HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 03/20/2001 - CONSIDERATION OF THE APPEAL OF THE JANUARY 18, 200 F p-., .. d ,a...g..,
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ITEM NUMBER: 32
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL DATE: March 20, 2001
FROM: Ted Shepard
SUBJECT :
Consideration of the Appeal of the January 18, 2001, Planning and Zoning Board Decision to
Approve, With One Condition, the Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Pad 6, Fuel Facility P.D.P.,
#33-94F.
RECOMMENDATION:
Council should consider the appeal based upon the record and relevant provisions of the Code
and Charter and, after consideration, (1) remand the matter back to the Planning and Zoning
Board, or(2) uphold, overturn, or modify the Board's decision.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On January 18, 2001, the Planning and Zoning Board approved, with one condition, the
Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Pad 6, Fuel Facility P.D.P. This was a request for a gasoline
service station consisting of a 2,790 square foot convenience store, 268 square foot kiosk, six
fueling islands and an 86' x 43' canopy on a pad site in a neighborhood service center. The
project would be built in phases. Pad 6 is 1.3 acres in size located on the north side of Harmony
Road between Wheaton Drive and McMurray Avenue. The site is zoned H-C, Harmony
Corridor.
At issue is the condition of approval which requires that the flush wall signs on the south and
west elevations of the convenience store be deleted.
On February 1, 2001, a Notice of Appeal was received by the City Clerk's Office alleging that
the Planning and Zoning Board failed to properly interpret and apply the relevant provision of
the Code and Charter with respect to the condition of approval.
Attachments include:
• Notice of Appeal
• Staff Report to Planning and Zoning Board
• Letters to Planning and Zoning Board
• Staff Response to the Appeal
0 Verbatim Transcript of the Planning and Zoning Board Meeting
MARCH & LILEY, P.C.
ARTHUR E.MARCH,JR. ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW
. LUCIA A.LILEY 110 E.OAK STREET
J.BRADFORD MARCH FORT COLLINS,COLORA00 805242880 AflTHUR E.MARCH
ISM 482-4322 1908-1981
F.. (970)482-5719
January 31, 2001 1 11 01�
FEB
Honorable Ray Martinez
CITY CLERK
Mayor
City of Fort Collins VIA HAND DELIVERY
300 Laporte Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado
City Council Members
City of Fort Collins VIA HAND DELIVERY
300 Laporte Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado
RE: Notice of Appeal
Dear Mayor Martinez and City Council Members:
This firm represents Galloway,Romero&Associates,the representative of Safeway Stores
46, Inc. and S-B Properties No. 22, Ltd., and the applicant for the Harmony Safeway Marketplace,
Lot 6, Safeway Fuel Facility, P.D.P., #33-94F (the "Project").
On January 18, 2001, the Planning and Zoning Board(the `Board")considered the Project
and upon the Staff s findings that all aspects of the Project, with the exception of certain signs,
complied with applicable land use and general development standards,voted to approve the Project
subject to a condition requiring the removal of two signs. Galloway, Romero & Associates
(hereinafter the"Applicant')appeals the January 18,2001 action of the Board imposing a condition
upon the approval of the Project requiring the removal of the signs on the south and west elevations
of the convenience store (the "Condition of Approval').
The Applicant is a party-in-interest with standing to file this appeal as the applicant for
approval of the Project who appeared before the Board on January 18, 2001. The Applicant is
located at 5350 DTC Parkway, Greenwood Village, Colorado 80111. The telephone number is
303/770-8884.
As grounds for its appeal,the Applicant alleges that the Board failed to properly interpret and
apply relevant provisions of the Code and Charter[Sec. 2-48(b)(1), City Code] in eliminating signs
with the Condition of Approval. In support of its allegations,the Applicant presents the following:
Mayor Ray Martinez and City Council Members _
January 31, 2001
Page 2
Summary of Arguments
(1) The Sign Code allows all four of the signs proposed;
(2) The Board's only authority is to review the location or placement of allowed signage;
(3) The Board eliminated of two of the four signs and cited Section 3.8.7.(E)(2) and
Sections 3.5.3.(A) and (D)(1) as justification;
(4) The Board's elimination of two of the four signs violates Section 3.8.7.(E)(2); and
(5) Even if the Board had been interested in the location of the signs, reliance.on the
cited sections for determining location would be misplaced because they contain no
standards or are not applicable to signs.
Explanation of Arguments
(1) The Sign Code allows all four of the signs proposed The Residential Neighborhood
Sign District regulations (the "Sign Code") regulate with specificity the amount and desien of
signage allowed in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District(e.g.square footage,lettering,height,
length and illumination). The record indicates that the Project includes a total of four signs on the
convenience store building,two on the east elevation and one each on the south and west elevations.
Each sign is proposed to be thirty (30) square feet in size, for a total of one hundred twenty (120)
square feet of flush wall signage,which amount is less than the permitted amount under Sign Code
Section 3.8.7.(E)(13). Neither Staff or the Board alleged that the amount of signage exceeds the
amount permitted by the Sign Code.
(2) The Board's only authority is to review the location or placement of allowed
signage. Sign Code Section 3.8.7.(E)(2)describes the authority reserved to the Board to review the
location of signs in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District, stating that the Board may impose
locational requirements as a condition of approval, but "shall not impose more restrictive
requirements or conditions than required under this Section."
(3) The Board eliminated two of the four signs and cited Section 3.8.7.(E)(2) and
Sections 3.5.3.(A) and (D)(1) as justification. It is obvious from the record that neither the Staff
or the Board were interested in the location or placement of the south and west elevation signs.
Instead,the Board adopted the Staff s recommendation to completely eliminate the two signs citing
a failure to meet Section 3.8.7.(E)(2) and Sections 3.5.3.(A) and 3.5.3.(D)(1).
(4) The Board's elimination of two of the four signs is a violation of Section 3.8.7.(E)(2).
It is error for the Board to equate its right to review location of signs (i.e. where to place permitted
signage)with a right to eliminate permitted signage entirely. Doing so is directly contrary to Section
Mayor Ray Martinez and City Council Members
January 31, 2001
. Page 3
3.8.7.(E)(2)which says that, although the Board may look at appropriate placement of signs, it may
not impose more restrictive regulations than the Sign Code, under which the amount of permitted
signage is determined. Clearly, eliminating in their entirety two of the four signs permitted under
the Sign Code results in a more restrictive regulation.
(5) Even if the Board had been interested in the location of the signs, reliance on the
cited sections for determining location would be misplaced because they contain no standards
or are not applicable to signs. Absent any locational criteria,any decision of the Board would be
arbitrary.
(i) Section 3.8.7.(E)(2) is devoid of standards, requirements or criteria upon which to
evaluate the location of signage.
(ii) Section 3.5.3.(A) defines the pumose of the standards applicable to certain buildings,
but contains no standards applicable to either buildings or signs. Section 3.5.3.(D)(1)
contains building design standards, which the Staff found the Project to be in compliance
with, but contains no standards applicable to signs.
(iii) The Staff, in its Staff Report and its presentation to the Board, relied on comparisons
of sign and building square footage. There are no criteria or standards that would allow such
calculations to be used for the evaluation of signs.
(iv) The Staff, in its Staff Report and its presentation to the Board,repeatedly referred to the
issue of"neighborhood compatibility". Again, this is not a standard under the Land Use
Code or Sign Code for reviewing signage. In fact, it is clear that the City Council adopted
the more restrictive Residential Neighborhood Sign District standards for the very purpose
of identifying objective sign criteria to deal with neighborhood compatibility. See the
following language from the Agenda Summary and Ordinance No. 141, 1992 that is quoted
in the Staff Report:
"In general, the concerns include the amount of signage allowed under the current Code,
appearance, aesthetics, and compatibility with the neighborhood quality and character."
"The proposed Sign Code changes are intended to reduce or eliminate opportunities for abuse
of the existing Code which could result in signage which is incompatible with an adjoining
residential neighborhood."
"Under the proposed changes, the amount and design of signage will be regulated by the
Sign Code through the addition of new requirements specifically prepared to address the
issue of neighborhood character and compatibility."
JAN-31-01 WED 01 :50 PM FAX NO. P. 02
Mayor Ray Martinez and City Council Members
January 31, 2001
Pngo 4
"'I'he Planning and Zoning 13oard will continue to review signage in Planed Unit
Developments only to the extent that the location of Mush wall signs relate to the
architectural chnracter of the associated buildings,"
In conclusion, [lie Applicant respectfully requests that Condition of Approval requiring the
removal of two signs from the convenience store be stricken because the Board improperly
interpreted and applicd Section 3.8.7.(F)(2) and Sections 3.53.(A) and (D)(1) as allowing it to
eliminate signs which are permissible under the Sign Code.
The appeal filing fee of $100 is enclosed. Please contact our office if you have any
(jilestions.
Sincerely,
MARCH & ILEY, P.C.
By:
cia . Lilcy
LA( ,.*
linclosarc
APPi.iCANTS:
OALLOWAY, ROMERO & ASSOCIATES,
amhoriml representative of
Safeway, Inc. and S-13 Properties
No. 22, I_td,
I ty: --...... .. _
I):wi�l
City Clerk
44'a
City of Fort Collins
NOTICE
The City Council of the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, on Tuesday, March 20, 2001 at 6:00 p.m.
or as soon thereafter as the matter may come on for hearing in the Council Chambers in City Hall
at 300 LaPorte Avenue, will hold a public hearing on the attached appeal from the decision of the
Planning and Zoning Board made on January 18,2001 regarding the Harmony Safeway Marketplace,
Lot 6,Safeway Fuel Facility,P.D.P. (#33-94F),filed by Galloway,Romero&Associates. You may
have received previous notice on this item in connection with hearings held by the Planning and
Zoning Board.
If you wish to comment on this matter, you are strongly urged to attend the hearing on this appeal.
If you have any questions or require further information please feel free to contact the City Clerk's
Office (221-6515) or the Planning Department (221-6750).
Section 2-56 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins provides that a member of City Council may
identify in writing any additional issues related to the appeal by March 13, 2001. Agenda materials
provided to the City Council, including City staff's response to the Notice of Appeal, and any
additional issues identified by City Councilmembers, will be available to the public on Thursday,
March 15, after 10:00 a.m. in the City Clerk's Office.
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services,
programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with
disabilities. Please call the City Clerk's Office (221-6515) for assistance.
Wanda M. Krajicek
City Clerk
Date Notice Mailed:
March 9, 2001
cc: City Attorney
Planning Department
Planning and Zoning Board Chair
Appellant/Applicant
300 LaPorte Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins,CO 80522-0580 • (970)221-6515 • FAX(970)221-6295
Community Planning and Environmental Services
Current Planning
ity of Fort Collins
TO: Mayor and Members of City Council
FROM: Ted Shepard, Chief Planner
THRU: Greg Byrne, Director C.P.E.S.
Cameron Gloss, Current Planning Direct ✓ .
DATE: March 12, 2001
RE: Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Pad 6, Fuel Facility P.D.P. —Appeal to
City Council
The purpose of this memo is to respond to an appeal regarding the January 18, 2001
decision of the Planning and Zoning Board to approve, with one condition, Harmony
Safeway Marketplace, Pad 6, Fuel Facility, P.D.P.
Section 2-48(b) of the City Code states:
"Except for appeals by members of the City Council, for which no grounds need be
stated, the permissible grounds for appeal shall be limited to allegations that the board or
commission committed one or more of the following errors:
(1) Failure to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Code and
Charter;
(2) Failure to conduct a fair hearing in that:
a. The board or commission exceeded its authority or jurisdiction as
contained in the Code and Charter;
b. The board or commission substantially ignored its previously
established rules of procedure;
C. The board or commission considered evidence relevant to its
findings which was substantially false or grossly misleading; or
d. The board or commission improperly failed to receive all relevant
evidence offered by the appellant."
281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970)221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020
Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Pad 6, Fuel Facility, P.D.P. —Appeal to City Council
March 12, 2001
Page 2
The Appeal is based on Sections 2-48(b)(1).
One specific allegation is made. The pertinent Code sections are stated in italics. The
arguments are briefly summarized below in bold followed by a staff response.
ALLEGATION:
The Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Code and
Charter in eliminating two wall signs on the south and west elevations of the convenience
store with the Condition of Approval.
PERTINENT CODE SECTIONS:
1. Section 2.48(b)(1)
The Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Code and
Charter.
2. Section 3.5.3 (A)
Purpose. These standards are intended to promote the design of an urban environment
that is built to human scale to encourage attractive street fronts and other connecting
walkways that accommodate pedestrians as the f rst priority, while also accommodating
vehicular movement.
3. Section 3.5.3(D)
In new buildings and, to the extent reasonably feasible, in development projects involving
changes to existing building walls,facades or awnings (as applicable), the following
standards shall apply:
(1) Site-Specific Design. Building design shall contribute to the uniqueness of
a zone district, and/or the Fort Collins community with predominant
materials, elements,features, color range and activity areas tailored
specifically to the site and its context. In the case of a multiple building
development, each individual building shall include predominant
characteristics shared by all buildings in the development so that the
development forms a cohesive place within the zone district or community.
A standardized prototype design shall be modified if necessary to meet the
provisions of this Land Use Code.
Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Pad 6, Fuel Facility, P.D.P. —Appeal to City Council
March 12, 2001
Page 3
4. Section 3.8.7(E)
Limitations for Nonresidential Districts and Nonresidential Uses in the
Residential Neighborhood Sign District. There is hereby established a
"Residential Neighborhood Sign District for the purpose of regulating signs for
nonresidential uses in certain geographical areas of the city which may be
particularly affected by such signs because of their predominant residential use
and character.
(2) Signs regulated under this Section shall also conform to any locational
requirements imposed by the decision-maker as a condition of the
approval of the development plan. Except as to location, the decision-
maker shall not impose more restrictive requirements or conditions than
required under this Section.
(13) For the first two hundred feet (200)feet in building frontage length in a
neighborhood service center, the maximum sign area permitted shall be
equal to one and one-quarter (1114) square feet for each linear foot of
building frontage length. For that portion of a building frontage, which
exceeds two hundred(200)feet in length, the maximum sign area
permitted shall be equal to two-thirds (213)foot for each linear foot of
building frontage length over such two-hundred(200)feet.
APPELLANT'S ARGUMENT/STAFF RESPONSE:
l. Argument: The Sign Code allows all four signs of the signs proposed.
The Residential Neighborhood Sign District allocates the amount and design of
signage (square footage, lettering,height, length, and illumination). This Code
section [3.8.7(E)(13)] allows the total number of signs proposed (four) and the total
amount of square footage(120 sq.ft.).
2. Argument: The Board's only authority is to review the location or placement
of allowed signage.
Section 3.8.7(E)(2) states that the Board may impose locational requirements as a
condition of approval, but shall not impose more restrictive requirements or
conditions than required under this Section.
Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Pad 6, Fuel Facility, P.D.P. —Appeal to City Council
March 12, 2001
Page 4
Staff Response:
The appellant's first two arguments point to the issue of how to interpret the Land Use
Code in general and how to interpret the Sign Code specifically as it relates to the
Residential Neighborhood Sign District. Staff contends that the Land Use Code must be
interpreted holistically with all applicable standards having an interrelationship on the
outcome of a development proposal.
In this case, Staff contends that there is an inter-relationship between the"Sign Code"
standard [Section 3.8.7(E)] and the"Character and Image"standards that apply to the
design of an urban environment for commercial buildings (Section 3.5.3). A
development proposal must be balanced so as to satisfy both standards, not one at the
exclusion of the other. Staff found that the placement of wall signs on the south and west
elevation of a small (2,790 square feet) convenience store, with gas pumps and canopy,
so overpowers the architecture and appearance of the store as to render the commercial
building out of compliance with the standards relating "Character and Image."
The appellant, however, contends that each individual standard should be reviewed as if
in isolation and independent from other standards.
For guidance on how to interpret the Land Use Code, there are five specific citations in
Article One that are pertinent. (Article One establishes the"General Provisions" for the
Land Use Code.)
(1.) Section 1.2.2 states: "The purpose of this Land Use Code is to improve
and protect the public health, safety and welfare by:
(.l) improving the design, quality and character of new development.
(M) ensuring that development proposals are sensitive to the character
of existing neighborhoods."
(2.) Section 1.2.4 states: "All development shall comply with the applicable
terms, conditions, requirements, standards and procedures established in
this Land Use Code."
(3.) Section 1.2.5 states: "The provisions of this Land Use Code are the
minimum standards necessary to accomplish the purposes of this Land
Use Code."
Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Pad 6, Fuel Facility, P.D.P. —Appeal to City Council
March 12, 2001
Page 5
(4.) Section 1.3.3 states: "The General Development Standards contained in
Article 3 and the District Standards contained in Article 4 are hereby
established and are declared to be minimum standards."
(5.) Section 1.4.9 states: "In the interpretation and application of any provision
of the Land Use Code, such provision shall be held to be a the minimum
requirement adopted for the promotion of the public health, safety,
comfort, convenience and general welfare."
From these "General Provisions," Staff contends that the cumulative effects of a
development proposal, within the Residential Neighborhood Sign District, taken as a
whole, shall be reviewed by all applicable standards. To do otherwise, would not-allow
the Planning and Zoning Board to evaluate a commercial development's overall design,
quality and sensitivity to the character of existing neighborhoods.
The Board reviewed the request for wall signs on the south and west elevations in the
total context of the development proposal, as per Section 3.5.3(A)(D), not just by the
Sign Code standard of Section 3.8.7(E). The Board found that the allocation of allowable
signage, in the form of flush wall signage on the south and west elevations of a 2,790
square foot convenience store, with gas pumps and canopy, tipped the scale and caused
the project to fail under the "Character and Image" standards.
While it is true that Section 3.8.7(E)(2) states that:
"Except as to location, the decision maker shall not impose more restrictive
requirements or conditions than required under this Section,"
Staff interprets this to mean that the Board may not interfere with the formulaic standards
addressing square footage, height of letters, type of illumination, etc. All the Condition
of Approval says is that the portion of the signage allowance that is in the form of flush
wall signage on the south and west elevations are out of proportion and scale with the
building and site context. Such disproportion fails to comply with the standards as set
forth in Sections 3.5.3(A)(D).
Staff contends that the Board did not fail to properly interpret and apply the relevant
provision of the Land Use Code.
Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Pad 6, Fuel Facility, P.D.P.—Appeal to City Council
March 12, 2001
Page 6
3. The Board eliminated two of the four signs and cited Section 3.8.7 (E)(2) and
Sections 3.5.3(A) and (D)(1) as justification.
The Board did not merely regulate the placement of wall signage,it eliminated two
signs.
Staff Response:
The issue is not merely one of signage allowance, but, rather, one of flush wall signage
location and its impacts on architecture,proportionality,building character and
neighborhood compatibility. In the Residential Neighborhood Sign District, flush wall
signage is not granted"by right." Not only must flush wall signage meet the test of
falling within the parameters of the maximum allowable square footage but it must also
meet the intention of Section 3.8.7(E)(2)which seeks to ensure that commercial signage
near neighborhoods is non-intrusive.
This Sign Code standard was placed into the Land Use Code in 1997 to continue to
reflect the policies set by City Council to address the broad issue of mixed-use land
planning and mitigating the proximity of commercial uses near neighborhoods. These
policies, innovative at the time, set Fort Collins apart from other cities by demanding a
high level of commercial design in exchange for strategic placement of land uses. The
objectives, then as well as now, are to prevent a string of neighborhood-serving business
along arterial streets. Instead, such uses should locate in planned centers, close to
neighborhoods, at arterial/collector street intersections. The objectives remain to promote
pedestrianibicycle access, reduce vehicle miles traveled, minimize congestion and
improve air quality. Briefly, the pertinent policies are:
• 1988 -Neighborhood Convenience Shopping Center—Design Guidelines,
Policies and Criteria
1988 - "Neighborhood Convenience Shopping Center"point chart of the
Land Development Guidance System
• 1993 —Sign Code addition: Residential Neighborhood Sign District.
