HomeMy WebLinkAboutMASON STREET SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT - PDP - PDP130038 - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORTITEM NO 6_________________
HEARING DATE May 8, 2014 _
STAFF Mapes___________
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD
Planning Services 281 N College Ave – PO Box 580 – Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
fcgov.com/developmentreview/ 970.221.6750
STAFF REPORT
PROJECT: Mason Street Sustainable Development PDP #130038
APPLICANT: Justin Larson
VFLA
401 W. Mountain Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80521
OWNER: Eric Moe / Justin Larson
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This project would remove a single-story commercial building built in 1888 and remodeled
extensively in the 1950’s, and construct a seven-story, 80-foot tall mixed-use office building
(with additional 9-foot tall elevator and HVAC structures) at the southwest corner of Mason and
Magnolia Streets. The existing building has been found not eligible for landmark recognition
and its demolition does not require further historic preservation review.
The property is zoned Downtown (D), Canyon Avenue Subdistrict. The proposed land uses are
permitted, and the project is subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Board.
The site is 2,830 square feet. The proposed building footprint is 2,728 square feet and total
floor area is 20,316 square feet. The ground floor is planned for retail/commercial space, and
the seventh floor is planned to accommodate a potential restaurant, with the remaining five
floors for office space. No vehicle parking spaces are required and none are provided on the
site.
The project includes new sidewalks and streetscape improvements, with a corner plaza space.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of Mason Street Sustainable Development PDP #130038.
Mason Street Sustainable Development PDP #130038
Planning and Zoning Board Hearing May 8, 2014
Page 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Many aspects of the proposed development are consistent with the community’s planning and
zoning for this portion of the Downtown. However, two sets of issues have generated concerns
and questions throughout the review process. These are 1) building height/massing, and 2)
potential parking impacts. Height/massing issues are the reason for staff’s recommendation of
denial of the project as proposed.
The height/massing issues involve a number of interrelated LUC standards for 1) the Downtown
zone district, 2) compatibility with adjacent historic resources and 3) building compatibility with
the adjacent surrounding area.
In regard to parking issues, which are a major concern for many citizens, staff finds that there
are no Land Use Code parking standards unmet. The developer team addresses parking in a
number of ways; and concerns generally involve cumulative, complex, ongoing parking-related
issues that are part of the nature of Downtown beyond the scope and incremental impact of
this individual project.
Parking concerns will be conveyed and carried forward into the larger, ongoing community
discussions about Downtown parking.
COMMENTS:
1. Background and Context of the Area
The 1989 Downtown Plan and 2006 Downtown Strategic Plan establish a vision and policy
direction for redevelopment in this near-west side portion of the Downtown. Additional new
office/employment uses, along with other commercial uses as proposed, are consistent with
the vision and policies for the area. The area is recognized as having properties suitable for
infill and redevelopment with larger new buildings, with new buildings sensitively sized, shaped,
and designed in response to the context of existing historic buildings and other buildings
expected to remain. The adopted policy direction is based on very extensive community
discussion, and represents a careful balance among widely differing interests with regard to
taller buildings.
Land Use Code Standards for taller buildings (over three stories) in the Downtown zone district
implement the policy direction. Zoning district standards work in conjunction with several city-
wide standards for compatible scale and design.
Mason Street Sustainable Development PDP #130038
Planning and Zoning Board Hearing May 8, 2014
Page 3
The vision and policies for Downtown redevelopment are congruent with planning concepts for
the Mason Corridor, which is generally envisioned to evolve with redevelopment of mixed uses
in multi-story, pedestrian-oriented buildings. The Mason Corridor vision does not specifically
address specific height and massing of new buildings. Its illustrations have portrayed buildings
in the three to four story range.
The surrounding area within about one block comprises an eclectic range of buildings from
different eras, in varying styles, with heights ranging from low single-story flat-roofed concrete
block buildings to the 11-story Park Lane Towers condos. Several nearby buildings are
designated or found eligible for designation as historic resources.
Surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
Direction Zone District Existing Land Uses
North D, Canyon Avenue Subdistrict
Vacant lot on the facing corner, 4-story
Magnolia Lofts, 1-3 story dwellings
including Montezuma Fuller House
(National Register listed) and Fuller Flats
(eligible) historic landmarks
South D, Canyon Avenue Subdistrict
1-story buildings including 415 restaurant
and retail space
(in National Register-eligible historic
buildings), convenience store with gas
sales
East D, Canyon Avenue Subdistrict
Sports Authority retail store (State
Register-eligible), Wells Fargo bank
(National Register-eligible) with drive-
through facility
West D, Canyon Avenue Subdistrict
Small vacant house, 2-story office building,
U.S. Bank
Mason Street Sustainable Development PDP #130038
Planning and Zoning Board Hearing May 8, 2014
Page 4
2. Compliance with Applicable Land Use Code Standards
Height and Massing Standards
Staff finds that the Mason Street Sustainable Development PDP does not comply with several
applicable standards for height and massing of taller buildings as explained below.
The several standards work in conjunction to regulate height and massing. The standards do
not state exact numerical parameters. Rather, they state descriptive performance
requirements such that exact height and massing are determined as part of the design and
review process.
Downtown Zone District Standards. Applicable standards for height and massing in the
Downtown Zone District are found in Article Four of the Land Use Code, Section 4.16 (D)(2)
Building Height. Figure 18.5 is a block-by-block Height Limits Map that shows maximum height
limits in the Canyon Avenue Subdistrict. Under subsection 4.16(D)(2)(c) the stated limits “are
intended to convey a scale of building rather than an exact point or line.” On the subject block,
the maximum height limit is 7-9 stories, +/- 115 feet. The proposed project is below this
maximum limit at 80 feet.
The height limits map is accompanied by requirements for “Building Mass Reduction for Taller
Buildings (over three stories)”. Taller buildings must have “a base portion of one or two stories,
clearly defined by a prominent, projecting cornice or roof, fenestration, different materials and
different colors from the remainder of the building.” Staff finds that the proposed project
complies with this requirement for a clearly defined based portion.
Upper portions of taller building must be further set back above the base “in such a manner as
to contribute to a significant aspect of the building design. Upper floor setbacks shall be
determined by an emphasis on pedestrian scale in sidewalks and outdoor spaces, compatibility
with the scale and massing of nearby buildings, preservation of key sunshine patterns in
adjacent spaces, and preservation of views in order to ensure sensitivity to the historic context
and scale of downtown and to maintain a degree of open sky as part of the visual character of
the City.” The standard is accompanied by the following figure showing how ground floor and
upper floor setbacks can be considered together to mitigate mass and height.
Mason Street Sustainable Development PDP #130038
Planning and Zoning Board Hearing May 8, 2014
Page 5
Staff finds that the proposed project does not meet this requirement for upper floor setbacks
as a significant aspect of building design. Ground floor setbacks are a factor in the finding.
Staff’s finding is based on the combination of the following specific factors:
80-foot height;
Zero ground floor setback along Mason Street;
18-inch ground floor setback along Magnolia Street;
18-inch further setback above the base portion (floors 3-6);
Zero further setback from the base portion for the 6th floor cornice and the roof; and
Zero setback of stair towers which extend straight up for the full height of the building.
Staff finds that these factors undermine the effect of the base portion in defining the scale and
mass of the building; rather, they create a taller mass directly abutting the sidewalks without
the required reduction in building mass of the upper portions.
Mason Street Sustainable Development PDP #130038
Planning and Zoning Board Hearing May 8, 2014
Page 6
Standards for All Development. The findings regarding height and massing standards in the
Downtown zone district are interrelated with staff findings regarding general development
standards for all development city-wide in Article Three of the Land Use Code.
Section 3.4.7 Historic and Cultural Resources contains standards for height and massing of new
buildings where designated or eligible historic landmarks are part of the surrounding
neighborhood context. The proposed project is adjacent or in close proximity to several such
historic properties. Therefore, the project needs to comply with Section 3.4.7.
Nearby historic properties include the two properties immediately adjacent to the project, at
415 South Mason (determined by the State to be individually eligible for the National and State
Registers, and found to be individually eligible for designation as a Fort Collins Local Landmark);
the Montezuma Fuller House, at 226 West Magnolia (designated on the National, State and
Fort Collins Landmark Registers); and the Fuller Flats at 228 West Magnolia (determined
individually eligible for designation as a Fort Collins Landmark, and potentially eligible for
National and State Register listing.
