital Physician Lot 100 71 71% Totals 2,144 1,499 70% Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2001 Table 2: Tuesday, March 27", 2001 (10:30 a.m.) Occupancy Type of Total 10:30 Percent Parking Name of Location Capacity a.m. Occupied Su ace Lot Main Lot 398 351 88% Surface Lot Lot A 198 108 55% Surface Lot Lot B 451 394 870/ Surface Lot Lot C 72 72 100% Surface Lot Lot D 211 210 100% Surface Lot ER Lot 76 53 7001. Surface Lot Radiation/Oncology Lot 26 20 7701 Surface Lot MOB Parking Lot 517 372 72% Surface Lot MOB Physician Lot 95 76 800/ Surface Lot Hospital Physician Lot 100 64 64% Source: Walker Parking Consultants, WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS 19 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 Table 3: Tuesday, March 27", 2001 (12:30 p. m.) Occupancy Type of Total 12:30 Percent Parking Name of Location Ca aci n- ' d Su ace Lot Main Lot p y 398 p.m. 340 cupta 85% Surface Lot LotA 198 114 58% Surface Lot Lot B 451 384 85% Surface Lot Lot C 72 72 100% Surface Lot Lot D 211 207 98% Surface Lot ER Lot 76 65 86% Surface Lot Radiation/Oncology Lot 26 16 62% Surface Lot MOB Parking Lot 517 267 52% Surface Lot MOB Physician Lot 95 65 68% Surface Lot Hospital Physician Lot 100 85 85% Totals 2,144 1,615 l 75% Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2001 Table 4: Tuesday, March 27th , 2001 (2:30 p.m.) Type of Total Occupancy Percent Parking Name of Location Capacity 2:30 p.m. Occupie Surface Lot Main Lot 398 375 94% Surface Lot Lot A 198 126 64% Surface Lot Lot B 451 357 79% Surface Lot Lot C 72 67 93% Surface Lot Lot D 211 205 970% Surface Lot ER Lot 76 58 7601. Surface Lot Radiation/Oncology Lot 26 24 92% Surface Lot MOB Parking Lot 517 298 58% Surface Lot MOB Physician Lot 95 76 800/ Surface Lot Hospital Physician Lot 100 61 61% Totals 2,144 1,647 7701 Source: Wolker Parking Consultants, 2001 WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS 20 OE WHEgT LAi.. USE CASE PROCESSING ..PPLICATION OF WHEgr Pc Planning and Development Department = rc 7500 West 29" Avenue, Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Phone (303) 235-2846 OOl ORP00 ~0(ORPO~ (Please print or type all information) Applicant ACAK'teJusc~ Address 1b21 lF~l} S~rcc~ 4, llo Phone 303 Zd~~-Q3~~~ city ~JJtec State CCU Zip FSO2U2 Fax3o3--1, ? Owner ~ yew t to c \~~ncar P Address q 3oo 3P411 A~e>JCr~ Phone City le1\.oo_a 2;c~cA f State c, Zip ECZ33 Fax Contact Address(&Zk lqei S~t~ea ~;~e tl0 Phone30-?W 4~~Id City State Co Zip Sso2ot Fax303-Z`LZ- (,d37 (The person listed as contact will be contacted to answer questions regarding this application, provide additional information when necessary, post public hearing signs, and will receive a copy of the staff report prior to Public Hearing.) Location of request (address): Type of action requested (check one or more of the actions listed below which pertain to your request.) Application su6mitiat requirements on reverse side ❑ Change of zone or zone conditions ❑ Special Use Permit ❑ Consolidation Plat ❑ Subdivision: Minor (5 lots or less) ❑ Flood Plain Special Exception ❑ Subdivision: Major (More than 5 lots) ❑ Interpretation of Code ❑ Preliminary ❑ Final ❑ Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Right of Way Vacation ❑ Planned Building Group ❑ Temporary Use, Building, Sign Site Development Plan approval ❑ Variance/Waiver (from Section ) ❑ Zoning Ordinance Amendment ❑ Other: Detailed description ofrequest: " o~- l\U e_t_AC ~c-v 4 QoS,A. 't~Qov fr'te u L s a Required information: Assessors Parcel Number: Size of Lot (acres or square footage): qd,~ 1~cePS Current Zoning: ice- t l7 Proposed Zoning: - CurrentUse: {~S~li~s~ ~~rnfJUS Proposed Use: I certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that in filing this application, I am acting with the knowledge and consent of those persons listed above, without whose consent the requested action cannot lawfully be accomplished. Applicants other than owners must submit power-of-attorney from the owner which approved of this action on his behalf. Signature of W H• .t~~••~i y'..O scribed and sworn tome this X, day of o C , 206.,)-Z_ 4~ o< I- J Not lic N9p VBl My commission expires ay --O3 Date received 109 Fee $ 0.00 Receipt No. Case No. Comp Plan Desig. Zoning lV( 0 Quarter Section Map tcf 'Z 0 v~ Ea Related Case No. Pre-App Mtg. Date /7 6)~- Case Manager e Case No.: 021 Quarter Section Map N o.' N26 App: Last Name: H+L Architecture Related Cases: j App: First N ame: c/o Gilbert Hack Case Histor y: Final Development Plan mendment... Owne r: Last Name: Exempla Healthcare Owner: First Nam e: F App Addre ss: 1621 18th St., Suite 110 Review Body: PC City, State Z ip: Denver, CO 80202 App: Pho ne: 303-244-9344 APN: 39-- Owner Address: 8300 W. 38th Ave. 2nd Revie w Body: cc City/St ate/Zip: heat Ridge, CO 80033 2nd Review Date : r Owner Phone: Decision-making Body CC Project Address: 8300 _ Appro vai/Denial Dater Street Name West 38th Avenue City/State, Zip: heat Ridge, CO 80033 ResolOrdinance No.: Cok ons of Approval: Case Disposition: District: III Project Planner: Reckert File Lo cation: ctive Date Rec eived: F11/26I2002 Notes:- Pre-App Date: 10117/2002 Follow- Up: CITY OF UHEAT RIDGE 11127/02 9.56 AM cdb H+L ARCHITECTURE RECEIPT 140-014189 AMOUNT FMSD ZONING APPLICATION F 2400.00 ZONE FMSD Z014ING REIMBURSEMENT 300.00 ZREIM PAYMENT RECEIVED AMOUNT CK 41561 2,300.00 TOTAL 2,300.00 Exempla AIDiDavis rector, Facilities Management x¢ n L r x c a a e Pager 303-514-9227 E-mail daVisa@exemp[a.org EXEMPLA LUTHERAN EXEMPLA SAINT JOSEPH MEDICAL CENTER HOSPITAL 8300 West 38th Avenue 1835 Franklin Street Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 Denver, Colorado 80218 303-425-2104 Fax 303-467-8854 303-837-7687 Fax 303-866-8111 H+L ARCHITECTURE FRED BUENNING, AIA ASSOCIATE PRINCIPAL DIRECT: 303.244.9343 1621 181H STREET, SUITE 110 DENVER, COLORADO 50202 MAIN. 303.295.1792 EMAIL: ibucnniny~hlarch.com FACSIMILE: 303.292.6437 WEB: www.hlarch.com H+L ARCHITECTURE GILBERT A. HACK ,..I I - --V 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 3031235-2846 Fax: 303/235-2857 The City of Wheat Ridge PRE-APPLICATION MEETING SUMMARY Date: October 17, 2002 Attending Applicant(s): Al Davis, Fred Buening, Gil Hack, Address/Phone: and John Greene Attending Owner: Address/Phone: Attending Staff: Meredith Reckert, Mike Garcia, Steve Nguyen, Travis Crane, Michael Pesicka, Dave Brossman & Walt Petit (Wheat Ridge Water Distict) Address or Specific Site Location: 8300 W. 38`h Avenue Existing Zoning: PHD (Planned Hospital Development) Existing Comp. Plan PB (Public/Semi-Public) Applicant/Owner Preliminary Proposal: Expand central power plant for existing and future expansion. Cooling towers will be replaced with newer ceramic towers. New 3-story medical office building (MOB) with approximately 80,000 square feet of floor area is being proposed. Parking lot will be revised to the south of the new MOB. Current heli-stop will be relocated to the west side of the Lutheran Parkway. New cooling towers will generate less noise and will be fully screened. Would like to submit by late November or early December. Minimal flights into heli-pad are expected. Will a neighborhood meeting need to be held prior to application submittal? YES Planning comments: Proposal will require a public hearing process. Hearings before Planning Commission and City Council. Provide noise-level date for cooling towers with submittal. Submittal shall include a detailed site plan, photometric plan, landscaping plan, and architectural drawings. No plat will be required at this time. Site would need to be re-platted if the building and land is ever divided and sold off. Looking at a 4-6 month process. A more complete submittal may expedite the process. A 30- day referral period is required after the submittal and then comments will be returned to applicant. Staff must approve submittal before hearings are scheduled. Holidays will add to the length of time. Public Works comments: Will need an updated traffic study and parking study with submittal. Please provide an amended master drainage plan with submittal. A complete civil set, grading and erosion control plan is required. Also provide a letter of approval from Rocky Mountain Ditch in drainage package. Building comments: Streetscape/Architectural Design comments: Other comments: FAA requirements for 2 flight approaches will need approval. Wheat Ridge Water District: Provide comparison between old and new cooling towers for water efficiency. Install subsurface/drip irrigation system for new landscaping. No capacity problems in providing water for the new development. Phone Numbers: Meredith Reckert/Senior Planner 303-235-2848 Travis Crane/Planner 303-235-2849 Michael Pesicka/Planner 303-235-2845 Mike Garcia/Development Review Engineer 303-235-2868 Steve Nguyen/Traffic Engineer 303-235-2862 Dave Brossman/City Surveyor 303-235-2864 Walt Petit/Wheat Ridge Water District 303-424-2844 Dave Roberts/Fire Marshal 303-403-5902 n _z r D Z s emo ~X' m D m_ i r 9 O M o r r m >0 3 rm z = z m> v Z-g m m ~m m D 3 rZ n = m o z O m O M #i= s: CASE NO. SHEET I6F2 I 7si S ° Se€j';€ o a In - III € Eel aLs "s- UM L f n ! r ~88 95~' fF E A L ~YtA z `e S$7 ~ IN I 1 11 W ll i 1 1 i flirt 111p S I' s - p ll' 4 €A 88 ki IF LEi t [ l s O - LYt : ~ E ^Y65 e f y PP ' 8{ ~x; xx ~ ~ r E ~ ~ s ~ p ~ g ~ ~ p Ti t T L 8 I I t g I I € ~ b4 i x ~ t IL ~ # a Lt as IF #E~i AA :L t'L E!i'!E lit IN 55[ Ff E~p~p e8T EiP RA s OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN "ADMINISTRATIVE AMENDMENT" CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COLORADO w+nixougiar ~u CASE NO. SHEET 2 OF 2 REVISED 060192, 060692 02-26-92.0426-0;062102. EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER WF~REAS, Exempla Lutheran Medical Center has bmiite Amendment for the City of Wheat Ridge's approval pursti~~nnt to V Section 26-311, for the land legally described a bmi~ted a Iaevelopr~:ent Flan ,~~e~r,+ 4'n t~T~rsa~t T~ ~~rin (''~,~c► of T otY~c• w ~ DESCRIPTION E~ BUILDING ADDRESS PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION START DATE :January, 2003 POWER PLANT ADDITION Exempla PROPERTY SITUATED IN THE NORTHWEST QUARTER O SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF OVERALL SITE DATA: WI~AT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF CO AS FOLLOWS: WEST 38TH AVE. Lutheran Medical Center 8300 W. 38th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado N Xlshng Sq• Ft• Acres Percentage COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID Roadway/Parking lots 1,29$,198 29.E ~2% LINE OF SAID SECTION A DISTANCE OF 986.19 FEET; T Bikepaths/ Misc. paved S j,QQQ ] ,2 j % POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINIUING S00°09'53 Building footprints 345,981 7.9 8% Po~T sEnvGOTHE sou~xwE Ts CORNER OF T~ cA~r.N Remainder unpaved 2,4Q9,~$$ 55.3 $9% 15, PAGE 61); THENCE ALONG SAID LINE N89°41'22'E A Total Campus ~ 4,103,6 7 94.2 1 DISTANCE OF 878,64 FEET TO A POINT ON A LINE 447.40 D ~ - ~ ~ .RER. t)F SECTIC~~ 26, A1`~lJ ~iJRT~AST QUARTE~t. t~F O ° PROTECT AREA . s~ . ~ _ _ ~ 1 ti - X1,7 7 ~ ~ ~ - . ~ LUTHE AN ~ rt ° TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE - MEDIC 1 = FIRST FLOOR SQUARE :FOOTAGE NEW- CENTE Q Q 57 = o 0 0 NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 26, (SAID LINE AL THREE SUBDIVISIONS: LUCOCK SUBDIVISIC?N AS REC Proposed Sq. Ft Acres Percentage NO.2 AS RECORDED AT BOOK 26, PAGE 40 AND 'THE BE t. Q i~ ; - Q i ~ m 1 r, - PAGE 48); THENCE ALONG SAID LINE S89°44'54"W A DIS Roadway/Parking lots 1,298,19$ ~9.