The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPENNY FLATS (BLOCK 33) - PDP - 32-05 - CORRESPONDENCE - (5)Anne Aspen - PDP-R_RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 11_13_05.doc Page 12 [8/23/05] What is the fire flow demand for the fire line to the townhomes on Howes? The water main in Howes is a 4-inch and may require upgrading. Acknowledged: Number: 31 Created: 8/23/2005 [10/25/05] (1 will research to see if there is any info on other services. (Final compliance item)) Acknowledged: thank you [8/23/05] Identify and show all existing water/sewer services around the perimeter of the block that will not be used and add appropriate notes for the abandonment. Number: 34 Created: 8/23/2005 [10/25/05] I'm concerned about the precipitation falling on the ramps entering the garage. What are the resulting flows? Could be pumped to storm drain. (Final compliance item) [8/23/05] How is the drainage at the entrances to the underground parking being handled? Surface run-off from precipitation is not allowed into the parking area drains that connect to the sanitary sewer. Acknowledged: Intent of design is to avoid runoff on ramps altogether. Number: 36 Created: 8/23/2005 [10/25/05] Can fire hydrant move north a bit to relieve some of the congestion in this area? Input from PFA needed for this. (Final compliance item) Acknowledged: CDI & JSD will work on this once potholing is completed and we have better information. [8/23/05] Move the fire line connection for Bldg 3 away from the fire hydrant. Number: 40 Created: 8/23/2005 [10/25/05] Please double check with the mechanical engineer. If PFA is pulling 1500 gpm from the hydrant, the flows to the fire sprinkler systems may be significantly reduced. (Final compliance item) ;lchnow�edced: CC will doule checK [8/23/05] What is the size of the proposed water main extending north of Maple? With all of the fire lines connecting to this main along with the fire hydrant, it should likely be bigger than a 6-inch. Number: 41 Created: 8/23/2005 [10/25/05] ( Final compliance item) Acknowledged: [8/23/05] Will insulation be needed where the fire lines cross the box culvert? (This is probably a final compliance question but wanted to record it for later.) Number: 114 Created: 10/25/2005 [10/25/05] Label sanitary sewer lines extending from public sewer in Maple into the garage areas as "private sanitary sewer service lines". (Final comDliance item) Ack io,^ dec ec Number: 115 Created: 10/25/2005 [10/25/05] Rotate the 4' x 6' meter vault 90-degrees and show curb stops outside of vault. (Final compliance item) Acknowledged: Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Peter Barnes Topic: zoning Number: 3 Created: 8/17/2005 [10/18/05] Landscape Note #25 refers to sheet C4 of the preliminary grading plan for phase boundaries. Since Zoning never sees the grading plan, the note should refer to the boundaries Page 12 Anne Aspen - PDP-R RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 11 13 05.doc Page 11 3. A floodplain use permit is required for any improvements within the floodplain or floodway. The fee is $25. Acknowledged: 4. Please label the floodplain and floodway boundaries on the drainage plan, site plan, and the plat if this property is going to be re -plated. Acknowledged: 5. The grading plan needs to provide existing and proposed spot elevations to document that no fill is being proposed in the floodway. Acknowledged: Department: Water Utilities Issue Contact: Roger Buffington Topic: Site Plan and Landscape Plan Number: 39 Created: 8/23/2005 [10/25/051 There is still too many obstacles that impact City's ability to maintain the water main in the ped spine. This area still needs work prior to hearing. CDI and JSD will revise this area after receiving as built documentation. Site and landscape plan for hearing will be presented to Roger Buffington for approval prior to scheduling hearing [8/23/051 Location of kiosk, water feature and seat walls make it nearly impossible to maintain the water line and some of the fire lines at the south end of the pedestrian spine. The gas main also falls under these items. These problems relate to the utility coordination that's needed for that area. All of these items should be addressed at the utility coordination meeting. Department: Water Utilities Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Topic: