Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
10/22/2014 - Landmark Preservation Commission - Agenda - Work Session
Landmark Preservation Commission Page 1 October 22, 2014 Ron Sladek, Chair Doug Ernest, Vice Chair CIC Room Maren Bzdek City Hall West Meg Dunn 300 Laporte Avenue Kristin Gensmer Fort Collins, Colorado Dave Lingle Pat Tvede Alexandra Wallace Belinda Zink Laurie Kadrich Karen McWilliams Josh Weinberg Gino Campana Staff Liaison, CDNS Director Preservation Planner Preservation Planner Council Liaison The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224- 6001) for assistance. Work Session October 22, 2014 Discussion Items 1. West Central Area Plan Update The purpose of this item is to provide the Commission with an update on the West Central Area Plan, and to seek Commission member's comments. 2. 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal The purpose of this item is to provide a conceptual review for the proposal to reconstruct the facade on the building at 242 Linden Street. 3. Bobcat Ridge Poultry Shed and Equipment Shed Rehabilitation The purpose of this item is to hear an update on proposed work to the Bobcat Ridge Poultry Shed and Equipment Shed, a City-owned historic property designated on the State Register of Historic Properties. The project has received a State Historical Fund grant for the work. 4. Landmark Residences on Mountain Avenue - Revised Architecture This item is to follow-up on the Commission's previous review of this project at its September 24 work session. The applicants have revised their architecture and are seeking any further Commission comments, with the goal of receiving a Final Recommendation at the November 12 regular meeting. Landmark Preservation Commission City of Fort Collins Page 2 5. Discussion of 2015 Landmark preservation Commission Work Plan The purpose of this item is to develop the Commission's 2015 Work Plan. The Commission's direction will then be incorporated into a document for adoption at the Commission's November 12 Regular Meeting. The 2014 Work Plan is attached for reference. 6. Commission Members Updates The purpose of this item is for Commission members to report upon recent events or activities they have attended, including the LPC Retreat; the DDA Retreat; and the Greeley Talk & Tour. Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 22, 2014 Landmark Preservation Commission STAFF Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Planner SUBJECT West Central Area Plan Update EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to provide the Commission with an update on the West Central Area Plan, and to seek Commission member's comments. STAFF RECOMMENDATION BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION PUBLIC OUTREACH ATTACHMENTS 1. WCAP_LPC_Handouts (PDF) 1.1 Packet Pg. 3 Desirable, safe, and affordable neighborhoods that are a source of pride Conveniently located parks, trails, open space, services, and employment Well-integrated campus community A range of ages and incomes and a variety of housing options New development that is compatible with existing development and accommodates future growth Multi-Generational and Multi- Single-Family Houses Family Housing Attractive, Well-Designed Multi- Family Housing Neighborhood Design Standards +LVWRULFDOO\6LJQL¿FDQW6WUXFWXUHV Attractive Street Appearance Good Neighbor Initiatives Well-Maintained Properties, Community Involvement Respectful and Quiet Neighborhoods Mixed-Use Development Parking Solutions Affordable Housing Neighborhood Market Retail and Personal Services Parks and Open Space We aspire to achieve: A collaborative design process that respects neighborhood concerns Collaborative Dialogue with Neighbors Sensitivity to Historic Character Emphasis on Quality and Design LU Land Use & Neighborhood Character VISION Vibrant and diverse neighborhoods that provide a high quality of life fcgov.com/westcentral 2 3 4 5 LU 6 LU LU LU LU 2 LU 2 LU 1 LU 1.1.a Packet Pg. 4 T Transportation & Mobility VISION A connected network that supports people safely walking, biking, or using public transit as DSULPDU\ZD\WRWUDYHOZKLOHEDODQFLQJWKHQHHGIRUHI¿FLHQWDXWRWUDYHOWKURXJKRXWWKHDUHD We aspire to achieve: Safe routes to school, CSU, and other major destinations Easy access to transit (including MAX) Option for residents to live without a car 6DIHDQGHI¿FLHQWWUDYHOE\ car with adequate, convenient parking Safe, reliable, arterial streets that are easy to cross and serve residents and commuters Improved transit service and convenient stops 5HVKDSHGDQGUHWUR¿WWHG streets that meet the needs of all ages, abilities, and modes P Walk Bike Ride Connections Between Modes Improved Frequency and Connections Access To and From Neighborhoods Improved Bus Stops Safe Crossing Distances and Improved Visibility of Users Multi-Family Parking Areas and Shared Parking Arrangements 7UDI¿F6DIHW\DQG (I¿FLHQF\ Safe and Effective Infrastructure Convenient Access to Destinations 7UDI¿F&DOPLQJ0HDVXUHV Neighborhood-Wide Approaches Improved Intersections and Underpasses Safe & Convenient Street Crossings Comprehensive & Connected Network Safe, Comfortable Options Landscaping Along Streets Enhanced Bike Facilities Effective Balance of Modes OS Land Use & Neighborhood Character VISION A functional network of public and private lands that connects wildlife, plants, and people Comprehensive and ecological approach to stormwater management Access to nature, recreation, and environmental stewardship opportunities Attractive urban tree canopy that supports habitat, character, and shade Preserved and enhanced wildlife habitat corridors Ecologically Healthy Stormwater System Native Habitat Enhancement and Restoration Residential Tree Canopy Street Trees and Median Improvements on Major Streets Tree Preservation During Redevelopment and New Development Neighborhood Parks, Community Gardens, and Xeriscape Projects Habitat Connectivity Educational Opportunities Road-Side Treatments and Medians Neighborhood Detention and Habitat Network of Multi-Use Trails Habitat Protection Along Irrigation Canals/Ditches We aspire to achieve: 1 OS 2 OS 3 OS 4 OS fcgov.com/westcentral 1.1.a Packet Pg. 6 Attachment: WCAP_LPC_Handouts (2522 : West Central Area Plan Update) P Prospect Corridor VISION Attractive and functional, well-integrated, mixed-use corridor that serves the mobility needs of nearby neighborhoods, CSU, and the community Safe and comfortable corridor for all modes of travel Seamless connection to MAX Safe crossings Attractive gateway to campus, downtown, and midtown Gateway Treatments Automatic Detection of Cyclists at Intersections Pedestrian Refuges Grade Separated or Enhanced Crossings Comfortable Sidewalks Welcoming Intersections Well-Marked Bike Facilities Street Trees and Medians Walk Bike Ride We aspire to achieve: 1 T 3 T 4 T 2 T fcgov.com/westcentral 7UDI¿F6DIHW\DQG(I¿FLHQF\ 1.1.a Packet Pg. 7 Attachment: WCAP_LPC_Handouts (2522 : West Central Area Plan Update) LU Land Use & Neighborhood Character VISION Vibrant and diverse neighborhoods that provide a high quality of life fcgov.com/westcentral Draft - 9/17/2014 N AAAve Ave Av ve WWWWWWWW PPPPPPPrrrrrroooooossssspppppeeeeeecccccctttt RRRRRRRRRRdddddddddddddd WWWWWWWWWWWWW EEEEEEEEEEEElllliiiiizzzzzaaaaaabbbbbbeeeeeettttthhhhh SSSSSSSSttttttttt BBBBBBAAAAAAYYYYYY AAAAAAA RRRRRRRDDDDDD WWW MMMMMMUUULLLBBBEEEERRRRRRRRRRYYYYY SSSSSTTTTTT WWWWWWWW PPPPPPPLLLLLLUUUUUUUMMMMMM SSSSSSSTTTTTTT MMMAXX AA GGGGGUUUUUIIIDDDDDEEEEEEWWWWWWAAAAA WWWW AAAAAA YYYY WWWWW SSSTTTUUUUUAARRTT SSSSSSSSSSTTTTTTTT CCCCCCCEEEEENNNNNNTTTTRRRRREEEEE AAAAAVVVVV AAAAAAA EEEEEEEEEE SSSSSSSS MMMMMMMAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSOOOOONNNNNNN SSSSSTTTT WWWWWWWWWWWWWW EEEELLLLIIIIZZZZZAAAAAABBBBBBEEEETTTTTHHHHHH SSSSSSTTTTTT SSSSSPPPPPRRRRRIIIINNNGGGGGGFFFFFIIIIEEEEELLLLLDDDDDD DDDDRRRRR CCCCCIIIIIIITTTTTTTYYYYY PPPPPPAAAAA PPPPP RRRRRRKKKKK AAAAAAVVVVVV AAAAAAAAA EEEEEEE SSSSSSOOOOOUUUUUTTTTTHHHHHH DDDDDDRRRRR EEEEAAAAAASSSSSSSSSTTTTTTTTTTT DDDDDDRRRRRR WWWWWWW PPPPPPPIIIITTTTTTKKKKKKKIIIIIIINNNNNNNN SSSSSSSTTTTTTTT SSSSSKKKKYYYYYLLLLIIINNNNNNEE DDDDRRR MMMMMEEEEEERRRRRRIIIIIIDDDDDDIIAAAAANNNNNN AAAAVVVV AAAAAAA EEEEEEE SSSS BBBBBBRRRRYYY RR YYY AAAAAA NNNNNN AAAAAVVVVVV AAAA EEEE CCCCCRRRRRREEESSSSTTTTTMMMMMOOOOORRRRREEEEE PPPPLLLL OOOOOORRRRCCCCHHHHAAAAARRRRRRDDDDDD PPPPLLLLLL CCCCCCOOONNNNNNSSSSSTTTIIITTTTUUUUUTTTTTIIIOOOOONNNNNNN AAAA AAAAVVVVV EEEEE SSSSSHHHHHHEEEEEEEEEEEEELLLLLYYYYY LLLLL DDDDDRRRRR CCCCCCAAAAASSSSSTTTTTTTTTTTTLLLLERRRRROOOOOOOOOOCCCCCCCCKKKKK DDDDDRRRR SSSSSHHHHHIIIRRRREEEEE CCCCCTTTTTT SSSSSS GGGGGGRRRRRAAAANNNTTT AAAAVVVVV AAAAA EEEEEE HHHHIILLLLLLL POONNNDDDD RRRDD VVVVVAAA VVVV LLLLLLLLLEEYY FFFFOOOOOORRRRGGGGEEEEEEE AAAVVVV AAA EEEEEE CCCCCEEEEEENNNNNNNTTTTTTTTEEEEEEEERRRRRR AAAAAAVVVVV AAAAA EEEENNNNNNUUUUUUEEEEEE MMMMMLLLLLL BBBBBIIIIRRRRRKKKKKYYYYY PPPLLLLL RRRRRRROOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLAAAANNNDDDDD MMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRREE DRR SSSS MMMMEEEELLLLDDDDDRRRRRRRUUUUUMMMMMM SSSSSTTTTT CCCCOOOOOOOOOOOKKKKK DDDDDRRRRRRRRRR WWWWIIIIINNNNNFFFFIIIIEEEELLDDDDD DDDRRRR SSSSSSS WWWWWWWHHHHHIIIITTTTTCCCCCCOOOOOOMMMMMMBBBB SSSSSTTTTT DDDDDOOOOOOVVVVEEEERRRR DDDDDRRRRR CCCCCCCLLLLLLLLLEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRVVVVVVVVV RRRRR IIEEEEEWWWWWW AAAAAAVVVVVV AAAAAAAAA EEEEEE JJJJJUUUUUNNNNNIIIIPPPPEEEEERRRRRR LLLLLNNNNN BBBBEEEEENNNNNNNNNNEEETTTTTTT RRRRDDDD RRRRRRRRREEEEEESSSSEEEEEEAAAAAARRRRRRRCCCCCCCHHHHHH BBBBBBBBLLLLVVVV LLLL DDDD SSSHHHHEEEEFFFFFFFFIIIEEEEEELLLLLLDDDDD DDDDDDRRRRRR EEEESSSSSSSSSEEEEEXXXX DDDDRRRRRR SSSSSCCCAAAAARRRBBBBBBOOOORROOOOOUUGGGGGHHHH DDDRRRR WWW MMMMYYYYYRRRRRTTTTTLLLEEEE SSSSTTTTTT HHHHEEAAAATTTTT AAAAA HHHHEEEEEEEEEEEEEERRRRRIIIIDDDDGGGGEEEEE RRRRRDDDDD SSSSHHHHHEEELLLLLLDDDDDDOOOOONNNNN DDDDRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR HHHHOOOOBBBBBBBBIIITTT SSSTTTT OOOOOOOVVVVVAAA VVVVV LLL DDDDRRR CCCCEEEENNNNTTTTTEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERRR AAAAAAAAAAAVVVVVVVVVVVVV AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA EEEEEEEEE BBBBBAAAAALLLLLSSSSAAAAAAMMMMMM LLLLLLNNNNN WWWWWWEEEEESSSSSTTTTTWWWWAAAAA WWWW RRRRRRDDDD DDDRRRRRR SSSS WWWWWWAAAAA WWWW SSSSSSHHHHIIIINNNNNGGGGGTTTTTOOOOOONNNNNN AAAAVVVV AAAAAAA EEEEE SHEELY DRIVE S Shields St S Taft Hill Rd W Drake Rd W Mulberry St W Prospect Rd W Laurel St W Elizabeth St S Mason St S Howes St BAY RD W MULBERRY ST W PLUM ST MAX GUIDEWAY W STUART ST CENTRE AVE W LAUREL ST S MASON ST W ELIZABETH ST SPRINGFIELD DR CITY PARK AVE SOUTH DR EAST DR W PITKIN ST SKYLINE DR MERIDIAN AVE S BRYAN AVE CRESTMORE PL ORCHARD PL CONSTITUTION AVE SHEELY DR CASTLEROCK DR SHIRE CT S GRANT AVE HILL POND RD S LOOMIS AVE VALLEY FORGE AVE CENTER AVENUE ML BIRKY PL ROLLAND MOORE DR S MELDRUM ST COOK DR WINFIELD DR S WHITCOMB ST CLEARVIEW AVE DOVER DR JUNIPER LN BENNETT RD RESEARCH BLVD SHEFFIELD DR ESSEX DR SCARBOROUGH DR W MYRTLE ST SHELDON DR HEATHERIDGE RD HOBBIT ST OVAL DR YORKTOWN AVE CENTER AVE BALSAM LN S Shields St S Taft Hill Rd W Drake Rd W Mulberry St W Prospect Rd W Laurel St W Elizabeth St S Mason St S Howes St BAY RD W MULBERRY ST W PLUM ST MAX GUIDEWAY W STUART ST CENTRE AVE W LAUREL ST S MASON ST W ELIZABETH ST SPRINGFIELD DR CITY PARK AVE SOUTH DR EAST DR W PITKIN ST SKYLINE DR MERIDIAN AVE S BRYAN AVE CRESTMORE PL ORCHARD PL CONSTITUTION AVE SHEELY DR CASTLEROCK DR SHIRE CT S GRANT AVE HILL POND RD S LOOMIS AVE VALLEY FORGE AVE CENTER AVENUE ML BIRKY PL ROLLAND MOORE DR S MELDRUM ST COOK DR WINFIELD DR S WHITCOMB ST DOVER DR CLEARVIEW AVE JUNIPER LN BENNETT RD RESEARCH BLVD SHEFFIELD DR ESSEX DR SCARBOROUGH DR W MYRTLE ST HEATHERIDGE RD SHELDON DR HOBBIT ST OVAL DR YORKTOWN AVE CENTER AVE BALSAM LN WESTWARD DR Agenda Item 2 Item # 2 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 22, 2014 Landmark Preservation Commission STAFF Josh Weinberg, City Planner SUBJECT 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to provide a conceptual review for the proposal to reconstruct the facade on the building at 242 Linden Street. DT: October 22, 2014 TO: Members of the Landmark Preservation Commission FM: Josh Weinberg, Historic Preservation Planner RE: 242 Linden Street, Conceptual Review of New Façade Proposal for Non-Contributing Building in the Old Town Historic District. Request: The applicants, Blue Ocean Enterprises, Inc., are seeking a Conceptual Design Review from the Commission regarding their plans to construct a new façade on the building at 242 Linden Street, formerly the Sunset Events Center. Background: The building at 242 Linden Street was constructed in 1901, according to Larimer County Assessor records, and has undergone several substantial alterations throughout its history. Little historic archival/photographic information is available for this building, except for a 1908 photograph looking north along Linden Street. The photograph shows a two-story building, but its detailing is difficult to ascertain. The earliest available photograph showing the building’s facade is from 1968, after the historic façade was substantially altered. The façade was further altered in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s. The applicant has conducted exploratory demolition on the building façade attempting to find evidence of historic materials and design, which is outlined in their submittal packet. The exploration yielded no indication of a historic façade. Staff feels the existing façade has been significantly altered, and does not contribute to the character of the Old Town Historic District. Review Criteria: Alterations to properties in Fort Collins Landmark Districts are reviewed for compliance with Municipal Code Section 14-48, “Approval of Proposed Work” and with the Old Town Historic District Design Standards. If the Commission agrees with staff that this building is a non-contributing element to the District, the Commission should reference Chapter 5 of the Design Standards, Design Standards for New Construction. Sec. 14-48. Approval of proposed work. 1.2 Packet Pg. 11 Agenda Item 2 Item # 2 Page 2 In determining the decision to be made concerning the issuance of a report of acceptability, the Commission shall consider the following criteria: (1) The effect of the proposed work upon the general historical and/or architectural character of the landmark or landmark district; (2) The architectural style, arrangement, texture and materials of existing and proposed improvements, and their relation to the sites, structures and objects in the district; (3) The effects of the proposed work in creating, changing or destroying the exterior characteristics of the site, structure or object upon which such work is to be done; (4) The effect of the proposed work upon the protection, enhancement, perpetuation and use of the landmark or landmark district; (5) The extent to which the proposed work meets the standards of the city and the United States Secretary of the Interior then in effect for the preservation, reconstruction, restoration or rehabilitation of historic resources. ATTACHMENTS 1. 