Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTHE MARKET PLACE PUD - FINAL - 21-89A - CORRESPONDENCE - STAFF'S PROJECT COMMENTSDevelo Ment Servi:es Planning Department June 9, 1989 Mr. Gene Yergensen 115 South Weber Colorado Springs, CO. 80525 Dear Mr. Yergensen: • The Planning Staff has held the final review session for the items being heard on the June 26, 1989 Planning and Zoning Board hearing. The following comments apply to both the preliminary and final of the Market Place P.U.D. PRELIMINARY P.U.D. The Preliminary P.U.D. is basically in good shape. Most of the comments that follow will apply to the final. When submitting the 10 prints and PMT's on June 19, 1989, it will not be necessary to include sheet SP-1 as this will duplicate the final P.U.D. cover sheet. Sheet SP-2 will suffice as long as it is labeled "Preliminary P.U.D." FINAL P.U.D. Sheet SP-1: Since this sheet will have the signatures, it will serve as the cover sheet for the entire P.U.D. package. As such, it should contain more detailed information. Please add the following information to sheet SP-1: 1. The title of the P.U.D. should appear in the lower right corner. Please add "The Market Place P.U.D., Phase One, Final" below the signature block for the Secretary of the Planning and Zoning Board. (L.D.G.S. p. 48) 2. A legal description must appear on the cover sheet. (L.D.G.S. p. 47) 3. At the top of the concept plan, please add the title "Amended Superblock Master Plan Number 3 For South College Properties". 4. The surrounding properties of the concept plan should also be labeled with the existing zoning. (L.D.G.S. p. 50) 5. Please add Note #16 to read: "Long term parking stalls to be identified with a raised sign." 6. Below the signature line for the owner, the name of the signor should be printed. 7. In the data table, the number of vehicular parking spaces should be totalled. Also, state the number of parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of the final P.U.D. in terms of a ratio. Sheet SP-2: 1. The patterned concrete crosswalks are not considered to be an alternate. Delete the reference to "Alternate". As a result of our meeting May 25, 1989, it was decided that these crosswalks provide a valuable sense of caution to the motorist and do not become tarred or blackened over time. Also, label the crosswalk at the sidewalk in the parking bay as "patterned concrete". 2. The sidewalk in between the parking bays that leads up to retail Pad F should be six feet wide, not four as shown. With a 17 foot parking stall, there will be a two foot vehicular overhang onto the sidewalk. Also, please label this "sidewalk". 3. In front of anchor tenant G, at the north property line, add the note: "Future sidewalk connection to north". 4. As stated in comment number 27 of the our letter dated May 19, 1989, there needs to be one landscaped island added to each of the three parking bays in front of anchor tenant G. As it stands now, there would be 180 linear feet without any landscape relief. SE6 71v (Ji v 10 vRL TXE� PL vTIN 6S w i C ve, 4 PP,O 7150,*rt onl 5. As stated in comment number 25 of the same letter, there needs to be a landscaped island at the end of the parking bay featuring the two handicapped parking spaces. 6. The four compact car parking spaces located behind retail F should be deleted and replaced with landscape materials. 7. Staff is concerned about the designation of 9 compact parking stalls just south of Pad A. According to the City's Off Street Parking Requirements: "Long term parking is parking which can reasonably be assumed to have a limited turnover during a normal working weekday. Long term parking would usually be employee type parking or residential type parking. The number of trips from a stall would generally be no more than two or three during the course of the day." Since these 9 stalls are adjacent to a potential 5,200 square foot pad, it seems likely that there would be frequent turnover for customers. As a result, these spaces should not be compact in size but rather standard size. Since there is landscaped overhang, the spaces could be 9' x 17'. 8. Add the same note as #16 on SP-1 regarding a raised identification sign for the long term parking stalls. The note should be in the vicinity of the long term stalls. 0 • Sheet L-1: 1. The frontage along J.F.K. Parkway, north of the curb cut, is 200 feet in length. This should be treated with 5 deciduous street trees, not 3, in order to achieve street trees planted on 40 foot centers. 