Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSYMBIOS LOGIC PUD - PRELIMINARY - 5-94E - CORRESPONDENCE - STAFF'S PROJECT COMMENTSCommunity Planning and Environmental Services Current Planning City of Fort Collins May 17, 1996 Roger Sherman BHA Design 2000 Vermont Drive Fort Collins, CO. 80525 Dear Roger, Staff has reviewed your documents for the Symbios Logic Overall Development Plan and the Symbios Logic PUD, Preliminary that were submitted to the City on April 22, 1996 and would like to offer the following comments: Symbios Logic ODP The Natural Resources Division stated that the extensiveness of this site means that the applicant will need to get a State Air Quality Permit prior to grading. Please contact Myrna Hanson with the Larimer County Health Department. 2. A note should be added to the ODP stating that adequate buffering will be provided along the north property line, on this property between future uses and the residential uses to the north, at the time of planning the phase in this area. 3. The primary entry into the property from East Harmony road appears to be a little short of the 1,100 feet that is approved on the Harmony Road Access Control Plan; however, there probably is not a problem with the location as shown. 4. Based on concerns expressed by residents of the English Ranch development to the north, the City is reevaluating the future Corbett Drive alignment as it connects with the property to the north. The location of Corbett Drive in English Ranch South, as approved on that ODP, should be shown on this ODP. 5. The proposed land uses appear to be in conformance with the adopted Harmony Road Corridor Plan and the allowable land uses in this area of the plan. 281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 FAX (970) 221-6378 • TDD (970) 224-6002 6. The Engineering Department has offered the following comments: a. We will need to confer with CDOT to verify that the Harmony Road access is within code. b. Make a note about the temporasry access location and the future expectations for the access. C. Are any of the other accesses temporary? A red -lined copy of the ODP is enclosed with the letter to BHA Design. Please return this plan with your revisions. Symbios Logic PUD Preliminary/ U.S. West has stated that they require a utility easement west from the proposed building to the center line of the section for telephone service to this building. 2. Public Service Company has offered the'following comments: a. There is existing underground three-phase primary electric line (PSCo) in the 20' utility easement adjoining the west line of County Road 9 that does show on the utility plans. The alignment of this electric line is approximately 16' west of the west line of County Road 9. b. There is also a 4" natural gas line in a common trench with this electric line in the vicinity of the proposed detention pond #2 that does not show on the utility plans. C. Any relocation of these lines required by this development will be at the developer's expense. 3. TCI of Fort Collins (cable television) has stated that they would like to see a utility easement along County Road 9 and an easement along East Harmony Road. They would also like to have some kind of easements so that they may provide service to the building. Additionally, TCI would like to work with the builders on pre -wiring the building to TCI code. 4. Police Services has stated that the development should provide good perimeter and parking lot lighting for security and safety. 5. Sensitivity to the surrounding area, especially the residential neighborhoods, must be considered as the lighting plan is developed for this project. The City would like to have the opportunity to review a detailed lighting plan no later than with the final PUD plan submittal. Ideally, a lighting plan should be under review with the preliminary to prevent unexpected concerns being expressed at time of final PUD. 6. The Poudre Fire Authority has stated that the building must be fire sprinkled to NFPA 13 standard. Buildings three or more stories in height must have access to a 30' unobstructed access roadway on at least one side for aerial operation. The roadway in this case must be able to support imposed load of a ladder truck on outriggers. The delivery and service roads appear to be acceptable. 7. The Zoning Department has offered the following comments: a. One additional handicapped parking space is required at the visitors parking area. You can reduce the employee handicapped parking by one space as only eight are required and ten are shown. b. Building dimensions - they will not be regarded as building envelopes. We suggest an envelope shown on the Site Plan instead. C. Does the "focal point" include a structure or only pavement and landscaping? Show an envelope/dimensions/elevations if there is a structure. d. The 18' parking stalls are not acceptable if they do not overhang a wall or landscaping. They need to be 19' unless they are all designated as "employee" parking, then 18' is o.k. e. The 46' building height requires a shadow analysis as part of the PUD review by staff an recommendation that goes to the Planning and Zoning Board. The requirements for this are on page 6.28 (Special Review of Buildings with Height Over 40 Feet) of the City's Development Manual. This information should be submitted as soon as possible to give staff time to review it. 8. A copy of the comments received from the Building Inspection Department is attached to this letter. 9. A copy of a red -lined Landscape Plan, with comments from the Water/Wastewater Department is enclosed with the letter to BHA Design. Please return this plan with your revisions. 10. A copy of the comments received from the Water Conservation Specialist is attached to this letter. 11. The City Forester has stated that street trees 40' on -center should be provided along County Road 9. The applicant should contact the City Forester for an on - site evaluation of existing trees and the final PUD Landscape Plan must accurately show all existing trees and whether they will remain or be proposed to be removed. 12. A copy of the comments received from the Engineering Department is attached to this letter. Also, a copy of a red -lined Site Plan is enclosed with the letter to BHA Design. Please return this plan with your revisions. 13. The Natural Resources Division has stated that the acreage of this site means that the applicant will need to get a State Air Quality Permit prior to grading. Please contact Myrna Hanson with the Larimer County Health Department. 14. The Transportation Department has made comments on a green -lined Site Plan that is enclosed with the letter to BHA Design. Please return this plan with your revisions. 15. Acceleration/deceleration lanes are needed to at the entry on East Harmony Road. 16. Kathleen Reavis of the Transportation Department should be contacted about plans for bicycle lanes along Harmony Road. Kathleen can be reached at 221- 6608. 17. The 46' building height requires a shadow analysis as part of the PUD review by staff an recommendation that goes to the Planning and Zoning Board. The requirements for this are on page 6.28 (Special Review of Buildings with Height Over 40 Feet) of the City's Development Manual. This information should be submitted as soon as possible to give staff time to review it. 18. The Stormwater Utility has stated that the required storm water crossing at County Road 9 is already in place. There may be a repay obligation attached to this property: Also, the proposed detention looks to be adequate based on the information provided for the preliminary PUD review. The storm water should be channeled from west to east across the property. 19. The ultimate width of Harmony Road in this location must be determined because the Harmony Corridor Plan requires that all improvements be set back a minimum of 80' for the ultimate edge of pavement. This completes the staff comments at this time. Additional comments will be forthcoming as they are received from City departments and outside reviewing agencies. Please be aware of the following dates and deadlines to assure your ability to stay on schedule for the June 24, 1996 Planning and Zoning Board hearing: Plan revisions are due no later than the end of the working day, June 5, 1996*. Please contact me for the number of folded revisions required for each document. NO REVISIONS WILL BE ACCEPTED AFTER THE ABOVE DEADLINE. THE ITEM WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT MONTH'S PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD AGENDA IF REVISIONS ARE NOT RECEIVED BY THIS DATE. PMT's (photo reduction of Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Building Elevations to 8.5" x 11"), rendering (one each colored full-size Site Plan and/or Landscape Plan and Building Elevations), and 8 folded copies of the final full-size Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Building Elevations revisions ( for the Planning and Zoning Board members packets) are due on June 17, 1996. ****************************************************************************** Please contact me at 221-6750 if you have questions or concerns regarding these comments or if you would like to schedule a meeting to discuss the comments. Sincerely, 4'0CA__ Steve Olt Project Planner xc: Ward Stanford Stormwater Utility Transportation Don Rott, Symbios Logic David Everitt, Everitt Company Stuart MacMillan, Everitt Company RBD inc. RNL Design Project File