HomeMy WebLinkAboutHARMONY TECH. PARK 3RD AMENDED ODP - 12-97F - CORRESPONDENCE - (3)EXHIBIT K
Procedures for Granting Modifications to the
Harmony Corridor Plan Standards
Harnmomy Corridor Standards & Gt;ide6nes
II. PROCEDURES
The following standards and guidelines are intended to be used by developers proposing
projects in the Harmony Corridor and by the City staff and the Decision Maker in their Land
Use Code review process. "Standards" denoted by (+) are mandatory. "Guidelines" denoted
by (o) are not mandatory, but are provided in order to further educate planners, design
consultants, developers and City staff about the intent of the Harmony Corridor Plan. The
guidelines describe a variety of ways that individual projects can contribute to the Harmony
Corridor Plan. In addition, the guidelines will be used by City staff to guide the development
of public sector projects in the corridor.
The Planning and Zoning Board is empowered to grant modifications to the mandatory (+)
standards under the following circumstances:
1. The strict application of the standard would result in peculiar and exceptional practical
difficulties or exceptional and undue hardship upon the owner of the affected property;
2. The alternative plan, as submitted, will protect the public interest advanced by the
standard for which the variance is requested equally well or better than would compliance
with such standard; and
3. In either of the foregoing circumstances, the variance may be granted without substantial
detriment to the public good.
3
EXHIBIT J
Morningside Village Phasing Plan TYPICAL e
AN e'w: IY w
I w,o,clx avw¢o.:
mean s uw
ux rtwwn w
smeex I m mu, a
.TYPE /// BARRICADE I ! I i I
TYPE /// BARRICADE
` MOVABLE -SEE NOTE i . # '
■ ■■■■�■�__
menu■■■
------F- rt---------�
•
TYPE /// BARRICADE I
' '� ` 1
^-�
•
I �PHI,
3
SUBJECT PARCEL M
I
I
ewM I
- J
u•
I
0
�y �:
us
r.
■
I
e
u•
e4p
■
PHASE 5
j
I
I
■
m
1pf
A
TYPE
BARRICADE 1 NOW
OE -SEE TE
I
�
r
;
■
-- -- ---
- -
PH
_ --
I
•
INCLI
---THE
r"
OI
B
/'PH,„1
I .:....
! 3 !
! ! 3
. ,
! ! !
! 9 ! -
--'�
�-
"
�-
�
'
•
•
TEMF
CLAc_
I
I
I
L
J
SE 1
.�
■ i
1
l
1
uv
I�
I
�
♦.
I'
u-
I
i
II✓g1I�FM IiliBl
> A TYPE / BARR
C pE
f
I
I
I
I
,
J
l
�-
PHASE
L L _J
o
J
i
!
! !
!
! !
1 AslO
j W'iJ 1 I l
I I 1 I
L__1111YYY 1 A -
IV.,L_�1WJ
nr v
If, � ♦���
I
I I� 9➢ *4p�.�
k iA4G(
EXHIBIT I
Harmony Corridor Plan Statement — Decreasing Land
Use Intensity as Distance from Harmony Road
THE VISION
The vision for the corridor area is that it
become a major business center in north-
ern Colorado attracting a variety of busi-
nesses and industries serving local as well
as regional markets. It should also include
a mixture of land uses including open
space, residential, office, recreational, and
retail activities.
The focus of most development activity,
especially commercial, should be at the
major street intersections. The intensity
of land use should decrease as distance
from Harmony Road increases and as the
distance from the major intersections in-
creases. To promote pedestrian, bicycle
and transit use, development in the area
should be compact. Buildings, spaces and
street frontages should be well -designed
and of high quality materials and work-
manship.
Business and industry provide the major
economic focus of the corridor area. The
land use mix also includes a variety of
commercial uses to meet tenant and
neighborhood resident needs.
Community and regional commercial ac-
tivities are introduced in well -planned
shopping centers or industrial parks, de-
signed to draw shoppers from the sur-
rounding community and region.
Free-standing highway related commer-
cial (convenience stores, fast-food restau-
rants, gas stations and the like) are not
permitted to locate outside of planned
shopping centers or industrial parks. Only
neighborhood scale shopping centers are
allowed in residential areas.
Hotels to serve business tenants within
the park will grow in importance. These
hotels will be sited near major industrial
parks, and in most cases be visible from
Harmony Road.
Low intensity retail, restaurants, day care
facilities, health clubs, personal service
shops, business services (print shops, of-
fice supply, etc.), banks and other similar
commercial activity is concentrated in at-
tractively designed centers and integrated
into planned industrial parks
Buffer areas (transitional land uses, linear
greenbelts, or other urban design ele-
ments) are provided to serve as cushions
between the adjacent residential neighbor-
hoods and the commercial areas. The
existing, low density residential uses in the
surrounding neighborhoods are main-
tained and enhanced. As business activ-
ity expands, new housing stock of a mix
of types and densities is introduced as
integral parts of the business and indus-
trial parks.
