HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOLLINDALE BUSINESS PARK THIRD REPLAT LOT 5 - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2003-07-31Community Planning and Environmental Services
Current Planning
City of Fort Collins
July 30, 1997
Bill Stashak, Architect
5 Forest Hills
Fort Collins, CO. 80524
Dear Bill,
Staff has reviewed your documentation for Engineering Data Management, Inc. (A
Portion of Lot 5 of the Collindale Business Park PUD, Third Filing) - Project
Development Plan (PDP) and Final Compliance - #7-821 that was submitted to the
City on June 26, 1997, and would like to offer the following comments:
Jim Slagle of Public Service Company offered the following comments:
a. The utility easement width adjacent to Automation Way needs to be
shown on the subdivision plat.
b. No trees are to be planted within 4' of gas lines. The main gas line will run
north/south on the west side of Automation Way, in the middle of the utility
easement.
2. Rusty Guyton of TCI of Fort Collins (cable television) stated that the
subdivision plat for this project does not call out a utility easement along
Automation Way. However, the street & utility plan, Landscape Plan, and other
various plans call out an 8' wide utility easement along the street. Is there going
to be a utility easement in this location? All of the plans must be consistent.
3. A copy of the comments received from Susan Peterson of U.S. West is attached
to this comment letter.
4. The Mapping Department offered the following comments:
a. The subdivision plat needs to show chord bearings and distances on the
curves.
b. The west line has a different bearing and distance than the original plat.
281 North College Avenue - PO. Box 580 - Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 - (970) 221-6750 - FAX (970) 416-2020
City of Fort Collins
Current Planning
DATE: 7 July, 1997
PROJECT
COMMENT SHEET
DEPT: Engineering
PROJECT: #i`7-82I Collindale Business Park P.U.D., 3rd Filing
Engineering Data Management, Inc.
PLANNER: Steve Olt
ENGINEER: Michael Coley
All comments must be received by: 7/23/97
No Problems
Problems or Concerns (see below or attached)
Plat:
1. Current City standards call for 66' ROW on Industrial local streets. Dedicate
two more feet ROW to comply. Also, 9' utility easement is required on Industrial
local streets.
2. Need to tie plat to two section corners.
3. Conflicting curve data; western property line segments do not add up to the given total.
Overall Utility Plan:
1. This plan does not correspond with the `final development plan'.
2. Sanitary sewer service should not be discharging in the upstream direction.
3. Current City standards call for detached sidewalk. Unless this sidewalk placement
causes hardship, the detached sidewalk should be used.
Grading, Drainage & Erosion Control Plan:
1. A portion of the detention pond is off of the dedicated drainage and detention easement.
2. Concrete outlet structure shown in detail is not shown on plan.
"Please see edline utility plans for additional comments" n
Date: 7 �-7 / 9 -7 Signature:
PLEASE SEND COPIES OF MARKED REVISIONS: [-PLAT
[- SITE
0- UTILITY
Er LANDSCAPE
DATE: 28 Aug, 1997 DEPT: Engineering
PROJECT: #7-82I Collindale Business Park P.U.D., 3rd Filing
Engineering Data Management, Inc.
PLANNER: Steve Olt
ENGINEER: Michael Coley
All comments must be received by: 9/3/97
No Problems
X Problems or Concerns (see below or attached)
Cover Sheet:
1. Some minor modifications to the General Notes are required.
Plat:
1. Conflicting curve data.
2. Drainage and Utility easement does not scale to 53'.
Street and Utility Plan:
1. Show adequate dimensions in order to make the parking lot / driveway buildable.
2. Street standards call for 4.5' sidewalk, not 6.5' ; show smooth sidewalk transition.
3. Show transformer location.
Final Development Plan:
1. Access ramp is inconsistant with that shown on utility plan.
2. Utility service locations are inconsistant with utility plans.
"Please see redline utility plans for additional comments"
J
Date: (�- /c ��� 7 Signature:��--
PLEASE SEND COPIES OF MARKED REVISIONS: PLAT
JC SITE
X UTILITY
?� LANDSCAPE
REVISION
COMMENT SHEET
DATE: August X 1997 DEPT: 6o4e�m l�
PROJECT: #7-82I Collindale Business Park P.U.D., 3rd
Filing (Engineering Data Management) - (LUC) .
