Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRAKE CROSSING SHOPPING CENTER (FIRST NATIONAL BANK DRIVE-UP) - AMENDED FINAL PUD - 35-96 - LEGAL DOCS - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCILOW If the Council votes "yes" to either of the above motions, then the Council should remand the matter and not proceed on to consider the third (following) motion. If, however, the Council votes "no" to both of the above motions, then the Council should proceed to consider the third (following) motion. Third Motion: Did the Board err in deciding that the Application satisfied all of the applicable criteria of the Land Development Guidance System, including any of the following criteria? E�r Criterion A-1.8. Air Quality EW Criteria A-2.1. Vehicular, Pedestrian and Bicycle Transportation OW Criterion A-2.6. Pedestrian Circulation 1W Standards and Guidelines for All Commercial Development DECISION OUTLINE FOR APPEAL OF FIRST NATIONAL PLAZA (FORMERLY DRAKE CROSSING SHOPPING CENTER P.U.D.) BANK DRIVE -UP FACILITY - AMENDED FINAL ORDER OF PROCEEDINGS • Staff s Presentation • Appellants' Presentation • Applicant's Presentation • Appellants' Rebuttal • Applicant's Surrebuttal • Council Questions • Council Motions, Discussion and Vote COUNCIL MOTIONS* First Motion: Did the Board fail to conduct a fair hearing in that it considered evidence relevant to its findings which was substantially false or grossly misleading? > IF YES - Adopt a motion, with supporting findings, to remand the Application to the Board for a new hearing. > IF NO - Adopt a motion, with supporting findings, that the Board did not fail to conduct a fair hearing. Second Motion: Does the third allegation of error regarding the "late filing" of documents constitute a legitimate ground for appeal under Section 2-48 of the Code? > IF YES - Adopt a motion, with supporting findings, to determine the appropriate ground for appeal that the Council should consider in examining the third allegation of error. If the Council determines that a legitimate ground for appeal was stated by the third allegation, then the Council must also, by separate motion decide whether the Board erred with respect to that issue. > IF NO - Adopt a motion determining that the third allegation of error does not comply with Section 2-48 of the Code and that, accordingly, the Council shall not consider the third allegation of error. As discussed previously in this memorandum, one motion that could be considered which is not listed above is to determine that it is necessary to remand the matter back to the Board for a rehearing to receive and consider additional information with regard to any issue raised on appeal. In doing so, such a motion should identify the particular issues to be addressed on remand. EXHIBIT F ADIARMTRATION (2) Presentation of argument by the appellant and any party -in -interest in support of the appeal; (3) Presentation of argument by any party -in -in- terest who is an opponent of the appeal; (4) Rebuttal presentation by the appellant and any party -in -interest in support of the ap- peal; (5) Rebuttal presentation by any party -in -inter - eat who is an opponent of the appeal; and (6) Motion, discussion and vote by the City Council. (b) No person making a presentation to the City Council shall be subject to cross-examination ex- cept that members of the City Council and the City Attorney may inquire of such person for the purpose of eliciting information and for the pur- pose of clarifying information presented. (c) In the event of multiple appeals involving the same decision of a board or commission, the Mayor, in his or her discretion, may modify the procedure contained in subparagraph (a) above so as to expedite the hearing of such appeals. (Code 1972, § 3A-10; Ord. No. 124, 1987, § 2, 9-1- 87; Ord. No. 174, 1988, §§ 2, 3, 12-20-88; Ord. No. 111, 1989, § 4, 8-1-89; Ord. No. 23, 1990, § 7, 4-3- 90; Ord. No. 139, 1990, 1-15-91; Ord. No. 59, 1994, § 4, 4-19-94) Sec.2-56. New evidence; scope of review; alternative actions available to the City Council; date of final ac- tion. (a) The City Council shall consider an appeal based upon the record on appeal, the relevant pro- visions of the Code and Charter, the grounds for appeal cited- in the notice of appeal and any addi- tional issues identified by a member of the City Council prior to the hearing. Any such additional issues must be identified in writing and filed with the City Clerk no later than ten (10) calendar days prior to the date of the hearing. § 2-70 (b) New evidence shall not be considered on ap- peal except under the following circumstances: (1) When offered in support of or in opposition to an allegation under § 248(2)c that a board or commission considered evidence relevant to its findings which was substan- tially false or grossly misleading. (2) When offered by city staff or parties -in - interest in response to questions presented by Councilmembers under § 2-55(b). (c) In considering an allegation that a board or commission failed to properly interpret and apply the relevant provisions of the Code or Charter as- serted under § 2-48(1), the City Council shall de- termine how such provisions should, in the Coun- cil's judgment, be applied to the evidence con- tained in the record on appeal. (d) At the conclusion of such hearing, the City Council shall uphold, overturn or modify the deci- sion of the board or commission; provided, how- ever, that: (1) The City Council shall instead remand the matter for rehearing if it finds that the ap- pellant was denied a fair hearing before the board or commission for any of the reasons stated in § 2-48(2). (2) The City Council may also remand the mat- ter for rehearing in order for the board or commission to receive and consider addi- tional information with regard to any issue raised on appeal. (e) No later than the date of its next regular meeting, the City Council shall adopt, by resolu- tion, findings of fact in support of its decision. The date of passage of such resolution shall be the date of final action of the City Council for the purpose of any subsequent judicial review of the decision of the City Council. (Code 1972, § 3A-11; Ord. No. 124, 1987, § 3, 9-1- 87; Ord. No. 23, 1990, § 8, 4-3-90; Ord. No. 67, 1993, § 3, 7-20-93; Ord. No. 59, 1994, § 5, 4-19-94; Ord. No. 88, 1995, § 5, 8-1-95) Secs. 2-57-2-70. Reserved. Supp. No. 36 . 163 ADMINISTRATION Sec. 2-55. Procedure at the hearing. (a) At the hearing on the appeal by the City Council, the presentation of argument on the mer- its of the appeal shall be made in the following or- der, subject to such limitations in time and scope as may be imposed at the discretion of the Mayor: (1) Explanation of the nature of the appeal and presentation by city staff; § 2.55 Supp. No. 43 162.1 [The next page is 163] § 2-50 FORT COLLINS CODE See.2-50. Review of notice of appeal by City Attorney. Within five (5) working days of the date of the filing of the notice of appeal, the notice shall be reviewed by the City Attorney for any obvious de- fects in form or substance. The City Clerk shall notify the appellant in writing by certified mail of any such defect in the notice of appeal, which no- tice shall be mailed no more than seven (7) work- ing days from the date of filing of the notice of ap- peal. The appellant shall have seven (7) calendar days from the date of mailing of such notice within which to file an amended notice of appeal under § 2-51. (Code 1972, § 3A-5; Ord. No. 111, 1989, § 2, 8-1- 89; Ord. No. 23, 1990, § 3, 4-3-90; Ord. No. 88, 1995, § 3, 8-1-95) Sec.2-51. Amended notice of appeal per- mitted. An amended notice of appeal may be filed by the appellant at any time prior to the date for mailing by the City Clerk of the notice of the appeal to other parties -in -interest as contained in § 2-54, or such later date as may be permitted under § 2-50. Such amended notice of appeal shall contain all of the information required under § 2-49 for the orig- inal notice of appeal. Amendments to the notice of appeal need not be limited to those defects, if any, which have been identified by the City Attorney. (Code 1972, § 3A-6; Ord. No. 111, 1989, § 3, 8-1-89; Ord. No. 59, 1994, § 2, 4-19-94; Ord. No. 88, 1995, § 3, 8-1-95) Sec. 2-52. Cost of appeal. In all appeals except those filed by members of the City Council, the appellant shall be charged a fee of one hundred