The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2018CV01 - Sutherland V. City Of Fort Collins, Et Al - 022B - Agenda Item Part 2SITE COVER LS001 N O R T H CONTEXT MAP JOHNSON DRIVE APARTMENTS N O R T H ZONING MAP: CG DISTRICT SITE PLAN SITE SITE Site Plan and Details ATTACHMENT 4 to Staff Report to P&Z W T FO FO FO FO FO FO G G G G G G G W W W W W W W W W W W W W S D S H Y D ELEC C T VAULT ELEC H Y D W S O ELEC S S SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS FO FO FO FO FO FO W T FO FO FO FO FO FO G G G G G G G W W W W W W W W W W W W W S D S H Y D ELEC C T VAULT ELEC H Y D W S O ELEC S S SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS FO FO FO FO FO FO W T FO FO FO FO FO FO G G G G G G G W W W W W W W W W W W W W S D S H Y D ELEC C T VAULT ELEC H Y D W S O ELEC S S SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS FO FO FO FO FO FO R R R R W/D W/D W/D 12 TYPICAL COURTYARD PLAN LS103 8' 0 4' 8' 16' N O R T H Site Plan and Details ATTACHMENT 4 to Staff Report to P&Z SITE DETAILS LS501 Site Plan and Details ATTACHMENT 4 to Staff Report to P&Z SITE DETAILS LS502 Site Plan and Details ATTACHMENT 4 to Staff Report to P&Z GROUND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A0.0 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE S P R I N G C O U R T J O H N S O N D R I V E ECO BUFFER (WIDTH VARIES) SIDEWALK FOR ROUTING OF EXIT STAIR TO PUBLIC WAY PARKING GARAGE ENTRANCE/EXIT ENCLOSURE WALL AROUND BASE OF PARKING WITH SCORING PATTERN AND GREEN SCREENS SLOPING PARKING UP TO 2ND FLOOR BUILDING WALL TO CONCEAL PARKING USING REAL WINDOWS WITH OBSCURE GLAZING; BRICK, OTHER MATERIALS TO MATCH REST OF BUILDING LINE OF 2ND FLOOR PKG ABOVE ELEVATOR 2 ELEVATOR 1 EXIT STAIR EXIT STAIR EXIT STAIR EXIT STAIR EXIT STAIR REFUSE & RECYCLING AREA PLAN DETAIL CONCRETE FILLED STEEL PIPE BOLLARD 5"X5" STEEL POSTS 6FT TALL WITH CORRUGATED METAL SIDING SCREENING TO MATCH BLDG. EXTERIOR STEEL GUARD RAIL AROUND INTERIOR SECOND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A0.1 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE ELEVATOR 2 ELEVATOR 1 EXIT STAIR EXIT STAIR EXIT STAIR EXIT STAIR EXIT STAIR S P R I N G C O U R T J O H N S O N D R I V E ENCLOSURE WALL AROUND BASE OF PARKING SEE 3D IMAGES AND ELEVATIONS AND GL PLAN AND SITE PLAN LS101 FOR MORE INFORMATION SLOPING PARKING DN TO GROUND FLOOR OPEN TO BELOW GUARD RAIL ALONG EDGE OF 2ND FLR. FITNESS CENTER PRIVATE TO TENANTS ONLY PRIVATE STUDY LOUNGE ELEC. CLOSET STUDY AND MTG. ROOMS FOR TENANTS CORRIDOR WINDOWS ALONG ALL FACADES FOR VIEWS TO STREET AND PARK WINDOWS ALONG PARKING AREAS WILL BE SAME QUALITY AS OTHERS WITH OBSCURE GLASS TO HIDE VEHICLES A0.2 THIRD LEVEL FLOOR PLAN (4TH, 5TH, 6TH FLOORS SIMILAR) SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE ELEVATOR 2 ELEVATOR 1 EXIT STAIR EXIT STAIR EXIT STAIR EXIT STAIR EXIT STAIR 4D 2B 2C 3A 1A 1B 1A 2C 2B 4D 1B 1B 2B 2B 2C 2B 2B 2B 4D 4D 2F 1C 4D 2B 2C 2C 2C 2C 2C 2C 1A 2B 2E 1A 2B 3A 4D 1A 3A 2B 2B 2B 3A 3A 1A NORTH ELEVATION A1.0 SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE BRICK - DARK, TYPICAL BRICK, LIGHT ENTRY STEPS ENTRY STEPS STOREFRONT SYSTEM WITH TRANSOM ABOVE, TYPICAL CORRUGATED METAL, LIGHT CORRUGATED METAL, LIGHT CORRUGATED METAL, LIGHT CORRUGATED METAL, LIGHT BRICK, LIGHT BRICK, LIGHT BRICK, LIGHT CORRUGATED METAL, DARK CORRUGATED METAL, DARK GRADE LINE CORRUGATED METAL, DARK METAL CANOPY, TYPICAL BRICK SOLDIER COURSE - DARK, TYP. ALUMINUM WINDOW, TYP. STEEL BALCONIES WITH CONCRETE SLAB FLOOR AND ROOF ABOVE, TYP. CORNICE DETAIL AT PARAPET 2 HEIGHT, TYP. PARAPET 3 CORNICE DETAIL LOFT WINDOW ALUMINUM EAST ELEVATION A1.1 SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE ENTRY STEPS STOREFRONT SYSTEM WITH TRANSOM ABOVE, TYPICAL BRICK, LIGHT METAL CANOPY, TYP. STEEL BALCONIES WITH CONCRETE SLAB FLOOR AND ROOF ABOVE, TYP. CORNICE DETAIL AT PARAPET 2 HEIGHT, TYP. PARAPET 3 CORNICE DETAIL ALUMINUM WINDOW, TYP. BRICK SOLDIER COURSE - DARK, TYP. PARAPET 1 CORNICE DETAIL TYPICAL AT ALL DARK BRICK SECTIONS CORRUGATED METAL, LIGHT CORRUGATED METAL, LIGHT CORRUGATED METAL, DARK CORRUGATED METAL, LIGHT ENTRY STEPS CORRUGATED METAL, DARK BRICK, DARK PEDESTRIAN ACCESS PATHWAY PARKING GARAGE ENTRANCE SOUTH ELEVATION A1.2 SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE STEEL BALCONIES WITH CONCRETE SLAB FLOOR AND ROOF ABOVE, TYP. CORNICE DETAIL AT PARAPET 2 HEIGHT, TYP. PARAPET 3 CORNICE DETAIL TYPICAL AT ALL DARK BRICK SECTIONS CORRUGATED METAL, LIGHT COURTYARD WITH RAILING PEDESTRIAN ACCESS PATHWAY GRADE LINE BRICK, LIGHT ALUMINUM WINDOW, TYP. CORRUGATED METAL, LIGHT CORRUGATED METAL, LIGHT PARAPET 1 PARAPET 1 PARAPET 1 PARAPET 1 CORRUGATED METAL, DARK CORRUGATED METAL, DARK CORRUGATED METAL, DARK BRICK, DARK PAINTED CONCRETE CORRUGATED METAL, DARK ALUMINUM WINDOW, TYP. (ANGLED) PARAPET 2 PARAPET 2 PARAPET 1 CORRUGATED WEST ELEVATION A1.3 SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE STEEL BALCONIES WITH CONCRETE SLAB FLOOR CORNICE DETAIL AND ROOF ABOVE, TYP. AT PARAPET 2 HEIGHT, TYP. BRICK, LIGHT GRADE LINE ALUMINUM WINDOW, TYP. PAINTED CONCRETE BUILDING STEPS BACK 6' COURTYARD WITH RAILING CORRUGATED METAL, DARK CORRUGATED METAL, DARK CORRUGATED METAL, DARK PARAPET 2 PARAPET 2 PARAPET 2 ALUMINUM WINDOW, TYP. CORRUGATED METAL, LIGHT CORRUGATED METAL, LIGHT CORRUGATED METAL, DARK CORRUGATED METAL, LIGHT