HomeMy WebLinkAboutOASIS ON OLIVE - PDP - PDP180003 - REPORTS - HISTORIC PRESERVATIONAgenda Item 7
STAFF REPORT May 16, 2018
Landmark Preservation Commission
PROJECT NAME
P.D.P. #180003 OASIS ON OLIVE, 310 WEST OLIVE STREET FINAL DESIGN REVIEW & REQUEST FOR
RECOMMENDATION TO DECISION MAKER
STAFF
Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Planner
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a proposal to construct a three-story, seven -unit multi -family building
between Howes Street and Canyon Avenue. The project is adjacent to several
designated and individually eligible buildings. The development proposal will be
subject to Planning and Zoning Board (Type II) review.
APPLICANT: Steve Slezak, Oasis Development, 231 S. Howes Street, Fort Collins, CO 80521
• OWNER: This Old Howes LLC, 561 York Street, Denver, CO 80209
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Landmark Preservation Commission adopt a
recommendation to approve the Oasis on Olive P.D.P. #180003
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
BACKGROUND: The applicant is seeking a review and recommendation regarding compliance with Land Use
Code Section 3.4.7 for the proposed project. The applicant shared the project with the Landmark Preservation
Commission (LPC) at a work session on March 21, 2018. Based upon comments received from LPC members, as
well as from Development Review staff, the applicant has revised the plans.
The developer owns both 227 and 231 S Howes Street; this lot was created from their two backyards. The LPC
held a conceptual review on the creation of the third lot at its September 14, 2016 Regular Meeting.
ROLE OF THE LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION:
At this meeting, the Landmark Preservation Commission will provide review of the project's compliance with LUC
3.4.7. Planning staff has determined that the design of the proposed buildings and the site plan will not undergo
significant further changes to meet other areas of the Land Use Code, and thus it is appropriate for the
Commission to provide a recommendation to the decision maker as provided for by Sec. 3.4.7(6). If the
Commission feels it lacks sufficient information to provide a recommendation, it may table the item for further
review or may place agreed upon conditions on its recommendation for staff to verify in the approval process for
the final development plan.
AREA OF ADJACENCY:
At its March 21, 2018 meeting, The Landmark Preservation Commission discussed relevant properties for its
evaluation for compliance with Sec. 3.4.7, and adopted a motion identifying the following properties. Staff offers
• additional information on those properties for consideration in the LPC evaluation of the proposed project:
Item # 7 Page 1
Packet Pg. 206
Agenda Item 7
1. Abutting (Touching): •
a. 231 S. Howes Street, the Humphry-Davis House, constructed in 1898 (Landmark)
b. 223 South Howes Street, the Dealy-Goode House, constructed in 1922 (Landmark)
c. 227 S. Howes Street - Old Towne Wealth Advisor, constructed in 1905
d. 316 W. Olive Street - Miscio Real Estate Services, constructed in 1900
2. Adjacent (Near):
e. 315 W. Oak/211 W. Canyon - The Old Town Professional Center Building, constructed in 1966
AREA OF ADJACENCY CHARACTERISTICS
Type and Style:
• Four c.1900 residential: a 1 story Hip Box; 1 story Queen Anne; 1'/Z story Craftsman Bungalow, and
2'/2 story Four Square
• One 1966 commercial: 7 story International Style office building
• Proposed building. Multi -family, 3 stories
Heights (based on dimensions provided by applicant):
• Historic buildings range from 19 feet 1 inch to approx. 77 feet at peak
• Average height of all five historic buildings: approx. 37 feet
• Average height of the four residential buildings: approx. 26 feet
• Proposed building: 39' 2"
Primary Cladding Materials:
• 3 of the 5 are primarily clad in unpainted brick on high stone foundations, with some painted wood
details: two Fort Collins red brick, and one blonde and light brown brick, with red brick detail. Brick is of
common, historic dimensions •
• 1 is painted stucco, with some painted wood details
• 1 is stone veneer main floor, with large concrete panels and windows on the tower, with painted wood,
brick and metal details
• Proposed building: Roman smooth textured brick in red shades; buff colored, smooth texture cut -stone
veneer; horizontal architectural metal panel, in dark bronze; and, to match the existing house at 227
Howes Street, three -coat cement stucco siding in antique green.
Roof Forms:
• Residential roof forms are a mix of hipped, gable, and intersecting gable; the office building is flat -
roofed.
• Proposed building's roof has intersecting gables
REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS OF FACT:
Land Use Code (LUC) Section 3.4.7, Historic and Cultural Resources contains the applicable standards for
new buildings, where designated or eligible historic landmarks or historic districts are part of the development site
or surrounding neighborhood context.
LUC Section 3.4.7(A), Purpose, states in pertinent part:
"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. "
LUC 3.4.7(B) General Standard states:
`If the project contains a site, structure or object that (1) is determined to be or potentially be individually eligible for
local landmark designation or for individual listing in the State Register of Historic Properties or National Register
of Historic Places; (2) is officially designated as a local or state landmark or is listed on the National Register of •
Item # 7 Page 2
Packet Pg. 207
Agenda Item 7
• Historic Places; or (3) is located within an officially designated national, state or City historic district or area, then,
to the maximum extent feasible, the development plan and building design shall provide for the preservation and
adaptive use of the historic structure. The development plan and building design shall protect and enhance the
historical and architectural value of any historic property that is: (a) preserved and adaptively used on the
development site; or (b) is located on property adjacent to the development site and qualifies under (1), (2) or (3)
above ...
... New structures must be compatible with the historic character of any such historic property, whether on the
development site or adjacent thereto. "
This project site does not contain designated or eligible historic resources and is not within the Old Town
Historic District.
There are designated and eligible historic resources within the proposed area of adjacency, noted above.
Staff finds, that to the maximum extent feasible, the development plan and building design provide for the
preservation and adaptive use of the historic structure. The development plan and building design protects
the historical and architectural value of the historic properties located adjacent to the development site,
and that the new structures are compatible with the historic character of the surrounding historic
properties.
LUC 3.4.7(F) New Construction:
"(1) To the maximum extent feasible, the height, setback and width of new structures shall be similar to: (a) 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 structure is located.... Notwithstanding
the foregoing, this requirement shall not apply if, 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. Where building setbacks cannot be
maintained, elements such as walls, columns, hedges or other screens shall be used to define the edge of the site
and maintain alignment. Taller structures or portions of structures shall be located interior to the site.
• Heights (based on dimensions provided by applicant):
• Historic buildings range from 19 feet 1 inch to approx. 77 feet at peak, with the average height of all five
historic buildings measuring approx. 37 feet.
• The height of the proposed building is 39 feet 2 inches.
• The proposed facade is a total of 75' wide, broken through articulation into roughly 25' sections. Elevations
are articulated into discernable sections through the use of setbacks, stepbacks, balconies, and varying
materials
• The width of the 316 West Olive building is not known, but is likely about 30 feet.
• The setback on Olive Street approximates the side yard setback of the 231 South Howes building and the
front setback of 316 West Olive.
• The project's overall footprint is dissimilar to the individual historic buildings, but the massing strategy and
use of similar materials and roof forms mitigate the negative impact on directly adjacent historic resources.
• The applicant notes that the building height helps to diminish the visual impact of the 7 story Cortina Lofts
on the historic residential buildings by visually stepping down from the 76-foot Cortina, to the 31-foot 231
S. Howes to the 28 feet at 227 S. Howes to the 19 feet at 316 W. Olive.
• The applicant notes that these variances between buildings are no more of an impact than any other two-
story building adjacent to a single -story building, and contribute to the diversity of the block without
adversely affecting the integrity of the historic properties.