$ 32% OF SAID BEBBER SUI3DNISION; THENCE S00°04'03"E AL Bikepaths/ Misc. paved ~ 1,~~~ 1.2 1 ~~o AND PARALLEL WITH "THE WEST LINE OF NORTHWEST ; WEST 3?ND AVE. t Building footprints 34$,981 "],9 417.40 FEET TO TIC SOUTEIWEST CORNER OF SAID BEB NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY OF WEST 32ND AVENUE; Tf~N Remainder unpaved 2,409,~gg $$.3 $9% DISTANCE OF 208.70 FEET; T'E~NCE N00°04'03"W PARAL Total Campus 4,103,607 94.2 1~~% FEET; THENCE S89°44'54"W A DISTANCE OF 208.70 FEET QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 26; THENCE S00°04'03`E AL NORTH RIGHT-0F-WAY OF WEST 32ND AVENUE; TF~N NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUA RIGHT-OF-WAY A DISTANCE OF 200.00 FEET; TI~NCE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 27, A DISTAN PARKING ANALYSIS: WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NpRTI-BAST QUARTER P 3 A POINT ON THE EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY OF DUDLEY ST OF DUDLEY ACRES SUBDIVISION AS RECORDED AT B EX1Stlri LUTHERAN SUBDMSION AS RECORDED AT BOOK 66, g RIGHT-OF-WAY A DISTANCE OF 1608.28 FEET TO THE +~F CQLORAI~tJ. BEING MORE l'A.RTIC'~C.JLARI~Y IJES~RII3EU Hospital 1 per 5 beds at 346 = 69 SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 17 OF LONGVIEW SUBDI 1 per staff at max, shift - 1,001 staff= 1,~~6 N89°33'52"E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 17 A SAAID SE~TT4N 26, T`IIENCE N89°3 7'48 "E ALC)~G T~~,1~TC~ E~T~ ~T` T~~ENCE S~►4p U9'S3"E A DISTANCE GF ~5.' TCa► T~~ TE~UE 1111[3(1/'\ft'r'fffT"y A T1T[`1T A 1T/"'iT7 !lT? 1 ht'11'1 r`7 f`'7'!l~r`f'r r'["*P"! A "T1{ll'AT~T' !`1"A.7 _T'[?~[~~ CORNER OF SAID LOT 17; THENCE N00 07 OS W ALONG ■ j M.~.B.'S 1 per 150 S.F. at i O5, leg S.F. _ ~~l FEET TO A POINT ON 'THE SOUTH BANK OF THE ROCK Total required = 1,~7f) SOUTH LINE OF FOOTHILLS MEDICAL CENTER SUBD THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISIO j THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) COURSES: j Existing stalls on campus = 2,014 {238 more than required) 1.)THENCE S80°55'20"E A DISTANCE OF 33.43 FEET; 'r 2.)THENCE S'78°10'03"E A DISTANCE OF 75.09 FEET; f~. Proposed: 3.)THENCE S73°33'S2~E A DISTANCE OF 79.81 FEET TO MEDICAL CENTER SUBDIVISION; THENCE N00°d3'41 "W The Hospital will have no increase in beds and adds no stafflshift. DISTANCE OF 48?.00 FEET TO A POINT ON 'TF~ SnUTH Total stalls provided in proposal ~ QUARTER OF SECTION 27; THENCE N89°37'28"E ALONG j s ' ua Total stalls required in proposal l,~~E) 5 OOo FEET THENCE N 9`37'28~~AxALLE x ~ N More than required 238 DISTANCE OF 276.$0 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID EAST L S00°04'03"E ALONG SAID EAST LINE A DISTANCE OF 10. NORTH LINE OF SECTION 26, A DISTANCE OF 453.41 FE LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION ~~E NC)RTI-~~VEST QUARTER OF SAID SF,TIC:)~1~ 26 (SAITa SAL-HAR ESTATES SU~3DIVIS1t~N AS RF~~RI~EU AT ~3t~C)K SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH 35.00 FEET OF SAID N~RTI SIGNAGE ALONG SAID NORTH LINE A DISTANCE OF 532.84 FEET A nirrr~n no a~n~~ ~r ,r nnnnrr~nr~na r~4~r Srfin~n ~7TT n~4~a «Ititc~O* T~1/'~(?I~  their campus currently zoned PHD, an addition to the Power Plant. The wit J1~11LL~4 aixaii vv iii a~.~.vi uuiivv YY 1 ill L ll ~l~+l\+ • ii vi «iv ♦ ~ LLVGL6 iv.,~.~ SAID PRQPERTY CONTAINS 94.212 ACRES MORE C?R LES r ~,R L~~~. development will consist of a story building with s.f, footprint. Code of Laws. The total square footage of the development will be square feet. BASIS OF BEARINGS BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE WEST LINE OF THE NO SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL ME LANDSCAPING OF WHEAT RIDGE HORIZONTAL CONTROL POINT' NO. 5 ~E NC)RTHV'V~ST CIUARTER (~F S~CTI(aN 2b, TC)wNS:~I:E' 3 ~ ~!~.RIDLAN ~EIN~ MC~NIJM:ENTEI) EiY A BRASS CAP (CITY NCB. Sbo9) AT TI-i~ NCJRT~~'t~~ST' CC7R:~~R tJF SECTIt~N 2b /l l1 \ IY"1 /'4'\T 4'4"l T Y T'11~1 /"a i"f"'\ i ~ ~ 6~~ a - All landsca in shall be in accordance with Secrion 26-502 of the Wheat AND A BRASS CAP (CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE HORI"I.ONT P g QUARTER CORNER OF THE SECTION 26 AND WFIICH H Ridge Code of Laws. _ l ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION OWNER'S CERTIFIt'ATIO The below signed legally designated agent therof; does h LIGHTING legally described herein will be developed as a Planned I?~velop restrictions and conditions contained in this plan, and as may oth All lighting shall be in accordance with Section 26-503 of the Wheat further recognize that the approval of Final Developmeak plan d Ridge Code of Laws. right. Vested property rights may only arise and accrue pursuant M The building addition will be constructed North and East of the Existing Power Plant..... The existing landscaping and accessories will be moved per the 26-121of the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge. l owner's discretion. Zf N Signature of Agent : ~ NOTARY PUBLIC Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of i ,Y~l 1- ~ Witness my hand and official seal, My commision expires NOTARY SEAL ~d A.~ A .iA./Jln/A. .10.J1 i.~~ Y 1R N Y ~ V ~~~V w• CHAPEL EL EMERGENCY ORIGINAL H(~5PITAL DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND DEVEI,OMENT DIltECTOR ►f does hereby agree that the property [velot~ment in accordance with the uses, MAYOR'S CERTIFICATE ~~.y otherwise be required by law. I DECONTAMINATION SHOWER Approved this day of , 20 by We !s/ t elan does not create a vested property ~~rsuant to the provisions of section ' BAST WINC3 EXISTING . , . Mayor CENTRAL . P[.ANT ATTEST: • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ PATIENT TOWER City Clerk day of 20 COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDERS' CERTIFICATE RADIATION ONCOLOGY This document accepted for filing in the office of the County Cle County at Goldea, Colorado, on the day of A.D. 20 SOUTH WING Page , Reception No. RADIATION ONCOLOGY ADDITION Jefferson County Clerk and Recorder by: Deputy by the City of wheat Ridge. ..~,n , 1Yl.V.i3,, 1 OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN °nnnnIKI,e PnT L9 I ° Mlm~ i LOCATION PROJECT EXEMPLA LmtJmrl CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS PARKING SUPPLY / DEMAND ANALYSIS EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO Prepared for: EXEMPLA HEALTHCARE Exempla JUNE 18, 2001 WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS June 18, 2001 Mr. Al Davis Director of Facilities Management Exempla Healthcare 8300 West 38'h Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Re: Parking Supply/Demand Study 2001 Walker Project #23-6748.00 Dear Mr. Davis: Walker Parking Consultants 6602 E. 75th Street, Suite 210 Indianapolis, IN 46250 Voice: 317.842.6890 Fa.: 317.577.6500 w .wolkerporking.com Walker is pleased to submit the final report of the parking study for Lutheran Medical Center in Wheat Ridge, Colorado. This report includes all previous comments we received from you. Thank you for your assistance with finalizing this report and for the opportunity to serve the hospital. It has been a pleasure working with you and your staff. Sincerely, r Parking Consultants Oh Dorsett Vice President 11~u B. Chris Walls Parking Analyst WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO Prepared for: EXEMPLA HEALTHCARE 23-6748.00 JUNE 18, 2001 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................ii INTRODUCTION 1 SCOPE OF SERVICES 2 DEFINITION OF TERMS 3 STUDY METHODOLOGY 4 STUDY AREA 4 PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS Parking Supply 7 Effective Parking Supply 8 Survey Days.. 9 Parking Demand 11 Current Conditions 1 1 Future Demand 14 Parking Adequacy... 16 Current Conditions 16 Future Conditions 16 Conclusion 18 APPENDIX A Occupancy Count Information 19 WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1: Parking Supply Page 7 Table 2: Effective Parking Supply Page 8 Table 3: Occupancy Counts Page 10 Table 4: Survey Day Demand Page 13 Table 5: Design Day Demand Page 14 Table 6: Future Parking Demand Page 15 Table 7: Parking Demand Comparison Page 15 Table 8: Year 2001 Adequacy Page 16 Table 9: Year 2006 Adequacy Page 17 Photograph l: Lutheran Medical Center Page 7 Photograph 2: Employee Lots A & B Page 8 Photograph 3: Physician Parking Page 9 Photograph 4: MOB Parking Page 10 Photograph 5: Employee Lot D Page 11 Map 1: Medical Center Map Page 5 Graph 1: Distribution of Parking Page 7 Graph 2: Monthly Acliviy Page 1 I Graph 3: Survey Day vs. Design Day Page 12 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 Walker Parking Consultants was engaged by Exempla Healthcare to perform a parking study update at Lutheran Medical Center. A similar study was conducted by Walker in 1999. The hospital asked Walker to provide current and projected parking demands based on planned construction projects. These projects include a multi-level heart center, the addition of 35-50 beds, the creation of green space (that will replace the main lot), and the demolition and rebuilding of the older portion of the hospital. The current parking supply at the hospital is 2,144 spaces. However, when the supply is adjusted to reflect a cushion necessary for efficient operation, the effective supply is reduced to 1,970 spaces. Parking demand was determined by creating parking models and observing levels of parking on an average busy day. Four separate inventory counts were performed on Tuesday, March 27*, 2001. Walker's counts revealed that peak demand occurred at 10:30 a.m. when occupancy reached 1 ,720 vehicles. When reviewing current parking supply and demand in aggregate terms for this campus, it appears that the current supply is adequate to meet the current demand, however, these numbers are misleading. Certain patron groups are currently experiencing difficulty in finding a space at peak times. Over the course of the next 4-5 years the demand will continue to increase, while the supply will decrease. Consequently the medical center will be