HomeMy WebLinkAboutPENNY FLATS (BLOCK 33) - FDP - 32-05/A - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 -0
City Planner
Page 12
M
i 10
Number: 163
Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] Detail for 1-1/2 and 2 inch water meters has been updated. Use current detail.
Acknowledged: See revised Utility Plans
Number: 164
Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] On Sheet C14, expand the horizontal
scale of the profile to match the plan view
and note the locations of the horizontal bends.
Acknowledged: See revised waterline
plan and profile
Number: 165
Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] See utility plans for other comments.
Acknowledged
Department: Zoning
Issue Contact: Peter Barnes
Topic: zoning
Number: 4
Created: 8/17/2005
[416/06] The revised Sheet SA2 still labels building
1 as townhouse. Acknowledged: See
revised Sheet SA-2
[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.
[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: 9 Created: 8/17/2005
[4/6/06] 1 didn't get a copy of sheets EP1 and EP2. Perhaps Current Planning can check to
make sure the note is there. Acknowledged: See revised Sheet EP-1
[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.
[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 H. Aspen
Page 11
•
Will the construction of these ends involve any foundations? Please note that foundations, if
any, need to be kept clear of that existing easement line. We do not plan any
encroachments in this easement.
Topic: Stormwater-inlet Sizing Calculations
Number: 152 Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] The hydraulic calculations sizing the revised inlet bank along Cherry Street is not
located in the drainage report as indicated in the text of the report. Please submit
calculations for all the proposed inlets as well as the revised inlet banks along Cherry Street.
Please see the revised Drainage Report for this information.
Topic: Stormwater-Trees in Pedestrian Spine
Number: 151 Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] It seems that several of the proposed trees along the pedestrian spine running
north south are within the existing drainage easement and could potentially negatively affect
the existing box culvert. It is our preference that trees be kept out of our easement if that
can be accomplished by shifting them around. If not, then a meeting should be arranged to
discuss alternative tree stocking or tree locations in order to minimize the impact on the
existing storm sewer box. The planting in this area has been changed, See the revised
Landscape Plan. Trees located over the box culvert have all been changed to
Hawthorns because of their shallow root systems.
Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Roger Buffington
Topic: Water/Wastewater
Number: 28 Created: 8/23/2005
[5/2/06]
[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. Fittings and appurtenances have been
labeled and additional references have been made to the Fort Collins Utility Details.
Number: 40 Created: 8/23/2005
[5/2/06] This line has been increased to 8" for the fire sprinkler supply
[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)
[8/23/051 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: 44 Created: 8/23/2005
[5/2/06] ,Acknowledged: See revised Utility Plans
[8/23/05] Coordinate with the landscape plans. Move meter pits out of planting/shrub beds.
Number: 115 Created: 10/25/2005
[5/2/06] Need detail for this special vault. The special vault has been eliminated by
reducing the service size for the commercial spaces to a 1" service. The smaller
meter pit for the 1" service eliminates the space problem created by two 1 %" pits.
[10/25/05] Rotate the 4' x 6' meter vault 90-degrees and show curb stops outside of vault.
(Final compliance item)
Page 10
•
Topic: Site Plan (SA3.2)
Number: 150 Created: 5/3/2006
[5/3/06] Sight distance concerns remain at the accesses, but Coburn has worked well to
maximize the sight distance in their design and landscaping. Equally as good as other
existing structures in the downtown area. We recognize their work while still needing to
maintain our concerns. Traffic has no other comments. Acknowledged.
Topic: Traffic
Number: 26 Created: 8/22/2005
[5/3/06] Our understanding is that we have agreement in principle with Traffic
Operations regarding the access conditions defined in the current plan
[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.
Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Roger Buffington
Topic: Site Plan and Landscape Plan
Number: 39 Created: 8/23/2005
[5/2/06] Provide minimum 5 feet horizontal clearance between water main and kiosk,
transformer and mailboxes. The kiosk location and water line alignment have been
revised. See the revised Site, Landscape and Utility Plans
[10/25/051 There are 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.
[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: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Basil Harridan
Topic: Stormwater- Landscape Plan
Number: 180 Created: 5/8/2006
[5/8/06] Please show the outline of the existing box culvert and the storm drainage
easement on the Landscape Plan. Acknowledged: See the revised Landscape Plan.
Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque
Topic: Stormwater- Water Quality
Number: 65 Created: 8/26/2005
[5/2/06] A meeting is recommended to discuss alternatives on how to meet water quality
requirements. We are in general agreement with the terms for payment in lieu as
outlined in the e-mail from Glen Schlueter to Dan Rotner, dated June 6, 2006. The
specific details for payment and phasing will be worked out prior to construction.
[10/28/05] Final Compliance item. See Above
[8/26/05] The water quality measures will be reviewed by Kevin McBride to ensure they
meet the alternative design previously agreed upon.
Topic: Stormwater-Building Placement Along Howes Street Outfall Easement
Number: 153 Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] The ends of Building 3 and Building 7 seem to have extensions that come right up
to the edge of the storm drainage easement for the existing Howes Street outfall box culvert.
Page 9
0 •
Number: 157 Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] STANDPIPE: All buildings 4 or more stories in height are required to have a
standpipe capable of supplying 100 psi to the highest habitable floor. A fire pump may be
required to attain this psi. Acknowledged:
Number: 158 Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] FDC: The Fire Department Connections for automatic fire sprinklers and standpipes
must be located in such a way to ensure fire department accessibility. Acknowledged:
Number: 159 Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] STAIRWAY IDENTIFICATION: Approved stairwell identification signs shall be
posted at each floor level in all enclosed stairways in buildings four or more stories in height.
Contact Carie Dann for specifics. Acknowledged:
Number: 160 Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] ADDRESS NUMERALS: PFA requires that each building have its address posted
in two locations: the side that fronts the street, and also the side of the building that fronts
the fire lane. Acknowledged:
Number: 161 Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] ADDRESSING OF BUILDINGS 2 AND 3: Based on FCLUC 3.5.2.C.1.b, the
addressing of Buildings 2 and 3 must be off Maple Street. Acknowledged:
Number: 162 Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] MONUMENT SIGNS: PFA requires that monument signs be placed at the drive -
aisle access points (one each at Mason Street and Howes Street) that show the proper
addresses for Buildings 2 and 3. Acknowledged:
Department: Traffic Operations Issue Contact: Ward Stanford
Topic: General
Number: 54 Created: 8/24/2005
[5/3/06] Our understanding is that we have agreement in principle with Traffic
Operations regarding the access conditions defined in the current plan
[ 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 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.
Number: 137 Created: 10/27/2005
[5/3/06] Our understanding is that we have agreement in principle with Traffic
Operations regarding the access conditions defined in the current plan
[10/27/05] Final: Traffic has continuing 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. Plant materials selected in proximity to
the drive entrances and within sight lines have mature heights of less than 30".
Page 8
M
0
looks like may not be occurring 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
[5/5/06] With the phasing plan for utilities now being shown, there is a general question as
to how each phase as it develops will tie into existing conditions. Please provide more
detailed phasing showing how each successive phase of development ties into the existing
conditions. The demo plan should be shown in phases as well. See the Construction
Phasing Plans prepared by Jim Sell Design. This series of sheets replaces the Utility
Phasing sheet from the last submittal.
[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.)
[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.
Topic: Plat
Number: 122 Created: 10/26/2005
[5/5/06] If Coburn Development Inc. is comfortable with replacing "undersigned" with
Coburn Development Inc. in the maintenance and repair guarantee language, we're satisfied
and can consider this issue resolved. Acknowledged, see the revised plat: "the
undersigned" has been replaced with "Penny Flats, LLC" the ownership entity for the
project.
[10/26/05] 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.
Department: Natural Resources Issue Contact: Doug Moore
Topic: General
Number: 140 Created: 4/3/2006
[413/06] No issues.
Department: PFA Issue Contact: Carle Dann
Topic: Fire
Number: 155 Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLERS: All proposed buildings shall be equipped with an
approved, automatic -fire sprinkler system. Acknowledged:
Number: 156 Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] KNOX BOX: PFA requires that all buildings equipped with required automatic fire
sprinklers have a Knox Box mounted near the front entrance. (This is the same comment as
#89, but I'm unable to carry Mike Chavez's comments.) Acknowledged:
Page 7
response to comment Number 173. The 82.36 spot was from the parking behind the
building and not a subsurface elevation.