2014-10-15_worksession narrative (PDF) 2. 242 Elevation Studies_layout_LPC Work Session_10152014 (PDF) 1.2 Packet Pg. 12 Tuesday, October 14, 2014 To: Josh Weinberg, Preservation Planner City of Fort Collins 401 West Mountain Avenue, Suite 200 Fort Collins, CO 80521 Re: 242 Linden Street Façade Renovation (former Sunset Events Center) Mr. Weinberg, We have prepared this narrative and accompanying exhibits and drawings summarizing the scope and intent of the proposed façade and building renovation at 242 Linden Street, and chronicling our efforts and approach to the Project’s design thus far. We look forward to the opportunity to review the Project with staff and committee at the 10/22 work session. Project Background The property at 242 Linden Street was acquired by Blue Ocean Enterprises in early 2014. Most recently, the building was home to the Sunset Events Center. Future plans for the two story building include a reconstructed façade and a significant renovation of the interior that will reveal many of the original bones of the building. The transformed space will be home to Galvanize, a collaborative home base for a community of innovators, mentors, investors, students and technologists and a place where people grow, launch businesses and life‐changing careers. Assessment of Existing Building In preparation for a potential remodel of the existing building and façade, The Architects’ Studio were retained by Blue Ocean Enterprises to investigate the existing building for evidence of historically significant details that might have been lost to or concealed by prior renovations, and to analyze the potential significance of the building within the Old Town Historic District. Archival History Initial research was conducted with the assistance of archivists at the Local History Archives at the Museum of Discovery. Based on the photographic, building and tax records found there, some limited history of the progression of the site into its current state was revealed. 1.2.a Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: 2014-10-15_worksession narrative (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) 2 2014-10-15_worksession narrative.docx It is our understanding that a building on this site was constructed sometime around or just prior to 1900. We have found a historical photo in the museum archives attributed to 1908 (Photo A.1) that appears to show a building in this location; however it is very distant in the photo and at an angle that reveals very little about the façade at that time. The site was not designated as a “Historically Significant Building” on maps describing a survey of buildings in the City Designated Historic District. Photo A.1: Linden Street, circa 1908 with 242 Linden in background. Resolution is insufficent to resolve details. No evidence of matching fenestration or cornice was found during exploratory demolition Subsequent photos from the 1960’s, 70’s and 80’s (Photos A.2 – A.4) reveal a series of facades devoid of many of the details typically found on historically significant buildings in the area. Any type of cornice treatment is absent, limited or no second story windows are present, and the pattern and proportion of ground floor storefront openings are inconsistent with what we see elsewhere on Linden Street and within the District. Photos from the 1980’s and 90’s (Photos A.5 – A.7) reveal the façade’s further evolution into its current state, including the addition of decorative stucco details and arched openings at the storefront. Photo A.2: Star – circa 1968 Photo A.3: Orion’s Belt Nightclub – circa 1970’s 1.2.a Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: 2014-10-15_worksession narrative (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) 3 2014-10-15_worksession narrative.docx Photo A.4: Orion’s Belt Nightclub – circa 1980’s Photo A.5: Electric Stampede – circa 1980’s Photo A.6: Electric Stampede – circa 1980’s Photo A.7: Current Sunset Events Center 1.2.a Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: 2014-10-15_worksession narrative (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) 4 2014-10-15_worksession narrative.docx Interior Exploratory Demolition Without sound photographic evidence of an original historical façade, selective demolition of portions of the interior finish on the front wall of the building was recommended, in hopes of revealing more about the building’s structure and original elements, including possible past openings and fenestration patterns. Removal of interior furred walls and plaster revealed a multi‐wythe brick wall construction, with a series of masonry openings that had been in filled with CMU. These in filled openings are approximately 6’‐0” wide by 4’‐0” tall, with a sill located approximately 16” above the second floor surface and a head at approximately 5’‐4” above the floor surface. The placement, pattern and proportion of these in filled brick openings does not appear to be consistent with the vertically oriented fenestration seen on similar buildings of the period and other contributing buildings on this block. From what could be seen, there was no evidence of any special sill, head or jamb treatments or other ornamentation such as stone or brick detailing. A combination of structural steel and rough timber structural lintel materials was observed. Refer to photos B.1 ‐ B.4. Photo B.1: Brick opening infilled with CMU; interior whythe of brick partially exposed Photo B.2: Brick opening infilled with CMU; interior whythe of brick partially exposed Photo B.3: Brick opening infilled with CMU; interior whythe of brick, jamb and sill partially exposed Photo B.4: Brick opening infilled with CMU; interior whythe of brick and head partially exposed 1.2.a Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: 2014-10-15_worksession narrative (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) 5 2014-10-15_worksession narrative.docx Exterior Exploratory Demolition Building upon this interior investigation, further selective exploration of the exterior façade was conducted. The strategy for this exterior exploration included cutting several vertically aligned holes through the current stucco skin. Each hole was approximately 16” x 16”, and provided a view back to a masonry substrate beyond. The location of these openings was selected to coincide with the sill and jamb of one of the in filled window openings already revealed by interior exploration, as well as one location at the top of the wall where an ornamental cornice would historically be found, and one location at the floor line where a sign band might historically be located. Our observation of these exterior exploratory openings indicates the current façade is constructed from an EIFS system consisting of a base and finish coat over ½” +/‐ expanded polystyrene over ½” +/‐ gypsum sheathing applied to 2 ½” metal furring studs set out 1 ½” from a masonry substrate. Beyond this layer of construction, visible portions of a previous façade appear to be covered by a trowelled fiber reinforced cement plaster applied directly to masonry substrates. Two small areas of plaster were removed to reveal both CMU and brick substrates, as was expected based on the in filled condition observed from prior interior exploration. This cement plaster was very well bonded to the substrate, and removal of a small area was difficult without damaging the underlying masonry. At and immediately beyond the locations investigated, the cement plaster surface appeared to be flush and without change in plane. This flush cement plaster surface appears to continue uninterrupted to the top of the wall, where it could be observed through an additional exploratory opening immediately below the parapet cap. From this limited exploration, there is no evidence of any original projecting masonry detailing at the sills, jambs or head of these windows, nor is there any evidence of a decorative cornice or band at the top of the wall. Refer to Photos B.5 ‐ B.8. Photo B.5: Two lower exploratory holes opened thru exterior façade in vicinity of window opening reveal cement plaster stucco applied direct to masonry substrate. Photo B.6: Lower exploratory whole with CMU substrate exposed below cement plaster stucco at lication of window opening infill. 1.2.a Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: 2014-10-15_worksession narrative (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) 6 2014-10-15_worksession narrative.docx Photo B.7: Lower exploratory hole with brick substrate exposed below cement plaster stucco at location beyond infilled window opening. No evidence of raised decorative brick or stone detailing visible within wall cavity. Photo B.8: Upper exploratory hole (viewed form above) at top of wall parapet. Plane of cement plaster stucco extends to top of wall with no eveidence of decorative features or cornice. Conclusions from Exploratory Research Based on our observations to date, it is our belief that the fabric of the current building facade does not presently possess significant historic or architectural value, and as such is not a contributing property, nor a candidate for historical preservation or rehabilitation. Without additional documentation of the possible form, character and detail of the original building that occupied the site, accurate restoration or reconstruction of significant original details, if any, would not be possible without considerable conjecture. 1.2.a Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: 2014-10-15_worksession narrative (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) 7 2014-10-15_worksession narrative.docx Old Town Historic District Design Standards The following summarizes our understanding and application of the recently adopted Old Town Historic Design Standards, and describes how the proposed design endeavors to address the intent of each guideline. Determination of “Track” and Applicability of Standards Based on the above assessment of the existing building, it is our conclusion that the Project is noncontributing and not restorable, and is thus subject to the “New Building Track” as described in the Old Town Historic District Design Standards: As such, the Project would be subject to the following sections of the Old Town Historic District Design Standards regarding building design: IV. Design Standards for All Properties V. Design Standards for New Construction VI. Design Standards for Signs Proposed Design The proposed new façade design for 242 Linden Street comprises a significantly reconstructed façade that incorporates design elements and quality materials that are evocative of and compatible with historically significant contributing properties in the district without invoking direct reproduction or mimicry. Compatibility will generally be achieved through appropriate alignment, scale, proportion, fenestration pattern, architectural character and detail. Proposed new façade design for 242 Linden Street, shown with awnings EXISTING BUILDING NONCONTRIBUTING NON-APPLICABLE NEW BUILDING TRACK 1.2.a Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: 2014-10-15_worksession narrative (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) 8 2014-10-15_worksession narrative.docx The palette of proposed materials includes: Modular clay brick Integrally colored precast concrete base, sills and lintels and trim Baked color aluminum clad wood window and door systems Painted wood or composite trim elements Painted steel lintels and ornamental accent features Simple fabric awnings over ground level storefront Simple painted metal patio rail The following sections summarize how the proposed Project endeavors to address the intent of each design standard. Items designated with a check mark have been considered in the proposed design, and those marked “N/A” have been deemed not applicable to the Project. The left column provides the guideline number and design standard directly from the Old Town Historic District Design Standards, and the right column provides further explanation of how the Project intends to meet each standard. IV. Design Standards for All Properties Awnings and Canopies N/A 4.1 Preserve traditional canopies No existing traditional canopies 4.2 Install an awning or canopy to fit the opening and be in character with the building Simple sloping canvas awnings matched to opening widths are proposed 4.3 Design an awning or canopy with colors and materials that are durable and compatible with the structure. Canvas awnings are proposed Street Layout 4.4 Retain the historic network of streets and alleys. Network of streets and alleys is maintained as public circulation space and has not been enclosed or closed to public access Outdoor Use Areas N/A 4.5 A small public plaza or courtyard shall contain features to promote and enhance its use. No public plaza or courtyard spaces are proposed N/A 4.6 Locate a raised dining area (deck) to minimize visual impacts to the street. No raised dining areas are proposed 1.2.a Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: 2014-10-15_worksession narrative (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) 9 