"(2) New structures shall be designed to be in character with such existing historic structures. Horizontal elements,
such as cornices, windows, moldings and sign bands, shall be aligned with those of such existing historic
structures to strengthen the visual ties among buildings. Window patterns of such existing structures (size, height,
number) shall be repeated in new construction, and the pattern of the primary building entrance facing the street
shall be maintained to the maximum extent feasible."
• The roof forms of the historic residential buildings are mix of hipped, gable, and intersecting gable. The
• proposed building is primarily intersecting gables.
Item # 7 Page 3
Packet Pg. 208
Agenda Item 7
• Staff did not identify any specific attempt for the proposed building to align horizontal elements with those •
of the existing historic buildings; however, given the variety and discrepancy of the horizonal elements of
the existing historic buildings, the proposed building often "splits the difference."
• The projecting, hip roof garage on Olive Street is similar in shape to the 316 West Olive building.
• The overall design of the project is a modern addition to the area. Like the massing strategy, the project
design relies on use of intersecting gables, traditional stucco, and red brick to create compatible transition
to the historic buildings rather than horizontal lines.
• Staff believes that the height of the proposed stone base does not reflect the use of stone on the historic
structures, and recommends that the stone base be reduced.
"(3) The dominant building material of such existing historic structures adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of the
proposed structure shall be used as the primary material for new construction. Variety in materials can be
appropriate, but shall maintain the existing distribution of materials in the same block."
• The mix of building materials of the adjacent buildings is reflected on the new. The proposed building
elevation materials include brick and cut -stone veneer, architectural metal panel, and three -coat cement
stucco siding to match the existing house at 227 Howes Street.
• The authentic cement based stucco provides an irregular texture rather than the mono -chromatic, perfectly
consistent coat of modern day synthetic stucco.
• The horizontal metal panel references the horizontal wood siding found on many historic buildings.
"(4) Visual and pedestrian connections between the site and neighborhood focal points, such as a park, school or
church, shall be preserved and enhanced, to the maximum extent feasible. "
• Visual and pedestrian connections between the proposed project and the two historic properties that the
lot was previously associated with will be maintained by not building fencing between the lots. This
significantly helps to retain and promote the historic buildings' setting and association with the historic rose •
gardens.
• Trash and recycling containers are located within the covered parking level of the building and will be
screened from view outside of this building.
"(5) 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 P.D.P. provides an approximate 22' landscape setback from back of sidewalk to closest building
fagade on Olive Street, consistent with existing abutting buildings on the block face. Additionally, the
parkway landscaping along Olive Street is approximately 20 feet in width between the curb and sidewalk,
with turf grass and street trees consistent with the traditional neighborhood pattern.
• A key feature that staff strongly supports is that no fencing is proposed between this lot and the rear lots of
227 and 231 South Howes that this lot was historically part of. This significantly helps to retain and
promote the historic buildings' setting and association with the historic rose gardens.
• Roses grown by the original owner, Adelia Davis, as well as multi- colored Iris have provided the
foundation for garden beds. To the extent possible these gardens will remain and the roses will be the
central feature.
• The many street trees along Olive and Howes Street will remain; as needed, replacement trees will be
approved according to the requirements of the City Forester.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the above findings of fact, staff concludes that the development plan does not impact the eligibility of
adjacent historic properties and its design is compatible with the existing historic character in the area of
adjacency, and thus supports a recommendation for approval of Oasis on Olive P.D.P. #180003.
E
Item # 7 Page 4
Packet Pg. 209
Agenda Item 7
• SAMPLE MOTION FOR RECOMMENDATION:
For a recommendation of approval:
"I move that the Landmark Preservation Commission recommend to the Decision Maker approval of the Oasis on
Olive project, P.D.P. #180003, finding it is in compliance with the standards contained in Land Use Code section
3.4.7 for the following reasons:
• The project does not negatively impact the individual eligibility for designation of the historic properties in
the defined area of adjacency, and therefore complies with 3.4. 7 (A) Purpose, and (B) General Standard.
• The project design's overall height, setback and width is compatible with the historic properties in the
defined area of adjacency, and therefore, complies with 3.4.7(F)(1). The project's massing strategy and
use of similar materials and roof forms mitigate the negative impact on directly adjacent historic resources.
• The project complies with 3.4.7(F)(2) through the use of gable and intersecting gable roof forms and
similar roof pitches to the historic resources. Additionally, the projecting garage on Olive Street is similar in
shape to the 316 West Olive building.
• The project design includes primary building materials reflective of the dominant historic materials, and
therefore complies with 3.4.7(F)(3).
• The focal and pedestrian points between the PDP gardens and the historic lots will be maintained, and no
fencing is proposed between this lot and the rear lots of 227 and 231 South Howes which this lot was
historically associated with. This significantly helps to retain and promote the historic buildings' setting and
association, and so complies with 3.4.7(F)(4).
• The purposeful omission of fencing between the new and historic lots significantly helps to retain and
promote the historic buildings' setting and association with the historic rose gardens. To the extent
possible the historic rose beds and gardens will remain. Replacement trees will be approved according to
• the requirements of the City Forester. For these reasons, the project complies with 3.4.7(F)(5).
Note: The Commission may propose additional findings of fact or remove any of these proposed findings according
to its evaluation.
:7
For a recommendation of denial:
"I move that the Landmark Preservation Commission recommend to the Decision Maker denial of the Oasis on
Olive project, P.D.P. #180003, finding it does not comply with the standards contained in Land Use Code section
3.4.7 for the following reasons [state which reasons are applicable]:
• The project does negatively impact the individual eligibility for designation of one or more of the historic
properties in the defined area of adjacency, and therefore does not meet 3.4.7 (A) Purpose, or (B) General
Standard.
• The project design's [specify: height, setback and/or width] is not compatible with the historic properties
in the defined area of adjacency, as evidenced by......, and therefore does not comply with 3.4.7(F)(1).
• The project's design does not create visual ties to historic buildings within the adjacent historic context,
and therefore does not comply with 3.4.7(F)(2).
• The project's design includes primary building materials that are not reflective of the dominant historic
materials, and therefore does not comply with 3.4.7(F)(3).
• The project does not retain relevant focal and pedestrian points, and therefore does not comply with
3.4.7(F)(4).
• Existing historic and mature landscaping will not be preserved to the maximum extent feasible, and so, the
project does not comply with 3.4.7(F)(5).
Note: The Commission may propose additional findings of fact or remove any of these proposed findings
according to its evaluation.
Item # 7 Page 5
Packet Pg. 210
Agenda Item 7
ATTACHMENTS
1. Applicant Narrative (DOC)
2. Area of Adjacency - Building Descriptions (PDF)
3. Howes Street Elev (PDF)
4. Olive Street Elev (PDF)
5. Oasis on Olive_3D Views (PDF)
6. Oasis on Olive —Al of 2 (PDF)
7. Oasis on Olive _A2 of 2 (PDF)
8. Product Indentification (PDF)
9. Oasis on Olive_ELEVS (PDF)
10. Oasis on Olive -Site Plan-05-3-18 (PDF)
11. Oasis on Olive LPC Concept Rev Comments 3-21-18 (DOCX)
12. Oasis on Olive PDP R1 - Final Staff Comments (PDF)
13. Staff Presentation (PDF)
14. Plan of Protection (DOC)
•
•
Item # 7 Page 6
Packet Pg. 211
7.a
oasis
de-elopmext
Compliance with 3.4.7
Section 3.4.7 of the Fort Collins Land Use Code states..."to the maximum extent
feasible, historic sites, structures or objects are preserved..." and "new construction is
designed to respect the historic character of the site..."
The Oasis on Olive does just that in every sense of the word. The Oasis, a small seven
unit condominium property, designed by acclaimed Fort Collins architect, John Dengler,
has fit a compatible property in an otherwise eclectic neighborhood actually enhancing
the historic nature by downplaying those buildings that detract from that character.
