HomeMy WebLinkAboutVIALE COLLEGIO - PDP - 1-02 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - PROJECT SUBMITTAL AND RESUBMITTALStaff Project Review Comments
Page 4
8. We are anticipating small motorscooters, such as is owned by students, rather than
full size motorcycles. We request to try this the way it is drawn, and if we find a
conflict, we will agree to change it.
9. We have labeled the long term parking spaces.
10/11. We request that the requirement for a 5' landscape strip along the north property
line be waived. This area abuts the adjacent zero property line building, and
furthermore, it is mostly under the second floor of our building. Nothing could
possibly grow here, and with a blank wall of the neighbor's building abutting our
under -building parking area, we see no practical or aesthetic reason to provide the
required parking separation at this location.
Staff Project Review Response
Page 3
Department: Transportation Planning
Topic: General
30. Retail tenant will be notified that deliveries are to be via the alley, under the
building. One parking space will be signed "15 minute parking only" to provide a
delivery parking area. No large trucks are anticipated to be needed for the type of
retail tenant targeted.
Topic: Site Plan
31. We do not want to have a bicycle ramp to the bicycle parking for maintenance
reasons. We have found that this encourages collisions into the building. By
making bike users dismount their bikes prior to locking them into the racks, they
are not as destructive.
33. The fountain bike rack is incorporated into the 28" high wall design. Signs will
be posted to dismount their bikes upon entering the fountain area. The strategic
placement of the racks will necessitate the dismount, thereby resolving any
potential conflict. Parking space #1 is being requested to remain as a variance.
34. Per City of Ft. Collins regulations, Sec. 3.2.2 (k) (5) states that handicap stalls
shall be 13' in width, with all other dimensions being the same as for standard
vehicles. This would indicate that the stall width should be 9' as drawn. Our total
width is 13' as required, so if you insist on dimensions of 8' and 5', we can easily
accommodate it.
35. We have enlarged the walk width from the parking area to the retail area to 4'
minimum to accommodate handicap access. The stairway was taken internal to
the retail space.
36. The College Ave. driveway has been reduced to 20' wide.
37. We believe that the driveway texture and appearance should be varied from the
sidewalk on either side so as to create a safety "notification" to pedestrians that
they are entering a vehicle access area. We therefore request to keep the paving
design as presented.
38. Notifications regarding storefront access widths and clearances will be given to
tenants as required.
Department: Water Wastewater
2-6. See attached utility plans for corrections as requested.
4. The type of restaurant that would require a grease trap will not be allowed as a
tenant, so a grease trap will not be required.
Department: Zoning
7. We have agreed with Mr. Stringer that the existing parking stall #1 will be located
in the same position as the existing stall. A variance request is being made with
this submittal. It has been this way for many years without record of accident.
The fountain wall is only 28" high, and will not present a sight hazard.
Staff Project Review Response
Page 2
23. The College Ave. drive cut meets all sight distance requirements. It has been
deepened to exceed the 25' perpendicular requirement. It also has been narrowed
to 20' as requested and agreed on 04-15-02.
32. The tenant will be required to obtain proper permits when it is determined that
patio dining actually will be used as such.
41. We have worked extensively with PVFA regarding alley access and adequate fire
protection. Per our meeting with staff on 04-02-02 it was agreed that the 30' alley
requirement would be waived. See attached letter requesting variance for such.
42. The confusion surrounding the TIS numbers is cleared up with the attached letter
of explanation from LSC Transportation Consultants. 20% of the traffic comes
from BOTH the east and the south
43. The alley does not have to be redesigned and reconstructed per our meeting 04-
02-02. See also attached letter from Streets Department confirming
reconstruction.
44. Utilities were undergrounded during the alley reconstruction of 2001. The
telephone and cable companies are not interested in undergrounding their
remaining lines, nor is there room to do so in the alley.
Department: Traffic Operations
A complete traffic impact statement was originally provided. We have included another
copy for your records. The site plan and context plan were originally submitted.
Additional copies are hereby included for your use.
Department: PFA
24. There are 2 fire hydrants within 300 ft of the building on East Laurel.
25. Building address numerals 8" high will be placed on the front entrance of the
building. See front (west) elevation.
26. We plan to incorporate a fire sprinkler system into the building design. We will
serve our system from the existing water main in College Avenue, and design the
system to contain any fire for a period of 3 minutes, as per agreement with the
utilities department and PVFA.
27. Ventilation and smoke removal system will not be required on the ground level
parking because it is open in excess of the requirements of UBC 97. There is no
underground parking.
Department: Stormwater Utility
40. Erosion and sediment control are as per the attached engineering plans and letter
from drainage engineer David Shupe (attached) as agreed.
39. The existing drainage patterns and flows will not be affected by this project. See
attached letter from drainage engineer David Shupe.
RESPONSE TO STAFF PROJECT REVIEW COMMENTS
Department: Forestry
48. The existing walnut tree appears to be in worse shape than originally diagnosed,
and will be removed for safety purposes. The trunk will be incorporated into a
sculpture to be placed in the general vicinity of the fountain.
