Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOVERLAND TRAIL FARM PUD REPLAT - Filed CS-COMMENT SHEETS - 2004-08-24, I1I F.>C)N AN t -.I I N N Al TVLINE`IS AT LAW FoHj COLONY. COLORADO _,.i. A I vn• l? , aye i, Sl. September 26, 1980 Mr. Lester M. Kaplan Planning Consultant 528 South Howes Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 Re: Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal Company's Approval of Overland Trail Farm PUD Final Plan Dear Mr. Kaplan: The purpose of this letter is to respond to your letter dated September 15, 1980 requesting that the Pleasant Valley and. Lake Canal Company review Overland Trail Farm final plans and provide you with written approval of those plans if that was the action that the ditch company desired. I have had an opportunity to discuss this matter with the ditch company and am authorized to send you this letter approving your final plans so far as the ditch company is concerned. I do so, however, with the requirement that you note the following matters: 1. The Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal Company has a 5o toot maintenance easement which extends 15 feet from the center of the ditch going towards the upper side and 35 feet from the center of the ditch going to the lower side. 2. The area which your development is in has historically been proven to be surrounded by a high water table and seepage. The developer must realize that any excavation could result in continuing or activating that seepage. 3. The approval of this letter does not extend to any structures which will actually cross over the ditch. Tv Pl.4i✓/�'G /9oo /.ea.�ir.>da✓>ls!-J,N+�+ ,a..'o ./era q�� Pii,/S �Cliix/,.,o /4/dOl,z lu? 3. ,4 camas �s/s-�✓ /•� o�r��n� i1 �✓� y ro ,6&-- A7e A,p 6"e7Y &111C. oe �,0f saes-/ .oilaPii3crl% eve /�loi.✓rAy,/ED G P«sr NLMW 7D -,vow X 4 e Z- 7D /,gE eye ,�� va. �✓tr�C �51 JoG 7. A ,cg,,~.4,,cr� �• 7;4- /'�06 STD/,4/�/ s✓A4� .��or✓6 �/ / .�iKot/c r� 1�u� ,4 n/ 9, 070 ' G-73s�,�c�vT3"�1to,/✓'� .va�T� .lio6 tv� P.G�i�� �in�.�r/ or /o. UuE ra rrrE .�En T of Lor /f rs�-a!ivle �3- .fi0;www /I O/�E.Z'GA�✓O 7;e,4/G 6M5 /mod /.S A IrO o ' R. 40*J, Sr�&c7X/•e d. aJ. A)l oTNJ oL i�/Tc2/0� t249� �s-1/o AO 14- .�/ W /3. -12� T,w�oe o1J Gbe _D J.a �cr�,.�,,�r� � /Q�&W/.W 7- j/dce-c-Y A&OWo 4VZv p 4V1,e61^11 a die: /S, �,�s- Dire•/ ,P,otc� A,.ip �6.vr�'-��.vc.vo�ioc�r 7� �l'a Gar"/ .�.s/e Sao BE .�� .✓. &7/ [,a/L G 4 Sa 4�t / �- l ?O Ti�E EQ6� 0�' .e G,GJ. �� �1��✓r. lc .S�leai�yT 4& u7-iL1776:5 Gq// rloT C041^0'7;)A r. 16, 771E eve✓6 .Q.gOii O.✓ `%,Q/N/A %�.4ta: �F/ V6 /..i 7vBr /JCGEp7w4oGE /7S ".Q. �i✓. %�j /7 T'/r�5r ,16o-�J' Ta 77,/6 C�BC beN cy !/6,u/cla `` /4cc oTJ" F,Go»i 2. A/�.o/r.•o-�,y+� ,pis/ce LviGG f36 .2BQllie6.t� �s� ,�,e,rx�J. p�/�� /.✓>�,.ran� .,�r...!'rsa �de.,�.rr�� 3 Pg2•t /a,va mac. DEpv,�en►»r ,ec3-quesrs r..r�r .¢ 771 TlA'- O�s�ii✓ L/N/� 4 /t/o Fc�vC /, / 4 GcJ i c c /3C .4c t owl 7o c,P�1J rh'G Dirc/l /N F+Go*.0 /4• , 00oOO/770v-1,46 DE7W1e-.F !tl/mac .9E /L�gUneb� Fv2 /N 7!//J 115'e� Lv i77-1 PGAT e (y, So- v- OT �J� 1�4?X/N6 �ACBS ��6 LoC ol60 7Da n/6�viG C/�2vsJ' .o.i� �.iractBcnm✓I A• O .a.le�' N�YA�C6P7q/jG6 1 �c1ca�, TF4-� Fo.e y,c G i��.PcY�fb*�✓T c'�t.Sr.�.c�cr8a vi'o� ��Ne�-e .Qeu-7, 71 9. si.�/%r" Dt.fi%:IdG6 oS/=��/c.� /3t GIS�cZ.,� i�v 2��►nor✓� /iG/�f/i st'.QE�TIf ✓cwl6 �dSs'i,BGE �i2e.dLC7s•f i.'.Zt�c /U P�.a. ✓ ✓ f .u. i c ��o< Al Ta zz). �oG9Tt p . �E WO.cJeGL7 44Ja y1' wi/OTt� a� Ti�ec' AQ/va�f /�• ��> .�Ti28•�7 L16/s! L o cazTle�,rJ /¢iC� � i3r �er�•��.�.NEv ✓3Y Cin' L✓GNr A�/� �vweayL /Z TlZialy �SG.ea�.vS sslo✓x� .,to-�BE GacaTBL� o-n/ e'ir-7' eO.40. /3. /�a.co✓.✓bsuco /3E dET ✓3+ccC wee ��eB� Gurr�=`;� SioEuJ.q.� Ar L6�1.?