Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMELDRUM/MYRTLE 4-PLEX - PDP - 13-01 - CORRESPONDENCE - REVISIONS (3)38� Issue Contact- Wes Lamarque Please provide easements for detention pond on and off -site of property. This can be done by a replat or by separate document. Al ` 40,& Gai** oft4 e.,1PA4. Transportation Planning Issue Contucr Mark Jackson Sidewalk standards - New sidewalk on Myrtle St. really needs to be 4.5' detached wl 6' parkway per Local Residential street standards. 2t i� JAOw�t iJ ¢.S' #4+J Po'kw-) tJ !p. 2 Issue Contact. Mark Jackson Offsite Parking to block sidewalk? - How will you keep residents' offsite parking (at driveway cut where garage is to be removed) from blocking the sidewalk? This is a problem along the Meldrum Street side of site. Water Wastewater w� Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Sanitary Sewer Main - No sanitary sewer main extends south from the existing manhole in the alley. Correct all notes pertaining to an invert south from the existing manhole. 74...Vort1. L,d fic We-d h.v.Yi w-r-,scOrrs.,4e issue Contact: Jeff Hill Proposed Service Invert - Provide information for the proposed service invert into the existing manhole. wt �JzeA We14 Issue Contact: Jeff Hill See Redlines - See site, landscape and utility plans for other comments. Be sure and return all of your redlined plans when you re -submit. If you have questions regarding these issues or any other issues related to this project, please feel free to call me at (970) 221-6750. Yours Truly, rp-.-- r_,Jh- BRIAN GRUBB City Planner 6 Light & Power Aa_� Issue Contact: Doug Martine Development Charges - Normal electric development charges plus costs to modify the existing electric system will apply. o k Natural Resources PFA 40 Issue Contact Doug Moore Mitigation Plan - I might make more sense to show all of the existing trees to remain and be removed on a separate mitigation plan. 41 Issue Contact: Doug Moore Review by City Forester - Have all of the trees that have been called out to be removed been reviewed by the City Forester? If the Forester is allowing them to be removed are any of them significant and will they need to be mitigated? 4Y Issue Contact Michael Chavez Address Numerals - Address numerals shall be visible from the street fronting the property, and posted with a minimum of 6-inch numerals on a contrasting background. Bronze numerals on browh brick are not acceptable. Note: This building shall have one numerical designation for the entire building with alphabetical designations for each individual unit and in a clockwise direction around the building. c1' Stormwater Utility r Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Detention Pond - Please design for orifice on outlet pipe and show calculations in report. we *,j4,4 }o Qeyo.+ L 4o p4ja.iJ4ed. FM Issue Contact Wes Lamarque Detention Pond - Please provide an emergency spillway for pond. Provide a cross-section on plans and calculations in report. We addd to DrV"'Ie lelook gpi Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Please provide a detail of the pipe oulet at Myrtle. tic t'f fo f4 r ,31 — Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque There appear to be some undetained flows in Basin II. If these flows are undetained, then the flows will need to be subtracted from the allowable release rate of the pond to make up the difference. Alternating the grading to force the e flows into the pond is another option. z ..4c a Jw. � f0 ° ; kevf """ °,ee j,0" 81_ ,uorf1. fr • I AJ0,44 ko—jc 0; fe PO-1 Wes Lamar ue Issue Contact: q The water Quality volume was calculated incorrectly. The watershed inches required was read wrong on the graph. Please revise calculation. Lvc corv"4tl 66� Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Please provide cross section of swales noted on grading plan.w& pK< tAfc.on f• ie»� ... r4e•t ¢s w�i/•t nrfa tefoe Ar*iI. Issue Contact: we Lamarque Please provide 1 foot of freeboard from HWL of pond to lowest opening of all existing and proposed buildings. 3:+w.o3 t2.-=A j4 ..,c Lv-L4 J&`06•7� of WL rsu+t-t wt. 4o..J &#,/lj 40 Love P'e eljO".f 5 F,. Issue Contact Katie Moore Grading/Drainage/Erosion Control Plan: ✓ Runoff is not allowed over a public sidewalk. Please show that this is not occuring at the driveway cuts or re-route drainage. rt-ij b+,is-t.,/y ,. t e evitRr1d/� ✓ Please provide 100-year storm statement. See ILE on Utility plan checklist. we dt'o( -tk1, ✓ Show temporary as well as permanent erostion control devices. we 1& a r, t f j0e"se, Sfi�,tMrv�' i�fr 44.