HomeMy WebLinkAboutNORTH COLLEGE MARKETPLACE, SECOND FILING - PDP - 43-08 - CORRESPONDENCE - (44)66a
Cityof Fort Collins
Planning and Zoning
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
Fn.c: 970-4I6-2020
REVISION
COMMENT SHEET
DATE: March 27, 2009
TO: Technical Services
PROJECT PLANNER: Steve Olt Md
#43-08 North College Market Place 2nd Filing PDP Type II
1, $ou r,J a A4-%0,4,0 5 4a-5
Z• SC41V RJ t AJ V t 6�r" C S 0 /tJ �j I TE I LiFnJ bSGA-P6 t o i/ C f TY OcAau S.
2nd Round of Review
&Z6e-47_/y13C0- AOL) 3CAl2itw�j D1:Jr;
PLEASE NOTE: 4
¢, r1I►,►oU L UTPt/nv5 HANE +"GHMA4-4`4 �1-DE5G2c8C-b rd&ft;
Please return all comments to the project planner no later than the staff6&6
review meeting: 504EETPi )
�j• �otlC-�E W(UZ-4 IMPI O1hrjA6%M5 ef,W:5 5kP.W'5 5,m 1.%)cV22ctrcV.
APRIL 8, 2009 (5" Comic SKC'Er)
Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference
❑ No Problems
K Problems or Concerns (see below, attached, or DMS)
Name
CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS
Plat Y Site _Drainage Report _Other
Utility LC Redline Utility X Landscape
6zCityof Fort Collins
6a REVISION
Cityof Fort Collins
Planning and Zoning COMMENT SHEET
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
Fax: 970-416-2020
DATE: March 27, 2009
TO: Water Conservation
PROJECT PLANNER: Steve Olt
#43-08 North College Market Place 2nd Filing PDP Type II
2nd Round of Review
PLEASE NOTE:
Please return all comments to the project planner no later than the staff
review meeting:
APRIL 8, 2009
Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference
❑ No Problems
[a'Problems or Concerns (see belo , attached or DMS)
aeld
.J ,
Name (please print)
CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS
_Plat _Site _Drainage Report _Other
_Utility _Redline Utility _Landscape
Number: 2 Created: 12/19/2008
[3/30/09] At final plan submittal, label the buildings on the overall site plan. i.e. Bldg. A to
match building A on Sheet 8.
[12/19/08] In addition to the site plan sheets submitted, an overall site plan should be
provided at a smaller scale showing the entire site on one sheet. It makes it much easier to
reference to ensure that nothing is missed. The site plan sheets submitted with this round are
difficult to review since parts of buildings are continued on the next sheet. Also, it would be
helpful to label the buildings in some manner (i.e. bldg 1, 2, 3, etc.).
Number: 7 Created: 12/19/2008
[3/30/09] Still need a detail or description of the trash enclosure materials and height.
[12/19/08] provide standard notes on cover sheet regarding such things as shielded, down -
directional lighting, mechanical screening, trash enclosure material. Note on lighting must
also state that under -canopy fueling areas shall feature flush -mounted, flat lens light fixtures.
Number: 8 Created: 12/19/2008
[3/30/09] Very few wall -mounted fixtures are shown. Are you sure that's all there are?
[12/19/08] Show wall -mounted light fixture locations on building elevations. The lighting
plan indicates some wall fixtures on the King Soopers building, but only on the rear and
north side. Does that mean that there won't be any on the front of the building?
This request is tentatively scheduled for the May 21s` Planning & Zoning Board public
hearing. Please make the necessary contacts with department staff to ensure it being able to
remain on the agenda. I will need some sort of confirmation from them, preferably an e-mail
saying they are OK. Be sure and return all red -lined plans if you re -submit before public
hearing or when you submit for final Plan review.
If you have any questions regarding these issues or any other issues related to this project,
please feel free to call me at 221-6341.
Yours Truly,
AteveIt
City Planner
cc: Marc Virata
Dana Leavitt
Loveland Commercial
AYRES Associates
Cedar Creek Associates, Inc.
Current Planning file 439-08
Page 7
Number: 121
Created: 4/7/2009
[4/7/09] No bicycle parking is shown for Pad 3. Please relocate or add additional bicycle
parking around this pad. .
