HomeMy WebLinkAboutHEWLETT-PACKARD C.I.C.D. RECEIVING AREA EXPANSION - I-L SITE PLAN REVIEW - 54-88A - CORRESPONDENCE - PROJECT SUBMITTAL AND RESUBMITTALA-E DESIGPOSOCIATES, P.C. •
- 323 SOUTH COLLEGE AVE., SUITE #7
- FORT COLLINS, CO 80524
Q�S 303/493-8883
August 5, 1988
Mr. Ted Shepard
City of Fort Collins
Planning Department
P. 0. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
RE: HP CICD Receiving Area Expansion
3404 E. Harmony Road
IL Site Plan Review
Dear Ted:
Attached are 20 copies of the partial site plan for this facility, 20 plan cover
sheets with vicinity plans, 5 existing partial storm sewer system drawings,
Application Form, and a check for $110.00 covering the Application Fee.
Storm D ra inag e
For this project, we are utilizing the existing on -site underground storm water
system to collect the additional runoff and direct it to the existing outfall and
detention location. Essentially the existing system is being used "as is"
including leaving the grading around the proposed addition essentially intact.
As you can tell from the attached drawings, the existing system consists of catch
basins, curb inlets, and UG piping with no "planned" ponding areas. We are also
informed by Hewlett-Packard that RBD will be doing a comprehensive storm drainage
evaluation for other major projects currently being reviewed by your department.
As a result, we are proposing no revisions to the existing system related to the
minor impact of this project. This minor impact of developed runoff between a 2
year and 100 year storm is in the order of 2.2 cfs as essentially created by the
conversion of 1200 sf of paved area to roof area plus approximately 14,860 sf of
additional asphaltic concrete paving. Compared to the total existing "developed"
site area this increase is not critical to the total system and can be easily
managed on site. RBD's report will further confirm this and address in more
detail the amount of surplus storage currently available due to the facility and
development "master planning" that has not been fully realized.
Mr. Ted Shepard
August 5, 1988
Page Two
Landscaping
Due to the location of this project (as you may review on the attached drawings)
and in comparison to the scale and massing of the existing adjacent buildings and
with additional consideration that the truck traffic and loading zone is an
existing condition, no additional landscaping is proposed.
Exterior Architecture
The proposed project is currently designed to match the existing brickmasonry and
precast concrete exterior materials. The attached drawings will also reveal that
the addition is essentially a one bay, one-story extension of the existing
structure.
Performance Standards/Hazardous Materials
The proposed project will essentially provide improved performance regarding
ventilation, containment, fire safety, gas monitoring, and material handling
standards as mandated by proposed Article 80 of the UFC. Plus, as stated during
the review, Mr. Bob Poncelow has been heavily involved in this project and has
finished his review of the construction documents for this project. Therefore,
Item #3 of the Conceptual Review comments is completed.
APO List
Per our discussions, an APO list is not included since it appears that it
probably is not required.
Ted, I hope this letter of report is sufficient to fulfill the submittal require-
ments when combined with the attached drawings. Since this is an existing site
currently developed with major structures as compared to a new site or "under-
developed" property, I trust this somewhat abbreviated submittal is acceptable in
light of the minor impact represented by this code compliance project.
Thank you for your assistance and continued cooperation. Please call if you have
any questions or need additional explanation or documentation.
Cordially,
Richard S. Beardmore
President/Owner
RSB:jds
Enclosures