HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 07/15/2003 - ITEMS RELATING TO THE HARMONY CORRIDOR PLAN AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ITEM NUMBER: 23A-C
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL DATE: July 15, 2003
10 FROM:
Pete Wray
SUBJECT:
Items Relating to the Harmony Corridor Plan.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution and of the Ordinances on First Reading.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
A. Resolution 2003-086 Amending the Harmony Corridor Plan (an Element of the
Comprehensive Plan of the City) to Allow for the Potential Development of a Lifestyle
Shopping Center in the Harmony Corridor.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 103,2003,Amending the Harmony Corridor Standards and
Guidelines to Regulate and Guide the Development of a Lifestyle Shopping Center in the
Harmony Corridor.
C. First Reading of Ordinance No. 104, 2003, Amending the Land Use Code to Allow for the
Potential Development of a Lifestyle Shopping Center in the Harmony Corridor.
The City has initiated certain amendments to the Harmony Corridor Plan to allow a Lifestyle
Shopping Center on the vacant property adjacent to the LSI Logic facility at the northwest corner of
Harmony Road and Ziegler Road. The property is currently designated in the Harmony Corridor
Plan forBasic Industrial and Non-Retail Employment uses. The proposed amendment would permit
on the property,in addition to the current list of employment land uses,a Lifestyle Shopping Center.
In addition,certain amendments are proposed to the Harmony Corridor Standards and Guidelines,
which implement the Plan, including adding new definitions, along with a few additional design
standards and guidelines that establish uses, size and character.
ACKGROUND:
Over the past several years,staff and the public have discussed the possibility of an additional,new
regional shopping center somewhere in Fort Collins. Information obtained through the City Plan
Update process shows that there is sufficient market demand for one future regional shopping center
ly
DATE: u , ITEM NUMBER:
somewhere in the region. Over the past few years, three regional shopping center developers have
approached City staff about locating in Fort Collins. Staff evaluated available large vacant parcels
within Fort Collins and from that analysis the property at the northwest comer of Harmony Road and
Ziegler Drive emerged as the best available site. From a market perspective,the preferred location
is somewhere near the southern end of the city near I-25.
Most recently, a national developer has approached the City to propose an outdoor regional retail
center(Lifestyle Shopping Center)on the subject property. The property is approximately 140 acres
in size. The proposed Lifestyle Center is estimated to include approximately 80 acres, leaving the
remaining 60 acres for basic employment and secondary uses. The size of the Lifestyle Center would
be expected to fall between approximately 250,000—450,000 square feet, with an upper limit of
800,000 in the event the shopping center was highly successful. No further details on either the
retail, residential or employment phases have been provided at this early stage in the process.
To permit a shopping center at this location requires an amendment to the Harmony Corridor Plan
as well as certain amendments and additions to the Harmony Corridor Design Standards and
Guidelines. The process to amend the Harmony Corridor Plan has included numerous opportunities
for citizen review and comment including opportunities to learn more about and ask questions at a
City-sponsored neighborhood meeting and a public open house. In addition, information about the
proposed amendment has been published on the City's Web site and the amendment has been well
covered in the local news media. Staff also met with the original citizen's advisory committee for
the Harmony Corridor Plan, as well as the Downtown Development Authority, Chamber of
Commerce, City boards and commissions, and other interested groups and individuals. See
attachments#3 and#4. Finally,on June 10,the City Council held a Study Session on the proposed
amendment during which several issues and concerns were raised (see attachment#5).
The key considerations of economic impacts and employment land inventory are analyzed in a
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis Final Report. (see attachment #6). And, City staff
evaluated preliminary traffic considerations (See attachment#7).
Planning and Zoning Board Recommendation
On June 19,the Planning and Zoning Board voted 7-0 to approve a recommendation to City Council
to adopt the items relating to the Harmony Corridor Plan Amendments (see attachment#8).
A part of the Board's discussion was regarding the recommended definitions and standards. In
particular, the discussion focused on the issue of whether the definitions and standards sufficiently
"tied down"the uses and character that were portrayed in the various images and literature provided
by City staff and the developer. While the Board generally felt comfortable with the definitions and
standards as presented,they encouraged and authorized the City staff to further investigate possible
improvements.
Subsequently, the staff further evaluated the definitions and standards including getting help from
outside experts. The product of this further work is a set of new, improved definitions and design
standards. Staff reviewed the updated information with the Planning and Zoning Board at a recent
Study Session. Both the Board and City staff are very comfortable with the new information.
DATE: July L.ITEM NUMBER:
Staff Recommendation
Staff is recommending approval of the proposed amendment to the Harmony Corridor Plan and
Standards and Guidelines for the following reasons:
• A Lifestyle Center at this location will significantly strengthen our community as a center for
retail trade in the region
• The trade area and demographics to support this type of Center clearly points to Fort Collins
as the best location
• A Lifestyle Center will fill a market need that is not currently met elsewhere in Northern
Colorado
• A Lifestyle Center will significantly contribute to Fort Collins' quality of life by providing
more choice in shopping
• A Lifestyle Center will protect and enhance our retail tax base
• The proposed site is currently the best site in our community for a Lifestyle Center from a
market standpoint
• The proposed site is an infill site which is ready for and capable of handling a Lifestyle
Center
• A Lifestyle Center would significantly contribute to the shopping opportunities forresidents
and employees who live and shop in the Harmony Corridor
• The City has adequate development requirements and standards in place to insure
compatibility with surrounding residential neighborhoods
• The inventory of land for employment is adequate to allow for projected job growth
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:
1. Site and Context Maps.
2. Harmony Corridor Plan Amendment Process Schedule.
3. Comments from Neighborhood Meeting, Public Open House Meeting, and Harmony
Corridor Advisory Committee Meeting.
4. Memo from the Downtown Development Authority.
5. Memo on staff response to questions raised at the June 10,2003 City Council Study Session.
6. Final Report of Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis prepared by Economic and
Planning Systems, Inc. dated June 2003.
7. Memo on preliminary traffic considerations analysis, dated June 30, 2003.
8. Summary of Meeting Notes from the June 19, 2003 Planning and Zoning Board Hearing.
9. Chamber of Commerce Resolution.
RESOLUTION 2003-086
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING THE HARMONY CORRIDOR PLAN
TO ALLOW FOR THE POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
OF A LIFESTYLE SHOPPING CENTER IN
THE HARMONY CORRIDOR
WHEREAS, the Harmony Corridor Plan is an element of the Comprehensive Plan of the
City; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the Harmony Corridor Plan should be
amended to allow for the potential development of a Lifestyle Shopping Center in the Harmony
Corridor•, and
WHEREAS, the location at the northwest corner of Harmony Road and Ziegler Road has
been identified as a desirable location for a Lifestyle Shopping Center because the site is an"infill"
site ready and capable of handling the development of a Lifestyle Shopping Center and because the
inventory of land for employment purposes is adequate to allow for projected job growth; and
WHEREAS, a Lifestyle Shopping Center in the City would significantly establish the City
as a center for retail trade in the region and the trade area and demographics of the region support
• the development of a Lifestyle Shopping Center in the City; and
WHEREAS,a Lifestyle Shopping Center would fill a market need that is not currently being
met elsewhere in the region and would contribute to the City's quality of life by providing more
choice in shopping and would protect and enhance the City's retail tax basis; and
WHEREAS, for the foregoing reasons the City Council has determined to amend the
Harmony Corridor Plan to accommodate the potential development of a Lifestyle Shopping Center
in the Harmony Corridor.
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That the City Council hereby finds that the existing Harmony Corridor Plan
is in need of the proposed amendment to allow for the potential development of a Lifestyle Shopping
Center in the Corridor.
Section 2. That the City Council hereby finds that the proposed amendment will promote
the public welfare and will be consistent with the vision,goals, principles and policies of City Plan
and the elements thereof.
•
Section 3. That policy LU-4 of the Harmony Corridor Plan is hereby amended to read
as follows:
LU-4 Locate a broader range of land uses in the areas of the Harmony Corridor
known as Mixed-Use Activity Centers as shown on Map 10.
Mixed-Use Activity Centers are areas where a broader range of land uses may locate.
The Mixed-Use Activity Center permits, in addition to the uses listed in the "Basic
Industrial and Non-Retail Employment Activity Center", a range of retail and
commercial uses to occur in shopping centers. If single family housing is provided,
at least a generally equivalent number of multi-family dwelling units must also be
provided. Neighborhood service centers,community shopping centers,=d regional
shopping centers, and a lifestyle shopping center shall be limited to those locations
shown on Map 10.
The essence of the Mixed-Use Activity Center is a combination of different types of
land uses along with urban design elements that reduce dependence on the private
automobile,encourage the utilization of alternative transportation modes,and ensure
an attractive appearance.
Section 4. That the Harmony Corridor Plan"Land Use Plan Map"(Map 10) be amended
as shown on Exhibit"A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held this 15th day of July,A.D.
2003.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
EXHIBIT!
Harmony Corridor Plan,Pace n Revise Land Use Map«h LifestyleS m_ c_Hatching and
\ j
Z.
• ��2 % o
... . . . `
���,�: � @�. • ; z
Axis \
|{ � ' ,
!d| � A\���
!!o� o ! {
\ } 2|
! 1
h|
. . : V :
/. A
MIR
�
ORDINANCE NO. 103, 2003
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
• AMENDING THE HARMONY CORRIDOR
STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES TO REGULATE AND
GUIDE THE DEVELOPMENT OF A LIFESTYLE SHOPPING
CENTER IN THE HARMONY CORRIDOR
WHEREAS,by Resolution 2003-086 the City Council has amended the Harmony Corridor
Plan to allow for the potential development of a Lifestyle Shopping Center in the Harmony
Corridor; and
WHEREAS,if such Lifestyle Shopping Center is to be developed in the Harmony Corridor,
then the Harmony Corridor Standards and Guidelines are in need of amendment to better regulate
and guide such development; and
WHEREAS,the proposed amendments to the Harmony Corridor Standards and Guidelines
will promote the public welfare and will be consistent with the vision,goals,principles and policies
of City Plan and the elements thereof; and
WHEREAS, the Harmony Corridor Standards and Guidelines provisions pertaining to
"procedure" should be amended to make reference to the Land Use Code rather than to the now
obsolete Land Development Guidance System.
• NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS that certain provisions of the Harmony Corridor Standards and Guidelines are hereby
amended to read as shown on Exhibit"A"attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Introduced and considered favorably on first reading and ordered published this 15th day of
July, A.D. 2003, and to be presented for final passage on the 19th day of August, A.D. 2003.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading this 19th day of August, A.D. 2003.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Exhibit A
Proposed Amendments
to the Harmony Corridor
Standards and Guidelines
• Land Use Map with New Designation
• New Definition of Lifestyle Shopping Center
• New Standards and Guidelines for Lifestyle Shopping Center
• Miscellaneous References and Housekeeping
!
1
LAND USE NIAP-Harmon%Corridor Standards and Guidelines.ogee 55.
Re%isc Land Use Nlao with Lifest%le Sh000ino Center Hatchine and Label:
os
g =: :?;k o W.
` ......IIIIIIII ••�Bll�i�r •... + o y Z
g8 a sm:
=z a � �'��, w3
E
Fe
mU
f•`,r y� r jjpr U
u
gal ^�i
2
• DEFINITION-Harmonv Corridor Standards and Guidelines Page 71
new definition formatted to match other shopping center definitions found on pp 65-71
(the entire definition is new text)
LIFESTYLE SHOPPING CENTER
General Definition
Lifestyle Shopping Center(hereafter sometimes referred to as a"Center")shall
mean a shopping center which is planned and developed as a unit;and intended to
serve consumer demands from the community as a whole and the region,with the
primary offering consisting of a mix of specialty retail stores.
The unique and high-quality site and building design of a Lifestyle Shopping
Center sets it apart from community shopping centers,outlet centers,power
centers,and many other regional shopping centers. Buildings and their entrances
are brought together along a sidewalk network in an open air setting,and the
Center includes a central gathering place for sitting outdoors,meeting,gathering,
and neighborhood and community activities.
As understood and defined by the commercial real estate industry,' a "Lifestyle
Shopping Center" is a relatively new format of shopping center that is not a
typical regional shopping center (e.g., a regional mall) or community shopping
center. Consistent with the majority of the Lifestyle Shopping Centers built in the
United States by year-end 2002, a Harmony Corridor Lifestyle Shopping Center
shall have the following defining characteristics:
'The definition of"Lifestyle Shopping Center"adopted in the Harmony Corridor Plan is
purposefully based on,and tied to,the commercial real estate industry's usage and definition of
the term(a.k.a."Lifestyle Center"). Fort Collins intends to interpret and apply its definition in
ways that do not significantly depart from the definition and usage of the term adopted by the
International Council of Shopping Centers in 2002. In addition,terms of art unique to the
commercial real estate industry used throughout these Lifestyle Shopping Center Provisions,such
as"inline tenants,""community center,"or"specialty retail,".shall be interpreted by the City in a
manner that is consistent with the common meaning and usage of the terms adopted by:the
industry. Because hybrids of lifestyle shopping centers are certain to emerge in the years after the
effective date of this Plan amendment,Fort Collins..intends that the term"Lifestyle Shopping
Center,"as.applied in the Harmony Corridor,shall retain the indu5by`s definition and
understanding of the term as it existed in 2002. pertinent sources and explanations of the
term relied upon by Fort Collins in preparing this definition of"Lifestyle Shopping Center"
include: "Lifestyle Centers::A Defining Moment,")CSC Research Quarterly,Vol.8,No.4
(Winter 2001-2002);"Lifestyle Centers Part 11:The Shopper's Verdict,"/CSC Research
Quarterly,Vol.9,No,4(Winter 2002-2003);and Gunter,:Gregory IL,"Lifestyle Centers,"Urban
Land(Urban Land Institute,Feb.2002).
3
•
Permitted Uses,Number of Uses,and Mix of Uses:
Permitted Uses—General. Subject to the limitations stated in this section below,
permitted uses shall be limited to retail stores,restaurants,grocery stores,
entertainment facilities and theaters. (+)
Retail Stores and Restaurants. A Center shall contain at least two types of uses,
those being retail stores and sit-down restaurants. (+)
Predominance and Mix of Retail Uses. Retail stores are predominate in the mix
of uses. The predominate type of retail stores is specialty retailers such as
apparel,home furnishings accessories,books/music,bathlbody,sporting goods,
and grocery stores.g(o)
The majority of retail stores shall be small or medium-size retail stores,each
containing less than 20,000 square feet of gross floor area. The majority of these
stores will be the kind of retail stores which are typical inline occupants in
regional shopping centers and regional malls. (+)
A Center shall be permitted to have no more than nine larger stores,each
containing between 20,000 and 50,000 square feet of gross floor area. (+)
A Center shall also be,permitted to have no more than two department stores,
each containing less than i 10,000 square feet of ground floor gross floor area. (+)
Large Number of Retail Stores in a Center. The minimum number of individual
retail store uses(with separate entrances)in a Center shall be twenty-five(25)
stores. (+)
Restaurants. A Center shall include at least two full-service(sit-down)
restaurants.2 Limited service restaurantsi may also be included in a Center's mix
of occupants,as well as snack and nonalcoholic beverage bars such as coffee
shops, ice cream/frozen custard/yogurt stores,cookie shops,bagel/doughnut
shops,and similar uses. (+)
Z.A full-service restaurant,as defined by the National Restaurant Association,is an establishment
that provides waiter or waitress service,and patrons pay after they eat.
'A limited-service restaurant,as defined by the National Restaurant Association,is an
establishment that usually does not provide table service,patrons generally order at a cash register
or select food items from a food bar,and pay before they eat.
4
Mixed-Use Dwellings. Mixed-use dwellings shall be permitted in conjunction
with the retail-based mix of uses in a Center. (+)
Other Complementary Uses Permitted As Part of a Center. In addition to the
predominant retail-based mix of uses,a Center shall also be permitted to contain
other subsidiary,complementary uses including offices,financial services,and
clinics,civic or cultural facilities(e.g.,a branch library or museum),health beauty
services(e.g.,day spas and athletic clubs),and uses of-similar character. (+)
Scale:
• A Lifestyle Shopping Center shall be situated on forty (40) to eighty-five
(85)acres. (+)
• A Lifestyle Center shall contain 200,000 to 800,000 square feet of gross
floor area. (+)
5
NEW STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES-Harmonv Corridor Standards and Guidelines.
oaee 50,add a whole new Section 4:(the entire section is new text)
4. LIFESTYLE SHOPPING CENTER
The unique and high-quality site and building design of a Lifestyle Shopping
Center sets it apartfrom most community and regional shopping centers, outlet
centers,and power centers. These standards are intended to ensure that ifa
lifestyle shopping center is developed, it fulfills the purposes of the land use
designation. The purposes include adding a significant and different new element
to the City's retail mix, thus adding to a diverse economy and enhancing the
City's fiscal health.
A. Framework of Streets,Drives,and Walkway Spines
Clear,Continuous Pedestrian Network. Building sites shall be formed by a
system of connecting Walkways,plazas,and courtyards. These pedestrian
frontages shall form a continuous network and a clear,shared focus for building
orientation. Shoppers shall be able to directly access all buildings and central
features and gathering places of the center via the pedestrian network. (+)
Street-Like Drives and Parkin¢Blocks. Off-street surface parking shall be
configured as a combination of 1)street-like parking drives with angled or
parallel parking and tree-lined walkways;and 2)discernable parking blocks
bounded by streets,drives,or walkway spines,with tree-lined sidewalks. (+)
Milli
Street-like drives with convenient
parallel or angled parking along
building frontage can make the
pedestrian areas more active,calm
traffic,and impart a feeling of a town
center street as opposed to a typical
parking lot edge.
6
u
• Shoppers will typically have the potential opportunity to park relatively close to
the front door of any store,and yet also conveniently walk from one store to
another. In other words,the layout of the center is conducive to both the
convenience shopper with a targeted destination,and to the browser shopper with
time to walk around the center or visit more stores. (o)
B. Grouping of Buildings Along Pedestrian Frontage
Non-Linear,Pedestrian-Friendly Site Plan. The site plan for a lifestyle center is
not a simple linear line-up of stores,as often found in a strip shopping center. A
site plan for a Center shall display creativity and flexibility in site layout to
achieve the following objectives:
• Buildings Clustered Along Walkways. Buildings shall be brought together to
form visually interesting pedestrian frontages that feature main entrances to
the buildings. To the maximum extent feasible,remote or independent pad
sites,separated by their own parking lots and service drives,shall be
minimized(single-tenant buildings on pad sites are allowed,but must be
brought together along pedestrian frontages in accordance with this standard).
