The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01/28/2015 - Landmark Preservation Commission - Agenda - Work SessionRon Sladek, Chair Doug Ernest, Vice Chair Council Information Center (CIC) Maren Bzdek City Hall West Meg Dunn 300 Laporte Avenue Kristin Gensmer Fort Collins, Colorado Per Hogestad Dave Lingle 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 January 28, 2015 • Call to Order • Discussion Items 1. PENNY FLATS: OLD TOWN BROWNSTONES DEVELOPMENT REVIEW & RECOMMENDATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Old Town Brownstones is a residential development being proposed as a Major Amendment to the previously approved PDP for buildings 7 & 8 of the Penny Flats Development. The applicant’s Written Statement and Plans are attached. Also included are the plans for the recently approved “Browns on Howes” townhome project, located nearby. Located on the same block as the Penny Flats/Old Town Brownstone project is the Fort Collin Municipal Railway Car Barn. Also known as the Trolley Barn, this property is an officially designated Fort Collins Landmark. APPLICANT: Coburn Partners 2. UTILITIES CUSTOMER SERVICE BUILDING - DEVELOPMENT REVIEW & RECOMMENDATION PROCESS PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Operation Services staff will provide an update on this project, and discuss further options on the design of the new Utility Administration Building, 222 Laporte Avenue. Landmark Preservation Commission Landmark Preservation Commission Page 1 January 28, 2015 3. DESIGN ASSISTANCE PROGRAM POLICY DISCUSSION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This item is to update the Commission on the status of the Design Assistance Program and discuss potential revisions to the program guidelines. 4. 711 REMINGTON STREET - BUTTON HOUSE - LPC SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Landmark Preservation Commission has established a subcommittee of its members to research further options for recognition of the demolished Button House, 711 Remington Street. This item will review and discuss the subcommittee’s findings and suggestions. A neighborhood meeting of Laurel School National Register District owners and residents will be held on February 3, 2015, to gather public comments and suggestions. The item is currently scheduled to be brought before the Commission at its February 11, 2015 Regular Meeting for further discussion and final action, if warranted. City of Fort Collins Page 2 Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 1 STAFF REPORT January 28, 2015 Landmark Preservation Commission PROJECT NAME PENNY FLATS: OLD TOWN BROWNSTONES DEVELOPMENT REVIEW & RECOMMENDATION STAFF Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Planner PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Old Town Brownstones is a residential development being proposed as a Major Amendment to the previously approved PDP for buildings 7 & 8 of the Penny Flats Development. The applicant’s Written Statement and Plans are attached. Also included are the plans for the recently approved “Browns on Howes” townhome project, located nearby. Located on the same block as the Penny Flats/Old Town Brownstone project is the Fort Collin Municipal Railway Car Barn. Also known as the Trolley Barn, this property is an officially designated Fort Collins Landmark. APPLICANT: Coburn Partners EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ATTACHMENTS 1. Penny Flats 2015 01 21 Old Town Browstones Written Statement (DOC) 2. Penny Flats Old Town Brownstone Landmark Preservation (PDF) 3. Nearby Approved Project- Browns on Howes - Perspective Renderings (PDF) 2.1 Packet Pg. 3 January 20, 2015 Old Town Brownstones Penny Flats - Buildings 7 & 8 Landmarks Preservation Committee Work Session (January 28th, 2015) Written Statement: The Old Town Brownstones is a residential development being proposed as a Major Amendment to the previously approved PDP for buildings 7 & 8 of the Penny Flats Development. The proposed Major Amendment, similar to the previously approved PDP, includes two buildings oriented along North Mason Street and the pedestrian spine. Per the previous PDP, the original design called for a mixed use project with commercial and multi-family units ranging from one to three bedroom units. The original scope included underground parking, four stories, and a total building area of 60,138 sf. The proposed Major Amendment will include two townhome buildings with a total of 22 units ranging from two to three bedrooms, three and four story buildings, and a total building area of 55,000 sf, resulting in a decreased height and density on the lot. The proposal includes a four story townhome along the pedestrian spine with attached garages, and a three story building along North Mason Street with detached garages. Access to parking will be from an existing internal private drive and thus will be shielded from view from both the street frontage and pedestrian spine. The architectural character of the development will be reminiscent of brownstone rowhomes and will include traditional materials, massing, and detailing. Not only will the customary elements blend with the character of old town Fort Collins, but this will directly relate to the historic Trolley Barn to the west of the project. The Trolley Barn is a one story brick building with notable architectural features such as a masonry cornices, masonry window heads and sills, and large wood paneled sliding doors. The Old Town Brownstones feature brick, wood paneled window bays, and precast cornice and window sill details that are complementary to the architecture of the historic Trolley Barn. It is also worth noting that the architectural style of proposed Major Amendment to the PDP is more consistent with the Trolley Barn than buildings 7 & 8 of the existing PDP. The existing pedestrian spine starts on Maple and will continue through to Cherry Street with the completion of this project. The pedestrian spine features landscaping and will act as a gentle buffer between the residential project and the neighboring Trolley Barn. Along the pedestrian spine, planters give way to a raised walk with unit entries, and then step back further on the top floor with rooftop patios. This helps break up the perceived mass as the building steps down towards the sidewalk to create a more pedestrian scale, and helps relate to scale of the adjacent Trolley barn. The Major Amendment to the approved PDP will result in a project that is less dense than the original plan, and will be in keeping with the form and style reminiscent of Old Town. In addition, the orientation of the building along the pedestrian spine helps to create a transition between the residential building and the Trolley Barn while shielding the drive aisle and garages from view. We believe the project to be complimentary in character and form to the Trolley Barn and welcome feedback from the Landmark Preservation Commission regarding our proposal. Thank you for taking the time to review our proposed revisions. 2.1.a Packet Pg. 4 Attachment: Penny Flats 2015 01 21 Old Town Browstones Written Statement (2824 : Penny Flats: Old Town Brownstones Development Review B O U L D E R : 3 0 3 . 4 4 2 . 3 3 5 1 | C R E S T E D B U T T E : 9 7 0 . 3 4 9 . 