/s✓G�,e unG✓n� CITY Of FORT COLLINS P.O. BOX 580, FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80522 PH (303) 484-4220 PLANNING DIVISION EXT.655 August 15, 1980 Lester Kaplan Planning Consultant 528 South Howes Street Fort Collins, CO 80521 Dear Les, The following is a list of the comments received from the various City Departments on thie site plan of Overland Trail Farms P.U.D. Final. Planning 1. Duplex townhouse unit on most south cul de sac is not within required 150' fire access. 2. Should allow at least one (1) car stacking space at intersections. 3. The type of fence being proposed along park does not appear to be of the same kind as was approved by City Council at preliminary. 4. Building elevations need to be shown. 5. Building enve-lopes with dimensions should be clearly indicated. 6. Typical parking stall dimensions should be shown. 7. Lot lines and R.O.W. should be shown on site plan. 8. Number of units in each building envelope should be shown. 9. Construction of pedestrian bridges over irrigation ditches should be provided in the utility plans. 10. "Potential future street connection" on east end of Virginia Dale Drive is not potential, it is built. 11. Duplex envelopes not dimensioned. 12. Additional berming should be shown along Overland Trail per preliminary. 13. Note on site plan regarding 150' fire access requirement across open space. 14. Typical landscaping adjacent to buildings should be shown. 15. Additional screening between townhomes and single family area should be shown. 16. Screening of parking areas from adjacent residential uses should be shown. 17. Will the pedestrian walkways to the north connect with a walkway in Lory Ann Estates? 18. Pedestrian access easement next to duplex should be indicated on subdivision plat. 19. Ditch easement should be shown on site plan. Parks and Recreation 1. 12" mow strip required under fencing. 2. Homeowners Association will be responsible for maintenance of area on both sides of fence. Les Kaplan 8/15/80 Page 2 Engineering Plat 1. Should show and note monumentation 2. Basis of bearings should be shown. 3. Acres given in description are only been described. and all pins as found and/or set. to be given for property which has 4. Plat is to be signed by Director of Engineering Services. 5. 20' easements along rear of Lots 1 through 10 shall be maintained. 6. Plat needs to show a statement that all tracts are to be maintained by Homeowners' Association. 7. A blanket easement shall be stated for all tracts. 8. The pedestrian walk along Lot 1 should show an easement. 9. 20' easements along north side of property south of the ditch R.O.W. shall be maintained. 10. Due to the replat of Lot 15 through 24 and the re -numbering of lots, this area should be stated as a new block. iw' L..u) 11. Overland Trail (the road) is a b0°` R.O.W. structure. 12. R.O.W. widths of interior road should be shown. 13. The temporary cul de sac easements for Pleasant Valley Road and Virginia Dale Drive should be shown. 14. All easements along Lots 10 through 16 should remain. 15. The ditch R.O.W. and centerline adjacent to property should be shown. NOTE: The city will require a 50' minimum from the centerline of the ditch to the edge of R.O.W. or easement. (Easement for utilities cannot count.) 16. The curve radii on Virginia Dale Drive are not acceptable - 175' r. min. 17. The plat needs to show the emergency vehicle access from Molly Brown Drive to Gold Rush Drive. P.U.D. Plan 1. Are walks to be public -access? If so, it should be shown that way and also stated on the plat. 2. Additional details will be required on bridges. Design information must be submitted and drawings stamped by a professional engineer. 3. P rk��d_ R�c^r? tii n Department requests that a mowing strip be installed �'K4he�c�ha'�i i' 7'n`R �encL-a nq—the park. 4. No fencing will be allowed to cross the ditch in the flow area. Additional details will be required for structures in this area. 5. The street R.O.W.'s do not agree with plat. 6. Some of the parking spaces are located too near curves and intersections and are not acceptable. 