• 1994—Harmony Corridor Plan: Neighborhood Service Center— Character
Standards
By enforcing the applicable standards,the Board was acting on these policies. The
contested Condition of Approval addresses only the location of flush wall signage on the
south and west elevation. It does not take away signage allowance. The allowable
Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Pad 6, Fuel Facility, P.D.P. —Appeal to City Council
March 12, 2001
Page 7
signage may simply be re-allocated in a more sensitive manner. (Staff has suggested that
this allowance be re-allocated to the east elevation,which features the front entrance of
the convenience store, gas pumps, and canopy.)
4. The Board's elimination of two of the four signs is a violation of Section
3.8.7(E)(2).
It is an error for the Board to equate its right to review location of signs with a right
to eliminate permitted signage entirely. Section 3.8.7(E)(2) says that although the
Board may look at placement of signs, it may not impose more restrictive
regulations than the Sign Code.
Staff Response:
In this argument, the appellant again asserts that an applicant may pick any standard and
have it reviewed in isolation independent of other standards in the Land Use Code. By
establishing the Residential Neighborhood Sign District, Council recognized the burden
of demonstrating design compatibility on commercial development applications when
located in close proximity to neighborhoods.
The Sign Code standard, 3.8.7(E)(2) allows the Board to look at the location of flush wall
signs. If Council did not intend for the Board to then act on a request where the location
of flush wall signs was deemed inappropriate, then why enact the standard at all? The
fact that locational discretion exists within the standard indicates that the Board may take
appropriate action to ensure that the overall character and image of a commercial
development is sensitive to the character of existing neighborhoods. Staff finds that by
approving the Condition of Approval, the Board did not fail to properly interpret and
apply the relevant standards.
5. Even if the Board had been interested in the location of the signs, reliance on
the cited sections for determining location would be misplaced because they
contain no standards or are not applicable to signs. Absent any locational
criteria, any decision of the Board would be arbitrary.
Staff Response:
The Sign Code is intentionally placed within the Land Use Code because signage, and its
visual and aesthetic impacts, is indeed a land development issue as per the General
Provisions of Article One. Flush wall signs have considerable influence on the public
appearance of a commercial building. The Sign Code does not exist outside of or
independent of the all applicable standards relating to the regulation of commercial
Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Pad 6, Fuel Facility, P.D.P. —Appeal to City Council
March 12, 2001
Page 8
development. The regulation of the location of flush wall signs, like landscaping,
setbacks, height, architecture, etc., is a subset of a group of standards that, acting in
concert, ultimately determine what our city looks like.
The Board found that the criteria for determining appropriateness of the location of flush
wall signage in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District is found in Section
3.5.3(A)(D), "Character and Image," which regulates mixed-use, institutional and
commercial buildings. The Board considered the placement of flush wall signs vis-a-vis
the size and scale of the convenience store. The Board considered the placement of flush
wall signage vis-a-vis the other three pad sites along Harmony Road within the
neighborhood center. (A comparison of the relationship between building/signage
proportionality between the proposed convenience store with the three existing pad
buildings along Harmony Road is provided on page eight of the attached Staff Report.)
The Board considered the impact on the neighborhood,just as the policy statements
enacting the Residential Neighborhood Sign District intended.
CONCLUSION:
In conclusion, the Board evaluated the cumulative impacts of a commercial development
proposal within the overall context of a pad site within a neighborhood service center.
The Board found that there is a relationship between the location of flush wall signage in
the Residential Neighborhood Sign District and a commercial building's character and
image.
Further,the Board found that the location of flush wall signs on the south and west
elevations does not meet the policies behind Neighborhood Convenience Shopping
Center—Design Guidelines, Policies and Criteria (1988), the Residential Neighborhood
Sign District(1993), and the Harmony Corridor Plan (1994) as enunciated by standards
3.5.3(A), 3.5.3(D)(1) and 3.8.7(E) of the Land Use Code. Therefore, the Board did not
fail to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Code and Charter.
Attachments include the verbatim transcript of the hearing (beginning on page 6) and the
Staff Report (pages 6-9).
MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
Held Thursday, January 18, 2001
At City Council Chambers
300 West Laporte Street
Fort Collins, Colorado
In the matter of Safeway Fueling Station
concerning Safeway Market, Lot 6, Safeway Fueling Station
Commission members present:
Jerry Gavaldon, Chair
. Mikal Torgerson, Vice Chair
Jennifer Carpenter
Judy Meyer
Glen Colton
Dan Bernth
Staff present :
Paul Eckman, City Attorney' s Office
Ted Shepard, Planning Department
Peter Barnes, Planning Department
Georgiana Deines, Planning Department
•
1
1 MR. COLTON: Good evening. Welcome to the
2 January 18th meeting of the Fort Collins Planning and
3 Zoning Board. Could we have roll call, please?
4 CLERK: Carpenter.
5 MS. CARPENTER: Here.
6 CLERK: Meyer.
7 MS . MEYER: Here.
8 CLERK: Bernth.
9 MR. BERNTH: Here.
10 CLERK: Gavaldon.
11 MR. GAVALDON: Here.
12 CLERK: Torgersor..
13 MR. TORGERSON: Here .
14 CLERK: Craig. Colton.
15 MR. COLTON: Here. Cameron, could we have the
16 agenda review, please?
17 MR. GLOSS : Yes . Good evening, Mr. Chairman,
18 members of the board. All items that were originally
19 advertised for this evening' s agenda, except for one set
20 of minutes on your first consent item will be heard this
21 evening. Four consent items appear on your agenda. The
22 first is the meeting of minutes for September 21st and
23 October 5th hearings, and we' ll try to complete the May
24 18th minutes as soon as we possibly can and get this on to
. 25 you. The second consent item is a request to modify final
2
1 conditions of approval for the Christ Fellowship Church.
2 And third is a request for modification of standard for
3 1045 Garfield. The fourth consent item is the Huntington
4 Hills West, preliminary and final subdivision. And a
5 note to the audience, these are consent items, and consent
6 items are considered noncontroversial, and may be pulled
7 off the agenda by a member of the Board, the staff, or a
8 member of the audience. Both discussion items are final
9 decisions by the Board. We've got two of those this
10 evening. The Provincetowne PUD, Filing 2, Final Plan, and
11 this was continued from our December 7th, 2000, hearing.
12 We did forward on to the board the meeting minutes, and
13 those were e-mailed to you earlier this week. The last
14 item is the Harmony Safeway Marketplace, the Safeway Fuel
15 Facility PDP, and with that, that concludes my agenda
16 report.
17 MR. COLTON: Okay. Thank you. And before we
18 continue on, tonight is our annual election of a new
19 Chair, which we do every year. So I would recommend that
20 we have a process that first we nominate and elect a
21 Chair, and then we can -- I ' ll turn over the gavel to that
22 person -- and then we can go ahead and elect a Vice Chair.
23 So, if that ' s all right with everyone, I open the floor
24 for nominations for Chair for the next year.
25 MS . MEYER: I nominate Jerry Gavaldon.
3
. 1 MR. COLTON: Okay. We have a nomination for
2 Jerry. Is there any other nominations for anyone else?
3 Okay. I don' t see any. Would anyone like to have any
4 discussions? Okay. If not, then let ' s go ahead and have
5 roll call, please.
6 CLERK: Meyer.
7 MS. MEYER: Yes .
8 CLERK: Bernth.
9 MR. BERNTH: Yes .
10 CLERK: Gavaldon.
11 MR. GAVALDON: Yes .
12 CLERK: Torgerson.
13 MR. TORGERSON: Yes .
14 CLERK: Carpenter.
15 MS . CARPENTER: Yes .
16 CLERK: Colton?
17 MR. COLTON: Yes . All right. Congratulations,
18 Jerry. You did a good job as Vice Chair and I 'm sure
19 you' ll do a good job as Chair, and so now I ' ll let you
20 take over for electing the Vice Chair and for running the
21 rest of the meeting.
22 MR. GAVALDON: Oh, okay. I ' ll do it from here
23 or you can --
24 MR. COLTON: We can switch or you can just do it
25 from there . That ' s fine .
4
1 MR. GAVALDON: Okay. Thank you. Thank you to
2 everyone on the board for your support . Let ' s go with
3 Vice Chair nominations. Opening -- I 'm open for
4 nominations for Vice Chair, or if --
5 MR. BERNTH: I nominate Mikal Torgerson.
6 MR. GAVALDON: Okay. We have Mikal. Any other
7 nominations? Okay. We have Mikal. Any discussion? No
8 speech?
9 MR. TORGERSON: No.
10 MR. GAVALDON: Okay. We ' ll go with a vote.
11 CLERK: Carpenter. Are we ready for this?
12 Carpenter.
13 MS. CARPENTER: Yes .
14 CLERK: Meyer.
15 MS. MEYER: Yes .
16 CLERK: Bernth?
17 MR. BERNTH: Yes .
18 CLERK: Torgerson.
19 MR. TORGERSON: Yes .
20 CLERK: Colton.
21 MR. COLTON: Yes .
22 CLERK: Gavaldon.
23 MR. GAVALDON: Yes . Congratulations, Mikal .
24 And I want to say, Glen, thank you for a wonderful two
25 years . I appreciate your support and your style and
5
1 letting us all work together, and trying to fill your --
2 carry on some shoes here. Okay. We ' ll go ahead and run
3 with a regular meeting. Is there anyone on the board,
4 staff, or the audience that would like to pull any of the
5 consent items? That ' s Items 1, 2, 3, and 4 . Is there
6 anyone who wants them pulled? Okay. Seeing none from the
7 audience, none from staff, none from the Board. We ' ll
8 close that.
9 -Cameron, all the minutes we have -- are we
10 missing any of them?
11 CLERK: Yes . May 18th.
12 MR. GAVALDON: May 18th? Okay. Motion for the
13 consent agenda, please?
14 MR. COLTON: I move for approval of the consent
15 agenda, Items Number 1, 2, 3, and 4 with acception of the
16 minutes of the May 18th meeting.
17 MR. BERNTH: I would second that motion.
18 MR. GAVALDON: We have a motion for movement and
19 seconded. Any discussion? Okay. Roll call, please .
20 CLERK: Meyer.
21 MS. MEYER: Yes .
22 CLERK: Bernth.
23 MR. BERNTH: Yes .
24 CLERK: Torgerson.
• 25 MR. TORGERSON: Yes .
6
1 CLERK: Colton.
2 MR. COLTON: Yes .
3 CLERK: Carpenter.
4 MS. CARPENTER: Yes.
5 MR. ECKMAN: Mr. Chairman?
6 CLERK: Gavaldon.
7 MR. GAVALDON: Yes . Okay.
8 MR. ECKMAN: Sorry.
9 MR. GAVALDON: The consent agenda is passed.
10 Paul?
11 MR. ECKMAN: I didn't want to -- I didn' t mean
12 to interrupt the vote. The Provincetowne PUD which is
13 Item 5, I understand that some of the persons who are here
14 to represent Provincetowne in that application aren' t here
15 yet, and so it ' s -- if the Chair wishes, I think that it
16 would be desirable if we could switch these two around and
17 go to Item 6 and then do Item 5 last .
18 MR. GAVALDON: Sounds like a very good idea.
19 Thank you very much. So we' ll go ahead and move to Item
20 Number 6. Harmony Safeway Market Lot, Safeway Fuel
21 Facility PDP. So if there' s any issues in us doing a
22 flip-flop here, we ' ll go ahead with Number 6 . Staff
23 presentation, please . Ed, you' re on.
24 MR. SHEPARD: Thank you, Mr. Newly Elected
25 Chairman.
7
1 MR. GAVALDON: Thank you.
2 MR. SHEPARD: And congratulations . This is the
3 -- a PDP. I think what ' s important to note about this, is
4 that, within the shopping center, the Harmony Safeway
5 Shopping Center, this is the first PDP. The shopping
6 center goes back a few years, and the previous submittals
7 were done as PUDs under the Land Development Guidance
8 System. That ' s an important distinction here.
9 It is in the Neighbor Service Center. The
10 Neighbor Service Center is a Type-2 use. What ' s being
11 requested is a two-phased project . The first phase
12 consists of a pay window, a kiosk, five fueling stations,
13 and the overhead canopy. The second phase would be a
14 removal of one of the fuel islands, and then, or in
15 addition to the fuel island, remove the kiosk and build a
16 2, 790 square-foot convenience store. This a pad site.
GOR�ioo�
17 It ' s 1 . 3 acres in size and it ' s in the Harmony eOJ4�
18 Zone District .
19 The staff is recommending two conditions of
20 approval, but we would like to, at your discretion, remove
21 the second condition of approval . We would like to stick
22 with the first condition of approval which refers to the
23 location of the flushwall signage. Elushwall signage is
24 being proposed on the convenience store which is part of
25 the Phase 2 of the project . It ' s being proposed on the
8
1 east elevation, which is the front of the store, the south
2 elevation which is Harmony Road, and the west elevation
3 which faces Village Inn.
4 There will be no other development between this
5 facility and the Village Inn. That will remain open,
6 that ' s Safeway' s parking lot. They've kept that open as
7 sort of a view window to the arterial street, Harmony
8 Road.
9 Staff is recommending this based on the criteria
10 that we have in the code that allows us to look at
11 flushwall signage located in the residential neighborhood
12 sign district . A little bit of background on that, the
13 residential neighborhood sign district, goes back to when
14 we were first being inundated with convenience stores at
15 arterial -- arterial locations . In 1988 we came up with
16 the -- you' ll recall that we came up with the Citizen' s
17 Committee, The Neighborhood Convenience Store Design
18 Standards and Guidelines . This actually led to the
19 creation of a new point chart aw!l- the guidance system. We
20 started to get a better handle on these. One of the last
21 convenience stores to come in ttn4e this was the Circle K
22 on Taft and Elizabeth and we thought that we needed a
23 little more land use regulation towards these things
24 springing up at arterial -- arterial intersections . So we
25 moved them off arterials, got them on collector arterials,
9
1 got reverse mode, and we got some design standards . It
2 worked very well for us . In terms of the evolution of
3 these convenience stores and design, we then established
4 the residential neighborhood sign district, which says
5 that signage in these districts is a little more
6 restrictive. The Prospect-Shields area that shopping
7 center is in the district. This shopping center was in
8 the district where signage is slightly reduced. The whole
9 point of these regulations is to allow these commercial
10 areas to serve neighborhoods, placed near neighborhoods,
11 and -- and yet the market incentive was for these things
12 to all go on College Avenue, Harmony Road, or East
13 Mulberry, because that ' s where the traffic was . So the
14 Guidance System had an all development criteria referring
15 to flushwall signage. When the Land Use Code was written,
16 that was transferred into the Land Use Code, but with less
17 explanatory language. And that might be what we ' re going
18 to have some issues tonight, and that might be what we
19 hear from the applicant . The explanatory language in the
20 guidance system is more descriptive. It does allow us to
21 look at building character and architecture. In fact, if
22 you go back to the intent of the legislation, I was on the
23 committee that established the Residential Neighborhood
Ace��J
24 Sign District and we worked at OfBeB , Shaw Sign, Gardener
25 Sign, all the sign contractors and the developers and the
10
1 neighborhood representatives . Clearly the intent at that
2 time was that we ' re going to introduce commercial uses
3 closer to neighborhoods, the trade-off is that they' re
4 going to be designed to a heightened level of design than
5 what we ' re normally seeing or from what we ' re seeing in
6 other communities . We knew what was happening, we knew
7 what the trend was, and we tried to get ahead of the
8 curve. So that ' s the basis for Condition Number 1 .
9 The only condition that we are recommending to -
10 the Board is look at the removal of the flushwall sign,
11 the west and the south elevations of the convenience
12 store, which is part of Phase 2, because this is in the
13 residential neighborhood sign district, it ' s a very small
14 building and the proportionality, the scale, the character
15 of the building, we feel is overpowered by the amount of
16 flushwall signage on the south and west elevations .
Jt tt
17 MR. GAVALDON: Okay. Any -side shots, Ted, you
18 want to go over real quick?
19 MR. SHEPARD: Well, I didn' t have time to do
20 that . Let me get over to the machinery and see if I can
21 hit the right buttons .
22 MR. GAVALDON: In the interest of time, we can
23 go ahead and let the applicant start the presentation,
24 and then we might want to take a step back and allow Ted
25 to go through the visuals, if that ' s okay with you.
_ 11
. 1 MR. MOORE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
2 MR. GAVALDON: Okay. You have thirty minutes
3 of time to present. If you need less that ' s fine with us .
4 MR. MOORE: Oh, if we need less . Okay. I ' ll
5 try and make it that way.
6 MR. GAVALDON: Thank you.
7 MR. MOORE: I do need a landscape plan to begin
8 my presentation so --
9 - MR. GAVALDON: Okay. Then we ' ll just let Ted
10 get that ready for you.
11 MR. SHEPARD: (Inaudible. )
12 MR. GAVALDON: Generally you can set it up in
. 13 front of the podiums . Could we ask a favor sir? If we
14 can take the two on your right and put them on towards the
15 floor, then at least we can see the screen and the cameras
16 can still focus on them. Yes . That ' s perfect. Thank
17 you. The third one ' s okay where it ' s at. I think they
18 can. We 've got this other here. Okay. Okay. Ted' s
19 ready.
20 MR. MOORE: Okay. I 'm David Moore with
21 Galloway, Romero and Associates, 5350 Denver Tech Center
22 Parkway, Greenwood Village, Colorado, 80111, (303)
23 770-8884 . We ' re representing Safeway for this fueling
24 station with convenience store. I also have with me this
. 25 evening John Scales who ' s an architect with our firm,
12
1 Galloway, Romero and Associates . And I also have with me
2 this evening Anne Bowers with Kreager and Associates, the
3 traffic engineer. So if we have questions that relate to
4 those two people, I ' ll ask them to join us . Thank
5 you for the opportunity to bring this project before you
6 this evening. Appreciate the quick start into it,
7 fortunately we were here, barely. What I ' d like to start
8 with is a quick site tour just to orient you with the site
9 plan. And obviously you see it in your packets but I want
10 to mention a few things . I don' t know if that ' s showing
11 up very well . That ' s Harmony on the south, of course .
12 This is the driveway going into this whole shopping
13 center. This is a driveway along the north. That ' s not
14 working well. That' s not much better.
15 Anyway, talking about automobile circulation, we
16 have circulation coming off of the north driveway in two
17 places and accessing the dispensers under the canopy. The
18 fuel truck would come in this street and turn and come
19 into the site, and the fuel tanks are located on the east
20 side of the site. The truck would then turn around, come
21 back out, come across and would exit on McMurray, so they
22 could use the left turn light there to head back. The
23 convenience store, of course, is located on the west side
24 as a future phase, and may or may not get built . We are
25 showing these on many of the Safeway sites with the
13
• 1 possibility that they may decide to put these in, but we
2 did want to include it in the package for you to look at
3 and to get the approval on it depending on what their
4 decision will be.
5 A lot of this part of the site exists, both the
6 landscaping and the pedestrian pathway and the sidewalk
7 into the site in the easternmost laneway also exists . We
8 are -- agreeing to put in another bus stop. There was one
9 approved originally in this location, and built in this
10 location, and staff has requested that we put in a bus
11 stop that ' s midpoint that would line up with the Safeway
12 sidewalk system that runs up to the front of Safeway up in
• 13 this location. That ' s, in our view, not a legal
14 requirement, but we've agreed to do it because it ' s
15 off-site to our site, and we don' t feel it ' s occasioned by
16 the addition of this use, but we've agreed to do it .
17 We 've added a significant amount of landscaping
18 around the site, and I actually have some numbers on that .