• Multiple Buildings, The site plan shall create multiple corner(end-cap)sites,
by housing the Center's retail stores in more than one primary multi-store
building.(this does not include the separate,single-occupant buildings on pad
• sites,which are often occupied by freestanding restaurants or theatres). (+)
C. Very High Architectural Program,Level of Finish and Detail
Variation and Quality. The architectural program for a lifestyle center shall
emphasize the individuality and unique storefront design of most of the stores in a
Center,giving the impression of a place built over time. The program shall
include varied building heights—often used as a means to differentiate individual
stores;high quality building materials(e.g.,natural or synthetic stone,brick,
tinted and textured concrete masonry units,stucco,high quality precast and
prestressed architectural concrete,water-managed EIFS,woodwork,architectural
metals,glass); and architectural lighting. (+)
Two examples of high quality
architecture setting the standard for
_ overall design of a Lifestyle Shopping
rt1 Center.
_ ea 7
Mixed Use Buildings, Lifestyle Shopping Centers often include mixed-use
dwellings and other multi-story buildings to add vitality to the center,add drama
and interest to the buildings,and reveal and capitalize on hidden markets for
office and residential products uncommon in suburban markets. (o)
o t� IN
i
Examples of mixed use buildings integrated into
Lifestyle Shopping Center settings,.along with i
other positive elements such as streets and street-'Osi 1
like drives with paddng that lead into or through
s
the Centers.
I
f%
I
1
8
• D. Very High Degree of Finish in Hardscape and Landscaping
Relatively Greater Amount of Landscaping and Pedestrian Enhancements.
A Center typically incorporates a significant amount of landscaping,community
amenities,and pedestrian enhancements that result in common areas considerably
more lavish than similar areas found in typical community and regional shopping
centers. (o)
4
Raised planters,sculptum,furnishings,paving,and plantings are all designed,built,and maintained with
a high degree of attention and quality.
• Landscaping. A Center shall incorporate substantial amounts of on-site
landscaping that exceed the minimum landscaping requirements of the Land Use
Code. On-site landscaping shall include landscaping along all walkways or
integrated into the walkway space with tree wells and raised planters; and in
conjunction with central features and gathering places,and both around and
within surface parking areas In addition to such permanent on-site landscaping,a
substantial amount of seasonal plantings(e.g.,flowers in raised architectural
planters and containers)shall be incorporated in order to provide color and variety
to the grounds and enhance the pedestrian/shopper experience. (+)
Xeriscape Design Principles/Regional Character Landscaping should be
developed to express xeriscapeprinciples and characteristics appropriate to the
North Front Range(this may include relatively lush plantings requiring significant
watering, such as flower beds and lawns,in appropriate high-use areas). (o)
Pedestrian Amenities and Enhancements. A Center shall,to the maximum extent
feasible,incorporate the following features to ensure a high level of ambience for
shoppers:
9
• Very wide(8 to 15-foot clear)sidewalks,particularly adjacent to buildings,
Incorporation of quality pavers and enhanced concrete treatments into
pedestrian areas,
• Street furnishings(e.g.benches and trash receptacles)
• Pedestrian-scale lighting along walkways and access drives
• Outdoor service or seating areas
• Gardens,container flowers,and other supplementary landscaping
• Fountains and other water features
• Sculpture,murals,and other public art
• Overhead weather protection elements(e.g. arcades,canopies,awnings,
umbrellas over seating,and double entries for stores)
• Full-time security during the center's operating hours (+)
E. Central Feature or Gathering Place
A Center shall contain facilities that establish a focus for the Center and that can
also serve as a focal point for neighborhood and community activities„gatherings
and meetings,and passive recreation. Such facilities shall include a pedestrian
plaza,courtyard,or small park,containing at least 6,000 square feet,with such
features as seating,an information kiosk,a water feature,a clock tower,special
plantings,an outdoor playground area,a gazebo,an amphitheatre or performance
stage,or other similar features and amenities. Alternatively,this standaard may be
met by another such deliberately shaped area and/or a focal feature or amenity
that,in the judgment of the decision maker,adequately establishes a community
gathering space or facility and a focus for the Center. (+)
Such facilities shall be highly visible,secure settings formed by the framework of
streets,drives and walkway spines,with direct linkage and visibility to and from
primary buildings within the Center. (+)
Any such facilities shall be constructed of materials that are equal to or better than
the principal materials of the building and landscape_ (+)
wux
fF x �'sa
{
1
Example of a multi-purpose central feature/gathering place with landscape and hardscape
elements.
10
• MISCELLANEOUS-Harmonv Corridor Standards and Guidelines.Title Pam
add date of this update:
HARMONY
CORRIDOR
Standards and Guidelines
•
Updated
March 1995
11
July 2003
MISCELLANEOUS-Harmonv Corridor Standards and Guidelines,Table of Contents,
housekeepine to simplify the heading for Shopping Centers:
TABLE OF CONTENTS
HARMONY OAKS CONCEPT.....................................................I
PROCEDURES........................................................................3
STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES................................................5
HARMONY ROAD SETBACK.............................................6
MEANDERING SIDEWALK................................................8
GRADING......................................................................8
WATER TRANSMISSION MAIN........................................10
PLANT PALETTES.........................................................I I
TREES/SHRUBS.............................................................14
W ILDFLOWERS/TURF....................................................16
COLLECTOR/ARTERIAL STREETS.....................................20
PLANTING SPECIFICATIONS...........................................24
MAINTENANCE.............................................................25
RETAINING WALLS.......................................................26
FENCING......................................................................28
LIGHTING....................................................................29
BOARDWALK DRIVE TO COLLEGE AVENUE...... ...... .......30
LOCAL AND COLLECTOR STREETS.................................32
LOCAL/COLLECTOR PLANT PALETTE..............................33
MEDIAN PLANTING.......................................................34
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN..............................................35
PARKING AND SERVICE AREAS.......................................35
I Deleted:NEIGHBORHOOD
SHOPPING CENTERS ..... .... ........................ . ...37 CONVENIENCE SHOPPING
CENTERS.-
LAND USE AND LOCATIONAL I NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE
STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES..............................51 CENTERS.COMMUNITY¶
SHOPPING CENTERS AND
j FREESTANDINGI
APPENDIX .........................................................................57 l RETAIL DEVELOPMENT
PLANT PALETTE SUMMARY
APPENDIXB..........................................................................63
SHOPPING CENTER DEFINITIONS
12
MISCELLANEOUS - Harmom Corridor Standards and Guidelines oaoe 3 ho sekeeoin
revision to refer to Land Use Code instead of LDGS:
PROCEDURE
The following standards and guidelines are intended to be used by developers
proposing projects in the Harmony Corridor and by the City staff and the
Planning o.,dZoningBeaf&-Decision Maker in their Land Use Code review
process. These standards and guidelines apply enly to pFejeets leeated in the
Halm fty r .der h' t. _ _ _a a' t. eFiteria ifis
AND
DEVELOPMENT GUIDANCE SYSTEM as Platined Unit Devele��
subjee t te !be "Site Plan Supplemental Review"previsiaiis in Chaptef 29, Adliele
dII, Divisien 4, Subdivision G e€ the Code. "Standards" denoted by (+) are
mandatory. "Guidelines" denoted by (o) are not mandatory, but are provided in
order to further educate planners, design consultants, developers and City staff
about the intent of the Harmony Corridor Plan. The guidelines describe a variety
of ways that individual projects can contribute to the Harmony Corridor Plan. In
addition, the guidelines will be used by City staff to guide the development of
public sector projects in the corridor.
The Planning and Zoning Board is empowered to grant veriaxees modifications to
the mandatory(+)standards under the following circumstances:
1. The strict application of the standard would result in peculiar and
exceptional practical difficulties or exceptional and undue hardship
upon the owner of the affected property;
2. The alternative plan, as submitted, will protect the public interest
advanced by the standard for which the variance is requested equally
well or better than would compliance with such standard; and
3. In either of the foregoing circumstances, the variance may be granted
without substantial detriment to the public good.
13
MISCELLANEOUS-Harmony Corridor Standards and Guidelines,Paee 37,housekeeping
to simplify/clarify the heading for Shopping Centers:
RETAIL ]DEVELOPMENT;
r
NEIGHBORHOOD CONVENIENCE
SHOPPING CENTERS.
CENTERS;NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE and
COMMUNITY SHOPPING GENTERc SHOPPING CENTERS
Ideally, retail development adds vitality- and convenience to neighborhoods and
work places without introducing negative impacts that overwhelm the
surroundings. Achieving this in the Harmony Corridor is the purpose of these
Standards and Guidelines.
Design criteria cannot predict the unique potential and constraints for each site
and building. Thus, the following Standards and Guidelines are intended to
establish a direction and a basic level of quality for compatibility with
neighborhoods.
It is the City's hope that the mandaimy standards do not limit creativity or reduce
a potentially better design, created by skillful and sensitive architects and land
planners, to a level of minimum compliance.
This section should encourage those it are responsible for new development to
thoroughly consider the particular situation, including the surrounding context,
so that each neiv dei elopment complements the positive and unique character of
its neighborhood and the community.
This section focuses on three areas: (1) the function of buildings in defining a
neighborhood and the community; (2) site relationships to surrounding
neighborhoods and mitigation of negative impacts; and(3)the mixing of uses.
Fort Collins already has a development review system that promotes solutions to
these general issues on a city-wide basis. The purpose of these Standards and
Guidelines is to augment those existing criteria with more specific interpretations
that apply to the Harmony Corridor.
• See Appendix B f u-definitions of these Shopping Centers.
14
MISCELLANEOUS- Harmony Corridor Standards and Guidelines Page 38 housekeeping
to add reference to a new Section 4:
ORGANIZATION OF THIS SECTION
1. BUILDINGS
A. Massing,Orientation,and Configuration on Site
B. Image, Detail Features, Fenestration,Entrances,Color and Materials
2. SITE RELATIONSHIP TO SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS AND
MITIGATION OF ADVERSE IMPACTS
A. Access and Circulation
B. Screening and Buffering of Service, Delivery and Loading Functions
C. Lighting
3. MIXED LAND USES
4: LIFESTYLE SHOPPING CENTERS
• A. Framework of Streets,Drives,and Walkway Spines
B. Grouping of Buildings Along Pedestrian Frontage
C. Very High Architectural Program,Level of Finish and Detail
D. Very High Degree of Finish in Hardscape and Landscaping
E. Central Feature or Gathering Place
15
MISCELLANEOUS-Harmony Corridor Standards and Guidelines,oaee 51,housekeeuine
for user-friendly reference:
LAND USE AND LOCATIONAL
STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES
The Harmony Corridor offers an opportunity for creating a major business and
industrial center in northern Colorado due to its desirable location, accessibility,
available infrastructure and land ownership pattern. Attracting desirable
industries and businesses into the community, and in particular the Harmony
Corridor, achieves an important public propose because it promotes primary and
secondary jobs and generally enhances the local economy.
The focus offuture development activity is planned to take place in two types of
major "activity centers" — the Basic Industrial and Non-Retail Employment
Activity Center and the Mixed-Use Activity Center. Basic Industrial and Non-
Retail Employment Activity Center are locations where either industrial uses,
and/or office or institutional type land uses are permitted to locate in planned
office (or business)park settings. Base industries are firms that produce goods
and services which are produced for export outside of the city, and thereby import
income into the city. Mixed-Use Activity Centers permit a broader range of uses
including shopping centers. The distribution of these activity centers in the
corridor is shown on the Land Use Map. Different types of shopping centers are
defined in Appendix B.
The essence of both types of activity centers is a combination of different types of
land uses along with urban design elements that reduce the dependence on the
private automobile, encourage the utilization of alternative transportation modes,
and ensure an attractive appearance.
16
• Land Use Code Article 5 Definition to Match Others in Article 5:
Lifestyle Shopping Center shall mean a shopping center which is planned and
developed as a unit, and intended to serve consumer demands from the
community as a whole and the region,with primary offerings of specialty retailers
such as apparel, home furnishings/accessories, books/music, bath/body, sporting
goods, and grocery stores. In addition, the center offers sit-down restaurants,
coffee shops, ice cream parlors, entertainment facilities and theatres, office uses,
and uses of similar character. Such a center is designed with architectural
distinction, individual identity for each store, and buildings which are brought
together along a sidewalk network in an open air setting, with a small park or
plaza,and a high level of amenity in landscaping and urban furnishings.
17
ORDINANCE NO. 104, 2003
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING THE LAND USE CODE TO ALLOW
FOR THE POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF A
LIFESTYLE SHOPPING CENTER IN
THE HARMONY CORRIDOR
WHEREAS, by Resolution 2003-086, the Council of the City of Fort Collins amended the
Harmony Corridor Plan to allow for the potential development of a Lifestyle Shopping Center in
the Harmony Corridor; and
WHEREAS, by Ordinance No. 103, 2003, the Council amended the Harmony Corridor
Standards and Guidelines to regulate and guide the development of any such Lifestyle Shopping
Center; and
WHEREAS,the Council has further determined that the Land Use Code should be amended
to add a definition of the term"Lifestyle Shopping Center" and to add such a Center as a permitted
use in the Harmony Corridor Zone District.
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS that the Land Use Code of the City be amended as follows:
• Section 1. That Section 4.21(B)(3)(c) is hereby amended by the addition of anew
subparagraph nine to read as follows and by renumbering all subsequent subparagraphs:
9. Lifestyle Shopping Center as defined/described in the Harmony
Corridor Plan.
910. Regional shopping centers as defined/described in the Harmony
Corridor Plan.
i811. Convention and conference center.
Section 2. That Section 5.1.2 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition
of a new definition of"Lifestyle Shopping Center" to read as follows:
Lifestyle Shopping Center shall mean a shopping center which is planned and
developed as a unit, and intended to serve consumer demands from the community
as a whole and the region, with primary offerings of specialty retailers such as
apparel,home fumishings/accessories,books/music,bath/body,sporting goods,and
grocery stores,and which offers sit-down restaurants,coffee shops,ice cream parlors,
entertainment facilities and theatres, office uses, and/or uses of similar character.
Such a center is designed with architectural distinction, individual identity for each
store,and buildings which are brought together along a sidewalk network in an open
air setting,with a small park or plaza,and a high level of amenity in landscaping and
urban furnishings.
Introduced and considered favorably on first reading and ordered published this 15th day
of July, A.D. 2003, and to be presented for final passage on the 19th day of August, A.D. 2003.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading this 19th day of August, A.D. 2003.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
• • • • : • •
r
t� • • • • L.____. .. .
a ,y
I
, s
•9
1-17.
• � 11
D
� f EHORSETOOTH RD
fl
1.: m
e
1 --F HARMONY RD- -
_ ' • ' Tip ;;1 II
m
.`'.. RECHTER RD _ -•_m;
� T _
O
0 Attachment 2
Revised 5-8.2003
Harmony Corridor Amendment Process 1i
Project Schedule (Apr-Jul, 2003) City of Fort Collins
Activity Name Apr'03 May'03 Jun'03 Jul '03
30 6 1 13 1 20 1 27 4 11 18 1 25 1 8 15 1 22 29 6
Market Analysis:
Task 1:Assessment of Existing Data
Task 2:Analysis of Retail Impacts O Draft Report
Task3:Analysis of Fiscal Impacts
Task 4:Analysis of E Land Inventory
Task 5:Recommendation Report O Final Report
Harmony Corridor Plan:
Task 1:Identify Text Plan Amendments
Harmony C.Standards/Guidelines:
Task 2:Identify Text Plan Amendments
Task 3:Identify Graphic Amendments
Traffic Impact Analysis
Presentation Materials:
Task 1:Develop Analysis GIS Maps
Task 2:Develop Presentation Boards
Task 3:Develop PP Slide Presentation 00011
..
Events/Meetings:
Chamber of Commerce (5/9/03) ♦ ♦ LAC (6/20/03)
DDAIDBA DDA (5/1/03) ♦ ♦ DBA(5/14/03) ♦ DDA/DBA (6/27/03)
Individual Business Meetings
Neighborhood Meetings English Ranch/HC Mobile HP ♦ 6-2-03)
Boards/Commissions Neighborhood Mtg.
Public Open House Meeting P & Z Worksessions ♦ Open House(6/4/03)
Planning and Zoning Board 4/11/03) (4/25/03) 5/16/03) N 5/30/03) ■ 6/13/03) P &Z Hearing (6/19/03)
City Council
CC Study Session (6/10/03) CC Hearing (7/15/03)
30 6 13 20 27 4 11 18 1 25 1 8 15 22 1 29 6
Attachment 3
• Harmony Corridor Plan Amendment
Neighborhood Meeting Summary
Held on June 2, 2003 at Linton Elementary School
Approximate attendance: 100 neighbors and business representatives
After a staff presentation, the public asked questions or commented on the topic. In
addition, some people forwarded comment cards included below.
The number one theme staff heard was the concern of traffic impacts on the English
Ranch subdivision, in particular the potential connection of Corbett Drive to Edmonds
Street. Most neighbors expressed an opinion that this connection would invite cut-
through traffic, and thus should not go through. Other traffic issues included traffic
calming options on Kingsley Drive and Paddington Drive, access on to Ziegler, noise and
congestion on Ziegler, and safety.
Staff responded that while the existing Master Street Plan, Approved LSI and English
Rangh ODP's show the Collector Street connection between Corbett Drive and Edmonds,
details of this future street will not be completed until a project development is submitted
and a Traffic Impact Assessment is finalized. Staff and the developer are aware of this
. primary concern and would work with the neighborhood to identify potential solutions to
the traffic impacts if and when an actual development plan is submitted.
Traffic Related Comments:
As a mother of 7 I carefully chose a quiet neighborhood where my children are safe to
play in the cul-de-sac. If I wanted this type of shopping in my neighborhood I would
have moved to Denver. The difference in traffic type between professionals and
young shoppers will make it no longer safe for my children to play outside. Please
vote no for our families!
■ Is Harmony Road able to handle the projected traffic from this type of Center?
• Are there opportunities to slow down traffic on Ziegler Road such as adding a traffic
signal at Paddington?
I prefer side street access to The Life Style Mall. There would be way too much traffic on Ziegler an
Harmony if there were not other choices. Side Streets are definitely needed. Would you hire local
firms to "create" this mall? Will larger CO-Saks, Pottery Barn donate back to the Community?
Traffic mitigation in English Ranch, Paddington, Sunstone and Stonehaven to Kingsley Drive.
Expansion of Ziegler Road to 4 lanes and harmony to 6 lanes when will this happen in respect to this
development?
Transportation Study-- will it be done while school is in session to get accuracy regarding children
crossing Kingsley? It took 4 years for the City to mark crosswalk at City. It took 5 years to add spee
bumps. It took 6 years to get fluorescent pedestrian crossing signs.
•
• Traffic is the BIG problem. It is a problem already. No cut through to Edmonds is necessary or
wanted. Ziegler&Paddington is already very dangerous. People on Ziegler headed north pass le
turning vehicles in the bike lane all of the time. I have seen many car to bike near misses.
■ I am fine with the shopping center as long as the traffic does not go thru my neighborhood. DO NOT
connect Edmunds thru or you will have one angry community on your hands.