7. Who maintains the walks in the ditch company's R.O.W.? 8. Approval from the ditch company is required for all improvement constructed upon their R.O.W. or easement. 9. Sight distance should be checked in relation to intersection and parking to trees and trash screens. Some possible problems have been noted. 10. Plan is unclear as to where drives are located. We would also like to see the typical width of the drives. 11. New street light locations are to be determined by City Light and Power. 12. Trash screens should not be located on city R.O.W. 13. Buildings should be set back from curb, gutter and/or sidewalk at least 15' for utilities. Les Kaplan 8/15/80 Page 3 Water and Sewer Not received. Public Service If gas service in the area is desired, if these plans have changed, the developer must contact Public Service Company since utility easements shown on plat may not be wide enough to allow installation of natural gas distribution system. Building Inspection 1. All easements should be shown on site plan. 2. Need to indicate building envelope dimensions and setbacks for 20' wide townhomes. 3. Are building envelope dimensions and setbacks as shown for 24' wide townhomes, typical for the 24' wide model? Please indicate. 4. Show building envelope dimension or setbacks shown for patio homes. 5. Indicate the maximum height of the buildings. 6. Lot line dimensions must be indicated on site plan. 7. Some building clusters don't appear to have 20' of frontage on public streets (illegal lots). 8. All permitted fence locations have to be shown. Fire 1. East end of Pleasant Valley Road will street develops. 2. East end of Virginia Dale Drive will develops. Light and Power Require 8' easements on all R.O.W.'s. have to have 80' turn -around until have to have turn -around until street Please contact Joe Frank to resolve these problems. Thank you. Linda Hopkins Planning Aide TO: Rnh Smith, Assistant City Engineer - Drainage FROM: Mauri Rupel - Assistant City Engineer - Develonrrent RE: Subdivision utility Plans DATE. Submitted for your review and comment are utility plans for please respond at your earliest convenience. 45e� IN4k ,dote 116 ,W - lqd'ol ON �� s 6d� sWew q,50 4"" Ael fir', TO: FROM RE: DATE I.E. Trout, Mountain Bell yl. E. Ruoel, Development Engineer, City of Fort Collins Subdivision Utility Plans /Zgr'Sa' Submitted for your review and comment are utility plans for i�✓aoLAn/LI ( - Please respond at your earliest convenience. ,Bye 9� 9�a TO: Doug *9artine, Light and Power Department FT"I: �7auri Rupel, Engineering Services RE: Subdivision Utility Plans DATE: q-I -81 Stilmitted for your review and comment are utility plans for O\/e'ZLAx-AC) iQ(a1L FR2xrl \ UN Please respond at your earliest convenience. -3y 4 -2 `i -81 4 r- Tl1& /fP�/2oa,.n i}7E ._ -5 1-16�-X(S7—iNfj SYSTc �"I�N BcA�n 74/£- rl"vL/G/7z-v O��PT"a�S �G/� T%! i virs In A2c=�� ?-<li17- �,-ivs,= ,d6- �+�.no✓E�� ,�//>v0��'t T41 S" ei4YcvT tS i.r✓cH F _r) 7 r ,^ .., �- , / N ff L� L� / /�,✓ 7z' 6 E 7-7-C' C wit',.. evict �e Sc.tie.' /?c '/NSi�i'=ciP7'io.✓ /vcC.2; rsgi2Y�7- pc Vc tz =R✓ c ���'.✓1� i7df_- s Tip _- - rc.r�Hr s syo .9�e� THE" 1 01?Ir< Ecrh-ter .vF'ri"4Y Lo cA7-1C i TO: Don Hisam, Fire Prevention Bureau FROM: Mauri Rupel Engineering Services RE: Subdivision Utility Plans DATE: -4-�I —e! I Submitted for your review and comment are utility plans for ©)(M RNo �iRA�L FActryl F LQ Please respond at your earliest convenience. 2q-81 �i"5;� �r Mr. Lester M_ Kaplan September 26, 1980 Page Two In particular, it was noted that your plans include walkover bridges. The procedure to get the ditch company's approval o[ such a structure is to apply r-o the _'.itc^ ccmoany for a permit. Approval of the crossing involves compensation to the ditch company and requires that a representative from the ditch company oversees the actual construction. Most sincerely, FISCHER, BROWN, HUDDLESON & GL-NN By �k _ J�, . 