Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCIVIC CENTER PARKING STRUCTURE - PDP - 35-98 - CORRESPONDENCE - (5)receipt of the revisions. At this staff review meeting the item will be discussed and it will be determined if the project is ready to go to the Planning and Zoning Board for a decision. Please return all drawings red -lined by City staff with submission of your revisions. The number of copies of revisions for each document to be resubmitted is on the attached Revisions Routing Sheet. You may contact me at 221-6341 to schedule a meeting to discuss these comments. Sincerely, Au�� Steve Olt Project Planner cc: Engineering Stormwater Utility Zoning Water & Wastewater Traffic Operations Transportation Planning Advance Planning Jack Gianola Parsons and Associates Fentress Bradburn Architects Project File 24. Cross -sections are needed for the 6' wide on -street bicycle lane back to Mountain Avenue. This project is responsible for the construction of the bicycle lane. 25. The proposed center median on Laporte Avenue must be shown on the Site, Landscape, and utility plans. 26. The existing access to the north from Laporte Avenue, just west of Washington's Restaurant, must be shown on the Site, Landscape, and utility plans. 27. The TIS just received by the City shows a westbound left turn lane into the parking structure. The geometrics shown would cut back the existing center median, which could create problems with potential elimination of some existing trees. For one, this would trigger a Landmark Preservation Commission concern. Staff needs clarification about this. 28. A cross-section of the intersection of Laporte Avenue and Mason Street is needed. The section should be north -south oriented. 29. Floor plans for all five levels must be submitted so that staff can review the operational aspect of the parking structure. 30. Encroachment permits are needed for all improvements proposed to be in the street rights -of way. 31. The information submitted to date is not sufficient to allow staff to schedule this item for a Planning and Zoning Board public hearing agenda. This completes the staff comments at this time. Additional comments will be forthcoming as they are received from City departments and outside reviewing agencies. Based on the concerns expressed by City staff and the questions raised about outstanding issues regarding storm drainage from this site, responsibility for necessary off -site improvements, and some design -related concerns, there is a need for this development request to go through another review. It is hoped that this item can be scheduled for the November 19th Planning and Zoning Board public hearing if the concerns are adequately addressed. The City's policy that was implemented at the time of adoption of the Land Use Code is that all significant, major issues be resolved prior to scheduling the development request for a public hearing (either administrative or Planning and Zoning Board). Under the development review process and schedule there is no revision date mandated by the City. The amount of time spent on revisions is up to the applicant. Upon receipt, the revisions will be routed to the appropriate City departments and outside reviewing agencies, with their comments due to the project planner no later than the second or third weekly staff review meeting (Wednesday mornings) following 14. The Transportation Impact Study (TIS) was submitted to the City on Tuesday, September 22nd, for review. The necessary off -site improvements will be determined from the results of this study. It appears that there will be significant off -site improvements needed, which begs the question: How can this project afford to do all of the needed off-ste improvements? 15. Who will be responsible for and construct all of the crosswalks at the intersection of Laporte Avenue and Mason Street? All four crossings should be done in conjunction with the parking structure. 16. What is the lighting scheme proposed for the alleyways? Will there be good pedestrian lighting, for security reasons? 17. Additional comments are included on red -lined plans that are being forwarded to the applicant. Stormwater Utility 18. How does this facility, and associated storm drainage, tie into the existing drainage system? This facility cannot create a rise in the Old Town basin floodplain. 19. Where is the outfall for this drainage system? The plans do not show water quality measures for the structure. 20. What is the on -going maintenance plan for the parking structure? How is the "residue" going to be taken care of? 21. The effect of the stormwater from this site on the alley and properties to the east must be addressed. The alley cannot take all of the stormwater because the existing storm sewer in the alley is undersized. Flows from this development should go west to Mason Street. The revised plans to address this concern/requirement. 22. The information submitted to date is not sufficient to allow staff to schedule this item for a Planning and Zoning Board public hearing agenda. Engineering 23. The sidewalks internal to the parking structure, now shown as 8' wide' to allow for potential car overhang and unobstructed pedestrian movement, do not appear to completely solve the problem. What remains are 15' deep parking stalls, some with structural columns directly in front of them. This latter situation would obviously eliminate car overhang. 9. A copy of the comments received from Mark McCallum of the Engineering Department is attached to this letter. Red -lined copies of plans, with additional comments, are being forwarded to the applicant. 