Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPETERSON PLACE - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2003-11-04Project Comments Sheet �M Selected Departments City of Fort Collins Department: Engineering Date: April 18, 2003 Project: 611 S PETERSON PDP/FC, #35-00 All comments must be received by�Steve Olt in Current Planning, no later than the staff review meeting: Lm 200f3 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Dave Stringer Number: 3 Created: 7/23/2001 no further comment Number: 4 Created: 7/23/2001 Engineering Ready for Mylar Need request for mylars from stormwater and water/ waterwater. Engineering ready for mylar 4/18/03 wksb` Number: 14 Created: 4/18/2003 Please have the developer fill out the attached sheet for the Development Agreement Signature Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site Drainage Report Other_ Utility _ Redline Utility Landscape Page 1 7. A copy of the comments received from Donald Dustin of the Stormwater Utility is attached to this comment letter. Additional comments are provided on red -lined plans and reports that are being forwarded to the applicant. Also, a letter from Marsha Hilmes-Robinson, the City's Floodplain Administrator, to Craig Houdeshell (dated 11/ 10/00) is attached to this comment letter. Please contact Donald, at 416-2053, if you have questions about their comments. 8. A copy of the comments received from Dave Stringer of the Engineering Department is attached to this comment letter. Additional comments are provided on red -lined plans that are being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Dave, at 221-6750, if you have questions about his comments. 9. A copy of the comments received from Jeff Hill of the Water/Wastewater Department is attached to this comment letter. Additional comments are provided on red -lined plans that are being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Jeff, at 221-6674, if you have questions about his comments. 10. Doug Moore of the Natural Resources Department offered the following comments: a. A detail of the proposed trash enclosure is needed for review. b. The location of the 2' square address column is not shown on the Site Plan. C. The bicycle rack should be anchored to a concrete pad set beside the walkway, not just a rack set in the mulch. d. Why is 6" steel edging being used between the walkway and the shrub beds? If the bed is built properly the rock mulch will sit slightly lower than the walkway. If, for some reason, edging is still needed, then 4" steel is typically used on projects of this size. e. Information regarding recycling containers is attached to this comment letter. Please contact Doug, at 224-6143, if you have questions about these comments. 11. Craig Foreman of the Parks Planning Department stated that they have no concerns or comments regarding this development proposal. 12. Beth Sowder of the Streets Department stated that they have no concerns or comments regarding this development proposal. 13. Tim Buchanan, the City Forester, stated that the standard Planting and Tree Protection notes should be added to the Landscape Plan. The Planting Notes are attached to this comment letter. 14. Mike Spurgin of the Post Office stated that they have no concerns or comments regarding this development proposal. 15. Gary Huett: of Public Service Company of Colorado stated that if natural gas service is desired for the proposed structure, the service line will have to be installed in the 10' wide utility, drainage, landscape, and pedestrian access easement along the south side of the property. There is an existing; gas main in South Peterson Street. 16. GayLene Rossiter of Transfort stated that they have no concerns or comments regarding this development proposal. 17. A copy of the comments received from Mark Jackson of Transportation Planning is attached to this comment letter. Additional comments are provided on a red -lined Site Plan that is being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Mark, at 416-2029, if you have questions about his comments. 18. Matt Baker of the Street Oversizing section of the Engineering Department stated that the street oversizing fee for apartments is $948 per dwelling unit, to be assessed at the time of issuance of building permits. He has no other comments. 19. The Technical Services (Mapping) Department offered the following comments: a. The title of the subdivision plat should read: "Being a Resubdivision ..... ". b. Block 146 is shown as Block 6 in several places. C. The Warranty Statements are missing. d. The Basis of Bearing statement does not match. e. The Peterson Street right-of-way should not have a bearing break. f. Text size and line weight needs to be reproducible (able to make good quality prints). Please contact Jim Hoff, at 221-6588, if you have questions about these comments. 