2014-10-15_worksession narrative.docx 4.7 Locate an at‐grade dining area to minimize impacts on the streetscape. At grade dining area is located in a public ROW in a street wall context, clearly defined by a railing Handrails and Enclosures 4.8 A railing shall be simple in design Proposed railing consists of simple painted metal design and is transparent in its overall character Art and Historic Properties N/A 4.9 Public art shall be compatible with the historic context No public art is proposed N/A 4.10 An art installation on a historic property shall be compatible with the resource. No art installations are proposed Site Lighting 4.11 Shield lighting to prevent off‐site glare Shielded source light fixtures utilizing cut off shielding to direct light downward are proposed 4.12 A light fixture must be in character with the setting Proposed fixtures are compatible with historic context 4.13 Use lighting to accent Lighting in used to accent building entrance, signs and to illuminate sidewalk 4.14 Minimize the visual impact of architectural lighting Proposed light fixtures are appropriate to the building and its surroundings in terms of style, finish, scale and intensity of illumination 4.15 Use shielded and focused light sources to prevent glare Proposed fixtures will be low intensity and direct light downward Service Areas 4.16 Minimize the visual impacts of a service area Service entrance and service areas are oriented toward a service lane and away from public streets 4.17 Position a service area to minimize conflicts with other abutting uses An alley is utilized for service areas. No noise impacts are anticipated Surface parking 4.18 Minimize the visual impact of surface parking Limited potential parking is oriented to the rear of the lot 1.2.a Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: 2014-10-15_worksession narrative (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) 10 2014-10-15_worksession narrative.docx N/A 4.19 Site a surface lot so it will minimize gaps in the continuous building wall of a commercial block Not applicable N/A 4.20 Provide a visual buffer where a surface lot abuts a public way Not applicable N/A 4.21 Provide a visual buffer along the edge of a parking lot or service area Not applicable Building Equipment 4.22 Minimize the visual impacts of building equipment on the public way and the district as a whole New rooftop equipment will be placed on the lower back portion of the building away from the primary façade. Where feasible, utility lines and junction boxes will be grouped on the rear wall. An existing gas meter on the front of the building cannot be relocated and will be painted to match the background color. 4.23 Install mechanical equipment to minimize the impacts on historic fabric New mechanical equipment will be installed on the lower back portion of the roof away from the primary façade and will not impact important architectural features Building Equipment N/A 4.24 Minimize the visual impact of security devices No security devices are anticipated N/A 4.25 Do not damage the character of the historic building when installing a security device No security devices are anticipated Color 4.26 The façade shall read as a single composition Color scheme is simple in character, using one base color for the walls and one to three accent colors for trim elements 4.27 Base or background colors shall be muted Proposed building features are muted with trim accents are contrasting color or harmonizing color. Proposed accent colors read as part of the composition. Bright, high‐intensity colors are not 1.2.a Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: 2014-10-15_worksession narrative (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) 11 2014-10-15_worksession narrative.docx used. Matt, low luster and non‐reflective finishes are proposed (with the exception of glazing systems) 4.28 Building elements shall be finished in a manner similar to that seen traditionally Proposed treatments include unpainted brick, integrally colored precast concrete, baked color aluminum clad wood windows and doors Archeological Resources N/A 4.29 Leave archeological resources in place, to the maximum extent feasible No archeological resources are known or anticipated V. Design Standards for New Construction Building Placement and Orientation 5.1 Maintain the alignment of building fronts along the street The proposed reconstructed façade is located to reflect the established patterns along the block and conforms to the alignment of a uniform street wall. 5.2 Maintain the traditional pattern of buildings facing the street A clearly identifiable, recessed primary entry is located to face the street Architectural Character and Detail 5.3 Design a new building to express its own time while remaining compatible with the historic district Proposed building is compatible with historic district without using mimicry or exact imitation 5.4 An interpretation of a historic style that is authentic to the district will be considered if it is subtly distinguishable as being new Proposed building is compatible with historic district without using mimicry or exact imitation 5.5 Incorporate traditional façade articulation techniques in a new design Proposed façade design includes: a tall first floor vertically proportioned upper story windows horizontal expression elements including belt course, moldings and cornice projecting vertical pilasters a similar ratio of solid wall to window area a base, middle and a cap 1.2.a Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: 2014-10-15_worksession narrative (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) 12 2014-10-15_worksession narrative.docx Building Mass, Scale and Height 5.6 Convey the traditional size of historic buildings in a new construction as it is perceived at street level Height of proposed building at street frontage is within the height range established in the context, and floor to floor heights appear similar to those of traditional buildings 5.7 The overall height of a new building shall be compatible with the historic district Height of propose building is compatible with the historic district N/A 5.8 Provide variation in the building height when a new building is substantially wider than historic buildings in the district Building does not significantly exceed width of other buildings in the district N/A 5.9 Maintain the scale of traditional building widths in the context Building does not significantly exceed width of other buildings in the district 5.10 Establish a sense of human scale in a building design Proposed design expresses each floor in the external skin and establishes a scale similar to historic buildings in the district. Material convey a sense of scale in their proportion, detail and form and architectural details are in scale with the building Building and Roof Forms 5.11 Use simple, rectangular building forms Proposed design uses building forms similar to traditional forms and roof forms similar to those seen traditionally in the district Entrances 5.12 Orient a primary entrance towards the street Primary entrance is oriented towards street and designed to convey a sense of scale and provide visual interest 5.13 Maintain the pattern created by recessed entryways Doors in proposed design are setback an adequate amount to establish a distinct threshold for pedestrians, and building line at the sidewalk edge is maintained by the upper floor. Transom above doorway maintains full vertical height of storefront 1.2.a Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: 2014-10-15_worksession narrative (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) 13 2014-10-15_worksession narrative.docx Materials 5.14 Use building materials that appear similar in scale, color, texture and finish to those seen historically in the district Proposed building materials appear similar to those seen historically in the district and proven durable and able to withstand ongoing contact with the public: modular dimension clay brick integrally colored precast concrete baked color aluminum clad wood windows and doors painted wood or composite trims painted steel Windows 5.15 A contemporary storefront design is permitted if it reinforces the visual characteristics of the district. Proposed design incorporates a ground floor storefront with transom and primary entrance using elements similar in profile and depth of detailing seen historically. A bifolding door system is proposed to allow for an open transition for patrons from the interior to the patio. This system precludes the incorporation of a traditional kickplate detail 5.16 Arrange windows to reflect the traditional rhythm and general alignment of others in the district Proposed design uses window rhythms and alignments similar to traditional buildings, such as: vertically proportioned (to the extent accommodated by the existing roof height) single or sets of punched windows sills, headers and rows of windows horizontally aligned 5.17 Use durable window materials Proposed design incorporates baked color aluminum clad wood windows (30 year finish warranty) Energy Efficiency in New Designs N/A 5.18 Locate a new building, or an addition, to take advantage of microclimate opportunities for energy conservation, while avoiding negative impacts to the historic context Remodel only is proposed – no new building or addition 1.2.a Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: 2014-10-15_worksession narrative (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) 14 2014-10-15_worksession narrative.docx 5.19 Design a building, or an addition, to take advantage of energy savings and generating opportunities To the extent feasible, the proposed façade renovation will increase daylighting and incorporate awnings as traditionally configured for shading Energy Efficiency in Building Massing N/A 5.20 Shape a building’s mass to maximize solar energy potential. Remodel only is proposed – no opportunity to affect building’s mass N/A 5.21 Orient a building to maximize green principles while ensuring compatibility with adjacent, lower‐scale structures. Remodel only is proposed – no opportunity to affect building’s orientation Environmental Performance in Building Elements 5.22 Use green building materials whenever possible Regionally manufactured brick and and precast elements, and low maintenance/long life span materials are proposed. 5.23 Incorporate building elements that allow for natural environmental control Operable windows are proposed for second floor; bifolding wall is proposed at ground floor storefront onto patio. New façade will be constructed using best practice insulating and air sealing methods Solar and Wind Energy Devices N/A 4.24 Minimize the visual impact of energy devices on the character of Old Town No energy devices are proposed VI. Design Standards for Signs Treatment of Historic Signs N/A 6.1 Consider history, context and design when determining whether to retain a sign. A sign shall be retained when the sign is No historic signs N/A 6.2 Leave a historic wall sign visible No historic signs N/A 6.3 Do not over restore a historic wall sign No historic signs 1.2.a Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: 2014-10-15_worksession narrative (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) 15 2014-10-15_worksession narrative.docx Sign Installation on a Historic Building N/A 6.4 Do not damage or obscure architectural details or other building features when installing a sign No historic building N/A 6.5 A sign shall not obscure character defining features of a historic building No historic building Design of New and Modified Signs 6.6 A sign shall be subordinate to the overall building composition Anticipated tenant signage will be oriented and designed to be subordinate to the overall building composition 6.7 Sign materials shall be compatible with the architectural character and materials of the building Anticipated tenant signage will include internally illuminated channel letters compatible with the material and color palette of the building 6.8 Use simple typeface design Anticipated tenant signage will use a single, simple, legible typeface 6.9 Use colors that contribute to legibility and design integrity Anticipated tenant signage will use limited colors that contribute to legibility and design integrity 6.10 Using a symbol for a sign is permitted Anticipated tenant signage may include a symbol in lieu of text Design of Specific Sign Types 6.11 An awning sign shall be compatible with the building An awning sign may be considered, dependent upon tenant needs N/A 6.12 Design an interpretive sign to be simple in character No interpretive sign is anticipated N/A 6.13 Mural content shall be appropriate to the district and its environs. No murals are anticipated N/A 6.14 When used, a mural shall be incorporated as an element of the overall building design No murals are anticipated N/A 6.15 The application of a mural shall not No murals are anticipated 1.2.a Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: 2014-10-15_worksession narrative (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) 16 2014-10-15_worksession narrative.docx damage historic materials N/A 6.16 Use a tenant panel or directory sign to consolidate small individual signs on a larger building No tenant panel or directory signs are anticipated 6.17 Design a bracket for a projecting/under‐canopy sign to complement the sign composition A projecting sign and bracket may be used to identify a sub‐tenant, such as a coffee shop 6.18 Locate a projecting/under‐canopy sign to relate to the building facade and entries A projecting sign and bracket may be used to identify a sub‐tenant, such as a coffee shop, and would be placed near the entry to relate to their location in the building N/A 6.19 Place a flush wall sign to promote design compatibility among buildings No flush wall signs are anticipated N/A 6.20 Place a flush wall sign close to the building wall. No flush wall signs are anticipated 6.21 Design a window sign to minimize the amount of window covered. If window signs are desired by the tenant, they shall