HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIRAMONT SELF STORAGE PUD - PRELIMINARY - 54-87AM - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTS•
�
�rEn�s �vo. 19
:i,_ F�. f��; �.;_; t� 31�41._9J
STAF�_Mike Ludwi � ___
City of Fort Collins PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD
STAFF REPORT
PROJECT: Miramont Self Storage PUD, Preliminary, #54-87AM.
APPLICANT: SecurCare Self Storage, Inc.
c/o Cityscape Urban Design
3555 Stanford Road, Suite 105
Fort Collins, CO 80525
OWNER:
Sharon K. Nordic
309 W. Harmony Road
Fort Collins, CO 80525
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This is a request for 69,750 square feet of mini-storage use with related office/residence
(Lot 1) and a 7,500 square foot office building (Lot 2) on approximately 5.27 acres currently
known as Parcel V of the Oak/Cottonwood Farm ODP. The property is located on the west
side of Boardwalk Drive at the intersection of Boardwalk and Oakridge Drive; and zoned
H-C, Harmony Corridor on the CityPlan zoning map.
RECOMMENDATION: Denial.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This PUD request is inconsistent with the uses identified on Parcel V of the
Oak/Cottonwood Farm Second Amended Overall Development Plan as approved on June
29, 1992. Staff has recommended denial of the applicant's request for a Third Amendment
to the Oak/Cottonwood Farm ODP, #54-87AL, as the request is inconsistent with the City's
Comprehensive Plan and thus, so is the Preliminary PUD. Staff recommends denial of the
PUD request on the basis of iYs non-conformance with the June 29, 1992 ODP, and for iYs
failure to satisfy All-Development Criteria A-1.2 "Comprehensive Plan" of the LDGS. The
PUD request achieves 71 % of the maximum applicable points on the Auto-Related and
Roadside Commercial Point Chart and 58% of the maximum applicable points on the
Business Service Uses Point Chart of the LDGS.
iOMMUNII'Y PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT.AL SERViCES 2fi1 N. Cr�lle�e� :Ave PO Rc,x �R(� F�;-± C�C;�-�. f C� H'�s3'_-`�;kn it`+"'f� „
uL,^�A' � . .._ � 7t � �_ � .
C�
Miramont Self Storage PUD, Preliminary, #54-87AM
March 24, 1997 P&Z Meeting
Page 2
COMMENTS
1. Background:
�
The surrounding zoning and land uses on the CityPlan zoning map are as follows:
N: H-C; vacant (Oak/Cottonwood Parcels T and U); church(Front Range
Baptist Church); approved bank (Bank 1 and office building);
Harmony Road.
S: R-L; existing single-family residential (Upper Meadow at Miramont).
E: H-C; Boardwalk Drive; existing commercial (Harmony Market Community
Regional Shopping Center).
MMN; existing multi-family (Oak Hill Apartments).
W: F-A (County);existing single-family residential (Fairway Estates)
The 271 acre Oak/Cottonwood Farm parcel was annexed and zoned into the City on June
23, 1980, as part of a larger property known as the Keenland Annexation.
On June 29, 1992, the Planning and Zoning Board approved the Oak/Cottonwood Farm
Second Amended Overall Development Plan. Parcel V was designated for land uses
allowed in the R-L Zoning District as of June 29, 1992.
Twenty-eight (28)filings have been approved based upon the 1992 Oak/Cottonwood Farm
Second Amended Overall Development Plan.
On March 24, 1997 the Planning and Zoning Board will consider the Oak/Cottonwood Farm
Third Amended Overall Development Plan, #54-87AL. The applicant requests to amend
the uses permitted on Parcel V to allow mini-storage uses. Staff has recommended denial
of the applicant's Amended ODP request.
This PUD application was submitted on December 23, 1996 prior to the effective date of
Ordinance No. 161, 1996 which established a temporary delay in the acceptance of certain
land use applications until March 28, 1997.
2. Land Use:
This is a request for 69,750 square feet of mini-storage use with related office/residence
(Lot 1) and a 7,500 square foot office building (Lot 2) on approximately 5.27 acres currently
known as Parcel V of the Oak/Cottonwood Farm Second Amended ODP. The property
is located on the west side of Boardwalk Drive at the intersection of Boardwalk and
Oakridge Drive.
