HomeMy WebLinkAboutPENNY FLATS (BLOCK 33) - PDP - 32-05 - CORRESPONDENCE - (8)Response to PFA comment Number 86
Addressing requirements are acknowledged and shall be implemented at Final
Compliance
General Note Regarding on Site Parking Provided:
The PDP re -submittal set illustrates a reduction in the amount of parking provided on
site relative to the original submittal. The prior submittal called for 324 spaces and
the revised scheme contains 318 spaces. The reason behind this is as follows:
1. The original submittal contained an error in the total count.
2. We have chosen to reduce parking at the surface level to provide for improved
trash and recycling capacity and fire access
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.
Sincerely,
Anne Aspen
City Planner
Please let me know if you have any questions or comments regarding our response.
Sincerely
Daniel R. Rotner, AIA
Senior Architect
Coburn Development, Inc.
Page 13
Number: 44 Created: 8/23/2005
[8/23/05] Coordinate with the landscape plans. Move meter pits out of planting/shrub beds.
Acknowledged: See revised landscape plan
Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Peter Barnes
Topic: zoning
Number: 3 Created: 8/17/2005
[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. See sheet SA-6 for phasing plan
Number: 4 Created: 8/17/2005
[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.) See revised sheets SA-1 & SA-2
Number: 5 Created: 8/17/2005
[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. See revised sheets SA-2 & SA-3
Number: 6 Created: 8/17/2005
[8/17/05] Is this going to be replatted? Yes, see Subdivision Plat
Number: 7 Created: 8/17/2005
[8/17/05] Need to show parking stall dimensions and drive aisle dimensions on parking
plan. The drive aisle dimensions are shown on the surface lot, but I don't see any shown for
the underground lot. I don't see stall dimensions for either lot. See revised sheets SA-3 &
new sheet SA-3.1
Number: 8 Created: 8/17/2005
[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. We would prefer a 2
hour parking limit in these areas if the city will accept this arrangement.
Number: 9 Created: 8/17/2005
[8/17/05] A note should be added somewhere stating that any building mounted lighting will
be shielded, down -directional. Acknowledged: See revised photometric study
Response to PFA comment Number 85
1. A 30' Emergency Access Easement is illustrated on the Subdivision Plat
2. See Sheet SA3.1 for illustration of turning radius feasibility at interior "T"
intersection. Inside radius Of 25' and outside radius of 50' are accommodated
within the proposed EAE.
3. Acknowledged
4. Acknowledged, see Subdivision Plat
Page 12
[8/23/051 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. See mechanical engineer's
line sizing calculations
Number: 31 Created: 8/23/2005
[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. Acknowledged:
See revised utility plan.
Number: 32 Created: 8/23/2005
[8/23/051 Indicate clearly the size of all water services and meters. Acknowledged: See
revised utility plan.
Number: 33 Created: 8/23/2005
[8/23/05] All water services two inch and smaller must have a curb stop adjacent to the
meter pit rather than a gate valve at the connection to the water main as shown. See City's
water service and meter pit details. Acknowledged: See revised utility plan.
Number: 34 Created: 8/23/2005
[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. The garage entries are designed to avoid any storm drainage into
the garages. See revised drainage plan and garage entry profile details.
Number: 35 Created: 8/23/2005
[8/23/05] Use restrained joint pipe and restrain all valves and fittings on the water main
extending north from Maple. Acknowledged
Number: 36 Created: 8/23/2005
[8/23/05] Move the fire line connection for Bldg 3 away from the fire hydrant.
Acknowledged: See revised utility plan.
Number: 37 Created: 8/23/2005
[8/23/051 Install fire hydrant with a standard swivel tee configuration. (Perhaps connect
Bldg 3 fire line to downstream end of swivel tee.) Acknowledged
Number: 38 Created: 8/23/2005
[8/23/051 Label sizes of existing water/sewer mains. Acknowledged: See revised utility
plan.
Number: 40 Created: 8/23/2005
[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. Hydraulic calculations by our mechanical engineer indicate that this line
should be adequate.
Number: 41 Created: 8/23/2005
[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.) Acknowledged
Page 11
Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: David Averill
Topic: General
Number: 75 Created: 8/30/2005
(8/30/05] Are the proposed streetscape/frontage improvements to be phased with
construction? The right of way improvements will be phased in sequence with the
vertical construction to the extent feasible given the City of Fort Collins completion
requirement deadlines.
