HomeMy WebLinkAboutCAMPUS WEST THEATRE REDEVELOPMENT - PDP - 23-04B - CORRESPONDENCE - REVISIONS (3)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 14
Number: 9 Created: 1 /17/2006
[1117/06] All sanitary sewer services need to be connected to a City maintained sewer
main. The services under the parking garage need to run out to manhole #2 in the private
drive.
Response #9 — Each building will have separate sewer services that connect to the public
sewer. Please refer to the revised plan.
Number. 10 Created: 1 /17/2006
[1/17/06] SDR 35 is the City's standard sewer pipe material and the proposed HDPE pipe
could only be used If it is proven an equal or better for this situation.
Response #10 — The pipe material has been changed to SDR 35 PVC. Please refer to
revised plan
Number: 11 Created: 1 /17/2006
[1/17/06] Please realign the sanitary sewer along the private drive to avoid the shallow
angle crossing of the water main. See redlines for realignment and for easement
requirements.
Response #11 — The alignment of the sewer has bee changed to eliminate the crossing.
Please refer to revised plan.
Number. 12 Created: 1 /17/2006
[1/17/06] Please label all fittings, thrust blocks, etc.
Response #12 — All fittings, thrust blocks, etc., have been noted. Please refer to revised
plan.
Number: 13 Created: 1 /17/2006
[1/17/06] Please show all curb stops and meter pits on the utility plan for all water services
Response #13 — Curb stops and water meter locations have been shown on the revised
plan.
Number. 14 Created: 1 /17/2006
[1/17/06] Due to shallow depth of sanitary sewer line, please provide design for insulation
thickness of sewer pipe.
Response #14 —A design for the insulation material is included with the resubmittal
information.
Number: 15 Created: 1 /17/2006
[1/17/06] Please provide the new revised detail for Detail 16-A.
Response #15 — Detail 16-A has been revised to reflect the current requirements.
Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Gary Lopez
Topic: zoning
Number: 54 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] Need a landscape note that no CO's issued without completion of landscaping or
secured by Letter of Credit/Bond/Escrow in the amount of 125% of the value remaining of
landscaping to be completed (both materials/labor).
Number 54 response
See landscape plan notes #13 for addition of note.
Page 13
Number: 76 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] State that the lowest floor (including basement or crawl space) and all HVAC will
be required to be elevated above the regulatory BFE. (This is assuming all buildings will be
elevated rather than floodproofed and that the Water Board approves a variance for Building
A.)
Response #76 — The lowest floor and all HVAC equipment are to be elevated a minimum of
18 inches above the BFE. This is stated in the revised report.
Number. 77 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] Please state that a Floodplain Use permit will be required for each structure and all
site elements located in the floodplain.
Response #77 — The revised report indicates that a Floodplain Use Permit is to be required
for each structure.
Number: 78 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] Please state that an approved FEMA Elevation Certificate must be completed and
approved prior to the release of a CO for each structure.
Response #78 — The revised report indicates that a FEMA Elevation Certification is to be
submitted for approval prior to issuance of CO.
Number: 79 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] In the compliance section, please list Chapter 10 of the City Code (these are the
floodplain regulations).
Response #79 — The notation for compliance has bee added to the revised report.
Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque
Topic: Stormwater
Number: 6 Created: 1 /17/2006
[1/17/06] Water quality mitigation is required per conceptual review comments. No water
quality treatment was proposed. The oil separator at the inlet is not mentioned as to what
the purpose is.
Response #6 — A structural BMP, a 'Storm Tech' system, has been added to the revised
plan. The system was chosen due to: space limitations, aesthetic issues; maintenance
requirements, and safety and liability issues.
Number: 16 Created: 1 /17/2006
[1/17/06] Please revise the hydrology calculations per redlines.
Response #16 — The calculations have been revised to address the comments.
Topic: Water/Wastewater
Number: 7 Created: 1 /17/2006
[1/17/06] The existing water and sewer services in Elizabeth need to be abandoned at the
main if they have not already been abandoned there.
Response #7 — All existing water and sewer services that have not been abandoned will be
used to serve the proposed buildings or landscape irrigation system.
Number: 8 Created: 1 /17/2006
(1/17/06) Building B needs to have its own commercial, residential, and fire water taps. See
redlines for a suggested location.
Response #8 — Building C (previously indicated a Building B) is to have separate
commercial, residential and fire water service taps. Please refer to revised plan.