dollars ($100.) for the cost of the appeal, to be paid to the City Clerk at the time of the filing of the notice of appeal. (Code 1972, § 3A-7; Ord. No. 23, 1990, § 4, 4-3-90) Sec. 2-53. Record on appeal. Any appeal to the City Council shall be an ap- peal on the record of the hearing before the board or commission. The record provided to the City Council shall include the following: (1) All exhibits, including, without limitation, all writings, drawings, maps, charts, graphs, photographs and other tangible items re- ceived or viewed by the board or commission at the proceedings; (2) A verbatim transcript of such proceedings before the board or commission. The cost of the transcript shall be borne by the city. (3) If available, a videotape recording of such proceedings before the board or commission. The cost of reproducing any such videotape for review by the City Council shall be borne by the city. Additional copies shall be pro- vided to any party -in -interest requesting the same within a reasonable period of time prior to the date for hearing the appeal, at a cost not to exceed the actual reproduction costs incurred by the city. (Code 1972, § 3A-8; Ord. No. 174, 1988, § 1, 12- 20-88; Ord. No. 23, 1990, §§ 5, 6, 4-3-90; Ord. No. 59, 1994, § 3, 4-19-94; Ord. No. 5, 1995, 2-7-95) Sec. 2-54. Scheduling of the hearing. (a) In the event of an appeal, the City Clerk shall schedule a date for hearing the appeal no less than thirty (30) nor more than sixty (60) days after the date of filing of the notice of appeal. The City Clerk shall provide the appellant and all other parties -in -interest fourteen (14) days' writ- ten notice of the date, time and place of the hear- ing. Said notice shall also include a copy of the no- tice of appeal and shall inform the parties -in - interest of the period of time within which the ap- pellant may file an amended notice of appeal or additional issues may be identified under §§ 2-50 and 2-56, respectively. (b) Any written materials that any party -in - interest may wish the City Council to consider in deciding the appeal shall be submitted to the City Clerk no later than 12:00 p.m. on the Wednesday immediately preceding the date upon which the hearing on the appeal is scheduled to be held. Such materials shall then be included by the City Clerk in the agenda materials pertaining to the appeal. (Code 1972, § 3A-9; Ord. No. 88, 1995, § 4, 8-1-95; Ord. No. 151, 1996, 12-17-96) Supp. No. 43 162 ADMUMTRATION (6) Zoning Board of Appeals. (Code 1972, § 3A-1; Ord. No. 117, 1996, § 3, 9-17- 96) Editor's note -Subsection (4) formerly referred to the Build- ing Contractor Licensing Board, which is no longer in exis- tence, being replaced by the Building Review Board pursuant to Ord. No. 93, 1987. The editor has, therefore, deleted former subsection (4) and has renumbered subsections (5)-(7) as (4)-(6). Cross references -Building Review Board, § 2-117 at seq.; Landmark Preservation Commission, § 2-276 et seq.; Planning and Zoning Board, § 2-351 at seq.; Water Utilities Board, § 2. 436 at seq.; Zoning Board of Appeals, § 2-441 at seq.; Fire Board of Appeals, §§ 9-2, 9-5. Sec.2-48. Appeal of final decision per- mitted; effect of appeal; grounds for appeal. (a) A party -in -interest may appeal to the City Council the final decision of any board or commis- sion to which this appeal procedure applies in the manner provided in this Division. No action shall be taken in reliance upon any decision of a board or commission that is subject to appeal under the provisions of this Division until all appeal rights related to such decision have been exhausted. (b) Except for appeals by members of the City Council, the permissible grounds for appeal shall be limited to allegations that the board or com- mission committed one (1) or more of the follow- ing errors: (1) Failure to properly interpret and apply rele- vant provisions of the Code and Charter. (2) Failure to conduct a fair hearing in that: a. The board or commission exceeded its authority or jurisdiction as contained in the Code or Charter; b. The board or commission substantially ignored its previously established rules of procedure; a The board or commission considered ev- idence relevant to its findings which was substantially false or grossly mis- leading-, or d. The board or commission improperly failed to receive all relevant evidence of- fered by the appellant. Appeals filed by members of the City Council need not include specific grounds for appeal, but shall Supp. No. 43 161 § 2-49 include a general description of the issues to be considered on appeal. Upon the filing of any such appeal, the director of the affected city service area shall identify the specific Code provisions that may pertain to the issues raised by such ap- peal and shall provide such information to the City Clerk prior to the date that the notice of hearing on the appeal is to be mailed by the City Clerk to parties -in -interest under § 2-54. Said in- formation shall then be mailed to the parties -in - interest together with the notice of hearing. . (Code 1972, § 3A-3; Ord. No. 124, 1987, § 1, 9-1- 87; Ord. No. 23, 1990, § 1, 4-3-90; Ord. No. 59, 1994, § 1, 4-19-94; Ord. No. 88, 1995, § 1, 8-1-95) Sec. 249. Filing of notice of appeal. An appeal shall be taken by filing a notice of ap- peal of the final decision of a board or commission to which this Division applies with the City Clerk within fourteen (14) days after the action which is the subject of the appeal. Such notice of appeal shall be signed by all appellants and shall include the following: (1) The action of the board or commission which is the subject of the appeal; (2) The date of such action; (3) The name, address, telephone number and relationship of each appellant to the subject of the action of the board or commission; (4) For all appeals except those filed by mem- bers of City Council, the grounds for the ap- peal, including specific allegations of error and a summary of the facts contained in the record on appeal which support those allega- tions; and (5) In the case of an appeal by more than one (1) appellant, the name, address and telephone number of one (1) such appellant who shall be authorized to receive, on behalf of all ap- pellants, any notice required to be mailed by the city to the appellants under the provi- sions of § 2-50. (Code 1972, § 3A-4; Ord. No. 111, 1989, § 1, 8-1- 89; Ord. No. 23, 1990, § 2, 4-3-90; Ord. No. 67, 1993, § 2, 7-20-93; Ord. No. 88, 1995, § 2, 8-1-95) § 2-34 FORT COLLINS CODE 4 committees for which public notice is required to be given by the provisions of the Code. The post- ing shall include, where possible, information about the availability of agenda materials. (Ord. No. 91, 1992, § 8, 9-15-92; Ord. No. 111, 1995, § 1, 9-5-95) Sees.2-35-2-45. Reserved. DIVISION 3. APPEALS PROCEDURE' Sec.2-46. Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this Division, shall have the meanings as- cribed to them in this Section: Appellant shall mean a party -in -interest who has taken an appeal from a board or commission to the City Council by the filing of a notice of appeal. Applicant shall mean the person who or orga- nization which submitted the application to the board or commission whose decision has been ap- pealed. Final decision shall mean the action of a board or commission by a vote of a majority of its mem- bers when no further rehearing is available before such board or commission; provided, however, that a recommendation to the City Council from a board or commission shall not be considered as a final decision of that board or commission. New evidence shall mean any evidence relating to the proposal or application which was the sub- ject of final decision by a board or commission and which was not presented at the hearing before such board or commission. 