Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBLOCK 81 419 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE - Filed GC-GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE - 2003-05-28Statement of Planning Objectives for 419 W. Mountain Ave. ( i ) Statement of appropriate City Plan Principles and Policies achieved by the proposed plan. Response: The proposed redevelopment brings the exterior architecture into alignment with other houses along Mountain Ave. The redevelopment increases landscaping and reduces storm runoff. The redevelopment will create an energy efficient living unit in a location which requires no new public infrastructure. ( ii ) Description of proposed open space, buffering, landscaping, circulation, transition area, wetlands and natural areas on site and in the general vicinity of the project. Response: The proposed redevelopment will increase landscaping on Mountain Ave. The existing 2 car concrete parking area in front of the building will be removed and replaced with grass and landscaping. Behind the building, a fence and landscape buffer was installed as well as a trash enclosure area. ( iii ) Statement of proposed ownership and maintenance of public and private open space areas; Applicant's intentions with regard to future ownership of all or portions of the project development plan. Response: The applicants will own and manage the property. The grassed public R.O.W. area in front of the building will have an automatic sprinkler system. (iv ) Estimate of number of employees for business, commercial, and industrial uses. Response: N/A (v) Description of rationale behind the assumptions and choices made by applicant. Response: The project as purchased in September of 2001 was an office building which had lost it exception zoning use due to 12 months of vacancy as an active office. The building now has to comply with the NCM zoning for the neighborhood which does not allow for offices. This proposed use will occur over the original building which was built in 1962. A second floor will be added to blend with the Mountain Ave. architecture. (vi ) The applicant shall submit as evidence of successful completion of the applicable criteria, the completed documents pursuant to the regulations for each proposed use. The Planning Director may require, or the applicant may choose to submit, evidence that is beyond what is required in that section. Any variance from the criteria shall be described. F-ACIITIL2�1 1630 S. ed&9e Afae(uce P, 0. Fax 270852 70%e e j&4, eO 90527 (970) 493-2909 5W (970) 495- 9735 January 27, 2003 Attn: Mr. Dave Stringer, Development Review Manager City of Fort. Collins 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado 80522-0580 Re: The Responsibility Statement on the Cover Sheet. Dear Dave, Recently, Ms. Katie Moore of your department has asked us to place the "responsibility" statement (Item J, page E-30 of the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards) on our sheet. We realize that Katie was doing her duty in making that request, and we do not have any issue with Katie or with any other person of your staff. We are actively providing services in 10 different jurisdictions and your staff, as reviewers, are the most thorough and conscientious. However, we do have a major concern with the wording of the following statement: 1 hereby affirm that these final construction plans were prepared under my direct supervision, in accordance with all applicable City of Fort Collins and State of Colorado standards and ,statutes, respectively: and that I am fully responsible for the accuracy of all design, revisions, and record conditions that I have noted on these plans. We have faxed the above statement to CNA, our Professional_ Liability / Error and Omissions Insurance Carrier, fir their review. Their attorney, Mr. Jerry Farquhar, ((301) 961-9872) contacted me to discuss the implication of the above statement. According to Mr. Farquhar, the wording of the statement is an applied warranty. CAN, as well as every other Error and Omissions Insurance Companies that he and I are aware of, do not cover warrantees. By placing that statement on the drawings, according to Mr. Farquhar, we are voiding our E & O insurance! I don't think the City's intent is to void the Professional Engineer's Insurance. I understand that the City would like to limit their own exposure, however, the statement could be re -worded in such a way that accomplish the City's desires while still maintaining the Professional Engineer's Insurance. I am also concern about taking full responsibility for accuracy of information that was provided by others. We do not offer surveying services and our design is base on information provided by surveying companies. We observe the site to verify the survey information is generally reflected of the current conditions. However, the surveying companies should be responsible for the accuracy of their work. And record drawings are prepared from information provided by the contractor and the City's