HomeMy WebLinkAboutTIMBERLINE CENTER - PDP - 41-05A - REPORTS - ADMINISTRATIVE INTERPRETATIONWhy a % mile separation distance?
This is a matter of community design based on multiple considerations. The main
idea is to avoid the possibility of having these developments occur along arterial
streets at any and every arterial or collector intersection, thus resulting in 3 per
mile (one at each arterial street intersection and one at the collector street
intersection midway between the arterial streets). This has always led to a
concept of a separation greater than 2/3 mile, because collector streets are
sometimes constructed at a shorter interval. % mile is a round number, slightly
greater than 2/3 mile and that has served the community well since 1988.
Many communities have adopted'separation requirements for a whole host of
land uses, e.g. - adult -oriented businesses, motels, churches, schools and
billboards, but have generally not done so for retail uses. The location of certain
care facilities, such as group homes, is typically governed by state law rather
than local zoning ordinances.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Land Use Code team does not proposed any code changes at
this time. Rather, the team has a comfort,level that procedures -and criteria for
Modification of Standards (Section 2.8) provide sufficient flexibility for property
owners, applicants, investors, developers, small businesses and multi -national
corporations to pursue reductions in the current separation requirements.
along major streets has aesthetic and urban form implications as well as
traffic impacts.
2. City Plan is structured to provide mixed use neighborhoods on the
condition that the non-residential uses are carefully limited in terms of
automobile -oriented uses, and building placement, orientation, scale and
character.
Neighborhoods are one of the primary building blocks of the community,
with the neighborhood center as the foundational element. Neighborhood
Centers are carefully defined, with the spacing requirement being one
important component.
3. As previously noted, the present commercial separation standards were
not new with the adoption of City Plan in 1997. Rather, they are a
continuation of two well -established precedents from the previous LDGS:
A) the % mile separation of "Neighborhood Convenience Shopping
Centers" (adopted 1988);
B) the location of these developments at collector/arterial street comers,
and not arterial/arterial street comers, with good "back side" access from
surrounding neighborhoods.
Those previous precedents were established based on a thorough
analysis and public discussion of issues; they were reviewed by the
Planning and Zoning Board and adopted by City Council. They have been
thoroughly tested in practice.
4. Reducing vehicle miles traveled has long been a goal from both a land use
and transportation perspective. The length of trip for the every day items
such as milk, bread, gas, etc. should not result in excessive driving. Thus,
small convenience centers envisioned by the L-M-N neighborhood center
should be allowed in close proximity to neighborhoods. The key tradeoff,
however, is that such a commercial intrusion, while convenient, should be
used sparingly, lest the proliferation lead to a diminishing quality in the
neighborhood. The two convenience centers at East Horsetooth Road
and Lochwood Drive, and West Harmony Road and Seneca Street are
often cited as good examples of the scale and quality in relationship to the
surrounding neighborhood. The frequency of their placement is well -
received in that they demonstrate the delicate balance between frequency
of location and aesthetic quality.
Item 710 Consider Amending Various Article Four Permitted Uses That Are
Subject To Commercial Separation Reguirements.
Problem Statement
The Land Use Code requires the separation of certain commercial land uses in
order to best support the neighborhood structure embodied in City Plan and to
reduce the negative visual impact of commercial 'strip" development along major
streets. More specifically, the LUC sets a minimum % mile separation between
neighborhood commercial centers that include retail or restaurant uses and are
located on an arterial street, and also between convenience retail stores with fuel
sales.
Staff has been asked to evaluate the present commercial separation
requirements and determine whether a Land Use Code Amendment is
appropriate.
Background
The latest commercial separation requirements found within the Land Use Code
are really a continuation of long-standing limitations on the location and intensity
of commercial use. The City of Fort Collins has a long history of restricting
commercial land uses; it dates all the way back to 1929 when the City adopted its
initial zoning ordinance. More modem regulations are rooted in the Land Use
Policy Plan, adopted in 1979, and the City's previous land use regulations,
known as the Land Development Guidance System (LDGS). While the LDGS
opened up the possibility for commercial development to occur in all zone
districts, performance criteria were established which often prevented
commercial development, particularly along arterial streets.
One could argue that the present land use regulatory climate is actually less
restrictive than it has been in the past. The current code requirements open up
some new possibilities for certain neighborhood -scale commercial uses such as
modest office facilities, business services and day care centers. These
possibilities are expanded primarily due to the adoption of mixed use zone
districts as a part of City Plan.
Why did the community adopt commercial separation requirements?