Number: 76 Created: 8/30/2005
[8/30/05] Please show proposed bicycle rack locations. Transportation Planning staff is
willing to help the applicant find a rack -type that is suitable/complimentary to what is being
proposed. Acknowledged: See revised landscape plan for bike rack details
Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Roger Buffington
Topic: General
Number: 43 Created: 8/23/2005
[8/23/05] For mixed use buildings the standard is to require separate water/sewer services
for the residential and commercial portions of the buildings. Some of the reasons are 1)
plant investment fees and water rights are calculated differently, 2) rate schedules for
monthly billings are different and 3) if restaurants are involved, a wastwater surcharge
applies to both the upfront impact fees and to the monthly billings. The utility plans currently
show a single domestic water line to each building. We should meet and discuss this further
with the Utility Finance group who do our fees and rate schedules. The revised utility
design anticipates separate meters for the residential and commercial uses in
buildings 4, 5, 6 & 8. The remaining buildings are residential only and have each been
provided with a single residential meter
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number: 39 Created: 8/23/2005
[8/23/05] 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. This area has been revised to coordinate with the new utility layout. See
response to comment Number 29
Topic: Utility Plans
Number: 28 Created: 8/23/2005
[8/23/051 Label all water main fittings and appurtenances including those at points of
connection to the existing distribution system. Acknowledged: See revised utility plan.
Number: 29 Created: 8/23/2005
[8/23/05] The water main shown extending north of Maple is in a very congested area.
Schedule a utility coordination to insure that there is space for all utilities. Can electric and
cable go joint trench to minimize number of separate trenches in a very congested area?
Where is telephone? The revised design documented on the utility plans was
coordinated with as built field verification. Electric, CAN and Telephone will all run
in a joint trench in this area.
Number: 30
Created: 8/23/2005
Page 10
Number: 64 Created: 8/26/2005
[8/26/051 The parking garage openings require 1 foot of freeboard from the high water line
or 1.33 the flow depth. If the 1.33 flow depth is less than 6 inches of freeboard, than 6
inches must be used as a minimum. Acknowledged: See revised drainage plan and
garage profile details
Number: 65 Created: 8/26/2005
[8/26/05] The water quality measures will be reviewed by Kevin Mcbride to ensure they
meet alternative design previously agreed upon. Acknowledged
Number: 66 Created: 8/26/2005
[8/26/05] At final, all hydraulic calculations will be reviewed in detail. Acknowledged
Department: Traffic Operations Issue Contact: Ward Stanford
Topic: General
Number: 53 Created: 8/24/2005
[8/24/05] Traffic was not routed a landscape plan or construction plans. Please provide on
subsequent submittals. Acknowledged
Number: 54 Created: 8/24/2005
[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 LCUASS. 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. Acknowledged: See civil engineer's variance request
Number: 55 Created: 8/24/2005
[8/24/05] The geometry of the Cherry and College intersection is in error in the TIS and will
to be amended. Acknowledged: See revised TIS
Number: 60 Created: 8/25/2005
[8/25/05] Please include the new median on Cherry in the ped spine area on the Site,
Landscape and Construction plans. Acknowledged: See revised plans
Number: 61 Created: 8/25/2005
[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. Acknowledged: See revised TIS
Topic: Traffic
Number: 26 Created: 8/22/2005
[8/22/05] The current plan for on -street parking near the site access drives do not meet the
minimum stopping sight distance requirements as provided in the LCUASS. Please review
and mitigate this issue. Acknowledged: See civil engineer's variance request
Number: 27 Created: 8/22/2005
[8/22/05] Please provide design profiles of the underground parking drives from the adjacent
roadway flowline to the garage floor. Acknowledged: See revised drainage plan and
garage entry profile details.
Paae 9
Department: Natural Resources Issue Contact: Doug Moore
Topic: General
Number: 17 Created. 8/19/2005
[8/19/05] Please show details of trash enclosures in future submittals to ensure that LUC
section 3.2.5 Trash and Recycling Enclosures is being met. Please review our guidance
document located at http://www.fcgov.com/recycling/enclosures.php. Trash & recycling
enclosure have been enlarged and additional enclosures have been added — see site
plan.