'Cross references —Appeals from the Liquor Licensing Au- thority, § 3-36; appeals from the Building Review Board may be heard by the City Council, § 5-312; appeals from the decision of the city regarding alarm permits to the City Council, § 15-36; appeals from the determinations of the Building Review Board regarding alarm permits to the City Council, § 15-41(b); disap. proval of pawnbroker's license may be appealed to the City Council, § 15-265(c); applicant for license regarding places of entertainment may appeal the decision to the City Council, § 15-298; appeals from the denial of the secondhand dealer's li- cense to the City Council, § 15-318(d); appeals for denial of a li- cense for a mobile home park may be appealed to the City Council, § 18-5(d). Supp. No. 42 Party -in -interest shall mean a person who or or- ganization which has standing to appeal the final decision of a board or commission. Such standing to appeal shall be limited to the following: (1) The applicant; (2) Any party holding a proprietary or posses- sory interest in the real or personal property which was the subject of the decision of the board or commission whose action is to be appealed; (3) Any person to whom or organization to which the city mailed notice of the hearing of the board or commission; (4) Any person who or organization which sent written comments to the board or commis- sion prior to the action which is to be ap- pealed; (5) Any person who appeared before the board or commission at the hearing on the action which is to be appealed; (6) The City Council as represented by the re- quest of a single member of the City Council. (Code 1972, § 3A-2; Ord. No. 67, 1993, § 1, 7-20- 93) Cross reference —Definitions and rules of construction gen- erally, § 1-2. Sec.2-47. Certain appeals to be taken to City Council. Appeals from the following boards and commis- sions, permitted under the provisions of this Divi- sion, shall be taken to the City Council in the manner as set forth in this Division: (1) Building Review Board; (2) Fire Board of Appeals; (3) Landmark Preservation Commission; (4) Planning and Zoning Board; (5) Water Utilities Board; EXHIBIT 160 E 24. In large multiple -building developments, outdoor spaces and landscape areas should be consolidated into formative, purposeful parts of the open space system in conjunction with streets and connections, and not merely residual areas left over after buildings and parking lots are sited. (o) 25. Architectural elements such as arcades, pergolas, porticoes, towers, shelters, walls, and other extensions of buildings should be used to integrate and add interest to circulation ways and spaces. Architectural elements and the site design should incorporate focal points such as information kiosks, drop-off'/pick-up points, and transit stops. (o) 16 Focus of Developments 22. A public street or walkway should be the primary focal point of developments unless, in multiple -building projects, the buildings focus on alternative publicly accessible, pedestrian - oriented outdoor space(s), such as walkways, squares, plazas, courtyards, and patios. (o) 23. Pedestrian -oriented outdoor spaces should be placed next to activity areas that generate the users (such as street corners, shops, stores, offices, daycare, and dwellings). Because liveliness created by the presence of people is the main key to the attractiveness of such spaces, link spaces to and make them visible from streets and sidewalks where possible. Consider unified plaza -style spaces with circulation defined by bollards, tree grates, light fixtures, or furniture, as an alternative to minimum standard streets and sidewalks. Anchoring spaces with sculpture, kiosks, or shelters is encouraged. (o) „ „�.,•/ ....,.,,;.. .. , l��>,--��'�c, uu�n nuw �.%Imint 1PIIII� NL G. Ilk w­11 1. � � a},•�..'�i��---+may-•L_ �-- ��'_��, '� �1 �•� •f /• , �. -`ire ,�A 7�-� � i•=,�� �•• � .� For- i. �•+R•,t�1Fn 15 III. Site Design The purpose of this section is to further encourage site design in large or multiple building da elopments that accmitmodates both motor vehicles and pedestrians in a fray that will be convenient and inviting for the pedestrian. 20. Entrances and parking lots should be shaped to be functional and inviting with continuous, landscaped walkways linking all land uses, the public transportation system, and other significant origins and destinations. The effect of buildings facing a street/sidewalk system should be maximized, including the effect of angled or parallel on -street parking in focal areas of parking lots. (o) Former one-story shopping center situated behind a large parking lot, later renovated with the addition of traditional - style buildings, sidewalks, and streets, shown at right. A center where an independent parking lot circulation system looks like streets, sidewalks, and plains. 21. The establishment of buildings (1) on isolated "pad sites" surrounded by parking lots and driveways, and (2) that offer mainly auto -oriented signage to define entrances, is discouraged. (o) Even relatively massive developments can be configured into "blocks" or other spaces proportioned on a human scale and city block scale; and need not be proportioned on a monolithic, auto -oriented scale. 14 Design of Independent Developments With Internal Orientation 18. Where it is not possible or appropriate to extend city streets and sidewalks directly into a development or to bring buildings up to a city sidewalk buildings should still be shaped and designed to form pleasant, direct connections to adjacent land uses. (o) _J L Deliberate Stseet/sidnwlk Eva mple Plan — r- 19. In multiple -building developments; all primary building entrances must face walkways, plazas, or courtyards that have direct, continuous linkage to the street without making people walk through parking lots. However, it may be necessary for such direct pedestrian access ways to cross -drive aisles. Any such driveway crossing must emphasize and place priority on the pedestrian access and the material and layout of the pedestrian access must be continuous as it crosses the drivewaway, with a break in continuity of the driveway paving and not in the pedestrian access way. Any such crossings which ramp down to a road bed shall be limited to either a maximum of two, or one per 200 feet of walkway length, whichever is greater. (+) At a minimum, such continuous definition essentially results in a crosswalk. At best, this can be an extension of a plaza or forecourt in front of the building that enhances the building and creates a central feature and a gathering point for people. A drive aisle directly in front of a building is often the single most negative element in otherwise inviting developments, detracting from both the building and the site design. 13 Parcels with Multiple Street Corners 14. Parcels bounded by more than one street corner shall be required to comply with #11 and #12 (above) at only one of the corners except where such corners are separated by more than one thousand feet, measured at the right-of-way. Front onto Streets with Minimized Setback 15. Building setbacks from local and collector streets should be minimized. Accordingly, "build - to lines" based on a relationship to the sidewalk should be established by development projects, in order to establish a visually continuous, pedestrian -oriented streetfront. To establish "build - to" lines, new buildings should be aligned with prior established building setbacks that have been established consistent with this guideline. "Build -to" lines for non-residential buildings should generally be the back of the sidewalk or within fifteen feet. (o) 16. Minimized setbacks and "build -to" lines may also be appropriate along arterial streets in some cases, where the dominance of vehicular traffic flow or the landform does not preclude viable pedestrian frontage. (o) A possible reason not to follow guideline #13 (above) would be to create a courtyard, patio, formal walkway, plaza, or similar outdoor space for people, between the building and the street. Also, in the case of large buildings for employment, storage, or auto -related uses that have little relationship to pedestrians, or that have a need to limit ground floor windows, the "build -to" line may not be realistic for the bulk of the building. Such buildings should still be built with at least 30% of one side of the building brought to a "build -to" line. CJ N r�_1 5TfE'ET --S Pa,-lc.'ner Cl Example Plan Part ofBuihiing Brought to Streetscape Treatment of Exceptions to the Minimized Setback 17. If variation from the suggested build -to lines in #13 above is proposed in a specific situation, the larger setback area should have landscaping, low walls or fencing, a tree canopy, and/or other site improvements along the sidewalk designed for pedestrian interest, scale, and comfort. (o) 12 Building Faces or Landscape Areas at Street Corners Buildings at street corners are significant because they have at least two facades exposed to the public street and because street corners are focal points and gathering points. Building faces and landscape areas can anchor the prominent position better, and for a longer term, than can parking lots and driveways, even where pedestrian activity is not crucial to the land use at the time of the development. 