Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTACO BELL RESTAURANT - 51-90 - CORRESPONDENCE - CITY STAFFMessage. Subject: TACO BELL, Sender: Mike DAVIS / CFC52/01 CC: Ted SHEPARD / CFC52/01 Part 1. FROM: Mike DAVIS / CFC52/01 TO: DISTRIBUTION Part 2. 141 Dated: 01/31 at 1451. Contents: 2. You asked for an' up -date on Taco Bell negotiations with staff and how the Choices 95 street improvement (Prospect and College) is to be balanced with economic considerations. 1. Staff has been working since March 1990 with Taco Bell to come -up with an acceptable site plan that would also save the Wickersham house. 2. The Wickersham house is not on any historic preservation list and is not under the protection of the LPC. Nevertheless, the LPC and staff are concerned that the house is significant and serves an important and historic urban design role in the block. 3. This is not a development by right project. Unless the applicant seeks a rezoning of the property, which is highly unlikely, Taco Bell will have to obtain PUD approval. Staff advises that the project will not be able to "earn" sufficient points to be approved and that a variance would have to be obtained from P&Z. The only points to Taco Bell's credit would be: (1) Taco Bell has been at this location for twenty -years; and, (2) the saving of the Wickersham house. These may not be sufficient in the eyes of the P&Z Board. A recommendation of approval from staff is critical in my opinion. 4. The Housing Authority has looked into the possible relocation of the house, and Taco Bell has indicated an interest in giving the house to the Authority if it can be relocated. 5. Examination by staff and knowledgable interests revealed the house is too large to be relocated. Also, a significant number trees would be lost if the house were moved. 6. Fortunately, the exterior design of the house is very compatible with the theme of Taco Bell and the staff believes the house can be adaptively re -used by Taco Bell. Ted Shepard has spent considerable time working with Taco Bell to convince them of the merits of saving and re -adapting the house for use as the new location for Taco Bell. 7. Taco Bell has provided staff with an off -the -shelf plan (M-90 store) it would like to use if the house cannot be re -used. With some modifications the plan could be made sympathetic architecturally. However, this is not the staff's or my preferred solution. 8. Taco Bell has said to adaptively reuse the Wickersham house will cost more than it has budgeted or can justify and is looking for some sort of relief from the city in the form of fee waivers and payment for the right-of-way desired by the city for the Prospect/College intersection improvements. I am not sympathetic to this argument. 9. Staff has taken the following positions: r (c) Taco Bell s..ould dedicate the right-of-way for ;.right turn bay on Prospect adjacent to the existing Toco Bell site. (d) A raised median needs to be built on West Prospect to prevent left -in and left -out of the Taco Bell property. (e) A right turn bay is needed when the Prospect/College intersection is improved in 1992. To build the bay now would be a benefit to Taco Bell in terms of better access and avoidance of major construction two years from now. (f) A PUD is required and Taco Bell cannot meet the point charts. (g) A variance from the point chart will have to be obtained in all likelyhood by Taco Bell, Staff support of the variance is critical to the P&Z approval of the PUD. There is no guarantee that P&Z will approve the PUD application. 10. Staff and Taco Bell have met twice with the neighborhood. It has agreed to limit operating hours. Taco Bell knows it will be a difficult sell. 11. The application has been tabled by Taco Bell until the issues can be worked out to everyone's satisfaction. -- - - - - - - --- ---- --------- --- ------ - - - - -- Prospect/College Ave project. Engineering staff would like to have R/W dedicated by Taco Bell. Area needed is approx. 2500 sq. ft. for a right turn bay. At est. $10/sq. ft. this is a $25,000 est. cost to purchase the R/W. Toco Bell has asked that the city purchase at market rate the R/W in consideration of the added costs to Toco Bell to adaptively re -use the house. -- - - - - - - - - ----- --- ------ --- ------- -- - - - - My Position: I think staff should hang tough on saving and adaptively re -using the Wickersham house. I believe this is to everyone's advantage and would be a good corporate gesture on the part of Taco Bell. Taco Bell should dedicate the R/W to the City. In exchange the city will participate in the cost of the street improvements, ie, median, curb and gutter, sidewalk and right turn lane. (We estimate this will cost around $15,000.) The only way Taco Bell can get approval for the PUD is for the staff to develop a strong case for a -variance. The saving and re -use of the house could be enough to convince the Board that this is an acceptable project. Otherwise, Toco Bell is dead in the water. If the house is designated historic it could be elegible for historic tax credits that may be of assistance. I have asked Ted Shepard to work with Tom Peterson to explore this possibility. Of course, any fee waiver is out of the question and will not be discussed by staff. I hope this responds to your question. I'll keep you informed of progress. Thanks, Community Collaborative Services, Boulder John Feinberg, Principal Banner Associates, Laramie, Wyoming Nore Winter Associates, Boulder Hammer, Siler, George, Denver Ellen Ittelson, Preservation Planner AE Design, Fort Collins Richard Beardmore, Principal