Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTESTA BEAUTY SALON, 1635 S. LEMAY AVE. - PDP - 12-07 - CORRESPONDENCE - (3)5' area can be landscaped in compliance with the code. If adverse possession can't be accomplished, then perhaps a letter from the neighbor stating that they agree to allow their 2.5' to be considered as part of the required 5' landscape setback. Of course if the setback area is 4' instead of 5', then a modification will be needed even if the property is obtained by adverse possession. RESPONSE: Modifications have been made on the plans to corrected the dimensions. There is a 5' setback of which 2.5' belongs to the neighbor. We have written permission from them to include their property as part of this landscaped setback. Be sure and return all of your redlined plans when you re -submit. If you have any questions regarding these issues or any other issues related to this project, please feel free to call me at (970) 221-6750. Yours Truly, Steve Olt City Planner cc: Randy Maizland Dana Leavitt Planning & Zoning file # 12-07 Page 12 of the buffer as possible. Additional trees will be added to the perimeter of the parking lot to provide shade. Number: 5 Created: 5/23/2007 [5/23/071 Section 3.2.l(E)(4) requires 1 tree every 40' along the north side lot line parking setback area. None are show. RESPONSE: Done. Number: 6 Created: 5/23/2007 [5/23/071 The one handicap parking space shown must be van accessible, meaning 8' wide with an abutting 8' wide access aisle. It looks like part of the access aisle is in an area labeled on the site plan as "flagstone walk". That surface isn't acceptable. The surface of the access aisle has to all be the same material, and it needs to be smooth, i.e. asphalt or concrete. RESPONSE: Parking has been shifted west and the flagstone walk is being removed. Number: 7 Created: 5/23/2007 15/23/071 There needs to be a note on the site plan stating what the proposed use is. RESPONSE: Done. Number: 8 Created: 5/23/2007 [5/23/07] The driveway modification request is not clear to me. 1) Rather than titling the request as "driveway", it should be titled "parking lot setback" or something similar. 2) The request apparently is in regards to the "hardship" standard. But I don't believe the letter elaborates clearly as to what it is about the property that creates the hardship. 3) The modification letter states that there's 2.5' between the edge of the driveway to the lot line, and then an additional 2.5' between the lot line and the neighbors fence. This would equal 5' from the edge of the driveway to the fence. However, the site plan shows 2' from the driveway to the lot line and then another 2' from the lot line to the fence - for a total of 4' from the driveway to the fence, not 5' as stated in the letter. Which dimensions are correct? 4) If the dimensions in the letter are accurate and there actually is 5' between the driveway and the fence, then perhaps the applicant should also use the "equal to or better than" standard for modification. Since the neighbor evidently constructed the fence, it should be determined if they've basically given up claim to the 2.5' of their lot that is on the south side of the fence. If they have, then it may be possible that the 2.5' can become part of the applicant's lot through "adverse possession". In such event, the Page 11 Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Roger Buffington Topic: Water/Wastewater Number: 31 Created: 6 / 8 / 2007 [6/8/07] Please add a note to the utility plans to contact the Water Utility (416-2165) when the drive approach is being replaced so that the City can check the curb stop and install a valve box. RESPONSE: Done. Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Peter Barnes Topic: Zoning Number: 1 Created: 5/23/2007 [5/23/071 The bike rack location could conflict with the sidewalk (i.e. bikes blocking the walk). It should be relocated. RESPONSE: The bike rack has been relocated. Number: 2 Created: 5/23/2007 [5/23/071 Is there going to be a trash enclosure? If so, then show location and material of enclosure. If there isn't going to be one, then need a statement explaining trash collection. The note on the plan states that existing trash receptacles will be used. Does this mean that the trash receptacles are in the building and then placed outside on trash pick-up day? Or does this mean there are existing outside receptacles. If they are outside, then they need to be in an enclosure. RESPONSE: The existing shed will be used for garbage collection after the open face of the shed is enclosed. Garbage will be placed outside on pick-up day. Number: 3 Created: 5/23/2007 [5/23/071 Need to show dimensions of parking stalls and driveway widths. RESPONSE: Done. Number: 4 Created: 5/23/2007 [5/23/071 Sections 3.2.2(M)(1) and 3.2.1(E)(5) require 6% interior parking lot landscaping. I don't see any. RESPONSE: The proposed Landscape Plan is an Alternate Compliance Plan to the 6% interior landscape which is required. If we comply with the 6% interior landscaping code the parking area would have to be moved south into the Spring Creek Suffer Zone. Please see attached. The proposed Landscaping Plan will be designed to better accomplish a desired overall design by