COURTYARD WITH RAILING (ANGLED) PARAPET 1 PARAPET 2 CORRUGATED METAL, DARK PARAPET 1 ALUMINUM WINDOW, TYP. PAINTED GREEN SCREEN, CONCRETE TYPICAL. SEE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE DRAWINGS BRICK, LOOKING SOUTHWEST A2.0 OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z LOOKING SOUTHWEST A2.1 OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z LOOKING SOUTH - AERIAL A2.2 OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z LOOKING SOUTH A2.3 OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z LOOKING SOUTH - AERIAL A2.4 OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z LOOKING SOUTHEAST A2.5 OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z LOOKING SOUTHEAST - AERIAL A2.6 OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z LOOKING EAST - AERIAL A2.7 OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z LOOKING NORTHEAST - AERIAL A2.8 OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z LOOKING NORTHWEST - AERIAL A2.9 OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z LOOKING NORTHWEST A2.10 OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z LOOKING WEST - AERIAL A2.11 OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z OVERALL AERIAL A2.12 OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z OVERALL AERIAL A2.13 OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z SHADOW STUDY A3.0 OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE SUMMER SOLSTICE - 11 AM SUMMER SOLSTICE - 2 PM FALL EQUINOX - 11 AM FALL EQUINOX - 2 PM Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z SHADOW STUDY A3.1 OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE WINTER SOLSTICE - 11 AM WINTER SOLSTICE - 2 PM SPRING EQUINOX - 11 AM SPRING EQUINOX - 2 PM Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z MATERIAL PALETTE A3.2 OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE LIGHT BRICK DARK BRICK DARK CORRUGATED METAL SIDING LIGHT CORRUGATED METAL SIDING GREEN SCREEN PAINTED BLOCK AND CONCRETE PANEL WALL WITH SCORING PATTERNS TO ADD VISUAL INTEREST AND PEDESTRIAN SCALE VIEW ON EAST ELEVATION VIEW ON SOUTH ELEVATION Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z MATERIAL DETAILS A3.3 OCTOBER 18, 2017 255 JOHNSON DRIVE PDP SUBMITTAL PDP SUBMITTAL FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 301 N. NEIL STREET SUITE 400 CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS 61820 P 217.355.8731 | E josh@mode3arch.com 2017 MODE 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. ME O D 3 ARCHITECTURE 2X WD FRAMING HEADER W/ 1 2" O.S.B. SPACER 5 8" G.W.B. BATT INSULATION 2X6 WD FRAMING 5 8" G.W.B. SEALANT SEALANT CULTURED MARBLE SILL IN PURE WHITE COLOR EXTEND EDGE PAST DRYWALL 3 4" 2X6 WD FRAMING BATT INSULATION 5 8" G.W.B. 5 8" G.W.B. 2X6 WD FRAMING BATT INSULATION 5 8" G.W.B. SEALANT BLDG. PAPER OVER WALL SHEATHING OVER FLASHING WINDOW UNIT WINDOW UNIT WINDOW UNIT PERIMETER WINDOW SEALANT, TAPE AND LAP WITH BUILDING PAPER PER WINDOW MANUFACTURER. PERIMETER WINDOW TRIM BLDG. WEATHER BARRIER OVER WALL SHEATHING CORRUGATED METAL PANEL CLADDING SYSTEM JAMB SILL CONTROL IRR AC CONTROL IRR CONTROL IRR CONTROL IRR B M ST X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X M X X W T FO FO FO FO FO FO G G G G G G G W W W W W W W W W W W W W S D S H Y D ELEC VAULT ELEC H Y D W S O ELEC S S SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO W T FO FO FO FO FO FO G G G G G G G W W W W W W W W W W W W W S D S H Y D ELEC C T VAULT ELEC H Y D W S O ELEC S S SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO PLANTING DETAILS LP501 Landscape Plans and Details ATTACHMENT 6 to Staff Report to P&Z W T FO FO FO FO FO FO G G G G G G G W W W W W W W W W W W W W D H Y D E LEC C T VAULT ELEC H Y D W S O ELEC SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO E E E E Alternative Compliance – Section 3.2.4(D)(6) – Buffer Zone Lighting Johnson Drive Apartments 1/This 02/narrative 2018 requests that the decision maker approve an alternative compliance request for the lighting standards within a natural area buffer zone. The reason for requesting the alternative compliance is to balance public safety and security while protecting natural features. Please see the text of Section 3.2.4(D)(6) below: 3.2.4(D)(6) Site lighting design standards Unique areas or neighborhoods within the City may have additional design guidelines for lighting as part of a neighborhood or area plan. The Community Planning and Environmental Services Department can provide information regarding neighborhood or area plans. Natural areas and natural features shall be protected from light spillage from off-site sources Justification for alternative compliance The proposed lighting plan shows the installation of 4 motion sensor activated building mounted light fixtures to be installed along the south portion of the proposed building illuminating the pathway. The pathway is required as a secondary means of egress and as a performance standard within the land use code section 3.4.1(E)(1)(H) – Natural Habitat and Features. The proposed plan accomplishes the purpose of this requirement equally well or better in the following ways: • The proposed lighting plan utilizes motion sensor lighting along the pathway to illuminate only when motion is detected by users passing within the motion range. A safety light will be on above the door to