HomeMy WebLinkAboutTHE SUMMIT ON COLLEGE PARKING GARAGE - MJA/FDP - FDP130056 - CORRESPONDENCE -Community Development and
Neighborhood Services
281 North College Avenue
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6750
970.224.6134 - fax
fcgov.com/developmentreview
January 24, 2014
Walker May
Capstone Development Corp. (on behalf of Fort Collins Assoc. L.P.)
431 Office Park Drive
Birmingham, AL 35223
Comment Summary:
Department: Current Planning
Contact: Seth Lorson, 970-224-6189, slorson@fcgov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
01/21/2014: Per the most recent elevation renderings, dated 1/20/14, the following comments apply:
The stone veneer should be brought up higher on the base and capped to provide a strong high
quality pedestrian experience.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: The red tower elements should be changed to the light gray as used in the residential
buildings.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: All 4 sides of the building shall provide a clearly delineated base, middle, and top
element. The base should be the stone veneer. (Sec. 3.5.3 (E)(2)
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: The west side of the building needs landscaping to buffer from the MAX line.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
Please see the following summary of comments from City staff and outside reviewing agencies for your submittal of
the above referenced project. If you have questions about any comments, you may contact the individual
commenter or direct your questions through the Project Planner, Seth Lorson, at 970-224-6189 or
slorson@fcgov.com.
RE: The Summit on College Parking Garage Major Amendment/Final Plan, FDP130056, Round Number 1
Page 1 of 11
01/21/2014: The following comments are sections of the Land Use Code as cited in conceptual review
that support the comments for a higher quality architectural design:
The building will be evaluated for compliance with Section 3.10.5 - Character and Image in the T.O.D.
Overlay District. While this section was not codified with parking structures in mind, the design of the
proposed garage must strive to comply with these standards to the extent reasonably feasible. There
will be high visibility from the public right-of-way to the east, west and south. Even as a utilitarian
structure, there must be attention given to architectural treatment of the building. Where high quality
finish materials cannot be achieved, staff expects that there be sufficient land area in which to plant a
generous amount of landscaping to mitigate the height, mass and bulk of the building. A good
example of a private parking structure is the Poudre Valley Hospital Garage located at the corner of
South Lemay Avenue and Garfield Street.
As noted above, the design of the structure is required to provide articulation: Exterior building walls
shall be subdivided and proportioned to human scale, using projections, overhangs and recesses in
order to add architectural interest and variety and avoid the effect of a single, massive wall with no
relation to human size. (3.10.5(A)
The rooflines cannot be flat and devoid of design treatment. They shall include cornice treatments:
Flat-roofed buildings shall feature three-dimensional cornice treatment on all walls facing streets or
connecting walkways, or a rail at the top of the wall of a usable rooftop deck, unless the top floor is
stepped back to form a usable roof terrace area. A single continuous horizontal roofline shall not be
used on one-story buildings. Accent roof elements or towers may be used to provide articulation of
the building mass. To the maximum extent feasible, a minimum pitch of 6:12 shall be used for gable
and hipped roofs. Where hipped roofs are used alone, the minimum pitch shall be 4:12. (3.10.5(B)
The material and design of the structure is intended to disguise parking structures in order to promote
interest and activity. The openings to the structure should be organized to appear to be windows. The
ground floor should be a high quality material and serve as a strong foundation for the rest of the
structure.
(C) Materials and Colors.
(1) Predominant exterior building materials shall be high quality materials, including but not limited to
brick, sandstone, other native stone, tinted/textured concrete masonry units, stucco systems or treated
tilt-up concrete systems.
(2) All building facades shall incorporate stone, stone veneer, brick, brick veneer, stucco, corrugated
metal, wood and/or equivalent accent material in a manner that highlights the articulation of the massing
or the base and top of the building. An all-brick building does not need to incorporate an accent
material, though soldier courses and banding or other brick, stone or metal detailing are encouraged
in order to subdivide masses and establish human scale.
(3) Predominant or field colors for facades shall be low reflectance, subtle, neutral or earth tone colors.
The use of high-intensity colors, black or fluorescent colors shall be prohibited.
(4) Building trim and accent areas may feature brighter colors, including primary colors, and black, but
neon tubing shall not be an acceptable feature for building trim or accent areas.
