HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning And Zoning Board - Minutes - 05/21/2009Chair Schmidt called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m.
Roll Call: Carpenter, Lingle, Rollins, Schmidt, Smith, and Stockover
Excused Absence: Campana
Staff Present: Dush, Eckman, Olt, Wempe, Urata, Mapes, Shepard, Barnes, Comstock,
D'Audney, Lukowski, and Sanchez -Sprague
Agenda Review. Director Dush reviewed the Consent and Discussion agenda.
Citizen participation:
Brian Schumm, 7203 Woodrow, wanted to speak to the issue of the Whitman Storage Facility and the
issue of public comment (where he thinks there is a problem.) He did not particularly care for the
outcome of the Whitman Storage Facility but he wanted to say that having observed the Board on that
and other reviews, he appreciates their time and attention to detail. He believes the Board really makes
a difference. He thinks they add rational thought to the land use planning process and he hopes they
continue their good work.
On the issue of the Whitman Storage Facility, as far as his return on investment he's accomplished what
he believes the staff should have done. The 209 (Skyway) issues came up when it was in Larimer
County but City staff failed to follow up on the opportunities they had available to them through the
Intergovernmental Agreement with Larimer County. He feels staff stretched the whole thing out way too
long. He thinks they were not very efficient and not very friendly to the applicant. He thinks the whole
thing should have taken months instead of years. He believes, in part, that was due to staff "flip -flops" —
changes of opinion, changes in staff. He thinks it would benefit the city to do a case study. He thinks an
analysis of the Whitman case would provide some insights into what we see going on with Timnath and
Riverwalk_ He thinks we'll never really know what's going on because a lot of it is legal wrangling and is
done behind closed doors.
In regard to public comment, he thinks the system is broken. Obviously staff and the applicant get
unlimited time to present and rebut. Three minutes is not adequate time for a citizen to discuss the
issues. He's here because if you're. interested you can make a difference. They're here because they
couldn't get what they wanted from staff —there's a disagreement of some sort with staff and they want
resolution. It's also a problem because the staff and the applicant get the last word. That is very much
part of their strategy and they can dump on you at the very last minute and you cannot respond. Also,
with many of the land use issues dealt with here, you cannot confer with your council representative
because they are quasi-judicial. The staff knows that and "plays" that to their benefit.
He thinks two specific problems that need to be addressed are logistics. When you ask why people
aren't there it's because they're busy (have other commitments) and can't attend all meetings.
Sometimes agendas change and you don't know an item's been changed until the very last minute. For
instance, you go to a City Council meeting and you wait until 11 p.m. when it's tabled and goes to the
Planning & Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
Page 2
next meeting. It just seems for that reason alone, why would people want to play a "game" played in that
fashion?
The second thing is often people do not get results. He can't tell you the number of people he's talked to
about having gone to staff (e.g. Southwest Annexation) who feel their issues still have not been
addressed. He can speak to issues about when they built Skyway to College— the city has never
delivered on the commitments they made to them. They have also never enforced the standards they've
placed on them. He said for the time you invest, you get very little back. It discourages many people
from participating in the process.
Chair Schmidt said the Board has discussed in work session how to make citizen participation better at
both neighborhood meetings and hearings. That's one of the reasons they moved public input to give
citizens a chance to hear the presentations by staff and the applicant as well as board member questions
and staff or applicant answers. She understands his frustration and invites him to share any other ideas
he might have with her or Current Planning Director Dush. They are always looking for ways to improve
the process. She also wanted to speak on staff's behalf. Many City offices are short staffed and people
are working as hard as they can to get things done as well as they can.
Deputy City Attorney Eckman said in response to Mr. Schumm comments, the order of presentation is
set out in the Land Use Code (LUC): staff report, applicant, staff response, public testimony, applicant
response and finally staff response to public testimony. He said Mr. Schumm is correct the public is two
steps before the end of the process. If desired, amendments to the text of the LUC can be made by the
Board, the Director, or by City Council.
Consent Agenda:
Chair Schmidt asked members of the audience and the Board if they'd like to pull any items from the
Consent Agenda. There were no requests to pull any items from the consent agenda.
1. Minutes from the April 16, 2009 Planning & Zoning Hearing
Member Stockover moved to approve the consent agenda which includes: item # 1—April 16,
2009 Planning and Zoning Board Hearing minutes. Member Lingle seconded the motion.
The motion was approved 6:0.
Discussion Items:
2. North College MarketPlace, Amended Overall Development Plan, # 42-08
3. North College MarketPlace, Second Filing, Project Development Plan, #43-08
4. 2009 Annual Revisions, Clarifications and Additions to the Land Use Code
Planning & Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
Page 3
Project: North College Marketplace, Amended Overall Development Plan, # 42-08
Project Description: This is a request to amend the approved 28.3 acre, 2-phase (filings) Overall
Development Plan (ODP) for open space/wetland (public facility) and
commercial land uses permitted in the CCN, Community Commercial - North
College District. The use on the 15t Filing (10.9 acres) is existing wetlands and
the uses on the 2nd Filing (17.4 acres) are commercial (supermarket, gasoline
station, standard & drive-in restaurants, small retail, and bank). The current
proposal is to relocate the PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE crossing the
Larimer & Weld Canal, connecting the shopping center with Spaulding Lane to
the north as shown on the previously approved ODP, to a location along the east
side of and adjacent to the North College Avenue bridge crossing of the Larimer
& Weld Canal (at the northwest corner of the subject property). The property is
(generally) located at the northeast corner of North College Avenue and Willox
Lane and is zoned CCN, Community Commercial - North College.
Recommendation: Approval
Hearing Testimonv, Written Comments and Other Evidence
Staff presentation:
City Planner Steve Olt said The North College Marketplace, Amended ODP complies with the applicable
review criteria in the Land Use Code (LUC), including the ODP criteria, the CCN, Community
Commercial — North College District, the General Development Standards, and the adopted Master
Street Plan. He said the current proposal is to relocate the proposed pedestrian bridge crossing the
Larimer & Weld Canal, connecting the shopping center with Spaulding Lane to the north as shown on the
previously approved (January 15, 2009) ODP, to a location along the east side of and adjacent to the
North College Avenue bridge crossing of the Larimer & Weld Canal (at the northwest corner of the
subject property). That change was due to not being able to get approval for a pedestrian/bike bridge
easement from the ditch company who for liability reasons did not want the bridge in the previously
proposed location. The new proposed location would still require the purchase of right-of-way and would
most likely be negotiated in combination with the city and CDOT (Colorado Department of
Transportation). The overall amended ODP does satisfy the conditions of approval of the previously
approved ODP and staff recommends approval.
Member Lingle said it appears the ODP is amended to show a possible relocation of the pedestrian/bike
bridge. In fact negotiations with the ditch company have not been concluded but there is no guarantee at
the ODP level that the location as proposed will occur. Olt said that is correct. We will be discussing that
with the next item (Project Development Plan).
Member Lingle asked Deputy City Attorney Eckman if the city has any rights of eminent domain in this
situation. Eckman said perhaps —it would take some research as both the City and the ditch company
have the power of eminent domain. Eckman thinks because the City is a governmental agency and
because it has to do with a traffic situation they would have dominant power especially if the bridge does
not substantially conflict with the Flow of water. He said any challenge would be an expensive and time
consuming process and it sounds like the ditch company is willing to participate in the city s acquisition of
right-of-way along College Avenue. Eckman said it is a very large and rapid flowing ditch that has had
some fatalities.
Planning & Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
Page 4
Member Lingle asked how the issues would be resolved by moving the crossing 100 feet west. Eckman
said that he would assume that if the City owns the bridge ("in fee") it helps to allay the ditch company's
liability concerns.
Chair Schmidt asked if the City would own it or would the applicant own it. Current Planning Director
Dush said at the originally proposed location which shows the bridge crossing the ditch and traversing
the wetlands; that property on which the trail would have been located would have been dedicated
(owned) to the city. The bridge would have been on an easement over the ditch. In the new location,
staff will be recommending a condition of approval with the PDP that identifies the fee in lieu of in
accordance with level of service in the Land Use Code (LUC).
Member Lingle asked for staffs professional opinion —if the objection to this location was not on the
table, would it be staffs opinion that the original location is preferred? Olt said yes. Director Dush said
in conversations with transportation planning staff relative to the proposed change that the new location
would potentially serve a larger area with future residential.
Applicant's Presentation:
Eric Holsapple, Loveland Commercial Developer, said he had several meetings with the ditch company.
They are far less concerned with the westernmost location as it would be the City's right-of-way/City
liability. In the original location pedestrians would have more access to the ditch road whereas in the
western location they can gate that road and limit access to the ditch.
Chair Schmidt asked when North College adds sidewalks and bikeways would that be in addition to
what's been added with this development. Transportation Planner Matt Wempe said the North College
improvements from Vine to Conifer and the improvements that this development are doing on College
Avenue are a part of the larger pedestrian improvements being made to the North College Corridor.