0, Steven B. Ray ATTORNEYS FOR PLEASANT VALLEY AND LAKE CANAL COMPANY SBR:ew CC: John Michie l PLANNING DIVISION EXT.655 April 23, 1981 Ms. Casey Raicer American Development Corporation 11059 East Bethany Drive, Suite 104 Aurora, Colorado 80014 Dear Casey: The staff has reviewed the application for development approval for the amended Overland Trail Farm PUD and would offer the following comments: 1. The building envelopes are not clearly indicated. Building envelopes must be dimensioned and distances from each of the envelopes to two property lines must be indicated. 2. Bedroom mix must be indicated on site plan. 3. Easements should be indicated on site plan. 4. Landscaping over utility lines should be avoided. Location of landscaping between two -unit and four -unit buildings in northwest corner of development is a problem in that there is a water line in that area. 5. All modifications to the existing electrical system will be at the expense of the developer. 6. The subdivision plat should indicate 13-foot utility easements rather than 12-foot utility easements along both sides of all streets. 7. The right-of-way standard for cul-de-sacs is 50-feet (radius) not 45-feet as indicated on the subdivision plat. Please revise. 8. The staff recommends the Molly Brown Drive and the "stubs" at the south and west end of Gold Rush Drive be private and designed as driveways rather than public streets. If applicant does not agree, the stub at the west end of Gold Rush Drive should be redesigned as a standard cul-de-sac. Please revise. 9. Additional landscape screening should be provided between Russel Court and Overland Trail. Ms. Casey Raicer American Development Corporation April 23, 1981 Page 2 10. The staff feels that the placement of the two townhome units in the southwest corner of the project are too close to the existing single- family residence. A minimum setback of at least 20-feet from property line should be provided. Please revise. 11. Landscape plan should indicate screening of trash areas. 12. The number of dwelling units in each envelope should be indicated on the site plan. 13. The "Note" on subdivision plat concerning use of Tracts D, E, F, H, J, and K should include reference to public access along major pedestrian ways. 14. The placement of fences along the rear property line of Lots 120-125 will create undesirable and unuseable strips of land. Staff would recommend that the rear lot lines be extended to the east property lines of the site. 15. What are the protective covenants being filed with the replat? Before the staff' will proceed with processing the application for development approval, a revised set of plans reflecting the above comments should be submitted to the Planning office no later than May 11, 1981. Five copies of the plans should be submitted. Also, on May 18, 1981, an 8-1/2 x 11 reduction of all site plans and architectural elevations and colored renderings of all site plans and elevations should be submitted to the Planning office. If you should have any questions or require additional information, please feel free to call. Sincere Jo Frank nior Planner JF/fsr cc: Curt Smith a/� C Mk e: 6 May 86 7-^-^a r+..�.,1 l ITEM 3.9 $ OVERLAND TRAIL FARM PUD - Final COMPEN IS: 5rlc�T7f 0 r 6 May 86 !'��r_.+"•-.��_.a:..:L« r,3; ":-:thw o._c.t4---�K:_�L ,1 � t.