Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHEWLETT-PACKARD, BUILDING FOUR - PDP - 54-88G - DECISION - HEARING OFFICER DECISION• ITEM NO. MEETING DATE + •'j STAFF !2A City of Fort Collins HEARING OFFICER STAFF REPORT Steven Klausing, Hearing Officer Hearing Officer, Administrative Type Hewlett-Packard, Building Four, Preliminary Development Plan #54-88G Hewlett-Packard c/o Mr. Steve Wolley 3404 East Harmony Road Fort Collins, CO 80525 This is a request for approval of a Project Development Plan to construct a 315,000 square foot building for manufacturing and fabrication of micro silicon chips and integrated circuits for computers. The building is located in the northwest section of the Hewlett-Packard campus which is 158 acres in size. The campus is located north of Harmony Road and east of County Road #9. The property is zoned H-C, Harmony Corridor. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION AND DECISION: Approval Approval with conditions COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 (970) 221-6750 PLANNING DEPARTMENT • • H-C, Harmony Corridor The city planner testified that the property was posted, legal notice published, written notices mailed and a neighborhood meeting held. PUBLIC HEARING The Hearing Officer, by appointment of the Director pursuant to The Fort Collins Land Use Code, opened the hearing on March 18, 1998 at approximately 6:00 p.m. in the conference room located at 281 N. College Ave. Fort Collins CO. The staff report and recommendation and the applicant's submittals were entered into the record. HEARING TESTIMONY, WRITTEN COMMENTS AND OTHER EVIDENCE The following individuals testified at the hearing: From the City: Ted Shepard, Senior City Planner Fort Collins, CO For the Applicant: Angela Milewski BHA Design, Inc. 4803 Innovation Dr. Fort Collins CO, 80525 Will Arduino Hewlett-Packard 3404 East Harmony Rd. Fort Collins, CO 80525 Tom Morton Callison Architecture, Inc. 1420, 5th Ave. 3rd. Seattle, Wash. 98101 Walter Benoit Mortenson Construction 4 • The applicant's submittal materials, the staff report, the interdepartmental referral sheet, and all correspondence between the City and the applicant are a part of the record and are incorporated herein by reference. The hearing Officer takes official notice of the drawings and visual aids used during the hearing. The surrounding zoning and land uses are N: R-L; Existing single family residential N: FA-1 (County); Existing rural residential S. H-C; Vacant W: H-C Vacant E: FA- I. (County) Existing residential, vacant and City owned natural area The proposed project is located on the 158 acre Hewlett-Packard campus platted as the Preston -Kelley Subdivision in 1978 and is the sixth building to be built. Findings The city planner testified that the proposed use is permitted within the district, that review of the project as a Type 1 Administrative review is appropriate because the building is less than 25% of the total campus square footage, that the plan complies with the applicable Harmony Corridor Plan and Standards, that the plan complies with the Article 3 General Standards; in particular a special height review, hazardous material impact analysis and transportation impact review. There was no testimony in opposition to the proposal. The project is located in the Harmony Corridor zone district and must comply with the zone district plan and standards. This project is located in the Harmony Corridor zone district. The proposed use is the manufacture and fabrication of micro silicon chips and integrated circuits for computers. The building will include a clean room for the manufacture of silicon materials in a contaminant -free environment. Article 5 defines 'light industrial" as "Light industrial shall mean uses engaged in the manufacture, predominately from previously prepared materials, of finished products or parts, including processing, fabrication, assembly, treatment, packaging, incidental storage, sales or distribution of such products. Further, light industrial shall mean uses such as the manufacture of electronic • • instruments, preparation of food products, pharmaceutical manufacturing, research and scientific laboratories or the like. Light industrial shall not include uses such as mining and extracting industries, petrochemical industries, rubber refining, primary metal or related industries." The Harmony Corridor district permits light industrial and the proposed use is consistent with the definition of light industrial. Land Use Standards: The development standards are set forth at 4.21 of the Land Use Code. The district standards require that the preliminary development plan comply with the standards as adopted in the Harmony Corridor Plan. The proposed building is 4 stories and complies with Section 4.21 (D)(2)(a) which requires that buildings not exceed 6 stories. Section 4.21 (D)(2)(c) requires that any building addition that exceeds 80,000 square