HomeMy WebLinkAboutMemo - Read Before Packet - 1/26/2016 - Memorandum From Cameron Gloss, Tom Leeson, Laurie Kadrich Re: Agenda Materials For The Joint Meeting With The Windsor Town Board Regarding The Potential Amendments To The Corridor Activity Center (CacTOWN OF WINDSOR – CITY OF FORT COLLINS
JOINT MEETING
February 1, 2016 - 6:00 p.m.
Dinner will be served
Community Recreation Center (Aspen Room), 250 N. 11th St, Windsor 80550
The Town of Windsor will make reasonable accommodations for access to services, programs, and activities and will make
special communication arrangements will be made for persons with disabilities. Please call (970) 674-2400 to make
arrangements.
This meeting will not be televised or recorded.
AGENDA
1. Introductions
2. Overview - History of I-25 Corridor Plans and Standards
a. Northern Colorado Regional Communities I-25 Corridor Plan
b. Fort Collins I-25 Subarea Plan
c. Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor
d. I-25/392 Corridor Activity Center (CAC) District
e. Public Involvement Process
3. Requests from property owners within the CAC
a. Request to add automobile sales and service to the list of allowed CAC uses
b. Proposal to allow single family detached residential uses under the CAC term “mixed use
residential”
4. Discussion by Town Board and City Council on CAC amendment requests and next steps
City of Fort Collins and Town of Windsor Staff Report - January 22, 2016
I-25/392 Corridor Activity Center Land Use, Design and Regulatory Options
Introduction
The Fort Collins City Council and Windsor Town Board continued discussion of the 392/I-25
development standards at their joint meeting on November 2, 2015, to allow additional time to
consider public input and to further study design and use options for the Community Corridor
Activity Center (CAC).
In general, the direction was for City and Town staff to review the existing I-25 Regional Plan
policies and regulations and assess new design standards for the CAC, and evaluate the
review period for the IGA and the appeal process. Specifically, staff was directed to work on
development standards that would make any permitted use in the CAC more compatible and
acceptable, and then the elected officials would discuss potential new uses.
Furthermore, staff was directed to seek the input of affected property owners on any
recommendations for modifying existing policies and regulations.
There are three fundamental questions to be answered:
1. Is there support for establishing Transit Oriented Development at this
interchange and within the CAC?
2. Should development standards within the Fort Collins and Windsor Land Use
Codes be amended to include additional requirements to mitigate visual and
functional impacts upon the gateway?
3. Is there support for the adding Auto Sales and Service use to the CAC Overlay
in some form?
History of I-25 Corridor Plans and Standards
A. Northern Colorado Regional Communities I-25 Corridor Plan
In 2001, eight Northern Colorado jurisdictions — Fort Collins, Loveland, Berthoud,
Windsor, Johnstown, Timnath and Larimer and Weld counties — created the Northern
Colorado Regional Communities I-25 Corridor Plan with the North Front Range
Transportation and Air Quality Planning Council and the Colorado Department of
Transportation. The Plan is also commonly referred to as the Regional Plan.
Development of the Regional Plan took 18 months and examined aesthetics, access
control, open lands/natural areas and land use issues.
Report to Council & Town Board – CAC Policies and Standards Page 2
January 22, 2016
An impetus for the Regional Plan was the tremendous regional growth pressure being
experienced within the I-25 Corridor and the unattractive development that has plagued
some of the interchange areas to the south. While most Northern Colorado communities
were excited about the economic benefits that growth can bring, there was also the
realization that without careful planning and coordination on a regional basis, it could
bring other costs and unanticipated consequences. It was acknowledged at the time
that there would be the potential for unattractive strip commercial development,
inadequate transportation systems, impact on future transit opportunities, and loss of
unique regional character and qualities.
The Regional Plan and its accompanying design standards created a framework for
development of the 30 mile-long corridor area extending from just south of Colorado 56
at Berthoud to Larimer County Road 58 north of Fort Collins.
A vision for Key Land Use Patterns is explained in the adopted Regional Plan. Some
pertinent excerpts are highlighted in bold text below:
• Development is concentrated in mixed-use activity nodes to support use of
alternative modes and reduce short-term land consumption.
• Development is organized to create a strong visual and physical connection to
current and future transportation systems, to other development, and to I-25.
• Single-family detached residential development does not occur within ¼ mile of I-25
to minimize noise and visual impacts.
• Larger employers and industrial uses are clustered in a campus-like setting
adjacent to activity centers, or are integrated with other uses into activity
centers.
The original concept for the Regional Plan was to come up with an overall framework
that all jurisdictions could adopt, and THEN adapt and modify it at the local (subarea)
level to reflect local conditions and tastes.
Six of the eight jurisdictions involved — Fort Collins, Loveland, Berthoud, Timnath,
Windsor and Larimer County — have adopted the Regional Plan.
B. Fort Collins I-25 Subarea Plan
The City of Fort Collins adopted a subarea plan specific to Fort Collins’ portion of the I-
25 corridor in 2003. This I-25 Subarea Plan provides a fine-grain analysis and
recommendations within the broader vision of the Regional Plan. The Subarea Plan
offers specific land use, road network and open lands recommendations on a parcel-by-
parcel basis. The I-25/392 Interchange lied outside the Fort Collins Growth
Management Area (GMA) boundary, when the Subarea Plan was adopted in 2003, thus
there are no directly applicable Plan principles or policies to the CAC.
Report to Council & Town Board – CAC Policies and Standards Page 3
January 22, 2016
C. Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor
A key component of the I-25 Regional Plan is a set of recommended Design Standards
that were prepared during the planning process. It was anticipated that the standards
would be adopted in a form tailored by each of the participating jurisdictions to meet
their respective needs.
The Design Standards document is organized into three areas: locational standards,
activity center standards, and standards for areas between activity centers. Of these
standards, it is the Activity Center standards that provide the basis for land use and
design parameters applicable to the I-25/SH 392 Interchange area, which was
designated as an “Activity Center” in the Regional Plan.
Design Standards for the Activity Centers were expressly created to “provide the tools
for creating an improved quality of appearance and more integrated mix of land uses for
concentrated areas of development” than typically found in highway commercial
development. The standards also were designed to further opportunities for transit-
supported development.
The Activity Center Design Standards address the following aspects of development
(see Attachment A for the applicable standards):
• Circulation and Access: vehicular and pedestrian connectivity and design
• Development Pattern/Site Layout: patterns of blocks and building orientation
• Parking: parking lot sizes, location, and landscaping/screening
• Building Design/Character: Building façade and roof treatments, and materials and
colors.
• Landscaping: landscape materials and quantities, and site perimeter landscaping
• Service Area, Outdoor Storage, and Mechanical Equipment: equipment and facility
locations and screening
• Fences and Walls: Materials, location, height and length of fences and walls.
While most jurisdictions governed by the I-25 Regional Plan have adopted the Regional
Plan, each has taken a different approach to implementing design standards. Some
regulatory variation was anticipated, as the Design Standards document states: “Each
participating community will be adopting a variation of this document based upon
existing regulations and community preference.” To date, some jurisdictions have
adopted the Design Standards verbatim, some have created a unique set of design
standards; and others have adopted the general design standards but have not
incorporated them into their development code or applied them consistently.
The Cities of Loveland and Fort Collins, and the Towns of Timnath and Windsor have
adopted all or part of Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor. The Towns
Report to Council & Town Board – CAC Policies and Standards Page 4
January 22, 2016
of Johnstown and Berthoud and Weld and Larimer Counties have not adopted the
standards. Below is a summary of the specifics related to adopted local versions of the
design standards:
Loveland
The City of Loveland adopted the Regional Standards through their Site Development
Performance Standards and Guidelines, last updated in August 2007. The most
significant frontage along I-25 within Loveland’s jurisdiction coincides with the Millenium
PUD (the PUD for all of Centerra) which was approved prior to the City of Loveland
adopting the I-25 Corridor Plan and Design Standards. The Millenium PUD, including
the Motorplex (BMW, Buick/GMC, Mercedes, MINI and Subaru), had specific standards
for vehicle display and landscape treatment along I-25, which was vested under the
development plan approval, so they were not subject to the Corridor Plan or the
subsequently adopted design standards.
Timnath
The Town of Timnath adopted the I-25 Design standards as originally published, yet
they were not incorporated into the Town’s development code nor fully applied to
notable recent developments at the I-25/Harmony gateway such as the WalMart and
Costco projects.
Windsor
The Town of Windsor adopted the Regional Plan and design standards in full. Windsor’s
design standards include limitations on allowable use, building materials, roof form,
building height, and signage.
Windsor also applies its Commercial Corridor Plan standards, which address aspects of
site layout, architecture, lighting and landscaping, to all commercial properties (see
Attachment B). The existing Windsor businesses at the I-25/392 Interchange were
developed prior to the Town’s adoption of the I-25 Design Standards.
Fort Collins
Fort Collins’ development standards for the interchange augment other pre-existing
citywide standards which are similar to the Regional Plan standards, further limit
building placement, and set additional requirements for landscaping, screening and
location of outdoor storage and service areas.
D. I-25/392 Corridor Activity Center (CAC) District
In 2010, recognizing that the I-25/392 Interchange is an important ‘gateway’ feature to
both Fort Collins and Windsor, an overlay zone district was created. The CAC was to
establish land use and gateway design standards to complement and enhance the
Report to Council & Town Board – CAC Policies and Standards Page 5
January 22, 2016
implementation of the Regional Plan, with the District being added to the Land Use
Codes of each community. As part of the Intergovernmental Agreement between the
City and the Town, both Land Use Codes were amended in the following manner in
order to implement the vision and establish new gateway standards for this joint
planning area.
Land Use
The permitted uses allowed in the CAC sub-district are more restrictive than otherwise
allowed in commercial zones in Fort Collins such as along South College Avenue. Fort
Collins’ General Commercial zone district contains a reference for properties located
along I-25 that specific design standards are found in Section 3.9 of the City of Fort
Collins Land Use Code – Development Standards for the I-25 Corridor. Several uses
were specifically excluded from the list of permitted uses, both on the Fort Collins and
Windsor sides of the interchange. Uses prohibited within the CAC were not viewed as
supportive of the Regional Plan vision for either “mixed use activity nodes” or
“larger employers and industrial uses (that) are …integrated into activity
centers”.
I-25/392 Interchange Corridor Activity Center Gateway Standards
Land Use Table
Permitted Uses in Gateway Prohibited Uses In Gateway
Small Scale Rec./Events Center Enclosed Mini Storage
Standard Restaurant Retail/Supply Yards
Personal/Business Service Shops Parking Garage (as primary use)
Health Club Funeral Home
Schools-Private/Vocational Colleges Car Dealerships/Sales
Drive Thru Restaurants Dog/Horse Track
Grocery/Supermarket Adult Uses
Medical Center/Clinics Multi-bay Self-Serve Carwash
Entertainment Facilities/Theaters Amusement Park
Tele-Communication Equipment, excluding
freestanding towers Warehousing/Distribution Wholesale
Cultural Venues
Outdoor General Advertising
Services/Billboards
Fuel Sales Convenience Stores Single Family Detached
Hospital Duplex
Long Term Care Facilities Group Homes
Adult Day Care Centers Extra Occupancy Rental Housing
Unlimited Indoor Recreation Places of Worship
Lodging Bed & Breakfast
Retail Store Vehicle Servicing/Testing/Repair
Report to Council & Town Board – CAC Policies and Standards Page 6
January 22, 2016
Multi-Family Mixed-Use Equipment Rental
Mixed Used Residential Truck/Trailer/RV/Boat/Storage Sales
Offices/Financial Freestanding Telecommunication Towers
Retail Establishment/Big Box Recycling Facilities
Composting
Fort Collins’ General Commercial District is intended to be a setting for development,
redevelopment and infill of a wide range of community and regional retail uses, offices
and personal and business services. Secondarily, it can accommodate a wide range of
other uses including creative forms of housing.
While some General Commercial District areas may continue to meet the need for auto-
related and other auto-oriented uses, it is the City's intent that the General Commercial
District emphasizes safe and convenient personal mobility in many forms, with planning
and design that accommodates pedestrians. Windsor’s underlying Limited Industrial and
General Commercial zoning was approved with the annexation of the subject properties
and would allow the for the uses listed in those respective chapters of the Windsor
Municipal Code if not for the adoption of the more restrictive CAC sub-district. Windsor
incorporated the I-25/392 Corridor Activity Center list of permitted uses and design
standards into Chapter 17, Article XIII, Division 3 of the Municipal Code. Windsor
applies the aforementioned Commercial Corridor Plan and I-25 Design Standards to
any commercial or industrial project within the CAC. Windsor’s Comprehensive Plan
depicts the southeast quadrant of the interchange as “Employment Corridor” and
defines Employment Corridor as follows: “Provides for areas of targeted investment
centered on gateway development activities including significant new office, commercial
and housing opportunities.” Windsor’s Comprehensive Plan Commercial and Industrial
Land Use Policies #11 and #15 further state:
“11. Discourage continued commercial “strip” development along key corridors
and establish “gateways” and into the Town.”
“15. In accordance with the design and location criteria outlined in the I-25
Corridor Plan, areas within one-quarter mile of I-25 should not be depicted in the
Land Use Plan or zoned for single-family detached residential uses to minimize
noise and visual impacts, while appropriate areas within one-half mile of I-25 and
near activity centers should be depicted and zoned for suitable commercial and
industrial uses. These areas should serve as the gateway for business for the
Town of Windsor.”
Long-term Land Use Implications
One of the implications for reducing the intensity of use within the CAC is the lost
opportunity to support transit. The Transportation Element of the Regional Plan is built
Report to Council & Town Board – CAC Policies and Standards Page 7
January 22, 2016
on a foundation stressing true, balanced multi-modal transportation alternatives. Multi-
modal transportation elements from the North Front Range Transportation Alternatives
Study (NFRTAFS) adopted in 1999 form the backbone for the future recommended I-25
Corridor transportation system. This includes regionally-focused commuter transit
supported by feeder bus transit servicing inter-regional and local needs. The North I-25
Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) suggests that both express bus service
and facilities will be provided in the relatively near future; with a BRT express bus
station on the southeast quadrant of the interchange. The EIS identifies that zoning is
in place at the interchange to best support transit.
