Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBLOCK 21 REPLAT OF LOTS 24-39 CIVIC CENTER PARKING STRUCTURE - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2003-05-28PROJECT COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins BUILDING PERMIT REVIEW ZONING DEPARTMENT DATE: July 1, 1998 DEPT: Engineering PROJECT: Building Permit Review Temporary parking lots on Blocks 22, 32, and 33 to be constructed by the City Facilities Department and us-- ed-fora period of 2 years. The lots will be surfaced with reconstituted recycled asphalt, which has been deemed to be an acceptable, dustless hard surface on which painted stripes can be applied. The lots are necessary in order to accomodate the displaced parking from Block 31 and from the Laporte Lot during the construction of the parking stricture and court house. Most of the spaces will be permit parking only. PLANNER: Peter Barnes, Zoning All comments must be received no later than July 20, 1998. *Note: On June 11, 1998, The Zoning Board of Appeals granted variances to numerous sections of'the LUC relative to parking lot design and landscaping. The plans you are reviewing reflect all of the variances, therefore no additional landscape requircnients or parking lot design requirements can be imposed. A copy of the ZBA minutes is included for your review. Date: � %/ Signature CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPES OF REVISIONS _ Plat ,Site Ilrai age Report _ Offer ,�illty j�Rellle Utility �Ldillhcape City of Fort Collins 12. Mason Street has to be widened 6' to the east to provide for a northbound bicycle lane. 13. The staircase at the southwest corner of the parking structure should be designed to appear more as an emergency entry/exit for the facility to discourage pedestrians from using it as a primary access. This should be done to discourage excessive mid -block street crossings on Mason Street. 14. The TIS has not yet been submitted to the City for review. 15. Maybe the ticket booths at the entries into the parking structure from Laporte Avenue and Mason Street should be moved further into the structure to allow for additional vehicle stacking space. Stormwater Utility 16. The applicant's engineer has used the HEC-2 stormwater modelling method to calculate the inflows and outflows for stormwater on this site. An analysis must be done on the flows and the information put on a diskette and provided to the Stormwwater Utility. Additional cross-section information must be modelled, using the "no rise" criteria, and provided to the City for review. A floodplain exhibit is required. 17. The grading plan must show all existing and proposed contours on the site. 18. Encasement must be provided around the storm sewers for protection to the other utilities. 19. Cross -sections and a profile of the alley must be provided that show how it works, from a storm drainage standpoint, relative to this site and development proposal. 20. How have water quality measures pertaining to this development been addressed? 21. The effect of the stormwater from this site on the alley and properties to the east must be addressed. The alley cannot take all of the stormwater because the existing storm sewer in the alley is undersized. Flows from this development should go west to Mason Street. Advance Planning 22. Some sort of shelters (for protection from inclement weather) for pedestrians should be provided at the corners on Laporte Avenue and Mason Street. 23. The sidewalks internal to the parking structure should be 6' wide instead of 5' to allow for potential car overhang and unobstructed pedestrian movement. Curb stops could be used. Current Planning 24. Red -lined copies of plans with comments are being forwarded to the applicant. This completes the staff comments at this time. Additional comments will be forthcoming as they are received from City departments and outside reviewing agencies. Under the development review process and schedule there is no revision date mandated by the City. The amount of time spent on revisions is up to the applicant. Upon receipt, the revisions will be routed to the appropriate City departments and outside reviewing agencies, with their comments due to the project planner no later than the third weekly staff review meeting (Wednesday mornings) following receipt of the revisions. At this staff review meeting the item will be discussed and it will be determined if the project is ready to go to the Planning and Zoning Board for a decision. If so, will be scheduled for the nearest Board hearing date with an opening on the agenda. Please return all drawings red -lined by City staff with submission of your revisions. The number of copies of revisions for each document to be resubmitted is on the attached Revisions routing Sheet. You may contact me at 221-6341 to schedule a meeting to discuss these comments. Si rely, 0 Z �A_ St ve It Project Planner cc: Engineering