(5) Exterior building materials shall not include smooth-faced concrete block, untreated or unpainted
tilt-up concrete panels or prefabricated steel panels.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
Page 2 of 11
(Sec. 3.10.5(C)
Topic: General
01/21/2014: The request will be processed as a Major Amendment, subject to consideration by the
Hearing Officer as an Administrative Review.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: Staff has expanded the Affected Property Owner (APO) area to comply with the
requirements in Sec. 2.2.6. See map attached.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/22/2014:
The project was approved without such a parking structure under the premise that it would be operated
as a transit-oriented development. The intent of transit-oriented development (TOD) is to provide a
walkable and bikeable environment that will encourage alternative modes of transportation and
discourage use of automobiles.
Please provide information identifying methods used by the applicant to:
1. Provide off-site, long-term automobile storage options for tenants. The shared parking facility was
a LEED requirement and noted in the URA approval of The Summit financial assistance package.
2. Construct a bicycle and pedestrian connection all the way to Prospect Road as required under the
original approval.
3. Model parking demand based on operation of the MAX Bus Rapid Transit system and the results
of such modelling.
4. Provide marketing materials that relay to tenants that The Summit is a transit-oriented development,
including the disclosure that tenant parking will be limited.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/22/2014
Topic: Landscape Plans
01/24/2014: As we are anticipating the structure to move 15 feet to the west, this provides an
opportunity to really improve the area on the east abutting the existing retail and outdoor dining.
Please consider a plaza element and enhanced landscaping.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/24/2014
Topic: Modification of Standard
01/21/2014: Handicap Parking
As per your modification request 10 spaces are required between the two lots (12 surface; 436
structured). Please put all 4 structured handicap spaces on the first floor. Then we will determine that
the structure and the aux lot outside are one lot.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: Drive Aisle Width
The request for a drive aisle width reduction from 20¿ to 15¿ is a substantial reduction. Please provide
a demonstration as to how this will function. The parking space at 60 degrees are required to be a
depth of 21¿ or compact at 17.9¿ which may only make up 40% of the overall spaces.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
Page 3 of 11
01/21/2014: Bike Parking
What is the reasoning for not providing the required amount of bike parking? Does each of your
tenants own a bike? Please provide details as to how the enclosed bike parking will function (security
and access), and the number of space at each location on site.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
Department: Engineering Development Review
Contact: Marc Virata, 970-221-6567, mvirata@fcgov.com
Topic: General
01/22/2014: Would like to get a sense of the sight distance for vehicles heading east to the stop sign
against the northeast corner of the building.Not sure if this is ultimately of any concern, especially with
the building potentially shifting further to the west, but some further input/dialogue on this would be
beneficial upon understanding how a shifting of the building might occur.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/22/2014
Topic: Plat
01/22/2014: It appears an existing 10' power line easement will need to be vacated either by the
replat, or by separate document prior to approval of the replat. It was indicated at the staff meeting that
this easement is City Light and Power.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/22/2014
01/22/2014: I had brought up at the staff review meeting on why all of Lot 1 needs to be replatted vs. a
portion of Lot 1 where the parking structure will be. Upon further discussion with the City Surveyor, he
indicated potential concerns with replatting a portion of a lot. It would appear that the present submittal
of replatting the entire Lot 1 should remain.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/22/2014
01/22/2014: We'll need to add a note on the plat indicating: "The Choice Center Development
Agreement dated October 10, 2011 between the City of Fort Collins and Capstone Development Corp,
Johnson Investments, Inc., and Kelly C. Brown shall apply to the property shown on this replat." From
an Engineering perspective, I don't see a need to amend the original development agreement. If other
departments have a need to amend the development agreement of record, I'll look to coordinate
compiling any resulting amended development agreement.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/22/2014
Department: Light And Power
Contact: Doug Martine, 970-224-6152, dmartine@fcgov.com
Topic: General
01/03/2014: A location for an electric transformer to serve the garage will need to be coordinated with
Light & Power Engineering. The transformer will most likely be 79" wide by 56" deep. Also the