3-5
EXHIBIT H
Harmony Corridor Plan Policies LU-6, LU-7
LU-6 Recognize the importance of the continued livability and stability of
existing residential neighborhoods as a means to expanding future eco-
nomic opportunities in the corridor.
The corridor area contains existing residential areas whose existence contributes to the
future economic health of the corridor area. Future development in the corridor should
be sensitive to these areas.
LU-7 Preserve a transition or cushion of lower intensity uses or open space
between existing residential neighborhoods and the more intense indus-
trial/commercial areas.
An important goal of the Harmony Corridor Plan is to provide a harmonious relationship
between land uses and to protect the character of new and existing residential neighbor-
hoods against intrusive and disruptive development. Open space, setbacks, landscaping,
physical barriers and appropriate land use transitions can be effective was to provide a
cushion between different uses. The following are generally considered to be appropriate
transitional land uses:
low intensity professional offices
multi -family housing
churches
childcare centers; and
nursing homes and/or elderly retirement homes.
3-9
EXHIBIT G
City of Fort Collins Design Manual, Context Diagram
for Neighborhood Development
Town -Like Pattern
Example Context Diagram For a Residential Development
Subdividing a Piece of Land vs. Building Up a Neighborhood or District
L
I r/
Typical Lotting Approaches - Land parcel about
10 acres in a growth area (h)pothetically).
Assume north is up
Fasting
Subdividing an Individual Parcel in Isolation
• Minimum access as required for emergencies.
• No neighborhood interconnections; street pattern forms
barriers in the larger neighborhood.
• Solar orientation of lots is not addressed.
• This approach is expedient; little is thought or design
work required.
Edsting Devebbpment
Future y„
Access
Needed.}
Goad place far small
de[en on based on park/ `.� r..
consideratkm of context
COxector street from
4
Master Street Plan
Future �
Development i. ,
Y ti
4-
tV!
�i
Developmen
as changed
msponse u
context
Temporary turrn-
aramdsd may be
needed
conagctions can't
be made initaly.
2 Context Diagram
Lock for r eighborhood relationships -
street pattern$ parks, center.
Rovndeforfutureaccessibiktyin all
directions
Area Abo
�tl/Iut�
80-10OAcres
Future
Neighborhood
Access 3
Goad dacrd w
Cen
Neff
ter based
on consider -
AM of
context
3 Response to Context Diagram
• Coordinate with neighbors if possible.
• Provide connections in all needed directions
• Address solar orientation
• Provide a mix of housing types.
• Form an integral part of a functional
neighborhood and district consistant with
City Plan
• This approach is more difficult; more work
required that #7 above.
4 / Introduction
No Text
EXHIBIT E
Graphic Overview of Morningside Village, including
Parcel M, within Technology Park
r+
N
Zi
r*
N
v p
c7 QJ
mq
m
n
O
O
2
O
v
Ma
0
O
a
n
CD
O0
EXHIBIT D
Buildable Lands Inventory on Redevelopment and Jobs
Redevelopment
Currently, there is no accurate way of estimating future redevelopment potential. The
traditional method compares land value to building value to identify underutilized
properties. This method was not found to be a good tool for identifying redevelopment
land in Fort Collins. When testing this method, many properties not likely to redevelop
were discovered based on a visual assessment of the property and building condition/use
and properties with known redevelopment value were not identified.
Based on an assumption made by Economic Planning Systems, Inc. for the "Market
Analysis for Fort Collins City Plan Update"( January 2003), the market was estimated to
support 10% of the future housing and 10% of all future jobs through redevelopment.
This translated into 2,872 housing units and 5,113 jobs by 2025. While this estimate is at
best a guess, no other method so far has offered a better prediction of future
redevelopment opportunities. The capacitX for future redevelopment is roob bl =much
higher throughout the City. ""����""°�'® ®�
In addition, future new employees and students at Colorado State University (CSU) were
added to the land supply estimates. Based CSU estimates (January, 2004), CSU is
expected to add 2,736 new students and 280 employees by 2009. The freshman portion
of the enrollment increase is estimated at 15.5%, or 424 students. Only freshmen are
included since it is assumed that freshmen will continue to be housed on campus: All
other students will find housing off campus; thus, they will be accommodated in existing
housing units. After 2009, it is assumed that enrollment and employment will remain
relatively unchanged.