• I live in Woodland Park Subdivision. It is already hard to get on to Ziegler from Grand Teton. What
are the plans to make sure residents of Woodland park won't be penalized even more?
■ Don't put Edmunds through. Traffic is bad enough along Sunstone Drive. You argue that the
Edmunds/Corbett connector was always the plan, but you are changing the plan. We don't want eagt
shoppers racing through our neighborhoods.
■ Please consider lining up the LSI-Ziegler exit with the stoplight at Zeigler/HP. It already is hard
turning left (go North)onto Zeigler in the PM rush. The traffic light at N HP entrance will make it
worse with bursts of traffic.
• As a mother of 7 I carefully chose a quiet neighborhood where my children are safe to play in the cul-
de-sac. If I wanted this type of shopping in my neighborhood I would have moved to Denver. The
difference in traffic type between professionals and young shoppers will make it no longer safe for in
children to play outside. Please vote no for our families!
• In regards to the Harmony Corridor. I am concerned about the high increase in traffic - especially sins
there are 2 school on Ziegler& Corbet with student drivers.
■ I live on Rock Creek directly across from the new high school and approx. 50 yards from Ziegler I
don't need any more traffic & especially the widening on Ziegler rd. I am against Harmony Corridor.
Other comments heard by staff included a range of issues from land use, urban design, types of retailers
proposed and provisions of original Harmony Corridor Plan.
General Comments:
■ How will the proposed Center effect our property values? Staff responded that information to date
suggests property values may increase. The quality of design usually plays a big part in an appraisal
including attractive architecture, type of tenants, landscaping and other site amenities.
What type of tenant mix will this Center have?
• What opportunities to buffer this retail center from adjoining neighborhoods? Staff explained that tht
southern portion of the property is planned for the center, leaving approximately 30-50 acres for
transitional uses such as office, light industrial and multi-family residential. In addition,other
opportunities to buffer the commercial from existing residential include landscaping, parking areas,
and regional detention.
■ What happens of this developer goes away?
Support for Lifestyle Center:
Go for it! We need it desperately---
• We need this project. Don't loose out to Loveland again!!!
Yes,we do want a life style center.
What are the plans for helping to save the wildlife in the area?, foxes, etc.. I like the idea! But need
more assurance, for traffic and relocating the animals in the area.
Harmony Corridor Plan Amendment Page 2
Neighborhood Meeting (6-2-03) -
Harmony Corridor Plan Amendment
Public Open House Summary
Held on June 4, 2003 at the Hampton Inn
Approximate attendance: 70 citizens
After a staff presentation, the public posed questions and comments for discussion by the whole
group.
Topics:
• Trade off loss of employment-designated land if the center happens.
• Effect on property values.
• Cut-through traffic via Edmonds connection in the English Ranch subdivision.
• Pressure to displace Mobile Home Park.
• Land uses on property between the center and adjacent residential uses.
• Sales tax revenues.
• What if center gets built, or partly built, and then fails.
• Pay of retail employees and affordable housing.
• City standards for lighting to avoid spillover.
Comment Cards:
• • I look forward to upscale shopping here in the northern Colorado area, specifically Fort
Collins. Our shopping opportunities are very poor. Foothills Mall is seriously lacking and
Greeley, Loveland, Windsor, and Cheyenne offer NO relief. Please develop this lifestyle
center and ALL others in the works. Linda Foutch, 4010 Stoneway Court.
• We do not want the light pollution that will occur, the increased traffic, the increased noise,
or the increased foot traffic that will occur in our relatively quiet neighborhood. This is a
short-sighted alternative economically to the future office buildings that could be put there
and which would provide more jobs and tax revenue when the economy improves. Susan
Kalman, 2938 Paddington.
• Build a roundabout at Horsetooth/Zeigler and Ziegler/Entrance.
• I think this is a great idea and support it whole heartily! Don't let the vocal minority of"no
growther" get you down. John Davis 2625 Newgate Court.
• This amendment needs to occur to continue to receive tax revenues from retail-residents are
all leaving for Flatirons Crossing.
• Sounds like a great concept with sound planning. I welcome the addition of your
development to my neighborhood! Robert Schutzius, 377-1225 home; 679-3991 work.
Comments received via email:
• There are several folks in our neighborhood that would like to voice our support for
amending the Harmony Corridor Plan. Is the meeting on June 191h the correct time and place
. to do this or is it the one in July? Please let us know where and when so we can attend.
Harmony Corridor Plan Amendment Page 1
Public Open House (6-4-03)
• Harmony Corridor Plait Amendment
1995 Harmony Corridor Advisory Committee
Notes from meeting held on June 16, 2003
Attendance:Roberta Martin, Mike Dolan,Jan Cottier, Scott Mason,Bill Tiley,Al Koppel, Les Kaplan,Bill
Strickfaden,Hal Swope,Dave Everitt,Mike Bello
Summary of Topics Discussed:
• Why staff is recommending this.
• Why limit retail to a Lifestyle Center only, vs other retail.
• Tax consequences and impacts to existing mall.
• Land needed for employment-does this hurt our prospects for large employers? As a City, plan for
jobs as well as retail. It's easy to look at needs right now,but do we lose the "next HP"in the
future? Are the 400-some acres left in H Corridor practical for another major employer?
• The Vision of the plan was deliberate and intentional,with a focus on primary jobs. Does this
change the vision? Does it fit the vision? We allowed a lot of retail in the earlier plan amendment—
should we allow more now?
• There's been a lot of quick activity on this site—if someone ID'ed another site and could pull it off
quicker...could we re-designate?
• Retail results from rooftops, which result from jobs. Loss of rooftops is leading to retail going
elsewhere. Are we focusing on the right issue?
• Sales tax vs. use tax comparisons.
• • This belongs in Fort Collins, Harmony/I-25 interchange can handle traffic, if we don't go, we lose it
to somebody else who will bulldoze it through, we'll lose tax and spin-off dollars. Not a problem
with plan change—8-year old plan. Respond to change. Adding this to the retail mix improves Fort
Collins' image. Strengthen Fort Collins as a destination.
• Prospect/1-25 newspaper articles.
• What's changed?—New retail format fills niche & void, new regional competition situation, lagging
sales tax for the first time in history. H.C. built out without filling this niche as was hoped in the
Regional Shopping Center designation.
• Fairness—why not allow ANY owner to sell to a Lifestyle Center developer,at any time?
• How do the proposed criteria enforce the ideas? Can this really be upscale? What if tenants don't
come here, can a developer switch to Costco, WalMart etc? Especially if we "lose the race"and this
developer sells it to another developer who is not a Lifestyle Center developer. Is this another
reason for a lapse period on the designation?
• Possibility of alternative locations. IF this proceeds,acknowledge this is not the ONLY site, i.e.
don't close the doors on other sites if this falls through. (If Fort Collins loses the race to Loveland
it may be moot since only one center will locate in No. Co.) But still then the question becomes
whether this designation locks up the NEXT unforeseen format in retailing. Put a lapse period on
the designation? (Use it or lose it?)
• What ELSE should staff be doing for fiscal health long term, i.e. beef up downtown and the
mall...we may be shooting ourselves in the foot by not expanding the UGA—counter intuitive
control future by limiting land we control. why decide NOT to have more control over the
development that will occur?-Political issue. Warning about rooftops moving south, a center dying
in the future as that happens.
Harmony Corridor Plan Amendment Page 1
CAC Meeting (6-16-03)
Attachment 4
DOWNTOWN
DEVELOPMENT
'AIM AUTHORITY
June 17, 2003
Mr. Mikal Torgerson, Chair
Members of the Board
City of Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board
300 LaPorte Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80521
Dear Mr. Torgerson and Members of the Planning and Zoning Board:
The City of Fort Collins Planning Department asked the Downtown Development
Authority to write you regarding the lifestyle center being proposed for southeast quarter
of the City.
Planning staff presented this project to the DDA Board of Directors at its regular May
meeting as an information-only item. The Board also had the opportunity to review the
"Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis" written by Economic & Planning Systems,
Inc.
The Board recognizes the inevitability of a lifestyle center in Northern Colorado. It
suggested that downtown might better capitalize on the impact such a center would have
if it were to be located in Fort Collins rather than Windsor or Loveland. It specifically
suggested the Harmony Road developers be approached to assist in business recruitment
for downtown and to fund the cost of two or three rubber-wheeled trolleys connecting
downtown, major City hotels, CSU,and Foothills Fashion Mall with the lifestyle center.
These suggestions have been passed on to the developers.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
SinFerely,
Chi Stei r
Executive Director
•
19 Old Town Square Suite 230 • Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 • tek 970.494.2020 fax.,970.484.2069
4aCommunity Planning and Environmental Services Attachment 5
Advance Planning Department
City of Fort Collins
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 26, 2003
TO: Mayor Ray Martinez and City Council
THRU: John Fischbach, City Manager`Ubi�
FROM: Pete Wray, City Planner, r
Greg Byrne, Director of CPES u
Joe Frank, Advance Planning D`
RE: Harmony Corridor Plan Amen en Staff Response to Council
Questions during the June 10, 2003 Study Session
• This Memo represents staff responses to questions raised by Council members during the
June 10 Study Session relating to the Harmony Corridor Plan Amendment Item.
1. How will the proposed Lifestyle Center affect Affordable Housing within
Fort Collins?
Retail and service developments alone, on average pay much less and generate more low
income households than office/high-tech jobs, creating a greater demand for affordable
housing. But, in fact, all development (residential and non-residential) has relative
impacts on the demand for affordable housing. Over the next 25 years, the City is
planning for over 28,725 new households, and over 50,000 new jobs (industrial, office
and retail jobs) being added to the Fort Collins economy. The City has and will continue
to anticipate the need for affordable housing resulting from new job and household
formation. The jobs that will be generated at the Harmony/Ziegler site are part of this
future job inventory and do not alter current forecasts of the need for affordable housing
in the community. The City is in the process of updating its 10-year plan for affordable
housing that will result in new/updated policies and strategies for encouraging the
production of affordable housing throughout the community for very low-income
families.
. We can estimate the affordable housing demand from new development. We consider
the "multiplier effect; e.g. employment-type jobs tend to create 2.5 service/retail jobs,
281 North College Avenue • P.O.Box 580 • Fort Collins,CO 80522-0580 • (970)221-6376
FAX(970)224-6111 • TDD(970)224-6002 • E-mail:aplanriing@fcgov.com
while a retail job would create an additional 1.5 service/retail jobs, according to the
Colorado Division of Local Government. At full development(90 acres), an office or
business park is expected to generate 2,200 more retail/service jobs community-wide than
a lifestyle center.
Should the community be concerned about affordable housing? Yes and both figures
begin to demonstrate the need to continue community-wide approaches and new region-
wide answers to the inevitable demand for affordable housing.
2. The market Analysis focused on potential revenues. Are there any public
costs associated with the Lifestyle Center?
Initial and on-going costs to the City to provide service to the Lifestyle Center will be
minimal. Capital Improvement Expansion fees, administrative fees, storm water utility
fees, and other fees and charges, have been created to ensure that new growth and
development in the city bear a proportionate share of the costs of capital expenditures and
maintenance.
The attached cost matrix,which breaks down the capital and operation costs for affected
City services, identifies that the development will provide infrastructure improvements
and fees necessary to offset the impact to such services.
3. Can we get a copy of the Harmony Corridor Plan to compare proposed
amendment language?
Staff will distribute a copy of the Harmony Corridor Plan and Harmony Corridor
Standards and Guidelines by separate cover.
4. With an anticipated development submittal if the Plan Amendments are
approved, what is the review process and opportunities for public input?
The review process for a Lifestyle Center on the LSI site will involve combining an
amendment of the LSI Overall Development Plan(ODP)with a Project Development
Plan (PDP) application. This consolidated development application will be reviewed,
considered and decided upon by the Planning and Zoning Board. Opportunities for
public input throughout the review process include neighborhood meetings, and public
hearing with the Planning and Zoning Board (See attached Development Review
Process).
List of Attachments:
1. Harmony Corridor Lifestyle Center Evaluation Cost Matrix, dated June 18, 2003.
2. Development Review Process—Lifestyle Center, dated June 20, 2003.
City Council Memo Page 2
Harmony Corridor Lifest0enter Evaluation Jun 003
Costs Matrix
Service Area Service How is Development Impact to Service o '�� Se "ce';;. ;� Comments
Calculated? :
a o it,and,
Transportation Arterial Compare existing conditions to adopted standards, and , , .. 28K/ a Developer pays for necessary
P P Y
Streets evaluate upgrades necessary to bring abutting Arterial , road/intersection
streets, Harmony and Ziegler Roads, up to acceptable ' s ;' improvements. Maintenance
operational standards. yc° and repair costs assumed by
§' Developer for 5 years, after
which Pavement Management
Program covers costs.
Collector Development must construct the collector street F Developer pays cost equal to
Streets consistent with the Master Street Plan and is eligible local street construction; City
for oversizing funds. s %s pays oversizing. O &M costs
fu x rw- as above.
Street Maintain roadways consistent with established ai See information above under
Maintenance practices. r each street classification
Health and Specific inspection for violations of health and safety A' 0 Existing staff adequate
Safety Code codes.
CPES Building Level of increased workload to review development r <' Existing staff adequate
Inspection plans. '
,mac
Utilities Water Provide water service per on established standards Service lines and system
:.? .ttir011 f�
improvements necessary to serve
the property are the
s �, F res nnqihjhtynfthPdPuP1oper
Wastewater Provide sanitary service per adopted standards are Service lines and system
improvements necessary to serve
the property are the
responsibility of the developer
1
Lifesnde Center.S'enwe/mpnet.dor
Service Area Service How is Development Impact to Service 4 s ,Service •-�,.r Comments
Calculated?
Light and Provide service per adopted standards `" OM cosa we Service lines and system
Power ski t - " improvements necessary to serve
and ` the property are the
responsibility of the developer
, .., r :_
Stormwater On-site improvements must meet established On-site detention necessary to
standards and be consistent with the Stormwater p jya serve the property are the
Master Plan. .: u responsibility of the developer.
Proposed regional stormwater
s #pryt detention pond to be constructed
h independent of the Lifestyle
"' - Center
PFA Fire Development must be constructed per the Uniform = * Any costs recovered through
Fire Code. fire capital expansion fee
°_27_w assessed to development
Police Police Evaluate based on projected increase in service The development will have a
population,particularly temporary populations private security force to help
residing outside Fort.Collins travelling to the Center, ;' sr offset the increase in City
anticipated increase in Calls for Service, and need for police service demand.
services to address increased vehicle traffic. Additional capital costs
covered by police capital
s expansion fee assessed to
development
Licensing City licenses Some additional costs for licensing of services such as OX Existing staff adequate
Revenue liquor licenses.
Summary of $ Pavement Management
Financial Program responsible for street
Impacts x~ maintenance after warranty
" 6 period has ended. Capital and
operation and maintenance
c costs for other services will be
covered through capital
expansion or other fees.
2
Lifestyle Center Se-•'^e hnporl.dor
i
Assumes: 9 ,
-The following services are unlikely to be affected by demands caused by the Lifestyle Center:
• Parks
• Library
• Performing Arts
• Cultural Services
• Recreation Services
• Golf
• Transportation Planning, TDM
• General Administration(ELJ)
3
Lifesgde Center Semice Lmpncl.doc
Development Review Process- Lifestyle Center
June 20, 2003
The review process for a Lifestyle Center on the LSI site will involve combining an
amendment of the LSI Overall Development Plan(ODP)with a Project Development
Plan (PDP) application. This consolidated development application will be reviewed,
considered and decided upon by the Planning and Zoning Board.
Step I- Conceptual Review/Pre-Application Meetings
The Conceptual Review meeting gives the applicant an opportunity to discuss with City
staff and other agencies, the requirements, standards and procedures that will apply to the
development. Major problems can be identified and solved during this conceptual stage.
After receipt of a concept plan, and review by City staff, written comments are provided
to the applicant to inform them and assist in preparation of a development application.
Some issues will likely require the scheduling of additional pre-application meetings to
help address specific areas of concern or provide clarification.
Step 2- Neighborhood Meetings
Prior to the formal development application submittal, neighborhood meetings will be
held with citizens most directly impacted by the proposal. All property owners within a
1,000-foot radius of the property will be notified of such meetings. The purpose of the
neighborhood meeting is for the conceptual plans to be presented to citizens in order to
identify, list and discuss issues, and to seek solutions to issues that are raised.
Neighborhood meetings are held during the conceptual planning stage of the proposal so
that neighborhoods may give input before time and effort has been expended by the
applicant to submit a formal development application to the City. One neighborhood
meeting is customary; however, staff will require that additional meetings be held given
the size and potential impact of the Lifestyle Center. Meetings will involve citizens of
the area neighborhoods, the applicant and their representatives, and the City staff.
The City staff will prepare a summary of neighborhood meeting minutes. The written
summary will be included in the staff report provided to the Planning and Zoning Board
as part of the public record.
Step 3 -Development Application Submittal
The applicant will submit the consolidated ODP/PDP development application based on
established submittal requirements. The submittal must include all information, data,
explanations, analysis, testing, reports, tables, graphics, maps and other documents
• necessary to determine whether the applicable development standards are met. Such
documents will include a detailed Transportation Impact Study(TIS) with all components
as required under the adopted Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS)
and by the City Traffic Engineer. Also submitted with the application are development
review fees based on the adopted fee schedule.
Step 4- Determination of Sufficiency
After receipt of the development application by the Current Planning Department, the
Current Planning Director will determine whether the application is complete and ready
for review. If the submittal is found to be insufficient, all review of the submittal will be
held in abeyance until the submittal is sufficient.
Step 5-Posted Notice
Within 14 days following the submittal of a complete development application, signs 12
square feet in size will be posted on the site. Public notice signs will include information
about the proposal and will be located in manner and at a location that will afford the
greatest visibility to the public.
Step 6-Review of Development Application
After the application is deemed sufficient,the Current Planning Department will assign a
project planner and refer the development application to the appropriate City departments
and review agencies. Once this review is completed to a level where the Planning and
Zoning Board has the requisite level of information to form a decision, the application
will be scheduled for a public hearing.
Step 7- Staff Report
The project planner will be prepare a Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Board
indicating whether, in the opinion of staff,the ODP/PDP application complies with all
applicable standards of the Land Use Code. The Staff Report will be made available for
inspection by the applicant and the public prior to the scheduled public hearing.
Step 8-Public Notice
Public Notice giving the time, date and place of the public hearing will be provided in the
form of a direct mailing and a published notice. Written notice will be mailed to all
property owners within a 1,000-foot radius of the property,representatives of adjacent
bona fide neighborhood groups and homeowner's associations, and all attendees of the
neighborhood meetings, if such individuals are not part of those required to receive
public notice. Written notices are mailed a minimum of 14 days prior to the public
hearing date. Public Notice will also be published in the Coloradoan at least 7 days prior
to the hearing.
