Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTOV Drawing Narrative 5339 Alpha Road T 972.701.9636 Architecture Suite 300 F 972.701.9639 Planning Dallas, Texas 75240 W humphreys.com Interiors HUMPHREYS & PARTNERS ARCHITECTS, L.P. Dallas • Irvine • New Orleans • Orlando 3/1/2010 MEMO To: George Ruther From: Vail Timber Ridge Project Team Re: Conceptual Review of Timber Ridge Redevelopment Date: 1/27/10 The Town of Vail Public Works Department received the PEC Timber Ridge Redevelopment plan received 1/15/09. Based on our review of these preliminary plans the following are our comments. Additional comments will be provided when more detailed plans are provided. Comments: 1. The Town of Vail General Notes shall be updated to reflect the most current notes. There are a few missing from this set shown on the Title Sheet. OK. 2. Please provide a stamped survey of the site within the Building Permit set. Additional spot elevations will be needed in the office surrounding area and buildings J and K in the areas that may be affected. OK. 3. Show the newly installed sidewalk at the west end of the project as existing, not proposed, this should be included in the existing survey conditions. The info didn’t have property lines on it, so there is still trouble with lining it up on the plan even after contacting PLC. It will be added and updated as soon as the information is provided. 4. Transit Area; a. Show all bus turning movements confirming 4 buses work independently and 6 buses can be stacked end to end. The bus operation is based upon a conversation with Tom Kassmel. Three buses are to enter the bus area going EAST bound, and three Enter Going Westbound. So it is intended to operate six buses, but not all end to end (three on a side). b. Show Bus entry turning movements, does the main entrance curb return have to be so large. Included. Efforts were made to make the entry as narrow as possible, without having buses encroach into opposite direction lanes. c. Show shelters for both WB and EB directions. This is outside the project scope. d. Bike path should be separate from transit walk to minimize conflicts. OK. e. Show grading/walls (as necessary) on the west end of the transit loop and up to the “new parking” area west of the office. This is outside the project scope. f. Show a connection along the north side of the transit loop (w/ stairs as needed) to a crosswalk across the drive entrance to just south of the club entrance. To be provided. 5. West entrance area/parking; a. Show crosswalks across drive entrance. To be provided. b. Extend a walk north from Fire lane/ped path along the east N-S curb line of the entrance. This walk should lead to the crosswalk/parking/stairwell to club entrance level. Page 2 of 11 3/1/2010 See revised plans: the fitness area is lowered and other changes have been made. c. Where does the inlet at the SE corner of the Office connect to. It should be piped across the street to the nearby inlet. To be shown. d. There should be a stair access to the parking at the entrance to the club. The clubhouse and west side of the site were redesigned to provide a better route from the parking to the clubhouse entrance. e. The minimum clearance between the wall and the club columns should be at least 5’, and even that is tight for this public space. The site is very tight in this location. The clubhouse and west side of the site were redesigned to provide a better route from the parking to the clubhouse entrance. f. The drive lane should be shifted south after the curve as it enters the east existing housing to eliminate the loss of parking on the north side. Civil has concerns about sight distance and exposure of the existing office basement walls. No changes made at this time. g. The “new parking” area should be maximized at this time. Looks like we may be able to add 2-3 more spaces. Agreed, more parking can be added this location. h. The 8 spaces and trash area seems to be a very expensive excavation with 18’- 36’ walls. Can the spaces be eliminated/moved elsewhere and the trash moved well forward as well to save the cost of all the retaining and leave this area alone? The construction shoring of these walls are sure to impact the eastern project, so how will these walks be built. The trash was relocated adjacent to the garage entrance. The retaining walls were moved southward to reduce the amount of excavation and impact on existing buildings. i. The Town will need to understand how this redeveloped access point will/may effect development potential of the western portion of the site. Owner to address. 