keeping the project as far off Page 10 Department: PFA Issue Contact: Carie Dana Topic: Fire Number: 23 Created: 6/6/2007 [6/6/07] Please add another NO PARKING FIRE LANE sign on the north side of the driveway. Contact me for an illustration showing the approved template for NO PARKING FIRE LANE signs. RESPONSE: Sign added as well as sign details. Department: Stormwater-Water-Wastewater Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Topic: Floodplain Number: 39 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] 1. Plat - Please include a note that the entire site is in the Spring Creek 100-year floodplain. RESPONSE. Done. 2. A floodplain use permit will be required for the remodel work to the structure. Please submit detailed cost estimates and value of the structure with the permit to document that it is not a substantial improvement. The permit fee is $25. RESPONSE. Acknowledged. 3. A floodplain use permit is required for each site element being done on the property (detention pond, parking lot, etc.). The permit fee is $25. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Topic: Stormwater Number: 47 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] Please provide a note on the grading plan stating an outfall system will need to be installed in the future if and when the pond does not infiltrate as initially designed. RESPONSE. Done. Number: 48 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] Stormwater is ready for a hearing. Please see other minor comments on the redlined plans. RESPONSE. Acknowledged. Page 9 Number: 15 Created: 6/5/2007 [6/5/07] If the existing drive approach (access) is to be reconstructed, please indicate this on the plans and call out with the standard LCUASS driveway detail. If not, please label to protect existing driveway in place. RESPONSE: The drive is now labeled to be reconstructed using the standard LUCASS detail. Number: 16 Created: 6/5/2007 [6/5/07] The Grading Plan is showing the parking lot on the east side draining over the pedestrian walk through a curb opening. This condition is not recommended and may lead to maintenance problems and liability risks with icing in the winter months. It is recommended that a drainage pipe or culvert be provided to drain the water under the walk at this location. RESPONSE: The plan has been revised to include a drainage pipe. Number: 17 Created: 6/5/2007 [6/5/07] Please refer to the Plat. Show and label the total ROW dedication from the centerline of Lemay Avenue on the Plat. A one -line street Vicinity Map should be provided on the Plat. Number: 20. Created: 6/5/2007 [6/5/07] Please see red -lines for any other minor comments related to drafting and labeling. Return all red -line copies with your next submittal. am OK with scheduling a hearing at this point but will need a revised plan showing the sidewalk corrections to take to the hearing. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Topic: Technical Services Number: 24 Created: 6/7/2007 [6/7/07] Boundary closes but the legal does NOT. Number: 25 Created: 6/7/2007 [6/7/07] No vicinity map provided ? Number: 26 Created: 6/7/2007 [6/7/07] The lines on the emergency access easement are not parallel. Need to revise to maintain 20 feet wide throughout easement. Number: 27 Created: 6/7/2007 [6/7/07] Please indicate how Lemay was originally dedicated. Number: 28 Created: 6/7/2007 [6/7/07] Please list the area of the ROW dedication. Page 8 M Number: 10 Created: 6/5/2007 [6/5/07] Please list all of the owners, developers and consultants on the Utility Plan cover sheet (name, address and phone numbers). RESPONSE: Done. Number: 11 Created: 6/5/2007 [6/5/07] Please provide a secondary City of Fort Collins bench mark on the Utility Plan cover sheet per LCUASS Appendix E requirements. RESPONSE: Done. Number: 12 Created: 6/5/2007 [6/5/07] The Plat sheet shall be added to the Utility Plan set for reference as indicated on the Sheet Index. RESPONSE: The Plat was not ready in time for printing the last submittaL Hopefully it will be for the next one. Number: 13 Created: 6/5/2007 [6/5/07] The title on the Utility Plan set, Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Plat should all match to ensure that they are all filed together in the same location under the same name. The recommended tile is Testa Subdivision. Addresses may not be used in the title. RESPONSE. The revised title for all plans is "Testa Subdivision. A subtitle of "1625 South Lemay Avenue" is being used to help identify the property. Number: 14 Created: 6/5/2007 [6/5/07] It is not clear on all of the plan sheets that there is 4 feet of additional new sidewalk being added to the existing walk. Please clearly show, dimension and label the existing sidewalk along the frontage and show how the new sidewalk ties into the existing walk to the north and south. Please disregard all red -line comments requesting a standard detached walk in the Ultimate location. Please keep in mind that some day, an ultimate detached walk will be constructed by the City. This may impact your grading or landscape in the new ROW dedication. RESPONSE: The existing sidewalk and the proposed widening is now more clearly depicted on the plans. Space for the future sidewalk is now provided for