The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPROMONTORY - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2005-05-11PROJECT ..MM � COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning Final Compliance DATE: November 30, 2000 TO: Technical Services PROJECT: #32-99A PROMONTORY — FINAL COMPLIANCE TYPE II (LUC) i^-' . , ") All comments must be received by STEVE OLT in Current Planning no later than the staff review meeting: December 13, 2000 Note- Please identify your redlines for future reference l _ .� �J..- �!l`. � !i '/L�J icy '✓... .` __r _ � �. — _-- - - - - - - Signature CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat _ Site _Drainage Report Other Utility Rcdline Utility Landscape City of Fort Collins (1) Structures and landscaping within the easement shall not exceed 24 inches in height with the following exceptions: (a) Fences up to 42 inches in height may be allowed as long as they do not obstruct the line of sight for motorists. (b) Deciduous trees may be allowed as long as all branches of the trees are trimmed so that no portion thereof or leaves thereon hang lower than six (6) feet above the ground, and the trees are spaced such that they do not obstruct line of sight for motorists. Deciduous trees with trunks large enough to obstruct line of sight for motorists shall be removed by the owner. For non -level areas these requirements shall be modified to provide the same degree of visibility. Utility Plans • Reduce the curb return radii to 20' on the northern driveway, in conjunction with the radii on the southern driveway. • Provide a detail of the enhanced crosswalks proposed on the site plan. • Note the use of concrete to the property line for the driveway detail • Please note the curb and gutter type used on the plans. Show where vertical curb and gutter and the outfall curb and gutter (provided in the detail • sheet) are used specifically on the site. • The sight distance easements provided in the utility plans are adequate. Note that this is measured 10' from behind the flowline of Boardwalk Drive for the driveways; it appears that more easement is provided than necessary. • How does the parking lot island noted in the utility plan set accommodate pedestrians for the pathway? Will access ramps be provided? Landscape Plans • Show the sight distance easement language notes as noted on the plat. See redlined plans for any additional comments. PROJECT: #32-99 Park Place Project Development Plan — Page 2 of 2 REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: November 24, 1999 TO: Engineering PROJECT: #32-99 Park Place PDP — Type II (LUC) All conunents must be received by Steve Olt no later than the staff review meeting: Wednesday, December 15, 1999 No Comment ❑ Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) Date: CHECK HERE LF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS _ Plat _ Site _ Dra rage Report _ Other Utility Redline Utility _ Landscape PROJECT COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: September 29, 1999 DEPT: ENGINEERING PROJECT: #32-99 Park Place Project Development Plan — Type II LUC PLANNER: Steve Olt ENGINEER: Marc Virata All comments must be received by: October 27, 1999 ❑ No Problems E�Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) Site Plan: • Parking stalls off the driveway connecting to Boardwalk Drive are required to be setback 100 feet from Boardwalk Drive based on the ADT generated by this site. Please note that 6 parking stalls for the residential. and 5 for the commercial are not allowed. • Provide a sight distance easement as shown on sheet 4 of the utility plan. Building 2 and perhaps Building 3 will need to be relocated. The site distance easement in proximity to Building 5 may need to be modified. Please provide a plan of the site to include 200 more feet of Boardwalk Drive headin- northwest in order to determine the exactness of the sight distance easement needed. • The northwest entrance needs 20' of lane width on both sides, 15' is not acceptable for the Poudre Fire Authority [3.6.6(D)(2)]. (PFA has indicated in their comments that a 16' minimum exit is sufficient and as such, 20' is not required.) • Are the commercial buildings 2 stories? The site plan indicates so, but the architectural elevations show a window at an apparent third level. Is this solely a window for a vaulted ceiling? Plat: • The plat needs to delineate the internal roadway to the site as an "Emergency Access Easement". Date: /��/ Signature: PLEASE SEND OPIES PLAT C OF MARKED REVISIONS: 9 SITE UTILITY ❑ NO COMMENTS — SUBMIT MYLARS J� LANDSCAPE • Provide the sight distance easement noted above on the plat. • Provide sight distance easement restrictions language on the plat and revise the Plat Language. (Enclosed) • Signatures are needed on the plat of the company in control of the Latimer Canal No. 2. Utility Plans • Please provide a detail for the northwest driveway entrance. As shown on the plan, we require driveways to be concrete to the property line. In addition, provide a detail of the pedestrian crossing at the driveways, will pedestrian ramps be needed? • Show where vertical curb and gutter and the outfall curb and gutter (provided in the detail sheet) are used specifically on the site. • The street repair on Boardwalk should be