provide security and a destination point for ingress and egress of the proposed building. • The proposed lighting plan illuminates the proposed pathway meeting the land use code 3.2.4 (C) Residential areas of .5 fc. • The proposed lighting plan allows for the protection of the health, safety and welfare of the public while balancing the light spillage to be minimal within the natural area. The proposed lighting plan creates a condition that achieves both protection of the health, safety and welfare of the public while also protecting the natural area from constant light spillage. For all the reasons cited above, the Applicant requests an alternative compliance of the standard in LUC Section 3.2.4(D)(6) to allow light from off-site sources to spill into the natural area. The Applicant proposes that the alternative compliance is not detrimental to the public good, and promotes the purposes of the standard equal to or better than a plan that could comply with the lighting requirement. ATTACHMENT 8 to Staff Report to P&Z 1 NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING SUMMARY Project: 255 Johnson Drive Mixed‐Use Development Location: 301 E Drake Road Date: June 28, 2017 Applicant: Patrick Quinn, Next Chapter Properties Consultants: Craig Russell, Land Planner Josh Daley, Architect City Staff: Jason Holland, City Planner Mitch Hendrick, Planning Intern Project Description This proposal is for a mixed‐use development in a five‐story building with retail and commercial space on the ground floor and student‐orientated housing on floors 2 through 5. The site is a total of 2.8 acres. A total of 412 beds are proposed in 192 for‐rent dwelling units. The preliminary plan proposes 44 one‐bedroom units, 104 two‐bedroom units, 16 three‐bedroom units and 28 four‐bedroom units. A parking garage is proposed on the building’s ground level with a total of 252 off‐street parking spaces provided. 3 parking spaces for car share vehicles are also proposed. The proposal is located in the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) and is zoned General Commercial (C‐G). This proposal is subject to review and approval at a public hearing by the Planning and Zoning Board(P&Z). Questions, Concerns, Comments (Reponses below are from the development group unless noted as from city staff) 1. Do renters receive notifications or are only homeowners notified of neighborhood meetings? City. The property owners within the radius will receive the notifications. We do encourage in the letter that owners notify their tenants. We also post the meeting notice online and put up a meeting sign on the property. Neighborhood Meeting Notes ATTACHMENT 9 to Staff Report to P&Z 2 2. Is anybody aware of the parking issues with the State on Campus development? A. We have looked into the parking vacancy rates of the surrounding developments and have structured ours accordingly, using a space per bed ratio. 3. Is there any concern for lack of parking during construction? A. We are still in the process of determining the locations to be used for construction worker parking. 4. We already have major parking issues with Fort Collins Muffler after the Summit went in. How can we function as a business if you take more of our parking away? City. Businesses are required to provide parking on their site and there is no guarantee that the on‐street parking in the right‐of‐way can be available for private use. We are aware of the challenges and maybe there are ways to look into off‐site parking or car sharing opportunities. We are required to look at the new development and review whether they will adequately mitigate their parking impact. 5. How long will this take to build and where will the workers park? A. Construction is estimated to take one year and the location of parking for the construction crew is to be determined at a later date. 6. Why does the State apartment complex have high parking vacancy and do they charge for their parking? A. The vacancy could be related to the proximity to local transit options. The State has typically experienced around 100 vacant parking spaces and they do sell permits for their parking spots. 7. I live near this development east of College and there is already a lot of parking overflow on the streets. Where will the excess vehicles from this development go? A. You can park on‐street at that location no more than one time per day without running the risk of receiving a ticket. That risk may be enough to compel some to find parking elsewhere or use alternative forms of transportation. We allocate visitor parking spaces so that parking overflow does not become an issue. 8. Where are the student’s significant others going to park? A. We do allocate for visitor parking but we selected this site because it is close to campus and the MAX corridor which may attract students that do not have personal vehicles and may encourage students to use the alternative sources of transportation that are available. Students have the option to use bicycles or public transit options such as the MAX line. 9. Where are the customers from retail spaces in this development going to park? Neighborhood Meeting Notes ATTACHMENT 9 to Staff Report to P&Z 3 A. Most of the businesses in the building will be supportive services of the building and will not create the need for more parking and we have an amount of parking that we need to provide in the TOD zone for the retail space. 