Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEVEN GENERATIONS (FORMERLY EASTBROOK) OFFICE PARK - PDP - 4-06 - CORRESPONDENCE - (5)development site. Contact Sue Paquette with our Master Planning department for further information as to the timing of the ampping. Topic: WaterMastewater Number: 19 Created: 3/6/2006 [3/6/06] Please consider whether a separate irrigation tap will be needed. None was shown at this time. Note 3 on the overall utility plan sheet 5 should be modified to say that one lenth of C900 water main pipe shall be centered... rather than 6" sewer service pipe as currently shown. Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Peter Barnes Topic: Zoning Number: 2 Created: 2/17/2006 [2/17/06] Perimiter parking lot landscaping along north and south lot lines doesn't comply with Section 3.2.1(E)(4)(a)and(b) of the LUC. Number: 3 Created: 2/17/2006 [2/17/06] The "proposed shrub planting" shown on the landscape plan should be illustrated as to species and quantity. The Plant List includes a large selection of recommended evergreen and decidious shrubs. Without some clarification on the plan, they could put in nothing but evergreen shrubs. Number: 4 Created: 2/17/2006 [2/17/06] How many bike racks are there? There are only 2 shown on the landscape plan, but it's not clear how many there are on the site plan. The site plan shows a couple of bike racks that aren't labeled with a "B", and then there are two "B's" labeled near the north and south handicap spaces with no bike rack drawn in. Are the "B's" also supposed to be bike racks, or were they meant to be located on the plan where the racks are actually shown? There should be a rack near each buidlings entrance, so 4 should be provided. Number: 5 Created: 2/17/2006 (2/17/06] Need to show/label building envelope or footprint dimensions and setbacks. 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) 221-6750. Yours Truly, Steve Olt City Planner Page 7 Please revise plans to include on -site water quantity detention. The release rate should not exceed the 2 year flows from the site. It is suggested that a meeting be held with the engineering consultant to further discuss detention requirements on this site. Topic: Stormwater -Grading Number: 25 Created: 3/7/2006 [3/7/06] Any grading on the property to the north should bedone in a manner that would minimize disturbance. Add a note stating that all disturbed areas are to be reseeded. Call out existing elevations on the grading plan. Make sure all grades are tied in (proposed and existing). Please add a note stating that no grading shall be done off -site except as indicated on these plans. Can the dry stack wall on the south property line be built without getting on Lot 1 ? Topic: Stormwater -Maintenance Number: 24 Created: 3/7/2006 [3/7/06] Please add a note to the plans stating that all on -site storm drains are private and will be maintained by the property owner. Topic: Stormwater - Off -site flows Number: 27 Created: 3/7/2006 [3/7/06] Please specify how much flow is coming from Lot 1 to the souith across the southeast corner. Topic: Stormwater - Off -site owner notification Number: 26 Created: 3/7/2006 [3/7/06] Owner of Lot 4 needs to be notified of the garding proposed on that property. Topic: Stormwater- easement Number: 20 Created: 3/6/2006 [3/6/06] The proposed water quality pond should be located within a drainage easement. This item can be handled at final. Topic: Stormwater- Floodplain Delineation Number: 22 Created: 3/7/2006 [3/7/06] Please delineate the floodplain for the flows coming under the railroad tracks and to the west of the site. Provide cross sections showing that these flows will be contained off - site. Acoording to our master planning department, the flows being released from the Neslon Pond behind the railroad tracks will be increasing, which could affect the floodplain delineation of the area to the east of the pond. The City will be delineating that area after as-builts are done for the work on the Nelson Pond. Once this mapping is done, it will be conveyed to you. At this time, we are not certain that this new floodplain would affect your Page 6 Department: Traffic Operations Issue Contact: Eric Bracke Topic: Traffic Number: 1 Created: 2/16/2006 [2/16/06] On page 4 of the TIS, it incorrectly states that the area is a mixed use district and the level of service standards are E for overall operation and F for approach leg. The structure plan defines this area as an industrial district, where the LOS standards are D and E, respectively. The intersection of Timberline/Danfield currently has the WB approach leg failing the standard. However, since the project does not add trips to this leg, they should not be held accountable for the deficiencies. A direct pedestrian connection from the parking area to the Vermont Trail/underpass may be appropriate. Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: David Averill Topic: General Number: 49 Created: 3/10/2006 [3/10/06] 1 concur with comment # 4 above. More bicycle parking should be provided and it should be located nearer to building entrances. Pleae coordinate all bicycle rack locations on utility/landscape/site sheets. Thanks. Number: 50 Created: 3/10/2006 [3/10/06] This project will be able to better address some Ped LOS deficiency's if you can figure out a way to connect directly to the multi -use path that lies on the parcel to the north. A connection could cross that northern drive -aisle and tie directly into the ped circualtion system that you have proposed on site. This would more adequately address the Failing "Directness" measure for the neighborhood to the west of this site. Number: 51 Created: 3/10/2006 [3/10/06] Need to provide a ramp near the handicap parking located off of the northern drive aisle. Number: 52 Created: 3/10/2006 [3/10/06] Need to intall a crosswalk ramp south of the northern drive aisle entrance that aligns with the existing ramp on the SE corner of Vermont/Eastbrook. See redlined site plan for clarification. Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Basil Hamdan Topic: Stormwater - Detention Requirements Number: 23 Created: 3/7/2006 [3/7/06] The conceptual review comments for this site stated that this site should detain in a manner that would limit the flows to the master plan requirements. The Foothills Master plan requires that all non developed sitesin Basin 50 release at a maximum 2 year rate. A copy of the appropriate section of the master plan is included for your information and documentation. The report states that since the adjacent properties would not develop, the 65% impervious amount will not be exceeded by the entire basin 50. This is contrary to our requirements, and is in fact incorrect, since most of the area in Basin 50 is already developed, and if this site is allowed to develop without providing detention, the overall basin impervious amount would probably exceed 65 %. Note that most of the railroad right of way is in fact outside of Basin 50, and thus would not contribute much open space. Page 5 Number: 37 Created: 3/7/2006 [3/7/06] More detailed comments to follow with Final Compliance submittal. Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Janet McTague Topic: Site Plan Number: 18 Created: 3/6/2006 [3/6/06] Need to coordinate transformer location. Will need C-1 form and approved site plan Department: Natural Resources Issue Contact: Doug Moore Topic: Ecological Characterization Number: 21 Created: 3/6/2006 [3/6/06] No issues. Copies submitted of the Ecological Characterization Study were missing pages 6 and 7. Cedar Creek and Associates e-mail an electronic file so no need to resubmit corrected versions. Thank you. Department: PFA Issue Contact: Carle Dann Topic: fire Number: 38 Created: 3/8/2006 [3/8/06] WATER SUPPLY: You are required to have a fire hydrant within 300 feet of every structure, with a minimum flow of 1,500 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure. Number: 39 Created: 3/8/2006 [3/8/06] AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLERS: A monitored, automatic fire -sprinkler system is required for every building. Number: 40 Created: 3/8/2006 [3/8/06] ACCESS: An Emergency Access Easement is required. It shall be a minimum width of 20 feet and maintained unobstructed, and visible by painting and signage. It must consist of an all-weather driving surface (asphalt or concrete); compacted road base is acceptable only temporarily, during construction. Number: 41 Created: 3/8/2006 [3/8/06] FDC: The fire department connections shall be located on the perimeter of the buildings, adjacent to the fire lanes. Number: 42 Created: 3/8/2006 [3/8/06] KNOX BOX: Poudre Fire Authority requires a "Knox Box" to be mounted on the front of every new building equipped with a required fire sprinkler system. Number: 43 Created: 3/8/2006 [3/8/06] ADDRESSING: Address numerals and letters shall be visible from the street fronting the property, and posted with a minimum of six-inch (6) numerals/letters on a contrasting background. (Bronze numerals/letters on brown brick are not acceptable.). Buildings shall be lettered in a clockwise manner, beginning with the building closest to Vermont/Eastbrook intersection. Therefore, in your plan sheets, your Building D would become Building B, and your Building B would be become Building D. Number: 44 Created: 3/8/2006 [3/8/06] TURNING RADII: PFA concurs with comment 32 above, regarding turning radii. Page 4 Number: 46 Created: 3/9/2006 [3/9/06] Dennis Greenwalt of Comcast Cable TV indicated that they did not receive a plat map for this project. They would like to see utility easements that would allow them to build from the street up to the buildings. Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Susan Joy Topic: General Number: 28 Created: 3/7/2006 [3/7/06] The existing attached 4' sidewalk along Eastbrook does not meet current standards and this development is responsible for upgrading their frontage to either an 8' attached walk OR a 4.5' detached walk. As discussed, Lance Newlin with Inspection went out to take a look at the sidewalk and reported back that the existing sidewalk is in very good shape and that no removals will be required (there is some broken curb that will need to be replaced but that's it). Engineering then discussed this with Transportation Planning and agreed that in this particular instance; we will only ask that you widen out the sidewalk to an 8' attached walk from the north drive entrance to the bike trail where the need is the greatest. We will not require the rest of the sidewalk to the southern property line to be widened out at this time. Please install a ramp in accordance with detail 1602 (T- Intersection Ramp requirement). . Number: 30 Created: 3/7/2006 [3/7/06] Driveways must be perpendicular (plus or minus 10 degrees) for a minimum of 25'. Number: 32 Created: 3/7/2006 [3/7/06] Minimum inside turning radii for Emergency Access Easements is 25' and minimum outside turning radii is 50'. 