faced with a large parking deficit if it does not increase its parking supply. Similar to the current-year adequacy, the projected deficit of 404 spaces by 2006 doesn't realistically reflect the future need for spaces, especially for associates, visitors and patients. The campus totals show a surplus in MOB spaces, however these spaces are not convenient for patrons of the main hospital buildings and therefore, it is important to look at parking in two separate areas; the main hospital and the MOB's. The main hospital is projected to have a 634 space deficit, while the MOB is projected to have a 230 space surplus. The projected 634 space deficit in supply at the main hospital must be abated with additional supply. Once the main lot is removed and replaced with green space, the parking demand will overwhelm the supply. In consideration of the future parking issues facing Lutheran, Walker recommends that a minimum of 635 new spaces be created on the main campus to serve the medical center and its patrons. Immediate WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS attention is needed to provide additional parking in the main lot 16& 80 spaces) for patients and visitors. EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 Lutheran Medical Center is located in Wheat Ridge, Colorado, a suburb 20 minutes northwest of downtown Denver. Walker Parking Consultants performed a supply and demand study for the hospital in 1999. Since that study, a number of variables have changed including increased staffing and patient volumes. The Medical Center is planning multiple changes that will further elevate parking demand. These plans include a new heart center consisting of several additional floors. Futhermore, visitor parking will be affected by the demolition of the older portion of the hospital that will be rebuilt. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS INTRODUCTION This study shall focus on the current and 5-year projected state of parking at the Wheat Ridge-based campus. EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS 40 WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS JUNE 18, 2001 Walker Parking Consultants was retained by Exempla Healthcare to provide parking consulting services. The purpose of this study was to determine the present and future parking needs of the campus. The following was our scope of services for this engagement: Met with hospital representatives once and confirmed study objectives, boundaries, procedures, and project schedule. Reviewed the 1999 Walker report and any other existing reports/studies pertinent to parking or traffic at Exempla Lutheran Medical Center. Reviewed the hospital's master plan for its impact on parking supply and demand. 4. Reviewed the hospital's inventory of existing parking spaces to determine number, user assignment (employee/physician/ visitor, time restrictions, fees, etc. 5. " Collected and reviewed historical data supplied by the hospital via a background information survey form supplied by Walker. 6. Conducted occupancy counts at selected times on a typically busy day for all spaces in the study area. This determined the pattern of parking utilization, and helped to identify/document unusual patterns. We required level of activity information from the hospital on the day the survey was completed. Required was the number of outpatients, inpatients, ER patients, and MOB patients, along with the number of physicians and employees in the hospital and MOB. 7. Determined the present parking supply and demand. This was based on data gathered from the hospital and parking demand ratios developed from Walker's database of other medical facilities. Compared 2001 parking demand ratios with those developed in 1999. Summarized our findings and conclusions about current parking adequacy in this draft report and we will discuss with appropriate hospital staff. SCOPE OF SERVICES Incorporate one consolidated set of comments from staff into a final report. EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 Several terms may be used in this report that require clarification. These terms are defined as follows: Survey Day - The day occupancy counts were taken on the subject property. This day should represent a typical busy day. 2. Design Day - The day that represents the level of parking demand the parking system is designed to accommodate. This level of activity is a reasonably high percentile of absolute peak activity. 3. Effective Supply - The total supply of parking spaces is adjusted to reflect the cushion needed to provide for vehicles moving in and out of spaces, spaces unavailable due to maintenance, and to reduce the time necessary for parking patrons to find the last few available spaces. The adjustment varies as to the amount and type of parking, but typically the effective supply is 85% to 95% of the total number of spaces. 4. Parking Demand - The number of spaces required by various user groups and visitors to the subject property. 5. Demand Ratio - The ratio of the number of vehicles observed to occupy parking spaces compared to a reference number. For example, if there are 1,000 full-time equivalent (FTE) associates and an observed peak occupancy of 400 vehicles in the employee lot, the demand ratio is 0.40 (40011000) for FTE's. 6. Optimum Utilization Factor - The factor applied to the calculated demand for parking to allow it to operate at maximum efficiency. The factor allows for a 5% to 15% "cushion" for vehicles moving in and pulling out of parking stalls and reduces the time necessary for patrons to find a space when few are available. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS DEFINITION OF TERMS 3 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 Walker Parking Consultants acquired annual bed census figures from Exempla Healthcare and conducted extensive occupancy counts on the survey day, Tuesday, March 27, 2001. This information was used to determine the parking patterns and utilization and generate demand ratios. The current parking supply/demand is determined before future projections are established. Lutheran Medical Center is located in Wheat Ridge, Colorado, a suburb of Denver. The study area is bound by 38" Avenue to the north, residential development to the east, 32" Avenue to the south and Foothills Medical Center to the west. Maps of the campus, parking locations, and the area considered in this study are contained on the following pages. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS STUDY METHODOLOGY STUDY AREA 4 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS JUNE 18, 2001 Map 1: Lutheran Medical Center Map Exempla Lutheran Medical Center Map 38th Avenue S4 light svtvadm;A xlva4 h}:RCanPartiin a The Blue Drive Halle TuRoom l.~ comunity DGVCIOyTllRi A ARf Exempla H EA ITH CAR[ Exempla Lutheran Aiedical Ceht 3300 W. 39th Ave. Wheat Ridge CO 30033 Ansm1ine: [3031 4'?0-1925 32nt Ak*nue 5 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER WALKER PARKING SUPPLY AND DEMAND STUDY PARKING CONSULTANTS ❑ JT~ o ~ LJ-I l ❑ ❑ d~ , - FOOTFALLS MEDICAL CEMEfl 9OBDMSION LOTD D U lJ LOTO 1 l/~ PAN I G MOBI ® \ l~_J PAPo(ING /o O MOB A I ~ RADNTION/ PAFKWG PAT~ENIaLOT O MOBM U ~ ~ ~ n / /l I Iti II M08 N PAPoONG MOB N o pAAIIWc I P 7LOTN C5 I=L L w~ OT A LOTS ❑ ❑ FIGURE 1: Study Area LEGEND: Study Area Boundary NORTH 6 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 Walker inventoried the study area parking supply at Lutheran to determine the number of spaces, the user assignments )e.g. employee, physician, and patient) and identified restrictions pertaining to campus parking. This inventory includes all spaces used by visitors, staff, physician, patients, and the general public. The complete parking supply is shown in the following table. Table 1: Parking Supply Type of Number of Parking Name of Location User Groups Spaces Surface Main Lot Patients, Visitors 398 Surface Lot A Employees 198 Surface Lot B Employees 451 Surface Lot C Employees 72 Surface Lot D Employees 211 Surface ER Lot Patients, Visitors 76 Surface Radiation/Oncology Lot Patients 26 Surface MOB Parking Lot Patients, Visitors 517 Surface MOB Physician Lot Physicians 95 Surface Hospital Physician Lot Physicians 100 Total 2,144 Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2001 The current parking supply at Lutheran is 2,144 spaces. This parking is available entirely in the form of surface parking. Graph 1 : Distribution of Parking Supply Distribution of Parking Supply 932 1,017 BE Employee Parking ElPotient Parking ❑Physician Parking WALKEii PARKING CONSULTANTS PARKING SUPPLY Photograph I:Lutheran Medical Center 7 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 EFFECTIVE PARKING SUPPLY Once the inventory counts were performed, Walker applied an optimum utilization factor to the results. This factor represents the level that a parking area operates at peak efficiency. Often a facility will be perceived as full by potential patrons, even when there are still a small number of spaces available. Patrons may experience frustration and delays as they have to search for the last few vacant spaces or may avoid parking altogether. The optimum utilization factor engineers a "cushion" against this perception, assuring both the perception and reality of adequate parking. The factor is also applied as a "cushion" for spaces lost to poor or improper parking, snow removal, repair, derelict vehicles, and the like. Optimum utilization factors are adjusted by the type of patron and type of facility. Associates who tend to park in the same place every day necessitate a 95% factor. If the employee parks in a smaller, reserved parking area (e.g. physicians) the factor would be 100%. Patients and hospital visitors who are unfamiliar with the area will require a factor of 90%. This factor is applied to both large surface lots found on the hospital campus because of the relative difficulty of finding an open space during peak times. When the optimum utilization factor is applied to the total parking spaces in the study area, the effective supply is rendered. The effective parking supply for the Lutheran campus is 1,970. The following table displays the calculations used to determine the effective supply. Table 2: Effective Parkinq Supply Number of Utilization Effective Name of Location Spaces Factor Supply Main Lot 398 90% 358 Lot A 198 95% 188 Lot B 451 90% 406 Lot C 72 100% 72 Lot D 211 95% 200 ER Lot 76 90% 68 Radiation/Oncology Lot 26 100% 26 MOB Parking Lot 517 90% 465 MOB Physician Lot 95 95% 90 Hospital Physician Lot 100 95% 95 2,144 1,970 Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2001 WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS 8 Photograph 2: Employee Lots A & B EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 SURVEY DAYS Demand is determined from occupancy counts conducted at typical busy times. Based on conversations with officials at Lutheran Medical Center, it was determined that Tuesday is typically the busiest day of the week. Walker counted the number of parked cars throughout the study area at four different intervals of time. The occupancy count was conducted on Tuesday, March 27, 2001. The results' of the occupancy counts are summarized and expressed in the following table and graph. Photograph 3: Physician and Visitor Parking WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS ' Complete breakdowns of the occupancy counts are contained in the attached Appendix A. a` U 70 Y 0 d 0 E z EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 Table 3: Parking Occupancy Count Summary (March 27", 2001) Number Occupied Spaces at: Location of Spaces 8:30 AM 10:30 AM 1230 PM 230 PM Main Lot 398 243 351 340 375 Lot A 198 83 108 114 126 LotB 451 383 394 384 357 Lot C 72 72 72 72 67 Lot D 211 198 210 207 205 ER Lot 76 49 53 65 58 Radiation/Oncology Lot 26 23 20 16 24 MOB Parking Lot 517 310 372 267 298 MOB Physician Lot 95 67 76 65 76 Hospital Physician Lot 100 71 64 85 61 144 Peak occupancy occurred at 10:30 a.m. revealing a car count of 1,720 vehicles. This level of occupancy represented 89% of the effective parking supply and 80% of the total supply. 