Public Input:
None
Board Questions:
Member Stockover said he understands there was no real concern at the neighborhood meeting about
moving the bridge. Olt said at the following May 13'h neighborhood meeting only 2 of the 7 people in
attendance spoke. They believed (like the ditch company) that the bridge in the original location was not
appropriate.
Member Rollins asked transportation staff if they would ever look at getting an easement east of the
College Avenue right-of-way. Do they think that moving it to the west is equal to what was originally
proposed? Wempe said the original proposal would have been the preferred location. Olt said the city
will own the wetlands and we'd be able to grant any future easement through that property to the canal if
there was future growth need and we were able to negotiate a bridge crossing with the ditch company in
the original location.
Chair Schmidt wondered if Natural Resources preference was not to have pedestrian/bike trails near
wetlands as mentioned in a discussion during work session. Olt said he is not personally familiar with
what she was referring to. Director Dush said Natural Resources preferences would definitely be taken
into consideration.
Chair Schmidt said if we can't have the pedestrian bridge to the east, she would really suggest not trying
to go across to Spaulding Lane because she just doesn't see how you can have bikes going two different
Planning & Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
Page 5
ways on the same side of College Avenue and there wouldn't be anyway to get across College to the
other side. She's pretty comfortable in having the applicant put the funds in escrow in lieu of building the
bridge.
Member Lingle asked the applicant if the objection from the ditch company was not there, would he be
willing to proceed as it was originally proposed. Holsapple said yes. Lingle said in his opinion this is not
really the applicant's problem. The problem, it appears, is with the ditch for thwarting what he considers
to be better design.
Chair Schmidt asked Eckman if there would be a City effort to try and address this and like situations.
Eckman said he's not familiar with what could be done politically. There may be the power of
condemnation. Also some of the ditch companies have city representatives on their board of directors —
there may be some ways to communicate with them in that venue.
Chair Schmidt asked at a future date what would be the procedure to try to reinstitute the originally
proposed pedestrian crossing. Director Dush said to leave your options open, he'd recommend placing
a note in the file with the recommendation identifying the ODP's proposed relocation (adjacent to the
north College bridge) or another location (indicating the originally proposed location) so should an
opportunity arise, there would be no need to come back with a request to amend the ODP. Chair
Schmidt asked who owns the property north of the originally proposed location. Director Dush said the
design would have taken it directly to city right-of-way.
Member Rollins suggested it would be wise to work with Transportation Planning staff to work with the
ditch companies on an overall plan for key ditch crossings. Chair Schmidt also thought that would be a
good idea.
Member Stockover made a motion to approve the North College Marketplace, Amended Overall
Development Plan, # 42-08. In support of his motion, he adopts the Findings of Fact and
Conclusions on pages 5, 6 and 7 of the staff report:
Section 2.3.2(H) (1) - The Amended ODP is in compliance with the applicable criteria
and zone district standards in the Land Use Code. As set forth in Section
2.1.3(13)(2), an ODP shall be required for any property which is intended to be
developed over time in 2 or more separate project development plan submittals.
This request is for a 2-phase ODP on 28.3 acres. Phase 1 is identified for Wetlands
and Phase 2 is identified for Commercial Uses (supermarket, gasoline station,
standard & drive-in restaurants, small retail, and bank). The applicant currently has
a PDP for Phase 1, containing existing wetlands on 10.9 acres, and a PDP for Phase
2, containing the commercial shopping center on 17.4 acres, in the City's
development review process.
* Section 2.3.2(H)(2) — Although the Amended ODP is in the CCN District this section
of the LUC is not applicable because there are no residential uses being proposed
as part of the project.
* Section 2.3.2(H) (3) - The Amended ODP conforms to the Master Street Plan
requirements, the street pattern/connectivity standards, and the Transportation
Level of Service Requirements. The ODP fronts on North College Avenue and
Willox Lane. No other public streets are proposed with this ODP. It is considered to
be in compliance with the Master Street Plan, as set forth in Section 3.6.1(B). The
ODP, being approximately 28.3 acres in size, provides for multiple private drive
Planning & Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
Page 6
accesses to both North College Avenue (to the west) and Willox Lane (to the south).
The existing wetlands and the existing Larimer & Weld Canal make the ability for
connecting streets into the adjacent properties to the north and east unfeasible.
The Amended ODP is considered to be in conformance with Sections 3.6.3(A) - (F).
The Traffic Operations Department and the Transportation Planning Department
previously reviewed and evaluated the required Transportation Impact Study (TIS),
as set forth in Section 3.6.4(C), for development on the North College Marketplace
property. At that time the ODP was considered to be in conformance with the
Transportation Level of Service Requirements as set forth in Section 3.6.4(B). A
pedestrian/bicycle route, via a bridge/trail across the Larimer & Weld Canal,
connecting the shopping center with the residential neighborhoods to the north
and east, was being proposed with the ODP. Since the ODP was approved by the
Planning & Zoning Board on January 15, 2009 the ditch company's Board of
Directors has stated that they will not approve an easement to allow such bridge
crossing. Therefore, this pedestrian/bicycle connection cannot be implemented.
The Amended North College Marketplace, ODP contains a commitment for a
pedestrianibicycle connection along the east side of the North College Avenue
bridge crossing of the Larimer & Weld Canal (at the northwest corner of the subject
property) to satisfy the Multi -modal Transportation Level of Service requirements
for motor vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian movement.
* Section 2.3.2(H) (4) - The Amended ODP provides for the location of transportation
connections to adjoining properties for vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle
movement.
The.Amended ODP provides for pedestrian and bicycle circulation systems to the
surrounding neighborhoods and Tavelli Elementary School via the existing street
and sidewalk networks in the surrounding neighborhoods adjacent to the property,
including a pedestrian/bicycle connection along the east side of the North College
Avenue bridge crossing of the Larimer & Weld Canal (at the northwest corner of the
subject property), as set forth in Section 3.2.2(C) (6).
The North College Marketplace, Amended ODP provides for private drive accesses
to North College Avenue (a 4-lane arterial street) and Willox Lane (a 2-lane arterial
street). The existing wetlands and the existing Larimer and Weld Canal on the north
and east sides of the property makes the possibility for connecting streets into the
adjacent properties unfeasible. The Amended ODP is considered to be in
conformance with Sections 3.6.3(C) - (F).
* Section 2.3.2(H) (5) - The Amended ODP has two (2) existing wetlands and the
Larimer & Weld Canal that warrant buffer zones and these features are shown on
the plan. Compliance with Section 3.4.1 of the LUC is being addressed with the
North College Marketplace, Wetland PDP that is currently in development review.
* Section 2.3.2(H) (6) - The Amended ODP is consistent with the Dry Creek Drainage
Basin Master Plan.
* Section 2.3.2(H) (7) - This section of the LUC is not applicable to the Amended ODP
because there are no residential uses being proposed as part of the project.
Planning & Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
Page 7
* The Amended ODP contains land uses that are permitted in the CCN, Community
Commercial — North College District, as well as 2 additional uses (drive-in
restaurant and gasoline station) that were approved by the Planning & Zoning
Board in august, 2008.
Member Smith seconded the motion. The motion passed 6:0.
Project: North College MarketPlace, Second Filing, Project Development Plan,
# 43-08
Project Description: This is a request for a supermarket -anchored shopping center at the northeast
comer of North College Avenue and East Willox Lane. The potential
development site is approximately 18 acres in size and the supermarket building
(King Soopers) would be about 123,000 square feet in size. Total building
square footage in the center would be about 170,000 square feet (including in -
line retail shops attached to King Soopers and 7 smaller building pad sites). The
primary access to the site will be from North College Avenue and East Willox
Lane. The property is in the CCN, Community Commercial North College Zoning
District. In addition to the supermarket the shopping center will contain retail,
restaurant (standard and fast food with & without drive-in), gasoline station, and
other commercial uses permitted in the CCN District.
Recommendation: Approval
Hearina Testimonv. Written Comments and Other Evidence
Staff presentation:
City Planner Steve Olt reported this is a request for a supermarket -anchored shopping center at the
northeast comer of North College Avenue and East Willox Lane. The primary access to the site will be
from North College Avenue and East Willox Lane. In addition to the supermarket the shopping center will
contain retail, restaurant (standard and fast food with & without drive-in), gasoline station, and other
commercial uses permitted in the CCN District. There was a question asked at the work session about
the stacking capability for vehicles on College. Looking at the geometry on the site plan it shows a left
turn lane that flair out back up to a point where it reaches a width of 7 feet which would enable any
vehicle to pull into the left turn lane. We're looking at about 175 feet so considering the average length
of 16 feet (most RVs are 14-16 feet, cars are shorter than that, trucks will be 18-20 feet) and a five foot
space between vehicles that 175 feet would accommodate between 7 and 9 vehicles.
