HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning And Zoning Board - Minutes - 08/21/2008Chair Schmidt called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
Roll Call: Campana, Lingle, Rollins, Schmidt, Smith, Stockover, and Wetzler
Staff Present: Olt, Eckman, and Sanchez -Sprague
Agenda Review. Interim Director Olt reviewed the Consent and Discussion agenda.
Citizen participation:
None
Chair Schmidt asked members of the audience and the Board if they wanted to pull items off the
consent agenda. Member Lingle asked that the minutes for the July 17°i meeting be taken from
consent as he wanted to recommend changes.
Consent Agenda:
2. 4800 Innovation Drive —Addition of a Permitted Use, #18-08
Discussion Items:
1. Minutes from the July 17, 2008 Planning and Zoning Board Hearing
3. North College Marketplace — Addition of a Permitted Use, #23-08
Member Stockover moved for the approval of the Consent Agenda including 4800 Innovation
Drive — Addition of a Permitted Use, # 18-08. Member Smith seconded the motion. The
motion was approved 7:0.
Minutes from the July 17, 2008 Planning and Zoning Board Hearing
Member Lingle asked for the following changes:
Page 11, paragraph 2 to "...current zoning as compared to a rezoning."
Page 11, paragraph 4 to "...Has the sentiment changed? Waido said..."
Chair Schmidt asked for the following change:
Page 4, end of paragraph 4 to "...grade change there. It is likely there is a flat section between
fence and curb."
Member Stockover moved for the approval of the July 17, 2008 Planning and Zoning Board
Hearing minutes as revised. Member Campana seconded the motion. The motion was
approved 7:0.
Planning & Zoning Board
August 21, 2008
Page 2
Project: North College Marketplace — Addition of a Permitted Use, #23-08
Project Description: This is a request to add Drive-in Restaurants and Gasoline Stations as an
Addition of Permitted Uses in the Community Commercial North College zone
district specifically for the property at the northeast corner of North College
Avenue and East Willox Lane (excluding the existing North College Motors and
Pobre Pancho's properties). The property is undeveloped; however, a
supermarket -anchored shopping center is being proposed. This request for the
addition of permitted use includes restaurants with drive-in/through facilities and
gasoline stations. More specifically, the proposed permitted uses would allow
for a maximum of one (1) gasoline station and four (4) drive-in restaurants. The
request is intended to further facilitate the redevelopment of a critical property
within the North College Avenue Corridor. The parcel is approximately 26 acres
in size and zoned CCN, Community Commercial North College.
Recommendation: Approval
Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence
Interim Planning Director Steve Olt reported the site is currently undeveloped. The proposed uses,
Drive-in Restaurants and Gasoline Stations, are not permitted in the CCN District. The proposed
uses have been reviewed by the criteria of Section 3.5.1 which addresses compatibility with the
surrounding area.
This new process was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board in May of 2008
and granted final approval by City Council on July 1, 2008. The process is equivalent to a Type Two
review in that a neighborhood meeting is required and consideration is by the Planning and Zoning
Board.
The new Addition of a Permitted Use is basically an extension of Section 1.3.4 of the Land Use Code
which, prior to July 1, 2008, allowed the Director to add a use to a zone but only so long as:
Such use is not specifically listed as a "Permitted Use" in Article 4;
• Such use is not specifically listed by name as a prohibited use in the zone district to
which it is added.
Now, under the expanded process, the Planning and Zoning may add a use to zone under the
following criteria:
• Such use may be specifically listed as a "Permitted Use" in Article 4;
But, such use, if approved, would be allowed only for the one specific parcel as
requested by the applicant and not on a zone district -wide basis.
The property is undeveloped; therefore, there have not been any previous uses, other than possibly
residential uses. No structures currently exist. Proposed uses are defined as:
Drive-in Restaurant shall mean any establishment in which the principal business is the sale of
foods and beverages to the customer in a ready -to -consume state and in which the design or
principal method of operation of all or any portion of the business is to allow food or beverages
to be served directly to the customer in a motor vehicle without the need for the customer to
exit the motor vehicle.
Planning & Zoning Board
August 21, 2008
Page 3
Gasoline Station shall mean any building, land area, premises or portion thereof, where
gasoline or other petroleum products or fuels are sold and light maintenance activities such as
engine tune-ups, lubrication, minor repairs and carburetor cleaning may be conducted.
Gasoline Station shall not include premises where heavy automobile maintenance activities
such as engine overhaul, automobile painting and body fender work are conducted.
The Applicant has provided the following description of the surrounding area:
The project site is generally located on the east side of North College Avenue at the northern
'Gateway' of the City limits. In its current state, North College Avenue lacks curb & gutter,
sidewalks, and streetscape along both the east and west sides of the street as well as the
operational capacity to accommodate the traffic generated by the development of the area.
Within the site, proposed improvements are to extend to Grape Street to the north and to East
Willox Lane to the south. Currently, Pobre Pancho's Mexican restaurant and North College
Motors auto dealership exist at the southwest comer of the proposed site. The eastern edge
is currently a natural area with some wetlands extending into the center of the site. The
natural area is mostly surrounded by the Larimer & Weld Canal to the north and east with a
small section at the southeast comer abutting an existing residential property in the County.
Immediately adjacent to the canal are lands and uses in Larimer County. The southeast
corner of the intersection of East Willox Lane and Blue Spruce Drive is currently zoned
Medium Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood (MMN). Properties west of North College Avenue
and south of East Willox Lane are located in the Commercial North College District (CN).