inspector. Why should the Engineer take full responsibility for information provided by them. Mr. Farquhar is available by phone to discuss the wording of the above note and I am willing to facilitate a discussion with the City's staff. Thank you in advance for your considerations pertaining to the above request. Sincerely, Zoo" aKd,4moezi&4, glow. James R. Loonan, PE cc: Katie Moore, Civil Engineer I Cam McNair, City Engineer Interoffice Memorandum Date: February 3, 2003 To: Cam McNair, City Engineer Thru: Dave Stringer, Development Review Manager >- From: Katie Moore, Development Review Engineer RE: Variance Request for 419 W. Mountain Avenue Loonan & Assoc. Inc_., on behalf of the Developer for the 419 W. Mountain Avenue project, has submitted a variance request to the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards. The variance is for the width of the utility easement along an alley. The utility easement is requested to be eliminated entirely. Typically, the City requires that utility easements along alley ROW be a minimum of 8 feet wide. This width is provided to accommodate the location of utilities along the backs of lots along the alley. The engineer proposes that this requirement be eliminated, and feels that this variance can be supported because the existing building encroaches approximately 4.4 feet into the area where the easement would be located, and, further, that the easement is not needed because the utilities are currently located in the alley right-of-way. It is my opinion that this variance cannot be supported due to the utilities' needs for a utility easement in this location. The standard 8' utility easement should be required along the alley on the south end of the lot where the building's parking lot is located. Where the building is close to the alley ROW, all remaining width between the building and the ROW should become a utility easement. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns or if you need any additional clarification. Transportation Services Engineering Department City of Fort Collins MEMORANDUM TO: Katie Moore, Development Engineer FROM: Cam McNair, City Engineer u �\z4 DATE: February 7, 2003 RE: Variance Request, 419 West Mountain Ave. I agree with you that this variance should not be approved as proposed. There are still overhead utility lines in that alley, and we need to preserve the options for the utility companies to underground their facilities in the future. I would support varying the easement width by 4.4-feet in the area immediately adjacent to the building itself, as you suggest. cc: Dave Stringer, Development Review Supervisor 28] North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6605 • FAX (970) 221-6378 www.fcgov.com VOSCO Risk Management 301-951-5496 02/10/03 02:22P P.001 Uit!; D W. FARQUHAR ATTOILXEY AT LAW 'n O WISCONSIN CIRCLE (301) 961-98 7 2 CHEVY CHASE, yIA 20815 FAX (301) 951-9764 February 10, 2003 Mr. Paul Eckman Loonan & Associates, Inc. 1630 S. College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80525 Dear Mr. Eckman: Thank you for the courtesy of discussing the insurability of the affirmation required by the City of Fort Collins. As I advised, the "affirmation" is in fact a warranty of perfection as to both the matters prepared by the Engineer as well as information provided by the City's other consultants. The CNA policy precludes coverage for express warranties and guarantees (page 8, IV. Exclusions, Section B.I.), a copy of which is enclosed. The other problem I see is that while compliance with mandated standards and statutes is, as a matter of law, required, they are subject to interpretation. I don't know how anyone can "affirm" that an interpretation by one party will necessarily coincide with the interpretation given by the one making the affirmation. Keeping in mind the negligence standard applied to professionals, it serves no purpose to expand the liability by an uninsurable requirement. Again, I thank you for the opportunity of discussing this issue and hold myself open to any questions or further discussions that you deem necessary or appropriate. Very truly yours, A ld W. Farquhar sulting Attorney CNA Insurance and Victor 0. Schinnerer & Company, Inc. Enclosure As Noted.. . VOSCO Risk Management 301-9S1-S496 02/10/03 02:23P P.002 PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY AND POLLUTION INCIDENT LIABILITY INSURANCE POLICY ©1999, Member Companies of CNA Insurance. All rights reserved. U. You or your means the Named Insured, a newly acquired subsidiary and: any past or present partner, officer, director, member, stockholder or employee of the Named Insured or newly acquired subsidiary or leased personnel under the direct supervision of the Named Insured or newly acquired subsidiary; a retired partner, officer, director, member or employee of the Named Insured or newly acquired subsidiary, while acting within the scope of their duties as a consultant for the Named Insured or newly acquired subsidiary; 2. the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns and legal representatives of any individual or their estate as designated in paragraph 1. above in the event of such individual's death, incapacity, insolvency or bankruptcy, but only to the extent that such individual would have been provided coverage under this Policy. While not within the definition of you or your, the spouses of those individuals identified in paragraphs 1. and 2. are insured under this Policy but only as respects their liability for your wrongful acts. IV. EXCLUSIONS We will not defend or pay under this Policy for any claim: A. for liquidated damages in excess of your liability caused by a wrongful act or a pollution incident; for fines and penalties imposed on you; or for the failure or refusal of a client to pay money due you; B. arising out of: your alleged liability under any oral or written contract or agreement, including but not limited to express warranties or guarantees; or 2. the liability of others you assume under any oral or written contract or agreement, except that coverage otherwise available to you shall apply to your liability that exists in the absence of such contract or agreement. In a foreign jurisdiction where your liability to a client is predicated only on contractual liability, subparagraph 1. does not apply except to the extent that you have agreed to pay consequential or liquidated damages; G-136511-A (Ed. 07/99) City Attorney City of Fort Collins MEMORANDUM DATE: February 13, 2003 TO: Katie Moore, Civil Engineer I FROM: W. Paul Eckman, Deputy City Attorne RE: Loonan and Associates Engineer Affirmation Katie, I did receive a phone call from Gerald Farquhar who is the attorney for CNA Insurance. Subsequently, he faxed me a letter and a copy of the letter and its attachment is attached to this memorandum. He did not request that the City change the language of the affirmation and he did indicate that the language does not void the insurance that CNA provides to Loonan and Associates. It is simply not covered under the policy. I advised him that we have not heard complaints about the language from other engineers and that we generated the language in collaboration with other engineer organizations. I think that his letter is largely a letter of protestation. WPE:mas Attachment '('i! 1 'iAvenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6520 • FAX (970) 221-6327 Transportation Services Engineering Department Development Review Engineering City of fort Coilins February 19, 2003 Mr. James Loonan Loonan and Associates, Inc. PO Box 270852 Fort Collins, CO 80527 Re: Variance request for 419 West Mountain Avenue Dear Loonan, This letter is in response to your request for a variance to the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards. The variance requested was for the elimination of the requirement for an eight -foot utility easement along the property's alley frontage. This variance was denied by the City Engineer; although he would entertain a new variance request to diminish the standard width only where it is encroached upon by the existing building. Should you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact this office Sincerely, Katie Moore Project Engineer City of Fort Collins r tirill�_ )t zSt) _C ',A'c71i1� :f..'�0 I� :�� _,Jf11T�, _,J— V'.vSV. �Lf;U V.'}J321 Page 2 Residential Uses: Response: The NCM zoning allows up to four units when structural or exterior alterations are made to an existing building . The proposed new unit with the existing two units will make a total of three units on the lot. Land Use Standards: Response: Minimum lot area shall be the equivalent of 2 times the total floor area of the building(s), and not less than 6,OOOs.f The existing lot is 7,000 s.f. The total area of the completed building will be 3,352s.f. (existing 2490+ 862new). The maximum allowable is 3,500s.f. Dimensional Standards: Minimum lot width shall be 50 for all uses other than single family. The existing lot is 35' X 200'. The new proposal will not be greater than the existing building width. Minimum front yard setback of 15 feet is met. Minimum side yard width shall be 5 feet for all interior side yards. The existing setbacks on the existing structure are 3.3' to 3.5' on the west side and 3.4 to 3.6 on the east side. The proposed height on the west side will be 18' or less so no additional setback will be required due to building height. Development Standards Building Design All Building Design standards (a) thru (g ) are met. Landscape/Hardscape Material With the required removal of the front parking spaces, all requirements will be met. Access All Access requirements are met. Site Design All Site Design requirements are met. (vii) N/A (viii) No neighborhood meeting has been held (ix) Name of the project as well as any previous name the project may have come through conceptual review with. Response: On March 25, 2002 the proposal was taken through the Conceptual Review Team. It was referred to as "419 West Mountain structural addition and change of use" (copy enclosed) Page 3 Development