Olt provided a history of the development including an approval of addition of permitted uses in August
2008, an approval of the ODP in January 2009 (with the amended ODP approved tonight), an approval
by an Administrative Office Type I North College Marketplace Wetlands PDP in February 2009, and the
approval of two modification of standards for parking stall dimensions and relations of buildings to
streets, walkways and parking in April 2009.
The project complies with applicable requirements and meets standards in Article 4 (Division 4.19 of the
LUC: Community Commercial — North College District), in Article 3 (LUC General Development
Standards) and is in conformance with the ODP.
Planning & Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
Page 8
Staff recommends approval with the following condition:
The developer shall be responsible for providing a payment to the City in lieu of having to secure
or obtain necessary street right-of-way and/or easements for a pedestrian/bicycle bridge, and
having to participate in the cost of construction of such bridge, along the east side of the North
College Avenue bridge crossing of the Larimer & Weld Canal. The payment shall not exceed
$125,000.00 and must be paid prior to any building permits being issued for the North College
Marketplace, Second Filing. The payment shall be used by the City to defray the cost of right-of-
way acquisition, design and construction of said bridge at a later time.
Board Questions:
Member Lingle asked if access has been provided to the two corner private properties at College &
Willox. Have the details been worked out and approved by those two private property owners? Olt said
they have not considered that as a part of the PDP review. That would be a question better answered by
the applicant. Applicant consultant Mike Mulhern said that North College Motors retains its access off of
Willox. Pobre Panchos will have access internal to the development. Lingle said the ODP shows access
to both properties from internal to the site. Holsapple of Loveland Commercial said as street plans
advanced, the city has allowed Fort Collins Motors all the access they want off Willox. Director Dush
asked Lingle if his concern was that if access points on Willox go away that an alternative access is
provided. Lingle said his concern is when the project goes to final compliance plans, that it has to be in
compliance with the PDP and it wouldn't be based on what they're seeing tonight. Lingle said he's fine
with whatever note to file is needed so long as there's not a technical problem later.
Member Lingle noted there are two loading docks on the east side of King Soopers. It looks look like
both have a masonry screened wall. Is that correct? Olt said he received the color rendering of the plan
this afternoon. Mulhern said with regard to screening, there are two screen walls. Chair Schmidt asked
how high the brick screened walls would be. Mulhern said the estate brick walls would be 14 feet high.
Chair Schmidt asked if the trees shown belong to the eastern part of the Wetlands ODP or will they be a
part of the PDP. Also, at what point in time will they be planted. David Kasprzak of BHA Design said the
randomly placed trees are a part of the 1" Filing Wetlands PDP along with a screened fence. Director
Dush said the screened docks are at an angle and with the trees will not be one continuous walled look.
Eric Holsapple said the trees will go in before phase 2.
Applicant's Presentation:
Mike Mulhem, President of the Mulhern Group and representing Loveland Commercial, said he'd like to
reinforce the fact that site totaled 27 acres of which 10 acres will be preserved, enhanced as wetlands,
and upon completion will be dedicated to the city. He said you don't see that every day. He said the
wetlands will create a buffer to the Highland Manor Mobile Home Park to the northeast. The wetlands
and the buildings will also create a separation from the activity and light in the parking lot.
Mulhern described the project including access from a full service roundabout. That roundabout also
provides access to Albertsons and a full -service drive on the east side of the site. Pedestrian connectivity
includes a 17 foot wide walkway with landscaping that ties King Soopers to the pad buildings across the
northern edge/entry. Pedestrian southern access is off of College Avenue next to gateway pad buildings
and a 100 foot long trellis element with another 17 foot wide walkway. There are also pedestrian walks
along the roundabout on the south side of Willox and a major connect ion along the shop space to the
south of King Soopers. Individuals coming from the east on Willox can travel along the pedestrian
southern entrance to the pad buildings at College Avenue. At the board's suggestion they ve created
two areas on both walkways where they have dedicated stripped walkways from the drive aisle. It
creates an opportunity to use the walk and still access the rear of your car for unloading your items.
Planning & Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
Page 9
The roundabout not only provides full movement and a traffic calming device, it also has landscaped
amenities tying pedestrians to King Soopers and the shops south of them.
Mulhern said the siting of the buildings put two major buildings at what would be the north and east end
of the site and brings a cluster of buildings up to College in an urban manner that creates a gateway.
There also a couple of best practices drainage amenities—bioswales that gathers drainage in the north
end of the parking lot and filters it before sending it to the detention pond in the southeast wetlands.
There are bioswales on the south side of the site that further filters water before it moves it into the
detention pond.
The architecture of the center seeks to embrace the turn of the century Victorian nature of old town Fort
Collins in a red brick and buff brick combination. A third element is the introduction of five gabled roof
elements that have been incorporated throughout the center to break from the norm of a typical retail
development where you typically see only flat roofs. The design includes strong cornice elements in
lintels, railings of the buildings through the use of awnings, steel lintel introductions and opportunities for
dining in the gateway pad building development area. The gabled elements which serve as a signature
feature for the first user off of Willox can also be found in the gateway entry, building two, and King
Soopers. Mulhern thanked the Board for their time and said he's open to any questions.
Member Carpenter noted in the neighborhood meeting notes on page3 there was a concern raised on 24
hour noise. The answer noted that King Soopers will control the times of day for truck and site deliveries,
She asked what those times would be and how would that be enforced. Mulhern said that's a good
question and he can't answer that —he doesn't have that information. He apologized and said they'd
have to get back to the Board. Mulhern said he does know that King Soopers has to abide by state laws
that have two different restrictions for noises for daytime and nighttime hours. They are very cognizant of
that and work with their neighborhoods to make sure they operate within those restrictions.
Chair Schmidt said that some neighbors said their houses will sit higher than King Soopers. She was
wondering what type of screening they had for air conditioning and ventilation that sit on top of the
buildings. Mulhern said the mobile home park has a rise up to the canal and is about 14 feet above the
finished floor level of King Soopers. King Soopers finished parapet is approximately 24 to 26 feet so the
top of that parapet is 10-12 feet above the elevations of the mobile homes. King Soopers tend to have
two major pieces of equipment that sit over the loading dock area. He apologized and said he can't tell
you how those units are going to be screened.
Chair Schmidt wondered if you'd explain how the access from Grape Street will work and if anyone will
be able to use the service road to drive around King Soopers. Mulhern said the Grape street entrance
from College Avenue will be closed and access for the three residences there will be via a shared private
drive. Mulhern said the service road is 25 feet so it does allow for two-way traffic and it's been setup
anticipating truck will approach coming north on College Avenue onto the service road, back into the
loading dock and go out via Willox back to College. There will be other deliveries servicing all the shops.
Chair Schmidt asked how the pedestrians cross the roundabout. If someone wanted to cross to the
shops to the south, how would they do that? Mulhern said the points of access at the roundabout are
shown on the east, north, and west edge and there would be an additional pedestrian crossing on the
south side. He showed a connection from the site onto sidewalks that would go to Albertsons. He said
it's pretty standard roundabout pedestrian access.
Chair Schmidt asked where the Willox bus stop would go. Holsapple said showed two stops ... one on
College Avenue.
Planning & Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
Page 10
Chair Schmidt said at the time it was given the designation of being a supermarket and not a big box,
was Building C and the adjoining stores connected? Olt said the attached shops (including Building C)
were a part of the plan when the interpretation was made. It was considered in its entirety to be a
supermarket.
Member Rollins asked for confirmation that to the south and west near the gas station where it is
currently unrestricted would it become a right in/right out with this proposal. Member Stockover said if
you're in the Albertson's parking lot and you want to go south, he thinks these changes will severely limit
your abilities to go south onto College Avenue without going east first through the roundabout. Eric
Bracke, ELB Engineering, LLC, said the recommendations of the traffic study were to reduce the "split
around" and allow this to self regulate but because of the city's concern about stacking it was determined
that the people going west would need could only turn right and go through the roundabout. They
deemed the u-turn through the roundabout to be safer.
Member Rollins asked for information on Pobre Panchos. Mulhern said the access from College to
Pobre Panchos will be closed and access given internal to the site.
Chair Schmidt asked for information on the number of vehicle trips —how does that compare to what it is
presently. Bracke said they don't really deal too much with daily traffic but he believes it is in the 5,000 to
6,000 trip range. Schmidt asked if this project would generate about 7500 trips per day at this location.
Bracke said yes, that would be a conservative estimate because there is another grocery store across
the street. Trips will be divided. Schmidt said the traffic report said traffic would be coming from 2-3
miles around the site —will that be the source of 7500 trips per day? Will we have the right road
adjustments to handle the traffic? Eric said for most grocery stores that the 2-3 mile radius is a pretty
good estimate. People may also come from Wellington, from the country club area, and from west of
College Avenue so the radius may be larger. Bracke said the estimate is conservative, is standard, and
that's the way its' done.