10. How tall will the building be? A. The building will be 75 feet tall. 11. Will the building block the view of the foothills from the East side of College? A. We suspect that it will. City. We will be reviewing the height impacts. 12. Does the city have building height ordinances? City. We do have ordinances that determine the maximum number of stories a building is allowed to be based on the site’s zoning. 13. How long has the project been in the works? City. I believe the conceptual review was submitted about 6 months ago. 14. This development is going to displace people. Why not build somewhere else? City. There is a lot of development taking place in Fort Collins right now in all parts of town, and we are seeing these types of projects close to the campus and the MAX line. 15. When will displaced residents be notified of a move‐out deadline? A. Many aspects of development review still need to take place before we can have a more refined timeline. A. Notifications will be sent approximately 6 months before building permits are issued. 16. Is the senior housing development going through? City. Yes, it is moving forward in final plan review, they had the hearing recently. 17. How far away from the senior housing is this new development? Will the developments share a walkway with students? A. The developments are approximately 400 feet apart. Yes, the walkway is a shared access easement. 18. Where will the construction trucks be coming from during construction? A. We have yet to determine where the trucks will be coming from. 19. We had so much trouble with the Summit, where will all of the out of town students living here be parking? Neighborhood Meeting Notes ATTACHMENT 9 to Staff Report to P&Z 4 City. The Summit development had serious parking issues when it was built and we don’t want that to be repeated. My understanding is that the developers had an agreement with the university that more off‐site parking would be provided. After the development was approved, the agreement was not carried forward. New parking requirements were passed that require these projects to have parking provided on a per‐bed basis at .75 spots per bed. Within the TOD district, the developers can request deductions based on the proximity to other transit options and parking alternatives such as providing shared cars. 20. How do you know if the parking garages are going to be completely full or not when garage owners are charging for parking? City. Developers are subject to the parking space requirements for the TOD zone. We want to make sure there is adequate parking to offset their development. 21. Is the per bed requirement based on bedrooms or per bed? City. The requirement is per bed. The base standard is .75 spaces per bed before taking deductions into account that can be requested in the TOD zone. 22. What is the parking ratio of the project up the hill (Spring Creek Place)? City. They are based on the City’s ratios for multi‐family on a per unit basis using the TOD parking ratios. (One or less units ‐ .75, Two br’s – 1, Total 143 spaces provided) 23. What is the traffic impact with there being this development and the senior housing development going in close by? City. This development has not been submitted yet. There has not been a traffic study submitted so we do not yet have any conclusions regarding their traffic impact, but that is an important consideration. The senior housing development will access from Rutgers and this development will access off of Johnson. 24. Is the light at Johnson drive being widened and will a turn light be added? City. The traffic impact study will determine that. Once the study is complete we can provide an answer. 25. Why are you providing the least amount of parking that you can? A. It is not necessarily the least amount of parking, but the parking we are provided is adequate based on our studies. Part of the issue is that when parking garages are constructed, like the State/District and they are only 70% utilized, it tells you that you they have built more than enough parking. 26. Can you force students to disclose if they have a vehicle or can you increase rents when providing parking spaces? Neighborhood Meeting Notes ATTACHMENT 9 to Staff Report to P&Z 5 A. We cannot force the students to do anything but we can look at various rental rate options based on the use of the parking lot. 27. Where are Creekside Park visitors going to park? A. There will continue to be on‐street parking on Johnson drive. Johnson Drive is not part of the 2 hour parking restriction. 