Stormwater Number: 65 Created: 8/26/2005 [10/28/05] Final Compliance item. [8/26/051 The water quality measures will be reviewed by Kevin Mcbride to ensure they meet alternative design previously agreed upon Ackna,vledgec Number: 66 Created: 8/26/2005 [10/28/05] (8/26/05] At final, all hydraulic calculations will be reviewed in detail. Acknowledged: Department: Water Utilities Issue Contact: Roger Buffington Topic: Utility Plans Number: 28 Created: 8/23/2005 [10/25/051 (Final compliance item) [8/23/05] Label all water main fittings and appurtenances including those at points of connection to the existing distribution system. Acknowledged. Number: 30 Created: 8/23/2005 [10/25/05] (Repeat comment - I did not receive any info from the mechanic engineer. (Final compliance item)) Page I I AnneRen - PDP-R RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 11_13 05.doc Page 10 Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: David Averill Topic: General Number: 126 Created: 10/26/2005 [10/26/05] question entered on behalf of Kathleen Bracke: Is an assumption of 1 % annual growth rate in traffic volumes adequate? Response pending from CDI's Traffic Engineer Number: 127 Created: 10/26/2005 [10/26/05] question entered on behalf of Kathleen Bracke: Is an assumption of 10% reduction in vehicular traffic due to the likely use of alternative modes acceptable? Response pending from CDI's Traffic Engineer Number: 128 Created: 10/26/2005 [10/26/05] comment entered on behalf of Kathleen Bracke: some of the intersection diagrams illustrating turning movents are in error - there will be no northbound left turns from College to Cherry St. in the long term. Please revise. Response pending from CDI's Traffic Engineer Number: 129 Created: 10/26/2005 [10/26/05] question entered on behalf of Kathleen Bracke: where will school children be picked up by PSD bus -service? CDI proposes on Maple Street immediately east of the Pedestrian Spine Number: 130 Created: 10/26/2005 [10/26/051 comment entered on behalf of Kathleen Bracke: The Mason bike/ped trail will be adjacent to this site ... and will not traverse this site on the "pedestrian spine" through the middle of the block. Acknowledged: Number: 131 Created: 10/26/2005 [10/26/05] The bicycle racks shown at the corner of Cherry and Mason St.'s don't make much sense to me in their current location. Lets discuss. No bicycle racks are intended for th - Dcation. Department: Water Utilities Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Topic: Floodplain Number: 62 Created: 8/26/2005 [10/28/05] The model is adequate and shows that the rise is negligible. Stormwater is OK with project going to a hearing. Acknowledged: [8/26/05] 1. The Old Town Master Plan indicates that floodplain and floodway exist in the right-of-way near the southwest corner of the development. No fill is allowed in the floodway unless hydraulic modeling, per City of Fort Collins specifications, can show no rise in water surface elevation. Acknowledged 2. A no rise certificate is required for any work in the floodway. Acknowledged: Page 10 Anne As - PDP-R RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 11 13 05.doc Page 9 [10/26/05] Ped. Walkway between buildings still below 1.Ofc. Is this a function of the program generating the photometrics? A wall mounted fixture in both areas could solve the problem. Acknowledged: note :o oe revised at fins Department: Traffic Operations Issue Contact: Ward Stanford Topic: General Number: 54 Created: 8/24/2005 [10/31 /05] [8/24/05] The Maple Street and Mason Street accesses do not meet the Sight Distance at Intersection standards per figure 7-16 of the LCLIASS. The drive locations proximity to the adjacent street corners create a safety issue between turning traffic and underground drive aisle traffic. The Traffic Department has concerns about the relationship of these drive aisles and the street corners. Per Discussion on 11/02/05 CDI to examine parking space adjacencies next to garage exits and illustrate sight triangles. Number: 61 Created: 8/25/2005 [10/31 /05] [8/25/05] Additional discussion and documentation in the TIS about Cherry St conditions, ADT's, and Pedestrian LOS is requested. These items have been discussed with the Developer's Traffic Engineer. Response pending from t:Di s Traffic Engineer Number: 134 Created: 