11. At street corners, if the applicant determines that it is necessary to locate intervening parking or a drive aisle between a building and the street corner because of the functionality of the proposed use, then a corner landscape area must be provided and no parking shall be located within a radius of 75 feet of the right-of-way at an arterial street corner, or 50 feet of the right-of- way at a collector street corner, or 25 feet of the right-of-way at a local street corner, measured from the center or apex of the right-of-way return. At a corner with two different street types, the lesser street type shall be used to determine the size of the landscape area under this standard. (+) Such a "corner landscape area" could combine several useful functions in addition to providing an attractive public view by buffering vehicular use areas. Examples are storm water improvements, landscaped pedestrian areas, and utility easements. An example C o r n e r . Cerr7er Of Corner Continuous Landscape I Pedestrian Access Area ��` Pa✓/� /vtcl i I 81d9. � � I 12. In single -building developments, if an applicant proposes a vehicular use area next to a street corner according to #10 or #11, direct pedestrian access must be provided with pedestrian frontage that includes no more than one driveway crossing. Any such driveway crossing must emphasize and place priority on the pedestrian access and the material and layout of the pedestrian access must be continuous as it crosses the drivewaway, with a break in continuity of the driveway paving and not in the pedestrian access way. (+) 13. Where a driveway crosses a walkway, make the walkway continuous in grade across a driveway, without a ramp down to the road bed, if possible without creating unreasonable drainage impacts. (o) Such a continuous grade crossing could be done either by elevating a crosswalk or by unifying a larger area in the manner of a plaza, with bollards, planters, paving, special curbing, or other site design elements to defuie the circulation. 11 Orient Entrances to Pedestrian Access 9. In single -building developments, a primary building entrance must face a public sidewalk or other walkway, plaza, or courtyard that has direct linkage to a public sidewalk without requiring people to walk across intervening parking lots or driveways, where physical conditions permit, except as provides' in #10 and #11 below. (+) This not T{iis Multiple or secondary entrances from parking lots or interior blocks are encouraged to accommodate other access needs. Exceptions to #9 10. Compliance with #9 above shall not be required if the applicant can demonstrate that a driveway across the pedestrian access is necessary because: (a) the absence of such driveway would violate other City or State access requirements; or (b) placing a building directly adjacent to the street with no intervening parking or driveway would result in an auto fueling or auto service area being located next to a residence or office use; or (c) the City has determined that an alternative to the street sidewalk should be provided for the purpose of connecting contiguous commercial destinations, due to the nature and volume of traffic on the adjacent street(s). (+) . An alternative as referenced in #9(c) may include walkways, plazas, courtyards, squares, gardens or other connecting outdoor spaces for people. 10 Relate to Streets 7. Building mass should be shaped by connections to the street and sidewalk network, and in turn the building mass should be designed to give deliberate form to streets and sidewalk areas and other adjacent public spaces (plazas, courtyards, patios, window shopping areas, and other similar spaces). Where possible, buildings should be placed to front on and relate primarily to streets. (o) Commercial developments in which the buildings have beet; shaped by the street/sidewalk network, and in turf; dire definite form to streets, sidewalks, and other spaces. XarnonyMajor Street Adjacent Building t Oriented 0* to Street e e Q o c e e Street/ 0 Sidewalk Ner"rk l?I _ Adjacent Space for Transitional Loading Contained Uses - Residential, Beneeen Bldgs. ' e, or Mired .Buildingsnted . to Street, ing !n From. Neighborhood 8. In commercial projects with multiple buildings, consider orienting at least some of the buildings to streets leading in from the neighborhood, rather than orienting all buildings to internal parking lots. (o) Following guideline #8 above can create several benefits to the community: it makes an inviting transition into the development; it accommodates some neighborhood -serving uses that have low visibility needs and traffic impacts; and it breaks a massive development into "blocks" of buildings and parking lots with proportions that are easier to identify with as a pleasing addition to the city. Nekbborbood cmnttnercial building oriented to a neidhborbood street. x II. Buildings The purpose of this section is to encourage site -specific, responsive planning and design, based on human scale and local standards of attractiveness; and to form streetfronts that are easily seined by a balanced transportation system. These standards and guidelines focus on the public characteristics and spaces that are created by coninnercial buildirtgs. Pedestrian Scale 5. Buildings should be designed to offer attractive and inviting pedestrian scale spaces, amenities, and details. (o) .4 ti•%I f t';4; N a �/y�f\fa1 l('C /y'�777Miii �c�VLC^r "JJgiL Design in Context 6. Buildings should be planned and designed to emphasize a complementary relationship to surrounding neighborhood areas, rather than a generic corporate or parking -driven formula. The primary concern regarding the public aspects of buildings should be the integration of buildings and adjoining spaces into a complete, connected extension of the community, with the design of the individual building treated as no more significant in itself than in relation to its neighboring environment and to Fort Collins as a unique community. (o) >U A •lt�&Ini�} :J:.,,�Arr,:J'G-' .' .■�, ,■� ���.yj��(g j■� T,�.,,.. ,f�.e' 1i1( iiiii �til a min 11�1r''. r111ri1' i�t7!s.,... ■J■.�..�������■Iel��''�'l+i Z-■•I�iiI.N��'■IT. �L 9.It1.� F1 �2�� 3Ji111'� Faannple of shopping center architecture nods roofs, windows, and domiways desQned to mnpharize a relationship and a transition to nearby nedhborboals. Such community -related design can be more flexible rarer time in aceminnodating changing uses and meeting a more complete range oftwds than cangertnic corporate design. 3. Walkways must be located and aligned to directly and continuously connect areas or points of pedestrian origin and destination, and not be located and aligned solely based on the outline of a parking lot configuration that does not provide such direct pedestrian access. (+) Sidewalk layout bared on reasonably logical circulation network. Gircn a measure ofpriority in the site design, such design can make parking lots more attractive to motorists as well. Building Sidewalk Access This not This Exfending sidewalks into and through a new development can tie buildings together as a part of town, and reduce the effect of isolated pads in a parking lot. On -Street Parking 4. Streets and other elements of the site plan should be designed so that on -street parking is a functional part of the development. (o) 7 Personal Mobility and Interaction 2. Access to developments must serve the needs of the pedestrian and the bicyclist as well as the motorist. Accordingly, in the planning and design of the development, the emphasis of the site plan must be shared among the following: (1) pedestrian access to the site and buildings; (2) gathering areas for people, and (3) auto access and parking lots. The emphasis must not be placed solely on parking and drive -through functions. (+) Depending on the size and complexity of the development, meeting #2 above may be as simple as a sidewalk and a landing, or as extensive as adding a major commercial area to the city. Even where foot traffic is not the most critical