2003 Buildable lands Inventory 15
EXHIBIT C
Labor Migration, Loveland
Area Median
Income Levels
Demographic
Profile
Commuting
Total Land
Area
2004 Area Median Income Levels
in Larimer County
Number of
Persons per
Household
Median
(100%)
Moderate
Income
(80% AMI)
Low Income
(50% AMI)
Extremely
Low Income
(30% AMI)
1
$46,550
$37,250
S23,300
$13,950
2
$53,200
$42,550
S26,600
$15,950
3
$59,8501
$47,900
$29,950
$17,950
4
$66,500*
1 $53,200
$33,250
$19,950
5
$71,8001
$57,450
$35,900
$21,550
6
$77,100
$61,700
$38,550
$23,150
7
$82,450
$65,950
$41,250
$24,750
8
$87,750
$70,200
$43,9001
$26,350
Source: US. Department of HUD
*24.8% change since 1999 ($53,300)
Web Link to 2000 US Census demographic profile of Loveland. CC
52.6% of Loveland's workers commute into Loveland
46% of Loveland working residents commute out of Loveland Source: Bureau o
Transportation Statistics, based on Census 2000
City of Loveland
Acres Annexed and City Land Area, 2000-2004*
Year
Acres
Annexed
Total City
Area Acres
Total City
Area (Sq Mi
2000
2,290.2
18,292.20
28.58
2001
563.0
18,855.20
29.46
2002
129.5
18,984.70
29.66
2003
276A
19,261.10
30.10
2004
467.9
19,729.00
30.83
Source: City ofLoveland IT Department. *Acres annexed
per recorded annexation plats for the respective yeam
Land Use Plan Web Link to Loveland Land Use Plan Source: 1994 Loveland Comprehensive Master Plan
Annual Data and Assumptions Report April 1, 2005- Revised July 2005 5
EXHIBIT C
Labor Migration, Longmont
City of Longmont, Colorado
Longmont Community Profile
-
LABOR MIGRATION STUDY SUMMARY
- 2004
(information is available on a two year basis - next update 2006)
% of Persons Living
Community Name
and Working in that
# of Positions
Community
Surveyed
Boulder
28.84%
14,242
Broomfield
20.32%
11,723
Erie
42.25%
71
Lafayette
26.95%
1,191
Longmont
45.56%
11,858
Louisville
16.97%
3,165
Superior
12.55%
271
Labor Migration Study Summary
50% --
40% _ —
30
20% -
10
0% �_.:. _..._
all
■ % of Persons Living and Working in that Community
Source: Longmont Area Economic Council
80
EXHIBIT C
Labor Migration, Fort Collins
0
■O
b
I E
E
Z
0
rn
M
°D
cc
o
E
n
0
c
'c
c
a
`m
v
c_
0
U
P°
Go
e
n
Go
OI
LL
`o
00
Oi
tD
U
m
�
T
n
(I!
O
S
C
A
O
7
O
(L
c
o
8
c
�Op
U
C
N
o
"5
c/)
8
8
v
LA
)
u
r
c
''
2
.
—
�°
-j
O
O
F
i
n N
H
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
June 19, 2003
Page 31
of a project of this size. It could be built in phases and it all may not be built at
one time, but there is a minimum square footage that they would commit to
before they would invest in the land and infrastructure that goes along with that.
Mr. Silverstein also addressed Member Craig's concern. He stated that the city
should understand exactly what is going to ultimately be built. He has always
viewed from his responsibility as potentially the developer of this Lifestyle Center
on this piece of property that through the development process, the next phase,
that a detailed development plan is part of what they would submit to staff, the
Board and the neighborhood so they could see where the landscaping is going,
where the buildings are located, points of ingress and egress, down to the light
fixtures they plan to use so there would be a clear understanding that when you
drive by this shopping center that it is what you envisioned it to be.
Member Gavaldon asked the staff not to get too worked up on drawings and
photos. What he is hearing from his colleague is that something that we cannot
offer and he would not support. He wants to see that at PDP and in the Land
Use Code you put examples down, this is what we want, but you put it into the
context. He thought that was an appropriate place to put it and tighten it up as
best you can, but he did not want to see micro managing and killing any creativity
of our applicants.
Member Colton asked about the Employment analysis because many of the
parcels that were mentioned were up in the Mountain Vista area. He knows that
there is some discussion that Anheuser Busch may or may not ever allow
development. He wanted to hear from the economic analysis that even if those
parcels were taken out that we would still have enough employment for the size
of the current GMA we have.
Director Byrne replied that one of the specific questions that we asked the
economic consultants was to do that. We know that the AB lands are
questionable. They have had a long history of saying that they want to maintain
their property as buffer rather than put it into the market place. At the same time,
other AB plants have surrounded themselves with business parks. We know
they have a model that works for them that we would like to see them do in town.
On page 21 of the consultant's report it states that "Anheuser Busch lands
D oY employment lan an o ot industrial ands are
a en out ot the inven orv. it still eaves acres of emp ovment an an 714
Member Schmidt asked that the wording be changed in the Harmony Corridor
Amendment to read "the amendment would designate a location for a fourth type
EXHIBIT B
Excerpts, June 19, 2003 Minutes
of the Planning and Zoning Board
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
June 19, 2003
Page 20
• It is estimated that we would have an increase in sales tax revenues
depending on the size of the Lifestyle Center anywhere from 1.3 to 2.4
million.