Stormwater Utility Zoning Water & Wastewater Traffic Operations Transportation Planning Advance Planning Parsons and Associates Fentress Bradburn Architects Project File REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: September 18, 1998 DEPT: Engineering PROJECT: 05-98 Civic Center Parking Structure-PDP-Type PLANNER: Steve Olt ENGINEER: Mark McCallum All comments must be received no later than the staff review meeting: General Comments: ♦ See redlined comments on all sheets of the utility plan. More specific comments and concerns will be mentioned below. ♦ In order to understand and review how the layout of the floors in the parking structure function, a plan view should be provided in the utility plans complete with dimensions and general layout. "There is question regarding the layout of the parking spaces for the code allows there to be different dimensions if the parking is classified long-term or short-term. ♦ A signing and stripping plan will have to be prepared. Utility Plan Comments: Cover Sheet; Sheet C 1 of 6: ♦ The minimum cover over water lines is 4.5 feet and the maximum cover is 5.5 feet. ♦ There is a new vertical control listing for the City which prohibits the use of the black bolt control. If there are any questions regarding the new vertical control listing call Wally Muscott at 221-6605. Replat; Sheet 1 of 1: ♦ The access easement overlaps the parking spaces along the commercial property. Unless this is to be employee parking for the commercial property, I would want an access easement to overlap those spaces. ♦ If the 0.038 acres of access easement is to remain along Mason Street it should be designated with a dashed line. Horizontal Control and Street Modification Plan; Sheet C3 of 6: ♦ The traffic impact study recommended that a left -turn median be constructed on Laporte Avenue. Show the full extent of improvements to Laporte Ave. from College Ave. through Mason St. Also provide cross -sections and a profile of the improvements. The improvement will include the design of the curb, gutter, and sidewalk. The Laporte Ave. access alignment with the existing access to the north is still a question and with improvements to the median this may be resolved. Maintain five feet of sidewalk space at the Laporte Ave. and Mason St. intersection for the stairway entrance to the building. This may require that the stairs be setback to accommodate the five foot walk. For all the construction within the street ROW encroachment permits should be obtained. The full extent of improvement should be depicted for Mason St. down through the Mountain Avenue intersection. Also, 100 foot interval cross -sections and profiles for the improvements should be submitted for review. The 12.7 access ramp detail is what we are looking for. However, modifications to the detail should be depicted on the detail sheet. The building columns inside the parking structure are still conflicting with the parking due to the overhang. Three feet of overhang is not acceptable. It should be two feet of overhang. We need to interpret if this is a long-term parking structure for the entirety of the parking garage or if it is for a portion? This is in response to the parking stall configurations. See note in general comments. Show detail of enhanced crosswalks. The maximum curb return for a private driveway/access is 15 feet. Utility Plan; Sheet C:4 of 6: ♦ The curb cut details should not be shown to conflict with automobile flowlines. See redlined comments. ♦ More information will be needed to review the alternate water main design if it is considered. ♦ Show all existing and proposed sanitary sewer lines including but not limited to: length of segments, type of pipe, and slope of pipe. Grading and Erosion Control Plan; Sheet C5 of 6: ♦ See redlined comments. Detail Sheet; Sheet C6 of 6: + Show details for the enhanced crosswalks, driveway detail (modifications to the street detail depicting correct slopes, concrete in the ROW; etc), and access ramp details(any modifications to D-12.7 should be depicted). P.D.P. Plan; Overall,Site and Landscape Plan Comments: ♦ See redlined comments. Date: Please send copies of marked revisions /flat /' Site 'Utility -'Landscape City of Fort Collins Commc '4y Planning and Environmental Current Planning City of Fort Collins September 23, 1998 City of Fort Collins c/o Eldon Ward Cityscape Urban Design, Inc. 3555 Stanford Road, Suite 105 Fort Collins, CO. 80525 Dear Eldon, ,rvices Staff has reviewed your revisions and other documentation for the CIVIC CENTER PARKING STRUCTURE, Project Development Plan (PDP) development proposal that were submitted to the City on September 9, 1998, and would like to offer the following comments: 1. This development proposal, being in the Civic Center Subdistrict of the Downtown Zoning District, is identified as a Planning and Zoning Board (Type II) review under the City's Land Use Code (LUC). Parking lots and garages (as a principal use) and retail establishments are permitted uses subject to a Type II review in the Subdistrict. 