HomeMy WebLinkAboutINTERSTATE LAND PUD, 1ST FILING (HARLEY DAVIDSON) - FINAL - 34-88C - CORRESPONDENCE - STAFF'S PROJECT COMMENTSand Environmental,&rvices
Current
City of Fort Collins
November 9, 1995
Mr. Eldon Ward
Cityscape Urban Design, Inc.
3555 Stanford Road, Suite 105
Fort Collins, CO 80525
Dear Eldon,
Staff has reviewed your submittal for the Interstate Land PUD, First Filing (Harley Davidson),
Final and offers the following comments:
L - - - SITE PLAN CONEVIENTS ---
A. Plan Comments:
1. The loading zone for Lot 1 appears problematic. The trash receptacle area protrudes
approximately six (6) feet into the 18' width, leaving about twelve (12) feet between the trash
receptacle and the curb. Is twelve feet a reasonable width to expect large trucks to be able
to back -in through? Is the 140' length a reasonable distance, considering the width, to expect
large trucks to back into or out oV
2. Service, trash, and loading areas must be effectively screened from public view.
3. Sidewalks:
The Prospect Road Streetscape Program states that the buildings should be integrated
into a "campus or park -like setting." As the site plans are right now, there is no real
internal pedestrian -oriented connection between the building on Lot 1 and the building
on Lot 2; a pedestrian would have to either walk across the parking lots or go back
out to the sidewalk along the frontage road to get from Lot 2 to Lot 1 (or vice versa).
This "campus or park -like setting" should be integrated with the design of the
developments on the south side of the frontage road (the rest of the Interstate Land
PUD).
Pedestrian connections between Lots 1 and 2 should be provided internal to the site
as well as connecting to future development to the south. We would suggest
wrapping the sidewalk from the east of the building on Lot 2 around the north side
281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750
FAX (970) 221-6378 • TDD (970) 224-6002
of this building,. and continuing it to the northeast around the parking area (separated
from the parking by a bed of shrubbery) up to the corner. From here, we suggest a
crosswalk over to and through the landscaping island on the corner between the
handicapped parking space and the row of parking spaces perpendicular to there. For
a graphic representation of this recommendation, please see the attached diagram.
The sidewalks along the Frontage Road appear to be only five (5) feet wide, and are
only on one side of the road (the western side). According to page V-7 of the
Prospect Road Streetscape Program "A detached six (6) foot wide concrete sidewalk
is required along both sides of the I-25 frontage roads."
Sidewalks must be extended to the ends of the property lines to the north, southwest,
and west.
As per page V-8 of the Prospect Road Streetscape Program, "Grading adjacent to
sidewalks shall allow for positive drainage away from the sidewalk for a minimum of
1 foot on both sides of the walk." I cannot tell whether or not this has been addressed
on the site plan or the grading plan.
4. The site must be accessible to persons with disabilities in accordance with Uniform Building
Code Section 3103 and UBC Appendix Section 3106. You must provide a designated and
marked "accessible route of travel' between all the buildings on the site, building exits and
entrances, and the public way (public sidewalk). Accessible routes shall comply with ANSI
Al 17.1-1992 with running slopes no greater than 1:20 and cross slopes no steeper than 1:48.
Where routes cross lanes for vehicle traffic, they must be designated and marked as a cross
walk. Parking and signs must be provided as per Appendix Section 3107. Parking and access
aisles must comply with ANSI Al17.1-1992, with slopes no greater than 1:48 in any
direction. One additional handicapped parking space is required; total of four (4).
5. Plan shows two handicapped parking stalls adjacent to the building on Lot 1, but there does
not appear to be enough space for them. Also, once vehicles are parked in these stalls, is the
access ramp in an accessible spot (this question applies to the handicapped stall on Lot 2 as
well)? Please clarify.
6. Need to show building dimensions on the site plan.
7. Need to correct the site plan to show new sight easement lines. (See Plat Comments: IV. M.)
8. The plat needs to indicate the square footage of each lot.
9. Is there going to be an outdoor display area for motorcycles? If so, it should be defined and
labeled on the site plan.
10. Storage or use of hazardous materials must be in compliance with the Fire Code and Chapter
9 of the 1991 Uniform Building Code as adopted by the City of Fort Collins. A list of such
materials with quantities and classifications should be submitted for review at the time of
building permit application.
•
•
IL Where is the loading zone for Lot 2? Where will the trash receptacle for Lot 2 be?