• It also pointed out that if the Lifestyle Center is not located in Fort.Collins,
there is a potential loss of sales between 1.1 and two million.
• It would also increase of the city's captured sales tax in the region.
In looking at potential impacts, this would bring new competition into the region,
and it will have some impact on the Foothills Mall and particularly with the
existing specialty retailers located in the Mall or within the vicinity. Some of the
same tenants that are targeted for Lifestyle Centers have also been shown to
locate in these. It is identified in the report that there could be some potential
impacts on those retailers.
Planner Wray thinks that the owners of the Mall are aware of this regional
competition and have plans.for expansion to stay competitive.
The impacts on Downtown were also looked at: The Downtown is very unique in
its composure and mix of locally owned tenants, primarily the historic value of the
downtown and its location. Because of the distance and the qualities he has
mentioned, it was determined that there would not be significant impacts in the
Downtown area. In fact, with the potential for regional draw, they could also
potentially shop Downtown or at the Foothills Mall as well.
Staff also looked at our Employment land inventory. There are approximately
550 acres in the Harmony Corridor and if you exclude the 140 acres that woulc
coula locate witnin the
re.
aooroxlmately 52 sites areater tnan i u acres tnat exist wltnin our Urowtn
management Area. me tnlnKs the Key points in tnis alscusslon are wny we are
looking at a preferred location for this Lifestyle Center, we also have determined
that there is sufficient inventory for future primary employment within the Growth
Management Area.
PUBLIC INPUT
Charles Sturgill, lives on Sunstone Drive in English Ranch. They have a
neighborhood that has a very large amount of small children of which many ride
bicycles. There is also a school and park near by. The main road in the area is
Kingsley Road. He and his neighbors are all in agreement with the shopping
center, the only thing they don't want to see is a major exit coming onto
EXHIBIT A:
Buildable Lands Inventory of Vacant Land
JX
R
X
Figure 9: Housing and Job Capacity of Vacant Land by Zone District,
2003
I
Zone District pS %d, ; u S,6 �P
Acres
tt'
Housing
Units
population
Building
Square Feet
Jobs
C
Commercial
363
0
0
1,711,138
3,422
CC
Community Commercial
115
345
813
576,811
1,154
CCN
Community Commercial, North College
87
18
41
86,890
174
CCR
Community Commercial, River
34
9
23
118,176
237
CL
Commercial, Limited
0
0
0
2,089
5
CN
Commercial, North College
69
0
0
162,452
325
D
Downtown
4
6
13
128,552
429
E
Employment g 1-
1,009
740
1,741
5,282,142
13,205
HC
Harmony Corridor 5 a(p
523
467
1,101
3,271,258
8,178
HMN
High Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood
3
56
133
948
2
I
Industrial q a
897
0
0
3,444,590
5,300
LMF
Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood,
Fossil Creek (phony zone)
225
194
456
19,712
40
LMN
Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood
2,992
8,573
20,182
523,757
1,047
MMN
Medium Density Mixed -Use
467
3,526
8,303
89,786
179
NC Neighborhood Commercial 129 122 286 608,177 1,216
NCL Neighborhood Conservation Low D 1 2 0 0
RC = River Conservation 793 0 0 88,653 148
RDR River Downtown Redevelopment 2 2 5 10,602 35
RL Low Density Residential 34 78 184 0 0
UE Urban Estate 3,578 2,731 6,429 0 0
UEN Urban Estate, North (phony zone) 542 161 380 0 0
Total 11,866 17,029 40,092 16,125,732 35,096
Figure 10 estimates the size and number of lots for vacant land. For residential land,
many lots are contained within the UE (Urban Estate) District and are mostly in the
unincorporated portion of the GMA. A significant number of lots are also within the
LMN (Low Density Mixed -Use) District. These two low density residential districts also
make up most of the potential new housing units (11,304 units, or 66% of future units).
The MMN (Medium Density Mixed -Use) District contains just a few lots over 20 acres,
and these lots are primarily in the Mountain Vista area. The MMN District comprises
2 1 % of future units.
While the C (Commercial) District contains the most lots, they are mostly less than three
acres in size. The E (Employment) and I (Industrial) Districts contain the next most
units. It is estimated that the greatest source of employment will be contained in the E
District at 38% of all new jobs (about 13,000 jobs). The HC (Harmony Corridor) will
also continue to be a large source of new jobs in the future.
Imo-� dL Zone. �j , S_Lr C
12 2003 Buildable Lands ;nventory
Application Approval Rationale
Page 8
c. In either of the foregoing circumstances, the variance may be granted
without substantial detriment to the public good.