pan of a business, cmnfortable walking andgathering areas can make a new development an attractive and complete addition to Fort Collins. Access should be dcsQned with at least as much prioritygiven to accommodating people, as to accommodating autos. Acconniodations fir people should not be added last it; Shared desdn cmpbasis among several different forms of access. Standards and Guidelines Streets and Connections The purpose of this sectiare is to place priority on convenient mobility for all residents by the evolution of a cwnplete rcetirork ofstreets aid coinectiotu frith frequent altemath e routes for local auto traffic, pedestriatu, aid bicyclists. (Connectiow may include paths, trails, alleys, and drivelrays). Also, the street aid sideivalk iehrorle should be do eloped in such a may that it fuels its role as attractive, enduring public open space that makes heir development an integral extension of the community. Extend the Community Network 1. Developments must be linked with surrounding areas and uses by extending city streets, sidewalks, and/or paths directly into and through the development, thereby providing convenient, direct pedestrian and bicycle access to and from all sides of the development. (+) Plan and design developments to provide for such access to and from future neighboring projects reasonably anticipated to occur, as well as existing adjacent development. Lai gc cmninmial derelopments frith multiptc buildings may bare the chance to extend the city sn•eet nenrm•k, depending on the size and shape of the do clopnnnet parcel. Snnaller developnn or single buildings; be able to influence but can still create Such connections highlight the importance of an attractive, uivitutg appearance on all sides where people live or work, thereby weaving new development as completely as possible into surrounding neighborhoods and uses. Submittal Requirement: A "Context Diagram" Notwithstanding any other requirements of the City?s development review processes, all applicants for commercial development approval or issuance of any building permit for commercial development shall submit a "context diagram" (or multiple diagrams) that graphically depicts how the development plan relates to its surrounding neighborhood or community context. The purpose of the diagram(s) is to convey the ideas that determine how the plan contributes to a complete, visually related pattern with existing development or approved plans in the vicinity. The format of the diagram(s) shall be determined by the. applicant, and should depend on the size and complexity of the development proposal. Following are some examples of subjects that are often crucial and should be considered: • Providing interconnections with the public transportation system including the local street, sidewalk, and bike path network. • Connecting pedestrian origins and destinations with inviting pedestrian frontage. • Creating comfortable outdoor spaces designed to attract and accommodate people, where higher pedestrian activity is likely to occur. • Incorporating some of the main characteristics of nearby buildings such as basic proportions, shapes, or kinds of materials (or, in some cases, deliberately designing a contrasting relationship with nearby buildings). • Preserving or creating key views of the mountains or other landmarks. • Designing the development to be reasonably attractive from significant -N iewpoints on all sides. • Containing or buffering the negative impacts of such elements as parking, service functions, outdoor storage, etc. The context diagram is to facilitate more productive review and analysis of the proposed project according to these standards and guidelines. The form of the context diagram may vary according to the site specific planning considerations, because of the wide range of situations covered by these standards and guidelines. The context diagram will be used as a tool to prepare and evaluate the remainder of the submittal. Procedure In this document, "standards" denoted by (+) are mandatory. "Guidelines" denoted by (o) are not mandatory, but rather state a design approach that is encouraged, based on community goals and locally determined aspirations for the future. The suggestions in the guidelines are meant to be considered in the specific context of individual situations. Approval may not be granted or denied based on compliance with the guidelines. The Planning and Zoning Board or the Zoning Board of Appeals, whichever is applicable, is empowered to grant variances to the mandatory (+) standards under the following circumstances: 1) The strict application of the standard would result in peculiar and unusual practical difficulties or exceptional undue hardship upon the owner of the affected property; or 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. Format of this Document The format for the standards and guidelines includes these distinctions: Italics - presents a purpose statement.for a section. Bold - presents the standard or guideline. (Also used in. headings). Standard type - presents additional background explanation of the standards and guidelines. small italics - present captions for illustrations. They only explain the illustrations. 2 Interim Design Standards and Guidelines for All Commercial Development Purpose The purpose of these standards and guidelines is to serve as interim requirements for commercial land development in Fort Collins, consistent with the growing awareness of ways to make Fort Collins more livable for all residents by the way our physical surroundings are arranged (including such things as streets, buildings, outdoor spaces, and neighborhoods). These standards and guidelines are intended to apply only until the finished implementation products of "City Plan" (the project to update the Comprehensive Plan, currently in progress) are adopted to replace them. Fort Collins already has a development review system that promotes such responsive land development. These standards and guidelines augment the existing system. They are part of a conatnunity response to dissatisfaction with generic land development formulas that would not add to Fort Collins as a unique place, and sprawled auto -oriented development trends that would not extend Fort Collins' well -regarded qualities in appropriate ways. These standards and guidelines provide more support for the design of an urban environment built to human scale and to inviting local standards of attractiveness. The underlying assumption is that motor vehicles can be accommodated by conununity design that acconunodates people as the first order of priority, and not vice versa, without sapping the vitality that comes from a balance between serving both automobile and pedestrian movement, and without undue costs that would escalate the cost of living in Fort Collins. This underlying assumption leads to essentially simple requirements under the standards: Streets, sidewalks, and other connecting outdoor spaces that weave new development into the community fabric of Fort Collins as completely as possible. Buildings that are oriented to sidewalks or other outdoor spaces for people, not set back behind parking lots or oriented only to parking lots. It is the City's hope that the standards will not limit creativity; but rather will be a useful tool for design professionals engaged in site specific design in context. EXHIBIT D T::c�. AESTHETIC CONSIDERATIONS The use of color and texture in pavement is encouraged. Colored or textured concrete, brick or modular paving can provide visual continuity throughout a project or define special purpose areas like plazas or cross walks. In general, special pavement color or texture should be used on privately maintained drives and not on public streets. S"C/el Psr/ng at uosswsa a/"LS moronsrs that psdesbisns O4 y De P�eSenL Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments The City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised March 1994 -36- n CHART A-2. NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY CRITERIA A-2.6 Pedestrian Circulation Does the pedestrian circulation system (a) accommodate pedestrian movement from the neighborhood to the site and ,throughout the proposed development safely and conveniently and (b) contribute to the attractiveness of the development? PURPOSE This criterion is designed to ensure that each new development in Fort