Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMCCLELLAND OFFICE PARK PUD - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2004-08-17CONCE� fUAL REVIE I STAFF CON"INIENTS :bS.!7-...e..wow,7e-.�!�nw4�+Kw..�.w+.,..a.,v,.,a�•.. ,www.••^5*vf.,s-,•�A.�.�t_,�..o.p�.,a+..ac.: :wax,..«.!... - METING DATE: April 23, 1984 ITEM : McClelland Park APPLICANT: Eldon Ward, Cityscape, 419 Canyon, Suite 300, Fort Collins, Colorado, 80521 LAND USE DATA: 102,000 square feet of office space on 4.3 acres COMMENTS: 1. Sewer service will be from line in Harvard. Water service will be from line in McClelland. 2. At least 15 feet of setback between sidewalk and parking should be provided. 3. Motorcycle, handicapped and bicycle parking should be provided. 4. All buildings must be within 150 feet of fire accessway. If some of the future parking lot connections are not accomplished as shown, there could be a problem. Existing fire hydrants should be shown. 5. Setback of parking from flowline should meet City requirements. If more than 750 trips, this distance will need to be 100 feet. If not, 50 feet will be required. 6. Swallow/McClelland intersection may need to be widened. If this widening affects your property, additional ROW may be required. 7. On -site detention will be required. 8. Some revisions to abutting parking lots may be required to make connections. 9. Traffic impact study will be required as part of the PUD application. 10. Prioritization of a major entranceway should be evaluated to handle the expected traffic volumes. There could be access problems because of the size of the facility. McClelland is one -lane in each direction with no left turns. Curb returns should be evaluated. 11. Applicant should work with Ed Carroll to determine future traffic needs. 12. Staff is concerned whether adequate landscaped area around the foundation of the building has been provided. 13. How will access through abutting properties be guaranteed? Public access easements will be required. 14. Applicant should carefully evaluate pedestrian movement from McClelland to site to adjoining properties and between buildings. DATE E 4 MAY 84 D""'EPARTMEN f � ITEM: MCCLELLAND OFFICE PARK PUD _ PRELIMINARY & FINAL 29-811 4 MAY 84 DATE DEPARTNIEN ITEM: McCLELLAND OFFICE PARK PUD — PRELIMINARY Yj FINAL 29-84 TO: Bob Smith, Assistant City Engineer - Drainage FROM: Bonnie Tripoli, Development Coordinator RE: Subdiv i ut liwil I DATE: S Please respond by r A ,'s, f, ' 0 DATE 4 MAY 84 DEPARTMEtAf ITEM: McCLELLAND OFFICE PARK PUD — PRELIMINARY & FINAL 29-8,1 f1kjtr, L CITY OF FORT COLLINS OFFICE OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT May 23, 1984 Eldon Ward Cityscape Design 419 Canyon Avenue, Suite 300 Fort Collins, CO 80521 Dear Eldon, The staff has reviewed the application for Preliminary and Final PUD approval of the McClelland Office Park and offers the following comments: 1. Written permission from adjacent property owners to access storm drainage outlet will be required. The staff questions some of the drain- age calculations used in the drainage report. 2. In order to assess adequacy of plan for maneuvering of fire equipment, turning radius within the parking lot should be indicated. 3. The staff questions the adequacy of the traffic impact report. For instance, the report did not mention the impacts at intersections and the need for additional ROW along McClelland. 4. Access easements will need to be dedicated for the public sidewalk along McClelland Drive. 5. The sidewalks along McClelland Drive should be dimensioned. The note concerning width of interior sidewalks should be repeated on the plan for clarification purposes. 6. Turning radii at all project entrances should be indicated. The design of the sidewalks in terms of their approaches to the entrances does not appear to meet City standard. 7. It would appear that some of the entrances to the buildings will be blocked by bicycle parking. Please clarify. 8. The off -site access through Gart Brothers parking lot will need to be guaranteed with public access easements. The necessary easement dedication documents should be submitted prior to approval of this PUD. 9. All compact parking stalls must be signed as such. Please indicate this on site plan. T° ""1,,,,,., I Uf f l(;f IJf -I f.NNIN S(J Fnrt. fI C�Prna J 0 2 • Ci031 221-6750 ANIJ I It'A I UI'MtNI Eldon Ward Letter 5/23/84 - Page 2 10. Typical width of parking stalls should be indicated on the site plan. 11. A building envelope dimension appears to be missing on Building enve- lope C. Please correct. 12. Bike parking should be provided for Building B. 13. All signs must comply with sign code. The plan shows two ground signs. The sign code will allow only one. 14. The applicants should provide evidence as to the possible impact of parking and building lot lighting shining onto adjacent residential areas. If a negative impact is identified, how will it be mitigated? 15. The building elevations should indicate color of exterior building material. 16. The staff would recommend that the applicant re-evaluate the plan in terms of clustering the buildings, thereby increasing the size of open space areas and improving pedestrian circulation between build- ings. 17. The site plan should specifically note how the site and building will contribute to the overall reduction of energy use in the building. 18. The staff questions whether adequate areas for landscaping have been provided adjacent to the buildings which will contribute to the overall aesthetic quality of the site. 19. The staff questions the adequacy of the main entrance in terms of providing for stacking of vehicles. Also, the staff questions the desirability of offsetting the intersection of parking aisles at the southeast corner of Building B. 20. The staff recommends that the following pedestrian connections be provided: connection between the sidewalk along the south side of Building A to the Gart Brothers building parking lot and along the east side of Building B. 21. The applicants should re-evaluate the plan in terms of incorporating design features in the parking lots to enhance pedestrian circulation including paving patterns and grade differences (speed humps) at cri- tical locations. 22. The staff is currently reviewing the landscape plan and will have comments forthcoming. Some initial comments include the adequacy of numbers of shrubs in parking islands; adequacy in number of street tree plantings, and; the need for ornamental tree plantings along base of buildings. Eldon Ward Letter 5/23/84 - Page 3 23. The pinion pine material should be minimum size of 5-6 feet rather than 4-5 feet. 24. The site plan is unclear as to the intentions of the dotted lines along the south property line. Please clarify. 25. The City has adopted two new solar access planning criteria for all new planned unit developments. The applicants should review these criteria and demonstrate they are being achieved in the plan. 26. Signed mylars of the site plan, landscape plan, building elevations and subdivision plat should be delivered to this office no later than Monday, June 18, 1984. Also on that date, a signed Site and Landscape Covenant document should be submitted. 27. On Monday, June 18, 1984, ten full size copies each of the site and landscape plan; 812"xll" PMT reductions of all plans; and colored renderings of the landscape and building elevation plans should be delivered. I recommend we meet as soon as possible to discuss the above comments. Revi- sions to the plans reflecting these comments should be submitted no later than Wednesday, June 6, 1984. If you have any questions or require further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincere y, Joe rank Sen4 r City Planner JF/kb CC: Bonnie Tripoli, Development Coordinator Mauri Rupel, Development Center Director