HomeMy WebLinkAboutREDTAIL - MAJOR AMENDMENT - 26-01B - CORRESPONDENCE - (4)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,
Oteve Olt
City Planner
cc: Susan Joy
Louise Herbert/VF Ripley
Tricia Kroetch/North Star Design
Current Planning file #26-01B
Page 9
Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue
Contact: Basil Hamdan
Topic: Stormwater
Number: 20 Created: 5/ 1 / 2007
[5/ 1 /07] Please include the amended letter in the original drainage report.
Original report can be retrieved from Stormwater so that no new reports
have to be produced (my contribution to earth day).
Please explain, in the amended letter explicitly what pipe sizes were changed
from the original design in order to accommodate the increased flows.
The private pipe running behind lot 6 is within a 5 foot drainage easement.
This is too narrow to allow any maintenance on this pipe. Since the pipe is
shallow a minimum of a 10-foot wide easement should be provided in this
case. Please extend easement to tie into row where the pipe bends to tie
into the inlet on Conejos drive.
Please add spot elevations in the rear of Lot 6 to ensure proper drainage is
maintained. Add top and bottom of wall elevations.
All sheets that are being changed should show all original information, that
will remain valid after these changes as well as the new information. All
changes should.be bubbled. Revision block title should describe the
proposed changes.
Department: Zoning
Topic: Zoning
Number: 32
[5/2/07] Issues resolved - ok.
Issue Contact: Gary Lopez
Created: 5/2/2007
This represents staff (and outside reviewing agencies) review and comments
at this time. Additional comments and red -lined plans may be forthcoming.
There are several issues that must be resolved before this item can go the
Planning and Zoning Board for a decision; therefore, 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 May 4, 2007) as set forth in Section 2.2.11(A) of the Land
Use Code. Be sure and return all 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.
Page 8
These requirements may be modified if buildings are equipped with
automatic fire sprinkler systems.
97UFC 901.2.2.2
Number: 2 Created: 4 / 23 / 2007
[4/23/07] SPRINKLER REQUIREMENTS: These proposed buildings shall be
equipped with approved, automatic fire -sprinkler systems.
Number; 3 Created: 4/23/2007
[4/23/07] FIRE LINE REQUIREMENT: Buildings that are required to be fire
sprinklered shall have a minimum 6-inch fire line unless hydraulic
calculations can support a smaller fire line.
Number: 4 Created: 4 / 23 / 2007
[4/23/07] KNOX BOX REQUIRED: Poudre Fire Authority requires a "Knox
Box" to be mounted on the front of every new building equipped with a
required fire sprinkler system or fire alarm system. 97UFC 902.4; PFA
BUREAU POLICY 88-20
Number: 5 Created: 4 / 23 / 2007
[4/23/07] FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION: Fire department connections
shall be installed remote from the buildings, and located on the street or fire
lane side of buildings, fully visible and recognizable from the street or
nearest point of fire department vehicle access or as otherwise approved by
the fire code official. If possible, a fire hydrant shall be located within 100
feet of the FDC. 2006 International Fire Code 912.2.1 and PFA Bureau
Policy
Number: 6 Created: 4 / 23 / 2007
[4/23/07] STANDPIPES AND FIRE PUMP: Buildings four or more stories in
height are required to be equipped with firefighting standpipes in every
stairwell. The standpipe system must be capable of supplying a minimum
100 psi to the top floor; an approved fire pump may be required to obtain
this minimum pressure. IFC 905.3.1
Number: 7 Created: 4 / 23/ 2007
[4/23/07] STAIRWELL SIGNAGE: Approved stairwell identification signs
shall be posted at each floor level in all enclosed stairways in buildings four
or more stories in height. 97UFC 1210.4 and Appendix I-C
Number: 8 Created: 4 / 23 / 2007
[4/23/071 ADDRESS NUMERALS: Address numerals shall be visible from
the street fronting the property, and posted with a minimum of six-inch (6)
numerals on a contrasting background. (Bronze numerals on brown brick
are not acceptable). 97UFC 901.4.4
Page 7
Topic: Grading Sheet
Number: 25 Created: 5 / 2 / 2007
[5/2/07] Missing some contour elevation labeling... could you add a few in
so that I make sure I'm not assuming something incorrectly? Thanks!!