Step 9- Planning and Zoning Board Public Hearine
The Planning and Zoning Board will conduct a public hearing, consistent with adopted
conduct and procedures, and approve, approve with conditions, or deny the ODP/PDP
application based on compliance with adopted standards. Any person may appear at the
public hearing and submit evidence, either individually or as a representative of a person
or organization.
Development Review Process—Lifestyle Center Page 2
June 20,2003
• Step 10-Appeal Period
Any party-in-interest aggrieved by the Planning and Zoning Board's action may request
an appeal of the decision if such appeal is filed within 14 days. The appeal would be
heard by the City Council based on the public record of the Planning and Zoning Board
hearing no sooner than thirty days and no greater than sixty days after the date of the
filing of the notice of appeal.
Step 11- Final Plan Review
A final plan may be submitted after approval of the PDP by the Planning and Zoning
Board. The final plan will include the final subdivision plat, development agreement, and
utility plan and require detailed engineering review.
Step 12- Submittal and Recordation of Final Documents
•
Development Review Process—Lifestyle Center Page 3
June 20,2003
Attachment 6
t
&conomic '8,
Planning Systems
Real rutals Emnomi®
9ieglonal E nornice
Public Fuu nce
Land Ux Pbliry
FINAL REPORT
LIFESTYLE CENTER ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
Prepared for:
City of Fort Collins
Prepared by:
Economic&Planning Systems,Inc.
June 2003
EPS#13806
730DENVER17' BERKELEY S .nl: 9 E N T O
730 17i°SO 80 Suite 630 Fax: 303-623-904 Phone: 510-841-9208 Fhone: 916-649-8010
Denver,CO 80202-3511 Fax: 303-623-9049 Fax: 510-841-9208 Fez: 916-649-2070
www.epsys.cann
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
EXECUTIVESUMMARY....................................................................................................................1
ProposedProject..............................................................................................................1
Conclusions......................................................................................................................1
PolicyConsiderations.....................................................................................................3
I. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................4
Lifestyle Center Characteristics.....................................................................................4
ColoradoCenters.............................................................................................................5
LifestyleCenter Proposal...............................................................................................5
II. RETAIL SALES AND EXPENDITURE PATTERNS.................................................................8
Northern Colorado Market............................................................................................8
Trade Area Expenditures and Sales.............................................................................. 9
RegionalCompetition................................................................................................... 11
III. LIFESTYLE CENTER ECONOMIC IMPACTS...................................................................... 13
Fort Collins Lifestyle Center Sales Impacts............................................................... 13
Loveland Lifestyle Center Sales Impacts................................................................... 17
IV. EMPLOYMENT LANDS..................................................................................................... 20
V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................................24
Conclusions....................................................................................................................24
PolicyConsiderations...................................................................................................25
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1 Typical Tenants found in Lifestyle Centers.............................................6
Table 2 Competitive Site Demographics................................................................9
Table 3 Household Total Personal Income(TPI),2002........................................9
Table 4 Citywide Taxable Retail Sales,2002........................................................10
Table 5 Citywide Outflows....................................................................................10
Table6 Citywide Inflows.......................................................................................11
Table 7 Citywide Taxable Retail Sales,2002........................................................ 12
Table 8 Fort Collins Lifestyle Center Net New Sales......................................... 14
Table 9 Fort Collins General Fund Budget,2001 and 2002................................ 16
Table 10 Fort Collins Location:Sales Tax Impacts ............................................... 17
Table 11 Loveland Lifestyle Center Net New Sales.............................................18
Table 12 Loveland Location:Sales Tax Impacts...................................................19
Table 13 Vacant Lands Inventory........................................................................... 20
Table 14 Large Employment Sites Land Potential................................................ 21
Table 15 Jobs Comparison........................................................................................ 22
Table 16 Occupations of Larimer County Residents,1999.................................. 23
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
• EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Fort Collins is considering amending its plans to allow a lifestyle center on
Harmony Road adjacent to LSI Logic. Its proposed plans would allow department store
anchors, in-line retail,as well as other retail uses. As an input to the planning process,
the City requested EPS to conduct an economic impact analysis of the proposed lifestyle
center. The City is concerned about impacts on existing retail,particularly Foothills
Mall,impacts on City sales tax revenue,impacts resulting from the loss of these lands
designated for employment,as well as potential impacts if the lifestyle center opens in
Loveland.
PROPOSED PROJECT
The City has proposed an amendment which would allow several phases of retail
development. However,there are no guarantees that a future developer will be able to
develop as much retail as will be allowed. This analysis therefore evaluates a project
range from 250,000 square feet typical of comparable existing Colorado lifestyle centers
up to 500,000 square feet.
The center will have an open-air configuration and be comprised of national upscale
. apparel and home furnishings stores and upscale national chain restaurants. The project
would also potentially include department anchor stores and other uses. Many of these
stores found in lifestyle centers are not currently in Fort Collins and would potentially
be interested in this market.
CONCLUSIONS
The following points summarize the conclusions of the economic impacts of the
proposed center.
• The proposed project is estimated to generate$1.3 to $2.4 million in additional sales
taxes per year for the City.
If a 250,000 to 500,000 square foot lifestyle center were developed,it would generate
$100 million to$190 million a year in retail sales. However,only a portion of total sales
would be net new sales to the City with the remainder the result of transfers from
existing retail stores. A total of$42.5 to$80.8 million is estimated to represent net new
sales to the City. The City would collect an estimated$1.3 to$2.4 million in total net
new sales tax revenues per year (3.0 percent tax rate)with$956,000 to$1.8 million of
these revenues going to the general fund (2.25 percent).
•
1
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
• The proposed project would be a unique retail draw increasing the City's capture of
sales from the larger regional trade area.
Approximately 35 percent of total center sales are expected to come from outside of Fort
Collins,primarily from residents of Larimer County (including Loveland),Weld County
(including Greeley),and Laramie County,Wyoming(including Cheyenne). The
majority of these sales will be net new sales to the City. This is due to the fact that most
of the upscale apparel and home furnishings stores, and most of the restaurants and
entertainment tenants will be new to the region.
• The proposed project will bring new competition to the market and will result in
some Ioss of sales to existing retail stores, including Foothills Mall.
An estimated 63 percent of the proposed center's retail sales will not be net new sales,
but rather sales transfers from existing retail competition,most notably Foothills Mall.
However,Foothills Mall is an older retail center and vulnerable to retail competition,not
only from a new lifestyle center,but any new regional retail space built in the City.
Because of its relatively close proximity and potential mix of tenants,the potential sales
loss to Foothills as a result of the lifestyle center location is estimated at$8.5 million to
$25.0 million,or approximately 6 percent to 18 percent of existing sales levels,
depending on center size and store composition.
• If the proposed lifestyle center is not built in Fort Collins, it will likely be built in
Loveland resulting in a net loss of$1.1 to$2.0 million in total sales tax revenues to
the City.
There are four competitive lifestyle centers proposed in the Northern Colorado trade
area. In addition to Fort Collins,Poag&McEwen is proposing a lifestyle center in
Loveland and CBL is proposing a center in Windsor. Prospect Partners is also
proposing a center at I-25 and Prospect in Fort Collins. Demographics in the general
market area will support only one new lifestyle center in the near future. Of these
proposals,the Loveland project appears to have the greatest momentum.
If the Fort Collins project is not built,it is likely that the Loveland project will be. A
similar center built in Loveland is estimated to result in a net loss of$35.4 million to
$67.3 million in annual retail sales in the City.Based on these figures,total sales tax
revenues would drop by$1.1 to$2.0 million and general fund sales tax revenues would
drop by$797,000 to$1.5 million annually.
• There is an adequate supply of primary employment lands available in the City for
economic development purposes.
Recent estimates of employment lands approximate that 555 acres of land are currently
vacant and appropriate for primary employment along the Harmony Corridor. Even if
140 acres are taken out of the inventory for the proposed project,this would leave 415
acres of land available. This could accommodate 35 companies equivalent in size to LSI
Logic. The City should continue to monitor this land supply to determine if additional
2
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
primary employment land is necessary. Additionally,Fort Collins is part of a larger
region which remains very attractive for primary employment in the future,once the
economy turns around. Fort Collins also stands to benefit if a primary employer chooses
to locate within the region,but outside of City boundaries.
POLICY CONSIDERATIONS
The Fort Collins retail competitive marketplace is changing. Over the last 15 years,the
City's retail store base has grown considerably commensurate with the City's growth in
population and income. However,the City's dominance as a regional trade center has
declined as smaller cities in the region have grown and developed their own local store
base. With commercial competition now coming from as close as Loveland,the City
cannot ignore the impacts of these projects and needs to consider proactive actions to
protect and expand the retail base on which it depends for vital city revenues.
In this particular case,it appears that not accommodating this proposed project will
result in a negative impact on the City as a competitive project in Loveland would likely
gain momentum. It is in the City's best interest to protect its fiscal resources and adjust
its land use mix to accommodate employment uses elsewhere in the City or the region.
The City must also continue to maintain adequate sites for primary employers for
economic development purposes. The number of large parcels available in the
Harmony Corridor can accommodate 35 companies equivalent to the size of LSI Logic,
in the short term. Longer term,the City may need to consider adding sites or rezoning
existing residential land.
3
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
I. INTRODUCTION
This report evaluates the economic impact of a proposed lifestyle retail center on
approximately 60 to 90 acres on Harmony Road in Fort Collins. It provides a discussion
of lifestyle center characteristics,regional competition,potential sales,and City sales tax
impacts. It also estimates the sales impacts on Fort Collins'retail sales if the lifestyle
center locates in Loveland,instead of Fort Collins. The report also discusses the
availability and potential impacts on employment lands in the City of Fort Collins.
This introductory section of the report provides a review of lifestyle center development
trends and characteristics based on research conducted by the International Council of
Shopping Centers (ICSC)and Urban Land Institute(ULI)and other industry sources
including Poag and McEwen lifestyle statistics. It also includes a description of the
proposed project as well as potential competing projects in the Fort Collins region.
LIFESTYLE CENTER CHARACTERISTICS
The term lifestyle center was first used in the mid 1980s. There were only about 15
centers in operation before 1990 and today it is estimated there are up to 50 or so centers
that meet the industry's definition of the concept. The motivation for these projects is
due to a number of factors,most notably the slowdown in the construction of new
regional malls, and the desire for national specialty chains to find a way to continue to
expand into new markets.
According to ICSC,a lifestyle center caters to the"lifestyle pursuits of customers in its
trading area". As they exist today,lifestyle centers are most often located near affluent
neighborhoods and have an upscale orientation with the following characteristics:
• Generally between 150,000 and 500,000 square feet of leasable retail area. According
to industry sources, a center requires at least between 250,000 to 300,000 square feet
in order to be viable.
• Centers typically have an open-air configuration.
• Tenant mix comprised of predominantly national upscale apparel and home
furnishings stores and national upscale chain restaurants.
• Most common tenants include apparel stores such as Gap,Ann Taylor,Eddie Bauer,
Banana Republic,Limited Express, Chico's,Talbots,and Victoria's Secret;home
furnishings stores such as Williams Sonoma,Pottery Barn,Restoration Hardware,
and Bombay Company;and books and music stores like Barnes&Noble and Borders.
• Some local independent specialty stores add to the local flavor of the center.
• Centers are designed to be an appealing destination for more than just shopping and
typically include one or more table-service restaurants and may also have a
multiplex cinema.
• Typical national restaurant tenants include P.F. Changs,California Pizza Kitchen,
and Macaroni Grill,among others.
• One or more department stores may be included as anchors,but these are generally
smaller than full-size stores.
4
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
• COLORADO CENTERS
There are two lifestyle centers in Colorado with an additional center under construction
as described below.
• Aspen Grove,Littleton-This 244,000 square feet center built by Poag&McEwen
was completed in 2001 and is comprised of approximately 50 stores and three table
service restaurants.
• Denver Pavilions,Denver-The Pavilions, located in downtown Denver on the 16th
Street Mall,is 350,000 square feet including five table service restaurants, a multiplex
AMC Theater,and 40 stores.
• The Shops at Briargate,Colorado Springs -This will be Poag&McEwen's second
center in Colorado when in opens in 2003 with 230,000 square feet in phase one. A
second phase is planned to include 75,000 square feet.
LIFESTYLE CENTER PROPOSAL
PRELIMINARY CONCEPT
The Fort Collins project is a proposed 495,000 square foot center on 60 acres on Harmony
Road adjacent to LSI Logic. This project would potentially include department store
anchors,in-line retail,as well as other uses. As the development process moves
• forward, it is likely that the parameters of the project will be adjusted. Unless a
department store is included,the likely size of the center is expected to be smaller, more
in line with the Littleton and Colorado Springs projects in the 230,000 to 250,000 square
foot range. The Harmony Road site could potentially include subsequent phases of
development that could expand the center to as much as 685,000 square feet of space.
CANDIDATE TENANTS
Typical national credit tenants in lifestyle centers include the list of tenants shown in
Table 1. Many of these tenants have a presence in other Colorado lifestyle centers.
While some of these retailers are already located in Fort Collins, many of them do not
have a presence in the City or in the Northern Colorado market.
Based on this limited sample,14 out of 32 apparel store tenants are already present in
the Fort Collins market. The home furnishings stores (many of which require a larger
trade area) are less well represented with 2 stores out of 12.
5
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
Table 1
Typical Tenants found in Lifestyle Centers
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Stores In Other Stores Stores In Other Stores
Typical Tenants the Mail in the City Typical Tenants the Mall in the City
Apparel Bath&Body
abercrombie Bath&Body Works 1
Abercrombie&Fitch Gap Body
American Eagle 1 The Body Shop t
Ann Taylor Victoria's Secret
Ann Taylor Lofts 1 Books&Music
Banana Republic Bames&Noble 2
Babe Borders
Casual Comer Coconuts Music&Video
Chico's Home Furnishings
Children's Place Bed,Bath&Beyond 1
Coldwater Creek Bombay Company
Easy Spirit Crate&Barrel
Eddie Bauer 1 Eddie Bauer Home
Express 1 Kirkland's Home
Gap 1 Organized Living
Gap Kids 1 Pier 1 Imports 1
Baby Gap Pottery Barn
Guess Pottery Sam Kids
Gymboree 1 Restoration Hardware
J.Crew Williams-Sonoma
J.Jill Yankee Candles
Lane Bryant 1 Restaurants
Limited 1 California Pizza Kitchen
Limited Too 1 Champs Americana
Old Navy 1 Macaroni Grill
Pacific Sunwear 1 Noodles&Company 1
Petite Sophisticate P.F.Chang's
Sunglass Hut Panere Bread
Talbots 1 Odoba 3
Victoria's Secret - t Rocky Mt.Chocolate Factory 1 1
Wet Seal Ted's Montana Grill
White House/Black Market Village Tavern
Source:Eco e&PlemYq Systems;cry of Fort Collins
6
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
• Twelve of the existing 14 upscale apparel tenants are located in Foothills Mall.This center
currently enjoys a 98 percent occupancy rate. A few national upscale chains with an
interest in coming to Fort Collins have had difficulty finding premium retail space. For
example,Talbots (which would typically be found in a mall with other like retailers) is
located in a converted Goodyear Tire store on an outparcel on the College Street frontage.
A few of the retailers are located within the City in locations outside of the mall. Some
of them,such as Barnes and Noble,have more than one store location within the City.
Borders and Whole Foods have plans to open at the old Montgomery Ward's site on
College.
Many of the apparel merchants listed in Table 1 not already present in the City are
logical candidates for the lifestyle center. Due to its proximity to Foothills Mall,existing
tenants are not likely to open second stores.
Some of the typical home furnishing stores found in lifestyle centers are also likely
candidates including Bombay Company,Williams Sonoma, and Organized Living.
Other stores including Restoration Hardware and Crate&Barrel have larger minimum
trade area requirements and are not likely to open stores at this potential location.
7
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
II. RETAIL SALES AND EXPENDITURE PATTERNS
This section of the report addresses the potential market for a lifestyle center in Fort
Collins including an analysis of the potential trade area and existing retail sales and
expenditure patterns.
NORTHERN COLORADO MARKET
According to ICSC,the primary trade area accounts for an average of 53 percent of
lifestyle center customers,compared to 60 to 65 percent for regional centers. In urban
areas,primary trade area customers live closer to the center(within five miles), are likely
to rate the centers as"convenient" from home, and tend to visit the lifestyle center more
frequently. Also,according to ICSC survey data,a higher percentage of sales comes
from households with incomes of over$75,000.
Lifestyle centers can have a larger trade area in underdeveloped trade areas such as
northern Colorado. The primary trade area population typically ranges from 95,000 to
350,000. The secondary trade area population ranges over a larger geographic area,
includes the primary trade area population and typically ranges up to 750,000 persons.
There are four potential regional retail centers planned in the north Front Range
Corridor. In addition to the Fort Collins' Harmony Road site,Poag&McEwen is
considering a site at the Centerra project on Highway 34 and I-25. This site may
potentially include a power center, in addition to the lifestyle retailers. CBL is
considering a location in Windsor at Highway 392 and I-25. A fourth proposed lifestyle
center is being considered for the Prospect/I-25 interchange area.
The Harmony Road site in Fort Collins best fits the criteria used by lifestyle centers
within the five-mile trade area as shown in Table 2. In the 10-mile radius,the Windsor
site has slightly larger numbers but is deficient in other ways. It is at an intersection
south of the unbanized area with little adjacent development. The Loveland site has
fewer households but higher incomes in the larger trade area. The larger Loveland
market area includes Fort Collins,which makes the site attractive to developers and
potential retailers.
8
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
• Table 2
Competitive Site Demographics
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Fort Collins Loveland Windsor
Characteristic 2 Mile 5 Mile 10 Mile 2 Mlle 5 MIN 10 Mlle 2 Mlle 5 MIN 10 MIN
Population
2002 17.203 92,187 218,555 770 38,767 145,228 2,553 39.810 217,727
2007 20,220 104,427 244,431 875 42,999 165,598 3,043 47,140 243,784
Households(NH)
2002 6,119 36,620 84,377 279 14,967 54.314 929 14,289 83,488
2007 7,190 41,673 94,938 320 16.700 62,158 1,107 16,973 94,161
Income(2002)
Average HH $81,946 $71.318 $66,203 $109.720 $63,986 $72,806 $81.493 $77,676 $66,649
HH Income$75,000«
Housaholtls 2,772 13,000 26,241 179 4,700 19,770 380 5,873 26.382
Percent of Total 45% 36% 31% 64% 31% 36% 41% 41% 32%
Sawm:C rue;6wmmc a P4nr,mg sys
TRADE AREA EXPENDITURES AND SALES
The following tables show the EPS retail model that estimates the inflows and outflows of
Fort Collins'retail market. This model can be used to help estimate subsequent impacts on
the City's sales tax revenues based on the potential location of the lifestyle center in the City.