Some land uses permitted within the CAC were specifically selected since they are
found to be transit-supportive, such as major employment types, including hospitals,
colleges, and office parks, and mixed-use (higher-density residential and non-
residential) development that can best take advantage of its proximity to transit.
Similarly, general retail, restaurants, and personal service functions will support the
major employment uses and generate activity during peak and non-peak hours.
Conversely, best practices from communities with successful TOD have shown that
non-transit supportive uses should be discouraged. These are typically uses that
generate little to no ridership spread on to larger parcels with low-intensity development
and large surface parking lots. Examples of non-transit supportive uses are warehouse
storage, mini-storage, vehicle storage, supply yards, car dealerships and service
centers, and very low-density housing. Approval of non-TOD uses may set a precedent
and spur additional requests to amend the interchange use limitations (applies to both
Windsor and Fort Collins) and more auto-oriented development.
Visual Character Impact of Uses
The potential negative impacts to visual character was another primary driver in
developing the list of permitted uses with the CAC, as the I-25/392 Interchange is a key
gateway feature of Fort Collins and the main gateway into Windsor. The design of the
recently constructed interchange bridge and landscaping has established an attractive
gateway feature, and the expectation has been that associated development will be
required to support the overall gateway concept. Prohibited uses within the CAC often
include physical characteristics that are not in keeping with a high-quality gateway
image. These uses, as described in the previous section, commonly include outdoor
vehicle and/or material storage, large parking lots, a relative lack of landscaping and
screening, large signs oriented to the highway, high lighting levels and security lighting,
and a lower level of architecture and materials.
CAC Development Standards Relative to Best Practices
The purpose of the CAC Design Standards adopted by Fort Collins and Windsor
(Attachments C and D) is to supplement existing commercial standards for both
jurisdictions and “raise the bar” in design quality to support an attractive gateway and
more intensive mixed-use commercial projects, without impeding potential new
Report to Council & Town Board – CAC Policies and Standards Page 8
January 22, 2016
development near the Interchange. Review of the best practices on a national level has
shown that the CAC site, building and landscaping standards, in general, far exceed
that of most jurisdictions.
Based on continued research and feedback during the January 21 public open house
meeting, staff is assessing additional design standards to further support the “gateway”
vision for a visually appealing and attractive commercial activity center around the
interchange area. New design elements to be considered include building orientation
and setbacks, site lighting shielding, sound limits, transitions of building height, building
form and articulation, and long-term design for adaptive re-use/redevelopment. These
additional elements will complement the existing building design standards for high
quality building materials, height, roof-pitch and façade treatments.
Of those existing site design standards that may be considered for amendment,
landscape buffer yards adjacent to I-25 may be insufficient to protect visual quality
within the gateway. Other landscape design elements that provide a more opaque,
year-round screening, such as more intensive plantings of coniferous trees and shrubs
and berms, may be appropriate. A good example of a more opaque highway buffer
occurs four miles south of the interchange along the east side of I-25 adjacent the
Shops at Centerra. In this case, all surface parking is virtually screened from view
through a combination of clustered coniferous vegetation and tall ornamental grasses
between berms, so that the primary visual focus is on buildings and landscaping. Rear
yard buffers and use restrictions, especially between existing residential and non-
residential development is important as well.
Review and Approval of Additional Uses within the CAC and Site Specific Development
Proposals
In order to consider changes to the list of approved CAC uses, the following steps would
need to be taken to amend the existing agreement:
• Joint jurisdiction staff review
• Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board
• Windsor Planning Commission recommendations
• Windsor Town Board Hearing
• Fort Collins City Council Hearing
• Fort Collins/Windsor IGA Amendment
In 2013, an administrative IGA was developed describing a joint development review
process for any development proposals within the CAC. The new process requires that
the reviewing entity refer the proposed development plan to the receiving entity at least
30 days prior to a decision.
Based on language within the IGA, staff is not recommending any specific changes to
either the process to amend CAC approved uses or the development review process.
Report to Council & Town Board – CAC Policies and Standards Page 9
January 22, 2016
Public Involvement Process to Consider Development Standard Amendments
An Open House hosted by the Town of Windsor and the City of Fort Collins was held on
January 21, 2016 to provide background regarding the existing development standards and
gather input from the surrounding neighborhoods. Advertising for the Open House was
provided through direct mail to affected property owners and homeowner’s associations, and
issuance of press releases to the local media.
Approximately 93 people, most of whom were neighbors to the CAC, attended the 1/21/16
open house meeting. Initial observations from the input received during the meeting include
primary concerns regarding site-lighting, setbacks/landscape buffers and traffic. Residents of
the Country Farms Subdivision also have strong concerns regarding the connection of existing
Country Farms Drive to future development to the west. Three comments indicated that
automobile dealerships would be acceptable with appropriate regulations, while fourteen
responses were against amending the IGA to include auto dealerships.
A summary of public comments, including a participant questionnaire will be provided the
City of Fort Collins City Council and Town of Windsor Town Board prior to the February 1,
2016 Joint Meeting between the two governing bodies.
List of Attachments:
Attachment A – Design Standards for Activity Centers (excerpt from Regional Design
Standards)
Attachment B – Windsor Commercial Corridor Plan
Attachment C – Fort Collins Development Standards for the I-25 Corridor
Attachment D – Windsor Municipal Code, CAC Uses and Design Standards
Attachment E – January 21, 2016 Neighborhood Open House Summary
Attachment F – PowerPoint Presentation
LOCATIONAL STANDARDS
Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor
9999
b) Regional Baseline Locational Standard
Building envelopes in subdivisions containing low-density residences such as
single-family homes or duplexes shall not be located within ¼ mile of the I-25
right-of-way.
c) Recommended Implementation Strategies
(1) Single-family subdivisions located between ¼ and ½ mile from the I-25
right-of way shall utilize clustering techniques to concentrate densities away
from the I-25 right-of-way, maximize views, and preserve landscape features
or open space.
(2) Transfer of Development Unit (TDU) or similar programs shall be used as a
means of achieving the required ¼ mile setback.
2. Multi-Family Residential
a) Intent
Multi-family residences should be located within or adjacent to activity centers,
where a range of services, including transit, are available or are planned for the
future. Actual densities of the residences will likely vary depending on existing
uses, zoning, and site conditions but should generally range between 8 and 15
gross dwelling units per acre. A development vision and master plan should be
drafted for each activity center and should, where appropriate, devote between
10% and 25% of the total gross land area to multi-family or mixed-use projects
that incorporate residential uses. A plan should also ensure that residential uses
within an activity center are sited to minimize noise and other undesirable
impacts.
b) Regional Baseline Locational Standard
Multi-family residential uses shall be located within or adjacent to mixed-use
activity centers, where employment, retail/commercial services, schools,
recreation, transit service, and other amenities are available.
c) Recommended Implementation Strategies
(1) Transfer of Development Unit (TDU) or similar programs may be utilized as a
means of achieving increased densities for multi-family residential uses within
activity centers.
(2) The underlying jurisdiction shall approve up to a 25% increase in permitted
density over what is allowed in the zoning district for vertically integrated
mixed-use development, e.g., residential over commercial use.
Attachment A
LOCATIONAL STANDARDS
Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor
10
E. PREFERRED LOCATION OF NON-RESIDENTIAL USES
1. Commercial and Retail Development
a) Intent
Properties near interchanges,
frontage roads, and other
north/south or east/west
roadways are valuable
locations for commercial and
retail businesses because of
their high visibility, ease of
access, and in some cases,
because of their likelihood of
functioning as future multi-
modal hubs. To further
enhance their visibility,
businesses often spread out
along these auxiliary
roadways, limiting future development potential and hindering circulation
patterns. These standards are intended to ensure that commercial and retail
development is concentrated within activity centers, rather than in a linear
pattern along frontage roads or other roadways, to help preserve views from I-
25, promote a more coordinated, compact pattern of development, take
advantage of nearby services for employees, and to maintain critical
transportation and infrastructure connectivity.
b) Regional Baseline Locational Standard
Commercial and retail development shall be concentrated within activity centers
and discouraged in a linear “strip” form along frontage roads.
c) Recommended Implementation Strategies
(1) Properties within agricultural districts, as defined by the underlying
jurisdiction, outside of activity centers shall not be rezoned for commercial or
industrial use, except for appropriate agribusiness uses.
(2) Existing zoning within activity centers shall be reviewed and modified to
support planned higher intensity commercial and retail uses.
Figure 5—Commercial and retail projects should be
concentrated in activity centers and discouraged from
developing in a linear “strip” form along frontage roads.
Attachment A
LOCATIONAL STANDARDS
Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor
11
2. Employment and Industrial
a) Intent
Employment and industrial uses often require large sites not compatible with the
more compact, urban pattern of development desired in activity centers. These
uses should be located in an office park setting adjacent to activity centers.
Other users desiring a location within an activity center will need to be
evaluated individually for their compatibility with adjacent retail, commercial,
and residential uses to ensure that issues such as vehicle and pedestrian
connectivity and block patterns are adequately addressed in the site’s design.
These locations will allow employees to utilize nearby services and transit
opportunities as well as help to create a more gradual transition between
activity centers and the less intense development found in the outlying areas.
b) Regional Baseline Locational Standard
Large employers and industrial uses shall locate in coordinated, campus or
office park settings adjacent to activity centers or be integrated into the more
urban pattern within activity centers.
F. PROTECTION OF NATURAL FEATURES, RESOURCES, AND SENSITIVE AREAS
1. Intent
The visual quality and character of the Corridor
relies heavily upon an open landscape, with
riparian corridors, natural areas, and
agricultural lands. These features add diversity
and beauty to the Corridor and provide
important wildlife habitat and drainage ways.
These standards are intended to protect the open
character of the Corridor and its significant
Figure 6—Employment and industrial uses
requiring large sites should be located adjacent to
activity centers in a more open, office park setting.
Figure 7—The visual quality and character of the Corridor
relies heavily upon an open landscape with riparian
corridors, natural areas, and agricultural lands.
Attachment A
LOCATIONAL STANDARDS
Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor
12
natural features by restricting the types and densities of development in areas identified as having
significant wildlife habitat, natural resource, or scenic qualities.
2. Floodplain
a) Regional Baseline Locational Standard
Development shall be prohibited from occurring within the 100-year floodway
boundary as defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (F.E.M.A.).
b) Recommended Locational Standard
(1) Development shall be prohibited from locating within the 100-year
floodplain boundary as defined by the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (F.E.M.A.).
(2) Development shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet from the edge of
identified floodplain boundaries as defined by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (F.E.M.A.). Where an existing setback requirement is
in place, the larger of the two shall apply.
3. Wetlands and Natural Areas
a) Regional Baseline Locational Standard
Development shall be prohibited from occurring within a jurisdictional or non-
jurisdictional wetland or natural area as defined by the underlying jurisdiction.
b) Recommended Locational Standard
(1) Development shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet from the edge of a
wetland or natural areas as defined by the underlying jurisdiction. Where an
existing setback requirement is in place, the larger of the two shall apply.
4. Wildlife Habitat
a) Intent
The presence of wildlife habitat areas is vital to the ecological balance and rural
character of the Corridor. The protection of these areas should be an integral
part of any development within the Corridor. Wildlife corridors should be
maintained where possible as defined by the appropriate agency.
b) Regional Baseline Standard
To the maximum extent feasible, disturbance or segmentation of blocks of
contiguous wildlife habitat, as identified by the Colorado Division of Wildlife, the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, or other federal, state, or local agency, shall be
avoided. Best management practices shall be used to minimize and mitigate
wildlife disturbance. All development plans that have the potential to adversely
affect critical wildlife habitat shall depict and protect important habitat
applicable to the site.
Attachment A
DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ACTIVITY CENTERS
Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor
13
IV. Design Standards for Activity Centers
A. INTENT
Activity Centers should provide a mix of uses, such as employment, residential, retail, and
commercial uses that accommodate and complement multiple modes of transportation, including
bicycles, pedestrians, high-frequency bus, and commuter rail. This poses a challenge for the
standards, because development patterns in these centers, sited near highways, frontage roads and
major east/west roadways have typically been designed for high visibility, easily accessible, auto-
oriented uses such as gas stations, fast-food establishments, and motels. The intent of these
standards is to provide the tools for creating an improved quality of appearance and more
integrated mix of land uses for concentrated areas of development. They will also improve
circulation within and between the centers, by providing basic requirements for vehicle, pedestrian,
and bicycle circulation to create connectivity between sites and integrate them with the surrounding
transportation network.
Although many of these centers will not be served by transit in the short-term, the standards provide
the necessary steps towards creating more transit-oriented centers. In addition to the regional
baseline standards, a number of recommended standards provide additional measures that should
be taken by those jurisdictions that have planned locations for future transit stops or park and rides
or simply wish to take larger steps toward creating a transit and pedestrian-oriented community.
B. APPLICABILITY
These standards shall apply to all development within activity centers in the I-25 Corridor Study Area as defined by the
underlying jurisdiction. General locations for activity centers are provided on the map above; however, specific
boundaries should be determined by each jurisdiction using the following guidelines:
Figure 8—General
location of Activity
Centers
Figure 9—The size, shape and specific location of each activity center will vary, however, they
will generally occur near an I-25 interchange or at the intersection of other major roadways or
transit facilities.
Attachment A
DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ACTIVITY CENTERS
Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor
14
• Commercial, retail, office, industrial or multi-family residential uses occurring adjacent to a frontage
road, east/west roadway, or near the intersection of an east/west and a north/south roadway within
approximately one-half mile of I-25, as measured from edge of the right-of-way.
• Within one-quarter mile of an existing or planned high-frequency bus stop, transit center, park-and-ride,
commuter rail stop, or other transit facility.
C. CIRCULATION AND ACCESS
1. Vehicular Connections
a) Intent
These standards are intended to provide improved circulation and reduced
vehicular traffic conflict by ensuring that circulation and access patterns within
activity centers create an integrated transportation network for vehicles and
bicycles. In addition, the frequency of driveways and other access points should
be minimized to avoid conflicts with other traffic patterns, particularly within
close proximity to highway interchanges.
b) Regional Baseline Standard
Vehicular connections shall be provided from a development site to adjoining
streets, driveways, or other circulation systems on adjoining sites.