4 W WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS Photograph 4: MOB Parking "`rrr+ r 10 8:30 AM 10:30 AM 12:30 PM 2:30 PM EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 CURRENT CONDITIONS As seen in the following graph, the monthly activity levels at the hospital fluctuated significantly throughout the year 2, with May being the busiest month. The average activity of these months is 22,348 patient days. This activity includes: outpatient plus observation patients, ER registrations, and inpatient bed census. Graph 2: Lutheran Medical Center Activity by Month (Year 2000) r V a T L C O N 6 P OJ Q 23 23 22 22 21 21 20 20,0001 ~°cJF Jo ~oJ e The level of activity on the survey day at the hospital campus was evaluated in comparison to peak levels of activity for inpatients, outpatients, and emergency room treatments. Walker recommends that hospitals should design their parking supply based on the 85' percentile level of patient activity. This level is equivalent to a very busy day that may occur once or twice a month. Designing parking to meet the absolute peak level of parking would leave many unused spaces during the majority of the year. Conversely, designing for the average level would mean inadequate parking during half the year. Design day demand statistics are based on the 85" percentile level of activity. The following graphs compare the level of activity during our survey day to the level of activity during the design day (85" percentile). The data used in the development of these graphs was provided by hospital administration. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS PARKING DEMAND Photograph 5: Employee Lot D 2 Data reflects 2000 hospital activity levels. FJ~J ~co\d ono ,oco~ eco~ See O O~ EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 Graph 3: Survey Day vs. Design Day Activity 600 500 400 a 0 300 0 200 100 0 v v N ~r N N Outpatients ER Patients Inpatient Census ®Survey Day ❑ Design Day 960 940 920 900 ~ o o 880 860 u Q 840 820 800 These graphs illustrate that during our survey day, levels of activity closely mirrored the level of activity projected for the design day. The outpatient and inpatient numbers were actually higher during the survey day. The comparison of the activity levels helps us to determine whether the conditions during observation are adequate upon which to base parking demand. To more precisely determine the number of spaces needed for each type of parking patron, the parking occupancy numbers are compared to group population statistics provided by the medical center'. From this comparison, a demand ratio is determined for each group, which is then used to project the number of parking spaces needed for each type of patron. The day Walker conducted the original parking ' The statistics used in the study were provided by Exempla Healthcare. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS 12 Survey Day Design Day EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 occupancy counts (March 27", 2001) is referred to as the survey day. The following table displays the parking demand at Lutheran on the survey day. Table 4: Survev Dav Demand Design Parking Parking Patron Statistic Demand Ratios Demand Physicians 719 0.20 spaces/physician 144 Associates 1,646 0.40 spaces/associate 658 Volunteers 122 0.20 spaces/volunteer 24 Inpatients/Visitors 238 0.55 spaces/occupied bed 131 Outpatients 505 0.55 spaces/daily outpatients 278 ER Patients 182 0.35 spaces/ER visit 64 MOB Physicians 120 0.80 spaces/physician 96 MOB Staff 396 0.40 spaces/associate 158 MOB Patients 120 1.35 spaces/physician 162 Total 1,715 Design statistics provided by: Exempla Healthcare These demand ratios are typical for hospitals and MOB'S. However, in some cases, the theoretical demand ratios may slightly differ from actual observed conditions on the survey day. While the majority of the parking supply at Lutheran Medical Center is designated for specific user groups, many of the areas of parking are abused (e.g. employees parking in areas intended for patient/visitor use). Consequently, it not possible to determine site-specific ratios for every group based on the occupancy counts. However, these ratios are typical for hospitals and reflect the overall picture of parking demand on the hospital campus. Physician and associate numbers will fluctuate little from day to day during the week in most hospitals, regardless of the level of patient activity. Parking areas that are affected by different levels of activity are the patient and visitor parking areas. Data from the year 2000 was evaluated to determine the 851" percentile level of activity of bed census. This data jsee Graph 3) was used to reflect the average conditions within the busiest month and create the Design Day parking demand. The following table shows this information. Lutheran patient activity levels on our survey day are very similar to the data developed for the design day. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS 13 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 Table 5: Design Day Parking Demand Design Parking Parking Patron Statistic Demand Ratios Demand Physicians 719 0.20 spaces/physician 144 Associates 1,646 0.40 spaces/associate 658 Volunteers 122 0.20 spaces/volunteer 24 Inpatients/Visitors 224 0.55 spaces/occupied bed 123 Outpatients 484 0.55 spaces/daily outpatients 266 ER Patients 241 0.35 spaces/ER visit 84 MOB Physicians 120 0.80 spaces/physician 96 MOB Staff 396 0.40 spaces/associate 158 MOB Patients 120 1.35 spaces/physician 162 Total 1,717 Design stafistics provided by: Exempla Healthcare A comparison between the design day and the survey day shows that the occupancy levels witnessed during our survey day very closely mirror the demand expected on the design day. A difference of only two spaces exists between the two days. This difference concludes that the activity observed (during the survey day) is adequate upon which to base current parking demand. FUTURE DEMAND Future demand is determined in much the some manner as current demand. Walker analyzed the planned changes and incorporated them into the parking demand model. All future changes as described by hospital administration and the Master Plan jOctober 1999) have been accounted for. The major changes considered in the future projections include the following: • Adding 35-50 beds over the next three to five years. • Planning a new, multi-level heart center in the south wing. • Replacing the main visitor/patient lot with an area consisting largely of "green space". The removal of this lot will reduce the future parking supply by 398 spaces. • Demolishing and re-building the older portion of the hospital on the northern side of the medical center. • 3% annual increase in employees'. The future demand model is displayed in the following table. ' Actual employee projections were not provided by hospital administration and therefore, 3% annual increases were assumed. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS 14 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 Table 6: Future Parking Demand (Year 2006) Design Parking Patron Statistic Demand Ratios Demand Physicians 634 U.2U spaces/ physician lo/ Associates 1,908 0.40 spaces/associate 763 Volunteers 122 0.20 spaces/volunteer 24 Inpatients/Visitors 275 0.55 spaces/occupied bed 151 Outpatients 531 0.55 spaces/daily outpatients 292 ER Patients 191 0.35 spaces/ER visit 67 MOB Physicians 143 0.80 spaces/physician 115 MOB Staff 473 0.40 spaces/physician 189 MOB Patients 143 1.35 spaces/physician 193 Total 1.961 The future (year 2006) demand for Lutheran Medical Center is projected to be 1,961 spaces. This represents an increase over the current demand of 246 spaces. The following table compares the parking demand by category between current survey day) and future levels. Table 7: Parking Demand Comparison Increase/ Category Current Year Year 2006 Decrease Physicians 144 167 23 Associates 658 763 105 Volunteers 24 24 0 Inpatients/Visitors 131 151 20 Outpatients 278 292 14 ER Patients 64 67 3 MOB Physicians 96 115 19 MOB Staff 158 189 31 MOB Patients 162 193 31 Totals 1,715 1,961 246 The category that experiences the greatest increase in demand is associates. The demand for this patron group will increase by 105 spaces over the current demand. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS 15 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 CURRENT CONDITIONS Parking adequacy is the ability of the parking supply to handle the parking demand. The following table represents the parking adequacy of the hospital in the year 2001. This calculation was made by subtracting the estimated current parking demand from the current parking supply. The current parking adequacy of the hospital campus is a surplus of 263 spaces. Table 8: Year 2001 Parking Adequacy Parking Supply Spaces Current Current Patron Demand Factor Needed Supply Adequac tnn n{a/ Ic1 Inn <I Associates 658 90% 732 780 48 Volunteers 24 95% 26 30 4 Inpatients/Visitors 131 900/ 145 178 33 Outpatients 278 90% 309 216 -93 ER Patients 64 90% 71 76 5 Hospital Subtotals 1,299 1,433 1,380 -53 MOB Physicians 96 95% 101 95 -6 MOB Staff 158 95% 167 152 -15 MOB Patients 162 90% 180 517 337 MOB Subtotals 416 448 764 316 Totals 1,715 1,881 2,144 263 Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2001 Although an overall surplus exists, it is important to individually analyze each user group. Several areas are experiencing a deficit including staff physicians5, outpatients, MOB physicians, and MOB staff. Associates overall show a surplus, however individual lots like C and D routinely are 95-100% occupied, so patrons of those lots may perceive there is inadequate parking. The outpatient adequacy number is significant because it is indicative of the problem occurring on the main patient/visitor lot. This lot routinely fills to capacity and experienced a peak occupancy of 375 vehicles during our survey day. This number, when compared to the effective supply, represents the lot being 1 10% full. Additional parking needs to be created for this patron group. 