Project Development Plan/Final Compliance
Review
PLANNER: Steve Olt
All comments the staff review meeting:
Date:
Wednesday, September 3, 1997
Signature:
CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS
_ Plat _Site _ I}rai W Report _Other
_ Utility — Redline Utility — Landscape
City ft�%-
of Fort Collins
REVISION
COMMENT SHEET
DATE: 28 Aug, 1997 DEPT: Engineering
PROJECT: 47-82I Collindale Business Park P.U.D., 3rd Filing
Engineering Data Management, Inc.
PLANNER: Steve Olt
ENGINEER: Michael Coley
All comments must be received by: 9/3/97
No Problems
X Problems or Concerns (see below or attached)
Cover Sheet:
1. Some minor modifications to the General Notes are required.
Plat:
1. Conflicting curve data.
2. Drainage and Utility easement does not scale to 53'.
Street and Utility Plan:
1. Show adequate dimensions in order to make the parking lot / driveway buildable.
2. Street standards call for 4.5' sidewalk, not 6.5' ; show smooth sidewalk transition.
3. Show transformer location.
Final Development Plan:
1. Access ramp is inconsistant with that shown on utility plan.
2. Utility service locations are inconsistant with utility plans.
"Please see redline utility plans for additional comments"
i
/��--
Date: `_l �� � 7
Signature: / �-
PLEASE SEND COPIES OF MARKED REVISIONS: PLAT
/ SITE
x- UTILITY
;` LANDSCAPE
PROJECT
COMMENT SHEET
City of Fort Collins
Current Plannint
DATE: 12 November, 1997 DEPT: Engineering
PROJECT: #7-82J Collindale PUD, 3rd Filing, Healing Arts Institute
PLANNER: Leanne Harter
ENGINEER: Michael Coley
No Problems
Problems or Concerns (see below or attached)
Utility Plans
Sheet 1:
X Some modifications to the General Notes are needed.
Sheet 3:
• An additional 2' of ROW is required along Automation Way. 4.5' sidewalk shall be
detached with 6.5' parkway strip.
• Building; square footage is inconsista : with site plan.
• There are several problems with proposed handicap facilities. See redline plans for
specific comments.
• Please delineate the boundaries of the asphalt patch at the entrance drive.
Sheet 5:
X Detail D-12 is illegible.
N Commercial access detail needs to show section A -A to ROW.
** See redline utility plans for additional comments **
Date:
'� Signature:
� � l -7 Sg
PLEASE SEND COPIES OF MARKED REVISIONS: ❑ PLAT,'
SITE
UTILITY
Q LANDSCAPE
PROJECT
COMMENT SHEET
City of Fort Collins
Current Plannin#
DATE: 19 December, 1997 DEPT: Engineering
PROJECT: Healing Arts Educational Facility
ENGINEER: Michael Coley
No Problems
Problems or Concerns (see below or attached)
Utility Plans
Sheet 3:
39 Handicap ramp locations are unacceptable. Try the design shown on standard detail
D-12.6.
39 Dimension the driveway and other important features such that the parking lot is
constructable.
39 Show all easements on overall utility plan.
Sheet 5:
9 Some of you details are illegible.
** See redline utility plans for additional comments**
nature:iDate: � 2� Ic � /CN-7 Signature:
PLEASE SEND COPIES OF MARKED REVISIONAO: PLAT
® SITE
UTILITY
❑ LANDSCAPE
C. The Subtitle of the subdivision plat should say "Being a Replat of Lot 5,
Collindale Business Park, Third Filing".
Please contact Jim Hoff, at 221-6605, 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 comment letter. Please contact Sharon, at 221-
6750, if you have questions about her comments.
6. Roger Frasco of the Poudre Fire authority stated that the fire extinguishing
system, fire hydrant location, and site access (for emergency purposes) are
acceptable as shown on the Site Plan.
7. Peter Barnes of the Zoning Department offered the following comments:
a. An additional 2 trees are required in the landscape buffer along the south
property line, between the property line and the driveway.
b. The walkway between the 2 handicapped parking spaces must have a
ramp, up to the sidewalk.
C. The total building square footage (14,135 sq. ft. at build out) allows for
only .42 parking spaces on -site. The Site Plan calls for 59 parking spaces
ultimately. This would be allowed only if a modification to the standard is
submitted, reviewed, and approved by the Planning and Zoning Board.
Please contact Peter, at 221-6760, if you have questions about these comments.
8. Janet McTague of the Light & Power Department stated that the transformer
needs to be located within 10' of a paved surface where a line truck can park to
service it.
9. Tim Buchanan, the City Forester, has included his comments on a marked -up
copy of a Landscape Plan that is enclosed with the letter to Bill Stashak.
