HomeMy WebLinkAbout300 SMITH STREET, OLD TOWN COMMONS - PDP - 39-03A - CORRESPONDENCE - (15)0
0
Number: 6 Created: 10/21 /2004
[10/21/04] Please submit standard size blueprints 24 x 36"
Number: 7 Created: 10/21 /2004
[10/21/04) Roof plan and Gross area plan are not required/necessary
Number: 8 Created: 10/21 /2004
[10/21/04] On the site plan, please show, label building dimensions, footprint/envelope,
distance to property lines.
Number: 9 Created: 10/21 /2004
[10/21/04] Please note the actual max building height on the elevations
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
City Planner
Page 6
Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: David Averill
Topic: Transportation
Number: 30 Created: 11 /2/2004
[11/2/04] Seems like a pretty straightforward submittal. I'll reiterate Engineering Staff's
comments (no.'s 19, 23, and 24) from above.
Number: 31 Created: 11 /2/2004
[11/2/04] Is there a compelling reason that the walk along Olive has been designed with a
"meander"? I'm not necessarily for or against it, just wondering why the design turned out
as such.
Number: 32 Created: 11 /2/2004
[11/2/04] Was there a TIS required with this project as the conceptual comments indicate?
Or was it waived? If it has been submitted I would like to take a look at a copy.
Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Jeff Hill
Topic: General
Number: 42 Created: 11 /4/2004
[11/4/04] Show and label location of existing sanitary sewer service. This service must be
used or abandoned at the main. Clearly define the abandonment procedure and new tap
procedures (If used).
Number: 43 Created: 11 /4/2004
[11/4/04] HOA documents will be required prior to final approval of development plans.
Number: 44 Created: 11 /4/2004
[11/4/04] Include the standard general notes on the landscape plans pertaining to locating
utilities and utility/landscape separation distances.
See site, landscape and utility plans for other comments.
Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Jenny Nuckols
Topic: Zoning
Number: 1 Created: 10/21 /2004
[10/21/04] Need to show parking stall dimensions
Number: 2 Created: 10/21 /2004
[10/21/04] Need 1 handicap space and that space needs to be van accessible - 16' overall
width - and signed as such
Number: 3 Created: 10/21 /2004
[10/21/04] Does the turf continue to the back (south) side of the building - it is unclear on
the drawings
Number: 4 Created: 10/21 /2004
[10/21/041 Need to show foundation plantings on the south side of the building.
Number: 5 Created: 10/21 /2004
[10/21/04] Need a note on the landscape plan regarding installation on landscaping prior to
issuance of Certificate of Occupancy.
Page 5
Number: 28 Created: 10/29/2004
[10/29/04] In general, provide standard title blocks, approval blocks (as appropriate), and
other required information on all drawing documents.
Number: 29 Created: 10/29/2004
[10/29/04] The soils report appears to recommend 10% slopes around the foundation(s)
which doesn't appear to be accommodated into the design, though if 10% slopes are to be
designed, could there be a concern with how such a design would tie into existing grades to
the south?
Number: 41 Created: 11 /3/2004
[11/3/04] A utility coordination meeting is suggested to discuss utility servicing to the site. I
will send out an email to the utilities in order to begin this.
Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Doug Martine
Topic: Light & Power
Number: 10 Created: 10/27/2004
[10/27/041 Electric and gas service & meter locations will need to be coordinated with Light
& Power Engineering and Xcel Energy. Normal electric development charges and electric
system modification costs will be payable by the developer.
Department: Police Issue Contact: Joseph Gerdom
Topic: General
Number: 33 Created: 11 /2/2004
[11/2/04] Questions about site lighting - specifically the east parking area. Also, is there a
path from parking area to units? How will access along south side of structure be designed
(is there a fence or is it open to foot traffic?)
Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque
Topic: Stormwater
Number: 45 Created: 11 /4/2004
[11/4/04] Please provide offsite contours 50 feet from the property line along the south edge
of the property. This is to ensure swale grading can tie into existing grades and that no
offsite grading easement will be required.