Number: 122
Created: 4/7/2009
[4/7/09] Please relocate or add additional bicycle parking near the main entrance of King
Soopers. There are currently eight spaces on the north entrance and only four near the main
south entrance.
Number: 123 Created: 4/7/2009
[4/7/09] The key map on the pedestrian bridge detail sheet in the civil plans does not match
the current site plan.
Number: 125 Created: 4/7/2009
[4/7/09] The construction plans for the Willox roundabout show a median extending onto the
King Soopers property. A pedestrian crossing is located within the public right-of-way. The
site plan shows the same median, but with another pedestrian crossing on the north end of the
median. My suggestion is to use the south pedestrian crossing that is part of the roundabout
(in the public right-of-way) and not extend the internal sidewalk on the west side of the
access drive past this crossing.
Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque
Topic: Stormwater
Number: 82 Created: 1 /2/2009
[4/10/09] Comment 81 resolved. PDP can go to a hearing.
[1/2/09] There is no more major comments that need to be addressed before the hearing
besides comment 81. During final compliance review, a detailed review will take place of
the site grading, erosion control measures, and all hydraulics. I did review the hydraulics that
was submitted, and found no comments.
Department: Zoning
Topic: Zoning
Number: l
Issue Contact: Peter Barnes
Created: 12/19/2008
[3/30/09] The sign detail for the King Soopers fuel price sign is still shown on Sheet 2 of the
architectural elevation drawings. Remove from drawings with final plan compliance.
[12/19/08]
Remove sign details from drawings. Signs must comply with the sign code. Since the
property is not in the residential neighborhood sign district, signs are reviewed only at time
of sign permit application. Showing signs now will give the wrong impression that the signs
will be ok, but that's not known yet. i.e. the monument sign shown might comply, but until
we know exact location we don't know for sure. So remove all signs.
Page 6
Fire hydrants, where required, must be the type approved by the water district having
jurisdiction and the Fire Department. Hydrant spacing and water flow must meet minimum
requirements based on type of occupancy. Minimum flow and spacing requirements include:
• Commercial, 1,500 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure, spaced not farther than 300 feet to
the building, on 600-foot centers thereafter
• Residential within Urban Growth Area, 1,000 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure, spaced
not farther than 400 feet to the building, on 800-foot centers thereafter
• Residential outside Urban Growth Area, 500 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure, spaced not
farther than 400 feet to the building, on 800-foot centers thereafter.
These requirements may be modified if buildings are equipped with automatic fire
sprinkler systems.
97UFC 901.2.2.2
Number: 134 Created: 4/8/2009
BOLLARDS: Please see 2006 IFC Section 312 Vehicle Impact Protection for requirements
for bollards around hydrants and other fire devices.
Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: Matt Wempe
Topic: General
Number: 116 Created: 4/7/2009
[4/7/09] Please specify the type of bicycle racks proposed.
Number: 124 Created: 4/7/2009
[4/7/09] At the southeast comer of the intersection of College and Willox, please see the
construction plans for redlines regarding hatching along the bicycle lane east of College. I
have also forwarded this comment to Matt Baker in Engineering.
Topic: Site Plan
Number: 117 Created: 4/7/2009
[4/7/09] No sidewalks are shown around Pad 1, though bicycle parking and ADA ramps are
located nearby. Please show any sidewalks proposed on both Sheet 2 and the other detailed
site plan, civil plan, and landscaping plan sheets.
Number: 118 Created: 4/7/2009
[4/7/09] Please use a consistent shading or cross -hatch for the sidewalks. This comment was
partially addressed in the last round of review.
Number: 119 Created: 4/7/2009
[4/7/09] Please see the site plan for redlines on bicycle parking locations. Bicycle parking
cannot impede pedestrian flow or block ADA ramps.
Number: 120 Created: 4/7/2009
[4/7/09] The bicycle parking around Building A is not located near a main entrance. Please
relocate or add additional bicycle parking around this building.
Page 5
Number: 133 Created: 4/7/2009
[4/7/09] The construction and site plan drawings should clearly discern what improvements
are to be done specifically with the 2nd filing from the 1st filing (such as a portion of
sidewalk on Willox and a drive approach) and the road project.
Department: Light & Power
Topic: General
Number: 115
[3/30/09] No Comments.