In addition to the Applicant's contextual analysis, Staff notes that the property directly south, across
East Willox Lane, is an existing Albertson's Supermarket -anchored shopping center that contains an
Albertson's gasoline station and a Burger King drive-in restaurant.
A Neighborhood information meeting was held Thursday, August 7, 2008. There was significant
attendance at that meeting. Notes for that meeting will be available at the time the Board reviews the
Project Development Plan (PDP.)
Staff recommends that Drive-in Restaurants, a total of four (4), and Gasoline Stations, a total of one
(1), be added as allowable uses in the Community Commercial North College zone district specifically
for the property at the northeast comer of North College Avenue and East Willox Lane (excluding the
existing North College Motors and Pobre Pancho's properties), to be known as the North College
Marketplace - #23-08. A recommended condition of approval memo (dated August 21, 2008 from Olt)
was included in the Board's materials for their consideration tonight. The memo speaks to the
proposed addition of permitted use —building permits will not be issued on any building until a formal
development plan has been submitted, reviewed, and approved on the proposed site and a building
permit has been issued for an anchor store of not less than 45,001 square feet in size in the center.
The project outside boundaries are subject to change within the defined CCN District bounded by
North College Avenue to the west, East Willox Lane to the south, the Larimer & Weld Canal to the
north and east, and the residential property in Larimer County to the east.
Chair Schmidt asked for confirmation that the uses approved tonight would be a part of the outside
boundaries when the POP is reviewed. Olt replied yes.
Eric Holsapple, Manager of Loveland Commercial and 1908 N. College, LLC, introduced partners
Nathan Klein and Blaine Rappe. Also with them was Bruce Hendee of BHA Design. They are
developers of Thompson Valley TowneCenter, an 115,000 square foot King Soopers anchored
Planning & Zoning Board
August 21, 2008
Page 4
shopping center in Loveland. It was a part of an 80 acre mixed use project with residential
apartments. It has been very successful with King Soopers continuing to do well at that location.
The site at 1908 N. College was previously owned by Jim Smith. That property has languished. Most
recently Developer Jim Sullivan tried to place a smaller King Soopers anchored center. With the
improvements to the Dry Creek Flood zone and the creation of the North College Urban Renewal
Zone, it made the project more feasible.
In addition to the 23 acres purchased from Jim Smith they are negotiating for the purchase of Y: acre
on the north side of Frank Perez's (Pobre Pancho) property, the mobile home park south of Grape
Street, and two residential properties on the east end of Grape Street, totaling 25.5 acres. Both Pobre
Pancho's and North College Motors will stay in place. They will be providing access into the shopping
center should they want it.
They are negotiating with King Soopers. They don't "have the deal done." They understand that if the
deal for King Soopers is not secured, they need to come in with another anchor. The fast food pads
are generally being considered along the two North College entry points with an "end cap" drive-thru
such as Starbucks on the north side of the site. An integral part of anchored shopping centers are
drive-thru restaurants. Gasoline stations are required for an anchor tenant to consider locating on this
site. For this project to be successful fast food drive-thru must be a part of the project.
Fast food drive-thrus and gasoline stations are allowed in the CN Zoning west and south of the site.
It's consistent with similar anchored developments. In summary, they are a capable development
team who's successfully completed development of this type before, it's a catalyst project for North
College supported by the North Fort Collins Business Association, and they need P&Z approval of
additional uses to move forward with the POP submittal. Neither King Soopers nor they are
comfortable moving forward unless they know that these uses would be acceptable. He requested
the Board's support.
Member Lingle noted the gas station depicted there was a canopy with gas stations only. At work
session the Board considered adding a condition that excluded minor vehicle repair from the
allowable uses under a gas station. Would that be acceptable to the applicant? Holsapple said he
did not have a huge problem with it. Member Wetzler asked if they were considering a vehicle
emissions site. Holsapple said they do not have the size to accommodate that use and preserve the
wetlands.
Chair Schmidt asked if Grape Street would stay as a street and if you don't acquire the properties,
would it always require people to come in and out via that street. Holsapple said they intend to
provide accesses for the Grape Street residents. They are not proposing to close Grape Street.
There will be a plan that comes from CDOT (Colorado Department of Transportation) and the City. It
is they who make the decision on how Grape Street will work. The applicant thinks it's important for
connectivity to provide access that serves that neighborhood.
Chair Schmidt asked about the neighbor's feedback on permitted uses at the neighborhood
information meeting. Holsapple does not remember any specific information on drive-thrus. Staff
member Olt added there was not any real detailed/specific discussion on permitted uses. Holsapple
said there have been some conversations with the Mayes (who live directly north) about moving
access to the east end of Grape Street.
Chair Schmidt asked if drive-in restaurants are allowed to have sit-down if they choose to. Olt said
yes. Holsapple agreed. Schmidt asked what else besides drive-thru restaurants are you considering.
Planning & Zoning Board
August 21, 2008
Page 5
Holsapple said it could be a dry cleaners, pharmacy, or bank. Holsapple said the proposed
supermarket is very large, with 123,000 square feet. It'll have a lot of uses inside. For the uses
around it to do well they have to be pretty convenient, otherwise people are just going to go into the
store. The applicant is really trying to serve both the anchor and the drive-thru components.
Chair Schmidt asked for clarification ... one anchor and everything else a drive-thru. Holsapple said
no, not at all. They want to be able to accommodate tenants who need drive-thru to be competitive.
Holsapple's colleague, Nathan Klein, said there is shop space with no drive-thru. There will be more
than just convenience oriented tenants.
Member Rollins asked if there was an access point into Grape Street from the proposed site.