Dengler has artfully utilized many of the architectural features seen in adjacent historic
properties without seeming to copy any particular style. By setting a single garage unit
outside the parking structure, the leading face of the project exhibits the hip roof
consistent with three of the adjacent historic buildings along with complementary
window size and spacing, stone base and a mixture of brick or stucco wall covering
materials hi -lighted with a horizontal metal panel tied in with patio rail heights. Window
placement is sensitive to existing structures in symmetry and groupings without copying
• the surrounding historic buildings. Multiple balconies break up massing and the stone
base anchors the property giving the sense of permanence and endurance. Dengler has
excelled in fitting this design into the developers objective that the building wants to look
as if its' been there for decades. This desire can also be seen in the historic renovations
owned by this same developer.
•
3.4.7 (F) is satisfied in part by the lining up of the front setback. The new buildings face
is directly in line with both the 231 S. Howes and the 316 W. Olive buildings thus
diminishing the impact of the larger structure. The smaller appearance of the garage with
its hip roof and side loaded overhead door eliminates the possibility of any negative
visual impact to the adjacent structures.
Building heights, shown on the PDP submittal drawings, indicate new roof lines certainly
compatible with the existing while diminishing the visual impact of the 76' Cortina Lofts.
At the request of the LPC board the height of the tower as been reduced by nearly 2 feet
to 38'-4" while the ridge of the building is 39'-2". Two of these historic properties are 2-
story and the other two properties are single story, however these details seem
insignificant. What makes the new building compatible is that the roof itself is much
shorter than the historic properties giving the appearance of a stepping effect from the 76'
Cortina, to the 39' ridge at 231 S. Howes to the 28' at 227 S. Howes to the 19' at 316 W.
Olive. These variances between buildings are no more of an impact than any other two
story building adjacent to a single story building. In fact they contribute to the diversity
of the block without adversely affecting the integrity of the historic properties.
231 S. HOWES STREET FT. COLLINS, CO 80521 970.484-5907 S.AMSHEL@COMCAST.NET
Packet Pg. 212
7.a
The architect skillfully mixes the building materials of the adjacent buildings into a
seamless blend on the new while picking up the dominant elements of the old. Stone,
brick and real, old fashion cement based stucco, with all its inconsistencies, gives way to
rn
the craftsman's art that has the irregular texture rather than the mono -chromatic, perfectly
5
consistent coat of modern day synthetic stucco. Wrought iron fences, contoured gutters
LU
e
and a mix of steel & stone lintels and window sills, combined with scale and proportion,
O
are thoughtfully repeated and the workmanship is assured by the years of construction
Z
experience of the owner/developer.
0
Q
c
Two of the properties, owned by This Old Howes, LLC, have long been admired not only
w
for the quality of the renovations but also by the landscaped gardens that surround the
buildings. Recycled, City of Fort Collins sidewalk stones form expansive patios and
O
walking paths. Award winning roses lovingly grown by Adelia Davis as well as multi-
w
colored Iris have provided the owner a foundation for incredible gardens. To the extent
°C
a
possible these garden will remain and the roses will be the central feature. If possible the
0
many street trees along Olive and Howes Street will remain and they exhibit that old
�
town feel for which Fort Collins is known. Every aspect of the historic properties is of
UJ
paramount concern to the developer. The new becomes an extension of the portfolio
MI
cY
controlled by the developer rather than a variety of ownership groups that may have
LU
1z
conflicting ideas for the outdoor space that is to be shared by all residents and tenants.
06
These gardens and exteriors will be covenant controlled and maintained by an Owners
w
Association.
w
It is evident that the Oasis on Olive has thoughtfully considered the land use code section
3.4.7 to insure the integrity of the historic properties to use their value to enhance the
•
entire block and that area of the downtown.
J
Q
Z
W
J
O
Z
O
Q
O
ti
ti
m
231 S. HOWES STREET FT. COLLINS. CO 80521 970.4845907 S,AMSHELCaCOMCAST.NET
m
:r
R
Z
w
c
is
Packet Pg. 213
•
•
0
231 S. Howes Street Front (east) elevation
The Humphries -Davis house was built in 1898 and
renovated in 1998 by the current owner/developer,
Stephen Slezak. It was designated as a historic landmark
in 1998.
The building is currently occupied as commercial offices
by various tenants in the energy industry.
In comparison, the building height at the roof peak is 31'
Packet Pg. 214
�
IV
low
7.b
•
r1
L_J
227 S. Howes Street
Front (East) elevation
Built in 1905 this building was completely
renovated in 2006.
Currently occupied as commercial offices by
Old Towne Wealth Advisors
• For comparison, the height of this building from roof peak to
top of curb is approximately 28'
Packet Pg. 216
7.b
227 S. Howes
elevation
elevation
elevation
LL
W
W
W
W
W
Z
0
W
0
J
Q
Z
E
W
J
O
Z
O
U)
ti
ti
co
v
•
•
7.b
316 W. Olive Street
Front (south) elevation
N
i
i
is 19' in height.
Packet Pg. 218
T
0
0
L
223 S. Howes Street Front (east) elevation 7.b
s
W
car
W
W
ad
W_
W
W
Z
0
U)
W
0
J
Q
Z
LL
W
J
O
Z
O
U)
1�
ti
ti
co
U)
c
0
a
0
c
m
EI
m
E
Packet Pg. 219
ICE
u
7.b
301 S. Howes St. Federal Building/ Post Office UP
w
4- stories in height
w
0
-� w
- ..• l c
p L�
n _
LL.`
w
lx . O
z
O
- N
ti
tD
H
C
O
C.
c�
CD
4
y
320 W. Olive Street
M
O
W
Single story office building a
constructed in 1976
y+II II r
Packet Pg. 221
7.b
205 S. Meldrum streetscape w/ OtterBox
7.c
tr
O
w
F
w
d
w
w
a�
3
w
w
Ix
Z
0
N
w
G
J
Q
Z
E
t Pg. 223
• • 7.d
w
O
U.
H
N
w
c7
w
w
od
3.1
w
w
z
0
Fn
w
0
J
a
z
M
w
J
O
z
O
Cn
Co
a
O
Packet Pg. 224
All
Emrl��
F fall
IE
op ibq
Till
ISO
IAAtli
5
-51
t
i
� c
t'
r.
9
a 3a�'
• • b
t—
U)
w
Ci
w
w
06
3
w
w
w
z
O
w
w
0
J
Q
z
M
w
J
O
z
O
U)
Q
O
Go
ti
so
H/
3
m
0
M
d
I
O
c
0
W
y
A
O
r
C
m
E
s
m
Q
Packet Pg. 228
a.
3
+ sY `1�4, � ' �. _. .. w.' � •3; � fit; i ..� �, • � r
i
11
O
.:;."A
h
6y
46 %
�q-V.
oft, &M 1,
W ` r 51Z
I gap '11�
!1
I+_
i
No Text
hA \
No Text
r
I 1
IY
� � �� __ �
' �� �
� � � �_� �
i � � ��
���_ '� __
_ 'Uf � ! �� %, �
�„- �
,���. e.
�� �.:—_
-�,
Sa�j' a1 �� �, �"y ..� � `tir
Yr f,�y to `- �.�. --a �
a *s
yk.;
Lh
r
goal
Pull 0 p
No Text
F�m
all
NJ
rr� ( rill low �� 1
ill _
it
t
.. ••�..'r� "•air ��;►, .: a,' ...
to
Y
oil
1
■
t
T �. r it
_ If. Jh•rll .._.
li If ` ailo ;
f s
OCT
9
a ,
ram;eglp
10
ag
i
Y f
Imo-
J
j w.
