HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOTTONWOOD PUD - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2003-07-31DATEZ-
�C� 3-8/C.
COMMENTS
I
CITY OF FORT 00LMNS OCTOBER 12, 1981
ATIN: IMMA HOPKINS PAGE TWO
PLANNING TECHNICIAN
HNICIAN
MIMMOOD FINAL
• ;,o m No. • •
END OF EA04 CAR, AND STILL LEAVE A 4'0" UNOBSTRUCTED WMXvQY.
PARKING AND ASPHALT SIDEWALKS ARE AT THE SAME LEVEL. IN THE
EXPERIENCE OF THE DEVELOPER, THIS ARRANGEt= IS QUITE SATIS-
FACTORY FOR BOTH AESTHETIC AND PRACTICAL REASONS.
6. DETENTION POND DESIGN - RK= TO ENGINEERING DP--W-t-T&7' �INJ-11�
CALCLIATIONS.
7. TRASH - Wf1r,T, BE SET BACK A MINIMUM OF 10' . SEE FILL SITE PLAN
(1 OF 2) .
FIRE
9. 150 FOOT ASS - SEE NOTE 2, FINAL SITE PLAN (1 OF 2). ALL
PARTS OF 29:lE BUILDING FOOTPRINT (SECONDARY ENVELOPE ON PLAN)
MEET THIS CRITERIA.
• 10. FA_EmERrS •- SHOWN ON PLAT (2 OF 6) .
11. EASEMam/'.FREES - REFER To REVISED LANDSCAPE PLAN (2 OF 2) .
C..M : ►It .o Jbr
12. EASEmEN S •- FINAL SITE PLAN (1 OF 2) .
13. UTILITY EA1�-,EmEmu - SEE FINAL SITE PLAN (1 OF 2),
14. IIQ =PE/PROPERTY LINES - SEE FINAL SITE PLAN (1 OF 2) AMID
PLAT (2 OF 6) .
15. SIGNS - NOTE 17, FINAL SITE PLAN.(1 OF 2).
1 16. P 'IONS - CCU NOT rd=VANT TO THIS P.U.D.
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
ATTN: LINDA HOPKINS
PLANNING TECHNICIAN
COTTCNwOOD
• ,v.• ENo. 81-269
U►1 NV
OCTOBER 12, 1981
PAGE THREE
17. SIDEWALKS/CAR STOPS - REFER TO TYPICAL PAVEMENT SECTION (4 OF 6 )
FOR DETAILS OF ASPHALT SIDEWAII{S AND CAR -STOPS. SEE ALSO CON4ENT
5 WITHIN LETTER.
18. LIGHTING - LIGIi'I'ING FI)TURFS FOR PEDESTRIAN PATHS WILL BE 8' - 10'
HIGH METAL POSTS WITH 100 WATT M.V., ILVINARIFS. REFER TO LAND-
SCAPE PLAN (2 OF 2).
19. E. DRAKE LANDSCAPE - THIS HAS BEEN INTENSIFIED WHERE REQUESTED.
SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN (2 OF 2).
20. PARKING ISLANDS - LOW-LYING SHRUBS ADDED TO PARKING ISLANDS.
SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN (2 OF 2) .
21. SCREENING - LANDSCAPE ADDED BETWEEN UNITS AND SINGLE-FAMILY
AREA AS REQUESTED. SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN (2 OF 2).
22. SET BAMS - SEE FINAL SITE PLAN (1 OF 2).
23. DEAD-END PARKING - BACK{ OUT SPACE PROVIDED. SEPARATION DISTANCES
AS DISCUSSED. SEE FINAL SITE PLAN (1 OF 2).