Member Stockover said if you're anticipating enough traffic going east on Willox that you need to put a
median in there, wouldn't people wanting to go south go to Bristlecone and wouldn't it be more
dangerous to turn left onto College there? Bracke said Bristlecone is scheduled to be a signalized
intersection at some point in the future under the North College Access Control Plan. Chair Schmidt said
the Board received letters from the owners of Country Club Corners and Albertsons expressing
concerning about the flow of traffic. Schmidt asked if someone could say when the changes to
Bristlecone would be made to alleviate these concerns especially during construction. Bracke suggested
those questions would be better directed to Traffic Engineer Olson.
Chair Schmidt asked Bracke to help her understand some of the level of service differences especially
on College at Highway 1. Bracke said between the build and the no build alternative and starting at
Willox and north College, a west bound turn lane is going to be added to that intersection for the build
altemative. When King Soopers goes in they're going to have to build that right turn lane. That changes
the geometrics. He optimized the splits (the green time between all the movements) from the no build
altemative of 100 second cycle length to a 110 second cycle length plus added the right turn lane so he
went to a 110 second cycle length. Since he went to a 110 second cycle length at Willox, he also did the
same at College and got a better result. Bracke said with adding the right lane and the additional traffic, .
he got a better operation of the signal with a 110 second cycle. He said the corridor is all going to have
the same cycle lane so the level of service was improved.
Chair Schmidt asked where the land was coming from for the right turn lane from Willox to College. Eric
Holsapple said there's about 14 feet by 1100 feet on the west side (College Avenue side). There will not
Planning & Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
Page 11
be any loss of property on Willox with the current plan. Schmidt asked if there would be any sidewalks or
improvements on that corner. Holsapple said a curb and an 8 foot attached sidewalk will be installed so
North College Motors (FCM) still has room to move and display cars on the Willox side. Holsapple said
FCM has two entrances on Willox and they're staying.
Member Lingle said he had the same concerns once he heard the circulation was not internal to the
development —how will it work and will there be traffic conflicts. Another thing he'd like to hear from the
City is with regards to future change in use of North College Motors --would it trigger full compliance with
development standards. Would those access points on Willox be allowed to remain indefinitely? Joe
Olson, City Traffic Engineer, said they would look at that when it came in for development and chances
are those access points off of Willox would go away. They would want to have internal access and if
there is no way to get internal access, they'd have to provide access to the site.
Member Lingle said if the plat has been developed, is that north/south access road coming into the east
of those two comer properties immediately adjacent to their property line? Will they be crossing private
property that they don't own? Eric Holsapple said there is a strip of land (1100 square feet) and he's
agreed to grant easement in the case that access is closed.
Member Rollins asked Olson if his analysis relative to the roundabout. Olson said Bracke actually did an
analysis without the roundabout and the left turns out were showing up as level of service 'T' at both
access points and there was a concern about impacting that existing business to that degree so that's
where the roundabout idea came from. They looked at the analysis of that and it worked much better
with the roundabout. Member Rollins asked if it was too close to College Avenue to signalize. Olson said
he doesn't know if it's too close —it is close. It's probably just not that desirable to signalize it. They can
get a lot more capacity with a roundabout there than they could with a signal.
Member Rollins asked if it was Olson's recommendation that they extend that median west and block
access to an existing development (Albertsons, Pobre Panchos and North College Motors). Olson said
that's correct. Staff thought the median needs to be extended and make it a right-in/right-out. It was also
very close to the intersection and there's potential for queues from the intersection backing up. (Any time
you get the queues backing up into the intersection, you'll see a lot of safety hazards.) If it's a normal
two-way stop intersection on the east access, Willox had priority over everything. The roundabout
equalizes access where the side streets have equal priority to enter on a gap. Staff thought they were
making things better for Albertsons by putting in the roundabout and having everybody use the
roundabout rather than having to make a very difficult left turn at either of the two access points
previously used.
Rollins said If it remained as a two way stops with left turns out that it would be difficult to get out and
people would go down to Bristlecone and have a more difficult time. Olson said that's why they thought it
was important to improve the access on Willox for the Albertson part of the equation. Rollins said some
people are very uncomfortable using roundabouts.
Chair Schmidt asked how much does the traffic at this kind of intersection compare with Wal-Mart and
Home Depot on Lemay. They have the same thing —the drives coming out high volume traffic coming
out but we don't' have roundabouts or signals there. Are we saying this area is going to have more traffic
than those two stores? Olson said he'd have to look but he believes there are about 7,000 cars a day so
that is probably a higher volume than what we see between Wal-Mart and Home Depot.
Chair Schmidt asked how the roundabout compares size wise to the roundabout at Taft Hill and Vine
Drive. City Engineer Marc Virata said he pulled some information about the various roundabouts in town
and the roundabout at Vine & Taft which is in the county. The outer diameter of the roundabout at Taft
Planning & Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
.Page 12
and Vine is 130-132 feet. It's actually the exact same size as the roundabout being proposed. The inner
diameter which includes the mountable curb area —at Taft and Vine it's 88 feet of diameter length and at
College & Willox it's 80 feet of diameter length. Virata said we have smaller roundabout that take traffic
in a similar fashion —the Pads at Harmony, the outer diameter is 100 feet (its 30 feet less). In terms of
through movements they are pretty much the same for most roundabouts that have a single lane.
They're in the 22-30 foot width. The one exception is the Horsetooth and Ziegler roundabout because
you have the double left movement that has a diameter of 155 feet width with a double movement of up
to 40 feet.
Chair Schmidt is concerned about the level of traffic including through traffic on Willox. She thinks some
drivers may not pay attention to the cues about who's going through and who's turning in. Virata said
he's not a traffic engineer but he can say that we do have a major shopping center that was just recently
built with a roundabout at Summit/Front Range development. That roundabout is pretty much the same
size. Lowes is taking their service vehicles through that roundabout. There are some in -line shops with
diagonal parking and a lot of through movement near the Council Tree Library. They have not heard of
any complaints of its operation.
Member Stockover said he didn't want to beat a dead horse but he's really concerned from a global
perspective about the people leaving the Albertson's area and going south. If the. west turn onto Willox is
a level of service F; did you do that study assuming the median was shorter, the left was allowed, and
the roundabout installed? Stockover said the roundabout should act as a traffic calming for the number
of cars coming west daily. They should slow significantly before they go around the roundabout. That
would make the left turn easier. Staff member Olson said the level of service analysis isn't so much
about a safety analysis as it is a delay analysis. It really looks at the gaps (or breaks) in traffic on Willox
for people to get out. Regardless of the speed of traffic, if gaps don't present themselves, people can't
get out and the delays go up. While he understands Mr. Stockover's concerns, it's not necessarily going
to have any effect on the level of service or the ability to get out as far as whether there are breaks in
traffic. Olson said another thing about a roundabout is that rather than a "platoon" flow (group of cars)
and then a break, they have a steady feed which makes it harder to find a gap. Even if left turns were
allowed there with the roundabout, it would be a tough movement to make.
Member Stockover asked about putting a signalized light on College at the main entrance to Albertson's.
Olson said that would be difficult to do due to the intergovernmental agreement between the City and
CDOT (Colorado Department of Transportation) related to the state highway's access control plan for
College Avenue. It basically says where access can be. In order to change that it would take agreement
from CDOT and it's unlikely they would agree to signalize a private driveway versus a public street.
Schmidt says it does allow for a signal at Bristlecone does it not. Olson said correct. Schmidt asked
what is required to bring that about. Olson said the volume of traffic (when "it meets warrants") on
Bristlecone.
Member Rollins asked if the traffic shifts around (two-way stop) could we do something similar to what
we did with the pedestrian bridge —could the funding shift to the Bristlecone signal when warrants are
met? Virata said transportation design improvements are being funded by the City Council
approved/Urban Renewal Authority (URA) funded design.
Chair Schmidt added there's an abbreviated median at Burger King so you can come out and make a left
turn to head south on College. If you're really concerned about safety, that median needs improvements.
You can see the marks on the road where people just wait for a break in traffic to head for the center
lane and merge going south. She has a feeling.that it'll be used more by people heading north from the
Albertson lot. We may, however, need to make improvements to it to deter people from turning left.
Planning & Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
Page 13
Stockover asked for the graphic that shows the design near Burger King and Bristlecone. He said it's
quite a ways down and he thinks we'll be pushing them down there if they want to go south. Schmidt
said that one day the whole Albertson's shopping center may redevelop into something else. If we do
have another redevelopment there and it's a much higher intensity use, will the proposed roundabout
handle a lot more traffic? Will another lane need to be added? Are we limiting ourselves when we do
this type of a plan? Staff member Olson said the roundabout will actually have more capacity than a two
way stop would have there. If the redevelopment would happen, this positions us for the future to handle
additional traffic.