For purposes of analysis,the primary trade area for the proposed center is defined as the
City of Fort Collins. This is somewhat larger than the typical primary trade area in an
unbanized area but fits the competitive shopping pattern of the City. The secondary
trade area would comprise the remainder of Larimer County (including Loveland) and
all of Weld County Colorado and Laramie County,Wyoming. Table 3 shows the
estimated households within the Fort Collins trade market area as well as total trade
area. Approximately 124,000 persons and 48,000 households live within the Fort Collins
primary trade area. The primary area has a total personal income of over$3 billion,
while the total trade area (primary and secondary) has a total income of over$12 billion.
Table 3
Household Total Personal Income (TPI),2002
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Trade Area
Characteristic Primary Total
Population 124,133 539,189
Households(HH) 48,234 201,961
Average HH Income $63,512 $62,673
TPI ($000's) $3,063,438 $12,657,554
Note:Primary Trade Area includes the City of Fort Collins and the total trade area
includes all of Latimer County,Weld County,and Laramie County,WY.
. Source:Clantas;Economic 8 Planning Systems
9
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
Table 4 shows annual taxable retail sales by major store category for the City of Fort
Collins. In 2002,there were a total of$973.2 million taxable retail sales in the City.
Table 4
Citywide Taxable Retail Sales, 2002
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Taxable
Category Sales
($o0o's)
Apparel&Accessories 84,280
Eating &Drinking 221,738
Furniture& Home Furnishings 120,301
General Merchandise 323,486
Miscellaneous Retail 223,347
Total $973,152
Source:City of Fort Collins;Economic&Planning Systems
Table 5 estimates retail expenditure potentials by type of good for Fort Collins residents.
Expenditures are estimated based on the percent of total personal income(TPI) spent by
store group based on statewide Census of Retail Trade data. For example, a typical
household spends 2.2 percent of its total household income on apparel and accessories.
The expenditure potential for the entire trade area is then calculated by multiplying
trade area population by average per capita income. The percent of TPI spent by store
type is then estimated and compared to actual store sales to estimate local capture and
sales outflow (or leakage).
Table 5 shows that Fort Collins residents are spending 85 to 90 percent of their retail
expenditures in the City with 10 to 15 percent sales outflow,primarily to the Denver
metro area.
Table 5
Citywide Outflows
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
%of Expend. Sales to Outflow
Category TPI Potential Local Residents Sales
($000's) $ % $ %
Apparel &Accessories 2.20% 67,396 60,682 90% 6,714 10%
Eating&Drinking 5.35% 163,894 147,456 90% 16,438 10%
Furniture&Home Furnishings 3.07% 94,048 80,000 85% 14,047 15%
General Merchandise 6.02% 184,419 166,595 90% 17,824 10%
Miscellaneous Retail 8.2n 251,202 178,677 71% 72,525 29%
Total 24.840/6 $760,958 $633,411 63°/a $127,547 17%
Source:U.S.Census of Retail Trade;Economic&Planning Systems
10
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
• Table 6 compares actual Fort Collins store sales to the estimate of resident expenditures.
The difference is comprised of store sales coming from residents from outside of the
local trade area(inflow). These retail inflows shown are overstated in the general
merchandise category,which includes department stores. This is likely due to local
residents spending a higher percentage of their purchases in department stores than the
statewide average. Nevertheless, total inflows for the selected store categories are shown
as averaging 35 percent overall,which is believed to be a reasonable estimate for the
general merchandise,apparel,furniture and home furnishings, and other miscellaneous
shoppers goods(GAFO) store categories.
Table 6
Citywide Inflows
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Store Sales to Sales from
Category Sales Local Residents Inflow
($000•s) $ % a %
Apparel&Accessories 84,280 60,682 72% 23,599 28%
Eating&Drinking 221,738 147,456 67% 74,282 34%,
Furniture&Home Furnishings 120,301 80,000 67% 40,301 34%
General Merchandise 323,486 166,595 52% 156,891 49%
Miscellaneous Retail 223,347 178,677 80% 44,669 20%
Total $973,152 $633,411 65% $339,742 35%
Source:City of Fort Collins;Economic&Planning Systems
REGIONAL COMPETITION
Lifestyle centers are generally not considered a threat to top performing malls. They are
typically smaller than regional malls and contain many of the same upscale apparel
stores found in an upscale regional mall without the complement of four to five full-line
department stores. In most cases,potential stores tenants will not move out of the mall
to locate in a new lifestyle center. If located far enough away (typically five miles or
more in an urban setting),a second store location may be possible.
Lifestyle centers,however,will directly compete with older,smaller regional malls such
as Foothills Mall in Fort Collins. In older,lower performing malls,any new regional
store competition is a threat to the mall's viability and may generate transference of
store sales and/or a loss of tenants.
A well-performing regional mall generates average sales of approximately$350 per
square foot for mall space. Based on information provided by the City,taxable Foothills
Mall sales in 2002 were approximately$135 million for an average$226 per square foot.
While mall space stores are generating sales of approximately$308 dollars per square
foot,the department stores are generating sales of less than$200 per square foot. With
I1
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
the exception of Sears,the department stores are underperforming relative to industry
averages. Table 7 below shows a breakdown of Foothills Mall sales by major store
category.
Table 7
Citywide Taxable Retail Sales,2002
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Taxable No.of Total Sales/
Category Sales Stores Space Sq. Ft.
($000's) (SF)
Mall Space
Accessories,Luggage, & Leather Goods 12,713 10 17,269 $736
Other Apparel 9,754 15 44,222 $221
Shoe Stores 4,615 6 20,688 $223
Upscale Apparel 17,259 11 53,015 $326
Eating& Drinking 6,391 16 13,292 $481
Books& Music 4,162 3 20,829 $200
Miscellaneous Retail' 14,565 28 56,017 260
Subtotal $69,459 89 225,332 $308
Department Stores 65,827 4 339,977 $194
Total $135,286 93 565,309 $239
Note:Excludes non-retail and unclassifiedivacant space of 32,896 square feet.
'Includes cosmetics,beauty supplies,perfume,optical goods,sporting goods,hobby,toys,
games,home furnishings,electronics,and other shopper goods.
Source:City of Fort Collins;Economic&Planning Systems
Foothills Mall is an older,smaller property and is underperforming industry averages in
the store categories most competitive with a lifestyle center,including apparel and
department stores. Any new regional retail development is likely to have an impact on
the mall. Without significant reinvestment,the mall's share of sales and its overall
contribution to the City sales tax revenues will likely be vulnerable to new regional store
competition of any kind. However,the mall owners are also potentially expanding and
reinvesting in the mall.
The most measurable short term impact to the mall may be on tenants such as Ann
Taylor,Eddie Bauer,Gap and other"upscale apparel" retail within Foothills Mall
should a lifestyle center open within Fort Collins. Although they may not be initially
tempted to relocate,the concentration of upscale apparel stores within the lifestyle center
may attract some of their clientele away from the mall,with a subsequent drop in sales.
12
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6, 2003
•
III. LIFESTYLE CENTER ECONOMIC IMPACTS
This section of the report estimates annual retail sales for the proposed lifestyle center on
Harmony Road under two development scenarios. Net new sales to the City are then
estimated in order to determine the impact of the proposed center on City sales tax
revenues. The net new retail sales calculations are also used to determine the impact of
the center on existing retail centers in the City. The net impacts of a lifestyle center
development in Loveland on the City of Fort Collins are also estimated.
FORT COLLINS LIFESTYLE CENTER SALES IMPACTS
In order to calculate net sales and subsequent impacts on budget,two lifestyle centers
prototypes are shown:
• 250,000 square foot small center assuming no major anchor stores,and
• 500,000 square foot center assuming a 100,000 square foot department store anchor.
These prototypes represent the likely range of development feasible in the short-term
horizon. At total build out,the project may be as large as 685,000 square feet;however,
the latter stages of project development are likely to occur a number of years in the
. future. By that point, the retail landscape may be much different than it is today. It
would therefore be difficult to assess the impacts of later phases of development for
which the timing and components are unknown.
The prototypes bracket the potential high and low impacts of the proposed first phase of
the center.Based on average sales of$300 per square foot for department stores and$400
per square foot for smaller stores,a total of$100 million to$190 million in total annual
sales is estimated as shown in Table 8. At 685,000 square feet which may include
several department stores,the center would generate an estimated total of$250 million
in annual sales.
A significant portion of the center's sales will be transfers of existing store sales. The
portion of center sales that represent net new sales to the City are derived from two
sources:
• Reductions in existing expenditure outflows by Fort Collins residents. Residents are .
now making an estimated 15 percent of their GAFOl purchases outside the trade
area,primarily in more upscale centers in the Denver metro area.
• Increases in retail sales inflows from outside of Fort Collins (secondary trade area).
Inflows are now estimated to account for 30 to 35 percent of GAFO store sales. The
potential for increased inflows would be due to the mix of stores in the lifestyle
center not available in retail centers in secondary trade area cities,including
Loveland,Greeley,and Cheyenne.
• 1 General Merchandise,Apparel,Funuhue&Home Furnishings,Miscellaneous Shoppers Goods
13
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
Net new sales to the City are estimated in two steps as shown in Table 8. A total of 65
percent of total lifestyle center sales are estimated to come from Fort Collins primary
trade area residents with 35 percent inflow from the secondary trade area. Net new sales
to the City are then calculated as 75 percent of sales inflows from the secondary trade
area plus 25 percent of local store sales. Net new sales are estimated at$42.5 million
under the small center and$80.8 million for the larger center.
Table 8
Fort Collins Lifestyle Center Net New Sales
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Lifestyle Center
Category Factor unit Small Large
Tenant Mix(SF)
Other Stores — — 250,000 400,000
Department Stores — — 0 100,000
Total 250,000 500,000
Annual Sales ($000's)
Other Stores $400 $/SF 100,000 $160,000
Department Stores $300 $/SF 0 $30,000
Total $100,000 $190,000
Source of Sales ($000's)
Local Residents 65% of total $65,000 $123.500
Inflow 35% oftotal $35,000 $66,500
Net New Sales($000's)
New Inflow 75% of Inflow 26,250 49,875
Reduction of Existing Outflow 25% of local sales 16,250 30,875
Total $42,500 $80,750
Source:Economic 8 Planning Systems
14
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
IMPACTS ON EXISTING RETAILERS
Foothills Mall
As previously indicated,Foothills Mall is vulnerable to retail competition. The owners
of the mall have tentative plans to remodel and expand the center including adding
another department store at 130,000 square feet and additional gross leaseable space of
20,000 to 25,000 square feet. Part of the plans includes incorporating a table-service
restaurant and reorienting the front entrance to accommodate the expanded space.
While lifestyle center stores typically have upscale apparel, books and music,and home
furnishings, a lifestyle center on Harmony Road would potentially have the most impact
in the upscale apparel category. There are 14 tenants in this category in or surrounding
the mall.A few of the potential home furnishings tenants have indicated that the Fort
Collins market is not appropriate for them at this time.
The upscale apparel sales comprise 13 percent of total current mall sales. Many of the
potential tenants for the Harmony Road site do not have a presence in the City and are
potentially interested. Some may not have located in the City because of the lack of
available prime retail space. A lifestyle center presents a new opportunity for them
particularly if they can co-locate with other upper-end stores. Foothills Mall is
vulnerable because this cluster of high-end stores could potentially attract some
shoppers away from the mall,particularly those that patronize upscale apparel stores.
In a smaller lifestyle center, (without a department store),if 50 percent of upscale
apparel sales at the mall were transferred to the lifestyle center,this would result in a
loss of sales of approximately$8.5 million to the mall. This loss represents 6 percent of
current total mall sales. The potential impact is larger should the lifestyle center also
include a department store. If losses were as high as 25 percent in the department store
category,this could result in losses up to$16 million. In addition to losses in upscale
apparel, this could result in total losses of$25 million,which is nearly 20 percent of
current mall sales.
Downtown
Downtown retail is not expected to be significantly impacted by the lifestyle center for
two reasons. It is farther from the proposed lifestyle center and downtown is primarily
comprised of locally-owned independent businesses rather than national credit retailers.
In fact, the lifestyle center may have a positive influence on downtown because it helps
attract people from a wide geographical area to come and shop. Shoppers at the lifestyle
center may also choose to visit downtown while they are in the area to eat or browse.
Downtown Fort Collins will likely maintain its role as the restaurant and entertainment
destination for the City as well as the region.
15
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
SALES TAX IMPACTS
Table 9 shows the City's revised general fund budget for 2002,in addition to actual
revenues and expenses for 2001. Currently, sales taxes comprise nearly 40 percent of the
City's general fund revenue sources. The revised budget for 2002 shows expenses
exceeding revenue by$1.7 million. While the overall general fund starts the fiscal year
of 2002 at$33.4 million,it is projected to end the year at$12.8 million.
Table 9
Fort Collins General Fund Budget,2001 and 2002
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Actual2001 Revised Budget 2002
Budget items Revenues %of Total Revenues %of Total
Revenue
Sales&Use Taxes Transferred
Sales Taxes $43,029,630 42.2% $42,788,329 39.6%
Use Tax Ceiling $7,000,000 6.9% $7,400,000 6.8%
Use Tax Over Ceiling $0 0.0% $1,364,623 1.3%
From Sales&Use Tax Fund Reserves $3,504,469 3.4% $1,740,057 1.6%
Other Taxes $11,641,D69 11.4% $13,687.757 12.7%
Licenses&Permits $1,843,234 1.8% $1,751,215 1.6%
Intergovernmental $1,758,338 1.7% $2.932,971 2.7%
Charges for Services $11,550,399 11.3% $11,174,308 10.3%
Fines&Forfeitures $1,224,963 1.2% $1,233,064 1.1%
Earnings on Investments $1,831,201 1.8% $1,000,000 0.9%
Miscellaneous $2,106,018 2.1% $3,823,299 3.5%
Lease Purchase Proceeds 87g 6,408 0.9% 38$ 0,739 0.4%
Total Revenue $86,365,729 84.8% $89,276,362 82.5%
Reserves Appropriated $15,514,755 15.2% $18,902,677 17.5%
Total Revenue&Reserves $101,880,484 100.0% $108,179,039 100.0%
Expenditures
Administrative Services $6,188,196 7.5% $8,954,766 8.2%
Communication&Technology $3,346,147 4.1% $4,976.825 4.5%
Comm.Planning&Environmental $5,068,231 6.2% $10,763,092 9.8%
Cultural,Library&Recreational $9,980.055 12.1% $11,192,284 10.2%
Executive,Legislative&Judicial $5,375,613 6.5% $5,947,247 5.4%
Police $20,374,513 24.7% $25,095,304 22.8%
Non-Departmental-Other $1,413,725 1.7% $4,538,348 4.1%
Contributions to Poudre Fire Auth $11,696.381 14.2% $12,619,828 11.5%
Transfers to Other Funds $18,936,965 23.0% $25,785,588 23.5%
Net City Expenditures $82,379,826 100.0% $109,873,282 100.0%
Not Revenue&Expenses $19,500,658 -$1,694,243
Beginning Fund Balance $29,309,230 $33,413,437
Net Revenue&Expenses $19,500,658 -$1,694,243
Appropriations from Reserves -$15,514,755 -$18,902,677
Fund Balance Adjustments -$33,430 0
To Emergency Reserve -$55,000
Ending Fund Balance $33,413,437 $12,761,517
Source:City of Fort Collins,Emnomic&Planning Systems
26
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
Potential sales tax impacts on general fund revenues are shown in Table 10. The table is
based on an analysis of the estimated net sales revenues or potential losses,based on the
location of a lifestyle center in Fort Collins. A smaller lifestyle center would generate an
additional$1.3 million in total sales tax revenues (3.0 percent rate) and $956,000 in sales
tax revenues (2.25 percent rate) to the City's general fund. A larger lifestyle center with
a department store could generate up to$2.4 million in total sales tax revenues and$1.8
million in general fund revenues as shown. This would represent an increase of 12 to
4.2 percent over current sales tax revenues.
Table 10
Fort Collins Location: Sales Tax Impacts
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Lifestyle Center
Category Factor units Small Large
Net New Sales($000's)
New Inflow 26,250 49,875
Reduction of Existing Outflow 25% of local sales 16,250 30,875
Total $42,500 $80,750
• Addition to General Fund ($000's) 2.25% $956 $1,817
General Enhancement 0.25% $106 $202
Transportation System 0.25% $106 $202
Parks/Natural Areas 0.25% 106 202
Total 3.00% $1,275 $2,423
Source:Economic 8 Planning Systems,City of Fort Collins
LOVELAND LIFESTYLE CENTER SALES IMPACTS
As discussed earlier,there is also a lifestyle center proposed on the Centerra property at
I-25 and U.S.34 in Loveland.This project,proposed by Poag&McEwen,is in direct
competition with the Harmony Road project in Fort Collins. The larger trade area is
only large enough to support one project in the near future. This section estimates the
net impact of the proposed Loveland project on the City of Fort Collins. To estimate the
project impacts the same high and low development scenarios are used:
250,000 square foot small center assuming no major anchor stores,and
a 500,000 square foot center assuming a 100,000 square foot department store anchor.
There may also be other additional power center retail space built in the Centerra
project,but this would include store types already present in Fort Collins and therefore
would not affect current sales outflows from the City.
17
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
Based on average sales of$300 per square foot for department stores and $400 per
square foot for smaller stores,a total of$100 million to $190 million in total annual sales
is estimated. A significant portion of sales will be transfers of existing store sales. Net
sales losses are estimated in the following steps:
• In order for a lifestyle center to be feasible in Loveland, the primary trade area
would need to be at least a 10-mile radius from the site, and would include Fort
Collins. Because of the larger trade area,the percentage of sales from local residents
would be higher in Loveland than in Fort Collins,estimated at 75 percent,compared
to 65 percent in the smaller Fort Collins primary trade area as shown in Table 11.
• Fort Collins comprises 63 percent of the estimated 10-mile primary trade area
population. Therefore,a total of 63 percent of the primary trade area sales are
estimated to be from City residents. This equals$47 million for a small center and
$90 million for a larger center.
• In addition,a lifestyle center in Loveland would be able to tap into a portion of
existing outflows to Denver by Fort Collins residents estimated at 25 percent of local
sales.
Table 11
Loveland Lifestyle Center Net New Sales
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Lifestyle Center
Category Factor unit Small Large
Tenant Mix(SF)
Other Stores — — 250,000 400,000
Department Stores — — 0 100,000
Total 250,000 500,000
Annual Sales ($000's)
Other Stores $400 $BF 100,000 $160,000
Department Stores $300 $/SF 0 $30,000
Total $100,000 $190,000
Source of Sales ($000's)
Local Residents 75% of total $75,000 $142,500
Inflow 25% of total $25,000 $47,500
Fort Collins Sales($000's)
%of Primary Trade Area 63% from Fort Collins 47,250 89,775
Reduction of Existing Outflow 25% of%from Fort Collins 11,813 2_2,444
Net Loss $35,438 $67,331
Source:Economic&Planning Systems
18
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
A lifestyle center location in Loveland would result in an estimated MA million net loss
in sales to Fort Collins retailers for a small center, and up to$67.3 million for a larger
center as shown.