be designed to minimize the amount of window covered N/A 6.22 A sign kiosk is prohibited within the district. No kiosk signs are anticipated N/A 6.23 Include a compatible, shielded light source to illuminate a sign Anticipated signage will be internally illuminated 6.24 If internal illumination is used, it shall be designed to be subordinate to the overall building composition Anticipated signage will be oriented to be subordinate to the overall building Building signage will be developed in the near future in conjunction with the tenant, with the intent that all signage conform to the above guidelines. The following are examples of typical signage utilized by this tenant on past projects which may be considered here: 1.2.a Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: 2014-10-15_worksession narrative (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) 17 2014-10-15_worksession narrative.docx Summary It is our opinion that the proposed new façade for 242 Linden Street represents an appropriate and compatible design approach that is consistent with the character of the District and surrounding buildings, including recognition of the scale, pattern and detailing of other buildings in the District. We believe the completed Project will contribute positively to the visual character of the District while modernizing the building’s structure and revitalizing the space to meet the needs of a new era of tenants and users. Sincerely, Jeffrey Errett, AIA Principal, The Architects’ Studio Attachments: Exterior Façade Studies; CONCEPT ‐ Without Awnings, 10.15.2014 Exterior Façade Studies; CONCEPT ‐ With Awnings, 10.15.2014 Exterior Façade Studies; CONCEPT ‐ PLAN, 10.15.2014 1.2.a Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: 2014-10-15_worksession narrative (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) Exterior Facade Studies CONCEPT - Without Awnings 242 LINDEN STREET 10.15.2014 242 Linden Street East Linden Streetscape BAKED COLOR ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOWS AND DOORS MODULAR CLAY BRICK VENEER CAST OR BUILT-UP COMPOSITE CORNICE ORNAMENTAL STEEL, PAINTED BUILT-UP STEEL LINTEL, PAINTED PAINTED METAL PATIO RAILING INTEGRALLY COLORED PRECAST BASE SHIELDED, LOW OUTPUT LIGHT FIXTURE 1.2.a Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: 2014-10-15_worksession narrative (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) Exterior Facade Studies CONCEPT - With Awnings 242 LINDEN STREET 10.15.2014 242 Linden Street East Linden Streetscape BAKED COLOR ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOWS AND DOORS MODULAR CLAY BRICK VENEER CAST OR BUILT-UP COMPOSITE CORNICE ORNAMENTAL STEEL, PAINTED BUILT-UP STEEL LINTEL, PAINTED PAINTED METAL PATIO RAILING INTEGRALLY COLORED PRECAST BASE SHIELDED, LOW OUTPUT LIGHT FIXTURE FABRIC AWNING 1.2.a Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: 2014-10-15_worksession narrative (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) Exterior Facade Studies CONCEPT - PLAN 242 LINDEN STREET 10.15.2014 STEP DN MAIN ENTRY OUTDOOR SEATING OUTDOOR SEATING BI-FOLD DOORS BIKE RACKS STORAGE 1.2.a Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: 2014-10-15_worksession narrative (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) Exterior Facade Studies CONCEPT - Without Awnings 242 LINDEN STREET 10.15.2014 242 Linden Street East Linden Streetscape BAKED COLOR ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOWS AND DOORS MODULAR CLAY BRICK VENEER CAST OR BUILT-UP COMPOSITE CORNICE ORNAMENTAL STEEL, PAINTED BUILT-UP STEEL LINTEL, PAINTED PAINTED METAL PATIO RAILING INTEGRALLY COLORED PRECAST BASE SHIELDED, LOW OUTPUT LIGHT FIXTURE 1.2.b Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: 242 Elevation Studies_layout_LPC Work Session_10152014 (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) Exterior Facade Studies CONCEPT - With Awnings 242 LINDEN STREET 10.15.2014 242 Linden Street East Linden Streetscape BAKED COLOR ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOWS AND DOORS MODULAR CLAY BRICK VENEER CAST OR BUILT-UP COMPOSITE CORNICE ORNAMENTAL STEEL, PAINTED BUILT-UP STEEL LINTEL, PAINTED PAINTED METAL PATIO RAILING INTEGRALLY COLORED PRECAST BASE SHIELDED, LOW OUTPUT LIGHT FIXTURE FABRIC AWNING 1.2.b Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: 242 Elevation Studies_layout_LPC Work Session_10152014 (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) Exterior Facade Studies CONCEPT - PLAN 242 LINDEN STREET 10.15.2014 STEP DN MAIN ENTRY OUTDOOR SEATING OUTDOOR SEATING BI-FOLD DOORS BIKE RACKS STORAGE 1.2.b Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: 242 Elevation Studies_layout_LPC Work Session_10152014 (2514 : 242 Linden Street - Review of New Façade Proposal) Agenda Item 3 Item # 3 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 22, 2014 Landmark Preservation Commission STAFF Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Planner SUBJECT Bobcat Ridge Poultry Shed and Equipment Shed Rehabilitation EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to hear an update on proposed work to the Bobcat Ridge Poultry Shed and Equipment Shed, a City-owned historic property designated on the State Register of Historic Properties. The project has received a State Historical Fund grant for the work. STAFF RECOMMENDATION BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION PUBLIC OUTREACH ATTACHMENTS 1. 17025_Bobcat Ridge_Schematic Design Submittal 101514 (PDF) 2. 141016 - BOBCAT RIDGE 2 - SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL - ALM_1434 (PDF) 1.3 Packet Pg. 36 Loc'n of Bend In Bent Beam Connection Fully Welded Moment Hanger Beam Column Mark Wide Flange Column, Column Mark Tube Steel Column, Joist Bearing Elevation Top of Steel Elevation Masonry Elevation Top of Concrete or Step In Floor Elevation Top of Floor Elevation or Anchor Bolts Pilaster W/ Special Reinf. Pier Penetration Drilled Pier, Pier Mark Footing Step Footing Mark Footing Elevation Grid Designation Revision Shear Wall Brick Ledge Rigid Frame Brace CMU Brick CIP Concrete Precast Concrete Wood Earth Shoring Roof Slope Direction of Slope Stair or Ramp Direction Direction of Deck Panels On Center Spacing Center Line Plate Existing New To Be Removed No. of Headed Anchor Studs Stressing End Anchor Deadend Anchor Intermediate Anchor RX {X} Symbols Key Bx RFx BL XXX'-X GRID JB XX'-X [XXX'-X] XXX'-X (XXX'-X) NEW HELICAL PIER P (SERVICE) =1,000 LBS P (SERVICE) =1,000 LBS D S STRUCTURAL NOTE: FIELD VERIFY CONDITION OF COLUMN BASES AND SILL PLATES, TYPICAL COLUMN BASES AND SILLS WITH SIGNIFICANT DECAY WILL BE REPLACED (N) 6"x6" COLUMN DOUG-FIR #2 OR BETTER W/ CONCEALED COLUMN BASE PL NEW 18"Ø PIER EXTEND 3'-0 BELOW FINISH GRADE REINF W/ (4) #4 VERT & #3 TIES @ 12" AND (2) IN TOP 6" (N) 6"x6" COLUMN DOUG-FIR #2 OR BETTER W/ CONCEALED COLUMN BASE PL HB NOTE: CHANNELS OR PILASTERS ADDED TO PROVIDE LATERAL STABILITY NOT SHOWN FOR CLARITY. SEE ELEVATIONS FOR LOCATIONS. PILASTERS OR CHANNELS WILL BE ADDED TO PLAN AND DIMENSIONED IN CD PHASE 2 S4.2 2'-0" 8" 8" 8" 2 NEW 8" CMU STEM WALL AND CONCRETE STRIP FOOTING 1 S4.2 2'-0" 8" 8" 8" EXISTING 4" CMU WALL TO REMAIN EXISTING 4" CMU WALL TO REMAIN 10 S4.2 OPTION A 9 S4.2 OPTION B 2x4's @ 24" DOUG-FIR #2 OR BETTER (3) 2x10 BEAM DOUG-FIR #2 OR BETTER ROOF DECKING TO MATCH EXISTING HB 6" DOUBLE 2x4 (1 3/4" x 3 3/4") OVER INTERIOR SHEAR WALLS (E) SINGLE 2x4's @ 24" (1 3/4"x3 3/4") (E) SINGLE 2x4's @ 24" (1 3/4"x3 3/4") (E) SINGLE 2x4's @ 24" (1 3/4"x3 3/4"), SISTER NEW IN KIND 2X4 TO EA MEMBER W/(2) 10d NAILS RE-USE EXISTING 4" THICK CMU BLOCK C4x5.4 C4x5.4 C4x5.4 C4x5.4 C4x5.4 2x6, DOUG-FIR #2 OR EQUAL C4x5.4 EXISTING CHICKEN WIRE ON WINDOWS. SEE ARCH FOR REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENTS (2)2"x4" HEM-FIR #2 OR EQUAL W/SPACERS @ 1/3 PTS C4x5.4 C4x5.4 S4.2 5 3 S4.2 2 S4.2 6 S4.2 4 S4.2 C4x5.4 C4x5.4 C4x5.4 C4x5.4 C4x5.4 2x6, HEM FIR #2 OR EQUAL C4x5.4 (2)2"x4" HEM-FIR #2 OR EQUAL W/SPACERS @ 1/3 PTS C4x5.4 C4x5.4 S4.2 5 2 S4.2 6 S4.2 4 HEAD & SILL WOOD PLATES S4.2 TO BE RE-USED ALL 2x6 MULLIONS TO BE RE-USED OR REPLACED IN KIND WITH DOUG-FIR #2 OR BETTER SUGGESTED SEQUENCE 1. SHORE EXISTING ROOF ON THE INTERIOR SIDE OF THE EXISTING CMU WALL. LOCATE SHORING LINE SUCH THAT NEW FOOTING & STEM WALL CAN BE INSTALLED. 2. INSTALL NEW STRIP FOOTING & STEM WALL PER DETAIL 3. INSTALL NEW C4 VERTICAL CHANNELS, TOP PLATE, DIAGONAL BRACES, AND HURRICANE ANCHORS. 4. REBUILD 4" CMU WALL RE-USING EXISTING 4" CMU. TIE WALL TO CHANNELS PER DETAIL 6/S4.2. NOTE THAT 4" CMU WILL IS STILL DESIGNED TO SUPPORT GRAVITY LOADS. THEREFORE, ROOF JOISTS MUST BEAR ON CMU WALL TOP PLATE. HEAD PLATE, AND SILL PLATE. 5. AS PART OF WALL REBUILD, RE-USE ALL EXISTING 2x6 MULLIONS UNLESS SIGNIFICANTLY DECAYED. RE-USE EXISTING 4" THICK CMU BLOCK EXISTING CHICKEN WIRE ON WINDOWS. SEE ARCH FOR REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENTS HEAD & SILL WOOD PLATES TO BE RE-USED ALL 2x6 MULLIONS TO BE RE-USED OR REPLACED IN KIND WITH DOUG-FIR #2 OR BETTER TYP 1'-8" 8 S4.2 TYP 9 S4.2 9 S4.2 8 S4.2 TYP AT PILASTER 10 S4.2 10 S4.2 AT PILASTER SUGGESTED SEQUENCE 1. SHORE EXISTING ROOF ON THE INTERIOR SIDE OF THE EXISTING CMU WALL. LOCATE SHORING LINE SUCH THAT NEW FOOTING & STEM WALL CAN BE INSTALLED. 2. INSTALL NEW STRIP FOOTING & STEM WALL PER DETAIL 3. INSTALL NEW PILASTERS INTEGRAL WITH REBUILT CMU WALL 4. REBUILD 4" CMU WALL RE-USING EXISTING 4" CMU. TIE WALL TO PILASTERS PER DETAIL 8/S4.2. 5. AS PART OF WALL REBUILD, RE-USE ALL EXISTING 2x6 MULLIONS UNLESS SIGNIFICANTLY DECAYED. REPLACE DECAYED MEMBERS W/ #2 DOUG-FIR OR BETTER OPTION B - LATERALLY REINFORCING SOUTH WALL W/ MASONRY PILASTERS 0 1/2" 1" 2" 5 4 3 2 1 A B C D PROJECT DATE DRAWN 712 WHALERS WAY SUITE, B-100 FORT COLLINS, CO 80525 (970) 223-1820 www.aller-lingle-massey.com PRINTED FILE NAME: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION JVA #17025 SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL 10/15/2014 10:32:33 AM Project Status ELEVATIONS-OPTION B 17025 HMH 10/15/2014 S4.1B SHF GRANT PROJECT - 2014-050 2'-0" 1'-0" #4 x 1'-6 @ 5'-0 T&B (3) #4 CONT T&B RE-USE EXISTING 4" CMU CONT 2x8 PT NAILER SIMPSON H3 HURRICANE ANCHOR, EA JOIST PAIR, CONCEAL W/BLOCKING GROUT ALL CELLS SOLID #4 VERTS @ 16" LADDER TYPE JT REINFORCE @ 16" BOND BEAM W/2-#4 CONT REPLACE EXISTING CONC SLAB AS REQ'D CONT 2X WD BLOCKING - PLACE TO CONCEAL SIMPSON ANCHOR 10d NAILS @ 6" C/C @ BEARING & @ 12" C/C IN FIELD 5/8" Ø x 0'-8" HEADED BOLTS @ EA END & @ 48" C/C EXISTING CONCRETE SLAB TO REMAIN RE-USED EXISTING 4" CMU ABOVE GRADE NOTE: FINISH EXTERIOR GRADE VARIES. COORD W/ARCH ELEVATIONS 2'-0" 8" 8" 8" 1'-0" (3) #4 CONT RE-USE EXISTING 4" CMU AS VENEER RE-USE EXISTING STONE AS VENEER ABOVE GRADE ALIGN OUTSIDE EDGE OF NEW 8" CMU WITH CURRENT INSIDE FACE OF (E) STONE VENEER & (E) 4" CMU FIELD VERIFY CONFIGURATION MASONRY TIES @ 16" C4x5.4, SEE ELEVATIONS (2) 3/4"Ø F1554 THREADED RODS. EMBED 6". INSTALL WITH HILTI RE-500 EPOXY REPLACE EXISTING SLAB AS REQUIRED GROUT ALL CELLS SOLID #4 VERTS @ 24" (1) #4 x 1'-6 @ 5'-0 6" NOTE: FINISH EXTERIOR GRADE VARIES. COORDINATE W/ARCH ELEVATIONS EXISTING SOG TO REMAIN NEW 4" CMU BELOW GRADE 3" 3" C4x5.4 & BASE PL1/2"x6x0'-6, SEE PLAN EXIST. 2 COURSES OF CINDER BLOCK UNDER WD. FRAMED WALL EXIST. SLOPED CONCRETE STOOP EXIST. (2) 2x4 CROSS SUPPORT MEMBERS EXIST. DOUBLE 2x4 POST - (TYP.) EXIST. 1x6 & 1x4 VERTICAL LUMBER DOORS W/ VERTICAL CORRUGATED METAL PANEL EXIST. TRIPLE 2x6 POST W2 ST2 ST1 W1 W1 S1 R4 S3 S3 S2 R3 ST3 19'-4" 20'-0" 19'-4" 20'-0" 53 /4 51 9'-4" " /2 5 9'-3" " 3/ 4" 9'-71 /2 " 9'-5" 9'-61 /4 " 3 1/ 2" 9'-6 1/ 4" 9'-61 /4 " 31 /2 " 9'-61 /4 " 1 A1.2 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 A1.2 1/4" = 1'-0" 3 A1.2 1/4" = 1'-0" 4 A1.2 1/4" = 1'-0" EXIST. VERTICAL GALV. CORRUGATED METAL PANELS WOOD AWNING POST HORIZONTAL WOOD EXIST. EXPOSED POST SUPPORT WD. 2x4 RAFTER TAILS EXIST. GALV. CORRUGATED METAL ROOF EXIST. HORIZONTAL WOOD PLANK ROOF DECKING WOOD AWNING POST EXPOSED AWNING SUPPORTS EXIST. EXPOSED WD 2x4 RAFTER TAILS 24" O.C. EXIST. VERTICAL GALV. CORRUGATED METAL PANELS EQUIPMENT SHED SOUTHWEST ELEVATION EQUIPMENT SHED NORTHEAST ELEVATION EQUIPMENT SHED SOUTHEAST ELEVATION EQUIPMENT SHED NORTHWEST ELEVATION EXIST. OPERABLE LATCHES W2 R4 R1 W1 W1 R3 ST1 R2 R3 R3 W1 W1 S1 S1 S1 S3 S3 R1 ST3 R1 R1 ST3 - --- Sim GENERAL PRESERVATION NOTES: 2 S4.2 1 S4.2 10 S4.2 EXIST. 6" STL. POST LINE OF TEMPORARY SHORING TO SUPPORT ROOF UP 2R UP 3R EXIST. 6" STL. POST TEMP. BRACING INSTALLED TO REINFORCE CMU WALL EXIST. WINDOW OPENINGS EXIST. 3-1/2" WOOD POST - (TYP.) EXIST. 3-1/2" WOOD POST - (TYP.) EXIST. WOOD ROOF SUPPORT BEAMS EXIST. EMP. HORIZONTAL SUPPORTS (TYP) EXIST. 2'-10”x6'- 4", BARN STYLE DOOR W/1x6 ROUGH SAWN WD. EXIST. CONCRETE STOOP EXIST. CONCRETE STEPS EXIST. CONCRETE STEP 3'-0"x6'-4" BARN STYLE DOOR W/ 1x6 ROUGH SAWN WD. EXIST. 2x4 WD. FRAMED WALL EXIST. 2x4 WD. FRAMED WALL 3'-9x6'-4" BARN STYLE DOOR W/ 1x6 ROUGH SAWN WD. - PAINTED 2'-10"X6'-4" BARN STYLE DOOR W/ 6-1/2" PAINTED SIDING MATERIAL EXIST. 2'-10"x6'-4" BARN STYLE DOOR W/ 1x6 ROUGH SAWN WD. CLADDING 6" 7' - 2" 7' - 5" 6' - 0 5/8" 2' - 4 3/8" C2 3 S4.2 2 S4.2 4 S4.2 6 S4.2 5 S4.2 2 S4.2 4 S4.2 6 S4.2 5 S4.2 2 A2.2 1/8" = 1'-0" 1 A2.2 1/8" = 1'-0" 3 A2.2 1/8" = 1'-0" 4 A2.2 1/8" = 1'-0" EXIST. 2'-10"x6'-4" BARN STYLE DOOR W/ 1x6 ROUGH SAWN WD. CLADDING EXIST. 4" THICK CINDER BLOCK EXIST. CHICKEN WIRE ON WINDOWS EXIST. WOOD FASCIA BOARD EXIST. 1x4 WOOD TRIM BOARD ON WINDOW AND DOORS TEMP.BRACING INSTALLED TO REINFORCE CMU WALL PLYWOOD AWNING @ DOORWAY (MISSING) EXIST. CONCRETE STEPS EXIST. GALV. CORRUGATED METAL ROOF EXIST. NORTHEAST "4 CINDER BLOCK WALL HAS FALLEN IN, SUPPORTED BY NEW FRAMING EXIST. 1"x4" WOOD TRIM BOARD ON WINDOW AND DOORS TEMP. BRACING INSTALLED TO REINSTALL CMU WALL PLYWOOD AWNING @ DOORWAY (MISSING) EXIST. CONCRETE STEPS PLYWOOD 1 S4.2 10 S4.2 9 S4.2 8 S4.2 9 S4.2 10 S4.2 10 S4.2 9 S4.2 8 S4.2 EXIST. 6" STL. POST LINE OF TEMPORARY SHORING TO SUPPORT ROOF UP 2R UP 3R EXIST. 6" STL. POST TEMP. BRACING INSTALLED TO REINFORCE CMU WALL EXIST. WINDOW OPENINGS EXIST. 