David Netz, chair of Stapleton CAB and the Zoning and Planning committee (ZAP), talks at a recent ZAP meeting about the principles that guide comprehensive planning of a town center.
Since the release of a conceptual site plan for a King Soopers in Eastbridge in late April, there have been numerous community meetings and voices expressing views that range from relief that a grocery store is finally coming to consternation that the site plan doesn’t resemble the town center residents say was advertised when they purchased their homes.
Stapleton’s Zoning and Planning Committee (ZAP) Chairman, David Netz, at the July ZAP meeting, said people have told him, “We anticipated something like 29th Ave Town Center.” Since no official site plan has been presented to ZAP for the citizen review process, Netz used the July meeting time to talk “big picture” about what a town center really is. He says the Urban Land Institute (ULI) defines a town center as, “an enduring, walkable integrated open air multi-use development organized around a clearly identifiable and energized public realm where citizens can gather and strengthen their community bonds. It is anchored by retail, dining, and leisure uses, as well as by vertical or horizontal residential uses.” Netz adds that town centers also have identifying features that say, “You’re now entering a town center,” which may include lighting, landscaping, public art and traffic calming devices. He also pointed out ULI’s ten principles for developing successful town centers, the second of which is “Respect market realities.”
That seems to be where “the rubber hits the road” in Eastbridge.
John Chrisman
Jim Chrisman, senior vice president of Forest City Stapleton says Forest City spent $8-900,000 on plans for a town center with a smaller grocery store and a main street along Geneva Court that would have resembled the 29th Ave. Town Center and they had a commitment to building it, but it turned out to be “unexecutable.” He says despite years of trying, no small grocer would commit.
“If this site were wider and not as long, you could have room for the Kings and you could do something along Geneva, more like 29th. But the dimensions of that parcel don’t lend itself to that with this size grocery.” Chrisman said they looked at several approaches and went with the current site plan because it consolidates all the retail space in one area so they could create an environment that, “Once you walked into it would be very peaceful, relaxing, accommodating outdoor public space. The other plans didn’t do as good a job of that. They were just shops. A couple buildings with parking distributed around them, but they did not accomplish in my mind the best opportunity to create a sense of place…I think people have lost sight of that because we haven’t had anything specific to show.”
Todd Ahlenius
Eastbridge resident Todd Ahlenius came to the July Stapleton Development Corporation meeting representing a group of residents who are distributing a flyer and yard signs that say, “Imagine a Great Town Center in Eastbridge. Do what you promised Forest City.”
In response to our observation, “What the community can’t get out of their heads is a big suburban- looking parking lot in the middle of a new urbanist neighborhood–—they look at the plan and they just see concrete,” Chrisman said the parking lot won’t be visible from within the town center. The town center will have 22,000 square feet of retail, and the plaza will be segregated from the street traffic and the parking lot by the buildings. To put that in perspective, all the retail on one side of the 29th Ave Town Center from Quebec to the Crescent is about 26,000 square feet. And in the 29th Ave. Town Center people can’t let their kids roam while they’re sitting on the patio eating.
“If you’re not in real estate and you saw the 29th Ave Town Center and you have one vision of what it is, when you see something that is different from that I guess you object to it. A town center means many different things to different people. I think what we will develop in Eastbridge will be every bit the town center that East 29th is in terms of what it brings in community gathering and outdoor eating space and public amenities and all those types of things. It’s just going to be done in a different way,” said Chrisman.
He added, “People need to remember, you can reduce the parking and then you put yourself in a situation like Trader Joe’s where it all bleeds out into the neighborhoods and you have traffic issues in your neighborhoods, and I don’t think that’s very appealing or appropriate.
“They are looking at creating a lot more space in front of the store than you typically see at any King Soopers store, with a public outdoor seating area and umbrellas outside the Starbucks and planter boxes and so on to kind of insulate the pedestrian area from the vehicular area.”
The town center and immediate area around King Soopers may be insulated from the parking lot, but what about the view from the street? Will there be landscaping to shield the big parking lot from the view of passers by and neighbors?
“We’re not at that level yet but I imagine there will be landscape treatments along the perimeter to try to mitigate some of the visual impact,” says Chrisman, adding that in August or September King Soopers will present their latest plans publicly at the CAB or ZAP meeting and residents can ask that question. (The Front Porch will announce the meeting on our website and Facebook.) Although the contract hasn’t been signed, Chrisman says, “I’m confident that they’ll open a store either next fall or the following spring.
Asked about pedestrian access concerns, Chrisman said Denver has authority over the roads and he suggests that concerned residents get into the site planning process with the city and make their views known. “When Kings submits it I’ll ask the same question,” he says.
Chrisman also said Peter Calthorpe, who was a pioneer in the concept of new urbanism and a consultant to Forest City in the design of Stapleton, saw the current Eastbridge plan and agreed it’s the best that can be done given the constraints of the property.
