The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCHOICE CENTER MIXED-USE REDEVELOPMENT - PDP - PDP110006 (15-08) - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 -Choice Center Mixed -Use Redevelopment PDP Second PDP Submittal — September 9, 2008 Number: 91 Created: 8/3/2008 [8/3/08] TIS is acceptable. THANK YOU. Thank you. Sincerely yours, Dave Pietenpol Senior Project Manager Page 22 Choice Center Mixed-L6C'Redevelopment PDP Second PDP Submittal — September 9, 2008 Number: 86 Created: 8/3/2008 [8/3/08] Utlity Plans Gen. Notes #14: Insert "Traffic" before Engineer, and add "or their designate." after Engineer. CORRECTED Number: 87 Created: 8/3/2008 [8/3/08] Utlity Plans Gen. Notes #15: Revise the word Protection to Protecting. CORRECTED Number: 88 Created: 8/3/2008 [8/3/08] Utlity Plans Gen. Notes #17: Insert the word "Traffic" before each use of the word "Engineer". Also insert the phrase "City of Fort Collins" before the phrase "or the CDOT M&S Standards. CORRECTED Number: 89 Created: 8/3/2008 [8/3/08] Please provide truck turning template analysis of the revised College median north bound opening. Wanting to verify median bull nose shape and opening width are adequate for trucks. WAITING ON CONFORMATION OF TRUCK TEMPLATE FROM ENGINEERING. Number: 90 Created: 8/3/2008 [8/3/08] TIS: Please provide discussion on the Trip Distribution, especially the 15% from west Prospect. Discussion regarding expected distribution of car versus bike related traffic. Call me and we can discuss. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE IN TRIP GENERATION BETWEEN THE CARS VERSUS THE BICYCLE. MOST BICYCLES WILL BE INCLINED TO USE THE MASON CORRIDOR WHICH TRAVELS TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH. THE VEHICLE TRAFFIC HEADING WEST OR TO THE UNIVERSITY HAVE TWO CHOICES — COLLEGE AVENUE OR PROSPECT. I BELIEVE THE 15% DISTRIBUTION TO THE WEST FOR UNIVERSITY AND OTHER RELATED AUTOMOBILE TRIPS IS REASONABLE. THE ISSUE HAS BEEN DISCUSSED AND AGREED UPON WITH WARD STANFORD. — ERIC BRACKE JIM SELL DESIGN Page 21 Choice Center Mixed -Use Redevelopment PDP Second PDP Submittal — September 9, 2008 DIMENSIONS HAVE BEEN ADDED. Number: 56 Created: 7/24/2008 [7/24/08] The landscape plan will need to contain a more detailed landscape table which states the tree/plant species and size. THIS INFORMATION WILL BE PROVIDED AT FINAL Number: 57 Created: 7/24/2008 [7/24/08] Since buildings exceed 40' in height, the Building Height Review required by Section 3.5.1(G) will apply. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 58 Created: 7/24/2008 Bike parking for Building 2 is shown at the southwest corner of the building. Code requires bike parking to be near building entrances and visible from the uses they serve. The proposed location is certainly visible from the parking lot, but I don't know where the "retail" entrances are since I didn't get elevation drawings for Building 2 (which are required since the building is part of phase 1). Bike parking should also be provided on the east side of Building 2 if store entrances are proposed on the east and north sides. BIKE PARKING HAS BEEN ADJUSTED AND ELEVATIONS ARE NOW INCLUDED. Issue Contact: Ward Stanford Topic: Traffic Number: 83 Created: 8/3/2008 [8/3/08] Utility Plans General Notes # 3: Please replace each occurance of the word Contractor with Developer. CORRECTED Number: 84 Created: 8/3/2008 [8/3/08] Utlity Plans Gen. Notes #5: Add to the end of the Note " "or epoxy paint.". ADDED Number: 85 Created: 8/3/2008 [8/3/08] Utlity Plans Gen. Notes #9: Insert "Traffic" in the last line after "Collinsr" and before "Engineer". ADDED JIM SELL DESIGN Page 20 Choice Center Nmxed-Liar_ Redevelopment PDP Second PDP Submittal — September 9, 2008 Number: 27 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] Install a curb stop and meter pit adjacent to Choice Center Drive for the tire shop. A private easement would also be required for this water service extending south of the public utility easement. ADDED Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Peter Barnes Topic: Zoning Number: 51 Created: 7/24/2008 [7/24/08] Clarification is needed regarding the request to allow the number of unrelated persons to be "increased to one individual per bedroom for each unit". If this means that they are planning on having only 1 person per bedroom, then the request should simply be to allow 4 unrelated persons in each 4 bedroom unit. The current wording - "increased to one individual per bedroom" when taken literally would imply that if the variance isn't granted, a 1 bedroom unit won't be allowed to be occupied by anyone. PLEASE SEE ATTACHED LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 9, 2008 FROM JIM SELL DESIGN INC. TO ANNE ASPEN. Number: 52 Created: 7/24/2008 [7/24/08] The site plan table and drawing simply state that the non-residential portion of the lot 2 building is retail. This description should be expanded to include things like standard and fast food restaurants, offices, personal service and business service, etc. Otherwise, anything other than a retail store will only be allowed subject to a minor amendment. ADDITIONAL USES HAVE BEEN ADDED. Number: 53 Created: 7/24/2008 [7/24/08] Is there going to be a trash enclosure for Building 2? Are the 2 trash enclosures shown adequate for Building 1? THE TRASH WILL BE COMPACTED. THE TRASH ENCLOSURE FOR BUILDING 2 WILL LIKELY SHARE AN ENCLOSURE WITH DISCOUNT TIRE. AN EASEMENT FOR THIS WILL BE PROVIDED BY SEPARATE DOCUMENT. Number: 54 Created: 7/24/2008 [7/24/08) show/designate a