The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutWOVENHEARTS MEMORY CARE - PDP/FDP - 5-97A - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - MODIFICATION REQUEST (3)2X2 CEDARLLIS 2X6 CEDAR TRELLIS J015T (2) I/2" TNRU-BOLTS —� C I��li!\ E�t� �I� Elri7Y BUILDING SIDE I X b VERTICAL CEDAR BOARDS BETWEEN NORIZ. RAILS a NOTE ALL WOOD TO BE STAINED OR PAINTED WHITE C 2 X 4 CEDAR TOP, MID, BOTTOM RAILS 4 X 4 CEDAR POST I la 1 I 51MP50N G155b6 GALV. --jam L _I I STAND-OFF COLUMN BASE SET IN FOOTING • VERIFY RECESS DEPTH WITH MANOR 5TANDARD5 I I MIN, 12' 0IA. GONG. FOOTING I y I I L__-J T . Wood Fence Section (::::)N.T.S=1' I; Sheet Title Wood Fence Section Project Sterling Cottage — Fort Collins, CO Project Architect DJK Date 5-1-98 Project No. 6-98176-03.002 Sheet No. SK-3 EPPSTEIN'UHEN 210 E. MICHIGAN ST. • P.O. BOX 92728 • MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN 53202-0728.414-271-5350 • FAX 414-271-7794 A R C R I T 9 C T 5 j 2X2 CEDAR TRELLIS 2 X CEDAR TRELLIS JOIST 2 X LATTICE W/ 2" OPENINGS I X 6 VERTICAL CEDAR BOARDS BETWEEN HORIZ. RAILS NOTE ALL WOOD TO BE STAINED OR PAINTED WHITE 2 X 4 CEDAR TOP, MID, 4 BOTTOM RAILS 4 X 4 CEDAR P05T SIMP50N CB5bb GALV. STAND-OFF COLUMN BASE SET IN FOOTING • VERIFY RECE55 DEPTH WITH MANUF. STANDARDS MIN. 12' DIA. GONG. FOOTING 0 Typ. Wood Fence Elevation N.T.S.=V-0" Sheet Title Wood Fence Elevation Project Sterling Cottage — Fort Collins, CO Project Architect DJK Date 5-1-98 Project No. 6-98176-03.002 Sheet No. SK-2 EPPSTEIN•UHEN 210 E MICHIGAN ST. a P.O. BOX 92728 a MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN 53202-0728 a 414-271-5350 a FAX 414-271-7794 ♦ F C M i T c C T 5 Architectu0ral Site Plan — 36 Bed Memor Care 1 - N.1. S. Sheet Title Prototypical Site Plan Project Sterling Cottage — Fort Collins, CO Project Architect DJK Date 5-1-98 Project No. 6-98176-03.002 Sheet No. SK-1 210 E. MICHIGAN ST *P.O. BOX 92728 • MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN 53202-0728.414-271-5350 • FAX 414-271-7794 EPPSTEIN•UHEN A X C H I T[ C T 5 Mr. Mike Ludwig • • Wovenhearts-36 Bed Memory Care EUA Project No.: 6-98176-03.002 May 1, 1998 Page 2 Based on the location of the fence relative to the building and the unique issues the fence addresses relative to the resident care, it is our belief that an 8'-0" high fence would not be a "detriment to the public good" as listed in Section 2.7.3 (A). It is also our belief that an approved Modification to Standards would "further protect the public interest" as described in Section 2.7.3 (B) by providing a more secure and safe quality of life for the residents. Thank you for your time with this issue. Should you have any questions or wish to further discuss any item, please do not hesitate to contact me. My direct line is (414) 291-8162. Sincerely, David J. Kirk Project Assistant DJ K/k j w/fe-mod if cation. doc. cc: Mark Lockwood / Delwest Bill Boerigter / BCl Midwest EPPSTEIN•UHEN May 1, 1998 Mike Ludwig City Planner City of Fort Collins Planning Department 281 North College Ave. Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 Re: Wovenhearts 36 Bed Memory Care EUA Project No.: 6-98176-03.002 Modification of Standards Section 3.8.11 (3)(c) Dear Mr. Ludwig: We are submitting this letter to request a "Modification of Standards" to the Land Use Code Supplementary Regulations Section 3.8.11 (3)(C) as it pertains to fences. This request will be pursuant to Division 2.7, Modification of Standards. Section 3.8.11 (3)(C) states "fences or walls shall be no more than six (6) feet high if located on a rear property line or on a side yard line in a rear yard. We are requesting a Modification of Standards to allow an increase to an 8'-0" high fence. Since both the rear and side courtyard fences are attached to the building and not located on a property line, it is our belief that these fences do not function as the typical property line separation fence for which the 6'-0" high restriction is written. In this situation, the fence acts as an extension of the building facade, securing and enclosing the exterior building courtyards. Further support for this modification is as follows: 1. Since the fences are linked to the building, an 8'-0" height fosters a better relationship with the 9'-0" eave elevation. 2. Due to the nature of the Memory Impaired residents being cared for within this facility, security is a major concern. The owner's concerns are for both resident elopement from the facility, and resident harm due to climbing. An increase to a height of 8'-0"places the projecting trellis and top of fence out of resident reach, thus discourages attempts at climbing. 3. Lowering the fence and trellis to a 6'-0" height creates a reduced sense of volume in the enclosed courtyards. As described in item number one above, the greater fence height better relates to the building eaves, thus reflecting a more continuous, open volume. I have attached copies of drawings SK-1, SK-2, and SK-3 for department review. Drawings represent a prototypical site plan indicating fence locations, an enlarged fence elevation, and an enlarged fence section respectively. I I. AIJ IiI(,AV I. • 1( I. It)X I - : • %III\ll I•.I 1. ACI L ON I\ .,II: I;-' I .' n • I A\ -it -, .' I -- -,; -i