Page 12
Number: 69 Created: 1/20/2006
[1/20/06] It's unclear from the submittal if Building A is three separate foundations, allowing
for a stepped BFE. If not, a variance request must be obtained from the Water Board to
allow for a stepped foundation. Please address this in the report.
Response #69 — Building A is a single building with steps proposed in the foundation. A
variance request is to be submitted for the March Water Board agenda.
Number: 70 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] Please clarify the parking area in the report and on the plans. The plans state it is
"covered parking", but the planning documents refer to a parking structure "connected" to all
buildings. Based on what kind of structure it is and what utilities or amenities are in it, there
may be additional floodplain requirements that must be met.
Response #70 — The parking structure is an open structure without walls and only the
structural members, columns, extending to the ground surface. The second level of the
parking structure connects to the residential apartments on the adjacent buildings to provide
access to the apartments.
Number: 71 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] Described the site as being in the floodplain. Include the floodplain name and if
the floodplain is a FEMA or City -designated. Site the master plan which the floodplain info
comes from. Describe any floodway, product corridor or erosion buffer limits.
Response #71— The above requested information has been added to the report
Number: 72 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] Describe the location of the structures relative to the floodplain.
Response #72 — The location of the structures with respect to the floodplain has been
identified in the report. All structures are within floodplain and none within floodway.
Number: 73 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1120/06] Describe the use of the each structure. This is to determine if the structure is
residential, non-residential, or mixed -use. State whether or not the structures in the 100-
year floodplains are going to be considered critical facilities. These are not allowed in the
floodplain. (See Chapter 10 of City Code for definitions.)
Response #73 - The use of each structure has been described in the report. None of the
structures are considered to be critical facilities.
Number: 74 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] Describe how the development will be in compliance with the applicable floodplain
regulations (Chapter 10 of City Code). Examples: elevation of lowest floor above regulatory
flood protection elevation, floodproofing, floodway regulations, product corridor regulations,
no -rise, etc.)
Response #74 — The lowest floor elevation is to be elevated a minimum of 18 inches above
the BFE and has been stated in the report.
Number: 75 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] Describe the type of foundation to be used for each structure in the floodplain.
Response #75 — The structures are to be slab on grade with no floor below grade. This has
been indicated in the report.
Page 11
Number: 63 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] Show cross-section lines and BFE lines.
Response #63 — Floodplain Cross-section lines and BFE lines have been added to the
revised drawings.
Number: 64 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] Add a note to the plan stating the lowest floor (including basement or crawlspace)
and HVAC will be required to be elevated at least 18" above the Base Flood Elevation
(BFE).
Response #64 — A note has been added to the plan to reflect the minimum elevation of 18"
above the BFE.
Number: 65 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] Add a note stating that a Floodplain use permit will be required for each structure
and all site construction elements in the floodplain.
Response #65 — The desired note has been added to the plan.
Number: 66 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] Add a note stating that an approved FEMA Elevation Certificate must be
completed and approved prior to the release of a CO for any structure in the floodplain.
(This is required even K the structure is in a City floodplain.)
Response #66 — The requested note has been added to the plan
Number: 67 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] Provide atypical drawing detail for each foundation type proposed showing the
elevation of the lowest floor and HVAC relative to the BFE.
Response #67 — A typical detail has been added to the plan to depict the relationship
between the lowest floor and HVAC equipment relative to the BFE.
Topic: Floodplain Plat
Number: 60 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] 1. Please put the benchmark and elevation on the plat.
Response #60 — The referenced benchmark information has been added to the plat
Number: 61 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] 2. The floodplain shown on the plat and
drainage plan represents the original Canal Importation analysis. Subsequently, we have
revised the map to reflect several projects that have been built in the basin. This revised
floodplain, slightly changed from the original, will be used for regulatory purposes. Please
contact Susan Hayes to get the revised information.
Response #61 — The revised mapping for the Canal Importation Floodplain is under review
at this time and is not expected to be officially adopted for several months. A note to that
effect has been added to the plan.
Topic: Floodplain/ Drainage Report
Number: 68 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] Please add a complete discussion of the floodplain issues for the site, including
the details listed below.
Response #68 — The floodplain discussion has been added to the drainage report.
Page 10
Number: 57 Created: 1/18/2006
[1/18/06] Fire lanes are required. Minimum width is 30 feet.
Number 57 response:
See revised site plan for minimum fire lane requirements. Only the existing access point
from Elizabeth will remain at 24 feet wide. This has been confirmed with Ron at PFA.
