HomeMy WebLinkAboutFOUNTAINHEAD PUD PHASE II - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2003-11-04CONCEF XAL REVIEV]
STAFF COMMENTS
MEETING DATE: November 22, 1982
ITEM: Fountainhead P.U.D.--Amended Preliminary
APPLICANT: Osprey Inc. c/o ZVFK Architects/Planners, 218 W. Mountain
Fort Collins, CO 80521
LAND USE DATA:
Request to amend existing P.U.D. to shift buildings around resulting in a
reduction of square footage. Location at southeast corner of Boardwalk
Drive and College Avenue.
COMMENTS:
I. All existing '_rees and their fate should be indicated.
2. Timing of the construction of the curbcut to College Avenue is critical.
Either the median will be constructed or a temporary right turn -in and
-out only curbcut will be constructed until the median is constructed.
The entire entrance would have to be constructed with the second phase.
3. Access to Pedersen's home should be from new curbcut.
4. Verify phasing of development and detention.
5. Loading zones for restaurants should be indicated with no dimension less
than 10 feet.
6. The median island in JFK will be constructed to City standard. The curb -
cut location to this project will be subject to these standards. The
location of cut as indicated on concept plan does not appear to work.
7. Interior circulation lanes should be better defined.
8. Pedestrian connection between properties should be carefully evaluated.
9. Signage should be indicated.
10. Landscape buffer area should be expanded along College Avenue.
11. Location of water lines in relation to hydrants should be carefully
evaluated.
12. Justification for building heights above 40 feet should be submitted.
JF/gla
DATE-
DEPARTMENT
1_9
z
UM
0,
a
0
CD
co
CD
i
E
E
0
0
Item
REVISIONS The Fountainhead PUD Phase One and Two Final
/,//- 0
DATER DEPARTMENT ��.
J
LIM
0,
O
IOU
cn
cn
E
E
O
V
Item�� �y
Comments
U
J
�Q
z
um
0q
0
E
E
O
0
Item`
Comments
VZ. �
C11Y Of F(1RT ( 01 1 INS
DEVELOPMENT CENTER EXT.655
December 21, 1982
Mr. Brian Broadus
ZVFK Architects/Planners
218 West Mountain
Fort Collins, CO 80521
Dear Brian:
The staff has reviewed the application for Master Plan approval and Preliminary
and Final approval of the Fountainhead PUD and would offer the following comments:
MASTER PLAN
1. The staff questions your intentions by calling this plan a "Master Plan."
The level of detail provided on the plan would appear to be a Preliminary
plan rather than a Master Plan. If it is indeed a Master Plan, then I
would recommend that the plan be amended to delete the detail and show
the information as required in the Planned Unit Development regulations
for Master Plans. The remaining comments will be influenced by staff
opinion that what you really want to do is a Preliminary plan rather than
a Master Plan.
2. Three of the buildings along the south property line do not appear to meet
the 150-foot fire access requirement. Please justify.
3. The southern curb cut to JFK Parkway was previously approved as a temporary
curb cut for emergency purposes until such time as a connection is made to
the west property. Please revise.
4. The "potential future access" point along JFK might conflict with storm
water detention plans. Please verify.
5. The applicant should provide a traffic study justifying the location of the
curb cut to College Avenue. This study should be submitted as soon as
possible.
6. The median island at the entrance to College Avenue needs to be redesigned
to allow for emergency equipment access.
7. The plan should indicate building envelopes and show dimensions.
8. Loading zones should be provided for the two southernmost retail buildings.
Mr. Brian Broadus
ZVFK Architects/Play ^s
December 21, 1982
Page 2
9. If outdoor dining area is on a deck, the deck should be indicated in
the building envelope.
10. All signs must comply with Sign Code.
11. Planning Objectives should be revised to address the requirements as
indicated in the Planned Unit Development regulations.
12. The applicant should submit a phasing schedule including the phasing
schedule for the installation of JFK Parkway.
13. The applicant should submit preliminary architectural elevations of all
buildings.
14. The applicant should submit evidence justifying buildings with height
greater than 40-feet. The evidence should be as required in the Planned
Unit Development guidelines.
15. All existing significant trees and vegetation should be indicated on
the site plan including their fate.
16. Existing zoning should be indicated on the site plan.
17. The plan should be revised to indicate the character of the area surround-
ing the site as detailed in the Planned Unit Development regulations.
18. A preliminary subdivision plat should be submitted.
19. The two notes under the "Variance Request" heading dealing with building
height and compact car spaces are not variances and should be deleted.
20. The plan notes under "Legend" the symbol "ss." Where are the street
sections?
21. While the notes under "energy conservation measures" do indicate proposed
character of measures, the final plans must detail exactly what will be
done.
22. Some of the compact car spaces do not meet City standards for location.
Please work with staff to overcome this problem.
23. The staff would recommend some minor changes in pedestrian circulation in
terms of providing future connections to abutting properties.
24. Additional landscape treatment will be required along the public streets
for screening purposes.
