Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSAINT ANDREWS APARTMENTS (300 WHEDBEE ST.) - MOD - 14-10 - MINUTES/NOTES - CORRESPONDENCE-NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING�VihVvi, n WAA A M eLA 1�f n44.1 Le PJ ec aOU Wkc c a S' s e e.6✓e ow, I • ca*,., LIO�Z 52`%i,r„'AL°tl5 GaliNk�(ofa-hotmwi L•Go �i Q. a- E t),-1c-.� 9 0 3 k �-�- J i Neighborhood Information Meeting Project: )by 41 Meeting Location: Date: I 1 D PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY Name Address Zip Phone Email a to receive a copy of meeting many (via summary es+ nk ,e S U' : 2- 2,!;' 4tl DS 2 �Z- cj�i i5.y14 7��.Lo,rt o�� � , Z C �,.(q • �a . 'AVe %1" 617 E. Laos 4,�-. 1b05Z+ +7 2- 6G7- �olk(�cc�lbtcyi-s��s' ee�St�,Cpt+, SAS G1'u4L 2Z J e 5; �'o5'a� lq�Ill C� l oun✓I eti C�� OcliwEckRn letcrrn 5 r 5 Zafl ►B M ., Jet-►,fetri .33 y e-. LJ fJ b,,�p-Zolf�) J ACAsl 1 I Fort Collins Staff closed the public meeting at approximately 8:00 pm and suggested that if the Modification of Standard hearing goes favorably for the applicant, that another neighborhood meeting will be held for more public input prior to the formal Project Development Plan submittal and/or hearing. City of Fort Collins Answer: (Applicant) Not at this point, we are waiting for the Stand Alone Modifications to go to hearing before making that investment in the project. 48. Comment: (Citizen) Parking can be a problem during the summer months because of festivals in the area, etc. Answer: (Applicant) The applicant realizes that and made the suggestion of changing Olive Street to diagonal to accommodate not only more parking demand in the area because of his project, but also to accommodate such events in the area. 49. Comment: (Citizen) A resident just poked his head out the door and wanted to point out that there are only four cars parked on Whedbee Street in the approximately 30 spaces available. , 50. Comment: (Citizen) A resident of the neighborhood does not feel this use is the most appropriate for the site and it could potentially bring property values down. 51. Comment: (Citizen) A resident stated that they do not want to see the church sit here and deteriorate. 52. Comment: (Citizen) A resident has concerns that this proposal could potentially change a quiet neighborhood to not be quiet anymore. 52. Comment: (Citizen) A resident states that even though the neighborhood has some concerns about the parking issues on this site, the applicant does seem very sincere about his intentionswith this site. 53. Comment: (Citizen) A resident wanted to point out that a small church on Laurel has sold recently. 54. Comment: (Citizen) A resident would like the applicant to pursue some creative solutions to the issues on this site. Answer: (Applicant) The applicant will consider the potential of a less intense number of units on this site, but is almost certain it is just not feasible for them to pursue. 55. Question: (Citizen) Would the stained glass be sent to other churches if some had to be removed from this site? Answer: (Applicant) We will most likely keep it on site but if we are unable to incorporate it on -site, we will consider sending it to churches or other organizations that could use them. 56. Question: (Citizen) What is the history of this church? Answer: (Applicant) It was built in 1914, by a German Congregation. It is our understanding that the first split of the congregation was when some members wanted to change the service to be spoken in English. 57. Comment: (Applicant) We do not want to rent to irresponsible renters that will trash or disrespect this structure that we will put love and a lot of work into. C 0 Fort Collins 37. Question: (Citizen) Why can't you instead pursue changing this structure into 2 owner occupied dwellings as opposed to 4 rental units? Answer: (Applicant) That is just not our interest in this property or our typical business plan. 38.Question: (Citizen) How are you proposing to divide the interior into the four units? Answer: (Applicant) We have a few options, 1) Having 2 units on the first floor and 2 on the second, or 2) Having 1 unit on the second floor, 2 on the first floor and 1 in the basement. 39.Question: (Citizen) What size bedrooms are you proposing? Answer: (Applicant) 12'x12' 40. Question: (Citizen) How many bathrooms per unit? Answer: (Applicant) Probably 1 each. 41. Comment: (Citizen) This sounds like a college rental housing project. Answer: (Applicant) That is not necessarily our intention, we have considered marketing this to a group of people with similar interests, like a church group or yoga practitioners for example. 42. Comment: (Citizen) A resident of the neighborhood would like to see the City do more in regards to review of projects like this. Response: (City Staff) The City reviews all projects based upon their compliance with the City's approved Land Use Code, beyond that is not within the City's purview. 