1 3 6 6 W W W . C O B U R N P A R T N E R S . C O M PENNY FLATS: OLD TOWN BROWNSTONES LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION WORK SESSION: 01.28.15 2.1.b Packet Pg. 5 Attachment: Penny Flats Old Town Brownstone Landmark Preservation (2824 : Penny Coburn Architecture Penny Flats: Old Town Brownstones V i c i n i t y M a p 2.1.b Packet Pg. 6 Attachment: Penny Flats Old Town Brownstone Landmark Preservation (2824 : Penny Coburn Architecture Penny Flats: Old Town Brownstones Previous Project scope: • 2 Multifamily Buildings • 1 Floor Commercial • 1 - 3 Bedroom Units • Underground parking • Original Proposal S.F. = 60138 S.F. Proposed Project scope: • 2 Townhome Buildings • 22 Units • 2 & 3 Bedroom Units • Attached & Detached garages • Total Living = 44076 S.F. • Total Garage = 10923 S.F. • Total Project = 55000 S.F. 2.1.b Packet Pg. 7 Attachment: Penny Flats Old Town Brownstone Landmark Preservation (2824 : Penny Coburn Architecture Penny Flats: Old Town Brownstones CHERRY STREET NORTH MASON MAPLE STREET NORTH HOWES STREET 2.1.b Packet Pg. 8 Attachment: Penny Flats Old Town Brownstone Landmark Preservation (2824 : Penny Coburn Architecture Penny Flats: Old Town Brownstones NORTH MASON S i t e CHERRY STREET 2.1.b Packet Pg. 9 Attachment: Penny Flats Old Town Brownstone Landmark Preservation (2824 : Penny Coburn Architecture Penny Flats: Old Town Brownstones F l o o r P l a n s P e d e s t r i a n S p i n e , L e v e l 1 2.1.b Packet Pg. 10 Attachment: Penny Flats Old Town Brownstone Landmark Preservation (2824 : Penny Coburn Architecture Penny Flats: Old Town Brownstones NORTH MASON F l o o r P l a n s N o r t h M a s o n , L e v e l 1 2.1.b Packet Pg. 11 Attachment: Penny Flats Old Town Brownstone Landmark Preservation (2824 : Penny Coburn Architecture Penny Flats: Old Town Brownstones F l o o r P l a n s P e d e s t r i a n S p i n e , L e v e l 2 2.1.b Packet Pg. 12 Attachment: Penny Flats Old Town Brownstone Landmark Preservation (2824 : Penny Coburn Architecture Penny Flats: Old Town Brownstones NORTH MASON F l o o r P l a n s N o r t h M a s o n , L e v e l 2 2.1.b Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: Penny Flats Old Town Brownstone Landmark Preservation (2824 : Penny Coburn Architecture Penny Flats: Old Town Brownstones P e d e s t r i a n S p i n e , L e v e l 3 F l o o r P l a n s 2.1.b Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: Penny Flats Old Town Brownstone Landmark Preservation (2824 : Penny Coburn Architecture Penny Flats: Old Town Brownstones NORTH MASON N o r t h M a s o n , L e v e l 3 F l o o r P l a n s 2.1.b Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: Penny Flats Old Town Brownstone Landmark Preservation (2824 : Penny Coburn Architecture Penny Flats: Old Town Brownstones P e d e s t r i a n S p i n e , L e v e l 4 F l o o r P l a n s 2.1.b Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: Penny Flats Old Town Brownstone Landmark Preservation (2824 : Penny Coburn Architecture Penny Flats: Old Town Brownstones E l e v a t i o n N o r t h M a s o n P e d e s t r i a n S p i n e 2.1.b Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: Penny Flats Old Town Brownstone Landmark Preservation (2824 : Penny Coburn Architecture Penny Flats: Old Town Brownstones P r e c e d e n c e Trolley Barn Wood Bay Window Window Cap Detail Wrought Iron Rail Cornice Detail 2.1.b Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: Penny Flats Old Town Brownstone Landmark Preservation (2824 : Penny Coburn Architecture Penny Flats: Old Town Brownstones 2.1.b Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: Penny Flats Old Town Brownstone Landmark Preservation (2824 : Penny 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 3-D PERSPECTIVE BROWNES ON HOWES 315 N. Howes Street Fort Collins, Colorado 12.16.14 1 SOUTHEAST VIEW 2.1.c Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: Nearby Approved Project- Browns on Howes - Perspective Renderings (2824 : Penny Flats: Old Town Brownstones Development 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 3-D PERSPECTIVE BROWNES ON HOWES 315 N. Howes Street Fort Collins, Colorado 12.16.14 1 SOUTHWEST VIEW 2.1.c Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: Nearby Approved Project- Browns on Howes - Perspective Renderings (2824 : Penny Flats: Old Town Brownstones Development 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 3-D PERSPECTIVE BROWNES ON HOWES 315 N. Howes Street Fort Collins, Colorado 12.16.14 1 NORTHEAST VIEW 2.1.c Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: Nearby Approved Project- Browns on Howes - Perspective Renderings (2824 : Penny Flats: Old Town Brownstones Development 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 3-D PERSPECTIVE BROWNES ON HOWES 315 N. Howes Street Fort Collins, Colorado 12.16.14 1 NORTHWEST VIEW 2.1.c Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: Nearby Approved Project- Browns on Howes - Perspective Renderings (2824 : Penny Flats: Old Town Brownstones Development 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 3-D PERSPECTIVE BROWNES ON HOWES 315 N. Howes Street Fort Collins, Colorado 12.16.14 1 SOUTHEAST VIEW 2 2.1.c Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: Nearby Approved Project- Browns on Howes - Perspective Renderings (2824 : Penny Flats: Old Town Brownstones Development 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 3-D PERSPECTIVE BROWNES ON HOWES 315 N. Howes Street Fort Collins, Colorado 12.16.14 1 EAST VIEW 2.1.c Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: Nearby Approved Project- Browns on Howes - Perspective Renderings (2824 : Penny Flats: Old Town Brownstones Development Agenda Item 2 Item # 2 Page 1 STAFF REPORT January 28, 2015 Landmark Preservation Commission PROJECT NAME UTILITIES CUSTOMER SERVICE BUILDING - DEVELOPMENT REVIEW & RECOMMENDATION PROCESS STAFF Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Planner PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Operation Services staff will provide an update on this project, and discuss further options on the design of the new Utility Administration Building, 222 Laporte Avenue. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This item is a part of continuous discussions with the Landmark Preservation Commission regarding the new Utility Customer Service Building and how it fits into the surrounding context, including the historic Creamery Laboratory Building and the Old City Hall, now the Operation Services Building. ATTACHMENTS 1. City UAB Staff Review Rd 2 1-21-15 (PDF) 2. Utilities - Draft Images for LPC Worksession (PDF) 3. Utilities - NW & NE Images (DOCX) 4. Utilities - Modernist style buildings at CSU (DOCX) 2.2 Packet Pg. 26 Community Development and Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6750 970.224.6134 - fax fcgov.com/developmentreview January 21, 2015 Brian Hergott City of Fort Collins 300 Laporte Ave Fort Collins, CO 80521 RE: City of Fort Collins Utilities Customer Services Building, PDP140005, Round Number 2 Comment Summary: Department: Planning Services Contact: Seth Lorson, 970-224-6189, slorson@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations 01/12/2015: The materials and colors need to be determined prior to public hearing. Please provide material details. It will be nice to see the difference between the sandstone (required material) and the cast stone (used on sills, lintels, and cornice). 05/27/2014: The gray brick conveys a cold feeling. Please try some different, more traditional, brick colors such as those used on the other civic buildings in the area. Perhaps blond and/or brown brick or more natural sandstone. Please provide a sample material board. What is the brick color of the Butterfly Building, perhaps the paint could be stripped and the color copied in the proposed building. Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/27/2014 01/12/2015: The rendering from June 5 shows a much more pronounced three dimensional cornice in the sense that this comment is addressing. We discussed the use of metal for the cornice which would be fine if it tied into other metal elements on the building. 05/28/2014: The cornices at the roof and the base level needs more architectural detail. Three-dimensional cornices. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 05/28/2014 01/12/2015: This comment addresses some of the conversation from the Oct. 10 meeting. 07/07/2014: The new building design does a much better job of conveying the sense of permanence of a civic building. The Code requires use of local sandstone, please provide more details as to how it is being incorporated. The long horizontal entry/cornice element could use some greater detail, perhaps something above each column. The entry doors need to be better distinguished. What will the building look like with the City's typical logo on the facade? Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 07/07/2014 Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for your submittal of the above referenced project. If you have questions about any comments, you may contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through the Project Planner, Seth Lorson, at 970-224-6189 or slorson@fcgov.com. Page 1 of 14 2.2.a Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: City UAB Staff Review Rd 2 1-21-15 (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - Development Review & Recommendation Topic: General 01/12/2015: The building appears to be the same as the last time we saw it. Many comments and recommendations were made at a meeting on Oct. 10 where we reviewed plans dated Sept. 25. Some of the comments were about the building design and provided a more pronounced entry feature that could tie in with the Butterfly Building. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/12/2015 01/16/2015: Landmark Preservation Commission weighed in on the building and site design at the Jan. 14 meeting. The following are my notes: - Replace the Dairy Gold sign or another sign with the same style. - Mark the existing footprint of the butterfly building with paving/landscaping. - Check the interior of the butterfly building for historic significance. - Utilize architects from the LPC to help with the design of the UAB building so it reflects on the butterfly building and the Op Services building: Per and Belinda volunteered. - Consider easier access to the butterfly building. - Landscaping should not hide the butterfly building. (Removal of landscaping and street trees does not comply with the Land Use Code but sensitivity in its design should be considered.) Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/16/2015 Topic: Landscape Plans 01/12/2015: The existing trees and mitigation plan should be on a separate page. Please provide a tree mitigation plan. See submittal requirements: http://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/pdf/pdp_submittal_req_11.18.14.pdf Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/12/2015 Topic: Lighting Plan 01/12/2015: Please provide cut sheets for the proposed light fixtures. And, the photometric measurements need to measure at least 20 feet beyond the property line. The LUC standard (3.2.4(D)(8)) requires that light levels measured 20 feet beyond the property line not exceed 0.1 foot candles. Also, the light loss factor for measurement should be set at 1. Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/12/2015 Topic: Site Plan 01/12/2015: The cover sheet should comply with the requirements outlined in the submittal requirements: http://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/pdf/pdp_submittal_req_11.18.14.pdf Including, parking counts (or an indication of what the requirements are and how they are being met), building height, signature blocks, building square footage, correct Floor Area Ratio etc... Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/12/2015 01/12/2015: The trees to be removed do not need to be on the site plan. Removing them will clean it up a bit. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/12/2015 Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Sheri Langenberger, 970-221-6573, slangenberger@fcgov.com Topic: General Page 2 of 14 2.2.a Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: City UAB Staff Review Rd 2 1-21-15 (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - Development Review & Recommendation 05/13/2014: Adequate information is not provided on the site plan to determine the proposed total square footage of the building. Once this information is provided I can determine if the TDRFees paid are correct. Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/13/2014 Contact: Tyler Siegmund, 970-221-6501, tsiegmund@fcgov.com Topic: General 01/16/2015: Please provide documentation from utility owners waiving the need for utility easements around the property. ADDRESS PRIOR TO HEARING 05/28/2014: Standard utility easements/alignments will be needed around the property. Current street standards specify 15ft utility alignments along Howes St and Laporte Ave, and 8ft utility alignments along the alleys. See redlines Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/14/2015 01/14/2015: Engineering never received a copy of the Traffic Impact Study. Please submit and additional comments may follow after complete review of the TIS. ADDRESS PRIOR TO HEARING 05/28/2014: A Traffic Impact Study was not received as part of the PDP project submittal. Additional comments may apply after the TIS has been submitted and reviewed. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/14/2015 05/28/2014: The seat walls along Laporte need to be set back a minimum of 2ft behind the public sidewalk. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/14/2015 01/14/2015: Please provide spot elevations of the existing alley off of Howes St to determine and document where surface water is draining. Also, please provide additional detail of the sidewalk and curb and gutter connection into the existing alley. If the existing alley does not meet ADA standards where the sidewalk ties in then a temporary sidewalk may be needed across the alley to tie into the existing sidewalk north of the alley. See redlines. ADDRESS AT FINAL 05/28/2014: How does the new detached sidewalk along Howes St tie into the exiting sidewalk to the north? The alley approach may need to be removed and replaced with this project. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 01/14/2015 01/14/2015: 4. The proposed inset parking along Laporte Ave does not meet minimum cross slope standards of 1.5% cross slope for reconstruct. (See station 12+50). The inner curb radii for the inset parking needs to be revised to provide minimum 15ft radii. Please revise. Also, please note on the plans that the inset parking will be constructed in concrete. See redlines. ADDRESS PRIOR TO HEARING Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 01/14/2015 01/14/2015: The proposed sidewalk along Laporte Ave reverses slope at station 12+00. Please revise. ADDRESS PRIOR TO HEARING Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 01/14/2015 01/14/2015: Please remove the decorative pavers from the Laporte Ave sidewalk at the alley entrance. See redlines. ADDRESS AT FINAL Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 01/14/2015 Page 3 of 14 2.2.a Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: City UAB Staff Review Rd 2 1-21-15 (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - Development Review & Recommendation 01/14/2015: Please provide the existing FL elevation at the inlet on Howes at Laporte AND where the curb and gutter ties to existing curb and gutter along Laporte Ave. See redlines. ADDRESS AT FINAL Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 01/14/2015 01/14/2015: Truncated domes will be required at the Laporte Ave alley crossing. ADDRESS AT FINAL Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 01/14/2015 01/14/2015: Decorative pavers are proposed for the alley reconstruction off of Laporte Ave, adjacent to the property. For maintenance purposes, current City code does not allow pavers to be installed within the public right-of-way. Please submit a variance request and a cross-section of the proposed paver system for review. ADDRESS PRIOR TO HEARING Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 01/14/2015 01/16/2015: Additional survey points and profiles of the reconstructed alley off of Laporte Ave will be needed. ADDRESS AT FINAL Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 01/16/2015 01/16/2015: Please provide a detail of the new alley approach off of Laporte Ave. ADDRESS AT FINAL Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 01/16/2015 01/16/2015: Is the concrete forebay needed in the rear alley? Typically private drainage structures need to be placed on private property and not within the public right-of-way. Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 01/16/2015 Department: Forestry Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970-221-6361, tbuchanan@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans 01/13/2015: This comment is continued from 5/28/15. Please set up an onsite meeting with the City Forester. 05/28/2014: Please set up an onsite meeting with the City Forester (Tim Buchanan 221 6361 tebuchanan@fcgov.com) to conduct an existing tree inventory and get information for the preparation of the mitigation plan. Other aspects of the project such as tree transplanting, placement and the rain garden tree details will also be discussed at this meeting. A separate landscape sheet should be provided for the existing tree inventory and mitigation plan. All existing trees should be identified as to species size and condition with intent to transplant keep in place or remove. The tree protection specifications found in LUC 3.2.1 G with the table for specification 7 should be placed on the tree inventory and mitigation plan. Add specification describing how the tree transplanting will occur to the tree inventory and mitigation plan. These tree transplanting specifications should include such things as time of year, ball size, tree space size after care and other important details. Include the City of Fort Collins manager of the project in this meeting. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/28/2014 01/13/2015: It appears the hackberry is quite close to the sidewalk where the sidewalks join. Evaluate if the tree can be moved a little further away from the sidewalk junction. 05/28/2014: Evaluate the trees planted near the corner of Howes and LaPorte for site distance. They are shown close to the corner and should be evaluated. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/28/2014 Page 4 of 14 2.2.a Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: City UAB Staff Review Rd 2 1-21-15 (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - Development Review & Recommendation 01/13/2015: This comment is continued from 5/28/14. The English Oak should be identified as the cultivar Skymaster. Also specifying the Honeylocust as Skyline Honeylocust is still requested. Consider using Skymaster English Oak where the three Bur Oaks are currently shown along the edge of the pull out on LaPorte Avenue. The narrow and more upright form of Skymaster would appear to work better at this location. Bur Oak could work well where the two English Oak are currently shown. 05/28/2014: Species Selection: Linden trees have not done well in sidewalk cut outs in the Fort Collins area. Forestry recommends using Skymaster English Oak as pyramidal cultivar in place of the Boulevard Lindens. Ash trees should not be planted due to the threat from Emerald Ash Borer. The have been moved to the do not plant category on the Front Range Recommended tree list. Use a suitable substitution. Please specify honeylocust as Skyline Honeylocust. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 05/28/2014 Page 5 of 14 2.2.a Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: City UAB Staff Review Rd 2 1-21-15 (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - Development Review & Recommendation 01/13/2015: This comment is continued from 5/28/15. Please check the current notes. It appears that the bullets 3-5 below still need to be added. Also the separation of 8 feet from drive ways or alleys needs to be added to the landscape note placed on the plan that includes separation distances. The table in LUC 3.2.1 7 will need to be placed on the tree inventory and mitigation sheet mentioned in comment number 2. All the tree protection notes in LUC 3.2.1 G will need to be placed on the Tree Inventory and Mitigation sheet 05/28/2014: Add the standard landscape notes. Standards notes can be obtained from Seth Lorson the city Planner for this project. Be sure to include the following as well as other standard notes on the landscape plan. ¿ The soil in all landscape areas, including parkways and medians, shall be thoroughly loosened to a depth of not less than eight (8) inches and soil amendment shall be thoroughly incorporated into the soil of all landscape areas to a depth of at least six (6) inches by tilling, discing or other suitable method, at a rate of at least three (3) cubic yards of soil amendment per one thousand (1,000) square feet of landscape area. ¿ A permit must be obtained from the City forester before any trees or shrubs as noted on this plan are planted, pruned or removed on the public right-of-way. This includes zones between the sidewalk and curb, medians and other city property. This permit shall approve the location and species to be planted. Failure to obtain this permit may result in replacing or relocating trees and a hold on certificate of occupancy. ¿ Contact the City Forester to inspect all street tree plantings at the completion of each phase of the development. All trees need to have been installed as shown on the landscape plan. Approval of street tree planting is required before final approval of each phase. ¿ The Developer shall replace dead or dying street trees after planting until final maintenance inspection and acceptance by the City of Fort Collins Forestry Division. All street trees in the project must be established, of an approved species and of acceptable condition prior to acceptance. ¿ All tree pruning and removal shall be by a business holding a current City of Fort Collins arborist licensee on the City Forestry Division bid list. ¿ Per the code required tree utility separations in LUC 3.2.1 K. Street and ornamental trees shall be planted no closer than 40 feet and 15 feet respectively from street lights, no trees shall be planted within 10 feet from water and sewer main lines, 4 feet from gas lines, 6 feet from storm sewer lines, 6 feet from water and sewer service lines and 8 feet from driveway or curb cuts. Tree utility and traffic control separations shall not be used as a means of avoiding the planting of required street tree. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 05/28/2014 01/13/2015: It appears that the east most existing honeylocust along LaPorte Avenue which is 13 inch caliper can be retained without significant construction impact. Review this tree for retention. This tree can be discussed at the on-site meeting with the City Forester that will be scheduled in the near future. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 Page 6 of 14 2.2.a Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: City UAB Staff Review Rd 2 1-21-15 (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - Development Review & Recommendation 01/13/2015: Tree Transplanting: Four impacted trees on this project are of a transplantable size. 2 Honeylocust located along LaPorte Avenue 2 Bur Oak located along Howes Street 1 Sensation Boxelder at the NE section of the site. Provide a transplant plan for these 4 trees. Evaluate as a first option incorporating them into the landscape plan at this location. Can the two honeylocust be utilized as street trees where two new honeylocust are shown along LaPorte Avenue? Can the two Bur Oak trees be utilized where the two English Oaks are currently proposed on the LaPorte Avenue side of the project? Please evaluate the feasibility of using these existing trees at these or other locations on the site. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 01/13/2015: Please explore adding additional street trees along Howes Street. The current plan shows only three street trees on Howes. Placing additional canopy shade trees along Howes Street appears limited by streetlight and utility locations. Street tree numbers could be increased by using ornamental trees which can be sited 15 from street lights and placed closer together. Two good xeric species to consider would be the following. Others may also be suitable. Canyon Maple tree form - Acer grandidentatum Gambel Oak tree form - Quercus gambelii. Evaluate the following street tree placement scheme along Howes Street. Keep the first two street trees north of LaPorte Street as canopy shade trees. Evaluate if an ornamental tree can be placed between the north canopy shade tree and the second street light. Evaluate if three ornamental trees at around 20-25 foot spacing can work between the middle and north streetlights along Howes street. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 01/13/2015: Additional species changes to review: Reducing the number of honeylocust used on the project is desirable. The two honeylocust shown along Howes street should be evaluated for a species change to either Chinquapin Oak or Shumard Oak. Amur Maple is not a favored ornamental tree for planting on City property in Fort Collins. Maintenance and survival issues have occurred locally. Evaluate changing the 5 Amur Maples to a cultivar of Peking Tree Lilac Syringa pekinensis. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 01/13/2015: Please list the percentage used of each tree species to the planting schedule. Review the Minimum Species Diversity standard in LUC 3.2.1 3 and make quantity adjustments if needed to meet this standard. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 01/13/2015: In the Planting Schedule please place Bullet Gall Resistant by the common name Bur Oak. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 Page 7 of 14 2.2.a Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: City UAB Staff Review Rd 2 1-21-15 (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - Development Review & Recommendation 01/14/2015: Add these or equivalent landscape notes to describe how irrigation will be review and provided on the project. The irrigation system for landscaped areas shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Fort Collins Water Utilities. Irrigation plans to be reviewed as part of the construction permit review process. The irrigation system must be installed according to approved plans. All irrigated turf areas shall be irrigated with an underground automatic, pop-up irrigation system. All shrub and perennial beds shall be irrigated with permanent drip or bubbler system. Trees located in non-turf areas to be irrigated with a permanent drip or bubbler system. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 01/14/2015 Department: Historical Preservation Contact: Seth Lorson, 970-224-6189, slorson@fcgov.com Topic: General 05/27/2014: Revised plans were discussed by the Landmark Preservation Commission at its May 14, 2014 meeting. The plans call for the historic Butterfly Building to be retained in its current location, and for the new Utilities Building to be moved farther to the north and to the west than previously shown, to provide more separation between the two buildings. Although no vote was taken, the Commission members were unanimously supportive of the revised plans. Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/21/2015 01/16/2015: Revised plans were reviewed by the LPC at its January 14, 2015 meeting, following presentations at the Commission's September 24, 2014 work session and October 8, 2014 meeting. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/21/2015 01/16/2015: The Dairy Gold sign should be reconstructed to match the dimensions, placement and design of the sign as it appears in the c. 1965 parade photograph. Facilities should arrange with the Attorney's office to verify if the name "Dairy Gold" is still in use and/or is copyrighted, which will determine if the name could be used on the sign. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/21/2015 01/16/2015: The interior features of the Laboratory Building will need to be assessed to determine if they contribute to the building's historic or architectural significance and, if so, should be retained following the building's relocation. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/21/2015 01/16/2015: Commission members liked the plinth or pedestal plaza concept. While it does raise the Laboratory Building above its original height, it also causes the building to stand out and be more visible. The original footprint of the Laboratory Building needs to be marked, likely through the use of different colored or textured pavers. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 01/21/2015 Page 8 of 14 2.2.a Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: City UAB Staff Review Rd 2 1-21-15 (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - Development Review & Recommendation 01/16/2015: The plaza area needs to be better developed. Stairs leading to the Laboratory Building from the south (Laporte) side should be added. Additional 1960s-era landscaping should be developed, with hardscape, trees, and plantings evoking the era. This 1960s landscaping should be continued down the pedestrian spine between the Laboratory Building and 215 Mason for a distance. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/21/2015 01/16/2015: The design of the Utilities Building does not reflect the historic context of the Old City Hall and the Laboratory Building. The Commission did not feel that the characteristics of either historic building were represented in the Utilities Building in any substantive manner, required to meet the compatibility standards of LUC Section 3.4.7 and which had been noted and promised at the October 8, 2014 meeting. The Commission established a subcommittee to work closely with Facilities to help ensure plans that will meet this standard. Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 01/21/2015 01/16/2015: The Commission commented that the design of the Utility Building was not representative of the advanced technology that will be used in the building, and suggested the City consider this in the building's exterior architecture, taking design inspiration from the Laboratory and Old City Hall. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 01/21/2015 01/16/2015: At its October 8, 2014 meeting, the Commission noted that the relocation of the Laboratory Building does not by itself comply with the "maximum extent feasible" standard contained in LUC 3.4.7, but that this can be mitigated by drawing design inspiration from the Old City Hall and Laboratory Building. While no formal action was taken at the January 14, 2015 meeting, the Commission appears to be united in its comments that this has not occurred. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 01/21/2015 Department: Internal Services Contact: Russell Hovland, 970-416-2341, rhovland@fcgov.com Topic: Building Insp Plan Review Page 9 of 14 2.2.a Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: City UAB Staff Review Rd 2 1-21-15 (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - Development Review & Recommendation 05/27/2014: Building Permit Pre-Submittal Meeting Pre-Submittal meetings are offered to assist the designer/builder by assuring, early on in the design, that the new commercial or multi-family projects are on track to complying with all of the adopted City codes and Standards listed below. The proposed project should be in the early to mid-design stage for this meeting to be effective and is typically scheduled after the Current Planning conceptual review meeting. Applicants of new commercial or multi-family projects are advised to call 416-2341 to schedule a pre-submittal meeting. Applicants should be prepared to present site plans, floor plans, and elevations and be able to discuss code issues of occupancy, square footage and type of construction being proposed. Construction shall comply with the following adopted codes as amended: 2012 International Building Code (IBC) 2012 International Residential Code (IRC) 2012 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) 2012 International Mechanical Code (IMC) 2012 International Fuel Gas Code (IFGC) 2009 International Plumbing Code (IPC) as amended by the State of Colorado 2011 National Electrical Code (NEC) as amended by the State of Colorado Accessibility: State Law CRS 9-5 & ICC/ANSI A117.1-2009. Snow Load Live Load: 30 PSF / Ground Snow Load 30 PSF. Frost Depth: 30 inches. Wind Load: 100- MPH 3 Second Gust Exposure B. Seismic Design: Category B. Climate Zone: Zone 5 Energy Code Use 1. Single Family; Duplex; Townhomes: 2009 IRC Chapter 11 or 2009 IECC Chap 4. 