Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutGATEWAY AT HARMONY ROAD PUD 3RD FILING - AMENDED PRELIMINARY - 1-88E - CORRESPONDENCE - STAFF'S PROJECT COMMENTS Developt Services Planning Department • City of Fort Collins October 19, 1989 Steve Smith 1740 Nedrah Drive Fort Collins, CO 80524 Dear Steve: Staff has reviewed the Gateway at Harmony Road PUD Final plan and has the following comments to make: 1. Water and sewer mains are existing in the access easement west of the proposed building. Services should be tapped to these mains. If a meter pit is used (rather than an interior meter setter) the pit must be in a landscaped area. 2. Natural gas service for this building will have to come from the existing gas main in College Avenue (west side), requiring a 3' x 5' cut in College Avenue. 3. Fire flows are inadequate to support the size of the proposed building with the high fire hazard tire store. (This comment may not be applicable if the tire store is deleted from the plan). 4. A revised drainage report was not submitted; therefore, a thorough drainage review can not be done until a report is received. The following comments apply to utility plans: - The plat does not appear to have the entire detention areas within dedicated drainage easements. This must be done. - Inlet types and sizes and pipe materials and sizes must be called out. - The proposed contours and existing contours need to be shown. - Sub-basin delineations must be shown, to determine what area flows to each pond. - Flow arrows must be added. - A benchmark must be referenced and a legend must be added. - Utility plans must reflect only the 3rd filing area. - The site plan and utility plans are not consistent. For example, the location of the walk along College Avenue is not shown consistently on both sets of plans. All inconsistencies must be corrected between the different plans. 300 LaPorte Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (303) 221-6750 - The grading plan shows the limits of the detention pond, while the site plan indicates berming within the detention pond. Clarification of the impacts of these berms on the volume of the pond must be provided. 5. The west end of the sidewalk going into the property from College Avenue should be ramped. 6. The 30 degree parking stalls along the south side of the building require a 15' wide driveway, rather than 11.5' shown. The driveway width for parking along both sides can be reduced to 24', rather than 30' as shown. The 19' parking stalls on either side of this driveway- may be 17' in length, with a 2' overhang. 7. A loading zone must be provided. 8. Parking spaces inside buildings do not count as off-street parking. 9. The location of the proposed drive-up window must be identified on the site plan. 10. The location of the menu board for the drive-up window must be identi- fied on the site plan. If the board is not mounted on the building, a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals will be required to allow this second free-standing sign. 11. Curbing should be used to separate the drive-up lane from the adjacent parking. 12. A ramp must be shown on the site plan for the handicapped parking. 13. Directional signs can be no larger than four square feet. 14. Street trees should be provided along the site's College Avenue frontage (between walk and curb) on 40' centers. 15. The City Forester (Tim Buchanan) should be contacted to evaluate the condition of the three cottonwoods on-site to determine whether they should be retained. If these trees are worth retaining, they should be incorporated into the site design. 16. All landscaping will be maintained by the developer. 17. The three parking lot islands on the south side should have at least one shade tree per island. 18. Standard landscape notes are needed on the site plan, with respect to detailing the type of irrigation system, requirement for permits prior to tree pruning, etc. The landscape key must also indicate all minimum plant material sizes, as per City requirements. 19. Areas to be sodded and/or mulched need to be identified on the site/landscape plan. a 20. The three landscape islands at either end of the parking area along the south property line should be enlarged to better channelize traffic flow. Additional landscaping should also be added to these islands, as well as along these parking spaces (between spaces and drive-through aisle). 21. Foundation plantings should be provided around the building foundation. 22. A landscaped island needs to be added in lieu of the northwestern-most parking space on the site to define traffic flow to and from this site and the Amoco site to the north. 23. Building materials and colors for all proposed structures must be consistent with those established in previous phases of this development (ie. McDo- nald's and Amoco site plans). 24. There are a number of items that are not consistent with the previously- approved preliminary plan and as a result of proposed changes on this site, impact the adjacent McDonald's and Amoco sites. The majority of these changes impact access and circulation for the adjacent sites. Therefore, the original preliminary plan must be revised for this preliminary proposal, so that any proposed changes that may affect these adjacent sites can be evaluated by City staff. This would necessitate a revised preliminary plan for the entire Gateway site, as well as a final site plan for this particular area. 25. Staff has concerns that parking for the proposed uses may be inadequate. The adequacy of parking must be substantiated by the applicant. 26. Additional land use data is required on the site plan (ie. number of parking spaces, etc.) as listed in the attached pages. 27. The proposed landscaping along College Avenue is an improvement over that proposed on the previous preliminary plan. Staff would like to commend the applicant for this area and would like to work with the applicant for a design concept for this area that is consistent with the newly-designed McDonald's College landscaping. Due to the nature of changes that may occur on this project as a result of the above comments and the change in tenants, the project's Planning and Zoning Board hearing date may need to be delayed. Please contact me when you know • the status of the project's design, so that we may further discuss the project's timing. Sin erely, {, _1Jaye_ Sherryertson-Clark, AICP Senior ¶!sty Planner cc Mike Herzig, Development. Coordinator file