HomeMy WebLinkAboutSILVERBERG PUD PRELIMINARY - 12 92A - CORRESPONDENCE - STAFF'S PROJECT COMMENTSCommun_ Planning and Environmental 5 /ices
Current Planning
City of Fort Collins
January 13, 1998
Robert Silverberg, et al.
c/o Ric Hattman
Hattman and Associates
145 West Swallow Road
Fort Collins, Colorado 80525
Dear Ric:
Staff has reviewed revisions submitted for the Silverberg P.U.D.-Preliminary
and would like to offer the following comments. Please note that I am now the
project planner for the Silverberg P.U.D. (Mike Ludwig had been the previous
project planner.)
1. The Zoning Department offered the following:
a) Bike racks should be placed closed to building entrances.
b) Trees at the entrance may cause some visibility problems for cars
pulling onto Prospect Road.
c) Please show the distance from the building envelope on Lot 4 to the
west property line and from the building envelope for the fast food use
to the north property line.
2. The Transportation Planning Department offered the following:
a) You should provide bicycle parking at all building entrances.
b) Regarding the issue of roadway improvements - how far is the traffic
study completed? We need to see a copy prior to reviewing any pro-
posed improvements.
3. Comments from the Engineering Department are attached.
4. Comments from the Stormwater Utility are attached.
5. Comments from the Poudre Fire Authority are attached.
281 North College Avenue - P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020
REVISION
r - COMMENT SHEET
DATE: December 8, 1997 TO: Traffic Operations
PROJECT: #12-92A Silverberg P.U.D. - (LDGS)
Preliminary
All comments must be received by Leanne Harter no later than the staff
review meeting:
Wednesday, *December 31,1997
FYI: This projects' revision comments are due on New Year's Eve day. Since,
the standing Development Review may be cancelled, it may then be necessary
to discuss this project at the Wednesday, January 7th meeting.
,ram
rr- a
Date: IZ Signature:` --
CHECK HERE T YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS
_ Ply _ Sit _NW Report _ Offer
My _ Reese UWq _Lads*City of Fort Collins
AM REVISION
COMMENT SHEET
aa• ,tea
DATE: December S, 1997 TO: Traffic. Ping
PROJECT: #12-92A Silverberg P.U.D. - (LDGS)
Preliminary
All comments must be received by Leanne Harter no later than the staff
review meeting:
Wednesday, *December 31,1997
FYI: This projects' revision comments are due on New Year's Eve day. Since,
the standing Development Review may be cancelled, it may then be necessary
to discuss this project at the Wednesday, January 7th meeting.
Lkk
Date: Q Signature:
CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS
Ply _ Sid _ _ 00lea
— UWAy _ Rd= Uh* _ I,an&* City of Fort Collins
6. Comments from Colorado Department of Transportation are attached.
7. The Traffic Operations Department stated "As mentioned in the first sub-
mittal, access from Prospect will pose problems in the future. We should re-
quire access off frontage road and not allow access from Prospect."
8. The Current Planning Department offered the following:
a) On the signature page, please label the zoning on the vicinity map and
provide a north arrow.
b) Please update General Note 11 as it refers to construction beginning
in the summer of 1997.
c) Please label the zoning on the site plan.
d) Is there any future access proposed from the frontage road? Please
refer to comments from Traffic Operations, CDOT and the Engineering
Department.
e) On the site and landscape plans, please add "Drive-Thru" to Fast Food
Restaurant.
f) Is Lot 3A, Lot 6? The numbering is confusing and if they are indeed
separate lots, it should be Lot 6.
g) Provide additional pedestrians connections as shown on the redlined
site and landscape plans.
h) ' Additional space should be provided between the sidewalk and trash
enclosures (see site and landscape plans for specific locations) to al-
low for more landscaping/screening and to address safety concerns.
i) The bicycle parking needs to be relocated closer to the main entrances
for all uses.
j) The trash enclosure at the hotel on the west side of the property
should be moved to provide a continuous pedestrian connection/spine
from the east to the west (please see site plan).
k) Please label the fence on the landscape plan.