�
Miramont Self Storage PUD, Preliminary, #54-87AM
March 24, 1997 P&Z Meeting
Page 3
A. Overall Development Plan
U
This PUD request is inconsistent with the uses identified on Parcel V of the
Oak/Cottonwood Farm Second Amended Overall Development Plan as approved on June
29, 1992. Parcel V allows only uses that are permitted in the R-L, Low Density Residential
Zoning District. Mini-storage and offices are not allowed in the R-L zoning district.
Staff has recommended denial of the applicant's request for a Third Amendment to the
Oak/Cottonwood Farm ODP, #54-87AL, as the request to allow mini-storage uses on
Parcel V is inconsistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
B. Harmony Corridor Plan
The subject property is located within a Mixed-Use Activity Center as designated on Map
10 of the Harmony Corridor Plan. Pursuant to Land Use Policy 4 of the Harmony Corridor
Plan, the Mixed-Use Activity Center permits in addition to uses listed in the "Basic Industrial
and Non-retail Employment Activity Center", a range of retail and commercial uses to occur
in shopping centers. Mini storage uses are not listed as a"Basic Industrial and Non-retail
Employment Activity Center Use". The site is not located within a shopping center. As
stated previously, the area west of Boardwalk is to be a transition befinreen the Harmony
Market Community Regional Shopping Center and the existing residential to the west. This
request is inconsistent with the Harmony Corridor Plan and therefore, is inconsistent with
City's Comprehensive Plan.
C. All-Development Criteria
The Miramont Self Storage PUD, Preliminary, #54-87AM satisfies all applicable All-
Development Criteria of the LDGS except for A-1.2 "Comprehensive Plan"
All-Development Criteria A-1.2 asks:
"Is the development in accordance with the adopted elements of the City's
Comprehensive Plan?"
In the analysis of the applicant's Amended ODP request, Staff stated that the request
satisfies Peripheral Growth Objective # 2(..�14.) of the 1977 Goals and Objectives
document.
However, the same analysis states that the request fails to satisfy the following statements
from the 1977 Goals and Objectives:
�
Miramont Self Storage PUD, Preliminary, #54-87AM
March 24, 1997 P&Z Meeting
Page 4
Neighborhood Identification #4 (,�.4�
Guiding Growth #1 (p.15�;
Land Use Compatibili #1 (p. 17�;
Land Use Compatibility Objective # 2(p.17�; and
Policies #3a and #74 of the 1979 Land Use Policies Plan.
•
Staff concluded that the request for Amended Overall Development Plan was not
consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, Staff concludes that the
Miramont Self Storage PUD, Preliminary fails to satisfy All-Development Criteria A-1.2
"Comprehensive Plan" of the LDGS.
D. Point Charts
This request achieves 71 %(34 out of 48) of the maximum applicable points on the Auto-
Related and Roadside Commercial Point Chart. Points are awarded for the following
criteria:
a. being located at other than at the intersection of two arterial streets - 4
points.
c. having primary access from a non-arterial street- 8 poinfs.
d. being on af least two acres of land - 6 points.
e. being mixed use - 6 poinfs.
h. having at least 1/6th contiguity to existing urban development - 10 points.
This request also achieves 63% (30 out of 48) of the maximum applicable points on the
Business Service Uses Point Chart. Points are awarded for the following criteria:
b. being located outside of the South College Corridor - 8 points.
d. being on at least two acres of land - 6 points.
e. being mixed use - 6 points.
h. having at least 1/6th contiguity to existing urban development - 10 points.
�
Miramont Self Storage PUD, Preliminary, #54-87AM
March 24, 1997 P&Z Meeting
Page 5
3. Neighborhood CompatibilitX:
•
A neighborhood meeting was held on October 2, 1996 regarding this PUD request.
Minutes of this meeting are attached. The Fairway Estates Homeowners' Association
supports the proposed request. However, the Planning and Zoning Board determined in
1992 that Auto-Related and Roadside Commercial Uses (such as mini-storage) are an
inappropriate and incompatible on the west side of Boardwalk Drive on the
Oak/Cottonwood Farm Second Amended Overall Development Plan. Staff recommends
that this is still true today.
