Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOAKRIDGE BLOCK ONE PUD THIRD - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2005-04-28Commu v Planning and Env; onrnental - rvices Current Planning Citv of Fort Collins February 16, 1996 Eldon Ward Cityscape Urban Design, Inc. 3555 Stanford Road, Suite 105 Fort Collins, CO. 80525 Dear Eldon, Staff has reviewed your documents forC�C-irrabba's Italian Grill PUD, Final t t were submitted to the City on January 22, 1996, and e to offer the foliowiQoma:------------- A copy of the comments received from U.S. West is enclosed with this letter. The Zoning Department has offered the following comments: a. Please consider ramping from the drivewav into the bicycle rack area, for ease of movement. b. Building dimensions should be shown on the Site Plan. a Show the distance from the building envelope to the north lot on the Site Plan. The 80' distance shown is the required setback from future edge of pavement on Harmony Road to the building, as set forth in the Harmony Corridor Plan. d. This site is not in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District; therefore, the signage content or location does not need to be, and should not be, shown on the Building Elevation Plan. A copy of the comments received from the Building Inspection Department is enclosed with this letter. 4. The Poudre Fire Authority has offered the following comments: a. A fine sprinkler system must be provided or the building must be fire contained into areas of less than 5,000 square feet in size. b. A fire alarm system may be required, depending on the occupancy classification. 281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 FAX (970) 221-6378 TDD (970) 224-6002 91 91 C. A "Knox" Box may be required if there is a fire sprinkler or fire alarm system in the building. The Water/Wastewater Department has indicated that their comments have been forwarded to Drexel MaTell on a red -lined set of utility plans and to Cityscape on a red -lined Landscape Plan (enclosed with this letter). A copy of the comments received from the Stormwater Utility is enclosed with this letter. The Engineering department has offered the following comments: Final Site Plan a. An access easement will be required for the sidewalk in the setback area. b. Need to insure that there exists a shared access easement/agreement for all of the shared drive lanes and entrances. Utility Plans - Cover Sheet a. Revise Title and Notes as shown on the plans. Utility Plans - Sheet 2/4 a. See comments 1 & 2, Final Site Plan (red -lined plan enclosed with letter to Cityscape). b. Add signature block (throughout the plan set). The Natural Resources Division has asked that you please urge the applicants to design the waste collection site so that they can include recycling, especially cardboard. The Transportation Department has asked if parking is going to be an issue? The amount of parking appears to be low. There are 66 parking spaces shown, which is just over 10 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of building floor area for the restaurant. Understandably, this is the ratio suggested in the parking lot guidelines used by the City. Will there be the potential for conflict between the Marriott and Carrabba's? 10. Comments relating to the Site Plan: a. The "service entrance" to the building is located on the south side. It appears that this area blends in fairly well, without being blatantly obvious. b. The line work appears not to be complete along Oakridge Drive, adjacent to the Marriott. c. General Notes 6 & 9 are related and unnecessary. The "administrative change" is an integral part of the Land Development Guidance System/Planned Unit Development process that is available for any approved PUD; however, Note 6 suggests that the building entries can be changed arbitrarily on -site during construction, without any further review, which is not correct. Both Notes 6 & 9 should be removed from the plan. d. General Note 14, concerning the lack of need for a traffic report and citing a specific individual, is inappropriate and should be removed. e. Where are the parking lot fight poles located? General Note 11, concerning site lighting, specifies 24' high poles with a 400 watt metal halide light source. What lighting sources and pole heights are on the two adjacent sites? The wattage seems appropriate but is not a high pressure sodium source more frequently used? The sidewalk and handicapped ramp in the connection between Carrabba's and the Marriott, and in the landscaped island on the Carrabba's site, narrows down to where it is too narrow for a wheeichair to maneuver safely. g. General Note 8 - will the mechanical units, with decking structures, be above any exterior walls or will they actually be recessed down below and behind a parapet wall. for instance? h. Where will the meters be on the building and will they be adequately screened from view? 11. Comments relating to the Landscape Plan: a. The number of deciduous trees could/should be increased around the north and east sides of the building. 12. Comments relating to the Building Elevations: a. Only one security fight is shown on the exteriors of the building, and that being on the south elevation above the trash enclosure. It should have a cutoff shield to direct the light downward to minimize light spillage. And is this, in fact, the only security light on the building? b. Could you please elaborate a little more on the note stating "all piers to be scored on all sides". C. The Exterior Finishes Note E-10 should be expanded to state that the awnings will not be internally illuminated. d. What is the base color of the building and how does it relate to the stucco finish of the Marriott Hotel? e. Would Catrabba's consider including some brick along the base of the building to tie it somewhat into the Harmony Medical Center? The building is attractive; however, three sides have elements that break up the very vertical nature of the architectural elements, leaving just the east side that has significant surfaces without some sort of horizontal articulation. g. Where will the meters be on the building and will they be adequately screened from view? This completes the review comments at this time. Additional comments may be forthcoming as the various depanments and reviewing agencies continue to review this request. Please be aware of the follov,ing dates and deadlines to assure your ability to stay on schedule for the March 25, 1996 Planning and Zoning Board hearing: RxxRXXRRxxxx RRxxRxx*******R***********R*R****************R**********RRRx****** Plan revisions are due no later than the end of the working day, March 6, 1996. Please contact me for the number of folded revisions required for each document. PMI's (photo reduction of Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Building Elevations to 3._" s 11"), rendering (one each colored full-size Site or Landscape Plan and Building Elevations), and 8 folded copies of the final Tull -size Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Building Elevations revisions ( for the Planning and Zoning Board members packets) are due on March 13, 1996. Please contact me at 221-6750 ifyou have questions or concerns related to these comments. I would like to schedule a meeting with you as soon as possible, if necessary, to discuss these comments. Sincerely, Steve Olt Project Planner xc: Ward Stanford Stormwater Utility Transportation Drexel Barreil Stuart MacMillan Project File