19 Looks like about twelve more trees have been added on the
20 site beyond what already exists . The landscaping is in
21 along Harmony and along this driveway. We ' ve also added
22 167 shrubs and also an annual bed of tulips for color in
23 the spring. The bus shelter which will be added to the
24 bus stop over in the left, lower corner is something that
• 25 will be shared with the city and with the developer of
14
1 this site.
2 The architectural information -- maybe, Ted, now
3 we can go on the architectural elevations, please. Thank
4 you. We ' ll talk about the building first . Obviously
5 we 've upgraded the architecture from what would be a
6 standard type of Safeway type of fueling facilities with
7 roof elements and quite a bit of architectural details
8 along the walls on both sides . We've included a
9 stone-type of material on the base and stucco above. The
10 colors match the colors that are used throughout the
11 center and what I ' ve done -- this board down in the
12 foreground is the whole center. And I ' ve brought it in
13 just so you see the location that we ' re in relative to all
14 the other buildings . This is the convenience store, this
15 is canopy, the is Blockbuster, this is the bank, this is
16 Long' s Drugs with the associated retail, this is Safeway
17 with their associated retail. This is the Village Inn and
18 this is the unbuilt pad.
19 One of the things that we tried to do on this
20 site was to work with the neighborhoods, and we had a
21 meeting with members of the board of Golden Meadows early
22 on, and they had no concern, and they took this to their
23 full board and came back with a letter that ' s in your
24 packet that says they have no concern of this use at that
25 location.
15
. 1 Subsequent to that, we have a letter from a Mrs .
=V A
2 Sullivan at iris Court expressing a number of issues. And
3 I provided back to her a letter with explanations relative
4 to her concerns . Unfortunately, that letter did not get
5 into your packets, and also subsequent just last week we
6 had second letter from Mrs. Sullivan saying that they' re
7 basically okay with what they saw at the meeting we had in
8 December.
9 With your permission, I 'd like to add this into
10 the record and I have copies for everyone, if you'd like
11 to.
12 MR. GAVALDON: Thank you. You can get it to
• 13 Georgeanna and she can get them to us .
14 MR. SHEPARD: No, I missed the packet deadline
15 by about ten days (INAUDIBLE) .
16 MR. GAVALDON: We have something from Elizabeth
17 P. Sullivan. Yes, we've got one. Okay. We already have
18 that . Thank you.
19 MR. MOORE: Do you also have my letter of
20 November 1st where I answered Mrs . Sullivan' s first
21 letter?
22 MR. GAVALDON: November 1st .
23 MR. MOORE: In any case, in our view, in
24 meeting with these neighbors, we felt that there are no
25 really strong neighbor concerns about what we are
16
1 proposing. There were a number of people that talked
2 about the use issue, but that ' s not a topic for
3 discussion, so I don' t see a problem there.
4 I did want to point out that we did notify far
5 beyond the code requirement of 500 feet from the site, and
6 we actually notified over 1500 feet from the site, so
7 there were over 450 people that were notified of the
8 proposal.
9 And now I ' d like to talk specifically about the
10 sign issuings, and I notice that the city has withdrawn
11 their second condition, which related to canopy signs, and
12 that related to the issue that, in our mind, in the code
13 the definition of street includes private streets as well
14 as public streets . And under that definition it gave us
15 three canopy allowed.
16 We ' ve decided not to put either a canopy sign or
17 a building sign on the north sides of the canopy or the
18 building because we feel that this residential community
19 can see through this gap between the buildings and would
20 see those signs lit at night. So we thought, well, let ' s
21 just not have them and not have that issue come up in the
22 future.
23 MR. ECKMAN: Mr. Moore.
24 MR. MOORE: Yes.
25 MR. ECKMAN: So your intention is to only
17
1 install two canopy signs?
2 MR. MOORE: Yes . We ' re installing one on the
3 southeast corner of the canopy and one on the south.
4 There ' s one on the east side of the canopy on the
5 southeast corner and one on the south side. But I think I
6 would like to put our information into the record anyway,
7 and, if you' ll bear with me, I ' ll quickly get through
8 this .
9 In our view the Residential Neighborhood Sign -
10 District regulations governs signs on the gasoline station
11 canopies, and it ' s section 3. 8 . 7E12 . And basically it
12 says, "One flushwall sign or under-canopy sign per street
13 frontage, not to exceed 12 square feet in area, shall be
14 permitted on or under the fascia of the canopy covering
15 the retail dispensing of sales of vehicle fuels . " Our
16 canopy signs will actually be 5 square feet, not 12, so
17 we ' ll in fact have two signs of 5 feet, each as part of
18 this particular use.
19 And, since I think the city is now agreeing --
20 agreeing with us, if I can confirm that, I won' t read in
21 these next few sections which relate to that . If you
22 could confirm that me so we don' t need to put that in the
23 record. Save us a little time.
24 On the question of flushwall signs on the south
25 and west elevations, the staff has recommended the
18
1 elimination of the flushwall signs, and basis for this is
2 stated to be the Board' s right to review location of signs
3 in the Residential No-Sign District. We believe this
4 violates the clear language and intent of the code. The
5 code regulates the amount and design of flushwall signs;
6 for example, square footage, lettering height, length, and
7 limitation, and that ' s Section 3.8.7" through 16.
8 And the code also describes the authority
9 reserved to the Planning and Zoning Board under Section
10 3.85(EP, and it says the Board may impose locational
11 requirements as a condition of approval . The Board may
12 not impose more restrictive requirements or conditions
13 than what is required under the regulations . The exact
14 language of that is in -- on Page 6 in your staff report
15 and I won' t go through it in detail.
16 In summary, the amount and design of signage is
17 specifically regulated in the sign code . The amount and
18 design are approved by the Zoning Department using
19 specific sign code criteria. The Board looks only at the
20 location of the signs in size and design and number as
21 permitted by the sign code.
22 The staff equates the right of the Board to
23 review location of the signs, for example, where to place
24 permitted signage, with the right to eliminate permitted
25 signage. This is directly contrary to the provisions of
19
• 1 the code which says that, although the Board may look at
2 appropriate placement of the signs, it may not impose more
3 restrictive regulations than the regulations allowed,
4 which actually determines the amount of signage.
5 Clearly, eliminating two of the three signs
6 permitted in the regulation results in a more restrictive
7 regulation. So we think we ' re entitled by code to have
8 three flushwall signs on the southwest and the east.
9 Now, you will see on the elevations that I have
10 added a second sign on the east side. It ' s down below
11 along the sign band. And I did that with the intent of
12 saying to you that it ' s been our experience with these
. 13 types of convenience stores, very often they come in with
14 a second use in the store . And it might be a bank
15 operation, it might be a quick serve restaurant operation,
16 it might be a dry cleaner pickup type of facility. But
17 these are happening more and more regularly, and we expect
18 that there will be two uses in that building in the
19 future, and so we wanted to provide for that opportunity
20 for a second sign and show you where we would expect to
21 put it . So that ' s why we' re showing those two signs on
22 the east wall.
23 So, as I said, we think we ' re entitled by code
24 to have three signs on the southwest and the east
25 elevations . And, in terms of deciding appropriate
20
1 locations for these signs, the regulation is silent, it
2 has no standards . Other than that, there is language in
3 the agenda summary for the ordinance stating in staff
4 report which appears to envision that an issue to look at
5 the signs ' location relationship to the architectural
6 character of the buildings to which it is associated.
7 This is consistent with the old LDGS standard
8 adopted after the RNSD ordinance was passed. "For
9 projects located within the Residential Neighborhood Sign
10 District are flushwall signs positioned to harmonize with
11 the architectural character of the buildings to which they
12 are attached including, but not limited to, any
13 projection, relief, cornice, column, change of building
14 materials, window or door openings . "
15 Do flushwall signs align with other such signs
16 on the same building? Staff cites Section 353 (D) (1) as to
17 what the Board should look for in sign location. And this
18 section does give standards for architecture, stating,
19 "The building design shall incorporate predominant
20 materials, elements, features, color ranges tailored to
21 the site and in multiple building developments like this
22 neighborhood center. Each building shall include
23 predominant characteristics shared by all buildings in the
24 development . " And we feel we 've done that .
25 We 've used materials, we ' ve used architectural
21
1 shapes, and we 've used materials that are common
2 throughout the center. And I 've already talked a bit
3 about those design features which would meet these
4 standards, and I think the staff agreed that the building
5 design meets the architectural standards .
6 Signage, on the other hand, is supposed to be
7 unique to the business it identifies, and it cannot be the
8 intent of the code to have these architectural standards
9 apply to signage. The result then would be that all
10 signage in the development would utilize the same
11 materials, elements, features, colors, and all other
12 predominant characteristics, defeating altogether the
13 purpose of signage which is to identify particular
14 businesses and to differentiate their individual
15 locations, which are sometimes located in very similar
16 looking buildings .
17 Other staff arguments regarding this location do
18 not appear to be relevant. "Signage is excessive . " Well,
19 one of the things I brought to you this evening is that
20 board on the right. And what that shows are the bank
21 building, the Blockbuster building, the elevations for our
22 building, since we don ' t have buildings we can take
23 pictures of, and the Village Inn. And when you look at
24 the scale of the sign on those elevations -- would you
25 like me to pass it so you can see it more closely?
22
1 MR. GAVALDON: Yes. Yes, please.
2 MR. MOORE: When you look at that, you' ll see
3 that our signs are relative to the scale of the building,
4 and they' re certainly comparable to the scale on any of
5 the other buildings in the site.
6 MR. GAVALDON: Thank you.
7 (Board examines visuals. )
8 MR. MOORE: The second point, "Signage is out of
9 proportion to the size of the building. " Staff states
10 that the signage is out of proportion to the building size
11 and compares -- actually in the square footage of the
12 signs to the square footage of the buildings as evidence.
13 The formula for calculating the allowable amount of
14 signage is not found in the sign code. Not that
15 particular one . They don' t look at the square footage of
16 building. Because the city has already determined in ' 93,
17 with the adoption of the RNSD regulations, that the
18 appropriate method for calculating the allowable amount of
19 signage would be based on the length of the building
20 frontage, not on it ' s overall square footage.
21 Again staff' s comparison is a criticism of the
22 amount signage, and it ' s not within the Board' s discretion
23 to restrict that amount of signage. It ' s sort of
24 interesting in that table the staff used the total square
25 footage of the two-story building, even though the
23
1 footprint of that building is almost the size of the
• 2 C-store that we ' re talking about .
3 Third point, "Signage is out of proportion when
4 compared with other pad sites and their signage. " Well, I
5 think you can look at these photographs . Unfortunately,
6 of course, the photographs are all at a different scale,
7 but in the one that shows the south and the east, they are
8 approximately the same scale as the Blockbuster. So you
9 can look at the Blockbuster signs and look at our signs,
10 and I think we ' re very much in scale with that.
11 There is no standard that requires, or even
12 permits, using comparisons with the building amount of
13 signage with the amount awarded to other buildings . The
14 formula of the sign code is building specific, based on
15 the individual building' s dimensions and street frontages,
16 which are different in each of these cases .
17 I think, in summary, we feel we 've met every
18 code requirement in your request, and that we ' re dead-on
19 with our code issue, that we' re within what ' s allowed
20 under the code.
21 On our wall signs we' re showing an area of 30
22 square feet . Because of the restrictions in the sign code
23 to restrict the letters to 2 feet, those signs will
24 probably be closer to 22 square feet rather than 30 square
. 25 feet . What we have shown is the 30 inches allowed for a
24
1 logo-type sign, so when you look at the elevations, that
2 box is 30 inches tall to allow for logos to fit within it.
3 Unfortunately, we don't know at this point what
4 the signs will be so we can' t show you replicas of what
5 they would be on these buildings . But I 've made up some
6 catchy names that I 'm going to put on the Web for future
7 use.
8 In any case, that ' s pretty much our case, and I
9 think at this point I- will ask for your support and
10 approval for this project and for the signs that we
11 requested. And I ' d be happy to take questions .
12 MR. GAVALDON: Thank you very much. Is there
13 any Board questions for staff or the applicant at this
14 time, or do we want to go to citizen input? Okay. Thank
15 you very much. Is there anyone in the audience that would
16 like to speak to the topic the Safeway fuel? Anyone?
17 Okay. Seeing that we have no one wanting to speak, we ' ll
18 bring it back to the Board and close public comments at
19 this time. Any Board members with any questions they
20 would like to bring up?
21 Ted, I have a couple. Could you address the --
22 the first condition about the flushwall signs, and --
23 let ' s see -- it ' s talking about the second sign. He had
24 the primary sign above and then about a second sign that
25 he was showing up in his drawings?
25
1 MR. SHEPARD: Well, I believe that ' s a question
• 2 better directed to the applicant. I believe Mr. Moore is
3 referring to the east elevation where they are showing two
4 flushwall signs .
5 MR. GAVALDON: Uh-huh.
6 MR. SHEPARD: That ' s fine. We have no objection
7 to flushwall signage on the east elevation. That ' s not
8 the issue That ' s the entrance. That ' s where it belongs .
9 So that question might be better directed to Mr. Moore.
10 MR. GAVALDON: I just wanted to get your take on
11 it because we were just looking at the earlier drawings,
12 and he just discussed the second one . I want to get some
. 13 clarity. Okay. Okay. Anyone else want to bring up
14 anything? Okay. Go ahead, Mike.
15 MR. TORGERSON: This might sound absurd, but I 'm
of
16 just curious, �s- the code could be interpreted this way.
17 In the character and image area, it talks about variation
18 of massing, and that you' re not supposed to exceed a
19 height-to-width ratio of 1 to 3 . And then, if you look in
20 the back at the definition of "building, " this canopy
21 seems to fall under the definition of building.
22 MR. SHEPARD: We don' t interpret the canopy to
23 fall under those standards .
24 MR. TORGERSON: Okay.
25 MR. GAVALDON: Okay. Any more questions or are
26
1 we getting close to a motion?
2 MR. COLTON: Ted, I was just wondering if you
3 could go through the staff' s explanation about the first
4 condition again since we just heard the applicant ' s --
5 MR. SHEPARD: Right. Again, we' re coming at
6 this from the perspective of the totality of the site.
7 The site has a potential of six fuel stations, a canopy,
8 and a C-store -- a pad site. It ' s the smallest pad site
9 in the center. It ' s the smallest building in the center.
10 And from that kind of context, what kind of aesthetic
11 image will this center have in it ' s relationship to Golden
12 Meadows? That ' s where we ' re coming from.
13 When we reviewed Village Inn, you' ll recall that
14 we went through two public hearings on that item over
15 these same issues . And I think the result is that we' re
16 all pretty pleased how that came out. So we ' re looking at
17 the interrelationship between signage and architecture.
18 We know that the sign code grants allowance, but
19 it also -- the code also allows us to look at the
20 relationship of signage to architecture. If it were just
21 an allowance issue, then we wouldn' t have this
22 architectural-signage relationship standard. We would
23 just have the sign code. But we do have the standard, and
24 the intent of the standard is to relate signage to the
25 building.
27
1 We know that there could possibly be the extreme
• 2 example where you have those old, little MotoPhoto things
3 out in parking lots which could probably have more signage
4 allowance and square footage of building. Would we want
5 that building to have that much signage? Well, the
6 standard says that we can look at that . In the
7 Residential Neighborhood Sign District only, of course.
8 That ' s where we are.
9 And so that ' s where we are coming from. We ' re
10 simply saying that contextually -- from a site
11 perspective, a small building on a small pad in the
12 Residential Neighborhood Sign District, in a very
13 sensitive shopping center, that was designed with a lot of
14 citizen input -- that this particular building needs to
15 have a little better relationship of its flushwall signage
16 to its architecture; mass-scale proportionality.
17 MR. GAVALDON: Okay. Any other questions? Are
18 we get getting close to a motion? I 'd do motions entered
19 were I could, but if anyone wanted to take a shot at it we
20 need a new motion maker.
21 MS. CARPENTER: I ' ll take a shot at it .
22 MR. GAVALDON: All right, Jennifer.
23 MS. CARPENTER: I move we approve the Harmony
24 Safeway Market Lot 6, Safeway Fuel Facility subject to the
• 25 following condition: that the removal of the flushwall
28
1 signs on the south and west elevations of the convenience
2 store because they fail to meet the sign code standard,
3 3 . 8 . 7 (E) (2) relating to location, and building standards
4 3. 5 . 3 (A) and 3 . 5 . 3 (D) (1) relating to the character and
5 image.
6 MR. TORGERSON: Second.
7 MR. GAVALDON: Okay. We have a motion moved and
8 second. Do we have more? Any discussion? I just wanted
9 to bring up one thing, if we could. The applicant had
10 indicated that they just want to have two signs on the
11 canopy, and that ' s already in the record, so we have that
12 covered.
13 MR. ECKMAN: Yes . They stated that into the
14 record, so that ' s -- that ' s what they' re bound by per your
15 approval.
16 MR. GAVALDON: Okay. Great. Any other
17 discussion? Okay. We ' re ready for a vote.
18 CLERK: Bernth.
19 MR. BERNTH: Yes .
20 CLERK: Torgerson.
21 MR. TORGERSON: Yes .
22 CLERK: Colton.
23 MR. COLTON: Yes.
24 CLERK: Carpenter.
25 MS . CARPENTER: Yes .
29
1 CLERK: Meyer.
. 2 MS. MEYER: Yes .
3 CLERK: Gavaldon.
4 MR. GAVALDON: Yes . Okay. That ' s approved.
5 Thank you very much. Do we have the folks here for Item
6 Number 5, going back to Number 5 . Is everybody here and
7 ready? Paul, do we have them here and ready?
8 MR. ECKMAN: Pardon me? I think -- I think
9 everyone' s here, so we can go with Item Number 5 . Is that
10 correct?
11 MR. GAVALDON: Okay.
12 (Inaudible)
13 MR. ECKMAN: So we can get started? Okay?
14 MR. GAVALDON: Okay. Let ' s go ahead and just
15 take a quick five minute break allowing everyone to get
16 ready. We ' ll come back in about 5 to 7 minutes .
17 (Recess taken at 7 : 15 p.m. )
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
. 25
1 STATE OF COLORADO )
2 ) TRANSCRIBER' S CERTIFICATE
3 COUNTY OF LARIMER )
4 I, Marcela T. Losh, a Shorthand Reporter and Notary
5 Public, State of Colorado, hereby certify that the foregoing
6 proceedings, taken in the matter of the application by
7 Safeway Market, Lot 6, Safeway Fuel Facility, and recorded
8 on Thursday, January 18, 2001, at 300 West Laporte Street,
9 Fort Collins, Colorado, was duly transcribed by me and
10 reduced under my supervision to the foregoing 30 pages; that
11 said transcript is an accurate and complete record of the
12 proceedings so taken.
13 I further certify that I am not related to, employed
14 by, nor of counsel to any of the parties or attorneys herein
15 nor otherwise interested in the outcome of the case .
16 Attested to by me this 23rd day of February, 2001 .
17
18
Marcela T. Losh '
20 ? =o7ARy Meadors Court Reporting, LLC
�r 140 West Oak Street, Suite 266
21 $� Fort Collins, Colorado 80524
�Nl PUBt��' QQ`� (970) 482-1506
9
22 �i'FrO My commission expires January 3, 2005 .
23
24
25
NEIGHBORHOOD
CONVENIENCE
SHOPPING
CENTER
DESIGN GUIDELINESPOLICIES CRITERIA
�0
FORT COLLINS, • • 1 •
FORT • �«
COLORADO �m
LAND DEVELOPMENT
GUIDANCE SYSTEM
FOR • P
;ems -W4
ATA
MID
_i •'MPS�• �
• c
r.0 r
CHART A-2. NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBIIM CRITERIA
A-2.14 Signs
For Projects Located Within the Residential Neighborhood Sign District:
Are flushwall signs positioned to harmonize with the architectural
character of the building(s) to which they are attached, including but not
limited to any projection, relief, cornice, column, change of building
material, window or door opening? Do flushwall signs align with other
such signs on the same building?