10. A copy of the comments received from the Stormwater Utility is attached to this
letter. Red -lined copies of the utility drawings, final drainage report, and erosion
control plan are enclosed with the letter to Bill Stashak.
11. A copy of the comments received from the Engineering Department is attached
to this letter. Red -lined copies of the utility drawings, Site Plan, and Landscape
Plan are enclosed with the letter to Bill Stashak.
12. Roger Buffington of the Water/Wastewater Department offered the following
comments:
a. Sizes of all existing and proposed utilities must be indicated on the plans.
b. Curb stops must be placed in utility easements or rights -of -way and within
a landscaped area.
C. Will fire suppression or irrigation taps be needed?
d. Red -lined Site and Landscape Plans, with Water/Wastewater comments,
are enclosed with the letter to Bill Stashak.
e. Water/Wastewater has stated that they did not receive utility plans. To
date, their comments are based on the Site and Landscape Plans. A set
of utility plans should be delivered to them as soon as possible.
Please contact Roger, at 221-6681, if you have questions about these
comments.
General comments from Staff Review on July 23, 1997:
13. The street & utility plan and grading, drainage & erosion control plan do not
correspond to the Site and Landscape Plans. There are differences in the
building footprints, sidewalk layout, and parking layout. The plans must be
consistent.
14. The sidewalk from the front entry area to the public sidewalk along Automation
Way, as shown on the site and Landscape Plans, should be on a straight line
and not include 90 degree turns. The utility plan shows it going straight.
15. Although the building is to be 20' in height, it is to be a 1-story building in terms
of leasable floor area? There will not be a habitable second story, just a tall
ceiling in the higher part of the building?
16. There does not appear to be enough right-of-way and utility easement being
provided along Automation Way.
17. The sidewalk along Automation Way should be detached and 6.5' wide.
18. There are some incorrect distances and conflicting curve data shown on the
subdivision plat.
19. The existing detention pond in the area was not sized to include stormwater from
this development. Pass off -site stormwater over the spillway for detention, not
into the street.
20. City staff does not agree with the projected release rate for stormwater from this
site, as defined in the drainage report. This could affect the detention
requirement.
21. A portion of the detention pond, as shown, is outside of the drainage easement.
22. More trees are needed along the south property line, south of the driveway.
23. Additional evergreen trees (2 or 3) should be added in the turfgrass area to the
north and northeast of the building.
24. Shrubs, as foundation plantings, should be added to the north and east sides of
the building.
25. A red -lined ropy of a Site Plan, with Planning concerns, is enclosed with the
letter to Bill Stashak.
26. The Site, Landscape, and Building Elevation Plans do not show enough
information about the proposed future building and parking expansion to enable
the City to grant FINAL approval of these facilities. They will have to come back
through the Final Compliance review stage at a later date.
27. Where is the mechanical equipment for the building to be located? If it is to be
outside or on the rooftop, it must be fully screened from public view.
28. The entire north, south, and east building elevations should be masonry
construction because of their proximity and exposure to adjacent development
(existing and future).
29. More information is needed on the finish and color of the masonry and CMU
materials on the building exterior.
30. Please pay close attention to Section 3.5.1 Building and Project Compatibility in
the Land Use Code. There are absolute requirements regarding site and building
considerations.
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 new development review process and schedule there is no revision date
mandated by the City. The timing is up to the applicant. The revisions will be routed
to the appropriate City departments and outside reviewing agencies, with their
comments due by the 4th weekly staff review meeting following receipt of the revisions.
At this staff review meeting it will be determined if the project is ready to go to the
Planning and Zoning Board for a decision and, if so, will be scheduled for the nearest
open date. Planning and Zoning Board public hearings will be held on the 1st and 3rd
Thursdays of every month, with a minimum two week notification period prior to the
public hearing.
Please return all drawings red -lined by City staff with submission of your revisions. You
may contact me at 221-6750 if you have questions about these comments or would like
to schedule a meeting to discuss them.
Sin erely,
*eveOlt
Project Planner
cc: Engineering/Mike Coley
Water & Wastewater/Roger Buffington
Zoning/Peter Barnes
Stormwater
Park Engineering Consultants
Steve Steinbicker
File
PPARK ENGINEERING
CONSULTANTS
October 15, 1997
City of Fort Collins
Design Review Team
Fort Collins, CO 80525
RE: Engineering Data Management
Lot 513, Collindale Business Park, 3'1 Filing
Dear Gentlemen,
The following are our responses to your comments regarding the aforementioned project.