20. Ward Stanford of the Traffic Operations Department offered the following comments: a. Will parking be allowed on the asphalt area east of the building, accessed from South Peterson Street? If so, an access easement should be considered. b. Is the condition of the alley pavement adequate to handle additional regular traffic without improvements? C. Do the accesses to the alley from Laurel and Myrtle Streets meet sight distance criteria? Please contact Ward, at 221-6820, if you have questions about these questions/ comments. 21. Historic Preservation in the Advance Planning Department stated that new development will need to comply with Section 3.4.7 of the LUC. It is being recommended that the applicants arrange a meeting with Karen McVlilliams to discuss the historic implications. She can be reached at 224-6078. 22. Steve Olt of the Current Planning Department stated that his comments are on red -lined Site, Landscape, and Building Elevations plans that are being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Steve, at 221-6341, if you have questions about his comments. The following comments/concerns were expressed at the weekly Staff Review Meeting on November 15, 2000: Engineerinq/Daue Stringer 23. The parking on -site may not be adequate for the new 3-plex building. 24. Both South. Peterson Street and the alley have been newly reconstructed. There will be substantial monetary penalties for cutting the pavement in these roadways. 25. A drainage easement must be shown for the concrete drainage pan along the north property line. 26. The existing asphalt along the south property line of Lot 1 must be removed and a new sidewalk must be constructed from Lot 2 to the existing sidewalk along South Peterson Street. Transportation Planning/Mark Jackson 27. Pedestrian connectivity from the new 3-plex on Lot 2 to the South Peterson Street sidewalk system must be provided. Natural Resources/Doug Moore 28. The trash enclosure should be designed to include recycling. 29. A detail of the trash enclosure is needed for staff to review. 30. The bicycle rack should be anchored on a hard surface, not placed on the mulch in a planting bed. 31. Steel edging around the planting beds next to sidewalks should not be needed. Planning 32. The neighbors have concerns about overflow parking from this development going into the surrounding neighborhood. 33. The neighbors and City staff have concerns about the size, scale, and mass of the proposed building and its compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. 34. There is concern about the lack of any outdoor yard or space for the residents of the proposed new 3-plex. 35. There is concern about the vehicular impact on the alley from traffic generated by the proposed new 3-plex. 36. The significant issue of this site being in a "No Rise" floodplain was first expressed to the applicants at the conceptual review meeting on November 15, 1999. This issue still exists and there is no information provided that would demonstrate how this new development will meet the "No Rise" requirement and criteria. Stormwater (Basil Hamdan 37. This site is in the Old Town floodplain, which is a "No Rise" floodplain. No new development can occur if it cannot be demonstrated how the new development will not create a rise. THIS MUST BE RESOLVED BEFORE STAFF DOES ANY FURTHER REVIEW OF THE PROJECT!!! 38. The applicant did not provide any water quality measures. 39. The applicant did not provide information for the required detention pond. This completes the staff comments at this time. Additional comments could be forthcoming if and when they are received from City departments and outside reviewing agencies. Under the development review process and schedule there is a 90 day plan revision submittal time -frame (by the applicant to the City) mandated by the City. The 90 day turnaround period begins on the date of this comment letter (November 22, 2000) prepared by the project planner in the Current Planning Department. In this case, revisions must be submitted no latter than February 20, 2001 by 5:00 p.m. Upon receipt, the revisions will be routed to the appropriate City departments and outside reviewing agencies, with their comments due to the project planner no later than the third weekly staff review meeting (Wednesday mornings) following receipt of the revisions. At this staff review meeting the item will be discussed and it will be determined if the project is ready to go to the Planning and Zoning Board for a decision. If so, will be scheduled for the nearest Board hearing date with an opening on the agenda. Please return all drawings red -lined by City staff with submission of your revisions. Also, the number of copies of revisions for each document to be resubmitted is on the attached Revisions Routing Sheet (both sides). Due to significant concerns expressed by City staff, you should contact me at 221- 6341 to schedule a meeting with the appropriate people to discuss these comments. Sincerely, 