Table 12 shows the impact on the general fund of the City of Fort Collins should the
lifestyle center locate in Loveland and not in Fort Collins. The result would be an
estimated net loss of$1.1 to$2.0 million in total sales tax revenues and$797,000 to$1.8
million to the general fund annually.
Table 12
Loveland Location: Sales Tax Impacts
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Lifestyle Center
Category Factor units Small Large
Net New Sales($000's)
New Inflow 47,250 89,775
Reduction of Existing Outflow 25% of local sales 11,813 22,444
Total $35,438 $67,331
Loss to General Fund ($000's) 2.25% $797 $1,515
General Enhancement 0.25% $89 $168
Transportation System 0.25% $89 $168
Parks/Natural Areas 0.25% $89 $168
Total 3.00% $1,063 $2,020
Source:Economic 8 Planning Systems,City of Fort Collins
•
19
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
IV. EMPLOYMENT LANDS
The Harmony Road site is approximately 140 acres of which 60 to 90 acres are currently
being considered for a lifestyle center. Some land remains for possible expansion or
future development opportunities. Of this remaining land,approximately 28 acres are
being considered for possible residential or another transitional use to the neighboring
residential community.
There are concerns about lands designated for primary employment being redesignated
for commercial use. To provide an overall context,Table 13 shows the vacant land
inventory in the City based on remaining land capacity as well as assumptions about the
number of potential jobs based on current employment characteristics in the City.
Table 13
Vacant Lands Inventory
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Potential
Zone Acres Jobs %of Total
Commercial 377 2,445 7.1%
Community Commercial 115 1,206 3.5%
Community Commercial North College 85 162 0.5%
Community Commercial River 37 149 0.4%
Commercial North College 70 304 0.9%
Downtown 6 592 1.7%
Employment 952 12,748 37.1%
Harmony Corridor 659 8,627 25.1%
Industrial 892 5,536 16.1%
Neighborhood Commercial 129 1,092 3.2%
All others N/A 1,537 4.5%
Total 3,322 34,398 100%
Source:City of Fort Collins
Job types can be divided into primary and non-primary jobs. While most of the jobs in
the commercial areas are retail and service jobs,cities are typically concerned with
attracting and retaining"primary"jobs,because they provide net wealth to the
community,and often result in other positive economic spinoffs,such as new business
creation. Many of the high tech jobs typically found at LSI Logic and Hewlett Packard
are"primary"jobs as are many of the jobs in the medical community and at CSU. Of
the zones listed, the Employment District,Harmony Corridor, and Industrial District
provide the most capacity for primary jobs,while the remaining districts are primarily
oriented to non-primary retail and service jobs.
20
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
• Anheuser-Busch lands comprise 47 percent(447 of 952 acres) of employment land and
20 percent (178 of 892 acres) of industrial land. If Anheuser Busch lands are taken out of
the inventory, this still leaves 504 acres of employment land and 714 acres of industrial
land.
Table 14 shows the acreage available with sites over 10 acres in size within each of the
listed zones.
Table 14
Large Employment Sites Land Potential
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Total of All 10+Acre Sites
10+Acre Potential Total Vacant As%of Total
Zone #Sites Sites Jobs Lands Vacant
Commercial 9 214 1,502 377 56.8%
Community Commercial 4 115 1,206 115 100.2%
Community Commercial North College 2 58 95 85 67.9%
Community Commercial River 1 20 69 37 55.0%
Commercial North College 1 10 10 70 14.6%
Employment 16 786 10,856 952 82.6%
Harmony Corridor 14 555 7,079 659 84.2%
Industrial 22 739 4,718 892 82.8%
. Neighborhood Commercial 5 77 657 129 59.7%
Total' 74 2,574 26,192 3,316 77.6%
Source:City of Fort Collins
1 Does not include downtown
In the Employment,Harmony Corridor,and Industrial districts,over 80 percent of the
available lands are on sites over 10 acres in size. In the Harmony Corridor alone, there
are 555 acres available in parcels over 10 acres in size.
Using the same factors as used in the City Plan update process,approximate job impacts
of removing 60 and 90 acres of land from the employment lands inventory are shown in
Table 15. These jobs,assumed to be high tech jobs, similar to jobs currently found at LSI
Logic and Hewlett Packard,will be replaced by retail jobs typically found in lifestyle
centers.
•
21
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
Table 15
Jobs Comparison
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Land Area High Tech Jobs Retail Jobs
60 acres 2,613,600 sf of land area 2,613,600 sf of land area
522,720 FAR of.2 500,000 FAR of.19
1,742 300 sf per employee 1,250 400 sf per employee
1,742 Employees 1,250 Employees
90 acres 3,920,400 sf of land area 3,920,400 sf of land area
784,080 FAR of.2 685,000 FAR of.175
2,614 300 sf per employee 1,713 400 sf per employee
2,614 Employees 1,713 Employees
Source:City of Fort Collins,EPS
According to City estimates,the Harmony Corridor area has capacity for approximately
8,627 additional jobs. Approximately 20 percent or 1,742 jobs are located on the 60 acres
initially proposed for the lifestyle center.
These jobs would be replaced by retail jobs. The first phase of approximately 60 acres
would result in approximately 1,250 retail jobs. There would be a net job loss of 492
jobs. At a larger lifestyle center at 90 acres,2,614 high tech jobs would potentially be
replaced by 1,713 retail jobs. The development potential at the Harmony Road site is
140 acres. At full development,it is likely that at least 30 to 50 of those acres would be
retained for employment purposes.
The retail jobs that would replace the high tech jobs,on average pay much less. Table 16
shows average hourly wages for residents in Larimer County by occupations. High tech
jobs currently found at Hewlett Packard and LSI,would fall into the management,
professional and related categories with some office and administrative support,while
jobs at the lifestyle center,for the most part would fall into the sales and related categories.
22
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
• Table 16
Occupations of Larimer County Residents, 1999
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
No.of Median
Occupations Persons Hourly
Management, Professional and Related
Management 5,920 $27.73
Business&Financial Operations 3,400 $17.65
Computer&Mathematical 3,420 $28.05
Architecture&Engineering 4,290 $24.26
Physical and Social Sciences 1,050 $21.36
Community&Social Services 900 $13.90
Legal 1,270 $15.10
Education,Training &Library 4,540 $14.41
Arts, Design, Entertainment Sports&Media 1,570 $11.89
Healthcare Technical 4,510 $18.86
Subtotal 30,870
•of Total 27.5%
Service
Healthcare Support 2,680 $8.90
Protective Service 1,620 $19.31
Food Prep&Serving 15,800 $6.66
. Building&Grounds Cleaning & Maintenance 4,290 $8.10
Personal Care&Service 2,050 $8.04
Subtotal 26,440
•of Total 23.6%
Sales and Office
Sales& Related 12,430 $8.44
Office&Administrative Support 15,970 $10.15
Subtotal 28,400
%of Total 25.3%
Other Subtotal 26,530 $16.26
%of Total 23.6%
TOTAL 112,240
Source:Larimer County Workforce Center,Economic&Planning Systems
Despite the reduced number of jobs and lower wages,the possibility of a lifestyle center
development is more immediate and real. The City retains plenty of large employment
land potential,even with the removal of the entire 140 acre Harmony Road site. As a
point of comparison,LSI Logic occupies 12 acres and employs 325 persons. Even with
the removal of 140 acres of land from the Harmony Corridor large parcel inventory,
there would be enough available vacant land for the equivalent of 35 companies equal to
the size of LSI Logic with the potential to locate on Harmony Corridor.2
. 2 555 acres in Harmony Corridor minus 140 aces of total development potential divided by 12 acres(size of L51 Logic)
23
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This section of the report summarizes the major economic impacts of the proposed
project. The major economic and land use policy issues affected by the project are also
identified.
CONCLUSIONS
A decision to amend the Harmony Corridor plan to allow 60 to 90 acres of primary
employment land adjacent to LSI Logic on Harmony Road to be used for a lifestyle retail
center has a range of potential impacts as summarized below:
• The proposed project is estimated to generate$1.3 to$2.4 million in additional sales
taxes per year for the City.
If a 250,000 to 500,000 square foot lifestyle center were developed,it would generate
$100 million to$190 million a year in retail sales. However,only a portion of total sales
would be net new sales to the City with the remainder the result of transfers from
existing retail stores. A total of$42.5 to$80.8 million is estimated to represent net new
sales to the City. The City would collect an estimated$1.3 to$2.4 million in total net
new sales tax revenues per year(3.0 percent tax rate) with$956,000 to$1.8 million of
these revenues going to the general fund (2.25 percent).
• The proposed project would be a unique retail draw increasing the City's capture of
sales from the larger regional trade area.
Approximately 35 percent of total center sales are expected to come from outside of Fort
Collins,primarily from residents of Larimer County (including Loveland),Weld County
(including Greeley), and Laramie County,Wyoming(including Cheyenne). The
majority of these sales will be net new sales to the City. This is due to the fact that most
of the upscale apparel and home furnishings stores,and most of the restaurants and
entertainment tenants will be new to the region.
• The proposed project will bring new competition to the market and will result in
some loss of sales to existing retail stores, including Foothills Mall.
An estimated 63 percent of the proposed center's retail sales will be not be net new sales,
but rather sales transfers from existing retail competition,most notably Foothills Mall.
However,Foothills Mall is an older retail center and vulnerable to retail competition,not
only from a new lifestyle center,but any new regional retail space built in the City.
Because of its relatively close proximity and potential mix of tenants, the potential sales
loss to Foothills as a result of the lifestyle center location is estimated at$8.5 million to
$25.0 million,or approximately 6 percent to 18 percent of existing sales levels,
depending on center size and store composition.
24
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
• If the proposed lifestyle center is not built in Fort Collins, it will Iikely be built in
Loveland resulting in a net loss of$1.1 to$2.0 million in total sales tax revenues to
the City.
There are four competitive lifestyle centers proposed in the Northern Colorado trade
area. Of these proposals,the Loveland project appears to have the greatest momentum
and is in direct competition with the proposed Harmony Road site. If the Fort Collins
project is not built,it is likely that the Loveland project will be. A similar center built in
Loveland is estimated to result in a net loss of$35.4 million to$67.3 million in annual
retail sales in the City.Based on these figures, total sales tax revenues would drop by
$1.1 to$2.0 million and general fund sales tax revenues would drop by$797,000 to $1.5
million annually.
• There is an adequate supply of primary employment lands available in the City for
economic development purposes.
Recent estimates of employment lands approximate that 555 acres of land are currently
vacant and appropriate for primary employment along the Harmony Corridor.3 Even if
140 acres are taken out of the inventory, this would leave 415 acres of land available.
This could accommodate 35 companies equivalent in size to LSI Logic. The City should
continue to monitor this land supply to determine if additional primary employment
land is necessary.
• Additionally,Fort Collins is part of a larger region which remains very attractive for
primary employment in the future,once the economy turns around. Fort Collins also
stands to benefit if a primary employer chooses to locate within the region,but outside
of City boundaries.
POLICY CONSIDERATIONS
The Fort Collins retail competitive marketplace is changing. Over the last 15 years, the
City's retail store base has grown considerably commensurate with the City's growth in
population and income. However,the City's dominance as a regional trade center has
declined as smaller cities in the region have grown and developed their own local store
base. With commercial competition now coming from as close away as Loveland,the
City cannot ignore the impacts of these projects and needs to consider proactive actions
to protect and expand the retail base on which it depends for vital city revenues.
It this particular case,it appears that not accommodating this proposed project will
result a negative impact on the City as a competitive project in Loveland would likely
gain momentum. It is in the City's best interest to protect its fiscal resources and adjust
its land use mix to accommodate employment uses elsewhere in the City or the region.
• 3 The 555 acres are currently divided into 14 parcels.
25
Lifestyle Center Economic Impact Analysis
Final Report
June 6,2003
The City must also continue to maintain adequate sites for primary employers for
economic development purposes. The number of large parcels available in the
Harmony Corridor can accommodate 35 companies equivalent to the size of LSI Logic,
in the short term. Longer term,the City may need to consider adding sites or rezoning
existing residential land.
26
Attachment 7
Transportation Services
Transportation Planning
ity of Fort Collins
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Fischbach, City Manager
THROUGH: Ron Phillips, Transportation Services Director
FROM: Mark Jackson, Chief Transportation Planner
ok-
RE: Preliminary Traffic Considerations Analysis,
Harmony Lifestyle Center
DATE: June 30, 2003
A prospective Lifestyle Center development firm has submitted a preliminary traffic considerations report
as requested by Transportation staff. This preliminary report examined and compared forecast trip
generation for the currently approved land uses (officelemployment)to that for the proposed Harmony
Lifestyle Center. The intent was to examine the relative difference between anticipated traffic impacts
from Office/Employment uses versus Retail uses. It is important to note that this is only a preliminary
analysis and does not approach the scope and detail of a full Transportation Impact Study (TIS)required
when a development application is submitted. Basic transportation background information for this area
includes:
• This site will take its primary access off of Harmony Road at Corbett Drive. This is consistent with
the current Harmony Corridor Access Control Plan. There will be another primary access on Ziegler
Road, aligned with the access to Hewlett-Packard on the east of Ziegler.
• The Master Street Plan currently reflects Harmony Road as a future 6-lane Major Arterial roadway,
and Ziegler Road as a 4-lane Arterial roadway. A north-south 2-lane Collector roadway is
conceptually shown extending from the intersection of Harmony & Corbett northward to Edmonds
Road. The proposed site development will be required to dedicate right-of-way and make
improvements along their frontage consistent with these classifications.
• The Developer will be expected to make improvements along their site frontage on both harmony
and Ziegler and will be required to pay Street Oversizing fees commensurate with their project's size
and impacts.
Key findings in the preliminary analysis suggest that, while the Harmony Lifestyle Center (at full
development)will generate more daily trips than Office/Employment uses, the impact to morning peak hour
traffic will actually decrease. Anticipated afternoon peak hour traffic is expected to be higher for the
Harmony Lifestyle Center than for Office/Employment uses in the same site area. Office/Employment uses
typically generate high numbers of trips in the peak hours (going to work in the morning and leaving work
in the afternoon). Retail uses, on the other hand, generally generate fewer peak hour trips, instead spreading
them out throughout the day and weekends. If adjusted to account for passby trips (those trips attracted to
the site which are already on the street, such as stopping at a store on the way home from work), it is
. estimated that Retail uses generate approximately 5%greater new pm peak hour trips than
Office/Employment uses.
215 N.Mason St.•P.O.Box 580-Fort Collins,CO 80522-0580•(970)224-6058•Fax(970)221-6239•Website:fcgov.com
Preliminary Traffic Considerations Analysis
May 30,2003
Page 2 of 2
Anticipated impacts from the Harmony Lifestyle Center will likely require improvements to the
intersections of Harmony &Ziegler, Corbett&Harmony, Ziegler&Horsetooth, and Ziegler Road itself
(adjacent to HP). Traffic impacts from the development of this area as an Office/Employment land use
would potentially trigger similar need for improvements. Specific required geometric improvements to
these intersections will be the subject of a future TIS.
The impact to the surrounding streets and neighborhoods is unknown at this time. Analysis that will
investigate site-related trip generation and distribution more in-depth, including the potential cut-through
traffic in the neighborhoods to east and to the north of the site, will be included in the TIS necessary as part
of any development proposal. Transportation staff understands that traffic is a primary concern of
surrounding neighborhoods and will work with the developer to incorporate measures that minimize traffic
impacts to these affected areas. Transportation staff has begun developing traffic mitigation options and will
require from any prospective developer that specific attention be paid to proposed site circulation and trip
distribution to the surrounding neighborhood areas.
Cc: Gregory Byrne, Community Planning Director
Joe Frank, Advance Planning Director
Pete Wray, Advance Planning
Attachment 8 DRAFT
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
Council Liaison: Karen Weitkunat Staff Liaison: Cameron Gloss
Chairperson: Mikal Torgerson Phone: (W) 416-7435
Vice Chair: Jerry Gavaldon Phone: (H) 484-2034
Chairperson Torgerson called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
Roll Call: Colton, Meyer, Schmidt, Gavaldon, Craig, Carpenter, and
Torgerson.
Staff Present: Gloss, Eckman, Waido, Frank, Jackson, Byrne, Shepard,
Wray and Deines.
Director of Current Planning Cameron Gloss reviewed the Consent and
Discussion Agendas:
1. Minutes of the February 20, 2003 Planning and Zoning Board
Hearings.
• Discussion Agenda:
2. Recommendation to City Council for the Adoption of the 1-25
Subarea Plan as an Element of City Plan.
3. Recommendation to City Council for an Amendment to the
Harmony Corridor Plan and the Harmony Corridor Standards
and Guidelines.
Member Gavaldon moved for approval of Consent Item 1, February 20, 2003
minutes. Member Craig seconded the motion. The motion was approved
7-0.
Project: Staff is requesting a recommendation to City
Council regarding adoption of an amendment
to the Harmony Corridor Plan, as an element of
City Plan. The amendment would designate
an additional location for a mixed-use Activity
Center, providing a location for a fourth type of
shopping center, called a Lifestyle Shopping
Center.
DRAFT
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
February 6, 2003
Page 2
Staff is also requesting a recommendation to
City Council for adoption of Amendments to the
Harmony Corridor Standards and Guidelines.
The amendments would add a definition of
Lifestyle Shopping Centers, along with
corresponding standards for development of
such a Center.
Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence.
Greg Byrne, Director of Community Planning and Environmental Services gave
the staff presentation. He stated that this amendment would "permit" but not
"require" development on land at the northwest corner of Harmony and Ziegler
Roads. He stated that staff has known for sometime that the city has a shortage
of market ready commercial zoning to meet projected demand. It was a key
issue that was identified by staff as the City Plan update process began months
ago.
Director Byrne stated that while preparing for the City Plan update we began to
get contacts by Real Estate Brokers and from National Developers looking for a
site. In response, availability of land was reviewed and about a dozen sites were
looked at that could potentially serve and would be large enough and have good
access. None were zoned and market ready. Of the dozen, about six have
moderate to strong possibilities to overcome the obstacles. Director Byrne
highlighted those sites for the Board. Three of the six potential sites are along
Harmony Road.
Staff decided not to initiate any changes to the zoning to meet this demand
because the City Plan update was in process. At the same time it was made
available to the developers and brokers the list of properties and said if the
market is ready, then bring that forward to staff and we will respond in advance of
the City Plan update. A development company that says they would like this to
be done prior to the City Plan update process running its course has now
approached us.
The City Plan update has been guided by the characteristics that the City Council
adopted recently to guide the completion of the Plan. We have included one of
those that talks about "Fort Collins strengthening its economic base while finding
ways to expand and diversify employment options, including but not limited to a
center for retail trade." When talking about a center for retail trade, it is referring
to the City of Fort Collins in the regional context.
CRAFT
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
February 6, 2003
Page 3
Director Byrne stated that tonight the focus would be on the key issue that staff
has heard in the public process to date, and they are the same ones that were
presented to the City Council at their study session.