Collins will provide appropriate pedestrian and bicycle links to the neighborhood and community, as well as, throughout the development being proposed.. Sidewalk and/or bikeway extensions off site may be required, based on impacts created by the proposed development. The following guidelines highlight the different aspects of pedestrian circulation that should be considered during the design process. SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS Separate pedestrians from vehicles where possible. Where complete separation of pedestrians and vehicles is not possible, the potential hazard can be minimized by the use of special paving, grade separations, pavement marking or striping, bollards, landscaping, lighting and/or other means to clearly delineate pedestrian areas. FUNCTION AND CONVENIENCE CONSIDERATIONS Encourage people to walk or bicycle to and from the site by providing convenient access points. Where pedestrians and bicyclists share walkways, design the pedestrian/bicycle system wide enough to easily accommodate the amount of foot and bicycle traffic volumes that are anticipated. A minimum of eight (8) feet is generally adequate. Locate curb cuts at convenient locations for the physically disabled, for bicyclists and for people pushing strollers or carts. Site amenities such as, bike racks, ramps, benches, etc., that enhance safety and convenience or in some way promote walking or bicycling as an alternative means of transportation are encouraged. Locate bike racks in safe convenient areas. Convenien fly placed bike racks encourage bicycling as an alternative n,pds of Venfpelbden. Consider security end visibility when bcating bike racks. Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments The City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised March 1994 -35- EXHIBIT C reser� ■ Street Classification System The five roadway classifications used in Fort Collins are identified on the following chart: Street Classification Travel R-O-W speed vehicles/day and purpose Lanes Width mph in thousands Major Arterial Connect major activity centers. 6 120' 40-50 20-50 Arterial Interconnect and augment 4 100' 30-40 30-40 major arterial streets. Minor Arterial Collect and distribute business , 2 68' 30-35 5-15 and commercial traffic while augmenting arterial streets. Collector Collect and distribute traffic 2 68' 25-30 2.5-5 from residential and business areas to the arterial and major arterial street system. Local Transport residential traffic. 2 54' 25 2 or less This category includes loop streets, cul de sacs and residential roads. • Sidewalks are included in all street classifications. • Bike facilities are included in all but local street classifications. ■ Community Transportation System Continuity It is important to ensure that the transportation network. (streets, transit, bike lanes, sidewalks, etc.) connect into the City's overall transportation plan. ■ Safety Safety is considered in all projects and is a judgement based on accident data, as well as national and local standards. Safety applies to all elements of transportation review. ■ Traffic Flow on Arterial The city needs to maintain and maximize efficient traffic flow on arterial roadways. ■ Signalized and non -signalized intersection operation. Adopted transportation policies have identified peak hour traffic level of services (LOS) D or above, as desirable within our community. Left and right rum bays and other operational improvements are also considered. ■ Future A traffic impact analysis is required to examine present traffic conditions combined with future project traffic in the development area. ■ National Standards National and local traffic engineering standards are used to provide a consistent approach that reduces potential liability and increases safe use of the transportation system. Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments The City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised March 1994 -24- CHART A-2. NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY CRITERIA A-2.1 Vehicular, Pedestrian and Bicycle Transportation Can the additional traffic (vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle traffic) generated by the land uses within the project be incorporated into the neighborhood and community transportation network without creating safety problems? Can impacts from the additional vehicular traffic meet city traffic flow delay policies? Can pedestrian and bicycle needs be addressed so that opportunities for these travel modes are integrated into the overall city pedestrian and bicycle system? PURPOSE Transportation planning is an element of growth management and is therefore an integral part of the development review process. During the development review process, transportation aspects of the project are examined to see that City Transportation policies are being met. The transportation status quo may change as streets reach their intended capacity or when community need dictates a change. Reasons for transportation planning include: • To address the community's transportation needs. ■ To understand the impacts future growth will have on the transportation system. ■ To incorporate historical patterns and existing community -wide expectations, as well as environmental and topographical concerns. INFORMATION REQUIRED Projects will be required to submit a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA)*. Specific requirements for what is included within a Transportation Impact Analysis may vary depending on the complexity of the project. Applicants should discuss requirements with a transportation planner prior to submittal and obtain a copy of Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines. * Until new Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines are developed, current Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines will be used. If the proposed project is located along a Federal or State Highway such as College Avenue (U.S. Highway 287) or Harmony Road (State Highway 68), the applicant will need to review the South College Avenue Access Control Plan or the Harmony Road Access Control Plan respectively. These plans regulate access along portions of these arterial streets. Copies are available in the Planning Department. The Downtown Plan, East Side Neighborhood Plan and West Side Neighborhood Plan also contain transportation policies that should be reviewed for developments proposed within the boundaries of these planning areas. THE EVALUATION PROCESS The development review process is designed to seek a balance between neighborhood concerns and community -wide transportation needs. Many elements are considered when evaluating a proposed project's collective transportation impacts that affect the community and neighborhood. The following issues are considered during the evaluation process and form the basis of the _Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines. Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments The City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised March 1994 -23- FBEXHIBIT r:�aos, CHART A-1. COMMUNITY -WIDE CRITERIA A-1.8 Air Quality Will the project conform to applicable local, state and federal air quality standards, including, but not limited to: odor, dust, fumes or gases which are noxious, toxic or corrosive; suspended solid or liquid particles; or any air contaminant which may obscure an observer's vision? Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments The City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised March 1994 -20- EXHIBIT A Mayor and City Councilmembers June 26, 1997 Page 7 At the next Council meeting, I will have a resolution summarizing the Council's findings and decisions regarding this appeal. WPE:med Attachments cc: Greg Byrne, Director of CPES (w/att.) Bob Blanchard, Current Planning Director (w/att.) Steve Olt, City Planner (w/att.) Mayor and City Councilmembers June 26, 1997 Page 6 allegation. The second exception relates to evidence offered by City staff or a party -in -interest in response to questions presented by Councilmembers. Therefore, in this appeal, new evidence can be considered by the Council both when it is offered in response to questions presented by Councilmembers and when offered in support of or in opposition to the allegation that the Board considered evidence that was substantially false or grossly misleading. APPLICABLE LAWS: In addition to the appeals provision of the Code, a copy of which is attached to this memorandum as Exhibit "E," the applicable law for the Council to consider in this appeal consists of the LDGS and the Standards and Guidelines for All Commercial Establishments. RECOMMENDATION AS TO FINDINGS: Since there is an allegation made that the Board failed to conduct a fair hearing because it considered evidence relevant to its findings which was substantially false or grossly misleading, I would recommend that the Council first address this allegation and, if it determines that the Board did fail to conduct a fair hearing, the Council must remand the matter back to the Board for a rehearing. Even if the Council determines that the Board did not fail to conduct a fair hearing, the appeals provisions of the Code permit the Council to remand the matter back for rehearing by the Board if the Council determines that it is necessary for the Board to receive and consider additional information with regard to any issue raised on appeal. If the Council does remand the matter for such reconsideration, it would be helpful for the Councilmember making the motion to identify the particular issue or issues to be addressed by the Board on remand. If the Council determines remand is not necessary under these circumstances, then the Council should address the issue of whether the Board failed to properly interpret and apply the relevant provisions of the City Code and Charter, specifically the provisions and criteria of the LDGS, and either uphold, overturn, or modify the decision of the Board with regard to the Application. If the Council finds that the Board did not properly interpret the LDGS provisions and criteria, it would be necessary to specify the particular LDGS provisions and criteria that were not properly interpreted and applied. To help the Council reach its decision in this appeal, attached as Exhibit "F" is a "Decision Outline." This Decision Outline describes the order of proceedings in this appeal and lists the motions the Council should consider in this appeal. Mayor and City Councilmembers June 26, 1997 Page 5 PROCEDURE FOR RECEIVING EVIDENCE: Code Section 2-55(a) describes the following manner in which presentations are to be made, subject to such limitations in time and scope as may be imposed at the discretion of the Mayor, or in the absence of the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem, by the temporarily elected chairperson of the Council: (1) explanation of the nature of the appeal and presentation by City staff, (2) presentation of argument by the Appellants and any party -in -interest in support of the appeal; (3) presentation of argument by the Applicant and any party -in -interest who is an opponent to the appeal; (4) rebuttal presentation by the Appellants and any party -in -interest in support of the appeal; (5) rebuttal presentation by the Applicant and any party -in -interest who is an opponent of the appeal; and (6) motion, discussion and vote by the Council. RECORD ON APPEAL: Code Section 2-53 provides that the appeal shall be "on the record," which record includes the minutes of the Board meeting, as well as all exhibits received or viewed by the Board, the videotape of the proceeding, and the verbatim transcript of the Board's proceedings pertaining to the Application. Section 2-56 of the Code provides that the Council shall consider an appeal based upon the record on appeal as well as the relevant provisions of the Code and Charter and also the grounds for appeal cited in the notices of appeal. Further, Section 2-56 authorizes the Council to consider the appeal based upon any additional issues identified by a member of the Council prior to the hearing if the Councilmember has identified those issues in writing and filed them with the City Clerk no later than ten (10) calendar days prior to the date of the hearing. Councilmembers have not raised any additional issues in this appeal. While Code Section 2-56(b) generally provides that new evidence shall not be considered in any appeal, there are two exceptions to this prohibition. The first exception relates to evidence offered in support of or in opposition to an allegation that the Board considered evidence relevant to its findings which was substantially false or grossly misleading. In this appeal there is such a Mayor and City Councilmembers June 26, 1997 Page 4 facts for the limited purpose of showing the facts upon which the Board relied were indeed substantially false or grossly misleading. Finally, Council should not conclude that a fair hearing was not held upon the basis of this ground of appeal unless it finds that the evidence was "substantially" (essentially; in its important aspects) false or was "grossly" (flagrantly) misleading. III. THE "LATE FILING" OF DOCUMENTS. The third allegation of error in the original notice of appeal does not comply with Section 2-48 of the Code because it does not cite a legitimate ground for appeal under that section. This allegation is based upon the question of whether the Applicant filed with the City in a timely manner the revised site plan and revised traffic study. The Appellants allege that a deadline existed for the filing of the revisions. The Code contains no such deadline; and the staff (Fred Jones and Steve Olt) have stated to me that no such deadline was established (administratively) by them. The Appellants were given the opportunity to amend their Notice of Appeal to change this allegation and as to comply with the Code, but they chose not to amend the appeal. Accordingly, the Council should either: (1) find that the third allegation of error does not comply with the Code and should not be considered by the Council, or (2) if Council desires to consider this third allegation, it should construe the allegation as a contention that the Board failed to conduct a fair hearing in that it substantially ignored its previously established rules of procedure (Section 2-48 [b][2][b]). COUNCIL'S STANDARD OF REVIEW: In this appeal, Council should review the record before it to determine whether there is competent evidence in the record to support the Board's determination that the Application satisfies all of the applicable criteria of the LDGS. If the Council determines that there is no such competent evidence in the record or that there is conflicting evidence in the record which is more persuasive to the Council that all applicable LDGS criteria have not been satisfied, then the Council should reverse the Board's approval of the Application. In other words, the Council may come to a different conclusion than the Board did about the interpretation of the evidence in the record, provided that there is competent evidence in the record to support the Council's conclusion. If, however, the Council decides that it agrees with the Board's interpretation of the evidence and there is competent evidence in the record to support the Board's decision, the Council should uphold the Board's approval of the Application. Mayor and. City Councilmembers June 26, 1997 Page 2 "Is the development in accordance with the adopted elements of the Comprehensive Plan?" The Appellants suggest that, under this criterion, the "Comprehensive Plan" review should include the "Goals and Objectives", the "Land Use Policies Plan", the "Design Standards for All Commercial Developments", the "Community Vision and Goals 2015" and the "City Structure Plan". It should be'noted, however, that the "City Plan" portions of the City's Comprehensive Plan are irrelevant to this planned unit development. This is because the Goals and Objectives and Land Use Policies Plan no longer exist for the purpose of reviewing final P.U.D. plans, and the Community Visions and Goals 2015 and City Structure Plan are to be used only for the review of applications filed under the new Land Use Code.' This means that the only regulation cited by the Appellants that is relevant for the Council to review is the "Design Standards for All Commercial Development". With respect to that document, it is important to note that that is not part of the Comprehensive Plan of the City that is made applicable to the review of the First National Bank Drive -up Facility through Chart A-1.2, but rather is one of the "standards documents" that is applicable to the review of the bank