6.c.1. The applicant furthermore finds that removing the subject parcel
from the City's inventory of employment land will have an
undetectable impact on the jobs/housing balance and would thus be
of no detriment to the public good. The property represents a mere
one-half of one percent of the City's total employment land
inventory. The proposed land use modification would rather
promote the public good by providing a transitional land use
between the adjacent residences of Morningside Village and the
remaining primary land use parcels to the north.
Attachments EXHIBIT A. Buildable Lands Inventory, Page 12, Figure 9
EXHIBIT B. July 19, 2003 Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
EXHIBIT C. Labor Migration Tables, Fort Collins, Longmont,
Loveland
EXHIBIT D. Buildable Lands Inventory, Page 15, Jobs and
Redevelopment
EXHIBIT E. Graphic of Morningside Village, Parcel M within
Technology Park
EXHIBIT F. Illustrative Overview of Parcel M within Context of
Morningside Village
EXHIBIT G. City of Fort Collins Design Manual, Context Diagram
for Neighborhood Development
EXHIBIT H. Harmony Corridor Plan Policies LU-6, LU-7
EXHIBIT I. Harmony Corridor Plan Statement about Land Use
Intensity Decreasing Away from Harmony Corridor
EXHIBIT J. Phasing Plan for Morningside Village Showing Parcel
M as Phase 5
EXHIBIT K. Procedures for Granting Modifications to the
Harmony Corridor Standards
Application Approval Rationale
Page 7
6. The Planning and Zoning Board is empowered to grant modifications to the
Harmony Corridor's mandatory standards under the following
circumstances (EXHIBIT K):
a. The strict application of the standard would result in peculiar and
exceptional practical difficulties or exceptional and undue hardship upon the
owner of the affected property.
The applicant finds that the mandatory standard, which is the existing land
use classification:
6.a.1. provides no transitional land use between, and thus does not protect,
the integrity of the Morningside Village residential area;
6.a.2. is inappropriate to the character of surrounding residences;
6.a.3. compromises the existing improvements to date; and,
6.a.4. is inappropriate to this property, given its configuration, location
and size.
b. The alternative plan, as submitted, will protect the public interest advanced
by the standards for which the variance is requested equally well or better
than would compliance.
6.b.1. The applicant finds that a secondary rather than primary use
classification will compel the continued development of the
Harmony Technology Park, its infrastructure and maturity in the
market, which are both substantially underdeveloped at this time.
6.b.2. Allowing for the continued development of the Morningside Village
residential community will protect the applicant's and the City's
existing investment. Ongoing residential development will provide
permit, impact fee and sales tax revenue. Ongoing residential
development will also create job activity in the real-estate and
construction industries. Taken together, the land use modification
would generate comparable economic development activities to
those put forth by the Harmony Corridor Plan's 75/25 primary to
secondary us policy.
Application Approval Rationale
Page 6
estimated at $800,000.00, and include participation in the continued
construction of Cinquefoil Street, Precision Drive, Lefever Drive and
Brookfield Drive.
4. The existing land use classification is inconsistent with key Harmony
Corridor Plan policies, including:
a. Policy to Protect Existing Residential Areas: The existing land use
classification is inconsistent with the Harmony Corridor Plan's call for the
protection of existing residential neighborhoods (see EXHIBIT H, LU-6).
b. Policy of Transitional Land Use: The existing land use classification is
inconsistent with the Harmony Corridor Plan's call for transitional land uses
between residential areas (see EXHIBIT H, LU-7).
c. Statement to Decrease Land Use Intensity Away from Harmony Road: The
Harmony Corridor Plan states: "The intensity of land use should decrease as
distance from Harmony Road increases and as the distance from the major
intersections increases." The existing land use classification is inconsistent
with this plan objective (See EXHIBIT I).
5. The subject parcel is marginally suited for basic industrial development due
to its:
a. Transportation Infrastructure and Access: The property is served by
Cinquefoil Street, which is a local street rather than the customary collector
or arterial street needed by industry, and the property is "hidden" back
within a residential area of the technology park, one mile from Harmony
Road.
b. Adjacency to Residential Areas: The property is located directly within and
adjacent to the residential community, Morningside Village. The subject
property is called out as "Phase V" of Morningside Village on the FDP for
the development (EXHIBIT J).
Application Approval Rationale
Page 5
b. Undermines Existing/Future Development o Morningside Village: The
subject parcel represents an integral part of the Morningside Village
community, illustrated in the attached overview of the technology park, with
the Morningside Village PDP boundary highlighted in yellow, and the
subject property highlighted in green (see EXHIBIT E attached). Taken as a
whole, Morningside Village is simply too small to support the introduction
of a basic industrial user without compromising the integrity of its existing
and future residences (EXHIBIT F). Together, all five phases of
Morningside Village, which include Parcel M, amount to less than 40 acres,
a comparatively small residential subdivision in relation to the standard 80
to 100-acre residential neighborhood size stipulated by the City of Fort
Collins Design Manual (see EXHIBIT G, Manual excerpt).