10/27/2005 [10/27/05] Pre -Hearing: Please include the ADT's on Figure 2, in the amended TIS. CDi will have the TIS upaateo accoratngiy for the nearinc Number: 135 Created: 10/27/2005 [10/27/051 Final: Request by Eric Bracke: This development is adding traffic to Cherry St which is already at greater daily volumes than the street classification allows. Since this is a City project, Traffic Operations is recommending that the City and the developer for the project partner with the neighborhood to make some good faith efforts in solving the excessive traffic problem on Cherry Street. c ,nowledged: CDI is in discussions with Ward Stanford regarding this topic Number: 136 Created: 10/27/2005 [10/27/05] Pre -hearing: Traffic did not receive Site Plans. Please provide Site, Landscape and Utility plans with subsequent submittals. CDI will provide copies of evised site and landscape plans to be presented at hearing Number: 137 Created: 10/27/2005 [10/27/05] Final: Traffic has continueing concerns with the lack of sight distance from the Maple St. corners and the Maple accesses. Please provide discussion about the vertical characteristics of the plantings along Maple and at the NE corner of the Maple and Howes intersection (minimum lower canopy height of the proposed trees, max height of the ground plantings, etc). Want to have a better sense that the proposed plantings will maintain maximum possible sight lines now and over time. Acknowledged. this issue will be addressed at final Page 9 Anne Aspen - PDP-R RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 11_13 05.doc Page 8 Topic: Plat Number: 118 Created: 10/26/2005 110/26/05] The plat shows an easement reserved for the railroad within the platted boundary. As a result, the railroad company will need to sign off on the plat. Perhaps it would be of benefit to revise the platted boundary to not include the railroad easement? CDI intends to exclude the railroad easement from the plat. Number: 120 Created: 10/26/2005 [10/26/05] The "right of way easement" document should be checked for verification as "right- of-way" cannot be vacated by plat, only an "easement". I'm not sure what this is. CDI will check with King Surveyors and obtain detail regarding this easement Number: 121 Created: 10/26/2005 [10/26/05] It's my understanding that the sale of the property to the developer will not occur until after the plat has been filed. As a result, easements shown on the plat cannot be "easements" per se, the plat will thus need to be revised. Resolution of this issue is in progress. CDI intends to cooperate with the City on the resolution of this technicality Number: 122 Created: 10/26/2005 110/26/05] 1 am in discussion with the City Attorney's Office on whether the maintenance and repair guarantee language is appropriate to be included in the plat given that the "undersigned" can only be the City. If this language is removed from the plat, we would likely want to have it included in the purchase agreement as a restriction. Resolution of this issue is in progress. CDI intends to cooperate with the City on the resolution of this technicality Department: Light $ Power Issue Contact: Doug Martine Topic: Landscape Plans Number: 116 Created: 10/26/2005 [10/26/05] 1 suggest the transformer at building #6 be rotated 90 degrees so the transformer faces south. As an alternative, when electric personnel need to operate the transformer it will be necessary for them to walk on the ornamental grasses. Acknowledged: note to be revised e The 3 trees east of the 2 transformers (N.E access to the transformers. Acknowledged: note to be revised at final. Department: Natural Resources Topic: General Number: 92 [10/13/05] No issues. Department: Police Topic: General Number: 132 of Bldg. #2) need to be eliminated to provide Page 8 Issue Contact: Doug Moore Created: 10/13/2005 Issue Contact: Joseph Gerdom Created: 10/26/2005 Anne Aspen - PDP-R RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 11_13_05.doc 7 a safer crossing for bicyclists crossing the railroad track. A revised detail shall be shown on the plans submitted for hearing. However, the design of any improvements in this area will be subject final approval by BNSF. Number: 59 Created: 8/25/2005 [10/26/05] Letter of intent has been provided. [8125/05] Offsite work is being show along the Trolley Barn which requires a letter of intent prior to hearing and easementlalignment (as appropriate) after hearing. Number: 119 Created: 10/26/2005 [10/26/05) A letter of intent is required from the railroad company for the work being done within their easement on the northeast corner of the site. See response to comment 138 Number: 123 Created: 10/26/2005 [10/26/051 Please amend the site plan note regarding the alley right-of-way to state "vacation petition pending" instead of "vacation pending".