5 Hospital administration feels that the physician parking supply is adequate. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS PARKING ADEQUACY 16 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 FUTURE CONDITIONS Hospital administration is anticipating ongoing changes in the future. Each of these changes will have an impact on the parking environment at the Medical Center campus. The new heart center, projected construction projects, and the increasing number of beds will create new demand for quality, close parking. In addition, the projected loss of the main patient/visitor lot (398 spaces) significantly impacts the need for new patient and visitor spaces. These future changes and how the parking will be impacted are summarized in the following table. Table 9: Year 2006 Parking Adequacy Parking Supply Spaces Future Future Patron Demand Factor Needed Suodv Adeouac Associates 763 900/ 848 780 68 Volunteers 24 95% 26 0 -26 Inpatients/Visitors 151 900/ 168 0 -168 Outpatients 292 900/ 324 26 -298 ER Patients 67 900/ 74 76 2 Hospital Subtotals 1,465 1,616 982 634 MOB Physicians 115 95% 121 95 -26 MOB Staff 189 95% 199 152 -47 MOB Patients 193 900/ 215 517 303 MOB Subtotals 497 534 764 230 Source: Walker Parkinq Consultants, 2001 According to the above table, the campus as a whole will have a deficit of 404 parking spaces in the year 2006. However, as these numbers are analyzed it becomes clear that parking in certain areas is more inadequate than depicted by Table 9. The subtotals portray a more realistic picture of parking conditions on the campus. Many times the numbers portrayed in tables do not accurately depict the real parking issues facing different facilities. This is especially true at Lutheran Medical Center where the majority of vacancies exist on the MOB parking lot. While the MOB is projected to have a surplus of 230 spaces in 2006, the main hospital is projected to have a deficit in parking of 634 spaces. The MOB lot unfortunately does not provide close parking for individuals that are going to the main hospital. Therefore, the surplus that exists on the MOB lot cannot be considered a remedy to the parking deficit experienced on the main campus. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS 17 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 Lutheran Medical Center administration understands that parking is and will continue to be a concern throughout the campus. This supply and demand study has outlined the issues facing the current and future levels of demand. Walker has identified that although parking is currently adequate on a campus-wide basis, several patron groups are struggling to find an open space on a more localized basis. As the hospital continues its plan for growth in the future, additional parking demand must be met with additional supply. Walker has shown that Lutheran has a current deficit among certain user groups on the main campus and this deficit will increase in the future. In order to provide adequate parking for current demands, the medical center should immediately add 60-80 more visitor/patients spaces. In anticipation of future growth and development, coupled with the loss of the main lot, the medical center should consider adding within the next few years, a total of 635 parking spaces on the main campus, distributed among several user groups. While a decision about structured parking was not part of the scope of this study, it is apparent that this may soon become the most viable option for adding necessary parking supply. WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS CONCLUSION 18 APPENDIX A EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 OCCUPANCY COUNT INFORMATION The occupancy count information contained in the body of the report represented the summary of the survey day. The following information is a detailed breakdown of the occupancy observed during the survey day at four separate intervals of time. Table 1: Tuesday, March 27'", 2001 (8:30 a.m.) Type of Total Occupancy Percent Parking Name of Location Capacity 8:30 a.m. Occupied Su ace Lot Main Lot 398 243 61% Surface Lot Lot A 198 83 42% Surface Lot Lot B 451 383 85% Surface Lot Lot C 72 72 1000/ Surface Lot Lot D 211 198 94% Surface Lot ER Lot 76 49 64% Surface Lot Radiation/Oncology Lot 26 23 88% Surface Lot MOB Parking Lot 517 310 60% Surface Lot MOB Physician Lot 95 67 71% Surface Lot Hospital Physician Lot 100 71 71% Totals 2,144 1,499 700% Source: Wolker Parking Consultants, 2001 Table 2: Tuesday, March 27'h, 2001 (10:30 a.m.) Occupancy Type of Total 10:30 Percent Parking Name of Location Capacity a.m. Occupied Su ace Lot Main Lot 398 351 88% Surface Lot Lot A 198 108 55% Surface Lot Lot B 451 394 870/ Surface Lot Lot C 72 72 1000/0 Surface Lot Lot D 211 210 1000/0 Surface Lot ER Lot 76 53 7001. Surface Lot Radiation/Oncology Lot 26 20 7701. Surface Lot MOB Parking Lot 517 372 72% Surface Lot MOB Physician Lot 95 76 800% Surface Lot Hospital Physician Lot 100 64 6406 Totals 2,144 1,720 800/ Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2001 WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS 19 EXEMPLA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS JUNE 18, 2001 Table 3: Tuesday, March 27'", 2001 (12:30 p.m.) Occupancy Type of Total 12:30 Percent Parking Name of Location Capacity p.m. Occupied Su ace Lot Main Lot 398 340 85% Surface Lot Lot A 198 114 58% Surface Lot Lot B 451 384 85% Surface Lot Lot C 72 72 1000% Surface Lot Lot D 211 207 98% Surface Lot ER Lot 76 65 860/ Surface Lot Radiation/Oncology Lot 26 16 62% Surface Lot MOB Parking Lot 517 267 52% Surface Lot MOB Physician Lot 95 65 68% Surface Lot Hospital Physician Lot 100 85 85% Totals 2,144 1,615 75% Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2001 Table 4: Tuesday, March 27th , 2001 (2:30 p.m.) Type of Total Occupancy Percent Parking Name of Location Capacity 2:30 p.m. Occupied Su ace Lot Main Lot 398 375 94% Surface Lot Lot A 198 126 640% Surface Lot Lot B 451 357 790/ Surface Lot Lot C 72 67 93% Surface Lot Lot D 211 205 970% Surface Lot ER Lot 76 58 760/ Surface Lot Radiation/Oncology Lot 26 24 92% Surface Lot MOB Parking Lot 517 298 58% Surface Lot MOB Physician Lot 95 76 800/ Surface Lot Hospital Physician Lot 100 61 61% Source: Walker Parking Consultants, WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS 20 LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER EXPANSION TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY ® FELSBURG ® HOLT & ULLEVIG engineering paths to transportation solutions LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER EXPANSION r TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Prepared for: Exempla Healthcare 1835 Franklin Street Denver. CO 86218-1191 r Prepared by: Felsburg Holt & Ullevig 7951 East Maplewood Avenue, Suite 200 Greenwood Village, CO 80111 303/721-1440 Project Manager: David Hattan, P.E. Project Engineer: Jennifer Salisbury, E.I. FHU Reference No. 01-173 October, 2001 Lutheran Medical Center Expansion Traffic Impact Study TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. INTRODUCTION ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 A. Project Overview------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 B. Site Location and Study Area Boundaries---------------------------------------------------1 C. Description of the Site ---------------------------------------------------------------------------1 EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS-------------------------------------------------------------------- 4 III. BACKGROUND TRAFFIC-------------------------------------------------------------------------6 IV. PROPOSED PROJECT TRAFFIC 9 A. Trip Generation-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------9 B. Site Trip Distribution------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 9 V. FUTURE TOTAL TRAFFIC FORECASTS------------------------------------------------------------- 12 VI. TRAFFIC OPERATIONS 15 A. Short-Term Levels of Service------------------------------------------------------------------- 15 B. Long-Term Levels of Service 15 VII. SUMMARY------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18 APPENDIX A. EXISTING ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS APPENDIX B. SHORT-TERM ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS APPENDIX C. LONG-TERM ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS t P FELSBURG C, HOLT & ~gg ULLEVIG 4~. Lutheran Medical Center Expansion Traffic Impact Study LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1. Vicinity Map------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2 Figure 2. Site Plan -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3 Figure 3. Existing Traffic Volumes----------------------------------------------------------------------------4 Figure 4. Existing Lane Configuration & Levels of Service--------------------------------------------- 5 Figure 5. Short-Term (2008) Background Traffic Volumes---------------------------------------------7 Figure 6. Long-Term (2020) Background Traffic Volumes --------------------------------------------8 Figure 7. Trip Distribution------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10 F- Figure 8. Expansion (Site) Generation Traffic Volumes--------------------------------------------- 11 Figure 9. Short-Term (2008) Total Traffic Volumes---------------------------------------------------- 13 Figure 10. Long-Term (2020) Total Traffic Volumes----------------------------------------------------- 14 F7 Figure 11. Short-Term (2008) Lane Configuration & Levels of Service------------------------------ 16 Figure 12. Long-Term (2020) Lane Configuration & Levels of Service 17 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Site Trip Generation-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------9 1 FELSBURG ULLE ~1 HOLT & LLEV IG r' L Lutheran Medical Center Expansion Traffic Impact Study INTRODUCTION A. Project Overview Exempla Healthcare is proposing a cardiology expansion of their current facilities at Lutheran Medical Center in Wheat