loading area for Building 2 non-residential. A LOADING AREA HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE SITE PLAN. Number: 55 Created: 7/24/2008 [7/24/08] Show building envelope or footprint dimensions on the site plan. JIM SELL DESIGN Page 19 Choice Center Mixed -Use Redevelopment PDP Second PDP Submittal — September 9, 2008 Number: 9 Created: 7/22/2008 (7/22/08] The City will do some computer modeling of the proposed water lines to determine if both water lines crossing College are needed. ACKNOWLEDGED. PLEASE LET US KNOW WHEN THE RESULTS ARE AVAILABLE. Number: 10 Created: 7/22/2008 [7/22/08] If a fire pumps are required due to building height on Bldg 1, will two fire lines be used (i.e. requiring TWO pumps)? REVISED TO ONE 8" SERVICE WITH ONE FIRE PUMP ON THE NORTH END OF THE BUILDING. Number: 11 Created: 7/22/2008 [7/22/08) What water main material is planned? If PVC, include the two Std Details pertaining to tracer wire. PVC IS PLANNED. DETAILS HAVE BEEN ADDED. Number: 12 Created: 7/22/2008 [7/22/08] The existing water service to the carwash must be abandoned at the main. Add appropriate notes to coordinate abandonment with City Water Field Operations crews. NOTES HAVE BEEN ADDED TO THE DEMO PLAN. Number: 23 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] Prior to construction, a CDOT utility access permit will be required for the water main installation in College Avenue. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 26 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] The area between Bldgs 2 and 3 appears to much too tight for the utility lines currently shown. Consider separate sewer services lines from Bldgs 2 and 3 to the proposed MH 4 which would allow less for separation distances than an 8" public sewer. This would require a private easement for the service to the tire shop. Utility routings and separations in this area need to be worked out prior to hearing. CURRENT UTILITY PLAN NOW SHOWS PRIVATE TWIN 6" SERVICES. JIM SELL DESIGN Page 18 Choice Center 1Vnxed-L6c'Redevelopment PDP Second PDP Submittal — September 9, 2008 12. Please make sure that all information (plans, designs, calculations, descriptions, etc.) in the CLOMR and LOMR submittals match the Development Plans. More coordination is needed between the submittals to ensure they are consistent. COMMENT ACKNOWLEDGED Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Roger Buffington Topic: Water/Wastewater Number: 4 Created: 7/22/2008 [7/22/08] Two 4" water services and meters for each of Bldgs 1 and 2 seem excessive. Provide fixture counts and water service sizing calculations for these buildings. BUILDING 1 STILL SHOWS TWO 4" WATER SERVICES. FIXTURE COUNTS WILL BE EMAILED DIRECTLY TO ROGER. SERVICE SIZES HAVE BEEN MODIFIED AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE MODIFIED THROUGH FINAL DESIGN. Number: 5 Created: 7/22/2008 [7/22/08] For mixed -use buildings, provide separate water and sewer services for the commercial and residential portions of the building. SEPARATE SANITARY AND WATER SERVICES FOR COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL HAVE BEEN ADDED TO BUILDING 2. Number: 6 Created: 7/22/2008 (7/22/08] Will there be any irrigation taps for the project? AN IRRIGATION TAP OFF OF CHOICE CENTER DRIVE HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE PLANS. Number: 7 Created: 7/22/2008 [7/22/08] North of proposed MH 4, move the water main to the east to provide more separation from the storm intake as shown on the redlined plans. THE SANITARY LINE NEEDED TO BE EXTENDED. SEE UTILITY PLAN FOR LAYOUT. Number: 8 Created: 7/22/2008 (7/22/08] At the location where the proposed sanitary crosses Stuart, move the sewer as shown on the redlines to provide more separation from the water main tee and valves. DONE JIM SELL DESIGN Page 17 Choice Center Mixed-)7se Redevelopment PDP \ Second PDP Submittal — September 9, 2008 BASED ON CONVERSATIONS WITH BRIAN VARRELLA, IT IS OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS COMMENT NO LONGER APPLIES AND THAT AN ELEVATION CERTIFICATE WILL NOT BE REQUIRED. 8. A Certificate of Occupancy shall not be issued for any structures at the Choice Center until the LOMR is approved by FEMA, and until an Elevation Certificate is approved for the building by the City. COMMENT ACKNOWLEDGED 9. The Applicant's engineer shall provide quantitative evidence, supported by engineering calculations, to prove the flood control channel on the west side of the residential structure is erosionally stable as designed. The channel is so close to the railroad embankment and the proposed residential building that any failure caused by erosion may threaten the life safety and property of the railroad and the student housing complex. Please refer to specific comments in the July 17, 2008 Floodplain Comments delivered to Nolte Associates, Inc., specifically Item #10, #10-a, #10-b, #15-b, and #15-c. TURF REINFORCEMENT (trm) WILL BE PROVIDED FOR ADDITIONAL REACHES OF THE CHANNEL. ADDITIONAL DESIGN INFORMATION AND CALCULATIONS FOR THE FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL IS INCLUDED IN THE CLOMR APPLICATION REVISIONS THAT WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY IN THE NEAR FUTURE. 