HomeMy WebLinkAboutFORT COLLINS DISCOVERY MUSEUM - PDP - 6-10 - CORRESPONDENCE - (8)Number: 8 Created: 3/10/2010
[3/10/10] Just a suggestion: Strategically place some more benches along the walking
paths. I only see a couple of them called- out near the entrance of the building.
Number: 9 Created: 3/10/2010
[3/10/10] Trash dumpster and recycle bins need to be within an enclosure, constructed to
match the main building.
Number: 10 Created: 3/10/2010
[3/10/10] Parking lot/drive aisles can't be gravel. Need to be of an approved hard surface.
Number: 11 Created: 3/10/2010
[3/10/10] Page LS1.3 Please add a note to the General Planting Notes regarding
installation of landscaping prior to issuance of a CO. 3.2.1(1)(4)
Number: 12 Created: 3/10/2010
[3/10/10] Please label the streets on the landscape plan as you did on the Site Plan
Number: 13 Created: 3/10/2010
[3/10/10] I'm questioning the large number of ornamental grasses that are being called out.
Although the initial year they will look great, a year or two into their growth, I feel that it will
just look overgrown and proper maintenance/thinning etc won't take place.
Number: 14 Created: 3/10/2010
[3/10/10] Elevations: Elevations need to comply with section 3.5.3 of the Land Use Code.
In my opinion this does not blend with the architecture of the area... no stone, no brick, very
few windows. It resembles an industrial type use building.
Be sure and return all red -lined 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) 221-6341. Of particular note is General Comment #85,
page 2 regarding the ultimate property line and the Planning & Zoning Board hearing on
April 15t'.
Yo s Truly,
City Planner
cc: Ron Kechter, Operations Services
Marc Virata
Craig Foreman
AECOM
Northern Engineering
CDNS file #6-10
Page 15
Number: 59 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] Include the storm sewer shown in the north part of the site on the overall utility
plan.
Number: 60 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] Is there a conflict at either of the points where the storm sewers cross the existing
water main?
Number: 61 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] Is a separate irrigation tap planned?
Number:62 . Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] Label the invert elevation of the sewer service connection to the manhole.
Number: 63 Created: 3/23%2010
(3/23/10] Re-route the gas line to eliminate the low angle crossings of the existing sanitary
sewer.
Number: 64 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] See redlined utility plans for other comments.
Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Jenny Nuckols
Topic: ZONING
Number: 1 Created: 3/10/2010
[3/10/10] Sheet SD1.3 -A 7' building envelope in referenced. Would like to see it noted on
the plan all around the building - A dashed line would be fine to differentiate that from the
building envelope.
Number: 2 Created: 3/10/2010
[3/10/10] Please remove topo lines from final site plan
Number: 3 Created: 3/10/2010
[3/10/10] What are the dimensions of the bus/RV parking space along the east side.
Number: 4 Created: 3/10/2010
[3/10/10] On the site plan please darken up the lines denoting the parking stalls.... Very
faint.
Number: 5 Created: 3/10/2010
[3/10/10] 1 don't see any handicapped parking spaces being called out. Please show their
location and note their dimensions. NOTE - HC spaces need an HC sign at the head of the
space between 3 and 5' tall.
Number: 6 Created: 3/10/2010
[3/10/10] Please note on the site plan where Type A and Type B fences will be located.
Plans only state "Proposed Fence" but not what type.
Number: 7 Created: 3/10/2010
[3/10/10] Note the building dimensions and setbacks to property line on the site plan.
Page 14
Number: 103 Created: 3/26/2010
[3/26/10] Please see Floodplain Review checklist for items not found on plans or drainage
report.
Number: 104 Created: 3/26/2010
[3/26/10] A no -rise floodplain certification is required for the wetland concept plan since it is
in the floodway.
Number: 105 Created: 3/26/2010
[3/26/10] It is suggested in the Wetland Concept Plan to move the foot bridge out of the
floodway if possible so you do not have to deal with a breakaway design and a no -rise
certification.
Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Roger Buffington
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number: 65 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] Show water/sewer lines more predominantly on the landscape plan and add a
note regarding the separation distance requirements of plantings from water/sewer lines
(Trees 10 feet, Shrubs 4 feet).
Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque
Topic: Stormwater
Number: 53 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] The flows for the southern half of the site do not have volume water quality
treatment per initial discussions with Stormwater staff. A low flow pipe was discussed to
carry the flows to the water quality pond on the north side of the building.