� %�•4 S�Yd,oa`'•••�- Issue Contact-. Katie Moore Overall Utility Plan: Please label all ROW and easements for Myrtle/Meldrum/alley, and internal to the site. we -[.'4 +k•; Issue Contact: Katie Moore Along alley, please observe setback requirements and design driveway to standards (figure 7-11F) W e. r-ev<i•J d LY' Issue Contact. Katie Moore Increase building setback from south lot line per requirements. Gy_ Issue Contact: Katie Moore Trash enclosure is not allowed within the utility easement/setback area from alley. sy We /w opt t +r t,J k e n o/oJ 4 v-e- Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please show design for PVC pipe outlet at curb. If curb is less than 10" high, need to use culvert as shown in detail D-10. C-4 ij 1 " /"9"' �°.�►o„ �~ Issue Contac : Katie Moore AVamaged existing curb and gutter or sidewalk will need to be replaced. Aere Ifno A4s '.ys.( Oat o. u,t//a 4j IP4:,/ 1L. ; G. ;sue Contact Katie Moore New general notes are in the process of being revised. I will send you the new general notes for the utility plans when the revisions are complete. wt s.Cle.( ¢ea4o, 4< Issue Contact Katie Moore Provide conduit for future undergroun ing of tel phone line along alley 3.3.2(D)7.b z1. �,,� (vs� yL.eeJ u.As�pr'�+.�� i� FAt, -f.. WG Wi Or w�l Issue Contact. Katie Moore Please see additional comments on plans. tgi Issue Contact: Katie Moore Street jutpermityvillpe requ ed�fprwork on Myrtle. QG' oIssue Contact: Katie Moore Please show detail of timber retaining wall. Retaining wall is not allowed within ROW. =f iJ no+ i^ ,e.0-u,. POr14 ed7c 1.0 p— R.e..a• 1,/..4. Gt/c 40✓6 WOO A,'/o•, f{r4r� �t Issue Contact Katie Moore Please show cross-section of si4i.vj%l rain pan along east edge of west lots. I'�d i, 4 t cPwF rro-+-,v- A — i-o s4eel- ¢• Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please show cross-section of timber retaining wall/pan area.. r 't/tdj G Pori Jae'/o„� I'$M-.64 44 ,rill{ ¢- 4 53 Issue C'untact Brian Grubb HVAC Equipment Screening - It appears that the plan does not meet the requirements of Section 3.5.1(J)(2) and (3) which states that HVAC equipment shall be located and screened so that the visual and acoustic impacts of these functions are fully contained and out of view of the adjacent properties and public streets. As stated in the concept review comment letter of November 6, 2000, please provide a sketch of the building complete with all of the utility elements and the proposed screening so it can be determined whether or not these requirements are being met. 54 Issue C'onract Brian Grubb Street Tree - A street tree is required for the north street frontage of the northwest lot (along Myrtle). 55 Issue Catvuct: Brian Grubb Density - After spending time reviewing this project and evaluating all the issues, it seems that there is a little too much building for the site. Many of the issues contained in this report can be addressed by reducing the size of the building, increasing the open area and redesigning certain improvements. Issues and problems such as setback conflicts, the need for off -site pedestrian access, and screening of HVAC equipment, to name a few, can be alleviated by reducing the footprint of the building. Engineering 9� Issue C'unrncr Katie Moore Site and Landscape Plans: Please match with Utility Plans. Please use an engineering scale Sofa io' .� Issue Contact Katie Moore Detail Sheet: Please use details from the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards where applicable. Lv e- cl%447cA io 1—.c. u-A. S.S. 1.5/ Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please submit a plat. ✓ Please provide current plat language (attached) Please show information to standards (see attached utility plan checklist), dedicating appropriate easements. An access easement will be needed for the sidewalk area on the east edge of the western lots. L,ve' &AJ-e'4 a P/sf. It 6/ Issue Contact: Katie Moore Please submit a soils report. ,y- L)J C h a v e- a hG 10J e J To I h RetoW i. Issue Contacr: Katie Moore Utility plan cover sheet: P#" Please reference updated/current soils report ✓ Please provide indemnification statement (see attached utility plan 1we &dde-1 4 4.twWd checklist). t/ Please provide name/address/phone for developer and owner we e.ldel 44it N 23 Issue Contact: Brian Grubb Pedestrian Access to West Side of Building - Pedestrian access to these units goes across the adjacent lots. A pedestrian access easement will need to be provided on the plat. 23 Issue Contact: Brian Grubb Plan Scale - The plans would be more readable at a larger scale. An engineer's scale of 1 inch = 10' would be more appropriate. 