49. Canopy trees cannot be placed along the south property line because the building
balconies extend to the property line, creating no pace for trees to grow.
50. The snowdrift crabapple has been change to springsnow.
51. Standard notes have been added per your request.
52. The planting bed at the NW corner is 4" in width, which is adequate for the shrubs
planned there, with adequate maintenance procedures.
Department: Current Planning
45. The size of the retail area on the first level is 5,536 Sf. This has been placed on
the plans.
AT&T Digital Cable
46. AT&T has been contacted.
Excel Energy
47. Developer agrees that gas line relocation, etc, is at developer's expense. A larger
service will be required. Developer will contact Excel when load has been
determined.
Department: Engineering
12. Utility plans are submitted herewith. Proper procedures will be adhered to for
permit applications.
13-17 Various details as required are incorporated into the utility plans. A written
drainage report has been submitted and plans prepared as per discussions with
engineering dept.
14. At our meeting on 04-02-02, it was agreed that the easements referenced would
not be needed. We have nevertheless provided for an 8' setback from the alley.
The College Ave. building line is as it currently exists.
18. The 50' setback requirement for parking is being asked for a variance. See
attached letter. The first space has been relocated per agreement with Mr. Stringer
and Ms. Joy on -site 04-15-02.
19. Parking stalls are in compliance with parking regulations. Long term parking has
been designated for clarity. Additional dimensions have been added to the plans.
20. The sight distance from the alley is adequate for the speeds anticipated. Several
structures (garages) along the alley are on the property line, and no instances of
accidents have been reported. The recycle bins could be eliminated to provide
additional clearance if required.
21. The cover sheet shows all existing features within 150' as required.
22. Handicap ramp detail is standard City of Ft. Collins detail.
LSC TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC.
1889 York Street
Denver, Colorado 80206
(303) 333-1105
FAX: (303) 333-1107
e-mail: 1sc(ascden. com
MEMORANDUM
DATE: April 1, 2002
TO: Ji
m HH' use
FROM: L. *Rle, Jr.
SUBJECT: Poudre Property Services - Response to City of Fort Collins Comments
The City of Fort Collins has provided one comment on the traffic impact analysis report dated
September 18, 2001.
Comment No. 42 - The TIS numbers do not add up. Your summary states that 50% of the traffic
accesses the property from the north, 10% from College, and 20% from the east and south.
Where is the other 30%?
Response - On page two of the September 18, 2001 traffic impact analysis report, second
paragraph, it states that "it is assumed that 20 percent of the traffic visiting the proposed
development will come from the east and south, ten percent will access the site to and from the
west, and the remaining 50 percent will access the site to and from the north." This totals 100
percent — 20 percent from the east, 20 percent from the south, 10 percent from the west, and
50 percent from the north. The phrase "20 percent of the traffic visiting the proposed
development will come from the east and south" means that 20 percent will come from the east
and another 20 percent will come from the south. The reviewer may have assumed that the 20
percent was shared between the east and south; however, the critical word is "and," which
means that the 20 percent will come from both directions.
I hope this response addresses the City of Fort Collins' comment on the traffic impact analysis
report.
Server: \LSC\Projects\2001 \011150\PPS001.wpd
MAR-28-2002 THU 11:17 AN FT ^OLLINS STREETS DEPT FAX NO. 97r"16270 P. 02
Transportation Services
Streets Department
Memorandum
Date: March 28, 2002
To: Robin Bachelet
From: Mike Mossburgh, Crew Chief, Streets Department /���/✓ r
Re: Paving Alley at 700 blk of College
Dear Robin:
The City of Fort Collins, Streets Department, did work on the alley in the 700
block of South College. Work began October 3, 2001, and at that time
crews milled and prepared the alley for paving. On October 4, 2001, the
crews placed 212 tons of 1 t/2 "HBP at a depth of 4". The crews returned
October 9, 2001, and placed 136 tons of 3/A" HBP at a depth of 2" to bring
the total depth of asphalt placed to 6".
If you have any further questions or concerns please don't hesitate to call
me at (970) 221-6615.
Thank you.
Cc: Mike Wermuth, Larry Schneider
625 Ninth Street • P.O. Box 580 - Fort Collins, CO 8052Z-0580 • (970) 221-6615
HILLHOUSE ARCHITECTS, INC.
ARCHITECTS & PLANNERS
May 2, 2002
Mr. Bob Barkeen
City Planner
City of Ft. Collins
281 N. College Ave.
Ft. Collins, CO 80522
Re: Viale Collegio Variance Request
Dear Mr. Barkeen:
As Applicant and on behalf of my client, Venture Pro, LLP, the owner of the above
referenced project, I hereby request a variance from two of the City of Ft. Collins
development policies as noted:
1. Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards, Drawing 19-03, requires a 50'
setback distance from the flow line of an Arterial street. The proposed first
parking stall is located 47 feet behind the flow line. This is the exact location
of the existing parking stall, as it has been for at least 20 years. There is no
report of any accident at this location, with the current setback of 47 feet, and
we are not proposing any change. We are actually creating a safer
environment, by making the current two-way driveway into the property a one
way in only drive. We have reduced the drive width from the current 28 foot
down to 20 feet to further curtail any possible turning movement conflicts.