For Projects Located Outside of the Residential Neighborhood Sian
District:
Are all signs in the project in compliance with the requirements of
Chapter 29, Article IV of the City Code (the Sign Code)?
PURPOSE
The Residential Neighborhood Sign District has been
established for the regulation of signs for non-
residential uses in certain areas of the city which may
be impacted by signage because of their
predominantly residential use and character. The
district includes neighborhood service centers,
neighborhood convenience shopping centers,business
services uses and auto-related and roadside
commercial uses that are in proximity to existing or
planned residential areas.
For those developments located within the Residential
Neighborhood Sign District,the Planning and Zoning
Board will review the location of all proposed
flushwall signs. All other aspects of signage for
developments within the district will be regulated by
the City's Sign Code.
A map delineating the district is available at the
Planning Department.
Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments
The City of Fort Collins,Colorado,Revised March 1994
-50-
Harmony
Corridor
^k:�i:`t���oi.. N:tr fa'"•'i'�ye;2ftt�°�'i� y);'h�.���Th?S�v�c':1vy tr�a$t �t'vc£';�L°'ni:�o-'f`''i'O'"�6�+0`;,x,.,3c.G;e,'p:::.:.:.cr:•:, t.i 'L`3aF� tk: #eft �"k .t.,'S,'Y: tri
•::i?c. fi7°53`.Y:p:�;2$$; k fi°.:. 71` trla,'F,00h�+:^�;;n#E:w°v:�'f eo,?osfS�F;:;};jyyteftc,:,t. �°trf >
::{A3cy$�":}?":^f S�e`:t c.:^^o y<�.r.<t,$L+F �rt :j%i}�>^'<7b;�f>t };5..}F,,^C::,°°:�Y'�'u•:}?£?c;?t
'<:3�'c`2f o��'va';oo':v'N°9`�:,L:�v}h�£�,}�y�{ny:u`:Gf:23%},fK�.. :..,I ;•}c.:ifii:^�•f$"o�#xc t.
SHOPPING CENTER DEFINITIONS
The following standards and guidelines are intended to be used in the
definition of proposed shopping centers and shall subsitute for and
otherwise replace and supersede any conflicting definitions contained in the
City Code. These definitions apply only to shopping centers located in
the harmony Corridor.
HARMONY CORRIDOR NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE CENTER
General Definition:
A shopping center located in a complex which is planned and developed as
a unit, and located within and intended to primarily serve the consumer
demands of residents and employees who live and work in adjacent and
surrounding neighborhoods. Typically, a neighborhood service senter shall
contain a grocery store or supermarket.
Permitted Uses:
• The principal uses shall be limited to grocery stores, supermarkets,
personal services, business services, gasoline service stations, drug
stores, standard or fast food restaurants, liquor and wine sales,
clothing and accessory shops, equipment rental (not including
outdoor storage), hardware stores, video stores, and uses of similar
character as determined by the Planning and Zoning Board.
Secondary uses shall be limited to professional offices, banks and
financial institutions, multi-family dwelllings, small animal
veterinary clinics, libraries, youth centers, child care centers, health
services, and uses of similar character as determined by the
Planning and Zoning Board. (+)
• The hours of operation of the center shall be between 5:00 a.m. and
12:00 a.m. Extended hours may be permitted by the Planning and
Zoning Board if evidence is submitted by the applicant to
demonstrate that the extended hours will not create an unreasonable
disruption or intrusion upon the adjacent residential neighborhood
due to exterior lighting, noise and automobile traffic. (+)
'1
i
,.65
Scale:
A neighborhood service center shall be situated on seven (7) to
twenty (20) acres. (+)
P. Generally, a neighborhood service center should occur on 10 - 15
acres. A center may be larger than 15 acres if necessary to allow
for the siting of secondary uses which would help to create an
effective transition from the adjacent residential neighborhood. (o)
A neighborhood service center shall contain at least six (6)
independent business establishments with separate Public entrances.
► A neighborhood service center continues the City's tradition of
having small neighborhood shops supplementing a grocery store or
supermarket. One building offering several different services or
goods is not considered a neighborhood service center. (o)
• A neighborhood service center shall contain 50,000 to 120,000
square feet of gross floor area. A neighborhood service center may
contain an additional 10,000 square feet of gross floor area of
secondary uses (for a total of not more than 130,000 square feet of
gross floor area) if necessary for the purpose of providing an
effective land use transition from the adjacent residential
neighborhood. (+)
► The scale of a neighborhood service center should be compatible
with its immediate and surrounding neighborhood. The placement
of secondary uses should create an effective land use transition i
between the more intensive retail uses in the neighborhood service
center and adjacent residential uses. (o)
No retail establishment occupying more than twenty-five thousand
(25,000) square feet of gross floor area shall be permitted, except
a supermarket shall be permitted which does not exceed 49,000
square feet of gross floor area. (+)
66
Character:
• Neighborhood streets, or sidewalks and bike paths shall lead into
and through the neighborhood service center, so that people who
live or work nearby can conveniently use the neighborhood service
center. The neighborhood service center shall contain a transit stop
with convenient and comfortable access to the uses in the
neighborhood service center. (+)
► The appearance and function of the neighborhood service center
shall be effectively integrated with the surrounding neighborhoods,
not segregated from them. (+)
► A neighborhood service center should look and function as a
"social and identity" center for the neighborhood. Its buildings
should create pleasant and readily identifiable outdoor spaces, such
as a plaza and/or major walkway, where people can meet, rest or
wait. (o)
► Careful design and placement of buildings and uses in a
Neighborhood Service Center can create an effective transition from
the rest of the neighborhood. The negative effects of large
buildings, noise, traffic, and exhaust should be contained within the
Neighborhood Service Center. (o)
HARMONY CORRIDOR COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER
General Definition:
A shopping and service center located in a complex which is planned and
developed as a unit, and intended to serve consumer demands from
residents and employees who live and work in surrounding neighborhoods
as well as the community as a whole. A community shopping center
provides, in addition to the convenience goods of a neighborhood service
center, a wider range of facilities for the sale of goods, such as (but not
limited to) food, books, apparel and furniture. Multi-family residential, as
well as non-retail employment generating uses (such as professional offices)
may be located amongst the retail component of the center.
ITEM NO. 6
MEETING DATE
STAFF Ted Shepard
City of Fort Collins PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD
STAFF REPORT
PROJECT: Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Lot 6, Safeway Fuel Facility,
P.D.P., 33-94F
APPLICANT: Safeway Stores 46, Inc.
C/o Galloway, Romero & Associates
5350 DTC Parkway
Englewood, CO 80111
OWNER: S-B Properties No. 22, Limited Partnership
C/o The Barclay Group
8145 N. 86a' Place
Scottsdale, AZ 85258
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Request for a P.D.P. within a Neighborhood Service Center for a gasoline service
station consisting of a 2,790 square foot convenience store, 268 square foot kiosk, six
fueling islands and an 86' x 43' canopy on Lot 6 of the Harmony Safeway shopping
center. The project would be built in phases. Phase One consists of the kiosk, five
fueling islands and the canopy. Phase Two consists of removing the kiosk, adding one
fueling island and the convenience store. Lot 6 is 1.3 acres in size located on the north
side of Harmony Road between Wheaton and McMurry Drives. The site is zoned H-C,
Harmony Corridor.
RECOMMENDATION: Approval with Two Conditions
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
A Neighborhood Service Center is a Type Two permitted use in the H-C zone. A
gasoline service station is a permitted use within a Neighborhood Service Center. The
P.D.P. complies with the applicable standards of both the Harmony Corridor Standards
and Guidelines and the General Standards of the Land Use Code with one exception.
The location of flush wall signage on the south and west elevations of the convenience
COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N.College Ave. P.O.Box 580 Fort Collins,CO 80522-0580 (970)221-6750
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Lot 6, Safeway Fuel Facility, P.D.P., 33-94F
January 18, 2001 P & Z Meeting
Page 2
store causes the P.D.P. to fail to meet the Sign Code and Building Standards relating to
the location and quality of the design and appearance of the structure. The P.D.P. also
fails to meet the Sign Code Standard relating to the location of the north and east
canopy fascia signs. Two conditions of approval recommend that the two flush wall
signs be removed from the convenience store and the two fascia signs be removed
from the canopy.
COMMENTS:
1. Background:
The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
N: H-C; Safeway Grocery Store
S: H-C; Restaurant and Medical Office —Oak Ridge Business Park
E: H-C; Multi-tenant Retail (Lot 5 of Harmony Safeway Center)
W: H-C; Village Inn (Lot 7 of Harmony Safeway Center)
The Golden Meadows area was annexed in 1977 as part of a 234-acre parcel known as
the Harmony Annexation. The shopping center was originally platted as Tract B,
Golden Meadows, 51h Filing, approved in 1980.
Originally master planned in the late 1970's, Golden Meadows was one of the first
large-scale neighborhoods in the City to propose a mixed-use development in
accordance with the Land Use Policies Plan. The objective was to create a
neighborhood with housing, shopping, employment and recreational opportunities. All
of these uses have been constructed. In addition, and not originally anticipated, an
elementary school (Kruse) was later incorporated into the Golden Meadows Industrial
Park.
In 1984, a Preliminary P.U.D. for a neighborhood shopping center, anchored by a
grocery store, was approved on the 17-acre parcel. This P.U.D. ultimately expired.
In 1994, a Preliminary P.U.D. was again submitted for a grocery store— based center
(King Soopers). On July 5, 1994, City Council adopted Ordinance No. 103, 1994 which
established a six month moratorium on the processing of retail and commercial P.U.D.'s
within the Harmony Corridor. On September 15, 1994 the developer for King Soopers
filed a lawsuit against the City for adopting the six- month moratorium.
On January 3, 1995, City Council adopted the Amended Harmony Corridor Plan and
Standards and Guidelines. The six-month moratorium expired on January 13, 1995.
The lawsuit filed by the King Soopers' developer against the City was eventually settled.
• Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Lot 6, Safeway Fuel Facility, P.D.P., 33-94F
January 18, 2001 P & Z Meeting
Page 3
On April 22, 1996, the Harmony Safeway Marketplace Preliminary P.U.D. was adopted.
This P.U.D. complied with the new restrictions on commercial development in the
Harmony Corridor and allowed for a 48,000 square foot Safeway grocery store and
seven other developable lots. Of the total eight lots, there are four approved pad sites
along Harmony Road.
On December 7, 1996, the Final P.U.D. for Lots 1, 2 and 3 (Safeway, Long's Drugs and
multi-tenant retail) was approved. Since then, three pad sites have developed. These
are:
Lot 4 —Centennial Bank
Lot 5 — Multi-tenant Retail (Blockbuster Video)
Lot 7— Village Inn
Lot 8 remains vacant and will also be subject to the Land Use Code upon submittal.
All development in the center thus far has been developed under the Land Development
Guidance System. Lot 6 is being processed under the Land Use Code due to expiration
of the time validity allowed by the various transition ordinances. Lot 8 (west of Safeway)
remains vacant and will also be subject to the Land Use Code upon submittal.
2. Compliance with Harmony Corridor Zone District:
A. Land Use
Harmony Safeway shopping center is classified as a "Neighborhood Service Center" by
the Harmony Corridor Plan. In the hierarchy of commercial centers, this type of center
is larger than a convenience center and smaller than a community center. According to
the Harmony Corridor Standards and Guidelines, a "gasoline service station" is a
permitted use within a Neighborhood Service Center.
B. Standards — Neighborhood Service Center
The Harmony Corridor Standards and Guidelines are adopted into the Harmony
Corridor Zone District by reference. The applicable standards are discussed below:
(1.) The hours of operation will be restricted to between 5:00 a.m. and 12:00 a.m.
(2.) The project is connected to the neighborhood by sidewalks that tie into all
surrounding public streets so that people who live or work nearby can
conveniently gain access. In addition, the project includes a transit stop along
Harmony Road.
Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Lot 6, Safeway Fuel Facility, P.D.P., 33-94F
January 18, 2001 P & Z Meeting
Page 4
(3.) As a pad site, the project is integrated into the center in both appearance and
function.
C. Standards — Harmony Corridor Standards and Guidelines
In addition to the specific standards associated with a Neighborhood Service Center,
the Harmony Corridor Standards and Guidelines also contain the following applicable
standards for all retail development, neighborhood convenience shopping centers,
neighborhood service centers and community shopping centers:
(1.) The convenience store provides an aesthetically pleasing appearance and
convenient access on all sides and not merely from the arterial street with one
exception to be discussed below.
(2.) The massing of the convenience store creates a transition from the edge of the
center inward to larger buildings in the interior of the center.
(3.) The sides and backs of the convenience store are as attractive and interesting as
the front.
(4.) The entrance to the convenience store faces east and is, therefore, placed and
designed to give clear orientation from the main avenues of approach. The
entrance is highlighted with a fagade and roof projection.
(5.) The predominant exterior color of the stone veneer on the convenience store is
low reflectance and a beige earth tone to match the multi-tenant retail building on
Lot 5 to the east.
(6.) The architectural elements and detail features are consistent with the other
buildings in the center with one exception which is discussed below.
(7.) The trash enclosure (stone veneer) and HVAC equipment are screened to
minimize the view from adjacent properties and public streets.
(8.) Parking lot securing lighting is shielded downward and designed to match the
center. Under-canopy lighting will be recessed. Foot-candles are reduced at the
property line to minimize impact on adjacent uses.
Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Lot 6, Safeway Fuel Facility, P.D.P., 33-94F
January 18, 2001 P & Z Meeting
Page 5
3. General Development Standards:
A. Site Planning and Design Standards
1. Landscaping and Tree Protection
The pad site is bordered on two sides (north and east) by private drive aisles and
on one side (south) by the 80-foot wide setback from Harmony Road. (The
setback in this particular area is a drainage swale.) The west side is bordered by
an open area that is owned by Safeway and acts as a "window" to the grocery
store from Harmony Road.
Trees and shrubs are provided on all four sides of the parcel. The extensive
paved area associated with the fuel islands is bordered by a continuous shrub
bed on two sides. Foundation shrubs are provided along three sides of the
convenience store. The landscaping meets the standards of the Land Use Code.
2. Access Circulation and Parking
There is no vehicular access from Harmony Road or the main driveway entrance
connecting to Harmony Road. There are two curb cuts on the north side of the
parcel along the private east-west drive aisle that connects the pad sites between
Wheaton and McMurry. The access and circulation system can accommodate
tanker trucks and fire equipment.
New sidewalks will be provided on the north and east sides of the pad site.
Existing walks are on the south and west sides. The bicycle and pedestrian
system will tie into both existing sidewalks. A new culvert over the existing
drainage swale will connect the pad site to a transit stop provided by this project.
This walk also connects to the entrance of Safeway. Pedestrians and bicyclists
can gain access to the convenience store without crossing a vehicular use area.
Bicycle parking is provided. The eight parking stalls are below the allowable
maximum. The access, circulation and parking system meets the standards of
the Land Use Code.
B. Building Standards
1. Building and Project Compatibility
• The convenience store and kiosk feature stone veneer painted a beige color to
match the existing building to the east. The projecting roof form matches the
grocery store anchor. The canopy will be painted a matching beige. The canopy
Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Lot 6, Safeway Fuel Facility, P.D.P., 33-94F
January 18, 2001 P & Z Meeting
Page 6
columns will be matching stone veneer. The building and project are compatible
with the shopping center. There is one exception to this standard which is
discussed below.
2. Mixed-Use, Institutional and Commercial Buildings
The building is exempt from the build-to line standard due to the existing 80-foot
setback along Harmony. The other two streets are private parking lot drive
aisles. The building is setback from Harmony Road in proportion to the other
three existing pad buildings.
The architecture of the building complies with both the standards of the Harmonv
Corridor Standards and Guidelines and the General Standards of the Land Use
Code.
C. Flush Wall Signs on the South and West Elevations of the Convenience Store
The Harmony Safeway Shopping Center is originally part of the Golden Meadows
Master Plan and, therefore, located in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. The
Sign Code allows the Planning and Zoning Board to review the location of flush wall
signs on commercial buildings in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District based on
the following standard (3.8.7(E)(2):
"Signs regulated under this Section shall also conform to any locational
requirements imposed by the decision maker as a condition of the approval of
the development plan. Except as to location, the decision maker shall not
impose more restrictive requirements or conditions than required under this
Section."
The proposed locations of the flush wall signs on the convenience store cause the
building to fail to comply with the building standards that relate to architecture, character
and image (Section 3.5.3).
(1.) History
The Residential Neighborhood Sign District and the aforementioned standard were
introduced into the Sign Code in 1993 as a way to help mitigate the introduction of
convenience centers into neighborhoods (Neighborhood Convenience Shopping Center
— Design Guidelines, Policies, Criteria, 1988). The "Neighborhood Convenience
Center" was viewed as a viable land use within a neighborhood in order to promote
pedestrian/bike access, reduce vehicle miles traveled, minimize congestion, and
improve air quality. Great effort went into steering these centers to arterial/collector
Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Lot 6, Safeway Fuel Facility, P.D.P., 33-94F
January 18, 2001 P & Z Meeting
Page 7
intersections with direct, neighborhood access, to avoid the market-driven tendency to
locate at arterial/arterial intersections as found in so many other cities.
To help mitigate this proximity of commercial land uses near neighborhoods, heightened
design standards were adopted. The regulation of the location of flush wall signs is
one example of this mitigation.
In the 1990 audit of the Land Development Guidance System, signage regulation was
identified as an area that needed further review and refinement. This was affirmed in
the City Council 1991-1993 Work Plan where Staff was directed to review the Sign
Code and prepare the necessary changes to address these concerns. This led to the
establishment of the Residential Neighborhood Sign District and subsequent changes to
the Sign Code.
To help guide the Planning and Zoning Board in their consideration of the signage-to-
architecture relationship standard, the following language from the Agenda Item
Summary and Ordinance No. 141, 1992 is provided:
"In general, the concerns include the amount of signage allowed under the
current Code, appearance and aesthetics, and compatibility with the
neighborhood quality and character."
"The proposed Sign Code changes are intended to reduce or eliminate
opportunities for abuse of the existing Code which could result in signage which
is incompatible with an adjoining residential neighborhood."
"Under the proposed changes, the amount and design of signage will be
regulated by the Sign Code through the addition of new requirements specifically
prepared to address the issue of neighborhood character and compatibility."
"The Planning and Zoning Board will continue to review signage in Planned Unit
Developments only to the extent that the location of flush wall signs relate to the
architectural character of the associated buildings."
(2.) South and West Elevation Flush Wall Signs
As proposed, flush wall signage is indicated on the east, south and west elevations of
the convenience store. Staff finds that the east-facing flush wall sign is appropriate as
this elevation features the building entrance. This is typically where flush wall signage
is found on a small convenience store.
The south and west flush wall signs, however, are found to be excessive given the
relative small size of the structure. In other words, the relationship of the location of
Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Lot 6, Safeway Fuel Facility, P.D.P., 33-94F
January 18, 2001 P & Z Meeting
Page 8
proposed flush wall signage on the south and west elevations to the size of the structure
is out of proportion and scale causing the building to fail to meet the architectural
building standards of the Land Use Code as found in Section 3.5.3.
At 2,790 square feet, the convenience store would be the smallest pad site structure
along Harmony Road in the center. And yet, proportionally, the Safeway convenience
store would feature more signage than the other three existing pad sites along Harmony
Road and twice as much as the Village Inn restaurant immediately to the west. In the
chart below, a comparison of the flush wall signage to building square footage ratio
among the three existing buildings and the Safeway convenience store is illustrated:
Bldg. Signage
Pad Sq.Ft. Sq.Ft. Signage/Bldg %
Centennial Bank 8,243 230 sq.ft. 2.79%
Multi-tenant Retail 5,000 119 sq.ft. 2.38%
Village Inn 5,000 90 sq.ft. 1.80%
Safeway C-store 2,790 120 sq.ft. 4.3%
As can be seen by the table, the Safeway convenience store would feature the most
signage as a proportion of the gross floor area. This does not include the canopy, nor
its signage, in the calculation.