�ti:. ^mil =AA .' OVERLAND TRAIL FARM PUD - Final i{ COMMR IS. Eao'; home must have its own separate water and sewer service. It appears several new seav:ce must be installed. New Utility Plans �.:;�' will have to tie prer..red. r� eo 6 May 86 ITEM: e 23—UGC. 9886 OVFRLA.VD TRAIL FARM PUD - Final CO RAENI.S: VIO dreNjM _ ff ftfk C�, hd S i �'C hGN�Q�S� c�c�'�.5� e�. •, G hG� ca rA i � �S P 1 Gf I I 6 May 86 ITEW car rm ens .1 -ZS-10� 38 86 OVERLAND TRAIL FARM PUD - Final, CONQ,,AR\ IS: Y- � 'vf'-� CITY OF FORT COLLINS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, PLANNING DIVISION May 20, 1986 Dick Gould c/o Dick Rutherford 214 N. Howes Fort Collins, CO 80521 Re: Overland Trail Farm PUD (#23-80C) Dear Dick: Staff has reviewed the above -referenced project and has the following comments: 1. The Light and Power utility requests you coordinate construction with them as there are existing underground lines. Any modifications needed to existing electrical services will be at the developer's expense. 2. No drainage report was submitted. Please contact Tom Gathmann for information regarding what needs to be provided. 3. Building elevations need to be on a 24" by 36" sheet. 4. Please indicate the distance of building envelopes from the rear prop- erty lines and for those sides where it is not indicated on the plan. 5. Please acid a note to the site plan: All signs are to comply with the sign code. 6. Bonnie Tripoli has already informed you that she needs to review a plat and utilities by June 2nd. 7. Please acid a note to the site plan that any damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk that is damaged is to be replaced by the developer. 8. Off -site street improvements may be required by the City. You will need to contact Rick Ensdorff for traffic impact information he requires in order to assess the impact to the streets in question. OFFICE OF COMMUNITY 300 LaPorte Ave- P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 (303) 221-6750 DEVELOPMENT, PLANNING DIVISION 9. Lots 78-83 !need to have well-defined property lines to prevent problems with construction and maintenance. Additionally, these lots need to have some sort of restriction with regard to fencing - this should be discussed during a meeting next week. 10. The ditch company has a right-of-way along the southern boundary of the site including a minimum 20 foot ingress/egress along the lower side of the ditch for maintenance. This easement needs to remain unobstructed (fences, permanent play equipment, etc.). 11. Each unit must have its own separate water and sewer service. This needs to be shown on updated utility plans. 12. Please state on the plan the average lot size and the gross density. 13. On the typical landscape plan, the following concerns need to be addressed: -The minimum size for ornamental trees is 1 1/2" caliper and for shade trees is 1 3/4" caliper. -Some means of screening the blank walls of adjacent units needs to be explored. Possibly the introduction of evergreens and/or fencing may work to break up the wall as well as better define front and back yards. 14. Earlier plans for this site show a ten foot pedestrian access easement between lots 14 and 68. This easement connected with a footbridge over the canal to the south. If this pedestrian access has not been preempted by subsequent development, it should be included in the plan. 15. On the site plan, land use information for 150 feet needs to be shown. 16. Signature blocks for attorney, owner and Planning and Zoning Board certification need to be shown on the site plan. A meeting should be held at your earliest convenience to discuss these comments. Revisions (three copies) to the plans are due in this office by noon, June 4, 1986. PMT's, colored renderings and ten copies of the plans are due in this office by noon, June 13, 1986. Final documents are due by noon, June 19, 1986. If you have any comments or questions regarding this matter, please 'let me know. Sincerely, to teve Ryde City Planner xc: Tom Peterson, Planning Director Bonnie Tripoli, Development Coordinator �tA e: 5 Son 86 ITEM: rtment: 23-80E OVERLAND TRAIL SUBDIVISION - Preliminary & Final COMMENTS: dare: 5 Sep 86 ITEM: rtment: �,� r-_:41 23-80E OVERLAND TRAIL SUBDIVISION - Preliminary & Final COMMENTS: IMODUTA; -) BELL N/fi5 SUKIED T-ELEPNOUe C-AOLE I AJ PLACE i u FXt -57-i00C ffA5EMEx1T3. TH E 2E DDES NoT A PPE A 2 To 13E h Al C 0 A_J F L I C T. S F / TT 1 5 AJ E C ES_5 4 R Y �U TD EE LOLA7-E QAJI/ TFLEPHoIUE FAL'iL/T/ES To AC-CC01MOPATE T-14;S KE PLATT. Li I LL/ AJ G Ld/ L-L- APOLY. ZLy- %Si?O COPY' TO : A ME?