2. Representatives of the Zoning Department offered the following comments: a. Regarding General Note 14 on the Site Plan - The Zoning Department will not enforce the signage requirement listed here, only when they violate the City Sign Code. b. Regarding Planting Note 7 on the Landscape Plan - How many "construction phases" are expected? It seems too small a project to have several phases. What does "surface treatment in local parkways" mean? If that represents any plant material, it needs some type of assurance that it will be completed. The Landscape Plan needs to show phases for landscaping if it is going to be done that way. Editorial note from Current Planning: This reads like a note that has been taken from some other residential project ... "with the exception of the surface treatment in local parkways" and "public right-of-way in the front or the side of a residential lot" ... and appears to be inappropriate. 28L North College Avenue • PO. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221 Ei750 •FAX (970) 416-2020 C. The dimensions of the structure are still difficult to make out on the Site Plan. d. The handicapped spaces need to be 12' wide unless they are parallel to a pedestrian walk. There are 5 handicapped spaces that are not wide enough, even with the allocated ramp space. Each of these spaces are only 10.5' wide. Sheet 3 of 5 (the Site Plan), with the handicapped spaces circled, is being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Peter, Gary, or Jenny at 221-6760 if you have questions about these comrr►ents. 3. Jim Slagle of Public Service Company stated that the "Access Easement" in Tract 'A' needs to be changed to "Access & Utility Easement", and make sure that it extends all the way through the site from north to south (Laporte Avenue to the alley). 4. Ken Kirchoff of the Police Department stated that the use of good lighting and a security system is needed to maintain security and safety in this facility. 5. Copies of comments from Tim Buchanan, the City Forester, pertaining to the Planting Noises on the Landscape Plan are attached to this letter. 6. Comments from Eric Bracke of the Traffic Operations Department are included on marked -up copies of the Overall Plan and Site Plan that are being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Eric, at 224-6062, if you have questions about his comments. 7. Bruce Vogel of the Light & Power Department offered the following comments: a. The existing streetlight on Mason Street, in front of the retail stores, will need to remain unless an alternative type of lighting can be approved to light the "street". b. The location of the transformer appears to be acceptable. Please contact Bruce, at 221-6700, if you have questions about these comments. 8. Dennis Greenwalt of TCI of Fort Collins (cable television) stated that they will need a Broadband Utility Easement to provide service to the retail spaces. This can be obtained through their Commercial Accounts Executive, Reneta Santoro. She can be reached at 493-7400, Monday through Friday. Without this easement TCI will make no plans to service this area. 9. A copy of the comments received from Mark McCallum of the Engineering Department is attached to this letter. Red -lined copies of plans, with additional comments, are being forwarded to the applicant. 10. A copy of the comments received from Basil Hamdan of the Stormwater Utility is attached to this letter. Red -lined copies of plans and reports, with additional comments, are being forwarded to the applicant. 11. The Advance Planning Department offered the following comments: a. The :southeast corner at the intersection of Laporte Avenue and Mason Street needs to be enlarged and designed in detail, maybe at a scale of 1" = 10'. Watch out for utility vaults (such as a fiber optics vault). The corner needs to be revised (see attached enlargement). b. See the marked -up Building Elevations for some comments and questions about details, especially at the pedestrian level. It is hard/impossible to perceive the effect of the various materials. Please draw an indication of them. C. Which crosswalks on Laporte Avenue and Mason Street are being built with this project? Current Planning editorial comment: All four crosswalks should be built with this project. It should be determined who is responsible for the cost of construction. Please contact Clark Mapes, at 221-6225, if you have questions about these comments. The following comments and concerns were expressed at the Staff Review meeting on September 23rd: Planning 12. The east elevation of the building should be further developed to possibly include textured and/or tinted concrete to break up the overall mass of the building. Also, please consider the possibility of incorporating planting boxes on the top floor, with vines that could drape over and hang down the sides. This could be a viable way of softening the elevation, with the vines maybe just at the columns. 