Schedule Construction of the addition and structural alterations will begin within 3mo. of the approval. Construction duration will be less than 6 mo. Request for Modification to the Standards for 419 West Mountain Ave. NCM District This is a request to modify the Land Uses Standards and Development Standards contained in Article 4. More precisely this is a request to modify side setback requirements and minimum lot width requirements as stated in "Dimensional Standards". The standards state minimum side yard width shall be five (5) feet for all interior side yards. They also state minimum lot width shall be fifty (50) feet for all uses except single and two family dwellings. The proposed project is the redevelopment of an office building built in 1962. The existing building has an existing interior side yard of 3.3 feet or 1.7 feet short of the required dimension. The existing lot width is 35 feet or 15 feet under the required width. These setbacks and lot widths are typical of this area. The existing building was operated by Larimer County Youth Services until approximately .tune of 1999. Subsequently the building remained unoccupied until its purchase by the applicants in October of 2001. The 12 consecutive months without use eliminated the exception or "grand -fathered" zoning for this building. The building can no longer be used as an office. The NCM district provides for mainly residential uses. The conversion from office use to residential use mandated by zoning requires Modification of the Standards. This proposal will not decrease the side yard setbacks any more than existing. The lot width, which is the same as the duplex residence next door, is an existing condition. We believe the Planning and Zoning Board should grant a Modification to the Standards. We believe there are exceptional and extraordinary existing conditions on the site and to the present structure. We believe by granting the Modification, the zoning for the area will be that much closer to general development standards. We believe the proposed 2 - story building is compatible with the distinctive characteristics of the Mountain Avenue area . While this is not considered a historic structure, great care has been given to relate the architectural design elements , scale, and massing to it's important contextual neighborhood streetscape . COPY OF LETTER SUBMITTED AND APPROVED WITH BUILDING PERMIT REVIEW FOR A DUPLEX ON THIS SITE. Oct. 22, 2001 Glenn Schlueter City of Ft. Collins Storm Drainage Dept. Re: Building Permit Review 419 W. Mountain Ave. Ft. Collins, CO. Dear Mr. Schlueter This letter shall serve as a request to waive a drainage study and drainage plan for the referenced address. We request this exemption for the following two reasons. 1. The submitted site plan shows several areas changing from pavement to turf or landscaped areas. In particular, the front two parking spaces will be removed and replaces with grass. This area contains 506 S. F. The rear parking area will have a 5'to 6' landscape border on the west and south sides of the existing parking area. Tlus area represents approximately 430 S.F. The lot contains a total of 7000 S.F., these changes represent a 13% gross increase in pervious area. 2. The existing lot does not contain a water detention area at this time. All water flows to an alley or Mountain Ave.. All improvements shown will not cause a redirection of existing water flows. All flows will remain unchanged. I hope this will satisfy your requirements. The property is easily viewed by an alley drive by should you so desire. If I can answer any of your questions or provide further evidence supporting this request, please notify me. Sincerely,' Bruce M. Froseth ZOO"O & 4444M. INC, 1630 S. eoffege A*Nw P. 0. got 270952 57w & a . e0 80527 (970) 493-2808 9, 4 Z (970) 495- 9735 November 21, 2002 Attn: Katie Moore City of Fort Collins 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado 80522-0580 Re: 419 West Mountain Avenue's request for a variance from the design standards. Dear Katie, We are requesting a variance from the minimum distance from the proposed garage and the edge of the drive lane. As per Table 19-03 of the Larimer County Urban Street Standards, the minimum off street parking setback is 20 feet. However, per Section 19.4.1 of the Larimer County Urban Street Standards, the driveway clearance is 6 feet. Per Figure 7-11 F of the Larimer County Urban Street Standards, the setback is 8 feet for fences placed with a setback of 8 feet or more. In any case, the proposed garage door will be approximately 8 inches inside of the exterior wall. There are two large power poles that are located within the alley. The net opening between the power poles is approximately 16.75 feet. In addition to the western power pole, there are two vaults/boxes. The distance from the edge of the building to the far edge of the power pole is 5.25 feet. Therefore, distance from the garage door to the far edge of the power pole will be approximately 5.93 feet. With the location