2. Multi-family and Condominiums 3 stories max: 2009 IECC Chapter 4. 3. Commercial and Multi-family 4 stories and taller: 2009 IECC Chapter 5. Fort Collins Green Code Amendments effective starting 1-1-2012. A copy of these requirements can be obtained at the Building Office or contact the above phone number. Project specific concerns: 1. Fire-sprinkler systems are required. 2. New Green Code requires: a. Upgraded insulation is required for buildings using electric heat or cooling. b. Low-flow Watersense plumbing fixtures (toilet, faucets, shower heads) are required. c. Low VOC interior finishes. Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/27/2014 Department: Light And Power Contact: Doug Martine, 970-224-6152, dmartine@fcgov.com Topic: General 05/13/2014: A completed Commercial Service Information (C-1) form will need to be provided to Light & Power Engineering before the electric system can be designed. Even though this is (in part) a Light & Power building, normal electric development charges will apply. Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/13/2014 Page 10 of 14 2.2.a Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: City UAB Staff Review Rd 2 1-21-15 (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - Development Review & Recommendation 05/13/2014: After plans are final, an AutoCad (v.2008) drawing of the utility plan needs to be sent to Terry Cox at TCOX@FCGOV.COM. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/13/2014 Department: PFA Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org Topic: General 01/14/2015 (active item from 05/27/2014): ALTERNATIVE MEANS OF CODE COMPLIANCE As the building will have an automatic fire sprinkler system, general fire access to the UCS building's exterior is acceptable under the proposed development plan. However, due to site constraints as well as building height, fire code requirements relative to aerial fire apparatus access cannot be met either in the short-term or long-term plans for the site. It is recognized the site will not allow the placement of a 30' wide EAE spaced 15' from the building and adjacent to the longest side of the building. The current plan therefore creates a condition with firefighter access obstacles similar to those of high rise buildings. The intent of the fire code shall be preserved and as such, offsetting measures must be added so as to mitigate the current 'out of access' condition. Further building design considerations are required to offset the lack of aerial fire apparatus access. These offsetting measures will ultimately require the approval of the fire marshal. Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/27/2014 Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control 01/02/2015: The site disturbs more than 10,000 sq-ft therefore Erosion and Sediment Control Materials need to be submitted for FDP. The erosion control requirements are in the Stormwater Design Criteria under the Amendments of Volume 3 Chapter 7 Section 1.3.3. Current Erosion Control Materials Submitted does not meet requirements. Please submit; Erosion Control Plan, Erosion Control Report, and an Escrow / Security Calculation. If you need clarification concerning this section, or if there are any questions please contact Jesse Schlam 970-218-2932 or email @ jschlam@fcgov.com Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 01/02/2015 Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General 01/13/2015: This includes the rain gardens south of the building. 05/30/2014: Pleae provide a drainage easement for all drainage features, including the bio-swale. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/30/2014 01/13/2015: Repeat Comment. 05/30/2014: The City would like the landscaping to be enhanced in the north water quality pond. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/30/2014 01/13/2015: Please label the northern water quality pond Porous Landscape Detention on the plans. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 01/13/2015: Underdrains are required for the southern rain gardens. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 Page 11 of 14 2.2.a Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: City UAB Staff Review Rd 2 1-21-15 (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - Development Review & Recommendation Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations 01/13/2015: No comments. 05/27/2014: No comments. Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/27/2014 Topic: Construction Drawings 01/13/2015: Please change the sub-title to match the Subdivision Plat. See redlines. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 Topic: Lighting Plan 01/13/2015: The sheet numbering does not match the index on sheet SD1.1, and is in conflict with the Existing Conditions sheet. See redlines. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 Topic: Plat 01/13/2015: Please add "City Of Fort Collins" as marked to the sub-title. See redlines. Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 01/13/2015: The benchmark statement in Note #4 is not necessary. If it is to remain, it must match the following format. PROJECT DATUM: NGVD29 UNADJUSTED (OLD CITY OF FORT COLLINS DATUM) BENCHMARK #1 w/ DESCRIPTION ELEVATION: BENCHMARK #2 w/ DESCRIPTION ELEVATION: NOTE: IF NAVD 88 DATUM IS REQUIRED FOR ANY PURPOSE, THE FOLLOWING EQUATION SHOULD BE USED: NAVD88 = NGVD29 UNADJUSTED + X.XX Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 01/13/2015: The lighter text & linework marked is not acceptable. It will not scan or reproduce. Please darken it up. See redlines. Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 01/13/2015: The alley north of the property was platted as 20'. Please explain the 25' alley. Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 01/13/2015: Please revise the dedication information for the alley north of the property. See redlines. Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 01/13/2015: Howes Street was platted as 140' of right of way. We show a vacation at Book 69, Page 261, but please verify. Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 Page 12 of 14 2.2.a Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: City UAB Staff Review Rd 2 1-21-15 (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - Development Review & Recommendation Topic: Site Plan 01/13/2015: This legal description needs to match the Subdivision Plat, or be replaced with "Lot 1, COFC Utilities Administration Building". 05/27/2014: Please add "COFC Utilities Customer Services Building" in front of the legal description shown on sheet SD1.1. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 05/27/2014 01/13/2015: There are still line over text issues. See redlines. 05/27/2014: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 05/27/2014 01/13/2015: There is still text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched areas. See redlines. 05/27/2014: Please mask all text within hatched areas. See redlines. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 05/27/2014 01/13/2015: The sheet numbering in the index for the Existing Conditions, Landscape & Lighting plans does not match the titles on those sheets. See redlines. Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Martina Wilkinson, 970-221-6887, mwilkinson@fcgov.com Topic: General 01/13/2015: Please work with Transportation Planning (Aaron Iverson) to discuss the reduction of non-road space (parkway and sidewalk) to create parking along the front of the building. His original recommendation was that LaPorte be re-striped with slightly narrower lanes to provide enough space for the parking. This would keep the same number of lanes, keep the same width for sidewalk/parkway, and allow for larger bulbs to shorten pedestrian distances across LaPorte at the crossings. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 01/13/2015: Will there be indoor bike parking? Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 Topic: Site Plan 01/13/2015: The response for this comment indicated that an intersection detail has been provided. I can't seem to find that. Can you point me in the right direction? 