Department: Police Issue Contact: Joseph Gerdom
Topic: General
Number: 56 Created: 8/24/2005
[8/24/05] Would like to see Ped Walk (E-W between Lot 4 & 5) lighting levels at min of
1.Ofc. The photometric plan has been modified accordingly.
Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque
Topic: Floodplain
Number: 62 Created: 8/26/2005
[8/26/051
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. In place of preparing cross -sections to determine cut vs. fill for each
section within the floodplain, a revised HEC-RAS model has been prepared to verify
that the proposed grading plan results in no rise to the 100-year flood plain (rounded
to the nearest tenth). Additionally, for final submittal, hydraulic modeling will be
prepared to reflect the reduction in the water surface due to additional proposed
inlets
2. A no rise certificate is required for any work in the floodway. Acknowledged: Certificate
will be provided with final compliance documents
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. A revised HEC-RAS
model for Maple Street in the Old Town Basin has been prepared and is included in
the drainage report. Existing spot elevations have not been added to the grading plan
to retain presentation clairity.
5. The grading plan needs to provide existing and proposed spot elevations to document
that no fill is being proposed in the floodway. Acknowledged: See revised grading plan
Topic: Stormwater
Number: 63 Created: 8/26/2005
[8/26/05] Please document in the text of the drainage report how all the sub -basins will
drain to their outfall. Include areas where roof drains will be directing flows as well.
Acknowledged: See revised drainage report and drainage plan
Page 8
"To mitigate potential automobile/pedestrian conflicts at the garage drive exits we are
installing low elevation planting beds in on either side of the ramp exits to push pedestrian
circulation away from the buildings at these locations. This will give drivers the opportunity
to view pedestrians approaching the ramp exit and also allow pedestrians to see cars
approaching before they actually cross the path of travel."
Our sight distance easement criteria specifies plantings not to exceed 24 inches in height.
I'd like to explore different species or different planting types in these areas, such as
groundcover. The landscape plan has been modified as necessary. Please refer to
comment #74.
Number: 19 Created: 8/19/2005
[8/19/05] In addition to the previous comment, the use of planting material in excess of 2
feet where the driveways intersect the adjacent street is problematic from a sight visibility
aspect of drivers seeing pedestrians while turning into the driveways and likewise
pedestrians seeing a turning vehicles. 3.6.3 of the City's Streetscape Design Standards and
Guidelines outlines the requirement. The use of grasses that mature to 5 feet high and
shrubs of similar height in these areas is of concern. This issue perhaps is in conjunction
with ID 26 as the diagonal parking provides the same visibility concerns. Please see the
redlined landscape plans. Plant materials proposed in the landscape plan has been
modified to respect sight distance triangles at driveway intersections.
Number: 22 Created: 8/22/2005
[8/22/05] The landscape plan specifies a water meter location along Maple Street that
appears equally split between the sidewalk and water quality basin/landscape area. This
would appear to be a conflict. Comment acknowledged. Water meter has been moved
out of the landscape area.
Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Doug Martine
Topic: Landscaping
Number: 1 Created: 8/16/2005
[8/16/051 Electric utility transformers must have a minimum of 3 ft.clearance on the back
and both sides, and 8 ft. clearance in front to any building, wall, structure, tree or shrub. The
landscape plan shows several trees and shrubs too close to the transformers. Comment
acknowledged. Landscape plan has been modified as necessary.
Topic: Utility Plans
Number: 2 Created: 8/16/2005
[8/16/05] The water line cannot be placed in the same location as the electric line.
Applicant is encouraged to confirm with the Ft. Collins Water Utility Dept. for the required
horizontal separation. Potholing has been performed to determine the exact location of the
encased electric line. Additional utility locates have been obtained to identify the
location of the encased electric line. The water line has been re -aligned to
accommodate the electric line. The design has been discussed with city staff. The
electric line will be accurately located by working with the City to expose critical
locations by excavation.
Pagc 7
are intended to be repaired and/or replaced by the Owner's Association in the event
exposing underground utilities is warranted.
