HomeMy WebLinkAboutRAMADA LIMITED SUITES PUD - PRELIMINARY/FINAL - 16-96 - CORRESPONDENCE - (3)8. Please provide erosion control detail on the detail sheet for the silt fence and area inlet
protection.
RESPONSE:
9. Please provide calculations for the curb opening inlet to determine the amount of
upstream runoff intercepted by the curb opening.
RESPONSE:
Please refer to the redlined plans and report for additional review comments
2. Who is the owner of the shared driveway south of the development? If the owner is
other than the developer of lots 1 and 2, then an off -site grading and construction
easement will be required.
RESPONSE:
3. Please show all underground utilities with their relationship to the proposed storm
sewers on the storm sewer profiles. There must be at leaset 18 in. of clearance between
utilites and the storm sewer, or the storm sewer will have to be concrete encased 10 ft. on
each side. Also include the 100 yr. HGL on these profiles.
RESPONSE:
4. Drainage easements must be dedicated for all of the detention ponds and proposed
storm sewers on the plat.
RESPONSE:
5. Please revise detention pond #4's design. Detention must be provided to include sub -
basin 4 (.31 ac.), and an area equivalent to the West 1/2 of South Mason Street east of the
proposed development (.24 ac.). Runoff from South Mason Street south of -the
development may be routed through the pond, but an equivalent area to South Mason
Street East must be detained.
RESPONSE:
6. All of the sub -basin flow calculations are for the 2 year minor storm. Please revise
these calcs. for the 10 year minor storm.
RESPONSE:
7. Please provide a drainage summary table for all contributing off -site and on -site sub -
basins.
RESPONSE:
PROJECT
COMMENT SHEET
City of Fort Collins
Current Planning
DATE: May 20, 1996 DEPT: Stormwater
PROJECT: # 16-96 Ramada Limited Suites PUD - Preliminary
& Final
PLANNER: Mike Ludwig
All comments must be received by: May 31, 1996
❑ No Problems
Problems or Concerns (see below or attached)
A written response for each of the following comments must be submitted, with the
redlined plans and report, at time of project resubmittal. The responses must note any
revisions or clarifications completed in result of these comments. If responses are not
submitted with the resubmittal, the project will be returned to the applicant without fiuther
review. This procedure will help the review process become more efficient and effective.
Thank you.
Note: This submittal does not have the level of detail necessary for a final submittal.
More details are needed about the existing wetlands, off -site grading and construction, and
underground utilities. These major comments need to be addressed and resolved by the
revisions due date for the PUD to remain on the July Planning and Zoning schedule.
1. The drainage report states that the low area north of the proposed development will be
filled prior to development. This low area is an existing wetlands. Please show on the
plans the limits of the existing wetlands. No encroachment by grading into the wetlands
will be allowed. Please contact the Natural Resources Dept. for further information.
RESPONSE:
�;- /a - r/Ce
Date: Signature:
CHECK IF YOU, WISH TO RECEIVE
COPIES OF REVISIONS
❑ PLAT
❑ SITE
❑ LANDSCAPE
❑ UTILITY
�t Lrrit 5 �
/cwNr r ; fl ss/a[.
G' cor9 c
• At this time, no driveways are proposed with the use -by -right development
currently under review on the east side of Mason Street. Therefore, the driveway
location for this project can shift to the south if necessary to avoid the wetlands. .
Ideally, if the wetlands don't cause a problem, access to this site should align
with Boardwalk Drive.
• Please clarify whether or not there is existing sidewalk to the north of this site
and how the proposed detached walk will tie into it without impacting the
wetlands or requiring an off -site easement..
Show .that a 0.60% minimum flowline grade will be constructed across the cross
pan at the driveway.
Provide a driveway detail or show more spot elevation information at the
intersection of the driveway and Mason Street.
• PROVIDE AN EXECUTED COPY OF THE ACCESS EASEMENT FOR THE
SHARED ACCESS AND ANY OTHER OFF -SITE EASEMENTS BY REVISION
DATE (JULY 3, 1996)
Sheet 4/4
• No comments
PROJECT
COMMENT SHEET
City of Fort Collins
Current Planning
DATE: May 20, 1996 DEPT: Engineering - Ping
PROJECT: # 16-96 Ramada Limited Suites PUD - Preliminary
& Final
PLANNER: Mike Ludwig
All comments must be received by: May 31, 1996
❑ No Problems
Problems or Concerns (see below or attached)
RAMADA SUITES - LOTS 1 & 2, GARTH COMMERCIAL PLAZA
Engineering Department Comments
June 13, 1996
Utility Plans
Sheet 1/4
No comments
Sheet 2A
Any new easements required with this development will need to be dedicated by
separate document since the property is not being replatted with this project.