2. Section 3.2.2 (J) requires a 5' landscape setback from side yards. In this case,
the north side yard abuts a zero lot line building setback. In other words, a
neighboring building with a blank (unfenestrated) wall sits right on the
property line. Additionally, the second floor of our proposed building covers
a good portion of the north property line, and will continually shade the area
required for landscaping. We contend that this "buffer" intent is useless and
void in this circumstance. It is not buffering anything but a blank wall, and
has no hope of sustaining any plant life. Therefore, we request a variance from
this requirement.
There are no detrimental effects to the public health, safety or welfare as a result of
granting these variances, nor will their granting increase the public costs or future
maintenance costs to the public. We therefore respectfully request that these variances be
granted.
Yours truly,(
Jim illhouse
Architect
Cc: Robin Bachelet
8897 GANDER VALLEY LN WINDSOR, CO. 80550 LOCAL (970) 686-0505 METRO (303) 666-6646
Jhillhouse@cs.com
We are proposing, therefore,
that the
alley be left in its present state,
rather than being rebuilt. In
terms of
pavement standards,
the Street
Department feels it is adequate. The
loads placed on it by
this project or
the Fire Department will not
present any untoward impact
upon capital
and maintenance costs, and
its design
was prepared by the
City itself.
This being the case, it is our belief that granting this variance would not
pose a detriment to the public health, safety and welfare of the
community, nor will it reduce the design life of the alley or increase its
cost of maintenance. Given the projected traffic volumes of the existing
and projected uses, we believe that the needs of the community will be
better served by leaving the alley 20' wide, as it is, rather than by
widening it to 30', possibly making it a thru-way for higher -speed traffic.
There are other, non-structural, variances from standards which are
architecture -related, and which we also seek. These are addressed in the
Architect's Memorandum attached to this letter. These include parking
setback and Right -turn -in -only driveway width, Please consider these
items also in your analysis of the feasibility of granting this variance.
Ver ly yours.
N 9 T
David S pe, Cons ant
Colorado P.E. 5914
Encl.
cc: Poudre Properties
James Hillhouse
Very truly yours,
David Shupe, Consultant
7525 Joel Place,
Loveland, CO 80537
April 4, 2002
Mr. Cam McNair, City Engineer
City of Fort Collins,
P.O. Box 580,
Ft. Collins, CO 80522
Re: Viale Collegio PDP - Type 1 (LUC), 706 So. College Ave.
Dear Mr. McNair:
On behalf of our clients, Venture Pro LLP, we request a variance from the
Development standards of the City for the alley behind the referenced
project, in accordance with the variance procedure outlined in Chapter
1.9.2 of the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards.
We have been informed by the City of Fort Collins Street Department in
their Memorandum of March 28, 2002 that some 6 months ago (October,
2001) the alley was in fact rebuilt by them to the current pavement
standard thickness by the overlaying of 6" pf HBP. We believe this was
part of a program of undergrounding utilities in the area. This should
allay many of the staff concerns expressed in the initial review
comments. The broader issue of widening the alley to 30' appears to be
well beyond the scope of this or any other developer, in that only the City
has the powers of eminent domain which would be required to acquire the
additional right-of-way to do so.
In light of the value of such a project as is being proposed to the
rehabilitation of the downtown area and to the community at large, as
well as the fact that traffic being added to the alley over and above the
present use potential is negligible, we feel a variance from this
requirement is worthy of consideration. We are under the understanding
that the Fire Department has posed no objection to the project.
11 I LL H[Ol[JS w ARCHITECTS, S, INC.
ARCHITECTS & PLANNERS
May 2, 2002
Mr. Bob Barkeen
City Planner
City of Ft. Colllins
281 N. College Ave.
Ft. Collins, CO 80522
Re: Viale Collegio PDP Reuubmittal
Dear Mr. Barkeen:
Presented herewith are the following documents in support of our resubmittal response to
your review of the PDP for the project known as Viale Collegio:
1. request for alley requirement variance
2. request for variance to parking setback and landscaping buffer
3. revised site plan and landscape plan
4. utility plans
5. grading and erosion control plans
6. response to your Staff Project Review comments of 02.14.02
I will be out of the country until May 15, but if you have any questions or require any
additional information to process this project, please feel free to contact Adam Hillhouse
at my office.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter, and we look forward to an early approval.
Yours truly,
Jim illhouse,
Architect
Cc: Robin Bachelet
8897 GANDER VALLEY LN WINDSOR, CO. 80550 LOCAL (970) 686-0505 METRO (303) 666-6646
Jhillhouse@cs.com