2. Pedestrian Connections
a) Intent
A continuous network of pedestrian
walkways should be provided within
and between developments to
encourage people to walk between
uses. In addition, clearly delineated
circulation paths from parking areas
to building entries create a friendlier,
more inviting image for a
development and support higher
levels of pedestrian activity.
b) Regional Baseline Standard
Continuous walkways shall provide connections to and between:
(1) The primary entrance or entrances to each building, including pad site
buildings;
(2) All parking lots or parking structures that serve such buildings;
(3) Adjoining arterial streets where potential transit stops or park and rides exist
or are planned;
(4) Any sidewalks or walkways on adjacent properties that extend to the
boundaries shared with the development;
Figure 10—A well-designed pedestrian network provides
a clearly delineated pedestrian path from parking areas
to building entries.
Attachment A
DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ACTIVITY CENTERS
Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor
15
(5) Any public sidewalk system along the perimeter streets adjacent to the
development;
(6) Adjoining land uses and developments;
(7) Any greenway on or adjacent to the property; and
(8) Other community amenities or gathering spaces.
c) Recommended Design Standards
(1) On-site walkways shall be a minimum of 5 feet in width, except walkways
adjacent to a parking area where cars may overhang the walkway, where the
minimum shall be 7 feet in width.
(2) At each point that a designated on-site pedestrian walkway crosses a parking
lot, street, or driveway, the walkway shall be clearly visible to pedestrians and
motorists through one or more of the following techniques:
(a) Painted crosswalks;
(b) A change in paving material or color;
(c) A change in paving height;
(d) A raised median walkway buffered by landscaping.
D. DEVELOPMENT PATTERN/SITE LAYOUT
1. Intent
These standards focus on the repetition of similar design elements within a concentrated area of development to
create a sense of visual unity. The standards outline desired block sizes, building orientations, and setbacks
necessary to create an urban, pedestrian-oriented scale and appearance within an activity center.
2. Block Pattern
a) Intent
A pedestrian-oriented environment, as desired within activity centers, requires
the creation of smaller, more urban scale “blocks” of development, with
frequent street spacing and connections. This type of block pattern provides
connectivity between uses, encourages pedestrian and bicycle activity, and
enhances vehicular mobility. Variations in block sizes may need to occur to
Figure 11—Breaking large
sites into a series of smaller
“blocks” with frequent street or
driveway spacing creates an
inviting environment for
pedestrians and bicycles.
Attachment A
DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ACTIVITY CENTERS
Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor
16
accommodate some larger uses within an activity center setting; however,
vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle connectivity through the larger site should be
maintained, irregardless of the type of use they are design to serve.
b) Regional Baseline Standard
To the maximum extent feasible, larger sites containing multiple buildings and
uses shall be composed of a series of urban scale “blocks” of development
defined by streets or driveways that provide links to adjacent streets along the
perimeter of the site.
c) Recommended Design Standard
(1) Block sizes shall not exceed 10 acres for commercial development areas.
3. Building Orientation: Street Frontages
a) Regional Baseline Standard
New buildings located along a street frontage shall, to the maximum extent
feasible, align building walls with existing buildings across the street to help
create a consistent building edge.
4. Building Orientation: Multiple-Building Developments
a) Regional Baseline Standard
When there is more than one building in a development, all principal and pad
site buildings shall be arranged and grouped so that their primary orientation
complements adjacent, existing development, as illustrated in Figure 12.
Figure 12—New buildings located along a street frontage should align building walls with existing buildings
across the street to help create a consistent building edge, to the maximum extent feasible.
New Structure
Existing Structure
Attachment A
DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ACTIVITY CENTERS
Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor
17
E. PARKING
1. Intent
Large blocks of uninterrupted parking detract from the appearance of a
development and create a confusing and sometimes hazardous environment for
both motorists and pedestrians. Parking should be strategically located away
from primary streets and broken into smaller “blocks” defined by landscaped
islands and walkways to help define the blocks, provide shade, and improve the
overall appearance of parking areas. This configuration allows buildings to be
brought forward to “frame” the street and provides space for additional
landscaping, walkways, plazas, or other pedestrian-oriented uses to be focused
near the street edge or building entry.
2. Parking Lots
a) Regional Baseline Standard
The number of contiguous
parking spaces shall be
limited to 20 and each
block of 20 shall be
separated from each other
by at least one of the
following methods:
(1) A landscaped island that is at least 9 feet wide;
(2) An orchard planting with tree diamonds;
(3) A pedestrian walkway or sidewalk within a landscaped median that is at least
9 feet wide;
(4) A decorative fence or wall, a maximum of 3 feet in height, bordered by
landscaping on at least one side;
(5) An access drive or public street; or
(6) A building or buildings.
3. Parking Location and Amount
a) Regional Baseline Standard
To the maximum extent feasible,
large areas of parking shall be
distributed between the back or
sides of a building, with not more
than 50% of the parking for the entire
property remaining between the
principal building and the primary
abutting street. This standard applies to parking lots of more than50 spaces.
Figure 13—Large parking areas should be broken into
smaller blocks defined by landscaping and walkways.
Figure 14—Large parking areas should be distributed
between the back and sides of a building and broken
into smaller “blocks” of parking.
Attachment A
DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ACTIVITY CENTERS
Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor
18
b) Recommended Design Standards
(1) A reduction of one off-street parking space shall be allowed for every two on-
street parking spaces located within a two-block radius of the development site.
(2) To encourage higher-density, mixed-use development, shared or joint-use
parking space requirements shall be reviewed on a case-by-case basis for
adjacent uses that may have staggered peak periods of demand. For
example, retail, office and entertainment uses would share parking areas and
quantities to minimize total parking area and to encourage use of transit.
4. Perimeter Landscaping
a) Regional Baseline Standard
The perimeter of all parking areas shall be buffered from adjacent streets,
public rights-of-way, public open space, and adjacent uses by at least one of
the following methods:
(1) A berm 3 feet high with a maximum slope of 3:1 in combination with
evergreen and deciduous trees and shrubs;
(2) A hedge at least 3 feet high, consisting of a double row of shrubs planted 3
feet on center in a triangular pattern, along 75 percent of the perimeter
length.
(3) An opaque fence or wall at least 3 feet high in combination with landscaping,
in accordance with fencing standards contained in Section I.
F. BUILDING DESIGN/CHARACTER
1. Intent
These standards focus on creating a more distinct character for activity center development. The standards provide
simple techniques, such as consistency in roof form, materials, and color to enhance commercial and industrial
development and create a more unified
development pattern. Pitched rooflines, with
variations in design elements should be used on
smaller structures to add character and visual
interest to the blocky building forms often used
for highway-oriented development within the
Corridor, while larger industrial or “big box”
structures should incorporate parapet walls,
towers, peaked forms, mansards, and other
architectural features to enhance the appearance
of flat roofs. These features will also emphasize
the contrast between the increased height and
development intensity of the activity centers and
the more open character of development in the surrounding areas.
Figure 15—Incorporating a variety of roof planes into a
building’s design can enhance its appearance.
Attachment A
DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ACTIVITY CENTERS
Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor
19
2. Roof Form: Buildings Less than 10,000 sq.ft.
a) Regional Baseline Standard
Roofs on primary structures with a floor plate less than 10,000 sq.ft. shall be
pitched with a minimum slope of at least 5:12 or provide the appearance of
5:12 pitch through the use of a modified mansard roof.
b) Recommended Design Standard
(1) At least one of the following elements shall be incorporated into the design
for each 50 lineal feet of roof:
(a) Projecting gables;
(b) Hips;
(c) Horizontal/vertical breaks.
(2) Three or more roof slope planes shall be incorporated into a design.
3. Roof Form: Buildings Larger than 10,000 sq.ft.
a) Regional Baseline Standards
Roofs on structures with a
floorplate of greater than 10,000
sq.ft. shall have no less than two
of the following features:
(1) Parapet walls featuring
three-dimensional cornice
treatment that at no point
exceed one-third of the
height of the supporting
wall;
(2) Overhanging eaves, extending no less than 3 feet past the supporting walls;
(3) Sloping roofs not exceeding the average height of the supporting walls, with
an average slope greater than or equal to 1 foot of vertical rise for every 1
foot of horizontal run;
(4) Three or more roof slope planes.
4. Building Form/Façade Treatment
a) Intent
Development near I-25 and other major roadways is typically oriented towards
an internal access road or parking area, leaving large, unsightly blank walls
and loading docks in prominent view for passing motorists. To avoid this
situation, all sides of a building visible to the public, whether viewed from I-25,
another roadway, or a nearby property, should display a similar level of quality
and architectural finish. This should be accomplished by integrating
architectural variations and treatments such as windows and other decorative
features into all sides of a building design.
Figure 16—Architectural variations, such as the parapet
wall and overhangs on the “big-box” building shown
above, can help break up the appearance of flat rooflines.
Attachment A
DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ACTIVITY CENTERS
Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor
20
b) Regional Baseline Standard
Two or more of the following
design elements shall be
incorporated for each 50
horizontal feet of a building
façade or wall:
(1) Changes in color,
texture, or materials;
(2) Projections, recesses, and
reveals, expressing
structural bays, entrances,
or other aspects of the
architecture with a minimum change of plane of 12 inches;
(3) Grouping of windows or doors;
(4) Arcades or pergolas providing pedestrian interest.
c) Recommended Design Standards
(1) Building walls that face public streets, adjacent developments, or connecting
pedestrian frontage shall be subdivided and proportioned along 60% of the
façade using features such as:
(a) Windows;
(b) Entrances;
(c) Arcades;
(d) Arbors;
(e) Awnings.
(2) Building facades facing a primary access street shall have clearly defined,
highly visible customer entrances that feature no less than 2 of the following:
(a) Canopies or porticos;
(b) Overhangs, recesses/projections;
(c) Arcades;
(d) Distinctive roof forms;
(e) Arches;
(f) Outdoor patios;
(g) Display windows;
(h) Planters or wing walls that incorporate landscaped areas and/or
places for sitting.
Figure 17—A variety of design elements, such as the
windows and awnings on the building above, should
be incorporated into facades and walls to provide
visual interest.
Attachment A
DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ACTIVITY CENTERS
Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor
21
5. Materials and Colors
a) Intent
Development near I-25 is typically highly visible to passing motorists. High-
quality building materials should be used to add texture, color, and visual
interest to the otherwise bland appearance of large walls, roofs, and facades. A
palette of appropriate materials and colors should be established for each
activity center to create a unified appearance.
b) Regional Baseline Standard
One or more of the following
building materials shall be
incorporated into a structure’s
design:
(1) Stucco;
(2) Brick;
(3) Stone;
(4) Tinted, textured masonry
block.
c) Recommended Design Standards
(1) Smooth faced gray
concrete block and tilt-up concrete panels are prohibited.
(2) Ribbed metal siding is prohibited as a primary exterior surface material. It
may be used as trim material covering no more than 10% of the façade or
as a roof material.
(3) Façade colors shall be earth tone colors with a low reflectance. High-
intensity, metallic, or fluorescent colors are prohibited.
(4) High-intensity primary, metallic, or fluorescent colors are prohibited on any
roof area visible from a public or private right-of-way or public open space.
G. LANDSCAPING
1. Intent
Landscaping can be a visible
indicator of quality development,
and is particularly important with the
high visibility of activity centers to
passing motorists. Landscaping
should be used as an opportunity to
visually tie an entire development
together by screening parking or
service areas, accenting entryways,
enhancing the appearance of
Figure 18—Variations in materials and massing can be
used to break up large buildings and provide interest at
the street level.
Figure 19—Site landscaping should include a variety of
plant materials for year-round interest.
Attachment A
DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ACTIVITY CENTERS
Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor
22
buildings, buffering automobile traffic, creating an attractive, shaded
environment along street edges, and defining circulation for vehicles and
pedestrians. Water-wise, “xeriscape” landscaping should be encouraged.
2. Materials and Quantity
a) Regional Baseline Standard
A minimum of 20 percent of a site’s total square footage shall be reserved for
landscaping consisting of a variety of trees, turf grasses, shrubs, annual and
perennial flowering species, mulches, or groundcovers selected for hardiness,
drought tolerance (xeriscape), and year-round interest.
b) Recommended Design Standards
(1) An approved list of xeriscape or low-water plant materials shall be available
from the underlying jurisdiction.
(2) All plant materials shall be installed in the following minimum sizes:
(a) Deciduous shade trees—2 inch caliper
(b) Ornamental trees—1 ½ inch caliper
(c) Evergreen trees—6 feet high
(d) All shrubs—5 gallon container
(e) Groundcover, annuals, and perennials—1 gallon container
(3) Accent materials such as stone, steel, masonry, and wood utilized as part of
a building or development’s overall theme shall be integrated into the
landscape design to add interest and create visual continuity.
(4) Reduced plant sizes may be approved for affordable housing projects.
3. Site Perimeter Landscaping Abutting Street Edges
a) Regional Baseline Standard
Building setback areas
along all arterial, collector,
or local streets, as well as
along private streets and
internal drives shall be
landscaped with a
minimum of 1 tree for
every 35 linear feet of
frontage.
b) Recommended Design
Standards
(1) Where a detached walkway is provided, a curbed landscaped area, which is
a minimum of 7 feet wide shall be incorporated between the walkway and
the adjacent roadway.
Figure 20—Landscaped areas can be used to buffer parking
areas from the street and provide a safe pedestrian pathway.
Attachment A
DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ACTIVITY CENTERS
Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor
23
4. Site Perimeter Landscaping Adjacent to the I-25 Right-of-Way
a) Regional Baseline Standard
Developments whose site perimeter is directly adjacent to I-25 shall provide a
landscaped buffer of at least 80-feet between the building or parking lot edge
and the I-25 right-of-way or frontage road. Buffers shall consist of informal
clusters of deciduous
and evergreen trees
and shrubs planted in
an offset pattern and
shall consist of a
minimum of 1 tree and
10 shrubs per 25
lineal feet of frontage.
b) Recommended Design Standards
(1) Berms shall not be permitted directly adjacent to the I-25 right-of-way where
they block long-range views of mountains and open lands for motorists on I-
25.