Our objective is to identify land uses for this property that compel
development within the technology park, and at the same time, complement,
rather than compromise, Morningside Village as a residential community.
Parcel M would better accomplish this objective with a secondary use
designation, where residential development and/or neighborhood oriented
support services, consistent with established adjacent land use patterns, could
occur.
3. The proposed land use modification would result in both current and long
range economic benefits to the City, including:
a. Jobs: The land use change would allow for the development of
Morningside Village to continue, and thus would result in the creation
and/or retention of jobs, including construction, engineering, land planning,
real-estate sales and marketing jobs.
b. Revenue: The continuation of the Morningside Village development would
also result in additional development fee revenues, including building
permit fees, impact fees and sales tax revenue for the City of Fort Collins.
c. Infrastructure: The continuation of the Morningside Village development
would also further the installation of public infrastructure critical to the
future development of the Harmony Technology Park as a whole. In road
construction costs alone, our future portion of the public improvements are
Application Approval Rationale
Page 4
In conclusion, the City's Buildable Lands Inventory report puts forth the
idea that the City of Fort Collins will be faced with a future economic
dilemma - that there will be insufficient employment land - and therefore
not enough jobs - for its residents. A notion such as this is simply not
believable. Yet it has the power to promote an overly vigilant, if not
dogmatic, decision -making mindset regarding land use, which would
insist on the retention of even the least suitably zoned industrial
properties, such as the subject of this application, within the City's
inventory of employment land.
We believe sufficient evidence has been provided to substantiate that
there will be plenty of land within the GMA to provide the needed supply
of jobs for the City well into the 20-year planning horizon and beyond.
The removal of 10 acres of improperly classified, basic industrial land
will thus have an imperceptible impact on the City's job growth.
2. The existing land use classification imposes a hardship on the property
owner.
a. Undermines Investments to Date: Chateau Development Company has
provided roughly $1,000,000.00 in revenue to the City of Fort Collins in the
form of building permits, use tax, park, school, and capital expansion fees
through the development of Morningside Village. Total investments to date
are estimated at $8,000,000.00, including in addition to the vertical
construction costs, the construction of regional drainage, water, sewer and
road improvements throughout the technology park, which directly benefit
the economic development of the City.
It is at cross purposes to the completion of the development, and thus
burdensome to the property owner, to then require the retention of a land use
classification on a related, adjacent parcel that is incompatible with the
existing or approved improvements. We request a land use classification
that will allow the remaining portion of the development to be planned,
entitled and constructed within the next 24 months, to generate economic
activity for both the Morningside Village development and the City of Fort
Collins. In the alternative, the property can expect to remain vacant and
thus economically unproductive for an unknown period of years.
Application Approval Rationale
Page 3
labor market. Fort Collins is fortunate to be centered within the North
Front Range regional economy, which is forecasted to grow significantly
in coming years. The Northern Colorado Economic Development
Corporation reinforces this point with the following illustration and
supporting commentary:
Mobile Workforce
Forl GoJIA
I rom 09 M.
1. Wtllv.i. rwl roim,
Gwlu,'
i
O
_ 14
t cagmon
t3:++lUer
G-00W
From ragw
LCMl6,6, Fml CAIM,
Gvn*
e
F�
v Porcentage
of workers
C011111141ting
Ueme• between cities~
O
Northern Colorado contniands die second L•aagest labor force In Colorado,
just behind that of the 1)enver metropolitan area to the south. The region's
workforce is a fluid one. TrtnsNrtadon corridors hiking northun
Colorado communities snake it possible for workers to choose to lire in one
community and work in another, while their spouses may weak in a third.
Sairct�l'otfb Fart Rouge dLYU 7ketse+LnN firxrl.tanrr
Cmr�[�k CaYNesr ojLerr3awt Rater-Herrl�SirOn ReinN:af
• BY UNDERESTIMATING REDEVELOPMENT'S CAPACITY TO PRODUCE JOBS:
The Buildable Lands Inventory points out that its jobs projections are
also low, due to the study's inability to target the capacity of
redevelopment to supply a much higher number of jobs than estimated
(Exhibit D, excerpt from Buildable Lands Inventory attached).
Application Approval Rationale
Page 2
However, in the case of the Lifestyle Center, staff s position was different.