Number: 46 Created: 11 /4/2004
[11/4/04] At final design, a swale cross-section showing the flow depth will be required for
the south swale to ensure that the flows will not inundate the window wells.
Number: 47 Created: 11 /4/2004
[11/4/04] At final, more spot elevations are required for the area where the existing alley ties
into the new paved alley to ensure the drainage has a positive outfall at this junction and
onto the public street.
Number: 48 Created: 11 /4/2004
[11/4/04] If the building does need to be raised per the soils report, additional issues could
surface regarding the drainage along the south side of the building and trying to fit a swale
in the narrow space.
Page 4
Number: 18 Created: 10/29/2004
[10/29/04] Add a note with regards to the existing sidewalk along Smith Street that all
substandard sidewalks along Smith Street adjacent to the property frontage shall be
replaced by determination of the City Engineering Inspector.
Number: 19 Created: 10/29/2004
[10/29/04] The sidewalk along Olive Street needs to continue across the alley with access
ramps on both sides of the alley.
Number: 20 Created: 10/29/2004
[10/29/04] More information is needed with regards to the existing surrounding area and
what impact the development may cause. Provide additional contours and existing spot
elevations.
Number: 21 Created: 10/29/2004
[10/29/04] Additional right-of-way will need to be dedicated along the alley to the back of
(driveover) curb. In addition, 8' of utility easement from behind the right-of-way is also
required. Where does the alley right-of-way end on the ease side of the alley?
Number: 22 Created: 10/29/2004
[10/29/041 The alley design notes a 6' concrete pan instead of the driveover curb and gutter
required with Alley Option (B) in the LCUASS.
Number: 23 Created: 10/29/2004
[10/29/04] There appears to be some discrepancy with regards to the sidewalk connection
from Smith Street to the property. The landscape plan and utility plan appear to show this
existing sidewalk to remain while the site plan apparently shows it to be removed and
replaced. If it is proposed to remain, it appears to be substandard for ADA with regards to
width and the lack of an access ramp connecting to Smith Street.
Number: 24 Created: 10/29/2004
(10/29/04] The site plan shows sidewalk connection out to Olive Street which are not shown
on the utility plan, please coordinate between the drawings.
Number: 25 Created: 10/29/2004
[10/29/04] Site plan, utility plan, and building elevation sets specify information (such as
finish floor elevations) that does not match each other.
Number: 26 Created: 10/29/2004
[10/29/04] The window wells along the south side of the building fall within the swale area,
is this a good idea considering flows being directed along the swale? I'd like to see a typical
cross section of the swale and window well situation.
Number: 27 Created: 10/29/2004
[10/29/04] Information will need to be provided indicating how a potential perimeter drain
system (as recommended by the soils report) around the foundation(s) will discharge.
Indicate on the construction plan set where the sump pump pit (or pits) are to be located or
where a pipe (or pipes) are to daylight.
Page 3
from the Advance Planning Department. The solution to these issues might be a fairly
simple rethinking of the exterior materials, windows and doors on the rear of the building or
it might require some major redesign of the rear building. I suggest that you simplify the
architectural character at a minimum, and prepare to "make your case" to the planning and
zoning board as to how the proposal is compatible with the immediate surroundings.
Number: 36 Created: 11 /2/2004
[11/2/04] The garage setback is not being met for the front building. The garage needs to
be set back from the main house.
Number: 37 Created: 11 /2/2004
[11/2/041 Comcast will require a utility easement of 6 feet outside of the road right-of-way
along Olive St, Smith St. and the alley way. Comcast will also be charging to relocate any of
our facilities that may be in conflict with this change of use for the property. Please contact
Dennis Greenwalt at 484-7166 to discuss what may need to be relocated and how much it
will cost.
Number: 38 Created: 11 /2/2004
[11/2/04] Please provide room in the trash enclosure for recyclable sorting.