28. Will views from the park be blocked? City. We can look at this further and appreciate the comment. With no more questions, the meeting was adjourned. Neighborhood Meeting Notes ATTACHMENT 9 to Staff Report to P&Z Traffic Impact Study Memo ATTACHMENT 10 to Staff Report to P&Z SCALE: 1"=1000' PEDESTRIAN INFLUENCE AREA Figure 1 DELICH ASSOCIATES 1 2 3 4 5 Traffic Impact Study Memo ATTACHMENT 10 to Staff Report to P&Z Table 1 Pedestrian LOS Worksheet Project Location Classification: Transit Corridor Description of Applicable Destination Area Within 1320’ Destination Area Classification Level of Service (minimum based on project location classification) Directness Continuity Street Crossings Visual Interest & Amenities Security Spring Creek/Mason trails Recreational Minimum B C C C B 1 Actual A A A A A Proposed A A A A A Residential/Commercial to the north Residential/ Commercial Minimum B C C C B 2 Actual A A A A A Proposed A A A A A Commercial to the south using the trail Commercial Minimum B C C C B 3 Actual D A A A A Proposed D A A A A Commercial to the south using College Ave Commercial Minimum B C C C B 3 Actual B C A A A Proposed B C A A A Commercial to the south using proposed ditch crossing Commercial Minimum B C C C B 3 Actual A E A D/E D Proposed A E A D/E D Offices to the southwest Office Buildings Minimum B C C C B 4 Actual A A A A A Proposed A A A A A CSU to the north Institutional Minimum B C C C B 5 Actual A A A A A Proposed A A A A A Minimum 8 Actual Proposed Minimum Traffic Impact Study ATTACHMENT 11 to Staff Report to P&Z DELICH 255 Johnson Drive TIS, October 2017 ASSOCIATES TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1 II. EXISTING CONDITIONS .......................................................................................... 2 Land Use ......................................................................................................................... 2 Roads .............................................................................................................................. 2 Existing Traffic ................................................................................................................. 5 Existing Operation ........................................................................................................... 5 Pedestrians Facilities ...................................................................................................... 5 Bicycle Facilities .............................................................................................................. 8 Transit Facilities .............................................................................................................. 8 III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................. 9 Trip Generation ............................................................................................................... 9 Trip Distribution ............................................................................................................... 9 Background Traffic Projections ..................................................................................... 12 Trip Assignment ............................................................................................................ 12 Signal Warrants ............................................................................................................. 12 Geometry ...................................................................................................................... 12 Operation Analysis ........................................................................................................ 12 Eastbound Left-turn and Northbound Left-turn Arrow Analysis ..................................... 24 Pedestrian Level of Service ........................................................................................... 24 Bicycle Level of Service ................................................................................................ 25 Transit Level of Service ................................................................................................. 25 IV. CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................. 26 LIST OF TABLES 1. Current Peak Hour Operation .................................................................................... 7 2. Trip Generation ......................................................................................................... 9 3. Short Range (2022) Background Peak Hour Operation .......................................... 20 4. Long Range (2035) Background Peak Hour Operation ........................................... 21 5. Short Range (2022) Total Peak Hour Operation ..................................................... 22 6. Long Range (2035) Total Peak Hour Operation ...................................................... 23 Traffic Impact Study ATTACHMENT 11 to Staff Report to P&Z DELICH 255 Johnson Drive TIS, October 2017 ASSOCIATES LIST OF FIGURES 1. Site Location ............................................................................................................. 3 2. Existing Intersection Geometry ................................................................................. 4 3. Recent Peak Hour Traffic .......................................................................................... 6 4. Site Plan .................................................................................................................. 10 5. Trip Distribution ....................................................................................................... 11 6. Short Range (2022) Background Peak Hour Traffic ................................................ 13 7. Long Range (2035) Background Peak Hour Traffic ................................................. 14 8. Site Generated Peak Hour Traffic ........................................................................... 15 9. Short Range (2022) Total Peak Hour Traffic ........................................................... 