Holsapple said they propose a tie to Grape Street —without that one they may ultimately end up with
two connections to Grape Street. Rollins said that was of great concern to her. It would completely
change the characteristics of that street (it's currently a dead end street that's not even two lanes
wide.) Holsapple said they've had numerous conversations with the two residential property owners.
He thinks the neighbors want it ... if they don't it's not integral to their development. He's aware of
Rollins concern and hopes to have a win -win by the PDP.
Chair Schmidt cautioned the applicant. If approved now, there is still some room for changes at the
PDP stage if there are concerns about traffic or one of the uses in one of the areas is going to
generate negative impacts. There are no guarantees at the PDP stage. Holsapple said they
understand their site plan and traffic circulation has to work. Further, Bruce Hendee will be working
with them to make sure that happens.
Chair Schmidt wondered if the traffic generated would warrant a round -about. Holsapple said he did
not have his traffic consultant Eric Bracke here tonight ... he wasn't expecting the question.
Deputy City Attorney Eckman referred to the staff report and the recently approved (March, 2008)
amendment to the Land Use Code (addition to permitted uses.) He read into the record the criteria on
which Addition of Permitted Uses (LUC 1.3.4) can be approved.
(A) Required Findings. In conjunction with a particular development proposal and upon
application by the applicant or on the Director's own initiative, the Director (the Planning &
Zoning Board as specifically authorized in subparagraphs (5) and (6) below) may add to the
uses specified in a particular zone district any similar use which conforms to all of the
following conditions:
1. Such use is appropriate in the zone district to which it is added;
2. Such use conforms to the basic characteristics of the zone district and the other
permitted uses in the zone district to which it is added;
3. Such use does not create any more offensive noise, vibration, dust, heat, smoke, odor,
glare or other objectionable influences or any more traffic hazards, traffic generation or
attraction, adverse environmental impacts, adverse impacts on public or quasi -public
facilities, utilities or services, adverse effect on public health, safety, morals or aesthetics,
or other adverse impacts of development, than the amount normally resulting from the
other permitted uses listed in the zone district to which it is added;
4. Such use is compatible with the other listed permitted uses in the zone district to which it
is added;
5. Such use is not specifically listed by name as a prohibited use in the zone district to
which it is added, or if such use is prohibited, the proposed use is specific to the
proposed site, is not considered for a text amendment under paragraph (B) below, and is
specifically found by the Planning and Zoning Board to not be detrimental to the public
Planning & Zoning Board
August 21, 2008
Page 6
good and to be in compliance with the requirements and criteria contained in Section
3.5.1;
6. Such use is not specifically listed as a "Permitted Use" in Article 4 or if such use is not
specifically listed, the proposed use is specific to the proposed site, is not considered for
a text amendment under paragraph (B) below, and is specifically found by the Planning
and Zoning Board to not be detrimental to the public good and to be in compliance with
the requirements and criteria contained in Section 3.5.1 (See Section 2.9 for procedures
for text amendments.)
Chair Schmidt asked if there was a magic number of drive-thrus. Holsapple said they just asked for
the use —staff suggested a number. Four fast-food establishments were what they arrived at. He
admitted there could be a different number later.
Member Lingle asked staff how does our definition of a drive-in restaurant address things like Red
Robin, Chili's or Appleby's that have parking spaces for people who pick-up food. They don't get out
of their car (staff from the restaurant brings their food out.) If that's an alternative it appears it could
fit without a drive-thru lane and could reduce traffic. Staff member Olt said that was an interesting
thought. We really haven't ever thought of something like that. The definition of Drive -In Restaurant
in the Code accommodates that type of arrangement.
Lingle said that what they ve heard from the neighbors is they'd like to see more sit-down
establishments in that neighborhood. Would a sit down restaurant take one of the four allowed slots?
Olt said no —we would not considered Red -Robin or Appleby's a drive-thru restaurant.
Public lnaut
Kathleen KilKelly, 920 Inverness (Larimer County.) The home is located off Hwy 1 to the east about
2-3 miles from this site. She'd like to know what year this property was changed to include
supermarket? Chair Schmidt said in 2002 City Council approve supermarkets in this zoning district.
Kilkelly said she can't believe in their wildest dreams they thought it would be a 123,000 square foot
super market. She would like to request the Board not allow the additional uses to this property.
There has been talk of decreasing auto -related business in the North College area. This proposal
strictly relies on and caters to the use of automobile. Besides the national trend about Americans
desire for convenience, there's a national trend toward obesity because people do not get out of their
cars and walk. She said it is a public health concern. That concern and Board review criteria such as
not detrimental to the public good and not create problems in public health are arguments against it.
She believes the traffic issues are also compounded by the additional uses that depend entirely upon
an automobile. She would like to ask the Board to at least substantially limit the number —not four fast
food drive-thrus.
Ed Zdenek, Zfl Development Group, 2120 S. College noted he had several properties in Fort Collins
that he manages including the development to the south of the proposed site which includes
Albertsons. He attended the neighborhood meeting and was struck by a comment from Holsapple—
"did any body think we did a good job?" Zdenek said yes, he thinks they're doing okay. He does
have concerns however; 1) the proposed anchor is 2.5 times larger than Albertson's due south and 2)
a change of access to Albertsons due to the proposed round -about —he knows he'll more about that
later at the PDP. With regard to the concern about obesity, he does use services such as pickup
after a call -ahead order —most people do. Being in the marketplace, the information you are being
given by the developer is pretty correct. More and more people are using these services therefore
they are being included in designs. Zdenek is more interested in servicing the client. Finally, his last
concern was directly south they have the ability to put in a drive-thru. He asked for a clarification of
Planning & Zoning Board
August 21, 2008
Page 7
the process. Is it possible to come in with a POP then go do a plat with that POP that would allow four
restaurants in the front and then bring those in individually with the PDP? Are they tied together
procedurally or not?