minimum clearances to the transformer are 3 feet on the back and two sides, and 8 feet unobstructed
in front. The transformer cannot be placed under an overhang. It must be located within 10 feet of an
all-weather surface that is accessible to a utility line truck.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/03/2014
Page 4 of 11
01/03/2014: A Commercial Electric Service (C-1) form will need to be completed and provided to
Light & Power Engineering outlining the electric service to the building. Light & Power Engineering will
also need a 1-line diagram (paper or pdf) of the electric service. Electric development AND system
modification charges will apply.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/03/2014
01/03/2014: Relocation of the existing underground electric facilities may be problematic. It is
suggested that the relocation(s) and the transformer location are coordinated with Light & Power
Engineering before the plan is finalized.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/03/2014
01/03/2014: After the plan is finalized, LIght & Power Engineering will need a paper or pdf of the utility
plan. Also, an AutoCad drawing (v. 2008) of the utility plan will need to be sent to Terry Cox at
TCOX@FCGOV.COM.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/03/2014
Department: PFA
Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org
Topic: General
01/17/2014: FIRE LANES
Fire access on the north side of the parking garage (south side of the Summit residences) shall be
maintained at 30' in width. The EAE shall show 30' width in this location. Code reference provided
below:
STRUCTURES EXCEEDING 30' (OR) THREE OR MORE STORIES IN HEIGHT
06IFC Appendix D; Poudre Fire Authority Administrative Policy 85-5: In order to accommodate the
access requirements for aerial fire apparatus (ladder trucks), required fire lanes shall be 30 foot wide
minimum on at least one long side of the building. At least one of the required access routes meeting
this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building,
and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/17/2014
01/20/2014: SCALE CORRETION
The 1" = 20' scale on the Site Plan (page 3) appears to be in error.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/20/2014
Department: Stormwater Engineering
Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com
Topic: Erosion Control
Page 5 of 11
01/14/2014: Erosion Control Plan has redlines and needs a sequence chart. The Erosion Control Plan
Details/Report needs redline changes as well as needs the following standards to be answered. 1)
Existing Percent Vegetation 2) Closest Receiving water 3) Rainfall and soil Erodibility 4) Timing and
sequencing 5) Identify Pollutant sources 6) Identify and Describe the means of control of the following
a) disturbed and stored soils b) Vehicle tracking of sediment Sweeping was not talked about c)
management of contaminated soils d) Loading and unloading operations e) Outdoor storage f)
equipment maintenance and storage g) on-site waste management h) concrete washing i) dedicated
asphalt or concrete batch plants 7) Soil Type how that effects the erosion 8) Soil amendments. Erosion
Control Escrow will need to be calculated. If you need clarification concerning this, or if there are any
questions please contact Jesse Schlam 970-218-2932 or email @ jschlam@fcgov.com
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/14/2014
Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com
Topic: Floodplain
Page 6 of 11
01/21/2014:
1. On the Plat, the FEMA 100-year floodway and floodplain boundaries should match FEMA Map Panel
Number 08069C0979H, dated May 2, 2012. Contact Shane Boyle (sboyle@fcgov.com) to obtain the
floodplain line work if needed.
2. On Sheets 2 and 3 of the Site Plan, include and label the FEMA 100-year floodway and floodplain
boundaries. These boundaries should match the Map Panel referenced in Note 1.
3. Please revise or amend the notes on the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan (C1.0) to
include the following notes:
a. Portions of this property are located in the FEMA-regulatory 100-year Spring Creek floodplain and
floodway, and must conform to the safety regulations of Chapter 10 of City Municipal Code.
b. All development in the floodway (including the parking garage, fill, excavation, landscaping, etc.)
must be certified by appropriate floodplain modeling techniques to cause no-rise in the BFE and the
floodway boundary, or any more than a 0.3’ fall to that BFE. After construction, the work must be
recertified prior to a Certificate of Occupancy being issued.
c. A FEMA Elevation Certificate must be approved prior to a Certificate of Occupancy being issued.
d. All development in the floodplain (including the parking garage, fill, excavation, landscaping, etc.)
must be preceded by an approved Floodplain Use Permit.
e. Storage of equipment or materials, whether temporary or permanent, is not allowed in the
floodway.
f. Any items which can float (such as picnic tables, bike racks, etc.) that are located in the floodway
must be anchored.
4. Please include the most recent the FEMA 100-year floodway and floodplain boundaries, as well as
the cross-sections and the BFE lines on the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan (C1.0).