2. Add one more deciduous street tree along Troutman, between the two curb cuts, 40 feet west of the Honeylocust, behind Retail D. 3. There are two Radiant Crabs (RC) that are not labeled located on Troutman, between the two curb cuts, just south and east of Retail D. 4. Between the sidewalk and the curb, in front of Pad B, along College Ave- nue, there is approximately 120 feet from the intersection without the benefit of street trees. Please add two deciduous street trees in this area. 5. Between the sidewalk and the curb, in front of Pad A, along College Ave- nue, there should be one additional deciduous street tree planted to close the gap between the two trees shown. 6. Staff recommends against using the L3 detail of large aggregate as the ground cover in the landscaped parking lot islands. This represents too much hard surface and contributes to bleak appearance. The surface treatment should be a combination of sod and shrubs. Also, two 5 gallon potentillas is insuf- ficient in a landscaped island that is 35 feet in length. Please increase the shrub cover to include one 5 gallon shrub per 5 feet of landscaped isl nd. This should be a minimum. 04z �6G /e�G.g � �Q [ i9C� SOD i 7. Again, referring to the landscaped islands, Staff applauds the use of small berms to help break up the large asphalt appearance. There are three existing islands, however, that would benefit from additional tree plantings. These three islands are located on the west end of the parking lot and are at the ends of the three bays that do not include the turf treatment throughout the length of the bay. 9, #C . 4f %Z. "' G R4 //0 8. Referring back to comment number 4 for Sheet SP-2, these additional landscape islands should be treated with two trees each for each side of the bay. 9. Referring back to comment number 5 for Sheet SP-2, the additional landscape island next to the handicap stalls should be treated the three Spring Snow Crab as well as additional shrubs (7 minimum), and turf. 10. The north side of the Phar Mor building should be treated with sod rather than the dryland seed mix. This sod should be irrigated. 11. Paralleling the screen wall along J.F.K. Parkway, there is a double solid line. What does this line indicate? Is this an edging material for the shrubs? It does not appear to represent the berm. Please clarify. Vn E'1Yr L g O G 4 N G 12. The screen wall along J.F.K. would benefit from additional shrub plant- ings. Adding both horizontal and vertical elements would greatly enhance the area. Please intensify this area and adjust the landscape table accordingly. 13. Please adjust the landscape schedule on Sheet L-3 to indicate RC for the radiant crab. Sheet L-2: It is not required to submit an irrigation plan as part of the P.U.D. process. Therefore, please do not include this sheet in the set of prints that are due on June 19, 1989. A PMT of this sheet will not be quired either. YUaM ► T ;t P. M 7' 9. P*Z Sheet A-1: Please indicate the color of the metal screen walls for the HVAC equipment. Signage Program: 1. Textured sheet metal base for the three free-standing monument signs will not be allowed. Bases must be brick or identical ribbed block to match the buildings. 2. There is a discrepancy between the Sign Program (p.2) and Sheet A-1 regarding the height of the Phar Mor building sign. The Program indicates these letters will be 7 feet tall and the Sheet indicates a height of 5 feet. Given the architectural elevation and the space allotted for signage, it would be difficult to place 7 foot letters in this area and still have room for the underline band. The Sign Program should be revised to indicate 5 foot letters. 3. The temporary banners referred to in the Sign Program (p.3) are not allowed by the Sign Code unless by special 30 day permit. Please add the sentence: "All temporary banners must comply with the Sign Code of the City of Fort Collins and be approved by a special Sign Permit issued on a temporary basis." 4. Staff has a major problem with the Exterior Elevation Wall Signs for Troutman Parkway as described on page 4 of the Sign Program. At the meeting of May 25, 1989, Staff allowed these signs on the condition that they be uniform in color (red was discussed), and with individual letters about 18 inches in height. In no way was it ever intended by Staff to allow one square foot of signage per one linear foot of frontage. This is far to excessive. Signage along the rear of the buildings should be 18 inches in height, no more than 8 feet in length, for a total square footage of 12 square feet per tenant. Please revise page 4 of the Signage Program. This letter will be sent by facsimile machine on June 9, 1989 so it may be the basis for discussion at the meeting scheduled for Monday, June 12, 1989 to be held at 2:00 at the City of Fort Collins. Sincerely: Ted Shepard, Project Planner