Finally, it's a difficult piece of property and he thinks the developer is doing a very good job.
Chair Schmidt asked Zdenek if on his property there is another drive-in approved that is not being
used at this time. Zdenek said that zone allows for drive-ins and there is still space in that area. He
added —national tenants gravitate to other national tenants. You are more likely to find market need
adjacent to a major super market than in an in -line situation on North College.
Mike Kronenberger, Manager of North College Motors (adjacent to the proposed site), said with the
original zoning request from CCN to CN heard by the Board in July, they were included. With the use
of the Addition of Permitted Use, they've been specifically eliminated from any zoning change. Given
the way that things change, he is requesting that his property and that of Pobre Pancho's be included
in any zoning change. If drive-thru is important in marketing, maybe Frank Perez may want to have
that ability to add a drive-thru to his restaurant. Secondly, it is unknown what may come down the
road in 5 to 10 years. They want to be a part of the process that allows them some options.
Kronenberger said the design is going to cause them to lose a part of their frontage, a part of the side
road, and perhaps their access to College Avenue and to Willox--resulting in them needing to have
rear access. Even though they are not being developed, they are a part of the applicant's
development process. He requested those two properties are also a part of the plan for development
possibilities in the future.
Nancy York, a member of the City's Air Quality Advisory Board, is speaking tonight as an individual
citizen. She is not in favor of adding permitted uses because they are automobile -centric. Both Fort
Collins and North Front Range is out of compliance in meeting ozone requirements. With
automobiles being the primary source of ozone pollution, it has become a public health issue. There
will also be economic consequences if we are not able to bring ourselves into compliance.
York added automobiles also release carbons and influence climate change. She believes drive-thrus
for convenience sake is an old national trend. New trends are being established. With the high cost
of gasoline there is a reduction in gasoline consumption and it is better for our health. She's
concerned about the traffic that will be generated near the intersection of College & Willox. To add a
gas station would bring the number of gas stations at that intersection to four. Finally, she asked the
manager of Albertson's how many people they employ and was told 120. Those 120 employees
could be directly impacted by the decision tonight. She encouraged the Board to think about the
national trends and move in a new direction as a society. She asked them to consider the issues of
ozone and climate change in their decision.
Robert Breckenridge, 9552 Poudre Canyon, Bellvue, is the owner of the NE comer of Grape Street
and North College. The City did not allow him to put a business in that location so now he's "stuck
with" the property and, like Mike Kronenberger, if you're going to change the zoning for that area than
it should be changed for everybody that has property there as they are being impacted by this
development. Basically, he's being shut down "again" with this piece of property and not being
allowed to do anything with it
Member Rollins asked specifically where Mr. Breckenridge's property was located. The NE corner of
Grape and College? Member Stockover asked if that's where the rafting company was a year ago.
Planning & Zoning Board
August 21, 2008
Page 8
Breckenridge said that's where he wanted a rafting company to be but the City basically said he
couldn't do that unless he spent $2,000,000 and that put an end to it. When he couldn't use the
property on Grape for parking, he tried to put parking on his northern parcel but the County shut him
down. He'd like to be able to sell the two pieces of property separated by the ditch. Chair Schmidt
asked what was the size of the properties. Breckenridge responded both are 3/10s of an acre —they
are mislabeled in County records because part of the property was given to the neighbor to the west
and the paper work was not completed.
Chair Schmidt said the all properties are in the CCN zone so all the other uses besides what we're
discussing tonight would be available. Are there other reasons you've not been able to do anything
on the property. Breckenridge said that's right --the CCN zone allows you to do virtually nothing. With
the restrictions of the road and all the restrictions on the property with Grape Street, it's basically
useless. He heard the City was going to zone CN and they were never notified that had fallen
through. Now he's hearing that this zoning change will also not include them.
Mike Legate, 2915 W. Mulberry, owns Mr. Mechanic at 172 Spaulding. He's naive to the project —
he's only just heard rumors. He thinks it's great from a North College business development
standpoint. We get a lot of traffic from the north (Wyoming) and it would be great for them to have
something there. When they come to his business they often ask about accommodations. This is a
great plan. He's curious if the City s going to annex Spaulding —how will it affect Hwy 1 and the ditch?
From a city growth and development standpoint, he supports this. Chair Schmidt asked if Spaulding
was on the north side of the ditch. Legate said yes, you can catch it off Hwy 1.
Jerry Davis lives directly east of the applicant's property. He noted that Eric Holsapple and his group
have been very courteous. One thing if this development is approved you might save people from
going all the way to Harmony to shop. You would cut down on traffic heading south. He's in favor of
the project and just wants to work out his situation and Eric and they are in the process of doing that.
End of Public Input
Chair Schmidt said the Board or staff would address the questions raised/comments made. The Land
Use Code has a minimum square footage for supermarket but there is no maximum. At the time they
were approved they could be as large as they wanted to be. Staff member Olt said that's correct,
there is no maximum size in the definition of a supermarket.
Chair Schmidt asked the applicant what types of services would be available in the anchor store.
Holsapple said the trend is to add a lot more fresh produce and a lot more deli. They also bring in
small appliances like toasters and coffee pots. They will have complimentary furnishings like lawn
and barbeque accessories. The "other" uses are less than 15% of the total sales. There could be a
Starbucks or some other coffee shop in the store. Nathan Klein said of the 123,000 square feet,
100,000 will be items found in a traditional grocery store.
