The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutUNIVERSITY PLACE PUD 425 WEST PROSPECT - Filed MA-MINOR AMENDMENT - 2005-07-27Cite of Pnrt Collins Date Submitted: City of Fort Collets Zoning Deparbnent 281 N. College Ave, PO Box 590 Fort Collins, CO 80522 (9701 41(-2745 FAA (970) 224-6134 Fy Comments Due By: { _ d dd -0j Minor Amendment File Fri/1L4740 Plannerul Effective Date_ Minor Amendment Application Form a-lr-0)- I ;- C,1k(-Acu, :Tr)v-i Project Name.-_ (/ ✓t • of-,-- ; ( Project Location (Street Address; �2� W=5��-�`3 1-.— Minor Amendment Fee: $192.00 Legal Description: General lntnrmatioq List all property owners having a ] -g i/equitable interest in the-propern, (Attach separate sheets ifnecessary). Owner's Namc(s):JDA-114 Street Address:3On �oN 1 hAt�!�a5 �etrylstate/zip: � h�L Tcicplume: �L1�in>� "' 30o Fax: Applicant's/Consultant's Name: J1M ��"ll'n >✓U FZ Name offirm: —� Street Address:'��-�OO�Q- ml'np-,4S City/State/Zip:-j pRltl(o I.1'% {'�i CD saw- T� per, elephone _ _Fax: �1 130rj Email LO NI��uI �-� � G• t tLr"' SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: 1) Six (0) copies of RECORDED plan (i.e, site, landscape, elevation - whichever is being altered) in 24" x 36" size (available at the Technical Services Department at 281 N. College) — RED -LINE THE CHANGES ON FIVE (5) OF THE COPIES; 2) Completed and signed application form, and 3) Application fee of $192.00. MINOR AMENDMENT Detailed description of the change and reason(s) for the request: iw 1i4� 1^n V12-bl�S�'''� �'1 ,��T.P,6' t - v hl L ._ 6iJr'i��11•�P!r�f ' — �> —C -Pi r� 75 s I �LLl 5 (� Nt o, ,� I CERTIFICATION I cernfs the intirrmalwn and exhibr, submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that in filing this application, I am acting with the kwiwlcdge, consent and authority otthe owners of the property (including all owners having a legal or equitable interest in the real pmperty, as dufmcd In .4eclmn 1 ? nl-tbc Cuv U )de; which is the subject of this application) without whose consent and authority the requested action should trot lawfully Ix: accomplished Puruuaotto slid :mntority, 1 hercbv permit City officials to enter uron the properly for the purpose of inspection, and if neeCsary, for posting a public notice on the propert}'_ Name (Please PR1N'I):__�1 _ �� 4m 4�EY'—._ - — - — A- Do r11- Jt J—p Vq CLI�_i'YIO .. l�°i`�(A h t n _ "Cd-phone l 11. L L L 6r 00 _ _Sic amre 1-n nI Approval Items for MA04140 Subdivision: UNIVERSITY PLACE Site Address: 425 W PROSPECT RD DepartmentlDescription Action Taken Entered By Comments (if any) ADVANCED PLANNING 01/03/2005 OK Peter Barnes ok per Clark Mapes. CURRENT PLANNING 01/03/2005 OK Peter Barnes ok per Clark Mapes 01/03/2005 HLD Peter Barnes Clark's comment entered in Current Planning instead of Advance Planning by mistake. 01/13/2005 CMNT Ted Shepard Approved subject to: 1. The proposed "up -lighting" is not permitted per Section 3.2.4(D)(3). 2. Changes to the landscape islands in the front parking lot promenade shall not result in the loss of mature trees. As per note number 9, Staff needs to work with the local consultant regarding all landscape changes. 3. If the monument sign is to be relocated, would it also be replaced? Presently, the sign contains several lines of "readerboard" copy. Given the number of lines and small font size, the information presented on readerboard cannot be read and comprehended while driving in traffic at 30 m.p.h. Staff suggests that the readerboard be re -designed - less copy is actually more comprehensible. 4. Finally, please make sure that the painting contractor is familiar with local regulations regarding proper disposal of paint and hazardous material. In the past, a Holiday Inn painting contractor was caught and fined for illegally dumping into Spring Creek. 5. Perhaps the reference to the paving at the Northglenn facility (note number 6) could be more accurately described. All other changes approved. 02/17/2005 CMNT Ted Shepard 1. Thank you for deleting the up -lighting. 2. Plans cannot be approved at this time. At the time of initial review, both plans and text were vague as to the final disposition of the landscaped promenade. These initial plans (and notes 2 and 5) led me to believe that the promenade would be retained and that the only changes would affect the existing planters and existing parking. Revised plans (sheet LP-1), however, indicate total elimination of the promenade. Such elimination would be a significant deviation from the existing plans and be in violation of the Land Use Code which calls for a connecting walkway between public sidewalk and building main entrance. 3. The reference in the letter (dated Feb. 10th) to Bath Landscaping "working with someone in the city concerning theloss of any mature trees and the requirements to replace these" is too vague. The disposition of the affected trees must be resolved prior to Current Planning approval. Since the promenade must be retained, why not simply retain the eight mature trees as well? The combination works well and is commonly accepted urban design treatment. 