4. Design:
A. Layout
Lot 1
Lot 1 consists of eleven mini-storage buildings (buildings B through L) and an
office/residence (building A). A stormwater detention is proposed on the south side of the
Lot 1 befinreen the mini-storage buildings and the existing single-family residences to the
south. A combination of the back sides of buildings D, I, J, K, and L; and a wrought iron
fence will line the perimeter of the mini-storage facility. Vehicular and pedestrian access
is gained from Boardwalk Drive. Brick pavers or scored, colored concrete will be provided
at the entrance from Boardwalk Drive.
Lot 2
Lot 2 consists of one, two-story, 7,500 square foot office building. Vehicular and
pedestrian access is gained from a shared access drive on the north property line. The
parking for the office building is located on the west side of the office building internal to
the site, rather than between Boardwalk Drive and the building.
B. Architecture
Lot 1
The architecture of the storage unit elevations on the perimeter of the site (facing adjacent
residential properties and the proposed office building on Lot 2) utilizes varying roof lines.
Perimeter building facades of Buildings B, I, J, K, L will be constructed of a light tan colored
lap siding and a reddish brown brick wainscoting and columns. The perimeter building
facade of Building D will be constructed of a dark tan colored CMU block, light tan colored
lap siding (alternative: brick), and reddish brown colored brick columns. The perimeter
storage buildings will have a maximum building height of approximately 16 feet. Interior
storage buildings will have a maximum building height of approximately 12 feet.
n
�
Miramont Self Storage PUD, Preliminary, #54-87AM
March 24, 1997 P&Z Meeting
Page 6
•
The Lot 1 office/manager's residence will be a two-story building with a maximum height
of approximately 27 feet. Building materials include a dark tan or beige dryvit (alternative:
masonite siding), and a reddish-brown wainscoting and columns. All roofing materials for
the storage buildings and office/manager's residence will be a dark brown, black, grey
colored high-profile, heavy dimensional asphalt shingle similar to the adjacent homes.
Lot 2
The office building on Lot 2 will be two-stories with a maximum height of approximately 27
feet. The building will be constructed of a dark tan or beige dryvit (alternative: masonite
siding), and a reddish-brown wainscoting and columns (alternative stone). The roof will be
a dark brown, black, grey colored high-profile, heavy dimensional asphalt shingle similar
to the adjacent homes.
C. Landscaping
The applicant proposes deciduous street trees between the back of the curb and the
sidewalk along Boardwalk Drive. New 12' to 15' coniferous trees on top of a berm are
proposed to be combined with existing deciduous and coniferous trees along the south
property line of Lot 1. The specific locations of these trees would need to be arranged with
adjacent property owners at the time of any Final PUD application. A mix of shade trees,
ornamental trees, and coniferous trees are proposed directly adjacent to the perimeter
storage buildings. Shade trees, ornamental trees, coniferous trees, and deciduous and
evergreen foundation shrubs are proposed around the office/manager's residence (Lot 1)
and office building (Lot 2). Further review of all landscaping would be required of any Final
PUD application.
5. Transportation:
Vehicular access to the mini-storage use on Lot 1 is proposed individually from Boardwalk
Drive. Vehicular access to the office building on Lot 2 is proposed via a shared access
drive from Boardwalk Drive along the north property line. The traffic study indicates that
the proposed mini-storage use on the new Parcel V and the office use on the new Parcel
W will generate approximately 441 average weekday vehicle trips. Approximately 50% of
these trips would be to and from the north on Boardwalk Drive; 20% to and from the south
on Boardwalk Drive; and 30% to and from the east on Oakridge Drive. The Transportation
Department has determined that all applicable intersections will operate at acceptable
levels of service.
A 6' wide pedestrian walkway is proposed along the north property line to provide
pedestrian access from Fairway Estates to Boardwalk Drive. This pedestrian access was
required to be retained when Palmer Drive (to the west) was vacated during consideration
of the Harmony Market 1 st Filing in 1989.
n
U
Miramont Self Storage PUD, Preliminary, #54-87AM
March 24, 1997 P&Z Meeting
Page 7
FINDINGS OF FACT/CONCLUSION:
r �
LJ
1. The Miramont Self Storage PUD, Preliminary, #54-87AM is inconsistent with the
uses identified on Parcel V of the Oak/Cottonwood Farm Second Amended Overall
Development Plan as approved on June 29, 1992.
2. The Miramont Self Storage PUD, Preliminary, #54-87AM is inconsistent with Land
Use Policy 4 of the Harmony Corridor Plan.