Ridge. The conceptual plan shows that the expansion will be approximately 74,000 square feet as a four-floor addition to the existing building. The purposes of this study are to estimate daily and peak hour traffic volumes generated by the anticipated development and to determine the impact of the traffic on critical intersections and roadways in the vicinity of the site. Short-term and long-term traffic projections were developed and analyzed as the basis for identifying necessary lane geometry and intersection traffic control needs. This report evaluates the following planing horizons: Short-Term Future in this study is defined as year 2008. • Long-Term Future is defined as the year 2020 to reflect the planing horizon identified and used by the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG). B. Site Location and Study Area Boundaries Lutheran Medical Center is located % mile west of Wadsworth Boulevard between 32nd i... Avenue and 38th Avenue, as shown on Figure 1. Lutheran is currently served by three intersections: Lutheran Parkway/38th Avenue intersection, Lutheran Parkway/32nd r Avenue intersection, and Lutheran Parkway West/381h Avenue intersection. No changes t to the internal roadway system are planned with this project. C. Description of the Site The 74,000 square feet expansion will serve as an addition to the main hospital building, as shown on Figure 2. As shown on the figure the existing access points will be used, it is not anticipated that additional access points will be required. North and west of the site is single family residential housing. South of the site is a cemetery and mortuary. East of the site along 38th Avenue is specialty retail. P FELSBURG (1HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 1 FELSBURG HOLT ULLEVIG PROJECT SITE ~L 771 Figure 1 Vicinity Map gg North g.; Lutheran Expansion 01-1738/13/01 X FELSBURG C®HOLT & ULLEVIG LJ ~1 ❑ a, L i i o ~0 1r~ L' 11 L h 5T PINES ~rl Figure 2 D Site Plan North Lutheran Expansion 01-173 8/3/oi II ~i i 4th Through H rw j ! 6th Floor Additior ; ~ ~ nand - °j 3rd Eloor Addition Jim// ' Lutheran Medical Center Expansion Traffic Impact Study II. EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Traffic counts at the intersections of Lutheran Parkway/38th Avenue, Lutheran Parkway/32nd Avenue, and Lutheran Parkway West/38th Avenue were recorded during the week of July 9, 2001 during the AM and PM peak periods. Additionally, hourly directional traffic volumes were recorded near each of these intersections. Figure 3 illustrates these existing traffic volumes. Currently, the intersection of Lutheran Parkway and 38th Avenue is signalized. The intersection consists of 38th Avenue as the east/west street and Lutheran Parkway as the north/south street, ending at 38th Avenue. The other two intersections are unsignalized, and operating as two way stop controlled intersections as shown on Figure 3. Peak hour capacity analyses were performed using procedures outlined in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual and the existing traffic volumes presented in Figure 3. Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative assessment of the traffic flow characteristics described by a letter designation ranging from "A" to 7". LOS A represents traffic conditions with essentially uninterrupted flow and minimal delay, whereas LOS F represents the breakdown of traffic flow with excessive congestion and delay. Unsignalized intersection analyses result in a LOS designation for each non-free flow intersection movement, whereas an overall LOS is reported for a signalized intersection. Capacity analyses for existing conditions at the intersections indicates that the critical movements operate at LOS C or better, with the exception of the left-turn out of the site at Lutheran Parkway West. The left-turn movement currently operates at LOS E during the pm peak hour. A poor LOS is not uncommon for a left-turn movement from a minor street approach, such as the left-turn movement from Lutheran Parkway West to 38th Avenue. The Highway Capacity Manual (Third Edition, updated 2000) states the following on page 10- 25: "It is important to note that LOS F may not always result in long queues but may result in adjustments to normal gap acceptance behavior, which are more difficult to observe in the field than queuing. In most cases at [two-way stop-controlled] intersections the critical movement is the minor-street left-turn movement. As such, the minor-street left-turn movement can generally be considered the primary factor affecting overall f; intersection performance. ...There are many instances, particularly in urban areas in which [delays are predicted] for minor-street movements under very low volume conditions on a minor street." Often, if drivers encounter significant delay in making a left-turn out of an unsignalized access, they will find an alternate route to incur less delay. The traffic signal at Lutheran Parkway and 38 h Avenue will provide an alternate route and more efficient means of making the left-turn movement onto 38th Avenue. FELSBURG Ci HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 4 I- , W FELSBURG HOLT & l ULLEVIG E =o ,284(695) 343(636) 38th, ve. L• ~--101(36) 13,780 : 225(102) 13,270 315 ( ) 479 512 - - - - 471(581) F - 15,420 ( ) l 72(42)-y 80(26) ON COQ v cn ma ' wn i y ~ LUTHER s AN MEDICAL a a CENTER J i' 108(56) 32nd Ave. - 1755331 7750 127(44) 7520 220(254)--' LEGEND XXX(XXX) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Figure 3 Existing Traffic Volumes orth Lutheran Expansion 01-173 8/2/01 1 FELSBURG (®HOLT & ULLEVIG V U A/A by a/a 38th Ave. W- a/a At- - - N LUTHERAN ~ z MEDICAL Y CENTER m L a Va iN ~ Q) J y Z3 I J R L ~ 32nd Ave. - - - - - - - a/a ---4 LEGEND X/X = AM/PM Peak Hour Signalized Level of Service x/x = AM/PM Peak Hour Unsignalized Level of Service = Stop Sign = Traffic Signal 7q Figure 4 Z Existing Lane Configuration & Levels of Service North Lutheran Expansion 01173 8/3/01 Lutheran Medical Center Expansion Traffic Impact Study III. BACKGROUND TRAFFIC Analysis of traffic impacts for a future year scenario requires projected background traffic volumes (future traffic on the roadway system not associated with the proposed development). Based on volume projections in DRCOG's 2020 regional transportation model, significant growth in traffic demand along adjacent streets is not anticipated. As such, a growth rate of one percent per year was used for this analysis in developing the background traffic. For the short-term, an annual growth rate of one percent was used over a seven year time frame to project 2008 volumes. For the long-term, the one percent rate was used over 19 years to project the 2020 volumes. Figure 5 illustrates the short-term background traffic and Figure 6 illustrates the long-term background traffic. i FELSBURG C,e HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 7 a FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG to Nin uiuiin 38th, ve. y 1_ 5(10) ,305(735) 105(40) 14,500 1370(680) : 225(105) y 13,350 515 55 jJ ~ - - - 505(620)-~ :1 r ( 75(45) 80(30) ~ N1Pp NON nNr .--N j r N O N m n ~ LUTHERAN j S MEDICAL CENTER CL t ~ ~ j I I o~ N r 32nd Ave. 8,200 130(45)_ LEGEND XXX(XXX) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes XXXX = Average Daily Traffic Volumes _J Figure 5 Short-Term (2008) Background Traffic Volumes North Lutheran Expansion 01-173 8/15/01 FELSBURG HOLT 6 ULLEVIG 3E 15,001 32nd Av 9,100 LEGEND 8,900 XXX(XXX) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes XXXX = Average Daily Traffic Volumes Figure 6 Long-Term (2020) Background Traffic Volumes forth Lutheran Expansion 01-173 8/15/01 ui to to 1n ~n ui ' _ 5(10) 340(825) 105(40) 16,000 420(775) : 230(105) 17 5)~ 75(45)- r olno ~o om ~LrJ~ ~N co LUTHERAN Y MEDICAL d z CENTER c m ~ N J J i' r c0 sT 130(45) 270(310)- Lutheran Medical Center Expansion Traffic Impact Study IV. PROPOSED PROJECT TRAFFIC A. Trip Generation As mentioned, the proposed cardiology expansion is estimated to include 74,000 square feet of hospital space. The trip generation analysis has been performed using trip generation rates calculated from the existing hospital facility. Using the hourly counts and the existing square footage of the hospital a daily rate of 14.26 trips/per day/per thousand square feet was determined. The ITE trip generation rate for a facility of this type is 16.78 which is slightly higher. Due to the fact that this facility currently exists, it was determined that using the actual rate of the facility would provide a better reflection of future conditions. The estimates are summarized in Table 1. Morning and evening peak hour trip generation rates were also derived from existing traffic counts. As shown, the expansion will generate a total of 1,055 daily trips, 70 in the AM peak hour and 60 in the PM peak hour. A trip is defined as a one-way movement either into or out of the development. Table 1. Site Trip Generation Land lase QuaniRy D2ily AM Peak P1til~Peak ? f Irt Odt Totai ; in > tit Total , I Hospital 74,000 sf 1055 50 20 70 20 40 60 B. Site Trip Distribution Site trip distribution patterns were established based on existing travel patterns and the existing street network. Figure 7 illustrates the site trip distribution. It is expected that a majority of the trips (45 percent) will be oriented along 38th Avenue to and from Wadsworth Boulevard. Twenty-five percent of the trips are expected to travel along 38th Avenue to and from the west. Fifteen percent of the trips are expected in each direction along 32nd Avenue. Figure 8-illustrates the estimate site generated traffic based on the trip generation and the trip distribution. 01 FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 10 /a FELSBURG p ® HOLT & i ULLEVIG LEGEND XXX(XXX) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 0 North Figure 7 Trip Distribution Lutheran Expansion 01-173 81001 15% 15% M FELSBURG C® HOLT G ULLEVIG 38th Ave. -5(10) ` - 20(10) 15(5) - - - 15(5) 0o i rN N O LUTHERAN s MEDICAL d i a CENTER i c m i I J I I ~ { I I I I I I i 32nd Ave. J I 551 10(0)-1' - LEGEND XXX(XXX) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Figure 8 Expansion (Site) Generated Traffic Volumes orth Lutheran Expansion 01-173115/01 Lutheran Medical Center Expansion Traffic Impact Study V. FUTURE TOTAL TRAFFIC FORECASTS Total traffic is a summation of background traffic volumes (traffic on the roadway system not associated with the proposed development) and site generated traffic volumes. Figure 9 and Figure 10 show the total traffic volumes for the short-term and the long- term planning horizons, respectively. In the short-term planning horizon, total traffic volumes on 38th Avenue in the vicinity of the site are 14,700 vehicles per day (vpd). On 32nd Avenue the traffic volumes range from 8,250 vpd to 8,100 vpd. In the long-term planning horizon, total traffic volumes on 38th Avenue in the vicinity of the site are 16,200 vpd. On 32nd Avenue the traffic volumes range from 9,150 vpd to 9,000 vpd. C IN FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 13 FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG FO in u7 t- 5(10) I --310(745) .