HomeMy WebLinkAboutCIMARRON WEST PUD - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2003-07-31No Text
DACE: /-7-8/
c
O
CD
CD
Item
DEPARTME"'IT
o
Comments,,,,-,,,.,--,-.
'�
� � � ,;� •r.� .._ ._, � Q y .� -�_a, g � .�
Q_ w o �. L b
� � t� ,� 1 z r,�
G�c
10 ' f'. � '' -'� s •.._� �- o -a 5 0 �.. -4 1-� �
Vs •2 s } � h va. a -4-'
� � v i) N o �Z_ -�; ��
fv'\ wk-
rF� p_
2
Robert Sutter—
architects planners
Mr. Joseph Fran:
City of Fort Collins
Planning Division
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, Colorado 80522
Subject: Cimarron West P.U.D.
Dear Joe:
drake office center ........ ..333 w. drake road
ft. Collins, Colorado 80526 . (303) 223 - 5198
February 2, 1981
This letter is in response to your comments, dated January 20, 1981. Our office
has coordinated with Taranto, Stanton & Tagge regarding your comments, submitted
herewith.
Item Numbers.
R"" The site plan has been revised to show curb cuts per the engineers
drawings.
i?l Curb cuts have been revised to 90°, ± 100, to public streets.
. The Public Works Department has not yet submitted their comments to
TST. These comments will be reflected on utility drawings after com-
pletion of Public Work's review and resubmitted.
TST has contacted the Engineering Department and complied with their
requests.
6. Site plan scale is indicated.
16. TST has coordinated all Shields/Drake Road requirements with the P.U.D.
LT. All private driveways are 24' minimum.
The southwest parking area has been revised to accomodate fire
equipment access.
(, All buildings meet the 150' fire access distance.
The landscape plan will be resubmitted at a later date. Additional
landscaping will be provided at the west property line, building areas,
and fencing will be supplied where presently non-existent.
Mr. Joseph Frank, Plani g Division February 2, 1981
Cimarron West P.IJ.D. page 2
A typical parcel schedule and plan will be submitted on the revised
landscape plan.
All sidewalks are 4' wide.
,13. Typical parking spaces and lane dimensions are noted on the revised
site plan.
1�. The number of bedrooms for each unit are listed on the revised plan.
A. Property line dimensions are indicated on the plan.
1�. Building envelopes and dimensions are noted for tennis courts and
recreation facilities.
f7. Dimensions of all envelopes to property lines have been noted.
18. All easements have been noted on the plan.
A 9. Active open space areas have been delineated on the plan.
P/ Additional trees at the street have been supplied.
?Y-I"-The developer will be responsible to supply all landscaping as noted
on the landscape plan.
16. The sprinkling system will be supplied per City of Fort Collins
requirements and as noted on the landscape plan.
The utility, landscape,rendered site plan and PMT plans will be resubmitted at
a later date, after all comments and revisions have been made. Those items
noted above are reflected on the revised site plan or will be noted on the
landscape plan, upon its final submission.
Please contact our office, if we may be of any further assistance to expedite
approval.
Co ' lly,
teph J Stein icker
Robert Su er, Architects/Planners
SJS:sfj
Copy: T.D. Murphy
ta®�
Ck. ITY OF FORT COLLINS P.O. BOX 580, FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80522 PH (303� 484�220
PLANNING DIVISION EXT. 655
December 22, 1981
Mr. Joe Roesser
JCR Engineering
211 West Myrtle
Fort Collins, CO 80521
Dear Joe:
The staff has reviewed your application to replat the subdivision plat of
Cimarron West PUD and would offer the following comments:
1. There is an existing Lot 2 and 3 in Block 2 which is not being replatted.
Therefore, the "new" Lots 2 and 3 should be renumbered to Lots 9 and 10.
2. There appears to be some question over how the replat meshes with the
plat of Cimarron Plaza. I would suggest we meet as soon as possible to
resolve this problem.
3. The existing easements that will be vacated as a result of this replat
must be approved by the City Council. The applicant should prepare the
necessary vacation documents for City Council review in early February.
4. The approved utility plans for Cimarron West must be revised to reflect
the replat. These revisions must be reviewed and approved by the City
prior to approval of the administrative change for Cimarron West.
I would suggest we meet as soon as possible to discuss the above comments.
Revisions to the subdivision plat reflecting the above comments should be
delivered to this office no later than Monday, January 11, 1982 (5 copies).
Also, on Monday, January 18, 1982, 8-1/2"xll" reductions of all plans and
colored renderings of the site plan should be submitted. Please feel free
to call if you should have any questions.