H. SERVICE AREA, OUTDOOR STORAGE, AND MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT
1. Intent
Typical orientation of businesses towards internal access roads and parking
areas often leaves exposed mechanical equipment, outdoor storage, outdoor
sale yards, and service areas located behind buildings visible to motorists
driving on I-25. The visual impact of these areas should be mitigated by shifting
them out of high visibility areas and screening them.
2. Location
a) Regional Baseline Standard
Loading docks, outdoor
storage yards, and all other
service areas shall be located
to the sides and/or rear of a
building, except when a site
abuts I-25; in which case,
said areas shall be located to
the sides of the building that
do not face I-25.
Figure 21—Buildings adjacent to I-25 should provide a landscaped
setback of at least 80 feet.
Figure 22-Service areas should be located away from high-
visibility areas and screened.
Attachment A
DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ACTIVITY CENTERS
Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor
24
b) Recommended Design Standards
(1) With the exception of off-street parking and loading areas, all industrial uses
shall be carried out entirely within completely enclosed buildings or
structures.
3. Screening
a) Regional Baseline Standard
All outdoor storage yards, loading docks, service areas, and mechanical
equipment or vents larger than 8 inches in diameter shall be concealed by
screens at least as high as the equipment they hide, of a color and material
matching or compatible with the dominant colors and materials found on the
façades of the primary building. Chain link, with or without slats, shall not be
used to satisfy this screening requirement.
b) Recommended Design Standards
(1) Equipment that would remain visible despite screening due to differences in
topography (i.e., a site that is at a lower grade that surrounding roadways)
shall be completely enclosed.
I. FENCING AND WALLS
1. Intent
Fences and walls can be very
effective for buffering and
screening. However, in excess,
they can create a visually
monotonous streetscape, block
views from a roadway, and
create a fragmented pattern of
development. Variations in
materials, height, and style,
within an overall theme should
be used to integrate a fence or
wall with the surrounding
development and provide a more attractive appearance from the street. This is
particularly important directly adjacent to the I-25 right-of-way, where a fence
or wall would be highly visible to passing motorists. In these high-visibility
areas, fencing and walls should also integrate landscaping into their design to
further soften the appearance from I-25.
Figure 23—Fences and walls should be set back from the
sidewalk edge and landscaped to provide visual interest.
Attachment A
DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ACTIVITY CENTERS
Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor
25
2. Materials
a) Regional Baseline Standard
Walls and fences shall be
constructed of high-quality
materials, such as, tinted,
textured blocks; brick; stone;
treated wood; or ornamental
metal and shall complement
the design of an overall
development and its
surroundings. The use of chain
link fencing or exposed plain
cinder block walls shall be
prohibited.
3. Location
a) Regional Baseline Standard
Opaque fences and walls, taller that 3 feet in height, shall be set back at least 6
feet from the back edge of an adjacent public sidewalk, and such setback area
shall be landscaped with turf, shrubs, and/or trees, using a variety of species to
provide seasonal color, plant variety, and to reduce visual prominence of screen
walls.
4. Maximum Length
a) Regional Baseline Standard
The maximum length of continuous, unbroken, and uninterrupted fence or wall
plane shall be 40 feet. Breaks shall be provided through the use of columns,
landscaping pockets, transparent sections, and/or a change to different
materials.
5. Maximum Height
a) Regional Baseline Standard
In front yard setbacks, the maximum height of a solid fence or wall shall be 36
inches. In all other locations the maximum height of a fence or wall shall be 6
feet.
Figure 24—Changes in materials, architectural
projections, and landscaping can all be used to effectively
break up large walls.
Attachment A
DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ACTIVITY CENTERS
Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor
26
J. SIGNAGE
1. Prohibited signs
a) Intent
Existing signage within the Corridor includes tall, pole-mounted signs,
billboards, and site-specific monument signs of all shapes and sizes. The sheer
number, frequency, and variety of signs create a visual clutter along the
Corridor that detracts from its rural character. To help alleviate this problem,
billboards, pole-mounted, roof signs, and flashing signs should be eliminated
over time.
b) Regional Baseline Standard
The addition, enlargement, or replacement of pole signs, billboards, or flashing
signs shall be prohibited.
2. Freestanding signs
a) Intent
On-site signs, such as monument signs should be designed with consistent
design elements, such as a base material, height, and lettering style, to create a
visual continuity and quality to development.
b) Regional Baseline Standard
All new or replacement freestanding signs shall be monument signs that shall
not exceed 10 feet in height. Such signs shall be consistent with the architectural
character of the site and building, incorporating at least one of the primary
materials, colors, or design elements of the associated structure(s).
c) Recommended Design Standards
(1) Monument sign bases and/or signs shall utilize one of the following
complementary materials or elements as a primary feature to create visual
continuity within activity centers.
(a) Native Colorado sandstone or similar type of stone;
(b) River cobblestone;
(c) Brick;
Figure 25—Colors,
materials, and forms used
for monument signs should
complement the
architectural character of
the building or overall
development.
Attachment A
Commercial Corridor Plan
(Design Criteria and Procedures)
November 22, 2010
Attachment B
2 CCP 11-22-10
Table of Contents
Section
Title
Page
I
Introduction
A. Purpose and Intent 3
B. Municipal Code References 3
II
Procedures
A. Application of Design Criteria 4
B. Variance and Waiver Processes 4
C. Submittal Requirements 5
III
Baseline Design Criteria
A. Site Planning 6
B. Architecture 8
C. Lighting 11
D. Landscaping 11
IV
Subarea Design Criteria
A. Downtown Subarea 12
B. I-25 Subarea (Res. 2001-50 adopted July 23, 2001) 12
V
Appendix
A. Downtown Corridor Plan
B. Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor
Attachment B
3 CCP 11-22-10
I. Introduction
A. Purpose and Intent
Over the years the Town of Windsor’s Planning Commission and Town Board
have taken great pride in the development of the major thoroughfares in and
around Windsor, adopting several corridor plans that address various elements
of site planning such as architectural requirements, lighting, landscaping and
other aspects of commercial development. As a result, the development that has
occurred in the Town’s arterial and collector corridors conveys an image of
quality and community to anyone travelling within Windsor. The high quality
development also creates positive first impressions on visitors and a sense of
pride for residents and property owners.
In an effort to make the aforementioned corridor plans more user friendly for the
development community, elected and appointed officials and staff, this Corridor
Plan Design Criteria and Procedures document consolidates the common
elements of the plans into baseline design criteria and breaks out those elements
that are unique to particular corridors into subarea design criteria.
The purpose of these design criteria is to:
1. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing commercial
development.
2. Provide guidance and direction for renovations and proposed new
construction.
3. To protect and enhance property values in the Town’s corridors and
ensure the long-term economic vitality of the Town through quality
development and redevelopment.
4. To increase the opportunity for development and expansion of
business.
5. To ensure that redevelopment and new development compliments
the positive and unique character of surrounding properties.
6. To integrate new development so that the transition to surrounding
residential neighborhoods is accomplished sensitively.
B. Municipal Code References
The Town of Windsor Commercial Corridor Plan (Design Criteria and
Procedures) are adopted by reference in Chapter 17, Article XIII of the Municipal
Code.
Attachment B
4 CCP 11-22-10
II. Procedures
A. Application of Design Criteria
The baseline design criteria and standards shall apply to all new commercial
development, additions or remodeling of existing commercial properties within
the Town’s adopted commercial corridors as defined in Chapter 17 of the
Municipal Code. The subarea design criteria and standards shall apply to all new
commercial development, additions or remodeling of existing commercial
properties within each respective subarea. It is not intended that these design
criteria replace or supplant any zoning requirements; the criteria merely
supplement such requirements. Furthermore, all pertinent requirements of the
Town and other agencies shall be followed in the development of each site and
shall require appropriate approval(s) by the Town of Windsor and any other
agencies having jurisdiction. All zoning ordinance, building code and other
restrictions and requirements shall be observed. In the event of any conflict
between this document and other codes, regulations, restrictions and
requirements, the more restrictive standard shall apply.
B. Variance and Waiver Processes
1. Variances: Variance applications apply to zoning requirements of
Chapter 16 of the Municipal Code and are the purview of the Board
of Adjustment. Variance applications are not applicable to Corridor
Plan Design Criteria.
2. Waivers. Requests for design criteria waivers shall be subject to
review and determination by the Planning Commission. The
Planning Commission may grant, conditionally grant or deny any
waiver request brought under this sub-section. Any person
aggrieved by a Planning Commission decision with respect to a
waiver may seek review by the Town Board by submitting a written
request for review within thirty (30) days of the Planning
Commission decision, setting forth the specific grounds for appeal.
The Town Board shall consider the request for review, together with
the record of the Planning Commission meeting, and shall affirm
the Planning Commission decision if there is any competent
evidence in the record to support the Planning Commission
decision. The Town Board’s decision shall be deemed final.
In order to receive a waiver, the applicant shall have the burden of
establishing justification for waiver approval under the the following
criteria:
Attachment B
5 CCP 11-22-10
a. Strict application of the applicable standard will result in
either extraordinary practical difficulties or undue hardship;
and
b. The proposed waiver, if approved, will protect the public
interest equally or better than the standard for which the
waiver is requested; and
c. Approval of the waiver request will not be detrimental to the
public interest.
C. Submittal Requirements
In addition to the applicable site plan and other requirements of the Municipal
Code, the following items shall be the minimum submittal requirements for
commercial development within the Town’s arterial and collector corridors:
1. Site Plan. In addition to the site plan elements required by the
Municipal Code, the site plan shall include the following elements:
a. The location of existing and proposed structures with the
location of the access points to the site and the building
entrances noted.
b. The location and dimensions of all driveways, parking areas,
loading areas and pedestrian walkways.
c. The location and type of outdoor trash facilities with a
description and of the screening materials.
d. The location and type of any accessory appurtenances such
as scales, satellite dishes, antenna, fuel pumps, etc.
e. The type and location of proposed site lighting
f. A land use table indicating the overall lot size, the building
square footage, the site area devoted to building coverage,
parking and driveway coverage, and open landscape area.
2. Building Elevations. In addition to the site plan elements required
by the Municipal Code, the site plan shall include the following
elements:
a. An indication and description of all materials to be used on
all sides of all buildings.
Attachment B
6 CCP 11-22-10
b. The height of all buildings and any appurtenances.
c. Trash enclosure elevation depicting all four (4) elevations
and labeling enclosure and gate materials.
d. The location and dimensions of any building mounted
accessory appurtenances such as satellite dishes, utility
meters, etc.
3. Building Color and Material Details: In addition to the site plan
elements required by the Municipal Code, the site plan submittal
shall include a high quality 24” x 36” full color rendering of all four
(4) building elevations, as well as color photocopies and detailed
manufacturer’s information for the following elements:
a. Roofing materials and colors.
b. Exterior wall materials and colors.
c. Trim materials and colors.
d. Window and door materials and colors.
4. Landscape Plan. All landscape plans shall comply with the
submittal requirements of the Town of Windsor’s Tree and
Landscape Standards, adopted by Resolution 2006-53 on October
23, 2006 and any subsequent updates thereto.
III. Baseline Design Criteria
New development should incorporate sustainable concepts that benefit current
and future generations. Building methods and land use planning concepts that
are durable, healthy, efficient, and have a proven track record of success are
encouraged. The baseline design criteria are intended to create consistent
requirements for corridor plan elements that should be uniform throughout the
community. The following baseline design criteria shall apply to all commercial
development within the Town’s arterial and collector corridors as designated in
Chapter 17 of the Municipal Code.
A. Site Planning
1. Open landscape area on any site shall be twenty percent (20%) or
greater.
Attachment B
7 CCP 11-22-10
2. The intent of this subsection is to minimize parking adjacent to Main
Street and other major arterial streets and to encourage the
location of buildings closer to those streets.
a. All property line setbacks as established by the Windsor
Municipal Code shall remain in full force and effect. In
addition thereto, there shall be an eighty foot (80’) minimum
building and paving setback where sites adjoin I-25 and US
34; and a thirty foot (30’) minimum building and paving
setback where sites adjoin Main Street and SH 257. Paving
shall be set back from property lines a minimum of fifteen
feet (15’) adjacent to all other arterial and collector streets,
and five feet (5’) from all other property lines.
b. All building and landscaping shall be oriented to minimize
the visual impact of parking areas.
c. Parking areas shall be minimized between the street and
building entrances.
3. All off-street loading and refuse areas shall be designed to include
adequate space for ingress, egress and maneuvering and shall be
screened from view with appropriate landscape elements or with
screenwalls constructed of materials which are compatible with the
building.
4. All storage or equipment areas shall be screened from view with
appropriate landscape elements or with screenwalls constructed of
materials which are compatible with the building.
5. Site entrance drives into and out of each site shall be landscaped
and include pedestrian connections from the building to the street.
Parking spaces shall be set back from such site entrance drives in
order to prevent blockage of site ingress and egress.
6. Landscape islands a minimum of fifteen feet (15’) in length and
eight feet (8’) in width shall occur at ends of all parking rows.
7. Double-loaded rows of parking spaces shall be divided into
sections of a maximum of thirty (30) parking spaces and single-
loaded rows of parking spaces shall be broken into sections of a
maximum of fifteen (15) spaces. Such sections of parking shall be
divided by a landscaped island meeting the minimum dimensions
required by Section III.A.6 above.
Attachment B
8 CCP 11-22-10
8. Parking lot areas shall be broken into sections of two hundred (200)
parking spaces maximum, separated by landscape buffers ten feet
(10’) wide or greater.
9. Bicycle parking shall be provided on a paved surface near building
entrances but shall not encroach into pedestrian walkways.
10. The use of a standard brick red concrete color and texture is
encouraged to be utilized at building entrances and at other
locations where pedestrian crossings occur.
11. All building sites shall incorporate pedestrian amenities such as
benches, fountains, courtyards, planters and/or works of art into the
site, particularly at building entrances.
12. All pedestrian walkways shall maintain a minimum width of four feet
(4’) free of any obstructions.