Clark Mapes, City Planner reviewed the Harmony Corridor and the history of the
Harmony Corridor Plan. Planner Mapes reviewed an aerial photo of the
Harmony Corridor and the proposed site as it exists today. He stated that the
existing Harmony Corridor Plan that is being amended has just a few main
aspects. First it calls for a landscaped corridor from 1-25 to College Avenue and
it designates two main types of land uses. Both allow a mix. The first type is
basic industrial and non-retail employment designation. The second is a
designation that also allows shopping centers, in addition to the basic
employment and non-retail uses. In both designations, there is an allowance for
supporting and secondary uses. That is where you see the hotels, childcare,
limited commercial service, convenience commercial and houses as secondary
uses under both the main designations.
The designation would work at Harmony and Ziegler, the addition of another
designation similar to the others of a new type of shopping center called a
• Lifestyle Shopping Center at this one location. Two properties are involved, one
a 100-acre undeveloped portion of the LSI property and there is another 50-acre
parcel involved called the Johnson Property. The southern portion of the two
properties is the portion that is proposed to be designated. The LSI property
does have an approved Overall Development Plan and there is a general bubble
diagram with a list of uses that includes all of the uses allowed in the Harmony
Corridor Plan in addition to possible future street connections. The proposed
land use designation would not represent an increase in intensity over the
existing land use designation. The building square footage would be similar
whether this additional designation is approved or not. Issues like building
height, lighting, deliveries and so forth would all be subject to the same
standards. Traffic generation would be significant either way, slightly higher with
the shopping center designation than in the employment mix, but with the a.m.
peak slightly lower, trips spread out more thinly and evenly in general.
The actual plan amendments as the Board sees in their packets are simple,
adding the one designation at this one location with a definition of the Lifestyle
Shopping Center. Planner Mapes showed slides of existing Lifestyle Centers
illustrating upscale retail and restaurants in an open air setting with very
distinctive high quality architecture and a generous pedestrian environment.
Mark Jackson of Transportation Services spoke to the Board about transportation
• and the context of how this would set in with the rest of the Harmony Corridor
AFT
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
February 6, 2003
Page 4
and the region. He stated that Harmony is currently a four lane arterial roadway
and also shows the designation as a Colorado Department of Transportation
Highway. Ultimately, the Harmony Road Corridor is designed to be a six lane
major arterial roadway. Ziegler, just east of the proposed site is currently four
lanes to a certain point and then tapers off up to Horsetooth. Ziegler is shown on
the Master Street Plan as a four-lane arterial ultimately in the future. Mr. Jackson
also showed on the Master Street Plan a conceptual collector level connection.
Mr. Jackson spoke about the interchange at Harmony and Interstate 25. If you
think in terms of different sites that have been looked at or mentioned in the
press or in discussions about potential retail or Lifestyle Centers —the
interchanges, with the exception of Harmony all have a lot of issues to them.
The Harmony interchange has recently been rebuilt, it has adequate capacity
and could certainly handle what is being proposed here. He believes that the
problems at Prospect Road, Interchange 392 and US 34 all have their own set of
issues and come with a large price tag to fix. That is why this site is so attractive
to a potential developer.
The anticipated access and circulation for this site, primary access would be
taken off of Harmony Road at Corbett. That is consistent with the Colorado
Department of Transportation's Harmony Access Control Plan. A second
primary access would be located on Ziegler and that would be a future signalized
intersection. That is right at the western entrance to Hewlett Packard.
Secondary access points are shown to the north of this primary site on Ziegler
and the north south connection that he mentioned earlier, the proposed collector
connection. Mr. Jackson reviewed circulation and stated that anticipated
impacts and issues regardless of what develops on this site, that there be the
need for improvements to the intersection at Corbett and the intersection at
Ziegler. It would be likely that improvements would also be needed at
Horsetooth and Ziegler as well. We won't know the exact level of those impacts
until a full-blown Transportation Impact Study is submitted with any development
application.
There is one issue that is on the table that is a really big issue for the folks that
live in the English Ranch neighborhood up north. That is the potential for cut
through traffic if a connection is made. They are very concerned and have
already been in conversation with the City's Traffic Engineer about what they
perceive to be a very high level of cut through traffic right now. The developer is
aware of it as an issue and staff is aware it is an issue. Everybody is committed
to make this work and the last thing that they want to do is make a bad situation
worse. Staff will work closely with the developer and the neighborhoods to
exhaust every design possibility that we can to see what we can do to mitigate
E)FR FT
• Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
February 6, 2003
Page 5
any impacts and not encourage cut through traffic. There is a whole laundry list
of potential traffic calming and traffic diversion types of strategies to be used.
That will be more appropriate when an actual development proposal comes in.
The preliminary trip generation analysis that was done showed that the retail
center looked like it would generate more average daily trips than the office,
employment or industrial. The patterns of the trips are markedly different. Office,
employment and industrial are peak hour driven in their traffic generation. If you
think in terms of a retail center, that is not necessarily the case. The shops don't
generally open that early in the morning, so you would see quite a marked
decrease in the percentage of impact on the morning peak hour. The trips also
tend to be spread out more throughout the day and they do also move into the
weekend as well. The p.m. peak hour, the retail center does generate slightly
more trips, if you account for new trips generated, the preliminary analysis
estimated a 5% increase.
Pete Wray, City Planner and Project Manager for this project stated that a
consultant was retained to help with the market analysis. Planner Wray
highlighted some key points that were brought up in the report.
• • Of the four proposed locations for the Lifestyle Center from Loveland to
Windsor and two in Fort Collins, it was estimated that only one Lifestyle
Center would materialize in this region.
• It would serve Fort Collins catching trips and sales that would otherwise leave
the city.
• It is estimated that we would have an increase in sales tax revenues
depending on the size of the Lifestyle Center anywhere from 1.3 to 2.4
million.
• It also pointed out that if the Lifestyle Center is not located in Fort Collins,
there is a potential loss of sales between 1.1 and two million.
• It would also increase of the city's captured sales tax in the region.
In looking at potential impacts, this would bring new competition into the region,
and it will have some impact on the Foothills Mall and particularly with the
existing specialty retailers located in the Mall or within the vicinity. Some of the
same tenants that are targeted for Lifestyle Centers have also been shown to
locate in these. It is identified in the report that there could be some potential
impacts on those retailers.
Planner Wray thinks that the owners of the Mall are aware of this regional
competition and have plans for expansion to stay competitive.
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
February 6, 2003
Page 6
The impacts on Downtown were also looked at. The Downtown is very unique in
its composure and mix of locally owned tenants, primarily the historic value of the
downtown and its location. Because of the distance and the qualities he has
mentioned, it was determined that there would not be significant impacts in the
Downtown area. In fact, with the potential for regional draw, they could also
potentially shop Downtown or at the Foothills Mall as well.
Staff also looked at our Employment land inventory. There are approximately
550 acres in the Harmony Corridor and if you exclude the 140 acres that would
leave 450 acres of vacant land. If you look at the approximate size of the LSI
property, approximately 35 companies of equivalent size could locate within the
corridor in the future. Looking citywide there is about 2500 acres with
approximately 52 sites greater than 10 acres that exist within our Growth
Management Area. He thinks the key points in this discussion are why we are
looking at a preferred location for this Lifestyle Center, we also have determined
that there is sufficient inventory for future primary employment within the Growth
Management Area.
PUBLI C INPUT
Charles Sturgill, lives on Sunstone Drive in English Ranch. They have a
neighborhood that has a very large amount of small children of which many ride
bicycles. There is also a school and park near by. The main road in the area is
Kingsley Road. He and his neighbors are all in agreement with the shopping
center, the only thing they don't want to see is a major exit coming onto
Paddington. That would automatically create a lot of traffic coming in their
direction.
John Cloudna, lives on Delaney and also works in the Harmony Corridor. He
was at a public meeting about the center and he heard someone say "that if you
can't buy it in Fort Collins you don't need it." He wanted to counter point that and
say that he does no shopping in Fort Collins because there is no high-end retail.
A Lifestyle Center like this would be great. He strongly encouraged the Board to
accept the amendment because this would be a great economic benefit to our
city. He feels that it is coming to Northern Colorado anyway, and it might as well
be in Fort Collins.
John Davis, lives in English Ranch and echoed the previous speakers
comments. He lives off of Kingsley Road on Newgate Court. He attended some
of the meetings and seeing the proposed exit onto Paddington and the
abatements that have been talked about, he felt would not be a concern to
himself as a homeowner. He has grandchildren who live in the area that rides
CRAFT
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
February 6, 2003
Page 7
bikes, play in the park and cross the streets. He did not feel that it would be a
major exit. He thinks that people would use the most convenient way and that
would be out to Ziegler Road and out to Horsetooth. He and his wife strongly
support this. From a personal standpoint, it will save him a lot of miles on his car
because his wife goes to Denver all the time to do her shopping and that would
help him out financially as well.
Ann Corbly lives on Spring Harvest Lane in Harvest Park Subdivision and is a
recent transplant from Littleton Colorado. She stated that in Littleton they just
constructed a Lifestyle Center named Aspen Grove and they were thrilled in their
area to have that development. Not only did it increase their property values
significantly, but also there was a minimal increase in traffic. Her experience is
that the peak hours are not significantly increased and it is not a real problem on
the main roads. She also concurred with some of the other speakers and that
she does very little shopping in Fort Collins and she would rather not send her
tax dollars and the jobs we could have here down to Broomfield or Denver.
Robert Schutzius, 3208 Mesa Verde Street, which is in the Woodland Park
Estates Subdivision, which is just north of the HP/Agilent Campus. He wanted to
. express his support for the proposed development and encourage the City
Council to amend the Harmony Road Corridor to allow such a development to
occur. He thought that it would be a tremendous source of badly needed jobs in
Fort Collins. The newspaper article in the Coloradoan inaccurately portrayed this
as a choice between 1,400 living wage jobs and 1,200 retail jobs. He thought the
reality of the matter is that this is an opportunity to harness 1,200 real jobs in Fort
Collins. There is no proposal on the table for any corporation to build a plant to
bring in any living wage jobs for this parcel or any other parcel along Harmony
Road that he is aware of. If any corporation wanted to do that, there is nothing to
stop them from building on any of the other parcels that are available. The city
could really use the sales tax revenue and property taxes that this project would
generate. He thinks that it is a foregone conclusion that there will be a Lifestyle
Center built somewhere in Northern Colorado and Larimer County. He would
prefer that it would be in Fort Collins and he prefers that it would be at the
Harmony Road site. He thinks that there is pent up demand here in Fort Collins
for the kind of retail stores that the developer would want to bring and he would
encourage the Board and Council to move boldly to secure that development
opportunity here. He also asked that the Planning and Zoning Board and the
City Council respect the wishes of those that live in neighboring English Ranch
and design the traffic flow so that it will not diversely impact those that live in that
neighborhood.
FT
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
February 6, 2003
Page 8
Marie Kilia, lives in the Harvest Subdivision and is also a transplant from Texas.
Her understanding is that this property will be developed anyway, this will just
upgrade the plan. Why shouldn't we upscale and get the best development that
we can. Even if they do decide not to develop here, if we approve this plan it will
already be market ready so if someone else would decide to develop here it will
be ready to go and we won't have to go through this process again. She agreed
that she is used to a little different shopping coming from a large city than what
Fort Collins offers. Fort Collins is a wonderful city and they love it here, but they
do have to go to Denver if they want to go to upscale shops. She would just as
soon spend her tax dollars here and support this beautiful city, than to have to
drive to Denver, or worse yet see the tax dollars go to Windsor or Loveland. If
the City Council decides not to approve this upgrade, it will send the message to
other developers who are interested in this city and it may discourage them from
any future plans that they have here. Finally, she thinks that Fort Collins needs
well planned growth, not no growth, not overgrowth but well planned growth. In
her opinion we have world class manufacturing so why don't we have world class
shopping.
Les Kaplan, stated he was on the Advisory Task Force for the Harmony Corridor
Plan update from about six years ago and is also a property owner on Harmony
Road. This is obviously a very unusual process, what we are looking at this
evening is not an application by a developer or an applicant and it is not a
scheduled update to the Harmony Corridor Plan. But none the less, he thinks
that it is important to take note that the staff has responded to an opportunity and
is trying to put the City of Fort Collins in the race for a Lifestyle Center. He
thought that for a Lifestyle Center to be built out of Fort Collins would be a sales
tax drain and would be detrimental to the city. He has two suggestions as the
Board considers this this evening. The first has to do with the definition of a
Lifestyle Center. They Lifestyle Center has seemed to become a "buzz" word for
something that is a desirable regional shopping center. We don't really know
what kind of entity it is. The staff is struggling with the definition. We all agree
that it is something that is pedestrian oriented and is something that is a higher
quality of retail and it is something that has a higher level of amenities in it. For
those reasons he thinks that the definition should limit the number of big box
stores. Currently the definition indicates that you cannot have a store that is
larger than 110,000 s.f. and he doesn't know if that is too big. That is
approximately the size of Builders Square. He thinks the size needs to be looked
at, but certainly the number needs to be looked at. If this center was dominated
by large users, it could lose out on this vision that we seem to all be sharing at
this moment as to what a Lifestyle Center is.
FT
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
• February 6, 2003
Page 9
The second thing is that this is a proposal by staff that is coming forward at this
particular time in history because there is interest in Northern Colorado on the
part of a multitude of developers to do something here for the Lifestyle Center.
This site might lose and if this site loses, he thinks the playing field on Harmony
Road needs to leveled again. There are sites that might not be "market ready"
as "market ready" as this site is considered to be; but five or six years from now,
if there is another round for additional retail in Northern Colorado with another
shopping center, some of the other sites might prove to be better sites than this.
What he is suggesting is that if a final development plan is not submitted for this
property within a certain time period, he was suggesting two years, that the
zoning revert back to what it is and the opportunity be equalized for other sites to
come in and to try and justify their properties for a Lifestyle Center or what ever
the term dejour is at that time.
Al Koppel, was on the original Harmony Corridor Update Committee in 1995 and
participated again a couple of days ago with the same group that was active in
1995. He was not there to underscore what has been said because he basically
agrees with most of what has been said so far. He has been associated with
retailing for close to 40 years. That has four decades that has shown many
• changes each decade. He wanted to make sure that people understand that this
is a change that will probably go out and if we don't' jump on this opportunity, we
may lose out in other areas beyond just this particular site we are talking about.
He cautioned the Board that all the deliberations and discussions that have went
on so far for this site and project, and will have in the future, will be purely
academic as this project goes forth on a fast track basis. If we don't move fast
on this project, we will likely lose out to Loveland anyway even if we try to move
forward on this project. He asked the Board and City Council to move
expeditiously on this project.
David Silverstein, principal with Bayer Properties from Birmingham Alabama
introduced himself to the Board. He thought it was fair to say that they were
there tonight because of the energy and effort that his company has been putting
into this process along with city staff for almost a year and a half, close to two
years. As a professional courtesy, he thought he should introduce himself to the
Board and talk about who he is, where he is from and why is he here before the
Board trying to change the character of Harmony Road. He has had the
pleasure of touching various segments of the community for the last year and a
half to introduce himself and inform about what it is that they are trying to bring to
Fort Collins. He has met with neighborhoods, had an open house, had ongoing
dialogue and shared information with city staff. He has met with the Chamber of
Commerce and Business Journal as well as the newspaper only in an effort to
. educate so that informed decisions can be made. He has not had the chance to
"11, -
154:i
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
February 6, 2003
Page 10
meet any of the Board, not privately or publicly. He has been doing this for a
number of years and has not ever quite had this distance between either
Planning Commission or Council Members in that they have been working within
the city for so long, but never had introduced himself. He stated that they were
very privileged to be here. A lot of reasons lead them to want to come to Fort
Collins. In many ways, even though they are 2,000 miles apart, Birmingham and
Fort Collins have a lot of similarities.
Before The Summit project was built in Birmingham, their city was under served
in the retail market. Shoppers were going to Atlanta. There was a tremendous
leakage of retail dollars going to Atlanta. They felt that if they could bring to their
community a project that was really new to the retail world in the sense of what
we are talking about today which is wonderful architecture, terrific landscaping,
quality mix of retailers, that the consumer in Birmingham would respond
favorably. Little do they know that The Summit project in Birmingham would
have achieved to the level it has. Their project has become part of the fabric of
their community. He submitted to the Board that they certainly value their
responsibility and acknowledge their responsibility as a developer coming to Fort
Collins. If in fact the Council ultimately chooses to allow for the amendment to
occur, they still must go through the process of submitting a development plan to
Planning in keeping with the definition of a Lifestyle Center. They have just
begun and look forward to the opportunity to invest in this community. They take
investment to mean more than just bringing dollars here, they invest culturally
and also philanthropically. They take their role as a corporate citizen beyond just
the economic investment. He invited the Board to ask any questions they would
like.
PUBLIC INPUT CLOSED
Member Colton asked about the issue Mr. Kaplan has with this becoming a big
box center with 100,000 s.f. stores dominating the center. He was concerned
with the wording on the permitted uses because it talks about retail stores,
apparel, home furnishings, bath and body, books and music, especially food, sit
down restaurants, coffee shops, ice cream parlors, grocery stores, theatres, uses
of similar character. It says that a Lifestyle Shopping Center shall contain at
least 20 different business establishments with separate public entrances. In
reading that, that could almost be the shopping center that Mr. Kaplan has, so he
was concerned that we need to have this definition be tight enough so we do get
these upscale retail establishments. He thought that it might mean adding "of
these 20, at least half have to be retail, not restaurant, or the secondary uses," or
something that will make sure that we are truly getting what we are envisioning.
DRAFT
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
February 6, 2003
Page 11
Director Byrne thought the question was perfectly valid and it is one that has also
worried staff through the process. One of the things we have done is to try and
create a new definition that is distinct and different. Some zoning ordinances are
nested so you can do up to something and anything that is lesser. We have not
done that, we have not said that you can do a Lifestyle Center or any smaller
center that is allowed in the Harmony Corridor. It would be this or nothing. So
the question is have we defined the Lifestyle Center adequately. We have spent
considerable time at this at the staff level and with our economic consultants and
now just recently we have put on contract Clarion and Associates to help us with
the legal side to work with the City Attorney's office to make sure that our Code
language is tight. He regrets he does not have that for the Board tonight, but it
will be generated in the next few days.
In addition to the 20 separate establishments that was mentioned, he thought
there was a couple of different things that are different about this that are
important to take a look at. One would be that the Lifestyle Center is intended to
serve the region and not just the community, so there is an issue of scale here.
The types of stores are regional in scope, not just neighborhood in scope.
Secondly, some language has been included in the design section that talks
about an impression of a place that is built over time. Some of the slides the
Board has seen emphasizes individual architecture for stores, rather than
architecture which tends to tie together a center to make a single statement of
unified architectural view like all awnings all the same color or roof or base
treatment that ties a bunch of stores together. This would be the opposite of that
of trying to give that impression of high scale architecture and individuality in the
storefronts.