3. The Miramont Self Storage PUD, Preliminary, #54-87AM satisfies all applicable All-
Development Criteria of the LDGS except for A-1.2 "Comprehensive Plan" based
upon the following elements of the 1977 Goals and Objectives Document:
Neighborhood Identification #4 (p.4�;
Guiding Growth #1 (p.15�;
Land Use Compatibility #1 (p. 17�;
Land Use Com atibili Objective # 2(p.17�; and
Policies #3a and #74 of the 1979 Land Use Policies Plan.
4. The Miramont Self Storage PUD, Preliminary, #54-87AM achieves 71 % of the
maximum applicable points on the Auto Related and Roadside Commercial Point
Chart and 58% of the maximum applicable points on the Business Service Uses
Point Chart of the LDGS.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the Miramont Self Storage PUD, Preliminary, #54-87AM.
:�/!\ 1�1 [�� F1,7L �� • . , • • .
•�:
.
� •
#54-87AM Oak/Cottonwood Farm
Miramont Self Storage PUD
Preliminary & Final
N
1"= 300'
VICINITY MAP 12/10/96
� �„�.�„ � , _
I t_
��-----�----�-- — ���� �1� � _�_ _,
� I — �'� _�"_
1 I
� p O
� ( ��l� � L
\ \
I �
i �
— �
� �
---- � /� � � ����N�� � l'�
C - - ONE _. t o
I � — -' �
�
- - , � � ��-j I �
I ��
, ��
,_ �— - - - — af�� w�K ; �� i � � �
; � �.
,
�- -� � o-o H
_ � ----- ,;� � _ �,
I
—, � � � �__� ,
� ' FUTURE �I O —O
' � — _ _ _ _ DEVELOPMEN7f i �� � �I
+ i i'I ' I}� I SAM'S CLUB �
- - - � �� � 'j � � —fl �� —
\ � ��
� ' �J o 1
i � `'''� -- -
! � �' ��- �_
�, � _ -_ < i � _., � �� ,
,m
, _��y-- - ---- `���
� .' _ � \
_ �I � � ��
� ' �
� ��� '� � -_ �
� �� � 9' �- � \� � ,�� � \
� o ��',`�����
— � � �n �_ �� '
� \ , ',���
- — � � ��R�I � �-.`a�F�
� � �, �` � g—{ , �
..B�UEStEM GT/ ��� �1�� II �
-- � �FAIRWAY ������� � � _ �
�
� E�TATES � E P ER �O� �
� 1vIIRA OP1�, � �
� j -\\ �
I\ N /I/I
- _ _ - � I _ _ _ - � �/ �.\ \ n�\ / C��¢��s��
i � SRFRSREED G�7. �� y,� �'
I— - —I I I I � �'����P� �
I--- � � J�� � `.. ���
HARMONY ROAD
�;_� -�
T _ �.'.
�
��
� - , �n�
�
OAKRIDGE
BUSINESS PARK
ZONED bp
-�'
�'�o�` � FAITH � �o� �
�P`OG ' , E A GELIC74� �
� �-=-n€Hk�iCH, - - - -�� � �
�S i n � i i �I ��
� �
�
�_' 1��'__ ��� ; OAKRIDGE WEST � �RULE PROPERTY
�_. � '^I (PROPOSED BUSINESS
; ��IRAM NT SERVICESI '
�RTS �ENT��
� —1
I!I � B � '� �' � �
�
���'�� �.
� I�������l��������l�����l�
� � � � � �
I '��'i�' �`ii�i' �i����`i�
�■ �-
- � �141%��a�°�
FviIIIIP33�MI�N°Il" �IEIIdIk`
�"IP��(�I� iP'��Jo�a
CONTEXT PLAN
�
�
FRONT RANGE BAPTIST CHURCH
MINOR SUBDIVISION
��j
«heRoa� I
i � ��
I � I
I
i �
I� �I i
( — � ( � I VACANT �
I � � .�0�0'"3�`� P� �
�I I
� �j �I
� � i �i
�" — I
• ` O . � � - B i -
0000� � �� � �_ =—
� F
' ' �� LOTi
�
� - r�Prw0.�Ev w*E
� ;e4— /
� % �' � � O , j1x . �I L
N i � ;
�- s 1 -----
W ' H
'__
� � �^ � — '
2 , /
J _ ' �
i, = � _. _
LL �� � � 2tiT'C* I",�f
J ^ ��. � I . —•- ' PR�P05E9 GE 1 • �-� '�.
z �— �'. _ - � �;i �rAEADOW AT
v� : I ., '� FIRSi FlLVI
C7' � _, i
Z �1 � � ' _
H
N... � -.� _ �..s.,�c..�_ �-' .,
+:. . � � . _ �.
x . ' -�'� ; � _
W , . � 1�
=9, W
6 ��- �
�\ c9, � � ,; � 1 ` �.