43.Question: (Citizen) A resident thinks the applicant must be getting a good deal on this property. Answer: (Applicant) This project will be a substantial investment, not only in the selling price, but also due to the amount of improvements that need to be done on the structure, all piping needs to be replaced as well as electric, just to name a few. 44. Comment: (Citizen) A resident acknowledges that anyone with any proposed use wanting to move into this building would have to make a substantial financial investment. 45. Comment: (Applicant) One reason we are not considering two high -end apartments is because of the challenges posed by the historic character of the structure and the costs to improve the site to standards, it just makes it infeasible for us. 46. Comment: (Citizen) Several residents believe that renters do not take care of a structure the way owner's would. Answer: (City Staff) That is out of the City's reviewing authority to say this should be owner vs. renter occupied. 47. Question: (Citizen) Do you have drawings of what you are proposing? 5 FO Coltins Answer: (City Staff) It is Staffs opinion that each Modification of Standard request is judged based upon the individual proposal and site constraints, but cannot say for sure either way. 28. Question: (Citizen) Would this impact property values in the area? Answer: ,(City Staff) Unable to answer that question. 29.Question: (Citizen) Is there a local property manager, since the applicant lives in Boulder? Answer: (Applicant) Yes, we have a local relative that looks over the properties for us. 30. Question: (Citizen) So you do not have any plan to address the parking impact on the neighborhood? Answer: (Applicant) We initially thought that street parking could be used to meet our requirement, but have found out that it cannot. 31. Comment: (Citizen) Just because diagonal parking works on other blocks, does not mean that it is appropriate for this area. This resident does not want to see the parking change. 32.Question: (Citizen) Would other uses require parking and other standards be brought into compliance with standards? Answer: (City Staff) Yes. 33. Question: (Citizen) A resident sees parking to be the biggest issue because a modification would basically nullify the requirement. 34.Comment: (Citizen) A resident is surprised that the Landmark Preservation Commission is supportive of this proposal because of the possibility of some stained glass windows being removed/changed. The resident believes that they are a dominate feature of the structure and thinks the applicant should look into this further with the Building Department to see if they will allow the windows to remain as is. Answer: (Applicant) The applicant is working with the Building Officials to determine the requirements of the windows, a requirement that the applicant is faced with is egress windows from bedrooms needing to be 5 square feet, not sure if the Building Department will budge on this. 35.Question: (Citizen) If any stained glass have to be removed, what are you planning to do with them? Answer: (Applicant) No set plans yet. We intend to keep the stained glass intact as much as possible by utilizing sky lights. If any have to be removed we will not destroy or throw them out, we would most likely try to use them on -site or potentially give them to some other church or organization that could use them. 36. Question: (Citizen) Could the side asphalt area adjacent to Olive Street be used as parking? Answer: (Applicant) No, this area will not meet parking standards. M !t of Fort CO«ins some time feels that they have had good luck with past renters. The applicant encourages residents that have concerns to take a look at the other properties they manage in Fort Collins before judging the quality of people they rent to and the quality of the properties they maintain. 20. Comment: (Citizen) The Modification of Standard requests seem hard to justify, the City's Land Use Code has criteria the request must meet, and the resident seems skeptical of how the applicant can meet the criteria. 21.Question: (Citizen) Have you considered a less intense proposal that would require less parking spaces? Answer: (Applicant) The applicant has considered it, but financially the proposed 4 units is the least they can consider to make this project feasible. 22. Comment: (Citizen) A resident suggests that a church would be the best use for this site, after that a project proposing owner occupied units and last a project proposing rental units. Answer: (City Staff) The city does not have the ability to require owner occupied units in a development proposal, that is a decision for the applicant to make. Response: (Applicant) The applicant is in the property management business, if they go through with this project it will be a renter occupied structure because that is their area of focus. 