Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout221 EAST MOUNTAIN AVENUE - BDR180012 - CORRESPONDENCE - RESPONSE TO STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS1 Community Development and Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6689 970.224.6134 - fax fcgov.com/developmentreview October 02, 2018 Jason Messaros BHA Design, Inc. 1603 Oakridge Dr Fort Collins, CO 80525 RE: 221 East Mountain Avenue, BDR180012, Round Number 4 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, Clark Mapes, at 970-221-6225 or cmapes@fcgov.com. Comment Summary: Department: Planning Services Contact: Clark Mapes, 970-221-6225, cmapes@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 4 05/15/2018: For clarification: the interrelated functions of bike parking, parking ramp, elevator, and ground floor hallways. October 3 update, bike parking: We discussed this early on but haven't followed up...let's touch base on final findings. We should have an answer for how the garage make sense for all bike parking. It looks like the evolution of steps in the right-of-way has precluded any potential solutions there. Comment Number: 5 05/15/2018: Label the minimum clear sidewalk dimension of 9.1 feet along Mathews per our email conversations. Comment Number: 7 08/21/2018: Building architecture: ready for mylars that incorporate the details discussed with the LPC. The elevation drawings can include perspective views and enlarged details. If helpful, send me pdf's of the final sheets before printing. Department: Engineering Development Review Contact: Katie Andrews, 970-221-6501, kandrews@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 7 2 10/1/2018: Recorded easement/reception number not yet provided. 08/20/2018: Is there an existing utility easement in the DDA alley on the west side of the property? If not please obtain an easement in this location and provide the reception number on the plans. Engineering cannot resolve this comment and approve plans until the easements with reception numbers are shown on the plans. 06/22/2018: I cannot find the easement on the demolition, horizontal control, or utility plans, please make the label more obvious if I am missing it. We will need to see the recording number for the offsite easement shown on the final plans prior to approval. 05/14/2018: Please show existing and proposed utility easements on the site and utility plans - is there an existing easement or an intent to grant an easement in the private DDA alley? No hearing so no letter of intent needed - we will need the reception number for the dedicated offsite easement shown on the plans before final plan approval. Comment Number: 10 10/01/2018: It is my understanding that no coordination has happened on the encroachment items - we'll want to set up a meeting to discuss encroachments. Contact: Marc Virata, 970-221-6567, mvirata@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 9 Comment Originated: 06/26/2018 10/1/2018: This note has not been added to the utility plans or the site plan. 08/20/2018: Please note on the plans that the steps are subject to an encroachment permit. 06/26/2018: It has been noticed with this current submittal that steps are being shown in right-of-way. Other site design options should be explored to not introduce steps and maximize the pedestrian clear zone and pathway in right-of-way. Steps and/or other encroachments if continued to be proposed would need to be reviewed under a major encroachment permit. Department: Forestry Contact: Molly Roche, 224-616-1992, mroche@fcgov.com Topic: Landscape Plans Comment Number: 9 10/2/2018: Please provide reason for removing the (2) Kentucky Coffeetrees along Mathews. A new requirement, titled “Existing Tree Removal Feasibility Letter” should be submitted to City Forestry and the Project Planner for review. This language is very similar to what is provided on the landscape plans regarding the reason for removing tree #3.Proposals to remove significant existing trees must provide a justification letter detailing the reason for tree removal. This is required for all development projects proposing significant tree removal regardless of the scale of the project. The purpose of this letter is to provide a document of record with the project’s approval and for the City to maintain a record of all proposed significant tree removals and justifications. Existing significant trees within the project’s Limits of Disturbance (LOD) and within natural area buffer zones shall be preserved to the extent reasonably feasible. Streets, buildings and lot layouts shall be designed to minimize the disturbance to significant existing trees. (Extent reasonably feasible shall mean that, under the circumstances, reasonable efforts have been undertaken to comply with the regulation, that the costs of compliance clearly outweigh the potential benefits to the public or would unreasonably burden the proposed project, and reasonable steps have been undertaken to minimize any potential harm or adverse impacts resulting from noncompliance with the regulation.) Where it is not feasible to protect and retain significant existing tree(s) or to transplant them to another on-site location, the applicant shall replace such tree(s) according to City mitigation requirements. If it is possible to coincide with project’s schedule, City Forestry might be interested in transplanting these two Kentucky Coffeetrees off-site and onto City Property. The would depend on existing utilities in the area of transplant as well as 3 project timing. Please add a note to the landscape plans stating: Trees 7 and 8 to be transplanted off-site by City Forestry depending on project schedule and existing utility locations. Department: Historic Preservation Contact: Maren Bzdek, 970-221-6206, mbzdek@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 11 09/21/2018: At its September 19, 2018 meeting, the Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) conducted a review of the development project known as 221 E Mountain (BDR180012). 