HomeMy WebLinkAboutKING SOOPERS FUELING STATION (CEDARWOOD PLAZA) - PDP - 40-07 - DECISION - CORRESPONDENCE-HEARINGProje
Meeti
Date:
Administrative Public Hearing Sign -In
PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY
Name
Address
Phone
Email
( 5cs
�s 14 k�zv? . ( c3�ce CC)
3-) 666- l z 17
dccuc4� ctvc f ,euzpc . c"
k �� P� .
1;-31- 3O(oO
a�)oA1 �V\00 • Co v\A
i O R l-E
lg' ,
-rwt t {-OJ j co
r .dam- ZZ3
3' %(f 27��
��a •SC ve t��( (:p �: c
/t/Q %ems p c,��igJa,
Ss O -rc Pgjnkk/
303-770-8885'
a7g,-jcc4 C,.'o.re QAVPva
3,0�u i F� (��
w(f1w,
r
Ae �� �,c4L4.Lt
is• ca.f
,1S
A
King Soopers Cedarwood Fu,,. Station
Administrative Hearing
Findings, Conclusions, and Decision
August 6, 2008
Page 6 of 6
2. The Applicant shall investigate the planting of street trees along the S. Shields
frontage, with tree species and location acceptable to the City's stormwater utility
and City Forester as part of the Final Plan review.
Dated this 8th day of August 2008, per authority granted by Sections
1.4.9(E) and 2.1 of the Land Use Code.
meron Gloss
Current Planning Director
King Soopers Cedarwood Fu... Station
Administrative Hearing
Findings, Conclusions, and Decision
August 6, 2008
Page 5 of 6
lane is located on West Elizabeth adjacent to the site and the pedestrian
movements will be much safer than under present conditions due to the
elimination of curb cuts and installation of detached sidewalks along both street
frontages. The subject property is well served by the Transfort bus network. The
Hearing Officer acknowledges and appreciates that the opponents have provided
careful thought in the framing of their concerns; however, the weight of evidence
presented by the Applicant and corroborated by the City staff, supports a finding
of compliance with the Transportation Level of Service Requirements.
To ensure that all Site Planning and Design Standards found in Article 3 are met,
the Hearing Officer will require two amendments to the site plan. First, at least
one bicycle rack must be placed on the site in a safe, convenient location.
Second, the applicant will be required to work with City staff, to the extent
reasonably feasible, to identify appropriate canopy street trees to place within the
detention pond area located within the planting strip adajacent to S. Taft Hill Rd.
SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS
A. The King Soopers Fueling Station (at Cedarwood Plaza), Project Development
Plan is subject to administrative review and the requirements of the Land Use
Code (LUC).
B. The King Soopers Fueling Station (at Cedarwood Plaza), Project Development
Plan satisfies the development standards of the NC zoning district.
C. The King Soopers Fueling Station (at Cedarwood Plaza), Project Development
Plan complies with all applicable General Development Standards contained in
Article 3 of the Land Use Code except where conditions have been added to
ensure compliance with the standards.
nFCISION
The King Soopers Fueling Station (at Cedarwood Plaza), Project Development Plan
#40-07, is hereby approved by the Hearing Officer subject to the following conditions:
1. The Applicant shall amend the Site Plan, incorporating at least one bicycle rack
in a location convenient for employees, prior to Final Plan approval.
King Soopers Cedarwood Fu,.. Station
Administrative Hearing
Findings, Conclusions, and Decision
August 6, 2008
Page 4 of 6
are being met with the proposed design. The Staff Report summarizes the
PDP's compliance with these specific standards and no specific evidence was
presented to contradict the statements and conclusion of the staff report
concerning compliance with Article 4 or the NC District Standards.
While there was no direct testimony or evidence presented at the public hearing
to contradict the Project's compliance with these standards, the testimony of
David Lewis (representative to the convenience store/gas station owner across
the street to the north), identified concern about the proposed gasoline station
use. As was discussed during the hearing, gasoline stations are a permitted use
within the zone district, and the existence of a former gasoline station on the
subject property has no bearing on whether the proposed facility can be
constructed. The subject property has long been planned and zoned for a
commercial use, such as contemplated by the PDP and, in fact, the subject
property was available for other commercial uses with potentially greater intensity
than that proposed by the PDP. As a result, adjacent owners understood, or
should be charged with some level of knowledge, that the subject property would
be used for commercial purposes, including the gasoline station use.
2. Compliance with Article 3 of the Land Use Code — General Development
Standards
The Project Development Plan complies with all applicable requirements of
Article 3, particularly the plat standards of Section 3.3.1., except for 2 specific
code sections where design alterations are required as a condition of approval.
Except for these two noted items, no evidence was presented to contradict the
statements and conclusion of the staff report or staff comments made at the
hearing, concerning compliance or to otherwise refute the compliance with Article
3.
Adverse traffic conditions in the immediate area of Elizabeth and Shields was an
issue raised during public testimony. Concerns were two -fold: one related to the
Traffic Engineer's assessment of impacts, and another related to the access of
alternative transportation modes (pedestrian, bicycle and transit) to and through
the site. As a right afforded to him under the Larimer County Urban Area Street
Standards (LCUASS), the Traffic Engineer waived the applicant's requirement to
complete a Transportation Impact Study (TIS). Such finding was based on
evidence presented to the Traffic Engineer by the applicant through multiple
meetings. The Hearing Officer is convinced that vehicular conflicts will not
increase in any significant manner by the traffic generated by the Project as
compared to the long-term gasoline service station use. No evidence or
testimony was provided that leads the Hearing Officer to find that alternate
transportation modes will be inadequately served by the development. A bicycle
King Soopers Cedarwood Fu,. Station
Administrative Hearing
Findings, Conclusions, and Decision
August 6, 2008
Page 3 of 6
From the Public:
David Lewis, 1314 Main St, Louisville, CO
Lou DeAngelis & Amanda Bartz, 1008 S. Taft Hill Road
Rex Miller
Written Comments:
None
FACTS AND FINDINGS
The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
N: NC; Convenience store, shopping center
S: NC; RL Cedarwood Shopping Center, existing residential
W: NC, MMN; Cedarwood Shopping Center, existing residential
E: RL; existing residential
The property was annexed into the City in November, 1960 as part of the Miller
Brothers Tenth Foothills Annexation.
