HomeMy WebLinkAboutFOOTHILLS MALL REDEVELOPMENT, PHASE ONE - MAJOR AMENDMENT/FDP - FDP130040 - CORRESPONDENCE - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS98 Spruce Street, Suite 201 | Denver Colorado 80230
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
303 220 8900 | 303 220 0708 Fax
www.SEMarchitects.com
November 26, 2013
Ms Courtney Levingston
City of Ft Collins, Current Planning
281 North College Avenue
Ft Collins, CO 80524
RE: Foothills Mall Redevelopment Phase One Final Plans, FDP130040, Round Number 3
Thank you for your efforts on the Foothills application. We have addressed the PA1 FDP
comments in the order they were received.
Department: Current Planning
Contact: Courtney Levingston, 970-416-2283, clevingston@fcgov.com
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/21/2013
11/12/2013: Due to the removal of a large number of mature trees along College
Avenue, Staff would like to see the proposed street tree spacing closer to 30 foot
intervals along College Avenue rather than 40 foot.
10/21/2013: The oaks along South College Ave are required to be spaced at 30 - 40 foot
intervals. The Phase One landscape plan (LA101) is showing 60 foot spacing.
We are keeping the trees at 40’ intervals per the previously approved PDP (approved
February 7, 2013) and per LUC.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/21/2013
10/21/2013: Please add another tree 10' off the stormline in the parking lot landscape
area south of the drive.
The tree has been added as requested.
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Marc Virata, 970-221-6567, mvirata@fcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 11/04/2013
11/22/2013: Please remove the reference to the approved variance requests in the
General Notes, (No. 48). These aren't pertinent to PA1 and are applicable to PA2.
The references have been removed from the sheet in question.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 11/22/2013
11/22/2013: Please ensure it's clear that the limits of improvements for PA1 are within
the boundaries of PA1 and that the College Avenue turn lane and drive approaches are
Foothills PA2 PDP MJA comment responses
11/22/13
Page | 2
part of PA2. (Note that the drive approach onto Monroe Drive for PA2 is identified as
an issue in its proposed location per a previous email that hasn't been resolved.)
Notes have been added to the site plan to reflect that the College Avenue and drive
improvements are to be constructed with PA2. Also the exit onto Monroe has been
updated to a RO per the other comments.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 11/22/2013
11/22/2013: Please ensure that in PA2 that the relocation by others identified at the
Monroe and College intersection is "at the Developer's expense".
The note has been revised as requested.
Topic: General
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 11/04/2013
11/22/2013: Understanding from Transportation Planning that the connection of the
sidewalk further down to Monroe Drive is a level of service issue for the PA1 project,
the amount of funds for sidewalk needs to include the additional property south of the
site down to Monroe Drive (appears to be about 400 feet total). We'll need to expand
the overall dollar amount collected as a result, based upon the actual amount of
sidewalk frontage along the northern boundary of PA1 to Monroe Drive x $35.00 per
foot.
11/04/2013: The following comment was included in the overall mall comments. It still
applies and was confirmed by Rick Richter after the conference call on 10/25 as a
requirement to meet code. With the additional information for PA1, the amount
required is 187.02 feet (of PA1 College Avenue frontage) x $35/foot = $6,545.70 and
would need to be in the form of a check/cash.
(previous comment) To meet code needs, we'll require with Phase 1 that the developer
provide security for the local portion of sidewalk along College Avenue for the frontage
of Phase 1 prior to the issuance of a site permit to address City Code requiring
sidewalk prior to building code. The City has established a per linear cost for 2013 of
$35 per linear foot for the local portion width of sidewalk. We'll allow a TCO with this
security in place but would require the sidewalk installed prior to issuance of full CO.
This will need to be part of the development agreement for Phase 1.
The developer is aware of these issues.
Foothills PA2 PDP MJA comment responses
11/22/13
Page | 3
Department: Forestry
Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970-221-6361, tbuchanan@fcgov.com
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/22/2013
10/22/2013: Evaluate adding an additional street tree for the 150 foot wide frontage.
Three street trees are shown. The standard is to provide street trees at 30-40 foot
spacing. LUC 3.2.1 D 2 a
We are keeping the trees at 40’ intervals per the previously approved PDP (approved
February 7, 2013) and per LUC.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/22/2013
10/22/2013: Evaluate adding two suitable trees in the two landscape areas on the
southeast side of the building.
Two trees have been added in the two landscape areas.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 10/22/2013
11/21/2013: Please remove "container grown".
10/22/2013: Under comments in the plant list use balled and burlapped or equivalent in
place of container.
The comments have been revised as requested.
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 11/01/2013
11/18/2013: Most of these have not been corrected. See redlines.
11/01/2013: There are line over text, text over text & cut off text issues on sheet C400.
See redlines.
The sheets have been revised per the redlines.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 11/18/2013
Foothills PA2 PDP MJA comment responses
11/22/13
Page | 4
11/18/2013: Please change the site shown in the vicinity map on sheet C001 to reflect
the PA#1 boundary. See redlines.
The vicinity map has been revised per the redlines.
Topic: General
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 11/04/2013
11/18/2013: This sheet was not routed this round.
11/04/2013: PA#1 PROJECT BOUNDARY SHEET: If this sheet is to be filed as part of
the PA#1, "Subdivision" and the sub-title will need to be removed from the sheet. We
also suggest that "- Sears" be added to the title. This will make it more obvious that
these plans are for the Foothills Mall Redevelopment project, even though they are
being filed in the Southmoor Village Fifth Filing & The Foothills Fashion Mall
Expansion plans. See redlines.
The sheet has been revised as requested.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 11/04/2013
11/18/2013: This sheet was not routed this round.