Sincerely,
Joe ank
Se 'or Planner
JF/fsr
cc: Josh Richardson, Development Engineer
Ken Waido, Acting Planning Director
DATE
CIMAZZO?-.l WEST AMEObEb
'11TEN-1: ? I-ELA M 19 A 9,y
COMMENTS
CITY OF:: FORT COLLINS
OFFICE OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
March 21, 1984
Mr. John Dengler
DENGLER & ASSOCIATES
Building E, Suite 200
760 Whalers Way
Fort Collins, Colorado 80525
Dear John:
Staff has reviewed the application for preliminary PUD approval of the Cimar-
ron West PUD and offers the following comments:
1. Existing and proposed easements should be shown on the site plan. Any
existing easements or ROW to be vacated will need to be approved by City
Council. An eight foot easement adjacent to Raintree Drive and along
Drake Road and Shields Street will be required.
2. There are repayments for improvements to water and sewer lines in Drake
Road due with this development. Contact Webb Jones in the Water and Sewer
Utility for more specific information.
3. Raintree Drive must be public rather than private. Please revise on site
plan showing necessary ROW dedication.
4. The parking spaces next to retaining wall should be dimensioned. No
overhang is possible so they must be a minimum of 18 feet in length.
5. Building B appears to be outside the 150 foot fire access area until the
driveway through Cimarron Plaza is constructed. Please clarify con-
struction schedule of this road.
6. The dimension between the south property line and parking areas should be
indicated.
7. Areas devoted to active open space must be clearly delineated on the site
plan. In no case shall the areas be less than 10,000 square feet in area
or have a dimension less than 50 feet.
8. In some cases, the location of bike parking does not appear adequate, for
r>�
OFFS(;[ (if PLANNING 2EE _c PortU Ave_ . O. Him 520 . Fort Collins, Ccihr6do 805PP . DD3) P21-6750
Af•JD DEVELOPMENT
Mr. John Dengler
From: Joe Frank
March 21, 1984
Page Two
instance, parking is needed between buildings J and K; in front of
building L; west of and between buildings N and P; between buildings W
and U; between buildings E and F; and at the pool building.
9. Height of berms should be indicated.
10. The dimensions between some of the buildings in the project should be
indicated.
11. If the tennis court is anticipated not to be provided, I recommend it be
completely deleted from the plan. If, in the future, tennis courts are
again desired, the plan could be administratively changed to include
them.
12. Staff questions the need and desireability of locating the ten space
parking lot adjacent to the tennis and pool area. Staff recommends the
applicants investigate eliminating the parking area.
13. The 150 foot area information is not complete. Please indicate location
of animal clinic to the south; density and type of dwelling units in
Cimarron Square; density and type of residential units to the west; and
proposed land uses to the north.
14. Staff recommends the applicants provide cross sections of the area be-
tween the existing single family residences and the adjacent parking and
buildings indicating distance between buildings, .landscaping and berming,
etc.
15. Architectural elevations should be submitted as part of the preliminary
PUD plan for both the 12- and 16-plex buildings. These plans should be
submitted before the revisions to the site plans are submitted for staff
review.
16. Staff is concerned that with only two different building types out of 22
buildings the project will lack variety in visual appearance. Staff
recommends the applicants investigate ways in which variety in building
design may be utilized in this site plan.
17. Staff recommends buildings G and K be re-evaluated in terms of better
integrating it into the rest of the site.
18. Staff questions the desireability of double fronting many of the build-
ings with parking, especially buildings W, T, P, and G. Staff recommends
the applicants re-evaluate the plans in terms of eliminating this
condition.
19. Staff has some suggestions for revisions to the landscape plan including
installation of low lying vegetation in parking islands, tree planting
Mr. John Dengler
From: Joe Frank
March 21, 1984
Page Three
and berming along the arterials and other public streets. Typical founda-
tion plantings around all buildings should be provided on the landscape
plan. The treatment of landscaping in this plan will be critical to
staff's anci the Planning and Zoning Board's review of this project. I
recommend the applicants retain a professional landscape architect to
prepare both the preliminary and final PUD landscape plans for this
project.
20. Preliminary subdivision plat will be required.
21. Motorcycle parking should be provided.
22. Staff questions the points you have taken on the Density Chart. I would
like to meet with you to discuss this item.