13. Site furniture shall be consistent in style and size throughout the
area.
14. Any plazas, patios, courtyards, retaining walls or other hard
surfaces shall be compatible with the materials utilized on the
building.
B. Architecture
1. Building designs shall be site specific and sensitively integrated into
the character of the surrounding development. Architectural
designs shall respond to the positive elements of the neighboring
projects rather than superimposing a design that is incompatible
with the area.
2. Building Height. Unless otherwise specified in Section IV. of the
subarea design criteria for a particular corridor, the following
maximum building heights shall apply:
a. The predominant portion of any building shall not exceed
thirty feet (30’) in height.
b. Ornamental architectural elements or appurtenances such
as clock towers or cupolas shall not exceed forty feet (40’) in
height.
Attachment B
9 CCP 11-22-10
3. Building Materials. A relatively wide variety of building materials
shall be permitted, however, it is intended that a basic harmony of
architecture prevail.
a. One or more of the following building materials shall be
incorporated into a structure’s design:
(1) Brick is encouraged both as a major building material
and as an accent element.
(2) Stone and high quality stone veneer.
(3) Concrete masonry units (CMU) shall be of an
architectural grade such as split-face, ground-face or
fluted block and shall be varied in pattern or shall be
combined with other accent materials (i.e. brick,
stucco, siding, etc.) to provide an aesthetically
appealing façade which is consistent with the intent of
the design criteria.
(4) Any proposed materials other than those mentioned
above shall be consistent in terms of high quality,
durability and compatibility with the abovementioned
materials.
(5) Stucco or Exterior Insulation Finish Systems (EIFS) is
encouraged to be used as a secondary material or
accent element not to exceed thirty-five percent (35%)
of the respective building facade.
b. The following building materials are prohibited as façade
materials:
(1) Vertical ribbed metal siding shall be prohibited. Only
architectural grade metal panels will be allowed on
non-prominent facades.
(2) Smooth faced gray concrete block.
4. Building Form:
a. Building facades should be articulated to reduce the scale
and the uniform, impersonal appearances of large retail
buildings and provide visual interest that will be consistent
with the community's identity, character and scale.
Attachment B
10 CCP 11-22-10
b. On non-residential buildings, ground floor facades that face
streets or public walkways must be modulated with features
such as windows, entrances, arcades, porches, pilasters,
arbors, awnings, recessed or projecting display windows
along no less than 50% of the façade. For residential
buildings these features must occur on 75% of the façade.
c. No blank wall that faces a public street or walkway shall
exceed fifty feet (50’) in length.
d. Building massing of taller projects shall transition into smaller
and lower building masses which are residential in scale
where such projects abut residential areas.
e. Architectural elements that add interest to roofs such as
dormers, cupolas, clock towers and other similar elements
are encouraged.
5. Roofs:
a. Roofing consisting of high-profile asphalt or composition
shingles is encouraged to be used on the most prominent
building elements. Standing seam metal roofs or concrete
tile roofs will also be allowed provided that such roofs are
compatible with the architecture of the proposed project and
surrounding buildings.
b. On non-residential projects, flat rooflines should be avoided
on low one-story buildings and where utilized on taller
buildings they should feature a three-dimensional cornice
treatment on all walls facing streets or public walkways.
c. Roof pitches on residential buildings shall be a minimum of
3:12.
6. Façade colors shall be earth tone colors with a low reflectance.
High intensity, metallic, or fluorescent colors are prohibited. Other
colors may be used for accent or to emphasize focal areas
provided that they are sensitively integrated into the overall color
palette.
7. All mechanical equipment on building exteriors or roofs must be
screened from view from all front and side streets and adjoining
side properties. Screening walls and other screening elements
shall be of a design and material compatible with those of the
building. Equipment and service functions of a building shall be
Attachment B
11 CCP 11-22-10
incorporated into the building design so that these functions are
screened from view from public ways and adjacent properties.
8. Building mounted accessory appurtenances such as satellite
dishes, utility meters, etc. shall be painted to match the building and
shall be labeled as such in the site plan drawings.
9. Garages and other covered parking must be located in side or rear
yards to minimize their visibility from the street.
10. Trash enclosures shall fully screen the dumpster from all visible
sides and enclosure gates shall be constructed of heavy gage
metal or similar material for durability.
C. Lighting
1. All lighting shall be compatible and harmonious throughout the
area.
2. Parking lot lighting shall not exceed thirty feet (30’) in height.
3. Pole mounted lighting shall utilize round poles anodized bronze in
color to minimize reflectance of light. Decorative light poles that
may be proposed to contribute to a specific design theme in a
development may be proposed for review and approval by the
Planning Commission. Appeals of a Planning Commission decision
are subject to review by the Town Board.
4. Lighting shall be designed to retain light within the property lines of
a given building site and not to spill any light outside said property
lines.
5. All exterior and security lighting shall have underground service.
6. All lighting fixtures, including wall pack lighting and other service
area and security lighting, shall be full cutoff fixtures and mounted
so that light is directed directly downward. The only exception shall
be for decorative lighting such as lanterns and wall sconces which
may be allowed as long as the fixtures do not exceed a maximum
of 3,200 lumens and do not emit light directly upward.
7. The use of compact fluorescent light bulbs is encouraged.
8. Lighting may be used to illuminate the face of a building so long as
the light does not spill outside the building façade.
Attachment B
12 CCP 11-22-10
D. Landscaping. All landscaping shall comply with the Town of Windsor’s
Tree and Landscape Standards, adopted by Resolution 2006-53 on
October 23, 2006 and any subsequent updates thereto.
IV. Subarea Design Criteria
The subarea design criteria are intended to be tailored to address unique aspects
of a particular corridor. In addition to the baseline design criteria, the following
subarea design criteria shall apply to all commercial development within each
respective subarea.
A. Downtown Subarea. In addition to the Downtown Corridor Plan, the Town
also undertook a Downtown Master Plan process in 2009 and is on-going.
Until such time that design criteria and standards are developed in
association with that master plan, the existing Downtown Corridor Plan will
be included in Appendix A and the following additional subarea design
criteria shall apply to development within the Downtown Subarea.
1. Building Height. In order to allow for taller mixed use buildings with
office and residential uses on the upper floors, the maximum height
in the Downtown Subarea shall be forty-five feet (45’).
2. Properties adjacent to Main Street within the Downtown Subarea
shall be exempt from the Section III.A.2.a baseline design criteria
regarding setbacks and offsets contained herein.
B. I-25 Subarea (Res. 2001-50 adopted July 23, 2001). The I-25 Corridor
Plan came about as the result of a regional planning effort that included
several communities, counties and other regional and state agencies in
order to “create a framework for development that focuses on improving
the quality, location, environmental sensitivity, and long-term viability of
land uses.” The Development Design Standards for the I-25 Corridor in
Appendix B and the following subarea design criteria shall apply to
development within the I-25 Subarea.
1. Building Height. The building height regulations of Chapter 16 of
the Municipal Code shall apply within the I-25 Subarea in
accordance with the respective zoning of the property.
Attachment B
Division 3.9 - Development Standards for the I-25 Corridor
3.9.1 - Applicability and Purpose
(A)
Applicability. The provisions contained in Sections 3.9.2 through 3.9.11 shall apply to
applications for development within the boundary of the I-25 Subarea Plan, and, to the extent
that such provisions regulate Activity Centers, they shall also apply to the I-25/State Highway
392 Corridor Activity Center; and the provisions contained in Section 3.9.12 shall apply only to
the I-25/State Highway 392 Corridor Activity Center.
(B)
Purpose. The purpose of this Section is to provide standards to implement the model
standards outlined in the "Development Standards for the I-25 Corridor" and the "Fort Collins I-
25 Corridor Subarea Plan," in addition to the standards contained elsewhere in this Land Use
Code.
(Ord. No. 120, 2003 §2, 9/02/03; Ord. No. 036, 2011 §3, 3/22/11)
3.9.2 - Location of Single-Family Residential Lots From I-25
(A)
Development of new single-family residential lots within one thousand three hundred twenty
(1,320) feet (one-quarter [¼] mile) of the centerline of Interstate Highway 25 (I-25) shall be
prohibited.
(1)
Exception: single family detached dwellings in the Rural Lands District (RUL) shall be
exempt from this standard.
(B)
In the Urban Estate zone district, development that creates new single-family residential lots
located between one-quarter (¼) and one-half (½) mile from the centerline of I-25 shall utilize
the clustering technique (as provided for in Section 4.2(E)(2)of this Land Use Code for the
Urban Estate District) in order to concentrate densities away from I-25, maximize views and
preserve landscape features or open space.
(Ord. No. 120, 2003 §2, 9/02/03; Ord. No. 131, 2006 §1, 9/19/06)
3.9.3 - Building Placement Standards
(A)
Attachment C
Minimum setback of any building on a lot, tract or parcel of land adjoining the I-25 right-of-way
shall be two hundred five (205) feet from the centerline of I-25.
(B)
Outside of I-25 activity centers, the placement of a building on a lot, tract or parcel of land
adjoining the I-25 right-of-way where the building is located between two hundred five (205)
feet and two hundred forty-five (245) feet from the centerline of I-25 shall be restricted so that
no more than fifty (50) percent of the total frontage of the lot, tract or parcel of land is occupied
by the building.
(C)
Outside of I-25 activity centers, the placement of a building on a lot, tract or parcel of land
adjoining the I-25 right-of-way where the building is located more than two hundred forty-five
(245) feet from the centerline of I-25 shall be restricted so that no more than sixty (60) percent
of the total frontage of the lot, tract or parcel of land is occupied by the building.
(Ord. No. 120, 2003 §2, 9/02/03; Ord. No. 173, 2003 §21, 12/16/03; Ord. No. 066, 2009 §14, 7/7/09)
3.9.4 - Landscaping Standards
(A)
Parking Lot Perimeter Landscaping. At least seventy-five (75) percent of the perimeter of all
parking areas shall be screened from nearby streets, public rights-of-way, public open space
and nearby uses by at least one (1) of the following methods:
(1)
A berm at least three (3) feet high with a maximum slope of 3:1 in combination with
evergreen and deciduous trees and shrubs;
Attachment C
(2)
A hedge at least three (3) feet high, consisting of a double row of shrubs readily capable
of growing to form a hedge, planted three (3) feet on center in a triangular pattern;
(3)
A decorative fence or wall between three (3) and four (4) feet in height in combination with
landscaping including, without limitation, evergreen and deciduous trees and shrubs.
(B)
Site Perimeter Landscaping Abutting the I-25 Right-of-Way.
(1)
Buffers abutting I-25. Developments with a site perimeter which is adjoining the I-25 right-
of-way shall provide a landscaped buffer of at least eighty (80) feet between the building
or parking lot edge and the I-25 right-of-way. The buffer shall consist of informal clusters
of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs planted in an offset pattern and shall consist
of one (1) tree and ten (10) shrubs per twenty-five (25) lineal feet of frontage.
(2)
Berms. Berms greater than three (3) feet in height shall not be permitted adjoining the I-25
right-of-way if they block long-range views of mountains and open lands for motorists on I-
25 (not including motorists on frontage roads or ramps).
(Ord. No. 120, 2003 §2, 9/02/03; Ord. No. 091, 2004 §24, 6/15/04)
3.9.5 - Commercial Building Design Standards
(A)
Roof Form.
(1)
Roofs on principal structures with a building footprint of less than ten thousand (10,000)
square feet shall:
(a)
be pitched with a minimum slope of at least 5:12,
(b)
incorporate the 5:12 pitch by use of a modified Mansard roof, covering a sufficient
area of the roof so as to create the appearance that the Mansard roof covers the
entire structure, and
(c)
incorporate at least one (1) of the following elements into the design for each fifty
(50) lineal feet of roof:
1.
Projecting gables/dormers,
2.
Attachment C
Hips,
3.
Horizontal or vertical breaks,
4.
Three (3) or more roof planes.
(2)
Roofs on structures with a footprint of greater than ten thousand (10,000) square feet shall
have at least two (2) of the following features:
(a)
Parapet walls featuring three-dimensional cornice treatment that at no point exceeds
one-third (?) of the height of the supporting wall.
(b)
Overhanging eaves, extending at least three (3) feet beyond the supporting walls.
(c)
Sloping roofs not exceeding the average height of the supporting walls, with an
average slope greater than or equal to one (1) foot of vertical rise for every one (1)
foot of horizontal run.
(d)
Three (3) or more roof slope planes.
(B)
Building Form/Facade Treatment.
(1)
Buildings that face public streets, adjoining developments or connecting pedestrian
frontage shall be articulated, fenestrated and proportioned to human scale along at least
sixty (60) percent of the facade using features such as windows, entrances, arcades,
arbors or awnings.
(2)
Building facades facing a primary access street shall have clearly defined, highly visible
customer entrances that feature at least two (2) of the following:
(a)
Canopies or porticos,
(b)
Overhangs,
(c)
Recesses or projections of at least three (3) percent of wall length,
(d)
Arcades,
(e)
Attachment C
Distinctive roof forms,
(f)
Arches,
(g)
Outdoor patios,
(h)
Display windows,
(i)
Planters or wing walls that incorporate landscaped areas and/or places for sitting.
(C)
Materials and Colors.
(1)
One (1) or more of the following building materials shall be incorporated into the design of
a structure and used to provide visual interest at the sidewalk level for pedestrians:
(a)
Stucco,
(b)
Brick,
(c)
Stone, or
(d)
Tinted, textured masonry block.
(2)
Smooth-faced gray concrete block and tilt-up concrete panels are prohibited.
(3)
Metal is prohibited as a primary exterior surface material. It may be used as trim material
covering no more than ten (10) percent of the facade or as a roof material.
(4)
Facade colors shall only be earth tone colors with a low reflectance.
(5)
High-intensity primary colors are prohibited on any roof area visible from a public or
private right-of-way or public open space.
(Ord. No. 120, 2003 §2, 9/02/03)
3.9.6 - Block Pattern for Activity Centers
(A)
Attachment C
To the maximum extent feasible, larger sites containing multiple buildings and uses shall be
composed of a series of urban-scale blocks of development defined and formed by streets or
drives that provide links to nearby streets along the perimeter of the site.