6. Fire Lane/Ped Path Areas; a. The Fire lane/ped path connection to the entrance drive should feel pedestrianized. Do not provide curb returns. Provide a mountable curb/ADA compliant ramp. And discuss with fire if this can be necked down to 10’-12’ for a very short section. The fire lane was redesigned to address this comment. b. I would envision both access points on the E and W side to be exit onlys for emergency vehicles and that EV access the lane by the main garage access point. Show Fire truck turning movements. The access points were redesigned to address this comment. Autoturn Fire Truck movements are provided in the updated plan set, however, the TOV regs (Fire Dept section) requires 4 feet more radius and 8 feet diameter than is actually needed by the fire trucks. 4 additional feet may be gained by moving the frontage road 4 feet south (as recommended below) and adding the remaining 4 feet on-site and providing the other 4 feet on-site. c. Seems like the lane on the west half could be sloped to toward the road easily and sheet flow across the grass slope down to the Frontage Rd curb. The east side could also be raised more quickly from the west entrance at a ~4% slope to help eliminate grade difference between the lane and the buildings. No change made at this time. d. The very west end should have an ADA connection to the Fire Lane/Ped Path to provide access to the Lane and across to the Transit area. The site was revised to address this comment. Page 3 of 11 3/1/2010 e. The east half of the lane could also sheet flow to the south and into the proposed storm sewer between the S. Frontage Rd and the Lane. Agreed. f. The east half could also be brought up quicker to match building FF elevations rather than have stairs. The FFE elevations were lowered instead. g. The east connection to the Frontage Road cannot occur as drawn, this will be easily considered as an access point. The connection should be made with the existing bike path and with a mountable curb/ADA compliant ramp. Keeping it 10’ 12’ for a short section will also be helpful. The access points were redesigned to address this comment. h. The Frontage Rd. curb should be wrapped around into the Savoy Villas entrance to the new Lane/path connection. The site was revised to address this comment. 7. All of the retaining walls in the back of the project do not meet Town Code and will require a variance or to be benched at a 6’V to 4’H ratio. A variance will be requested. Do the walls need to be battered? 8. Engineered analysis on the existing condition of the gabion walls to remain will be required, details on how to connect to existing gabion walls and how to build walls beneath the existing gabion walls will be required, as well as construction shoring plans showing no impact to the adjacent properties. A shoring contractor is reviewing. It is assumed that shoring walls “beneath” gabion walls just need to include surcharge. A shoring contractor is assisting with connection/compatibility details. It is planned to remove the wire basket gabion sections at exist gabion “box sections”, which likely requires more wall than just connecting into exist gabion walls where the new shoring wall intersects it on the plan. Impact to exist gabion walls has been reduced per revised plan. 9. The walls at the back of the building should be designed with larger benches to provide room for larger landscape/trees. There is a 5 feet wall separation, typical. 10. Frontage Road; a. A CDOT access permit approval will be required prior to approval. Kimley Horn has been asked to submit the Access permit. b. Full CDOT frontage Rd design plans will be required as a part of this project OK. c. A full width overlay will be required as a part of this project for the limits of the Frontage Rd improvements. To be provided. d. Tapers and Decel lengths shall match Traffic study recommendations, 190’ left turn lane with 10:1 taper and 20:1 lane shift tapers. The CDOT access code was used for the criteria and will need to be compared to the Traffic Study Recommendations. 11. Can any widening be done to the south, maybe part or all of the south shoulder? Yes: the previous code allowed gravel shoulders, the current code requires paved shoulders, so the shoulder will be paved. There is currently snow covering the site, but it appears this can be accomplished. 12. Accommodations for a bus stop on LRL should be made the grade meets the road with fill against the parking structure. This could alleviate some congestion at the Transit area and function for the eastern half of the building. A bus stop is not part of the project scope and was not added to the project. 