1) Label the lot numbers on the landscape plan.
m) Provide additional landscaping to the north of the fast food restaurant,
either shrubs or perhaps an ornamental tree (in a tree well) to break up
the concrete space next to the building.
n) Please more clearly define the trash enclosures on the landscape
plan.
o) The roofing materials should be labeled as "high -profile, heavy dimen-
sional". Please provide roofing samples.
p) Fort he south motel, please carry through features from the canopy
and/or introduce other architectural features to help define the two
different motels.
q) Specify the building materials and colors.
r) Please label what elevations are which (for example, the sit down res-
taurant - Lot 1).
s) Is it possible to increase the size of the canopy for the hotel on the
west edge of the property? It appears disproportional to the mass of
the hotel, as well as not providing much coverage in case of inclement
weather.
t) Show all rooftop mechanical equipment.
u) Please provide a detail of the car wash.
v) Is any lighting proposed on the canopy for the fuel sales? Any lighting
on the other buildings in the project?
w) On sheet 7, please increase the height of the parapet on the site
down restaurant to provide additional screening. Please provide de-
tails on the proposed screening materials.
x) Label the fence on sheet 7.
y) You are required to demonstrate how you comply with Method 1 and
the Model Energy Code. This must be addressed with the resubmittal
of revisions.
z) Staff has determined that Point Chart D - Auto -Related and Roadside
Commercial is applicable. Attached is staff's interpretation of the Point
Chart, and, based on the numbers assigned for the various criterion,
the project does not achieve the required 50% of the maximum points
available.
aa) Criteria #4b of Point Chart D and Criteria #2c of Point Chart E refers
to the location of the project to an existing neighborhood or commu-
nity/regional shopping center, office or industrial park. As there are no
existing neighborhood or community/regional shopping centers, office
or industrial parks contiguous to of functionally a part of the Silverberg
PUD, no points may be awarded for this criteria.
bb) Criteria #4f of Point Chart D and Criteria #2f of Point Chart E address
vehicular and pedestrian access between on -site parking areas and
adjacent existing or future off -site parking areas which contain more
than ten (10 ) spaces. Please document where the future off -site
parking is located. Without further information demonstrating the di-
rect pedestrian access, agreements for shared vehicular and pedes-
trian access, and direct access to existing or future off -site parking ar-
eas with more than ten (10) spaces, no points may be awarded for this
criteria.
cc) Based upon staff's interpretation of Point Chart E, this project receives
27% (14 out of 52). A minimum of 50% is required on the point chart,
and failure to achieve 50% of the maximum applicable points is.
grounds for denial. Please either resubmit adequate information to
justify additional points (for both Point Chart E as well as Point Chart
D) or submit a variance request to the requirements based upon the
Variance Procedures outlined in Section K (p. 108) of the LDGS.
This completes the review comments at this time. Additional comments may be
forthcoming as the various departments and reviewing agencies continue to re-
view this request.
Please contact me at 221-6750 if you have questions or concerns related to
these comments. If you would like to schedule a meeting to discuss these com-
ments, please contact me as soon as possible.
Best regards,
&VZ40404A-6ZV
Leanne A. Harter, AICP
Project Planner
xc: Sheri Wamhoff
Stormwater Utility
File/Project Planner
REVISION
m. COMMENT SHEET
DATE: December 8, 1997 TO: Engineering
PROJECT: #12-92A Silverberg P.U.D. - (LDGS)
Preliminary
All comments must be received by Leanne Harter no later than the staff
review meeting:
Wednesday, *December 31,1997
FYI: This projects' revision comments are due on New Year's Eve day. Since,
the standing Development Review may be cancelled, it may then be necessary
to discuss this project at the Wednesday, January 7th meeting.
Silverburg PUD January 9, 1998
• As was indicated in a letter to Ayres and Assoc. dated January 27, 1997 an updated traffic
study is needed for this site. As has been indicated by CDOT access to Prospect Road
has not been agreed to and if allowed will be limited to right -in right -out. The traffic
study needs to look at these two alternatives and the site designed in that manner also.
• The traffic study should also address when the frontage road connection would need to be
made if it is not being proposed to be built with the first building.
• Until a traffic study is received the proposed improvements can not be evaluated to
determine if they are adequate.
• Additional improvements to the frontage road intersection will be needed. The additional
pavement needed may not fit within the existing row. If it doesn't additional row will
need to be acquired. Will need letters of intent for this prior to being scheduled for a
preliminary hearing.