Staff finds that the proposed building fails to meet Section 3.4.7 in significant ways.
3.4.7(A) Purpose, states:
“This Section is intended to ensure that, to the maximum extent feasible: …new construction
is designed to respect the historic character of the site and any historic properties in the
surrounding neighborhood. This Section is intended to protect designated or individually
eligible historic sites, structures or objects as well as sites, structures or objects in designated
historic districts, whether on or adjacent to the development site.”
Staff finds that the project is not designed to respect the character of the historic properties in
the surrounding neighborhood as evident in the discrepancy and incongruity of the 80-foot
height and unrelieved massing of the new construction relative to the historically significant
single-story property at 415 South Mason Street, and the other historic properties noted, which
are 1 ½ and 2 stories respectively.
3.4.7(B) General Standard reinforces the Purpose discussed above. It states:
“The development plan and building design shall protect and enhance the historical and
architectural value of any historic property that is…located on property adjacent to the
development site and…(1) is determined to be individually eligible for local landmark
designation or for individual listing in the State or National Registers of Historic Places; [or]
(2) is officially designated as a local or state landmark, or is listed on the National Register of
Historic Places. New structures must be compatible with the historic character of any such
historic property, whether on the development site or adjacent thereto.”
Mason Street Sustainable Development PDP #130038
Planning and Zoning Board Hearing May 8, 2014
Page 7
Staff finds that the project is not designed to protect and enhance the historical and
architectural value of the adjacent historic properties as required, in terms of height and
massing.
Finally, 3.4.7(F) New Construction further reinforces the standards discussed above. It states:
“To the maximum extent feasible, the height, setback and width of new structures shall be
similar to those of existing historic structures on any block face on which the new structure
is located and on any portion of a block face across a local or collector street from the block
face on which the new building is located unless, in the judgment of the decision maker,
such historic structures would not be negatively impacted with respect to their historic
exterior integrity and significance by reason of the new structure being constructed at a
dissimilar height, setback and width.”
and,
“Taller structures or portions of structures shall be located interior to the site. Structures at
the ends of blocks shall be of a similar height to structures in the adjoining blocks.”
Staff finds that the height and setback of the proposed new structure has no similarity to the
historic structures on the Mason Street block face and the opposing block face across Magnolia
Street, and that the structure’s taller portions are not located interior to the site.
The term maximum extent feasible is defined as “no feasible and prudent alternative exists, and
all possible efforts to comply with the regulation or minimize potential harm or adverse impacts
have been undertaken.” Staff does not find significant efforts undertaken to comply with
Section 3.4.7 regarding building height, setback, and the resulting massing.
Section 3.5.1 Building and Project Compatibility requires compatibility with the context of the
surrounding area in terms of building size, massing proportions, design character and building
materials. These standards should be read in conjunction with zone district standards.
3.5.1(B) General Standard states:
“New developments in or adjacent to existing developed areas shall be compatible with the
established architectural character of such areas by using a design that is complementary. In
areas where the existing architectural character is not definitively established, or is not
consistent with the purposes of this Land Use Code, the architecture of new development
shall set an enhanced standard of quality for future projects or redevelopment in the area.
Compatibility shall be achieved through techniques such as the repetition of roof lines, the
Mason Street Sustainable Development PDP #130038
Planning and Zoning Board Hearing May 8, 2014
Page 8
use of similar proportions in building mass and outdoor spaces, similar relationships to the
street, similar window and door patterns, and/or the use of building materials that have
color shades and textures similar to those existing in the immediate area of the proposed
infill development. Brick and stone masonry shall be considered compatible with wood
framing and other materials. Architectural compatibility (including, without limitation,
building height) shall be derived from the neighboring context.”
Staff finds that the compatibility of height and massing is not derived from the neighboring
context.