3-1/2" WOOD POST - (TYP.) EXIST. 3-1/2" WOOD POST - (TYP.) EXIST. WOOD ROOF SUPPORT BEAMS EXIST. EMP. HORIZONTAL SUPPORTS (TYP) EXIST. 2'-10”x6'- 4", BARN STYLE DOOR W/1x6 ROUGH SAWN WD. EXIST. CONCRETE STOOP EXIST. CONCRETE STEPS EXIST. CONCRETE STEP 3'-0"x6'-4" BARN STYLE DOOR W/ 1x6 ROUGH SAWN WD. EXIST. 2x4 WD. FRAMED WALL EXIST. 2x4 WD. FRAMED WALL 3'-9x6'-4" BARN STYLE DOOR W/ 1x6 ROUGH Agenda Item 4 Item # 4 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 22, 2014 Landmark Preservation Commission STAFF Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Planner SUBJECT Landmark Residences on Mountain Avenue - Revised Architecture EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This item is to follow-up on the Commission's previous review of this project at its September 24 work session. The applicants have revised their architecture and are seeking any further Commission comments, with the goal of receiving a Final Recommendation at the November 12 regular meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATION BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION PUBLIC OUTREACH ATTACHMENTS 1. Elevation modification narrative_10.08.14 (PDF) 2. South_Elevation_10-08-2014 (PDF) 1.4 Packet Pg. 47 Strength in design. Strength in partnership. Strength in community. VAUGHT FRYE LARSON architects 401 W Mountain Ave Fort Collins, CO 970.224.1191 211 West 19 th Street Cheyenne, WY 307.635.5710 w w w . t h e a r t o f c o n s t r u c t i o n . c o m October 8, 2014 Karen McWilliams Historic Preservation Planner 281 North College Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 To Ms. McWilliams and the members of the Landmark Preservation Commission: At the LPC work session on September 24th, we presented the proposed elevations for the Landmark Residences on Mountain Avenue located at 1032 W. Mountain Avenue. Some of the feedback we received is as follows: • The elevations showed different colors, windows, dormers, and porches at each townhome. LPC members indicated that they would prefer to see a more consistent building design with similar materials and colors throughout the units. • It was commented that the mass and height of the building seemed too large for this location. LPC members suggested that a variety in the height of the units that simulates the variety of building heights that exist along Mountain Avenue would be preferable. • In a similar vein, members indicated that a variety of sizes of units could add visual interest to the proposed buildings. We are happy to present a revised proposed south elevation that responds to the comments above in the following ways. • The building has been redesigned to be more consistent with materials, colors, and design features. References to historic shapes and elements have been preserved but incorporated with more current colors and materials. • The building has been redesigned by eliminating the ½ story at the center two units, thus lowering the ridge height by 9 feet. The easternmost unit was also lowered by eliminating the ½ story. This change in roof height simulates the variety that exists along Mountain Avenue and reduces the mass of the building. Half of the six units are now two- stories tall. • By redesigning and reducing mass, the units now provide a variety of features. The two center units have an optional roof deck or room above the garages on the north side of the townhomes with an enclosed circulation space. The easternmost unit now can accommodate 2 bedrooms and an office loft on the second floor by moving the master bedroom north over the family room on the first floor. We look forward to your comments at the upcoming work session on October 22nd. If you have any questions or concerns prior to the meeting, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Andy Goldman 1.4.a Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Elevation modification narrative_10.08.14 (2535 : Landmark Residences on Mountain Avenue - Revised Architecture) 1.4.b Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: South_Elevation_10-08-2014 (2535 : Landmark Residences on Mountain Avenue - Revised Architecture) Agenda Item 5 Item # 5 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 22, 2014 Landmark Preservation Commission STAFF Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Planner SUBJECT Discussion of 2015 Landmark preservation Commission Work Plan EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to develop the Commission's 2015 Work Plan. The Commission's direction will then be incorporated into a document for adoption at the Commission's November 12 Regular Meeting. The 2014 Work Plan is attached for reference. STAFF RECOMMENDATION BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION PUBLIC OUTREACH ATTACHMENTS 1. LPC 2014 Work Plan (DOCX) 1.5 Packet Pg. 50 Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 970.416.2740 970.224.6134- fax fcgov.com Planning, Development & Transportation Services MEMORANDUM TO: Wanda Nelson, City Clerk FM: Ron Sladek, Chair, Landmark Preservation Commission RE: 2014 Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) Work Program In 2013, the Commission’s primary focus was on implementing the goals and actions resulting from the Historic Preservation Program Process Improvements Study, and aligning these improvements with the Historic Resources Preservation Program Plan, an element of City Plan. Previously, the Commission had identified as a priority the development of updated design standards for the Old Town Historic District. A State Historic Fund grant for this purpose was sought and received by Historic Preservation staff, and the project is currently underway. 2013 also marked the first full year of two re-instated preservation-related programs: the popular Design Assistance Program, which provides professional consultation on context sensitive design; and Voluntary Design Review offered to property owners by a subcommittee of the Commission. The Commission is already seeing the benefits of these two programs, in the quality of new design proposals for additions and alterations in the historic core neighborhoods. The Landmark Preservation Commission's 2014 Work Program consists of both continuing responsibilities and new projects. For 2014, the Commission has identified these goals to further City Council objectives: The Commission’s primary focus is on implementing the goals and actions identified as priorities by Council as a result of the recent Historic Preservation Improvements Study. A priority of Council and of the Commission is historic property survey. The survey of areas containing a preponderance of older buildings and structures results in proactively identifying those individual properties and potential districts of historic and architectural significance. The Commission has identified several areas that need to be surveyed as funding allows, including: o The West Side Neighborhood, including the Loomis Addition, City Park Neighborhood and the properties along Mountain Avenue and Oak Street, which are all areas facing substantial development and infill pressures; o Properties 40 years old and older likely to be affected by development along the MAX/BRT corridor; o Properties in the area surrounding Colorado State University; and o Commercial and residential properties in the Midtown area, with an emphasis on the University Acres, Indian Hills and College Heights neighborhoods. The Commission has requested that staff pursue funding to develop design guidelines and/or pattern books for new and infill construction in areas adjacent to historic districts and properties. 1.5.a Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: LPC 2014 Work Plan (2520 : Discussion of 2015 Landmark preservation Commission Work Plan) Landmark Preservation Commission 2014 Work Program Page 2 - 2 - The Commission has requested that staff pursue a study of an expansion of the Old Town Historic District, to provide financial incentives to the numerous designated and eligible historic properties in the Downtown Commercial Center which are already subject to Historic Preservation restrictions. Additional ongoing and special projects which will require Landmark Preservation Commission involvement in 2014 include: Incentives: Review applications to the Landmark Rehabilitation Loan Program. This program supports all three legs of the City’s triple bottom line. Community sustainability is promoted by enhancing the quality, livability and attractiveness of our neighborhoods; greening existing buildings is an effective tool for environmental stewardship; and financial sustainability is shown by the program’s ability to leverage funding at a ratio of nearly 1:4. Approve applicants for the Design Assistance Program, and comment upon or approve any changes to the program’s policies and guidelines. By incentivizing the use of pre-qualified professionals with experience in context-sensitive historic design, the DAP is enhancing the compatibility of alterations and new construction occurring in our historic neighborhoods. Participate in Complimentary Design Reviews of additions, alterations and infill construction in the core neighborhoods, helping owners and developers identify design issues at the preliminary stages of planning, and providing education and awareness of incentives to encourage compatible design. Landmark Designation and Design Review of Landmark Properties: Evaluate applications for individual and district landmark designation, and provide recommendations on eligibility to Council. At the end of 2013, Fort Collins could boast 264 Fort Collins Landmarks, 15 properties listed on the State Register, and 734 properties listed on both the National and State Registers. Final decision-making authority for design review of designated landmark buildings. In 2013, the Commission heard 42 proposals for significant alterations and additions to Landmark properties. Planning: Community character and quality neighborhoods are enhanced by ensuring compatible alterations and infill development supported by financial and design incentives. In 2014, the Commission will review and comment on issues affecting historic properties, particularly regarding implementation of City Plan redevelopment policies. Economic vitality is promoted through leveraging private investment: Owners can receive back up to 70% of their costs for renovation, leading to further reinvestment and more disposable income. In 2014, the Commission will continue its promotion of the nine existing incentive programs, and will investigate adding additional financial incentives for historic preservation. 1.5.a Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: LPC 2014 Work Plan (2520 : Discussion of 2015 Landmark preservation Commission Work Plan) Landmark Preservation Commission 2014 Work Program Page 3 - 3 - The adaptive re-use of historic buildings and the greening of existing buildings are effective tools for environmental stewardship. Many older buildings are remarkably energy efficient because of their site sensitivity, quality of construction, and use of passive heating and cooling, and can go green without compromising historic character. Renovating an existing building creates 30-50% less carbon emissions than new construction. In 2014, the Commission will participate in and provide funding towards model projects that promote sustainable historic preservation practices. Education and Awareness: In 2014, the Commission will focus its efforts to inform and educate the community on the long-term social, environmental and economic benefits of historic preservation through: Continue community outreach by providing technical information and education on the community-wide benefits of historic preservation, and by promoting financial incentives for historic preservation. Continue the "Friends of Preservation" award program. Facilitate communication with public and private business and development entities. Facilitate the Demolition/Alteration Review process, allowing citizen input on the demolition or alteration of non-designated properties fifty years old or older. Training: In 2014, the Commission will reaffirm its high standards for professionalism through ongoing training and education. Attendance at professional conferences and workshops, including Colorado Preservation Inc.’s annual conference, will be encouraged of all Commission members. Additionally, in 2014, several Commission members will be attending the 2014 National Alliance of Preservation Commissioner bi-annual conference, which offers valuable training and networking opportunities with historic commissions across the nation. cc: Landmark Preservation Commission Members Gino Campana, Council Liaison Darin Atteberry, City Manager Karen Cumbo, PDT Director Laurie Kadrich, CDNS Director 1.5.a Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: LPC 2014 Work Plan (2520 : Discussion of 2015 Landmark preservation Commission Work Plan) Agenda Item 6 Item # 6 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 22, 2014 Landmark Preservation Commission STAFF Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Planner SUBJECT Commission Members Updates EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is for Commission members to report upon recent events or activities they have attended, including the LPC Retreat; the DDA Retreat; and the Greeley Talk & Tour. STAFF RECOMMENDATION BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION PUBLIC OUTREACH 1.6 Packet Pg. 54 SAWN WD. - PAINTED 2'-10"X6'-4" BARN STYLE DOOR W/ 6-1/2" PAINTED SIDING MATERIAL EXIST. 2'-10"x6'-4" BARN STYLE DOOR W/ 1x6 ROUGH SAWN WD. CLADDING 6" 7' - 2" 7' - 5" 6' - 0 5/8" 2' - 4 3/8" C2 M5 C4 C2 M1 S4 S4 M3 S1 S2 S3 S2 M1 M2 ST2 R1 R2 ABOVE M5 W1 ST2 W1 W1 W2 W2 C1 C1 C5 C5 C3 C3 IN2 IN2 R1 RI CMU CAP CMU CAP 2 A2.3 1/8" = 1'-0" EXIST. 2'-10"x6'-4" BARN STYLE DOOR W/ 1x6 ROUGH SAWN WD. CLADDING EXIST. 4" THICK CINDER BLOCK EXIST. CHICKEN WIRE ON WINDOWS EXIST. WOOD FASCIA BOARD EXIST. 