HomeMy WebLinkAboutPETERSON PLACE (611 S. PETERSON) - PDP - 35-00 - CORRESPONDENCE - (6)no later than July 5, 2001 by 5:00 p.m. 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. Also, the number of copies of revisions for each document to be
resubmitted is on the attached Revisions Routing Sheet (both sides). Due
to significant concerns expressed by City staff, you should contact me at 221-
6341 to schedule a meeting with the appropriate people to discuss these
comments.
Sincerely,
--
Vv
Steve Olt
Project Planner
cc: Cameron Gloss, Current Planning Director
Engineering
Stormwater
Water/ Wastewater
Natural Resources
Transportation Planning
Traffic Operations
Intermill Land Surveying
Project File #35-00
15. Steve Olt of the Current Planning Department stated that his
comments are on red -lined Site, Landscape, and Building Elevations
plans that are being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Steve, at
221-6341, if you have questions about his comments.
The following comments/concerns were expressed at the weekly Staff Review
Meeting on March 21, 2001:
Engineering
16. Need detail (both upstream and downstream) where water will flow under
the access points at Peterson Street and the alley.
17. Need to show street patching for Peterson Street.
Transportation Planning/Mark Jackson
18. Show bicycle parking as shown on the previous Site Plan.
19. Extend the walkway on the south side of the property to the west end of
the site.
Natural Resources/Doug Moore
20. The trash enclosure should be designed to include recycling.
Stormwater (Basil Hamdan)
21. 80% of the site is not detained.
22. The pipe has been incorrectly sized, using 0.4 cfs instead of the
standard.
23. Another round of review is needed.
This completes the staff comments at this time. Additional comments could be
forthcoming if and when they are received from City departments and outside
reviewing agencies.
Under the development review process and schedule there is a 90 day plan
revision submittal time -frame (by the applicant to the City) mandated by
the City. The 90 day turnaround period begins on the date of this
comment letter (April 6, 2001) prepared by the project planner in the
Current Planning Department. In this case, revisions must be submitted
the 611 Peterson Street address because the address for these new
dwelling units may change.
b. The subdivision plat does close.
C. A copy of the Project Comment Sheet dated 11/ 15/00 is attached
to this comment letter.
Please contact Jim Hoff, at 221-6588, if you have questions about these
comments.
14. Ward Stanford of the Traffic Operations Department offered the
following comments:
a. Traffic Operations did not receive any response to their previous
comments (below):
* Will parking be allowed on the asphalt area east of the
building, accessed from South Peterson Street? If so, an
access easement should be considered.
* Is the condition of the alley pavement adequate to handle
additional regular traffic without improvements?
* Do the accesses to the alley from Laurel and Myrtle Streets
meet sight distance criteria?
Please provide a response.
b. Do the proposed Broadmoor Junipers along the alley meet the
City's sight distance criteria? What are their growth
characteristics? It appears that the sight distance triangle as
shown on the Landscape Plan does not meet City or AASHTO
requirements. Minimum sight distance for 20 mph is 125' and the
given triangle measures only 50'. Please verify adequate sight
distance.
Please contact Ward, at 221-6820, if you have questions about these
questions/comments.
f. Additional comments are provided on red -lined plans that are
being forwarded to the applicant.
Please contact Jeff, at 221-6674, if you have questions about his
comments.
7. Doug Moore of the Natural Resources Department stated that the
applicant should consider designing the trash enclosure to accommodate
recycling.
8. Tim Buchanan, the City Forester, stated that he has no concerns or
comments regarding this development proposal.
9. Mike Spurgin of the Post Office stated that they have no concerns or
comments regarding this development proposal.
10. A representative of Public Service Company of Colorado stated that if
natural gas service is desired for the proposed structure, the service line
will have to be installed prior to paving in the 10' wide utility, drainage,
landscape, and pedestrian access easement along the south side of the
property.
11. GayLene Rossiter of Transfort stated that they have no concerns or
comments regarding this development proposal.
12. Mark Jackson of Transportation Planning offered the following
comments:
a. Show the bicycle parking rack as in the previous Site Plan.
b. Can the pedestrian walkway be extended to the western edge of the
site and still accommodate long-term parking (see red -lined Site
Plan)?
C. Most previous comments have been addressed.
Please contact Mark, at 416-2029, if you have questions about these
comments.
13. The Technical Services (Mapping) Department offered the following
comments:
a. The title of the subdivision plat should be something other than
4. Gary Lopez of the Zoning Department stated that one Honeylocust must
be added along the alley and move the proposed Honeylocust on the
south property east to accommodate the additional tree.
5. Dave Stringer of the Engineering Department offered the following
comments:
a. Stormwater wants an additional round of review.
b. Need 2 survey control points shown on the cover sheet.
C. Show detail of the pan aligning with the 6" outlet pipe at the curb.
d. Show detail of estimated street repair limits at driveway
reconstruction, as required by the City Repair Standards dated
October, 1998.
C. What will be the address of the new dwelling units? If not 611
Peterson Street, the plan should not reflect this address.
f. Additional comments are on red -lined plans that are being
forwarded to the applicant.
Please contact Dave, at 221-6750, if you have questions about these
comments.
6. Jeff Hill of the Water/Wastewater Department offered the following
comments:
a. As previously indicated, locate and show the approximate
location of the existing water and sewer services for the lot
adjacent to Peterson Street.
b. Include the standard general note pertaining to shrub separation
on the Landscape Plan.
C. Provide required landscape/utility separation distances on the
Landscape Plan.
d. Realign the proposed sidewalk along the south property line to
allow for proposed water and fire lines to extend along the south
property line.
e. Provide the meter pit detail with the next submittal.
Commu_ .y Planning and Environmental _ .rvices
Current Planning
City of Fort Collins
April 6, 2001
Susan Kruel-Froseth
Kruel-Froseth Architects
1630 South College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO. 80525
Dear Susan,
Staff has reviewed your revisions documentation for the 611 PETERSON
STREET, Project Development Plan (PDP) - #35-00 that was submitted to
the City on February 28, 2001, and is offering the following comments:
1. This property and development request is located at 611 Peterson Street.
The lot fronts on Peterson Street, with an alley along the rear property
line. There is an existing single family structure on the front of the lot.
The property is in the NCM - Neighborhood Conservation, Medium
Density Zoning District in the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code LUC .
The proposed 3-plex, multi -family residential use is permitted in this
District, subject to a Planning and Zoning Board (Type II) review and
public hearing for a decision.
2. Dennis Greenwalt of AT&T Broadband (Cable TV) stated that they have
no concerns or comments regarding this development proposal.
3. Michael Chavez of the Poudre Fire Authority offered the following
comments:
a. Address numerals shall be visible from the street fronting the
property and posted with a minimum of 10" numerals on a
contrasting background (example: bronze numerals on brown brick
are not acceptable). The design of the Address Kiosk is approved.
The location of the kiosk needs to be discussed with PFA.
b. This proposed building shall be fire sprinklered.
Note: This building exceeds 150' from fire apparatus access.
Please contact Michael, at 221-6570, if you have questions about his
comment.
281 North College Avenue • PO. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020