(3.) Signage Allowance
Attached is a letter from the applicant stating that the Sign Code allows a certain
amount of signage square footage and that all three proposed flush wall signs fall below
the maximum signage allowed. Therefore, according to the applicant, all three flush
wall signs should be allowed as if "by right."
Staff disagrees. The issue is not one of signage allowance but, rather, one of flush wall
signage location and its impact on architecture, proportionality, building character and
neighborhood compatibility. In the Residential Neighborhood Sign District, flush wall
signage is not granted "by right." Not only must flush wall signage meet the test of
falling within the parameters of the maximum allowable square footage, but it must also
meet the requirements as enunciated in Section 3.8.7(E)(2) which reflects the policies
set by City Council in 1993. This is.a two-part test. With flush wall signage on the south
and west elevations of the convenience store, the P.D.P. fails the second part of the
test.
• Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Lot 6, Safeway Fuel Facility, P.D.P., 33-94F
January 18, 2001 P & Z Meeting
Page 9
(4.) Condition of Approval
Staff finds that the location of the south and west flush wall signs on the Safeway
convenience store building dominates and negatively impacts the overall architectural
character of the building. These signs are out of proportion for such a small structure.
In addition, the flush wall signs on the south and west elevations are found to be
incompatible with the residential character of the adjacent neighborhood. As a result,
the following building standards of the LUC are not met:
Section 3.5.3(A): "Purpose. These standards are intended to promote the
design of an urban environment that is built to human scale to encourage
attractive street fronts and other connecting walkways that accommodate
pedestrians as the first priority, while also accommodating vehicular movement."
Section 3.5.3(D): "Character and Image. In new buildings and, to the extent
reasonably feasible, in development projects involving changes to existing
building walls, facades or awnings (as applicable), the following standards shall
apply:
• (1) Site-Specific Design. Building design shall contribute to the uniqueness of
a zone district, and/or the Fort Collins community with predominant materials,
elements, features, color range and activity areas tailored specifically to the site
and its context. In the case of multiple building development, each individual
building shall include predominant characteristics shared by all buildings in the
development so that the development forms a cohesive place within the zone
district or community. A standardized prototype design shall be modified if
necessary to meet the provisions of this Land Use Code."
Staff, therefore finds that the south and west flush wall signs cause the P.D.P. to fail to
meet these applicable standards. In order to focus on the problematic signs and allow
the project to move forward, Staff recommends the following condition of approval:
Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Lot 6, Safeway Fuel Facility, P.D.P., is
approved subject to removal of the flush wall signs on the south and west
elevations of the convenience store.
D. Canopy Fascia Signs and Definition of"Street'
The P.D.P. indicates canopy signage on the north, east and south elevations.
According to the applicant (letter attached), such signage is allowed because these
. three elevations front on "streets," as presently defined in the Land Use Code.
Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Lot 6, Safeway Fuel Facility, P.D.P., 33-94F
January 18, 2001 P & Z Meeting
Page 10
Again, Staff disagrees. Canopy signage can only be allowed on the south elevation
which faces Harmony Road, a dedicated public street. The north and east elevations
front on a privately owned parking drive aisles and, therefore, are not eligible for
signage. Staff has consistently interpreted the Sign Code is such a manner.
Although there is a discrepancy between the definition of "street" as found in the
Engineering section of the Code versus the consistent interpretation of the Sign Code,
Staff relies upon the Sign Code to administer the permitting of commercial signage.
Please refer to the attached memo from the Zoning Administrator for further clarification.
Staff, therefore, finds that the canopy fascia signs on the north and east elevations are
specifically prohibited and do not comply with the Sign Code. In order to focus on these
problematic signs and allow the project to move forward, Staff recommends the
following condition of approval:
Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Lot 6, Safeway Fuel Facility, P.D.P., is
approved subject to removal of the canopy fascia signs on the north and
east elevations.
4. Transportation Impact Analysis:
A revised Transportation Impact Analysis was performed reflecting the changes made
within the center since the original (1996) and is included as an attachment. The site
was approved under the Preliminary P.U.D. as a retail/restaurant site containing an
estimated 6,600 square feet of gross floor area. With all the previous changes and
including the present request, there is a slight reduction in overall trip generation for the
center and all affected intersections continue to operate within an acceptable level of
service.
Pedestrian and bicycle level of service has been analyzed and found acceptable. The
addition of the transit stop and connecting walkway over the drainage swale promotes
transit service to and from the center. The P.D.P. meets the Transportation and
Circulation standards of the Land Use Code.
5. Findings of Fact/Conclusion:
In evaluating the request for Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Lot 6, P.D.P., Staff makes
the following findings of fact:
A. The land use, gasoline service station, is permitted in the Neighborhood Service
Center as per the Harmony Corridor Plan and the Harmony Corridor zone district.
Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Lot 6, Safeway Fuel Facility, P.D.P., 33-94F
January 18, 2001 P & Z Meeting
Page 11
B. The design of the structure is compatible with the architectural character of the
center by the use of similar exterior materials such as stone veneer, concrete
roof tiles and projecting entrance feature.
C. The P.D.P. complies with the General Development Standards of the Land Use
Code with one exception.
D. The P.D.P. is located within the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. The
location of the flush wall signs on the south and west elevations of the
convenience store causes the P.D.P. to fail to meet the Sign Code standard,
3.8.7(E)(2) relating to location and Building Standards, 3.5.3(A) and 3.5.3(0)(1)
relating to character and image.
E. The P.D.P. indicates canopy fascia signage on the north and east elevations
which are in violation of the Sign Code standard, 3.8.7(E)(12).
F. Bicyclists and pedestrians are provided safe, direct and convenient access from
both areas external and internal to the shopping center.
G. A transit stop and connecting sidewalk will be constructed as part of the project.
H. Vehicles and trucks are provided a logical circulation system with joint parking
opportunities within the center.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Lot 6 Safeway Fuel
Facility, P.D.P., #33-94F, subject to the following conditions:
1. Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Lot 6, Safeway Fuel Facility, P.D.P., is
approved subject to removal of the flush wall signs on the south and west
elevations of the convenience store.
2. Harmony Safeway Marketplace, Lot 6, Safeway Fuel Facility, P.D.P., is
approved subject to removal of the canopy fascia signs on the north and
east elevations.
ORME
PIE lip
WE mom
EVA
MW
WE
Ins
• �1■� SEEM�
�I S �� r
i
BEENE
MEN
MEN
any
HARMONY SAFEWAY MARKETPLACE AW
LOT 6, SAFEWAY FUEUNC, FT. COLUNS, COLORADO
G BANAL SUE PLAN APPROVAL
CENEML NOTES INDEX
�K a wrtn vul
— N• vs[RM
e re®a..r_o u ou.r )K e unoswE wx }"
u rs�y.wu.s •ore Ngy11 WCq NLMMVS y�l
_ 5 W I CWfWFR SsgK[ILWIMS _ L
34
r mw..v._u 60.6 IMIGu(AC nVy
t
rMoaw�rrrw L(NLtCPy[NT qtA = :
s` f 9lg;
PY-�vI XNL_LLLN-NpIS w•�- WR KBI
.m.�uen .r� w
�nMrt� 6/]WO
�. SIGNATURES MD APPROVALS
uv. a urvlmm ws/oo wxn 0m Ms N[nx M uwu ewos n ¢ �
LEGAL NE RIPTION v vex uac .�.e. .mn m[moms w xznyam at.um w.i[ eMu 2 p
4 O O
BEKGHa41K eY'••vA••••m_ aooe avmr m—art
3
.rs.r ev.a dm1@9®L Q Z
w� x
nw-..na m�. M ryAii NBfi,Is xNaw wo � p W
wyF [N u�imars nf—ao unim wnuvrt �s1A)1-]�]-���.�x fxiumi iu.Pr�K O YO ws[ �U
O
(i W yiw ry y��rn nui W O.a%S.W O N
mn KwA ��
�a�tl aa�nx—.art 9((11111L
!¢(Y crmn• MIMM nyc�u
R �.m.N. rn-swR-sw� SHEET
aanNroo.Me yr.x rt. m_.
yrzT xn
1 OF 6
RNASE I scHEDULE a
w. sov=Urov^ UTII LEGEND .--
10
_
1
,
s
o - �- _ 0= W
--o--p 4WT So�—
,
ems-
---- �- o
Ef
PHASE x SCNEWLE
.v.
�0
H— _ems - oC77�"'i::. •- u o
;? i
wow
Q U
N� o
o n
i ru rrr¢,wv.i.wwu
4m;
SECDNMRI'GROUNDS,LN- IRATH ENCLOSURE
lTiR�NALY R,NYIIUI['v.w+ u
•• 2 OF 6
• s a
N NORS: GENERAL NOTES: a
/�✓/ i �® a CEII� ..ry sm�a� v r r r
_
•na - � e r... m�ter..4:
A" v
r _
i e.
4+ - PuT�HEGu c a o00
e�
--------------------------- ------- -----
LEGEND
______
_ go
� _ a
O 'f
UNOSCI.PE AREA STAnSTIC5:
UMISCAPE
PLAN
utun^nr-n7N O
_ .� ^� Le:sn•"r, CEM R W C0.0RI➢U
w v 1-200-9]2-199] yip.
m '�w ° SHFUR PUNPNG 0E1ML TREE P.TING [I TI L �r
CANOPY FRONT (EAST) ELEVATION'.--- CANOPY FRONT (SOUTH) ELEVATION:e.xn�ou mrs�.x
' 4
r
KIOSK ENO (EAST) ELEVATION KIOSK SIDE (NORTH) ELEVATION:-- KIOSK REAR (WEST) ELEVATION yyR
•/zom
s!aeFtT
0 .
O
Wrt: NATERUL SCHEDULE
LYp�SIGwLE:uu NiGwEn .om w re.Yr:m..eWE, f
PEAYxORM.GSi 0 m 4 vi p
SWm IASCUS. u 0 xw Y.e im-nn�r..
V
GWUW'EWFN.E Y.WIWU N1pXFD is wwa m-w unvmrwf Q
]]Y KR EICC. o •�® 3 J Z
WILL SG .1NYIYUY N10YC0 pl mW�• w m u s W U W
ME WEST N10 FAST YYLS OF m Q
COM£NIERCE STOWE....2,S
'. .w�w ra x_®r UI N
SF/El AOOW).=00U. m ®.Y iw+.w wrvm E, p
AuawEo Ox 1....wVo sou.
NMls Is].S .]AY'(.TS
Y/EuvATwrv). O •Y.wr�w.WnY�.r�..i.�
ID.SCWRE FW.OF.SO. mww.a.-r. .w 1RlI
K
ON zre.Wi I.EEO ME I.T. CMlOW
AuoWEY SO.ARFA O ELEVATIONS
M scx.mE Yusi sc ARRRaEo Yxo[R p "x$.. v s.+n
sEaAwiE RERYn.
0
alto o.
4 OF 6
l�
v_,
r
Qn
CONVENENCE STORE FRONT ELEVATION (EAST) CONVENIENCE STORE RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION (NORTH)
4
k "s
S
lt
P _
SI06
xs
swu,r
0 0
CONVENIENCE STORE REAR ELEVATION (WEST) CONVENIENCE STORE LEFT SIDE ELEVATION (SOUTH) a p-
a
OJ r
z
J O O
>� a
MATERIAL SCHEDULE ^ 3 0
Q m.wru.a an.rar e®rnr scumr wnw cu �U
Q ..0 vw.m.-rrn...rt aayy p 1p
Q mmwwn-..nom m.w. r•u r.u. O f
Q mtan m N e.a ur a N 1 mrvrtY'.iW.rwn YQI Orl[
Q o,n.n a.rm.nr..nm.. �. .,,r u.': CONVENIENCE
QSTORE
ELEVATIONS
O .�.....m.r.m..w..Km
5 OF 6
SITE suuwm r
.KNc wn uu-vs rc
SIWNd
EN T.. ..rs
LEGEND
0 o•I[a.E uw.(.ao mn.rn).o Rrtx ortlwl RNru
° insRs.'s."m1°°.riusmx,
///��� a•�u s, u- v u•�4'1��;,� u �a u u r • �ILf��K-HL OEINI Wr +wnur<�rwr0� R
� \/ ..) a i' '/u•)iu u u u a �CD1 v� u u u YL g
m .�....___' .-•.aa �. m .!ll+++IRRRrrr��� RNJJ. •. { � i� '$I� a €e (({{ �.
gill
m -- u •.e •• • n� a� u R EM
_u u ,
~� IUC JWF.W
u u u m m s� •� <� s� <. u u r k� ypgi
u u u u <� • Ia, 00 p
Z02
=\L o m u a• as m ..T3"3wm 2a07Em a� ss=p�. • s 3? _
., m .. •, .. .. ., .. — In
E0i w
m
m ml .. a. m m m m m .. iuRNBRv•46•.E"om ., .. ., .. .. .. m m m m m .. o N
s_--�
vm nnE
PHOTOMETRIC
PUN
O
6 OF 6
STATEMENT OF PLANNING OBJECTIVES
SAFEWAY FUEL AT HARMONY MARKETPLACE
1426 E. HARMONY ROAD
FORT COLLINS, CO
Project Description:
The Safeway Fuel at Harmony Marketplace project is a proposed fueling and
convenience development located with the Harmony Safeway Center at the northwest
comer of E. Harmony Road and McMurry The 1.3-acre lot is described as Lot 6,
Harmony Safeway Marketplace P.U.D. The proposed development will be a two-phased
development as follows:
Phase I Construction
• Construct an 86' x 43' canopy(3698 sf).
• Install five multi-product fuel dispensers
• Construct a 22' x 12' kiosk(268 sf)
• Install perimeter landscaping and paved area
• Install freestanding tower feature
• Sod Phase II area until construction of the convenience store
• Install the trash enclosure and bicycle rack
• Install the secondary ground sign
Phase II Construction
• Remove kiosk and replace with sixth multi-product fuel dispenser
• Construct 46.5' x 60' convenience store (2790 sf)
• Stripe parking spaces
• Add Phase II landscaping
Forty-six percent of the site will be landscaped, including an existing landscape buffer,
drainage swale and detached sidewalk along E. Harmony Road. Vehicular access to the
site is by two curb cuts off the internal private drive of the retail center. Pedestrian access
to the site is by a public sidewalk network along E. Harmony Road as well as an internal
sidewalk system within the center. There is a bus pad that was installed with the original
Safeway center improvements at the southeast corner of the site to provide the option of
alternate transportation via Transfort.
The subject site is currently owned by SB Properties 22, in care of Wessex, PO Box
44033, Phoenix, AZ 85064. Developer and Contract Purchaser is Safeway, Inc., 1850
Mount Diablo Boulevard, #250, Walnut Creek, CA 94596. Galloway, Romero &
Associates will represent the owner and developer for all correspondence and matters
related to the development review process for the Project Development Plan approvals.
Compliance with Intent of Zone District
The proposed Safeway Fuel at Harmony Marketplace is located within the Harmony
Corridor Zone District(HC). The site is further located within the Neighborhood Service
Center area. The purpose of the Neighborhood Service Center is to provide a shopping
center located in a complex which is planned and developed as a unit, and located within
and intended to primarily serve the consumer demands of residents and employees who
live and work in adjacent and surrounding neighborhoods. A gasoline service station is
one of the limited permitted uses within this zone district.
The proposed fuel facility is compatible with the character of a Neighborhood Service
Center as outlined in the zone district in the following ways:
• Development of this site will further link the pedestrian system. A sidewalk will be
constructed with Phase N leading from the Harmony pedestrian system,to the store
and connecting-to the existing center. A transit pad was constructed with the original
direct sidewalk connection from E. Harmony. Development of Lot 6 will add the
required bus shelter for this pad and activate the Transfort route to this center.
• The Safeway Marketplace"identity"has been created with the previously approved
PUD, which established architectural themes, colors and materials. This development
will be compatible with the existing commercial structures. The facility will
incorporate the same building materials, color, and architectural elements as the
anchor and retail stores.
• Additional outdoor space is created through construction of a freestanding tower
structure and the installation of a picnic area on site.
• Additional landscaping will provide year-round screening of the vehicular activity
area from the public street and internal drives.
Compliance with Land Use Harmony Corridor Development Standards
The proposed fueling/convenience facility meets the Land Use Development Standards of
the Harmony Corridor Zone District as follows:
Site Design:
• Site development is subject to the Site and Landscape Covenants for Harmony
Safeway Marketplace POD, and the Declaration of Easements with Covenants and
Restrictions Affecting Land in addition to the Harmony Corridor Development and
Design Standards as outlined in the Land Use Code. Pursuant to the real estate
contract on the property, Safeway commits to enter into cooperative agreements with
adjacent property owners within the center to create a site design in compliance with
a comprehensive development plan establishing an integrated pattern of internal
drives and pedestrian links, outdoor space,building style and land use. The Harmony
Marketplace Declarations of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions require
approvals through an architectural control committee to insure a standard of quality
development contextually complimentary to other developments within the center.
2
f
• • This use does not directly abut a residential neighborhood. It is surrounded by
commercial development on the north, east and west. The land use area directly
south of E. Harmony consists of undeveloped Oakridge Park Business Center and an
historic cemetery site. The proposed structures will match the existing retail anchor
and center with regard to building materials, color and architectural design
components.
• There will be no outdoor storage or sales of items except as otherwise authorized
through the Zoning Code and Harmony Marketplace PUD Declarations of Covenants,
Conditions and Restrictions.
• The Safeway-Harmony PUD is included as the context diagram. This demonstrates
compatibility between the proposed project and developed sites within the retail
center. Existing development within the center consists of a variety of unrelated
mixed-use retail uses and a restaurant. The design offers vehicular access through the
existing public street system and pedestrian links through a combination of public and
private walkways and pedestrian paths. -
Buildin¢Design:
• The proposal is a two-phase construction project. Phase I is strictly a fuel facility for
vehicular use. Phase II introduces the convenience store, which is oriented with an
entrance that faces and opens directly onto an adjacent sidewalk that, has direct
. linkage to the street sidewalk without requiring pedestrians to cross any intervening
driveways or parking lots. The proposed sidewalk will also link the development to
the retail center's existing connective paths for pedestrian circulation among the
businesses.
• The scale and height of the proposed offices are complimentary to surrounding
developments within the center in both mass and height.
Compliance with Harmony Corridor Design Standards and Guidelines
• Harmony Road Setback—The setback zone along the E. Harmony Road frontage was
established with approval of the Harmony- Safeway Marketplace Final PUD Site
Plan. There is an 83' landscaped setback from the edge of street pavement. The
setback also includes berms and a drainage swale. Proposed buildings are located
over 80' from E. Harmony Road, exceeding the zoning setback requirements.
• A detached,meandering 8' sidewalk/bikepath was installed with the original
perimeter and infrastructure construction along the Harmony frontage. In addition, a
concrete pad for the planned transit stop was also constructed with the original
infrastructure connecting to the direct sidewalk path established to the main retail
shops.
• Grading—The site grades have been established through previously approved plans
for the overall center. This pad will be developed in conformance with the
established grades for this site.
• • Plant Palette—Proposed plantings will be selected from the same palette used for
other developments in the center.
3
4
• Lighting—Internal site lights will match the existing center light standards.
Pedestrian lighting and private drive lighting currently exist along the east property
frontage. Canopy lighting is restricted to recessed light fixtures with flat lens that
will be mounted flush to the canopy ceiling deck. This light design will prevent any
onfite and offsite glare commonly associated with fuel canopies.