05/27/2014: Sheet C200. There are some changes shown on the adjacent street (Howes and LaPorte) in terms of parking without a clear understanding of how this impacts the street width, striping etc. Please provide a signing and striping plan that details how the width of the street will be used. For instance, there may not be enough street width to allow any kind of diagonal parking (head-in) on Howes. Will lanes need to be narrowed on LaPorte to accommodate the new parking? Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 05/27/2014 Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering Contact: Roger Buffington, 970-221-6854, rbuffington@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings 05/27/2014: How will water and wastewater service be provided to the Butterfly Building? Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 05/27/2014 Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Page 13 of 14 2.2.a Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: City UAB Staff Review Rd 2 1-21-15 (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - Development Review & Recommendation Topic: General 01/16/2015: Ready for a hearing Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 01/16/2015 Department: Zoning Contact: Noah Beals, 970-416-2313, nbeals@fcgov.com Topic: General 01/13/2015: Need to add Director of Community Developemtne and Neighborhood services and the Owners Certification signature blocks to sheet SD1.3 Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 01/13/2015: Where are the catalog cut-sheets of the lighting fixtures? Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 01/13/2015: Where is the shadow and visual analysis for the building over 40ft in height. Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 01/13/2015: Sheet index should include all sheets not included in the utility plans or plat. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 01/13/2015 Contact: Peter Barnes, 970-416-2355, pbarnes@fcgov.com Topic: Site Plan 01/13/2015: Repeat comment addititionally add dimensions for the Mechanical Enclosure 05/16/2014: Show the building footprint dimensions. Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 05/16/2014 01/13/2015: Please provide a bicycle parkin table. Are there not any bike racks located near the south entrance? Where are the enclosed bike spaces? 05/16/2014: The plan shows 9 bike 'racks'. Is each rack a multi-bike rack, or an individual bike rack? Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 05/16/2014 01/13/15: Repeat comment 05/16/2014: Need to add a notes table to plan indicating building use, building square footage (total and per floor), number of stories, overall height, number of bike parking spaces, etc. With regard to bike parking, at least 1 bike per 4000 sf. of floor area is required, with 20% enclosed. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 05/16/2014 Page 14 of 14 2.2.a Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: City UAB Staff Review Rd 2 1-21-15 (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - Development Review & Recommendation 2.2.b Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: Utilities - Draft Images for LPC Worksession (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - 2.2.b Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: Utilities - Draft Images for LPC Worksession (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - 2.2.b Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: Utilities - Draft Images for LPC Worksession (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - 2.2.b Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: Utilities - Draft Images for LPC Worksession (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - 2.2.b Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: Utilities - Draft Images for LPC Worksession (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - 2.2.b Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Utilities - Draft Images for LPC Worksession (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - NW NE 2.2.c Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Utilities - NW & NE Images (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - Development Review & Recommendation Process) 2.2.d Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Utilities - Modernist style buildings at CSU (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - 2.2.d Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Utilities - Modernist style buildings at CSU (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - 2.2.d Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: Utilities - Modernist style buildings at CSU (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - 2.2.d Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: Utilities - Modernist style buildings at CSU (2827 : Utilities Customer Service Building - Agenda Item 3 Item # 3 Page 1 STAFF REPORT January 28, 2015 Landmark Preservation Commission PROJECT NAME DESIGN ASSISTANCE PROGRAM POLICY DISCUSSION STAFF Josh Weinberg, City Planner PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This item is to update the Commission on the status of the Design Assistance Program and discuss potential revisions to the program guidelines. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BACKGROUND: Instituted by City Council in 2011, the Design Assistance Program (DAP) aims to help property owners minimize the impacts of additions, alterations, and new construction on neighbors and on the overall character of the historic Eastside and Westside Neighborhoods. Council recognized the usefulness of such a program following the first round of the Eastside/Westside Character Study that took place in 2010, looking for an educational solution for many of the problems with design compatibility in those areas. The program is designed to utilize the expertise of qualified consultants with documented experience in compatible historic design, for the design of new construction and alterations, as well as for providing expert assistance during the project planning stages. Consultants on the list need to demonstrate competency in promoting design compatibility within historic context. Please review the current program guidelines and criteria for application, which are attached and will inform the discussion. Staff is seeing the program become increasingly popular, and will only gain more popularity as new design guidelines are created for the Eastside and Westside neighborhoods. While the eventual goal is to tie the DAP to the design guidelines, the guidelines will not be completed until next year. Staff is looking for direction on the following questions/topics: 1. Should program funds be available for the design of new secondary buildings; what about those that are on alleys and largely out of public view? 2. Should funding be available for two different projects on the same building within the same year (a front porch and a rear addition, for example)? 3. Should funding be available for the same project over two years (one invoice in December and another in January, for example, so the total of both exceeds $2,000)? 2.3 Packet Pg. 52 Agenda Item 3 Item # 3 Page 2 4. Currently the program provides funding for structural engineering. Should there be restrictions placed on this type of work? If this is an acceptable use of program funds, should the funding maximum be limited? 