feet in floor area or exceeds 25% of the gross floor area of the existing building, which ever is greater, shall be subject to Planning and Zoning Board review. The evidence indicates that the proposed building is an addition to Building Two. While 315,000 square feet exceeds 80,000 square feet, because the building is attached to Building Two and the additional 315,000 square feet equals 24.5% of the total square footage of the campus the project falls within the jurisdiction of a Type 1 review. •�16 - 1'_I_ - .I- R• I - ISO The Project Development Plan must meet all applicable standards in Article 3, General Development Standards, of the Land Use Code. The applicant presented evidence of compliance with the standards. The following standards were reviewed in detail and at the hearing. Section 3.5.1 (H) requires that buildings in excess of 40 feet are subject to a special review with respect to views, light and shadow, privacy and neighborhood scale. Building Four is under the six story standard and therefore only a special /Height Review is necessary. Views, Section 3.5.1 (H) (1)(a)(1): Evidence was presented at the hearing that the height of the building does not substantially alter or interfere with the views from public places, streets and parks within the community. Evidence indicates that the proposed height of the building would not interfere with the view of the foothills from I-25. 4 Light and Shadow, Section 3.5.1 (11)(1)(a)(2): Evidence indicates that the impact on light to surrounding buildings and shadows would only impact other buildings within the Hewlett-Packard campus and not surrounding properties. Privacy, Section 3.5.1 (H)(1)(a)(3): Evidence indicates that the building will not infringe upon the privacy of adjoining properties. Neighborhood Scale, Section 3.5.1 (H)(1)(a)(4); Evidence indicates that the proposed building will be compatible with the other buildings on the campus. Hazardous Material Impact Analysis The applicant submitted a hazardous material impact analysis's required by Section 3.4.5(c). The analysis was reviewed by the Poudre Fire Authority and found acceptable. The proposed design indicates compliance with all safety, fire and building code requirements. The evidence indicates compliance with the applicable standards. The applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis. The evidence indicates that the proposal complies with Section 3.6.4 (B) in that the project provides for vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle facilities necessary to maintain the adopted transportation level of service standards in Part II of the City of Fort Collins Multi -modal transportation Level of Service Manual. The traffic impact analysis indicates that all signalized intersections will function at acceptable levels. In the future should a traffic signal be needed at the Hewlett-Packard and County Road 9 intersection such signal will be the responsibility of the applicant. JLNq La MOITITOTIKOMI-1-re -mom A neighborhood meeting is not required for approval of this project however, a neighborhood meeting was held on January 14, 1998. The minutes of the meeting are included in this decision. No significant issues were raised. This project does not have any frontage along Harmony Road and therefore no part of the project is within the 80 foot setback along Harmony Road. The evidence is that the building sets back 523 feet from the adjoining residential area to the north and therefore does not present a drastic or abrupt change in scale and height from the adjoining residential area, additionally there is mature landscaping which shields the project from the area to the north. Thus the project complies with Section 4.21 (E) (1)(b). There are no outside activities except for offsite loading and parking and therefore the project complies with Section 4.21 (EO(1))c). The evidence indicates that Building 4 is oriented towards an internal campus like environment. The campus provides recreational and dining facilities and other employee amenities. The campus includes internal walkways and drives, parking is on the perimeter of the campus and there are minimal pedestrian -vehicular conflicts. Section 4.21 (E)(2) requires where feasible that industrial buildings provide a primary entrance that faces and opens directly unto adjacent street and sidewalk or walkway, plaza or courtyard that has direct linkage to the street sidewalk system without requiring pedestrians to cross any intervening driveways or parking lots. There is an exception to this provision where the development provides a campus or park like development block with an internal pedestrian network that functions as an additional alternative to the street sidewalk by connection buildings within the site. The evidence is that the Hewlett-Packard site has been planned and developed as a campus like environment and that the features of this development satisfy the requirements of an internal campus system that uses internal walkways and courtyards in addition to a parking layout that permits a finding that an exception to the requirements of 4.21 (E)(2) is justified. 