I recommend we meet as soon as possible to discuss the above comments. Revi-
sions to the plans should be submitted no later than Monday, April 2. Also, on
Monday, April 16, 82"xll" reductions and co ®red renderin—g—s-U—JI plans in
addition to ten 24"x36" copies of the site, landscape, cross sections and
building elevations should be submitted to me. If you have any questions,
please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
e rank
or City Planner
JF:ro
cc: Bonnie Tripoli, Development Coordinator
'9q DEPARTMEN'
DATE co
ITENI: =19 E - CINR(LRoN OE�ST
COMMENTS
�. CSu w,l� .I► Q�-d fo S, y y% -61{f p
l��s due fa �rr� ya���
�he for eas Pip L,uc. ow- �y 4L,.
y �
2 �ra,nar e Cork«�s *er- 5i7r,v4 o f Curb "Y"t. ✓'ou��r�
y LL
bev-e-lorfs ✓bSPC-„s.b,I,fc.� .
. ��� ��a� ruaf�r
a
S. i)evdo r cv/l we Crf prorstf 0
S.eu�ev v-vi oc,
1 �
12, r�'2'-/a/�-- c��1-� <--� _d�J
CITY OF FOH T- COLLINS
OFFICE OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
June 21, 1984
Mr. John Dengler
Dengler & Associates
760 Whaler's Way
Bldg. E, #200
Fort Collins, CO 80526
Dear John,
The staff has reviewed the application for Final PUD approval of
Cimarron West and would offer the following comments:
1. There are repays due on the existing water and sewer lines in
Drake Road.
2. The front building envelope setbacks from rear of sidewalks do
not in all cases satisfy the fifteen foot requirement necessary
for installation of power, natural gas and water stop boxes in
the space. This should be of concern to the developer if use of
natural gas is anticipated.
3. CSU will need to sign -off plans due to irrigation line along the
east property line owned by them.
4. Ten foot utility easements should be shown along all streets. All
existing and proposed utility easements should be indicated on the
site plan. Any unused utility easements will need to be vacated with
a separate instrument.
5. Certain additional street improvements to Drake Road may be re-
quired depending on whether this proposal, Cimmaron Plaza, or the
Raintree Shopping Center develops first.
6. Security lighting of buildings and parking lots and other planned
security measures in the project should be indicated on the site plan.
7. Site plan should indicate building envelope dimensions and dimensions
of building envelopes from at least two platted property lines.
8. Pool and club house needs to be in a dimensioned envelope.
mwr
� a
17
OFF ICF OF PL_ANNIN(
AN[) ❑EVELOPMFNT
i
ton Li Pnrte AvH, • J O Box 580 • Fnrt'E'uha ti, • 03)i PP 1 E-750
John Dengler Letter
6/21/84 - Page 2
9. The site plan should indicate both building envelopes and building
footprints.
10. Building elevations should be submitted for all buildings in the
project.
11. Dimensions of buffer areas along exterior property lines should be
indicated on the site plan.
12. Dimensions between buildings should be indicated on the site plan.
13. The applicant should provide evidence indicating how building light-
ing and parking lot lighting will be designed to minimize glare
into abutting residential area. The type of lighting should be in-
dicated on the site plan.
14. Access easements across Cimarron Plaza should be dedicated to
provide for the fire access as indicated on the site plan.
15. The site plan is unclear as to which buildings are "Type 1" or
"Type 2". Please clarify.
16. The preliminary landscape plan was approved with the condition
that larger than minimum landscaping would be provided along the
west property line. The final landscape plan should indicate
exact location of these plants.
17. The landscape plan should include typical landscaping around
foundation of buildings.
18. Additional screening materials should be provided between the ends
of the buildings and the west property line as was the concept
indicated on the preliminary site plan.
19. In general, the final landscape plan does not appear to conform to
to the preliminary plan in terms of:
a. Overall, there appears to be less plant materials in the open
space areas;
b. Low-lying shrubs in addition to shade trees in parking islands
should be provided;
c. Tree, evergreen and shrub planting along the arterials appears
to be sparse as compared to the preliminary plan;
d. Tree, evergreen and shrub planting along the interior local
street appears to also be lacking as compared to the approved plan;
e. Additional screening should be provided in the area between
buildings g and b and the adjacent commercial uses.
John Dengler Letter
6/21/84 - Page 3
20. On Monday, July 16, 1984, signed mulars of the site plan, land-
scape plan, building elevations and subdivision plat should be sub-
mitted. Also, on that date a signed Site and Landscape Covenants docu-
ments should be submitted.
21. On Monday, July 16, 1984, 8," X 11" PMT reductions of all plans;
ten full size copies of the site and landscape plan, and; colored
renderings of the landscape plan and building elevations should be de-
livered to me.
I would recommend we meet as soon as possible to discuss the above
comments. Revisions to the plans (five copies) should be delivered to
me no later than Monday, July 11, 1984. If you should have any questions
please feel free to call me.
Sincerely,
i
Joe F ank
Senio City Planner
/kb
CC: Bonnie Tripoli, Development Coordinator
Mauri Rupel, Development Center Director