Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBLOCK 14 261 PINE STREET PINE STREET LOFTS - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2004-12-02CONCEPTUAL REVIEW STAFF COMMENTS City of Fort Collins MEETING DATE:: November 18, 2002 ITEM: Redevelopment of Poudre Valley Creamery at Jefferson and Pine APPLICANT: Berryhill Development Inc. Kevin Berryhill P.O. Box 631 Niwot, CO 80544 Ross Cooney CCMK Architecture & Planning 2121 301h Street, Suite 100 Boulder, CO 80301-1118 Larry Stroud Realtec, Inc. 255 E. Monroe, Suite 4 Fort Collins, LAND USE DATA: The request is to demolish the existing Poudre Valley Creamery building at 251 Pine and develop 14 multifamily dwelling units in a new building with 25 below -ground level parking spaces. DEPARTMENTAL CONTACTS: Current Planning- Troy Jones 221-6750 Advance Planning Clark Mopes 221-6225 Historic Preservation Karen McWilliams 224-6078 Zoning Department- Jenny Nuckols 221-6760 Engineering Department- Marc Virata 221-6605 Street Oversizing Coordinator- Matt Baker 221-6605 Poudre Fire Authority- Ron Gonzales 221-6570 COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. PO. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 (970)221-6750 CURRENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT hnProject Comments Sheet Selected Departments City of Fort Coll' Department: Engineering Date: August 21, 2003 Project: PINE STREET LOFTS -BASIC DEVELOPMENT REVIEW All comments must be received by Marc Virata in Engineering, no later than the staff review meeting: Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Marc Virata Topic: General Number: 11 Created: 8/8/2003 The stairwells leading into the building(s) are required to be outside of the right-of-way and within the property line. In general, please ensure that the property lines are evident on all plans to help demonstrate compliance that all permanent structures are outside of the right-of-way. Number: 12 Created: 8/8/2003 In general, a utility plan set needs to be created, consisting of a cover sheet, utility plan, grading plan, and details sheet. The site, landscape, and building elevations need to separated from this utility plan set. Number: 15 Created: 8/11/2003 The access ramp along Jefferson crossing pine should be "directional' (not leading pedestrians out on a diagonal towards Jefferson, just straight across Pine). Number: 16 Created: 8/11/2003 The access ramp and sidewalk system along Pine should "line back up" with the sidewalk system on the west side of the public alley. As a consequence, the transformer should be relocated outside of the right-of-way in order to allow for the sidewalk to be located in this manner. Number: 17 Created: 8/11/2003 It is suggested that a utility coordination meeting be held with the various utility agencies in order to discuss servicing the site and coordination between the different entities. Engineering can set up this meeting if desired from the developer. Number: 18 Created: 8/11/2003 Engineering would appreciate obtaining a CAD filets) of the site design in order to check vehicular turning movement throughout the area. The turning movement of Jefferson to Pine for a WB-50 vehicle, in particular, would be of interest to analyze using our electronic modeling software. Number: 19 Created. 8/11/2003 The curb extension adjacent to the westernmost parking stall along Pine Street is of concern with regards to street sweeping/snow plowing operations. This should be "angled" the other direction to better allow those vehicle turning movements. Please see the attachment of a copy from the proposed King Soopers development in Rigden Farm. Signature / // Date ECK ]HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site Drainage Report Other, Utility _ Redline Utility Landscape Page I Number: 49 Created: 8/21/2003 In conversation with Poudre Fire Authority, they need to have access to the site to meet their requirements. Per 3.6.6(D) of the Land Use Code, the unobstructed width of Pine Street will need to be 30' minimum (only 20' exists) because the building is 3 stories in height. Pine will need to be widened 10' additional on this side of the street. Also, per code, the turning radius for Pine out to Jefferson will need to be 25'. Number: 50 Created: 8/21 /2003 The access to the parking garage off the alley is required to intersect the alley at a right angle, per LCUASS 8.2.3. The access does not appear close to complying with this criteria. Number. 51 Created: 8/21 /2003 Please see additional comments from other departments and agencies. In general, a meeting with the applicant and various City departments are suggested. Topic: Utility Plans Number. 13 Created. 8/8/2003 Please ensure on the created utility plan set that it is indicated what items are to be removed, repaired, and/or replaced. It is unclear to me if the current median island along Pine Street is to be salvaged in some form as well as sections of curb and gutter on Jefferson Street. It is suggested that a demolition plan being included on the utility plan set in order to help understand the level of demolition taking place within the right-of-way. Number: 14 Created: 8/8/2003 The drainage from the alley out to Jefferson Street might be a concern with CDOT, as Jefferson is a state highway. From a City perspective, it would be preferred if the alley is designed in such a way to minimize the amount of drainage from the alley crossing over the public walk out to Jefferson. Number: 20 Created: 8/12/2003 Please show street patching on the plans where street cuts are proposed. Please also add a note on the plans indicating as such. "Limits of street repair are approximate. Final limits to be determined in the field by the City Engineering Inspector at the time the street cuts are made." Number: 21 Created: 8/12/2003 The utility plans need to show more information with regards to Pine Street. As it appears that no existing curb along Pine Street is to be retained, it needs to be demonstrated that the new curb will work with the existing street, please provide cross sections of Pine Street at the intersection of Jefferson Street, where it meets with the alley, and at intervals in between of 50 feet. Please indicate on the flowline where the high points are and the spot elevations at these points. There are two instances along the flowline of Pine where grades fall below .5%. In one instance, out to Jefferson, the grade is only .23%. In general to ensure no areas of ponding, it needs to be demonstrated that adequate cross slope is maintained across Pine and that adequate grade along the flowline is also maintained. This is especially the case where there are curb extensions. Number: 22 Created: 8/12/2003 The utility plan needs to show more information with regards to Jefferson Street. As new curb and gutter appears to be provided, a profile of the flowline is required in order to verify that flowline profiles meet criteria specified in the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards, Chapter 7. Page 2 BASIC DEVELOPMENT R•EVI•EW City of Fort Collins £N6IN££RIN6 DATE: October- 8, 2003 D£PT: XcelEnergy PROJEU- PINE STREET LOM All comments musf be received by Marc l,r-a7`'a no lafer- fhaA the sfa ff r evrew meefrh y: October- 29, 2003 ❑ No Problems D Problems or Corscerns (see below or attached) COMmmts.. • FXI Tf^tb rR' ."Vr _0 El.D6 Wil N"L 7) 17J.l TINT, "SAIN ..0"Rif--q !! ietL IFr ;:! *� At�FU /17 7-r�17I�6SFn Nt t`'Tf��t�`1e`. `D'f'ti�P,:1Al. Da+e: _�o���la S;yha+ure:._�, PLEASE SEND SEND COPIES OF MARKED REVISIONS ❑ Plat 0 Site ❑ Utility ❑ Larsdscape ❑ Drainage Repot C3-N'0 COMMENT BASIC D-EVEWPN1-ENT R-EVI-Ew RECEIVED City of Fort Collins 11 I ' `'A CURRENT PLANNING £N6IN££RIN6 DAME: October 8, 2003 D-EPt: Comcast PROMCrt: PINE STREET LOFTS All COMI"enfs Musf loe received by /14arc Vt, -afa no lafer than fhe sfa f f'revtew meefih y: October 29, 2003 this item �s on "DMS'' under "P;r\e Street Lofts - Bas c Developmer\t Rev;ew' ❑ No Pro6le,ns jw Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) COMMent5: Contcast Cable would like to see some sort of pocket utility easement out side of city right of way so that an above eround enclosure can be placed to provide service to this project or any of the other buildings around it. City engineering will not permit us to place enclosures in the rights of way. :Also no plans will be made to provide service to this Project until a Broadband Utility Basement, also called a sen ice agreement. is completed with our commercial Accounts B.secutive. Reneta Santro. Dote:. �i _ Siynoture:— M-AS£ SEND COPI-E5 OF MARKED REVISIONS as;te ❑ ■ m STAFF PROJECT REVIEW City of Yurt Collins BERRYHILL DEVELOPMENT Date: 10/29/03 KEVIN BERRYHILL 1708 WALNUT ST. BOULDER, CO 80302 Staff has reviewed your submittal for PINE STREET LOFTS -BASIC DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, and we offer the following comments: ISSUES: Department: Advance Planning Topic: General Number: 40 Site Planning. Issue Contact: Clark Mapes Created: 8/20/2003 Steps should not encroach into the Jefferson Street R.O.W. We discourage this solution because the sidewalk is already squeezed by the effects of the highway. The sidewalk connection to the south should be shown (across the drive to the adjoining property). How would this work now and in the future? The rear plaza looks very harsh and stark - all concrete? Could at least one tree be worked into the structure? Number: 41 Architecture. Created: 8/20/2003 This project is located directly adjacent to the Old Town Fort Collins Historic District, designated on both the National Register of Historic Places and as a Fort Collins Landmark District. The proposed design fails to comply with Building Compatibility standards in Sections 3.5.1 and 3.4.7 of the Land Use Code as explained below. [Section 3.5.1 Building and Project Compatibility 3.5.1 (B) Architectural Character. Compatibility shall be achieved through techniques such as the use of similar proportions in building mass(and) similar window and door patterns. 