13. Drainage; a. Provide a Drainage Report The existing culvert under i-70 near the bus area drains to Cascade Village (so many culvert/channel capacities will need to be checked). The developed flows are about 15% more than previous flows (significant). However, now that there is more room in the front (Fire/Ped lane), some surface detention may be provided Page 4 of 11 3/1/2010 to reduce some storm sewer piping and reduce the underground detention. Revised report is underway. b. The Town does not require detention for developed sites, unless there is a significant increase in water run-off and existing storm sewer cannot handle the anticipated flow, in which case the existing system should be upsized or detention can be considered. See above. c. We do require all surface and structured parking drainage to run thru Water Quality (which is shown). The structured parking drainage design will be provided at the time of permit submittal. d. Identify which storm sewers take public water run-off and provide adequate easements thru the site. To be provided. e. Does the 18” pipe on the NE corner of the parking structure flow over a 10+’ retaining wall? This will need to be piped. It is a non-typical [Constructability problem] detail to pipe behind shoring walls, and a shoring contractor will be consulted. f. In the same area as above an existing storm sewer crosses Lions Ridge Loop, where is that water proposed to go. This is an existing storm sewer that would dump water onto us, so it is being re- routed to the west around the building (and this exist culvert would be plugged). g. Provide storm sewer profiles. To be provided. 14. Utilities; a. Utility sign offs will be required on the title sheet OK. b. The option to minimize the utility easement to 30’ is shown, is this going to be considered? The current plan does not seem to need that additional room. This idea was brought up to help the building move forward (south) 10’ to help the retaining wall grading issue in the back and/or for additional landscaping in the back. No change made at this time. c. The idea of ‘meandering’ the fire lane/ped path is great, however locating significant landscaping (trees) will not be allowed over utilities. If it is determined to ‘meander’ the lane, show how the utilities will be protected. The fire lane was revised and is no longer straight. d. The depth of the existing water line is needed. Civil asked B&B to measure down inside valve boxes for limited water line depth info. Info was inconclusive. Some valves were covered with ice, some ok, etc. Some water line sections will likely require insulation or relocation. e. All necessary additional easements for utilities will be required. Information added to civil drawings. f. How will existing services be maintained thru construction Holy Cross thinks it should be a “clean” cut for the new project with no down times for exist buildings to remain (Jeff Shreeve, Holy Cross). Qwest (Sam Tooley) thinks the exist club should be reviewed (have bldg service locates provided prior to const) but that other exist buildings to remain are on a different loop, and it should also be “ clean”, not a problem. Water and Sewer: I expect that the whoever/whenever the bus transit area is constructed, that the existing OFFICE building water and sewer service will be disrupted. Gas: There is currently no gas to the site. 15. Show the existing sewer/water services to the buildings to remain. Will any utility services be required to be relocated? This is outside the scope of the project. Page 5 of 11 3/1/2010 16. Please provide a Landscape plan. Sight distance and Utility conflicts will be a key issue. And any landscape in CDOT ROW will require a CDOT landscape permit. A landscape plan is included in the submittal. 17. Show lighting plan. How will the project, transit area, Frontage Rd, Fire Lane/ped path be lighted. A lighting plan is included in the submittal. 18. Building; a. The Environmental report indicates that the population of this new development will be ~552-570 individuals housed in 352 units as compared to ~424 in 106 individuals housed in 106 units today. The existing calculation is based on 106 2 bedroom units with 4 persons per unit. What is the developed population based on? The current 352 unit count contains 544 bedrooms, at 2 persons per bedroom, the resulting population would be 1088 individuals. Please clarify the proposed population and please clarify whether there are 102 vs 106 units being removed. There are 544 beds. b. The circulation for the storage/trash/mail room seems to be inadequate. At a minimum short term parking spaces need to be assigned in this area. The Traffic study indicates approximately 30 vehicles will be entering and 50 vehicles will be exiting during a peak hour. Some percentage of those trips will want to stop in this area, and need accommodations to do so. Moving the access west may help with circulation. This may be done by swapping unit location. The garage was redesigned to minimize congestion. c. The trash circulation and locations seem