Chair Schmidt said tonight's proceedings are not really a rezoning. That was requested previously
and the Board recommended the property not be rezoned. The applicant is requesting certain uses
that are not permitted in the zone. If you are part of the development then those uses could also
apply. You would be entitled to ask for them just as this developer is doing. Olt said that's correct.
Within the site, proposed improvements are to extend to Grape Street to the north and to East Willox
Lane to the south. Immediately adjacent to the canal are lands and uses in Larimer County. The
southeast corner of the intersection of East Willox Lane and Blue Spruce Drive is currently zoned
Medium Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood (MMN). Properties west of North College Avenue and
south of East Willox Lane are located in the Commercial North College District (CN).
Planning & Zoning Board
August 21, 2008
Page 9
Olt said if a formal development plan came in on the entire group of properties and it could be
designed and integrated into the shopping center then it could happen on any or all of the properties.
Chair Schmidt asked if Mr. Zdenek concern about the construction of drive-thru' prior to the
construction of the anchor store would be addressed. Staff member Olt said that based on the
condition put before the Board, they could not occur. The City is not wanting a number of free
standing fast food restaurants and a gas station that are not a part of a development with an anchor
store. Schmidt asked 1 without the condition that would be a possibility. Olt said yes.
Member Lingle asked if the City decided North College Motors and Pobre Panchos were a part of this
center in terns of a POP review, and the restaurant decided they wanted a drive-in window; would
they take one of the four slots that are being requested. Would it infringe on this applicant's request?
Lingle asked if that is staffs intent or could that happen as a result of that condition. Olt said they're
still looking at a conceptual plan that does not include the two properties on the southwest corner of
the center or the three residential properties on the north side. It is conceivable that any of those 5
properties IF included and integrally functioning as a part of the center would then, in fact, use one of
the four drive-in restaurant pad sites. Holsapple said their application does not include those parcels.
They don't mind whatever those owners and the City do regarding drive-thru but they wouldn't want
them to come off one of their drive-thru sites. (He said it was different when the rezoning came
through —that came from staff and all the properties were included.)
Member Smith said if Pobre Pancho's is outside the POP and applies independently for a drive-thru
function, that wouldn't affect this application —taking away one of the four drive-thrus allowed. Staff
member Olt agreed. Chair Schmidt noted any condition (relative to number of drive-thrus) is related
to this application only. Member Smith said If Pobre Pancho's wanted that use in this zone, he would
have to make application for that use and it would be reviewed by the Board based on its own merits.
Deputy City Attorney Paul Eckman said they couldn't' just ask for it out of the blue. They have to ask
for it in conjunction with a particular development proposal. See Ordinance 73-2008/1.3.4 (a) required
findings... in conjunction with a particular development proposal.
Chair Schmidt asked for a comparison to the application approved on consent (4800 Innovation Drive
— Addition of a Permitted Use, #18-08.) It was a part of a POP at one time. We just approved that it
and it wasn't a part of a particular development proposal --it was just asking for that permitted use on
that particular site. Member Lingle said it was triggered by a Minor Amendment. Olt said that
Innovation Drive was a part of an approved and developed Overall and site specific development
plan.
Member Lingle said he brought the point up because he doesn't want to compromise the site design
in including and providing internal access to these two lots on the southwest comer (which he felt was
very good.) It's going to make the overall site function better but if that somehow inadvertently
triggers penalty to this applicant, than everyone needs to know that up front. Either we have to say
that's not our intent or they ask for five drive-thrus versus four.
Member Campana noted that prior to submittal of the applicant's PDP, things might happen like they
might put the property under contract or they might do a joint venture. If we were to remove the
"excluding" portion related to the adjacent properties and delete the quantity than if conditions change,
we have enough tools in our POP tool box to evaluate and say "6 is too many for that property OR..."
Campana's reluctant to put a restriction on it just to put a restriction on it without seeing a full POP file.
That way the Board will not have to come back if something happens between the parties and the
adjacent property owners.
Planning & Zoning Board
August 21, 2008
Page 10
Chair Schmidt said with regarding to the question from the gentleman on Spaulding Lane. If you're
within the Growth Management Area (which the boundary on the north is Douglas Road) and your
property is next to city limits then annexation is possible. The City doesn't wants to grow in a
coherent fashion and do so as a part of the Intergovernmental Agreement between the City and the
County. If you want to develop, then annexation is a part of that process. In that specific area it may
be difficult because it's unknown how things will change there.
Chair Schmidt said with regard to the air quality issues raised --does that get done as a part of the
traffic study? We'll have six drive-thru restaurants within a quarter of a mile. If all those cars are there
idling, will the air quality impact be looked at? Holsapple said in a typical traffic impact study air
quality would not be evaluated. Schmidt asked staff if we ever do an air quality study. Are those
factors consider/reviewed by staff as a part of the development review process?
Eckman said with regard to ozone or other air quality issues you can consider that under #3 in
Permitted Uses. You could see if these proposed uses create more ozone than other uses that are
permitted in that zone district. If so than you can analyze that to say that may be or may not be
approved. Holsapple said that drive-thrus are already approved in the zone. Schmidt said we
probably wouldn't know that until the PDP stage and what's being proposed. Olt said as a part of the
PDP review, we do have in Article 3, Section 3.4.2, air quality, section (a), -- the general development
standard. The project shall conform to all applicable local, state and federal air quality regulations and
standards, including but not limited to those regulating odor, dust, fumes or gases which are noxious,
toxic or corrosive and suspended solid or liquid particles. That's where the Natural Resource
Department, as a part of the development review process, will evaluate that air quality question.