�I on ' , MEN
60
PA . I-klm
.1��- :1�►r�X, � gyp.
n y r
c ■
� ilk
No Text
7.e
w
CJ
w
w
06
w
w
z
O
as
w
0
J
Q
z
M
w
J
O
z
O
U)
N
Q
O
Le`
u
I(:
r+
Q
t Pg. 249
• • OE�K:l
Cn
w
d
w
o:
06
3
w
w
w
z
c�
w
0
J
Q
Z_
LL
w
ti
I-
N
3
d
C
C)
I
N
Lo ,
u
T7
Packet Pg. 250
t
.•t
■
s YVEST ELE`✓ATION
SOUTH ELEVATION
� rKe• w• • ro•
w+was Nos
mur oar. c
cap,.• w. saw cewzero-.. a., a..w. e...s�u co4.. rwe„m ew
caas�d .,.w can as ns. �..Yerrse �ro.we �a a cad z uw m.m.�
NORTH ELEVATION
EAST ELEVATION
C .% � -
tEVAt10N5
O
LL
L—
w
Z)
cY
w
---
06
3
w �-
c
W o0
Q 0
C 0 �`
0 c
�LLJ) m _-
v 0
O N O
Q
z_
LL
Packet Pg. 252
E
,OLIVE STREET ELEVATION
.w. �—
HOWES STREET ELEVATION
�J
7.g
lo�
art 0
O vo U)
C >�i 0
0 °
r-
Sul
t'i
�0'
N
O
i
Q
y
>
Q
et Pg. 253
7.h
OPAC-CLAD Horizontal Metal
Accent Panel
Percision Series HMP
Dark Bronze
' ..ISR.K1. � wn�ItlY/J9 •!Y • Ki[ tlCK=
w.+Y N.M![�M9YM .F3nC• ♦ Y 1Mss :,T.
KnY{•n.`'!cM •r.• MIR�In.R�p. \,wA Mmnw •+ ...._..._
NOW.
•
PAC -CLAD
Mi�O.Mt:JY R:�oa.a�a YY.OtwLas
4T N.tl Mt Y:p.Y/J.MP 11rS'•�s•Ctlli
Roof Shingle
Certain Teed
Grand Manor
0 Weathered Wood
7.h
Brick: Cloud Ceramics
Color: Blended CHEROKEE & CRIMSON
Style: ROMAN smooth texture
STONE /
lintles & trim bands
BRICK
COTTONWOOD BUFF
Smooth texture
3cm adhered
a
a
z
w
O
L)
w
O
LL
w
D
U
w
w
ad
w
w
w
z
0
U)
w
c
J
i
Go
Is
Packet Pg. 255
3 x a..WEST ELEVATION
Q
NORTH ELEVATION
14
SOUTH ELEVATION
EAST ELEVATION
w
O
U.
I—
U)
w
Ci
w
w
a�
3
w
w
w
z
a
V5
w
c
J
a
Z
LL
w
J
w
d
I
O
C
0
0
y
m
O
r+
C
d
E
._
0
A
Q
Spie Pan Notes
=.=Aft
PMmingAWoval Owm% Cerftahw cd Appro #A:
PROACT
t MN
I.,W�J.6WNW,
L.pt D."ftn;
ITO
orIGROUP
Z=="
Oasis u, 01"S
ad
3.1
LU
LLJ
Ix
z
LLI
z
0
z
0
0
co
ti
90t Pg. 257
0 0 'Raw
7.k
• Oasis on Olive Development Review
No disclosures or recusal
Steve Slezak - applicant presentation -
Windows on the tower - these are the windows on the tower as originally shown
Projections - shingles used
Area of Adjacency:
Will not include post office;
Do include the Old Town Professional Building; the three Howes Street buildings, and the Olive Street
building
Questions for applicant:
**Noted that the application has been submitted
Brad: could vote on the area of adjacency tonight
Bud: move that the above five properties are accepted as area of adjacency:
Bud: likes the vertical ribbon of corner windows on the tower. Window pattern on the southwest corner
elevation has changed - double sets in various locations, rest are more contemporary; construction
documents seem to be all fixed or casement with variations of double and single; pattern on the original
rendering is more pleasing than that on the construction document.
Pattern of windows need to be corrected in the renderings - the working drawings are the current
proposal (except the tower)
Steve: heard from LPC it was more important to reflect the adjacent historic window patterns; so now
• using 2.5 x 5 windows with some rare instances of smaller windows, in bathrooms; windows are operable
mullion -less double -hung. LPC: Not what is shown on plans. Plans depict casement or fixed. What's your
intent? Double -hung cannot be mullion -less if they are operable. Steve: Double -hung.
Bud: Windows should be drawn to show double -hung with horizontal mullion
Steve: Window size on historic buildings is 2.5 x 5
Need more information on windows.
Meg: zoom in on garage section to show the screen - Right Side Elevation - shows the garage is totally
enclosed
Per: need to know where eave and window heights are relative to the historic buildings. Steve - doesn't
have that yet.
Per: why is the tower at that height? Could it be lowered?
Steve: the eave could go down
Per: it feels taller than everything around it - can still be a tower without being higher than the ridge on the
main part of the building
Per: the tower feels out of proportion
Katie: which is the correct tower design?
Steve: the one with the corner windows - vertical ribbon window. Stone base with stucco above.
Per: what kind/pattern of stone? Steve: match Cortina. LPC — not whats shown on plans. Plans need to
be corrected.
Steve: traditional thought process is articulation in the roofline; something needs to soften impact of
• Cortina building on the whole block; helps to soften it as an in between
Packet Pg. 258
7.k
Meg: agrees it gives a transition to Cortina, but historic buildings don't have a lot of articulation; houses
don't have complex rooflines
Kevin: is roofline of stairway affecting buildings in front of it?
Per: hard to tell without having an elevation that shows the relationship of the buildings to historic
buildings; tower feels like a freestanding tower so it should be carefully considered in relationship to
historic buildings
Bud; and it doesn't need the added height because it IS freestanding; perceived as taller because it is
freestanding
Steve: 40 feet
Per: Also tower feels out of proportion to rest of proposed building
Per: overhead views - is the siding of the tower no longer on the project?
Steve: shingles for the bump outs - used in the garage - trying to bring it back
Per: the building needs something to give it some scale - a blank wall of stucco doesn't do that. Stone,
siding, other materials can do that.
Need horizontal alignment
Per: Need heights of eaves and other details relative to the historic buildings;
Per: Need Tower height relative to the historic buildings.
SUMMARY: LPC needs
1.) a better sense of proportion of the tower to the historic buildings
2.) comparison of eave heights and alignments with historic buildings
3.) info on the windows
4.) clear up uncertainty of materials and whether you plan to use shingles and where; what is the
stone? Is it ashlar, or something else?
5.) materials should give a sense of scale
6.) Drawings needs to be specific.
Meg: we are generally in favor but we need more information before we can give any recommendation
Steve - the tower sits way back — providing an elevation showing the historic buildings next to it will be
false information (Meg explained that other renderings provide that more accurate building relationship)
�1
w
F-
y
W
CY
W
GC
Cd
3
w
W
z
0
y
w
C
J
Q
z
E
cc
N
M
a�
m
E
E
0
U
m
w
a
0
c
0
c�
a
J
d
O
c
0
Mn
y
M
O
Packet Pg. 259
•
City of
F6rt Collins
April 13, 2018
Oasis Development
231 S Howes St
Fort Collins, CO 80521
RE: Oasis on Olive, PDP180003, Round Number 1
Community Develop 7.1
Neighborhood Services
281 North College Avenue
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6750
970.224.6134 - fax
fcgov. com/developmentreview
Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for
your submittal of the above referenced project. If you have questions about any comments, you may
contact the individual commenter or direct your questions through the Project Planner, Pete Wray, at
970-221-6754 or pwray@fcgov.com.