This just doesn’t add up. Are you telling me that King Soopers is the only grocery chain that believes it can make a profit at this location, and do so while potentially siphoning off a considerable percentage of its current customer base from the 29th & Quebec store? It’s well known that the Quebec location is doing very well financially – they have a captive clientele, and they don’t even pretend to care about the image of the store (just try parking your bike amidst the cigarette buts, spit and trash at one of the 3 bike “racks” located at the employee smoking corner – it’s not a pleasant experience, even considering the amusing conversations that you are likely to overhear between the employees griping about how much they hate their jobs). They did spend a few dollars to pay someone to paint a some cute murals over the produce section, but that was the extent of the much hyped makeover last year. It’s obvious that they don’t care, and they don’t need to as long as people keep shopping there and the money keeps flowing. But that’s what doesn’t make sense – why would they want to build another store right down the road to compete with one of their best performing stores? Are they really OK with splitting the profits between the two stores, or are they just trying to keep the competition out? I don’t have anything against King Soopers or Kroger (in fact, I often drive to the Leetsdale location on weekends because it has a better selection, better meat/seafood department and it’s much cleaner) but it seems to me that they have taken advantage of the residents of Stapleton because there isn’t any competition, and now they are planning to put a lock on the market by securing the Eastbridge location. That might be good for King Soopers and the corporate folks back in Ohio, but it’s not good for Stapleton. I think we would all benefit from a little bit of competition.
I’m pretty sure that I said that there are height restrictions and transitional requirements due to the surrounding zoning. The downtown site will not have the same transitional requirements, and can solve the very real parking issue via the sub-level parking garage. The plans there indicate 590 parking spaces within the structure, in addition to the exterior parking around the building. Overall, accounting for the number of spaces that will be allocated for the apartments on-site, the amount of business parking is pretty much in line with what is being allocated for Eastbridge proposals.
I get that many are unhappy with the solution. I disagree with the outright dismissal of alternate information just because it’s not what you want to hear. Planning buildings for business needs and zoning regulations takes more than a few minutes of Google searching.
As far as “creating” the requirements… That would be just as true for any development surrounded by residential. This isn’t unique to Stapleton, or Denver. Other than the fact that some restrictions were put into place so that there was an initial grocery store in Stapleton, many of the other restrictions are not unique.
Howdy Michael, for an overview of the history of the Eastbridge town center, please see this article. http://stapletondenveraccountability.org/the-sordid-history-of-the-eastbridge-town-center/
What is being discussed is the Fresh Fare King Soopers with a smaller footprint that is being built as we speak Downtown while the proposal from KS for Stapleton isn’t aligned with the Master Development Plans. The neighborhood wants the Town Center Forest City promised, not a parking lot.
Yet again, no one is talking about the 5 stories of apartments on top of the King Soopers at the downtown location. The subterranean parking spaces you mention are for those residents; not the King Soopers shoppers.
The current lack of imagination by King Soopers and Forest City is shocking at best, lazy at worst. The housing is award-winning, while the retail is nothing short of big box gluttony. Please give us a Town Center like the sign on this parcel of land has promised from the beginning.
It’s important to remember that Forest City created the constraints of the site. Peter Calthorpe has acquired a reputation in recent years for selling out his espoused principles. The controversy surrounding the Cargill Salt Flats project is a case in point. Calthorpe’s endorsement of Forest City’s position on the Eastbridge design only further tarnishes his reputation and undermines his credibility. See –
http://archpaper.com/news/articles.asp?id=5021
http://www.greenbelt.org/in-the-news/headlines/letter-to-the-editor-save-the-bay-from-cargill/
Christopher you are correct. The parcel is zoned M-MX-5 which represents up to 5 story mixed use.
Thanks Michael but you are missing the point. The point isn’t that KS must put apartments above; rather the point is threefold. 1 — KS has said they don’t have any other options yet they clearly have a (different) very good design firm producing a really great design in Denver already so clearly they DO have other options. 2 — The design which KS is producing downtown fits nicely on a smaller part of the allotted space in the Town Center area while still making room for more town center which was promised to us by Forest City. Finally number 3 — KS is already producing a grocery store in Denver with a much smaller parking lot that meets Denver’s minimum requirements but doesn’t go overboard with more than twice what is called for—unlike the one Forest City is backing. Forest City needs to stop doing back room deals just so they can sell land. Forest City needs to make King Soopers conform to the rules and requirements of both the Green Book and Stapleton’s published guidelines. The land is zoned for a town center, not a parking lot. The neighborhood deserves the town center they were sold. Bait and Switch cannot be tolerated.
Why can’t they do something like the Kroger in Grosse Point Michigan (or the trader joes across the street).. No parking any place on the front side… all walkable shopping.. small lot behind it.. discreet looking parking garage.. http://goo.gl/cSRXVF take a peak..
Stapleton Denver Accountability has just posted an interesting article about the ex-urban design of the proposed King Soopers and the design that Kings is producing in Downtown Denver right now. Spoiler Alert: The one in Downtown Denver right now actually fits into the space with room for parking and a town center AND happens to be a really nice New Urban design. http://stapletondenveraccountability.org/did-peter-calthorpe-actually-review-the-eastbridge-town-center-site-plan/
While the downtown building is very cool, it also obviously will not meet zoning restrictions in Eastbridge. Which would be the “constraints of the property” – namely being adjacent to residential zoned development, and thus having height restrictions and transitional requirements for height of the buildings.
I thought the area was zoned for buildings with a height of 5 stories?
As a Stapleton resident and supporter of the proposed KS plan I have to add my two cents. I would absolutely love all of the alternates everyone has proposed, but I think we are all forgetting the realities of the surrounding area that has been built. The urban KS in Union Station area or the one mentioned in Grosse Point MI are all surrounded by housing and density in every direction. The KS downtown is surrounded by thousands of apartments that will feed tons of pedestrian traffic. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t see how the Urban KS with minimal parking would ever survive in an area that is quite Sub-Urban. I think the proposed solution is a good compromise and we should be rallying for good design elements, landscaping, traffic calming features, lighting, etc.
any word on the meeting date yet? I hope you guys will post the new proposed plan on your site and/or on nextdoor.