and labeled on the plans. Page 7 RESPONSE. Done. Number: 55 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] Accessible parking aisle cannot contain flagstone material. If flagstone is to stay, then accessible parking and aisle have to shift to the west to have separate functions. RESPONSE. Parking has been shifted west and the flagstone walk is being removed. Number: 56 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] Bike parking cannot be within the buffer. A paved surface is required at the bike rack location. RESPONSE. Bike parking has been moved. Number: 57 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] Will lathe existing 3' pole fence remain? If so, label accordingly on the plan. RESPONSE: The fence is now labeled to remain. Number: 58 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] Label the buffer as "Natural Area Buffer", not 100' Spring Creek buffer. RESPONSE: Done. Number: 59 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] Building elevations with the ramp and deck are not consistent with each other or the Grading Plan. City of Fort Collins accessibility standards are to be complied with. RESPONSE. The plans and elevations have been revised and should now match. Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Randy Maizland Topic: Engineering Number: 9 Created: 6/5/2007 [6/5/07] The Transportation Development Review Fee was not calculated correctly and the fee was underpaid by $522.25. This underpaid amount will be added to the Final Compliance submittal fee of $1000. Total due at final plan submittal will be $1,522.25. RESPONSE: Acknowledged Page 6 Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Steve Olt Topic: Site Plan Number: 40 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] The distances between the north edge of the driveway along the north side of the building, connecting the 2 parking areas, must be verified. If there is 5' between the edge of driveway and the existing fence and this applicant receives permission from the property owner to place landscaping in there then there should not be a problem. RESPONSE. Dimensions have been revised. A written letter of permission has been procured from the neighbor to allow their property, which is included in the setback, to be included as part of the 5' landscaped setback. Number: 41 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] Where is the "ultimate" location for a sidewalk? Neither the Site Plan or Landscape Plan show it. RESPONSE: Space for the future sidewalk is now provided for and labeled on the plan along the Right of Way. Number: 42 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] The existing sidewalk that the proposed new 3.5' - 4.0' wide walk will attach to should be shown. RESPONSE. The existing sidewalk is now more clearly shown on the plans. Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Dana Leavitt Topic: Site Plan Number: 52 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] label the driveway and parking area materials. As it stands, it is labeled "gravel drive" RESPONSE. Done. Number: 53 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] Show a new location for mailbox if it going to be reused. RESPONSE. Done. Number: 54 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] Dimension parking stalls and aisles, width of walkways, ramp and deck. Page 5 Number: 36 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] Show outline of landscape berm on plan and label; berm may interfere with ultimate location of sidewalk with regards to plantings and grading. RESPONSE. The berm has been eliminated from the design. Number: 37 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] Mugo Pines shown will outgrow the space planned for, and present problems to remove if/when the sidewalk is built in its ultimate location. Mugos will also grow to obscure proposed sign as shown on the Site Plan. If sign will be used, show on Landscape Plan also. Consider changing location of sign. Is the front area to be a plant bed or turf? RESPONSE: The landscape plan has been revised to account for size of plantings. The sign is now shown on the landscape plan. The front area is now labeled as a plant bed with organic mulch. Number: 38 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] Additional native plants are needed within the buffer. Proposed planting scheme does not meet the intent of Section 3.4.l(E)(1). Deciduous shrubs that provide habitat value are encouraged. Please refer to the City of Dort Collins Native Plant list for appropriate plant material. RESPONSE. The landscape plan has been revised. Number: 49 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07[ Change the proposed lilac shrubs along the western property line within the buffer zone to native species in informal plantings. Rock mulch west of parking lot will be required to stop at the edge of the buffer zone. Define edge between rock mulch and grasses. RESPONSE: The landscape plan has been revised. Number: 50 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07) Proposed shrub located under existing apple tree should be moved from under tree, eliminating potential for damage to the root system of the tree. RESPONSE: The landscape plan has been