-:,Knowleoged note to be revised at final. Number: 124 Created: 10/26/2005 [10/26/05] The three variance requests will be evaluated with decisions forthcoming. Ncknow!eoge, Number: 125 Created: 10/26/2005 [10/26/05] The following items should be addressed prior to hearing: #13 verification on doors not swinging out into ROW (add a note?) See response to comment #23 verification of roof drain outlets not affecting public sidewalk, in some cases sidewalk chases were not provided? See response to comment #23 #57 verification with PFA on phasing plan concepts (not possibly having an emergency access easement built to connect from Maple to Cherry) See response to comment #57 #118The plat shows an easement reserved for the railroad within the platted boundary. As a result, the railroad company will need to sign off on the plat. Perhaps it would be of benefit to revise the platted boundary to not include the railroad easement? See response to comment #119 A letter of intent is required from the railroad company for the work being done within their easement on the northeast corner of the site. See response to comment #138 #120 The "right of way easement" document should be checked for verification as "right-of- way" cannot be vacated by plat, only an "easement". I'm not sure what this is. See response to comment #120 #121 It's my understanding that the sale of the property to the developer will not occur until after the plat has been filed. As a result, easements shown on the plat cannot be "easements" per se, the plat will thus need to be revised. response to comment #121 #122 1 will need to follow up with the City Attorney's Office on whether the maintenance and repair guarantee language is appropriate to be included in the plat given that the "undersigned" can only be the City. response to comment #122 Page 7 Anne Ashen - PDP-R RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 11_13 05.doc Page 6 Number: 117 Created: 10/26/2005 [10/26/05] Add a note regarding street patching: "Limits of street repair are approximate. Final limits to be determined in the field by the City Engineering Inspector at the time the street curs are made." Acknowledged: note to be added at final Topic: Genera/ Number: 13 Created: 8/19/2005 [10/26/05] The response indicated that plans have been modified to clarify that doors will not open in right-of-way. I'm not seeing this and would like to follow up on this item. Perhaps a note can be added to the elevations indicating that doors shall not swing out into right-of-way. Acknowledged: limitation on door design at zero setback will be clarified for hearing [8/19/05] With buildings 5 and 6 being built to the Maple right-of-way, please clarify the intent with regards to door access from Maple as it is not evident from the building elevations as to whether the doors are recessed from the right-of-way and/or are inset. Doors are not allowed to swing out into the right-of-way. Number: 20 Created: 8/19/2005 [10/26/05] The response indicated that a detail has been provided on the landscape plan with bike racks. The landscape plan shows the bike racks in plan view but no detail, instead a planting bed curb detail is provided. <,c.k-ow!edger: the detail will be revised at final [8/19/051 Please provide more detail information (beyond C5 of the construction plan set) as to the vertical depth of the planting bed for the street trees. I'm not aware of a situation in which landscaping and street trees are situated in an urbanized setting (without a grass parkway) of attached sidewalks where grates are not utilized to help ensure a smooth walking surface. How is the pedestrian less likely to inadverdently step in this landscape bed and possibly turn an ankle, trip, etc? A similar concept of these water quality beds were proposed on another project where a 1 foot drop to the planting bed was proposed, which