HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOURTYARD COMMONS (TO LANDINGS BAY) - PDP - 38-98 - CORRESPONDENCE - (8)9. A copy of the comments received from Basil Hamdan of the Stormwater Utility
is attached to this letter. See the red -lined copies of the drainage report and
utility plans for additional comments. Please contact Basil, at 221-6035, if you
have questions about his comments.
10. A copy of the comments received from Mark McCallum of the Engineering
Department is attached to this letter. See red -lined copies of the Site Plan,
Landscape Plan, and utility plans for additional comments. Please contact Mark,
at 221-6750, if you have questions about his comments.
11-. Kathleen Reavis of the Transportation Planning Department has made
comments on a red -lined copy of the Site Plan that is being forwarded to the
applicant. Please contact Kathleen, at 224-6140, if you have questions about her
comments.
The following comments and concerns were expressed at the weekly staff meeting on
February 24, 1999:
Stormwater
12. There is grading required along the south property line. An off -site grading
easement is required for this work and a letter of intent is needed prior to this
item going to public hearing before the Planning and Zoning Board.
13. The proposed storm sewer along the north property line needs to be eliminated.
14. A portion of the detention pond may be in the street right-of-way when additional
right-of-way is dedicated (which is necessary). There may be a problem
associated with detention capacity if JFK Parkway widens. This issue must be
resolved before the item goes to the Planning and Zoning Board for a decision
on the project.
15. The rip rap in the detention pond must be covered and reseeded.
16. The existing wetlands in the detention pond must be protected.
Engineering
17. The developer is responsible for the cost and construction of the pedestrian
refuge pad in the center of JFK Parkway at the time of development of Landings
Bay. The City will be doing the design for this pad. The design should be done
before the item goes to the Planning and Zoning Board for a decision, but
absolutely no later than when the Landings Bay utility plans are finally approved
and signed.
f0' �
1 4' � R �
T R
i'
1 T� r �
M
FRONT
f"=f0'
- 4' M R
T R�
2'
1 LLL
M 11
FRONT
1"=f0'
f
Recycling and Trash Collection Area
Good Design Poor Thcinn
"�J
As-
:145,
�ltcsj L-4jce-S AP-,G CADk-`IV GJI�t-
ti
A,)VZIH To
C cc, L I �7
�(7"7—
qpawsU3
!logs -014
C�, U
/ 4-jq
26. A 12'x12' or 12'x14' trash enclosure, in all locations, should be provided to allow
for a recycling bin to be included.
27. If the existing wetlands are to be disturbed then a mitigation plan must be.
submitted to the City for review, prior to the item going to the Planning and
Zoning Board for a decision.
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 amount of 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 to the project
planner no later than the third weekly staff review meeting (Wednesday mornings)
following receipt of the revisions. At this staff review meeting the item will be discussed
and it will be determined if the project is ready to go to the Planning and Zoning Board
for a decision. If so, will be scheduled for the nearest Board hearing date with an
opening on the agenda.
Please return all drawings red -lined by City staff with submission of your revisions. The
number of copies of revisions for each document to be resubmitted is on the
attached Revisions Routing Sheet. There are still significant issues that must be
resolved before this item can go to a public hearing before the Planning and Zoning
Board. You may contact me at 221-6341 to schedule a meeting to discuss these
comments.
SinGerely,
dt-M) lt
Project Planner
cc: Engineering
Stormwater Utility
Zoning
Water & Wastewater
Traffic Operations
Transportation Planning
Natural Resources
Advance Planning
Lagunitas Company
Northern Engineering
King Surveyors Inc.
Project File
18. Although some or all of the buildings in this development are to be fire
sprinklered the Poudre Fire Authority still needs clear, unobstructed access
through the site. Are the internal driveway.widths and curve radii acceptable for
truck movement between JFK Parkway and Landings Drive? This same concern
could also apply to accessibility for trash hauling trucks.
19. There is new subdivision plat language that must be included on the final plat.
Transportation Planning
20. The current development plan does not have direct handicapped accessibility
from Office Buildings 10, 11, and 12 to the residential buildings. Possibly a
"switchback" sidewalk down the grade between Buildings 11 & 12 would enable
the developer to provide the pedestrian connection while meeting the required
grade for wheelchair users.