13. What does the "painted metal mesh security screen" really look like? Is it possible to make this blend in with the other materials and colors to ensure a good appearance from the Opera Galleria area, Laporte Avenue, and the alley along the south side? 14. The Transportation Impact Study (TIS) was submitted to the City on Tuesday, September 22nd, for review. The necessary off -site improvements will be determined from the results of this study. It appears that there will be significant off -site improvements needed, which begs the question: How can this project afford to do all of the needed off-ste improvements? 15. Who will be responsible for and construct all of the crosswalks at the intersection of Laporte Avenue and Mason Street? All four crossings should be done in conjunction with the parking structure. 16. What is the lighting scheme proposed for the alleyways? Will there be good pedestrian Fighting, for security reasons? 17. Additional comments are included on red -lined plans that are being forwarded to the applicant. Stormwater Utility 18. How does this facility, and associated storm drainage, tie into the existing drainage system? This facility cannot create a rise in the Old Town basin floodplain. 19. Where is the outfall for this drainage system? The plans do not show water quality measures for the structure. 20. What is the on -going maintenance plan for the parking structure? How is the "residue" going to be taken care of? 21. The effect of the stormwater from this site on the alley and properties to the east must be addressed. The alley cannot take all of the stormwater because the existing storm sewer in the alley is undersized. Flows from this development should go west to Mason Street. The revised plans to address this concern/requirement. 22. The information submitted to date is not sufficient to allow staff to schedule this item for a Planning and Zoning Board public hearing agenda. Engineering 23. The sidewalks internal to the parking structure, now shown as 8' wide' to allow for potential car overhang and unobstructed pedestrian movement, do not appear to completely solve the problem. What remains are 15' deep parking stalls, some with structural columns directly in front of them. This latter situation would obviously eliminate car overhang. 24. Cross -sections are needed for the 6' wide on -street bicycle lane back to Mountain Avenue. This project is responsible for the construction of the bicycle lane. 25. The proposed center median on Laporte Avenue must be shown on the Site, Landscape, and utility plans. 26. The existincl access to the north from Laporte Avenue, just west of Washington's Restaurant, must be shown on the Site, Landscape, and utility plans. 27. The TIS just: received by the City shows a westbound left turn lane into the parking structure. The geometrics shown would cut back the existing center median, which could create problems with potential elimination of some existing trees. For one, this would trigger a Landmark Preservation Commission concern. Staff needs clarification about this. 28. A cross-section of the intersection of Laporte Avenue and Mason Street is needed. The section should be north -south oriented. 29. Floor plans -for all five levels must be submitted so that staff can review the operational aspect of the parking structure. 30. Encroachment permits are needed for all improvements proposed to be in the street rights -of way. 31. The information submitted to date is not sufficient to allow staff to schedule this item for a Planning and Zoning Board public hearing agenda. This completes the staff comments at this time. Additional comments will be forthcoming as they are received from City departments and outside reviewing agencies. Based on the concerns expressed by City staff and the questions raised about outstanding issues regarding storm drainage from this site, responsibility for necessary off -site improvements, and some design -related concerns, there is a need for this development request to go through another review. It is hoped that this item can be scheduled for the November 19th Planning and Zoning Board public hearing if the concerns are adequately addressed. The City's policy that was implemented at the time of adoption of the Land Use Code is that all significant, major issues be resolved prior to scheduling the development request for a public hearing (either administrative or Planning and Zoning Board). Under the development review process and schedule there is no revision date mandated by the City. The amount of time spent on revisions is up to the applicant. Upon receipt, the revisions will be routed to the appropriate City departments and outside reviewing agencies, with their comments due to