revised. Topic: Plat Number: 60 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] Label the buffer area as "Natural Area Buffer". RESPONSE: The landscape plan has been revised. Page 4 Number: 44 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] If there is to be a berm on the front of the property, between the back of sidewalk and parking area, it should be shown on the Landscape Plan. RESPONSE. The berm has been eliminated from the design. Number: 45 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] At least 6% interior landscaping for the parking areas (see attachment) is required unless a request for Alternative Compliance is submitted and approved (see attachment). RESPONSE: The proposed Landscape Plan is an Alternate Compliance Plan to the 6% interior landscape which is required. If we comply with the 6% interior landscaping code the parking area would have to be moved south into the Spring Creek Suffer Zone. Please see attached. The proposed Landscaping Plan will be designed to better accomplish a desired overall design by keeping the project as far off of the buffer as possible. Additional trees will be added to the perimeter of the parking lot to provide shade. Number: 46 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] Please see the red -lined Landscape Plan for a minor addition to Plant Note #4. RESPONSE: Done Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Dana Leavitt Topic: Landscape Plan Number: 32 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] The landscape plan can be cleaned up by removing the following information: existing contours, trees that will be removed and materials that are to be removed. RESPONSE: Done. Number: 35 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] Revise Plant Notes per redline comments. Revise Plant List with correct name/spelling; specify dryland seed species, mixtures and application requirements. Provide typical planting details for trees and shrubs. Show plant symbols at mature size - a Patmore Green ash may grow to 25. RESPONSE: Done. Page 3 RESPONSE. Done Number: 51 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] On the Site and Landscape Plans: 1. Make proposed ROW/property line a heavier line, so that the public and private parts of the property can be differentiated. 2. Label existing electric meter and gas meter on the plans. 3. Will the proposed deck be built over the existing gas meter? 4. Use a heavier line type to depict the buffer zone line. 5. Extend the buffer zone line to Lemay Avenue (existing property line). RESPONSE. Drafting changes have been made. Gas meter will be relocated as now indicated on plans Number: 61 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] On the Utility Plan set, add Environmental Planner to the approval block on all sheets. RESPONSE: Done. Topic: Grading Plan Number: 64 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] Accessible parking has a maximum slope of 2%. There is not enough information on the plan to determine if the accessible parking space and aisle meets this standard. RESPONSE. Additional spot elevations are provided to demonstrate slopes do not exceed 2%. Topic: Horizontal Control Plan Number: 63 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] Add buffer line to plan with appropriate label. RESPONSE. Done. Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Steve Olt Topic: landscape Plan Number: 43 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] Trees must be installed at 40' on -center along the north property line (see red -lined Landscape Plan). RESPONSE. Done. Page 2 RE-S T 6a STAFF PROJECT REVIEW 212 Fort Collins JOHN TESTA Date: 06/ 11/2007 4221 COBB LAKE DR. FORT COLLINS, CO 80524 Staff has reviewed your submittal for TESTA BEAUTY SALON, 1635 S. LEMAY AVE. PDP - TYPE I, and we offer the following comments: ISSUES: Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Dana Leavitt Topic: Existing Conditions Plan Number: 62 Created: 6/8/2007 [6/8/07] Label all parts of the property that will be removed as part of the project on this plan. Add buffer zone line and label same as other plans. RESPONSE: Done. Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Steve Olt Topic: General Number: 21 Created: 6 / 5 / 2007 [6/5/07] Rick Lee of the Building Department indicated that the City's Codes & Standards to be enforced (accessible ramp per Section 1003.3.4 & ANSI 117.1) are attached to this comment letter. Number: 22 Created: 6 / 5 / 2007 [6/5/07] Bonnie Ham of the U.S. Post Office indicated that mail delivery for the new use on the property will continue in the established manner. RESPONSE: Acknowledged Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Dana Leavitt Topic: General Number: 30 Created: 6 / 7 / 2007 [6/7/07] A Limit of Development (LOD) line shall be defined and shown on the Site, Landscape, Horizontal Control and Grading Plans. RESPONSE: LOD is now on plans. Number: 33 Created: 6 / 8 / 2007 [6/8/07] The Site Plan and Landscape Plan have to be prepared in a professional, workman like manner so that it can be easily read and understood. The drawing has to be prepared to meet the City's scanning standards, found in Appendix E-6. Please see JR in Technical Services with any questions. Page 1