-370(680) 38th Ave. J y L 105(40) 14,700 245(115) 16 13,360 5(15) 505(620)-> `1 r' 530(555)H 90(50)-y 80(30)v ~v ttllr ~N r r, y r LUTHERAN i... 3 MEDICAL CENTER a C M t~ ~T Rp ? r1J O 1: r r ( t c' i 1 O - M lb 3 i1 c m m J '~-115(65) 32nd Ave.----------`-- ~--1355)_------ 8,250 140(45) 235(270)---' c~ E LEGEND XXX(XXX) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes E XXXX = Average Daily Traffic Volumes 8,100 Q Figure 9 Short-Term (2008) Total Traffic Volumes North Lutheran Expansion 01-173 8/15/01 0 FELSBURG OHOLT & ULLEVIG 36 15,050 i 1A Nin X5(10) 345(835) Ive. 105(40) 16,200 5(15)_- 600(630) -z 570(680)-> 85(30) 90(50) o o N T M LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER G N 7 J i' ~ N 115(65) 32nd Ave. _`=21,40 9,150 140(45) 270(310)- LEGEND XXX(XXX) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes XXXX = Average Daily Traffic Volumes 1420(775) I-250(115) 1 N N c m m J Figure 10 0 Long-Term (2020) Total Traffic Volumes North # Lutheran Expansion Ol-173 8/15/01 Lutheran Medical Center Expansion Traffic Impact Study VI. TRAFFIC OPERATIONS A. Short-Term Levels of Service Capacity analyses were performed for the peak hours at each of the three site access points. Figure 11 summarizes the expected operating conditions. The existing configurations were used to evaluate each of the intersections. As can be seen, the critical movements at the intersections analyzed are projected to operate at LOS D or better with the left-turn out of the site at Lutheran Parkway West being the exception. In the short-term, the left-turn out of the site at Lutheran Parkway West operates at a LOS F in the pm peak. The traffic generated by the cardiology expansion is not expected to deteriorate conditions in the short-term future, the projected increase in background traffic is causing the operations to deteriorate. Short-term traffic volumes do not warrant a traffic signal at Lutheran Parkway West and 381h Avenue or at Lutheran Parkway and 32nd Avenue based on the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) peak hour warrant criteria. The peak hour warrant criteria are the easiest of the 11 warrants to meet. The intersections did not meet warrants due to low side street volumes. B. Long-Term Levels of Service Capacity analyses were again performed at each of the three intersections. The existing configurations were also used to perform the long-term analyses. Figure 12 illustrates 4 the LOS and land configuration for the long-term future. r As in the short-term analysis, most movements are operating at LOS C or better. The left-turn out of the medical facility at Lutheran Parkway West deteriorates to LOS D in the am peak and LOS F in the PM peak similar to the projected short-term future conditions. Long-term traffic volumes do not warrant a traffic signal at Lutheran Parkway West and 38`h Avenue or at Lutheran Parkway and 32"d Avenue based on MUTCD peak hour warrant criteria. P FELSBURG OHOLT & ■ ULLEVIG Page 16 FELSBURG VOLT & ULLEVIG ro 1 a/a A/A ~ F` I U v .a to ~ LUTHERAN s MEDICAL Q. CENTER ~ m w J r i ~c - -m L F, L 32 s CC U Ave. - 4r- - a/a - " LEGEND X/X = AM/PM Peak Hour Signalized Level of Service x/x = AM/PM Peak Hour Unsignalized Level of Service = Stop Sign = Traffic Signal I 0 North Lutheran Expansion 01-173 8/15101 Figure 11 Short-Term (2008) Lane Configuration & Levels of Service FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG w b a/a A/A - 38th Ave. ~ a/a - - w~ y LUTHERAN Y E: MEDICAL a ii CENTER ~L' m N Z J L yr^ CQ U i E 32nd Ave. - a/a --4 LEGEND X/X = AM/PM Peak Hour Signalized Level of Service x/x = AM/PM Peak Hour Unsignalized Level of Service = Stop Sign = Traffic Signal Figure 12 L 0 Long-Term (2020) Lane Configuration & Levels of Service North L Lutheran Expansion 01-173 8/3/01 Lutheran Medical Center Expansion Traffic Impact Study VII. SUMMARY The following highlight the findings of this report. • The proposed 74,000 square foot cardiology expansion is proposed to generate a total of 1,055 daily trips, 70 trips in the AM peak hour and 60 trips in the PM peak hour. • Adjacent intersection levels of service are anticipated to be acceptable given projected peak hour operations. • New signals are not warranted at 38th Avenue/Lutheran Parkway West and 32nd/Lutheran Parkway and no other traffic improvements are deemed to be necessary. F" t,. L F"^ L L ^1 F"9t PO FELSBURG C,HOLT d ULLEVIG s i t Page 19 Lutheran Medical Center Expansion APPENDIX A. EXISTING ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS P0 / FELSBURG ■ 4 HOLT & ULLEVIG Traffic Impact Study Lanes, Volumes, Timings I:\01173\Existing\AM.sy6 10: I nt 10/22/2001 Frt A:"850 850' . w„. Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 5attl. "Flow (prot) ;y3539 1583 177D 353J X1770 1583 } F E _ x ~Y lt Permitted 0.457 0.950 rugni i ur ~atd' FIo~ Headway EtW*e Link Dista C; Travel,Ti Volume r~ Peak Ho Add. Flow Lane'Gro Minimum` Total Spill Total Spli Maximum Yellow jr TAll-Red Ti t LeadlLag Lead Lag tJyalkTim_ 4 Flash Dor P.edestna G" Act Effct C ~~tuated v/c Ratio l7 001 D Delay 4: eS Approach Apprpa6-h lrea Type Cycle Lern Actuated Offset: 0 (I r Natural Cy e:~ L 2738 841 2027 1822::: ;1931 48"Is 471 72 225 343 28 512 78 245 373 30 Turn Type Perm Perm custom - Protec#edPhases~_u ~ 4'n 8 Permitted Phases - w q 8 2 Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 FELSBUENGL-FF51 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 10: Int I :\01173\Existin g\AM.sy6 10/22/2001 Control Type: Pretimed MAPuu~ri ilc F3atio. M2 Intersection Signal Delay: 9.8 Intersection LOS: A Splits and Phases: 10: Int m2 mA m8 t Baseline Synchro 5 Report ' Page 2 FELSBUENGL-FF51 Lanes, Volumes, Timings I:\01173\Existing\PM.sy6 10: I nt 10/22/2001 Lane Configurations o a Lost Time s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Tuming"Speed (mph) 9 . 15 _ 15': " 9 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 1.00 . 0.95 1.00 1.00 Fat 0:850 ; ` B50 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd: Flow,(prot) 3539 1583 ,9770 x,5391 X70 1583 - , „ Flt Permitted 0.402 0.950 ~ sy 5.9 1.4 8.8 5.6 16.8 4.9 RM, ach belay 5.3 6.8 8.4 r Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 FELSBUENGL-FF51 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1:\01173\Existing\PM.sy6 10: I nt 10/22/2001 Control Type: Pretimed MaxNrnum vlcf~atioi"0.61 „ Intersection Signal Delay: 6.2 Intersection LOS: A Splits and Phases: 10: Int e2 ed { e8 L L Fr k L E L F t L f ; Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 2 L FELSBUENGL-FF51 't i. r-. 1 usV 1 vl G TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Jennifer Salisbury Intersection Lutheran Pkwy West/38th Agency/Co. FHU Jurisdiction Date Performed 812101 Analysis Year Existin Analysis Time Period M Project Description 01-173 East/West Street: 38th North/South Street: Lutheran Pkwy West Intersection Orientation: East-West Stud Period hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 3 479 80 101 284 3 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 3 504 84 106 298 3 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - - 0 - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 1 2 0 Configuration L TR L T TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 14 0 '34 2 3 3 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 14 0 35 2 3 3 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 0 Configuration - LT R LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L LT R LTR (vph) 3 106 14 35 8 C(m)(vph) 1272 997 209 487 244 lc 0.00 0.11 0.07 0.07 0.03 95% queue length 0.01 0.36 0.21 0.23 0.10 Control Delay 7.8 9.0 23.5 13.0 20.3 LOS A A C B C Approach Delay - 16.0 20.3 pproach LOS C C file://C:\TEMP\u2k68.tmp L 10/22/2001 ..b.. - - 1-11 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst ennifer Salisbury Intersection Lutheran Pkwy West138th Agency/Co. FHU Jurisdiction Date Performed 812101 Analysis Year Existing naIsis Time Period PM Project Description 01-173 East/West Street: 38th North/South Street: Lutheran Pkw West Intersection Orientation : East-West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 15 512 26 36 695 8 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 15 538 27 37 731 8 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - 0 - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 1 2 0 Configuration L #TR L T TR U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 75 5 27 0 1 4 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 78 5 133 0 1 4 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 0 Configuration LT R LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L LT R LTR (vph) 15 37 83 133 5 C (m) (vph) 876 1017 179 483 363 lc 0.02 0.04 0.46 0.28 0.01 95% queue length 0.05 0.11 2.19 1.11 0.04 Control Delay 9.2 8.7 41.4 15.3 15.1 LOS A A E C C Approach Delay - - 25.3 15.1 pproach LOS D C file://C:\TEMP\u2k6C.tmp 10/22/2001 I W U- Way J LUP 1. V 11L1 V 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Situ Infnrmntinn rage 1 ot2 Analyst Jennifer Salisbury Intersection Luthern Pkwy/32nd Agency/Co. FHU Jurisdiction Date Performed 812101 Analysis Year Existing nal sis Time Period M file:HC:\TEMP\u2k70.tmp 10/22/2001 r e= f ~r rv: E €v. iW Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst ennifer Salisbury Intersection Luthern Pkwy/32nd Agency/Co. FHU Jurisdiction Date Performed 612101 Analysis Year Existing naIsis Time Period PM Project Description 01-173 East/west Street: 32nd North/South Street: Lutheran Pkwy Intersection Orientation: East-West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 44 254 56 44 331 56 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 46 267 0 0 348 58 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR U stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 111 0 146 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 116 0 153 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Len th, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT L R (vph) 46 116 153 C (m) (vph) 1164 374 674 lc 0.04 0.31 0.23 95% queue length 0.12 1.30 0.87 Control Delay 8.2 18.9 11.9 LOS A C B pproach Delay 14.9 pproach LOS B file:HC:\TEMP\u2k74.tmp 10/22/2001 Lutheran Medical Center Expansion Traffic Impact Study APPENDIX B SHORT-TERM ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS I L 3 3 FELSBURG C,HOLT & ULLEVIG f -1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings I:\01173\Short-Term\AM.sy6 10: I nt 10/22/2001 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 0.07 0.16 Cycle Length 50 Actuated Cycle Lerigih:¢ Offset: 0 (0%) Referen( t f Ubtural Cycle b5 „ Baseline FELSBUENGL-FF51 Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Link Speed (mph)' Link Distance (ft) 2738 841 2027 r- Lanes, Volumes, Timings I:\01173\Short-Term\AM.sy6 10: I nt 10/22/2001 Control Type: Pretimed Maxim umv/c'Ratio: 0 Intersection Signal Delay: 7.3 Intersection LOS: A 4 r-- SDlits and Phases: 10: Int m2 -r and t Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 2 FELSBUENGL-FF51 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 10: Int I :\01173\S ho rt-Term\P M.sy6 10/22/2001 ' * or, , Ideal Flow (vphpl)' "`.'