23.Question: (Citizen) What if this project is build out and then it does not work out? Will the structure be hindered from being a church again? Answer: (City Staff) Historic Preservation Staff comment that this is one of the reason's Historic Preservation is supportive of this proposal, the applicant is proposing changes to the building that could be removed or undone so that the church could be a church again, if someday in the future that is feasible. 24. Comment: (Citizen) A resident comments that a year and a half on the market is not that long, in the life of a historic structure like this. 25. Comment: (Citizen) A resident does not want to see the City facilitate this proposal because it seems to be a proposal that is supported by Historic Preservation. Answer: (City Staff This project is not in any way being pushed by City Staff. Historic Preservation is just one commenting department in the development review process, many other departments and outside agencies, such as Poudre Fire Authority, are involved in the review of this proposal. Furthermore, a hearing officer will be the final decision maker for a development request of this kind. 26. Question: (Citizen) Are you going to pursue Landmark Designation of this structure? Answer: (Applicant) We are unsure at this point. 27. Question: (Citizen) Will this project set a precedent if the parking modification request is approved? 9 1? • Fort Collins Answer: (City Staff) The City owns the Avery House, but it is run by a volunteer organization that currently manages 3 other properties in the City and is not looking to expand. 10. Comment: (Citizen) This structure would be a great place for a Wedding Center. Answer: (City Staff) The zoning on this property does not allow for commercial uses, so that would not be permitted without a process known as an "addition of permitted use." 11. Question: (Citizen) Is there a rezone process? Answer: (City Staff) Yes, there is a process for rezoning, but the City has a policy not to make "spot' rezones. The appropriate process for adding a use to this site, not currently allowed, would be an "addition of permitted use." 12. Comment: (Citizen) A resident says seeing this structure empty is unfortunate and likes seeing a proposal that is trying to preserve the historic character. 13. Question: (Citizen) Is this structure a Designated Landmark? Answer: (City Staff) No, this structure is not a Landmark Property, which means that it will not necessarily be saved from future development proposals changing the historic character. 14. Comment: (Citizen) A resident sees churches as sacred, and is not supportive of the property being changed to a different use. 15. Question: (Citizen) Could a church move in without having to go through review by the City? Answer: (City Staff No, even a church would be required to bring the site into compliance with current standards, to the maximum extent feasible, because the site had been vacant for more than 12 months. 16. Question: (Citizen) What other properties does the applicant currently own in Fort Collins? Answer: (Applicant) 418, 420 and 230 Remington Street and the Northeast corner of Olive and Remington. 17. Comment: (Citizen) A resident of the neighborhood has concerns that this structure will just be a student rental like the property on Remington and Olive that the applicant owns. 18. Comment: (Citizen) A resident of the neighborhood is concerned about the proposed patio area to be located on the northwest corner of the site, being a partying spot for students. 19. Comment: (Citizen) Several residents agree that they do not want this to be a student rental project. Answer: (Applicant) The applicant does not want to have disrespectful renters either, and since they have been in the property management business for quite 2 of Fort Collins The neighborhood meeting notice was sent to 223 Affected Property Owners within 800 feet of the property. Approximately 20 neighbors, the applicants and two City Staff members attended the neighborhood informational meeting. QUESTONS, CONCERNS, COMMENTS AND RESPONSES 1. Question: (Citizen) Would the diagonal parking be changed on all of Olive? Answer: (Applicant and City Staff) The parking will only be changed to diagonal along Olive if the property owners directly adjacent to the street request it be done. 2. Question: (Citizen) How many spaces would diagonal parking add? Answer: (Applicant) Diagonal parking would add approximately 5 spaces per half block. 3. Question: (Citizen) What about the safety factor for parallel vs. diagonal parking? It is some citizen's opinion that diagonal parking cuts down on visibility. Answer: (City Staff) We do not have any data at this time to support or refute the safety implication of diagonal vs. parallel parking. 4. Question: (Citizen) How many spaces currently are adjacent to the church? Answer: (Applicant) Approximately 6. 5. Comment: (Citizen) A resident in the neighborhood made the comment that a block down, on Whedbee and Magnolia, there is diagonal parking currently. It was this resident's opinion that diagonal parking is a better use of space. 