HomeMy WebLinkAboutREMINGTON ANNEX - MOD. OF STANDARDS - MOD120002 - REPORTS - MODIFICATION REQUEST (3)(2) is not associated with the lives of person significant in history since the record
contains no evidence whatsoever; and,
(3) does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of
construction, or represent the work of a master, or posse high artistic values or represent a
significant and distinguishable entity with components that lack individual distinction in that the
record includes evidence clearly demonstrating (i) significant alterations and additions to the
property with incompatible design, materials and workmanship, (ii) an unknown builder and
architect, and, (iii) an unappealing location and setting abutting and adjoining a high traffic
commercial alley, and located directly between two properties both of which are determined as
individually ineligible for landmark designation and both of which are listed separately as
intrusions to the historic district; and,
(4) has not yielded, and is not likely to yield, information important to prehistory or
history since the record contains no evidence whatsoever.
2
When balanced against the expressly stated goals of City Plan, the Land Use Code, the N-C-B
zone district, and the fiscal objectives of the property owner, and for the reasons stated above, we
find that relocation is not detrimental to the public good.
2. Relocation is appropriate by reason of extraordinary and exceptional situations
unique to this property as evidenced by the city's inconsistent statements of individual eligibility
for Landmark Designation, and the applicant's reasonable reliance on the city's statements
during the prescribed development process, such that the strict application of the standard for the
preservation and adaptive use of a property would result in exceptional or undue hardship under
these unique situations. We find that the applicant reasonably relied on the city's initial
determination of ineligibility for individual Landmark Designation when acquiring 711
Remington and the two immediately adjoining lots (705 Remington and 715 Remington) for
proposed Remington Annex project.
GENERAL FINDINGS OF FACT
(Proposed by Applicant)
711 Remington lacks Exterior Integrity and fails to meet any one (1) of the standards for
designation set forth in Section 14-5 of the Municipal Code.
711 Remington is a side by side duplex that is irregularly shaped and has a rear addition that is
not compatible with the rest of the house. The street facing side of the duplex is estimated to
have been constructed in the 1890's as a single family dwelling of approximately 500 square
feet. A cinder block three car garage was added to the site in 1947 which is not compatible with
the original house in design, materials or workmanship which damages the exterior integrity of
the structure. A second major alteration and addition occurred in 1962 with the conversion of the
property from a single family residence to a side by side duplex. This addition is also not
compatible with the original house. Collectively, the major additions more than double the size
of the original structure with negative impacts on the setting, feeling and association of the
property. The garage addition and the duplex addition are not compatible with the original house
and damage the exterior integrity of the structure.
The duplex is located between two larger structures each of which is designated as an intrusion
to the Laurel School Historic District. The property is located on the outer most fringe of the
Laurel School Historic District. The property directly abuts a high traffic commercial alley, and
directly abuts the Community Commercial District (C-C) zoning. The property is located in the
Neighborhood Conservation Buffer District (N-C-B) zoning which is a transition zone between
residential neighborhoods and more intensive commercial -use areas or high traffic zones.
The record establishes that 711 Remington does not meet any of the standards for designation as
a Fort Collins landmark under Section 14-5 in that that duplex:
(1) is not associated with events that have made a significant contribution to broad
patterns of history since the record contains no evidence whatsoever; and,
sidewalks, trials, bicycle routes and other alternative modes of transportation through in -fill
development approximate to the Mason Street Corridor, City Transit Center, Colorado State
University sidewalk infrastructure and established bicycle routes on Remington Street and
throughout downtown Fort Collins (subsection H); and, (iv) fostering a more rational
relationship among residential and business uses for the mutual benefit of all through in -fill
development approximate to established student services and the unique synergies and
efficiencies arising from common ownership and management of the Collegio mixed -use
development and the immediately adjoining Remington Annex residential project (subsection K).
3. Relocation substantially alleviates existing, defined and described problems of
city-wide concern and substantially addresses and benefits important community needs through
advancing the intent and purpose of the Land Use Code, alleviating pressure on enforcement and
violations of the "3-unrelated" law, and addressing the concerns identified in the Student
Housing Action Plan. A strict application of the standard for the preservation and adaptive use of
a property that lacks Exterior Integrity and possess no ability to convey any Significance renders
the project practically infeasible when balanced against the expressly stated goals of City Plan,
the Land Use Code and the N-C-B zone district.