expanded as noted. • In the General Notes, replace all occurrences of "Director of Engineering" with "City Engineer" and add the following to the end of General Note No. 5: The finished patch shad blend in smoothly into the existing surface. All large patches shall be paved with an asphalt lay -down machine. In streets where more than one cut is made, an overlay of the entire street width, including the patched area. may be required. The determination of need for a complete overlay shall be made by The City Engineer at the time the cuts are made. Landscape Plans • Show the sight distance easements on the plan along with the sight distance easement language as noted on the plat. PROJECT 0LA" _ COMMENT SHEET _. City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: September 29, 1999 TO: Engineering/Pavement PROJECT: #32-99 Park Place Project Development Plan - Type II LUC All comments must be received by Steve Olt no later than the staff review meeting,: October 27,1999 /V, I-_=)W, CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS _Plat _Site _Drainage Report _Other _Utility _Redline Utility _Landscape City of Fort Collins PROJECT i•••• COMMENT SHEET City of Fort Collins Current Planning DATE: September 29, 1999 TO: Engineering PROJECT: #32-99 Park Place Project Development Plan - Type II LUC All comments must be received by Steve Olt no later than the staff review meeting: October 27, 1999 Date CI IECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site Drainage Report __Other_ Qw�l Utility Redline Utility _Landscape City of Fort colons REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: April 12, 2000 TO: Mapping PROJECT: #32-99 P-arlt-r1aL , PDP - Type I - LUC All comments must be received by Steve Olt no later than the staff review meeting: Wednesday, April 26, 2000 No Comment Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) "PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE" wi-447 rH j 2ALTs �L „ Ti/Vo l R/+�-t- S'. D//eMr=NT �iJC DO 0s i Nis 64/L r »m e rL Co . Z X'dGJlc�S esrr/ � T v U�) Tv 7-W(F '�tcrr4 jJ l J C- a %/fc Di icA Jc-jw ! //J 7/�4c r L % Jc, 14L- l 0U G,I/vas — Date: Signature: CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site _ ftnage Report _ Other Utility — Redline Utility _ Landscape F ,+' COMMENT a DATE: April 12, 2000 DEPT: ENGINEERING PROJECT: #32-99 Promontory PDP (LUC) PLANNER: Steve Olt ENGINEER: Marc Virata All comments must be received by: April 26, 2000 ❑ No Problems 2 Problems or Concems (see below or attached) Comments: As previously noted, appropriate letter(s) of intent for off -site easements are required prior to a hearing for this project. It is my understanding that this project has been scheduled for hearing. If letters of intent from the affected property owner(s) have not been received on or before the Friday prior to the hearing date, the scheduled hearing may be postponed. It was discussed that an offsite construction easement should be received from the Post Office for the construction of the retaining wall along the west edge of the property. A letter of intent for this easement is required prior to hearing. I have not received the documentation noted in the response to comments that Public Service agreed to the 9' of utility easement separation along Boardwalk and the Planner could not locate such documentation as well. Please provide a copy of this documentation on or before the Friday prior to the hearing date, otherwise the scheduled hearing may be postponed. The Attorney's Certification on the Plat needs to be changed. See enclosed. This language is used when a modification or waiver is granted by the Planning Director. The sight distance easement language on the site and landscape plan does not appear correctly, the last line was also omitted: ("For non -level areas these requirements shall be modified to provide the same degree of visibility.") [a repeat comunent] Mylars may be resubmitted at the nest round of review, provided comments are addressed and other Departments are in agreement. Please contact me prior to resubmittal. Date: Mav 4, 2000 Signature: r _— PLEASE SEND COPIES OF MARKED REVISr6NS 2 Plat 23 Site 2 Utility 2 Landscape 0 Drainage Report NO COMMENTS -SUBMIT MYLARS REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: April 12, 2000 TO: Mapping PRO MOAITORK PROJECT: #32-99 14ifk-P a=, PDP —Type I - LUC All comments must be received by Steve Olt no later than the staff review meeting: Wednesday, April 26, 2000 No Comment Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) "PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE"/EFERENCE T('1L. ( (a4c.T) �-(� ;�iZ cr �020 /"/ 4 A' [L „ :7. N �C oi�,� ; f �cr -7--zoy� 7-0 /s U/�) T Ts 5: Date: Signature: CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site Drainage Report _ Other — Utihty _ Redline Utility _ landscape �� R • COMMENT SHEET DATE: February 16, 2000 DEPT: ENGINEERING PROJECT: #:32-99 Park Place — PDP (LUC) PLANNER: Steve Olt ENGINEER: Marc Virata All comments must be received by: March 8, 2000 ❑ No Problems 21 Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) Comments: As previously noted, appropriate letter(s) of intent for off -site easements are required prior to a hearing for this project. The submitted variance request to allow