Number: 54 Created: 3/23/2010
(3/23/10] Riprap rundowns are no longer allowed as shown from the north drive loop into
the water quality pond. This can be a concrete chute, or an inlet with a pipe extending to the
toe of slope.
Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Roger Buffington
Topic: Water/Wastewater
Number: 55 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] It's my understanding that portions of the 12-inch water main have NOT been
located. Has the main been located at the tie-in points?
Number: 56 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] The Utility does not have 2.5-inch water meters. Either 2-inch or 3-inch meters
are available. The water service from the main through the meter pit must be the same size
as the meter. At a point 5 feet downstream of the meter, the service size may be increased
to minimize hydraulic losses.
Number: 57 Created: 3/23/2010
(3/23/10] Move the location of the meter pit as noted on the plans.
Number: 58 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] Show and label the curb stop which must be within 2 feet of the meter pit.
Page 13
Topic: Plat
Number: 40
[3/23/10] The boundary & legal close.
Created: 3/23/2010
Number: 41 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] The emergency access easement on the plat, needs to be defined.
Number: 47 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] BNSF Railway will need to sign the plat for the easement vacation, or be vacated
by separate document.
Number: 48 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/101 What is the Union Pacific RR ROW area across our property? It is not defined.
Number: 49 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] Has Mason Street been vacated?
Number: 50 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] The subtitle of the plat needs to be revised.(See plat)
Number: 51 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] Please define the type of the 20' easement alignment on the north side of the
property.
Number: 52 Created: 3/23/2010
(3/23/10] Does the City have title to the triangular parcel between the BNSF, UPRR &
Cherry Street?
Topic: Site Plan
Number: 42 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] The site plans have line over text issues.
Number: 43 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] The site plans have linework that is too light, and will not copy or scan well.
Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque
Topic: Floodplain
Number: 99 Created: 3/26/2010
[3/26/10] Please show floodplain lines more prominently on the Site Plan sheet SD1.3
Number: 100 Created: 3/26/2010
[3/26/10] Please add the note redlined on the Landscape plan sheet LS1.3
Number: 101 Created: 3/26/2010
(3/26/10] Please verify RR elevation vs. College Ave elevation. Use higher of low points.
Please see conceptual comment #2.
Number: 102 Created: 3/26/2010
[3/26/10] Please revise number and dates for the FEMA map references on the plat and in
the text of the drainage report.
Page 12
Department: Traffic Operations Issue Contact: Ward Stanford
Topic: Traffic
Number: 19 Created: 3/19/2010
[3/19/10] The TIS states "another pedestrian improvement that should be considered as
part of the Museum project development is the installation of additional crossing
improvements across Cherry Street in the eastern crosswalk of the Cherry/Mason street
intersection." Please provide discussion and analysis of the impacts and mitigations that
may be involved to provide the additional improvements this project should fund. That
review should include as a minimum the impacts to westbound traffic flow, The need for a
west bound left turn lane at Mason upon conversion to 2-way traffic, would changes to the
median drive further changes due to the existing RR gate structure and possible setback
requirements, and ped volume analysis of the future ped volume the project will generate
that warrants the project funding these additional improvements.
Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: Jennifer Petrik
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number: 66 Created: 3/23/2010
(3/23/10] Suggest contacting Daz Bog to discuss parking.
Number: 67 Created: 3/23/2010
(3/23/10] The TIS and project plans are not consistent. Please reconcile so project plans
and TIS are consistent. Pedestrian crossing improvements may not be required based on
the Pedestrian Level of Service criteria; however improving the crossing Level of Service
would be advantageous given the use and proximity to the Transit Center. An enhanced
crosswalk similar to Maple and Mason would improve the Level of Service without interfering
with a future left turn lane from Cherry onto Mason.
Number: 68 Created: 3/23/2010
(3/23/10] ADA ramps are not shown on plans. Please show ADA ramps.
Number: 69 Created: 3/23/2010
(3/23/101 Suggest contacting DK Kemp the bicycle coordinator at dakemp@fcgov.com
regarding input on bicycle rack style and quantity of bicycle parking facilities. There is an
opportunity to develop a design that is unique to the Discover Science Center. Bicycle rack
needs to be closer to entrance. Current location is further away than vehicle parking. With
current location cyclist will park in areas not intended for bike parking. Any changes that
address Clark Mapes comments on building entrance orientation may affect the location of
the bicycle rack.