B. The granting of modifications to the General Development Standard Section 3.4.7(B) and
to Section 3.4.7 (E) as stand alone modifications to allow relocation of 711 Remington meets the
requirements of Section 2.8.2(H)(3) as supported by the following specific findings:
1. Relocation of 711 Remington is not detrimental to the public good because the
property lacks Exterior Integrity and lacks Significance for Landmark designation. The Property
does not possess the requisite degree of the seven (7) aspects or qualities that define Exterior
Integrity. The garage addition and the duplex addition are not compatible in design or materials
with the original house with the result that the physical and aesthetic characteristics of the
property and the site are weakened and damaged to the extent that any sense of identity, heritage
and contribution to the historic district is lost. The property's location on the outer most fringe of
the historic district, directly located between two intrusions to the historic district, and backing
up to a high traffic commercial alley and zone district is such that its setting, feeling and
association fail to establish Exterior Integrity.
The Property lacks the requisite Significance in that it fails to meet any one (1) of the standards
for designation set forth in Section 14-5 of the Municipal Code. We find in the alternative that
711 Remington would still lack Significance even if the record had demonstrated that the
property had met one (1) of the standards for Landmark designation under Section 14-5, since
the composite of the seven (7) aspects or qualities that define Exterior Integrity are of
insufficient degree such that 711 Remington has no ability to convey any Significance and does
not retain any identity for which it may have been significant.
K
REMINGTON ANNEX
SPECIFIC FINDINGS FOR MODIFICATION OF STANDARDS
(Proposed by Applicant)
As supported by evidence submitted at the Planning and Zoning Board hearing, the applicant
submits the following findings of fact:
Modification 2.8.2(H)(2) — Substantially Alleviate City -Wide Concern and Address Adopted
Policies
A. The granting of modifications to the General Development Standard Section 3.4.7(B) and
to Section 3.4.7 (E) as stand alone modifications to allow relocation of 711 Remington meets the
requirements of Section 2.8.2(H)(2) as supported by the following specific findings:
1. Relocation of 711 Remington is not detrimental to the public good because the
property lacks Exterior Integrity and lacks Significance for Landmark designation. To be
designated as a Landmark, a property must not only be shown to be Significant, but must also
have Exterior Integrity. 711 Remington has neither Exterior Integrity nor Significance. The
Property does not possess the requisite degree of the seven (7) aspects or qualities that define
Exterior Integrity. The garage addition and the duplex addition are not compatible in design or
materials with the original house with the result that the physical and aesthetic characteristics of
the property and the site are weakened and damaged to the extent that any sense of identity,
heritage and contribution to the historic district is lost. The property's location on the outer most
fringe of the historic district, directly located between two intrusions to the historic district, and
backing up to a high traffic commercial alley and zone district is such that its setting, feeling and
association fail to establish Exterior Integrity.
The Property lacks the requisite Significance in that it fails to meet any one (1) of the standards
for designation set forth in Section 14-5 of the Municipal Code. We find in the alternative that
711 Remington would still lack Significance even if the record had demonstrated that the
property had met one (1) of the standards for Landmark designation under Section 14-5, since
the composite of the seven (7) aspects or qualities that define Exterior Integrity are of
insufficient degree such that 711 Remington has no ability to convey any Significance and does
not retain any identity for which it may have been significant.
When balanced against the expressly stated goals of City Plan, the Land Use Code, the N-C-B
zone district, and the fiscal objectives of the property owner, and for the reasons stated above, we
find that relocation is not detrimental to the public good.
2. Relocation does not impair the intent and purpose of the Land Use Code, and
further relocation advances the intent and purpose of the Land Use Code set forth in Section
1.2.2 by: (i) encouraging renewal through the relocation and restoration of 711 Remington to its
original unaltered condition (subsection B); (ii) encouraging patterns of land use which decrease
trip length of automobile travel through in -fill development approximate to Colorado State
University and student services (subsection F); (iii) increasing public access to mass transit,