Member Rollins said that she's done a significant number of traffic studies. Air quality is a very
difficult thing to look at on a site by site basis and that's why we have the North Front Range MPO.
That is their job on a regional level. To try to analyze that specifically for the first time ever on this
particular site for this special use would be very difficult to do. We'd be coming up with something
we've not previously done in the City of Fort Collins. She is sympathetic with the concerns raised but
that is typically done from a regional standpoint because that's where you have the ability to do it.
There are small things you can do on layout but other than that, she didn't know anywhere where
that's done.
Member Lingle asked if the rezoning request that Advance Planning brought last month was officially
withdrawn. Is it not proceeding to City Council? Olt said it is not proceeding onto City Council. This
action is being considered in lieu of that.
Member Stockover wanted to follow up on Campana's comments. If the applicant were to acquire
Pobre Pancho's and North College Motors, they would own that property and it would be considered
part of the shopping center. They could then use that corner as one of their restaurant sites without
having to come to us. Olt said if it were acquired and included as a part of their formal site specific
PDP, than it would be included and these uses would than be permitted as part of that development
proposal.
Eckman said that's unclear because on page 7 of the staff report staff recommends that a total of 4
drive-thru restaurants and one gas station be added as allowable uses in the CCN North College zone
district: "specifically for the property at the NE corner of College and Willox (excluding North College
Motors and Pobre Pancho's properties.)" These four drive-in restaurants are not to be under that
language —in the memo from Olt dated August 21, 2008 it is broader than that. Eckman said the
better approach is to clarify what it is you want to do and make it clear in the motion. Olt said that if
Planning & Zoning Board
August 21, 2008
Page 11
you want to strike that from the recommendation that is fine because what we have covers it in the
recommended condition. It recommends "integrally part of a planned shopping center* ... boundaries
subject to change..."
Holsapple said it is important to them, because they've been under extensive negotiations with
adjacent property owners, that they not leave them any worse off than they are today. If they can be
a little better off —that's between them and the City of Fort Collins. They (North College Motors and
Pobre Pancho's) are not formally part of their application.
Chair Schmidt said that if the Board does decide to go with a number like four or one and they want to
change those then they could come in and request more permitted uses. Olt said staffs intention with
regard to the compilation of properties (approximately 30 acres in size) is those should be functionally
part of a shopping center. Staff would not be supportive of a request from Pobre Pancho's for a drive-
thru restaurant gaining access solely from College Avenue (with its back turned to the shopping
center.) It would not have a clear connection to the function of the shopping center.
Chair Schmidt asked if the pad sites were about the same size. If we did have a lot of fast food and
the trend did change, would those pads be able to be converted to other uses? Holsapple said they
were not that far along to be able to answer that question —they have some conceptual ideas they are
trying to refine. They really need to know if these uses are going to be allowed to make that progress.
Holsapple said that typically uses regenerate. Look to College Avenue to see how things evolve.
Schmidt wanted to know if we had the flexibility. If we approve drive-thrus, could it be changed to
something else if it needed to be more viable? Holsapple said that typically that's also their concern.
Member Lingle asked Olt with regard to Campana's suggestion that we eliminate the quantity part of
this application and we do is approve additional uses; do we still maintain the ability to restrict the
number of those uses at the PDP level? Lingle couldn't remember ever looking at a PDP that had
allowable uses and than we said 50,000 square feet of this but not 75,000 square feet of that.
Olt said from a straight numerical standpoint in either Article 3 or Division 4.19 (CCN Zoning District
Land Use and Development Standards,) there wouldn't be anything that would directly say we can
have no more than 6, 7, or 8 drive-in restaurants. We get into building and project compatibility in
terms of criteria that both staff and the Board could use to limit the number of drive-in restaurants in
this area. Lingle said he'd be concerned about just opening it up to anything without the ability to
control it at some point.
Member Campana said it would not be a concern for him. He is confident in the use of the
compatibility argument in conjunction with the neighborhood.
Chair Schmidt asked if having a gas station important to having an anchor— this gas station will
definitely be a King Soopers gas station if that's the anchor. Schmidt asked if it had the ability to be
sold and be a separate gas facility. Holsapple said their intention is it's tied —a loyalty card program
where every dollar spent in the store gives you a discount at the pumps. But anything can happen in
corporate America ten years down the road. Today with gas and food prices they feel it's is
absolutely essential they have that at this location.
Applicant Nathan Klein said it could be owned by Kroger but have a different flag (e.g. Loaf & Jug) for
the loyalty connection. Schmidt said she finds it more palatable having the 41' gas station at that
intersection if it looks like it's definitely connected with the store. Olt said what he anticipates is
something like King Soopers has at Rigden Farm (Timberline & Drake) There is a kiosk which is not
more than 150 square feet in size. They have personnel walking out from King Soopers to staff the
kiosk in shifts. The City's also just approved a kiosk almost identical to that at the King Soopers at
Planning & Zoning Board
August 21, 2008
Page 12
Cedarwood Plaza (Taft Hill & Elizabeth.) It'll have the same gasoline station kiosk and nothing more.
We're assuming that is what we're going to see here because of the convenience store to the south
and the requirement that there is a 3/. mile separation between convenience stores.
Eckman said that who owns the gas station is not, in his judgment, something we can legally control.
Ownership is not a legitimate land use issue. From a land use perspective, a gas station is a gas
station no matter who owns it. We couldn't say it has to be owned by the anchor.