5. Should funds be available to design a second, but better (more compatible) version of the same project within the same year, or for the same owner in later years? Would it make a difference if the project was an addition on an eligible vs. non-eligible building? ATTACHMENTS 1. Program Guidelines (DOC) 2. Application Criteria for Consultants (DOCX) 2.3 Packet Pg. 53 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 DESIGN ASSISTANCE PROGRAM BACKGROUND: Instituted by City Council in 2011, the Design Assistance Program aims to help property owners minimize the impacts of additions, alterations, and new construction on neighbors and on the overall character of the historic Eastside and Westside Neighborhoods. Council recognized the usefulness of such a program following the first round of the Eastside/Westside Character Study that took place in 2010, looking for an educational solution for many of the problems with design compatibility in those areas. The program is designed to utilize the expertise of qualified consultants with documented experience in compatible historic design, for the design of new construction and alterations, as well as for providing expert assistance during the project planning stages. Consultants on the list need to demonstrate competency in promoting design compatibility within historic context. DESIGN ASSISTANCE PROGRAM GUIDELINES: Assistance Amounts 1. The city will provide a maximum of $2,000 for design assistance. Depending on the scope of the project, the entire fee may be more, which will be the responsibility of the property owner to fund. Upon approval of the design plans, the City will reimburse the contractor up to $2,000. The City reserves the right to reject plans that do not meet the intention of this program, which is to facilitate contextually compatible design, or which do not meet building codes or permit requirements. 2. Funds are allocated on an annual basis, and are available on a first come, first served basis. There will not be any application periods; rather the program will be continually available depending on remaining funds. Who May Apply 1. The applicant shall be the owner of the structure. 2. Design Assistance Program funding can be applied for different aspects of the same project, i.e. mortar analysis and design work can be applied for independently, with two separate consultants, working on the same project. 3. If the structure is sold, the new owner may apply for Design Assistance Program funding. 4. Owners of multiple structures may apply for Design Assistance Program funding for once per structure per year, unless otherwise approved by the Commission. Type of Projects 1. Design Assistance Program funding is intended to provide homeowners with technical design assistance for projects that will impact a building’s exterior, particularly those elevations that are visible from public streets. 2. Properties must be generally located within the Eastside/Westside Neighborhoods, Sheely Drive Neighborhood, the Historic Old Town commercial district, be a designated Landmark, or have the potential to affect a designated Landmark. Additional projects/properties can be approved by the Commission. 3. Design Review assistance will provide guidance on exterior alterations and/or new construction. 2.3.a Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: Program Guidelines (2823 : Design Assistance Program Policy Discussion) - 2 - Application Process 1. Meet with city historic preservation staff for an initial discussion. Receive/download Application Form and list of design assistance professionals. 2. Contact, interview, and select consultant. 3. Submit completed Application Form including property location, nature of project, property owner name and contact information, consultant selected, and full amount of anticipated charges. Staff will review and set aside money for the project if available. 4. At the LPC’s discretion, the owner shall submit a draft of plans, or report, and meet with the Commission - or subcommittee - for a complimentary, no obligation design review. 5. Submit conceptual plans or a copy of the report developed by the consultant (the “deliverables”) for approval, and provide a copy of the consultant’s paid invoice. 6. The City will pay the Design Assistance Program funds to the contractor directly for the agreed amount, up to a maximum of $2,000. 2.3.a Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: Program Guidelines (2823 : Design Assistance Program Policy Discussion) APPLICATION CRITERIA FOR CONSULTANTS: Design Assistance consultants shall apply to the City of Fort Collins to be part of the program. Consultants meeting the criteria, as determined by the Landmark Preservation Commission, will be placed on a list that will be provided to property owners. Property owners shall interview, select and contract with the consultant. The City will pay the consultant directly, upon receipt of the deliverables and an itemized invoice. Any costs above the $2,000 maximum, or any costs incurred outside of the scope of the program, will be the sole responsibility of the property owner. 1. To be eligible for the program, consultants shall meet the following criteria:  Be in the design or construction profession, with a specialization in or strong understanding of historic preservation.  Can demonstrate having successfully worked on at least five historic properties; and can demonstrate context sensitive design, compatible with surrounding historic properties.  Applicants must specifically describe the work that they were responsible for on said properties/ projects.  Provide drawings and/or before photos, along with documentation of the work through after-photos.  Through overall body of work, must demonstrate an understanding of the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Historic Preservation. This could be in conjunction with the sample projects, demonstrating how the Standards were applied.  Receive approval of LPC. 2. In addition to the previous criteria, the applicant will show how they meet one or more of the following criteria established by the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards: Architects/Designers  At least two years of graduate study in architectural preservation, American architectural history, preservation planning, or closely related field; or  At least two years of full-time professional experience on historic preservation projects, with a demonstrated leadership role in their area of expertise on sample projects.  Such academic study or experience may include detailed investigations of historic structures, preparation of historic structures research reports, and preparation of plans and specifications for preservation projects. Contractors/Engineers/Specialized Trades  The equivalent of at least two years managing projects where the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Buildings was applied. 2.3.b Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: Application Criteria for Consultants (2823 : Design Assistance Program Policy Discussion)  Such projects may include detailed investigations of historic structures, preparation of historic structures research reports, and preparation of plans and specifications for preservation projects. Consultants shall remain on the list for a period of three years, at which time they will need to reapply to remain on the list. Consultants who are deemed by the Landmark Preservation Commission to not be maintaining their commitment to historic preservation standards and historic design compatibility may be removed from the list. 2.3.b Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: Application Criteria for Consultants (2823 : Design Assistance Program Policy Discussion) Agenda Item 4 Item # 4 Page 1 STAFF REPORT January 28, 2015 Landmark Preservation Commission PROJECT NAME 711 REMINGTON STREET - BUTTON HOUSE - LPC SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT STAFF Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Planner PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Landmark Preservation Commission has established a subcommittee of its members to research further options for recognition of the demolished Button House, 711 Remington Street. This item will review and discuss the subcommittee’s findings and suggestions. A neighborhood meeting of Laurel School National Register District owners and residents will be held on February 3, 2015, to gather public comments and suggestions. The item is currently scheduled to be brought before the Commission at its February 11, 2015 Regular Meeting for further discussion and final action, if warranted. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2.4 Packet Pg. 58