24. SCULPTURE - SEE NOTE 17, FINAL SITE PLAN.
25. PHASING -- SEE NOTE 18, FINAL SITE PLAN.
26. DEFINITION OF PROPOSED CONA4ERCIAL USE:
RETAIL SHOPS
OFFICES
PERSONAL SERVICE SHOPS
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
MEDICAL (7=C
HEALTH CUM
M NMERSH IP CLUB
STANDARD RESTAURANT
RETAIL LAUNDRY
DRY CLEANING OUTLET
FT.ORAL SHOP
SMALLr•L VETEpJjVjff CLINIC
PET SHOP/AQUARIUM.
PRINTING OFFICES
LIMITED INDOOR RECREATION USES
•= USES WHICH
SIMILARCHARACTER
CITY OF FORT ODLLINS OCTOBER 12, 1981
ATIN : LINDA HDPKINS PAGE FOUR
PLANTING TECHNICIAN
RE: CWTONWOOD FINAL P.U.D-
• .• a NO. 81-269
27. N/A
28. PLANT SIZES — THESE HAVE BEEN ALTERED, AS REQUESTED. SEE
LANDSCAPE PLAN (2 OF 2).
WE TRUST THE ABOVE MEETTS WITH YOUR APPROVAL. IF YOU HAVE ANY F IER
QUESTIONS, PLEASE DO NOT HESITATE TO CALL.
SIN« Y,
TONY HUGHES
It
DATE < a -,51 DEPARTMENT
ITEM:
COMMENTS
Ile
End
P.O. BOX 580,FORT COLLINS COLORADO 80522
PH �303 484-4220
d:'W.1K.'?P�K;s.
.�:e='s�:ie.-v',...e.. '.5:.. „a�X .;a,',.3.%1..�,..':�::'e...4�".e.a'^3✓9ILYu.�,Ya ::4�'"...m,_.... __::i-:�.. :§iWFJL2Gf3...
� .-.<.�1E:'L.Pv': .«a... m-. a..ny - 'fF^.Se�'�:.=
EXT. 655
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
PLANNING DIVISION
June 23, 1981
Mr. John Dengller
Gefroh Associates, Inc.
One Drake Park, Suite 23
333 West Drake Road
Fort Collins, CO 80526
Dear John:
The staff has reviewed the application for preliminary plan approval of the
Cottonwood PUD and would offer the following staff evaluation as to the
projeIT'IS'!F-ess or failure to address the applicable criteria within the
Land Development Guidance System.
ALL DEVELOPMENT - NUMBERED CRITERIA
1. Security lighting in parking lots and around buildings should be indicated.
Security hardware locks are recommended on all units.
2. At the time of preparation of this letter, no utility plans had been
submitted. Please verify.
3. A 10-foot easement on Stover Street and Drake Road will be required for
Light and Power purposes.
4. 20% of parking spaces may be designated for compact cars. Please verify.
5. The staff is very concerned about protecting the character and liveability
of the abutting single-family residences. Additional detail should be
provided concerning landscape treatment compatability in scale of structures
and setback between the uses. Additional screening between Units 177-188
and Drake Road should be provided. Applicant should provide buffer
study of impact of commercial and residential traffic on Marquette Street.
The applicant should provide indication of signing for proposed commercial
area.
6. The plan should provide for bicycle parking in the retail/office area.
7. Two handicapped spaces for 22,000 sf of commercial area does not appear
adequate. Please provide evidence to justify this number.
Mr. John Dengler
Gefroh Associates, Inc.
June 23, 1981
Page Two
8. Please provide evidence to justify the distribution of bicycle parking in
the residential area.
9. The dimension for handicapped spaces in the "Notes" section should read
12' x 17' not 9' x 17'.
10. Trash area and screening thereof in commercial area should be indicated
on site plan.
11. Shade trees should be provided along Drake Road and Stover Street at a
minimum interval of every 50-feet. Landscaping on Drake/Stover corner may
present sight distance problems.
12. Exterior lighting of commercial areas should be indicated.
ALL DEVELOPMENT - VARIABLE CRITERIA
13. The staff evaluation is that the site plan as submitted scores 45% of the
applicable criteria (see Point Chart A attached).