-1900 _;1900 1900 - F900 1900',' 1900 V Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Turning Speed (mpti~ 9 15 15 9 r Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 rt 0850` x0850 4 a 4. n Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Said. Flow (prot) „3539; 1583 1770 259 1770_ A~W83 r s . Flt Permitted 0.349 r, 0.950 , yi 20.0 20.0 Maximum 16.0 16.0 1 h: 40 t^ L Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBL and 6:, Start of Green Lanes, Volumes, Timings 10: Int I :\01173\S hort-Term\PM.sy6 10/22/2001 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/o Ratlois0 52 .rt Intersection Signal Delay: 8.6 Intersection LOS: A IntersectonCapaeV,Uttlrzation42:5% IGII}LevehofServiceA f r:_ tea„ Splits and Phases: 10: Int A,.~: 02 1 o4 08 Ta. S: k rF' k^ r: Baseline Synchro 5 Report f Page 2 FELSBUENGL-FF51 t, . . . iwo-way 3iop ~-omroi r t a ~r rF B-_ F L I. L E rage 1 or TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Jennifer Salisbury Intersection Lutheran Pkwy West/38th Year Short Term North/South Street: Lutheran Pkwy West Intersection Orientation: East-West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments ajor Street Eastbound Westbound ovement I 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume 5 530 80 105 310 5 D eak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 5 557 84 110 326 5 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 1 2 0 Configuration L TR L T TR U stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 15 5 35 5 5 5 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 15 5 36 5 5 5 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 0 Configuration LT R LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L LT R LTR (vph) 5 110 20 36 15 C (m) (vph) 1240 953 177 450 194 Vic 0.00 0.12 0.11 0.08 0.08 95% queue length 0.01 0.39 0.38 0.26 0.25 Control Delay 7.9 9.3 27.9 13.7 25.1 LOS A A D B D -Approach Delay - 18.8 25.1 pproach LOS C D enc /Co . FHU Jurisdiction Date Performed ormed 812101 Analysis nal Isis Time Period M Project Description 01-173 East/West Street: 38th ' file://C:\TEMP\u2k78.tmp 4 10/22/2001 two-way stop uontroi Page 1 of Z I TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Salisburv [Agency/Co. FHU urisdiction Date Performed 812101 nal sis Year Short Term nal sis Time Period PM F a r-, file://C:\TEMP\u2k7C.tmp 10/22/2001 . av v ay " Fvv v rags i ui z I TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Information Analyst Jennifer Salisbury Intersection Luthern Pkwy/32nd Agency/Co. FHU Jurisdiction Date Performed 812101 nal sis Year ShortTerm naIsis Time Period M file://C:\TEMP\u2k80.tmp 10/22/2001 L Two-Way Stop Control Page I of 2 I TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Jennifer Salisbury Intersection Luthern Pkwy/32nd Agency/Co. FHU Jurisdiction Date Performed 8/2/01 nal sis Year Short Term MI Isis Time Period PM file://C:\TEMP\u2k84.tmp 10/22/2001 Lutheran Medical Center Expansion Traffic Impact Study APPENDIX C. LONG-TERM ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS f FELSBURG (4 HOLT S ULLEVIG Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1:\01173\Long-Term\AM.sy6 10: I nt 10122/2001 Lane Configurations r Vi t+ !deal Flow, (uphpl) 1900;. .'1900 1900 :•1900 1.900 ` 1900 ` F Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 , 4.0 Turning Speed (mphj '9 15 9 s m Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 rt ,0:850 FltProtec ted 0.950 0.950 Satd.Flow(prot) s 3539: 1383 1770 f'~ 3 539 1770 1583 , 4 4 Flt Permitted 0.402 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) F~ 3539; )583 .';749 539177D µ A583= s ' k ,z , s , Right Turn on Red . Yes s z , L v Yes 1.00 1.00 1.00 Link Distance 2027 570 90 Flow 272 457 38 custom 4 8 Uttset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2 NBL and 6:, Start of Green Natural Cycle: fi0 << Baseline Synchro 5 Report L FELSBUENGL F Pagel L - F51 Lanes, Volumes, Timings I:\01173\Long-Term\AM.sy6 10: Int 10/22/2001 Control Type: Pretimed Maxjmurrv/~t~atio'Bfy...~ Intersection Signal Delay: 6.2 Intersection LOS: A Splits and Phases: 10: Int `o2 MOMMMEMENNI= -►m4 17 08 _ `a r r i. r r. n Baseline Synchro 5 Report I', Page 2 L FELSBUENGL-FF51 L Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1:\01173\Long-Term\PM.sy6 10: I nt 10122/2001 Lane Configurations if tt Vi Ideal Flow (vphpl) 19obr - 11 1900 A 000"--1g00 1900 1900 _ Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ~ Turning Speed (mpf~j . _ 9 15 15'r 9 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 . _ _ 1.00 1.00 Frt X Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd."Flow; (prat) 339 183 14770 3539 1770 ' 71583 s " J ~x' Fit Permitted „ 0.310 0.950 vpn) 139 54 125 842 125 272 p Flow (yph) 739 54 125 ,842 125 "27.2 Perm Perm custom Phases 4 ; 8 Phases 4 8 2 2 I otal Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 L Total Split' ?4) d 50% 50% 5t)% `50°10 5000% Maximum Green (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 Yellow,Time {s) T~3 5r x 3y5£ 3 5 3 5 3 5 3 `5 All Red Time (s) _ 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 R N, t Lead Lag Optimize? Ut/alk Time (s) = 3'~ 0. 5f0 S A, Y 5:0 ' 0 r 5 0S Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 al ht ,rte 0 ~y 0Z `0~ 0 0 0- Act Effct Green (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 'D 40= b A0, { 0.40 ,Dµ40 , C)40,~p~0~10 v/c Ratio 0.52 0.08 0.54 0.59 0.18 0.39 Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 FELSBUENGL-FF51 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 10: Int I:\01173\Lo ng-Term\PM.sy6 10/22/2001 Control Type: Pretimed r 9.2 Intersection LOS: A Splits and Phases: 10: Int °r t o2 - 0► o4 F- r 08 Baseline Synchro 5 Report FELSBUENGL-FF51 Page 2 L~` I wu-Way Oiup i.uiirrur Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Jennifer Salisbury Intersection Lutheran Pkwy West138th Agency/Co. FHU urisdiction Date Performed 812101 nal sis Year 2020 Analysis Time Period M Project Description 01-173 East/west Street: 38th North/South Street: Lutheran Pkw y West Intersection Orientation : East-West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume 5 600 85 105 345 5 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 5 631 89 110 363 5 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - 0 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 1 2 0 Configuration L TR L T TR U stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume 15 5 35 5 5 5 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 15 5 36 5 5 5 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 0 Configuration LT R LTR Dela , Queue Len th, and Level of Service pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L LT R LTR (vph) 5 110 20 36 15 C (m) (vph) 1202 891 149 401 161 We 0.00 0.12 0.13 0.09 0.09 95% queue length 0.01 0.42 0.45 0.29 0.30 Control Delay 8.0 9.6 32.9 14.9 29.6 LOS A A D B D Approach Delay - 21,3 29.6 pproach LOS C D file://C:\TEMP\u2k88.tmp 10/22/2001 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Jennifer Salisbury Agency/Co. FHU Date Performed 812101 nal sis Time Period PM 0.25 nts voiume 75 63U 3U 40 835 10 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 15 663 31 42 878 10 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - 0 Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 1 2 0 Configuration L TR L T TR U stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 80 5 130 5 5 5 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 84 5 136 5 5 5 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 0 Configuration 7 1 LT R LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L LT R LTR (vph) 15 42 89 136 15 C (m) (vph) 771 911 120 399 71 is 0.02 0.05 0.74 0.34 0.21 95% queue length 0.06 0.14 4.16 1.48 0.73 Control Delay 9.8 9.1 92.6 18.6 68.8 LOS A A F C F Approach Delay - 47.9 68.8 file://C:\TEMP\u2k8C.tmp 10/22/2001 Two-Way Stop Control r r c L.¢ fi C ~I L L E L L Page I of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst ennifer Salisbury Intersection Luthern Pkwy/32nd Agency/Co. FHU Jurisdiction Year 2020 Project Description 01-173 Street: 32nd North/South Street: Lutheran Pkwy Intersection Orientation: East-West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 140 270 56 130 215 115 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 147 284 0 0 226 121 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - 0 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 Configuration LT T R U stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T is R L T R Volume 0 0 0 50 0 35 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 52 0 36 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes - 0 0 0 1 0 1 Configuration L R Dela , Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT L R (vph) 147 52 36 C (m) (vph) 1223 312 818 lc 0.12 0.17 0.04 95% queue length 0.41 0.59 0.14 Control Delay 8.3 18.8 9.6 LOS A C A Approach Delay - 15.1 pproach LOS - C Date Performed 8/2/01 Analysis nal Isis Time Period M file://C:\TEMP\u2k90.tmp 10/22/2001 Iwo-way stop Lontrol i Yage 1 012 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Jennifer Salisbury Intersection Luthern Pkwy/32nd Agency/Co. FHU Jurisdiction Date Performed 812101 Analysis Year 2020 naIsis Time Period PM Proect Descri lion 01-173 EasUWest Street: 32nd North/South Street: Lutheran Pkw Intersection Orientation: East-West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 45 310 56 130 405 65 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 47 326 0 0 426 68 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 Configuration LT T R L T ~ R L T R Volume 0 0 0 120 0 155 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 126 0 163 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes _ 0 0 0 1 0 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT L R (vph) 47 126 163 C (m) (vph) 1080 320 633 lc 0.04 0.39 0.26 95% queue length 0.14 1.81 1.02 Control Delay 8.5 23.4 12.6 LOS A C 8 pproach Delay 17.3 pproach LOS C file://C:\TEMP\u2k94.tmp 10/22/2001