(B)
Block sizes shall not exceed ten (10) acres for commercial development.
(C)
In addition to a network of streets and drives, blocks shall be connected by a system of parallel
tree-lined sidewalks that adjoin the streets and drives combined with off-street connecting
walkways so that there is a fully integrated and continuous pedestrian network.
(D)
To the maximum extent feasible, remote or independent pad sites, separated by their own
parking lots and service drives, shall be minimized. Such buildings shall be directly connected
to the pedestrian sidewalk network.
(Ord. No. 120, 2003 §2, 9/02/03)
3.9.7 - Service Areas, Outdoor Storage and Mechanical Equipment
(A)
Location. Loading docks, outdoor storage yards and all other service areas shall be located to
the sides and/or rear of a building, except when a site abuts I-25, in which event said areas
shall be located to the sides of the building that do not face I-25.
(B)
Screening.
(1)
All outdoor storage yards, loading docks, service areas and mechanical equipment or
vents larger than eight (8) inches in diameter shall be concealed by screens at least as
high as the equipment they hide, of a color and material matching or compatible with the
dominant colors and materials found on the facades of the principal building. Chain link,
with or without slats, shall not be used to satisfy this requirement.
(2)
Equipment that would remain visible despite screening, due to differences in topography
(i.e., a site that is at a lower grade than surrounding roadways) shall be completely
enclosed except for vents needed for air flow, in which event such vents shall occupy no
more than twenty-five (25) percent of the enclosure facade.
(Ord. No. 120, 2003 §2, 9/02/03)
3.9.8 - Fencing and Walls
(A)
Attachment C
Materials. Walls and fences shall be constructed of high-quality materials, such as tinted,
textured blocks; brick; stone; treated wood; or ornamental metal; and shall complement the
design of an overall development and its surroundings. The use of chain link fencing or
exposed cinder block walls shall be prohibited.
(B)
Location. Fences and walls shall be set back at least six (6) feet from the back edge of an
adjoining public sidewalk, and such setback area shall be landscaped with turf, shrubs and/or
trees, using a variety of species to provide seasonal color and plant variety.
(C)
Maximum Length. The maximum length of continuous, unbroken and uninterrupted fence or
wall plane shall be forty (40) feet. Breaks shall be provided through the use of columns,
landscaping pockets, transparent sections and/or a change to different materials.
(Ord. No. 120, 2003 §2, 9/02/03)
3.9.9 - Wireless Telecommunication
(A)
Location. Wireless telecommunication facilities shall not be permitted within one thousand four
hundred forty-five (1,445) feet of the centerline of I-25.
(B)
Height. Wireless telecommunication facilities shall not exceed the maximum height allowed for
a structure as specified in the Land Use Standards of the underlying zone district.
(Ord. No. 120, 2003 §2, 9/02/03)
3.9.10 - Height
(A)
Outside the i-25 activity centers, nonresidential building heights shall not exceed twenty (20)
feet within two hundred twenty-five (225) feet of the centerline of i-25.
(B)
Outside the I-25 activity centers, nonresidential and residential building heights shall not
exceed forty (40) feet between two hundred twenty-six (226) feet and seven hundred twenty-
five (725) feet of the centerline of I-25.
(C)
Where existing site topography (whether natural or man-made) blocks views of the mountains
or open lands from I-25, these height restrictions shall not apply.
(Ord. No. 120, 2003 §2, 9/02/03)
3.9.11 - Minimum Residential Density in Activity Centers
Attachment C
Minimum residential density in activity centers shall be twelve (12) dwelling units per gross acre.
(Ord. No. 120, 2003 §2, 9/02/03)
3.9.12 - Corridor Activity Center Design Standards
(A)
On any first floor building elevation that is visible from a public right-of-way, masonry materials
limited to natural stone, synthetic stone, brick and concrete masonry units that are textured or
split face, solely or in combination, shall be applied to cover from grade to the top of the entry
feature of such elevation, or if there is no entry feature on any particular elevation, to a height
that would be equivalent to the top of the first floor. For first floor building elevations not visible
from a public right-of-way and on all upper stories, other exterior finish materials, including, but
not limited to, synthetic stucco (E.I.F.S.), architectural metals, clay units, terra cotta,
prefabricated brick panels or wood, can be applied in whole, or in combination with the
masonry materials described above. For the purposes of this provision,architectural
metals shall mean metal panel systems that are either coated or anodized; metal sheets with
expressed seams; metal framing systems; or cut, stamped or cast ornamental metal panels,
but not ribbed or corrugated metal panel systems. Standard concrete masonry units or tilt-up
concrete with applied texturing are prohibited on any building elevation.
(B)
A roof pitch shall be required for buildings containing less than twenty-five thousand (25,000)
square feet and having three (3) stories or less. In cases where mechanical equipment must be
mounted on the roof, a sloping mansard roof shall be allowed.
(C)
The maximum building height shall be ninety (90) feet.
(D)
All freestanding signs shall be ground signs and shall be limited to a maximum height of
fourteen (14) feet along and perpendicular to I-25 and twelve (12) feet along and perpendicular
to all other streets. Such ground signs shall be subject to all other requirements in Section
3.8.7.
(Ord. No. 036, 2011 §4, 3/22/11
Attachment C
Page 1
Town of Windsor Municipal Code
Chapter 17, Article XIII Design Criteria and Procedures
Division 3 - Interstate 25/State Highway 392 Corridor Activity Center
Sec. 17-13-410. - Corridor Activity Center defined.
For purposes of this Article, the "Corridor Activity Center" shall mean the Interstate 25/State Highway
392 Corridor Activity Center defined in the Intergovernmental Agreement Pertaining to the Development
of the Interstate 25/State Highway 392 Interchange dated January 3, 2011, between the City of Fort
Collins, Colorado, and Town of Windsor, Colorado, and as may, pursuant to said Intergovernmental
Agreement, be amended in the future.
(Ord. 2011-1402 §2)
Sec. 17-13-420. - Corridor Activity Center; permitted uses.
Land uses within the Corridor Activity Center shall be limited to the following:
(1) Adult day care centers.
(2) Drive-thru restaurants.
(3) Entertainment facilities/theaters.
(4) Fast food restaurants.
(5) Fuel sales convenience stores.
(6) Grocery/supermarkets.
(7) Health clubs.
(8) Hospitals.
(9) Lodging.
(10) Long-term care facilities.
(11) Medical center/clinics.
(12) Mixed use residential.
(13) Multi-family mixed use.
(14) Offices/financial.
(15) Personal/business service shops.
(16) Retail establishments/big box.
(17) Retail stores.
(18) Schools - private/vocational colleges.
(19) Small scale recreation/events centers.
(20) Standard restaurants.
(21) Telecommunication equipment, excluding freestanding towers.
(22) Unlimited indoor recreation.
Attachment D
Page 2
(Ord. 2011-1402 §2)
Sec. 17-13-430. - Corridor Activity Center; design standards, applicability.
The design standards for the Corridor Activity Center established pursuant to this Division shall apply
to all building, growth and development within the Corridor Activity Center.
(Ord. 2011-1402 §2)
Sec. 17-13-440. - Design criteria.
The following criteria shall apply to all building, growth and development within the Corridor Activity
Center:
(1) Minimum level of masonry. On any first floor building elevation that is visible from a public right-
of-way, masonry materials limited to natural stone, synthetic stone, brick and concrete masonry
units that are textured or split face, solely or in combination, shall be applied to cover from
grade to the top of the entry feature of such elevation, or if there is no entry feature on any
particular elevation, to a height that would be equivalent to the top of the first floor. For first floor
building elevations not visible from a public right-of-way and on all upper stories, other exterior
finish materials, including but not limited to synthetic stucco (E.I.F.S.), architectural metals, clay
units, terra cotta, prefabricated brick panels or wood, can be applied in whole or in combination
with the masonry materials described above. For the purposes of this provision, architectural
metals shall mean metal panel systems that are either coated or anodized; metal sheets with
expressed seams; metal framing systems; or cut, stamped or cast ornamental metal panels, but
not ribbed or corrugated metal panel systems. Standard concrete masonry units or tilt-up
concrete with applied texturing are prohibited on any building elevation.
(2) Roofs. A roof pitch is required for buildings containing less than twenty-five thousand (25,000)
square feet and having three (3) stories or less. In cases where mechanical equipment must be
mounted on the roof, a sloping mansard roof shall be allowed.
(3) Building height. The maximum building height shall be ninety (90) feet.
(4) Sign standards. All freestanding signs shall be ground signs and shall be limited to a maximum
height of fourteen (14) feet along and perpendicular to I-25 and twelve (12) feet along and
perpendicular to all other streets. Such ground signs shall be subject to all other requirements
found in Chapter 16, Article IX of this Code.
(Ord. 2011-1402 §2)
Sec. 17-13-450. - Site plan process.
Submission of a site plan demonstrating compliance with the applicable design criteria, as
established in this Division, shall be submitted and processed pursuant to the site plan review procedure
set forth in Article VII of this Chapter and the requirements of the Intergovernmental Agreement
Pertaining to the Development of the Interstate 25/State Highway 392 Interchange dated January 3,
2011, between the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, and Town of Windsor, Colorado, prior to the approval of
any building, growth or development within any Corridor Activity Center.
(Ord. 2011-1402 §2)
Sec. 17-13-460. - Review by Town.
Attachment D
Page 3
The Town Manager is hereby authorized to retain the services of a consulting architect to examine
the site plan and report to the Planning Department, Planning Commission and Town Board with respect
to the site plan's compliance with the design criteria established in this Division.
(Ord. 2011-1402 §2)
Sec. 17-13-470. - Design criteria controls other rules and regulations.
The requirements of this Division shall be in addition to all other building, growth and development
rules and regulations set forth in this Code. Where those rules and regulations specifically conflict with the
design criteria adopted hereunder, the design criteria adopted hereunder shall control.
(Ord. 2011-1402 §2)
Attachment D
I-25/SH 392 Corridor Activity Center (CAC) Development Standards
1/21/16 Open House Summary
Approximately 93 people, most of whom were neighbors to the CAC, attended the 1/21/16 open
house at Windsor-Severance Fire Rescue Station No. 1. Information regarding the history of
the I-25 Corridor Plan, the intergovernmental agreement (IGA) between Windsor and Fort
Collins regarding the I-25/SH 392 CAC and related development standards was presented.
Comments were solicited regarding neighbor preferences and concerns pertaining to site and
building design, as well as thoughts on expanding the allowable uses within the CAC.
Based upon the comments received, the following themes emerged:
• Development standards regarding site lighting (40%) and setbacks/landscape buffers
(38%) are top site design priorities for the neighbors.
• Residents of the Country Farms Subdivision also have strong concerns regarding the
connection of existing Country Farms Drive to future development to the west (Town of
Windsor and Windsor-Severance Fire Rescue officials are meeting with the Country
Farms HOA on Thursday, January 28th to discuss this issue).
• Of the 17 comments specific to automobile dealerships, 14 were opposed to an IGA
amendment that would allow dealerships in the CAC.
• With regard to site design, abundant landscaping (22%) was the top priority, while an
excess of pavement/parking (11%) was the top concern.
• With regard to building design, the three most preferred examples included: a single-
story restaurant with stone materials and sloped roof elements (78%); a two-story
masonry and stone commercial building with sloped roof elements (50%); and a three-
story masonry mixed use building with ground floor retail use and office/residential on
upper floors (39%).
• Also attached are email comments that were received from neighbors in response to the
open house. They generally reflect similar desires for light and noise mitigation,
abundant landscaping, substantial buffers, and compatible land uses.
• Neighbors also voiced concerns that auto sales uses would likely prompt adjacent
properties to develop as automobile support businesses such as maintenance and
repair, auto body and paint, muffler shops and parts stores.
The following summary of responses to questions has been grouped into common themes that
attendees included on comment cards at various stations at the open house.
Question: What are your top three concerns regarding a change to the allowable uses
in the CAC?
Forty-two written responses were received regarding this question, many of which pertained to
site design, with others related to allowed uses. Concerns regarding site lighting,
setbacks/landscape buffers and traffic were the top three concerns. Three comments indicated
that automobile dealerships would be acceptable with appropriate regulations, while 17
responses indicated opposition to auto dealerships.
Page 2 of 9
Concern # of Responses
Light 17
Traffic 16
Setbacks/buffers/landscaping/berms 16
Extension of Country Farms Drive 11
Noise 9
Building height 8
Preservation of open space/natural areas 5
Safety (traffic, pedestrians, etc.) 3
Odor (restaurants) 2
Automobile dealerships 3 in favor 14 against
Question: Please circle all site design concepts that you most prefer:
What do you like about these concepts?
Participants were shown eight images of different development types in order to comment on
which concepts they liked and why (see attached Site Design board). Seventy-seven written
responses were received regarding this question. The three most preferred concepts share
similarities in abundant landscaping, use of natural material, and human scaled design.
Landscaping was the most common response to what people liked about the concepts shown.
Please circle all site design concepts that you most prefer:
# of Responses
Concept 2 21
Concept 6 18
Concept 5 13
Concept 8 11
Concept 3 8
Concept 4 3
Concept 7 3
Concept 1 0
What do you like about these concepts? # of Responses
Abundant landscaping 17
Larger setbacks 5
Pedestrian connections 4
Screening/berming 4
Buffer to residential area 3
Lower building heights 3
Planning for transit 2
Lower amounts of lighting 2
Small town feel 2
Open look/large spacing between buildings 2
Wide streets 1
Quiet 1
Page 3 of 9
Minimal parking 1
Building orientation long sides perpendicular to
mountain views
1
Room for growth & traffic 1
Close grouping of buildings 1
Question: Please circle all site design concepts that you least prefer:
What do you dislike about these concepts?
Of the eight images displayed for the previous question, participants were also asked which
concepts they least preferred. Ninety written responses were received regarding this question.
Participants identified minimal landscaping and large amounts of parking as top concerns,
elements present in the two least preferred concepts. The concept receiving the third most
unfavorable responses pertained to the urban/commercial feel of the image.