Number: 175 Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] Given the work previously done with utilities, it may be of benefit for the
developer/engineer to provide additional approval blocks for Comcast, Xcel, and Qwest,
plus adding Light and Power to the City approval block. This is not a requirement but again
may be of benefit to the developer and engineer as these facilities are being shown on the
drawings. We would prefer avoid having to obtain additional signatures for our
approval if they are not required.
Number: 176 Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] In verification with the Pavement Management Engineer, the series of patching
along Howes needs to be expanded from each extent of the patching occurring fully across
the street as the patches are less than 75 feet apart per our criteria in 25.7.2B.6 of LCUASS.
In addition, the patching presently shown on Maple needs to involve the entire half width at
a minimum per the same section. Further analysis of the patching will be made with the
additional patching expansion for the previously mentioned fiber optic and gas lines.
the Construction Phasing Plans prepared by Jim Sell Design.
Topic: General
Number: 13 Created: 8/19/2005
[5/5/06] Per discussion at staff review, please add a note on the building elevations
regarding the inset doors along Maple. See note on Sheet SA-4
[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.
[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
[5/5/06] Given the discussion at staff review regarding the possible payment to Stormwater
in -lieu of providing water quality, the comment is deferred at this time. Should the water
quality planter be used along Maple Street, additional information on the detail dimensioning
the depth and slopes of the soil from the sidewalk edge should be provided. We are in
general agreement with the terms for payment in lieu as outlined in the e-mail from
Glen Schlueter dated June 6, 2006. The specific details for payment and phasing will
be worked out prior to construction.
[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.
[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 a pedestrian less likely to inadvertently 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
Page 6
Number: 169 Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] For transitions from inflow to outfall gutter, please specify a transition length and
indicate on the plan set (such as along Mason Street). Please demonstrate with spot
elevations that positive flowline drainage is being maintained along this area to ensure no
pooling of water can take place. Acknowledged: See revised drawings
Number: 170 Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] Indicate the property line on the grading plan. Acknowledged: See revised
drawings
Number: 171 Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] There are locations along Maple Street and Howes Street where cross slopes
along the street do not meet our 2-3% requirement. Howes Street is notably out of
compliance where the neckdown is being incorporated. Please look at the cross slopes
along these two streets. Additionally, please provide cross slopes (existing and proposed)
along these two streets at 50 foot intervals and at several points along each of the neck
downs to help ascertain how much of the cross slope concerns are due to existing
conditions verses caused by the design. Acknowledged: See Cross Section Sheets.
Most cross slopes have been redesigned to conform with the 2-3% standard. Some
cross slopes are still slightly above 3% and below 2%. A variance has been issued
with this resubmittal to address these areas.
Number: 172 Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] Storm Line #9 has inadequate cover from the top of the pipe. An acceptable
remedy to this (in consultation with the pavement management engineer) would be to have
concrete pavement over this area, extending the existing concrete section south of the pipe.
The asphalt to concrete transition originally proposed would have caused some concern
from our perspective, so the use of concrete over the pipe would accomplish two concerns.
Acknowledged: See revised drawings -the surface above this pipe is now shown as
concrete in the plans.
Number: 173 Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] Please provide a construction drawing illustrating the subsurface area of the
buildings to help illustrate how the parking structure area is situated in relation to right-of-
way and easements as well as how elevations are continued from the entrances of the
parking garage(s) to the basement. Acknowledged: See revised drawings for the Garage
Floor Elevations Sheet. We have confirmed with our geotechnical consultant that any
potential foundation drainage structures can be accomplished on the interior side of
the garage/foundation walls.
Number: 174 Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] I'm not following the spot elevation shown for the underground parking access. For
instance on Sheet C10, spot elevations at the entrance of the garage are shown at 83.45,
then heading north (shown on C9) spot elevation are shown presumably further into the
garage at 82.36, it doesn't appear that there is slope to head down into the basement
(perhaps ID 174) will clarify this? See the Garage Floor Elevation Sheet provided in
Page 5
[5/3/06] Elevations have been revised for buildings 3. 4 & 5 to reflect the design
development of these buildings to date.
[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.