Comment Summary:
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Katie Andrews, 970-221-6501, kandrews(a--)fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 04/09/2018
04/09/2018: Please clarify what's happening with the two drive approaches — does
2' curb typical existing mean vertical or rollover? The driveways should be brought
up to current LCUASS standards and designed and reconstructed in accordance
with detail 706.1 (or 707.1 if the traffic warrants a high -volume drive).
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 04/09/2018
04/09/2018: The minimum width for a private drive approach is 24 feet — a variance
would be required to allow for the reduced width.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 04/09/2018
04/09/2018: If you do not wish to dedicate the standard utility easements, please
provide a variance request in accordance with 1.9.4 of the LCUASS.
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 04/09/2018
04/09/2018: The diagonal chase is not a standard design nor is it ideal for this area
from the City's perspective. We'd like to work with you on the chase design in this
area, there are some locations around the City where the drain directly abuts the
drive approach — a good example is 619 S College Ave.
Comment Number: 5
Comment Originated: 04/09/2018
04/09/2018: It appears that a portion of the fence is being left in the ROW frontage —
an encroachment permit would need to be approved in order for this to remain.
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 04/09/2018
04/09/2018: 1 did not notice signage for the entrance only/exit only — this is a critical
part of the access/drive design, please include a proposal for this with the next
submittal. It might be beneficial to include this information in the variance request for
the reduced -width driveway as well.
lX
0
LL
i—
U)
w
Ci
w
M
w
w
W
z
C)
rn
w
0
J
Q
z
w
0
z
0
M
Q
O
co
r—
ti
S
Page 1 of 10 Packet Pg. 260
Comment Number: 7
Comment Originated: 04/11/201 7.1
04/11/2018: Covered chase drains have been approved in the past in the City.
Please include a design for review with your next submittal or provide an exhibit
directly to me for a quick review prior to the next submittal.
Department: Environmental Planning
Contact: Rebecca Everette, 970-416-2625, reverette(a--)fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 04/09/2018
04/09/2018: LANDSCAPE PLAN: At the time of Final Plan, please provide detailed
species, quantities and planting locations for all shrubs, perennials and grasses,
including species for the turf areas and rain gardens.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/09/2018
04/09/2018: Thank you for selecting 3000K, full cutoff light fixtures for this project.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 04/09/2018
04/09/2018: Environmental Planning is ready for hearing.
Department: Forestry
Contact: Molly Roche, , mroche(a-)fcgov.com
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 04/10/2018
04/10/2018:
There appears to be existing trees on -site. Please schedule an on -site meeting with
City Forestry to obtain tree inventory and mitigation information. All existing trees
should be retained and protected to the extent reasonably feasible.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 04/10/2018
04/10/2018:
Will the new driveway installation require any grading? Please note that the Ash tree
adjacent to the proposed driveway is planned to receive treatment for Emerald Ash
Borer by City Forestry.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 04/10/2018
4/9/2018:
Three of the Ash trees shown on landscape plans will not be treated for Emerald
Ash Borer by City Forestry. This means that they will be removed within the next
couple years. City Forestry would like to discuss a few planting management
options with the developer:
1) Developer remove and replace (3) Ash trees within the right-of-way at time of
project approval. Replace Ash trees with approved species from the City of Fort
Collins Street Tree list.
2) City Forestry remove and replace (3) Ash trees within the right-of-way.
Replacement trees to be included in the Ash Replacement Program — paid for and
planted by City Forestry.
3) Consider 'shadow -planting' between existing Ash trees. This will allow new trees
to start establishing before the Ash are removed.
I am throwing out these options so that landscape updates coincide with site
improvements. It will benefit the development to establish new trees now instead of
later.
r 1
L
X
O
w
W
w
Ci
w
e:
06
3
w
w
z
O
w
0
J
Q
Z
U.
n
Page 2 of 10 Packet Pg. 261
•
•
•
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/10/201 7•I
04/10/2018:
Please include any proposed landscaping, including trees, on the landscape plan
and provide a plant legend to detail quantity, species, size, method of transplant, and
species diversity (see LUC 3.2.1).
Comment Number: 5
Comment Originated: 04/10/2018
04/10/2018:
There appears to be areas of the site that could benefit from additional trees (east
side of parcel). Please consider ornamentals, upright species, or smaller evergreen
plants to this area and others where feasible.
Department: Historic Preservation
Contact: Karen McWilliams, 970-224-6078, kmcwilliams(dfcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 04/06/2018
04/06/2018: The project is subject to land Use Code Section 3.4.7, Historic and
Cultural Resources. 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.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/06/2018
04/06/2018: At its March work session the LPC identified the Area of Adjacency for
the historic review of this project. Designated Fort Collins Landmarks within this
area are 231 S. Howes Street, the Humphry-Davis House, and 223 South Howes
Street, the Dealy-Goode House. Properties with a non -binding determination of
individual eligibility are 227 S. Howes Street, 316 West Olive Street, and the Old
Town professional Center Building at 315 West Oak/211 W. Canyon Avenue.
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 04/06/2018
04/06/2018: The project was discussed at a Conceptual Review by the LPC on
March 21, 2018, and is scheduled to return to the LPC on May 16, 2018. Upon
completion of its review, the LPC will provide a recommendation on the project to
the P&Z.
At this meeting, the LPC requested additional information to be provided by the
applicant, which staff has made the applicant aware of.
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 04/06/2018
04/06/2018: The applicant has indicated that the design will change from that
shown on the submittal and presented to the LPC. Historic Preservation staff will
provide comments on the design compliance with applicable standards when the
revised plans are submitted.
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Clint Reetz, 970-221-6326, creetz(a�fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 04/06/2018
04/06/2018: Currently single phase power is serving the existing property. Any
upgrades or changes to the existing electric infrastructure will incur system
modification charges.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 04/06/2018
04/06/2018: Developer will be responsible for supplying and installing electric
service from the transformer to the multi -family units.
Page 3 of 10
Packet Pg. 262
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/06/201 7.1
04/06/2018: Transformer locations will need to be coordinated with Light & Power.
Transformers must be placed within 10 ft of a drivable surface for installation and
maintenance purposes. The transformer must also have a front clearance of 10 ft
and side/rear clearance of 3 ft minimum. 0
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 04/06/2018
04/06/2018: Meter locations for multi -family attached units will need to be
coordinated with Light and Power Engineering. Each unit will need its own meter, it
is recommended that the meters be located in one common area.
Comment Number: 5
Comment Originated: 04/06/2018
04/06/2018: Please contact Light & Power Engineering if you have any questions
call me directly at 970-221-6326. Please reference our policies, development
charge processes, and use our fee estimator at
http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers.
Comment Number: 6
Comment Originated: 04/13/2018
04/13/2018: Per a discussion had at PDP where the possibility of an existing
transformer on the site may need to be moved, after a site visit it looks like no
conflict exists.
Department: PFA
Contact: Andrew Rosen, , arosen(a-)fcgov.com w
Topic: General 0
z
0
Ln
N
y
C
O
E
E
O
U
�a
w
W
ea
C
ii
IL
0
IL
m
Al
Page 4 of 10 Packet Pg. 263
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 04/05/201 7.1
is
04-11-2018 UPDATE
The project owner requested clarification on whether an NFPA 13 or 13R sprinkler
system would be required. From the provided documentation, this appears to be a
multi -family project which will require a full NFPA 13 system. If it can be shown that
these are individually owned homes with a lot line between each, then a 13R may be
allowed if there is a 2hr vertical and horizontal separation between units. Please
contact the Fort Collins building department for further information.
04-10-2018 UPDATE
The project team stated that the building was at grade level and that the 29ft 10in
height was taken from true ground level.
04/05/2018:
AUTOMATED FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM
This building will require an approved NFPA 13 automated fire sprinkler system. This
typically requires a 6" supply line and the plan shall be provided to PFA for approval
under separate permit. Please contact PFA at 970-416-2891 with any fire sprinkler
questions. Code language follows:
GROUP S-2 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
> IFC 903.2.10: An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout
buildings classified as enclosed parking garages (Group S-2 occupancy) in
accordance with IBC 406.6 OR where located beneath other groups.