Reference NAVD 88 elevations on the cross sections and BFE lines.
5. On the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan (C1.0), include a detail drawing, showing the
finished floor of the parking garage, the BFE at the upstream edge of the parking garage, the RFPE for
the parking garage, and the minimum elevation of all duct work, heating, ventilation, electric systems,
etc., and a table showing all of those elevations (NAVD88).
6. On the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan (C1.0), include information about the elevator,
showing the type of elevator specified (traction, hydraulic lift, etc.), and show that all equipment
associated with the elevator will either be elevated at or above the RFPE, or that all equipment will be
floodproofed. Include a note stating sensors will be included with the elevator that will return the
elevator to one of the upper floors (state which floor) in case of flooding.
7. If the parking garage will be vented allowing floodwaters to pass into and then out of the structure,
show the location and sizes of those vents on the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan (C1.0).
The vents should be located on the upstream and downstream sides of the structure, and the total
square inches of open vent space should equal or exceed the total square feet of the ground floor of
the parking garage.
8. The red-lined comments in the “Preliminary Drainage Report for the Summit on College Parking
Garage” should all be addressed.
9. In the drainage report, include the following:
a. Discuss the floodplain modeling report which will be needed to prove that the parking garage will
not cause a rise, or less than 0.3’ drop, to the BFE or a change to the floodway boundary. Explain
why the report is needed, etc.
b. Discuss the type of foundation which will be used.
c. Describe how the development will be in compliance with Chapter 10 of City Code.
e. Include a table, listing the finished floor of the parking garage, the BFE at the upstream edge of
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
Page 7 of 11
the parking garage, the RFPE for the parking garage, and the minimum elevation of all duct work,
heating, ventilation, electric systems, etc. (NAVD88).
Topic: General
01/24/2014: A drainage easement is required for the realigned storm sewer and the proposed water
quality pond.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/24/2014
01/24/2014: Pleas show the grading of the water quality pond on the plans with all details and provide
sizing calcs in the drainage report.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/24/2014
01/24/2014: The PLD/water quality pond needs to be landscaped more than just grass seed mix per
the detention pond landscape standards.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 01/24/2014
Department: Technical Services
Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com
Topic: Building Elevations
01/21/2014: Please provide the plans at 24"x36" sized sheets.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: The smaller text is hard to read.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
Topic: Construction Drawings
01/21/2014: Is the description for benchmark C 322 on sheet C0.0 what is stamped on the benchmark?
The NGS describes it as "C 322 Reset 1959".
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: The benchmarks on sheet C0.2 do not match what is shown on sheet C0.0.
Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: There are line over text issues on sheet C1.0. See redlines.
Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: Please mask all text in the profiles.
Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: There are text over text issues on sheet CE1.0. See redlines.
Comment Number: 7 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
Topic: General
01/21/2014: FLOOR PLANS: If these plans are filed, they will need to be 24"x36" sized sheets.
Comment Number: 8 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
Topic: Landscape Plans
01/21/2014: Please change the subdivision name to match the Subdivision Plat. See redlines.
Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: Please remove the legal description from sheet 1. It is not necessary.
Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
Page 8 of 11
01/21/2014: Please correct the sheet numbering on sheet 1. See redlines.
Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
Topic: Lighting Plan
01/21/2014: These plans will need to be 24"x36" sized sheets.
Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
Topic: Plat
01/21/2014: Please rename the Plat to Choice Center Second Filing.
Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: You may keep the metes & bounds description in the Statement Of Ownership And
Subdivision for internal reasons if necessary, but from our standpoint the description is "Lot 1, Choice
Center". See redlines.
Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: Is Guaranty Bank And Trust Company a lienholder?
Comment Number: 15 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: Please correct the Land Use Breakdown note as shown. See redlines.
Comment Number: 16 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: Please correct the note #2 as marked. See redlines.
Comment Number: 17 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: If you are using the Basis Of Bearings as shown in note #3, you should be showing it on
the Plat. This is not necessary, since this Plat is replatting a portion of an existing Subdivision Plat.
You may use an existing lot line.
Comment Number: 18 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: If the section line is used for the Basis Of Bearings, you will need to provide surrent
acceptable monument records for the aliquot corners shown. If this is the case, please email the
monument records directly to Jeff County at jcounty@fcgov.com.