Department: Technical Services Issue Contact: Jeff County
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number: 44 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] The landscape plans have linework that is too light, and will not copy or scan well.
Number: 45 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] The landscape plans have line over text issues.
Number: 46 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] There is text that is "cut off' on the tree tables on landscape plan LS1.1.
Page 11
x
Number: 38 Created: 3/23/2010
Remove landscaping around existing electric equipment and proposed new transformer.
Maintain a clearance of 8' from operating doors and 3' from sides of equipment. See
provided sketch for removal areas.
Department: PFA Issue Contact: Carie Dann
Topic: Fire
Number: 89 Created: 3/24/2010
EMERGENCYVEHICLE ACCESS: Instead of an Emergency Access Easement, please
label it an Emergency Access Alignment. All other parameters/requirements for the
Emergency Access Easement provided at conceptual review still apply.
Number: 90 Created: 3/24/2010
FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS AREA: Thank you for the area on the west side of the building
where we can operate fire apparatus. To improve this, here are my suggestions:
- "Strengthen" the language on the site plan and write something like "22x60 Clearance
for PFA Apparatus Access Area" (without the quotes).
- I suggest we also make this part of the Emergency Access Alignment, to prevent
museum folks from erecting outdoor displays and blocking our apparatus access.
This area needs to be clear to the sky (no overhead obstructions)
Let's get together to confirm sign language and placement for this area
Number: 91 Created: 3/24/2010
FACP: Your note should say that the fire alarm control panel will be located in the fire riser
room, not fire entry room. The NE door that provides access to the FRR shall be labeled on
the exterior of the building, "Fire Riser Room" (no quotes). Please get with me for specific
size and color of sign.
Number: 92 Created: 3/24/2010
FACP MAIN ENTRY: Per previous discussions, we will require a full -function FACP located
near the main entrance to the building.
Number: 93 Created: 3/24/2010
FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION: Your note regarding the FDC location is confusing.
You were responding as if you were commenting on fire hydrants. There is only ONE FDC.
Please label the FDC and the fire line coming into the building.
Number: 94 Created: 3/24/2010
EXISTING HYDRANT: Please show and label the existing fire hydrant on Mason Court.
Number: 95 Created: 3/24/2010
RADIO AMP SYSTEM: I'm concerned about the SF of the building (-47,288 SF) in relation
to our requirement for public -safety radio amplification (50,000 SF). I don't want this to be
brought up in the future and you be required to install an amplification system at that time,
when it would cost less to do it now. Please contact Ron Gonzales at PFA, 219. 5316.
Page 10
* #79 the establishment of the platted boundary (as a result of the staff review
discussions), reflected on all the drawings.
* #82 - further follow-up on the findings of the TIS with direction on whether the need for
a crossing improvement on Cherry Street is needed (and if so, what will it be and
how/who will construct?) or the findings of the TIS are amended or changed to indicate
the improvement isn't required.
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number: 81 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] It appears that street trees aren't being provided along the Cherry, Mason, and
College fronting the property?
Topic: Plat
Number: 79 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] The platted boundary seems to show areas that may require the signature of one
or both railroad companies on the plat. Confirmation from the appropriate City attorney who
will be certifying the plat should be coordinated as soon as possible to understand what may
be needed. from the railroad companies in order to meet the requirements for the City
attorney to sign off on the plat. The indication of a railroad easement to be vacated by this
plat appears to be odd if intending to truly "vacate" as this would imply signature from that
railroad company being needed.
Number: 80 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] The plat should be showing the establishment of a right-of-way area/alignment
that would correspond to the back of sidewalk for Mason Court. (Upon property transfer
such that the City no longer owns the area within the platted boundary, this section would be
reserved to become public right-of-way).
Number: 83 Created: 3/24/2010
[3/24/10] Technical Services has raised the question as to whether the original Mason
Street north of Cherry has ever been vacated. If this is truly right-of-way, given the
conveyance of the property to the Discovery Museum, we should probably check with the
City Attorney's Office on whether this portion potentially being right-of-way and then
conveyed to the Discovery Museum is problematic or not. Should that be viewed as
problematic, a vacation process of Mason Street should perhaps proceed as soon as
possible.
Topic: TIS
Number: 82 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/101 Should through the conclusion of the analysis of the TIS result in some sort of
pedestrian crossing improvement on Cherry Street, the design and specifications of such an
improvement will need to be shown on the construction and site plan drawings.
Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Alan Rutz
Topic: Light & Power
Number: 37 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] Due to asbestos contamination in the area additional construction costs will apply.
Page 9
driveway intersected Mason Court closer to 90 degrees, the turning movement off Mason
Court would perhaps be smoother.)
Number: 76 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] There may be a desire by the developer's consultant to seek separate
entitlements of first rough grading for the property, and then the remaining utilities,
hardscape, building, and final grading with a second entitlement. This appears to be
possible, though an expanded City staff should meet with the consultant team to verify what
the requirements will be for a final approval for grading only.
Number: 77 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] The triangular portion of property on the southeast corner of the site (south of
BNR) was previously under an obligation to repay the City for the construction of Cherry
Street. The dollar amount was for $2,375.40 (plus a percentage added to recognize the
effects of inflation). Please be aware that this obligation would be carried over on this
project, with the additional Cherry Street frontage west of that portion also needing to be
included. In addition, it appears repays would be required for the frontage along College
Avenue, and a repay may be required from the developer of Mason Street North for the
frontage on Mason Court.
Number: 78 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] As a heads -up, per an earlier email I had sent on 2/3/2010, the following approach
shall be used in lieu of a development agreement for the project:
- A development agreement will not be done for the project.
- Instead of a DA, needed provisions that would have been in a development agreement
will be placed on the plat.
- These provisions needing to be placed on the plat are specific to concerns regarding
ongoing maintenanceP'running with the land" types of provisions. Items that would
pertain to construction of the development should not be included.
- There are a few standard conditions in the typical development agreement that will be
included on the plat after consultation with Paul. I'm also understanding that there will
be special condition type language added to the plat pertaining to at least stormwater
and natural areas. Finally repays for public streets fronting the project would likely need
to be included on the plat.
Number: 96 Created: 3/25/2010
[3/24/10] Sheri Langenberger calculated an additional $573.25 required for the TDR fee
(see attached) based upon mainly the finding of a higher building square. footage than what
was indicated on the TDR fee application. Given that there may be some changes reducing
the area being platted, there could be some savings to offset the additional amount owed.
Number: 97 Created: 3/25/2010
[3/25/101 The following are the items that I believe should be resolved prior to the public
hearing for the project:
#71/#72 - either a letter of intent from UP Railroad/Mason Street North, LLC or revise
the drawings to no longer show work being done outside of the property.
Page 8
* The entries into the building, on all sides, are difficult to find on this plan.
* Please better delineate the dividing line between the asphalt paving and the gravel
paving for the driveway on the east/northeast side of the building.
* There is fiber optic cable in an easement running diagonally through the south end of
the property. Is this facility intending to connect to and utilize this cable?
* A detail or details is/are needed for the retaining walls on the west side of the building.
* If striping is proposed for the pedestrian crosswalk at the entry drive to the facility, the
question is: Could more substantial enhancement be provided here?
* There is no intent to physical control (gate, etc.) entry into the facility's parking lot, is
this correct?
* Will the amount of building, walls, and patio as shown be allowed within the 100'
wetland buffer?
* Does the 100' wetland buffer actually end in the planting area at the southwest corner
of the building, as shown?
* The pipes at the south/southwest and north sides of the building should be labeled as
to what they are, presumably storm drains.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Marc Virata
Topic: General
Number: 71 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] The project shows offsite grading work on what appears to be UP Railroad
property. The offsite work would require a letter of intent from UP prior to scheduling a public
hearing per the PDP submittal requirements. Alternatively, the project could be designed to
show no off -site work which would then negate the letter of intent requirement.
Number: 72 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] The project appears to show some offsite sidewalk and potentially storm sewer
work on property owned by Mason Street North, LLC. A letter of intent from that property
owner should be provided prior to hearing. Will that property owner be agreeing to the
sidewalk maintenance?
Number: 73 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] Please indicate on the construction and site plan drawings the width of the
sidewalk along Mason Court that is to be added.
Number: 74 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] Please show the drive approach out to Mason Court being in concrete to the back
of sidewalk (this should also be reserved out on the plat as right-of-way).
Number: 75 Created: 3/23/2010
[3/23/10] The use of a 25' radius for the drive approach onto Mason Court is required to be
15' per Table 8-2 of LCUASS. The radius should be reduced (as a suggestion, if the
Page 7
3. The Discovery development team has been informed that they may be able to attach to
the existing Lee Martinez irrigation system for their outdoor landscape water needs.