03/09/2005 OK Ted Shepard ENGINEERING -DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 01/03/2005 CMNT Page 1 of 2 03/30/2005 1:10:54 PM Sheri Wamhoff It looks like they are planning on rebuilding the entry driveway. If so they need to provide revisions to the utility plans showing changes to the driveway and the driveway will need to be built to current standards. A DCP permit will be needed for the Driveway work. (security and inspection fees provided for the public infrastructure work.) Department/Description Action Taken Entered By 02/28/2005 CMNT Sheri Wamhoff 03118/2005 OK Sheri Wamhoff STORMWATER ENGINEERING 01/10/2005 OK Basil Harridan ZONING 01/03/2005 CMNT Georgians Deines 01/13/2005 HLD Peter Barnes 02/15/2005 CMNT Peter Barnes 02/15/2005 OK Peter Barnes 03/15/2005 CMNT Jenny Nuckols Page 2 of 2 03/30/2005 1:10:54 PM Comments (if any) Did review the Civil plans once in January. The plans submitted with this revision do not reflect the comments made on that set of plans. The Civil plans and the site and landscape plans need to correspond in regards to the improvements planned for the driveway. Prior comments were given to Northern Engineering. A DCP permit will be needed for the Driveway work. (Security and inspection fees provided for the public infrastructure work.) Utility plans for driveway entry have been signed and approved - will need to make sure that the site plans show the same design. Approved, no additional impervious area added, still need an erosion control plan during construction. 1. Need to show dimensions of new canopies on site plan 2. All new signage and relocated monument signs are not part of this minor amendment. Signs require separate permit and must comply with the sign code. Revisions received 2-15-05 and routed same day. REC'D PLANS FROM C PLANNING (ok). SENT REMAINING COMMENTS TO APPLICANTS L O H M E Y 1 R■ RUSSELL I' I: a I P. , I �% I, r. n I: P n k i I I n N February 10, 2005 Peter Barnes City of Fort Collins 281 N. College Ave. PO Box 580 Fort Collins. CO 80522 Re: Minor Amendment Application #MA04140 Subdivision: University Place 425 West Prospect Road Dear Peter: With this letter please find four (4) new sets of plans that will hopefully address all of the issues and comments that have been brought up by the different departments in the City of Fort Collins. I will address each one of their comments as it relates to the new plans. Under the department Current Planning. there were several comments from Ted Shepard. His first comment related to up -lighting on the building. Please be advised we will not be uplighting the building as we have found out this will not be allowed due to a local ordinance. As you can see we do have an electrical drawing, Sheet El, which does on the newly submitted drawings, not show any new building lighting. The only new lighting that we are showing on Sheet E1 is I'm the new canopy on the north side of the building, the existing canopy of the north side of the building, and a new entrance canopy on the west side of the building. Also included in this set are landscaping plans which show all new landscaping and also a mitigation plan. They owner has contracted with Bath Nursery and Garden Center for the landscaping design as shown. Mr. Ryan 131Umenshine from Bath has told us that he will be working with someone in the city concerning the loss of any mature trees and the requirements to replace these. Also, we are planning to remove the existing monument sign and replace it with a small wall sign/planter combination. This signage is preliminary and we will submit all signage in a separate package at a later time. It is also our understanding that all signs will require separate permitting amd they will need to comply with the local sign code. AR C H ITR CT I; It I ItANDY Rf1 .yi El L_ AI_� 1, i F 1 I: I. G, ,U I.. o[lI ,_."c , I e I 1,,.0 I _`.I1171 N I 1-1?1,r ■ Continuing with Ted Shepard', comments, we will also make sure that the paint contractor will be familiar with local regulations regarding proper disposal of paint and hazardous material. Concerning Tcd Shepard's last note reagrding the paving, we will be using either brick pavers or some type of stamped concrete design. We have not specified the exact style and color yet, but we can forward these to you once theis has been determined. Sheri Wamhoff with Engineering -Development requested revisions to the utility plans showing changes to the driveway and driveway entrance. With our plan set, please find Sheets 1-4 titled "Utility Plans for Ilotel Exterior Remodel at University Place PUD." I understand that a set of utility plans has been delivered directly to Sheri and is under current review. We will provide a soil erosion control plan during construction per the requirements of Basil Hamdan within the Stormwater Engineering department. Peter, concering your comments, this new set of drawings has all of the details for the canopies including dimensions, both verticall and horizontally. I hope this will suffice for you at this time. if you would heed something to be shown on the site plan, please let me know. The initial submittal that we sent in did not have any dimensions whatsoever, so 1 would hope that this new Submittal with much more detail will answer your questions. Again, concerning the signage, we will submit a signage package at another date. The owner is developing the exterior signage package at this time .and we will have something for you very soon. I would hope that the above information answers most of the comments and concerns and that the Minor Amendment can be approved. I look forward to hearing from you. Jim , . Lohmeyer, AIA Lohi ever -Russell Architects Cc' Bill George Nick Haws Ryan Blumenshine Greg Meisinger A RC III T E C TU It