� � � �� : �� , ,,
�
I, HARMONY
MARKET
PUD
_a.g z
OAKRIDGE DRIVE
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
� _ � ,'.o#'�
iENERAL NOTES
OAK HILL
APARTMENTS
P. U.D.
� 1 n Pn�. s-a�
II ca�c � �
II�'
LAND USE BREAKDOWN
� � _ ', �' � .�, , ._ _
�ONT � , \ , ovm.ae ��>�"� �� •
� � ' ...
�" , .' . ��o w+ovnm . . . .•
✓ B
O�J�gSEMGOJPS . 904 y.�.,.a.n.�o� 4 »�.,¢.�a.. ,..�,�
� V � ��
�
� ���\ �
VICINITY MAP
J�li1VN I�V Fi�t CLu _�4.rE+�• m.u++.ua�w c__ ^...
LEGEND
� R
��,:,:�s ��
JOHN H. KING III iVllil1i�1t1�1Vll�iV ll e1�11elleLC
DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANT �j.7I��]P3.4�C(aI� IP'o�JoIl➢o
���� ��� ����w� PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
�
7 3
7 )� �'� �
j;�� �,�
�ii�," -'�'
(7 UJ ..
zwc
J 4
LL_ `
2
_� I �
W LL � �'- � i
F W �
�O3 w� I
�nzm o e
w� �30�
>�� ��E
aZ
¢ u�i
a x '�
LLw ��
���
x� �a,. ��s �..
�
� � �
�:�� ���;
�� � �� -5s=:� <
)�,`_�
� I
� �
i
�,
� ��, � i � � VACANT �
� ii� � �
_ ��
��� ��---- —���I
� — — ,r� � � _.
li HARMONY
MPUDET
�
OAKRIDGE DRIVE
� _
OAK HILL
IIAPARTMENTS
P.U.D.
i
II
�'',
�r-a.s� s �_�. Perac-� , <
I'I
,��,,
�
� �
�.� ... , � � ,,.
� '
��� � ` '�
\ _ ,� m
_� _ � ���� � ��
� St�M � "pp �
� ��uB '�� i �V \
� � , . ���
PLANT NOTES
LEGEND
4'� �
� �9� �er«nc...va�++
��a�
JOHN H. KING III i���vllL��t�\tt[inlln�ll�� °�'11e1i°!i`
DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANT n��IPv1�1iut11�IE IPo�IoIIDo
W��"�` �� �"�`�� PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN =,
� �.
... ,.- _ , . ,- 2 -° 3
i FRONT RANGE BAPTIST CHUflCH
MINOR SUBDIVISION
LOT 1 OFFICE/ MANAGER'S RESIDENCE SOUTH ELEVATION
L�OE �1 TYPICAL EXTERIOR ELEVATION OF INTERIOR BUILDINGS
- nn�-`��►r�o — - �� o� - •
■�■�■�■�■�.-
LOT 1 OFFICE/ MANAGER'S RESIDENCE EAST ELEVATION
) -- , JOHN H. KING III
�"'�,°",°'�„�,w'���•'��^�E^°� DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANT
, s.���em..R,or.E �,`�"`[/ '�L (c]�,;'j1�
����� ����
����c�� �a�7o�o
PRELIMINARY ELEVATIONS
3 3
LOT 1 TYPICAL EXTERIOR BUILDING EIEVATION, BUILDINOS �^.,I,J,K,L
_ LOT 2 WEST IFRONT) ELEVATION (EAST ELEVATION SIMILARI �� LOT 2 NOflTH ELEYATION BOUTH ELEVATION SIMIIARI
LOT 1 TYPICAL PARTIA� EXTEFIOR BUILDING EIEVATION, BVILDING D
..