46Eb�t— Steve Olt Project Planner cc: Cameron Gloss, Current Planning Director Engineering Zoning Stormwater Water/ Wastewater Poudre Fire Authority Natural Resources Transportation Planning Traffic Operations Intermill Land Surveying Project File #35-00 REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: February 28, 2001 TO: Technical Svs PROJECT: #35-00 611 Peterson Street — Project Development Plan — Type II — (LUC) All comments must be received by Steve Olt in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: V�2q March 21, 2001 ❑ No Comment ❑ Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) **PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE** I, Ftgr CCosE,� � z� o�IliL ��I4H C 1 1 q L,i e I q J J �:55- Tl, CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS DA3.11 Site Drainage Rc�d Signatufi r Utility Redline Ulility Landscape q d O �--42 s s- 1 11 C-1 REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: MARCH 26, 2001 DEPT: Engineering PROJECT: #35-00, 611 Peterson Street — LUC, Type 2 PLANNER: Steve Olt ENGINEER: Dave Stringer All comments must be received by: March 21, 2001 ❑ No Problems ❑ Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) 1. Storm Water wants an additional round of review 2. Need 2 survey control points shown on cover sheet 3. Show detail of pan aligning with 6 inch outlet pipe at curb 4. Show detail of estimated street repair limits at driveway reconstruction, as required by City repair standards dated October 1998 5. What will be the address? If not 611 Peterson, plan should not reflect this address Date: March 26, 2001 Signature: PLEASE SEND COPIES OF MARKED REVISIONS 0 Plat ❑ Site 0 Utility ❑ Landscape 11 Drainage Report, 0 NO COMMENTS -SUBMIT MYLARS REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: June 29, 2001 TO: Technical Services PROJECT: #35-00 611 Peterson Street - Project Development Plan - Type II (LUC) All comments must be received by Steve Olt in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: August 1, 2001 ElNo Continent ❑ Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) *"PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE** CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS DAUM _ Site _ Drainage Report Signatd&r — Utli me _ ape Citv of Fort Collins STAFF PROJECT REVIEW Citvof F<Collins Noonan & Assoc Date: 04/04/2003 Jim Noonan PO Box 270852 Fort Collins, CO 80527 Staff has reviewed your submittal for 611 S PETERSON PDP/FC, #35-00, and we offer the following comments: ISSUES: Department: Engineering Number: 3 no futher comment Issue Contact: Dave Stringer Created: 7/23/2001 Number: 4 Created: 7/23/2001 Engineering Ready for Mylar Need request for mylars from stormwater and water/ watewater Department: Natural Resources Issue Contact: Doug Moore Number: 13 Created: 7/31/2001 No Issues - Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Number: 7 Created: 7/27/2001 1. Due to most of the proposed building rooftop in basin B, which is not detained, please explore the option of a shallow detention pond just east of the building. The proposed 4984 contour almost forms a pond as graded. A slight berm on the south side and a small pipe outlet similar to the parking lot pond outlet could create some detention for basin B. Please call Wes Lamarque at 416-2418 with any questions. Number: 8 Created: 7/27/2001 2. The pipe under the sidewalk needs to be sized for 1.71 cfs according to the calculations of the total runoff from the site at this point. Even though the site is in the 100-year floodplain, the entire Old Town Basin may not be affected by the storm, resulting in this area not being flooded. At this time the pipe should be sized for the 100-year event to prevent overtopping onto the sidewalk. Number: 9 Created: 7/27/2001 Page I /499M i..� FINAL COMPLIANCE City of Fort Collins i COMMENT SHEET Current PlanninE DATE: April 9, 2003 TO: Technical Services PROJECT: #35-OOA 611 PETERSON STREET FINAL COMPLIANCE -TYPE 11(LUC) All comments must be received by Steve Olt no later than the staff review meeting: April 23, 2003 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference ), t'�, �,. 1 '.,,., • ....'( _ 7 C. is lip I° �.�, d 'S. Name (please print) CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES Ot Plat _Site _Drainage Report _Olhi _Utility _Redline Utility _Landscape /:) T7 �2irliiv�-J L «' T,ALeAD w rram <J ►-� �la� o rJ s-27 "TJ Y j/fi wracS 3. The width of the swale at the WSEL for the 100-year spillway flow of .5 cfs is around 3.2 feet. Please show this width on the swale detail and verify the size of the grass swale on the grading plan. Number: 10 Created: 7/27/2001 4. Please provide the top of curb elevation and the orifice invert elevation for the detail of the outlet works for the detention pond on sheet 7. Number: 11 Created: 7/27/2001 5. Because of the flatness of the site, more spot elevations would be helpful. Please add these and extend the offsite contours to 50 feet from the border of the site. In particular, more detailed grading would verify that flow from the north edge of the property will reach the southern gutter and not run onto the property to the north. Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: Mark Jackson Number: 2 Created: 7/17/2001 no further comment. Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Number: 5 Created: 7/26/2001 Show location of existing sanitary sewer service for existing house on the front of this property Number: 6 Created: 7/26/2001 Provide stationing for proposed sanitary sewer service measured from the downstream manhole. Department: Zoning Number: 1 no comment Issue Contact: Gary Lopez Created: 7/10/2001 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. Page 2 Yours Truly, Steve Olt City Planner Page 3 Connnar.__y Planning and Environmental _ _:vices �Ll I'TC II {_ild❑(1Ail i� Pity or I ort Collin, April 6, 2001 Susan Kruel-Froseth Kruel-Froseth Architects 1630 South College Avenue Fort Collins, CO. 80525 Dear Susan, Staff has reviewed your revisions documentation for the 611 PETERSON STREET, Project Development Plan (PDP) - #35-00 that was submitted to the City on February 28, 2001, and is offering the following comments: 1. This property and development request is located at 611 Peterson Street. The lot fronts on Peterson Street, with an alley along the rear property line. There is an existing single family structure on the front of the lot. The property is in the NCM - Neighborhood Conservation, Medium Density Zoning District in the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code LUC . The proposed 3-plex, multi -family residential use is permitted in this District, subject to a Planning and Zoning Board (Type II) review and public hearing for a decision. 2. Dennis Greenwalt of AT&T Broadband (Cable TV) stated that they have no concerns or comments regarding this development proposal. 3. Michael Chavez of the Poudre Fire Authority offered the following comments: a. Address numerals shall be visible from the street fronting the property and posted with a minimum of 10" numerals on a contrasting background (example: bronze numerals on brown brick are not acceptable). The design of the Address Kiosk is approved. The location of the kiosk needs to be discussed with PFA. b. This proposed building shall be fire sprinklered. Note: This building exceeds 150' from fire apparatus access. Please contact Michael, at 221-6570, if you have questions about his comment. ��I `;xth �'nlli„ A�crnic • l).3w SNIT • Port Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (070) 2 1-6750 • FAA (970) 416-2020 4. Gary Lopez of the Zoning Department stated that one Honeylocust must be added along the alley and move the proposed Honeylocust on the south property east to accommodate the additional tree. S. Dave Stringer of the Engineering Department offered the following comments: a. Stormwater wants an additional round of review. b. Need 2 survey control points shown on the cover sheet. C. Show detail of the pan aligning with the 6" outlet pipe at the curb. d. Show detail of estimated street repair limits at driveway reconstruction, as required by the City Repair Standards dated October, 1998. e. What will be the address of the new dwelling units? If not 611 Peterson Street, the plan should not reflect this address. f. Additional comments are on red -lined plans that are being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Dave, at 221-6750, if you have questions about these comments. 6. Jeff Hill of the Water/Wastewater Department offered the following comments: a. As previously indicated, locate and show the approximate location of the existing water and sewer services for the lot adjacent to Peterson Street. b. Include the standard general note pertaining to shrub separation on the Landscape Plan. C. Provide required landscape/utility separation distances on the Landscape Plan. d. Realign the proposed sidewalk along the south property line to allow for proposed water and fire lines to extend along the south property line. e. Provide the meter pit detail with the next submittal. f. Additional comments are provided on red -lined plans that are being, forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Jeff, at 221-6674, if you have questions about his comments. 7. Doug Moore of the Natural Resources Department stated that the applicant should consider designing the trash enclosure to accommodate recycling. 8. Tim Buchanan, the City Forester, stated that he has no concerns or comments regarding this development proposal. 9. Mike Spurgin of the Post Office stated that they have no concerns or comments regarding this development proposal. 10. A representative of Public Service Company of Colorado stated that if natural gas service is desired for the proposed structure, the service line will have to be installed prior to paving in the 10' wide utility, drainage, landscape, and pedestrian access easement along the south side of the property. 