10. A vehicle containment system, or car catcher, has been proposed for the perimeter of the south parking lot. This parking lot is located partially in the floodway, and the car catcher was designed with the intent of containing all floating vehicles to the parking lot. This design, if correctly applied, will help address some of the public safety concerns associated with floating vehicles, and the potential rise in the BFE associated with clogging of the College Avenue Bridge. Please refer to specific comments in the July 17, 2008 Floodplain Comments delivered to Nolte Associates, Inc., specifically Item #30, #30-a, #30-b, and #15-e that relate to this design. REVISIONS TO THE CAR CATCHER DESIGN WERE MADE BASED ON THE COMMENTS NOTED. REVISED DESIGN INFORMATION IS INCLUDED IN THE CLOMR APPLICATION REVISIONS THAT WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY IN THE NEAR FUTURE. 11. Please refer to the 50% and 100% floodplain review checklists for information required on the construction plans and drainage report. THE LISTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AND THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND DRAINAGE REPORT WILL BE REVIEWED FOR CONSISTENCY. JIM SELL DESIGN Page 16 Choice Center lviixed-Unc Redevelopment PDP Second PDP Submittal — September 9, 2008 2. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) is required to document and quantify all proposed modifications to the floodway and floodplain per City Code 10- 45(2)(a). The CLOMR application shall be prepared for review and approval by City staff and FEMA, and shall be supported by floodplain modeling and technical analysis consistent with floodplain modeling guidelines, per City Code Sec. 10-45. COMMENT ACKNOWLEDGED. THE CLOMR APPLICATION AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION HAVE BEEN REVIEWED BY THE CITY. ADDITIONAL REVISIONS TO ADDRESS CITY COMMENTS WILL BE SUBMITTED IN THE NEAR FUTURE. 3. The CLOMR shall be approved by City Floodplain Administration staff prior to the 50% submittal hearing. COMMENT ACKNOWLEDGED 4. The CLOMR application shall be submitted to FEMA immediately following City approval. FEMA's acceptance of the CLOMR as proposed shall be a condition of approval for the 50% submittal. COMMENT ACKNOWLEDGED 5. No site work may commence prior to approval of the CLOMR by FEMA per City Code 10-45(2)(a). Floodplain Administration will only agree to the early release of a grading permit if the Floodplain Use Permit and No -Rise Certification are approved, if all other departments are in agreement, and if the applicant understands that all overlot grading shall commence at their risk. Revisions to the site plan may be necessary based on FEMA's comments on the CLOMR application. A Floodplain Use Permit shall be required for each building and site element (parking lot, drainage channel, detention feature, etc.). A $325 permit fee and hydraulic review fee is required for the Floodplain Use Permit for the channel construction. All other Floodplain Use Permits have a $25 permit fee. COMMENT ACKNOWLEDGED 6. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) is required immediately after completion of development activities at the Choice Center site, per City Code 10-45(2)(b). The LOMR application shall be prepared for review and approval by City staff and FEMA. COMMENT ACKNOWLEDGED 7. A FEMA Elevation Certificate shall be prepared and submitted to the City for approval for each structure. Allow 2 weeks for review and approval. JIM SELL DESIGN Page 15 Choice Center Mixed -use Redevelopment PDP Second PDP Submittal — September 9, 2008 single entrance is the best solution, should it be highlighted more with arhitectural differentiation of that stair tower? SINGLE POINT ENTRY FROM STREET SIDE IS DESIGNED FOR SECURITY PURPOSES PER CAPSTONE. ENTRANCE "TOWER" IS ACTUALLY TALLER FOR EMPHASIS AND HAS A HORIZONTAL CANOPY AROUND IT BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND STORY. INTERNAL CORRIDORS PROVIDE ROUTES TO ALL UNITS WITHIN SIDE WINGS, SAME AS ON ALL UPPER FLOORS. Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Topic: Stormwater Number: 13 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] Please provide actual % impervious calculations for the proposed development to determine if the site is under the assumed master plan % impervious of 75%. The standard commercial % impervious numbers used in the calculations are lower than what is being proposed. Instead of 60% impervious for some of the assumed basins, the number is probably closer to 80%. COMMENT ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 14 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08) Water quality mitigation needs to be designed and accounted for in the preliminary submittal before a public hearing. The addition of water quality mitigation could have an impact on the site plan. COMMENT ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 59 Created: 7/25/2008 [7/25/08] Drainage easements dedicated to the City of Fort Collins are required for all of the storm sewers and the flood control swale. DRAINAGE EASEMENTS HAVE BEEN REVISED AND ADDED ON ALL STORM DRAIN AND FLOOD CONTROL SWALES. Number: 71 Created: 7/28/2008 [7/28/08] 1. The Choice Center project is located in a FEMA regulatory floodway and floodplain on Spring Creek. The development application must comply with all applicable sections of Chapter 10 of the City Municipal Code. COMMENT ACKNOWLEDGED. A FLOODPLAIN MODELING REPORT AND CLOMR APPLICATION HAVE BEEN PREPARED AND REVIEWED BY THE CITY. ADDITIONAL REVISIONS TO ADDRESS CITY COMMENTS WILL BE SUBMITTED IN THE NEAR FUTURE. JIM SELL DESIGN Page 14 Choice Center lwuxed-U.,., Redevelopment PDP Second PDP Submittal — September 9, 2008 developed hardscape with patios/plazas/generous walk areas/seat walls/integrated bike parking etc. which then define planters or panels of lawn. (vs a lawn with a typical sidewalk through it.) The trellis structure in one of the courtyards reflects a little bit of this idea but could it be a centerpiece in a courtyard designed more along the lines outlined above, vs simply sitting on the grass? Also: are the other two courtyards less significant in some way? THANK YOU FOR THE COMMENT. DETAILED DESIGNS ARE ON -GOING. The west side sidewalk should be generous. 