inadequate for this large of a development. Having only one point to dump trash and only accessible from inside the parking structure is inadequate. Having a trash chute on both sides of the parking structure (E&W) and accessible from inside the building along with one on the very far west and east side of the building seems more accessible. There remains only one trash location. d. The trash chute should also be coupled with a recycle area/chute. Separate trash and recycle chutes are now provided. e. How will the Bike storage areas be secure/controlled/accessed? How many bikes will it hold? Bike storage is located on each floor. Storage for a total of 76 bikes is provided. Since the garage is not secured overall, the bikes cannot be secured more than this. The bike storage areas are not controlled by management and are accessed from the drive aisles or stairwells. Bikes could also be stored in the rental storage units should a resident desire this. f. Is the storage area secured by a gate/door? The storage area is separated from the garage by a 1-hour rated fire barrier and rated doors. At the Owner’s request, the doors can be on controlled access. g. An emergency/service access from the top deck would be very functional for service and an emergency/secondary access to this large of a structure. Lets discuss: it can easily be done. No emergency/service access is provided. h. Show typical dimensions for parking spaces/drive lanes etc… These will have to meet Town code. All exposed surface spaces are 9x19 and garaged/covered are 9x18. Cross-over aisles are supposed to be 30’. The garage spaces are 9’ x 18’; compact spaces are 8’ x 16’. The cross-over aisle issue needs further review. i. Show elevations for parking garage. Elevations have been added to the drawings. j. There are walks shown at the entrance at the parking garage, are these raised or at grade. The walks are on-grade and exit from the 4th level. Page 6 of 11 3/1/2010 k. Show drainage for the parking structure. Where will it tie into the sanitary sewer(this will require ERWSD approval) The structured parking drainage design will be provided at the time of permit submittal. l. Show Snow storage calculations. Where will the top deck snow storage go? Attached. The top deck gets pushed off to the rear of the building. m. Where do the roof drains daylight or connect to the storm sewer? The roof downspouts will connect to the underground storm system. n. Generic grading is provided in the courtyards. Provide specific design, hardscape, ped paths, landscape etc… A landscape plan is included in the submittal. o. How does Unit 2A function, is the bedroom surrounded by four walls, is there no typical door entry to the bedroom, the closet looks very narrow will hangers fit in it, the kitchen island seems oddly placed and in the way of living space. N/A p. Does the dumpster meet Town Animal proof enclosure requirements. Shouldn’t its footer be below frost line. The trash collection area is now located to the west of the garage entry. The doors will be provided with animal resistant locking devices. q. Some of the units on the ground floor are only accessible from the outside not the garage without going up one floor to then go down. Should there be an interior corridor to access these units and also the Elevator tower Correct, there are some units on the ground floor that do not have an interior route. r. The upper levels do not match with the garage floor plate so there is ramping and stairs to each level. The direct route, the stairs seems narrow for a main entry way, can this be widened. The route meets the code requirements for egress. s. Multiple garage levels show stairwell exits that go no where, what is the intent? This has been corrected. t. The 4th and 5th floor garage level plans show a different entrance into the buildings on the east side, why is there a difference. And the 5th floor does not show an access door for the east side of the garage to the building. This has been corrected. u. The plans reference Garage Plans by others, when will they be provided. Garage plans will provide at the time of permit submittal. 19. Easements shall be provided for Drainage, the Fire/Ped Path, Access to the west existing property, Transit area. OK. 20. Who is responsible for plowing the fire lane? Owner. 