-NC4AJ D1dEiZ5i FiED CAPtro9l- CORD d .54500 .S. 5Y fAC-41SE ENGLEGijDOD . C�'O. C/D PHiL POBIA)SO JO 7-1 1 N . Ho")H s. FORT "LLI A15) I' D. 005L2 Planning Les eCConsultant M. Kaplan -=FI V LEE October 9, 1980 Flauiimg bepartment Linda Hopkins Department of Planning and Development City Hall Fort Collins, CO RE: Final Site Plan: Overland Trail Farm P.U.D. Dear Linda: As you requested, please be assured that the applicant for the overland Trail Farm P.U.D. agrees to make the follow- ing minor revisions to the Final Site Plan: 1. Relocation of the two pedestrian bridges to correspond to the revisions requested by the Engineering Division for the Final Utility Plan. 2. Relocation of 3 trash receptacles to comply with Engineering Division's concerns regarding site distances. Please contact me should you require any other assurances. It is critical to the applicant that the Final Plan be before the City Council at its October 21, 1980 meeting. Very truly yours, �6s Lester M. Kaplan LMK/jt cc: Sark Arslanian 528 S. Howes Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 (303) 482-3322 CITY OF - FORT COLLINS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, PLANNING DIVISION September 26, 1986 American Diversified Capital Corporation C/O Phil Robinson 214 North Howes St. Fort Collins, CO. Dear Phil: Staff has reviewed your submittal for Overland Trail Farm P.U.D., Prelimi- nary and Final and offers the following comments: 1. The eight foot front lot utility easements proposed appear to be ade- quate. 2. Lots with less than 40 feet of street frontage must provide 2 off street parking spaces. Due to the narrowness of the lots, lot #6 will require approximately a 25 foot front building setback, and lot # 12 approximately a 40 foot front: setback in order to meet the requirement for 60 foot mini- mum lot width at the narrowest line through the building. 3. A mow strip 18" wide, or a minimum of 9" from the center of the post towards the park must be provided for the fence along the park. The top of the mow strip must be flush with the finish grade of the park. 4. Repays are due on existing water lines in this subdivision, 5. There are existing underground utilities in this area. Construction must be closely coordinated with Light and Power. 6. There are questions concerning the Virginia Dale Drive Street alignment. It appears the curve is not to City standards. 7. Staff has a concern over the affect of seepage from the irrigation ditch on the north property boundary on the adjacent lots. How will this be addressed? We recommend that some facility to collect seepage, and carry the raw water into the detention pond be used. This should be shown on the utility plan, Contact Craig Foreman with Parks and Recreation. They would like to have the runoff in the park. OFFICE OF COMMUNITY IN DEVELOPMENT, PLANNING DIVISION 300 LaPorte Ave. • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 • (303) 221 6750 Oveland Trail PUD Co- rots 9/26/86 - Page 2 8. Staff would like to see the proposal for the fence treatment along the arterial. The fencing should also address noise mitigation needs (a six foot fence is recommended). 9. Notes need to be placed on the plan which address how open space will be maintained. 