Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutROMERO HOUSE (425 TENTH STREET) - PDP - 43-04 - CORRESPONDENCE - HISTORIC PRESERVATION (7)-Anne Aspen - Re_Museo Project Staff Rem -t Draft Language _ _.__� Page 2] In addition, the Advance Planning Department has held meetings with the members of the neighborhood in preparation for the Northside Neighborhood Plan, in which the number one concern raised by the neighborhood was the lack of sidewalks. The Applicant <has indicated a willingness> is willing to work with appropriate City staff and with the neighborhood to find an appropriate solution to address the stated concerns. The City, including all involved staff and department heads, is likewise interested and willing to arrive at an appropriately sensitive solution. Since this project has been placed on an accelerated schedule, however, there was not sufficient time to have this discussion prior to the hearing. Therefore, an appropriate solution to the sidewalk situation must be a condition of approval of this PDP. • Bicycle Parking and Amenities [3.2.2(C)(3) and (4)] Adequate bicycle parking and amenities are available at the adjacent City -owned Romero Park, which abuts the site to the south. • Parking [Because of the very limited hours of operation and in order to protect both the historic integrity of the site and the existing residential neighborhood, no parking facilities are proposed for this site. Parking will be available at the neighboring City of Fort Collins Streets Facility at 925 Ninth St for school busses. Parking for individuals wishing to visit the facility will be available in shared parking at the Romero Park adjacent to the site and to the south. Bicycle parking is also available at the Romero Park. iAnne Aspen Re Museo Project Staff RP -rt Draft Language _ Page 1 From: Karen McWilliams To: Anne Aspen Date: 11/17/04 2:26PM Subject: Re: Museo Project Staff Report Draft Language Anne - Looks fine! See the few suggestions I've made, in bold. - Karen >>> Anne Aspen 11/17/04 12:22PM >>> B. Landscaping and Tree Protection [3.2.1 and 3.4.7] The site contains a number of existing trees and shrubs presumably planted by the Romeros. The Poudre Landmarks Foundation proposes no changes to the existing landscaping at this time. They intend to investigate the 1930's era landscaping for this project in Phase II of their project management process. Changes to the existing landscaping may be made at that time in order to more closely and accurately resemble the landscaping on the site at the target restoration timeframe. In both the temporary and ultimate conditions, the regulations in Section 3.4.7 (E)(5) will rule: To the maximum extent feasible, existing historic and mature landscaping shall be preserved and when additional street tree plantings are proposed, the alignment and spacing of new trees shall match that of the existing trees. The above section is reinforced by the General Standard in Section 3.2.1 (C) Landscaping and Tree Protection. which states: All developments shall submit a landscape and tree protection plan that: (1) reinforces and extends any existing patterns of outdoor spaces and vegetation where practicable, (2) supports functional purposes such as spatial definition, visual screening, creation of privacy, management of microclimate or drainage, (3) enhances the appearance of the development and neighborhood, (4) protects significant trees, natural systems and habitat, (5) enhances the pedestrian environment, (6) identifies all landscape areas, (7) identifies all landscaping elements within each landscape area, and (8) meets or exceeds the standards of this Section. Though it would be contextually inappropriate for this project to meet the tree stocking and foundation plantings standards found in Section 3.2.1 of the Land Use Code, a landscape plan following the alternative compliance section of the Land Use Code (3.2.1 (N)) is required to be reviewed by the City Forester and Planning Departments, as well as the Landmark Preservation Commission. Therefore a second condition of approval of this project is the provision of City review of the landscape plans of both existing (temporary) and proposed (ultimate) conditions prior to commencement of any landscaping work. C. Access, Circulation and Parking [3.2.2 and 3.4.7] • Development Standards [3.2.2 (C)] - Sidewalks There are no existing sidewalks in the Anderson Place Subdivision, nor have there ever been. It is the applicant's desire to present the property as being "true" to its designated period of significance, complying with the city -adopted Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, in this case as a Restoration. While these Standards do not prohibit the addition of new ammenities such as sidewalks, they do require that they not detract from the property's historic character. <However, (delete)> Sidewalks along the street frontages and to the building are a requirement of this project under the Land Use Code and the Municipal Code. The City requires such sidewalks at all new developments or changes of use. Sidewalks are to be designed to accommodate all forms of pedestrian and bicycle traffic and need to comply with Americans with Disabilities ACT (ADA) standards. Curbcuts and ramps are required at the corner of Romero and Tenth Streets. An accessible entrance must be made somewhere on the site, especially given its proposed public use.