__ ��
... � 1�A1R��Abf�' S�- S=bRA6� Pt� UM � .
� � S�l�'7 '
Acfivi�y Q: ALL DEVELORMENT CRlT�R1A �
ALL CRITERIA I aPpuc�EL� CRITc��� .
ON� r
Ils :he c:2enon 4Y�! ihe crscricr� .
CRl i ��lON
ac�iicacle7 be sa;isf,ea?
_• = 3 il Yes INo
: �
r.1. COMti1UNliY-l•VIDE CR1T��1�.
� 1. i Sc►Cr On�r,;�tion
i.2 C�morzhensive P12n
1.� `/�/I(Clli? Fi2Dlt2i
1.= f�line�zi De�csii
- - ..uu,..inc P.�c�.r:�:�t and Or�ent=_ticr, � �
? �,J�tur�f r�=tur�s ' I j �
%. � V_nicul�r Circ�i�iion �nc P_rkirc � ; �
�.� ",��yc�C�.=,C���J - l I I
2.� rs��strian Cir;:►�tion � I I
?.; .�r;.:;ii��:ure � I �
2 �' ���ilaing He:cnt �nd Views I I I
`2.� S��ding I � �
2. � C �cl�r rc��ss �
2. � ; ;-�ist�ric �escur„�s + l
l. I I
2.12 �at�acks . I I
2.13 L=_n�sc�ce � � �
2.1-� � icns � �
2.' � Sita Lighting I ' I�
2.16 Ncisa 2nd Vibr2tion � v
2.1 � G;are or He�t . � �
2.18 H2�=_rdcus Materiafs � �
��
�
�
�
l.� _�: loc�c�liy Sersi�ive Ar�25 i r�se.rve� � I ( •
1.c L_=n�s Ci nCfIC�ltUfal Imocr_r,ce � re��r�e� I � �
1. r' �nerev Cor,s�rv�tion � (�- � �
�.� �.ir Qu2liiv �' � � + � .
�.0 wcTar CL'c�IIY � � � � � .
'' Q ��'NcCe =f�C1 ��=ciE� I � � � � �
1 1� W�• �C'Onccrv^:i n ! � �
i.12 ResidentialDensitv � � � + � � �
� T
�. N�!G'r'EORHOGD C0��1F.'� i iCILI � Y C�=t! i�=cl,;� I �
%. � V_�ic�i�r. P=ces,r,an. Bike Trns�cr,�ticn � I I � �
;; �
%� 3. ENGINEc�1NG CRlTERIA
3.1 Utility Capacity
• ,� 3-2 Design Stand�rds
3.3 Wat�r Hazards
� 3.4 Gcolooic Ha�=res
�I I I .
�
��
�
,
�
_ �� -
Land Development Guidance System for Planned Uait Developmencs
T}:e Ciry of Fort Collins, Cotorr�o, Revised , h 1994 -
� .6� _ ����fi
If nc, pleasa ex-(ain
�
M�RA�WOI�T S� �TottAGE Pu� , PR�� nh��Y ,-1'� 5� -8'1 Rlvl
�1��' ��
ACTivir�;
Auto-Related and Roadside Commercial
�
DEFINITION:
Those retail and wholesale commercial activities which are generally considered and typically found
along highways and arterial streets. Uses include free-standing department s[ores; auction rooms;
automobile service stations, repair faciliues, car washes; boat, car, trailer, motorcycle showrooms, sales,
and repair; fuel and ice sales; greenhouses and nurseries; warehouses and storage; repair or rental of a�y
article; exterminaring shops; drive-in restaurants; adult book stores; ea[ing places with adult amusement
or entertainment; adult photo studios; adult theaters; any uses intended to provide adult amusement or
entertainment; and, o[her uses which are of the same general character.
Ci?ITEf�IA;
Each of the followinQ applicable criteria must be answered "yes" and implemen[ed wi[hin the
developm�nt plan.
Yes No N/A
I. Does the pr�;ect gain iu primary vehicular access from a street other than �❑
South College Avenue?
2. Are all repair, pain[ing and body work activities, inciuding [he stor2ge of
refuse and ��ehicle parts, planned to take place within an enciosed
structure?