10. Shrub plantings need to be provided along the base of the fence along Overland Trail. There is a need for an additional tree as well. 11. On the plat, label the 12 foot easement through lots 50 and 49 as an irrigation easement only. 12. There will be off -site street improvements required, consisting of a 2" overlay on Overland Trail. 13. The 150 foot lot depth proposed does not meet City standards. A vari- ance will be required. 14. The drainage report proposal to keep things the same is o.k, if all current criteria are met, but this is not discussed. The map showing the 5 sub -catchments with flow directions is good, but please take it one step further, and include the numbers of Q2 and QIOO developed flows at key design/concentration points. Then show that at those key points the current standards are met. 15. Mountain Bell has buried telephone cable in place in existing ease- ments. There does not appear to be any conflict. If it is necessary to relocate any telephone facilities to accommodate this replat, billing will apply. This is the extent of staff's comments at this time. Please contact me if you have questions, or would like to set up a meeting to discuss these con- cerns. Revisions are due October 8, 1986. PMT's, colored renderings, and 10 blue- print copies for the P&Z Board are due October 17th. Final documents are due October 23rd. Planning and Zoning Board hearing will be on October 27th. Sincere ZnsloVnA� Bob Wil City Planner CC: Tom Peterson, Planning Director Jim Newell, Engineer Mike Herzig, Development Coordinator ENGINEERING DIVISION April 3, 1981 Mr. Robert E. Maloney c/o American Development Corporation 11059 East Bethany Drive Suite 104 Aurora, Colorado 80014 Re: overland Trail, P.U.D. Dear Mr. Maloney: Thank you for your letter of Nkirch 25, 1981 requesting variances fran our engineering standards in the referenced P.U.D. Your request is granted on the three items in question, namely: 1 - 90o parking on a public street be allowed opposite each other. on Cody Drive, Gold Rush Drive, Russell Court. 2 - Parking be allowed on a side street within 50' of a public street. On Molly Brawn Drive. 3 - Cody Drive & Virginia Dale Drive centerlines be allowed to be less than 200 feet. We are granting this because you are using an approved P.U.D., one which was approved prior to adopting the new standards. We ask, therefore, that future submittals reflect the new standards. Your cooperation is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Maurice E. Rupel, P.E. & L.S. Assistant City Engineer - Development cc: Joe Frank, Planning Division CITY OF FORT COLLINS OFFICE OF PLANNING AND DEVELUPMEN i May 11, 1984 American Diversified Capital Corporation 11059 East Bethany Drive Suite 103 Aurora, CO 80014 ATTN: Mr. G. R. McIntire RE: Overland Trail Farm PUD Our #23-80B Dear Mr. McIntire: Your request to extend the final approval of Overland Trail Farm PUD dated March 22, 1984, is hereby granted to November 15, 1984, with the condition that Utility Plans be revised and updated prior to the request for any building permits. Water, sewer and street designs must be brought to current City standards and a thorough understanding of what lines are to be abandoned and where must be reached before you proceed. I will be happy to arrange a meeting between you, your engineer, and affect- ed City staff when you are ready to discuss these items. Yours very truly, ��__ Maurice E. Rupel Development Center Director MER/gla CC: Dave Stringer, Chief Construction Inspector Bonnie Tripoli, Development Coordinator Webb Jones, Water & Sewer L;`df I UE vF t_UI,6l,Ff i CITY OF FOP-i T COLLINS STORM WATER UTILITY July 3, 1984 Mike Norman 3037 Wells Fargo Drive Fort Collins, CO 80521 Re: Groundwater problems Dear Mr. Norman: As I promised (luring our recent phone conversation, I am sending to you information pertaining to the groundwater problems you've been experiencing as