Topic: Utility Plans
Number: 27 Created: 5 / 2 / 2007
[5/2/07] Please refer to detail and sheet number when involving anything
in or affecting the public row.
Number: 28 Created: 5/ 2 / 2007
[5/2/07] Please provide tow, bow spots for all new retaining walls.
Depending on the height, we may require the actual design to be included in
the plan set. For instance, a new retaining wall is proposed by the gazebo
north of Cameron Drive. Does it have a footing? If so, the footing needs to
be located outside of the utility easement. Also, please refer to detail and
sheet number for the appropriate retaining wall section.
Number: 29 Created: 5 / 2 / 2007
[5/2/07] Tricia - have we raised any of the utilities under the roads so that
we now have a cover issue (per 12.2.2)?
Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Doug Martine
Topic: Electric Utility
Number: 9 Created: 4 / 24 / 2007
[4/24/07] Developer will need to provide a completed Commercial Service
(C-1) Form to Light 8s Power Engineering. This form is available by calling
Electric Engineering at 221-6700. The developer will also need to
coordinate revised transformer locations with Light & Power Engineering.
The sizes and requirements for commercial transformer pads are different
than what was required for the previous residential plan.
Department: PFA Issue Contact: Carie Dann
Topic: Fire
Number: 1 Created: 4 / 23 / 2007
[4/23/071 WATER SUPPLY: Fire hydrants, where required, must be the
type approved by the water district having jurisdiction and the Fire
Department. Hydrant spacing and water flow must meet minimum
requirements based on type of occupancy. Minimum flow and spacing
requirements include: Commercial, 1,500 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure,
spaced not further than 300 feet to the building, on 600-foot centers
thereafter; residential within Urban Growth Area, 1,000 gpm at 20 psi
residual pressure, spaced not further than 400 feet to the building, on 800-
foot centers thereafter; residential outside Urban Growth Area, 500 gpm at
20 psi residual pressure, spaced not further than'400 feet to the building,
on 800-foot centers thereafter.
Page 6
Topic: Utility Plans
Number: 31 Created: 5 / 2 / 2007
[5/2/07] A copy of a letter from Terry Farrill, District Engineer for the Fort
Collins -Loveland Water and South Fort Collins Sanitation Districts, is
attached to this comment letter. The Districts will provide water and
sanitary sewer services to this development so please contact Mr. Farrill
directly about their requirements.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Susan Joy
Topic: General
Number: 19 Created: 5/ l/2007
[5/ 1/07] From Technical Services: The site and landscape plans have type
over lines. Please correct to meet our scanning requirements.
Number: 21 Created: 5 / 2 / 2007
[5/2/07] We'll handle all of the changes to the original approved utility
drawings as revisions so you'll need to bubble out the changes you made on
each sheet. I think I found most of the changes and made as many
comments as I could, but I may have missed a few differences in the plan
sets. There MAY be an additional comment or two on the next round after I
see the bubbling though. I'm not sure that I found each change.
Number: 22 Created: 5/ 2 / 2007
[5/2/07] The building on Lot 8 is located outside of the platted building
envelope and within a utility easement. Please provide a written vacation
request plus a completed TDRF application and the associated fee. I will
route the vacation request to the various utilities and get back to you as
soon as they approve or deny it. Once we've received the paperwork, this
process takes 2 to 3 weeks including mail time. You do NOT have to wait
until the next submittal to do this. You can submit the paperwork anytime
and I'll get it out within a day or two.