Department: PFA
Topic: Fire
Number: 71
Issue Contact: Justin Fields
Created: 3/30/2009
Issue Contact: Carie Dann
Created: 12/31 /2008
[4/8/09] Per our discussion at Staff Review, an addition to the EAE should be made to the
loop drive aisle around Building D, particularly if the FDC is on the east side of the building.
[12/31/08] REQUIRED ACCESS: PLEASE NOTE: The preliminary plate was great from a
fire -protection standpoint. The EAEs shown on the plat were spot on. Thank you. I
recommend that you contact me during the construction process so we can determine fire
lane sign placement and red curb paint location in advance.
Fire access roads (fire lanes) shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a
building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the PFA's jurisdiction when any
portion of an exterior wall of the first story of the building is located more than 150 feet from
fire apparatus access as measured by an approved route (from a public street) around the
exterior of the building or facility. This fire lane shall be visible by painting and signage, and
maintained unobstructed at all times. In addition to the design criteria already contained in
relevant standards and policies, any new fire lane must meet the following general
requirements:
❑ Be designed as a flat, hard, all-weather driving surface (asphalt or concrete) capable of
supporting fire apparatus weights. Compacted road base shall be used only for
temporary fire lanes or at construction sites.
❑ Have appropriate maintenance agreements that are legally binding and enforceable.
❑ Be designated on the plat as an Emergency Access Easement.
❑ Maintain the required minimum width of 20 feet throughout the length of the fire lane
(30 feet for buildings three or more stories in height).
❑ A fire lane plan shall be submitted for approval prior to installation.
If a fire lane is not provided, all buildings out of access (exceeding the 150-foot
requirement) shall be equipped with an approved automatic fire -sprinkler system.
97UFC 901.2.2.1; 901.3; 901.4.2; 902.2.1
Number: 77
Created: 12/31/2008
[4/8/09] Per our discussion at Staff Review, we need to meet and also include Roger
Buffington, so we can determine hydrant locations that will optimize firefighting operations
and also meet Water requirements.
[12/31/08] WATER SUPPLY: PLEASE NOTE: Contact me if you want to discuss specific
locations of and questions regarding fire hydrants.
Page 4
Number: 80 Created: 1 /2/2009
[4/7/09] It was indicated at staff review that access to North College Motors from within the
property is not being provided at this time and they will continue their access onto Willox.
Please revise the drawings to reflect this and as a result, show that no letter of intent for work
on the North College Motors is needed.
[1/2/09] Prior to a hearing for this PDP, we should receive written acknowledgement from
the two owners of the two out parcels (restaurant and car dealership) on how this project will
impact their existing businesses and will grant the developer access onto their property for
the work pertaining to the internal drive aisle and access.
Number: 84
Created: 1 /2/2009
[4/7/09] The offset across drive aisles such that a vehicle may be more pre -disposed to hit a
landscaped island is still there, especially at the main drive aisle off College. In addition, the
revised parking lot design shows that almost all the east -west drive aisles now do not line up
across the main north -south drive aisle (when they had previously). While again, this really
isn't jurisdictionally under Engineering but under Planning and Zoning instead, I have quite a
bit of concern on the parking lot layout for the folks who intend to use it. I'd like to see some
feedback from the consultant's engineer and/or traffic engineer addressing whether the design
is of a safety concern.
"Note: The City internally had further discussion on the parking lot design on 4/9.
The overall consensus is that the parking lot design was viewed as awkward and. likely
problematic for the end user. With that said, Engineering won't claim jurisdiction over
the matter and won't look to review the parking lot design any further.
[1/2/09] There are a couple of instances where the internal drive aisles shift across an
intersection that seem awkward where drivers might hit landscape median. (As internal drive
aisle design is not an Engineering concern, this is more of an observation rather than a
comment.)
Number: 87 Created: 1 /5/2009
[4/7/09] Carried over for further discussion.
[1/5/09] We should have further dialogue regarding Grape Street and how the proposed
development affects its legal status. As Grape Street is apparently not right-of-way but
owned by the City, the City may take the position that with the proposed development and
change to the access control plan, that there is no benefit in the City owning the property
either in fee or as right-of-way. The timing of the City potentially abandoning Grape Street
would need to then be coordinated with the project's entitlement accordingly.
