Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout210-212 W. MAGNOLIA ST., URBAN LIVING LOFTS - MOD #1 - 24-05/A - CORRESPONDENCE -Anne As en - Re: 210-212 W. Magnolia Lofts Staff Review Comment Letter Page 5 > sense to have the owners of the lofts wait for 90 seconds if they > happen > to pull in the garage at the exact same time someone is removing a > car > from a lift rather that having us inconvenience the whole downtown > community by eating up off site parking that is vital to the continued > development and economic health of downtown. > Is it possible to submit the plans with the lifts and ask for a > variance > / modification that would allow us to count the lifts as parking > spaces? > We would support the request with documentation showing that this plan > is consistent with the city's planning principals and the impact to > the > downtown community makes this a much better alternative to off site > parking. Please let me know as soon as possible if we can ask for > this variance / modification and if so what the process is. > Thank you for your time, > Corey Seitz > Urban Living Concepts, LLC > —Original Message— • From: Anne Aspen [mailto:AAsoen(a2fcgov.com1 > Sent: Friday, July 15, 2005 4:25 PM > To: corev seitz(cDexcelfg.com; icl-architectureng.gwest.net; > alan(cDsavanthomesinc.com > Subject: 210-212 W. Magnolia Lofts Staff Review Comment Letter > Hi all, > Here is an electronic copy of the letter. The redlines and a hard > COPY > are on our counter for pickup. > Anne > Anne Aspen > City Planner > Current Planning Department > City of Fort Collins, CO > aasoen(cDfcgov.com >(970)221-6206 CC: alan@savanthomesinc.com; Cameron Gloss; corey_seitz@excelfg.com; jcl- architecture@qwest.net; Pete Wray Anne Aspen - Re: 210-212 W. Magnolia Lofts Staff Review Comment Letter Page 4 > I am just starting to read a book called 'The High Price of Free > Parking" by Donald Shoup. You might be interested in taking a look at > it. It could be useful in your efforts to obtain a modification. >Iam > happy to work with you on the modification but I want you to go > into it > with your eyes open. This is not a matter of the City beaurocrats > blindly holding you up. This is the forefront of change in our > community and it has no simple answer. There are many issues and many > stakeholders involved. > Another thing you should be aware of is that the City is hosting a > charrette on this very topic in three weeks. It is called REFILL, on > infill and redevelopment issues and strategies. Cameron Gloss, the > Director of Current Planning is coordinating it to involve as many > types > of stakeholders as possible from the various utilities, to > transportation, to the marketing world, to the DDA and private sector > developers and consultants. The result of this effort will be > proposed > Land Use Code changes for this fall on emerging topics of > redevelopment > like parking requirements, so STAY TUNED!! > Hope that answers some of your questions. Please let me know if you > have others. > Anne > Anne Aspen > City Planner > Current Planning Department > City of Fort Collins, CO > aasoeniaaft-gov.com >(970)221-6206 »» "Corey Seitz" <corev seitz(&excelfa.com> 07/18 9:22 AM >>> > Anne, > Thank you for emailing us the staff project review notes for Urban > Living Lofts at 210 W. Magnolia. The only issue that we are having > difficulties with is issue #48 (parking). The fact that the > operation > of the lifts does not allow us to count them towards our parking > requirement has brought up a lot of issues with our neighbors, the > DDA, > parking services, as well as being in direct conflict with principals > T-1, T-2, and T-4 of the Fort Collins city plan. > We have contacted parking services and the city currently does not > have > any parking we can lease off site. We have found private parking that > we may be able to purchase but we are getting strong objections to > doing > that from the DDA, parking services, as well as our neighbors. What > we are hearing from the downtown community is that it makes much more Anne As en - Re: 210-212 W. Magnolia Lofts Staff Review Comment Letter Page 3 > are ways to handle this situation. I mentioned that offsite > parking was > an option or that a request for modification of standards was another > option. You all seemed to be interested in the offsite parking > option. > That was the last I heard until I got an excited call from Chip. > Since > the offsite option has not panned out, your other option is still to > request a modification to that parking standard. > As I told you all and Justin, if you go that route, you'll need to > justify it. I have a few examples available for your review. I > gave a > couple of them to Justin when we met but since you weren't thinking > about a modification at that point, I didn't go into a lot of detail > with him on that so I have more info if you want it. Some of the > issues > that have come up with the Planning and Zoning Board and Admin Hearing > Officers in these cases will alert you to their concerns. > For example, a similar modification was granted to the Atrium Suites > for a reduction in parking required. Ted Shepard was the planner on > that project. He and the applicant put a significant amount of energy > into convincing the Board that fewer cars would be brought by someone > living across from campus. They documented nearby apartment buildings > etc. and showed that the parking numbers were lower than average in > the > adjoining blocks. The decision makers in that project granted the > modification largely because of its proximity to campus, the fact that > they are rentals and that the associated income is much lower. > Similar > projects that have price tags in the mid-200,000's have not fared so > well because of the likelihood that there will be 2 breadwinners who > both have cars which they use to commute. > The requirements for how to request a modification are located in > Section 2.8 of the Land Use Code. The Land Use Code is available > on the > City website at htta://www.colocode.com/ftcollinsAanduse/beain.htm. > The fewer cars you seek to get the modification for, the better. > As of > staff review, you would have needed a mod. for 10 of your 30 or so > cars. > That's a lot. You would also need to show that the lifts WORK. > As of > staff review, it did not appear to me that sufficient