Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFORT COLLINS HOTEL (DOWNTOWN HOTEL) - FDP - FDP150033 - CORRESPONDENCE - (2)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 December 02, 2015 Stu Macmillan Bohemian Companies 262 E. Mountain Ave Fort Collins, CO 80524 RE: Fort Collins Hotel (Downtown Hotel), FDP150033, Round Number 2 Comment Summary: Department: Planning Services Contact: Seth Lorson, 970-224-6189, slorson@fcgov.com Topic: Site Plan 11/20/2015: Actually it should be "Planning Director" - as was noted in a follow-up email. 10/20/2015: Please change signature block from "CDNS Director" to "Planning Manager". Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/20/2015 Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Marc Virata, 970-221-6567, mvirata@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings 11/24/2015: Please identify what the building limits are for 300 E Mountain on the plans, is it the shaded area? I'm concerned that the landing behind the access ramp potentially leads directly into the pole and overhang for the building? Comment Number: 291 Comment Originated: 11/24/2015 11/24/2015: Please ensure that the variance requests are submitted for both the variable curb height on the south side of Chestnut Street and the modifying of Chestnut from a crowned street to a slope to the south street along part of the frontage. Comment Number: 292 Comment Originated: 11/24/2015 Topic: General 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. Page 1 of 8 11/24/2015: There should still be additional area north along Jefferson Street indicating the removal of parking (with either no parking signs and/or red curb as directed by Traffic Operations) to the existing tree. 10/21/2015: A response to the pork chop comment indicated that the TIS for the surface lot does not warrant a right turn lane and that the plans will be revised to not show a right turn on Jefferson. In discussing this with Martina, the City is still requiring as previously commented: "we'll want to see that no parking is indicated along Jefferson Street from just past the tree (in front of the depicted SU-40 vehicle) to the intersection. This won't technically serve as a turn lane, but will aid in turning movements for the areas." Comment Number: 110 Comment Originated: 10/21/2015 11/24/2015: I'm still looking to have the driveway abutting the property be modified to be ADA compliant with cross slope. This would involve transitioning the curb head to the driveway opening over a longer distance on the south side of the driveway abutting the property and adding truncated dome detection on the south side. Ideally the north side of the driveway would be similarly modified as well. Additionally as part of subsequent discussions with Seth and Cole, also please ensure access easement is dedicated on the plat for the driveway which should also extend for the pedestrian connection out to the alley. 10/21/2015: The area shown as proposed sidewalk along the north side of the parking lot aligns with the existing driveway out to Jefferson Street. Understanding the recent input that the driveway is to remain open, wouldn't the drawings need to be modified accordingly, with the removal of the planter area, street tree on Jefferson Street and the concrete wall, as well as the site and landscape plans showing the driveway? Is it understood, and any concern that the identified 7 foot wide sidewalk will be driven on for a portion of it, for the access off Jefferson Street? Please have all the plans show the existing infrastructure to the north (parking lot, existing paving, existing buildings, etc.) identified to understand how the proposed infrastructure will tie into the existing context. Truncated dome detection should be provided on either side of the driveway, and in general the driveway itself I don't believe has a 2% cross slope max for the sidewalk crossing, with the six inch drop for the curb removal. The driveway would likely need to be rebuilt for ADA compliance. Comment Number: 120 Comment Originated: 10/21/2015 11/24/2015: Rob Mosbey indicated that the City Manager did approve the encroachment permit for the appurtenances identified in the right-of-way. I would still want the clouded area on the site plan referencing that these are subject to the encroachment permit being in place. Note that the bike racks in the Walnut Street bulb out should still be within the clouded area. Comment Number: 160 Comment Originated: 11/24/2015 Department: Forestry Contact: Tim Buchanan, 970-221-6361, tbuchanan@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans 10/21/2015: A conceptual plan has been submitted that explores retention of existing trees number 12 and 13. Provide information on feasibility of moving the drive around 5-6 feet away from the trees with a retaining wall. The conceptual indicates moving the drive around 14 feet from the trees. Also evaluate feasibility of retaining existing tree number 17. The location of this tree is currently shown in the proposed sidewalk. Provide information on feasibility of retaining tree number 17. Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 10/21/2015 Page 2 of 8 10/29/2015: Add a canopy shade tree at the corner of Chestnut and Jefferson Street in the landscape area. Comment Number: 14 Comment Originated: 10/29/2015 Department: Historical Preservation Contact: Katie Dorn, 970-416-4250, kdorn@fcgov.com Topic: General 10/20/2015: As provided for in Land Use Code Section 3.4.7(F)(6), in its consideration of the approval of plans for properties containing or adjacent to designated, eligible or potentially eligible sites, structure, objects or districts, the Decision Maker shall receive, and consider in making its decision, a written recommendation from the Landmark Preservation Commission. This memorandum contains the Commission’s Findings of Facts and its motion for this project. 1) The development project known as the Downtown Hotel is located adjacent to the Old Town Fort Collins Historic District, which is a designated Fort Collins Landmark District as well as a National Register of Historic Places District; and to the Armory Building, which is individually designated on the National, State, and Fort Collins historic registers; additionally, it is adjacent to properties that have been officially determined to be individually eligible for local landmark designation. 2) At its September 9, 2015 Regular Meeting, the Landmark Preservation Commission reviewed the development project known as the Downtown Hotel, and as authorized under LUC Section 3.4.7(F)(6), made the following findings of facts: That the project is compatible and respectful to the character of the surrounding historic context for the following reasons: a. The project design uses traditional proportion and historic modules typical of like adjacent historic buildings. b. The project uses massing location and appropriate step-backs to mitigate height, relative to the historic context, as well as to the Mitchell Block. c. The building uses historically scaled materials, and colors of materials, that are compatible with adjacent historic properties. d. The project uses compatible solid to void window pattern, typical of the adjacent historic context. e. The pedestrian scale of the main floor of the proposed project is compatible with the historic context. 3) The Commission specifically discussed in its deliberations the applicants’ request for modifications to two Standards, relative to the building’s height and setback, specifically: Section 4.16(D)(2)(a), which permits a maximum height of four stories or 56 feet; and Section 4.16(D)(4)(a), which requires a setback at a 35 degree angle measured at the intersection of the floor plane of the fourth floor and the property line. 4) At its September 9, 2015 Regular Meeting, the Commission adopted the following motion on a vote of 8-0: That the Landmark Preservation Commission recommend to the decision maker, the Planning and Zoning Board, the approval of the development proposal for the Fort Collins Hotel located at the corner of Chestnut and Walnut Streets, finding that it complies with Land Use Code Section 3.4.7. Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/20/2015 Department: Internal Services Page 3 of 8 Contact: Russell Hovland, 970-416-2341, rhovland@fcgov.com Topic: Building Insp Plan Review 10/21/2015: Building Permit Pre-Submittal Meeting: Pre-Submittal meetings are offered to assist the designer/builder by assuring, early on in the design, that the new commercial or multi-family projects are on track to complying with all of the adopted City codes and Standards listed below. The proposed project should be in the early to mid-design stage for this meeting to be effective and is typically scheduled after the Current Planning conceptual review meeting. Applicants of new commercial or multi-family projects are advised to call 416-2341 to schedule a pre-submittal meeting. Applicants should be prepared to present site plans, floor plans, and elevations and be able to discuss code issues of occupancy, square footage and type of construction being proposed. Construction shall comply with the following adopted codes as amended: 2012 International Building Code (IBC) 2012 International Residential Code (IRC) 2012 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) 2012 International Mechanical Code (IMC) 2012 International Fuel Gas Code (IFGC) 2012 International Plumbing Code (IPC) as amended by the State of Colorado 2014 National Electrical Code (NEC) as amended by the State of Colorado Fort Collins has amendments to most of the codes listed above. See the fcgov.com web page to view them. Accessibility: State Law CRS 9-5 & ICC/ANSI A117.1-2009. Snow Load Live Load: 30 PSF / Ground Snow Load 30 PSF. Frost Depth: 30 inches. Wind Load: 100- MPH 3 Second Gust Exposure B. Seismic Design: Category B. Climate Zone: Zone 5 Energy Code Use 1. Single Family; Duplex; Townhomes: 2012 IRC Chapter 11 or 2012 IECC. 2. Multi-family and Condominiums 3 stories max: 2012 IECC residential chapter. 