building envelope placement within the 15' of required utility easement separation from right-of-way for an arterial street has thus far received concerns from Public Service Company. The request is still currently under review with the utility companies. Based upon Public; Service's response, 9' of utility easement separation is required as a minimum, additional may be necessary. As such, the 8' of utility easement separation shown from Tract F is not adequate and needs to be widened 1'. It appears that the physical location of all the buildings are at or exceeding 15', if the building envelopes on the tracts are moved back to 15', then there would not be an issue. Further discussion with the utilities needs to be conducted (perhaps a second utility coordination meeting) and at this point, the variance request does not appear to be acceptable. The use of enhanced crosswalks along Boardwalk Drive across the driveways is not allowed (as shown on the site plan.) Please remove this from all future submittals. Please put the culvert, channel, and pan details back on the grading plan, they were removed with this submittal and are needed to compare with the proposed grading. Note that on the plat, the entire area outside of all building envelopes has the designation of being an emergency access easement. Typically, we only require the fire lanes to have this designation. It is suggested that the fire lane portion be delineated on the plat with this portion being noted as utility, drainage, access, and emergency access easements. Property owners might find it of concern that emergency access designation is given throughout the site, allowing (in theory) emergency services the right to cite people or property anywhere outside of the buildings. The sight distance easement language on the landscape plan does not appear correctly, the last line was also omitted: ("For non -level areas these requirements shall be modified to provide the same degree of visibility.") �_ Date: March 15, 2000 Signature: PLEASE SEND COPIES OF MARKED REVISION 2 Plat 0 Site 0 Utility 21 Landscape 0 Drainage Report 0 NO COMMENTS -SUBMIT MYLARS REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: February 16, 2000 TO: Mapping PROJECT: #32-99 Park Place - Project Development Plan (LUC) All comments must be received by Steve Olt no later than the staff review meeting: Wednesday, March'V. 2000 No Comment Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) "PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE" �. Ll5/niG THE �EA2rn�(>�CiEGCED /n1 �ED> TH/5 Bo(/NOR2Y DoES�'T GLo S£, THE 8EA2/NU A 5a paE5n1T p7grC/l � �/r T//EEXCEPfianl /5 oK, k�2G /Po� hC(-"e 1"r' 6 Gace lS 4 l� a � u J ?-L+� jfirtCs {'1'i�Vq IJecs ).laT S(-Ea�..� !�� Date: Signature:_ Egffg-4UU-W5Tfii lat _ Site _ Ommage Report _ Other _ Utility _ Redline Ulility _ Landscape REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: February 16, 2000 TO: Engineering PROJECT: #32-99 Park Place - Project Development Plan (LUC) All comments must be received by Steve Olt no later than the staff review meeting: Wednesday, March 1, 2000 No Comment Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) "PLEASE IDENTIFY YOUR REDLINES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE" Date: CHECK HEIT77013 5T OT _ Plat _ site Utility _ Redline Utility _ Drainage Fgod _ Other tandsw REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: November 24, 1999 TO:.6n,5, pwnf. PROJECT: #32-99 Park Place PDP — Type II (LUC) Date: A11 comments must be received by Steve Olt no later than the staff review meeting: Wednesday, December 15, 1999 No Comment Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) _�ZZ CHECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS _ Plat _ Site _ OraiWe Report _ Other — Utility — Redline Utility -Landscape REVISION COMMENT SHEET DATE: November 24, 1999 DEPT: ENGINEERING PROJECT: #32-99 Park Place Project Development Plan — Type II LUC All comments must be received by Steve Olt no later than the staff review meeting: December 15,1999 ❑ No Comment 0 Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) General Comments: • The City Engineer approved the submitted variance requests dated November 24, 1999. • Provide sufficient separation from the buildings to the dedicated right-of-way. 15 feet of separation is required. • A letter of intent from Larimer Canal No.2 is needed for the necessary off -site easement prior to a hearing for this project. Plat: • 15' of utility easement needs to be maintained past the right-of-way. It appears that the buildings and the tracts they sit on are often well within 15' of the right-of-way offered for dedication. • The sight distance easement language on the plat should be revised as follows: Sight Distance. Easement — The sight distance easement is an easement required by the City at some street intersections where it is necessary to protect the line of sight for a motorist needing to see approaching traffic and to react safely for merging their vehicle into the traffic flow. The following are requirements for certain objects that may occupy a sight distance easement for level grade: Date: / 211 Signature: k �- Please send copies of marked revisions Plat Site Utility -10t andscape ❑ NO COMMENTS —SUBMIT MYLARS City of Fort Collins