Chair Schmidt asked what if we wanted to condition this particular gas station so it not have the
vehicle repair uses that way this gas station would not be quite equal to the definition of gas station in
the Code. Is that something we're able to do? Eckman said yes. Holsapple said that would be
acceptable. If for some reason there is some reason to have that, they'd be happy to bring it back.
Member Rollins said with regard to the allowance of fast food restaurants and the woman's comments
regarding obesity. Has there been any discussion about tying the neighborhood that's north and east
across the ditch to the site from a pedestrian/bike standpoint? Olt said many comments and concerns
were expressed at the neighborhood meeting from residents to the north and northeast of this
property. They'd like to see a bike/pedestrian connection across the ditch.
This was actually a part of the recent City Council pre -application hearing discussion as to whether
the existing North College Access Control Plan should be amended to eliminate a vehicular
connection north from East Willox across this property and the ditch to connect to Spaulding Lane.
The wetlands to the north of this property along the ditch are considered to be a significant wetland.
City Council has asked staff to initiate an amendment to the plan to eliminate any future street
connection.
Olt said in response to Member Rollins questions there have been some ongoing discussions about a
possible bike/pedestrian bridge across the Larimer & Weld Canal. Holsapple said that since he last
spoke with Olt an issue has come up from a couple of neighbors. Depending on feasibility, the
applicant is looking at having a path that would actually be a part of the existing bridge. Bikes and
pedestrians could then make an easier connection. They've heard from Natural Resources that they
don't want pedestrians in the natural areas. It is a concern they are addressing and the Board will see
more at the PDP level.
Member Rollins thinks if we're intensifying the uses and creating uses that are attractive to members
of the neighborhood (including children) than it's imperative, given the increasing traffic, to create
alternative mode options for people that live very close to this site. Holsapple says they are trying to
make an affordable easy connection. That ditch is very wide —it's not going to be feasible to cross it
with a separate pedestrian bridge.
Member Smith asked it you could create some connection at the south end at Valley View Lane and
not touch any of the sensitive areas? Holsapple said no, that's all other people's property and the
wetlands go along the whole end.
Chair Schmidt said that'll be one of her main concerns when we get to the PDP stage. There is a lot
of pedestrian traffic there and adding such high auto intensity uses is going to make it even more
difficult for the pedestrians. There are at least 3 motorized wheel chairs that come from the mobile
home park along the street to the shopping center. Holsapple said consultant Bruce Hendee assures
him he's up to the challenge. Holsapple said at this point people don't even have sidewalks.
Chair Schmidt said that's one of the strong points —many are happy to see this development come
because they have expectations that pedestrian access is also going to be improved.
Planning & Zoning Board
August 21, 2008
Page 13
Member Rollins said the Board will be very interested in the pedestrian impact study portion of the
traffic study.
Member Stockover said the flip side is that no matter where you put a connection you are going to
make an equal number of people unhappy. The connection will funnel a number of people very close
to someone's yard. Hendee said they are going to try and get that connection along College and get it
within the right-of-way so it will be less impact. Stockover said he lives up there and has no problem
making that corner. His family rides their bikes there all the time. Holsapple said there will be bike
lanes on both sides of College Avenue. Stockover is not opposed to if they can't make any
connection. The natural connection of the street works very well without funneling it through that
mobile home park.
Member Smith asked Member Campana—he was suggesting they remove the number of drive-in
restaurants permitted, did you also want to remove the number for gas stations as well? Campana
said their intention is to approve a fueling station to go along with the grocery story so if we want to
leave a restriction of one gas station, he's fine with that.
Member Stockover moved to approve Item 23-08 to add drive in restaurants and gasoline
stations as an addition of permitted uses in the North College Market Place project for the
following reasons. The granting the addition of uses would not be detrimental to the public
good and meet the six criteria for addition of permitted use as found in 1.3.4 of the Land Use
Code. In support of my motion I adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions as contained on
pages 6 and 7 of the Staff Report 1 would also attach the following conditions of approval:
• The first condition is the recommendation outlined In Interim Planning Director Steve
Olt's August 21, 2008 memorandum: Condition of Approval for the North College
Marketplace - Addition of Permitted Uses, # 23-08 that basically states this would be in
conjunction with an approved anchor store of not less than 45,001 square feet in size in
the center.
• The second condition would be revision of the Project Description found on page 1 of
the Staff Report. The revision would read: "This is a request to add Drive-in
Restaurants and Gasoline Stations as an Addition of Permitted Uses in the Community
Commercial North College zone district specifically for the property at the northeast
corner of North College Avenue and East Willox Lane (STRIKING excluding the existing
North College Motors and pobre Pancho's properties). The property is undeveloped;
however, a supermarket -anchored shopping center is being proposed. This request for
the addition of permitted use includes restaurants with drive-In/through facilities and
gasoline stations. More specifically, the proposed permitted uses would allow for a
maximum of one (1) gasoline station and (STRIKING four (4)) drive-in restaurants. The
request is intended to further facilitate the redevelopment of a critical property within
the North College Avenue Corridor. The parcel is approximately 26 acres in size and
zoned CCN, Community Commercial North College.
• STRIKE (excluding the existing North College Motors and Pobre Pancho's properties)
parenthetical in Recommendation on Page 7 of the Staff Report.
• STRIKE "a total of four (4) after Drive -In Restaurants in Recommendation on Page 7 of
the Staff Report.