Staff indicated that even with the elimination of 140 acres credited to a new
classification known as a Mixed -Use Activity Center, the corridor would
support 35 companies of equivalent size. As stated by staff in the July 19,
2003 Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Board:
"There is sufficient inventory for future primary
employment within the Growth Management Area. "
The Planning and Zoning Board endorsed staffs findings and recommended
approval of the applicant's request to the City Council. (EXHIBIT B,
Excerpts of the Minutes attached).
c. Harmony Corridor May Support 15 Additional Acres of Secondary Use:
According to the City's 2004 Buildable Lands Inventory update, the
Harmony Corridor Zone District captured 63 acres of land between 2003
and 2004 (EXHIBIT A, updated figures noted on the attached Figure 9). If
this is true, then the Harmony Corridor should support an additional 15
acres of secondary uses and still maintain a 75/25 primary to secondary use
balance.
d. Buildable Lands Inventory Exaggerates Future Jobs De acit: The Buildable
Lands Inventory overstates the possibility of a future jobs deficit:
• BY DOWNPLAYING LABOR FORCE COMMUTING PATTERNS:
According to the 2000 U.S. Census, over 27 percent of Fort Collins
residents commute out of the area for jobs. This is a common
phenomenon, and by comparison to other communities along the North
Front Range, represents an above average and healthy retention of
workers. By comparison, 54 percent of Loveland's labor force, and 46
percent of Longmont's labor force, work locally (EXHIBIT C attached).
Should the City's current labor migration patterns remain at 27 percent
through the year 2025 planning horizon, an estimated 40,000 regional
jobs would reinforce local job deficits. Yet the Buildable Lands
Inventory never acknowledges normal labor migration as a legitimate
supplement, and therefore contributor, to the health of the community's
Application Approval Rationale
Harmony Technology Park ODP Amendment
1. The amendment would be of no detriment to the City's jobs/housing
balance.
a. Employment Land Inventory Could Support 156 Basic Industrial Sites:
The following are the latest employment land figures for the City:
Employment Zone Districts No. Acres
Harmony Corridor 586
Employment 841
Industrial 921
Total 2,348
Source: Buildable Land Inventory with advance
planning staffs updates noted (EXHIBIT A attached).
Contrary to the 1300-acre figure put forth in staff s July 20th letter to Angie
Milewski, the sum total is 2,348 acres of vacant employment land, almost
double what staff stated in its letter.
Citywide, 156 basic industrial sites, an average of 15 acres in size, could be
supported by the remaining inventory. If the average parcel size were
increased to 25 acres, 93 basic industrial sites could be provided. From this
perspective, the City's inventory of basic industrial properties is healthy,
even with the removal of Parcel M from that inventory. The subject
property's 10-acre size would represent an imperceptible percentage, less
than one-half of one percent, of the City's documented inventory of vacant
employment land.
b. Staff Confirms Adequacy of City's Employment Land: On July 19, 2003, the
Planning and Zoning Board considered a proposal to amend the Harmony
Corridor Plan to accommodate a "Lifestyle" shopping center. The proposal
would result in a 25 percent reduction of basic industrial non -retail
employment land within the Harmony Corridor, compared to a 1.8 percent
reduction contemplated by the current application.
Mr. Mike Bello
August 11, 2005
Page 2 of 2
primarily made up of residences and neighborhood support services. As residential and
neighborhood oriented retail and service uses are not allowed in the primary use classification, a
primary use designation for Parcel M is inappropriate. Parcel M would be better served by a .
secondary use classification where residential development and/or neighborhood oriented support
services more consistent with established adjacent land use patterns could occur.
We anticipate no further action with the ODP amendment application until we can resolve the land
use issues presented by the City's staff. We would"like to arrange a meeting with the appropriate
Hewlett Packard representative to discuss the above referenced land use exchange as soon as
possible. I will contact you within the next week to arrange this meeting.
Please contact me at (303) 280-9630 Ext. 106 should you have questions or need additional
information. Thank you very much for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Ja0--e n.&44A-%�
Margaret Barden
Project Planner
C: Steve Steele, Vice President and Director of Acquisitions and Development
Attachments: July 20, 2005 Letter from Ted Shepherd
Harmony Technology Park Overall Development Plan
Table of Permitted Uses within the Harmony Technology Park
8101 E. Prentice Ave., Suite 815
Greenwood Village, CO 801 1 1
(303) 771-8854 Fax (303) 694-3332
Chateau Development
Chateau Custom Builders
www.chateaudevelopm entcom
Mr. Mike Bello
Facilities Manager
Hewlett Packard Company
3404 East Harmony Road, MS 10
Fort Collins, Colorado 80528-9599
August 11, 2005
RE: Harmony Technology Park Overall Development Plan (ODP)
Dear Mike:
12050 Pecos Street, Suite 100
Westminster, CO 80234
(303)280-9630 Fax (303) 280-9640
I am following up on a letter I wrote to you July 14, 2005 on behalf of Chateau Development
Company. We own and are developing residential properties within the Harmony Technology
Park in Fort Collins, Colorado.
Chateau made application to the City of Fort Collins for an amendment to the Harmony
Technology Park Overall Development Plan (ODP) on Wednesday, June 22, 2005. The
amendment involves the conversion of a 10-acre primary use parcel, Parcel M, to secondary use.