1x4 WOOD TRIM BOARD ON WINDOW AND DOORS TEMP.BRACING INSTALLED TO REINFORCE CMU WALL PLYWOOD AWNING @ DOORWAY (MISSING) EXIST. CONCRETE STEPS POULTRY SHED SOUTHWEST ELEVATION OPTION - B C2 S4 ST2 M1 C2 W1 W1 M1 R5 R4 R5 R4 W1 1/8" = 1'-0" POULTRY SHED PLAN OPTION - B 0 1/2" 1" 2" 5 4 3 2 1 A B C D PROJECT DATE DRAWN 712 WHALERS WAY SUITE, B-100 FORT COLLINS, CO 80525 (970) 223-1820 www.aller-lingle-massey.com PRINTED FILE NAME: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 10/16/2014 3:00:14 PM C ALLER-LINGLE-MASSEY 2014 0000-Project-SD.rvt POULTRY SHED PLAN AND ELEVATION OPTION - B 1434 Author 10/02/2014 A2.3 SHF GRANT PROJECT - 2014-01-050 CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO BOBCAT RIDGE 2 NO ISSUE DATE SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL N 1.3.b Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: 141016 - BOBCAT RIDGE 2 - SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL - ALM_1434 (2519 : Bobcat Ridge Poultry & Equipment Sheds Rehabilitation) AWNING @ DOORWAY (MISSING) POULTRY SHED SOUTHWEST ELEVATION OPTION - A POULTRY SHED NORTHWEST ELEVATION OPTIONS A & B POULTRY SHED SOUTHEAST ELEVATION OPTIONS A & B POULTRY SHED NORTHEAST ELEVATION OPTIONS A & B C2 C4 C2 S4 R5 R4 R5 R2 S3 M5 M5 S1 S1 S1 ST2 M1 C2 R5 R4 ST2 S2 ST2 R3 W1 W1 M1 R5 R4 R5 R4 W1 W2 W2 S5 S2 S2 R4 M1 M3 ST3 ST3 GENERAL PRESERVATION NOTES: 1. WORK FOR THE POULTRY SHED IS CONSIDERED A REHABILITATION PROJECT. ALL WORK SHALL BE DONE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR'S STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS. 2. ALL EXISTING MATERIALS AND HISTORIC FABRIC SHALL BE RETAINED AND PRESERVED , UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 3. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF EXISTING FRAMING MEMBER OR FACE OF EXISTING MASONRY, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 4.DISTURBANCE OF EXISTING SITE AND VEGETATION AROUND THE BUILDINGS SHALL BE MINIMIZED. 0 1/2" 1" 2" 5 4 3 2 1 A B C D PROJECT DATE DRAWN 712 WHALERS WAY SUITE, B-100 FORT COLLINS, CO 80525 (970) 223-1820 www.aller-lingle-massey.com PRINTED FILE NAME: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 10/16/2014 3:00:13 PM C ALLER-LINGLE-MASSEY 2014 0000-Project-SD.rvt POULTRY SHED ELEVATIONS OPTION A 1434 LER 10/02/2014 A2.2 SHF GRANT PROJECT - 2014-01-050 CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO BOBCAT RIDGE 2 NO ISSUE DATE SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL 1.3.b Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: 141016 - BOBCAT RIDGE 2 - SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL - ALM_1434 (2519 : Bobcat Ridge Poultry & Equipment Sheds Rehabilitation) M5 C4 C2 M1 S4 S4 M3 S1 S2 S3 S2 M1 M2 ST2 R1 R2 ABOVE M5 W1 ST2 W1 W1 W2 W2 C1 C1 C5 C5 C3 C3 IN1 IN1 IN2 IN2 R1 RI 24'-0" 1'-111 /2 " 3'-0" 19'-0 1/ 2" 71'-10" 36'-81 /2 " 35'-11 /2 " 24'-0" 2'-0" 2'-10" 19'-2" 71'-10" 6'-31 /8 " 23'-11 /2 " 1'-7 7/ 8" 1'-11" 4'-6" 1'-8" 1'-9" 1'-7 1/ 2" 23'-0 1/ 2" 6'-3 1/ 2" 7'-7 1/ 2" 12'-7" 7'-7 1/ 2" 6'-5" 6'-2" (F. VER.) (F. VER.) (F. VER.) (F. VER.) (F. VER.) (F. VER.) (F. VER.) (F. VER.) R3 R4 R5 R4 R5 GENERAL PRESERVATION NOTES: 1. WORK FOR THE POULTRY SHED IS CONSIDERED A REHABILITATION PROJECT. ALL WORK SHALL BE DONE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR'S STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS. 2. ALL EXISTING MATERIALS AND HISTORIC FABRIC SHALL BE RETAINED AND PRESERVED , UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 3. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF EXISTING FRAMING MEMBER OR FACE OF EXISTING MASONRY, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 4.DISTURBANCE OF EXISTING SITE AND VEGETATION AROUND THE BUILDINGS SHALL BE MINIMIZED. 0 1/2" 1" 2" 5 4 3 2 1 A B C D PROJECT DATE DRAWN 712 WHALERS WAY SUITE, B-100 FORT COLLINS, CO 80525 (970) 223-1820 www.aller-lingle-massey.com PRINTED FILE NAME: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 10/16/2014 2:58:31 PM C ALLER-LINGLE-MASSEY 2014 0000-Project-SD.rvt POULTRY SHED PLANS OPTION - A 1434 LER 10/02/2014 A2.1 SHF GRANT PROJECT - 2014-01-050 CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO BOBCAT RIDGE 2 NO ISSUE DATE N POULTRY SHED ROOF PLAN N POULTRY SHED PLAN OPTION A SCALE" 1/4" = 1'-0" SCALE" 1/4" = 1'-0" SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL 1.3.b Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: 141016 - BOBCAT RIDGE 2 - SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL - ALM_1434 (2519 : Bobcat Ridge Poultry & Equipment Sheds Rehabilitation) 1. WORK FOR THE EQUIPMENT SHED IS CONSIDERED A PRESERVATION PROJECT. ALL WORK SHALL BE DONE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR'S STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS. 2. ALL EXISTING MATERIALS AND HISTORIC FABRIC SHALL BE RETAINED AND PRESERVED , UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 3. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF EXISTING FRAMING MEMBER OR FACE OF EXISTING MASONRY, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 4.DISTURBANCE OF EXISTING SITE AND VEGETATION AROUND THE BUILDINGS SHALL BE MINIMIZED. 0 1/2" 1" 2" 5 4 3 2 1 A B C D PROJECT DATE DRAWN 712 WHALERS WAY SUITE, B-100 FORT COLLINS, CO 80525 (970) 223-1820 www.aller-lingle-massey.com PRINTED FILE NAME: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 10/16/2014 2:58:30 PM C ALLER-LINGLE-MASSEY 2014 0000-Project-SD.rvt EQUIPMENT SHED ELEVATIONS 1434 LER 10/02/2014 A1.2 SHF GRANT PROJECT - 2014-01-050 CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO BOBCAT RIDGE 2 NO ISSUE DATE SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL 1.3.b Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: 141016 - BOBCAT RIDGE 2 - SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL - ALM_1434 (2519 : Bobcat Ridge Poultry & Equipment Sheds Rehabilitation) (F. VER.) (F. VER.) (F. VER.) (F. VER.) (F. VER.) (F. VER.) (F. VER.) (F. VER.) (F. VER.) (F. VER.) (F. VER.) (F. VER.) 5' - 2" RIDGE R1 R2 R3 GENERAL PRESERVATION NOTES: 1. WORK FOR THE EQUIPMENT SHED IS CONSIDERED A PRESERVATION PROJECT. ALL WORK SHALL BE DONE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR'S STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS. 2. ALL EXISTING MATERIALS AND HISTORIC FABRIC SHALL BE RETAINED AND PRESERVED , UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 3. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF EXISTING FRAMING MEMBER OR FACE OF EXISTING MASONRY, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 4.DISTURBANCE OF EXISTING SITE AND VEGETATION AROUND THE BUILDINGS SHALL BE MINIMIZED. 0 1/2" 1" 2" 5 4 3 2 1 A B C D PROJECT DATE DRAWN 712 WHALERS WAY SUITE, B-100 FORT COLLINS, CO 80525 (970) 223-1820 www.aller-lingle-massey.com PRINTED FILE NAME: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 10/16/2014 2:58:30 PM C ALLER-LINGLE-MASSEY 2014 0000-Project-SD.rvt EQUIPMENT SHED PLANS 1434 LER 10/02/2014 A1.1 SHF GRANT PROJECT - 2014-01-050 CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO BOBCAT RIDGE 2 NO ISSUE DATE N EQUIPMENT SHED FLOORPLAN SCALE" 1/4" = 1'-0" N EQUIPMENT SHED ROOF PLAN SCALE" 1/4" = 1'-0" SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL 1.3.b Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: 141016 - BOBCAT RIDGE 2 - SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL - ALM_1434 (2519 : Bobcat Ridge Poultry & Equipment Sheds Rehabilitation) FOR LOCATIONS (2) 3/4"Ø F1554 THREADED RODS EMBED 6". INSTALL W/ HILTI RE-500 EPOXY OR PRE-APPROVED EQUAL 1 1/2" 3" 1 1/2" 3/16 3 3/16 3 TYP 6" 2x BLOCKING BETWEEN RAFTERS, LOCATE TO CONCEAL SIMPSON ANCHORS CONT 2x6 TOP PLATE C4x5.4, SEE ELEVATIONS & PLANS FOR LOCATIONS (2) 3/4"Ø BOLTS @ EA CHANNEL SIMPSON A34/A35 ANCHOR AT EACH JOIST, CONCEAL W/BLOCKING CAP PL3/8x4x0'-6 MASONRY TIES @ 16" 10d NAILS @ 6" C/C @ PERIMETER & 12" C/C IN FIELD 1 1/2" 4" 3" (2) 2x4 WITH SPACERS AT 1/3 POINTS, HEM-FIR #2 OR EQUAL C4x5.4 2- 3/4"Ø BOLTS 1/4" GUSSET PLATE 3/16 3 3/16 3 EA SIDE C4, SEE ELEVATIONS TRIANGULAR MASONRY TIES @ 16" 4" CMU C4x5.4 1 1/2" 4" 1 1/2" 4" 3" CAP PL1/2x4x0'-8 1/4" SIDE PL's 1/4" PLATE 3/4"Ø BOLTS, TYP (2) 2x4 WITH SPACERS AT 1/3 POINTS, HEM-FIR #2 OR EQUAL X ROOF SHEATHING 2-10d NAILS @ 6" C/C GROUT SOLID FULL HEIGHT 4" 4" 4" LADDER JOINT REINFORCE @ 16" 4" 1'-0" ± 4" 9 GAGE WIRE TIES @ 16" (2) #4 4" CMU INTERIOR EXTERIOR 9 S4.2 NEW 4" CMU MATERIAL 2'-0" 8" 8" 8" 1'-0" (3) #4 CONT RE-USE EXISTING 4" CMU AS VENEER RE-USE EXISTING STONE AS VENEER ABOVE GRADE ALIGN OUTSIDE EDGE OF NEW 8" CMU WITH CURRENT INSIDE FACE OF (E) STONE VENEER & (E) 4" CMU FIELD VERIFY CONFIGURATION REPLACE EXISTING SLAB AS REQUIRED GROUT ALL CELLS SOLID (2) #4 VERTS FULL HEIGHT AT PILASTERS (1) #4 x 1'-6 @ 5'-0 NOTE: FINISH EXTERIOR GRADE VARIES. COORDINATE W/ARCH ELEVATIONS EXISTING SOG TO REMAIN NEW 4" CMU BELOW GRADE 8 S4.2 8" 1 PILASTER 2'-0" 8" 8" 8" 1'-0" (3) #4 CONT RE-USE EXISTING 4" CMU AS VENEER RE-USE EXISTING STONE AS VENEER ABOVE GRADE ALIGN OUTSIDE EDGE OF NEW 8" CMU WITH CURRENT INSIDE FACE OF (E) STONE VENEER & (E) 4" CMU FIELD VERIFY CONFIGURATION REPLACE EXISTING SLAB AS REQUIRED GROUT ALL CELLS SOLID #4 VERTS @ 24" (1) #4 x 1'-6 @ 5'-0 NOTE: FINISH EXTERIOR GRADE VARIES. COORDINATE W/ARCH ELEVATIONS EXISTING SOG TO REMAIN NEW 4" CMU BELOW GRADE BOND BREAK 0 1/2" 1" 2" 5 4 3 2 1 A B C D PROJECT DATE DRAWN 712 WHALERS WAY SUITE, B-100 FORT COLLINS, CO 80525 (970) 223-1820 www.aller-lingle-massey.com PRINTED FILE NAME: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION JVA #17025 SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL 10/15/2014 10:32:35 AM Project Status SECTIONS 17025 HMH 10/15/2014 S4.2 SHF GRANT PROJECT - 2014-050 CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO BOBCAT RIDGE 2 0 6" 1' 2' 3' 3/4" S4.2 3/4" = 1'-0" 1 SECTION - NORTHEAST RETAINING WALL 0 6" 1' 2' 3' 3/4" S4.2 3/4" = 1'-0" 2 SECTION - SOUTHWEST WALL 0 6" 1' 2' 3' 3/4" S4.2 3" = 1'-0" 3 DETAIL - CHANNEL BASE 0 6" 1' 2' 3' 3/4" S4.2 3/4" = 1'-0" 4 SECTION - CHANNEL TOP 0 6" 1' 2' 3' 3/4" S4.2 1" = 1'-0" 5 ELEVATION - DIAGONAL BRACE 0 6" 1' 2' 3' 3/4" S4.2 1" = 1'-0" 6 DETAIL - MASONRY TIE 0 6" 1' 2' 3' 3/4" S4.2 3/4" = 1'-0" 7 ELEVATION - DIAGONAL BRACE 0 6" 1' 2' 3' 3/4" S4.2 3/4" = 1'-0" 8 PLAN VIEW 0 6" 1' 2' 3' 3/4" S4.2 3/4" = 1'-0" 9 SECTION - SOUTHWEST WALL 0 6" 1' 2' 3' 3/4" S4.2 3/4" = 1'-0" 10 SECTION - SOUTHWEST WALL NO ISSUE DATE OPTION A & B OPTION A OPTION A OPTION A OPTION A OPTION A OPTION A OPTION B OPTION B OPTION A & B 1.3.a Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: 17025_Bobcat Ridge_Schematic Design Submittal 101514 (2519 : Bobcat Ridge Poultry & Equipment Sheds Rehabilitation) CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO BOBCAT RIDGE 2 0 1' 2' 4' 8' 1/4" S4.1B 1/4" = 1'-0" 1 POULTRY SHED SOUTHWEST ELEVATION - OPTION B 0 1' 2' 4' 8' 1/4" S4.1B 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 SOUTHEAST ELEVATION - OPTION B 0 1' 2' 4' 8' 1/4" S4.1B 1/4" = 1'-0" 3 NORTHWEST ELEVATION - OPTION B NO ISSUE DATE 1.3.a Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: 17025_Bobcat Ridge_Schematic Design Submittal 101514 (2519 : Bobcat Ridge Poultry & Equipment Sheds Rehabilitation) REPLACE DECAYED MEMBERS W/ #2 DOUG-FIR OR BETTER OPTION A - LATERALLY REINFORCING SOUTH WALL W/ STEEL CHANNELS 0 1/2" 1" 2" 5 4 3 2 1 A B C D PROJECT DATE DRAWN 712 WHALERS WAY SUITE, B-100 FORT COLLINS, CO 80525 (970) 223-1820 www.aller-lingle-massey.com PRINTED FILE NAME: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION JVA #17025 SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL 10/15/2014 10:32:30 AM Project Status ELEVATIONS-OPTION A 17025 HMH 10/15/2014 S4.1A SHF GRANT PROJECT - 2014-050 CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO BOBCAT RIDGE 2 0 1' 2' 4' 8' 1/4" S4.1A 1/4" = 1'-0" 1 POULTRY SHED SOUTHWEST ELEVATION - OPTION A 0 1' 2' 4' 8' 1/4" S4.1A 1/4" = 1'-0" 3 NORTHWEST ELEVATION - OPTION A 0 1' 2' 4' 8' 1/4" S4.1A 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 SOUTHEAST ELEVATION - OPTION A NO ISSUE DATE 1.3.a Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: 17025_Bobcat Ridge_Schematic Design Submittal 101514 (2519 : Bobcat Ridge Poultry & Equipment Sheds Rehabilitation) @ 6" C/C DOUBLE 2x4 (1 3/4" x 3 3/4") OVER INTERIOR SHEAR WALLS RE-USED 4" CMU FOR INTERIOR VENEER NEW 8" CMU BEARING/RETAINING WALL DOUBLE 2x4's (1 3/4" x 3 3/4") AT END BRACES, TYPICAL DOUBLE 2x4's (1 3/4" x 3 3/4") AT END BRACES, TYPICAL DOUBLE 2x4's (1 3/4" x 3 3/4") AT END BRACES, TYPICAL DOUBLE 2x4's (1 3/4" x 3 3/4") AT END BRACES, TYPICAL EXISTING 4" CMU WALL TO REMAIN EXISTING 4" CMU WALL TO REMAIN. FIELD VERIFY CONDITION OF WALL AND REPAIR CMU AND/OR MORTAR JOINTS WITH SIGNIFICANT CRACKING REPLACE DAMAGED AND PERMANENTLY DEFLECTED/WARPED (E) MEMBERS W/NEW MEMBERS IN KIND AS REQ'D. NEW MEMBERS SHALL BE DOUG-FIR #2 OR BETTER REPLACE DAMAGED AND PERMANENTLY DEFLECTED/WARPED (E) MEMBERS W/NEW MEMBERS IN KIND AS REQ'D. NEW MEMBERS SHALL BE DOUG-FIR #2 OR BETTER REPLACE DAMAGED AND PERMANENTLY DEFLECTED/WARPED (E) MEMBERS W/NEW MEMBERS IN KIND AS REQ'D. NEW MEMBERS SHALL BE DOUG-FIR #2 OR BETTER ESTABLISH POSITIVE ATTACHMENT BETWEEN RE-CONSTRUCTED CMU WALL AND EXISTING INTERIOR WOOD SHEAR WALL ESTABLISH POSITIVE ATTACHMENT BETWEEN NEW CMU RETAINING WALL AND EXISTING INTERIOR WOOD SHEAR WALL 0 1/2" 1" 2" 5 4 3 2 1 A B C D PROJECT DATE DRAWN 712 WHALERS WAY SUITE, B-100 FORT COLLINS, CO 80525 (970) 223-1820 www.aller-lingle-massey.com PRINTED FILE NAME: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION JVA #17025 SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL 10/15/2014 10:32:27 AM Project Status EQUIPMENT SHED & POULTRY SHED FOUNDATION AND ROOF PLANS 17025 HMH 10/15/2014 S1.1 SHF GRANT PROJECT - 2014-050 CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO BOBCAT RIDGE 2 0 1' 2' 4' 8' 1/4" S1.1 1/4" = 1'-0" 1 EQUIPMENT SHED FOUNDATION PLAN 0 1' 2' 4' 8' 1/4" S1.1 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 POULTRY SHED FOUNDATION PLAN 0 1' 2' 4' 8' 1/4" S1.1 1/4" = 1'-0" 3 EQUIPMENT SHED ROOF PLAN 0 1' 2' 4' 8' 1/4" S1.1 1/4" = 1'-0" 4 POULTRY SHED ROOF PLAN NO ISSUE DATE 1.3.a Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: 