Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHOWELL BUILDING - PDP - 46-98 - CORRESPONDENCE - (3)The following comments/concerns were expressed at the weekly Staff Review Meeting on October 2, 1998: 11. The parking situation is unacceptable, from an operational standpoint. All of the cars will have to back out into the alley and the movement will be difficult, conflicting, and potentially dangerous, at best. 12. Even if the parking layout were acceptable, the steps (or whatever they are) on the east side of the building (as shown on the Site & Landscape Plans) would interfere with the parking space closest to the building. 13. Additional Planning Department comments are on red -lines plans that are being forwarded to the applicant. This completes the staff comments at this time. Additional comments will be forthcoming as they are received from City departments and outside reviewing agencies. Under the development review process and schedule there is no revision date mandated by the City. The time spent on revisions is up to the applicant. Upon receipt, the revisions will be routed to the appropriate City departments and outside reviewing agencies, with their comments due no later than the second weekly staff review meeting (Wednesday mornings) following receipt of the revisions. At this staff review meeting it will be determined if the project is ready to go to the Administrative Hearing Officer (or Planning and Zoning Board, if necessary) for a decision and, if so, will be scheduled for the nearest open date. Please return all red -lined plans and reports with your revisions when they are submitted to the Current Planning Department The number of copies of revisions for each document to be resubmitted is on the attached Revisions Routing Sheet. Please be aware that Leanne Harter has left the City and the responsibility for completing the development review of this project has been assigned to Steve Olt. You may contact me at (970)221-6341 to schedule a meeting to discuss these comments, if necessary. cerely, eve Olt Project Planner cc: Engineering Advance Planning Zoning Larry Howell Stormwater Stewart & Associates Water/Wastewater File h needed parking for the office uses be provided? Also, one handicapped parking stall is required for this project. d. Where is the trash enclosure for this project? e. The location and nature of the signage should not be shown on the Building Elevations. The signage is subject to the City's Sign Code and is not a consideration of this project's development review. £ Will the balcony, as shown on the North Building Elevation (on the west side of the building), extend into the street right-of-way? This balcony and the South College Avenue right-of-way should be shown on the Site Plan. Please contact Jenny, Peter, or Gary, at 221-6760, if you have questions about these comments. 7. Basil Hamdan of the Stormwater Utility stated that the erosion control plan is approved as submitted. The $1,000 erosion control escrow can be waived. Additional comments can be found on the red -lined reports and plans that are being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Basil, at 221-6035, if you have questions about his comments. 8. A copy of the comments received from Mark McCallum of the Engineering Department is attached to this letter. Additional comments can be found on the red -lined plans that are being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Mark, at 221-6750, if you have questions about his comments. 9. Roger Buffington of the Water/Wastewater Department offered the following comments: a. Show all water and sanitary sewer services on the Landscape Plan. b. Install separate sanitary sewer service for the new addition. Additional comments can be found on red -lined plans that are being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Roger, at 221-6681, if you have questions about his comments. 10. Tim Buchanan, the City Forester, stated that an ornamental tree should be placed in the middle of the planting island at the southeast corner of the site, along the alley. The tree should be ornamental to avoid potential conflict with the overhead power lines. Please see the attachment. 4. Ron Gonzales of the Poudre Fire Authority offered the following comments: a. Fire apparatus access roads shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction when any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the first story of the building is located more than 150' from fire apparatus access as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. This fire lane shall be visible by painting and signage, and maintained unobstructed. A fire lane plan shall be submitted for approval prior to installation. Any building not meeting this criteria shall be fire sprinklered. b. Address numerals shall be visible from the street fronting the property [South College Avenue], and posted with a minimum of 6" numerals on a contrasting background (example: bronze numerals on brown brick are not acceptable). C. Fire hydrants are required with a maximum spacing of 600' along an approved roadway. Each hydrant must be capable of delivering 1,000 gallons of water per minute at a residual pressure of 20 psi. Hydrants shall be of an approved type as defined by the water department and the fire department. No commercial (office) building can be greater that 300' from a fire hydrant. d. The two new upper residential floors shall be fire sprinklered. Please contact Ron, at 221-6570, if you have questions about these comments. 5. A copy of the comments received from Sharon Getz of the Building Inspection Department is attached to this letter. 6. Representatives of the Zoning Department offered the following comments: a. What is the proposed building height? b. Some landscaping should be provided at the rear of the building. C. The parking plan does not comply with the City's requirements. There is no turnaround for the diagonal and parallel parking spaces and, therefore, it cannot be considered as parking. People in their cars cannot be backing out into the alley in this manner. One row of perpendicular parking can occur and provide for the required 5' wide landscape buffers on each side of the lot. However, a minimum of 7 spaces is needed for the residential apartments alone. How will the Commur ' - Planning and Environmental f Current Planning City of Fort Collins October 7, 1998 M. Torgerson Architects 211 Jefferson Street Fort Collins, CO. 80524 Dear Mikal, 7nces Staff has reviewed your documentation for the HOWELL BUILDING, Project Development Plan (PDP) - #46-98 that was submitted to the City on September 16, 1998, and is offering the following comments: 1. A copy of the comments received from Susan Peterson of U.S. West is attached to this letter. 2. This property is located on the east side of South College Avenue between Locust and Plum Streets. It is in the CC - Community Commercial Zoning District. The proposed multi -family residential and office uses are permitted in this District, subject to an administrative review (Type I) and public hearing for a decision. The Project Development Plan (PDP) must go to a public hearing before an administrative hearing officer for a decision unless any modifications of standards are required, which would automatically change the request to a Type II, Planning and Zoning Board review. 3. Doug Martine of the Light & Power Department offered the following comments: a. The `Lighting Plan' (titled only as Site Plan on the sheet) shows a "70 watt HPS City street light in alley". This existing light is actually a 100 watt HPS. b. The dwelling units must each be electrically metered individually. C. The standard City electric development charges will apply to this project. d. The developer/builder will be responsible for installing any new electric services underground. Please contact Doug, at 221-6700, if you have questions about these comments. 281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020