3.5.1(C) Building Size, Height, Bulk, Mass, Scale requires buildings to “either be similar in size
and height, or, if larger, be articulated and subdivided into massing that is proportional to the
mass and scale of other structures, if any, on the same block face, abutting or adjacent to the
subject property, opposing block face, or cater-corner block face at the nearest intersection.”
Staff finds that the mass and scale are not proportional to the mass and scale of other
structures on the same block face and opposing block face across Magnolia Street, and are not
subdivided into such proportional mass and scale.
Section 3.5.1(G) Building and Project Compatibility, Building Height Review, (1)(a)4.
Neighborhood Scale requires buildings over 40 feet in height to be found “compatible with the
scale of the neighborhoods in which they are situated in terms of relative height, height to
mass, length to mass, and building or structure scale to human scale.”
This neighborhood contains development with a variety of scales from mid-century one-story
buildings to the four-story Magnolia Lofts building across Magnolia Street. Staff finds that the
proposed 80-foot height relative to the surrounding context, and the relative height to mass of
the proposed building are not compatible with the scale of the neighborhood.
Parking Standards
The only applicable parking standard is subsection 3.2.2(K)(2) which states maximum allowable
parking in off-street parking lots for the proposed non-residential uses. There is no required
vehicular parking associated with the proposed project. The project does not include a parking
lot.
While compliance with the Land Use Code is not an issue with regard to parking, public
outreach and staff review have included extensive discussion of citizen concerns about parking
Mason Street Sustainable Development PDP #130038
Planning and Zoning Board Hearing May 8, 2014
Page 9
issues in this area of Downtown. In that discussion, the applicant team has emphasized several
factors that help address potential parking needs generated by the building’s users. The
applicant/developer team will own the building and they plan to occupy most of the office
space. Parking factors cited by the team include:
The team has a contract to purchase of the Montezuma Fuller House across Magnolia
street, with an accompanying 11- space parking lot that will be available for users of the
proposed building;
A majority of their employees live Downtown and walk or bike to work;
Two office pool cars will be available for those who don’t drive to work;
Leases in the Civic Center Garage will be provided for those who do drive to work;
MAX passes will be provided for those who live outside of everyday walking/biking
distance; and
Parking counts show that there is presently on-street parking available at all times of
day within 1-2 blocks of the site.
Other Standards in Article 4, Division 4.16, Downtown Zone District Standards
Staff finds that the project complies with all applicable standards other than height and massing
standards, in the Downtown zone district, with the following comments.
Subsection 4.16(D)(5) Building Character and facades prohibits long blank walls and glass
curtain wall systems, and requires high quality materials. Staff finds that the façade articulation
with architectural precast concrete, architectural storefront window systems, and other detail
features, meets the standards.
Section 4.16(E)(1)(c) Canyon Avenue and Civic Center: Plazas applies to projects with taller
buildings, requiring ground floor open space accessible to the public for active or passive use.
The proposed project includes a plaza at the Mason/Magnolia corner of approximately 600-700
square feet. Staff finds this space adequate to meet the standard.
Mason Street Sustainable Development PDP #130038
Planning and Zoning Board Hearing May 8, 2014
Page 10
Other Standards in Article Three – General Development Standards
Staff finds that the project complies with all applicable General Development Standards other
than height and massing standards, with the following comments.
Section 3.2.1 Landscaping and Tree Protection requires a fully developed landscape plan that
addresses relationships of landscaping to the street, the building, abutting properties, and users
on site. The project provides street trees and other landscaping along the streets in a manner
that complies with standards and is appropriate for the Downtown site.
Section 3.2.2(C)(4) Bicycle Parking Space Requirements requires a minimum of 4 bicycle
parking spaces each for the office, retail and restaurant uses, for a total of 12. 10 of the 12
spaces must be fixed outdoor spaces; the others must be enclosed. The proposed project has
10 fixed outdoor spaces in the Magnolia Street right-of-way and 18 spaces in the basement of
the building, thus meeting and exceeding requirements.
The 10 spaces in Magnolia right-of-way are dependent on a separate administrative decision to
approve a revocable right-of-way Encroachment Permit for the bicycle racks. If the project
were to be approved by the decision-maker, a condition of approval should be the successful
procurement of the Encroachment Permit for bike parking. Staff supports the proposed
encroachment as part of this development plan review.