Sheet 3/4
• Need to -show the wetland boundary and buffer area - see comments from
Planning and Natural Resources. It may be necessary to shift -the building and
driveway to the south to protect the existing wetland area.
6,1 i ce 14
Date: Signature:
CHECK IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE ❑ PLAT
COPIES OF REVISIONS ❑ SITE
❑ LANDSCAPE
0 UTILITY
Plan revisions are due by 12:00 noon on July 3, 1996. Please contact me for the
number of folded revisions required for each document. Revisions and supporting
documentation submitted after this deadline will not be reviewed for the July 22,
1996 Planning and Zoning Board hearing.
PMTs, renderings, and 8 folded copies of final revisions are due by 12:00 noon on
July 15, 1996.
Please contact me at 221-6206 if you have any questions or concerns related to these
comments. I would like to schedule a meeting with you as soon as possible, if necessary,
to discuss these comments.
Sincerely,
Michael Ludwig
Project Planner
xc: Kerrie Ashbeck
Stormwater Utility
file/Project Planner
Criterion "e" asks: "Does the project contain two (2) or more significant uses
(for instance retail, office, residential, hotel/motel, or recreation)?" Although
this project is a part of the Garth Commercial Plaza Plat (not P.U.D.), it is a
stand alone use and is not mixed use. Therefore, no points will be awarded
for criterion "e".
Criterion "f asks: "Is there direct vehicular and pedestrian access between
on -site parking areas and adjacent existing or future off -site parking areas
which contain more than ten (10) spaces?' No documentation was
submitted which verifies agreements for joint access (lot 3 of Garth Plaza is
vacant, who owns it?) or shared parking (where is it located, where are
agreements to allow joint parking?) Therefore, pending the submittal of
additional documentation, no points will be awarded for criterion "f".
Without points for the above stated criteria, this development request
achieves only 19% of the maximum applicable points and is an inappropriate
use for this site. The applicant may request a variance to the Business
Service Uses Point Chart. However, the request is unlikely to receive staff
support as it is not apparent how this project meets any of the variance
criteria as stated in the LDGS.
b. The proposed ratio of building height to building setback is inadequate as
the building crowds the south property line. Please refer to All -Development
Criteria A-2.2 "Building Placement and Orientation" and A-2.12 "Setbacks"
for further guidance.
C. Please label the Building Elevations as north, south, east and west not front,
rear, right and left.
d. Pease label building materials and colors on the elevations.
e. All rooftop and ground mounted mechanical equipment must be screened
from the public view.
f. Additional architectural elements and features are needed (brick, shutters,
etc.).
g. The proposed roof must have high profile, heavy dimensional shingles.
This completes the review comments at this time. Additional comments may be
forthcoming as the various departments and reviewing agencies continue to review this
request. Please be aware of the following dates and deadlines to assure your ability to
stay on schedule for the July 22, 1996 Planning and Zoning Board hearing:
b The proposed building must be fully equipped with an automated fire
suppression system.
The proposed building must be equipped with a fire alarm system. The
lJ Poudre Fire Authority prefers an addressable system.
7. The Advance Planning Department offers the following comments:
a. Additional parking lot islands are needed in the rear parking lot.
b. It appears that the trash dumpsters are visible from South Mason Street.
Trash dumpsters must be fully enclosed/screened and gated. The enclosure
should be constructed of the same materials as the motel building.
8. TCI of Fort Collins requests a plat map of this property.
9. The Water and Wastewater Utility offers the following comments:
a. Please add a sentence to Landscape note #10 which states: "Keep all
shrubs 4' clear from water and sewer services."
b. There appear to be conflicts between landscaping and sanitary sewer and
water services from South Mason Street into the site. Please coordinate
Utility Plans and the Landscape Plan to assure minimum separation
distances as noted.