the project planner no later than the second or third weekly staff review meeting (Wednesday mornings) following receipt of the revisions. At this staff review meeting the item will be discussed and it will be determined if the project is ready to go to the Planning and Zoning Board for a decision. Please return all drawings red -lined by City staff with submission of your revisions. The number of copies of revisions for each document to be resubmitted is on the attached Revisions Routing Sheet. You may contact me at 221-6341 to schedule a meeting to discuss these comments. Sincerely, Steve Olt Project Planner cc: Engineering Stormwater Utility Zoning Water & Wastewater Traffic Operations Transportation Planning Advance Planning Jack Gianola Parsons and Associates Fentress Bradburn Architects Project File PROJECT COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: 18, August 1998 DEPT: Engineering PROJECT: #35-98 Civic Center Parking Structure (LUC) Type I PDP PLANNER: Steve Olt ENGINEER: Mark McCallum All comments must be received by: 08/26/98 [],,,No Problems LL J Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) General Comments: Show surrounding features for a minimum of 150 feet around the entire site. This would include but is not limited to: all streets, sidewalks, existing parking lots, sanitary sewers, water mains, and storm sewers. 2. At this time it is difficult to recommend off -site improvements to the streets and accesses due to lack of a traffic impact study. However, there appears to be some issues that should be mentioned. (a.) There is an existing access across Laporte Avenue, depending upon the movements required the proposed parking structure access will have to align with the existing access. (b.) What will be the definition of the movement for the proposed access? Is it a full movement access or is it a right-in/right-out access? If it is a right-in/right-out access the median will have to be extend to protect that movement. If it is a full access, comment (2.(a.)) will apply, as well as the need to define a stripping plan to accommodate traffic safely and efficiently. ► Note: More in depth comments can be made about the access when a traffic impact REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: October 22, 1998 DEPT: Engineering PROJECT: #35-98 Civic Center Parking Structure -Type II-PDP PLANNER: Steve Olt ENGINEER: Mark McCallum A11 comments must be received no later than the staff review meeting: All Plans & Supplements Included: 1. Utility Plan 2. Site Plan 3. Landscape Plan 4. "Street Repair and Reconstruction Standards and Guidelines" General Comments: N See redline comments on all sheets of the utility plan. More specific comments will be mentioned below. Utility Plan Comments: Horizontal Control and Street Modification Plan; Sheet C3 of 9: • Label enhanced crosswalks. • The island addition should not be raised. • The median should not be extended contrary to our field discussion. Eric Bracke should have some comments in regard to the median and left -turn lane. Contact Eric Bracke at 224-6062 if you have any questions about the design. Mason Street Plan and Profile; Sheet C6 of 9 • Show utilities in plan view and where applicable show utility crossings in the profile view. Show all existing and proposed valves , hydrants, manholes, inlets, blow -off valves; ETC, where applicable in the public ROW. 0 Reference the sheet number for the interconnecting street plan and profile. • Reference the stormwater profile sheet. Show stormwater utilities in the plan view and crossing in the profile view. ❑N The cross -sections for Mason Street should be shown at the 100 foot stationing (2+00- 7+00), as well as at the points -of -curvature. ❑N Show all grade breaks. Laporte Avenue Plan and Profile; Sheet C7 of 9: 0 Show utilities in plan view and where applicable show utility crossings in the profile view. Show all existing and proposed valves , hydrants, manholes, inlets, blow -off valves; ETC, where applicable in the public ROW. • Reference the sheet number for the interconnecting street plan and profile. IN Reference the stormwater profile sheet. Show stormwater utilities in the plan view and crossing in the profile view. IN Provide station numbering. IN Show all grade breaks. Site and Landscape Plan Comments: IN See redline comments. Date: // /g Signature: Please send copies of marked revisions mat ✓gite motility ✓randscape City of Fort Collins Commu y Planning and Environmental .vices Current Planning City of Fort Collins November 19, 19,98 City of Fort Collins c/o Eldon Ward Cityscape Urban Design, Inc. 3555 Stanford Road, Suite 105 Fort Collins, CO. 80525 Dear Eldon, Staff has reviewed your revisions and other documentation for the CIVIC CENTER PARKING STRUCTURE, Project Development Plan (PDP) development proposal that were submitted to the City on October 27, 1998, and would like to offer the following comments: 1. This development proposal, being in the Civic Center Subdistrict of the Downtown Zoning District, is identified as a Planning and Zoning Board (Type II) review under the City's Land Use Code (LUCI. Parking lots and garages (as a principal use) and retail establishments are permitted uses subject to a Type II review in the Subdistrict. 