12. Need to show the width of parking stalls (lengths are already shown). Will there be any
motorcycle -sized parking stalls?
13. The site plan should indicate where the transformer will be placed. In addition, transformers
should be screened from view.
14. One of the corners of the structure on Lot 2 appears to extend beyond the building envelope,
and only 28' or so from the edge of the sidewalk (30' is the minimum).
15. The nearest light and power facilities are on the south side of Prospect Road. Thus, the
developer may be required to provide off -site easements to Prospect if the existing Frontage
Road right-of-way is not adequate for installation of the electric system. In a related fashion,
the proposed locations of all streetlights, consistent with page V-10 of the Prospect Road
Streetscape Program, must be shown on the site plan.
B. General Notes Comments:
Note 95: This note needs to be less ambiguous and/or open-ended. The location and number
of building entries greatly affects the layout of the site (i.e., handicapped parking and access,
pedestrian orientation, etc.); please attempt to determine, with reasonable certainty, the
amount and location of entries that are being proposed.
2. Note 96: Should read as follows: "Accent lighting of signage, sculptural and/or landscape
elements is allowed, subject to Uniform Building Code Requirements and the City of Fort
Collins Sign Code. "
3. The following comments, provided by the Poudre Fire Authority, apply to Note 91:
• The building on Lot 1 is out of access and must be fire sprinklered.
• The buildings exceed 5000 square feet and must be fire contained or equipped with
an automatic fire suppression system in accordance with Section 3802, Uniform
Building Code as amended by the City of Fort Collins.
• Fire hydrants must be placed at both parking lot entrances and less than 400' from the
buildings-
C. Signature Block Comments:
You might want to leave the year open-ended to allow for the possibility that approvals
and/or signatures may not occur until 1996. (i.e., 199_) This comment also applies to the
Landscape Plan.
H. - - - LANDSCAPE PLAN COMMENTS ---
A. Plant List Comments:
All plant species within the 30' Setback Zone of the Frontage Road must be consistent with
page V-5 and Appendixes E, F, and G of the Prospect Road Streetscape Program. Several
species shown on the landscape plan are not, including:
• Autumn Joy Sedum
• Snow in Summer
• Basket of Gold
• TURF Bluegrass Blend
2. Please correct inconsistencies between the number of plants shown on the plan and the
number indicated under quantity for the following:
• Dwarf Fragrant Sumac (deciduous shrub) ... listing 3 8 under qty., but showing only
37 on plan.
• Native Pink Rose (deciduous shrub) ... listing 10 under qty., but showing only 8 on
plan.
• Buffalo Juniper (evergreen shrub) ... listing 24 under qty., but showing only 19 on
plan.
• Purple Coneflower (ornamental grasses/perennials) ... listing 18 under qty., but
showing none on plan. There are, however, 18 EUC's shown on plan and none
included on plant list. (EUC -- ECH?)
• Redtwig Dogwood (deciduous shrub) ... listing 13 under qty., showing 13 on plan,
but 16 are labeled.
• Peking Cotoneaster (deciduous shrub) ... listing 8 under qty., but showing 10 on
plan.
• Autumn Joy Sedum (ornamental grasses/perennials) ... listing 13 under qty., but
showing 14 on plan.
• Snow In Summer (ornamental grasses/perennials) ... listing 14 under qty., but
showing only 13 on plan.
NOTE: perhaps labels for SED and CER (8 and 9 above) got crossed on either the
plan or the list.
According to page V-15 of the Prospect Road Streetscape Program, Russian Hawthorne and
Allegheny Serviceberry should be planted in groups of 3 or 5 rather than 2, as indicated.
B. Planting Notes Comments:
1. Note #4: Should read as follows: "All shrub beds to be mulched with wood or rock mulch (3" -
4 " average depth) on Typar filter fabric and maintained on a regular basis."
2. Note #5: Should read as follows: "Edging between grasses and shrub beds shall be 1/a" X 4"
steel set I" above sod grade."
•
0
3. Note 96: Should read as follows: "All irrigated turf areas to be sodded or seeded with a
drought tolerant Bluegrass Blend." However, Bluegrass is not an acceptable species
within the Setback Zone; adjust this note accordingly.
4. Note 99: Should read as follows: "... 125% of the valuation of the materials and installation
prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy."
The following note needs to be added: "Developer shall ensure that the landscape plan is
coordinated with the plans done by other consultants so that the proposed grading, storm
drainage, or other construction does not conflict nor preclude installation and maintenance
of landscape elements on this plan.