Number: 25 Created: 8/22/2005
[8/22/051 The address kiosk shown on the site and landscape plans needs to be relocated
outside of the Maple Street right-of-way. Please provide a detail as to what the design of
the kiosk comprises. The kiosk has been removed from the right-of-way. A design of
the kiosk is presented on sheet SA2 plan.
Number: 42 Created: 8/23/2005
[8/23/05] 1 was going to raise a general question regarding the operation of the driveways
off of Maple with regards to the close proximity of the angled parking spots to the driveways
and the ability of turning movements as a result. It seems ID 26 speaks to this issue with
greater detail. On -street parking on Maple Street has been modified to accommodate
the turning movements from the garage entrance ramps. Please refer to comment ID
26.
Number: 57 Created: 8/25/2005
[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. Comment
acknowledged. See civil engineers phasing plan for phasing of right of way and
improvements.
Number: 58 Created: 8/25/2005
[8/25/05] 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 a safer crossing for bicyclists crossing the railroad track. Sidewalk crossings at
the railroad tracks have been modified to provide safer cyclist movement over the
tracks. Please refer to the site plan.
Number: 59 Created: 8/25/2005
[8/25/05] Offsite work is being show along the Trolley Barn which requires a letter of intent
prior to hearing and easement/alignment (as appropriate) after hearing. Comment
acknowledged. The letter of intent will be transmitted under separate cover directly
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number: 14 Created: 8/19/2005
[8/19/05] The landscape plan does not reflect the removal of 13 trees as specified in the
demo plan of the construction documents. Please indicate this information on the landscape
plan and whether the existing trees are to be relocated/eliminated, etc. Has City Forrestry
been made aware of the tree removal? Tim Buchannan has been consulted in regards
to tree removal. The landscape plan has been modified to identify existing trees for
removal/relocation.
Number: 18 Created: 8/19/2005
[8/19/05] 1 question the use of Russian Sage plantings around the driveway openings
leading to the parking garages. With a mature height up to 5' and width of up to 4', this
creates a probably visibility issue for pedestrians and vehicles in these conflict areas. While
I concur with the use of landscape areas, this plant choice doesn't seem well suited for the
intent cited in the response to the Conceptual Review comments:
Pa,e 6
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. Comment acknowledged. Plans
have been modified to clarify that doors will not open into right-of-way.
Number: 15 Created: 8/19/2005
[8/19/051 The main pedestrian spine down the middle of the property is interesting with
regards to the portions within Cherry Street and Maple Street. Why are the access points
designed to appear as driveway connections (with curb radii) interesecting these streets? It
would seem that these "driveway approaches" could be eliminated and access ramps
provided, reducing the amount of "street" type area a pedestrian would have to cross and
being in more keeping with our access ramp requirements. It appears that it may encourage
drivers to believe that vehicles can enter. The plans have been modified to replace curb
radii with access ramps.
Number: 16 Created: 8/19/2005
[8/19/05] The Statement of Planning Objectives and the document "Penny Flats: Block 33.
Fort Collins, CO - Requested Engineering Variances" listed four variance requests. Only the
first variance regarding driveway cuts and street separation requirements is an
"Engineering" variance request. Engineering variance requests (such as #1) are required to
be prepared and signed by a professional engineer licensed in Colorado and meet the
requirements set forth in 1.9.4 of the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards.
Comment acknowledged. Engineering variance requests included with this submittal
are: drainage in rear of diagonal parking on north side of Maple Street and west side
of Mason Street, Slope at intersection of Cherry Street and private drive access, and
alley intersection spacing.
Number: 20 Created: 8/19/2005
[8/19/05] 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. A detail has been
provided to the landscape plan that illustrates the plan with bike racks to discourage
pedestrian movement through the islands.
Number: 24 Created: 8/22/2005
[8/22/05] 1 believe a subsequent utility coordination meeting would be beneficial with the
layout now routed for review. Aside from aspects regarding servicing the site, the various
structures within the alley right-of-way (intended for vacation and retained as a utility
easement in the future) are located over various utilities and maintaining access to these
may be an issue. Several utility coordination meetings have occurred since the first
PDP submittal. Additional surface utility information has been obtained to gain a
better understanding of horizontal orientation of utilities in sensitive areas including
the pedestrian spine. Proposed pedestrian spine elements that remain over utilities
Page 5
concrete section will have a warped surface that will direct storm runoff to inlets
without concentrating discharge in a rear flowline that can be blocked by the rear
tires of larger vehicles. Please refer to the grading plan.