1. These code limitations have always been a response to proliferation of
commercial developments along arterial streets and that fall outside of
established commercial districts. The limits address those commercial
uses which tend to generate high traffic volumes, have high visibility, and
strong corporate image needs, such as retail and restaurants. Proliferation
The applicant, has, however, raised legitimate questions about the City's adopted
policies and code standards that would justify further analysis and discussion of
the commercial separation requirements.
Since staff was recently directed by City Council to review all use separation
standards within the LUC as part of the fall 2005 Land Use Code amendments, it
would be most appropriate and efficient to analyze the applicant's request as part
of this larger land use policy discussion. The schedule for this next cycle of the
biannual Land Use Code amendments would result in any code changes
becoming effective approximately January 1, 2006.
Although it is staffs preference to delay furtherevaluation of issues surrounding
the separation standards, the applicant has the right to submit a modification
request at the present time.
cc: Ted Shepard
Gregory Byrne
Paul Eckman
Peter Bames
Pete Wray
• A driver cant see the two closest fueling spots because they are located
off of Timberline Road. Therefore, visual proliferation shouldn't be an
issue.
• A fast food restaurant is allowed at this location with no separation
requirement. Are C-stores inherently less attractive than fast food
restaurants?
• Our intent is to have a well -planned and architecturally coordinated
commercial center. Meaning that it is the developer's intent to use
matched or similar building materials, rooflines and architectural details. A
well -coordinated and visually -coordinated color scheme is also planned.
We respectfully request that the City staff consider all of the facts and make an
interpretation as (to) whether or not we meet the Land Use Code because fuel
sales and retail sales are both allowed without a separation requirement. If staff
determines that the proposal does not meet the Land Use Code, then we would
like staff to re -consider whether or not they would support a Modification to the
"separation" requirement because of the mitigating factors stated above."
Note: five requests for Land Use Code interpretation have been previously
submitted (#1-99, #4-99,#1-00,#1-02 and #2-03) addressing commercial
separation requirements of the Land Use Code, yet none have been applicable
to a property located within the Industrial -I zone district.
INTERPRETATION:
In response to the questions raised above:
Are the separation requirements met with the applicant's request?
No. Based on the strict application of the separation requirements found in
Section 4.23(B)(3)(c) and the method of measurement described in Section
1.4.10, the proposed location for the Timberline Center convenience store would
be less than the required % mile (3,960 feet) distance from the recently
constructed King Sooper's fueling station near Drake and Custer Drive and the
existing convenience store within the Spring Creek Center near Prospect and
Specht Point Roads. Therefore, the proposed Project Development Plan would
not comply with the standard.
Would staff support a request for modification to the separation requirement?
No. Based on the adopted City Plan policies and supporting text found within the
Land Use Code, staff would not support a modification at this time. A
Convenience store with fuel sales on the subject property will be oriented
primarily to the motoring public and not as a "complementary and supporting use"
to the industrial area as is explicitly stated in the Purpose section of the Industrial
District (4.2.3(A).
Commu_ y Planning and Environmental —zrvices
Current Planning
City of Fort Collins
TO: Interested Parties
FROM: Cameron Gloss
Current Planning Director
DATE: July 1, 2005
SUBJECT: Administrative Interpretation #8-05 pertaining to the commercial
separation standards found in Section 4.23(B)(3)(c) of the Land
Use Code for Convenience retail stores with fuel sales within the
Industrial (1) zone district and application of such standards to the
Timberline Center PDP.
BACKGROUND
A request has been received to clarify the commercial use separation
requirements for Convenience retail store with fuel sales within the Industrial (1)
zone district. This particular question relates to the application of such standard
to the potential future Timberline Center PDP located along the west side of
Timberline Road approximately half way between Drake and Prospect Roads.
Gasoline stations, and retail uses less than 25,000 sq. ft. in gross leasable area,
are permitted within the I District with no separation requirement, yet
Convenience retail stores with fuel sales must be separated by at least % mile
(3,960 feet).
The applicant has submitted the following argument within the interpretation
request:
'Apparently it's okay to purchase fuel at the proposed location, but allowing that
fuel customer to purchase a jug of milk in the same trip is not acceptable. On the
other hand, our City Policies in general promote one -stop shopping because it
saves on vehicle miles traveled. We believe this inconsistency was not
intentional. Gas stations are allowed because it is the 1-Industrial District. The
Zoning District that supposedly accommodates uses that are less attractive. To
deny the location of a C-store based on visual concerns seems inappropriate for
several reasons:
281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020