17025_Bobcat Ridge_Schematic Design Submittal 101514 (2519 : Bobcat Ridge Poultry & Equipment Sheds Rehabilitation) FXX FS Px 100'-0 XXX'-X XXX'-X Cx Cx <X> (R) (N) (E) PL CL @ DN UP SLOPE XX:12 Joist Elevation BL=XXX'-X Top of Brick Ledge SWx STRUCTURAL GENERAL NOTES _____________________________________________________________________________________________ DESIGN LOADS: 2012 International Building Code with City of Fort Collins Amendments, ASCE 7-10 Risk Category I Low Hazard - Agricultural Structures _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Roofs: Roof Dead Load 8 psf Roof Live Load 20 psf Ground Snow Load Pg 30 psf Flat-roof Snow Load Pf 18.1 psf Snow Exposure Factor Ce 0.90 Snow Importance Factor I 0.80 Thermal Factor Ct 1.20 _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Wind: Ultimate Design Wind Speed, Vult, (3-second gust) 165 mph Internal Pressure Coefficient 0.18 (Enclosed) Wind Exposure C Wind Risk Category I Components and Cladding Design Wind Pressures Walls: Within 3 feet of corners +73 psf -91.1 psf Away from corners +73 psf -77.5 psf Roofs: Within 12 feet of corners +42.8 psf -118.3 psf Within 6 feet of edges +42.8 psf -93.2 psf Away from edges +42.8 psf -83.1 psf Pressures may be reduced for effective wind areas larger than 10 square feet, but not below 16 psf. Seismic: Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters Short Period Ss 0.196g SDS 0.209g One Second S1 0.060g SD1 0.096g Soils Site Class D Seismic Risk Category I Seismic Design Category B Basic Seismic-Force-Resisting System(s) Ordinary Plain Masonry Shear Walls and Concentric Steel Braced Frames Design Base Shear(s) 2.8 kips Seismic Response Coefficient(s), Cs 0.139 Response Modification Coefficient(s), R 3.0 (For Option A) 1.5 (For Option B) Analysis Procedure Equivalent Lateral Force _____________________________________________________________________________________________ LOADS ON EXISTING STRUCTURES/CODE STUDY: IBC 2012 3404.3 - EXISTING STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS CARRYING GRAVITY LOADS We do not anticipate gravity load increases of more than 5%. IBC 2012 3404.4 - EXISTING STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS CARRYING LATERAL LOADS We do not anticipate altering the overall length of walls resisting lateral loads, so the structure stays well below the 10% exception #1. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ FOOTINGS: Design of footings is based on maximum presumed allowable bearing pressure 2000 psf Bear on the natural undisturbed soil or compacted structural fill. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ HELICAL PILES: Piles shall be installed by a contractor certified by the manufacturer and shall develop the manufacturer's recommended installation torque to satisfy the load requirements given on in the Structural Drawings. Shaft dimension, helix diameter, and helix spacing shall be determined by the pile manufacturer based on the criteria presented in the Soils Report and the manufacturer's own requirements. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ EARTH RETAINING STRUCTURES: Presumed Earth Equivalent Fluid Lateral Pressure: Walls Restrained at Top (at rest) 70 pcf Cantilevered Walls (active) 50 pcf Passive Resisting 300 pcf Coefficient of Sliding Friction 0.3 _____________________________________________________________________________________________ REINFORCED CONCRETE: Design is based on ACI 318 "Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete." Concrete work shall conform to ACI 301 "Standard Specifications for Structural Concrete." Structural concrete shall have the following properties: | | Max | | Slump, | Entrained | | | |f'c, psi| W/C | Maximum | inches |Air, percent|Cement|Admixtures,| Intended Use | 28 day | Ratio | Aggregate |(+/- 1")| (+/- 1.5%)| Type | Comments | Footings and | | | | | | | | Stem Walls | 4,000 | 0.48 | 3/4" Stone | 4 | 6 | I/II | | Detailing, fabrication, and placement of reinforcing steel shall be in accordance with ACI 315 "Details and Detailing of Concrete Reinforcement." Welded wire fabric shall conform to ASTM A185. Reinforcing bars shall conform to ASTM A615, Grade 60, except ties or bars shown to be field-bent, which shall be Grade 40. Unless noted otherwise on the Structural Drawings, lap bars 50 diameters (minimum). At corners and intersections, make horizontal bars continuous or provide matching corner bars for each layer of reinforcement. Trim openings in walls and slabs with 2-#5 for each layer of reinforcement, fully developed by extension or hook. In continuous members, splice top bars at mid-span and splice bottom bars over supports. Except as noted on the drawings, concrete protection for reinforcement in cast-in-place concrete shall be as follows: Cast against and permanently exposed to earth: 3" Exposed to earth or weather: #6 through #18 bars 2" #5 bar, W31 or D31 wire, and smaller 1-1/2" Not exposed to weather or in contact with ground: Slabs, walls, joists: #11 bars and smaller 3/4" Beams and columns: Primary reinforcement 1-1/2" Stirrups, ties, spirals 1-1/2" _____________________________________________________________________________________________ STRUCTURAL MASONRY: Design is based on ACI 530/ASCE 5/TMS 402, "Building Code Requirements for Masonry Structures," Allowable Stress Design. 28-day compressive strength of reused masonry used for design is 750 psi (half strength of currently used values), based on net-bedded area. 28-day compressive strength for new masonry is 1500 psi. Mortar shall be type K or similar (compatible with existing masonry) for existing masonry and type type S for new CMU. Grout used in new block cells shall be coarse grout, as defined by Article 2.2 of TMS 602/ACI530.1/ASCE 6, with a minimum cube strength = 2,000 psi or 3,000 psi concrete using 3/8" diameter aggregate and placed by vibrating unless an approved self-consolidating mix is used. Placement of mortar, grout, masonry units and wall ties shall comply with TMS 602/ACI 530.1/ASCE 6. Provide full shoved mortar in all head and bed joints. 'Low-lift' grouting shall not exceed 2 feet in height Vertically space continuous horizontal joint reinforcing at 16" maximum in all CMU walls. Joint reinforcing shall be welded type with 9 gage side rods and 9 gage trussed or ladder cross rods. In exterior walls, joint reinforcement shall be hot-dip galvanized. Reinforcing bars shall be as for reinforced concrete except as noted. Unless otherwise noted on the Structural Drawings, lap bars 50 diameters (minimum) at splices. Reinforcement shall be secured against displacement prior to grouting by wire bar locators or other suitable devices at intervals not exceeding 200 bar diameters or 10 feet. Reinforce and grout vertical cells at corners, ends of walls, jambs of openings, each side of vertical control joints, and at spacing shown on drawings. ____________________________________________________________________________________________ STRUCTURAL WOOD FRAMING: In-Grade Base Values have been used for design. 2x framing shall be S4S Douglas Fir-Larch No. 2 and better unless noted otherwise. All lumber shall be 19% maximum moisture content, unless noted otherwise. Solid timber beams and posts shall be Douglas Fir-Larch No. 1. Studs shall be Douglas Fir-Larch Stud grade and better. Top and bottom plates shall be Douglas Fir-Larch No. 2 and better. Fasteners for use with treated wood shall comply with IRC Section 2304.9.5 - '06/'09 IBC. Conventional light framing shall comply with IBC Section 2308. Provide solid blocking between joists under jamb studs of openings. Columns must have a continuous load path to foundation. Unless otherwise indicated, install two lengths of solid blocking x joist depth x 12 inches long in floor framing under column loads. All beams and trusses shall be braced against rotation at points of bearing. Unless noted on drawings, lower chord of gable end trusses shall be anchored to wall plate with framing anchors at 4'-0 spacing and laterally braced to roof framing at 8'-0 spacing. Except as noted otherwise, minimum nailing shall be provided as specified in IBC Table 2304.9.1 "Fastening Schedule." Metal framing anchors shown or required, shall be Simpson Strong-Tie or equal Code approved connectors and installed with the number and type of nails recommended by the manufacturer to develop the maximum rated capacity. Note that heavy-duty hangers and skewed hangers may not be stocked locally and require special order from the factory. All roof rafters, joists, trusses, beams shall be anchored to supports with metal framing anchors. Lead holes for lag screws shall be 40%-70% of the shank diameter at the threaded section and equal to the shank diameter at the unthreaded section per NDS section 11.1.3. Connector bolts and Lag Screws shall conform to ANSI/ASME B18.2.1 and ASTM SAE J429 Grade 1. Nails and Spikes shall conform to ASTM F1667. Wood Screws shall conform to ANSI/ASME B18.6.1. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ SHOP DRAWINGS: The Structural Drawings are copyrighted and shall not be copied for use as erection plans or shop details. Use of JVA's electronic files as the basis for shop drawings requires prior approval by JVA, a signed release of liability by the General Contractor and/or his subcontractors, and deletion of JVA's name and logo from all sheets so used. The General Contractor shall submit in writing any requests to modify the Structural Drawings or Project Specifications. All shop and erection drawings shall be checked and stamped (after having been checked) by the General Contractor prior to submission for Structural Engineer's review; shop drawing submittals not checked by the General Contractor prior to submission to the Structural Engineer will be returned without review. Furnish two (2) prints of shop and erection drawings to the Structural Engineer for review prior to fabrication for reinforcing steel, concrete mix design Submit in a timely manner to permit 10 working days for review by the Structural Engineer. Shop drawings submitted for review do not constitute "request for change in writing" unless specific suggested changes are clearly marked. In any event, changes made by means of the shop drawing submittal process become the responsibility of the one initiating the change. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ FIELD VERIFICATION OF EXISTING CONDITIONS: The General Contractor shall thoroughly inspect and survey the existing structure to verify conditions that affect the work shown on the drawings. The General Contractor shall report any variations or discrepancies to the Architect and Structural Engineer before proceeding. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ STRUCTURAL ERECTION AND BRACING REQUIREMENTS: The Structural Drawings illustrate and describe the completed structure with elements in their final positions, properly supported, connected, and/or braced. The Structural Drawings illustrate typical and representative details to assist the General Contractor. Details shown apply at all similar conditions unless otherwise indicated. Although due diligence has been applied to make the drawings as complete as possible, not every detail is illustrated and not every exceptional condition is addressed. All proprietary connections and elements shall be installed in accordance with the manufacturers' recommendations. All work shall be accomplished in a workmanlike manner and in accordance with the applicable codes and local ordinances. The General Contractor is responsible for coordination of all work, including layout and dimension verification, materials coordination, shop drawing review, and the work of subcontractors. Any discrepancies or omissions discovered in the course of the work shall be immediately reported to the Architect and Structural Engineer for resolution. Continuation of work without notification of discrepancies relieves the Architect and Structural Engineer from all consequences. Unless otherwise specifically indicated, the Structural Drawings do not describe methods of construction. The General Contractor, in the proper sequence, shall perform or supervise all work necessary to achieve the final completed structure, and to protect the structure, workmen, and others during construction. Such work shall include, but not be limited to temporary bracing, shoring for construction equipment, shoring for excavation, formwork, scaffolding, safety devices and programs of all kinds, support and bracing for cranes and other erection equipment. Do not backfill against basement or retaining walls until supporting slabs and floor framing are in place and securely anchored, unless adequate temporary bracing is provided. Temporary bracing shall remain in place until all floors, walls, roofs and any other supporting elements are in place. The Architect and Structural Engineer bear no responsibility for the above items, and observation visits to the site do not in any way include inspections of these items. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ DEFERRED SUBMITTALS: Portions of the structure have elements of proprietary design and fabrication, which shall be submitted by the supplier for approval after award of contract. These items shall conform to the load, capacity, size, geometry, connection, and support criteria noted on the Structural Drawings. Shop drawings and calculations shall be prepared by an engineer registered in the state of Colorado. Final shop drawing submittals shall be stamped and signed. Furnish deferred submittals for: helical piles Submittals will be reviewed by the Structural Engineer of Record for compliance with the specified design requirements, stamped as "Reviewed," and forwarded to the local building authority for review as required. Final issue of the Building Permit may, at the approval authority's option, be contingent on its approval of the deferred submittal documents. Deferred submittal items shall not be installed until their design calculations and drawings have been reviewed by the Architect, Structural Engineer, and/or local building authority as required. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ LETTERS OF CONSTRUCTION COMPLIANCE: The General Contractor shall determine from the local building authority, at the time the building permit is obtained, whether any letters of construction compliance will be requested from the Structural Engineer. The Contractor shall notify the Structural Engineer of all such requirements in writing prior to the start of construction. Two day advance notice shall be given when requesting site visits necessary as the basis for the compliance letter. The General Contractor shall provide copies of all third-party testing and inspection reports to the Architect and Structural Engineer a minimum of one week prior to the date that the compliance letter is needed. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ 0 1/2" 1" 2" 5 4 3 2 1 A B C D PROJECT DATE DRAWN 712 WHALERS WAY SUITE, B-100 FORT COLLINS, CO 80525 (970) 223-1820 www.aller-lingle-massey.com PRINTED FILE NAME: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION JVA #17025 SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL 10/15/2014 10:32:25 AM Project Status GENERAL NOTES 17025 HMH 10/15/2014 S1.0 SHF GRANT PROJECT - 2014-050 CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO BOBCAT RIDGE 2 STRUCTURAL DRAWING LIST S1.0 GENERAL NOTES S1.1 EQUIPMENT SHED & POULTRY SHED FOUNDATION AND ROOF PLANS S4.1A ELEVATIONS-OPTION A S4.1B ELEVATIONS-OPTION B S4.2 SECTIONS NO ISSUE DATE 1.3.a Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: 17025_Bobcat Ridge_Schematic Design Submittal 101514 (2519 : Bobcat Ridge Poultry & Equipment Sheds Rehabilitation) S WASHINGTON AVE GLEN HAVEN DR A ST UNIVERSITY AVE WALLENBERG DR MOBY DR S SHERWOOD ST SOUTHRIDGE DR FREEDOM LN BRENTWOOD DR WAGONWHEEL DR LONGWORTH RD BAY DR BAYSTONE DR BROADVIEW PL WEST DR ELLIS DR OAKWOOD DR GLENMOOR DR RIDGEWOOD RD BIRCH ST WORTHINGTON CIR CRAGMORE DR GLENWOOD DR SUNSET AVE AVOCET RD PERENNIAL LN LARKSPUR DR NEWPORT DR SHAMROCK ST MICHAEL LN UNION DR CONCORD DR WATERS EDGE WAGNER DR JAMES CT MANTZ PL NEWPORT CT SCOTT AVE PROSPECT LN UNDERHILL DR CORVID WAY DEL NORTE PL WINDSOR CT LAKEWOOD DR HUNTINGTON CIR BENNINGTON CIR ARMSTRONG AVE MCALLISTER CT LEXINGTON CT BRAIDEN DR REMBRANDT DR EVENSTAR CT ESSEX CT ASTER ST WINFIELD CT JAMES CT S BRYAN AVE W MYRTLE ST S WHITCOMB ST GLENMOOR DR W PLUM ST CRESTMORE PL SKYLINE DR UNIVERSITY AVE W PITKIN ST UNIVERSITY AVE BIRCH ST West Central Area Plan Age of Buildings CITY OF FORT COLLINS GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its internal purposes only, and were not designed or intended for general use by members of the public. The City makes no representation or warranty as to its accuracy, timeliness, or completeness, and in particular, its accuracy in labeling or displaying dimensions, contours, property boundaries, or placement of location of any map features thereon. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKES NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITNESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, WITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any users of these map products, map applications, or data, accepts them AS IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and assumes all responsibility of the use thereof, and further covenants and agrees to hold the City harmless from and against all damage, loss, or liability arising from any use of this map product, in consideration of the City's having made this information available. Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any users of these products, or underlying data. The City disclaims, and shall not be held liable for any and all damage, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, which arises or may arise from these map products or the use thereof by any person or entity. Printed: June 06, 2014 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Miles Scale 1:4,000 © Legend Year Built N/A 1851 - 1900 1901 - 1920 1921 - 1940 1941 - 1960 1961 - 1980 1981 - 2000 2001 - 2014 West Central Neighborhoods Parcels 1.1.a Packet Pg. 10 Attachment: WCAP_LPC_Handouts (2522 : West Central Area Plan Update) WESTWARD DR S WASHINGTON AVE GLEN HAVEN DR A ST UNIVERSITY AVE WALLENBERG DR MOBY DR S SHERWOOD ST SOUTHRIDGE DR FREEDOM LN BRENTWOOD DR WAGONWHEEL DR LONGWORTH RD BAY DR BAYSTONE DR BROADVIEW PL WEST DR ELLIS DR OAKWOOD DR GLENMOOR DR RIDGEWOOD RD BIRCH ST WORTHINGTON CIR CRAGMORE DR GLENWOOD DR SUNSET AVE AVOCET RD PERENNIAL LN LARKSPUR DR NEWPORT DR SHAMROCK ST MICHAEL LN UNION DR CONCORD DR WATERS EDGE WAGNER DR JAMES CT MANTZ PL SCOTT AVE NEWPORT CT PROSPECT LN UNDERHILL DR CORVID WAY DEL NORTE PL WINDSOR CT LAKEWOOD DR HUNTINGTON CIR BENNINGTON CIR ARMSTRONG AVE MCALLISTER CT LEXINGTON CT BRAIDEN DR REMBRANDT DR EVENSTAR CT ESSEX CT ASTER ST WINFIELD CT W PLUM ST JAMES CT W MYRTLE ST W PITKIN ST GLENMOOR DR CRESTMORE PL S BRYAN AVE UNIVERSITY AVE S WHITCOMB ST SKYLINE DR UNIVERSITY AVE BIRCH ST West Central Area Plan Historic Features CITY OF FORT COLLINS GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MAP PRODUCTS These map products and all underlying data are developed for use by the City of Fort Collins for its internal purposes only, and were not designed or intended for general use by members of the public. The City makes no representation or warranty as to its accuracy, timeliness, or completeness, and in particular, its accuracy in labeling or displaying dimensions, contours, property boundaries, or placement of location of any map features thereon. THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKES NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR WARRANTY FOR FITNESS OF USE FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, WITH RESPECT TO THESE MAP PRODUCTS OR THE UNDERLYING DATA. Any users of these map products, map applications, or data, accepts them AS IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and assumes all responsibility of the use thereof, and further covenants and agrees to hold the City harmless from and against all damage, loss, or liability arising from any use of this map product, in consideration of the City's having made this information available. Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any users of these products, or underlying data. The City disclaims, and shall not be held liable for any and all damage, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, which arises or may arise from these map products or the use thereof by any person or entity. Printed: June 05, 2014 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Miles Scale 1:4,000 © Legend Historic Properties Historic Districts West Central Neighborhoods 1.1.a Packet Pg. 9 Attachment: WCAP_LPC_Handouts (2522 : West Central Area Plan Update) AAAAAA SSSSSSSTTTTTTTTT UUUUUNNNNNIIIIVVVVVEEEEEERRRRRRSSSSSIIIITTTTYYYYY AAAAAAVVV AAAAA EEEEE WWWWWWAAAAAAA WWWWWWWW LLLLLLLLLLLEEEEENNNNNBBBBBEEEEERRRRRGGGG DDDDRRRRR MMMMMMOOOOOOBBBBBBBYYYYYYY DDDDDDDDRRRRRRRR SSSSSS SSSSSHHHHHHEEEERRRRRWWWWWWOOOOOOOOOOOODDDDD SSSSSSTTTTTT SSSSSSOOOOOOUUUUUTTTTTHHHHHRRRRRIIIIIIDDDDDGGGGEEEEEE DDDDDDRRRRR FFFFRRRREEEEEEEDDDOOOMM LLNNN BBBBBRRRREEEEENNNNTTTTTTTWWWWWOOOOOOOOOOODDDDDD DDDDDDRRRR LLLLLOOOOOONNNNGGGGGGGGWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWOOOOORRRRRTTTTTHHH RRRDDD BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA DDDDDDDDRRRRRRRRRRRRRR BBBBBAAAAAYYY AAAAA SSSSSTTTTTOOOOONNNNEEEE DDRRRRR BBBBBBRRRROOOOOOAAAAAADDDDDVVVVVVIIIIIEEEEEWWWWW PPPPLLLLL WWWWWEEEEEESSSSSTTTTT DDDDDDDRRRRRRR EEEEEELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLIIIISSSSSS DDDDDDDRRRRRRRRR OOOOOOAAAAAAKKKKKWWWWWWOOOOOOOOOOOODDDDD DDDDDDRRRRRR GGGGLLLLLEEEEENNNNNMMMMOOOOOOOOOORRRR DDDDRRRRR RRRRRRIIIDDDDDDGGGEEEEEWWWWWWOOOOOOOOODDDDDD RRRRRRDDDDDD BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBIIIIIIIIRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT WWWWWOOOOORRRTTTTHHHHHIIINNNNNGGGGGTTTTTOOOONNNNNN CCCCCCIIIIIRRRRRR CCCCRRRRAAAAGGGGMMMMMMOOOOOORRRREEEEE DDDDDRRRRR GGGLLLEENNNNWWOOOOOOOOODDDD DDDRRRRR SSSSSUUUUUNNNNNSSSSSSEEEEETTT AAAVVVVV AAAAAA EEEEEE PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPERENNNNNNIALLL LLLLNNNNN LLAAAAAARRRKKKKKKSSSSSPPPPPUUUUURRRRR DDDDDRRRR WWPPPPPOOOORRRRRTTTTT DDRRRR SSSSSHHHHHAAAAMMMMMMRRRRRROOOOOOOCCCCKKK SSSSSSTTTTT MIICCCCCCCCCHHHHAAAAAEEEELLLL LLLLNN UUUUUNNNNIIIOOOOONNNNNN DDDRRRRRRRR CCCCCOOOONNNNCCCCCOOOORRRRRDD DDDDRRRRRR WWWWWWWWWAAAAA WWW AAAAAA TTTT EEERRRSSS EEEDDDGGGGGEEEEE WWWWAAAAA WWWWW GGGGGGNNNNNEEEEERRRRR DDDDDDDDRRRRRR JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT MMMMMMAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNTTTTTTZZZZZ PPPPPLLLLL NNNNNNEEEEEEWWWWWPPPPOOOORRRRRRTTTTT CCCCCTTTT SSSSSCCCOOOTTTTTTTTT AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAVVVVV AAAAAA EEEE PPPPRRRRROOOSSSSPPPEEECCCCCCTTTTT LLLLNNNNN UUUUUUUUUUNNNNNDDDDDEEEEERRRRRHHHHHIIIILLLLLLLL DDDDDDR CCCCCOOOORRRRRVVVIIIDDDD WWWW WWWAAA AAA YYY DDDDDDEEEEELLLLL NNNNNOOOOOORRRRTTTTEEEEE PPPPPLLLLL WWWWWWIIIIINNNNNDDDDSSOORRRR CCCTTT LLLLAAAAAAKKKKKKEEEEWWWWWOOOOOOOOODDDD DDDDRR HHHHHUUUUUUUUUUUNNNNNTTTTIIINNNNNGGGGGGTTTTOOOOONNNN CCCCCIIIIIRRRRRR BBBBEEEEENNNNNNNNINNNNNGGGGGGTTTTTOOOOOONNNN CCCIIIIRRRRR AAAAARRRRRMMMMMSSSSSSTTTTTTRRRRRROOOOOONNNNNGGGGGG AAAAAVVVVVV AAAAA EE MMMMMCCCCCAAAAALLLLLLLLIISSSSSTTTTTEEEERRRR CCCCTTTT LLLLLLEEEXXXIIINNNNNGGGGGTTTTTOOOOONNNNN CCCCCTTTT BBBBBBBBRRRRRRAAAAAAAIIIIIDDDDDDEEEEEENNNNN DDDDDRRRRR RRRRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEMMMMMMMMBBBBBBBBRRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAANNNNNNDDDDDDDTTTTTT DDDDDDDRRRRRRR EEEEVVVVEENNNSSSSTTTTTA TT R CCCCTTT EEESSSSSEEEEXXXXX CCCCCCTTTTT AAAAAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSTTTTEEEERRRR SSTTTTT WWWWWWWIIIIINNNNNNFFFFIIIIEEEEELLDDD CCCCCTTTT JJJAAAAMMMEEEESSSSS CCCCCCCTTTTTT SSSSSS BBBBRRRRRYYYYYYY RRR YYYYYYYY AAAAAA NNNNNN AAAAVVVVV AAAAA EEE WWWWWWW MMMMMYYYYYYRRRRRRTTTTTTLLLLLEEEEEEE SSSTTTTT SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHIIIIIIIIIIIIITTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMBBB SSSTTTTT GGGGGGLLLEEEENNNNNNMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOOOORRRRR DDDDRRRRR WWWWW PPPPPLLLUUUUUUMMMM SSSSSTTTT CCCCCCRRRREEEESSSSSTTTTTMMMMMMOOOOOORRRREEEEE PPPPLLL SSSSSKKKKKYYYYYLLLLLLIIIINNNNNEEEEEE DDDDDRRRRR UUUUUNNNNIIIVVVVVVEEEEERRRRRRSSSSSIIIIIITTTTTTYYYYY AAAAAVVVVVV AAAAAAA EEEEE WWWWWW PPPPPPPIIIIIITTTTTTTKKKKKKKIIIINNNNNNN SSSSSSSTTTTTT UUUUUNNNNNIIIIIIVVVVVVEEEEEEERRRRRRRSSSSSSSSIIIIITTTTTTTYYYYYYYY AAAAAAAVVVVVV AAAAAAA EEEEEEE BBBBBIIIIRRRRCCCCCHHHH SSSSTTTT Legend POTEN P PO PPPPO O OTE OT TEEE TE ENTIAL TIAL AL CSU CC CS C SU S U S SS STAD TADIU TTT ADIU DI IU UM MMMMMMMM M WWWWWWWWWWW WW W WWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW Dr DDr DDDr DDDDDDDrrrrak ak akkkkk akk aak aaaaaa eeeeeeeeeeeeee Ro RRo RRRoo RRRo Roo R ad add aad aaa Areas of Stability, Enhancement, & Development SPRIN SPRINN S PRIN RIN NG G GG CR CRRE CRE EK KK K T TRR TR AIL AI AILL A AA L MASOO MMAASO SOO SOOO SO SOONN ON ONN ONNN O TRAI TRAA TR TRR TTTTR TRRRRAA RAI RA R RAAI AI A AIIILLLL LLLLLL S SSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSS Ta Taa TTa Taaa TTT a ft ftt ffffffff HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHil il iiiii lllllllllllllllll Ro RRR ad addd aa SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS Sh Shh Shhhhh SSSS ie iee ieee iiiiii ld lddd ldd ldddddd ll sssssssssssssssssss Stt St SSSSSSSSS WW WWW W WWWWWWWWWWWW Mu MMu Muu MMMu Muuu Muuuu u lb lbbb lbbbbb lbbbb lber b er eer err errr errry ry ryyy ryy rrry rryy SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSStttttttttttt WHOLE FOODS/ KING SOOPERS KING SOOPERS CSU VETERINARY TEACHING HOSPITAL NATURAL RESOURCES RESEARCH CENTER SENIOR CENTER ROLLAND MOORE PARK ROSS NATURAL AREA FISCHER NATURAL AREA RED FOX MEADOWS NATURAL AREA AVERY PARK CITY PARK POTENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER CSU CAMPUS CORE BENNETT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LAB/POLARIS SCHOOL BLEVINS MIDDLE SCHOOL SAFEWAY SHOPPING CENTER POTENTIAL ELIZABETH “MAIN STREET” WW WWW WWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW La Laa Laur ur uur urr urrrel el eel ell eeel SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSttttttttttttttttttt SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSS Ma Maaaa Maa MMMMMMMM MMMMMMMaa MM aa so sooo soo soooo sooooo ss s nn nnnn nnnnnnnnnnn nnnnnnnnnnnn St SSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSt SSSt SSSSSSSSSSSSSSS Co Coo CCCCC ll llll l eg egg egeeeeeeeeeee g Av Avv AAA eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee COMMERCIAL CENTER COMMERCIAL CENTER COMMERCIAL CENTER WWW WWWWWW WWWWWWWW WWWWW WWWWWWWWWW W WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWW La LLa Laa LLaa LLake LLLakkke L LLLaa Laaaaa LLLLLaa LLLLLLa LL aaaaakkkk aaaaaak a kke ke kk kkkkkkk kkk kkkeee kkee kkkke k eeeeeee e eeee eee SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSttttttttttttt SSSSS SSSS SSSStt SSSSSSttt SSSSSSSSSt SSSSSSSSS S ttt GARDENS ON SPRING CREEK * 6LJQL¿FDQW1HZ'HYHORSPHQW5HGHYHORSPHQW6LJQL¿FDQWQHZGHYHO- * RSPHQWUHGHYHORSPHQWDQWLFLSDWHGRQYDFDQWSDUFHOVSRWHQWLDOO\UHVXOWLQJLQ FKDQJHRIXVHRULQWHQVLW\ 6RPH1HZ'HYHORSPHQW5HGHYHORSPHQW6RPHPDUNHWGULYHQLQ¿OODQG UHGHYHORSPHQWOLNHO\WRRFFXU Neighborhood Enhancements6RPHUHLQYHVWPHQWLQLQIUDVWUXFWXUHDQG SRWHQWLDODGGLWLRQVUHQRYDWLRQV Areas of Stability6WDEOHDUHDVXQOLNHO\WRFKDQJHVLJQL¿FDQWO\ 3DUNV 2SHQ6SDFH 0DMRU7UDLOV &683URSHUW\ 3RWHQWLDO(OL]DEHWK³0DLQ6WUHHW´ ([LVWLQJ(OHPHQWV 3RWHQWLDO2SSRUWXQLWLHV 6FKRROV .H\'HVWLQDWLRQV :HVW&HQWUDO$UHD%RXQGDU\ 3RWHQWLDO.H\'HVWLQDWLRQV $5($62)67$%,/,7<(1+$1&(0(17 '(9(/230(17 $UWHULDO5RDG 3RWHQWLDO3ROLFH6XEVWDWLRQ POTENTIAL POLICE SUBSTATION HMN ZONE 1.1.a Packet Pg. 8 Attachment: WCAP_LPC_Handouts (2522 : West Central Area Plan Update) 1 T 2 T 3 T 4 T 5 T 6 T 7 T fcgov.com/westcentral 1.1.a Packet Pg. 5 Attachment: WCAP_LPC_Handouts (2522 : West Central Area Plan Update) Attachment: WCAP_LPC_Handouts (2522 : West Central Area Plan Update)