11/04/2013: PA#1 PROJECT BOUNDARY SHEET: Please change the "tie" line to a
dashed broken line, labeled as a tie line. See redlines.
This has been revised as requested.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 11/04/2013
11/18/2013: This sheet was not routed this round.
11/04/2013: PA#1 PROJECT BOUNDARY SHEET: Please move the westernly
bearings & distances(marked) outside of the hatching and project boundary. See
redlines.
These have been revised as requested.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 11/04/2013
11/18/2013: This sheet was not routed this round.
11/04/2013: PA#1 PROJECT BOUNDARY SHEET: Please label the Northwest corner
of Tract B & Northeast corner of Tract A. See redlines.
Foothills PA2 PDP MJA comment responses
11/22/13
Page | 5
The label has been revised as requested.
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 11/04/2013
11/18/2013: This sheet was not routed this round.
11/04/2013: PA#1 PROJECT BOUNDARY SHEET: Please change the bearing as
marked in the legal description. See redlines.
The bearing has been revised as requested.
Topic: Lighting Plan
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 10/21/2013
11/01/2013: Cleaning up these details is up to you. We would like it corrected, but
won't hold up filing of plans because of it.
10/21/2013: Some of the text in the details on sheet LD-16.5 & LD16.6 is hard to read.
See redlines. Please clean these up.
Posting process changed to enhance printed sharpness of all Lighting Fixture Cut
Sheets.
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 11/18/2013
11/18/2013: No comments.
Acknowledged.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 10/21/2013
11/18/2013: This legal description still does not match the PA#1 Project Boundary
sheet. The preamble is missing from the description. Please remove "Lot 16" from the
title, and correct the bearing marked. See redlines.
11/04/2013: The "proposed" portion has been addressed. The Plat referenced has not.
10/21/2013: Please remove "Proposed" from the legal decription on sheet A100.
*Please Note*: If these plans are dependant on the Foothills Mall Redevelopment
Subdivision Plat, they can't be filed until the Subdivision Plat is recorded.
The sheet has been revised based on the redline drawing provided.
Department: Traffic Operation
Foothills PA2 PDP MJA comment responses
11/22/13
Page | 6
Contact: Ward Stanford, 970-221-6820, wstanford@fcgov.com
Topic: General
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/24/2013
10/24/2013: If any sidewalk impovements are required at the College and Monroe
intersection, those
improvements will probably require changes to traffic equipment at the location. This
may include
moving the signal cabinet and foundation, re-routing underground cabling and conduits
and possibly other changes.
Understood, based on recent information provided by FHU, we understand that the City
desires to update the entire signal at Monroe and College. We support FHU designing
the entire signal for uniformity. The developer has been made aware that cost
discussions will need to be had. We request these discussions happen ASAP and be
included in the developers agreement.
In the interim, we are aware that the signal box will need to be moved, we refer to it on
the plans and the Developer has had discussion on who shall pay for it with Engineering
(Marc Virata).
Department: Transportation Planning
Contact: Amy Lewin, 970-416-2040, alewin@fcgov.com
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 11/19/2013
11/19/2013: Please locate bike rack closer to the store entrance.
The design team feels that this is the most appropriate location for this rack. Moving it
to the front of the store lessens pedestrian access and adds challenges to handicap
accessibility. We prefer to leave it as shown on the previous submittals.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 11/19/2013
11/19/2013: While it is part of phase two, the driveway along Monroe either needs to
be: 1) moved back to the existing location and line-up with the driveway on the south
side of Monroe, 2) eliminated as was previously approved at P&Z, or 3) revised to be a
right-out only. (Though the driveway is indicated as a right-in, right-out, we¿re not as
optimistic that left-ins won¿t occur, and the offset-left situation with the driveway on the
Foothills PA2 PDP MJA comment responses
11/22/13
Page | 7
south side is a concern.) This driveway could impact phase one in terms of drive aisle
configuration.
Door #3 is the selected option. The plans have been revised to reflect this.
Department: Zoning
Contact: Peter Barnes, 970-416-2355, pbarnes@fcgov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
Comment Number: 6
11/18/2013: Repeat comment Comment Originated: 10/21/2013
10/21/2013: Show the dimensions of the trash enclosure on the elevation sheet.
Dimensions have been added as requested.
Topic: Landscape Plans
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/21/2013
11/18/2013: repeat comment
10/21/2013: Landscape note #2 indicates that maintenance of trees within the
development and in ROW is responsibility of "metro district". Please clarify who the
metro district is.
The note has been clarified.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 10/21/2013
11/18/2013: repeat comment
10/21/2013: Indicate the percentage of interior parking lot landscaping.
The percentage is 20%, and the note has been added on sheet LA -103.
Topic: Site Plan
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/21/2013
11/18/2013: Repeat comment
10/21/2013: Show the length/depth of the angled parking stalls.
Parking stall depth dimensions have been added to the site plan as requested.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/21/2013
Foothills PA2 PDP MJA comment responses
11/22/13
Page | 8
11/18/2013: Repeat comment
10/21/2013: Label the lot line(s).
Lot lines have been labeled as requested.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/21/2013
11/18/2013: Repeat comment
10/21/2013: Show dimensions of the building and setbacks to lot lines.
Dimensions of the building and its relation to the lot lines are shown on the site plan.
Please review these responses in the context of this submittal and related exhibits. We
appreciate your efforts on the Foothills Redevelopment.
Sincerely,
SEM Architects on behalf of the Foothills Redevelopment Team
Bruce McLennan AIA, NCARB
Principal
T:\12048.00 Foothills Redevelopment\03 Process\Final Plans\Block 16 FDP\Comment Response 2\PA1 Final Plans comment responses
compiled.docx