1 will need an exhibit showing that PFA's requirements are being met - an 8.5xl 1 is fine. Number: 33 Created: 3/7/2006 [3/7/06] Please provide legals and exhibits for all easements being dedicated by separate document for our review. Number: 34 Created: 3/7/2006 [3/7/06] All easements to dedicated by separate document have a $250 processing fee each plus the appropriate Larimer County filing fee. Number: 35 Created: 3/7/2006 [3/7/06] Please show, label and dimension all easements on all plan sets. All plan sets need to match. The landscape plans are showing offsite grading along the north side of the property line that the utility plans do not. Topic: Utility Plans Number: 31 Created: 3/7/2006 [3/7/06] Grading Sheet - Drainage at the driveways must have the HP at the row line. That way drainage goes back into the site from the row back and into the street from the row forward. (Final Compliance) Number: 36 Created: 3/7/2006 [3/7/06] Grading Plan -please refer to detail D10/Sheet 8 for the sidewalk chases (Final Compliance). Page 3 [3/1/06] Will the proposed native shrub plantings along the parking lots on the north and south sides of the development provide sufficient year -around screening from adjacent properties to satisfy the requirements set forth in Section 3.2.1(E)(4)(b) of the Land Use Code? *In the case of the north parking lot, screening from all residential uses shall consist of a fence or wall 6' in height in combination with plant material of sufficient opacity to block at least 75% of light from vehicle headlights. *In the case of the south parking lot, screening from all non-residential uses shall consist of a wall, fence, planter, earthen berm, plant material or a combination of such elements, each of which shall have a minimum height of 30". Such screening shall extend a minimum of 70% of the length of any boundary of the parking lot that abuts any non-residential use. Topic: Site Plan Number: 9 Created: 3/1/2006 [3/1/06] Is there a reason why no direct pedestrian connections are being made from the east ends of the buildings to the public sidewalk along Eastbrook Drive? These connections are very important for convenient movement to the street. Number: 10 Created: 3/1/2006 [3/1/06] Please elaborate on the meaning of "flex" as it relates to these office buildings. Will the sole use of these buildings be office spaces? Number: 11 Created: 3/1/2006 [3/1/06] The Site Plan should identify approximately how much square footage will be in each of the 4 buildings. It is understood that there will be up to a total of 50,000 square feet of leasable floor area in the 4-building complex. Number: 12 Created: 3/1/2006 [3/1/06] The Site Plan identifies a maximum building height of 20'-0" (which actually is 21'- 5", based on the elevations) and a maximum of 50,000 square feet of floor area in the 4 buildings. The Planning Objectives indicate that the buildings will range from 1 to 2 stories in height. Will the building elevations be the same for all 4 buildings, as the Exterior Building Elevations sheet would indicate, whether they are 1 or 2 stories? Number: 13 Created: 3/1/2006 [3/1/06] On the Site Plan, are the buildings as shown the building footprints or the building envelopes? Building envelopes should be shown, with scaled dimensions. for the sides and distances from property lines. Number: 14 Created: 3/1/2006 [3/1/06] Scaled distances for the 4 property lines must be included on the Site Plan. Number: 15 Created: 3/1/2006 [3/1/06] There should be bicycle racks conveniently located for the 2 western buildings. Topic: Utility Plans Number: 45 Created: 3/9/2006 [3/9/06] Len Hilderbrand of Xcel Energy indicated that the proposed 10' wide utility easement must extend across the entire length of the east frontage of the office park. Page 2 6 STAFF PROJECT REVIEW City of Fort Collins JOANNA FRYE Date: 3/10/2006 VF RIPLEY ASSOCIATES 401 W MOUNTAIN AVE #201 FORT COLLINS, CO 80521 Staff has reviewed your submittal for EASTBROOK OFFICE PARK PDP - TYPE I, and we offer the following comments: ISSUES: Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Steve Olt Topic: General Number: 6 Created: 3/1/2006 [3/1/06] Bonnie Ham of the U.S. Post Office indicated that the developer is responsible for providing mailboxes for all possible office suites. The actual number of boxes is not noted on the plans. Number: 7 Created: 3/1/2006 [3/1/06] Rick Lee of the Building Department indicated that he is forwarding the various codes that the Fort Collins Building Department will enforce (attached to this comment letter). The information submitted is very limited and his department does require a pre - submittal meeting be scheduled before the construction documents proceed too far in the review process. There may be some concerns about exterior wall and opening rquirements due to the nearness of the adjacent structures. Number: 8 Created: 3/1/2006 [3/1/06] The site layout and architectural style for the buildings present a "barracks" feel to the project. The interior distances between buildings are minimal and do not create any sense of usable/livable outdoor space for employees. None of the entries into the buildings have an inviting, primary entrance feel to them. Number: 47 Created: 3/9/2006 [3/9/06] A comment letter dated March 4, 2006 from Gregg A. Larsen, Senior Manager - Real Estate for the Union Pacific Railroad, is attached to this comment letter. Number: 48 Created: 3/9/2006 [3/9/06] Is there a better way to lay out and design this development? The open space areas between the buildings are extremely narrow, considering the size of the buildings, and do not appear to be very usable. Please consider trying to make these outdoor spaces more user friendly. A significant "gathering place" for the employees would be advantageous. Topic: Landscape Plan Number: 16 Created: 3/1 /2006 [3/1/06] The Landscape Plan as submitted does not satisfy Section 3.2.1(E)(4)(a) of the Land Use Code pertaining to trees in the parking lot setback areas along the north and south property lines. There must be at least 1 tree per 40 lineal feet in these areas along the parking lot. Number: 17 Created: 3/1/2006 Page 1