2. Representatives of the Zoning Department offered the following comments: a. This site is not in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. Do not show building signage locations on the Building Elevations Plans. b. Does the lighting plan reference the building and pole mounted lighting as being down -directional, with cut-offs, etc.? Please include this information, if it is not already addressed. Please contact Peter, Gary, or Jenny at 221-6760 if you have questions about these comments. 281 North College Avenue • PO. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020 3. Eric Bracke of the Traffic Operations Department has commented that the long term operations of the north entry into the parking structure from LaPorte Avenue may require that the existing island in the middle of that street, at the LaPorte Avenue/North College Avenue intersection, be modified to include a westbound left -turn lane into the site. Also, a signing and striping plan for the surrounding roadways is needed. 4. Bruce Vogel of the Light & Power Department offered the following comments: a. There are two areas in the alley off of LaPorte Avenue that could be possible conflicts with L&P's 3-phase primary line (see enclosed map). Any cost of relocation or modification will be at the owner's expense. b. L&P would like to see a detail drawing of the location where the transformer is going to be installed (in plan view and elevation). Please contact Bruce, at 221-6700, if you have questions about these comments. S. A copy of the comments received from Mark McCallum of the Engineering Department is attached to this letter. Red -lined copies of plans, with additional comments, are being forwarded to the applicant. 6. A copy of the comments received from Basil Hamdan of the Stormwater Utility is attached to this letter. Red -lined copies of plans and reports, with additional comments, are being forwarded to the applicant. The following comments and concerns were expressed at the Staff Review Meeting on November 18th: 7. Who will be responsible for and construct all of the "enhanced" crosswalks at the intersection of LaPorte Avenue and Mason Street? Possibly, all four crossings should be done in conjunction with the parking structure or the money should be placed in escrow to ensure that the necessary improvements are made. The City's approval must include the mechanism to accomplish this. 8. Encroachment permits are needed for all improvements proposed to be in the street :rights -of way. They should be applied for through the Engineering Department. This completes the staff comments at this time. Additional comments will be forthcoming as they are received from City departments and outside reviewing agencies. City staff did discuss this project at staff review on November 18th and determined that the outstanding issues are not significant enough to necessitate another whole round review. This item has been placed on the December 17, 1998 Planning and Zoning Board public hearing discussion agenda. Please continue, however, to address the concerns and comments expressed in this letter and provide City staff with the number of revisions as indicated on the attached Revisions Routing Sheet. The PMT's of the Site Plans, Landscape Plans, Building Elevations Plans, and the renderings of the Site and/or Landscape Plan and Building Elevations are due on December 1, 1998. If the applicant wants to do their own photographic slides of the required renderings, then the slides must be provided to the Current Planning Department no later than the morning of December 11, 1998 (the P&Z Board work session date). You may contact: me at 221-6341 to schedule a meeting to discuss these comments, if necessary. Sincerely, OtevRO�lt Project Planner cc: Engineering Stormwater Utility Zoning Water & Wastewater Traffic Operations Transportation Planning Advance Planning Jack Gianola Parsons and Associates Fentress Bradburn Architects Project File study is reviewed and when the access on Laporte Avenue is defined in respect to the comments made above. This does not in any way suggest the Mason Street access is fully compliant, however at this time it appears to have no significant issues. Again a traffic impact study will have to be reviewed to determine its functionality. 3. The pedestrian sidewalk along Laporte Avenue should be designed consistent with the proposed pedestrian sidewalk for Block 21 (at the corner of Laporte Avenue and College Avenue). 4. Cross -sections for the commercial front on Mason Street should be provided. See redlined utility plans. 