Member Rollins said if this proposed design is approved tonight, she'd like to see the perpendicular
parking very close to the north side of the roundabout reduced. She said you could have someone
backing out about the same time someone may be seeking entrance/coming out of the roundabout.
Mulhem said that's a point well taken.
Mulhem said he appreciated the issues raised. He said if they were coming in with a new development
today, they wouldn't be able to get a full movement intersection in that adjacency to North College. He'd
like to point out that he understands the implications to the business to the south and having to move
through the Albertson's parking lot to get to the intersections on the north side to get out. He noted what
options they had with this proposal.
Chair Schmidt said she understands as a frequent shopper there the shoppers' preferences for parking
and for selecting routes when leaving the area. She said since we're using URA funds on this proposal,
we need to effectively use that money to make sure there are safety features or other enhancements
when we're shifting traffic that's fair to all the businesses.
Chair Schmidt noted that in the Loveland outlet malls there are two roundabouts in close proximity; is
that feasible in this situation? Olson said they can look at it but he suspects that it's getting too close to
College Avenue to fully develop the turn lanes for the west bound approach to College:.
Chair Schmidt asked relative to the site plan is most of the outside dining areas/outside spaces
specifically connected to a particular restaurant or will there be a public area for shoppers. Mulhern said
what brings these centers to life is street furnishings throughout. In addition to the specific dining areas
there would be various benches and ornamental lights that work along with the banners and planters to
draw them to a place to "chill out" or sit with their children. In some cases, there is a need to tie to a
quick serve or sit down restaurant to be maintained by them.
Chair Schmidt asked where the parking corrals are located. Mulhern said they are not showing them on
the plan, that would typically be handled by King Soopers and he would assume there'd be about eight
placed throughout the parking lot.
Chair Schmidt asked how wide was the entrance through the gateway located on the south west corner
of the site. Mulhem said that's one of the wider parking aisles.
Chair Schmidt asked what improvements will be made to College Avenue for pedestrians. Holsapple
said there will be sidewalks and bike lanes on the west side of the development. Olt said that it would be
part of the North College improvements to the Weld/Larimer ditch constructed by the City. Schmidt
asked when will there be improvements north to the Highway 1 intersection. Staff member Mapes said
that is unknown. He said they are currently working on a North College Improvements Funding Plan and
that is not in the upper tiers of priority —it would be at such time as the properties north of the ditch
develop or redevelop and would trigger annexation.
Planning & Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
Page 14
Chair Schmidt asked can URA funding be used to help with pedestrian/bicycle access improvements. At
one time staff member Ken Waido said we could apply some of the URA funds even if it were not in the
city limits. She said if we're talking about pedestrian level of access, counting mobile home residents to
the parks just northeast and northwest of the site, there is a need for pedestrian access to this shopping
center. Also, there are always a large number of pedestrians and bicyclists on the west side of College
from Highway 1 down to the bingo parlor area. Mapes said for the reasons given by Chair Schmidt are
the reasons why this project is improving the west side from Willox to the ditch. For the URA to take on
the other, it is identified as a discrete project on a list of improvements to be made to North College
Avenue. He believes we're going pretty far with what's being done on the west side of College due to
this project.
Chair Schmidt asked if there were any County regulations in existence to put pressure where needed.
Mapes said he did not think so.
Eric Bracke said he did a scoping meeting for the pedestrian level of service with former Transportation
employee Denise Weston and she realized that all these improvements are a part of a very large picture
and not something that can be placed on one developer. Schmidt said she recognizes this is beyond
one developer but we are talking about $2.8 million dollars in URA money that is specifically for
infrastructure needs.
Public Input:
Barry Lewis, 1630 30t' Street, # 495 Boulder, is the owner of Country Club Corners (the property
adjacent to Albertsons). He thanked the Board for being so thoughtful with all the "ins and outs' of this
project and it impact on existing property owners. Country Club Comers is about 25,000 square feet.
There's potential for 17 shop owners and currently there are 7. He asks for as much assistance as
possible to maintain access and visibility. He thinks having this development is going to be good for this
part of town and he certainly does not oppose it. He wants to point out that it is standard to have
crosswalks with the roundabout and he's not sure how that's going to work in terms of safety. He would
imagine it would stop or slow traffic. We also have large trucks coming out from the southeast portion of
the site and travel west —how will they negotiate the roundabout. He's not aware of how the URA
funding works but as he understands it, its $150,000 to put in a signal so having a signal at Bristlecone
would be pretty easy to be part of this "high end" project. Also for coming in and out of the Albertson
center at the main entry, there is a proposed % turn to come left out of that —he'd like to see that as a
part of this project.
Lewis said for the shop owners there, this will be a little more competition for them and he's asking to
have additional signage for that property both on Willox and on College. It'd be great to have large
marquee signs so the shop owners there can have their name on signage on both streets. Currently
there is a small monument sign that doesn't really compare to what they have down the street at
Cottonwood Plaza. What would his next steps be to apply for that? He thinks that only so much square
footage is allowed. It seems contradictory to what's going on just south of this center.
Lewis said he'd like to make sure they have access during construction coming off of both College and
Willox. Finally, they really still do want access on the west entrance to Willox in the area of the median
just west of the roundabout. To limit that is not really fair to the people in the center to the south.
He wants to do whatever is the highest good for everybody and it would be great if they could have a
stop sign there if that's going to serve the needs of everyone. Chair Schmidt said the Board did receive
his letter with a few additional points.
Steve Baker, 8244 Benson Court, is the manager owner of the Valero Station on the corner and he's
very concerned about the access. As you know the headcount for the houses is out to the east. To
Planning & Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
Page 15
force those customers to come through the Albertson's parking lot to get to the Valero and other shops is
a pretty "tough deal" and he thinks Chair Schmidt hit it right on the head that Albertson's may not be
there for the long term —something bigger may be going in there. That's going to make it even tougher
to get into that small parking lot to access the seven businesses along there. He would like to ask that
the median does stay and stops left hand turns but at least insure they have access for people headed
west to be able to turn into that access road there. Its a fairly major access road (the same size as the
one that services Albertson on the east side of the lot).
Baker is not a proponent of roundabouts. He lives in south Fort Collins near the Super Wal-Mart on
Highway 285 where all his neighbors find roundabouts difficult to negotiate. Those don't even have
crosswalks so he can't imagine a roundabout with crosswalks. He had an independent engineering firm
assess the roundabout and he'd like to have that report added to the record and have Planner Olt and
the engineers take a look at it. Chair Schmidt noted a copy would be part of the public record and the
Board could review at a break_
Ron Powers, 2018 Terry Lake Road, said they have adjacent property to the north of the development
and as a long term resident would like to welcome them. He thinks it's a good project and well thought
out. He likes the roundabout. He thinks North College Motors may need to be "thought out" and have
that right turn lane thought out. With the pedestrian access shifted west (when the bridge over the
LadmerdWeld Ditch further east went away), he'd like to see URA monies used to improve pedestrian
access on both the west and east side of College.
End of Public Comment
Chair Schmidt said they have received several other pieces of information at work session and since
then. Since some of the Board members have not had a chance to review all the material the Board will
take a short break.
After the break, Chair Schmidt asked the applicant if he'd had a chance to review the letters. He had.
Board Questions:
Chair Schmidt asked if staff could address the signage request made by Mr. Lewis. Director Dush said
there were a number of questions raised for which he'd like to provide some clarification. With regard to
questions related to traffic, Traffic Engineer Joe Olson will address them.
Director Dush said the City has a Sign Code. That is entirely a separate process and not something that
can be addressed in this forum. He'd be more than happy to chat with Mr. Lewis and explain the process
to him. Dush also wanted to touch upon the reference to the Urban Renewal Authority. It is indeed a
fact that this project is a part of the URA. It is a funding mechanism but within the confines of the
evaluation of this application, it's important to note that the evaluation is relegated to the Land Use Code
and the level of service standards that we have in place. The Urban Renewal Authority funds are like
any other funding mechanism and those are considerations that don't apply to a level of service
standard. This project would perhaps have the ability to spur additional development relative to the
pedestrian bridge and linkages.
Staff member Eckman said there is one condition staff has recommended in order to comply with Section
3.6.4 regarding level of service requirements (relative to the bridge). If the Board is inclined toward any
additional conditions of approval, it would be good to place on record the section or sections of the Land
Use Code that you believe that are not being met without the condition being imposed. Director Dush
said the transportation level of service condition is shown on page 11 of the staff report.
Planning & Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
Page 16
Chair Schmidt said Mr. Lewis had some questions about the truck traffic. Feedback the Board has
received is that trucks can maneuver the roundabout —it's designed to accommodate them. Schmidt said
the one letter they had from Albertsons says their trucks could probably avoid the roundabout by
traveling west on Willox to their drive or they'd recommend they use Bristlecone. She thought they could
come north on Lemay and east on Willox (albeit not the desirable solution.)