3.5.1 (C) Building Size, Height, Bulk, Mass, Scale. Buildings shall either be similar in size and height, or, if larger, be articulated and subdivided into massing that is proportional to the mass and scale of other structures on the same block, or if no buildings exist thereon, then on adjoining blocks. New buildings in historic districts should reflect the historic character of the neighborhood through repetition of roof lines, patterns of door and window placement, and the use of characteristic entry features.] General comment: Generous detailing on the ground level at the scale of a pedestrian is crucial. This is particularly true along Jefferson where there is no room for landscaping. The architecture needs to make up for the lack of landscaping, as it does throughout the historic district. The buildings in the district provide good examples of the amount of detailing and variation needed, all within a harmonious overall order. In general, this building should be articulated into modules that look more like traditional building fronts found on traditional homes, townhomes, brownstones, etc. Specific comments: The horizontal mass of the building should be articulated into approximately 25 to 50-foot bays or modules, to reflect the historic pattern of buildings on Pine and Jefferson Streets and add interest. This creates vertical directional orientation in essentially horizontal building mass. A degree of differentiation among these bays and modules could further reinforce the Page 1 traditional historic ambience and add interest and individuality to the different units. The historic district is full of examples. Doors should be centrally located within these bays rather than being placed between modules as shown in the submittal plans. Especially on the ground floor, the window area should be increased to better respect traditional ratios between solid and void found nearby in the defining areas of the historic district. This could involve pairing and ganging windows more closely together. In places where windows are not appropriate due to the interior use, blind recesses could be used to provide articulation with the same sense of scale and proportion. At the upper level, windows should form a rhythm or repeating patterns, rather than appear indeterminately placed. Rather than maintain the head height of all of the windows to compensate for the slope of the site, the building should be subdivided into modules with the head height of windows within each module proportional to grade. If the taller windows are desired, then a transom would be more appropriate than the different types of tall windows as shown. In addition to differentiating the horizontal mass with vertical divisions, the ground floor should be differentiated from the Boor above, and a prominent horizontal belt course feature should be added. Again, the historic district is full of good examples. [Section 3.4.7 Historic and Cultural Resources 3.4.7 (A) (2) Purpose. ...new construction is designed to respect the historic character of the site and any historic properties in the surrounding neighborhood. 3.4.7 (B) General Standard. The development plan and building design shall protect and enhance the historical and architectural value of any such historic property, whether on or adjacent to the project site. New buildings must be compatible with the historic character of any such historic resource, whether on the project site or adjacent thereto.] The proposed development plan fails to respect the historic character or protect and enhance the historical and architectural values of the Old Town Historic District. Elevations facing the streets should express closer attention to the historic buildings. Arched openings are not commonly used within the historic district, and when used, are of the same size and symmetrically placed. Comments stated above apply under this Section as well. The more whimsical details, such as the eyebrows on the third story, should be moved to the rear elevations, facing the plaza. [3.4.7 (E) (I ) New Construction. To the maximum extent feasible, the height, setback and/or width of new buildings shall be similar to those of existing historic buildings on any block face on which the new building is located and on any portion of a block face across a local or collector street from the block face on which the new building is located. Buildings at the ends of blocks shall be of a similar height to buildings in the adjoining blocks.] The historic buildings along Jefferson and Pine Streets are one and two stories in height; this building is proposed to be three -stories. The third Boor should be set back further so as to not be readily visible from the streets. 13.4.7 (E) (2) New Construction New buildings shall be designed to be in character with existing historic structures, but not be an imitation of historic styles. Horizontal elements, such as cornices, windows, moldings shall be aligned with those of existing historic buildings to strengthen the visual ties among buildings. Window patterns of existing buildings (size, height, number) shall be repeated in new construction, and the pattern of the primary building entrance facing the street shall be maintained to the maximum extent feasible.] Historically, facades were articulated with vertical elements, and stories were clearly differentiated. These defining characteristics are not adequately evident on this project. The windows and arched openings should also be revisited for rhythm of placement. [3.4.7 (E) (3) New Construction The dominant building material of existing historic buildings adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of the proposed structure shall be used as the primary material for new construction. Variety in materials can be appropriate, but shall maintain the existing distribution of materials in the same block.] The use of metal on the third Boor is inappropriate for the site. It is not a material commonly found in historic commercial districts, including the Old Town District. Page 2 Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Troy Jones Topic: General Number: 42 Created: 8/21/2003 1 recommend that a meeting be scheduled between your architects and Clark Mapes, Karen McWilliams and Troy Jones to flush out solutions for the Advance Planning comments regarding the need to revise the building elevations. Contact me, Troy Jones, at 221-6206 to set this meeting up. Number: 43 Created: 8/21/2003 In the event that you wish to pursue encroachments in the right-of-way, the standards don't allow it outright, so an Engineering Department variance would need to be granted to accomplish that. CDOT would likely need to be involved in the request if such an encroachment involves the Jefferson right-of-way as it is a State Highway. The area between Jefferson Street's curb and the building is fairly narrow, so staff would not likely support any encroachments in this area. Number: 44 Created: 8/21/2003 It appears that the proposed transformer is shown behind a screen wall. Please clarify the materials of this screen wall on the building elevations. Such materials can't be inferior to the materials of the building, and need's to be compatible with the adjacent facade. If, for some reason, this screen wall isn't allowed by the Light at Power Utility, an underground vault for the transformer would be the preferred solution. Otherwise, landscape screening could potentially work if the transformer isn't in such a prominent location. Number: 45 Created: 8/21/2003 Will the resident's be allowed to have satellite dishes? If so, their locations must be restricted so that such dishes are not attached to the Jefferson or Pine Street facades, but rather the facades facing internal to the block. We want to ensure that such dish locations are carefully thought out and planned for in the design, rather that becoming an awkward afterthought. Number: 46 Created: 8/21/2003 There is a general discomfort with the metal siding as a building material. Section 3.5.1(E) allows for matierials dissimilar to those already being used in the neighborhood only if "other characteristics such as scale and proportions, form, architectural detailing, color and texture," are "utilized to ensure that enough similarity exists for the building to be compatible, despite the differences in materials." Based on the Advance Planning comment N 41 above, staff has applied this language to the review of the proposed building elevations and has found that the design does not comply. Number: 47 Created: 8121 /2003 The internally oriented courtyard could be a very wonderful space if detailed successfully. Although there really isn't a code provision dealing with this, I have a few suggestions for this space. I recommend adding much more brick and stone to the facades that face this courtyard. The majority of the human experience from within this courtyard, as designed , seems to be concrete, stucco, and metal siding. I recommend you make to walls of the rams out of stone or brick. I also recommend adding some green into the space in the form of planters, trelliage with vines, etc. Ornamental trees in large planters would also greatly enhance the space. Number: 48 Created: 8/21/2003 The landscape plan only seems to show turf in the foundation planting are between the building and the sidewalk on the Pine Street facade. Is this the intent, or are there plans to plant shrubs here? This needs to be either a hard urban edge where the sidewalk comes up to the building, or it needs to integrate shrubs into a foundation planting area. [LUC 3.2.1(H)]. Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Marc Virata Topic: General Number: 11 Created: 8/8/2003 The stairwells leading into the building(s) are required to be outside of the right-of-way and within the property line. In general, please ensure that the property lines are evident on all plans to help demonstrate compliance that all permanent structures are' outside of the right-of-way. Number: 12 Created: 8/8/2003 In general, a utility plan set needs to be created, consisting of a cover sheet, utility plan, grading plan, and details sheet. The site, landscape, and building elevations need to separated from this utility plan set. Page 3 i Number:15 Created: 8/11/2003 The access ramp along Jefferson crossing pine should be "directional" (not leading pedestrians out on a diagonal towards Jefferson, just straight across Pine). Number: 16 Created: 8/11/2003 The access ramp and sidewalk system along Pine should "line back up" with the sidewalk system on the west side of the public alley. As a consequence, the transformer should be relocated outside of the right-of-way in order to allow for the sidewalk to be located in this manner. Number: 17 Created: 8/11/2003 It is suggested that a utility coordination meeting be held with the various utility agencies in order to discuss servicing the site and coordination between the different entities. Engineering can set up this meeting if desired from the developer. Number: 18 Created: 8/11/2003 Engineering would appreciate obtaining a CAD file(s) of the site design in order to check vehicular turning movement throughout the area. The turning movement of Jefferson to Pine for a WB-50 vehicle, in particular, would be of interest to analyze using our electronic modeling software. Number. 19 Created: 8/11/2003 The curb extension adjacent to the westernmost parking stall along Pine Street is of concern with regards to street sweeping/snow plowing operations. This should be "angled" the other direction to better allow thosee vehicle turning movements. Please see the attachment of a copy from the proposed King Soopers development in Rigden Farm. Number: 49 Created: 8/21/2003 In conversation with Poudre Fire Authority, they need to have access to the site to meet their requirements. Per 3.6.6(D) of the Land Use Code, the unobstructed width of Pine Street will need to be 30' minimum (only 20' exists) because the building is 3 stories in height. Pine will need to be widened 10' additional on this side of the street. Also, per code, the turning radius for Pine out to Jefferson will need to be 25'. Number: 50 Created: 8/21/2003 The access to the parking garage off the alley is required to intersect the alley at a right angle, per LCUASS 8.2.3. The access does not appear close to complying with this criteria. Number: 51 Created: 8/21/2003 Please see additional Conurients from other departments and agencies. In general, a meeting with the applicant and various City departments are suggested. Topic: Utility Plans Number: 13 Created: 8/8/2003 Please ensure on the created utility plan set that it is indicated what items are to be removed, repaired, and/or replaced. It is unclear to me if the current median island along Pine Street is to be salvaged in some form as well as sections of curb and gutter on Jefferson Street. It is suggested that a demolition plan being included on the utility plan set in order to help understand the level of demolition taking place within the right-of-way. Number: 14 Created: 8/8/2003 The drainage from the alley out to Jefferson Street might be a concern with CDOT, as Jefferson is a state highway. From a City perspective, it would be preferred if the alley is designed in such a way to minimize the amount of drainage from the alley crossing over the public walk out to Jefferson. Number: 20 Created: 8/12/2003 Please show street patching on the plans where street cuts are proposed. Please also add a note on the plans indicating as such: "Limits of street repair are approximate. Final limits to be determined in the field by the City Engineering Inspector at I:he time the street cuts are made." Number: 21 Created: 8/12/2003 The utility plans need to show more information with regards to Pine Street. As it appears that no existing curb along Pine Street is to be retained, it needs to be demonstrated that the new curb will work with the existing street; please provide cross sections of Pine Street at the intersection of Jefferson Street, where it meets with the alley, and at intervals in between of 50 feet. Please indicate on the flowline where the high points are and the spot elevations at these points. There are two instances along the flowline of Pine where grades fall below .5%. In one instance, out to Jefferson, the grade is only .23%. In general to ensure no areas of ponding, it needs to be demonstrated that adequate cross slope is maintained across Pine and that adequate grade along the flowline is also maintained. This is especially the case where there are curb extensions. Number: 22 Created: 8/12/2003 The utility plan needs to show more information with regards to Jefferson Street. As new curb and gutter appears to be provided, a profile of the flowline is required in order to verify that flowline profiles meet criteria specified in the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards, Chapter 7. Department: Light: & Power Topic: Electric Number. 3 Each residential unit must be metered individually Issue Contact: Doug Martine Created: 7/21/2003 An accessable location for the meters will be necessary. Department: PFA Issue Contact: Ron Gonzales Topic: fire Number: 52 Created: 8/22/2003 A fire hydrant shall be required at the corner of Jefferson and Pine in front of the building(s). Number: 53 Created: 8/22/2003 The building which fronts on Jefferson shall be addressed on Jefferson Street; and the building which fronts on Pine shall be addressed on Pine Street. Number: 54 These 3-story bldgs shall be fire sprinklered. Created: 8/22/2003 Number: 55 Created: 8/22/2003 These 3-story blldgs are required to have a 30-foot fire lane on the Pine Street side of the project. Number: 56 Created: 8/22/2003 A 6-inch water supply line is required for the fire sprinkler system; unless the sprinkler contractor proves first that a smaller supply line will suffice. Hydraulic calcs are required prior to installation to verify vollumes and pressures. Department: Police Issue Contact: Joseph Gerdom Topic: General Number. 35 Created: 8/13/2003 Lighting: Needs lighting (photometric) plan. Points to consider will be the garage entrance and the access doors onto the alley. Access doors should provide a viewport to allow occupants to surveil the adjacent areas prior to exiting building. How will residents access trash? What type of security will ground Floor windows be provided with, esp., those on alley side? Number: 59 Created: 10/28/2003 [ 10/28/03] No photometric plan. Landscaping and lighting at northern most entrance may have safety and security issues. Lighting and security of access to trash/recycle area needs limited access from exterior, adequate lighting and surveillance component. Page 5 Department: Stormiwater Utility Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Topic: Drainage Number: 29 Created: 8/13/2003 The new sidewalk and parkway is reducing the existing street's capacity regarding storm water Flows. The street acts as the conveyance element, which if the street is altered, a new analysis needs to take place. This analysis would consist of documenting the Flow rate during the 100-year storm that is traveling down Pine Street and showing that the reduced capacity in the street has no negative impact on surrounding properties as well as this site. Please contact Wes Lamarque at 4 16-24 18 for more information. Number: 30 Created: 8/13/2003 The City also requires the lowest opening of the building (the grade lust before the driveway drops to the underground parking for this case) to be I foot higher than the water surface elevation for any detention pond or major conveyance (Pine Street in this case). Options may have to be discussed verbally before next submittal. Number: 31 Created: 8/13/2003 Options also need to be discussed for water quality mitigation. The City requires 40-hour water quality extended detention for new development. In "in -fill" development, there are alternatives that can be designed to satisfy this requirement. Number: 32 Created: 8/13/2003 Please change existing storm sewer layout to reflect actual location. See grading plan. Number. 33 Created: 8/13/2003 Please provide all drainage construction details needed for this site in the plan set. Number. 34 Created: 8/13/2003 Please provide and erosion control plan and report for this site. If you have any questions please call Bob Zakely at 221- 6700. Department: Traffic Operations Issue Contact: Eric Bracke Topic: Traffic Number: 4 Created: 7/22/2003 Generally no problem and a TIS is not required as part of this project. Impacts to traffic, parking, and pedestrian circulation will be monitored and regulated during the construction phase of the project. Department: Transfort Issue Contact: Garold Smith Topic: General Number: 5 Created. 7/28/2003 No Comments Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: Tom Reiff Topic: Transportation Number: 36 Created: 8/19/2003 The stairs proposed along Pine Street and Jefferson are not permitted within the public Right -of -Way. Number: 38 Created: 8/19/2003 According to the LUC, attached sidewalks where cars overhang onto the walk are required to be 6' in width. However, since the proposed walk in front of the parked cars is secondary in nature a 4'6" width would be acceptable. Number: 39 Created: 8/19/2003 Relocate the proposed bike racks closer to the entrances of the buildings. Preferably just off the walkways leading into the buildings from the parking on Pine St. and located within the landscaped areas. Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Topic: Utility Plans Number: 23 Created: 8/12/2003 Page 6 Stormwater Utility- Glen Schlueter 224-6065 Water & Sewer Utilities- Roger Buffington 221-6854 Natural Resources Development Planner Doug Moore 221-6750 Light and Power Bruce Vogel 221-6700 Transportation Services (ped. & transit) Tom Reiff 416-2040 Transportation Services (traffic) Eric Bracke 224-6062 Transfort (local bus service) Gerold Smith 224-6195 Park Planning Jeff Lakey 416-2260 COMMENTS: 1. Zoning Department: a. The property is zoned Downtown (D), Old City Center Sub -district. b. The building height is limited to 4 stories not to exceed 56 feet. c. Although 25 off-street parking spaces (providing 1.75 spaces per unit) would be enough for two -bedroom dwelling units, if the owners of any of the units ever propose to convert a unit to a three -bedroom unit, there won't be enough parking, and therefore the building permit for such a request will not be granted because three -bedroom units require 2.0 spaces per unit. d. The setback will need to align with other nearby buildings. e. Section 4.12 of the Land Use Code provides additional specific standards. f. Show bicycle parking and trash/dumpster locations. g. A site plan, landscape plan, and utility plans will be required. h. We have set up a "utility plan/building permit review process for things that are allowed by Basic Development Review. This process generally is used whenever there are public improvements, drainage, transportation issues, etc. If you are planning to demolish and build new, It sounds like those issues would be present. The Development Review Engineering staff usually takes the lead on those. They have a submittal check list, and then they route them around to various departments and agencies for review and comment. If those types of issues aren't present, then you would submit 10 copies of a site/landscape plan and eievat ions to Zoning and then we route it around for comments. 2. Stormwater Utility Department: Location: 253 Pine Street 1. This site is in the Old Town drainage basin where the new development fee is $4,150/ac:re which is charged if there is an increase in impervious area greater than 350 :square feet. 2. The site is on Stormwater inventory map #8G. A copy of the map can be obtained from the Utilities office at 700 Wood Street. 3. There is a stormsewer in Pine Street that crosses Jefferson Street. It may be deep enough to gravity drain the underground parking area. The pipe does not flow to the Oak Street Outfoll and water quality treatment facility. Therefore, 2 Maintain the required 4 feet of minimum separation between the outside wall of meter pit and all permanent structures (Le building envelops, trash enclosures, permanent signage, etc.) Curb stop must be with 2 feet of the meter pit. Curb stops are not allowed in hard surfaced areas. Number: 26 Created: 8/13/2003 Show proposed water and sewer services on the landscape plans and provide the required landscape/utility separation distances. Number: 27 Created: 8/13/2003 As previously indicated, replace the existing 4-inch water main Pine Street with an 8-inch water main to the southwest most portion of this project. Number: 60 Created: 10/28/2003 [ 10/28/03] PVC pipe is not permitted for use with in the City of Fort Collins Utilities service area. Include the standard general note pertaining to depth of bury of water lines and polywrapping all D.I.P. Number: 61 Created: 10/28/2003 [10/28/03] Has Poudre Fire Authority approved a 4-inch fire line? See site, landscape and utility plans for other comments. Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Peter Barnes Topic: zoning Number: 8 Created: 7/31/2003 The site plan needs to be dimensioned. Show lot line dimensions and building dimensions. Also, need to clearly label the lot lines. 10-10-03, Second submittal still doesn't show dimensions on site plan. Also, lot line is labeled on parking plan page, but needs to be labeled on the site plan. Number: 57 Created: 10/10/2003 parking space #17 is an awkward space. I don't know how they would back out of the stall and get turned around so that they can drive FORWARD to the exit. Since they have more parking than the code requires, they should probably delete it so that we don't create a potentially unsafe situation where a driver tries to drive backwards all the way to the exit. Perhaps the space can be additional lockers. Space # 16 is marginal with regards to being able to back out of the stall and get headed in the right direction. Be sure and return all of your reclined 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. Yours Truly, Marc Virata City Planner Page 7 Project Comments Sheet Selected Departments Department: Engineering 111111111 Date: November 7, 2003 Project: PINE STREET LOFTS -BASIC DEVELOPMENT REVIEW All comments must be received by Marc Virata in Engineering, no later than the staff review meeting: Issue Contact: Marc Virata Topic: Drainage Number: 64 Created: 11/5/2003 [ 1 1 /5/031 Please provide information on where roof drains are located. Roof drainage should not be directing Flows over the public walk. The site plan shows trench drains internally but it is not shown on the utility plans what these tie into. Topic: General Number: 11 Created: 8/8/2003 111/5/031 Please note the letter from Don Bachman dated 10/23/03. The stairwells leading into the building(s) are required to be outside of the right-of-way and within the property line. In general, please ensure that the property lines are evident on all plans to help demonstrate compliance that all permanent structures are outside of the right-of-way. Number: 19 Created: 8/11/2003 (11/6/031 Because no inlet is being installed for this area (at elevation 76.09), please ensure a 5' radius is designed for to better allow street sweeping operations. The curb extension adjacent to the westernmost parking stall along Pine Street is of concern with regards to street sweeping/snow plowing operations. This should be "angled" the other direction to better allow thosee vehicle turning movements. Please see the attachment of a copy from the proposed King Soopers development in Rigden Farm. Number: 69 Created: 11/6/2003 [ 11 /6/031 The construction drawings reference the landscaping plans with regards to the colored/pattern concrete. The landscape plan shows this, but doesn't call out dimensions or specify colors. There should be some detail (preferrably in the construction plans) specifying what is intended. Number: 70 Created: 11 /6/2003 [ 11 /6/031 The project requires two benchmarks to be listed on the coversheet. In addition, add the following notes to the General Notes section: -Refer to Appendix E-I of the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards for additional General Notes. -These public improvement construction plans shall be valid for a period of three years from the date of approval by the Local Entity Engineer. Use of these plans after the expiration date will require a new review and approval process by the Local Entity prior to commencement of any work shown in these plans. Signature // / , Date 0HECK HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site Drainage Report Other Utility Redline Utility � Landscape Page I -The engineer who has prepared these plans, by execution and/or seal hereof, does hereby affirm responsibility to the Local Entity, as beneficiary of said engineer's work, for any errors and omissions contained in these plans, and approval of these plans by the Local Entity Engineer shall not relieve the engineer who has prepared these plans of all such responsibility. Further, to the extent permitted by law, the engineer hereby agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the Local Entity, and its officers and employees, from and against all liabilities, claims, and demands which may arise from any errors and omissions contained in these plans. -All recommendations of the final drainage and erosion control study (name of the study and date) by (Engineering Firm) shall be followed and implemented. -Approved Variances are listed as follows: (list applicable) Number: 71 Created: 11/6/2003 [ 1 1 /6/03] With the variance request being denied for the alley design, please ensure the alley intersection design (drawing 803) is met with the inlet at the north (this also includes the slope across the sidewalk previously noted). Number. 72 Created: 11 /7/2003 [ 1 1 /7/03] Please see additional comments from Comcast and City Forestry. Topic: Utility Plans Number: 68 Created: 11/6/2003 [1 1 /6/031 The alley design exiting out to Pine Street shows a 6.5% grade which is pretty steep for the sidewalk across the alley and not ADA compliant. It appears the design intends to construct a straight-line grade from the asphalt to the back of walk. The design should maintain the sidewalk at not more than a 2% slope, which appears to be how it exists today. Page 2 `¢ STAFF PROJECT REVIEW City of Fort Collins BERRYHILL DEVELOPMENT Date: 11/7/03 KEVIN BERRYHILL 1708 WALNUT ST. BOULDER, CO 80302 Staff has reviewed your submittal for PINE STREET LOFTS -BASIC DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, and we offer the following comments: ISSUES: Department: Advance Planning Topic: General Number: 40 Site Planning. Issue Contact: Clark Mapes Created: 8/20/2003 Steps should not encroach into the Jefferson Street R.O.W. We discourage this solution because the sidewalk is already squeezed by the effects of the highway. The sidewalk connection to the south should be shown (across the drive to the adjoining property). How would this work now and in the future? The rear plaza looks very harsh and stark - all concrete? Could at least one tree be worked into the structure? Number: 41 Architecture. Created: 8/20/2003 This project is located directly adjacent to the Old Town Fort Collins Historic District, designated on both the National Register of Historic Places and as a Fort Collins Landmark District. The proposed design fails to comply with Building Compatibility standards in Sections 3.5.1 and 3.4.7 of the Land Use Code as explained below. [Section 3.5.1 Building and Project Compatibility 3.5.1 (B) Architectural Character. Compatibility shall be achieved through techniques such as the use of similar proportions in building mass(and) similar window and door patterns. 