HomeMy WebLinkAboutCARRIAGE HOUSE APARTMENTS - MOD - MOD120001 - CORRESPONDENCE - (5)CCatani.oant
P R C) P F F' T F t;
January 30, 2012
Ms. Courtney Levingston
Planner
City of Fort Collins
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
Re: Carriage House Apartments — 1305 S. Shields Street
Dear Courtney:
This letter is sent in response to your Comment Summary letter to me dated January 18, 2012. As you know,
the Modification of Standard Request is focused on having a Decision Maker (Planning and Zoning
Commission) determine that a variance to Section 3.4.7 of the land use code is achievable with respect to the re-
development status of the above captioned residence.
There are two reports by authorities on the historic integrity of the subject property that differ in their
conclusions. A Colorado Cultural Resources architectural inventory prepared by Historitecture and dated
November 30`h has been supplied to the City Planning Department by a group of neighbors. While that report
declares that the property is eligible for historic protection under the City of Fort Collins standards, Line 44 in
that report indicates that the subject property isn't eligible for consideration under the National Register
Eligibility Assessment standards! So the Fort Collins standards aren't aligned with the Interior Secretary's
standards? Line 45 also indicates that there isn't National Register district potential either. Mr. Jim Bershof of
Oz Architecture has submitted a letter dated November 22 detailing multiple reasons why the subject property
shouldn't be eligible for historic protection under any reasonable set of circumstances or standards. Despite the
presentation of these facts, the LPC has determined the subject property to be eligible for historic protection.
1 do not believe that the comments prepared and submitted by Mr. Clark Mapes in Advance Planning are
relevant to the matter. Mr. Mapes makes a variety of statements that effectively represent a "red herring"
argument that serves to distract the attention from the issue at hand, whether the house is truly worth saving or
not. Delving into the "site layout" debate is pointless and irrelevant. Both the Applicant and the Landowner do
not believe that the house is historic and worth saving. So making an argument that the Applicant should
rework the site plan in a manner to save the house is unproductive. I ask that you delete Mr. Mapes comments
from the Staff Report because they will simply divert attention from the issue during the Planning Commission
Hearing on February 161h
Thank you for your attention to the matter.
B,
Charles Bailey
__
+_if).' }�DZCI7:1 t)i !t4, T{hi ;illUf?i.. {,!)loi dt�s) �`3 `i:_, .7{l,-;i ��- J i j0" , r}j(i :::1<fl ii..C1; 4� f:'Ci)'C:�,ctiLncl