25. The preliminary landscape plan should be revised to indicate additional
landscaping interior to the site including low-lying shrubbery in
addition to trees in landscaped parking islands.
Mr. Brian Broadus
ZVFK Architects/Pla 2rs
December 21, 1982
Page 3
26. Landscape plan should include planting objectives.
27. Screening of trash areas should be indicated on landscape plan.
PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAN
28. Following the first comment of this letter, I would recommend that the
Fountainhead Phase One and Two is actually the final site plan rather than
a Preliminary and Final site plan.
29. The applicant should provide a traffic study indicating the need for the
College Avenue curb cut with this phase. The staff feels that the curb
cut is not necessary until greater development is anticipated.
30. The two variance requests as noted on the site plan are not in fact
variances and should be deleted from the site plan.
31. How are the "three temporary spaces" near Restaurant B designed to work?
Please indicate.
32. The applicant should submit building elevations for all buildings.
33. I have not recieved landscape plans for Phase One. Have they been submitted?
34. The building envelopes as indicated on the final site 'plan are much larger
than is being indicated as the location of the buildings on the preliminary
plan. Please clarify.
35. An additional landscape island is recommended along the west side of
Restaurant B. Please revise.
36. The Preliminary plan (Master Plan) indicates landscaping and pedestrian
facilities near Restaurant A and the College Avenue curb cut that are
not being provided for in the final plan. Please clarify.
37. If outdoor eating area is on a deck, it must be within the building
envelope.
38. Only one freestanding or ground sign per street frontage is allowed.
Therefore, Restaurant A will not be permitted to have one. (All signs
must comply with Sign Code.)
39. The site plan should indicate the distance of building envelope of
Restaurant A to at least two property lines. Please revise.
40. The subdivision plan should be revised to show building envelopes so
that note regarding easements is valid.
41. I would recommend that this phase be renamed as Phase One for filing
purposes rather than Phase One and Two.
Mr. Brian Broadus
ZVFK Architects/Pla--ers
December 21, 1982
Page 4
42. The applicant should submit the signed reproducible mylars of the site,
landscape, subdivision plat and architectural elevations no later than
Monday, January 17, 1982. Also on that date, the signed landscape and
open spare covenants document should be submitted.
I would recommend we meet as soon as possible to discuss the above comments.
I will be unable to meet with you until after January 3, 1983. Please contact
Fran Ramsey to arrange a suitable meeting time. Revisions and new information
reflecting the above comments should be delivered to me no later than Monday,
January 10, 1983. Also, on January 17, 1983, 8-1/2"xll" reductions and colored
renderings of all plans and elevations should be delivered to this office. If
you should have any questions, please feel free to call.
Sincerely yours,
Joe Frank
City Planner
JF/f
cc: Mauri Rupel, Development Center Director
Bonnie Tripoli, Engineering Analyst
ZVFK architects/planners
a professionel corporallon
' 1 P vies! mocclain avw.nwe
'rrl a1II rr� .0 8Q5?! usa
n.rophono 503 41)"!-4105
January 11, 1983
Joe Frank
Development Center
Fort Collins, Colorado 80522
Dear Joe,
We have revised our drawings and delivered other clarifying documents
to answer your criticisms of the Fountainhead P.U.D., noted in your
letter of December 21, 1982. The following paragraphs elaborate on
items in those drawings, or address comments not touched by them.
We remind you that Phase One of the development has been finally ap-
proved.
Numbers identify questions contained in your letter.
Preliminary Master Plan
Refer to engineering.
Trip generation statistics, drawn from the ITE manual on the
subject, indicate a morning peak of 243 entrance trips and an
afternoon peak of 226 exit trips; a conservative estimate that
half of 'these trips will use the College Avenue curb cut places
its morning traffic at 120 units, and evening journeys at 113.
We believe that these numbers form only a small portion of, and
will have little impact on, the traffic flow of South College
Avenue.
The easy movement of automobiles within the Fountainhead depends
on this curb cut; we are concerned a bottleneck will form, at
peak hours, at the Boardwalk drive entrance to the site if exit
and entry is not allowed from College Avenue. Automobile access
to Phases Two and Three will become too circuitous, and we are
anxious to avoid the problems which now plague the Denny's Rest-
aurant located north of College and Drake.
Phase Three at the Fountainhead has, as of January 5, 1983, been
submitted for preliminary approval,, its traffic needs help to
justify the immediate construction of the curb cut in Phase Two.
17. All buildings and contours within 150' of the development are
illustrated.
24. Our preliminary plan shows evergreen trees screening the parking
& areas from major rights -of -way. We have made this condition more
25. clear. The location of small shrubs is presented through final
landscape plans.
Final Plans
While our office buildings fulfill all requirements stipulated by our
energy conservation measures, we are able to say only that the restau-
rant will use building and glass orientation effectively.
Thank you for your consideration.
Since�r�e�l/y/,�, v
Brian Broadus
bgl