HomeMy WebLinkAboutRETREAT AT 1200 PLUM ST. - PDP - 34-08 - CORRESPONDENCE - (9)Rog@r Buffington - Rer Fwd: Glenwood Stud��t Communities /Plum. Street project Pag
University school year - a month of delay could cost us a years worth of revenue. We have approached
you in the hope that your leadership will quickly clear up the inconsistencies and confusion we have
mentioned. Thank you for your patience in listening to our concerns. We look forward to completing the
acquisition of the Plum street properties and commencing construction on this project. Rondo Rondo
FehlbergPresidentGlenwood Student Communities1425 North University Avenue2nd FloorProvo, UT
84604Office: (801) 342-4800Fax: (801) 342-4996Cell: (801) 361-6392Email: rfehlberg(Qglenwoodgrp.net
CC: Brian Janonis; Darin Atteberry; Glen Schlueter; Jim Hibbard; Mike Freeman; Roger
Buffington
o�uffn ger gton - Re: Fwd: Glenwood Stun^nt`Communities /Plum Street project-� V Page 2'
Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
970-416-2232
>>> Darin Atteberry 12/3/2008 9:07 AM >>>
Mike, Diane, Brian:
What's up and what can be done? This sounds like a great project.
Darin
>>> "Rondo Fehlberg" < rfehlberg(cDglenwoodgrp.net > 12/2/2008 4:35 PM >>>
Darin,Thank you for taking time out of your busy schedule to meet with us last week at Starbucks. We are
also grateful for your expressions of support for our proposed Plum Street project. As promised, attached
are copies of our current renderings and floor plans. We are excited about the Plum Street project and
think it will be a great addition to the Ft. Collins and CSU communities. As we discussed, the primary
reasons we chose Ft. Collins for this project were the Universitys student growth projections combined _
with the stated desire by both the City and the University to develop a more urban walkable community
with higher density student housing located within comfortable walking distance to campus We were
gratified by the initial reception we received from Planning and other City departments as we began
conceptual work on the Plum Street project. We were encouraged to pursue a higher density, multi -level
design that could justify the land acquisition and entitlement costs of the project and would be consistent
with the Citys objective to reduce the infiltration of students into residential neighborhoods. Before we
expended significant non-refundable earnest monies and stage two design costs we met again with City
officials, showed them our preliminary designs, and were encouraged to proceed. Unfortunately, as we
mentioned last week, as we have moved further into the PDP process we have encountered an increasing
number of roadblocks that could significantly increase our costs and render the project uneconomic. For
am exple, we ha suggested possible storm water retention and distribution solutions that are used
routinely in urban developments elsewhere but, after encouraging conceptual discussions, the City has
rejected our proposals in favor of traditional surface retention that is impractical (and cost prohibitive) in an
urban setting. In addition, the International Fire Code, adopted by most cities and metropolitan
communities, allows a developer to waive the general requirement that all windows have direct access
outside the perimeter of each building as long as the buildings are sprinkled, as ours will be. The
Building/Fire Departments do not recognize this widely utilized exception, thus eliminating the possibility of
courtyards which are essential to higher density multi -level development. Further, the Fire Department has
stated that its ladder trucks must be able to.park adjacent to the longest side of each building. This
potential requirement would eliminate much of our amenity space (swimming pool, cabana, etc.) and
require significant redesign of some buildings, despite the fact that some of them are only three stories
high. In faimess to City staff, it has not all been bad news. The Power Department initially rejected our
plans and design as being contrary to policy and preferred practice but, after studying our plans and
project design, said in essence, Oh, this is an urban design. We can make this work. They have been
great to work with, even suggesting optimizations that have further reduced the costs of our electrical
installations. As we discussed, I think much of this apparent conflict is a function of departmental
guidelines and regulations that were implemented with a more suburban community in mind and do not
reflect the Citys current desire to move to a more urban development model. This seems to be borne out
by our experience with the Power Department and by comments by some in other departments who have
said the designs we are requesting would require waiver and/or approvals at higher levels within the City
administration. It is not our intent to lobby for inappropriate concessions or unsafe designs. Everything we
are seeking has been proved in practice elsewhere and is consistent with national and international codes.
Further, we have relied on the encouragement of City officials to proceed with the acquisition of this
property and significant additional financial commitments. And while we dont mind being a pioneer for this
type of walkable urban student community, we also dont want to feel we are trapped between two
inconsistent municipal philosophies. Once again, Darin, we apologize for adding to your already
overloaded schedule. But, as we mentioned last week, student housing has a very narrow window in
which projects must be commenced in order to open for the upcoming school year. Delays are not
measured in weeks and months of additional expense, but in student rental commitments tied to the
Roger Buffington - Re: Fwd: Glenwood Studpnt Communities / Plum Street project Page 1
From: Diane Jones
To: Jeff Scheick; Steve Dush
Date: 12/07/2008 11: 51:43
Subject: Re: Fwd: Glenwood Student Communities / Plum Street project
Jeff and Steve:
I am copying you on this message string. It appears that the issues are being worked out on this project
However, I think it is worth reviewing in the spirit of "continuous improvement' some of the issues in light
of our code requirements, particularly as we move toward more urban types of developments. The
code/regulatory topics that pop out of this and for which I would like to get on your agenda include:
a. storm water retention and distribution regulations and options
b. fire code requirements associated with window access to the outside perimeter
c. fire requirement for truck access in conjunction w/the longest side of the building
Thanks,
Diane
>>> Jim Hibbard 12/5/2008 10:34 AM >>>
Drain and Brian,
The Stormwater Utility has been and is supportive of the proposed Retreat student housing project on
Plum Street. We are totally open to innovative stormwater practices for urban settings, but cannot support
non -sustainable practices that make downstream flooding worse or are in violation of our stormwater
discharge permit.
In working with the developers engineer, we have grandfathered in the existing imperviousness on the
site. This is a major concession and has the effect of reducing the detention requirement for the project in
spite of the fact that runoff from this site already contributes to flooding problems downstream. In addition,
staff has suggested the engineer consider a host of Low Impact Development techniques that can be
used to reduce runoff in urban settings. We have repeatedly been told that any change from what they
have apparently already decided to do will kill the project. Focusing only on economic considerations is not
sustainable since it totally discounts social and environmental perspectives. With some reluctance, we
have also offered to allow underground detention provided they use a gravity outfall as opposed to a
pumped discharge. Staff does not consider pumping of stormwater to be a sustainable practice. In order
to obtain a gravity outfall, a new storm sewer may have to be extended east on Plum to Shields. Because
this alternative replaces an existing storm sewer, we would be open to discussions on cost sharing.
With respect to water quality, there are many new, innovative methods of providing this treatment. We
have offered to meet with the developers engineer to discuss Low Impact Development (LID) approaches
to providing water quality treatment.
The Stormwater staff is working hard to be supportive of this project. At the same time, however, there are
some real challenges facing the developer due to the intensity of the proposed development.
>>> Brian Janonis 12/4/2008 1:38 AM >>>
Jim,
Pls respond to all regarding the stormwater issues.
Brian Janonis, P.E.
Utilities Executive Director
700 Wood Street