3.5.1 (C) Building Size, Height, Bulk, Mass, Scale. Buildings shall either be similar in size and height, or, if larger, be articulated and subdivided into massing that is proportional to the mass and scale of other structures on the same block, or if no buildings exist thereon, [hen on adjoining blocks. New buildings in historic districts should reflect the historic character of the neighborhood through repetition of roof lines, patterns of door and window placement, and the use of characteristic entry features.] General comment: Generous detailing on the ground level at the scale of a pedestrian is crucial. This is particularly true along Jefferson where there is no room for landscaping. The architecture needs to make up for the lack of landscaping, as it does throughout the historic district. The buildings in the district provide good examples of the amount of detailing and variation needed, all within a harmonious overall order. In general, this building should be articulated into modules that look more like traditional building fronts found on traditional homes, townhomes, brownstones, etc. Specific comments: The horizontal mass of the building should be articulated into approximately 25 to 50-foot bays or modules, to reflect the historic pattern of buildings on Pine and Jefferson Streets and add interest. This creates vertical directional orientation in essentially horizontal building mass. A degree of differentiation among these bays and modules could further reinforce the traditional historic ambience and add interest and individuality to the different units. The historic district is full of examples. Page I Doors should be centrally located within these bays rather than being placed between modules as shown in the submittal plans. Especially on the ground Floor, the window area should be increased to better respect traditional ratios between solid and void found nearby in the defining areas of the historic district. This could involve pairing and ganging windows more closely together. In places where windows are not appropriate due to the interior use, blind recesses could be used to provide articulation with the same sense of scale and proportion. At the upper level, windows should form a rhythm or repeating patterns, rather than appear indeterminately placed. Rather than maintain the head height of all of the windows to compensate for the slope of the site, the building should be subdivided into modules with the head height of windows within each module proportional to grade. If the taller windows are desired, then a transom would be more appropriate than the different types of tall windows as shown. In addition to differentiating the horizontal mass with vertical divisions, the ground Boor should be differentiated from the Boor above, and a prominent horizontal belt course feature should be added. Again, the historic district is full of good examples. [Section 3.4.7 Historic and Cultural Resources 3.4.7 (A) (2) Purpose. ...new construction is designed to respect the historic character of the site and any historic properties in the surrounding neighborhood. 3.4.7 (B) General Standard. The development plan and building design shall protect and enhance the historical and architectural value of any such historic property, whether on or adjacent to the project site. New buildings must be compatible with the historic character of any such historic resource, whether on the project site or adjacent thereto.] The proposed development plan fails to respect the historic character or protect and enhance the historical and architectural values of the Old Town Historic District. Elevations facing the streets should express closer attention to the historic buildings. Arched openings are not commonly used within the historic district, and when used, are of the same size and symmetrically placed. Comments stated above apply under this Section as well. The more whimsical details, such as the eyebrows on the third story, should be moved to the rear elevations, facing the plaza. ]3.4.7 (E) (I ) New Construction. To the maximum extent feasible, the height, setback and/or width of new buildings shall be similar to those of existing historic buildings on any block face on which the new building is located and on any portion of a block face across a local or collector street from the block face on which the new building is located. Buildings at the ends of blocks shall be of a similar height to buildings in the adjoining blocks.] The historic buildings along Jefferson and Pine Streets are one and two stories in height; this building is proposed to be three -stories. The third Boor should be set back further so as to not be readily visible from the streets. [3.4.7 (E) (2) New Construction New buildings shall be designed to be in character with existing historic structures, but not be an imitation of historic styles. Horizontal elements, such as cornices, windows, moldings shall be aligned with those of existing historic buildings to strengthen the visual ties among buildings. Window patterns of existing buildings (size, height, number) shall be repeated in new construction, and the pattern of the primary building entrance facing the street shall be maintained to the maximum extent feasible.] Historically, facades were articulated with vertical elements, and stories were clearly differentiated. These defining characteristics are not adequately evident on this project. The windows and arched openings should also be revisited for rhythm of placement. [3.4.7 (E) (3) New Construction The dominant building material of existing historic buildings adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of the proposed structure shall be used as the primary material for new construction. Variety in materials can be appropriate, but shall maintain the existing distribution of materials in the same block.] The use of metal on the third Boor is inappropriate for the site. It is not a material commonly found in historic commercial districts, including the Old Town District. Page 2 Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Troy Jones Topic: Drainage Number: 65 Created: 11 /5/2003 [ 11 /5/031 The architictural revisions proposed are appropriate, however I suggest lintels and sills facing the plaza to be brick to provide material variety and articulation of details facing the plaza. Number: 66 Created: 11/5/2003 It 1 /5/031 See the attached photo of planter pots. Number: 67 Created: 11/5/2003 [11/5/031 The Jefferson Street encroachments are problematic given the narrowness of the existing condition between the curb and the building facade. I look forward to participating in the in -the -field discussion of the issue that Marc Virata has coordinated. Topic: General Number. 43 Created. 8/21/2003 [ 11 /5/03] 1 look forward to the meeting we have scheduled on Friday morning to discuss this issue and look at examples in the field. [8/21 /031 In the event that you wish to pursue encroachments in the right-of-way, the standards don't allow it outright, so an Engineering Department variance would need to be granted to accomplish that. CDOT would likely need to be involved in the request if such an encroachment involves the Jefferson right-of-way as it is a State Highway. The area between Jefferson Street's curb and the building is fairly narrow, so staff would not likely support any encroachments in this area. Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Marc Virata Topic: Drainage Number: 64 Created: 11 /5/2003 [ 1 1 /5/031 Please provide information on where roof drains are located. Roof drainage should not be directing Flows over the public walk. The site plan shows trench drains internally but it is not shown on the utility plans what these tie into. Topic: General Number. 