HomeMy WebLinkAboutPENNY FLATS (BLOCK 33) - PDP - 32-05 - MINUTES/NOTES - CORRESPONDENCE-NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGNEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING
PROJECT 96oCe 33 6L6 h4 12OTa'#Z
DATE / 13, 200G-
ZfW PHONE EMAIL
O — l 1
3,2,2-
7 r ,FisToili
5- � 57--
4W;-- F-e--5-3
u s w Gen
W
( /U• 6oli vG
Y
1,!o7y 3
(Gtra.da v- rrt
LVac Vlmr/9
11
I `
ZL/-IoGct�S
mvinata
l53 �• moo 0TAI..i
&x, 7-4
1g2-1
vtqc A„� E� IG�•c
(—a✓
'Ile r'(�
- D� Kurz X-
S
Zl S
btu l� a o ,/
�
�F 's `M t, a
3 l l/ r c �c
l �D / v S 6
n
!(�`
.'n.nn+ .1 11V170,1
1
�'in I\) 1 ��.t',fnn `I
(�,D52
OUSZI
4U%-000Z
;/',✓Ili+c I0.)q,/oC�.Ur.
7
/ �'�
Qua
di7
o/vr��a@llti �u rn4 A o. fcr
30 GJ, visT wL
10S2—I
6 -6S6
t 'c Csw&,jf s c
/�Rb'E7 E /I /j
Qi fiwon 2,Sl 05Z% r L C.4
23. Question: Will there be any bridges to connect the buildings?
Answer: Yes, there are three bridges in our conceptual plan. The
bridges allow access and allow us to share elevators between
some buildings (ones where the floor plates are at the same
level).
24. Question: Have you thought about using car lifts to maximize your
pare
Answer: We have explored their use in past projects but they have
never found them to be cost-effective at these land rates.
They also impact the depth of excavation needed for the
parking which adds considerably to the cost. They might be
cost-effective at the surface but that wouldn't be an
attractive solution. The logistics of managing the use of the
lifts are also an issue.
25. Question: Is the speed limit increasing on Cherry St to 30 mph?
Answer: (Anne Aspen:) City Staff present is unaware of any such
changes. We will look into it. (follow-up: a phone call to Ward
Stanford, the City's ng(ftc Systems Engineer confirmed that
there are no plans to change the speed limit on Cherry SQ
The meeting concluded at about 8:45 pm.
281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 9 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 9 FAX (970) 416-2020
17. Comment: Pedestrian spine should have live/work if possible.
18. Question: Right now it looks like the project is just pedestrian and
emergency access. What about deliveries?
Answer: Deliveries will happen from the alleys. We considered mixing
vehicular traffic on the pedestrian spine but decided against
it.
19. Question: What about trash enclosures?
Answer: There will be centralized dumpsters but we have not gotten
down to that level of detail yet.
20. Question: Have you worked with the railroad to eliminate the spur?
Answer: Not specifically. The railroad is not interested in vacating
that track. In the future, the track might also be used as a
light rail turn around, given its close proximity to the
Downtown Transit Center.
21. Question: How do you intend to provide mitigation from the railroad
noise? What will it cost?
Answer: The building facing Mason and the RR will be double loaded
with units on each side of a central access hall so a limited
number of units will face the RR. Also, the first floor is
slated to be commercial, so even fewer residential units will
be exposed to the noise. We are working on balconies which
would be carved into the building facade instead of
projecting to provide additional sound mitigation. Well likely
use triple pane windows and other measures to mitigate
sound. We have not gotten to that level of detail yet so we do
not know what the costs will be. `We have'however done
similar projects in Boulder that neighbor the RR and we
learned two things: 1) The cost of sound mitigation isn't a big
deal and 2) that folks love the RR. It's not the problem we
had originally thought it was.
22. Question: These costs to mitigate RR noise are borne by all developers
along the RR and they add up: AY what point does the City
stand up and do something about getting the train out of.
here?