24 Issue Contact: Brian Grubb Plan Dimensions - The plan lacks certain dimensions. Please show dimensions for the following: Setback from East property line; Dimensions of proposed new lots; and, width of the sidewalks. 24 Issue Contact Brian Grubb Timing of Plat Review - The plat submitted was not received in time to be evaluated during this first round of staff review. The plat will be distributed with the re -submittal for review during the second round. 25 issue Contact Brian Grubb West Sidewalk - Is there a curb on the west sidewalk that channels water into a drainage on the north side? Please identify these features. A cross- section of this sidewalk, curb and the adjacent grade would be helpful. 25 Issue Contact: Brian Grubb Lighting Plan - The plan should show the property boundaries and lighting values 20 feet beyond the boundaries. 26 Issue Contact: Brian Grubb Sidewalk Redundancy - It appears that there is redundancy in the sidewalk access on the northwest corner of the building. Anything you can do to eliminate unnecessary impervious surface on this site and increase landscape area will help. 27 Issue Contact: Brian Grubb Architectural Compatibility - Please provide a north elevation including the existing structure to the west. This is necessary to determine if the project is compatible with the character of the neighborhood as an infill project. 27 Issue Contact: Brian Grubb Architectural Compatibility - The north elevation of the structure should be made to appear like it is the main entrance to the building and like a typical entrance to a single family dwelling. 52 Issue Contact: Brian Grubb Driveway - The driveway cut for the existing house at the corner of Meldrum and Myrtle is not allowed by the municipal code. See Section 24-76 (1)(d). I recommend you review that entire section of the code to familiarize yourself with city standards. Please contact Katie Moore for information on this issue. Modify page 2, section 3.0 of the "Project Description and Planning Objectives" accordingly. 2 I STAFF PROJECT REVIEW Charles & Ann Knight The Architects Studio 151 W Mountain Ave Fort Collins, CO 80524 Date: 04/11 /2001 Staff has reviewed your submittal for MELDRUM/MYRTLE FOUR PLEX, #13-01, and we offer the following comments: ISSUES: Dry Utilities 46 issue C'ontact: Dennis Greenwalt Utility Easement - AT&T Broadband would like to see a Public Utility Easement along the south property line so that the homes that face south Meldrum St. could be serviced. AT&T Broadband did not receive a plat on this project. Woe A LttViiai.f 4/.u.7 ;L& fo. -t* Prv�oo Af L+»e Advance Planning W `P�.. 49 Issue Contact: Clark Mapes Detail of Plans - This is urban. Detail is extra important thus the comments on the plans. 50 Issue (.bruact Clark Mapes Compatibility - As proposed, the 4-plex needs some work to be considered "compatible" with the historic character of the existing nearby homes (3.4.7 LUC). 51 Issue Contact: Clark Mapes Historic Preservation - Applicant will need to go through Karen McWilliams demolition/alteration review process. Building & Zoning 47 Issue Contact Rick Lee Codes and Standards - Please find attached the codes and standards that the Fort Collins Building Department will enforce. Verify the accessibility requirements of 1103.1.9.3 of the 1997 UBC. Current Planning 21 Issue Contact: Brian Grubb Front Setback - The structure does not meet the front setback requirement of 15 feet. Certain architectural features are allowed to encroach into the setback; however, the porch that encroaches is not an allowed encroachment. 22 Issue Contact: Brian Grubb Rear Setback - The structure does not meet the rear setback requirement of 15 feet. Encroachments for certain architectural features are also allowed in the rear yard setback; however the porch that encroaches is not one of those features.