Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCSU UNIVERSITY VILLAGE HOUSING - Filed GC-GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE - 2003-07-31Cornmuri Planning and Environmental vices Planning Department Citv of Fort Collins April 20, 1993 Greg Smith, Project Manager Colorado State University Facilities Services Department Fort Collins, CO 80523 Dear Greg: City staff and reviewing agencies have reviewed the University Village Expansion project and have the following comments to make on this project: 1. Public Service Company recommends that the areas shaded in red on the attached site plan be dedicated as "utility easements" by final plat or easement dedication. PSCO has a requirement that no trees can be planted less than 4' from any natural gas line. A utility coordination meeting has been recommended by PSCO, so that all of the utilities involved in serving these sites can coordinate how services will be provided. City staff will arrange for this meeting to occur with representatives of the utilities (as well as your project representatives) prior to submittal of the project design/development plans. 2. Columbine Cable Vision notes that utility easements will be needed and that they would like to see the buildings wired in a "home -run" system for cable service. 3. The City's Light and Power Utility recommends that blanket utility easements be used (similar to PSCO recommendation). The attached information provides a standard for tree/streetlight clearances to use for street tree plantings along West Elizabeth. 4. The City's Water and Wastewater Utility will need a utility plan reviewed and approved prior to beginning any construction on either water or sewer mains and services. Easements will also be needed and may best be addressed through utility coordination. 5. Poudre Fire Authority has identified concerns regarding emergency access, fire hydrants and fire flows in the attached letter to Bud Curtis of RBD Engineering. As noted in the PFA letter, we recommend that consideration be given to providing a vehicular connection to Skyline Drive. As designed, all vehicular traffic to and. from the site must travel a rather circuitous route from Plum Street via an off -site parking lot. We expect that a '81 North C0II,',(' :AV('nuO • I' Greg Smith/CSU April 20, 1993 Page 2 large percentage of vehicular trips from this site may be to the shopping center to the west and believe that a Skyline connection would facilitate that direction of travel. 6. The City's Zoning Office notes that signs were not shown on the proposed plan; however, we assume that any signage proposed will comply with the multi -family development sign allowances in the City's Sign Code. 7. The Parks and Recreation Department notes that all landscaping in the public right-of-way should be maintained by CSU and that standard notes regarding the protection of existing trees during construction, as well as providing a medium prune of existing trees, should be added to the revised landscape plan. 8. Transfort staff notes that the addition of these dwelling units will impact bus Route 3 and requests that a 7' x 13' concrete pad extension be provided adjacent to the sidewalk on City Park Avenue (south of Plum intersection) so that a bus shelter can be provided. This bus stop location should be designed to meet Federal ADA requirements for disabled passengers. 9. The multi -family land use and densities proposed for both sites are supported by the City's Land Use Policies Plan; however, the interface between the existing single family homes and the more intensive use proposed for the northwest site needs to be addressed. Specifically, buffering for noise and privacy, through the use of fencing and/or landscape materials, is recommended. While the proposed garden spaces are an attractive element for residents of these units, they will not be effective in providing buffering between these sites. 10. There are several areas of inconsistency between the site plan and landscape plan (ie. width of fire access to Skyline Drive; setback width between parking area and City Park Avenue; numbers of parking spaces in several areas on both sites; retention of existing tree: and trash receptacles and landscaping). 11. Perimeter buffering of parking areas (along Skyline Drive, City Park Avenue and West Elizabeth) should be accomplished with 3' high berming and shrub groupings. 12. Deciduous shade tree plantings should be provided along City Park Avenue and along the detention area on Skyline Drive. 13. Foundation plantings should be provided on the north and west sides of buildings at the southeast site. Greg Smith/CSU April 20, 1993 Page 3 14. A pedestrian connection should be provided from the northwest site to Skyline Drive, to facilitate pedestrian traffic to and from Moore Elementary School. is. The future extension of sidewalks from the northwest site to West Elizabeth and from the southeast site along West Elizabeth to Constitution needs to be addressed. 16. Typical parking stall dimensions need to be noted on the site plan. 17. Bicycle parking at both sites appears to be somewhat limited. Will bicycle parking be provided in the interior courtyards, or within the buildings? 18. Trash enclosures should be constructed of materials that complement the proposed buildings. In some cases, the location of trash receptacles appear to conflict with proposed landscaping. 19. The driveway alignment along the New Mercer Canal is, in several places, extremely close to the canal easement. This driveway needs to be maintained as an unobstructed access, so treatment between the driveway and canal should be designed to discourage impromptu parking. 20. It would be helpful, in evaluating the location of the City Park Avenue curb cut, if existing curb cuts on the east side of City Park Avenue were shown on the site plan. 21. Building materials for the proposed southeast community building should be noted on the elevations. 22. Since the proposed building height for the southeast site exceeds 40', information pertaining to the potential impacts of the building height on community scale, views, light and shadow, privacy and neighborhood scale (see attached information) should be provided. 23. The end elevations of the northwest buildings could benefit from the addition of windows or relief on the blank wall areas (windows in kitchen or living room areas). Since we will be receiving more detailed plans and reports with the design/development stage, we do expect that there will be additional comments made as a result of our review of the next submittal. If you are interested in meeting with us to discuss these comments, please contact me to schedule a meeting. In closing, we believe that the proposed plans offer an exciting Greg Smith/CSU April 20, 1993 Page 4 living opportunity not currently available to area students and think that the suggestions included here will serve to further enhance this project and the community, as well! We look forward to working with you on the University Village Expansion project over the next several months. Sincerely, Sherry Al rtson-Clark, AICP Chief Pl ner cc Mick Aller, Aller-Lingle Architects Greg Byrne: Tom Peterson Mike Herzig file