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. The Commission’s discussion included the following points: General: Commission members noted that the building design has come a long way and now meets the requirements of section 3.4.7, with the exception of mass and bulk mitigation. Materials change: Members noted that the Arriscraft precast stone meets the materials standard in 3.4.7 and resolves the concerns previously mentioned that were associated with the proposed use of the larger cementitious Nichiha panels. Height/Massing: Several members stated that the greater definition and articulation of materials is one of the improvements of note, but it doesn’t result in an “equal to or better than” solution that would meet what the fourth story stepback requirement is designed to achieve. They noted that the current design lacks a varying height profile that is reflective of the historic pattern. One member stated that staff’s favorable visual comparison of the overall massing of the building with the Mitchell Block and the Elizabeth Hotel was unconvincing without a stronger basis for that conclusion (e.g. comparing the percentage of stepback on the buildings), and that they are specifically charged with comparing the new construction only with the historic area of adjacency in accordance with 3.4.7. Several members discussed how removing the balcony roofs or possibly making them lighter or transparent would be the applicant’s easiest route to achieve a partial stepback that would also mitigate the mass and vary the height profile so that it is more in keeping with the area of adjacency. The LPC adopted the following motion on a vote of 6-0: That the Landmark Preservation Commission recommend to the Decision Maker approval of the proposal for 221 E. Mountain (BDR180012) with the condition that the balconies be modified to create stepbacks to help the building maintain the historic articulation pattern. Historic Preservation staff and LPC review is complete as of the September 19, 2018 meeting. If significant changes to building design change during the final review, please contact me to determine if additional comment is needed from our division. Department: Light and Power Contact: Janet McTague, 970-224-6154, jmctague@fcgov.com Topic: General INFORMATION ONLY Comment Number: 4 09/11/2018: 05/15/2018: We will need a C-1 form to identify the size and voltage of the electric service. Normal Capacity fees will apply. 4 Department: PFA Contact: Andrew Rosen, 970-416-2599, arosen@poudre-fire.org Topic: General Comment Number: 22 INFORMATION ONLY Comment Originated: 08/20/2018 9-28-2018 UPDATE There has been offline discussion about the proposed green roof and the required space for a pathway around the edge. The Fire Marshal will not require a walkway between the green roof and the parapet if the shown railing is continued around the area of the roof where the green roof is proposed so as to protect from the risk of falling from the rooftop 08/20/2018: ANSWERS TO PROJECT TEAM QUESTIONS 1)The residential elevator is not required to stop at the 2nd floor 2)Sprinkler requirement for mechanical penthouse on roof: Typically, a mechanical penthouse on the roof is sprinklered when the building itself is required to be sprinklered. Please contact Assistant Fire Marshal, Jerry Howell with any fire sprinkler related questions at 970-416-2868. Department: Stormwater Engineering Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 5 08/20/2018: The drainage report needs to include the required volume calculation and provided volume. The Utility Plans need to show how this drainage is connecting to the public drainage system. 06/19/2018: Please provide a design for the LID mitigation that is proposed for the rooftop. The required WQ volume and media cross-section need to be included in the drainage report as well as an explanation of the technique being proposed. This will be used during the drainage certification process to ensure the LID technique was built per design. Comment Number: 8 08/20/2018: Please use the City's standard sidewalk chase detail. The detail can be modified to include a smaller width opening. Department: Water-Wastewater Engineering Contact: Wes Lamarque, 970-416-2418, wlamarque@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 9 08/20/2018: Please provide 5 feet of separation between all the water services in Mountain Avenue. Department: Technical Services Contact: Jeff County, 970-221-6588, jcounty@fcgov.com Topic: Construction Drawings Comment Number: 7 REDLINE PROVIDED 08/16/2018: The Benchmark Statement has been updated but does not match the required format. Please provide the 5 following information for the Benchmark Statement in the EXACT format shown below. PROJECT DATUM: NAVD88 BENCHMARK # w/ DESCRIPTION ELEVATION: BENCHMARK # w/ DESCRIPTIONELEVATION: PLEASE NOTE: THIS PLAN SET IS USING NAVD88 FOR A VERTICAL DATUM. SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENTS HAVE USED NGVD29 UNADJUSTED (PRIOR CITY OF FORT COLLINS DATUM) FOR THEIR VERTICAL DATUMS. IF NGVD29 UNADJUSTED DATUM (PRIOR CITY OF FORT COLLINS DATUM) IS REQUIRED FOR ANY PURPOSE, THE FOLLOWING EQUATION SHOULD BE USED: NGVD29 UNADJUSTED (PRIOR CITY OF FORT COLLINS DATUM) = NAVD88 - X.XX¿. Department: Traffic Operation Contact: Tim Tuttle, 970-221-6820, TTUTTLE@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 4 INFORMATION ONLY 10/01/2018: No further comments from Traffic Operations 09/13/2018: No Further Comments from Traffic Operations. Department: Transportation Planning Contact: Seth Lorson, 970-416-4320, slorson@fcgov.com Topic: General Comment Number: 1 INFORMATION ONLY 06/26/2018: PARKING SERVICES Alternative compliance cannot be supported with parking permits within the public parking structures. Currently, there are no available permits for purchase. Comment Number: 2 08/21/2018: Please remove the note on the site plan that references parking in the public parking structure. Department: Water Conservation Contact: Eric Olson, 970-221-6704, eolson@fcgov.com Topic: General INFORMATION ONLY Comment Number: 1 04/30/2018: Irrigation plans are required no later than at the time of building permit. The irrigation plans must comply with the provisions outlined in Section 3.2.1(J) of the Land Use Code. Direct questions concerning irrigation requirements to Eric Olson, at 221-6704 or eolson@fcgov.com