Please circle all site design concepts that you most prefer:
# of Responses
Concept 1 27
Concept 4 24
Concept 7 17
Concept 3 10
Concept 8 7
Concept 5 2
Concept 6 2
Concept 2 1
What do you dislike about these concepts? # of Responses
Too much pavement/parking 10
Not enough landscaping 8
Industrial or commercial look 7
Amount or brightness of lighting 6
Traffic 3
Too busy/urban/dense 3
Car dealers have another location one exit away 2
Safety concerns 2
No personality 1
No preservation of natural areas 1
Small streets 1
Too boxy 1
Signage 1
Single use concept of only car dealers 1
Page 4 of 9
Question: Please circle all building design concepts that you most prefer:
What do you like about these concepts?
Participants were then shown eight images of different building types to gather their input on
which concepts they liked and why (see attached Building Design board). Forty-six written
response cards were received regarding this question. The four most preferred concepts share
similarities in unique and interesting design, inviting and aesthetically appealing design, and
materials used. Design/aesthetics was the most common response topic. For a complete
breakdown of all comments received from the comment cards, please see Appendix A.
Please circle all building design concepts that you most
prefer:
# of Responses
Concept 8 36
Concept 4 23
Concept 2 18
Concept 5 5
Concept 3 3
Concept 1 2
Concept 6 2
Concept 7 1
What do you like about these concepts? # of Related Responses
Design/aesthetics: inviting; interest/uniqueness 55
Materials 50
Overall height 29
Mass and scale 22
Color; warmth 13
Incorporation with residences (design; flow) 7
Orientation of building 4
Incorporation of landscaping and setbacks from street
and residences
2
Question: Please circle all building design concepts that you least prefer:
What do you dislike about these concepts?
Of the eight images displayed for the previous question, participants were also asked which
concepts they least preferred. Participants identified design/aesthetics, height and massing as
top concerns. For a complete breakdown of all comments received from the comment cards,
please see Appendix A.
Please circle all building design concepts that you least
prefer:
# of Responses
Concept 7 20
Page 5 of 9
Concept 1 18
Concept 6 16
Concept 3 9
Concept 5 4
Concept 2 4
Concept 4 3
Concept 8 0
What do you dislike about these concepts? # of Related Responses
Design/aesthetics: uninviting; bland; industrial looking;
old/dated; stark
37
Too high or too tall 31
Mass and scale/ too boxy 23
Incorporation with residences (design; flow) 17
Materials and colors 15
Proximity to streets (i.e. setbacks) 5
Perceived lighting 1
Page 6 of 9
Appendix A - Building Design board responses from open house
#1 Likes
• orientation • least boxy looking
#1 Dislikes
• very tall and wide
• many windows means a lot of light
reflection
• too tall
• looks more ‘industrial’
• doesn’t fit the look of the
neighborhood
• too stark
• doesn’t fit into residential area
• too tall
• too modern
• too tall
• too tall
• boxy
• big
• tall
• height
• service looking
• uninviting
• too much glass
• doesn’t fit with residential area
• too high
• too high and massive
• seems ‘big city’
• cold materials
• too many hard lines and flat surfaces
• too high
• too tall and boxy
• boxy
• close to streets
• too high
#2 Likes
• interesting
• mass broken up w/ 3rd story step
back
• angles in buildings
• materials are more visually
appealing
• lower heights
• pleasant design
• materials look like they would be
there 100 years from now
• style
• adequate amounts of windows
• does not look ‘industrial’
• building lines
• inviting
• classic, natural and unique
• keeps height below 3 stories
• Colorado style and materials
• mass broken up w/ 3rd story step
back
• height
• less glass
• clean, simple and classic designs
Page 7 of 9
#3 Likes
• clean design
#3 Dislikes
• looks more ‘industrial’
• doesn’t fit the look of the
neighborhood
• boxy
• big
• tall
• height
• service looking
• uninviting
• industrial looking
• too bland/status quo
• looks old
• color combo is not pretty
• looks like the start of urban decline
• boxy
• close to streets
#4 Likes
• nice material
• northern Colorado feel
• not too tall
• blends in better with residences –
“country club” feel
• “home like” design
• low
• angles in buildings
• materials are more visually
appealing
• lower heights
• pleasant design
• materials look like they would be
there 100 years from now
• style
• adequate amounts of windows
• does not look ‘industrial’
• classic, natural and unique
• keeps height below 3 stories
• Colorado style and materials
• residential look
• more inviting design and materials
• great architecture
• lower elevation/height
• nice setbacks
• nice landscaping
• rocky mountain design
• lower height of buildings
• height
• less glass
• clean, simple and classic designs
• 2 story preferred
• warm appearance fits town
• good materials and design
• not too tall
• looks nice with the stone
• okay
• aesthetics
#4 Dislikes
Page 8 of 9
• least boxy looking
#5 Dislikes
• too stark • doesn’t fit into residential area
#6 Likes
• look is very ‘Colorado’ • too close to street
#6 Dislikes
• too trendy, will look dated soon
• too stark
• doesn’t fit into residential area
• too choppy
• not a nice flow
• too tall
• boxy
• big
• tall
• height
• service looking
• uninviting
• uninviting
• industrial looking
• signs ruined building
• too big
• close to street
• too much tilt up concrete
• boxy
• close to streets
• too high
• not organic
#7 Likes
• so-so
#7 Dislikes
• very tall and wide
• many windows means a lot of light
reflection
• too tall
• looks more ‘industrial’
• doesn’t fit the look of the
neighborhood
• too stark
• doesn’t fit into residential area
• too tall
• too modern
• materials
• prefer concrete/brick, too massive
• too tall
• boxy
• big
• tall
• height
• service looking
• uninviting
• too much glass
• doesn’t fit with residential area
• too boxy
• too massive
• seems ‘big city’
• cold materials
• too many hard lines and flat surfaces
• too high
Page 9 of 9
#8 Likes
• open feel
• Not too tall
• blends in better with residences –
“country club“ feel
• “home like” design
• low
• least intrusive design
• lower profile
• angles in buildings
• materials are more visually
appealing
• lower heights
• pleasant design
• materials look like they would be
there 100 years from now
• style
• adequate amounts of windows
• does not look ‘industrial’
• building lines
• inviting
• classic, natural and unique
• keeps height below 3 stories
• Colorado style and materials
• residential look
• more inviting design and materials
• great architecture
• lower elevation/height
• nice setbacks
• landscaping
• rocky mountain design
• lower height of buildings
• materials
• low height
• height
• less glass
• clean, simple and classic design
• 2 story preferred
• warm appearance fits town
• lower height/mass
• look is very ‘Colorado’
• good materials and design
• setback from street
• not too tall
• looks nice with the stone
• least boxy looking
• looks like some thought was put into
it
• design
• color
• material
• height
• nice
• aesthetics
#8 Dislikes
• None
General comments/ questions:
• Can you open the frontage road from the Ranch to 392?
• Consider reducing max building height to 3 stories or 30’
Site Design
*Please provide feedback on each illustration below for site design
elements such as: parking lots; screening; landscaping;
building location; noise; lighting; signage; etc.
1 2
3 4
555 6
7 8
Building Design
*Please provide feedback on each illustration below for building
design elements such as: orientation; mass; height;
material; architecture, etc.
1 2
33 44
555 6
7777 8
1
Scott Ballstadt
From: diane howell <di50howell@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 7:35 PM
To: Scott Ballstadt
Subject: WestgateCenter ideas
Scott, thanks again for hosting the open house this evening. It was a good
opportunity for us residents to have input. We appreciate your reaching out to
us. I am forwarding you the email I sent to the Boards a few months ago -
you asked that I forward it again to you for your upcoming discussions.
Thanks for taking my ideas into consideration. I speak for many of my
neighbors who feel we need a quality buffer between us any any development
on the other side of our fence, not just 80' and a row of trees here and there.
We think we deserve special design/site consideration given the density of what
the car dealers propose. This is the only area along this stretch of interstate
where residential backs up so close to proposed development. We love living
here and are proud of our community! Thank you again for you consideration
and for keeping me in the loop of information. I do pass it along to our
neighbors. I will spread the word about the Feb 1st mtg.
Have a great week. Thanks again for all you do! Let me know how I can help
you.
Diane Howell
From:"diane howell" <di50howell@yahoo.com>
Date:Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 12:48 PM
Subject:Email I sent to Windsor and FtC Boards re: car dealerships -
info for Nov 2 mtg
I sent this email to both Boards. It is just food for thought and possible discussion on the 2nd.
Thanks, Scott!
For the record, I am against the car dealerships because it is not allowed in the IGA. Also, I feel
that Moreland LLC knew that the car dealerships were not allowed when he bought this land.
We paid a premium for our houses to have a mountain view. The tradeoff is we have to tolerate
the horrible highway noise, especially at night. We know that something will be built on that land
but are counting on a win-win proposition. I know that the Town wants that as well. We don’t need
development for development’s sake and want to have smart and thoughtful growth.
When we saw the packet for the upcoming joint Board meeting, we were stunned. Only then did
we find out that it was more than just about car dealerships!
The proposal that Moreland has presented for the Westgate 52 acre parcel, in particular, is so
dense it borders ridiculous. He says he is giving us a 30-50 feet buffer – that’s crazy. We will be
giving up any privacy we now have because of windows overlooking our yards and bedrooms. If
there is parking lot right there on the back of these buildings, we will get to look at dumpsters as
well.
Maybe Moreland figured he would propose something so dense that we would welcome his car
dealerships in here. What he proposes is not attractive, especially on the back side. That multi-
2
story pad of retail/office as well as the brewery is not a good spot for this. There are plenty of
vacant office and retail spaces around Windsor/Crossroads – do we want more. I don’t agree that
necessarily if you build it, they will come. They might come once but not twice. Even Centerra has
vacant retail spaces and it was well thought out and designed.
I have an idea.
If we have to give Moreland his way, let him build his 4 car dealerships near the interstate.
Crossroads Motorplex is well designed with for the most-part one story buildings and decent
landscape/lighting. Keep in mind it is not near residential, so no negative impacts with the height.
We limit him to 4 car dealerships on these parcels and one story.
The back part of his plan where he wants to put a row of multi-story pads and a brewery, let him
move that to the south 50 acres near the interstate. That way he can have his brewery with live
music, outside dining and would also invite more retail. If you put it behind the car dealerships, it
might be tucked out of the way but it would also be a very congested area. Note: there is an
existing daycare center right next to Moreland’s proposed brewery site.
The space that would now be vacant behind the car dealerships would be open. I walked the
Centerra sculpture garden yesterday and it is very nice and makes a wonderful break between
County Rd 5 and the Centerra shops. There are walk paths, wild grasses, berms, sculptures. This
could go all the way along the east end of the parcels closest to our fences and at the
southernmost part there could be a small ampitheatre area where there could be town concerts
or bands the brewery might host. There is plenty of open space to be designed well and
thoughtfully. Between the car dealerships and this garden area there could be a small road that
has pull off places for parking. There could even be a little creek through here or rolling terrain.
Again, the buffer that Centerra Shops has is a perfect example of what I think would be agreeable
and pleasant for us homeowners to look at, enjoy, and be something that Windsor could develop
as an art space. (Ray Martinez asked what I would think would be a good buffer and I said 200-
300 feet at least.)
This way the car dealer gets his car dealers he so badly wants. We put enough controls in place
that he conforms with the Town’s wishes (no big LED signs, for instance). We homeowners also
have a win because we would be preserving our views for the most part. Any dirt berms and
varied terrain could also help with noise abatement.
I know it sounds obvious but someday we will want to sell our homes. No one in their right minds
would buy a house that backs up so closely to a multi story building of any sort, let alone parking
lots of cars! They can easily go nearby and buy something else with so many choices. I vote for a
win-win. The town can gain revenue from the retail space and brewery on the southern end of
these parcels.
Since the north side of 392 will be developed as well, can’t we do a blend – spread the retail out
over the two developments. The Ptarmigan folks are much farther from any retail than we would
be given the size of that vacant land, therefore, less impact.
I also vote that we do the sculpture garden/open area first because little if any infrastructure is
necessary. We homeowners can then feel assured that when we sell our homes the prospective
buyers will know what is going in. If nothing else, identify this area so it cannot be amended later.
I invite you to come over to Country Meadows and walk our back fence and see for yourself what
a 2-3 story building would be 50 feet from our back fences. Fort Collins Councilman Ray
Martinez did so. He also sat down with a few of us neighbors with a cup of coffee and talked.
Again, this not only affects Country Meadows but Country Farms – about 200 homeowners.
Thank you for listening and I would be happy to work with you in any way I can.
Diane Howell
1
Scott Ballstadt
From: Elaine Burritt <elaineburritt@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 10:29 PM
To: Scott Ballstadt; Elaine Burritt; Don Burritt
Subject: Further Comments Re: 1/21/16 Planning Open House
Dear Scott,
Thank you and all of the planners for hosting this important open house. It was great to talk to the
planners, and we hope they found our comments useful.
Below are some additional comments to include in your report to the Windsor Town Board and Fort
Collins City Council.
Buffer space / green belt separating neighborhood from businesses / parking lots. There is not a
barrier that is common in most areas, such a street between the neighborhood and the development,
so a large green belt barrier is not unreasonable to ask for to preserve residential privacy. Perhaps
200 feet could be possible.
Terrain variations in green belt to provide visual interest, and block headlights.
Barrier to eliminate headlight glare into neighborhood.
Protect and preserve the wetlands.
Be sure there is adequate drainage for severe weather, such as July 28, 1997 and Sept 13, 2013
floods. Be prepared for climate change and how it will affect this land and surrounding
neighborhoods when severe weather occurs.
Building orientation appropriate to allow visual corridors for neighborhood residents and to maximize
solar roof efficiency.
Noise must be kept to a minimum. Car dealerships would include engines, pneumatic tools, loud
exhaust systems, etc.
Music venues are not appropriate. Ripley Design included a large brewery right next to the existing
children's daycare.
The allowable 85 feet height for buildings is too high for anywhere on this property. Ripley Design
included a 3-story hotel right along our residential perimeter which is a high building height, and a
large intrusive footprint.
Height of buildings reduced that are closest to neighborhood. Buildings block the view of sun, moon,
sky, mountains. Can create a constant shadow on surrounding property, which is very undesirable.