Topic: Photometrics (E1P)
Number: 110 Created: 10/14/2005
[5/3/06] Didn't get redlines back. I contacted RJ McNutt & Associates, and their records
show that the redlines were returned to Current Planning via UPS on 04-03-06. If
needed they have a copy which they can duplicate.
[10/14/05] Other minor comments on redlines.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Marc Virata
Topic: Construction Plans
Number: 21 Created: 8/19/2005
[5/5/06] Carried over as noted in ID 20.
[10/26/05] Carried over for reference to be addressed in detail after a public hearing.
[8/19/051 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: Water quality basins in the
right of way will be eliminated through a "payment in lieu" agreement for off -site
mitigation.
Number: 49 Created: 8/23/2005
[5/5/06] Carried over pending resolution of ID 166.
[10/26/051 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.
[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: 166 Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] Please provide a concrete scoring and joint pattern detail for the concrete areas of
inset parking along Maple Street and Mason Street. Acknowledged: See revised
drawings
Number: 167 Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] The construction plans seem to show additional utility work (fiber optic and xcel)
that results in additional street patching than what is reflected on the demo and grading
plans. Please revise the patching limits accordingly. Utility routing for both Xcel and
Qwest has been revised to provide a layout with fewer street cuts
Number: 168 Created: 5/5/2006
[5/5/06] Provide a detail for truncated domes at access ramps--1607(a). Acknowledged:
See revised drawings
Paee 4
The soil in all landscape areas, including parkways and medians shall be thoroughly
loosened to a depth of not less than eight inches and soil amendment shall be thoroughly
incorporated into the soil of all landscape areas to a depth of at least six (6) inches by tilling,
discing or other suitable method, at a rate of at least three (3) cubic yards of soil amendment
per thousand (1,000) square feet of landscape area. " Acknowledged: These notes have
been added to the Landscape Plan.
Topic: Site Plan (SA 1)
Number: 183 Created: 5/8/2006
[5/8/06] 1 am in the process of getting the proper sidewalk crossing detail. It may be a few
days before I locate it. I'll send it along when I get it. The new crossing detail has been
added to the civil engineering drawings.
Topic: Site Plan (SA2)
Number: 95 Created: 10/14/2005
[5/3/06] Please show on site plan.
[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. Acknowledged: See
revised drawings
Number: 96 Created: 10/14/2005
[5/3/06]
[10/14/05] Final Plans: The units of Building 1 should be designated as a multifamily
fourplex not townhomes. Acknowledged: See revised drawings
Number: 146 Created: 5/3/2006
[5/3/06] Thanks for adding the crosswalk across Maple. Please also show the condition it
will tie into on the south side, including curb line and nearby curbcuts. Acknowledged: See
revised drawings
Topic: Site Plan (SA 3.1)
Number: 147 Created: 5/3/2006
[5/3/06] Great job resolving the spine ramp offsets.
Number: 148 Created: 5/3/2006
[5/3/06] See minor redlined comments. Acknowledged: See revised drawings
Topic: Site Plan (SA3.2)
Number: 149 Created: 5/3/2006
[5/3/06] See minor redlined comments. Acknowledged: See revised drawings. Note
that we have revised the garage plan to eliminate the plaza condition at the raised
sidewalk along Mason Street. The sidewalk is still raised, but the garage no longer
extends below. As part of this reconfiguration, we have reduced the quantity of
accessible parking spaces to a number closer to the code minimum. This allowed for
the creation of additional standard spaces to compensate for the three spaces lost to
the elimination of the plaza condition.
Topic: Site Plan (SA4 and 5)
Number: 111 Created: 10/14/2005
Page 3
location, manner of display, color, working, stereotyped design or otherwise attracts or is
designed to attract attention to the subject or to the premises upon which it is situated, or is
used as a means of identification, advertisement or announcement. The term sign shall not
include the following:
(3) works of art which in no way identify the name of a business and which in the judgment
of a reasonably prudent person are not displayed in conjunction with a commercial
enterprise for the purpose, or with the effect, of advertising a product or service offered by a
business located on the property where such work of art is displayed..."
According to that definition, it may be considered a sign if the businesses nearby/on the
property have Penny Flats in the name, like Penny Flats News Stand. If not, it wouldn't be
considered a sign since the rest is residential uses. This isn't an issue that needs to be
resolved right now. I just wanted you to have a heads -up to the issues.