Number: 58 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1 /18/06] Address numerals shall be visible from the street fronting the property, and posted
with a minimum six-inch numerals on a contrasting background. Buildings shall be lettered
in a clockwise fashion.
Number 58 response.
See general note added to the site plan with this information.
Number: 59 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18106] A Hazardous Materials Impact Analysis (HMIA) shall be completed and supplied
to the Fire Department and Planning Department.
Number 59 Response
The Hazardous Materials Impact Analsis (HIMA) was provided for both the Theatre and
Schrader Sites in the original submittal. Additional copies were provided to Poudre Fire
Authority via email. Additional copies will be provided in re -submittal for records. (TWPS)
Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: David Averill
Topic: Site Plan
Number: 21 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] Where will a customer of the proposed retail that arrives by bicycle park along W.
Elizabeth St.? There needs to be some bicycle parking located along the W. Elizabeth
frontage to serve the proposed retail uses.
Number 21 response:
See site plan for the addition of bike racks and benches along Elizabeth
Number: 26 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] What is the proposed pedestrian route from either City Park or W. Elizabeth to
Building C? It seems that a connecting walkway would be in order. If this cannot be
achieved, there should at a minimum be a crossing treatment of drive aisle that clearly
delineates where pedestrians can be expected to cross safely. I am particularly curious
about the safety of peds crossing the ramp to the upper levels of the parking structure.
Number 26 response:
See #81 response previously responded to.
Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Glen Schlueter
Topic: Floodp/ain Drainage/Grading Plan
Number: 62 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] Please add the following items to the plan. If it gets too cluttered, you may want to
create a separate Floodplain Sheet to address these comments. Show the revised
floodplain boundary.
Response #62 — The current floodplain boundary is being shown since the revised boundary
is under review and may not be adopted for several months.
Page 9
Number: 53 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] Comments from Technical Services
1. Boundary and legal do not close. Chord bearing in boundary does not match legal.
2.The east and south sides of this plat are adjoined by Brazil 2004, not as shown.
3.Point of beginning does not match the legal.
4.Outer boundary monuments?
5.Title is wrong as this is a replat of portion of Lot 1 and 2 Brazil 2004.
6.There was a permanent utility, pedestrian, sidewalk easement that was granted with the
West Elizabeth project in 2003, does this plat accommodate it?
7. How was City Paris and West Elizabeth dedicated? Please show.
Response #53 - Boundary and legal description have been revised to reflect proper closure.
Bearing on drawing matches legal. The platted area includes Brazil 2004. Point of Beginning
revised. Outer boundary Monuments have been shown. The plat includes all of Lots 1 and 2
of Brazil 2004. The West Elizabeth Easements are shown. Dedication for West Elizabeth
and City Park are shown on the revised plat.
Topic: Site Plan
Number: 48 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] Check the scale. As shown, parking spaces would be 25' deep.
Number 48 response:
The site plan was correct. The landscape plan scale indicator has been revised to 1 "=20'
Number: 49 Created: 1/18/2006
[1/18/06] Remove the gray from the buildings, it will not scan well.
Number 49 response:
Confirmed
Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Doug Martine
Topic: electric service
Number: 1 Created: 12/30/2005
[12/30/05] All electric meters must be accessible without an access key or an escort. All
residential units must be individually metered.
Number 1 Response.
All electric meters will be accessible without an access key or an escort. All residential units
will be individually metered.
Department: PFA Issue Contact: Carte Dann
Topic: fire
Number: 55 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] The proposed buildings shall be fire sprinklered.
Number 55 response.
We are producing a code study for the project to confirm sprinkler requirements.
Number: 56 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06) Fire hydrants are required, spaced not farther than 300 feet to any building, with
minimum flow requirement of 1,500 gallons per minute at 20 psi residual pressure.
Response #56 - A proposed hydrant is to be placed at the east side of the West Elizabeth
Street entrance to the site.
Number 56 response:
Fire hydrant locations have been confirmed to be within 300 feet to any building as
indicated.
Page 8
Topic: overall utility plan
Number: 39 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] Add a legend to this sheet.
Response #39 — A legend has been added to the revised Utiltiy Plan.
Number. 40 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] One sanitary and one stormwater manhole are located outside of the utility
easement. Not sure that this will be acceptable to the utilities.
Response #40 - The location of the sanitary manhole has bee revised to be within the
proposed easement. The storm water manhole is a private line.