16 10. Long Range (2035) Total Peak Hour Traffic ............................................................ 17 11. Short Range (2022) and Long Range (2035) Geometry ......................................... 18 APPENDICES A. Base Assumptions form and related information B. Recent Peak Hour Traffic C. Current Peak Hour Operation/Level of Service Descriptions/Fort Collins LOS Standards D. Short Range (2022) Background Peak Hour Operation E. Long Range (2035) Background Peak Hour Operation F. Short Range (2022) Total Peak Hour Operation G. Long Range (2035) Total Peak Hour Operation H. Pedestrian/Bicycle Level of Service Traffic Impact Study ATTACHMENT 11 to Staff Report to P&Z DELICH 255 Johnson Drive TIS, October 2017 ASSOCIATES Page 1 I. INTRODUCTION This transportation impact study (TIS) addresses the capacity, geometric, and control requirements at and near the proposed 255 Johnson Drive student housing development. The proposed 255 Johnson Drive site is located in the southwest quadrant of the Johnson/Arthur intersection in Fort Collins, Colorado. During the course of the analysis, numerous contacts were made with the project planning (Russell + Mills Studios) and the Fort Collins Traffic Engineering staff. This study generally conforms to the format set forth in the Fort Collins transportation impact study guidelines contained in the “Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards” (LCUASS). The base assumptions packet is provided in Appendix A. The study involved the following steps:  Collect physical, traffic, and development data;  Perform trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment;  Determine peak hour traffic volumes;  Conduct capacity and operational level of service analyses on key intersections;  Analyze signal warrants;  Conduct level of service evaluation of pedestrian, bicycle, and transit modes of transportation. This TIS is a revision of the “255 Johnson Drive Transportation Impact Study” dated September 2017. It addresses City staff comments with regard to the College/Spring Park- Johnson intersection. Traffic Impact Study ATTACHMENT 11 to Staff Report to P&Z 9 Actual Proposed Minimum 10 Actual Proposed Traffic Impact Study Memo ATTACHMENT 10 to Staff Report to P&Z E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E T T T CTV CTV CTV CTV FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO G G G G G G W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W D H Y D ELEC C T VAULT ELEC H Y D B M D SS SS ST X X X X X X X X X X W W E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E G G G G G E E G E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD R R T T T T T OVERALL SITE LIGHTING PLAN 20' 0 10' 20' 40' N O R T H LL101 Lighting Plans ATTACHMENT 7 to Staff Report to P&Z FO FO FO E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E T T T CTV CTV CTV CTV FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO G G G G G G W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W S D S S H Y D ELEC C T VAULT ELEC H Y D B M S S SS SS ST X X X X X X X X X X W W E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E G G G G G E E G E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD R R T T T T T REQUIRED 50' BUFFER ZONE CALCULATIONS 50' BUFFER AREA REQUIRED 19,933 SF REQUIRED BUFFER DISTANCE 50 FEET PROPOSED BUFFER ZONE CALCULATIONS PROPOSED BUFFER AREA 18,194 SF PROPOSED ADDITIONAL AREA ENHANCED (DETENTION POND) 3,348 SF TOTAL PROPOSED BUFFER AREA 21,542 SF PROPOSED BUFFER ZONE CALCULATIONS CONTINUED MINIMUM BUFFER DISTANCE 21 FEET MAXIMUM BUFFER DISTANCE 78 FEET AVERAGE BUFFER DISTANCE 42 FEET BUFFER ZONE DIAGRAM 20' 0 10' 20' 40' N O R T H LP102 Landscape Plans and Details ATTACHMENT 6 to Staff Report to P&Z FO E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E T T T CTV CTV CTV FO FO FO FO FO FO G G G G G G W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W S D S S H Y D ELEC VAULT ELEC H Y D B M S S SS SS ST X X X X X X X X X X W W E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E G G G G G E E G E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD R R T T T T T HYDROZONE AREA (SF) WATER NEED (GAL/SF) ANNUAL WATER USE (GAL) 0 18.0 0 5138 10.0 51382 29234 3.0 87702 34372 4.0 139084 – OVERALL LANDSCAPE PLAN LP101 20' 0 10' 20' 40' N O R T H Landscape Plans and Details ATTACHMENT 6 to Staff Report to P&Z X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T9 T10 T11 T12 T13 T14 T15 T17 T16 T18 T19 T20 T21 T22 T7 T6 T8 T23 T24 T25 T27 T28 T29 T30 T26 TREE INVENTORY AND MITIGATION PLAN LP100 20' 0 10' 20' 40' N O R T H Landscape Plans and Details ATTACHMENT 6 to Staff Report to P&Z HEAD G.W.B. J-BEAD SEALANT CORRUGATED METAL PANEL CLADDING SYSTEM CORRUGATED METAL PANEL CLADDING SYSTEM CRANK PERIMETER WINDOW TRIM PERIMETER WINDOW SEALANT, TAPE AND LAP WITH BUILDING PAPER PER WINDOW MANUFACTURER. PERIMETER WINDOW SEALANT, TAPE AND LAP WITH BUILDING PAPER PER WINDOW MANUFACTURER. SIDING + PANEL MANUFACTURER APPROVED TERMINATION FLASHING HEAD SILL JAMB THE WINDOW UNIT SHALL BE TAPED AND FLASHED ACCORDING TO THE SELECTED WINDOW MANUF. INSTRUCTIONS BLDG. WEATHER BARRIER OVER WALL SHEATHING OVER FLASHING MASONRY VENEER (BRICK OR STONE - SEE ELVATIONS) MORTAR NET MTL. FLASHING & WEEPS STEEL LINTEL PAINT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION WEATHERPROOF SEALANT/BACKER WINDOW UNIT WINDOW UNIT WEATHERPROOF SEALANT/BACKER