BALCONIES AND DECKS
> IFC 903.3.1.2.1: Sprinkler protection shall be provided for exterior balconies,
decks, and ground floor patios of dwelling units where the building is of Type V
construction.
FDC
The FDC should be located where it is easily visible and accessed from Olive
street. This location will require PFA approval. Code language follows:
>IFC 912.2: Fire department connections shall be located on the street side of the
building, fully visible and recognizable from the street or nearest point of fire
department vehicle access. The location of the FDC shall be approved by PFA.
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 04/05/2018
04/05/2018:
ADDRESSINGMAYFINDING
To assist with prompt emergency response, an overall addressing and wayfinding
plan will be required that involves the whole building, the two towers and the single
unit. The street address and number should be clearly visible from Olive street.
Signage shall be affixed to the elevation facing Olive to indicate the appropriate
accessway to each unit.
KNOX BOXES
If garage doors, security gates or access doors into the towers are required to be
opened to gain entrance into the garages or towers, then each one will be designed
with an approved Knox Key Switch or other approved access mechanism. The
overall access plan should be submitted to PFA for approval.
Page 5 of 10 Packet Pg. 264
Comment Number: 3
Comment Originated: 04/05/201 7•I
04/05/2018:
PUBLIC -SAFETY RADIO AMPLIFICATION SYSTEM TEST
> IFC 510 & 1103.2: New & existing buildings require a fire department, emergency
communication system evaluation after the core/shell but prior to final build out. For
the purposes of this section, fire walls shall not be used to define separate buildings
Where adequate radio coverage cannot be established within a building,
public -safety radio amplification systems shall be designed and installed in
accordance with criteria established by the Poudre Fire Authority.
Comment Number: 4
Comment Originated: 04/05/2018
04/05/2018:
ACCESS
>Access is required to within 150ft of all exterior portions of the building. On the
provided site plan dated 3-14-2018, this criteria has been met by measuring from
Olive St and Canyon Ave.
Comment Number: 5
Comment Originated: 04/05/2018
04/05/2018:
HYDRANT
A hydrant is required within 300ft of the building. This criteria appears to be met by
the hydrant on Olive St. However it is the project team's responsibility to verify
volume and pressure.
Department: Planning Services
Contact: Pete Wray, 970-221-6754, pwray(a)fcgov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 9
Comment Originated: 04/10/2018
04/10/2018: Add color to elevations or on separate sheet with material color legend
to match call outs. If these exist by Architect, then use if they match elevations. Are
there any roof chimney or FP vents used in units?
Comment Number: 10
Comment Originated: 04/10/2018
04/10/2018: Refer to Historic Preservation staff and LPC comments for building
design compatibility requirements.
Topic: General
Comment Number: 7
Comment Originated: 04/10/2018
04/10/2018: Utility Plans.
Label all sheet title blocks and on plans correct address of 310 W Olive, not 312 typ.
all sheets.
Comment Number: 8
Comment Originated: 04/10/2018
04/10/2018: Utility Plan shows new site wall Sheet 3 in front of garage on Olive
Street. Need to show on all other plans including detail of this design.
Comment Number: 11
Comment Originated: 04/10/2018
04/10/2018: PDP R2 Review.
If staff determines this PDP is ready for P & Z Board hearing in May during the staff
review meeting on April 11, 1 will need a revised plan set (same as LPC plan set)
submitted by May 2 for packet.
Prior this this date, please confirm with Katie Andrews Engineering comments are
addressed in revised plan set, including any variances as identified in her
comments. If they are not addressed and she determines this project is not ready
for hearing, it will be deferred to June meeting with the Board.
•
r
Page 6 of 10 Packet Pg. 265
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 4
7.1
Comment Originated: 04/10/2018
04/10/2018:
See site plan redline notes for ex. tree on Olive, and ex. metal fence.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/10/2018
04/10/2018:
Please add foundation planting on garage wall facing Olive Street, see redline. Add
some additional taller planting in foundation strip at base of stair tower to soften tall
wall.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 04/10/2018
04/10/2018:
Sheet LS-2. Add planting legend, and details of all landscape materials such as
cobble mulch, LID rain garden planters, fencing, other?
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/10/2018
04/10/2018:
Fencing: Label existing metal fence column if maintaining this with removal of
remainder of fence. Add labels for new 6' cedar fence in all locations. New site wall
shown on Utility Plan Sheet 3 in front of garage on Olive St. needs to be shown on
all plans. Need detail of this design.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/10/2018
04/10/2018:
Site Plan Legend: Add parking calculation for existing standard (Required spaces),
then compare to TOD Overlay calculations.
• Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/10/2018
04/10/2018:
Exist. Ash tree on Olive label either retaining or removal.
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, ischlam(a)_fcgov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 03/30/2018
03/30/2018: The site disturbs more than 10,000 sq. ft. and therefore Erosion and
Sediment Control Materials need to be submitted. (the lot is -9700 SF but the off lot
work with curb gutters and utilities installations put this project about-11,000 SF)
The erosion control requirements can be located in the Stormwater Design Criteria
under the Amendments of Volume 3 Chapter 7 Section 1.3.3. a copy of the erosion
control requirements can be found at www.fcgov.com/eroison. The Erosion Control
Materials will need to be submitted at time of the first round of FDP. If you need
clarification concerning the Erosion Control Material Requirements or Comments
presented above please contact myself. Jesse Schlam (970) 224-6015
jschiam@fcgov.com
Contact: Mark Taylor, 970-416-2494, mtaylor(aD_fcgov.com
Topic: Drainage Report
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 04/09/2018
04/09/2018: Please describe portions of the site as being in the City's Old Town
Basin and indicate the presence of the City -regulated 100-year floodplain, as well as
the FEMA Map Panel number and the date of the City's Master Plan. Also, include a
copy of the FEMA Map Panel with the site location noted in red.
Page 7 of 10
Packet Pg. 266
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/09/201 7•1
04/09/2018: The second half of the paragraph CITY FLOODPLAIN/FLOODWAY
should be changed. The building is not in the floodplain, so there is no need for an
RFPE, a minimum elevation of the building, for venting to be provided, or any sort of
hold on the certificate of occupancy. Any grading in the floodway, utility cuts, or
driveway changes will need a floodplain use permit and a no -rise certification.
Topic: Floodplain LLO
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/09/2018
04/09/2018: On Sheets 4 and 5 of the Utility Plans, please add a note that any utility
work in the floodway must be preceded by a floodplain use permit and no -rise
certification.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 04/09/2018
04/09/2018: On Sheets 4 and 5 of the Utility Plans, please add a note stating that
storage of equipment and materials is not allowed within the floodway.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 04/09/2018
04/09/2018: On Sheet 5 of the Utility Plans, an RFPE is listed with XS #3164. Since
the building is not in the floodplain, this elevation is not relevant and does not need to
be included.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/09/2018
04/09/2018: Please show and label the current effective City -regulated 100-year
floodplain and floodway boundaries.
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamargue(cDfcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 8
04/10/2018: The LID concept meets City Criteria.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty(u�fcgov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Originated: 04/10/2018
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/06/2018
04/06/2018: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/06/2018
04/06/2018: There is text that needs to be masked. Mask all text in hatched areas.
See redlines.
