HomeMy WebLinkAboutTHE OVAL FLATS - PDP - 26-08 - CORRESPONDENCE - (9)Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Jenny Nuckols
Topic: Zoning
Number: 3 Created: 8/21 /2008
[8/21/081 Please provide a shadow analysis for the buildings.
Number: 4 Created: 8/21 /2008
[8/21/08] Site Plan: Please show building envelope, footprint, Building dimensions,
setbacks to property lines.
Number: 6 Created: 8/21 /2008
[8/21/08] NOTE: One of the handicap spaces needs to be signed as "Van Accessible"
Be sure and return all of your redlined plans when you re -submit.
If you have any questions regarding these issues or any other issues related to this project,
please feel free to call me at (970) 221-6206.
Sincerely,
Anne H. Aspen
Senior City Planner
Page 9
Number: 19 Created: 8/29/2008
[8/29/08] Alley Design — Please provide LCUASS 7-12F on the detail sheets. The profile
will need to show both sides of the alley at the final compliance stage. What is shown now
is fine for going to hearing.
Number: 20 Created: 8/29/2008
[8/29/081 Please provide one ADA access ramp detail in the detail sheets for on -site ramps.
Number: 21 Created: 8/29/2008
[8/29/08] Please see the redlines for any additional minor coments related to drafting or
labeling.
Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Doug Martine
Topic: Light & Power
Number: 1 Created: 8/20/2008
[8/20/08] The developer/builder will need to complete a Commercial Service Information (C-
1) form outlining the electrical needs of the project. Please call Light & Power Engineering
at (970)221-6700 to coordinate power requirements and electric development charges.
Number: 2 Created: 8/20/2008
[8/20/08] A 10' x 10' electric (or utility) easement is needed at the N.W. corner of the lot.
Department: PFA Issue Contact: Carle Dann
Topic: r1re
Number: 59 Created: 9/5/2008
[9/5/08] KNOX BOX REQUIRED: Poudre Fire Authority requires a "Knox Box" to be
mounted on the front of every new building equipped with a required fire sprinkler system or
fire alarm system. PLEASE NOTE: We likely will require TWO Knox Boxes for this project:
One for commercial, one for residential. 97UFC 902.4; PFA BUREAU POLICY 88-20
Number: 60 Created: 9/5/2008
[9/5/08] FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION: Fire department connections shall be
installed remote from the buildings, and located on the street or fire lane side of buildings,
fully visible and recognizable from the street or nearest point of fire department vehicle
access or as otherwise approved by the fire code official. If possible, a fire hydrant shall be
located within 100 feet of the FDC. PFA Bureau Policy. PLEASE NOTE: It is unlikely PFA
will approve an on -building FDC. However, can you be more specific where your proposed
on -building FDC would be located? Are you referring to the southwest corner of the building,
adjacent to Laurel Street? Neither an on -building nor remote FDC would be approved if it's
located INTERNALLY on the site (access via the alley). ALSO, please contact me for
specific requirements for remote FDCs (height, color, angles, etc.).
Number: 61 Created: 9/5/2008
[9/5/08] FIRE PUMP: The fire pump, if required, must be located in a room that is separate
from the fire riser room, due to the noise the fire pump will produce when operating.
Number: 62 Created: 9/5/2008
[9/5/08] ADDRESS NUMERALS: Address numerals shall be visible from the street fronting
the property, and posted with a minimum of 6 inch numerals on a contrasting background.
(Bronze numerals on brown brick are not acceptable). PLEASE NOTE: While 6-inch
Page 7
[9/4/08] Under the Demolition and Site Development section of the report, there is no
discussion on tree protection methods in relation to the removal of all tree root systems.
Number: 45 Created: 9/4/2008
[9/4/08] Under section Drainage, there is no discussion of using landscape planters to
capture roof runoff.. This needs to be addressed.
Number: 46 Created: 9/4/2008
[9/4/08] There is no discussion on the use of porous pavements for parking areas. If
porous pavements are being considered, then the report should discuss this option.
Number: 41 Created: 9/4/2008
[9/4/08] Grass pavers are not allowed at bike rack locations due to the need to irrigate the
grass which can cause an unsuitable surface. An all weather surface is required for all bike
rack locations.
Number: 48 Created: 9/4/2008
[9/4/08] The location and materials proposed for the trash enclosure needs to be
reconsidered. Metal doors are durable, but do not fit in with the building materials or
compatible next to a patio area.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Randy Maizland
Topic: Engineering
Number: 7 Created: 8/29/2008
[8/29/08] The TDRF review fees were calculated incorrectly. Attached to the redlines is our
calculation of residential and non-residential square footage. Based on our calculations the
review fees were underpaid by $916.50. Please include this additional payment with your
next submittal or prior to scheduling a hearing for this project.
Number: 8 Created: 8/29/2008
[8/29/08] Site Plan — The vicinity map will not scan or copy well. Please use a simple one
line street map and project location label instead. See redline comments.
Number: 9 Created: 8/29/2008
(8/29/08] Site Plan — You are showing structures (walls and planters) encroaching into the
ROW near the street intersection. Please remove these encroachments from the plan. If
you cannot relocate these outside the ROW then we do have a separate encroachment
permit process which is administered by our Engineering Inspection Department. You would
need to submit an application for encroachment permit to Tracy Dyer, Chief Inspector.
