HomeMy WebLinkAboutLEGACY SENIOR RESIDENCES - PDP - PDP120015 - CORRESPONDENCE - (12)Page 2 of 2
environmental clearance.
Finally, I talked with several of the planning staff members about the design standards in the R-D-R River
Downtown Redevelopment District, in which this site is located. My interpretation of these standards, which
include building design standards (height, massing, materials) as well as other items such as buffers and building
materials, is that I don't believe the current building design at four stories and the current massing meets the
district standards and that's one of the criteria I have to address in the Environmental Assessment. The most
notable standard I see is "multiple story buildings of up to five stories are permitted; however, massing shall be
terraced back from the river and streets as follows: (1) buildings or parts of buildings shall step down to one story
abutting the river landscape frontage; and (2) buildings or parts of buildings shall step down to three stories or
less abutting any street frontage"). I suspect this standard is the type of design that might address some of the
adverse effects on historic properties. Bottom line is this is my interpretation - not the staffs. I would suggest
that you take the project through the city's Conceptual Review process to get comments on the design and any
other city requirements as soon as possible to see how the staff interprets and applies these standards to the
project,
In summary, this site is becoming a very complex one to address and the issues of the gas plume and potential
asbestos on the site are well beyond my level of expertise. If the State Historic Preservation Office requires new
historic surveys for all of the properties in the APE, then I don't believe I have the level of expertise you'll need for
this either. I will ask Karen McWilliams at the City of Fort Collins to help me try to get confirmation from the state
on the survey requirement. You may want to find another firm that can do all of the work required for the
Environmental Assessment, including the historic element. If so, I won't expect compensation for any of the work
I've done to date.
Please call me next week if you want to discuss any of this.
Sherry
Sherry AU>evLao4i� Cl a rl1, AICP
t hone:' (970) 581-7799
Fax:(970) 223-7144
2/22/2011
Page 1 of 2
Karen McWilliams
From: Julie Smith
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2011 11:37 AM
To: Karen McWilliams
Subject: FW: Legacy Senior Residences
Here you go!
From: Sherry Albertson -Clark [mailto:salbertclark@Ipbroadband.net]
Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2011 1:50 PM
To: Julie Smith
Subject: FW: Legacy Senior Residences
Julie, FYI.
From: Sherry Albertson -Clark [mailto:salbertclark@lpbroadband.net]
Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2011 12:14 PM
To: 'Bobbi Jo Lucas'
Subject: Legacy Senior Residences
Bobbi:
I wanted to give you another update on the work I've been doing on the Legacy project and offer several
suggestions.
I met on January 19th with a City of Fort Collins staff representative (Matt Zoccali) about the city's
agreement with EPA on the property to the west of your site (location of the city's Azatlan Center). There
is an underground plume of a gasoline -type product in the ground from many years ago and remediation
has been done in the past; however, the city has an agreement that precludes any work being done on
the city's site that might allow this plume to migrate from it's current location. I don't know whether the
Legacy project will trigger issues relative to this or not - the Phase I and II may address this. Also, there
is evidence that the Legacy site is within the old landfill that was operated in the area until the late
I960'sleafly 1970'suarid asbestos has appareritly been found'ih' other areas of the landfill;'so if may well
be present on your site. Again, Terracon's work may address this.
I met on January 27th and 28th with Karen McWilliams of the City's Historic Preservation office to discuss
the historic review process with her and gather information. We outlined an area known as the Area of
Potential Effect (or APE), which is a first step in the required historic review process. This area includes
about 25 different buildings, many of which, have been surveyed before for their eligibility for nomination
to the National Register of Historic Places. Several are already on the National Register, some are
probably eligible, and others are probably not eligible. The key is that if a property is on the register, or is
eligible (it's then considered "historic") then any potential adverse effect on historic properties must be
determined. Most of the survey work done on these properties was in a study for the city (A Cultural
Resources Inventory of the Old Fort Site) which was done by Jason Marmor in 2002. This means that
the survey forms on each property are nearly 10 years old. I've been told, but haven't been able to
confirm with the state, that they will require new surveys or updates to the earlier ones because of the
lapse of time and the potential for changes to have been made on any of these structures or sites - thus
having a bearing on whether a structure or site is eligible for the National Register or not. If so, this is a
significant amount of additional work on historic and archaeological resources just to complete any
necessary surveys if required by the state. Once materials are submitted to the state, they will also go to
the city for review and other interested parties are invited to participate. The city has a listing of who to
notify, based on past work they've done on transportation projects that included federal funding. I believe
that the project and building as currently designed, will have adverse effects on at least some of the
historic structures, on the basis of its height and visual impact, and its location will potentially have
adverse effects on the Old Fort Site. This process is designed to find ways to address or mitigate these
adverse effects by involving the state, city (as local government) and other interested parties. Ultimately,
a Memorandum of Agreement would likely be required by the state and would define conditions, changes
in design, etc. that could be required in order for the State Historic Preservation Office to give an
2/22/2011