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/06/2018
04/06/2018: Please add the Lot, Block, and Subdivision of this project to the
sub -title on sheet 1.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/06/2018
04/06/2018: Please revise the Benchmark Statement as marked. See redlines.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 04/06/2018
04/06/2018: Some of the sheet titles in the sheet index do not match the sheet titles
on the noted sheets. See redlines.
w
cv
w
3
w
w
W
z
t9
w
0
J
Q
z
U.
w
J
O
z
O
rn
a
0
IL
d
C�
Page 8 of 10 Packet Pg. 267
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 04/06/201 7.1
04/06/2018: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Topic: Landscape Plans
is Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/06/2018
04/06/2018: There are line over text issues. See redlines.
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Tim Tuttle, , TTUTTLE(aD_fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/09/2018
04/09/2018: The distance from the new diagonal parking on Canyon to the driveway
should be 5 ft.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/09/2018
04/09/2018: Please show the location of any new or relocated signs.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/09/2018
04/09/2018: Signing and striping redlines will be provided at the Staff Review
meeting.
Department: Water Conservation
Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson(a)_fcgov.com
Topic: General
• Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/10/2018
04/10/2018: A landscape plan shall contain accurate and identifiable hydrozones,
including a water budget chart that shows the total annual water use, which shall not
exceed fifteen (15) gallons per square foot over the site. If you have questions
contact Eric Olson at eolson@fcgov.com or 970-221-6704.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/10/2018
04/10/2018: Irrigation plans are required no later than at the time of building permit.
The irrigation plans must Comply with the provisions outlined in Section 3.2.1(J) of
the Land Use Code. Direct questions concerning irrigation requirements to Eric
Olson, at 221-6704 or eolson@fcgov.com
Department: Water -Wastewater Engineering
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamargue(a_fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 04/10/2018
04/10/2018: The water service does not meet City distance requirements form
other improvements and will need to be relocated.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 04/10/2018
04/10/2018: Please draw the water meter pit per scale. A 2-inch meter pit requires
a 4-foot manhole.
Department: Zoning
Contact: Missy Nelson, , mnelson(aD-fcgov.com
Topic: General
Page 9 of 10 Packet Pg. 268
Comment Number: 1
Comment Originated: 04/09/201 7•�
04/09/2018: The correct address is 310 W. Olive St (I confirmed this with our GIS
department). Please correct on all documents for next round's submittal.
GIS contact:
Email: gis@fcgov.com
Phone: 970.416.2483
Comment Number: 2
Comment Originated: 04/09/2018
04/09/2018: What is your exiting plan for garage bay/parking space number 8? Is
there an interior pedestrian access? Also, for the car to then exit, will they have to
open the other garage to go through and exit? I have a feeling they won't do so and
will just exit through the entrance.
Pedestrian access to and from parking garage?
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 04/09/2018
04/09/2018: All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened from public view
from both above and below by integrating it into building and roof design to the
maximum extent feasible. Where will the mechanical equipment be located?
In addition, conduit, meters, vents and other equipment attached to the building or
protruding from the roof shall be painted to match surrounding building surfaces.
Please make sure there's a note on the site plan.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 04/09/2018
04/09/2018: Please add drive aisle dimensions.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 04/09/2018
04/09/2018: A full landscape plan will need to be submitted at Final.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 04/11/2018
04/11/2018: LUC 3.2.2The 1 handicap parking space shall be designated as
van -accessible and must be a minimum of 8 feet wide and adjoin a minimum 8 foot
wide access aisle.
LJ
1X
O
w
w
D
cY
w
06
w
w
z
(D
co
w
0
J
Q
z
w
J
O
z
O
U)
Fn
d
E
s
�o
Page 10 of 10 Packet Pg. 269
7.m
•
•
City of
Fort Collins '�
Project Summary M.
• 3-story multi family residential project with 7 units o
U)
U)
• Located behind 227 S. Howes and 231 S. Howes Street o
• New lot created from rear portions of these lots
• Planning and Zoning Board (Type 2)
•
Packet Pg. 270
7.m
Foi tQ 11ns
• Provide a recommendation to the Decision Maker
regarding the proposed project's compliance with Land
Use Code Section 3.4.7, which requires new construction
to respect the historic character of surrounding historic
properties on or adjacent to the development site.
Cf1 ni
Lep.rw
W OAK ST
G%
W MAGNOLIA ST
z
0
a
y
U
W
0
O
H
z
O
H
a
0
z
w
O
U
w
W
W
O
LL
U)
w
c�
w
3
w
w
J
Q
z
M
00
cc
r-
0
M
c
m
N
a
M
C
d
E
Packet Pg. 271
""M_;
IY
W7440
Wo-
231 S. Howes
• Landmark
• 4-Square
r 2 '/2 Stories
• Stucco
• Raised
foundation
223 S. Howes
• Landmark
• Craftsman
bungalow
• 1 '/2 Stories
• Blonde brick
• Raised
foundation
5
6
227 S. Howes
• Queen Anne
• 1 Story
• Red brick
• Raised
foundation
316 W. Olive
• Hip Box
• 1 Story
• Red brick
• Raised
foundation
8
7.m
E
•
_Fort ColUns
Staff recommends approval:
3.4.7 (A) Purpose, and (B) General Standard:
• The project does not negatively impact the individual
eligibility for designation of the historic properties in the
defined area of adjacency
n
LJ
Packet Pg. 274
7.m
Fort CO«ins
3.4.7 (F)(1): Height, setback and width:
• The project design's overall height, setback and width is
compatible with the historic properties in the defined area
of adjacency.
• The project's massing strategy and use of similar
materials and roof forms mitigate the negative impact on
directly adjacent historic resources.
City of
i,.FOrt CoRinS
3.4. 7 (F) (2). Character — Horizontal elements, window
pattern, primary entrance:
• Use of gable and intersecting gable roof forms and
similar roof pitches
• The projecting garage is similar in shape to the 316 West
Olive building.
r �
rn
U
w
0
0
F-
Z
0
F-
a
0
Z
w
0
U
w
0
U.
w
c�
w
W
ad
w_
>
w
Q'
w
J
0
Z
0
Ln
U)
a
0
00
E
di
Packet Pg. 275
7.m
•
�Cclhns
3.4.7 (F)(3): Building materials:
• The project design includes primary building materials
reflective of the dominant historic materials: red brick,
buff stone, stucco, horizontal metal panels.
•
Fort Collins
3.4.7 (F)(4): Visual and pedestrian connections:
• Visual and pedestrian connections maintained by not
building fencing between the new and historic lots.
• This significantly helps to retain and promote the historic
buildings' setting and association with the historic rose
gardens.
U
Packet Pg. 276
7.m
City ffothns
3.4.7 (F)(3): Landscaping. -
No fencing is proposed between this lot and the rear lots
of 227 and 231 South Howes: promotes historic buildings'
setting and association with the historic rose gardens.
• To the extent possible rose gardens will remain.
• Street trees will remain; replacement trees according to
the requirements of the City Forester.
lr
U
W
0
O
z
O
Q
0
Z
W
O
U
W
O
LL.
N
W
D
d
W
06
3
W
W
IX
J
Q
Z
LL
W
J
O
z
O
U)
Q
O
00
ti
co
E
i
Packet Pg. 277
T.n
� oasis
�Ic relopmeu!
Plan of Protection for Historic Properties
Project Title: Oasis on Olive
Full Property Address: 312 W. Olive Street Fort Collins, CO 80521
Form Prepared by: Stephen Slezak/ developer
Please complete the following as applicable. Please answer each question thoroughly, and
add additional pages if needed:
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Legal Description: 312 W. Olive Street Lot 3 Olive Street Apartments
SITUATE IN THE SOUTHEAST % OF SECTION 11,
TOWNSHIP 7 N, RANGE 69 W OF THE SIXTH P.M.
• CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO
1.2 General description of work: Project is owned & developed by Stephen Slezak dba
Oasis Development, LLC. This will be the new construction of a 3- story condominium building
with ground floor 'tuck -under' parking. There are 7 condominiums that will be FOR SALE & will
be controlled by a Homeowners Association.