looks like may not be occuring here. In that case, we wanted to explore the option of providing barrier curb with notches in the curb at location in order to provide the visual aspect of not being able to walk in this area unlike most other areas downtown where sidewalk grates are placed over the trees. Further discussion is needed. Number: 57 Created: 8/25/2005 [10/26/05] The construction drawings showed phasing on the grading plan with regards to buildings, pedestrian spine, and parking structure. The phasing plan should also show how utilities are installed per phase as well as access. Of concern for example, does PFA need the entire parking structure built across Lots/Phases 1 & 2 to ensure through access to Cherry Street? The building numbers should be shown on this sheet for clarity. (Perhaps a new sheet should be created instead of using the grading plan.) Acknowledged. Regarding PFA access Ron Gonzales agreed that access during the construction period will be coordinated on site as the project is developed [8/25/051 With the project intending to be phased, a phasing plan for the public improvements is required to be created on the construction drawings. Number: 58 Created: 8/25/2005 [10/26/05] The response letter did not indicate addressing the bicycle crossing concern. This can be addressed however with the final plan submittal. [8/25/051 The crossing of the sidewalk over the railroad track along Mason Street will need to be designed. In addition, please incorporate a design along the flowline for Mason that creates Page 6 Anne Aspen - PDP-R RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 11_13_05.doc Page 5 Number: 105 Created: 10/14/2005 [10/14/051 Pre -Hearing: There is a back-up space on the northeast corner of the western subterranean parking lot that is not safe since it is also an access point to vertical circulation. Also, in the eastern subterranean lot, the northeast corner staircase is not accessible to pedestrians. CDI wi^I edit plans to be preserted at heari-c Topic: Site Plan (SA4 and 5) Number: 111 Created: 10/14/2005 [10/14/05] Final Plans: At some point we will want to review the remaining elevations. This isn't needed prior to hearing. Please see comments on redlines: there are still some remaining issues re base, top and materials. Acknowledged Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Marc Virata Topic: Construction Plans Number: 21 Created: 8/19/2005 [10/26/05] Carried over for reference to be addressed in detail after a public hearing. [8/19/05] Cutoff walls will be required for the use of the water quality basin areas in right-of-way to help reduce possible damage to the pavement subsurface caused by water infiltration into the pavement subsurface. Acknowledged: to be clarified at final. Number: 23 Created: 8/22/2005 [10/26/05] The response indicated sidewalk chases were provided where appropriate. I'm seeing this provided in one location (southeast corner of Lot 2) but not in the other locations. How does the roof drain tie into the sidewalk chase? Does the roof drain on the northeast corner of Lot 1 drain directly onto a stairwell? Acknowledged: sidewalk chases and locations shal' be coordinated and further clarified prior to hearing [8/22105] It appears the roof drains are intended to surface discharge. Additional information is needed to demonstrate that if this is the case, flows won't be directed to cross a sidewalk. It would appear that there are opportunities to tie these into storm drain lines rather than surface discharge. Number: 49 Created: 8/23/2005 [10/26/05] A variance request was received and will be evaluated. It is not anticipated to be of concern, however there may be design details to be worked out with a final compliance submittal. The grading plan sheet should indicate the use of concrete for the inset parking along Maple as was indicated along Mason. AW umedged: to be revised at fine [8/23/05] The street design of the parking along Maple on the west side of the pedestrian spine is not to standard with street flows being directed to a concrete pan behind the parking rather than to the curb and gutter section adjacent to the sidewalk. A variance requiest would be required for evaluation. This should be a further topic of discussion to consider design alternatives. Page 5 I.Anne Aspen - PDP-R RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 11_13_05.doc Page 4 [10/14/05] Final Plans: The units of Building 1 should be designated as a multifamily fourplex not townhomes. ACKnowiedgec Topic: Site Plan (SA3.1) Number: 97 Created: 10/14/2005 [10/14/05] Final Plans: Please dimension onstreet parking spaces according to my redlines. ACKnowiedgeo Number: 98 Created: 10/14/2005 (10/14/05] Pre -Hearing: Van accessible spaces require a minimum of 8 foot spaces with an 8 foot access. You are showing more than adequate space but it needs to be restriped. CDi will edit plans to be presented at hea; inc; Number: 99 Created: 10/14/2005 [10/14/05] Pre -Hearing?: The spine connection to the north is not lined up with the Cherry Street crossing. This is unfortunate. Is there any way to remedy this or at least provide some direct access? CDI and JSD will revise the landscape plan for presentation at hearing Also, as noted above, please show your proposed crosswalk across Maple. I fear that that crossing will be equally awkward... ACK. Number: 100 Created: 10/14/2005 [10/14/05] Final Plans: The accessible parking you propose behind buildings 4 and 5 doesn't seem like it is in a particularly handy spot given that the adjoining vertical circulation is stairs only and there is no safe walkway out to Mason at the vehicular entry (which is likely to have decelerating traffic there too). Please consider locating it behind Buildings 3 and 4 just south of the east -west pedestrian walk. Acknowledged Number: 101 Created: 10/14/2005 (10/14/05] Final Plans: Please label the building numbers on this plan. Acknowledged Topic: Site Plan (SA3.2) Number: 102 Created: 10/14/2005 [10/14/05] Pre -Hearing: This plan is pretty hard to read. Can you either shade parking spaces or use a heavier line weight to differentiate the spaces so that drive aisles are easier to see? CDI will edit plans to be presented at hearing Number: 103 Created: 10/14/2005 [10/14/05] Pre -Hearing: In the parking analysis, please add a line for total number of accessible spaces required. CDI will edit plans to be presented at hearing Number: 104 Created: 10/14/2005 110/14/05] Pre -Hearing: Comment ID 98 applies to this plan also. CDI will edit plans to be presented at hearinc Page 4 Anne Aspen - PDP-R RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 11 13 05.doc Page 3 elec. Eng. a cleaner, simpler base map? Lots of numbers are not legible. In some cases the horizontal notation of the fixture overlaps the photometric reading. ACKnow!ecgec Number: 109 Created: 10/14/2005 [10/14/05] Final Plans: The east west pedestrian walkway between the buildings needs to be fit, preferably to about 1 fc. If you are proviing an east west walk to Howes, it should be lit too but please do so in a manner that is sensitive to residential neighbors (full cutoff, no glare or uplighting, lowest amount of light possible to do the job.) Acknowledged. code compliant fixtures will be added in this area Number: 110 Created: 10/14/2005 [10/14/05] Other minor comments on redlines. Acknowledge Topic: Plat Number: 112 Created: 10/14/2005 [10/14/05] Final Plans: Remove signature line for City Clerk. Just leave space for the Clerk's stamp. Acknowledged Number: 113 Created: 10/25/2005 [10/25/05]Pre-hearing and Final Plans (!?*&A@): As our attorneys work through the writing of the purchase agreement language, we are discovering some issues in regard to our process scheduling. For instance, if the purchase agreement occurs first, then the vacation of the right of way and then the development agreement and lastly the plat gets filed, we will need to have a signature block for Penny Flats LLC on the plat. And since the plat will be filed prior to the take down of all of the property, the easements cannot be dedicated on the plat since the City is the property owner and cannot grant easements to itself. The City is pursuing defining easements in the purchase agreement and will forward language to your attorney soon for review. Acknowledged Topic: Site Plan (SA1) Number: 93 Created: 10/14/2005 [10/14/051 Final Plans: You may need to add a signature block for the City Manager on your site plan if the pedestrian easement happens between the townhouses and the trolley barn AcKnowiecge: Topic: Site Plan (SA2) Number: 94 Created: 10/14/2005 [10/14/05] Pre -Hearing: Please show the scheme you propose for