• On Page 3 of the Staff Report —Description of the Proposed Uses and Previous Uses:
For this proposal and specific to this site, the definition of a Gasoline Station shall
mean any building, land area, premises or portion thereof, where gasoline or other
petroleum products or fuels are sold and (ADD excluding) light maintenance activities
such as engine tune-ups, lubrication, minor repairs and carburetor cleaning may be
Planning & Zoning Board
August 21, 2008
Page 14
conducted. Gasoline Station shall not include premises where heavy automobile
maintenance activities such as engine overhaul, automobile painting and body fender
work are conducted.
Member Campana seconded the motion.
Member Lingle had a question relative to the revision of a definition of a gasoline station. Member
Lingle said as presented in the staff report it's a definition taken directly out of the Land Use Code.
Interim Director Olt agreed that it could not be changed. Member Lingle suggested the addition of
wording: For this proposal and specific to this site (as shown above.)
Member Lingle wondered if we should be revising the description portion because if we said we
recommend approval of this as a part of the North College Market Place plan then that really has the
boundaries covered ... does it not? Interim Director Olt agreed —it's the plan they submit and that plan
is certainly subject to increasing or decreasing in size depending on what parcels/what properties are
a part of the development plan.
Member Stockover thought they should deal with both conditions separately. Chair Schmidt said we
could do this in phases. If we want one of our largest concerns that it does come with an anchor
proposal so that would be one condition that we'd definitely want to have —Member Stockover said
that was covered by including reference to Oit's August 21, 2008 memorandum.
Chair Schmidt said the next part is excluding North College Motors and Pobre Pancho's—is that really
necessary? Deputy City Attorney Eckman said it was necessary to take the parenthetical out if that's
part of the recommendation on page 7 because that doesn't match the condition. Eckman said that it
might be possible for North College Motors and Pobre Pancho's could become a part of this proposal.
Chair Schmidt said the two conditions we have are the memorandum and the change in definition of
gas stations. Eckman agreed ... the change in definition intention was for this particular motion and
this particular project gasoline station means as proposed.
Member Lingle asked if you wanted to vote on the conditions separately. Member Stockover said
no —we just need to clean up the wording separately.
Chair Schmidt said that now that we've left it open-ended, if they decide if every single pad site there
is going to be a fast food or drive-thru restaurant, how are you going to decide which ones are yes
and which ones are no. Member Lingle said that's the part that gives him a little heart -bum. Member
Smith said he shares the same concern but he thinks that a compatibility analysis would limit that.
Member Lingle asked for an example —you'd have to make a finding that 4 are okay but 5 are not —
why is 5 not? What would be the compatibility rationale for that? Chair Schmidt said they might say
the most northernmost might not be because it would negatively impact the residents on Grape
Street.
Applicant Eric Holsapple said he didn't believe it was limited in that way in the CN district. If this was
just a straight CN there wouldn't be a limited number and we'd have the same potential issue nor
does he think we'll have that problem here. Functionally there's a limited amount that you can get in
and work. Member Smith said he'd raised a good point. Smith said to answer Lingle's question,
we're all talking about the same intent. If we're talking about four being the maximum that the
Planning & Zoning Board
August 21, 2008
Page 15
applicant agreed to outside of potentially might be the overall property —maybe we take the four and
add potentially could be if they acquired more property on the north and south —maybe it's seven.
Member Campana said he'd have a hard time restricting it without having the information. He'd have
more background information with a PDP (Project Development Plan) and could evaluate that but to
arbitrarily pick four tonight without a PDP—he's less comfortable with that.
Member Lingle said the only reason that four works because that's what the applicant is asking for —
we're not coming up with that. Member Wetzier said that's what City staff came up when pressing
the applicant for a number. Member Campana said additionally the area might increase —there might
be 5, 7 or 3 (who knows?)
Chair Schmidt said that what we see at the PDP will still just be pad sites. We won't have an idea if
one's going to be. We know they'd be restaurants as opposed to a drive-thru dry cleaner. If they're
all drive-thru restaurants then it would be very much mixed -use (it that's a criterion at all for a good
shopping center.) BHA Design's Bruce Hendee said the reality when you start to do site planning for
the site is that you can't get the access points to work with too many. It seems to be self-limiting just
through the way you have to master plan these things. He thought four was an optimistic number that
they got from City staff. He feels pretty strongly that when they come in with a PDP they'll have some
self-limiting factors that will minimize those.
Member Rollins said she'd agree with that. She's very comfortable leaving it with
Stockover/Campana motion. it would be difficult to add pad sites and get all those turns, drive aisles,
parking, and then traffic at your access points to work. From an internal and external point of view,
it's very difficult to do. If we looked at a site plan and it appeared there were "too many," traditionally,
the traffic impact studies have only look at external intersections. We might ask for some internal lot
analysis to see how the flow would work. King Soopers will want this flow to work. They don't want
customers to come to a shopping center and not be able to get around with the appropriate turning
movements. Rollins said she'll be supporting the motion.
Chair Schmidt will support the motion but she'll be really concerned at the PDP level. She doesn't
want North College to become a "street mall" of fast food restaurants. We already have Burger King
and McDonalds nearby and if you had four more it's an "image" problem. We'll simply be changing
the image from auto parts to fast food restaurants. It could be a detriment in some respect to King
Soopers. Hopefully, if11 reinforce North College Corridor Plan in a little better fashion.
Member Lingle said he'd be voting against the motion. Looking at the site plan, he could easily add
more drive through lanes ... two of the six pads could have drive-thru quite easily. He would disagree
with Rollins on the limitations.
The motion passed 5:2 with Chair Schmidt and Member Lingle dissenting.
Other Business: None.
Meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m.
rA JAP,r) r: -