Construction by Amshel Corporation, 231 S. Howes Street Fort Collins, CO 80521
1.3 Eligible historic structures are at 223 & 231 S. Howes Street. Eligible structures include
227 S. Howes & 316 W. Olive.
1.4 The building at 316 W. Olive is immediately to the west of the new construction and will
be separated by a total of 15 feet. The new building will sit the required 5 feet east of property
while the 316 building sits 10 feet west of property line. The buildings at 227 & 231 S. Howes are
considerable distance from the new construction with the 227 building a full 21' from the
closest construction element & the 231 building 25' from the closest element. Foundation over
dig is generally 3-5 feet from the outside edge of the concrete wall so there will remain between
10 feet & 22 feet respectively from any open excavations. These locations are detailed on the
building SITE PLAN & enclosed in this submittal package.
1.5 223 S. Howes is a designated historic landmark. Construction date is unknown
227 S. Howes is eligible for designation & was built in 1905
231 S. Howes is a designated historic landmark & was built in 1898
• 316 W. Olive is eligible for designation. Date of construction is unknown.
231 S. HowES STREET FT. COLLINS, CO 80521 970.484,5907 S.AMSHEL@COMCAST.NET
Packet Pg. 278
7.n
2.0 Scope of Work
Describe the work, and how it will affect any historic building(s) (both on the subject property
and on adjacent properties, if applicable). Provide descriptions on each of the following, as
applicable:
2.1 Demolition: N/A
2.2 Site preparation: Erosion controls will be installed on the subject property & streets
ONLY. A temporary fence will be erected around the perimeter with weighted stands.
2.3 Excavation: A 30" deep trench will provide for the foundation wall except at the ground
floor unit #1. That 850 s.f. area will have a basement where sufficient excavation will be
required with anticipated haul of excess material. Access will be on to Olive at an existing drive
approach. There is no anticipation of shoring on underpinning.
2.4 Utilities: Water & Sewer excavations will be between two existing street trees out to
Olive Street sufficiently away from existing structures. Electrical has been installed from the
ground vault to the SW corner of the building so will not require additional excavation near the
316 building. Gas will come from Olive directly north 60' east of the 316 building.
2.5 New foundation: The new foundation will be grade beam spanning drilled piers.
Foundation at the basement will be spread footings with concrete walls. The drilled piers will
cause less impact adjacent to the 316 W. Olive building while the top of pier will be mitigated to
30" meaning a more shallow excavation.
2.6 New construction: Exterior walls of the parking area will be concrete block with brick
veneer. Scaffolding will be set on the west exterior but access will be limited to within property
line without encroachment onto the 316 W. Olive property. Building line of that property is 10
feet from property so masonry construction will be 15 feet from existing building.
Structure above the garage level will be steel beams with concrete toping. All work will be from
the garage side or from the street. Cranes will not swing over the 316 building, rather only over
the new construction. Permits will be secured for street closures if necessary. No work will be
allowed over others existing structures.
2"1 & P floor exterior walls will be either brick or stucco & again will be performed within
'enclosed" scaffolding on subject property. No access from adjacent property will be allowed.
2.7 Parking lot: Parking area is poured concrete on the enclosed area only.
2.8 Driveways/alleyways: Existing curb approaches on Olive & Canyon will be removed &
replaced according to city engineer specifications. Work must be performed by licensed 'right of
way' contractors who are bonded & insured.
2.9 Landscaping: Most of the existing landscaping will be preserved with new 'rain gardens'
constructed according to civil engineers design in compliance with City of Fort Collins storm
drainage requirements.
2.10 Drainage: Low Impact Development Site drainage will be incorporated using 'rain
gardens from roof downspouts & underground piping.
lr-1
`i
►_I
J
Q
z
LL
a
c
m
E
46
231 S. HOWES STREET FT. COLLINS. CO 80521 970.4845907 S.AMSHEL@COMCAST.NE7
Packet Pg. 279
7.n
0 3.0 Coordination of Project Activities
3.1 General Contractor: Amshel Corporation
Stephen Slezak 970-484-5907 s.amshel@comcast.net
231 S. Howes, adjacent to the proposed construction site.
Superintendent: Wayne Hupp 970-545-0687
3.2 Wayne will be on site daily while work is occurring.
3.3 If not, how may they be contacted if needed when that work is underway? n/a
3.4 What specific coordination practices will be used to coordinate work activities?
Wayne has been in the business for almost 50 years. Wayne will coordinate subcontract
activities & schedule, maintain safety practices & tool box meetings weekly. Amshel has written
Safety Manual & requires all trades to follow industry safety practices.
4.0 Deconstruction, Salvaging & Recycling Materials
4.1 Which historic materials will be deconstructed and salvaged? n/a
4.2 Which historic materials will not be salvaged, and how will they be disposed of? n/a
• 5.0 Protection of Existing Historic Property
How will you ensure that historic buildings, structures, and surface features will not be damaged
during work? What means will be used to protect them?
5.1 Site Conservation The building was designed to take advantage of the Landscaping
element that existed. The new building footprint is essentially where the old garages were
with much of the existing landscaping meant to provide the project with the amenity of the
"outdoor space". While care will be used in the protection of existing landscape elements,
much of the site requires modification for storm drainage requirements. Existing Ash street
trees will be fenced with signage that those areas are Tree Protection Zones.
5.2 Demolition of Building n/a
5.3 Foundation Stability adjacent building is of sufficient distance & separated by the
construction fence that no additional protections are anticipated.
5.4 Structural New construction is independent from other structures. No overhead
material movement (crane) will be allowed.
5.5 New Construction: The building is entirely independent of any existing buildings
is
whether designated historic or not. State & City laws & codes regulated the protection
& exposure mitigation for all construction projects & are monitored by building officials
231 S. HowEs STREET FT. COLuNS. CO 80521 970.484�5907 S.AMSHELCJ'COMCAST.NET
Packet Pg. 280
7.n
& inspectors, bank inspectors, insurance inspectors & of course by the decades of
construction experience of the general contractor & the field supervision. Many layers
of insurance serve to protect to the greatest extent any damage that may occur.
Nothing is 100% certain but the safeguards that are delineated in code & law serve to
protect the best anyone can expect.
5.6 Historic Openings & Materials n/a
5.7 New Openings n/a
5.8 Floor Framing n/a
5.9 Roof Structure and Roof Framing n/a
5.10 Structural Loads n/a
5.11 Supporting and Bracing of Existing Structure; Under -Pinning n/a
5.12 Excavation and Shoring of Existing Structure None
5.13 Site Cleanup: Tracking pads are required to knock mud & debris from equipment tires
prior to entering roadway. Street will be cleaned according to City requirements. Trash
& recycles will be confined to designated dumpsters located is specified areas. Concrete
washout will be controlled by City standards.
6.0 Documentation for Record
6.1 Does the project include measured drawings and/or photographs?
Yes. Project will be constructed from plans that are stamped by State Certified engineers
and architects. City of Fort Collins requires licensed trades including right -of way, framing &
structural steel, mechanical & electrical. Time lapse photography is not anticipated on a
project of this size.
6.2 Where will these be stored?
Hard copies & digital copies will be maintained with the City Building Department as well as
with the developer/ property owner.
7.0 Archeology
How will you address archeological resources if they are likely to be present or if you should
unexpectedly find them? (e.g., contact the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery; have an
archeologist on site to monitor the work; have an archeologist on call.)
None expected. Garage demolition was completed with no discoveries & no evidence of
artifacts within the soil borings.
r�
(n
U
W
G
O
H
Z
O
H
Q
0
Z
w
O
U
w
Q:
O
u.
H
w
Ci
w
W
W
W
Ix
231 S. HowES STREET FT. COLLINS, CO 80521 970.484,5907 S.AMSHEL@COMCAST.NET
Packet Pg. 281