6. Other "Notes" needed to address standards of Prospect Road Streetscape Program (p. V-17):
• "Soil preparation shall include the addition of organic matter and/or other substances
to improve the condition of the soil and to conserve water."
• "All shrubs and or accent plants shall be within defined shrub beds."
• "Plant material shall be spaced in a shrub bed to achieve coverage within three years."
• Trees with a maximum height of over 30' shall be spaced at least 40' from a
streetlight. Trees with a maximum height of less than 30' may be planted as close as
15' from a streetlight.
C. Plan Comments:
Screening of buildings and parking areas: Not sure what is being shown on the plan, but it
looks like swales. At any rate, the following standards (from p. V-6) of the Prospect Road
Streetscape Program must be followed:
• "The height of berms along the I-25 Frontage roads may vary from three (3) feet to
six (6) feet above existing grade. Berms intended to screen parking shall be at least
four (4) feet high in order to effectively screen vehicle headlights. Berm heights must
be approved by the city prior to any construction of such berms."
• `Berms, swales and detention areas within the Setback Zone shall be graded in such
a way as to be an integral part of the landscape, designed with smooth transitions
between changes in grade."
• "Slopes shall be 4:1 or less within the public right-of-way and 3:1 throughout the
Setback Zone, with smooth transitions between changes in grade."
• In general, berms or other means to shield parking areas from public streets are
required. Specifically, page V-13 of the Prospect Road Streetscape program states
that "All parking areas shall be screened from public streets by plant material, fencing,
walls, and/or berming."
2. In the footprint of the southern building (Lot 2) there is a label which reads as follows: "3 -
CSC." This label does not point to anything. See also "Plant List Comment" #6 (III.A.6.)
above.
0
3. Screening of the service/repair area of the building on Lot 1 should be provided. This
landscaping should include a mix of some higher elements such as taller evergreen trees and
some lower elements such as shrubs and hedges.
4. The landscape plan shows only three (3) trees along the northern lot line. The Lot 1, north
elevation, however, shows four (4) trees in this area. In other words, the elevation shows one
more tree along the north side of the building on Lot 1 than does the landscape plan. The
four (4) trees, as shown on the north elevation, are the preferred alternative. The fourth tree
is located between the trees labeled as "PA" and "PS" on the landscape plan.
5. See Plat Comments for planting restrictions in the sight distance easement.
M. - - - ELEVATION COMMENTS - - -
A. The metal siding portion of the structure on Lot 1 is not acceptable. Instead, it must include
architectural detail and be similar to the principal structure in design and materials. This
needs to be reflected in the revisions to the elevations. Please reference page V-10 of the
Prospect Road Streetscape Program, as well as All Development Criteria 2.2 and 2.7.
Section A-2.7 specifically states that "All sides of the building should be equally attractive.
Down -grading of materials for side or back sides is generally not acceptable." Furthermore,
as you are to "set a standard of quality for future projects ... in the area," the following
comments will need to be addressed.
The east and south elevations must be given equal architectural detail and attention as is given
to the west and north elevations; after all, these are the two elevations that will be visible from
the Frontage Road, and the LDGS's All Development Criteria A-2.2 states that "If backs or
sides of buildings are oriented toward public streets, provide visual interest along the street
through architectural detail, landscaping, berming, or a combination of the above." We re-
commend that you consider continuing the framed window motif around the corners of these
(east and south) elevations and use a "combination of the above" to address these concerns.
City staff further recommends that both building designs attempt to give some definition and
detail to the portions of the structures that interface with the ground. In addition, roof -top
mechanical equipment, if needed, will have to be screened through the use of parapet walls
or something similar in affect. These concerns should be reflected on the elevations.
B. Lot 1, East elevation: Showing "glass in aluminum frames" with an arrow labeled "bronze"
pointing to these frames. Is this bronze -colored aluminum?
C. What is the material of the primary structure? What does "coated insulation system" mean?
Dryvit? Synthetic stucco? This needs to be clarified.
D. Can we get a sample (i.e., swatch) of all the colors and materials?
TV. - - - PLAT CONMIENTS - - -
A. The Dedication Statement is incomplete.
B. The Curve Table does not match the Legal Description.
C. The plat needs another control monument, west of the SE Corner Section.
D. The SE Corner of Section and NE Corner are labeled R69W; this is incorrect.
E. The Control Monuments and Outer Boundary Monuments are not described.
F. What is the 1807.05' distance along the east line of the Section?
G. What/where is the East '/< Corner of Section 16?
H. Please show how the Frontage Road was dedicated (Reception Number).
I. It is difficult to follow the separation of the lots from the drainage, access, and utility
easements. Could this be clarified (shown more clearly)?