Number: 23 Created: 5/ 2 / 2007
[5/2/07] Scanning issues exist. This does not need to be addressed until
mylars, but just wanted to make you aware of it early on.
Number: 26 Created: 5/ 2 / 2007
[5/2/07] We will need to amend the original Development Agreement for
Redtail where the number of building permits change and effect certain
payments or construction of certain improvements. We can work through
that in Final Compliance - it does not need to be addressed prior to hearing.
Number: 30 Created: 5 / 2 / 2007
[5/2/07] Please remove the no parking striping in front of the ped ramp on
the northwest corner of Cameron and Conejos.
Page 5
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Dana Leavitt
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number: 35 Created: 5 / 2 / 2007
[5/2/07] With the change from building sites to parking lots, additional
screening is required in the buffer zone to meet Section 3.4.1(E)(1) of the
LUC. The organized plant beds next to the parking lot edges should
transition into informal plantings for a more natural setting. Refer to the
red -lines for the locations where additional plant material is needed.
Topic: Photometric Plans
Number: 36 Created: 5 / 2 / 2007
[5/2/07] The proposed fixtures on the east and south edges of the new
parking lots adjacent to the buffer areas are to be screened from the buffer
area and the adjacent City owned natural area with house -side shields. To
meet the standards in 3.4.1(E)(1) of the LUC, the actual fixture is to be
screened as a mitigation measure adjacent to the wetlands and natural
areas.
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Steve Olt
Topic: Site Plan
Number: 10 Created: 5/ 1 /2007
[5/ l/07] The office buildings are to be 53' in height. A Special Building
Height Review is necessary for all buildings over 40' in height, regardless of
the allowable height in any zoning district, and this is not optional. This is
set forth in Section 3.5.1(G) of the Land Use Code. The submittal
requirements for the height review are set forth in Section 3.5.1(G) (1) (b) of
the LUC.
Number: 11 Created: 5/ 1 / 2007
[5/ 1/07] The maximum "general" office parking allowed by code is 4 spaces
per 1,000 square feet of leasable floor area, not 4.5 spaces as indicated on
the Major Amendment Site Plan. Please see the red -lined Site Plan for
additional comments about the parking on -site.
Number: 12 Created: 5 / 1 / 2007
[5/ 1/07] As noted in the narrative as submitted, a portion of Building 4 is
outside of Lot 5 and encroaches into Tract B, a utility, drainage, and public
access easement. That portion of the easement would have to be vacated,
either by separate document or a replat.
Number: 13 Created: 5/ 1 /2007
[5/ 1 /07] The building square footage shown in the building footprints on
the Site Plan is different than the building square footage indicated in the
LAND USE STATISTICS table. It would make the information on the plan
clearer if the numbers in the building footprints (6,300 sq. ft. and 5,060 sq.
ft.) included the word Footprint under the numbers.
Page 4
Environmental Planner/ Dana Leavitt
a. Please provide an existing conditions plan, showing the wetlands and
wetlands buffer, with all changes from the approved & recorded plan
and this Major Amendment plan identified.
Poudre Fire Authority/Cane Dann
a. All of the buildings must be fire sprinklered. Where are the fire
hydrants?
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Dana Leavitt
Topic: General
Number: 33 Created: 5 / 2 / 2007
[5/2/07] When the revised "bubble" areas have been submitted to
Engineering, I will review and comment on relationship to limit of impacts
from approved plans.
Topic: Grading Sheet
Number: 34 . Created: 5/2/2007
[5/2/07] With.the plan changing from a building to a parking lot where the
original Lot 2 and 3 were is it possible to use a retaining wall to reduce the
grading impacts within the buffer zone?
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Steve Olt
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number: 14 Created: 5 / 1 / 2007
[5 / 1 / 07] One additional street tree must be included in the parkway in
front of Building 4, Lot 5.