Number: 132 Created: 4/7/2009
[4/7/09] On the construction plan set, the utilities shown that are to be built with the 1st
filing should be faded back rather than appear prominent. On Sheet C-111 for example much
of the sheet should be "reversed" in that the parking lots and drive aisles should be
emphasized while the utilities should be shown in the same lineweight as the parking lots and
drive aisles. On the utility sheets, everything built with the 1 st filing should be faded.
Page 3
Number: 91 Created: 1 /5/2009
[4/7/09] Will need to address with Steve Olt.
[1/5/09] Parking is required to be 5 feet from property lines. Out Lot B is a separate parcel
to be conveyed to the City. All parking and circulation drives adjacent to Out Lot B must
meet the setback requirement. This is also an issue for parking and circulation next to
Grape Street, which is City -owned property.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Marc Virata
Topic: Engineering
Number: 39 Created: 12/30/2008
[4/7/09] It should be verified that the road scope of work is coordinated.
[12/30/08] Will the street trees along College and Willox be part of the road project or be
installed with the development?
Number: 45 Created: 12/30/2008
[4/7/09] Access and emergency access easement should also be shown on the plat for the
drive aisle east of building D that connects to the Grape Street area so a loop is provided.
[12/30/08] The plat should be specifying an access easement internal to the site connecting
to a public street and stubbing out to the north for where future development could connect to
in order to assure access through the site.
Number: 46 Created: 12/30/2008
[4/7/09] Carried over pending further outcome on the bridge situation.
[12/30/08] An access easement should also be specified for the bike/ped connection to the
north. The design of this connection should be shown on all plans.
Number: 47 Created: 12/31 /2008
[4/8/09] Technical Services has provided the following updated comments:
1. Boundary closes.
2. Scanning issues on site, landscape & utility plans.
3. All easements need to be locatable - add bearings & distances.
4. Filing #2 construction plans have benchmark 42-01 described incorrect.
5. College & Willox improvement plans shows benchmark 4201 incorrectly.
[12/31/081 Technical Services provided the following comments:
1. Boundary closes.
2. Please add "Being a Replat Of' and Section, Township, Range information to the
heading.
3. Minor line over text (scanning) issues on site and landscape plans.
4. Bearing and distances missing. See redlines. (The plat needs to "stand by itself' and
show all bearings and distances.)
Page 2
STAFF PROJECT REVIEW
Cityof Fort Collins
David Kasprzak Date: 4/10/2009
BHA Design, Inc.
1603 Oakridge Drive
Fort Collins, CO 80525
Staff has reviewed your submittal for NORTH COLLEGE MARKETPLACE, SECOND
FILING - TYPE 2, and we offer the following comments:
ISSUES:
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Dana Leavitt
Topic: Lighting Plan
Number: 95 Created: 1 /5/2009
[4/7/09] Plan still shows spillage beyond property line in several locations. Add the correct
property line to the plan, per comments on the redline. It is very difficult to read the fixture
number with the foot-candle numbers superimposed on the fixture number.
[1/5/09] Light spillage from north and east sides of the King Soopers building encroaches
into Out Lot B, which is considered City owned property. Foot-candle levels shall be at 0.0
along the property boundaries adjacent to Out Lot B. Night light pollutions is not allowed to
occur within the wetlands/natural areas adjacent to this development.
Number: 96 Created: 1 /5/2009
[4/7/09] Luminaire schedule does not identify said fixtures as having a house side shield.
[1/5/09] Pole mounted fixtures A27, A28, A29, A30, A52 and D21 are required to have
houseside shields on fixtures as used on fixture F. This is required to reduce/eliminate
potential impacts due to the fixture itself being visible from within the wetlands/natural areas.
Topic: Site Plan
Number: 53 Created: 12/31 /2008
[4/7/09] Provide documents and graphic of driveway access location demonstrating no other
alternative to extend Grape Street.
[12/31/08] Consider eliminating the east end of Grape Street so that it is outside of the 100'
buffer for the wetland. If impossible, change surface from gravel to a porous grass paver or
similar material. Parking shall not be allowed within the 100' buffer zone along Grape Street.
Add note on Site Plan to this effect.
Number: 90 Created: 1 /5/2009
[4/7/09] Per previous comment, demonstrate no other alternative for this location. The
access to Grape Street could be moved to the west outside of the buffer.
[1/5/09] Show complete improvements to east end of Grape Street. Is access from the
northeast comer of the development necessary onto Grape Street?
Page 1