This would be a cost savings to the project in not having to establish a new tap for their
landscape needs. This item can be coordinated with Bill Whirty for the physical
connection and cost sharing items.
4. The development team agreed to supply power for a light to new park sign from their
electrical system.
5. The parking needs for park and trail users will be addressed at a later date since the
programming of the Discovery Museum is unknown at this time. Once the
programming and associated parking needs are more defined; then the ability for
shared parking for park and trail user can be determined.
6. Staff is working with Ingrid in the City Attorney's Office to determine the legal for the
Discovery Museum building and affected land around the building for its "lot".
7. Park Maintenance will work with the Discovery Museum team on documentation as to
.who does what" on the landscape areas around the building and improvements, such
as boardwalks, etc., for their long term operation and maintenance.
Topic: Site Plan
Number: 18 Created: 3/19/2010
[3/19/101 Several things under LAND USE DATA on the Site Plan cover sheet:
* Zoning is POL & CCR (unless the triangular area between the railroad tracks & Cherry
Street and the area between the parking lot and North College Avenue area removed
from the within property boundary). Nothing is proposed in either of the aforementioned
areas except trees in the triangular area. The only thing to be aware of in the CCR
District is Section 4.20(D)(4)(a) Landscaping/Vegetation Protection, which states:
"The natural qualities of the River landscape shall be maintained and enhanced using
plants and landscape materials native to the River corridor in the design of the site and
landscape improvements." It might be a stretch to say that this triangular area, at the
corner of Cherry Street and North College Avenue, is in the "River corridor".
The Gross Land Area and the Net Land Area numbers appear to be reversed. The Net
is larger than the Gross as shown.
Number: 20 Created: 3/19/2010
(3/19/10] Overall Site Plan, Sheet SD1.2:
Please bring the line weight for the background information up slightly so that it is
legible. There are numerous labels for things that are not readable.
* Please distinguish between the 2 zoning areas (POL & CCR) on the plan.
Number: 21 Created: 3/19/2010
(3/19/10] Site Plan, Sheet SD1.3:
* Please bring the line weight for the background information up slightly so that it is
legible. There are numerous things that are not readable.
Page 6
7. All plant material in the buffer zones shall consist of native plant species common to
the existing habitat.
8. Provide a separate plant list and seed list for the buffer zone plants.
9. Remove all Siberian Elm and Russian Olive trees within the buffer zone, excluding any
wetlands areas.
10. Additional plant material is required between the bike trail and the edge of the wetlands
to enhance the buffer zone such that the landscape improvements, along with the
removal of nuisance trees, performs equal to or better than the performance standards
in Section 3.4.1(E) of the LUC.
11. Lighting shall not extend into the buffer zone.
12. The 2 parking lot pole mounted lights next to the natural feature and buffer zone are
required to have a house side shield on the fixture. Provide product information on the
fixtures.
13. Remove references to the 300' Poudre River buffer and the 100' wetland buffer from all
plans.
14. Provide construction details for proposed fences adjacent to natural feature buffer
zones.
15. Add buffer zone distances to all sections on SD5.1.
16. Add tree protection notes to the Utility Plan set, sheet C001.
17. All comments can be addressed during Final Plan Review.
Topic: Parks Planning
Number: 15 Created: 3/19/2010
[3/19/10] From: Craig Foreman, Park Planning and Development:
Lee Martinez Community Park Sign — Staff has been working with the development
team to site a new sign for the park in the appropriate location off Cherry Street. The
site proposed for the sign appears to have a conflict with a proposed telecom line. A
storm water line in the location may be able to be worked around. The proposed
relocation of the sidewalk running east/west in this area needs to remain at existing
location. This sidewalk will need a flat connection, maximum 3%, to the proposed re-
graded trail running north/south. Discussion needs to continue on this important sign
for the park.
2. The sidewalk proposed between Cherry Street and the Discovery Center building has
been discussed about becoming an attached walk along Disc. Court drive. This
seemed to be a good decision and opens up some land for the Discovery sign. It is
proposed the sidewalk be widened to 10' from back of curb if attached, due to the
amount of anticipated traffic and for snow removal.
Page 5
Topic: Natural Resources
Number: 87 Created: 3/24/2010
[3/24/10] Mark Sears of the Natural Resources Department offered the following comments:
The maintenance access road to the river will need to line up with the existing road
north of the Poudre trail.
