HomeMy WebLinkAboutWOOD STREET LOFTS - MODIFICATION OF STANDARDS - 14-04 - CORRESPONDENCE - (7)This request does not demonstrate that proposed buildings would be compatible with the
neighborhood context. The proposal is not consistent with Section 3.5.1 nor with the
Purpose of the Neighborhood Conservation zone district. This is what matters, and not the
25-foot story limit. Any building proposed for this area should be designed based on mass
and scale characteristics found in the neighborhood. Any development proposal should
start with buildings that meet the standards - 2 story maximum, with yards, building mass,
walls, roofs, windows, doors, etc. in proportion with typical neighborhood characteristics.
Any modification request for a building greater than 2 stories should be based on
comparison with a building that meets the standards, strongly demonstrating very careful
and sensitive responsiveness to neighborhood characteristics; and not based on a
hypothetical building with 25-foot stories. This comment is not to encourage applicants to
seek such a modification nor imply staff support -- it appears difficult or impossible to justify
such a modification in this situation even based on a careful, sensitive, and responsive
approach.
Modification #2: Staff contends that the step -back standard for taller side walls is just as
relevant in this situation where the "next -door" neighbor is a back yard as if it were a side
yard; and in fact the design of this side wall facing a neighbor's back yard may be even
MORE sensitive and critical given the typical use of back yards.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Katie Moore
Topic: General
Number: 6 Created: 1 /3/2005
[1/3/05] What is proposed to be done with the south alley?
Engineering standards require that an 8-foot utility easement be provided along the alley
unless a reduction of this width is agreed to by the utilities.
This request to reduce the easement width along the alley was sent to all the utilities, with a
comment due date of January 19th. More information will be available after the 19th.
Be sure to return all of your redlined plans when you re -submit.
If you have any questions regarding these issues or any other issues related to this project,
please feel free to call me at (970) 221-6750.
Sincerely,
±ne. Aspen
n�
City Planner
Page 2
STAFF PROJECT REVIEW
Citv of Fort Collins _
M TORGERSON ARCHITECTS Date: 01/14/2005
TROY JONES
223 N. COLLEGE AVENUE
FORT COLLINS, CO 80524
Staff has reviewed your submittal for WOOD STREET LOFTS MODIFICATION OF
STANDARDS - TYPE II, and we offer the following comments:
ISSUES:
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Anne Aspen
Topic: General
Number: 8 Created: 1 /12/2005
[1/12/05] This request for modification was originally submitted in May of 2004. The
request was put on hold because of a snag in the lending for the project but is being revived
at this time by the applicant. Unfortunately, this project has technically expired and even if a
90 day extension had been granted, that too would have expired. Therefore, a new
application must be submitted with fees, and all of the steps of the process must be taken,
even if they have been done previously. These comments are in draft form then, until we
receive a new application.
Number: 9 Created: 1 /12/2005
[1/12/05] Based on some of the discussion at Staff Review meeting, it is, unclear how the
25' floor height limitation outlined in the Land Use Code is to be applied. Therefore the
Current Planning Director will render an administrative hearing on that topic by January 21.
Number: 10 Created: 1 /12/2005
[1/12/05] From Staff's perspective, the development plan for this parcel is too intensive for
the NCM zoning district. The project is incompatible within its in terms of height, density,
mass. Instead of starting with the context and tweaking to make it work, this plan seems to
have started programmatically too big and now the "give" built into the Land Use Code is
being stretched too far in order to shoehorn. this proposal into working. Recognizing the
bottom line that is probably needed to make this project work for your client, you need to
rethink the approach that you take to meet it and the intent of the Land Use Code.
Number: 11 Created: 1 /12/2005
[1/12/05] Staff does not support either request for modification. The height modification
does not have a supportable basis. The side setback request appears to have some
problems vis a vis both the utilities' requirements and from a compatibility perspective. A
reasonable alternative redevelopment plan could be designed which does not require these
modifications and which stays within the intentions of the Land Use Code.
Department: Advance Planning Issue Contact: Clark Mapes
Topic: General
Number: 7 Created: 1/12/2005
[1/12/05] Staff can not support either modification request. Explanation follows:
Modification #1: The 25-foot limit on story height found in Section 3.8.17 should not be used
to justify 3-story buildings on grounds that 2-story buildings could be even taller. The 25-
foot limit is not an automatic right to multiply stories by 25 and construct buildings of that
size.
Page 1