Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPENNY FLATS (BLOCK 33) - PDP - 32-05 - CORRESPONDENCE - (10)[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 [8/17/05] Is this going to be replatted? 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. 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. 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. 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 Page 11 [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. 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. 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. Number: 36 Created: 8/23/2005 [8/23/05] Move the fire line connection for Bldg 3 away from the fire hydrant. Number: 37 Created: 8/23/2005 [8/23/05] Install fire hydrant with a standard swivel tee configuration. (Perhaps connect Bldg 3 fire line to downstream end of swivel tee.) Number: 38 Created: 8/23/2005 [8/23/05] Label sizes of existing water/sewer mains. 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. 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.) Number: 44 Created: 8/23/2005 [8/23/05] Coordinate with the landscape plans. Move meter pits out of planting/shrub beds. 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. 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.) Number: 5 Created: 8/17/2005 Page 10 Number: 84 Created: 8/30/2005 [8/30/05] The idea of an enhanced mid -block crossing of Cherry St. was discussed at the TAC review of 8/24/05 in accordance with the Civic Center Master plan strategy of creating an enhanced pedestrian spine through this area. Thanks for considering this improvement for future submittals. 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. 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. Topic: Utility Plans Number: 28 Created: 8/23/2005 [8/23/05] Label all water main fittings and appurtenances including those at points of connection to the existing distribution system. 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? Number: 30 Created: 8/23/2005 [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. 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. Number: 32 1Created: 8/23/2005 [8/23/05] Indicate clearly the size of all water services and meters. Number: 33 Created: 8/23/2005 Page 9 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. 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. 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? Number: 76 Created: 8/30/2005 [8/30/05] Please show proposd 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. Number: 78 Created: 8/30/2005 [8/30/05] How much thought has the applicant given to the Mason street frontage and how the "split-level" sidewalk will work with future uses, particularly if "sidewalk dining" is proposed? There seem to be potential conflicts between public and private uses of this space. I'm just wondering what the applicants thought process is on this piece of the proposal. Number: 79 Created: 8/30/2005 [8/30/05] Please provide some street -signing and striping drawings (these can probably be shown with the utility plans or on the site plan) to provide a little more context with surrounding development and infrastructure. Thanks. Number: 80 Created: 8/30/2005 [8/30/05] Please provide a detail of sidewalk crossings at the railroad tracks on this site. Number: 81 Created: 8/30/2005 [8/30/05] Please revise the curbline on Mason as it crosses the railroad spur in order provide a better crossing for bicycilists in the bike lane on Mason. This crossing has historically been an issue and part of the problem can be solved by providiing this modified curb line so that cyclists can cross the tracks at closer to 90 degrees. We talked about this at the TAC on 8/24/05 but if it is not clear what we are requesting please contact me directly. Number: 82 Created: 8/30/2005 [8/30/05] Type III barricades need to be shown at the end of your sidewalk improvements on Cherry and Howes. Number: 83 Created: 8/30/2005 [8/30/05] Please be aware that your proposal shows a net loss of public parking on Cherry St. and that this may be a bit of a hurdle for you to cross as the project progresses. Page 8 3. A floodplain use permit is required for any improvements within the floodplain or floodway. The fee is $25. 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. 5. The grading plan needs to provide existing and proposed spot elevations to document that no fill is being proposed in the floodway. 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. Number: 64 Created: 8/26/2005 [8/26/05] 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. 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. Number: 66 Created: 8/26/2005 [8/26/05] At final, all hydraulic calculations will be reviewed in detail. 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. 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 comers 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 comers. 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. 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. 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. Page 7 [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. 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. Department: Light & Power Topic: Landscaping Issue Contact: Doug Martine Number: 1 Created: 8/16/2005 [8/16/05] 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. 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. Department: Natural Resources Topic. General Issue Contact: Doug Moore 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. Department: Police Topic: General Issue Contact: Joseph Gerdom 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 1.0fc. Department: Stormwater Utility Topic: F/oodp/ain Number: 62 Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Created: 8/26/2005 [8/26/05] 1. The Old Town Master Plan indicates that floodplain and floodway exist in the right-of-way near the southwest comer 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. 2. A no rise certificate is required for any work in the floodway. Page 6 Number: 25 Created: 8/22/2005 [8/22/05] 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. 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. Number: 57 Created: 8/25/2005 [8/25/05] 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 [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. 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 easementlalignment (as appropriate) after hearing. 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? 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: "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. Number: 19 Created: 8/19/2005 Page 5 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). 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". Topic: General Number: 13 Created: 8/19/2005 [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: 15 Created: 8/19/2005 [8/19/05] 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. Number: 16 Created: 8/19/2005 [8/19/051 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. 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. 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. Page 4 [8/18/05] 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. 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. 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. 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. Number: 49 Created: 8/23/2005 [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. Number: 50 Created: 8/23/2005 [8/23/05] 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. 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. Number: 52 Created: 8/23/2005 [8/23/05] Why is the access ramp at the southwest comer of Cherry Street and Mason Street proposed out to the comer of the intersection rather than directional north -south and east -west? 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. Page 3 of the spine for folks arriving from the park or trail. Clean up some scanability issues, marked on redlines. 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 circumfrence lighting is quite bright. Tone it down to avoid light spillage off property. The bollards and step lights are very nice, very appropriate. 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. 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. Number: 47 Created: 8/23/2005 [8/23/05] 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, cell # 970-214-3668, fax # 970-225-4139. 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. Department: Engineering Issue Contract: 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. Number: 11 Created: 8/18/2005 Page 2 STAFF PROJECT REVIEW City of Fort Collins 0 COBURN DEVELOPMENT INC. Date: 08/30/2005 DANIEL ROTNER 1811 PEARL ST. BOULDER, CO 80302 Staff has reviewed your submittal for PENNY FLATS (BLOCK 33) PDP - TYPE I, and we offer the following comments: ISSUES: Department: Current Planning Topic: Composite Site Plan Number: 70 Issue Contact: Anne Aspen Created: 8/30/2005 [8/30/05] Please ensure that the pedestrian spine crossing of the interior drive aisle emphasizes the priority of pedestrians and their safety. Topic: Elevation Number: 72 Created: 8/30/2005 [8/30/05] 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. 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. 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. 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 Page 1