Chair Schmidt asked if the $150,000 is a correct assessment of what it would take to put a signal in at
Bristlecone. Is that possible as a temporary situation before the CDOT plan is totally instituted? Olson
said that assessment is low. A traffic signal on a state highway (because they have different
requirements for signal poles and mast arms) is running more like $250,000-$300,000. There's a criteria
that has to be met before the signals are considered and there are good reasons for that. In some
circumstances, they can actually increase the risk of accidents so it's not something that we're "loose"
with. CDOT even more so being it's a state highway. Until the criteria are met, they will not be willing to
consider putting a signal at Bristlecone. Chair Schmidt asked about a temporary signal during
construction. Olson said they would have to look at that as they work through the traffic control plan for
the development and the construction. They will be working to make sure that we're always providing
access to all business throughout the construction process.
Chair Schmidt asked how you assess whether to take Bristlecone east to head down to Lemay just from
the standpoint of people changing their habits because there's no way they can get there. Olson asked if
Schmidt was referring to the volume going to Albertson's will be less. She said yes. Olson said that's
always a challenge with construction and they'll do everything they can to grant access to the site.
Member Rollins asked Olson on the traffic impact study, page 19 the overall intersection with a 2010
build out with stop control is level of service A at the west access point and at the east access point it's A
& B (in the morning and afternoon). If some of those lefts are headed northbound from the current
Albertson's site, she would presume they'd shift their pattern to College and make a right turn onto
College if they're going to experience delays. She asked if they looked at that detail as far as still wanting
the roundabout there and the median across that west access point. Olson said they looked at the
projected volumes shown and that's what they based the decision on. At the west access, eastbound
traffic coming off College could potentially stop to make a left turn north was another movement they
were concerned about and another reason they felt it was important to control west access.
Chair Schmidt said it appears the roundabout shifts Willox a bit. Will this development be responsible for
the landscaping on the south side of the roundabout? Olson said he couldn't say for sure whether the
development or the URA would be responsible for the landscaping on the south side. He did know that
the property owner on the south would not be responsible for it.
Member Stockover said this is such a big decision and the developer has spent so much time, effort, and
.money. When you're concerned about people turning left when they re going east on Willox, you could
put a triangle median there and not affect the existing. Olson said when they talked about out onto
College that doesn't work on a street like Willox, little "pork chops" tend to work even worse. The most
effective way to make that control is with a median. Stockover said while it is the most effective, it is the
least desirable for Albertsons. He's having a hard time with a new development is having such an impact
on so many small businesses. It's not so much on Albertson's as the Valero, Subway, Showtime and the
new shops to the south. He thinks it's his job as a citizen board to look out for those businesses. He
wants to make sure we've exhausted every option to make that intersection work as it is presently
designed.
Planning & Zoning Board
May21, 2009
Page 17
Holsapple said he'd like to make one comment that might make it better for Stockover. In the context of
this application, we spent $100,000 on traffic studies doing preliminary designs on Willox and North
College. City Council has accepted those and funded those as capital improvement projects for the City.
He has no control. Those projects are ongoing and being designed on how far that median goes out.
They came up with some criteria accepted by staff and they brought it to Council where it was approved.
They approved Willox and North College as a City capital improvement project so any of those changes
can still happen as staff goes through their planning process. They're meeting with land owners just as
he's met with everyone around. He has no control of whether that median comes back 20 feet or not and
he doesn't think it's been determined until that plan goes to Mylar and when the City gets ready to build
that.
Chair Schmidt asked Olson if that median can be installed later if there are safety issues that develop.
Olson said separate from this development proposal; the City is actually working on the design. They
can go back and talk about it. They've heard everyone's concerns. Perhaps they do come up with an
alternative where they don't put the median across that west driveway and they monitor it. Later if they
did end up with a safety problem, they may want to install at a future date. He said that is something we
can do through the design process —separate from this development. Stockover said he thinks people
will gradually get use to this new scenario but if you initially really irritate them, they'll never come back.
If you can phase it in and as traffic increases, people will adapt. What Olson is suggesting would
personally make Stockover feel better.
Olson said, like the Board, staff is concerned about the public. That is what drove their decisions to do
what they did. They do have safety concerns about leaving it open but he guarantees that they'd take
another look at it. Once they've made a decision, they could come back and report.
Chair Schmidt asked Olson if there would ever be safety concerns that would trigger the signal at
Bristlecone (even with volume might be less than is required)? Olson said accident history is one of the
criteria for signalization and they would be watching that at Bristlecone.
Member Lingle said he doesn't necessarily concur with some of the concerns regarding that median but
the thing that really concerns him is the fact that this design funding by the URA is exactly the issue
we've been concerned about for about a year. His concern is with decisions being made in advance of
a Project Development Plan (PDP) that are cast in stone, approved by Council, funded and moving
forward —it hamstrings their ability to effectively review PDPs. It's happened, it'll continue to happen, and
what can we do to prevent that from happening again? Lingle said they've been assured at every step
along the way that the development review and the Land Use Code (LUC) will still dictate and control
what we do at the PDP level and here's a prime example that potentially it isn't happening.
Chair Schmidt asked Director Dush to explain. She's not clear about Lingle's concern and what
Holsapple implied. Did the URA, at the time they designated funds not designate specific projects?
Director Dush said the Board's ability to review this project is with the LUC. He's not certain as to the
comment from Holsapple relative to what was approved and how it would necessarily hamstring their
ability to review a development proposal in accordance with the LUC. Your ability to take a look at
compliance with any of the criteria in the LUC is still intact and they have the ability to look at the level of
service, the ability to look at the design and any other components in the LUC.
Member Lingle said what the applicant just told them was he doesn't have the ability to change. Those
have been city staff driven decisions that then causes the Board to evaluate the PDP with some of these
perimeter issues related to access that the applicant has no control over yet they're evaluating and
approving his PDP. Dush said we're taking a look at the development application, reviewing the traffic
impact study, and doing the scoping with each application that comes in. Staffs recommendation is in
Planning & Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
Page 18
line within the criteria of the LUC. Transportation staff are taking a look at the traffic volumes and
making recommendations on what type of traffic controls are going to be in place to ensure safety and
the level of standards are being met.
Member Rollins said she completely understands Olson's perspective. Where in this is neighborhood
compatibility? Because sometimes we look at access points and they say that needs to be modified from
a neighborhood compatibility perspective —in this case the neighbor is to the south. Where does that
come into the process just described by Dush? Dush said with every new development application on
land that has no development on it, there will be impacts and those impacts are then addressed to
certain allowable thresholds. Neighborhood compatibility relative to traffic is outlined and identified in the
LUC relative to level of service. So when you take a look at the types of streets (the neighbor to the
south tieing adjacent to College) and the property's zoning in this area; that zoning allows for uses that
generates traffic. Our purview and our ability to address neighborhood compatibility are within
maintaining that established level of service.
Chair Schmidt asked what about safety? We're say the median addresses safety and not level of
service. On the one hand we're saying level of service is a big concern but we have to have the median
for safety. Can you use the safety "hold factor" as compatibility related? Is the project too big? Does it
create too much stress on what the neighborhood can bear?
Member Rollin said if she goes to the traffic study and the level of service and she looks at it without the
project and what's going to happen to the adjacent driveways, there overall level of service is fine so the
impact upon them going from their left turns (level of service B to level of service F). She would argue
that if we go from a B to an F for a neighbor that is a neighborhood compatibility component of traffic
impacts. She agrees with Lingle when Holspapple said this has already been decided and outside his
control —this is the "stuff" we talk about. They talk about adjacent neighborhood and to her it's not just
residential. We need to feel that we can say "does that make sense" without someone saying that's
already been decided. It's been designed right now. It puts them in a different situation than they've
been before.
Holsapple said that was not what he was saying at all —that it's already been decided. What he was
trying to do was give Stockover comfort in approving the PDP. The median is not decided until City staff
has worked through all those issues including considering their comments tonight. Stockover said the
Board's ability to have input ends tonight.
Olson said the challenge here is that there are two things going on —the development and the capital
project which includes rebuilding the intersection of College and Willox and the roundabout. Normally
with a capital project, the City is designing and building and that typically doesn't come to the Board for
review. The thing that complicates it is they are intertwined. If the development wasn't happening, the
capital project wouldn't be happening either. To speak to Lingle's concern, you won't see these things if
it's part of a capital project. As far as the development is concerned, as Holsapple said whether the
median blocks that west entrance or not is a moot point to them. In fact, when they did the traffic study,
they didn't show it that way. City staff looked at that and felt it was the best solution for that section of
street. What they can do is go back as a staff and look at the capital project design and through that
process determined if it needs to be changed and reconfigured.