11 Created: 8/8/2003 [11/5/031 Please note the letter from Don Bachman dated 10/23/03. The stairwells leading into the building(s) are required to be outside of the right-of-way and within the property line. In general, please ensure that the property lines are evident on all plans to help demonstrate compliance that all permanent structures are outside of the right-of-way. Number: 19 Created: 8/11/2003 [1116/03] Because no inlet is being installed for this area (at elevation 76.09), please ensure a 5' radius is designed for to better allow street sweeping operations. The curb extension adjacent to the westernmost parking stall along Pine Street is of concern with regards to street sweeping/snow plowing operations. This should be "angled" the other direction to better allow thosee vehicle turning movements. Please see the attachment of a copy from the proposed King Soopers development in Rigden Farm. Number: 69 Created: 11 /6/2003 [ 11 /6/031 The construction drawings reference the landscaping plans with regards to the colored/pattern concrete. The landscape plan shows this, but doesn't call out dimensions or specify colors. There should be some detail (preferrably in the construction plans) specifying what is intended. Number: 70 Created: 11 /6/2003 [1 1 /6/031 The project requires two benchmarks to be listed on the coversheet. In addition, add the following notes to the General Notes section: -Refer to Appendix E- I of the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards for additional General Notes. Page 3 -These public improvementconstruction plans shall be valid for a period of three years from the date of approval by the Local Entity Engineer. Use of these plans after the expiration date will require a new review and approval process by the Local Entity prior to commencement of any work shown in these plans. -The engineer who has prepared these plans, by execution and/or seal hereof, does hereby affirm responsibility to the Local Entity, as beneficiary of said engineer's work, for any errors and omissions contained in these plans, and approval of these plans by the Local Entity Engineer shall not relieve the engineer who has prepared these plans of all such responsibility. Further, to the extent permitted by law, the engineer hereby agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the Local Entity, and its officers and employees, from and against all liabilities, claims, and demands which may arise from any errors and omissions contained in these plans. -All recommendations of the final drainage and erosion control study (name of the study and date) by (Engineering Firm) shall be followed and implemented. -Approved Variances are listed as follows: (list applicable) Number: 71 Created: 11/6/2003 [ 1 1 /6/03] With the variance request being denied for the alley design, please ensure the alley intersection design (drawing 803) is met with the inlet at the north (this also includes the slope across the sidewalk previously noted). Number: 72 Created: 11/7/2003 [11/7/03] Please see additional comments from Comcast and City Forestry. Topic: Utility Plans Number: 68 Created: 11/6/2003 [ 1 1 /6/031 The alley design exiting out to Pine Street shows a 6.5% grade which is pretty steep for the sidewalk across the alley and not ADA compliant. It appears the design intends to construct a straight-line grade from the asphalt to the back of walk. The design should maintain the sidewalk at not more than a 2% slope, which appears to be how it exists today. Department: Light & Power Topic: Electric Number: 3 Each residential unit must be metered individually. Issue Contact: Doug Martine Created: 7/21/2003 An accessable location for the meters will be necessary. Department: Police Issue Contact: Joseph Gerdom Topic: General Number. 59 Created: 10/28/2003 [ 10/28/031 No photometric plan. Landscaping and lighting at northern most entrance may have safety and security issues. Lighting and security of access to trash/recycle area needs limited access from exterior, adequate lighting and surveillance component. Department: Storrnwater Utility Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Topic: Drainage Number: 31 Created: 8/13/2003 Options also need to be discussed for water quality mitigation. The City requires 40-hour water quality extended detention for new development. In "in -fill" development, there are alternatives that can be designed to satisfy this requirement. 10/30/03 Repeat Comment. If no water quality mitigation is to be proposed, a variance request would need to be submitted for acceptance. Number: 62 Created: 10/30/2003 Please provide separation between trees and existing storm sewer. 10 feet is the standard, as low as 6 feet would be accepted in this case. Number: 63 Page 4 Created: 10/30/2003 1. Please provide a stormwater management report, plan, and calculations (erosion control) per City specifications. Please call Bob Zakely at (970) 221-6700 if you have any questions. Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Topic: Landscape plan Number: 26 Created: 8/13/2003 Show proposed water and sewer services on the landscape plans and provide the required landscape/utility separation distances. Topic: Utility Plans Number: 23 Created: 8/12/2003 Maintain the required 4 feet of minimum separation between the outside wall of meter pit and all permanent structures (Le building envelops, trash enclosures, permanent signage, etc.) Curb stop must be with 2 feet of the meter pit. Curb stops are not allowed in hard surfaced areas. Number: 60 Created: 10/28/2003 [ 10/28/031 Ductile iron pipe (D.I.P.) is the standard water main material within the City of Fort Collins. Label the fire line and the section of main to the fire hydrant as D.I.P. Include the standard general note pertaining to depth of bury of water lines and polywrapping all D.I.P. Number: 61 Created: 10/28/2003 [ 10/28/031 Has Poudre Fire Authority approved a 4-inch fire line? See site, landscape and utility plans for other comments. Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Peter Barnes Topic: zoning Number: 8 Created: 7/31/2003 The site plan needs to be dimensioned. Show lot line dimensions and building dimensions. Also, need to clearly label the lot lines. 10-10-03, Second submittal still doesn't show dimensions on site plan. Also, lot line is labeled on parking plan page, but needs to be labeled on the site plan. Number: 57 Created: 10/10/2003 parking space # 17 is an awkward space. I don't know how they would back out of the stall and get turned around so that they can drive FORWARD to the exit. Since they have more parking than the code requires, they should probably delete it so that we don't create a potentially unsafe situation where a driver tries to drive backwards all the way to the exit. Perhaps the space can be additional lockers. Space #16 is marginal with regards to being able to back out of the stall and get headed in the right direction. 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. Yours Truly, Marc Virata City Planner Page 5 $ASIC DEVELOPMENT R-EVI-EW City of Fort Collins £N6IN££RING DAT-E: 7amuary 14, 2004 D-EPT: Comcast PROI�Kt PINE STREET LOFiSS All commeh fs must be recewed loy Marc V,,�-a -�a n o la -`er Phan - `he sfa Ff revrew mee-6;i y: gFCEt�tvs; February 41 2004 Liv�Jh This item ;s oh "DAAS' ur%Jer "P;r\e Street Lofts - Bas c Devetopment Review' ❑ No Probtems ;� ProWerns or Concerns (see below or attached) COMMents: Comcast Cable still needs to have adequate utility casements to build facilities along the alleyway and be able to place pedestals'_ feet behind the right of way as requested hcforc. So at this time Con -cast Cable will not be making plans to service this block of the City of Ft. Collins. The owner of the property will need to contact our Commercial Accounts Executive. Rencta Santroro. at 970-49 t-? 106 to arrange a contract to service this site. Date: Siynature: PLEAS£ SEND COPIE5 OF MARKED R-EVISIONS 2 Plat ®" Site ❑ UtXty © Landscape'-❑ ❑ NO 6Z STAFF PROJECT REVIEW (. it, (,I tort Cnlim, BERRYHILL DEVELOPMENT Date: 2/9/04 KEVIN BERRYHILL 1708 WALNUT ST. BOULDER, CO 80302 Staff has reviewed your submittal for PINE STREET LOFTS -BASIC DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, and we offer the following comments: ISSUES: Department: Advance Planning Issue Contact: Clark Mapes Topic: General Number: 81 Created: 2/9/2004 Some friendly questions and concerns: The planters against the building appear more suited to urban gardening rather than suburban landscape maintenance. Especially on Jefferson, shrubs as shown will require frequent and knowledgable pruning and probably some replacement. Some questions: Is gravel mulch a good choice? It has more of a suburban feel and would make it tough in the future to garden with Flowers or do frequent replacements. Shredded wood or bark seems to fit better but takes more attention. Are the shrubs along Jefferson a good choice? We do not want them to outgrow the 2-foot planter so knowledgable pruning is crucial for there to be an asset. Snow and ice will probably accumulate on the north side of the building, shoveling will probably cod damage in the tight quarters. Boxwood is iffy here. It may work in this particular spot, or it may not. Ground covers and ivy may work better. In fact, Boston Ivy could be an asset for the property and lend greenery in concert with the architecture. Why the non -planted spats on the north side of each of the raised stoops on Pine Street? Please feel welcome to call Clark Mapes at 221-6225 to talk about this landscaping in the public Right of Way. Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Marc Virata Topic: General Number: 69 Created. 11 /6/2003 [2/6/041 This comments appears to not have been addressed. [1 1 /6/031 The construction drawings reference the landscaping plans with regards to the colored/pattern concrete. The landscape plan shows this, but doesn't call out dimensions or specify colors. There should be some detail (preferrably in the construction plans) specifying what is intended. Number: 70 Created: 11 /6/2003 [2/6/041 The second benchmark listed is not a City recognized approved benchmark. A benchmark in close proximity is 5-00 "On the top of curb at the signal pole base at the northwest corner of Linden St. and Jefferson St." 4974.87, Also, please note the reclined corrections on the listed General Notes. [ 1 1 /6/03] The prolect requires two benchmarks to be listed on the coversheet. In addition, add the following notes to the General Notes section: -Refer to Appendix E- I of the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards for additional General Notes. -These public improvement construction plans shall be valid for a period of three years from the date of approval by the Local Entity Engineer. Use of these plans after the expiration date will require a new review and approval process by the Local Entity prior to commencement of any work shown in these plans. Page I there is a water quality treatment requirement. I would suggest discussing methods of treatment with Kevin McBride. His phone number is 224-6023. 