21. Traffic Study; Traffic Engineer to Comment a,b.c below a. The Traffic study will need to be updated, once the final program in the development is determined. b. Note on the Traffic generation summary that the 171 units is based on occupancy not capacity. c. The traffic engineer should comment on the circulation issue as stated above regarding the mailroom/storage/trash area. 22. Transit projections; a. A more specific Town bus impact analysis should be made. As indicated in the Traffic study the Town’s bus headways will probably not change as much as suggested, although shadow buses will increase and this will impact number of buses, operations, maintenance of buses. This will also provide a bigger incentive to construct Simba Run underpass and the need for a line haul route at faster headways at peak times. Page 7 of 11 3/1/2010 b. The project removes 106 units roughly equivalent to a maximum of 424 people. The new development provides 352 units roughly equivalent to 1088 people(This assumes 2 per bedroom). The increase of people on this site is ~260%. The existing peak ped. counts using transit (based on counts on 12/30/09) was 112, which was based on ~86% occupancy rate. So at full occupancy this could have been 130 people. An increase of 260% would then result in a transit ped need of 338 at full occupancy, 2 per bedroom. If the LRL bus stop was installed and 10% of the transit use went there, then the Frontage Rd. Transit Area would need to carry 305 people in an hour. The existing bus at peak times currently arrives 2/3rds full with a total capacity of about 50. A shadow bus typically follows this bus once it arrives at Timber Ridge to allow for an additional capacity of 50. Additional analysis will be required to understand the true impact to the Town bus system, regarding operations, maintenance, new buses, new positions, etc… This is outside the scope of the project. c. This additional need would have to be covered by the Red and Green routes today, but could be supplemented by a new Line Haul route in the future if the Simba Run underpass were built. This is outside the scope of the project. d. In addition, there is currently a safety hazard with pedestrians crossing the interstate at this location in order to short cut travel to the Cascade employment center/lift access. This is likely to increase due to almost 3x the pedestrian population as there is now. A Simba Run underpass would help alleviate this concern, although probably not eliminate the problem. This is outside the scope of the project. 23. Hazard Study: Owner to discuss with TOV. a. The hazard study needs to provide language compatible with the Town Code. Basically stating that mitigation of the High severity Rockfall was required. Figures 1-13 were not included in the pdf report we received. A rockfall mitigation plan will be required based on the study and Town Code. b. Assuming a rockfall mitigation fence is provided on site, a larger bench south of LRL will be required to install the fence and provide landscape screening. 24. The development will require a public art component. Owner will provide public art. Page 8 of 11 3/1/2010 Town of Vail Public Works General Conditions of Approval AGREED (1-12 below) 1. Please add the Town of Vail General Notes to construction plans. (Notes can be e- mailed upon request) 2. Please add Utility Signature block and have all utilities sign acknowledging acceptance of utility design. 3. All construction staging issues shall be resolved prior to construction including staging, construction parking plan, phasing, access, schedules, traffic control, emergency access, etc… 4. A ROW/Utility permit shall be obtained and approved by the Town of Vail prior to commencing any construction within public Right of Way. 5. A Town of Vail Revocable ROW permit shall be recorded for all private property improvements located within public ways. 6. A CDOT access permit shall be approved prior to Civil Plan and Building Permit submittal, and a CDOT Notice to Proceed set of plans shall be approved prior to approval of Building Permit. 7. Prior to approval of a Building permit all necessary permanent and temporary easements are recorded with Eagle County. 8. Prior to approval of a Building permit a shoring and excavation plan shall be submitted including; excavation phasing, engineered shoring plans with plan, profile and cross sections. Cross Sections and plans shall include all existing conflicts (i.e. utilities). 9. Any excavation shoring methods used that encroach upon adjacent public or private property shall have approval by the appropriate owner and have a recorded easement prior to construction. This includes CDOT and the Town of Vail Right of Ways. 10. A CDPHE Permit and all applicable ACOE permits (i.e. Dewatering) shall be submitted prior to construction. 11. If temporary and/or permanent dewatering is anticipated during construction, a dewatering soils analysis will be required by a qualified licensed engineer analyzing the impact to adjacent properties (i.e. settlement). Provide full civil construction drawings meeting Town of Vail standards prior to building permit submittal. Page 9 of 11 3/1/2010 TOWN OF VAIL – WRITTEN COMMENTS ON DRAWINGS DATED 1/11/10 HPA Project Number 2009024 Town of Vail, Colorado Cover Sheet Use 2009 Building Codes with Town Amendments; Must comply with ADA and Building Code for accessibility Title 2? Adopted codes added to the cover sheet. A2.01 1. Existing and proposed grade required. Refer to civil drawings. 