6 feet in narrowest portions may be adequate but please consider a more streamform layout with more width where they skirt building corners - seems better for the high level of use. Also, if the meandering curves deviate too much from point A to point B, people may simply short-cut off the sidewalk. This point is illustrated on an attached plan with redline design suggestions/questions. SITE CONSTRAINTS DO NOT ALLOW FOR A WIDER WALK. GRADING AND SLOPES ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE WALK WILL DISSUADE MOVEMENT OTHER THAN ON THE WALK. Bike parking, west side: are 5x10 areas adequate? These should be generous. Also, it does not appear to relate to the window and detail patterns of the buildings which it butts up against, and appears that a few bikes on the end of the rack may obstruct the entry to a degree. This looks like an opportunity for a more generous and integrated site design. THE AREAS HAVE BEEN ADJUSTED. Site Plan, north side. The main "collector" sidewalk which the whole west side feeds onto, goes nowhere. It appears that there may be a way to better tie more directly into the Mason/RR corridor with interim access and provisions for future access along more direct desire lines. SITE CONSTRAINTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FLOODWAY WILL NOT ALLOW THE WALK TO CONTINUE TO THE NORTH. Site Plan, south side. A few details could be adjusted to better accommodate pedestrian circulation and functional landscaping. DUE TO STORM WATER SITE CONSTRAINTS, THE DESIGN CANNOT BE MODIFIED. Building, east side: how does the single entrance work? Does it create indirect routes to units in the side wings? Why don't the other side wings have entrances? If the one JIM SELL DESIGN Page 13 Choice Center Mixed -Use Redevelopment PDP Second PDP Submittal — September 9, 2008 Number: 67 Created: 7/25/2008 [7/25/08] CUL-DE-SAC: Regarding comment 109 from the PDR (Sheri Langenberger) - While Stuart Street ceases to exist as a public street at the intersection of the private drive, it is not truly a cul-de-sac from an emergency response perspective; we can exit either by driving through the parking lot to the west, or by traveling south and then east on the private drive, to College Avenue. So PFA will NOT require a turnaround at the intersection. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 68 Created: 7/25/2008 [7/25/08] TURNING RADIUS: Curve 5 shows a 12-foot minimum turning radius. Our minimum turning radius is 25 feet. We need to come up with a way to make that turn (from College Avenue, north onto the drive aisle) navigable for fire apparatus. THE TURNING RADIUS HAS BEEN MODIFIED TO 25'. THE CURB HAS BEEN ADJUSTED TO ACCOMMODATE TRUCK TURNS. Number: 69 Created: 7/25/2008 [7/25/08] EMERGENCY ACCESS EASEMENT: Please add an Emergency Access Easement (minimum 20 feet wide) in the drive aisle of the parking lots east of Building 3 and south of Building 2. All requirements of Emergency Access Easements (as stated in PDR comments) apply. EASEMENT HAS BEEN ADDED Number: 70 Created: 7/25/2008 [7/25/08] STREET NAME: The name of Choice Center Drive for the private drive is acceptable. However, as shown this name applies to the private drive as it runs both north/south AND east/west. With a 90-degree bend, the private drive must have a name change. Because it does not appear there will be any addresses off the east/west portion of the private drive, my suggestion is to name the private drive only on the north/south portion of the private drive and not name the east/west portion, since the east/west portion does not have near the appearance of a "street." STREET NAME HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM E-W PORTION OF PRIVATE DRIVE. Department: Advance Planning Issue Contact: Clark Mapes Topic: Architecture and site planning [7/29/08] Choice Center Capstone Student Housing: Site Plan, west side. The yards are indicated similar to single family house yards -- should these receive more significant and functional design attention? The high level of everyday use by hundreds of people walking and bicycling appear to warrant it. Student housing complexes often have more JIM SELL DESIGN Page 12 Choice Center lviixed-L�c Redevelopment PDP Second PDP Submittal — September 9, 2008 Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Doug Martine Topic: Electric Utility Number: 1 Created: 7/7/2008 [7/7/08] The developer will need to coordinate power requirements and transformer locations with Light & Power engineering (221-6700). 1 understand from previous conversations that another electric transformer (besides the one shown on the utility plan) will be required near the south end of building #1 (location?). A SECOND TRANSFORMER IS LOCATED ON THE UTILITY PLAN Number: 2 Created: 7/7/2008 [7/7/08] It appears that several existing electric facilities will need to be relocated. Relocation of existing electric will be at the developer's expense, in addition to normal electric development charges. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 3 Created: 7/7/2008 [7/7/08] The electric service line to the existing Discount Tire building is located where the proposed building #2 is planned. It appears that there is little or no alternate way to maintain electric service to Discount Tire. ELECTRICAL SERVICE FOR DISCOUNT TIRE WILL BE REROUTED FROM CHOICE CENTER DRIVE BETWEEN BUILDING 2 AND BUILDING 3. Department: PFA Issue Contact: Carle Dann Topic: Fire Number: 65 Created: 7/25/2008 [7/25/08] BUILDING AREA: Structures that exceed 5,000 square feet for type V construction shall be fire contained or fire sprinklered. 97UBC Table9-B (City of Fort Collins Amendment). This pertains to Building 3, which includes the addition of another level. If the building is not equipped with automatic fire sprinklers, then it shall be fire contained between each level, and also in no more than 5,000-SF areas on each floor. Full fire containment includes fire -rated door assemblies, ventilation/duct connections, etc. If Building 4 is not undergoing an addition and is merely going to receive a "facelift," this comment does not pertain to Building 4. WILL COMPLY Number: 66 Created: 7/25/2008 [7/25/08] WATER SUPPLY: Please include the addition of one more fire hydrant, to be located on the west side of College Avenue, north of Stuart Street. ADDED TO UTILITY PLAN JIM SELL DESIGN Page 11 Choice Center Mix4l-use Redevelopment PDP Second PDP Submittal — September 9, 2008 striping and parking arrangement adjacent to College is not shown on these plans to verify how any interim or ultimate parking lot layout will work for this site. THE PROJECT WILL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ONE PHASE (INCLUDING COLLEGE IMPROVEMENTS) Number: 50 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] See redlines for any additional minor comments. ACKNOWLEDGED Number: 64 Created: 7/25/2008 [7/25/08] Please list all variance requests under note 48 on the general Notes sheet in the Utility Plan set. A formal variance request must be submitted with justification stamped by the engineer for consideration by the City. There are at least a couple parts of the Stuart vertical design which do not meet LCUASS standards. A VARIANCE HAS BEEN LISTED AND A FORMAL VARIANCE REQUEST HAS BEEN SUBMITTED. Topic: Technical Services Number: 60 Created: 7/25/2008 [7/25/08] Showing existing Zoning on Plat is not wrong but not necessary. EXISTING ZONING IS A PDP REQUIREMENT. IT WILL BE REMOVED AT FINAL PLAT. Number: 61 Created: 7/25/2008 [7/25/08] Basis of bearings is not shown on the Plat. BASIS OF BEARINGS HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE PLAT. Number: 62 Created: 7/25/2008 [7/25/08] Typos on title sheet (Plat) and missing reception numbers in legal. CORRECTIONS MADE Number: 63 Created: 7/25/2008 [7/25/081 Line over text (scanning) issues on all plans. See redlines for clarification. CORRECTIONS MADE "I wft9� JIM SELL DESIGN Page 10 Choice Center lbuxed-L-- Redevelopment PDP Second PDP Submittal — September 9, 2008 proposed improvement on College along with access permit applications. CDOT must provide acceptance of the access permits prior to scheduling a hearing for this project. PLEASE SEE ATTACHED LETTER FROM ELB BNGINEERING, LLC. Number: 46 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] Street Plan — The vertical street design for Stuart does not meet LCUASS standards for VC lengths & K values. Please see redlines for clarification and revise as needed or submit formal variance requests for consideration. PLEASE SEE VARIANCE REQUEST Number: 47 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08) Street Plan — The detached sidewalk on College is only required to be 6 feet wide with a 10 foot parkway per LCUASS 6-Lane Arterial standards. The typical college cross section shows a 7 foot wide sidewalk? Was this intentional? Per the staff review meeting an 8 foot walk is required per the T.O.D. district requirements and 7 feet width was a reasonable compromise accepted by Transportation Planning. THE 7' SIDEWALK HAS BEEN CONFIRMED AND REMAINS ON THE PLAN. Number: 48 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] Street Plan — You will be required to submit a signage and striping plan on a separate sheet with your next submittal. We will also need to have turning templates provided showing that larger trucks can use the 3/ access on College as well as all turning movements at the intersection with Stuart (mainly left turns out of the site onto College). Please also clearly show how the striping lines up with Stuart on the east side of College to verify there will be safe movements in all directions at this intersection. will provide the maximum size truck template information as soon as I hear back from CDOT. THE STRIPING PLAN IS INCLUDED. THE TURNING TEMPLATE HAS NOT BEEN RECEIVED FROM THE CITY. WE WILL WORK WITH THE CITY ON THIS DURING FINAL COMPLIANCE. Number: 49 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] PRIOR TO HEARING Phasing — Within the text of your submittal package (Project Overview) it states that parking lot improvements etc... will be completed in phases. It should be understood that no actual project phasing has been proposed on the plans (no phasing plan submitted) and all of the proposed ROW improvements on College and Stuart will need to be completed with the project or with any phase 1 of this project if phasing will be proposed. Any phased improvements of the parking adjacent to the ROW improvements must also work with the ultimate sidewalk improvements. The parking JIM SELL DESIGN Page 9 1 Choice Center Mixed -Use Redevelopment PDP \ Second PDP Submittal — September 9, 2008 Number: 40 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] Grading