a dedicated crossing of Maple at the spine. Acknowledged: see Number 138 response Number: 95 Created: 10/14/2005 [10/14/05] Final Plans: Please show the proposed striping and curb alignment for the bike lane so that riders approach RR tracks at more of a 90 degree angle. Number: 96 Page 3 Created: 10/14/2005 Anne Aspen - PDP-R RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 11_13 05.doc Page 2 Potholing of the existing electrical on the site is scheduled for 11/15/05 to expose the critical points of potential conflict between water and electrical utilities. CDI will schedule site meeting with Roger Buffington to observe actual as -built condition. CDI has been in communication with Ward Stanford regarding the question of traffic mitigation on Cherry Street. At this time it is unclear what measures could be taken to improve the Cherry Street situation CDI has held a coordination meeting with Marc Virata, Anne Aspen and Ron Gonzales. An easement exhibit and plat notes were defined in response to that meeting. CDI has received comments from Ron Gonzales. Marc Virata has forwarded this document to Wally Muscott for review and comment. CDI to make revisions to the language once those comments are received. CDI is under the impression that there is agreement in principle regarding the parameters of the emergency access easement at this time. Topic: Landscape Plan (L1) Number: 106 Created: 10/14/2005 [10/14/05] Pre -Hearing: Please show crosswalk scheme for Maple at the spine. See other minor notes on redlines. Acknowledged: see Number 138 response Topic: Landscape Plan (L2) Number: 107 Created: 10/14/2005 [10/14/05] Final Plans: The ramps proposed at Cherry and Mason are deep enough that they impede pedestrian traffic. Please resize. Acknowleagea Topic: Parking Access Plan Number: 71 Created: 8/30/2005 [10/14/05] This plan still needs some work for legibility and pedestrian access to vertical circulation and safety of pedestrians in the backing area at the NEC of west parking structure. CDI will F, Fans to be prese ,.-+ at hearing Show also the street treatment you propose for a mid -block crossing both north and south. Transportation Coordination approved the idea of a dedicated crosswalk. CDI and JSD will revise the landscape plan for presentation at hearing [8/30/05] Please see the parking plan for redlined comments. This needs to be a separate sheet and a larger scale to review. Please get rid of cars and call out dimensions (typical). Ensure that there is sufficient backing space for cars. Show more detail on vertical circulation conditions —where is the door? Please also dimension the above ground spaces (typical) and show how above ground vertical circulation elements work. Revise the street crossings of the pedestrian spine to be more pedestrian friendly. Show also the street treatment you propose for a crosswalk both north and south. Transportation Coordination approved the idea of a dedicated crosswalk. Provide some bike parking near the north end of the spine for folks arriving from the park or trail. Clean up some scanability issues, marked on redlines. Topic: Photometrics (E1P) Number: 108 Created: 10/14/2005 [10/14/051 Final Plans: This plan is hard to read and has scanability issues. Can you give your Page 2 Arne Aspen - PDP-R RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 11 13 05.doc Pa 1 ,a STAFF PROJECT REVIEW Citv of Fort Collins COBURN DEVELOPMENT INC. Date: 11/04/2005 DANIEL ROTNER 1811 PEARL ST. BOULDER, CO 80302 CDI responses in red CDI pre hearing tasks in red & bold JSD involvement in pre -hearing tasks Staff has reviewed your submittal for PENNY FLATS (BLOCK 33) PDP - TYPE I, and we offer the following comments: ISSUES: Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Anne Aspen Topic: Elevation Number: 72 Created: 8/30/2005 [10/14/05] At some point, preferably before the hearing, you'll need to present some sort of color scheme either in the form of a rendered perspective or elevations or a material sample board. This will facilitate the hearing officer's understanding of the project. Also, since the hearing will be televised, it will be useful for the public's understanding of the project too. CDI will prepare a renderea perspective and PowerPoint presentation tlor the hearing [8/30/051 Please call out colors and materials on your elevations and/or