STONE SILL-SLOPED FOR DRAINAGE MASONRY VENEER (BRICK OR STONE - SEE ELVATIONS) WINDOW UNIT WEATHERPROOF SEALANT/BACKER MASONRY VENEER (BRICK OR STONE - SEE ELVATIONS) BUILDING WEATHER BARRIER OVER WALL SHEATHING 5 8" GWB BATT INSULATION 2X6 WD FRAMING SEALANT ENTIRE PERIMETER CULTURED MARBLE SILL IN PURE WHITE COLOR EXTEND EDGE PAST DRYWALL 3 4" 5 8" GWB 2X6 WD FRAMING BATT INSULATION 5 8" GWB SEALANT SILL BEYOND SEALANT 5 8" GWB 5 8" OSB SPACER 5 8" GWB 2X WD FRAMING HEADER W/12" O.S.B. SPACER - SEE STRUCTURAL SHEETS FOR HEADER SIZES STONE LINTEL MTL. FLASHING WINDOW AT CORRUGATED METAL SIDING WINDOW AT BRICK 3" 3" 3" 3" 3" 3" TYPICAL MATERIAL DETAILS PAINTED STEEL HANDRAILS DARK UTILITY SIZED BRICK WITH STANDARD TRADITIONAL GRAY MORTAR COLOR TO INSURE BRICK COLOR STANDS OUT ALUMINUM WINDOW UNITS - SLIGHTLY RECESSED TO GIVE RELIEF AND SHADOW LINE TO EACH WINDOW CORRUGATED METAL "S" WAVE SIDING WITH EXPOSED FASTENER SYSTEM - GIVES CHARACTER AND SHADOW LINES TO BUILDING FACADE - DURABLE AND LONG LASTING PAINT WARRANTY POWDER COATED PAINTED STEEL BALCONY RAILS, POSTS, AND SUPPORT CHANNELS- ALL WITH S.S BOLTED CONNECTIONS PROVIDING LONG LASTING DURABLE MAINTENANCE FREE FINISHES PRECAST CONCRETE BALCONY SLABS WILL BE SET ON STEEL SUPPORTS - WELDED IN PLACE. SLAB IS MADE WITH SLOPE AND DRIP AT EDGE FOR GOOD DRAINAGE CORNICE DETAILS MADE FROM COMBINATION OF FLAT 16 GAUGE POWDER COATED STEEL SHEET MATERIALS AND FIBER CEMENT TRIM BOARDS - (NO PAINTED WOOD OR VINYL) ALUMINUM STOREFRONT GLAZING SYSTEM USED ON ALL PODIUM LEVEL AREA FOR CONSISTENT LOOK - FRAMES WILL BE RECESSED TO GIVE RELIEF AND SHADOW LINE TO EACH OPENING LIGHT UTILITY SIZED BRICK FIBER CEMENT BOARD TRIM DETAIL BUILT OUT TO BREAK BETWEEN BRICK AND UPPER CORRUGATED METAL MATERIALS DESIGN CONCEPT: TO EMULATE, AND BRING SOME OF THE OLD DOWNTOWN FORT COLLINS CHARACTER AND FEEL TO THIS LOCATION USING BRICK, BRICK DETAILS, COLORS, METALWORK THROUGH CORNICE DETAILS, CANOPIES, TIE-RODS, AND OLDER LOOKING BOLTED CONNECTIONS, CHANNELS, LINTELS SEEN IN FORT COLLINS 1800'S AND 1900'S DOWNTOWN BUILDINGS. METAL SUN SHADE DEVICE/ CANOPIES OF PERIMETER CHANNEL AND SLATTED AND SOLID METAL INFILL WITH 1" DIAMETER TIE RODS BACK TO BUILDING FACADE TO GIVE CHARACTER/ VISUAL INTEREST AND PEDESTRIAN SCALE BRICK SOILDER COURSES WILL BE PLACED AT LOCATIONS WITHIN BRICK TO GIVE INTEREST TO BRICK FACADE Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z LIGHT BRICK, DARK Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z METAL, LIGHT CORRUGATED METAL, DARK BRICK, LIGHT CORNICE DETAIL BRICK, DARK GRADE LINE GREEN SCREEN, TYPICAL. REFER TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE DRAWINGS PARAPET 2 BRICK, LIGHT CORRUGATED METAL, LIGHT PAINTED CONCRETE GREEN SCREEN, TYPICAL. REFER TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE DRAWINGS Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z WITH GATED ACCESS - MATERIAL OF GATE WILL BE METAL TO MATCH BUILDING FACADE GRADE LINE PARAPET 3 PARAPET 2 PARAPET 2 PARAPET 1 PARAPET 2 PARAPET 1 BRICK, LIGHT BRICK, LIGHT BRICK, DARK BRICK, DARK ALUMINUM WINDOW, TYP. LOFT WINDOW BUILDING STEPS BACK 10' CORRUGATED METAL, DARK CORRUGATED METAL, LIGHT CORRUGATED METAL, DARK CORRUGATED METAL, DARK BUILDING STEPS BACK 8' BUILDING STEPS BACK 6' BUILDING STEPS BACK 6' Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z WINDOW, TYP. BRICK SOLDIER COURSE - DARK, TYP. PARAPET 1 PARAPET 2 PARAPET 1 PARAPET 3 PARAPET 1 PARAPET 2 PARAPET 1 PARAPET 3 PARAPET 1 BUILDING STEPS BACK 30' BUILDING STEPS BACK 8' BUILDING STEPS BACK 7' COURTYARD WITH RAILING THREE PRIVATE TERRACES CORNICE DETAIL TYPICAL AT ALL DARK BRICK SECTIONS CORNICE DETAIL CORRUGATED METAL, DARK BRICK, DARK BUILDING STEPS BRICK, DARK BACK 7' Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z 1A 2D 2B 1A I.T. CLOSET I.T. CLOSET ACCESSIBLE COURTYARD AREA FOR TENANTS - REFER TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PLANS ACCESSIBLE COURTYARD AREA FOR TENANTS - REFER TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PLANS ACCESSIBLE COURTYARD AREA FOR TENANTS - REFER TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PLANS NO ACCESS TO THESE ROOF AREAS - WILL BE BALASTED ROOF SYSTEM ONLY ENLARGED PATIO AREAS PRIVATE TO EACH UNIT PRIVATE PATIO AREAS FOR EACH APT. UNIT NO ACCESS TO THESE ROOF AREAS - WILL BE BALASTED ROOF SYSTEM ONLY ROOF ACCESS DOOR FOR MAINTENANCE ONLY ROOF ACCESS DOOR FOR MAINTENANCE ONLY EGRESS CORRIDOR EGRESS CORRIDOR EGRESS CORRIDOR EGRESS CORRIDOR EGRESS CORRIDOR EGRESS CORRIDOR EGRESS CORRIDOR EGRESS CORRIDOR COURTYARD ACCESS/ EGRESS COURTYARD ACCESS/ EGRESS COURTYARD ACCESS/ EGRESS COURTYARD ACCESS/ EGRESS COURTYARD ACCESS/ EGRESS COURTYARD ACCESS/ EGRESS S P R I N G C O U R T J O H N S O N D R I V E NORTH ALL BUILDING FACADES HAVE BALCONIES AND MINOR/MAJOR WALL OFFSETS TO ADD VISUAL INTEREST, SHADOW, AND QUALITY MASSING & CHARACTER TO BUILDING Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z GUARD RAIL ALONG EDGE OF 2ND FLR. GUARD RAIL ALONG EDGE OF 2ND FLR. OPEN TO BELOW OPEN TO BELOW OPEN TO BELOW OPEN TO BELOW LOBBY PARKING GARAGE AREA - REFER TO SITE PLAN AND CALCS ON LS101 NORTH Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z PERIMETER TENANT ACCESS POINT FROM PKG. GARAGE TENANT ACCESS POINT FROM PKG. GARAGE 2 CU. YD. DUMPSTERS LINED UP WITHIN ENCLOSURE SEPARATED FROM