The City's planning staff was not supportive of the amendment proposal because the amendment
would result in a reduction in the amount of primary employment land within the technology park
(staff letter attached). Staff furthermore, during a follow up meeting to discuss staff position,
recommended that Chateau Development negotiate a land use exchange with Hewlett Packard.
Under this scenario, Hewlett Packard's Parcel D would become a secondary use classification, and
Chateau Development's Parcel M would become a primary use classification. The resulting net
loss of primary employment land would thus be minimized.
Chateau Development Company would like to explore the possibility of a land use exchange with
Hewlett Packard in consideration of the City's recommendation. In reviewing the Harmony
Technology Park ODP (attached), it is apparent that Hewlett Packard's Parcel D is an isolated
secondary use parcel among large tracts of primary use parcels. Furthermore, in reviewing the
attached outline of permitted uses for primary use classified parcels, it appears obvious that the
area that includes Parcel D is intended to develop collectively into a campus -style employment
center. Thus, changing Parcel D to a primary use designation would logically result in
development more consistent with surrounding land use patterns and/or designations in the
immediate area.
Similarly, Parcel M is an isolated primary use parcel among large tracts of secondary use parcels.
Again, in reviewing the list of permitted uses within the secondary use classification, it is clear that
the intent of this land use designation is to provide for the development of a neighborhood,
July 20, 2005
Mrs. Angie Milewski
B.H.A. Design
4803 Innovation Drive
Fort Collins, CO 80525
RE: Harmony Technology Park O.D.P. Third Amendment
Dear Angie:
Staff has reviewed the request for Harmony Tech Park O.D.P. Third Amendment
to convert Parcel M from primary to secondary use as defined by the Harmony
Corridor Plan Standards and Guidelines (pp. 52 — 53) and the Land Use Code
Section 4.21 (D)(2). The purpose of the proposed Amendment is to allow
Morningside Village to undertake another residential phase on the subject 10
acres.
Staff is concerned about the loss of 10 acres of land designated for primary uses
This concern is particularly acute in the Harmony Corridor which is considered a
prestigious area for future employers.
According to the City's Buildable Lands Inventory, there is roughly 1,300 vacant
acres of land designated for employment or industrial uses. This includes the
land owned by Anheuser-Busch (which may be preserved as a buffer) and the
Lifestyle Center (which is allowed by the Harmony Corridor Plan to be a retail
center). This supply is estimated to provide approximately 14 years of
availability.
One idea that Staff could support is if the resulting loss of 10 acres of primary
use on Parcel M could be offset by a 10 acre gain in primary use elsewhere
within the O.D.P. Thus, there would be no net loss of primary use acreage.
Staff understands the logic of using Parcel M to finish out Morningside Village
project and how multi -family housing acts as a transitional land use between
Harmony Road and Observatory Village. Staff remains concerned, however,
about the long range opportunity cost of reducing primary use land on a
community -wide basis.
Sincerely:
Ted Shepard
Chief Planner
Mr. Ted Shepard, Chief Planner
October 25, 2005
Page 2 of 2
C: Steve Steele, Vice President of Acquisitions and Development
Attachments: July 20, 2005 Letter from Ted Shepherd
August 11, 2005 Letter to Hewlett Packard
Application Approval Rationale
8101 E. Prentice Ave., Suite 815
Greenwood Village, CO 801 1 1
(303) 771-8854 Fax (303) 694-3332
Chateau Development
Chateau Custom Builders
www.chateaudevelopment.com
Mr. Ted Shepard, Chief Planner
City of Fort Collins
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
October 25, 2005
RE: Harmony Technology Park ODP Amendment
Dear Ted:
12050 Pecos Street, Suite 100
Westminster, CO 80234
(303)280-9630 Fax (303) 280-9640
Thank you for your letter dated July 20, 2005, and for arranging a meeting to discuss
staff's position regarding the above referenced application. Based on our meetings with
planning staff, and written and verbal correspondence with you, we understand that the
City's advance planning staff is not supportive of the amendment. This is because the
amendment would reduce the City's inventory of basic industrial non -retail employment
land (staff letter attached).
Staff followed its position with the recommendation that we explore negotiating a land use
exchange with the Hewlett Packard Corporation. Since the time of our meeting with staff,
we have approached Hewlett Packard about a land use exchange (letter attached).
Unfortunately, Hewlett Packard's representatives indicated no interest in our proposal.
For the reasons outlined as an attachment to this letter, we still strongly believe that the
amendment request has merit. As a next step, prior to the public hearing, we request
another meeting with the advance planning staff to discuss our further substantiated
position, with hope that staff will look more favorably upon the proposal. I will contact
you to discuss a follow up meeting date, and a proposed public hearing schedule. Thank
you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
i� 6
Margaret Barden, AICP
Entitlement Coordinator