• Setbacks—Generous setbacks are observed in the proposed site layout.
• Architectural Design—High quality design has been upheld for this project. The
kiosk and convenience store will be constructed with similar exterior finishes as the
retail shops, incorporating stucco,concrete roof tile, stone wainscot and canopy
columns, and metal framework accents to match the retail buildings. Development of
the pad will complete the Harmony frontage with a cohesive presentation. A tower
will be added at the northeast comer of the site to compliment the tower entry feature
on the east side of the shopping center entry drive. The structures will match Retail
Building"D"in color.
• Parking and Service Areas—The parking spaces will be striped with Phase H
construction of the convenience store. The parking area and fueling activity area will
be screened from E. Harmony with a combination of berming and plantings including
deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs in the 83' landscaped buffer.
Compliance with General Development Standards
Open Space/Landscaping:
The proposed landscaping supports functional purposes by creating spatial definition of
the site as well as creates a buffer between the fuel activity area and the public street.
Perimeter landscaping exists along both the Harmony frontage and along the private drive
into the center, located immediately east of the site. Combinations of evergreen and
deciduous trees and shrubs provide buffering along the perimeter of the pad. The
selection of planting materials and landscape design is from the landscape palette
approved for the PUD.
46% of the site is provided in landscaping,which meets and exceeds the standards of
Division 3.2.1 of the Fort Collins Land Use Code. Additional plant materials added to
the existing perimeter plantings exceed minimum planting requirements.
The placement and interrelationship of required landscape elements enhances visual
continuity within and between adjacent pad developments, and provides visual interest
year round. Placement of the shrub beds along the internal fueling area provides
additional screening and frames the monument price sign.
Access. Circulation and Parking 3.2.2:
The proposed development is designed with safety, efficiency and convenience in mind
for vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians,both within the development and to and from
surrounding areas. Phase I of the project is strictly a vehicular use,with no attraction for
pedestrian services. The pedestrian sidewalk connection through the site is proposed
4
with Phase H. The sidewalk will connect the internal walk along the north property line
with the detached sidewalk system along the E. Harmony corridor. A bicycle rack is
located west of the western access drive.
Two points of access are provided to promote efficient circulation at the fueling activity
area. Striped parking spaces will be provided for Phase H,with the convenience store
addition. The parking will be located directly in front of the store, to eliminate any
conflict between the fueling area and convenience users.
The paved areas for fueling and parking are setback approximately 85 feet from the E.
Harmony right-of-way. Parking requirements utilized for this development are 4 spaces
per 1,000 square feet of retail space. A total of nine spaces is provided with Phase II
construction, one of which will be handicap accessible.
Site Lighting 3.2.4: _
Sight lighting is designed with safety provisions for the users and sensitivity to
surrounding uses within the center. The existing light standards are 400 watt high
pressure sodium luminaries, with down cast fixtures, not to exceed 0.10 foot candles on
E. Harmony Road. The poles will match the overall center light poles and be constructed
23' high to match the existing lighting. Site lights will match the existing center. Light
sources will be shielded. A photometric light analysis is provided to demonstrate
compliance with the Land Use Code requirements.
Engineering Standards:
Utilities: All utilities are stubbed to the site. A 4" sanitary line will be extended from the
existing line located at the northeast corner of the site. A 1"waterline will be extended
from the existing main located at the northeast comer of the site. Electric and gas will be
serviced from existing lines located in the existing drive along the north property line.
Drainage: The site complies with the approved drainage for the overall center as well as
current drainage criteria adopted by the City.
Public Improvements: There are no public improvements associated with development
of this site. All public improvements were constructed with the initial development phase
for the Harmony-Safeway Marketplace PUD.
Building Standards:
Measures were taken to provide architectural compatibility with the established
architectural character of the overall center. The same colors and materials are
incorporated into the design of the structures, which include stone veneer, stucco to
match Retail Building"D", comice/cap flashing to match the Safeway grocery store, and
concrete roof tile to match the existing buildings.
5
1
The trash enclosure is located unobtrusively at the rear of the site. The enclosure consists
of materials and color to match the proposed kiosk and existing center. Screening of
rooftop mechanical equipment is provided by stucco panels to match the building on the
kiosk, and screened by the parapet on the convenience store. The conduit,meters,vents
and other equipment attached to the buildings will be painted to match surrounding
building surfaces.
Section 3.5.3,Mixed-Use, Institutional and Commercial Buildings:
Consideration was given to the relationship of the building, canopy and fueling area to
the streets,private drives,walkways and parking areas. The entrance of the convenience
store faces directly onto a connecting walkway that leads to the public pedestrian system
along E. Harmony Road. The building facade includes wall articulation by patterns of
stucco; stone veneer and window planes. The entrance is clearly defined by the same
pitched roof element characteristic of the existing center. A freestanding tower feature is
located at the northeast comer of the site to mirror the tower element used on the building
east of the entrance driveway off E. Harmony Road. Pursuant to Planning Department's
request,we have provided a picnic table under the tower for an amenity to the center.
Signs:
The proposed site is located within the Non-Residential Uses in the Residential
Neighborhood Sign District and will comply with City Code Section 3..8 (E). According
to discussions with Peter Barnes in the Zoning Department, there is one"secondary"
ground sign available for the Harmony frontage,which the proposed project will utilize.
The proposed secondary ground sign will be installed on a stone veneer base to match the
store. The secondary sign is 28 square feet per face and measures six foot high. There
will be one canopy logo sign located on the Harmony Road frontage not to exceed 12
square feet. Wall signage for the Phase II convenience store consists of one sign per
elevation,within the allowable area.
SUMMARY STATEMENT:
The Safeway Fueling Facility will provide a quality project to further enhance the
existing Harmony Safeway Marketplace retail center development. We respectfully
request approval of the Project Development Plan(PDP) upon design and plans meeting
and exceeding the codified development standards and design guidelines for the
Harmony Corridor project.
6
I
• SAFEWAY FUEL FACILITY
1426 E. Harmony Road
Fort Collins, CO
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOT 6, HARMONY SAFEWAY MARKETPLACE P.U.D.
CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO.
PROPERTY OWNER OF PROPOSED PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN:
S-B Properties No. 22, Ltd.
8145 N. 86th Place
Scottsdale, AZ 85258
Tele: (480) 596-9399
Fax: (480) 596-6366
LIST OF NAMES OF OFFICERS INVOLVED AS PROPERTY OWNER:
Robert E. Austin, Senior Vice President
S-B Properties No. 22, Ltd.
8145 N. 861h Place
Scottsdale, AZ 85258
Tele: (480) 596-9399
Fax: (480) 596-6366
DEVELOPMENT PHASING:
Phase I:
Construction to begin immediately upon city planning and permitting approvals.
• Construct a 3698 sf canopy
• Install five multi-product fuel dispensers
• Construct a 268 sf kiosk
• Install perimeter landscaping and paved area
• Install freestanding tower feature
• Sod Phase II area until construction of the convenience store
• Install the trash enclosure and bicycle rack
• Install the secondary ground sign
Phase II:
Construction for future date undetermined.
• Remove kiosk and replace with sixth multi-product fuel dispenser
• Construct a 2790 sf convenience store
• Stripe parking spaces
• Add Phase II landscaping
DESIGN ENGINEERS, PLANNERS, ARCHITECTS:
PLEASE SEND ALL CORRESPONDENCE ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TO
THE FOLLOWING:
GALLOWAY, ROMERO &ASSOCIATES
5350 DTC PARKWAY
ENGLEWOOD, CO 80111
CONTACT: PEGGY FRIESEN, PROJECT MANAGER
TELE: (303)770-8884
FAX: (303)770-3636
e-mail: peggy_friesen@graa.com
i
Galloway, Romero &Associates
Design Engineering Planning
5350 DTC Parkway _
Englewood,Colorado80t11 rrII r
(303)770-8884 I U
(303)770-3636 fax
david_moore@graa.com JAN 0 4 2001
December 29, 2000 B
Y
Mr. Ted Shephard
City of Fort Collins Planning Division
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80523-0580
Re: Safeway Fueling Facility at Harmony Safeway Marketplace
Dear Mr. Shephard
In response to your request (12/18/2000) to remove proposed signs from the north, west and south
elevations of the convenience store, I can find no justification in the Code. We have shown no sign for the
north wall and propose signs for the east, south and west walls of the convenience store. We also propose
canopy signs on the east and south sides of the canopy.
. In response to your letter of 10/20/2000, we have reviewed our proposal in the context of the City of Fort
Collins Land Use Code, the overall Harmony Marketplace Center and the three other pad buildings. We
feel that our proposal is in context with the established precedent already set by sign permit approvals and
signs installed on the existing buildings. Further, we find no Code support for the rationale proposed in
your letter. In fact, the existing conditions, for example at the bank, far exceed the sign impact from the
proposed convenience store.
I find the following Code justification for the proposed signs:
I. Street definition, 5.1.2.Street: Street shall mean a public way(whether publicly or privately
owned) used or intended to be used for carrying vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian traffic and
shall include the entire area within the public right-of-way and/or public access easement.
This site has streets on three sides, public Harmony Avenue on the south and private
streets on the east and north sides.
2. Building frontage definition, 5.1.2. Building frontage: Building frontage shall mean that side
of the building which faces and is parallel to or mostly parallel to a public or private street.
The length of the frontage is determined by measuring along the outside walls of the building
and including eaves which are at least eight(8) feet above grade and are an integral part of the
roof or building wall. There can be only one (1) building frontage for each street upon which a
building faces. This site has three building frontages, north, east and south.
3. Sec. 3.8.7 (E) (12): One (1) flushwall sign or under-canopy sign per street frontage, not to
exceed twelve (12) square feet in area, shall be permitted on or under the fascia of a canopy
• covering the retail dispensing or sale of vehicular fuels. Three (3) canopy signs are allowed,
one for each street frontage.
4. Sec. 3.8.7 (E) (13): For the first two hundred (200) feet in building frontage length in a
neighborhood service center, the maximum sign area permitted shall be equal to one and one-
quarter(1 '/4) square feet for each linear foot of building frontage length. For that portion of a
building frontage which exceeds two hundred (200) feet in length, the maximum sign area
permitted shall be equal to two-thirds (2/3) foot for each linear foot of building frontage over
such two hundred(200) feet. This site has one hundred and fifty three(153) feet of
building frontage. This calculates to one hundred ninety one (191) square feet of sign
area allowed.
5. Sec. 3.8.7 (D)(5): flush wall signs,projecting wall signs,window signs, freestanding signs and
ground signs, provided that the placement and use of all such signs shall be governed by and
shall be within the following limitations: (c)In no event shall the total sign allowance for any
property be less than one(1) square foot of sign allowance for each linear foot of lot frontage.
This lot has frontage of 280 lineal feet along Harmony Avenue, so this becomes the
minimum allowed signage area.
6. The following table shows the convenience store wall sign calculation:
BUILDING S F ALLOWED S F USED BALANCE SF
FRONTAGE LF SIGN AREA * SIGN AREA SIGN AREA
NORTH 46.5 87 0 87
SOUTH 46.5 87 30 57
EAST 60 100 60 40
WEST 60 0 30 (30)
TOTAL 213 274 120 154
• Area is 75% of building frontage(Max. of 40 feet)X maximum cabinet height of 30"
• Sec. 3.8.7 (E) (8), (10).
6. The proposed signs are very much in proportion to the walls of the convenience store and
significantly less than allowed. This is evident in viewing the elevations of the building.
Please call me if you have any questions.
G l}lo'w'ay,�oC�ero & Associates
IC•`� `�^ t7 Yh4rL0__
David H. Moore
Project Supervisor
CC: Dan Clayton, Safeway Stores No. 46, Inc.
Cameron Gloss, Current Planning Director
Lucia Liley, March& Liley
Attachment: Your letter of 10/20/2000
FXA I"
The village at the Enclave
1357 M Court tt��
FL Collins,CO 80525
c. :J L�:i c5 IIIIII�111111
JAN 15 2001
January 11,2001
RE: Harmony Safeway Service Station
Mr.Ted Shepherd
Chief Planner,City of Ft Collins
P.O.. Box 580
Ft Collins, CO 80522-0580
Dear Mr.Shepherd:
After meeting with you and representatives from Gallloway, Romero & Associates on November 30,
2000, Mr. Dick Bolin and I approve of the plans which were presented for the fueling station at the
Harmony Safeway. As was explained at that meeting, the building of such a facility is permitted in the
original approval of the development _
Our concerns regarding the size and exterior appearance of the structure were satisfied by the
explanation provided by Mr. Moore and Ms. Friesen. We also understood that the facility will not
operate beyond the hours established for the Safeway site.
Although our association would prefer to not see a fueling facility, we learned from the meeting that
Safeway has the right to build it We, therefore, can only accept it with the agreement that the size,
design, landscaping, and operating hours discussed on November 30 will be implemented as outlined.
• Thank you for addressing our concerns.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth B. Sullivan, Secretary
The Village at the Enclave
cc: David H. Moore
Galloway, Romero &Associates
Design Engineering Planning
5350 OTC Parkway
Englewood, Colorado 80111
(303)770-8884
(303)770-3636 W
david_moore@g raa.com
November 1, 2000
Ms. Elizabeth Sullivan, Secretary
The Village at the Enclave
1357 Ivy Court
Fort Collins, CO 80525
Re: Harmony and McMurry Safeway Fueling Facility.
Dear Ms. Sullivan:
This letter is a response to your letter of October 8, 2000, to Mr. Ted Shepherd, Chief Planner of the City
of Fort Collins.
I would like to arrange a meeting for the members of your community at your convenience to explain the
project and answer questions that you have. If you would call me at 303-770-8884, I will arrange a
. mutually agreeable time and place.
Meanwhile, I'd like to respond to your concerns. On the land use question, the Harmony-Safeway
Marketplace PUD provides for this use; and this pad was identified for this use since conceptual plans.
This is the only place along the Harmony Corridor that the use is allowed.
Safeway has a major nation-wide program underway to provide the convenience of fueling at their food
stores. We are currently working on 20 projects for Safeway. Their practice is to be very price
competitive.
The convenience store will not be constructed initially. However,when it is constructed it will provide a
limited number of convenience items that are quickly available to the customer obtaining fuel, and saves
the time of driving over to the food store and spending much more time obtaining the few convenience
items.
We don't anticipate this fueling facility to be used by trucks since diesel fuel will not be dispensed at this
site. Large trucks use highway oriented facilities were the accommodation is made for the large rigs with
parking areas and fuel contracts. Farmers and ranchers tend to use their co-ops where the fuel costs are
lower. Truck traffic is a non-issue here.
This station may attract additional automobile traffic from west-bound Harmony Road traffic. Much of
• that traffic will enter, Wm directly into the station and exit directly back out to Harmony. Some of that
traffic will be attracted by other businesses in the center and will take advantage of the fueling stop to
transact other business. This is not a convenient stop for east-bound Harmony Road traffic since the route
in and out is so circuitous. A large portion of business is expected to be from existing Safeway customers
who may now also enjoy the convenience of fueling their vehicle along with their food-shopping trip.
The impact of this facility on your community is very minimal. The Safeway and other buildings between
your community and this pad site buffer visual and sound impacts. Traffic impacts are also minimal.
To conclude, I am anxious to arrange the opportunity to review this proposal with your community and
look forward to a neighborhood meeting.
Please call me if you have any questions.
Crlyway Romero &A,ssso`ci-ates
Q �'•ae N•
David H. Moore
Project Supervisor
CC: Ted Shepherd, City of Fort Collins
John Scales,Peggy Friesen, Galloway Romero &Associates
t-31-00 08: 19A sxL ;/ %1 � P . 01
0. n v T
a '
t
toss
The village at the Enclave
1357 Iva Court
Vil. Collins, CO 80525 E-
P.O.October 8,200012000
Mr, 'I'cd Shepherd Chief Planner, City ofFt. Collins Box 580
Pt. Collins, CO 80522-0580
Dear Mr. Shepherd:
The board of the Village at the Enclave Association recently met and discussed the plans for the
proposed service station at the Harmony Safeway. The unanimous decision was against this
project. It was felt that such a business was entirely against the PUD as approved by the city
before the development of the land. When we once felt the plans were in place for a
development acceptable to the neighbors, we are now faced with constantly reviewing changes.
Thu need for a gasoline station at this location is minimal. There are 2 stations less than one-half
mile away on Lemay just south of Harmony. These 2 outlets fill the need of the area adequately.
. The additional request to include a convenience store with the pumps is Overwhelming. A full-
service supermarket within a few steps from the locution seems to be more than adequate for
filling any needs a convenience store provides. This is merely a duplication of retail space. As
you pointed out in your letter to the Safeway planner, the business hours cannot be extended
beyond those already ollbred by Safeway, so the convenience store cannot provide any
additional times.
A service station of this size with the addition of a convenience store would certainly lure large
trucks from l larmony causing additional sound and congestion to the neighborhood. What was
to be a neighborhood shopping center would now become a magnet for Harmony traffic in
general.
The Original plans of Safeway to be a friendly neighbor to a residential area seems to have been
forgotten by the corporation. To date, we have been pleased with the ntanncr in which the
property has been developed. These new proposals are troublesome to our association which is
adjacent to the retail properly. The lack of a need for such an outlet as well as the draw of
unwanted vehicles makes us request that the city deny the proposal.
Please notify us when hearings are to be held on this matter.
Sincerely,( (� Q .,ln�( '
1M.>E�`l, tll7l1CXflxtl, Paate b Note 7671 Dale
Elizabeth Sullivan, Secretary coe�0p -� —6 rx P�'mTEo EVARo
C3 �l�o ta.•7• ie-6M fp.o 1 P. T
January 12, 2001
Planning and Zoning Board RECEI V E J)
`BAN 1 ? 2001
Harmony Marketplace RE: Safeway Fueling CURRENT pIANNING
Lot 6
Final Site Plan Approval
Dear Planning and Zoning Board
My name is Matt Rankin and I am a resident of 4236 Kingsbury Drive in the Golden
Meadow Subdivision. I am writing as an affected property owner regarding the proposed
Safeway Fueling Center to be built on Lot 6 of the Harmony Safeway Marketplace.
Although an adequate saturation of fueling centers exists within my neighborhood, I
understand this use is allowable under current zoning designations. I do wish, however,
to lend my support to City Staff recommendations regarding the proposed signage for the
facility, and thereby limit the unnecessary visual noise and nighttime illumination.
I contend that our environment has conditioned us to recognize that the form and colors
of the fueling canopy alone, identifies this business as a fueling center facility with multi-
station pumps and a convenience store. In some cases, signage is not even necessary to
identify brand name stations.
I ask that you limit the proposed signage to the minimum necessary to identify brand
name on the SE and East corner of the canopy as well as the East face of the convenience
store.
Sincerely,
Matt Rankin
Golden Meadows Subdivision
4236 Kingsbury Drive
Fort Collins, Co 80525
1 AUG. 3. 2000 3:55PM . - GALLOWAY ROMERO., NO. 4907...._ P.
Peggy Friesen
i From: Ken Allen[allenCCAHS.Colostate.edu]
i Sent Wednesday,July 19.2WO 11:35 AM
To: 'Friee'�en,Peggy S;'Moore,David H'
Subject: SafaJjay development Harmony Rd
i
i
Peggy and David: The Boa r�txars of Golden Meadows Homeowners
Assoc.met last night and I the material on the gas station etc.
There were no objections or to the proposed filing station(canopy
We plus kiosk)from our board. I also indicated that future plane may
I include a convenience store to the W of the filling staton.
r
Kenneth G.D.Allen,PhD
i Professor,Food Science and Human Nutrition
{ Professor,Physiology
! Colorado State University
Fort Collins,CO 80523-1571
Office phone: 970/491-6712
Fax: 970/491-7252
small: allenCDahs.eolostate[edu
i
I
i
i
i
i
i
( i
,
j
i
I
III �
I 1
Commu. ..y Planning and Environmental . _,vices
Current Planning
J -v
City of Fort Collins
October 20, 2000 By.
