HomeMy WebLinkAboutCENTRE FOR ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY PUD FOURTEENTH - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2003-05-28Devei-Pment Services
Planning Department
q 3.
�gy
3
Citv of Dort Collins
April 20, 1989
Mr. Jim Gpfroh and Mr. Ric Hattman
Gefroh-Hattman, Inc.
145 West Swallow Road
Fort Collins, CO. 80525
Dear Gentlemen:
Staff has reviewed the request for Preliminary P.U.D. for the Congregate Living
Facility (14th Filing) and offers the following comments:
1. A P.U.D. request for a building height over 40 feet must also be reviewed for
height considerations. Enclosed please find the "Special Review of Building
with Height Over 40-feet" as copied out of the Development Manual. On page
5.18, please note the submittal requirements. Briefly, the submittal
requirements call for a shadow analysis, a visual analysis, and a statement of
planning objectives addressing the review criteria.
2.� The final plat needs to dedicate a 15 foot minimum width utility easement
adjoining the north right-of-way of Worthington Circle. Planting of street
trees must be coordinated with Public Service Company. Trees should be six
feet away from buried gas lines.
3. The Drainage Plan does not meet the Preliminary submittal requirements.
Please add the following information:
A. All proposed drainage facilities including the approximate area and
volume of the detention ponds.
B. A note indicating the outfall from the site and downstream conditions
and/or downstream restrictions.
C. Proposed contours and flow arrows.
D. Name of the P.U.D. west of the site and an indication of two runoff
from the adjacent site affects the 14th Filing.
E. This site will drain into the proposed 7th Filing detention pond. Until the
7th Filing is built, however, there is no outlet to the site. The 14th
Filing design must take this into account and provide any interim
improvements required.
300 Lal'orte Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (303) 221-6750
Page 2
4. The west side must have a fire hydrant accessible. It may be that the parking
lot could be reconfigured to provide unobstructed access to the existing
hydrant. Otherwise, an additional hydrant must be added.
5. A new hydrant must be added to serve the cast side of the building. This
hydrant may be on the public street at the cast parking lot entrance.
6. ) Will the street trees along Worthington Circle be placed in berms? The
—' widened sidewalk to match the nursing home is a good idea but should be
offset with berms.
7. The site: has tremendous views to the west and north. For this reason, Staff
suggests that the sidewalk system linking the patios on the north and cast be
continued to the west, around the front, and tie back into the sidewalk
serving the entry feature. This would offer a walking loop for the residents.
8. Staff applauds the inclusion of the patios on the north and east. However, a
10 wide patio on the north side of a 49 foot building may not be the most
pleasing, common space. Have you considered adding a patio on the northwest
side of the property to be served by the sidewalk loop suggested above? This
may result in a more pleasant space.
9. At the neighborhood meeting, it was mentioned that some parking statistics for
Congregate Care facilities would be available to justify the proposed parking
ratios. Are these data available? Is one handicap parking space sufficient?
What are the ratios at the facility on Lemay across from Parkwood?
10. Please specify the perimeter fence. Will this fence by the same plastic coated
chainlink, 4 foot in height?
11. Does the client anticipate any pedestrian travel between the Congregate Care
and the nursing home? Staff suggests that a sidewalk be constructed between
the two uses to keep pedestrians or wheel chairs from having to walk to the
ends of the drive aisle to cross to the other site. This could be done in a
landscaped island on both sides of the fence to promote pedestrian safety.
12. The site plan indicates two monument signs on the Worthington Circle
frontage. The Sign Code would only allow one.
13. Have you considered extending the perimeter sidewalk through the service area
on the east side of the building? This would create a loop through the patios
and provide a pleasant, secure, outdoor amenity.
14. The C.A.T. Master Plan (amended January, 1988) indicates that there is a
possible pedestrian connection across the New Mercer Ditch in between the
east line of Parcel N and the west line of Parcel K. Also, Staff discussions
with the Everitt Company and Cityscape Urban Design have indicated that
bicycle/pedestrian paths would parallel the two ditches north and west of
Centre Avenue. The site plan for the Congregate Care facility does not
account for this future path and connection. Staff strongly encourages you to
consider the ditches as amenities and not something to be fenced off. If
Page 3
fencing is required for security, then perhaps a gate system could be
implemented. It is difficult to imagine the future residents not wanting to
have access to a path system that will ultimately link up with the City's
Spring Creek trail.
This concludes Staff comments at this time. In order to remain on schedule for
the May 22, Planning and Zoning Board hearing, please note the following
deadlines:
Plan revisions are due May 3, 1989
PMT's, colored renderings, and 10 prints are due May 15, 1989
Please feel free to call and set up a meeting to discuss these comments at your
earliest convenience.
Sincerely,
,-tee
Tcd Shepard,
City Planner
Enc.
cc: Joe Frank, Assistant Planning Director
Mike Herzig, Development Engineer