of the power pole, drivers trend to "shy away" from both poles and end up driving in the middle of the alley. This result is approximately 11 feet from the edge of the true driving lane and the garage door. With the eleven feet offset, the drivers in the alley should be able to see any vehicle that is backing out of the garage and be able to stop if they are driving at the design speed of 15 mph. Please find the enclosed copies of the utility plan for your reference. If you need further information or have any questions please feel free to contact our office at your convenience. Thank you in advance for your considerations pertaining to the above request. Interoffice Memorandum Date: To: Thru: From: RE: \S Gk- Av December 5 2002 ` f` ` �tt Cam McNair, City Engineer' Dave Stringer, Development Review Manager Katie Moore, Development Review Engineer Variance Request for 419 W. Mountain Avenue Loonan & Assoc. Inc., on behalf of the Developer for the 419 W. Mountain Avenue project, has submitted a variance request to the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards. The variance is for the garage door setback from an alley. The setback distance is requested to be shorter (approximately 5 feet) as opposed to the standard setback of 20 feet. Typically, the City requires that garage doors be set back 20 feet when fences are placed less than 8 feet from the alley edge or 8 feet when fences/walls are set back 8 feet or more. This distance is to minimize conflicts and increase visibility between cars maneuvering in the alley and cars entering and exiting the garage. The engineer proposes a 5 foot setback for the garage door which would be recessed 8"from existing adjacent walls (an existing house is being renovated), and feels that this variance can be supported because the presence of power poles on either side of the garage door force cars further into the middle of the alley than is typical, resulting, in effect, in a larger setback distance (approx. 11 feet) than is required under the standard (8 feet). It is my opinion that this variance can be supported based the engineer's judgment above. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns and if you need any additional clarification. Transportation Services Engineering Department Development Review Engineering City of Fort Collins December 18, 2002 James Loonan Loonan & Assoc. Inc. 1630 S. College Avenue PO Box 270852 Fort Collins, CO 80527 Re: Variance request for 419 W. Mountain Avenue Dear Mr. Loonan, The variance requested to allow the garage door setback from the alley to be less than 20 feet has been approved as shown on the utility plans, provided that no parking is allowed in the alley next to the building. As with all variances to the street standards, the variances granted for this project are based on the particular situation under design and the judgment that we (the designer and the City) apply to determine whether there is a public safety concern. The variances for this project in no way set any precedence for relaxing these standards on other projects without complete analysis and justification. Should you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, Katie Moore Development Review Engineer City of Fort Collins cc: file Troy Jones 281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6605 • FAX (970) 221-6378 www.ci.fort-collins.co.us P 0, Fax 270852 7aat e , eO 80527 (970) 4934 09' 7,42 (970) 495- 9735 January 15, 2003 Katie Moore Engineering Department City of Fort Collins 281 North College Fort Collins, CO 80521 RE: 419 W, Mountain Avenue, Unit 1 Remodel Dear Katie: On behalf of our client, Loonan & Associates, Inc. is requesting a variance in regards to the required 8-foot utility easement beyond the alley ROW for this project (refer to Figure 7-1 IF of the Larimer County Urban Street Standards). This project consists of an existing building approximately 3.6 f,-et from the existing alley ROW, with an existing concrete sidewalk around the building to the alley ROW (see enclosed survey by Stewart & Associates). This condition exists on the East property line of the subject lot. Therefore, the required 8-foot utility easement cannot be granted because the building location is existing. The proposed alternative to the construction criteria is to allow the existing condition to remain as is. All utility improvements now exist along this side of the property and no future new development will take place in this location. Surrounding properties are serviced through existing utility easements and public ROW's. It is our opinion that granting the variance will not be detrimental to the public good. All use for a wider than the existing easement are already using other means to provide services. Any future needs can be accommodated through the existing alley ROW and utility easements. Loonan and Associates, Inc. is looking forward to you granting this variance. If you have any questions or comments, please call me at 493-2808. Sincerely, %' %r Loonan Ass1 ames R. Loom °�a`�d J w\\tea