project pursuant to subsection (E)(5) of the Land Development Guidance System which provides that: The City shall have the right to establish general locational, land use and design standards, guidelines and policies for the purpose of augmenting, implementing and interpreting the provisions of this section [the Land Development Guidance System] and all plans presented to the City for review and approval must, as a condition of approval, comply with all such mandatory requirements as are applicable to such plans. Based upon the foregoing provision of the Land Development Guidance System, the Design Standards for All Commercial Development are applicable; however, the Appellants have not cited for the Council any particular standard which they believe has not been met by the Applicant. And, the only quotation from the Design Standards and Guidelines for All Commercial Development that 1 Resolution 97-25 adopted the Community Vision and Goals 2015, the City Structure Plan and the City Plan Principles and Policies as elements of the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Section 5 of that Resolution stated that the Land Use Policies Plan and Goals and Objectives expired except to the extent that they are necessary to review applications for approval of overall development plans and preliminary planned unit development plans filed prior to March 28, 1997, or as otherwise authorized to be filed under Ordinance 161, 1996 (the "Moratorium/Pipeline" Ordinance). Accordingly, the Goals and Objectives and the Land Use Policies Plan no longer exist for the purpose of reviewing applications for final planned unit development plans. e Citv of Fort Collins City Atto,.,ey CONFIDENTIAL MEMORANDUM June 26, 1997 Mayor and City Councilmembers W. Paul Eckman, Deputy City Attorney ,t Steve Roy, City Attomey///—,-- Appeals Procedure -- First National Plaza (formerly Drake Crossing Shopping Center P.U.D.) Bank Drive -up Facility - Amended Final A Notice of Appeal was filed with the City on May 12, 1997, by several individual appellants with respect to the April 28, 1997, decision of the City's Planning and Zoning Board ("the Board") approving the First National Plaza (formerly Drake Crossing Shopping Center P.U.D.) Bank Drive - up Facility - Amended Final (the "Application") submitted by NWS Studios ("the Applicant"). ISSUES ON APPEAL: • Whether the Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Code and Charter (Code Section 2-48[b][1]). • Whether the Board failed to conduct a fair hearing in that the Board considered evidence relevant to its findings which was substantially false or grossly misleading (Code Section 2- 48[b][2]c.). • The "late filing" of documents by the Applicant. ANALYSIS: I. FAILURE TO PROPERTY INTERPRET AND APPLY RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE CODE AND CHARTER. The first allegation of error that is contended by the Appellants is that the Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the City Code and Charter when it approved the application. In support of this contention the Appellants list various review criteria which they believe the Board did not properly interpret and apply. The first criterion listed is LDGS All Development Criterion A-1.2 which asks the question: 300 LaPorte Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6520 • FAX (970) 221-6327 Explanation/Definition of Terms Commercial development: Any land development activity in the city, except development activity intended solely for residential, industrial and/or light industrial use. Direct pedestrian access: Walk. -way access that connects origins to destinations for pedestrians, without requiring pedestrians to backtrack, walk through parking lots, or follow parking lot outlines which are not aligned to a logical route. Drive aisles: The lames in a parking lot devoted to the passage of vehicles, as opposed to the parking stalls. The term "drive aisle" does not include lanes used only or primarily for drive -through customer service. Pedestrian frontage: The area adjacent to walkways, designed to provide interest and comfort for people walking or sitting; pedestrian frontage may consist of building faces, site design features, and/or landscape areas. Pedestrian scale (human scale): Relationship between the dimensions of a building, street, outdoor space, or streetscape element to the average dimensions of the human body. City block scale: Relationship between the proportions of elements of urban land development and the proportions of traditional city blocks in Fort Collins, which blocks, for the purposes of this definition, shall be considered to be approximately 400 feet on each side. Where physical conditions permit: Where this phrase is used, it means that the development application must comply with the standard unless the applicant can demonstrate that it is not physically possible to do so due to landform, sight line requirements, existing trees, utilities, drainage requirements, access requirements, or other constraints of the land parcel. Mayor and City Councilmembers June 26, 1997 Page 3 is given by the Appellants is a quotation from the "Purpose Statement". The Purpose Statement is not a regulatory provision and is not a valid "criterion" for either approval or denial of a project.' Accordingly, I would recommend that the Council focus only on the other Land Development Guidance System criteria that are listed by the Appellants as having not been met by the Applicant and, accordingly, have not been properly interpreted and applied by the Board. Those criteria are Community -wide Criteria A-1.8 (Air Quality), A-2.1 (Vehicular, Pedestrian and Bicycle Transportation) and A-2.6 (Pedestrian Circulation). Attached to this memorandum as Exhibits "A", "B" and "C", are those Community -wide Criteria, respectively. In reviewing those criteria, the Council will need to review the record that is before it to determine whether there is competent evidence in the record which supports the Board's decision that those criteria have been satisfied by the application. If the Council determines that there is no such competent evidence or that there is conflicting evidence in the record that is more persuasive that those criteria have not been satisfied, then the Council should reverse the Board's decision. Otherwise, the Council should uphold the Board's decision, as it relates to those criteria. II. FAILURE TO CONDUCT A FAIR HEARING IN THAT THE BOARD CONSIDERED EVIDENCE RELEVANT TO ITS FINDINGS WHICH WAS SUBSTANTIAL FALSE OR GROSSLY MISLEADING. Under this ground for appeal, the Council must decide whether the Board failed to conduct a fair hearing because it considered evidence which was substantially false or grossly misleading. The Appellants argue that discrepancies between the `original" traffic study and the traffic study that was presented to the Board at the time of its hearing (which the Appellants refer to as the revised traffic study) indicate that the facts contained in the revised traffic study are substantially false or grossly misleading. In determining whether "substantially" false or "grossly misleading" evidence was presented to the Board, the Council is at liberty to examine the entire record but is not at liberty to examine facts outside of the record, unless those facts are introduced as new evidence at the appeal hearing under the exception discussed below. Therefore, any traffic studies, whether original, supplemental, revised or otherwise that are contained in the record can be examined to make this determination. In addition, Section 2-56(b)(1) allows for the introduction of new evidence at the time of the Council hearing on the appeal when such evidence is offered in support of or in opposition to an allegation that the Board considered evidence relevant to its findings which was substantially false or grossly misleading. Therefore, the Appellants are entitled to introduce new 2 Even though the Appellants did not cite any specific standards which the Board failed to properly interpret and apply, I have attached for the Council's convenience as Exhibit "D" a copy of the interim Standards and Guidelines for All Commercial Development. Even though the "City Plan" implementation products have been adopted, I believe that the interim standards would continue to apply to projects that are reviewed under the Land Development Guidance System.