We appreciate your looking into this. Right now, we are going to wait on the flattened
penny idea until the other issues with the railroad are resolved to avoid confusing
issues in this area of the site
Number: 178 Created: 5/8/2006
[5/8/06] Carol Tunner comments as follows:
"There are two items still of concern to historic preservation: One is the contour/swale lines
starting against the east elevation of the trolley barn. Starting the ground downgrade at the
building could undermine the foundation, and any change of land surface like that within the
designated site would need Landmark Preservation Commission approval. They are
unlikely to give approval so close to the building. Second, the large deciduous tree is
planted close enough to the barn to place its canopy over the roof. This will be a
maintenance problem with clogged gutters and tree debris dropping on the roof to shorten
the roof lifespan there. Better to plant an ornamental tree that doesn't get so large as to
cover the barn roof, or move the tree further away." Acknowledged: We have made some
adjustments to the grading in this area and we are confident that the proposed
topography will not adversely impact the trolley barn. The large deciduous tree has
been replaced with a smaller ornamental tree.
Topic: Landscape Plan (L1)
Number: 179 Created: 5/8/2006
[5/8/06] Tim Buchanan in Forestry comments as follows:
"The following notes should be added to the landscape plan:
A permit must be obtained from the City Forester before any trees or shrubs as noted on this
plan are planted, pruned or removed on the public right-of-way. This includes zones
between the sidewalk and curb, medians and other city property. This permit shall approve
the location and species to be planted. Failure to obtain this permit may result in replacing
or relocating trees and a hold on certificate of occupancy.
The developer shall contact the City Forester to inspect all street tree plantings at the
completion of each phase of the development. All trees need to have been installed as
shown on the landscape plan. Approval of street tree planting is required before final
approval of each phase. Failure to obtain approval by the City Forester for street trees in a
phase shall result in a hold on certificate of occupancy for future phases of the development.
Page 2
(Awal
STAFF PROJECT REVIEW
Citv of Fort Collins
COBURN DEVELOPMENT INC. Date: 05/08/2006
DANIEL ROTNER
1811 PEARL ST.
BOULDER, CO 80302
Staff has reviewed your submittal for PENNY FLATS (BLOCK 33) PDP AND FINAL PLANS
- TYPE I, and we offer the following comments:
Final Compliance Re -Submittal Action: June 21, 2006
ISSUES:
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Anne Aspen
Topic: General
Number: 142 Created: 5/3/2006
[5/3/06] The following departments and agencies have indicated that they have no further
concerns: Parks planning, Water Conservation, GIS, Neighborhood Services, and Xcel
Energy.
Number: 143 Created: 5/3/2006
[5/3/06] Comcast comments that they would like to see a utility easement outside of the
Maple Street right-of-way like was discussed in the past to avoid conflicts with existing
facilities. On June 6, 2006, Dan Rotner had a telephone conversation with Dennis
Greenwalt, of Comcast, regarding this subject. Dennis agreed that an easement along
Mason St. would not be needed if their lines remain in their current location. This was
confirmed in an e-mail to City staff on 06-07-06 which was copied to Comcast.
Number: 144 Created: 5/3/2006
[5/3/06] Building Inspection comments that a presubmittal meeting has been held and
reminds you to verify compliance with Section 1003.3.3.11 of the UBC as you finalize your
plans. Acknowledged
Number: 145 Created: 5/3/2006
[5/3/06] USPS comments that you must provide mailboxes and has attached a letter, which
is included in your redline packet. Acknowledged. Mailbox installation will be phased
with one mailbox location per phase
Number: 177 Created: 5/8/2006
[5/8/06] 1 checked with Peter about the possible flattened penny sculpture and whether it
would trigger sign code requirements or not. Peter read me the definition of sign, including
these excerpts:
"Sign shall mean any writing (including letter, word or number), pictorial representation
(including illustration or declaration), product, form (including shapes resembling any
human, animal or product form), emblem (including any device, symbol, trademark, object or
design which conveys a recognizable meaning, identity or distinction) or any other figure of
similar character which is a structure or any part thereof or is written, painted, projected
upon, printed, designed into, constructed or otherwise placed on or near a building, board,
plate or upon any material object or device whatsoever, which by reason of its form,
Page 1