2
Dimmable parking lot lights required after business hours. Motion detectors can provide extra security
for businesses.
Keep our dark skies dark.
Buildings sides minimally lit after business hours.
No lighted windows, after business hours, that face neighborhood.
Minimal or no lighted signs after business hours facing neighborhood.
Screening essential to block unsightly garbage dumpsters, storage areas, backs of buildings.
Is there even enough room for all that is proposed? Instead of retail, will we end up with auto
support businesses right next to our houses? No industrial / auto repair / auto maintenance / repair,
paint, collision buildings near neighborhood.
Re-purposable facility should be built if created facility fails. Auto dealerships are difficult to re-use, as
exemplified by now defunct Champion / Iron Mountain Auto-plex.
Keep the width of Westgate drive to 2 lanes. Do not intrude on Country Farms by extending into their
neighborhood.
A positive, aesthetically pleasing gateway to our communities should be created.
This property was envisioned as an employment zone. That is probably the best use for it. Auto
dealerships will not create as much employment or tax revenue as an employment based business
would. Think Google or similar corporate business/technology company that would provide a nice
business campus.
Sincerely,
Elaine and Don Burritt
Elaine Burritt
7931 Bayside Drive
Fort Collins, CO 80528
970-690-4756
elaineburritt@gmail.com
Travel and change of place impart new vigor to the mind.-Seneca
1
Scott Ballstadt
From: Jana Anderson <janacmcanderson@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, January 22, 2016 4:21 PM
To: Scott Ballstadt
Subject: last night's open house
Hi Scott,
I was at the open house last night and had a chance to talk briefly with you. You mentioned that I should be sure
to write down my comments, but I didn't have time to write them down before the open house ended. I wanted
to let you know that my main concerns with development of the I25/SH392 corridor are:
1. We should have a "respectful" buffer between developed areas (buildings/parking lots) and the existing
neighborhoods. I think that 200 feet would be very reasonable.
2. The buffer between the development and existing neighborhoods should be attractive (trees, berms, etc).
3. Lighting and noise should also be respectful of existing neighborhoods. I'm not sure how to define that,
but I'm sure the planning division has some resources in regard to those issues.
4. I know that this may not be reasonable, but it would be really nice if buildings did not exceed 3-4
stories.
5. Buildings should, of course, be attractive. Again, I'm not sure how to define that.
Finally, I don't live in Country Farms, but if I did, I would really, really not want Country Farms Rd to go
through into the new development. I know that is a separate issue, but I would hope that making Country Farms
a through street could be avoided!
Thanks for listening and for all of your time (as well as your staff's)! I really appreciate the opportunity to be
heard and to see the resources that are available, so far!
Jana Anderson
Country Meadows resident
I-25/SH 392 Corridor Activity Center
Use and Design Standards Discussion
Joint Work Session
February 1, 2016
Windsor Town Board
Fort Collins City Council
I-25/392 Interchange IGA
Direction for Staff for Potential IGA Amendments:
ID purpose statement for scope and process
Evaluate review period for IGA and appeal process
Develop public outreach process
Assess new compatibility/design standards for CAC
Determine is the new use – Auto Dealerships –
appropriate for inclusion in CAC
I-25/392 Interchange
Planning Process Since Joint Meeting
2015
Nov. 2 Joint Elected Officials meeting:
- discuss potential amendments to IGA
- staff directed to determine scope of
work and process
Dec. 7, 29 Joint staff meetings
2016
Jan. 14 Dealership Owners hosted Open House
Jan. 21 Public Open House hosted by joint staffs
I-25/SH 392 Corridor Activity Center
Key Questions for Discussion:
1. Is there support for establishing Transit Oriented
Development at this interchange and within the CAC?
2. Should development standards within the Fort Collins
and Windsor Land Use Codes be amended to include
additional requirements to mitigate visual and
functional impacts upon the gateway?
3. Is there support for adding the “Auto Dealerships”
use that includes vehicle sales and servicing to the
CAC overlay in some form?
I-25 Corridor Background
I-25 Regional Corridor Plan (2001)-----------
I-25 Subarea Plan (2003)------------------------
I-25/SH 392 Interchange------------------------
Improvement Plan (2008)
5
I-25 Corridor Regional Plan
6
Participants:
City of Fort Collins
City of Loveland
Town of Windsor
Town of Berthoud
Town of Johnstown
Town of Timnath
Larimer County
Weld County
CDOT
North Front Range MPO
Clarion Associates
LSA Associates
• High quality development
• Development concentrated in activity centers
• Residential away from the highway
• Key views and natural features protected
• Parallel roadway system where feasible
• Transit opportunities preserved
Elements of the Preferred Vision:
I-25 Regional Plan
I-25 Regional Plan – Design Standards
Concentrate Commercial
uses at interchange
Mixed-use with urban block
character, parking located to
side and rear of buildings
High quality appearance and
function of uses
Multi-modal connections
and high pedestrian LOS
Building design/character
including pitched roofs,
architectural details and high
quality materials
I-25 Corridor Plan & Design Standards established a vision for the I-25/SH 392
Interchange with the following intent statement:
“Activity Centers should provide a mix of uses, such as employment, residential,
retail, and commercial uses that accommodate and complement multiple modes
of transportation, including bicycles, pedestrians, high-frequency bus, and
commuter rail (TOD).
This poses a challenge for the standards, because development patterns in these
centers, sited near highways, frontage roads and major east/west roadways have
typically been designed for high visibility, easily accessible, auto-oriented uses
such as gas stations, fast-food establishments, and motels.
The intent of these standards is to provide the tools for creating an improved
quality of appearance and more integrated mix of land uses for concentrated
areas of development, that can support TOD.”
1. VISION 2. BACKGROUND 3. ISSUES 4. MITIGATION
I-25 Corridor Background
10
I-25 Subarea Plan (2003)
• Focus east of I-25 (Prospect – Douglas
Rd.)
• Two primary activity centers (Prospect
& Mulberry)
• Future development setback from I-25
• Land Use Code Standards for I-25
Corridor
SH 392/I-25 Interchange Improvement Plan
11
2008 Joint Plan (Windsor and Fort
Collins)
Plan to fund and reconstruct
interchange
Interchange area vision
Interchange design/funding options
Open lands buffers
Corridor Activity Center (CAC)
Gateway land use/design standards
Intergovernmental Agreements
Corridor Activity Center (CAC)
Windsor Commercial Corridor Plan
Key Site Design Elements
• 20% minimum landscaped area
• 80’ paving & building setback from I-25
• Landscaped entrance and exit drives
• Parking lot landscape islands every 15 spaces
Key Building Design Elements
• Primary materials: brick, stone, architectural concrete masonry units (CMU)
• Earth tone colors
• Screening of mechanical and storage areas
• 1st floor modulation facing public streets through windows, entrances,
arcades, awnings, etc. on 50% of façade
Windsor Large Retail Establishments
Applies to retail establishments over 50,000 s.f.
Key Site Design Elements
• 85% of parking allowed between building front and street
• Screening of parking with landscaping and either 3’ walls or earth berms
• Landscape islands every 20 spaces
Key Building Design Elements
• Requires articulation through wall plane projections or recesses
• Ground floor facades facing streets must have arcades, display windows,
awnings, etc.
• Facades must feature 3 of the following: color change, texture change,
material change, or change of architectural plane
• Materials: brick, wood, native stone, tinted & textured concrete masonry
units (CMU)
• Colors: neutral, earth tone
Parking/Display Lot Screening
Walls Landscaping Berms
SCREENING OPACITY
Screening can be described as having varying levels of opacity
Low Opacity
Medium
Opacity
High
Opacity
I-25 Corridor Standards
Land Use Code Standards for the I-25 Corridor
(Windsor/Fort Collins):
• Implementation of the I-25 Regional Corridor Plan/I-25
Subarea Plan
• Residential setback ¼ mile from I-25
• Commercial building design standards
• Building height and placement standards
• Landscaping and screening standards
• Corridor Activity Center standards
16
CAC Gateway Standards
Purpose of Gateway Standards:
• Establish cohesiveness in commercial design
(both sides of I-25)
• “Raise the Bar” in design quality for the
interchange gateway area
• Promote more intensive mixed-use development
to support TOD
CAC Gateway Standards
Design Standards:
1. Minimum Level of Masonry
• Require a masonry product on any elevation that is visible from a
public right-of-way from grade to the top of the entry feature
• Or to a height that would be equivalent to the top of the first
floor
• Masonry - Natural or synthetic stone, brick, and concrete
masonry units
• Concrete masonry units that are textured or split face and
concrete masonry units
CAC Gateway Standards
This Not This
Building Façade Materials
CAC Gateway Standards
Design Standards:
2. Roofs
• Apply to buildings less than 25,000 SF
• Require roof pitch versus flat roof
• Sloping mansard can be used for mounted mechanical
equipment
This Not This
Roof Pitch
CAC Gateway Standards
CAC Gateway Standards
Design Standards:
3. Commercial Building Height
• Maximum building height shall be 6-stories (+/- 85
feet)
• Existing standard (3-4 stories maximum)
CAC Gateway Standards
Existing (3-4 Stories) Building Height Proposed (5-6 Stories)
CAC Gateway Standards
CAC Gateway Standards
Design Standards:
4. Commercial Pole Sign Standard
• Freestanding pole sign contain no more than 30% air
space between top and ground (vertically), and
between horizontal limits of sign extended
perpendicular to the ground
• Maximum sign height is 12 feet
CAC Gateway Standards
This Not This
Pole Signs
Prohibited Uses In CAC Gateway Area:
• Enclosed Mini Storage Group Homes
• Retail/Supply Yards Extra Occupancy Rental Housing
• Parking Garage Places of Worship
• Funeral Home Bed & Breakfast
• Car Dealerships/Sales Vehicle Servicing/Testing/Repair
• Dog/Horse Track Equipment Rental
• Adult Uses Truck/Trailer/RV/Boat/Storage Sales
• Multi-bay Self-Serve Carwash Freestanding Telecom. Towers
• Amusement Park Recycling Facilities
• Warehousing/Distribution Wholesale Composting
• Outdoor General Advertising/Billboard
• Single Family Detached
• Duplex
CAC - Gateway Land Use Standards
CAC - Gateway Land Use Standards
I-25/392 Interchange IGA
Land Use Implications:
Development for auto dealerships forego opportunity for
large-scale employment uses and/or Transit Oriented
Development (TOD) in Windsor
Approval may spur additional requests to amend the
interchange use limitations (applies to both Windsor and
Fort Collins) and more auto oriented development
Proposed Design Standards Outline
Site Design:
Visual Impacts
- Parking distribution
- Landscaping
- Vehicle display areas-internal or external
- Distance from frontage road and 1-25
Drainage/ Detention
Noise Pollution
Lighting Impacts
Landscaping maintenance, size of plant materials, code enforcement
Motorist distraction (signs (particularly electronic), lighting)
Code Enforcement (primarily vehicle display, temporary signs, lighting,
noise)
Density/Intensity
Adequate space for vehicle inventory on-site (possible spillover)
Proposed Design Standards Outline
Building Design:
Height, Roof pitch
Materials
Location of Service bays, utilities, storage, display
Signage
Setbacks and orientation
Building form-articulation, style, etc.
Proposed Design Standards Outline
Use trade-off Issues if car dealership in CAC:
RTA – complementary uses (tourism/recreation)
Gateway appeal (economic development impacts)
Activity/TOD (not highest and best use of TOD area)
CAC intent (vision and goals of cooperative planning area)
Proximity of car service to population centers
Site/building vacancy
Increased code enforcement
Westgate Auto Dealership Proposal
CAC Review Process
Amended IGA – I-25/SH 392 Interchange (2012):
Review of Development Proposals:
Joint staff review (Fort Collins/Windsor) of proposed
development projects within the CAC area
Proposed project information including plans and
specifications will be forwarded to other jurisdiction for
review
Review for consistency with adopted joint standards
(minimum 30 days prior to decision)
Review comments intended to be cooperative in nature and
not binding by party having jurisdiction
IGA/CAC Standards Amendment Process
Amendment process for proposed changes to IGA and
Jointly adopted CAC regulations:
Identify information and options for proposed changes by
staff
Public outreach
Review and recommendation by the Windsor Planning
Commission
Review and recommendation by the Fort Collins Planning and
Zoning Board
Decision by the Windsor Town Board
Decision by the Fort Collins City Council
Next Steps
Public Involvement Process Next Steps:
1/14/16 Open House (Hosted by Dealerships)
1/21/16 Public Open House (City/Windsor)
2/1/16 Jt. Meeting (Elected Officials at Windsor)
March Board/Commission Recommendations
April City Council/Town Board Hearings
Open House Comments
1/21/16 - Public Open House Initial Observations:
93 people attended (mostly neighbors in area)
Forty-two written responses were received, many of
which pertained to site design, with others related to
allowed uses
Primary concerns included impacts of site lighting,
setbacks/landscape buffers and traffic
18% of written comments pertaining to use indicated that
automobile dealerships would be acceptable – while
82% were against including auto dealerships as a use in
CAC
I-25/SH 392 Corridor Activity Center
Key Questions for Discussion:
1. Is there support for establishing Transit Oriented
Development at this interchange and within the CAC?
2. Should development standards within the Fort Collins
and Windsor Land Use Codes be amended to include
additional requirements to mitigate visual and
functional impacts upon the gateway?
3. Is there support for adding the “Auto Dealerships”
use that includes vehicle sales and servicing to the
CAC overlay in some form?
• Consider berms in offset areas
• How will smells/odors be handled?
• What are the standards for smells/odors?
• Low buildings, low lights, no noise, parking away from residents, more greenery and
walkways
• too tall
• boxy
• boxy
• close to streets
• too high
• no personality or accents
• too choppy
#5 Likes
• nice design
• least intrusive design
• lower profile
• angles in buildings
• materials are more visually
appealing
• lower heights
• pleasant design
• so-so
• 2 story preferred
• warm appearance fits town
• charm
• materials
• lots of windows
• height seems good too
• good materials and design
• nice aesthetics
#2 Dislikes
• too tall
• boxy
• close to streets
• too high