Section 3.2.4 Site Lighting limits light glare and spillover. The proposed lighting consists of
complete glare cutoff fixtures on the building. No foot-candles exceed one-tenth as measured
20 feet from property lines as required under this standard.
Section 3.5.1 Building and Project Compatibility requires compatibility with the context of the
surrounding area in terms of building height and scale, massing proportions, design character
and building materials.
3.5.1 (B) General Standard states:
“New developments in or adjacent to existing developed areas shall be compatible with the
established architectural character of such areas by using a design that is complementary. In
areas where the existing architectural character is not definitively established, or is not
consistent with the purposes of this Land Use Code, the architecture of new development
shall set an enhanced standard of quality for future projects or redevelopment in the area.
Compatibility shall be achieved through techniques such as the repetition of roof lines, the
Mason Street Sustainable Development PDP #130038
Planning and Zoning Board Hearing May 8, 2014
Page 11
use of similar proportions in building mass and outdoor spaces, similar relationships to the
street, similar window and door patterns, and/or the use of building materials that have
color shades and textures similar to those existing in the immediate area of the proposed
infill development. Brick and stone masonry shall be considered compatible with wood
framing and other materials. Architectural compatibility (including, without limitation,
building height) shall be derived from the neighboring context.”
The height and massing components of this standard reinforce the standards discussed above
under the heading of Height and Massing.
Staff findings of non-compliance regarding height and massing are independent of the quality
design, materials, and detail features of the proposed building. Staff finds the proposed
building design to be in compliance with the components of this standard that address building
character and materials. Factors include prominent entrances, architectural canopies, cornices,
architectural precast concrete with deep, wide reveals and embedded medallion details, a
chamfered base detail in the kickplate area, textured finish stair towers, architectural screens,
and storefront windows. The finishes and details are designed to respond to the context
created by neighboring buildings, particularly the adjacent 415 building.
Section 3.5.1(G)(1)(a) Building and Project Compatibility, Building Height Review requires
consideration of the effects of buildings taller than 40 feet in regard to the following topics:
1. important views of the foothills and mountains from public streets and public spaces;
2. light and shadow;
3. privacy; and
4. neighborhood scale.
1. Views. Staff finds no significant views of the mountains from streets and public spaces,
because of buildings and trees in existing development. The key views are views of the
townscape.
2. Light and Shadow. The applicant has provided a shadow analysis (attached). The 80-foot
building will cast shadows onto Magnolia Street and nearby properties. Because of the small
footprint, the shadow is narrow and thus moves substantially throughout the day. Staff finds
that that shadows cast would not have a substantial adverse impact on the distribution of
natural and artificial light on adjacent property for more than three months, considering the
Downtown zoning context.
Mason Street Sustainable Development PDP #130038
Planning and Zoning Board Hearing May 8, 2014
Page 12
3. Privacy. This standard requires that the project is designed to avoid infringing on the privacy
of adjoining uses, particularly residences and parks. There are no adjoining residential uses or
parks, and staff finds no privacy issues.
4. Neighborhood Scale. This subsection requires buildings over 40 feet in height to be found
compatible with the scale of the neighborhoods in which they are situated in terms of relative
height, height to mass, length to mass, and building or structure scale to human scale.
Staff findings regarding this subsection are discussed above under the heading of Height and
Massing. Other than height and massing, the human scale design features of the building are
compatible with the scale of the neighborhood.
Section 3.6.4 – Transportation Level of Service. A Traffic Engineering Study was submitted and
accepted by the City’s Traffic Operations Department. Staff finds that the project does not
create incremental impacts warranting any changes to the configuration of streets,
intersections, and sidewalks.
NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING:
Neighborhood informational meetings were held on March 31 and April 14. The meetings were
attended by approximately 50 community members. The top topic of concern was Downtown
parking and potential parking impacts of the proposed development. Building height was also a
concern for some attendees. Concerns range from community character and neighborhood
compatibility, to potential blockage of views of the eastern plains from upper story condos in
Park Lane Towers on the block to the west. Meeting notes are attached.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSION:
In evaluating Mason Street Sustainable Development PDP #130038, staff makes the following
finding of fact and conclusions:
A. The PDP does not comply with one subsection in the Downtown Zone District, Canyon
Avenue Subdistrict, in Article 4, Division 4.16 of the Land Use Code. This is subsection 4.16
(D)(4) Building Mass Reduction for Taller Buildings (over three stories), (b)2. Upper Floor
Setbacks.