Number: 50 Created: 8/23/2005
[8/23/051 Please specify the placement of Type III barricades at the termination of the
sidewalk heading west along Cherry and north along Howes Street, given that it is proposed
not to build sidewalk along the not a part area of Block 33. Comment acknowledged;
Type III barricades have been added to the grading plan.
Number: 51 Created: 8/23/2005
[8/23/05] The drive aisles connecting the site to Cherry Street has a drive aisles grade of
10% which exceeds our requirements. Per Figure 8-17 of LCUASS, a maximum of 4% is
allowed for a distance of 65 feet from the flowline of Cherry Street. Comments
acknowledged. Slopes in this area have been reduced from 10% so that the
maximum slope is 6%. The private drive access to Cherrry Street will require a slope
greater than 4% to accommodate the post tension slabs underneath for the parking
garage below. As a result, a variance will be required. Please refer to the grading
plan for greater detail.
Number: 52 Created: 8/23/2005
[8/23/05] Why is the access ramp at the southwest corner of Cherry Street and Mason
Street proposed out to the corner of the intersection rather than directional north -south and
east -west? The site plan has been modified to incorporate directional north -south
sidewalk access ramps.
Number: 67 Created: 8/26/2005
[8/26/05] The amount of street patching shown on sheet C2 does not seem consistent with
the utility connections shown on sheet C4 as numerous utility connections are shown on
Maple, Mason, and Howes that are beyond the limits of patching shown. With the amount of
street cuts necessary, a major pavement impact fee would be levied (and the fee tripled if
the street is less than 5 years old). There may be an opportunity to waive the fee with a mill
and inlay of half the street width, however this will be evaluated further upon revised
information on the level of street cuts necessary to serve the development. Comment
acknowledged. Street patching illustrated on the existing conditions and demolition
plan have been modified to include patches for utility connections on the opposite
side of the street.
Number: 68 Created: 8/26/2005
[8/26/05] Please remove instances of the word "alley access" for the drive aisles between
the buildings, as these are private ("private drive" access). Comment acknowledged;
notes have been modified accordingly.
Number: 69 Created: 8/26/2005
[8/26/05] On the signature block, "Water Utility" and "Wastewater Utility" should be
combined into "Water & Wastewater Utility". Comment acknowledged.
Topic: General
Number: 13 Created: 8/19/2005
[8/19/051 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
Page 4
cell # 970-214-3668, fax # 970-225-4139. Site Plan (Sheet SA3.2) has been modified to
include USPS centralized box units.
Number: 48 Created: 8/23/2005
[8/23/05] A mistake was made in the routing of this project. Though the applicant is
providing some affordable housing, it is not the minimum 10% that is required to trigger the
accelerated review. Future routings will be processed in the standard timeframes. Sorry for
the confusion. Comment acknowledged.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Marc Virata
Topic: Construction Plans
Number: 10 Created: 8/18/2005
[8/18/05] Please show the existing driveways directly across the site from the streets
bounded by the site in order to document how the proposed access points are to align/offset
from driveways across the street which will be used as a basis for evaluating any variance
requests regarding driveway separation. Base drawings have been modified to include
driveway locations across the street on streets bordering the project.
Number: 11 Created: 8/18/2005
[8/18/051 Given that the plans specify tapping into utilities that are on offsite (i.e., south side
of Maple and west side of Howes) please document property line boundaries and easement
locations as verification of whether any offsite easements are required. Property lines
have been added to the utility plan. All proposed utility connections are either onsite
or within the ROW.
Number: 12 Created: 8/18/2005
[8/18/05] Indicate existing tree locations along the south side of Maple and Howes in order
to identify any potential conflicts with utility installation occuring on the south side of Maple
as referenced in the previous comment. Tree locations are located on the landscape
plan. All existing trees will either be relocated or removed prior to utility installation.
Number: 21 Created: 8/19/2005
[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. Comment acknowledged. Detail to be
provided with final plan submittal.
Number: 23 Created: 8/22/2005
[8/22/05] 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. Sidewalk chases have been added to site plan & grading
plan where appropriate to ensure roof drainage does not sheet flow across sidewalks.