Chair Schmidt said she's not sure it is because you can look at that capital project and without this scale
of a development there, your assessment of the things needed to be changed would be different. If you
add this kind of a project at this location, then you're not only developing one intersection but you'll need
to go down to Bristlecone and up to Highway 1 and work on that because the impacts will be felt more
broadly. She said our assessment for the traffic impact north and east of the sites (in the county) is lower
Planning & Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
Page 19
than what they actually need to be. Olson said it's very interesting and challenging because if this goes
away so will the capital project improvements ... he can see both sides of the issues.
Member Lingle noted that in their presentation, the applicant noted building in old town having different
colors of brick. Are the materials they are proposing and for which you are seeking approval that level of
quality? Are you proposing the horizontal bands that are shown pre -cast concrete, limestone, or
something less? Mulhern said they are incorporating "estate" brick in the reds and buff ranges and will
use them to "break up" the building and add interest.
Mulhern said 75% of what he does is retail. Often with centers that are as big as 1.2 million square feet.
They did a 560,000 square foot center directly across from Park Meadows-75% of the traffic for that
center enters through a right-in/right-out with no potential to connect directly south into Park Meadows.
One has to go to the extent there (if you're on one side of the center) to go to an area like Bristlecone to
get out. Here we're talking about going approximately another 300 feet to the other drive to a
roundabout and out. He doesn't mean to sound coy but one of their premises is that if you can get
people in, they're going to find their way out. If we take the "cup's half -full analogy", they're putting in a
roundabout which is making great connectivity with a flagship King Soopers store and the whole
neighborhood. This ease of connection between the King Soopers center and the Albertson's center is
going to be a great catalyst for redevelopment of the Albertson's center once King Soopers "lands" and
becomes an anchor. All of a sudden this becomes a two block redevelopment and offers opportunities
that aren't there today. The roundabout ties the two properties together and creates a great synergy.
Member Stockover said when you're coming west on Willox and you miss that first roundabout and
you're going to Valero and you can't get there, you drive right across the street and go to one of the other
two gas stations. You've then impacted someone. That's why he's pushing so hard not to have that
median there and we can't assume that Albertsons is going to fail. Mulhern said he's not assuming that
Albertsons will fail but there are other properties to the south of Albertsons that King Soopers will bring
synergy to that area. Stockover said he understands that but he did not want to minimize the impact the
new development is having on existing businesses. Mulhern said he would agree but one key accident at
that intersection and we're thinking safety is a more important issue than access. Chair Schmidt said that
part of north College is already one of the more hazardous areas and no one has made safety
improvements. This will make improvements in that section.
Chair Schmidt said they have a set architecture in mind, will some of the users such as an Appleby's or
other national chain come in with a preset design. Does the applicant know what might be coming in the
center or will there be certain architectural guidelines they'll need to meet? Holsapple said as far as
users they're working with there will be a bank, fast-food users, a sandwich shop, and maybe a liquor
store. The design will be as much as possible what has been laid out. Each user will come and have
some of their own signage and emblems and there will be a process of give and take getting it to work
with the renderings presented today. Users will most likely want the theme to tie throughout.
Director Dush, if he understood the question, is the Board is looking for some sort of a unifying theme
whether it's colors, materials or architectural treatments. Chair Schmidt asked if there were some
requirements with which they need to comply. Dush said if you're seeking a unifying theme, whether
through colors, roof pitches or materials, those would be items to suggest to the applicant. Dush said it's
important to recognize there is a menu of elements and we could look for some guidance from Member
Lingle as to what those menu items would be. Depending on who is the designer, you could also get
something that is compatible, well-done, and not necessarily have the theme elements --its artistic license
for what might still work.
Planning & Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
Page 20
Member Lingle said what he hears Chair Schmidt saying is if it's a classic McDonalds design for
instance, in terms of materials, color and quality; it would not be compatible with what we're being
presented with tonight. He'd like to compliment the applicant and he would like to see carried through in
the architectural standards for all the uses is the fact that the gabled roofs are really roof forms and not
just a fake parapet with maybe two feet of gable roof going in and then cut off. They relate to the entire
building mass. He would personally not want to see that element lost in the translation to actual users.
Mulhern said the developer -built buildings would control the architecture and are key to creating that
gateway theme. They set the pad building back thinking that architecture could vary if the first two
pieces were very strong. Once they set up the "vocabulary" and "fabric", they set the "guts" and could
then get some variety. The. banks are normally very willing to use the same materials as the center. The
fast food establishments will be a little more of a challenge but they are typically good about using the
same materials if you set the theme early on.
Chair Schmidt asked about the loading dock and the compatibility with the neighborhood —will the
beepers be going off 24 hours a day? Holsapple said the comment they had at the neighborhood
meeting was with regard to trash behind the store from someone who hears the trash pickup from the
Albertson store. This store has a trash compactor so it's not the banging lid that might be irritating to
neighbors. There are 300 feet to the nearest structure at the mobile home park and with an elevation
difference of 12-14 feet, a ditch and other things; he doesn't think it'll be an issue at this center.
Holsapple said they have a King Soopers center in Loveland and there is traffic throughout the day.
They set deliveries prior to 11 when they stock the shelves. Smaller trucks make deliveries during the
day. Member Carpenter asked about noise and lights in the middle of the night. In some areas of town
we do have places called quiet zones where signs are up relative to truck back up beepers —they turn
the trucks off versus having them run especially in the middle of the night. With the wetlands, are you
looking at any mitigation considerations? Holsapple said as far as the light, there are restrictions that the
light does not "spill over" into the wetland area or any off property areas as the general standard.
Holsapple said there will be beepers when they back up. The big trucks mostly don't come in the middle
of the night and if they do they drop (the cargo) and go. They have residential within 100 feet of their
Loveland store and they don't have complaints.
Member Lingle asked Olt about the pad buildings being identified as Pad 1, 2 or 3 or Building B or C but
he doesn't see any legend with approved uses that are associated with each of those. There's a
depiction about 1 or 2 fast food, a bank, and in -line retail. If the Board were to approve this, the mix of
uses and types of buildings seen here is what is being approved even though we've approved by
modification of standard far more fast food restaurants (for instance.) Olt said the site plan doesn't
differentiate the nature of the uses. The plan does identify the types of uses that will occur within the
center but as to how they relate to each pad site they do not. Lingle asked if it was not more common to
have Pad A be this, this or this and there are actually identified uses. Olt said not necessarily.
Lingle then asked if that's okay and in compliance with the LUC that level of uncertainty can be approved
at the PDP level. Olt said the shopping center is approved for an approved range of uses —where they
occur within the shopping center isn't necessarily defined building to building —no. Lingle said so at the
FCP (Final Compliance Plan) level where the bank is shown now with drive through lanes, curbs and
sidewalks can that be changed at the FCP without affecting the PDP approval. Olt said they'd have to
look at it for substantial compliance with the PDP. Lingle's point is the level of intensity and the mix of
uses is something that is attractive to him when he looks at the site plan and to have a lot of those uses
convert to more of one kind of the exclusion of others would not be as desirable and he's looking for
some level of certainty of what that might be. Maybe we can't get that but he was hoping they could.
Planning & Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
Page 21
OR said we don't typically. Trying to design the center today for a specific type of commercial use in this
building, that building and that building is very difficult to do as they get approval of the entire center
without getting assurances of the nature of the uses that are going to be there. They are certainly
designing from a layout stand point the vehicular circulation to accommodate certain kinds of uses on
certain pad sites.
Member Lingle mentioned a development on south Timberline immediately north of the Police Services
Building that there was a mixed -use development that has mini -storage at the far west against the tracks.
When we saw that PDP each of the pads was more identified that these are the uses that will occur on
these individual pads. Olt said that even if that were to occur, you'd most likely see multiple minor
amendments to that center if it was approved at that level of detail. As they start to lease out particular
buildings, who ultimately wants to be where is based on market driven decisions. Olt said what they're
going to get final approval would be geometrically from a layout standpoint. It would look similar to what
the Board is reviewing and conceivably approving. To change dramatically the building shape or size
would require an amendment to the plan not only for the building itself but the landscaping, parking and
circulation associated with it.
Member Smith said he thinks the sticking point is the median and he's okay with that. When we have a
commitment in our LUC to encourage infill development there will be effects to the adjacent property
owners. We've seen medians put in places (for safety reasons) where there wasn't one before and it did
have some adverse impacts on folks that got accustomed to something else. But as the city has grown
we've kind of instituted in the LUC that's going to be acceptable as long as we take great pains to
mitigate and minimize those impacts. If there was not access from the gas station to Willox that might be
an entirely different question but what's proposed is not that far (folk's habits will adjust).