Plan — Please add a note to the Grading Plan stating that any retaining walls over 40 inches measured from bottom of footing to top of wall shall be under separate permit by the Building Department. THERE ARE NO NEW RETAINING WALLS ON THE PROJECT. Number: 41 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] Grading Plan — Show & label all easements per the Plat comments. See redlines for clarification. ADDED Number: 42 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] Street Plan — Please dimension all parkways and sidewalks in plan view, revise HC ramps at Stuart intersection and pull the median nose out of the ROW at the 3/4 access per previous comments. See redlines for clarification. ADDED Number: 43 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] Street Plan — Please add a bold note to the street plan stating that Stuart Street construction within the public ROW shall be constructed to current LCUASS standards and accepted by the City Engineering inspector prior to City acceptance for maintenance. ADDED Number: 44 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] Street Plan — Please provide one intersection detail for College and Stuart per LCUASS 7-27 and show the approximate limits of street cut needed to construct the proposed street improvements at that intersection. Add the standard street cut note to the plan sheet. ADDED Number: 45 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] PRIOR TO HEARING The median island creating 3/4 access to the site on College does not meet CDOT or City standards for median construction and left turn lane lengths and tapers. We have discussed this access in several meetings prior to this submittal and the City will support the access as shown with a variance request (variance for median nose minimum width and radius, left turn lane lengths and tapers for 6 lane arterial 45 mph design speeds). CDOT will also support the proposed access and median modifications and provide waivers for their standards. Please submit formal waiver requests to CDOT for this JIM SELL DESIGN Page 8 r Choice Center Nuxed-L..; Redevelopment PDP Second PDP Submittal — September 9, 2008 Number: 34 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] Overall Utility Sheet — There is a cross walk crossing college at the Stuart intersection. Standard directional type ramps should be shown at the North West corner of this intersection. Please also show the cross walk location. ADDED Number: 35 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] Overall Utility Sheet — Please show all utility and access easements as requested under the Plat comments. ADDED Number: 36 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] Overall Utility Sheet — Please provide at lease one typical cross section of the College parkway, sidewalk and westerly parking lot to show that parked vehicles will NOT overhang the sidewalk. Show any wheel stops if proposed and parked vehicle location. ADDED Number: 37 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] Overall Utility Sheet — The median nose at the 3/4 access on College should not extend into the ROW. See redlines for clarification. MODIFIED Number: 38 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] Overall Utility Sheet — Please clearly show and label the approximate street cut limits on College needed at the intersection with Stuart to construct the street and sidewalk & ramp improvements. COMPLETED Number: 39 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] Grading Plan — Please dimension sidewalk and parkway ROW improvements on College and Stuart. Show one cross section for Stuart showing the relationship to the proposed retaining wall which should have 2 feet minimum clearance from the sidewalk. THE RETAINING WALL IS NOW OUT OF THE DESIGN. DIMENSIONS ADDED. Page 7 ig Choice Center Mixed -Use Redevelopment PDP Second PDP Submittal — September 9, 2008 EASEMENT ADDED Number: 30 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] Plat — The parking and access easement on Lot 3 adjacent to the tire store must be dedicated as a Public Access easement such that the southerly driveway access to the tire store is fully contained within a public access/cross access easement. CDOT may or may not provide an access permit for both of these driveways in front of the tire store. From previous meetings I recall that this was discussed and it was my understanding that CDOT wanted to see one of these access points closed with cross access through this development. I will coordinate again with CDOT. PUBLIC ACCESS HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE PLAT. NO CHANGES ARE BEING MADE TO THE EXISTING TIRE STORE DRIVES. DEVELOPER IS WORKING ON A LETTER OF INTENT WITH THE TIRE STORE. Number: 31 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] PRIOR TO HEARING Plat - Please clearly label and dimension all new ROW dedication on College and on Stuart. The Stuart ROW dedication does not match the ROW shown within the Utility Plan set on the street design sheet(s) etc.. The Plat shows approximately 60.72 feet total ROW (30 feet on the south and approx. 