1 l . GayLene Rossiter of Transfort stated that they have no concerns or comments regarding this development proposal. 12. Mark Jackson of Transportation Planning offered the following comments: a. Show the bicycle parking rack as in the previous Site Plan. b. Can the pedestrian walkway be extended to the western edge of the site and still accommodate long-term parking (see red -lined Site Plan)? C. Most previous comments have been addressed. Please contact Mark, at 416-2029, if you have questions about these comments. 13. The Technical Services (Mapping) Department offered the following comments: a. The title of the subdivision plat should be something other than the 611 Peterson Street address because the address for these new dwelling units may change. b. The subdivision plat does close. C. A copy of the Project Comment Sheet dated 11/ 15/00 is attached to this comment letter. Please contact Jim Hoff, at 221-6588, if you have questions about these comments. 14. Ward Stanford of the Traffic Operations Department offered the following comments: a. Traffic Operations did not receive any response to their previous comments (below): * Will parking be allowed on the asphalt area east of the building, accessed from South Peterson Street? If so, an access easement should be considered. * Is the condition of the alley pavement adequate to handle additional regular traffic without improvements? * Do the accesses to the alley from Laurel and Myrtle Streets meet sight distance criteria? Please provide a response. b. Do the proposed Broadmoor Junipers along the alley meet the City's sight distance criteria? What are their growth characteristics? It appears that the sight distance triangle as shown on the Landscape Plan does not meet City or AASHTO requirements. Minimum sight distance for 20 mph is 125' and the given triangle measures only 50'. Please verify adequate sight distance. Please contact Ward, at 221-6820, if you have questions about these questions/comments. 15. Stcve Olt of the Current Planning Department stated that his comments are on red -lined Site, Landscape, and Building Elevations plans that are being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Steve, at 221-6341, if you have questions about his comments. The following comments/concerns were expressed at the weekly Staff Review Meeting on March 21, 2001: Engineering 16. Need detail (both upstream and downstream) where water will flow under the access points at Peterson Street and the alley. 17. Need to show street patching for Peterson Street. Transportation Planning/Mark Jackson 18. Show bicycle parking as shown on the previous Site Plan. 19. Extend the walkway on the south side of the property to the west end of the site. Natural Resources/Doug Moore 20. The trash enclosure should be designed to include recycling. Stormwater (Basil Hamdan) 21. 80% of the site is not detained. 22. The pipe has been incorrectly sized, using 0.4 cfs instead of the standard. 23. Another ,round of review is needed. This completes the staff comments at this time. Additional comments could be forthcoming if and when they are received from City departments and outside reviewing agencies. Under the development review process and schedule there is a 90 day plan revision submittal time -frame (by the applicant to the City) mandated by the City. The 90 day turnaround period begins on the date of this comment letter (April 6, 2001) prepared by the project planner in the Current Planning Department. In this case, revisions must be submitted no later than July 5, 2001 by 5:00 p.m. Upon receipt, the revisions will be routed to the appropriate City departments and outside reviewing agencies, with their comments due to the project planner no later than the third weekly staff review meeting (Wednesday mornings) following receipt of the revisions. At this staff review meeting the item will be discussed and it will be determined if the project is ready to go to the Planning and Zoning Board for a decision. If so, will be scheduled for the nearest Board hearing date with an opening on the agenda. Please return all, drawings red lined by City staff with submission of your revisions. Also, 'the number of copies of revisions for each document to be resubmitted is on the attached Revisions Routing Sheet (both sides). Due to significant concerns expressed by City staff, you should contact me at 221- 6341 to schedule a meeting with the appropriate people to discuss these comments. Sincerely, Steve Olt Project Planner cc: Cameron Gloss, Current Planning Director Engineering Stormwater Water/ Wastewater Natural Resources Transportation Planning Traffic Operations Intermill ]Land Surveying Project File #35-00 Project Comments Sheet Selected Departments City of�)rt� C� Department: Engineering Date: April 18, 2003 Project: 611 S PETERSON PDP/FC, #35-00 All comments must be received by Steve Olt in Current Planning, no later than the staff review meeting: C 'Juiq 18, 2001 Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Dave Stringer Number: 3 no further comment Created: 7/23/2001 Number: 4 Created: 7/23/2001 Engineering Ready for Mylar Need request for mylars from stormwater and water/ waterwater. Engineering ready for mylar 4118/03 L v,- 1Li Number: 14 Created: 4/18/2003 Please have the developer fill out the attached sheet for the Development Agreement ---ram-- Signature y -C' Date CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site Drainage Report Other_ Utility Redline Utility Landscape Page 1 PROJECT giz&=l COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: October 13, 2000 TO: Technical Services PROJECT: #35-00 611 S. Peterson — PDP — Type II (LUC) (Da>ru All comments must be received by Steve Olt no later than the staff review meeting: November 15, 2000 Note- Please identify your redlines for future reference Z. %/iLcr of c,4r� /.5c://�� %% I'Pef�6/i�t�t/1/u.j -- - 3. ,)? I,k ILI& /S S'Hj,•,) /�� �✓E1c oU fiL (O SC�1/Lr/2a L /4,1 C e-j 4, ((q /2/2 A j i-7 ST 14 Tc,-Y/9l_rn/T 1 S J / Ny ✓1 S �AS/J O/Z/A/f ST/+Tcs mr^T // // LP, rCT(=lLs�•J S%�'Ec'7- /C u -) sHJ,1 L0 H4VS 7, `T�x% Sizes cthld ltA.e, wergk-% VICCJ5 A -it �e / )^e P ro u cq �p . Signature CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat _Site _Drainage Report _Other Utility Redline Utility _Landscape Citv of Fort Collins PROJECT COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: October 13, 2000 TO: Street Oversizing PROJECT: #35-00 611 S. Peterson — PDP — Type II (LUC) All comments must be received by Steve Olt no later than the staff review meeting: November 15, 2000 Note- Please identify your redlines for future reference S gnature CHECK H RE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS _Plat Site _Drainage Report _Other Utility Redline Utility _Landscape City of Fore Collins Utilities light & power • stormwater • wastewater • water Citv of Fort Collins October 10, 20CIO Mr. Craig Houdeshell Engineering Design and Research Corporation 5616 South Gibralter Way, Suite H P.O. Box 110 Aurora, Colorado 80015 RE: Floodplain Report and Use Application - Froseth Property Dear Craig: The City has completed a preliminary review of the above referenced report. Because the report is not complete according to the City's modeling guidelines, a detailed technical review was not conducted by the City. Our preliminary comments are as follows: • Old Town is a no -rise floodplain. The report, in addition to establishing the BFE for construction purposes, must also demonstrate no -rise. This needs to be part of the purpose of this report and included on P.I. • On page 3, the table shows the project is causing a rise in WSEL for CS 5750 and CS 5795. This is not allowed. Any rise in WSEL must be mitigated as part of the proj ect. • The table on page 3 does not show any upstream and downstream cross -sections. Please include all cross -sections within your study area (which needs to be defined). • The lowest floor elevation shown on the floodplain use permit is not 18" above the BFE. Please also remember that the "lowest floor" includes basement or bottom of crawl space. Drawings of the structure should be submitted so that finished floor elevations can be verified. • Because this project required hydraulic modeling, the floodplain use permit fee is $325 not $25. The additional $300 must be submitted. • The elevation of the benchmark is not filled in on the floodplain use permit. • A disk with all models was not included. • The Old Town Hydrology is currently being revised. It appears this revision has caused the flows in the vicinity of Myrtle and Peterson to decrease considerably as 7Uf1 Wood tit. P.O. Box SRO • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6700 • FAX (970) 221-6619 • TDD (970) 224-6003 (-mail: Utilities(,, i.fort-collins.co.us • www.ci.fort-collins.co.us/UTILITIES r compared to the Old Town Hydrology of 9/99. This decrease is primarily due the re- analysis of split flows upstream of this area. Although the discharge used in your report is conservative, it may be advantageous to review this updated hydrology for consideration in your analysis. As the project proceeds, please keep in close contact with City Staff to keep informed on any changes to the Old Town Hydrology. The Floodplain Modeling report guidelines have not been followed. Please refer to the attached guidelines for the requirements. Until all figures, cross-section plots, water surface profiles, maps, tables, etc. are included and have the required information on them, the City will not complete a technical review of the report. Please note that even if an item does not apply, it needs to be in the report with "not applicable" written next to it. We also expect a complete discussion of methods and results for each modeling condition. Please follow the report outline presented in the guidelines. 