PARKING AREAS SLIDING ENCLOSURE GATE CLOSED TO CONCEAL REFUSE AREA. OPENED DURING PICK-UP TIMES ONLY ROW OF RECYCLING ROLL OUT TOTES EXTERIOR FACADE & WINDOWS WILL BE TRUE STOREFRONT WINDOWS WITH OBSCURE/ TINTED GLAZING TO CONCEAL PARKING AND REFUSE AREAS. SOLID WALL AREAS WILL BE BRICK PARKING GARAGE ACCESS GATE SLIDES HORIZONTALLY ON TRACKS TO MAKE PARKING GARAGE SECURE ACCESS FOR TENANTS ONLY -GATE WILL BE SOLID USING METAL CLADDING TO MATCH EXTERIOR OF BUILDING FACADE DUMPSTER ROUTE FROM ENCLOSURE TO BACK OF TRUCK STANDARD REAR LOADING GARBAGE TRUCK WILL FIT IN DRIVEWAY WHILE LOADING - NO DUMPSTERS WOULD BE PLACED ON R.O.W. PUBLIC SIDEWALK **ACCESS DRIVE STILL CAN BE USED WHILE TRUCK IS IN DRIVEWAY** REFUSE/RECYCLE ENCLOSURE HIDDEN FROM PKG. GARAGE WITH 6FT TALL FENCE ** REFUSE PICK-UP PROPOSED TO OCCUR AT OFF-PEAK HOURS OF PARKING GARAGE VEHICLE INGRESS/EGRESS DWELL TIME FOR HAULER IN DRIVEWAY WOULD BE LESS THAN 10 MIN. STREET CURB LINE OUTDOOR GATHERING SPACE - REFER TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT DWGS. PARKING GARAGE REFER TO SITE PLAN AND CALCS ON LS101 SHERWOOD LATERAL REFER TO LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS VEGETATION CABLES - REFER TO LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS MECHANICAL/STORAGE WATER METERS/ FIRE SUPPRESSION EQUIPMENT TENANTS ONLY AMENITY SPACE PRIVATE/ TENANT ONLY AMENITY/OFFICE SPACE PRIVATE TENANT LOBBY SPACES ELECTRICAL PARKING GARAGE & BIKE PARKING: REFER TO SITE PLAN AND CALCS ON LS101 SEE 2ND FLOOR PLAN FOR CONTINUATION LINE OF 2ND FLOOR PKG ABOVE REFUSE ENCLOSURE SEE ENLARGED PLAN THIS SHEET NORTH TREES AND PLANTERS - REFER TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT DWGS. TREES AND PLANTERS - REFER TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT SITE PLAN DWGS. Building Plans Shadow Analysis and Details ATTACHMENT 5 to Staff Report to P&Z FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E T T T CTV CTV CTV CTV FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO G G G G G G W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W S D S S H Y D ELEC C T VAULT ELEC H Y D B M S S SS SS ST X X X X X X X X X X W W W W W W SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS W W W W W W W E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E G G G G G E E G E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E CCCCCCCC CCCCCCCC CCCCCCCCCCC 15 25 24 12 SECOND FLOOR SITE PLAN LS102 20' 0 10' 20' 40' N O R T H Site Plan and Details ATTACHMENT 4 to Staff Report to P&Z FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E T T T CTV CTV CTV CTV FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO G G G G G G W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W S D S S H Y D ELEC C T VAULT ELEC H Y D B M S S SS SS ST X X X X X X X X X X W W W W W W SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS W W W W W W W E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E G G G G G E E G E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C CCCCCCCCCCCC C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C * C 8 8 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 R R T T T T T * *** * 12 12 ’ ’ AREA CALCULATIONS COVERAGE AREA (SF) AREA (AC) % OF TOTAL 12,855 0.30 10% 109,238 2.51 81% 73,484 1.69 54% 251,674 N/A 2.30 73,261 1.68 54% 35,753 0.82 26% 23,019 0.53 N/A 12,855 0.30 10% 134,948 3.10 100% GENERAL LAND USE DATA PARKING CALCULATIONS VEHICULAR BASE NUMBER REQUIREMENT STALLS 412 0.75 N/A 309 ≥200 77 309 40% 124 MITIGATION TYPE # OF SPACES REDUCTION MITIGATION QTY. -61 309 -10% -31 6 -5 SPACES /CAR -30 248 254 SPACES PROVIDED % OF TOTAL STALLS 261 5 137 6 7 1 40% 105 BICYCLE BASE NUMBER REQUIREMENT STALLS 412 1.00 N/A 412 60% 247 40% 165 SPACES PROVIDED % OF 412 STALLS 416 248 184 64 168 LAND USE CALCULATIONS OFFICE/COMMERCIAL 2,934 1,000 RESIDENTIAL BEDROOMS/UNIT # OF UNITS BEDROOMS 14444 2 104 208 31648 4 28 112 TOTAL 192 412 80.00 115.08 FLOOR AREA 0.028064 FAR= 12 OVERALL SITE PLAN LS101 20' 0 10' 20' 40' N O R T H Site Plan and Details ATTACHMENT 4 to Staff Report to P&Z FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E T T T CTV CTV CTV CTV FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO G G G G G G W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W S D S S H Y D ELEC C T VAULT ELEC W S O H Y D W S O W S O W S O W S O W S O E G VAULT ELEC CONTROL IRR AC CONTROL IRR CONTROL IRR CONTROL IRR G B M ELEC S CABLE C S S SS SS ST X X X X X X X X X X WW W W W W T T M VAULT ELEC G G G E E E 160.0' 30.2' 160.0' 30.2' 230.0' 30.2' 230.0' 30.2' 230.0' 30.2' 230.0' 30.2' 240.0' 30.3' 240.0' 30.3' 202.93 LF 36" RCP @ 0.63% 121.17 LF 36" RCP @ 0.59% 50.3' 60.2' 26.2' 35.3' 11.8' 8.4' 12.3' 16.5' 19.9' 210.3' 19.9' 60.3' 129.4' 20.6' (M) S89°19'59"E 348.66' (M) S00°14'42"W 93.88' (M) S00°15'01"W 210.00' (M) S89°16'04"E 100.18' (M) S00°24'41"W 62.51' (M) N85°00'09"W 39.65' (M) N73°06'55"W 149.35' (M) N89°17'57"W 191.87' (M) N00°04'59"E 82.06' (M) N06°28'01"E 240.68' (M) N00°15'01"E 93.70' 26.4' 48.4' 26.4' 48.4' 26.4' 48.4' 26.4' 48.4' 26.4' 48.4' 26.4' 48.4' 6.2' 8.0' S89°13'56"E 100.01' S00°12'16"W 209.94' N89°16'04"W 100.18' N00°15'01"E 210.00' N89°16'04"W 100.12' N89°16'04"W 100.07' 70.00' 70.00' 69.93' 70.00' 70.00' 70.00' SITE SURVEY PLAN SV101 20' 0 10' 20' 40' N O R T H Site Plan and Details ATTACHMENT 4 to Staff Report to P&Z