30.72 of new ROW dedicated on the north side). The street design with typical cross section shows 64 feet total ROW. Please correct the discrepancy and verify that you are dedicating enough new ROW to build a standard road section curb to curb and detached sidewalk on the north side. THE RIGHT OF WAY IS NOT PARALLEL TO THE ROADWAY AS BUILT OR TO THE EXISTING PROPERTY LINE. DIMENSIONS HAVE BEEN ADDED AT BOTH ENDS OF THE LINE. Number: 32 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] Plat — Please see the ROW dedication detail on the Plat. A line needs to be removed where existing ROW is more than what is proposed. See redlines for clarification. ROW cannot be vacated by the Plat. Must go to City council with 2 readings of Ordinance ... application for ROW vacation and fees must be submitted if you wish to vacate this small area of ROW. ROW HAS BEEN SHOWN AS IF IT WAS ALREADY VACATED. DETAIL SHOWS THE PORTION TO BE VACATED. THE VACATION WILL BE PROCESSED BETWEEN PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT. Number: 33 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] Overall Utility Sheet — Please clearly dimension the ROW with parkways and sidewalk widths on College and on Stuart. ADDED JIM SELL DESIGN Page 6 Choice Center Njuxed-U— Redevelopment PDP J Second PDP Submittal — September 9, 2008 RIPRAP ADDED Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Randy Maizland Topic: Engineering Number: 24 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] The shaded vicinity map on the Utility Plan cover sheet will not scan well. A one one -line street vicinity map without shading is preferred. MODIFIED Number: 25 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] Please add the Traffic Engineers information to the cover sheet of the Utility Plan. ADDED Number: 28 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] PRIOR TO HEARING Plat - There are several references to easement vacations and dedications by separate document on the Plat. Each easement vacation or dedication document (deed draft and legal exhibits) must be submitted and review fees paid prior to scheduling a hearing for this project. Easement vacations are $400 each and dedications are $250 each. This comment applies to public easements only. See redline comments on Utility Plan set Plat. If CDOT will issue an access permit for both driveways to the tire store, then a public easement will need to be dedicated on the Choice Center property that covers the shared driveway access to the north. All private easements can be vacated by separate document but the City will need to see those referenced documents prior to final Plat recordation. ANY VACATIONS OF PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY OR PUBLIC EASEMENTS WILL BE DONE BY CITY PROCESS. THE ONLY VACATION ANTICIPATED IS THE VACATION OF COLLEGE ROW ON LOT 4. VACATIONS WILL BE PROCESSED BETWEEN PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT. Number: 29 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] PRIOR TO HEARING Plat — The City would like to see a public access easement connection dedicated all the way to the north property line such that a vehicular and pedestrian connection can be provided if the property to the north ever redevelops. You will not be required to construct a physical connection at this time but we would like to have the easement in place for the future connection. Please show off -site buildings to the north so that placement of the easement connection is logical. JIM SELL DESIGN Page 5 1 Choice Center Mixed -Use Redevelopment PDP Second PDP Submittal — September 9, 2008 THE UPDATED LIGHTING PLAN COMPLIES WITH CITY COMMENTS. Number: 22 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] Before hearing, please resize the lighting plan to standard 24x36. THE PLAN HAS BEEN CHANGED PER THIS COMMENT. Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Dana Leavitt Topic: General Number: 78 Created: 7/29/2008 [7/29/08] The following note shall be added to the Site Plan and Plat at final review: For allowable uses within a buffer zone, refer to Section 3.4.1(E)(2) of the Land Use code. ADDED Number: 79 Created: 7/29/2008 [7/29/08] During the final review process, a "Limits of Development" line will be determined and shown on the following plans: Site, Landscape, Existing conditions and Demolition, Utilities, Grading and Erosion Control. ADDED Topic: Grading Plan Number: 80 Created: 7/29/2008 [7/29/08] Trickle pan in swale adjacent to the railroad R.O.W. should reflect the grading of the side slope and walkway, creating a more curvilinear alignment. THE PROPOSED ALIGNMENT IS BASED ON CLOMR/LOMR DESIGN. DISCUSSIONS WITH STORMWATER ARE ON -GOING ABOUT REMOVING THE TRICKLE PAN. Number: 81 Created: 7/29/2008 [7/29/08] Provide plan and profile of storm drain line adjacent to Spring Creek, between SDMH-OS1 and SDMH-OS2. The creek and the retaining wall are very close together, which may have impacts to the creek. ADDED Number: 82 Created: 7/29/2008 [7/29/08] The plan does not show any kind of riprap at the south end of the trickle pan where it ties into the creek. Provide details of design to allow for evaluation on impacts to the creek and associated wetlands. JIM SELL DESIGN Page 4 Choice Center Nnxed-U.. Redevelopment PDP Second PDP Submittal — September 9, 2008 you will need to submit a visual analysis prior to the hearing. See Section 3.5.1 (G) for details and call me if you have questions about this. WILL COMPLY PRIOR TO THE HEARING. PLEASE SEE ATTACHED ELEVATIONS. Number: 19 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] We'll need to have either a colored rendering or a material sample board keyed to the elevations prior to hearing. Also, if you want to include Phase II buildings in the approval, we will need all elevations for those buildings as well. PLEASE SEE ATTACHED COLOR -RENDERED ELEVATIONS. Number: 72 Created: 7/28/2008 [7/28/08] Upon further review of the elevations, I wonder why there are no entries