The subject property was platted as a portion of Tract "A" of the Miller Brothers
Foothills Subdivision, Sixth Filing in October, 1960.
The subject property remained part of Tract "A" with the Replat of the Miller
Brothers Foothills Subdivision, Sixth Filing in August, 1962.
The convenience store and gasoline/service station building was constructed in
1968 and remodeled in 2005.
1. Compliance with Article 4 and the NC Zoning District Standards:
The Project Development Plan complies with all applicable requirements of
Article 4 and the NC Zoning District. Such standards pertain to use of the
property and design standards for site layout and design of the canopy structure.
Gasoline stations are a permitted use within the NC zone. Addition of vehicular
cross access lanes to the adjacent Cedarwood Center contributes to a more
cohesive, visually -related and functionally -linked pattern as is required under the
site planning standards. The Land Use Code sets rigorous standards for the
architectural design, height and lighting of gasoline station canopies, all of which
King Soopers Cedarwood Fu.. Station
Administrative Hearing
Findings, Conclusions, and Decision
August 6, 2008
Page 2 of 6
Elizabeth Street, and an internal connection from the Cedarwood Plaza shopping
center.
SUMMARY OF HEARING OFFICER DECISION: Conditional Approval
ZONING DISTRICT: NC — Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Conditional Approval
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: Evidence presented to the Hearing Officer established
no controversy or facts to refute that the hearing was
properly posted, legal notices mailed and notice
published.
PUBLIC HEARING
The Hearing Officer, presiding pursuant to the Fort Collins Land Use Code, opened the
hearing at approximately 4:00 p.m. on August 7, 2008 in Conference Rooms C and D at
281 North College Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado.
HEARING TESTIMONY, WRITTEN COMMENTS AND OTHER EVIDENCE:
The Hearing Officer accepted during the hearing the following evidence: (1) Planning
Department Staff Report; (2) application, plans, maps and other supporting documents
submitted by the applicant and the applicant's representatives to the City of Fort Collins;
and (3) a tape recording of discussion provided during the hearing. The LUC, the City's
Comprehensive Plan (City Plan), and the formally promulgated policies of the City are
all considered part of the evidence considered by the Hearing Officer.
The following is a list of those who attended the meeting:
From the City:
Steve Olt, City Planner
From the Applicant:
Michael Scheckel
Matthew Duhaime
Amy DePasquale
City of
F6�` Collins Planning, Development, and Transportation - Current Planning
rt281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
(970) 221-6750
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER
TYPE I ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING DATE:
PROJECT NAME:
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
HEARING OFFICER:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
August 6, 2008
King Soopers Fueling Station (at
Cedarwood Plaza), Project
Development Plan
#40-07
Galloway & Company
c/o Matthew Duhaime
5350 DTC Parkway
Greenwood Village, CO. 80111
King Soopers
65 Tejon Street
Denver, CO. 80223
Cameron Gloss
Current Planning Director
This is a request to construct a King Soopers Fueling Station (gasoline station) on a
0.38 acre site located at the southwest corner of South Taft Hill Road and West
Elizabeth Street. It is adjacent to and functionally part of the existing Cedarwood Plaza
neighborhood shopping center containing a King Soopers supermarket as the primary
anchor store. The kiosk building will be one story, 11.5' in height, and contain
approximately 118 square feet. There will be a 43' x 92' rectangular canopy that will be
about 23' high. This proposed facility will be very similar to the existing King Soopers
fueling center at the Shops @ Rigden Farm, on the east side of Fort Collins. Existing
and proposed access to the development site is from South Taft Hill Road, West
of
City
Collins
August 8, 2008
Planning, Development, and Transportation - Current Planning
281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
(970)221-6750
Dear Participant in the King Soopers Fueling Station (at Cedarwood Plaza) PDP
Administrative Hearing,
Enclosed is a copy of the Type I Administrative Hearing Findings, Conclusions, and
Decision for the King Soopers Fueling Station (at Cedarwood Plaza) PDP Administrative
Hearing. The Hearing Officer has approved the application with two conditions.
This final decision of approval may be appealed to the City Council in accordance with
Section 2-48 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins.
The appellant must submit written notice of appeal, reasons for the appeal and a filing fee
of $100 to the City Clerk's Office within 14 days of the date of final action (August 8,
2008) by the Hearing Officer. Information regarding the grounds for appeal is available
on the City Clerk's page of the City's website at http://fcaov.com/cityclerk/appeals/Shp. If
appealed, the City Clerk will place the item on the Council agenda for hearing as
expeditiously as possible.
The City Clerk will provide written notice of an appeal from a final decision of the
Hearing Officer to the City Council to the appellant, the applicant and all other parties -in -
interest 10 days prior to the date set for the hearing.
An appeal of the Hearing Officer's final decision is based on the minutes of the
proceedings at the Administrative Hearing and any other materials received by the
Hearing Officer. New evidence may not be considered on an appeal. The City Council
may uphold, overturn, or modify the decision of the Hearing Officer.
If you have specific questions about the appeal process, please contact me at 221-6750.
Sincerely,
4
Steve Olt
City Planner