3. Commercial and Multi-family 4 stories and taller: 2012 IECC commercial chapter. City of Fort Collins Building Services Plan Review 416-2341 Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/21/2015 Department: Light And Power Contact: Coy Althoff, , CAlthoff@fcgov.com Topic: General Page 4 of 8 10/19/2015: Any changes to the existing electric capacity and or location will initiate electric development and system modification charges. Please coordinate power requirements with Light and Power Engineering at 221-6700. Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/19/2015 10/19/2015: Please contact Light & Power Engineering if you have any questions at 221-6700. Please reference our policies, development charge processes, and use our fee estimator at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and-developers. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/19/2015 10/21/2015: Light & Power has 3-phase electric facilities in this area for both of the existing addresses. System modification and capacity charges may apply. Once the electrical service size has been determined, contact Light & Power Engineering to estimate the associated added kVA and relocation charges. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/21/2015 10/21/2015: Please provide a one line diagram and a C-1 form to Light and Power Engineering. The C-1 form can be found at: http://zeus.fcgov.com/utils-procedures/files/EngWiki/WikiPdfs/C/C-1Form.pdf Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/21/2015 11/23/2015: Transformer clearance requirements are as follows: All transformers must be within 10' of a paved surface. Size 25 kVA through 750 kVA require an 8' clearance on the front and a 3' clearance around the back and sides. Size 1000 kVA through 2500 kVA require an 8' clearance on the front and a 4' clearance around the back and sided. Comment Number: 5 Comment Originated: 11/23/2015 Department: PFA Contact: Jim Lynxwiler, 970-416-2869, jlynxwiler@poudre-fire.org Topic: General 10/20/2015: AERIAL FIRE ACCESS VS ALTERNATIVE MEANS OF COMPLIANCE PFA and the project team have both acknowledged that the site plan does not provide minimum fire access for aerial apparatus as required by code. Although the building does not meet the definition of a high rise, access limitations, due to site constraints, create a situation similar in nature to that of a high rise. The PFA will continue to work with the project team to meet the intent of the fire code through alternative means of compliance in order to offset code deficiencies. PFA advises the project team to consider high rise provisions in future discussions. Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/20/2015 Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Dan Mogen, , dmogen@fcgov.com Topic: Drainage Report 11/24/2015: Please update request per redlines. 10/20/2015: Please complete variance request for 6" of freeboard (rather than 12") and include this request in the drainage report. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/20/2015 Page 5 of 8 11/24/2015: Please also show the area of each paver section along with the run-on area so the run-on ratio can be shown. Run-on areas of up to 3:1 are acceptable. Have the rain gardens been sized to treat the area indicated in the table? Please provide sizing spreadsheet from Urban Drainage to show the treatment capacity of the rain gardens. 10/20/2015: Please expand on the LID Summary Table provided to include a breakdown of the area that is treated by each LID feature. Please show for each paver section and rain garden. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/20/2015 11/24/2015: Noted that this discussion is in process with the City. 10/20/2015: If the parking garage alternative is approved and the proposed parking lot is not built, how will the proposed hotel meet the LID requirements? Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/20/2015 11/24/2015: Calculation for the inlet is seen; however, proposed flows at this design point are not shown and no storm line design calculations are provided in Appendix B.2. 10/20/2015: Please show that the pipe from the proposed inlet to the existing infrastructure has sufficient capacity for the proposed flow. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/20/2015 Topic: General 11/24/2015: Please see updated redlined plans and drainage report. 