5. In order to understand and review how the layout of the floors in the parking structure function, a plan view should be provided in the utility plans complete with dimensions and general layout. e*,_ e P,1? L-7 L.r 4WSC 6. The landscape and site plans differ from the utility plans as follows, but not limited to: (a.) The parking details to not coincide. Specifically, the handicap and motorcycle parking spaces. (b.) The entire eastern access ramp along the alley including the transformer. (c.) The access along Mason Street does not have the same layout or dimensions. In particular the return radius. (d.) The layout of the stairwell near the Mason Street access. 7. A signing and stripping plan will have to be prepared. Utility Plan Comments: Cover Sheet: 8. See redlined general notes. The general notes should also include: (a.) The minimum cover over water lines is 4.5 feet and the maximum cover is 5.5 feet. (b.) Temporary erosion control during construction shall be provided as shown on the Erosion Control Plan. Replat: 9. See redlined comments. Horizontal Control and Street Modification Plan; Sheet 3 of 6: 10. Show existing features for a minimum of 150 feet around the entire site. 1 l . In addition to the comments made above in the general comments, see the redlined comments on the utility plan. The following statements coincide with the redlined comments: (a.) The access ramps along Mason Street should be representative of the downtown area. Instead of using Detail D-12.5 use D-12.7 from the City of Fort Collins Design Standards or design an appropriate replacement. (b.) The access ramps for the access driveway on Laporte Avenue should be consistent with the downtown area. However, there is currently no standard City detail that would promote a consistent pedestrian access ramp. One option would be to modify one of the branches in detail D-12.7 and use it for an access ramp. A detail must be shown for the design of this access ramp. (c.) The plan sheet should include but is not limited to the following dimensions: curb return for accesses, access width, parking stall details, the slope of the access ramp to the commercial front, and Mason Street and Laporte Avenue sidewalk dimensions. In order to review the horizontal control more distinct dimensions will have to be provided. See other redlined comments. (d.) Cross -sections should be provided along Mason Street as shown on the utility plan sheet. Utility Plan; Sheet 4 of 6: 12. Show existing, features for a minimum of 150 feet around the entire site. 13. See redlined comments. Grading and Erosion Control Plan; Sheet 5 of 6: 14. See redlined comments. P.D.P. Plan; Site and Landscape Plan Comments: 1.5. See comment #6 and other applicable comments made above. 16. See redlined comments. Date: �! /��/�� Signature-.- � ,,4' �--e PLEASE SEND COPIES OF MARKED REVISIONS: 'PLAT [I' S_ITE �J TILITY LANDSCAPE Commur;ty Planning and Environmental -rvices Current F�-aning City of Fort Collins August 19, 1998 City of Fort Collins c/o Eldon Ward Cityscape Urban Design, Inc. 3555 Stanford Road, Suite 105 Fort Collins, CO. 80525 Dear Eldon, Staff has reviewed your documentation for the CIVIC CENTER PARKING STRUCTURE, Project Development Plan (PDP) development proposal that was submitted to the City on July 29, 1998, and would like to offer the following comments: 1. This development proposal, being in the Civic Center Subdistrict of the Downtown Toning District, is identified as a Planning and Zoning Board (Type II) review under the City's Land Use Code (LUC1. Parking lots and garages (as a principal use!) and retail establishments are permitted uses subject to a Type II review in the. Subdistrict. 2. Representatives of the Zoning Department offered the following comments: a. Show ramps at the handicapped parking spaces. b. The bicycle locker area does not look to be very large. How many bicycles will it hold? C. There are no evergreen plant materials (shrubs and trees) being proposed on this; site. Some color during the winter months would be desirable. d. Show typical parking stall dimensions and drive aisle widths. e. Show bicycle racks in front of the retail space entrances. f. Has the issue of snow removal from the top floor of the parking structure been addressed? Loaders will need to bucket the snow and drop it over the edge into an awaiting truck in the alley or street, which would then haul it away. 281 North 9i0 College .venue • [?O. Box 580 •Fort Collins, CO 80522 0580 • ( ) 2 �2 1-6750 FAX (970) 416-2020 g. Show building dimensions or envelope dimensions and relative distances to nearest property lines. Please contact Peter, Gary, or Jenny at 221-6760 if you have questions about these comments. 