Staff finds that the 18-inch upper floor setbacks on two sides of the building, and zero setbacks
on two sides, do not adequately contribute a significant aspect of building design with reduced
mass of the upper portion of the building.
Mason Street Sustainable Development PDP #130038
Planning and Zoning Board Hearing May 8, 2014
Page 13
This finding is based on the combination of the following specific factors:
80-foot height.
Zero ground floor setback along Mason Street.
18-inch ground floor setback along Magnolia Street.
Zero setback of stair towers which extend straight up for the full height of the building.
[elevation graphics]
18-inch further setback above the base portion (floors 3-6).
Zero further setback from the base portion for the 6th floor cornice and the roof.
Staff finds that these factors undermine the effect of the base portion in defining the scale and
mass of the building; rather, they create a building mass with almost sheer walls forming a mass
of 72’ with 80-foot stair towers, and completely sheer, straight walls of 72 and 80 feet.
B. The PDP contains permitted uses, and complies with all other applicable land development
standards of the Downtown Zone District, Canyon Avenue Subdistrict, in Article 4, Division 4.16
of the Land Use Code,
C. The PDP does not comply with two Sections of the applicable General Development
Standards of Article 3 of the Land Use Code. These are Section 3.4.7, Historic and Cultural
Resources containing standards for height and massing of new buildings where designated or
eligible historic landmarks are part of the surrounding neighborhood context; and Section 3.5.1,
Building and Project Compatibility containing standards for compatibility with the context of the
surrounding area in terms of building size, height, mass, and scale. Staff finds that:
The project is not designed to respect the character of the historic properties in the
surrounding neighborhood as required under Section 3.4.7(A), in terms of height and
massing. This finding is based on the magnitude of discrepancy and incongruity of the
80-foot height and unrelieved massing of the new construction relative to the
historically significant single-story property at 415 South Mason Street, and the other
historic properties noted, which are 1 ½ and 2 stories respectively.
The height and setback of the proposed new structure has no similarity to the historic
structures on the Mason Street block face and the opposing block face across Magnolia
Street; and the structure does not have taller portions located interior to the site as
required under Section 3.4.7(F).
The historic structures would be negatively impacted by reason of the new structure
being constructed at a dissimilar height and setback, contrary to required findings under
Mason Street Sustainable Development PDP #130038
Planning and Zoning Board Hearing May 8, 2014
Page 14
Section 3.4.7(F), based on the magnitude of dissimilarity and the lack of massing
variation and setbacks to reduce the scale of the single tall mass.
The compatibility of height and massing is not derived from the neighboring context
as required under Section 3.5.1(B).
The proposed 80-foot height relative to the surrounding context, and the relative
height to mass of the proposed building are not compatible with the scale of the
neighborhood as required under subsection 3.5.1(G)(1)(a)4.
D. The PDP complies with all other applicable General Development Standards of Article 3 of
the Land Use Code.
E. The PDP complies with the applicable procedural and administrative requirements of Article
2 of the Land Use Code.
F. The 10 bicycle parking spaces in the Magnolia Street right-of-way are dependent on a
separate administrative decision to approve a revocable right-of-way Encroachment Permit.
For purposes of this development review, staff finds the proposed bike parking to be
appropriate and supportable based on its integration into a new streetscape with landscaping
and sidewalk/plaza space. If the project were to be approved by the decision maker, a
condition of approval should be “the successful procurement of the Encroachment Permit for
bicycle parking.”
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of Mason Street Sustainable Development PDP #130038 based on
standards for building height and massing, and compatibility with historic resources.
ATTACHMENTS:
1 – Vicinity Map
2 – Site Plan
3 – Landscape Plan
4 – Architectural Elevations
5 – Site Context Illustrations
6 – Shading Analysis Diagram
7 – Neighborhood Meeting Notes