J. The square footage of each lot needs to be indicated.
K. Need to indicate who is to own and maintain Tract A.
L. Is an easement needed for the Lake Canal going through the northern comer of the site?
M. Need to correct the sight distance easements to reflect what is required for both entrances.
The sight distance easement restrictions need to be provided on the plat; these restrictions
include: 1) Fences shall not exceed 42" in height and shall be of open design; if fences exceed
32" in height, they shall be constructed of split rail with a maximum dimension of 12" between
horizontal members; 2) Berms, hedges, shrubs and other objects located within the sight
distance easement shall not exceed 32" in height; and, 3) No trees shall be planted in the sight
distance easement.
V. - - - UTILITY PLANS - - -
A. The street work is not shown the same as it is on the site plan.
B. Drainage and Erosion Control Plan (sheet 3): must provide sidewalk to property lines. Also,
see "Other/General Comments" (VI. D.) below.
0 •
C. Horizontal control and utility plan (sheet 5):
• Site distance easements are needed for both entrances - calculated for 30 mph posted
and design speed in accordance with Section 4.9 of the State Highway Access Code.
Based on calculations done by the City's Engineering Department, the corners of the
building on Lot 2 are in this easement.
• All ADS pipe located in the right-of-way needs to be replaced with RCP pipe.
D. Frontage Road flowline plan and profile and signing and striping plan (sheet 6):
• Must provide a taper/transition from the expanded road cross-section.
• The culvert on the north end of the property needs to be expanded to meet the
AASHTO standards for clear areas adjacent to roadways.
• Entrance drives should each have a forty (40) foot radius.
• Must indicate stationing along the frontage road.
• Need to extend profile lines past the site - - - enough to verify that the slopes work.
• Need to provide profile of other side of street.
• Flowline profile shows a slope of. I% - - - the minimum acceptable slope is .4%.
• Striping plan must show striping like a collector cross-section with a center turn lane.
Additional pavement may be required to accommodate this.
E. Frontage Road cross -sections:
• Curb, gutter, and sidewalk is needed from edge of property line to edge of property
line.
• Guard rail needs to be removed from the street.
VL - - - OTHER/GENERAL CONEMENTS - - -
A. Site Plan will need signed approval of the ditch company.
B. The Natural Resources Department has expressed concerns regarding Boxelder Creek, which
is shown on the Natural Area Maps as a Natural Resource Area/Corridor. The concerns
center around the adequacy of the transitions and landscaping between the development and
the creek Specifically, the Natural Resources Department has requested the answers to the
following questions:
What channel stabilization activities will be precipitated by this development? If any
engineering or channel stabilization actions are needed along Boxelder Creek, these
need to be reviewed by Natural resources staff. If any meetings are arranged to
review such plans, please coordinate with Rob Wilkinson of the Natural Resources
Department.
C. The Water and Waste Water Department needs more information on the impacts to the
irrigation lateral that feeds the Resource Recovery Farm and on the capacity of Boxelder
Creek. Further comments will be forthcoming.
w
D. The following comments and requests have been forwarded by the City's Stormwater Utility
Department:
• Please indicate all easements on the plans.
• Please indicate the floodplain and floodway boundaries and base flood elevations on
both sides of Boxelder Creek.
• Please tie all proposed contours into the existing.
• Please include an inlet filter detail on the Detail Sheet.
• Please do not put trees or bushes in the swales of the water quality pond.
• Please fill out a floodplain use permit, and send it to Mike Grimm of the Stormwater
Utility office. Please provide a copy in the drainage report, too.
• Please include the pipe sizing calculations in the report.
• Please include the water quality pond design in the report.
• Please include the gravel base course schedule in the report's construction sequence.
• Please address all redlined comments in the report and plans.
This concludes Staff comments at this time. Additional comments may be forthcoming as the various
departments and reviewing agencies continue to review this request. In order to stay on schedule for
the December 18, 1995 Planning and Zoning Board hearing, please note the following deadlines:
Plan revisions are due November 29, 1995.
P.M.T.'s, 10 prints, colored renderings are due December 11, 1995.
If you should have any questions regarding these comments or if I could be of further assistance to
you in any way, please do not hesitate to contact me at 221-6641.
Sincerely,
4Mitchell Haas
Project Planner
encl.
LOT 2 ::::
1