HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOARDWALK CROSSING, LOT 2, FILING 2 - FDP - 76-93C - CORRESPONDENCE - REVISIONSArchitecture West Response: The second note #6 has been revised to #7 and
revised to state that site lighting fixtures would be pole mounted at 22'-0" and be
down -directional. Reference to `ground -mounted lighting' has been deleted.
This completes staff (and outside reviewing agencies) review and comments at this
time. Red -lined plan from City departments are included with this comment letter.
Additional comments and red -lined plans may be forthcoming. Another round of staff
review is determined to be necessary. This proposal is subject to the 90-day
revision re -submittal requirement (from the date of this comment letter, being
April 6, 2005) as set forth in Section 2.2.11(A) of the Land Use Code. Be sure
and return all of your red -lined plans when you re -submit. The number of copies of
each document to re -submit is shown on the attached Revisions Routing Sheet.
Stewart & Associates Response: Acknowledged.
Architecture West Response: Acknowledged.
If you have any questions regarding these issues or any other issues related to this
project, please feel free to call me at 221-6341.
Yours Truly,
Steve Olt
City Planner
cc: Katie Moore
Current Planning File #76-93C
Pace 4
Stewart & Associates Response: There are no WQO structure elevations shown on
the plan but references the detail on sheet C. Revised WQ structure elevations.
Number: 56 Created: 3/ 18/2005
[3/18/05] Rust proofing is required for the WQ outlet structure grate.
Stewart & Associates Response: Added note to detail for rust proofing.
Number: 57 Created: 3/18/2005
[3/18/05] The diameter for the orifice on the outlet pipe does not match the
calculation in the report. Please revise.
Stewart & Associates Response: Revised detail to match report -now 4.7 inch
diameter.
Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: David Averill
Topic: General
Number: 59 Created: 3/22/2005
[3/22/05) All previous comments addressed and nothing new to add. Thanks.
Stewart & Associates Response: Acknowledged.
Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Roger Buffington
Topic: General
Number: 58 Created: 3/20/2005
[3/20/05] No comments.
Stewart & Associates Response: Acknowledged.
Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Peter Barnes
Topic: zoning
Number: 7 Created: 6/23/2004
[2/25/05] They've added a second note #6 to the site plan to address this. It should
be renumbered to #7. However, the note is not acceptable. It should simply state
that pole mounted light fixtures will be down directional, and the pole height will be x
feet. If shouldn't refer to a note on another sheet. Also, it refers to "lighting mounted
on ground". I don't believe there's any ground -mounted lighting.
[12/2/04] The wording of this note has been changed, but there are still pole fixtures
shown that aren't addressed in the note as to down directional, height of poles, etc.
[6/23/04] General Note #6 implies that all exterior lighting will be building mounted,
yet there are pole fixtures shown on the site plan. If there are to be pole fixtures,
then the note should address those as well (i.e., down directional, height of poles,
etc). If there aren't going to be any poles, then remove them from the site plan.
Page 3
[12/2/04]
[717/041 Please see redlines for any additional comments.
Stewart & Associates Response: Revised redlines.
Number: 54 Created: 3/15/2005
[3/15/05] Please submit deeds of dedication, sketches, and legal descriptions for all
easements to be dedicated with this project (public access easement, 1, utility
easement, drainage) and submit a sketch and legal for the drainage easement to be
vacated.
Stewart & Associates Response: Okay
Department: Light & Power
Topic: General
Number: 53
[2/25/05] No Comments.
Issue Contact: Doug Martine
Created: 2/25/2005
Stewart & Associates Response: Acknowledged
Department: Natural Resources Issue Contact: Doug Moore
Topic: General
Number: 60 Created: 3/23/2005
[3/23/05] No issues.
Stewart & Associates Response: Acknowledged
Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque
Topic: Drainage
Number: 36 Created: 7/9/2004
[3/18/05] Repeat Comment
[12/10/04)
A drainage easement is required for the detention pond. The existing drainage
easement needs to be vacated for the part that is in conflict with the proposed
building.
Stewart & Associates Response: We have submitted a request to vacation of part of
the existing easement - 3 months ago -check with your engineering department for
the status.
Number: 55 Created: 3/18/2005
[3/18/051 The elevations on the water quality outlet structure do not match the
elevations on the drainage plan or in the report. The WQ outlet structure will need to
be revised.
Page 2
aSTAFF PROJECT REVIEW
Citvof Fort Collins
Architecture West LLC and Stewart & Associates Comment Responses
ARCHITECTURE WEST LLC Date: 03/22/2005
4710 S. COLLEGE AVE. Revised: 04/06/2005
FT. COLLINS, CO 80525
Staff has reviewed your submittal for BOARDWALK CROSSING, LOT 2, FILING 2
PDP AND FINAL COMPLIANCE, and we offer the following comments:
ISSUES:
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Steve Olt
Topic: General
Number: 61 Created: 4/6/2005
[4/6/05] See red -lined Site and Landscape Plans for comments.
Architecture West Response: Red -line comments were in reference to scanability.
Line weights were adjusted and reprinted and taken to city scanner for test scan.
Drawings passed scannability test. Scannability test was conducted by John Pedis.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Katie Moore
Topic: General
Number: 21 Created: 7/7/2004
[3/15/05] Just one location on northernmost ramp where slope is a bit too steep.
[12/2/04] Due to new ADA requirements, and difficulties encountered with
constructing ped ramps at corners, additional detail and spot elevations are needed
for the design of the corner ramps to ensure ADA compliance.
[7/7/04] Please provide both directional ramps on the northwest corner of the site.
Stewart & Associates Response. Revised grades at ramp.
Number: 28 Created: 7/7/2004
[3/15/05] The only scanning issue that might still be a problem is the grey lines -
they may not show up. If you'd like, some morning during the week you could bring
in a set of plans and do a test scan to see. Ask at Technical Services.
[12/2/04] There are still areas of the plans needing attention regarding scanability.
[7/7/04] Please review appendix E-10 in LCUASS for the City's scanability
requirements for all plan sheets and revise plans as necessary.
Stewart & Associates Response: They print good. They should show up good on
mylar.
Number: 31
[3/15/05]
Created: 7/7/2004
Page 1