Member Smith said over time that whole corridor will redevelop and we'll see behavior modifications as
to the way folks drive as we see North College uses intensify with different streets and parallel road
networks. He understands Stockover's concerns but he thinks that when staff has said they re safety
issues, he'd probably rest with their analysis. As far as their purview with the LUC and the criteria they've
asked the applicant to adhere to; he thinks they have to the best of their ability. Staff has done a good
job to work some plans that really do address a unique little street that is changing. As proposed, he's
okay with it.
Chair Schmidt asked if they could make the condition of the funds placed in escrow vaguer in case we
determined later there may be a better use for pedestrian related improvements. Is that an option at all?
Matt Wempe of Transportation Planning said that wouldn't be a problem. It does have to relate to
pedestrian level of service based on the URA agreement. Staff member Eckman said "or at such other
location as the Traffic Engineer may determine in accordance with the level of service standards of the
City." Director Dush said the short answer is yes, we can come up with something.
Chair Schmidt confirmed with Traffic Engineer Olson that at this point in time he would be comfortable
with leaving the median out. Olson said they would definitely reconsider shortening it. Stockover said it
takes a leap of faith on his part but he's willing to take that chance. He truly feels they can make that
intersection work.
Member Rollins asked if they would be opposed to removing (as shown on page 12 of 22) four additional
parking spaces (two on each side) on the north side of the roundabout as you come into the project, so
we can clear the intersection up a little more. She'd like to get to a tangent on the curve. Holsapple said
yes, they would remove the spaces.
Planning & Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
Page 22
Chair Schmidt reviewed the changes being requested: 4 parking spaces removed on the north entry of
the roundabout, the median will be shortened at this point in time (as seen on page 9 of the traffic study,
site plan figure 4). Schmidt also wanted to add that during construction, we look at making sure that
traffic has access to the Albertson shopping area including facilitating Bristlecone. Director Dush said
they will guarantee the adjacent properties will have access during construction.
Olson, said what the figure shows is a painted median ... the splitter island (from the roundabout) is a
raised median. If staff reviews and changes it, there would be some stipulation in writing that if an
accident problem developed, they reserve the right to change at a future date. He is not committing to
changing it tonight. While the Traffic Engineer has the authority he doesn't do that in a vacuum. Olson
staff working on this project will work as a group to review, discuss, and come to consensus on how they
want to move forward with that design feature. Stockover wants to go on the record as requesting/
recommending a "phased" approach. Lingle said he's comfortable with the proposal as stated by Olson.
Schmidt said it's good to phase in because we might be anticipating an increase volume of traffic but in
fact any growth may come in a slower fashion to start.
Marc Virata said the City Code stipulates the Traffic Engineer has the right to regulate driveways.
Eckman agreed the Traffic Engineer has the right to regulate the medians and structures in the streets.
Director Dush said he has revised language for the condition. "The developer shall be responsible for
providing a payment to the City in lieu of having to secure or obtain necessary street right-of-way and/or
easements for a pedestrian/bicycle bridge or other necessary improvements to achieve the pedestrian
level of service in accordance with the Land Use Code. The payment shall not exceed $125,000.00 and
must be paid prior to any building permit being issued for the North College Marketplace, Second Filing.
The payment shall be used by the City to defray the cost of right-of-way acquisition, design of necessary
improvements at a later time."
Eckman said you could make the issue of the reduced parking spaces just north of the roundabout a part
of the motion but not a condition of approval as Mr. Holsapple agreed to the change on the record.
Eckman said the same relates to staffs agreement to review the need for a median just west of the
roundabout.
Chair Schmidt made a motion the Planning & Zoning Board approve the North College
Marketplace, Second Filing (King Soopers) PDP, # 43-08 given the facts and findings on page 12
and 13 of the staff report including the condition:
The developer shall be responsible for providing a payment to the City in lieu of having to
secure or obtain necessary street right-of-way and/or easements for a pedestrian/bicycle
bridge or other necessary improvements to achieve the pedestrian level of service in
accordance with the Land Use Code. The payment shall not exceed $125,000.00 and must
be paid prior to any building permit being issued for the North College Marketplace,
Second Filing. The payment shall be used by the City to defray the cost of right-of-way
acquisition, design of necessary improvements at a later time.
1. The PDP is in conformance with the approved North College Marketplace ODP.
2. The proposed land uses are permitted in the CCN, Community Commercial — North
College District.
The Planning & Zoning Board, on August 21, 2008, approved a request for the
Addition of Permitted Uses, being Drive-in Restaurants and Gasoline Stations, per
Section 1.3.4 of the LUC.
Planning & Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
Page 23
3. The Project Development Plan complies with applicable General Development
Standards contained In Article 3 of the Land Use Code, with two (2) exceptions:
* Section 3.2.2(L) Parking Stall Dimensions. This section requires that Two -Way Drive
Aisle Widths for 60 degree angled parking be a minimum of 24 feet. The applicant is
proposing a width of 22 feet.
* Section 3.5.3(B) Relationship of Buildings to Streets, Walkways and Parking,
Subsections 3.5.3(B)(1) & (2) Orientation to a Connecting Walkway and Orientation
to Build -to Lines for Street front Buildings. These sections require that at least one
(1) main entrance of any commercial or mixed -use building face and open directly
onto a connecting walkway with pedestrian frontage. Two (2) buildings being
proposed in the shopping center (Building/Pad 1 and Building/Shops D) would not
satisfy this requirement.
The Planning & Zoning Board, on April 16, 2009, approved modifications of these two
(2) standards.
4. The Project Development Plan complies with applicable district standards of Article 4,
Division 4.19 CCN, Community Commercial — North College Zoning District of the Land
Use Code.
Schmidt noted the commitment to remove parking spaces to the north of the roundabout and the
review by city staff of the median design on Willox. Stockover seconded the motion.
Motion was approved 6:0.
Eckman said with regard to the 4 parking spaces, given the statements made by the developer and the
comments made in the motion, when it comes to final plan review the staff will make sure the parking
spaces are removed.
Member Lingle said he'd like to compliment the developer and the design team for coming up with a
good solution architecturally, with urban planning, and with urban hardscape. Many of the other design
concepts we're seeing are exciting. He hopes it's very profitable and meets everyone's expectations,
including redevelopment across the street. Chair Schmidt said that she would second that. The gateway
aspect is going to be a great feature and she's looking forward to people in the area taking advantage of
the amenities.
Project: 2009 Annual Revisions, Clarifications and Additions to the Land Use Code
Project Description: This is a request for a Recommendation to City Council regarding the annual
update to the Land Use Code. There are proposed revisions, clarifications and
additions to the Code that address a variety of subject areas that have arisen
since the last update in 2008.
Recommendation: Approval
Hearina Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence
Staff presentation:
Chief Planner Ted Shepard reported that he would be making a very brief presentation (as he'd been
working with the Board over the course of the past several months on the specific recommended
Planning & Zoning Board
May 21, 2009
Page 24
changes). As has been done in the past, Shepard said the Board could vote on the proposed revisions,
clarifications, and additions to the Land Use Code in a package or they could call issues out and
consider them individually. Shepard recommends issue # 824 (which amends Section 3.4.2 — Air
Quality — to reduce the 1,000 foot buffer for wastewater treatment plants to 300 feet but only if there are
covered basins and secondary odor control systems such as carbon scrubbers) be considered
separately.
The Board concurred and Chair Schmidt asked audience members if they wished to pull any issues.
Only issue # 824 was pulled.
Item # 824
Shepard said staff recommends a change to LUC Section 3.4.2 based on:
• the Board's comfort at the work session on May 15t',
• input they've received from the Link-n-Greens property owner,
• technical advice they've received from the wastewater treatment plant operator including
■ the upgrades going into the plant
• the secondary odor control
■ The covered basins and scrubbers
Staff is comfortable with increasing the prohibition of any use from 300 to 500 feet and to allow from 500
to 1,000 feet for residential where residential was previously prohibited.
Board Questions:
Member Lingle asked for clarification —he said as it reads now it reduces it from 1,000 feet to 300 feet
but staff would like to change that to read from 1,000 feet to 500 feet —is that correct? Shepard said yes
and between 500 and 1,000 feet where residential was previously prohibited, staff recommend it be
allowed. Lingle noted that's not currently how it's included in the staff report. Shepard said that based
on information on plant technological upgrades information received at the work session on May 15u ;
staff will be adding it to the recommended changes.
Member Carpenter asked if we're talking simply about odor control and not taking out the health and
safety controls related to chlorine gas. Chair Schmidt said these buffer regulations apply only to places
that don't have chlorine. Shepard said that's correct --chlorine has its own separate buffer and there
wouldn't be any chlorine at Wastewater Treatment Plant 1.
Public Input:
None
Member Lingle moved to approve the 2009 annual revisions to the Land Use Code as described
in the staff report. Member Stockover seconded the motion. The motion was approved 6:0.
Other Business:
None
Meeting adjoume at 10:20 p.m.
Steve bush, Current Planning Director