• Need letters of intent for off site easements needed for services and for access prior to
being scheduled for preliminary hearing.
(Continued on next page)
Dater sigaataae - <
r
CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS
X Plat N� Sk _ Drainage Report _ Odff
xUWAy Redline UWAy Iands* City of Fort Collins
PROJECT
COMMENT SHEET
Qty of Fort Collins
Current Planning
DATE: L12 (Pr,-) he,- 3 i 9 9 7 DEPT: Stormwater
PROJECT: 5: ef5 ID u 1) ��� I i kn
PLANNER: LPc-, n y)e Noll f,0/
1. More information is needed regarding the downstream outfall swale for this site. The
flow path of the swale needs to be defined from the site to a major dramageway. Please
show supporting topography for the flow path. The outfall swale must be within a
drainage easement for the entire flow path. All letters of intent to grant the necessary off -
site drainage easements are needed before the project can be considered for a Preliminary
Planning and Zoning Hearing. This comments was made with the previous review. Please
address this issue before resubmitting.
RESPONSE:
2. The proposed development must be detained at the 2-year historic rate. The 100-year
developed condition model should be shown to release no greater than'the 2-year historic
rate from the detention pond.
RESPONSE:
Date: 1 ,
CHECK BE T YOU Wo M RECFIVB COPIES Of RMSIONS
� x l
Leaf n* OCIz
of Fort Collins
3. The report discusses an existing 24" CNIP culvert under Prospect Road. Please show
this pipe on the drainage plan. It appears the pipe might be located where regrading of the
road embankment is proposed. The off -site runoff should not be blocked. Provide
measures to pass the off -site flow through the site.
RESPONSE:
4. The analysis of the off -site flow north of Prospect Road assumed the irrigation ditches
to intercept all upstream flow. Please provide documentation that supports this
assumption.
RESPONSE:
5. There appears to be grading proposed outside the property lines. Off -site grading
easement will be needed for the off -site grading. Agreement from the State DOT will also
be needed to grade within the I-25 right-of-way.
RESPONSE:
Please refer to the redline plans and report for additional review comments.
r'� yam.," .s aaC yVm?t
�s REVISION
- COMMENT SHEET
DATE: December 8, 1997 TO: PFA
PROJECT: #12-92A Silverberg P.U.D. - (LDGS)
Preliminary
All comments must be received by Leanne Harter no later than the staff
review meeting:
Wednesday, *December 31,1997
FYI: This projects' revision comments are due on New Year's Eve day. Since,
the standing Development Review may be cancelled, it may then be necessary
to discuss this project at the Wednesday, January 7th meeting.
1. Water supply appears OK per site plan.
2. Fire Department Access appears OK per site plan.
3. Hotels shall have fire alarm systems and fire sprinkler system. Separate permits required for
installation of each system.
4. Fuel tanks require separate permit for installatiion.
5. Chlorine system(s), and any other hazardous materials require separate permit for installation.
6, Moot) 4 01ACT Are PMcd#1e-% SyS+`w. IS MIUSOtA %1" fV& t4.4 a 00-1-15 SW46CAJ
1.1 lut+ds . Scrtws{t Parr..+ rcywrct.
Date: 17 - 30 —11
Signature: '"
CM HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS
pld _ Site — — Oda
_Utility _ Redline Uo _ Iands*
REVISION
COMMENT SHEET
DATE: December 8, 1997 TO: CDOT
PROJECT: #12-92A Silverberg P.U.D. - (LDGS)
Preliminary
All comments must be received by Leanne Harter no later than the staff
review meeting:
Wednesday, *December 31,1997
FYI: This projects' revision comments are due on New Year's Eve day. Since,
the standing Development Review may be cancelled, it may then be necessary
to discuss this project at the Wednesday, January 7th meeting.
Lca nhq, ,
�kl(' 'Pv (o�- . f`n�v�eY��S a`ool�� 0.cceS5 r�tv�� r-- �al �� . W� �a✓�
nn
C.40
I-,
DEC 1997
i'• t(;*D
C.r).07-
P��--, L.oJ�,Q � N�a;,�tww-r.�t.••�r. ten, `��� tC'
Date: 12r� Signature: 0 c
CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS
_Plat _ Sk _ Drib* Refit _ Oiff ��
Rmkc Ufik _ City of Fort Conine
Xc-