4. A drainage and erosion control report is required but for this site it will be fairly simple since the site is all building or pavement now. The existing imperviousness is grandfathered in. As for erosion control requirements, I suggest discussing them with Bob Zalkely at 224-6063. Drainage patterns need to be maintained unless there are problems that need corrected. 5. The floodplain appears to be contained in Pine Street, but the newer mapping being prepared may remove that floodplain. I suggest keeping the building above the curb and possibly raise the driveway access to prevent street flows from entering the parking level. Floodproofing is also an option to consider with a manually placed shield to protect the parking level. Engineering Department: a. Street Oversizing Fees are assessed per unit for multifamily. Check with Matt Baker for the specific amount of this fee for your project. b. You will be required to have a Development Agreement and Utility Plans. c. The appropriate amount and location of right-of-way and easement dedication will need to be discussed in detail to determine due to the unique circumstances of the site. d. Pine Street will need a new sidewalk. The driveway will introduce a design challenge with regard to the Pine Street sidewalk. e. Improvements to Jefferson are already planned by the City as part of a Capital Improvement Project. Contact John Lang in the Engineering Department at 221-6605 to coordinate the timing of this project with your development. Hopefully it can be avoided to cut into a newly improved street. f. Access to Pine will need City and COOT approval because Jefferson is a State Highway. g. The Downtown Development Authority (ODA) may have some encroachment allotments. Any encroachments in the right -of -wary will need a permit. h. The alley will need to be improved to standard. i. Replace any damaged curb, gutter, and sidewalk. j. A utility coordination meeting for the project should be scheduled soon. This can be done prior to submittal of the project. k. The North College / Hwy. 14 Access Management Plan identifies the parking on Jefferson to be temporary, so keep in mind that the on -street parking in front of this building may go away at some point in the future. 4. Water & Wastewater Utility: Location: 253 Pine Street (Poudre Valley Creamery site) (6-8) Proposal: Condominiums - 14 units Ex. Mains: 16-inch water in Jefferson; 4-inch water and 15-inch sewer in Pine -The engineer who has prepared these plans, by execution and/or seal hereof, does hereby affirm responsibility to the Local Entity, as beneficiary of said engineer's work, for any errors and omissions contained in these plans, and approval of these plans by the Local Entity Engineer shall not relieve the engineer who has prepared these plans of all such responsibility. Further, to the extent permitted by law, the engineer hereby agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the Local Entity, and its officers and employees, from and against all liabilities, claims, and demands which may arise from any errors and omissions contained in these plans. -All recommendations of the final drainage and erosion control study (name of the study and date) by (Engineering Firm) shall be followed and implemented. -Approved Variances are listed as follows: (list applicable) Number: 77 Created: 2/6/2004 [2/61041 As was noted by Transportation Planning, the bike racks along Jefferson Street need to be relocated closer to the curb. Number: 78 Created: 2/6/2004 [2/6/04] While the stairway entrances off of Jefferson result in a pedestrian width of less than 9' as specified in the letter dated October 23, 2003, it was decided that this amount of encroachment would be tolerated. However, we are still requiring the 9' of width be met on the other area, therefore the planters shown along Jefferson will need to be reduced to ensure the 9' of separation around the trees and bike racks. It is still preferred (but not required) as commented by the City previously chat pots placed closer to Jefferson were used instead of the planters along the building. Number. 79 Created. 2/6/2004 [2/6/04] Coordinate whether an access ramp is proposed for the sidewalk along Pine Street to the alley, the plan sets vary. Number. 80 Created: 2/6/2004 [2/6/04] Combine the site plan set with the permit set (street and utility plan set remaining separate). Topic: Utility Plans Number. 68 Created: 11 /6/2003 [2/6/04] The redesign provides for 2% for a 4 foot width. In discussing this internally, given that the sidewalk on either side is 12', please increase by 2 feet the 2% for a total width of 6 foot. [ 1 1 /6/03] The alley design exiting out to Pine Street shows a 6.5% grade which is pretty steep for the sidewalk across the alley and not ADA compliant. It appears the design intends to construct a straight-line grade from the asphalt to the back of walk. The design should maintain the sidewalk at not more than a 2% slope, which appears to be how it exists today. Department: Police Issue Contact: Joseph Gerdom Topic: General Number: 76 Created. 2/4/2004 [2/4/04] Lighting around the area near the northern most and western most points of the build should be increased to not less than Loft. Department: Stormwater Utility Topic: Drainage Number. 63 12/3/041 IZEPFAT COMMENT Issue Contact: Wes Lamarque Created: 10/30/2003 1. Please provide a stormwater management report, plan, and calculations (erosion control) per City specifications. Please call Bob Zakely at (970) 221-6700 if you have any questions. Page 2 Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: Tom Reiff Topic: Transportation Number: 74 Created: 2/4/2004 [2/4/041 The proposed bike racks along Jefferson Street need to be located closer to the curb in the long concrete band so parked bikes do not block the sidewalk through area. Number. 75 Created: 2/4/2004 [2/4/041 Additional information is required regarding the proposed planters along the building on Jefferson Street. For some reason they do not appear on the site or utility plans? A more appropriate location would be to locate the planters or planter pots along Jefferson Street in the furnishing zone next to the curb to buffer the narrow sidewalk and pedestrians from the traffic on Jefferson Street. Department: Water Wastewater Issue Contact: Jeff Hill Topic: Utility Plans Number: 61 Created: 10/28/2003 [2/3/041 Show and label the location of street cuts for the abandonment of the existing sanitary sewer services. Clearly define that the existing sanitary sewer services are to be abandoned at the main. [ 10/28/031 Has Poudre Fire Authority approved a 4-inch fire line? See site, landscape and utility plans for other comments Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Peter Barnes Topic: zoning Number: 73 Created: 1 /14/2004 [ 1 / 14/041 The Site at Building Data table on sheet A I .I tates that there are 9 compact parking spaces. Sheet A4.1 has I I spaces labeled compact. They are only allowed to have a maximum of 9 compact spaces (Section 3.2.2(L)(2) of the Land Use Code), so they need to reduce the number on Sheet A4.1 to 9. Spaces 1 and 25 don't function properly and should be deleted. Removing them will still leave them with the minumum number required, and since only 1 HC space is required, they will still comply with that as well. Also, space 9 is labeled as Compact, but it appears to be designed as a standard size stall. If so, then remove "compact" from 9, coupled with the removal of space I, will leave 9 compact spaces, the max. allowed. Page 3 Project Comments Sheet L01hooms) Selected Departments C'itt- n[ hurt lins Department: Engineering Date: February 10, 2004 Project: PINE STREET LOFTS -BASIC DEVELOPMENT REVIEW All comments must be received by Marc Virata in Engineering, no later than the staff review meeting: No Review Date Note - Please identify your redlines for future reference Issue Contact: Marc Virata Topic: General Number: 69 Created: 11 /6/2003 [2/6/04] This comments appears to not have been addressed. [1 1 /6/03] The construction drawings reference the landscaping plans with regards to the colored/pattern concrete. The landscape plan shows this, but doesn't call out dimensions or specify colors. There should be some detail (pi eferrably in the construction plans) specifying what is intended. Number: 70 Created: 11 /6/2003 [2/6/04] The second benchmark listed is not a City recognized approved benchmark. A benchmark in close proximity is 5-00 ''On the top of curb at the signal pole base at the northwest corner of Linden St. and Jefferson St." 4974.87. Also, please note the reclined corrections on the listed General Notes. [ 1 1 /6/031 The project requires two benchmarks to be listed on the coversheet. In addition, add the following notes to the General Notes section: -Refer to Appendix E- I of the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards for additional General Notes. -These public improvement construction plans shall be valid for a period of three years from the date of approval by the Local Entity Engineer. Use of these plans after the expiration date will require a new review and approval process by the Local Entity prior to commencement of any work shown in these plans. -The engineer who has prepared these plans, by execution and/or seal hereof, does hereby affirm responsibility to the Local Entity, as beneficiary of said engineer's work, for any errors and omissions contained in these plans, and approval of these plans by the Local Entity Engineer shall not relieve the engineer who has prepared these plans of all such responsibility. Further, to the extent permitted by law, the engineer hereby agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the Local Entity, and its officers and employees, from and against all liabilities, claims, and demands which may arise from any errors and omissions contained in these plans. -All recommendations or the final drainage and erosion control study (name of the study and date) by (Engineering Firm) shall be followed and implemented. -���Date - CHECK, HERE IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE COPIES OF REVISIONS Plat Site �✓ Drainage Report Other — Utility Redline Utility ,- Landscape Page 1 -Approved Variances are listed as follows: (list applicable) Number: 77 Created: 2/6/2004 [2/6/04] As was noted by Transportation Planning, the bike racks along Jefferson Street need to be relocated closer to the curb. Number. 