Ms. Peggy Friesen
Galloway, Romero and Associates
5350 DTC Parkway
Englewood, CO 80111
Dear Peggy:
At our recent meeting on October 5, 2000, you asked for further clarification
regarding the City's request to delete wall signage from the north, west and south
elevations of the proposed convenience store on Lot Six of the Harmony
Safeway Shopping Center. The purpose of this letter is to provide our
• justification in writing.
The site is located within the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. This sub-
district of the City was established in 1993 in response to growing concerns
about the relationship of commercial signage to residential neighborhoods.
The City has had a long-standing policy of mixing residential and non-residential
uses. The challenge is to appropriately mitigate the impacts of commercial
development and yet allow its proximity to neighborhoods in order to reduce
vehicle miles traveled and encourage walking and biking to nearby commercial
centers. According to the advisory task force that assisted the Staff in formation
of the Residential Neighborhood Sign District, one of the methods to mitigate
such impacts is to regulate the location of flush wall signs on commercial
buildings.
The primary intent of the Residential Neighborhood Sign District is make sure
that wall signage on commercial buildings relates to the overall architecture of
the building in a sensitive manner. The purpose is to preserve the integrity of a
building's architecture from excessive wall signage and protect the aesthetic
character of those neighborhoods near commercial areas.
The convenience store is a small building totaling only 2,790 square feet. Its
front door faces east, the gas fueling area under the canopy. It is wholly
appropriate for wall signage to be placed on this east elevation. The building,
however, is too small for three additional wall signs. With signs on each of the
281 North College Avenue •P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins,CO 80522-0580 • (970)221-6750 • FAX(970)416-2020
four elevations of such a diminutive structure, the basic building form and
function of the building are sacrificed.
The architecture of the building is designed to blend in with the balance of the
center by use of similar materials and secondary roof form. The addition of three
extra wall signs will dominate this basic architectural perspective and reduce the
image to merely "building-as-billboard," an image that is not in keeping with high-
quality urban design established for the Harmony Corridor. Further, the
additional wall signs detract from objective of blending in with the center and
cause the building to appear as a stand-alone structure, reminiscent of strip
center development, not a planned cohesive shopping center.
Staff finds the request for wall signage on the north, south and west elevations to
be excessive in relative proportion to the size and scale of the convenience store
structure, and, therefore, violates the fundamental intent of the Residential
Neighborhood Sign District. If you have any further questions regarding this
finding, please feel free to call our office at 221-6750.
Sincerely:
Q
Ted Shepard
Chief Planner
Cc: Cameron Gloss, Current Planning Director
Commti__.ty Planning and Environmental }rvices
Building and Zoning Department
Cityof Fort Collins
MEMORANDUM -
DATE: January 4, 2001
TO: Ted Shepard
FROM: Peter Barnes, Zoning Administrator A j
RE: Safeway Fueling Facility Signage
I have reviewed the December 29, 2000 letter from Galloway, Romero & Associates
regarding proposed signage for the Safeway Fueling Facility. In the letter, they cite the
definition of"street' that is currently in Section 5.1.2 of the LUC and they base some of
their assumptions on this definition. However, the use of the current definition violates
the intent of the sign code sections referenced in the letter.
The term "street' has been amended a couple of times since 1997 based on the
recommendation of the City Engineering Department. Unfortunately, staff did not
realize this created a conflict with the sign code use of the term "street" until the issue
was raised by Galloway, Romero & Associates. "Street" was defined in the original
1997 LUC as "...a public way used or intended to be used for carrying vehicular, bicycle
and/or pedestrian traffic and shall include the entire area within the public right-of-way".
(See attached copy of original LUC code section). This definition is in keeping with the
intent of the wording of the sign code relative to such things as one canopy sign per
street frontage, sign allowance based on lot frontage (when used in conjunction with the
definition of"front lot line", which is the property line dividing a lot from a street), and
sign allowance based on "building frontage" as set forth in Section 3.8.7(D)(6). The
intent has never been to consider dedicated access easements as streets for the
purpose of calculating sign allowance or placement of signs.
Now that staff is aware of the conflict created by the various Engineering Department
definitions of street and other terms, there will be proposed code changes presented to
the P&Z Board and City Council in the near future. In the meantime, the Zoning
Department will apply the intent of the sign code when considering sign permit
applications.
281 North College Avenue + P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins,CO 80522-0580 • (970)221-6760 • FAX(970)224-6134
j
Article S, Terms and Definitions Division 5.1.Definitions
aquatic insect diversity as identified in the NAPP; remnant native prairie habitat; mixed
foothill shrubland; foothills ponderosa pine forest;plains cottonwood riparian woodlands;
and any wetland greater than 1/4 acre in size.
Specified anatomical areas shall mean less than completely and opaquely covered human
genitals,pubic region,buttocks, female breast or breasts below a point immediately above
the top of the areola and human male genitals in a discernibly turgid state,even if completely
and opaquely covered.
Specified sexual activities shall mean:
(1) human genitals in a state of sexual stimulation or arousal;
(2) acts of human masturbation, sexual intercourse or sodomy;
(3) fondling or other erotic touching of human genitals,pubic region, buttocks
or female breast or breasts.
Story: See Height.
Street shall mean a public way used or intended to be used for carrying vehicular,bicycle
and/or pedestrian traffic and shall include the entire area within the public right-of-way.
Structure shall mean a combination of materials to form a construction for use, occupancy,
or ornamentation whether installed on, above or below the surface of land or water.
Subdivider or developer shall mean any person,partnership,joint venture, limited liability
company,association or corporation who participates as owner,promoter,developer or sales
agent in the planning,platting,development,promotion, sale and lease of a development.
Subdivision shall mean the platting of a lot or the division of a lot,tract or parcel of land into
two (2) or more lots,plots or sites.
Supermarket shall mean a retail establishment primarily selling food, as well as other
convenience and household goods, which occupies a space of not less than twenty-five
thousand one(25,001) square feet.
Transit facility shall mean bus stops, bus terminals, transfer points, and depots without
vehicle repair or storage.
City of Fort Collins
lad Use Code Article S, Page 34 Effective March 28. 1997
1
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ITEM NUMBER: 34
DATE: December 15, 1992
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL Joe Frank
STAFF: Peter Barnes
SUBJECT:
earing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 141, 1992 Amending the Sign Code
Relating to Limitations for Non-residential Uses in the Residential Neighborhood
Sign District.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of this Ordinance on First Reading. On September 28,
1992, the Planning and Zoning Board voted 7-0 to recommend to the City Council
the adoption of the proposed amendments to the Sign Code.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
While the Sign Code has generally worked well , there has been growing concern
about signage as it applies to non-residential land uses in predominantly
residential areas. This concern was affirmed in the City Council 1991 - 1993
Work Plan and the 1990 Audit of the Land Development Guidance System wherein
staff was directed to review the Sign Code and prepare necessary changes to
address these concerns. The City Planning Department and Building Permits and
Inspection Division staff, with the assistance of a local consulting firm has
prepared changes to the Sign Code to address these concerns. In general , the
recommendations are two-fold: First, new standards are being recommended for the
Sign Code which will regulate the amount, location and design of signs for non-
residential land uses in residential areas. Second, these provisions only apply
to non-residential developments located in the "Residential Neighborhood Sign
District", which is considered to be those areas of the community that are
predominantly residential in use and character. This District excludes
predominately commercial areas, such as, College Avenue, Downtown and portions
of Harmony Road and Prospect Road.
BACKGROUND:
Several years ago, the City enacted regulations to control the location and
design of signage on private property. While the Sign Code has been well
received by both the business industry and public, there has been growing concern
that these regulations do not adequately control signage as it applies to
shopping centers and free-standing auto-related and business service uses located
in predominantly residential areas. This concern was affirmed in the City
Council 1991-1993 Work Plan and the 1990 Audit of the Land Development Guidance
System (LDGS) wherein staff was directed to review the Sign Code and prepare
necessary changes to address these concerns. In general , the concerns include
the amount of signage allowed under the current Code, appearance and aesthetics,
and compatibility with neighborhood quality and character. Some specific issues
which have been identified include the size and finish of freestanding/ground
signs, illumination, window signage, and architectural compatibility.
E; December 15, 1992 ) \
2
BEM NUMBER: 34
This is not a criticism of existing businesses or sign companies. Rather, staff 11
research has found that many businesses located in or near residential areas of h
1 the community are already sensitive to these issues and have, in many cases
doing a good job in designing and controlling signage. In fact
projects have been used as models for development of the proposed any o these
forThe pabuse Of the roposed Sign Code changes are intended to reduce or eliminate opportunities
of these
incompatible with anexisting adjoiningCode whi
resid rech sidential neighborhood.
could result in signage owh�icht�is
The La
-r44€velooment Guidance S s e currently includes a provision which allows
the Planning and Zoning Board to impose more restrictive signage requirements
than the Sign Code in Planned Unit Developments. The Planning and Zoning
and staff have used this provision to regulate signs in new Planned Unit
Developments. The proposed Sign Code Board
requirements imposed by the Planning and Zonings Board ons a in them recent past.
i h the
It has become apparent i'S that consistent and documented standards and criteria
for approving signage in shopping-centers 'located in predominantly and free-standing retail/office uses
The proposed additions to the Sign lCodeaarerintended to addre in the ss s and this p�oblem.
Under the proposed changes, the amount and design of signage will be regulated
by the Sign Code through the addition of new requirements specificall
to address the issue of neighborhood character and compatibility.approval of permits for individual signs will be by the City y prepared
Inspection Division staff. Y• The review and
The Planning and Zoning Board will continueeto�review
signage in Planned Unit Developments only to the extent that the location of
flushwall signs relate to the architectural character .of the associated
buildings. All other aspects of signage in this under the new Sign Code provisions. District will be controlled
Staff believes the explicit listing of signage requirements in the Sign Code and
LDGS should make the decision-making process more predictable and consistent from
project to project. This should help all parties to better understand the basis
for decision-making in advance.
designed and made more compatible with importantly
surroundings.
etter
precise criteria should also help reduce City administrativ costs inthe review
and approval of signs, More
This project is not intended to signage or other issues related toress other '
spehe
"Residential Neighborhood Sign District", geographic
areas
concerns about
the Board to review signs in predominantly commercial areas located Outside of
the "Residential Neighborhood Sign District,, as It does not change the authority of
LDGS. These issues and others will be considered during an upcoming "audit" of
the Sign Code which will. be undertaken by City y provided for in the Sign Code and
staff in 1993.Recommended Changes:
Staff, with the assistance of a local consulting firm, has prepared changes to
the Sign Code to address the above issues.
The recommended changes are attached
and are indicated in UPPER CASE LETTERS. An explanation (in italics) follows
each specific Code change. In general , the recommendations are two-fold:
First, clear and consistent standards are recommended for the amount, location
and design of signs in the "Residential Neighborhood Sign District" which will
guide staff in the approval of individual tenant sign
will be incorporated into the Sign Code. The Plannin
9 permits. These provisions
g and Zoning Board will
December 151 1994
�— to review proposed signage only to the E Int that the
retain its ability
ns are compatible with the architectural character of
location of flushwall Sig
&he building.
Second, these provisions shall only apply to non-residential developments locate
in an area known as tTh�sRepa����tlincludeshborhareas�of D the rcommunity dwhachdare
the attached map. redominantly residential in use and character.
considered by the City as being p Road and Prospect Road
This district excludes predominantly coof th ai or industrial areas, such as
college Avenue, downtown, and portions of the Harmony pursuant to a permit
corridors. Existing signs in this District will be made to conform to these
signs will not be
regulations whenever such signs are erected or remodeled p
after the date of enactment of these regulations. Existing 9 I
subject to the more restrictive sign all
provisions of these regulations.
Citizen Participation Process
Many opportunities for citizen comment were provided during
the planning process.
ance to staff on the
An advisory
committee composed of representatives of major sign companies
operating in the Fort Collins area was formed to ee provide
ever with the Planning and
technicalcaspects19of 91tand August, 1992, including met several times with staff
between 0 j
Zoning Board in a special work session on June 16,companies,
developers, design
Last June, over 175 letters were mailed to sign companies,
on June 4. This letter
professionals, neighborhood organizations and interested citizens oard hearing o
and Zoning
proposed changes and invited them to a public meet ng
also included an invitation to speak at the Planning
June 22, 1992. No member of the public attended the June 4 public meeting. I
• approximately 30 letters were sent to owners and/or Resmanidential
More ers of
recently, ng centers and/or businesses located in the
existing shopping
Neighborhood Sign District" informing them of the recent changes in the propose
Sign Code which relate to existing signs.
and the Planning and Zoning Board met in work session on
In addition, staff has had several conversations with individuals about the
proposed Code changes,
four iff ren and Septembet occasions er discuss the
project and conducted public hearings o
our
J
and public hearings on the matter were
Finally, notices of the open house
published in a local newspaper.
RECOMMEN'
On September 28, 1992, the Planning and Zoning Board voted 7 0 to recommend to
Sadfptiono reche ommendsoadoptmondments to the Sign Code (see
the City Council the
of V
attached minutes) .
r '
i
. ORDINANCE NO. 141, 1992
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING THE SIGN CODE RELATING TO LIMITATIONS
FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE RESIDENTIAL
NEIGHBORHOOD SIGN DISTRICT
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That the title of Section 29-593 of the Code of the City,
"Limitations for Nonresidential Districts and Uses" is hereby amended to read as
follows:
Sec. 29-593. bIimitations for nonresidential districts and
uses.
Section 2. That a new Section 29-593.1 is hereby added to the Code of the
City, which new Section shall read as follows:
Sec. 29-593.1. Limitations for non-residential districts and
uses in the Residential Neighborhood Sign
District.
There is hereby established a "Residential Neighborhood Sign
District" for the purpose of regulating signs for non-residential
uses in certain geographical areas of the city which may be
particularly affected by such signs because of their predominantly
residential use and character. The boundaries of the Sign District
shall be shown on a map which shall be maintained in the office of
the City Clerk. Any amendments to this map shall be made in the
same manner as amendments to the zoning district map of the city, as
provided in Sections 29-23 and 29-24. The following provisions shall
only apply to proposed neighborhood service centers, neighborhood
convenience shopping centers, business service uses and auto-related
and roadside commercial uses in the "Residential Neighborhood Sign
District" which are developed on or after January 15, 1993. In
addition, all such provisions, except subsections 14 and 15 below,
shall apply to signs in neighborhood service centers, neighborhood
convenience shopping centers, business service uses and auto-related
and roadside commercial uses in the "Residential Neighborhood Sign
District" which were developed prior to the effective date of this
ordinance, whenever such signs are erected or remodeled pursuant to
a permit after January 15, 1993.
(1) Signs regulated under this Section shall generally
conform to the other requirements of Chapter 29, Article
IV, except that when any of the following limitations
are applicable to a particular sign, the more
restrictive limitation shall apply.
(2) Signs regulated under this Section shall also conform to
any locational requirements imposed by the Planning and
. Zoning Board as a condition of the approval of the
planned unit development plan under Section 29-526.
J
Except as to location, the Planning and Zoning Board
shall not impose more restrictive requirements or
conditions than required under this Section.
(3) No sign shall project more than twelve (12) inches
beyond the building fascia. Under-canopy signs which
are perpendicular to the face of the building shall be
exempted from this requirement except that they shall be
limited to four (4) square feet in area per face.
(4) Freestanding or ground signs shall comply with the
following requirements with respect to size, number and
height:
I MA
Nlq��IG�(S
MAXIMUM AREA ' PERMITTED PER
PER STREET. MAXIMUM .
USE SIGN FACE ;; FRONTAGE- HEIGHT .
AUTO-RELATED AND PRIMARY - 32 S.F. PRIMARY - 1 PRIMARY 5
ROADSIDE FT.
COMMERCIAL AND
BUSINESS SERVICE
USES
NEIGHBOR- PRIMARY - 40 S.F. PRIMARY - I PRIMARY - 8
HOOD CONVENIENCE FT.
SHOPPING CENTER
NEIGHBOR- PRIMARY - 55 S.F. PRIMARY - 1 PRIMARY -
HOOD SERVICE SECONDARY - SECONDARY - 1 10 FT.
CENTER 32 S.F. SECONDARY -
6 FT.
(5) Freestanding signs shall be permitted only if
constructed with a supporting sign structure, the width
of which exceeds seventy (70) percent of the width of
the sign face. Freestanding or ground signs shall
contain no more than two (2) faces. No freestanding or
ground sign shall be located less than seventy-five (75)
feet from any directly abutting property which contains
an existing or approved residential use or is zoned for
residential use. For the purposes of this subsection,
the term "approved" shall be defined as having current
preliminary or final planned unit development approval .
(6) All supporting sign structures of a freestanding or
ground sign shall match the primary finish and colors of
the associated building(s).
2
(7) All signs which are greater than. four (4) square feet in
area, except ground signs and those signs which
replicate a business logo, must be comprised only of
individual letters or cabinets wherein only the letters
are illuminated.
(8) The maximum size of individual letters and logos on
flushwall signs and flush wall cabinets shall be as
follows:
er USE
0 � �� r MAf1IMUM
EIGHMGO . : HEIGHT GHT
LETTEREGMT ,,
AUTO-RELATED AND 12" 18" 18"
ROADSIDE
COMMERCIAL AND
BUSINESS SERVICE
USES
NEIGHBORHOOD 18" 24" 24"
CONVENIENCE
SHOPPING CENTER
NEIGHBORHOOD 24"* 3011* 3011*
SERVICE CENTER
* Any individua tenant space exceeding Forty-five thousand (45,000) square.
feet in floor area shall be permitted one (1) flushwall sign with
individual letters not to exceed forty-eight (48) inches in height and/or
logos not to exceed fifty-four (54) inches in height. The maximum cabinet
height shall be fifty-four (54) inches in height.
(9) If signs are illuminated, only internal illumination
shall be permitted. This requirement shall not apply to
freestanding or ground signs.
(10) The length of any flushwall sign for an individual
tenant space shall be limited to seventy-five (75)
percent of the width of the tenant storefront, but no
sign shall exceed forty (40) feet in length; provided,
however, that any individual tenant space exceeding
forty-five thousand (45,000) square feet in floor area
shall be permitted one (1) flushwall sign not exceeding
fifty-five (55) feet in length. Each tenant space shall
be allowed one such flushwall sign on each exterior
building wall directly adjacent to the tenant space. In
the event that a tenant space does not have a directly
adjacent exterior wall , one sign not exceeding thirty
(30) square feet may be erected on an exterior wall of
the building for the purpose of identifying that tenant
space.
3 .
(11) No illuminated sign visible from or within three hundred
(300) feet of any property which contains an existing or
approved residential use or is zoned for residential
use, may be illuminated between the hours of eleven
(11:00) p.m. (or one-half [1/2] hour after the use to
which it is pertains is closed, whichever is later) and
six (6:00) a.m. ; provided, however, that this time
limitation shall not apply to any lighting which is used
primarily for the protection of the premises or for
safety purposes or any signage which is separated from
a residential use by an arterial street. For the
purposes of this subsection, the term "approved" shall
be defined as having current preliminary or final
planned unit development approval .
(12) One flushwall sign or under-canopy sign per street
frontage, not to exceed twelve (12) square feet in area,
shall be permitted on or under the fascia of a canopy
covering the retail dispensing or sales of vehicular
fuels.
(13) Awning signs shall not be permitted to be back-lit
except for individual letters and business logo only.
The extent of signage on an awning shall be limited to
the lesser of thirty-five (35) square feet per
individual tenant space or twenty-five (25) percent of
the total area of the awning and shall be applied to the
most vertical portion of the awning. Awning signs shall
not be allowed above the first story of a building.