Plannina
21. A walkway next to Building 8 connecting to the public sidewalk along JFK
Parkway, enclosing a loop for pedestrian movement around the office complex,
should be provided.
22. The ability for truck movement through the site appears to be very, very tight and
maybe not acceptable. Please check with Ron Gonzales of the Poudre Fire
Authority and Mark McCallum of the Engineering Department to determine if
the emergency access drive widths and turning radius are adequate and
acceptable.
23. Based on the information provided on the Architectural Elevations Plan, the
buildings appear to be more than 40' high, requiring a Special Height Review as
per Section 3.5.1(H)(1) of the LUC (see the red -lined plan that is being forwarded
to the applicant). The way the City determines building height is measuring the
height of the building at the midpoint of each side, from grade to highest point,
adding that height for each of all four sides, and averaging them. By this method
the building height would appear to be 41.4.
Natural Resources
24. A cross-section through the ditch, where the buildings become the closest,
should be provided.
25. The limits of development along the ditch must be shown on the Site Plan and
utility plans.
III
4. Kim Kreimeyer, the City's Natural Resources Planner, stated that the trash
enclosures should be designed to accommodate recycling (please see the red -
lined Site Plan that is being forwarded to the applicant). The dimensions should
be 12'x12' or 12'x14' (see the attachments to this letter). Please contact Kim, at
221-6750, if you have questions about this comment.
5. Clark Mapes of the Advance Planning Department offered the following
comments:
a. First, overall the City staff acknowledges the ambitious approach to
efficiency, intimacy, urbanity, etc.
b. Then, there are some basic urban improvements that go with
development that are squeezed pretty hard in this project design and
layout.
C. For City staff, it's the connecting walkway that ties the residential and
office buildings together. A red -lined copy of the Landscape Plan shows
an initial 'cut' at the Transportation Planning Department's comments
on ramp access between offices and dwellings.
A red -lined copy of the Landscape Plan, with comments, is being forwarded to
the applicant. Please contact Clark, at 221-6225, if you have questions about
these comments.
6. The Mapping/Drafting Department offered the following comments:
a. This development proposal is no a PUD; therefore, the reference to a
PUD should be taken off of the subdivision plat wherever it may be
referenced.
b. If this is a replat then it should be referenced in the title on the subdivision
plat.
C. Need ties for the building envelopes if they are to remain on the
subdivision plat.
7. A copy of the comments received from Ron Gonzales of the Poudre Fire
Authority is attached to this letter.
8. A copy of the comments received from Roger Buffington of the
Water/Wastewater Department is attached to this letter. Additional comments
are on a red -lined set of utility plans that are being forwarded to the applicant.
Please contact Roger, at 221-6681, if you have questions about his comments.
Commun Planning and Environmental S ices
Current Planning
City of Fort Collins
March 2, 1999
Linda Ripley
VF Ripley Associates, Inc.
1113 Stoney Hill Drive
Fort Collins, CO. 80525
Dear Linda,
Staff has reviewed your revisions for the LANDINGS BAY (formerly COURTYARD
COMMONS), Project Development Plan (PDP) development proposal that were
submitted to the City on February 3, 1999, and would like'to offer the following
comments:
This development proposal is on property that is in the E - Employment Zoning
District. Residential uses are defined as Secondary Uses in Section 4.22(D)(1)
Land Use Standards of the LUC and these uses shall occupy no more than
25% of the total gross area of the development plan. A modification of the
standard is necessary and has been requested by the applicant. The request is
being supported by City staff, who will forward a recommendation for approval on
to the Planning and Zoning Board.
Per a December, 1998 Code change, a modification is not required to
allow the office use to exceed 25%. The modification, request is required
only for the residential portion of the development. Please revise the
request to'reflect this.
2. John Moen of the Larimer County Canal No. 2 Ditch Company stated that if
any part of the development (including streets, utilities, etc.) encroaches on the
Ditch Company right-of-way, then a signed agreement between the developer
and the Ditch Company must be in place before the Ditch Company can sign off
on the final subdivision plat and utility plans.
3. A copy of the comments received from the Zoning Department is attached to
this letter.
281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020