ALL ACTIVITY CATEGORIES - NUMBERED CRITERIA
14. See Comment No. 1.
DENSITY CALCULATION - DENSITY CHART
15. The staff evaluation is that credit cannot be given for Bonus Criteria K.
16. Based on Comment No. 15, the staff calculation for maximum density is
246 units.
BUSINESS SERVICE USES - POINT CHART E
17. Applicant should provide evidence to justify credit under Criterion G -
Energy Conservation.
Overall, the project scores 45% of the applicable lettered criteria and has
failed 13 absolute criteria. The proposed density is consistent with the PUD
criteria. I would recommend that we meet as soon as possible to discuss the
above evaluation. Any revisions to the site plan must be received by this
office no later than Wednesday, July 8, 1981. Also, on Monday, July 20, 1981
8-1/2" x 11" reductions of all site plans and colored renderings of site plans
must be submitted. If you should have any questions please feel free to call.
Sincerely,
Joe Frank
Senior Planner
JF/fsr
cc: Curt Smith
Josh Richardson
}
CITY OF FORT COLLINS P.O- BOX 580, FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80522 PH (303) 484-4220
PLANNING DIVISION EXT. 655
September 28, 1981
Mr. John Dengler
Gefroh Associates, Inc.
555 South Howes, Suite 100
Fort Collins, CC) 80521
Dear John:
The staff has reviewed the submittal of Cottonwood PUD Final and have expressed
the following concerns: --------------------------
Engineering
1. Both curb cuts are to be built with the first phase of the project, if it
is phased.
2. Plan shows buildings located in detention pond. The detention ponds should
be revised and supportive calculations given.
3. Pedestrian paths from the single-family areas to Drake Road should be raised
concrete wanks with handicap ramps at the driveway crossings. These walks
should be a unobstructed minimum of 4-feet.
4. If the buildings are be set back 15-feet to provide for utilities, the
envelopes should also be set back 15-feet.
5. What type of curb stops are to be used? Are the parking and asphalt sidewalks
in front of the parking at the same level?
6. The detention pond should meet the engineering guidelines for use as active
open space.
7. The screened trash enclosures should not be placed next to the parking drives.
They should be set back 10-feet at least.
8. A letter formally requesting the variance of the centerline -to -centerline
distance for the curb cut on Stover Street should be submitted. The
standard is 200-feet from the centerline.
Fi re
9. The access 'roadway shall be extended to within 150-feet of all portions of
the exterior walls of the first story of any building. The note (#2)
indicates that all structures will meet this requirement, however some
structures appear to be further. Please clarify.
Mr. John Dengler
Gefroh Associates,, Inc.
September 28, 1981
Page 2
Water & Sewer
10. Easements for water and sewer need to be shown on the plat.
11. No trees or shrubs should be planted on top of water and sewer lines within
the easement.
Light & Power
12. A minimum 13-foot easement will be required on Stover and Drake, 8-feet on
Marquette.
Building Inspection
13. Show utility easements on site plan.
14. Show dimensions of building envelope to at least two property lines.
15. Site plan note should indicate that all signs will comply with the Sign Code.
16. Any roof overhang or projection beyond a lot line or building envelope must
be in an easement, which specifically mentions the type of projection and
the limits of said projection allowed in said easement.
Plannin
17. Applicant should provide evidence as to details of asphalt internal sidewalks.
The use of railroad ties, etc. to separate parking from sidewalks is not an
acceptable solution.
18. Landscape plan should include typical lighting fixtures for pedestrian paths.
19. Landscaping along East Drake is insufficient and needs to be intensified.
20. Parking islands should include low lying shrubs in addition to shade trees.
21. Screening betweem units and single-family area should be intensified.
22. Minimum rear year setbacks from single-family lots as approved on preliminary
plan must be maintained for both office and residential buildings.