78 Created. 2/6/2004 [2/6/04] While the stairway entrances off of Jefferson result in a pedestrian width of less than 9' as specified in the letter dated October 23, 2003, it was decided that this amount of encroachment would be tolerated. However, we are still requiring the 9' of width be met on the other area, therefore the planters shown along Jefferson will need to be reduced to ensure the 9' of separation around the trees and bike racks. It is still preferred (but not required) as commented by the City previously that pots placed closer to Jefferson were used instead of the planters along the building. Number. 79 Created. 2/6/2004 [2/6/04] Coordinate whether an access ramp is proposed for the sidewalk along Pine Street to the alley, the plan sets vary. Number. 80 Created: 2/6/2004 [2/6/04] Combine the site plan set with the permit set (street and utility plan set remaining separate). Topic: Utility Plains Number 68 Created: 11 /6/2003 [2/6/04] The redesign provides for 2% for a 4 foot width. In discussing this internally, given that the sidewalk on either side is 12', please increase by 2 feet the 2% for a total width of 6 foot. [ 1 1 /6/03] The alley design exiting out to Pine Street shows a 6.5% grade which is pretty steep for the sidewalk across the alley and not ADA compliant. It appears the design intends to construct a straight-line grade from the asphalt to the back of walk. The design should maintain the sidewalk at not more than a 2% slope, which appears to be how it exists today. Page 2 Comments: If a fire line is needed, the 4-inch main in Pine may not have adequate capacity; therefore, it may be necessary to connect to the 16-inch main in Jefferson. The water conservation standards for landscape and irrigation will apply to any landscape requirements. Development fees and water rights will be due at time of building permit. MOT and the City are planning a street paving project for Jefferson Street adjacent to the Poudre Valley Creamery site starting in approximately May 2003. This will increase the costs of utility work in Jefferson if done after that project. If utility work could be planned and accomplished before then, it would be desirable. 5. Natural Resources: -Provide adequate space in dumpster area to allow for recycling services. - Please use a single trash hauler to reduce impacts. 6. Fire Department: a. Address must be visible from the street using a minimum 6" numerals on a contrasting background. b. A fire hydrant must be within 300' of the building (measured as a hose would lay) with a capacity of 1500 g.p.m @ 20 p.s.i. c. Given that the building would be three-story, it will require fire sprinklers. 7. Light and Power: a. Demolition is considered redevelopment, so full development charges apply. b. Power is available at the northwest corner of the site within that existing trash enclosure area. Power comes from this spot, and can't be covered, needs to be accessible. This is a 3-phase switch cabinet. c. If you need to relocate existing electric services, it can be done at developer's expense. d. Cluster and gang the meters, and locate them open and accessible. Electric, gas and TV all need meter locations. Gas cannot be located in the garage, but maybe electric can. 8. Transportation: a. A Traffic: Impact Study (TIS) will most likely be required, and if so, will need to address all modes of transportation including vehicle, bicycle, Pedestrian and transit. Contact Eric Bracke (vehicular), Tom Reiff (ped & bike), and Gerold Smith (transit) for scoping. Pedestrian Level of Service (LOS) analysis will be critical. The criteria are available in the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards. b. Based on the access management plan for Jefferson, conducted a few years ago, the on -street parking along Jefferson may be removed at some point in the future. 4 c. Pine Street is a local street. The existing loading area is in the right-of- way. I'm curious to see how this street edge would look. d. The Jefferson Access Management Plan also had Pine with a mid -block pedestrian crossing. e. Provide ADA accessible routes to units, parking and transit. 9. Historic Preservation: a. The property is in the Historic Downtown District. Comply with historic preservation regulations in 3.4.7 of the Land Use Code, and the neighborhood compatibility standards in section 3.5.1 of the LUC. b. Look at the height and materials in context with the historic district. 10. Advance Planning: a. The Downtown Stratigic Plan's planning area includes this site. This study is currently in progress. Involve Clark Mapes in the conceptual layout discussions of this project. 11. Park Planning a. The neighborhood and community parkland fees are based on square footage of each unit, and are due at the time of building permit. 12. Current Planning: a. Refer to Section 3 (General Development Standards), and Section 4.12 (Downtown Zoning District) in the Land Use Code for the standards that apply to your proposed development. The Land Use Code is available to view on the internet at www.fcgov.com/cilyclerk/codes.t)p, b. As a Building Permit Review, no hearing is required for approval. The application is submitted to the Zoning Department. c. Current Planning will be forwarding comments to the Zoning Department on this application. d. Submit a site plan, landscape plan, and elevations as part of the application. 5 BASIC DEVELOPMENT REVIEW City of Fort Collins £N61N££RIN6 DAME: July 17, 2003 D£PT: PAVEMENT PROJECT PINE STREET LOM All commeAh must be recewed by Marc Vrafa no later than the sf a ff'revtew meefrhg: August 13, 2003 th;s ;tern ;s on "DMS° under 'Pt"ne Street Lofts — 3asic Development Rev;ew' ❑ No Problems ❑ Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) COMMentS: 1 Date: `_ % ' O = siynat�re: __ PLEASE SEND COPIES OF MARKED REVISIONS ❑ Plat ❑ Site ❑ U+Xty ❑ Landscape ❑ Drw Wage mm i Department I ��_. .I��Ennril Rrcir�� l�, 'L1 Y \/ 11 V'—T—M 11 Q l./ .SIC DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DATE: 7uly 17, 2003 D£PT: XC£L £N.ER6Y PR0%Ct PIN-E STREET LOFTS All commen fs mu5- loe recetved by Marc Vlr-a f a AO later than the sta f f e-ev;eW meetLh g: August 13, 2003 eMlis oh %D�N S'' uh e F'ts — Basic Devel pn, t Rev' w'' ❑ No ProWems Q-Proiolefns or Concerns (see below or attached) COMMem+5: • C>fY1 MTRA WILL NEED TD BE CLVSTERP_0 LN ONLI L.oc- rtwt I;A\ LOLR-MO LN ALLEY R.O.W. N. NI. CVoWr.Q. I Eyt3TIIVI- SERVICP LCCRTEO 13M I4'.E3T WALL .39' SDLJTN Dr M007-H WPhLL . RNY RELVCftn .V . REINFORCFMEMiT WOLILn Ba RT 436.�ELOPEW EXPCN3E. L L� I r JUL 2. R 2003 i11 Dare: �iy f><u f�A4RN/J 5iynature: PL-EAS-E SPEND COF'I£5 OF MARK-ED R£VI5ION5 D-flat fL ;+e E-JtXty 11 Landscape 0 Drainage Report ❑ NO COMM£NT5 BASIC DEVELOPMENT REVIfM RECEIVED City of Fort Collins AUG 11 2003 £N61N££RI76 CURRENT PLANNING DAT-E: 3u1y 17, 2003 D-EPt: COMCAST PRO7-ECt PINE STREET LOFTS All commen fs mw-f be recetved toy tilarc V ra fa n o la fete than the sfa f f rev,ew meeft;i9: August 13, 2003 th;s itern is on "DMS° ur\der "P;r\e Street Lofts — Banc Development Review'' ❑ No Problems ❑ Problems or Concerns (see below or attached) COMMents: Come ast Cable will not be making any plans to service this project until a Broadband Utility Easement is completed with our Commercial Accounts F_secutive, Reneta Santro, who can be reached at 970-419-31W Date: ��z 3 Signature: PLEAS-E SEND COPIES OF MARKED REVISIONS ®-Plat Q Site Ca -Utility E9Lanciscape ❑ Dra;nage Repot ❑ NO COMM£Nl City of Fort Collins Memo To: Marc Virata From: Dean Klingner, 221-6605 CC: John Lancl, Rick Richter Date: August 21, 2003 Re: N. College & Jefferson/Riverside Improvements and the proposed Pine Street Lofts Following are my comments regarding the "Basic Development Review' submittal for the Pine Street Lofts Project proposed at 251-253 Pine Street. The City of Fort Collins has teamed with the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) to construct street improvements on Jefferson Street in front of this proposed project. We plan to mill the existing asphalt pavement and overlay the underlying concrete with a new 2'/2-inch lift of asphalt. This project will be starting construction in mid -August, 2003 and this portion will be completed by mid November, 2003. In the event that this project is approved and ready for construction by the first of September, 2003, the developer should contact me to coordinate these improvements with our street work. In the event that this project follows the street improvements the appropriate street repair requirements should be coordinated through Rick Richter and CDOT. Also, note that all concrete curb ramps on Jefferson will need to meet the State's truncated dome ("Detectable Warnings") standards.