Response (from audience): The train was here first.
Answer: We provided adequate commercial parking to ensure that the
commercial space would be viable and to prevent parking
problems in the neighborhood.
(Anne Aspen) 4-In the Land Use Code, the parking
requirements for commercial use are maximums as opposed
to minimums for residential. In the downtown, there is no
minimum requirement for. commercial parking to account for
the higher density, greater foot and alternative transit traffic.
The assumption is that the market will require adequate
parking but that it may not be the same as a suburban
model. The Land Use Code does not encourage a complete
lack of commercial parking.
Follow-up Comment: As a downtown resident, I applaud you for
providing adequate parking. This comment was "seconded."
Don't apologize for providing adequate parking. We don't
want to undermine the value of the properties here.
15 Question: Why is the Trolley Barn not incorporated into the design?
The City is shortsighted in not including it in the planning of
the project.
Answer: (Hen Waido): Various City Staff, the DDA etc. would like to
see the Barn used in a way that would benefit the
community, such as a transportation museum, a working
trolley barn, an indoor farmer's market. The problem is a
lack of funds. The City wishes to•retain ownership of the
property for now. Substantial state and federal grant money
has been invested into the building.
Follow-up question: Are there budget reasons why the proceeds from the
sale of Block 33 couldn't be used to fixnd adaptive reuse of
the Barn?
Answer: (Hen Waido): There are a number of reasons why this would
not likely occur. City Facilities Department has a set of
priorities and this is not on the list.
16. Comment: I think you should intensify the greenness of the spine more,
make it pedestrian friendly.
Response: We absolutely agree with you. Right now, we're working
through what the Poudre Fire Authority (PFA) requires for _
the fire access..
9. Question: Is 30,OOOsf of commercial enough?
Answer: Good question. We are considering ways to make the space
flexible internally. We don't know if the balance is right yet.
10. Question: Is there really the market for increased commercial space?
When I walk around town I see a whole lot of vacancies....
Answer: One thing we really liked about this project is that the City
wants and supports what's appropriate or right for Fort
Collins.
Comment: Hear, hear!
11. Question: What is the timeframe for this project?
Answer: We intend to submit our Project Development Plan to the
City in July of '05. We have scheduled in 180 days to get
through the PDP process, at the end of which we will seek
approval for the land purchase from the City Council. After
that we will finalize the plans. We hope to break ground in
September of 2006.
12. Question: Please give more detail on the phasing.
Answer: We don't know yet. It will be based on economics; we want
to deliver a reasonable amount of product to the market at a
time. Construction issues will also inform the phasing
schedule. For example, the subterranean parking structure
will be built first. We expect at least three phases, probably
one per year,/perhaps more.
(Hen Waido): This project entails more units than all the
other downtown loft projects going in, total.
13. Question: Will the Traffic Impact Study MS) be made'publicly
available?
Answer: (Anne Aspen): The TIS will be submitted with the PDP. in
July according to Coburn's schedule. The entire submittal is
placed in a file which is a public record, so yes, once it'has
been submitted, it will be available for review by members of
the public.
14. Question: No commercial parking is required at this site. Why did you
provide any?
i
Comment: Best left to the Planning and Zoning Board or the
Administrative Hearing Officer. This is a really nice plan.
5. Question: Do you anticipate any modification requests or issues that
would trigger a Type I1 (Planning and Zoning Board) review?
Answer: (Hen Waido): They are trying for a.Type. L (Administrative)
review. Either way, there will be a public hearing. Both
types of review are appeal -able.
6. Question: What is the status of the appraisal?
Answer: (Hen Waido): The appraisal is due to us at the end of the
week. We will do an internal review and request any
necessary changes based on the zoning, the conceptual
plans Coburn has presented, or to make sure it's based on
the most current information (the appraisal was ordered 3
months ago.)
Follow-up Question: Will the appraisal be made. public?