10. A copy of the comments received from Basil Hamdan of the Stormwater Utility is attached to this letter. Red -lined copies of plans and reports, with additional comments, are being forwarded to the applicant. 11. The Advance Planning Department offered the following comments: a. The southeast corner at the intersection of Laporte Avenue and Mason Street needs to be enlarged and designed in detail, maybe at a scale of 1" = 10'. Watch out for utility vaults (such as a fiber optics vault). The corner needs to be revised (see attached enlargement). b. See the marked -up Building Elevations for some comments and questions about details, especially at the pedestrian level. It is hard/impossible to perceive the effect of the various materials. Please draw an indication of them. C. Which crosswalks on Laporte Avenue and Mason Street are being built with this project? Current Planning editorial comment: All four crosswalks should be built with this project. It should be determined who is responsible for the cost of construction. Please contact Clark Mapes, at 221-6225, if you have questions about these comments. The following comments and concerns were expressed at the Staff Review meeting on September 23rd: Planning 12. The east elevation of the building should be further developed to possibly include textured and/or tinted concrete to break up the overall mass of the building. Also, please consider the possibility of incorporating planting boxes on the top floor, with vines that could drape over and hang down the sides. This could be a viable way of softening the elevation, with the vines maybe just at the columns. 13. What does the "painted metal mesh security screen" really look like? Is it possible to make this blend in with the other materials and colors to ensure a good appearance from the Opera Galleria area, Laporte Avenue, and the alley along the south side? C. The dimensions of the structure are still difficult to make out on the Site Plan. d. The handicapped spaces need to be 12' wide unless they are parallel to a pedestrian walk. There are 5 handicapped spaces that are not wide enough, even with the allocated ramp space. Each of these spaces are only 10.5' wide. Sheet 3 of 5 (the Site Plan), with the handicapped spaces circled, is being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Peter, Gary, or Jenny at 221-6760 if you have questions about these comments. 3. Jim Slagle of Public Service Company stated that the "Access Easement" in Tract 'A' needs to be changed to "Access & Utility Easement", and make sure that it extends all the way through the site from north to south (Laporte Avenue to the alley). 4. Ken Kirchoff of the Police Department stated that the use of good lighting and a security system is needed to maintain security and safety in this facility. 5. Copies of comments from Tim Buchanan, the City Forester, pertaining to the Planting Notes on the Landscape Plan are attached to this letter. 6. Comments from Eric Bracke of the Traffic Operations Department are included on marked -up copies of the Overall Plan and Site Plan that are being forwarded to the applicant. Please contact Eric, at 224-6062, if you have questions about his comments. 7. Bruce Vogel of the Light & Power Department offered the following comments: a. The existing streetlight on Mason Street, in front of the retail stores, will need to remain unless an alternative type of lighting can be approved to light the "street". b. The location of the transformer appears to be acceptable. Please contact Bruce, at 221-6700, if you have questions about these comments. 8. Dennis Greenwalt of TCI of Fort Collins (cable television) stated that they will need a Broadband Utility Easement to provide service to the retail spaces. This can be obtained through their Commercial Accounts Executive, Reneta Santoro. She can be reached at 493-7400, Monday through Friday. Without this easement TCI will make no plans to service this area. Comma r Planning and Environmental vices Current Planning City of Fort Collins September 23, 1998 City of Fort Collins c/o Eldon Ward Cityscape Urban Design, Inc. 3555 Stanford Road, Suite 105 Fort Collins, CO. 80525 Dear Eldon, Staff has reviewed your revisions and other documentation for the CIVIC CENTER PARKING STRUCTURE, Project Development Plan (PDP) development proposal that were submitted to the City on September 9, 1998, and would like to offer the following comments: 1. This development proposal, being in the Civic Center Subdistrict of the Downtown Zoning District, is identified as a Planning and Zoning Board (Type II) review under the City's Land Use Code (LUC). Parking lots and garages (as a principal use) and retail establishments are permitted uses subject to a Type II review in the Subdistrict. 2. Representatives of the Zoning Department offered the following comments: a. Regarding General Note 14 on the Site Plan - The Zoning Department will not enforce the signage requirement listed here, only when they violate the City Sign Code. b. Regarding Planting Note 7 on the Landscape Plan - How many "construction phases" are expected? It seems too small a project to have several phases. What does "surface treatment in local parkways" mean? If that represents any plant material, it needs some type of assurance that it will be completed. The Landscape Plan needs to show phases for landscaping if it is going to be done that way. Editorial note from Current Planning: This reads like a note that has been taken from some other residential project ... "with the exception of the surface treatment in local parkways" and "public right-of-way in the front or the side of a residential lot" ... and appears to be inappropriate. 281 North College Avenue • PO. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020