HomeMy WebLinkAboutCHICK-FIL-A, MINOR AMENDMENT - MA0900004 - CORRESPONDENCE - (22)• i4
c. an establishect pattern of existing buildings that makes a pedestrian -oriented
streetfront infeasible.
The section further states that such an alternative to the street sidewalk must include a
connecting walkway(s) and may include internal walkways or other directly connecting
outdoor spaces such as plazas, courtyards, squares or gardens. It has been determined
that, if an enhanced pedestrian crosswalk (raised, different material and/or color, etc.) is
provided across the exit drive -through lane, then a modification of this standard will not
be required. This would enable the proposal to be reviewed as a Minor Amendment.
6. I understand that Helen Migchelbrink, Director of Engineering, has forwarded to you a
letter stating that the City will not require any additional street ROW for West Horsetooth
Road as part of the Chick-Fil-A submittal. It is important, however, to provide enough
setback from the ROW for sufficient buffering and screening of the drive -through lane
from West Horsetooth Road. A minimum 5' setback, with landscaping and possibly a
freestanding wall, is needed to ensure proper screening of vehicles in the drive -through
from the street, especially at night when there will be headlights going towards one
another.
7. There are several standards set forth in various sections of the LUC that are very relevant
and must be addressed with your Minor Amendment submittal. They are:
* Section 3.5.1(I)(1) states that trash collection or compaction shall not be located
within 20' of any public street, public sidewalk, or internal pedestrian way.
* Section 3.5.3(C) of the LUC sets forth variation in building massing standards.
* Section 3.5.3(D) of the LUC sets forth standards relating to site specific design,
building facade treatment, building entrances, awnings, building base and top
treatments, encroachments, drive -through lane width limitations, and illumination
(lighting) prohibitions.
* Section 4.21(E) in the Commercial District section of the LUC sets forth several
Development Standards that you should be aware of.
City staff can and will be available to meet with you if any further clarification of our position is
necessary as you prepare your Minor Amendment submittal package. We do look forward to
working with you on this project.
Sincerely,
�(/ dr/"�-&
Steve Olt,
Interim Current Planning Director
cc: Jeff Scheick, PDT Director
Helen Migchelbrink, Engineering
Sheri Langenberger, Engineering
Randy Maizland, Engineering
Peter Barnes, Zoning
i
preclude any greater deviation from the standards of this Land Use Code by
reason of such amendments)."
Based on a conceptual plan discussed at our September 23`d meeting, it appears that the
drive-in restaurant building and drive -through lane would satisfy the "build -to" line
requirement set forth in Section 3.5.3(13)(2)(c) of the LUC, which requires at least 30% of
the proposed building to be located at least 10' and no more than 25' behind the right-of-
way (ROW) line of the adjoining street (Horsetooth Road). On the plan it appears to be
22' - 23' from the ROW line. Due to the existing Larimer County No. 2 Canal east of the
site the proposed drive-in restaurant development cannot (and will not be required
to) satisfy the build -to line standard for South College Avenue.
4. The drive-in restaurant building and drive -through lane as shown on the aforementioned
conceptual plan do not satisfy the Orientation to a Connecting Walkway requirement set
forth in Section 3.5.3(B)(1) of the LUC. This section states (in part):
At least one main entrance of any commercial or mixed -use building shall face
and open directly onto a connecting walkway with pedestrian frontage.
Based on Figure 10 in this section it appears that the conceptual plan would not directly
satisfy this standard. There is a sidewalk on the south, front entry side of the building;
however, for pedestrians to access the north — south sidewalk to West Horsetooth Road
on the west side of the site they must cross the exit drive -through lane. If an enhanced
pedestrian crosswalk (raised, different material and/or color, etc.) is provided then a
modification of this standard will not be required, enabling the proposal to be reviewed as
a Minor Amendment. Also, some form of signage notifying drivers exiting the drive -
through of the pedestrian crossing would be a significant benefit. The island containing
the north - south sidewalk should be widened by at least 3' to include some shrub
materials between the sidewalk and the drive -through lane.
The drive-in restaurant building, drive -through lane, and sidewalk network as shown on
the aforementioned conceptual plan do not satisfy the Orientation to Build -to Lines for
Streetfront Buildings requirement set forth in Section 3.5.3(13)(2) of the LUC. This
section states:
"Build -to lines based on a consistent relationship of buildings to the street
sidewalk shall be established by development projects for new buildings and, to
the extent reasonably feasible, by development projects for additions or
modifications of existing buildings, in order to form visually continuous,
pedestrian -oriented streetfronts with no vehicle use area between building faces
and the street.
This section of the LUC does have exceptions to the build -to line standards that shall be
permitted. In Section 3.5.3(13)(2)(d)2 it states that if the building abuts a four -lane or six -
lane arterial street, and the Director has determined that an alternative to the street
sidewalk better serves the purpose of the connecting commercial destinations due to one
or more of the following constraints:
a. high volume and/or speed of traffic on the abutting street(s),
b. landform,
City of
FCollins
October 2, 2008
Allen Ginsborg
Managing Director & Principal
NewMark Merrill Mountain States
5700 Hearthstone Circle
Fort Collins, CO 80528
Dear Mr. Ginsborg,
Planning, Development and
Transportation Services
Current Planning
281 North College Ave.
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
970.221.6750
970.224.6134 - fax
fcgov. com/currentplanning
This letter is a follow-up to our meeting on Tuesday, September 23, 2008, regarding your
proposal to develop a Chick-Fil-A drive-in restaurant in the Cottonwood Shopping Center,
replacing the vacant Nate's Restaurant building. The following items outline the City Current
Planning Department's position on your development proposal.
The change -of -use from a standard sit-down restaurant to a fast food restaurant with
drive-in can be reviewed and possibly approved through the City's Minor Amendment
process. To be included in the Minor Amendment submittal are the following minimum
requirements:
* Site Plan
* Landscape Plan
* Building Elevations Plan
* Utility Plans (as necessary, please contact Randy Maizland, Engineering, at 970-
221-6605)
* Storm Drainage Plans (as necessary, please contact Glen Schlueter, Stormwater
Utility, at 970-224-6065)
* Traffic Impact Study (if necessary, please contact Joe Olson, Traffic Engineer, at
970-224-6062, and Denise Weston, Transportation Planning, at 970-416-2643)
The Minor Amendment will be submitted to and routed by the Zoning Department, 281
North College Avenue. Please contact Peter Barnes, Zoning, at 970-416-2335, or Steve
Olt, Current Planning, at 970-221-6341 for information on the number of copies of each
document to submit.
Regarding Minor Amendments, Section 2.2.10(A) of the Land Use Code (LUC) states:
"Minor amendments to any approved development plan, including any Overall
Development Plan or Project Development Plan, or any site specific development
plan (except replats) may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied
administratively by the Director and may be authorized without additional public
hearings. Such minor amendments may be authorized by the Director as long as
the development plan, as so amended, continues to comply with the standards of
this Land Use Code, at least to the extent of its original compliance (so as to