4. Ron Gonzales of the Poudre Fire Authority offered the following comments: a. Address numerals shall be visible from the street fronting the property, and posted with a minimum of 6" high numerals on a contrasting background (example: bronze numerals on a brown brick is not acceptable). b. Fire hydrants are required with a maximum spacing of 600' along an approved roadway. Each hydrant must be capable of delivering 1,000 gallons of water per minute at a residual pressure of 20 psi. Hydrants shall be of an approved type as defined by ther water department and the fire department. No commercial building can be greater than 300' from a fire hydrant. C. The retail use section of the structure shall be fire sprinklered. Occupant notification is required within all retail tenant spaces, in accordance with N.F.P.A. 72. Manual pulls are not required. d. The parking use section of the structure shall be protected with fire standpipes. Please contact Ron, at 221-6570, if you have questions about these comments. 5. A copy of the comments received from Sharon Getz of the Building Inspection Department is attached to this letter. 6. Eric Bracke of the Traffic Operations Department offered the following comments: a. Off -site improvements that are needed include: 1) westbound left turn off of Laporte Avenue into the parking structure; 2) northbound left turn on North College Avenue into Laporte Avenue. Need to remove parking on North College to accommodate this need. b. Need to find a way to discourage mid -block crossings on Mason Street. C. More details will follow after the required Transportation Impact Study (TIS) its submitted and reviewed. d. A red -lined copy of a PDP Site Plan, with additional comments, is being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Eric, at 224-6062, if you have questions about these comments. 7. Bruce Vogel of the Light & Power Department offered the following comments: a. Any relocation of existing electric facilities will be at the owner's expense. b. Existing underground electirc lines in the alley will need to be protected from site excavation work. C. The proposed shade trees on Mason Street are shown to be placed much too close to the existing streetlight. The trees need to be 40' from the streetlight. Please contract Bruce, at 221-6700, if you have questions about these comments. 8. Kathleen Reavis of the Transportation Planning Department offered the following comments: a. Need to widen Mason Street by 6' on the east side, from Mountain Avenue to Laporte Avenue, to accommodate 8' wide northbound bicycle lane. Possibly 6' can be taken from the sidewalk. b. Provide enhanced cross -walks on all 4 legs of the intersection of Laporte Avenue and Mason Street, and across both driveways into the parking structure. C. Provide directional pedestrian/ADA ramps at the intersection of Laporte Avenue and Mason Street, and at driveways (do not use corner ramps that direct people out into the streets). d. Need on -street bicycle parking racks along Mason Street in front of the retail spaces. e. The internal walkways should be widened to 6' to provide better walkway clearance given the possiblility for car overhangs; or, if the parking spaces are deep enough, curbstops can be provided. f. Provide exterior canopies or large awnings at the southeast corner of Laporte Avenue and Mason Street to give pedestrians a covered area to wait for street crossings when trains are present. g. A red -lined copy of a PDP Site Plan, with additional comments, is being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Kathleen, at 224-6140, if you have questions about these comments. 9. A copy of the comments received from Mark McCallum of the Engineering Department is attached to this letter. Red -lined copies of plans, with additional comments, are being forwarded to the applicant. 10. A copy of the comments received from Basil Hamdan of the Stormwater Utility is attached to this letter. Red -lined copies of plans and reports, with additional comments, are being forwarded to the applicant. 11. Roger Buffington of the Water/Wastewater Department offered the following comments: a. Coordinate the landscape design with the civil design. Show and label all water and sanitary sewer lines on the Landscape Plan. Provide the required landscape/utility separations on the Landscape Plans. b. Will the existing sanitary sewer manholes located in the alley need adjusting to finish grade? If so, label the adjustment and include a manhole adjustment detail. C. Maintain a 5' separation between water services and street lighting on the Site Plan. d. Provide a traffic rated clean -out detail on the detail sheet. e. Separate all notes on the utility plans for clarity. f. Provide a profile of the storm sewer line showing the sanitary sewer crossing. g. Red -lined copies of plans, with additional comments, are being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Roger, at 221-6681, if you have questions about these comments. The following comments and concerns were expressed at the Staff Review meeting on August 19th: Transportation Planning