Number. 43 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] Please add our standard street cut note: "Limits of street cut are approximate.
Final limits are to be determined in the field by the City Engineering Inspector. All repairs to
be in accordance with City street repair standards."
Response #43 — The note has been added to the General Notes.
Topic: Plat
Number. 47 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] Label how existing ROW along Elizabeth was dedicated (reception number), or
else clearly dimension it on this plat.
Response #47 — The portion of street right-of-way not dedicated by this plat was dedicated
by the Brazil 2004 plat. This is shown on the revised plat.
Number: 50 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06]Per the improvements shown on the utility plans it appears that the area east of the
utility, access, and emergency access easement along the eastern property line needs to be
a utility and drainage easement.
Response #50 — The easement has been indicated to be a Utility and Drainage Easement.
Number: 51 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] The 30 foot utility and access easement also needs to be an emergency access
easement.
Response #51 — The easement has been designated as an Emergency Access and Utility
Easement.
Number 52 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] Show and label all the adjacent properties- includes those to the north and west.
Response #52 — The names of the plats to the North and West have been added.
Page 7
Number: 41 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] Please check the layout design with Poudre Fire Authority. They may have issues
with turning radius and with obstructions in the 30' wide easement. They also do not allow
any parking within the emergency access easements — so if a 30 emergency access
easement is needed there is a conflict with the parking stalls.
Number 41 response:
See revised site and utility plans removing any obstructions such as curbing and parking in
the 30 foot emergency access easement.
Response #41— The parking has been shifted to the east toward the property boundary to
eliminate conflict. Communication has been made with the Poudre Fire Authority to make
sure that the easements are adequate
Number: 42 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] Believe that the easement labeled as public access and utility should also be
labeled as emergency access easement.
Number 42 response.
See revised labeling at the easement.
Number: 44 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] Add detail #1602 to the detail sheets.
Response #44 — Detail #1602 has been added to the revised plans.
Number: 45 Created: 1 /18/2006
(1/18/06] Detail #1606(a) got stretched out somehow.
Response #45 — Detail #1606(a) has been resized to eliminate the visual distortion.
Topic: Grading and Drainage
Number: 35 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] Please refer to Appendix E-6 of LCUASS or speak with JR in Technical Services
regarding plan scanability. Suggest separating this sheet into 2 sheets (Grading Plan, and
Drainage and Erosion Control Plan). There is too much going on for one sheet, and the
plan is Guttered.
Response #35 — The drawing has been separated into two sheets.
Number: 36 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] It is difficult to distinguish between existing and proposed contours. Please adjust
line types for more clarity.
Response #36 — The line types for the existing and proposed contours have been changed
to allow better definition.
Number: 37 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] Existing contours should be shown a minimum of 50' offsite to verify that you are
tying in properly.
Response #37 — Additional existing contour length offsite has been provided. The Grading
Plan indicates that the proposed grading will take place on the site and not encroach onto
the adjacent properties.
Page 6
Number: 29 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] Need to show that the existing driveway off of Elizabeth Street aligns with the
proposed drive and is of adequate width. If not it will need to be reconstructed.
Response #29 - Additional detail for the driveway has been added to the plan. Also,
communication with Poudre Fire Authority has resulted in their desire that the driveway
remain at the present 24 foot width.
Number: 30 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] The driveway onto City Park Ave is to be built to City driveway standards - with
directional ramps. Non directional are shown at this time.
Response #30 — The plan has been revised to reflect directional ramps.
Number: 31 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] The parking setback distance from Elizabeth is not being met. Per the volumes in
the parking lot and volumes on Elizabeth the setback is 100 feet.
Response #31 — A variance request is being submitted with this resubmittal
Number: 32 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] The storage building along the east property line is shown within the 5 foot
easement. Buildings can not be placed within an easement. Is the easement needed in this
location? If not maybe it can be vacated in this location. This could be done on the plat.
Number 32 response
The storage buildings have been removed from the project.
Number: 33 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06) Need to dimension the sidewalk widths existing and proposed.
Response #33 — The revised plan reflects the sidewalk widths for the existing and proposed
walks.
Number: 34 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] Sidewalk on City Park Ave doesn't meet minimum attached width requirement
Attached sidewalks are to be a minimum of 6 feet in width — The minimum width that can be
added to a sidewalk is 4 feet or the sidewalk will need to be rebuilt. With the elimination of
driveways, the new driveway and any curb, gutter and/or sidewalk that maybe damaged it
may make more sense to replace the walk rather than add to it.