2. Re-align 20’ paved lane to create landscape pockets. Fire lane was revised. 3. 20’ setback required. Design was revised to provide 20’. 4. Provide roof ridge elevations. Information added to the drawings. 5. Provide top and bottom of retaining wall elevations. Information added to the drawings. 6. Screening of top deck of the parking garage. No changes made. 7. CDOT access or letter of intent. Owner to coordinate. 8. Increase the depth of the entry overhangs. No changes made. 9. Heat tape @ all gutters and downspouts. Yes. 10. Clean up and coordinate the plan set. Comment unclear. 11. Provide a snow shed plan. Provided. 12. Purpose of dormers. They are to provide articulation to the façade. Those located in courtyards were deleted. 13. Utility meter location. Screen. Electric meters to be located inside the parking garage. Gas meter to be located in remote shed along Lion’s Ridge Loop. 14. Garage entrance design and lighting. Comment unclear. 15. Access to courtyards. No changes made. 16. Why is fire lane drained to the north? Refer to civil drawings. 17. De-construction opportunities. Contractor to make efforts to reuse materials wherever possible. 18. Water usage BMP. Efforts will be made to meet best practices. 19. Easements platted and vacated? Owner to coordinate. 20. Landscape Plan. Provided. Page 10 of 11 3/1/2010 21. Courtyard Design. Provided. Miscellaneous comments: Show calculations – color or key coded. Comment unclear. 359 was marked for number of dwelling units. There are 352 dwelling units. Sidewalks, ramps and stairs to be accessible for required accessible routes. OK. Bus Shelter o be accessible and on accessible route per ADA. OK. Outdoor plaza area. Not provided. There is a covered porch at the SW corner of the building that can accommodate over 200 standing people. Construction obligation of transit stop. Not in project scope. Landscape median at transit stop. Not in project scope. Not enough width between west side surface parking spaces and building. Area was redesigned to have more space. Accessible space too far from entrance. Accessible space was moved close to new clubhouse entrance. Structural excavation shoring detail. Area was revised to decrease impact on existing buildings. Shoring details to be provided in permit set. Dumpster capacity. Trash area was relocated to west of the garage entry. Recycling capacity. Space for recycling is provided. Landscape area on west side. Area was revised to provide more landscape area. Slopes per ADA at sidewalks exiting rear side of parking garage. OK. Top Deck Access from rear side of parking garage. Not provided. Landscape median in frontage road. Not in project scope. Synthetic stone not permitted. Drawings now call for natural thin stone veneer. Accessible exit to public way. Refer to Civil drawings. Sheet A4.10 Access to courtyards. Provided where feasible. Bike racks, trash collection alternative/accessible as well. All areas are accessible. Direction of exit from garage to center elevator lobby. This is not a designated exit from the garage, so door swing is not an issue. Only trash chute. A recycling chute was added. There is now one of each. Mailroom creates congestion. Mailroom was relocated to the clubhouse to decrease congestion. Describe storage units/accessible storage. Storage units are provided in two sizes – 42” x 60” and 48” x 60”. One space is accessible. Page 11 of 11 3/1/2010 Sheet A4.10A Identify the use of spaces in the clubhouse. See drawings. Utilize void areas in ground floor corridors. Change was made. Sheet 4.12B Elevation rise per ANSI. Each run of ramp does not exceed 30” in vertical elevation change – meets ANSI. Sheet A4.15 2 means of egress required in east wing. The east wing has one vertical exit stair and one horizontal exit to the garage. Sheet A4.15B Snow shed on parking garage and public? Provide analysis per new code criteria, see town amendments. See drawings. Sheet A4.17 Provide section through easternmost wing. See drawings. Sheet A4.18 Recessed windows on front elevation clouded. Detail provided. Sheet A4.19 Increase stone height to vary rear elevation. The grade hides the lower portion of the building, so stone was not added. Sheet A4.20 Textured or stucco finish on garage? The garage will have a textured pre-cast finish. Sheet A4.21 Provide section cuts through eaves. See drawings. Increase grade on east side. Grade was increased. Sheet A4.22 Proportionate dormers in courtyard? These dormers were deleted.