3. If the project contains any uses intended to provide adult amusement or
entertainment, does it meet the following requirements?
a. Is the use established, operated or maintained no ]ess than 500 feet
from a residendal neighborhood, church, and/or school meeting all of
the requirements of the compulsory education laws of the State of
Colorado?;
� � �
� ❑ �
b. Is the use established, operated, or maintained no less than one
thousand (1,000') feet from another similar use?
4. DOES THE PROJECT EARN AT LEAST FIFTY (50%) PERCEI�'T OF ��
T'I� MAXIMUM POINTS AS CAI.CULATED ON POINT CHART
"B" FOR Ti� FOLLOWLNG CRITERIA?
a. Is the activity located other than at the intersecdon of two anerial stre�ts?
b. Is the project contiguous to and functionally a part of an existing neighborhood or
community/regional shopping center, office, or industrial park?
c. Is the pnmary access to the activity from a non-arterial street?
d. Is lhe pr�ject on at least two (2) acres of land?
e. Does the project contain two (2) or more significant uses (for instance retail, office, residential,
hocel/motel, or recreation)?
Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments
The City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised March 1994
�
�
�
�
a-
�
.�. -
�
n`.;
A:
�,�
�_
P".--
�•
-� _
��
_��
�
.�
�=�
`�
:7
a�
�
7
,: y
_�
_y
�
_�
_�
_a
-r
��
w
�
�
�
�
1
�1
�
h
;
.
• �
. __ .
. .
Aufo Relafed_and Roadside Commercial - : .-
. ... _ _
_ _._
� (continued) : , _ _ -
_ _ _. _
f. Is there direct vehicular and pedestrian access be[ween on-site parking areas and adjacent existing
or future off-site parking areas wtuch contain more than ten (10) spaces?
g. Dces the activity reduce non-renewable energy usage through the applicauon of altemaave energy
systems or through energy conservation measures beyond those normalIy required by the Model -
Energy Code as adopted by the City? Refer to Appendix "E" for. energy conservation methods to
use for calculaung energy conservadon points. -
h. Is the proje�t located with at least one-sixth (1/6) of its properry boundary contiguous to existing
urban development? - _
i. If the site contains a building or place in which a historic event occurred, has special public value
because of notable architecture, or is of cultural significance, does the project fulfiIl the following
criteria? � _ -
1. Prevent creauon of influences adverse to its preservation;
2. Assure that new structures and uses will be in keeping with the character of the building or
pIace. Imita[ion of period styles should be avoide�; and
� 3. Propose adapuve use of the building or place that will lead to its c�ntinuance, conservation,
and improyement in an appropriate manner while respecting the integrity of the
neighborhood.
-- Land Development Guidance System for Ptanned Unit Developments - '- -
� The City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised March 1994
, ; -69- , :,
. . ,, .
_ , . _.
�, ..... _ .
,:�..
-- �
i
� s�.
� .
AUTO-RELATED AND .
ROADSIDE COMMERCI,�L POINT CHART D
For All Criteria Applicable Criteria Only
� • �5 I , II III IV
- tne
Criterion Circle Multip(ier Points Maximum
CCIt@f101'1 App(icabie me Earned Appllcable
Yes No Correct Score Points
Ixll
a. Not at Two Arterials X X 2O 0 2 � 4
b. Part of Planned Center � X X 2 0 3 � 6
c. On Non-Arterial X X O2 0 4 8 8
d. Two Acres or More X X O2 0 3 (0 6
e. Mixed-Use -� . X X 2� 0 3 (,p, 6
f. Joint Parking x 1 2 0 3 .�.. �
g. Energy Conservation X l 2 3 4 0 2 � 8
h. Contiguifiy X X 2 0 5 �� 10
i, Historic Preservation X 1 2 0 2 ..� �
). 1 2 0
k. 1 2 0
I. 1 2 0
Totals 3y y
v vi
Percentage Earned of Maximum Applicable Points V/VI = VII "� �%
vu
Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments
The Ciry of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised h�iarch 1994
, _ _70-
�
LJ
MIR�IMONT a�t�F PVp � �R�1M1�1P�'� S�{-8T �I�l
C� Z�
ACTIVITY;
Business Service Us2s
DEF1NITlON:
Those activities which are predominanrly rerail, office, and services uses which would not qualify as a
neighborhood service, neighborhood convenience, or community/regional shopping center. Uses include
recail shops; offices; personal service shops: financial institutions; hote:s/motels; medical clinics; health
clubs; membership clubs; standard and fast-food res�uranrs; hospitals: r�onuaries; inaaor ti��ters;
recreaaon uses; small animal veterinary ciinics: printing and newspaper offices; and, other uses whica
are of the same geaeral character.