Response #34 — A variance request to allow the attached six (6) foot sidewalk is being
submitted as a part of this resubmittal. The revised plan indicates that the entire walk along
City Park Avenue is to be reconstructed.
Number: 38 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] Refer to redlines for additional comments.
Number 38 response
Confirmed.
Page 5
Number: 85 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] There is excessive light spillage beyond the southern boundary. Since the church
rectory is there and is residential in nature, measures will need to be taken to tone down the
lighting or provide additional shielding.
Number 85 Response:
All pole lights along the southern boundary will be provided with House Side Shields to
mitigate the excessive light spillage beyond the southern boundary and bring the lighting
design into compliance with the City of Fort Collins Lighting Code.
Number: 86 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] The parking garage fixture does not meet our standards for down -directional, full
cutoff and fully shielded. Please choose a different fixture.
Number 86 Response:
Parking garages are inherently unsafe. A well lighted parking structure is a must to assure
the security needs are met for this application. This parking structure in this particular
situation is basically shielded on 3 of it's sides from the adjacent properties by the actual
onsite buildings, the fixtures them selves will sit inside the structural T framing members of
the parking garage and will most likely not be visible from the adjacent properties. The
particular fixture specified is by far the most appropriate solution for our application. We
recommend the city reconsider allowing the use of the specified fixture.
Number 87 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] If you are selecting any options on the fixtures, please call out in a note on the
plans.
Number 87 Response:
All options selected are outlined in the light fixture catalog numbers submitted.All exterior
site lighting will comply with the City of Fort Collins Lighting Code.
Number. 88 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] The pole mounted Mitre fixture is really large. It seems way overscaled for this
project. Are they really 25" tall?
Number 88 Response:
All exterior site lighting will comply with the City of Fort Collins Lighting Code.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Sheri Wamhoff
Topic: Genera/
Number: 27 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] Retaining walls/ seat walls may not encroach into the ROW without an
encroachment permit. This includes the footings. Please provide construction details of the
proposed walls, and add spot elevations of top and bottom of walls to the grading sheet.
Engineering will look at this and let the applicant know its thoughts regarding the issuance of
encroachment permits in this area.
Response #27 — Retaining walls and seat walls have been relocated to wag or foundation
element from extending into the public right-of-way.
Number: 28 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] Greater than 8% slope requires a variance request, even if the ramp will be
heated. Who will maintain the heating equipment?
Response #28 — Per communication with Sheri Wamhoff, a variance is not required since
the ramp is not a public improvement and will not affect the public street system
Page 4
Number: 23 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] I've noted some sight distance triangle problems on the redlines.
Number 23 response.
Please see revised landscape plan for solutions to sight distance triangles.
Number: 24 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] Landscape notes need to be current City of Fort Collins notes.
Number 24 response
confirmed
Number: 25 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] The scale on this plan appears to be V=20' not 30' as stated.
Number 25 response:
See corrected scale on Landscape plan. The site plan was correct at 1 '=20'
Number: 80 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] Tim Buchanan, the City Forester comments as follows:
'The applicant is proposing the use of Autumn Blaze Maple. This species does very poorly
in Fort Collins and should be changed to another canopy shade tree species.
Number 80 response.
See the deletion of the Autumn Blaze Maple on the landscape plan.
Also, add this note to the landscape plans:
'The soil in all landscape areas, including parkways and medians, shall be thoroughly
loosened to a depth of not less than eight (8) 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 one thousand (1,000) square feet of landscape area."'
response.
See note 2 on landscape plan for this added
Topic: Architecture Plans
Number: 82 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] Please add elevations of trash enclosure and storage buildings. Materials and
styling must blend with the main building design.
Number 82 response:
See exterior elevations sheet A 1.2 for the addition of trash enclosure elevations. The
storage buildings have been removed from the project.
Topic: Lighting Plan
Number: 83 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] I've circled areas on the plan that are too bright. Please tone them down.
Number 83 Response:
All exterior site lighting will comply with the City of Fort Collins Lighting Code
Number: 84 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] LLF should be set at 1.0.
Number 84 Response:
All exterior site lighting will comply with the City of Fort Collins Lighting Code.