provide sample boards. Mixed -use buildings need to meet Section 3.5.3 (D), including a distinct base and top etc. Topic: General Number: 133 Created: 10/26/2005 [10/26/05] Transportation would like the TIS updated or appended prior to hearing to factor in that there will be no northbound lefts from College to Cherry in the long term - this will impact the Mason/Maple intersection and whether or not the intersection of Cherry/Mason will meet signal warrants in the future. They would also like to see a revised plan for both the pedestrian and bike lane railroad crossing at the northeast corner of the site prior to hearing. Any other comments can be addressed in Final Plan review. CDI will have the TIS updated accordingly for the hearing Number: 138 Created: 11 /4/2005 (11 /4/05] 1 will schedule the hearing once I've reviewed the crosswalk, colors, base and top, and once I hear that Marc is satisfied with the plat and RR issues, Roger is satisfied with the water line issues and that Transportation is satisfied. I will follow up with an email to Dan on Nov. 9th to see where we are. Ingrid, Dan, Marc, Greg and I are likely to need another meeting to resolve, which I can schedule. Jim Sell Design will generate a crosswalk scheme by 11/15/06 for review CDI has been in communication with the BNSF's management subcontractor and they have been unresponsive. Our current inclination is to exclude the railroad easement from the plat and leave it in city ownership with right of way improvements to be constructed by CDI pending approval by the railroad. Page I Ann Aspen - PDP-R RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 11_13_05.doc Page 14 please feel free to call me at (970) 221-6750. Sincerely, Anne Aspen City Planner Page 14 Anne Agpen PDP-R RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 11 13 05.doc PJge 13 shown on Sheet SA6 - Composite site plan. Acknowledged [8/17/05] The Landscape Assurance note on sheet L1 refers to phases, but I don't see any phase lines on the landscape plan. Number: 4 Created: 8/17/2005 [10/18/05) Building 1 is still labeled as townhouse. Since there's no such term, and since the entire building is on one lot (unless they've changed their mind), Building 1 should be labeled as multi -family on Sheet SA2. 4cknowledged Final? [8/17/05] There should be a Land Use Table that clearly specifies the uses. For example, list the types of commercial uses (the narrative states that there will be support -type retail and offices. Does that mean that restaurants won't be located here? Also, the table should list the residential use as "multi -family" since the units are not on their own lots and the land use code does not contain terms like "townhouse", "rowloft", or "loft". The proposed residential buildings are all legally classified as multi-famiy dwellings. The table should list how many 6-plexes, 14- plexes, etc.) Number: 5 Created: 8/17/2005 [10/18/051 1 don't see that the lot lines have been labeled. I can assume which lines are the lot lines, but they need to be labeled (preferably on Sheet SA2. Acknnwledged �inal� [8/17/05] Show the building setback distances on the site plan from the buildings to the lot lines. Some setback distances are shown, but not all, in particular side setbacks. Label the lot lines on the site plan. Number: 6 Created: 8/17/2005 [10/18/05] Based on some notes on Sheet SA6, I guess it's going to be replatted. If so, I need a copy of the plat. PDP re -submittal included a preliminary plat. [8/17/05] Is this going to be replatted? Number: 8 Created: 8/17/2005 [10/18/05] Will they be "reserved" for commercial use? CDI proposes 2 nour parking omits but not reservation for commercial use. Guest parking for residents is also a ootertial desired use of these spaces [8/17/05] It would be nice to have the street parking regulated so that tenants don't park in those spaces. They should be kept open for the commercial uses. Number: 9 Created: 8/17/2005 [10/18/05) 1 don't see the note added on any of the sheets I received. If it was added to an elevation drawing sheet, I'd like to get a copy of it. ,:cKnowledged: CD, mall add this note on final photometric plans [8/17/051 A note should be added somewhere stating that any building mounted lighting will be shielded, down -directional. 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, Page 13