(14) For the first two hundred (200) feet in building
frontage length in a neighborhood service center, the
maximum sign area permitted shall be equal to one and
one-quarter (1 1/4) square feet for each linear foot of
building frontage length. For that portion of a
building frontage which exceeds two hundred (200) feet
in length, the maximum sign area permitted shall be
equal to two-thirds (2/3) foot for each linear foot of
building frontage length over such two hundred (200)
feet.
(15) For the first two hundred (200) feet in building
frontage length in a neighborhood convenience shopping
center, business service use or auto-related and
roadside commercial use, the maximum sign area permitted
shall be equal to one (1) square foot for each linear
foot of building frontage length. For that portion of
a building frontage which exceeds two hundred (200) feet
in length, the maximum sign area permitted shall be
equal to one-half (1/2) foot for each linear foot of
building frontage over such two hundred (200) feet.
4
i
. (16) In addition to the basic size allowance permitted under
subsection 29-593.1 (4), the sign area and height of a
freestanding or ground sign may be increased by an
additional twenty (20) percent if only identification of
the name and/or logo of the retail center or business
park is used on the primary or secondary freestanding or
ground sign. This bonus shall only be applied to the
freestanding or ground sign on which the limitation
occurs.
(17) Window signs, excluding ideological signs, may cover no
more than twenty-five (25) percent of the surface area
of the window or door in which such signs are placed.
Temporary window signs shall not be allowed above the
first story of a building. A window sign shall be
considered to be a temporary window sign if it is
displayed in the same window or door, or same
approximate location outside of a window or door, for no
more than thirty (30) calendar days within a six (6)
month period of time. Changes in the message displayed
on such sign shall not affect the computation of the
thirty (30) day period of time provided for herein.
Section 3. That Section 29-1 of the Code of the City is hereby amended,
in alphabetical , by the addition of the definition of "Window signs," which
shall read as follows:
• Sec. 29-1. Definitions.
Window sign shall mean a sign which is painted on, applied or
attached to a window or door, or located within three (3) feet of
the interior of the window or door and is visible from the exterior
of the building.
Section 4. That Section 29-526(G)(3)(b) of the Land Development Guidance
System, relating to preliminary architectural elevations, of the Code of the City
is hereby amended to read as follows:
(b) . Preliminary architectural elevations of all buildings
sufficient to convey the basic architectural intent of the ro osed
improvements, fi i s .:. ,
IF
Section 5. That Section 29-526 of the Code of the City, the Land
Development Guidance System, is hereby amended by the addition of a new criterion
to the ALL DEVELOPMENT category of the Land Development Guidance System, which
new criterion shall read as follows:
49. Are flushwall signs positioned to harmonize with the
architecture character of the building(s) to which they are
attached, including but not limited to any projection, relief,
cornice, column, change of building material , window or door
opening? Do they align with other flushwall signs on the same
building?
5
Section 6. That if any section, subsection, paragraph, clause or other
provisions of this Ordinance shall for any reason be held to be invalid or
unenforceable, the invalidity or unenforceability thereof shall not affect any
of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs, clauses or provisions of this
Ordinance.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published in
summary form this 15th day of December A.D. 1992, and to be presented for final
passage on the 5th day of January, A.D. 1993.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading this 5th day of January, A.D. 1993.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
6
r[[�[Ivat at 1t WE
'
f1.lIIR�A B�iE: psi f�
..��n.■ � fit,
� l :47AMR
Pq--1� �'j��.
vp
A� iiai,IA
WR
ANA
~Scl i% �►^ fjlti' t 1
YIn
CIF •. r
�f
9A/
«F/ Ilrw ''�
ORDINANCE NO. 8, 1994 �.
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING CHAPTER 29 OF THE CODE OF
THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS RELATING TO
SIGN REGULATIONS
WHEREAS, in 1971, the City Council adopted the City's first comprehensive
sign code, which is presently contained in Chapter 29 of the City Code; and
WHEREAS, in 1990, an audit of the Land Development Guidance System
identified the need to address certain issues which have arisen with regard to
the provisions of the sign code; and
WHEREAS, in response to said audit, City staff has undertaken a
comprehensive, two-phase review of the sign code; and
WHEREAS, the first phase of this review resulted in City Council's adoption
of Ordinance No. 141, 1992, which made certain changes to the Code and to the
provisions of the Land Development Guidance System with regard to signage in the
"Residential Neighborhood Signage District"; and
WHEREAS, having completed the second phase of this review, City staff is
recommending certain additional changes to the sign code, which changes have been
reviewed by the City's Planning and Zoning Board and recommended for approval ;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council believes that those changes to the sign code
. dealing with on-premise signs which have been recommended by City staff and the
Planning and Zoning Board should be adopted by the Council so as to better
protect the aesthetic interests of the citizens of the City; and
WHEREAS, City staff has proposed two alternative revisions to the sign code
dealing with off-premise signs; and
WHEREAS, the City Council believes that off-premise signs negatively affect
the aesthetic appearance of the City as a whole and may endanger the public
safety by causing undue confusion and distraction among motorists when
interspersed with on-premise signs; and
WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that ideological and political off-
premise signs are entitled to a higher level of First Amendment protection under
the Colorado and United States Constitutions than commercial signs and
billboards; and
WHEREAS, for the foregoing reasons, the City Council believes it to be in
the best interests of the City to prohibit the construction of additional off-
premise signs in the City, with the exception of ideological and political signs.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
as follows:
Section 1. That the definitions of Flush wall sign, Ground sign and
Portable sign, as contained in Section 29-1 of the Code of the City, are hereby
amended to read as follows:
Krager and Associates, Inc. JUN
1390 Stuart Street. Carriage House 8 Y
Denver, Colorado 80204-1243 ..,,
(303) 446-2626 FAX (303) 446-0270
June 6, 2000
Ms. Peggy Friesen
Galloway, Romero &Associates
5350 DTC Parkway
Englewood, Colorado 80111
Re: Harmony Center Marketplace - Safeway Fuel - Fort Collins, Colorado
00491pf.wps
Dear Peggy:
Per your request I have conducted a Trip Generation and Alternate Modes analysis
for the proposed gasoline/service station for the Harmony Center Marketplace.
I. TRIP GENERATION
The revised project trip generation is shown in Table 1. Table 2 illustrates the trip
generation that was approved in the Traffic Impact Study for this site. As you can
see from the two tables, the addition of a gasoline/service station on this site
results in less traffic than the land uses assumed in the Traffic Impact Study.
TABLE 1
REVISED TRIP GENERATION
ITE I PM PEAK HOUR
LAND USE SIZE CODE ADT ENTER EXIT TOTAL
Grocery 48.3 KSF 850 5,386 284 272 556
Retail 49.1 KSF 814 1,997 55 72 127
Drive-In Bank 6 windows 912 1,591 42 34 76
Restaurant 5.0 KSF 832 652 33 21 54
Gasoline/Service Station 12 VFP 845 1,953 80 80 160
w/Convenience Market
Day Care 6.0 KSF 565 476 37 42 79
TOTAL 12,055 531 521 1,052
KSF: 1000' Gross Floor Area
VFP: Vehicle Fueling Positions
}
Ms. Peggy Friesen June 6, 2000 -
Galloway, Romero & Associates Page 2
TABLE 2 TRIP GENERATION
FROM APPROVED TRAFFIC STUDY
SIZE ITE AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR
LAND USE (KSF) CODE ADT IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL
Grocery Store 48.0 850 4,960 67 29 96 253 243 496
Retail 40.3 814 1,639 124 134 258 113 86 199
Restaurant 12.0 832 2,134 91 87 178 87 68 155
Fast Food 3.8 834 2,698 108 104 212 72 67 139
Bank 4.6 912 1,220 29 22 51 96 105 201
Daycare 6.6 565 523 46 40 86 42 48 90
TOTAL 13,174 465 416 881 663 617 1,280
KSF: 1000'gross floor area
II. ALTERNATE MODES ANALYSIS
Pedestrian Analysis
A pedestrian analysis, in accordance with the City of Fort Collins Pedestrian LOS
Standards, was conducted for this project. The following, in addition to the
Pedestrian LOS Worksheet, summarizes the findings of the analysis.
According to The City of Fort Collins Transportation Master Plan, the Harmony
Center Marketplace, including the proposed gasoline/service station, is located
within a location area deemed "activity corridor/center". The applicable minimum
Level of Service for the "activity corridor/center ' category is LOS B.
The Harmony Center Marketplace is bounded by Monte Carlo Drive to the north,
Harmony Road to the,south, Wheaton Drive to the'wesi and McMurry Avenue on
the east.
The following destination areas within a quarter-mile of the proposed project site
were identified. These include the Enclave residential development to the north,
the Knuse Elementary School to the northeast, the Golden Meadow Business Park
to the east, the RockBridge multi-family residential development to the west, the
Hampton Inn, Quiznos Restaurant, and Pizza Pipeline development to the
southeast, an office development south of Hampton Inn, and the Comfort Suites
hotel and some retail uses to the southwest.
Ms. Peggy Friesen June 6, 2000
Galloway, Romero & Associates Page 3
a The analysis determined the existing Pedestrian LOS for each destination area by
looking at directness, continuity, street crossings, visual interest & amenities, and
security.
The Enclave single-family residential development is located just north of Monte
Carlo Drive, on the north side of the Harmony Center Marketplace. There is very
good pedestrian connectivity and continuity between the Harmony Center
Marketplace and the Enclave development. There are sidewalks on both sides of
Monte Carlo Drive. In addition, there are safe, well signed, raised crosswalks
across Monte Carlo Drive from the site to the north side of Monte Carlo Drive. The
raised crosswalks are located at Iva and Monaco Place.
The RockBridge multi-family residential development, located on the west side of
Wheaton Drive can be accessed easily from the Harmony Center Marketplace.
Continuous sidewalks exist on both sides of Wheaton Drive from Harmony Road
north for at least 1/2 mile. Crosswalks do not exist at the intersection of Wheaton
Drive/Harmony Center Access/RockBridge Access. However, there is good
visibility for both the pedestrians and the motorists so that pedestrian crossings
could be made safely.
Knuse Elementary School is located northeast of the Harmony Center Marketplace,
. on the northeast corner of McMurry Avenue and Monte Carlo Drive. Continuos
sidewalk exists on the west side of McMurry Avenue from Harmony Road to north
of the school. Sidewalk exists on the east side of McMurry from north of the school
to the undeveloped parcel on the northeast corner of McMurry and Harmony.
The school entrance is just north of the intersection of McMurry and Monte Carlo.
The intersection of McMurry and Monte Carlo is a four-way STOP controlled
intersection with pedestrian crosswalks on all four legs. Monte Carlo Drive, east of
McMurry Avenue also has sidewalks on both sides of the roadway that stop short of
Innovation Drive.
The Golden Meadows Business Park, located on the northeast quadrant of
Harmony Road and McMurry Avenue is easily accessible by pedestrians, as well.
As indicated earlier, sidewalks exist on McMurry Avenue. Pedestrians can safely
cross McMurry Avenue at the signalized intersection with Harmony Road.
The Hampton Inn, Quiznos, Pizza Pipeline, and office development located in the
southeast quadrant of Harmony and McMurry are accessible to/from the Harmony
Center Marketplace relatively easily. Continuous sidewalk exists on the north side
of Harmony Road. The signalized intersection of Harmony Road and McMurry
Avenue has pedestrian push buttons and pedestrian crosswalks on all four legs.
South of Harmony Road, McMurry Avenue has continuous sidewalk on the east
side of the roadway. Sidewalk does not existing on the west side of McMurry nor
on the south side of Harmony - adjacent to the cemetery.
7
Ms. Peggy Friesen June 6, 2000
Galloway, Romero & Associates Page 4
The Comfort Suites hotel and surrounding retail land uses, located in the southwest
quadrant of Harmony Road and Wheaton Drive are not as easily accessible for
pedestrians. Sidewalk does exist on the north side of Harmony Road - adjacent to
the Harmony Center Marketplace. However, the intersection of Harmony Road and
Wheaton Drive is not particularly pedestrian friendly. This is a three-quarter
movement intersection with the STOP-control on Wheaton Drive. If pedestrians
from the Harmony Center Marketplace desired to walk to the Comfort Suites, etc.,
they could cross at the Harmony/McMurry intersection but would have to walk on
the south side of Harmony which does not have sidewalks.
Within the Harmony Center Marketplace, good pedestrian amenities exist.
Pedestrians can comfortably walk to and from each of the individual land uses.
Bicycle Analysis
"On-Street Bicycle Lanes" exist on Harmony Road, Wheaton Drive, McMurry
Avenue, Monte Carlo Drive that would provide access to/from the Harmony Center
Marketplace to any of the destination areas outlined above.
Transit Analysis
The ease of using transit to access the proposed project was reviewed. According
to City of Fort Collins staff, there is existing, limited peak hour transit service on
Harmony Road. With the development of the proposed gasoline/service station, a
bus shelter will be constructed on the existing transit pad located on the north side
of Harmony Road on the west side of the existing right-in/right-out access point.
To summarize, because the proposed gasoline/service station is located on one of
the internal pads within the Harmony Center Marketplace, the pedestrian and
bicycle amenities have already been constructed. This gasoline/service station will
not have an impact on the existing amenities. This lot is easily accessible from
within the Harmony Center Marketplace and from the destination areas outlined
above. In addition, a bus shelter will be constructed on the existing transit pad on
the north side of Harmony Road with the development of this gasoline/service
station.
I believe that this letter addresses both the trip generation adjustments and the
alternative modes analysis for the City of Fort Collins. If you have any other
questions, please feel free to call me.
Sincerely,
Q
Ann T. Bowers, P.E.
Transportation Engineer
enc.
Multimodal Transportation Level of Service Manual p. Is
IAS Standards for Development Review-Pedestrian /
Z
Figure 6. Pedestrian LOS Worksheet
project location classification: 477yp �p-o&A C (enter as many as apply)
description of applicable destination area ievel of service(minimum based on project location classification)
destination area within1,320' classification
includingaddress (see text) ""'"r
Erce,4i,� s•tae�-F,,ryr R ,t nay 3 B
j�s,D�.vn�9c a�mal .8.
S,n�a,7ri�c } / iI .JT//AL actual 2? a
�(..Y/EfY7DN Drei✓E (oFt' Proposed
3❑ iW✓sE F1E�+Ew7� /Nsrirvrriw
�Mfr`I✓r�/� proposed
II 6pcdEIJ N OFf/LE rribr.sn -a
�rlS✓.�655 a!%/tdrNEis actual73
C '�
s. o � p'°Posed G
City of Fort Collins Transportation Master Plan
Multimodal Transportation Level of Service Manual P. Is
LOS Standards for Development Review-Pedestrian
Figure 6. Pedestrian LOS Worksheet
project location classification: ✓� �� iN (enter as many as apply)
description of applicable destination area level of service(minimum based on project location classification)
destination area within3,321Y classification N�a
includingaddsess (see text) ..o.+o , t....wa ..n.ar
..� a
Q / pJTlaJ TirW� QJ/Z.saQS �O�YMIt'iGCI m.snaan
l�ivD AA!e D�l�iiiL actual Cn
<sE CWaxr PANcM+r�Arr proposes t3 13
E of s
nfrinaan
a �pr/Fv/1'i TsV�I�slc-i�7.� t�1N6CCiAL.
AA6 9&.04U �mG actual D A
iTlsS (SeJ Csv of R��
SW OGtss
,il44A W41!/ I
oi.nm
4� Of � � O�LE actual
PfOP�
Inklinvan
F actual
a Y
Proposed
/�� City of Fort Collins Transportation Master Plar,,
Hazardous Materials Impact Analysis
for
Safeway, Inc.
Safeway-Harmony Marketplace PUD
NW of E. Harmony Road and McMurry Avenue
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
July, 2000
Prepared for:
Safeway, Inc.
• 6900 South Yosemite Street
Englewood, CO 80112-1412
(303) 843-7600
Attn: Howard Gerelick
Prepared by:
Galloway, Romero & Associates
5350 DTC Parkway
Englewood, CO 80111
(303) 770-8884
Attn: Peggy Friesen
•
Project Information
The proposed development is a Safeway Fuel Facility with gasoline fuel sales and
a convenience store. It is located near the northwest corner of East Harmony Road and
McMurry Avenue in the City of Fort Collins.
The adjacent property to the east, west and north is currently a developed retail
center anchored by a Safeway grocery store. These properties are zoned HC-Harmony
Corridor, Neighborhood Service Center. The properties to the to the south across East
Harmony Road are also zoned HC and are within the Oakridge Business Park and
currently undeveloped.
The hazardous material utilized by this operation is unleaded gasoline. There will
be two, 20,000 gallon underground doublewalled steel/frp composite storage tanks. One
of the tanks is a double compartment to contain 10,000 gallons of premium unleaded and
10,000 gallons of super unleaded gasoline. The other 20,000 gallon tank will contain
regular unleaded gasoline. The storage and distribution system complies with the State
of Colorado requirements regulating service stations. The distribution system contains the
following safety features:
(1) Multiple product dispensers with:
(a) Automatic nozzles to prevent customer overfill and spillage.
(b) Hose break-away connections that separate and seal the hose
opening when customers drive off with the nozzle still in the vehicle.
(c) Emergency shut-off valves under the dispenser that shut off gasoline
flow into the dispenser when either:
(1) The dispenser sustains an impact and the emergency valve
shears away, or
(2) A fire melts a fusible link connection on the valve.
(2) Dispenser containment sumps to collect any fuel spillage under the dispenser
and prevent soil contamination. Dispenser sumps shall have electronic leak
detectors to report the presence of spilled fuel.
(3) Doublewall fiberglass piping to contain fuel in the event of a primary piping
failure.
}
• (4) Submersible pump containment sumps to contain any fuel leaking from the
pump or piping connections. Containment sumps shall have electronic leak
detectors to report the presence of leaking fuel.
(5) Cathodic protection system consisting of tank coating and internal tank
anodes.
(6) Pressure/vacuum vent valves to prevent tanks from over pressurizing
(positive or negative) during filling procedures or due to thermal
contraction/expansion of product.
.(7) Submersible pump leak detector to shut down pump if detector suspects a
leak in the primary piping system.
(8) Monitor walls in the tank area to monitor for contaminants in the soil and/or
groundwater.
(9) Emergency stop switch at cashier's counter to shut down entire fueling
operation in the event of a spill or fire.
Fuel is delivered to the underground tanks by tanker. Each truck holds
approximately 8,000 - 10,000 gallons. The most likely route the transport truck would travel
would be along E. Harmony Avenue to the site from the east. The truck would leave the
site via E. Harmony.
Some of the most realistic scenarios involving use of gasoline at this facility include:
(1) A spill at the dispenser due to consumer lack of attention or mechanical
failure. This spill would be minimal based on a two minute response and a
flow rate of ten gallons per minute. Twenty gallons of gasoline probably
would not travel off site and could be controlled by spreading an absorbing
material and evaporation. A manual shut-off gate is also provided in the 2
foot chase drain to prevent any spillage running into the storm system.
(2) A larger surface spill originating at the underground storage tank area during
a product delivery. Fuel is "dropped" into the underground storage tank by
gravity fill. The most likely scenario would be the delivery hose becoming
disengaged from the truck or tank connection. Since the truck driver is
required by law to stay within sight of and within control of the delivery
operation, a spill should not exceed a quantity of approximately 250 gallons.
In the event of this type of spill, the fuel would travel to the southwest portion
of the site. The fuel would stay within paved areas contained by site curbing.
The outlet for the storm water from this area releases into the large roadside
ditch along Harmony. It would be possible for the driver to manually block
the 2 foot chase drain with a manual shut off gate and contain the spill within
the paved drive area of the site. The contained fuel could then be properly
cleaned up and disposed of under the supervision of the fire department.
sa06.psf .haz mat impact analysis.doc