Comment Number: 19 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: Please revise note #4, if there have been updates to the title commitments. If easements
have been granted since the date of the commitment how do you know?
Comment Number: 20 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: Please review note #5 carefully and remove any items that don't affect Lot 1.
Comment Number: 21 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: All of the curve data contains double labeling for the delta angle. Please remove one of
them.
Comment Number: 22 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: All easements must be locatable. See redlines.
Comment Number: 23 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: Please add "not accepted" to all found corners whos position was not accepted. See
redlines.
Comment Number: 24 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
Page 9 of 11
01/21/2014: Please change the delta angle degrees to 2 digits on the curve along the west property
line. See redlines.
Comment Number: 25 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: Please show the right of way of Stuart Street and the recording document dedicationg the
street. See redlines.
Comment Number: 26 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: Please dimension and tie the 10' power line easement (Bk 1723 Pg 728). If someone
different than the City, please note.
Comment Number: 27 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: Please check the distance marked in Detail D. See redlines.
Comment Number: 28 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: Please check the areas marked in Detail F. See redlines.
Comment Number: 29 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
Topic: Site Plan
01/21/2014: Please remove "Replat Of" from the legal description on sheet 1. See redlines.
Comment Number: 30 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: Please change the subdivision name to match the Subdivision Plat. See redlines.
Comment Number: 31 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: Please change the "NAGVD" to "NGVD" in the benchmark description on sheet 1. These
are not necessary for the Site Plans, and can be removed. See redlines.
Comment Number: 32 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: The title for sheet 2 in the index on sheet 1 does not match sheet 2. See redlines.
Comment Number: 33 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: There are line over text issues on sheet 2. See redlines.
Comment Number: 34 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: There are text over text issues on sheet C1.0. See redlines.
Comment Number: 35 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: Please mask all text within hatched areas on sheets 2 & 3. See redlines.
Comment Number: 36 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: Please rotate the marked text 180 degrees on sheets 2 & 3. See redlines.
Comment Number: 37 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: There is missing text on sheet 2. See redlines.
Comment Number: 38 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
Department: Traffic Operation
Contact: Ward Stanford, 970-221-6820, wstanford@fcgov.com
Topic: General
01/22/2014: Traffic Op's will restrict parking on W. Stuart leaving 3 parking spaces near the west end.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/22/2014
Department: Transportation Planning
Page 10 of 11
Contact: Aaron Iverson, 970-416-2643, aiverson@fcgov.com
Topic: General
01/22/2014: Would like to see the number of total bicycle parking spaces closer to the required overall
total (for entire project), bumping up enclosed as much as possible.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/22/2014
Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering
Contact: Roger Buffington, 970-221-6854, rbuffington@fcgov.com
Topic: Construction Drawings
01/21/2014: The relocation of the sanitary sewer is currently under review; therefore, comments on the
sewer location and resulting easement will await the revised location. The location shown and 15 foot
easement are not adequate allow for future maintenance and replacement of this sewer.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: The water service connection is shown in an area where the water main was lowered to
pass under three storm sewers and a sanitary sewer. The water main is 10+ feet deep in this location.
An alternate point of connection is needed.
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: A 4" water service seems larger than needed for a parking garage and will result in high
development fees and raw water requirements. If a 4" is needed, provide the estimated peak day
flow rate in gallons ser minute and the estimated annual usage in gallons for calculating the fees and
the raw water requirement.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
Department: Zoning
Contact: Ali van Deutekom, 970-416-2743, avandeutekom,@fcgov.com
Topic: Landscape Plans
1/21/2014: LUC 3.2.1(E)(2)(d) Foundation plantings are required in high-use or high-visibility areas of at
least 5 feet wide and 50% of such walls.
All four sides are fairly visible, at the least, the South side wall needs to have the 50% required
foundation plantings.
Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
Topic: Site Plan
01/21/2014: The modification on the handicap parking spaces is okay as long as the handicap spaces
are moved to the first floor of the parking structure and a sign is added to the entrance stating "all
handicap parking in the parking structure is located on the first floor."
Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
01/21/2014: We would like to see a mock-up demonstration of the modification for the drive aisle width
to insure the public can safely navigate the proposed 15' width.
Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 01/21/2014
Page 11 of 11