10. Comments from the Engineering Department are attached.
11. Comments from the Stormwater Utility are attached.
12. The Current Planning Department offers the following comments:
a. Base upon the information that has been submitted, it appears that this
development application fails to achieve the minimum required fifty (50%) of
the maximum applicable points on the Business Service Uses Point Chart.
Criterion "c" asks: "Is the project contiguous to an functionally a part of a
neighborhood or community/regional shopping center, an office or industrial
park, or located in the Central Business District, or in the case of a single
user, employ a total of more than one -hundred (100) full-time employees
during a single eight (8) hour shift?' This site is not a part of a neighborhood
or community/regional shopping center, an office or industrial park, or
Central Business District as defined in the LDGS. No documentation of 100
full-time employees during a single eight hour shift was submitted.
Therefore, no points will be awarded for criterion "c".
Provide a designated and marked "accessible route of travel" between all the
buildings on the site and building exits and entrances and the public way
(public sidewalk). Accessible routes shall comply with ANSI A117.1-1992
with running slopes no greater than 1:20 and cross slopes no steeper than
1:50. Where cross routes cross lanes for vehicle traffic they shall be
designated and marked as a cross walk. Provide parking and signs per
Appendix Section 3107. Parking and access aisles shall comply with ANSI
A117.1-1992 with slopes no greater than 1:50 in any direction.
3. The Light and Power Utility requests that the applicant coordinate power
requirements with the Light and Power Distribution Engineering. Please contact
Doug Martine at 221-6700.
4. Public Service Company offers the following comments:
va. A minimum 13' wide easement is needed adjacent to the west right-of-way
of S. Mason Street. The proposed 8' wide utility easement is too'small.
b. No trees are to be planted within 4' of any gas lines.
5. The Natural Resources Department offers the following comments:
✓a. Additional bike racks and pedestrian connections to Mason Street are
needed (brick pavers across the parking lot at the northeast corner and
southeast corner preferably).
(fy. Please contact Susie Gordon at 221-6600 to discuss opportunities to
incorporate recycling bins in the solid waste enclosure.
13� AII-Development Criteria A-2.3 "Natural Features" asks: "Do the physical
• elements of the site plan adapt well to the physical characteristics of the site
and minimize the disturbance of topography, water bodies, streams,
wetlands, wildlife habitats, vegetation and other natural features?" The Site
Plan as currently designed, fails to satisfy this criteria. The northern edge
of the parking lot extends into existing wetlands. A wetland delineation must
be provided and a buffer is needed. This will cause the building, parking etc.
to be shifted to the south. Please contact Rob Wilkinson at 221-6288 to
discuss appropriate buffers and mitigation.
6. The Poudre Fire Authority offers the following comments:
a. If the proposed facility is equipped with a spa/pool, designs for the chemical
treatment system must be submitted to the Fire Authority.
Community Planning and Environmental „cervices
Current Planning
City of Fort Collins
June 14, 1996
The Swahn Group, Inc.
Go Eldon Ward
Cityscape Urban Design, Inc.
3555 Stanford Road, Suite 105
Fort Collins, CO 80525.
Dear Eldon,
Staff has reviewed your documents for the Ramada Limited Suites PUD, Preliminary and
Final, that were submitted on .May 20, 1996, and would like to offer the following
comments:
1. The Zoning Department offers the following comments:
a. Please show building dimensions on the Site Plan.
An additional three (3) trees are required along the north lot line.
,.0. A direct ramp needs to be provided for the 1 V wide handicap parking space.
2. The Building Inspections Department offers the following comments:
✓a. Hotel guest rooms and associated bathing and toilet facilities accessible to
the disabled shall be provided in accordance with Uniform Building Code
Section 3103(a)8 as amended by the City of Fort Collins. One of every
seven guest rooms shall comply with the American National Standards
Institute publication Al 17.1-1992 titled Accessible and Usable Buildings
and Facilities. .
x0 fib. An automatic fire suppression system is required.
mac. If a swimming pool is proposed, it is required to be accessible to the disabled
by ramp, hydraulic chair, transfer tier or other means. Hazardous materials
used to maintain the swimming pool must be used and stored in accordance
with the Fire Code. Classifications (UFC) and quantities of such materials
must be included in the building permit submittal.
�d. The site shall be accessible to persons with disabilities in accordance with
Uniform Building Code Section 3103 and UBC Appendix Section 3106.
281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750
FAX (970) 221-6378 • TDD (970) 224-6002