Answer: (Hen Waido): The sale of the property will go through City
Council and public hearings. The process started with a
decision by the Council in the form of a Resolution in 2004
to dispose of the,property in a manner that would allow the
City to achieve a policy objective of housing in the downtown
as per the Civic Center Master Plan. The sale will go back
through the Council for their approval.
7. Comment: You are not working in a realistic market. This is not the
same as a standard commercial development venture. It will
be interesting to see the appraisal.
8. Question: Is the market study done for this project private or is it
publicly available? I am concerned about the fairness of the
process.
Answer: (Anne Aspen and Helen Matson, City's Real Estate
Services): It is very typical in these sorts of transactions that
the information is not released until_ the negotiations are
brought before the City Council at a publi&hearing. This
project is no different in that sense than any other'City
owned property sale transaction. The City Attorney strictly
adheres to the laws on what is open record and public and
what is not.
what the market would support due to the high cost of
additional structured parking.
Follow up Question: So parking is the only limiting factor preventing you
from proposing a higher density?
Answer: Compatibility is not enforced but reinforced by the City.
Marketing suggests that this is an appropriate density. The
project will be phased so as not to dump too much product
on the City at once.
2. Question: Is this proposal something less than the highest and best
use of the site?
Answer: Economics suggests that even adding one more floor may not
be viable due to the complications of addressing the parking
requirement.
3. Question: The project looks good but I am concerned that this is an
underutilization of the land. This project ought to be more
dense. Parking should not be the limiter of the density. I
think that if the City is giving Coburn a sweetheart deal,
then a second level of underground parking could be
penciled out in the pro forma.
Comment: Wasn't the original scope called.out in the RFP for around 90
units? Now it's 147. That's half again as much density
already.
Answer: (Hen Waido): "Sweetheart deal" is not an appropriate term
here. The City has a fiduciary responsibility to taxpayers.
There is no deal yet at all. It's a negotiation.
4. Comment: The Downtown Strategic Plan had input from the DDA,
citizens and business owners. It was.a recently. completed
report and it cost $400,000. They would disagree with this
underutilization of the land. Density is critical to the
Downtown core. The plan is very nice though.
Response: In the history of urban development there are numerous
examples of high density that didn't benefit the community
economically or otherwise. Bigger isn't necessarily better.
The right project is the right project. It's based on scale,
function, etc. I think that this is the first time we've heard
feedback at a neighborhood meeting that the building isn't
big enough! (laughter from audience) The 80' height is a
maximum not a requirement.
Communit,, _Tanning and Environmental S._ vices
Current Planning
City of Fort Collins
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING #2
PROJECT:
DATE:
APPLICANT:
CITY PLANNER:
FACILITATOR:
Block 33, Penny Flats
April 13, 2005
Coburn Development, Inc. (represented by Dan Rotner,
Pete Weber)
Anne Aspen, Asst. Project Manager
Ken Waido, Project Manager
The Applicant is proposing a mostly residential, mixed -use project on city -
owned land between Cherry and Maple on the north and south and Howes and
Mason on the west and east. This is a different type of project than is usually
the topic of a Neighborhood Meeting, in that the City owns the property. The
City selected the Applicant from a pool of 8 teams who submitted valid
responses to a public Request for Proposal process held in the Fall of 2004.
The City hopes to achieve a policy objective of creating middle income
downtown housing opportunities with this development. The developer will
ultimately purchase the property from the City.
The meeting started at 7:05 pm. After a brief introduction to the process and a
brief presentation by the developer, the following discussion ensued (the
questioner or commenter is an audience member unless otherwise stated and
the answerer or responder is the developer unless otherwise stated):
QUESTIONS, CONCERNS, COMMENTS, RESPONSES
1. Question: How does this project relate to the Downtown Strategic Plan?
What if you proposed an 80' height?
Answer: (Hen Waido): The City asked Coburn to address the
transition from neighborhood to Civic Center.
(Dan Rotner): Also, parking is a limiting factor. To provide
the amount we'd need for greater density, we'd likely exceed