thought was put > into making the lifts feasible in physical reality. Another point to > consider is the marketability of the units. Most of the other loft > project developers (Pine St. Lofts, Belle Claire and Penny Flats > included) have told me that they have to provide 2 parking spaces per > unit to be marketable. Belle Claire even went so far as to design the > parking first and then figure out how many units they could create > based > on how many cars they could park. So unless you have a very different > marketing strategy, I think we're all in this together. Anne As en - Re: 210-212 W. Magnolia Lofts Staff Review Comment Letter Page 2 count spaces being provided by a project because they happen to be on a hoist. Finally, I do not think it is the planning department's purview to consider a project's marketability. If that were the case (or a criterion), no incentives should ever have been offered to the lifestyle center on Harmony. Marketability, I believe, is for the developer to determine. To ask the developers to "justify!' through the appeal process, a reduction in parking spaces also does not seem logical. They ARE providing the spaces; the Planning Department simply isn't willing to count them. Having said all that, I understand that you probably find yourself in something of a catch-22. Maybe Cameron can help. Chip On Jul 18, 2005, at 11:12 AM, Anne Aspen wrote: > Hi Corey, > You are not alone in having this problem. Downtown redevelopments are > very tricky. They are a relatively new concept too and we are all > still > learning how to do it well. You are right that the City Plan > encourages > reduced vehicle trip miles, increased mass transit use and increased > bike use as an alternative to auto use. I myself (and many of my > coworkers) use a bike most days of the week to commute and support > these > principles. > However, the regulatory standards to carry out City Plan are housed in > the Land Use Code and according to the Land Use Code, you must > provide a > certain number of parking spaces per bedroom. This number has > arguably > worked very well for years in predicting how many cars will be > associated with a project. Hopefully, that number will start to > decrease as people adopt a more urban lifestyle. I've gotta > editorialize though and say that "urban" next to the foothills and > RMNP > etc. is different than urban in Manhattan. I doubt people will go > without cars here because part of the allure of this area is > getting up > in the mountains, which you can really only do in a car. Simply > pointing to City Plan's principles is not a realistic way to assess > whether it will happen in reality. Also, at this point, unlike > Manhattan, downtown Fort Collins is not yet consistently able to offer > most services in walking distance. Most folks can't walk to a grocery > store or dry cleaners or other typical services —yet. (In your case, > one small part of your mod argument could be that you are in fact > walking distance to Safeway, Ace Hardware and the Co-op.) > With that said, you should also know that I explained in detail with > you all at staff review and with Justin in a separate meeting that > there Anne As en - Re: 210-212 W. Magnolia Loftc Staff Review Comment Letter Page 1 From: Anne Aspen To: Robert Steiner Date: 07/18/2005 2:52:12 PM Subject: Re: 210-212 W. Magnolia Lofts Staff Review Comment Letter Chip, It is not up to the Planning Department to decide these matters. We take no hostages. The Land Use Code defines the decision makers as the Planning and Zoning Board or an Administrative Hearing Officer, depending on the project. If appealed, a decision goes to the City Council. My job is to help clients work through the review process before it gets to the decision makers, to ensure that the project complies with the Land Use Code. I make myself very available and work hard with consultants to make projects work. I help applicants craft convincing requests for modifications when it makes sense to not meet the LUC requirements. I cannot simply change the Code to suit a good project. Nor can Cameron. And in fact, similar parking modifications have been appealed to Council and been denied. We as a staff advocated that parking in the campus area and downtown be subject to reduced standards. Council at that time was not supportive of the idea. They would not allow changes to the Land Use Code. Therefore, every project that has such issues needs to apply for a modification and justify their individual reasons. That's what the modification process is for and that is what Council has said they want to see. If you would like this to change, I suggest you take it up with Council. The parking spaces on the lifts proposed on this project are not acceptable towards meeting minimum pkg. requirements because they do not meet 3.2.2 (D)(2). This section states that parking must be unobstructed. It has pertained to parking in driveways, parking in tandem and situations like this where one car must move to allow another car to exit or enter. It is not the lift per se that is the problem. There are lifts available that do not have this constraint. As for the Charrette, it is a staff driven idea for how to facilitate these redevelopment and infill issues that have surfaced in the City Plan Update process so that the public and private sectors can work effectively together on the emerging issues that we and many other similar communities are facing. We've had great success building public / private rapport and solving sticky problems with them. These charrettes are not required and are not mandated by anyone. Nothing is "held up" waiting for them to happen. They are a service we provide in an attempt to detangle stuff that isn't working well. I hope you will be involved. If you want to discuss this further, I suggest that we set up a meeting. Anne Anne Aspen City Planner Current Planning Department City of Fort Collins, CO aaspen@fcgov.com (970)221-6206 >>> Robert Steiner <steinco@frii.com> 07/18 12:11 PM >>> Anne — I did not think my call was "excited." Concerned would be more accurate. While I understand that the City is working through issues regarding parking in the downtown, I don't think it is fair to hold a project hostage until a determination is made to re -write the code (if indeed, that would even happen). Nor does it seem fair to simply not