2. Could the water quality pond drain north in a pipe under the maintenance road and
then through a depressed area, perhaps a drainage swale and then in a pipe under the
Poudre trail, then again in a swale to the river?
Number: 98 Created: 3/26/2010
Environmental Planner (Dana Leavitt) comments:
Add "Natural Feature Buffer Line" to the following plans:
• Plat, sheets 1 & 2
• Site Plan, sheets SD1.2, SD1.3
• Landscape Plan, sheets LS1.1, LS1.2, LS1.4
• Utility Plans, sheets C100, C200, C201, C300, C400 & C401
• Lighting Plan
2. Add "Natural Feature Buffer Zone" in the buffer areas to the following plans:
• Plat, sheets 1 & 2
• Site Plan, sheets SD1.2, SD1.3
• Landscape Plan, sheets LS1.1, LS1.2, LS1.4
• Utility Plans, sheets C100, C200, C201, C300, C400 & C401
• Lighting Plan
The Natural Feature Buffer line is to include the Poudre River 300' buffer, the wetland
buffer (which is to be defined as the west edge of the bike trail) and the fox den buffer.
Buffer lines are only shown on the project property.
3. Show the edge of the wetlands on all sheets.
4. Add 'Limits -of -Development" (LOD) line per the full extent of development activities
(from site, landscape and utility plans) on the following sheets:
• Site Plan, sheets SD1.2, SD1.3
• Landscape Plan, sheets LS1.1, LS1.2, LS1.4
• Utility Plans, sheets C100, C200, C201, C300, C400 & C401
5. Add the note "Refer to Section 3.4.1(E) of the Land Use Code for allowable uses in a
buffer zone" to Plat, Site, Landscape and Utility Plans.
6. Add Environmental Planner signature block to the following plans:
Utility Plans, sheets C100, C200, C201, C300, C400 & C401
Page 4
Number: 86 Created: 3/24/2010
[3/24/10] After further thought about documents to re -submit by Wednesday, March 31 st (or
as soon thereafter as possible) here are the numbers of each document:
* 12 Site Plans
* 8 Landscape Plans
* 4 Building Elevations Plans
* 11 Subdivision Plats
* 9 Utility Plans
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number: 27 Created: 3/22/2010
(3/22/10] Please bring the line weight for the background information up slightly so that it is
legible. It is difficult to identify the driveways and parking lots amidst the landscaping.
Number: 28 Created: 3/22/2010
[3/22110] There are numerous "line-overs" on the Landscape Plan where the plant labeling
cannot be read very well. Please change.
Number: 29 Created: 3/22/2010
[3/22/10] Please darken the line weights for the various items under the LEGEND.
Number: 30 Created: 3/22/2010
[3/22/10] The pipes at the south/southwest and north sides of the building should be labeled.
as to what they are, presumably storm drains.
Number: 31 Created: 3/22/2010
[3/22/10] Please add the required standard note about installing or securing the
landscaping prior to Certificate of Occupancy (see red -lined Landscape Plan, sheet #LS1.3).
Number: 32 Created: 3/22/2010
[3/22/10] The fences are very difficult to see on the Landscape Plan.
Number: 33 Created: 3/22/2010
[3/22/10] Please label the adjacent streets, Mason Court and Cherry Street, on the
Landscape Plan.
Number: 34 Created: 3/22/2010
(3/22/10] Please label the Railroad Easements on the Landscape Plan.
Number: 35 Created: 3/22/2010
[3/22/10] Please label the building (Fort Collins Discovery Museum) on the Landscape Plan.
Number: 36 Created: 3/22/2010
[3/22/10] Please label the Pedestrian/Bicycle Trails on the Landscape Plan.
Number: 88 Created: 3/24/2010
[3/24/10] Street trees (canopy shade trees) must be provided along the property's frontages
on Cherry Street and Mason Court (at 30' to 40' spacings) per Section 3.2.1(D)(2) of the
Land Use Code. Please see red -lined Landscape Plan sheet #LS1.4.
Page 3
The north building in Penny Flats, yet to be built, will be 5 stories in height, similar to the 58'-
6" tower height on the Discovery Museum.