CRIiEI�IA;
Each of the following appiicable c:i[era must be answered "yes" and implemented wirhin rhe
deve:opment plan.
1. Does the project gain its primary vehicuIar access from a street o[her than
Sourh College �venue?
2. DOES T� PROJECT EARN AT LEAST FI�iY (50�'0) PER�i�I'I' OF
'I� :v1A.YIMULi POINTS AS CAI.CL'LATED ON PO �NT C:iART
`B" FOR TF� FOLLO WING CRITERIA?
a. Is the activity conriguous to an existing nansit rou[e (not applicable
for uses of less than twenty-five thousand [�,000] square feet GLA or
with less than twenry-Five [25j employees, or located in the Cenual
Business Dis�ict)?
b. Is the project located outside of the "South CoIlege Avenue Corridor"?
Y�No N/A
�
� ❑
c. Is the project condguous to and functionally a pazt of a neighborhood
or community/regional shopping center, an office or industrial park,
loca[ed in the Cencral Business Disuict, or in [he case of a single user, employ or will employ a
total of more than one hundred (100) full-ume employees dunng a single eight (8) hour shift?
d. Is the project on at least two (2) acres of land, or located in the Central Business Disorict?
e. Does the project contain two (2) or more significant uses (for instance retail, office, residendal.
hote!/motel, or recreadon)?
f. Is there d'uect vehicular and pedestrian access between on-site parldng areas and adjacent existing
or future off-site parking areas which contain more than ten (10) spaces?
g. Does the activity reduce non-renewable energy usage through the application of alternative energy
systems or through energy conservaaon measures beyond those normally rrequired by the Model
Energy Code as adopted by the City? Refer to Appendiz "E" for energy conservation methods to
use for calcuIating energy conservation points.
Land Development Guidance System for Planned Unit Developments
The City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised March 1994
-71-
-�:�F;
- � i �
BUSI�i�SS S2fV1Ce �SeS {confinued)
h. Is the �vject located with at least one-sixth (1/� of its property bounci�y contiguous to ezisting
urban development?
i. If the site contains a building or place in which a historic event occurred, has special public value
be�ause of notable architecture, or is of cult�al significance, does the project fulfill the following
criteria?
1. Prevent creation of influences adverse to its preserva[ion;
2. Assure that new s�ucnu�es and uses will be in keeping with the character of the building or
place. Imitation of period styles should be avoided; and
3. Propose adaptive use of the building or place that will lead ta its condnuance, conservarion,
and improvement in an appropriate manner while respecting the integrity of the
neighborhood.
Land Development Guidance System tor Planned Unit Developments
The City of Fort Collins, Colorado, Revised Ma�h 1994
-72-
� •
BUSINESS �
SERVICE USES POINT CHART E
For All Criteria Applicable Criteria Only
- t�te � �� III �V _
Criterion �`��"°" cU�,a M�,,n
App�cable me pGer Points Mcximum
CoRect Score �med Appllcable
Yes No Poinis
Ixli
a. Transit Roufie X X 2 � 2 O
y
b. South Coliege Corridor X X O 0 4 8 g
c. Part of Center X X 2 p 3 � 6
d. Two Acres or More X X 2Q 0 3 � 6
e. Mixed-Use X X 2O 0 3 6
�
f. Joint Parking X 1 2 0 3 _, ,�
g. Energy Conservation X 1 2 3 4 0 2 � 8
h. Contiguity X X 2Q 0 5 �� 10
i. Historic Preservation x � 2 p 2 � �
�' 1 2 0 �
k. 1 2 0
i. �
1 2 0
Totals y
� � v vi
Percentage Earned of Maximum Applicable Points V/V� - V�� (03 %
. vu
Land Development Guidance System for Planned Uait Developments
The City of Fort Collins, Colondo, Revised March 1994
-73-
•
•
MIRAMONT SELF S'TORA GE PUD
PRELIMINAR Y, #54-8 �AM
ISS UE:
• Is the request consistent with the
approved Overall Development
Plan and Comprehensive Plan?