Number: 15 Created: 5/ 1 / 2007
[5/ 1/07] Buildings 1, 2, 3, and 4 should be labeled in the building
footprints on the Landscape Plan.
Number: 37 Created: 5 / 4 / 2007
[5/4/07] Additional landscaping is needed for screening of the parking lots
on Lot 2, Lot 4, and Lot 8 (see red -lined plans).
Number: 38 Created: 5 / 4 / 2007
[5/4/07] The proposed Buffalo Juniper and Hancock Coralberry really do
not provide enough height to properly screen the parking lots. Please look
for alternatives to both of these plant materials.
Page 3
Number: 39 Created: 5 / 4 / 2007
[5/4/07] The following comments were expressed at Staff Review on May 2,
2007:
Engineering/Susan Joy
a. The original Development Agreement for the Redtail project will need to
be amended.
b. The utility plan changes will be done as revisions to the recorded utility
plan set.
c. Because of the proposed encroachment of Building 4, Lot 5 into Tract B
- Utility, Drainage, and Public Access Easement, it would be cleaner
and easier to replat this portion of Redtail with the Major Amendment.
d. Top of Wall and Bottom of Wall elevations are needed for any new
retaining walls.
Zoning/Peter Barnes
a. This portion of the Redtail development must be replatted or a portion
of Tract B - Utility, Drainage, and Public access Easement must be
vacated by separate document to allow a portion of Building 4, Lot 5 to
encroach into what is now Tract B.
Stormwater/Basil Hamdan
a. The amounts of imperviousness and runoff have gone up with this
Major Amendment plan. These increases must be satisfactorily
addressed and resolved.
b. More spot elevations are needed along the west side of the buildings.
c. Only a 5' wide easement currently exists for the storm sewer. More
easement may be needed.
Light & Power/Janet McTague
a. The transformer locations must be identified and the electric load needs
must be determined.
Transportation Planning/David Averill
a. Please add a bicycle rack for Building 4
Page 2
STAFF PROJECT REVIEW
City of Fort Collins
Lagunitas Redtail, Inc Date: 05/04/2007
c/o Jon Prouty
3944 JFK Parkway, Suite 12E
Fort'Collins, CO 80525
Staff has reviewed your submittal for REDTAIL, MAJOR AMENDMENT -
TYPE 2, and we offer the following comments:
ISSUES:
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Steve Olt
Topic: Elevations Plan
Number: 16 Created: 5/ 1 / 2007
[5/ 1/07] The Elevations sheet contains only one "Typical' Building
Elevation. Does this mean that all 3 of the other sides will look almost
identical to this elevation? Typically City staff wants to see all 4 sides of a
building.
Number: 17 Created: 5/ 1 /2007
[5/ 1 /07] The one building elevation provided presents a very monolithical
structure, without well-defined materials and colors on the plan, that would
not seem to blend in well with the context of the site and its relationship to
the natural areas adjacent to it. It is important that the applicant evaluate
the proposed buildings against the Building and Project Compatibility
criteria and standards set forth in Section 3.5.1 of the Land Use Code. How
will these buildings relate to the existing buildings in Cameron Office Park
and the future residential buildings in Redtail?
Topic: General
Number: 18 Created: 5/ 1/2007
[5/ 1 / 07] The name of the plan set containing the Site Plan, Landscape
Plans, Elevations Plan, and Lighting Plan should be changed to say "Major
Amendment # 1 to REDTAIL" to differentiate these plans from the already
approved and recorded set of REDTAIL plans. They will be recorded with the
existing plans, including the subdivision plat. This is essentially a "new"
project, changing this portion of the development from residential to
office/restaurant uses. Also, it is imperative that a new date (probably
4/ 11 /07, the submittal date) be included in the REVISED portion. of the title
block, at the lower right hand corner of the sheets. This is how these plans
will be distinguished from the original plans so that someone looking at the
REDTAIL plans will know that a change was made and what can actually be
built on this portion of the development.
Page 1