a result of living next to a major irrigation canal. I've enclosed copies of the subdivision soils report, pertinent correspondence, and a typical sub -drain design for your reference. The City currently has no regulatory status with regard to the methods taken by developers and builders to combat groundwater problems. Typically, a developer will hire a soils engineering firm to conduct tests and recommend measures for addressing potential soils and/or groundwater problems. However, it is entirely up to each developer and builder to decide how best to protect the homes in a subdivision from such problems. Most are reputable professionals who rely heavily upon the advice of the soils engineer and consequently have few problems later on. The City similarly has no control over overlot grading practices. Improperly sloped yards and poorly designed landscaping and sprinkling systems result in foundations that leak and yards that are perpetually saturated. I doubt that the Pleasant Valley and Lake Irrigation Company would feel any obligation to take measures to prevent seepage from their ditch. Their argument traditionally is that the ditch was there long before development occurred in the area, and therefore the "late -comers" must bear the expense associated with addressing seepage from the ditch. Nevertheless, contact with the company can be made through its attorneys: S JF�,Plt WA fFq I q i F3(JO L.)P"n re Ave P rJ Hnx')HU • F,v t (; i r � » �� 'J5� l�_'�31 1-CEL): Mike Norman Page Two July 3, 1984 Fischer, Brown, Huddleson & Gunn First Tower Building, llth Floor Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 I've highlighted certain sections of the attached soils report which I thought to be pertinent. Chet Smith of Empire Laboratories, Inc. said that to his best recollection, no drains were placed along the edge of the canal to collect seepage, nor was a dewatering system installed. A soils engineering firm should be able to advise you as to the best way of alleviating your current problem. If you feel that I can be of further help, please don't hesitate to call. Sincerely, Michael H. Mercer Stormwater Utility Engineering Services Enclosures James H. Stewart and Associates, Inc. Consulting Engineers and Surveyors 214 North Howes Street P.O. Box 429 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 (303)482-9331 June 16, 1986 Mr. Rick Ensdorf City Traffic Engineer P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 Dear Rick: Laboratory: 301 Lincoln Court P.O. Box 429 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 (303) 4846309 This is regarding the estimated traffic generated by the 17 lots that are being replatted in Overland Trail Farm, P.U.D.. The lots would gen- erate approximately 170 trips per day. It is estimated that the traf- fic will be split evenly between West bound to Overland Trail and East bound via Wildwood Road, West Lake Street and Cedarwood Drive to West Prospect Street. It is questionable whether offsite street improvements are appropriate for these. lots. They are the same lots that were platted, replatted, and fully developed several years ago. They simply were not built upon at that time and since it was a P.U.D. the site plan expired. Overland Trail adjacent to Overland Trail Farm has been improved with curb, gutter and widened asphalt on the East side. That part of Over- land Trail not adjacent to Overland Trail Farm was improved and widened at the time Hughes Stadium was constructed. It is 36 feet wide and has bike lanes. If I can be of further assistance in this matter or if you have any ques- tions, please call. This item is scheduled for the Planning and Zoning Board meeting June 23rd. Sincerely, JAMES H. STEWART AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Richard A. Rutherford, P.E. & L.S. President CIS MEMORANDUM