The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About120 CHERRY ST., CHERRY ST. STATION - PDP - 9-05 - REPORTS - MODIFICATION REQUESTchange or lighting change, such as banners, flags, stream- ers, balloons, propellers, whirligigs, searchlights, and flashing lights. That part of a building that is immediately below and ATTIC wholly or partly within the roof framing. See STORY, HALF. See Figure 6. C WHE" A IS L855 THAI," 6 - C IS A GE LLA{� Figure 6 physical, natural, constructed, or demographic charaL ATTRIBUTES teristics that define and describe a building, site. "I entity. Comment: Examples of attributes include physical cha+ acteristics of a building or structure, length and width 14 a road, and demographic data of a municipality or ccnwlll tract. AUCTION HOUSE A place where objects of art, furniture, and other pim" are offered for sale to persons who bid on the object competition with each other. Comment: The above definition assumes the nUV 4 MWh takes place within a building. Open-air auctions, vehicle auctions, are not included in the definition, a e AUDIOMETER An instrument for measuring hearing sensitivity. 26 ECTION II — framework plan Figure 2.6 Mmimm &dftq Heights v Maximum Building Heights Downtown Strategic Plan ��'oo o (b DOWNTOWN STRATEGIC PLAN -47 height. While it is unknown what the height of the future development to the north of the CSS PDP site will be, but it is assumed that whatever is ultimately built there will continue this pattern of stepping down in height to meet the river. ■ The proposed alternative plan is consistent with the adjacent master plan for the applicable group of contiguous properties, namely the Downtown Strategic Plan, which indicates an appropriate building height of 115 feet on the block directly south of the site, and 80 feet directly southwest of the site. Thank you for your consideration on this matter. Sincerely, Mikal Torgerson M. Torgerson Architects The proposed layout of our vehicular use area is not detrimental to the public good because a code compliant plan is more massive that the proposed alternative plan. A code compliant plan is 70 feet tall over the entire building footprint whereas our proposed alternative plan has a cornice line at 55 feet with only a small portion of the building (the roof peak of a small "4"' story) achieving the height of 70 feet. The granting of the modification would promote the general purpose of the standard for which the modification is requested equally well or better than would a plan which complies with the standard for which a modification is requested for the following reasons: ■ Although the property is at the fringe of downtown, and it has street frontage, it doesn't have river frontage. These characteristics of the site are not affected by the modification request, therefore satisfy the standard equally well. • Development of moderate intensity uses that are supportive of Downtown, subject to floodplain restrictions are promoted better in the alternative plan than the code compliant plan because a code compliant plan is 70 feet tall over the entire building footprint whereas our proposed alternative plan has a cornice line at 55 feet with only a small portion of the building (the roof peak of a small "4"' story) achieving the height of 70 feet. ■ The proposed alternative plan is compatible with the scenic, cultural, natural and historical context of the River and Downtown because a code compliant plan is 70 feet tall over the entire building footprint whereas our proposed alternative plan has a cornice line at 55 feet with only a small portion of the building (the roof peak of a small "4"' story) achieving the height of 70 feet. Furthermore, the river is more than 700 feet away, therefore the context of the river isn't really a factor in either scenario. ■ The proposed alternative plan fosters a healthy and compatible relationship between the River, the Downtown and surrounding urban uses better than a code compliant plan because a code compliant plan is 70 feet tall over the entire building footprint whereas our proposed alternative plan has a cornice line at 55 feet with only a small portion of the building (the roof peak of a small "4t' story) achieving the height of 70 feet. Furthermore, the following should be considered. The site is bounded on the West by the Mason Street North mixed use development which has just begun construction. To the north and northwest lies a parcel of land owned by the City of Fort Collins Parks and Recreation department, which has been considered for various developments by the City of Fort Collins ranging from botanical gardens to the Discovery Center museum. Beyond this to the north is Martinez Park and the Poudre river, over 700 feet away. The Cherry Street Station PDP design provides an extremely compatible relationship between the river, the downtown and surrounding urban uses. The block immediately to the south of CSS PDP is zoned for a height of one hundred and fifteen feet and proposals are being designed that will take advantage of this. The CSS PDP proposes a building with a seventy foot overall height stepping down to a fifty five foot main parapet September 7, 2005 Hearing Officer c/o City of Fort Collins Current Planning 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins. CO 80524 Dear Hearing Officer We propose a mixed use project on the north side of the 100 block of Cherry Street. It recently came to our attention (September 6`') that the city of Fort Collins now considers the building, as designed, a four rather than three story building. Because section 4.16(D)(3)(a)1 limits the maximum building height to three stories. we request a modification of standards as provided for in section 2.8 of the Land Use Code to allow four stories within the Cherry Street Station PDP (CSS PDP). The design proposed as a part of the Cherry Street Station PDP exhibits a fifty- five foot tall building which then steps back significantly (thirty eight feet) and has a much less massive floor level which has a nine foot ceiling. A pitched roof rises above this floor bringing the total overall peak of the roof to just under seventy feet. Please see our attached diagrams. Section 2.8.2(H) of the LUC specifies the criteria by which a modification request is evaluated. In accordance with this criteria, the modification is not detrimental to the public good, and the plan as submitted will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the modification is requested equally well or better than would a plan which complies with the standard for which a modification is requested. The Community Commercial - Poudre River District (C-C-R) purpose, as defined in Article 4.16 of the LUC, "is for downtown fringe areas in the Cache La Poudre River corridor with both public street frontage and River frontage. This District provides locations for redevelopment or development of moderate intensity uses that are supportive of Downtown, subject to floodplain restrictions. Such redevelopment or development shall be compatible with the scenic, cultural, natural and historical context of the River and Downtown. A main purpose of the District is to foster a healthy and compatible relationship between the River, the Downtown and surrounding urban uses. Any significant redevelopment shall be designed as part of a master plan for the applicable group of contiguous properties." r 211 Jefferson Forf [ollim, CO 80524 970.416.7431 1.888.416.7431 Fax: 970.416.7435 Email: mikal®archilex.com hffp://wwwarchilex.com