1£ you would like to see an example of an approved report, you may come look at one in our office. It is expected after the required information is submitted, additional comments will arise. If you have questions about these comments or would like to set up a meeting to discuss this report, please call me at (970) 224-6036 Sincerely, UA.1--- 12eh�A. Marsha Hilmes-Robinson Floodplain Administrator Cc: Loonan and Associates, Inc. City of Forl Collins CURRENT PLANNING DATE: 11-10-00 PROJECTV COMMENT SHEET DEPT: Engineering PROJECT: #35-00 611 S. Peterson Street PDP Type II (LUC) PLANNER: Steve-04 ENGINEER: Dave Stringer All comments must be received by: Wednesday November 15, 2000 No Problems Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) 1. Plat needs to show drainage easements as shown on utility plan 2.. Need to add Owners Certification block 3. Remove existing driveway on Peterson and Existing asphalt along lot 1 add a minimum 4'6" sidewalk out to Peterson Street 4. Show proposed address column a j 5. Can concrete pan as proposed be built without damage to existing tree? 6. Minimum 2' wide sidewalk culvert- if culvert is open channel to street then increase length of culvert to 1' wider then sidewalk width each side 7. City of Fort Collins Excavation Permit is required for Peterson and alley cuts. Substantial fees will be assessed for both. Alley and street newly reconstructed. Contact Rick Richter or Lance Newlin at 970.221-6605 for assessment costs. 8. Overhead electric service to be placed under ground or install conduits for future service connection. Contact city4ight and Power at 970. 221-6700 9. see other comments on redline plans Date: // /n -r---so Signature:✓� 2 PLEASE SEND COPIES OF MARKED REVISIONS: r,—�--nAT &1S'ITE UTILITY .LANDSCAPE Commu ✓ Planning and Environmental ' vices Current Planning Citv of Fort Collins November 22, 2000 Sue Kruel-Froseth Kruel-Froseth Architects 1630 South College Avenue Fort Collins, CO. 80525 Jim Loonan Loonan and Associates, Inc. P.O. Box 270852 Fort Collins, Co. 80527 Dear Sue and Jim, Staff has reviewed your documentation for the 611 SOUTH PETERSON STREET, Project: Development Plan (PDP) - #35-00 that was submitted to the City on September 13, 2000, and is offering the following comments: 1. This property and development request is located at 611 South Peterson Street. The lot fronts on South Peterson Street, with an alley along the rear property line. There is an existing single family structure on the front of the lot. The property is in the NCM - Neighborhood Conservation, Medium Density Zoning District in the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code (LUC'[. The proposed 3-plex, multi -family residential use is permitted in this District, subject to a Planning and Zoning Board (Type 11) review and public hearing for a decision. 2 Dennis Greenwalt of AT&T Broadband (Cable TV) stated that they have no concerns or comments regarding this development proposal. 3. Doug Martine of the Light & Power Department stated that the normal electric development charges, plus the cost of required system modifications, will apply to this request. 'tit Anrth l\� rnuc • I'O. Boy DSO • Fort colhns, CO 80322-05s0 • t970) 221-(,7�0 • FAX (q70) 41tr4020 4. Laurie D'Audney, the City's Water Conservation Specialist, stated that they have no concerns or comments regarding this development proposal. 5. Michael Chavez of the Poudre Fire Authority offered the following comments: a. Address numerals shall be visible from the street fronting the property and posted with a minimum of 6" numerals on a contrasting background (example: bronze numerals on brown brick are not acceptable). b. Fire hydrants are required, with a maximum spacing of 600', along an approved roadway. Each hydrant must be capable of delivering 1,500 gallons of water per minute at a residual pressure of 20 psi. No commercial building can be greater than 300' from a fire hydrant. C. This proposed building shall be fire sprinklered. Note: This building exceeds 150' from fire apparatus access. d. Street names shall be verified and reviewed by L.E.T.A. prior to being put in service. Please contact Michael, at 221-6570, if you have questions about his comment. 6. Gary Lopez, of the Zoning Department offered the following comments: a. Show the height of the building on all building elevations. b. Where are the required planting notes? Also, the Landscape Plan needs a statement that landscaping must be completed or the remaining secured by 125% of the cost of materials and labor before a certificate of occupancy will be issued. See Sections 3.2.11(F) through (J) of the LUC. C. Provide building footprint and/or building envelope dimensions. Please contact Gary, at 221-6760, if you have questions about these comments.