6. Comment: (Citizen) A resident of the neighborhood acknowledged that this is a tough site because of the historic nature of the structure and commends the applicant for making the effort, but is unsure this is the best use of this site. 7. Comment: (Citizen) Several residents voiced their concern that this proposal is a change in character of the current neighborhood and they would prefer that the structure be maintained as a church. Answer: (City Staff) Historic Preservation Staff agrees that maintaining this structure as a church would be preferred by all parties involved, but this property has been on the market for quite some time and it has not been pursued by church congregations that we are aware of, most likely due to the small size of the structure and the high costs that would be involved in updating the structure. 8. Question: (Citizen) Would the changes proposed be allowed by Historic Preservation? Answer: (City Staff) Yes, this proposal was brought before the Landmark Preservation Commission earlier this week and the board and Staff are supportive of this adaptive reuse of the structure because the applicant is not proposing changes that will impact the structure's historic character. 9. Question: (Citizen) Who owns the Avery House? Why can't the City by this property and use it as a community center? ' City of Community Development and Fort Collins Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue /vS PO Box 580 Fort Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6750 970.224.6134 - fax fcgov.com/Currentp/anning NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING PROJECT: 300 Whedbee Street Change of Use (St Andrews Apartments) DATE: June 24, 2010 APPLICANT: Robert King CITY PLANNER: Emma McArdle The potential project is known as Saint Andrew Apartments (300 Whedbee Street - Change of Use). The proposal is to convert the existing church into a multi -family building with 4 semi -high end (3 bedroom) apartments. The applicant is only proposing minor changes to the exterior of the building with the intent to preserve the historic character of the structure. The site is in the NCM (Neighborhood Conservation Medium Density) zone district. The proposed four unit multi -family building is permitted as a Type 1 (Administrative) review and public hearing, so long as no structure additions or exterior alterations are made to the structure. The applicant has met with City Building Officials to discuss aspects of the building that do not meet current code requirements. Historic structures have some flexibility when it comes to building standards, which are addressed in the 1997 Uniform Code for Building Conservation. This will allow for the preservation of historic features of the building, such as the stained glass windows and staircase, to the maximum extent feasible, except for where life safety issues are present. The site only accommodates one parking stall; eight are required with the applicants proposed number of units and bedrooms. The applicant has submitted a Stand Alone Modification of Standard * to this parking requirement to be considered by City Staff. A hearing is tentatively scheduled for July 22, 2010, at 6:00 pm in the Community Room in 215 Mason Street, Fort Collins, CO, to consider this Modification of Standard to the parking requirement and the two other Modification of Standards, which are regarding the increase in floor area on the site. If you received a mailed notice of the Neighborhood Meeting, you will also receive a formal notice of this hearing. If you did not receive a notification of the Neighborhood Meeting and would like to be notified of the public hearing, please contact me at 221-6206 or emcardle(a)fcgov.com. *Stand Alone Modification of Standard — This is commonly known as a variance request to a standard. The City allows applicants apply for Modification of Standards in two ways: 1) As a part of the overall Project Development Plan, or 2) as a Stand Alone Modification of Standard, in this case the hearing officer is only considering the Modification and not the full development proposal (an approval of a Stand Alone Modification requires the applicant to follow-up the Modification of Standard review and public hearing with the full Project Development Plan review and public hearing). City of • 0 F6rt Collins July 1, 2010 RE: 300 Whedbee Neighborhood Meeting Dear Resident: 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/currentplanning Please see the attached Neighborhood Meeting Notes from June 22, 2010. A public hearing has TENTATIVELY been scheduled for July 22, 2010 at 6:00 pm in the Community Room in 215 S Mason Street, Fort Collins, CO. You will receive an OFFICIAL NOTIFICATION of the meeting by mail if you received a notification of the neighborhood meeting. If you did not receive a neighborhood meeting,notification, please contact me about future hearings. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. nks, Emma McArdle City Planner City of Fort Collins emcardle a)fcgov.com (970)221-6206