Director Byrne offered Board Members the opportunity to make suggestions for
how to improve or tighten the definition that has been presented tonight, to
please share those with staff.
Deputy City Attorney Eckman also shared the difficult time they had with some of
the words like "upscale"which was debated as to who's scale. How up is
upscale. All these words are very subjective and mean different things to
different people. Staff has explored those and if the Board has other suggestions
they would like to hear them.
Member Colton thought that the language now designates this as an Activity
Center. He wanted to clarify that this site would be an Activity Center for a
Lifestyle Center only and would not allow any other types of Activity Centers.
r
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
February 6, 2003
Page 12
Joe Frank, Advance Planning Director replied that it would be basic non-retail
employment uses and then on top of that has it as optional Lifestyle Center. The
Lifestyle Shopping Center would be the only type of shopping center allowed on
that site.
Member Craig cited Page 2, LU4, "locate a broader range of land uses in the
area of the Harmony Corridor known as mixed use Activity Centers as shown on
map 10." "Mixed-use Activity Centers are areas where a broader range of land
uses may locate. The mixed use Activity Center permits, in addition to the uses
listed in the basic industrial and non-retail Activity Centers, a range of retail and
commercial uses to occur in shopping centers. If single family housing is
provided, at least a general equivalent number of multi family dwelling units must
also be provided. Neighborhood Service Centers, Community Shopping
Centers, Regional Shopping Centers and a Lifestyle Shopping Center shall be
limited to those locations."
If she reads that correctly and we open this up to a mixed-use Activity Center,
everything in that paragraph can be put on this piece of property and if the
Lifestyle Center goes away, then anything else can go in here.
Director Frank replied that what would be permitted is what he described. It
would be the basic employment uses or as an overlay the Lifestyle Shopping
Center. That will be the zoning on this piece of property. That was more of just a
generalized policy statement, not mixed use Activity Centers. The Design
Standards and the map that shows this as a Lifestyle Center, is in the Design
Standards to become the zoning in addition the definition of a Lifestyle Center.
That is what the Plan will be designated as, a Lifestyle Center, not Neighborhood
Shopping Center or Community Regional Shopping Center.
If we are going to zone it a Lifestyle Center, then we can't have the basic and
non-retail on it if someone were to show up tomorrow.
Director Frank replied that was not true. There will be permitted uses on it in the
zoning. One of the permitted uses.in the zoning in the Harmony Corridor is basic
employment uses. In addition, the HC Corridor zoning states that Lifestyle
Centers, Neighborhood Shopping Centers or Community Regional Shopping
Centers are located, but as specified on the map. That map in the Harmony
Corridor Design Standards and Guidelines and in the plan will say that this spot
will be for Lifestyle Centers. As is the other centers across the street in the
Preston Center that had the basic employment land uses, and on top of that it
said also possible, potential neighborhood shopping centers. That developer
jr•` ...a r^t
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
. February 6, 2003
Page 13
chose not to develop that site for a neighborhood shopping center, they decided
to develop under the non-retail basic employment land uses.
Member Schmidt asked about the transportation portion and that there really
wasn't any numbers. She stated that there would be an increase of 5%, what is
that a 5% increase of. How many trips are we talking.
Mr. Jackson replied they do have some numbers and basically they come with a
caveat. That is that this is really back of the envelope stuff and it is not anywhere
near approaching the level of specificity that you will find in the required
Transportation Impact Analysis that look at much more specificity. Basically the
numbers we are talking about, the retail trip generation averages about 20,000
trips a day. Similar trip generation for office/business park type of thing is
approximately 14,000 trips a day.
Member Schmidt asked about the map that had the green line across and that
was not what was in their packets, so will the Lifestyle Center only go to that
green line and if so, what is going above it.
. Director Byrne replied yes, it would only go up to that green line. What would go
above it is what is there now. It would continue to be the Harmony Corridor
designation for the basic non-retail employment.
Member Schmidt asked if when the Lifestyle Center goes in, would the roads go
in, or would they have to wait until that other piece would develop into something.
Director Byrne responded that the decision would be made based upon the more
detailed traffic study. In speculation, if this plan amendment goes through, it is
very likely that the retail component would be built first and that the major access
points, one on Harmony Road and one on Ziegler Road would serve the center.
People would learn to use those major access points and over time, the balance
of the site would be developed and a more complete road network would be
developed.
Member Carpenter asked about the traffic calming for English Ranch and was it
also being looked at blocking traffic so it can't go through that area.
Mr. Jackson replied that it will be an option that will be on the table. At this point
everything is on the table. What they are committed to doing is looking at design
alternatives, both within the site, but also the "halo" area around it. That would
include traffic calming strategy, diverter strategy, signage, neighborhood design,
• working with the neighborhoods and potential enforcement. Is it possible that no
in
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
February 6, 2003
Page 14
connection would be made, it is going to be on the table but used only as a last
resort.
Member Carpenter said that although she does believe in connectivity, and she
does think that is important, we also have a value in our city of neighborhoods.
She thought that if you are going to sacrifice one or the other, it needs to be the
connectivity rather than the neighborhood. She realized that there are a lot of
other things that you can do, but there is also a lot of other ways that you can
provide pedestrian and bicycle and that kind of connectivity without allowing cut
through traffic.
Member Gavaldon asked about other neighborhoods that have complained about
cut through traffic and was there any comparison analysis to see if all the fears
were validated or were they just mute.
Mr. Jackson replied that he has not. The information he has anecdotal.
Eric Bracke, Transportation Operations replied that they actually did a number of
before and after studies for the Safeway and the Ticonderoga area. There was
absolutely no increase in traffic. There has also been no increase in traffic at the
First National Bank facility and Drake and Taft. The two developments and
Drake and Timberline have not developed, so there is no data on that.
Mr. Bracke stated that they intend to work with this neighborhood. He agrees
with Member Carpenter 100% in that connectivity standards and neighborhood
value standards, he thinks those priorities are correct. He thinks that this
neighborhood has the potential to get cut through traffic as part of this. He also
thinks that there are some very creative ways to prevent it and make it very
inconvenient.
Member Gavaldon asked in terms of fairness, have we been consistent with
connectivity being a lower priority over neighborhood integrity in keeping the
neighborhood, or have we reversed it and used it differently.
Mr. Bracke replied that yes we have and gave examples. He stated that we are
as consistent as we can be and there is not a cookie cutter approach. Every
development is different and every development has its own set of issues. Staff
looks and them and evaluates them and we are as consistent as we possibly can
be.
Chairperson Torgerson asked about the issue Mr. Kaplan brought up about
timing. It seems apparent that based on the research that has been done that
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
February 6, 2003
Page 15
this is probably the best site. If this were not to develop as a Lifestyle Center,
would we down the road look at the other six sites that looked promising and do
a similar process here, or would this just stand and assume that there is only one
Lifestyle Center in town.
Director Frank replied that this is the only site that we are currently looking at. If
a property owner came forward with a request to amend the plan, we would give
it consideration and they could bring there proposal forward. Staff has not
studied other sites, there have been no neighborhood meetings held on other
sites along Harmony Road. The opportunity is certainly there.
Director Byrne added that some of the property that he had said had potential
that was not market ready, is correctly zoned. The property on the Interstate
around Prospect Road and around Mulberry, the commercial zoning would
completely support a Lifestyle Center with no change. A developer could come
in and build one today, the problem of course is the infrastructure. It is simply not
ready to handle that amount of traffic. The different sites that he suggested to
the Board that they gave to a variety of different people as potentials, had a array
of different kinds of problems.
Member Craig asked about the two Lifestyle Centers that have been or are being
built in Colorado and was there any pictures that were included of those
developments.
Planner Wray replied that no they did not include the Aspen Grove and the
Briarwood is still in the planning stages.
Director Byrne added that they did not want to have people have images of
something that they may not get on this site. What they tried to show was
pictures from projects that this developer has proposed without tying this
proposal to close to that, because we think that it is a reasonable and feasible
thing to expect. Some of the pictures that are in the Library are clearly not
reasonable on this site.
Member Craig's concern is that it is great to put pictures up there, but she just
does not feel like we have grasped the criteria to get those pictures. She has the
feeling that she can't take that picture at PDP and say "hey it does not look like
this, " what are you going to do about it? She wants to make sure we are not
fanaticizing a Lifestyle Center and not making one materialize in our Land Use
Code.
jf
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
February 6, 2003
Page 16
Director Byrne stated that staff has tried their best to give the Board a definition
that differentiates this center from others. If the Board has suggestions that they
would like to add or areas to strengthen it, staff would certainly entertain that.
Planner Mapes added that the same issue came up at the Harmony Corridor
Advisory Committee Meeting. No matter what we do, there is always going to be
a risk. The pictures we show and the vision we have and the words we use to
describe it are going to lead to a push and pull tug-of-war when a developer
submits an actual plan. Rarely does someone come in and absorb the spirit of
what is behind everything we say as well as the letter. You can't legislate good
design so there is always going to be a risk that a development is not going to
end up like the pictures. Most of the pictures are from another center that this
developer built.
Member Craig stated that she could only work off of what has been written to get
what it is we want. She thinks we have been through enough shopping centers
etc, that we do know what we want out of this. She wants to make sure that it is
here so when it does come before her as a PDP, she can say that is what she
envisioned as a Lifestyle Center.
Member Schmidt asked what the minimum number of stores you would need to
have to start.
Mr. Silverstein responded that they are not speculators, for them to acquire the
land, put the infrastructure in place and only open 5 stores, they would be out of
business. Certainly there is a minimum square footage that would make sense
before they would turn the first spade of earth and begin the construction process
of a project of this size. It could be built in phases and it all may not be built at
one time, but there is a minimum square footage that they would commit to
before they would invest in the land and infrastructure that goes along with that.
Mr. Silverstein also addressed Member Craig's concern. He stated that the city
should understand exactly what is going to ultimately be built. He has always
viewed from his responsibility as potentially the developer of this Lifestyle Center
on this piece of property that through the development process, the next phase,
that a detailed development plan is part of what they would submit to staff, the
Board and the neighborhood so they could see where the landscaping is going,
where the buildings are located, points of ingress and egress, down to the light
fixtures they plan to use so there would be a clear understanding that when you
drive by this shopping center that it is what you envisioned it to be.
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
February 6, 2003
Page 17
Member Gavaldon asked the staff not to get too worked up on drawings and
photos. What he is hearing from his colleague is that something that we cannot
offer and he would not support. He wants to see that at PDP and in the Land
Use Code you put examples down, this is what we want, but you put the context.
He thought that was an appropriate place to put it and tighten it up as best you
can, but he did not want to see micro managing and killing any creativity of our
applicants.
Member Colton asked about the Employment analysis because many of the
parcels that were mentioned were up in the Mountain Vista area. He knows that
there is some discussion that Anheuser Busch may or may not ever allow
development. He wanted to hear from the economic analysis that even if those
parcels were taken out that we would still have enough employment for the size
of the current GMA we have.
Director Byrne replied that one of the specific questions that we asked the
economic consultants was to do that. We know that the AB lands are
questionable. They have had a long history of saying that they want to maintain
their property as buffer rather than put it into the market place. At the same time,
other AB plants have surrounded themselves with business parks. We know
they have a model that works for them that we would like to see them do in town.
On page 21 of the consultant's report it states that "Anheuser Busch lands
comprise 47% of employment land and 20% of industrial land. If AB lands are
taken out of the inventory, it still leaves 504 acres of employment land and 714
acres of industrial land. Staff is very comfortable with those numbers.
Member Schmidt asked that the wording be changed in the Harmony Corridor
Amendment to read "the amendment would designate a location for a fourth type
of shopping center called a Lifestyle Shopping Center" and take out the "mixed-
use Activity Center." She felt that would guarantee that it would be a Lifestyle
Center.
Planner Mapes responded that was really just a technicality. If you look on the
map, there are two main designations that we would amend. One is the basic
industrial Activity Center; the other is called a mixed-use Activity Center. Some
of the mixed-use Activity Centers would allow different types of shopping centers.
It would be put on the map and legend that would show where mixed-use Activity
Centers could locate.
Member Craig had a concern that on page 11 it states "a Lifestyle Center shall
contain at least 20 different business establishments." She thought that raises a
. question of is there a possibility of making sure that there is some kind of a
'yam A
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
February 6, 2003
Page 18
percentage or number that are retail so we don't end up with another Timberline
that has no retail.
Director Byrne replied that he understands her point, but he does not know what
that number would be. He agrees that what we are looking at here is a specific
type of center that is retail in its core. He felt that it could be looked at.
Member Gavaldon moved to recommend to City Council adoption of the
amendment to the Harmony Corridor Plan as an element of City Plan. The
amendment shall designate an additional location for a mixed-use Activity
Center, providing a location for a fourth type of shopping center called a
Lifestyle Shopping Center. In addition, a request that staff continue to
work on the language, examples and steps that they need to totally define a
Lifestyle Shopping Center. Also to further investigate the minimum
standard that it would take to opening level from 0 to 20 for retail
establishments.
Member Colton seconded the motion.
Member Colton felt that we were 99% there, but he felt that the number of retail
establishments versus other types needs to be looked at. If this does not go
through and another one comes down the road, who knows what we would get if
we don't have strict enough criteria to define this. He is supporting this because
he was on the Harmony Corridor Plan Committee and recognized the need for
employment, but felt that has been looked at and addressed. There is going to
be a Lifestyle Center in Northern Colorado and he felt this was a good location
with an improved street. He thought that the traffic concerns could be dealt with
so he felt it made sense overall.
Member Carpenter concurred with Member Colton and was felt that it was a
good thing to change the Harmony Corridor Plan because it has been a long
time.
Chairperson Torgerson stated that he has struggled with this one all along. He
was not used to the city government responding to business concerns and
promoting economic growth like this. That encourages him. This is an unusual
process, but he thinks that it is in response to some economic realities that we
face right now.
Member Craig would also be supporting the motion. She still has many concerns
but felt that they would be addressed at PDP. She thinks that she has made her
point to staff and hopes that at PDP she has something in front of her that she
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
February 6, 2003
Page 19
can work with. She appreciates all the work that staff has put into this. She
greatly appreciates the market analysis because it was very helpful and
developed a comfort level. We don't know in five years whether we would need
the employment or industrial land. It seems that we still have plenty of land left.
The motion was approved 7-0.
Member Gavaldon moved to recommend to City Council adoption of the
Amendments to the Harmony Corridor Standards and Guidelines. The
amendments would add a definition of Lifestyle Shopping Centers, along
with corresponding standards for development of such a Center. Including
the additional comments made in the previous motion as well.
Member Craig seconded the motion.
The motion was approved 7-0.
•
•
Attachment 9
G I 225 South Meldrum Street I 970482 37g6 I www.fortcollioschamber.com
Fort Collins,Colorado 9
70.48z.3774 fax
CHANIBER
OF CO)t?I P:RCE
RESOLUTION REGARDING FORT COLLINS AS
A MAJOR CENTER OF RETAIL TRADE
Whereas, there is documented market demand for one new regional retail center in the
greater Fort Collins region making new retail competition inevitable, and
Whereas, four viable potential sites have been identified for a new regional retail center
with two of those sites within the city limits of Fort Collins, and
Whereas, the City of Fort Collins experienced a decline in its sales and use tax revenues for
the first time in its history and is seeking solutions to stem that problem, and
Whereas, Fort Collins is the center of retail trade in Northern Colorado and development of
a new retail center near I-25 would cement that position for years to come, and
Whereas, the economic benefit of a new regional retail center in Fort Collins would be a net
increase of $42.5 to $80.8 million in annual retail sales while decreasing retail leakage to
northern Denver and adding upscale shopping for area residents, and
• Whereas, locating a regional retail center outside of Fort Collins will result in a net loss of
$35.4 to $67.3 million in annual retail sales in Fort Collins, and
Whereas, locating a regional retail center within Fort Collins should provide additional
opportunities for mass transit service locating a center outside of Fort Collins will
exacerbate regional auto traffic, and
Whereas, one solution being pursued by the City involves removing impediments such as
the Harmony Corridor Plan and the Harmony Corridor Locational Standards and
Guidelines that currently prevent the Fort Collins site from being competitive, and
Whereas, amending the Harmony Corridor Plan does not constitute any development
approvals, but merely demonstrates that a suitable site is available for and supported by the
local government as a regional retail center, and
Whereas, amending the corridor plan does not eliminate the existing potential uses of the
site, e.g., for primary employment, it would remove a major piece of property from the
inventory of land for primary employment if developed as the proposed retail center, and
Whereas, the inevitable new retail competition in the region will affect the Foothills Mall,
which has been a fixture in Fort Collins for decades, and its owners have made substantial,
continuous, longstanding contributions to all aspects of the Fort Collins community, and
. Whereas, the owners of the Foothills Mall are considering plans to expand and renovate
their property, and
RESOLUTION REGARDING FORT COLLINS As A MAJOR CENTER OF RETAIL TRADE
PAGE 2
Whereas, the downtown business district is unique and would probably benefit from more
regional retail trade because it would draw a larger number of people into the area to shop
and dine, and
Whereas, a new regional retail center in Fort Collins helps meet short-term retail demand
and helps the City bolster its sales and use tax revenues, it does not address more fundamen-
tal, long-term macroeconomic trends that are eroding the primary job base. A new retail
center is a short-term fix but cannot replace a strategic economic plan to replace lost income
for area residents.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Fort Collins Area Chamber of Commerce
supports amending the Harmony Corridor Plan to permit a retail center as an added use at
the Harmony location and adjusting the Standards and Guidelines that clearly define its use,
size and character, and
Be It Further Resolved That, the Fort Collins Area Chamber of Commerce encourages the
City to:
• Work closely with the Foothills Mall to facilitate their renovation and expansion plans
by using all appropriate means within the City's power including tax increment fi-
nancing, infrastructure improvements and responsive planning and development re-
view;
• Show the same level of engagement with Downtown and other established retail cen-
ters as their needs are identified;
• Work with the developers of the I-25/Prospect site to assist with their planning efforts
while ultimately allowing the marketplace to determine the optimal location for a new
retail center, and
Be It Further Resolved That, the Chamber supports a review by the City to consider add-
ing sites or rezoning existing land to assure adequate sites for primary employers, and
Be It Further Resolved That, the Chamber encourages the City to not only explore new
revenue sources but to also examine its expenses for services and programs that have grown
over the past decade that aren't for public safety, infrastructure or utilities, and
Finally Be It Further Resolved That, the Chamber strongly recommends that the City un-
dertake an economic study that examines long-term macroeconomic trends and their impact
on Fort Collins while developing an economic strategy that capitalizes on Fort Collins'
strengths and embraces the values of our community, specifically the creation of primary
jobs in a way that minimizes environmental impacts.
Adopted by the Fort Collins Area Chamber of Commercee this 16th day of June, A.D. 2003.
l.W 4 wola�
Chairman