Page 3
Number: 5 Created: 1 /17/2006
[1/17/06] Water Conservation comments that "The landscape plan shall contain a general
note calling for the review and approval by the City of Fort Collins of any required landscape
irrigation system prior to the issuance of a Building Permit." They have also included an
information packet on Water Conservation Standards for Landscaping and Irrigation
Systems, which will be included with your redline packet.
Number 5 response:
See landscape note 12 for location of note.
Topic: Site Plan
Number: 17 Created: 1 /17/2006
(1/17/06) Please remove all radius info and surveying information from the site plan. Also,
show the proposed finished improvements not the delineation between existing and
proposed.
Number 17 response:
See revised site plan for deletion of all survey and radius info.
Number: 18 Created: 1 /17/2006
[1/17/06] Call out the existing fence material. If it meets City standards, it may remain.
Chain link fence is not allowed. Fences used to screen from neighboring residential uses
must be 6 feet high, at least 70% solid and wood or better materials.
Number 18 response
The existing chain link fence will be removed and replaced with a new solid wood fence that
is 6 feet high. See site plan for annotation.
Number: 19
[1/17/06] See minor comments on redlines.
Number 19 response:
confirmed.
Created: 1 /17/2006
Be sure to return all redlines on resubmittal.
Number: 81 Created: 1 /20/2006
[1/20/06] You will need to modify the design of the site to accommodate pedestrians on a
connecting walkway to Building C. It would be ideal to have safe walkways from both City
Park and Elizabeth, but the Elizabeth access is probably more crucial. There should be
walkways on both sides of the drive aisle and enhanced crosswalks where the access must
cross the drive aisles (raised, integrally colored, scored etc.). More detail on the redlines.
Number 81 response:
We have modified the site plan to allow for pedestrian access from Elizabeth and City Park
to the 12 unit residential building. We did not put a walk in front of the parking as we have
our required landscaping and open space in this region for a buffer to the adjacent site. Our
access from City Park is accomplished with the walk shown before. We included patterned
concrete crosswalks at the drive aisles.
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number: 22 Created: 1 /18/2006
[1/18/06] Street tree standards are not met along the west end of Elizabeth and all of the
City Park Ave. frontage. Please rectify.
Number 22 response:
See revised landscape plan for the addition of street trees along Elizabeth. Along City Park,
we have street trees behind the attached sidewalk. Comcast has buried fiber optics in this
region so street trees in tree wells was not an option because of the risk of line damage.
Page 2
STAFF PROJECT REVIEW
Citv of Fort Collins
SCOTT A DDI NGTON Date: 01 /23/2006
TRADE WIND PROJECT SOLUTIONS LLC
314 RED HAWK DR
FORT COLLINS, CO 80525
Staff has reviewed your submittal for CAMPUS WEST THEATRE REDEVELOPMENT PDP
- TYPE I, and we offer the following comments:
NOTE: ALL RESPONSES IN BLUE TYPSET
ISSUES:
Department: Advance Planning Issue Contact: Clark Mapes
Topic: Site Plan
Number: 20 Created: 1 /17/2006
[1/17/06] The street -fronting building has indirect, minimal access from the street sidewalk
and the street comer. This is a suggestion to provide more clear, simple, direct, and
generous access for foot traffic.
Number 20 response.
We have revised the site plan. Oversized pedestrian areas accessed from Elizabeth and
City Park are now shown. We feel individual sidewalks for each tenant is too redundant.
The oversize walks will give a plaza feel connection.
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Anne Aspen
Topic: General
Number: 2 Created: 1/17/2006
[1/17/06] The following departments and agencies have no issues or concerns with the
proposed project: Park Planning, Larimer County Assessor, Xcel Energy (existing 6" gas
main along W. Elizabeth and a 2" gas main in City Park Ave.).
Number 2 response
confirmed -
Number: 3 Created:1/17/2006
[1/17/06] Comcast comments as follows:
"Comcast Cable would like to see some utility easement along West Elizabeth St. outside of
the road right-of-way.
Response #3 — Due to the elevated walkways and outdoor seating areas adjacent to the
street, there will be no space available to place Comcast facilities. Easements are provided
along the east and south boundaries of the site
Number: 4 Created: 1 /17/2006
[1/17/06] The US Post Office responds as follows:
"Mail delivery mode needs to be agreed on. CBV letter sent previously."
Number 4 Response:
CB Letter discussed and agreed upon with Bonnie Ham from the USPS. A copy of the
location sketch and letter of consent will be included in the re -submittal. (TWPS)
Page 1