ENGINEERING:
Comments dated August 28, 1997
1. Acknowleged. Cover Sheet notes have been revised.
2. Acknowleged. Clarity has been placed on the plan. Please see the Plat.
3. Acknowleged. Easement dimensioning has been revised. Please see the Street and Utility
Plan.
4. Acknowledged. A plan prepared by the Architect has all of the dimensioning for the site.
Please see the additional plans.
5. Acknowledged. The proposed sidewalk width has been modified.
6. Acknowledged. The electrical transformer has been shown on the Utility Plan.
7. Acknowledged. The Final Development Plan has been revised. Please coordinate with the
Architect.
WATER/WAs,rEWATER:
Comments dated August 25, 1997
(Last two comments. Please see the Landscape Plan.)
1. Acknowledged. Additional notes for water service sizing has been added to the plan. Please
see the Street and Utility Plan.
2. The specified location would place the water meter and curb stop within the detention pond.
The water service has not been relocated.
1240 Main Street Longmont, CO 80501 (303) 651-6626 FAX (303) 651-0331
STORMWATE,R:
Comments dated August 16, 1997
1. Acknowleged. Additional information has been added.
2. As per our discussions with Basil, it was agreed upon that we would enclose the reference
master drainage report within this report. All streets within the subdivision are existing and the
release rates from developable parcels have been determined by said master plan. Please see
the enclosed report within Appendix C.
3. Acknowleged. Common response as Item (2) above.
4_ Acknowleged. Please see report.
5. Acknowleged. The proposed 4" oriface has been replaced with a 3" oriface.
If you have any questions concerning these issues, please call us as soon as possible. Thank you
for working with us for this project.
Project Engineer
cc: Mr. Bill Stashak, A.I_A.
file 2314rspl.doc
PARK ENGINEERING
CONSULTANTS
August 26, 1997
Planning & Zonling Board
City of Fort Collins
281 North Colleae Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado 80522
RE: Request for Variance from the required 15' maximum front yard setback from
Right-Of-'kVay. EDINI building at 4001 Automation NVay, Collindale Business
Park.
To Whom It May Concern:
In designing the storm water facilities for the above referenced Project and doing the
subdivision, it was necessary to utilize the area between the proposed building and the
road to provide the required ponding. The original plat for this lot had provided for a
drainage and detention pond easement alone the east and north property lines. The
easement was 3W wide on the north and 45. wide on the east (next to the street). It has
become necessary to widen the easement along the street to 53. Based on the Master
Drainaue Plan that was developed as part of the original development, this area is
required to over -detain storm water due to the size of down stream facilities. This causes
the ponding facility to be larger than normal. Due to the natural topography of the site
and the inability to desiLYLa `deep" pond all the area in the easement is needed to provide
the required ponding. Ti�fore, it is our opinion that the setback variance be approved
in order to develop this site.
If you have any questions or need further information, please call.
RespectfuU,�Sul)j I ,
Donald W. Park. P.E.
cc: file 2314002.doe
1240 Main Street Longmont, CO 80501 (303) 651-6626 FAX (303) 651-0331
City of Fort Collins
Current Plannint
DATE: 7 July, 1997
PROJECT
COMMENT SHEET
DEPT: Engineering
PROJECT: #7-82I Collindale Business Park P.U.D., 3rd Filing
Engineering Data Management, Inc.
PLANNER: Steve Olt
ENGINEER: Michael Coley
All comments must be received by: 7/23/97
No Problems
Problems or Concerns (see below or attached)
Plat:
1. Current City standards call for 66' ROW on Industrial local streets. Dedicate
two more feet ROW to comply. Also, 9' utility easement is required on Industrial
local streets.
2. Need to tie plat to two section corners.
3. Conflicting curve data; western property line segments do not add up to the given total.
Overall Utility Plan:
1. This plan does not correspond with the `final development plan'.
2. Sanitary sewer service should not be discharging in the upstream direction.
3. Current City standards call for detached sidewalk. Unless this sidewalk placement
causes hardship, the detached sidewalk should be used.
Grading, Drainage & Erosion Control Plan:
1. A portion of the detention pond is off of the dedicated drainage and detention easement.
2. Concrete outlet structure shown in detail is not shown on plan.
"Please see redline utility plans for additional comments" '
Date: i / %' 7 Signature: / �
PLEASE SEND COPIES OF MARKED REVISIONS: Ej"PLAT
SITE
UTILITY
Er LANDSCAPE