Please do not show any encroachments on these plans (Site or Utility).
Number: 10 Created: 8/29/2008
[8/29/08] Please add a secondary City Bench Mark to the Utility Plan cover sheet and
General Notes sheet per LCUASS requirements. You should also add the DigAlert phone
number to the cover sheet.
Number: 11 Created: 8/29/2008
[8/29/08] Please add the following language to the cover sheet of the Plat. This language
will become standard language on all Plats reviewed by the City now. The following note
shall be placed on the plat:
Page 5
Number: 36 Created: 9/3/2008
[9/3/08] Remove text from adjacent properties. Show at least partial footprints, parking or
drives, etc of those buildings instead. This doesn't need to be surveyed. You can take the
information off a recent aerial photo. This will help us understand relationships between the
proposed and the adjacent existing.
Number: 37 Created: 9/3/2008
[9/3/08] Once you have finalized the site design, please add a couple of lines to the lot
coverage chart showing total sf of the parking lot and sfage of the landscaping within the
parking lot.
Number: 38 Created: 9/3/2008
[9/3/08] Remove interior floor plan info except stairs, elevators, retail/residential unit labels.
Number: 39 Created: 9/3/2008
[9/3/08] Doors that open to sidewalks or walkways should either open in or be recessed so
that they do not swing into the pedestrian path.
Number: 40 Created: 9/3/2008
[9/3/08] More comments on this page and the others on redlined set. Please return redlines
with revisions.
Topic: Architectural Elevations
Number: 50 Created: 9/4/2008
[9/4/08] The proposed design is not compatible with the surrounding area per Section 3.5.1
of the Land Use Code. It is based on a very downtown typology instead of the University
and residential areas that surround the site. While there is not an obvious established
character in this area, this project needs to respond to and be compatible with what is there
in some way. During the preliminary design review I had pointed out the building
immediately to the west as a good source of inspiration because it is a much denser project
than its neighbors but fits in to the residential typology around it and also because it picks up
architectural cues of its context and presents them in a more modern way. Given the mixed -
use and larger nature of the proposed project, it will necessarily incorporate different specific
design gestures, but it will still need to draw from its context and contribute to this area's
sense of identity. Feel free to send me sketches for feedback as you work through this. As
always, I am happy to meet with you also if you wish.
Number: 51 Created: 9/4/2008
[9/4/08] 1 understand that this site is quite constrained and I am pretty sure you've probably
gone around and around on how to best lay it out. That said, there are a few instances in
the elevations where I think things aren't as good as they can be. The stair volume on the
Howes side currently only has a door opening to the parking lot so it feels like it is turning its
back on the street, especially with the blank wall. For both aesthetic and functional reasons,
I think it would be better to add doors on the Howes side too. The volume just to the left
(south) of that also seems kind of out of place with its recessed patio area, as if it is a
suburban condo. Can you tweak that to be more appropriate to this context? Finally, the
west end of the south elevation is lacking a sense of grounding and pedestrian interest. Per
Section 3.5.2 (D)(2)(a)(1), facades must have at least two methods of creating pedestrian
scale. This volume would benefit from some sort of base.
Page 3
6i STAFF PROJECT REVIEW
City of Fort Collins
BP Laurel LLC Date: 9/8/2008
Kevin Brinkman
3003 E Harmony Rd Suite #300
Fort Collins CO 80528
Staff has reviewed your submittal for THE OVAL FLATS PDP TYPE I, and we offer the
following comments:
ISSUES:
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Anne Aspen
Topic: General
Number: 22 Created: 8/29/2008
[8/29/08] The following departments have no problems or concerns with the project as
proposed: Poudre R-1 school district, Park Planning, County Assessor, GIS.
Number: 30 Created: 9/3/2008
[9/3/08] In your statement of planning objectives you request a modification of standards for
exceeding the 3-unrelated rule. A modification of standards is not needed, just an
explanation. I will include an explanation of this in the staff report and recommend that the
decision -maker increase the number of unrelated people allowed since this is a student
housing project and the exact antidote desired to the problem that prompted the ordinance
in the first place.
Number: 53 Created: 9/4/2008
[9/4/08] Tim Buchanan comments as follows:
The proposed development will seriously impact the three large cottonwoods in the right of
way along Howes Street.
Excavation for the proposed buildings is shown to occur 8-10 feet from the outer bark of
these 50 inch diameter cottonwood trees.
The multistory building will require the removal of several large scaffold branches.
Forestry has conducted an evaluation of the three cottonwoods.
1. The north and south trees are sound and in good condition. They are significant
trees. The north tree was rated to be better than the south tree.
2. The middle cottonwood has several structural defects and should be removed as
a hazard tree.
To effectively protect and preserve the two good cottonwoods a significant portion of the
root system can not be disturbed. There is a conflict with the west side of the building along
Howes and the cottonwoods. The position of the face of the building would result in the
removal of a large portion of the canopy of the cottonwoods. To adequately preserve these
trees adjustments would need to be made to the project.
1. Excavation for the building and its foundation would need to be 25-30 feet from
the base of the trees.
Page 1