1Y. IT This project does not have any frontage on Harmony Road. Thus the 80 foot setback requirement is not applicable, in addition the frontage along Harmony Road is already landscaped. The Harmony Corridor Plan requires that the P.D.P. complement and harmonize with the proposed landscaping on adjacent properties. The evidence is the landscaping plan continues the theme established for the remainder of the campus and satisfies this requirement. Maintenance The plan includes an automatic irrigation system and the applicant will be responsible for long term maintenance. Fencing The P.D.P. does not include any area within the 80 foot setback along Harmony Road. The proposed fencing along County Road 9 matches the existing fencing. Lighting The Landscape Plan indicates that trees above 30 feet shall be spaced at east 40 feet from a streetlight and trees of less than 30 feet shall be at least 15 feet from streetlights. These requirements comply with the Harmony Corridor Plan. • Architectural Design The evidence presented at the hearing indicates that the proposed building elevations, materials and architectural features are attractive and that all four sides present an aesthetic appeal. This complies with the Harmony Corridor Plan. The plan indicates that he cooling towers are screened form County Road 9, landscaping is utilized to screen the towers and trash and loading areas are located to take maximum advantage of screening. These aspects of the plan comply with the Harmony Corridor Plan. Additional Development Standards The Project Development Plan must comply with applicable standards from Article 3 of the Land Use Code (General Development Standards) and the applicable standards from Article 4 of the Land Use Code for the zoning district in which the property is located. The applicant's submittal and testimony presented at the public hearing demonstrate compliance with Division 3.2, Site Planning and Design Standards. The plan complies with the Access, Circulation and Parking 3.2.2, standards, Bicycle Parking, 3.2.1(4)9)(a), Street Crossings 3.2.2(5)(b), Site Lighting 3.2.4, Building and Project Compatibility 3.5.1, and Building Orientation 3.5.1(D). The building materials are compatible with the existing neighborhood uses and there are no proposed rooftop or ground mounted equipment. The applicant submitted a traffic study which complies with the Land U se Code. A neighborhood meeting was not required however one was held, all issues raised were satisfactorily addressed. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION After reviewing the staff report and recommendation, the applicant's submittal, hearing the testimony and considering the record the Hearing Officer makes the following findings and conclusions: 1. The applicant has submitted a Project Development Plan which complies with the requirements of Article 2, Administration of the Land Use Code. 2, Building 4 is connected to Building 2. Because the proposed building is less than 25% of the total gross floor area of the Hewlett-Packard campus the project may proceed as a Type 1 Administrative review. 7 • • 3. The property is located in the H-Harmony Corridor District. The proposed use is permitted in the district and is consistent with the intent of the district. 4. The application meets all the relevant standards of Article 3 General Development Standards, including the Special Height Review and the Hazardous Materials review of the Land Use Code, the Harmony Corridor District Plan and Standards. 4. The traffic Impact Analysis indicates that the proposed use and development meet the criteria for the Transportation Level of Service Requirements. DECISION Based upon the findings and conclusions, the applicant's request for Preliminary Development Plan Approval for Hewlett-Packard, Building Four, Project Development Plan #54-88G is approved with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with all notes and conditions set forth on the applicant's submittal sheets 1 through 8 dated January 13, 1998, as modified in accordance with the provisions of the Land Use Code. Dated this3Z-t ( day of March, 1998, by authority granted by Section 2.1 of the Fort Collins Land Use Code. Steven Klausing, Hearing Officer VICINITY MAP #54-88G Hewlett-Packard Building 4 Tvne I (LUC) PDP RL HORSETOOTH ROAD ■■L ■ RL ■ LARIMER COUNTY UE'flow&' UE 70M LMN ■ RL j ■ ■ CITY LIMIT ee ee ®�♦ LMN Ln HC HC ♦♦ a EXISTING ♦♦ FUTURE HEWLETT-PACKARD SYMBIOS CAMPUS LOGIC SITE Z � HARMONY ROAD e HC PRESTON �■ in M M lb a ■ ■ m CENTER COLORADO HC �■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ o o ■ HC ■ III PREHIGN HARMONY TECHNOLOGY o PARK SCHOOL ■ ■ HC ■ ■ ZI RLRr ■ ■ U ■ ■It NORTH CONTEXT DIAGRAM HP GENESIS IV NOT TO SCALE