10/20/2015: Please see redlines. Comment Number: 10 Comment Originated: 10/20/2015 11/24/2015: The updated flowline with variable height curb is seen and it is understood this will provide improved conveyance. In the drainage report, please discuss the change to the remove the road crown as well as how this change will affect flows reaching the improved curb and gutter and downstream infrastructure. Will the affected infrastructure be able to handle the change in flow? 10/22/2015: Removing the crown from Chestnut in front of the entrance will increase the stormwater flows across the street to the SE curb and gutter on Chestnut. Please show that curb and gutter has adequate conveyance to handle the proposed flow and the downstream inlet can also handle the flow. Comment Number: 11 Comment Originated: 10/22/2015 11/24/2015: Please provide evidence that the rain gardens are in compliance with drain times per Colorado Revised Statute 37-92-602(8). More information on this statute is available at http://tinyurl.com/RevisedStatuteMemo, and a spreadsheet to show compliance is available for download at http://tinyurl.com/ComplianceSpreadsheet. Please contact Dan Mogen at (970)224-6192 or dmogen@fcgov.com with any questions about this requirement or for assistance with the spreadsheet. Comment Number: 12 Comment Originated: 11/24/2015 Contact: Jesse Schlam, 970-218-2932, jschlam@fcgov.com Topic: Erosion Control Page 6 of 8 11/24/2015: Erosion Control Report was acceptable. Still missing an erosion control Plan as it was not found in the Utilities Plan set along with a detail sheet for the Utilties Plan set. The Dynamic Copy in the erosion control report looks like a good start in meeting the erosion control plan with a need for perimeter protection. Erosion control escrow calculation was not included in the submitted materials. 10/05/2015: The site disturbs more than 10,000 sq-ft, therefore Erosion and Sediment Control Materials need to be submitted for FDP. The erosion control requirements are in the Stormwater Design Criteria under the Amendments of Volume 3 Chapter 7 Section 1.3.3. Please submit; Erosion Control Plan (Not Submitted in the Utilities Plans as required for the final plans), Erosion Control Report (Not Submitted), and an Escrow / Security Calculation (Not Submitted). If you need clarification concerning this section, or if there are any questions please contact Jesse Schlam 970-218-2932 or email @ jschlam@fcgov.com Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/05/2015 Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Building Elevations 11/23/2015: No comments. 10/20/2015: No comments. Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/20/2015 Topic: Construction Drawings 11/23/2015: There are line over text issues. See redlines. 10/20/2015: There are line over text issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/20/2015 11/23/2015: 10/20/2015: There are cut off text issues. See redlines. Comment Number: 3 Comment Originated: 10/20/2015 Topic: Lighting Plan 11/23/2015: No comments. 10/20/2015: No comments. Comment Number: 6 Comment Originated: 10/20/2015 Topic: Plat 11/23/2015: Are there pipes that drain the easements shown on Lot 1? If so, there will need to be easements for those pipes to the right of way. Comment Number: 13 Comment Originated: 11/23/2015 Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Martina Wilkinson, 970-221-6887, mwilkinson@fcgov.com Topic: General 11/25/2015: A few more minor redlines provided to engineering. 10/07/2015: redlines provided to engineering. Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/07/2015 11/25/2015: The pedestrian connection between the parking lot and the hotel entrance at the alley is very weak. (There's just one sidewalk by the handicapped parking stall.) People will be walking between and among cars, and carrying suitcases over landscaped areas to get to the alley. Please consider providing a better walkable connection. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 11/25/2015 Page 7 of 8 Department: Water Conservation Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com Topic: General 10/15/2015: Perovskia Atriplicifolia (Russian Sage) has been removed from the City of Fort Collins Plant List. Please replace with a plant variety from the current list. If you have questions contact Eric Olson at eolson@fcgov.com or 970-221-6704. Comment Number: 1 Comment Originated: 10/15/2015 Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering Contact: Dan Mogen, , dmogen@fcgov.com Topic: General 11/24/2015: While the mechanical/plumbing drawings will detail the connection and routing, please include routing outside the building and to the sewer main on the utility plan. 10/20/2015: Please show that the proposed grease trap is connected to sewer service. Comment Number: 2 Comment Originated: 10/20/2015 11/24/2015: The City is currently looking into the status of these pipes running thru the manhole and will communicate status once known. 10/22/2015: Please add a call out to the existing manhole west of the alley that is said to have sewer, water and stormwater running thru it. The City is unsure of the status of these lines and would like to have coordination at time of construction with Water Field Operations at 970-221-6700. Comment Number: 4 Comment Originated: 10/22/2015 Page 8 of 8