Number: 26 Created: 3/22/2010
[3/22/10] Staff agrees with the analysis provided in the Special Height Review Request for
the portions of the building in excess of 40' in height. The views to and through the site will
be minimally impacted, with the view of only one small area of foothills from properties east
of North College Avenue that will be impacted. The shadows from the building will be
completely contained on -site with the exception of 9 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. on December 21st.
In the morning there will be shadows cast over natural areas to the west and north of the
building for a short period of time; and, in the afternoon there will be shadows cast over a
short stretch of railroad tracks, off -site to the east, for a short period of time. On -site lighting
will be sensitive to the surrounding natural areas environment and no other buildings will be
adversely affected by the shadows cast by the Discovery Museum building. The building will
be in scale with the surrounding neighborhoods and privacy will not be compromised by this
facility.
Topic: General
Number: 16 Created: 3/19/2010
[3/19/10] Richard Stiverson of Qwest indicated that they have no problems with or
concerns about this development proposal.
Number: 17 Created: 3/19/2010
[3/19/10] Statement of Planning Objectives:
page 10 - "parking area contains 68 spaces" ... Should this be 71 parking spaces?
pages 10 & 11 - references 11 part-time employees as FTE's (being full-time
employees). Is this not contradictory?
Number: 22 Created: 3/19/2010
(3/19/10] The property that the Discovery Museum will be located on is, and supposedly will
continue to be, owned by the City of Fort Collins. This is indicated on the application and in
the Statement of Planning Objectives. However, would it be possible to provide information
about the actual operators of the facility? Also, what is/are the funding source(s) for the
Discovery Museum?
Number: 84 Created: 3/24/2010
[3/24/10] Don Kapperman of Comcast Cable TV indicated that they have no problems with
or concerns about this development proposal.
Number: 85 Created: 3/24/2010
[3/24/10] After lengthy discussion at staff review on Wednesday morning, March 24th, it
was determined that the Fort Collins Discovery Museum, Project Development Plan could
possibly go to the Planning & Zoning Board on April 15, 2010 if certain additional information
is provided in a timely manner. However, there appears to be a significant difference of
opinion between several City departments and the development team about the
property line for the Discovery Museum as currently shown on the Site Plan and
Subdivision Plat and the ultimate property line. If this cannot be resolved soon it
would be inappropriate for this development proposal to go to the Board in April. The
issue could be difficult to resolve between. PDP approval and Final Plan approval.
Pale 2
g>.
i
STAFF PROJECT REVIEW
W
City of Fort Collins
OZ Architecture Date: 3/26/2010
c/o David Schafer
1805 29th Street, #2054
Boulder, CO 80302
Staff has reviewed your submittal for FORT COLLINS DISCOVERY MUSEUM, PROJECT
DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PDP) - TYPE 2, and we offer the following comments:
ISSUES:
Department: Advance Planning Issue Contact: Clark Mapes
Topic: Building Elevations
Number: 39 Created: 3/23/2010
(3/23110] The building and site plan should have a much clearer and stronger pedestrian
orientation to the corner of Mason Court and Cherry Street. That is by far the most
important pedestrian linkage and corner. The building overtly de-emphasizes this
relationship with the location of the entrance and the overall massing and design. Let's
discuss this.
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Steve Olt
Topic: Building Elevations
Number: 23 Created: 3/22/2010
[3/22/10] The proposed Discovery Museum is a relatively contemporary building in this
older part of Fort Collins. This comment relates to both the architectural design and the
materials. There is a statement in Section 3.5.1(B) Architectural Character that says: "New
developments in or adjacent to existing developed areas shall be compatible with the
established architectural character of such areas by using a design that is complementary".
Please provide a brief explanation of how this building complements other buildings in the
area, or visa versa..
Number: 24 Created: 3/22/2010
(3/22/10] The proposed building materials are as follows:
* precast concrete
* stucco
* metal planting trellis
* metal panels (gray)
*. spandrel glass
Without a doubt there are existing buildings in the area containing precast concrete, stucco,
and spandrel glass materials; however, are there any metal panels or metal planting trellises
on buildings in the area? The metal planting trellises (with live greenery) up against the
precast. concrete walls is a good effect but the significant metal panels on the tower portions
of the building may not be duplicated anywhere in the area.
Number: 25 Created: 3/22/2010
[3/22/10] The heights of the various portions of the building will be consistent with existing
and proposed buildings in the area. There are 2-story buildings, 3-story buildings, and 4-
story buildings that provide similar heights to the 21'-6", 30'-8", and 49'-0" heights proposed.
Page 1