Number: 49 Created: 8/23/2005
[8/23/051 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 request
would be required for evaluation. This should be a further topic of discussion to consider
design alternatives. As discussed with City staff, the pans will be replaced with a
concrete section that extends from the rear of the parking to the face of curb. This
Pa-e
from fruits, birds, and other debris. Seating opportunities have been increased.
Please refer to the landscape plan for additional detail.
Topic: Parking Access Plan
Number: 71 Created: 8/30/2005
[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. Comments acknowledged; please refer to parking plan for
modifications.
Topic: Photometric Plan
Number: 77 Created: 8/30/2005
[8/30/05] 1 notice that the photometric plan is a work in progress. Please add the fixtures to
the areas indicated on the site plan. The circumf_erence lighting is quite bright. Tone it down
to avoid light spillage off property. The bollards and step lights are very nice, very
appropriate. Comments acknowledged; please refer to revised photometric plan for
modifications.
Topic: Utility Plans
Number: 45 Created: 8/23/2005
[8/23/05] The following departments have indicated that they have no problems or concerns
with the proposed project: Water Conservation and Park Planning. Comment
acknowledged.
Number: 46 Created: 8/23/2005
[8/23/05] Building Inspection comments as follows:
Please find attached the various codes that the Fort Collins Building Department will
enforce. We have already had a required pre -submittal meeting regarding this project, see
attached minutes. Pay careful attention to the solutions of concerns addressed at this
meeting. Comment acknowledged; minutes from July 28, 2005 meeting have been
reviewed and applied to project as appropriate.
Number: 47 Created: 8/23/2005
[8/23/051 The USPS comments as follows:
Mail Service: Centralized delivery using of a minimum of 12 centralized box units (12
industry type III) is required. Revise plan to show the required CBU locations as approved
by the US Postal Service. In all cases the CBU's must be located in the public right-of-way
or a designated easement. Be advised the responsibility of purchase and maintaining the
CBU's with the concrete pads is that of the owner/developer/builder/HOA. Prior to
occupancy within the development approved mail receptacles will be in place. Delivery
Agreement will be in place prior to any delivery of mail. Contact Carl Jenkins Growth
Coordinator, US Postal Service 301 E. Boardwalk, Fort Collins, CO, phone # 970-225-4130,
Pa<,e 2
COBURN
Fort Collins Block 33
Coburn Development and Jim Sell Design have reviewed the comments from the
City of Fort Collins dated 08/30/2005 and have the following responses:
Coburn Development comments in red
- Jim Sell Design Comments in blue
ISSUES:
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Anne Aspen
Topic: Composite Site Plan
Number: 70 Created: 8/30/2005
[8/30/051 Please ensure that the pedestrian spine crossing of the interior drive aisle
emphasizes the priority of pedestrians and their safety. A raised pedestrian crossing at
the intersection with the alley with signage (stop signs) and different pavement
materials will indicate to alley traffic that pedestrians moving along the spine have
priority. Please refer to site plan and grading plan for greater detail.
Topic: Elevation
Number: 72 Created: 8/30/2005
[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 clear base and top
etc. See revised elevations for material call outs and revisions.
Topic: General
Number: 73 Created: 8/30/2005
[8/30/05] Please show the surrounding blocks on all site view plans. They don't need to be
very detailed --just locate in space with accurate ROW and perhaps show some existing
building footprints where that would illustrate something well. Let me know if you need
footprint info. Comment acknowledged. Please refer to site plan, grading plan, and
utility plan for requested information. This information was not duplicated on SA2 &
SA- 6 due to space limitations, let us know if this is a problem
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number: 74 Created: 8/30/2005
[8/30/05] There are numerous places where the landscape plan appears to be at odds with
your concept for this project. Most are noted on the redlines. In general, there are many
sight distance problems, several places in the spine where tall grasses form a wall that limits
community interaction and "eyes on the spine", fruit trees that will drop staining berries on
hardscape etc. I think it would be smart to provide some more seating opportunities in the
spine too. The landscape plan has been modified to ensure plant materials within site
distance triangles do not exceed 2 feet in height at maturity. Ornamental trees
proposed along the pedestrian spine have been modified to minimize inconveniences
Pa,-e 1