onto Choice Center Drive except the main entry. On a building this large and with the intention of Choice Center Drive to be a pedestrian activated space, I should think additional entries at the other three stair volumes would be warranted in addition to the entries on the courtyard side. SINGLE POINT ENTRY FROM STREET SIDE IS DESIGNED FOR SECURITY PURPOSES PER CAPSTONE. ENTRANCE "TOWER" IS ACTUALLY TALLER FOR EMPHASIS AND HAS A HORIZONTAL CANOPY AROUND IT BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND STORY. INTERNAL CORRIDORS PROVIDE ROUTES TO ALL UNITS WITHIN SIDE WINGS, SAME AS ON ALL UPPER FLOORS. Number: 75 Created: 7/28/2008 [7/28/08] If you want Phase II buildings included in this approval, we must have elevations of them and either color renderings or material sample boards keyed to the elevations. Please provide with next submittal. PLEASE SEE ATTACHED COLOR -RENDERED ELEVATIONS. Number: 77 Created: 7/28/2008 [7/28/08] For the Choice Center Drive elevations to be pedestrian friendly as was intended, additional design features need to be incorporated like additional entries, porticos, perhaps metal awnings or trellises. PLEASE SEE ATTACHED COLOR -RENDERED ELEVATIONS. Topic: Lighting Plan Number: 18 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] On the lighting plan, I need to see either the picture or sketch from the cut sheet of each fixture proposed. Also, there needs to be more information in the chart including wattage of bulb, LLF, etc. JIM SELL DESIGN Page 3 1 Choice Center Mixed�-Use Redevelopment PDP Second PDP Submittal — September 9, 2008 PLEASE SEE ATTACHED LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 9, 2008 FROM JIM SELL DESIGN INC. TO ANNE ASPEN. Number: 20 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] For the bike level of service issue, you will need a modification of standards. This can be done concurrently with your PDP hearing. The process is outlined in Section 2.8.2 of the Land Use Code. You'll start by writing a letter to the hearing officer (send to me for now) requesting the modification. You'll explain what standard you wish to modify and why, using one of the 4 rationales in the code. I think hardship makes the most sense but we can discuss further by phone. I can get you a sample modification letter or two to use as a template if you wish. PLEASE SEE ATTACHED MEMORANDUM DATED AUGUST 22, 2008 FROM ELB ENGINEERING, LLC WITH A SUBJECT HEADING "CHOICE CENTER DEVELOPMENT — REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION OF THE STANDARD". Topic: Site Plan Number: 21 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] I'm still not seeing any context to the north towards Prospect. We need to see the buildings and the proposed pedestrian connection from your site to Prospect. Please add this to your site plan or as a separate exhibit. PLEASE SEE SHEET IN SITE PLAN Number: 73 Created: 7/28/2008 [7/28/081 1 am concerned about the plaza design. The walkways are narrow given how many students will be coming and going on them and there aren't areas to eat or bbq or sit and read. Clark Mapes suggested looking at the University Village courtyards on campus for ideas. THANK YOU FOR THE COMMENT. DESIGNS ARE ON -GOING. Number: 74 Created: 7/28/2008 [7/28/08] The walkway to the south that connects to the Spring Creek trail is very narrow at 5 feet. With 2 way bikes and pedestrians, this will likely not function adequately. THE WALKWAY HAS BEEN WIDENED TO 8' ALL THE WAY TO THE SPRING CREEK TRAIL CONNECTION. Topic: Elevations Number: 17 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/081 Since the buildings are taller than 40 feet, the project is subject to the special height review in Section 3.5.1(G). With the raised railroad tracks to the west and the higher topography and existing buildings to the east, I don't see any reason for alarm but JIM SELL DESIGN Page 2 Choice Center Niixed-L�c Redevelopment PDP Second PDP Submittal — September 9, 2008 Ms. Anne Aspen City Planner Current Planning 281 North College Fort Collins, CO 80524 1 Dear Anne, September 9, 2008 What follows is our response to the items that were listed in the staff comments for CHOICE CENTER MIXED -USE REDEVELOPMENT PDP - TYPE I, dated 7/29/2008: ISSUES: Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Anne Aspen Topic: General Number: 15 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] From a planning perspective, this is an excellent submittal --very thorough! Great job with this complicated and challenging project! THANK YOU. Number: 76 Created: 7/28/2008 [7/28/08] There are significant comments on this project, some of which may require changing the site plan. As a result, it will be necessary to have another complete round prior to hearing. The biggest concern appears to be the flood mitigation and design for the CLOMR/LOMR process. There are significant concerns that -do not appear to have been addressed adequately in this submittal. I urge you to coordinate your efforts with Brian Varrella right away before proceeding. THANK YOU. NOLTE AND JIM SELL DESIGN HAVE MET WITH BRIAN ON A FEW OCCAISIONS SINCE THE FIRST SUBMITTAL. Topic: Modifications Number: 16 Created: 7/23/2008 [7/23/08] The documentation for the 3-unrelated looks adequate to take to the public hearing. You do not need a variance (actually a modification) for this as you are complying with the standard and providing info per the standard. Just FYI, modifications are needed to standards in the Land Use Code. Variances are needed to standards in LCUASS. JIM SELL DESIGN Page 1