Number: 39 Created: 11 /2/2004
[11/2/04] Please use a standard architectural or engineering scale on your drawings instead
of the bar scale. The drawings you presented appear to be at 1/8" scale.
Number: 40 Created: 11 /2/2004
[11/2/04] You cannot claim the guest parking in the driveways towards your parking
requirement. However, assuming one 3 BR and two 21313 units, you are responsible for 6
off-street parking spots which you have met, so you also do not need to claim these.
Number: 49 Created: 11 /4/2004
[11/4/04] You need to show floor plans for the lower levels of the units. Additional
bedrooms will increase your parking requirements.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Marc Virata
Topic: General
Number: 12 Created: 10/29/2004
[10/29/04] Please ensure all documents are in 24x36" format.
Number: 13 Created: 10/29/2004
[10/29/04] The alley needs to be constructed in concrete from the street to the projection of
the front property line for the project.
Number: 16 Created: 10/29/2004
[10/29/04] Provide a concrete ribbon on the east side of the alley in accordance with the
LCUASS.
Number: 17 Created: 10/29/2004
[10/29/04] Expand the patching limits shown along Olive Street to 6' in width (half a lane)
and add the following note referencing these patches: "Limits of street repair are
approximate. Final limits to be determined in the field by the City Engineering Inspector at
the time the cuts are made."
Page 2
.r !
STAFF PROJECT REVIEW
City of Fort Collins
ROSITA BACHMANN
8018 FOX HILL DR.
LONGMONT, CO 80501
Date: 11 /03/2004
Staff has reviewed your submittal for 300 SMITH STREET, OLD TOWN COMMONS PDP -
TYPE II, and we offer the following comments:
ISSUES:
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Anne Aspen
Topic: General
Number: 11 Created: 10/29/2004
[10/29/04] The following departments have indicated that they do not have any issues or
concerns about the project: Streets, Water Conservation, Park Planning, and the Post
Office.
Number: 14 Created: 10/29/2004
[10/29/04]Xcel Energy has the following comments:
+Gas Meters will need to be located on the west wall of the west unit. No existing gas main
on Olive Street.
+Will need to install gas service from existing main located in Smith St along the west side.
Number: 15 Created: 10/29/2004
[10/29/04] Building Inspection has responded to the submittal with a list of building codes
that will be enforced. I will include this list with your redlines. If you have not already done
so, please sign up for a pre -submittal meeting with the building inspection department.
Number: 34 Created: 11 /2/2004
[11/2/04] You will either need to set the back building back further from the side lot line,
lower your top plate height to 18 feet or prepare a modification of standards, probably based
on 2.8.2 (H)(4) (nominal and inconsequential), for the standard contained in 4.7 (E)(4) which
was discussed in both your conceptual review in Sept. 2003 and at our pre -submittal
meeting recently. You may submit this modification concurrently with your PDP or as a
standalone modification.
Number: 35 Created: 11 /2/2004
[11/2/04] This project is a bit unusual and complicated in that it is a corner lot on the corner
of a zone district. I know you have worked hard to make sure that this project is compatible,
but in my review I have consulted the Neighborhood Character Design Guidelines for the
East Side and West Side Neighborhoods in Fort Collins, prepared in February 1996, which
are adopted guidelines prepared through a public process with City Council, planning staff,
the neighborhood, and consultants, and I cannot say I feel confident that the P&Z Board will
find this project to be compatible based on the design guidelines. On the positive side, I
think the front building meets just about all the design guideline requirements. The overall
site plan substantially meets the design guidelines. The rear building is where problems
arise. The issues P&Z may raise about the rear building include height, especially as seen
from Smith Street, compatibility in terms of building mass, roof form, materials, windows,
doors and architectural character. Quoins and rounded doors with louvers, for example, are
not found in the neighborhood traditionally. Please refer to the design guidelines available
Page I