23. Dead-end parking lots should provide for back -out space at end of parking
lane. A minimum of 15-feet landscape separation between the dead-end parking
and Marquette Street and a minimum of 20-foot separation between the south
property line and the dead-end parking lot is recommended.
24. Details of the proposed sculpture should be submitted at this time.
Mr. John Dengler
Gefroh Associates, Inc.
September 28, 1981
Page 3
25. The site plan should indicate any proposed phasing.
26. Specific definition of the proposed commercial use was a condition of the
Planning and Zoning Board approval of the Preliminary. Please define
proposed uses.
Arborist
28. The following landscape materials are undersized. The appropriate sizes
are listed below (by their common names):
a. Western Catalpa 1-3/4" B&B
b. Fruiting Cherry 1-1/2" Cont.
c. Floweririg Crab 1-1/2" Cont.
d. Mountain Ash 1-1/2" Cont.
e. Purple Leaf Plum 1-1/2" Cont.
Revisions (5 copies) addressing these concerns should be submitted to the Planning
Division by October 12, 1981. Please call if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Linda Hopkins
Planning Technician
LH/fsr
cc: Curt Smith, Planning Director
Josh Richardson, Development Engineer
JCK Engineer
DATE DEPARTMENT"wm�
ITEM:
F7-
COMMENTS
.qc''o r 4
It, 4r-A)
S OvArr, ^v
1
5) f Ciox -o
-dc A�:CP.y
4,�>/S W41le-4
OJ ILL )F
'12et 1 4 ONTs 4 L
57-4 r"
c ..e) ntt*,, cAf ,,#It if aar &mz OF
10.1:3-6t
)W-4Z--
ME
GB ROH ASSOCIATES INC.
ARCHITECTS/PLANNERS
555 Howes Street
Suite 100
Fort Collins, CO 80521
(303) 493-1080
OCTOBER 12, 1981
CITY OF FORT COIJ INS
PLANNING DEPARTMENI"
P.O.BOX 580
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80521
ATTN: LINDA HOPKINS
PLANNING TECHNICIAN
RE: COTTONWOOD FINAL P.U.D.
PROJECT NO. 81-269
HERE IS THE ITEn-BY—ITEM REPLY TO STAFF COMMENM:
ENGINEERING
• 1. CURB CUTS — REFER TO NOTE 16 ON "FILL SITE PLAN" (1 OF 2) .
•2. DETENTION POND — REFER TO ENGINEERING DRAWING "FINAL GRADING
AND DRAINAGE" (4 OF 6).
3. PATHS — PEDESTRIAN PATHS FROM SINGLE FAMILY AREAS TO DRAM
ROAD WILL BE 4' WIDE UNOBSTRUCTED, CONCRETE WALKS, WE FEEL
THAT THESE CAN BE LEVEL WITH THE PARKING ASPHALT, THUS REMOVING
THE NEED FOR HANDICAP RAMPS. WE FEEL THAT RAILROAD TIES WILL
GIVE SUFFICIENT PROTECTION AGAINST INGRESS OF CARS, WHERE THE
PATH RUNS ALONG THE PARKING BAYS. TO ALSAY STAFF CONCERNS,
WE WILL SPECIFY 3 REBAR FIXING TO EACH CAR STOP. REFER TO
FINAL SITE PLAN (1 OF 2) AND FINAL GRADING AND DRAINAGE (4 OF
6) .
• 4. UTILITY SET BACK — REFER TO FINAL SITE PLAN (1 OF 2) WHICH
NOW ILLUSTRATES 5' SET BACK FROM PRINCIPAL BUILDING ENVELOPE
TO SECONDARY ENVELOPE (OR BUILDING FOOTPRINT) ON TYPICAL "A"
AND "B" UNITS. SEE NOTE 6, FINAL SITE PLAN.
5. CURB STOPS — RAILROAD TIES, AS APPROVED AT P P.U.D.
THESE WILL BE SET SO AS TO ALLOW 2'0" OVERHANG AT THE FRONT